Interlude (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm), drinks and popcorn are available at the confectionary desk.
Yes , this is difficult , to sell "free energy (machines)" .....
This must "eat" Oil !!
than it can be sale!
Pese
Quote
Heins is focused on showing his invention to anybody willing to see it
Anybody live in or near Ottawa :)
oops, missed that the article was past tense
This quote is interesting...
Contacted by phone a few hours after the test, Zahn is genuinely stumped ? and surprised. He said the magnet shouldn't cause acceleration. "It's an unusual phenomena I wouldn't have predicted in advance. But I saw it. It's real. Now I'm just trying to figure it out."
I'm not sure I like how the paragraph above the previously quoted one reads:
QuoteHe holds a permanent magnet a few centimetres away from the driveshaft of an electric motor, and the magnetic field it creates causes the motor to accelerate.
It's worth a trip if someone is nearby :)
From the article:
Quote
Others want to believe ? or at least help out. Cunningham, whose brother is general manager at Angus Glen Golf Club, introduced Heins to the club's president, Kevin Thistle. For two years Thistle has acted as angel investor, providing start-up capital needed to incorporate Potential Difference, file patents and continue research.
Does anyone have a link for the patent(s)?
Bessler007
edit: I found the patent. CIPO isn't as user friendly as the USPO in the states. They claim to not provide images because they were "unscanable". Lame.
http://patents.ic.gc.ca/cipo/cpd/en/patent/2437745/images.html?section=description&modificationDate=20070315&page=1&scale=50&rotation=0
They scan text into a graphic but can't scan a drawing into a graphic.
Quote from: Bessler007 on February 04, 2008, 10:09:28 AM
From the article:
Quote
Others want to believe ? or at least help out. Cunningham, whose brother is general manager at Angus Glen Golf Club, introduced Heins to the club's president, Kevin Thistle. For two years Thistle has acted as angel investor, providing start-up capital needed to incorporate Potential Difference, file patents and continue research.
Does anyone have a link for the patent(s)?
Bessler007
I found this, but oddly there seems to be missing information
http://patents.ic.gc.ca/cipo/cpd/en/patent/2437745/summary.html
?Credibility, after all, can't be invented. It must be earned.?
Imho that?s the right attitude! (And the first elementary check is passed so far.)
Based on such grounds, I assume the inventor might want to come here and earn some credibility.
If the group agrees, who?s going to invite?
Cheers,
Tinu
Quote from: tinu on February 04, 2008, 10:42:35 AM
?Credibility, after all, can't be invented. It must be earned.?
Imho that?s the right attitude! (And the first elementary check is passed so far.)
Based on such grounds, I assume the inventor might want to come here and earn some credibility.
If the group agrees, who?s going to invite?
Cheers,
Tinu
From my somewhat limited research so far, I get the feeling he may not be interested, he has achieved his goal of getting someone with credibility to look at it and confirm its operation.
anyone got any contact details for his company - can't find a web site.
I just emailed my phone number to Professor Zahn. Maybe he'll call or email something back.
Bessler007
edit: his resume is 32 pages. wow.
Quote from: Bessler007 on February 04, 2008, 11:03:57 AM
I just emailed my phone number to Professor Zahn. Maybe he'll call or email something back.
Bessler007
nice one thanks !
long post
Date: post from Sciencebase Science Blog on 04 July 2007 11:00:18
- . . . Thane Heins, of Potential Difference Inc, contacted me recently with the claim that he and his company have developed a device based on a bi-toroid transformer prototype that in tests proved to be 7000% efficienta bi-toroid transformer prototype.
- "Your claims seem to violate the law of conservation of energy and Maxwell?s equations of electro-magnetics.?
- Heins talks of how the technology is ?Based on the unique theory of leveraging back EMF and upsetting the power balancing mutual coupling coefficients?, his company has apparently ?developed and produced an operational transformer which exceeds 100% efficiency.?
- ?For a transformer the Law of Conservation of Energy can ONLY APPLY if mutual coupling exists from the secondary back to the primary. The Bi-Toroid diagram shows how this cannot happen and how the Law of Conservation of Energy is violated by simply employing Lenz?s Law and Maxwell?s Equations and controlling flux path magnetic reluctance.? Magnetic reluctance is the analogous phenomenon of electrical resistance, but unlike electrical resistance consumes no energy.
Heins adds that he and his colleagues ?have coupling from the primary to the secondary. The reluctance flux path in the secondary is lower because either the secondary core area is greater or because we employ core material with a higher relative permeability which results in a decrease in reluctance. When the secondary reluctance is lower - back EMF induced flux from secondary coil 1 must follow the path of least reluctance into secondary 2 and not back to the primary. The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source. The law of conservation of energy for a transformer requires secondary back EMF to be able to mutually couple back to the primary - but if this flux path is higher it will not be able to do so.?
http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html
Bessler007
sorry...
I live a couple of hours away and just read this in the morning paper.
Mac
similar idea in "variable reluctance"
The Alexanderson alternator operates by variable reluctance (similar to an electric guitar pickup), changing the magnetic flux linking two coils. The alternator has a circular laminated iron stator carrying two sets of coils, in a C-shape. One set of coils is energized with direct current and produces a magnetic field in the air gap of the stator. The second set of coils generates the radio-frequency voltage. The rotor is a laminated iron disk with holes or slots cut into its circumference. The openings are filled with non-magnetic material so as to reduce air drag. The rotor has no windings or electrical connections.
As the rotor turns, either an iron portion of the disk is in the gap of the stator, allowing a high magnetic flux to cross the gap, or else a non-magnetic slot is in the stator gap, allowing less magnetic flux to pass. These changes in flux induce a voltage in a second set of coils on the stator.
Ernst Frederick Werner Alexanderson (Uppsala, Sweden, January 25, 1878 ? May 14, 1975) was a Swedish-American electrical engineer, who was a pioneer in radio and television development.
Bessler007
For full details, see the videos on:
http://www.g9toengineering.com/backemf/demonstration.htm
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Can the next person who contacts Thane Heins, get a copy of his patent application, scan it in, and post it here? If he really is doing this for the good of the planet then he won't mind sharing that info, so that other people can try to replicate his device.
His patent application (mentioned earlier in this thread) became a "Dead Application" on March 14, 2006 (see http://patents.ic.gc.ca/cipo/cpd/en/patent/2437745/financial_transactions.html).
Only one page of his patent application is available online at http://patents.ic.gc.ca/cipo/cpd/en/patent/2437745/summary.html (there are 2 pages missing).
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 04, 2008, 03:25:21 PM
For full details, see the videos on:
http://www.g9toengineering.com/backemf/demonstration.htm
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Thank for the link.
Looking at the video now! :)
On the part 4 video, here he quote from some text there:
Quote
TOROID GENERATOR QUESTIONS
Answered by Texas A & M University( October 21, 2006)
Dear Mark,
It was nice to speak with you this morning. Thank you for your time.
We have 3 questions that we need answered please:
I was wondering if this "mark" is Steven Mark?
I thought that Thane Heins was looking to commercialize his invention and not freely release it to the World - asking him to come here and talk about it might not happen?
Further more, I do not understand why would he need to prove it to anyone that his invention works, especially to some eminent MIT scientist, unless he was looking for endorsements for a possible future product, and having a main stream scientists say "Yes, this works" is a pretty good jumping point for future sales.
Otherwise, if Thane Heins plans to release this to the public for free then in my opinion he should seek replications and confirmations from the FE Community and forget about MIT or any other orthodox establishment but I do not see that happening...
This is a great discovery !
But he just confirms, what Stevem Sullivan has already shown
earlier, that by reconducting the magnetic flux into a toroid for example,
( see video part4 for instance) he can use the Lenz law not
to hinder, but to produce electrical energy.
Great confirmation.
Regards, Stefan.
P.S He should better talk about Counter-EMF and not Back-EMF,
cause he does not pulse the output coils.
( Back-EMF is normally associated by opening current carrying coils
and the buildup of high voltage induction spikes...)
Also it would have been nice, if he would not just have shorted out his coils,
but powering a incandescent bulb with each coil, so we could
have got an impression, what output power would have been
available when loading the coils...
3. Also it has to be cleared out, why the flux being redirected into
the induction motor rotor causes there more torque and
if this also draws more power from the grid then...
( have not yet finshed watching all the videos yet...)
Hi guys,
I'm from Ottawa and believe it or not I know Thane Heins, but I have not seen him for over 7 years since he left his wife (my sisters best friend) after the birth of his daughter. I will look into this and get back with my findings
Luc
I just saw in one video he also shows,
that when the rotor accelerates when the coils are shorted out
and the flux is redirected into the induction drive motor,
that the input current into the drive motor is also falling.
So yes, he has the real McCoy !
Finally somebody who has really shown that Lenz law could be
used to help and generate and not destroy energy in electric-magnet motor setups.
Hi All,
I have converted the videos into DIVX.com codec MPEG4 AVI format,
so they are much smaller without visual degradation and
am just uploading them now right here:
www.overunity.com/heins
The first one is already up there, so for you, who still
have only dialup connection you can download them much faster now.
Enjoy.
Regards, Stefan.
Okay, now all movies are uploaded.
Please post, what you think about them.
Many thanks.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 04, 2008, 10:31:59 PM
Hi All,
I have converted the videos into DIVX.com codec MPEG4 AVI format,
...
Hi Stefan,
Many thanks for compressing the movies!
Can you please have a look at mpd05.avi? It doesn?t seem to play. Different codec or it is just my computer?
Cheers,
Tinu
I want this to be real, but I have to say that part 6 looks very suspect, the other videos are plausible because the coils would produce dynamic interaction, a fixed permanent magnet would not have dynamic interaction, I also noted on a couple of occasions that acceleration was considerably delayed after the magnet was put in position.
Quote from: RunningBare on February 05, 2008, 06:10:47 AM
I want this to be real, but ...
I want it also to be real but it looks like a cold shower. Oh, well, at least it was a short one!
I?ll refrain to post my views (explanation and everything) but only after hearing more opinions from members. (A bit revolted by the ?Physics Turned on its Ear? but that?s what media/press is pretty much about, isn?t it?)
Have a nice day,
Tinu
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 04, 2008, 10:31:59 PM
Hi All,
I have converted the videos into DIVX.com codec MPEG4 AVI format,
so they are much smaller without visual degradation and
am just uploading them now right here:
www.overunity.com/heins
The first one is already up there, so for you, who still
have only dialup connection you can download them much faster now.
Enjoy.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan,
that shown me very similar to the way with this "pur" mechanical-magnetic solution ! (?)
Pese
http://yirkha.fud.cz/steorn/JVMJOoEQ6_A.flv
I attempted to replicate part 6 since it seemed simple enough, but no matter how I orientated the magnet or no matter where I placed it, I could not get any perceived speed increase :'(
Heres an image of the actual motor I'm using, its an old typewriter induction motor rated 230 volts ac, 0.3 amps(no load)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcosmopod.com%2Fmysite%2Fbarefm%2Fop%2Fmotor.jpg&hash=73206538a9ee38bed4960d518748bd659b78bd38)
Interesting stuff, but I'm a bit skeptical naturaly.
The inventor uses terms that don't quite apply.Ã, He says stuff like "we'll short out the generator coil and introduce the back EMF into the AIR GAP... and magneticaly couple..."
well, back EMF is voltage on a wire, not a flux in an AIR GAP.Ã, Ã, He has to get his terminology straight.
Then he talkes about strengtening the rotor flux with this "back EMF"Ã, Ã, If that realy happens then yes a motor would speed up.Ã, The Induction motor has slip, so if you magnetize the cage it will approach the behavior of a synchronous AC motor,
However, no matter what he does with the coils, power is coming in from the wall socket.Ã, If he wants to show that he is getting more energy in then out, then he must take this into account, but he is not there yet, and I'm not sure he is claiming an OU system yet, he is hinting at it perhaps.
What is intersting here as opposed with the Adams motors, seems to be this idea of linking the flux through the Induction motor.Ã, Other than that everything else has been tried before. Perhaps this idea has been tried before as well, not sure though, it's new to me.
EM
::)
Nutcake, what do you mean? All he is trying to show is the slight increase in speed when he shorts out the generator coil. You see that on his Tachometer, it speeds up a bit. But it's not OU, saddly to say.
EM
@all,
am i just impatient or are the video links no longer working? anyway i can't seem to see anything but a blue screen saying downloading. but for thirty minutes? just my observation. have the MIB gotten there that quick? damn they must be improving thier response time this week!
lol
sam
ps: i wish i could see the videos, the articles i have read seem awful simple.
All the videos can be found here, uploaded by Steorn forum member Speccy
http://uk.youtube.com/user/speccy
Quote from: supersam on February 05, 2008, 07:18:18 PM
@all,
am i just impatient or are the video links no longer working? anyway i can't seem to see anything but a blue screen saying downloading. but for thirty minutes? just my observation. have the MIB gotten there that quick? damn they must be improving thier response time this week!
lol
sam
ps: i wish i could see the videos, the articles i have read seem awful simple.
Quote from: tinu on February 05, 2008, 05:28:30 AM
Hi Stefan,
Many thanks for compressing the movies!
Can you please have a look at mpd05.avi? It doesn?t seem to play. Different codec or it is just my computer?
Cheers,
Tinu
It just tested it again and it works, just redownload it first to your harddisk
and play it from there.
www.overunity.com/heins
Here are the interesting parts from:
http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html
Free energy with magnetic reluctance
post from Sciencebase Science Blog on 04 July 2007 11:00:18 AM. ? Sciencebase Science Blog
Potential difference transformer
As I think I?ve mentioned before, I get a lot of emails from people claiming to have solved all the worlds environmental problems through some perpetual motion device or similar. These are not the usual run of the mill spam messages, they are usually targeted at me as a science journalist and talk of big solutions. If they were sent by snailmail they would be in green ink, the majority of them, I suspect.
Some of these claims seem to reach global proportions as we?ve seen with the Steorn research, which is yet to bear fruit. In fact, I created a new section on SciScoop to cover and discuss just such controversial conjectures; I highlighted several odd scientific claims some time ago on Sciencebase too.
Anyway, Thane Heins, of Potential Difference Inc, contacted me recently with the claim that he and his company have developed a device based on a bi-toroid
transformer
prototype that
in tests proved
to be
7000% efficienta bi-toroid transformer prototype that in tests proved to be 7000% efficient. ?This past weekend we gave a product demonstration (generator and transformer) to an international transformer manufacturer,? Heins told me, ?Our transformer used 0.2 Watts in the primary and produced 14 watts through a 180 ohm - 25 watt resistor. We will be producing 1 - 7000 Watt toroids in the near future and even larger industrial ones.?
Could he be on to something. It?s a controversial claim, indeed, and certainly one that might warrant refiling in SciScoop?s Controversial Conjectures. But Heins claims to have reproducible evidence to support his claims. ?We have third party data,? he told me. Moreover, ?the power dissipation calculations are very simple and can be verified by anyone.?
Heins confessed that the team is still trying to get the physics aspect of the technology, which he refers to as the Perepiteia Transformer, evaluated and published by a university. He says they have been trying for almost two years. Heins sent me comments from various academics who have looked at the work. One of them states, ?Your claims seem to violate the law of conservation of energy and Maxwell?s
equations of electro-magneticsYour claims seem to violate the law of conservation of energy and Maxwell?s equations of electro-magnetics.? Heins perceives this as a positive statement, ?It is very positive and rare for someone to actually put that in writing - very brave in my book,? he told me. However, Heins adds that the academic in question has not been able to take physical readings on the transformer prototype, and to my mind it almost sounds like a skeptic?s voice as opposed to a supporter.
Another academic describes the technology as ?a new source of electric power? but then goes on to advise Heins: ?Do Not explain the physics - stay with explaining ONLY the electrical POWER measurements - it will keep you out of a lot of media trouble.?
I am sure it will, anyone claiming such vast energy efficiencies from what is essentially a simple transformer that just happens to have donut-shaped components is bound to attract skeptical inquiry.
That correspondent ?was responding to the press release not the transformer data or diagrams/explanations,? retorts Heins, [he] did not understand at the time that the back EMF that would otherwise couple back to the primary is now diverted into secondary coil 2 doing real work, I assume that [he] thought that I didn?t know where the extra power is coming from but I do and designed things to work as they do.?
Heins talks of how the technology is ?Based on the unique theory of leveraging back EMF and upsetting the power balancing mutual coupling coefficients?, his company has apparently ?developed and produced an operational transformer which exceeds 100% efficiency.?
?Any skeptic can recreate the same transformer in about 8 hours and get virtually identical results,? Heins adds, ?I wound ours by hand so I know.? He concedes that it is hard to comprehend and says he was skeptical at first. ?For a transformer the Law of Conservation of Energy can ONLY APPLY if mutual coupling exists from the secondary back to the primary. The Bi-Toroid diagram shows how this cannot happen and how the Law of Conservation of Energy is violated by simply employing Lenz?s Law and Maxwell?s Equations and controlling flux path magnetic reluctance.? Magnetic reluctance is the analogous phenomenon of electrical resistance, but unlike electrical resistance consumes no energy.
Heins adds that he and his colleagues ?have coupling from the primary to the secondary. The reluctance flux path in the secondary is lower because either the secondary core area is greater or because we employ core material with a higher relative permeability which results in a decrease in reluctance. When the secondary reluctance is lower - back EMF induced flux from secondary coil 1 must follow the path of least reluctance into secondary 2 and not back to the primary. The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source. The law of conservation of energy for a transformer requires secondary back EMF to be able to mutually couple back to the primary - but if this flux path is higher it will not be able to do so.?
I?d be interested to see comments on these claims from the physicists among you, although better still it would be educational if someone were to reconstruct the device, test it and post their results. Can the laws of physics cope with a 7000% efficient transformer? Can we really get more energy out than in by diverting magnetic reluctance? If so, then it might be worth breaking open the fireworks early this July 4, but I suspect that this really is simply one for the Controversial Conjectures folder once again?shame.
=========================
SO the main thing :
Heins told me, ?Our transformer used 0.2 Watts in the primary and produced 14 watts through a 180 ohm - 25 watt resistor. We will be producing 1 - 7000 Watt toroids in the near future and even larger industrial ones.?
could be verified in the posted videos, if he had shown, how much power
he pulled out of his coils when he shorted them out.
Too bad the videos did not contain any lighting incandescent bulbs in series with the
shorted out coils.
Especially video part 4 is convincing, where he has this toroid flux path and shorts
out the 2 coils and the rotor does not slow down.
If he would have shown how much power he did short out out of the coils,
that would have been even more convincing.
Regards, Stefan.
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
See:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg75560.html#msg75560
for my comments and answer to Top Gun.
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
Put a shorted coil near a moving magnet and then come back with your theory
Lenz Law, when a magnet approaches a coil it will induce a current in the coil which in turn will create a magnetic field opposing the approaching magnet, a shorted coil is the same as saying the coil has an extremely low resistive load attached to it.
http://msdaif.googlepages.com/demo_lenz
Lenz's Law, la-di-da. Do you understand magnetic hysteresis? Against his low-speed rotating magnetic disc, a carbon steel rod will create far more drag than a shorted coil of wire. Look at the numbers. Why would his induction motor draw so much current with the coils open, unless there was significant drag on it? When the coil is shorted, Lenz's law induces current in the coil that tends to keep the magnetic flux in the steel rod at zero, minimizing its magnetic hysteresis. Lenz's Law will result in drag on the shorted coil, but eliminate the drag on the steel core rod.
Again, I say BUSTED!
Look at: http://www.magtrol.com/tensioncontrol/hysteresisbrakes.htm
and: http://www.djautomation.co.uk/html/hysteresis_brake___clutch.html
He has a hysteresis brake that is turned off by shorting the coil windings.
Quote from: ltseung888 on February 05, 2008, 10:13:57 PM
See:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg75560.html#msg75560
for my comments and answer to Top Gun.
Answering questions to your own questions via multiple persona isn't exactly rocket science. As to your answers, those people on your thread already know you're a rather silly comedian!
cheers
chrisC
@blindsanxxxx
Ok, then tell me just how is it that the main guy at MIT "does" agree with him. "And" he is stumped as to why.
thaelin
Look at this simple video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/665396/how_increase_speed_of_electric_motor/
Just repeated the experiment with my oral B electric tooth brush. The frequency (or the sound from the vibrating brush system) changed with the approaching of a strong magnet.
So there is nothing revolutionary with the Thane Heins discovery???
Quote from: EMdevices on February 05, 2008, 03:18:03 PM
Nutcake, what do you mean? All he is trying to show is the slight increase in speed when he shorts out the generator coil. You see that on his Tachometer, it speeds up a bit. But it's not OU, saddly to say.
EM
sorry, i thought it was a OU running machine.
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
Hi:
blindsangamon is correct. This is a common phenomenon regards "generators", but one often not commonly known about if you are not working with AC motors and generators all the time. So the professor at MIT may not have this practical engineering savvy to identify the issues at first glance.
An hysteresis brake is one way to describe the apparently anomalous increase in speed when you short the generator coils. What EVERY ferromagnetic core does when exposed to varying magnetic fields is to have it's domains rock or flip direction in accord with the magnetic field changes impinging on them.
This consumes power in the "friction" between domains as they sort of scrape past each other. It results in the material heating up. In addition to this hystersis "loss" is an eddy current effect within bulk steel from the very same time varying magnetic fields, also making heating of the core. These two effects combined are commonly termed "core loss".
Core loss produces a reaction torque in a generator, in that the domain "friction" resists their aligning with the external field - causing more drag torque. Eddy currents make magnetic fields which oppose the fields making the eddy currents too, making more drag torque.
Now "core loss" in any ferromagnetic core material is directly proportional to the induction, B. Put another way the higher the delta flux density, the more core loss you get. (it is also proportional to the frequency, but let's assume a constant freq here, even though it is not at a constant one - it speeds up and slows down, again a neophyte mistake - you must measure things here at common speeds/freqs to make comparisons accurately)
And the induction, B is then what produces the coil voltage via Faraday/Lenz laws. That is voltage is the time derivative of delta flux. So people, when you short a generator coil and it's voltage drops to near zero, you can be certain that the delta B within the coil's core is also near zero!
So if you started with a delta B of say 1,000 gauss at no load on the coils, and your core material produces say 15 watts of core loss per pound of core (solid steel is in this ballpark, which is why we laminate special steels for transformers which takes the core loss down to about 2 watts per pound) then you'd have some serious drag torque experienced by the drive motor with coils open circuit.
Now if you short the coils and drop the delta B down to say 10 gauss, you have REDUCED the core loss by a factor of 1000/10=100 times less core loss when shorted than when open circuited!
This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh)
This is amateur hour gone mad - both in the videos and mostly in these lists! Which does nothing but hurt the cause of getting O/U to the masses in my view, as it simply reinforces to the powers that be in the scientific community that it is a bunch of flakes and idiots making these claims!
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists. BUT you have to do proper energy/power balances to measure this gain. And you have to endeavor to reduce core losses to a minimum and account for core loss change when you heavily load the coils too.
I have one which gets a gain in excess of the entire core loss value, both eddy and hysteresis - therefore the gain cannot be from this artifact that plagues all coil/core systems. But it is a modest gain, and yes the rotor does want to speed up. But you have to manage this speed, and measure the loaded and unloaded condition at the same shaft speed, because friction and windage change too when speed changes.
Then you have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power, including friction, core loss, coil heating and direct electrical output for a complete energy/power balance. In fact there is an IEEE protocol for doing a complete power balance on motors and generators, which includes all these things.
This person did few if none of these things properly and is delusional about the apparent speed increasing meaning it is O/U. There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system, but it is completely overriden by mundane, conventional effects as "blindsangamon" correctly points out.
In short his videos are a waste of bandwidth and show nothing conclusive except that author is both ignorant of EM, and of how to perform measurements on said systems.
Sorry for being so terse with you folks, but it is very annoying to watch so many people do harm to the cause by spouting off without really having a grasp of conventional ElectroMagnetics. Both amateur's like in these videos, and indeed a large percentage of the armchair critics populating these lists! Do your homework before putting foot in mouth!
There's a few rational voices out there, blindsangamon being one, and most of you then deride these voices with nonsense and blind faith!
here's a simplified protocol for measuring a generator's complete power balance:
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
1 Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including:
2 Friction alone, meaning with no magnets or mag fields acting on the cores.
3 Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
The difference between 3 minus 2 is the core loss at no load.
4 Measure the DC resistance of all coils as they would be connected in a loaded condition (i.e. series or parallel).
5 Load the generator at the same speed as the no load tests.
6 measure input power via torque times speed. (Newton-meters times RPM times 0.1047 = shaft power in watts)
7 measure True output electrical power. Not with DMM's. but with appropriate True Power meters or analyzers.
8 measure coil current, and calculate coil's "Joule heating" via I^2R.
9 measure and compare coil voltage compared to no load voltage for a ratio with which to discount core loss.
Then take the loaded input shaft power in watts as INPUT to system.
Against this Input, you add the following:
a electrical output in watts
b friction in watts
c core loss via no load core loss times the voltage drop ratio (so if no load core loss were 37 watts, and no load voltage was 125V and loaded voltage is 83V, then the ratio is 0.664. Multiply 0.664 times no load core loss of 37 watts to equal 24.57 watts output core loss)
d coil heating via I^2R
Add up item a through d for the total system OUTPUT.
Now divide Output by Input for your COP. (Coefficient of Performance)
Note friction, core loss and coil heat are legitimate outputs.... they heat the room! Useful output is an arbitrary distinction based on subjective criteria. If you want shaft power then heat is not useful. If however you want a heater, then shaft power is not useful! So to know in the absolute sense if a thing is over unity or not, you have to account for ALL outputs in a balance sheet.
That's another pet peeve of mine - those who dismiss everything they deem as "not useful"! Now suppose you had a system which routinely produces 200% more heat output in coil heating and core heating while it turns a shaft as in some newfangled motor. The shaft power COP is only 35%, but overall the system is 200% gainful. These persons I refer to would dismiss this as not being useful because the shaft power is under unity!
When in fact a home heating system would require a heat exchange mechanism to get heat from your machine to the air, thus it requires a pump - moving air or water or both. So you could make "use" of both the excess heating and the shaft power from said system!
My point is at these early stages it is imperative that you measure all aspects even if you may "think" they aren't useful. For complete energy balances and because overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!
DMBoss
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 10:49:27 PM
Look at: http://www.magtrol.com/tensioncontrol/hysteresisbrakes.htm
and: http://www.djautomation.co.uk/html/hysteresis_brake___clutch.html
He has a hysteresis brake that is turned off by shorting the coil windings.
He has hysteresis "braking" when applying a DC voltage to the field coil, which is exactly what you would expect, read the stuff that you link to
http://www.magtrol.com/datasheets/hb-mhb.pdf
The hysteresis effect in magnetism is applied to torque
control by the use of two basic components ?a reticulated
pole structure and a specialty steel rotor/shaft
assembly?fastened together but not in physical
contact. Until the field coil is energized,
the drag cup can spin freely on the ball
bearings. When a magnetizing force
from either a field coil or magnet is
applied to the pole structure, the
air gap becomes a flux field.
The rotor is magnetically
restrained, providing a
braking action between
the pole structure and
rotor.
I agree with the hysteresis brake theory. I here also have a video:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
that shows a generator loaded with a 50watt 12v car bulb and indeed under load (or direct short) there is a very considerable increase in rpm. (and thus a drop in motor amp draw) The motor is a ?universal motor? from a washing machine powered by a variac.
This accelerating effect does give the feeling that lenz is ?overcome? but it is not so. The effect is only there when one uses ?bad cores? with lots of eddy current and hysteresis losses. In this generator solid steel cores are used and I tell you in only 1 minute they are 70+ degrees (Celsius) hot, and I?m not joking. But the main problem is that these bad cores don?t seem to be able to give a bigger output then the losses they have. So the solid steel cores were replaced with good silicon steel laminations, but you guessed it, the accelerating effect is now gone.
So you can kinda say it like this. If you have a core with lots of core losses, Lenz will fight them and cause less drag on the rotor under speed (but only up to a balance between the two) but due to the bad core you can forget any o.u potential. So you say let?s use good cores then, like silicon steel or metglass? well you now have the potential of real good output? but unfortunately the no load effect is now gone. So again nature has found a way to put ?it? just out of our reach.
Regards,
Steven
So to put this in simple terms, the drive motor is in fact loaded down when the light is not connected?
Just to get a picture of this, whats the motors specified rpm under no load conditions? in other words its shaft not connected to anything.
Quote from: Nali2001 on February 06, 2008, 09:11:00 AM
I agree with the hysteresis brake theory. I here also have a video:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
that shows a generator loaded with a 50watt 12v car bulb and indeed under load (or direct short) there is a very considerable increase in rpm. (and thus a drop in motor amp draw) The motor is a ?universal motor? from a washing machine powered by a variac.
This accelerating effect does give the feeling that lenz is ?overcome? but it is not so. The effect is only there when one uses ?bad cores? with lots of eddy current and hysteresis losses. In this generator solid steel cores are used and I tell you in only 1 minute they are 70+ degrees (Celsius) hot, and I?m not joking. But the main problem is that these bad cores don?t seem to be able to give a bigger output then the losses they have. So the solid steel cores were replaced with good silicon steel laminations, but you guessed it, the accelerating effect is now gone.
So you can kinda say it like this. If you have a core with lots of core losses, Lenz will fight them and cause less drag on the rotor under speed (but only up to a balance between the two) but due to the bad core you can forget any o.u potential. So you say let?s use good cores then, like silicon steel or metglass? well you now have the potential of real good output? but unfortunately the no load effect is now gone. So again nature has found a way to put ?it? just out of our reach.
Regards,
Steven
The MAGTROL brakes are not HYSTERISIS activated. I'm surprised they claim that.
Hysterisis comes about by cycling the operating point of a ferromagntic material back and forth along the H-B curve. This requires AC, and these brakes use DC (just follow the flux path, they even say it's dc, the small poles all have the same polarity, so it's not like an alternator rotor with alternating N S poles).
The principle of operation here is eddy currents, which get induced due to motion through a magnetic field, which in the case of these brakes exists radialy in the airgap through which the rotor (cup) passes. Just because the rotor shaft is magnetic does not negate the effect and somehow make it hysterisis activated, it's still eddy current induction and the steel amplifyes the magnetic field of the eddy currents and the Dc flux in the gap.
That's how I see it, but that's not realy related to what this Heins guy is doing.
EM
DMBoss and Steven are right, that the core losses have to be researched and I agree, that the videos were done not very professionally from a measurement standpoint.
But if you look again at video 4 where he shows the coils inside the toroidal core, it would only take to measure the output power when the coils are shortrd out not directly but across a load and then compare versus the input power.
Also I think these videos might be a bit older as he now claims to have an overunity transformer having 0.2 Watts input and 14 Watts output.
So maybe Luc, who knows him can ring him up and get the latest infos from Mr. Heins ?
Many thanks.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 06, 2008, 09:29:53 AM
So maybe Luc, who knows him can ring him up and get the latest infos from Mr. Heins ?
Many thanks.
Does anyone have an email address for Heins. Maybe he would be willing to show up here or on the Steorn forum to discuss what he has.
Quote from: ltseung888 on February 06, 2008, 01:01:07 AM
Look at this simple video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/665396/how_increase_speed_of_electric_motor/
Just repeated the experiment with my oral B electric tooth brush. The frequency (or the sound from the vibrating brush system) changed with the approaching of a strong magnet.
So there is nothing revolutionary with the Thane Heins discovery???
hahaha
Quote from: ltseung888 on February 06, 2008, 01:01:07 AM
Look at this simple video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/665396/how_increase_speed_of_electric_motor/
Just repeated the experiment with my oral B electric tooth brush. The frequency (or the sound from the vibrating brush system) changed with the approaching of a strong magnet.
So there is nothing revolutionary with the Thane Heins discovery???
Lawrence, you're showing your ignorance again! Your knowledge of Physics is elementary at best and your knowledge of magnetics and electronics is at the grade school level.
The moral of the story is don't believe everything you see and certainly don't jump the gun in announcing a great find to try impress others you're on the 'leading edge' in understanding these great OU findings, including such home made flying saucer experiments from your commie friends.
Haven't you been laughed at long enough and by more people you can even count? I would have thought you would have learnt by now about not teaching your nonsense on this and other forums, eh?
cheers
chrisC
Quote from: DMBoss on February 06, 2008, 06:49:33 AM
Hi:
blindsangamon is correct. This is a common phenomenon regards "generators", but one often not commonly known about if you are not working with AC motors and generators all the time. So the professor at MIT may not have this practical engineering savvy to identify the issues at first glance.
DMBoss
Now while I admit that I do not hang on the words of scientists/professors.
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/300042
Contacted by phone a few hours after the test, Zahn is genuinely stumped ? and surprised. He said the magnet shouldn't cause acceleration. "It's an unusual phenomena I wouldn't have predicted in advance. But I saw it. It's real. Now I'm just trying to figure it out."
There's no talk of perpetual motion. No whisper of broken scientific laws or free energy. Zahn would never go there ? at least not yet. But he does see the potential for making electric motors more efficient, and this itself is no small feat.
Resume for Markus Kahn http://lees.mit.edu/lees/old_files/full/faculty/Zahn/Zahnbiography%208-05.pdf
Maybe the effect is not commonly known as you put it, but surely this guy would have spotted it?
And hes not exactly a n00b to magnetics.
http://lees.mit.edu/lees/old_files/full/projects/ferrof00.html
EMdevices sez:
>The MAGTROL brakes are not HYSTERISIS activated. I'm surprised they claim that.
>
>Hysterisis comes about by cycling the operating point of a ferromagntic material back and forth along the H->B curve. This requires AC, and these brakes use DC (just follow the flux path, they even say it's dc, the >small poles all have the same polarity, so it's not like an alternator rotor with alternating N S poles).
It is indeed a hysteresis brake. Hysteresis works at DC, too, unlike an eddy current brake. A hysteresis brake can exhibit full torque at zero RPM.
Here's our coverage: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc)
This is really a great story, told repeatedly over the last 20 plus years.
"Neo magnet runs the risk that increased flux can drive the housing and armature laminations into saturation, increasing iron losses and limiting the potential gain in efficiency. To work around this problem, the relative radial thicknesses of the magnet and the steel housing should be adjusted for maximum air-gap flux density. The lamination spoke width should increase and the inner lamination spokes should be converted to a solid rotor hub. Maximum efficiency can easily rise another 5 to 10% by optimizing the magnet, housing, and armature lamination dimensions"
The higher the remanence (BR) of a magnet, the better it can reduce current draw in a dc motor. The product of a magnet's operating flux density (B) and its magnetizing force (H) is a direct measure of its energy density. The maximum, (BH)max, is commonly used as a figure of merit for a permanent-magnet material.
Remanence is the magnetization left behind in a medium after an external magnetic field is removed. It is denoted in equations as MR. In engineering applications it is often assumed that the magnetization M is synonymous with the flux density B, hence the remanence is denoted as BR.
The remanence magnitude can be taken from a hysteresis loop at the intersections of the loop with the vertical magnetization axis.
- Schpankme
thanks magnetoelastic,Ã, I think you might have set me straight.Ã, I read a bit more, and sure enough they have eddy current brakes which are separate from the hysterisis type, which work independent of RPM.Ã, Ã, I guess I learned something new today.
EM
@All,
Just want to say that tests done on MY pulse motor gives the oposite result as stated by DMBoss!
When I run my rotor and put a unshorted (open) coil (with a ferrite core) up to the spinning rotor then
the RPM stays almost the same. When I short the coil and put it up to the rotor the RPM is going DOWN!
A shorted coil is a break for the rotor.
Groundloop.
I think its important to understand here that if Mr. Heins were to short the coils through a resistive load, the energy would be dissipated in the resistor and not be available for magnetic coupling back to the motor.
The question everyone should be asking themselves is: "If the energy is available when the magnetic coupling is in place, what happens to it when the coupling is removed?"
What Mr. Heins is doing is showing us an inefficiency in our current technology where losses occur that could be recouped and utilized in other ways.
8)
Quote from: Groundloop on February 06, 2008, 05:21:02 PM
@All,
Just want to say that tests done on MY pulse motor gives the oposite result as stated by DMBoss!
When I run my rotor and put a unshorted (open) coil (with a ferrite core) up to the spinning rotor then
the RPM stays almost the same. When I short the coil and put it up to the rotor the RPM is going DOWN!
A shorted coil is a break for the rotor.
Groundloop.
Try and place a magnetic pathway back to the spindle of your pulse motor. The flux induced in your handheld coil must have somewhere to go. ;)
Speaking of Perepiteia,Ã, Ã, or something opposite taking place than what is intended,Ã, I remember a phenomena simular to Hein's accelerating motor,Ã, and I'm wondering if perhaps it's not the same thing.
A few years ago I was taking an engineering class dealing with electric machines (motors, generators, transformers, etc..),Ã, and in the lab, the professor showed us what happens if you think you will stop a motor by cutting the current to the rotor field coils but leaving the stator coils powered up.Ã, (I think we were dealing with an AC synchronous motor, where the rotor tracks the rotating field with no slip, but it might have been something else like a DC type of motor running with AC)Ã, Ã, Common sense would tell us that if we decrease the magnetic field, the motor would have less torque (which normaly depends on the magnetic flux strength) and eventualy slow down some more.Ã, Well that's not exactly what happens, and what happens can be quite dangerous and even kill.Ã, Ã, The motor accelerated like a demon, and the professor quickly cut the power to the other set of coils and explained that you will have a catastrophic event if you make this mistake.Ã, The motor speeds up so fast it will fly apart and kill people in it's blasting range.Ã, so YOU DON'T CUT THE POWER TO JUST ONE SET OF COILS BUT TO BOTH COILS. Ã, Ã, I don't remember much from that class, but this stuck in my memory as something odd and counterintuitive.
So why is it couterintuitive?Ã, Ã, I believe at face value we don't think in terms of torque curves for the motor, but with modeling equations you can show how the torque curve gets modified when the flux drops in the rotor.Ã, From the torque curves it becomes apparent that the steady state speed (equilibrium point) has just moved higher in RPM.
So, I believe Mr Heins might be dealing with this phenomena.Ã, It's not a new physics phenomena, but an engineering or system effect.Ã, That's why some of these profesors are also amazed.Ã, They are experts in a very specific domain, but they can be quite ignorant in other areas.Ã, I see that in myself as well.
EM
Ever listen to vacuum cleaner when the hose gets plugged?
Or, have you ever taken the output of a fan and routed it back to the input?
How an apparent load interacts with the source can often have unexpected results.
EM,
You are right about the professors. I used to work in the engineering department for a large food processing plant. We had a mechanical engineering professor stop by one day to see what we were doing. I showed him a positive displacement pump and he said, " so that's what they look like". This guy could tell you everything you wanted to know about them, but has never seen one up close before. They are very intelligent with the theory but I think they fall a bit short in the practical.
Tim
@Harvey,
What will the rpm result be if I provide a magnetic path from the RUN coil and back to the rotor axle?
Groundloop.
The technology is so complicated we need at least 100 lab coats to explain how it works.
.....o no! We only had to hold the magnet close to the motor.
Rocket science!
hahaha
Quote from: Thaelin on February 06, 2008, 12:12:41 AM
@blindsanxxxx
Ok, then tell me just how is it that the main guy at MIT "does" agree with him. "And" he is stumped as to why.
thaelin
Professor Zahn hasn't responded. Thaelin, before I'd say the professor agrees with Heins I'd have to hear him explain why (not someone quoting him). The same is true for why or if he's stumped. There's no sound reason to conclude either.
Bessler007
edit: I still haven't watched the videos.
Hey guys and girls,
I'm reporting back as I said in Reply #21.
I live in Ottawa and have known Thane Heins for about 9 years now but have lost touch with him for the past 7 years. However I talk to him on the phone tonight for about half an hour. I invited him to the O.U. forum but he said he would not have the time to get involve at this time.
He has a demonstration at the Ottawa University Monday next week which he invited me and another member from this forum to attend.
So if anyone has easy and specific question or tests that we can ask him to do, please PM me but keep in mind that Thane or myself have only basic understandings of electronics. Thane wants to share any of his finding with all, so nothing is hidden. I also want to do the same.
I will give an update of the demonstration.
Luc
Quote from: chrisC on February 06, 2008, 01:57:02 PM
Quote from: ltseung888 on February 06, 2008, 01:01:07 AM
Look at this simple video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/665396/how_increase_speed_of_electric_motor/
Just repeated the experiment with my oral B electric tooth brush. The frequency (or the sound from the vibrating brush system) changed with the approaching of a strong magnet.
So there is nothing revolutionary with the Thane Heins discovery???
Lawrence, you're showing your ignorance again! Your knowledge of Physics is elementary at best and your knowledge of magnetics and electronics is at the grade school level.
The moral of the story is don't believe everything you see and certainly don't jump the gun in announcing a great find to try impress others you're on the 'leading edge' in understanding these great OU findings, including such home made flying saucer experiments from your commie friends.
Haven't you been laughed at long enough and by more people you can even count? I would have thought you would have learnt by now about not teaching your nonsense on this and other forums, eh?
cheers
chrisC
@chrisC
Never forget that a stopped face clock is correct twice a day. ;)
I gave up on that so called, "lead out theory," long ago when I looked into the "simple" pendulum example. I recall that I could not reconcile even the most basic premise due to a lack of clear system definitions. I only check in on that topic nowadays for a quick giggle. :D
That said, I happened to notice a motor acceleration myself a while back. I was using a small DC motor and a battery as a sort of a poor man's 'spark gap oscillator' to drive some current around a coil of mag-wire wrapped around two magnets super-glued together in an opposing configuration. Part of that experiment had something to do with making CD music sound 'different' somehow when this 'radiant beam' emitted from the magnet centers was left on the CD for some time. There were some other things going on with that experiment that escape my memory at the moment, but I digress.
At one point in my screwing around with that particular experiment I happened to attract/attach this small motor to the magnet. I noticed that at certain positions I could hear the motor speed-up. I thought it was due to the opposing-fields-radiant-energy thing. However, after seeing the video quoted above in this reply, I wonder if it was not just the magnets alone that were accelerating the motor.
At any rate, you might not want to throw the baby out with the 'lead-out' bath water just yet. I am sure that a bunch of folks here have magnets and small DC motors lying about. Why not give it a try? 8)
UPDATE: I just spoke with jdo300 about this. He said that placing magnets near a DC motor will increase the speed because, if done right, all we are doing is increasing, by augmentation, the strength of the magnets already inside the motor. Jason also said that Thane is using AC motors and that this fact is what makes his results such a curiosity.
Sometimes I feel that my only purpose in posting here is to make others feel smarter. ???
Hi this is my first post here. I know very little about motors and generators. I would like to know if this quote supports the hysteresis explanation?
from:
http://www.thestar.com/Article/300041
quote:
Heins realized what had happened: The steel rotor and driveshaft had conducted the magnetic resistance away from the coil and back into the heart of the electric motor. Since such motors work on the principle of converting electrical energy into motion by creating rotating magnetic fields, he figured the Back EMF was boosting those fields, causing acceleration.
But how could this be? It would create a positive feedback loop. As the motor accelerated faster it would create a larger electromagnetic field on the generator coil, causing the motor to go faster, and so on and so on. Heins confirmed his theory by replacing part of the driveshaft with plastic pipe that wouldn't conduct the magnetic field. There was no acceleration.
endquote
Quote from: gotoluc on February 06, 2008, 11:28:37 PM
Hey guys and girls,
I'm reporting back as I said in Reply #21.
I live in Ottawa and have known Thane Heins for about 9 years now but have lost touch with him for the past 7 years. However I talk to him on the phone tonight for about half an hour. I invited him to the O.U. forum but he said he would not have the time to get involve at this time.
Hi Luc,
many thanks for contacting Mr. Heins.
Did he say anything about his overunity transformer
and if the shown videos were still from an earlier development
stage ?
Does he now have better units and videos ?
Looking forward to a report from the upcoming
university demonstration
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 06, 2008, 05:21:02 PM
@All,
Just want to say that tests done on MY pulse motor gives the oposite result as stated by DMBoss!
When I run my rotor and put a unshorted (open) coil (with a ferrite core) up to the spinning rotor then
the RPM stays almost the same. When I short the coil and put it up to the rotor the RPM is going DOWN!
A shorted coil is a break for the rotor.
Groundloop.
Well Groundloop:
You are comparing apples to oranges! Exactly my point in chiding people posting results without doing their homework!
Ferrite cores, have exceptionally small core loss per pound of material and are virtually non-conductive so there is almost no eddy current loss. And that's why we can use ferrites for extremely high frequencies, and cannot use steel above 400 Hz!
it's because steel, has very high core loss and so can't be used at higher freqs. Not only is your test irrelevant to the issue at hand, i.e. Heins used bulk steel blocks as cores and you used ferrite (one has 15 watts per pound core loss at 60 Hz and the other has a few tens of milliwatts per pound at 60 Hz), But you fail to grasp energy/power balances!
Just because the rotor speed falls does not tell you anything about what and where power is going! If you had a few turns of heavy wire on that shorted coil with ferrite as core - that would make a LOT of current and then the I'2R of that coil could be 20 watts! This by itself with slow the rotor down, irrespective of a core loss change. So you could have really large coil heating output placing a load torque on the rotor in excess of the miniscule core loss change of your ferrite core.
To make your blanket statement with authority, you'd have to measure torque, speed, True Power, and Rms voltage and current and crunch some numbers. You'd also have to know the rotating mass friction at particular speeds being measured too, along with coil's DC resistance.
If however you had a gazillion turns of really fine wire as it appears Heins has, and shorted them, a miniscule current will flow and only a few tens of milliwatts will be dissipated by the coil heating, and the very large core loss change will be evident in rotor increase in speed!
To spell it out for you:
Your improper comparison using ferrite core, has a teensy core loss reduction upon shorting the coils, and this core loss reduction in drag, is less than the increase in drag due to the I^2R output of the coil heat. (yours is teensy because a 90% reduction in a core loss that starts at only 100milliwatts is teensy by comparison to a 90% reduction in steel core loss that starts at 5 or 50 watts!)
Heins' system has solid iron or steel bars as core, with a huge core loss value. he also used a LOT of really fine wire to wind his coils - he shows one having 175 ohms DC resistance! This miniscule current will flow to completely take the B in the core down to near zero as evidenced by the near zero voltage induction value. So say he has 50mA flowing - into 175 ohms - that is then 437 milliwatts of coil heat adding drag to the rotor. But he obviously has anywhere from 50 to 300 watts of drag in his system at no load, a large percentage of that being core loss - so if core loss were even a mere 5 watts no load, and it dropped to 1 watts when coils are shorted, the rotor will speed up because this lessened drag of 4 watts, is 10x higher than the increased drag from coil heating of 437mwatts!
Sorry your argument is nonsense.
DMBoss
Speed increase? I can see that.
No matter how much I dig I haven't found anything about shaft output power increase. If it is out there someone please post a link.
Thanks,
BEP
BEP,
If the rate of rotation is accelerating that means the shaft is capable of delivering more power then if it were rotating at a constant rate.
Harry
@hveeder,
At some point in the curve, yes.
How I'm relating to this:
Diesel generator short circuit test using MIL STD 705C methods....
Short the generator stator leads out to confirm other things but when doing so the poor engine RPM shoots sky-high. If it wasn't for the fuel control the engine would throw more than magnets out.
I don't see yet how he is reaching that point in the curve. Is this happening while the motor is under a conventional load?
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 07, 2008, 02:39:01 AM
Hi Luc,
many thanks for contacting Mr. Heins.
Did he say anything about his overunity transformer
and if the shown videos were still from an earlier development
stage ?
Does he now have better units and videos ?
Looking forward to a report from the upcoming
university demonstration
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan,
I did not ask Thane about the (overunity transformer) but I can talk to him about it when we meet. All we talked about was what he showed in the videos. Also I do not think that his unit has any improvements since the videos but I will know once I see the demonstration.
I did ask him why he did not put a load at the coils instead of just shorting them and he replied that none of the coils were winded the same way or had the same turns, mag wire gauge and core shape. He did this to find out if core shape, magnet wire gauge or turns had any effect over the motors acceleration. After individually testing each coil he has found no difference in the effect. So not one coil will output the same voltage, so it would be difficult to just attach a bulbs to each one. Also some output high voltage and just milliamp. He said that all the coils together (I think 8 of them) would produce around 1,000 volts and around 2 watts. So how many volts can a fluorecent bulb take?
I will bring my own MP4 pocket video camera for the demonstration and ask if I can take some footage.
Luc
Hi DMBOss,
many thanks for your insights, but you seem to have missed somepoints.
The open circuit voltage of the 175 Ohm DC resistance output coil in video 1
is about 75 Volts .
So that gives us in the shorted case an output power of Voltage^2 / 175 Ohm= 32 Watts.
So if he closes the switch he heats the coil?s DC resistance with 32 Watts if you neglect
any AC phase shift angle.
So also he has about 600 Watts of driving power, 120 Volts x 5 Amps,
again if you neglect cos phi phase angle, so it could also be much lower..
So do you still think he is just making impedance matching with his system ?
I had a closer look at the original MPEG movies and it looks like
he is not using solid iron cores but laminated iron cores,
so the eddy current losses should be small.
Hi Luc,
many thanks for this additional infos.
Well, yes, I have seen it already from video 3,
where in the toroidal setup one coil had over 70 Volts and the other
only about 7Volts.
Maybe you can still call him for a few minutes only again today
and just ask about the overunity transformer and if this will
be shown at the university and if he can already selfrun the transformer ?
Then we don?t have to wait so long.
Many thanks in advance.
Regards,.Stefan.
P.S: Yes,if he can put a big 60 or more Watts fluorescent bulb across all the coils in series
this should light it up pretty well.
At least if he used a 25 Watts incandescent bulbs for his main 175 Ohm coil,
it should light up also pretty well at 75 Volts already.
Quote from: DMBoss on February 07, 2008, 10:18:09 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 06, 2008, 05:21:02 PM
@All,
Just want to say that tests done on MY pulse motor gives the oposite result as stated by DMBoss!
When I run my rotor and put a unshorted (open) coil (with a ferrite core) up to the spinning rotor then
the RPM stays almost the same. When I short the coil and put it up to the rotor the RPM is going DOWN!
A shorted coil is a break for the rotor.
Groundloop.
Well Groundloop:
You are comparing apples to oranges! Exactly my point in chiding people posting results without doing their homework!
Ferrite cores, have exceptionally small core loss per pound of material and are virtually non-conductive so there is almost no eddy current loss. And that's why we can use ferrites for extremely high frequencies, and cannot use steel above 400 Hz!
it's because steel, has very high core loss and so can't be used at higher freqs. Not only is your test irrelevant to the issue at hand, i.e. Heins used bulk steel blocks as cores and you used ferrite (one has 15 watts per pound core loss at 60 Hz and the other has a few tens of milliwatts per pound at 60 Hz), But you fail to grasp energy/power balances!
Just because the rotor speed falls does not tell you anything about what and where power is going! If you had a few turns of heavy wire on that shorted coil with ferrite as core - that would make a LOT of current and then the I'2R of that coil could be 20 watts! This by itself with slow the rotor down, irrespective of a core loss change. So you could have really large coil heating output placing a load torque on the rotor in excess of the miniscule core loss change of your ferrite core.
To make your blanket statement with authority, you'd have to measure torque, speed, True Power, and Rms voltage and current and crunch some numbers. You'd also have to know the rotating mass friction at particular speeds being measured too, along with coil's DC resistance.
If however you had a gazillion turns of really fine wire as it appears Heins has, and shorted them, a miniscule current will flow and only a few tens of milliwatts will be dissipated by the coil heating, and the very large core loss change will be evident in rotor increase in speed!
To spell it out for you:
Your improper comparison using ferrite core, has a teensy core loss reduction upon shorting the coils, and this core loss reduction in drag, is less than the increase in drag due to the I^2R output of the coil heat. (yours is teensy because a 90% reduction in a core loss that starts at only 100milliwatts is teensy by comparison to a 90% reduction in steel core loss that starts at 5 or 50 watts!)
Heins' system has solid iron or steel bars as core, with a huge core loss value. he also used a LOT of really fine wire to wind his coils - he shows one having 175 ohms DC resistance! This miniscule current will flow to completely take the B in the core down to near zero as evidenced by the near zero voltage induction value. So say he has 50mA flowing - into 175 ohms - that is then 437 milliwatts of coil heat adding drag to the rotor. But he obviously has anywhere from 50 to 300 watts of drag in his system at no load, a large percentage of that being core loss - so if core loss were even a mere 5 watts no load, and it dropped to 1 watts when coils are shorted, the rotor will speed up because this lessened drag of 4 watts, is 10x higher than the increased drag from coil heating of 437mwatts!
Sorry your argument is nonsense.
DMBoss
@
DMBoss,
I never said you where wrong. All I said is that MY pulse motor slowed down when you load it. This was to show people that this is the normal thing for a motor to do. So it is easy to be fooled by lossy cores.
OK?
Groundloop.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 07, 2008, 01:08:06 PM
I had a closer look at the original MPEG movies and it looks like
he is not using solid iron cores but laminated iron cores,
so the eddy current losses should be small.
I agree, part 4 definitely shows laminated cores.
Even with laminated core materials, the hysteresis braking effect will occur if he is using carbon steel for the laminations.
Quote from: gotoluc on February 06, 2008, 11:28:37 PM
He has a demonstration at the Ottawa University Monday next week which he invited me and another member from this forum to attend.
Please see if you can borrow a digital camera that will let you take movies, and post anything that you take here.
QuoteThane wants to share any of his finding with all, so nothing is hidden.
The copy of his patent application on the Canadian Patent website is incomplete (it is missing 2 pages).
Please ask him for a copy of his patent application, so it can be posted here, so people can try to reproduce his results.
I don't know if this would even be relevant to the current discussion but you may want to check out this patent, "Method and Apparatus for Increasing Energy." In it, they talk about adding a DC bias winding to the rotor in an AC motor to increase the output. Might be worth a look:
http://www.google.com/patents/pdf/METHOD_AND_APPARATUS_FOR_INCREASING_ELEC.pdf?id=lYA3AAAAEBAJ&output=pdf&sig=nhE0OQ-Zg7JP66IqJR_cIWTN8NI
God Bless,
Jason O
Quote from: gotoluc on February 06, 2008, 11:28:37 PM
Hey guys and girls,
He has a demonstration at the Ottawa University Monday next week which he invited me and another member from this forum to attend.
Luc
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=H7KrlDZ5Hkw
Just a little light entertainment ;D
Quote from: RunningBare on February 08, 2008, 07:36:08 PM
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=H7KrlDZ5Hkw
Just a little light entertainment ;D
Excellent choice RunningBare ;) I love this group.
Here is another good one that speak of the changes to come: http://www.mp3tube.net/musics/Mamas-and-the-Papas-Age-of-Aquarius/16501/
Stay tuned for more.
Luc
Interesting blog by Tyler Hamilton the reporter
http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/2/4/3505063.html
and one of the comments
If Mr. Heins wants to get publicity for his motor along with all the FREE third-party verification he could ask for ($5000 to Zahn to watch a demo?!?!), all he has to do is hook up the output back to the input so that the device is self-sustaining.
That is what anybody would do asap after realizing that he had something so unusual; yet, like all the inventors of these wonderful devices, all Mr Heins does is come up with ambiguous videos.
Just based on such amazing behavior, I would guess that there is nothing unusual in what Heins has, and that consciously or unconsciously, he knows it.
@canam101,
Also read the two posts done by the inventor:
SNIP
Re: Harnessing Back EMF to create "free" energy?
by Thane Heins on Wed 06 Feb 2008 05:45 AM EST | Permanent Link
Dear Tyler,
Isn't it interesting that you ask a QUESTION, "did Thane
Heins invent....blah, blah" And virtually everyone reads it
as a statement of fact (everyone so far I've seen so far at least)
when in fact your article went to great lengths to conclude that
the QUESTION is still UNANSWERED.
How can we humans anything new if we don't start with and aren't afraid
to ask "WHAT IF"? I would suggest all your bloggers read this interesting
article: http://www.lightshift.com/Inspiration/monkey.html
Our MIT financial budget to have the question answered
is $20,000.00 USD. Our trip to Cambridge alone cost 5
grand. I can assure you that Dr. Zahn would not agree to
take our money and waste one second of his valuable time if the design
was obviously flawed in any way. BTW he is NOT stumped but pleasantly
surprised and interested. Our main goal is to have a third party evaluation performed
to provide due diligence for any future investors to protect their money,
maintain our corporate integrity and serve science and humanity in the process.
As far as putting the demo in a public place it already is (on the internet)
and anyone who wants a demo can come to Ottawa U and get one
ANYTIME. In fact we have 2 business people coming next week from
Toronto who may end up being strategic partners and the Ottawa Skeptic
Society is coming on Monday.
Finally to clarify another point - the motor power goes DOWN as the system
speed increases while simultaneously the generator output goes UP. This
what we have observed and can demonstrate and claim.
Is this phenomenon perpetual motion or perpetual nonsense - only time
and effort and tell along with a willingness to try and ask the difficult
questions (in the face of adversity) while those who don't continue eating dirt.
The man who says it cannot be done - should not interfere with the one doing it.
Chinese Proverb
Cheers
Than
Re: Harnessing Back EMF to create "free" energy?
by Thane Heins on Thu 07 Feb 2008 05:56 AM EST | Permanent Link
Dear Stephen B,
Yes and in part 5 I think; I briefly show the input power when coil 2 is producing about 220 no load volts while the other coils are shorted AND DRIVING the motor - then I use ONLY the motor to accelerate the system up to 220 no load volts on coil 2 and the motor is drawing more than 50 more watts of power than in the first case.
I know the demo is very boring for most people so it is not as technical as it ought to be. Here is an explanation I gave to someone else yesterday (who wanted to know about a mechanical rather than electrical load) which might be useful to you as well.
The prototype uses an induction motor as the prime mover. The speed increase is due to the
magnetic coupling of the generator Back EMF - MMF's to the induction motor's rotor. Without
this it would operate as a conventional generator prime mover scenario and decelerate under
electrical load.
When an induction motor accelerates - the slip angle between the stator and rotor decreases.
The slip angle dictates how much current will be drawn by the stator coil.
Maximum slip angle at startup RPM = 0 = maximum motor current.
Minimum slip angle at full speed = max RPM = minimum motor current.
The induction motor's current draw is in direct proportion to the RPM of the rotor. As the
motor speeds up the slip angle decreases and the motor draws less and less current. If you talk about one you are also talking about the other.
Shorting out a CONVENTIONAL generator = maximum electrical load = maximum RESISTIVE magnetic load = maximum counter torque = maximum deceleration.
Shorting out a MAGNETICALLY COUPLED generator = maximum electrical load = maximum ASSISTIVE magnetic load = maximum complimentary torque = maximum acceleration.
The point is, for physics a load - be it mechanical or electrical is NOT supposed to cause
acceleration.
In this case a mechanical brake would produce deceleration because a brake does not produce a
magnetic field like a salient pole coil of wire does which is the "not so secret recipe" for success
here.
Concerning your wind turbine question, look at Part 4 of the Demo which uses the Toroid Coil configuration - this was specifically designed for wind generators to reduce and ultimately eliminate "motor action" inside the generator.
I hope this helps for now.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
Co-Founder - Potential Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
"Credibility can't be invented, it has to be earned"
Tyler Hamilton - Toronto Star Columnist
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
R. Buckminster Fuller
END SNIP
What Thane Heins is claiming:
"Finally to clarify another point - the motor power goes DOWN as the system
speed increases while simultaneously the generator output goes UP. This
what we have observed and can demonstrate and claim."
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 09, 2008, 10:51:14 AM
@canam101,
Also read the two posts done by the inventor:
Re: Harnessing Back EMF to create "free" energy?
by Thane Heins on Wed 06 Feb 2008 05:45 AM EST | Permanent Link
<snip>
As far as putting the demo in a public place it already is (on the internet)
and anyone who wants a demo can come to Ottawa U and get one
ANYTIME. In fact we have 2 business people coming next week from
Toronto who may end up being strategic partners and the Ottawa Skeptic
Society is coming on Monday.
<snip>
</color>
Uh oh. Sounds like Monday might to be a big show with all those people.
And with a group of skeptics, it may not be all that productive. I guess
we'll see. I was hoping for enough information to be able to decide if it's
worth replicating (power in vs power out with the toroid configuration) and
then information on materials (there are sufficient other construction
details in the videos.)
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
I have done ONE test so far. I glued two toroid Ferrite cores together and added three coils.
(As shown in the attached drawing.)
My first and only test (so far) showed me NO output in L3 when the switch was open.
When I closed the switch then I got output in L3.
I have NOT compared any input vs. output power yet!
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
Does the two ferrite rings have differing permeabilities or they are more or less equal?
If I read correctly, the two cores must differ in permeabilities.
from http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html :
Heins adds that he and his colleagues ?have coupling from the primary to the secondary. The reluctance flux path in the secondary is lower because either the secondary core area is greater or because we employ core material with a higher relative permeability which results in a decrease in reluctance. When the secondary reluctance is lower - back EMF induced flux from secondary coil 1 must follow the path of least reluctance into secondary 2 and not back to the primary. The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source. The law of conservation of energy for a transformer requires secondary back EMF to be able to mutually couple back to the primary - but if this flux path is higher it will not be able to do so.?
Thanks for the test.
Gyula
Hi Groundloop,
well done.
Please let us know more about your coil?s setup
and what wire and turn ratio you use.
Also what could help is to rectify the input AC with a diode,
so only thepositive amplitude wave can pass and
then also use a diode at the output coil into the other direction,
so you can decouple core magnet field energizing
from output coil energy extraction.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: gyulasun on February 09, 2008, 02:43:13 PM
from http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html :
Heins adds that he and his colleagues ?have coupling from the primary to the secondary. The reluctance flux path in the secondary is lower because either the secondary core area is greater or because we employ core material with a higher relative permeability which results in a decrease in reluctance. When the secondary reluctance is lower - back EMF induced flux from secondary coil 1 must follow the path of least reluctance into secondary 2 and not back to the primary. The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source. The law of conservation of energy for a transformer requires secondary back EMF to be able to mutually couple back to the primary - but if this flux path is higher it will not be able to do so.?
The above also says that the secondary core can be of greater area, though it sounds like Thane used the permeability difference trick. I was thinking more of replicating the toroid setup in video 4 but this certainly seems easier. Thanks for bringing it up Groundloop. I missed it completely.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
@gyulasun,
No they are the same. I did not have to cores of the same size but with different materials right now so I
just use two high frequency (HF) cores I had in my box. Will try different cores when I find any.
@hartiberlin,
I have tried to hook the coil onto my SSG. It (the SSG) has a diode on the output. I was able to light up a small light bulb on the output coil (L3) when the middle coil was shorted out. There was no output when the middle coil (L2) was open. I will try different cores (as soon as I find any.) It is a pain in the ass to wind the coils because I have to manually thread the wire through the core for each turn.
My present cores has L1 = L3 = 0,35mm magnet wire 100 turns. L2 = 0,35mm magnet wire 50 turns.
Transformer toroid of 4C6 material has been used. Dimensions: 23 x 14 x 7 mm.
Groundloop.
[EDIT] Added image of the cores.
Steve,
I found an old PC power supply and can use two of the Ferrite cores from that unit.
They are made of Ferrite and of different size. It will take three hours to wind the cores.
Then I will build an oscillator as shown in the attachment to test the cores.
Groundloop.
@All,
Can anybody tell me the permeability difference of the two cores in the attached image?
Which core has the highest permeability of the two?
(One is yellow with a white ring. The other is pale green with a blue ring.)
Groundloop.
Groundloop,
Do you mind if I print at least your diagrams to show Thane on Monday for his feedback? I found that back when I was visiting David Hamel, bringing my replication helped a lot since he pointed out details I would never have thought to ask about.
Luc,
Do you have a colour printer? That would be much much cheaper than going to a shop to get printouts.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
Everything I do here is open source. Print, share all you want.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop
with the Switch SW1 in your circuit:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D4047.0%3Battach%3D17412&hash=d0693a4cec7352f7007fe59f768f02a1db2ad42b)
you can easily switch in and out the MMF coupling of the cores,
thus if you do it very fast and maybe with a spark gap you can
make very nice BACK-EMF pulses at the output coil !
So you could convert all the flux in the second right core to ouput power
without drawing additional input power, if you open up the switch.
It is a very fantastic and easy circuit !
Congratulations !
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Groundloop
Would you mind checking if there is any reflection of the load to the input coil in this setup? ;)
Would you short circuit or load heavily L3 while monitoring input power to L1? (switch SW1 should be closed for this test)
I could not help but ask this till I also obtain some rings. By the way if I remember well, Amidon cores use color codes and maybe some old Philips cores. Are your cores old?
Thanks, Gyula
@hartiberlin,
I guess it is possible to switch in and out the magnetic coupling like you say.
Maybe have a switch on the output also. Then one can switch off the coupling
and switch in the load some nano seconds later. Just theorizing here..........
My first job will be winding (threading) the new coils based on the cores shown
in the picture. Next job will be soldering together an oscillator with feedback.
It will be easy to see if the output > input when connected to a lead acid battery.
O/U or no o/u, it IS a fun hobby to play with electronic. :D
Groundloop.
@gyulasun,
I did some measurements for you.
When I short out the output (L3) I could NOT see any difference in the input power.
When I measured the current in the shorted middle coil I got higher current with a shorted output than without.
(The middle coil L2 was shorted in both cases.)
The meter I used is NOT very accurate so I can not say that this result is 100% correct. It is only an indication.
BTW: The cores is relative new. Less than 3 years old.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 09, 2008, 06:15:41 PM
@gyulasun,
I did some measurements for you.
When I short out the output (L3) I could NOT see any difference in the input power.
When I measured the current in the shorted middle coil I got higher current with a shorted output than without.
(The middle coil L2 was shorted in both cases.)
The meter I used is NOT very accurate so I can not say that this result is 100% correct. It is only an indication.
BTW: The cores is relative new. Less than 3 years old.
Groundloop.
Thank you very much. Very good news! Indication is just enough for this test I think.
Here is a link to Amidon (in fact Micrometals) toroid cores. They have a wast amount of core types: http://www.qsl.net/ok1dxd/amidon.htm (http://www.qsl.net/ok1dxd/amidon.htm) Your Yellow/White is for low frequency filters / chokes as it turns out. But your pale Green/Blue I am not sure...
The best would be to wind 10 or 20 turns on it and insert it into an oscillator for frequency check (unless you happen to have a inductance meter) and recalculate its inductance from which the permeability could be found out...
rgds, Gyula
@gyulasun,
Thanks for the link. It seems to me that the yellow/white has a material permeability of 75 and all other colors has a lower permeability.
I think I can safely assume that my green/blue one has a lower permeability. So the green will be the input and oscillator coil. I will make both
the input coil and out coil of two strands of magnet wire. Then I can test the core both "ways".
Groundloop.
Just a quick request for those testers on here. After completing a test, can you include a short set of conclusions (which can be just a sentence or two) which indicates that the test results either agree with conventional theory/thinking or disagree with conventional theory/thinking.
I am interested in this thread, but my education is chemistry and this electronics stuff is beyond me. It would help me a lot if the results are summarized as to why they are normal, strange, important, irrelevant, etc.
Thanks,
Johnny
@johnnyl,
I will not make any conclusions based on any preliminary tests. The only way I will make a statement is if a looped
electronic circuit is charging up the input battery. So if I connect a lead acid battery to my circuit and the
battery goes down in charge then there is nothing special. If the battery charges up then we need at
least three replications of the circuit. If every replicates agree with the result then, and only then, can we
make a statement that a circuit MAY be over unity. Next step would be to get a university to test the circuit.
Groundloop.
Thanks Groundloop. That clarifies things for me!
Good morning.
My new twin core is now done.
Next step is soldering together the oscillator circuit.
Groundloop.
[EDIT] PCB done. Added image of circuit.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 09, 2008, 07:22:17 PM
@gyulasun,
Thanks for the link. It seems to me that the yellow/white has a material permeability of 75 and all other colors has a lower permeability.
I think I can safely assume that my green/blue one has a lower permeability. So the green will be the input and oscillator coil. I will make both
the input coil and out coil of two strands of magnet wire. Then I can test the core both "ways".
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
Well, I did some more search on ferrite toroids and it turns out Ferroxcube ( http://www.ferroxcube.com ) has similar or almost similar color code system like Amidon/Micrometal. This link has a tablet on their materials/codes:
http://sharon.esrac.ele.tue.nl/~on9cvd/E-Inleiding%20en%20overzicht%20ferrieten.htm (http://sharon.esrac.ele.tue.nl/~on9cvd/E-Inleiding%20en%20overzicht%20ferrieten.htm)
So your White/Yellow core can also be their 3E5 material with an initial permeability of around 10000 for toroids so your earlier conclusion of all your other colors have a lower permeability is still valid. Only the permeability values are higher than that of Amidon:
White/Yellow = 10000 3E5 material
Blue = 2000 3F3 material
Ultramarine = 2300 3C90 material
rgds, Gyula
@gyulasun,
Thanks for checking out the cores. I have also searched the net and have the same conclusion.
I have made the input and output coils the same so I can test the cores both ways. I'm currently
soldering a oscillator circuit now. First run in a couple of hours.......................
Thanks,
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 10, 2008, 06:59:25 AM
@gyulasun,
Thanks for checking out the cores. I have also searched the net and have the same conclusion.
I have made the input and output coils the same so I can test the cores both ways. I'm currently
soldering a oscillator circuit now. First run in a couple of hours.......................
Thanks,
Groundloop.
Very good!
If I may give some hints:
---try using higher values for R1, the 470 Ohm seems too low for me (peak collector current may exceed core saturation and the goal I believe is to aim for the maximum flux change from zero current to max possible current BELOW core saturation.
---insert a 10-100 Ohm series resistor between the cathode of diode D2 and + battery pole so that you could monitor its voltage drop as an indication of the (charging) current flowing back to the battery from L4 coil.
Thanks, Gyula
@gyulasun,
Yes, you are 100% correct. The amp draw from the battery at first run was so high that both the
coil and the transistor got hot. I will find a resistor (R1) with a much higher resistance. Good news
is that the circuit did run without any smoke. :D
Changing resistor now........
Groundloop.
@Group,
Circuit is running from a lead acid battery, 12,23 V. Without feedback the circuit uses 0,15 A.
When I connect the feedback the input usgae drops to 0,08 Amp. Measurements is done
with a moving Iron analog meter and is approximately only. More measurements must
be done before any certain conclutions. But it seems to me that the system is capable of
coupling magnetic flux from the input core to the output core by using a short circuit coil.
BTW: The R1 is only needed to start the circuit so I used 580K.
Groundloop.
[EDIT-1] The moving Iron amp meter affects the circuit. When I remove the amp meter the input current increase a lot.
To get the amp down again I just connected an air core coil in series with the plus on the battery.
Now the circuit runs a very low input amp.
Groundloop.
@Groundloop,
Would it be of value to replace D2 (diode) with a bridge rectifier and add a 100uf cap or larger on the output of the bridge rectifier? It looks like D2 only offers half wave rectification, where a bridge might offer more output. Just something to think about.
Have fun... :)
@Liberty,
I can try that, but first I must check the frequency of the oscillator!
I can not use a diode bridge if the frequency is too high.
All the diode bridges I have is for 50Hz.
What I can do is making a bridge with four ultrafast BYV29 diodes.
But first I need a break. I have been working on this circuit into the night and has
only slept 4 hours. Been working on the circuit for 6 hours today. ;D
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 10, 2008, 10:04:32 AM
@Liberty,
I can try that, but first I must check the frequency of the oscillator!
I can not use a diode bridge if the frequency is too high.
All the diode bridges I have is for 50Hz.
What I can do is making a bridge with four ultrafast BYV29 diodes.
But first I need a break. I have been working on this circuit into the night and has
only slept 4 hours. Been working on the circuit for 6 hours today. ;D
Groundloop.
50hz is only given as a manufacture spec for power bridge rectifiers, they can operate at much higher frequencies, well into the khz range.
Hi Groundloop,
Thanx for spending all that time! It is well appreciated......
Many of us are following your tests with great interest!
Just to let you know ;)
Keep up the good work...
regards
Robert
@RunningBare,
Yes I know that. The loss (heat loss) will increase with higher frequency. So when you pulse
the diode bridge with frequencies over 2KHz then the loss is big. Better to use 4 ultra fast
diodes arranged as a bridge. My circuit is running at 36,4 KHz.
Groundloop.
Robert,
Thanks. :D
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 10, 2008, 08:49:38 AM
@Group,
Circuit is running from a lead acid battery, 12,23 V. Without feedback the circuit uses 0,15 A.
When I connect the feedback the input usgae drops to 0,08 Amp. Measurements is done
with a moving Iron analog meter and is approximately only. More measurements must
be done before any certain conclutions. But it seems to me that the system is capable of
coupling magnetic flux from the input core to the output core by using a short circuit coil.
BTW: The R1 is only needed to start the circuit so I used 580K.
Groundloop.
[EDIT-1] The moving Iron amp meter affects the circuit. When I remove the amp meter the input current increase a lot.
To get the amp down again I just connected an air core coil in series with the plus on the battery.
Now the circuit runs a very low input amp.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
Impressive work! I wish I had even half your knowledge.
When you say "connect the feedback" above, do you mean closing L3?
Are you going to disconnect L2 from the circuit later to measure output or are you checking by looking at the effect of closing L3 on the input current?
Lastly, do you have any specific questions you'd like us to ask Thane that would help you?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Hi Groundloop,
well done.
With using an moving iron ampmeter you can not be sure,
if it is + 80 mA input current or minus 80 mA input current as
these meters also show negative currents as positive currents.
So try to get a real analog coil ampmeter, so you will know for sure.
Many thanks and looking forward to your new tests.
Regards, Stefan.
Steven,
No, I connected and disconnected the L3 coil. Seems to me that I can loop back
approx. 50% of the total power back to the battery. When I open and close the L2 coil I can also see the input going up and down.
I am going to remove the feedback and do a measurement on the output to see how much I can get. I will also play with the L2 coil and see if I can get some power from that coil also.
I have one question you can ask: What type of cores and size of cores to use in this setup.
@hartiberlin,
No, it is +80mA FROM the battery because the battery is slowely going down in voltage.
Groundloop.
@Group,
Last test today. I reversed my coil so that the core with low Permeability was the oscillator coil and the core with high Permeability was the output coil. I did expect a drop in the performance with less power going back to the battery. That did not happen! I got the same result as before. So my coupling stayed the same and my output stayed the same. The current usage was the same 80mA from the battery. This tells me that there is no difference in performance when I reverse the cores.
For the non tech. out there: I get a 50% feedback to the battery from the circuit.
Same performance regardless of the Permeability.
The magnetic coupling works the same both ways.
So MY circuit does not work as claimed by the inventor. I get NO gain in the output regardless of Permeability issues. This does NOT mean that the inventors circuit does not work. I means that MY circuit does not work. Maybe it is too small and maybe the cores is of the wrong type or size. I must stress that my measurements is preliminary at best due to no high tech. measurement instruments available.
Groundloop.
Groundloop,
Very nicely done! If the toroids in this only picture I could find are truly representative of what is required, then maybe it really is the cores that make the difference. Anyways, an awesome piece of creativity in a short time on your part, and if we get some clues from Thane it may be the perfect testing platform!
tak
@tak22,
I really hope there will be more information on this. As far as I see it right now is that the magnet coupling effect IS something in itself! Think on that for a second. Just a little switch and you can turn on and off a much bigger effect. Just like a transistor but for magnetic fields. I bet that if i put a transistor on the middle coil then I can turn on and off the output in a linear fashion.
Groundloop.
@Groundloop
If I've understood the principle by which the overunity transformer is supposed to work, then you're supposed to drive the coil on the low permeability core, and take power off the center coil. The idea is that the current induced in the center coil magnetizes the high permeability core instead of sending back EMF through the primary.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
@Mr.Entropy,
Yes you are correct about that. The input at the low permeability core and the output at the center coil and the output coil. So if you load the center coil then you get magnetic coupling to the next core thus powering the output coil. The more you load the center coil the more coupling you get. At maximum load on the center coil (e.g.. short circuit) then the highest ampere turn you get on the coupling and the highest output. Since this coil (center) now is at its maximum ampere turn no back emf can be transferred to the input. Any load now on the output will not reflect back to the input. Maybe the solution is to load the center coil with the right load and then add together that with the output? Must test this. Also, I see no problem with introducing a static magnetic field on the input core and switch that field to the output coil. (Permanent magnet added to the input core).
Thanks,
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 10, 2008, 07:51:29 PM
@tak22,
I really hope there will be more information on this. As far as I see it right now is that the magnet coupling effect IS something in itself! Think on that for a second. Just a little switch and you can turn on and off a much bigger effect. Just like a transistor but for magnetic fields. I bet that if i put a transistor on the middle coil then I can turn on and off the output in a linear fashion.
Groundloop.
yep,
its called a Mag amp,
magnetic amplifier or
saturable-core reactor.
interesting device.
http://www.answers.com/topic/saturable-reactor?cat=technology
http://www.tpub.com/content/neets/14180/css/14180_140.htm
http://www.geocities.com/aaawelder/reactor.html
@Groundloop
..No, I connected and disconnected the L3 coil. Seems to me that I can loop back approx. 50% of the total power back to the battery. When I open and close the L2 coil I can also see the input going up and down...
This is a property of Saturable reactors, as this PDF attachment explain, In how much, the device, involves as an amplifier for only a half wave. It is possible to get an amplification for all wave varying it electric scheme. As reported in the PDF document.
However it is very interesting, in how much this scheme resembles to a MEG divice. The appropriate use of the switch could certainly produce some spikes.
In this moment, however I don't succeed in understanding the utility of this device to produce OU.
@argona369 and @abassign,
An saturable reactor uses a DC current to switch a larger AC current.
My replica device uses no DC current to switch the output on or off.
The difference is that my circuit use NO power to do the switching.
So I do NOT agree that my replica circuit is an saturable reactor.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
At this link I referred to earlier http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html
Thane Heins says this: The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source.
So it seems a circulating reactive current is to be created like in a parallel resonant tank circuit, right?
If you agree, then a normal oscillator that includes a tank circuit should be built. I included here a Colpitts oscillator from this link, slightly modified Fig.3 from there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colpitts_oscillator
If you connect your L1 and L2 (bifilar) coils on your lower permeability core in series in the correct phase (I indicated with black dots) and connect the common middle point of the coils to the collector of Q1, then the resonant reactive energy gets increased with respect to the case where there is only one coil without any tap in the collector circuit. (Resonant voltage up-transformation occurs.) And the oscillator current could be changed by modifying the bias current of Q1, by decreasing (or increasing) R3. The frequency can be changed by C1 and C2, experiment reveals values, I suggest between 47nF to 470nF.
Regarding a bridge rectifier at the output, I agree with you using diodes of higher speed, and a full wave rectifier is needed if the output waveform has both positive and negative amplitudes with respect to a zero value. An oscilloscope would be of great value here.
rgds, Gyula
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#Improper_use_of_an_AC_induction_motor)
On Feb. 11, 2008, DMBoss added:
There is one thing I neglected to mention in the above commentary. That is this Heins fellow may also get this apparent anomalous rotor speed up entirely due to the improper use of an AC induction motor.
His related demonstration of putting a strong NIB magnet near the steel shaft of this induction motor, with said motor's front "C" plate removed and having it's speed increase is telling.
That is removing the C plate leaves the AC motor's fields rather open to external influence. And it's steel shaft is magnetically connected to the AC rotor, comprising steel laminations and several heavy turns of short circuited windings.
The AC induction motor [in this case a split phase motor] works by making the stator fields produce a rotating field, which induces currents and then fields in the rotor windings/core. These rotor fields try to couple to the 60Hz stator field rotation, and tries to synchronize with them. An AC motor never completely syncs though, and some rotor "slip" occurs. The more the slip the more current the stator coils draw, and this tries to lessen the slip this it automatically "throttles" the current to meet the drag torque causing the increased slip.
Anyway these things should never use an AC motor as they are inherently unreliable and non linear regards their power signature vs the output torque. But this chap is going wildly out of the normal operating envelope for an AC induction motor on top of that.
That is a 2 pole AC motor tries to run at 3600 rpm, and a 4 pole at 1800 rpm. And he is running at 50-200 rpm. So he has massive slip between rotor field and stator field. (you can allow a split phase motor to run at low speed by simply plugging it into a Variac and turning down the voltage after the rotor's turning, or give it a shove by hand as he does)
Now the force/torque on the rotor is proportional to the B^2 in the air gap. Yes it's alternating, but it is still proportional to the square of the flux density. Adding an external magnetic field from permanent magnets could very well provide a DC offset in this magnetic field - as a path is formed from the motor case to return to the magnet, and from the magnet's other pole to the shaft, through rotor, across air gap to stators, and into the motor case. (C plate is removed so you can make a complete flux path out to the magnet)
This small change in flux levels would make no difference if force was proportional to flux density. But it is proportional to flux density squared. So it is plausible that this small offset, applied to the motor in this very unusual running mode of extreme amounts of slip - has caused an imbalance in the amount of rotor torque.
In a sense this addition of external flux has made the coupling coefficient of the rotor to stator higher due to the DC offset and squared condition. No absolute power gain has occurred, but you have gotten more of the power applied to make rotor boost torque.
His own numbers belie this - his AC motor if the two stacked power meters are to be trusted, is drawing some 250 watts to run at this low speed. While the shaft friction of such a sized device is reasonably estimated to be below 20 watts, probably below 5 watts of shaft power to meet friction etc. So his coupling is below 10%. Adding the magnetic path from external magnets to the AC motor system, could cause say a 15 or 20% coupling to occur. Making the shaft speed up, but this is NOT a gain in energy!
My initial comments are correct - you can engineer a system which produces a shaft speed up when you have massive core loss and you short the generator coils - as this negates much of this core loss - so if the coil heating upon shorting is low, then the rotor can speed up.
Also his messing with AC motor can be responsible for the speed up alone or in combo with this generator core loss artifact. But neither is anything but mundane and neither cause of shaft speed up necessarily indicates a gain over unity!
@gyulasun,
Thanks, I will try your Colpitts oscillator this weekend.
Groundloop.
Notes by Steven Dufresne from February 11, 2008 demonstration given by Thane Heins at the University of Ottawa. The photos I took are in another post. Luc, please correct me if I you remember anything differently.
Regarding the bi-toroid transformer mentioned on this webpage:
http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html
- Thane did not want to answer my questions about specific construction details due to his contractual agreements with organizations he is involved with regarding the bi-toroid transformer. He did confirm that he was using round cores, and that they would be better than rectangular ones and that the input core should be of lower permeability than the output core. I showed him a color photo furnished by Luc of Groundloop's replication attempt and he seemed to indicate that they were the types of cores he used, but again, he would not give specifics. He also confirmed that they did manage to get the flux to go one way, i.e. no back EMF into the primary, but were having
problems with the voltage balancing.
- Regarding the claim on the webpage of of 7000% efficiency, this was incorrect. The author of this blog was jumping the gun on releasing this information and shouldn't have. The 7000% efficiency is based on a measurement made by an undisclosed person in Russia who did not make power factor into account. Once power factor is taken into account, it is less than 100% efficient. However, Thane is working with other organizations to improve it and "I GOT THE IMPRESSION" (i.e. he did not say it outright) that he thought that it should be possible to make it over 100%.
- Looking back at the above blog, I should have asked him about the claim of 0.2 watts in and 14 watts out also made on the webpage.
Regarding the demonstration...
- Nothing new came up in the demonstration. Given the time, and that we'd already seen the videos, less time was spent on the set demonstraton than in the videos. See the videos for details on the demonstration.
- In case it's hard to read from the videos, the units he uses to display power are Lutron DW-6090 Power Analyzers.
- The output of any single coil is in the milliwatt range. Remember, the cores are just steel pieces purchased from Home Depot, nothing special.
- He did try combining the output of a bunch of coils but found that too difficult since it's like combining 8 phases, with a different voltage from each coil. Remember, each one is different since he
was trying many variables. Thane made no claims to have measured more power out than in.
- Thane will be emailing Luc documents showing test results with open circuit coils, coils with resistive loads, and short-circuit coils. Luc will upload these to the group.
Regarding construction of the devices in the videos...
- The steel wheel is just a spoked wheel available at Lee Valley Hardware, a store in Ottawa and is a wagon wheel. He then welded on the rings that hold the magnets and the magnets were glued in place. The magnets were also from Lee Valley, which sells Neodymium magnets. The wheel/magnet
he used in the demonstration was a different one than in the videos in that it had only one magnet (though there may have been more than one magnet back-to-back within each ring) per spoke and so there were less and they were more uniformly distributed around the wheel.
- The motor is the induction motor and base taken from a RYOBI 6" grinder purchased at Home Depot. Thane did suggest that DC and AC motors should work too, as long as when the flux from redirected back EMF would make a contribution once it made its way back into the motor.
- The steel used as coil cores and to furnish a flux path to the shaft and to other corse was purchased at Home Depot. As needed, some were just straight pieces or as in the 4th video with the toroid, 90 degree pieces. In some places, tranformer tape was used to separate pieces of steel to make laminated cores, in other places the steel pieces were bolted togther with nothing in between to simply make a large mass flux path.
- Various gauges of wire were used in the coils as were different amounts of steel pieces and laminations in an effort to test many variables. From observation some of the wire was around 22 AWG enamel coated wire.
Regarding the patent 2437745...
- Thane said that this patent was an old idea that lead up to what he had now and was outdated. Incidentally, he gave the patent office diagrams in color which they scanned. This may be the reason
that they don't appear in the online version - i.e. problem with the resulting scan.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Photos attached from February 11, 2008 demonstration given by Thane Heins at the University of Ottawa. I didn't take a lot of photos since everything that was there was the same as in the demonstration videos available online.
-Steve
http://rimstar.og
Hi All,
Please note the following statement from the news article:
'Heins adds that he and his colleagues ?have coupling from the primary to the secondary. The reluctance flux path in the secondary is lower because either the secondary core area is greater or because we employ core material with a higher relative permeability which results in a decrease in reluctance. When the secondary reluctance is lower - back EMF induced flux from secondary coil 1 must follow the path of least reluctance into secondary 2 and not back to the primary. The primary operates only at magnetizing current levels (reactive current only) and does not draw any non-reactive current from the source. The law of conservation of energy for a transformer requires secondary back EMF to be able to mutually couple back to the primary - but if this flux path is higher it will not be able to do so.?
In order for the back EMF induced flux in core 1 to follow the path of least reluctance into core 2, the cores must be in direct contact at the center point. Each core may be a half circle at the point of contact. Please note that the drawing in the article shows that if the circles were extended they would overlap.
If there is any spacing between the two cores caused by the coating, etc, the induced flux in core 1 will not jump to core 2 as the air gap will not be the least reluctance path. You would only get the induced flux causes by the current in the center wire wrapping. This may be why when Groundloop switched cores the results were the same. Also, the two cores must be closer than two cores just touching as they would easily saturate at the point of contact. Half of each core at the point of contact would best help the flux switching to the second core.
Regards, LarryC
Steven,
Thank you for providing the information and images.
If the "o/u" transformer is only 100% effective (or less) then I see no need to continue reaserach on my replica.
Same old story, we are not quite there yet.
@LarryC,
Thank you for the information.
Groundloop.
LarryC,
If the cores were ground down flat to about half their thickness, not their diameter but the thickness of the ring material, and then joined would that do?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Groundloop on February 11, 2008, 05:25:24 AM
@argona369 and @abassign,
An saturable reactor uses a DC current to switch a larger AC current.
My replica device uses no DC current to switch the output on or off.
The difference is that my circuit use NO power to do the switching.
So I do NOT agree that my replica circuit is an saturable reactor.
Groundloop.
your right i think,a second look and it is a bit different than a mag amp.
there are different configurations of mag amps but i don't think this is one of them
as all the power transfers through the control winding.
interesting idea to chop the control to stop feedback btw.
Anyone know if the demonstration website has gone for good?
http://www.g9toengineering.com/backemf/demonstration.htm
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 11, 2008, 08:33:07 PM
LarryC,
If the cores were ground down flat to about half their thickness, not their diameter but the thickness of the ring material, and then joined would that do?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Yes, that is what I trying to indicate, but you stated it clearer.
Thanks, LarryC
Quote from: RunningBare on February 12, 2008, 06:07:32 AM
Anyone know if the demonstration website has gone for good?
http://www.g9toengineering.com/backemf/demonstration.htm
Yes it is gone somehow. Thane sent me an email today saying:
Someone removed Dr. Habash's (Riadh Habash, PhD, P.Eng. of Ottawa University) webpage but it was not him and he doesn't know who would do it - but it is gone...
ThaneI'll keep you posted
Luc
Hi Steve,
many thanks for the report and the pictures.
So how many people attended the demo ?
Was Prof Zahn also there ?
What did he say ?
So the claim of an already existing overunity transformer
was just an exxageration of an external blogger ?
So is it just impedance matching or do you still feel that there is more to it ?
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Hello to all,
I have not yet posted my finding of the semi private demonstration of Thane Heins generator which was held at the University of Ottawa, School of Information Technology and Engineering (SITE) which Dr. Riadh Habash, PhD, P.Eng. is responsible for.
Present at the demonstration held on February 11th 2008, was me, Luc (gotoluc), Steve (Steven Dufresne), Harry (hveeder) who are all members of this forum, (user names). Also to note, we all live in Ottawa. The only other person there was one reporter of a local radio station.
Thane did 2 demonstrations for us and and later supplied me with all the Data sheets which I posted below.
The one named: (OverUnity Group Demo) is the results of the 2 tests.
Also find 3 test data sheets named: (KINECTRICS TEST DATA) and (KINECTRICS TEST MAGNET COUPLER) sheet
Plus 2 sheets named: (Toroid Coil Evolution)
And to top it off, 2 sheets of his transformer named: (BI - Toroid Transformer)
I must say I am very satisfied with the demonstration and find Thane Heins findings of the effect to be true as shown in all his video's (part 1 to 7)
THE EFFECT IS REAL BOYS AND GIRLS all the way to the permanent magnets increasing the rpm of the split phase induction motor. I have it recorded with my own video camera. If anyone wants to see it please let me know and I can post it on youtube or maybe Stefan can have me post the original MP4 video on this site.
@Groundloop, Thank you for your great attempts to replicate Thane's transformer, mostly with so little information available at the time and I hope the information I just posted will encourage you to continue with the support of all of us here. Thane will contine to send me what he can to help us reach the goal.
Thank you all for your participation.
Luc
@gotoluc,
Thank you for providing the information. I will study it and see what to do next.
As I said before, the magnetic coupling effect is real and the switching of
this effect does not require any operator input of power. So if there is a way
to get around the Lentz law with this device then there could be some o/u.
I will study the information and report back on my progress.
Groundloop.
gotoluc, please provide us the youtube Link to your video.
Thanks in advance...
Hi Stefan,
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 12, 2008, 08:18:44 PM
So how many people attended the demo ?
Was Prof Zahn also there ?
What did he say ?
Luc has already answered the first question. Regarding Prof Zahn, as of the demo Thane hadn't heard back from him yet.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 12, 2008, 08:18:44 PM
So the claim of an already existing overunity transformer
was just an exxageration of an external blogger ?
So is it just impedance matching or do you still feel that there is more to it ?
I have nothing more on this than what was in my report. Though we do now have the more up-to-date schematic that Luc posted. I do remember that when I asked Thane about it he said that the little picture on the blogger's webpage was wrong, another case of the blogger posting too soon. So now we have the right one, a much better design too since the secondaries are entirely on the higher permeability core.
Two other things I forgot to report...
- I did bring a printout of the posts by blindsangar, DMBoss, and others re what they thought it might be with the intent of giving it to him so he could read them on his own, and since I'm not expert enough to convey them in my own words. However, Thane didn't want it since he is using this corporate partners, university contacts, ... for feedback and evaluation. He did volunteer, without my asking, that he had heard about the speculation that it was a hysteresis brake and he said he'd eliminated that possibility. I didn't ask how though.
- In the photos I posted you can see some green wrapped coils facing the wheel on an angle. These were attempts by Thane to put coils on both sides of the wheel. This caused too many cogging problems so he reoriented them so that they would not have any effect.
Incidentally, I did say in my report that the was wheel available at Lee Valley Hardware, a store in Ottawa. I purchased one today in case I want to replicate it some time. If anyone would like one then just send me a private message either through overunity.com's message system or to my email address in my profile. The cost is $30.00 CDN (which is also around $30.00 US) plus shipping. It is just the spoked wheel and does not include the rings that are welded on to hold the magnets.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
In case anyone out there is like me and needs to see how there might be at least a remote glimmer of possibility where excess energy could be entering into the transformer before proceeding with experiments... If ZPE is electromagnetic waves (instead of just electric waves) then the fluxing of the low permeability core could be "stimulating" ZPE electromagnetic waves to enter at the junction between the low permeability core and the high permeability core - sort of like a transistor/diode.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: dani1 on February 13, 2008, 06:00:51 AM
gotoluc, please provide us the youtube Link to your video.
Thanks in advance...
@dani1 I have not yet uploaded the video's to my youtube account since it takes lots of time and bandwith to upload and I was waiting to see it there is a large enough interest to do so. Also my video is not showing anything diffrent than what you can see in Thane's video's. The only thing is it was done in the presence of 3 members of this forum and with my own video camera.
I will do it if Stefan requests for my video's to be posted or if 2 more members ask for it.
Thank you for your interest
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on February 13, 2008, 12:33:19 PM
Quote from: dani1 on February 13, 2008, 06:00:51 AM
gotoluc, please provide us the youtube Link to your video.
Thanks in advance...
@dani1 I have not yet uploaded the video's to my youtube account since it takes lots of time and bandwith to upload and I was waiting to see it there is a large enough interest to do so. Also my video is not showing anything diffrent than what you can see in Thane's video's. The only thing is it was done in the presence of 3 members of this forum and with my own video camera.
I will do it if Stefan requests for my video's to be posted or if 2 more members ask for it.
Thank you for your interest
Luc
Yes please.
The Bi-Toroid Transformer design appears to be pure simple genius.
The following is an excerpt from a University Physics book describing how a transformer works: 'The process by which the transformer is enabled to draw the requisite amount of power is as follows. When the secondary circuit is open, the core flux is produced by the primary current only. But when the secondary circuit is closed, both primary and secondary currents set up a flux in the core. The secondary current, by Lenz's law, tends to weaken the core flux and therefore to decrease the back-emf in the primary. But the back-emf in the primary must equal the primary terminal voltage, which is assumed to be fixed. The primary current therefore increases until the core flux is restored to its original no-load magnitude.'
Since it appears that the design will decouple the primary and secondary flux, there should be no increase in current in the primary. The only small losses will be from wire resistance, hysteresis, and eddy currents. The normal for a no load transformer.
His design does not break Lenz's law, he seems to have found a way around it. His unorthodox design of his original generator, using an iron wheel instead of a non-ferrous type like the other 1000's of attempt on OU sites was very serendipitous. At first glance it appears that most of the permanent magnet flux would have been wrapping into the edge of the wheel. His results caused him to look into why the motor speeded up, which resulted in how he found out about the decoupling benefits. What great luck for the world.
By the way, most ceiling fan motors have a large toroid of laminated steel.
Regards, LarryC
I did some homework today looking for high permeability cores. Thane's design talks about using a relative permeability (ur) of 100,000. The highest I could find for a reasonably easy to work with core was 10,000 for 6cm and 7cm cores. Anything at 20,000 was far too small to work with, a few millimeters.
These were on:
http://www.ferroxcube.com/prod/assets/fertor.htm
for example:
http://www.ferroxcube.com/prod/assets/tx633825large.pdf
I guess the higher the better and 10,000 is pretty high relative to a rod with ur=200. Does anyone know if there is better, while still being a workable size, on the market?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 13, 2008, 05:21:16 PM
I did some homework today looking for high permeability cores. Thane's design talks about using a relative permeability (ur) of 100,000. The highest I could find for a reasonably easy to work with core was 10,000 for 6cm and 7cm cores. Anything at 20,000 was far too small to work with, a few millimeters.
These were on:
http://www.ferroxcube.com/prod/assets/fertor.htm
for example:
http://www.ferroxcube.com/prod/assets/tx633825large.pdf
I guess the higher the better and 10,000 is pretty high relative to a rod with ur=200. Does anyone know if there is better, while still being a workable size, on the market?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
@Steve,
Please check out http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#mur for relative permeability of materials.
The ceiling fan motor toroid should be grain oriented silicon steel, almost any ferrite should be of less permeability.
Regards, LarryC
Quote from: LarryC on February 13, 2008, 06:01:19 PM
Please check out http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#mur for relative permeability of materials.
The ceiling fan motor toroid should be grain oriented silicon steel, almost any ferrite should be of less permeability.
Larry,
Thanks! Do the ceiling fans have high permeability cores to keep the amount of copper down, and hence the weight down? I just bought a dirt cheap, $15.00 ceiling fan on sale but was looking for any insight about if there's a certain type of ceiling fan that wouldn't have it before I rip it apart. It's returnable but probably not after I've broken any pieces.
-Steve
After reading this thread for a while I thought I might try my hand at the Heins transformer. What I did is a little different from all of your experiments in that I took a standard 120 volt to 12 volt ac transformer and the field core and windings from a 120 volt fan motor and milled them to fit together in a T shape dual flux path transformer. I then welded the two cores together. You can see a picture of it below. My thought was that the induced voltage would travel to the center core from the outer leg and back emf would take the easiest path around the center core.This was actually my second unit as the first one was bolted together. Both behave in exactly the same way. When I apply AC voltage to the new grafted on primary, the secondary coil which was the primary of the original transformer sees a voltage as you would expect. The strange thing is that if you load the new secondary it does not affect the input current at all, not even if it is shorted out. I'm not sure if this means anything or not. Maybe one of you more knowledgeable electrical types might have a take on my experiment. I would appreciate any comments.
Quote from: gotoluc on February 13, 2008, 12:33:19 PM
@dani1 I have not yet uploaded the video's to my youtube account since it takes lots of time and bandwith to upload and I was waiting to see it there is a large enough interest to do so. Also my video is not showing anything diffrent than what you can see in Thane's video's. The only thing is it was done in the presence of 3 members of this forum and with my own video camera.
I will do it if Stefan requests for my video's to be posted or if 2 more members ask for it.
Thank you for your interest
Luc
Hi Luc,
yes, please post the videos,
if they are each under 5 MB here as an attachment,
if they are bigger,please upload to e.g.
www.megaupload.com
and post the links to them over here.
Many thanks in advance.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: vince on February 13, 2008, 09:41:36 PM
After reading this thread for a while I thought I might try my hand at the Heins transformer. What I did is a little different from all of your experiments in that I took a standard 120 volt to 12 volt ac transformer and the field core and windings from a 120 volt fan motor and milled them to fit together in a T shape dual flux path transformer. I then welded the two cores together. You can see a picture of it below. My thought was that the induced voltage would travel to the center core from the outer leg and back emf would take the easiest path around the center core.This was actually my second unit as the first one was bolted together. Both behave in exactly the same way. When I apply AC voltage to the new grafted on primary, the secondary coil which was the primary of the original transformer sees a voltage as you would expect. The strange thing is that if you load the new secondary it does not affect the input current at all, not even if it is shorted out. I'm not sure if this means anything or not. Maybe one of you more knowledgeable electrical types might have a take on my experiment. I would appreciate any comments.
Many thanks for this info.
Please post details how you measured this device and
what the voltage and amps settings were and how much
power you pumped into it and at what frequency and
what the output reading was.
Many thanks.
Quote from: ltseung888 on February 06, 2008, 01:01:07 AM
Look at this simple video:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/665396/how_increase_speed_of_electric_motor/
Just repeated the experiment with my oral B electric tooth brush. The frequency (or the sound from the vibrating brush system) changed with the approaching of a strong magnet.
So there is nothing revolutionary with the Thane Heins discovery???
Hi Itseung888 !
Have You made this beutifull scalable eyeopener experiment ?
If so many thanks to You, and before we say we have breahthrough can you please
dissmantle tooth brush and put A-meter and meassure current from battery with and without magnets.
I even expect current drop !?!
is it so
again big THX and all the best
Wiz
It is not overlooked, cause knowone ever looked at all.
Quote from: LarryC on February 13, 2008, 04:33:47 PM
The Bi-Toroid Transformer design appears to be pure simple genius.
The following is an excerpt from a University Physics book describing how a transformer works: 'The process by which the transformer is enabled to draw the requisite amount of power is as follows. When the secondary circuit is open, the core flux is produced by the primary current only. But when the secondary circuit is closed, both primary and secondary currents set up a flux in the core. The secondary current, by Lenz's law, tends to weaken the core flux and therefore to decrease the back-emf in the primary. But the back-emf in the primary must equal the primary terminal voltage, which is assumed to be fixed. The primary current therefore increases until the core flux is restored to its original no-load magnitude.'
Since it appears that the design will decouple the primary and secondary flux, there should be no increase in current in the primary. The only small losses will be from wire resistance, hysteresis, and eddy currents. The normal for a no load transformer.
His design does not break Lenz's law, he seems to have found a way around it. His unorthodox design of his original generator, using an iron wheel instead of a non-ferrous type like the other 1000's of attempt on OU sites was very serendipitous. At first glance it appears that most of the permanent magnet flux would have been wrapping into the edge of the wheel. His results caused him to look into why the motor speeded up, which resulted in how he found out about the decoupling benefits. What great luck for the world.
By the way, most ceiling fan motors have a large toroid of laminated steel.
Regards, LarryC
Hi Larry and all,
The principle of the Bi toroid transformer recalls my memories on the so-called "ph-machine" from the 1990s but the difference between the two is that in the ph-machine a permanent magnet is rotated diametrically inside a toroidal core, to create flux change in the toroid, see this link: http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/ph-machine.htm So a measured overunity is claimed...
I would be very curious to know whatever happened to this design since then and other people have managed to replicate it and confirm overunity since then?? Maybe Stefan could comment here?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: vince on February 13, 2008, 09:41:36 PM
After reading this thread for a while I thought I might try my hand at the Heins transformer. What I did is a little different from all of your experiments in that I took a standard 120 volt to 12 volt ac transformer...
Vince,
I can't picture what you did from your description. Any chance you could upload a simple sketch? If so, could you make clear which parts are which core?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 13, 2008, 08:25:58 PM
Larry,
Thanks! Do the ceiling fans have high permeability cores to keep the amount of copper down, and hence the weight down? I just bought a dirt cheap, $15.00 ceiling fan on sale but was looking for any insight about if there's a certain type of ceiling fan that wouldn't have it before I rip it apart. It's returnable but probably not after I've broken any pieces.
-Steve
Steve,
Grain oriented silicon steel is used in most motors and transformer as it has high permeability and is cheap. If your ceiling fan is in the shape of large pancake, then it is most likely the correct type. The fan motor that Vince has is a shaded pole induction motor used in many vent fans.
If you use the toroid from the ceiling fan, be aware of the fine slanted lines in the toroid. They are die cast aluminum which is connected at the top and bottom with a continuous bar of aluminum. The rotors magnetic field induces a current in the connected lines to create another magnetic field. The top and botton bar should be removed so that this does not happen. The fine slanted lines do not go completely thru the core, so it should'nt cause much of flux problem.
Larry
@gotoluc,
Thanks for all the great info.
I'm a little concerned about the permeability of 200 on the primary. It seems like it would severly restrict the amount of flux going to the secondary and reduce the available power considerably. Could it be that a zero or a couple of zeros were chopped off in the picture?
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on February 14, 2008, 11:14:21 AM
If you use the toroid from the ceiling fan, be aware of the fine slanted lines in the toroid. They are die cast aluminum which is connected at the top and bottom with a continuous bar of aluminum. The rotors magnetic field induces a current in the connected lines to create another magnetic field. The top and botton bar should be removed so that this does not happen. The fine slanted lines do not go completely thru the core, so it should'nt cause much of flux problem.
Larry,
Please see the following pictures. There are some numbered questions on one of them. Also, how delicate do I have to be in tearing this apart?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 14, 2008, 12:00:34 PM
Larry,
Please see the following pictures. There are some numbered questions on one of them. Also, how delicate do I have to be in tearing this apart?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
Actually, I'm surprised at the amount rust in a new fan motor. I had to replace the bearing in three of my frozen fans after Katrina and the toroid had less rust.
Everything should be removed above and below until you can see the fine thin lines on the top and bottom. I'm not sure about the green as mine didn't have any, but as long the thin slanted lines can't conduct it will be okay. You may be able to use a chisel on the aluminum and if that doesn't work a grinder will. The steel is a lot harder and if you are careful it shouldn't mess up too much. I would put tape or clamps around the sections you are not working on to keep the steel laminations together as they usually are just held together with an insulating epoxy to reduce eddy currents. A note of caution, some of these items may contain lead, so a mask is recommended.
All,
The Bi-Toroid transformer can also be reproduced by removing the center steel out of a EI type transformer. Then replace the center with a lower reluctance member. Someone stated that a toroid was more efficient but it appears that this would still work. I would wait on gotoluc answer to my permeability question before getting a primary member.
Regards, Larry
Hi Steve
Here is the diagram of my transformer.
Vince
Quote from: LarryC on February 14, 2008, 12:56:36 PM
The Bi-Toroid transformer can also be reproduced by removing the center steel out of a EI type transformer. Then replace the center with a lower reluctance member. Someone stated that a toroid was more efficient but it appears that this would still work.
Or create an airgap in the center? ??? ???
Edit: input (primary) on the center, output (secondary/ies) on the outer paths. The airgap will destroy the efficiency, but the principle should still stand
Where can you buy large ferrite cores?
Quote from: gyulasun on February 14, 2008, 06:00:50 AM
Hi Larry and all,
The principle of the Bi toroid transformer recalls my memories on the so-called "ph-machine" from the 1990s but the difference between the two is that in the ph-machine a permanent magnet is rotated diametrically inside a toroidal core, to create flux change in the toroid, see this link: http://alexfrolov.narod.ru/ph-machine.htm So a measured overunity is claimed...
I would be very curious to know whatever happened to this design since then and other people have managed to replicate it and confirm overunity since then?? Maybe Stefan could comment here?
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
Mr. Frolov did mix this up.
It was not me, who has built this Phi machine generator,
but Steven Sullivan from Omnidyne corporation.
Old contact info:
OMNIDYNE
Sphere of activity: Free energy
Business type: Licencing of patent technology
Products: Self-sustaining electrical power generator
Address: 19504 Wyndmill Circle, Florida 33556, USA
Telephone: +1 813 920 0830
E-mail: 007@tampabay.rr.com
Internet: http://www.omnidyne.com
Contact person: Steven Sullivan
He claimed to have overunity with it and also claimed to have 8:1 overunity with his
MEG replication.
He showed only onepicture of his MEG, but never afterwards got back to us,
what he really had..
He also wanted to patent it and it has costed him already a lot of money
for the patents...
But when he changed his email address, he was not anymore reachable.
Does anybody know, what happened to Steven Sullivan and his devices ?
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: LarryC on February 14, 2008, 11:32:05 AM
@gotoluc,
Thanks for all the great info.
I'm a little concerned about the permeability of 200 on the primary. It seems like it would severly restrict the amount of flux going to the secondary and reduce the available power considerably. Could it be that a zero or a couple of zeros were chopped off in the picture?
Thanks, Larry
Hi Larry,
I have a phone message to Thane about the permeability of 200 on the primary. As you say it maybe an error since it's right on the edge of the sheet.
@all, it's great to see your participation ;) ...also
EDIT: I will upload the full size videos on megaupload as Stefan mentions in the below post. Please give me till tomorrow as my upload speed is slow and the videos are a total of 300mb.Luc
Hi Luc,
with
www.megaupload.com
you have 250 MBytes per file
free storage space.
So better upload the original Files there,so
they are much sharper in detail than converted FLV files.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: M@rcel on February 14, 2008, 02:37:44 PM
Or create an airgap in the center? ??? ???
Edit: input (primary) on the center, output (secondary/ies) on the outer paths. The airgap will destroy the efficiency, but the principle should still stand
Where can you buy large ferrite cores?
M@rcel,
If you're saying to leave the existing center core material and just introduce airgap(s) that wouldn't be working towards the principle. The idea is to prevent the flux due to the secondaries' back EMF from going back into the center coil. Airgaps would allow the flux from the primary to enter the secondary core but also allow the flux from the secondaries' core back EMF back into the primary core.
So a low permeability (i.e. high reluctance or high resistance to magnetic flux) core for the primary and the opposite for the secondary core will allow the primary's flux to enter the secondary but prevent or at least reduce the secondary's flux from going back into the primary. It's basically a diode for magnetic flux. That's why the permeability 200 for the primary and 100,000 for the secondary in Thane's diagram.
What you can see on the link that Larry gave before:
http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#mur
is that the permeability (more properly the relative permeabity, also ur) for ferrites is around 10,000 but for grain oriented silicon steel it is higher, 40,000 in the table. I'm no expert though, so I don't know if 10,000 is good enough or if new problems are introduced if you go too high. I know there's a frequency issue, lower permeability for higher frequency and vice versa.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
PS. Stefan, I'm having problems downloading Larry's attachment. Can you have a look at my post re this at: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3893.15.html, #28 in the "Re: Forum access problems" topic?
yes, I understand that, but I thought an airgap in the centre would do the same. The primary flux has no alternative than going through the gap. The secondary flux takes the easy way, all around the outer core.
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 14, 2008, 03:12:38 PM
Quote from: M@rcel on February 14, 2008, 02:37:44 PM
Or create an airgap in the center? ??? ???
Edit: input (primary) on the center, output (secondary/ies) on the outer paths. The airgap will destroy the efficiency, but the principle should still stand
M@rcel,
If you're saying to leave the existing center core material and just introduce airgap(s) that wouldn't be working towards the principle. The idea is to prevent the flux due to the secondaries' back EMF from going back into the center coil. Airgaps would allow the flux from the primary to enter the secondary core but also allow the flux from the secondaries' core back EMF back into the primary core.
Hi All,
When I first seen the Bi-Toroid Transformer drawing I wondered about the air gap between the primary member and the toroid. Didn't know wheather it was intentional or a drawing problem. I ended up assuming that it was intentional due to the statement about the primary being magnetically isolated from the secondary.
I pictured it like this: If the primary bar was an electromagnet without any other metal around, all the magnetic flux would just expand around the bar to complete the N S connection. If it was placed inside a toroid all the flux would complete the N S connection by jumping into the toroid because the small air gap at each end is a much easier path then the longer air path around the primary bar. In a normal toroid all flux will contain itself completely in the core. If back emf is created in the toroid, the flux would not want to jump the air gap to the primary bar because the toroid is still the easiest path. That's why I thought the design was pure simple genius, but I still wonder about the need for the big permeability difference.
Guys, please feel free to correct me if any of this is illogical as you know what assuming causes.
@Luc,
If you haven't heard from Thane yet, maybe you could ask about the air gap in the drawing.
Thanks, Larry
I think that the use of the airgap could be sufficient to prove that the bemf flux doesn't go through the primary. For practical purposes this may however cause too much loss. Therefore a toroid with a higher perm. than the center (which now has no gap) would be better.
my 2c
Quote from: LarryC on February 14, 2008, 04:10:38 PM
@Luc,
If you haven't heard from Thane yet, maybe you could ask about the air gap in the drawing.
Thanks, Larry
Larry, that was one of my questions also plus the permeability numbers. I will be talking to Thane tonight!...our time is E.S.T.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on February 14, 2008, 05:16:46 PM
Larry, that was one of my questions also plus the permeability numbers. I will be talking to Thane tonight!...our time is E.S.T.
Luc
Luc,
And if I'm not too late too, can you ask what frequency, roughly is okay, he uses?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
PS. Almost all aluminium/lead grinded off the core. Had to come inside in case an local couples were having a romantic dinner. The sound of my grinder would probably hurt the mood. ;)
Quote from: vince on February 14, 2008, 01:26:10 PM
Hi Steve
Here is the diagram of my transformer.
Vince
Hi Vince,
Thanks for your info. Would like to help you in getting to know whether how much current is able to flow in your output coil in the main core when you load it with something or short circuit it.
I assume you may have already tried to load it with something like a light bulb or a resistor?
If you short circuit your output coil, then the current is determined by the copper coil resistance of the output winding. So when the primary is completely disconnected from the mains, you can measure the DC resistance of your output coil with your multimeter set to the appropiate OHM range: if that winding served originally as a mains transformer primary, then its DC resistance can range from some 10 Ohm to some 100 Ohm. When you know this DC resistance, you can divide the 62V with that Ohm value to get the short circuit current value.
Now if you find your output coil DC resistance is -say- 332 Ohm, then the 62V unloaded output voltage will create a current of 62/332=0.1867 Amper in the output coil when you short it and when the primary is switched onto the 120V mains.
Because NOW you know what current to expect in a short circuit case for your output coil, you could connect a certain value of resistor in series with your current meter. Say you have a 22 Ohm resistor at hand, then the expected current will be 62V/(332+22Ohm)= 0.175 Amper, this is the current value your meter should show with a some percent accuracy. (The resistor wattage need is not high: 0.175*0.175*22=0.673 Watt so a 1W rated 22 Ohm resistor will do for a short time current load measurement.)
In case you happen to have a clamp-on current meter, then you directly connect the load resistor to the output coil and clamp on the wire to see the current.
The method I outlined corresponds to a normal mains transformer load test but your transformer is not a normal one because you have found no input current change at your primary input (the current remained at 1.2 Amper) when you shorted the output coil so I look forward to your measurements ;) (by the way, the 1.2A is rather high input current for an unloaded transformator, I suspect core saturation, what if you used the so far secondary output coil as the input primary coil and the other coil as the output coil, so actually you reverse the role of the coils? a normal unloaded conventional transformer consumes about 50-100mA of primary current from the mains)
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 14, 2008, 02:51:52 PM
Hi Gyula,
Mr. Frolov did mix this up.
It was not me, who has built this Phi machine generator,
but Steven Sullivan from Omnidyne corporation.
OK Stefan, thanks for your answer.
Gyula
Hi all,
I received an email from Thane but only now noticed it had attachments of information that seem to be about the split phase induction motor and permanent magnet test. I attached them below and also the message (red) Thane wrote in the email.
I did not post the NASA letter of invitation to Thane that he is referring too, since it may not help in the testing or replication. But if anyone would like to see them please ask and I will post it.
Luc
Dear Luc,
This information may also be of use to your group.
People need to understand that the generator coils voltage and CURRENT are increasing with increased system speed.
You also should notify them about my invitation to present at NASA.
Cheers
Thane
I am interested in seeing the NASA letter. Thanks... J
Here's another email from Thane to Luc. I'll give Luc a break and post it myself. I think the diagram he's refering to is Vince's, since I haven't posted any. Being unable to download it, I can't confirm that. Regarding the visit to Thane's, if you guys have any questions, post them.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Dear Luc,
Your guys have it all wrong.
Steve's diagram will never work.
You have to use the primary to supply magnetizing current to the secondaries and then rely on the secondaries themselves to "self regulate" the load voltage without the help of the primary drawing additinal supply current.
You have to be able capture all the available flux and not let it escape down exterior flux paths. This was the premise on our original ?Flux Variable Tri-Coil Generator? that we worked on with UVA but you don?t want to do it with a transformer.
The primary and secondary relative permeabilities numbers are there for computer modeling purposes ONLY. You can plug any number in a computer almost.
Your guys also need to have a wattmeter on hand so they can watch the power factor and read true watts.
I have made about 50 ? 100 transformer prototypes like the ones you guys are doing and I deduced that I need to rely on a very high secondary relative permeability to give the flux multiplication required to maintain power across the load.
I think you should come over and I can give you a tour of my current samples and get some photos etc which will really help and reduce your guys frustration levels.
I am also wondering if that's not a LONG STATOR LINEAR MOTOR in that fan photo as opposed to a Toroid?
Cheers
Thane
Larry,
Here's a photo of the core ground down. Touching it with a meter, touching the probes pretty much anywhere, including on the same surface, opposite surfaces, outer edge and a surface, I get fraction of an ohm or signel digit ohm resistance. Is that right? Note that I still have about half the circumference of aluminium to grind off one surface.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Hi Gyula;
Thanks for helping me with the measurements. Here is what I found:
Primary coil resistance 8.8 ohms
Secondary coil resistance (originally the primary of the mains) 24.5 ohms
Secondary coil resistance(originally the secondary of the mains) 1.1 ohms
With my clamp meter I checked the output of the secondary coil and found these results:
With 12 volt bulb attached .8 amps, 0 volts (Bulb would not light)
With 45K resistor .8 amps, 56.9 volts
With 4.6K resistor .8 amps, 26 volts
With Neon bulb attached .8 amps, 0 volts( Bulb would flash if I momentarily touched the second output wires together)
You are right about the 1.2 amps being high but I did notice that when I first tested this coil setup it was originally at about .3 amps then it later went to 1.3 and stayed there.
I did try hooking up the power to the original primary on the Main transformer and what I found was that the primary input current was
0 amps ( My meter did not detect anything) and my new secondary (Outer leg) was approximately 1 volts. The secondary on my Mains transformer showed 12.3 volts. When I shorted out the new secondary it did not change the current reading but when I shorted out the secondary on my mains the current jumped to 4.3 amps!
I no electrical whiz but it sure looks like current draw does not increase if a load is taken on the opposite path or leg of my transformer.
Your thoughts are greatly appreciated
Vince
Hi all,
a few more items to post. One was a request by johnnyl to see the request from NASA which I copied the body of email and pasted below (in blue). This email was sent to Dr. Riadh Habash, PhD, P.Eng. who is the head of the School of Information Technology and Engineering (SITE) at Ottawa University where Thane Heins is presently demonstration his generator.
The other item is a word doc. attached below named (Dear Luc #2) sent by Thane to help replicators.
More to come, stay tuned ;)
Luc
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: re: previous phonecall
From: "Erik Clark"
Date: Tue, February 12, 2008 8:48 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riadh,
I had contacted you this previous Saturday about trying to procure an abstract on the work you are doing with Thane Heins. The magnetics lab here at Goddard expressed some interest in having you come down to do a colloquium, but would like to get an abstract on the work done so far before moving ahead. Let me know when you could provide this, so we can look at posibilities moving forward.
--
Erik Clark
NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center
Bldg 18 Room 200 Mailstop 730.0
Greenbelt, MD 20771
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 14, 2008, 08:21:04 PM
Larry,
Here's a photo of the core ground down. Touching it with a meter, touching the probes pretty much anywhere, including on the same surface, opposite surfaces, outer edge and a surface, I get fraction of an ohm or signel digit ohm resistance. Is that right? Note that I still have about half the circumference of aluminium to grind off one surface.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
Good work.
From the picture it appears that the thin slanted lines turn into small circles. Is that correct? This is using up more lamination then I thought, but you should still have enought lamination to generate the effect.
Yes, the resistance should be low as the thin slanted lines allow electrical flow from one level of the laminated steel to another. The removal of the large aluminium bar at the top and bottom will stop the flow from forming a circle which creates a large magnetic field between two thin slanted lines. It was the path of least resistance, but with the large aluminium bars removed any eddy current generated should only short across the closest laminated steel or rotate within the small aluminium circles. If it does cause a problem the small aluminium circles will need to be drilled out, mainly at the point where the primary bar meets the toroid.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on February 14, 2008, 10:12:20 PM
From the picture it appears that the thin slanted lines turn into small circles. Is that correct? This is using up more lamination then I thought, but you should still have enought lamination to generate the effect.
Holy cow! That's correct, they do line up to the slanted lines and those slanted lines do turn into the small circles. I hadn't noticed that. You sure are familiar with these particular cores. Did you design them or something? Thanks a bunch Larry.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Hi Luc,
I'm very excited about your latest info and that you will be visiting Thane. It will clear up many issues.
Also, from Thane's letter it appears that the air gaps were intentional to create the magnetic isolation between the primary and secondary and the 100,000/200 permeability were just the latest parameters entered in a computer program. This is great news as the available power just took a giant leap.
Thanks for all your efforts,
Larry
Here is again the letter toLUC in PDF format,
as not all people have WORD or OpenOffice installed.
I converted the DOC file via OpenOffice to PDF.
It is nice that it has an integrated standard PDF file exporter.
Just a thought:
What would happen if the centre of the core is replaced by a permanent magnet and the primary fed through a fwbr (no smoothing C's). Wouldn't it be logical to expect that when the flux created by the pm is larger than the (now unidirectional) flux by the primary that the bemf flux from the secondaries is blocked by the pm?
Quote from: M@rcel on February 15, 2008, 06:55:23 AM
What would happen if the centre of the core is replaced by a permanent magnet and the primary fed through a fwbr (no smoothing C's). Wouldn't it be logical to expect that when the flux created by the pm is larger than the (now unidirectional) flux by the primary that the bemf flux from the secondaries is blocked by the pm?
I've been thinking along the same lines (pulsed DC) and trying different shapes than just sine wave AC turned into DC; spikes too. I hadn't thought of the magnet too though. Good idea. The orientation of the magnet would have to be such that it is not demagnetized by the pulses. I especially like this when thinking of the junction between the two permeabilities as a diode and as a means of tapping ZPE EM waves.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Hi Vince, I included my thoughts in green characters below.
Quote from: vince
With my clamp meter I checked the output of the secondary coil and found these results:
With 12 volt bulb attached .8 amps, 0 volts (Bulb would not light)
With 45K resistor .8 amps, 56.9 volts
With 4.6K resistor .8 amps, 26 volts
With Neon bulb attached .8 amps, 0 volts( Bulb would flash if I momentarily touched the second output wires together)
These measurements mean I think that there is no real power behind the 62V open output AC voltage it behaves as if this voltage would come mainly from 'stray' induction and not mainly from the primary flux made by the primary 8.8 Ohm coil. Another strange thing is the output current is 0.8 Amper whatever your load is from an almost short (12V bulb) to a 45 kOhm resistor. As if your clamp meter had a lower limit for small currents... Re the flash when you short the second output (1.1 Ohm) coil comes from the back emf voltage this process creates when you let the wires open and this back emf adds an extra induction to your first output coil.
You are right about the 1.2 amps being high but I did notice that when I first tested this coil setup it was originally at about .3 amps then it later went to 1.3 and stayed there.
I did try hooking up the power to the original primary on the Main transformer and what I found was that the primary input current was 0 amps ( My meter did not detect anything) and my new secondary (Outer leg) was approximately 1 volts. The secondary on my Mains transformer showed 12.3 volts. When I shorted out the new secondary it did not change the current reading but when I shorted out the secondary on my mains the current jumped to 4.3 amps!
This latter comes from normal transformer operation: there is a direct/common flux path in this operating case between your original mains coil (24.5 Ohm) and the original secondary (1.1 Ohm) coil. For you did not see any input current in the unloaded case again brings up the lower measurement limit question of you clamp meter! check its data sheet specifications. Re your shorting the coil on the outer leg and no effect it is both good and bad news: good because the input current need does not seem to increase and bad because you cannot utilize the output from this coil (output voltage was around 1V and no useful output current).
I no electrical whiz but it sure looks like current draw does not increase if a load is taken on the opposite path or leg of my transformer. Well, I agree but then again you cannot utilize this unusual behavior in your present setup, something is wrong. I think what Thane wrote to you in the doc/pdf file on introducing airgap could be a possible remedy for your setup. One more notice: because you welded the outer leg to the main core, the laminations individual insulating layers may have been damaged and /or the original permeability value of the core may have been decreased. The insulation problem may cause eddy currents that can explain the 1.2 A high input current, and also can explain -together with the possible permeability decrease-- the original 0.3 A current that went up to 1.2-1.3 A.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 15, 2008, 07:43:01 AM
Quote from: M@rcel on February 15, 2008, 06:55:23 AM
What would happen if the centre of the core is replaced by a permanent magnet and the primary fed through a fwbr (no smoothing C's). Wouldn't it be logical to expect that when the flux created by the pm is larger than the (now unidirectional) flux by the primary that the bemf flux from the secondaries is blocked by the pm?
I've been thinking along the same lines (pulsed DC) and trying different shapes than just sine wave AC turned into DC; spikes too. I hadn't thought of the magnet too though. Good idea. The orientation of the magnet would have to be such that it is not demagnetized by the pulses. I especially like this when thinking of the junction between the two permeabilities as a diode and as a means of tapping ZPE EM waves.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
If you're interested in permanent magnet switching of the primary, please check out Flynn Research on the net,
Controller circuit needed for Hilden Brandt motor on OU and the american patents of Sanshiro Ogino. Sanshiro developed the Sumo motor for Genesis corporation in Japan. His patent 6369479 has extensive research material with charts and graph showing the effects of voltage, current, distances, etc.
Regards, Larry
Hi all,
Please find 2 links to megaupload.com for the 2 full size videos I took of Thane Heins Demonstration February 11th 2008 at Ottawa University of his device demonstrating that when electromagnetic coils are under full load (in his demonstration shorted) and are magnetically coupled to the electric motor which is driving a steel wheel with Neo magnets arranged N-S-N-S-N-S-N-S around the wheel which is bolted to the steel shaft of the motor, it seems that the load (force needed to turn the wheel) on the motor is cancelled. However once the coils are open (no load) the motor (driving the same load with the same voltage) is uncapable of keeping the wheel of magnets freely turning and eventually comes to a stop.
To my knowledge electricity generators we have today work the other way around. The more load you have on the coils the more the motor will need power to drive the coils.
So I'm concluding; have been very unwise over the past 100 years on how to build an efficient generator ??? ??? ???
I sure hope not >:( since we are close to have ruined or world for the need of more electrical power. So I hope Thane's findings can be explained by the science we have relied on, if not we all need serious wake up :o call.
To date, no same theory as to why this is happening has come in. So I ain't going to sit around and wait for the science that its technology developed has proven to be cancer to the world, to tell me if this is usefull or not.
Thane is sharing it so we can use it now. So lets replicate, improve and intergate NOW.
Luc
Links:
Thane Heins Generator (Video) Part 1: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=00RZNW1Z
Thane Heins Generator (Video) Part 2: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2C3V1JXI
;D
Hi
the 2 videos are not working for me,maybe its magaupload ???
Quote from: powercat on February 15, 2008, 01:52:35 PM
Hi
the 2 videos are not working for me,maybe its magaupload ???
You have to give in the 3 digit code at the top and then wait 45 seconds
before the download starts.
Luc, I am just downloading it now.
Does it also show the power via a bulb coming out of the shorted
coils ? did you connect a bulb toit to shortout the coils ?
Quote from: powercat on February 15, 2008, 01:52:35 PM
Hi
the 2 videos are not working for me,maybe its magaupload ???
They are MP4 ASF files, so you need to install a video codec for it.
I suggest you install Cole Media Codec Pack: http://mirror.cole2k.net/f0f54f59-9454-46d1-b455-ae6437eafe0e/files/Cole2k.Media.-.Codec.Pack.V6.0.9.-Standard-.32Bit.Setup.exe
Then you will be able to play all video formats.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 02:03:43 PM
Luc, I am just downloading it now.
Does it also show the power via a bulb coming out of the shorted
coils ? did you connect a bulb toit to shortout the coils ?
@Stefan, no we did not plug a lightbulb even though we brought a few with us. Steven and I were satisfied with the tests and found them to be authentic (like Thane's videos) also we would of had to take his setup apart to access his switch panel and we did not feel the need to do this since we know that a shorted coil is the most load you can have.
Luc
thanks Gotoluc but its not working,will Wait until its re posted in a standard format
hopefully
powercat
Quote from: gotoluc on February 15, 2008, 02:13:07 PM
@Stefan, no we did not plug a lightbulb even though we brought a few with us. Steven and I were satisfied with the tests and found them to be authentic (like Thane's videos) also we would of have had to take his setup apart to access his switch panel and we did not feel the need to do this since we know that a shorted coil is the most load you can have.
Also, at the demo, Thane showed us paper versions of the Kinectrics reports that Luc post in reply #144 on page 10 of this thread and they included 1kohm loads. After seeing that it had already been done and the results were there (we'd asked Thane at the time to send us electronic versions instead of keeping the paper versions) and seeing what we'd have to do to Thane's demo setup, I didn't even suggest doing the bulb tests.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Just watched the 2 movies.
Well done Luc,
nice picture quality.
What did Thane say at the end of the first video,
when you asked him about DMboss`s comments about impedance matching ?
Has he ever got more power out from all his coils
than putting into the device, which is ruffly about 200 Watts ?
Steven, Luc:
Has Thane stated his position to you on whether these discoveries he has made are, in his opinion, the basis for a new source of energy, or simply findings which will allow for increased motor efficiencies?
I would think that with all the experiments he has performed, he would have an opinion on this--or at least he would be able to say: "So far I have increased motor efficiency by doing this," or "I have used this technique to get more energy out of my motor/generator combo than I put in."
I find it hard to visualize that utilizing back emf would result in overunity--however, he stresses "positive feedback loop" in his videos and his system speed vs. load graph shows and exponentially increasing system speed for increasing load...
So I am somewhat confused and would like to know what his position is.
Thanks,
Johnny
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 15, 2008, 03:03:34 PM
Also, at the demo, Thane showed us paper versions of the Kinectrics reports that Luc post in reply #144 on page 10 of this thread and they included 1kohm loads. After seeing that it had already been done and the results were there (we'd asked Thane at the time to send us electronic versions instead of keeping the paper versions) and seeing what we'd have to do to Thane's demo setup, I didn't even suggest doing the bulb tests.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Hi Steve,
looking again at these paper,
it is getting clear that the coils only output around 0.3 to 2.7 Watts of power each,
depending on the coils.
Okay, a 1 KOhm load is probably not the right impedance to get the
most power out as normally you need to set it lower to get more current out...
But the question still remains,
is this all only impedance matching, when he puts
in about 200 Watts and gets out only maybe 10 to 20 Watts from his coils ?
So the version which you have shown in your video is still highly suspect..
I agree, that the other version with the toroidal transformer,
with which Steven Sullivan from Omidyne corp already had success with is
much more viable.
@all,
after regestering as a member, i still can't access the videos for love nor money! i know i am a bit thick in the head, but can anyone give me directions for this megadownload site? sorry to be so computer illeterate, but i am just an old ironworker.
lol
sam
@supersam,
See attached image. If you can't play the file then download video codec and install.
A great video player that plays ALL mediafiles is KMPlayer. Just Google it.
Groundloop.
Oops... Groundloop just beat me to the screenshot. Since I put the effort into making this, I'll post it as well in case it helps clarify things further... The moderator can delete this post if it is found to be redundent... j
@johnnyl,
Faster than a speeding bullet. LOL.
@Group,
I have started to make an Iron core with a Ferrite core in the center.
Tomorrow I will make the coils and try it out.
Groundloop.
Groundloop: Any idea what the reluctance differences in these materials are?
thanks to Groundloop and johnnyl video now working
@johnnyl,
I do not know.
But one thing is for sure, the laminated soft Iron core has a much higher Permeability than the Ferrite rod.
Groundloop.
My toriod is all grinded down now but the only ferrite core I have is far too short (it's 9.75cm long). Does anyone know what I can find a ferrite core in (e.g. radios) or something else that can be used. I need it to be around 12.5cm long.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
Do a Google search for Ferrite rods.
Here is one:
http://www.bytemark.com/products/rod1.htm
Groundloop.
Hi All,
I must thank you all for your interest and your eager desire to start replication of Thane's more advanced Toroidal transformer. However before you all start taking your ceiling fans down for parts in search of the perfect core :-\ please give me a day or so to give you more information.
Thane was going to meet Steven and I this morning with his toroid coil so we could take pictures, video and get up to date on what not do that he has already tried and does not work. However we had a big snow storm this morning and he could not make it into town since he lives outside the city of Ottawa. He has now invited Steven and I to go to his home in Almonte to see the toroidal coils he has built allready and he is even ready to let us take them back to our home for testing.
Thane has been keeping an eye on this thread and sees we are a very dedicated group and wishes to help us succeed. So I will soon have much more information on Thanes toroidal transformer.
Luc
Quote from: johnnyl on February 15, 2008, 03:22:37 PM
Has Thane stated his position to you on whether these discoveries he has made are, in his opinion, the basis for a new source of energy, or simply findings which will allow for increased motor efficiencies?
I would think that with all the experiments he has performed, he would have an opinion on this--or at least he would be able to say: "So far I have increased motor efficiency by doing this," or "I have used this technique to get more energy out of my motor/generator combo than I put in."
Regarding the rotating system, at the demo he said:
1. these are just prototypes, not finished products,
2. he is violating Lenz's law which means he is also violating the conservation of energy,
3. and from the results he gave, which I mentioned in my report - milliwatt range per coil and he wasn't able to combine the output of all the coils due to their differences - are what he's measure so far, so no overunity.
Regarding the toroid transformer, I'm still waiting until I see him again for clarification. Our meeting today was postponed (no new time set yet that I know of) due to weather.
Quote from: johnnyl on February 15, 2008, 03:22:37 PM
I find it hard to visualize that utilizing back emf would result in overunity--however, he stresses "positive feedback loop" in his videos and his system speed vs. load graph shows and exponentially increasing system speed for increasing load...
Yeah, I can't visualize that utilizing back emf would result in overunity either. If you have a battery and you use some of its energy to recharge the battery and some to run a load, your battery will still run down eventually. I guess I don't get how it violates conservation of energy either.
Actually, now that you mention it, that exponential line for Test #2 is wrong, if its source of data are the three data points in the Kinectrics study. It actually flattens out a lot between the second two data points. Luc, can you get a clarification, or point out this error, on this from Thane?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Groundloop on February 15, 2008, 06:22:23 PM
Do a Google search for Ferrite rods.
Here is one:
http://www.bytemark.com/products/rod1.htm
Thanks Groundloop. I was really looking for something I could dig up locally so I wouldn't have to wait for shipping.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve,
all types of ferrite core here http://www.technomag.net/ferrite.htm (http://www.technomag.net/ferrite.htm)
Steve,
You will find a Ferrite rod in old radios. The ones that have the short wave band.
The problem today IS to find an old radio. ;D
Groundloop.
Quote from: gotoluc on February 15, 2008, 06:29:34 PM
Hi All,
I must thank you all for your interest and your eager desire to start replication of Thane's more advanced Toroidal transformer. However before you all start taking your ceiling fans down for parts in search of the perfect core :-\ please give me a day or so to give you more information.
Thane was going to meet Steven and I this morning with his toroid coil so we could take pictures, video and get up to date on what not do that he has already tried and does not work. However we had a big snow storm this morning and he could not make it into town since he lives outside the city of Ottawa. He has now invited Steven and I to go to his home in Almont to see the toroidal coils he has built allready and he is even ready to let us take them back to our home for testing.
Thane has been keeping an eye on this tread and sees we are a very dedicated group and wishes to help us succeed. So I will soon have much more information on Thanes toroidal transformer.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Your comments are dead on. His current devices will shed more light than sunshine.
Hope the weather improves!
Anxiously awaiting your info.
Thanks for your great efforts, Larry
@Steven: Thanks for the info -- looking forward to learning more.
Ok, I have confusion about the torroidal transformer too. Most of my problem is due to the fact that my education is in Chemisty and IT. Other than an EM101 and EM102 course taken several years ago I don't have experience with electronic systems.
Am I understanding correctly that the goal of the torroidal transformer with a primary coil on a higher reluctance core coupled to two secondaries on a lower reluctance torroidal core is to show that the back EMFs of the secondaries cancel each other out and do not affect the primary?
If so:
- What is the practical outcome of this design expected to achieve? Reduce ineffeciencies of the transformer? I looked at the wikipedia entry for transformers and it states that transformers are one of the most efficient electrical machines that exist--up to 99.75% efficient... So would negating the secondaries back EMF and isolating it from the primary really make much difference in the transformers efficiency?
- In what ways would a toroidal transformer which has the back EMF of the secondaries cancel out and/or not affect the primary coil differ from or be superior to a regular transformer?
J
When I remember correctly Jean Louis Naudin
and also Mr. Frolov had on their websites a few years back devices simular
to a MEG or pulse motor or magnetic amplifier ( can?t find it now)
that also showed
decreasing input when the output coils were shorted,
but this also was only impedance matching
as with open output coils the input power for
creating the magnetic flux was higher, as when the
output coils were shorted.
But never the output power was higher than the input power.
So the only thing the shortening of the output coils did
was to set a better impedance, so the input power decreased.
Maybe we have the same case over here ?
As long as the total input power is still bigger
than the drawable output power I don?t trust these circuits
although they are pretty interesting in their design.
Here are the links Stefan:
For Frolov's: http://www.alternativkanalen.com/ph-machine.html
For Naudin's: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smep11.htm
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 07:36:03 PM
When I remember correctly Jean Louis Naudin
and also Mr. Frolov had on their websites a few years back devices simular
to a MEG or pulse motor or magnetic amplifier ( can?t find it now)
that also showed
decreasing input when the output coils were shorted,
but this also was only impedance matching
as with open output coils the input power for
creating the magnetic flux was higher, as when the
output coils were shorted.
But never the output power was higher than the input power.
So the only thing the shortening of the output coils did
was to set a better impedance, so the input power decreased.
Maybe we have the same case over here ?
As long as the total input power is still bigger
than the drawable output power I don?t trust these circuits
although they are pretty interesting in their design.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 15, 2008, 05:07:26 PM
@johnnyl,
Faster than a speeding bullet. LOL.
@Group,
I have started to make an Iron core with a Ferrite core in the center.
Tomorrow I will make the coils and try it out.
Groundloop.
Shouldn't the toroid be made of ferrite with an iron center?
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 07:36:20 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 15, 2008, 05:07:26 PM
@johnnyl,
Faster than a speeding bullet. LOL.
@Group,
I have started to make an Iron core with a Ferrite core in the center.
Tomorrow I will make the coils and try it out.
Groundloop.
Shouldn't the toroid be made of ferrite with an iron center?
Why?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 16, 2008, 08:13:03 AM
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 07:36:20 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 15, 2008, 05:07:26 PM
@johnnyl,
Faster than a speeding bullet. LOL.
@Group,
I have started to make an Iron core with a Ferrite core in the center.
Tomorrow I will make the coils and try it out.
Groundloop.
Shouldn't the toroid be made of ferrite with an iron center?
Why?
Groundloop.
Because afaik the center (= primary) should have the lower permeability to keep the bemf flux in the higher permeability toroid.
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 08:29:10 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 16, 2008, 08:13:03 AM
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 07:36:20 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 15, 2008, 05:07:26 PM
@johnnyl,
Faster than a speeding bullet. LOL.
@Group,
I have started to make an Iron core with a Ferrite core in the center.
Tomorrow I will make the coils and try it out.
Groundloop.
Shouldn't the toroid be made of ferrite with an iron center?
Why?
Groundloop.
Because afaik the center (= primary) should have the lower permeability to keep the bemf flux in the higher permeability toroid.
Yes you are correct. That is why I use Ferrite in the center.
Groundloop.
Oh no, am I displaying my noob-status again?? ::)
@M@rcel,
I do not know what "noob-status" means but you are right. I will use the Iron as input (primary) and the ferrite
as output (secondary). I have made the coil so I can test both ways. If I find no difference then there is NO effect by
using cores this way.
Groundloop.
I'm afraid this won't work because the bemf flux from the center secondary has no other way to go than into the primary.
Where can I find large (min. 4") ferrite or better toroids?
mmm, metglass comes to mind (with a soft-iron center bar)
Quote from: johnnyl on February 15, 2008, 03:22:37 PM
Steven, Luc:
Has Thane stated his position to you on whether these discoveries he has made are, in his opinion, the basis for a new source of energy, or simply findings which will allow for increased motor efficiencies?
I would think that with all the experiments he has performed, he would have an opinion on this--or at least he would be able to say: "So far I have increased motor efficiency by doing this," or "I have used this technique to get more energy out of my motor/generator combo than I put in."
Thanks,
Johnny
@johnnyl, Thane has seen your post and sent me the email below in response.
Luc
Dear Luc,
Send them these letters - especially Dr. Townsend and Kirtley's from MIT.
I have an opinion but I ought to stick with facts for now.
Thanks
Thane
Groundloop,
You should be able to use the same material for the primary and secondary, as long as the permeability is pretty high and (very important) you have air gaps (or plastic separators) at the end of the primary rod.
I've been doing some modeling with vizimag, and it says that the effect works pretty well when the permeability is 2000 or so, and the air gaps are each about 3% of the rod length.
It also seems important to balance the loads on the secondaries (use a variable resistor on one) so that their fluxes will cancel. This reduces the secondary inductance and allows you to draw current more easily.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Quote from: johnnyl on February 15, 2008, 07:29:12 PM
@Steven: Thanks for the info -- looking forward to learning more.
Am I understanding correctly that the goal of the torroidal transformer with a primary coil on a higher reluctance core coupled to two secondaries on a lower reluctance torroidal core is to show that the back EMFs of the secondaries cancel each other out and do not affect the primary?
J
@johnnyl, in response to your question above Thane has sent me this response.
Luc
Dear Luc,
Fluxes do NOT cancel each other out. They repel in air and bypass each other in metal. A piece of ferromagnetic material will handle any amount of flux going in any different number of directions up to the point of saturation.
The point is that the Secondary Coil 1?s Back EMF flux couples into Secondary Coil 2 and vice versa and NOT back into the primary. The secondary coils can be an ?infinite? size (number of turns) having an ?infinite? induced voltage in them.
Picture a 1: 1,000 step up transformer and a primary which NEVER deviates from its NO LOAD operating state - then picture a 1: 1,000,000,000 step up transformer which employs the same primary only its SECONDARY turns have increased.
As long as the Back EMF flux paths for the secondaries MUTUALLY COUPLES one to each other and not down the primary coil leg ? an ?infinite? amount of power can be obtained with a magnetically isolated primary delivering a fixed magnetizing flux.
The design also requires mutual secondary coupling to ?self regulate? the desired voltage across the load. This replaces the conventional transformer operation where secondary Back EMF flux couples back to the primary ? lowers the primary impedance ? causes the primary to draw more magnetizing current ? thus regulating the voltage across the load.
Our problem is not with proof of concept but with finding the ideal manufacturability ?recipe? to keep cost of production down and avoid waste. That is where computer modeling comes in for us right now. In the RED section above we have simply decided to increase our output by increasing the permeability of our core material (and multiply our output this way) rather than increasing our turns ratio.
You and Steve have an opportunity now to increase the primary efficiency of the samples I gave you and perhaps make the world's first 101% efficient transformer. I hope you succeed!
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 10:15:39 AM
I'm afraid this won't work because the bemf flux from the center secondary has no other way to go than into the primary.
Where can I find large (min. 4") ferrite or better toroids?
mmm, metglass comes to mind (with a soft-iron center bar)
What if I use an air core coil in the center as a primary, will that work?
@Mr.Entropy,
OK. Will try that also..
Groundloop.
Luc (and Thane!):
Thanks so much for the information! I'm digging in trying to understand it on a deeper level. Looking forward to learning more...
Thanks,
Johnny
Do I understand this correctly? An airgap in the center primary is ok as long as
- the secondaries have lots of windings and/or
- the outer toroid has the lowest reluctance possible
Mark the "and/or", for testing the "or" might be usefull
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 11:33:57 AM
Do I understand this correctly? An airgap in the center primary is ok as long as
- the secondaries have lots of windings and/or
- the outer toroid has the lowest reluctance possible
Mark the "and/or", for testing the "or" might be usefull
Magnetic reluctance or "magnetic resistance", is analogous to resistance in an electrical circuit (although it does not dissipate magnetic energy). In likeness to the way an electric field causes an electric current to follow the path of least resistance, a magnetic field causes magnetic flux to follow the path of least magnetic reluctance. It is a scalar, extensive quantity, akin to electrical resistance. Magnetic flux always forms a closed loop, as described by Maxwell's equations, but the path of the loop depends on the reluctance of the surrounding materials. It is concentrated around the path of least reluctance. Air and vacuum have high reluctance, while easily magnetized materials such as soft iron have low reluctance. Air gaps can be created in the cores of certain transformers to reduce the effects of saturation. This increases the reluctance of the magnetic circuit, and enables it to store more energy before core saturation.
What we want is a primary with a higher reluctance than the secondary. There is many ways to do that. One is by choice of material used in the cores. One is by using air gap in the primary. One is by the number of turns in the coils. etc.
Groundloop.
Thanks for the info, clears things up. One question: Why is the reluctance dependant on the number of turns?
Quote from: M@rcel on February 16, 2008, 04:05:59 PM
Thanks for the info, clears things up. One question: Why is the reluctance dependant on the number of turns?
The total reluctance is equal to the ratio of the "magnetomotive force? in a passive magnetic circuit and the magnetic flux in this circuit. In an AC field, the reluctance is the ratio of the amplitude values for a sinusoidal "magnetomotive force? and magnetic flux.
The reluctance definition can be expressed as:
R = F / PHI (Where R = reluctance, F = is the magnetomotive force in ampere-turns and PHI = is the magnetic flux in webers.) So the number of turns will give you a greater value of F thus a greater value of R. So R = is the reluctance in ampere-turns per weber (a unit that is equivalent to turns per henry). "Turns" refers to the winding number of an electrical conductor comprising an inductor.
Groundloop.
Hi All,
As indicated in our lasts posts, Luc and I ended up going to Thane's home last night. Thane showed us some small coils and toroids he had hand wound for his first tests and quickly explained the evolution of his transformer. He then brought out three toroids but one at a time, since they weigh well over 30 pounds each. These 3 toroids were professionally built by a transformer company called ToroidTech: http://www.toroidtech.com/. Attached are photos of each Toroid. At the end of our visit Thane told us we could take all his toroids with us and experiment as we wish and share the results with everyone.
For a few years now Thane had been experimenting with a number of different hand wound toroids, lately having the 3 last ones made by ToroidTech. The only difference in each of the 3 was the number of turns wound on the secondary. We'll call them Toroid 1, Toroid 2 and Toroid 3. Changing only the number of turns allowed him to play with just one variable at a time. Here's the data for the core, which is the same for all of them:
Permeability: around 200
Outer diameter: 222mm (8.7")
Inner diameter: 117mm (4.6")
Thickness: 60mm (2.36")
Weight: approximately 14kg (31lbs)
Wire gauge: 24AWG
All dimensions are approximate since they are wrapped in paper and plastic and hard to measure. The weight is approximate since there is wire coiled around all of them but do increase in weight by about 8 pounds each for the extra windings. All are covered in transformer paper before winding so as to prevent cutting the wire insulation and then wrapped in plastic afterwards.
Each toroid has two secondary coils wrapped around it.
Toroid 1 has 2000 turns per secondary coil.
Toroid 2 has 4000 turns per secondary coil.
Toroid 3 has 5500 turns per secondary coil.
Thane used the same primary for testing all three by simply pulling out the primary from the center and inserting in the next toroid. Test results were done with watt meters so as to take power factor into account. Thane did not give us his exact test results since he wants to see what our independent tests would give. However he gave us sample figures to help us understand how the evolution would go. He said for example, if you were to feed the primary with 50 volts, 60Hz, 50 watts, with Toroid 1's 2,000 turns you would get about 12 watts out, with Toroid 2's 4,000 turns (double that of Toroid 1), you would get about 24 watts out, and lastly, with Toroid 3's 5,500 turns you would get about 30 watts out. From this you can see that the amount of output is proportional to the number of turns.
When Thane did his measurements, based on the results he got for Toroid 1, he ordered Toroid 2 with double the windings, 4,000 turns, to see if the output would keep going up with the more turns. Based on the results from Toroid 2 he then order Toroid 3 with 8,000 turns. However the manufacturer used the same wire gauge and was able to get only to 5,500 turns before finding that with any more turns the center opening would be too small to fit the primary.
He then asked the manufacture to continue to do the modelling in software. That did not work as the software was not able to even simulate what he was already getting with his first 3 toroids since the software had not been written to take in account his effect. So at this time Thane and a transformer manufacturer are working with the software developers to write a new program that can simulate his effect, including trying out many more parameters such as toroid and primary core materials, dimensions, wire gauge, ..., in order to design a toroid with the correct combinations, all the way to using state of the art core material such as supermalloy of permeability 1,000,000.
This is where Thane is at this point. Also note that he tested with only one simple hand wound primary (see photos below) which has a solid metal core, so further improvement could be done by us making more efficient primary combinations and see if we can boost output up.
If anyone has any input then please speak up.
We find Thane to be genuine and extremely helpful by allowing us to take his latest Toroids to our homes to experiment as we wish to our hearts content.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: gotoluc on February 16, 2008, 10:20:24 AM
Dear Luc,
Send them these letters - especially Dr. Townsend and Kirtley's from MIT.
I have an opinion but I ought to stick with facts for now.
Thanks
Thane
Hi all,
Don't know any more on this science than I've been able to wring out of google since I began to follow the Toronto Star story, however this thread has still been great. It's not only the science that's intruiging, but how these potentially heretical ideas are received across the various communities.
I was interested to know how it went from "MIT ain't interested" to the demonstration Thane was able to do there last month. What changed for MIT in the intervening year? Or was is it just a matter of hitting up the "right" person at MIT for this kind of flexible thinking?
Thanks so much to all of you out there trying to build a better mousetrap. :)
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 16, 2008, 10:11:44 PM
....
Each toroid has two secondary coils wrapped around it.
Toroid 1 has 2000 turns per secondary coil.
Toroid 2 has 4000 turns per secondary coil.
Toroid 3 has 5500 turns per secondary coil.
....
Hi Steve and Luc,
Thank you for this report, very helpful indeed. I would have two questions if you or Thane could answer:
1) the 2000 turns on Toroid 1 is meant for one side of the core, say on its left side and there is also 2000 turns on its right side, so that all together Toroid 1 has got 4000 turns? (Because you wrote 2000 turns per secondary coil and you also wrote each toroid has two secondary coils, right?)
2) when the load tests were performed how much input energy increase has been noticed on the watt meter in the moment of connecting the load to the secondary coils? Putting it otherwise: the 50W input includes already the (possible) reflective effect of the load and if so then how much Watt the 50W input power decreases to when the load is disconnected?
Thanks,
Gyula
What a miracle, an honest straight forward inventor who can communicate clearly.
It would seem to me that the only way this can work is if indeed each secondaries flux shorts through the other* and this would leave little in the way of any net field from either of the secondaries freeing them up to have more ampere-turns than the field provided by the primary without canceling out the primary.
There are 2 other ways to improve output, one is to have an external C core primary with 2 toroids between the poles, a good way to double the output for free since the secondary toroids don't 'poison' the flux it can be used more than once.
The better idea being that since the primary is unloaded it should be possible to get any losses down by various means of reducing eddy currents and hysteresis and making it a tuned tank circuit with the input freq., In theory if everything worked perfectly and you used superconductors and lossless caps and laminated metglas core you'd never need to put more energy in ever, in reality you will always need to trickle energy in.
Another thought is that if the secondaries don't create a magnetic or inductive field then they should I think have a 90 degree phase relationship with the primary as opposed to a 180 degree phase relationship in a normal transformer. (except when it's unloaded then normal transformers show a 90 deg relationship)
It would be very cool to see if the phase relationship is 90 degrees!
I'd also note that the voltage should (assuming the secondaries have little if any effect) not drop just because more amps are drawn so it would be best to power a high current load and try to cool the coils for max power once adding more copper becomes too great a challenge.
*If they don't then it would spew out into the air and load the primary which I gather Thane hasn't witnessed.
Quote from: gyulasun on February 17, 2008, 05:25:08 AM
1) the 2000 turns on Toroid 1 is meant for one side of the core, say on its left side and there is also 2000 turns on its right side, so that all together Toroid 1 has got 4000 turns? (Because you wrote 2000 turns per secondary coil and you also wrote each toroid has two secondary coils, right?)
That's correct, you read it right. I don't have the answer to your second question.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 17, 2008, 07:56:29 AM
Quote from: gyulasun on February 17, 2008, 05:25:08 AM
1) the 2000 turns on Toroid 1 is meant for one side of the core, say on its left side and there is also 2000 turns on its right side, so that all together Toroid 1 has got 4000 turns? (Because you wrote 2000 turns per secondary coil and you also wrote each toroid has two secondary coils, right?)
That's correct, you read it right. I don't have the answer to your second question.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Steve, thank you for confirming the number of turns question. Re my second one, maybe Thane will be kind to answer.
I would have one more question, what is the DC resistance of the 4000 turn coil on Toroid 2 and of the 5500 turn coil on Toroid 3?
Thank you for taking your time.
rgds, Gyula
Ok, I've got some more questions:
Steve:
- When you say the toroid 1 output is appox. 12W out, you are saying that each of the two secondary coils of toroid 1 are giving 6W out, right? Same with toroid 2 having 12W out per secondary and toroid 3 having 15W out per secondary, right?
Anyone:
- I have been trying to find information on the web describing the relationship between the primary and secondary coil of a transformer and how the back emf from the secondary affects the primary. I am looking for this so that I can understand how a magnetically isolated primary, as in Thanes design, will differ from a regular transformer. It would help me to see equations pertaining to this so I can get a quantitative idea of the effect and consequences. So far, I have only found information referring to the back EMF of the primary coil inducing current in the secondary, but no discussion of the consequences of the induced back EMF of the secondary and the effect or role it plays on the primary.
Even when I read about load losses in a transformer, I have not seen any mention of the back EMF from a secondary and it's effect on a primary being a source of concern. Documentation I have read so far lists winding resistance as the major load loss factor. Having said that, if we are to continue increasing the windings on the secondary legs, are we also not increasing the winding resistance proportionally? Since I haven't found any equations describing the beneficial effect of a magnetically isolated primary, how do these competing and oppositional factors compare to one another in magnitude? For instance, is the magnetic isolation of the primary (a beneficial effect) stronger than that of increased winding resistance (a detrimental effect)?
If anyone has web links handy which address any of the questions, please post them so I can educate myself some more... Thanks...
According to what I have read, an ideal transformer with no losses should have Power_in = Power_out. Given the rough numbers Thane gave to Steven and Luc (which they can confirm or update later), the efficiencies of toroid 1, 2, and 3 are approximately: (12W/50W =) 24%, (24W/50W =) 48%, and (30W/50W =) 60%. Assuming I have calculated this correctly (please correct me if I am wrong) I have a few questions:
- Transformers are supposed to be highly efficient (up to 99.75%). Does it make sense that toroid 1, 2 and 3 could have losses of 76%, 52% and 40% respectively? I've never built a transformer or tested any so I don't know what would be a normal loss range for a transformer of this sort.
- Obviously the efficiency of the toroidal transformer is increasing as N2 increases, but why? With more copper the winding resistance is also increasing as N2 increases, so why is the efficiency going up? What am I not understanding? Is this due to the effect of the magnetically isolated primary? (Afterthough: Hmm... Could the increase in effeciency be because like the Power_waste = I^2*R equation used for electrical transmission lines, the efficiency goes up in this transformer as voltage goes up and therefore current goes down thus minimizing Power_waste?)
Johnny
Quote from: gyulasun on February 17, 2008, 10:23:45 AM
I would have one more question, what is the DC resistance of the 4000 turn coil on Toroid 2 and of the 5500 turn coil on Toroid 3?
By DC resistance, do you mean connecting the probes of a multimeter to the wire ends and setting it to measure resistance? If not, tell me how to do it. If so, read on...
You opened up a can of worms. :-) I think there are issues with the coils on Toroid 3 so I can give you an estimated answer now and need more information before I can complete the measurements.
For Toroid 1, secondary 1: 25.71 ohms measured
For Toroid 1, secondary 2: 25.63 ohms measured
For Toroid 2, secondary 1: 53.08 ohms measured
For Toroid 2, secondary 2: 53.04 ohms measured
For Toroid 3, secondary 1: 73.7 ohms estimated
For Toroid 3, secondary 2: 73.7 ohms estimated
First off, if you look closely at the photos, you'll see that there are lots and lots of wires coming out of the coils. That's because the coils are wound 1000 turns at a time. Then the ends are connected up in series (well some were connected already, some I connect.) So for Toroid 1's secondary one, there are two 1000 turns wires and four ends. Connecting two of those ends gives a single 2000 turn winding. For Toroids 2 and 3, the actual turns are done with 24 AWG wire but the ends are different colored 22 AWG. So for the first 1000 turns, one end is a black 24 AWG wire and the other end is a white 24 AWG wire. I think it's done this way so that a wiring table can be made up and they can be connected in the right order. The partial wiring table I have for Toroid 3 is:
black - white (so these are the colors of the ends for one 1000 turn wire)
brown - orange
red - yellow
blue - gray
... and then there are striped wires for which I don't have a diagram and they aren't all connected. So I connect white with brown, orange with red, yellow with blue, ...
QUESTION 1: does the order matter? Can I connect white with red, yellow with brown, orange with blue instead? I ask because some are connected differently on the two secondaries (e.g. secondary 1, gray with striped red but secondary 2, gray with striped blue.) If the order doesn't matter then that may be why they're different.
QUESTION 2: does the direction matter? For example, when connecting the first two can I go black with orange instead of white with brown? It seems to matter since if on secondary one I connect them as above then my meter goes a little crazy but if I go with yellow - red instead of red - yellow then it's fine. Note that when I measure the turns individually with no wires connected then each is around 13.4 ohms, except for one of the stripped pairs which gives infinity. The meter is a Fluke 187 true RMS digital multimeter. On the resistance setting with beeping turned off, it keeps flashing "-0L kohm" and the bar graph keeps going off scale and repeating that display. With the beeping turned on, it correctly displays 41.2 ohms (approx. 3 x 13.4) but beeps every half second or so.
Anyway, to estimate Toroid 3 resistances, I took the first 1000 turn wire and measured its resistance, 13.4 ohms. I then did (13.4 / 1000) * 5500 = 73.7 ohms.
I wonder who had these Toroids before me because these resistance measurements are all I've done so far and there are definately issues.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Dear All,
I am responding to: aether22
?It would seem to me that the only way this can work is if indeed each secondaries flux shorts through the other* and this would leave little in the way of any net field from either of the secondaries freeing them up to have more ampere-turns than the field provided by the primary without canceling out the primary.?
Fluxes don?t CANCEL ? but they do ADD. You cannot cancel opposing fluxes inside ferromagnetic material, it is impossible because flux always follow the path of least reluctance ? which would be air once saturation is reached. Notice the directions of PRIMARY FLUX 1 and INDUCED SECONDARY 2 FLUX (BI - Toroid Transformer NYKOLAI 2.jpg) in the transformer diagrams are in the same direction and are ADDATIVE so NET FLUX can only increase.
If this were not true then there would be no such thing as Lenz?s Law because the magnet field entering a coil of wire would be cancelled by the induced field exiting.
Lenz's Law
When an emf is generated by a change in magnetic flux according to Faraday's Law, the polarity of the induced emf is such that it produces a current whose magnetic field opposes the change which produces it. The induced magnetic field inside any loop of wire always acts to keep the magnetic flux in the loop constant. In the examples below, if the B field is increasing, the induced field acts in opposition to it. If it is decreasing, the induced field acts in the direction of the applied field to try to keep it constant.
?Another thought is that if the secondaries don't create a magnetic or inductive field then they should I think have a 90 degree phase relationship with the primary as opposed to a 180 degree phase relationship in a normal transformer. (except when it's unloaded then normal transformers show a 90 deg relationship)?
Using a purely resistive load (for now) the power factor for the secondaries is 1 (current and voltage in phase) ? which is also in phase with the primary. Perhaps Steve and Luc can come to the lab on Tuesday with the ?small? toroid 1 and we can verify this on my watt/power factor meter. I have already confirmed this for myself but I might still be wrong.
You can also see from the Toroid Coil Evolution diagrams ? that FLUXES DON?T CANCEL BUT THEY DO ADD ? if they did cancel the Toroid Generator application would not work but indeed it does.
To Gyula?s question:
?2) When the load tests were performed how much input energy increase has been noticed on the watt meter in the moment of connecting the load to the secondary coils? Putting it otherwise: the 50W input includes already the (possible) reflective effect of the load and if so then how much Watt the 50W input power decreases to when the load is disconnected??
None or virtually no primary power increase from no load to full load (short circuit). If the primary power goes up then your primary reluctance is too low and secondary Back EMF is causing it to go up ? time to make a new primary ? either with less area in the core ? less primary turns ? or a lower grade core material or increase the relative permeability of the secondary (which is our choice so we can get away with less copper and have a greater output as well).
The primary must not deviate from it?s 50 W no load value if it does something is amiss.
Note: The primary will respond (slightly) to the increase in flux in the secondary as load is applied because the reluctance of the secondary is increasing as the load on the secondaries is increased.
Cheers
Thane
Dear Johnny,
?I am looking for this so that I can understand how a magnetically isolated primary, as in Thanes design, will differ from a regular transformer. It would help me to see equations pertaining to this so I can get a quantitative idea of the effect and consequences. So far, I have only found information referring to the back EMF of the primary coil inducing current in the secondary, but no discussion of the consequences of the induced back EMF of the secondary and the effect or role it plays on the primary.?
In a conventional transformer the Back EMF induced magnetic field from the secondary MUTUALLY couples back to the primary - reduces the primary impedance - and as a result - the primary draws more current from the source - which in turn increases the flux delivered from the primary to the secondary - which regulates the voltage across the load. Without this mutual coupling the secondary voltage would collapse under load.
?how a magnetically isolated primary, as in Thanes design, will differ from a regular transformer?
An isolated primary as in my design will not allow the primary current magnitude to deviate from a NO LOAD level because there is an asymmetrical coupling:
PRIMARY to SECONDARY
and
SECONDARY to SECONDARY
but
NO SECONDARY to PRIMARY.
A conventional transformer REQURES this MUTUAL coupling or they would not be able to supply power to a load effectively.
The design criteria has 2 necessities:
1)
A blind? primary which does not respond to secondary loading.
2)
Two secondaries which are mutually coupled as to provide voltage self regulation.
Secondary 1 into Secondary 2 and vice versa.
We have proven our ability to do both of the above so far in our lab testing ? but have not identified the upper limits yet.
?Having said that, if we are to continue increasing the windings on the secondary legs, are we also not increasing the winding resistance proportionally? Since I haven't found any equations describing the beneficial effect of a magnetically isolated primary, how do these competing and oppositional factors compare to one another in magnitude? ?
Increasing the number of secondary turns ? increases the secondary induced voltage across the load. Power = V^2/R.
So for us we have not found the upper limits of our design simply because we ran out of room on our toroid cores. So now we are computer modeling the whole thing so we can change parameters more rapidly and find the ideal ?recipe?. If in fact there is one to find?
You won?t find any equations describing this because no one has ever done it before and we are writing the equations as we go along but the hardest part is ?forgetting what we have learned? about traditional transformer theory because it gets in the way.
?For instance, is the magnetic isolation of the primary (a beneficial effect) stronger than that of increased winding resistance (a detrimental effect)??
We don't know the answer to that yet. What we do know is as we increase the number of turns we increase the power output - how far is anybody's guess right now. This design is weird because increasing the number of turns increases the induced voltages in the secondaries but it also increases the impedance of the secondaries as well ? so if you go too high the secondary magnetic field?s required to regulate the voltage drops and so too does the output power.
That is why we are increasing the relative permeability of out toroid core to take advantage of its multiplication effect on our Back EMF induced field. See Solenoid Magnetic Field Calculation diagram.
That is of course unless Steve and Luc make a nice efficient primary and make the modeling exercise moot.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 17, 2008, 03:20:30 PM
That is why we are increasing the relative permeability of out toroid core to take advantage of its multiplication effect on our Back EMF induced field.
Welcome to this forum. I hope you'll feel at home soon!
Can you tell us what core materials you are investigating?
Marcel
Dear Steve,
START - END
black - white
brown - orange
red - yellow
blue ? gray
"QUESTION 1: does the order matter? Can I connect white with red, yellow with brown, orange with blue instead? I ask because some are connected differently on the two secondaries (e.g. secondary 1, gray with striped red but secondary 2, gray with striped blue.) If the order doesn't matter then that may be why they're different".
ANSWER 1:
YES just follow the START ? END directions.
Ignore the stripes.
QUESTION 2: does the direction matter? For example, when connecting the first two can I go black with orange instead of white with brown?
ANSWER 2
Black is a START ? Orange is an END
You need to connect: END, START, END, START and so on?
Get it wrong and you cancel out some current.
"It seems to matter since if on secondary one I connect them as above then my meter goes a little crazy but if I go with yellow - red instead of red - yellow then it's fine. Note that when I measure the turns individually with no wires connected then each is around 13.4 ohms, except for one of the stripped pairs which gives infinity."
THIS IS THE ONE WITH THE BROKEN WIRE I TOLD YOU ABOUT.
1ST verify that each wire START and END shows resistance and is not broken i.e infinite resistance.
Then connect the wires in series as shown above. Take your time and double check your connections. If you and Luc were doing "Dukes of Hazard" on the way home you may have broken some more wires as well.
"The meter is a Fluke 187 true RMS digital multimeter. On the resistance setting with beeping turned off, it keeps flashing "-0L kohm" and the bar graph keeps going off scale and repeating that display. With the beeping turned on, it correctly displays 41.2 ohms (approx. 3 x 13.4) but beeps every half second or so I wonder who had these Toroids before me because these resistance measurements are all I've done so far and there are definately issues."
Only me ? your meter is not used to measuring such a high impedance with remnant flux.
Remember Luc's capacitor storing voltage well inductors store magnetic fields - and remnant flux which freaks out your meter.
So get the flux outa here and...
Carry on!
Cheers
Thane
First johnnyl, I am not sure that even normal transformers can't be OU.
I also can't see where the secondary removes energy from the primary but I can see how it effects it.
It opposes the primaries magnetic field (in effect canceling it although I'm unsure how it effects saturation and maybe cancel is the wrong term but inductivly it is true) and since the only thing stopping massive current flow through the primary is it's self induction once you reduce that more current flows which you need because otherwise you'd never get more out of the secondary than the tiny no load energy through the primary.
Now what must somehow cause the primary to lose energy must be a very slight phase difference between the primary and the secondary, it must not be precisly 180 degreed and that might do it.
But maybe that's not it, maybe transformers are overunity but due to their design they can't output more than is flowing through (but not 'used by' the primary any more than a simple coil uses energy to produce a magnetic field, it needs energy flowing but doesn't use it up), maybe if you made the primary a resonant tank circuit and reduced various losses you could just trickle energy in?
Still chances are someone would have noticed if transformers didn't use energy riiight? (however if it's not 180 degrees but out by a bit then the secondary will be inducing a counter voltage into the primary that will ensure it loses energy, I just can't be sure that it keeps pace as required)
Now I'm going to quote Thane and put my reply throughout in a different colour.
Fluxes donââ,¬â,,¢t CANCEL They do in air as in a bucking bifilar coil and the same wound over a steel core would have no effect, sure both are there but the effects are equal and oppositeââ,¬â€œ but they do ADD. You cannot cancel opposing fluxes inside ferromagnetic material As I mentioned above the reason more current flows through a primary when a secondary is loaded is because the secondary creates the opposite magnetic field canceling the self induction that was keeping the current to a low level, it is impossible because flux always follow the path of least reluctance ââ,¬â€œ which would be air once saturation is reached Who says saturation has to be reached just because you have 2 opposing fields?. Notice the directions of PRIMARY FLUX 1 and INDUCED SECONDARY 2 FLUX (BI - Toroid Transformer NYKOLAI 2.jpg) That pic seems to only show the primaries magnetic field Edit: having studied it again I see what you are saying but you are forgetting each secondaries effect on it's self which is to oppose the flux of the the pri and other sec, but Demo_Part_2_-_Toiroid_Coil_Evolution_B.jpg diagram 5 shows precisly what i mean, you have the blue flux from the primary going down both halves and you has red from the secondaries going CW & CCW in equal proportions meaning that the secondary is in effect unable to respond to the primaries magnetic field in the transformer diagrams are in the same direction and are ADDATIVE so NET FLUX can only increase.[/color]
You have really lost me, I mean we seem to be on the same page because I can see how such a setup would mean that the secondary would have no load on the primary and furthermore would not reduce the primaries field inside the toroid meaning that you can have more turns to get more power as you claim.
If this were not true then there would be no such thing as Lenzââ,¬â,,¢s Law because the magnet field entering a coil of wire would be cancelled by the induced field exiting.
Induced fields do cancel, only not entierly.
The magnetic field in a transformer where the primary and secondary are wound close together stays constant regardless of if there is a load or not because the secondary cancels most of the field created by the primary, the primary responds by putting in more current, enough to keep everything the same. Though actually due to resistance and other factors the more current you put through the weaking the magnetic field gets, especially if resistance is playing a part is reducing primary currents.
The thing to remember is that even when no current is drawn from the secondary the voltage induced by the primary in the primary is enough to keep say 240 volts from putting the 50 amps it would want to put through and instead limit it to possibly milliamps. (in otherwords the magnetic field is generating a voltage close to 240v even with only ma of current)
So as the secondary draws current it opposes the field but the primary pushes a bit more current (or ampere turns in a non 1:1 ratio) then ther sec., a few more miliamps and so the magnetic field remains much as it was under no load. (primary 50ma and secondary 0 ma creates the same net magnetic field in the core as primary 5050ma and secondary 5000ma)
Lenz's Law
When an emf is generated by a change in magnetic flux according to Faraday's Law, the polarity of the induced emf is such that it produces a current whose magnetic field opposes the change which produces it.
Agreed The induced magnetic field inside any loop of wire always acts to keep the magnetic flux in the loop constant. In the examples below, if the B field is increasing, the induced field acts in opposition to it. If it is decreasing, the induced field acts in the direction of the applied field to try to keep it constant.
Agreed
ââ,¬Å"Another thought is that if the secondaries don't create a magnetic or inductive field then they should I think have a 90 degree phase relationship with the primary as opposed to a 180 degree phase relationship in a normal transformer. (except when it's unloaded then normal transformers show a 90 deg relationship)ââ,¬Â
Using a purely resistive load (for now) the power factor for the secondaries is 1 (current and voltage in phase) ââ,¬â€œ which is also in phase with the primary. Perhaps Steve and Luc can come to the lab on Tuesday with the ââ,¬Å"smallââ,¬Â toroid 1 and we can verify this on my watt/power factor meter. I have already confirmed this for myself but I might still be wrong.
While I'm not convinced it must be 90 degrees to the primary it would seem it probably should be.
The only reason it is 180 degrees normally is because while the voltage created in the secondary by the primary is at 90 degrees that wouldn't work because of the secondaries self induction.
But since the secondaries have no self induction (if they did you couldn't get more out more ampere turns than if flowing through the primary).
On a different subject I think there are 2 tests that everyone interested in this transformer should do as it is cheaper and easier than building a free energy machine.
Take a toroid (an iron powder one) and wind 2 secondaries on it as in thanes design, and then try 2 tests.
The first being to put a DC current through each so that thet create opposite flux directions and see how much of an external field there is, how strongly do they attract magetic materials? (compare it to the leaked flux when they are in attraction mode)
The second being to test the inductance of one of them, 2 of them in parallel then series. (being sure to try both attractive and repulsive modes)
Hopefuly no magnetic field is found in the first test and hopefully the self induction when they are in opposing series should be abnormally low or non existant.
If these tests come through then have a party because he's done it! The world is going to change and you then know that it's a good idea to morgauge the house and get into licencing and selling these things.
You can also see from the Toroid Coil Evolution diagrams ââ,¬â€œ that FLUXES DONââ,¬â,,¢T CANCEL BUT THEY DO ADD ââ,¬â€œ if they did cancel the Toroid Generator application would not work but indeed it does.
Is it possible we mean different things by cancel and add?
From my perspective your device can only work if the secondaries fail to generate a net field in the core.
hmmm, it has just struck me that maybe by add you mean that the flux of the primary in secondary 2 and the flux of sec1 in sec2 are in the same direction and hence add which is true (but sec 2 is opposing the flux produced by the other 2 so it's still 1+1-1=1).
But I am looking at it as the field of sec 1 canceling any observible effect of sec 2's field on it's self and sec 2 doing the same for sec 1 leaving the primary to have the only net field in the core.
In either case it's the same equasion from a different perspective.
Dear Marcel,
Thanks, we are starting with the highest grade material available i.e. Superpermalloy and
working our way backwards until we establish the upper and lower limits for each variable and looking to find the best ?practical? mix which gives us the best performance possible at the best cost point on the computer and then we begin production.
Cheers
Thane
"Is it possible we mean different things by cancel and add? From my perspective your device can only work if the secondaries fail to generate a net field in the core.
hmmm, it has just struck me that maybe by add you mean that the flux of the primary in secondary 2 and the flux of sec1 in sec2 are in the same direction and hence add which is true (but sec 2 is opposing the flux produced by the other 2 so it's still 1+1-1=1).
But I am looking at it as the field of sec 1 canceling any observable effect of sec 2's field on it's self and sec 2 doing the same for sec 1 leaving the primary to have the only net field in the core.
In either case it's the same equation from a different perspective.[/i]"
Dear aether22:
This is why I prefer to build prototypes and test my theories that way rather than endlessly debating back and forth?
Here are some actual facts that Luc and Steve ought to be able to corroborate soon.
When only secondary 1 in the Bi ? Toroid Transformer is connected across a load the voltage across the load will be roughly 0.6 V ? with BOTH secondaries connected the voltage jumps to 150 V ? the primary is identical and fixed as is the load (so leave them out of the discussion for now).
As you can deduce from the above something is adding to the total output across the load.
I am saying it is the MUTUAL COUPLING of S1 MMF?s into S2 and vice versa and in fact it is the SECONARY NET FIELD in the core which makes it work.
We expect a huge increase in output when we increase the quality of our Toroid core material because our hysterisis curve will be much narrower.
Thane
Hi Thane,
welcome to the forum.
Many thanks for coming over here and sharing your great work.
Finally an inventor who delivers ! ;)
Well, I just searched the patent database and found the old
patent from Steven L. Sullivan.
where he has patented already these kinds of toroidal
transformer designs.
Please have alook at it and compare to your setups.
@Steven.
Surely you have towatch out, how you connect all the coils
on the toroids, so that no windings voltages will cancel out.
Best is to feed one coil with some low voltage 60 Hz AC from
a normal transformer and mark all the polarities of the other coils, so you
will connect them right, when you hook then up in series or in parallel..
P.S: Still have to study all the latest stuff that was posted here.
Keep it coming ! ;)
Regards, Stefan-
I thought that this might add some to the current discussions going on here. (Please excuse this post if anyone here finds it out of place.)This patent by Markov is directly related to your current discussions on canceling flux and transformer setups...
Gennady MARKOV - 'Bidirectional Transformer'Check the link here: http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm
Here is his patent here: http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/ca2224708.pdf
Here was an ensuing post exchange between BEP and I...Quote from: tao on July 10, 2007, 01:32:22 AM
Exactly, and that is why THIS WORKS: http://rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm
A transformer where there are TWO primaries that DIRECTLY oppose each other and CANCEL/NULL the magnetic flux, YET, on the ONE secondary, there is OUTPUT POWER...
Windings ratios mean NOTHING for Markov's transformer...
Quote from: BEP on July 10, 2007, 01:53:56 AM
This is new? Really, I am surprized.
In winding transformers it is common to wind from one end to the other and return the opposite direction and continue. This allows lower grade cores because the cancelling flux allows the core to remain closer to the ideal state of 'idle' - like an unloaded transformer. In old fashioned switchboard class metering separate phases were wound on the same core to improve precision. All three phases came out on the secondaries. And yes, going by the above experience - I already believed you can have separate magnetic circuits traveling through the same 'conductor' just like electric current flow.
There must be a difference but I don't see it in the text.
All in all, I thought it interesting and might add to the current discussions here.
Quote from: Steven Dufresne on February 17, 2008, 01:15:49 PM
By DC resistance, do you mean connecting the probes of a multimeter to the wire ends and setting it to measure resistance? If not, tell me how to do it. If so, read on...
Hi Steve, Yes I meant by DC resistance the copper wires' electrical resistance and you did it nicely with the multimeter set to measure resistance , thank you very much. Regarding your estimations on the resistance of coils on Toroid 3 must be well within the ballpark, for the 5500 turn of coils are obviously wound as multilayer coils and the length of the turns gradually increase as the number of layers increase (this why the manufacturer could not wind more turns (8000) as requested.
Re your other questions on my questions, they were nicely answered by Thane.
Thanks, Gyula
Again Thane in black and I'm in blue.
Dear aether22:
This is why I prefer to build prototypes and test my theories that way rather than endlessly debating back and forthââ,¬Â¦
Bravo, I'm guilty of experimenting less than I ought.
Here are some actual facts that Luc and Steve ought to be able to corroborate soon.
When only secondary 1 in the Bi ââ,¬â€œ Toroid Transformer is connected across a load the voltage across the load will be roughly 0.6 V ââ,¬â€œ with BOTH secondaries connected the voltage jumps to 150 V ââ,¬â€œ the primary is identical and fixed as is the load (so leave them out of the discussion for now).
As you can deduce from the above something is adding to the total output across the load.
IMO the main reason is that you have a low reluctance path through which the primaries flux can escape (the unused secondary leg), if you have both secondaries connected and add a 3rd path where it can short without facing S1 or S2 it would and your voltage would drop again.
Of course also playing a significant part in this amplification is that once you have the 2 secondaries on the ampere turns on the secondaries need show no relation to the primary.
In the end I'm only guessing as to which is the main reason.
I am saying it is the MUTUAL COUPLING of S1 MMFââ,¬â,,¢s into S2 and vice versa and in fact it is the SECONARY NET FIELD in the core which makes it work.
I don't believe that is the sole reason for the jump from .6v to 150v but I do believe it is a critical function of your transformer, without which you couldn't get more ampere turns out than the primary has even if it were OU.
In other words your transformer achieves 2 miracles, it protects the primary from the secondaries flux and it protects the secondaries from their own flux in effect so that their output need not be related to the primaries input.
You are right, it is S1's MMF coupling into S2 that makes S2 work so well, but S1's field at S2 is as strong and opposite to S2's field at S2. (as S2 must oppose the changing field brought about by S1 and P)
The secondaries flux isn't amplifying the induction as such but removing the counter induction a secondary normally creates, but the end result is the same.
Still this seems close to semantics really since we are both saying that the MMF from one secondary is boosting the output to the other secondary (only diff is I'm saying it's equal to that secondaries counter induction of it's self), the much bigger deal is that if you aren't lying or crazy you have likely pulled it off and we should all be having a huge celebration in your honor.
I've just got to figure if I want to test your motor discovery or your transformer discovery first.
Dear aether22
No I?m not lazy but my wife says that I AM COMMITTED or at the very least should be committed.
The miracle(s) you speak of are also demonstrated in the Toroid Generator application Part 4 where the effects associated with Lenz?s Law (motor action in a generator) are completely eliminated by diverting the induced coil MMF out of the air gap.
The transformer requires a delicate balance of ?ingredients? to achieve good results but the Magnetically Coupled Generator can be done in a weekend quite easily.
Thane
Assuming that Thanes transformer works here is how I would go about increasing output. (and assuming it works like I think it does which if it works at all I have little doubt I'm right)
This is just a list I was making for my own pondering until I realized something important!
Add a cap and make the primary a resonant tank circuit. (Based on the fact that the circulating energy is not the same as the energy used,)
Saturate the primary (a highly permeable material will increase the magnetic field produced which will increase the output which is good but air gaps/laminations and saturation is required to keep the path unattractive)
Make the primary of a low hysteresis material and reduce eddy currents.
Make the toroid of as high a permability material as practical to keep the flux in.
Add as many turns as can be fit, cool the wire and pull as much current as possible. (actually it's not about the number of turns really as that increases voltage but you can simply choose to pull more amps if you use a thicker wire, it's about the amount of wire employed)
Ok, here is the big one, this will increase the output energy big time, ready for it?
Raise the input frequency!
You see frequency increases induction, that's why high frequency transformers can have such poor coupling (or at least it would be poor at a lower freq), the greater the rate of change the stronger the electric field/force the wire sees from the changing flux.
You can't normally use this to create energy though because while the primary is of a higher frequency and inducing more strongly the secondaries flux is changing just as fast.
BUT IN THANES TRANSFORMER THE SECONDARIES FLUX INFLUENCES CANCEL OUT, THE SELF INDUCTION THAT NORMALLY LIMITS INDUCED CURRENT IS NO LONGER PRESENT SO BY RAISING THE FREQUENCY YOU RAISE THE OUTPUT VOLTAGE AND CURRENT!!!!!
So they should be run at as high a frequency as allowed by the core material! Once verified (Steve, get one of those transformers back to Thane for tests ASAP!!!) we should be trying to make high frequency toroid transformers! In the khz!! (though the current core won't stand anything near that high)
Wow, please take this seriously I don't think I'm wrong here!
Just to clarify, this can make for an easy 10-100 or even 1,000 fold increase of output power (or decrease of input power).
BINGO!
Like increasing the rotor speed on your generator to increase output.
Wow!
aether22 may be a GENIUS!
It's hard to argue with - now let's see if it holds up in the lab.
Luc and Steve where art thou???
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 17, 2008, 07:22:35 PM
BINGO!
Like increasing the rotor speed on your generator to increase output.
Wow!
aether22 may be a GENIUS!
It's hard to argue with - now let's see if it holds up in the lab.
Luc and Steve where art thou???
Thane
Hi Thane, welcome to the forum, your openness is great, not something we often see.
RE: increasing frequency, it is true that this will increase voltage in a coil but not current, as frequency is increased coil reactance also increases, (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.freeuk.com%2Fdunckx%2Fwireless%2Fmaxpower1%2Fsvb0hb0k.gif&hash=650dee23187398ebb54958a9fc672af55eae2eb7) higher resistance to current flow, this will be true for primary and secondary coils
Quote from: RunningBare on February 17, 2008, 07:32:53 PM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 17, 2008, 07:22:35 PM
BINGO!
Like increasing the rotor speed on your generator to increase output.
Wow!
aether22 may be a GENIUS!
It's hard to argue with - now let's see if it holds up in the lab.
Luc and Steve where art thou???
Thane
Hi Thane, welcome to the forum, your openness is great, not something we often see.
RE: increasing frequency, it is true that this will increase voltage in a coil but not current, as frequency is increased coil reactance also increases, (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.freeuk.com%2Fdunckx%2Fwireless%2Fmaxpower1%2Fsvb0hb0k.gif&hash=650dee23187398ebb54958a9fc672af55eae2eb7) higher resistance to current flow, this will be true for primary and secondary coils
Not so RunningBare, sure less current will flow through the primary (not a bad thing) but the thing about these secondaries is that they don't act on themselves as in a normal transformer.
Dear All,
Don?t forget that this transformer IS INTENDED to be a high voltage low current unit. P = V^2/R with low losses due to heat. So we will definitely try the higher frequency approach ? Luc?s said he?s buying the champagne if we succeed.
Thane
Hello all,
I have been following, silently watching.
Hmmm....Starting to sound like a Toroidal Power Unit.
@aether22
Brilliant analysis. I believe this is also a part of the mystery that is Steven Mark, and his discovery.
@ Thane
Welcome to the Forum, and thank you for your commitment.
A quick question:
Have you ever attempted the same idea as your bi-transformer, but instead of two secondaries, having four? One at each quadrant of the toroid? What would the result of that be?
When you pulse your primary, according to aether22's suggestion, I would suggest an attempt at 35.705 Khz or 245 Khz. A long story why...but please keep it in mind. I would also suggest using extremely fast pulses. Extremely fast. ;)
Happy experimenting and I look forward to hopeful results.
Bruce
Quote from: Heinstein on February 17, 2008, 08:06:03 PM
Dear All,
Don?t forget that this transformer IS INTENDED to be a high voltage low current unit. P = V^2/R with low losses due to heat. So we will definitely try the higher frequency approach ? Luc?s said he?s buying the champagne if we succeed.
Thane
Hi all,
first I would like to thank Thane for joining the forum. It's going to really help to speed things up ;)
I would like to ask all of you for your help with ideals and explanation to make a new Primary for testing Toroid 3 once again but this time with higher frequencies than 60Hz. I will be the one making a new one and need all your help and expertize.
As you have seen in the pictures, the primary that was quickly made for testing could possibly be improved. The core of the primary is 2 pcs. of 1/8" (3mm)
Thick x 4 1/4" (108mm)
Length x 1" (25mm)
Wide solid steel strips of angle steel you buy in a hadware store. The magnet wire looks to be 16 gauge.
Thane gave me some thin steel transformer laminations which I could cut and group together of core. What do you think?
How many turns of wire, how
Thick a core and how
Wide? The
Length has to stay as above to fit inside the Toroid.
Please you input a.s.a.p.
Thanks
Luc
Can someone (whoever has it) post the DC resistance and turn count of Thane's primary?
Thanks,
Mr. Entropy
Hi Luc,
try maybe also with a AM ferrite rod and
wind there maybe 2x100 windings on there both winding in paralel
( Bifilar) and use the Tesla style connection, so the flux in this primary
does not cancel out, but add, but has much more capacitance.
Also then try to use much higher frequencies like in the Khz range and
try pulse the primary coil with a MOSFET circuit.
OR you can try your other circuit,
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4124.0.html
where you had the sparks at the magnets
from this afternoon and do this pulsing with the primary and
then use both secondaries in parallel or series to feed the bridge
rectifier and charge cap.
Should also work quite well with these spark pulses..
Good luck !
Regards, Stefan.
First Bruce_TPU, I don't think those frequencies will be of any help here (though I've made note of 'em), the reason being that they are 2 different types of Free Energy device, the TPU is like most, based on a physics of the aether which we truly don't understand.
Thanes transformer however is based of straight forward electromagnetic principles working just slightly differently than would have been predicted. (the flux staying in the core)
The advantage is that you get a much easier device to engineer without any dangers or risks because it's a Free Energy device and that's all. (aetheric tech is very dangerous if misused to say the least whereas this (FE) transformer will never be anything other than a (FE) transformer)
Now again luc in black, myself in blue.
Hi all,
first I would like to thank Thane for joining the forum. It's going to really help to speed things up ;)
I would like to ask all of you for your help with ideals and explanation to make a new Primary for testing Toroid 3 once again but this time with higher frequencies than 60Hz. I will be the one making a new one and need all your help and expertize.
Well if I understand it correctly you would want to saturate the core so that it becomes no more attractive than air to the fields we would rather stay in the ring, and that there is no advantage in using a low permability material if it's saturated anyway. (does that sound right to everyone else?)
Of course it's easier to saturate something smaller. (I think? but have my doubts on second thought. On 3rd thought I'm pretty sure that a smaller coil will create a denser field and hence saturate a core more readily )
You also want it to have good hysteresis and eddy current qualities (none).
So an I bar from a transformer or some iron powder/ferrite rod all sound ok. Thane, any idea what freq's the toroid cores go up to before becoming tooooo lossy?
As for the number of turns, do you have a meter to measure induction? If so you can just do a few test turns and work out from that what's desired, of course it will depend of on what voltage you are running it at and the freq's you want to hit. But getting these things right isn't my strong suit.
As you have seen in the pictures, the primary that was quickly made for testing could possibly be improved. The core of the primary is 2 pcs. of 1/8" (3mm) Thick x 4 1/4" (108mm) Length x 1" (25mm) Wide solid steel strips of angle steel you buy in a hadware store. The magnet wire looks to be 16 gauge.
Thane gave me some thin steel transformer laminations which I could cut and group together of core. What do you think?
Sounds good, and you can tune the number of laminations
How many turns of wire, how Thick a core and how Wide? The Length has to stay as above to fit inside the Toroid.
Please you input a.s.a.p.
Thanks
Luc
May I make other suggestions of tests you should try first?
Put DC through each of the coils in a bucking config (try it both ways to be sure) and test for magnitude of external field.
This is an important test since it proves the basis or this one, that the fields stay in the core.
And get a meter than can measure inductance and see how much inductance a coil has and how many it has when in reverse series with an equal turn primary of the other side.
Those 2 experiments are invaluable.
Edit: Incidentally due to thoughts on how tighter coils create denser magnetic fields I think I may have just invented my own superlame FE transformer.
Take several large normal toridal transformer cores and wind a coil over 4 (or more) of them so that as seen from above it looks like a + sign with the just wound (secondary) coil in the center, the primary would be on one of the outside legs of one of the toroid cores. It may not really require (may even hurt) to have the other toroids there just have enough spacing between the toroid and the secondary winding. In fact one of my first FE idea from too many years ago to even think about was very much this idea with a slight difference only. I'm thinking now it would have worked!
The idea being of course that if a larger diameter coil produces a less intense magnetic field in the core while still recieving just as great an induction (which is true by my understanding) then that's OU. (Oh btw my idea from 13+? years ago was to have a number of core hugging counter turns in series with the well spaced sec, the idea being that they would counter the secondary field/increase the primary field while only cancelling a portion of the induced voltage)
Thanks for joining Thane. (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.phonecotech.com%2FOverU%2FSmile%2Fsmiley-notworthy.gif&hash=b84f43fd9483173aa87160b212f42d264450c915)
Quote from: Bruce_TPU on February 17, 2008, 08:53:00 PMHmmm....Starting to sound like a Toroidal Power Unit.
I don't know but if gotoluc throws his magnet in the gap and more energy is seen I'm calling all bets off. ;D
There might be room for some resonance too.
Thanks for the great work guys. Take care.
nap
Thane, thank you for being so open with everything, its quite the honor to have you here replying to quesitons. I'm nowhere near the experts you'll find here however I have some simple questions.
Have you tried powering anything with your discovery?
Such as a series of lightbulbs or another motor?
To me, this is the most important topic in the news right now and I'm trying to follow every development possible, this is a most incredible discovery!
Hi,
I was wondering if the circuit (or circuits) is (are) grounded in some way, and if Thane's effect depends on grounding or is eliminated by grounding.
I ask this because Stiffler's circuit (discussed on the Vortex List) is used to power some white LEDs and it appears to produce more lumens (light) than can be accounted for by input power only when it is properly grounded.
Please don't ask me to elabourate, cause I am not knowledgeable about electronics and motors.
Harry
It seems that frequencies up to 25khz can be transformed by audio transformers which I guess have steel cores, at least the pictures of them I can find seem to show such. Hopefully Thane's is of a grade that can work in this range, Thane can you confirm?
That's over 400 times faster than what Thane used, it might be a little too high if you get much current to pass through the primary at all. (the higher the frequency the less current will pass through the primary, depending on what was limiting current input, higher frequencies may not mean more output just drastically lower input ;)
Now I have calculated that at 25khz if you wanted say 250ma through your primary from a 12v source (3w .vs 1248w at 60hz for the same emf) you would need to have about 300 microheneries of inductance so that might be a good value to aim for, not sure how many turns that would be on a core and it would be hard to calculate without trying it out first anyway.
Oh, and the point of that was that the current in primary would become 1/400th of what it was at 60hz while still apparently inducing the same energy in the secondaries, or with a few changes 400 times the output with the same input. (these changes would be a higher voltage and since higher voltage at the same current is simply more energy you would need to make the primary a resonant tank circuit)
Addition: I forgot to mention one possibly important thing.
In a normal transformer there is self induction from the secondary so if you put a square wave DC pulse into the primary you know that when when the current is steady state on and not changing that there is still an emf because if the current drops self induction comes in.
This transformer shouldn't have any/much self induction however so if the flux stops changing for a few millisecs the current and voltage might well drop to 0 momentarilty, so it is best to keep it constantly coming.
A square wave into the primary is ok only if I am either wrong or if the primaries self inductance is too high to let the current reach a stable point (where only resistance effect current flow not primary self inductance)
@Group,
Here is my new core and coils. This is a Iron powder core with 2 x 1000 turns 0,2mm magnet wire on the secondary.
First test is run with a 400 turns 0,35mm primary onto a Ferrite rod with 10mm air gap at each side. With approx. 1 Watt
input the output voltage in each coil was approx. 100 Volt. Could not get any current out of the secondary coils. There was
voltage but even a Neon bulb would not light up. The primary frequencies was approx. 20KHz. Next test will be with a air core
coil on the primary with smaller air gap.
Groundloop.
I woke up in the middle of last night and something hit me:
Increasing the output by increasing the turns count on the secondary leads to a dead end because of thicker wire needed (for low resistance) and more turns. The amount of copper would be sky high.
Then I thought about the TPU and Steven Marks's remark on this subject:
=======================
If you had a short wire and you move the magnet across it, you would always
have limited potential because the length of the wire was so short.
Ok, now what if we increase the length of the wire to many miles in length ,
even with a very weak magnetic field moving across the wire you still have a
much greater potential flow of power available.
If we out it into perspective of power per inch, it may be easier to understand.
If you have a small magnetic field moving across a wire 12 inches long, it can
generate an electron flow equal to let?s say 1 milivolt per inch.
If you move the magnetic 12 inches at the same speed , you get 12 milivolts
as you transgress the 12 inches of wire.
Understand that I am trying to convey a principle that you can understand for
use in the future.
So you have a wire 12 inches long, and you can make 12 milivolts moving a
magnet across it.
If you have a wire 1000 feet long and you move the same small magnetic
field across the length of it, you can create much more voltage potential
perhaps 12,000 milivolts let?s say.
So, you have managed to generate a significant amount of electric power
with a weak magnetic force.
Ok, how does this help us? Where am I going with this?
Suppose you have 1000 pieces of wire 12 inches long and you run the same
weak magnetic field over them all at the same time??. You get the same
flow of electrons.
If the wires are run in series , then you will get the 12,000 milivolts etc.
If you connect the wires in parallel, you will get a higher current but lower
voltage.
However, the power potential is the same whether you run the wires in series
or parallel.
=======================
What would happen if there were many parallel secondaries instead of a large series one? What would happen if HF-Litze is used for the secondaries with just enough turns to obtain a nice output voltage. Think of litz with eg. 600 individually insulated strands.
FYI: http://www.coonerwire.com/Products/LWC.html
Very true, I said as much myself when I said it's the volume of copper that's most important.
Not sure why Thane prefers hv models but I didn't feel like disagreeing with him any further about how his investion works.
He has after all apparently single handedly done it, assuming verification holds up.
BTW Thane, are you in a position to carry out the 2 tests (mag field and anti series self induction) I recommended or have you given all versions away to Luc and Steve? I am hoping to test them both in the morning.
Hi,
I was thinking about this point Mr.Entropy brought up:
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on February 16, 2008, 10:28:05 AM
...
It also seems important to balance the loads on the secondaries (use a variable resistor on one) so that their fluxes will cancel. This reduces the secondary inductance and allows you to draw current more easily.
...
Maybe it is possible to make one load draw balanced power from both secondaries by rectifying the current from each secondary and then connect the two rectified currents in parallel.
In this case the loading of the two equal secondaries should be automatically 50:50:
(I will delete this posting if Thane Heins thinks it is not helpful)
Wouldn't you just put the 2 secondaries in series?
Groundloop, tempted to ignore your post since I don't really understand your circuit.
I'd put the L3 & L4 in series with various loads/open circuit and measure voltage across them, but I can't make sense of your secondary circuit.
However in theory drawing current shouldn't hurt the effect, 1000 turns at 1 amp is the same as 4,000 turns at 250ma as far as the transformer is concerned provided the wire is suited to carry such voltages/current and since adding more turns had no negative effect then pulling more current shouldn't either. (the core should have no way of knowing if something is 1,000 turns at 1 amp or 1,000 amps in one fat turn, it cares not how many times electrons must encircle it to get off the merry-go-round, it only cares how many are doing so)
Now Thane is right, experimental results trumps the most solid of theories so if he has evidence that what I just said is not true then I have no answer for that.
Anyway my suggestion for Groundloop is other than hooking the secondaries in series as above, please try the experiments I outlined where DC is put through the coils to create a bucking in the core and check for field leakage and if you have a meter to measure inductance measure the anti-series inductance of L3 and L4 which should be nearly zero. (perhaps correctly oriented laminations (which I assume are employed in Thanes toroids) are required and iron powder won't cut it?)
And an important question for Thane, did you find that the voltage vanished if you tried to pull say double the current of when you were reading 170v? (and if so did it begin to effect the primary circuit? I assume not based on your mot/gen video)
Dear All,
Happy Family Day for all you Ontarians out there.
It's very nice for me to be with such a keen and respectful group!
Can anyone see now why I decided to go to computer modeling?
My thought was to fix a primary input then double the relative permeability of the secondary toroid core material which would:
- double the induced secondary Back EMF fields ? and (theoretically) double the output.
- I was already at 60% with a very inefficient core ? but at least I didn?t have any secondary ?blow
back? which was important ? and I could short both secondaries without any effect on the primary.
- I still believe that the fluxes are additive but perhaps there are other factors at play as
well?
Then quadruple the permeability and so on (keep increasing it within practical levels) and lower the number of turns accordingly (which also has the effect of lowering the impedance ? increasing current and increasing the fields as well).
That way you get to use your unit in a 60 hz environment without any special electronics etc.
The above can be done mathematically quite easily as well for any math wizzes out there.
I would like to see someone tackle that task - Dr. Zahn at MIT said he would do it but he is currently looking at the generator and I have invited him to present with me when we go to NASA.
Thanks
Thane
@Group,
Here is my new core and coils. This is a Iron powder core with 2 x 1000 turns 0,2mm magnet wire on the secondary. First test is run with a 400 turns 0,35mm primary onto a Ferrite rod with 10mm air gap at each side. With approx. 1 Watt input the output voltage in each coil was approx. 100 Volt. Could not get any current out of the secondary coils. There was voltage but even a Neon bulb would not light up. The primary frequencies was approx. 20KHz. Next test will be with a air core coil on the primary with smaller air gap.
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
QUESTIONS
What was your load?
What was your voltage across said load?
Did you have 1 load one each secondary?
or
1 load with the secondaries connected in series or parallel?
Thanks
Thane
Luc,
I just realized that the ferrite rod that I rejected for my high permeability toroid (too short) fits inside Thane's toroids with about a 5mm air gap on either end. The rod is about 10cm [CORRECTED] long and about 1cm in diameter (well it's sort of round with two flattened sides.) You're welcome to it if you think it's a good idea.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: M@rcel on February 18, 2008, 04:13:45 AM
I woke up in the middle of last night and something hit me:
Increasing the output by increasing the turns count on the secondary leads to a dead end because of thicker wire needed (for low resistance) and more turns. The amount of copper would be sky high.
Then I thought about the TPU and Steven Marks's remark on this subject:
=======================
If you had a short wire and you move the magnet across it, you would always
have limited potential because the length of the wire was so short.
Ok, now what if we increase the length of the wire to many miles in length ,
even with a very weak magnetic field moving across the wire you still have a
much greater potential flow of power available.
If we out it into perspective of power per inch, it may be easier to understand.
If you have a small magnetic field moving across a wire 12 inches long, it can
generate an electron flow equal to let?s say 1 milivolt per inch.
If you move the magnetic 12 inches at the same speed , you get 12 milivolts
as you transgress the 12 inches of wire.
Understand that I am trying to convey a principle that you can understand for
use in the future.
So you have a wire 12 inches long, and you can make 12 milivolts moving a
magnet across it.
If you have a wire 1000 feet long and you move the same small magnetic
field across the length of it, you can create much more voltage potential
perhaps 12,000 milivolts let?s say.
So, you have managed to generate a significant amount of electric power
with a weak magnetic force.
Ok, how does this help us? Where am I going with this?
Suppose you have 1000 pieces of wire 12 inches long and you run the same
weak magnetic field over them all at the same time??. You get the same
flow of electrons.
If the wires are run in series , then you will get the 12,000 milivolts etc.
If you connect the wires in parallel, you will get a higher current but lower
voltage.
However, the power potential is the same whether you run the wires in series
or parallel.
=======================
What would happen if there were many parallel secondaries instead of a large series one? What would happen if HF-Litze is used for the secondaries with just enough turns to obtain a nice output voltage. Think of litz with eg. 600 individually insulated strands.
FYI: http://www.coonerwire.com/Products/LWC.html
I could not agree with M@rcel more, in his thinking and the above post. ;D
Cheers,
Bruce
@aether22,
It is a very simple circuit so I can't see the problem of understanding it. The transistor forms an oscillator together with L1 and L2. The frequency is set by the LC value of L1/L2. The input current is set by the value of R1. C1 is a autostart capacitor, meaning the circuit will self start because C1 is charging up via R1 to plus rail. When the capacitor passes 0,7 Volt the transistor turns on. A pulse in L2 shuts off the transistor and the oscillation goes on. I use this oscillator as a input sourche to the coil because I do not have an signal generator.
@Heinstein,
I tried to load both coil with a Neon Bulb. I also tried in series and in parallel. The open ended voltage output on the coils depends on the input and the position of the center input coil. With 12 Volt 0,1 A input I got close to 130 VAC on one coil and 100 VAC on the other. This was at 0300 last night and I need to make more measurements. I also think I have a too big airgap between the input coil and the core so I will make a new air core coil and test that. Then I will put resistors on the output coil and do some measurements. It takes time. I do not think people on this forum really know how much work is it to thread 2000 turns of wire onto that core. (2 x 1000 turns.) :(
Groundloop.
Hi All,
For anyone having trouble fitting the primary within a toroid due to the wrapping sizes, an alternative can be made. Take the E's from an EI transformer and remove the center of the E so that you now have a C. Wrap the center and stand it up inside the toroid with the center above the toroid. The flux will still take the path thru the toroid from the lower side of the C as it will be more permeable than the airgap at the bottom of the C. This should resolve the lack of space for the wrapping problem and work almost as well as a straight primary. Many sizes are available.
Regards, Larry
@Heinstein,
I tried to load both coil with a Neon Bulb. I also tried in series and in parallel. The open ended voltage output on the coils depends on the input and the position of the center input coil. With 12 Volt 0,1 A input I got close to 130 VAC on one coil and 100 VAC on the other. This was at 0300 last night and I need to make more measurements. I also think I have a too big airgap between the input coil and the core so I will make a new air core coil and test that. Then I will put resistors on the output coil and do some measurements. It takes time. I do not think people on this forum really know how much work is it to thread 2000 turns of wire onto that core. (2 x 1000 turns.)
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
May I suggest that 1st you try:
- Running your outputs in parallel through one ceramic 25 W, 1k load, then 100 ohms and check the
voltage across the loads and calculate P = V^2/R.
- Assume your power factor is 1 (has to be 1 or less) and record input volts and amps to
give you a max input power.
- Compensate your ?too big? air gap with a ferromagnetic shims for now.
- You need to see what your voltage is across a resistor,
and
- You need to determine if your primary is isolated or not ? current increase w/ load = secondary
Back EMF in your primary.
Also can you increase the turns on your Toroid to show an output power increase with a fixed input power? If you can do this then you are proving the concept! You can run your new winding right on top of the present ones and show :
TEST # 1
i/p P = x W with x turns secondary, o/p P = y W
TEST # 2
i/p P = x W with 2x turns secondary, o/p P = 2y W
I would avoid an air core as your input power will be through the roof, however on the other hand, you can use it as a variable inductor and insert various amounts of ferromagnetic material into it to give you the best performance for your set up.
After you have spent 11 months winding and unwinding coils as I have with the transformer ? you will understand why I am ?copping out? and going to computer modeling instead. BTW I spent 7 years (full time) winding ? unwinding ? winding ? coils for the generator until I was able to produced results I was happy with.
Also I prefer Thane - as Heinstein is my nickname I was given now but I am not sure if it was in jest or not (seems a bit presumptuous) but at least it is better than Frankenstheins.
Cheers
Thane
Using one end of a flynn parallel path device as the primary could be interesting.
Thane,
I know computer simulations is one way but nothing compare to the real coils. LOL
Yes, I will measure with resistors on the output coils. Just said that in my most resent post.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
welldone with your new core,
but you should stick in here where I painted it black
some iron or ferrite core pieces ,
so you do not have so big airgaps...
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Stefan,
This was my first test with what I had ready at hand. I will make a new center coil soon.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 18, 2008, 10:48:32 AM
@aether22,
It is a very simple circuit...
It was the secondary circuit i was unclear on, not the primary.
Thane, if you halved the resistance in the secondary circuit in your tests when you were getting (I think it was) 170v across your load, did the voltage across your load drop?note: I am assuming you did find it dropped by the fact that you were increasing turns each time despite the fact that you can't have been pushing the wire near it's max current. However such a result would be in seeming contradiction of getting more energy out when the number of turns was increased.
This would lead me to another question and that is, when the number of turns was increased could you pull the same current as the last test while realizing a higher voltage? (or was it a higher voltage but somewhat lower current?)
Hi Thane,
Would you mind telling which software you use nowadays for modelling your toroid setups?
Is it from Ansoft?
rgds, Gyula
All,
Attached is a image of my new air core coil. I have a 8 mm center plastic tube so that I can try out various small cores. The center coil is made of two bi-filar coils. The power coil is made of 0,35mm magnet wire and the trigger coil (for my oscillator) is made of 0,25mm magnet wire. The coil is made egg shaped so that the coil will fit inside the powder Iron core center. The number of turns is 700.
With this coil the oscillator is using 0,1 Amp at 11,97 Volt from the battery. The two secondary coil is not connected to any back looping circuit right now. The open ended voltage was 90 Volts at both coils.
Test number 1: I started up the oscillator and did look at the amp meter. When I short circuited BOTH coils (or one of them at the time) then I could NOT see any DIFFERENCE in the input current usage!
Next test will be soldering resistors to the output coils and do measurements.
Groundloop.
[EDIT] It is late night now and I will test more tomorrow. First resistor test 470R 5W gave 0,139 VAC over the
resistor. Input was 12,50 @ 0,1 A. So over 1 Watt input and nothing something output.
( Output: 4,1108510638297872340425531914894e-5 Watt. = 0,00004 Watt.)
"Thane, if you halved the resistance in the secondary circuit in your tests when you were getting (I think it was) 170v across your load, did the voltage across your load drop?"
When you say "halved the resistance" do you mean halved the resistance from 1 k ohms to 500 ohms for example?
"note: I am assuming you did find it dropped by the fact that you were increasing turns each time despite the fact that you can't have been pushing the wire near it's max current. However such a result would be in seeming contradiction of getting more energy out when the number of turns was increased."
I was simply using Faraday?s Law of Induction and increasing the number of turns in my secondary to increase the output voltage across the load.
"This would lead me to another question and that is, when the number of turns was increased could you pull the same current as the last test while realizing a higher voltage? (or was it a higher voltage but somewhat lower current?)"[/size]
I didn?t focus on the current in fact I didn?t care because of Mr. Ohm's - all I cared about was:
1) Is my voltage across the load increasing with increased turns in the secondary?
Answer YES.
2) Is my primary power consumption increasing with increased secondary turns and secondary output?
Answer NO.
Ok Toroid Tech keep giving me more secondary turns until the output voltage goes south or until the output Power P = V^2/R across the load exceeds the input.
We were at 170 V and needed 220 V to be over unity but ran out of room on our toroid and I had the ?bright idea? to increase the core material permeability instead of increasing the turns ratio which may be right or wrong.
I just didn't see any reason to continue winding when we could use the cores permability to increase our output more easily. Also I didn't think that I would be pushed by you guys but I am glad it worked out this way.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: gyulasun on February 18, 2008, 04:03:10 PM
Hi Thane,
Would you mind telling which software you use nowadays for modelling your toroid setups?
Is it from Ansoft?
rgds, Gyula
We are working with Mag-Num Consulting Services, LLC they use:
Mag-Num Consulting Services, LLC is an organization that provides customers with information on the electromagnetic field behavior of their devices using state of the art electromagnetic Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software provided by the Ansoft Corporation. www.Ansoft.com
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on February 18, 2008, 06:15:19 AM
Wouldn't you just put the 2 secondaries in series?
You want the secondaries to generate equal and opposite flux. If you tie them together in series, what you get is equal current. This is
approximately the same thing, but not quite, because the flux depends on coil geometries + things that aren't going to be exactly the same on both sides.
The easiest way to get equal flux is the make one of the secondary loads a little bit adjustable, so you can tune it to maximize power output.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 18, 2008, 07:19:43 PM
"Thane, if you halved the resistance in the secondary circuit in your tests when you were getting (I think it was) 170v across your load, did the voltage across your load drop?"
When you say "halved the resistance" do you mean halved the resistance from 1 k ohms to 500 ohms for example?
Yes.
Here's the thing, you can take a normal transformer and measure the open circuit secondary voltage (no power) and double the number of turns and measure double the voltage, that's not interesting.
What IS interesting is if you take a transformer and measure the voltage across a load, say 1K (giving you a predictible current) and then double the number of turns giving double the voltage and hence double the current across the 1k load (quadrupuling the energy) without loading the primary any more.
And if you can do that yes you should be able to halve the resistance that you measure the resistance across and still measure the same voltage across it and hopefully no more load on the transformer.
This is very important, if this is not happening then the transformer isn't working like either of us think.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 18, 2008, 07:19:43 PM
When you say "halved the resistance" do you mean halved the resistance from 1 k ohms to 500 ohms for example?
Why that nasty 1KOhm load? Wouldn't you expect to draw maximum power when your load impedance matches the secondary coil impedance, i.e., 20 ohms or so? If it doesn't end up loading the primary, then that's many times more power than you would get into 1K.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 18, 2008, 04:17:14 PM
All,
Attached is a image of my new air core coil. I have a 8 mm center plastic tube so that I can try out various small cores. The center coil is made of two bi-filar coils. The power coil is made of 0,35mm magnet wire and the trigger coil (for my oscillator) is made of 0,25mm magnet wire. The coil is made egg shaped so that the coil will fit inside the powder Iron core center. The number of turns is 700.
With this coil the oscillator is using 0,1 Amp at 11,97 Volt from the battery. The two secondary coil is not connected to any back looping circuit right now. The open ended voltage was 90 Volts at both coils.
Test number 1: I started up the oscillator and did look at the amp meter. When I short circuited BOTH coils (or one of them at the time) then I could NOT see any DIFFERENCE in the input current usage!
Next test will be soldering resistors to the output coils and do measurements.
Groundloop.
[EDIT] It is late night now and I will test more tomorrow. First resistor test 470R 5W gave 0,139 VAC over the
resistor. Input was 12,50 @ 0,1 A. So over 1 Watt input and nothing something output.
( Output: 4,1108510638297872340425531914894e-5 Watt. = 0,00004 Watt.)
Hi Groundloop,
are you sure you did not conect the 2 primary coils wrong,
so they did buck and cancel out in their field ?
Otherwise if not, you have to use at least a ferrite core or an iron
core in it, so you couple the flux into the core.
Also what is the DC resistance of your output coils ?
470 Ohm load resistance might be a bit high.
Try maybe 10 to 100 Ohm to get out more power.
Regards, Stefan.
Stefan,
Yes I'm sure. I connected one 470R 5W resistor at each output coil.
The DC coil resistance for the output coils is 33 Ohm for L3 and 37 Ohm for L4.
Lowering the parallel resistor values will only give me lower voltage to measure
and thus even more inaccuracy in the measurement result. If I use a higher resistor
value then the voltage over the resistor will be higher (lighter load on the coils) and
more easy to measure. I will try using some core material in the coil to see if I can
couple more magnetic flux into the core. Will test more this afternoon.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 01:08:08 AM
Stefan,
Yes I'm sure. I connected one 470R 5W resistor at each output coil.
The DC coil resistance for the output coils is 33 Ohm for L3 and 37 Ohm for L4.
Lowering the parallel resistor values will only give me lower voltage to measure
and thus even more inaccuracy in the measurement result. If I use a higher resistor
value then the voltage over the resistor will be higher (lighter load on the coils) and
more easy to measure. I will try using some core material in the coil to see if I can
couple more magnetic flux into the core. Will test more this afternoon.
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
Also consider connecting your 2 secondaries in parallel across ONE resistor.
Determine which set up give you the most output - my bet it is this one (above)?
Record data starting at 1k and go down from there 500, 100, 50 25 ohms.
To be really accurate you should also be looking at power factor as well later on perhaps.
Thane
Thane,
OK, I will test that also. (Both coils in parallel.) I have seen that loading the output coils will NOT increase the current usage in the input coil so there is still hope. But I agree with Stefan that an air core coil is not transferring enough magnetic flux to the powder Iron core. So I will fill the new egg shaped coil core with Iron wires to get a more powerfull flux with the same input current. Then I will connect both the output coils in parallel to a resistor and see how much output I get. My hope is that the small air gap (due to the tape used) will be enough increase in reluctance for the center coil so that I get no back coupling of the BEMF, even with Iron in that core.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 06:59:03 AM
Thane,
OK, I will test that also. (Both coils in parallel.) I have seen that loading the output coils will NOT increase the current usage in the input coil so there is still hope. But I agree with Stefan that an air core coil is not transferring enough magnetic flux to the powder Iron core. So I will fill the new egg shaped coil core with Iron wires to get a more powerfull flux with the same input current. Then I will connect both the output coils in parallel to a resistor and see how much output I get. My hope is that the small air gap (due to the tape used) will be enough increase in reluctance for the center coil so that I get no back coupling of the BEMF, even with Iron in that core.
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
Very good plan.
Keep adding iron into your primary until the current starts to go up it it ever does.
Also try not to assume anything - such as which load is best.
Let the data speak for itself.
I got the most power out a 1 k load but I can't explain why but who cares right now anyway.
Is there any room left on your toroid to add more turns to determine if the output voltage will increase with increased turns with a "static primary" input?
Luc and Steve how are you guys making out?
Cheers
Thane
Thane, let's have another crack at that question.
What I want to establish is that under your tests ohms law seemed to work out so if you halved the resistance did the current double? (or to put it another, did the voltage remain approximatly the same over the load)
In part I'm asking because groundloops results would indicate the answer is no.
Because if there is a sudden loss of power once a certain current is pulled that would both be anomlious and highly undesirible.
So did any experiments you conducted give you an apparent answer? For instance if you didn't test it as described above did you at least notice the signs of significant current when the coils were shorted?
Thanks
Thane,
No, there is not much room left on my toroid to add more turns, as you can see from the image I posted.
I guess I can add some few 300 to 600 turns but it will a tight fit. There is hardly any room left for the
center coil. I think I will keep the current configuration and test some more before adding any new turns.
I'm also expecting others on this forum to start replicating. I think we can get faster results with more people
testing your system.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 08:39:20 AM
Thane,
No, there is not much room left on my toroid to add more turns, as you can see from the image I posted.
I guess I can add some few 300 to 600 turns but it will a tight fit. There is hardly any room left for the
center coil. I think I will keep the current configuration and test some more before adding any new turns.
I'm also expecting others on this forum to start replicating. I think we can get faster results with more people
testing your system.
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
There is no shame in admitting that winding toroids by hand is just nutty.
Thane
Hi Groundloop,
well done so far.
Yes, please keep the core as it is in this moment and first try to measure it with a few tests.
Do you have a 2 channel scope ?
Please pull first the input coil out and make sure, that your 2 parallel bifilar winding is hooked up in wiring correctly like the Tesla flat coil style. you can test it,so the fields are not bucking (canceling), but adding with trying to attract some metal, when you apply some DC supply.
If this is verified, that you have the right wiring, please put it into the core again and be sure to have the 2 output coils in series or in parallel, but with the right polarity, so the output voltage does not cancel each other.
For this step itis helpfull to use a two channel scope, so you can exactly see the polarities of the coil voltages. Then you can also check the polarity conditions of the input coil versus the output coils. Be sure not to press the invert button of one of the scope input channels , so you dont mix up the polarities, but it seems you are a pro and know about this. :).
Just add enough iron pieces into your input coil core, so you can see the voltage come out at the output coils. This way you setup a working point on the BH curve of the main output core. Try not to saturate the core too much, otherwise the flux will go back to the input core.
Many thanks in advance and looking forward to your test results.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: aether22 on February 19, 2008, 08:22:32 AM
Thane, let's have another crack at that question.
What I want to establish is that under your tests ohms law seemed to work out so if you halved the resistance did the current double? (or to put it another, did the voltage remain approximatly the same over the load)
In part I'm asking because groundloops results would indicate the answer is no.
Because if there is a sudden loss of power once a certain current is pulled that would both be anomlious and highly undesirible.
So did any experiments you conducted give you an apparent answer? For instance if you didn't test it as described above did you at least notice the signs of significant current when the coils were shorted?
Thanks
Dear aether22,
I never measured current only voltage across the load.
All I wanted to focus on was
an increase in voltage across the load with
an increase in secondary turns ? with
NO increase in primary power.
Groundloops results are not complete from my perspective yet?
I find some of your questions to be ambiguous ? so I need you to be a little more specific please?
?did you at least notice the signs of significant current when the coils were shorted??
If I am assuming PRIMARY CURRENT here with this question ? the answer is NO.
A good way to test the ?isolated? primary is to short out both secondaries.
"sudden loss of power once a certain current is pulled that would both be anomlious and highly undesirible".
Maybe yes maybe no - if the transformer is over unity great!
If every transformer has to be built to supply only one load at a time who cares - it's over unity?
I hope I did a good job answering your question(s)?
Thane
Thane,
Threading coils on toroids is not so bad. It is the removing of coils from toroid cores that is slow. :D
I use a round wood stick and just wind up a lot of magnet wire onto the stick. Then I just thread the
wood stick through the core while counting turns.
Stefan,
Yes, I have a 2 channel O-scope. But I do not have a signal generator. That's way I made the oscillator.
The egg shaped coil has two bi-filar windings because the oscillator needs a trigger winding to run the
power winding. I use thinner wire for the trigger winding and when the oscillator runs I know that I have
the correct wires connected. So the oscillator with the bi_filar coil is my input power to the iron powder core.
Most easy way to connect the two output coils in parallel is just to run the oscillator and then measure
the voltage on one of the output coils. Then you connect the other in parallel. If the voltage drops then reverse
the wires.
Cutting Iron wires now.....................
Groundloop.
[EDIT]
Testing Thane coil with soft Iron input core.
Test 1, Low input wattage.
Input: 12,00 V 0,06 A = 0,72 Watt.
Out: 470R 0,694VAC = 0,0010 Watt
Test 2, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 470R 1,47VAC = 0,0046 Watt.
----------------------------------------------
All resistors below this line is 1% metallfilm.
Test 3, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 820R 3,80VAC = 0,017 Watt.
Test 4, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 2K2 11,84VAC = 0,064 Watt.
Added more soft iron to input core.
(Input core now full.)
Test 5, Low Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,01A = 0,3 Watt.
Out: 2K2 1,40VAC = 0,00089 Watt.
Test 6, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,12A = 3,6 Watt.
Out: 2K2 12,20VAC = 0,068 Watt.
Groundloop.
This time current me is in Green old me is in red and Thane in classic stylish Black
Edit; colours now as advertised ;)
Dear aether22,
I never measured current only voltage across the load.
All I wanted to focus on was an increase in voltage across the load with an increase in secondary turns ââ,¬â€œ with NO increase in primary power.
Groundloops results are not complete from my perspective yet?
I find some of your questions to be ambiguous ââ,¬â€œ so I need you to be a little more specific please?
ââ,¬Å"did you at least notice the signs of significant current when the coils were shorted?ââ,¬Â
If I am assuming PRIMARY CURRENT here with this question ââ,¬â€œ the answer is NO.
A good way to test the ââ,¬Å"isolatedââ,¬Â primary is to short out both secondaries.
I know the primary showed no load when the secondaries were shorted, that wasn't my question.
No, the question was in regard to the current in the secondaries when being similtaniously shorted.
I don't know how you measured the 170 (or whatever it was) volts, open circuit or over a ?ohm load, but if it was measured say over 1Kohm for example did you see if you got the same voltage over a 500ohm load? (which would imply the current has just doubled)
And if you shorted the secondaries at 170v there ought to be a decent level of current induced in them, heat and humming/vibration should be expected along with possibly destroying the transformer.
While obviously the latter didn't occur were there any signs that when shorted they were pulling significant amps?
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 01:58:54 PM
Thane,
Threading coils on toroids is not so bad. It is the removing of coils from toroid cores that is slow. :D
I use a round wood stick and just wind up a lot of magnet wire onto the stick. Then I just thread the
wood stick through the core while counting turns.
Stefan,
Yes, I have a 2 channel O-scope. But I do not have a signal generator. That's way I made the oscillator.
The egg shaped coil has two bi-filar windings because the oscillator needs a trigger winding to run the
power winding. I use thinner wire for the trigger winding and when the oscillator runs I know that I have
the correct wires connected. So the oscillator with the bi_filar coil is my input power to the iron powder core.
Most easy way to connect the two output coils in parallel is just to run the oscillator and then measure
the voltage on one of the output coils. Then you connect the other in parallel. If the voltage drops then reverse
the wires.
Cutting Iron wires now.....................
Groundloop.
[EDIT]
Testing Thane coil with soft Iron input core.
Test 1, Low input wattage.
Input: 12,00 V 0,06 A = 0,72 Watt.
Out: 470R 0,694VAC = 0,0010 Watt
Test 2, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 470R 1,47VAC = 0,0046 Watt.
----------------------------------------------
All resistors below this line is 1% metallfilm.
Test 3, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 820R 3,80VAC = 0,017 Watt.
Test 4, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,13A = 3,9 Watt.
Out: 2K2 11,84VAC = 0,064 Watt.
Added more soft iron to input core.
(Input core now full.)
Test 5, Low Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,01A = 0,3 Watt.
Out: 2K2 1,40VAC = 0,00089 Watt.
Test 6, High Input Wattage.
Input: 30,00 V 0,12A = 3,6 Watt.
Out: 2K2 12,20VAC = 0,068 Watt.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
ah I see, you use your oscillator...
Maybe this is not a good idea.
Better for now use a Transformer powered from the grid,
so you run it first only on 60/ 50 Hz for which the core is more optimized...
So use a 110 / 240 Volts to 12 Volts transformer for instance and use the
12 Volts AC output to drive your input coil.
This way it is much easier to setup and you can be sure,
that your oscillator circuit is not jammed by any output coil
setup.
At which frequencies did you do the above tests ?
Maybe it were in the Khz range, where the
core does not respond anymore ?
Many thanks.
Stefan,
The powder Iron core I'm using is good for DC to 1MHz. See the attached pdf document.
My oscillator is running at 14,3 KHz. This is within the cores ability to handle the frequency.
Groundloop.
[EDIT] I did solder a 2,2uF capacitor across the oscillator coil. The frequency dropped to 2,2KHz.
Input: 30V @ 0,22A = 6,6 Watt.
Output into 2K2 Ohm: 14,28VAC = 0,093 Watt.
Groundloop.
Has anybody thought about using bifilar winding?
See "A Special Case of Voltage Gain" at http://home.comcast.net/%7Eonichelson/VOLTGN.pdf
I realize that this would be a big do-over so how about some comments on the theory?
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 05:55:19 PM
Stefan,
The powder Iron core I'm using is good for DC to 1MHz. See the attached pdf document.
My oscillator is running at 14,3 KHz. This is within the cores ability to handle the frequency.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
You are completely right this core was designed for that frequency range.
My understanding on Thane transformers is to use cores with high permeabilities (mu) for the output coils and cores with low permeabilities for the input coil. (At least there should be a big difference between the two, favoring higher values for the output core in order to keep flux much better inside the toroid and a high (mu) value helps this very much The core you are using has got a permeability of 75 from the data sheet and this I think an unfortunately low value for this task. I apologize saying this, I do know one has to work with components at hand from his junk box.
You will hate me when I say to use iron wire formed into toroidal shape of a chosen diameter (preferably isolate the iron wire turns from each other) , this way you could form a toroid core that has sizes of your choice and has permeability about in the range of 1000-1500 at least. And then you could make the output coils on this iron wire toroid core, maybe winding them easier than on the Amidon toroid due to the preferably higher OD and ID sizes... What do you think? I suggest this only assuming you do not have at the moment a ferrite toroid core of at least 6-8 cm or higher OD AND with 3000-4000 or higher permeability value...
I really appreciate your excellent hand-on work on this topic!
rgds, Gyula
@Gyula,
Yes I agree with you. How about a Metglass core for output? I have ONE Metglass core with a very high permeabilities (mu).
The problem with using that core is that it currently has a 50mmx20mmx30mm Grade45 Neodym magnet in its middle.
How I can get that magnet out of that core without destroying the core is the big question. (I'm afraid of big Neos.)
Insulating soft Iron wire (painting eg.) is out of the question. Way too much work. But a good idea anyway.
Groundloop.
Dear Groundloop,
Try not to get too distracted by your efficiency numbers right now.
Can your data answer the questions?;
?Do fluxes cancel or add??
If they are additive then test #2 should provide a higher output power
than test # 1.
Can a primary be magnetically isolated?
Best test ? short out both secondaries ? does the input current change?
TEST # 0 Open Circuit Test R = infinity
Input
Volts =
Amps =
Watts =
Output (both coils in parallel)
Volts =
TEST # 1 R = x
Input
Volts =
Amps = (should be the same as test # 0)
Watts = (should be the same as test # 0)
Output
Secondary 1 connected, Secondary 2 open:
Volts across load =
Power =
TEST # 2 R = x
Input
Volts =
Amps = (should be the same as test # 0)
Watts = (should be the same as test # 0)
Output
Secondary 1 and 2 connected in parallel across load:
Volts across load =
Power =
Thane
Well there are iron wire for garden use and such iron wires are insulated with colored pvc layer much like normal copper wires. People dealing with selling flowers could tell you where such insulated iron wire is available.
Re your metglas core, what sizes does it have? Somehow sliding/slipping the magnet sideways you could remove it...
Gyula
Dear Groundloop.
Do you have a 1 k resistor handy?
This was the only load where I could get any encouraging power output.
Thane
Thane,
I will do your test tomorrow. Late night now, must sleep.
@gyulasun,
The core is a AMCC-320 PowerLite C-core.
[EDIT] The Neo magnet is so strong that I will probably rip the core in small fragments when I remove the magnet.
Metglass cores is made out of a long tape. The tape is so brittle that normal handeling can damage the core.
Groundloop.
We've got Fleet Farm stores in our area that sell electric fence cable.
Soft steel and insulated too.
I've been testing some insulated 12 gauge in one of my tpu's as a collector.
Take care.
nap
Quote from: Heinstein on February 19, 2008, 06:58:14 PM
ââ,¬Å"Do fluxes cancel or add?ââ,¬Â
If they are additive then test #2 should provide a higher output power
than test # 1.
You are of course welcome to your own opinion but IMO finding a higher power in test 2 than test 1 doesn't indicate that the fluxes don't cancel.
2 things make this occur,
one is the fact that if you have one of the coils shorted it will resist the primaries changing flux and the primary flux will be diverted into the other open leg.The other thing and this could admittedly be an issue of semantics in part but the flux from the 2 secondaries is identical and opposite if everything is setup correctly.
This means that unlike in a normal transformer where the secondary cancels out the primaries magnetic flux (stopping and further induction) they cancel out each others flux meaning that no matter how much current passes through them they can't dent the primaries emf and so more turns will indeed mean more power. (though so will lower resistance)
Now you could look at this in isolation, you could look at it as each secondary helping the other but if you bother to consider the self induction each coil has on it's self it the exactly equal and opposite to the effect the other coil has.
So while this is indeed semantics as you are not wrong about the secondaries amplifying themselves it seems more accurate to say that the net field from the 2 secondary coils is 0 and hence the primary emf can not be countered by anything the secondaries do.
Sorry, just had to reiterate that one last time.
What we need to establish is if your device is capable of providing real power or just currentless voltages.
You said you found little current if the loads resistance was less than 1kohm? That is a concern.
Hi Thane:
Some time ago, I wound a torrid core from coated iron wire about six inches o.d. Would testing your setup on this be of any value for the group. The core has no use at this time and I can de-wind it for the purpose. Let me know what you think.
thaelin
Hi, I hope this isn't a stupid question but here goes.
Why create the secondaries on a circular torroid?
Would it be much less efficient if they were parrallel then connected at both ends like a square? So basically you'd have a square with the primary in the center.
One other question, not sure if anyone has tried this yet. What of the secondary core had 4, 6 or even 8 different coils (isolated like the current 2) does it share the same effect?
???
"You said you found little current if the loads resistance was less than 1kohm? That is a concern."
Now that really hurts, that is a serious concern.... so far.
Dear aether22,
I didn't say (or at least I meant to say) that I said I was getting 170 volts across a 1 k load, 28.9 watts. I needed 220 volts across the same load to be over unity because my input was 45 watts. Our progress to date suggested that as we increased turns on our secondary the output power increased as well with a fixed input. I am waiting for Luc to finish his primary so we can post the data for all three of my toroids which should bear this out.
Anyone please tell me what do you think the effect will be in doubling the relative permeability in the above toroid?
Also please find enclosed my invitation to Dr. Zahn to join me at NASA.
Looks like I am going solo but I would like some feedback on the ?hysterisis brake? idea circulating the web since no one ever suggests that in the lab after they see it.
Luc or anyone else any comments?
Please find enclosed the Test Data for Luc and Steve?s demo.
The speed of the system for the NO LOAD Test # 1 was about 60 RPM.
The speed of the LOADED system, Test # 2 was about 1100 RPM.
Thanks
Thane
Markus Zahn <zahn@MIT.EDU> wrote:
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:36:42 -0500
To: "Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
From: Markus Zahn <zahn@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center Invitation & Information
Request
CC: rhabash@site.uottawa.ca, kcunningham@OCRI.ca, zahn@MIT.EDU
Dear Thane:
It seems to me that before you give more high level demonstrations, that you need to do more homework on your induction motor speed up due to the presence of a strong permanent magnet. As I and others have stated, the effect is most likely due to the magnetic hysteresis of the iron material that gets shifted by the permanent magnet to a new DC operating point. If not already done I also think you need to do some careful performance measurements such as measuring shaft speed and terminal current magnitude and phase with and without the presence of the permanent magnet as a function of line voltage. You should also measure the magnetic hysteresis curve with and without a permanent magnet present of your simplest motor configuration that you demonstrated to me. This is not difficult to do. I attach a video entitled "Measurement of B-H Characteristic" that shows how this can be done with an oscilloscope, two resistors and a capacitor. It can also be done with an integrating op-amp circuit. The attached text materials from the book by Haus and Melcher entitled Electromagnetic Fields and Energy also describe the measurement method and theory. In any measurements you should also measure the true electrical power in from your outlet power (voltage, current, and phase angle) as well as shaft power (torque and speed).
Any talk of perpetual motion, over unity efficiency, etc. discredits you, now me, and your ideas. I would not want to go to NASA or anywhere else to help promote your invention until basic testing and measurements are done so that the cause of shaft speed up due to a permanent magnet is understood and that the foolishness is stopped of hinting that your motor violates fundamental laws of physics.
Best of luck to you,
Markus Zahn
At 08:35 AM 2/18/2008, Thane C. Heins wrote:
Dear Dr. Zahn,
Please find enclosed an invitation for Dr. Habash and I to present at NASA. Dr. Habash is unable to go due to his present workload and I was wondering if you might be interested in going with me in his place?
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 07:07:35 PM
@gyulasun,
The core is a AMCC-320 PowerLite C-core.
[EDIT] The Neo magnet is so strong that I will probably rip the core in small fragments when I remove the magnet.
Metglass cores is made out of a long tape. The tape is so brittle that normal handeling can damage the core.
Groundloop.
Hi Groundloop,
OK, I understand. I wonder if you can separate the two metglas C cores from each other without problems?
If yes, then maybe making a coil on that C core which has the big Neo magnet and apply a certain DC current into that coil to form a countermagnetic field to the Neo poles? So that the attraction of the Neo to the side of the C core is decreased by the electromagnet, then removing the Neo could be much easier?
If even the C cores separation is a problem because of the Neo, then the use of electromagnetic coil(s) could also be of help?
Gyula
Dear Thane, your posting of the letter from Zahn I predict sets your 15 mins of fame clock at right around 14:59. Your visit to him generated the news that is driving the excitement right now and your NASA invite on which you have no academia backing you (actually you now have negative academia backing). The fact that he has turned down your invite rather harshly too rebukes the Zahn excitement quotes from the media making it sound as if you are onto something astounding and brings the whole device back down to earth.
I believe you have a matter of a few days to do precisely what Zahn requests and post the results again publicly otherwise you will probably slip into obscurity.
I am neither master of magnets or electricity but common sense needs to be the only discipline applied to see what's going on.
1) Satisfy Zahn's request as quickly as possible. Publically, perhaps more youtube videos are in order.
2) Try to save enough face here on forums like this to get at least SOMEONE to reproduce your motor who can also duplicate the Zahn testing.
A believer but now doubtful.
@gyulasun,
The magnet is in the center of the core, pulling the core together with great force.
See image.
Groundloop.
Groundloop, I've just sent you a private message.
While I have some doubt my idea could be applied to your MEG with the neo installed do give it a read and be sure you understand it before you break your MEG apart.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 19, 2008, 07:07:35 PM
The Neo magnet is so strong that I will probably rip the core in small fragments when I remove the magnet. Metglass cores is made out of a long tape. The tape is so brittle that normal handeling can damage the core.
Groundloop.
Perhaps it's worthwile to try
this (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg77158.html#msg77158) first as long as you already have a magnet inside your core.
Thane,
Do you think it might be worthwile to invest in a Metglas core? They are expensive but if it's a good core for this research, I just might get me one.
Quote from: MainePower on February 20, 2008, 08:05:26 AM
Dear Thane, your posting of the letter from Zahn I predict sets your 15 mins of fame clock at right around 14:59. Your visit to him generated the news that is driving the excitement right now and your NASA invite on which you have no academia backing you (actually you now have negative academia backing). The fact that he has turned down your invite rather harshly too rebukes the Zahn excitement quotes from the media making it sound as if you are onto something astounding and brings the whole device back down to earth.
I believe you have a matter of a few days to do precisely what Zahn requests and post the results again publicly otherwise you will probably slip into obscurity.
I am neither master of magnets or electricity but common sense needs to be the only discipline applied to see what's going on.
1) Satisfy Zahn's request as quickly as possible. Publically, perhaps more youtube videos are in order.
2) Try to save enough face here on forums like this to get at least SOMEONE to reproduce your motor who can also duplicate the Zahn testing.
A believer but now doubtful.[/size]
Dear MainePower
I can show you even worse and harsher criticisms than Dr. Zahn?s. The fact remains they are all simply
un-quantified opinions which in the absence of supporting data are worthless (and some are just plain silly). We offered Dr. Zahn $ 20,000 to provide the supporting data.
Now what we do have in the way of academia backing is; Dr. Habash of Ottawa U (and also two scientists from York University) who I gave a demo to yesterday and we addressed all the issues presented (hysterisis brake, no useable generator output etc.). I told Dr. Habash that either I convince him that my claims are valid (off the record) or I pack it in. I am still there today.
Dr. Habash feels that the generator Back EMF is creating an ?energy less? synchronous motor effect inside the induction motor (causing acceleration) while at the same time the generator output continues to go up.
Dr. Habash also said that it is easier to kill something like this but hard to keep alive so from the university?s perspective every
public pro or against comment has to be supported with data to protect the integrity of the university ? which takes time to produce. The university has given me 5 ? 4th year students to get the data. From a common sense point of view ? does that sound like support or not?
The NRC is sending 3 scientists in for a demo tomorrow or Friday.
Edison, Einstein, Galileo, Tesla, the Wright Brothers and Banting didn?t have any easier a time than I am ? they had their doubters also. It?s par for the course.
I can do a lot in 60 seconds.
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: M@rcel on February 20, 2008, 10:21:17 AM
Thane,
Do you think it might be worthwile to invest in a Metglas core? They are expensive but if it's a good core for this research, I just might get me one.
Dear Marcel,
Do as you please - the worst thing that can happen is you learn something from your investment.
As for me I am waiting to hear back from Luc on his new primary?
And waiting to see what results Groundloop produces.
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on February 19, 2008, 10:05:29 PM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 19, 2008, 06:58:14 PM
?Do fluxes cancel or add??
If they are additive then test #2 should provide a higher output power
than test # 1.
You are of course welcome to your own opinion but IMO finding a higher power in test 2 than test 1 doesn't indicate that the fluxes don't cancel.
2 things make this occur, one is the fact that if you have one of the coils shorted it will resist the primaries changing flux and the primary flux will be diverted into the other open leg.
The other thing and this could admittedly be an issue of semantics in part but the flux from the 2 secondaries is identical and opposite if everything is setup correctly.
This means that unlike in a normal transformer where the secondary cancels out the primaries magnetic flux (stopping and further induction) they cancel out each others flux meaning that no matter how much current passes through them they can't dent the primaries emf and so more turns will indeed mean more power. (though so will lower resistance)
Now you could look at this in isolation, you could look at it as each secondary helping the other but if you bother to consider the self induction each coil has on it's self it the exactly equal and opposite to the effect the other coil has.
So while this is indeed semantics as you are not wrong about the secondaries amplifying themselves it seems more accurate to say that the net field from the 2 secondary coils is 0 and hence the primary emf can not be countered by anything the secondaries do.
Sorry, just had to reiterate that one last time.
Dear aether22,
Very well said, I knew I was wrong when I posted it but I was too tired to correct myself.
Can you do something for me though?
Take two magnets with identical poles facing each other and repelling in air.
Then place them on a sheet of iron ? and make the fields cancel each other out such that they are NOT attracted to the iron because the fields cancel each other out inside the metal?
Keep reducing the thickness of the metal until it saturates (same permeability as air)
and tell me what happens?
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 10:24:05 AM
Quote from: MainePower on February 20, 2008, 08:05:26 AM
Dear Thane, your posting of the letter from Zahn I predict sets your 15 mins of fame clock at right around 14:59. Your visit to him generated the news that is driving the excitement right now and your NASA invite on which you have no academia backing you (actually you now have negative academia backing). The fact that he has turned down your invite rather harshly too rebukes the Zahn excitement quotes from the media making it sound as if you are onto something astounding and brings the whole device back down to earth.
I believe you have a matter of a few days to do precisely what Zahn requests and post the results again publicly otherwise you will probably slip into obscurity.
I am neither master of magnets or electricity but common sense needs to be the only discipline applied to see what's going on.
1) Satisfy Zahn's request as quickly as possible. Publically, perhaps more youtube videos are in order.
2) Try to save enough face here on forums like this to get at least SOMEONE to reproduce your motor who can also duplicate the Zahn testing.
A believer but now doubtful.[/size]
Dear MainePower
I can show you even worse and harsher criticisms than Dr. Zahn?s. The fact remains they are all simply un-quantified opinions which in the absence of supporting data are worthless (and some are just plain silly). We offered Dr. Zahn $ 20,000 to provide the supporting data.
Now what we do have in the way of academia backing is; Dr. Habash of Ottawa U (and also two scientists from York University) who I gave a demo to yesterday and we addressed all the issues presented (hysterisis brake, no useable generator output etc.). I told Dr. Habash that either I convince him that my claims are valid (off the record) or I pack it in. I am still there today.
Dr. Habash feels that the generator Back EMF is creating an ?energy less? synchronous motor effect inside the induction motor (causing acceleration) while at the same time the generator output continues to go up.
Dr. Habash also said that it is easier to kill something like this but hard to keep alive so from the university?s perspective every public pro or against comment has to be supported with data to protect the integrity of the university ? which takes time to produce. The university has given me 5 ? 4th year students to get the data. From a common sense point of view ? does that sound like support or not?
The NRC is sending 3 scientists in for a demo tomorrow or Friday.
Edison, Einstein, Galileo, Tesla, the Wright Brothers and Banting didn?t have any easier a time than I am ? they had their doubters also. It?s par for the course.
I can do a lot in 60 seconds.
Thanks
Thane
Arguably I would say that you are where you (today) are because of Dr. Zahn, delivering you (media, public debate, this forum, NASA, NRC?) so I guess throwing him under the bus as a skeptic because he doesn't want to take the time (or your money) to prove your invention is real is a tactical decision? I guess I don't understand that if Dr. Zahn's tests are so easy that you can't just produce the results? Wasn't that your intent? To go to MIT (or any university) to try to get the scientific community behind your invention because you lacked the expertise? That's how you hooked me in, you were humble and seeking validation. He seems to be "interested" but skeptical - why not continue to play that out by cooperating rather then just dismissing it as "more skeptical nonsense from people who don't care to do the diligence to prove me wrong" I think he's asking you to do the same, he's saying the burden of proof is on _you_, not him. I think that's fair.
He didn't shut you out and laugh you out of the building. He challenged you. I think you have to seize this opportunity and challenge him back rather then saying he needs to supply you with data of his hypothesis. In short, you need him more then he needs you. Be humble.
Imagine that if every inventor marched into MIT with a reporter on their shoulder and said "prove I am brilliant in my invention!" obviously that doesn't work. You've invested your life in this, you're so close, why not give the respected professor his due and complete the task? You yield your lack of education to these folks - so I just see it as the next logical step in your process. I'm passionate about this because I want you to be RIGHT.
Dr. Zahn's reputation is on the line now, he's basically thrown the gauntlet down and said "do these tests" and come back to the table with the results. If you do them, then you can challenge his thinking and perhaps engage him further and earn another high caliber supporter in your to be on the mantle with Edison, Tesla. Without these types of individuals, you could go to your grave pounding the table that "everyone else is wrong while I am right, they just don't understand".
I think there are many paths to greatness and you are on the brink right now, I see your relation to Dr. Zahn as a key catalyst to break through.
Again I hope you can hit these two objectives:
1) show Dr. Zahn you're right and disprove the hypothesis.
2) get people duplicating your device. Which you're doing here and I think it's wonderful.
GOOD LUCK!
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 07:08:26 AM
... Anyone please tell me what do you think the effect will be in doubling the relative permeability in the above toroid?
Hi Thane,
It is true in practice as well that you can increase a coil self inductance,
{L=(mu*N*N*A)/l where A is cross-section of the coil and l is coil length, mu is permeability of the core and N is number of turns}
by making more turns or increasing the core's permeability. So in a coil with a given mu core permeability, you can induce a voltage of Vi=-L*(dPHI/dt), L is self inductance of the coil, dPHI is flux change during dt time change.
Now if you double the permeability given before, the induced voltage will nearly also double (assuming the core still far from saturation) because the mu permeability is a proportional multiplier in the induced voltage formula: the higher the mu the higher the induced voltage.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 07:08:26 AM
...Also please find enclosed my invitation to Dr. Zahn to join me at NASA.
Looks like I am going solo but I would like some feedback on the ?hysterisis brake? idea circulating the web since no one ever suggests that in the lab after they see it. ....
Luc or anyone else any comments?
Here is what I believe takes place in your setup: when you run your setup with the coils unloaded, the load on your motor shaft (hence your input power consumption) comes from magnetic drags between the magnets and the cores, neglecting normal ball bearing friction and airdrag, right? The magnetic drag comes from the natural attraction between the cores and the magnets. Agree with this?
And when you short circuit the coils, the created current will turn the cores into an electromagnet whose flux should work AGAINST the permanent magnets' flux (ala Lenz law) but this means the natural attraction between them gets reduced, hence the drag can also reduce, hence the driving motor's shaft load also gets reduced, this means RPM can increase and motor input power consumption can approach to the unloaded motor running consumption which is always less than a loaded motor consumption. Can you agree with this explanation?
I can also think of simply core saturation from the induced current when you short circuit the coils, hence the magnetic drag can also reduce in this case.
I have probably missed if you mentioned but let me ask what happens to the motor consumption when you start loading output coil 2, gradually towards a short circuit? I mean Test case 2 when you have the unloaded 177.7V on coil 2.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Thane,
Here is what I believe takes place in your setup: when you run your setup with the coils unloaded, the load on your motor shaft (hence your input power consumption) comes from magnetic drags between the magnets and the cores, neglecting normal ball bearing friction and air drag, right? The magnetic drag comes from the natural attraction between the cores and the magnets. Agree with this?
YES I agree also called Cogging Torque
And when you short circuit the coils, the created current will turn the cores into an electromagnet whose flux should work AGAINST the permanent magnets' flux (ala Lenz law) but this means the natural attraction between them gets reduced, hence the drag can also reduce, hence the driving motor's shaft load also gets reduced, this means RPM can increase and motor input power consumption can approach to the unloaded motor running consumption which is always less than a loaded motor consumption. Can you agree with this explanation?
I might agree if the acceleration occurred at ALL speeds.
It does not.
At a certain low RPM the system decelerates to a DEAD STOP when the coils are shorted. Indicating Back EMF in the air gap and Lenz?s Law effect.
At a certain higher RPM the system accelerates ? the greater the generator output the greater the acceleration. My explanation for this is the higher RPM state produces more generator MMF (magnemotive force H) ? enough to overcome the reluctance of the (hard) steel rotor and motor drive shaft to make it?s way into the motor rather than remaining in the air gap as per the lower RPM state.
I have probably missed if you mentioned but let me ask what happens to the motor consumption when you start loading output coil 2, gradually towards a short circuit? I mean Test case 2 when you have the unloaded 177.7V on coil 2.
The system speed gradually increases as the resistive value approaches 0 ohms from an open circuit - the slip angle between the rotor and stator decreases and the stator power draw decreases..
Thane
Quote from: gyulasun on February 20, 2008, 11:48:57 AM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 07:08:26 AM
...Also please find enclosed my invitation to Dr. Zahn to join me at NASA.
Looks like I am going solo but I would like some feedback on the ?hysterisis brake? idea circulating the web since no one ever suggests that in the lab after they see it. ....
Luc or anyone else any comments?
Here is what I believe takes place in your setup: when you run your setup with the coils unloaded, the load on your motor shaft (hence your input power consumption) comes from magnetic drags between the magnets and the cores, neglecting normal ball bearing friction and airdrag, right? The magnetic drag comes from the natural attraction between the cores and the magnets. Agree with this?
And when you short circuit the coils, the created current will turn the cores into an electromagnet whose flux should work AGAINST the permanent magnets' flux (ala Lenz law) but this means the natural attraction between them gets reduced, hence the drag can also reduce, hence the driving motor's shaft load also gets reduced, this means RPM can increase and motor input power consumption can approach to the unloaded motor running consumption which is always less than a loaded motor consumption. Can you agree with this explanation?
I can also think of simply core saturation from the induced current when you short circuit the coils, hence the magnetic drag can also reduce in this case.
I have probably missed if you mentioned but let me ask what happens to the motor consumption when you start loading output coil 2, gradually towards a short circuit? I mean Test case 2 when you have the unloaded 177.7V on coil 2.
rgds, Gyula
Thane,
I'm no expert on hysterisis braking so I can't comment there. Everything and more than I saw in the demo at Ottawa U is in Thane's demonstration videos (go to youtube and search for thane heins) so anyone familiar with hysterisis braking can look at them. All I can add is that there was no smoke and mirrors, but then I never thought there was (well, there might be smoke and broken mirrors if he let's the rotor continue to accelerate :-).)
Gyula,
If you look at the first video, PEREPITEIA GENERATOR DEMO VIDEO - Parts 1 & 2, you'll see that Thane does the tests with the motor not magnetically coupled and again with the motor magnetically coupled. The motor runs significantly faster when the motor is magnetically coupled to the rotor than when it's not. So you might want to rethink after looking at the video. The two diagrams Thane recently posted don't point that out.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
"Arguably I would say that you are where you (today) are because of Dr. Zahn, delivering you (media, public debate, this forum, NASA, NRC?) so I guess throwing him under the bus as a skeptic because he doesn't want to take the time (or your money) to prove your invention is real is a tactical decision? I guess I don't understand that if Dr. Zahn's tests are so easy that you can't just produce the results? Wasn't that your intent? To go to MIT (or any university) to try to get the scientific community behind your invention because you lacked the expertise? That's how you hooked me in, you were humble and seeking validation. He seems to be "interested" but skeptical - why not continue to play that out by cooperating rather then just dismissing it as "more skeptical nonsense from people who don't care to do the diligence to prove me wrong" I think he's asking you to do the same, he's saying the burden of proof is on _you_, not him. I think that's fair."
I didn't throw him under the bus I invited him on the bus and we were prepared to pay him up to $60,000 (all totaled) for the privilege of riding with him.
What else can we do?
Thane
I hope Thane that you will take the time to read MainePower's post again. And probably again after that. As many times as it takes to understand what he or she is saying. Hint: It might be four. That's how many times I had to read "A Brief History of Time" back in the day. :)
If you can't or won't do Dr. Zahn's tests, the very best thing that will be concluded is hubris. The worst I think is clear. The results are no more important than the fact that you are willing to get them, wherever they fall.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 12:49:54 PM
I didn't throw him under the bus I invited him on the bus and we were prepared to pay him up to $60,000 (all totaled) for the privilege of riding with him.
What else can we do?
Thane
Well, I think that would be wasted money.
For this amount of money you could employ a few students which
would wind all the timeforyou new coils and you perfect a prototype
that really works...
Why go the MIT route, when you can find people, who
you don?t need to convince and do this work for little money,
cause they belive it is worth to do it...
Regards, Stefan.
Quote
Why go the MIT route, when you can find people, who you don?t need to convince and do this work for little money, cause they belive it is worth to do it...
Regards, Stefan.]
Because at the time we had a $15 M offer on the table and we wanted to provide our investor with some due diligence and Dr. Habash's experise is not in this area - so it just made sense to go to MIT because the door was open at the time.
Besides everyone needs convincing my word is not nor should it be sufficient.
Thane
Thane,
I see.
And how did now the Dr. Zahn demo work out ?
Is he still pondering about it or is he not anymore involved ?
What was his latest words about it ?
Just: I don?t know what is going on ?
Pretty lame for such a Dr.Dr. Prof.....
It seems, he was only interested in your money...
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 20, 2008, 03:05:33 PM
Thane,
I see.
And how did now the Dr. Zahn demo work out ?
Is he still pondering about it or is he not anymore involved ?
What was his latest words about it ?
Just: I don?t know what is going on ?
Pretty lame for such a Dr.Dr. Prof.....
It seems, he was only interested in your money...
Dr. Zahn it appears was put off by the newspaper angle.
We tried very hard not to push him too far too fast but we did not account for the Toronto Star spotlight all 14 minutes of it.
So now we are off to NASA and we will see what comes of that.
One step at a time.
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 12:37:02 PM
I have probably missed if you mentioned but let me ask what happens to the motor consumption when you start loading output coil 2, gradually towards a short circuit? I mean Test case 2 when you have the unloaded 177.7V on coil 2.
The system speed gradually increases as the resistive value approaches 0 ohms from an open circuit - the slip angle between the rotor and stator decreases and the stator power draw decreases..
Thane
Hi Thane,
Sorry that I considered your two recent diagrams when I answered and that did not include the magnetic coupling through the shaft... as Steven just pointed out to me. (Thanks Steven!) So I will ponder on this further on...
I would like to confirm what I quoted above: So in Test 2 all the coils are shorted except coil 2 and the speed just increased and already got stabilized, now the unloaded coil 2 output is 177.7V and from now on you start loading coil 2 resistively towards 0 Ohm, the already increased speed starts increasing and gets even faster? while motor power consumption further decreases from the value it had when coil 2 was yet unloaded? Please confirm this, sorry for not fully understanding how you meant but these are important details.
Thanks, Gyula
Hi there Thane have you ever seen my 'no-load generator' video?
Here it is:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
that shows a generator loaded with a 50watt 12v car bulb and indeed under load (or direct short) there is a very considerable increase in rpm. (and thus a drop in motor amp draw) The motor is a ?universal motor? from a washing machine powered by a variac.
This accelerating effect does give the feeling that lenz is ?overcome? but it is not so. The effect is only there when one uses ?bad cores? with lots of eddy current and hysteresis losses. In this generator solid steel cores are used and I tell you in only 1 minute they are 70+ degrees (Celsius) hot, and I?m not joking. But the main problem is that these bad cores don?t seem to be able to give a bigger output then the losses they have. So the solid steel cores were replaced with good silicon steel laminations, but you guessed it, the accelerating effect is now gone.
So you can kinda say it like this. If you have a core with lots of core losses, Lenz will fight them and cause less drag on the rotor under speed (but only up to a balance between the two) but due to the bad core you can forget any o.u potential. So you say let?s use good cores then, like silicon steel or metglass? well you now have the potential of real good output? but unfortunately the no load effect is now gone. So again nature has found a way to put ?it? just out of our reach.
The deal is that you really can't tell these systems until you use proper low loss lamination (easy to obtain from an old microwave oven transformer) and start cranking some real watts. It really matters a whole lot between solid steel or laminations. So if I were in your shoes I would make your systems so that you get at least like 100+watt out of your 200+watt input, and see if the no-load effect is still there.
Kind regards,
Steven
Regards,
Steven
MainPower is right on. Dr Zahn's request needs to be carried out.
If I had discovered a strange phenomena, I would investigate it rigurously. I would ask things like: where are the forces created? Is there a breaking action that's reducing? How are the phase angles changing? How is the flux linking. I would hook sensors all over that thing.
So let's not forget the main "invention", or rather discovery. It's the "motor speed-up" phenomena, not the toroidal transformers!
All this parallel magnetic path stuff is old news. Lots of people have wasted time and money exploring this. They don't work as overunity devices, maybe as something else perhaps. These devices are enticing because people think in simplistic terms about magnetic flux. For the record, flux will shoot out of that ring when you apply current to the two coils which are in opposition. Early motor designs used this. So you don't violate reciprocity (which is what people are trying to violate, not Lenz's law)
So my advise is to focus on trying to understand the speeding-up effect of the motor, it is this phenomena that has raised eyebrows.
EM
on understand the speeding-up effect of the motor
found this on Nanowiers
have achieved very high rotation rates of 1803 rpm for free nanowires and 445 rpm for nanowires with one-end fixed at 10 V and f = 80 kHz as shown in Fig. 2a. We have detected no limitation in the rotation speed up to 1800 rpm, beyond which our video system with 30 frames per second could not accurately track the rotation. The value of ̉ۡ also depends on the frequency of the AC voltage. As shown in Fig. 2b, at VAC = 2.5 V and 5 V, the rotation rate of a free nanowire increases sharply below 50 kHz before leveling off and then decreasing slightly fro
http://arxiv.org/ftp/cond-mat/papers/0503/0503162.pdf (http://arxiv.org/ftp/cond-mat/papers/0503/0503162.pdf)
pc
I agree with EMdevices statements.
Both the toroid not being what it was hoped (no I can't say this definitively but all signs are pointing that way, it doesn't support any real current) and the speeding up generator effect being very worthy of further investigation.
I would appreciate more complete details so as to replicate the generator effect.
Many things should and could be tested, one noteworthy test is to give a motor a constant load, say a prony break and then use the 'Back EMF' from another motor/gen setup into the prony brake motor not the one turning the generator.
This means that the loading on the motor and the frequency of the 'back EMF' can be independently changed.
You can also put a coil around the back EMF output (near where it enters the target motor when installed) and 'record' the intensity of the pulses and then recreate them with a pulsing coil to see if that can stand in for a rotating generator or not.
Finally is it possible that this effect applies to any other type of motor?
Or to any other magnetic device?
When the motor is running at a high efficiency can this still dramatically improve efficiency?
Addition:
It really is quite astounding that the'back EMF' magnetic field from an electromagnet (which is drawing I believe an unknown but possibly not awfully impressive current) can travel into a repelling Neo, through the spokes of a steel rotor (not a steel chosen by the manufactures to be highly permeable), through a steel shaft (ditto), spread out into a rotor and return through the air many feet to the back end of the generator coil while having the dramatic effects it has.
I probably don't have to tell you how improbable it is that any useful level of flux could be delivered to the motor to effect it in an as yet speculative way to increase power and decrease input.
When the above is compared to the measly looking results of putting some powerful Neo's right next to an induction motor's shaft the results are even more astounding.
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 20, 2008, 03:05:33 PM
It seems, he was only interested in your money...
Yeah, it's how he earns his living, I guess he should have been a charitable soul and pitched in for nothing huh?
"I would like to confirm what I quoted above: So in Test 2 all the coils are shorted except coil 2 and the speed just increased and already got stabilized,"
The speed did not stabilize - it was still increasing ? I lowered the input voltage to keep it within safe limits.
?now the unloaded coil 2 output is 177.7V and from now on you start loading coil 2 resistively towards 0 Ohm, the already increased speed starts increasing and gets even faster?
Not in the videos but YES in lab testing ? Speed increase is a function of load.
More load = more acceleration.
?while motor power consumption further decreases from the value it had when coil 2 was yet unloaded? Please confirm this, sorry for not fully understanding how you meant but these are important details.?
YES as the motor speed increases ? this slip angle between the rotor and stator decreases ? therefore the power consumption MUST go down accordingly.
Thane
"Yeah, it's how he earns his living, I guess he should have been a charitable soul and pitched in for nothing huh?"
You mean like Dr. Habash at Ottawa U who feels that it his duty as an educator and the duty of the university as a source of unbiased exploration and research?
Thane
I sent Thane a private message a few days ago, a portion of his reply was:
"The split phase motor has the same result if the rotor is placed on it as does my electric drill."
Thane, what kind of motor does your Electric drill use? (should I assume induction?)
Trying to see if my drillpress uses an induction or sychronous motor (It's not DC or universal that's for sure)
Otherwise going to cost me about $60 to pick a second hand one up. short of taking the motor apart anyone know how to tell the difference? And no I don't have a tachometer.
Quote from: aether22 on February 20, 2008, 08:35:25 PM
I sent Thane a private message a few days ago, a portion of his reply was:
"The split phase motor has the same result if the rotor is placed on it as does my electric drill."
Thane, what kind of motor does your Electric drill use?
An electric one.
Thane
Black & Decker
DR501 13mm
Type 2 120 Vac
50/60 Hz 6 A
0 - 750 RPM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 08:49:12 PM
Quote from: aether22 on February 20, 2008, 08:35:25 PM
I sent Thane a private message a few days ago, a portion of his reply was:
"The split phase motor has the same result if the rotor is placed on it as does my electric drill."
Thane, what kind of motor does your Electric drill use?
An electric one.
Thane
Very funny, should I take that as a joke, or as 'I don't know'?
Do you believe the effect may work on other types of electric motors besides induction?
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 09:01:02 PM
Black & Decker
DR501 13mm
Type 2 120 Vac
50/60 Hz 6 A
0 - 750 RPM
Should I assume it's a drill press? or is it a hand held? (never seen a handheld drill with anything other than a universal motor in it, but 750rpm seems a tad low for hand held, both of mine are abut 2500rpm max)
750rpm sounds like a fair bit of slip for an induction motor, but I doubt it's a DC motor.
Have you ever tested the effect to see if it worked on motors you know for a fact aren't induction motors?
Very funny, should I take that as a joke, or as 'I don't know'?
Do you believe the effect may work on other types of electric motors besides induction?
YES it does the hand drill rotates faster when magnetically coupled.
Thane
Black & Decker
DR501 13mm
Type 2 120 Vac 50/60 Hz 6 A
0 - 750 RPM
"750rpm sounds like a fair bit of slip for an induction motor, but I doubt it's a DC motor."
You are right - it's a 120 V AC motor - definately NOT DC.
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 20, 2008, 09:14:47 PM
Very funny, should I take that as a joke, or as 'I don't know'?
Do you believe the effect may work on other types of electric motors besides induction?
YES it does the hand drill rotates faster when magnetically coupled.
Thane
Ah, indeed it is a universal motor (the low speed reported is almost without doubt the tripple gear reduced speed, after all if the motor was truly turning at 750rpm with tripple gear reduction it would be only 4 revolutions a second at the drill bit!).
I know this because not only does putting an induction motor in a hand drill seem a bit off but on B&D's website it reports: Reversing brush system provides full power in forward and reverse.
Obviously that could only mean either a DC motor which allows AC input due to diode rectification or most probably a universal motor.
So the only question that remains is
'How different would have the video parts 1&2 looked if you had used the drill, would the change in speed have seemed as dramatic as with your induction motor?'That your effect works on 2 totally different motor types (likely the key effect in many OU mot/gen setups over the years) is very very important! But please do clarify is the result near as dramatic as we've all seen with the induction motor?
Adittion: 2 requests, one could you if not too much trouble release a quick version of video parts 1 & 2 but with your electric drill as the motor this time?
Ok, now I've made the slightly unreasonible request hopefully it will make this next request seem all the more reasonible. Can you give plans for the coils (& cores) you used in your generator?
Thx
QuoteThe speed did not stabilize - it was still increasing Ã,â€" I lowered the input voltage to keep it within safe limits.
What kind of safe limit? ( as it magnets flying off?)Ã, Because the AC induction motor will not speed up beyond it's operating speed dictated by #of poles etc..
Perhaps a suggestion would be to design a wheel that can handle the full speed of the induction motor. Then see if it accelerates even more when loaded. If that happens we know
power flow occurs from the motor (now a generator) to the grid. But perhaps the real quest should be to see if we can break into overunity, even below this top speed.
QuoteBlack & Decker
DR501Ã, 13mm
Type 2 120 Vac 50/60 Hz 6 A
0 - 750 RPM
"750rpm sounds like a fair bit of slip for an induction motor, but I doubt it's a DC motor."
You are right - it's a 120 V AC motor - definately NOT DC.
Most drills have gear reduction so rpm specs say very little.Ã, Also,Ã, you can run a DC motor off of AC just fine.Ã, In fact the powerfull drills are DC motors with brushes, but use AC, at least mine does.
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on February 21, 2008, 01:11:49 PM
Most drills have gear reduction so rpm specs say very little. Also, you can run a DC motor off of AC just fine. In fact the powerfull drills are DC motors with brushes, but use AC, at least mine does.
I found his specific drill and it uses gear reduction to reduce speed x3 so 750rpm is the gear reduced speed.
And obviously you do not mean to say that you can run a DC motor on AC, but you can run a universal motor off it (the only difference is it has electromagnetic stators) or run a DC motor off DC rectified from AC.
If you run a DC motor on AC it viabrates rather than turning.
Quote from: aether22 on February 21, 2008, 04:02:22 PM
If you run a DC motor on AC it viabrates rather than turning.
Can I do this at home?
aether22,Ã, Ã, see this link:Ã, Ã, http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_13/12.htmlÃ, Ã, Ã, I had a class in electric machines years ago and I remember having the same objections at the time, but it works.Ã, They use them in drills because of the higher torque for the volume, higher speeds etc...Ã,Â
EM
P.S.Ã, Ã, Oh I see what you are saying.Ã, Yes,Ã, certain DC motors, that use magnets etc, will not run, they will just vibrate, don't try this at homeÃ, Ã, LOLÃ, :)Ã, Ã, Ã, I guess what I had in mind is properly called "AC Commutated Motors" or "Universal Motor" that can run on either DC or AC, where running them on DC is slightly better then AC. Good point.
speaking of motors, is there a configuration that can generate a synchronous AC induction motor? The emphisis is on Induction. I want no slipage at all and no brushes. But when the power is off no magnetism should exist in the rotor(you can use magnets of course but none of that). In other words, somehow induce current in the rotor with transformer action, then use that current to energize the rotor and create torque with no brushes involved whatsoever, simular in performace to a DC motor or one of these Universal motors.
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on February 21, 2008, 05:13:04 PM
speaking of motors, is there a configuration that can generate a synchronous AC induction motor? The emphisis is on Induction. I want no slipage at all and no brushes. But when the power is off no magnetism should exist in the rotor(you can use magnets of course but none of that). In other words, somehow induce current in the rotor with transformer action, then use that current to energize the rotor and create torque with no brushes involved whatsoever, simular in performace to a DC motor or one of these Universal motors.
EM
You must have some slip I think but increasing the strength of the stator field (odd name for a rotating field huh?) will reduce the slip.
Synchronous motors are pretty much sychronous though ;)
They use a magnetic core so speed difference is not required.
Ok, I do see what you are saying though, you could have a design which uses a pulsing to induce a current and if angled correctly it would rotate but the speed of the resulting rotation would be far below line freq.
Quote from: JustMe on February 21, 2008, 04:20:45 PM
Quote from: aether22 on February 21, 2008, 04:02:22 PM
If you run a DC motor on AC it viabrates rather than turning.
Can I do this at home?
Yes but make sure the bedroom door is locked!Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 21, 2008, 05:53:26 PM
Quote from: JustMe on February 21, 2008, 04:20:45 PM
Quote from: aether22 on February 21, 2008, 04:02:22 PM
If you run a DC motor on AC it vibrates rather than turning.
Can I do this at home?
Yes but make sure the bedroom door is locked!
Thane
I've got the same question actually.
Can I do it at home? Not without your specs ;)
No, patience isn't my strong suit.
Oh, and unlike JustMe I'm gonna video it and put it on youtube ;)
I've got the same question actually.
Can I do it at home? Not without your specs ;)
No, patience isn't my strong suit.
Oh, and unlike JustMe I'm gonna video it and put it on youtube ;)
Do it at home get:
an induction motor
a steel rotor
a solenoid (or many)
some strong magnets
a variac (would be useful as well)
safety glasses
Thane
I'm blue da ba dee da ba di... (Eiffel 65's, one hit wonder)
-----------------------------------
Do it at home get:
an induction motor
Will buy one if I must but you have indicated that it worked much the same with your drill.
So I'm waiting on you to verify that if you had filmed parts 1&2 with a drilll in place of an induction motor that the results would be similarly impressive.
You don't need to film it, just tell me how the test with your drill went.
a steel rotor
I can probably find a flat circular steel disk a few mm's think.
Do you have any reason to believe that would not be suitible? (Not sure what your one was sold/made for but I don't know if I can get one locally, can you tell me what it's purpose is?)
a solenoid (or many)
I guess I could just go ahead and build one but if you have a rough idea of how many turns it would be helpful.
Also helpful would be core dimensions.
It is in your interest to have the first replication attempt I'm aware of anyway be successful, a failed replication does no one any good, least of all your technologies reputation.
Quote from: EMdevices on February 21, 2008, 01:11:49 PM
QuoteThe speed did not stabilize - it was still increasing ââ,¬â€œ I lowered the input voltage to keep it within safe limits.
What kind of safe limit? ( as it magnets flying off?) Because the AC induction motor will not speed up beyond it's operating speed dictated by #of poles etc..
Perhaps a suggestion would be to design a wheel that can handle the full speed of the induction motor. Then see if it accelerates even more when loaded. If that happens we know power flow occurs from the motor (now a generator) to the grid. But perhaps the real quest should be to see if we can break into overunity, even below this top speed.
If the 'Back EMF' is possibly speeding an induction motor past it's sychronous speed or at any rate improving it's effiency likely beyond unity, and the effect works on a universal motor too.
Then while speculative we may propose that it stands a chance of making a transformer overunity. (Maybe all transformers or maybe only ones without a closed magnetic bath between primary and secondary, just as a motors magnetic path is not closed)
Do it at home get:
an induction motor
Will buy one if I must but you have indicated that it worked much the same with your drill.
So I'm waiting on you to verify that if you had filmed parts 1&2 with a drilll in place of an induction motor that the results would be similarly impressive.
You don't need to film it, just tell me how the test with your drill went.
NO I DIDN'T - LUC CAME TO THE LAB TODAY BUT DID NOT BRING HIS CAMERA.
YOUR RESULTS WOULD NOT BE AS IMPRESSIVE BECAUSE THE DRILL IS BUILT FOR TORQUE NOT SPEED - ALTHOUGH THE EFFECTS SHOULD STILL BE EVIDENT.
a steel rotor
I can probably find a flat circular steel disk a few mm's think.
Do you have any reason to believe that would not be suitible? (Not sure what your one was sold/made for but I don't know if I can get one locally, can you tell me what it's purpose is?)
MY NEXT PROTOTYPE WILL USE A SOLID DISK - I THINK IT OUGHT TO WORK FINE.
MY ROTOR IS ACTUALLY A GARDEN WHEEL BARREL WHEEL.
a solenoid (or many)
I guess I could just go ahead and build one but if you have a rough idea of how many turns it would be helpful. Also helpful would be core dimensions.
EVERYTHING ON MY PROTOTYPE IS DIFFERENT TO TEST WHICH SET UP WORK BEST - NOTHING I COULD DO WOULD MAKE IT FAIL.
It is in your interest to have the first replication attempt I'm aware of anyway be successful, a failed replication does no one any good, least of all your technologies reputation.
[/quote]
IF YOU ATTACH A STEEL ROTOR TO A STEEL DRIVE SHAFT AND USE AN INDUCTION MOTOR WITH A SOLENOID COIL YOU CAN'T FAIL. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FAILURE ANYWAY IF YOU LEARN SOMETHING AND THEN TEACH US WHAT YOU LEARNED.
DO YOU WANT ME TO ASK LUC TO BUILD YOU ONE AND MAIL IT TO YOU?
Thane
Thane, one question.
Does your motor speed up faster, or is the effect more pronounced, if you place your external solenoids, on the same side with the motor? (relative to the wheel) I would venture to guess yes, since the flux linkage is greater through the motor axle due to the proximity.
What would be really great is if this phenomena somehow had to do with mysterious torques occurring on the magnets themselves. That's what I was thinking initially when I saw the videos, sort of like the Adam's motor and others.
EM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 21, 2008, 09:51:42 PM
DO YOU WANT ME TO ASK LUC TO BUILD YOU ONE AND MAIL IT TO YOU?
Thane
I don't know if you meant that genuinly or not, but either way 'yes'.
But it would probably cost more to get it to NZ than it would cost for me to just build, so I'll take a shot but if it fails I might be seriously interested in taking you up on that offer genuine or not since I think you have something here and I really want to explore it.
Thane, I am proceeding to build, one thing though.
I am assuming that you are using 'magnet wire' in your coils?
Not wire with a thick plastic coating?
I'll assume no answer to mean it's magnet wire.
And if you finish your new version before I do and find that a solid rotor doesn't work so well speak up.
One other thing, you could test with a single coil and a variable load and measure the current, see if the magnitude of the effect is linked in a linear way to the current through the coil or not.
Oh BTW EMdevices, not sure if Thane understands your question but I don't, the motor is on the same shaft as the wheel not to one side of it so I can't make sense of your question. Never mind, just got it. you mean front and back not left or right.
Interesting thread and a good read, my sympathies go to groundloop, winding all those toroids with thousands of turns, keep up the good work.
A few tips for groundloop which might save you some effort, removing windings from a toroid, an angle grinder is quick if you need to remove all the coil.
The bitoroid appears very similar to a 3 leg 3 phase transformer and even some saturable reactors, it may be easier to pick up a 3 phase transformer from the local scrap dealer, a 120V one (208V Y) could be run off the mains as the number of turns and peak flux are optimised for this, a variac could be used to adjust the input voltage, load testing is simple as well as things like jug elements can be made into calorimeters giving true RMS power measurement, the watthour meter on the property can be used to measure input power, If you know anybody working for your electicity company it may be easy to get a mains watthour meter (keep magnets away from them) Putting a DC bias on one leg of the transformer will change the permeabilty of that side of the circuit. Also it is easier to get good efficiency from larger transformers due to the copper loss falling off with increasing core area. Japanese transformers tend to be low loss and fairly common as they ship 100V equipment with the appropriate step down transformer for the target market.
Cheers
Mark
Quote from: EMdevices on February 21, 2008, 04:50:15 PM
aether22, see this link: http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_13/12.html I had a class in electric machines years ago and I remember having the same objections at the time, but it works. They use them in drills because of the higher torque for the volume, higher speeds etc...
Link was not working. Why?
this here work:
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_13/12.html
its shown the same... but first dont work on 3 deifferent PCs
Pese
P.S.
The copied link from EM , is also working now.
The origiune osted from hin: NOT.
(Not to understand...)
pese, no idea what's going on but his original link worked for me before you mentioned any difficulty and still works.
Quote from: EMdevices on February 21, 2008, 09:59:24 PM
Thane, one question.
Does your motor speed up faster, or is the effect more pronounced, if you place your external solenoids, on the same side with the motor? (relative to the wheel) I would venture to guess yes, since the flux linkage is greater through the motor axle due to the proximity.
THE SHORTER THE FLUX PATH THE BETTER THE EFFECT.
What would be really great is if this phenomena somehow had to do with mysterious torques occurring on the magnets themselves. That's what I was thinking initially when I saw the videos, sort of like the Adam's motor and others.
YOU MAY HAVE SOMETHING THERE - WE ARE LOOKING INTO THAT AS WELL.
EM
I don't know if you meant that genuinly or not, but either way 'yes'.
But it would probably cost more to get it to NZ than it would cost for me to just build, so I'll take a shot but if it fails I might be seriously interested in taking you up on that offer genuine or not since I think you have something here and I really want to explore it.[/quote]
ACTUALLY WE HAVE A COMPANY IN THE U.S. WHO IS CONSIDERING BUILDING SMALL UNITS JUST FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT ONE BUT DON'T WANT TO BUILD THEM THEMSELVES - LIKE THE STERLING ENGINES.
PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS AND YOU CAN'T FAIL. JUST TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOUR ROTORS LEVER ARM TO INCREASE TORQUE - DON'T MAKE IT TOO SMALL.
@PulsedPower,
Magnet wire cost approx. 280,- NOK/Kg bought in Norway. (Approx. $53 pr. Kilogram.)
So unwinding is also a slow process because I reuse the wire. Using a grinder will destroy
the magnet wire and also the core if not careful. But it is a fast way to unwind a core.
@pese,
There is also a brush less induction motor where there is two shorted coils on the Iron laminate.
This motor has two stator coils on the laminate and two one turn shorted coils at 2'o clock and 8'o
clock as seen above looking at the coils pointing at 12'o clock position. The rotor is a laminated soft Iron
round rotor. These motors is used in computer fans (of bigger size) where you want to drive the fans from
the AC mains. Such a fan will use approx. 8 - 9 Watt/Hour from the mains.
I use those fan motors for various projects. One way to use them is to remove the outer fan housing
and take out the Iron laminate and coils. Then use the fan for pulse motors, just adding Neos.
@aether22,
I wonder if the fan motors (the AC ones, not the small DC ones.) can be used for testing the Thane systems?
One can mount the magnets direct (glue them on) onto the rotor thus create a very small distance for the
magnetic feed back direct into the axle and Iron rotor.
Thane,
Do you think such small Induction motors will display the increased RPM effect if driven via a Variac at
slower speeds and then add magnets to the rotor and see if the rpm goes up?
Groundloop.
[EDIT] Something like this?
G.
Quote from: aether22 on February 22, 2008, 03:39:06 AM
Thane, I am proceeding to build, one thing though.
I am assuming that you are using 'magnet wire' in your coils?
YES OF COURSE
Not wire with a thick plastic coating?
NO WAY
I'll assume no answer to mean it's magnet wire.
ASSUME AWAY - MAGNET WIRE 22 G
And if you finish your new version before I do and find that a solid rotor doesn't work so well speak up.
NO I'LL KEEP IT TO SECRET LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE I DO - SO THE BAD GUYS WILL HAVE A REASON TO PUT ME "ON ISE".
One other thing, you could test with a single coil and a variable load and measure the current, see if the magnitude of the effect is linked in a linear way to the current through the coil or not.
OF COURSE IT IS THAT IS WHY I ONLY SHOW OPEN CIRCUITS (ZERO CURRENT - ZERO INDUCED COIL MAGNETIC FIELD) AND SHORT CIRCUIT ( MAX CURRENT - MAX INDUCED COIL MAGNETIC FIELD). LOADS BETWEEN OPEN AND SHORT (SAY 500 OHMS) VARY THE CURRENT IN THE COIL AND AFFECT THE FLUX FIELD DIRECTLY - I THINK LUC POSTED A GRAPGH SOMEWHERE. I CAN POST IT IF YOU WISH?
Oh BTW EMdevices, not sure if Thane understands your question but I don't, the motor is on the same shaft as the wheel not to one side of it so I can't make sense of your question. Never mind, just got it. you mean front and back not left or right.
MAKE DEMO WITH TWO ROTORS ONE ON EACH SIDE OF THE MOTOR (DRIVE SHAFTS) WITH MAGNETS FACING INWARD PLACE THE SOLENOIDS IN THE MIDDLE LINKING THE TWO ROTORS
NORTH ON ROTOR - SOUTH ON THE OTHER.
THIS WORKS VERY WELL!
IF IS ANYONE INTERESTED IN THE "HYSTERISIS HOMEWORK" QUESTION - WE WENT TO MIT ON THE 28TH OF JANUARY but ANSWERED THE HYSTERISIS QUESTION FOR OURSELVES ON THE 3RD OF JANUARY.
WE ALSO CONCLUDED THAT REDUCING THE HYSTERISIS OF OUR ROTOR COULD NOT RESULT IN SUCH HUGE EFFECTS - BUT WE WERE QUITE WILLING TO PAY FOR DR. ZAHN'S OPINION BECAUSE WE FELT THAT HE WOULD EVENTUALLY CONCLUDE THE SAME.
THANE
MvsH curves and their effect on machine efficiency
Thu, 3 Jan 2008 21:13:46 -0500
Hi Thane,
I have given some thought to Prof. Zahn's idea that the M vs H curves are somehow affecting motor
or generator efficiency.
M vs H (magnetization vs magnetic field) curves are useful things. As the applied magnetic field H
is changed in magnitude and reversed in direction, the magnetization M in the material also
shifts. Eventually, M must snap into the state dictated by H. M is also limited by the characteristics
of the material, in other words, M saturates and further increases in H do not result in further
increases in M. As H changes, the operating point on the M vs H curve follows a loop around the
centre of the curve.
From the point of view of describing machine efficiency, the key feature of M vs H curves is the
hysteresis, that is, the space enclosed in the middle of the curve. The smaller the centre area,
the smaller the hysteresis loss, and the more efficient the machine using this material in a
magnetic core conducting flux. On the other hand, large hysteresis is exactly what you want in permanent magnets. Also note that hysteresis is not the only cause of losses in machines - friction, eddy currents, and ohmic losses contribute too - but they are not of immediate interest because they are not affected by external magnets.
In real life, one would never design a machine in such a way that its core material is driven to
saturation, so a real machine operates over a smaller range of M and H than the maximal values used to characterize the material. Applying an external static magnetic field would change where you
smaller working loop is located on the maximal loop. Could this affect the efficiency of the
machine? In a word, YES. Can one demonstrate what effect it has, and prove it? In a word, NO, because this type of phenomenon is difficult to model with
any reliability.
Here is an authoritative comment on the subject from a widely respected magnetics textbook by
Chikazumi and Charap (see attachments).
pg 291:
"Since, however, the actual mechanism of magnetization is very complicated, it is not so easy to
construct a real hysteresis curve on theoretical grounds."
I'm attaching some excerpts from this book including this passage and bibliographical information.
In summary, what this means is that Zahn can't prove that his theory is right, and I can't prove
that it's wrong.
All,
Better support plate and a new coil. First test did show me that MY setup does not work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test-1 :
Input: 230VAC @ 0,03Amp. = Approx. 6,9 Watt Apparent power.
Output: 8,74VAC over 470R load. = Approx. 0,16 Watt Apparent power.
Output coil: Ferrite 100mm x 10mm, 1600 Turns 0,35mm wire.
Open coil voltage = 10,00 VAC.
When I short the coil the motor stops. So MY setup does not work.
This does NOT mean that other setups will not work! It only mean
that MY test setup in the current configuration does not work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 10:58:55 AM
All,
Better support plate and a new coil. First test did show me that MY setup does not work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test-1 :
Input: 230VAC @ 0,03Amp. = Approx. 6,9 Watt Apparent power.
Output: 8,74VAC over 470R load. = Approx. 0,16 Watt Apparent power.
Output coil: Ferrite 100mm x 10mm, 1600 Turns 0,35mm wire.
Open coil voltage = 10,00 VAC.
When I short the coil the motor stops. So MY setup does not work.
This does NOT mean that other setups will not work! It only mean
that MY test setup in the current configuration does not work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundloop.
DEAR GROUDLOOP,
YOUR SETUP WORKS!
YOU JUST RE-AFFIRMED LENZ'S LAW.
YOUR COIL FLUX IS NOT LINKING YOUR ROTOR THAT'S ALL
Thane
Thane,
How do I link my coil flux to the rotor?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 11:21:09 AM
Thane,
How do I link my coil flux to the rotor?
Groundloop.
TAKE THE MOTOR OUT OF ITS HOUSING.
PUT A STEEL ROTOR ON THE DRIVE SHAFT (WHICH HAS TO BE STEEL NOT ALUMINUM) THEN YOUR MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR AND YOU ARE GOOD TO GO.
Thane
Thane,
What you ask me to do is not possible with this type of motor. The laminated mild Iron rotor is casted to the plastic rotor housing. Is there another method of coupling the coil flux to the laminated soft iron rotor?
The axle IS available both at the front of the rotor and at the back of the motor casing. Can you explain a bit more what you mean by coupling the coil flux to the motor. Perhaps by a simple drawing?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 11:40:22 AM
Thane,
What you ask me to do is not possible with this type of motor. The laminated mild Iron rotor is casted to the plastic rotor housing. Is there another method of coupling the coil flux to the laminated soft iron rotor?
The axle IS available both at the front of the rotor and at the back of the motor casing. Can you explain a bit more what you mean by coupling the coil flux to the motor. Perhaps by a simple drawing?
Groundloop.
PLASTIC ROTOR HOUSINGS WON'T CONDUCT MAGNETIC FLUX.
LUC POSTED SOME PICTURES ON PAGES 15-16? WHICH SHOULD HELP I CAN'T SEEM TO BE ABLE TO UPLOAD ANYTHING RIGHT NOW?
PLEASE CHECK PAGES 10 & 12 FOR SOME GOOD PICTURES.
THANKS
Thane
Thane,
My magnets and coil core is very close to the motor and a LOT of magnetic flux is coupled to the motor. I agree that plastic don't conduct magnetic flux but plastic is transparent to magnetic flux also. So what do you want me to couple back to the motor? And where in the motor do you want me to couple that?
Groundloop.
Quote from: slapper on February 04, 2008, 09:34:38 AM
Quote
Heins is focused on showing his invention to anybody willing to see it
Anybody live in or near Ottawa :)
hello all yes i have read his article in the paper and i happen to have a few copies in fact im close enough to ottwa lol!! agin this is another thing on my list of things i must do
i will have to read more about this device altho i think i may have a few answers for him ;) however im not even finished reading this entire thred yet but i thought i better repond as im close enough to ottawa to make a venture as i may have some explaining to do on some of my inventions too in owatta ;D
l8r
ist
Thane,
My magnets and coil core is very close to the motor and a LOT of magnetic flux is coupled to the motor. I agree that plastic don't conduct magnetic flux but plastic is transparent to magnetic flux also. So what do you want me to couple back to the motor? And where in the motor do you want me to couple that?
Groundloop.
TAKE A LOOK AT DEMO 1 & 2 ON YOUTUBE.
NOTE: THE "IDLE" SPEED IN THE FIRST PART IT IS AROUND 60ish "RPM".
THEN I PUT THE STEEL MAGNETIC COUPLER INTO THE BRASS COUPLER.
NOTE: THE "IDLE" SPEED HAS INCREASED TO 90ish "RPM" (EXACT SAME MOTOR INPUT).
YOU WILL BE COUPLING GENERATOR MAGNETIC ROTOR FLUX AND GENERATOR COIL BACK EMF INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELDS INTO THE MOTOR?S ROTOR.
Thane
QUESTION:
Anyway how much magnetic field CAN couple back via your rotor to the motor itself due to the long steel axle?
ANSWER:
Enough
Thane,
I have a hard time trying to understand why the magnetic flux will prefer to go into the motor instead just stay in the soft Iron rotor. As I understand a magnetic flux will always choose to go the way that have the lowest magnetic resistance (reluctance). So If I mount the magnets on the soft Iron rotor, why will the magnetic flux go into the rotor?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 22, 2008, 11:30:40 AM
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 11:21:09 AM
How do I link my coil flux to the rotor?
TAKE THE MOTOR OUT OF ITS HOUSING.
PUT A STEEL ROTOR ON THE DRIVE SHAFT (WHICH HAS TO BE STEEL NOT ALUMINUM) THEN YOUR MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR AND YOU ARE GOOD TO GO.
Groundloop,
Defering to Thane, another difference I note is that Thane's magnets are housed in steel cylinders, which makes the coil even closer to the rotor.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 01:25:54 PM
Thane,
I have a hard time trying to understand why the magnetic flux will prefer to go into the motor instead just stay in the soft Iron rotor. As I understand a magnetic flux will always choose to go the way that have the lowest magnetic resistance (reluctance). So If I mount the magnets on the soft Iron rotor, why will the magnetic flux go into the rotor?
Groundloop.
THE FLUX HAS NO CHOICE SINCE THE ROTOR IS A STATOR INDUCED ELECTROMAGNET
AND EVERYTHING CONNECTED TO IT NOW BECOMES PART OF SAID MAGNET.
LOOK AT THE ROTOR DIAGRAM ON PAGE 12 AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE ROTOR, DRIVESHAFT AND STEEL ROTOR ALL COMPRISE THE ROTOR ELECTROMAGNET - THE COIL INDUCED BACK EMF MAGNETIC FIELD IS ATTRACTED TO THE ROTOR'S OPPOSITE POLE.
WHAT HAPPENS AT ON END WILL HAPPEN THROUGHOUT BUT THE MMF'S HAVE TO HIGH ENOUGH FOR YOU TO NOTICE ANY CHANGE.
Thane
I SHOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT THE ROTOR (STEEL WHEEL BARREL WHEEL) IS EVERY BIT AS HARD AS THE ROTOR'S DRIVE SHAFT.
Thane
Thane,
Am I correct in this drawing?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 02:31:39 PM
Thane,
Am I correct in this drawing?
Groundloop.
THE DRUNK PERSON WHO WOUND YOUR STATOR - FORGOT TO WIND THE ROTOR BEFORE HE PASSED OUT - BUT OTHERWISE IT'S PRETTY CLOSE. YOU SHOULD ADD THE ROTOR FIELD IN THERE AS WELL SO YOU ARE CLEAR.
Thane,
I'm trying to be serious here and so should you! I'm trying hard to find out the most about your setup and my best way of
understanding is with drawings. They are not so very good, I admit that, but I think they show the most basic circuits.
(BTW: I do not drink alcohol at all.)
I did not draw any windings on the rotor because MY motor is an Induction motor. The rotor is the only moving part and has
no copper windings. The rotor is made of laminated soft Iron.
Have you done any measurements of the magnetic flux coming out of your motor axle?
I did a test where I connected a 450 turn coil (Ferrite core) to my DVM. When I placed the coil close to my motor axle (motor running) then I got 0,003 VAC open coil voltage. This flux is so small that it could well be from the internal motor coils. I do not have a magnetic flux meter so if anybody on this forum can do the test I will be grateful.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 22, 2008, 06:45:34 AM
PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS AND YOU CAN'T FAIL. JUST TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOUR ROTORS LEVER ARM TO INCREASE TORQUE - DON'T MAKE IT TOO SMALL.
What is the minimum you have tried successfully/believe works.
I'm trying to be serious here and so should you! I'm trying hard to find out the most about your setup and my best way of understanding is with drawings. They are not so very good, I admit that, but I think they show the most basic circuits. (BTW: I do not drink alcohol at all.)
YOUR DRAWINGS ARE GREAT, ACTUALLY WE CAN BE SERIOUS AND HAVE FUN (JOKE A LITTLE) AT THE SAME TIME. BLACK SUITED OIL HITMEN COULD TAKE ME OUT AT ANY MOMENT SO PERMIT ME THE ODD ATEMPT AT HUMOR PLEASE.
I did not draw any windings on the rotor because MY motor is an Induction motor. The rotor is the only moving part and has no copper windings. The rotor is made of laminated soft Iron.
HOW DOES YOUR ROTOR DEVELOP A MAGNETIC FIELD IF IT IS NOT INDUCED BY THE STATOR?
IS YOUR MOTOR A PERMANENT MAGNET ROTOR?
Have you done any measurements of the magnetic flux coming out of your motor axle?
YES WE CERTAINLY DID IT WAS 25 GAUSS @ 300 RPM - AND IT INCREASES WITH ROTOR SPEED INCREASE.
I did a test where I connected a 450 turn coil (Ferrite core) to my DVM. When I placed the coil close to my motor axle (motor running) then I got 0,003 VAC open coil voltage. This flux is so small that it could well be from the internal motor coils. I do not have a magnetic flux meter so if anybody on this forum can do the test I will be grateful.
YOUR VOLTAGE IS PROBABLY WAY TO SMALL TO PRODUCE A CURRENT AND MAGNETIC FIELD LARGE WITH ENOUGH FORCE LARGE MAKE INTO YOUR ROTOR? GOTTA GO A BLACK VAN JUST PULLED INTO MY DRIVEWAY!
Groundloop.
[/quote]
Quote from: aether22 on February 22, 2008, 03:08:44 PM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 22, 2008, 06:45:34 AM
PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS AND YOU CAN'T FAIL. JUST TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOUR ROTORS LEVER ARM TO INCREASE TORQUE - DON'T MAKE IT TOO SMALL.
What is the minimum you have tried successfully/believe works.
CHECK OUT VIDEO # 6 ON YOUTUBE - THERE IS NO ROTOR BUT THE EFFECT IS STILL THERE ?THE MAGNETIC FIELD IS THE
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE THE OBSERVED SPEED INCREASE IS THE
DEPENDANT VARIABLE BUT THERE IS NO CONTROL VARIABLE.
SO TO DO A GOOD TEST YOU NEED TO HAVE A CONTROL VARIABLE WHICH IS YOUR SYSTEM CONFORMING TO LENZ?S LAW WHICH IS PROVIDED BY THE ROTOR LEVER ARM.
(The independent variable is the variable you purposely manipulate (change). The dependent variable is the variable that is being observed, which changes in response to the independent variable. The variables that are not changed are called controlled variables.)
Thane,
OK, you got me there! ;D
No, the motor is made out of two parts, one round laminated Iron stator with two big (high Ohm) coils and two one turn
coil that are shorthed. The rotor is a round and made out of laminated Iron. See image of the stator. (This stator has been
rewound for 12VAC. The 230VAC stator has thinner wire and more turns.) The laminated Iron rotor is in the middle of the rotor.
Do you state that I need a motor that has windings both on the stator and the rotor?
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 03:55:54 PM
Thane,
OK, you got me there! ;D
No, the motor is made out of two parts, one round laminated Iron stator with two big (high Ohm) coils and two one turn
coil that are shorthed. The rotor is a round and made out of laminated Iron. See image of the stator. (This stator has been
rewound for 12VAC. The 230VAC stator has thinner wire and more turns.) The laminated Iron rotor is in the middle of the rotor.
WHERE IS THE MIDDLE PART THE PART THAT SPINS? THE ROTOR
ALL I SEE IS THE STATOR I THINK? THE PART THAT IS STATIONARY
WHAT GOES IN THE DOUGHNUT HOLE?
Do you state that I need a motor that has windings both on the stator and the rotor?
Groundloop.
Groundloop, Induction motors have coils on their rotor which is what the stator field induces a current in.
Synchronous motors are however the same as induction motors except they have an iron core without windings, that is what you have drawn. (they don't have the slip phenomena either since a magnetic field does not need to move to induce a magnetic field in iron)
One other thing, Thane said you need to use steel but note he obviously means magnetic steel, stuff which is attracted to a magnet.
If you have not seen demo parts 1 & 2 on youtube yet you really need to.
Also I wouldn't worry about the logic of why, I simulated the flux path in Vizimag and it showed that a vanishingly tiny bit of flux gets to the end of the shaft, but when you see a motor speed up when a short is made provided there is a magnetic steel shaft being used you know things aren't working normally so don't require it to make sense.
I personally believe that there is an aether stream (which may be intertwined with a magnetic field) shot out of the coil and it is that which is improving the motors efficiency, 25 gauss is pretty tiny to have such a huge effect.
BTW Thane, I see video 6 but I see how tiny the effect is, it's vanishingly small and that's from powerful Neos next to the shaft not from a probably poorly induced coil far away (I say poorly induced because I have simulated that too and magnetic flux doesn't make it far down the core, but that's Ok because personally I don't believe it's an electric current that's really important in the coil but an aetheric current which does poorly unless shorted)
In fact if Neos have such an effect wouldn't the leakage from the Neos on the shaft increase motor torque anyway without shorting the coil.
BTW Thane one thing, you are a very rare creature, an intelligent inventor who knows the keys of how his invention works (the shaft coupling) can communicate effectively and shares openly while getting assistance from the FE community and academics.
Saying stuff in all caps though has a very bad reputation on the internet, it is almost exclusively spammed scams, lunatics and very very angry people (who if they don't stop shouting are thought of as lunatics).
If your motivation is faster/easier typing then all lower case is far more acceptible (it makes the author seem young but not crazy), if it is differrentiation from the other authors then a colour change or other method is more appropriate.
Saying stuff in all caps though has a very bad reputation on the internet, it is almost exclusively spammed scams, lunatics and very very angry people (who if they don't stop shouting are thought of as lunatics).
As you can see I am answering a lot of questions and I just found using caps was the most expedient way to insert my comments without leaving anyone out.
PERSONNALY I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING I READ ON THE INTERNET ANYWAY!
Thane
@aether22,
What I have is an induction motor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_motor
I have seen all the videos.
Thane,
You can also use color in your answers. :D
Groundloop.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 22, 2008, 04:16:43 PM
PERSONNALY I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING I READ ON THE INTERNET ANYWAY!
Thane
LOL! er...lol!
you guys crack me up, try to have some fun :D
Groundloop,
What happened to your metglas toroid setup?
btw I ran into this post. Looks like the same principles.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2093.msg26105.html#msg26105
edit: link added
In fact if Neos have such an effect wouldn't the leakage from the Neos on the shaft increase motor torque anyway without shorting the coil.
THEY DO HAVE AN EFFECT.
CHECK OUT PART 1's VOLTAGE JUST BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED approx 70 V.
THEN CHECK IT OUT AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED.
THE VOLTAGE INCREASES TO 90 V - PRE - COIL SHORTED.
THE MOTOR INPUT IS NOT INCREASED.
If your motivation is faster/easier typing then all lower case is far more acceptible (it makes the author seem young but not crazy), if it is differrentiation from the other authors then a colour change or other method is more appropriate.
IN MY BOOK CRAZY IS GETTING INTO A HUMMER EVERY OTHER DAY ONLY TO BE SHOT AT AND KILLED IN A FOREIGN LAND BECAUSE YOUR GOVERNMENT IS USING YOU TO STEAL OIL SO WE AT HOME CAN DRIVE OUR SUV's. CRAZY AND SAD ALL IN ONE WHICH MANY PEOPLE ALSO CONSIDER MORE APPROPRIATE THAN DEVELOPING NEW TECHNOLOGIES AS WELL.
"Don't be fuelish - get current!"
Captain JCH - Canadian Army
@M@rcel,
I decided not to destroy my MEG. So no more core/transformer testing for a while.
Groundloop.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 22, 2008, 04:36:19 PM
@aether22,
What I have is an induction motor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_motor
I have seen all the videos.
Thane,
You can also use color in your answers. :D
Groundloop.
THANKS MAN!
But it's too much work, LET ME BE CRAZY FOR NOW.
Cheers off to dinner now...
Thane
Groundloop
The price of magnet wire in Norway is horrendous, I think it is around A$14 / kg for 1mm wire in 10Kg spools here in Australia.
QuoteI did a test where I connected a 450 turn coil (Ferrite core) to my DVM. When I placed the coil close to my motor axle (motor running) then I got 0,003 VAC open coil voltage. This flux is so small that it could well be from the internal motor coils. I do not have a magnetic flux meter so if anybody on this forum can do the test I will be grateful.
The coupling into a toroid of reasonably high permeability by an external field will be very low, far better to pass the shaft though a coil and hook the coil up to a CRO to determine the changing flux in the shaft, no need for hundreds of turns, 50 should be plenty..
Luc and I (or at least I) will be starting a more efficient primary on Saturday.
We may have some results posted early next week.
Thane
Quote from: PulsedPower on February 22, 2008, 08:16:23 PM
I think it is around A$14 / kg for 1mm wire in 10Kg spools here in Australia.
Not sure I can get it that cheap in NZ, but better look around a bit more, need some more wire though.
Thane, your results are very interesting but here's a test for you, compare the speed with and without the coil present (when present have it open circuit).
Or alternatly with 2 coils present, neither shorted but one monitored for voltage, them remove the other one and see if the voltage on the monitored coil changes. (If it's higher with one then that makes sense since there are core losses that have been reduced but if it's higher with 2 then something might be up)
Quote from: PulsedPower on February 22, 2008, 08:16:23 PM
I think it is around A$14 / kg for 1mm wire in 10Kg spools here in Australia.
Ok, I have researched and I can get 100grams for $10 from Surplustronics, or 1Lb for $110 from RS Components.
So PulsedPower, I am seriously interested, please tell me who that's from and if they don't ship to NZ can you send it over? or maybe we have them here?
I have been putting off experiments due to the price.
Infact I'm gonna send you this as a PM too since I'd rather not wait to verify this price!
BTW copper costs only $3.50 a pound (not sure of it's current price but that was a recent high in '07).
So at about $7US to make a KG the price PulsedPower quoted makes sense even though it's AU money that's still close to double the raw material cost.
But I'm paying x17 times more per pound! And groundloop is paying a similarly awful price. this needs to be rectified!
Thane,
I would like to address one thing you stated.
"THEY DO HAVE AN EFFECT.
CHECK OUT PART 1's VOLTAGE JUST BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED approx 70 V.
THEN CHECK IT OUT AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED.
THE VOLTAGE INCREASES TO 90 V - PRE - COIL SHORTED.
THE MOTOR INPUT IS NOT INCREASED."
Are you sure that your steel bar is increasing the voltages in your output coil because of some very low back coupling of bemf to the motor? The effect could very well be the fact that your motor become more efficient because the steel bar is improving the magnetic field in your motor because of a strengthening of the rotor field in the motor itself. I ask because when I put a Ferrite to the end of my coil I get more core mass to the coil and my voltage goes up because of that. In my little motor setup I get a voltage gain of approx. 1 Volt by just adding more core to my coil. So this is a dramatic big effect compared to the back coupling of some low gauss from the magnets. This effect does NOT explain why a motor speeds up when your coils are loaded, just to be clear about that. One way to test this is by running the motor without any load at a preset voltage. Measure the rpm before and after a steel axle is connected to the motor.
@PulsedPower,
Yes, everything is exspencive in Norway. :(
By CRO you mean a Catode Ray Oscilloscope?
Groundloop.
@groundloop
QuoteBy CRO you mean a Catode Ray Oscilloscope?
Sure do, not that many use "cathode rays" these days, the only problem is that is will only pick up changing flux but given there are 4 magnets on your rotor there should be some change in flux as the rotor turns.
PULSEDPOWER, GUESS YOU HAVE NOT NOTICED SO THIS IS IN ALL CAPS!
I AM VERY INTERESTED IN VERIFYING THE $14PER KG YOU MENTIONED FOR MAGNET WIRE.Can you please tell me where from?
And if they don't ship overseas would I be able to get you to send me some? (If not I know others in OZ)
It costs SEVENTEEN TIMES MORE here.
OK NO MORE SHOUTING!
PROMISE
ah, just wanted to test the Marquee ;)
Group,
Today I made a soft Iron rotor plate and glued the plate to my motor. The center of the plate is in direct magnetic contact with the motor axle.
Test 1:
Input: 230VAC @ 0,03Amp. = Approx. 6,9 Watt Apparent power.
Output: 9,4VAC over 470R load. = Approx. 0,188 Watt Apparent power.
Output coil: Ferrite 100mm x 10mm, 1600 Turns 0,35mm wire.
(Same coil as before.)
When I short the coil the motor stops.
Groundloop.
@aether22
lol, I was probably replying to your PM at the same moment you were writing that very effective attention grabber.
@groundloop, if your rotor stops the instant that the coil is shorted then it may be due to insufficient inertia to overcome the strong torque peaks created by shorting the coil.
@PulsedPower,
Yes. It is Lentz law. But I was expecting the opposite due to the fact that my motor now has a soft Iron rotor where the magnets is glued. This soft Iron rotor is in direct magnetic contact with the motor axle. So I expected the bemf flux generated in the shorted coil to couple back into the motor thus canceling the Lentz effect. That did not happen in my setup.
Groundloop.
@groundloop
That is the fun with uncharterd territory, the unexpected don't assume any reason for the effect, you might have some theories but only experimetation and measurement will narrow down the cause of this interesting effect. Anyway it may be that the accelleration effect due to any flux entering the motor is weak and it is totally swamped by the strong pulsating pull of the magnet to the shorted coil. The system that Thane was demonstrating had plenty of inerita compared to the pulstations of the magnets interacting with the coil pole pieces.
The other thing I noticed with Thanes setup was that it was a bench grinder, these typically have aluminium end closures meaning that any magnetic flux can easily enter the rotor, If I am not mistaken you motor has a pressed steel end closure which would act as a magnetic shield with an effectiveness that increases with thickness and permeability.
Thanes motor is also running with massive slip (98.5% @ 60 rpm) and may behave very differently to a motor running closer to its design slip.
@PulsedPower,
You are not paying attention to the information I post. My induction motor has a plastic cover over the rotor. This plastic cover is transparent to magnetic flux. On top of that I have a soft Iron plate that is in direct magnetic contact with the axle. The back of my motor consists of cast iron. In Thane's setup the magnetic flux is supposed to enter the axle of the motor. I can say that my motor has a better chance of getting the back emf flux in, than a motor that uses steel axle and cast aluminum.
I agree with you about the difference of a motor that runs at slow speeds vs full speed. If the Thane effect is only visible when using a motor at slow speeds then it will be impossible for my motor to show the effect at full speed. I will try to slow down my motor.
[EDIT] I checked and the back cover of my motor is cast aluminum. Cast aluminum is non-magnetic.
Groundloop.
Thane, your results are very interesting but here's a test for you, compare the speed with and without the coil present (when present have it open circuit).
WITHOUTH THE COIL YOU HAVE NO GENERATOR.
WITH THE 1 COIL YOU HAVE A GENERATOR WITH ALOT OF COGGING TORQUE.= X
PLACE ADDITIONAL COILS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AND THE COGGING TORQUE DECREASES
X / NUMBER OF COILS.
PLACE A HUGE CHUNK OF IRON NEAR THE ROTOR AND YOU HAVE A HYSTERISIS BRAKE.
Or alternatly with 2 coils present, neither shorted but one monitored for voltage, them remove the other one and see if the voltage on the monitored coil changes. (If it's higher with one then that makes sense since there are core losses that have been reduced but if it's higher with 2 then something might be up)
WHAT'S HIGHER VOLTAGE OR RPM?
TOTAL GENERATOR O/P VOLTAGE IS HIGHER WITH ADDITIONAL COILS USED.
SIMPLY ADDING ANOTHER COIL (IRON) WILL DECREASE THE SPEED (EVERYTHING ELSE BEING EQUAL) AND THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN THE MONITORED COIL WILL GO DOWN AS A RESULT.
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF COILS INCREASES THE COGGING TORQUE UNLESS THEY ARE BALANCED AROUND THE ROTOR PROPERLY. ONE COMPENSATING FOR THE OTHER ETC.
IF ON THE OTHER HAND YOU PLACE ALL 8 OF MY COILS AT " 6 OCLOCK" ON MY ROTOR THE COGGING TORQUE WOULD BE SO HIGH THE 1/3 HP MOTOR WOULD NEVER TURN IT.
IF YOU NOTICE IN THE PICTURES LUC AND STEVE POSTED YOU WILL SEE TWO ADDITIONAL COILS ON THE INSIDE OF THE ROTOR - NEAR THE MOTOR. WHEN THESE COILS ARE EMPLOYED THE COGGING TORQUE INCREASES SO THAT THE EFFECT IS DECREASED BECAUSE I DIDN'T BALANCE THEM PROPERLY. SO I ONLY USE THEM TO SHOW THAT THE GENERATOR CAN EMPLOY COILS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROTOR WITH THE SAME
EFFECT I.E INCREASED SYSTEM SPEED WITH LOAD APPLIED.
THANE
Are you sure that your steel bar is increasing the voltages in your output coil because of some very low back coupling of bemf to the motor? The effect could very well be the fact that your motor become more efficient because the steel bar is improving the magnetic field in your motor because of a strengthening of the rotor field in the motor itself.
YES EXACTLY THE NEW DRIVE SHAFT FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL IS DECREASING THE AIR GAP RELUCTANCE BETWEEN THE STATOR AND ROTOR BUT NOW THE NEW ROTOR WEIGHS ANOTHER 10 lbs (ROTOR WEIGHT + MAGNETS + COGGING TORQUE) - RIDDLE ME THAT ONE BATMAN?
I ask because when I put a Ferrite to the end of my coil I get more core mass to the coil and my voltage goes up because of that. In my little motor setup I get a voltage gain of approx. 1 Volt by just adding more core to my coil.
YOUR VOLTAGE GOES UP BECAUSE YOU ARE INCREASING THE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF YOUR COIL. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/solenoid.html
So this is a dramatic big effect compared to the back coupling of some low gauss from the magnets. This effect does NOT explain why a motor speeds up when your coils are loaded, just to be clear about that.
THE MOTOR SPEEDS UP BECAUSE THE COIL'S MAGNETIC FIELD CAUSES IT TO DO SO WHEN LOADED (OR SHORTED). THERE MAY BE MORE THAN ONE TERTIARY REASON BUT THIS IS THE BROAD ONE.
One way to test this is by running the motor without any load at a preset voltage. Measure the rpm before and after a steel axle is connected to the motor.
GOOD PLAN!
@PulsedPower,
Yes, everything is exspencive in Norway. :(
By CRO you mean a Catode Ray Oscilloscope?
Groundloop.
[/quote]
When I short the coil the motor stops.
Groundloop.
SO KNOW YOU KNOW THAT MOTOR TYPE DOES NOT WORK BUT LENZ'S LAW DOES.
NOW CHANGE MOTORS UNTIL YOU FIND ONE THAT DOES WORK.
Thane
Anyway it may be that the accelleration effect due to any flux entering the motor is weak and it is totally swamped by the strong pulsating pull of the magnet to the shorted coil. The system that Thane was demonstrating had plenty of inerita compared to the pulstations of the magnets interacting with the coil pole pieces.
THERE IS A THRESHOLD SPEED AT WHICH:
BELOW THIS SPEED = DECELERATION
ABOVE THIS SPEED = ACCELERATION
THIS THRESHOLD IS A FUNCTION OF THE MOTOR - SO YOU HAVE TO GET INTIMATE WITH YOUR MOTOR AND FIND THE RIGHT SPOT. TRY A VARIAC OR BREAK BREAK OUT THAT VIBRATING DRILL.
The other thing I noticed with Thanes setup was that it was a bench grinder, these typically have aluminium end closures meaning that any magnetic flux can easily enter the rotor, If I am not mistaken you motor has a pressed steel end closure which would act as a magnetic shield with an effectiveness that increases with thickness and permeability.
Thanes motor is also running with massive slip (98.5% @ 60 rpm) and may behave very differently to a motor running closer to its design slip.
[/quote]
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE WITH SPEED (OR SLIP) IF THE THRESHOLD SPEED IS IDENTIFIED.
THE EFFECTS ARE STILL THERE AT HIGH SPEEDS BUT LESS NOTICABLE DUE TO THE STORED INERTIA IN THE ROTOR - SO A VIDEO DEMO WOULD BE MORE BORING THAN IT ALREADY IS.
WE ACTUALLY CUT OUT SOME FRAMES IN PART 1 TO BECAUSE THE ROTOR DECELERATES SLOWLY OVER TIME.
Thane
I agree with you about the difference of a motor that runs at slow speeds vs full speed. If the Thane effect is only visible when using a motor at slow speeds then it will be impossible for my motor to show the effect at full speed. I will try to slow down my motor.
IF YOUR SLIP ANGLE IS ZERO (OR VERY CLOSE) HOW CAN YOU INCREASE SPEED BEYOND THAT?
Thane
Are you sure that your steel bar is increasing the voltages in your output coil because of some very low back coupling of bemf to the motor?
THE STEEL BAR IS INCREASING THE VOLTAGES IN THE COIL BECAUSE THE ROTOR IS SPINNING FASTER AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED THAN BEFORE.
MOTOR INPUT HAS NOT INCREASED BUT THE SPEED HAS INCREASED SO MY GENERATOR COIL IS ADHERING TO FARADAY'S LAW OF INDUCTION.
NO STEEL BAR = 70 V
STEEL BAR = 90 V
REASON = INCREASED ROTOR RPM
INCREASED ROTOR RPM REASON = STRONGER MOTOR ROTOR FIELD DUE TO MAGNETIC COUPLING OF PM ROTOR TO MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT AND MORE TORQUE = ACCELERATION.
Thane
Are you sure that your steel bar is increasing the voltages in your output coil because of some very low back coupling of bemf to the motor? The effect could very well be the fact that your motor become more efficient because the steel bar is improving the magnetic field in your motor because of a strengthening of the rotor field in the motor itself.
YES EXACTLY THE NEW DRIVE SHAFT FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL IS DECREASING THE AIR GAP RELUCTANCE BETWEEN THE STATOR AND ROTOR BUT NOW THE NEW ROTOR WEIGHS ANOTHER 10 lbs (ROTOR WEIGHT + MAGNETS + COGGING TORQUE) - RIDDLE ME THAT ONE BATMAN? sorry not correct
I'm in blue.
WITHOUTH THE COIL YOU HAVE NO GENERATOR.
WITH THE 1 COIL YOU HAVE A GENERATOR WITH ALOT OF COGGING TORQUE.= X
PLACE ADDITIONAL COILS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AND THE COGGING TORQUE DECREASES
X / NUMBER OF COILS.
PLACE A HUGE CHUNK OF IRON NEAR THE ROTOR AND YOU HAVE A HYSTERISIS BRAKE.
I know all that and the test would be imperfect but by my understanding it is possible that the coil even when electrically open circuit might be having an effect which could be why you had a result before they were shorted. (being that in my opinion the weak magnetic flux seems like an unlikely culprit by it's self to have the magnitude of effect apparent, and while there is massive slip which makes it seem more plausibly a magnetic only effect the fact it works with a universal motor in which slip has no meaning reduces that explination)
I realize that with one core it wouldn't work (And I really had not thought it through) and would be doubtful with two due to the difference in hysteresis drag, but maybe if identical cores without windings can be tested against open circuit coiled cores, but I don't expect you to try that test and I am far from sure of the result.
Wow, 8 posts in a row, that's pretty impressive Thane.
BTW the best use of your prescious time on here would probably be in giving any suggestions to avoid bung builds like that of groundloops, guide builders around as many pot holes as you can, and give any clues or observations (that it works in universal motors also!), or building tips (for instance I am not sure how I am going to make a version of your brass coupler).
The worst thing that could happen would be for a few bad reproductions to take place and for you to go MIA leaving a lack of confidence in further build replication, still I'm reasonibly optomistic mine will work.
But tips on how to couple shafts to motors and rotors and couplers would be good, and I'm saying that despite having done some before.
Oh, I just realized the test I should have suggested, but see that I may need to do it since it's a big ask.
Run it with a friction load and no stator anythings, then try it again but with no magnets on the rotor, replaced by equivilent weights.
But I really do doubt it's the Neos on the rotor since the poles are a very short distance apart (and the flux is shorted out by the rim of the wheel on the outside) and there is an even number of Norths and South facing the motor, so by all accoints it should be next to didly squat getting to the motor, more likely the steel shaft is a bit magnetically hard and retains a slight magnetic field..
I know all that and the test would be inperfect but by my understanding it is possible that the coil even when electrically open circuit might be having an effect which could be why you had a result before they were shorted.
I DON'T THINK SO BECAUSE I IDENTIFIED THE SAME PHENOMENON WITH MY ELECTRIC DRILL INSTEAD OF THE INDUCTION MOTOR. INCREASED RPM WITH STEEL BAR INSERTED NO COILS AT ALL - JUST A SIMPLE 2 OHM AIR COIL TO MEASURE "RPM".
I realize that with one core it wouldn't work and would be doubtful with two due to the difference in hysteresis drag, but maybe if identical cores without windings can be tested against open circuit coiled cores, but I don't expect you to try that test and I am far from sure of the result.
DID THAT ABOVE.
Wow, 8 posts in a row, that's pretty impressive Thane.
BTW the best use of your prescious time on here would probably be in giving any suggestions to avoid bung builds like that of groundloops,
NO SUCH THING AS BUNG BUILDS IF YOU LEARN SOMETHING ALONG THE WAY.
I HAD 1000'S OF SO CALLED BUNG BUILDS AS DID EDISON AND BELL ETC.
guide builders around as many pot holes as you can, and give any clues or observations (that it works in universal motors also!), or building tips (for instance I am not sure how I am going to make a version of your brass coupler).
USE PVC PIPE.
PURCHASE A I/3 HP BRUSHLESS INDUCTION MOTOR BENCH GRINDER.
MY MOTOR PROF ONCE SAID, "IF ALL ELSE FAILS GO BACK AND READ THE INSTRUCTIONS."
But tips on how to couple shafts to motors and rotors and couplers would be good, and I'm saying that despite having done some before.
USE A THREADED LATHE ARBOUR
OR
1)
PUT YOUR STEEL ROTOR ON ONE SIDE DIRECTLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT.
2)
ON THE OTHER SIDE GLUE PVC PIPE AND ATTACH IT TO ANOTHER BEARING MOUNTED DRIVE SHAFT.
3)
CHANGE THE ROTOR FROM DIRECT MOUNT TO PVC PIPE ISOLATED MOUNT AND SEE THE DIFFERENT EFFECTS.
4)
DON'T RUN YOUR MOTOR AT MAX SPEED EITHER.
5)
EMPLOY ROTOR LEVER ARM TO AMPLIFY LENZ TORQUE EFFECT TO OVERCOME MOTOR POWER.
Thane
TRUE STORY
THE BRASS COUPLER WAS MADE FOR US BY EEC ? ELECTRON ENERGY CORPORATION IN PENNSYLVANIA AFTER 5 HOURS OF TESTING BECAUSE THEIR TWO PH.D?S CONCLUDED THAT MY PVC PIPE WAS ABSORBING THE MOTOR TORQUE THUS CAUSING DECELERATION WHEN THE COILS WERE SHORTED ... ALTHOUGH THERE WAS NO DECELERATION PRIOR TO SHORTING THE COILS?
AFTER THE BRASS COUPLER WAS INSTALLED THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGE IN BEHAVIOR AT ALL SO THEY CONCLUDED THAT THEY COULD NOT EVALUATE THE PROTOTYPE PROPERLY BECAUSE ONE ROTOR WAS SPINNING CLOCKWISE (DIRECT MOUNT) AND THE OTHER COUNTERCLOCKWISE (ISOLATED MOUNT).
AND THEY CALL ME CRAZY!
Thane
hi guys
heres my take i watched the vids and a damm good job done!!!
this apears to be a simple device
what more can i say
lol
to replacate this should be simple to put it to proper use should also be simple lol
so far i have not seen a proper use of this unit however perhaps i can help ;)
ist
TRUE STORY II
SO IN MY NEXT DEMO AT FILTRAN TRANSFORMERS IN OTTAWA I MOUNTED THE COILS SUCH THAT BOTH ROTORS TURNED CLOCKWISE.
I WAS TOLD THAT THE PROTOTYPE DIDN?T WORK BECAUSE THE ACCELERATION WAS CAUSED BY THE GENERATOR COILS FLUX ENTERING THE MOTOR AND AFFECTING THE STATOR FIELD CAUSING ACCELERATION WHICH MEANT IT DIDN?T WORK.
Thane
Thane,
I agree 100% with you. Experiments and real life lab tests is fun and educating.
I have learned a lot about induction motors lately. :D
"I DON'T THINK SO BECAUSE I IDENTIFIED THE SAME PHENOMENON WITH MY ELECTRIC DRILL INSTEAD OF THE INDUCTION MOTOR. INCREASED RPM WITH STEEL BAR INSERTED NO COILS AT ALL - JUST A SIMPLE 2 OHM AIR COIL TO MEASURE "RPM"
You state that a motor will improve its RPM with a steel bar attached. (No coils etc.)
Well, that was exactly my point. Maybe my english is not good enough.
Groundloop.
TRUE STORY III[/b]]TRUE STORY III (http://[b)
IN MY DEMO AT OTTAWA U 2 DAYS AGO THE ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE INVESTOR SAID THAT I OUGHT TO REPLACE MY INDUCTION MOTOR WITH A HAND CRANK.
FOLLOWING THAT I WAS TOLD TO LEAVE THE UNIT RUN FOR A WEEK TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED.
Thane
You state that a motor will improve its RPM with a steel bar attached + ROTOR WITH MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR. (No coils etc.) Well, that was exactly my point. Maybe my english is not good enough.
MAYBE MY EXPLANATION IS NOT GOOD EITHER.
Thane
lol i love it
are you guys presenting somthing ....... or perfecting somthing......
you look right past my words and i laugh lol!!!!!!!!
wise up already
ist
are you guys presenting somthing ....... or perfecting somthing......
PRESENTLY, WE ARE PRESENTING SOMETHING WHICH WE ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY PERFECTING AS WE GO BECAUSE IT IS NOT PERFECT.
you look right past my words and i laugh lol!!!!!!!!
PERHAPS YOUR ENGLISH IS NOT SO GOOD - LAUGHTER IS THE BEST MEDICINE.
wise up already
"THE GREATEST WISDOM IS NOT TO BE WISE"
Tibetan saying
Thane
a suggestion
sure my English sux but ask me if i care lol
OK
throw a real generator on 1 end of it and use the unit that you have as the prime mover only!!!
and as a self acceleration unit then cap the speed at a safe level and basically pulse the bemf to achieve you desired speed and put a Faraday disc Genny on the end of it now you have high amperage unit and at what ever voltage you want ;)
perhaps we have a chat
perhaps we don't lol that is your choice
ist
hey then there is always a tuned coil lol
POSIBILITIES LOL!!! HUMMMMMMMM...........
Quote from: Heinstein on February 23, 2008, 08:23:48 AM
SO YOU HAVE TO GET INTIMATE WITH YOUR MOTOR AND FIND THE RIGHT SPOT.
Old ground.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 23, 2008, 10:27:38 AM
TRUE STORY III[/b]]TRUE STORY III (http://[b)
IN MY DEMO AT OTTAWA U 2 DAYS AGO THE ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE INVESTOR SAID THAT I OUGHT TO REPLACE MY INDUCTION MOTOR WITH A HAND CRANK.
FOLLOWING THAT I WAS TOLD TO LEAVE THE UNIT RUN FOR A WEEK TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED.
Thane
These guy are GENIUS, Hollywood NEEDS THESE ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS TO WRITE COMEDY.
Next time any of us are called crackpots we'll know just how much that is the pot calling the kettle black.
Quote from: JustMe on February 23, 2008, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: Heinstein on February 23, 2008, 08:23:48 AM
SO YOU HAVE TO GET INTIMATE WITH YOUR MOTOR AND FIND THE RIGHT SPOT.
Old ground.
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
I edited a message shortly after writing it but Thane had already replied and I don't think he noticed the revision.
In essence yes I was totally wrong to suggest the test with the stators (hadn't thought it through at all).
The test I should have suggested: (but see that I may need to do it since it's a big ask)
Run it with a friction load and no stator anythings, then try it again but with no magnets on the rotor, replaced by equivilent weights. (monitor the rpm, both tests include full steel shaft)
But I really do doubt it's the Neos on the rotor since the poles are a very short distance apart (and the flux is shorted out by the rim of the wheel on the outside) and there is an even number of Norths and South facing the motor, so by all accoints it should be next to didly squat getting to the motor, more likely the steel shaft is a bit magnetically hard and retains a slight magnetic field..
@groundloop Oops I did read all the posts but replied from memory and missed the bit about the plastic end cover, my mistake. One thing that I did notice was that your motor is a shaded pole motor whereas Thanes motor is a split phase motor. Shaded pole motors have different slip characteristics to split phase phase motors, maybe that is a factor.
@Thane It is possible to make an induction motor exceed it synchronous speed and have negative slip just ny driving it instead of loading it then it supplies power, I have never seen it done with a split phase motor but it is well documented and quite popular with 3 phase motors. Thanks for The clarification on the testing, it wasnt aparent in the first video. Now I am getting interested :)
hello
so i drew you all up a real simple unit thought i wouuld post it and see what ya think lol
i quite like it
ist
Quote from: PulsedPower on February 23, 2008, 09:29:20 PM
@groundloop Oops I did read all the posts but replied from memory and missed the bit about the plastic end cover, my mistake. One thing that I did notice was that your motor is a shaded pole motor whereas Thanes motor is a split phase motor. Shaded pole motors have different slip characteristics to split phase phase motors, maybe that is a factor.
@PulsedPower,
Yes, I agree. I will need the same type of motor as Thane is using.
Groundloop.
@innovation_station,
Could you also provide a short text describing you drawing?
(From Left to Right, perhaps?) E.g. Ball Bearing, Stator Coil, Steel Axle etc.
Thanks,
Groundloop.
Quote from: innovation_station on February 23, 2008, 10:40:47 PM
hello
so i drew you all up a real simple unit thought i wouuld post it and see what ya think lol
i quite like it
I quite like it too, but where are the guns?
What was your main inspiration, Star Trek, BSG, Star Wars, Stargate, B5?
i will label all the parts and repost it
this is by no means perfect altho it is another step along the way ;)
my mind is my insperation ..... do we really need guns??? we all need to get our needs in check b4 our wants lol......
isteam!!
this is by no means perfect altho it is another step along the way ;)
VERY NICE DRAWING
JUST MAKE SURE YOUR KEEPER BEARINGS AND HOUSING ARE STEEL NOT ALUMINUM.
my mind is my insperation ..... do we really need guns??? we all need to get our needs in check b4 our wants lol......
NO GUNS BUT LASERS FOR SURE!
BTW - WHAT IS ALL THAT STUFF ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR MAGNETS?
WHY NOT MAKE YOUR COILS THE STATOR (A BRUSHLESS AC GENERATOR) TO AVOID
ALL THAT BRUSHY CRAP?
Thane
8)
well lets not stop now....... ;D lets buld a few diffrent models hehehehe
varity is the spice......
that is a n machine style generator or a faraday disc style generator or if you prefer hpg or a spg
the reason for this style genny is this there is an unmesureable amount of back torque generated when takeing power from this ....
the brushes well this is how we adjust the output voltage and amparage ;)
the tiny bit of drag from the brushes will be over come by the self accelerating prime mover
now if you want to take this to the next level hummmmmm........
maybe after we get on the same page
ist
These guy are GENIUS, Hollywood NEEDS THESE ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS TO WRITE COMEDY. Next time any of us are called crackpots we'll know just how much that is the pot calling the kettle black.
YOU HAVE NO IDEA - IN THAT SAME DEMO THE "ENGINEER EXPERT" SAID, OK "REGENERATIVE BRAKING RIGHT", I SAID, "YES THAT IS WHAT I AM PROPOSING",
"SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE BATTERY IS FULLY CHARGED," HE COUNTERED - I SAID, "YOU THEN DISCONNECT THE GENERATOR."
"AH HA" HE SAID - "NOW HOW DO YOU KEEP THE CAR GOING IF THE GENERATOR IS DISCONNECTED???"
"UM OFF THE BATTERY?" I SAID SHEEPISHLY.
EVERYTHING I SAID WAS TRUE - JUST ASK LUC HE WAS THERE ALTHOUGH HE HAD TO LEAVE THE ROOM A COUPLE OF TIMES.
FYI - NEW TORONTO STAR ARTICLE (FOLLOW UP) COMING OUT THIS MONDAY.
Thane
well lets not stop now....... ;D lets buld a few diffrent models hehehehe
VERY GOOD IDEA BUT WHY NOT MAKE ONE THAT WORKS 1ST AND THEN CHANGE IT LATER ON?
the reason for this style genny is this there is an unmesureable amount of back torque generated when takeing power from this ....
THE BACK TORQUE CAN BE MEASURED BY SPEED CHANGE/LOAD?
the brushes well this is how we adjust the output voltage and amparage ;)
A MULTIPLE SALIENT POLE BRUSHLESS STATOR GENERATOR CAN DO THE SAME THING AND WAY SIMPLER I WOULD THINK - BUT I'M NO EXPERT.
the tiny bit of drag from the brushes will be over come by the self accelerating prime mover
FINE BUT BRUSHES ARE MESSY AND SO OLD SCHOOL.....................................
now if you want to take this to the next level hummmmmm........
THE NEXT LEVEL WITH LASERS?
maybe after we get on the same page
ME ON YOUR PAGE THAT IS............................................ RIGHT?
FEELS LIKE GOING BACKWARDS TO ME.
I WOULD SUGGEST THE KISS RULE
Thane
"everything should be made as simple as possible - but not simpler."
Albert Einstein
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?
Thane
THAT'S - KEEP IT SIMPLE STIPID NOT YOU CAN KISS MY ASS STUPID CAUSE THIS IS A FAMILY RATED DISCOURSE.
Thane
:)
next level is high speed super conductive materials lol
match the output of this generator is my chalange ......... i said high amparage high voltage low backtorque ........
what is the damn deal with lasers and guns ..........?!?!?!?!?!?!
ist
next level is high speed super conductive materials lol
TOO COLD FOR ME - I ALREADY LIVE IN CANADA.
match the output of this generator is my chalange ......... i said high amparage high voltage low backtorque ........
IF THAT IS YOUR CHALLENGE - THEN YOU NEED HIGH CURRENT - HIGH BACK TORQUE.
what is the damn deal with lasers and guns ..........?!?!?!?!?!?!
WHAT ELSE ARE WE CRAZY HUMANS GOING TO KILL EACH OTHER WITH - KINDNESS?
SADLY WE CAN ONLY DREAM RIGHT?
Thane
Hi Thane,
Thanks for keeping us posted on developments with your work. I'm looking forward to reading the follow up Toronto Star article when it comes out.
I'm also continuing to follow this thread with interest to watch where it and your work leads...
Best,
Johnny
I'm also continuing to follow this thread with interest to watch where it and your work leads...
Best, Johnny
RIGHT NOW I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE THE OVERUNITY MARKETING DEPARTMENT GOOD VALUE FOR THEIR YOUTUBE ADVERTISING DOLLAR.
Thane
i for got to mention superconductive liquid at room tempeture ;)
as mercury did for the n machine of bruce de pualma
and guess what if it gets hot good lol!!!!!!!
we will use the heat to heat the house and hot water lol !!!
useing a liquid cooled copper disc ;)
ist
Quote from: Heinstein on February 24, 2008, 12:46:03 PM
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?
Thane
He was directing that at me, referencing the fact that my sole contribution to this discussion has been lame naughty jokes about running DC motors on AC. :)
Quote from: Heinstein on February 24, 2008, 12:46:03 PM
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?
Thane
Sorry, meant that for JustMe, she has an interesting body of research, in vibrating motors.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 24, 2008, 12:46:03 PM
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?
Thane
Sorry, meant that for JustMe, she has an interesting body of research, in vibrating motors.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 24, 2008, 12:46:03 PM
Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet ;).
SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?
Thane
Sorry, meant that for JustMe, she has an interesting body of research, in vibrating motors.Whoops,
double Tripple post, can't delete it.
Hey, JustMe, can you compete with that! Can you do 3 in a row? I bet you can't, but I wanna see you try!
Ok, no more dirty jokes I promise.
He was directing that at me, referencing the fact that my sole contribution to this discussion has been lame naughty jokes about running DC motors on AC. :)
COULD IT BE BECAUSE YOU ARE SO CRAZY BUSY OVER AT THE SKEPTIC FRIENDS NETWORK? http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9484&whichpage=7
I THINK YOU OUGHT TO ASK SOME OF THESE CHAPS TO HELP YOU OUT OVER THERE?
Thane
"You know, technically, he never said either that he wouldn't do them or hadn't done some form of them already. He implied...something...with "I can do a lot in 30 seconds". He hasn't, directly, said any one device was overunity. I don't think? It's rather muddy.
He stated unequivocally that he feels the effect violates Conservation of Energy principles via Lenz, but has skirted saying the current applications of it produce free energy. So given that, I don't think he needs to produce eureka numbers anyway. Just a sense that he is acting appropriately science-y. Like my son! Who won third place at his school science fair today. Perpetual bread mold.
Now I have no excuse not to finish what I started. Since Mr. Heins has now commenced shooting himself in the foot, I think I'll wait for a few more toes to fly, making the whole argument that much more difficult, and therefore, fun.
This Perepetia stuff is all superfluous anyway. Some guy from Toronto invented the paint roller in 1940, and the world is owed nothing more from Canada.
I can't hit the forum right now either, but I think what he said was "unquantified opinion". Either way, it's not the right response given the circumstances. He does indeed seem to be showing the strain of all this, and while his emotional commitment is understandable from a human perspective, it ain't good science.
Heins' response to Dr. Zahn's email can be found at http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.315.html for anybody who may be interested. I posted the URL (which I hope is pithy enough for all) rather than the text because there are some other comments there that were interesting (to me) as well, and the dialog may be ongoing for a bit.
I've thought for a few days that his lack of discretion with all the posting of the private email and conversations and such is probably going to cost him. I wouldn't be surprised if the NASA invitation, if it had been confirmed at all, evaporates.
I didn't in any way imply it was bad sharp, or innapropriately sharp, just that it was sharp. Which on the matter of Mr. Heins' beliefs that he has something that breaks the laws of physics, it is. It's the first feedback of sorts we have from Dr. Zahn, and I thought it good information. *Of course* any specific tests and measurements he can recommend are important, and a positive step towards understanding the effect.
Are people on here going to misunderstand me forever, or just until we stop talking about this?
The behaviour of his device remains unexplained at this time, so this is still a puzzle that is to me worthy of exploration and explanation. When and if that puzzle is solved it will add to human knowledge on some level, so for me there is very broad definition of success. Anything from a mundane "Oh THAT'S what was happening" to something useful and applicable to a world slowly choking on it's own exhaust will contribute something to the pool.
Do I think Mr. Heins' device throws over centuries of careful observations in phsyics and mathematics? Unlikely. Do I think that as of today we've discovered and mastered every method and every source of energy we ever will? Equally unlikely. As unintuitive as it may feel, his observations do justify his hypothesis as it relates to Lenz's law. Note I said 'justify' which is nothing close to 'prove'. There have been other hypotheses presented as well, and they all require vigourous proofs or disproofs equally, no matter their source.
You think he is scripted, and I think YOU are scripted. I am just not perceiving the objectivity and analytic processes I expected here, but maybe I just don't understand the percieved role of a capital "S" skeptic. I am also not perceiving what he has done to warrant the very personal derision. Attack the methods when appropriate, but what has given you license to attack the man? I find it thoughtless, as in both without adequate thought and without adequate consideration. Maybe this is just not of sufficient interest to people who have been there done that too many times, and therefore it doesn't warrant a serious look.
So maybe it *is* me, but I can assure you it's not because I'm not thinking critically and you are.
Thanks for illustrating my point so nicely. And so quickly!
Here are the facts:
-Heins' generator is sitting in a lab at the University of Ottawa, and has been for some time. So you're right, it wouldn't be hard for them to run some tests. Which might explain why they have, and continue to do so. They have been unable to establish a cause for the behaviour of the device, and thus asked MIT to get involved.
-According to Heins, Marcus Zahn of MIT was offered $20,000 to study the device and document and report his findings, but has declined. There is a follow up article forthcoming in the Toronto Star tomorrow according to Heins, and I am hoping that may provide further information as to why Zahn will not be further involved.
-Heins has been handing out tips, tricks and traps for replicating his device on overunity.com for days. There is certainly the appearance of him supporting and facilitating replication at this time. The proof of that will have to wait for a successful replication.
So, Dude. Help ME understand why you felt justified in implying that the default assumption on Mr. Heins should be retard and/or scam artist based on a bunch of clearly unresearched nonsense. My point is, and always has been, that there is a legitimate process going on here that does not deserve the mindless snark. Even if it all turns to nothing."
JustMe
I believe this is a serious discussion of a real scientific/marketing opportunity -- so why all the interpersonal crap at the end of this discussion?
"I believe this is a serious discussion of a real scientific/marketing opportunity -- so why all the interpersonal crap at the end of this discussion?"
ANONYMITY NEGATES RESPONSIBILITY.
HERE CHECK OUT OUR NASA ABSTRACT.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 24, 2008, 04:38:30 PM
So, Dude. Help ME understand why you felt justified in implying that the default assumption on Mr. Heins should be retard and/or scam artist based on a bunch of clearly unresearched nonsense. My point is, and always has been, that there is a legitimate process going on here that does not deserve the mindless snark. Even if it all turns to nothing.[/i]"
JustMe
The problem JustMe is that they aren't Skeptics.
That's just what they call themselves but they aren't, I am a skeptic, I doubt something but openly investigate it and let the weight of evidence tell me what's up.(ultimately realizing that my preconceived notions of how things are or aren't are worthless, indeed the core beliefs held by even the wisest in a society are turned upside down every 50-150 years)
But 'Skeptics' aren't actually willing to consider anything outside of their very limited world as even being possible.
They can't explain why this or that is categorically impossible and if it is how they could have the all knowing ability to say so. (knowing what is, is one thing, knowing what is not is quite another)
If you can find me someone who identifies themselves and who others identify as a skeptic and is actually willing to believe that _Blank_ is possible and is willing to give anything like a fair assessment then I'll um, post a video on youtube!
Where is the greatest strength? In insisting that something isn't possible and attacking it ruthlessly by any means and ignoring anything inconvenient.
Or in looking into something you find hard to believe determined to let the evidence speak for it's self no matter how uncomfortable or foreign it may be and no matter how much the former may ridicule you.
Of course I'm preaching to the chior.
Without getting something made for me at my nearest friendly metal worker the largest (single piece rotor) I can do is 29.5cm diameter steel disk.
I can go up to 37CM but what would be 2 pieces, the outside ring and a center disk which was cut out of it to make the ring, I don't have welding equipment so the best I could do would be to attach both to a wooden disk I've got but that would leave a 1mm air gap and I'd be scared that similar to the design of your toroid transormer the flux would be disinterested in jumping the airgap to leave the ring, so I think I'll go for the 29.5cm option unless Thane feels it's worth going large anyway? (but if that doesn't work I'll take luc up of his offer to ship a wheelbarrow wheel)
Though if i want to increase drag I could look at making a prony break (a friction break used to measure motor output)
Not quite sure how I'm going to mount the disk on the shaft, despite having had to do it before I've never found a perfect answer.
Oh and I managed to get to about $20NZD per KG for magnet wire which is a huge improvment, though that's 30% higher than the prices Pulsed_Power quotes the waiting and shipping costs probably make it worth getting locally.
Assuming my rotor (a few mm think steel circle) is Ok and I've got wire sorted then the next thing to tackle is the shaft and electromagnet cores, will be watching the videos again to get a better idea of core sizes.
There is an induction motor I can get for $60, it's 2nd hand. But would want to veriy what type of induction motor Thane is using in his generator demo, shaded pole or split phase? (makes sense if I go to the bother of buying something special for the experiment I get as close as possible, I wish I could have Thanes philosphical view on failed experiments but they just hurt)
If anyone knows of a cheap appliance I could pull an indiction motor out of speak up.
I should have plenty of Neo's but all in all it will likely take about a week+ to get it all put together, mounting various things, waiting for parts to arrive. In fact how much would I have to pay for luc to send a whole working demo unit seriously?
Seems to me that if there is any gain being created, you would get twice the amount of gain if you simply built an identical wheel holding identical magnets positioned on the opposite side of the coils. Meaning that the coils have magnets on both sides. Just saying...
@aether22
Good to see you found a better source of magnet wire, the price I quoted was couple of years old and the price of copper has been up and down like a yo yo.
As for Thanes motor, while I can't be 100% certain I can come close that Thanes motor is a split phase, it is just a bench grinder, some are cap start cap run, others are cap start only. I have never seen a shaded pole grinder probably because the torque characteristics are unsuitable, grinders being constant speed variable load machines.. Shaded pole motors are popular on fans because thay are contant torque machines, speed can be varied by changing the input voltage.
Sources for induction motors, bench grinder ( 1/3 to 1hp) pool pumps photo copiers for small split phase motors even old washing machines though many of these are split phase with no capacitor. Many front loaders are cap start cap run with a 4 and a 16 pole motor in the same housing. The way that Thane is running them needs some form of current control, a 3000 rpm bench grinder motor will smoke very quickly at 70 rpm if there is not current limiting.
For a load, car power steering pumps are good, no magnetics to interfere with the experiment and they can be set up as contant torque or rising torque with RPM, in direct drive they can stall a 1hp motor, a bit of hydraulic hose makes a cheap shaft coupler. Technically they are a compensating vane pump with set pressure around 1500psi Throttle though a valve to load the motor.
Thane, while I can see plenty of reasons not to specify too much in replication of your effect since it would reduce how readily replications can be made (and ultimatly perfect replications are impossible and often unneeded) I believe that a 'Document' should be put together hitting on every factor and indicating in each case how much leway is believed to exist in each part. (Sure, stupid replications will still happen sadly but this should help those commited to doing it right)
Please realize that when people spend money and time with high hope to replicate something only to have it fail possibly because of incomplete info to accuratly replicate, they learn to seek more complete info.
Looking through the skeptic forum I partly agreed with:
4) Heins' support has mostly been "watch these videos," a poor substitue for handing out careful schematics.
5) When others fail to replicate Heins' effect, Heins tells them it's their problem, even before knowing the details.
If Heins is following the typical crackpot script, as the above suggests
Full details of the motor, I just turned down a 1/2hp motor because I was not sure if a 1/4 inch shaft might be too small for the flux/aether/whatever. (now looking at your video again I would estimate the steel rod in the brass coupler is about 1/4 inch)
And there are various types of induction motor, also possibly important? Is not having a magnetic steel face plate on it.
Also replicators should be warned to check with a magnet that the shaft is of a magnetic steel.
Anyone know of a easy way to limit the power of an induction motor? Variacs aren't cheap and my one (actually an autotransformer) is in poor shape)
A PVC non magnetic coupler sounds like a good idea, if you want to expand how you attached that to each shaft.
Were the bearings between the motor and generator made of a steel that is strongly attracted to a magnet? (could they divert the flux? If yours were and it still worked that would be good to know)
In your motor gen setup are there any air gaps from the magnet to the motor shaft? I there are 2 where you insert the steel piece in your brass coupler, what about how your rotor attaches to the shaft?
Anyway here is my crack at it (forgive me for mixing metric and imperial), measurements guessed at from the video.
A 1/4hp induction motor (shaft size down to as low as 1/4in should be fine). With starter cap.
Brass coupler though PVC is more practical, tested with and without a ferrous steel bar 1/4inch dia approx 9cm long, try to keep gaps between bar and shafts as tight as possible.
A bearing to hold the shaft, unknown but possibly best to find one which is at most weakly magnetic.
Rotor is a steel wheelbarrow wheel, about 27cm Diameter, with 6 strong spokes (also appear to be about 1/4 inch).
Magnets are Neodymium. Iron & Boron, about 30mm dia and appear to be about 12mm thick, there are 18 of them in a n/s/n/s pattern. (It is not known if a solid steel generator rotor would work but it is being tested with no real reason to expect failure)
The greater the diameter the greater the leverage the generator drag has on the motor, if the motor is too near it's max speed little speed increase will be seen, never the less the effect is noticed in the gear reduced universal motors used in drills. If the motor isn't turning it fast enough it will slow down, there is a feedback effect where the faster the motor turns the greater the back emf, the more the back-emf accelerates the motor. Tuning the effect to the motor for the most dramatic results may require experimentation and something to control the power going to the motor.]
Beware of excessive cogging torque or hysteresis that may stop the mottor dead immediatly with or without magnetic coupling to the motor.
The core the coil is wound on is made of a magnetic steel, it is not laminated so has high core losses as intendid.
It appears to be about the same diameter as the magnets and looks to be 12cm long.
The coil is of wire assumed to be about 22AWG or in the neighbourhood but it likely is not too important.
The mass of wire probably is more important and it seems to be about 1cm shorter than the core at the back and probably also the front end, it seems to increase the diameter by about another 30mm.
I intend on using 24AWG which is usefully about .5mm thick so that would be about 6,000 turns.
There must be a complete magnetic circuit from the Neodymium magnets to the motor shaft.
These measurements are all estimates and could be easily out +/- 15% possibly even more.
Provided that there is a direct complete ferrious magnetic path to the motor and it isn't running unloaded there is a good chance this effect can be seen on some level with quite different setups other than the one described.
But it is possible that there are unknown conditions the effect may rely on. (the shape of the rotor? The coil core supporting eddy currents? etc...)
A list of ideas for experimentation may well follow.
PulsedPower, that's an excellent info dense post, thanks.
@aether I will give shaft dimensions whch cover the vast majority of 8" bench grinders: I have 4 of them :) Thread 5/8 UNC LH on one side RH on the other. Shaft reduced diameter 5/8" (16mm) shaft diameter entering motor 20mm or 25mm depending on machine shaft entering rotor 1" (25.4mm) or 1 1/8" If in doubt go to a hardware and measure one I think that Thanes grinder might be a 6" but the 5/8" shaft is pretty much standard as it fits most wheels and wheel adapters They are an abusive lot over at the Skeptics aren't they?
Subject: WTF
From: JustMe
Today at 12:02:42 AM
"Why did you do that to me? I'm working my ass off over there defending you at no benefit to me, and as you've seen they've been pretty rough on me. Some people give you money to help, some people give you ideas. I don't have either, so I'm doing what I can at the grassroots to fight in some small way the difficult and largely unjustified atmosphere of skeptecism in which you and other pioneers have to operate. And somehow you're making me feel like you're calling me out and exposing me for doing something slighty slimy."
Dear NotMe,
I WOULDN?T WASTE TOO MUCH TIME IN YOUR SELF IMPOSED STATE OF DENIAL.
IF YOU ARE SINCERE AND YOU WANT TO HELP - DON?T DO IT FOR ME EITHER ? DO IT FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN FIGHTING AND DYING IN IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN RIGHT NOW SO WE CAN ENJOY LOWER GAS PRICES HERE AT HOME. DO IT FOR THEIR CHILDREN AND SO MOMMY OR DADDY CAN COME HOME SAFE ASAP.
DO IT FOR THE FARMER AND HIS FAMILY IN DARFUR WHO IS BEING HUNTED DOWN BY CHINESE GOVERNMENT PAID HIT MEN TO MAKE ROOM FOR OIL WELLS AND PIPELINES.
DO IT FOR THE PEOPLE OF ALBERTA WHO SIT IDLY BY WHILE 1/3 OF THEIR PROVINCE IS RAPED AND FOREVER DESTROYED SO OIL CAN BE SHIPPED TO THE UNITED STATES.
SOME OF THE THINGS YOU SAID MAY ACTUALLY BE TRUE ? LIKE NASA WITHDRAWING THEIR OFFER. THAT IS NOT IMPORTANT ? WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT THIS INFORMATION AND EXPLORATION OF THIS TECHNOLOGY IS MADE PUBLIC AND STAYS PUBLIC IF WE ARE ALL TO KEEP IT ALIVE.
Sincerely
Thane
There is an induction motor I can get for $60, it's 2nd hand. But would want to veriy what type of induction motor Thane is using in his generator demo, shaded pole or split phase?
CAPACITOR START http://www.homedepot.ca/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prodmap_932134_932134_10051_-15_10051_mode+matchallpartial_mode+matchall_0_0_level1_Ryobi
(makes sense if I go to the bother of buying something special for the experiment I get as close as possible, I wish I could have Thanes philosphical view on failed experiments but they just hurt)
LEAVE YOUR EGO AT THE DOOR THEN AND DO IT FOR THE SAME REASONS I SUGGESTED TO NOTME.
In fact how much would I have to pay for luc to send a whole working demo unit seriously?
ASSUMING LUC OR STEVE? HAD THE TIME IT WOULD COST ABOUT $750.00 CANADIAN TO BUILD + SHIPPING. IF THEY WON'T DO IT I WILL - IN FACT I HAVE A SPARE ROTOR & MOTOR I CAN SEND YOU FOR $300 CANADIAN + SHIPPING IT'S MY BACKUP BUT I DON'T NEED IT ANYMORE. IT IS AN 18 POLE ROTOR MAGNETS INCLUDED - YOU MAKE THE COILS.
Thane
Seems to me that if there is any gain being created, you would get twice the amount of gain if you simply built an identical wheel holding identical magnets positioned on the opposite side of the coils. Meaning that the coils have magnets on both sides. Just saying...
YES VERY GOOD IDEA - OR COILS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROTOR.
Thane
The way that Thane is running them needs some form of current control, a 3000 rpm bench grinder motor will smoke very quickly at 70 rpm if there is not current limiting.
USE A VARIAC TO CONTROL I/P OR A 600 W CEiLING FAN SPEED CONTROLER.
Thane
8)
well folks i offer any help i can offer ........
and
well i have a few words for you all GET ER DONE
@ Thaine in the next comming months i may have some time and some materials laying around to build a real nice unit for demonstration perpousous on this site but being this is your tech i would like to work with you on this and im also in canada lol ontario in fact and really not all that far from you
yea im sure i can put my hands where my mouth is lol
hey maybe even my pocket too lol
ist
Please realize that when people spend money and time with high hope to replicate something only to have it fail possibly because of incomplete info to accuratly replicate, they learn to seek more complete info.
IF YOU WENT ONLINE AND PURCHASED A HOME DEPOT 6" BENCH GRINDER (1/2 " ARBOUR),
A LEE VALLEY 10" WHEEL BARREL WHEEL, 12 - 1" LEE VALLEY MAGNETS MAGNETS W/ CUP HOLDERS - YOU WOULD BE 3/4's OF THE WAY THERE. THEN MAKE A COIL AND YOU ARE DONE.
Looking through the skeptic forum I partly agreed with:
4) Heins' support has mostly been "watch these videos," a poor substitue for handing out careful schematics.
5) When others fail to replicate Heins' effect, Heins tells them it's their problem, even before knowing the details. If Heins is following the typical crackpot script, as the above suggests
I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE CRACKPOT SCRIPT CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
Full details of the motor, I just turned down a 1/2hp motor because I was not sure if a 1/4 inch shaft might be too small for the flux/aether/whatever. (now looking at your video again I would estimate the steel rod in the brass coupler is about 1/4 inch)
- RYOBI 6" BENCH GRINDER - I/2 INCH ARBOUR.
And there are various types of induction motor, also possibly important? Is not having a magnetic steel face plate on it.
RYOBI 6" BENCH GRINDER HAS A STEEL HOUSING.
Also replicators should be warned to check with a magnet that the shaft is of a magnetic steel.
Anyone know of a easy way to limit the power of an induction motor? Variacs aren't cheap and my one (actually an autotransformer) is in poor shape)
USE A CEILING FAN SWITCH OR A STEP DOWN TRANSFORMER OR MAKE A VARIABLE INDUCTOR.
A PVC non magnetic coupler sounds like a good idea, if you want to expand how you attached that to each shaft.
GLUE IT W/ EPOXY
Were the bearings between the motor and generator made of a steel that is strongly attracted to a magnet? (could they divert the flux? If yours were and it still worked that would be good to know)
ALUMINUM BEARINGS
WHERE WOULD THEY DIVERT IT TO?
MAGNETIC FLUX NEEDS A CLOSED LOOP LIKE ELECTRICITY.
In your motor gen setup are there any air gaps from the magnet to the motor shaft?
THE MAGNETS ARE ATTACHED TO THE STEEL ROTOR.
I there are 2 where you insert the steel piece in your brass coupler,
THERE IS A 3" AIR GAP INSIDE THE BRASS COUPLER - TO WHICH A 3" STEEL BAR IS INSERTED CHANGING THE SETUP FROM MAGNETICALLY ISOLATED TO MAGNETICALLY COUPLED.
what about how your rotor attaches to the shaft?
THE WAGON WHEEL "ROTOR" IS MADE TO ATTACH TO A 1/2" SHAFT AND THE BENCH DRINDER SHAFT IS THREADED AND A NUT IS PROVIDED BY RYOBI TO SECURE THE ROTOR.
Anyway here is my crack at it (forgive me for mixing metric and imperial), measurements guessed at from the video. THAT'S CRACK POT ATTEMPT RIGHT?
A 1/4hp induction motor (shaft size down to as low as 1/4in should be fine). With starter cap.
GOOD.
Brass coupler though PVC is more practical, tested with and without a ferrous steel bar 1/4inch dia approx 9cm long, try to keep gaps between bar and shafts as tight as possible.
GOOD.
A bearing to hold the shaft, unknown but possibly best to find one which is at most weakly magnetic.
THE TYPE OF BEARING HAS NO BEARING USE STEEL IF REQUIRED.
Rotor is a steel wheelbarrow wheel, about 27cm Diameter, with 6 strong spokes (also appear to be about 1/4 inch).
COULD ALSO BE SOLID - DOES NOT REQUIRE SPOKES.
Magnets are Neodymium. Iron & Boron, about 30mm dia and appear to be about 12mm thick, there are 18 of them in a n/s/n/s pattern. (It is not known if a solid steel generator rotor would work but it is being tested with no real reason to expect failure)
GOOD
- GO WITH A 6 POLE ROTOR - LESS WEIGHT, BETTER PERFORMANCE - LIGHTER FLYWHEEL - THE 18 POLE WAS MOSTLY FOR TESTING THE TOROID COIL.
The greater the diameter the greater the leverage the generator drag has on the motor,
IN THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR MODE - YOUR TEST CONTROL VARIABLE.
if the motor is too near it's max speed little speed increase will be seen, never the less the effect is noticed in the gear reduced universal motors used in drills.
GOOD.
LITTLE OR NO SPEED INCREASE WILL BE SEEN - BUT IT SHOULD NOT DECELERATE EITHER WHEN MAGNETICALLY COUPLED - AND SHOULD DECELERATE WHEN MAGNETICALLY ISOLATED.
If the motor isn't turning it fast enough it will slow down, there is a feedback effect where the faster the motor turns the greater the back emf, the more the back-emf accelerates the motor.
GOOD.
THERE IS A THRESHOLD SPEED WHERE THE GENERATOR RPM NEEDS TO BE ABOVE THAT
TO PRODUCE ENOUGH MMF's TO MAKE INTO THE MOTOR.
Tuning the effect to the motor for the most dramatic results may require experimentation and something to control the power going to the motor.
GOOD
LIKE A VARIAC, CEILING FAN SPEED ADJUSTER, VARIABLE INDUCTOR, OR YOU CAN ALSO EMPLOY THE HYSTERISIS BRAKE EFFECT BY PUTTING SOME IRON NEAR YOUR ROTOR MAGNETS.
Beware of excessive cogging torque or hysteresis that may stop the mottor dead immediatly with or without magnetic coupling to the motor.
GOOD
BEWARE OF IT OR USE IT TO YOUR ADVANTAGE.
The core the coil is wound on is made of a magnetic steel, it is not laminated so has high core losses as intendid.
NO GOOD
THE MORE EFFICIENT YOUR COIL THE BETTER.
I MADE 100's OF COILS OVER 5 YEARS SO TO SAVE TIME I USED CHEAP READILY AVAILABE STEEL.
USE THE BEST CORE MATERIAL YOU CAN FIND.
It appears to be about the same diameter as the magnets and looks to be 12cm long.
GOOD
THE AREA OF THE CORE DICTATES MAGNETIC FIELD MMF MAGNITUDE.
MINE ARE ALL VARIOUS SIZES TO TEST DIFFERENT EFFECT BUT THEY ALL WORK.
The coil is of wire assumed to be about 22AWG or in the neighbourhood but it likely is not too important.
GOOD.
THE WIRE GUAGE WILL DICTATE CURRENT MAGNITUDE SO DON'T GO TOO SMALL OR YOUR INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL BE SMALL AS WELL.
The mass of wire probably is more important and it seems to be about 1cm shorter than the core at the back and probably also the front end, it seems to increase the diameter by about another 30mm.
?????
IDEALLY THE COIL SHOULD BE PROFESIONALLY MADE AND VERY SYMETRICAL - THE LENGTH HAS AN EFFECT ALSO ON THE MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCED.
I intend on using 24AWG which is usefully about .5mm thick so that would be about 6,000 turns.
GOOD
There must be a complete magnetic circuit from the Neodymium magnets to the motor shaft.
YES GOOD SORT OF?
IF YOU MEAN A COMPLETE FERROMAGNETIC FLUX PATH - YES.
FOR BEST PERFORMANCE THERE SHOULD BE A CLOSED MAGNETIC CIRCUIT BETWEEN A NORTH POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR AND A SOUTH POLE ON THE ROTOR.
- THE COIL CAN ALSO BE A SINGLE SOLENOID AS WELL.
These measurements are all estimates and could be easily out +/- 15% possibly even more.
RIGHT.
Provided that there is a direct complete ferrious magnetic path to the motor and it isn't running unloaded there is a good chance this effect can be seen on some level with quite different setups other than the one described.
GOOD - PERHAPS
BUT WITH THE MASS OF THE ROTOR AND THE COGGING TORQUE THE MOTOR IS LOADED.
DID YOU MEAN GENERATOR?
But it is possible that there are unknown conditions the effect may rely on. (the shape of the rotor?
ROUND IS A GOOD ROTOR SHAPE.
The coil core supporting eddy currents? etc...)
BEST TO USE CORE MATERIAL WITH A THIN HYSTERISIS CURVE FOR BEST RESULTS.
A list of ideas for experimentation may well follow.
GOOD.
PulsedPower, that's an excellent info dense post, thanks.
HEY WHAT ABOUT ME GUYS?
CAN SOMEONE GET ME OFF THE CRACK POT LIST NOW PLEASE ???
Thane
Thane, sorry for causing you any stress, but thanks for giving more complete info.
IF YOU WENT ONLINE AND PURCHASED A HOME DEPOT 6" BENCH GRINDER (1/2 " ARBOUR),
A LEE VALLEY 10" WHEEL BARREL WHEEL, 12 - 1" LEE VALLEY MAGNETS MAGNETS W/ CUP HOLDERS - YOU WOULD BE 3/4's OF THE WAY THERE. THEN MAKE A COIL AND YOU ARE DONE.
Can't find the wheelbarrow wheel online, will proceed with by solid rotor and ask Luc to send me one if I fail to get decent results.
Just bought a grinder, not that one since shipping would have added to the time and cost too much, hope the one I got suits but the price was right, $10NZ in a local auction.
I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE CRACKPOT SCRIPT CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
Here you go
Be very hard to understand and technically ignorant F
Be secretive F-
Keep real keys to it's success hidden F (I hope)
Decide humanity isn't ready for it F
Give no or very poor instructions or plans E-
Know almost nothing of how it works F
Rave on about UFO's, Angels, Channeled info etc... F-
Hold out for Money money money!!, screw the world, even sell out -F
Create crazy theories (I hate theories, one should wait until a mountain of evidence paints undeniably clear picture) -F
Insist that OU isn't possible even as you clearly demonstrates it F
Turn out to be mistaken or scamming F (I'm sure)
Ignore danger posed by Oil and such F
Is dismissive and disinterested in verification from respected scientists F <The one I would personally score most highly on, I have very low respect or care for them
Overall result F, you fail to be any decent crackpot at all!
COULD ALSO BE SOLID - DOES NOT REQUIRE SPOKES. - He reasonably assumed, or so I assume
there are 18 of them
GOOD
- GO WITH A 6 POLE ROTOR - LESS WEIGHT, BETTER PERFORMANCE - LIGHTER FLYWHEEL - THE 18 POLE WAS MOSTLY FOR TESTING THE TOROID COIL.
Ah, should make it a bit easier attaching only 6 magnets.
A VARIAC, CEILING FAN SPEED ADJUSTER, VARIABLE INDUCTOR, OR YOU CAN ALSO EMPLOY THE HYSTERISIS BRAKE EFFECT BY PUTTING SOME IRON NEAR YOUR ROTOR MAGNETS.
I'm going to look into the costs of the ceiling fan controller but would like to ask anyone experienced with MOSFET circuits to design a suited circuit that might hopefully be built for a few dollars. (I suck at designing mosfet circuits)
The core the coil is wound on is made of a magnetic steel, it is not laminated so has high core losses as intended.
NO GOOD
But the aim is to slow the motor slow down with drag no? Indeed we are increasing the rotor diameter to ensure this.
Though if you want to reach OU maybe laminated high quality is best, but then again unless you have verified it I think it remains speculation, just because you don't know why such would be critical does not mean it may not be until pr oven otherwise by experiment. (Can we say it is improbable that such is required but not impossible unless you have tested it already)
THE MORE EFFICIENT YOUR COIL THE BETTER.
I MADE 100's OF COILS OVER 5 YEARS SO TO SAVE TIME I USED CHEAP READILY AVAILABE STEEL.
USE THE BEST CORE MATERIAL YOU CAN FIND.
What changed? what was wrong with your first ones or right about your last ones?
THE WIRE GUAGE WILL DICTATE CURRENT MAGNITUDE SO DON'T GO TOO SMALL OR YOUR INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD WILL BE SMALL AS WELL.
Yes but most times thinner wire means more turns in the same space, so higher voltage induced with equal increases in voltage and resistance.
So less current flows but you get turns so the field stays the same. Now something weird might be (IS) happening so you can not be sure sure of otherwise normal physics working as expected. if in doubt replicate the original before changing anything.
The mass of wire probably is more important and it seems to be about 1cm shorter than the core at the back and probably also the front end, it seems to increase the diameter by about another 30mm.
?????
IDEALLY THE COIL SHOULD BE PROFESIONALLY MADE AND VERY SYMETRICAL - THE LENGTH HAS AN EFFECT ALSO ON THE MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCED.
Ah, no what I mean is that the coil increases the total diameter by 3cm on top of the cores 3cm so the core and coil is about 6cm diameter IF my estimation is reasonably accurate.
These measurements are all estimates and could be easily out +/- 15% possibly even more.
RIGHT.
There was a hint that maybe you missed ;) maybe I can get Luc to get busy with a ruler next time he visits.
Though I do believe there is enough info to make a successful replication quite straight forward, so I'm probably being silly.
Though if I ever invent an important device my first action will be to video construction of one or more in as much detail as possible, preferably hold a work shop where many can build it and upload that to youtube with parts lists and plans etc...
BUT WITH THE MASS OF THE ROTOR AND THE COGGING TORQUE THE MOTOR IS LOADED.
DID YOU MEAN GENERATOR?
I mean a magnetic path from gen to motor, but possibly not the one running the generator, of course that would remove the feedback effect but it would be interesting to investigate the effect more in isolation.
ROUND IS A GOOD ROTOR SHAPE.
This is the kind of critical information I'm glad you just shared! think of all the shapes I could have tried first!
BEST TO USE CORE MATERIAL WITH A THIN HYSTERISIS CURVE FOR BEST RESULTS.
I'll do one of each, I have a stack of I bar laminations from a transformer perfect for this.
HEY WHAT ABOUT ME GUYS?
You did excellent, you just made it a whole lot easier to replicate, thx!
CAN SOMEONE GET ME OFF THE CRACK POT LIST NOW PLEASE ???
You're off! ;)
I noticed that he uses a fan to keep the grinding wheel motor cool and I am wondering that if was powered with pulses instead of direct current by using a relay, could that be used to help keep the motor cool by using the collapsing field of the relay pulsed to the motor in between the pulsed main power.
Would that also help make the operation more efficient? Couldn't this concept be used with all electric powered motors?
I have seen where this concept was used in helping keep electrolizer cells cooler and yet also helped the efficientcy of the operation.
Also, couldn't the magnets on the wheel be wrapped with windings and then tied in to the coils output to help create more electricity?
Ok, now to new stuff.
First, Is there anyone reading this who is sure they can design an effective mosfet based power control circuit? (I suck at MOSFET circuit design)
Ok, Now on to experiments to do with your shiny new PERI.. PEARAP.. PEREPITE ahh um, Thane Heins based Motor Gen. replication.
After you have done what is shown in the demo video parts 1 and 2 try the following...
Divert some or all of the 'Back-EMF' into a motor other than the one driving the Generator (maybe drive the gen by belt to leave the shaft free and clear, getting the motor driving it to go as fast as possible, possibly friction loading the motor under test)
Switch the motor with other devices, such as a poor inductor with lots of core loss.
Or a transformer, preferably apply the backemf to the secondary of a transformer without a closed magnetic core, a loose coupling transformer would be ideal. (note: if you think about it, if it works for a motor there is no way it should know not to wiork for a transformer)
Or into another more conventional and possibly belt driven generator.
Short the generator coil into an identical coil not situatred around the generator rotor, see if this coil when put next to the shaft of a loaded motor (or better have a shaft between motor and core) speeds it up about as much as the other coil does through the rotor and shaft.
If it works then measure the current and recreate the current (magnitude and freq) by normal means (signal gen etc).
See if it is as effective when applied to an electric motor, the possibility is that so callerd cold current flowing through most such generator setups might be the real key to the effects seen and as such the generator current may have a far greater effect than the conventional simulated current.
Another possibility is to remove all the stators and add a friction break, them remove the magnets but replace something of same weight in the same place, compare speed with previous test, should be higher speed with magnets installed
Whoa, very tired, no spell checking this time, keep falling asleep...
;D
mosfets hummmmm
i hear that i say junk lol
a waste of time
may i suggest what muller should have done perhaps he did
TUBES ;D
;) ;) ;D
OR A MECHANICAL OSC or a VIBRATOR eh!!! justme ?? lol
ist
but hey if we were real slick it would already be done ...... and the coils built with this in mind ..... as i see it every time the mag passes the coil this makes and breakes the curcit as would the tubes or the fets or the vibrator lol
i think a few more things should come in to play here verry soon
as i said muller hummmm 16 magnets and 15 coils ringggg a bell easy turn method lol
just toooo many ways to achive the same result eh?!?!?!?!
so
why does thanes unit self accelerate?!?!?!?!?!
ah
the answer
because the kickback is harnessed electrictaly and converted to magnetic engery and dumped via the steel shaft to the rotor of the induction motor thus increaseing the strength in the rotor feild of the induction motor and accelerating it
no ?
yes this is much like a mechanical tpu in a run away mode ;)
ist
Quote from: Heinstein on February 25, 2008, 05:05:02 AM
There is an induction motor I can get for $60, it's 2nd hand. But would want to veriy what type of induction motor Thane is using in his generator demo, shaded pole or split phase?
CAPACITOR START http://www.homedepot.ca/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prodmap_932134_932134_10051_-15_10051_mode+matchallpartial_mode+matchall_0_0_level1_Ryobi
(makes sense if I go to the bother of buying something special for the experiment I get as close as possible, I wish I could have Thanes philosphical view on failed experiments but they just hurt)
LEAVE YOUR EGO AT THE DOOR THEN AND DO IT FOR THE SAME REASONS I SUGGESTED TO NOTME.
In fact how much would I have to pay for luc to send a whole working demo unit seriously?
ASSUMING LUC OR STEVE? HAD THE TIME IT WOULD COST ABOUT $750.00 CANADIAN TO BUILD + SHIPPING. IF THEY WON'T DO IT I WILL - IN FACT I HAVE A SPARE ROTOR & MOTOR I CAN SEND YOU FOR $300 CANADIAN + SHIPPING IT'S MY BACKUP BUT I DON'T NEED IT ANYMORE. IT IS AN 18 POLE ROTOR MAGNETS INCLUDED - YOU MAKE THE COILS.
And here's the link for the wheel:
http://www.leevalley.com/hardware/page.aspx?c=1&p=40029&cat=3,51976
It's the one with the six spokes. If you want pricing in other than Canadian dollars then go to:
http://www.leevalley.com
and do an Item Search for traditional steel wheel. It should ask you about your currency.
@Thane,
What are the cupholders you talk of? Are they the rings around the magnets and if so
where did you get those?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE CRACKPOT SCRIPT CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
Here you go
Be very hard to understand and technically ignorant F
Be secretive F-
Keep real keys to it's success hidden F (I hope)
Decide humanity isn't ready for it F
Give no or very poor instructions or plans E-
Know almost nothing of how it works F
Rave on about UFO's, Angels, Channeled info etc... F-
BUT I GOT MY IDEA FROM JESUS - DOES THAT COUNT?
Hold out for Money money money!!, screw the world, even sell out -F
Create crazy theories (I hate theories, one should wait until a mountain of evidence paints undeniably clear picture) -F
Insist that OU isn't possible even as you clearly demonstrates it F
Turn out to be mistaken or scamming F (I'm sure)
Ignore danger posed by Oil and such F
Is dismissive and disinterested in verification from respected scientists F <The one I would personally score most highly on, I have very low respect or care for them
Overall result F, you fail to be any decent crackpot at all!
DAMN!
COULD ALSO BE SOLID - DOES NOT REQUIRE SPOKES. -
He reasonably assumed, or so I assume
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T MAKE AN ASS OUT OF U AND ME.
But the aim is to slow the motor slow down with drag no?
Indeed we are increasing the rotor diameter to ensure this.
YES
Though if you want to reach OU maybe laminated high quality is best,
YES
but then again unless you have verified it I think it remains speculation,
I VERIFIED IT ALREADY
just because you don't know why such would be critical does not mean it may not be until pr oven otherwise by experiment. (Can we say it is improbable that such is required but not impossible unless you have tested it already)
ALREADY TESTED AND VERIFIED IT.
What changed? what was wrong with your first ones or right about your last ones?
THE FIRST ONES WERE CUT UP TRANSFROMER CORES - TOO MUCH WASTED TIME.
Yes but most times thinner wire means more turns in the same space,
WHO CARES ABOUT SPACE - EXCEPT NASA?
So less current flows but you get turns so the field stays the same.
LESS CURRENT = WEAKER FIELD.
Now something weird might be (IS) happening so you can not be sure sure of otherwise normal physics working as expected. if in doubt replicate the original before changing anything.
DON'T FORGET THE GUNS THOUGH.
These measurements are all estimates and could be easily out +/- 15% possibly even more.
There was a hint that maybe you missed ;) maybe I can get Luc to get busy with a ruler next time he visits.
OH NO GOOD - YOU HAVE TO NAIL ME RIGHT BETWEEN THE EYES.
Though if I ever invent an important device my first action will be to video construction of one or more in as much detail as possible, preferably hold a work shop where many can build it and upload that to youtube with parts lists and plans etc...
THEN THEY WILL CALL YOU CRAZY!
This is the kind of critical information I'm glad you just shared! think of all the shapes I could have tried first!
LEAVE THAT STUFF OUT AND THE UNFRIENDLY SKEPTICS NETWORK WILL COME AFTER YOU.
I'll do one of each, I have a stack of I bar laminations from a transformer perfect for this.
LOVE THAT CRACKPOT CRITERIA LIST!
I NEVER LAUGHED SO HARD! THANKS
Thane
I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE CRACKPOT SCRIPT CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
Here you go
Be very hard to understand and technically ignorant F
Be secretive F-
Keep real keys to it's success hidden F (I hope)
Decide humanity isn't ready for it F
Give no or very poor instructions or plans E-
Know almost nothing of how it works F
Rave on about UFO's, Angels, Channeled info etc... F-
BUT I GOT MY IDEA FROM JESUS - DOES THAT COUNT?
Hold out for Money money money!!, screw the world, even sell out -F
Create crazy theories (I hate theories, one should wait until a mountain of evidence paints undeniably clear picture) -F
Insist that OU isn't possible even as you clearly demonstrates it F
Turn out to be mistaken or scamming F (I'm sure)
Ignore danger posed by Oil and such F
Is dismissive and disinterested in verification from respected scientists F <The one I would personally score most highly on, I have very low respect or care for them
Overall result F, you fail to be any decent crackpot at all!
DAMN!
COULD ALSO BE SOLID - DOES NOT REQUIRE SPOKES. -
He reasonably assumed, or so I assume
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T MAKE AN ASS OUT OF U AND ME.
But the aim is to slow the motor slow down with drag no?
Indeed we are increasing the rotor diameter to ensure this.
YES
Though if you want to reach OU maybe laminated high quality is best,
YES
but then again unless you have verified it I think it remains speculation,
I VERIFIED IT ALREADY
just because you don't know why such would be critical does not mean it may not be until pr oven otherwise by experiment. (Can we say it is improbable that such is required but not impossible unless you have tested it already)
ALREADY TESTED AND VERIFIED IT.
What changed? what was wrong with your first ones or right about your last ones?
THE FIRST ONES WERE CUT UP TRANSFROMER CORES - TOO MUCH WASTED TIME.
Yes but most times thinner wire means more turns in the same space,
WHO CARES ABOUT SPACE - EXCEPT NASA?
So less current flows but you get turns so the field stays the same.
LESS CURRENT = WEAKER FIELD.
Now something weird might be (IS) happening so you can not be sure sure of otherwise normal physics working as expected. if in doubt replicate the original before changing anything.
DON'T FORGET THE GUNS THOUGH.
These measurements are all estimates and could be easily out +/- 15% possibly even more.
There was a hint that maybe you missed ;) maybe I can get Luc to get busy with a ruler next time he visits.
OH NO GOOD - YOU HAVE TO NAIL ME RIGHT BETWEEN THE EYES.
Though if I ever invent an important device my first action will be to video construction of one or more in as much detail as possible, preferably hold a work shop where many can build it and upload that to youtube with parts lists and plans etc...
THEN THEY WILL CALL YOU CRAZY!
This is the kind of critical information I'm glad you just shared! think of all the shapes I could have tried first!
LEAVE THAT STUFF OUT AND THE UNFRIENDLY SKEPTICS NETWORK WILL COME AFTER YOU.
I'll do one of each, I have a stack of I bar laminations from a transformer perfect for this.
LOVE THAT CRACKPOT CRITERIA LIST!
I NEVER LAUGHED SO HARD! THANKS
Thane
I noticed that he uses a fan to keep the grinding wheel motor cool
THE MOTOR IS WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED AND OVERWORKED TO SHOW THAT IT COULD NEVER ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM ON IT'S OWN WITHOUT THE GENERATOR BACK EMF INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELDS AIDING IT IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY. THE FAN IS THERE TO PRESERVE MY MOTOR FOR FUTURE DEMOS.
why does thanes unit self accelerate?!?!?!?!?!
HIDDEN BATTERIES
because the kickback is harnessed electrictaly and converted to magnetic engery and dumped via the steel shaft to the rotor of the induction motor thus increaseing the strength in the rotor feild of the induction motor and accelerating it
YES - BUT DON'T FORGET THE HIDDEN BATTERIES.
@Thane,
What are the cupholders you talk of? Are they the rings around the magnets and if so
where did you get those?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
DEAR STEVE,
STEEL MAGNET CUP HOLDERS WHICH ARE WELDED TO THE ROTOR IN WHICH THE MAGNETS ARE PLACED. HERE THEY ARE;
http://www.leevalley.com/hardware/page.aspx?c=1&p=42348&cat=3,42363
CHEERS
Thane
there many ways s to slow it down or speed it up lol
like loading every third coil or shorting it if you perfer and useing the other coils for out put yes i have a few things that will improve the operation of this unit lol
but the hear and the now ........
in fact i have a unit built that i could modify a wee bit but it has 16 groups of 4 neos 1" x .25" a total of 64 neos in it altho it is plastic how ever steel could be machined at a low cost for me in a cnc mill ;)
also i think improveing the core material will change things dramatically 8)
but hey i love this line
im just a dumb construction worker what do i know lol
2 more sayings that fit are ......
~~~as is above ~~ so is below~~~
~~~~~~"One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to bind them, One Ring to bring them all and from the darkness find them."~~~~~~
2 more sayings that fit are ......
~~~as is above ~~ so is below~~~
~~~~~~"One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to bind them,
One Ring to bring them all and from the darkness find them."~~~~~~
GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE IST
- YOU ARE WACKED.
Thane
;D
sorry guys
too much info to fast lol
my style is wild but my words are 8) THE TRUTH LOL !!! 8)
:) ;) ;D
ISTEAM!!
here are a few pictures i really like ......
so some may wonder....... why would i post ~~one ring to rule them all~~ ......
then agin some may not .......
then you ask WHERE is the ring lol
and i answer the RING is your positive feed back loop
william
Speaking of troubles finding the right motor... If you use the toroid approach as in demonstration video 4:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jpIdu1lWVW0
then isn't the type of motor irrelevant? The motor isn't magnetically coupled to the wheel. Instead, the toroid takes care of the back EMF.
Hmmm... If the cores are nonmetalic, to eliminate cogging, then this sounds like a good way to make a generator for a wind turbine, especially for low wind speed areas like Ottawa (I must stay focused on my other project, must stay focused on my other project, must stay focused, ... >:().
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
So less current flows but you get turns so the field stays the same.
LESS CURRENT = WEAKER FIELD.
Do you mean weaker back-EMF field or do you mean weaker magnetic field?
Because as you should know the strength of a magnetic field increases with the amps and the number of turns, if you halve one but double the other you get the same magnetic field provided you can fit it in the same space. (And since more turns meaning more voltage it all works out)
It is possible though that the back-EMF is somehow changed, which means not just magnetic field strength but possibly rise time (which I would expect to still be the same but maybe not somehow) and the possibility that the aetheric current or cold current that is responsible flows better in a fatter wire?
Quote from: Heinstein on February 25, 2008, 11:28:45 AM
@Thane,
What are the cupholders you talk of? Are they the rings around the magnets and if so
where did you get those?
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
DEAR STEVE,
STEEL MAGNET CUP HOLDERS WHICH ARE WELDED TO THE ROTOR IN WHICH THE MAGNETS ARE PLACED. HERE THEY ARE;
http://www.leevalley.com/hardware/page.aspx?c=1&p=42348&cat=3,42363
CHEERS
Thane
And it all falls into place, you're an employee of Lee Valley's advertising Dept! It uses Hidden batteries!
And the big money backing you is not some mysterious millionaire hoping to help the world/get even more money, it's Lee Valley, Black and Decker and Ryobi!
It's all an attempt to bring product placment to youtube content! And the passionate FE crowd do will buy anything for their hobby!
THAT WHY THERE ARE SO MANY CAPS, THIS IS ADVERTISING BABY!
Now the skeptics can go home since the fraud has been unveiled, may you know that your thinking small has once again been right on, safe in the knowledge that nothing extraordinary, exotic or interesting exists in the world.
Quote from: Heinstein on February 25, 2008, 11:36:21 AM
2 more sayings that fit are ......
~~~as is above ~~ so is below~~~
~~~~~~"One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to bind them,
One Ring to bring them all and from the darkness find them."~~~~~~
GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE IST
- YOU ARE WACKED.
Thane
Rude, sad but true.
You just had the guts to says what everyone else was thinking.
Glad someone said it.
And it all falls into place, you're an employee of Lee Valley's advertising Dept! It uses Hidden batteries!
And the big money backing you is not some mysterious millionaire hoping to help the world/get even more money, it's Lee Valley, Black and Decker and Ryobi!
It's all an attempt to bring product placment to youtube content! And the passionate FE crowd do will buy anything for their hobby!
THAT WHY THERE ARE SO MANY CAPS, THIS IS ADVERTISING BABY!
Now the skeptics can go home since the fraud has been unveiled, may you know that your thinking small has once again been right on, safe in the knowledge that nothing extraordinary, exotic or interesting exists in the world.
WOW! THAT IN FACT WOULD BE A BRILLIANT IDEA!
CAN YOU WRITE UP A PROPOSAL SO WE CAN TRY TO SELL THE SCRIPT.
HEY DON'T FORGET WESTINGHOUSE - I USE ONE OF THEIR MOTORS AS WELL.
I HOPE THEY GET RUSSEL CROWE TO PLAY ME IN THE "REAL" COMMERCIAL.
TRUTH BE KNOWN
MY BROTHER WORKS FOR LEE VALLEY IN THE PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT - THEY PRODUCE THE CATALOGS AND WE DID ASK LEE VALLEY AND RYOBI FOR PERMISSION TO USE THEIR NAMES PRIOR TO SHOOTING OUR VIDEOS.
Thane
Do you mean weaker back-EMF field or do you mean weaker magnetic field?
WHERE'S THE DIFFERENCE?
Because as you should know the strength of a magnetic field increases with the amps and the number of turns, if you halve one but double the other you get the same magnetic field provided you can fit it in the same space. (And since more turns meaning more voltage it all works out)
HENCE WHY MY TRANSFORMER DOES WHAT IT DOES AS TURNS ARE INCREASED.
It is possible though that the back-EMF is somehow changed, which means not just magnetic field strength but possibly rise time (which I would expect to still be the same but maybe not somehow) and the possibility that the aetheric current or cold current that is responsible flows better in a fatter wire?
[/quote]
YOU MEAN THE SAME BUT DIFFERENT RIGHT?
I THINK - JUST LIKE THE TRANSFORMER EVERY VARIABLE PRODUCES A DIFFERENT RESULT WHEN CHANGED AND THERE IS A SWEET SPOT WHICH HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED YET AND ALL THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN FLUSHED OUT YET.
Thane
New Toronto Star articles out today:
Reaction to story staggering:
http://www.thestar.com/article/306532
and
Reader reaction was 'perpetual' and emotional:
http://www.thestar.com/article/306530
Enjoy!
johnny
@all,
if you are looking for stock bargains, you might want to look at black & decker or ryobi, they are both way down on twelve month high's. i can see no real rebound since thane's article has come to our attention. so as an advertising campaign it hasn't really had the real impact yet. but they are reasonably stable stocks if your in it for the long haul. like they say buy low sell high.
good luck everyone with your replications..
lol
sam
ps: has anyone got a stock symbol for lee valley, can't seem to find anything on them. are they privately owned?
What non metalic substances can be used as cores for coils? I am confused about this because i thought cores had to be of a iron substance if the core is to be used to create a resistance.
Damn, I should have stayed in school.
thanes core material is fine in his setup ..... but there are other cores aswell .....
just thought i would drop this on you all too.....
hey Y not?
just finished the first draft on a future project just thought i would give you all a sneek peek lol
isteam!!
ISTEAM YOU ROCK !
Thane
Quote from: Heinstein on February 25, 2008, 08:54:23 PM
ISTEAM YOU ROCK !
Thane
lol!! ;)
thought you might like it but it always gets better lol!!!
care to build it with me Thane!?!?!?!
william
I have been able to answer my own question.
The answer is to use a Triac (not a MOSFET, what was I thinking?) and to run it from a function generator.
I have to look into snubbers though.
Oh, here's a circuit too simple and effective not to build:
http://www.geocities.com/budb3/arts/eltron/motcntrl.html
Thane - just realism checking in -
MIT's Dr. Zahn - his requests to you for basic supporting evidence blown off as annoying skeptical nonsense - when of course you stated you went to academics because you lacked such discipline. Ironic. To think a public response to him wouldn't have even cost you $20K either. Why not leverage the public disagreement you have with a world wide respected institutional representative like Dr. Zahn and bury his skepticism with facts and evidence not yet entered into the public? Surely you would be revered by history were you to take on MIT establishment - heck you could even leverage the OU talent body to mount a grass roots scientific twenty-first century debate right here. Never before in the history of technology could you be forded so much stage with such little evidence.
NASA - Invite revoked. Or potentially fictional? I didn't see any NASA letter posted - you seem to have no problem posting personal effects from other institutions like MIT professors, why would you discriminate against NASA? No scanner handy?
Star - publishes additional fluff piece - when read between the lines is a brag piece about itself and how much user response they've generated to the first story - there's no Thane updates in that piece really, it actually protects you from the truth of the Dr. Zahn letter and doesn't clarify on the NASA invite. It's unfortunate that you didn't use the opportunity to counter Dr. Zahn's contest from MIT. It would have been the perfect forum.
NRC scientists? - I haven't seen any updates from this front yet, no shows or are they still in the lab from Friday?
Reproductions after you have been here giving explicit instruction - zero. (anyone think they're close here on OU?).
If NASA is out, MIT is out, NRC is out and the Dr. from O of U is too busy to accompany you to invites to NASA, then where are you getting the fortitude to continue on here? What's your next step to getting your invention to light seriously?
I hope you're right and there are five or six people right now running some kind of reproduction right now and soon there will be detailed plans all over the internet, but right now the evidence really points to the contrary.
MainePower
PulsedPower or Thane, in your opinion are most or all bench grinders induction motor run?
The one I'm looking at is either sychronous or induction (based on the speed).
Update: I now feel confident that it will indeed be an induction motor, hopefully cap start. I now feel confident it will be cap start also.
Aether22 the capacitor if present will be hidden in the base, just remove the 2 screws holding on the base cover. Grinders are never synchronous, too much cost and complexity for no tangible benefit. Looks like you are getting the hang of these motors.
There are 2 ways of using the cap, either for starting or both for starting and running. If it is the former then there will be a cenntrifugal switch inside the motor, if you hear a distinct click as the motor slows down it is this type otherwise it is the cap start and run type. If it is the type with the switch then the capacitor will need to be replaced with one suited for continous duty, starting caps are a special type of electrolytic cap which gets hot if used for more than a few seconds.
@MainePower
You should understand that all these so called "credible" persons and institutions have no intention of pursuing this technology, there supposed interest is nothing more than PR for the general public. There only interest in reality is two words---- job protection ;)
@Heinstein
I found your bi-toroid transformer design very interesting, I had built something similar a few years ago and basically came to the same conclusions you have. I call these machines "alternate path" technologies as realistically that is all that is needed to secure the desired effect. But I think this is only one half of the picture, while we can produce unidirectional flux paths or decoupling of the primary/seconday this is still only an issue of efficient power transfer. My analogy is kicking a flywheel and not dragging your feet on it, as this is basically what conventional motors and generators do--- drag there feet. We are looking for a good kick then a complete free-wheeling effect and this effect must follow through the whole system.
MIT's Dr. Zahn - his requests to you for basic supporting evidence blown off as annoying skeptical nonsense - when of course you stated you went to academics because you lacked such discipline. .
DR ZAHN IS A VERY GENROUS MAN AND DESPITE ALL THE NONSENSE OF LATE HE IS STILL WILLING TO SPEAK TO US WHICH IS AMAZING.
WE GO TO ACCADEMICS TO GET THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONS ON OUR DEVELOPMENTS TO ATTRACT AND PROTECT NEW FINANCIAL INVESTMENT WHICH ALLOWS US TO CONTINUE WORKING.
Fwd: Zahn hysteresis, voltage and current measurements of a toroidal coil wound around an iron core with a nonlinear magnetization characteristic.
Markus Zahn <zahn@MIT.EDU> wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:24:56 -0500
To: "Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
From: Markus Zahn <zahn@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Zahn hysteresis, voltage and current measurements of a
toroidal coil wound around an iron core with a nonlinear magnetization
characteristic.
CC: zahn@mit.edu
Dear Thane:
I attach 4 oscilloscope pictures showing the effects of a strong permanent
magnet (about 1400 Gauss) on the hysteresis curve experiment that I emailed
you a few weeks ago described in Demonstration 9.4.1 of the Haus/Melcher
text book and shown in the video.
C:\ThaneHeins\HysteresisCurve-NoMagnet.bmp; shows the hysteresis curve
with no permanent magnet present.
C:\ThaneHeins\With Magnet.bmp; shows the hysteresis curve with the
permanent magnet just touching the toroidal copper winding surrounding the
hysteretic magnet core. The vertical and horizontal voltage scales are the
same in these two hysteresis measurements. Note the hysteresis curve with
the magnet present has about half the area of the hysteresis curve with no
magnet present. This indicates about half the power dissipated due to
hysteresis with the magnet present. Note also that with the magnet present
the hysteresis curve has reached into the saturation region.
C:\ThaneHeins\NoMagnet.bmp; shows the scaled voltage (nice looking sine
wave) and the scaled current (with some higher order harmonics due to
nonlinear magnetization characteristic of coil). No magnet was present
during this measurement.
C:\ThaneHeins\With Magnet.bmp; shows the scaled voltage (slightly
distorted sine wave) and the scaled current (with much larger peak
amplitude and lots of third harmonic current due to nonlinear magnetization
characteristic of coil). The permanent magnet was present during this
measurement and because the hysteresis curve was driven to saturation the
voltage became somewhat distorted and the current had much high current
contributions from third and higher harmonics.
From the voltage and current measurements it is possible to calculate the
total input energy to the coil. I suggest that you do the same type of
measurements of voltage, current, and B-H curves in your motors. Using
Labview to process your waveforms and the addition of a torque meter and
tachometer for measuring shaft speed, you should be able to quantitatively
verify the increase in torque and speed as well as increased electrical
energy in from the wall due to the draw of higher harmonic currents. It is
my opinion that doing this will let you better understand your observations
and can lead to more efficient motors. This would provide you with
quantitative proof that the motor becomes more efficient that could offer
practical energy conservation applications and increased machine performance.
Good luck,
Mark
Markus Zahn
Thomas and Gerd Perkins Professor of Electrical Engineering and
Director, VI-A Internship Program
MIT
Room 10-174
Cambridge, MA 02139
Tel: 617-253-4688
Fax: 617-258-6774
email: zahn@mit.edu
"Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca> wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:22:28 -0500 (EST)
From: "Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Fwd: MvsH curves and their effect on machine efficiency
To: Markus Zahn <zahn@MIT.EDU>
CC: kcunningham@OCRI.ca
Dear Dr. Zahn,
Thank you for your comments. We are doing the tests you suggest as we speak, however we looked into the hysterisis question three weeks prior to meeting with you in an effort to be as prepared as possible.
We concluded (for ourselves at least) that it is a fair assumption to make for the small permanent magnet experiment but a difficult stretch if applied to the AC generator because the acceleration is so much more pronounced, (see Dr. Bilaniuk?s comments below).
Sincerely
Thane
NASA - Invite revoked. Or potentially fictional? I didn't see any NASA letter posted - you seem to have no problem posting personal effects from other institutions like MIT professors, why would you discriminate against NASA? No scanner handy?
OK I CAN SEE THAT YOU ARE A CRUSTY OLD FART HERE TO STIR UP THE POT AND CAUSE CONFLICT AND TENSION IN THIS REASONABLY CIVIL AND RESPECTFUL DISCUSSION - FINE I WON'T BE PLAYING ALONG THOUGH.
CHERRIOS
Thane
@MainePower
You should understand that all these so called "credible" persons and institutions have no intention of pursuing this technology, there supposed interest is nothing more than PR for the general public. There only interest in reality is two words---- job protection ;)
THERE ARE GOOD AND BAD PEOPLE EVERY WHERE JUST AS THERE ARE GOOD AND BAD SCIENTISTS AND TEACHERS ETC.
IF THIS FORUM IS GOING TO TURN INTO COWARDLY VENUE FOR TAKING POT SHOTS AT REAL PEOPLE'S CREDIBILITY (I KNOW HOW IT FEELS ) WHO DON'T HIDE BEHIND ANONYMOUS NICKNAMES THEN FINE - I BID YOU ALL ADIEU.
Thane
With the speculation about Academics like Dr Zahn I thought it might be good to explain a bit about how things work in academic circles. Reporters and academia are not a good mix early in research, Reporters are trying to get a story, while academics usually avoid a story until the research is concluded because if they make a mistake which is easy at the beginning of research, there will be plenty of people who will pick up on it. Check out how cautious the Gravity Probe B researchers are http://einstein.stanford.edu/http://einstein.stanford.edu/ (http://einstein.stanford.edu/)
Some people took Dr Zahns comments earlier to be negative, I took them to be constructive, the point of research is to get a good idea of the the topic being researched then explore theories. Dr Zahn's mail was just cautions with suggestions on what to explore. The best way to shut up naysayers is to explore their assertions and if possible eliminate them from consideration.
While there is politics in science like everywhere and preserving ones position in a given field is undoubtably the motivation from time to time, the scrutiny that Thane is getting is nothing compared to what a work like this published for peer review would get and nobody likes to look the fool. It is the process of critical review which makes academic work reliable, compared to say government reports :) The motivations of the criticisers is irrelevant the substance of the criticisms is what counts, pay attention to the substantive criticisms and devise an experimental method to prove or disprove them. Ignore insubstantive criticisms entirely.
I hope this gives you some encouragement Thane and others.
i drew up 1 more picture for you all ....... ;)
Thane put your dubble ended grinder where my turbine is lol
ist
for those of you who have not seen my turbine here is the you tube link ;D
it just kinda fit lol
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Erf7Fn--324
OK, so let's recap what we have here and see just what we can figure out about the effect shown in the first 2 videos.
For some reason when a complete magnetic circuit exists between motor and generator the drag previously felt from shorting the coils turns into a push.
This means that either the motor is effecting the generator to create far less drag or the generator is effecting the motor to make it more powerful on less power input. (or both?)
Because of a later test where a far more powerful magnetic field has what seems to be a vanishingly smaller effect on a motor it is assumed that the magnetic field from the generator is effecting the motor, but while the magnetic field from neodymium magnets is very dense, generally quoted at about 10,000 Gauss at the face of the magnet the field measured from the shaft is about 25 Gauss, only a few time stronger than the earths magnetic field.
So why don't we just say that motor enhancement is the preferred theory but not state it as absolute fact yet, and the assumption that a simple super weak magnetic field alone can have such a dramatic effect seems unlikely to be true considering the far far stronger fields already inside the motor.
Those who are familiar with 'cold current' and other names for unconventional electrical like currents flowing through wires and creating unusual fields generated in generators much like this one might consider that the real key to the effect.
So assuming motor enhancement is the key, and for now ignoring how the effect happens why don't we try to identify 'what' happens in the motor.
How can the force a motor outputs be increased?
One would be to make more current flow which would create a stronger magnetic field and hence increase the force, but we know that isn't happening since the current decreases.
Another might be to reduce inefficiencies, especially reduce loss due to hysteresis so more power goes into driving the motor.
Another might be to increase the permeability of the of the steel or the air gap to create a stronger magnetic circuit, to pull more of the stator field into the rotor, this would also increase the inductance of the motor. (this would have the added effect of reducing a DC motors top unloaded speed for the rated voltage input, though DC motors have not yet been tested) note: If this effect could somehow make make a motor overunity I think depends on precisely how the magnetic field of which (stator or rotor) is made stronger by what means, and it can depend on the type of motor, a DC motor would seem like the least likely to become OU by my estimation.
Reversing Lenz Law in the motor probably would not have the effect witnessed unless combined with increasing inductance because otherwise the motor would become a generator pushing even more power through it's self, though it would not be using energy the amps would go up without an increased inductance to hold it back.
I do not believe there is any other way by manipulating the forces and effects in an electric motor to gain higher torque with less current input, but if you disagree speak up, I suppose I could have included the possibility of reducing eddy current losses?
So really we have only 2 ways this could seemingly be occurring short of something entirely new powering the electric motor, it is either a reduction in hysteresis (resistance of a magnetic material to changing it's magnetic orientation) or an increase in permeability.
The first test that might be tried could be to take an electric motor, preferably a universal motor powered by AC, limit the current so that it will not exceed it's maximum rating and without letting it rotate measure it's torque, then measure it when being fed back emf from a generator, if it works when it's rotating (and it does according to thanes test with the drill) it ought to work when it's not. Then try it on DC, if it still works being fed DC then you can rule hysteresis out as a sole effect though it might well be worth seeing if the back-emf flux has an effect on hysteresis.
If that is successful then we can put motors aside and try static configurations of electromagnets, measure the force increase!
Even if it only increases on AC it does not mean that the effect is due to hysteresis or solely due to hysteresis.
As previously mentioned there is a vanishingly small a difference between a transformer and motor from the coils point of view, though it might be required to have air gaps in the core as transformers have it seems probable they would be effected too.
And if this effect can be overunity it might be a good idea to start with something already so close to unity.
Another test would be to apply the flux to the ferrite loop of an analog AM radio, see if it improves thr pull of otherwise hard to head stations.
I have not yet considered how it could work if the motor is effecting the generator, it might be best to rule out this possibility with an experiment first so hopefully it won't require analysis.
@Aether22
QuoteThe first test that might be tried could be to take an electric motor, preferably a universal motor powered by AC, limit the current so that it will not exceed it's maximum rating and without letting it rotate measure it's torque, then measure it when being fed back emf from a generator, if it works when it's rotating (and it does according to thanes test with the drill) it ought to work when it's not. Then try it on DC, if it still works being fed DC then you can rule hysteresis out as a sole effect though it might well be worth seeing if the back-emf flux has an effect on hysteresis.
It might work but there are better ways. Build Thanes apparatus if that is where you want to go measure any flux in the motor shaft. Remove the magnet assembly and attach a dynamometer, using a coil placed around the shaft recreate the same flux, while holding constant speed measure the torque on the dynamometer, measure watts in calculate watts out, repeat for a range of speeds and shaft fluxes. This is quantifying the effect that the magnet assembly has on the motor without all the aditional effects it has.. A universal motor is different to an induction motor, why change motor types before the induction motor is researched better. If this is inconclusive, reverse the experiment using just the magnet asembly driven by a small hydraulic motor or a shielded electric motor. Most of this can be built with junkyard material.
@ Thane
in this video here am i playing with one of those hidden batteryies?!?!?!? you speek of?
ist
innovation_station, how many amps of the 140 volts did the capasitor have?
Why haven't you utilized that concept?
Am I missing something?
@ innovation_station,
In the last drawing, I'm not sure you need the two wheels in the center.
Can't you just use one wheel with one array of magnets?
Thane, have you tried a single coil on the inside of the wheel, the side the motor is on. (so the action end of the coil is pointing away from the motor)
Were the results similar to it being on the other side?
I ask because if it is about as effective then it will be an easier setup, I won't need to raise the bench grinder or the coil above the table surface, I can just run the wheel over the edge of the table.
This will make things decidedly easier.
Thanks.
Quote from: rukiddingme on February 26, 2008, 11:08:06 PM
@ innovation_station,
In the last drawing, I'm not sure you need the two wheels in the center.
Can't you just use one wheel with one array of magnets?
if i understand you correctely you are correct in this set up as it is an ac setup if it were a dc setup it should be used as showen
on the cap video thing i never did read the amparage of the cap but it came out of the pressure washer showen in my turbine video wich was a 110 vac 15 amp motor
as for tha tech in the vid ever herd of a
MOTORAIDER? LOL
ISTEAM!!
Let me clarify,
In the drawing, there are six wheels with magnets on them.
There is one wheel at each end.
There are also two sets of two wheels each between the end wheels.
These are what I am talking about.
Seems you only need one wheel with one set of magnets
for these interior wheels. All the magnets have two sides.
Wish you much laughter.
yes you are correct ....
i will change it and repost it fixed
yes i have been haveing my laughs ;D
there is really no need for a center brush in an ac setup to improve the copper disc further we should look at TESLAS work with his fuel less generator setup and ask the question why did he devide the disc into sections!?!?!?!?!?!
ist
fixed the pic
@innovation station, Isn't a homopolar generator just a bit OT, FWIW there is no need to use copper rotors for a continous output homopolar generator, by using ferromagnetic rotors and filling as much of the air gaps with ferromagnetic material as possible the magnetic field can be strengthened giving a higher output voltage. The university of Texas's electomechanics department made 9 ferromagnetic rotor homopolar generators for a tokomak experiment also the Australian National University has a large ferromagnetic rotor homopolar generator.
yes this generator has 3 outputs
1st is Thanes magnetic coupling to the induction motor
2nd is the 2 cores between the third core wich is shorted
3rd is the hpg's
all with verry low backtorque
enough out of me this is THANES thred
l8r
william
food for thought
Thane, have you tried a single coil on the inside of the wheel, the side the motor is on. (so the action end of the coil is pointing away from the motor)
Were the results similar to it being on the other side?
I ask because if it is about as effective then it will be an easier setup, I won't need to raise the bench grinder or the coil above the table surface, I can just run the wheel over the edge of the table.
This will make things decidedly easier.
Thanks.
note: figured I should repost so it doesn't get buried.
Thane, have you tried a single coil on the inside of the wheel, the side the motor is on. (so the action end of the coil is pointing away from the motor) Were the results similar to it being on the other side? I ask because if it is about as effective then it will be an easier setup, I won't need to raise the bench grinder or the coil above the table surface, I can just run the wheel over the edge of the table. This will make things decidedly easier.
Thanks.
YES THIS SETUP WORKS VERY WELL BUT WHEN YOU DEMO IT YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED PEOPLE TELLING YOU THAT THE GENERATOR COIL IS INTERFERING WITH THE MOTOR'S STATOR COIL (SEE TRUE STORY # II) AND CAUSING ACCELERATION - WHICH MEANS IT DOES NOT WORK.
Thane
The level of desperation, or (and?) stupidity from these people is nothing short of astounding.
It doesn't take even a technically competent person to spot from a mile off who's full of it.
Do these people believe their own excuses? Next time you hear such a claim please ask the person 'how honest do you feel tight now in giving that answer? Do you feel that is an intellectually honest answer?'
It's impressive that you still bother with these people at all to find the odd gem you have.
1st is Thanes magnetic coupling to the induction motor
2nd is the 2 cores between the third core wich is shorted
3rd is the hpg's
all with verry low backtorque
WILLIAM YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION:
THE GENERATOR COUNTER-TORQUE WHEN MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE INDUCTION MOTOR IS CONVERTED INTO COMPLIMENTARY-TORQUE WHICH HAS THE EFFECT OF ACCELERATING THE MOTOR UNDER LOAD RATHER THAN DECELERATING IT.
IS THAT CLEAR?
YOU ACTUALLY WANT HIGH BACK/COUNTER TORQUE.
SAY AMEN OR SOMETHING PLEASE.
Thane
QuoteYES THIS SETUP WORKS VERY WELL BUT WHEN YOU DEMO IT YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED PEOPLE TELLING YOU THAT THE GENERATOR COIL IS INTERFERING WITH THE MOTOR'S STATOR COIL (SEE TRUE STORY # II) AND CAUSING ACCELERATION - WHICH MEANS IT DOES NOT WORK.
I thought that was the whole point of the first video to demomstate that the generator is interfering with the motor and increasing it's torque. Maybe giving your presentation a title like "Torque augmentation of a squirrel cage induction motor by axial flux injection" might make it more clear :) Not that it isn't clear anyway.
ah yes the wants and the needs lol
if you think you need backtorque go ahead and use it :)
i dont need it ;D
just imagine that generator i just designed spinning at 30 000 from a 15 amp input at 110 vac
hummmmm
oh yea running on a pressure washer
ist
if you all want to go further than get rid of all moveing parts lol
~~To understand the action of the local condenser E in fig.2 let a single discharge be first considered. the discharge has 2 paths offered~~ one to the condenser E the other through the part L of the working circuit C. The part L however by virtue of its self induction offers a strong opposition to such a sudden discharge wile the condenser on the other hand offers no such opposition~~
just incase some of you have not figured this out yet ;)
how many of thease units i just showed could be powered from this picture below and how much power will come from 1 coil?!?!?!
hey you all wanted to know more about my GUNS lol!!!!
Quote from: OilBarren on February 27, 2008, 06:37:56 AM
1st is Thanes magnetic coupling to the induction motor
2nd is the 2 cores between the third core wich is shorted
3rd is the hpg's
all with verry low backtorque
WILLIAM YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION:
THE GENERATOR COUNTER-TORQUE WHEN MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE INDUCTION MOTOR IS CONVERTED INTO COMPLIMENTARY-TORQUE WHICH HAS THE EFFECT OF ACCELERATING THE MOTOR UNDER LOAD RATHER THAN DECELERATING IT.
IS THAT CLEAR?
YOU ACTUALLY WANT HIGH BACK/COUNTER TORQUE.
SAY AMEN OR SOMETHING PLEASE.
Thane
thane
you are correct in your set up backtorque is required for proper operation :)
ist
ist, I'm seldom this rude, but isn't there some traffic you could go play in?
Oh and since you seemingly didn't get it, I thought your first drawing looked incomprehensible and could have been of a space ship, but it needed guns.
Yes, everyone here knows of how to remove the slight performance losses caused by magnetic cogging, we are aware of Bill Muller.
And a design such as you show might work but the world will never know since no one will ever build it, least of all you, but please prove me wrong.
You are being a distraction but you aren't doing anything useful, you aren't replicating the effect or trying to understand it, you aren't giving sage advice to Thane and you aren't challenging the validity of Thanes effect.
Quote from: aether22 on February 27, 2008, 06:27:26 AM
The level of desperation, or (and?) stupidity from these people is nothing short of astounding.
Do these people believe their own excuses? Next time you hear such a claim please ask the person 'how honest do you feel tight now in giving that answer? Do you feel that is an intellectually honest answer?'
It's impressive that you still bother with these people at all to find the odd gem you have.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS LIKE THIS - THE PROBLEM IS OFTEN VERY TECHNICALLY COMPETENT AND
SINCERE PEOPLE TRYING TO APPLY CURRENT LEVELS OF UNDERSTANDING (WHICH ARE NOT ADEQUATE) TO THE NEW PHENOMENON(S).
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS THREAD - IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY - MOST PEOPLE SIMPLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH JUICE LEFT TO APPLY THEMSELVES AT THE END OF THE DAY.
BTW - LUC WAS IN THE LAB TODAY WORKING ON HOOKING UP SOME LIGHT BULBS FOR THOSE OUT THERE WHO "WANT TO SEE THE LIGHT" SO TO SPEAK.
PERHAPS LUC CAN ELABORATE - IN HIS OWN WORDS - WHAT OCCURED WHEN THE LIGHT BULB WAS CONNECTED?
Thane
Hi Thane,
Thanks for not leaving the board, love your new nickname by the way! :)
bitbeam
Thane, while I remain skeptical that your toroid transformer is working in the way you think it is, I have reasons to believe it or something like it may work in a different way. (not strictly involving the technicalities of magnetic flux)
And evidence that such can work is found here: http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Chapter1.pdf
Page 11
Quote from: bitbeam on February 27, 2008, 03:21:30 PM
Hi Thane,
Thanks for not leaving the board, love your new nickname by the way! :)
bitbeam
THANKS FOR NOTICING.
NOBODY GOT MY OTHER ONE?
BEER
STEIN + FULL OF
HEINEKEN =
HEINSTEINThane
Heheh.. I actually thought it was your own personal flavor of Einstein... Ie: [H]einstein. Seems fitting if your really have discovered something which is revolutionary! :)
johnny
ok im gonna go and leave you guys to it you are doing such a great job of it ......... ;)
but b4 i go i leave just 2 more pictures i really like .....
ist
Quote from: johnnyl on February 27, 2008, 06:49:40 PM
Heheh.. I actually thought it was your own personal flavor of Einstein... Ie: [H]einstein. Seems fitting if your really have discovered something which is revolutionary! :) johnny
WHO SAID IT WASN'T - JOHNNY?
GOOD JOB ON THE
REVOLUTIONARY PUN THERE - EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A FREUDIAN SLIP?
I'M JUST DOING
WATT I CAN TO CREATE AN ENERGY
REVOLT.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on February 27, 2008, 03:32:42 PM
Thane, while I remain skeptical that your toroid transformer is working in the way you think it is, I have reasons to believe it or something like it may work in a different way. (not strictly involving the technicalities of magnetic flux)
And evidence that such can work is found here: http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Chapter1.pdf
Page 11
ONE LINE SAYS OVERUNITY ANOTHER SAYS "THEORETICAL"? CURIOUS NO?
I HAVE A COMPUTER FULL OF NICE PICTURES WHICH DON'T WORK.
Thane
:)
maybe it is just a matter of knowing why they dont work ......
or
knowing how to make them work ....... ;)
ist
!st 360 didnt think you all would mind..........
Thane.
I suppose I'll learn this myself from experimentation, but have you found the best gap between the coil and the neodymiums? How many millimeters is it an in those videos? (it can make a significant difference apparently)
Quote from: aether22 on February 28, 2008, 12:27:32 AM
Thane.
I suppose I'll learn this myself from experimentation, but have you found the best gap between the coil and the neodymiums? How many millimeters is it an in those videos? (it can make a significant difference apparently)
IT DEPENDS ON THE STRENGTH OF YOUR MOTOR - HOW MANY COILS YOU HAVE - HOW WELL BALANCED THEY ARE AROUND THE ROTOR - THE COIL(S) ACT AS A HYSTERISIS BRAKE WHEN OPEN CIRCUITED.
Thane
And probably when close circuited too. (my point being that some would say the electrical and magnetic induction loss is lower when shorted but that is clearly not the case as when the motor and generator are not connected and likely doesn't change when they are, though it's possible that coil loss reduces and is larger than all types of core loss when shorted)
Here's an ultra-simple sanity check. It's so simple I can't understand why no one (to my knowledge) has suggested it.
Because the coils in his machine are either shorted or open, they produce no power. So if it provides any benefit at all, it would be by accelerating the motor past its normal no-load speed, i.e., without the apparatus in place.
So just remove the entire apparatus from the motor! Get rid of the electromagnets, the rotating disk with the magnets, everything. Leave just the motor, its drive circuit, and the motor speed sensor. Apply power to the motor as usual. How fast does it run?
If the motor runs slower without the apparatus than with it, then it may be argued that the apparatus provides some sort of benefit to the motor, at least when the coil switches are closed. But if the motor runs faster *without* the apparatus, then it's obvious that the apparatus is a net power drain that only slows the motor down. It may slow it down a lot with the switches open and just a little with the switches closed, but in either case it's a net drain on the motor.
@KA9Q
Your ultra simple check sounds reasonable, but it should be understood that power and efficiency are two different things. I can make an AC or DC motor run as fast as I want by increasing frequency or voltage but this does not imply that the efficiency nor the power required to operate the motor has changed. Thanes motor could easily lose speed but gain efficiency and power, that is why energy in Vs energy out must be calculated to show efficiency and the motor must be loaded to calculate power. At the end of the day, Peak efficiency at Peak power levels is what our goal should be. I have a few motors that are super efficient but produce very little power which makes them very expensive paperweights ---nothing more.
Quote from: KA9Q on February 28, 2008, 06:29:52 AM
Because the coils in his machine are either shorted or open, they produce no power.
WHEN A COIL IS
OPEN NO CURRENT FLOWS.
WHEN A COIL IS
SHORTED - MAXIMUM CURRENT FLOWS AND ALL OF THE POWER IS DISSIPATED WITHIN THE COIL ITSELF AS JOULE HEATING (see Lenz's Law below) RATHER THAN BEING DISSIPATED IN MORE THAN ONE COMPONENT IN THE CIRCUIT.
CURRENT LAW
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/ohmlaw.html#c3
Thane
Lenz's law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaLenz's law gives the direction of the induced electromotive force (emf) and current resulting from electromagnetic induction. Heinrich Lenz formulated it in 1834.
DefinitionLenz's law states that any induced electromotive force will be in the direction such that the flux it creates will oppose the change in the flux that produced it.
Connection with law of conservation of energyLenz's Law is one consequence of the principle of conservation of energy. To see why, move a magnet towards the face of a closed loop of wire (eg. a coil or solenoid). An electric current is induced in the wire, because the electrons within it are subjected to an increasing magnetic field as the magnet approaches. This produces an emf that acts upon them. The direction of the induced current depends on whether the north or south pole of the magnet is approaching: an approaching north pole will produce an anti-clockwise current (from the perspective of the magnet), and south pole approaching the coil will produce a clockwise current.
To understand the implications for conservation of energy, suppose that the induced currents' directions were opposite to those just described. Then the north pole of an approaching magnet would induce a south pole in the near face of the loop. The attractive force between these poles would accelerate the magnet's approach. This would make the magnetic field increase more quickly, which in turn would increase the loop's current, strengthening the magnetic field, increasing the attraction and acceleration, and so on. Both the kinetic energy of the magnet and the rate of energy dissipation in the loop (due to Joule heating) would increase. A small energy input would produce a large energy output, violating the law of conservation of energy.[/color]This scenario is only one example of electromagnetic induction. Lenz's Law states that the magnetic field of any induced current opposes the change that induces it.
For a rigorous mathematical treatment, see electromagnetic induction and Maxwell's equations.
Practical Demonstrations
A brief video demonstrating Lenz's Law is at EduMation.
A neat device made by William J. Beaty levitates a magnet above two spinning rollers.
A dramatic demonstration of the effect with an aluminum block in an MRI, falling very slowly.
A demonstration that even a small child can try:
- Find a small electric motor.
- Spin its shaft.
- Connect its wires together (with a paper clip or alligator clip), and spin the shaft again.
- This time, the motor resists turning, because current can flow through its wires.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenz%27s_law"
author=KA9Q link=topic=4047.msg79398#msg79398 date=1204198192]
So if it provides any benefit at all, it would be by accelerating the motor past its normal no-load speed,
ASSUMING YOU CAN RUN AN INDUCTION MOTOR PAST ITS NO-LOAD SPEED WHICH = MINIMUM OR NEAR ZERO SKIP ANGLE?
So just remove the entire apparatus from the motor! Get rid of the electromagnets, the rotating disk with the magnets, everything. Leave just the motor, its drive circuit, and the motor speed sensor. Apply power to the motor as usual. How fast does it run?
APROXIMATELY 3500 RPM
If the motor runs slower without the apparatus than with it, then it may be argued that the apparatus provides some sort of benefit to the motor, at least when the coil switches are closed.
GOOD PLAN BUT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO RUN THE SYSTEM "SAFELY" BEYOND 1500 RPM DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL SISSIES.
But if the motor runs faster *without* the apparatus, then it's obvious that the apparatus is a net power drain that only slows the motor down. It may slow it down a lot with the switches open and just a little with the switches closed, but in either case it's a net drain on the motor.
OUR PROTOTYPE IS MEANT TO PROVIDE PROOF OF CONCEPT FOR OUR ABILITY TO ACCELERATE (see red section in previous email) THE SYSTEM UNDER MAXIMUM LOAD (SHORT CIRCUIT) - WHEN THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY SAYS THAT THIS SCENARIO SHOULD RESULT IN DECELERATION.
Thane
Note: This reply is late because the site was down, not read more recent messages yet so this may have all be covered already.
Here's an ultra-simple sanity check. It's so simple I can't understand why no one (to my knowledge) has suggested it.
Because the coils in his machine are either shorted or open, they produce no power.
Not true, when shorted without the steel rod in place they slow it down more, there is power being produced, a short is not the most useful load but it is one hell of a load.
There is also voltage, although it is hard to measure in a perfect short, you must calculate it by knowing the resistance and current, and to some extent inductance
So if it provides any benefit at all, it would be by accelerating the motor past its normal no-load speed, i.e., without the apparatus in place.
So just remove the entire apparatus from the motor! Get rid of the electromagnets, the rotating disk with the magnets, everything. Leave just the motor, its drive circuit, and the motor speed sensor. Apply power to the motor as usual. How fast does it run?
Ah, so you're crazy!
The motor is slowed down hugely by the core losses even when the coil is open circuit, there are eddy currents and hysteresis.
Without any load it will run very much faster indeed, somewhere near 3600rpm minus slip.
If the motor runs slower without the apparatus than with it, then it may be argued that the apparatus provides some sort of benefit to the motor, at least when the coil switches are closed. But if the motor runs faster *without* the apparatus, then it's obvious that the apparatus is a net power drain that only slows the motor down. It may slow it down a lot with the switches open and just a little with the switches closed, but in either case it's a net drain on the motor.
No, the crux of this device is that by shorting the coils it some to a relatively swift stop, UNLESS there is a fully magnetic path to the motor in which case it energetically accelerates.
What is super strange is that a powerful magnetic field improving the power of some types of electric motor a little does not seem all that far fetched, but the flux path and source of flux source are so poor compared to the magnitude of the effect (an effect that works with other types of motors also) that it seems something a little strange must be going on.
BTW just got my cheapie 2nd hand bench grinder home, it's only 150W so it may burn up!
Or should i keep this one on the bench? (Yes, a sports joke)
Still worth a try, once I have proven the effect I will use a larger synchronous motor I have to run the generator by a belt and have the axle end of of the generator outputting to this one as effectively a detector, no physical connection.
Going to need to hunt down Thanes one again to see it's wattage, guess I will just need to reduce losses a bit which I will to with my laminated core. (and only one)
Hi Thane
In the video one and two,the coil used what gauge of wire and how many turns.As i understand it the magnets are arranged n s n s,what happens if there all south or all north,do you still get the accelerating effect.I'm attempting to duplicate your set up i have the wheel, motor and variac waiting on more magnets and cups.I think your onto something very important!!
Thane mentioned to me that using 6 or so magnets is fine, would be interested to hear Thanes answer to your questions too.
Quote from: aether22 on February 28, 2008, 11:50:39 PM
BTW just got my cheapie 2nd hand bench grinder home, it's only 150W so it may burn up!
Or should i keep this one on the bench? (Yes, a sports joke)
IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN MINE IS 95 W?
Hi Thane
In the video one and two,the coil used what gauge of wire and how many turns.
22, 26, 30 GUAGE THE TURNS VARIED FOR EACH COIL I MADE I AM NOT SURE WHICH GUAGE IT WAS - BUT MOST LIKELY 26 AND 75 OHMS WORTH.
I STOPPED COUNTING TURNS AFTER THE FIRST WEEK OF YEAR 1 - OF 7 YEARS OF TURNING.
I USED RESISTANCE AS MY PERSONAL GUAGE MY COILS RANGE FROM 75 OHMS TO 275 OHMS.
As i understand it the magnets are arranged n s n s,what happens if there all south or all north,do you still get the accelerating effect.I'm attempting to duplicate your set up i have the wheel, motor and variac waiting on more magnets and cups.I think your onto something very important!!
YES YOU DO (GET ACCELERATION) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS YOUR AC OUTPUT SINE WAVE WILL STAY ON ONE SIDE OF THE ZERO AXIS.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on February 29, 2008, 01:43:47 AM
Thane mentioned to me that using 6 or so magnets is fine, would be interested to hear Thanes answer to your questions too.
EVERYTING DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DISPLAY.
AN 18 POLE ROTOR WILL SLOW DOWN MORE RAPIDLY IN CONVENTIONAL MODE BECAUSE OF THE TIGHTER MAGNET SPACING AND RESULTING BACK EMF INDUCED MAGNETIC DRAG.
I STARTED WITH AN 18 POLE ROTOR ONLY BECAUSE I WAS EMPLOYING MY MOTOR AT FULL INPUT POWER - THEN I GOT SMART AND NOW USE A VARIAC.
A 6 POLE ROTOR WILL ACCELERATE QUICKER BECAUSE OF THE REDUCED FLYWHEEL INERTIA AND IT WILL DECELERATE QUICKER WHEN THE LOAD IS DISCONNECTED.
Flywheel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flywheels resist changes in their rotational speed, which helps steady the rotation of the shaft when a fluctuating torque is exerted on it by its power source such as a piston-based (reciprocating) engine, or when the load placed on it is intermittent (such as a piston pump).
Quote from: nightlife on February 26, 2008, 10:25:06 PM
innovation_station, how many amps of the 140 volts did the capasitor have?
Why haven't you utilized that concept?
Am I missing something?
dont think so
M.O.T tech application 1
JUST CUZ I CAN ;D
ist!!
Quote from: OilBarren on February 29, 2008, 06:33:03 AM
YES YOU DO (GET ACCELERATION) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS YOUR AC OUTPUT SINE WAVE WILL STAY ON ONE SIDE OF THE ZERO AXIS.
Thane
Actually you won't, it's impossible.
But it will look less like a sine wave on an oscilloscope, you get a double hump arrangement, but there will be equal area under the 0 line as above.
Actually you won't, it's impossible.[/quote]
WHAT'S IMPOSSIBLE?
(http://)
Quote from: KA9Q on February 28, 2008, 06:29:52 AM
Here's an ultra-simple sanity check. It's so simple I can't understand why no one (to my knowledge) has suggested it.
Because the coils in his machine are either shorted or open, they produce no power. So if it provides any benefit at all, it would be by accelerating the motor past its normal no-load speed, i.e., without the apparatus in place.
So just remove the entire apparatus from the motor! Get rid of the electromagnets, the rotating disk with the magnets, everything. Leave just the motor, its drive circuit, and the motor speed sensor. Apply power to the motor as usual. How fast does it run?
If the motor runs slower without the apparatus than with it, then it may be argued that the apparatus provides some sort of benefit to the motor, at least when the coil switches are closed. But if the motor runs faster *without* the apparatus, then it's obvious that the apparatus is a net power drain that only slows the motor down. It may slow it down a lot with the switches open and just a little with the switches closed, but in either case it's a net drain on the motor.
I'm a big fan of simple, but I recognize the problems with this method as was referenced by comments above. To counter those issues we could build a "super simple" test of total energy - run the device with a purely mechanical nonmagnetic light load ex. a simple string winder - place a wooden spool against the motor wheel with a length of string while housed in the "apparatus" using a carefully measured constant amount of energy (hopefully a small battery pack for consistency)... and measure how much string was rolled up. Then remove the motor from the apparatus and run the same test. If the spool rolls more string it is more efficient, if not it is less. This should avoid all of the issues of hysterisis and proper power measurement...
Quote from: jacksatan on February 29, 2008, 03:03:50 PM
I'm a big fan of simple, but I recognize the problems with this method as was referenced by comments above. To counter those issues we could build a "super simple" test of total energy - run the device with a purely mechanical nonmagnetic light load ex. a simple string winder - place a wooden spool against the motor wheel with a length of string while housed in the "apparatus" using a carefully measured constant amount of energy (hopefully a small battery pack for consistency)... and measure how much string was rolled up. Then remove the motor from the apparatus and run the same test. If the spool rolls more string it is more efficient, if not it is less. This should avoid all of the issues of hysterisis and proper power measurement...
IS THIS NOT SIMPLE ENOUGH?THIS ACTUAL TEST DATA FROM THE OVERUNITY DEMO AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY FOR LUC AND STEVE.
TEST #1 =
NO LOAD ? COIL # 2 =
0.92 VOLTS / INPUT =
275 W SYSTEM SPEED =
60 RPM (approx)
TEST # 2 =
MAXIMUM LOAD ? COIL # 2 =
177.7 V / INPUT =
200 W SYSTEM SPEED =
1500 RPM (approx)
COIL # 2 IS OPEN IN BOTH TESTS
AND
TEST # 1 IS ALL OPEN CIRCUITED COILS
WHEREAS TEST # 2
ALL THE COILS WERE SHORTED (except # 2)
ALL OTHER COILS EMPLOYED TO DRIVE UP THE SYSTEM RPM
YOU MAY ALSO NOTICE THAT THE
INPUT VOLTAGE IN TEST # 1 IS 75.2 VOLTS IN TEST # 2 THE INPUT VOLTAGE IS
7.2 % V LOWER AND COIL # 2?s
OUTPUT VOLTAGE IS 19,215.2 % HIGHER. SOMETHING IS ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND IT AIN'T THE MOTOR.
THE ONLY
VARIABLE THAT HAS CHANGED IS CURRENT FLOW IN THE COILS.
Thane
Hi All,
I know that the Bi-Toroid generator approach seems to have been dropped due to poor results, but I have been slowly working on my EI steel lamination version and just wanted to pass on the results of my testing. It shows some promise.
I wound three coils using 28 gauge wire, two secondary coils at 6.9 ohms apiece and one primary coil at 12 ohms. In all testing an AC input of 6.8 volts from the split secondary of a 120 to 12.6 volt transformer was used. A load of 27 ohms on each secondary was used, 100 and 220 were also tested but the 27 produced the best wattage.
First a series of test were made with the coils set up as a regular transformer so that a comparison could be made to the generator version.
Test 1 AC input using a 12 ohms resistor as a load.
AC 6.81V 557MA 3.79W
Test 2 Transformer with secondary coils open.
Primary 6.91V 37.3MA .258W
Test 3 Transformer with 27 ohms on each secondary coil.
Primary 6.88V 67.6MA .465W
Sec 1 1.77V 61.9MA .110W
Sec 2 1.74V 61.3MA .107W
Transformer Notes:
1. The BEMF in the Primary reduced the 3.79W for a 12 ohms resister to .258W in the 12 ohms primary coil.
2. The primary wattage increased by .207 in test 3 which is close to the .217 watts produced by the two secondary coils.
3. As expected the made up transformer with the hand wrapped coils, unusual configuration and rather loose components was not as efficient as the normal 80% for small factory made transformers. It was only 47%, but this gives a good baseline for the generator capabilities. But if the generator primary works as stated (secondary coils always open), then the efficiency could be much higher.
Second a series of test were made with the coils set up as proposed in the Bi-Toroid generator design, this is a similar Bi-Rectangular design.
Test 1 Generator Primary coil and Primary bar only.
Primary 6.70V 456MA 3.06W (Wow, almost bad as 12 ohms resistor. )
Test 2 Generator complete with secondary coils open.
Primary 6.88V 231MA 1.59W
Test 3 Generator with 27 ohms load on each secondary.
Primary 6.81V 228MA 1.55W
Sec 1 1.28V 45MA .057W
Sec 2 1.29V 44MA .057W
It was apparent after test 1 and 2 that the air gap is causing the BEMF to get out of its amperage blocking phase and allows more amperage to be drawn by the primary. The air gap when the primary bar is within the generator base was a little less than 1 MM at each end. I then added a metal shim on each end to cut the spacing to .5 MM and got the following results. This is not the best way as it should also increase eddy currents.
Test 4 Generator complete with secondary coils open.
Primary 6.84V 207MA 1.42W
Test 5 Generator with 27 ohms load on each secondary.
Primary 6.85V 207MA 1.42W
Sec 1 1.42V 50MA .071W
Sec 1 1.42V 50MA .071W
Generator Notes:
1. Generator test 4 and 5 are significant in that for the same input wattage, .142W output wattage was gained in test 5. My transformer input wattage went up to match the additional output wattage. This shows that an open secondary or a loaded secondary does use the same input wattage!2. Generator test 2 and 4 show that by decreasing the air gap that the input wattage is reduced and the output wattage increased. An air gap of .1 MM or less should be used. I don?t have the equipment to attain that critical of a gap.
3. The efficiency of the generator in transformer terms would have only been 10% compared to 47% for the transformer. I?m sure this could be significantly improved with the reduced air gap.
For any future questioning, please note that my only test tool is a decent multimeter, no wattmeter or oscilloscope for additional testing.
Regards,
Larry
Actually you won't, it's impossible.
WHAT'S IMPOSSIBLE?
Normal induction is never DC unless it is a faraday/homopolar generator.
A magnetic field increasing in a coil creates the opposite EMF to what it gets when the same field decays again.
If it were possible to get a net DC induction in say a transformer for instance then you could just have many different transformers in slightly different phases and put the secondaries in series for flat DC output which would not load the primaries.
If you ever do get net directional voltage induced in a coil (not counting commutated switches, diode rectification or Faraday disk generators) something very weird and strange (and cool) is going on.
Normal induction is never DC unless it is a faraday/homopolar generator.
A magnetic field increasing in a coil creates the opposite EMF to what it gets when the same field decays again.
If you ever do get net directional voltage induced in a coil (not counting commutated switches, diode rectification or Faraday disk generators) something very weird and strange (and cool) is going on.[/color
WHO SAID DC INDUCTION?
Not that I'm Homopolarphobic or anything
I SAID, "YES YOU DO (GET ACCELERATION)
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS YOUR AC OUTPUT "SINE WAVE" WILL STAY ON ONE SIDE OF THE ZERO AXIS".
(My mistake for adding that nit-pick fodder)
THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT ACCELERATION WAS IT NOT?
SO THE ANSWER IS: YES
YOU WILL GET ACCELERATION IF YOU USE JUST NORTH POLE FACING MAGNETS AND YOU WILL GET ACCELERATION IF YOU USE JUST SOUTH FACING MAGNETS ALTHOUGH IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY THE PERFORMANCE IS NOT AS PRONOUNCED.
Thane
;D
i like your comic Thane
lol
i can just keep cranknmout ;) if you all like ......
yes another busy day lol
ist
+5 more 2day ;D i just love what i do
isteam!!
Quote from: innovation_station on February 29, 2008, 09:04:13 PM
;D i like your comic Thane
lol
i can just keep cranknmout ;) if you all like ...... yes another busy day lol
ist
+5 more 2day ;D i just love what i do
isteam!!
WILLIAM - YOU ARE OFF YOUR MEDS AGAIN DUDE !
Quote from: OilBarren on February 29, 2008, 05:01:19 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on February 29, 2008, 03:03:50 PM
I'm a big fan of simple, but I recognize the problems with this method as was referenced by comments above. To counter those issues we could build a "super simple" test of total energy - run the device with a purely mechanical nonmagnetic light load ex. a simple string winder - place a wooden spool against the motor wheel with a length of string while housed in the "apparatus" using a carefully measured constant amount of energy (hopefully a small battery pack for consistency)... and measure how much string was rolled up. Then remove the motor from the apparatus and run the same test. If the spool rolls more string it is more efficient, if not it is less. This should avoid all of the issues of hysterisis and proper power measurement...
IS THIS NOT SIMPLE ENOUGH?
THIS ACTUAL TEST DATA FROM THE OVERUNITY DEMO AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY FOR LUC AND STEVE.
TEST #1 = NO LOAD ? COIL # 2 = 0.92 VOLTS / INPUT = 275 W SYSTEM SPEED = 60 RPM (approx)
TEST # 2 = MAXIMUM LOAD ? COIL # 2 = 177.7 V / INPUT = 200 W SYSTEM SPEED = 1500 RPM (approx)
COIL # 2 IS OPEN IN BOTH TESTS
AND TEST # 1 IS ALL OPEN CIRCUITED COILS
WHEREAS TEST # 2 ALL THE COILS WERE SHORTED (except # 2)
ALL OTHER COILS EMPLOYED TO DRIVE UP THE SYSTEM RPM
YOU MAY ALSO NOTICE THAT THE INPUT VOLTAGE IN TEST # 1 IS 75.2 VOLTS
IN TEST # 2 THE INPUT VOLTAGE IS 7.2 % V LOWER AND COIL # 2?s OUTPUT VOLTAGE IS 19,215.2 % HIGHER.
SOMETHING IS ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND IT AIN'T THE MOTOR.
THE ONLY VARIABLE THAT HAS CHANGED IS CURRENT FLOW IN THE COILS.
Thane
Thane, when you say "something is accelerating but not the motor" do you mean that the back emf getting to the motor is accelerating it (hence it is the motor providing the extra speed but only because of the gen) or do you truly believe that the generator is acting as a motor (or dramatically less of a load somehow) only when there is a magnetic path between the 2?
If so it would seem you are saying that the motor has an effect on the generator, or that both have an effect on each other. or are you just guessing and quite confused?
If you want to not just be guessing them you need some kind of force gauge in the coupling, not sure how best to do it, but if you had say a flexible rubber coupling between the motor and gen a strobe could help stop the action so you can see how much force is there.
Though if you can't get a stable speed a strobe won't help you.
Addition;
Thane, it would be ideal if you had a bifilar coil, that way while shorting one of the coils you can measure the voltage on the other on the same core. (and you can then know for a fact the voltage in the shorted coil not one near it unshorted)
This is relevant because measuring a whole separate coil does not tell you how much power you have.
Another question would be can you measure the short circuit current with a clamp meter?
I would not be shocked if when you do the math doesn't add up and you find it to be less than expected.
It's no reason to be concerned, it just means you have something more valuable than electricity, but it can be turned into electricity. Sorry if that sounds cryptic.
@Aether22
QuoteThane, it would be ideal if you had a bifilar coil, that way while shorting one of the coils you can measure the voltage on the other on the same core. (and you can then know for a fact the voltage in the shorted coil not one near it unshorted)
That is not a bad idea though you could probably get away with only a few turns as long as the turns ratio was known. Another method would be to wrap the coil in insulation and measure how much it heats up in a given run time, apply DC later to calibrate. Average temperature of a coil can be determined quickly by measuring the DC resistance of the coil at a known stable temperature then looking up the temperature coefficient for the resistance of copper to determine the actual temperature. AFAIK transformer manufacturers do it this way.
Thane, when you say "something is accelerating but not the motor" do you mean that the back emf getting to the motor is accelerating it (hence it is the motor providing the extra speed but only because of the gen) or do you truly believe that the generator is acting as a motor (or dramatically less of a load somehow) only when there is a magnetic path between the 2?
I AM SAYING THAT THE SYSTEM (WHICH INCLUDES A SALIENT POLE GENERATOR AND A MAGNETICALLY COUPLED INDUCTION MOTOR) ACCELERATES WHEN AN ELECTRICAL LOAD IS APPLIED TO THE GENERATOR.
If so it would seem you are saying that the motor has an effect on the generator, or that both have an effect on each other. or are you just guessing and quite confused?
YES I AM QUITE CONFUSED - I THOUGHT YOU AT LEAST GOT THIS AETHER22?
THE MOTOR HAS AN EFFECT OF TURNING THE GENERATOR ROTOR.
THE LOADED GENERATOR HAS AN EFFECT OF ACCELERATING THE MOTOR WHEN MAGNETICALLY COUPLED.
WE ARE ALSO LOOKING INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF MOTOR ROTOR FLUX INTERACTING WITH THE GENERATOR COILS AS WELL AT THE TIPS OF THE ROTOR.
If you want to not just be guessing them you need some kind of force gauge in the coupling, not sure how best to do it, but if you had say a flexible rubber coupling between the motor and gen a strobe could help stop the action so you can see how much force is there.
I ACCIDENTLY STUCK MY FINGERS IN THE ROTOR AT 1500 RPM ONCE WOULD THAT COUNT?
WE CAN CALL IT A "SCREAM GUAGE"
Addition;
Thane, it would be ideal if you had a bifilar coil, that way while shorting one of the coils you can measure the voltage on the other on the same core. (and you can then know for a fact the voltage in the shorted coil not one near it unshorted) I ALREADY DO THAT WITH MY BI-TOROID COIL IN DEMO 4 DON'T I?
This is relevant because measuring a whole separate coil does not tell you how much power you have.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT POWER! - FIRST YOU GET THE MONEY! - THEN YOU GET THE CHICKS! - THEN YOU GET THE POWER!.
ALL I CARE ABOUT RIGHT NOW IS SHOWING PROOF OF CONCEPT OF HOW THE EFFECTS OF LENZ'S LAW CAN BE REVERSED AND HARNESSED - THEN OF COURSE HARNESSING THE CHICKS LATER ON.
Another question would be can you measure the short circuit current with a clamp meter?
YES WE DID THAT AT KINECTRICS LABS.
I would not be shocked if when you do the math doesn't add up and you find it to be less than expected.
It's no reason to be concerned, I AM CONCERNED - AETHER22 ARE YOU OFF YOUR MEDS AGAIN ALSO?
HOOKING UP SOME LIGHTS TODAY MAY EVEN HAVE SOME PICS TO SHARE SOON.
Thane
"SOMETHING IS ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND IT AIN'T THE MOTOR.
THE ONLY VARIABLE THAT HAS CHANGED IS CURRENT FLOW IN THE COILS."
Thane
MY APOLOGIES, THIS MAY NOT BE CLEAR - TO CLARIFY:
SOMETHING IS ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND IT IS NOT THE MOTOR ALONE (MEANING THE MOTOR AND THE SOURCE INPUT POWER ALONE) BECAUSE WHEN THE GENERATOR ELECTRICAL LOAD IS TAKEN OFF (OPEN CIRCUIT COILS) THE MOTOR IS NOT CAPABLE OF TURNING THE ROTOR AGAINST THE GENERATOR'S COGGING TORQUE.
LUC'S NEXT VIDEO WILL SHOW THE SYSTEM ACCELERATING UNDER LOAD (LIGHTS AGLOW) - MOTOR INPUT = 199 W
THEN THE LIGHTS WILL BE TURNED OFF (NO LOAD - OPEN CIRCUITED GENERATOR) AND THE "SYSTEM" WILL DECELERATE DOWN TO A DEAD STOP EVEN THOUGH THE MOTOR IS DRAWING CLOSE TO 300 W.
Thane
Looking forward to the video!
All this talk about voltage and current and speed and acceleration and force and all that only serves to obscure the real issue. What matters is only POWER, which is a function of all those things of course, in combination - but power is actually the only thing that matters. The experiment needs to measure the electrical power in, and it needs to provide a (separate) load with a means to reliably measure the power delivered to that load. The experimenter can then jiggle about with the coils and switches in whatever configuration they like. If this thing works it will be very easy to show that there's an increase in efficiency (ie power out vs power in) when the magic is activated. This is an extremely simple experiment to set up and one wonders why none of the videos or other postings ever show that very direct and objective measure. Kind of makes one suspicious...
Quote from: OilBarren on February 29, 2008, 09:39:17 PM
Quote from: innovation_station on February 29, 2008, 09:04:13 PM
;D i like your comic Thane
lol
i can just keep cranknmout ;) if you all like ...... yes another busy day lol
ist
+5 more 2day ;D i just love what i do
isteam!!
WILLIAM - YOU ARE OFF YOUR MEDS AGAIN DUDE !
NAW not enough coffee and the bag is almost empty lol ;) ;)
ist
Quote from: PulsedPower on March 01, 2008, 05:57:03 AM
@Aether22
QuoteThane, it would be ideal if you had a bifilar coil, that way while shorting one of the coils you can measure the voltage on the other on the same core. (and you can then know for a fact the voltage in the shorted coil not one near it unshorted)
That is not a bad idea though you could probably get away with only a few turns as long as the turns ratio was known. Another method would be to wrap the coil in insulation and measure how much it heats up in a given run time, apply DC later to calibrate. Average temperature of a coil can be determined quickly by measuring the DC resistance of the coil at a known stable temperature then looking up the temperature coefficient for the resistance of copper to determine the actual temperature. AFAIK transformer manufacturers do it this way.
I thought of that but it would depend how well distributed those few turns are, if a turn is outside the flux return path it has less voltage induced in it.
As for the heating idea, in motor/gen setups very very much like this one a cooling effect is noted in things such as coils which are normally expected to heat up.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 01, 2008, 10:09:18 AM
All this talk about voltage and current and speed and acceleration and force and all that only serves to obscure the real issue. What matters is only POWER, which is a function of all those things of course, in combination - but power is actually the only thing that matters. The experiment needs to measure the electrical power in, and it needs to provide a (separate) load with a means to reliably measure the power delivered to that load. The experimenter can then jiggle about with the coils and switches in whatever configuration they like. If this thing works it will be very easy to show that there's an increase in efficiency (ie power out vs power in) when the magic is activated. This is an extremely simple experiment to set up and one wonders why none of the videos or other postings ever show that very direct and objective measure. Kind of makes one suspicious...
MOTOR
POWER IN APPROACHES
ZERO (as system speed increases).
GENERATOR
POWER OUT ACROSS LOAD APPROACHES
INFINITY (as system speed increases).
Thane
Quote from: johnnyl on March 01, 2008, 08:58:03 AM
Looking forward to the video!
I HAVE THE OTTAWA SKEPTICS VIDEO HERE BUT I NEED SOMEONE TO TELL ME WHERE TO GO?
- SORRY THAT ALREADY HAPPENED TODAY - I NEED INSTRUCTIONS ON WHERE AND HOW TO UPLOAD THIS VIDEO.
THANKS
Thane
Hey Thane... Do you have a youtube account? If so, you could upload it to that...
Some of the other members seemed to prefer the higher resolution original videos in the past (as opposed to youtube), and had suggested using http://www.megaupload.com . You should be able to upload any file up to 500 mb to that service for free from what I understand. Instructions on how to upload to this site are found here: http://www.megaupload.com/faq/ (you'll have to scroll down a little). Leave the option fields blank like it says, and once uploaded, you should get a link to the file that you can share with us...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 01, 2008, 04:11:09 PM
MOTOR POWER IN APPROACHES ZERO (as system speed increases).
GENERATOR POWER OUT ACROSS LOAD APPROACHES INFINITY (as system speed increases).
Thane
Yes, I understand that is the claim. But there's a very simple opportunity to PROVE it by simply adding a load to the system and mesuring power. It needs to have an actual load, a mechanical load (like a brake), to absorb the output power, and this would also regulate the speed to a chosen steady-state condition. You can then measure the power out of the system under controlled conditions. It is then possible to measure the efficiency (Power-out vs power-in) under two conditions: (a) with the Peripeteia off and (b) with the Peripeteia on. Demonstrating that the efficiency goes up with the Peripeteia engaged would provide incontrovertible proof. It's a very simple experiment: why hasn't anyone done it?
Yes, I understand that is the claim. But there's a very simple opportunity to PROVE it by simply adding a load to the system and mesuring power. It needs to have an actual load, a mechanical load (like a brake), to absorb the output power, and this would also regulate the speed to a chosen steady-state condition. You can then measure the power out of the system under controlled conditions. It is then possible to measure the efficiency (Power-out vs power-in) under two conditions: (a) with the Peripeteia off and (b) with the Peripeteia on. Demonstrating that the efficiency goes up with the Peripeteia engaged would provide incontrovertible proof. It's a very simple experiment: why hasn't anyone done it?
[/quote]
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED A $20,000 REPORT - WHICH MAY ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS AND WILL LITERALLY CAUSE AETHER22 TO DIE IN A FIT OF UNCONTROLLABLE LAUGHTER AND TEARS.
WE WILL BE RECREATING THIS REPORT AT OTTAWA U THIS WEEK. - WITH VERY DIFFERENT RESULTS I IMAGINE
THIS IS FOR JOHNNY
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=31887883-be00-4d3c-8763-d96564794cae
Thank you for posting the article and the reports! I need some time to look over the reports more thoroughly, but the article was interesting!
So Thane, is that really you? I live in Carp, can I come and have a look? If so, please let me have your phone number...
I POSTED THE DEMO VIDEO ON MEGA UPLOAD BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO WORK.
I WILL TRY AGAIN TOMORROW.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 01, 2008, 06:39:39 PMI live in Carp, can I come and have a look?
Every time I make the big 6 hour trek for a Sens game I laugh at the exit to "Carp". But in a nice way. :)
Quote from: SHOCKEDandODD on March 01, 2008, 07:49:35 PM
I POSTED THE DEMO VIDEO ON MEGA UPLOAD BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO WORK.
I WILL TRY AGAIN TOMORROW.
Thane
I was able to download and watch the video as initially posted. However, I had to upgrade to the latest version of Quicktime in order to get both video and audio. Without the new version I got audio only. Alternately, you could try and hunt down the proper codec for use with your current version.
Hi All,
I was also able to download the video from megaupload. If you'd like to avoid megaupload's ads I've uploaded the video to youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CTH3Mzvt-U
Enjoy!
Aaron
What is the link to the megaupload file?
Quote from: johnnyl on March 01, 2008, 10:30:57 PM
What is the link to the megaupload file?
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=KHB9U8QX
Well found I need 2 bearings for the extended axle (a zinc bolt with the head cut off) or else face problems with the connection (via hose, had this issue before when trying coupling with hose).
But the greater annoyance is that for some reason I have not yet established the steel disk is wobbling by several millimeters. (the problem is tiny at the axle but is magnified by the diameter of the disk)
Looks like it's going to be a real pain fixing the latter, easiest solutions I can think of which make a very poor magnetic connection for the disk to the axle.
Maybe if I buy more expensive precision nuts.
Or is the bolt bad? (the disk is fine)
Quote from: aether22 on March 02, 2008, 03:28:34 AM
Well found I need 2 bearings for the extended axle (a zinc bolt with the head cut off) or else face problems with the connection (via hose, had this issue before when trying coupling with hose).
But the greater annoyance is that for some reason I have not yet established the steel disk is wobbling by several millimeters. (the problem is tiny at the axle but is magnified by the diameter of the disk)
Looks like it's going to be a real pain fixing the latter, easiest solutions I can think of which make a very poor magnetic connection for the disk to the axle.
Maybe if I buy more expensive precision nuts.
Or is the bolt bad? (the disk is fine)
WHY DON'T YOU TAKE ME UP ON MY OFFER AND I WILL SEND YOU MY SPARE MOTOR AND ROTOR WITH MAGNETS - ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS MAKE A COIL AND YOU ARE GOOD TO GO?
SHIPPING WILL BE A BITCH BUT SO IS MUCKING ABOUT?
Thane
Thanks Thane--the Megaupload video worked for me on the first try. The resolution and quality are great. Looking forward to Luc's video with the lightbulb as the load.
Quote from: johnnyl on March 02, 2008, 09:57:06 AM
Thanks Thane--the Megaupload video worked for me on the first try. The resolution and quality are great. Looking forward to Luc's video with the lightbulb as the load.
LOOK AGAIN JOHNNY - THERE ARE 8 LED's ON THE PROTOTYPE AND 4 OF THEM WERE HOOKED UP FOR THE SKEPTICS VIDEO. LUC AND I ARE GOING TO RE-SHOOT THE VIDEO AGAIN SO VIEWERS CAN DRAW A CLEAR LINK BETWEEN CURRENT FLOW IN THE COILS (i.e. LIGHTS COMING ON) AND SYSTEM ACCELERATION.
Thane
:)
Thane you dont want me to buy that now do you lol !!!!!
did you find with coils and higher resistance you get a better effect?
all i would have to do is wind a coil ...... hummmmm
how hard could it be ... lol
i did notice on 1 of your vids an ohm reading on a coil as i recall it was quite high in resistance 170 somthing ohms if my memery serves me correct
but hey maybe that just dont matter .... i just so happin to have a few miles of copper wire laying round lol!!
!st
hey here is a pic for you utilizing the kickback tech ;D
already availabile for sale hummmmm
what could i do with a few of thease .......
Thane, yup, I missed them on the first viewing--my bad... I see them now on top of the square frame around the motor--thanks for pointing that out to me!
The LEDs (or a lightbulb) don't prove anything whatsoever. They're internal to the system. What you need to prove is that when the peripeteia is activated, the system delivers more power to an EXTERNAL load for the same amount of power going INTO the entire system. It would be a very clear demonstration to set up and it would prove the issue once and for all. It's such a very simple, objective and direct experiment. Why would you not do that?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 02, 2008, 11:30:42 AM
The LEDs (or a lightbulb) don't prove anything whatsoever. They're internal to the system. What you need to prove is that when the peripeteia is activated, the system delivers more power to an EXTERNAL load for the same amount of power going INTO the entire system. It would be a very clear demonstration to set up and it would prove the issue once and for all. It's such a very simple, objective and direct experiment. Why would you not do that?
My testing of the Bi-Toroid generator design has proved Thane's theory that a decoupled primary uses the same wattage with an open secondary or a loaded secondary. See reply 566, generator test 4 and 5.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 02, 2008, 11:30:42 AM
The LEDs (or a lightbulb) don't prove anything whatsoever. They're internal to the system. What you need to prove is that when the peripeteia is activated, the system delivers more power to an EXTERNAL load for the same amount of power going INTO the entire system. It would be a very clear demonstration to set up and it would prove the issue once and for all. It's such a very simple, objective and direct experiment. Why would you not do that?
Mr. Heins' experiment should be simple to reproduce. I seriously doubt that researchers at General Electric Shell Oil, or some other large corporation with a vested interest in energy resources has not done the necessary experimenting already.
If the device were to actually improve engine efficiency to ~100% or greater, then crude oil (as well as other energy resource prices) would fall from over $100 per barrel to near zero almost instantaneously, and there would be a world wide economic collapse, due to the change in underlying value of most natural resources.
With that sort of money and power at stake, were I in the inventor's shoes, I would be asking the Canadian government to provide me with a security force equipped with a nuclear deterrant capability. ;D
duplicate message by accident... Deleted...
As of 2002, there are over 590 million passenger vehicles in use which are utilizing combustion engines. There are also millions of other combustion engines being utilized in places other than passenger vehicles. If a new technology emerges which will clearly replace combustion engines, the price of oil will not collapse.
It will take some number of decades to replace the existing hundreds of millions of combustion engines currently in use and for that period of time oil, and it's derivatives, will still be in demand (and always will be to some extent). Thus the price of oil will be supported and will not go into freefall. In this instance, oil would probably see a slow decline in price as demand decreases, but this may not even be so given that the capacity to produce oil is changing as the planet follows the peak oil production curve.
Kent1 you are definately not preaching to the choir overhere [thane you go boy] Chet
Quote from: LarryC on March 02, 2008, 11:58:34 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 02, 2008, 11:30:42 AM
The LEDs (or a lightbulb) don't prove anything whatsoever. They're internal to the system. What you need to prove is that when the peripeteia is activated, the system delivers more power to an EXTERNAL load for the same amount of power going INTO the entire system. It would be a very clear demonstration to set up and it would prove the issue once and for all. It's such a very simple, objective and direct experiment. Why would you not do that?
My testing of the Bi-Toroid generator design has proved Thane's theory that a decoupled primary uses the same wattage with an open secondary or a loaded secondary. See reply 566, generator test 4 and 5.
Regards,
Larry
Larry, I read that carefully and it does not provide the clear, direct evidence that I was talking about. The setup needs to measure power input (which yours does) and also to measure power output to an independent external mechanical load (which yours does not). Then it would be a simple matter to demonstrate whether the efficiency (power out vs power in) of the system changes or not when the peripeteia is activated. It's a very simple, direct and clear experiment but nobody seems to have done it. Wonder why?Your open vs loaded secondary doesn't do it because it's not an independent external mechanical load.
Quote from: johnnyl on March 02, 2008, 01:03:31 PM
As of 2002, there are over 590 million passenger vehicles in use which are utilizing combustion engines. There are also millions of other combustion engines being utilized in places other than passenger vehicles. If a new technology emerges which will clearly replace combustion engines, the price of oil will not collapse.
It will take some number of decades to replace the existing hundreds of millions of combustion engines currently in use and for that period of time oil, and it's derivatives, will still be in demand (and always will be to some extent). Thus the price of oil will be supported and will not go into freefall. In this instance, oil would probably see a slow decline in price as demand decreases, but this may not even be so given that the capacity to produce oil is changing as the planet follows the peak oil production curve.
I respectfully disagree. Mr. Heins' device (if it works as it appears) is not simply an incremental leap over existing engine technology. It's the scientific equivalent of magic.
The change would come faster than you can possibly imagine -- and it would rock every political power structure.
Quote from: ramset on March 02, 2008, 01:19:08 PM
Kent1 you are definately not preaching to the choir overhere [thane you go boy] Chet
Chet, I am not attempting to dissuade Mr. Heins from his endeavor. If he's found the energy "fountain of youth," then I salute him for his discovery and courage.
I'm just proposing that if this thing is really what it's purported to be, that it will change the face of civilization -- and that circumstance has certain inherent risks which are potentially hazardous to one's health.
Chet, I am not attempting to dissuade Mr. Heins from his endeavor. If he's found the energy "fountain of youth," then I salute him for his discovery and courage.
I'm just proposing that if this thing is really what it's purported to be, that it will change the face of civilization -- and that circumstance has certain inherent risks which are potentially hazardous to one's health[/u]
NOT REALLY I'LL JUST SHOW THEM THE REMOTELY ACTIVATED LITHIUM BATTERIES EMBEDDED IN THE BASE AND THE "BAD GUYS" WILL LEAVE ME ALONE ONCE I SHOW THEM IT'S ALL FAKE
Thane.
Quote from: kjkent1 on March 02, 2008, 02:17:31 PM
I respectfully disagree. Mr. Heins' device (if it works as it appears) is not simply an incremental leap over existing engine technology. It's the scientific equivalent of magic.
The change would come faster than you can possibly imagine -- and it would rock every political power structure.
Perhaps my opinion is wrong... It's happened before! LOL. :).
Quote from: SHOCKEDandODD on March 02, 2008, 02:39:44 PM
Chet, I am not attempting to dissuade Mr. Heins from his endeavor. If he's found the energy "fountain of youth," then I salute him for his discovery and courage.
I'm just proposing that if this thing is really what it's purported to be, that it will change the face of civilization -- and that circumstance has certain inherent risks which are potentially hazardous to one's health[/u]
NOT REALLY I'LL JUST SHOW THEM THE REMOTELY ACTIVATED LITHIUM BATTERIES EMBEDDED IN THE BASE AND THE "BAD GUYS" WILL LEAVE ME ALONE ONCE I SHOW THEM IT'S ALL FAKE
Thane.
Touche! I admire your openness and sense of humor.
PS. Can I buy a couple shares of your company (shamelessly hedging my bets)?
Quote from: SHOCKEDandODD on March 02, 2008, 07:19:23 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 02, 2008, 03:28:34 AM
Well found I need 2 bearings for the extended axle (a zinc bolt with the head cut off) or else face problems with the connection (via hose, had this issue before when trying coupling with hose).
But the greater annoyance is that for some reason I have not yet established the steel disk is wobbling by several millimeters. (the problem is tiny at the axle but is magnified by the diameter of the disk)
Looks like it's going to be a real pain fixing the latter, easiest solutions I can think of which make a very poor magnetic connection for the disk to the axle. (I could pay you in April/May)
Maybe if I buy more expensive precision nuts.
Or is the bolt bad? (the disk is fine)
WHY DON'T YOU TAKE ME UP ON MY OFFER AND I WILL SEND YOU MY SPARE MOTOR AND ROTOR WITH MAGNETS - ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS MAKE A COIL AND YOU ARE GOOD TO GO?
SHIPPING WILL BE A BITCH BUT SO IS MUCKING ABOUT?
Thane
I
very much want to take you up on your offer but am unable to unless I can give you an IOU for it, should be able to swing the shipping costs.
I very much want to take you up on your offer but am unable to unless I can give you an IOU for it, should be able to swing the shipping costs.
SURE JUST PAY THE SHIPPING - WHAT PART OF THE EARTH ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?
Thane
FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN BEING INFORMED;
I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING THE PRINCIPLES OF HYSTERESIS BRAKE OPERATION AND I FOUND THIS GOOD website http://www.magtrol.com/tensioncontrol/principles.htm
IT TURNS OUT THAT SHORTING THE COILS (INDUCES MAXIMUM COIL CURRENT) AND CREATES MAXIMUM BRAKING EFFECT INSTEAD OF ?RELEASING IT" AS I HAVE BEEN READING LATELY AS AN EXPANATION AS TO WHY MY SYSTEM ACCELERATES WHEN THE COILS ARE SHORTED.
"THE AMOUNT OF BRAKING TORQUE TRANSMITTED BY THE BRAKE IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE AMOUNT OF CURRENT FLOWING THROUGH THE BRAKE COIL. THE DIRECTION OF CURRENT FLOW (POLARITY) IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE TO THE OPERATION OF THE BRAKE." Magtrol Inc U.S.A.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 02, 2008, 08:17:48 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN BEING INFORMED;
I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING THE PRINCIPLES OF HYSTERESIS BRAKE OPERATION AND I FOUND THIS GOOD website http://www.magtrol.com/tensioncontrol/principles.htm
IT TURNS OUT THAT SHORTING THE COILS (INDUCES MAXIMUM COIL CURRENT) AND CREATES MAXIMUM BRAKING EFFECT INSTEAD OF ?RELEASING IT" AS I HAVE BEEN READING LATELY AS AN EXPANATION AS TO WHY MY SYSTEM ACCELERATES WHEN THE COILS ARE SHORTED.
"THE AMOUNT OF BRAKING TORQUE TRANSMITTED BY THE BRAKE IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE AMOUNT OF CURRENT FLOWING THROUGH THE BRAKE COIL. THE DIRECTION OF CURRENT FLOW (POLARITY) IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE TO THE OPERATION OF THE BRAKE." Magtrol Inc U.S.A.
Cheers
Thane
Indeed, in fact by chance i watched a TV program the other day from Discovery in which they showed the magnetic braking system used by roller coasters and they were seeing if it could slow a free fall for emergency evacuations.
All it is is some neo's and some aluminium. (cheaper than copper)
Shorts produce by far the largest Lenz Law effect when outside of your motor gen system.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 02, 2008, 08:02:20 PM
I very much want to take you up on your offer but am unable to unless I can give you an IOU for it, should be able to swing the shipping costs.
SURE JUST PAY THE SHIPPING - WHAT PART OF THE EARTH ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?
Thane
New Zealand.
I'll do the rest by personal message.
Hi All,
I just want to say hi and give a quick update of what I have been doing.
I have been busy trying to conclude one of my own projects in order to free my time to better focus on Thane's work.
Starting Monday, March 3rd I will start making a new primary coil to do further test Thane's Toroid transformers.
We have also shot a new video of Thane's generator which will now show lights attached to each coils (instead of just shorting the coils). I am editing it at this time and will be posting the link in a few days.
Thanks for looking and your interest.
Luc
Hi Thane and all;
Ive been trying to replicate your motor experiment but am not having much luck with the results. I'm using a 1/25 hp induction motor from an walkin cooler evaporator fan. I've made the steel rotor about 6.5" dia. with fairly strong ceramic 3/4" dia. magnets at 45 degree spacing and ( 8 magnets)were used. I'm also using 6 pickup coils that are factory wound 12volt coils, 1.7 ohms resistance each. When I start the motor with no load and no coils it is drawing 2.7 amps @110 volts When I introduce the 6 coils into the system and short them out it still draws 2.7 amps and does not accelerate at all. The coils are putting out 3.2 volts AC each and will light up small 12 volt bulbs as can be seen in my photo.
My unit is quite flexable and can be configured for different coils fairly easily. What am I doing wrong or are these results OK with these small coils??
Regards
Vince
Quote from: gotoluc on March 02, 2008, 08:38:48 PM
... We have also shot a new video of Thane's generator which will now show lights attached to each coils (instead of just shorting the coils). I am editing it at this time and will be posting the link in a few days.
Thanks for looking and your interest.
Luc
You're wasting your time connecting lights to the coils. That doesn't prove anything at all. What you need to be doing is measuring the power in and the power out. If you can show that this technology increases the power out for a given power in, then you're off to the races. But until you do that, it's just snake oil.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 02, 2008, 09:34:24 PM
You're wasting your time connecting lights to the coils. That doesn't prove anything at all. What you need to be doing is measuring the power in and the power out. If you can show that this technology increases the power out for a given power in, then you're off to the races. But until you do that, it's just snake oil.
Um, No.
Trying to prove there is more out than in would be the waste of time.
Any such measurements will be easily disputed (and always is in such cases) and it would be hard to get the current system OU.
Close loop is another matter but would be even harder to get to work correctly and will just attract claims that he really does have hidden batteries.
What has been done is to show that there is a stunning and novel anomaly which no one can honestly account for, which seems like it must break ground on some new physics and which is reasonably straight forward and repeatable (we hope).
Why go to huge effort to make an experiment everyone could have doubts about when there is one currently which requires only a few brain cells and a modicum of honesty (sadly missing in too many) to realize the results are extraordinary and not explained by convention. (at least not on the magnitude and robustness observed)
The best way forward is to better understand what is going on here.
Can a tiny magnetic field really effect the torque output of a motor so dramatically? (or is it more than a basic field)
How is the 'whatever' from the coils effecting the motor, and what other magnetic devices can it also treat for more desired operation?
Is this the result of an unusual electrical like (but abnormal) current in wires that oh so many other similar motors/generator inventors/experimenters have reported time and again?
Can other ways be found to amplify the effect or generate it in a solid state form?
If someone did want to investigate how likely overunity was with this device they would setup 2 motor generator systems. (2 motors 2 generators)
One conventional and high efficiency motor gen pair, giving as great an output for the input as possible.
The other would be Thanes generator attached to a very powerful high speed motor, connected by belt drive, the axle of the generator feeding into the high efficiency motor gen setup.
Since the back-emf or whatever coming from the Thane Generator can't be considered significant energy in a normal sense then you would only count the energy going into and out of the conventional motor/generator and see if that can be pushed into overunity.
People should stop thinking of this as a Free Energy machine, hopefully it will be one day but right now it's a very cool 'physics anomaly' device and in a way that is more valuable than just another FE machine because with this the underlying principle is far more exposed than in most Free Energy designs.
Meanwhile vince, seems to me you don't know for a fact if you are getting Thanes effect or not, sounds like the only way you can be sure is to compare operation when you have a complete magnetic circuit to the motor .vs broken magnetic circuit to the motor (both with shorted coils), if it's faster with the complete magnetic path then you have replicated the effect.
Another thought would be to measure the current pulled by the motor.
Quote from: OilBarren on February 29, 2008, 05:01:19 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on February 29, 2008, 03:03:50 PM
I'm a big fan of simple, but I recognize the problems with this method as was referenced by comments above. To counter those issues we could build a "super simple" test of total energy - run the device with a purely mechanical nonmagnetic light load ex. a simple string winder - place a wooden spool against the motor wheel with a length of string while housed in the "apparatus" using a carefully measured constant amount of energy (hopefully a small battery pack for consistency)... and measure how much string was rolled up. Then remove the motor from the apparatus and run the same test. If the spool rolls more string it is more efficient, if not it is less. This should avoid all of the issues of hysterisis and proper power measurement...
IS THIS NOT SIMPLE ENOUGH?
THIS ACTUAL TEST DATA FROM THE OVERUNITY DEMO AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY FOR LUC AND STEVE.
TEST #1 = NO LOAD ? COIL # 2 = 0.92 VOLTS / INPUT = 275 W SYSTEM SPEED = 60 RPM (approx)
TEST # 2 = MAXIMUM LOAD ? COIL # 2 = 177.7 V / INPUT = 200 W SYSTEM SPEED = 1500 RPM (approx)
COIL # 2 IS OPEN IN BOTH TESTS
AND TEST # 1 IS ALL OPEN CIRCUITED COILS
WHEREAS TEST # 2 ALL THE COILS WERE SHORTED (except # 2)
ALL OTHER COILS EMPLOYED TO DRIVE UP THE SYSTEM RPM
YOU MAY ALSO NOTICE THAT THE INPUT VOLTAGE IN TEST # 1 IS 75.2 VOLTS
IN TEST # 2 THE INPUT VOLTAGE IS 7.2 % V LOWER AND COIL # 2?s OUTPUT VOLTAGE IS 19,215.2 % HIGHER.
SOMETHING IS ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND IT AIN'T THE MOTOR.
THE ONLY VARIABLE THAT HAS CHANGED IS CURRENT FLOW IN THE COILS.
Thane
Thane - I recognize that you can gett a significant increase in voltage, but what we are all looking for is an increase in "useful energy". After reading the report from Kinectrix, and gaining a greater appreciation of the difficulties of verifying the power output of your device, I am all the more convinced that the easiest and most visually simplifying method of verification is mechanical. The device that you have is not easily represented in the standard form of x volts y amps for z time. Using a mechanical measure for the power output will allow you to easily distill all the variables into a simple yes/no factor of the two fundamental questions 1) "Is this more efficient at doing useful work?" and 2) "Is there sufficient useful output to 'close the loop'". At this point, I am not the only one asking this simple question, it seems PolarBreeze has the same request - it seems reasonable.
I wish you the same as Zahn did... Good Luck
@vince,
are you running your power thruogh the load, before or after the short? i think that the experiment is to short the circuit back to the motor not to a load, at this point. i may be reading this wrong so feel free to disagree, however i think to get the acceleration you should just short the circuit.
lol
sam
ps: havn't you got 2.7 amps before and after the power to run your lamp? and you did mention the 3.2 volts, so are we talking 2.7 amps times 3.2 volts? it seems to me to be 8.64 watts of power!!! surely i am missing something here, so please fill me in.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 02, 2008, 10:25:21 PM
Thane - I recognize that you can gett a significant increase in voltage, but what we are all looking for is an increase in "useful energy". After reading the report from Kinectrix, and gaining a greater appreciation of the difficulties of verifying the power output of your device, I am all the more convinced that the easiest and most visually simplifying method of verification is mechanical. The device that you have is not easily represented in the standard form of x volts y amps for z time. Using a mechanical measure for the power output will allow you to easily distill all the variables into a simple yes/no factor of the two fundamental questions 1) "Is this more efficient at doing useful work?" and 2) "Is there sufficient useful output to 'close the loop'". At this point, I am not the only one asking this simple question, it seems PolarBreeze has the same request - it seems reasonable.
I wish you the same as Zahn did... Good Luck
The fact Thanes coils are slowing the wheel down when shorted in test 1 shows that they are using energy. (the best way to find out how much is either with a bifilar coil to sample the flux (for voltage and a hall effect probe or clamp meter for current) or a fractional ohm resistor to give voltage and current)
Mechanical measurement of energy makes no sense I'm afraid.
First we have the problem that not everyone agrees how to measure mechanical energy, in fact the SEAS power people would not accept kinetic FE devices because they believed that the conventional formulas are out by an order of magnitude!
But the best reason is that his generator IS using mechanical energy, it may be helping the motor and maybe the motor it's self has a positive effect on the generator but one thing is for sure, the motor would turn faster and use less power with no generator attached.
It is simply faster than shorted without a magnetic path to the motor.
Even with the coils open regardless of the magnetic path to the motor the generator has many losses which load the motor such as hysteresis (magnetic drag) or eddy currents (electrical induction in the core).
Indeed since even without coils there is electrical induction in the cores (termed eddy currents) and this creates back-emf which speeds up the motor before coil shorting, just realized why his machine speeds up before shorting and I doubt it's the Neo's! This isn't ready for people wanting undoubted Free Energy now, it is however ready for people who want to do their own research, to shout 'Eureka' with the help of Thanes most valuable principle.
If Thane was hoping to show overunity with this model he would not have chosen to run the motor he runs at the speed he does, this is to Demo a FE effect not to be a FE device. (Thane, sure you would agree I but don't want to put words in your mouth)
Just to clear up what I am doing!
Motor input has a clamp on meter on one line which shows 2.7 amps no matter what I do.
Out put coils have been shorted out ( all 6 of them ) and do not seem to affect the RPM or the input current to the motor.
Light was used to show that the coils are producing 3.2 volts, ( measured with a meter at each coil)
Motor does not slow down at all when fully loaded with the 6 coils.
I will be trying this setup with different coils (perhaps some heavy wire) to see if there is any effect.
The other variable is the magnet strength may be too weak for the effect??
Regards
Vince
Hi All ...KneeDeep
I only just noticed this thread. The experiments you are doing with "Thanes motor" seem to be trying to achieve a condition
that I dealt with in 2001.
Very recently, I did a small write up for some "adams motor" beginners (in another overunity.com forum thread) and posted some additional information into a website aimed at helping enthusiasts to attain a basic grasp of pulse motors in general.
On page 8 and page 10 of my site, I dealt with the phenomena of acceleration due to coil loading. But at the end on page 10
I deliberately left my conclusions regarding the reason for this phenomena open, until a time when others might be studying this phenomena independently, and come up with their own conclusions.
Without me tainting their (your) opinions, I might learn something more myself. LOL :D
Visit this link below. Then check out specifically pages 8 and 10 as it relates to the subject of acceleration due to coil loading.
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/
Cheers all......KneeDeep :D
@Aether22 Re the point you made about the magnetic lines not coupling with all the turns on the pickup coil, that is true it is called coupling coeficient in the transformer industry. Many AC welders deliberately make it poor to save on having a seperate inductance to limit current. If you spread the turns out over the length of the coil and only use the pickup coil for metering the voltage drop due to poor coupling will be minimal, poor coupling manifiests itself as a high impedance rather than reduced voltage. Also re your problem of getting a disk and bearings, one way around that, drill a hole in your disk to suit the grinder shaft approximately in the centre and mount it on the grinder directly using the wheel flanges. bolt the grinder down and start it. Assuming the imbalance is not too bad carefully bring the old grinding wheel in contact with the steel disk, and hold it firm while gently feeding it in, keep moving it to even the wear out. It should take about 10 minutes to remove 2mm of imbalance. Wear safety glasses and hearing protection and stand to one side of the disk in case it comes off. If the imbalance is too bad then rotate it by hand while holding a texta near the rim to mark the high spots, remove them with an angle grinder, repeat until satisfactory.
If you decide to mount it seperate on bearings can you describe what you need, my garage is full of junk some of which which may do what you need, and if it only weighs a couple of kilo I dont mind posting from Aus.
@vince, check your motor is not a shaded pole type, these are commonly used for HVAC fans, also Thanes motor was loaded and current limited to give high slip, I suspect your motor is running at close to rated speed ie at low slip
P.S.
@all
You will achieve a much more noticeable acceleration and greater usable power output if your rotor material is non magnetic. Hollow heel end style coil cores also exaggerate the effect. High speed (frequency) plays a dominant part of the effect.
For reference, I'll repeat "Visit this link below. Then check out specifically pages 8 and 10 as it relates to the subject of acceleration due to coil loading.
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/ "
KneeDeep from The Toad who Hops.
I have rather openly argue that Thanes motor generator in it's current form is not in the neighborhood of becoming OU, and I don't believe it is the best approach to try and make it OU right away as we need to know much more of what is going on, but it's not the worst idea to try (though it attracts more unwanted attention)
While that is true, if you wanted to reach overunity without knowing anything more than is currently known here is how you would go about it.
First you would need a far more powerful motor, one with a decent efficiency.
I don't know if an induction motor fits the bill or not as I am not sure of the relative efficiencies of different motor types in general but it would need to draw no more than it's maximum power and work with a damn site less slip than currently. (If you are powering it as recommended then it will be at an acceptable provided you keep it within it's max watt/hp rating)
The best option would be a rotoverter setup which is meant to be OU anyway, though maybe it is in part OU due to this effect? Anyway the motor must be able to run near the speed it was designed for while pulling no more than the rated power.
An AC motor would be strongly recommended. (not counting universal)
Also the hysteresis and eddycurrents must be reduced by use of laminations, metglass if you can (odd even config to eliminate cogging torque won't hurt).
Try and get it so that when the coils are open circuit you are using less energy powering the motor than you hope to get out, hopefully when you go closed circuit you will see significant OU.
Investigate if you are best to short some coils outright and use others for useful energy output, I say this because while in theory the coils are outputting energy in the form of heat and you can calculate the theoretical energy output from a shorted coil, often cooling is found in it's place which may mean no energy output.
The problem is unless it is 10 times the energy chances are you will have many doubters.
To get it self sustaining is tricky because you have to covert the output to a compatible form and you are likely to have runaway effects which will either stop the system or send it into destruction unless you have something to keep power constant, that's all rather complex.
Indeed the only design I've ever seen is the 2 battery system, but batteries not only add further loss and are going to require an inverter to run an AC motor but you will have people wanting to see it run for very long periods powering things other than it's self, you can't get around this because batteries can gain surface charge which is not representative of the power available.
Once you have done that you will attract claims of hidden batteries and the attention of spooks.
So for my money the better course of action is to understand what we are calling 'back-emf', how best to generate the largest amount of it, whatever 'it' is, and finally what it is doing to the motor to give it more torque and speed with less power input, and is there a more attractive target for whatever effect this has on electromagnetic systems.
The end result of that could be anything from knowing how best to apply this discovery to motor generators with a lot less work, to a discovery of how to build an easy to make solid state FE device or at the extreme end, a new branch of physics opening up Star Trek like technology.
Ok, sorry for hogging the thread, but I am going to expand on hoptoad's notes of this anti Lenz effect,
Page 8 & 10 are worth a read no doubt.
One of the things he mentions is that loading the coils slows the motor down, unless it's a short or near short. (showing that Lenz Law is occurring and that the accelerating effect is not linear with current)
He shows by using variable loads that it only works when you are close to no resistance, this is something I hinted at in my post just above and a test I recommended Thane try.
You see if all that was happening was flow of normal current it would slow the motor down, and even if it worked you would expect it not to change how it works based on the load.
The reason is this crazy sounding current which has had me accused of being off my meds ;) really does not like flowing through resistance, and it is this current the induction of which produces no load of the generator at all (regardless of if the motor and generator are connected), ideally we would use wire that let this other current flow and stop the electric current, but the best we can do in this case is feed back some of this other current back into the motor, yeah I know it sounds crazy and I have not explained this fully (such as how a current of a wire is projected from a coil) and I can assure you that none of this is conjecture but over a decade of constant research.
This is also seen in other clues such as the comment that non magnetic disks work best, this stuff can flow through other materials if setup right. (including probably brass if shaped as a bar not just a cylinder)
That was one of the things that made me question if this might be something different, so it's good to see materials other than steel can carry this effect to the motor.
Also interesting is that a cylinder worked best to generate the effect, that is precisely what I would expect! (It may sound odd that a cylinder is good to produce it but poor to conduct it, well it's better than nothing for conduction but far far better is a direct connection without a big break in continuity as occurs at the brass coupler)
Again I know this sounds far out to many (and probably Thane included?) and I sure didn't believe in any such stuff initially and really hated the concept of aether or other airy fairy sounding mysterious mumbo jumb, but the evidence is overwhelming, it would be like denying electricity existed.
If I find more to comment on I will edit this post until there in a new page, to keep my comments under control.
Quote from: vince on March 02, 2008, 09:00:55 PM
Hi Thane and all;
Ive been trying to replicate your motor experiment but am not having much luck with the results. I'm using a 1/25 hp induction motor from an walkin cooler evaporator fan. I've made the steel rotor about 6.5" dia. with fairly strong ceramic 3/4" dia. magnets at 45 degree spacing and ( 8 magnets)were used. I'm also using 6 pickup coils that are factory wound 12volt coils, 1.7 ohms resistance each. When I start the motor with no load and no coils it is drawing 2.7 amps @110 volts When I introduce the 6 coils into the system and short them out it still draws 2.7 amps and does not accelerate at all. The coils are putting out 3.2 volts AC each and will light up small 12 volt bulbs as can be seen in my photo.
My unit is quite flexable and can be configured for different coils fairly easily. What am I doing wrong or are these results OK with these small coils??
Regards
Vince
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE SOME WAY TO
CONTROL MOTOR SPEED (CEILING FAN SPEED CONTROLER or VARIAC) AND SOME
METHOD TO MONITOR MOTOR SPEED (AIR COIL AND VOLTMETER or TACHOMETER)
IF YOUR MOTOR IS RUNNING AT MAX SPEED - I DOUBT IT WOULD ACCELERATE BEYOND THIS POINT.
DOES YOUR SYSTEM DECELERATE UNDER GENERATOR LOAD CONDITIONS?
IF IT DOES NOT DECELERATE - YOUR MOTOR IS TOO POWERFUL OR YOUR COILS ARE TOO WEAK.
ALSO IS YOUR BASE FERROMAGNETIC AND IS YOUR COIL MOUNT FERROMAGNETIC?
IF SO THIS COULD DEFLECT THE COILS INDUCED FIELDS?
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 06:20:56 AM
Again I know this sounds far out to many (and probably Thane included?) and I sure didn't believe in any such stuff initially and really hated the concept of aether or other airy fairy sounding mysterious mumbo jumb, but the evidence is overwhelming, it would be like denying electricity existed.
YES
AETHER22, BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR NICKNAME TO
CONVENTIONALELECTRICITYWISDON22 or
FARADAY'SLAW22,
KIRCHOFF'SCURRENTLAW22 or SOMETHING EQUALLY BORING.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 03, 2008, 06:59:42 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 06:20:56 AM
Again I know this sounds far out to many (and probably Thane included?) and I sure didn't believe in any such stuff initially and really hated the concept of aether or other airy fairy sounding mysterious mumbo jumb, but the evidence is overwhelming, it would be like denying electricity existed.
YES AETHER22, BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR NICKNAME TO CONVENTIONALELECTRICITYWISDON22 or FARADAY'SLAW22, KIRCHOFF'SCURRENTLAW22 or SOMETHING EQUALLY BORING.
Thane
Ah, so you get it ;)
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 07:17:35 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 03, 2008, 06:59:42 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 06:20:56 AM
Again I know this sounds far out to many (and probably Thane included?) and I sure didn't believe in any such stuff initially and really hated the concept of aether or other airy fairy sounding mysterious mumbo jumb, but the evidence is overwhelming, it would be like denying electricity existed.
YES AETHER22, BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR NICKNAME TO CONVENTIONALELECTRICITYWISDON22 or FARADAY'SLAW22, KIRCHOFF'SCURRENTLAW22 or SOMETHING EQUALLY BORING.
Thane
Ah, so you get it ;)
YES I DO GET IT, AND FROM NOW ON YOU WILL BE FOREVER KNOWN AS:
AIRYFAIRY22SORRY DUDE BUT YOU BROUGHT THIS UPON YOURSELF...
Thane
i here some more talk of the hidden batteries....
have we all discovered what they are yet lol
i am sure they are used in this unit...........
THANE i bet you have played with resistors and diodes in similar setups eh? ;)
ist
Quote from: aether22 on March 02, 2008, 10:22:22 PM
Um, No.
Trying to prove there is more out than in would be the waste of time.
Any such measurements will be easily disputed (and always is in such cases) ...
That's not what I said at all. Of course such a claim would be disputed - getting more power out than you put it breaks the energy conservation law. It would be extremely stupid for anyone to claim that. Extremely stupid. But if this thing does anything at all, it will reduce losses and therefore increase the efficiency of the system. That is the experiment I am proposing. It is a very simple, straightforward and transparent experiment to do and the reluctance of those involved to do that experiment suggests to me that they already know it would fail. But I'd be very, very happy for someone to prove me wrong.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 02, 2008, 10:25:21 PM
Thane - I recognize that you can gett a significant increase in voltage, but what we are all looking for is an increase in "useful energy"... Using a mechanical measure for the power output will allow you to easily distill all the variables into a simple yes/no factor of the two fundamental questions 1) "Is this more efficient at doing useful work?" and 2) "Is there sufficient useful output to 'close the loop'"...
Well said, jacksatan - let's get an objective measure of this so we can all see what it's about.
Quote from: aether22 on March 02, 2008, 10:22:22 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 02, 2008, 09:34:24 PM
You're wasting your time connecting lights to the coils. That doesn't prove anything at all. What you need to be doing is measuring the power in and the power out. If you can show that this technology increases the power out for a given power in, then you're off to the races. But until you do that, it's just snake oil.
Um, No.
....
What has been done is to show that there is a stunning and novel anomaly which no one can honestly account for...
Ummmm ::)
More stunning than novel! ;D
It?s stunning indeed to turn a fine motor into a 275W heater.
Then, voila, the beauty of novelty reveals in resurrecting the same motor after it was killed in the first place.
Lol!
@ all,
Take a transformer (any kind) and place a magnet on it. Got it heating already? Place a shielding coil in between magnet and core and the transformer will (partially) resurrect. Voila! Very educative in B-H loops, hysteresis loses and saturation. In addition, any transformer will work in opposition to motors, which may have a stubborn personality. And, as a matter of fact, although it?s still way too expensive for a heater, at least it?s stationary. ;D
Cheers,
Tinu
Quote from: OilBarren on March 03, 2008, 06:50:50 AM
Quote from: vince on March 02, 2008, 09:00:55 PM
Ive been trying to replicate your motor experiment but am not having much luck with the results. I'm using a 1/25 hp induction motor from an walkin cooler evaporator fan. I've made the steel rotor about 6.5" dia. with fairly strong ceramic 3/4" dia. magnets at 45 degree spacing and ( 8 magnets)were used. I'm also using 6 pickup coils that are factory wound 12volt coils, 1.7 ohms resistance each. When I start the motor with no load and no coils it is drawing 2.7 amps @110 volts When I introduce the 6 coils into the system and short them out it still draws 2.7 amps and does not accelerate at all. The coils are putting out 3.2 volts AC each and will light up small 12 volt bulbs as can be seen in my photo.
My unit is quite flexable and can be configured for different coils fairly easily. What am I doing wrong or are these results OK with these small coils??
DOES YOUR SYSTEM DECELERATE UNDER GENERATOR LOAD CONDITIONS?
IF IT DOES NOT DECELERATE - YOUR MOTOR IS TOO POWERFUL OR YOUR COILS ARE TOO WEAK.
Thane,
Isn't there also the possibility that since it doesn't decelerate under generator load conditions, it is producing the effect? i.e. You'd expect it to decelerate but the back EMF flux is feeding back into the motor and helping keep the speed up. I can understand your possibilities too, but I'm just wondering if there might be this third possibility.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 03, 2008, 08:01:43 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 02, 2008, 10:22:22 PM
Um, No.
Trying to prove there is more out than in would be the waste of time.
Any such measurements will be easily disputed (and always is in such cases) ...
That's not what I said at all. Of course such a claim would be disputed - getting more power out than you put it breaks the energy conservation law. It would be extremely stupid for anyone to claim that. Extremely stupid. But if this thing does anything at all, it will reduce losses and therefore increase the efficiency of the system. That is the experiment I am proposing. It is a very simple, straightforward and transparent experiment to do and the reluctance of those involved to do that experiment suggests to me that they already know it would fail. But I'd be very, very happy for someone to prove me wrong.
Um, I think the reason no such test has been done (other than the fact that the test has been done and it's in vid 1&2) is that no one questions for a moment that the losses of the system aren't being reduced, there is seriously less energy going into the motor while it produces much more torque, now please tell me, how is that not efficiency increasing? The only question is if it is becoming OU or if the losses in the system, heating caused by hysteresis and possibly eddy currents etc. are being vanquished for more efficient and powerful operation, I hope for the former but fear it might be all the latter. (in either case the effect is mysterious and I have no doubt it is the aether causing the effect)
-----------------------------
Tinu, what you can't answer is this.
Why does placing a tiny piece of steel connecting the motor and generator seriously increase the torque and speed while decreasing the energy into the motor, turning a lenz law (demonstrated in the first piece) loss into the reverse.
The effect with the transformer has no comparison at all, what is happening here is the opposite, a magnetic field (sometimes vanishingly tiny) is being added and heating and losses go down not up.
If however the magnetic field wasn't vanishingly tiny I'd say the effect is interesting but conventional, explainable. But it is vanishingly tiny.
Also the inefficiency with which the motor is run slightly dramatizes the effect, but it works with universal and DC motors working in a much more healthy mode so your heater comment bears no water.
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 01:39:36 PM
...the test has been done and it's in vid 1&2...
No, the tests in vid 1 and 2 do NOT measure external efficiency, which is why they have no value in determining whether or not this device actually works. All this talk about current and speed and acceleration and torque etc is meaningless because individually these things don't mean a thing. The issue is whether there is any direct evidence - even the slightest piece of evidence, that this device improves system efficiency. Why do you resist the idea that such a basic and simple test should be performed?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 03, 2008, 01:57:42 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 01:39:36 PM
...the test has been done and it's in vid 1&2...
No, the tests in vid 1 and 2 do NOT measure external efficiency, which is why they have no value in determining whether or not this device actually works. All this talk about current and speed and acceleration and torque etc is meaningless because individually these things don't mean a thing. The issue is whether there is any direct evidence - even the slightest piece of evidence, that this device improves system efficiency. Why do you resist the idea that such a basic and simple test should be performed?
First I'd say that what vid 1&2 shows is amazing regardless, it shows a change that should do nothing but has a dramatic effect on the current drawn (energy in), the speed of rotation, the voltage therefore produced, torque, current output.
But now to be useful to you it needs to fit into whatever you mean by 'External efficiency' so please do explain what you mean by this if it's not covered by input power taking a dive as generator losses (outputs), inductive and magnetic increase (as shown in the first vid and hence almost surely present in the 2nd unless the motor dramatically reduces losses in the generator also).
In all seriousness you simply don't want to find that this thing works, you are grasping at straws.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 03, 2008, 07:28:12 AM
YES I DO GET IT, AND FROM NOW ON YOU WILL BE FOREVER KNOWN AS:
AIRYFAIRY22
SORRY DUDE BUT YOU BROUGHT THIS UPON YOURSELF...
Thane
That's ok.
Had always wanted to find the kind of logic loophole I hoped your transformer was, a Free Energy or Antigravity device that somehow tricked the equations, saying to the universe in effect 'now you didn't think of that!'.
Not that one super strange 'energy' made a host of different impossible things possible, but that's where the evidence points, strongly.
So alas I accept that the universe is airy fairy and so must I be also. (though when the aether (read space-time) is not flowing or agitated, energized or distorted it is a very rigid universe granted)
Thane, Isn't there also the possibility that since it doesn't decelerate under generator load conditions, it is producing the effect? i.e. You'd expect it to decelerate but the back EMF flux is feeding back into the motor and helping keep the speed up. I can understand your possibilities too, but I'm just wondering if there might be this third possibility. -Steve http://rimstar.org
MY POINT IS THAT: YOU OUGHT TO HAVE A CONTROL VARIABLE IN YOUR EXPERIMENT.
FOR ME IF YOU CAN'T DEMONSTRATE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR/PRIME MOVER PERFORMANCE VS MAGNETICALLY COUPLED PERFORMANCE THEN IT'S HARD TO COMPARE.
FOR EXAMPLE:
IF THE AIR GAP IS TOO LARGE THE SYSTEM WILL NOT DECELERATE OR IF THE MOTOR IS TOO POWERFUL ETC.
I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SHOW THE "BEFORE" AND "AFTER" SCENARIOS WHERE ALL THINGS ARE VIRTUALLY EQUAL.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 02:15:10 PM
...please do explain what you mean by (external efficiency) if it's not covered by input power taking a dive as generator losses (outputs), inductive and magnetic increase (as shown in the first vid and hence almost surely present in the 2nd unless the motor dramatically reduces losses in the generator also).
In all seriousness you simply don't want to find that this thing works, you are grasping at straws.
What I mean by external efficiency is simply power out divided by power in. Measure those with Thane's device completely out of action (ie make sure it's exerting no drag on the system, either mechanical or electrical: preferably, remove it altogether). Let's say you measure 80W out for 100W in. That means your motor's efficiency is 80%.
Now, connect Thane's device to the system and connect/disconnect any coils you like in any combination. One of three things can happen:
1. That same 100W in gets you 85W out - then this is a valuable invention because you've increased the efficiency to 85%.
2. But if you only get 75W out, then the efficiency has dropped to 75% so it's a bust.
3. If you get 101W out, then you're dreaming.
I'm not sure why you think this is grasping at straws - which part of this suggestion do you find to be unreasonable or illogical?
Quote from: Bessler007 on February 04, 2008, 10:09:28 AM
Bessler007
...I found the patent. CIPO isn't as user friendly as the USPO in the states. They claim to not provide images because they were "unscanable". Lame.
http://patents.ic.gc.ca/cipo/cpd/en/patent/2437745/images.html?section=description&modificationDate=20070315&page=1&scale=50&rotation=0
They scan text into a graphic but can't scan a drawing into a graphic.
That is not a patent. It's just a rather vague patent
application, which was abandoned in March 2006.
Thane;
Thanks for responding. I think I'll keep my nose out of all this discussion that is going on! In the mean time I have taken your suggestions and have begun to make the changes. I have included a variable speed control into the system and now when I turn it on to the minimum speed that it will run at with no output coils shorted it produces about 1 volt AC per coil and turns fairly slowly. When I start shorting the coils it now starts to decelerate and will come to a stop with all coils connected and no added power to the motor. I think you were asking if it would do that and now it does. You are right in that my coil mounts are ferromagnetic (STEEL) and are probably bleeding the flux away. I will mount the coils on a plastic ring in the next day or so and try again.
Thanks
Vince
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 03, 2008, 03:39:21 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 02:15:10 PM
...please do explain what you mean by (external efficiency) if it's not covered by input power taking a dive as generator losses (outputs), inductive and magnetic increase (as shown in the first vid and hence almost surely present in the 2nd unless the motor dramatically reduces losses in the generator also).
In all seriousness you simply don't want to find that this thing works, you are grasping at straws.
What I mean by external efficiency is simply power out divided by power in. Measure those with Thane's device completely out of action (ie make sure it's exerting no drag on the system, either mechanical or electrical: preferably, remove it altogether). Let's say you measure 80W out for 100W in. That means your motor's efficiency is 80%.
Now, connect Thane's device to the system and connect/disconnect any coils you like in any combination. One of three things can happen:
1. That same 100W in gets you 85W out - then this is a valuable invention because you've increased the efficiency to 85%.
2. But if you only get 75W out, then the efficiency has dropped to 75% so it's a bust.
3. If you get 101W out, then you're dreaming.
I'm not sure why you think this is grasping at straws - which part of this suggestion do you find to be unreasonable or illogical?
Um, no, again.
You have correctly recognized that motors output less torque energy than electrical in.
But you have failed in the above example to load the motor so the test without the generator will show very little in and nothing out. (and the efficiency of an unloaded motor is different to the efficiency of a loaded one, also if you are not going to have any drag, then you have no output, can't measure something that does not exist)
You would need to load it mechanically so that it is at the same speed and draws the same amps (has the same drag) as with the generator active with the full path to motor.
But you should find the gen less efficient probably because Thanes generator like any generator has losses compared to the torque input, in fact it has been built to have extra losses to slow it down. (say electricity to torque is a 35% loss (his motor ain't efficient) so you have 65% efficiency, but useful electrical output might be only 50% efficient as eddy and hysteresis losses in the core are so great so 32.5% efficiency or 32.5w from 100w in, meaning even if the amps to the motor halved with the same output you'd still show it as less successful than straight torque)
A better comparison would be to have a known equal drag on the motor, say a shorted generator, hey let's use Thanes! And then try it again with an uninterrupted path to the motor, we know that in each case the generator hasn't changed (unless you propose that the motor sends something to the generator) and is providing the same drag, we can therefore see that the generator's emf/aether output is effecting the motor.
Since the drag in vid one must be present in vid 2 we can count it as output without needing to see if it's still there (if it isn't an even larger miracle has occurred), so now shorted coils, and heating from eddy currents and hysteresis are automatically counted as output.
In short Thane has already done (the sane and possible version of) your test and the result is positive.
Your test is quite simply impossible and nonsensical and even if 'fixed' Thanes current generator is too inefficient to have too much chance of passing it unless you get into calorimetry and measure the heat outputs.
Because you can't possibly explain the effect you are just suggesting very poor experiments to do away with it while ignoring the anomaly.
Edit:
[/color]
Polar, one more thing.
I already suggested the most practical corrected version of the experiment you suggest, which is to run Thanes generator via a belt leaving the shaft free to output flux (though it's possible it would work just find at either end of the axle currently) into another motor (which again should maybe be belt) powering a conventional generator with set load.
Since Thanes generator is not passing any recognized form of energy to the other conventional motor generator system you can simply see if it improves the efficiency to recognize if the effect is valid, though we already know it is.
Quote from: vince on March 03, 2008, 05:07:43 PM
Thane;
Thanks for responding. I think I'll keep my nose out of all this discussion that is going on! In the mean time I have taken your suggestions and have begun to make the changes. I have included a variable speed control into the system and now when I turn it on to the minimum speed that it will run at with no output coils shorted it produces about 1 volt AC per coil and turns fairly slowly. When I start shorting the coils it now starts to decelerate and will come to a stop with all coils connected and no added power to the motor. I think you were asking if it would do that and now it does. You are right in that my coil mounts are ferromagnetic (STEEL) and are probably bleeding the flux away. I will mount the coils on a plastic ring in the next day or so and try again.
Thanks Vince
GOOD VINCE, YOU JUST ESTABLISHED LENZ'S LAW WORKS FOR YOUR SYSTEM.
CAN YOU PLEASE VERIFY THAT YOUR MOTOR IS
NOT A SHADED POLE MOTOR?
GROUNDLOOP ALREADY PROVED THAT THIS TYPE OF MOTOR DOES NOT WORK - ACCELERATION WISE.
THRESHOLD SPEEDIN MY SYSTEM THERE IS A THRESHOLD SPEED -
BELOW THIS SPEED THE SYSTEM ACTS AS A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR AND SLOWS DOWN UNDER LOAD.
ABOVE THE THRESHOLD SPEED
ACCELERATION RESULTS BECAUSE THE COIL MMF's ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO OVERCOME THE ROTOR + ROTOR DRIVESHAFT RELUCTANCE AND MAKE IT INTO THE MOTOR RATHER THAN REMAINING IN THE AIR GAP (AND CAUSING TROUBLE) BETWEEN THE COIL AND MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR AND CAUSING HYSTERESIS BRAKING EFFECT ASSOCIATED WITH LENZ'S LAW.
YOU MAY WANT TO INCREASE YOUR SPEED SLIGHTLY (ABOVE THE THRESHOLD) - ALSO MAKE A SMALL AIR COIL WHICH YOU CAN PLACE NEAR THE ROTOR TO MEASURE mVOLTS - WHICH REPRESENTS A MAKE SHIFT "TACHOMETER" IF YOU DON'T HAVE A LASER TACH LYING AROUND.
YOU MAY ALSO REQUIRE LARGER COILS THAT PRODUCE 50 - 75 - 100 VOLTS AS WELL.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 06:18:46 PM
Um, no, again.
You have correctly recognized that motors output less torque energy than electrical in.
...
You would need to load it mechanically so that it is at the same speed and draws the same amps (has the same drag) as with the generator active with the full path to motor.
But you should find the gen less efficient probably because Thanes generator like any generator has losses compared to the torque input, in fact it has been built to have extra losses to slow it down.
...
In short Thane has already done (the sane and possible version of) your test and the result is positive.
...
Your test is quite simply impossible and nonsensical and even if 'fixed' Thanes current generator is too inefficient to have too much chance of passing it unless you get into calorimetry and measure the heat outputs.
...
Because you can't possibly explain the effect you are just suggesting very poor experiments to do away with it while ignoring the anomaly.
1. "Torque energy" is a meaningless term. Torque is torque; energy is energy.
2. "Load it mechanically" - yes, of course, that's what I'm suggesting! A motor is no good unless it can provide mechanical output so the only proper way to test it is with a mechanical load.
3. "built with extra losses to slow it down" - so what on earth benefit is that? Loss means wasted energy.
4. Thane's test is NOT anywhere close to what I'm proposing because he does not provide an external mechanical load on which to measure the power output.
PolarBreeze ,just for clarity what do you mean by dreaming ,Chet
Hi Thane;
I'm not sure what a shaded pole motor is, But I have taken the name plate data to see if you recognize this type of motor.
Robbins and Myers Ont. Canada
HP 1/25
V 110
CY 60 PH 1
RPM 1550
A 1.5 FR L842
TP T1-AVS1 SER T J2820
Temp Rise 50 deg
I have mounted the coils on a plastic ring. I gave it a quick test. I don't know for sure but I was measuring .5 volts on one open coil with 5 shorted coils and it did not do anything. I increased the speed so that it started making 1 volt on that coil and guess what! it took off and started to speed up and went to 3 volts, with no added power. This is just preliminary. May be I'm seeing things . Going to have to test this further. Was this the threshold speed you talk about?
Vince
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 06:18:46 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 03, 2008, 03:39:21 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 02:15:10 PM
...please do explain what you mean by (external efficiency) if it's not covered by input power taking a dive as generator losses (outputs), inductive and magnetic increase (as shown in the first vid and hence almost surely present in the 2nd unless the motor dramatically reduces losses in the generator also).
In all seriousness you simply don't want to find that this thing works, you are grasping at straws.
What I mean by external efficiency is simply power out divided by power in. Measure those with Thane's device completely out of action (ie make sure it's exerting no drag on the system, either mechanical or electrical: preferably, remove it altogether). Let's say you measure 80W out for 100W in. That means your motor's efficiency is 80%.
Now, connect Thane's device to the system and connect/disconnect any coils you like in any combination. One of three things can happen:
1. That same 100W in gets you 85W out - then this is a valuable invention because you've increased the efficiency to 85%.
2. But if you only get 75W out, then the efficiency has dropped to 75% so it's a bust.
3. If you get 101W out, then you're dreaming.
I'm not sure why you think this is grasping at straws - which part of this suggestion do you find to be unreasonable or illogical?
Um, no, again.
You have correctly recognized that motors output less torque energy than electrical in.
But you have failed in the above example to load the motor so the test without the generator will show very little in and nothing out. (and the efficiency of an unloaded motor is different to the efficiency of a loaded one, also if you are not going to have any drag, then you have no output, can't measure something that does not exist)
You would need to load it mechanically so that it is at the same speed and draws the same amps (has the same drag) as with the generator active with the full path to motor.
But you should find the gen less efficient probably because Thanes generator like any generator has losses compared to the torque input, in fact it has been built to have extra losses to slow it down. (say electricity to torque is a 35% loss (his motor ain't efficient) so you have 65% efficiency, but useful electrical output might be only 50% efficient as eddy and hysteresis losses in the core are so great so 32.5% efficiency or 32.5w from 100w in, meaning even if the amps to the motor halved with the same output you'd still show it as less successful than straight torque)
A better comparison would be to have a known equal drag on the motor, say a shorted generator, hey let's use Thanes! And then try it again with an uninterrupted path to the motor, we know that in each case the generator hasn't changed (unless you propose that the motor sends something to the generator) and is providing the same drag, we can therefore see that the generator's emf/aether output is effecting the motor.
Since the drag in vid one must be present in vid 2 we can count it as output without needing to see if it's still there (if it isn't an even larger miracle has occurred), so now shorted coils, and heating from eddy currents and hysteresis are automatically counted as output.
In short Thane has already done (the sane and possible version of) your test and the result is positive.
Your test is quite simply impossible and nonsensical and even if 'fixed' Thanes current generator is too inefficient to have too much chance of passing it unless you get into calorimetry and measure the heat outputs.
Because you can't possibly explain the effect you are just suggesting very poor experiments to do away with it while ignoring the anomaly.
Edit:
[/color]
Polar, one more thing.
I already suggested the most practical corrected version of the experiment you suggest, which is to run Thanes generator via a belt leaving the shaft free to output flux (though it's possible it would work just find at either end of the axle currently) into another motor (which again should maybe be belt) powering a conventional generator with set load.
Since Thanes generator is not passing any recognized form of energy to the other conventional motor generator system you can simply see if it improves the efficiency to recognize if the effect is valid, though we already know it is.
I am honestly just as confused over here as PolarBreeze... My original suggestion was to put EQUAL LOAD on the system in the contraption as out - I suggested a simple wooden string winder which would put a small but measurable load on the motor and simply measure the amount of string wound both in and out of the contraption. This would put the identical load on the system and would tell you whether while using the SAME amount of input energy you are able to get a greater lesser USEFUL OUTPUT than if the whole contraption did not exist... I do not mean to belittle any of the fascinating exercises on the applicability of Lenz' Law or hysteresis braking, but what I am interested in (and what I believe 99% of those reading the past 45 pages of messages are interested in) is whether Thane managed to increase the efficiency of the motor. One way to verify if it is more efficient is listed above... ways to avoid the question include measuring voltage without amperage, torque without energy, rpms without time, or any other number that is not simply distillable into a number that can finish the following statement: "The unique magnetic structure of this motor has made it __ % more/less efficient than the the use of the motor itself."
BTW - It does not help you case to say in one breath that he has both evidenced a more efficient motor, and that he cannot evidence it due to inherent inefficiencies in his setup...
Quote from: ramset on March 03, 2008, 07:01:27 PM
PolarBreeze ,just for clarity what do you mean by dreaming ,Chet
What he means is that if your results indicate that you have broken the laws of Conservation of Energy, you are either dreaming or likely doing something wrong... here is as good a place as anywhere to indicate that the laws of Conservation of Energy are similar to the laws of gravity in the following way:
In theory, there may be someone out there who can fly, it is unlikely, but possible. How unlikely? Unlikely enough that if I saw Chris Angel flying down the street like Superman, I would not for a moment think that he has broken the laws of gravity, but would instead assume any other conceivable explanation almost regardless how far-fetched before the thought that he has broken the laws of gravity even crossed my mind...
Conservation of Energy is similar... I am open-minded enough to admit that it is "possible", but I am realistic enough to believe that is about as likely as us Muggles not noticing platform 9 1/2 with the train to Hogwarts School of Wizardry...
or 9 3/4... its been a while
I'm in blue once again, polar in black
1. "Torque energy" is a meaningless term. Torque is torque; energy is energy.
It is pretty clear what I mean, let's consult Wikipedia:
If a force is allowed to act through a distance, it is doing mechanical work. Similarly, if torque is allowed to act through a rotational distance, it is doing work.
And work is energy.
Now I am to either assume that you are an idiot, or a c#^t.
You either do not understand that energy can be conveyed through applying torque to a shaft or you are playing some word game in some lame (and IMO failed) attempt at one oneupmanship and making an argument in preference to truth or science.
2. "Load it mechanically" - yes, of course, that's what I'm suggesting! A motor is no good unless it can provide mechanical output so the only proper way to test it is with a mechanical load.
You did not mention any mechanical load, you said "no drag on the system, either mechanical or electrical", now I was not sure at the time but now it's clear that you simply omitted mentioning applying some other load which does drag the motor.
3. "built with extra losses to slow it down" - so what on earth benefit is that? Loss means wasted energy.
This is what you do not understand, Thane did not call it a Free Energy device, the name he gave it is a reverse action device and he has tuned it to make this effect most readily apparent to make a good demo.
And he is very wise in having done so and very likely by studying the physics involved in it's operation it can progress with less negative attention and contribute far far more than just another FE device to be dismantled and ignored. (and not understood)
Yes Free Energy is clearly Thanes goal, but Free Energy is not quite what this device was designed to create, rather to identify and demo an anomaly which can be used for Free Energy in a more efficient device when better understood. (If it had no core losses it would be running at max speed when not shorted already, that would not make a good demo!)
Clearly Thane has not been concerned with making it effecient yet.
4. Thane's test is NOT anywhere close to what I'm proposing because he does not provide an external mechanical load on which to measure the power output.
It has an electrical load that places a mechanical drag.
If you argue that this is not as good as your test then you would have to claim that either: Energy is going missing in the first demo, it is not being wasted as hysteresis, eddy currents, or mechanical vibration but is disappearing and this is not occurring in the second demo.
OR you would need to hold that in the second demo somehow adding the piece os steel has dramatically reduced losses in the generator. (although that would it's self be useful)
Otherwise the generator is an equal or in fact due to the higher speed a greater load in the second demo.
If you have 100 watts usage (through the intended coil induction as well as core losses) in the first demo then tell me how you could possibly have less in the second, and if there is less in the second how would that not be an achievement anyway?
You are utterly missing the point, you have no interest in physics, all you want to do is find the most impractical test to show the device does not work.
WHAT YOU CAN NOT EXPLAIN IS HOW A TINY PIECE OF STEEL ADDED TO THE SHAFT CAN CHANGE IT FROM A DEAD STOP TO OUT OF CONTROL ACCELERATION WHILE REDUCING INPUT!
Suggesting entirely impractical tests that are sure/likely to fail with the current design does not sound helpful to me, you also seem to be assuming that a generator can turn rotational (torque) energy into electrical energy at 100% efficiency, far from it and with a home made generator even further.
If you put 100W into the motor, while pulling 80W on a mechanical load, if you selected a normal electrical generator to provide an 80W mechanical loading it might be 64W electrical output assuming an 80% efficient generator.
Since Thane has huge hysteresis losses due to solid core coils and inefficient pickup coils it would likely require a redesign.
I'd rather not waste my time replying to this nonsense, I don't think you want to get the point of this.
Quote from: vince on March 03, 2008, 07:21:56 PM
Hi Thane;
I increased the speed so that it started making 1 volt on that coil and guess what! it took off and started to speed up and went to 3 volts, with no added power. This is just preliminary. May be I'm seeing things . Going to have to test this further. Was this the threshold speed you talk about?
Vince
Is this a breakthrough?
Lets pay attention to Vince fellas!
;D
:)
CONGRATS VINCE!!
;)
do make a video!!
ist
Quote from: jacksatan on March 03, 2008, 07:29:21 PM
BTW - It does not help you case to say in one breath that he has both evidenced a more efficient motor, and that he cannot evidence it due to inherent inefficiencies in his setup...
It is not my fault you can not grasp a simple sentence.
He can evidence it just fine and has, but only if you count the losses.
If you count only the output of the coils you will have a harder time because the losses are likely larger.
These losses are required because otherwise it would be going at full speed before shorting and there would be nothing to demo.
Is it really that hard to understand that the losses the slowed the generator down in demo 1 are the same losses that are present in demo 2 only in demo 2 they must be greater due to the higher speed.
And therefore the only answer is the motor is now more efficient.
IF that is not the case then the only other vaguely sane way is to assume that by having an all magnetic connection to the motor, the generator became hugely more efficient (due to receiving what? from various motor types) which would make it the reverse but really just as interesting a claim. (that is however less likely as it requires many different motor types to create a mysterious energy to travel through the shaft which effects only this one type of generator since it is known not to happen normally when a motor and gen are connected together)
The only way to test the idea you are proposing is to measure the torque between the motor and generator, if it shows the torque to be greater when at an identical speed (and current) with Thanes gen than with a mechanical load that means the motor is outputting more energy for a certain speed/current.
Comparing the mechanical to the electrical output of Thanes coils is unfair since in reality the weaker the electric current the more pronounced the effect (since Lenz Law is holding up in reality) and Thane has designed it to show off the effect not the electrical output.
I am quite done explaining to anyone why a mechanical load compared to the electrical output is a bad idea.
AETHER22 please don't confuse them with the facts their minds already made up . also I agree Thane is working with this thread [vince] and I tremendously commend that ,Chet
I guess if you're blue and PolarBreeze is black, I'll be red...
I'm in blue once again, polar in black
1. "Torque energy" is a meaningless term. Torque is torque; energy is energy.
It is pretty clear what I mean, let's consult Wikipedia:
If a force is allowed to act through a distance, it is doing mechanical work. Similarly, if torque is allowed to act through a rotational distance, it is doing work.
And work is energy.
Now I am to either assume that you are an idiot, or a c#^t.
You either do not understand that energy can be conveyed through applying torque to a shaft or you are playing some word game in some lame (and IMO failed) attempt at one oneupmanship and making an argument in preference to truth or science.
Your being a little disingenuous here - you cut off the omnipotent Wikipedia mid-statement. The actual text is "If a force is allowed to act through a distance, it is doing mechanical work. Similarly, if torque is allowed to act through a rotational distance, it is doing work. Power is the work per unit time." So once again, achieving higher torque is wonderful, but does not do much mankind - achieving greater Power could change the world...
2. "Load it mechanically" - yes, of course, that's what I'm suggesting! A motor is no good unless it can provide mechanical output so the only proper way to test it is with a mechanical load.
You did not mention any mechanical load, you said "no drag on the system, either mechanical or electrical", now I was not sure at the time but now it's clear that you simply omitted mentioning applying some other load which does drag the motor.
So we're clear on this point?
3. "built with extra losses to slow it down" - so what on earth benefit is that? Loss means wasted energy.
This is what you do not understand, Thane did not call it a Free Energy device, the name he gave it is a reverse action device and he has tuned it to make this effect most readily apparent to make a good demo.
And he is very wise in having done so and very likely by studying the physics involved in it's operation it can progress with less negative attention and contribute far far more than just another FE device to be dismantled and ignored. (and not understood)
Yes Free Energy is clearly Thanes goal, but Free Energy is not quite what this device was designed to create, rather to identify and demo an anomaly which can be used for Free Energy in a more efficient device when better understood. (If it had no core losses it would be running at max speed when not shorted already, that would not make a good demo!)
Clearly Thane has not been concerned with making it efficient yet.
But with all due respect, if we are in agreement that this device does NOT produce greater efficiency than the standard motor, why in the name of everything that is holy is there so much talk about its spectacular voltage?!? There are stun guns out there that run off of a AA battery that can produce 50,000 Volts... shocking isn't it?
4. Thane's test is NOT anywhere close to what I'm proposing because he does not provide an external mechanical load on which to measure the power output.
It has an electrical load that places a mechanical drag.
If you argue that this is not as good as your test then you would have to claim that either: Energy is going missing in the first demo, it is not being wasted as hysteresis, eddy currents, or mechanical vibration but is disappearing and this is not occurring in the second demo.
OR you would need to hold that in the second demo somehow adding the piece os steel has dramatically reduced losses in the generator. (although that would it's self be useful)
Otherwise the generator is an equal or in fact due to the higher speed a greater load in the second demo.
If you have 100 watts usage (through the intended coil induction as well as core losses) in the first demo then tell me how you could possibly have less in the second, and if there is less in the second how would that not be an achievement anyway?
You are utterly missing the point, you have no interest in physics, all you want to do is find the most impractical test to show the device does not work.
Yes, there may be an expected electrical drag, but does that reduce output or not??? if it reduces output, you haven't shown me anything that I haven't seen before, if it increases output, PLEASE SHOW ME HOW MUCH!!! Simply saying "Look it spins fast" does not tell how much energy is being provided. We are all very interested in this phenomenon or we would not be wasting our time writing about it. There is no one on this board who would not be tickled pink if OU were proven a reality, but a simple mechanical test will tell us if there is anything to talk about, or if we should go find something else to occupy our time...
WHAT YOU CAN NOT EXPLAIN IS HOW A TINY PIECE OF STEEL ADDED TO THE SHAFT CAN CHANGE IT FROM A DEAD STOP TO OUT OF CONTROL ACCELERATION WHILE REDUCING INPUT!
I don't have to, you did it for me above - all those comments about hysteresis and eddy currents and what not... but more importantly, though it would be very interesting to replace the electric starter on my car a magnet induced "out of controll" accelerator, I don't think that is what we are looking to accomplish, is it?
Suggesting entirely impractical tests that are sure/likely to fail with the current design does not sound helpful to me, you also seem to be assuming that a generator can turn rotational (torque) energy into electrical energy at 100% efficiency, far from it and with a home made generator even further.
If you put 100W into the motor, while pulling 80W on a mechanical load, if you selected a normal electrical generator to provide an 80W mechanical loading it might be 64W electrical output assuming an 80% efficient generator.
Since Thane has huge hysteresis losses due to solid core coils and inefficient pickup coils it would likely require a redesign.
I'd rather not waste my time replying to this nonsense, I don't think you want to get the point of this.
No one suggested this test to fail - nor am I certain that it will fail (though chances are it will). The purpose of the test is to see just how efficient the motor is... does this motor have any commercial value??? If Thane can show an increase in motor efficiency - not even mentioning OU - there would be a line of financiers out the door looking to license the technology for everything from nuclear powerplant generators to ceiling fans... so why not run the simple test???
Quote from: vince on March 03, 2008, 07:21:56 PM
I have mounted the coils on a plastic ring. I gave it a quick test. I don't know for sure but I was measuring .5 volts on one open coil with 5 shorted coils and it did not do anything. I increased the speed so that it started making 1 volt on that coil and guess what! it took off and started to speed up and went to 3 volts, with no added power. This is just preliminary. May be I'm seeing things . Going to have to test this further. Was this the threshold speed you talk about?
Vince
WHAT DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY "
I INCREASED THE SPEED" ?
MAY I RECOMMEND THAT YOU START OUT WITH ALL COILS
OPEN - MAKE SURE YOUR 1 VOLT COIL IS AT 1 VOLT (AND NOT ACCELERATING - SHOULD BE A STEADY STATE SPEED) - AND
THEN SHORT OUT THE OTHER COILS -
DO NOT TOUCH THE INPUT - IT SHOULD EITHER DECELERATE OR ACCELERATE? LET'S SEE... WE ALL HAVE OUR FINGERS CROSSED FOR YOU VINCE!
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 08:24:27 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 03, 2008, 07:29:21 PM
BTW - It does not help you case to say in one breath that he has both evidenced a more efficient motor, and that he cannot evidence it due to inherent inefficiencies in his setup...
It is not my fault you can not grasp a simple sentence.
He can evidence it just fine and has, but only if you count the losses.
If you count only the output of the coils you will have a harder time because the losses are likely larger.
These losses are required because otherwise it would be going at full speed before shorting and there would be nothing to demo.
Is it really that hard to understand that the losses the slowed the generator down in demo 1 are the same losses that are present in demo 2 only in demo 2 they must be greater due to the higher speed.
And therefore the only answer is the motor is now more efficient.
IF that is not the case then the only other vaguely sane way is to assume that by having an all magnetic connection to the motor, the generator became hugely more efficient (due to receiving what? from various motor types) which would make it the reverse but really just as interesting a claim. (that is however less likely as it requires many different motor types to create a mysterious energy to travel through the shaft which effects only this one type of generator since it is known not to happen normally when a motor and gen are connected together)
The only way to test the idea you are proposing is to measure the torque between the motor and generator, if it shows the torque to be greater when at an identical speed (and current) with Thanes gen than with a mechanical load that means the motor is outputting more energy for a certain speed/current.
Comparing the mechanical to the electrical output of Thanes coils is unfair since in reality the weaker the electric current the more pronounced the effect (since Lenz Law is holding up in reality) and Thane has designed it to show off the effect not the electrical output.
I am quite done explaining to anyone why a mechanical load compared to the electrical output is a bad idea.
One more try - keep in mind we are on the same side... let's try this one point at a time - if the only thing stopping an equal mechanical demonstration is that the motor will be running at "full speed", why not put a mechanical load on the motor to slow it down? Then when you attach the magnets you will either see the motor output increase or decrease? In order to allow for the mechanical load to visably slow down the motor you may need to tie a five pound weight to the end of the string winder, but it's the same principle...
Thane;
I'm not sure if I have anything here or not! I tried starting the motor with all the coils open and my meter on one coil to show output. I reduced the speed via the control to the minimum speed that it would run at and let it stabilize. I then started shorting coils 1 at a time and by the third coil it stopped. So, I disconnected all the coils again and started the motor, this time I gave it about 1/4 to 1/3 turn on the speed control. I don't have a tach so my only indication of speed is the output at the coil. This time as I started to hook up the coils and it did not slow down but kept on running although I don't know if it is speeding up. It sounds like the same speed and the output coil still puts out the same as when it was unloaded. The strange thing is that once it stabilizes at its own speed I can dial back the control to minimum setting and maintain the speed and output at the coil. If I start the motor with all coils open and try to run it at minimum speed setting it barely turns if not stops. It seems that once a certain speed is attained you can load the output coils, back off the controller and still maintain output and speed. I need to find a way to measure RPM and also to test some larger coils with laminated cores. The small coils that I have now have solid cores and maybe Laminations will enhance the effect. I can certainly see how you may have become motivated when you discovered this.
Also when the motor became fully loaded at the lowest speed setting it was drawing about .1. I know this is not much but a loaded motors should draw more not less.
Regards
Vince
Quote from: ramset on March 03, 2008, 07:01:27 PM
PolarBreeze ,just for clarity what do you mean by dreaming ,Chet
Chet, what I mean by dreaming is that it is a fantasy to expect to put 100W in and to get >100W out. And it does a disservice to Thane's idea for people to be associating it with that idea. It's quite possible that Thane has invented a way to greatly improve the efficiency of electric motors. It would be a great shame for that invention never to see the light of day because its credibility is shot by linking it to the idea of perpetual motion.
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 07:47:49 PM
...Now I am to either assume that you are an idiot, or a c#^t.
...or you are playing some word game in some lame (and IMO failed) attempt at one oneupmanship...
...You are utterly missing the point, you have no interest in physics, all you want to do is find the most impractical test to show the device does not work.
...I'd rather not waste my time replying to this nonsense, I don't think you want to get the point of this.
I was hoping that we're having an objective discussion about how to prove that this device works and I'm kind of shocked at your reaction so I'm sorry if something I've said has offended you. Perhaps we have a different concept of what "prove that the device works" means. Here's my point of view on that: the proposition being made is that adding this device to an electric motor will make the motor more efficient. Do we agree that's the proposition - if not, please describe to me what you consider to be the proposition. Then maybe we can get on the same page.
Satan, not sure we are on the same side ;)
Again I will not discuss this mechanical testing idea with anyone, I have said I doubt it will work, pointed out that a failure of it to work proves nothing (and is not required for proof of the effect) and explained how to carry the test out successfully (which did not interest any arguing for it), I do not believe any or the majority of those arguing for it to be genuine or intelligent or interested in overunity or even a performance enhancement. THE END
-------------------------
Thane , I have been looking for any way I can preform the experiment before/without getting the disk from you, and I may have found one. (Incidentally if 'they' are being genuine (they aren't, considering OU 'dreaming' on an OU forum is clearly skeptic) then it would make polar et al happy.)
I have a synchronous motor, it's either a hp or close to it, it has a pully on which was mounted an aluminum disk, I have chosen not to use the Aluminum disk but mount my steel disk on it, but in isolation of any steel parts (the pully is perfect, no wobble and my steel disk on it has no wobble), and have a bolt protruding from the center to carry the flux to the device under test, initially a bench grinder motor under a mechanical load. (it has no mechanical connection to the disk of course)
Now I'm not saying you should delay in sending the disk as this setup may not work, but you could help me by running a simple test, should be pretty easy.
Take a bench grinder motor, other induction motor (or even your drill if you stick it on your variac) and apply a mechanical load, even your hand + glove, and place either next to (or lightly touching) the free end of the axle of the wheel side, or on the back of the motor end.
See if the 'back'emf'/aether gets into and increases the torque. (if not my experiment won't work)
It would seem very very unlikely that you need the motor physically connected to/rotating the disk for it to effect the motor, but it would be very interesting to prove as it opens up the possibility of using a normal motor with or without a normal generator and increasing it's output with possibly a solid state low power back-emf/aether generator coil slipped over the shaft or something.
I hope to have this completed some time late tomorrow, the main time waster will be in winding and mounting the coils as well as trying to find core.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 03, 2008, 10:51:54 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 07:47:49 PM
...Now I am to either assume that you are an idiot, or a c#^t.
...or you are playing some word game in some lame (and IMO failed) attempt at one oneupmanship...
...You are utterly missing the point, you have no interest in physics, all you want to do is find the most impractical test to show the device does not work.
...I'd rather not waste my time replying to this nonsense, I don't think you want to get the point of this.
I was hoping that we're having an objective discussion about how to prove that this device works and I'm kind of shocked at your reaction so I'm sorry if something I've said has offended you. Perhaps we have a different concept of what "prove that the device works" means. Here's my point of view on that: the proposition being made is that adding this device to an electric motor will make the motor more efficient. Do we agree that's the proposition - if not, please describe to me what you consider to be the proposition. Then maybe we can get on the same page.
I am reluctant to go back on my word and I see honestly nothing more I could possibly say.
No the device is not in it's current form a device which will make a motor more effective overall because right now the device has been designed to do 2 things, to act as a mechanical load and to improve the motor as it powers said load.
I have explained how to do the test, to use another motor to feed the generator, and have the back-emf/aether/whatever from the Thane generator feed into a stand alone with a control test load.
Since the Thane generator is not outputting any notable energy to the motor we can ignore the power it takes to drive it and simply see if it has any effect.
In the end no such test is needed since if you have a decent comprehension of what is going on then no answer besides improved motor efficiency could possibly explain the results in demo 1&2.
I have now restated what I had already said, so if you are looking for further reply from me I suggest rereading what I have already said and trying to understand it.
Also I don't know what you are doing on an OU forum if you believe OU to be impossible.
And I really really do not want to be drawn into this anymore so unless someone has a new idea please don't address me in any way that expects a reply on this subject
@ All
Thane, please take no offence to the following as this is not a personal attack. I just feel that the "discovery" needs to be attributed to the correct person.
Thane did not make this "acceleration when coil is loaded" discovery.
He has rediscovered what Robert Adams had previously discovered and documented in 1977 !
You all seem to be unaware of this, and seem to be intent on re-inventing the wheel.
I researched this phenomena during the years 1999-2001. The effect is present in ANY OPEN MAGNETIC generating system.
But the effect can be so subtle until correct conditions are met, that it is often not observed.
The amplitude of the effect is frequency (rotor speed) and coil impedance dependent. The relationship with both parameters is non linear and parabolic in function.
@Vince, this is why your setup exhibits a "threshold speed" before you notice the effect taking place.
IMHO, study what is happening in the generator pickup coil and core, and forget about the motor.
Stop thinking about the electricity, and what it's expected phase relationships are and think purely about magnetic phase relationships and what you think they should be but aren't !
Then ask yourself why aren't they what you were expecting! (assuming you've successfully observed the phenomenon)
Phasing out for a while.....KneeDeep. .......I've hit a bloch wall........need some transition time to rest......Then I'll kick my heel ends up
Cheers from the Toad who Hops. :D
Hoptoad, I have not read your entire post yet, so it's possible you will make this point anyway but while Thane was not the first to observe this effect, nor is Robert Adams the first for sure (though he's a fine fellow Kiwi, I even got to meet him, and not he developed an aether theory also)
Thane is the first to find that the effect is the result of the back-emf/aether effecting the power of the motor and that there must be good coupling to the motor for the effect to exist.
And really that IMO is the greatest breakthrough, many have made generators like this, but finding motors detect this 'energy' is an extremely important breakthrough.
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 01:39:36 PM
Tinu, what you can't answer is this.
Why does placing a tiny piece of steel connecting the motor and generator seriously increase the torque and speed while decreasing the energy into the motor, turning a lenz law (demonstrated in the first piece) loss into the reverse.
The effect with the transformer has no comparison at all, what is happening here is the opposite, a magnetic field (sometimes vanishingly tiny) is being added and heating and losses go down not up.
If however the magnetic field wasn't vanishingly tiny I'd say the effect is interesting but conventional, explainable. But it is vanishingly tiny.
Also the inefficiency with which the motor is run slightly dramatizes the effect, but it works with universal and DC motors working in a much more healthy mode so your heater comment bears no water.
This must be a joke, isn?t it?!
Of course it can be explained. I talk about:
?Why does placing a tiny piece of steel connecting the motor and generator seriously increase the torque and speed while decreasing the energy into the motor, turning a lenz law (demonstrated in the first piece) loss into the reverse.?, which shall be read
?Why does placing a tiny piece of steel connecting the motor and generator
(seriously) increase the torque and speed IN COMPARISON TO A KILLED MOTOR BUT STILL TOTALLY INSIGNIFICANT IN COMPARISON TO THE NORMAL WORKING REGIME while decreasing the energy into the motor, AND NOT turning a Lenz law
(demonstrated in the first piece) loss into the reverse BUT JUST DECREASING LOSES TO SOME EXTEND (which seems impressive from visual point of view but totally irrelevant).?
A 200W motor running idle shall take maybe 30-50W or less at its designed speed, which I assume is well in excess of 3kRPM. By the way, all those motor parameters should have been clearly stated in the beginning of all experiments. What?s that difficult to run the motor idle, to measure and to present its idle power and speed?! Other than embarrassment, of course?
You must have been somehow blinded by looking at a twisted and mind-twisting setup.
?The effect with the transformer has no comparison at all, what is happening here is the opposite, a magnetic field (sometimes vanishingly tiny) is being added and heating and losses go down not up.?
Losses go down?!!! When you start with a system that initially has 275W losses (it barely moves so bare with me that almost all input power goes into losses) of course losses goes down. It can not go up, for God?s sake! It?s already very close to 100% at start. Now that?s a ?great accomplishment? indeed, to come with a system that produces nothing but losses!
Transformer is the same. Do some experiments for yourself. When you add a metal shielding or a coil shielding, you?ll find it?s exactly the same ? well, let?s call it ?effect? for the sake of so many readers here. Then the explanation you seek for and that you assume it doesn?t exist will be already in your own hands.
Cheers,
Tinu
Greetings @ aether22
:Quote " Thane was not the first to observe this effect, nor is Robert Adams the first for sure (though he's a fine fellow Kiwi, I even got to meet him, and not he developed an aether theory also)"
I Agree. Robert Adams was the first, however, to highlight and incorporate the observed effect into a working patented pulse motor/generator system. I also had the pleasure of meeting him briefly, but only as a curious seminar attendee. That was in 1995 in Sydney.
:Quote "Thane is the first to find that the effect is the result of the back-emf/aether".
I Disagree. Adams attributed this effect to "aether gating". Beyond that, I also disagree with Adams. IMHO, there is no O/U or "aether gating" going on here, but there is a very practical effect that has serious implications for more efficient alternators.
:Quote "And really that IMO is the greatest breakthrough, many have made generators like this, but finding motors detect this 'energy' is an extremely important breakthrough."
I'm still open minded on this one. More information please........KneeDeep....... :D
IMHO, something much simpler than aether gating is going on, but I'm all ears on everyones theories. ;)
My own experiments indicated that there are no net gains in total system energy, but there is a significant decrease in wasted energy and wasted torque as oppositional magnetic forces undergo relational phase shifting at higher frequencies.
Achieving these magnetic phase shifts is actually quite easy with low impedance coils, wound heel end style on solenoid cores, and using high speed rotor drivers.
Cheers all. :)
Tinu, from reading your reply I find nothing worth replying to, other than to say that you have ignored that the effect works with motors run at a high level of efficiency and that changing the efficiency of the motor with the back-emf from the generator is not explainable by current physics, it does not matter how interesting you find the effect to be, you have not argued the effect does not exist only that it does not interest or impress you, so I suggest you leave.
Quote from: tinu on March 04, 2008, 03:33:56 AM
BUT JUST DECREASING LOSES TO SOME EXTEND [/color] (which seems impressive from visual point of view but totally irrelevant).? [/color]
:D :D :D :D :D........ totally irrelevant ??? hmmmmmm........KneeDeep
:Quote "Thane is the first to find that the effect is the result of the back-emf/aether".
I Disagree. Adams attributed this effect to "aether gating".
I can't be bothered checking what I said but what I meant to say is: Thane is the first to find that the effect is the result of the back-emf/aether getting into the motor when conducted into the motor improving motor performance.
Adams did not find such since he did not AFAIK use separate motors with and without an aether conducting shaft.
Beyond that, I also disagree with Adams. IMHO, there is no O/U or "aether gating" going on here
I know the aether IS in play, no doubt and it can be proven with experiments I have sent you in pm.
As for overunity I believe it has been demonstrated by such systems but even IF it has not with this type it is achievable with other setups. (meaning other than mot/gen)
:Quote "And really that IMO is the greatest breakthrough, many have made generators like this, but finding motors detect this 'energy' is an extremely important breakthrough."
I'm still open minded on this one. More information please........KneeDeep....... :D
Well I sent you a private message, one test which I think that stands a fair chance of working is outputting (from the gen) to another external coil and using this coil to effect motors just as Thane has shown the 'whatever' from the generator coil to effect the motor only in this case more directly, if that works then establish the current level in the coil and recreate with a normally sourced electric current and compare 2 identical coils with the same ampere turns of DC, if this 'energy' is flowing through the wires of the alternator energized coil it should have different effects.
Achieving these magnetic phase shifts is actually quite easy with low impedance coils, wound heel end style on solenoid cores, and using high speed rotor drivers.
Heel end style means that the coil is only wound on the front half of the core, right?
Please clarify what you mean by 'solenoid cores', are you talking about the cylindrical iron cores you mention on the site?
If you have a model handy spin it up and try some of these experiments I mentioned before I get to 'em.
@aether22
:quote "Please clarify what you mean by 'solenoid cores', are you talking about the cylindrical iron cores you mention on the site?"
Yes, by solenoid, I mean hollow cores. You will have a significant decrease in magnetic drag without a co linear equivalent loss of
magnetic coercivity of the core. The overall electron yield of the total core mass may decrease slightly with decreasing mass, but the percentage electron yield per unit mass will increase greatly, in conjunction with the decreased drag. Any hollow iron core material is preferable to a solid core, but nickel-iron-tin alloys, or MU-Metal for the hollow cores, will yield superior output and phase shifting characteristics.
:quote "If you have a model handy spin it up and try some of these experiments I mentioned before I get to 'em."
After recently moving interstate, I'm not geared up for anything in the model arena at the moment. .......KneeDeep.....
no tools, no workshop, a limited budget and very little time..............But I wont rule it out ;)
Curiosity killed the Cat... KneeDeep... I hope it doesn't kill the frog!
Cheers
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 04:06:10 AM
Tinu, from reading your reply I find nothing worth replying to, other than to say that you have ignored that the effect works with motors run at a high level of efficiency and that changing the efficiency of the motor with the back-emf from the generator is not explainable by current physics, it does not matter how interesting you find the effect to be, you have not argued the effect does not exist only that it does not interest or impress you, so I suggest you leave.
Oh, but that?s exactly what I implied: the effect does not exist at all as long as we speak about Lenz law. I would find it extremely interesting, if real. Unfortunately this was not the case here with what was presented so far.
Improvement in efficiency is something easily achievable (enough while maintaining losses to increase the magnetic field by any means to get an improved efficiency) especially in commercial motors, which were not designed for best efficiency but for best cost-performance ratio. That and hiding behind crude and miss-interpreted data is not impressing me much.
At least I fully agree with you that it is not much substance to discuss into this thread and I?ll leave it. My small contribution besides pointing to the fact that subject is very thin was, if it may be reminded, that instead of using a motor-shield(metal and/or coil)-magnet setup, one can use a much cheaper and much facile transformer-shield-magnet setup. It behaves exactly the same way in all respects and it?s not subject to mechanical parameters (hence better data on power in, power out, losses) and to so much internal/constructive variability as in motors.
See you all later,
Tinu
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 01:40:35 AM
...No the device is not in it's current form a device which will make a motor more effective overall because right now the device has been designed to do 2 things, to act as a mechanical load and to improve the motor as it powers said load.
Yes, aether22, it looks like we agree on the first part - I have reached the same conclusion. This device puts a load on the motor, and that load can then be altered by means of feedback into the motor from the back-emf in its associated coils. However, this does not seem to be an improvement to the motor - would it not be better to remove that load altogether, since it is only producing waste heat and is not providing any useful work? It's analogous to adding a brake to the system - a brake acts as a mechanical load, producing waste heat, and when you ease off on it, the motor goes faster and the waste heat is reduced - but the motor will of course work best if you remove the brake altogether.
Quote from: aether22 on March 03, 2008, 11:32:38 PM
(Incidentally if 'they' are being genuine (they aren't, considering OU 'dreaming' on an OU forum is clearly skeptic) then it would make polar et al happy.)
The powerful thing about the scientific method is that it does not depend on the personal beliefs of the people involved. It doesn't matter at all if I'm a skeptic or not because results can be proved or disproved with experiments - and those experiments can be replicated by others to support or to discredit the results.
It is extremely easy to set up an experiment that measures the power in and the power out, and allows you to make an objective measure of the system efficiency with and without Thane's device in the system. I would do it myself except that (a) I do not have the mechanical skills or tools to do it and (b) if I did it and it disproved the theory, then you'd simply say I cooked the books. So I think the onus is on you, or one of the other proponents of the device, to perform this experiment. Why do you resist that so vigorously?
Hoptoad;
My setup IS using solenoid coils with hollow cores but I have installed the solid armatures in them for my tests. Should I remove the solid cores?
Am I just wasting my time here Or is the effect worth replicating??
Vince
Quote from: hoptoad on March 04, 2008, 04:26:16 AM
Quote from: tinu on March 04, 2008, 03:33:56 AM
BUT JUST DECREASING LOSES TO SOME EXTEND [/color] (which seems impressive from visual point of view but totally irrelevant).? [/color]
:D :D :D :D :D........ totally irrelevant ??? hmmmmmm........KneeDeep
Forgot to reply earlier:
I said ?totally irrelevant? because output is still in mW-W range while input power is around 200W. Everything is hundreds of years behind what we already know and use. To put it more freely, that motor should rotate the shit out of a rotor like the one we see in the movie for much less than 200W if not poisoned by improper use of external magnetic flux. If I knew the mass and radius involved I?d compute moment of inertia, angular acceleration and achievable RPM. But that is not telling much to some people around. Instead, consider a small grinder (mine is 120W at around 2900RPM) and see that it accelerates fast, it takes extremely little power to maintain that speed when idle and that it indeed put out maybe around 100W of useful work when grinding. One can mess it with magnets but it would be wiser to do it only after documenting its un-hampered performances. And then a look at the two sets of figures may speak for itself.
In the last posts Polarbreeze actually said it very well: figures speak. I?d like to add maybe the well-known concept of baseline. If baseline is 275W in and 0(or very close to it)W out, then one bare Watt out is already a huge achievement. What?s the baseline here? I must have missed it...
And then it appears out of nowhere a quick jump to the conclusion: Lenz law is bent (I always laugh because of this verb; a law can not be bent by definition in its entire area of applicability. It?s either valid or not. And if it?s not valid, it ceases to exist as a law. So a law is always valid. At best the area of its applicability can be reduced: i.e. classical mechanics versus relativity, ohm in DC versus AC). Well?! I can accept (although rigorous data and proof are needed) that Lenz law is, in the best scenario and most excited interpretation given to the actual experiments, ?bent? at around zero efficiency. But who cares? Who?s gonna make use of it? We are at >90% efficiencies already.
Tinu
I never had the chance to express my appreciation for your excellent hard and high-quality work. I sincerely and respectfully do it now. I?m familiar with your well written web pages (and associated experiments) since November and although I didn?t have time to work on the subject, following your recent clear statement that the system is not OU, I tend to believe it?s an issue of impedance matching.
Yes, aether22, it looks like we agree on the first part - I have reached the same conclusion. This device puts a load on the motor
As it is designed to for the Demo.
It need not put any load on the motor either at all or that it does not output in electrical form if designed without various losses currently in place deliberately.
and that load can then be altered by means of feedback into the motor from the back-emf in its associated coils.
No, the back-emf going into the motor does not decrease the mechanical load the generator puts on the motor, it does reduce the electrical load though.
However, this does not seem to be an improvement to the motor - would it not be better to remove that load altogether
In it's current form yes, if you are interested in something ready to manufacture without any research look elsewhere, what this device proves is however most extraordinarily important.
, since it is only producing waste heat and is not providing any useful work? It's analogous to adding a brake to the system - a brake acts as a mechanical load, producing waste heat, and when you ease off on it
Only the waste in the generator is not reduced, the mechanical load on it stays constant.
The waste in the motor is reduced and that is useful, and it may even be over unity. (though you would need to count the heating output in it's current form)
Seriously, you and various others saying much the same thing really seem to have a problem understanding anything but the most simple and most unsubtle issues.
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 04:54:00 PM
Polar: However, this does not seem to be an improvement to the motor - would it not be better to remove that load altogether
Aether: In it's current form yes...
Good, now we're getting on the same page. So we agree that, with the device in its current form, the motor works better if the device is removed. So far so good.
The next question, then, is: what results are there from the current experiments that suggest how it would eventually be modified to improve the motor performance rather than detract from it?
Polar, I have already said how in other messages, to recap:
Reduce losses (friction and cogging torque, wind, eddy, hysteresis) and make use of the energy induced in the coils. (but that would make a sad demo as it would not go (much?) faster when shorted as it would already be at/near max speed unless you added another load)
Or the isolation experiment I suggested, basically to research what the generator is outputting, generate it more powerfully with less input and output it to better use than a motor.
Finally selection of the right motor for the job rather than the right motor for a dramatic demo.
But as for proving it works (does something unexplainable and fascinating according to physics), that part is already done.
yadda, yadda, yadda ::)
Does it work or not?
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 07:39:35 PM
yadda, yadda, yadda ::)
Does it work or not?
Of course it works, that is a proven fact.
But I wonder if you are trying to trick me.
If you want to discredit it, you could make a straw man attack, claim it does not work as something other than what Thane (or I for whatever that's worth) has claimed it to be.
A ready to manufacture net motor power booster, no, not yet.
A Free Energy generator that out preforms normal generators, no, not yet.
A device that creates something that travels through the shaft and into the motor boosting motor power in a way not explainable by current physics opening up a new arena of research which can surely lead to the above, YES!
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 07:41:58 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 07:39:35 PM
yadda, yadda, yadda ::)
Does it work or not?
Of course it works.
The definition of "works" is the following:
1. Connect an electric motor to an arrangement of magnets on a disc, with adjacent coils and things. This arrangement loads the motor (through the electromagnetic force between the magnets and the coils) and so slows it down.
2. With a series of switches that make the loading coils open-circuit vs closed-circuit, reduce the electromagnetic loading (because of changing the back-emf).
Result:
The motor speeds up and the input power goes down. The reason is probably that in #2, there is less power being dissipated in the loading mechanism.
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 07:41:58 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 07:39:35 PM
yadda, yadda, yadda ::)
Does it work or not?
A ready to manufacture net motor power booster, no, not yet.
A Free Energy generator that out preforms normal generators, no, not yet.
So the answer is no, thanks aether.
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 09:53:44 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 07:41:58 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 07:39:35 PM
yadda, yadda, yadda ::)
Does it work or not?
A ready to manufacture net motor power booster, no, not yet.
A Free Energy generator that out preforms normal generators, no, not yet.
So the answer is no, thanks aether.
YOU HEARD THE MAN AETHER IT'S TIME FOR US TO ALL
JUST DO IT...AND
GIVE UP AND GIVE IN!Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 04, 2008, 10:05:14 PM
YOU HEARD THE MAN AETHER IT'S TIME FOR US TO ALL
JUST DO IT...
AND
GIVE UP AND GIVE IN!
Thane
I'm sorry, I'm a little lost here, I thought you had something that worked?, so wtf is to "give up and give in" on?
polar said;
The motor speeds up and the input power goes down. The reason is probably that in #2, there is less power being dissipated in the loading mechanism.
Only if you hold that Thane has it the wrong way round and that an even more unlikely effect is occurring involving transmission of something from various different types of electric motors into the generator to reduce it's losses, and that this while coming from all motors only effects one type of generator.
But I am wasting my breath (er, fingers) since I said that already, you are a troll, go find a bridge I don't want to play.
Quote from: RunningBare on March 04, 2008, 10:09:16 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 04, 2008, 10:05:14 PM
YOU HEARD THE MAN AETHER IT'S TIME FOR US TO ALL
JUST DO IT...
AND
GIVE UP AND GIVE IN!
Thane
I'm sorry, I'm a little lost here, I thought you had something that worked?, so wtf is to "give up and give in" on?
Stop acting dense, it's a demo, it works at showing an incredible effect but clearly it is too subtle for you to understand 'demo' or 'principle' so go away, there is nothing for you here.
The 'give up and give in' may have been a suggestion that I stop arguing with you so you will go away.
I am going to take that suggestion and not read or reply to posts from these recent infiltrators as clearly they are not really reading what I write and not genuinely interested in the effect demonstrated.
Quote from: aether22 on March 05, 2008, 12:01:32 AM
Stop acting dense, it's a demo, it works at showing an incredible effect but clearly it is too subtle for you to understand 'demo' or 'principle' so go away, there is nothing for you here.
The 'give up and give in' may have been a suggestion that I stop arguing with you so you will go away.
I am going to take that suggestion and not read or reply to posts from these recent infiltrators as clearly they are not really reading what I write and not genuinely interested in the effect demonstrated.
I started this thread with some real excitement, but what have I seen as it has gone on?, no offense to Thane, but he was not the reason I started this thread, I started it because of proffessor Markus Zahn, but it seems that little bit of magic has slipped away, seems the same with NASA as well.
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 11:54:46 PM
...you are a troll, go find a bridge I don't want to play.
Aether, I'm not sure what a troll is exactly but I had understood this to be an open forum where, in this topic, everyone is free to discuss Thane's invention. As it turns out, I live only 10 miles away from (the real) Thane so I'm in a position to go look for myself, I have been involved in several technology startup companies myself and I know what it takes to prove out a new idea and to get funding for it. I would very much like to help Thane out because if he has a new technology for improving the electric motor, then that is very exciting news - it deserves serious investment and rapid development. Your lack of objectivity, your affinity for pseudo-science and your tendency to abuse those who are asking simple, direct, objective questions or raising very legitimate and well-thought-out proposals to prove the technology is very damaging indeed to Thane's efforts - because your behaving that way makes it all sound like snake oil: which, we all hope, it is not.
As it turns out, I live only 10 miles away from (the real) Thane so I'm in a position to go look for myself,
DEAR POLAR,
LUC AND I ARE IN THE LAB TODAY TESTING LUC'S NEW PRIMARY FOR THE TRANSFORMER FROM 10 AM - 1 PM - YOU ARE WELCOME TO COME AND VIEW A DEMO IF YOU CAN BRAVE THE SWOW OTHERWISE I WILL BE THERE ON FRIDAY.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 05, 2008, 07:47:02 AM
As it turns out, I live only 10 miles away from (the real) Thane so I'm in a position to go look for myself,
DEAR POLAR,
LUC AND I ARE IN THE LAB TODAY TESTING LUC'S NEW PRIMARY FOR THE TRANSFORMER FROM 10 AM - 1 PM - YOU ARE WELCOME TO COME AND VIEW A DEMO IF YOU CAN BRAVE THE SWOW OTHERWISE I WILL BE THERE ON FRIDAY.
Thane
I can't make it today, Thane, but I'll take you up on your offer some other time if I may. Meanwhile, hang in there with the real science and engineering and don't be misled by the perpetual motion pseudo-scientists!
I started this thread with some real excitement, but what have I seen as it has gone on?, no offense to Thane, but he was not the reason I started this thread, I started it because of proffessor Markus Zahn, but it seems that little bit of magic has slipped away, seems the same with NASA as well.
DEAR RUNNINGBARE,
THANK YOU FOR STARTING THIS THREAD - AND DEBATE.
WHY FOCUS ON THINGS THAT DON'T WORK, I.E. DR. ZAHN/MIT?
WHY NOT FOCUS ON WHAT DOES WORK, I.E.
DR. HABASH OF OTTAWA U, OVERUNITY MEMBERS STEVE AND LUC, ETC.
DR. ZAHN IS A VERY NICE AND GENEROUS PERSON WHO IS SIMPLY NOT INTERESTED - HIS NAME GETS ADDED TO A GROWING LIST OF NON INTERESTED ACADEMICS INCLUDING, DR. PAUL ALLAIRE, DR. MARK EHSANI, DR. JAMES KIRTLEY AND THE LIST INCLUDES ABOUT A DOZEN OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE ENTITLED TO DO AS THEY PLEASE IN THIS DEMOCRACY.
WE ARE STILL WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM NASA BUT AGAIN IT IS THEIR CHOICE TO DO AS THEY PLEASE.
IF YOUR "LEVEL OF EXCITEMENT" IS DETERMINED BY ANOTHER PERSON OR OTHER PEOPLE(S) APROVAL OF THE SUBJECT OR INTEREST THEN YOU ARE IN DEEP TROUBLE BECAUSE YOU HAVE GIVEN AWAY YOUR ABILITY FOR INDEPENDENT THOUGHT WHICH IS SCARY AND UNFORTUNATE FOR YOU.
Thane
stop looking for overunity.....
as it is merly unity we serch.....
;)
i would not waste my time with people like nasa or others
if they really do know all the questions what makes you think they will answer them!?
it looks like a magnetic return path to the rotor form the kick back converted back to magnetic engery what is so hard to grasp ? you can do the same with out moveing parts :o
first the kick back must be understood then the conversion then the acceleration .....
the kick back is radeient engery it must be converted to "REAL" ENGERY to be of any great use .....
so what is the kickback or bemf .... it is mother nature pushing back from the disturbance we made in her pinch her ... grab and collect her smack and use it ..... the SMACK is far more than what was used to generate the ripple
so in reality use your source power only to pinch her use the returning SMACK to add to the action....
teslas aproch every action has a reaction .... but if you can use the original action to make a reaction that adds to the original action where will you be?!?!?!?! hummmmm...
just like his fuelless generator ... so it is a motor generator but as you take power from it it gains in speed why??
well because the action of takeing power from it adds to the magnetic feild that drives it.... thus increaseing it in speed
as i understand it it will accellerate till it reaches unity and it is deturminied by the LOAD!!
much like the tpu no??
ist
Hi Thane,
thank you Thane for sharing your discoveries. Not many men would take the time as you have done here to share and help mankind.
If Jesus were here He would be pleased.
;D
Hi all.
as promised here is the link to the most up to date 2 camera video that I took of Thane's Generator with LIGHTS as load and it has the same acceleration as before.
YouTube Link: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=MFUwNJx6x1o
Megaupload: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ERQEFPBW
We have also completed a new and much more efficient primary coil to test Thane's Toroids and so far have achieved 38% efficiency in Toroid number 1 which is only 2,000 windings per side. We have not wet tested it in Toroid 2 which is 4,000 windings which should double the efficiency and then Toroid 3 which is 5,500 windings, who knows what it will do ???
Please stay tuned for more updates.
Luc
Quote from: OilBarren on March 05, 2008, 08:06:46 AM
I started this thread with some real excitement, but what have I seen as it has gone on?, no offense to Thane, but he was not the reason I started this thread, I started it because of proffessor Markus Zahn, but it seems that little bit of magic has slipped away, seems the same with NASA as well.
DEAR RUNNINGBARE,
THANK YOU FOR STARTING THIS THREAD - AND DEBATE.
WHY FOCUS ON THINGS THAT DON'T WORK, I.E. DR. ZAHN/MIT?
WHY NOT FOCUS ON WHAT DOES WORK, I.E.
Thane
Dear Thane, the answer is quite simple, I wanted to see this come out of the fantasy OU world and enter into the real world such as MIT and NASA.
I mean no offense to anyone here, but until claimed tech is proven outside of this OU world then it remains meaningless.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 05, 2008, 07:23:37 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 04, 2008, 11:54:46 PM
...you are a troll, go find a bridge I don't want to play.
Aether, I'm not sure what a troll is exactly but I had understood this to be an open forum where, in this topic, everyone is free to discuss Thane's invention. As it turns out, I live only 10 miles away from (the real) Thane so I'm in a position to go look for myself, I have been involved in several technology startup companies myself and I know what it takes to prove out a new idea and to get funding for it. I would very much like to help Thane out because if he has a new technology for improving the electric motor, then that is very exciting news - it deserves serious investment and rapid development. Your lack of objectivity, your affinity for pseudo-science and your tendency to abuse those who are asking simple, direct, objective questions or raising very legitimate and well-thought-out proposals to prove the technology is very damaging indeed to Thane's efforts - because your behaving that way makes it all sound like snake oil: which, we all hope, it is not.
Running Bare, I apologize.
There are many who I have felt were not genuinely interested and just looking to argue and I am not sure that you were really one of them, it is also hard to know what people mean, you say 'so it does not work, thanks aether' which really was not how I would sum it up, his current model is not ready to manufacture, IMO it works to prove how someone could make one and the changes would be to the coil cores to reduce hysteresis and eddy currents and that would make is successful, I also have made it clear that i believe this is a breakthrough in Free Energy, not my definition of does not work.
A troll is a term for someone who tries to start arguments.
Your lack of objectivity your affinity for pseudo-science and your tendency to abuse those who are asking simple, direct, objective questions or raising very legitimate and well-thought-out proposals to prove the technology is very damaging indeed to Thane's efforts - because your behaving that way makes it all sound like snake oil: which, we all hope, it is not.
Obviously I disagree that I lack objectivity and feel that is demonstrated by those who I am arguing with as they are suggesting a test which it will in it's immediate form almost surely fail and it's failure would not disprove what has been proven, I have a repulsion to pseudo science but I have an affinity to evidence/observation/correlation based science and going where that leads even if that is not familiar or comfortable, now IMO when dealing with something that is breaking all the current rules that is the kind of science you would want, now incidentally I went to a lecture where a noble prize winning (for QCD) physicist described what I call the aether but named it 'the void' at the end of the lecture I asked him if this was really an aether and he said yes.
As for being abusive it is the result of having a few too many people saying much the same thing and none of them listening to what I say causing me to repeat myself and doubt how genuine they are.
And I have shown errors in the well thought out proposals, they are in the devices current state totally inappropriate and I would have thought that to be obvious to almost anyone, maybe it is not.
I have made this exception because I felt I owed you an apology and because I am glad you started the thread, but I do question how if you have read and understood my replies to these people how you could think their proposal made any sense.
If you believe that a device which has something travel through the shaft to dramatically lower the losses on the other side is not interesting then maybe this is not for you
Since the shaft is the only thing that changes between the 2 tests this is without ANY possible doubt what is happening, the the only question is in which direction is what traveling to effect performance how? The answer to which direction (unless it's bi-directional) seems many times more likely to be Generator to Motor, Obviously I am personally convinced I know what is moving through the shaft and it being a magnetic field is doubtful for reasons stated previously, The how can only be speculated at present.
If you are interested is such an extraordinary thing with immediate promises then stay but please try and avoid talking to me unless you are willing to read and comprehend what I say because that has clearly not been happening of late.
THE END
BTW there has been a very generous donation to help cover a portion of the shipping costs of sending Thanes spare setup to me and I have humbly accepted it.
I say this both as an additional thank you to the donor, a disclosure and most of all to encourage Thane to send it at his earliest convenience. (I guess I just want to verify Thane has not (metaphorically) got cold feet)
Quote from: Electrick on March 05, 2008, 09:00:06 AM
Hi Thane, thank you Thane for sharing your discoveries. Not many men would take the time as you have done here to share and help mankind.
If Jesus were here He would be pleased.
;D
YOU MEAN HE'S
NOT HERE?
IF HE IS NOT HERE WHERE IS HE?
Thane
Quote from: RunningBare on March 05, 2008, 10:38:39 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 05, 2008, 08:06:46 AM
I started this thread with some real excitement, but what have I seen as it has gone on?, no offense to Thane, but he was not the reason I started this thread, I started it because of proffessor Markus Zahn, but it seems that little bit of magic has slipped away, seems the same with NASA as well.
DEAR RUNNINGBARE,
THANK YOU FOR STARTING THIS THREAD - AND DEBATE.
WHY FOCUS ON THINGS THAT DON'T WORK, I.E. DR. ZAHN/MIT?
WHY NOT FOCUS ON WHAT DOES WORK, I.E.
Thane
Dear Thane, the answer is quite simple, I wanted to see this come out of the fantasy OU world and enter into the real world such as MIT and NASA.
I mean no offense to anyone here, but until claimed tech is proven outside of this OU world then it remains meaningless.
WHO GIVES A DAMN ABOUT OU?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 05, 2008, 05:43:29 PM
YOU MEAN HE'S NOT HERE?
IF HE IS NOT HERE WHERE IS HE?
Thane
HE IS EVERYWHERE AND
ALLWAY IN OUR HEARTS
Quote from: Electrick on March 05, 2008, 10:17:58 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 05, 2008, 05:43:29 PM
YOU MEAN HE'S NOT HERE?
IF HE IS NOT HERE WHERE IS HE?
Thane
HE IS EVERYWHERE AND
ALLWAY IN OUR HEARTS
Good grief!, I'm outta here! ::)
@Vince Quote: Hoptoad; My setup IS using solenoid coils with hollow cores but I have installed the solid armatures in them for my tests. Should I remove the solid cores? Am I just wasting my time here Or is the effect worth replicating??
Vince"
If its easy to remove the armatures, then try it ! Try both and compare. I have no idea about any of the parameters of the machine your playing with, so the outcome is for you to discover! It may not react like either of us expected. :D
And no I don't think your wasting time, if your enjoying experimenting anyway. And you must be, else why would you ask ? :D Hmmmmmm.......Prognosis says........bitten by the tinkers bug.........you'll survive :D.........KneeDeep
@Tinu Quote: "One can mess it with magnets but it would be wiser to do it only after documenting its un-hampered performances. And then a look at the two sets of figures may speak for itself."
I agree. I'll go further and infer that Documented Comparative studies are the best way to ascertain performance ratings and efficiencies.
@Tinu Quote: "And then it appears out of nowhere a quick jump to the conclusion: Lenz law is bent"
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
@Tinu Quote:" (I always laugh because of this verb; a law can not be bent by definition in its entire area of applicability. It?s either valid or not. And if it?s not valid, it ceases to exist as a law. So a law is always valid. At best the area of its applicability can be reduced: i.e. classical mechanics versus relativity, ohm in DC versus AC)."
Yeah, but "bending Lenz's Law" has got a poetic ring to it! ;D :D It's easier than saying "a study of the non-linear counter electro/magneto motive forces resulting from induced currents, in a high speed open magnetic alternator system".....phewww......KneeDeep
Seriously, don't take everything too literally. In my own works, I merely used this expression because it is the perfect symbolic analogy represented visually by the graph diagrams on page 10 which show comparative outputs versus braking reaction of, both, a closed and open magnetic generating system.
@Tinu Quote: "Well?! I can accept (although rigorous data and proof are needed) that Lenz law is, in the best scenario and most excited interpretation given to the actual experiments, ?bent? at around zero efficiency. But who cares? Who?s gonna make use of it? We are at >90% efficiencies already."
In all generating systems, the performance and efficiency ratings are gauged to a specific load range. When you extend the load range of any generating system, it's efficiency falls off. My experiments revealed that the non linear counter-MMF reaction of an open magnetic configuration, has the effect of extending the efficiency range of the alternator over a much greater load demand, as compared to a closed system. Also, the "bending" of the counter-MMF curve can occur well before coil short circuit conditions, and contributes to higher output efficiency at nominal loading which occurs with impedance matching.
@Tinu Quote: "following your recent clear statement that the system is not OU, I tend to believe it?s an issue of impedance matching."
It is definitely not O/U, and while impedance matching plays an important part in output power and efficiency, it is not the only parameter "playing in the field". IMHO I think you are wrong to dismiss the possible beneficial aspects of this non linear behaviour. It can be exploited to extend generating output efficiencies.
Cheers all from The Toad Who Hops.....KneeDeep
P.S. I'm only referring to the generator output characteristics here. I'm not inferring any knowledge or opinion about the work of Thane or others with respect to the effects that external magnets may or may not have on motors and their performance.
Aether - Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot... Allow me to introduce myself - I am not a scientist. I am a businessman. I have an MBA, not a masters in electrical engineering. Despite my lack of science background, I have worked on venture capital placement in the fields as diverse as batteries, solar energy, and commodity trading. I am a skeptic of things that I have not seen before. I believe Jesus died more than 2000 years ago. I believe that Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years. I believe in the existence of black swans. I did not believe black swans existed five years ago. The reason I did not believe in black swans five years ago was because no credible person on earth had seen one, and people on earth have been almost everywhere. But realize, finding a black swan was not something everyone on earth cared all that much about. So not too many people were dedicating their lives to finding a black swan. I do not believe free energy exists. I don't believe it exists because no credible person has been able to prove it exists. Unlike black swans, many intelligent people have dedicated their lives to finding free energy. They have all failed. This is not proof positive that free energy does not exist. It is just a reason that it is unlikely.
Aether - you have repeatedly pointed out that it is impossible to test Thane's device on an unloaded system since the motor will run at max speed and their will be no discernable benefit from Thane's device. I have repeated suggested mechanically loading Thane's device and the motor without the magnets so there can be an equal comparison. Although you have grown quite irate along the way, you have never directly respoded to this suggestion (I personally think it's quite good). You have however, repeatedly indicated your lack of confidence that Thane's contraption would pass this simple test (ie. complete more mechanical work within the contraption than without) since the contraption is not fully optimized. Be that as it may, I can see much good coming from this test - even if the contraption does fail. Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2) when the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power? - what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?
Quote from: RunningBare on March 05, 2008, 10:25:23 PM
Good grief!, I'm outta here! ::)
When we give up we give in, don't do it!
That's one ironic signature line considering he's throwing up his hands and leaving.
I found myself replying before remembering my promise, considered deleting, or posting privatly, but oh well...
Aether - Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot...
Probably.
Allow me to introduce myself - I am not a scientist. I am a businessman. I have an MBA, not a masters in electrical engineering. Despite my lack of science background, I have worked on venture capital placement in the fields as diverse as batteries, solar energy, and commodity trading. I am a skeptic of things that I have not seen before. I believe Jesus died more than 2000 years ago. I believe that Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years. I believe in the existence of black swans. I did not believe black swans existed five years ago. The reason I did not believe in black swans five years ago was because no credible person on earth had seen one, and people on earth have been almost everywhere. But realize, finding a black swan was not something everyone on earth cared all that much about. So not too many people were dedicating their lives to finding a black swan. I do not believe free energy exists. I don't believe it exists because no credible person has been able to prove it exists. Unlike black swans, many intelligent people have dedicated their lives to finding free energy. They have all failed. This is not proof positive that free energy does not exist. It is just a reason that it is unlikely.
I agree that is no proof and that proving such a negative is impossible.
I entirely disagree whole heartedly without the slightest iota of doubt whatsoever with your claim that "all have failed to find Free Energy". (of which there are 3 types, breaking the 1st 'law' (I believe possible given the right conditions but hard to prove), Breaking the 2nd 'law' (verifiably broken), or taking energy from some unseen source)
Aether - you have repeatedly pointed out that it is impossible to test Thane's device on an unloaded system since the motor will run at max speed and their will be no discernable benefit from Thane's device.
True.
I have repeated suggested mechanically loading Thane's device and the motor without the magnets so there can be an equal comparison.
Obviously if you remove the magnets the generator will not work.
So you must mean for a control, but how heavily would you load it? As heavily as the load supplied by the magnets when shorted without the full steel connection? (so it goes the same speed, problem is that is 0 RPM currently, it comes to a dead stop)
You could do that but the question would be what you could possibly achieve because once you replace the magnets you would need to remove the purely mechanical load or face twice the load.
Is this never the less what you are suggesting, so as to get an idea of the loading the generator has (or most likely has) when shorted with the full steel shaft? (actually it would not truly give the loading since the greater the speed the greater the loading and the generator swiftly rotates)
Maybe if you ran the test for a short enough time (a second) relying on inertia or calculating inertia into the equation somehow?
If so that would work very partially though I fail to really see the point as it would not prove or disprove anything and it would be so messy and estimated few would trust the results but I suppose it could be of some use.
If this is what you mean I apologize, what I thought you meant was load it mechanically both with the magnets and without (which would double the loading it experiences with), I am however sure that even if you did not mean that some others did.
Although you have grown quite irate along the way, you have never directly respoded to this suggestion (I personally think it's quite good).
I had but maybe I misunderstood the suggestion and responded to what I thought was being suggested?
You have however, repeatedly indicated your lack of confidence that Thane's contraption would pass this simple test (ie. complete more mechanical work within the contraption than without) since the contraption is not fully optimized. Be that as it may, I can see much good coming from this test - even if the contraption does fail.
Obviously it would not 'fail' the version I am considering you may mean in this message, it IS doing more work when the shaft is all steel, But much of that work is removable losses such as eddy currents and hysteresis etc... if removed by a better core material, and covered in plastic to reduce aerodynamic drag possibly I am sure it would pass any version of the test.
Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2) when the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power?
Yes, it must be, now I wonder again just what test you mean.
The mechanical loading the generator places on the motor must increase dramatically under such a condition, the only way it possibly could not (since it does in vid 1) is if the motor (any kind) sends something through the shaft to reduce losses in this one specific generator type, that we can safely say is 100 times less likely than a specific generator effecting the motor.
- what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?
Well the test (any version) can be preformed if losses are reduced (relatively straight forward).
Or I have suggested an isolated version where the generator feeds 'whatever' into a motor mechanically loaded, but not the one driving the generator.
I have also suggested a whole host of other experiments what can further advance this and give a clearer picture of what is happening.
hoptoad, how sure are you that the effects you observed involved reducing the load of the generator?
Because in Thanes setup no such effect is apparent, but what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful and no other interpretation of the results makes any sense.
Are we looking at 2 different effects or just one? (Maybe losses in the generator are decreased by Thanes generator even when not connected to the motor only the loading is still too great since he does not have the required speed? one could ask why what works to improve a motor would not improve a generator)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Thane,
That you have replied to other messages since I asked if you were still going to send the generator my way but not replied to mine gives me an uneasy feeling, say it ain't so. (I guess I am probably just being overly anxious)
Anyway I am trying to make something with what I have, got some of the hard stuff built, from here I think it is mostly work with mounting the coils being the trickiest challenge, not really sure how much longer it will take.
One issue though is that I have no idea if what I am doing can work, obviously I imagine it could but I can also imagine it may not.
If you could run a simple test it could tell me if I am wasting my time.
I have a sych motor, with a pully which I am using to mount stuff on, in this case wood, I then have my steel disk securely attached, all up it has practically no eccentricity or wobble on the steel disk so I am happy.
On it obviously will go the magnets, above it the coil, the induction motor under test will have it's shaft make light contact with the disk but obviously not rotate with it, it will have a mechanical load placed on it. (initially something manual likely involving a grinding stone)
Now my generator will be rotating at 3000rpm (50 hz here) so it should be doing a decent job of creating back-emf/aether flow, but I simply do not know if the lack of co-rotation might stop whatever from getting into the motor and improving power
As a backup I could magnetically connect the steel disk to the synchronous motor but there will be no speed changes, possibly/hopefully amperage changes though but I fear that with the HP available from this larger motor and due to it running at a highly efficient state there may be little change, also this type of motor has not been tested before with this effect.
If you could take a universal motor and place a mechanical load on it and put it next to either free end of the axle on your current setup (while running) and see if it picks up speed when next to the Gen.that would be a huge help with my current efforts,
Thanks.
Re Hoptoad's: "My experiments revealed that the non linear counter-MMF reaction of an open magnetic configuration, has the effect of extending the efficiency range of the alternator over a much greater load demand, as compared to a closed system."
Excellent, that's the objective information I think we need. Would you be in a position to share those results with us so that we can quantify the benefits of this technology? Efficiency vs load range, with and without the device. That would certainly clear the fog!
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 06:16:25 AM
... what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful...
Aether, I have carefully read and re-read the postings; and I have carefully viewed and re-viewed the videos. There is no data anywhere in all of that which supports the idea that the motor becomes "more powerful". Speed is not the same thing as power - far from it. The simple, direct and objective test that I and others are suggesting would allow you to put some real numbers on this claim and so give you a sound basis for what you're saying. Measure the efficiency, with and without. That's all - simple.
Quote from: aether22 on March 05, 2008, 03:19:53 PM
BTW there has been a very generous donation to help cover a portion of the shipping costs of sending Thanes spare setup to me and I have humbly accepted it.
I say this both as an additional thank you to the donor, a disclosure and most of all to encourage Thane to send it at his earliest convenience. (I guess I just want to verify Thane has not (metaphorically) got cold feet)
DEAR AETHER22,
CONTACT KIM CUNNINGHAM AT OCRI - INTRODUCE YOURSELF GIVE HERE YOUR ADDRESS - WE WILL WEIGHT THE MOTOR AND KIM WILL TELL YOU HOW MUCH THE SHIPPING WILL BE. http://www.ocri.ca/
SOUND FINE?
Thane
That you have replied to other messages since I asked if you were still going to send the generator my way but not replied to mine gives me an uneasy feeling, say it ain't so. (I guess I am probably just being overly anxious)
AETHER22,
DOES THE MOTOR VOLTAGE/FREQUENCY MIS-MATCH CONCERN YOU AT ALL?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 06, 2008, 06:49:52 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 05, 2008, 03:19:53 PM
BTW there has been a very generous donation to help cover a portion of the shipping costs of sending Thanes spare setup to me and I have humbly accepted it.
I say this both as an additional thank you to the donor, a disclosure and most of all to encourage Thane to send it at his earliest convenience. (I guess I just want to verify Thane has not (metaphorically) got cold feet)
DEAR AETHER22,
CONTACT KIM CUNNINGHAM AT OCRI - INTRODUCE YOURSELF GIVE HERE YOUR ADDRESS - WE WILL WEIGHT THE MOTOR AND KIM WILL TELL YOU HOW MUCH THE SHIPPING WILL BE. http://www.ocri.ca/
SOUND FINE?
Thane
Sounds great, only don't weigh the motor it's self since it won't run on my 240v 50hz current, will be far better for me you use a bench grinder I can source locally.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 06:33:39 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 06:16:25 AM
... what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful...
Aether, I have carefully read and re-read the postings; and I have carefully viewed and re-viewed the videos. There is no data anywhere in all of that which supports the idea that the motor becomes "more powerful". Speed is not the same thing as power - far from it. The simple, direct and objective test that I and others are suggesting would allow you to put some real numbers on this claim and so give you a sound basis for what you're saying. Measure the efficiency, with and without. That's all - simple.
CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR MODEWITH ALL COILS LOADED AND
450 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM
CANNOT ROTATE.
OUTPUT POWER = O MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEMWITH ALL COILS LOADED AND
196 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM IS
ACCELERATING BEYOND SAFE LIMITS AND
GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING.
THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0
THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY
- THE EFFICIENCY OF THE SYSTEM CANNOT BE DETERMINED
YET BECAUSE THE UPPER SPEED LIMIT OF THE SYSTEM HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 06:33:39 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 06:16:25 AM
... what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful...
Aether, I have carefully read and re-read the postings; and I have carefully viewed and re-viewed the videos. There is no data anywhere in all of that which supports the idea that the motor becomes "more powerful". Speed is not the same thing as power - far from it. The simple, direct and objective test that I and others are suggesting would allow you to put some real numbers on this claim and so give you a sound basis for what you're saying. Measure the efficiency, with and without. That's all - simple.
To rotate a load faster you need more power or the load to lessen, as Thane mentions the output of the shorted coils increase (as hence must eddy currents) as speed picks up and unless something very unconventional is going on the hysteresis is also.
For the load to lessen only when there is magnetic coupling from the motor would it require seemingly any type of electric motor to output something that effects just this specific type of generator, that is a near impossibility.
Therefore we know as surely as possible that the motor is producing more power, now it is possible that due to the extra motor power it gets up to a speed where the back-emf/aether starts having an effect on and decreases the losses in the generator and so it is possible the benefits are all over the show, but it would still require more motor power first and this would be an even greater achievement.
Again, I said nothing new, there is nothing new to say, however if you read and comprehend what I say that would help.
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 07:26:39 AM
...we know as surely as possible that the motor is producing more power...
None of the measurements that have been provided give any evidence that the motor is actually producing more power. The only credible way to do that is to do actual measurements of power in and power out, comparing the system with and without the device in place. It is a very, very simple thing to set up - why don't you just do that?
Quote from: OilBarren on March 06, 2008, 07:10:34 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 06:33:39 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 06:16:25 AM
... what is apparent is that if something from the generator gets into the motor the motor becomes more powerful...
Aether, I have carefully read and re-read the postings; and I have carefully viewed and re-viewed the videos. There is no data anywhere in all of that which supports the idea that the motor becomes "more powerful". Speed is not the same thing as power - far from it. The simple, direct and objective test that I and others are suggesting would allow you to put some real numbers on this claim and so give you a sound basis for what you're saying. Measure the efficiency, with and without. That's all - simple.
CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR MODE
WITH ALL COILS LOADED AND 450 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM CANNOT ROTATE. OUTPUT POWER = O
MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM
WITH ALL COILS LOADED AND 196 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM IS ACCELERATING BEYOND SAFE LIMITS AND GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING.
THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0
THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY
- THE EFFICIENCY OF THE SYSTEM CANNOT BE DETERMINED YET BECAUSE THE UPPER SPEED LIMIT OF THE SYSTEM HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
Thane
Thane, what happens if you remove the coils (I mean physically remove them). What is the power input then and what is the motor speed (rpm)?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 09:55:55 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 07:26:39 AM
...we know as surely as possible that the motor is producing more power...
None of the measurements that have been provided give any evidence that the motor is actually producing more power. The only credible way to do that is to do actual measurements of power in and power out, comparing the system with and without the device in place. It is a very, very simple thing to set up - why don't you just do that?
Some things can just be assumed because they simply must be true unless something unbelievable has happened for no apparent reason, you do not throw something out the window and check that it actually fell instead of getting stuck in mid air just in the event gravity may selectively fail.
Secondly we DO know the drag from Lenz Law IF in place as assumed (if not that's OU!) is increasing since the coil output is increasing (and has been verified) so the drag from that is increasing.
Since there is no way for the generator to lose drag simply due to a magnetic connection to the motor and since this effect would be similarly useful and impressive we will either rule it out or accept it as just as good.
Since even you can not claim it possible that without the steel piece the generator has no or little drag (since it is great enough to bring it to a stand still) then the ONLY way for acceleration to occur (with the steel when shorted) is for there to be
a huge reduction of losses in either the motor or the generator due to due to the magnetic connection, the chances of it being the latter alone while similarly useful are so incredibly improbable we may just as well rule it out as it would require an energy to flow from any kind of electric motor into the generator but have the drag reduction work on only this kind of generator, while just as useful and impressive it would be easily 100 times less likely than the reverse, it is not improbable it is patently ridiculous. Again I have said all this before, and I don't expect you to grow ears, so
can EVERYONE reading this who can understand and agrees with what I have said and agrees that polarbreeze does not have a leg to stand on please drop me a private message with a line expressing your agreement and I will post and update it as/if they roll in. (or reply to this thread if you would rather)
And if you agree with polarbreeze by all means message me also but I will ignore such messages from people who have made similar arguments on this thread (Jacksatan, Tinu etc...) and anyone who seems to have registered just to private message me to agree with polarbreeze. (otherwise everyone from the skeptic list will simply join)
To me it seems as though aether22 and polarbreeze are talking about 2 different things. Polarbreeze seems to me to be looking for quantitative proof that the motor's performance is improved through the presence of the generator and it's effects, relative to a comparable operating state without the generator at all. It would be a reasonable and critically important test if it addressed the current claim and focus of the demonstration, but I don't think it does. If further research indicates that this effect can be taken out of it's current context and practically applied (as we all very much hope!) the types of tests Polarbreeze advocates will of course be invaluable, and one would expect standard as well.
Forgive me if I've made any bad assumptions. I've read every word very carefully, but some things remain muddy. :-[
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 02:10:32 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 09:55:55 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 07:26:39 AM
...we know as surely as possible that the motor is producing more power...
None of the measurements that have been provided give any evidence that the motor is actually producing more power. The only credible way to do that is to do actual measurements of power in and power out, comparing the system with and without the device in place. It is a very, very simple thing to set up - why don't you just do that?
...
EVERYONE reading this who can understand and agrees with what I have said and agrees that polarbreeze does not have a leg to stand on please drop me a private message with a line expressing your agreement and I will post and update it...
And if you agree with polarbreeze by all means message me also but I will ignore such messages from people who have made similar arguments on this thread ...
Aether, what you said was:
...quote...
(1) EVERYONE reading this who can understand and agrees with what I have said and agrees that polarbreeze does not have a leg to stand on please drop me a private message with a line expressing your agreement and I will post and update it...
(2) And if you agree with polarbreeze by all means message me also but I will ignore such messages from people who have made similar arguments on this thread...
...unquote...
OK, go ahead if you want to manipulate the postings that way but it detracts from the real issue, which is that there are NOT any measurements of actual power that demonstrate that the device increases efficiency. Those measurement would be very easy to do - why have they not been done and shared with everyone so we can see the performance of this technology?
Quote from: JustMe on March 06, 2008, 03:00:23 PM
To me it seems as though aether22 and polarbreeze are talking about 2 different things. Polarbreeze seems to me to be looking for quantitative proof that the motor's performance is improved through the presence of the generator and it's effects, relative to a comparable operating state without the generator at all. It would be a reasonable and critically important test if it addressed the current claim and focus of the demonstration, but I don't think it does. If further research indicates that this effect can be taken out of it's current context and practically applied (as we all very much hope!) the types of tests Polarbreeze advocates will of course be invaluable, and one would expect standard as well.
Forgive me if I've made any bad assumptions. I've read every word very carefully, but some things remain muddy. :-[
Yes, I think you're right. The difficulty is that what you are calling the "current context" is as follows:
When the device is added to the system, it imposes a huge load on the motor (like a strong brake). This of course slows the motor down or may even stall it so it can't run at all. Then by making changes to the connections to the coils, the load imposed by the device is of course reduced (due to well-known effects of back-emf), the braking effect is reduced and so naturally the motor spins faster. There seems to be nothing at all mysterious about this and you're definitely wasting a lot more power with the device installed than when it's not installed. There is absolutely no evidence from any of the measurements that there is any efficiency gain in this system. That is why I am suggesting that those efficiency measurements be made, so everyone can see objectively what benefit the device is contributing.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 03:16:39 PM
Then by making changes to the connections to the coils, the load imposed by the device is of course reduced (due to well-known effects of back-emf), the braking effect is reduced and so naturally the motor spins faster. There seems to be nothing at all mysterious about this and you're definitely wasting a lot more power with the device installed than when it's not installed.
It's been my understanding that Thane's back-emf theory would not be properly characterized as a well known effect. If we accept that it is back-emf that is being shunted through the shaft to positively affect motor performance (aether22's theory is somewhat different), the claim seems to be that this is the first time a force previously associated exclusively with system losses has been identified as a potential booster. Thus the focus on the interaction between the motor and the generator without consideration for overall system efficiency at this time.
First - Aether, I appreciate the time you are putting into this, and I further appreciate the more direct response that you are offering. I am proud to say that in the last give and take we agreed no less that three times!!! A major accomplishment... So in that vein, and the prospect of further agreement I would like to continue this dialogue...
I found myself replying before remembering my promise, considered deleting, or posting privatly, but oh well...Thanks for trying
Aether - Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot...
Probably.Note the first agreement!!!
Allow me to introduce myself - I am not a scientist. I am a businessman. I have an MBA, not a masters in electrical engineering. Despite my lack of science background, I have worked on venture capital placement in the fields as diverse as batteries, solar energy, and commodity trading. I am a skeptic of things that I have not seen before. I believe Jesus died more than 2000 years ago. I believe that Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years. I believe in the existence of black swans. I did not believe black swans existed five years ago. The reason I did not believe in black swans five years ago was because no credible person on earth had seen one, and people on earth have been almost everywhere. But realize, finding a black swan was not something everyone on earth cared all that much about. So not too many people were dedicating their lives to finding a black swan. I do not believe free energy exists. I don't believe it exists because no credible person has been able to prove it exists. Unlike black swans, many intelligent people have dedicated their lives to finding free energy. They have all failed. This is not proof positive that free energy does not exist. It is just a reason that it is unlikely.
I agree that is no proof and that proving such a negative is impossible.Second agreement!!!
I entirely disagree whole heartedly without the slightest iota of doubt whatsoever with your claim that "all have failed to find Free Energy". (of which there are 3 types, breaking the 1st 'law' (I believe possible given the right conditions but hard to prove), Breaking the 2nd 'law' (verifiably broken), or taking energy from some unseen source)I don't feel that you completely acknowledged the gist of the concept that if it were broken, Americans would not have paid $285 billion dollars in electricity costs last year... Conspiracy theorists often forget that the medium-term beneficiary of 'free energy' would undoubtedly be the utility providers since it would be a patented concept for 21 years and would lower their generation costs... coal companies don't give a damn about coal miners, and would praise the lord if another method were found that would be more economical... The fact that something so extraordinarily valuable has not been verifyably and repeatedly proven leads me to believe that is about as likely as spinning straw into gold - if someone had figured out how to do it we would know about it because Forbes would publish it under - Richest Man in the World, dude figured out how to make something from nothing!!!
Aether - you have repeatedly pointed out that it is impossible to test Thane's device on an unloaded system since the motor will run at max speed and their will be no discernable benefit from Thane's device.
True.Third Agreement!!!
I have repeated suggested mechanically loading Thane's device and the motor without the magnets so there can be an equal comparison.
Obviously if you remove the magnets the generator will not work. My apologies, you are correct (some might even consider this a fourth agreement!!!), what I meant to say was to remove the entire contraption - including coils - and let the motor run using a measurable mechanical load to slow it down
So you must mean for a control yes, but how heavily would you load it? A good rule of thumb would be to start testing at a load which would cause the RPM to to fall to half its rated speed, and dependant on the results repeat the test using the same method at 25% and 75% speed As heavily as the load supplied by the magnets when shorted without the full steel connection? (so it goes the same speed, problem is that is 0 RPM currently, it comes to a dead stop) No, the idea is to compare the total output 'including load' from the completed contraption to total output without the contraption
You could do that but the question would be what you could possibly achieve because once you replace the magnets you would need to remove the purely mechanical load or face twice the load.
Is this never the less what you are suggesting, so as to get an idea of the loading the generator has (or most likely has) when shorted with the full steel shaft? no, sorry (actually it would not truly give the loading since the greater the speed the greater the loading and the generator swiftly rotates)
Maybe if you ran the test for a short enough time (a second) relying on inertia or calculating inertia into the equation somehow? no
If so that would work very partially though I fail to really see the point as it would not prove or disprove anything and it would be so messy and estimated few would trust the results but I suppose it could be of some use. ???
If this is what you mean I apologize, what I thought you meant was load it mechanically both with the magnets and without (which would double the loading it experiences with), I am however sure that even if you did not mean that some others did. Nope, it was the same recommendation as the others... I still believe that irrespective of whether the contraption 'passes' the test (in the sense that it increases the total output from an uncontraptionalized motor) the data will be vital
Although you have grown quite irate along the way, you have never directly respoded to this suggestion (I personally think it's quite good).
I had but maybe I misunderstood the suggestion and responded to what I thought was being suggested?Maybe?
You have however, repeatedly indicated your lack of confidence that Thane's contraption would pass this simple test (ie. complete more mechanical work within the contraption than without) since the contraption is not fully optimized. Be that as it may, I can see much good coming from this test - even if the contraption does fail.
Obviously it would not 'fail' the version I am considering you may mean in this message, it IS doing more work when the shaft is all steel, But much of that work is removable losses such as eddy currents and hysteresis etc... if removed by a better core material, and covered in plastic to reduce aerodynamic drag possibly I am sure it would pass any version of the test. This is the crux of my confusion... Why in the name of everything that is holy would you be so confident that, in its current unoptimized state, the contraption would fail the 'test', but once it is optimized it will pass the 'test'. This is completely baffling me. Is there some data that tells you that in its current state will not pass the test? Is there some data that tells you that if it were optimized it would pass the test? Do you have any baseline whatsoever that would indicate how close you are to achieving your goal???
Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2) when the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power?
Yes, it must be, now I wonder again just what test you mean.
The mechanical loading the generator places on the motor must increase dramatically under such a condition, the only way it possibly could not (since it does in vid 1) is if the motor (any kind) sends something through the shaft to reduce losses in this one specific generator type, that we can safely say is 100 times less likely than a specific generator effecting the motor. speaking of likelihood when referring to free energy is a bit relativistic... some might say it is more likely that the minor magnetic field from the contraption creating a maglev kind of scenario inside the shaft effectively removing most all friction from the rotor would be 'more likely' than free energy, but relative likelihood is pure speculation. The fact is that few will care all that much until you can prove something with value - be it a slightly better mousetrap, more efficient motor, or free energy for all.
- what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?
Well the test (any version) can be preformed if losses are reduced (relatively straight forward) See crux of my befuddlement above.
Or I have suggested an isolated version where the generator feeds 'whatever' into a motor mechanically loaded, but not the one driving the generator. This is not something I have seen you recommend before (maybe I missed it?). If 'whatever' is a measurable quantity of electricity, this sounds remarkably similar to what I am trying convince you to test?
I have also suggested a whole host of other experiments what can further advance this and give a clearer picture of what is happening.
I hope they explain things, and advance science - I, however, am a little more focus oriented... it is difficult for me to estimate how close we are to a breakthrough without some sort of baseline - I don't feel that we have one as of yet.
Please note, one of the reasons that I don't see it as necessary (or for that matter particularly useful at this point) to put much effort into making this contraption more 'efficient' stems from comments such as the following:
CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR MODE
WITH ALL COILS LOADED AND 450 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM CANNOT ROTATE. OUTPUT POWER = O
MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM
WITH ALL COILS LOADED AND 196 WATTS BEING SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR THE SYSTEM IS ACCELERATING BEYOND SAFE LIMITS AND GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING.
THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0
THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY
- THE EFFICIENCY OF THE SYSTEM CANNOT BE DETERMINED YET BECAUSE THE UPPER SPEED LIMIT OF THE SYSTEM HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
Thane
A statement that in its current form "THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0 THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY" would seem to indicate that in its current form, if this motor were bolted to the ground, and attached to a strong enough chain and pulley, the only thing that should stop it from lifting a full laden semi truck into the air would be the tension strength of the steel in the wheel itself... this is something which I see as easily verifyable at this point, and a demonstration of which would (even if not providing concrete numbers) would certainly be extremely visually pleasing...
Ok, I demand you actually address each point as I do OR DO NOT BOTHER RESPONDING!
When the device is added to the system, it imposes a huge load on the motor (like a strong brake). This of course slows the motor down or may even stall it so it can't run at all. Then by making changes to the connections to the coils, the load imposed by the device is of course reduced (due to well-known effects of back-emf),
WRONG!!
The change IS NOT a change to the coils that makes the difference between stalled and rotating swiftly, THE CHANGE IS TO THE SHAFT CONNECTING MOTOR AND GEN., in both cases the coils are shorted!
Also while it may be argued with some success that the counter magnetic field produced by a shorted coil may possibly overall reduce drag by reduction of core losses, THIS IS ELIMINATED IN THE FIRST VIDEO!
the braking effect is reduced and so naturally the motor spins faster.
THE BREAKING EFFECT DOES NOT DECREASE ONCE SHORTED AS PROVEN!
There seems to be nothing at all mysterious about this
HAVE YOU SEEN THE VIDEO?!?!
and you're definitely wasting a lot more power with the device installed than when it's not installed.
AS BY DESIGN, IF IT DID NOT LOAD THE MOTOR IT WOULD BE AT FULL SPEED THE WHOLE TIME AND MAKE A POINTLESS DEMO.
Answer these questions:
1: Have you recently watched the 1st and 2nd video? (the second being appended to the first)
2: Did you see in the (1st) video where the coils were shorted INCREASING THE LOAD ON THE MOTOR bringing it to a dead stop?
3: Did you see in the video where with the one change of adding a steel piece in the brass coupler made it accelerate beyond the point where it could be safely run as opposed to coming to a dead stop?
4: Did you notice that the voltage and in more recent tests the power output of the coils increased as the speed increased?
5: Since you believe that the generator load has decreased rather than the motor becoming more powerful, and given that the first video shows load increasing on coil shorting and since the only change in the 2nd vid is that the shaft is all steel can you explain how this steel shaft can dramatically reduce losses in the generator?
If you do not answer those 5 questions do not reply to me!.
If you do however unsuccessful my attempt may or may not be I will ask Stefan if he could please remove you. (I am not saying you could not post in this thread but do not directly reply to the subject I bring up and do not address me)
Are demands and ego something inherent to free energy groupies? ;D
I'm green now.
I agree that is no proof and that proving such a negative is impossible.Second agreement!!!
I entirely disagree whole heartedly without the slightest iota of doubt whatsoever with your claim that "all have failed to find Free Energy". (of which there are 3 types, breaking the 1st 'law' (I believe possible given the right conditions but hard to prove), Breaking the 2nd 'law' (verifiably broken), or taking energy from some unseen source)I don't feel that you completely acknowledged the gist of the concept that if it were broken, Americans would not have paid $285 billion dollars in electricity costs last year... Conspiracy theorists often forget that the medium-term beneficiary of 'free energy' would undoubtedly be the utility providers since it would be a patented concept for 21 years and would lower their generation costs... coal companies don't give a damn about coal miners, and would praise the lord if another method were found that would be more economical... The fact that something so extraordinarily valuable has not been verifyably and repeatedly proven leads me to believe that is about as likely as spinning straw into gold - if someone had figured out how to do it we would know about it because Forbes would publish it under - Richest Man in the World, dude figured out how to make something from nothing!!!
The reasons besides suppression which does exist I assure you is the disbelief that such is possible, similar to the level of disbelief you show.
The very belief you have is a self fulfilling prophesy, because you are sure it would have been found if possible, become widespread if found and since it is not widespread it is obviously impossible, therefore any claim can be ignored as a mistake or hoax no matter the evidence, don't tell me you don't see the flaw in that logic.
Then there is inventor secrecy, it comes in many forms but a big one is "I hit the jackpot", which means the inventor keeps it under wraps until he has everything sorted to make billions off it.
Then because respected scientists would lose credibility, jobs etc... for looking into such a subject the only ones looking and willing to look 'outside the box' for the solution are those who do not have the education, the respect or the means to really get it out there.
But the main reason is the technology it's self, the fact is you are right, Free Energy is impossible.
It is only achievable by changing what is possible (that is why anomalies swarm around many of these devices), this will sound out there but it's space-time engineering, it's changing the rules by playing with the medium of all matter and energy, it's very much like macro quantum engineering.
And since that is not a generally easy thing to do and since the devices are not designed to do it because the inventors really do not know how it is only devices that become accidental hybrids, working in the normal way such as a motor or generator but also effectively in an aetheric way.
Well the point is since the aetheric part is hit on by accidentally it can be lost, sometimes the right conditions are only hit one and the experimenter can not replicate the effects himself, other times the device is replicated with the conventional part in tact but the aetheric function broken by an innocent change.
The aetheric part can rely on the darnedest things, such as having an all steel connection back to the motor!
Nope, it was the same recommendation as the others... I still believe that irrespective of whether the contraption 'passes' the test (in the sense that it increases the total output from an uncontraptionalized motor) the data will be vital
Well I suppose it could be carried out , you are not suggesting a pass/fail so it would not hurt, I think there are many things that would muddy the waters.
I think what would be needed is to run many varying measured mechanical loads and you could get some picture of motor performance increase.
But when arguing with the likes of polarbreeze the thought of expecting him to appreciate complex data and subtitles was not something worth considering. But yes if not coming from a debunking point of view and with good analysis such a test could be of use, still I think I have suggested better tests.
if removed by a better core material, and covered in plastic to reduce aerodynamic drag possibly I am sure it would pass any version of the test. This is the crux of my confusion... Why in the name of everything that is holy would you be so confident that, in its current unoptimized state, the contraption would fail the 'test', but once it is optimized it will pass the 'test'.
In the current state it is putting a huge load on the motor, and while maybe with some load there is a chance it could 'pass' I think it unlikely, it is even when shorted with the steel in place putting no where near max speed. At my most generous I'd say it has a 10% chance of working.
BUT if you remove all losses, and count the electrical output (reduce the mechanical loading by the amount of energy being usefully output) then it simply MUST pass the test since in effect it would be placing no load on the motor and we know it improves motor power.
This is completely baffling me. Is there some data that tells you that in its current state will not pass the test? Is there some data that tells you that if it were o0ptimized it would pass the test? Do you have any baseline whatsoever that would indicate how close you are to achieving your goal???
MAYBE it would pass the test, but since it is putting a massive load on it and it has not fully overcome that load (it is far below 3600 - slip), how can it if the improvment is not enough to overcome it's own loading?
Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2)
Hard to know
When the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power?
No realistic way for it not to be.
- what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?
I do not have the time to (re)state the various tests I believe will prove invaluable, though if have already stated them previously.
Or I have suggested an isolated version where the generator feeds 'whatever' into a motor mechanically loaded, but not the one driving the generator. This is not something I have seen you recommend before (maybe I missed it?). If 'whatever' is a measurable quantity of electricity, this sounds remarkably similar to what I am trying convince you to test?
Um, 'whatever' refers to the aether/back-emf or 'whatever' the generator is sending to the motor.
The idea is to preform a test that is remarkably similar to yours, only it is one that provided the 'whatever' can transfer from a rotating frame to a differently rotating colinear shaft in light contact will work (will 'pass').
The idea is to have a strong motor rotate the excrement out of the generator feeding the 'whatever' not into the motor powering it but into an induction motor with a measured mechanical load, it's shaft would obviously rotate separately but be placed right next to the generator shaft lightly touching it.
A statement that in its current form "THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0 THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY" would seem to indicate that in its current form, if this motor were bolted to the ground, and attached to a strong enough chain and pulley, the only thing that should stop it from lifting a full laden semi truck into the air would be the tension strength of the steel in the wheel itself... this is something which I see as easily verifyable at this point, and a demonstration of which would (even if not providing concrete numbers) would certainly be extremely visually pleasing...
That sounds like the definition of taking things too far.
Quote from: RunningBare on March 06, 2008, 04:39:53 PM
Are demands and ego something inherent to free energy groupies? ;D
You completely misread the emotion... it's
utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
The importance of a continuous ferromagnetic path from generator to motor IS THE ONLY THING THAT RESULTS IN UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR. With a non-continuous path (i.e., two separate shafts separated by significant air gap), the system behaves
as expected, and comes to a stop when coils are shorted due to the drag caused by the loaded generator. The single significant fact of the continuous path has been what Thane points out NUMEROUS times in his vids and his contributions in this forum. Perhaps its your lack of solid science/engineering background that prevents you from grasping the SIGNIFICANCE of this single variation of the system.
I too would like to see answers to the 5 questions that Aether22 listed... perhaps then we'll have some indication that you understand precisely what is novel and exciting about this system!
-Mark
Look mom... I'm a rainbow!!!
I'm green now.
I agree that is no proof and that proving such a negative is impossible.Second agreement!!!
I entirely disagree whole heartedly without the slightest iota of doubt whatsoever with your claim that "all have failed to find Free Energy". (of which there are 3 types, breaking the 1st 'law' (I believe possible given the right conditions but hard to prove), Breaking the 2nd 'law' (verifiably broken), or taking energy from some unseen source)I don't feel that you completely acknowledged the gist of the concept that if it were broken, Americans would not have paid $285 billion dollars in electricity costs last year... Conspiracy theorists often forget that the medium-term beneficiary of 'free energy' would undoubtedly be the utility providers since it would be a patented concept for 21 years and would lower their generation costs... coal companies don't give a damn about coal miners, and would praise the lord if another method were found that would be more economical... The fact that something so extraordinarily valuable has not been verifyably and repeatedly proven leads me to believe that is about as likely as spinning straw into gold - if someone had figured out how to do it we would know about it because Forbes would publish it under - Richest Man in the World, dude figured out how to make something from nothing!!!
The reasons besides suppression which does exist I assure you is the disbelief that such is possible, similar to the level of disbelief you show.
The very belief you have is a self fulfilling prophesy, because you are sure it would have been found if possible, become widespread if found and since it is not widespread it is obviously impossible, therefore any claim can be ignored as a mistake or hoax no matter the evidence, don't tell me you don't see the flaw in that logic. If you'll recall, I started by pointing out that I do believe in black swans today, but I did not believe in them five years ago. Why? because someone put a bloody black swan on TV and said "here it is!!!". Similarly, if someone showed proof of free energy I am sure we would all believe him. Or, he could make loads of free energy in his basement and sell it to the grid for buco cash... then regardless of whether we believe him or not he would be listed in that magazine I mentioned...
Then there is inventor secrecy, it comes in many forms but a big one is "I hit the jackpot", which means the inventor keeps it under wraps until he has everything sorted to make billions off it. The inventor secrecy in this should be no different that the inventor secrecy in any other great invention... eventually the invention comes to light... It makes it all the more unlikely that those who claimed to find 'free energy' more than sixty years ago would not have shown incontravertable proof of it by now.
Then because respected scientists would lose credibility, jobs etc... for looking into such a subject the only ones looking and willing to look 'outside the box' for the solution are those who do not have the education, the respect or the means to really get it out there. Any one of these 'discoveries' must first start with some observable anomaly (such as Thane's). At the point of discovery, any legitimate scientist would have little problem studying the anomaly (such as the original offer by Zahn). Being associated with the wacko movement (no offense, it's perception) would be detrimental to ones credibility, but until such movement arises there should be little issue with the study of said anomaly. Furthermore, though Zahn has not dedicated his life to investigating this anomaly, he has offered suggestions on how to verify if it is something new, and has even gone so far as to suggest that it may be useful - without being 'free energy'. I assume the test that Zahn has recommended are being carried out and the results suplied to him for review...
But the main reason is the technology it's self, the fact is you are right, Free Energy is impossible. A fifth agreement!!! - and one I really didn't see coming...
It is only achievable by changing what is possible (that is why anomalies swarm around many of these devices), this will sound out there but it's space-time engineering, it's changing the rules by playing with the medium of all matter and energy, it's very much like macro quantum engineering.
And since that is not a generally easy thing to do and since the devices are not designed to do it because the inventors really do not know how it is only devices that become accidental hybrids, working in the normal way such as a motor or generator but also effectively in an aetheric way.
Well the point is since the aetheric part is hit on by accidentally it can be lost, sometimes the right conditions are only hit one and the experimenter can not replicate the effects himself, other times the device is replicated with the conventional part in tact but the aetheric function broken by an innocent change.
The aetheric part can rely on the darnedest things, such as having an all steel connection back to the motor! Well than this is our chance to prove it...
Nope, it was the same recommendation as the others... I still believe that irrespective of whether the contraption 'passes' the test (in the sense that it increases the total output from an uncontraptionalized motor) the data will be vital
Well I suppose it could be carried out W00T!!! We have a winner!!!, you are not suggesting a pass/fail so it would not hurt, I think there are many things that would muddy the waters.
I think what would be needed is to run many varying measured mechanical loads This is something I think I pointed out clearly in my last post "A good rule of thumb would be to start testing at a load which would cause the RPM to to fall to half its rated speed, and dependant on the results repeat the test using the same method at 25% and 75% speedand you could get some picture of motor performance increase.I think I'm starting to like you...
But when arguing with the likes of polarbreeze Sorry Polarbreeze, it looks like you're just going to have to take one for the team...the thought of expecting him to appreciate complex data and subtitles was not something worth considering. But yes if not coming from a debunking point of view and with good analysis such a test could be of use, still I think I have suggested better tests.W00t W00t!!!
if removed by a better core material, and covered in plastic to reduce aerodynamic drag possibly I am sure it would pass any version of the test. This is the crux of my confusion... Why in the name of everything that is holy would you be so confident that, in its current unoptimized state, the contraption would fail the 'test', but once it is optimized it will pass the 'test'.
In the current state it is putting a huge load on the motor, and while maybe with some load there is a chance it could 'pass' I think it unlikely, it is even when shorted with the steel in place putting no where near max speed. At my most generous I'd say it has a 10% chance of working.Maybe. Maybe not. I know one way to find out...
BUT if you remove all losses, and count the electrical output (reduce the mechanical loading by the amount of energy being usefully output) then it simply MUST pass the test since in effect it would be placing no load on the motor and we know it improves motor power.You might want to reffer back to your comment about just how finicky your 'whatever' stuff is... before moving on to the next project, I would certainly want to verify what we have here. In theory, it could be that if the motor were not heavily loaded 'whatever' might vanish...
This is completely baffling me. Is there some data that tells you that in its current state will not pass the test? Is there some data that tells you that if it were o0optimized it would pass the test? Do you have any baseline whatsoever that would indicate how close you are to achieving your goal???
MAYBE it would pass the test, but since it is putting a massive load on it and it has not fully overcome that load (it is far below 3600 - slip), how can it if the improvement is not enough to overcome it's own loading?See comments below about 'infinite output'
Among things that may be clarified is 1) what is the comparative efficiency or how much to we need to bridge 2)
Hard to know Not if we run the test
When the short causes the RPM to increase until the magnets fly off, is that useful power?
No realistic way for it not to be. Zahn seems to think there is...
- what are its limits? - how much load can that sustain? I fear that the fear of failure for a minor test is prohibiting the further advancement of this 'science'. For if this is never tested, how will you ever get this conraption to perform useful work?
I do not have the time to (re)state the various tests I believe will prove invaluable, though if have already stated them previously.??? Tests that would offer a numeric index to just how efficient this is??? I'm not counting you calorimetric idea, as I assume it was made in jest...
Or I have suggested an isolated version where the generator feeds 'whatever' into a motor mechanically loaded, but not the one driving the generator. This is not something I have seen you recommend before (maybe I missed it?). If 'whatever' is a measurable quantity of electricity, this sounds remarkably similar to what I am trying convince you to test?
Um, 'whatever' refers to the aether/back-emf or 'whatever' the generator is sending to the motor.
The idea is to preform a test that is remarkably similar to yours, only it is one that provided the 'whatever' can transfer from a rotating frame to a differently rotating colinear shaft in light contact will work (will 'pass').
The idea is to have a strong motor rotate the excrement out of the generator feeding the 'whatever' not into the motor powering it but into an induction motor with a measured mechanical load, it's shaft would obviously rotate separately but be placed right next to the generator shaft lightly touching it. Who knows? If 'whatever' exists there is no scientific base with which to draw upon for how to capture, transfer, or perceive it. If you thought of an experiment for it, knock yourself out...
A statement that in its current form "THE INPUT POWER IS 196 W AND IS APPRAOCHING 0 THE GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASING AND APPROACHING INFINITY" would seem to indicate that in its current form, if this motor were bolted to the ground, and attached to a strong enough chain and pulley, the only thing that should stop it from lifting a full laden semi truck into the air would be the tension strength of the steel in the wheel itself... this is something which I see as easily verifyable at this point, and a demonstration of which would (even if not providing concrete numbers) would certainly be extremely visually pleasing...
That sounds like the definition of taking things too far.Absolutely... I don't believe that unfettered the motor will continue to accelerate infinitely either. But if you don't think it could lift a Semi, do you think it could lift Yukon? A Prius? A Harley? This is exactly what I mean by 'measurable metrics'. I'm not a scientist, but if you told me that the most Thane's motor could lift was 500 pounds on a vertical pulley for 100 feet, I bet I could find some B average college student to do the math for me and figure out the total energy output... Infinity is very big number...
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 06, 2008, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 06, 2008, 04:39:53 PM
Are demands and ego something inherent to free energy groupies? ;D
You completely misread the emotion... it's utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
The importance of a continuous ferromagnetic path from generator to motor IS THE ONLY THING THAT RESULTS IN UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR. With a non-continuous path (i.e., two separate shafts separated by significant air gap), the system behaves as expected, and comes to a stop when coils are shorted due to the drag caused by the loaded generator. The single significant fact of the continuous path has been what Thane points out NUMEROUS times in his vids and his contributions in this forum. Perhaps its your lack of solid science/engineering background that prevents you from grasping the SIGNIFICANCE of this single variation of the system.
I too would like to see answers to the 5 questions that Aether22 listed... perhaps then we'll have some indication that you understand precisely what is novel and exciting about this system!
-Mark
Should I know you???
A possible alternative sollution to #5 (bare in mind I am not a scientist, but I am throwing this out as a possibility for actual discussion - it may be contrary to rule 12532 of the great book of science, but here goes...)
5: Since you believe that the generator load has decreased rather than the motor becoming more powerful, and given that the first video shows load increasing on coil shorting and since the only change in the 2nd vid is that the shaft is all steel can you explain how this steel shaft can dramatically reduce losses in the generator?
Is it possible that that magnetic effect creates an effect similar to a maglev, and thereby removes almost all friction load (losses) from the system?
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 06, 2008, 05:58:48 PM
You completely misread the emotion... it's utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
-Mark
Firstly, I was not reading any emotion, secondly I have more than a fair understanding of magnetic flux/paths, thirdly, my post was not aimed at you.
There's obviously many smart people's egos involved here, but I think the endless arguing is a waste of time.
At the end of the day, the people acutally doing the research, i.e. Thane, Aether and few others are going to do it the way they see fit.
if you want to see it done another way i.e. polar breeze, jacsatan, there's no reason you can't do it on your own, or you can hire a high school intern to do it for you, Thane has been very open in helping other people get started. :)
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 06, 2008, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 06, 2008, 04:39:53 PM
Are demands and ego something inherent to free energy groupies? ;D
You completely misread the emotion... it's utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
The importance of a continuous ferromagnetic path from generator to motor IS THE ONLY THING THAT RESULTS IN UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR. With a non-continuous path (i.e., two separate shafts separated by significant air gap), the system behaves as expected, and comes to a stop when coils are shorted due to the drag caused by the loaded generator. The single significant fact of the continuous path has been what Thane points out NUMEROUS times in his vids and his contributions in this forum. Perhaps its your lack of solid science/engineering background that prevents you from grasping the SIGNIFICANCE of this single variation of the system.
I too would like to see answers to the 5 questions that Aether22 listed... perhaps then we'll have some indication that you understand precisely what is novel and exciting about this system!
-Mark
I don't understand the frustration .
Mr Satan has clearly stated that he does not believe in OU and he clearly has no intention of ever believing in OU .
My opinion from the fist post of his that I read was that he came here just to argue.
WIth people that just want to argue you can drop a truckload of truth on them and they will comment only on the one or 2 points that they find inconsistent .
If you enjoy the art of arguing by all means please continue .
If you are actually trying to make a point .......you might as well save your energy for someone that is open minded enough to accept your point. .
gary
Quote from: jacksatan on March 06, 2008, 06:36:37 PM
Is it possible that that magnetic effect creates an effect similar to a maglev, and thereby removes almost all friction load (losses) from the system?
JS:
Now that's an interesting question, and actually contributes to this forum's knowledge base! Bravo...
Be interested in hearing some discussion on this possibility...
For a MagLev effect, there must be opposing magnetic fields (like poles repel). My guess is that the shaft/bearing arrangement is not conducive to forming opposing magnetic poles adjacent to each other... hmmm, or is it? We know that if we take a bar magnet and break it in two, we get two magnets, but the poles at the break will be opposite (one N and one S), and therefore attracting. Could the mag-flux from the motor shaft be opposing mag-flux from generator backemf, causing opposing (like poles) mag-fields at any metallic interface (ball bearings-to-bearing-inner-and-outer-races, or at shaft joints)????
-Mark
im outta here
ist
Quote from: jacksatan on March 06, 2008, 06:36:37 PM
A possible alternative sollution to #5 (bare in mind I am not a scientist, but I am throwing this out as a possibility for actual discussion - it may be contrary to rule 12532 of the great book of science, but here goes...)
5: Since you believe that the generator load has decreased rather than the motor becoming more powerful, and given that the first video shows load increasing on coil shorting and since the only change in the 2nd vid is that the shaft is all steel can you explain how this steel shaft can dramatically reduce losses in the generator?
Is it possible that that magnetic effect creates an effect similar to a maglev, and thereby removes almost all friction load (losses) from the system?
No, frictional losses are tiny (not counting wind).
And there is no way that could create a maglev situation, not only is there no way for it to happen and bearing are to tight to allow such but it would be like claiming 'Officer, I didn't knock my wife so hard her head came off, she was bending over the dog just as a (tiny normal) flea jumped up and it hit her" in other words it is beyond ridiculous
Quote from: RunningBare on March 06, 2008, 06:37:57 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 06, 2008, 05:58:48 PM
You completely misread the emotion... it's utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
-Mark
Firstly, I was not reading any emotion, secondly I have more than a fair understanding of magnetic flux/paths, thirdly, my post was not aimed at you.
WTF, are you telling me that you have not detected frustration from me!
Fuckeddy fuck fuck fuck. sorry, but Fuck!
Did that clear anything up?
Quote from: one on March 06, 2008, 07:20:55 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 06, 2008, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on March 06, 2008, 04:39:53 PM
Are demands and ego something inherent to free energy groupies? ;D
You completely misread the emotion... it's utter frustration!
The only reason I chose to add my $.02 is also frustration...
If you and jacksatan and any others still do not understand that the only thing that seems to make a difference is whether there is a solid steel shaft connecting motor to generator, or a 3" air gap, then no amount of explaining is going to help you understand that fact.
The importance of a continuous ferromagnetic path from generator to motor IS THE ONLY THING THAT RESULTS IN UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR. With a non-continuous path (i.e., two separate shafts separated by significant air gap), the system behaves as expected, and comes to a stop when coils are shorted due to the drag caused by the loaded generator. The single significant fact of the continuous path has been what Thane points out NUMEROUS times in his vids and his contributions in this forum. Perhaps its your lack of solid science/engineering background that prevents you from grasping the SIGNIFICANCE of this single variation of the system.
I too would like to see answers to the 5 questions that Aether22 listed... perhaps then we'll have some indication that you understand precisely what is novel and exciting about this system!
-Mark
I don't understand the frustration .
Mr Satan has clearly stated that he does not believe in OU and he clearly has no intention of ever believing in OU .
My opinion from the fist post of his that I read was that he came here just to argue.
WIth people that just want to argue you can drop a truckload of truth on them and they will comment only on the one or 2 points that they find inconsistent .
If you enjoy the art of arguing by all means please continue .
If you are actually trying to make a point .......you might as well save your energy for someone that is open minded enough to accept your point. .
gary
Somehow they get me to reply, in part I fear that unanswered they may convince some people, hopefully things have been covered enough to make that unlikely.
And it seems that though Jack is skilled in the art of self deception (believing that as you say a subjective inconsistency is more solid that proof) he is compared to the others an open mind and not seemingly out to disprove it.
I think the arguing can end here, I've got more building to do.
Just acquired a ramset masonry anchor as recommended by hoptoad for the cores, and as I went to get it guess who is right next door to my Mitre10? The previous location of the Ramset factory and present location of their wharehouse! What are the chances!
I am going to visit their (nearby) factory to see if I can just buy the piece I want.
Sadly though it seems their current design is slightly less optimal than when hoptoad was buying them. (short sleeve in 2 pieces)
Look mom... I'm a rainbow!!!
It's getting puke making almost, luckily I can heavily prune it.
Similarly, if someone showed proof of free energy I am sure we would all believe him.
Already been done, but I guess you don't research FE much.
W00t W00t!!!
Glad you are happy, if the load is increased by adding a set small mechanical load to various other levels of mechanical load so you can see how over different speeds just how much adding say a 5W mechanical load effects the speed and current at different performance ranges.
And then trying the same with it in 'Thane Mode' (TM), adding the 5w load and comparing it's effect to when you add the 5w load to a control at the same rpm as the gen in 'TM'.
I actually think this would be a good test though personally there are other things I believe are far more critical, but still it would be helpful.
You might want to reffer back to your comment about just how finicky your 'whatever' stuff is... before moving on to the next project, I would certainly want to verify what we have here. In theory, it could be that if the motor were not heavily loaded 'whatever' might vanish...
You may very well be right, heavy loading may help pull the aether, er I mean 'back-emf' into the motor.
I do not have the time to (re)state the various tests I believe will prove invaluable, though if have already stated them previously.[/color]??? Tests that would offer a numeric index to just how efficient this is??? I'm not counting you calorimetric idea, as I assume it was made in jest...
Yes, it was in jest, not awfully practical.
Quickly my other tests include (other than the one I mentioned last time).
Running the current from the coils through another external coil, this one probably slipped over the shaft of a running loaded motor, see if it has a comparable effect. (if it does rectify and smooth verify effect remains)
Then if that works replicate the same current through an identical coil, same amps but from a normal source such as from a normal transformer connected to the mains, see if this current with the same ampere turns has the same level of performance boost.
Another test is to freeze the motor and measure the static torque (preferable with a DC motor) with and without aether/back-emf/whatever.
Finally apply the output to different electromagnetic devices to see if it decreases hysteresis, if it reduces eddy currents (doubtful), if it increases magnetic field strength or if it increases pulling or projecting of a magnetic field, see precisely what it does to increase motor (and possibly also generator) function.
Who knows? If 'whatever' exists there is no scientific base with which to draw upon for how to capture, transfer, or perceive it. If you thought of an experiment for it, knock yourself out...
That should really read 'I am not AWARE of any scientific base...", personally I am.
Absolutely... I don't believe that unfettered the motor will continue to accelerate infinitely either. But if you don't think it could lift a Semi, do you think it could lift Yukon? A Prius? A Harley?
Well one thing worth noting is that even if Thane was right and had not exaggerated about energy output increasing to infinity (or failure) your test would still not work because the faster it goes the more power the motor gains (or at least more correctly the factor improving motor poower without increased current increases) so adding a physical load that reduces speeds and does not contribute more aether flow to the motor will hurt or kill the effect.
This is exactly what I mean by 'measurable metrics'.
It's not that I don't think your tests are a good idea, but it IS that there are tests that are much higher on my list for when I get this up and running, understanding and improving the effect is more important than measuring it, IMO the final form will likely be solid state and possibly not improve motor power but actually help make energy. (there is a bunch of evidence for the ability of some devices to literally pull fields from great distances with full strength and yet not return the favor making a one way transformer, this is also one of my theories of how motor power might be increased)
I'm not a scientist, but if you told me that the most Thane's motor could lift was 500 pounds on a vertical pulley for 100 feet, I bet I could find some B average college student to do the math for me and figure out the total energy output... Infinity is very big number...
It could of course lift any weight with the right gearing.
Quote
Somehow they get me to reply, in part I fear that unanswered they may convince some people, hopefully things have been covered enough to make that unlikely.
I personaly don't think that people are that easy to sway.
This is not the kind of site that you just stumble across
Everyone that comes here has a reason .
Those that choose to believe in OU will find more reasons to believe on this site.
Those that come here to make fun of ideas that they find ignorant will find more ways to make fun of other peoples ideas here.
You are not likely to change any of the basic ideas of either group .
For the most part I try to ignore the people that just come here to argue .
When I see someone with an idea that looks good or a question that I might be able to help with ....... I will put in my 2 cents worth ..........of course at times it may only be worth 1/2 a cent ...............but that is life :)
Quote
And it seems that though Jack is skilled in the art of self deception (believing that as you say a subjective inconsistency is more solid that proof) he is compared to the others an open mind and not seemingly out to disprove it.
self deception ?
I don't think so.
I think that Jack just loves to argue .....and he is very good at it .
What better place to argue than a place where people have passion for what they are trying to do .
Quote
Just acquired a ramset masonry anchor as recommended by hoptoad for the cores, and as I went to get it guess who is right next door to my Mitre10? The previous location of the Ramset factory and present location of their wharehouse! What are the chances!
I am going to visit their (nearby) factory to see if I can just buy the piece I want.
Sadly though it seems their current design is slightly less optimal than when hoptoad was buying them. (short sleeve in 2 pieces)
good luck with your project :)
gary
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 08:33:49 PM
Look mom... I'm a rainbow!!!
Oh look at me, I'm quoting! Oh, wait. here's you talking again:
QuoteIt's getting puke making almost, luckily I can heavily prune it.
Well, it's certainly hard to read, with all the "I'm red and Thane is fuschia" business going on. Maybe try quoting instead?
QuoteI actually think this would be a good test though personally there are other things I believe are far more critical, but still it would be helpful.
Yes, it does clearly separate the speakers -- almost as though it was designed for that purpose. It even puts others' comments in a diminuitive font SO I DON'T HAVE TO YELL.
Good Luck,
Mr. Entropy
Sorry Ent
I guess it's because I have been heavily using a customly coded forum and one of the bugs is it dumps all quotes at the top of the page no matter where you put them.
Quote from: JustMe on March 06, 2008, 03:40:39 PM
...this is the first time a force previously associated exclusively with system losses has been identified as a potential booster. Thus the focus on the interaction between the motor and the generator without consideration for overall system efficiency at this time.
There is no evidence that it is a "potential booster". The device with the magnets and the coils imposes a very strong load on the motor - a load strong enough in some circumstances to stall the motor completely, as reported in the experiments. Certain changes to the device and coils, such as coupling some of its magnetic flux back into the motor through the steel shaft, relieve that wasteful load somewhat so the motor goes faster and wastes less power. Introducing a 50% power loss (say) and then making changes to it that reduce those losses to 45% (say) is NOT any kind of "booster" - unless you can see any other logic in this?
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 08:33:49 PM
...adding a physical load that reduces speeds and does not contribute more aether flow to the motor will hurt or kill the effect.
So if the motor must be run without a physical load in order for the device to have an effect, what possible practical use can the device have even if it works? An electric motor can't do anything useful if you're not allowed connect it to a load where it can do real work.
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 07:35:30 PM
...frictional losses are tiny...
That's why standard, off-the-shelf electric motors operate routinely in the range of 95% efficiency. Unless they have this device attached, in which case the efficiency is much, much lower due to the electromagnetic braking effect which wastes large amounts of power as heat.
In light of the fact that no one has chosen my favorite color for quite some time, I'll be black...
It's getting puke making almost, luckily I can heavily prune it. - Agreed
Similarly, if someone showed proof of free energy I am sure we would all believe him.
Already been done, but I guess you don't research FE much. - so many definitions of 'free energy' - put it this way, 'free' energy would be wonderful, but I'd settle for 'cheap' energy... or at least any energy that costs less than $0.10 per kWh...
I actually think this would be a good test though personally there are other things I believe are far more critical, but still it would be helpful. - I'm just leaving this in because it makes me happy...
Running the current from the coils through another external coil, this one probably slipped over the shaft of a running loaded motor, see if it has a comparable effect. (if it does rectify and smooth verify effect remains)
Then if that works replicate the same current through an identical coil, same amps but from a normal source such as from a normal transformer connected to the mains, see if this current with the same ampere turns has the same level of performance boost.I don't see how this would give an indexed metric?
Another test is to freeze the motor and measure the static torque (preferable with a DC motor) with and without aether/back-emf/whatever.
Finally apply the output to different electromagnetic devices to see if it decreases hysteresis, if it reduces eddy currents (doubtful), if it increases magnetic field strength or if it increases pulling or projecting of a magnetic field, see precisely what it does to increase motor (and possibly also generator) function.
This last one flew way over my head... you may need to demonstate it with finger puppets...
That should really read 'I am not AWARE of any scientific base...", personally I am. - To the contrary, as you so rightly pointed out, since it is so stigmatic to associate with the 'free energy' movement, respectable scientist in the field are hard to come by... thereby leaving the existing base of data very heavily weighted toward wackos... (this is not meant to offend, but you seem intelligent enough to recognize that even if 'free energy' exists, 2 out of 3 people who believe in it are tin foil hat types...)
Well one thing worth noting is that even if Thane was right and had not exaggerated about energy output increasing to infinity (or failure) your test would still not work because the faster it goes the more power the motor gains (or at least more correctly the factor improving motor power without increased current increases) so adding a physical load that reduces speeds and does not contribute more aether flow to the motor will hurt or kill the effect. - A potentially valid point only if the increase in energy output is directly related to existing speed of the motor. If this turns out to be the case (which would certainly offer a very fundamental insight into the cause of the anomaly) one way around this would be to test using tension cables where the load would increase in direct proportion to the power output...
It's not that I don't think your tests are a good idea, but it IS that there are tests that are much higher on my list for when I get this up and running, understanding and improving the effect is more important than measuring it, IMO the final form will likely be solid state and possibly not improve motor power but actually help make energy. (there is a bunch of evidence for the ability of some devices to literally pull fields from great distances with full strength and yet not return the favor making a one way transformer, this is also one of my theories of how motor power might be increased) - here's hoping...
It could of course lift any weight with the right gearing. - and "I could move the earth if I only had a place to stand" - I said vertical pulley no gears - direct weight proportion.
Quote
Quote
And it seems that though Jack is skilled in the art of self deception (believing that as you say a subjective inconsistency is more solid that proof) he is compared to the others an open mind and not seemingly out to disprove it.
self deception ?
I don't think so.
I think that Jack just loves to argue .....and he is very good at it .
What better place to argue than a place where people have passion for what they are trying to do .
- I'm truly touched...
Here's a simple test for all who dare to try... and I bet all, or nearly all, will fail it.
Give me a complete, concise statement of the Law of Conservation of Energy... can be done in one sentence. If you're shy, then email it to me.
No, this isn't a game... it's to drive home a very important point about the proper application of this Law, and all the "confident" assertions on the possibility, or lack thereof, of FE/OU devices.
-Mark
Quote
Then if that works replicate the same current through an identical coil, same amps but from a normal source such as from a normal transformer connected to the mains, see if this current with the same ampere turns has the same level of performance boost.I don't see how this would give an indexed metric?
You have a bit of a one track mind, it won't but it will inform of the nature of the current in the coils, the motor accelerating performance is not linear with current as already established by hoptoad so that the current is not just electric has strong evidence, but this would clinch it, if that works it can be made solid state.
Quote
Another test is to freeze the motor and measure the static torque (preferable with a DC motor) with and without aether/back-emf/whatever.
Finally apply the output to different electromagnetic devices to see if it decreases hysteresis, if it reduces eddy currents (doubtful), if it increases magnetic field strength or if it increases pulling or projecting of a magnetic field, see precisely what it does to increase motor (and possibly also generator) function.
[/color] This last one flew way over my head... you may need to demonstate it with finger puppets...
It has an effect on the motor, motors have similarities to other electromagnetic devices, you can see if a motor is the best thing to apply it to and see precisely how it reduces losses (if that is all it does)
Quote
That should really read 'I am not AWARE of any scientific base...", personally I am. - To the contrary, as you so rightly pointed out, since it is so stigmatic to associate with the 'free energy' movement, respectable scientist in the field are hard to come by... thereby leaving the existing base of data very heavily weighted toward wackos... (this is not meant to offend, but you seem intelligent enough to recognize that even if 'free energy' exists, 2 out of 3 people who believe in it are tin foil hat types...)
Hey, what you say'n about my hat!
Anyway sure but there is evidence that is scientific not by respected scientists 9even if they should be0 and there is evidence by respected physicists who manage to wrap it up in terms the rest will accept.
Also there are devices made by wacko's that never the less illistrate what is really going on.
Quote
It could of course lift any weight with the right gearing. - and "I could move the earth if I only had a place to stand" - I said vertical pulley no gears - direct weight proportion.
Ok then, it deoends on the diameter of the pully.
@aether22
Quote: "Just acquired a ramset masonry anchor as recommended by hoptoad for the cores, and as I went to get it guess who is right next door to my Mitre10? The previous location of the Ramset factory and present location of their wharehouse! What are the chances!"
:o :D :D........You're not Irish are you ? ......Talk about Paddy's luck... :D :D
Quote: "I am going to visit their (nearby) factory to see if I can just buy the piece I want.
Sadly though it seems their current design is slightly less optimal than when hoptoad was buying them. (short sleeve in 2 pieces)"
It would be good if you find out exactly what this alloy is. I'm curious, as I never did find out the actual elemental makeup of the alloy's constituent metals. It would also be good for best comparison purposes, if you could get the sheaths without the holes as well.
To objectively test the metals electron yield properties as it reacts to the rotating magnets, you need to compare as close as possible, that is "like for like" with other core material, and core types. So try also to get a small amount of soft iron (tube and solid), some non retentive magnetic stainless steel (tube and solid), all of the same or nearest diameter. Also get some "I" laminate. In the case of laminates, calculate the outside circumference of the tubes, and that will give you total length of 1 single coil winding.
Use this length to calculate the height of your laminates, based on the width of the laminate being equal to the outside diameter the tube.
Make numerous hollow, solid and laminated cores, all of the same length. Wind just 10 turns of .5 - .62 mm wire (not critical for test purposes) onto the alloy core, noting the length of the piece of wire it takes for 10 turns. Allow an extra measured small length for each end of the coil for attaching to loads and meters. Then use the same length of wire to wind 10 turns on every different core type. Place your windings as close as possible to one end of the core.
10 turns is enough to compare O/C and loaded conditions of the coil, and will save you a lot of copper, time and winding effort, to see which core material and type is capable of producing the greatest output. Use a small, but real resistive load, like a 1.5 volt globe. When you've discovered which gives you the best O/P at just 10 turns, then use that material to carry out your experiments with the number of windings and wire gauge you desire. I will be extremely surprised, if you don't get the best O/P from the alloy cores.
However it may well turn out, that the alloy, as well as the sheath type, has been changed by Ramset. But with Irish luck, hopefully it's the same. If it has, they might still have all the specs, and may be able to recommend a supplier.
I personally have no idea how a solid steel rotor will perform with reference to a non lineal braking response in an open magnetic system.
All my experiments involved the use of non metallic rotor material to minimize any magnetic coupling between the alternator coils, and the driving motor. That's because all my experiments were focused on the study of this effect in open magnetic generating systems, and not on motor systems.
It may be possible that the steel rotor is diverting the effect away from the alternator. But I truthfully don't know, because I,ve never tried it. But the conclusions I drew from my own experience, is that the configurations I used, raised efficiency by lowering losses at any load, compared to a closed magnetic generating system. A different focus altogether from Thanes experiments, but possibly related just the same.
As I've already stated on my own website, "Please don't take a single word I have to say on this page as explicit "truth ". PLEASE reproduce your own motor/generator experiments as outlined on this page. Please Verify Effects For Yourself!!!
That goes for core design also. If you find something superior, then please inform me. If you find something that disagrees with my conclusions, please inform me. I'm always open to learning, and if shown to be wrong, will adjust my understanding according to the information given.
For anyone unfamiliar with my experiments with open systems alternators and how it relates to this thread, try this link below.
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/ Read pages 8 and 10
Cheers all :)
Mark - "energy can neither be created nor destroyed"
Aether - the diameter of a quark...
Quote
:o :D :D........You're not Irish are you ? ......Talk about Paddy's luck... :D :D
By majority yes.
Quote
It would be good if you find out exactly what this alloy is. I'm curious, as I never did find out the actual elemental makeup of the alloy's constituent metals. It would also be good for best comparison purposes, if you could get the sheaths without the holes as well.
I did manage to get the latter, they have it in 2 pieces on he bigger bolts, one with holes one not, though the one without only has one but not 3 like the bottom one.
Quote
. I will be extremely surprised, if you don't get the best O/P from the alloy cores.
I guess I am a bit lazier than you, and since I figure you are right anyway why bother? ;)
Quote
However it may well turn out, that the alloy, as well as the sheath type, has been changed by Ramset. But with Irish luck, hopefully it's the same. If it has, they might still have all the specs, and may be able to recommend a supplier.
I am sure I have seen the same metal before, holding hard drive Neo's or something like that.
I doubt they have changed it, should do for my initial tests.
Quote
I personally have no idea how a solid steel rotor will perform with reference to a non lineal braking response in an open magnetic system.
All my experiments involved the use of non metallic rotor material to minimize any magnetic coupling between the alternator coils, and the driving motor. That's because all my experiments were focused on the study of this effect in open magnetic generating systems, and not on motor systems.
I suspect that what is happening is that the aether is improving the efficiency of the generator in your setup and that the reason it is not apparent in Thanes system is simply that it never goes fast enough without the coupling to kick into action and maybe doesn't at all. (effecting the motor must be easier)
So the real interest would be when the generator approaches the unloaded speed when shorted and insulated from the motor, and then connect it to the motor anyway so that both are either at just about no loss or hopefully OU.
Thank You hoptoad, I am sure that your research will help in pursuing this effect, please stay around, your research is impressive.
I am sure you must wish you could join in experimenting so I hope that becomes possible for you.
Toad who hops, I am going to first try the number of windings consistent with your suggestions on your site for generating coils (I think you gave an impedance range actually).
So assuming my layer length is similar to what is shown, can you tell me how many layers I will need?
What I am trying to figure is if I need to delay construction and source bobbins. (initially I had planned on cutting end caps from some plastic or wood but I have figured that is likely to become a mess and be too thick)
Or if there are only a few layers hopefully I can get away without anything other than a bit of tape or glue or just total free style?
Quote from: aether22 on March 07, 2008, 04:54:27 AM
Toad who hops, I am going to first try the number of windings consistent with your suggestions on your site for generating coils (I think you gave an impedance range actually).
So assuming my layer length is similar to what is shown, can you tell me how many layers I will need?
What I am trying to figure is if I need to delay construction and source bobbins. (initially I had planned on cutting end caps from some plastic or wood but I have figured that is likely to become a mess and be too thick)
Or if there are only a few layers hopefully I can get away without anything other than a bit of tape or glue or just total free style?
@aether22
The pickup coil shown on page 10 on my website consists of 80 turns of .63 mm wire wound onto a 100 mm length x 12 mm O/D sheath.
There are 4 layers, each consisting of 20 turns.
I wound the coils directly onto the cores with a paper layer for insulation. A stick on paper label in fact. I put a different bolt with a long threaded shank though the sheath and included a large washer on the bolt which abutted one end of the sheath. I made up a wooden masonite "washer" which slipped over the outer sheath diameter, and behind it placed a spacer of larger diameter tubing cut to the remaining length of the sheath (approx 87mm) . I then slipped another washer suited to the bolt in behind that, and screwed a nut up to it to hold the assembly in loose position. The masonite washer also had two slots in them to set the coil wire entry and exit points, and stop the coil from slipping during the first few winds. Once you wind the first layer, the "washers" at each end tighten up into position as the coil takes up the space between them, and subsequent layers are easy to wind.
After I wound the coils, I put a few dobs of super glue on them in various places at each end, then disassembled the jig and then dipped the cores into PVC glue and allowed them to set overnight before use.
The coils have a low DC resistance. < 0.5 ohm. Their impedance is a different matter, because impedance is frequency dependent, and also determined by the core/coil inductance value. Impedance (Inductive reactance) is the product derived from the formula X
L = 2 x pi x frequency x inductance. So the Impedance will increase with increasing frequency. (increased rotor speed and/or increased magnets on rotor).
The total impedance of a circuit is the square root of the sum of the squares of the resistance and reactance.
Z = sqrt( (R^2) + (X^2) )
Cheers from The Toad Who Hops... :)
Excellent, Thanks!
I got a somewhat larger size (20mm) and a smaller one.
Wind a few before bed then, 100 turns is easy!
Addition:
BTW, have you realized that these or even normal laminated cores will not work so well in open flux path devices?
For each 120 degrees of strip at the end near the magnet is induced say 1v.
But since it is an open path the magnetic flux at the other end is far far less and so may only be .1v.
This means there is 1v minus .1v leaving .9v of potential to induce eddy currents.
Insulated wire or nails would work better but obviously if it is a worse material there will be greater hysteresis losses, I am wondering if I have seen nails or anything made with a similar material.
Still it does not concern me for my current application.
I believe the reason this works far better than anything else you have tested is in a large part due to the hole. (both is reducing core and hence core losses but likely improving aetheric characteristics)
BTW, you mentioned on page 4 or so that there was a freaky anomaly with the core but you would mention it later but I could find nothing on it.
Quote from: aether22 on March 07, 2008, 05:34:35 AM
Excellent, Thanks!
I got a somewhat larger size (20mm) and a smaller one.
Wind a few before bed then, 100 turns is easy!
Addition:
BTW, have you realized that these or even normal laminated cores will not work so well in open flux path devices?
For each 120 degrees of strip at the end near the magnet is induced say 1v.
But since it is an open path the magnetic flux at the other end is far far less and so may only be .1v.
This means there is 1v minus .1v leaving .9v of potential to induce eddy currents.
Insulated wire or nails would work better but obviously if it is a worse material there will be greater hysteresis losses, I am wondering if I have seen nails or anything made with a similar material.
Still it does not concern me for my current application.
I believe the reason this works far better than anything else you have tested is in a large part due to the hole. (both is reducing core and hence core losses but likely improving aetheric characteristics)
BTW, you mentioned on page 4 or so that there was a freaky anomaly with the core but you would mention it later but I could find nothing on it.
@aether
There is no freaky anomaly with the core itself. I was freaked by its great O/P characteristics and I was alluding to its ability to exaggerate the "anomoly" of a non linear counter MMF. And this is an anomoly under current electrical theory, because permanent magnet systems are meant to exhibit linear MMF and counter MMF properties. They certainly do in closed systems, but not in open systems.
You will never rid yourself completely of eddy currents and losses. But by winding the coil as a heel end configuration, the apparent loss you refer to is of little significance. IMHO there is something to be learned by re-reading page 4 from fig 10 onwards, and page 5 from fig 14 onwards
very carefully. There are IMHO some very important observations regarding magnetic behavior on those two pages.
Quote from: hoptoad on March 07, 2008, 02:43:42 AM
...the conclusions I drew from my own experience, is that the configurations I used, raised efficiency by lowering losses at any load, compared to a closed magnetic generating system...
hoptoad, could you please post your efficiency measurements? There's a lot of arm-waving going on about this and it sounds like you have actually made efficiency measurements to that would give us an objective proof the the device is providing efficiency improvements. This would silence the skeptics.
Quote from: aether22 on March 06, 2008, 04:09:01 PM
Answer these questions:
1: Have you recently watched the 1st and 2nd video? (the second being appended to the first)
2: Did you see in the (1st) video where the coils were shorted INCREASING THE LOAD ON THE MOTOR bringing it to a dead stop?
3: Did you see in the video where with the one change of adding a steel piece in the brass coupler made it accelerate beyond the point where it could be safely run as opposed to coming to a dead stop?
4: Did you notice that the voltage and in more recent tests the power output of the coils increased as the speed increased?
5: Since you believe that the generator load has decreased rather than the motor becoming more powerful, and given that the first video shows load increasing on coil shorting and since the only change in the 2nd vid is that the shaft is all steel can you explain how this steel shaft can dramatically reduce losses in the generator?
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. The motor and the loading device (what you're calling a "generator") form a closed system. ALL of the electrical power that is input is dissipated as waste heat, since there is no other output from the system. Therefore the efficiency of the system is 0%. When the steel shaft insert is in place, there is magnetic feedback from the "generator" to the motor. It is a matter for speculation whether this affects the level of waste heat in the motor or that in the "generator", since neither you nor I nor anyone else AFAIK has measured this separately for the motor and the "generator". I think it's in the "generator"; you think it's in the motor. However, what's for sure is that it has no effect whatsoever on the efficiency of the total system because ALL of the electrical power that is input is STILL dissipated as waste heat. The efficiency of the system is still 0%.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 01:24:15 AM
Give me a complete, concise statement of the Law of Conservation of Energy...
In a closed system, the total amount of energy remains constant.
In all of these experiments, the "closed system" is the combination of the motor connected to the loading device ("generator"). The amount of energy in that system remains constant. Therefore in the steady state the amount of power leaving the system must be exactly the same amount of power as the electrical power entering the system. Since there is no mechanical output from the system, all of the electrical power leaves the system as waste heat. This is the case whatever material the motor shaft is made of (steel vs brass vs plastic etc).
Quote from: gotoluc on March 05, 2008, 09:11:39 AM
Hi all.
as promised here is the link to the most up to date 2 camera video that I took of Thane's Generator with LIGHTS as load and it has the same acceleration as before.
YouTube Link: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=MFUwNJx6x1o
Megaupload: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ERQEFPBW
We have also completed a new and much more efficient primary coil to test Thane's Toroids and so far have achieved 38% efficiency in Toroid number 1 which is only 2,000 windings per side. We have not wet tested it in Toroid 2 which is 4,000 windings which should double the efficiency and then Toroid 3 which is 5,500 windings, who knows what it will do ???
Please stay tuned for more updates.
Luc
Luc,
interesting to see what happens there. I'm curious though. It appears to me each bulb was connected to one coil. What would happen if you add a few extra electrical loads incrementally to one or two coils instead of switching on each coil in turn?
I'm no electrical engineer but wouldn't electrical resistance be lower if you put a few lamps in parallel instead of hooking up one (assuming they're all the same)? If that were true you could make a parallel circuit in which you can switch on one lamp at a time (connected to the same coil) and see how the system behaves with each incremental change.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 07, 2008, 08:01:03 AM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 01:24:15 AM
Give me a complete, concise statement of the Law of Conservation of Energy (LoCE)...
In a closed system, the total amount of energy remains constant.
In all of these experiments, the "closed system" is the combination of the motor connected to the loading device ("generator"). The amount of energy in that system remains constant. Therefore in the steady state the amount of power leaving the system must be exactly the same amount of power as the electrical power entering the system. Since there is no mechanical output from the system, all of the electrical power leaves the system as waste heat. This is the case whatever material the motor shaft is made of (steel vs brass vs plastic etc).
Congrats to PB. Here was what I had written prior to posting the 'test'...
"In a CLOSED system, energy can never be created nor destroyed, just converted from one form to another.ââ,¬Â
The key here is the phrase, "In a closed system"...
ââ,¬Å"In a CLOSED system.ââ,¬Â What does that mean? It means that you are aware of and can monitor/measure ALL sources of energy in the system under test (heat, electrical, chemical, kinetic, potential, nuclear, etc.). If there is any possibility that some other form of energy is present in the system, then one would need to be able to monitor that other form of energy in order to make any kind of determination concerning the LoCE.
But you say, ââ,¬Å"We know and can measure all forms of energy!ââ,¬Â Oh really? Thatââ,¬â,,¢s either arrogance or naivete talking. There is at least one more potential source of energy recognized by mainstream science that is never considered in these systemsââ,¬Â¦ the zero point field (ZPF). We now have significant empirical evidence of its existence (e.g., the Casimir effect). As far as I am aware, no one has proven that interactions between the ZPF and matter cannot occur. Perhaps they are continually interacting (i.e., inertia) but science just hasnââ,¬â,,¢t caught up yet with realityââ,¬Â¦
If one even allows the possibility that the ZPF exists and MIGHT interact with matter or other forms of energy, then there is another potential source/sink of energy that must be monitored. So far, I am not aware of any such instrument that allows us to do that. This means that achieving a truly ââ,¬Å"closedââ,¬Â system is virtually impossible. Thus, although very unlikely, a true scientist/inventor must allow for devices that seem to violate the LoCE. Only careful and methodical analysis will determine if any apparent OU is due to error, or that weââ,¬â,,¢re dealing with a system that is not truly ââ,¬Ëœclosedââ,¬â,,¢.
Funny how some people are not even capable of acknowledging the
possibility of a ZPF/matter interaction... they probably feel like that would be akin to 'losing' the argument! Sad... not losing an argument is more important than discovering the truth.
-Mark
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 10:09:06 AM
...although very unlikely, a true scientist/inventor must allow for devices that seem to violate the LoCE...
I agree completely. In this case, though, the device does not seem to violate the LoCE in any way, does it? Power in = heat out, no muss, no fuss.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 10:09:06 AM
...But you say, ?We know and can measure all forms of energy!? Oh really? That?s either arrogance or naivete talking...
markzpeiverson, I'm not sure who you're quoting but I didn't say that.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 10:09:06 AM
?In a CLOSED system.? What does that mean? It means that you are aware of and can monitor/measure ALL sources of energy in the system under test (heat, electrical, chemical, kinetic, potential, nuclear, etc.). If there is any possibility that some other form of energy is present in the system, then one would need to be able to monitor that other form of energy in order to make any kind of determination concerning the LoCE.
Yep, absolutely right. And there's even a real-life example of that, to change topics for a short moment: we all know that if there were a nuclear reaction going on inside that closed system, then there is a conversion going on between matter and energy so the classical LoCE does not apply. BUT, if I'm dealing with a classical system (say, I'm trying to figure out the fuel economy of a car for example), then I don't need to worry about the possibility of a nuclear reaction because the classical LoCE fully and precisely describes the system.
By the same token, this motor/generator arrangement of Thane's, which is also a closed system, can be fully described by the classical model with the classical LoCE fully and simply in effect. There are absolutely no external observations that have been made of this closed system that cannot be described by a classical model. So there is no reason at all to be speculating on some other, non-classical, source/sink of energy (whether it's nuclear or ZPF or whatever).
so....
here is the final answer
TESLA'S RADIENT ENGERY CONVERSION
or if you like THE SUN!!
THIS IS THE REASON THIS IS POSIBLE ........
ist
The dfinition of conservation of energy is somewhat unimportant... to me it means "you can't deliver electricity to my home for less than a nickel a kilowatt"... if you can, you'll be my hero - with or without conservation of energy...
Whoa!
Ok, THIS IS BIG!
Actually it needs it's own thread! it's freaking HUGE.
I just woke up and still had eddy currents on my mind and I realized that for open path magnetic systems EVERY SINGLE METHOD EVERY USED TO DIVIDE THE CORE IS USELESS OR NEARLY SO! (Laminates halve it no they don't)
The ONLY way to do it is to have a cut ring, or a coil with or without breaks in it. (but obviously not shorted and must be insulated as it is more vulnerable than normal laminates)
This impacts every Adams motor ever made, EVER, this impacts Thanes generator, this impacts the majority of OU electromagnetic designs.
This has either been hurting the efficiency of, or possibly even a hidden ingredient of every open circuit electromagnetic device.
Let me explain, with open paths the flux leaks out so the further you get away from the source the field is less strong and so is the induction from it if time varying.
And so currents induced in strongly induced locations will short through currents in poorly induced locations.
Now that piece I have already said, the amazing thing is that if you think about it, it matters not one iota if you cut the core up length wise, think about it, current will still flow just fine. (yes, it would be odd looking but it will still flow pretty much the same, the fact that the currents must pass each other in a long thin wire means nothing!)
This is HUGE and I will make a separate post in the OU forum for it.
If anyone 'get's it' and wants to make pictures to help others understand go ahead, I really need to get building.
edit: made a pic
Quote from: hoptoad on March 07, 2008, 06:46:27 AM
You will never rid yourself completely of eddy currents and losses. But by winding the coil as a heel end configuration, the apparent loss you refer to is of little significance. IMHO there is something to be learned by re-reading page 4 from fig 10 onwards, and page 5 from fig 14 onwards very carefully. There are IMHO some very important observations regarding magnetic behavior on those two pages.
Only reading this after having made my latest "It's HUGE" post, so I am interested in how you think is gets rid of the problem, I am reasonably sure it does not.
But I'll take your advice and read those pages.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 06, 2008, 11:58:35 PM
There is no evidence that it is a "potential booster". The device with the magnets and the coils imposes a very strong load on the motor - a load strong enough in some circumstances to stall the motor completely, as reported in the experiments. Certain changes to the device and coils, such as coupling some of its magnetic flux back into the motor through the steel shaft, relieve that wasteful load somewhat so the motor goes faster and wastes less power. Introducing a 50% power loss (say) and then making changes to it that reduce those losses to 45% (say) is NOT any kind of "booster" - unless you can see any other logic in this?
I'm truly trying hard to understand your point, but I just can't see it. Most here are focusing on the potential of a novel and unexpected effect in a system optimized only to illustrate this novel and unexpected effect, and you want this system to do something uniquely productive
right now. It took years and many wise minds to turn an initial observation of a bacteria free ring around an invading mould in a petri dish into the useful product penicillin. There are many arguments and approaches that are perfectly reasonable, but not particularly informative. To me your posts seem to fall into this category. Only time and patience will tell if this will turn into something that can be applied to increase efficiency. What's the hurry?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 07, 2008, 10:59:46 AM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 07, 2008, 10:09:06 AM
...But you say, ââ,¬Å"We know and can measure all forms of energy!ââ,¬Â Oh really? Thatââ,¬â,,¢s either arrogance or naivete talking...
markzpeiverson, I'm not sure who you're quoting but I didn't say that.
Hi PB:
no, wasn't quoting anyone in particular; it was a 'rhetorical' quote!
-M
Quote from: JustMe on March 07, 2008, 01:37:12 PM
...Only time and patience will tell if this will turn into something that can be applied to increase efficiency. What's the hurry?
Some may think there's no hurry but doesn't it speak volumes that, based on Thane's timeline, 23 years have elapsed since work first began on this device, yet nobody has yet managed to demonstrate that it has the potential to improve efficiency - even though it would be extremely simple to put together such a demonstration and measure it objectively.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 07, 2008, 02:15:21 PM
Some may think there's no hurry but doesn't it speak volumes that, based on Thane's timeline, 23 years have elapsed since work first began on this device, yet nobody has yet managed to demonstrate that it has the potential to improve efficiency - even though it would be extremely simple to put together such a demonstration and measure it objectively.
It's hard to perceive you as objective when you spin this as a project that has struggled in fruitlessness for 23 years. The collateral observation that is solely responsible for this device and this conversation is barely two years old. Because Thane's operating theory involves some pretty funky physics he is going to encounter even more roadblocks than a typical inventor. I personally wouldn't find it wise to draw conclusions from the rate of progress at this point.
You call the measurements you propose simple, and others here have disagreed. I don't have the technical expertise to form a judgement either way. I do know however that potential to improve efficiency is a different animal than improves efficiency right now.
Quote from: JustMe on March 07, 2008, 03:16:36 PM
It's hard to perceive you as objective when you spin this as a project that has struggled in fruitlessness for 23 years. The collateral observation that is solely responsible for this device and this conversation is barely two years old. Because Thane's operating theory involves some pretty funky physics he is going to encounter even more roadblocks than a typical inventor. I personally wouldn't find it wise to draw conclusions from the rate of progress at this point.
You call the measurements you propose simple, and others here have disagreed. I don't have the technical expertise to form a judgement either way. I do know however that potential to improve efficiency is a different animal than improves efficiency right now.
Yes, I'm sorry if I come across sounding negative: that's certainly not coming from any preconception. I did arrive here very excited about what I'd read elsewhere and I'm here to find out more information - but every time I make a request for the slightest very simple, direct, measurable, objective indicator I'm just getting back non-information at best or rudeness at worst. If Thane does have a real invention on his hands, his interests certainly aren't served by the pronouncements of some of the pseudo-scientists on this forum - because it gives the whole project a kind of crackpot aura which will destroy his credibility with potential partners or investors.
Quote
Yes, I'm sorry if I come across sounding negative: that's certainly not coming from any preconception. I did arrive here very excited about what I'd read elsewhere and I'm here to find out more information - but every time I make a request for the slightest very simple, direct, measurable, objective indicator I'm just getting back non-information at best or rudeness at worst. If Thane does have a real invention on his hands, his interests certainly aren't served by the pronouncements of some of the pseudo-scientists on this forum - because it gives the whole project a kind of crackpot aura which will destroy his credibility with potential partners or investors.
I do not believe that you are genuinely interested for one second, the answers you gave to my 5 questions directly contradict almost everything you have said showing you say things you know are not true to discredit this discovery, do you want me to quote what you say against the answers you gave saying the exact opposite?
Also can you please give the 'it sucks as a (net) motor power increaser' line a rest, I have told you how it could be used as one by making the cores unaffected by 2 significant losses present.
But mainly the point is that this has not been presented as a thing to make motors more powerful but a generator at increases motor output but even more than that are an astounding science demo showing something very unexpected is going on.
Now I need to figure out how to attach my coil/cores to my generator.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 07, 2008, 03:32:40 PM
If Thane does have a real invention on his hands, his interests certainly aren't served by the pronouncements of some of the pseudo-scientists on this forum - because it gives the whole project a kind of crackpot aura which will destroy his credibility with potential partners or investors.
uh oh - Aether, it looks like I wasn't the only one to notice your hat...
Quote from: jacksatan on March 07, 2008, 03:58:39 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 07, 2008, 03:32:40 PM
If Thane does have a real invention on his hands, his interests certainly aren't served by the pronouncements of some of the pseudo-scientists on this forum - because it gives the whole project a kind of crackpot aura which will destroy his credibility with potential partners or investors.
uh oh - Aether, it looks like I wasn't the only one to notice your hat...
Oh no, polarbreeze doesn't respect me as a scientist, now I'm not going to be able to sleep!
Oh wait, I'm not going to be able to sleep 'cause it's day time!
Quote from: aether22 on March 07, 2008, 03:52:04 PM
...do you want me to quote what you say against the answers you gave saying the exact opposite?
...Oh no, polarbreeze doesn't respect me as a scientist, now I'm not going to be able to sleep!
Do I want you to? Well, you might find it instructive to try but I think you'd be wasting your time on that one. It's not personal, though. It's just a matter of finding out whether or not there is substance to Thane's invention - it's purely objective.
"However, what's for sure is that it has no effect whatsoever on the efficiency of the total system because ALL of the electrical power that is input is STILL dissipated as waste heat. The efficiency of the system is still 0%." polarbreeze
THIS ARGUEMET ONLY WORKS AS LONG AS YOU IGNORE THE ENERGY STORED IN THE ROTOR AS INERTIA (YOU CANNOT) ALSO HEAT IS NOT WASTE.
THE WORK DONE IN TEST # 2 TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WAS NOT SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR OR THE SOURCE POWER SINCE THESE PARAMETERS WERE IDENTICAL IN BOTH TESTS.
THE ENERGY REQUIRED TO DO THE WORK REQUIRED TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM ? WAS SUPPLIED BY THE GENERATOR LOAD VIA A 3? PIECE OF STEEL NOT BY THE MOTOR SINCE TEST # 1 PROVED THE MOTOR COULD NOT ACCELERATE THE ROTOR WHEN THE GENERATOR WAS NOT MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR.
THE ENERGY STORED AS INERTIA IN THE ROTOR IN TEST #2 IS THEREFORE FREE BECAUSE THERE IS NO ENERGY COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
ALSO TO CREATE A SHORT CIRCUIT IN A GENERATOR AS SHOWN IN THE DEMOS ONE WOULD HAVE TO PLACE AN INFINITE LOAD ON THE SYSTEM IN PARALLEL I.E. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF LIGHT BULBS, FRIDGES, AIR CONDITIONERS ETC.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/work.html
Work-Energy Principle
The change in the kinetic energy of an object is equal to the net work done on the object.
This fact is referred to as the Work-Energy Principle and is often a very useful tool in mechanics problem solving. It is derivable from conservation of energy and the application of the relationships for work and energy, so it is not independent of the conservation laws. It is in fact a specific application of conservation of energy. However, there are so many mechanical problems which are solved efficiently by applying this principle that it merits separate attention as a working principle.
Thane
p.s. To learn something about flywheel energy storage...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage
How about this for measuring the torque?
I was going to make it for my unit but I thought I'd get your opinions first.
And YES Thane, my motor does accelerate just as you have demonstrated!
Regards
Vince
Sorry;
I can't compress my drawing enough to get it to go thru.
Vince
Quote from: OilBarren on March 07, 2008, 06:31:19 PM
Polarbreeze said: "However, what's for sure is that it has no effect whatsoever on the efficiency of the total system because ALL of the electrical power that is input is STILL dissipated as waste heat. The efficiency of the system is still 0%." polarbreeze
Thane said: THIS ARGUEMET ONLY WORKS AS LONG AS YOU
IGNORE THE ENERGY STORED IN THE ROTOR AS INERTIA (YOU CANNOT)
Polar replies: The energy stored in the rotor does not factor into the equation for calculating power, nor efficiency. The reason is that in the steady state, this stored energy is not changing so it has no effect on power-in, nor on power-out. (Because power = energy/time)
Thane: ALSO HEAT IS NOT WASTE.
Polar: Well, it's not waste if your goal is to heat your workshop; otherwise it's certainly waste. But if you remove the word "waste" from my statement it does not change the technical meaning so it's a moot point.
Thane: THE WORK DONE IN
TEST # 2 TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WAS
NOT SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR OR THE SOURCE POWER SINCE THESE PARAMETERS WERE IDENTICAL IN BOTH TESTS.
Polar: During acceleration, less waste heat was generated than otherwise, because some of the power was instead diverted to raising the rotational energy of the rotor. This rotational energy will be given back eventually as heat when the rotor slows down (when you change the drive conditions or switch off the system). There is no indication of any change in efficiency.
Thane: THE
ENERGY REQUIRED TO DO THE
WORK REQUIRED TO
ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM ? WAS SUPPLIED BY THE
GENERATOR LOAD VIA A 3? PIECE OF STEEL
NOT BY THE MOTOR SINCE TEST # 1 PROVED THE MOTOR COULD NOT ACCELERATE THE ROTOR WHEN THE GENERATOR WAS NOT MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR.
Polar: Again, the concept of efficiency applies to the steady-state condition. In that state, there is no acceleration (nor deceleration).
Thane: THE ENERGY STORED AS INERTIA IN THE ROTOR IN
TEST #2 IS THEREFORE
FREE BECAUSE THERE IS NO ENERGY COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
Polar: The energy stored in the rotor is NOT "free" - it is supplied by the motor, which in turn is supplied by the electrical power input. In addition, for some of the experiments, the power to help the rotor get up to speed is supplied by Thane's hand.
Thane: ALSO TO CREATE A SHORT CIRCUIT IN A GENERATOR AS SHOWN IN THE DEMOS ONE WOULD HAVE TO PLACE AN INFINITE LOAD ON THE SYSTEM
IN PARALLEL I.E. AN INFINITE NUMBER OF LIGHT BULBS, FRIDGES, AIR CONDITIONERS ETC.
Polar: why not just a good, solid, thick piece of wire?
I'll try this as a photo. Sorry for the poor quality
Vince
@polarbreeze. Quote: ?hoptoad, could you please post your efficiency measurements??
I would but can?t. Polarbreeze, I recently moved interstate from a quiet little country town in South Australia called Marion Bay, to another bigger country town in Victoria called Torquay. Both towns are about 1000 km apart. All my equipment, models, notes, data etc, are safely tucked away in a locked cabinet in my shed back in Marion Bay. My wife and I only intended to be where we are currently living for a month?s holiday.
We?ve been here for 12 months now, and in the interim period, we have leased out our own property for holiday rentals. I have no idea if or when I might return home to South Australia.
To put things into a little historical context, The experiments I carried out which are represented on page 10 were carried out in 2001-2002. The website I recently posted is drawing upon memory. Since I cannot remember the exact amp/current/rpm figures, any curves showing actual readings would be untruthful. But the resultant curve shapes and curve relationships were easy to remember. Burnt into my memory as a result of surprise at the unexpected !
@polarbreeze. Quote: ?There's a lot of arm-waving going on about this?
LOL?? :D :D .Sounds like a lot of fun, I?d like to see that !!
@polarbreeze. Quote: ? and it sounds like you have actually made efficiency measurements to that would give us an objective proof the the device is providing efficiency improvements.?
In spite of not being able to post figures which give empirical credence to the curves drawn on page 10, I stand by those curves as representative of my experimental results.
@polarbreeze. Quote: ? This would silence the skeptics.?
I don?t want to silence anyone, especially the skeptics. Skepticism is healthy and life saving. It stops us all running off the edge of cliffs like lemmings. It promotes debate and helps to advance true understanding. However, if someone is exclusively an armchair skeptic, I couldn?t care less about their opinion. But I do value the opinions of skeptics who stop waving their arms and puts them to good use by actively replicating an experiment.
Lets, face it, the experiment I outlined on page 10 of my site is very easy to reproduce. There is no requirement for advanced electronics or mechanical knowledge. Just common sense, a little bit of mechanical accuracy, and a sense of safety, due to high rotor speeds involved.
The total material costs (including DC motors) is under $100. And the time needed to set it up and see results for yourself is not great. If you are a skeptic who wants to be convinced one way or another, then collect your own empirical results and derive your conclusions from them.
The most convincing and easiest way to debunk or verify an experimental result and conclusion is to try the experiment yourself.
If you find glaring problems or differences with my conclusions, please inform me. Although I ceased these particular experiments early in 2002 due to ill health at the time, I?m still very curious about the effect, and am eager for more information, even if it proves my conclusions to be wrong.
Cheers all from the Toad who Hops KneeDeep :)
Polar:
"The energy stored in the rotor is NOT "free" - it is supplied by the motor, which in turn is supplied by the electrical power input. In addition, for some of the experiments, the power to help the rotor get up to speed is supplied by Thane's hand".
OK - NOW I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING!
Thanks for setting me straight.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 07, 2008, 06:31:19 PM
PROVED THE MOTOR COULD NOT ACCELERATE THE ROTOR WHEN THE GENERATOR WAS NOT MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR.
@Oilbarren
This is where I get a little perplexed, and think that the steel rotor redirects the "effect" away from coil electrical output. The conclusion drawn in the quote above is in direct contradiction to my own experiments conducted in 2002, which used a non magnetic rotor to specifically avoid, as much as possible, any magnetic coupling between the output coils and the driving motor. In fact, I also used a non magnetic brass shaft on the generator (alternator) and coupled it to the steel shaft of the motor with high density vulcanised rubber tubing to ensure greater decoupling.
Go figure ???
Quote from: hoptoad on March 07, 2008, 10:50:30 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 07, 2008, 06:31:19 PM
PROVED THE MOTOR COULD NOT ACCELERATE THE ROTOR WHEN THE GENERATOR WAS NOT MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR.
@Oilbarren
This is where I get a little perplexed, and think that the steel rotor redirects the "effect" away from coil electrical output. The conclusion drawn in the quote above is in direct contradiction to my own experiments conducted in 2002, which used a non magnetic rotor to specifically avoid, as much as possible, any magnetic coupling between the output coils and the driving motor. In fact, I also used a non magnetic brass shaft on the generator (alternator) and coupled it to the steel shaft of the motor with high density vulcanised rubber tubing to ensure greater decoupling.
Go figure ???
Yes, I think you both are finding the same thing, only in Thanes it is directed to the motor and either not effecting the generator because of too low a speed or because 'it' is being conducted away (into the rotor and any magnetic portion of the shaft).
And again I would like to express just how unlikely it is that it could be a magnetic field for those who have only recently started reading this thread.
A magnetic field does not move very far through steel without loosing the vast majority of of it's strength in an open circuit, but we are meant to believe that the magnetic field from the coil (by all accounts not awfully powerful) passes through a super strong neodymium magnet (12,000 gauss) which is saturating nearby steel making it as conductive to the coils magnetic field as air, through spokes, through a shaft that seem more than a foot long and then must compare to the far far stronger fields created by the motor. (the fields in the motor are stronger than the fields in the coil let along after it has conducted all this way)
From simulations with vizimag it would seem to be 1/100th of the strength at the coil at most. (and that was simulating with a permeability of 100,000! and without tiny breaks present in reality which drops conducted flux hugely.)
But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core.
The measured field at the rotor is 25 gauss which is really tiny (some of which is likely to be a remnant magnetic field or a bit of flux leakage from the neos), that's 160th of the strength of a ceramic magnet and far closer to the earth magnetic field, and yet the effect on the motor is the difference between a dead stop (despite the fact that slower speeds have lower loads though admittedly increasingly inefficient use of the motor) and speeding up to the point where it must be stopped for fear of it flying apart if left to accelerate any longer.
And this is in stark contrast to the demo where a Neo stack is brought near the shaft of a motor to exhibit only a very very hint difference in speed (and therefore current)
Also the fact that the effect (well an obviously related effect) was highly non linear as discovered by hoptoad, requiring a low resistance otherwise it slowed it down, that is interesting since assuming the same carries over to Thanes we must ask why the field from the coil would change so much by doubling or trippling the current? (with hoptoads setup it seems plausible that some complex timing might have been at work but that is not possible with Thanes!)
Even more so since the effect appeared almost insensitive to magnetic field strength, showing a huge effect from a single coil and a long shaft with multiple breaks or showing only slightly stronger action from more coils and a far shorter axle with no substantial breaks, that would probably be in reality up to a 100 fold difference in the strength of the magnetic field delivered to the motor i'd guess from simulations.
In short it seems that what is getting into the motor is what I am sure is aether but what others might call torsion/spin fields, orgone/odic, animal magnetism, Zero point Flux/Energy etc... (the same thing discovered many times given different names)
So if you want to believe it's a magnetic field, or 'back-emf' that's fine with me but since I have tons of evidence that the aether is real and is created by generators and can have effects like this all before Thane came along you will understand if I call it aether. (except for polarbreeze who won't understand)
BTW, no comments on my eddy current discovery?
Hi Thane
Have you ever tried to couple the emf around the brass coupling
this is refering to video 1,2.Now don't get me wrong I think you have something very important,and I'm sure you have
done this type of demo hundreds of times,but a die hard skeptic(theres a few in here Ha Ha) will say you might have done something else in adding the metal shaft that caused it to accelerate,you disturbed the overall setup.my own experiments show that if you adjust the variac and monitor rpm so its stable as possible I use an optical tach, a magnet near the bare shaft of the ryobi motor like you use has no effect,an ac magnetic field has no effect even if it can cause a magnet to vibrate 5 inches away.In your video 1,2 it would have to travel up the spoke along the shaft looks like 2 feet enter the motor change something
magnetic field strength possibly.Theres nothing known that can do this so if you redirect the flow around the brass coupler with no metal shaft inside , mount the bracket on a door hinge ,down coupled up not coupled
that removes more arguments about real ,not real.For this to be real the back emf would have to travel as a pulse , it would have to cause magnetic effects,it would not spread out from the time it traveled from the spoke to the motor or loose strength during its travel.
Have a good one
powerunlimited, I couldn't agree with you more, very well said and good experiments.
One question though, were you loading your grinder mechanically or was it near full speed already?
Anyway obviously I do not believe it's a magnetic field at work.
To Aether 22:
I bought the ryobi grinder at home depot and removed all of the things wheels ect its a bare motor except for a plastic wheel with holes part of the optical tach and thats a very very tiny load.
No addtional load was applied,plasic wheel on one end bare shaft on other end ,the variac was adjusted to make the motor run slow but stable,since in a lot of experiments that Thane has done the motor is run at a low speed by adjusting the variac,motor speed was not effected by a strong magnet near the bare shaft i used a ceramic magnet.I use the laminated part of a refrigerator fan motor with the moving part removed pluged into the 120ac voltage, i also put the open part where the ac field is strongest directly on the shaft no effect
now the motor speed tends to drift ,not accelerate, but i made the rpm as stable as possible no effect.The ryobi motor is very shielded as far as construction goes.My conclusion is no magnetic field or ac magnetic field effects this motor at the bare shaft so at two feet away forget it as in videos 1,2. Now to the non believers because a ac magnetic field or static magnetic field has no effect on the ryobi motor this does not mean Thanes device doesn't work only that what gets to the motor isn't a magnetic field.
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 08, 2008, 06:03:09 AM
To Aether 22:
I bought the ryobi grinder at home depot and removed all of the things wheels ect its a bare motor except for a plastic wheel with holes part of the optical tach and thats a very very tiny load.
No addtional load was applied,plasic wheel on one end bare shaft on other end ,the variac was adjusted to make the motor run slow but stable,since in a lot of experiments that Thane has done the motor is run at a low speed by adjusting the variac,motor speed was not effected by a strong magnet near the bare shaft i used a ceramic magnet.I use the laminated part of a refrigerator fan motor with the moving part removed pluged into the 120ac voltage, i also put the open part where the ac field is strongest directly on the shaft no effect
now the motor speed tends to drift ,not accelerate, but i made the rpm as stable as possible no effect.The ryobi motor is very shielded as far as construction goes.My conclusion is no magnetic field or ac magnetic field effects this motor at the bare shaft so at two feet away forget it as in videos 1,2. Now to the non believers because a ac magnetic field or static magnetic field has no effect on the ryobi motor this does not mean Thanes device doesn't work only that what gets to the motor isn't a magnetic field.
I think you need a load, but since it was running slow then you had load however tiny, so yes you bust pretty effectively that any claim that a normal magnetic field causes the effect.
I think we can see why Thane had to go to such lengths to get his motor to speed up slightly in the test where it actually did respond to a magnet when the effect with the generator is so powerful and robust.
So I am going to stop saying 'back-emf' and say aether/whatever instead when referring to what must be moving from (likely) gen to motor.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 07, 2008, 10:37:20 PM
Polar:
"The energy stored in the rotor is NOT "free" - it is supplied by the motor, which in turn is supplied by the electrical power input. In addition, for some of the experiments, the power to help the rotor get up to speed is supplied by Thane's hand".
OK - NOW I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING!
Thanks for setting me straight.
Thane
No problem, Thane, it's often good to have another pair of eyes looking at the results because it's easy to miss something. The key point that I think you need to work with is that the energy stored in the rotor does not change in the steady state so it's irrelevant how it got there. The fact that you had to get it up to speed by boosting it with your hand, as shown in the video, may appear to some to be "cheating" but it isn't a problem at all because the start-up phase isn't relevant: what's important is the steady-state. The proof of this effect can only be established by making measurements at steady-state, measuring the power in vs the power out and comparing them under different conditions.
I've looked at this from a theoretical viewpoint and I've come up with a hypothesis which maybe someone could test with a real motor/generator setup. I am assuming that the motor that's being used is a synchronous AC motor. The hypothesis is as follows:
A synchronous motor runs at a fixed rpm which depends on the frequency of the AC supply (and is more or less independent of load). If that frequency is changed, the motor speed will change accordingly to re-establish synchronism. Attaching the "generator" device to the shaft sets up an alternating magnetic field in the shaft of the motor, at a frequency which is a multiple of the speed of the motor (because there are multiple magnets/coils on the generator). This perturbs the alternating field in the motor, delivering an effect equivalent to using a higher frequency AC supply. In an attempt to re-establish synchronism, the motor speeds up.
There are several ways that immediately come to mind in which this hypothesis could be tested on the setups that are already in place. Comments?
Quote from: hoptoad on March 07, 2008, 10:24:33 PM
@polarbreeze. Quote: ?hoptoad, could you please post your efficiency measurements??
I would but can?t. Polarbreeze, I recently moved interstate from a quiet little country town in South Australia called Marion Bay, to another bigger country town in Victoria called Torquay. Both towns are about 1000 km apart. All my equipment, models, notes, data etc, are safely tucked away in a locked cabinet in my shed back in Marion Bay. My wife and I only intended to be where we are currently living for a month?s holiday.
We?ve been here for 12 months now, and in the interim period, we have leased out our own property for holiday rentals. I have no idea if or when I might return home to South Australia.
"The dog ate my homework" ;)
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 08, 2008, 11:10:53 AM
I've looked at this from a theoretical viewpoint and I've come up with a hypothesis which maybe someone could test with a real motor/generator setup. I am assuming that the motor that's being used is a synchronous AC motor. The hypothesis is as follows:
A synchronous motor runs at a fixed rpm which depends on the frequency of the AC supply (and is more or less independent of load). If that frequency is changed, the motor speed will change accordingly to re-establish synchronism. Attaching the "generator" device to the shaft sets up an alternating magnetic field in the shaft of the motor, at a frequency which is a multiple of the speed of the motor (because there are multiple magnets/coils on the generator). This perturbs the alternating field in the motor, delivering an effect equivalent to using a higher frequency AC supply. In an attempt to re-establish synchronism, the motor speeds up.
There are several ways that immediately come to mind in which this hypothesis could be tested on the setups that are already in place. Comments?
Bravo, PB!
Just the number of magnets/coils should alter the acceleration characteristics...
I'd also like to add a potential complexity... the magnetic (or whatever) "pulses" from the generator mixed with the 60Hz AC in the motor create a 'beat' frequency which the motor is attempting to synch with... and this beat freq'y will be changing as the generator speeds up.
But then again, aether22 and/or hoptoad feel that any feedback magnetic flux/field is way too small compared to the motor's msg-fld to really cause that much difference/effect?????
More complexity... will the steady-state RPM be an integer multiple of the 60Hz?
-M
Mark, it's great to hear some objective thinking on this, well done!
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 08, 2008, 12:48:02 PM
... feel that any feedback magnetic flux/field is way too small compared to the motor's msg-fld to really cause that much difference/effect...
In order to crack this, I think it's important to get away from "feeling" and get into "measuring". And also to figure out ways to determine objective measurements rather than terms like "way too small". It is actually quite straightforward to measure the field strength within the armature of the motor, by inserting sensors, and it would be very instructive to observe the waveform on an oscilloscope.
I've noticed that there's a tendency, among those who want to believe in a mysterious previously-unexplained external force, to keep everything vague because that's the way to keep the mystery alive. So IMHO it's important to keep everything very objective and measurable. The vagueness is an absolute killer to the credibility too, so it prevents people from taking it seriously.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 08, 2008, 11:10:53 AM
I've looked at this from a theoretical viewpoint and I've come up with a hypothesis which maybe someone could test with a real motor/generator setup. I am assuming that the motor that's being used is a synchronous AC motor. The hypothesis is as follows:
A synchronous motor runs at a fixed rpm which depends on the frequency of the AC supply (and is more or less independent of load). If that frequency is changed, the motor speed will change accordingly to re-establish synchronism. Attaching the "generator" device to the shaft sets up an alternating magnetic field in the shaft of the motor, at a frequency which is a multiple of the speed of the motor (because there are multiple magnets/coils on the generator). This perturbs the alternating field in the motor, delivering an effect equivalent to using a higher frequency AC supply. In an attempt to re-establish synchronism, the motor speeds up.
There are several ways that immediately come to mind in which this hypothesis could be tested on the setups that are already in place. Comments?
With this and the fact that polar thought Thane really meant 'you have opened my eyes' I think we can all ignore polarbreeze and let him talk to himself.
I thought he was a skeptic and just wanting to argue but now I realize he really is that dumb.
Read him only if we need a laugh but hopefully not respond, he may then go away. (or not)
Quote from: aether22 on March 08, 2008, 02:50:43 PM
...I thought he was a skeptic and just wanting to argue but now I realize he really is that dumb.
So I take it that you disagree with that hypothesis. Can you offer an alternative hypothesis?
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 08, 2008, 12:48:02 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 08, 2008, 11:10:53 AM
I've looked at this from a theoretical viewpoint and I've come up with a hypothesis which maybe someone could test with a real motor/generator setup. I am assuming that the motor that's being used is a synchronous AC motor. The hypothesis is as follows:
A synchronous motor runs at a fixed rpm which depends on the frequency of the AC supply (and is more or less independent of load). If that frequency is changed, the motor speed will change accordingly to re-establish synchronism. Attaching the "generator" device to the shaft sets up an alternating magnetic field in the shaft of the motor, at a frequency which is a multiple of the speed of the motor (because there are multiple magnets/coils on the generator). This perturbs the alternating field in the motor, delivering an effect equivalent to using a higher frequency AC supply. In an attempt to re-establish synchronism, the motor speeds up.
There are several ways that immediately come to mind in which this hypothesis could be tested on the setups that are already in place. Comments?
Bravo, PB!
Just the number of magnets/coils should alter the acceleration characteristics...
I'd also like to add a potential complexity... the magnetic (or whatever) "pulses" from the generator mixed with the 60Hz AC in the motor create a 'beat' frequency which the motor is attempting to synch with... and this beat freq'y will be changing as the generator speeds up.
But then again, aether22 and/or hoptoad feel that any feedback magnetic flux/field is way too small compared to the motor's msg-fld to really cause that much difference/effect?????
More complexity... will the steady-state RPM be an integer multiple of the 60Hz?
-M
markzpeiverson,
That the flux is too small has nothing to do with why that would not work. (although it is too small, ridiculously so)
First the fact that a synchronous motor has not been tried with this effect, only induction and universal is one problem.
But the greater problem is that the rotating field must be applied to the periphery of the rotor and it must be from a stationary source (a stator, or at least not a co-rotating one).
That is not only required for any force to be generated but if a rotational torque was developed it would violate laws of physics (or at least the rotational version which has been observed to be as true as the linear one) , namely the one (Newton's 3rd) about equal and opposite which applies to torque.
Quote from: aether22 on March 08, 2008, 03:21:23 PM
...the flux is too small... ridiculously so...
I assume then that you have measured the flux. How large is it, and how large does it need to be?
Quote from: aether22 on March 08, 2008, 03:21:23 PM
...a synchronous motor has not been tried with this effect, only induction and universal...
I was being too narrow in my definition, sorry. In fact, a standard AC induction motor also has an inherent synchronous speed but unlike a synchronous motor, it is allowed to have a degree of slip, which is related to the torque. I realize now that the slip is just a detail and of course the hypothesis can be broadened to include the AC induction motor too. As far as I can see, though, the hypothesis would not apply to DC motors. Maybe Thane could comment on what type of motor(s) he has used in his experiments - and/or maybe others could report on what kinds of motors they have, and have not, observed this effect on.
Quote from: aether22 on March 08, 2008, 03:21:23 PM
...the greater problem is that the rotating field must be applied to the periphery of the rotor and it must be from a stationary source (a stator, or at least not a co-rotating one)...
I don't think you've quite understood the hypothesis. The magnetic field arrives in the motor through the shaft and modulates the base field in the motor. It's time-varying but there's nothing rotational about it - of course, it was generated by the rotating "generator" but when it arrives in the motor it's simply time-varying, NOT rotating. I suggest applying sensors to the motor and making observations of what is happening to the magnetic field as the motor rotates. I think we can agree that the device does probably modulate the magnetic field in the motor so a good step forward would be to observe in detail what happens to the magnetic field - and to relate that to what's happening in the "generator".
Quote from: aether22 on March 08, 2008, 03:21:23 PM
... if a rotational torque was developed it would violate laws of physics (or at least the rotational version which has been observed to be as true as the linear one) , namely the one (Newton's 3rd) about equal and opposite which applies to torque...
I don't think this violates any laws of physics but perhaps you could share your reasoning?
Added later: I think maybe the way to look at it is that when the "generator" acts to change the effective frequency of the rotating magnetic field, this forces rotor slip (because slip is directly proportional to stator voltage frequency) and so increases torque (which is directly proportional to slip). That's where the torque comes from to accelerate the rotor - it's a direct consequence of basic induction motor theory.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 08, 2008, 11:13:20 AM
"The dog ate my homework" ;)
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D .............But sir. I don't have a dog ! :D :D :D :D
Polarbreeze, that's a fair comment if you believe I'm trying to convince you of something for which I offer no empirical evidence.
But first of all, I'm not trying to convince you or anybody else. It is more preferable that you convince yourself !
Secondly, if I did post empirical data, would you accept it at face value ? I think you would still be skeptical and assume that the figures are fudged. So I'll repeat what I've said on page 8 of my website.
"Please don't take a single word I have to say on this page as explicit "truth ". PLEASE reproduce your own motor/generator experiments as outlined on this page. Please Verify Effects For Yourself!!!"
I have provided a template of the rotor size I used (on page 10), and have given all the details of magnet sizes, core types, rotor material, coil wire gauge and number of turns, type of driving motors, and incremental loading setup.
And as I have previously stated, you don't need to be a genius to build a working model to create the effect. Though it might help to be a genius to adequately explain the effect. :D
Don't take my word or anybody else's word for the effects existence and characteristics. Create it yourself. It's easy. ;)
Please prove me wrong! (or right! )
Cheers from the Toad who Hops :)
Quote from: hoptoad on March 08, 2008, 06:05:35 PM
...you don't need to be a genius to build a working model to create the effect. Though it might help to be a genius to adequately explain the effect...
Hi, hoptoad, I was just kidding of course. I don't feel the need to build one of these myself because so many other people have built them so it does seem apparent that there is something a bit peculiar happening (though nothing outside the laws of physics as we know them). I'm much more interested in figuring out the theoretical explanation for it - that's why I'm such a pain with my questions! In any case, I live only 10 miles away from Thane so I can go look at his setup if I need to.
PB YOU HAVE AN INVITE !!!! you you Im speechless and jealous you gotta go Chet
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 08, 2008, 06:11:41 PM
I don't feel the need to build one of these myself because so many other people have built them so it does seem apparent that there is something a bit peculiar happening (though nothing outside the laws of physics as we know them). I'm much more interested in figuring out the theoretical explanation for it - that's why I'm such a pain with my questions! In any case, I live only 10 miles away from Thane so I can go look at his setup if I need to.
@ polarbreeze
I also think the effect is explainable by current accepted laws of physics. As previously stated, I think the effect is due to MMF / counter MMF phase changes at high frequency, exaggerated by a magnetic transition lag effect of one half of the output sine cycle created by the heel end configuration of the cores I used.
I'm only referring here to my own experiments - not necessarily Thanes experiments which are slightly different, though I believe they are related. I also think that in my own setup, the increased efficiency is not due to extra energy entering the system, but due to a decrease in losses normally associated with counter MMF by virtue of a phase change of the counter MMF and thus a change in the relationship between the applied MMF and the reactive counter MMF.
Like you and many others, I am very curious and interested in figuring out the correct theoretical explanation for it. And also assessing the most practical way to derive benefit from it.
Cheers from The Toad who Hops....KneeDeep :)
Quote from: hoptoad on March 08, 2008, 06:55:53 PM
...assessing the most practical way to derive benefit from it.
That would be the tricky part! Electric motors are already routinely 95% efficient so it's hard to imagine how this effect could provide any cost-effective improvement. It's an intriguing curiosity nonetheless.
"That would be the tricky part! Electric motors are already routinely 95% efficient so it's hard to imagine how this effect could provide any cost-effective improvement. It's an intriguing curiosity nonetheless."
@ polarbreeze
DEAR NEIGHBOR POLAR-ICE,
YOU STILL HAVE IT ALL WRONG.
IT HAS NOTHING WHAT SO EVER TO DO WITH MOTORS OR MOTOR EFFICIENCY.
IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE KNOWN EFFECTS OF LENZ?S LAW AND THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RE: LOADED GENERATOR CAUSES PRIME MOVER DECELERATION.
AND IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH (THE NOW KNOWN) REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF LENZ?S LAW IN A MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM (ACCELERATION).
YOU NOW BEAR THE BURDEN OF RESPONSIBILITY AND OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (1/2 HOUR DRIVE) AND SEE FOR YOURSELF AND CORRECT YOUR MISUNDERSTANDINGS FOR THOSE ON THIS BLOG SITE WHO CANNOT.
SO YOU CAN THEN JOIN YOUR FELLOW BLOGGERS STEVE AND LUC WHO HAVE DONE THE SAME AND CAN SPEAK INTELLIGENTLY ON THIS SUBJECT.
" I must say I am very satisfied with the demonstration and find Thane Heins findings of the effect to be true as shown in all his video's (part 1 to 7)..." "THE EFFECT IS REAL BOYS AND GIRLS all the way to the permanent magnets increasing the rpm of the split phase induction motor. I have it recorded with my own video camera." gotluc http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.135.html
IGNORANCE IS DEFINATELY NOT BLISS
Thane
;D ;D
yep how could it be faked lol
it is real !!!
and it works
i dont even have to build it to understand the hows and the whys...
do you all?
isteam!!
just build it ....
everybody cut... everybody cut... everybody gota cut FOOTLOOSE!!!!
So much theoretical discussion -- so little practical demonstration.
I don't understand why so much effort is invested in trying to get others to "believe" that Mr. Hein's device works. The "money zone" is simply demonstrating that the motor can be put to some practical use, with results superior to anticedent systems. Once you accomplish this, the theoreticians will come leaping in to try to explain what's happening. Until you accomplish a practical use demo, however, few will care -- outside of this thread, that is.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 09, 2008, 09:07:02 AM
...COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (1/2 HOUR DRIVE) AND SEE FOR YOURSELF...
Is the setup at Ottawa U then? I thought you were set up in Almonte. I could do either. What's the name of the researcher you're working with at Ottawa U?
Just for the record, I'm not doubting the observations that you're making. What I think is missing though is a hypothesis for how it works. Unless you can hypothesize what mechanism is at work, you can't do any objective experiments to prove or disprove it. There's no point at all in doing repeated observations of the "effect" - every experiment needs to be structured to prove or disprove a hypothesis. That vital element seems to be absent as far as I can see - unless you've stated your hypothesis somewhere and I've missed it?
blank
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 11:56:56 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 09, 2008, 09:07:02 AM
...COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (1/2 HOUR DRIVE) AND SEE FOR YOURSELF...
Is the setup at Ottawa U then? I thought you were set up in Almonte. I could do either. What's the name of the researcher you're working with at Ottawa U?
Just for the record, I'm not doubting the observations that you're making. What I think is missing though is a hypothesis for how it works. Unless you can hypothesize what mechanism is at work, you can't do any objective experiments to prove or disprove it. There's no point at all in doing repeated observations of the "effect" - every experiment needs to be structured to prove or disprove a hypothesis. That vital element seems to be absent as far as I can see - unless you've stated your hypothesis somewhere and I've missed it?
Polar, I appreciate your presence here and share your interest in getting some cold hard numbers. However, I hope nobody replies to your post with anything substantive because almost every word of it is ridiculous. That you don't know where the device is, or who Heins' University of Ottawa collaborator is, or seem to think there has been no hypothesis presented is inexcusable for someone who stomped in here throwing words like 'suspicious' around. On what knowledge authority was that then? Go get the basic facts you asked for yourself. Shouldn't be hard since they're pretty much everywhere, and have been from the beginning.
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 12:24:23 PM
Polar, I appreciate your presence here and share your interest in getting some cold hard numbers. However, I hope nobody replies to your post with anything substantive because almost every word of it is ridiculous. That you don't know where the device is, or who Heins' University of Ottawa collaborator is, or seem to think there has been no hypothesis presented is inexcusable for someone who stomped in here throwing words like 'suspicious' around. On what knowledge authority was that then? Go get the basic facts you asked for yourself. Shouldn't be hard since they're pretty much everywhere, and have been from the beginning.
So there is a hypothesis for what's going on here? What is that hypothesis?
Quote from: kjkent1 on March 09, 2008, 11:52:56 AM
So much theoretical discussion -- so little practical demonstration.
I don't understand why so much effort is invested in trying to get others to "believe" that Mr. Hein's device works. The "money zone" is simply demonstrating that the motor can be put to some practical use, with results superior to anticedent systems. Once you accomplish this, the theoreticians will come leaping in to try to explain what's happening. Until you accomplish a practical use demo, however, few will care -- outside of this thread, that is.
Perhaps it's a catch-22 situtation where little progress can be made without further investment that depends on more progress being made before anybody is willing to invest. It's hard from the outside to assess where the focus needs to be next. Does is need to be on proving the back emf theory so it can be accepted as something new and worth exploring? To me, even if we accept that the force at play is indeed back emf, we still have to see what happens beyond the early stage acceleration that has been described as a postitive feedback loop. Back emf captured - maybe, but that means it is still a closed system and mother nature has proved so gloriously tricky in the past. I'd be very interested to know where others think this needs to go next, what needs to be quantified first etc. and what Thane would like to see happen.
how much more progress must be made...
have a look at my first tranny test video agin for the first time .......
it looks like bak emf to me .. or better knowen as radient engery .....
i used only the primary.... so.... i guess it was not a tuned curcuit .....
also in that video i see..... much more power out than in ....
as well you all say seeing is BELEAVING right lol
here is the youtube link http://youtube.com/watch?v=sD5xQmvb5ao
ist
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 12:58:31 PM
... It's hard from the outside to assess where the focus needs to be next. Does is need to be on proving the back emf theory so it can be accepted as something new and worth exploring?...
umm, back emf isn't exactly "new"!!
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 12:58:31 PM
Quote from: kjkent1 on March 09, 2008, 11:52:56 AM
So much theoretical discussion -- so little practical demonstration.
I don't understand why so much effort is invested in trying to get others to "believe" that Mr. Hein's device works. The "money zone" is simply demonstrating that the motor can be put to some practical use, with results superior to anticedent systems. Once you accomplish this, the theoreticians will come leaping in to try to explain what's happening. Until you accomplish a practical use demo, however, few will care -- outside of this thread, that is.
Perhaps it's a catch-22 situtation where little progress can be made without further investment that depends on more progress being made before anybody is willing to invest. It's hard from the outside to assess where the focus needs to be next. Does is need to be on proving the back emf theory so it can be accepted as something new and worth exploring? To me, even if we accept that the force at play is indeed back emf, we still have to see what happens beyond the early stage acceleration that has been described as a postitive feedback loop. Back emf captured - maybe, but that means it is still a closed system and mother nature has proved so gloriously tricky in the past. I'd be very interested to know where others think this needs to go next, what needs to be quantified first etc. and what Thane would like to see happen.
A catch-22 implies that the only method by which a goal may be accomplished is by means of accomplishing the goal.
Here, a demonstration of Mr. Hein's device doing ANY sort of practical work at an efficiency level above what would ordinarily be expected will accomplish the goal of proving the device's usefulness. Therefore, there is no catch-22.
It seems to me that the only thing stopping Mr. Heins is his unwillingness or inability to create a practical demonstration. That is to say, if Thomas Edison were in possession of Hein's device, he would have hooked it up to something by now and done something with it. Edison was not an inventive genius, as much as he was a man driven to produce useful tools.
I think that Mr. Helins could learn something from Edison's history.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 01:54:04 PM
umm, back emf isn't exactly "new"!!
Thanks for setting me straight.
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 02:13:28 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 01:54:04 PM
umm, back emf isn't exactly "new"!!
Thanks for setting me straight.
You're welcome - it's just a question, as you said to me, of "getting the basic facts straight". Back-EMF, Lenz's Law and the Conservation of Energy are some of those basic facts.
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 12:58:31 PM
...I'd be very interested to know where others think this needs to go next, what needs to be quantified first etc...
Efficiency.
PB on the subject of efficiency if I could drive you to the Lab, Ottawa I would you are in the best position because of knowledge and proximity to save tons of postulating. Chet
>Perhaps it's a catch-22 situtation
Perhaps it's a catch JustMe situation! bitch, trying to catch me!! I thought were were friends!
Does anyone know what happened with the toroid with the new primary?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 11:56:56 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 09, 2008, 09:07:02 AM
...COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY (1/2 HOUR DRIVE) AND SEE FOR YOURSELF...
Is the setup at Ottawa U then? I thought you were set up in Almonte. I could do either. What's the name of the researcher you're working with at Ottawa U?
PB:
You can't be serious? His name has been mentioned at least 4 or 5 times, and there was an attachment or two pertaining to the U of O collaboration. Are you honestly that unaware of this important aspect? I would think that you of all people would be VERY MUCH aware of the details of an objective, academic expert's involvement. Unless of course, you're just interested in delaying progress by keeping Thane and others busy with answering questions or responding to your suspicions and innuendos.
Are you also unaware of the details of Steve and Luc's visits there? Not good... I'd say your sincerity about this is seriously in question... if not in the toilet or even down the drain. I'd suggest that you start reading from page-[1] including all attachments, and your next post should confirm who that Ottawa U professor is...
You might also stumble across an interesting letter Thane posted from a PhD, PEng from U of Toronto, in which he states:
"Stay out of the limelight, and ignore any critical skeptics; don't let your energy get tied up in responding.
Develop the new technology; it will market itself; you do not have to persuade sceptics.
All best wishes for technical & business success...
<signed>, Ph.D., P.Eng."
See what you're missing!!!
-M
Quote from: aether22 on March 09, 2008, 04:22:55 PM
>Perhaps it's a catch-22 situtation
Perhaps it's a catch JustMe situation! bitch, trying to catch me!! I thought were were friends!
What the HOLY HELL are you talking about aether22? Why on earth would you call me a bitch? I've expressed privately to you my respect for your work and my appreciation for your time more than once. Jesus, don't worry, I won't bother you again.
NOT good fellows!!! take this out to the parking lot Chet
Quote from: M@rcel on March 09, 2008, 04:53:49 PM
Does anyone know what happened with the toroid with the new primary?
@M@rcel, If you are talking of the primary I made for Thane's Toroids, then I know about it.
We have some very interesting results ;D.
I have made 2 primaries this week and so far the 2nd one is working so well that we are having difficulty understanding why it is doing what it is.
Thane and I have been at the Ottawa University all weekend testing it. At this moment I am just waiting for Thane to send me the data of the test and I will post it as soon as I get it.
Stay tuned ;)
Please everyone here If you do not find the information posted here to be satisfactory to prove to you what we don't even understand ourself, then I suggest for you come to Ottawa for a demonstration and make your own measurements and conclusions. If you cannot come to Ottawa then please build it for yourself. If you cannot build it for yourself, then wait some time and we will build units that you can buy and see the workings of it for yourself.
Luc
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 09, 2008, 05:08:01 PM
PB:
You can't be serious? His name has been mentioned at least 4 or 5 times, and there was an attachment or two pertaining to the U of O collaboration. Are you honestly that unaware of this important aspect? I would think that you of all people would be VERY MUCH aware of the details of an objective, academic expert's involvement. Unless of course, you're just interested in delaying progress by keeping Thane and others busy with answering questions or responding to your suspicions and innuendos.
Are you also unaware of the details of Steve and Luc's visits there? Not good... I'd say your sincerity about this is seriously in question... if not in the toilet or even down the drain. I'd suggest that you start reading from page-[1] including all attachments, and your next post should confirm who that Ottawa U professor is...
There's no need to get personal. Consider how it would look to, say, a prospective investor trying to do a detailed and objective investigation into this project. A lot of the emotional stuff that gets posted in this forum is really not very helpful to Thane's credibility, by association.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 09, 2008, 05:08:01 PM
You might also stumble across an interesting letter Thane posted from a PhD, PEng from U of Toronto, in which he states:
"Stay out of the limelight, and ignore any critical skeptics; don't let your energy get tied up in responding.
Develop the new technology; it will market itself; you do not have to persuade sceptics.
You're referring to Dr Townsend and a crucial piece of advice he also gave in the same letter was to stick with reporting actual measurements of power, input versus output. This is the same thing that I have been asking for but it has not been forthcoming.
Quote from: kjkent1 on March 09, 2008, 02:03:14 PM
A catch-22 implies that the only method by which a goal may be accomplished is by means of accomplishing the goal.
Here, a demonstration of Mr. Hein's device doing ANY sort of practical work at an efficiency level above what would ordinarily be expected will accomplish the goal of proving the device's usefulness. Therefore, there is no catch-22.
It seems to me that the only thing stopping Mr. Heins is his unwillingness or inability to create a practical demonstration. That is to say, if Thomas Edison were in possession of Hein's device, he would have hooked it up to something by now and done something with it. Edison was not an inventive genius, as much as he was a man driven to produce useful tools.
I think that Mr. Helins could learn something from Edison's history.
Without knowing really what Thane has planned, or what new resources (time, money, expertise, knowledge etc.) may be needed to get there, or what progress may already have been made, it's hard to know if this is a valid critisism at this point. I put the question privately to someone the other day like this:
"In your view, how important is understanding the mechanism responsible for the effect to making progress on the engineering side? Is it imperative that one understands precisely what's going on to apply it effectively and efficiently? Or can research and development happily co-exist?"
In other words, it's not clear to me where the effort needs to be right now to get from point A to point B in the best and most productive way. Of course, it doesn't have to be. It just has to be clear to Thane, and any of the replicators out there, whatever their respective theories may be.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 06:21:22 PM
We have some very interesting results ;D.
I have made 2 primaries this week and so far the 2nd one is working so well that we are having difficulty understanding why it is doing what it is.
Thane and I have been at the Ottawa University all weekend testing it. At this moment I am just waiting for Thane to send me the data of the test and I will post it as soon as I get it.
Stay tuned ;)
Luc
Looking forward to your report!
Johnny
LUC sounds very exciting also sounds like a good time I envy you fellows Chet
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 06:35:31 PM
"In your view, how important is understanding the mechanism responsible for the effect to making progress on the engineering side? Is it imperative that one understands precisely what's going on to apply it effectively and efficiently? Or can research and development happily co-exist?"
In other words, it's not clear to me where the effort needs to be right now to get from point A to point B in the best and most productive way. Of course, it doesn't have to be. It just has to be clear to Thane, and any of the replicators out there, whatever their respective theories may be.
It normally goes like this:
1. Demonstrate a prototype which, however crudely, provides objectively measurable end-results that show how the device can be used to improve a real end-product. In this case it would mean demonstrating that the device improves the efficiency of a motor. (Or any other real end-result would be fine too provided it has value and provided it can be objectively measured, right now, on the actual prototype.)
OR
2. Put forward a theory of operation that can be properly defended and shows that the creator understands the mechanism/phenomenon/process at work and rigorously describes it in proper scientific/engineering terms. Show experimental results that clearly prove this fundamental mechanism (not necessarily, in this case, the end-result) and also, very importantly, exactly how that mechanism can be incorporated with further development into an actual prototype like #1.
What do you think?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 06:48:08 PM
It normally goes like this:
1. Demonstrate a prototype which, however crudely, provides objectively measurable end-results that show how the device can be used to improve a real end-product. In this case it would mean demonstrating that the device improves the efficiency of a motor. (Or any other real end-result would be fine too provided it has value and provided it can be objectively measured, right now, on the actual prototype.)
OR
2. Put forward a theory of operation that can be properly defended and shows that the creator understands the mechanism/phenomenon/process at work and rigorously describes it in proper scientific/engineering terms. Show experimental results that clearly prove this fundamental mechanism (not necessarily, in this case, the end-result) and also, very importantly, exactly how that mechanism can be incorporated with further development into an actual prototype like #1.
What do you think?
Please everyone here If you do not find the information posted here to be satisfactory to prove to you what we don't even understand ourself, then I suggest for you come to Ottawa for a demonstration and make your own measurements and conclusions. If you cannot come to Ottawa then please build it for yourself. If you cannot build it for yourself, then wait some time and we will build units that you can buy and see the workings of it for yourself.
Luc
JM PB we have MEN!!! in the field right now working on this maybe you two should email each other privately Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 09, 2008, 06:57:26 PM
JM PB we have MEN!!! in the field right now working on this maybe you two should email each other privately Chet
QUESTION CHET,
CAN YOU TELL ME PLEASE - ARE THESE
MEN JUST
OUT STANDING IN THEIR FIELDS OR ARE THEY ACTUALLY WORKING?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 09, 2008, 04:22:55 PM
>Perhaps it's a catch-22 situtation
Perhaps it's a catch JustMe situation! bitch, trying to catch me!! I thought were were friends!
What the HOLY HELL are you talking about aether22? Why on earth would you call me a bitch? I've expressed privately to you my respect for your work and my appreciation for your time more than once. Jesus, don't worry, I won't bother you again.
Sorry JustMe, I hoped you'd get my joke.
You said catch-22 and I was acting like I was not aware of the term and that you must be saying in effect '
catch aether
22', not sure quite what you'd do with me once you had but I never pass up an opportunity to make a joke.
Please say you get it now.
OILB Very good im still chuckling Chet
OILB THESE MEN MAKE ME PROUD !!!!!
Quote from: ramset on March 09, 2008, 06:57:26 PM
maybe you two should email each other privately Chet
My, what a ridiculous thing to say.
Yes been Quite a few ridiculous things in this forum thanx for setting me strait But things are looking up Chet
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 06:22:33 PM
A lot of the emotional stuff that gets posted in this forum is really not very helpful to Thane's credibility, by association.
Polar, I'm sure you'd lay the entire blame for the "emotional stuff" at the feet of posters here other than yourself, and really and truly believe it. However, the fact is you are on OVERUNITY.COM. And here on overunity.com you've said OU is a "fantasy", and that anyone who might observe ane report such a thing was "stupid". You've used words like "suspicious", and rather uselessly insulted a patent application for a different device entirely. You've called people pseudo-scientists and crackpots, and dragged out the spectre of the tin foil hat. All those words are loaded, loaded, loaded, and any one of them calls a man many things, all without the benefit of you actually having to make any actual observations or a real argument. I don't how they let it roll off their backs to the degree that they do, because without even having it directed at me personally I almost blew an artery on another forum dealing with a few folks who were being neanderthal thugs on the matter, who would also go to their grave swearing how objective and impersonal it all was.
There is nothing wrong with wanting good, reliable data. There is a great deal wrong with your attitude considering where you are.
PLEASE don't bring him back its like poison
No, ramset, that's not right either. Nobody learns much in an echo chamber. He has a contribution to make. He'll be able to make it a lot more effectively if he allows this opportunity to challenge himself as much as he does others, and practice what he preaches about data and objectivity.
WELL I offered to bring him to Ottawa He lives very close He is obviously brilliant to much negative , Look at what just happened on the cold elec forum
Okay, here are the test results of today. Tests were done on Toroid no. 2 with the 2nd primary I made yesterday.
First, I must explain that Toroid no. 2 (picture below) has 4 x 1,000 turns layers on each side and each layer has wire break out lead. So we have many many possible wire configurations for the Toroid Secondaries. The test below are done with 120 volts 60 hz electrical power regulated by a variac down to 2 volts. At this voltage the Primaries (nested in the middle of the Toroid) consumes 2 amps with no load attached to the Secondaries, results shown in Test # 1.
What is very interesting is the results of Tests # 2 to # 4. With a 1 K ohm load on the Secondaries and by ONLY changing around our Secondaries wire leads in a different configurations, we have been able to lowers the input voltage and current to the Primary and increase the voltage and power output of the Secondaries without touching the input voltage :-\ ??? :o
At this time, Thane and I are both stunned as to why we are able to do this. Usually a transformer Primary (in transformers we have today) have the input power to the Primary going up as you add load to the Secondary. Not the other way around ???.
We will continue to do tests and report our findings.
Stay Tuned or Stunned :o for more.
Luc
BI-TOROID TEST DATA ? March 9th, 2008
Luc and Thane
Test # 1 - NO LOAD
Primary I/P
2 volts
2 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 4 watts
Output Power = 0.00 watts @ 0.0 v
Test # 2 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
2 volts
2 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 4 watts
Output Power = 0.003 watts @ 1.63 v
Test # 3 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
2 volts
1.8 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.6 watts (10% decrease)
Output Power = 0.023 watts @ 4.8 v (194.5 % increase)
Test # 4 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
1.75 volts
1.88 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.29 watts (17.8 % decrease)
Output Power = 1.05 watts @ 32.4 v (1887.7 % increase)
NOW I won't sleep
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
BI-TOROID TEST DATA ? March 9th, 2008
Luc and Thane
That does sound very interesting.
What is the difference in the test setup/conditions between tests 2, 3 and 4?
What's the reason for dropping the input voltage in test #4 to 1.75V; and what happens if you keep it at 2V?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
BI-TOROID TEST DATA ? March 9th, 2008
Luc and Thane
That does sound very interesting.
What is the difference in the test setup/conditions between tests 2, 3 and 4?
What's the reason for dropping the input voltage in test #4 to 1.75V; and what happens if you keep it at 2V?
WE ARE ADDING IN TURNS - SIMPLY CONNECTING WIRES ON THE SECONDARY.
WE ARE
NOT DROPPING THE VOLTAGE IT IS DROPPING ON IT'S OWN AS IS THE CURRENT. WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE OUTPUT GOES UP.
WE ARE NOT TOUCHING THE INPUT WHAT SO EVER.WE WILL GET VIDEO TOMORROW AND WE NEED TO DOULBE CHECK THE POWER FACTOR WITH A SILLYSCOPE..
Thane
Personally IMO this device is a curiosity only, but the input voltage dropping is kooky.
The only way the input voltage should be able to go down is if you reduce it, or if you pull so much current it can't keep up.
To have current and voltage go down it's like turning off (or more correctly turning down0 a running tap and watching water pressure in the pipes decrease, it should only be possible if you are effecting the generation capability of whatever you have supplying energy to the primary.
By far the most likely thing is that the wave shape/power factor is screwed up and causing a measurement error.
Very strange.
Quote from: JustMe on March 09, 2008, 08:57:34 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 06:22:33 PM
A lot of the emotional stuff that gets posted in this forum is really not very helpful to Thane's credibility, by association.
Polar, I'm sure you'd lay the entire blame for the "emotional stuff" at the feet of posters here other than yourself, and really and truly believe it. However, the fact is you are on OVERUNITY.COM. And here on overunity.com you've said OU is a "fantasy", and that anyone who might observe ane report such a thing was "stupid". You've used words like "suspicious", and rather uselessly insulted a patent application for a different device entirely. You've called people pseudo-scientists and crackpots, and dragged out the spectre of the tin foil hat. All those words are loaded, loaded, loaded, and any one of them calls a man many things, all without the benefit of you actually having to make any actual observations or a real argument. I don't how they let it roll off their backs to the degree that they do, because without even having it directed at me personally I almost blew an artery on another forum dealing with a few folks who were being neanderthal thugs on the matter, who would also go to their grave swearing how objective and impersonal it all was.
There is nothing wrong with wanting good, reliable data. There is a great deal wrong with your attitude considering where you are.
I think I said that it would be "stupid" to make that
claim and the reason is that it would ruin the inventor's credibility and thereby prevent him from getting funding to advance the work. Thane has received exactly the same advice from some of the PhD references whose names are used on this forum. Maybe I could have used a milder word - so sorry for that. It wasn't intended as an insult to OU believers: just a comment about a reality of the techno-business world.
My comment about the patent was in response to another poster who said he'd "found the patent" and posted a link to it. He hadn't and I pointed that out. I think that's pretty much OK.
etc... etc... I don't have the patience to retrace all of what you're saying. I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything about any "tin foil hat" though so I think maybe you're collecting others' words in with mine.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 09, 2008, 10:34:57 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 10:21:52 PM
That does sound very interesting.
What is the difference in the test setup/conditions between tests 2, 3 and 4?
What's the reason for dropping the input voltage in test #4 to 1.75V; and what happens if you keep it at 2V?
WE ARE ADDING IN TURNS - SIMPLY CONNECTING WIRES ON THE SECONDARY.
WE ARE NOT DROPPING THE VOLTAGE IT IS DROPPING ON IT'S OWN AS IS THE CURRENT. WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE OUTPUT GOES UP.
WE ARE NOT TOUCHING THE INPUT WHAT SO EVER....
It would be helpful for each test to list the number of turns that are "in circuit" on the secondary. Also, how many turns are there on the primary? Have your considered how impedance is reflected through the transformer? Does the source impedance come into play? (Maybe that has something to do with the input voltage dropping?)
Permit me another dumb question: what's different in the construction of these toroidal transformers compared to off-the-shelf ones? (I realize they have multiple taps for test purposes but what I'm getting at is the basic construction features that make them behave differently than off-the-shelf ones). Thanks.
PS - any chance of making a snowblower out of this thing?!!! :) Have you dug out yet...?
PB that was funny good funny Chet
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 10:50:28 PM
I think I said that it would be "stupid" to make that claim and the reason is that it would ruin the inventor's credibility and thereby prevent him from getting funding to advance the work. Thane has received exactly the same advice from some of the PhD references whose names are used on this forum. Maybe I could have used a milder word - so sorry for that. It wasn't intended as an insult to OU believers: just a comment about a reality of the techno-business world.
My comment about the patent was in response to another poster who said he'd "found the patent" and posted a link to it. He hadn't and I pointed that out. I think that's pretty much OK.
etc... etc... I don't have the patience to retrace all of what you're saying. I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything about any "tin foil hat" though so I think maybe you're collecting others' words in with mine.
The "tin foil hat" thing was probably jacksatan, so I retract that with apology. Your original comments on the patent application that stood for a short time before you edited them several days ago would be described as neutral by exactly no one, so we'll call that a retraction too, perhaps with an implied apology. And I don't think anybody would ever confuse any of your comments with those of Dr. Townsend. All that being said, you're dead on when you say that the emotional responses are unproductive and a distraction, and my last post to you was intended to point out that you do have some power of your own to steer this discussion in a positive way. However if your response to me is a true reflection of your perception of the things you've said, and a true reflection of your perpection of what a reasonable person might draw from your various statements, I'm not sure that you appreciate that as much as you could.
You don't have to find OU or other versions of colouring outside the lines likely or even possible to be a good addition to this thread. In fact, it's the very fact that you don't, along with your empirical nature, that contributes to you being a valuable check and balance. Like it or not, overunity.com is where we are with this, because like it or not, Thane's back-emf theory takes it here and out of the comfortable world of journal articles and textbooks, out of the well documented and the well understood. So you, and in a sense I as well, are strangers in a strange land. Guests as it were. I think there's benefit in remembering that.
PB you conger up emotional response at will To say it has no place and then provide the venue WELL whats up with that Chet
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
At this time, Thane and I are both stunned as to why we are able to do this. Usually a transformer Primary (in transformers we have today) have the input power to the Primary going up as you add load to the Secondary. Not the other way around ???.
:o...... :D :D :D Ahh the joys of dicovery! Often, when you stumble across the unexpected, you realize that what you expected might not have been reasonably expectable to begin with. It remains the unexpected until we know more, after which we will come to expect it. ! ;D :D :D
To quote someone ?? - "If we only do what we've always done, we will always get what we always had."
Keep on exploring guys, there is always more to discover.
Good luck in solving this "unexpected outcome". It can be "expected" in certain induction motors, where the nominal loading of the motor slows the rotor into synchronous phasing, resulting in current consumption decreases, but increasing the load further, causes the current consumption to rise again.
But in a 'simple' transformer, it stays IMHO, in the unexpected category. Till we know more ! :D Good luck
Cheers
P.S. Polarbreeze is right to mention impedance. It may be part of the puzzle and therefore part of the solution, then again ......... ?
Hmmmmm KneeDeep
If you use two wheels of magnets,one on each side of the coil, impedence will cancel out, resulting in zero impedence. I think that would be a good thing.
Quote from: JustMe on March 10, 2008, 12:16:11 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 10:50:28 PM
I think I said that it would be "stupid" to make that claim and the reason is that it would ruin the inventor's credibility and thereby prevent him from getting funding to advance the work. Thane has received exactly the same advice from some of the PhD references whose names are used on this forum. Maybe I could have used a milder word - so sorry for that. It wasn't intended as an insult to OU believers: just a comment about a reality of the techno-business world.
My comment about the patent was in response to another poster who said he'd "found the patent" and posted a link to it. He hadn't and I pointed that out. I think that's pretty much OK.
etc... etc... I don't have the patience to retrace all of what you're saying. I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything about any "tin foil hat" though so I think maybe you're collecting others' words in with mine.
The "tin foil hat" thing was probably jacksatan, so I retract that with apology. Your original comments on the patent application that stood for a short time before you edited them several days ago would be described as neutral by exactly no one, so we'll call that a retraction too, perhaps with an implied apology. And I don't think anybody would ever confuse any of your comments with those of Dr. Townsend. All that being said, you're dead on when you say that the emotional responses are unproductive and a distraction, and my last post to you was intended to point out that you do have some power of your own to steer this discussion in a positive way. However if your response to me is a true reflection of your perception of the things you've said, and a true reflection of your perpection of what a reasonable person might draw from your various statements, I'm not sure that you appreciate that as much as you could.
You don't have to find OU or other versions of colouring outside the lines likely or even possible to be a good addition to this thread. In fact, it's the very fact that you don't, along with your empirical nature, that contributes to you being a valuable check and balance. Like it or not, overunity.com is where we are with this, because like it or not, Thane's back-emf theory takes it here and out of the comfortable world of journal articles and textbooks, out of the well documented and the well understood. So you, and in a sense I as well, are strangers in a strange land. Guests as it were. I think there's benefit in remembering that.
Hey - why are you knocking the hat? I liked the hat line... Aether tells me his is a ten gallon! But seriously speaking, there is a bit of logic behind skepticism. Every once in a while it even convinces people to produce results... like 3.29 watts in 1.05 watts out (thank you Luc!!!) where we finally have a benchmark number to work against!!! Now if we could only make that 3.29 watts in 3.30 watts out... that would be a fantasy... but I'd love to see it happen!
satan is that what you deduced from test #4 please take another look Chet
Quote from: JustMe on March 10, 2008, 12:16:11 AM
... Thane's back-emf theory takes it here and out of the comfortable world of journal articles and textbooks, out of the well documented and the well understood. So you, and in a sense I as well, are strangers in a strange land. Guests as it were. I think there's benefit in remembering that.
I think it's important to keep an open mind on this. Thane's observations can probably be explained with conventional theory but so far there has been very little data gathered to plug into the models so we don't know for sure. If, when all the data are collected and the theoretical model drawn, conventional theory doesn't do it, then indeed there needs to be another hypothesis, and that may include OU concepts. I think it's a mistake to jump to the conclusion that it's OU without first doing all the experiments and gathering all the data - and I'm sure everyone in the OU community would concur with that because they wouldn't want the OU concept to be polluted by "false alarms".
Of course, another absolutely valid way to do it would be to construct a hypothesis that does include OU and then to carry out experiments to validate that hypothesis. That would be an excellent way to go, actually, and it would be a shortcut to the solution if some OU theoretician could develop such a hypothesis and document it so that others could work on it together. Although OU by definition would rewrite the current laws of physics, there's no reason to abandon the scientific method - that would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. After all, quantum mechanics went outside the then-recognized laws but it was established and proven (and continues to be refined) through scientific method. I think there's benefit to remembering that.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
Okay, here are the test results of today. Tests were done on Toroid no. 2 with the 2nd primary I made yesterday...
Need to mathematically model this to see where it deviates from conventional theory. I'll do that for you if you like because I think I'm better at doing that than at building stuff! The parameters needed to "build" the model are the following:
- Source impedance
- Resistance of each of the windings
- Self inductance of each of the windings
- Magnetizing reactance (Xm)
- Core loss equivalent resistance (Rc)
- Number of turns on the primary and on the secondaries
Cheers,
PB
Hi Luc and Thane,
Thank you for the test results. The data you measured indicates to me that the primary coil has got very low number of turns for your 60Hz mains voltage, the coil inductive reactance I think is very small: at 2V AC input from the variac the 2A current is extremely high and I do think it oversaturates the core the primary is wound on.
If you are aware of this saturation and you designed it on purpose, than it is ok but for me it is an unwanted situation in case of electric transformers in general.
In oversaturated cores the average current hardly changes when you try to utilize its fluxchange but fluxchange can only occur in your primary when your (sinusoidal) input voltage is small enough not to cause a current level from which saturation starts. i.e. from ,say, zero to 0.5V AC input there is no or very little core saturation and as the sinus voltage exceeds 0.5V and goes up to your 2V, the current goes to high peak values during this time. This could be observed by watching the waveform of the current in the primary by an oscilloscope as a voltage drop across a 0.1 Ohm noninductive resistor placed in series with the primary coil. (Be sure to use a mains isolating 1:1 transformer when you derive your 2V from the variac that is fed by the mains directly and use a scope on the mains side too.)
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
Okay, here are the test results of today. Tests were done on Toroid no. 2 with the 2nd primary I made yesterday.
Test # 3 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
2 volts
1.8 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.6 watts (10% decrease)
Output Power = 0.023 watts @ 4.8 v (194.5 % increase)
Test # 4 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
1.75 volts
1.88 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.29 watts (17.8 % decrease)
Output Power = 1.05 watts @ 32.4 v (1887.7 % increase)
Quote from: ramset on March 10, 2008, 01:21:03 AM
satan is that what you deduced from test #4 please take another look Chet
I think I have made it relatively clear in the past that I am no scientist... So while I do see that there are likely anomalies which need explanation as to why/how there is a change in power output from a change in setup, I still see the most important data being the raw number as baseline efficiency so that in future tests we can assess better/worse/same - unless of course the concentration over here has switch over completely to a more efficient way to increase voltage, but I didn't really get that vibe...?
But as always, when dealing with things that I am admitadly less than an expert in, I'm open for any clarification you might have in what would be more informative from test #4...
Hi All,
Here is a link to my YouTube account with a new video (shot today) of the Tests done on Thane's Toroid no. 2 that were posted yesterday.
Link: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
The results of this video are posted here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg81689.html#msg81689
Enjoy and stay tuned.
Luc
LUC Nice video Thanx for keeping us in the loop Jack please take no offence
Quote from: ramset on March 10, 2008, 06:40:11 PM
LUC Nice video Thanx for keeping us in the loop Jack please take no offence
None taken - I was just perplexed... you had me reading and rereading that posting trying to figure out if I mis read something...
Quote from: gotoluc on March 10, 2008, 06:12:36 PM
...
Link: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
The results of this video are posted here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg81689.html#msg81689
...
Luc
Hi Luc. Watched the video, very interesting. How many turns on the primary and how many total turns on the secondary in each test?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 10, 2008, 11:04:30 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 10, 2008, 06:12:36 PM
...
Link: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
The results of this video are posted here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg81689.html#msg81689
...
Luc
Hi Luc. Watched the video, very interesting. How many turns on the primary and how many total turns on the secondary in each test?
Hi Polarbreeze,
You can find lots of data on the toroidal transformers, except the primary coil. See this earlier post here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg77494.html#msg77494 and
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg77560.html#msg77560
Because Thane wrote earlier that the core in the primary coil is made of much lower permeability than the toroid core (to get less back emf effect from the secondary etc.) I suspect the primary coil's self inductance is also a low value and the dominant primary current is determined by its windings copper resistance rather than its inductive reactance. If this is so, than the current flowing in the primary coil is mainly used for heating the wire and not for mainly magnetizing the core. They supply the primary coil with 2V 60Hz AC and the current is 2A: if I assume 0.5 Ohm DC copper resistance for their primary coil, the loss is 2A*2A*0.5Ohm=2W wasted for heat from their 4W input power! Of course I do not know their exact coil DC resistance, I assumed a resonable value. And I am concerned also by core saturation too as I wrote yesterday (Reply #861). I hope they are aware of all these.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 11, 2008, 05:47:21 AM
Hi Polarbreeze,
You can find lots of data on the toroidal transformers, except the primary coil. See this earlier post here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg77494.html#msg77494 and
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg77560.html#msg77560
Because Thane wrote earlier that the core in the primary coil is made of much lower permeability than the toroid core (to get less back emf effect from the secondary etc.) I suspect the primary coil's self inductance is also a low value and the dominant primary current is determined by its windings copper resistance rather than its inductive reactance. If this is so, than the current flowing in the primary coil is mainly used for heating the wire and not for mainly magnetizing the core. They supply the primary coil with 2V 60Hz AC and the current is 2A: if I assume 0.5 Ohm DC copper resistance for their primary coil, the loss is 2A*2A*0.5Ohm=2W wasted for heat from their 4W input power! Of course I do not know their exact coil DC resistance, I assumed a resonable value. And I am concerned also by core saturation too as I wrote yesterday (Reply #861). I hope they are aware of all these.
rgds, Gyula
Hi, Gyula, thanks for that. I was hoping to get them simply to list all the parameters of the coils in one place so that there's no chance of misunderstanding. But I can get the secondary turns count and the resistances from those other postings so that's part of it. There seems to be no information, though, about the following, unless I'm missing it? Any ideas?
- Self inductance of each of the secondaries
- Number of turns on the primary
- Resistance of the primary
- Self inductance of the primary
- Magnetizing reactance (Xm)
- Core loss equivalent resistance (Rc)
- Source impedance (output resistance and reactance of the variac)
These parameters are easily measured in the experimental setup and they are absolutely necessary in order to model what's going on.
If, as you say, they're driving the core into saturation, then this is going to mess it up somewhat but the first step, I think, is to make sure the base operation of the transformer (when not saturated) is properly understood and modeled. Only then can we quantify what's going on that is different from conventional expected operation - what do you think?
Hi Polarbreeze,
I cannot recall any specific data given by them that would serve as answers to your list of parameters.
May I notice for you though that there is no any chance in any circuit simulator on market to get overunity operation when you simulate a circuit of any kind (be it a passive transformer or an active device circuit) because the designers of such softwares simply used conventional way of approaches/calculations that is taught in universities for ages, unless the circuit to be simulated does readily operate as an overunity device.
If the developers of such softwares happen to find extra output in certain cases they will do their best to teach the software NOT to give out such results, for surely it must be a bug... this is their way of thinking I guess.
In case of this toroidal transformer setup the catch is certainly the possibility of less drag back on the primary from the load on the secondary, partly because of the airgaps between the two cores and partly because of the big difference in the two permeabilities of the two cores. The big question is if these two catches can indeed give more output than input power in a clearly measurable and repeatable way? I wish they could!
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 11, 2008, 08:47:33 AM
...because the designers of such softwares simply used conventional way of approaches/calculations that is taught in universities for ages, unless the circuit to be simulated does readily operate as an overunity device...
Yes, I agree, Gyula, that's very astute. That's the line of reasoning that I'm following. If we create a simulation of the circuit using conventional principles and we find that it does predict the results Thane & co are measuring, then we've fully explained the phenomenon, end of story. If, however, we find the conventional model is NOT able to predict these results, then we'll have an extremely good case for proposing something outside the conventional. So this is a huge opportunity - but we do need the data in order to pursue it. I really hope that Thane's team will be able to provide this information.
:)
hello all
for those that dont know or havent seen.......
i started a thred called 8) TELL THE TRUTH...... 8)
early in the new year
i highly recomend you all read it and study it hard....
as your answers lie there .....
here is the link http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3852.0.html
it is time to wave the caution flag.....
as this is a verry thin red line we all walk ......
ist
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
Test # 4 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
1.75 volts
1.88 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.29 watts (17.8 % decrease)
Output Power = 1.05 watts @ 32.4 v (1887.7 % increase)
OK, here's the thing: you can't just multiply the volts by the amps to get the power because that's only true if the voltage and the current are exactly in phase. They can't be exactly in phase because your source (the variac) has a large reactive component to its output impedance and your monster toroid also surely has a large reactive component. We can model that if you provide the parameters I was asking for before but meanwhile, I think if you look on an oscilloscope you'll find this to be the case. The phase difference between the voltage and current will change when you bring different secondaries into and out of circuit, which is probably a major contributor to the differences you are seeing between the tests.
I know you're saying that your power factor is 1 but with all that reactance around, that's extremely hard to justify - so I suggest you revisit your method of measuring power factor. There is an alternative explanation though: Gyula has pointed out that your core may be thoroughly saturated, in which case it would appear to the variac mostly like a big fat resistor. If that's the case, your power factor would, of course, appear to be (approximately) unity but then all you're doing is making a heater. I would postulate that, if the core is heavily saturated:
1. Tests 2 and 3 aren't able to extract any (much) electrical power out from the secondary because it's pretty much all going off as heat due to saturation;
2. Test 4 relieves a small part of the saturation so that some power is now able to be extracted from the secondary instead of being wasted as heat.
Key questions:
Is the core saturated?
Is saturation essential to the effect?
Well, I wish this were such simple as that... But if there is a device that is claimed to give more output than input power, and you happen to have all the models/data in your decent simulator software, yet your simulator would not give any extra output results, then what is your conclusion?
Such a case could be for instance core saturation, piezo effects, radiant energy inputs and who knows what effects for a device but you simply are not able to input these sources into your software: then you declare such device is not overunity just because you modeled it and it gave underunity... see the problem?
So all I mean is I would not make any conlusion on any alleged overunity device just by getting underunity results from a simulator. It well may happen: the extra input energy of any kind from which the extra output is coming is not taken into consideration by the software (especially if the extra source is not known by the inventor).
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 11, 2008, 09:18:31 AM
Yes, I agree, Gyula, that's very astute. That's the line of reasoning that I'm following. If we create a simulation of the circuit using conventional principles and we find that it does predict the results Thane & co are measuring, then we've fully explained the phenomenon, end of story. If, however, we find the conventional model is NOT able to predict these results, then we'll have an extremely good case for proposing something outside the conventional. So this is a huge opportunity - but we do need the data in order to pursue it. I really hope that Thane's team will be able to provide this information.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 11, 2008, 09:56:48 AM
Well, I wish this were such simple as that... But if there is a device that is claimed to give more output than input power, and you happen to have all the models/data in your decent simulator software, yet your simulator would not give any extra output results, then what is your conclusion?
My conclusion would depend on whether the effect (more output power than input power) had been actually measured or not. If it had been actually measured, then I would have to revise my simulation to explain it. If it had not actually been measured but only postulated, then I would expect those postulating it to be able to come up with a simulation for it.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 11, 2008, 10:04:53 AM
My conclusion would depend on whether the effect (more output power than input power) had been actually measured or not. If it had been actually measured, then I would have to revise my simulation to explain it. If it had not actually been measured but only postulated, then I would expect those postulating it to be able to come up with a simulation for it.
Now I'm really confused - is there some indication that there was an instance of more power out than power in? The best number I had seen was 3.29 watts in and 1.05 watts out? I'm no engineer, but I would assume that leaves 2.24 watts as waste heat? Did I miss something in the simple math?
Quote from: jacksatan on March 11, 2008, 01:46:32 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 11, 2008, 10:04:53 AM
My conclusion would depend on whether the effect (more output power than input power) had been actually measured or not. If it had been actually measured, then I would have to revise my simulation to explain it. If it had not actually been measured but only postulated, then I would expect those postulating it to be able to come up with a simulation for it.
Now I'm really confused - is there some indication that there was an instance of more power out than power in? The best number I had seen was 3.29 watts in and 1.05 watts out? I'm no engineer, but I would assume that leaves 2.24 watts as waste heat? Did I miss something in the simple math?
No, I don't think you missed anything. My understanding is the same as yours.
Anybody who has only joined this thread recently and has some interest in the current topic of these Frankenformers :) may wish to jump back to page 16 or so for further information about the units, previous testing, software modeling etc.
Is there a pictrure of the entire setup for the test? All that can be seen from the youtube clip are the meters and the coils... I'm just trying ot visualize how all of this relates to the magnets...
Quote from: jacksatan on March 11, 2008, 05:30:37 PM
Is there a pictrure of the entire setup for the test? All that can be seen from the youtube clip are the meters and the coils... I'm just trying ot visualize how all of this relates to the magnets...
What you saw is what there is JS. No external magnets in this one. Again, lots of information earlier in the thread.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
...Toroid no. 2 ... has 4 x 1,000 turns layers on each side and each layer has wire break out lead. So we have many many possible wire configurations for the Toroid Secondaries...
What wiring configurations did you use in each of tests 2, 3 and 4? I mean, which secondaries were in use and how were they connected to each other, and were they in phase or out of phase?
Thanks
Quote from: JustMe on March 11, 2008, 05:47:45 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 11, 2008, 05:30:37 PM
Is there a pictrure of the entire setup for the test? All that can be seen from the youtube clip are the meters and the coils... I'm just trying ot visualize how all of this relates to the magnets...
What you saw is what there is JS. No external magnets in this one. Again, lots of information earlier in the thread.
OK - now I'm feeling like I REALLY missed the boat... I thought the whole point of these tests were to create data on Thane's contraption (you know, the thing with the magnets that spins really fast) ... if not, what are they testing?? Did I accidentally open the wrong thread?
Quote from: jacksatan on March 12, 2008, 12:17:14 AM
OK - now I'm feeling like I REALLY missed the boat... I thought the whole point of these tests were to create data on Thane's contraption (you know, the thing with the magnets that spins really fast) ... if not, what are they testing?? Did I accidentally open the wrong thread?
This is separate but related testing and research on transformers of Thane's design that attempt to exploit similar principles.
Quote from: JustMe on March 12, 2008, 12:23:32 AM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 12, 2008, 12:17:14 AM
OK - now I'm feeling like I REALLY missed the boat... I thought the whole point of these tests were to create data on Thane's contraption (you know, the thing with the magnets that spins really fast) ... if not, what are they testing?? Did I accidentally open the wrong thread?
This is separate but related testing and research on transformers of Thane's design that attempt to exploit similar principles.
... and if the objective is to identify a phenomenon that's outside of conventional theory, I think the transformer experiment is much superior because it's much simpler (no moving parts) and so can be modelled/simulated much more readily. Of course that means it will also be much easier to refute the existence of the non-conventional effects if that's where the data take us - but we're all in search of the truth so it's all good.
Quote from: vince on March 07, 2008, 09:30:32 PM
How about this for measuring the torque?
I was going to make it for my unit but I thought I'd get your opinions first.
And YES Thane, my motor does accelerate just as you have demonstrated!
Regards
Vince
Vince, did you decide to go ahead with testing?
Hi all,
Please find below (attached zip file) all the Toroid test Data done to date. It includes new test done on Toroid no. 3 which has 6 layers of winding per side = 5,800 turns each side, compare to Toroid no.2 with 4 layers per side = 4,000 turns each side.
Test seem to support Thane's earlier conclusion that the more turns the more is the output WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER.
Enjoy and stay tuned.
Luc
oops, double post ;D
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:59:12 PM
oops, double post ;D
You shoud have said you posted just one, but got two out. :)
Have attached data in 5 page pdf document for those who don't have Word and/or don't want to deal with .rar files.
it seems the end result of test 4 does not change significantly from toroid #2 to toroid #3 - the output to input efficiency edges up from 32% with #2 to 33% with #3...
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
Test seem to support Thane's earlier conclusion that the more turns the more is the output WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER.
I'm confused (again - it seems to be happening often these days). Acording to your posting input power increased every all test scenario, ranging from a 30-50% increase, with the biggest increases in tests 3 and 4 - where there was actual measurable output... what could you be referencing when you say
WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER?
Quote from: jacksatan on March 12, 2008, 06:54:17 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
Test seem to support Thane's earlier conclusion that the more turns the more is the output WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER.
I'm confused (again - it seems to be happening often these days). Acording to your posting input power increased every all test scenario, ranging from a 30-50% increase, with the biggest increases in tests 3 and 4 - where there was actual measurable output... what could you be referencing when you say WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER?
JACKSATAN, IF YOU REFER TO OUR STARTING POINT IN TEST # 1 ? WE START WITH A PRIMARY
NO LOAD POWER DISSIPATION OF
4 WATTS. (LUC AND I ARE ENDEAVORING TO OPTIMIZE OUR PRIMARY PERFORMANCE I.E. LOWER CURRENT DRAW)
THEN THROUGH VARIOUS WIRE CONFIGURATIONS WE FINALLY END UP WITH AN END RESULT IN TEST # 5 (SUB TEST # 4) OF 2.39 WATTS THROUGH OUR LOAD.
PRIMARY I/P 1.80 VOLTS
2.65 AMPS
PF = 1
INPUT POWER = 4.77 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 2.39 WATTS @ 48.9 VOLTS RECALL THAT WE STARTED AT
4 WATTS IN SO IN ESSENCE WE OBTAIN
2.39 WATTS OUT WITH ONLY
0.77 WATTS OF ADDITIONAL POWER IN.
IN ALMOST EVERY CASE WE ARE SEEING AN
INCREASING POWER ACROSS THE LOAD WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY HAVING OUR
INPUT POWER DECREASE ? IT SHOULD NOT DECREASE (THIS IS THE POINT) ? IT SHOULD INCREASE IN TANDEM WITH THE INCREASE IN SECONDARY POWER ACROSS THE LOAD. (WE JUST THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE WORTH SHARING).
Thane
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
...
Please find below (attached zip file) all the Toroid test Data done to date. It includes new test done on Toroid no. 3 which has 6 layers of winding per side = 5,800 turns each side, compare to Toroid no.2 with 4 layers per side = 4,000 turns each side.
...
Luc, it's not possible to interpret these results without knowing how the secondary coils were connected in each of the tests. They can be connected in various combinations, series or parallel or a combination, and in-phase or antiphase. It's essential to know that. Would you please post that info?
Thanks,
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 12, 2008, 08:25:32 PM
...THEN THROUGH VARIOUS WIRE CONFIGURATIONS WE FINALLY END UP WITH AN END RESULT...
Again, Luc, "various wire configurations" doesn't provide the needed info. What exactly were the wire configurations?
Thanks,
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 12, 2008, 08:31:41 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
...
Please find below (attached zip file) all the Toroid test Data done to date. It includes new test done on Toroid no. 3 which has 6 layers of winding per side = 5,800 turns each side, compare to Toroid no.2 with 4 layers per side = 4,000 turns each side.
...
Luc, it's not possible to interpret these results without knowing how the secondary coils were connected in each of the tests. They can be connected in various combinations, series or parallel or a combination, and in-phase or antiphase. It's essential to know that. Would you please post that info?
Thanks,
PB
I AM SORRY BUT THAT'S
TOP SECRET INFORMATION WHICH CANNOT BE SHARED UNTIL LUC AND I CONTROL THE ENTIRE EARTH'S ENERGY SUPPLY - SORRY.
OR UNTIL YOU COME TO THE LAB AND SEE FOR YOURSELF?
Thane
PB you got another invite this is great Chet
Quote from: OilBarren on March 12, 2008, 08:36:13 PM
Luc, it's not possible to interpret these results without knowing how the secondary coils were connected in each of the tests. They can be connected in various combinations, series or parallel or a combination, and in-phase or antiphase. It's essential to know that. Would you please post that info?
Thanks,
PB
I AM SORRY BUT THAT'S TOP SECRET INFORMATION WHICH CANNOT BE SHARED UNTIL LUC AND I CONTROL THE ENTIRE EARTH'S ENERGY SUPPLY - SORRY.
OR UNTIL YOU COME TO THE LAB AND SEE FOR YOURSELF?
Thane
You are kidding, right? Are you guys serious or are you just farting around with everybody?
hi pb,
he's kidding about the first line (he has a quirky sense of humor :) )
but he's not kidding about the visit, you seem to be so curious about his work, why not accept the invite this time?
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on March 12, 2008, 11:37:20 PM
hi pb,
he's kidding about the first line (he has a quirky sense of humor :) )
but he's not kidding about the visit, you seem to be so curious about his work, why not accept the invite this time?
Aaron
What is your connection to the project?
PB why don't you get in your car and drive the ten miles to the univercity Im quite serious or tell me how much the cab ride woulod be and I LL send you the money Chet
hi pb,
I'm not affiliated with Thane, I just read the posts because I'm interested in how this possible discovery may play out. I have read all the posts from the start though, and I can vouch for Thane's quirky sense of humor! :)
Aaron
Quote from: ramset on March 12, 2008, 11:41:13 PM
PB why don't you get in your car and drive the ten miles to the univercity Im quite serious or tell me how much the cab ride woulod be and I LL send you the money Chet
Chet:
I had that same thought after reading PB's posts... I'll even help out with the cost to get him there!
;)
But doubt he'll go...
:-\
-Mark
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 13, 2008, 03:46:39 AM
Quote from: ramset on March 12, 2008, 11:41:13 PM
PB why don't you get in your car and drive the ten miles to the univercity Im quite serious or tell me how much the cab ride woulod be and I LL send you the money Chet
Chet:
I had that same thought after reading PB's posts... I'll even help out with the cost to get him there!
;)
But doubt he'll go...
:-\
-Mark
Tell you what - if they provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all. It's not a question of the time or money: it's a question of credibility. Not this week though because I'm at the Globe 2008 environmental conference in Vancouver. Plenty of potential investors here, it's a perfect fit, but I'm not talking about Thane's thing because I don't have the info and without that it just sounds like snake oil.
Quote from: bitbeam on March 12, 2008, 11:49:18 PM
hi pb,
I'm not affiliated with Thane, I just read the posts because I'm interested in how this possible discovery may play out. I have read all the posts from the start though, and I can vouch for Thane's quirky sense of humor! :)
Aaron
Re: "PB why don't you get in your car and drive the ten miles to the univercity Im quite serious or tell me how much the cab ride woulod be and I LL send you the money Chet"
Thane
I know where the university is - that's where I did my MBA. I will not get personally involved until your team gives me a reason to believe you are working on something with merit. The due diligence questions I have asked are absolutely reasonable. It's your decision as to whether you want my help or you just all want to fart around. Most investors would have written this off long ago due to the failure to answer the simplest of questions. Let me know. It's up to you.
polarbreeze
"Tell you what - if they provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all. It's not a question of the time or money: it's a question of credibility. Not this week though because I'm at the Globe 2008 environmental conference in Vancouver. Plenty of potential investors here, it's a perfect fit, but I'm not talking about Thane's thing because I don't have the info and without that it just sounds like snake oil." polarbreeze
WE CREDIBILITY-LESS FARTING SNAKE OIL SALESMEN DO WANT AND NEED YOUR HELP.
WE JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPOSE US AS THE FRAUDS WE REALLY ARE. WE NEED HELP SO WE CAN STOP LIVING THIS LIE!!!
ENJOY VANCOUVER. DON'T TAKE ANY WOODEN NICKELS.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 07:12:30 AM
"Tell you what - if they provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all. It's not a question of the time or money: it's a question of credibility. Not this week though because I'm at the Globe 2008 environmental conference in Vancouver. Plenty of potential investors here, it's a perfect fit, but I'm not talking about Thane's thing because I don't have the info and without that it just sounds like snake oil." polarbreeze
WE CREDIBILITY-LESS FARTING SNAKE OIL SALESMEN DO WANT AND NEED YOUR HELP.
WE JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPOSE US AS THE FRAUDS WE REALLY ARE. WE NEED HELP SO WE CAN STOP LIVING THIS LIE!!!
ENJOY VANCOUVER. DON'T TAKE ANY WOODEN NICKELS.
Thane
Haha...
This is really funny.
Polarbeeze: why don't you just go there and see their setup for yourself instead of typing almost 10 pages full of posts ridden with issues/questions, and problems?
Go, see the Thane's setup and report back.
No?
Quote from: adlep on March 13, 2008, 09:20:12 AM
Polarbeeze: why don't you just go there and see their setup for yourself instead of typing almost 10 pages full of posts ridden with issues/questions, and problems?
Go, see the Thane's setup and report back.
No?
If they first provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all.
PB PLEASE GO Chet
OUR posts crossed thanx PB chet
Quote from: polarbreeze
It's your decision as to whether you want my help or you just all want to fart around.
A bit of a false dilemma I'd say. ::)
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 13, 2008, 09:56:55 AMIf they first provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all.
You've spent more time *repeatedly* posting here, than it would have taken for you to have driven to one of their demos, where you could have answered your own questions.
It's pretty clear that you aren't serious. Whether or not your questions are valid, because *you* are asking them, those questions aren't going to get answered, because they aren't going to waste any more time on you than they already have wasted.
I'm not connected with this project. I've formed the above opinion after reading most of the posts in this thread.
If you want to get your questions answered then go to one of their demos.
Quote from: FredWalter on March 13, 2008, 12:05:53 PM
...You've spent more time *repeatedly* posting here...
If the questions had been answered the first time, repetition would not have been necessary
Its not actually so much a Demo as much as Research at University an amazing opportunity at least IMHO Chet
let us ask the question .... RESERCH hummmm....
why is it called re-serch?!?!?!?!
are we looking for somthing we already know??
ist
can you ask the questions........ to find out your own answers?!?!?!?!?! how can time travel be possible??
hummmmm........
I think PB will take up the invite and I for one would greatly appreciate that and yes an interesting word that re search Chet PS many would Appreciate that
Quote from: OilBarren on March 12, 2008, 08:25:32 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 12, 2008, 06:54:17 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
Test seem to support Thane's earlier conclusion that the more turns the more is the output WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER.
I'm confused (again - it seems to be happening often these days). Acording to your posting input power increased every all test scenario, ranging from a 30-50% increase, with the biggest increases in tests 3 and 4 - where there was actual measurable output... what could you be referencing when you say WITHOUT INCREASING THE PRIMAY INPUT POWER?
JACKSATAN, IF YOU REFER TO OUR STARTING POINT IN TEST # 1 ? WE START WITH A PRIMARY NO LOAD POWER DISSIPATION OF 4 WATTS. (LUC AND I ARE ENDEAVORING TO OPTIMIZE OUR PRIMARY PERFORMANCE I.E. LOWER CURRENT DRAW)
THEN THROUGH VARIOUS WIRE CONFIGURATIONS WE FINALLY END UP WITH AN END RESULT IN TEST # 5 (SUB TEST # 4) OF 2.39 WATTS THROUGH OUR LOAD.
PRIMARY I/P
1.80 VOLTS
2.65 AMPS
PF = 1
INPUT POWER = 4.77 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 2.39 WATTS @ 48.9 VOLTS
RECALL THAT WE STARTED AT 4 WATTS IN SO IN ESSENCE WE OBTAIN 2.39 WATTS OUT WITH ONLY 0.77 WATTS OF ADDITIONAL POWER IN.
IN ALMOST EVERY CASE WE ARE SEEING AN INCREASING POWER ACROSS THE LOAD WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY HAVING OUR INPUT POWER DECREASE ? IT SHOULD NOT DECREASE (THIS IS THE POINT) ? IT SHOULD INCREASE IN TANDEM WITH THE INCREASE IN SECONDARY POWER ACROSS THE LOAD. (WE JUST THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE WORTH SHARING).
Thane
My appologies - I was using the PDF as my reference guide, and I did not realize that it had 5 pages... my reference was comparing the results of test #1 (all subsets) to test #2 (all subsets), but that is irrelevant now...
So we are now at 50% efficiency - up from 31% - that certainly can be called progress.
A couple of comments and request related to the testing as it stands right now...
1) Could someone fill in the changes made in test #1 and 2 between subset tests 2, 3, and 4 (ie. added 1 coil, etc.)
2) There seems to be some sort of threshold breach between 1 and 2 coils on secondary 2 after which useful energy is allowed to flow. In order to determine whether the linearity of the growth in efficiency after that threshold, you will need to repeat the same setup with 3, 4, and 5 coils on the secondary. This way we could plot the effects and project a growth rate and terminal value.
3) Test #5 introduces a new variable (resonater), and so all tests would need redone with/without the resonater
Polar - if you could find the time to make the trek it would save us all a ton of greenhouse gasses emited by wasting precious electricity repeatedly accessin this forum...
Quote from: ramset on March 13, 2008, 12:46:05 PM
I think PB will take up the invite
Only if they've started handing out common sense and good manners with the peanuts on east bound airplanes. And what with the price of fuel...
Quote from: jacksatan on March 13, 2008, 02:28:27 PM
My appologies - I was using the PDF as my reference guide, and I did not realize that it had 5 pages... my reference was comparing the results of test #1 (all subsets) to test #2 (all subsets), but that is irrelevant now...
Have modified my post with the pdf attached to indicate it is five pages...hopefully that will help.
PB PLEASE MAKE YOUR POSITION CLEAR REGAURDING THE ON GOING RESEARCH AND YOUR INVITE TO INVESTIGATE THANKS CHET
Quote from: ramset on March 13, 2008, 03:21:58 PM
PB PLEASE MAKE YOUR POSITION CLEAR REGAURDING THE ON GOING RESEARCH AND YOUR INVITE TO INVESTIGATE THANKS CHET
As I said before, if they first provide the due diligence info I asked for, I'll go for the demo and I'll report back to you all.
PB over 24000 reads on this thread the MEN in the field have alot of onlookers I hope your due diligance has some realistic boundaries considering the huge opportunity to advance understanding one way or the other Chet
Quote from: gotoluc on March 05, 2008, 09:11:39 AM
We have also completed a new and much more efficient primary coil to test Thane's Toroids and so far have achieved 38% efficiency in Toroid number 1 which is only 2,000 windings per side. We have not wet tested it in Toroid 2 which is 4,000 windings which should double the efficiency and then Toroid 3 which is 5,500 windings, who knows what it will do ???
Please stay tuned for more updates.
Luc
Are there any early thoughts on why the orginial hypothesis on the efficiency trajectory didn't come to pass?
Quote from: JustMe on March 13, 2008, 07:35:46 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 05, 2008, 09:11:39 AM
We have also completed a new and much more efficient primary coil to test Thane's Toroids and so far have achieved 38% efficiency in Toroid number 1 which is only 2,000 windings per side. We have not wet tested it in Toroid 2 which is 4,000 windings which should double the efficiency and then Toroid 3 which is 5,500 windings, who knows what it will do ???
Please stay tuned for more updates.
Luc
Are there any early thoughts on why the orginial hypothesis on the efficiency trajectory didn't come to pass?
JUSTSHE - PLEASE POST IT AGAIN TO REMIND US?
AS PROMISED - LUC AND I ARE IMPROVING OUR PRIMARY POWER TRANSFER BY ADDING ADDITIONAL TURNS - THERE IS AN IDEAL NUMBER WE JUST HAVE NOT FOUND IT YET.
THAT BEING SAID OUR
EFFICIENCY FOR TOROID # 2 IS UP 20% FROM 31% TO 51% AND WE HAVE NOT TESTED TOROID # 3 YET WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ABOUT 71% IF ALL GOES WELL.
OUR PEAK PRIMARY POWER TRANSFER RANGE HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED SO WE WILL BE ADDING ADDITIONAL TURNS TO OUR PRIMARY TOMORROW AND WILL ALSO BE WINDING AN ALTOGETHER NEW PRIMARY WITH NEW CORE MATERIAL.
ALSO
OU (
OTTAWA
UNIVERSITY'S) MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS GENEROUSLY OFFERED US A RAIL DUNE BUGGY FRAME TO INSTALL AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR/MOTOR SYSTEM IN. LUC WILL POST PHOTOS ON FRIDAY.
WE WILL BE RUNNING OUR SPECIALLY DESIGNED "DUNE BUGGY" ON A
SPECIAL FORMULA OF
FART INFUSED METHANE GAS, SNAKE OIL AND HOT AIR FUEL BLEND WHICH PRODUCES LOTS OF SPARKS.
CHEERS
Thane
p.s.
"If an idiot were to tell you the same story every day for a year,
you would end by believing it."
- Horace Mann
Maybe when you get the buggy going you could go and pickup PB Chet PS nice to see the MEN in the field in such good spirits
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 09:12:16 PM
THAT BEING SAID OUR EFFICIENCY FOR TOROID # 2 IS UP 20% FROM 31% TO 51% AND WE HAVE NOT TESTED TOROID # 3 YET WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ABOUT 71% IF ALL GOES WELL.
Please retest the existing setups using 3, 4, and 5 coils on secondary-2 before moving on to different toroids... testing only 1 and 2 coils does not give enough data points to estimate the perfect number... once the ideal number of coils with toroid #2 is determined, you can move on to toroid #3 and test to see if the ideal coil number has changed...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 09:12:16 PM
THAT BEING SAID OUR EFFICIENCY FOR TOROID # 2 IS UP 20% FROM 31% TO 51% AND WE HAVE NOT TESTED TOROID # 3 YET WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ABOUT 71% IF ALL GOES WELL.
Another thing - as I pointed out in a previous post, though the efficiency of toroid #2 has increased form 31% to 51%, this seems to have little to do with a change in toroids, but rather the adition of coils. Under the same testing conditions (ie. test 1 and test 2) toroid #1 and toroid #2 seem to have almost identicle efficiencies... So once again, before moving onto another toroid, I would definitely retest toroid #1 under the same conditions as toroid #2 was tested under in tests 3, 4, and 5 - it may turn out that the number of windings in the toroids is a red herring...
BTW - rereading what I just wrote I recognize a lot of numbers and reference tests - please drop me a line if my comment makes absolutely no sense at all... Thanks
Quote from: jacksatan on March 13, 2008, 09:39:56 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 09:12:16 PM
THAT BEING SAID OUR EFFICIENCY FOR TOROID # 2 IS UP 20% FROM 31% TO 51% AND WE HAVE NOT TESTED TOROID # 3 YET WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ABOUT 71% IF ALL GOES WELL.
Another thing - as I pointed out in a previous post, though the efficiency of toroid #2 has increased form 31% to 51%, this seems to have little to do with a change in toroids, but rather the adition of coils. Under the same testing conditions (ie. test 1 and test 2) toroid #1 and toroid #2 seem to have almost identicle efficiencies... So once again, before moving onto another toroid, I would definitely retest toroid #1 under the same conditions as toroid #2 was tested under in tests 3, 4, and 5 - it may turn out that the number of windings in the toroids is a red herring...
BTW - rereading what I just wrote I recognize a lot of numbers and reference tests - please drop me a line if my comment makes absolutely no sense at all... Thanks
SORRY FOR THE MIS-UNDERSTANDING.
AT THIS TIME - WE ARE IMPROVING OUR TRANSFORMER EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE BY INCREASING THE NUMBER OF TURNS IN OUR PRIMARY - THAT IS ALL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 09:12:16 PM
JUSTSHE - PLEASE POST IT AGAIN TO REMIND US?
AS PROMISED - LUC AND I ARE IMPROVING OUR PRIMARY POWER TRANSFER BY ADDING ADDITIONAL TURNS - THERE IS AN IDEAL NUMBER WE JUST HAVE NOT FOUND IT YET.
THAT BEING SAID OUR EFFICIENCY FOR TOROID # 2 IS UP 20% FROM 31% TO 51% AND WE HAVE NOT TESTED TOROID # 3 YET WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ABOUT 71% IF ALL GOES WELL.
OUR PEAK PRIMARY POWER TRANSFER RANGE HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED SO WE WILL BE ADDING ADDITIONAL TURNS TO OUR PRIMARY TOMORROW AND WILL ALSO BE WINDING AN ALTOGETHER NEW PRIMARY WITH NEW CORE MATERIAL.
ALSO OU (OTTAWA UNIVERSITY'S) MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS GENEROUSLY OFFERED US A RAIL DUNE BUGGY FRAME TO INSTALL AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR/MOTOR SYSTEM IN. LUC WILL POST PHOTOS ON FRIDAY.
WE WILL BE RUNNING OUR SPECIALLY DESIGNED "DUNE BUGGY" ON A SPECIAL FORMULA OF FART INFUSED METHANE GAS, SNAKE OIL AND HOT AIR FUEL BLEND WHICH PRODUCES LOTS OF SPARKS.
CHEERS
Thane
p.s.
"If an idiot were to tell you the same story every day for a year,
you would end by believing it."
- Horace Mann
It's not clear to me whether you're making fun of my gender and/or insinuating I think you're peddling snake oil and/or implying that somebody named Horace Mann might think I'm an idiot. Either way, by now it should be clear that I respect your goals and very much hope you succeed. Any conclusion otherwise falls under the category of "your problem".
The results Luc posted recently from the work on March 11th all reference "Toroid 3". Am I reading that wrong? I assumed that meant the 5500 turn one...
How much can you rely on the known properties and performance of typical transformers to predict how various changes will affect your design? For example, can you make a reasonable prediction on how your new core will affect things? Was the computer modelling you did in the past predictive?
Hope you weren't kidding about the dune buggy frame. That sounds like a great next step. What kind of data would a context like that allow you to gather that wouldn't be practical in your demo unit? Is the basic concept going to need much modification, or is that hard to determine at this point? What's more fun..the theorizing or the engineering?
Is that enough questions?
Quote from: gotoluc on March 12, 2008, 03:57:57 PM
RECALL THAT WE STARTED AT 4 WATTS IN SO IN ESSENCE WE OBTAIN 2.39 WATTS OUT WITH ONLY 0.77 WATTS OF ADDITIONAL POWER IN.
IN ALMOST EVERY CASE WE ARE SEEING AN INCREASING POWER ACROSS THE LOAD WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY HAVING OUR INPUT POWER DECREASE ? IT SHOULD NOT DECREASE (THIS IS THE POINT) ? IT SHOULD INCREASE IN TANDEM WITH THE INCREASE IN SECONDARY POWER ACROSS THE LOAD...
Thane
The most likely explanation for this is that it's an impedance matching effect. Reconfiguring the coils is creating a better impedance match between the load and the source (variac) - it's absolutely normal for the input power to go down as the output power goes up if what you're doing is reconfiguring the coils to give a better impedance match. What would be surprising would be if that happened WITHOUT reconfiguring the coils.
It's not clear to me whether you're making fun of my gender and/or insinuating I think you're peddling snake oil and/or implying that somebody named Horace Mann might think I'm an idiot. Either way, by now it should be clear that I respect your goals and very much hope you succeed. Any conclusion otherwise falls under the category of "your problem".
CLEARLY - THE HORACE MANN QUOTE WAS MEANT FOR POLARBREEZE'S NONSENSE.- NOT THAT HE'S AN IDIOT BUT HIS POSITION IS BORDERING ON THE IDIOTIC WHEN YOU CONSIDER WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM.
DON'T WORRY IF I KNEW YOUR GENDER THEN I WOULD BE SURE TO MAKE FUN OF IT.
BTW, WHAT GENDER ARE YOU?
The results Luc posted recently from the work on March 11th all reference "Toroid 3". Am I reading that wrong? I assumed that meant the 5500 turn one...
YES THIS IS CORRECT.
How much can you rely on the known properties and performance of typical transformers to predict how various changes will affect your design? For example, can you make a reasonable prediction on how your new core will affect things?
THE PRIMARY HAS A PEAK MAGNETIC FLUX TRANSFER WINDOW WHICH IS DICTATED (RIGHT NOW) BY THE NUMBER OF TURNS OF WIRE ON IT. FOR EXAMPLE LUC INCREASED OUR PRIMARY YESTERDAY BY 15 TURNS AND OUR EFFICIENCY INCREASED BY 20%.
WE ARE HOPING FOR MORE OF THE SAME TODAY.
TYPICAL TRANSFORMER PERFORMANCE IS COMPLETELY OUT THE WINDOW AND IF WE SLIP INTO THINKING ALONG THOSE LINES WE MAKE MISTAKES - WHICH HAPPENS OFTEN.
THEREFORE WE TRY TO THINK AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE (AND ASSUME AND PREDICT NOTHING).
MY PREDICTION (HOPE DESIRE):
AN OPTIMIZED PRIMARY WILL GIVE US OVER 100% EFFICIENCY ANYTHING LESS AND IT'S ALL GOING IN THE GARBAGE.
Was the computer modelling you did in the past predictive?
NO TIME FOR THIS YET.
WE WILL DO IT AFTER WE GET IT ALL WORKING.
Hope you weren't kidding about the dune buggy frame. That sounds like a great next step. What kind of data would a context like that allow you to gather that wouldn't be practical in your demo unit? Is the basic concept going to need much modification, or is that hard to determine at this point? What's more fun..the theorizing or the engineering?
WE ARE INTENDING TO MAKE THE $ 10 M - 100 MPG X PRIZE COMPETITION MOOT.
IDENTICAL CONCEPT - JUST SCALED UP FROM A 1/3 HP SINGLE PHASE, CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR TO A 10 HP SINGLE PHASE, CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR. NO DESIGN CHANGES UNTIL AFTER WE DEMO IT ALL WORKING ON THE ROAD.
ENGINEERING, BUILDING AND LEARNING BY MAKING MISTAKES IS THE MOST FUN -
THEORIZING JUST CAUSES PROBLEMS BECAUSE EGOS ARE INVOLVED AS YOU CAN SEE EVERYDAY IN THIS FORUM?
Is that enough questions?
NOT FOR ME - ENOUGH ANSWERS FOR YOU?
"History will be kind to me because I intend to write it."
Winston Churchill
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
It's not clear to me whether you're making fun of my gender and/or insinuating I think you're peddling snake oil and/or implying that somebody named Horace Mann might think I'm an idiot. Either way, by now it should be clear that I respect your goals and very much hope you succeed. Any conclusion otherwise falls under the category of "your problem".
CLEARLY - THE HORACE MANN QUOTE WAS MEANT FOR POLARBREEZE'S NONSENSE.- NOT THAT HE'S AN IDIOT BUT HIS POSITION IS BORDERING ON THE IDIOTIC WHEN YOU CONSIDER WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM.
DON'T WORRY IF I KNEW YOUR GENDER THEN I WOULD BE SURE TO MAKE FUN OF IT.
BTW, WHAT GENDER ARE YOU?
The results Luc posted recently from the work on March 11th all reference "Toroid 3". Am I reading that wrong? I assumed that meant the 5500 turn one...
YES THIS IS CORRECT.
How much can you rely on the known properties and performance of typical transformers to predict how various changes will affect your design? For example, can you make a reasonable prediction on how your new core will affect things?
THE PRIMARY HAS A PEAK MAGNETIC FLUX TRANSFER WINDOW WHICH IS DICTATED (RIGHT NOW) BY THE NUMBER OF TURNS OF WIRE ON IT. FOR EXAMPLE LUC INCREASED OUR PRIMARY YESTERDAY BY 15 TURNS AND OUR EFFICIENCY INCREASED BY 20%.
WE ARE HOPING FOR MORE OF THE SAME TODAY.
TYPICAL TRANSFORMER PERFORMANCE IS COMPLETELY OUT THE WINDOW AND IF WE SLIP INTO THINKING ALONG THOSE LINES WE MAKE MISTAKES - WHICH HAPPENS OFTEN.
THEREFORE WE TRY TO THINK AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE (AND ASSUME AND PREDICT NOTHING).
MY PREDICTION (HOPE DESIRE):
AN OPTIMIZED PRIMARY WILL GIVE US OVER 100% EFFICIENCY ANYTHING LESS AND IT'S ALL GOING IN THE GARBAGE.
Was the computer modelling you did in the past predictive?
NO TIME FOR THIS YET.
WE WILL DO IT AFTER WE GET IT ALL WORKING.
Hope you weren't kidding about the dune buggy frame. That sounds like a great next step. What kind of data would a context like that allow you to gather that wouldn't be practical in your demo unit? Is the basic concept going to need much modification, or is that hard to determine at this point? What's more fun..the theorizing or the engineering?
WE ARE INTENDING TO MAKE THE $ 10 M - 100 MPG X PRIZE COMPETITION MOOT.
IDENTICAL CONCEPT - JUST SCALED UP FROM A 1/3 HP SINGLE PHASE, CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR TO A 10 HP SINGLE PHASE, CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR. NO DESIGN CHANGES UNTIL AFTER WE DEMO IT ALL WORKING ON THE ROAD.
ENGINEERING, BUILDING AND LEARNING BY MAKING MISTAKES IS THE MOST FUN -
THEORIZING JUST CAUSES PROBLEMS BECAUSE EGOS ARE INVOLVED AS YOU CAN SEE EVERYDAY IN THIS FORUM?
Is that enough questions?
NOT FOR ME - ENOUGH ANSWERS FOR YOU?
"History will be kind to me because I intend to write it."
Winston Churchill
The swing at the X prize is really a great idea to prove your concept Thane. Very practical swing at the naysayers.
If that works, I will have you convert my Prius to run on your "engine"?
:P
:)
good work guys keep it up
is
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
THE PRIMARY HAS A PEAK MAGNETIC FLUX TRANSFER WINDOW WHICH IS DICTATED (RIGHT NOW) BY THE NUMBER OF TURNS OF WIRE ON IT. FOR EXAMPLE LUC INCREASED OUR PRIMARY YESTERDAY BY 15 TURNS AND OUR EFFICIENCY INCREASED BY 20%.
Sounds like the extra 15 turns bring you closer to a good impedance match. What you should find is that as you change the number of turns, you'll eventually get to an optimum where the impedance is matched as close as it can be, then adding more turns will make the efficiency drop off again. A good way to present the results might be as a graph with # of turns on the X axis and efficiency on the Y axis.
Some cautions: (a) you need to be very careful about your power measurements because your voltage and your current are not in phase - you can't just multiply them together to calculate the power. And (b), I suggest you revisit your method of calculating power factor because with the voltage and current not in phase the power factor can't be unity.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 09:56:09 PM
Test # 4 - 1 K ohm LOAD
Primary I/P
1.75 volts
1.88 amps
PF = 1
Input Power = 3.29 watts (17.8 % decrease)
Output Power = 1.05 watts @ 32.4 v (1887.7 % increase)
Thane/Luc, there's a methodology issue that I think you need to take into account. Here is an example from the earlier batch of tests but it will apply also to any present and future test. The issue is that you're not taking account of the extra power dissipated in the variac (in test #4 in this case) when you let the input voltage drop, details below. Caution: as I said before, these numbers will not be exactly right because the voltage and the current are not exactly in phase; however, it serves as an approximation to give an understanding of where the missing power went:
Between your tests 3 and 4, the increased load introduced a voltage drop in the variac of 0.25V (2.0V dropped down to 1.75V). Since the current is now 1.88A there is an additional 0.47W (0.25 x 1.88) being dissipated in the variac that wasn't being dissipated before. Because you're not keeping the input voltage constant at 2V, what you're really doing is causing some of the power that was previously dissipated in the coils to be dissipated in the variac instead. But it's being dissipated either way so it does need to be counted. If you don't count that power in your equations you're missing a key piece of where the input power went. To compare apples to apples, you need to consider the input power in test 4 to be 3.76W (ie 3.29 + 0.47). This is actually MORE than in test 3, which was 3.6W. The true input power did not go down: it went up.
As a corollary to this, I think a much more representative way to conduct the tests would be to ensure that the input voltage to the primary is always the same, adjusting the variac at each test if necessary to achieve that. This will ensure that the power dissipated in the variac is automatically eliminated from all the comparisons. Otherwise you may find that people will be able to challenge the results as not being apples-for-apples comparisons.
Hi All,
please find a link to megaupload to a single zip file of 4 pictures of the aluminum dune buggy that the Ottawa University has donated to us.
Download link: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=5KLKQU8R
We will be removing the gasoline engine and installing Thane' s accelerating charging electric motor.
Stay tuned
Luc
Thanks...:) Luc's pictures in the .rar file are large, high res images of very nice quality and well worth downloading. But again, for the more casual user who may not be equipped to easily deal with the archive format I offer them here as smaller, lower quality images. Note to JackS: There are FOUR (4) (IV). ;)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi256.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh185%2FJustMe-67%2FOttawa-U-dune-buggy-A.jpg&hash=a19955605af1715c830ce92561420d7f6a8b996e)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi256.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh185%2FJustMe-67%2FOttawa-U-dune-buggy-B.jpg&hash=a70aa2f975b91b47c0532caa265e40f2a27df297)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi256.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh185%2FJustMe-67%2FOttawa-U-dune-buggy-C.jpg&hash=6d9fdf055394a9cdd4701fc399c5a511811ebae0)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi256.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh185%2FJustMe-67%2FOttawa-U-dune-buggy-D.jpg&hash=783b98b9fcf4f7f725adcbf2d9a15b05bea72ad1)
Quote from: OilBarren on March 13, 2008, 09:12:16 PM
ALSO OU (OTTAWA UNIVERSITY'S) MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS GENEROUSLY OFFERED US A RAIL DUNE BUGGY FRAME TO INSTALL AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR/MOTOR SYSTEM IN. LUC WILL POST PHOTOS ON FRIDAY.
That's the kind of practical demonstration that will really make a difference, Thane. Good move. Do you plan to remove the gasoline motor and replace it by batteries to drive your electric motor; or will you keep the gasoline motor in and use it to drive a generator for the electric motor? That's a tricky engineering decision because the space in the frame seems to be quite limited. What would be really cool would be if you could get access to the latest lithium ion battery technology that they're going to start using in hybrid vehicles.
JUST thanx for posting the pix PB it does look cool and yes somebody has a gift for marketing also Chet
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 15, 2008, 11:53:12 AM
That's the kind of practical demonstration that will really make a difference, Thane. Good move.
Ooohhh! I think Polar just gave Thane a biscuit!
looks like it will be a fun job building that unit and getting it running and moveing but it has lots of road clearence
is
Quote from: JustMe on March 15, 2008, 12:25:49 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 15, 2008, 11:53:12 AM
That's the kind of practical demonstration that will really make a difference, Thane. Good move.
Ooohhh! I think Polar just gave Thane a biscuit!
NO THANKS I'M VEGETARIAN - CAN'T EAT POLAR BISCUITS.
THERE IS A NICE AND COOL INTERVIEW HERE BY
ROY WINDSOR OF KEY RECORDS FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED http://keyrecords.com/designers.html.
Thane
Quote from: innovation_station on March 15, 2008, 12:27:17 PM
:)
well now hummmm...
can i help lol?!?!?!?!
i had a raceing 2 stroke go kart i just sold.... it would have been verry fast with my turbine as a motor with a cintrifical clutch....
but we are years beond this now...
may i sugguest the ist cap:pac !i! :o
here is a dwg of the pac
IST
HEY IST,
WHERE CAN I GET MY HANDS ON THOSE DRUGS YOU ARE TAKING?!!! NEWS FLASH !!!WE INSTALLED A PLEXIGLAS ROTOR TODAY MADE FOR US BY
CARL FALSNES OF PERTH - DEMO VIDEO SUNDAY.
Thane
Thanks for the link /info looking foward to sunday's vid changing the world a step at a time How COOL is that Chet
I'm also looking forward to the video tomorrow, thanks for the posts! :)
The level of BS from ist and PB is killing this thread.
BTW Thane not heard back from Kim Cunningham yet, she has been silent for 6 days?
Meanwhile I am getting closer to replicating Thanes setup although I have had to do it a bit unconventionally, by mounting it on another motor, a few deficiencies with this plan but it should work.
Quote from: aether22 on March 15, 2008, 10:03:58 PM
The level of BS from ist and PB is killing this thread.
BTW Thane not heard back from Kim Cunningham yet, she has been silent for 6 days?
Meanwhile I am getting closer to replicating Thanes setup although I have had to do it a bit unconventionally, by mounting it on another motor, a few deficiencies with this plan but it should work.
AETHER, I HAVE THE ROTOR READY FOR YOU - WHAT IS YOUR SHIPPING BUDGET?
I.E. HOW FAST DO YOU WANT IT? ALSO IS YOUR DRIVE SHAFT 1/2 INCH.
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH
THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN
1/2 A DAY.Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 15, 2008, 10:03:58 PM
The level of BS from ist and PB is killing this thread.
YES - WE DO HAVE RUDENESS REPUTATION ISSUES PEOPLE...
"@Charlie_V: I would agree with almost everything you have stated, it's really nice to talk with a person who can debate there perspective in detail but still be open to others opinions. I was reading some of the "lenz thane a hand" thread and it seems to have disintigrated into an endless rant session." allcanadian
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 15, 2008, 12:25:49 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 15, 2008, 11:53:12 AM
That's the kind of practical demonstration that will really make a difference, Thane. Good move.
Ooohhh! I think Polar just gave Thane a biscuit!
The dune buggy is a great idea. I think there are some engineering issues that will need to be resolved though:
1. The magnetic feedback effect along the shaft requires AC drive. For a portable application like the buggy, it will need to run from batteries, which are DC, so they'll need to add a high power inverter to generate the AC.
2. To drive the buggy, it will be necessary to get some mechanical output from the device. In the lab setup, the motor is not capable of any mechanical output at all so the configuration for the buggy will have to be substantially different.
3. In the lab setup, all of the electrical power that's input to the device is consumed driving the device itself and ends up being dissipated as heat so there is no spare power available to drive a vehicle. This is an issue that will need to be addressed.
A suggestion: I think it would be a good first step to demonstrate actual mechanical output in the lab setup, to iron out those issues before migrating the setup into the vehicle.
PB
Hi Thane,
I think I have always hit a normal tone in my letters here yet you or Luc still avoid answering...
I mean for instance my mail here http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg81771.html#msg81771
and I would also ask what was your primary coil's DC resistance (copper resistance) in that experiment?
Thanks,
Gyula
blank
Quote from: gyulasun on March 16, 2008, 09:00:20 AM
Hi Thane,
I think I have always hit a normal tone in my letters here yet you or Luc still avoid answering...
and I would also ask what was your primary coil's DC resistance (copper resistance) in that experiment?
Thanks,
Gyula
WE HAVE ABOUT 200 PRIMARIES TO DATE AND COUNTING - WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT THE RESISTANCE OF?
Thane
Hi All,
@gyulasun, sorry you feel I was avoiding to answer your question of the DC resistance of the primary. You are right it is very low, it was maybe about 9 Ohms. I say was, because since then I'm now testing primary no. aah ??? ??? lost count :-\ and I still need to test other configurations. I was waiting to get closer to the better design before giving information. The best results so far have been around 6 to 8 Ohms.
@all, Today after working two 7 day weeks at the Ottawa U lab, I have decided to stop posting or looking at this tread for the next 2 weeks or more if needed. What is needed is real physical help with the project and I also need to stay focused on just that. If anyone here can come and help with the development please PM me and I will arrange to meet you at the lab.
Thank you
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 16, 2008, 09:00:20 AM
Hi Thane, I think I have always hit a normal tone in my letters here yet you or Luc still avoid answering...I mean for instance my mail here http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg81771.html#msg81771
Thanks, Gyula
GYULA PLEASE INDICATE YOUR "INSTANCE" SO LUC AND I CAN BE CERTAIN WHAT WE ARE AVOIDING?
"Hi Luc and Thane,
Thank you for the test results. The data you measured indicates to me that the primary coil has got very low number of turns for your 60Hz mains voltage, the coil inductive reactance I think is very small: at 2V AC input from the variac the 2A current is extremely high and I do think it oversaturates the core the primary is wound on.
If you are aware of this saturation and you designed it on purpose, than it is ok but for me it is an unwanted situation in case of electric transformers in general.
In oversaturated cores the average current hardly changes when you try to utilize its fluxchange but fluxchange can only occur in your primary when your (sinusoidal) input voltage is small enough not to cause a current level from which saturation starts. i.e. from ,say, zero to 0.5V AC input there is no or very little core saturation and as the sinus voltage exceeds 0.5V and goes up to your 2V, the current goes to high peak values during this time. This could be observed by watching the waveform of the current in the primary by an oscilloscope as a voltage drop across a 0.1 Ohm noninductive resistor placed in series with the primary coil. (Be sure to use a mains isolating 1:1 transformer when you derive your 2V from the variac that is fed by the mains directly and use a scope on the mains side too.)"
rgds, Gyula
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 06:53:24 PM
Quote from: gyulasun on March 16, 2008, 09:00:20 AM
Hi Thane,
I think I have always hit a normal tone in my letters here yet you or Luc still avoid answering...
and I would also ask what was your primary coil's DC resistance (copper resistance) in that experiment?
Thanks,
Gyula
WE HAVE ABOUT 200 PRIMARIES TO DATE AND COUNTING - WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT THE RESISTANCE OF?
Thane
Hi, and thanks for the question. I gave the link which test I thought of the primary coil resistance, it was this test here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg81771.html#msg81771 or any other primary coil DC resistance you or Luc used for tests and on which you both gave the test results here on the Forum. (So I mean the toroid core #2 and #3 for which you used the primary as input power receiver).
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Luc,
OK, now I received the answer, thank you. Thanks to Thane too.
Gyula
Quote
AETHER, I HAVE THE ROTOR READY FOR YOU - WHAT IS YOUR SHIPPING BUDGET?
I.E. HOW FAST DO YOU WANT IT? ALSO IS YOUR DRIVE SHAFT 1/2 INCH.
It is $60 right now (rather sad since $50 was donated), and another $50 or more from the 8th of April and another $50 (total of $160) from the 15th.
And yes it is half inch.
Actually make that $70 right now and $100 on the 8th and 15th of april, forgot how much better the NZD has been doing against the US of late.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
YES
Quote from: gyulasun on March 10, 2008, 10:55:30 AM
Hi Luc and Thane,
Thank you for the test results. The data you measured indicates to me that the primary coil has got very low number of turns for your 60Hz mains voltage, the coil inductive reactance I think is very small: at 2V AC input from the variac the 2A current is extremely high and I do think it oversaturates the core the primary is wound on.
If you are aware of this saturation and you designed it on purpose, than it is ok but for me it is an unwanted situation in case of electric transformers in general. rgds, Gyula
THE IDEA IS TO
OPERATE THE PRIMARY AS NEAR SATURATION AS POSSIBLE - TO
KEEP PRIMARY RELUCTANCE HIGH OR
AT LEAST HIGHER THAN THE SECONDARY SO SECONDARY INDUCED MMF?S CANNOT NOT COUPLE BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY CAUSE IT TO DRAW ADDITIONAL CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 17, 2008, 06:21:49 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
YES
Half a day to replicate with the correct parts. This sounds reasonable and I am sure there are many builders that would like to replicate.. Is there a condensed guide (perhaps PDF) that can be used to replicate this project instead of reading 64 pages of questionable and confusing banter ?
Thanks,
TomG
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:14:15 PM
Actually make that $70 right now...
Note: If
need be I could find more money, as much as say $130 immediately, and I would choose for it to be sent now rather than later.
Oh, and apparently the best way is by Canada Post 'Expresspost International' if not unreasonable.
Quote from: aether22 on March 17, 2008, 04:33:51 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:14:15 PM
Actually make that $70 right now...
Note: If need be I could find more money, as much as say $130 immediately, and I would choose for it to be sent now rather than later.
Oh, and apparently the best way is by Canada Post 'Expresspost International' if not unreasonable.
AETHER22,
I WILL LET YOU KNOW THE DETAILS (cost & delivery date) TOMORROW.
Thane
Thanks!
Quote from: OilBarren on March 17, 2008, 06:21:49 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
YES
Great Scott!
That is a fascinating news!
Quote from: adlep on March 17, 2008, 09:55:37 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 17, 2008, 06:21:49 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
YES
Great Scott!
That is a fascinating news!
SHOW SOME RESPECT MAN!
THAT'S
GREAT IRISH! YESTERDAY ONLY.
Thane
p.s.
@
justme - please invite any or all of those armchair critics at SFN to a demo at Ottawa University at their leisure - you are NOT invited however now that we are apparently "sleeping together?" I don't want to end up like Senator Spitzer...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 18, 2008, 07:04:04 AM
Quote from: adlep on March 17, 2008, 09:55:37 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 17, 2008, 06:21:49 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 16, 2008, 10:33:55 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 16, 2008, 08:13:14 AM
IF ANYONE WANT TO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO REPLICATE THIS WITH THE CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS - CARL FALSNES RECREATED IT IN 1/2 A DAY.
Thane
Did he replicate the effect?
YES
Great Scott!
That is a fascinating news!
SHOW SOME RESPECT MAN!
THAT'S GREAT IRISH!
YESTERDAY ONLY.
Thane
Instead of taking trash :P, u better start thinking about mass producing your CORRECT IDENTICAL COMPONENTS. I am sure thousands of amateur engineers are dying to try it on themselves.
I bet you could finance your venture just by setting up the online store that offers the DYI "effect replicate" kit with instructions.
1. You make money
2. Skeptical people like PB validate your findings (there is nothing wrong with being skeptical btw).
3. Owners of the kit come online to swap the experiences and improvements to it.
4. Big Profit?
Quote from: OilBarren on March 18, 2008, 07:04:04 AM
@ justme - please invite any or all of those armchair critics at SFN to a demo at Ottawa University at their leisure - you are NOT invited however now that we are apparently "sleeping together?" I don't want to end up like Senator Spitzer...
That's the way one particularly irritating "skeptic" elected to parse my annoyance at him flying on to the thread calling strangers crackpots without even the most basic of information. How...objective.
P.S. You owe me $4,273.34 CDN.
JustMe, it's not a question of if we are crackpots or not, because we are.
it's an issue of if we are RIGHT or not, which we are. ;)
Quote from: JustMe on March 18, 2008, 01:06:06 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 18, 2008, 07:04:04 AM
@ justme - please invite any or all of those armchair critics at SFN to a demo at Ottawa University at their leisure - you are NOT invited however now that we are apparently "sleeping together?" I don't want to end up like Senator Spitzer...
That's the way one particularly irritating "skeptic" elected to parse my annoyance at him flying on to the thread calling strangers crackpots without even the most basic of information. How...objective.
P.S. You owe me $4,273.34 CDN.
But you said that one was a freebe?
I need that $ to mail this rotor to aether22.
> Private message from Polarbreeze:
>Re: "... level of BS from ... PB..."
>The BS is coming from elsewhere. I suggest you do a bit of research on these guys and draw your own conclusions. Caveat emptor.
>PB
Thane, you bastard, sending me a free rotor, giving me complete instructions and doing quality demos with unambiguous results.
Good job Polarbreeze saved me from you trying to um, er wait, what are you accusing Thane of PB? Going to the effort and expense of sending me free stuff!
Go away and die Polarbreeze, it is abundantly clear to everyone you are full of it, you will not visit a demo despite living very close by and you make arguments you know not to be true as proven by your answers to my 5 questions some pages ago.
Sorry if I just made the rudeness rep of this thread a little worse but I am trying to reduce the 'sly underhanded twerp' population of the thread.
Quote from: aether22 on March 18, 2008, 03:22:52 PM
JustMe, it's not a question of if we are crackpots or not, because we are.
it's an issue of if we are RIGHT or not, which we are. ;)
Right nuts then. You know, I bet you anything the collective they would sign off on that...
:)
Quote from: aether22 on March 18, 2008, 03:48:05 PM
> Private message from Polarbreeze:
>Re: "... level of BS from ... PB..."
>The BS is coming from elsewhere. I suggest you do a bit of research on these guys and draw your own conclusions. Caveat emptor.
>PB
Thane, you bastard, sending me a free rotor, giving me complete instructions and doing quality demos with unambiguous results.
Good job Polarbreeze saved me from you trying to um, er wait, what are you accusing Thane of PB? Going to the effort and expense of sending me free stuff!
Go away and die Polarbreeze, it is abundantly clear to everyone you are full of it, you will not visit a demo despite living very close by and you make arguments you know not to be true as proven by your answers to my 5 questions some pages ago.
Sorry if I just made the rudeness rep of this thread a little worse but I am trying to reduce the 'sly underhanded twerp' population of the thread.
DARN WHERE WILL I GO NOW?
ANYWAY AETHER22, YOUR ROTOR SHIPPING COST IS ABOUT $50.00 CANADIAN.
KIM WILL SEND YOU HER PRIVATE EMAIL ADDRESS AND YOU CAN DO AN INTERNET MONEY TRANSFER AT YOUR BANK. YOU SHOULD HAVE THE ROTOR AND MAGNETS BY NEXT WEDNESDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 18, 2008, 04:41:23 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 18, 2008, 03:22:52 PM
JustMe, it's not a question of if we are crackpots or not, because we are.
it's an issue of if we are RIGHT or not, which we are. ;)
Right nuts then. You know, I bet you anything the collective they would sign off on that...
:)
THE
BORG COLLECTIVE?
we are watching ;D
Reluctance is futile.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 18, 2008, 06:03:18 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 18, 2008, 03:48:05 PM
> Private message from Polarbreeze:
>Re: "... level of BS from ... PB..."
>The BS is coming from elsewhere. I suggest you do a bit of research on these guys and draw your own conclusions. Caveat emptor.
>PB
Thane, you bastard, sending me a free rotor, giving me complete instructions and doing quality demos with unambiguous results.
Good job Polarbreeze saved me from you trying to um, er wait, what are you accusing Thane of PB? Going to the effort and expense of sending me free stuff!
Go away and die Polarbreeze, it is abundantly clear to everyone you are full of it, you will not visit a demo despite living very close by and you make arguments you know not to be true as proven by your answers to my 5 questions some pages ago.
Sorry if I just made the rudeness rep of this thread a little worse but I am trying to reduce the 'sly underhanded twerp' population of the thread.
DARN WHERE WILL I GO NOW?
ANYWAY AETHER22, YOUR ROTOR SHIPPING COST IS ABOUT $50.00 CANADIAN.
KIM WILL SEND YOU HER PRIVATE EMAIL ADDRESS AND YOU CAN DO AN INTERNET MONEY TRANSFER AT YOUR BANK. YOU SHOULD HAVE THE ROTOR AND MAGNETS BY NEXT WEDNESDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Whoa! excellent, I expected it to be more than that, I have that in my paypal account thanks to a donation of, well $50 (US).
So if I can pay by paypal that would be best.
I just tried to replicate it using a jury rigged system, I had ruled out using a solid (wood) coupler between gen and motor (for some reason due to vastly different gen and motor axle sizes the 2 hole sizes would not match up at each end despite starting with the smaller size drilled through the whole piece) but found surprisingly that hose worked despite the diameter differences. (in part due to it fitting over a nut on the generator axle of the same diameter as the motor shaft)
But when I just now added the steel piece between the motor and gen the steel piece is flung outwards centrifugally and the hose is too flexible and allows it giving it a terrible unworkable wobble.
Ha, I just looked it up and the donation is 48c should of paying 50 CAD because the Canadian is now worth very slightly more than the USD.
Kinda funny given how I've heard the US insult Canadian money.
Next Wednesday, that's also faster than I had expected!
By the way I found a neat way to bench grind a rod with a flat perfect finish, it is quite hard to do by eye but if you put the rod in your drill so it turns you get a nice flat finish.
Hey Thane, so I can get up and running ASAP when it arrives let's see if I can sort out everything I'll need.
So you are sending a rotor with magnets on it on an axle, that much is pretty clear.
And I guess/hope some coupler made of probably PVC? With or without the steel shaft piece making the effect occur? (or is it just a straight connection to the motor making that comparison impossible?)
I guess I need to add (a pair of?) bearings to the shaft (and stand) to hold it in place, then just place my stator coil/s around the rotor and go?
If you have not sent anything to couple the motor to the generator then I would appreciate plans for what you have previously used, I think you mentioned your first coupler was PVC.
Basically if you can detail anything I might need to buy or build that I can do before it arrives that would be appreciated.
Also do you know how great the gap between steel shaft pieces can be before the effect goes away? Is light touching strongly encouraged or is a very tiny sub millimeter gap Ok?
Very excited about the experiments that this effect practically demands be done.
Hi Thane;
I wanted to ask you a question about your motor setup. I have been playing with my motor and magnets since this thread started,and with several different load coils the motor always showed an increase in speed with no extra current draw. The part that is strange is that when I place any kind of laminated core (WITHOUT WINDINGS) near the rotating magnets the motor speeds up to its maximum speed almost immediately and does not draw any more amps. This also happens to a lesser degree with just any steel placed close to the magnets although the greatest effect is with laminations. It seems that my motor speeds with just the metal present. I am using an air core coil as you suggested for rpm monitoring and it definitely increases the speed. In fact, I just had an accident where the rotor went too fast and I lost several magnets. Close call with just a cut finger. My question is; Do you see the same effect with just the iron close to rotor?
Just Curious
Vince.
Quote from: vince on March 18, 2008, 09:24:00 PM
Hi Thane;
I wanted to ask you a question about your motor setup. I have been playing with my motor and magnets since this thread started,and with several different load coils the motor always showed an increase in speed with no extra current draw. The part that is strange is that when I place any kind of laminated core (WITHOUT WINDINGS) near the rotating magnets the motor speeds up to its maximum speed almost immediately and does not draw any more amps. This also happens to a lesser degree with just any steel placed close to the magnets although the greatest effect is with laminations. It seems that my motor speeds with just the metal present. I am using an air core coil as you suggested for rpm monitoring and it definitely increases the speed. In fact, I just had an accident where the rotor went too fast and I lost several magnets. Close call with just a cut finger. My question is; Do you see the same effect with just the iron close to rotor?
Just Curious
Vince.
VERY STRANGE - YOUR STEEL SHOULD BE CONTRIBUTING TO SOME HYSTERISIS DRAG?
WE NEED PICTURES OR DRAWINGS?
I WONDER IF YOU ARE REDUCING THE COGGING TORQUE?
IS THERE MORE THAN ONE IRON CORE IN PLAY HERE?
ARE YOUR CORES CLOSE TO THE MOTOR OR ROTOR?
HOW ARE YOU CONTROLLING THE MOTOR SPEED?
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION
NO - FOR ME PLACING STEEL OR LAMINATED MATERIAL NEAR THE MAGNETIC ROTOR SLOWS DOWN THE MOTOR - IN FACT I USED IT TO CONTROL SPEED IN MY 1ST PROTOTYPE.
Thane
Thane;
I removed all my coils and was going to replace them with a new laminated core with heavier windings. I made the core out of light steel strips used for holding brick to a wall in construction. They are approximately 1" by 6" by 22 gauge and stacked together about 1" thick. Before I wound them with wire I bolted them together (they have predrilled holes) and mounted it in a support with the end facing the rotor magnets just like the coils with no winding. The motor rpm definitely went to maximum (from Minimum )when I brought it close to the rotor magnets. I am controlling the motor speed with a fan speed control and it was set at minimum setting drawing 1.2 amps on the motor feed. When the motor is set to full speed on the control it draws 2.4 amps. After the motor speeds up with just the laminations it still only draws 1.2 amps. I check the motor speed with an air core coil and watch the volts. I had a reading at low and high speeds and can monitor rpm in this way. I repeated this with the laminations from an old transformer that I had cut open. Again, holding it (BY HAND) close to the spinning magnets the motor speed increased. I will have to get some new magnets and take some pictures to show you but I thought it was odd to see this happening.
Regards
Vince
Quote from: vince on March 19, 2008, 12:46:17 AM
Thane;
I removed all my coils and was going to replace them with a new laminated core with heavier windings. I made the core out of light steel strips used for holding brick to a wall in construction. They are approximately 1" by 6" by 22 gauge and stacked together about 1" thick. Before I wound them with wire I bolted them together (they have predrilled holes) and mounted it in a support with the end facing the rotor magnets just like the coils with no winding. The motor rpm definitely went to maximum (from Minimum )when I brought it close to the rotor magnets. I am controlling the motor speed with a fan speed control and it was set at minimum setting drawing 1.2 amps on the motor feed. When the motor is set to full speed on the control it draws 2.4 amps. After the motor speeds up with just the laminations it still only draws 1.2 amps. I check the motor speed with an air core coil and watch the volts. I had a reading at low and high speeds and can monitor rpm in this way. I repeated this with the laminations from an old transformer that I had cut open. Again, holding it (BY HAND) close to the spinning magnets the motor speed increased. I will have to get some new magnets and take some pictures to show you but I thought it was odd to see this happening.
Regards
Vince
YOU ARE HOLDING IT BY HAND - SO WHERE ARE
YOU PLUGGED IN?
Thane
Not sure of your humor? Kinda stupid to hold it near a rotating wheel with magnets but you know how crazy we Canadians can be .EHH!
This paper from 1997 helps to explain what is going on:
http://www.overunity-theory.de/bht/bht.htm
Hi Polarbreeze;
I'm not qualified to comment on the results of the paper you presented but one line in the report seems to indicate that they were not using a metal rotor as Thane is using to couple the magnets to the motor shaft.ie: ("The revolver drum-like rotor housing of the fluxgate cores was made of plastic and contained four laminated iron cores")
Am I reading this wrong or is there experiment missing a key feature for this effect?
Vince
I believe one of the co-authors of the paper may be the moderator of this forum. They share a name and an interest in energy science at any rate. He was active in this thread early on, and enthusiastic about Thane's demonstration, so perhaps will be able to drop by and comment if it is indeed him.
Quote from: vince on March 19, 2008, 07:14:47 PM
Hi Polarbreeze;
I'm not qualified to comment on the results of the paper you presented but one line in the report seems to indicate that they were not using a metal rotor as Thane is using to couple the magnets to the motor shaft.ie: ("The revolver drum-like rotor housing of the fluxgate cores was made of plastic and contained four laminated iron cores")
Am I reading this wrong or is there experiment missing a key feature for this effect?
Vince
There are always some differences in the details but the principle and the claim is always the same. Venetin Coliu, Bedini, Perendev, Brown-Ecklin etc etc. It's actually fascinating to browse them: such ingenuity.
I have never said such a thing before and don't say such things lightly, I am prone to discounting such accusations as they retain a plausible deniability factor.
But never the less based on things said in PM I very much feel polarbreeze is a spook.
I know they exist but what I can never figure out is who pays for them, do you think they just pass that hat around and do it as a group or does one oil company, intelligence agency etc... send their own people based on their own criteria and let the others reap the benefit of a continued status quo.
Hi Thane
I recently completed my set up,I used the wheel barrel like your set up ,attached directly to the motor shaft,
instead of 1 inch magnets I used 3/4
inch ones.I use 6 cup holders spaced around the wheel one inch from each spoke, there glued with jb weld.
I use the ryobi grinder motor like your set up,for the coil core I went into home depot
and went to the place where they have cooper plumbing,they have a 1/2 inch by 15 inch steel
bar with holes in the area ,don't what its for but works good I used 8 of them cut to 11 inches.
The wire used for the coil is 2,100 feet 28 gauge,coil resistance 132 ohms,each cup has two magnets,
the magnets are lined up N,N,N,N,N,N,
the gap between the magnets and
coil core is about 1/8 inch.I use a variac to control the voltage,the results are the same as your set up
run adjust variac to get a stable speed,short coil,wheel speeds up,open coil wheel slows down.
It does work exactly as you say,very strange,but very interesting.
I'm going to build a plastic rotor to take the place of the wheel to test
the conducted back emf theory it should not work as per your video 1,2,I will use 6 cups 2 magnets each
plus the coil I have.
My question to you is has anybody not using the spoked wheel gotten results?
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 20, 2008, 06:12:56 AM
Hi Thane
I recently completed my set up,I used the wheel barrel like your set up ,attached directly to the motor shaft,
instead of 1 inch magnets I used 3/4
inch ones.I use 6 cup holders spaced around the wheel one inch from each spoke, there glued with jb weld.
I use the ryobi grinder motor like your set up,for the coil core I went into home depot
and went to the place where they have cooper plumbing,they have a 1/2 inch by 15 inch steel
bar with holes in the area ,don't what its for but works good I used 8 of them cut to 11 inches.
The wire used for the coil is 2,100 feet 28 gauge,coil resistance 132 ohms,each cup has two magnets,
the magnets are lined up N,N,N,N,N,N,
the gap between the magnets and
coil core is about 1/8 inch.I use a variac to control the voltage,the results are the same as your set up
run adjust variac to get a stable speed,short coil,wheel speeds up,open coil wheel slows down.
It does work exactly as you say,very strange,but very interesting.
I'm going to build a plastic rotor to take the place of the wheel to test
the conducted back emf theory it should not work as per your video 1,2,I will use 6 cups 2 magnets each
plus the coil I have.
My question to you is has anybody not using the spoked wheel gotten results?
WE HAVE OBSERVED
ACCELERATION (ALBEIT REDUCED) WITH A PLEXI-GLASS WHEEL ON THE
8 COIL SET UP. ALTHOUGH THE PLEXIGLASS WHEEL IS LIGHTER AND IS LESS OF A LOAD ON THE MOTOR.
THERE IS
DECELERATION WITH THE PLEXI-GLASS WHEEL WITH THE
SINGLE COIL SET UP.MY CONCLUSION:
THE 8 COILS PRODUCE ENOUGH BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WHERE THE SINGLE COIL DOES NOT.
WE ARE ALSO WORKING ON A SOLID STEEL WHEEL FOR A 5 HP MOTOR SET UP FOR OUR DUNE BUGGY.
HOW ABOUT TRYING TO REPLICATE VINCE'S OBSERVATION - I.E. ACCELERATION WITH JUST STEEL - NO COIL.Thane
Quote from: vince on March 19, 2008, 09:32:48 AM
... Kinda stupid to hold it near a rotating wheel with magnets but you know how crazy we Canadians can be .EHH!
Stand a bit closer, you could be up for a Darwin Award! ;)
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 20, 2008, 06:12:56 AM
....I use a variac to control the voltage,the results are the same as your set up
run adjust variac to get a stable speed,short coil,wheel speeds up,open coil wheel slows down.
So far so good. Here are the measurements needed to quantify the effect:
1. What is the power input in each of those cases? To calculate it you need to measure the voltage, the current and also take account of the phase difference between the voltage and the current.
2. If the input voltage changes when you change the coil connections, you also need to measure the power with the input voltage held constant, otherwise you'll be having an unknown power dissipation in the variac. You need to readjust the variac to keep the voltage constant and then measure the power as above.
Please post your results because I'm working on the theory side of this.Thanks!
Quote from: aether22 on March 20, 2008, 05:34:22 AM
I have never said such a thing before and don't say such things lightly, I am prone to discounting such accusations as they retain a plausible deniability factor.
But never the less based on things said in PM I very much feel polarbreeze is a spook.
I know they exist but what I can never figure out is who pays for them, do you think they just pass that hat around and do it as a group or does one oil company, intelligence agency etc... send their own people based on their own criteria and let the others reap the benefit of a continued status quo.
I think that Polarbreeze has a very healthy dose of a skepticism, but I don't think he has malicious intents. His posts provide for a healthy perspective and as such they should be tolerated.
If you can have him say: "Wow it works" then you are doing something right for sure.
Just relax and ignore the noise :D
Thane seems to be on something, especially with his openness in regards to the setup.
Whatever his intent, he is the author of his own problems on this thread, that's for sure. Couldn't alienate himself much more if he tried.
well what can i say
vince's setup and observations....
proves that there is more than just bemf at play here as i first thought hummmmm....
so how about some kind of magnetic feed back loop ....
well i drew a pic of my turbine useing the postivite feedback loop ..... concept thus allowing acceleration after starting
i have the same drawing with a starter motor it can be found in my turbine thred in half baked
here is the link for it http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1977.165.html
ist
or ground loop through your body ??
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 08:19:09 AM
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 20, 2008, 06:12:56 AM
....I use a variac to control the voltage,the results are the same as your set up
run adjust variac to get a stable speed,short coil,wheel speeds up,open coil wheel slows down.
So far so good. Here are the measurements needed to quantify the effect:
1. What is the power input in each of those cases? To calculate it you need to measure the voltage, the current and also take account of the phase difference between the voltage and the current.
2. If the input voltage changes when you change the coil connections, you also need to measure the power with the input voltage held constant, otherwise you'll be having an unknown power dissipation in the variac. You need to readjust the variac to keep the voltage constant and then measure the power as above.
Please post your results because I'm working on the theory side of this.Thanks!
FYI - YOU ALREADY HAVE THIS INFORMATION - POLAR.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 01:03:35 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 08:19:09 AM
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 20, 2008, 06:12:56 AM
....I use a variac to control the voltage,the results are the same as your set up
run adjust variac to get a stable speed,short coil,wheel speeds up,open coil wheel slows down.
So far so good. Here are the measurements needed to quantify the effect:
1. What is the power input in each of those cases? To calculate it you need to measure the voltage, the current and also take account of the phase difference between the voltage and the current.
2. If the input voltage changes when you change the coil connections, you also need to measure the power with the input voltage held constant, otherwise you'll be having an unknown power dissipation in the variac. You need to readjust the variac to keep the voltage constant and then measure the power as above.
Please post your results because I'm working on the theory side of this.Thanks!
FYI - YOU ALREADY HAVE THIS INFORMATION - POLAR.
Thane, I do not have this information for Vince's experiment AFAIK but if it's posted here somewhere and I've missed it I'd appreciate your pointing me to it. Thanks.
PB
Quote from: innovation_station on March 20, 2008, 11:02:11 AM
well what can i say
vince's setup and observations.... proves that there is more than just bemf at play here as i first thought hummmmm.... so how about some kind of magnetic feed back loop ....
well i drew a pic of my turbine useing the postivite feedback loop ..... concept thus allowing acceleration after starting this pic is a crank start i also have the same drawing with a starter motor it can be found in my turbine thred in half baked here is the link for it http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1977.165.html
enjoy
ist
IST,
I AM SENDING SOME
MIB's OVER TO YOUR HOUSE RIGHT NOW!
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 20, 2008, 05:34:22 AM
I have never said such a thing before and don't say such things lightly, I am prone to discounting such accusations as they retain a plausible deniability factor.
But never the less based on things said in PM I very much feel polarbreeze is a spook.
I know they exist but what I can never figure out is who pays for them, do you think they just pass that hat around and do it as a group or does one oil company, intelligence agency etc... send their own people based on their own criteria and let the others reap the benefit of a continued status quo.
don't worry about the bear - the hat will protect you... that and the second ammendment...
Thane, thanks for the Kinectrics data. Their report (April 2007) concludes that it is not possible to test the back-emf theory on this setup because the motor cannot run anywhere close to its rated speed (3600rpm) due to overheating - largely because at the very low operating speed (300rpm to 1000rpm) the starter capacitor stays in circuit, which forces the current up to 2x to 3x the rated current.
Kinectrics proposed a very clean solution to that problem, which is to use instead a 220V, 300rpm motor which is capable of running all the tests under real-life conditions without the starter capacitor problem and without overheating. Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?
I HAVE POSTED A GRAPH OF THE KINECTRICS TEST DATA FOR A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR VS THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4I9C6GVU
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE LAB DATA THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR SLOWS UNDER LOAD ENENTUALLY TO A DEAD STOP AND THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM ACCELERATES BEYOND SAFE LIMITS.
THE 1 K LOAD REDUCES THE CURRENT MAGNITUDE IN THE COIL WHICH REDUCES THE COIL'S INDUCED MMF's AND REDUCES ACCELERATION RATE.
THE LIME GREEN GRAPH IS OUR NEW 6 POLE ROTOR AND 8 POLE COIL CONFIGURATION WHICH ACCELERATES QUICKER DUE TO LESS ROTOR MASS AND INCREASED GENERATOR BACK EMF INDUCED MMF's.
Thane
p.s.
Kinectrics Labs is a privately owned research facility formerly of Ontario Hydro.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 04:27:05 PM
Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?
THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
I HAVE ENOUGH OF MY OWN - NOW THAT THE WORD IS OUT BETWEEN
JUST(sleepwith)ME AND I.
Thane
Le graph:
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 05:33:46 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 04:27:05 PM
Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?
THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
...
Thane
As you submitted your invention to them for testing for a third party opinion, I'd assumed you'd chosen Kinectrics as a trusted authority on the subject. So when they found basic problems with your experimental setup and offered a clear and simple solution so you could do a truly objective test, I'm surprised that you didn't at least try out their recommendation. Why is that?
Quote from: JustMe on March 20, 2008, 05:56:45 PM
Le graph:
The graph illustrates the issue that Kinectrics found. The rated rpm of the motor is 3600rpm. All the measurements on the graph are made at very slow speeds (300 - 1000), where the starting capacitor is still in circuit and the current consumption is 2x to 3x what it should be under rated conditions. Their recommendation was to operate the motor at its rated operating conditions, which would then allow an objective assessment of the effect of the back-EMF. The graph is very good - it's just that it needs to be re-done under proper operating conditions.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 05:59:31 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 05:33:46 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 04:27:05 PM
Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?
THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
...
Thane
As you submitted your invention to them for testing for a third party opinion, I'd assumed you'd chosen Kinectrics as a trusted authority on the subject. So when they found basic problems with your experimental setup and offered a clear and simple solution so you could do a truly objective test, I'm surprised that you didn't at least try out their recommendation. Why is that?
WHO SAID I DIDN'T?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 06:06:39 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 20, 2008, 05:56:45 PM
Le graph:
Their recommendation was to operate the motor at its rated operating conditions, which would then allow an objective assessment of the effect of the back-EMF. The graph is very good - it's just that it needs to be re-done under proper operating conditions.
MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE "FACTS" OF ANY
REPORT ARE THE MEANING WE ATTRIBUTE TO THOSE FACTS. IT IS CRUCIAL, THEREFORE TO BE AWARE NOT ONLY OF
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON OUR PERCEPTION - THE INHERENT BIASES IN INFORMATION SOURCES SUCH AS EDUCATION ETC. BUT ALSO OUR
INTERNAL TENDENCIES.
OUR BASIC NATURES HAVE ENOURMOUS EFFECT ON HOW WE SEE THINGS.
THAT BEING SAID - WHEN YOU COME TO THE LAB (
THIS IS YOUR 4TH INVITATION BTW)
YOU CAN RUN THE SYSTEM UP TO
3500 RPM AND COLLECT THE ALL DATA REQUIRED TO SATISFY YOUR BASIC NATURE, EXTERNAL INFLUENCES, AND PERCEPTINS - ASSUMING YOU HAVE ANYTHING LEFT TO HANG YOU BASIC
ASSESSMENT ON.
I DOUBT LUC AND I WILL BE IN THE ROOM WITH YOU HOWEVER.
ALL JOKING ASIDE - THE GRAPH SHOWS A
POSITIVE TREND WHICH WE ARE DOING OUR BEST TO EXPLOIT FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT.
Thane
PB another invite ???? how do you resist?? RESEARCH !!!!! Chet
First I suggest no one actually talk to PB, utter waste of time, he's a spook and if not then he's got some kind of problem, at any rate you are talking to a brick wall. (IF he isn't a dishonest skeptic or a spook then I have nothing against him and would not wish to insult him but he'd still be about as receptive as a Brick wall)
As for the laminated steel speeding it up, of course it would, if you recall I made a post about my realization that in open magnetic circuits where flux leaves the core over it's length strong eddy currents circulate in a single laminate which are entirely absent in a correctly designed closed magnetic flux path.
In other words the laminate is still a short circuit.
Thane, just to verify it is as we speak "In the mail" right?
I'd also note that if you can tell me what I'd need to prepare first I should be able to get it up and running sooner.
At any rate I will be out of town for about a week from the 3rd of April.
1: Did you include a coupler? (I guess you would have since initially you were also going to send the motor also)
2: I guess I need to add (a pair of?) of bearings to the shaft (and stand) to hold it in place, then just place my stator coil/s around the rotor and go?
So I need x2 half inch (ID) bearings for the shaft?
Basically if you can detail anything I might need to buy or build that I can do before it arrives that would be appreciated, want to get experimentation done before my trip, if you are too busy to detail such that's cool too, you have helped me more than I would have ever imagined already and I intend to make you very glad you have.
Also do you know how great the gap between steel shaft pieces can be before the effect goes away? Is light touching strongly encouraged or is a very tiny sub millimeter gap Ok? (I suppose since a plexiglass rotor works it must be Ok?)
Thanks, Oh and :)
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 06:40:20 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 05:59:31 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 05:33:46 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 20, 2008, 04:27:05 PM
Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?
THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
...
Thane
As you submitted your invention to them for testing for a third party opinion, I'd assumed you'd chosen Kinectrics as a trusted authority on the subject. So when they found basic problems with your experimental setup and offered a clear and simple solution so you could do a truly objective test, I'm surprised that you didn't at least try out their recommendation. Why is that?
WHO SAID I DIDN'T?
You. And if you did, why do you choose not to publish the results?
Quote from: OilBarren on March 20, 2008, 07:03:47 PM
MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE "FACTS" OF ANY REPORT ARE THE MEANING WE ATTRIBUTE TO THOSE FACTS. IT IS CRUCIAL, THEREFORE TO BE AWARE NOT ONLY OF EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON OUR PERCEPTION - THE INHERENT BIASES IN INFORMATION SOURCES SUCH AS EDUCATION ETC. BUT ALSO OUR INTERNAL TENDENCIES.
I completely agree, Thane. That's why I think it's so important to draw our conclusions from objective measurements and results - because they are free of "external influences on our perception" and "internal tendencies".
Thane, just to verify it is as we speak "In the mail" right?
I'd also note that if you can tell me what I'd need to prepare first I should be able to get it up and running sooner.
At any rate I will be out of town for about a week from the 3rd of April.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE - BUT IN ADDITION TO THE ROTOR YOU WILL NEED:
A. MOTOR W/ 1/2 INCH ARBOR
B. A GENERATING COIL
C. A MULTIMETER OR 2
D. A VARIAC OR FAN SPEED CONTROL
1: Did you include a coupler? (I guess you would have since initially you were also going to send the motor also)
NO I DID NOT YOU CAN MAKE YOUR OWN OUT OF PVC PIPE OR COPPER ETC.
2: I guess I need to add (a pair of?) of bearings to the shaft (and stand) to hold it in place, then just place my stator coil/s around the rotor and go?
OR JUST PUT THE ROTOR DIRECTLY ON THE MOTOR AS powerunlimited DID.
YOU ONLY NEED ONE STATOR COIL TO GET THE EFFECT.
So I need x2 half inch (ID) bearings for the shaft?
THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING
Basically if you can detail anything I might need to buy or build that I can do before it arrives that would be appreciated, want to get experimentation done before my trip, if you are too busy to detail such that's cool too, you have helped me more than I would have ever imagined already and I intend to make you very glad you have.
PUT ME IN YOUR WILL - I'LL TAKE THE 10,000 ACRE SHEEP FARM, THANKS
Also do you know how great the gap between steel shaft pieces can be before the effect goes away? Is light touching strongly encouraged or is a very tiny sub millimeter gap Ok? (I suppose since a plexiglass rotor works it must be Ok?)
YOU WILL HAVE TO EXPERIMENT AND FIND THE ONE THAT SUITS YOUR SETUP BEST.
Thanks, Oh and :)
[/quote]
Quote from: aether22 on March 20, 2008, 10:39:38 PM
First I suggest no one actually talk to PB, utter waste of time, he's a spook and if not then he's got some kind of problem, at any rate you are talking to a brick wall. (IF he isn't a dishonest skeptic or a spook then I have nothing against him and would not wish to insult him but he'd still be about as receptive as a Brick wall)
I THINK
PB IS ACTUALLY MY 85 YEAR OLD NEIGHBOUR -
MRS. FLATBOTTOM? THAT'S WHY SHE WON'T COME TO THE LAB.
Thane
I completely agree, Thane. That's why I think it's so important to draw our conclusions from objective measurements and results - because they are free of "external influences on our perception" and "internal tendencies". PB
YOU MEAN LIKE SUGGESTING THE SYSTEM MUST RUN AT 3500 RPM TO OBSERVE ACCELERATION BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT CANNOT BE OBSERVED (EVEN THOUGH MAGNETS ARE FLYING OFF THE ROTOR)?
OR THAT THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAUSES ACCELERATION BUT ONLY AFTER THE COILS ARE SHORTED (BUT NOT BEFORE)?
OR THAT THE STARTING CAPACITOR WAITS UNTIL THE COILS ARE SHORTED BEFORE CAUSING ACCELERATION?
OR THAT EVEN THOUGH THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAN BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND THE EFFECT STILL REMAINS - IT STILL IS THE CAPACITOR THAT CAUSES THE EFFECTS?
THE SPLIT-PHASE INDUCTION MOTOR (DEMO PART 4 - WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A STARTING CAPACITOR) HAS BEEN ACCELERATED UP TO IT'S NAMEPLATE SPEED OF 1740 RPM USING THE GENERATOR COILS.
THE BEST ONE:
OR THAT A MOTOR THAT IS OPPERATING AT ITS MAXIMUM SPEED AS DICTATED BY THE LINE FREQUENCY - WILL SOMEHOW ACCELERATE BEYOND THIS MAXIMUM SPEED SO THAT THE SLIP ANGLE BETWEEN THE ROTOR AND STATOR IS NOW LESS THAN ZERO?
PB - I AM STARTING TO GET THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU ARE SIMPLY A SNAKE IN THE GRASS HERE TO DRAIN "ENERGY" AND ENTHUSIASM FROM THIS THREAD - THE INFORMATION YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IS SIMPLY BEYOND COMPREHENSION.
Thane
Quote from: ramset on March 20, 2008, 07:55:10 PM
PB another invite ???? how do you resist?? RESEARCH !!!!! Chet
DEAR ALL,
I HAVE POSTED THE FOLLOWING LETTER ON A
CHEVRON SPONSORED ENERGY WEBSITE. http://www.willyoujoinus.com/discussion/
IT WILL TAKE ABOUT 24 HOURS TO BE POSTED.
Thane
New Electric Generator Technology & NASA AbstractDear will you join us,
Please allow me to introduce you to our technology to you all. It is currently being researched at the University of Ottawa and reviewed by NASA. More layman friendly information can be found on the links below.
In a nutshell our electric generator causes the prime mover (induction motor) to accelerate under load. This appears to be in conflict with several laws of physics.
We are currently installing our generator technology into an electric vehicle and should have an automobile on the road by May or June.
http://keyrecords.com/designers.html
www.thestar.com/Business/article/300042
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=31887883-be00-4d3c-8763-d96564794cae
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogLeKTlLy5E
NASA AbstractThe objectives of the Potential Difference Inc. Perepiteia Generator study are to determine what effects can be obtained by:
Magnetically coupling a salient pole electric generator with an induction motor (prime mover) such that the generator?s load current and corresponding Back EMF induced magnetic fields (according to Lenz?s Law) are coupled directly to the induction motor?s rotor.
The study is currently being undertaken at the University of Ottawa under the supervision of Dr. Riadh Habash which includes efficiency calculations and observations for the prototype when operating in a ?conventional generator? mode.
Direct comparisons have be made between the Conventional Generator which decelerates the prime mover under load according the Law of Conservation of Energy and the Magnetically Coupled Generator application which accelerates the induction motor-prime mover under load.
To date it has been quantifiably observed that magnetically coupling the Salient Pole Generator to the induction motor has immediate benefits in providing an efficiency-enhancing positive feedback loop such that the generator load causes induction motor acceleration which is dependant upon load magnitude, i.e. increasing the load increases the induction motor?s acceleration (decreasing stator current draw from the source) and increasing the generator output power across the load as well.
The significance of the results suggest that the efficiency of electricity generation can be significantly improved in electric vehicles or in conventional electric generators where different prime movers are employed.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 08:32:22 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 20, 2008, 10:39:38 PM
First I suggest no one actually talk to PB, utter waste of time, he's a spook and if not then he's got some kind of problem, at any rate you are talking to a brick wall. (IF he isn't a dishonest skeptic or a spook then I have nothing against him and would not wish to insult him but he'd still be about as receptive as a Brick wall)
I THINK PB IS ACTUALLY MY 85 YEAR OLD NEIGHBOUR - MRS. FLATBOTTOM? THAT'S WHY SHE WON'T COME TO THE LAB.
Thane
Now I know where you live :)
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 08:56:40 AM
I completely agree, Thane. That's why I think it's so important to draw our conclusions from objective measurements and results - because they are free of "external influences on our perception" and "internal tendencies". PB
PB - I AM STARTING TO GET THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU ARE SIMPLY A SNAKE IN THE GRASS HERE TO DRAIN "ENERGY" AND ENTHUSIASM FROM THIS THREAD - THE INFORMATION YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IS SIMPLY BEYOND COMPREHENSION.
Thane
I don't dispute any of your observations. I am not ignoring any of that information. The issue, though, is to figure out what it means - what it proves or suggests. Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. This does NOT demonstrate that there is any power gain, or even suggest that there is. What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing.
"I don't dispute any of your observations. I am not ignoring any of that information. The issue, though, is to figure out what it means - what it proves or suggests. Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. This does NOT demonstrate that there is any power gain, or even suggest that there is. What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing." PB
SO THE INCREASING POWER GAIN ACROSS THE 1 K LOAD AS THE SYSTEM SPEED INCREASES HAS NO EFFECT IN YOUR BRAIN THEN?
ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.
THERE IS AN INCREASING OUTPUT POWER ACROSS THE LOAD WITH A CORRESPONDING DECREASING INPUT MOTOR REQUIREMENT WHICH FOR SOME REASON YOU FAIL TO SEE?
INDEED THERE IS SOMETHING MISSING MY MAN, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXPERIMENT.
Thane
Hi Thane,
It sounds like your NASA trip is still on, is that correct?
I hope so! :)
Aaron
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 08:56:40 AM
I completely agree, Thane. That's why I think it's so important to draw our conclusions from objective measurements and results - because they are free of "external influences on our perception" and "internal tendencies". PB
PB - I AM STARTING TO GET THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU ARE SIMPLY A SNAKE IN THE GRASS HERE TO DRAIN "ENERGY" AND ENTHUSIASM FROM THIS THREAD - THE INFORMATION YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IS SIMPLY BEYOND COMPREHENSION.
Thane
I don't dispute any of your observations. I am not ignoring any of that information. The issue, though, is to figure out what it means - what it proves or suggests. Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. This does NOT demonstrate that there is any power gain, or even suggest that there is. What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing.
@PB
In your reply to me, about my testing of Thane's Bi-Toroid generator you said 'Your open vs loaded secondary doesn't do it because it's not an independent external mechanical load' I was using a resistor as a load. Well a load can be a resistor, a light, a electic motor, etc, or a load of crap(PB). But since you didn't understand basic electronic testing, I didn't think it would be worth the effort to explain it to you.
I also have an issue with you making so many half truth statements to make it seem like you know what you are talking about. Two just from above follow.
Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. Because the motor is accelerating you have to say 'An acceleration in speed is not the same thing as power' to be the whole truth. But then only an idiot would say that. Also, it does require power to maintain a given speed unless you're in space and there are no other forces at work.
There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. You would need to add 'speeds up while reducing input power and exceeding the maximum motor rpm'. A thousand ways???? Here again unless you're in space it doesn't happen. Since you so easily know a thousand, can you enlighten us with just 1% of the cases?
Also, would you please quit bringing up the obivious on phase difference in the transformer type generators. In the beginning of this blog Thane brought up that we needed a good watt meter for testing his devices. I'll save you the trouble of researching wattmeter, it gives you the actual watts used correcting for phase difference. Also, those that cannot afford a good wattmeter, can just put a heavy load on the secondaries and the phase difference will be nearly zero.
@All,
The weirdest thing about PB is he never gets upset when informed of his ignorance or lack of common sense. Anyone who actually believes that they are contributing something useful to this forum would have went ballistic by now. Apparently it is not his true intention to contribute only to aggravate.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 11:12:19 AM
"...What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing."[/b] PB
...ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.
That is NOT a power gain, Thane. Your experimental setup was initially converting its ENTIRE input power (619W) to HEAT. When you changed the configuration, it was then converting only 520W to heat. So what happened was that you're now producing nearly 100W less heat. This is NOT any kind of a power gain. In both cases, you were converting 100% of the power into heat. In the first case, 619W of electrical input made 619W of heat; in the second case, 520W of electrical input made 520W of heat.
Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2008, 01:06:39 PM
@PB
In your reply to me, about my testing of Thane's Bi-Toroid generator you said 'Your open vs loaded secondary doesn't do it because it's not an independent external mechanical load' I was using a resistor as a load.
That's exactly my point, Larry. The whole setup is actually a convoluted way of turning electrical power input into heat. Using a resistor as a load is just another way of making heat. I was very specific - there was no MECHANICAL load in that setup (a resistor is NOT a mechanical load). There was zero mechanical power output in any of the scenarios. In all cases, the setup was simply converting 100% of the electrical power input into heat.
The purpose of an electric motor is to convert electrical power input into mechanical power output. If there is no mechanical power output, the efficiency of that machine is 0%. If you disagree with me, please post any results from any of the tests that show a non-zero mechanical power output, regardless of what the electrical power input is.
Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2008, 01:06:39 PM
@All,
The weirdest thing about PB is he never gets upset when informed of his ignorance or lack of common sense. Anyone who actually believes that they are contributing something useful to this forum would have went ballistic by now.
He sends snipey little passive agressive PMs instead, ostensibly so he can keep the public discussion
full of thinly disguised contempt objective.
Quote from: bitbeam on March 21, 2008, 12:22:06 PM
Hi Thane,
It sounds like your NASA trip is still on, is that correct?
I hope so! :)
Aaron
YES IT IS STILL ON - WHY DO YOU WANT TO COME ALONG?
ACTUALLY IT MIGHT BE
OFF IF PB WORKS THERE - HE'LL NEVER LET ME IN.
LET ME GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
POLAR - DO YOU WORK FOR NASA BY ANY CHANCE?
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 01:49:21 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 11:12:19 AM
"...What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing."[/b] PB
...ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.
That is NOT a power gain, Thane. Your experimental setup was initially converting its ENTIRE input power (619W) to HEAT. When you changed the configuration, it was then converting only 520W to heat. So what happened was that you're now producing nearly 100W less heat. This is NOT any kind of a power gain. In both cases, you were converting 100% of the power into heat. In the first case, 619W of electrical input made 619W of heat; in the second case, 520W of electrical input made 520W of heat.
FINE HAVE IT YOUR WAY THEN - WE ARE ACCELERATING THE SYSTEM AND GENERATING ADDITIONAL POWER ACROSS A 1 K LOAD WITH 100 W LESS HEAT SIMPLY BY MAGNETICALLY COUPLING THE GENERATOR TO THE MOTOR.
ENGINEERING ENHANCEMENTS PROVIDE THE ROUGHLY SAME OUTPUT POWER ACROSS THE 1 K LOAD WITH 421 W LESS HEAT.
THAT'S A POWER GAIN (SAVINGS) OF 421 W + LOAD POWER DISSIPATION IN THE MECHANICALLY COUPLED SYSTEM OVER THE CONVENTIONAL GENERATING SYSTEM.
UPCOMING ENHANCEMENTS IN THE WORKS WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL POWER GAINS, ENERGY SAVINGS, HEAT LOSS REDUCTIONS ETC, ETC.
Thane
PB this is your chance!! 15 minutes in the spotlite !! to rub elbows with the inventors!! to help change the world!! and you only have to drive 15 minutes!! Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 21, 2008, 03:32:35 PM
PB this is your chance!! 15 minutes in the spotlite !! to rub elbows with the inventors!! to help change the world!! and you only have to drive 15 minutes!! Chet
Or, just get HERSELF out of the computer chair and walk HER FLATBOTTOM ass next door?
:D :D ;)
PS: Thane, apologies to your neighbor if she isn't PB?
I'm sure she's got a very nice... naw, better not go there! ;)
-Mark
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 01:49:21 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 11:12:19 AM
"...What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing."[/b] PB
...ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.
That is NOT a power gain, Thane. Your experimental setup was initially converting its ENTIRE input power (619W) to HEAT. When you changed the configuration, it was then converting only 520W to heat. So what happened was that you're now producing nearly 100W less heat. This is NOT any kind of a power gain. In both cases, you were converting 100% of the power into heat. In the first case, 619W of electrical input made 619W of heat; in the second case, 520W of electrical input made 520W of heat.
@PB,
Well, I see where Thane agreed with you and I'm sure he's very sincere, allthough I never saw him sweating from all that heat in any of the demo's.
But I'd like to try to understand your statement.
First we have a rotor with large Neo's spinning next to iron core coils. When the rotor is not magnetically connected to the motor and the coils are shorted the rotor stops. I use to think that was because of the large amount of mechanical work needed to pass these charged coils. Are you saying that it does not take mechanical work only heat?
Then with magnetically coupled rotor the power goes down and rotor speeds up. I'm not sure exactly why it sped up but the rotor with large Neo's is still spinning next to a charged coil and you would normally think, that would require even more mechanical work to accomplish that speed up. Now this is where I'm really confused, we loss 100W of heat. Now that we have less heat why did the motor speed up?
Also I'd like to know how all the observable mechanically work is being done by heat.
Nevermind, I got it!
@Thane,
You rascal, you should be ashamed for hidding a Stirling engine in your device.
Polar's 97 post point seems to be that at some stage Thane is going to have to compare this motor to something other than itself. That Thane's generator set up is going to have to do some useful work as effectively and more efficiently than an existing technology that serves purpose x. All so self evident it hardly justifies a single mention, let alone the endless tedium.
Well, I see where Thane agreed with you and I'm sure he's very sincere, allthough I never saw him sweating from all that heat in any of the demo's.
ACTUALLY I WAS JUST JOKING AROUND WITH PB WHO IS SKIRTING THE REAL ISSUES AS PER USUAL.
But I'd like to try to understand your statement.
First we have a rotor with large Neo's spinning next to iron core coils. When the rotor is not magnetically connected to the motor and the coils are shorted the rotor stops.
EXACTLY
I use to think that was because of the large amount of mechanical work needed to pass these charged coils. Are you saying that it does not take mechanical work only heat?
THE MOTOR HEATS UP TRYING TO DO THE WORK - WHICH IS EXCESSIVE.
Then with magnetically coupled rotor the power goes down and rotor speeds up.
YES
I'm not sure exactly why it sped up but the rotor with large Neo's is still spinning next to a charged coil and you would normally think, that would require even more mechanical work to accomplish that speed up.
IT SPEEDS UP BECAUSE THE GENERATOR COILS INDUCE BACK EMF MMF's WHICH ARE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TO THE MOTOR'S ROTOR.
THIS IS THE ENTIRE POINT THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, LENZ'S LAW AND THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE AND OTHER PHYSICS LAWS ALL SAY IT SHOULD REQUIRE MORE WORK - BUT IT DOES NOT.
Now this is where I'm really confused, we loss 100W of heat. Now that we have less heat why did the motor speed up?
AGAIN I WAS KIND OF JOKING BUT IT TAKES ENERGY TO PRODUCE HEAT SO LESS HEAT MEANS LESS INPUT ENERGY - WHICH STILL AMOUNTS TO A SAVINGS OR GAIN OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.
Also I'd like to know how all the observable mechanically work is being done by heat.
THE ONLY HEAT HERE IS POLARBREEZE'S HOT AIR...
AND THE FRICTION HE CREATES HELPING US ALL WORK ON BEING MORE PATIENT.
Nevermind, I got it!
@Thane,
You rascal, you should be ashamed for hidding a Stirling engine in your device.
FORGET THE STERLING ENGINE WE HID LITHIUM BATTERIES INSTEAD.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 21, 2008, 05:24:32 PM
Polar's 97 post point seems to be that at some stage Thane is going to have to compare this motor to something other than itself. That Thane's generator set up is going to have to do some useful work as effectively and more efficiently than an existing technology that serves purpose x. All so self evident it hardly justifies a single mention, let alone the endless tedium.
YOU MEAN LIKE IN AN ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY?
JUSTME IF YOU LIVED IN CARP - ENDLESS TEDIUM WOULD BE THE HIGH POINT OF YOUR DAY.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 02:34:24 PM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 21, 2008, 12:22:06 PM
Hi Thane,
It sounds like your NASA trip is still on, is that correct?
I hope so! :)
Aaron
YES IT IS STILL ON - WHY DO YOU WANT TO COME ALONG?
ACTUALLY IT MIGHT BE OFF IF PB WORKS THERE - HE'LL NEVER LET ME IN.
LET ME GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.
POLAR - DO YOU WORK FOR NASA BY ANY CHANCE?
Thane
Hi Thane,
That's great news! :)
Do you have any details yet on time and place?
Aaron
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 05:32:44 PM
YOU MEAN LIKE IN AN ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY?
JUSTME IF YOU LIVED IN CARP - ENDLESS TEDIUM WOULD BE THE HIGH POINT OF YOUR DAY.
Thane
Yes, like an electric dune buggy. Didn't want to say something self evident in a post about self evidence.
I truly hope you succeed.
Quote from: JustMe on March 21, 2008, 05:43:56 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 05:32:44 PM
YOU MEAN LIKE IN AN ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY?
JUSTME IF YOU LIVED IN CARP - ENDLESS TEDIUM WOULD BE THE HIGH POINT OF YOUR DAY.
Thane
Yes, like an electric dune buggy. Didn't want to say something self evident in a post about self evidence.
I truly hope you succeed.
I THINK THAT IS SELF EVIDENT.
Thanks
Thane
p.s.
now I wonder if we can "resurrect" old PB from the dark side?
Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2008, 04:39:35 PM
But I'd like to try to understand your statement.
First we have a rotor with large Neo's spinning next to iron core coils. When the rotor is not magnetically connected to the motor and the coils are shorted the rotor stops. I use to think that was because of the large amount of mechanical work needed to pass these charged coils. Are you saying that it does not take mechanical work only heat?
Then with magnetically coupled rotor the power goes down and rotor speeds up. I'm not sure exactly why it sped up but the rotor with large Neo's is still spinning next to a charged coil and you would normally think, that would require even more mechanical work to accomplish that speed up. Now this is where I'm really confused, we loss 100W of heat. Now that we have less heat why did the motor speed up?
Also I'd like to know how all the observable mechanically work is being done by heat.
No, you've got it kind of backwards. Here?s a thought-experiment that might help to explain it better:
Sit in your car with one foot on the gas and the other foot on the brake. You can make the car go along at a constant speed by adjusting your foot pressure just right. Now, ease off your brake foot just a bit. The car will accelerate; then ease off on the gas just a bit until you?re at a new constant (higher) speed.
Result: the car is going faster and it?s using less gas. The reason it?s using less gas is that less heat is being dissipated in the brake.
This is what?s happening in Thane?s system. The magnet/coil system is analogous to the brake; and the electrical input to the motor is analogous to the gas.
Hope that helps.
THE ONLY REAL AND TRUTHFUL DIFFERENCE IS WHEN YOU ADD A 3" STEEL BAR BETWEEN THE MOTOR AND THE BRAKE - THE BRAKE NOW BECOMES A MOTOR AND THE MOTOR IS STILL A MOTOR.
SO NOW YOU HAVE 2 MOTORS AND NO BRAKES UNLESS OF COURSE YOU REMOVE THAT MAGIC STEEL BAR THEN YOU HAVE YOUR BRAKES BACK.
IT'S NOT WHAT PEOPLE SAY THAT IS IMPORTANT - BUT RATHER WHAT THEY DON'T.
YOU HAVE TO READ BETWEEN THE LIES.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 06:15:43 PM
Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2008, 04:39:35 PM
But I'd like to try to understand your statement.
First we have a rotor with large Neo's spinning next to iron core coils. When the rotor is not magnetically connected to the motor and the coils are shorted the rotor stops. I use to think that was because of the large amount of mechanical work needed to pass these charged coils. Are you saying that it does not take mechanical work only heat?
Then with magnetically coupled rotor the power goes down and rotor speeds up. I'm not sure exactly why it sped up but the rotor with large Neo's is still spinning next to a charged coil and you would normally think, that would require even more mechanical work to accomplish that speed up. Now this is where I'm really confused, we loss 100W of heat. Now that we have less heat why did the motor speed up?
Also I'd like to know how all the observable mechanically work is being done by heat.
No, you've got it kind of backwards. HereÃ,’s a thought-experiment that might help to explain it better:
Sit in your car with one foot on the gas and the other foot on the brake. You can make the car go along at a constant speed by adjusting your foot pressure just right. Now, ease off your brake foot just a bit. The car will accelerate; then ease off on the gas just a bit until youÃ,’re at a new constant (higher) speed.
Result: the car is going faster and itÃ,’s using less gas. The reason itÃ,’s using less gas is that less heat is being dissipated in the brake.
This is whatÃ,’s happening in ThaneÃ,’s system. The magnet/coil system is analogous to the brake; and the electrical input to the motor is analogous to the gas.
Hope that helps.
Bravo PB,
You are certainly one of the greatest example of a overenergy crusher master that I have seen. You have been paid to destroy any belief in Thane's process. It doesn't matter what truth is thrown at you, you will deflect and try to create a new one. My email to you was only an attempt to get you to understand known physics in the hope that you were not such an evil individual. But as usual you change the subject. You would burn up in the light of true science. Quit bothering Thane!
No regards,
LarryC
"Bravo PB,
You are certainly one of the greatest example of a overenergy crusher master that I have seen. You have been paid to destroy any belief in Thane's process. It doesn't matter what truth is thrown at you, you will deflect and try to create a new one. My email to you was only an attempt to get you to understand known physics in the hope that you were not such an evil individual. But as usual you change the subject. You would burn up in the light of true science. Quit bothering Thane!
No regards,
LarryC"
DEAR LARRYC,
I AM HERE OF MY OWN FREE WILL AS WE ALL ARE.
IT IS A GOOD COMPLIMENT TO PB SINCE I ENJOY SPARRING WITH HIM.
MOST WHO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS THREAD HAVE ENOUGH INTELLIGENCE TO FORMULATE THEIR OWN OPINIONS ? REGARDLESS OF WHAT ANYONE SAYS ? INCLUDING WHAT I SAY. IN FACT I WOULD PREFER IF NO ONE BELIEVED ME AND DID IT ALL FOR THEMSELVES. BUT NOT EVERYONE HAS THAT LUXURY.
THE REALLY GREAT THING (AND THE REASON I STAY) IS SO PEOPLE CAN REPLICATE THE TECHNOLOGY ON THEIR OWN ? WHICH I BELIEVE HAS BEEN DONE TWICE SO FAR?
SO THIS THREAD IS A GREAT SUCCESS!
Thane
@Thane,
Got it.
Regards,
LarryC
PB SEE !!! almost like another invite I kinda like PB he's thick as a post tuff stuff OLD school But then again its nice to see an inventor with such thick skin and great intentions Chet
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 06:29:24 PM
THE ONLY REAL AND TRUTHFUL DIFFERENCE IS WHEN YOU ADD A 3" STEEL BAR
BETWEEN THE MOTOR AND THE BRAKE
That's certainly an ingenious twist, Thane. Of course, it doesn't alter the fact that ALL the input power is being turned into heat.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 07:31:43 PM
DEAR LARRYC,
I AM HERE OF MY OWN FREE WILL AS WE ALL ARE.
IT IS A GOOD COMPLIMENT TO PB SINCE I ENJOY SPARRING WITH HIM.
MOST WHO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS THREAD HAVE ENOUGH INTELLIGENCE TO FORMULATE THEIR OWN OPINIONS...
Thane
Well said, Thane - I enjoy the sport too!
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 05:28:09 PM
THIS IS THE ENTIRE POINT THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, LENZ'S LAW AND THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE AND OTHER PHYSICS LAWS ALL SAY IT SHOULD REQUIRE MORE WORK - BUT IT DOES NOT.
But it's not a mystery in the example of the car/brake/gas so why is it such a mystery in this case? The two situations are exactly analogous...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 02:34:24 PM
POLAR - DO YOU WORK FOR NASA BY ANY CHANCE?
Thane
Is that North American Skeptics Association? :)
LOOK at PB he got a promotion sporting another star!!!
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 07:49:37 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 06:29:24 PM
THE ONLY REAL AND TRUTHFUL DIFFERENCE IS WHEN YOU ADD A 3" STEEL BAR
BETWEEN THE MOTOR AND THE BRAKE
Of course, it doesn't alter the fact that ALL the input power is being turned into heat.
PB: I get it, and the power REQUIRED to keep the motor AND generator turning at several hundred RPMs against bearing friction, air turbulence, etc. must be coming from where? Yeah, the hidden Sterling engine, lithium batteries, and all the other things that Thane is hiding in this thing.
-Mark
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 08:28:09 AM
Thane, just to verify it is as we speak "In the mail" right?
I'd also note that if you can tell me what I'd need to prepare first I should be able to get it up and running sooner.
At any rate I will be out of town for about a week from the 3rd of April.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE - BUT IN ADDITION TO THE ROTOR YOU WILL NEED:
A. MOTOR W/ 1/2 INCH ARBOR
B. A GENERATING COIL
C. A MULTIMETER OR 2
D. A VARIAC OR FAN SPEED CONTROL
1: Did you include a coupler? (I guess you would have since initially you were also going to send the motor also)
NO I DID NOT YOU CAN MAKE YOUR OWN OUT OF PVC PIPE OR COPPER ETC.
2: I guess I need to add (a pair of?) of bearings to the shaft (and stand) to hold it in place, then just place my stator coil/s around the rotor and go?
OR JUST PUT THE ROTOR DIRECTLY ON THE MOTOR AS powerunlimited DID.
YOU ONLY NEED ONE STATOR COIL TO GET THE EFFECT.
So I need x2 half inch (ID) bearings for the shaft?
THAT GOES WITHOUT SAYING
Basically if you can detail anything I might need to buy or build that I can do before it arrives that would be appreciated, want to get experimentation done before my trip, if you are too busy to detail such that's cool too, you have helped me more than I would have ever imagined already and I intend to make you very glad you have.
PUT ME IN YOUR WILL - I'LL TAKE THE 10,000 ACRE SHEEP FARM, THANKS
Also do you know how great the gap between steel shaft pieces can be before the effect goes away? Is light touching strongly encouraged or is a very tiny sub millimeter gap Ok? (I suppose since a plexiglass rotor works it must be Ok?)
YOU WILL HAVE TO EXPERIMENT AND FIND THE ONE THAT SUITS YOUR SETUP BEST.
Thanks, Oh and :)
Well I've got A thru D already.
But if you could provide any details on the PVC, did you manage to find some with a 1/2 inch ID? (not sure they make it that small)
If larger what did you use to fill it up?
And what makes it rotate with the motor? a grub screw?
2 out of 3 of my mechanical designs don't work so a design that I know is good would be appreciated. For instance I have tried to replicate this twice, one design having wobble due to imperfections in threads and nuts (despite it being the same method bench grinders hold the disk on with) and the other destroyed it's self (well the hose) because the otherwise well known hose coupling method does not work to support an unsupported steel piece.
I even tried to use the hose without the steel piece, but because I felt it a requirement to have the motor and generator shaft extremely close they ended up grinding on each other as they rotated, this along with knowing that a better solution is on the way made me abandon that already compromised approach. (I very much want to replicate it with and without full steel shaft test)
Obviously I will make or buy a solution eventually but your design details would be much appreciated.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 21, 2008, 08:17:13 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 07:49:37 PM
Of course, it doesn't alter the fact that ALL the input power is being turned into heat.
PB: I get it, and the power REQUIRED to keep the motor AND generator turning at several hundred RPMs against bearing friction, air turbulence, etc. must be coming from where?
ALL the power that enters the system is coming from the electrical input.
ALL the power that leaves the system is output as HEAT.
Your examples, such as bearing friction, are internal to the system, they produce only HEAT and do not produce any useful mechanical output. This is the whole point I was making.
Quote from: ramset on March 21, 2008, 08:01:22 PM
LOOK at PB he got a promotion sporting another star!!!
Quote from: ramset on March 21, 2008, 07:44:07 PM
PB SEE !!! almost like another invite I kinda like PB he's thick as a post tuff stuff OLD school But then again its nice to see an inventor with such thick skin and great intentions Chet
Just a question. Does anyone get the feeling that ramset is acting like Renfield for Dracula? Usually around the same post times as PB. Are we getting played here?
Regards,
Larry
LARRY I would NEVER play THIS IS WAY TO SERIOUS !!!! CHET
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 07:56:23 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 05:28:09 PM
THIS IS THE ENTIRE POINT THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, LENZ'S LAW AND THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE AND OTHER PHYSICS LAWS ALL SAY IT SHOULD REQUIRE MORE WORK - BUT IT DOES NOT.
But it's not a mystery in the example of the car/brake/gas so why is it such a mystery in this case? The two situations are exactly analogous...
WAY WRONG - SO VERY WRONG PB - CAR BRAKES AND GAS MOTORS DON'T PRODUCE MAGNETIC FIELDS. FOR YOUR ANALOGY TO WORK YOUR BRAKES (GENERATOR COILS) WOULD HAVE TO PRODUCE
GASOLINE 1 (GENERATOR BACK EMF INDUCED MMF"s) WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PRODUCING
GASOLINE 2 (GENERATOR EMF"s).
THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO FEED YOUR
GASOLINE 1 INTO THE
GAS MOTOR - CAUSING THE MOTOR TO
ACCELERATE - WHICH IN TURN WOULD CAUSE YOUR BRAKES TO PRODUCE MORE
GASOLINE 2 AND GASOLINE 1. WHICH WOULD IN TURN CAUSE THE MOTOR TO ACCELERATE EVEN FURTHER.
YOU COULD CHOOSE TO BURN YOUR GASOLINE 2 IN AN EXTERIOR MOTOR (RESISTIVE LOAD)
OR ALLOW IT TO BURN IN THE BRAKES AS JOULE HEATING WHICH WOULD MAXIMIZE YOUR GASOLINE 1 PRODUCTION AND MOTOR ACCELERATION.
THE POINT IS YOU CAN'T
CONFUSE THE SIMPLE ISSUE HERE AND LEAVE OUT
KEY COMPONENTS REQUIRED FOR ACCURATE COMPREHENSION.
CAR BRAKES PRODUCE HEAT - GENERATOR COILS PRODUCE EMF's
AND MMF's
AND HEAT AND PROBABLY OTHER THINGS WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT YET.
YOU MIGHT AS WELL JUST GOOGLE MY NAME AND FORM YOUR OPINIONS FROM ALL THE NONSENSE OUT THERE IN THE "REAL WORLD" IF IGNORING KEY PARAMETERS IS THE NAME OF THE GAME.
Thane
Quote from: ramset on March 21, 2008, 09:17:34 PM
LARRY I would NEVER play THIS IS WAY TO SERIOUS !!!! CHET
Oh my,
What a perfect answer PB. You are truely the head of disillusionment. I don't know why you are doing it, but you are probably the biggest lier on the planet.
@Thane,
Your response has perfect logic to PB's stupidity, but it is wasted on PB who knows nothing of logic. My suggestion is to quit waisting your time on this charlitain.
Regards,
Larry
I went out to get the smallest ID PVC I could find but I couldn't find any that was small enough (17mm ID when I want 1/2inch which is 12.7mm).
What I did find is some cheap black pipe that it 1/2 inch ID and fits over the shaft of the motor perfectly, the only problem is 'flex' is quite literally it's middle name, but it's not too bad and the PVC pipe I did find was kinda flexible too.
Anyway I would still appreciate learning how you did it, thanks. (currently I plan of grinding notches in the shaft, drilling 2 holes in the pipe and putting a pin (steel wire) through it.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 01, 2008, 06:39:39 PM
So Thane, is that really you? I live in Carp, can I come and have a look? If so, please let me have your phone number...
Memories like the corners of my mind Memories Misty watercolor memories....
Quote from: aether22 on March 22, 2008, 12:43:12 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 01, 2008, 06:39:39 PM
So Thane, is that really you? I live in Carp, can I come and have a look? If so, please let me have your phone number...
Memories like the corners of my mind Memories Misty watercolor memories....
I've thought about that post often. And this was back when he thought the device was in the cellar of a suspicious stranger...
Due diligence. Uh huh. It's difficult to conclude anything other than there was never any interest in going, just interest in tagging the project as secretive and resistant to scrutiny. It didn't work out that way.
Thane, you there? <Just wanted to ring Thane and didn't want to risk waking him.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 10:26:19 PM
WAY WRONG - SO VERY WRONG PB - CAR BRAKES AND GAS MOTORS DON'T PRODUCE MAGNETIC FIELDS.
Thane, of course that's true and I didn't mean to imply that the mechanisms are the same. I was using the car-gas-brake example simply as a "thought-experiment" because someone was having trouble understanding the physics of the electromagnetic system. It was just intended as an analogy, as I said.
"I've thought about that post often. And this was back when he thought the device was in the cellar of a suspicious stranger... Due diligence. Uh huh. It's difficult to conclude anything other than there was never any interest in going, just interest in tagging the project as secretive and resistant to scrutiny. It didn't work out that way."
"As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a fool repeats his folly." - PROVERBS 26:11
AMEN
Nobody seems to have posted any theoretical treatment of this so far so I thought I'd have a go at it.
We can model the experimental setup in the following equation:
e.Pin + f.Pgen = Pout + Pgen
where:
e -- the basic efficiency of the unmodified motor (prime mover) ? usually in the order of 90%+ for a standard modern induction motor
f -- the proportion of the generator power that is fed back to enhance motor performance ? it is zero with the brass coupling and only comes into play when the steel coupling is used.
Pin -- the electrical power input delivered to the motor (prime mover).
Pgen -- the power used to drive the generator
Pout -- the mechanical power output from the system ? presently zero because the system is not driving anything but will be non-zero when installed to drive the buggy, for example.
Here?s what it will look like when used in practice to drive a mechanical load:
1. Without the generator in place, the equation simplifies to:
Pin = Pout /e
This is the situation where the motor is used in the conventional way to directly drive the mechanical load.
2. With the generator in place but with the coupling of brass instead of steel, the feedback is zero and the equation becomes:
Pin = (Pout + Pgen)/e
The power input has to be higher than in the first case because extra power must be supplied to drive the generator. This of course is not useful in practice because it just wastes power in the generator - but it serves for comparison with the third case, below.
3. With the feedback enabled by inserting the steel coupling, the equation gives:
Pin = (Pout + Pgen.(1-f))/e
The power input in this case may be lower (better) or higher (worse) than in case 1 depending on the value of f. With f<100%, it is worse; with f>100% it is better.
Conventional theory states that f must always be <100% since the generator cannot produce more power than it consumes. OU theory would allow >100%. The measured value for f is presently about 20% (using Thane?s numbers). It is hard to predict what value of f may eventually be achievable.
PB
Pgen.(1-f)
The above seems to me to suggest that we should expect either a) an decrease in generator output when coupled or b) an increase in draw to maintain the same generator output when coupled
Yes? No?
If yes, I don't think either are in evidence?
Quote from: JustMe on March 22, 2008, 02:01:27 PM
Pgen.(1-f)
The above seems to me to suggest that we should expect either a) an decrease in generator output when coupled or b) an increase in draw to maintain the same generator output when coupled
I assume when you use the term "generator output" you mean the power dissipated in the load resistor. But P
gen is not that: it's the power used to drive the generator. P
gen has three components:
1. Power dissipated as heat in the coils and the cores.
2. Power fed back magnetically to the motor along the shaft (in the coupled case only)
3. Power dissipated as heat in the load resistor (what you're calling "output")
The total amount of power for P
gen was reported by Thane to be about 500W - 600W so #3 is quite tiny compared to that total and it would be hard to detect its influence on the other components. Mostly it looks like the power is going 80:20 to #1 and #2 respectively.
No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).
Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.
At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor. Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.
JustMe, the only thing you are missing is that talking to him is a waste of time. (though I suspect you know that really)
The fact is that heat is an output, and unless you can explain why connecting the motor and generator magnetically should reduce the various forms of waste heat output within conventional physics (and how a faster rotating generator with higher voltage generation would not lead to more electrical power) then we have something worthy of investigation.
Polarbreeze knows perfectly well everything I have said and that his arguments do not hold water and I even forced him to entirely contradict everything he has said when I forced him to answer 5 questions.
He IS a spook, or a dishonest skeptic or a person with very real mental problems. (the latter two being much the same)
The fact is that waste heat very likely IS being reduced by having the all steel shaft allowing 'something' to flow through the shaft and neither Thane nor I nor anyone else has said that such may not be happening, while we hope the effect is OU we can not rule out that it may be at least in part merely a device that reduces various losses, but does it in a way not conventionally explainable and indeed valuable.
He is an outright liar and manipulator and with the way he works if he isn't being paid then he should be.
Quote from: JustMe on March 22, 2008, 04:43:25 PM
No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).
Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.
At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor. Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.
I can't speak for Thane, but I'll have a go anyway ;)
I don't think that Thane is saying that he's sure Lenz Law stops working in the generator when it's coupled to the motor (though he may be considering it as a possibility).
I believe what Thane is saying is that the overall effect is that of Lenz Law being reversed (it gives that appearance) and I would guess that he thinks the most indicated cause is that the motor power is being augmented somehow rather than the generator load being reduced. (The odds of both happening though seems very good)
Of course it doesn't really matter, the key is that the utterly innocent act of placing a 3 inch steel piece changes the dynamic hugely and even polarbreeze admitted that something is traveling through the shaft.
Polarbreeze is so full of s#!t, he was somehow 'confused' and thought that the motor driving it was a synchronous motor after it had been mentioned 50,000 times that mostly it has been tested with an induction motor. (and universal)
But in a recent PM he sent me he claims to be an expert on induction motors, obviously I have and will never reply to a PM of his.
And his theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.
I would say the chance that he is as persistent as he is, dishonest as he is, manipulative as he is, knowledgeable as he is (when it suits him) and incredibly dumb as he is leaves almost no doubt that he's a pro at disinfo and disruption, and I don't just mean 'good at it'.
Quote from: aether22 on March 22, 2008, 06:07:41 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 22, 2008, 04:43:25 PM
No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).
Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.
At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor. Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.
I can't speak for Thane, but I'll have a go anyway ;)
I don't think that Thane is saying that he's sure Lenz Law stops working in the generator when it's coupled to the motor (though he may be considering it as a possibility).
I believe what Thane is saying is that the overall effect is that of Lenz Law being reversed (it gives that appearance) and I would guess that he thinks the most indicated cause is that the motor power is being augmented somehow rather than the generator load being reduced. (The odds of both happening though seems very good)
Of course it doesn't really matter, the key is that the utterly innocent act of placing a 3 inch steel piece changes the dynamic hugely and even polarbreeze admitted that something is traveling through the shaft.
Polarbreeze is so full of s#!t, he was somehow 'confused' and thought that the motor driving it was a synchronous motor after it had been mentioned 50,000 times that mostly it has been tested with an induction motor. (and universal)
But in a recent PM he sent me he claims to be an expert on induction motors, obviously I have and will never reply to a PM of his.
And his theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.
I would say the chance that he is as persistent as he is, dishonest as he is, manipulative as he is, knowledgeable as he is (when it suits him) and incredibly dumb as he is leaves almost no doubt that he's a pro at disinfo and disruption, and I don't just mean 'good at it'.
@All,
I received a personnel email from PB today it follows.
New Personal Message: Cool it Larryââ,¬Â
From: free energy (harti@harti.com)
Sent: Fri 3/21/08 7:05 PM
To: lardonx2@msn.com
You have just been sent a personal message by polarbreeze on free energy. IMPORTANT: Remember, this is just a notification. Please do not reply to this email. The message they sent you was:
Thanks for your noble attempts to help me "understand known physics". Kind of inflammatory though and I don't think it helps the tone of the thread. What makes you such an authority? Do you have any kind of education, training or practical experience in physics?
Maybe I was wrong about the fact that PB never gets upset, since in a later email to Thane he said
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 22, 2008, 07:51:25 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 10:26:19 PM
WAY WRONG - SO VERY WRONG PB - CAR BRAKES AND GAS MOTORS DON'T PRODUCE MAGNETIC FIELDS.
Thane, of course that's true and I didn't mean to imply that the mechanisms are the same. I was using the car-gas-brake example simply as a "thought-experiment" because someone was having trouble understanding the physics of the electromagnetic system. It was just intended as an analogy, as I said.
In any event for once he right about something, that I need to cool it. PB is the first one on a forum to get me agravated. I'm sure it is the same with the rest of you guys as I seen most post from the beginning. I am gone to try to get back to testing and ignore him unless he tries more deception if and when I get something interesting to post. I do feel sorry for any newcomers that get caught in his traps, but others of higher statue will have to warn them.
Regards,
Larry
Perhaps we all might do well to reflect on some messages given to us by the "PRINCE OF PEACE"
and wish each other a Happy Easter?
Happy Easter to All...
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 22, 2008, 04:43:25 PM
At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor. Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.
I think actually that the third equation applies to BOTH conventional, generally accepted theory AND to the "theory of the inventor". The difference though lies in what are the allowable values of "f". According to conventional theory, f must be <100% (conservation of energy). The OU theory however would allow f to be >100%. I think that ALL the measurements that have been made so far on this system are consistent with values of f less than 100%. If anyone disagrees with that, perhaps they could post which specific measurements are inconsistent with it.
Quote from: aether22 on March 22, 2008, 06:07:41 PM
And his (PB's) theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.
Aether, reading between the lines, I get the impression that maybe you don't completely agree with my theory :)
I posted that about 2 weeks ago. The jist of it was that an alternating magnetic field passes through the shaft from the generator to the rotor and since it has a higher frequency than the source power, the motor acts a though it has more slip than before. More slip creates more torque, which causes the rotor to accelerate until a new equilibrium is established.
Do you have either (a) experimental results that disprove this theory; or (b) an alternative theory of your own?
Quote from: OilBarren on March 22, 2008, 09:59:36 PM
Perhaps we all might do well to reflect on some messages given to us by the "PRINCE OF PEACE"
and wish each other a Happy Easter?
Happy Easter to All...
Thane
Happy Easter to you too, Thane, and to all...
PB
PB its me your evil twin mom says no more theories tonight its time for bed Chet
Quote from: OilBarren on March 22, 2008, 09:59:36 PM
Perhaps we all might do well to reflect on some messages given to us by the "PRINCE OF PEACE"
and wish each other a Happy Easter?
Happy Easter to All...
Thane
Thane your response has reminded me of an event that occured at a family holiday reunion about 15 years earlier. A college age stranger started talking to me and my wife. He seemed like a bright, intelligent young man with a lot of enthusiasm. After about 10 minute's he started talking about a great new energy machine that he was working on. Well, being a free energy fanatic I was all ears. He then proceded to explain that if you put a large tank on top of a house to collect rainwater, then use a reverse pump system to generate energy as the water is used in the house to power the house. Well, I was in shock, it was so well presented that it didn't hit me until he was almost thru. We found out later from his family, which were new friends of my family, that he was accidently dropped on the head when he was a baby and that he is perfectly normal in most area, but extremely mentally retarded in a few others. I was extremely sadden over his status and the burden on his family.
Now just image what would happen if he came on this website, explained his ideas, then got verbally destroyed, no doubt what so ever. Then later his parents blamed us for his suicide. We would all be devastated.
Maybe it will help us, especially me, to control our temper if we keep this possibility in mind.
Sorry to bumb everybody out on Easter, but Happy Easter to All.
Regards,
Larry
NOT bummed at all LAR I have found many times in life everyone can make a contribution if we just listen sometimes we get to big for our own shoes enjoy the holiday Chet PS I love to here other peoples idea's
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 22, 2008, 11:25:06 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 22, 2008, 06:07:41 PM
And his (PB's) theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.
Aether, reading between the lines, I get the impression that maybe you don't completely agree with my theory :)
I posted that about 2 weeks ago. The jist of it was that an alternating magnetic field passes through the shaft from the generator to the rotor and since it has a higher frequency than the source power, the motor acts a though it has more slip than before. More slip creates more torque, which causes the rotor to accelerate until a new equilibrium is established.
Do you have either (a) experimental results that disprove this theory; or (b) an alternative theory of your own?
My only reaction is 'you can't be serious?'
I hate it when I misunderestimate people. (note: I am using this Bushism in the same sense that people get on hearing Bush say misunderestimate, that any low estimation was apparently not nearly low enough)
Has anyone put a coil around the shaft to measure exactly how much magnetic flux is getting into the motor?
Quote from: ramset on March 22, 2008, 11:31:06 PM
PB its me your evil twin mom says no more theories tonight its time for bed Chet
Ramset your one liner are great. Thanks for the laughs.
Quote from: ramset on March 23, 2008, 12:12:19 AM
NOT bummed at all LAR I have found many times in life everyone can make a contribution if we just listen sometimes we get to big for our own shoes enjoy the holiday Chet PS I love to here other peoples idea's
Ramset, I appreciate your first and last comment, but I'm confused with the 'if we just listen sometimes we get to big for our own shoes' statement. Can you give me more insight?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 23, 2008, 12:36:10 AM
Has anyone put a coil around the shaft to measure exactly how much magnetic flux is getting into the motor?
25 gauss I believe Thane mentioned at one time.
I have also posted more than once on just how implausible any notible level of flux getting to the motor is.
LAR Change the we to I MY personal experience and very true in my life I have a son such as you speak of and have learned a great deal from him over the years as well as many others I meant no offence Chet
LAR PS I know somebody is going to think it or say it but PB IS NOT MY SON Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 23, 2008, 12:44:56 AM
LAR Change the we to I MY personal experience and very true in my life I have a son such as you speak of and have learned a great deal from him over the years as well as many others I meant no offence Chet
Hi Chet,
I'm truely sorry if you felt that I implied an offence on your part, please believe me as I have not intended it so. I will not say anything further about your situation, as only the actual parents can truely express their situation. But you do bring tears to my eyes as well as many others.
May the God of your faith bless you with the strength and fortitude needed.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 12:38:29 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 23, 2008, 12:36:10 AM
Has anyone put a coil around the shaft to measure exactly how much magnetic flux is getting into the motor?
25 gauss I believe Thane mentioned at one time.
I have also posted more than once on just how implausible any notible level of flux getting to the motor is.
Aether, you did say it was implausible but you never explained why. According to Thane's measurements, whatever is going on in that shaft is changing the power consumption by about 20%. This is very significant and I don't think you can just dismiss it as "implausible". If there is now a quantitative measure of the flux, we can compare that with the level that you'd predict is required to have an impact on the motor. What level is that, do you have a figure?
As well as measuring the flux in the shaft, the following two simple measurements would provide more information to refine our understanding of this system:
1. Measure the torque on the shaft. This, along with the rpm which is already being measured, will allow us to quantify the amount of mechanical power that is being delivered from the prime mover to the "generator" under different conditions.
2. Measure the flux at specific points in the motor (stator and rotor), including observing its waveform. This will allow us to observe what actually happens in the motor under different conditions.
Aether, I'm sorry to say that you seem to be very quick to dismiss theories that are proposed by others but you don't seem to be so forthcoming with theories of your own, nor to be supportive of objective measurements that would help to flush out the truth. It's hard to make any progress that way.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 08:13:15 AM
Aether, I'm sorry to say that you seem to be very quick to dismiss theories that are proposed by others but you don't seem to be so forthcoming with theories of your own, nor to be supportive of objective measurements that would help to flush out the truth. It's hard to make any progress that way.
PB
WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF WE
JUST PRESENTED IDEAS AND THEORIES
TODAY WITHOUT TAKING PERSONAL POT SHOTS AT EACH OTHER?
THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO VERBALLY ATTACKING AND TRYING TO "KILL" EACH OTHER ON TUESDAY.
OK LET'S HEAR IT?WHO HAS A BETTER THEORY THAN MINE I.E. GENERATOR BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX GOING INTO THE DRIVE SHAFT AND AFFECTING THE MOTOR.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND YOUR PROPOSITION SHOULD RELATE TO
PART 1 AND 2 ON THE YOUTUBE VIDEOS.
1) IF NOT MAGNETIC FLUX WHAT ELSE COULD IT POSSIBLY BE?
2) OH AND ALSO HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO ACCELERATE A 1/4 HP MOTOR WITH A 10 LB ROTOR FROM 300 RPM UP TO OVER 1100 RPM -
WITHOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC POWER -BUT JUST A 3" STEEL BAR?
REMEMBER ALL OTHER PARAMETERS ARE EQUAL.
SO LET'S BE GENUINE HERE...
I WOULD LOVE FOR SOMEONE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING OTHER THAN MY THEORY.
MAYBE IT IS AFFECTING THE ROTOR FREQUENCY?
HYSTERISIS CURVE?
ROTOR CORE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY?
AND FINALLY
3) WHY DOES A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR PRODUCE THE SAME RESULT (ACCELERATION) WITH 8 COILS BUT
NOT WITH ONLY 1 (DECELERATION)?
ANY TAKERS?
Let's also remember to have a little fun - this is just entertaining debate after all.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:14:50 AM
MAYBE IT IS AFFECTING THE ROTOR FREQUENCY?
That's basically what I'm saying, Thane. Building on your theory that it's magnetic flux feeding back down the driveshaft, the question is, how does that affect the motor? I'm saying that it's something to do with changing the effective frequency of the driving field. The way to check that would be to look at the magnetic field at different points inside the motor. Aether thinks that the effect would be too small to make a difference but I really think it would be worthwhile to check that by measuring it.
Also, it would be worthwhile measuring the magnetic flux in the shaft, since that's apparently where the feedback is happening. I hadn't heard that figure Aether mentioned before (25 gauss) and indeed that's quite small, though not negligible. It would be interesting to know how that measurement was made - because this is an alternating magnetic field and the peak values could be very much higher than that, depending on how it was measured.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:14:50 AM
2) OH AND ALSO HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO ACCELERATE A 1/4 HP MOTOR WITH A 10 LB ROTOR FROM 300 RPM UP TO OVER 1100 RPM - WITHOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC POWER -BUT JUST A 3" STEEL BAR? REMEMBER ALL OTHER PARAMETERS ARE EQUAL.
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
This thing is obviously baloney. A typical mistake or con job, where the inventor never seems to get around to feeding the 'extra' output back to the input to make it self-sustaining.
Quote from: canam101 on March 23, 2008, 09:51:31 AM
This thing is obviously baloney. A typical mistake or con job, where the inventor never seems to get around to feeding the 'extra' output back to the input to make it self-sustaining.
Well, there ya go, Thane - you did ask for other theories! :)
"Also, it would be worthwhile measuring the magnetic flux in the shaft," [/quote]
PB
OK PB NOW TELL US HOW TO MEASURE FLUX INSIDE A STEEL SHAFT?
I SAY IT CANNOT BE DONE.
WHAT DO OTHERS SAY?
Thane
Quote from: canam101 on March 23, 2008, 09:51:31 AM
This thing is obviously baloney.
I DON'T SEE HOW
BALONEY CAN CAUSE THE MOTOR TO ACCELERATE BUT A GOOD TRY ANYWAY.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:43:27 AM
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
OK NOW EXPLAIN WHY THE EFFECT IS THE SAME (ACCELERATION) WITH:
AN 18 POLE ROTOR
A 6 POLE ROTOR AND
A 2 POLE ROTOR -
A SINGLE MONO-POLE ROTOR
A 1 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 2 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 4 POLE STATOR COIL,
AN 8 POLE STATOR COIL
AND A 9 POLE STATOR COIL.
AND A TOROID COIL THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE BACK EMF IN THE AIR GAP BUT DOES INTORDUCE ROTOR FLUX INTO THE DRIVE SHAFT?
ALSO 1 MORE THEORY PLEASE...
WHY DOES THE ROTOR IN DEMO 2 SPIN FASTER
AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED
BUT BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED?
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:43:27 AM
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
ONE FINAL THING...
HOW DOES A
DC MAGNETIC FIELD (WITH NO FREQUENCY) ACCELERATE THE MOTOR IN
DEMO 4?
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:30:18 AM
The way to check that would be to look at the magnetic field at different points inside the motor.
THE ONLY PAUSIBLE WAY TO ACHIEVE THIS WOULD BE THROUGH COMPUTER MODELING AS PROPOSED BY DR. ZAHN OF MIT WHEN HE PROPOSED HIS HYSTERISIS THEORY.
SO PB HOW DOES ONE LOOK AT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INSIDE A MOTOR WITH 100% ACCURACY?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:33:45 AM
"Also, it would be worthwhile measuring the magnetic flux in the shaft,"
PB
OK PB NOW TELL US HOW TO MEASURE FLUX INSIDE A STEEL SHAFT?
I SAY IT CANNOT BE DONE.
WHAT DO OTHERS SAY?
Thane
[/quote]
Put a coil round it.
"Put a coil round it."PB
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:18:58 AM
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil. It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
WHAT HAPPENED TO ITS EASTER KEEP IT LIGHT
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 12:38:29 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 23, 2008, 12:36:10 AM
Has anyone put a coil around the shaft to measure exactly how much magnetic flux is getting into the motor?
25 gauss I believe Thane mentioned at one time.
I have also posted more than once on just how implausible any notible level of flux getting to the motor is.
I think you might be surprised.
If there's a low reluctance loop back to the coil or rotor through, say, a steel-topped table, then there could be signficant flux -- remember that a whole metre of permeability 1000 material has the same reluctance as only 1 mm of air.
If there's no such path, then... I think you might be surprised anyway. Think of a thin toroidal core, 1 metre around, permeability 1000, with a small coil at some point. The coil displays a certain inductance. If you cut a 1mm gap in the core opposite the coil, the inductance in the coil goes down by half... So... how does the coil see this new gap that is a whole 1/2 metre away through the iron? The magnetization caused by the coil must travel around the whole core before coming back to the coil and reinforcing itself to boost inductance. How does that work? Is it like a wave? If it's like a wave, how fast does it go? Can it be reflected? Could you make standing waves
without a loop?
The standard equations don't model the dynamics of magnetic propagation through ferromagnetic materials, and I don't know a thing about it.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:14:50 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 08:13:15 AM
Aether, I'm sorry to say that you seem to be very quick to dismiss theories that are proposed by others but you don't seem to be so forthcoming with theories of your own, nor to be supportive of objective measurements that would help to flush out the truth. It's hard to make any progress that way.
PB
WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF WE JUST PRESENTED IDEAS AND THEORIES TODAY WITHOUT TAKING PERSONAL POT SHOTS AT EACH OTHER?
THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO VERBALLY ATTACKING AND TRYING TO "KILL" EACH OTHER ON TUESDAY.
OK LET'S HEAR IT?
WHO HAS A BETTER THEORY THAN MINE I.E.
GENERATOR BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX GOING INTO THE DRIVE SHAFT AND AFFECTING THE MOTOR.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND YOUR PROPOSITION SHOULD RELATE TO PART 1 AND 2 ON THE YOUTUBE VIDEOS.
1) IF NOT MAGNETIC FLUX WHAT ELSE COULD IT POSSIBLY BE?
2) OH AND ALSO HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO ACCELERATE A 1/4 HP MOTOR WITH A 10 LB ROTOR FROM 300 RPM UP TO OVER 1100 RPM - WITHOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC POWER -BUT JUST A 3" STEEL BAR? REMEMBER ALL OTHER PARAMETERS ARE EQUAL.
SO LET'S BE GENUINE HERE...
I WOULD LOVE FOR SOMEONE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING OTHER THAN MY THEORY.
MAYBE IT IS AFFECTING THE ROTOR FREQUENCY?
HYSTERISIS CURVE?
ROTOR CORE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY?
AND FINALLY
3) WHY DOES A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR PRODUCE THE SAME RESULT (ACCELERATION) WITH 8 COILS BUT NOT WITH ONLY 1 (DECELERATION)?
ANY TAKERS?
Let's also remember to have a little fun - this is just entertaining debate after all.
Thane
Well my theory is that magnetic flux is not effectively delivered to the motor, that the flux path is far too poor and any flux that gets through is massively overpowered by the fields in the motor.
I also believe that it has been shown mat magnetic fields simply can not have such a sizable effect.
I believe based on much research that the medium of space (the Aether) is it's self changed and conducted through the shaft.
And that once there it has the ability to change the operation of the motor in various ways.
I am more than aware that without context that sounds unlikely and baseless.
Ways to possibly verify the aether (orgone) theory:
Amplification of the effect when various shorted coil forms are wound over the shaft. (possibly in series with the gen coils)
Amplification of the effect by use of radioactive materials, very high voltage electric fields and UV or Xrays. (all of these energize the aether)
Study of the effects the aether/back-emf pouring out of the generator shaft has on various systems designed to isolate a single effect. (hysteresis, eddy currents/induction, transmission or reception of distant fields)
An air-core coil placed over the shaft of a mechanically loaded motor powered by Thanes generator (preferably full-wave rectified and smoothed if it does not kill the effect) to see if it improves motor power, if it does try it again but powered by a conventional source. (ensure the current is the same in each instance.
got to go, more later.
Addition: First, now I have a bit more time, thanks for getting this back on course, this is where we need to be.
We need to be proposing ways to find out just what is going on, what makes your discovery anything over and above any other generator that speeds up on shorting is the clarity provided by the 3 inch steel rod.
The reason plexiglass would work (pretty much regardless of what theory anyone might have) is that while it reduces the conduction of 'whatever' into the motor, if you create lots of 'whatever' then some of it will push it's way to the shaft.
I would think that it would also make it's way through the 3 inch gap also if you added enough coils and possibly shortened the shaft length.
So let's have a #4, have everyone suggest experiments and make a list of the top 10. (and debate them)
Then as those of us with generators find it expedient to do so we will complete and report the results.
So here are my submissions:
The first 3 are a progression, if one fails go no further
A: Feed flux from generator into a motor which is not mechanically coupled. (have the shafts as close as possible or even lightly brushing if possible)
B: Hold the shaft of the motor under test in the above experiment still measuring it's static torque with varying levels of input from the generator.
C: If it works try effectively the same thing but with with a linear DC motor. (AKA a DC powered coil attracting a piece of steel, try feeding the steel or the coil)
Make an electromagnet or transformer with large hysteresis losses, see if the generator output can lower the hysteresis.
And one mentioned above:
An air-core coil placed over the shaft of a mechanically loaded motor powered by Thanes generator (preferably full-wave rectified and smoothed if it does not kill the effect) to see if it improves motor power, if it does try it again but powered by a conventional source. (ensure the current is the same in each instance.
So #1 What? (if not magnetic flux)
#2 How?
#3 How with plexi?
#4 Suggest an experiment and explain how it would be valuible, what it would tell us. (if not seemingly obvious)
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil.
It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"Cheers, Mr. Entropy
YES BUT TRANSFORMERS USUALLY DON'T ROTATE AT 1000 RPM DO THEY?
Thane.
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil. It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"
Cheers,Mr. Entropy
I BELIEVE I POSTED A DIAGRAM OF THE RUNNING ANALYSIS OF A SPLIT PHASE INDUCTION MOTOR A WHILE BACK?
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
EVEN IF YOU COULD CREATE A BRUSHED SYSTEM FOR READING YOUR DRIVE SHAFT COIL OUTPUT - THERE WOULD BE NO OUTPUT BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE COIL'S INDUCED CURRENT WOULD BE CANCELLED BY THE BOTTOM HALF.
THE DRIVE SHAFT FLUX DOES NOT TRAVEL INTO AND OUT OF THE "PAGE" O AS IT WOULD IN A TRANSFORMER - BUT RATHER IT IS FLIPPING AS SHOWN BELOW:
N
O
S
S
O
N
N
O
S
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:33:45 AM
"Also, it would be worthwhile measuring the magnetic flux in the shaft,"
PB
OK PB NOW TELL US HOW TO MEASURE FLUX INSIDE A STEEL SHAFT?
I SAY IT CANNOT BE DONE.
WHAT DO OTHERS SAY?
Thane
[/quote]
A stationary coil over the rotating shaft would give you changes in the magnetic field (regardless of the fact that the flux appears to stay in the shaft).
But it would not give you the intensity of the magnetic field.
The posting from you (Thane) above in reply to Mr.Entropy has no bearing (forgive the pun) on the truth that you can read the
changes in flux through a shaft. (but not the absolute value unless you start from zero flux and carefully record all voltages)
NOTE: My post above this one has several important additions in case you didn't notice them.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:44:39 AM
ALSO 1 MORE THEORY PLEASE...
WHY DOES THE ROTOR IN DEMO 2 SPIN FASTER AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED BUT BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED?
Thane
Because your coil cores support eddy currents and are hence always shorted to an extent.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:51:51 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:43:27 AM
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
ONE FINAL THING...
HOW DOES A DC MAGNETIC FIELD (WITH NO FREQUENCY) ACCELERATE THE MOTOR IN DEMO 4?
Thane
Note the extreme weakness of the effect which to get you had to remove the face plate of the motor despite the fact that the magnetic field delivered by the neo's is HUGELY stronger by probably at least 500 times than any back emf from the coil (assuming your table is not a magnetically permeable steel).
Also WRT my theory magnets do create some aether flow.
Here is a repost of my argument against magnetic flux, Mr.Entropy is right though about the level of flux that may exist if Thane is offering a closed loop path, so Thane are you?
quote powerunlimited: "To Aether 22:
I bought the ryobi grinder at home depot and removed all of the things wheels ect its a bare motor except for a plastic wheel with holes part of the optical tach and thats a very very tiny load.
No addtional load was applied,plasic wheel on one end bare shaft on other end ,the variac was adjusted to make the motor run slow but stable,since in a lot of experiments that Thane has done the motor is run at a low speed by adjusting the variac,motor speed was not effected by a strong magnet near the bare shaft i used a ceramic magnet.I use the laminated part of a refrigerator fan motor with the moving part removed pluged into the 120ac voltage, i also put the open part where the ac field is strongest directly on the shaft no effect
now the motor speed tends to drift ,not accelerate, but i made the rpm as stable as possible no effect.The ryobi motor is very shielded as far as construction goes.My conclusion is no magnetic field or ac magnetic field effects this motor at the bare shaft so at two feet away forget it as in videos 1,2. Now to the non believers because a ac magnetic field or static magnetic field has no effect on the ryobi motor this does not mean Thanes device doesn't work only that what gets to the motor isn't a magnetic field."
I would like to express just how unlikely it is that it could be a magnetic field for those who have only recently started reading this thread.
A magnetic field does not move very far through steel without loosing the vast majority of of it's strength in an open circuit, but we are meant to believe that the magnetic field from the coil (by all accounts not awfully powerful) passes through a super strong neodymium magnet (12,000 gauss) which is saturating nearby steel making it as conductive to the coils magnetic field as air, through spokes, through a shaft that seem more than a foot long and then must compare to the far far stronger fields created by the motor. (the fields in the motor are stronger than the fields in the coil let along after it has conducted all this way)
From simulations with vizimag it would seem to be 1/100th of the strength at the coil at most. (and that was simulating with a permeability of 100,000! and without tiny breaks present in reality which drops conducted flux hugely.)
But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core.
The measured field at the rotor is 25 gauss which is really tiny (some of which is likely to be a remnant magnetic field or a bit of flux leakage from the neos), that's 160th of the strength of a ceramic magnet and far closer to the earth magnetic field, and yet the effect on the motor is the difference between a dead stop (despite the fact that slower speeds have lower loads though admittedly increasingly inefficient use of the motor) and speeding up to the point where it must be stopped for fear of it flying apart if left to accelerate any longer.
And this is in stark contrast to the demo where a Neo stack is brought near the shaft of a motor to exhibit only a very very hint difference in speed (and therefore current)
Also the fact that the effect (well an obviously related effect) was highly non linear as discovered by hoptoad, requiring a low resistance otherwise it slowed it down, that is interesting since assuming the same carries over to Thanes we must ask why the field from the coil would change so much by doubling or trippling the current? (with hoptoads setup it seems plausible that some complex timing might have been at work but that is not possible with Thanes!)
Even more so since the effect appeared almost insensitive to magnetic field strength, showing a huge effect from a single coil and a long shaft with multiple breaks or showing only slightly stronger action from more coils and a far shorter axle with no substantial breaks, that would probably be in reality up to a 100 fold difference in the strength of the magnetic field delivered to the motor i'd guess from simulations.
In short it seems that what is getting into the motor is what I am sure is aether but what others might call torsion/spin fields, orgone/odic, animal magnetism, Zero point Flux/Energy etc... (the same thing discovered many times given different names)
So if you want to believe it's a magnetic field, or 'back-emf' that's fine with me but since I have tons of evidence that the aether is real and is created by generators and can have effects like this all before Thane came along you will understand if I call it aether. (except for polarbreeze who won't understand)
Still I'd like to bring it back around to theories and suggested experiments.
Let's create a list of experiments and discuss the merit of them.
Something to ponder,5 neo magnets 3/4 inch put on the shaft,with the wheel,rotating with the shaft
the rpms of the wheel are monitored by an wireless optical tach just bought it cheap ,thats accurate to .5 rpm,
no effect the wheel accelerates
when the coil is shorted as with out the magnets on the shaft,not a magnetic field as for what it is,"UNKNOWN" just did this a while ago.If theres 25 gauss on the shaft normally imagine how much with 5 neo 3/4 inch magnets on the shaft and it still accelerates with the coil shorted very strange shit.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 05:06:03 PM
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
Inside the motor, maybe, but if your coils are sending any flux through the shaft, it'll run longitudinally, and in alternating directions as the polarity of the magnets that pass them changes.
Quote
EVEN IF YOU COULD CREATE A BRUSHED SYSTEM FOR READING YOUR DRIVE SHAFT COIL OUTPUT
- THERE WOULD BE NO OUTPUT BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE COIL'S INDUCED CURRENT WOULD BE CANCELLED BY THE BOTTOM HALF.
You don't need brushes -- the coil doesn't need to turn with the shaft, and doesn't need to wrap it tightly.
"But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core". Aether22
AETHER22 THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST INTERING PROPOSAL I HAVE HEARD YET...!
AN AIR CORE WOULD PRODUCE THE MINIMUM BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFOMANCE PRE AND POST 3" STEEL BAR?
WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED POSSIBLE MOTOR ACTION FROM THE ROTOR FLUX AT THE SHORTED COILS.
Thane
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 23, 2008, 07:41:51 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 05:06:03 PM
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
Inside the motor, maybe, but if your coils are sending any flux through the shaft, it'll run longitudinally, and in alternating directions as the polarity of the magnets that pass them changes.
WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE THE MOTOR ALSO HAPPENS ON THE DRIVE SHAFT SINCE THEY ARE ALL PART OF THE SAME "MAGNET" ESSENTIALLY.
SOMEONE SHOULD RUN A DC FIELD THROUGH A ROTOR AND CONFIRM THIS?
TOP TO BOTTOM NOT END TO END.
Thane
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 07:38:26 PM
Something to ponder,5 neo magnets 3/4 inch put on the shaft,with the wheel,rotating with the shaft
the rpms of the wheel are monitored by an wireless optical tach just bought it cheap ,thats accurate to .5 rpm,
no effect the wheel accelerates
when the coil is shorted as with out the magnets on the shaft,not a magnetic field as for what it is,"UNKNOWN" just did this a while ago.If theres 25 gauss on the shaft normally imagine how much with 5 neo 3/4 inch magnets on the shaft and it still accelerates with the coil shorted very strange shit.
DEAR POWERUNLIMITED,
CAN YOU ELABORATE AGAIN PLEASE?
FORGET IT - I THINK I UNDERSTAND.
TRY TO RECREATE PART 4 OF THE DEMO VIDEOS IF YOU FEEL UP TO IT?
YOU WILL NEED A 1/8 HP SPLIT PHASE MOTOR.
Thane
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 07:38:26 PM
Something to ponder,5 neo magnets 3/4 inch put on the shaft,with the wheel,rotating with the shaft
the rpms of the wheel are monitored by an wireless optical tach just bought it cheap ,thats accurate to .5 rpm,
no effect the wheel accelerates
when the coil is shorted as with out the magnets on the shaft,not a magnetic field as for what it is,"UNKNOWN" just did this a while ago.If theres 25 gauss on the shaft normally imagine how much with 5 neo 3/4 inch magnets on the shaft and it still accelerates with the coil shorted very strange shit.
I DID AN EXPERIMENT THE OTHER DAY WHERE I USED A MAGNET-LESS ROTOR AND I RAN AC THROUGH ONE OF MY COILS.
THERE WAS NO ACCELERATION
I ALSO PUT THE AC COIL ON THE MOTOR CAST IRON BASE - NO ACCELERATION.
NEXT WEEK I AM BUILDING A UNIT WITH A PM BRUSHLESS GOLF CART DC MOTOR TO SEE IF THIS WILL WORK FOR THE DUNE BUGGY.
Thane
Hi Thane
I place 3/4 inch 5 neo magnets stacked on the shaft of the motor on top of the wheel,i monitor the rpm with a very accurate optical tach,.5 rpm accuracy,then let it run to get a stable speed,then short out the
coil, the wheel accelerates the same as with out the magnets remember the 5 magnets are all so rotating with the shaft,the effect is not effected by the presence of such strong magnets, it still accelerates.My set up is 6 holders two magnets on each holder, 3/4 inch neos, one coil.
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 08:32:59 PM
Hi Thane
I place 3/4 inch 5 neo magnets stacked on the shaft of the motor on top of the wheel,i monitor the rpm with a very accurate optical tach,.5 rpm accuracy,then let it run to get a stable speed,then short out the
coil, the wheel accelerates the same as with out the magnets remember the 5 magnets are all so rotating with the shaft,the effect is not effected by the presence of such strong magnets, it still accelerates.My set up is 6 holders two magnets on each holder, 3/4 inch neos, one coil.
DEAR POWERUNLIMITED,
CAN YOU ELABORATE AGAIN PLEASE?
FORGET IT - I THINK I UNDERSTAND.
I TRIED THE SAME THING THEN SWITCHED MOTORS.
TRY TO RECREATE PART 4 OF THE DEMO VIDEOS IF YOU FEEL UP TO IT?
YOU WILL NEED A 1/8 HP SPLIT PHASE MOTOR.Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 07:50:48 PM
"But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core". Aether22
AETHER22 THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST INTERING PROPOSAL I HAVE HEARD YET...!
AN AIR CORE WOULD PRODUCE THE MINIMUM BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFOMANCE PRE AND POST 3" STEEL BAR?
WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED POSSIBLE MOTOR ACTION FROM THE ROTOR FLUX AT THE SHORTED COILS.
Thane
that is intresting
i in reading this post got an idea sorry guys ...
but thane have you conssidered there may be some kind of wirless power tranmission between the coils motor and shorted generator coils
just poped into my head thought i would share it
are your coils tuned if they were would they not transmitt through resosnance
i just dont know enough about it with out building .....
on my other ideas i shared they are only ideas and drawings and have yet to be proven true but what if .......
ist
happy easter everyone and God Bless
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 08:32:59 PM
Hi Thane
I place 3/4 inch 5 neo magnets stacked on the shaft of the motor on top of the wheel,i monitor the rpm with a very accurate optical tach,.5 rpm accuracy,then let it run to get a stable speed,then short out the
coil, the wheel accelerates the same as with out the magnets remember the 5 magnets are all so rotating with the shaft,the effect is not effected by the presence of such strong magnets, it still accelerates.My set up is 6 holders two magnets on each holder, 3/4 inch neos, one coil.
@ PU,
CAN YOU:
1) TAKE
ALL YOUR MAGNETS
OFF - CHECK THE SPEED?
THEN
2) PUT THE MAGNETS
BACK ON (6 x 2) - CHECK THE SPEED AGAIN?
- MAKE SURE YOUR MOTOR INPUT IS
NOT CHANGED.Thane
Quote from: innovation_station on March 23, 2008, 08:38:22 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 07:50:48 PM
"But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core". Aether22
AETHER22 THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST INTERING PROPOSAL I HAVE HEARD YET...!
AN AIR CORE WOULD PRODUCE THE MINIMUM BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFOMANCE PRE AND POST 3" STEEL BAR?
WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED POSSIBLE MOTOR ACTION FROM THE ROTOR FLUX AT THE SHORTED COILS.
Thane
that is intresting
i in reading this post got an idea sorry guys ...
but thane have you conssidered there may be some kind of wirless power tranmission between the coils motor and shorted generator coils
just poped into my head thought i would share it
are your coils tuned if they were would they not transmitt through resosnance
i just dont know enough about it with out building .....
on my other ideas i shared they are only ideas and drawings and have yet to be proven true but what if .......
ist
happy easter everyone and God Bless
LIKE A WIRELESS RESONANT TESLA COIL?
VERY - VERY NEAT!
AGAIN THOUGH - HOW WOULD A 3" STEEL BAR MAKE OR BREAK THIS?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:18:58 AM
"Put a coil round it."PB
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
Thane
The alternating magnetic field in the shaft will induce a current in the coil. That's how a transformer works.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:18:58 AM
"Put a coil round it."PB
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
Thane
The alternating magnetic field in the shaft will induce a current in the coil. That's how a transformer works.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT TRANSFORMER OPERATION?
I AM WILLING TO LEARN THOUGH.
MAYBE SOMEDAY I WILL FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:44:39 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:43:27 AM
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
OK NOW EXPLAIN WHY THE EFFECT IS THE SAME (ACCELERATION) WITH:
AN 18 POLE ROTOR
A 6 POLE ROTOR AND
A 2 POLE ROTOR -
A SINGLE MONO-POLE ROTOR
A 1 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 2 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 4 POLE STATOR COIL,
AN 8 POLE STATOR COIL
AND A 9 POLE STATOR COIL.
AND A TOROID COIL THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE BACK EMF IN THE AIR GAP BUT DOES INTORDUCE ROTOR FLUX INTO THE DRIVE SHAFT?
ALSO 1 MORE THEORY PLEASE...
WHY DOES THE ROTOR IN DEMO 2 SPIN FASTER AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED BUT BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED?
Thane
I think the best approach will be to thoroughly analyse just one example by taking measurements and comparing them with various theories of operation. It will be very confusing to try to work with all variants at once. When a robust theory starts to emerge, then will be the time to see whether it also can be applied to other variants of the experiment. IMHO.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 04:47:05 PM
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil.
It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"Cheers, Mr. Entropy
YES BUT TRANSFORMERS USUALLY DON'T ROTATE AT 1000 RPM DO THEY?
Thane.
Doesn't matter. Put a coil around the shaft. Measure the current. This will tell you what the magnetic field is in the shaft. If you want to work out the absolute value, then you'll need to calibrate the coil against a known field - but you'll be able to learn a lot just by observing how the field changes when you change the "generator" operating conditions. It will be most interesting to look at the shape of it on an oscilloscope too.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:18:22 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 10:44:39 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:43:27 AM
The drive-frequency theory explains that too. Higher frequency means higher slip, which means higher torque, which delivers the acceleration you observed. It does not require additional electric power input because some of the power that was formerly being dissipated as heat is instead accelerating the motor.
OK NOW EXPLAIN WHY THE EFFECT IS THE SAME (ACCELERATION) WITH:
AN 18 POLE ROTOR
A 6 POLE ROTOR AND
A 2 POLE ROTOR -
A SINGLE MONO-POLE ROTOR
A 1 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 2 POLE STATOR COIL,
A 4 POLE STATOR COIL,
AN 8 POLE STATOR COIL
AND A 9 POLE STATOR COIL.
AND A TOROID COIL THAT DOES NOT PRODUCE BACK EMF IN THE AIR GAP BUT DOES INTORDUCE ROTOR FLUX INTO THE DRIVE SHAFT?
ALSO 1 MORE THEORY PLEASE...
WHY DOES THE ROTOR IN DEMO 2 SPIN FASTER AFTER THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED BUT BEFORE THE COIL IS SHORTED?
Thane
I think the best approach will be to thoroughly analyse just one example by taking measurements and comparing them with various theories of operation. It will be very confusing to try to work with all variants at once. When a robust theory starts to emerge, then will be the time to see whether it also can be applied to other variants of the experiment. IMHO.
PB
GREAT! THANKS FOR THE OFFER!JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU WANT TO COME TO THE LAB AND GET STARTED?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:30:18 AM
The way to check that would be to look at the magnetic field at different points inside the motor.
THE ONLY PAUSIBLE WAY TO ACHIEVE THIS WOULD BE THROUGH COMPUTER MODELING AS PROPOSED BY DR. ZAHN OF MIT WHEN HE PROPOSED HIS HYSTERISIS THEORY.
SO PB HOW DOES ONE LOOK AT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INSIDE A MOTOR WITH 100% ACCURACY?
Thane
One way to do it would be to put some sense coils at strategic spots inside the motor.
Another option might be to use a Hall effect sensor but I haven't ever done that myself.
While you're about it, you could try a Ham effect sensor to monitor the baloney. :)
PB
PS - "100% accuracy" isn't a requirement, at least not initially. It's sufficient to gather approximate data to point us in the right direction. Refinement can come later.
PB that was good !!!
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:31:58 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:30:18 AM
The way to check that would be to look at the magnetic field at different points inside the motor.
THE ONLY PAUSIBLE WAY TO ACHIEVE THIS WOULD BE THROUGH COMPUTER MODELING AS PROPOSED BY DR. ZAHN OF MIT WHEN HE PROPOSED HIS HYSTERISIS THEORY.
SO PB HOW DOES ONE LOOK AT THE MAGNETIC FIELD INSIDE A MOTOR WITH 100% ACCURACY?
Thane
One way to do it would be to put some sense coils at strategic spots inside the motor.
Another option might be to use a Hall effect sensor but I haven't ever done that myself.
While you're about it, you could try a Ham effect sensor to monitor the baloney. :)
PB
PS - "100% accuracy" isn't a requirement, at least not initially. It's sufficient to gather approximate data to point us in the right direction. Refinement can come later.
GREAT! THANKS FOR THE OFFER!JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU WANT TO COME TO THE LAB AND GET STARTED?
I CAN SWING BY YOUR HOUSE IN CARP ON TUESDAY AND PICK YOU UP?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 05:06:03 PM
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil. It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"
Cheers,Mr. Entropy
...
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
EVEN IF YOU COULD CREATE A BRUSHED SYSTEM FOR READING YOUR DRIVE SHAFT COIL OUTPUT - THERE WOULD BE NO OUTPUT BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE COIL'S INDUCED CURRENT WOULD BE CANCELLED BY THE BOTTOM HALF.
THE DRIVE SHAFT FLUX DOES NOT TRAVEL INTO AND OUT OF THE "PAGE" O AS IT WOULD IN A TRANSFORMER - BUT RATHER IT IS FLIPPING...
Thane
1. I don't think you can say what the field looks like unless you measure it.
2. I don't think you need a brushed system: the coil can be static and have the shaft rotating within it.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 05:50:40 PM
A stationary coil over the rotating shaft would give you changes in the magnetic field...
But it would not give you the intensity of the magnetic field.
It would be quite easy to calibrate the sense coil against a known core with a known field. That would allow absolute measurements of field to be made.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:39:36 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 05:06:03 PM
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil. It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"
Cheers,Mr. Entropy
...
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
EVEN IF YOU COULD CREATE A BRUSHED SYSTEM FOR READING YOUR DRIVE SHAFT COIL OUTPUT - THERE WOULD BE NO OUTPUT BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE COIL'S INDUCED CURRENT WOULD BE CANCELLED BY THE BOTTOM HALF.
THE DRIVE SHAFT FLUX DOES NOT TRAVEL INTO AND OUT OF THE "PAGE" O AS IT WOULD IN A TRANSFORMER - BUT RATHER IT IS FLIPPING...
Thane
1. I don't think you can say what the field looks like unless you measure it.
2. I don't think you need a brushed system: the coil can be static and have the shaft rotating within it.
PB
GREAT! THANKS FOR THE OFFER!JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU WANT TO COME TO THE LAB AND GET STARTED?
AETHER22 CAN PB COME TO YOUR HOUSE FOR TESTING INSTEAD - IT'S WARMER?
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:42:53 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 05:50:40 PM
A stationary coil over the rotating shaft would give you changes in the magnetic field...
But it would not give you the intensity of the magnetic field.
It would be quite easy to calibrate the sense coil against a known core with a known field. That would allow absolute measurements of field to be made.
PB
GREAT! THANKS FOR THE OFFER!JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU WANT TO COME TO THE LAB AND GET STARTED?OH FORGET IT!WHEN CAN I SET UP THE PROTOTYPE AT YOUR HOUSE?Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:12:17 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:18:58 AM
"Put a coil round it."PB
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
Thane
The alternating magnetic field in the shaft will induce a current in the coil. That's how a transformer works.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT TRANSFORMER OPERATION?
I AM WILLING TO LEARN THOUGH.
MAYBE SOMEDAY I WILL FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
Thane
It's not complicated, Thane. Just a static coil around the shaft is all you need for a sensor. No involved transformer theory required.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:49:57 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:12:17 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 11:18:58 AM
"Put a coil round it."PB
THE MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL (UNLIKE COPPER CURRENT BEARING WIRE) SO WHAT WILL THE COIL READ OTHER THAN STRAY FIELDS?
Thane
The alternating magnetic field in the shaft will induce a current in the coil. That's how a transformer works.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT TRANSFORMER OPERATION?
I AM WILLING TO LEARN THOUGH.
MAYBE SOMEDAY I WILL FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
Thane
It's not complicated, Thane. Just a static coil around the shaft is all you need for a sensor. No involved transformer theory required.
PB
CAN'T DO IT NOW I'M BUSY POKING MY EYES OUT WITH A SHARP STICK!Thane
THANE your on the cutting edge sometimes people in the business are afraid to get to close less they be wounded BUT they still want to help / research anonymously
Quote from: ramset on March 23, 2008, 09:54:21 PM
THANE your on the cutting edge sometimes people in the business are afraid to get to close less they be wounded BUT they still want to help / research anonymously
SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO GO OUT ON A LIMB
IF YOU WANT TO GET THE FRUIT
Thane
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 07:38:26 PM
Something to ponder,5 neo magnets 3/4 inch put on the shaft,with the wheel,rotating with the shaft
the rpms of the wheel are monitored by an wireless optical tach just bought it cheap ,thats accurate to .5 rpm,
no effect the wheel accelerates
when the coil is shorted as with out the magnets on the shaft,not a magnetic field as for what it is,"UNKNOWN" just did this a while ago.If theres 25 gauss on the shaft normally imagine how much with 5 neo 3/4 inch magnets on the shaft and it still accelerates with the coil shorted very strange shit.
The Neo magnets would be saturating the shaft making it as permeable to air to the magnetic field from the coils.
This is another way to possibly rule out magnetic field conduction a a cause, use magnets to saturate and kill the permeability of the core so that no back-emf can get through. (unless it is somehow carried by the aether)
BTW I would clarify something.
Some ask 'how can a magnetic field induce a field in a copper coil if the coil is not imersed in the magnetic field'
Well it's a trick question, in reality there IS a magnetic field even outside perfect toroidal coil.
Magnetic fields don't bend or truly conduct, nor is this flux composed of lines, not on a deeper level do magnetic fields even exist.
What happens is they sum and add to zero so we do not see them, but they are still there.
And when the inductive effects from 2 magnetic fields add even though their magnetic presence cancels to zero net flux then you appear to have the induction without the magnetic field.
Look up Hooper-Monstein.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:48:24 PM
WHEN CAN I SET UP THE PROTOTYPE AT YOUR HOUSE?
Thane
Why? Did they kick you out of the U? ;)
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:00:39 PM
Look up Hooper-Monstein.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hpmoncrt.htm
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 07:50:48 PM
"But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core". Aether22
AETHER22 THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST INTERESTING PROPOSAL I HAVE HEARD YET...!
AN AIR CORE WOULD PRODUCE THE MINIMUM BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFOMANCE PRE AND POST 3" STEEL BAR?
WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED POSSIBLE MOTOR ACTION FROM THE ROTOR FLUX AT THE SHORTED COILS.
Thane
Sorry, let me clarify.
I said air core since the coil would not be wound over a core, but the coil would be placed over the shaft so in a way it is a steel cored coil.
The aim is to see if we can use the same pulsing current going through the generator coils and put it through a similar coil to create aether/back-emf/magnetic flux in another motor.
What way we have isolated it to just the influence of a coil on a motor.
And we can compare different current types.
If you are right and it is a magnetic field then the above experiment should work (as it should if I am right likely, though the aether is largely unknown) but if you are right then your generator can be turned into a motor power enhancing coil powered by conventional power.
And if I am right it likely will not. (unless so-called conventional power has much of an aetheric component)
Quote from: innovation_station on March 23, 2008, 08:38:22 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 07:50:48 PM
"But wait, I forgot to include the fact that the Neo is probably saturating most/all of the core the the coil is wound on likely making it little more than an air core". Aether22
AETHER22 THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST INTERING PROPOSAL I HAVE HEARD YET...!
AN AIR CORE WOULD PRODUCE THE MINIMUM BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE IN PERFOMANCE PRE AND POST 3" STEEL BAR?
WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED POSSIBLE MOTOR ACTION FROM THE ROTOR FLUX AT THE SHORTED COILS.
Thane
that is intresting
i in reading this post got an idea sorry guys ...
but thane have you conssidered there may be some kind of wirless power tranmission between the coils motor and shorted generator coils
just poped into my head thought i would share it
are your coils tuned if they were would they not transmitt through resosnance
i just dont know enough about it with out building .....
on my other ideas i shared they are only ideas and drawings and have yet to be proven true but what if .......
ist
happy easter everyone and God Bless
IST, you say sorry and yet you just made the one useful contribution to the thread IMO.
One thing the aether can do is pull in distant fields, it can literally bend flux and pull in power.
Now I had considered that maybe the generator was inducing energy into the motor but that does not make sense. (if it would happen it would not result in what is witnessed)
But the other direction might make sense, and in theory it could be induced in such a way as to have the generator turn into a motor, the problem is the timing would be critical, the number of poles and all sorts of details should matter and they apparently do not.
That is the kind of useful out of the box thinking it is nice to hear.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:26:10 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 04:47:05 PM
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil.
It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"Cheers, Mr. Entropy
YES BUT TRANSFORMERS USUALLY DON'T ROTATE AT 1000 RPM DO THEY?
Thane.
Doesn't matter. Put a coil around the shaft. Measure the current. This will tell you what the magnetic field is in the shaft. If you want to work out the absolute value, then you'll need to calibrate the coil against a known field - but you'll be able to learn a lot just by observing how the field changes when you change the "generator" operating conditions. It will be most interesting to look at the shape of it on an oscilloscope too.
PB
Wrong.
The coil can not tell you the strength of the field inside (unless you monitor it from a known zero flux level), it can only give you details in the rate of change.
if you have a 100,000 gauss field and it drops 1 gauss to 99,999 gauss you get the same voltage (and current) induced in a coil of wire around it as you would for 1 gauss dropping to 0.
note: whoops, modified this post in part by accident, anyway it's better now but misses the subject of theories.
Experiments:
Small measured mechanical loads, with and without generator. (as fought for by Jacksatan, it has real merit but is limited in usefulness as it puts numbers on the effect but does not tell us anything new about the effect besides it's magnitude)
Even more useful results of motor torque in measured as vince is carrying out.
Energize a coil from the generator and apply it's flux to another motor (or possibly the motor running the generator if isolated with the brass/pvc coupler) and see if it is effected. (possibly rectified and smooth)
Then switch powering it from a conventional source of electrical power which matches the electrical qualities in the previous test to see if it is just the magnetic field or something else in the current.
Update: To replicate the coil and magnet config which may prove critical also try a version where a magnet is attached to the motor shaft with the coil pointing at it's face. (the magnet rotating on it's long axis) Consider using a monopole rotor with this version of the experiment so the generator coils and the one applied to the motor both see the same pole facing them.
These 3 are a progression, if one fails go no further
A: Feed flux from generator into a motor which is not mechanically coupled. (have the shafts as close as possible or even lightly brushing if possible) It would be hard to think of a reason this would fail but it would be very useful and make various tests asked for by JS & PB far far more effective and less ambiguous.
B: Hold the shaft of the motor under test in the above experiment still measuring it's static torque with varying levels of input from the generator.
C: If it works try effectively the same thing but with with a linear DC motor. (AKA a DC powered coil attracting a piece of steel, try feeding the steel or the coil)
Make an electromagnet or transformer with large hysteresis losses, see if the generator output (aether, back-emf) can lower the hysteresis. (under the theory that the motor power gain may be due to a reduction of energy wasted due to hysteresis)
note: There are many other tests that can be done if the 'whatever' can leave the shaft and effect other devices, you may test various transformers especially types with a loose coupling, radio reception/transmission and so on.
Amplification of the effect when various shorted coil forms are wound over the shaft. (possibly in series with the gen coils) - aether theory
Amplification of the effect by use of radioactive materials, very high voltage electric fields and UV or Xrays. -aether theory (all of these energize the aether)
New!! Instead of having an air-gap between the motor and generator have a non-magnetic material (one with no or little permeability) rod inserted, one possibility would be a non-magnetic stainless steel, a further idea would be to place magnets to saturate the low magnetic steel material to drop it's permeability to zilch.
Did I miss any?
Hi Thane
Removing the magnets are a problem as they got glued to the holders with jb weld however i went back and repeaded
the test with the magnets setting on the shaft 5 times same results throw switch acceleration open switch deacceleration.Doing video 4 is a bit too much for right now, i have also put 8 neo magnets on the coil core back part the result is increase cogging or decrease cogging,the acceleration effect still works. in video 1,2 did you ever put a non magnetic material in place of the magnetic one across the air gap such as a copper rod or a brass rod.It seems to me that your dealing with lenzs law and something unknown created at the same time
and effects of lenzs law and the other do not run the same that is bigger coil ,more magnets more lenzs effect but not as much other effect,Its not a one to one example.I get very little lenz effect but big acceleration effect,also my coil is much fewer windings than the coil in video 1,2. and I use 2 magnets per holder.
Can you upload a photo or even a diagram of your setup?
ok heres a pix,the magnets are still on the shaft,i had trouble up loading a pix before.
Quote from: powerunlimited on March 23, 2008, 11:27:03 PM
Hi Thane
Removing the magnets are a problem as they got glued to the holders with jb weld however i went back and repeaded the test with the magnets setting on the shaft 5 times same results throw switch acceleration open switch deacceleration.Doing video 4 is a bit too much for right now, i have also put 8 neo magnets on the coil core back part the result is increase cogging or decrease cogging,the acceleration effect still works. in video 1,2 did you ever put a non magnetic material in place of the magnetic one across the air gap such as a copper rod or a brass rod.It seems to me that your dealing with lenzs law and something unknown created at the same time and effects of lenzs law and the other do not run the same that is bigger coil ,more magnets more lenzs effect but not as much other effect,Its not a one to one example.I get very little lenz effect but big acceleration effect,also my coil is much fewer windings than the coil in video 1,2. and I use 2 magnets per holder.
YOU ALSO HAVE MOTOR ROTOR FLUX EXITING AT BOTH ENDS OF THE DRIVE SHAFT - AND WHERE YOUR ROTOR IS CONNECTED - SO THERE MIGHT BE SOME MOTOR ACTION AT THE COIL AS WELL.
RE:
NON MAGNETIC MATERIAL...
THE BRASS COUPLER IS NON MAGNETIC RIGHT?
NO YOU ARE RIGHT LENZ EFFECT AND ACCELERATION ARE NOT EQUAL BECAUSE LENZ EFFECT - COIL BACK EMF INDUCED FIELDS ENTER THE HIGH RELUCTANCE AIR GAP WHEREAS
THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED WAY IT IS ATTRACTED TO THE STEEL SHAFT THROUGH THE AIR GAP WHICH REPRESENTS A LOWER RELUCTANCE SCENARIO.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:25:18 PM
Wrong.
The coil can not tell you the strength of the field inside (unless you monitor it from a known zero flux level), it can only give you details in the rate of change.
if you have a 100,000 gauss field and it drops 1 gauss to 99,999 gauss you get the same voltage (and current) induced in a coil of wire around it as you would for 1 gauss dropping to 0.
Aether, sorry but you are wrong. The coil will indeed provide a measure of the field strength inside. Your example is false because this is not a step-function change we're talking about: it's an alternating field. An alternating field will induce a current in the coil that is proportional to the magnitude of the field, since for an alternating field its rate of change is proportional to its magnitude.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory
Couple of things, Aether:
1. "PB's slip theory" is not a separate theory. I was building on Thane's hypothesis that there's magnetic feedback going down the shaft and theorizing on how that could be affecting the speed. It is a fact that greater slip produces greater torque and therefore will accelerate the motor, which is the effect that Thane has observed.
2. "Aether theory" has not been clearly stated anywhere on this forum. I think it would be very helpful if you could summarize that theory in a short post so that everyone can have the same idea of what this theory entails.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 07:12:01 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory
Couple of things, Aether:
1. "PB's slip theory" is not a separate theory. I was building on Thane's hypothesis that there's magnetic feedback going down the shaft and theorizing on how that could be affecting the speed. It is a fact that greater slip produces greater torque and therefore will accelerate the motor, which is the effect that Thane has observed.
THIS IS VERY FREAKY BECAUSE GREATER SLIP SHOULD CAUSE THE MOTOR STATOR COIL TO DRAW MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE WHICH IT CLEARLY DOES NOT.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 24, 2008, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 07:12:01 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory
Couple of things, Aether:
1. "PB's slip theory" is not a separate theory. I was building on Thane's hypothesis that there's magnetic feedback going down the shaft and theorizing on how that could be affecting the speed. It is a fact that greater slip produces greater torque and therefore will accelerate the motor, which is the effect that Thane has observed.
THIS IS VERY FREAKY BECAUSE GREATER SLIP SHOULD CAUSE THE MOTOR STATOR COIL TO DRAW MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE WHICH IT CLEARLY DOES NOT.
Thane
Thane, you may want to observe the stator current closely in real time and see what happens to it at the moment the acceleration takes place. You will probably find that it RISES momentarily, ie during the time there is increased slip and increased torque, and THEN it drops back to a lower level when the rpm stabilizes again. You'll likely need to capture it on a scope because the meter may not be able to show it as it's a transient thing.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 09:26:25 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 24, 2008, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 07:12:01 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory
Couple of things, Aether:
1. "PB's slip theory" is not a separate theory. I was building on Thane's hypothesis that there's magnetic feedback going down the shaft and theorizing on how that could be affecting the speed. It is a fact that greater slip produces greater torque and therefore will accelerate the motor, which is the effect that Thane has observed.
THIS IS VERY FREAKY BECAUSE GREATER SLIP SHOULD CAUSE THE MOTOR STATOR COIL TO DRAW MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE WHICH IT CLEARLY DOES NOT.
Thane
Thane, you may want to observe the stator current closely in real time and see what happens to it at the moment the acceleration takes place. You will probably find that it RISES momentarily, ie during the time there is increased slip and increased torque, and THEN it drops back to a lower level when the rpm stabilizes again. You'll likely need to capture it on a scope because the meter may not be able to show it as it's a transient thing.
PB
PB - For crying out loud, get you behind to Thane's lab ASAP. You could make a really important contribution to the research, so what is the delay?
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
...Shaft saturation, place neodymium magnets in attraction on the shaft...
I think using the neo's is a bit hit-and miss. I suggest the most effective way to saturate the shaft will be to do it with a (DC) electromagnet. If you want the field to be axial, you can put a (static) coil around the shaft. If you want it to be radial, you can position the electromagnet radially adjacent to the shaft.
PB
PS - but see my post below also because I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to be adding complexity to the system when its existing behaviour has not yet been measured and modelled.
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
...These 3 are a progression, if one fails go no further
A: Feed flux from generator into a motor which is not mechanically coupled... etc
The drawback I see with this approach is that it adds extra configurations to the contraption, each of which will add more unknowns and so be more and more difficult to theoretically model. IMHO the most productive approach will be to take a single configuration on which the effect has actually been demonstrated and then measure, observe, analyze the heck out of it. Everything about that setup is measurable (fields, currents, voltages, torques...) and most of those measurements have not actually been done to date so the picture of what's going on in there is incomplete. Once the data have been collected, they can be tested against mathematical models of each of the candidate theories. Just IMHO.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory (may be ignored without any consideration if any non science types are wondering)
Experiments:
There is an alternative method of testing which should eliminate some of these theories easily... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change. If that is the case, the efficiency will continue to increase as there are more and more coils attached to the secondary until the point of optimal match, at which point the efficiency will contiguously fall. This would be contrasted starkly to many of the other theories which seem to claim that efficiency will continue to rise as the number of coils increases ad infinitum. So the experiment to prove/disprove this is simply to complete that which you have started... take the simple tests from 3/9-3/11, and instead of changing the testing parameters follow a single course of loading up the secondaries 1 coil at a time... it should not take very long before you will either reach an optimal load (or at least be able to graph the projected growth) or reach a point of greater output than input... but in order to create a projection we need more than three data points for each experiment!!!
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
Small measured mechanical loads, with and without generator. (as fought for by Jacksatan, it has real merit but is limited in usefulness as it puts numbers on the effect but does not tell us anything new about the effect besides it's magnitude)
I am still in positive awe at the fact that after all the give and take you finally agreed that this is something worth doing... it gives hope to the prospect of all kinds of logically negotiated agreements where if people argue for long enough they may actually arrive at some agreement... like peace in the middle east...
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change...
JS: "more accurate match of the phase change", no, that's not it - in fact I'm not sure what that phrase means. Here is a clarification which may or may not change your experiment proposal. I was offering an explanation for the observed ACCELERATION, which is NOT a predictor (either way) of efficiency. Efficiency is about power, not about speed/acceleration - it's important not to confuse the two.
"It sped up" is NOT equivalent to "It got more efficient".
PB
PS - I agree with you about the "not enough data points" - much better to properly analyse what exists already, rather than building ever more complexity, which just adds to the fog.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 07:01:28 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:25:18 PM
Wrong.
The coil can not tell you the strength of the field inside (unless you monitor it from a known zero flux level), it can only give you details in the rate of change.
if you have a 100,000 gauss field and it drops 1 gauss to 99,999 gauss you get the same voltage (and current) induced in a coil of wire around it as you would for 1 gauss dropping to 0.
Aether, sorry but you are wrong. The coil will indeed provide a measure of the field strength inside. Your example is false because this is not a step-function change we're talking about: it's an alternating field. An alternating field will induce a current in the coil that is proportional to the magnitude of the field, since for an alternating field its rate of change is proportional to its magnitude.
PB
You are assuming that the only important part is that which changes, but if there is an imbalance in the NIB's there will be a static component.
but for coil flux you are right
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory (may be ignored without any consideration if any non science types are wondering)
Experiments:
There is an alternative method of testing which should eliminate some of these theories easily... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change. If that is the case, the efficiency will continue to increase as there are more and more coils attached to the secondary until the point of optimal match, at which point the efficiency will contiguously fall. This would be contrasted starkly to many of the other theories which seem to claim that efficiency will continue to rise as the number of coils increases ad infinitum. So the experiment to prove/disprove this is simply to complete that which you have started... take the simple tests from 3/9-3/11, and instead of changing the testing parameters follow a single course of loading up the secondaries 1 coil at a time... it should not take very long before you will either reach an optimal load (or at least be able to graph the projected growth) or reach a point of greater output than input... but in order to create a projection we need more than three data points for each experiment!!!
PB's slip theory makes no sense so it need not be considered or experimented for.
An analogy on his theory would be that you have an old fashioned human powered mill, strong guys holding spoke like logs of wood force the axle to rotate.
If you made the resistance too strong eventually they could no longer keep it turning, PB is proposing that in effect having a guy hammer or push down the axle will somehow help, it can not.
And it can't increase induction of an entirely different magnetic field either.
It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 02:15:36 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change...
JS: "more accurate match of the phase change", no, that's not it - in fact I'm not sure what that phrase means. Here is a clarification which may or may not change your experiment proposal. I was offering an explanation for the observed ACCELERATION, which is NOT a predictor (either way) of efficiency. Efficiency is about power, not about speed/acceleration - it's important not to confuse the two.
"It sped up" is NOT equivalent to "It got more efficient".
PB
PS - I agree with you about the "not enough data points" - much better to properly analyse what exists already, rather than building ever more complexity, which just adds to the fog.
"more accurate match of the phase change" was a poorly worded phrase... Essentially what I was getting at was that (and please correct me if I am wrong) your hypothesis would claim that if the tests as referenced in the PDF from March 11 were to be replicated using additional coils added one at a time, the overall efficiency of the device (as measured by watts in/watts out) will increase to a point, at which it will plateau and then gradually decrease with each additional coil, and the likely plotted graph of efficiency on the y axis and number of coils on the x axis would resemble a bell curve. This would be in direct contradiction to Thane and Aether's hypothesis which would predict a continuous increase in efficiency for each additional coil - possibly (although not necessarily - Aether) leveling off as efficiency approaches 100%, approximating a sine curve. The test I propose shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to complete, would offer useful and measurable data irrespective of the results, and can be completed with tools that are currently readily available.
BTW - not sure why you threw that acceleration vs. power thing in?
Poor JackS. You really have to drop by more often. The March 11 pdf focused on the transformer tests. The thread is back to talking about the motor/gen device.
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 03:19:41 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
So, let's make a summary.
Theories:
Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory (may be ignored without any consideration if any non science types are wondering)
Experiments:
There is an alternative method of testing which should eliminate some of these theories easily... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change. If that is the case, the efficiency will continue to increase as there are more and more coils attached to the secondary until the point of optimal match, at which point the efficiency will contiguously fall. This would be contrasted starkly to many of the other theories which seem to claim that efficiency will continue to rise as the number of coils increases ad infinitum. So the experiment to prove/disprove this is simply to complete that which you have started... take the simple tests from 3/9-3/11, and instead of changing the testing parameters follow a single course of loading up the secondaries 1 coil at a time... it should not take very long before you will either reach an optimal load (or at least be able to graph the projected growth) or reach a point of greater output than input... but in order to create a projection we need more than three data points for each experiment!!!
PB's slip theory makes no sense so it need not be considered or experimented for.
An analogy on his theory would be that you have an old fashioned human powered mill, strong guys holding spoke like logs of wood force the axle to rotate.
If you made the resistance too strong eventually they could no longer keep it turning, PB is proposing that in effect having a guy hammer or push down the axle will somehow help, it can not.
And it can't increase induction of an entirely different magnetic field either.
It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.
Aether - despite your belief that PB is spooky, PB has acknowledged that there are aspects to this design for which he does not understand with certainty... He has put forward a hypothesis, and offered ways to prove/disprove it. As with most thing in the scientific realm, it will be extraordinarily difficult to assess with any degree of accuracy the underlying mechanics of the device - we therefore devise experiments to assess the effects, and then hypothesise the mechanics that causes them. Whether or not there is some unknown mysterious force at work here (the hand of God?), those that have been contributing to this forum regularly (and that includes Thane, Luc, Aether, PB, and all the other people in interesting hats out there) do not yet understand the effects fully enough to predict its effects on an untested experiment - there simply is no model which currently explains what the effects will be (if you doubt this statement, ask Thane what the input and output will be on the experiments that he has completed himself using 4 coils instead of 2). But to identify PB's claim as it relates to your analogy, PB believes that the axle is off its bearing, and by pushing down on it with the hammer you are putting it back in its place... similar to pulling down on a doorknob to open a door that is jammed closed - even though you are increasing the friction on the hinges, it still makes it easier to open the door since you decreased the friction on the top of the door jam...
Is this possible? From my standpoint, maybe... Is it probable? You seem to think not... Is there any reason not to perform a test to verify conclusively one way or the other? I think the answer to that does not need a rhetorical response.
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 03:19:41 PM
It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.
So I guess you're somewhat ambivalent about my theory then? ;)
What's yours?
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 24, 2008, 03:52:23 PM
Poor JackS. You really have to drop by more often. The March 11 pdf focused on the transformer tests. The thread is back to talking about the motor/gen device.
That much I gathered (see I'm not as lost as I used to be)... but PB's hypothesis can be tested using just the transfomer (I think)
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 03:42:10 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 02:15:36 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 02:07:35 PM
... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change...
JS: "more accurate match of the phase change", no, that's not it - in fact I'm not sure what that phrase means. Here is a clarification which may or may not change your experiment proposal. I was offering an explanation for the observed ACCELERATION, which is NOT a predictor (either way) of efficiency. Efficiency is about power, not about speed/acceleration - it's important not to confuse the two.
"It sped up" is NOT equivalent to "It got more efficient".
PB
PS - I agree with you about the "not enough data points" - much better to properly analyse what exists already, rather than building ever more complexity, which just adds to the fog.
... Essentially what I was getting at was that (and please correct me if I am wrong) your hypothesis would claim that if the tests as referenced in the PDF from March 11 were to be replicated using additional coils added one at a time, the overall efficiency of the device (as measured by watts in/watts out) will increase to a point, at which it will plateau and then gradually decrease with each additional coil...
...
BTW - not sure why you threw that acceleration vs. power thing in?
I wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion about efficiency (although it may be so, I just don't know). All I'm saying is that higher effective frequency would increase slip, which would increase torque, which would cause the motor to accelerate (which is what has been observed). I'm only going so far as to suggest a possible reason for the
acceleration and I'm not predicting anything about the
efficiency. One thing at a time: it accelerated... why? Solve that, then on to the next thing...
PB
ADDED: - oh, wait a minute, you're talking about the transformer experiment, not the motor thing. Sorry, we're at cross purposes. In that case, yes indeed, my hypothesis for the transformer thing is that it's a question of matching impedance and YES, I agree completely with you that a good way to do it would be to look for the peak by way of a graph. I think the preferable way to do it though would be with a
fixed secondary and then add turns to the
primary: we already know that the
efficiency of this transformer is rising with added primary turns, so let's keep doing that until we find the peak (or not!). Great idea. Very clear. As I said before, I do prefer the transformer experiment because it's a much simpler system and it has no moving parts and far fewer unknowns. Sorry about the disconnect!
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 04:47:06 PM
ADDED: - oh, wait a minute, you're talking about the transformer experiment, not the motor thing. Sorry, we're at cross purposes. In that case, yes indeed, my hypothesis for the transformer thing is that it's a question of matching impedance and YES, I agree completely with you that a good way to do it would be to look for the peak by way of a graph. I think the preferable way to do it though would be with a fixed secondary and then add turns to the primary: we already know that the efficiency of this transformer is rising with added primary turns, so let's keep doing that until we find the peak (or not!). Great idea. Very clear. As I said before, I do prefer the transformer experiment because it's a much simpler system and it has no moving parts and far fewer unknowns. Sorry about the disconnect!
PB
Amazing, huh? Aether and I have found agreement, Polar and I have found agreement, by transitive theory PB and Aether already agree!!! they just don't know it yet... pretty soon this going to be one big happy disfunctional family - with spooks dressed in trenchcoats and black bent-down Stetsons and wackos in their Star Trek uniforms with their tinfoil hats all working toward the common goal of global domination...
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 04:02:06 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 03:19:41 PM
It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.
So I guess you're somewhat ambivalent about my theory then? ;)
What's yours?
PB
Well there is no point in me giving my theory, you see really there are 2 issues. (I would here point out that I am not so much replying to polarbreeze which I consider pointless but bringing up an important subject).
There are 2 issues here, since it is clear from Thanes demo that something is communicated down the shaft and that brings us to the question of what is communicated through the shaft.
So far only 2 suggestions, one is that of is EMF/MMF. The other is that it is aether/orgone/torsion/ZPE (it has been given many names), of course it could well be both but we will assume one is more critical.
A separate question is once conducted what does the aether/magnetic field do to increase the torque output by the motor while lowering the current draw, we can answer these 2 questions quite separately.
There are experiments to answer the first question and separate experiments to clarify the second. (an answer of the first question may not enlighten us on the second and visa versa)
On another note, Jacksatan, you are making less than no sense currently, the transformer has no relation to the generator and a theory based on the latter can not be tested on the former.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 04:47:06 PM
I think the preferable way to do it though would be with a fixed secondary and then add turns to the primary: we already know that the efficiency of this transformer is rising with added primary turns, so let's keep doing that until we find the peak (or not!). Great idea. Very clear.
Isn't this what they've already stated they're doing? Increasing turns on the primary and gathering data on a repeated set of secondary configurations?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 23, 2008, 10:50:12 PM
...Shaft saturation, place neodymium magnets in attraction on the shaft...
I think using the neo's is a bit hit-and miss. I suggest the most effective way to saturate the shaft will be to do it with a (DC) electromagnet. If you want the field to be axial, you can put a (static) coil around the shaft. If you want it to be radial, you can position the electromagnet radially adjacent to the shaft.
PB
PS - but see my post below also because I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to be adding complexity to the system when its existing behaviour has not yet been measured and modelled.
While I believe if pulled off it would be a potentially telling experiment I feel you may be right about a DC coil being the best choice but I agree that may be a bit much to add.
I never thought you would have anything to say that I would find agreeable but I guess you never know.
My opinion for what its worth is, theory 1 Some weird effect, of some known effect due to a combination of things magnets /coils /induction motor ect. acceleration due to some sort of decrease in cogging when coil is shorted.Theory 2 a coupling back of emf that is magnetic,conducted by magnetic materials and tends to increase the magnetic field in the motor, the rotating portion causing acceleration.
Theory 3, a freaky creation of something unknown along with the lenz effect,at the magnet/coil junction, thats not magnetic , can travel thru magnetic material iron,can travel thru nonmagnetic metal materials copper,brass ,or even nonmagnetic materials (plastic ,wood),if exposed to long enough or if in a very large amount,has to penetrate material does not move over surface, can effect electrons if they go thru a on/off cycle,increasing current there for increasing magnetic field,causing acceleration.
Test for Theory 3 best option, insert in video 1,2 for the iron piece in the air gap a brass or copper rod
if it works what travels is not magnetic,if works try different materials.This talk of when strong magnets are placed on the shaft the back emf can still get thru,if the back emf is magnetic ,magnetic fields attract, repel it would get effected,i have placed an ac magnetic field directly on the shaft and no effect if it its magnetic it would at least alter it in some way ,also this motor is very well shielded against electrical fields/magnetic fields.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 24, 2008, 05:39:33 PM
...PB and Aether already agree!!! they just don't know it yet...
I may even invite Aether to come visit me in the Diefenbunker where I live.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 05:47:34 PM
There are 2 issues here, since it is clear from Thanes demo that something is communicated down the shaft and that brings us to the question of what is communicated through the shaft.
OK, so far so good. We agree that it's either magnetic flux or aether/orgone/torsion/ZPE. Now: we can measure the magnetic flux in the shaft (at least I hope we've now finally persuaded you that we can!). To complete the picture, what is your method for measuring the aether/orgone/torsion/ZPE? Then we can just compare the two and solve the riddle.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 24, 2008, 07:00:41 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 05:47:34 PM
There are 2 issues here, since it is clear from Thanes demo that something is communicated down the shaft and that brings us to the question of what is communicated through the shaft.
OK, so far so good. We agree that it's either magnetic flux or aether/orgone/torsion/ZPE. Now: we can measure the magnetic flux in the shaft (at least I hope we've now finally persuaded you that we can!). To complete the picture, what is your method for measuring the aether/orgone/torsion/ZPE? Then we can just compare the two and solve the riddle.
PB
First it was Thane that had the real problem of measuring magnetic fields in a shaft and he still may.
But it still is not possible to measure any static component so it remains that any non alternating field such as from the neo's will not be counted.
At any rate that is not the best way, for one aether has a tendency to drag magnetic fields with it.
To solve the riddle of which one the best test may be the one where the generator coils feed an external coil which feeds flux into a (the?) motor, you could even maybe place a magnet for it to react against if you like (it may be needful) and then try energizing it with a conventionally produced current instead to see if the effect only occurs or is larger with the generator current than an electrically identical current provided from more normal means.
Hi guys;
MORE FUEL FOR THE FIRE !
I while back I posted a drawing of a possible way to measure the torque of the motor while it was running. I modified my motor to this design and have done several tests to try and determine if there was an increase in torque. My motor stator is mounted on bearings and it is free to rotate opposite to the shaft rotation with an arm mounted at one end . The arm contact point is 6" radius from the centerline of the shaft. When the shaft turns the stator turns in the opposite direction to counter the force required and is resisted by a scale. Unfortunately I do not have a digital scale and it is not that accurate. It does show differences in force and that is the important part for now.
Here is my setup.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/TorqueTest?authkey=w_64OCgYnxI
Here is my findings albeit not that scientific.
Maximum force exerted at 6" radius with the motor stalled is 6 grams 2.4 amps draw 120 volt
Force with the motor running at no load no rotor (stabilized) 1.5 grams 1.5 amps 120volt
Introduce the 8 small coils and rotor,no connection, minimum speed setting, 1.5 grams, 1.5 amps 120volts
Short all 8 coils minimum speed setting > 1.5 grams, 1.5 amps 120volts
Introduce 1 large coil and rotor, no connection, minimum speed setting 1.7 grams 1.6 amps 120 volts
Short output of single coil,speed accelerates, 2.7 grams,1.6 amps 120 volts
In every test I have done the motor counterforce (which can be calculated into torque) increases with the coil shorted.
My meters have not shown any corresponding increase in amps drawn from the line or voltage spikes.
In all my attempts at this it is showing a slight increase in torque with no increase in current draw.
I know the increase in force is small but keep in mind that the the motor only makes 6 grams at full stall so 1 gram is significant.
Regards
Vince
Thanks Vince...I always look forward to your posts. :) Anxious to hear what the analysis on this will be...
Quote from: vince on March 24, 2008, 09:52:16 PM
Hi guys;
MORE FUEL FOR THE FIRE !
I while back I posted a drawing of a possible way to measure the torque of the motor while it was running. I modified my motor to this design and have done several tests to try and determine if there was an increase in torque. My motor stator is mounted on bearings and it is free to rotate opposite to the shaft rotation with an arm mounted at one end . The arm contact point is 6" radius from the centerline of the shaft. When the shaft turns the stator turns in the opposite direction to counter the force required and is resisted by a scale. Unfortunately I do not have a digital scale and it is not that accurate. It does show differences in force and that is the important part for now.
Here is my setup.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/TorqueTest?authkey=w_64OCgYnxI
Here is my findings albeit not that scientific.
Maximum force exerted at 6" radius with the motor stalled is 6 grams 2.4 amps draw 120 volt
Force with the motor running at no load no rotor (stabilized) 1.5 grams 1.5 amps 120volt
Introduce the 8 small coils and rotor,no connection, minimum speed setting, 1.5 grams, 1.5 amps 120volts
Short all 8 coils minimum speed setting > 1.5 grams, 1.5 amps 120volts
Introduce 1 large coil and rotor, no connection, minimum speed setting 1.7 grams 1.6 amps 120 volts
Short output of single coil,speed accelerates, 2.7 grams,1.6 amps 120 volts
In every test I have done the motor counterforce (which can be calculated into torque) increases with the coil shorted.
My meters have not shown any corresponding increase in amps drawn from the line or voltage spikes.
In all my attempts at this it is showing a slight increase in torque with no increase in current draw.
I know the increase in force is small but keep in mind that the the motor only makes 6 grams at full stall so 1 gram is significant.
Regards
Vince
Bravo Vince, great testing. Your 37% (based on the final value) or 59% (based on the original value) increase in relative torque is certainly not insignificant for the same current level. It is very interesting that the large core and coil is required for the best results. What arrangements of magnets are you using, alternating poles or the same poles?
Thanks,
Larry
Would there be any value in trying this at higher motor speeds where I believe there has been reduced (or no) acceleration with the shorted coil(s), or would an increase in torque always be expected to be accompanied by an increase in speed?
Quote from: vince on March 24, 2008, 09:52:16 PM
Hi guys;
MORE FUEL FOR THE FIRE !
While that was a foregone conclusion for most, it is nice to have evidence to beat skeptics over the head with.
JustMe: If the motor is running at minimal slip it seems near impossible for speed that is in effect already maximum to increase notably. (the motor can not exceed the sych speed unless something besides the motor is having a motor action)
The real question (despite the aether .vs magnetic field question being dearer to me) that needs to be answered most is how can a motors torque and speed increase while the input current drops.
There seems to be a limited number of possibilities.
One is that reduction of losses such as hysteresis (reduction of eddy currents would seem unlikely due to the fact that's how the motor operates) is meaning more of the input power is being turned into torque.
I could see it reducing wasted energy input but I am unclear if this would lead to torque increase or only a drop in input power.
But let's say it does.
Another would be an increase in permeability, that should work to increase torque.
Another would be that of pulling the stator field into the rotor more strongly and unidirectionally. (kind of like a one sided increase of permeability) Please note that while I believe this has been demonstrated in various FE and similar devices this is deeply impossible conventionally speaking, but it does have implications as it is the only way the device may be made OU.
Finally while increased induction into the rotor could increase torque, how this could occur without any of the above occurring though is unclear, maybe a drop in resistance of the rotor would allow greater current flow but resistance likely is not a limiting factor (likely the field strength and slip are to a much greater degree), this also work against increased functioning of a universal motor, it can be reasonably disregarded.
I can not think of any other ways this could work, though I am open to sensible suggestions I do not believe there are any other ways.
I can not imagine any way that a magnetic field conveyed to the motor could have any of these effects, although to be perfectly honest I can only imagine it of the aether because it is so unknown and fuzzy, I know for a fact that it exists and that it can do some of these things but the details are out of reach both due to it's nature and due to the fact that very little is solidly known as opposed to magnetism.
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 07:25:02 PM
To solve the riddle of which one the best test may be the one where the generator coils feed an external coil which feeds flux into a (the?) motor, you could even maybe place a magnet for it to react against if you like (it may be needful) and then try energizing it with a conventionally produced current instead to see if the effect only occurs or is larger with the generator current than an electrically identical current provided from more normal means.
The problem, Aether, is that you keep trying to change the configuration of the system. All that does is introduce new unknowns that add to the complexity of analysis. There is ALREADY a defined configuration of the system which displays this effect. Several people have duplicated it. It's known. It's stable. So don't keep trying to mess with it. The first priority should be to measure, study, analyse that system as it stands right now. IMHO.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 12:06:02 AM
The problem, Aether, is that you keep trying to change the configuration of the system. All that does is introduce new unknowns that add to the complexity of analysis. There is ALREADY a defined configuration of the system which displays this effect. Several people have duplicated it. It's known. It's stable. So don't keep trying to mess with it. The first priority should be to measure, study, analyse that system as it stands right now. IMHO.
PB
I disagree. I think Aether's proposed experiments and others that alter the configuration are very valuable as potential sources of information on the qualitative properties of this affect. I think it's an excellent line of parallel inquiry. I look forward to his results.
Larry
I'm using alternate north south magnets. I've tried the test at all speed settings and with the large coil it always shows about 1 gram increase.
To improve the results I think I need a heavier rotor, stronger magnet and better coils.
Vince
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 12:06:02 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 07:25:02 PM
To solve the riddle of which one the best test may be the one where the generator coils feed an external coil which feeds flux into a (the?) motor, you could even maybe place a magnet for it to react against if you like (it may be needful) and then try energizing it with a conventionally produced current instead to see if the effect only occurs or is larger with the generator current than an electrically identical current provided from more normal means.
The problem, Aether, is that you keep trying to change the configuration of the system. All that does is introduce new unknowns that add to the complexity of analysis. There is ALREADY a defined configuration of the system which displays this effect. Several people have duplicated it. It's known. It's stable. So don't keep trying to mess with it. The first priority should be to measure, study, analyse that system as it stands right now. IMHO.
PB
All I hear is a spook going 'please don't learn more about this!'
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 11:42:26 PM
JustMe: If the motor is running at minimal slip it seems near impossible for speed that is in effect already maximum to increase notably. (the motor can not exceed the sych speed unless something besides the motor is having a motor action)
I guess I was asking if it was possible for the affect to increase torque independently even when speed is near max because many of the criticisms have focused on the inefficiency of running the motor so far under capacity.
Quote from: vince on March 24, 2008, 09:52:16 PM
Introduce 1 large coil and rotor, no connection, minimum speed setting 1.7 grams 1.6 amps 120 volts
Short output of single coil,speed accelerates, 2.7 grams,1.6 amps 120 volts
Regards
Vince
Very interesting results, Vince. It's excellent to have some torque measurements (or at least a proxy for now) because now we can start to see how much mechanical power the motor is really delivering to the device along the shaft. Some questions:
1. Are all those proxy-torque values measured under steady-state conditions? (ie rpm stabilized)
2. What is the steady-state rpm (a) without the coils (but with the rotor in place); (b) with the coils open; (c) with the coils shorted?
3. What do you calculate the power to be in each case (ie the mechanical power being delivered through the shaft to the rotor)?
4. What is the phase difference between the voltage and the current in each case?
5. Are these results obtained with the steel shaft or the brass shaft?
6. What is the comparison in all these results between the steel vs the brass?
7. What is the rating of the motor (rated rpm, V, A)?
I'm building a theoretical model of this and I'm looking forward to plugging in real numbers!
Thanks,
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 12:12:46 AM
I disagree. I think Aether's proposed experiments and others that alter the configuration are very valuable as potential sources of information on the qualitative properties of this affect. I think it's an excellent line of parallel inquiry. I look forward to his results.
I look forward to them too. Provided they actually do include a complete set of actual measurements. In my opinion, though, jumping around from one configuration to another without measuring or analyzing any one of them properly will result in a bunch of inconclusive anecdotal material which will not help move us to a proper knowledge of what's going on.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 12:17:06 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 12:06:02 AM
The problem, Aether, is that you keep trying to change the configuration of the system. All that does is introduce new unknowns that add to the complexity of analysis. There is ALREADY a defined configuration of the system which displays this effect. Several people have duplicated it. It's known. It's stable. So don't keep trying to mess with it. The first priority should be to measure, study, analyse that system as it stands right now. IMHO.
PB
All I hear is a spook going 'please don't learn more about this!'
What you "hear" is in your imagination. What I am actually saying is that by not following a careful process of complete measurement and analysis you're not going to be able to learn more about this and it will remain foggy. Some people prefer fog because it allows the imagination to enjoy mysteries that aren't really there; others are primarily intent on finding the solution to the mysteries.
PB
Quote from: vince on March 25, 2008, 12:14:26 AM
Larry
I'm using alternate north south magnets. I've tried the test at all speed settings and with the large coil it always shows about 1 gram increase.
To improve the results I think I need a heavier rotor, stronger magnet and better coils.
Vince
Thanks Vince,
Please don't allow any of the noise on this forum to change your planned improvements. You are doing great. I hope to catch up.
Best of luck,
Larry
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 11:42:26 PM
The real question (despite the aether .vs magnetic field question being dearer to me) that needs to be answered most is how can a motors torque and speed increase while the input current drops.
That is indeed a good question, Aether. Now Vince has figured out how to measure torque, a whole new area of investigation becomes open to us. This is brilliant, well done Vince!
The obvious experiment to do will be, first, to remove the Thane device completely from the system and conduct a characterization exercise on the motor using a simple variable mechanical load (thus removing all electromagnetic loading effect, or aether forces or whatever). Apply the variable mechanical load to the motor. Characterize it over the same range of rpm's that are being observed in the main experiment. Plot on a graph the input current versus torque and speed. This gives an unambiguous measure of the motor's behavior without the device in the picture. Then with the device reinstalled, the performance can be compared against this baseline. The difference will be attributable to the electromagnetic or aethereal impact on the system.
This would be GREAT - it's completely unambiguous and I'm sure everyone would agree with that.
ADDED: The result will be something like this link http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp - note that at low rpm it's absolutely normal for torque and speed to rise while current falls. I think we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all.
PB
polarbreeze, phase angle? What do mean by that or should I ask, what is a phase angle?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 12:51:09 AM
What I am actually saying is that by not following a careful process of complete measurement and analysis you're not going to be able to learn more about this and it will remain foggy. Some people prefer fog because it allows the imagination to enjoy mysteries that aren't really there; others are primarily intent on finding the solution to the mysteries.
PB
I agree .... KneeDeep.
This little mystery deserves the time spent on empirical data collection. I am also eager to see if the response of the motor acceleration is non linear or linear when a graduated varied load is put on the coils, ranging from O/C to S/C. I still think this experiment is greatly related to my own prior experiments, of which you are already aware. But there do seem to be other peculiarities reported in some of the posts which may suggest it is unrelated to the effect I've documented.
The tests you have asked Vince to do, are common sense. Crawl before you walk, walk before you run......KneeDeep
Cheers all.
p.s.
In my own experiments, I was using DC pm shunt wound motors, which have a linear torque versus current/voltage relationship. This makes consumption measurement relatively easy, their are no real surprises, even when using pwm switching, if you know the duty cycle. But induction and series wound universal motors have non linear responses to supply current/voltage, and also phase differences between voltage and current. This makes consumption measurement a little more difficult, and the use of scopes is highly recommended.
Quote from: nightlife on March 25, 2008, 01:14:46 AM
polarbreeze, phase angle? What do mean by that or should I ask, what is a phase angle?
Check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_%28waves%29
The issue is that if the voltage and current are not in phase, you can't simply multiply them together to get power - you have to adjust for their phase difference. This is the same for our purposes as the concept of Power Factor.
PB
I'm going back to my colour using ways on this one.
PB says:
That is indeed a good question, Aether. Now Vince has figured out how to measure torque, a whole new area of investigation becomes open to us. This is brilliant, well done Vince!
The obvious experiment to do will be, first, to remove the Thane device completely from the system and conduct a characterization exercise on the motor using a simple variable mechanical load (thus removing all electromagnetic loading effect, or aether forces or whatever). Apply the variable mechanical load to the motor. Characterize it over the same range of rpm's that are being observed in the main experiment. Plot on a graph the input current versus torque and speed. This gives an unambiguous measure of the motor's behavior without the device in the picture. Then with the device reinstalled, the performance can be compared against this baseline. The difference will be attributable to the electromagnetic or aethereal impact on the system.
That would be useful, it would help us put numbers to the effect, we would be able to quantify it.
But that will not tell us any more of what is going on, useful yes but not hugely so.
But if we do experiments that give us the limits and mechanisms of the effect that is far more valuable.
We could find out precisely what is going on.
That is of far greater value than knowing the magnitude of the effect under varying conditions.
This would be GREAT - it's completely unambiguous and I'm sure everyone would agree with that.
I am sure you could find a way to disagree.
ADDED: The result will be something like this link http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp - note that at low rpm it's absolutely normal for torque and speed to rise while current falls. I think we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all.
PB
No it is not normal, also no magnetic breaking can possibly explain the results.
of course the generator is working as a magnetic break but that breaking force provibly does not let up when the shafts are connected.
On a slightly different note, someone mentioned quite rightly that Thanes experiment might be showing that the form of the shaft is critical not the magnetic properties.
That a brass rod would still conduct the 'whatever'.
If I may make an alteration to this very plausibly worthwhile experiment, it would be best to carry it out with a non magnetic stainless steel first, something barely attracted to a magnet at all, it will do little to convey a magnetic field of any strength but may provide greater continuity by at least being similar, furthermore a Neo would be well suited to saturating such an extremely low magnetic material so maybe the saturating Neos on the shaft do have a place after all.
Experiments:
Small measured mechanical loads, with and without generator. (as fought for by Jacksatan, it has real merit but is limited in usefulness as it puts numbers on the effect but does not tell us anything new about the effect besides it's magnitude, though some feel that looking at performance curves will be enlightening what it can tell us is limited.
Even more useful results if motor torque is measured as Vince is carrying out.
Energize a coil from the generator and apply it's flux to another motor (or possibly the motor running the generator if isolated with the brass/pvc coupler) and see if it is effected. (possibly rectified and smooth)
Then switch powering it from a conventional source of electrical power which matches the electrical qualities in the previous test to see if it is just the magnetic field or something else in the current.
Update: To replicate the coil and magnet config which may prove critical also try a version where a magnet is attached to the motor shaft with the coil pointing at it's face. (the magnet rotating around it's long magnetized axis like a Faraday generator) Consider using a monopole rotor with this version of the experiment so the generator coils and the one applied to the motor both see the same pole facing them.
These 3 are a progression, if one fails go no further
A: Feed flux from generator into a motor which is not mechanically coupled. (have the shafts as close as possible or even lightly brushing if possible) It would be hard to think of a reason this would fail but it would be very useful and make various tests asked for by JS & PB far far more effective and less ambiguous.
B: Hold the shaft of the motor under test in the above experiment still measuring it's static torque with varying levels of input from the generator.
C: If it works try effectively the same thing but with with a linear DC motor. (AKA a DC powered coil attracting a piece of steel, try feeding the steel or the coil)
Make an electromagnet or transformer with large hysteresis losses, see if the generator output (aether, back-emf) can lower the hysteresis. (under the theory that the motor power gain may be due to a reduction of energy wasted due to hysteresis)
new note: There are many other tests that can be done if the 'whatever' can leave the shaft and effect other devices, you may test various transformers especially types with a loose coupling, radio reception/transmission and so on.
Amplification of the effect when various shorted coil forms are wound over the shaft. (possibly in series with the gen coils) - aether theory
Amplification of the effect by use of radioactive materials, very high voltage electric fields and UV or Xrays. -aether theory (all of these energize the aether)
New!! Instead of having an air-gap between the motor and generator have a non-magnetic material (one with no or little permeability) rod inserted, one possibility would be a non-magnetic stainless steel, a further idea would be to place magnets to saturate the low magnetic steel material to drop it's permeability to zilch.
Did I miss any?
I would also encourage any notes on possible pitfalls or detailed specific criticisms of any experiments.
Also if you have one of these generators (4 or so people do that this point I believe) and could hence possibly test any of these experiments your feedback is especially valuable, in fact I implore Thane, Vince, Powerunlimited and the other person Thane mentioned who is I think off list but replicated it in half a day to at least give their view of these experiments and hopefully indicate which if any they hope to replicate, if not why not and what they do plan on testing.
Naturally I will implore myself to do many of these experiments when I can. (which is as soon as Thanes generatr and i are at the same address)
In summary (of my opinion expressed throughout this thread anyway) right now we do not have an entirely practical device and it is not clear that it will be practical by simply cleaning it up. (removing losses and improving generation potential)
But while this may not yet be practical it is an extremely useful testbed, what is needed most of all, more than theories is experiments that will clarify the operation of the device, and so as strongly as possible I encourage everyone to come up with, test, debate and bug hunt various experiments because that is where development will come from, it is where the rubber meets the road!
The most important thing that separates this device from all others is the practicality and ease by which experiments can lead to a full understanding and utilization of the effect.
So if you can't preform experiments you can still help out with experiments in various ways.
aether puts on his bossy(er) boots...
So to the extent that anyone will listen to me I'd like to give everyone homework, think of an experiment (or a testable/falsifiable hypothesis) and if you can't then analyze an experiment. (or what the results would mean either way)
Everything else is really just pointless chatter and detracts from the end goal, being pragmatic about this is critical.
This is the only way forward, if you think the above experiments are flawed (and your nick isn't polabreeze) please explain why, if you think they are good but you have better ideas then please suggest them, if you think they are potentially valuable then vote for them.
Let's pull together, get a little organized and focus on experiments that can be done to better understand and utilize this effect, let's try and sort out who is going to test what.
aether removes his (bossy) boots realizing he had grown too large for them.
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 02:23:26 AM
...of course the generator is working as a magnetic break...
That's what I thought. The problem with brakes is that they consume energy (that's what they're for actually) so if the generator is working as a brake the best way to improve efficiency will be to remove it completely.
PB
Quote from: aether22 on March 24, 2008, 11:42:26 PM
The real question (despite the aether .vs magnetic field question being dearer to me) that needs to be answered most is how can a motors torque and speed increase while the input current drops.
That is absolutely normal behavior, Aether, and it is fully described and understood in induction motor theory. Read this: http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp - actually you don't even need to read it, just look at the graph. It shows
torque and speed increasing while input current drops.
PB
PB, you are a very very poor spook, you are so transparent.
You jump back and forth to things you know full well are bunk, you change your tune, you become stupid or intelligent as required, you act nothing like a genuine person.
Tell your handlers that it's all Ok, there is nothing going on here and no need to pay any attention, k thanks.
AETHER22,
CAN YOU GIVE US ALL A CRASH COURSE ON "AETHER" AND OR "RADIANT ENERGY"?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 07:00:41 AM
You jump back and forth to things you know full well are bunk, you change your tune, you become stupid or intelligent as required, you act nothing like a genuine person.
Examples please? I've got my performance review coming up and I'd like to be well prepared for the interview with my handlers.
PB
I have a question:
How many people have observed this difference between steel-shaft and brass-shaft behavior?
I know Thane has observed it in his lab and I think maybe others have too but I've lost track.
Anyone care to share with us their brass-versus-steel results?
PB
Sure Thane, Ahem.
Ok, this is what I understand of it, as I have said before I didn't only not believe in the aether (or anything like it) but actually hated it, a repulsive concept, I liked an empty universe clean universe rather than new agey mysterious airy fairy claptrap..
But I am a sucker for evidence and truth, and after researching lots and lots of different Free Energy and Antigravity devices (ones where no explanation other than them being real could explain the evidence), hoping to find correlations (but not some ultimate energy responsible for all of it).
The first thing I found was that impossibly there were no correlations (at least on the level I was looking for them), but I found several other things, I found there were extraordinarily strong correlations between totally different devices but in ways that made no sense, actually increasingly all devices despite the fact that few if any were designed based on what was coming to light, the aether.
Another observation is that these devices have a tendency to manifest more than one 'impossibility', there are a number of free energy devices that besides other side effects demonstrate antigravity.
Likewise there are antigravity devices that have Free energy as a side effect.
The most interesting is the GEET carburetor which has over a hundred anomalies including generation of heat and cold, electromagnetic fields, transmutation, fogging of film besides of course overunity operation.
Anyway yadda yadda I came to realize that it was true beyond any doubt whatsoever, and here is what I have found. This is not theory (as that is projecting beyond what is plainly spelt out by the evidence) but observation of phenomena, much like the difference between observing that fire exists and theorizing how it works and what it is.
Everything I present here has tons of evidence that made me draw the following inescapable conclusions.
Aether is the medium of space and increasingly apparently matter. (as mentioned previously I thought this was likely the case then attended a lecture by a physicist who won a noble price for work in QCD and he described what I termed the aether and showed it to be the medium in which all matter is just an eddy. He had 'proof' and agreed with the term 'aether')
Meanwhile I have found time and again that the type of Free Energy (and antigravity) device that I hope I would find, the 'logical' type that exploits a loophole, that out foxes the universe does not exist.
But if you can change the rules by changing the board game on which we play the game almost anything becomes possible.
Ok, so this is the condensed version because no one would read the full version, but here goes.
First there are 2 slightly different issues, one is that there is aether, it's everywhere, if you compress it you can fit more matter in that space. (which is why parallel mine shafts have been repeatedly measured in different places to be further apart at the bottom, yes really.
You can move it, one reason this is interesting is that you can carry (less dense) aether disturbances such as magnetic fields, electrons sometimes and if you wondered why twins have a connection it's because of resonant aetheric coupling, a superluminal stream of aether carrying various things including the fields that make up thoughts and feeling etc... (not just twins of course, the Russians did an interesting (read disgusting) experiment with killing baby rabbits as they monitored the mother who was far away from the babies in a sub deep under water as they monitored her polygraph)
Another thing though is that by moving it, it flows through and is agitated by matter and this agitation is important. (it's known as torsion, orgone etc...)
So there is the aether, the movement of the aether (acceleration/deceleration of aether imparts a force as per Morton, podklennov and many others), the compression (and rarification) of the aether (note: another Russian experimenter had nested coils finding that if they pulsed inwards time inside slowed down slightly this is due to the coils dragging and compressing aether much as a large mass does, if reversed time sped up) and the energisation of the aether.
The latter can be gained in several ways, well there is radionics (which works just like the twins, resonance pulls an increasingly strong current of aether from a matching disturbance, or it can be shaken out (which is how homeopathics works, aether (at least some of it) keeps moving even after matter has stopped and is thrown out, this is why 'succession' it so forceful and violent and sudden)
Other examples are tiny particles that are out of control such as bions discovered by Reich (which create Orgone radiation) or very similar if not identical oemus/m-state which are tiny metal particles spinning like crazy which also radiate distirbed aether.
But the best way is to make aether move through something that disturbs it especially.
note: As noted previously HV, ionizing radiation, radioactive decay also energize the aether.
That is why some have found something called 'orgonite' to work, if you move aether through a substance that irregularly reflects and refracts it (yes, aether can move Ok through say a ring of metal but dislikes discontinuities) it becomes agitated. (There is a guy, I think his name was Bob, he took at iron powder toroid and wound over it a number of segmented windings which he energized in sequence, they pulled the aether through the iron powder core as the aether becase more and more churned and agitated until he either attracted a lightening strike, or possibly generated one!)
This was also found by another Russian which turned it Cavity Structural Effect, it has been discovered time and again in a dizzying array of devices and methods but then again it is how our bodies create orgone/life energy/chi (has tons of names).
That is why many (especially the Chinese) will talk of blocks in your chi, if the aether is moving through your cells it literally generates tuned life energy.
No I didn't start believing any of this fringe energy based health stuff until I would learn something else about the aether and suddenly the penny would drop and I'd suddenly 'get' something I previously thought to be rubbish.
Anyway that's the basics, now here is some more relevant stuff.
The aether (perhaps it must be reasonably energized?) can help pull in or project a magnetic field. (many many examples but an interesting story is that of the guy who managed to attract steel to his hands by running a magnetic field through his body carried)
This might be how the motor is increasing performance, if it is then it can be OU and can be used to create an very very much overunity transformer. (a loose coupling transformer)
Many many many solid state FE devices provably use this effect, an interesting example is the Kipper coil. (Ground radio is another, but there are tons of examples, 20 or so)
Oh, if you have 6 conical coils with an aether flow through the wires they will project an aether flow out the ends, if you focus these 'beams' on a central point not only will it compress the aether but it can create antigravity.
Now you may ask why aether comes out the end of the cone, is it due to the cone shape? In part yes as the aether will flow towards something that will compress or squeeze it.
But that's not all, I do not know why but there is an effect, it may be dependany on direction I am not sure, it may generate or only amplify aether flows but simply aether 'enjoys' flowing at right angles to it's self.
So a pancake coil will also create a beam.
As will to a lesser extent (or more correctly a lesser density) and coil.
It is also why Slim Spurling's rings work (new age fruit cake who just so happens to have something) and why caduceus coils have strange effects and much much more.
Another thing worth mentioning is that magnets tend to generate an aether flow along the field lines, out of the north and into the south.
Look into Boyd Bushman who focused 5 magnets to get a focused magnetic field carrying aether beam, it also could increase the discharge distance of a VDG from a fraction of an inch to 5? feet along the beam. (recall I said electrons are carried, much evidence for this)
Now, rather cutting edge, so much so I can't say it's fact or stake my life on it like I truly could with much of this stuff, but a time varying aether flow seems to have an enhanced action of inducing an aether flow at 90 degrees.
Another thing, aeher flows at 90 degrees to electric fields, or tends to.
So putting electric and magnetic fields at 0 degrees creates 90 degree aether flows.
Ok, there is a bit more though less relevant but for relativly if brief completeness.
Some things absorb and others transmit (yin and yang) either all or most common forms of orgone/chi/aether disturbance. (that is how Reich's orgone accumulators work)
Female Male
yin yang
clockwise spiral anticlockwise (spiral, coil, rotation)
\\ handed mobius ///// Handed Twist (mobius or twist) -reverse?
Antenna like conver-
ging lines like a The point being the pushing
cone or pyramid \/
Positive Negative (electrical polarity, how the Joe cell works)
Diamagnetic Magnetic
South North
resonance reciever resonant energy
secondary is yin primary (transmitter) is yang
Dielectric? Metal? (might be just a manifestation of dia/mag as all ORAC's were mag/diamag layering as well as metal/dielectric)
Night Day
Vacuum Noble gas (especially in conjunction with a magnet)
Update: Sparks especially in an orgone rich environment cause an 'explosion' of charged orgone. (and causes an implosive effect on metal akin to gravity)
Oh, another thing and this one is important, Aether moves very very well in circles, so give it shorted loops/coils etc...
One last note, an entrained aether (which this is) agrees with ALL evidence for light speed, it has the same predictions as SR for any cases where SR is proven right and explains what is going on where SR has failed (which is never if you believe SR's adhenents but they just ignore stuff that is inconvenient)
It is worth noting that Einstein and the scientists that preformed the experiment generally believed to have debunked the concept (it's late but never thought I'd forget their names!) of an aether all continued to believe it it none the less and that such experiments disagree with SR anyway.
So here is what I would do.
While very 'attached' to the experiments above (a few messages ago^) the most critical is to feed the aether (or back-emf) into various test devices that will only show a result if one thing occurs such as pulling a distant field in, decreasing hysteresis etc...
We know that this 'whatever' is effecting the motor and we need to hand it simpler systems to see how it effects them.
In the end that is the most critical thing, not what is communicated by the axle but what it does, personally to me it would seem a magnetic field alone would seem impotent to have the effects that have been witnessed but if you think it can that's fine by me.
Here would be a roadmap I'd set out:
Try the experiments above.
If they work as hoped/expected then use aetheric output of the generator (axle and or coil) to use in a loose coupling transformer. (the primary could maybe even be the grid, but it's not stealing power)
Then use the info above to improve the generator (and or make a bigger better faster one, even a solid state one) and apply the aetheric electrical current to conical coils focused in on a point.
Orgone could be made by using coils with orgonite (or iron powder).
Twisted wire coils (look up Slim Spurling) could also be placed shorted in the generator circuit around someone with health problems. (actually I tried it on my (reluctant) mother with the generator I did make and just now realize she reported improved health but I had not thought it could be due to the device till just now)
It is also worth noting that using wire coils around another wire (like the other wire were a core) or a tightly twisted pair may make improved coil for the generator, and hollow steel cores (as per hop toad) in place of solid, if you want to go all out carbon rods of vials of noble gas inserted in the core may give interesting results. This is all very speculative.
Good night, no time to proof read or speel cheque.
addition: Asymmetric, biased and nonlinear things effect the aether (as well as aetyher having nonlinear effects).
One interesting example is that after realizing that I heard of a claim where the 3 qualities were impressed in electrical signals (biased, asymetric and nonlinear waveforms) and this caused copper wire to become superconducting.
Greetings Gentlemen,
I have emailed Dr. Mike Rosing. He is the skeptical scientist who decided to try to measure/validate the failed Steron's device. He is also an instrumentation expert. I have emailed Dr. Mike seeking his comments and here is his reply (quoted with his permission):
QuoteHowdy Adam,
I saw this on FreeEnergyTracker blog
(http://freeenergytracker.blogspot.com/) but didn't give it much thought.
I'm having too much fun trying to model Bussard Fusors for the moment,
but the first thing comes to mind looking at these claims is that they all use
volt or amp meters to try to figure things out. What they really need to
do is hook up one of those LED+generator flash lights and run the motor
without added coil for 2 minutes and see how long the LED's glow, then
hook up the motor plus coil and run it for 2 minutes and see if there is
any difference.
Trying to argue internal/instantaneous power misses the point. If there
is an energy gain, it has to be able to do useful work. Hooking up
something that takes work and converts it back to heat is the ultimate
test. So using a microprocessor to turn on a relay for 2 minutes and then
turn off is a really good and cheap way to control the input power. Do it
10 times and you've got good statistics even.
If it really works - he can run a submarine under water longer. Lots of
people will pay him big bucks for that. The added cost and weight of 10%
more efficient motors is well worth it for that application. I doubt it
has anything to do with "perpetual motion", but one professor suggested it
may be a more efficient way to run a motor. The LED test would prove that
too.
So I'd suggest putting up a real test - finite input power/energy with
microsecond control (a PIC can do that!) and a real load with an easy way
to measure the output under different conditions (with and without extra
coils). All the other measurements are fine - but they don't tell the
whole story.
Dr. Mike's web site is here:
http://www.eskimo.com/~eresrch/
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 01:08:09 AM
ADDED: The result will be something like this link http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp - note that at low rpm it's absolutely normal for torque and speed to rise while current falls. I think we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all.
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new. His affect initiates acceleration from a steady RPM, something that would intuitively seem to need at least a temporary bump in input - or the release of a braking affect, as you and others have pointed out. I find your conclusion, and what seems to be an implication that there is no value in the affect, premature.
Can someone tell me if the terms "hysteresis brake" and "magnetic brake" are synonymous as they are used on this thread?
Note: before I fell asleep I thought of some stuff I missed, it has been added above with red 'updates'.
It is also worth noting that when it come to agitation of the aether by using things such as orgonite (as well as the reflective structure in orgone accumulators and Joe cells) there are tons of other examples such as earth energy (soil), Mesmer (a tub of water, iron filings and glass shavings) and even utterly different things such as the vanes in magnetrons and even parallel electrical circuits. (a guy made multiple parallel amplifier circuits and found it added a 'richness' to the circuit which was then recombined inductively, but he found that if he added a 13th transistor it would blow and on hollowing it out the silicon would have vanished. (can be found by searching Keelynet/Jerry Decker)
I have at times called the effect multiple or cellular resonance but that was before I understood it and only had the observation that these material created orgone. (even before I understood what orgone was)
What I have presented is not a theory and I have not heard anyone else express it, it is generally not in agreement of how the inventors thought their experiments to work but it is what is evident if you look.
It makes sense of things in a way that leaves me even the possibility of questioning the reality of what is revealing it's self, I can not however show anyone else all the evidence as it's a decade long journey but rest assured if you look understand what I have presented and apply it to various anomalies, especially Free Energy and Antigravity devices you will see it explains most any devices operation no matter if it is from 100 years ago or discovered a week from now.
What has tortured me is the fact that most of these devices are 'unintentional hybrids' meaning they work on a conventional level they were designed for but also on an aetheric level which has been 'lucked into' and the latter can be broken by the craziest things, but no more evidence need be given of that than the shaft coupling required by Thanes device.
But sometimes it is far far more subtle stuff such as location, details of operation, energy from experimenter etc...
This is the first time a device has been robust and replicated, acceptably detailed, clear in it's function and how to proceed, clear in it's ability to effect the aether and to respond to that effect.
I can show you an almost endless number of devices but there is one thing or another that stands in the way of it being an idea or acceptable testbed.
I am very happy to note that I have not on list anyway received any laughter or attacks, and while I made my 'peace' with the concept of the aether long long ago I am still acutely aware of how this sounds to many people since I have a very conventional skeptical scientist in my head telling me so.
Anyway I hope at least some found my disclosure interesting.
I found your info very interesting Aether22. Thanks - clearly that was LOTS of typing.
Odd you tried to vaporize your own mother with a generator. That's legal in New Zealand, eh?
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 02:55:01 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 01:08:09 AM
ADDED: The result will be something like this link http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp - note that at low rpm it's absolutely normal for torque and speed to rise while current falls. I think we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all.
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new. His affect initiates acceleration from a steady RPM, something that would intuitively seem to need at least a temporary bump in input - or the release of a braking affect, as you and others have pointed out. I find your conclusion, and what seems to be an implication that there is no value in the affect, premature.
Basically the faster they rotate the less current they draw and the less torque they output.
You can't drop the input and get more torque and speed out of a motor unless you are changing some other part of the equation such as reducing losses.
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 03:04:56 PM
Can someone tell me if the terms "hysteresis brake" and "magnetic brake" are synonymous as they are used on this thread?
That depends on who is talking I would imagine, there are of course 2 different breaking effects, hysteresis and Lenz Law (eddy currents or intentional induction)
But hysteresis MAY be imagined to be greater. Also cogging may be included by some people.
Quote
Odd you tried to vaporize your own mother with a generator. That's legal in New Zealand, eh?
In a small country like this, anything goes ;)
Thane, can you give me the tracking number?
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:13:23 PM
I am very happy to note that I have not on list anyway received any laughter or attacks, and while I made my 'peace' with the concept of the aether long long ago I am still acutely aware of how this sounds to many people since I have a very conventional skeptical scientist in my head telling me so.
Well, this is overunity.com, and half the people here have ideas that sound crazier than yours.
Tell me, though: Do you have mathematical expressions for any "aetheric" laws that could be used to predict the behaviour of physical systems?
Thanks,
Mr. Entropy
Not managed to resolve things to such a fine point yet because due to the means of discovery of the aether i have started with a very very fuzzy picture which has slowly resolved finer detail, but because I have resisted theorizing I can not go beyond the almost mosaic like picture that forms.
Also the aether may well resist such standard quantification, although after having said that the noble prize winning physicist I mentioned was able to create equations.
It is in it's nature highly nonlinear.
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 04:33:13 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
Stop making me waste electrons!
The hat IS my other house.
Now to keep my massive post (which was typing intensive) around for more than a few hours I will repost it.
Ok, this is what I understand of it, as I have said before I didn't only not believe in the aether (or anything like it) but actually hated it, a repulsive concept, I liked an empty universe clean universe rather than new agey mysterious airy fairy claptrap..
But I am a sucker for evidence and truth, and after researching lots and lots of different Free Energy and Antigravity devices (ones where no explanation other than them being real could explain the evidence), hoping to find correlations (but not some ultimate energy responsible for all of it).
The first thing I found was that impossibly there were no correlations (at least on the level I was looking for them), but I found several other things, I found there were extraordinarily strong correlations between totally different devices but in ways that made no sense, actually increasingly all devices despite the fact that few if any were designed based on what was coming to light, the aether.
Another observation is that these devices have a tendency to manifest more than one 'impossibility', there are a number of free energy devices that besides other side effects demonstrate antigravity.
Likewise there are antigravity devices that have Free energy as a side effect.
The most interesting is the GEET carburetor which has over a hundred anomalies including generation of heat and cold, electromagnetic fields, transmutation, fogging of film besides of course overunity operation.
Anyway yadda yadda I came to realize that it was true beyond any doubt whatsoever, and here is what I have found. This is not theory (as that is projecting beyond what is plainly spelt out by the evidence) but observation of phenomena, much like the difference between observing that fire exists and theorizing how it works and what it is.
Everything I present here has tons of evidence that made me draw the following inescapable conclusions.
Aether is the medium of space and increasingly apparently matter. (as mentioned previously I thought this was likely the case then attended a lecture by a physicist who won a noble price for work in QCD and he described what I termed the aether and showed it to be the medium in which all matter is just an eddy. He had 'proof' and agreed with the term 'aether')
Meanwhile I have found time and again that the type of Free Energy (and antigravity) device that I hope I would find, the 'logical' type that exploits a loophole, that out foxes the universe does not exist.
But if you can change the rules by changing the board game on which we play the game almost anything becomes possible.
Ok, so this is the condensed version because no one would read the full version, but here goes.
First there are 2 slightly different issues, one is that there is aether, it's everywhere, if you compress it you can fit more matter in that space. (which is why parallel mine shafts have been repeatedly measured in different places to be further apart at the bottom, yes really.
You can move it, one reason this is interesting is that you can carry (less dense) aether disturbances such as magnetic fields, electrons sometimes and if you wondered why twins have a connection it's because of resonant aetheric coupling, a superluminal stream of aether carrying various things including the fields that make up thoughts and feeling etc... (not just twins of course, the Russians did an interesting (read disgusting) experiment with killing baby rabbits as they monitored the mother who was far away from the babies in a sub deep under water as they monitored her polygraph)
Another thing though is that by moving it, it flows through and is agitated by matter and this agitation is important. (it's known as torsion, orgone etc...)
So there is the aether, the movement of the aether (acceleration/deceleration of aether imparts a force as per Morton, podklennov and many others), the compression (and rarification) of the aether (note: another Russian experimenter had nested coils finding that if they pulsed inwards time inside slowed down slightly this is due to the coils dragging and compressing aether much as a large mass does, if reversed time sped up) and the energisation of the aether.
The latter can be gained in several ways, well there is radionics (which works just like the twins, resonance pulls an increasingly strong current of aether from a matching disturbance, or it can be shaken out (which is how homeopathics works, aether (at least some of it) keeps moving even after matter has stopped and is thrown out, this is why 'succession' it so forceful and violent and sudden)
Other examples are tiny particles that are out of control such as bions discovered by Reich (which create Orgone radiation) or very similar if not identical oemus/m-state which are tiny metal particles spinning like crazy which also radiate distirbed aether.
But the best way is to make aether move through something that disturbs it especially.
note: As noted previously HV, ionizing radiation, radioactive decay also energize the aether.
That is why some have found something called 'orgonite' to work, if you move aether through a substance that irregularly reflects and refracts it (yes, aether can move Ok through say a ring of metal but dislikes discontinuities) it becomes agitated. (There is a guy, I think his name was Bob, he took at iron powder toroid and wound over it a number of segmented windings which he energized in sequence, they pulled the aether through the iron powder core as the aether becase more and more churned and agitated until he either attracted a lightening strike, or possibly generated one!)
This was also found by another Russian which turned it Cavity Structural Effect, it has been discovered time and again in a dizzying array of devices and methods but then again it is how our bodies create orgone/life energy/chi (has tons of names).
That is why many (especially the Chinese) will talk of blocks in your chi, if the aether is moving through your cells it literally generates tuned life energy.
No I didn't start believing any of this fringe energy based health stuff until I would learn something else about the aether and suddenly the penny would drop and I'd suddenly 'get' something I previously thought to be rubbish.
Anyway that's the basics, now here is some more relevant stuff.
The aether (perhaps it must be reasonably energized?) can help pull in or project a magnetic field. (many many examples but an interesting story is that of the guy who managed to attract steel to his hands by running a magnetic field through his body carried)
This might be how the motor is increasing performance, if it is then it can be OU and can be used to create an very very much overunity transformer. (a loose coupling transformer)
Many many many solid state FE devices provably use this effect, an interesting example is the Kipper coil. (Ground radio is another, but there are tons of examples, 20 or so)
Oh, if you have 6 conical coils with an aether flow through the wires they will project an aether flow out the ends, if you focus these 'beams' on a central point not only will it compress the aether but it can create antigravity.
Now you may ask why aether comes out the end of the cone, is it due to the cone shape? In part yes as the aether will flow towards something that will compress or squeeze it.
But that's not all, I do not know why but there is an effect, it may be dependany on direction I am not sure, it may generate or only amplify aether flows but simply aether 'enjoys' flowing at right angles to it's self.
So a pancake coil will also create a beam.
As will to a lesser extent (or more correctly a lesser density) and coil.
It is also why Slim Spurling's rings work (new age fruit cake who just so happens to have something) and why caduceus coils have strange effects and much much more.
Another thing worth mentioning is that magnets tend to generate an aether flow along the field lines, out of the north and into the south.
Look into Boyd Bushman who focused 5 magnets to get a focused magnetic field carrying aether beam, it also could increase the discharge distance of a VDG from a fraction of an inch to 5? feet along the beam. (recall I said electrons are carried, much evidence for this)
Now, rather cutting edge, so much so I can't say it's fact or stake my life on it like I truly could with much of this stuff, but a time varying aether flow seems to have an enhanced action of inducing an aether flow at 90 degrees.
Another thing, aeher flows at 90 degrees to electric fields, or tends to.
So putting electric and magnetic fields at 0 degrees creates 90 degree aether flows.
Ok, there is a bit more though less relevant but for relativly if brief completeness.
Some things absorb and others transmit (yin and yang) either all or most common forms of orgone/chi/aether disturbance. (that is how Reich's orgone accumulators work)
Female Male
yin yang
clockwise spiral anticlockwise (spiral, coil, rotation)
\\ handed mobius ///// Handed Twist (mobius or twist) -reverse?
Antenna like conver-
ging lines like a The point being the pushing
cone or pyramid \/
Positive Negative (electrical polarity, how the Joe cell works)
Diamagnetic Magnetic
South North
resonance reciever resonant energy
secondary is yin primary (transmitter) is yang
Dielectric? Metal? (might be just a manifestation of dia/mag as all ORAC's were mag/diamag layering as well as metal/dielectric)
Night Day
Vacuum Noble gas (especially in conjunction with a magnet)
Update:
Sparks Electrical arcs especially in an orgone rich environment cause an 'explosion' of charged orgone. (and causes an implosive effect on metal akin to gravity)
Oh, another thing and this one is important, Aether moves very very well in circles, so give it shorted loops/coils etc...
One last note, an entrained aether (which this is) agrees with ALL evidence for light speed, it has the same predictions as SR for any cases where SR is proven right and explains what is going on where SR has failed (which is never if you believe SR's adhenents but they just ignore stuff that is inconvenient)
It is worth noting that Einstein and the scientists that preformed the experiment generally believed to have debunked the concept (it's late but never thought I'd forget their names!) of an aether all continued to believe it it none the less and that such experiments disagree with SR anyway.
So here is what I would do.
While very 'attached' to the experiments above (a few messages ago^) the most critical is to feed the aether (or back-emf) into various test devices that will only show a result if one thing occurs such as pulling a distant field in, decreasing hysteresis etc...
We know that this 'whatever' is effecting the motor and we need to hand it simpler systems to see how it effects them.
In the end that is the most critical thing, not what is communicated by the axle but what it does, personally to me it would seem a magnetic field alone would seem impotent to have the effects that have been witnessed but if you think it can that's fine by me.
Here would be a roadmap I'd set out:
Try the experiments above.
If they work as hoped/expected then use aetheric output of the generator (axle and or coil) to use in a loose coupling transformer. (the primary could maybe even be the grid, but it's not stealing power)
Then use the info above to improve the generator (and or make a bigger better faster one, even a solid state one) and apply the aetheric electrical current to conical coils focused in on a point.
Orgone could be made by using coils with orgonite (or iron powder).
Twisted wire coils (look up Slim Spurling) could also be placed shorted in the generator circuit around someone with health problems. (actually I tried it on my (reluctant) mother with the generator I did make and just now realize she reported improved health but I had not thought it could be due to the device till just now)
It is also worth noting that using wire coils around another wire (like the other wire were a core) or a tightly twisted pair may make improved coil for the generator, and hollow steel cores (as per hop toad) in place of solid, if you want to go all out carbon rods of vials of noble gas inserted in the core may give interesting results. This is all very speculative.
Good night, no time to proof read or speel cheque.
addition: Asymmetric, biased and nonlinear things effect the aether (as well as aetyher having nonlinear effects).
One interesting example is that after realizing that I heard of a claim where the 3 qualities were impressed in electrical signals (biased, asymetric and nonlinear waveforms) and this caused copper wire to become superconducting.
Also Thane, now I have complied with your request can I ask something much easier of you, what is the tracking number of the package, and was the second address included? Thanks.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 23, 2008, 09:39:36 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 23, 2008, 05:06:03 PM
"By Faraday's law, the voltage on the coil is the rate of change of flux through the coil. It doesn't matter one bit that the flux is confined to the shaft.
That's why transformers work, eh?"
Cheers,Mr. Entropy
...
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS SECTION OF THE DRIVE SHAFT IT WILL HAVE POLARITIES AS SHOWN BELOW:
N pole
O - Drive Shaft
S pole
EVEN IF YOU COULD CREATE A BRUSHED SYSTEM FOR READING YOUR DRIVE SHAFT COIL OUTPUT - THERE WOULD BE NO OUTPUT BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE COIL'S INDUCED CURRENT WOULD BE CANCELLED BY THE BOTTOM HALF.
THE DRIVE SHAFT FLUX DOES NOT TRAVEL INTO AND OUT OF THE "PAGE" O AS IT WOULD IN A TRANSFORMER - BUT RATHER IT IS FLIPPING...
Thane
1. I don't think you can say what the field looks like unless you measure it.
2. I don't think you need a brushed system: the coil can be static and have the shaft rotating within it.
PB
GREAT! THANKS FOR THE OFFER!
JUST LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU WANT TO COME TO THE LAB AND GET STARTED?
AETHER22 CAN PB COME TO YOUR HOUSE FOR TESTING INSTEAD - IT'S WARMER?
Thane
I want to see a live demonstration of this device. I would like to shoot some footage and conduct my own tests.
Will you extend your offer to anyone who may be interested?
ANGEL thats an interesting moniker HOWEVER Thane is not hiding in Ottawa he has pretty much extended an open invite to help in the research [if thats your intention] ANGEL so maybe you should get ready to pack @aether very interesting post thanx Chet
"I want to see a live demonstration of this device. I would like to shoot some footage and conduct my own tests. Will you extend your offer to anyone who may be interested?"
The ANGEL
DEAR THE ANGEL,
ARE YOU "THE ANGEL OF DEATH" BY ANY CHANCE?
IF YOU ARE WOULD YOU MIND STOPPING BY BI-POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE IN CARP FIRST?
HE LIVES NEAR THE CARP FARMER'S MARKET I THINK? - JUST GOOGLE CARP ONTARIO YOU'LL FIND IT.
THANKS
Thane
p.s.
Concerning a demo and testing - for sure please contact Kim Cunningham at OCRI and work out the details with her.
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 04:33:13 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
FOR ANYONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW
AETHER22 IS A MULTI-BILLIONAIRE WITH
HOMES ALL OVER THE WORLD - EXCEPT FOR HIS ESTATE IN CARP, ONTARIO CANADA WHICH WAS GIVEN AWAY TO CHARITY JUST LAST WEEK FOR NO APPARENT REASON?
Thane
NOW I have to go change my shorts [very good ] Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 25, 2008, 06:24:02 PM
ANGEL thats an interesting moniker HOWEVER Thane is not hiding in Ottawa he has pretty much extended an open invite to help in the research [if thats your intention] ANGEL so maybe you should get ready to pack @aether very interesting post thanx Chet
Thank you for the information. I would be interested in replicating the work after I've tested it (for my own personal research)--if I am granted permission to do so.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 07:17:54 PM
"I want to see a live demonstration of this device. I would like to shoot some footage and conduct my own tests. Will you extend your offer to anyone who may be interested?"
The ANGEL
DEAR THE ANGEL,
ARE YOU "THE ANGEL OF DEATH" BY ANY CHANCE?
IF YOU ARE WOULD YOU MIND STOPPING BY BI-POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE IN CARP FIRST?
HE LIVES NEAR THE CARP FARMER'S MARKET I THINK? - JUST GOOGLE CARP ONTARIO YOU'LL FIND IT.
THANKS
Thane
p.s.
Concerning a demo and testing - for sure please contact Kim Cunningham at OCRI and work out the details with her.
Thank you. I found the website. I will be contacting her in the coming days.
A no problemo Concerning a demo and testing - for sure please contact Kim Cunningham at OCRI and work out the details
DEAR ALL,
HERE IS SOME DATA ON LUC'S LATEST CREATION...
AN OCTO-FILAR PRIMARY
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
EFFICIENCY = 114.2 %
I AM POSTING A PHOTO BUT WILL POST METER READINGS TOMORROW.
(sorry I can't post it?)
PLEASE NOTE:
WE ARE CHANGING OUR METERS - TO BETTER MORE SENSITIVE ONES TO ENSURE ACCURACY - AND WE WILL BE VERIFYING OUR PRIMARY POWER FACTOR AS WELL.
THANKS TO LUC FOR HIS HARD WORK!
Thane
Thane, if it's because the photo is too large you can e-mail it to me and I can work sufficient magic. Let me know...
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 04:33:13 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
what? what? what did I miss? - for you JustMe
Aether - I have a much better theory for you... Everyone has heard the standard philosophical question of "if a tree falls in the forrest with no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?"... My response to that has always been that it is a trick question since trees don't fall in the forrest when there is no one around to experience it... You see, I believe that every time you turn your back the entire world behind you ceases to exist. If you believe in God (or the devil), you believe that the world was created for the sake of man. And lacking man to experience it, there is no reason for the world (or any part of it) to exist. Some might consider this a bit self centered (I am the center of the universe), but it is a religious belief - one that cannot by its very nature be disproven... your beliefs on the existence of aether (and GEET) seem to follow a similar vein.
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 08:23:33 PM
Thane, if it's because the photo is too large you can e-mail it to me and I can work sufficient magic. Let me know...
OK, PM ME YOUR EMAIL AND I WILL SEND YOU
"LUC'S DEMOLITION DERBY DAY" AS WELL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 07:17:54 PM
"I want to see a live demonstration of this device. I would like to shoot some footage and conduct my own tests. Will you extend your offer to anyone who may be interested?"
The ANGEL
DEAR THE ANGEL,
ARE YOU "THE ANGEL OF DEATH" BY ANY CHANCE?
IF YOU ARE WOULD YOU MIND STOPPING BY BI-POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE IN CARP FIRST?
HE LIVES NEAR THE CARP FARMER'S MARKET I THINK? - JUST GOOGLE CARP ONTARIO YOU'LL FIND IT.
THANKS
Thane
p.s.
Concerning a demo and testing - for sure please contact Kim Cunningham at OCRI and work out the details with her.
Thane, no matter who it is, it's always in bad taste to make angel of death threats ;)
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 08:14:25 PM
DEAR ALL,
HERE IS SOME DATA ON LUC'S LATEST CREATION...
AN OCTO-FILAR PRIMARY
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
EFFICIENCY = 114.2 %
I AM POSTING A PHOTO BUT WILL POST METER READINGS TOMORROW.
(sorry I can't post it?)
PLEASE NOTE:
WE ARE CHANGING OUR METERS - TO BETTER MORE SENSITIVE ONES TO ENSURE ACCURACY - AND WE WILL BE VERIFYING OUR PRIMARY POWER FACTOR AS WELL.
THANKS TO LUC FOR HIS HARD WORK!
Thane
Good idea on changing those meters - based on rounding A = 0.02 AMPS X V = 1.06 VOLTS could equal 21.2 mWATTS, but if that 0.02 amps was really 0.0249 amps it would round down to 0.02 and the real input would be 26.4 mWATTS for a total efficiency of 91.7%
Quote from: jacksatan on March 25, 2008, 08:35:44 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 04:33:13 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
what? what? what did I miss? - for you JustMe
Aether - I have a much better theory for you... Everyone has heard the standard philosophical question of "if a tree falls in the forrest with no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?"...
WHEN A TREE FALLS IN THE FOREST IT MAKES
NO SOUND - UNLESS THERE ARE EARS THERE TO TRANSFORM THE AIR WAVES INTO SOUND INSIDE THE BRAIN OF THE OBSERVER.
OK SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THEN IS...
IF I "TURN MY BACK" ON POLARBREEZE HE CEASES TO EXIST?
WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL ME THAT BEFORE I HAD CARP NAPOMBED?
Thane
Quote from: jacksatan on March 25, 2008, 08:35:44 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 04:33:13 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 25, 2008, 03:37:23 PM
Also were the 2 addresses put on it as I asked?
Maybe answer in PM? Thanks.
Aether, does your special hat have it's own house? ;)
JustMe in for JackSatan who is not expected back until we're talking about something else again.
what? what? what did I miss? - for you JustMe
Aether - I have a much better theory for you... Everyone has heard the standard philosophical question of "if a tree falls in the forrest with no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?"... My response to that has always been that it is a trick question since trees don't fall in the forrest when there is no one around to experience it... You see, I believe that every time you turn your back the entire world behind you ceases to exist. If you believe in God (or the devil), you believe that the world was created for the sake of man. And lacking man to experience it, there is no reason for the world (or any part of it) to exist. Some might consider this a bit self centered (I am the center of the universe), but it is a religious belief - one that cannot by its very nature be disproven... your beliefs on the existence of aether (and GEET) seem to follow a similar vein.
Jacksatan, have I got the cat for you! he's shy and likes to say in his box.
And as free gifts you get a vial of poison and a sample of radioactive material!
Just promise not to use him in one of your infamous rituals.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 25, 2008, 08:47:11 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 08:14:25 PM
DEAR ALL,
HERE IS SOME DATA ON LUC'S LATEST CREATION...
AN OCTO-FILAR PRIMARY
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
EFFICIENCY = 114.2 %
I AM POSTING A PHOTO BUT WILL POST METER READINGS TOMORROW.
(sorry I can't post it?)
PLEASE NOTE:
WE ARE CHANGING OUR METERS - TO BETTER MORE SENSITIVE ONES TO ENSURE ACCURACY - AND WE WILL BE VERIFYING OUR PRIMARY POWER FACTOR AS WELL.
THANKS TO LUC FOR HIS HARD WORK!
Thane
Good idea on changing those meters - based on rounding A = 0.02 AMPS X V = 1.06 VOLTS could equal 21.2 mWATTS, but if that 0.02 amps was really 0.0249 amps it would round down to 0.02 and the real input would be 26.4 mWATTS for a total efficiency of 91.7%
DON'T FORGET THE POWER FACTOR MIGHT BE 0.5 AS WELL...?
AT ANY RATE - WE ARE HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AS LONG AS LUC DOESN'T BLOW UP THE LAB WITH HIS
EXPLODING NEO-MAGNET CLAYMORE MINE IN A BOX!
Thane
Back in the sixties and seventies, when I was working on linear induction motors at Imperial College, London (and later at Cambridge University on the RTV31 linear induction monorail), I often took the London tube (aka subway). There was a gentleman who got on that train every day with his trilby hat and his umbrella. He sat down and, every day, got out a newspaper and laboriously tore it up into tiny strips and spread it over the floor. One day, my curiosity overcame me and I asked him, "Why do you do that every day?" His reply: "Because it keeps the elephants away". "But", I retorted, "there are no elephants on the tube". "So you see", said he, "my strategy has proved completely effective".
PB
PS - this is also why no elephants have ever been sighted in the Diefenbunker.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 09:15:21 PM
Back in the sixties and seventies, when I was working on linear induction motors at Imperial College, London (and later at Cambridge University on the RTV31 linear induction monorail), I often took the London tube (aka subway). There was a gentleman who got on that train every day with his trilby hat and his umbrella. He sat down and, every day, got out a newspaper and laboriously tore it up into tiny strips and spread it over the floor. One day, my curiosity overcame me and I asked him, "Why do you do that every day?" His reply: "Because it keeps the elephants away". "But", I retorted, "there are no elephants on the tube". "So you see", said he, "my strategy has proved completely effective".
PB
PS - this is also why no elephants have ever been sighted in the Diefenbunker.
WOW- THAT'S JUST CRAZY!!!
WHAT A COINSCIDENCE - JUST THE OTHER DAY AS WITH EVERY DAY SO FAR - OUR LAB TECHNICIAN FRED WAS SPREADING TINY STRIPS OF
USED BEEF CATTLE TOILET TISSUE ALL OVER THE LAB DOORWAY. I HAD TO ASK, "
FRED, WHY DO YOU DO SPREAD THAT BS LADEN PARCHMENT THERE EVERYDAY WITHOUT FAIL?"
"IT'S INSULATION" HE SAID, "
IT KEEPS POLARBREEZES FROM BLOWING IN".
"OK", I SAID "AT LEAST NOW WE KNOW WHY".
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 08:14:25 PM
HERE IS SOME DATA ON LUC'S LATEST CREATION...
AN OCTO-FILAR PRIMARY
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
That sounds pretty impressive. Are you still running at 60Hz? If so, then that primary must have a lot of turns to get that much reactance, yes? What is its DC resistance? It looks like your numbers come out to way overunity if you count the resistive losses in the copper.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 06:48:08 PM
It normally goes like this:
1. Demonstrate a prototype which, however crudely, provides objectively measurable end-results that show how the device can be used to improve a real end-product. In this case it would mean demonstrating that the device improves the efficiency of a motor. (Or any other real end-result would be fine too provided it has value and provided it can be objectively measured, right now, on the actual prototype.)
OR
2. Put forward a theory of operation that can be properly defended and shows that the creator understands the mechanism/phenomenon/process at work and rigorously describes it in proper scientific/engineering terms. Show experimental results that clearly prove this fundamental mechanism (not necessarily, in this case, the end-result) and also, very importantly, exactly how that mechanism can be incorporated with further development into an actual prototype like #1.
What do you think?
Please everyone here
If you do not find the information posted here to be satisfactory to prove to you what we don't even understand ourself, then I suggest for you come to Ottawa for a demonstration and make your own measurements and conclusions. If you cannot come to Ottawa then please build it for yourself. If you cannot build it for yourself, then wait some time and we will build units that you can buy and see the workings of it for yourself.
Luc
I am attempting to read through this entire thread. I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?
If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one?
I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes. I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 09:51:07 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 09:15:21 PM
Back in the sixties and seventies, when I was working on linear induction motors at Imperial College, London (and later at Cambridge University on the RTV31 linear induction monorail), I often took the London tube (aka subway). There was a gentleman who got on that train every day with his trilby hat and his umbrella. He sat down and, every day, got out a newspaper and laboriously tore it up into tiny strips and spread it over the floor. One day, my curiosity overcame me and I asked him, "Why do you do that every day?" His reply: "Because it keeps the elephants away". "But", I retorted, "there are no elephants on the tube". "So you see", said he, "my strategy has proved completely effective".
PB
PS - this is also why no elephants have ever been sighted in the Diefenbunker.
WOW- THAT'S JUST CRAZY!!!
WHAT A COINSCIDENCE - JUST THE OTHER DAY AS WITH EVERY DAY SO FAR - OUR LAB TECHNICIAN FRED WAS SPREADING TINY STRIPS OF USED BEEF CATTLE TOILET TISSUE ALL OVER THE LAB DOORWAY. I HAD TO ASK, "FRED, WHY DO YOU DO SPREAD THAT BS LADEN PARCHMENT THERE EVERYDAY WITHOUT FAIL?"
"IT'S INSULATION" HE SAID, "IT KEEPS POLARBREEZES FROM BLOWING IN".
"OK", I SAID "AT LEAST NOW WE KNOW WHY".
Thane
I have not had such a good laugh in a long time... ;D ;D ;D my neck is hurting.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2008, 10:54:31 PM
I have not had such a good laugh in a long time... ;D ;D ;D my neck is hurting.
Luc
Happy to oblige, Luc!
BTW, Thane, was that you I saw in the Naismith pub Monday evening? I thought I recognized your hat - the baseball cap, not the other one (I guess you were off duty).
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 02:55:01 PM
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new.
Indeed he has, and he presents it as some kind of mystery that requires an unusual explanation. However, it's no mystery at all: it's absolutely standard behavior for an induction motor, as shown inÃ, http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp . Hence my statement about "it's just a brake after all" - sorry, it may have sounded dismissive I guess but I simply mean that this issue is now resolved, which is a good step forward. BUT there is still an important issue remaining: the observation (by Thane/Luc and possibly others, although nobody else has said so yet) that there are differences in behaviour when different shaft materials are used (eg brass vs steel). This remains an open issue and I think (as do others including Aether) that this should now be the focus of attention.
PB
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU? ???
Cheers,
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 12:14:55 AM
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU?Ã, ???
Cheers,
Aaron
It would BUT the operative word is "tentative". Luc's calculations do not take account of power factor (ie phase difference between current and voltage), which will have a huge impact, and his measure of input current has an uncertainty of about 25%. Until those major measurement issues are resolved, the efficiency is unknown.
PB
Hi PB,
Thanks for the info! These are exciting days! :)
Aaron
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:13:37 AM
However, it's no mystery at all: it's absolutely standard behavior for an induction motor, as shown in http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp . Hence my statement about "it's just a brake after all" - sorry, it may have sounded dismissive I guess but I simply mean that this issue is now resolved, which is a good step forward. BUT there is still an important issue remaining: the observation (by Thane/Luc and possibly others, although nobody else has said so yet) that there are differences in behaviour when different shaft materials are used (eg brass vs steel). This remains an open issue and I think (as do others including Aether) that this should now be the focus of attention.
PB
It's standard behaviour for all motors. As the rotor of any motor increases rpm, it acts like a generator and produces its own magnetomotive force which induces a counter (back) emf in the drive windings. The final drive winding current is a vector of the source current minus the counter emf current.
I'll wager two pond lillies, that the "effect" is evident regardless of shaft materials, as it is related to the interaction of the external magnets and external coils, which are in a semi-open magnetic configuration in Vinces model. If Vinces rotor were non magnetic, and the coil is mounted on a non magnetic base, the effect will still occur, even though it would be a completely open magnetic system.
If the effect isn't evident with an induction motor, I'll still wager it will occur with a Universal motor, or a DC motor as a driver (which I've already documented in experiments. see link below)
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams (page 10)
That's two pond lillies ........ anybody for a wager ? ...... KneeDeep
Cheers all.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 25, 2008, 10:30:04 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 25, 2008, 08:14:25 PM
HERE IS SOME DATA ON LUC'S LATEST CREATION...
AN OCTO-FILAR PRIMARY
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
That sounds pretty impressive. Are you still running at 60Hz? If so, then that primary must have a lot of turns to get that much reactance, yes? What is its DC resistance? It looks like your numbers come out to way overunity if you count the resistive losses in the copper.
IT MAY SOUND IMPRESSIVE - BUT WE ARE KEEPING OUR FEET PLANTED ON THE FLOOR UNTIL
WE HAVE EVERYTHING PROPERLY METERED. I HAVE BEEN FOOLED BEFORE.
WE JUST WANTED TO SHARE IT - BECAUSE AT THE VERY LEAST IT SHOWS A VAST IMPROVEMENT OVER OUR PREVIOUS (VIDEO) DATA PRESENTATION.
WE WILL GET YOU THOSE NUMBERS TODAY WITH SOME BETTER PHOTOS.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 25, 2008, 11:30:39 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2008, 10:54:31 PM
I have not had such a good laugh in a long time... ;D ;D ;D my neck is hurting.
Luc
Happy to oblige, Luc!
BTW, Thane, was that you I saw in the Naismith pub Monday evening? I thought I recognized your hat - the baseball cap, not the other one (I guess you were off duty).
PB
I ONLY WEAR MY
DUNCE CAP ON SUNDAY.
AND THAT WASN'T MY FAULT -
YOUR WIFE CALLED ME THIS TIME!
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:13:37 AM
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 02:55:01 PM
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new.
Indeed he has, and he presents it as some kind of mystery that requires an unusual explanation.
PB
YES A REAL MYSTERY:
AS AN INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED INCREASES THE ROTOR BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD INCREASES AND COUPLES BACK TO THE STATOR COIL - INCREASING STATOR IMPEDENCE AND CAUSING STATOR CURRENT DRAW TO DECREASE.
HOW COULD TESLA KEEP THIS INFO FROM THE WORLD ALL THESE YEARS?
Thane
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 12:14:55 AM
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU? ???
Cheers,
Aaron
AT SUCH LOW NUMBERS - THE METERS ARE HAVING AN EFFECT ON THE DATA.
WE WON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF AN EFFECT UNTIL WE DOUBLE CHECK WITH MORE SENSITIVE EQUIPMENT - THE EFFICIENCY MIGHT EVEN BE HIGHER HOWEVER.
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on March 26, 2008, 02:36:28 AM
If the effect isn't evident with an induction motor, I'll still wager it will occur with a Universal motor, or a DC motor as a driver (which I've already documented in experiments. see link below)
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams (page 10)
That's two pond lillies ........ anybody for a wager ? ...... KneeDeep
Cheers all.
I'LL TAKE THAT WAGER MISTER!
I'LL SEE YOUR TWO POND LILLIES AND RAISE YOU TWO
CANADIAN LOONIES (THAT'S ACTUAL MONEY $ 4.00 - NOT LUC AND I )
WE WILL BE SETTING UP A DC GOLF CART MOTOR WHICH IS ARRIVING TODAY.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:55:03 AM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 12:14:55 AM
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU? ???
Cheers,
Aaron
It would BUT the operative word is "tentative". Luc's calculations do not take account of power factor (ie phase difference between current and voltage), which will have a huge impact, PB
WE ASSUME A (
WORST CASE) PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 1.
THEREFORE
NO PHASE ANGLE IMPACT AT ALL.
UNLESS OF COURSE -
IF IT'S LOWER THAN 1WHICH WOULD HAVE A
HUGE IMPACT ON INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY ABOVE 114%.
PRIMARY CURRENT AND VOLTAGE MAGNITUDES NEED TO BE DOUBLE CHECKED.
Thane
@ OilBarren:
Do you have a diagram of your latest transformer setup?
I am trying to filter through all these postings and sparing matches but can't seem to find the essence of the unit.
I would like to try replication your unit for myself. Sorry I just spotted this posting today.
I was all caught up with the fellow from Kitchener who build a energy converter he is now marketing.
Perhaps his unit has something in common with yours.
Anyway I would like to try and replicate your device.
Harold.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 05:59:19 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:55:03 AM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 12:14:55 AM
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU?Ã, ???
Cheers,
Aaron
It would BUT the operative word is "tentative". Luc's calculations do not take account of power factor (ie phase difference between current and voltage), which will have a huge impact, PB
WE ASSUME A (WORST CASE) PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 1.
THEREFORE NO PHASE ANGLE IMPACT AT ALL.
UNLESS OF COURSE - IF IT'S LOWER THAN 1
WHICH WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY ABOVE 114%.
PRIMARY CURRENT AND VOLTAGE MAGNITUDES NEED TO BE DOUBLE CHECKED.
Thane
<sigh> you've got it backwards, Thane. But you know that, of course. Or maybe you are unaware that the phase difference between voltage and current has to be accounted for in BOTH the input AND the output power measurements?
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 05:38:31 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:13:37 AM
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 02:55:01 PM
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new.
Indeed he has, and he presents it as some kind of mystery that requires an unusual explanation.
PB
YES A REAL MYSTERY:
AS AN INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED INCREASES THE ROTOR BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD INCREASES AND COUPLES BACK TO THE STATOR COIL - INCREASING STATOR IMPEDENCE AND CAUSING STATOR CURRENT DRAW TO DECREASE.
HOW COULD TESLA KEEP THIS INFO FROM THE WORLD ALL THESE YEARS?
Thane
Exactly, Thane. It's NOT a mystery. You have demonstrated nothing at all with this contraption which isn't already very well known by people who have been building motors, generators and other electromagnetic devices for decades. You have some kind of a problem with the shaft materials/construction/mounting interfering with the experiment (which nobody else has reported by the way) so when you solve that you'll be all done.
PB
Quote from: hoptoad on March 26, 2008, 02:36:28 AM
I'll wager two pond lillies, that the "effect" is evident regardless of shaft materials, as it is related to the interaction of the external magnets and external coils, which are in a semi-open magnetic configuration in Vinces model. If Vinces rotor were non magnetic, and the coil is mounted on a non magnetic base, the effect will still occur, even though it would be a completely open magnetic system.
I completely agree, hoptoad. The "effect" happens in the contraption itself and its only interaction with the motor is to place a mechanical load on it through the shaft (which is as easily done with a mechanical brake). So the investigation now needs to be around
Thane's report that he gets different results depending on the shaft material/properties. It's worth noting that nobody else on this thread has reported that effect (ie the dependence of the results on shaft material) and it's the only remaining unexplained effect of Thane's experiment. So once we've determined a reason why his setup is misbehaving when he changes the shaft materials the riddle will be solved.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 05:29:29 AM
AND THAT WASN'T MY FAULT - YOUR WIFE CALLED ME THIS TIME!
Thane
She was calling you about something else - I told her you were an expert on avoiding paying GST so she was looking for advice on that. How did that work out for you by the way?
PB
Quote from: gotoluc on March 09, 2008, 06:53:54 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 09, 2008, 06:48:08 PM
It normally goes like this:
1. Demonstrate a prototype which, however crudely, provides objectively measurable end-results that show how the device can be used to improve a real end-product. In this case it would mean demonstrating that the device improves the efficiency of a motor. (Or any other real end-result would be fine too provided it has value and provided it can be objectively measured, right now, on the actual prototype.)
OR
2. Put forward a theory of operation that can be properly defended and shows that the creator understands the mechanism/phenomenon/process at work and rigorously describes it in proper scientific/engineering terms. Show experimental results that clearly prove this fundamental mechanism (not necessarily, in this case, the end-result) and also, very importantly, exactly how that mechanism can be incorporated with further development into an actual prototype like #1.
What do you think?
Please everyone here
If you do not find the information posted here to be satisfactory to prove to you what we don't even understand ourself, then I suggest for you come to Ottawa for a demonstration and make your own measurements and conclusions. If you cannot come to Ottawa then please build it for yourself. If you cannot build it for yourself, then wait some time and we will build units that you can buy and see the workings of it for yourself.
Luc
I am attempting to read through this entire thread. I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?
If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one?
I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes. I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.
May I please get approved documentation from you to get this device built?
Thank you,
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:13:37 AM
Quote from: JustMe on March 25, 2008, 02:55:01 PM
Thane has spoken more than once about induction motors having the property of requiring less and less power as they accelerate, so I don't think this is new.
Indeed he has, and he presents it as some kind of mystery that requires an unusual explanation. However, it's no mystery at all: it's absolutely standard behavior for an induction motor, as shown in http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp . Hence my statement about "it's just a brake after all" - sorry, it may have sounded dismissive I guess but I simply mean that this issue is now resolved, which is a good step forward.
You continue to imply that either Thane was unaware of this standard behaviour, or has attempted to cloak the standard behaviour illustrated in that link you can't seem to stop posting in mystery. I call bullshit on both. Again, Thane stated more than once that induction motors require less and less power as they accelerate as a matter of course. That's all your graph says. Your graph doesn't cover a motor accelerating from a stabilized RPM, just an uniterrupted normal starting sequence. So not news to anyone who has been following here, except perhaps you.
We can agree that your "it's just a brake after all" statement was indeed dismissive. I fail to see how it's "now resolved" unless I've missed something, and I don't miss much. As I understand the various braking hypotheses, Vince's setup and observations in particular leave questions about this wide open and deserving of further analysis. The people who have bothered to invest time and thought and effort on the ideas presented here one way or another deserve better than you trying to herd them off a cliff. The fact that you're trying so hard is getting weird.
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 11:20:06 AM
I am attempting to read through this entire thread. I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?
If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one?
I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes. I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.
May I please get approved documentation from you to get this device built?
Thank you,
Hi Angel,
I may be wrong, but from what I can tell, the duplicators so far have done so on their own account, merely by reading the posts and watching Thane's videos. In other words, they made an effort to build first then asked questions if they needed additional help. Since you have a "master electrician" and a "master mechanic" why don't you let them watch the videos and let them loose. :)
Or, take Thane up on his invitation to visit him and bring along your electrican and mechanic with you.
Cheers,
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 11:49:38 AM
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 11:20:06 AM
I am attempting to read through this entire thread. I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?
If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one?
I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes. I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.
May I please get approved documentation from you to get this device built?
Thank you,
Hi Angel,
I may be wrong, but from what I can tell, the duplicators so far have done so on their own account, merely by reading the posts and watching Thane's videos. In other words, they made an effort to build first then asked questions if they needed additional help. Since you have a "master electrician" and a "master mechanic" why don't you let them watch the videos and let them loose. :)
Or, take Thane up on his invitation to visit him and bring along your electrican and mechanic with you.
Cheers,
Aaron
Fair enough then. I do not understand what you imply by "master electrician" and a "master mechanic". What do the quotations mean? I have a very good friend who is a master electrician and a family member who is a mechanical engineer.
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 11:24:45 AM
Your graph doesn't cover a motor accelerating from a stabilized RPM, just an uniterrupted normal starting sequence.
The graph (it's not mine, by the way, it's from a standard induction motor datasheet) shows the relationship between rpm, torque and current. You are wrong in your assumption that it "doesn't cover ... etc" - it applies to ALL situations, whether you're starting from zero, from some arbitrary rpm or whatever. I suggest you re-read the paper. The results that Thane has reported are fully consistent with a motor characteristic of this kind. Yet he speaks of a discovery of unexpected results which could lead to great advances in motors/generators. The results, though, are NOT unexpected: they are exactly as predicted by theory and prior empirical evidence.
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 11:24:45 AM
... I fail to see how it's "now resolved" unless I've missed something, and I don't miss much. As I understand the various braking hypotheses, Vince's setup and observations in particular leave questions about this wide open and deserving of further analysis...
I did make the point (which you omitted to quote) that there are TWO parts to this:
1. The relationship between rpm, torque and current - for which, yes, I think it is fully justified to say is resolved, since the device's behaviour is as predicted by theory - see http://polk-burnett.apogee.net/pd/dmcs.asp
AND (the part you didn't quote):
2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including:
- Since Thane's hypothesis is that there's magnetic flux passing through the shaft that's affecting the motor behaviour, then I proposed that we measure that flux and see what it tells us. Thane first of all claimed that it couldn't be measured and then when several people pointed out to him that it could indeed be readily measured he didn't follow up on it. So it is an open issue.
- In support of the speculation about a possible mechanism whereby the flux of Thane's theory could be affecting the motor, I made a suggestion. This was that this fed-back flux (if it exists), being of a higher frequency, could have the same effect as "slip" and therefore result in increased torque, which would cause acceleration (and acceleration is what Thane had observed). This is simply an idea and it could be easily measured but, again, Thane chooses not to follow up on it. There are other theories too, such as Aether's, which are also open issues right now.
- A third suggestion: since the only observation of the brass-vs-steel effect to date has been in Thane's own setup, it would be very desirable for someone else to try to reproduce it, and report on the results.
So I think you're mistaken when you suggest I'm trying to shut down the research (which is the way I interpret your comment "herd off a cliff"). I'm just offering an opinion about what's already explained and what remains to be explained. Do you see what I mean?
PB
jacksatan wrote:
"Everyone has heard the standard philosophical question of 'if a tree falls in the forrest with no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?"...
I always liked this version of that question...
"If Helen Keller is alone in a forrest and falls, does she make a sound?"
;)
-Mark
PS:
Depends on your definition of 'sound'. The compressional waves in air are there regardless of anything else, so there's the potential for 'hearing/perceiving' a sound. Human perception is quite an interesting thing...
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 11:57:41 AM
Fair enough then. I do not understand what you imply by "master electrician" and a "master mechanic". What do the quotations mean? I have a very good friend who is a master electrician and a family member who is a mechanical engineer.
Hi Angel,
Sorry, the implication, if any, is that they sound more than qualified to duplicate the device, just let them have at it! The more duplicators the better! :)
Cheers,
Aaron
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 05:59:19 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:55:03 AM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 26, 2008, 12:14:55 AM
Hi All,
Forgive my cluelessness but does the tentative efficiency of 114% on Luc's latest test mean OU? ???
Cheers,
Aaron
It would BUT the operative word is "tentative". Luc's calculations do not take account of power factor (ie phase difference between current and voltage), which will have a huge impact, PB
WE ASSUME A (WORST CASE) PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 1.
THEREFORE NO PHASE ANGLE IMPACT AT ALL.
UNLESS OF COURSE - IF IT'S LOWER THAN 1
WHICH WOULD HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY ABOVE 114%.
PRIMARY CURRENT AND VOLTAGE MAGNITUDES NEED TO BE DOUBLE CHECKED.
Thane
For those of you who want me to prove my skeptics point of view...
Based on the metered results of:
INPUT
A = 0.02 AMPS
V = 1.06 VOLTS
P = 21.2 mWATTS
OUTPUT @ 1 K OHM
VOLTS = 4.91 VOLTS
P = 24.2 mWATTS
and varying only the input amperage (for simplicities sake) by the potential rounding error... the input amperage could range from =>0.015 to >0.025 or 25% of the measured efficiency in either direction... so given the measured efficiency of 114%, the actual efficiency could be anywhere between 85.5% and 142.5%... assuming the actual input is completely unknown, given the range of efficiency of (142.5-85.5=) 57%, the random likelihood of the efficiency being less than 100% (under-unity) would be (100-85.5=) 14.5/57 or 25.4%... given odds like that, I should request at least 3 to 1 odds that the correctly measured efficiency is uderunity, right? But I am a benevolent sucker, so I will offer 3 to 1 odds to anyone who wants to bet that this is over unity... any takers?
Thane, It has been sent right?
If so the tracking number would be very helpful as with verification on what day it was sent and the extra address I requested Kim add.
I need to see how likely it is that it will arrive before I leave and if after I need to assure it will be safe.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 26, 2008, 01:49:34 PM
...I will offer 3 to 1 odds to anyone who wants to bet that this is over unity... any takers?
Be careful, you need to also specify that the only units that qualify are Watts: not orgone, chi, torsion, zpf, manna, bions etc. Just Watts - otherwise you could lose your shirt. ;)
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:26:34 PM
The graph (it's not mine, by the way, it's from a standard induction motor datasheet) shows the relationship between rpm, torque and current. You are wrong in your assumption that it "doesn't cover ... etc" - it applies to ALL situations, whether you're starting from zero, from some arbitrary rpm or whatever. I suggest you re-read the paper. The results that Thane has reported are fully consistent with a motor characteristic of this kind. Yet he speaks of a discovery of unexpected results which could lead to great advances in motors/generators. The results, though, are NOT unexpected: they are exactly as predicted by theory and prior empirical evidence.
Your graph does not illustrate predict or explain (because it's not designed to) the
resumption of standard changes in speed, torque and consumption from a steady state rpm. Common sense dictates that that requires that something give (or take). If you misunderstand me again it can be nothing but deliberate.
Repeating yourself and your pet link will not change the fact that Thane has noted the very properties you and your graph describe more than once. From one of the videos: "Now an induction motor is kind of cool in that as it accelerates it requires less and less power..." You are putting out a total red herring, and it was already old yesterday. The unexpected results are not the acceleration/decrease in consumption on their own (though the process may be augmented or attenuated by the presence of the external influence) , but in contrast to the deceleration without a clear magnetic (or whatever) path between the motor and the flux (or whatever) created at the generator. The magnetic brake theory could indeed be the primary thing at play here, but it's far from proven, quantified, qualified or any other such thing. No justification whatsoever for your clear and unambiguous statement that "we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all". Where'd all the love for copious data go?
In summary, you seem to have been unaware of the standard relationship between acceleration and power consumption in an induction motor, and compounded that knowledge deficit with an assumption that others were unaware as well. This has led you to misunderstand what Thane feels is the significance of his observations. That's your problem, not his, and moves nothing over from the unknown column just yet.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:26:34 PM
2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....
It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 11:20:06 AM
I am attempting to read through this entire thread. I presume that from the above post that I can freely build this device for personal and research use?
If so, where may I obtain the necessary documentation to build one?
I have a master electrician and a mechanical engineer on-hand to build your device for testing purposes. I will personally travel to your lab if/when we replicate the effect that you have demonstrated and obtain satisfactory measurements.
May I please get approved documentation from you to get this device built?
Thank you,
I am sure Thane would be happy to show you his device running in person if you would like.
As for the details of the device anything that you are unsure of just ask but if you read the complete thread then you will have most of your questions answered.
The best way to build Thanes device is to buy the parts that Thane uses from the same place, not sure what page but Thane did put the links in the thread somewhere.
But basically the device is:
A bench grinder (cap start induction motor, Ryobi)
1/2 inch shaft
Steel wheelbarrow wheel (from online store).
Neo magnets (also from the same store, and holders too I think) 6 will do but Thane is using 18.
And coils, of which Thane mentioned ohms ranges in one post and I think he mentioned the main AWG he uses, though the device has been successfully replicated with coils of fewer turns than Thanes and different wire gauges.
The coil core can be anything from simple solid steel, to laminates to hollow tubes (masonry anchor sheaths). (the latter not having been tested by Thane personally yet I don't believe)
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:26:34 PM
2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....
It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.
OK, let's focus on what we agree about then. I agree with your statement that the "entire foundation of the observations" is now this brass-vs-steel thing. Let's move forward from there. It's a good place to focus.
PB.
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:26:34 PM
The graph (it's not mine, by the way, it's from a standard induction motor datasheet) shows the relationship between rpm, torque and current. You are wrong in your assumption that it "doesn't cover ... etc" - it applies to ALL situations, whether you're starting from zero, from some arbitrary rpm or whatever. I suggest you re-read the paper. The results that Thane has reported are fully consistent with a motor characteristic of this kind. Yet he speaks of a discovery of unexpected results which could lead to great advances in motors/generators. The results, though, are NOT unexpected: they are exactly as predicted by theory and prior empirical evidence.
Your graph does not illustrate predict or explain (because it's not designed to) the resumption of standard changes in speed, torque and consumption from a steady state rpm. Common sense dictates that that requires that something give (or take). If you misunderstand me again it can be nothing but deliberate.
Repeating yourself and your pet link will not change the fact that Thane has noted the very properties you and your graph describe more than once. From one of the videos: "Now an induction motor is kind of cool in that as it accelerates it requires less and less power..." You are putting out a total red herring, and it was already old yesterday. The unexpected results are not the acceleration/decrease in consumption on their own (though the process may be augmented or attenuated by the presence of the external influence) , but in contrast to the deceleration without a clear magnetic (or whatever) path between the motor and the flux (or whatever) created at the generator. The magnetic brake theory could indeed be the primary thing at play here, but it's far from proven, quantified, qualified or any other such thing. No justification whatsoever for your clear and unambiguous statement that "we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all". Where'd all the love for copious data go?
In summary, you seem to have been unaware of the standard relationship between acceleration and power consumption in an induction motor, and compounded that knowledge deficit with an assumption that others were unaware as well. This has led you to misunderstand what Thane feels is the significance of his observations. That's your problem, not his, and moves nothing over from the unknown column just yet.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 12:26:34 PM
2. Thane's observation that this behaviour is modified, in his setup, depending on whether the shaft piece is steel or brass. This part, I agree is still open and can use further investigation. In fact, I've made several suggestions about it, including....
It's not a little loose end that needs tying up, it's the entire foundation of the observations. Nothing's changed.
Ok, first all normal electric motors pull less current the faster they rotate.
But they produce less torque (less mechanical power), because there is less current and hence a weaker magnetic field. (and in induction motors less rotor inducing slip also)
Vince has proven that when the shafts are coupled the thing that changes is not a reduction in magnetic breaking (which of course the main thing that slows down the motor from it's top freewheeling speed) which can not possibly be reduced but an increase in motor output as measured.
Polarbreeze, again I say if you are doing this for free what is your motivation?
You are not winning any arguments, convincing anyone, you are clearly not actually interested in the device or you would visit, in fact I question if you really live where you claim and I doubt you are who you claim because if you had experience in induction motors as you claim you wouldn't have confused it with a synchronous motor as you did earlier.
You are full of it, you know it and we know it, and you know we know, so why are you still here?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 03:27:53 PM
OK, let's focus on what we agree about then. I agree with your statement that the "entire foundation of the observations" is now this brass-vs-steel thing. Let's move forward from there. It's a good place to focus.
WE don't get to move forward from anywhere. Thane, Luc, Vince, Aether22 and others who bother to avail themselves of a means to move forward will move forward. WE get to hang out on the thread and observe, and appreciate their time and effort. This whole thing where you feel a pressing need to drive the science bus for a bunch of unruly incompetent children is a complete illusion. Or delusion. Whatever. Pick your "usion".
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 03:27:53 PM
OK, let's focus on what we agree about then. I agree with your statement that the "entire foundation of the observations" is now this brass-vs-steel thing. Let's move forward from there. It's a good place to focus.
WE don't get to move forward from anywhere. Thane, Luc, Vince, Aether22 and others who bother to avail themselves of a means to move forward will move forward. WE get to hang out on the thread and observe, and appreciate their time and effort. This whole thing where you feel a pressing need to drive the science bus for a bunch of unruly incompetent children is a complete illusion. Or delusion. Whatever. Pick your "usion".
I'd pick f
usion if it's an option, is it?
Of course you 2 aren't going to build a generator, one is a bit too much of a girl and would be afraid of breaking their nails, and the other is busy being a mother ;)
Quote from: aether22 on March 26, 2008, 04:31:03 PM
I'd pick fusion if it's an option, is it?
No it is not! You are "moving forward", and so are ineligible to "pick an usion". We all know that good science requires very rigid (if selectively applied) rules. Sorry.
I wonder if Stephan would allow a read only sticky thread with replication information while this is a hot topic so replicators don't have to wade through all our nonsense.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 02:37:33 PM
Quote from: jacksatan on March 26, 2008, 01:49:34 PM
...I will offer 3 to 1 odds to anyone who wants to bet that this is over unity... any takers?
Be careful, you need to also specify that the only units that qualify are Watts: not orgone, chi, torsion, zpf, manna, bions etc. Just Watts - otherwise you could lose your shirt. ;)
PB
nah - I'd take manna too - provided it could light my over-unity light bulb... or even if it could keep me alive in the desert for 40 years... scratch that last one, I meant if it could keep JustMe alive in the desert for 40 years... heck, even if it can't keep her alive in the desert for 40 years, I'd pay just to see her try...
Quote from: aether22 on March 26, 2008, 02:35:31 PM
Thane, It has been sent right?
If so the tracking number would be very helpful as with verification on what day it was sent and the extra address I requested Kim add.
I need to see how likely it is that it will arrive before I leave and if after I need to assure it will be safe.
DEAR AETHER22,
I AM SORRY - I SENT YOU A PM YESTERDAY WITH THE TRACKING NUMBER?
I MAY HAVE DONE IT WRONG.
IT IS SLATED TO ARRIVE ON THE 4TH AT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO YOURS.
I WILL ASK KIM TO EMAIL THE TRACKING NUMBER TO YOU.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 06:53:51 PM
Quote from: aether22 on March 26, 2008, 02:35:31 PM
Thane, It has been sent right?
If so the tracking number would be very helpful as with verification on what day it was sent and the extra address I requested Kim add.
I need to see how likely it is that it will arrive before I leave and if after I need to assure it will be safe.
DEAR AETHER22,
I AM SORRY - I SENT YOU A PM YESTERDAY WITH THE TRACKING NUMBER?
I MAY HAVE DONE IT WRONG.
IT IS SLATED TO ARRIVE ON THE 4TH AT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO YOURS.
I WILL ASK KIM TO EMAIL THE TRACKING NUMBER TO YOU.
Thane
Ah, thx, no I didn't get your pm.
But I did get the tracking number from Kim and the website accepts it.
DEAR ALL,
I HAVE POSTED LUC'S LATEST RELENTLESS TRANSFORMER - TRANSFORMATION HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=S6N8U210
WE WILL BE HAPPY TO POST AN ENABLING DISCLOSURE ONCE OUR PATENTS HAVE BEEN FILED. THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
Thane
PS-BS-PB
"Or maybe you are unaware that the phase difference between voltage and current has to be accounted for in BOTH the input AND the output power measurements?"PB
POWER FACTOR ACROSS A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD IS OF COURSE 1
satan how much whats your ante 3 to 1 put up or shut up lets hear it Chet
Hi all,
I need help, I'm trying to resize pictures so I can post them here at 50k or less but I'm having problems with keeping the quality (they look bad) I p.m. JustMe and asked if she/he can tell me how the dune buggy pictures she/he posted looked so good at size 600 x 400 and under 50k ???.
Can anyone tell me how to do it.
Luc
PM FEYNMAN OR Stephan they know Chet
I've read through this entire thread and I don't quite understand the rudeness factor. Why? Thane seems like a really nice guy in the newspaper article and the YouTube videos; but when I read this thread it seems he is a totally different person.
Someone said that if the device is genuine it will sell itself-- I wholeheartedly believe that. However, the tone and conversation here is not helping you at all from my perspective.
This isn't intended to be directed at just Mr. Heins as many others here seem seemingly mean-spirited. Do you all know each other and are just jesting?
Please forgive me if I'm being ignorant and missing the humor. I just stared this forum yesterday so maybe I'm missing something.
Quote from: ramset on March 26, 2008, 08:20:27 PM
PM FEYNMAN OR Stephan they know Chet
Last time I pm Stephan he did not reply and if you haven't noticed he has not posted on this topic for close to a month now. So I don't know what is up with him, he was so excited at the begining :-\ ??? and I don't know who Feynman is.
This forum should have a location to read on how to do this kind of stuff.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 08:17:16 PM
Hi all,
I need help, I'm trying to resize pictures so I can post them here at 50k or less but I'm having problems with keeping the quality (they look bad) I p.m. JustMe and asked if she/he can tell me how the dune buggy pictures she/he posted looked so good at size 600 x 400 and under 50k ???.
Can anyone tell me how to do it.
Luc
I do not know what Operating System you are using; if you use MS Windows, you can install the Image Resizer utility located here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx
The file download is here:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/Install/2/WXP/EN-US/ImageResizerPowertoySetup.exe
Luc
I had the same problem. I found the easiest way to go was to sign up for the freeware that Stephan had posted in a earlier thread on size restriction. I used picasa and it works great. Just takes a few minutes to sign up then you can load your pictures or diagrams and post he link to them.
Hope this helps
Vince
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 08:38:35 PM
I've read through this entire thread and I don't quite understand the rudeness factor. Why? Thane seems like a really nice guy in the newspaper article and the YouTube videos; but when I read this thread it seems he is a totally different person.
Someone said that if the device is genuine it will sell itself-- I wholeheartedly believe that. However, the tone and conversation here is not helping you at all from my perspective.
This isn't intended to be directed at just Mr. Heins as many others here seem seemingly mean-spirited. Do you all know each other and are just jesting?
Please forgive me if I'm being ignorant and missing the humor. I just stared this forum yesterday so maybe I'm missing something.
DEAR ANGEL,
FOR MY PART - WE ARE JUST JESTING ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT VIGOROUSLY AT TIMES.
THIS IS AN
ANONYMOUS CHAT-ROOM SO IT IS BEST TO NOT TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY.
IT'S JUST ENTERTAINMENT WITH A DOSE OF SCIENCE.
WE DON'T JOKE ABOUT THE LAB DATA AND GENERATOR PERFORMANCE HOWEVER.
AND IT SHOULD BE
SEEN BEFORE BEING ACCEPTED FULLY.THAT IS ONLY LOGICAL AS WE ARE NOT HERE TO "SELL" ANYTHING BUT RATHER TO SHARE UNSUBSTANTIATED INFO.
Thane
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 08:38:35 PM
I've read through this entire thread and I don't quite understand the rudeness factor. Why? Thane seems like a really nice guy in the newspaper article and the YouTube videos; but when I read this thread it seems he is a totally different person.
Someone said that if the device is genuine it will sell itself-- I wholeheartedly believe that. However, the tone and conversation here is not helping you at all from my perspective.
This isn't intended to be directed at just Mr. Heins as many others here seem seemingly mean-spirited. Do you all know each other and are just jesting?
Please forgive me if I'm being ignorant and missing the humor. I just stared this forum yesterday so maybe I'm missing something.
Hi Angel,
Please ignore the posts that have negativity or non helpful information, they are only here to distract, discourage and cause confusion. Just take the good stuff and build the generator. You will see a pattern of the user names that don't provide useful information, just skip over their posts.
Thane is a good man, have known him for about 10 years. I started working with him about a month ago to help with the development of this project.
He is just having fun with the non contributing ones. Again, overlook his replies to those users.
Luc
Understood.
Thanks,
Just so no one should say I haven't contributed "anything"...
Luc's TRANSFORMER DATA ? MARCH 26TH, 2008
Primary Input
Voltage = 0.736 volts
Current = 0.01 amps
Power = 0.00736 watts
Output @ 1 k Resistor
Voltage = 3.377 volts
Power = 0.0114 watts
Efficiency = 154.9 %
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 08:41:06 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 08:17:16 PM
Hi all,
I need help, I'm trying to resize pictures so I can post them here at 50k or less but I'm having problems with keeping the quality (they look bad) I p.m. JustMe and asked if she/he can tell me how the dune buggy pictures she/he posted looked so good at size 600 x 400 and under 50k ???.
Can anyone tell me how to do it.
Luc
I do not know what Operating System you are using; if you use MS Windows, you can install the Image Resizer utility located here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx
The file download is here:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/Install/2/WXP/EN-US/ImageResizerPowertoySetup.exe
Thanks Angle,
that works great. will post some pics soon.
Luc
However, in all fairness, at 0.01 amps there is now a 50% margin of error - ie. instead of 0.01 amps it could be 1.49 amps... and at the absolute lowest calculable measurement that the machine is capable of, it is more than a little suspect of inaccuracy. Same goes for your resistor... with output as low as you are trying to measure, if you rubbed it in your pocket for a couple of minutes you might scrape off enough atoms woth of resistance to skew the results... try to replicate this with enough elecricity to be accurately measurable... otherwise you might need to spring for the big bucks to get highly accurate meters... either way, I'd hold off on that patent application until you have something with enough value to recoup the cost of the patent... or at least long enough for PB to race to the patent office and file on behalf of the spooks - right PB?
just a little more clarification here - at 3.377 volts you are getting 0.0114 power, so you are figuring 0.0033 amps... that is one third of measurable amperage on your test meter...
Hi All,
I was busy Easter weekend building a new generator to test with four 2" x 1" N50 super neo magnets that I would allow to accelerate to full speed inside a protective box
See pictures below of what is left of that test. No one was hurt thank God, but the whole thing was destroyed, the magnets just broke off the epoxy on the wheel at the speed of about 3,000 RPM and came through the side walls and top. So be careful and don't use Acrylic, Plexiglas or particle board if you build a protective box. Use only 3/4" plywood on all walls and use 1/2" Lexan for see through areas.
I would also suggest not to go over speeds of 2,000 RPM
The ruler in the picture is 15" long.
Luc
At the very worst the input power is 0.73649999999999 x 0.01499999999999 = 0.0110474999999924850000000001w (not counting any possibility of the meter being wrong)
And that is still slightly lower than the output power, and let's face it 100% should be impossible.
But yes the resistor and the meters could be wrong but if they are both fine that that looks to be OU, are you still offering 3-1?
It is premature to break out the champagne and no one has suggested otherwise but they are nice looking results.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 26, 2008, 09:40:16 PM
However, in all fairness, at 0.01 amps there is now a 50% margin of error - ie. instead of 0.01 amps it could be 1.49 amps... and at the absolute lowest calculable measurement that the machine is capable of, it is more than a little suspect of inaccuracy. Same goes for your resistor... with output as low as you are trying to measure, if you rubbed it in your pocket for a couple of minutes you might scrape off enough atoms woth of resistance to skew the results... try to replicate this with enough elecricity to be accurately measurable... otherwise you might need to spring for the big bucks to get highly accurate meters... either way, I'd hold off on that patent application until you have something with enough value to recoup the cost of the patent... or at least long enough for PB to race to the patent office and file on behalf of the spooks - right PB?
BIG BUCKS ARE BEING SPENT AND THE METERS ARE COMING...
AS IS THE PATENT.
EXPENSIVE METERS WILL ONLY MAKE THE RESULT GREATER.
BY THE TIME THE METERS GET HERE THOUGH LUC WILL HAVE THIS PUPPY OVER 200%!
BTW - LUC DOUBLE CHECKED THE CURRENT READING WITH 2 DIFFERENT METERS BEFORE ACCEPTING IT.
ALSO WE DON'T PRESENT THIS DATA HERE AS
ABSOLUTE INFALLIBLE PROOF - WE PRESENT IT IN THE SPIRIT OF SHARING - PEOPLE WHO CAN DO BETTER THAN LUC AND I SHOULD FEEL FREE TO DO SO.
Thane
ps
FOR SALEGently used Ryobi 6" Bench Grinder Motor with precision built custom made plexiglass enclosure to be sold in "as is" condition. Good fixer upper for handy man types.
contact Luc@exploding.generators.are.us.com
Hi All,
here is a new ideal we got and just put together as a new rotor for the generator. It is a 10-3/4" Cast Iron belt pulley available at most quality bearing and pulley shops. We drilled through the spokes and installed screws with nylon lock nut to hold the magnet holders cups. The wheel is true and balanced. It is much heavier than the wheel barrel wheel but is an easy off the shelf precision piece. However, since it is heavier it accelerates slower but seems to give the same affect. We will be testing it more and will give an update.
Stay tuned.
Luc
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 10:14:51 PM
[ deleted...]
PS:
FOR SALE
Gently used Ryobi 6" Bench Grinder Motor with precision built custom made plexiglass enclosure to be sold in "as is" condition. Good fixer upper for handy man types.
contact Luc@exploding.generators.are.us.com
ROTFLMAO
That gets my vote for best humor so far on the entire thread...
-M
LUC:
What's the rated RPM on that motor? 1760? And it went to 3000+ before the generator decided to rapidly self-disassemble...
-M
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
Your graph does not illustrate predict or explain (because it's not designed to) the resumption of standard changes in speed, torque and consumption from a steady state rpm. Common sense dictates that that requires that something give (or take). If you misunderstand me again it can be nothing but deliberate.
Well, JustMe, at risk of having you berate me again, I have to tell you that I don't understand the phrase "...resumption of standard changes in...". And it's not deliberate.
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
The magnetic brake theory could indeed be the primary thing at play here, but it's far from proven, quantified, qualified or any other such thing. No justification whatsoever for your clear and unambiguous statement that "we can conclude that the device is simply a magnetic brake after all". Where'd all the love for copious data go?
Again, yet again, you're only quoting half of what I said because that's the half that supports your idea that I'm an idiot (or whatever). This is getting repetitive so I apologize but it has to be because you keep ignoring the most important part. I'll be very brief:
1. The contraption is acting as a magnetic brake.
2. It behaves differently with a brass vs steel shaft.
#1 is not surprising. #2 needs further analysis to figure out what's going on.
PB
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 26, 2008, 11:13:14 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 10:14:51 PM
FOR SALE
Gently used Ryobi 6" Bench Grinder Motor with precision built custom made plexiglass enclosure to be sold in "as is" condition. Good fixer upper for handy man types.
contact Luc@exploding.generators.are.us.com
ROTFLMAO
That gets my vote for best humor so far on the entire thread...
-M
LUC:
What's the rated RPM on that motor? 1760? And it went to 3000+ before the generator decided to rapidly self-disassemble...
-M
These Ryobi grinders can go up to 3,600 RPM. Thane has never allowed it to go anywhere close to that speed since he had a few magnets fly off in a demo once and ever since has been real careful. I just wanted to see what would happen at around full RPM. Now we know Thane is right.
So be careful.Luc
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 26, 2008, 11:13:14 PM
LUC:
What's the rated RPM on that motor? 1760? And it went to 3000+ before the generator decided to rapidly self-disassemble...
-M
The one in the Kinetrics report was 3600 RPM I think. Not necessarily the same one...
Edited to add...sorry Luc...I posted when you were posting. Wasn't sure if you were around to answer tonight...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 09:31:46 PM
Luc's TRANSFORMER DATA ââ,¬â€œ MARCH 26TH, 2008
Primary Input
Voltage = 0.736 volts
Current = 0.01 amps
Power = 0.00736 watts
Output @ 1 k Resistor
Voltage = 3.377 volts
Power = 0.0114 watts
Efficiency = 154.9 %
Come on, April 1 is nearly a week away. ;)
The single data point doesn't really give us useful information since it's too inaccurate in the last digit of the meter. But you can extract some VERY interesting data from this setup - since you already have it in place it will be very easy to make a series of measurements with various different input voltages: for example 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 etc through to about 10v, say. You can then plot efficiency against input voltage. At the lower voltages you'll still run into the meter resolution issue but the trend line will be very illuminating indeed: you'll be able to see at what voltage it passes 100% efficiency, if it does. How about trying that?
PB
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:28:16 PM
These Ryobi grinders can go up to 3,500 RPM. Thane has never allowed it to go anywhere close to that speed since he had a few magnets fly off in a demo once and ever since has been real careful. I just wanted to see what would happen at around full RPM. Now we know Thane is right. So be careful.
Luc
Is glue the only option for affixing the magnets?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 11:30:25 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 26, 2008, 09:31:46 PM
Luc's TRANSFORMER DATA ? MARCH 26TH, 2008
Primary Input
Voltage = 0.736 volts
Current = 0.01 amps
Power = 0.00736 watts
Output @ 1 k Resistor
Voltage = 3.377 volts
Power = 0.0114 watts
Efficiency = 154.9 %
Come on, April 1 is nearly a week away.
PB
I guess now you can't wait to see what we'll post on that day.
;D
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 11:32:23 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:28:16 PM
These Ryobi grinders can go up to 3,500 RPM. Thane has never allowed it to go anywhere close to that speed since he had a few magnets fly off in a demo once and ever since has been real careful. I just wanted to see what would happen at around full RPM. Now we know Thane is right. So be careful.
Luc
Is glue the only option for affixing the magnets?
No, Epoxy is an added extra to help hold. If you look at my picture of the plastic rotor, I had 2" holes right through the 1/2" rotor to hold the magnets in place plus the epoxy all around each side of the magnets on the rotor. So the rotor should of been doing most of the holding of the magnets, the epoxy on each side was mostly to keep it from sliding out of the hole. The problem with the rotor was it was Acrylic Plexiglass which can crack under pressure. I had that 1/2" plexiglass laying around, so I just used it. But I should of known better and use Lexan which does not crack, even with a gun shot bullet.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 11:32:23 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:28:16 PM
These Ryobi grinders can go up to 3,500 RPM. Thane has never allowed it to go anywhere close to that speed since he had a few magnets fly off in a demo once and ever since has been real careful. I just wanted to see what would happen at around full RPM. Now we know Thane is right. So be careful.
Luc
Is glue the only option for affixing the magnets?
No, Epoxy is an added extra to help hold. If you look at my picture of the plastic rotor, I had 2" holes right through the 1/2" rotor to hold the magnets in place plus the epoxy all around each side of the magnets on the rotor.
Luc
Take a look at these magnets. Perhaps they will assist with safety issues at high speeds.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg296.imageshack.us%2Fimg296%2F8275%2Fmagnetsmo5.th.jpg&hash=732073165a1043f86e590916e832a76c1c81cba0) (http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?image=magnetsmo5.jpg)
Dimensions: 5/8" od x 1/8" id x 1/4" id x 1/8" thick
Tolerances: ?0.002" x ?0.001" x ?0.002" x ?0.001"
Material: NdFeB, Grade N42
Plating/Coating: Ni-Cu-Ni (Nickel)
Magnetization Direction: Axial (Poles on Flat Ends)
Weight: 0.320 oz. (9.06 g) (per pair)
Pull Force: 22.67 lbs
Surface Field: 3010 Gauss
Brmax: 13,200 Gauss
BHmax: 42 MGOe
I can get bigger ones of course, but the idea is the same. What do you think?
Quote from: jacksatan on March 26, 2008, 09:40:16 PM
... or at least long enough for PB to race to the patent office and file on behalf of the spooks - right PB?
Right, JS. In fact we already captured the most important intellectual property from this exercise and it is already claimed on behalf of Her Majesty. Once we perfect this technique of advancing and describing science we will no longer need to protect or encrypt any of our secret materials because they will be completely incomprehensible to our adversaries even in their open form. This is an extraordinary breakthrough and a triumph for national security.
PB
Sigh. Thane already made the OU/Loonie joke. I feel robbed. Interesting looking magnets though!
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:04:05 PM
Hi All,
here is a new ideal we got and just put together as a new rotor for the generator. It is a 10-3/4" Cast Iron belt pulley available at most quality bearing and pulley shops. We drilled through the spokes and installed screws with nylon lock nut to hold the magnet holders cups. The wheel is true and balanced. It is much heavier than the wheel barrel wheel but is an easy off the shelf precision piece. However, since it is heavier it accelerates slower but seems to give the same affect. We will be testing it more and will give an update.
Stay tuned.
Luc
Luc, thanks for sharing the blow up! But the pictures are great in that I can see what and how you
are building. As you found out acylic is very brittle. lexan is stronger, along with delrin, but it is not
until you get into the special re enforced plastics that one can feel safer.
However you are not out of the woods yet with the new cast iron wheel. Again cast iron is a very
brittle material. Did they give you a maximum rpm limit? I would think 2000 rpm would be it.
Being a pulley would allow you to wind the vee grove with piano wire or 600 pound test SS fishing
wire, the groove say half filled and the wire ends brought out through a couple of small holes and
down to a clamp screw on the spokes.... could safely double your speed. Either that or a purpose
built steel wheel.....
OK, I'll just go back to counting flowers, lol
Ron
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 26, 2008, 03:27:53 PM
OK, let's focus on what we agree about then. I agree with your statement that the "entire foundation of the observations" is now this brass-vs-steel thing. Let's move forward from there. It's a good place to focus.
WE don't get to move forward from anywhere.
It was an olive branch but I guess you missed it.
PB
Well I have had my gen at 3,000rpm, but my magnets are attached by machine screw through drill holes.
That JB weld suff sounds good but if you can obviously screw or bolt on is the way to go.
Why am I not reporting results? Well I could only get a well balanced system to work with a sync motor and they never change speed, also there is no metal connection between the rotor and the axle.
When I get back from my trip I'll get to have fun with Thanes Gen currently on it's way to me, yay!
And then I'll be looking at buying a nice large pulley like the one above because it should allow running at higher speeds smoothly!
Quote from: The_Angel on March 26, 2008, 11:49:53 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 26, 2008, 11:32:23 PM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:28:16 PM
These Ryobi grinders can go up to 3,500 RPM. Thane has never allowed it to go anywhere close to that speed since he had a few magnets fly off in a demo once and ever since has been real careful. I just wanted to see what would happen at around full RPM. Now we know Thane is right. So be careful.
Luc
Is glue the only option for affixing the magnets?
No, Epoxy is an added extra to help hold. If you look at my picture of the plastic rotor, I had 2" holes right through the 1/2" rotor to hold the magnets in place plus the epoxy all around each side of the magnets on the rotor.
Luc
Take a look at these magnets. Perhaps they will assist with safety issues at high speeds.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg296.imageshack.us%2Fimg296%2F8275%2Fmagnetsmo5.th.jpg&hash=732073165a1043f86e590916e832a76c1c81cba0) (http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?image=magnetsmo5.jpg)
Dimensions: 5/8" od x 1/8" id x 1/4" id x 1/8" thick
Tolerances: ?0.002" x ?0.001" x ?0.002" x ?0.001"
Material: NdFeB, Grade N42
Plating/Coating: Ni-Cu-Ni (Nickel)
Magnetization Direction: Axial (Poles on Flat Ends)
Weight: 0.320 oz. (9.06 g) (per pair)
Pull Force: 22.67 lbs
Surface Field: 3010 Gauss
Brmax: 13,200 Gauss
BHmax: 42 MGOe
I can get bigger ones of course, but the idea is the same. What do you think?
They are ok for low RPM, maybe up to 800 RPM any higher and the vibrations can crack them apart and now you would have multiple sharp pieces flying magnets around. Maybe you can use them for a proof of concept mode and get a sheet of min. 1/8" lexan which you can heat and bend as a shield around your rotor for protection. The safer way is to have the magnets sunken in and epoxyed in the rotor. Also keep in mind that a magnet with a hole in the center is weaker.
An easy and safer way is to use these magnet cups holders here:
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=&p=32066&cat=1,42363,42348
Magnets and cups:
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=&p=58750&cat=1,42363,42348
Luc
Quote from: aether22 on March 26, 2008, 03:31:59 PM
Ok, first all normal electric motors pull less current the faster they rotate.
But they produce less torque (less mechanical power)...
Aether, you're right about the current but I think you'll find that for an AC induction motor operating in a low speed regime (which is the case in all these experiments), torque usually
increases with speed, it does not decrease as you state.
Also, torque and power are not equivalent as you seem to be implying. Power = torque x rpm.
Quote from: aether22 on March 26, 2008, 03:31:59 PM
In fact I question if you really live where you claim and I doubt you are who you claim because if you had experience in induction motors as you claim you wouldn't have confused it with a synchronous motor as you did earlier.
Well, it doesn't really matter where you think I live because I'm reasonably certain of that myself and that's what really counts. I do seem to be able to get back to the same house every night so I guess I'm doing
something right. ;)
As for the synchronous motor thing, I think if you go back to my posts you'll find that I proposed an idea to explain Thane's flux feedback mechanism and when I did that I was describing a synchronous motor. Then, in a later post I generalized it to apply to any sort of AC induction motor (but still excluded DC motors). I don't think there was any confusion but maybe you missed one of those posts?
Incidentally, the conceptÃ, of the generator back-EMF creating an ââ,¬Å"energy lessââ,¬Â
synchronous motor effect inside the induction motor was originally proposed by Dr Habash, according to one of Thane's earlier posts, so I don't think the synchronous motor argument was so far out of line in the first place.
PB
Quote from: i_ron on March 27, 2008, 12:02:05 AM
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2008, 11:04:05 PM
Hi All,
here is a new ideal we got and just put together as a new rotor for the generator. It is a 10-3/4" Cast Iron belt pulley available at most quality bearing and pulley shops. We drilled through the spokes and installed screws with nylon lock nut to hold the magnet holders cups. The wheel is true and balanced. It is much heavier than the wheel barrel wheel but is an easy off the shelf precision piece. However, since it is heavier it accelerates slower but seems to give the same affect. We will be testing it more and will give an update.
Stay tuned.
Luc
Luc, thanks for sharing the blow up! But the pictures are great in that I can see what and how you
are building. As you found out acylic is very brittle. lexan is stronger, along with delrin, but it is not
until you get into the special re enforced plastics that one can feel safer.
However you are not out of the woods yet with the new cast iron wheel. Again cast iron is a very
brittle material. Did they give you a maximum rpm limit? I would think 2000 rpm would be it.
Being a pulley would allow you to wind the vee grove with piano wire or 600 pound test SS fishing
wire, the groove say half filled and the wire ends brought out through a couple of small holes and
down to a clamp screw on the spokes.... could safely double your speed. Either that or a purpose
built steel wheel.....
OK, I'll just go back to counting flowers, lol
Ron
Yes i_ron, you are correct. Iron is brittle, the pulley is rated max 2,400 RPM and we will not be goin over that. We got this pulley to see if Iron would give a better magnetic coupleling effect than the carbon steel wheel. Also since it is heavy we can also see if flywheel effect is helpful.
Stay tuned for results.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Great to have you back on the board! Especially with all the cool info and pictures! :)
Aaron
Whimp! If it is rated to do 2,400rpm long term it should do 3,600rpm fine for a while, or at least that's my opinion till it breaks apart killing someone ;)
considered making a joke about having PB stand near it when you test it, but there is no way you'd get him near a test no matter what.
In fact PB, please explain why you have not observed a test, tell Thane what would be required for you to do so.
Not that it wouldn't be a waste of time, you just asked hoping to discredit Thane until he called your bluff.
Luc, why not use the pulley wheel as a pulley? Run a belt from the pulley around a generator and see how much energy you can transfer... ideally, you would want a generator with a continuously variable transmition given the exponential rate of rpm, but a standard generator should be give some basic first impression numbers...
Quote from: aether22 on March 27, 2008, 01:27:47 AM
In fact PB, please explain why you have not observed a test...
I've already observed multiple tests: they're all in the videos and I believe them all and take them at face value. Also, as multiple people are reproducing them, I think the effect is very well established and an additional pair of eyes viewing it won't add to or detract from that. (Exception: nobody yet has reproduced the brass-vs-steel effect so that's an open issue).
The question (as I see it) is not about observing the effect: it's about determining an explanation for it.
Quote from: aether22 on March 27, 2008, 01:27:47 AM
tell Thane what would be required for you to do so.
I wouldn't presume to tell Thane that because he is not making that request of me. But since you ask,
here's an idea, see post #1286. I just posted some suggestions to Luc about a series of measurements to make on the transformer. If he carries out that series of tests under the direct supervision of Dr Habash, and if they unequivocally show >100% efficiency in a regime where experimental error doesn't obscure the results, and if Dr Habash endorses those results, then I would be interested in coming inÃ, and taking a look at both the transformer and the motor/generator experiments.
Quote from: aether22 on March 27, 2008, 01:27:47 AM
Not that it wouldn't be a waste of time, you just asked hoping to discredit Thane until he called your bluff.
Yes, well, that's exactly the problem isn't it. If I have issues with it, however objective they may be, they'll be discounted or even ridiculed as the words of a skeptic, as has happened several times already with others way more qualified than me to pass judgement on this thing. Scientific method keeps getting trumped by innuendo and personal barbs. Therein lies the problem, hence my caution.
PB
Quote from: jacksatan on March 27, 2008, 01:39:54 AM
Luc, why not use the pulley wheel as a pulley? Run a belt from the pulley around a generator and see how much energy you can transfer...
Excellent idea JS!
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 27, 2008, 08:19:31 AM
Quote from: aether22 on March 27, 2008, 01:27:47 AM
In fact PB, please explain why you have not observed a test...
I've already observed multiple tests: they're all in the videos and I believe them all and take them at face value. Also, as multiple people are reproducing them, I think the effect is very well established and an additional pair of eyes viewing it won't add to or detract from that. (Exception: nobody yet has reproduced the brass-vs-steel effect so that's an open issue).
Ok, so now I have a few more questions ;)
Why did you ask Thane to see a demo?
And why was your previous reason for not going 'lack of due diligence' or something like that?
Quote from: aether22 on March 27, 2008, 02:30:35 PM
Ok, so now I have a few more questions ;)
Why did you ask Thane to see a demo?
And why was your previous reason for not going 'lack of due diligence' or something like that?
All these questions! I'm not sure anybody's really interested in this but since you asked, I'll tell you. Others can just skip it if they're not interested. This is how it happened for me:
I first became aware of this project through an article in the Citizen on 1 Mar. Then I ran across Tyler Hamilton's article in the Star. This piqued my interest because Tyler is quite well know in this field and I know him because he's run a couple of articles on energy-efficiency projects that I've worked on over the past couple of years. Googling also uncovered this forum (where we are now) and to my surprise I found that Thane was posting here. I thought that was kind of odd because Tyler's article talked of Thane as a serious scientist/engineer and linked him to MIT and things like that - yet this forum isn't the kind of place you'd expect such a person to be promoting his project. So I was puzzled and in fact I wasn't really convinced at first that it was the "real" Thane on here. But I sent him a PM and, because he apparently lives very close to me, I thought I'd be able to meet him in person and see this experiment for myself. We exchanged a few emails and I continued monitoring the forum. I was very interested and very keen to see this stuff for myself. I know you may not believe that but I can only tell it the way it is/was. On March 6 when I first exchanged emails with Thane and started to read the materials I was very interested and very open-minded about it.
Am I a skeptic now though? Yes of course. Do you know why? Just browse through the postings on this forum and put yourself in the position of a neutral observer. What would you think about the reality of this technology, based on the substance of the postings, on the elusiveness of any hard data, on the misunderstandings (involuntary or deliberate) about prior art, on the total lack of scientific method, and especially on the attitude of the proponents? It's disappointing but I'm still interested because there is a puzzle there and I'm intrigued by it even though it's increasingly likely that I'm wasting my time.
Hope that answers your question about whether or not I'm keen to see a demo in person: initially I was very keen but now I'm very cautious because I know more about it now than I did then.
PB
PS - this is the way they taught us to answer at spook school so I hope it does the trick ;)
DEAR ALL,
I PURCHASED A NEW TRUE RMS CLAMP ON METER TODAY WITH A + or - 1.5% ACCURACY DOWN TO 40 mA. ALTHOUGH STILL NOT QUITE GOOD ENOUGH.
I INTEND TO PURCHASE AN EVEN MORE ACCURATE ON WHEN THE STORE HAS ONE IN STOCK.
http://www.tes.com.tw/prova11.htm
I ASKED JUSTME TO POST THE PHOTO-DATA BUT HERE ARE THE NUMBERS ANYWAY:
INPUT
AMPS = 0.01 A
VOLTS = 0.694 V
POWER = 0.00694 W
OUTPUT @ 1 K RESISTOR + or - 1% ACCURACY
VOLTS = 3.209
POWER = 0.0103
Thane
As requested...:)
Quote from: JustMe on March 27, 2008, 10:33:10 PM
As requested...:)
THANKS TO JustMe
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT MAGMETALS INC HAS SUPPLIED LUC WITH TWO TOROID CORES WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000 - THE ONES WE ARE CURRENTLY USING ARE 17,000.
OUR OUTPUT SHOULD INCREASE BY A FACTOR OF ABOUT 12.
Visit Magnetic Metals Website at:
http://www.magmet.com
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:48:26 PM
Quote from: JustMe on March 27, 2008, 10:33:10 PM
As requested...:)
THANKS TO JustMe
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT MAGMETALS INC HAS SUPPLIED LUC WITH TWO TOROID CORES WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000 - THE ONES WE ARE CURRENTLY USING ARE 17,000.
OUR OUTPUT SHOULD INCREASE BY A FACTOR OF ABOUT 12.
Visit Magnetic Metals Website at:
http://www.magmet.com
Thane
Holy Moly!
Sounds like the electric dune buggy may be faster than the Tesla Roadster right out of the gate! :)
Aaron
@PB,
it looks to me like something we'll need in petra! what do you really think?
lol
sam
once again we are talking about numbers that are within the margin of error...and again, for those who are not doing the math (Bitbeam this is for you) we are talking about such infintesimaly small current that it can be affected by the temperature in the air... to put in perspective, if you had a way to store the "generated" power in a completely lossless fashion, and you ran this machine for three years - 24/7 - you would not have "created" enough energy to light a light bulb for an hour... you would likely generate a thousand times as much energy walking across a shag carpet...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
DEAR ALL,
I PURCHASED A NEW TRUE RMS CLAMP ON METER TODAY WITH A + or - 1.5% ACCURACY DOWN TO 40 mA. ALTHOUGH STILL NOT QUITE GOOD ENOUGH.
Smart buy - it's just perfect for keeping that measurement down in the final digit, causing experimental error to completely obscure the true results. Just what the doctor ordered.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
INPUT
AMPS = 0.01 A
VOLTS = 0.694 V
POWER = 0.00694 W
OUTPUT @ 1 K RESISTOR + or - 1% ACCURACY
VOLTS = 3.209
POWER = 0.0103
Thane
Congratulations. Truly homeopathic amounts of power. Perhaps this will also provide a cure for the common cold.
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 27, 2008, 10:33:10 PM
As requested...:)
Nice pic, JustMe. So this setup and the homeopathic results were verified by Dr Habash, were they? I mean, in his daily review as per Thane's posting:
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
...WHEN YOU CONSIDER WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM.
...Thane
To add to aether22's comments on zero-point energy (ZPE)...
First, contrary to most scientists' understanding, relativity theory did NOT disprove the existence of an aether; Einstein himself said, "Relativity theory does not need to invoke the existence of an aether in order to explain the propagation of light thru the vacuum of space". This is a far cry from saying that it "proved there was no aether."
Second, there is considerable empirical evidence now, published in mainstream journals, that "quantum fluctuations" or the "zero-point field" (ZPF) does indeed exist; most of the evidence comes by way of the Casimir effect, but other confirming evidence has been found. Bottom-line: what we think of as the "empty vacuum of space", is not really empty. Well, it's empty of matter, but not empty of energy. Just because we don't have a handy-dandy ZPF meter to easily detect/measure it, doesn't mean it isn't there! I can't see the wind, but I sure can feel it's affects on me, and can see how it affects other things, like trees and dust. To quote a recent peer-reviewed paper,
"In a series of experiments, Koch et al. (1980; 1981; 1982) measured voltage fluctuations in resistive wire circuits that are induced by the ZPF. The Koch et al. result is striking confirmation of the reality of the ZPF and proves that the ZPF can do real work (cause measurable currents). Although the Koch et al. experiment detected miniscule amounts of ZPF energy, it shows the principle of ZPF energy circuit effects to be valid and opens the door to consideration of means to extract useful amounts of energy."
"Blanco et al. (2001) have proposed a method for enhancing the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations in circuits. Treating a coil of wire theoretically as an antenna, they argue that the antenna-like radiation resistance of the coil should be included in the total resistance of the circuit, and they suggest that it is this total resistance that should be used in the theoretical computation of the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations. Because of the strong dependence of the radiation resistance on the number of coil turns (scaling quadratically), coil radius (quartic scaling), and frequency (quartic scaling), these enhanced ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations should be measurable in the laboratory at quite accessible frequencies (100 MHz compared to the 100 GHz range necessary in the Koch et al. experiments)."
Third, a major advance came in 1994 with a paper published in Physical Review A entitled, "Inertia as a zero-point Lorentzian force" (or something like that; have a copy of the manuscript, just too lazy to get up and find it!). Up until this time, inertia was considered a fundamental postulate of physics; i.e., NOT deriveable. This paper derived the fundamental equation of inertia, F=ma, as a kind of electromagnetic "drag" on matter caused by an asymmetrical interaction between the ZPF and accellerated matter. Since then, they have simplified the math and have extended the "model" to other fundamental things like deriving the Debroglie wavelength of the electron; things that have added strength to the correctness of the model.
Fourth, and kind of the whole point of this, I have had several visits with the brilliant mathematician who did all the math for that seminal paper and many followup papers, and asked him a very specific question, "Can the ZPF be converted into one of the forms of energy that we know, such as heat, electric current or potential difference, etc.?" His reply was immediate, and cautious: "I haven't yet come across a way that it can be done, but I also have not encountered any mathematical or physical reasons that would rule it out." This question is obviously one that he has thought about a number of times since it didn't require any thought to formulate a concise answer... i.e., he's probably been asked that question by a number of other scientists.
I would include a recent paper on the likelihood of energy extraction from the ZPF, but it's way too large (585KB), and I'm not sure where I found it, but here's the title and a few paragraphs... a web search should find it:
Review of Experimental Concepts for Studying the Quantum Vacuum Field
E. W. Davis1, V. L. Teofilo2, B. Haisch3, H. E. Puthoff1, L. J. Nickisch4, A. Rueda5, and D. C. Cole6
ABSTRACT
We review concepts that provide an experimental framework for exploring the possibility and limitations of accessing energy from the space vacuum environment. Quantum electrodynamics (QED) and stochastic electrodynamics (SED) are the theoretical approaches guiding this experimental investigation. This investigation explores the question of whether the quantum vacuum field contains useful energy that can be exploited for applications under the action of a catalyst, or cavity structure, so that energy conservation is not violated. This is similar to the same technical problem at about the same level of technology as that faced by early nuclear energy pioneers who searched for, and successfully discovered, the unique material structure that caused the release of nuclear energy via the neutron chain reaction.
INTRODUCTION
Quantum theory predicts that the vacuum of space in the universe is filled with low-energy electromagnetic waves, random in phase and amplitude and propagating in all possible directions. This is different from the cosmic microwave background radiation and it is referred to as the electromagnetic quantum vacuum since it is the lowest state of otherwise empty space. When integrated over all frequency modes up to the Planck frequency, νP (~ 10^43 Hz), this represents an enormous potential source of energy with a density of as much as ~ 10^113 J/m3 which is far in excess of any other known energy source even if only an infinitesimal fraction of it is accessible. This is also several tens of orders of magnitude greater than the energy density of matter-antimatter annihilation reactions. Even if we are constrained to integrate over all frequency modes only up to the nucleon Compton frequency (~ 10^23 Hz), this energy density will still be enormous (~ 10^35 J/m3). And we have not taken into account the fact that the electromagnetic quantum vacuum is not alone by itself. On the contrary, it intimately couples to the charged particles in the Dirac sea of particle-antiparticle pairs and thereby couples to the other interactions of the Standard Model (weak and strong force vacua). So all the numbers we just mentioned admit of some further adjustment.
This energy is so enormous that most physicists believe that even though zero-point energy (ZPE) seems to be an inescapable consequence of quantum field theory, it cannot be physically real, and so is subtracted away in calculations by ad hoc means. A minority of physicists do, however, accept it as a real energy which we cannot directly sense since it is the same everywhere, even inside our bodies and measuring devices. From this perspective, the ordinary world of matter and energy is like foam atop the quantum vacuum sea. It does not matter to a ship how deep the ocean is below it. If the ZPE is real, then there is the possibility that it can be tapped as a source of power or be harnessed to generate a propulsive force for space travel.
That's enough for tonight... my head hurts!
-Mark
PS:
A hundred years from now, I wonder if the 21st century will be referred to as the "Zero-point" century?
;)
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 28, 2008, 01:44:10 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
DEAR ALL,
I PURCHASED A NEW TRUE RMS CLAMP ON METER TODAY WITH A + or - 1.5% ACCURACY DOWN TO 40 mA. ALTHOUGH STILL NOT QUITE GOOD ENOUGH.
Smart buy - it's just perfect for keeping that measurement down in the final digit, causing experimental error to completely obscure the true results. Just what the doctor ordered.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
I INTEND TO PURCHASE AN EVEN MORE ACCURATE ON WHEN THE STORE HAS ONE IN STOCK.
http://www.tes.com.tw/prova11.htm
Hey Polar, just another random person shooting the breeze and reading this thread. As you have loads of time on your hands to inform us all of the poor science going on here, maybe you could nip out for an hour and find the exact meter that would be required at a shop that's local to Thane and get it reserved for him. It'd help you to get Thane to get some readings you'd like and bring the science up to your level. You could even ask him what shop he went to and verify for yourself what was in stock.
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Thane, is there a specific timeframe you're sticking to in this development?
Like, when are you thinking of getting round to closing the loop on your device and eventually mount one in the buggy?
Considering that you suspect OU has been achieved it would eem logical to close the loop and make the whole shebang selfrunning soon right?
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Indeed it is. You didn't answer my question. Were these results reviewed by Dr Habash?
PB
Quote from: barkbarkuk on March 28, 2008, 04:38:38 AM
Hey Polar, just another random person shooting the breeze and reading this thread. As you have loads of time on your hands to inform us all of the poor science going on here, maybe you could nip out for an hour and find the exact meter that would be required at a shop that's local to Thane and get it reserved for him. It'd help you to get Thane to get some readings you'd like and bring the science up to your level. You could even ask him what shop he went to and verify for yourself what was in stock.
Posts:1
New pseudonym, huh? Nice try.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:06:19 PM
I INTEND TO PURCHASE AN EVEN MORE ACCURATE ON WHEN THE STORE HAS ONE IN STOCK.
http://www.tes.com.tw/prova11.htm
Don't waste your time and money on a new clamp meter. The clamp meter approach is not sensitive enough for what you're doing. Get a really good true rms multimeter with the right AC current ranges, and use that in series with your power supply. For example the
Fluke 287 True-rms Electronics Logging Multimeter with TrendCapture (http://ca.fluke.com/caen/products/specifications.htm?cs_id=37736(FlukeProducts)&category=HMA(FlukeProducts)) . You'll get 0.6% accuracy and you'll get resolution right down into current levels way below what you're running at.
Another way to measure these very low currents with the accuracy and resolution required is to insert a precision series resistor (sense resistor) in the supply and to measure the voltage across it directly with a precision voltmeter. If the resistor is +/- 0.5%, say, and the voltmeter is +/- 1%, then you'll be able to determine the current to an accuracy of +/- 1.5%. This is the same as the quoted accuracy of the clamp meters with the advantage that the sense-resistor approach allows you to measure down to much lower current levels so that the measurement is no longer obscured by experimental error, which is what your problem is right now. Furthermore there are no doubt voltmeters galore with this accuracy or better at the U there so you won't have to go out and buy one or wait for availability.
But for sure forget the clamp meter: it's not the right tool for this job.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 28, 2008, 07:58:50 AM
Indeed it is. You didn't answer my question. Were these results reviewed by Dr Habash?
PB
Perhaps he didn't answer your question because it was rather oddly and uselessly directed at me?
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 01:19:58 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 28, 2008, 07:58:50 AM
Indeed it is. You didn't answer my question. Were these results reviewed by Dr Habash?
PB
Perhaps he didn't answer your question because it was rather oddly and uselessly directed at me?
The question was directed at Thane. He told us that all results are reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash. I was looking for confirmation of that for these particular results because I was surprised that they would pass muster with Dr Habash since they are completely obscured by the margin of experimental error.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:48:26 PM
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT MAGMETALS INC HAS SUPPLIED LUC WITH TWO TOROID CORES WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000 - THE ONES WE ARE CURRENTLY USING ARE 17,000.
I believe you said the other ones were professionaly wound...will that be the case this time?
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 28, 2008, 03:52:51 AM
To add to aether22's comments on zero-point energy (ZPE)...
...
"Blanco et al. (2001) have proposed a method for enhancing the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations in circuits. Treating a coil of wire theoretically as an antenna, they argue that the antenna-like radiation resistance of the coil should be included in the total resistance of the circuit, and they suggest that it is this total resistance that should be used in the theoretical computation of the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations. Because of the strong dependence of the radiation resistance on the number of coil turns (scaling quadratically), coil radius (quartic scaling), and frequency (quartic scaling), these enhanced ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations should be measurable in the laboratory at quite accessible frequencies (100 MHz compared to the 100 GHz range necessary in the Koch et al. experiments)."
[/color]
Good stuff. But considering that the ZPF effect requires frequencies of 100,000,000 Hz (Blanco) or even 100,000,000,000 Hz (Koch), even to obtain what they call "minuscule" results, and that they quote the frequency dependence as quartic (ie fourth power), what is the probability that this effect has a bearing on Thane's setup, which is operating at only 60 Hz? I think the calculation would be that at 60Hz the effect, if it exists at all, would be about 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times smaller than what they're already calling "minuscule".
Whatever the effect is that Thane's experiment is demonstrating, I think it unlikely that it is related to ZPF. It seems much more likely that we're in the realm of more conventional EM theory.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 28, 2008, 01:24:27 PM
The question was directed at Thane. He told us that all results are reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash. I was looking for confirmation of that for these particular results because I was surprised that they would pass muster with Dr Habash since they are completely obscured by the margin of experimental error.
PB
The question was (oddly and uselessly) directed at me.
These results have never been presented as outside the margin of error, as you know full well. You and JackSatan have laid down exponentially more blather on this than anbody else here - most observers are just remaining appropriately reserved until this shakes out one way or the other.
In my opinion, the right meter for you will be the one that stops saying there might be something different going on whether it's a 'Fluke 287 True-rms Electronics Logging Multimeter with TrendCapture' or one that comes free with an econosize tub of crazy from Lee Valley. It's clear that despite your lip service to open mindedness you decided what all the answers to these kinds of questions must be long ago, as have many other intelligent people. So if there's anything to be discovered here, it's not going to be discovered through you.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Hopefully it goes without saying that the hard work and dedication of all involved is very much appreciated by most of the people following this thread whether those people participate or not, no matter what the end result. Please continue to post your results. :)
Quote from: Morgenster on March 28, 2008, 07:18:39 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Thane, is there a specific timeframe you're sticking to in this development?
Like, when are you thinking of getting round to closing the loop on your device and eventually mount one in the buggy?
Considering that you suspect OU has been achieved it would eem logical to close the loop and make the whole shebang selfrunning soon right?
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF TESTING DIFFERENT MOTORS FOR THE DUNE BUGGY AS WELL AS COILS, WIRE GUAGE, CORE MATERIAL ETC, ETC. WE HOPE TO HAVE THE DUNE BUGGY UP AND RUNNING WITHIN 3 MONTHS TIME.
AS FAR AS SELF RUNNING - WE ARE DOING OUR BEST - BUT WE WOULD BE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH EXTENDING THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE'S RANGE BY JUST 50%.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 01:41:05 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 27, 2008, 10:48:26 PM
I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT MAGMETALS INC HAS SUPPLIED LUC WITH TWO TOROID CORES WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000 - THE ONES WE ARE CURRENTLY USING ARE 17,000.
I believe you said the other ones were professionaly wound...will that be the case this time?
PERHAPS YES - GOOD IDEA ACTUALLY - TOROID TECH INC. SUPPLIED US WITH THE ONES WE ARE CURRENTLY USING SO I WILL ASK THEM WHEN THET VISIT - TO WIND THEM FOR US.
Thane
I too want to thank Thane, Luc, Aether22 and all the others that are actually making an effort here! If it weren't for people like you nothing would change in this world, you are all heros in my eyes, even if it turns out that we are all delusional! :)
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on March 28, 2008, 07:10:39 PM
I too want to thank Thane, Luc, Aether22 and all the others that are actually making an effort here! If it weren't for people like you nothing would change in this world, you are all heros in my eyes, even if it turns out that we are all delusional! :)
Aaron
Thank you Aaron and very well said. I hope this statement will make some think ::)
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 28, 2008, 07:29:00 PM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 28, 2008, 07:10:39 PM
I too want to thank Thane, Luc, Aether22 and all the others that are actually making an effort here! If it weren't for people like you nothing would change in this world, you are all heros in my eyes, even if it turns out that we are all delusional! :)
Aaron
Thank you Aaron and very well said. I hope this statement will make some think ::)
Luc
IT SHOULD BE PUBLICLY NOTED THAT WITHOUT
LUC'S ONGOING EFFORTS, GIVEN FREELY AND WITHOUT ONE IOTA OF "WHAT'S IN IT FOR ME - PAYBACK EXPECTATIONS" THERE WOULD BE NO TRANSFORMER TO SPEAK OF. THAT IS THE TRUTH OF IT.
SO THANKS TO LUC! (and Lucie for letting Luc assist me)
Thane
ps
JustMe should be posting Luc's 173% transformer photo-data soon.
On the way to 200% by Sunday.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Sorry for the derision, but it is hard to comprehend how you can compare the tests that you had been doing last week with 50-60% efficiency to the current tests when the differency in power input and output is three orders of magnitude??? no one derided your experiments last week, as they were transparent... yes there could have been extraneous impacts, but barring an extra set of batteries and assuming you are being sincere, it would be difficult to screw up those measurements if you tried... but now, measuring input/output on the last digit of a meter on the order of milliamps, often well within the range of standard error, and on a scale that is so de minimus that it can be inadvertently affected by static cling in you shirt... well it begs the question of why? Why not perfect the coils that you were working with last week so that you can (potentially) have actually measurable effects?
Quote from: jacksatan on March 28, 2008, 09:28:26 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 06:08:59 AM
TO BE HONEST I DID NOT POST THIS LATEST PHOTO-DATA BECAUSE I AM LOOKING FOR VALIDATION...
I POSTED IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO GIVE THE FAULTFINDERS ON THIS THREAD A SOAP BOX.
THE REALITY IS LAST WEEK LUC AND I STRUGGLED AROUND THE 50 -60% EFFICIENCY RANGE - THIS WEEK WE ARE IN THE 90 - 110 RANGE.
IN MY VIEW THIS SHOULD BE CAUSE FOR CELEBRATION FOR LUC'S SINCERE EFFORTS - for the improvement NOT THE ACTUAL EFFICIENCY PERCENTAGE BUT INSTEAD IT IS MET WITH DERISION.
IT IS A SAD COMMENTARY.
Thane
Sorry for the derision, but it is hard to comprehend how you can compare the tests that you had been doing last week with 50-60% efficiency to the current tests when the differency in power input and output is three orders of magnitude??? no one derided your experiments last week, as they were transparent... yes there could have been extraneous impacts, but barring an extra set of batteries and assuming you are being sincere, it would be difficult to screw up those measurements if you tried... but now, measuring input/output on the last digit of a meter on the order of milliamps, often well within the range of standard error, and on a scale that is so de minimus that it can be inadvertently affected by static cling in you shirt... well it begs the question of why? Why not perfect the coils that you were working with last week so that you can (potentially) have actually measurable effects?
THAT IS EXTREMELY CONSISTENT STATIC CLING TO EFFECT THE READINGS
EVERY TIME!
TOMORROW LUC AND I WILL TAKE OUR READINGS MEASUREMENTS NUMBERS .... OH CRAP ... METERY THINGYS IN THE NUDE.
GET READY JM.SERIOUSLY WE ARE PERFECTING THE PRIMARY EVERYDAY.
QUESTION: WOULD 200% EFFICIENCY BE ENOUGH TO BRING YOU OVER FROM THE "DARK SIDE?"
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 09:45:34 PM
THAT IS EXTREMELY CONSISTENT STATIC CLING TO EFFECT THE READINGS EVERY TIME!
TOMORROW LUC AND I WILL TAKE OUR READINGS MEASUREMENTS NUMBERS .... OH CRAP ... METERY THINGYS IN THE NUDE.
GET READY JM.
Thane
What's it's worth to you guys for me to swear that no matter what I did I just COULD NOT get the pics under 50K?
In order of stated efficiency:
...
...
...
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 28, 2008, 01:56:04 PM
Good stuff. But considering that the ZPF effect requires frequencies of 100,000,000 Hz (Blanco) or even 100,000,000,000 Hz (Koch), even to obtain what they call "minuscule" results, and that they quote the frequency dependence as quartic (ie fourth power), what is the probability that this effect has a bearing on Thane's setup, which is operating at only 60 Hz?
Whatever the effect is that Thane's experiment is demonstrating, I think it unlikely that it is related to ZPF. It seems much more likely that we're in the realm of more conventional EM theory.
PB
Did I say anywhere that I felt ZPF was a likely possibility, or even an unlikely possibility? No. It seemed that Thane was wanting to learn a little more about the ZPF, as any good inventor/scientist would want to educate himself about ANY possible factors that could affect his work/research. Since aether22's description, although quite thorough, was anecdotal, I wanted to bring some mainstream science into the explanation, for Thane, and more importantly, for the rational skeptics reading this thread, since they roll their eyes when one mentions anything like ZPE.
RE: your reference to the paper which states that the effect was 'miniscule'...and that is reason enough to rule ZPF out...
Not so fast, as one of the interesting anecdotal things attributed to ZPE/ZPF phenomenon is that it is highly
nonlinear, and that once a threshold was reached, there was an 'avalanche' effect where the energy flow increased exponentially. Have I seen this in person? No, but a few of the people who claimed these affects were very credible and knowledgeable people.
Now, as far as the likelihood that this is at least partially a ZPF/aether effect... well, as you say, I think one should focus on more conventional explanations at this time.
-Mark
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 02:27:49 PM
These results have never been presented as outside the margin of error, as you know full well.
There is a difference between (a) an experimenter cautioning that margin of error leaves some room for uncertainty and (b) an experimenter cranking down the amps so that the margin of error completely obscures the results.
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 02:27:49 PM
In my opinion, the right meter for you will be the one that stops saying there might be something different going on...
The "right meter for me", as you put it, will be the one that measures the results unobscured by the margin of error. You know as well as I do that making an AC current measurement with the required resolution should be no challenge at all with even the most basic of equipment - yet these guys have chosen to use a clamp meter which isn't up to the task. Why? To keep the fog going.
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 02:27:49 PM
... if there's anything to be discovered here, it's not going to be discovered through you.Ã,Â
I tend to think that my identifying for Thane the right piece of gear to fix the measurement issues is some kind of a positive contribution whereas your sarcasm in direct response to that is the kind of attitude that actually impedes discovery.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 28, 2008, 09:45:34 PM
QUESTION: WOULD 200% EFFICIENCY BE ENOUGH TO BRING YOU OVER FROM THE "DARK SIDE?"
Thane
Any number >100% does the trick, and I'll be first in line at the gates to the Dark Side, provided it's still >100% after correcting for the margin of error in the measurements. On the other hand, even the
7000% that you claimed you had already measured in July 2007 (http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html) is completely unconvincing if the measurement method cannot be defended.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 28, 2008, 07:29:00 PM
Quote from: bitbeam on March 28, 2008, 07:10:39 PM
I too want to thank Thane, Luc, Aether22 and all the others that are actually making an effort here! If it weren't for people like you nothing would change in this world, you are all heros in my eyes, even if it turns out that we are all delusional!Ã, Ã, :)
Aaron
Thank you Aaron and very well said. I hope this statement will make some think ::)
Luc
Kudos to all who are making honest efforts to advance this experiment and if you are among them, Luc, congratulations and thanks to you for sure. To those, however, who are cynically manipulating the results for whatever reasons of their own, shame on you because you are perpetuating the bad name this field has, and making it that much harder for the honest ones to advance their ideas.
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 10:41:25 PM
What's it's worth to you guys for me to swear that no matter what I did I just COULD NOT get the pics under 50K?
THANKS JM
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR TESTS DONE YESTERDAY TO MEGAUPLOAD WHICH SHOWS THE
PRIMARY INPUT POWER DROPING 8.99% FROM
12.13 mW (TEST #3) to
11.04 mW (TEST #5)
WHILE THE
POWER ACROSS THE LOAD INCREASES BY
6525% FROM
0.064 V TO
4.24 V (TEST #3 and TEST #5 RESPECTIVELY)
AT A CALCULATED EFFICIENCY OF
163% +/- 35% (margin of error)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=PKCL9JEM
Also - Please find enclosed our transformer performance demo video wich shows the primary input dropping as the output across the load increases...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
Dear All,
For any sincerely interested reader following this thread I would like to point out the desired design premise and operational outcome requirement for the Bi-Toroid Transformer.
The only operational criteria was that:
1)
The primary coil should NOT draw additional current when the secondary is placed on load. The primary power dissipation should be fixed due to the lower reluctance flux path in the secondary and the inability of induced secondary back EMF flux from coupling back through the primary core ? causing a reduction in primary impedance and an increase in primary current draw from the source.
2)
Voltage regulation across the load and internal flux levels should be self-maintained by each secondary coupling induced flux into each other ? rather than being maintained by the primary and source as per a traditional transformer.
THE FACT THAT: Our primary is NOT neutral but actually DECREASES under load is a happy unexpected anomaly ? which Luc and I are both earnestly trying to understand and further exploit.
The actual efficiency numbers posted here are actually of very little significance to me (although very hugely exciting) since the transformer must perform as designed first and foremost. As far as I am concerned the transformer far and away exceeds any hopes I started with. I am in the process of ordering a clamp on current meter which is accurate down in the mA range where this current prototype seems to perform best so we can ensure 100% accurate data. The data we are posting is for personal your interest only and is NOT infalible.
To be totally fair - I only post the efficiency numbers here to tease the faultfinding skeptics who don?t know where to focus their attention and whose hearts and minds are mired in mud.
I would like to say finally that Luc is fervently driven to exceed 200% by Sunday and my hopes are with him.
Believing is seeing.
Thane
Thane, luc and so on, thank you for offering the results but I have an important question.
With which type of pulses are you pulsing the bi-toroid transforma and how high is the frequency ?
At high frequency und non sinoidal pulses it will be more difficult to measure the real input current.
Quote from: Frederic2k1 on March 29, 2008, 09:07:15 AM
Thane, luc and so on, thank you for offering the results but I have an important question.
With which type of pulses are you pulsing the bi-toroid transforma and how high is the frequency ?
At high frequency und non sinoidal pulses it will be more difficult to measure the real input current.
60 hz AC IS WHERE WE ARE AT.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 29, 2008, 07:43:10 AM
...I HAVE UPLOADED OUR TESTS DONE YESTERDAY TO MEGAUPLOAD...
This is starting to look very interesting, Thane. There are now several data points for the configuration that has a turns ratio of 3.84: that's three of the four tests from the last batch, plus test 5 from this batch. The results seem to be quite consistent. Some observations:
1. The voltage readings are predicting the turns ratio with a standard deviation of about 0.6% so this gives confidence that your voltage readings are contributing an error in that range, which is quite small.
2. Your output power reading depends critically on the precision of the 1Kohm load resistor and I don't recall seeing any indication of what tolerance this resistor is. If it's 10%, say, then this has to be added to your margin of error. You can eliminate this error almost completely though if you do a precision measurement of that resistor and then use the measured value in all your calculations.
3. The difficulty remains that the input current readings cannot be relied upon at all because of the use of the clamp meter and because the readings are so low that they remain in the final digit of the display. This can be easily resolved by removing the clamp meter and instead placing a true rms ammeter in series with the supply to the transformer (ie in the red wire that's shown in the picture passing through the clamp meter). You need to be able to resolve down to +/- 0.1mA in order to tighten up the margin sufficiently (ie +/- 1% - tighter would be even better of course). I'm sure it will be no problem to locate such a meter at the U, it's not a very demanding spec. Be sure to take your input voltage reading on the transformer side of the ammeter, not on the supply side.
I really look forward to seeing the next batch of results!
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 29, 2008, 09:34:25 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 29, 2008, 07:43:10 AM
...I HAVE UPLOADED OUR TESTS DONE YESTERDAY TO MEGAUPLOAD...
This is starting to look very interesting, Thane. There are now several data points for the configuration that has a turns ratio of 3.84: that's three of the four tests from the last batch, plus test 5 from this batch. The results seems to be quite consistent. Some observations:
1. The voltage readings are predicting the turns ratio with a standard deviation of about 0.6% so this gives confidence that your voltage readings are contributing an error in that range, which is quite small.
2. Your output power reading depends critically on the precision of the 1Kohm load resistor and I don't recall seeing any indication of what tolerance this resistor is. If it's 10%, say, then this has to be added to your margin of error. You can eliminate this error almost completely though if you do a precision measurement of that resistor and then use the measured value in all your calculations.
I really look forward to seeing the next batch of results!
PB
BE CAREFUL PB YOU WOULDN'T WANT PEOPLE TO THINK YOU ARE A SOFTY!
YOU MIGHT LOSE YOUR P-BS STATUS IF YOU KEEP IT UP.
HEALTHY SKEPTICS (ESPECIALLY PRICKS) ARE
THE BEST MOTIVATORS.
OUR 1 K RESISTOR IS +/- 1% ACCURATE.Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 29, 2008, 07:43:10 AM
Quote from: JustMe on March 28, 2008, 10:41:25 PM
What's it's worth to you guys for me to swear that no matter what I did I just COULD NOT get the pics under 50K?
THANKS JM
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR TESTS DONE YESTERDAY TO MEGAUPLOAD WHICH SHOWS THE PRIMARY INPUT POWER DROPING 8.99% FROM 12.13 mW (TEST #3) to 11.04 mW (TEST #5)
WHILE THE POWER ACROSS THE LOAD INCREASES BY 6525% FROM 0.064 V TO 4.24 V (TEST #3 and TEST #5 RESPECTIVELY)
AT A CALCULATED EFFICIENCY OF 163% +/- 35% (margin of error)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=PKCL9JEM
Also - Please find enclosed our transformer performance demo video wich shows the primary input dropping as the output across the load increases...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BJqnfR3B4oc
Wow!!!! Great job guys.
Thane,
It appears that you are now using a long thin primary. Is this part of your new success or is it just due to the lack of space?
Regards,
Larry
Ps. Thanks for the laughs, it really helps.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 29, 2008, 09:43:12 AM
OUR 1 K RESISTOR IS +/- 1% ACCURATE.
Thane
Thanks for that into, Thane. +/- 1% on the resistor is good enough for now. Only one more issue to resolve on the measurement and fortunately it's very easily done with gear that you surely have to hand at the U. You may have missed that point because I notice you didn't reference it.
I realize from your most recent post that you have other goals for this setup, other than demonstrating its efficiency. Those goals also require an accurate measurement of input current, so the current measurement issue jumps to the top of the priority list, I think.
The roadblock right now is that the input current readings cannot be relied upon at all because of the use of the clamp meter and because the readings are so low that they remain in the final digit of the display (note that this meter has +/- 3 digits measurement uncertainty). This can be easily resolved by removing the clamp meter and instead placing a true rms ammeter in series with the supply to the transformer (ie in the red wire that's shown in the picture passing through the clamp meter). You need to be able to resolve down to +/- 0.1mA in order to tighten up the margin sufficiently (ie +/- 1% but tighter would be even better of course). I'm sure it will be no problem to locate such a meter at the U, it's not a very demanding spec. Be sure to take your input voltage reading on the transformer side of the ammeter, not on the supply side.
Just a suggestion, hope it's useful.
PB
Quote from: LarryC on March 29, 2008, 09:54:05 AM
Wow!!!! Great job guys.
Thane,
It appears that you are now using a long thin primary. Is this part of your new success or is it just due to the lack of space?
Regards,
Larry
Ps. Thanks for the laughs, it really helps.
IF THERE IS ANY SUCCESS IT IS DUE TO LUC AND WHAT HE HAS BROUGHT TO THE LAB. HE IS MAKING IT ALL HAPPEN NOW.
THE PRIMARY IS MADE TO FIT IN A SPACE OF 1/2 cm WHICH IS AN INITIAL DESIGN FLAW ON MY PART BECAUSE I HAD NO IDEA WHAT I WAS DOING WHEN I STARTED - IT TURS OUT I AM EVEN MORE IGNORANT NOW THAN WHEN I STARTED BECAUSE I CANNOT EXPLAIN WHY THE INPUT DROPS AND ALTHOUGH I LIKE IT - IT STILL FREAKS ME OUT TO SEE IT OCCUR!
Thane
I noticed something when I was working with the large hig res pics last night that I wanted to ask about. But first I wanted to look into it some to avoid asking a totally stupid question 'cause I hate when that happens. Just hate it! :) So I'm still not entirely sure if this will be helpful, but what I noticed was that the yellow meters you are using for your voltage readings and previous amp readings have amp settings from 400 microamps right up to 10A. The meter seems to have been set at the 10A setting for the amp reading posted here before you switched to your new meter and I wondered if any of the other settings (400 mA, 40mA, 4mA, 400 microamps) would be usable and more precise as a stand in until you get you hands on whatever the best tool is? Maybe? Kinda sorta? Maybe it would just shuffle the decimal point around. Dunno. :-\
About 12 years ago when I was a fresh hire at the outfit I work for now I did something very bad to a multimeter. I work in IT and for many years now I have spent the bulk of my time in programming and web development but when I first started there I was your typical Jane of all trades. One of my occasional tasks was to assemble and/or repair coaxial cable segments for some of our networks. So I got pretty good at making good ends but once in a while something would be amiss and it would fail a resistance test and I'd have to do it again. One such day I snipped off the bad end....along with BOTH leads of the multimeter...in one fell swoop. It was the very last time I ever touched a meter, my work partner at the time made sure of that. I have of course, not yet lived that down in my department, and frankly no longer ever expect to.
As per Thane's request - Photo data showing input decreasing with load. Test #1:
Test #2:
Test #3:
Test #4:
Test #5:
Quote from: LarryC author=OilBarruote on March 29, 2008, 09:54:05 AM
... I CANNOT EXPLAIN WHY THE INPUT DROPS ...
Thane
Here is a possible explanation:
The input voltage drops because the input current increases - thus dropping more voltage over the impedance in the power supply and its associated circuit. You can't see the input current increase on the meter because it still reads "1" in the last digit due to the measurement limitations discussed elsewhere.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 29, 2008, 10:46:21 AM
Here is a possible explanation:
The input voltage drops because the input current increases - thus dropping more voltage over the impedance in the power supply and its associated circuit. You can't see the input current increase on the meter because it still reads "1" in the last digit due to the measurement limitations discussed elsewhere.
PB
Didn't they see the same anomoly in earlier experiments with current around the 2 amp range? Where both voltage and current dropped?
Quote from: JustMe on March 29, 2008, 11:06:48 AM
Didn't they see the same anomoly in earlier experiments with current around the 2 amp range? Where both voltage and current dropped?
Maybe, I lost track of that. But I think that's a much different situation: 2A versus 10mA. They could have been saturating the core at 2A for example. I really think the most important thing right now is to measure that input current in the latest batch of experiments with sufficient accuracy to draw conclusions from. We can get some unambiguous results very quickly that way - not only for efficiency but for Thane's #1 experimental goal that the primary coil should not draw additional current when the secondary is placed on load. It's very encouraging that the answer is so close.
PB
@Thane,
Looks good so far, MEG look-a-like perhaps?
60Hz input implies you are using a low voltage mains transformer (say 110V AC to 3V or 4.5V AC or 240V AC if you are not in the USA) to supply your experiment, is that correct?
At least at 60Hz it should not upset the meter reading too much, and a true RMS meter should be fine.
The center winding is on a slab ferrite rod, yes?
Is the load resistor wire wound, and if it is try using lots of carbon resistors in its place, just in case the winding in the resistor is effecting the results.
Calorimeter Test:
Here's a suggestion: place the load resistor wrapped in PVC or waterproof it somehow, into a 1Litre container of water placed in a polystyrene filled box or something insulated and measure the temperature rise to get the energy in joules.
You could also work out a load resistance to match the input power readings and do the same test so that you have a comparison of true energy in and out.
What is the toroidal transformer you are using Vin / Vout and power?
I have a similar large toroidal, 240V in 2 x 55v 500VA I bought years ago but it does not have the winding nicely split like yours, its wound 360 degrees with no apparent gaps.
However I do have some big cores from the Bob Boyce project that would be ideal.
One more thing, 0.01A on a 10A scale is very bad news, this should be 10mA on a 100mA scale ideally.
Because you test #5 could read (worst case based on dropping overflow digits):
Input voltage = 1.104 v
Input current = 19.5mA
Input power = 21.5 mW
Output voltage = 4.24 v
Output current = 4.24/990 = 4.2mA
Output Power = 17.8 mW
Efficiency = 82%
Saying that, I cannot understand the drop on input power when you put more output windings onto the load only that unless they were shorted before being separated and attached to the load.
One of my meters I have is a Tenma 72-7760 Professional DMM with true RMS on AC current and voltages.
No clamps needed.
Regards
Rob
What about these meters?
http://www.fwbell.com/Content.aspx?Page=200
FEATURES:
* True RMS measurement
* Measures low level DC & AC currents from 0 to 2000 mA with resolution as low as 0.1 mA.
* Frequency range DC to 100kHz
* Built in 3 1/2 digit display
* Simple clamp-on operation
* Supplied with hard carrying case
* Basic DC accuracy of 1% of reading
* Built to IEC 1010 safety standards/Approval Pending
* BNC analog output for connection to oscilloscope or recorder
Or, use a power meter and don't worry about calculating power; many even calculate power in the harmonics:
http://www.powermeterstore.com/p5834/accuenergy_acuvim_l_power_meter.php
The Acuvim-L series meters are multifunction power meters manufactured by Accuenergy. It is the ideal choice for monitoring and controlling of power distribution system. Some of the features and electric power parameters available on the ultra-compact Acuvim-L are:
True-RMS measuring parameter
4-quadrant Energy
Power Quality Analysis
Over limit alarm
Energy pulse output
Acuvim-L may be used as a data gathering device for an intelligent Power Distribution System or a Plant Automation System. All monitoring data is available via an optional digital RS485 communication port running Modbus Protocol.
The quality of the power system is important with increasing use of electronic loads such as computers, ballasts or variable frequency drives. With the Acuvim-L power analysis option, any phase current or voltage can be displayed and the harmonic content calculated.
By knowing the harmonic distribution, action can be taken to prevent overheated transformers, motors, capacitors, neutral wires and nuisance breaker trips. Redistribution of the system loading can also be determined.
Hey where's our nightly update? Luc better not be starting any sleeping or eating or stuff like that...
Hi all,
since many are wondering why we have chosen to use a clamp meter to measure our amps in ??? here are some of the reasons.
We have 6 multimeters at our disposition. The one from the University (true RMS) has 2 scales, 0-2 amps and 0 to 20 amps. When we use it on the 0-2 amps side our output voltage drops by 40%, so that's not good. The 0-20 amp side has about a .4 volt drop but not much resolution. Thane has 5 others meters which 3 of them are the same and I have compared them to the University meter and they give accurate readings on their 0-10 amp scale and only drop the voltage by .2 volts but like the University meter on the 400 ma or lower scales it drops the output voltage by 30%, so also not good. The same story for Thanes 2 other cheaper models.
So we decided to try a clamp meter since they have no effect on input or output voltage. When I got I the New clamp meter I checked it against the University model on the 0-20 amp side and also Thane's 3 good meters on the 0-10 amps and in all cases the clamp meter gives a higher reading and no voltage drops, so that is good.
We want to stay with a clamp meter since we will have 1,000's of more tests to do and also on different things like generator coils, so it will make our moving the meter around much easier and also not effect or results. I know we need a more accurate one, we just could not get a milliamp clamp meter in stock in our city but we now have on order a True RMS Milliamp clamp meter, it could take 10 days or more to get it though, so please be patient and do not conclude we are trying to fool people, we are real and we also want real results as much as you.
Here is the link to the meter we ordered: http://www.prova.com.tw/E_PROVA_11.html
Here is the link to the meter we have: http://www.prova.com.tw/E_CM_07.html
At this time the efficiency of the Toroids are in the lower input voltages but if I get it to work better this Sunday I will push the volts in as hight as I can go and stop it at a 101% and we will post the results of the low and high points.
Stay tuned
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 29, 2008, 10:42:50 PM
...
Here is the link to the meter we ordered: http://www.prova.com.tw/E_PROVA_11.html
Here is the link to the meter we have: http://www.prova.com.tw/E_CM_07.html
...
Luc
Luc, you realize the Prova 11 has a measurement uncertainty of +/- 5 digits, right? I really think you should use a proper in-circuit meter for these tests, as also recommended by Mr Megger and others. It's important to remove the ambiguity in the readings. It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter. This is really very fundamental research discipline - you need to make sure your test results withstand scrutiny otherwise there's no point in doing the tests. Please think very carefully about your choice here.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 12:03:55 AM
Luc, you realize the Prova 11 has a measurement uncertainty of +/- 5 digits, right? I really think you should use a proper in-circuit meter for these tests, as also recommended by Mr Megger and others. It's important to remove the ambiguity in the readings. It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter. This is really very fundamental research discipline - you need to make sure your test results withstand scrutiny otherwise there's no point in doing the tests. Please think very carefully about your choice here.
PB
It sounded to me like he was saying the actual voltage ultimately output was changed by the presence of some devices at some settings, not that he had measurement problems with the voltage on the way in...?
Hi Luc,
30% and 40% voltage drop, I cannot understand this?
I just checked the resistance of the 800mA and 10A ranges on my Tenma 72-7760 and it reads as follows:
800mA = 1.4 Ohms
10A = 0.14 Ohms
Max voltage drop on 800mA scale at 800mA:
V = I * R
V = 0.800 x 1.4
V = 1.12 V
Max voltage drop on 800mA scale at 10mA:
V = I * R
V = 0.010 x 1.4
V = 0.014 V or 14mV
Max voltage drop on 10A scale at 10A:
V = I * R
V = 10 x 0.14
V = 1.4 V
Max voltage drop on 10A scale at 10mA:
V = I * R
V = 0.010 x 0.14
V = 0.0014 V or 1.4mV
Anyway, I look forward to your results with a more sensitive clamp meter.
Regards
Rob
Quote from: JustMe on March 30, 2008, 12:33:56 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 12:03:55 AM
Luc, you realize the Prova 11 has a measurement uncertainty of +/- 5 digits, right? I really think you should use a proper in-circuit meter for these tests, as also recommended by Mr Megger and others. It's important to remove the ambiguity in the readings. It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter. This is really very fundamental research discipline - you need to make sure your test results withstand scrutiny otherwise there's no point in doing the tests. Please think very carefully about your choice here.
PB
It sounded to me like he was saying the actual voltage ultimately output was changed by the presence of some devices at some settings, not that he had measurement problems with the voltage on the way in...?
YESTERDAY LUC SPENT 7 HOURS MAKING A NEW PRIMARY - NOW THAT HE HAS SORTED OUT WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T. I BELIEVE HIS GOAL IS 200% WHICH SHOULD SILENCE ALL CRITICS.
THE UNIVERSITY IS AWARE OF OUR IMPROVEMENTS AND THEY WILL PEER REVIEW EVERYTHING IN DUE COURSE - SO IF WE ARE IN ERROR ANYWHERE IT WILL BE EXPOSED.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 12:03:55 AM
It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter. PB
THE
INLINE INPUT AMP METER CAUSES AN
OUTPUT VOLTAGE DROP ON THE OUTPUT VOLTAGE ACROSS THE RESISTOR - WHICH DOES NOT OCCUR WITH THE CLAMP ON.
INSTEAD OF WAITING 10 DAYS OR SO TO GET ANOTHER METER LUC INTENDS TO MAKE THE MOST OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE - IT MAY TURN OUT TO BE THE WRONG APROACH IN THE END (ALTHOUGH IT DOUBT IT) - BUT NEVER A "WASTE OF TIME" SINCE WE ARE LEARNING VOLUMES EACH AND EVERY DAY ON WHY THIS TRANSFORMER DOES WHAT IT DOES - WHICH WE DON'T FULLY COMPREHEND AS YET.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 30, 2008, 08:11:54 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 12:03:55 AM
It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter. PB
THE INLINE INPUT AMP METER CAUSES AN OUTPUT VOLTAGE DROP ON THE OUTPUT VOLTAGE ACROSS THE RESISTOR - WHICH DOES NOT OCCUR WITH THE CLAMP ON.
Thane
The only way an ammeter on the input can cause an
output voltage drop is if it is causing an
input voltage drop, since for any given turns ratio the output voltage is exactly proportional to the input voltage. This is true from theory and also confirmed by your own voltage measurements so far - for example, the 3.84 turns ratio predicts the voltage ratio to within 0.6% every time, over multiple different tests, which is consistent with the accuracy and resolution of your voltmeters.
The inline ammeter will of course cause some small voltage drop at the input (but 30% - 40% would be surprising). This actually doesn't matter at all to the measurements (even if it's very large) because the input voltage you need to use in your calculations is the voltage at the
input terminal to the transformer. You can measure this precisely with your voltmeter regardless of what the voltage drop is across the ammeter.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 30, 2008, 08:11:54 AM
... LUC INTENDS TO MAKE THE MOST OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE...
Thane
I noticed there was a grey bench meter in one of the pictures, just caught the side of it, maybe a Keithley or something? What does that have for AC current ranges? Maybe it would do as a stopgap for an inline ammeter until you find a better one. It seems such a waste for Luc to be spending a lot of time making measurements with an ammeter that's not telling us anything useful at all. The voltage measurements are OK but the information about current is of no value.
PB
Quote from: JustMe on March 30, 2008, 12:33:56 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 12:03:55 AM
...I really think you should use a proper in-circuit meter for these tests, as also recommended by Mr Megger and others. It's important to remove the ambiguity in the readings... It's not important if there's voltage drop across the ammeter because you can measure the actual voltage entering the transformer with your voltmeter...
PB
It sounded to me like he was saying the actual voltage ultimately output was changed by the presence of some devices at some settings, not that he had measurement problems with the voltage on the way in...?
Yes, he was saying that but the output voltage drop is caused by the input voltage dropping (understandably). Neither one matters at all provided they measure the actual voltage at the transformer input and output terminals to use in their calculations. I posted more details explaining that to Thane a couple of posts up...
PB
Hi Thane,
I have a proposed addition to your theory and would appreciate your opinion and the opinions of the other motor testers.
Quote from Thane:
At a certain low RPM the system decelerates to a DEAD STOP when the coils are shorted. Indicating Back EMF in the air gap and Lenz?s Law effect.
At a certain higher RPM the system accelerates ? the greater the generator output the greater the acceleration. My explanation for this is the higher RPM state produces more generator MMF (magnemotive force H) ? enough to overcome the reluctance of the (hard) steel rotor and motor drive shaft to make it?s way into the motor rather than remaining in the air gap as per the lower RPM state.
Quote from Aether22:
It really is quite astounding that the 'back EMF' magnetic field from an electromagnet (which is drawing I believe an unknown but possibly not awfully impressive current) can travel into a repelling Neo, through the spokes of a steel rotor (not a steel chosen by the manufactures to be highly permeable), through a steel shaft (ditto), spread out into a rotor and return through the air many feet to the back end of the generator coil while having the dramatic effects it has.
I was pretty much convinced that most of your theory was correct even though I agreed with Aether22 about the electromagnet being able to produce the effect.
But I was thrown for a loop with the announcement that it also worked with an acrylic rotor. I didn?t see the acrylic rotor until it exploded. Luc stated that he used 2? X 1? N50 (need superman to pull them apart).
I picture the acrylic rotor working this way: When the coil is open both Neo S and N can use the flux path thru the long iron bar of the coil. When the coil is closed whichever pole is closes (lets say S) will end up winning the flux battle and charge the electromagnet while tying up most of the S flux. N then has to look for the path of least reluctance. The choices are to jump to the opposite end of the long electromagnet or to the motor rotor/stator, since the other Neo N S flux is occupied. Obviously it was the motor rotor/stator. However the flux from N along would not be enough to create a significant speed increase, unless a major portion of it was released at one time and slapped the motor at near the speed of light producing much greater power. The flux release is probably not a slow time varied process. There must be a dynamic interaction between the forces, for instance how long can N hang on to the core? Does it wait until the coil current and S flux reaches certain values, which would cut off the cores attraction as least reluctance?
Now, is a similar effect occurring in the iron rotors? That it is not the electromagnet flux, but the fact that the opposite pole has to find a new path and a similar dynamic occurs.
Is this a new easy build advanced magnet switching motor? Easy build, because all the other ones require special equipment to build the laminations. These are already built!!!
I could have tested this out in a month or so, but why waste Thanes and others, valuable experience. I?m sure those testers with non-magnetic rotors available or equipment to build, can figure out a flux block to check part of the additional theory proposed, of course if it makes it pass Thane and the other testors. Time is short. Sadly, JackH just announced that he has ALS and he will be turning over the development of his magnet switching motor to Ohio State.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on March 30, 2008, 06:14:31 PM
Hi Thane,
I have a proposed addition to your theory and would appreciate your opinion and the opinions of the other motor testers.
Now, is a similar effect occurring in the iron rotors? That it is not the electromagnet flux, but the fact that the opposite pole has to find a new path and a similar dynamic occurs.
Is this a new easy build advance magnet switching motor? Easy build because all the other ones require special equipment to build the laminations. These are already built!!!
I could have tested this out in a month or so, but why waste Thanes and others, valuable experience. I?m sure those testers with non-magnetic rotors available or equipment to build, can figure out a flux block to check part of the additional theory proposed, of course if it make it pass Thane. Time is short. Sadly, JackH just announced that he has ALS and he will be turning over the development of his magnet switching motor to Ohio State.
Regards,
Larry
DEAR LARRY,
THE PLEXIGLASS WHEEL
ONLY WORKS WITH THE 8 COIL SET UP NOT WHEN ONLY A SINGLE COIL IS EMPLOYED. ACCELERATION IS THERE BUT IT IS SLIGHT.
ALSO LUC AND I DISCOVERED RECENTLY THAT LOW GAUGE WIRE PRODUCING HIGH CURRENT SLOWS DOWN THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED STEEL ROTOR BUT HIGH GAUGE WIRE PRODUCING HIGH VOLTAGE ACCELERATES THE ROTOR.
WE ARE DESIGNING OUR DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR WITH LOW GAUGE, HIGH CURRENT WIRE FOR REGENERATIVE BRAKING AND HIGH GAUGE, HIGH VOLTAGE FOR REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION.
CHEERS
Thane
I've been puzzling over different ways in which there could be electromagnetic interaction between the motor and the "generator" and now I've come to think that the behavior of the motors/loads in this experiment can be explained completely in terms of a mechanical interaction between the motor and the "generator", NOT electromagnetic, nor "unconventional". This explains why a brass shaft, or an acrylic wheel, can transport the effect as well as steel can.
For an explanation, check out this paper: AC Induction Motor Fundamentals - Rakesh Parekh (http://www.industrialcontrols.eetchina.com/PDF/2007JUL/ICCOL_2007JUL12_IODR_TA_02.pdf)
In particular, starting on page 9, the section "Load Characteristic", and its figure 12, outlines the way a motor/load combination can be "stable" or "unstable". It's a question of how the torque-speed curve of the motor relates to the torque-speed characteristic of the load.
By changing the torque-speed characteristic of the load (which is what is happening when the coil arrangements/connections are reconfigured), the system can be caused to go unstable, in which case it may either (a) accelerate indefinitely or (b) slow down until it stalls, depending on which way it's perturbed. This is exactly the behavior that has been observed in these experiments so far (see para 6 of that section).
So the good news is that it's not necessary to look for an electromagnetic feedback, which several people on here are finding a questionable theory. Instead, it's sufficient to explore how the different coil arrangements affect the torque-speed characteristic of the "generator", which is what is placing the mechanical load on the motor (ie acting as a magnetic brake)Ã, - and then apply conventional theory to that.
PB
I don't want to get off topic here but I was taking some transformers apart for a different experiment when I thought it might be possible to get a rectangular configuration of Thane's toroid transformer to behave in a similar manner. I cut down several similar transformer and welded them together so that the outer legs have secondary coils on them and the center was left open to try different primaries. You can look at the construction in the link below. I was trying to see if I could get the thing to operate on one of Thanes goals; that is, not drawing additional current on the primary when the load is applied. I have been trying several different primaries with an air gap and many different cross sections and sizes.
So far I have noticed that with all the coils the configuration works great as a regular transformer. I found that if you load only one of the secondary coils there is no extra draw on the primary, but if you load both sides the current increases with the load just like a regular transformer.
Thane or Luc
I'm not sure how you wired your two secondaries together but I would appreciate any comments you may have.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/Transformer02/photo?authkey=zxCjMbm16To#5183750246070079682
Thanks
Vince
Quote from: vince on March 31, 2008, 12:23:04 AM
So far I have noticed that with all the coils the configuration works great as a regular transformer. I found that if you load only one of the secondary coils there is no extra draw on the primary, but if you load both sides the current increases with the load just like a regular transformer.
Thane or Luc
I'm not sure how you wired your two secondaries together but I would appreciate any comments you may have.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/Transformer02/photo?authkey=zxCjMbm16To#5183750246070079682
Thanks
Vince
INDEED BOTH SECONDARIES MUST BE LOADED.
I WON'T BE DISCUSSING HOW THE SECONDARIES ARE CONFIGURED UNTIL PATENTING ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED - ALTHOUGH SOMEONE COULD FIGURE IT OUT IF THEY TRIED SINCE THERE ARE 4 x 1000 TURNS ON EACH SECONDARY AND LUC IS USING 700 STRAND LITZ WIRE IN THE PRIMARY - WHICH HE HAS BEEN MAKING BY HAND FOR THE LAST TWO DAYS.
WE HOPE TO HAVE SOME RESULTS TO POST SOON.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 10:14:30 PM
So the good news is that it's not necessary to look for an electromagnetic feedback, which several people on here are finding a questionable theory. Instead, it's sufficient to explore how the different coil arrangements affect the torque-speed characteristic of the "generator", which is what is placing the mechanical load on the motor (ie acting as a magnetic brake) - and then apply conventional theory to that.
PB
APPLY
CONVENTIONAL THEORY IF YOU HAVE TIME TO WASTE.
APPLY
UN-CONVENTIONAL THEORY IF YOU HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO.
APPLY ALL THE "THEORY" IN THE WORLD AND LEARN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
(EXCEPT HOW BIG YOUR EGO IS)
OR
BUILD A UNIT YOURSELF AND
LEARN WHILE OTHERS
TALKThane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 31, 2008, 06:55:13 AM
BUILD A UNIT YOURSELF AND LEARN WHILE OTHERS TALK
Thane
Building is good; but I think that
learning also requires the interpretation of the results.
PB
Luc, a question about the power supply in the toroid experiment. I guess it's coming from the red and black wires that go off the top of the pictures? What is the no-load voltage at that point?
Also, I'm wondering if you've measured the output impedance of that supply - because of course that will have a bearing on what happens to the toroid input voltage when the loading changes. Any figures for that? Thanks.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 10:14:30 PM
I've been puzzling over different ways in which there could be electromagnetic interaction between the motor and the "generator" and now I've come to think that the behavior of the motors/loads in this experiment can be explained completely in terms of a mechanical interaction between the motor and the "generator", NOT electromagnetic, nor "unconventional". This explains why a brass shaft, or an acrylic wheel, can transport the effect as well as steel can.
I am unclear on how your theory squares with the actual experimental results. To begin, who has observed acceleration with a brass shaft?
Luc,
Thanks for the explanation on the difficulties with the various meters. Certainly the clamp meter is a much more practical and flexible solution for your stated needs over the coming weeks and months. This is your personal investment of time and energy, and as you and Thane are the people who will ultimately have to submit your work for peer review if your results hold up over time, you really don't have to justify your choice of equipment to anyone but yourselves and your reviewers. If it means that full confidence in the results is delayed in the eyes of critics and the rest of us onlookers that hardly matters. You are still at the early stages of your research, and most really appreciate the front row seat your information sharing provides. So once again, thanks for your efforts both here and at the lab.
As a note to all, I came across this article when I was trying to learn about meters to assess the various comment here: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3828/is_200801/ai_n21279782/pg_1
I'm sure much of it is the basics for most, but it was comprehensive enough that I thought it worth sharing on the chance that many would be able to pick up something useful.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 09:22:36 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 30, 2008, 10:14:30 PM
I've been puzzling over different ways in which there could be electromagnetic interaction between the motor and the "generator" and now I've come to think that the behavior of the motors/loads in this experiment can be explained completely in terms of a mechanical interaction between the motor and the "generator", NOT electromagnetic, nor "unconventional". This explains why a brass shaft, or an acrylic wheel, can transport the effect as well as steel can.
I am unclear on how your theory squares with the actual experimental results. To begin, who has observed acceleration with a brass shaft?
I think the only observation of any difference between brass and steel behaviour has come from Thane's own setup and almost no information has been posted about that so it's hard to draw any conclusions about it. The point I'm making is that there is no reason to invoke any idea of electromagnetic feedback somehow influencing motor performance because the acceleration, or not, is fully explained by the instability, or not, of the load (ie the magnetic brake).
If more information were available about the brass-versus-steel observations it might be possible to connect them with the theory. For example, it's possible that due to the difference in magnetic properties between the brass and the steel, the load is stable when brass is used but unstable when steel is used. There are several other possibilities too, including simply mechanical effects, but without more information on the observations it's impossible to tell. I don't think anyone else has replicated the brass-is-different-from-steel effect but if I'm wrong I hope someone will correct me.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 09:53:37 AM
I think the only observation of any difference between brass and steel behaviour has come from Thane's own setup and almost no information has been posted about that so it's hard to draw any conclusions about it.
PB
So to continue then, what is the justification for your unambigious conclusion "This explains why a brass shaft...can transport the effect as well as steel can." when as you point out the only experimental data we have says otherwise. What was that? Some kind of weird psyop? Please answer my specific question about the justification for your statement before claiming some other main point.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 10:18:21 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 09:53:37 AM
I think the only observation of any difference between brass and steel behaviour has come from Thane's own setup and almost no information has been posted about that so it's hard to draw any conclusions about it.
PB
So to continue then, what is the justification for your unambigious conclusionÃ, "This explains why a brass shaft...can transport the effect as well as steel can." when as you point out the only experimentalÃ, data we have says otherwise. What was that? Some kind of weird psyop? Please answer my specific question about the justification for your statement before claiming some other main point.
The point I'm making is that there is no reason to invoke any idea of electromagnetic feedback somehow influencing motor performance because the acceleration, or not, is fully explained by the instability, or not, of the load (ie the magnetic brake).
This explains why a brass shaft...can transport the effect as well as steel can (ie because it's transported mechanically).
I don't think anyone has observed any difference between brass and steel, except for the one report in Thane's setup, for which we have almost no information and which has not been replicated by anyone else. But if it is validated by other experiments that brass does behave differently from steel, I think it's more likely that it's because it's altering the properties of the magnetic brake, and NOT because there's some kind of an "EM feedback" going on.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 30, 2008, 09:46:06 PM
DEAR LARRY,
THE PLEXIGLASS WHEEL ONLY WORKS WITH THE 8 COIL SET UP NOT WHEN ONLY A SINGLE COIL IS EMPLOYED. ACCELERATION IS THERE BUT IT IS SLIGHT.
ALSO LUC AND I DISCOVERED RECENTLY THAT LOW GAUGE WIRE PRODUCING HIGH CURRENT SLOWS DOWN THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED STEEL ROTOR BUT HIGH GAUGE WIRE PRODUCING HIGH VOLTAGE ACCELERATES THE ROTOR.
WE ARE DESIGNING OUR DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR WITH LOW GAUGE, HIGH CURRENT WIRE FOR REGENERATIVE BRAKING AND HIGH GAUGE, HIGH VOLTAGE FOR REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION.
CHEERS
Thane
Thanks for the rest of the picture. One does make some ignorant assumptions without all the fact. Very interesting new facts about the gauge.
I agree with JustMe, we do need an area to keep all of the characteristics of this design.
Regards,
Larry
PB - I have not been recording all of the test results as they have been posted, but it seems that you have (you indicated that you observed a trend previously) - could you post a spreadsheet of the raw data so that we can project trends and verify experementally? - if I recall correctly, Thane had indicated that some of his trends ran past unity... but at the time I did not think there were enough data points to make an educated projection that was anything but linear...
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 10:32:37 AM
I don't think anyone has observed any difference between brass and steel, except for the one report in Thane's setup, for which we have almost no information and which has not been replicated by anyone else. But if it is validated by other experiments that brass does behave differently from steel, I think it's more likely that it's because it's altering the properties of the magnetic brake, and NOT because there's some kind of an "EM feedback" going on.
PB
We can agree then that your statement "This explains why a brass shaft...can transport the effect as well as steel can" is based on 1) your own new untested theory and not on experimental evidence available from any of the available instances of this setup at this time, and 2) the experimental evidence that is available at this time does not support your hypothesis that a brass shaft is able to produce the effect in Thane's setup.
Aether22 has said he intends to fully reproduce Thane's setup, brass shaft and all, so that should be an important contribution to the knowledgebase one way or the other. In the meantime, your statements with regard to the brass shaft and the purported lack of any need to consider electromagnetic feedback seem more than premature.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 01:10:03 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 10:32:37 AM
I don't think anyone has observed any difference between brass and steel, except for the one report in Thane's setup, for which we have almost no information and which has not been replicated by anyone else. But if it is validated by other experiments that brass does behave differently from steel, I think it's more likely that it's because it's altering the properties of the magnetic brake, and NOT because there's some kind of an "EM feedback" going on.
PB
We can agree then...
Yes, we can agree, except that what I posted about load stability/instability is hardly an "untested theory" - it's textbook stuff and it does explain all results that have been
observed posted to date AFAIK.
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 10:32:37 AM
Aether22 has said he intends to fully reproduce Thane's setup, brass shaft and all...
Excellent. Looking forward to that.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 01:27:24 PM
Yes, we can agree, except that what I posted about load stability/instability is hardly an "untested theory" - it's textbook stuff and it does explain all results that have been observed posted to date AFAIK.
PB
The theory as it relates to the specific setup in question is completely untested, and in fact is about the third theory you have put forth as something that "does explain all results that have been
observed posted to date", though frankly none of them explain those results quite as comprehensively as Thane's own theory, for now. You like to look at things in little pieces that suit your goals, and generally speaking that detracts quite a bit from your arguments, whatever the value of those arguments may be in the end.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 01:43:13 PM
...frankly none of them explain those results quite as comprehensively as Thane's own theory, for now...
And Thane's theory is what exactly?
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 02:09:18 PM
And Thane's theory is what exactly?
PB
Thane's theory is that you are a prick. Me, I just think you're cynical and bored.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 02:22:50 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 02:09:18 PM
And Thane's theory is what exactly?
PB
Thane's theory is that you are a prick. Me, I just think you're cynical and bored.
I guess that would explain it :)
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 01:27:24 PM
[...]what I posted about load stability/instability is hardly an "untested theory" - it's textbook stuff and it does explain all results that have been observed posted to date AFAIK.
It only explains the results we've seen in the videos if you assume completely implausible values for one or more of the physical parameters.
Quote from: Vince on March 31, 2008, 01:27:24 PM
I don't want to get off topic here but I was taking some transformers apart for a different experiment when I thought it might be possible to get a rectangular configuration of Thane's toroid transformer to behave in a similar manner. I cut down several similar transformer and welded them together so that the outer legs have secondary coils on them and the center was left open to try different primaries. You can look at the construction in the link below. I was trying to see if I could get the thing to operate on one of Thanes goals; that is, not drawing additional current on the primary when the load is applied. I have been trying several different primaries with an air gap and many different cross sections and sizes.
So far I have noticed that with all the coils the configuration works great as a regular transformer. I found that if you load only one of the secondary coils there is no extra draw on the primary, but if you load both sides the current increases with the load just like a regular transformer.
Thane or Luc
I'm not sure how you wired your two secondaries together but I would appreciate any comments you may have.
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/Transformer02/photo?authkey=zxCjMbm16To#5183750246070079682
Thanks
Vince
Hi Vince,
I had made a smaller bi-retangular generator previously. I did not have any primary increase when both coils were loaded, also when cross wired and loaded. It was even the same when both was unloaded. The generator was not very efficent so that may be why mine did not have the problem. How or where did you get your transformers? My secondarys was hand wound and may be why my version was not efficient.
Thanks,
Larry
Hi Larry;
I had about 8 similar power supply transformers for some old cash registers. My unit uses the primary and secondary combo from the center of the originals, installed on the newly formed outer legs. I have been trying various primary coils from all kinds of things and even some hand wound ones. I have not tried any serious attempt at connecting all the secondaries but I will continue so to see if I can get it to react like Thanes. An earlier incorrect attempt at this ( you can find it way back in this post) was successful at not drawing extra from the primaries but it could produce NO real power for a load. This one will power a load and needs to be tested further.
Keep experimenting!
Vince
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 03:55:54 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 01:27:24 PM
[...]what I posted about load stability/instability is hardly an "untested theory" - it's textbook stuff and it does explain all results that have been observed posted to date AFAIK.
It only explains the results we've seen in the videos if you assume completely implausible values for one or more of the physical parameters.
Mr. Entropy, you may be right but I'm wondering which physical parameters you think would need to have implausible values? As far as I can see, the only requirement would be that by changing the coil connections you can cause the the torque-speed characteristic of the device to go from being a stable one to an unstable one with that particular motor - and there seems to be plenty of opportunity to do that with all the coils and magnets that are in play there, don't youÃ, think?
PB
Dear All,
I just sent some really great pictures to JustMe of Luc hard at work creating a 700 strand Litz primary. Pay close attention - that is 126 feet of wire he is using and he made 3 spools like this. (hopefully she can post them soon)
It takes about 4 hours to lay down what you see in the photos and about another 4 hours to wind 1 spool. That?s after he washes the floor first.
Luc has spent the past 3 days and about 30 hours creating a new primary ? hopefully it will work out?
Thane
Luc @ work:
...
...
...
.
...
Quote from: OilBarren on March 31, 2008, 07:13:37 PM
!!! MR. ENTROPY BEWARE !!!
Don't drink PB's cool aid!
Thane
HEY! Don't interrupt me while I'm posting pictures.
I like symmetry dammit.
.
Quote from: jacksatan on March 31, 2008, 01:09:42 PM
... could you post a spreadsheet of the raw data so that we can project trends and verify experementally?...
Here it is JS - I'm not sure if I collected all of the data but this is what I got. As came up before, the results don't tell us much because the current measurements are all in the last digit and that meter has a resolution of +/- 3 digits. This means that the efficiencies that were reported as, say, 160%, could just as easily be, say, 50%. The voltage measurements look OK though as they're very consistent in predicting the turns ratio.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on March 31, 2008, 06:39:03 PM
Dear All,
I just sent some really great pictures to JustMe of Luc hard at work creating a 700 strand Litz primary. Pay close attention - that is 126 feet of wire he is using and he made 3 spools like this. (hopefully she can post them soon)
It takes about 4 hours to lay down what you see in the photos and about another 4 hours to wind 1 spool. ThatÃ,’s after he washes the floor first.
Luc has spent the past 3 days and about 30 hours creating a new primary Ã,â€" hopefully it will work out?
Thane
Thane, Luc, JustMe,
I didn't know if you were joking when you first talked about Luc winding 700 strand Litz. I first though of my comments about Luc's magnets ( it would take superman to pull them apart). Didn't understand how a 700 strand Litz wire could be done manually other then by superman. Thanks for the great pictures and how to
get er done, very motivational.
Great job people,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on March 31, 2008, 08:26:19 PM
Thane, Luc, JustMe,
I didn't know if you were joking when you first talked about Luc winding 700 strand Litz. I first though of my comments about Luc's magnets ( it would take superman to pull them apart). Didn't understand how a 700 strand Litz wire could be done manually other then by superman. Thanks for the great pictures and how to get er done, very motivational.
Great job people,
Larry
FOR ANYONE WHO'S COUNTING THATS OVER - 4 MILES / SPOOL AND LUC MADE 3 SPOOLS (12.5 MILES) THIS WEEKEND BUT ONLY WOUND 4 MILES SO FAR ON THE PRIMARY. - THE FIRST 9 MILES DIDN'T WORK.
Thane
.
.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 31, 2008, 08:55:59 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO'S COUNTING THATS OVER - 4 MILES / SPOOL AND LUC MADE 3 SPOOLS (12.5 MILES) THIS WEEKEND BUT ONLY WOUND 4 MILES SO FAR ON THE PRIMARY. - THE FIRST 9 MILES DIDN'T WORK.
Thane
Duh. Kilometres are way shorter. ;)
What didn't work about the first 9 miles (wow) and where were those miles when they weren't working?
All,
I noticed that some non testers thank that they are asking for information from their corporate research department, not the basement/kitchen table researcher on this blog.
So anyone who would like to have an accurate digital tachometer using a magnetic sensor for less than $25 should look at http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/. The Cateye unit used in the article is not available anymore. I found a newer version, which is a Cateye Velo 8. Got it today, set it up according to the article and it correctly measure the two speeds of my Ryobi drill.
It was 22.56 including shipping from BikeWorldUSA.com.
Also found an article on building a Gaussmeter for less than $25, but it has the same problem with using an outdated Hall effect sensor. I'll be doing further research to find a solution. Would appreciate any help.
Would also like to have a cheap Wattmeter that can measure Milliwatts. I've ordered the Kill-a-Watt meter for $21.49 including shipping thru Amazon.com, but it doesn't handle Milliwatts.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 09:17:32 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on March 31, 2008, 08:55:59 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO'S COUNTING THATS OVER - 4 MILES / SPOOL AND LUC MADE 3 SPOOLS (12.5 MILES) THIS WEEKEND BUT ONLY WOUND 4 MILES SO FAR ON THE PRIMARY. - THE FIRST 9 MILES DIDN'T WORK.
Thane
Duh. Kilometres are way shorter. ;)
What didn't work about the first 9 miles (wow) and where were those miles when they weren't working?
LUC'S USING IT NOW AS A GIANT 2 LB STEEL WOOL POT SCRUBBER!
Thane
Pictures of the new generator set up and a theory question from Thane:
Here is our new coil test prototype.
And here is a question for all the armchair theorists out there?
The Gold ? high current wire slows the rotor when shorted
and the Gold ? high voltage coil on the same core accelerates the rotor?
Why?
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 05:48:31 PM
As far as I can see, the only requirement would be that by changing the coil connections you can cause the the torque-speed characteristic of the device to go from being a stable one to an unstable one with that particular motor - and there seems to be plenty of opportunity to do that with all the coils and magnets that are in play there, don't you think?
Not on average, no. The system will accelerate when it is at a speed where load torque < motor torque. If you apply any kind of break, which is what the load coil is supposed to be, then it increases load torque at various speeds by various degrees -- that's what "break" means. Since it does not also boost motor torque, this can only reduce the extent and depth of any accelerating speed ranges. It cannot introduce an accelerating speed range.
The coil is not really just a break, however. It is on average, but its inductance gives some inertia to the current in it, so its magnetism, once established, will not be cancelled immediately by Lenz's law, and will actually boost the rotor during some parts of the rotation. If one of these little boosts could nudge the rotor so far into a speed range where it accelerates that it was caught up by the increased motor torque and increased further before the breaking part of the cycle could push it back down into the stable region, then it could initiate a sustained acceleration. It would then accelerate to the top of the accelerating speed range.
If this were the case, howerver, then disconnecting the coil would increase the extent and depth of the accelerating speed range and cause the rotor to accelerate further instead of slowing down as it does. Also, this significant boosting is not plausible given reasonable estimates of the rotor inertia, coil inductance, and motor torque curve. The acceleration effect would also not increase with the number of connected coils, as it appears to do.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 10:07:51 PM
Pictures of the new generator set up and a theory question from Thane:
Here is our new coil test prototype.
And here is a question for all the armchair theorists out thereÃ,…
The Gold Ã,â€" high current wire slows the rotor when shorted
and the Gold Ã,â€" high voltage coil on the same core accelerates the rotor?
Why?
Sorry JustMe, but your two 'Gold' have me confused. I can see the two different coil gauges but not any Gold. What am I missing?
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on March 31, 2008, 10:30:04 PM
Sorry JustMe, but your two 'Gold' have me confused. I can see the two different coil gauges but not any Gold. What am I missing?
Regards,
Larry
Dunno. It's a direct quote from Thane via email. He'll have to clarify. :)
Does the rotor slow to a stop, or just slow down and maintain?
Does higher current/lower voltage mean more back emf as opposed to lower current/higher voltage? I apologize because that's probably a really easy one, I just don't know.
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 10:48:20 PM
Does the rotor slow to a stop, or just slow down and maintain?
Does higher current/lower voltage mean more back emf as opposed to lower current/higher voltage? I apologize because that's probably a really easy one, I just don't know.
THERE ARE 3 COILS IN THE PICTURE:
1 HIGH VOLTAGE GREEN - 26 GAUGE WIRE
HVG1On the same coire
1 HIGH VOLTAGE GOLD - 26 GAUGE WIRE
HV21 HIGH CURRENT GOLD - 14 GAUGE WIRE
HC3THE HIGH CURRENT (HIGH BACK EMF) GOLD COIL
HC3 WHEN SHORTED SLOWS THE ROTOR PRODUCING 2 A @ ABOUT 700 RPM.
THE HIGH VOLTAGE (LOW BACK EMF) GOLD COIL
HV2 NEUTRALIZES
HC3's HIGH CURRENT SHORTED DECELERATION EFFECT AND EVEN SURPASSES IT AT CERTAIN SPEEDS CAUSING ACCELERATION WHILE THE HIGH CURRENT COIL
HC3 S PRODUCING 2 AMPS OR MORE. (THIS WILL BE GREAT FOR CHARGING OUR DUNE BUGGY BATTERY)
THE
HV2 PRODUCES ABOUT 100 VOLTS 0.5 A @ 700 RPM
SO ON THE DUNE BUGGY WE WILL BE SWITCHING BETWEEN COILS TO OBTAIN
REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION HV COILS ENGAGED -
REGENERATIVE BRAKING HC COILS ENGAGED OR
REGENERATIVE COASTING - BOTH
HV and
HC COILS ENGAGED.
MY "USELESS" THEORY AND OPINION (VALID ONLY TO ME) IS:
AT A CETAIN HIGHER SPEED THE
HC COIL WILL ALSO CAUSE ACCELERATION or IF THE TURNS RATIO OF THE
HC COIL IS INCREASED.
AT THIS POINT THOUGH WE DON'T REALLY CARE WHY THESE PHENOMENONS OCCUR WE TOO BUSY EXPLOITING THEM (REAL SCIENTISTS CAN EXPLAIN IT LATER - AFTER THEY EXPLAIN WHAT ELECTRICITY AND MAGNETISM REALLY ARE).
Thane
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 05:48:31 PM
As far as I can see, the only requirement would be that by changing the coil connections you can cause the the torque-speed characteristic of the device to go from being a stable one to an unstable one with that particular motor - and there seems to be plenty of opportunity to do that with all the coils and magnets that are in play there, don't youÃ, think?
Not on average, no.Ã, The system will accelerate when it is at a speed where load torque < motor torque.Ã, If you apply any kind of break, which is what the load coil is supposed to be, then it increases load torque at various speeds by various degrees -- that's what "break" means.Ã, Since it does not also boost motor torque, this can only reduce the extent and depth of any accelerating speed ranges.Ã, It cannot introduce an accelerating speed range.
So far so good. So with coil configuration "A", let's call it, the motor will stabilize at a speed where load torque = motor torque. I think we both agree on that, and it is what Thane has observed.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
The coil is not really just a break, however.Ã, It is on average, but its inductance gives some inertia to the current in it, so its magnetism, once established, will not be cancelled immediately by Lenz's law, and will actually boost the rotor during some parts of the rotation.Ã, If one of these little boosts could nudge the rotor so far into a speed range where it accelerates that it was caught up by the increased motor torque and increased further before the breaking part of the cycle could push it back down into the stable region, then it could initiate a sustained acceleration.Ã, It would then accelerate to the top of the accelerating speed range.
Yes, it could be something like that and this condition can be invoked by changing the coil configuration, to configuration "B" say (eg, adding a coil or shorting a coil or reversing a coil's polarity etc). Unlike configuration "A", which is stable, configuration "B" may be unstable and so cause the speed to rise indefinitely. It can actually be a very small change to the coil configuration that causes this unstable condition if "A" is already on the very edge of the stable range - in that case, connecting or disconnecting one of the coils for example (creating configuration "B"), could push the system into instability, resulting in the acceleration which has been observed.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
If this were the case, howerver, then disconnecting the coil would increase the extent and depth of the accelerating speed range and cause the rotor to accelerate further instead of slowing down as it does.Ã,Â
I disagree with that. Don't forget that instability can go in either direction. It can EITHER result in acceleration OR it can result in deceleration. It just depends on which way the system starts to go when the instability first sets in. The point is that it tends to move AWAY from its previously stable speed/torque, but it can be in either direction. That topic was described in the paper I just posted a link to.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
Also, this significant boosting is not plausible given reasonable estimates of the rotor inertia, coil inductance, and motor torque curve.Ã, The acceleration effect would also not increase with the number of connected coils, as it appears to do.
We disagree here too. The reason is as I outlined above. If the system setup (config A) is only just stable then only a very small change (from A to B) can be enough to make it go unstable. Also, adding coils may act to make it even more unstable and so increase the effect, consistent with what has been observed. I don't see a justification for your statement that the boosting is "not plausible given reasonable estimates of the rotor inertia, coil inductance, and motor torque curve" but if I've missed something, please explain it to me.
PB
To save walking up and down the lab you could always buy some multi-stranded enamelled wire:
http://www.wires.co.uk/acatalog/st_wire.html
They do a 60 strands of 0.315mm and 1000 strands of 0.14mm wire all in 500g spools.
For longer lengths just create a "tap" at every 500g and then you have the option of connecting in line or parallel.
Ryobi 6" bench grinder, about 150 to 250 watts input?
Induction motor?
What is the voltage on the high current coil?
HV2 output is 100V x 0.5A so that could be 50Watts or if RMS is taken into account 0.707 x 100 x 0.5 = 35 Watts
Wild guess here: Shorting the longer length of wire might be to do with the delay in the field collapse of the core material creating less cogging of the rotor but you would also see a reduction in the high current coil.
Regards
Rob
I just had another thought about the stability/instability thing. Since only a small perturbation may be needed to cause the system to go from stable to unstable, that perturbation could actually also be created by the presence or absence of nearby ferrous materials, since that may have a small effect on the magnetic properties of the system. This is a possible explanation for the reports that the system behaves differently with a steel shaft versus a brass shaft. Just a thought.
PB
I have been watching this thread from the very first post, quietly in the background. Originally, I saw the news article, and then did some additional searching and found http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/2/4/3505063.html which ultimately led me here. I'm highly impressed by the progress that has been made and the collaboration of all those who have offered ideas and attempted to replicate Thane's results. The thread has led to many interesting dinner discussions with both my children and at times friends and peers. My background is and has been in Finance and the development of start-up companies. My interest in this topic is more a hobby than professional in nature and I have often investigated other reports of potential "free energy" claims/projects e.g. "The Searl Effect" "Steorn" etc. I look forward to the daily posts and the test results and am looking forward to Aether's future results.
I just felt I should take the time to say thank you to all those involved and their willingness to post their observations and data.
OK THE DAY IS ALMOST OVER SO I GUESS IT'S TIME TO COME CLEAN. ALL OF THE ABOVE IS 100% TRUE. THE BELOW HOWEVER...
SADLY PB DIDN'T BITE ON MY APRIL FOOLS JOKE. PB YOU ARE BEYOND ANNOYING AND IT IS CLEAR TO EVERYONE THAT YOU HAVE NO REAL INTEREST IN THE RESEARCH BEING DONE. I CAN ONLY PRAY THAT PEOPLE WILL SIMPLY STOP RESPONDING TO YOUR POSTS REGARDLESS OF HOW AGGRAVATING AND NONSENSICAL THEY ARE. THE ONLY POSITIVE THAT YOUR REPETITIVE POSTS HAVE BROUGHT ME IS THE LAUGHTER I ENJOY WHEN THANE MOCKS YOU IN HIS RESPONSES.
I also want to thank Polarbreeze for his continued involvement. His fair and reasonable questions. His desire to learn and bring some order to the discussion and his obvious intellectual openness and thought provoking questions, answers and ideas.
PB its cousin EDDY !!!!
Quote from: JustMe on March 31, 2008, 10:07:51 PM
Pictures of the new generator set up and a theory question from Thane:
Here is our new coil test prototype.
And here is a question for all the armchair theorists out thereââ,¬Â¦
The Gold ââ,¬â€œ high current wire slows the rotor when shorted
and the Gold ââ,¬â€œ high voltage coil on the same core accelerates the rotor?
Why?
He's doing different things with them. It's not very clear exactly what the setup is but making some deductions from Thane's post:
1. He's shorting HC3 to produce a deceleration - but it's unclear whether it restabilizes at 700rpm or is still slowing down. I'm guessing it stabilizes because he needs to have time to take the current measurement on HV2
2. HV2 is showing 100V and 0.5A, which means it's not shorted (otherwise the voltage would be zero). It appears to have a 200 ohm load attached to it, rather than being shorted. V=I.R
So we wouldn't expect the two coils to have the same effect, since one is shorted (zero ohms load) and the other has a 200 ohm load. Also, we don't know whether they have the same number of turns or not. Again, if I've deduced the setup wrong I'm sure Thane will be kind enough to correct me. ;)
PB
All,
Update to low cost test equipment research in blue:
An article to buy an accurate digital Tachometer using a magnetic sensor for less than $25 at http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/. The Cateye unit used in the article is not available anymore. I found a newer version, which is a Cateye Velo 8. Got it today, set it up according to the article and it correctly measure the two speeds of my Ryobi drill.
It was $22.56 including shipping from BikeWorldUSA.com.
An article on building a Gaussmeter for as little as $6.00 at http://my.execpc.com/~rhoadley/magmeter.htm. The hall effect IC in the article is discontinued. The replacement is the Allegro A1323LUA-T. Digi-Key has it for 1.45.
Wanted a low cost Wattmeter that can measure milliwatts. Couldn't fine one, so I've ordered the Kill-a-Watt meter for $21.49 including shipping thru Amazon.com. Displays active power and apparent power in whole watts.
Regards,
Larry
[/quote]
He's doing different things with them. It's not very clear exactly what the setup is but making some deductions from Thane's post:
1. He's shorting HC3 to produce a deceleration - but it's unclear whether it restabilizes at 700rpm or is still slowing down. I'm guessing it stabilizes because he needs to have time to take the current measurement on HV2
2. HV2 is showing 100V and 0.5A, which means it's not shorted (otherwise the voltage would be zero). It appears to have a 200 ohm load attached to it, rather than being shorted. V=I.R
NO SORRY - 100 V OPEN AND THEN 0.5 A WHEN SHORTED.
So we wouldn't expect the two coils to have the same effect, since one is shorted (zero ohms load) and the other has a 200 ohm load. Also, we don't know whether they have the same number of turns or not. Again, if I've deduced the setup wrong I'm sure Thane will be kind enough to correct me. ;)
PB
YOU ARE WAY OFF BUT I HAVE AN EVEN BETTER IDEA THAN CORRECTING YOU HOWARD
- COME TO THE LAB AND CORRECT YOURSELF. HONESTLY LUC AND I WOULD LIKE TO MEET YOU.
Thane
HERE IS THE QUESTION AGAIN...
1 HIGH VOLTAGE COIL (270 ohms) CAUSES ACCELERATION WHEN SHORTED
1 HIGH CURRENT COIL (55 ohms) CAUSES DECELERATION WHEN SHORTED
THEY ARE MOUNTED ON THE SAME CORE
SO WHY ARE THEY PRODUCING DIFFERENT RESULTS?
I HAVE MY IDEAS BUT - I WANT TO HEAR FROM OTHERS.
FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED THERE IS THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE FROM KEY RECORDS. http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ECN1N26Y
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on March 31, 2008, 09:23:26 PM
...I noticed that some non testers thank that they are asking for information from their corporate research department, not the basement/kitchen table researcher on this blog...Ã,Â
LarryÃ,Â
There are only two main things missing, as far as I can see:
1. An in-line ammeter to measure the input current in the transformer experiment. It should be possible to pick one up with sufficient accuracy/resolution in a used/surplus store for well under $50. Or else to borrow one from the U. This is not a hard piece of gear to find. The clamp meter is a problem and the new clamp meter will continue to be a problem because it has +/- 5 digit error spec.
2. A torque meter to reliably measure the torque in the shaft between the motor and the device. This is important for determining how much power is being transferred (torque x rpm), and will also allow the measurement of the torque/speed curve for both the motor and for the device so the stability/instability mechanism can be observed. I don't know anything about torque meters - may be a lot harder to find at a reasonable price than the ammeter I think. How about this: http://www.lorenz-sensors.com/frame/torque.htm (http://www.lorenz-sensors.com/frame/torque.htm)
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 01, 2008, 07:18:19 PM
HERE IS THE QUESTION AGAIN...
1 HIGH VOLTAGE COIL (270 ohms) CAUSES ACCELERATION WHEN SHORTED
1 HIGH CURRENT COIL (55 ohms) CAUSES DECELERATION WHEN SHORTED
THEY ARE MOUNTED ON THE SAME CORE
SO WHY ARE THEY PRODUCING DIFFERENT RESULTS?
I HAVE MY IDEAS BUT - I WANT TO HEAR FROM OTHERS.
Thane
1. What is the initial steady-state rpm?
2. When you short the HV coil and it accelerates, does it re-stabilize at a new higher rpm (if so, what rpm?) or does it go on accelerating?
3. When you short the HC coil and it decelerates, does it re-stabilize at a new lower rpm (if so, what rpm?) or does it go on decelerating?
4. What's happening in your green coil for all of this? Is it open, shorted, loaded etc? Are you changing that at all?
5. Is there any electrical connection at all between any of these coils?
6. How many turns on each coil (ie the green one, the HV one and the HC one?)
7. What happens with both HV and HC coils shorted (but not connected together)
8. What happens if you connect the HV and HC coils in series and short the free ends?
9. What happens if you do #8 but reverse one of the coils so they're out of phase?
10. What is the meaning of the universe?
PB
HERE IS THE QUESTION AGAIN...
1 HIGH VOLTAGE COIL (270 ohms) CAUSES ACCELERATION WHEN SHORTED
1 HIGH CURRENT COIL (55 ohms) CAUSES DECELERATION WHEN SHORTED
THEY ARE MOUNTED ON THE SAME CORE
SO WHY ARE THEY PRODUCING DIFFERENT RESULTS?
I HAVE MY IDEAS BUT - I WANT TO HEAR FROM OTHERS.
[/quote]
Thane,
Mr Others back to you here.... lol
This is quite fascinating, especially what appears to be your use of MOT cores and coils.
May I ask some construction pointers?
1) It looks like the single Lee Valley cup, but with two 1/8th thick magnets in it?
2) It looks like two MOT cores with the outside legs cut off?
3)The two cores are mounted on a back steel piece to tie them together?
4) are they clamped down tight or is there a spacer block between the mot core and the transverse
core? (or an air gap?)
5) are the two mot cores one magnet spacing apart? (do the cores align on each magnet)
6) are the magnets NSNS or NNNN?
7) The two gold coils are the primary and secondary from the Mot?
8) The green coil is hand wound?
To answer your question, I would have to know if the green coil and gold coil are connected....
Ron the builder, in sunny Victoria
All,
Update to low cost test equipment research in blue. Actually PB has reminded me of Prony Brake information that I had forgot to post earlier:
An article to buy an accurate digital Tachometer using a magnetic sensor for less than $25 at http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/. The Cateye unit used in the article is not available anymore. I found a newer version, which is a Cateye Velo 8. Got it today, set it up according to the article and it correctly measure the two speeds of my Ryobi drill.
It was $22.56 including shipping from BikeWorldUSA.com.
An article on building a Gaussmeter for as little as $6.00 at http://my.execpc.com/~rhoadley/magmeter.htm. The hall effect IC in the article is discontinued. The replacement is the Allegro A1323LUA-T. Digi-Key has it for 1.45. Found out that Digi-Key will not have it in stock until May. I'll try to find other alternatives.
Wanted a low cost Wattmeter that can measure milliwatts. Couldn't fine one, so I've ordered the Kill-a-Watt meter for $21.49 including shipping thru Amazon.com. Displays active power and apparent power in whole watts.
An article on how to build a Prony Brake ( used to measure shaft power of small motors) can be found at http://www.geocities.com/koneheadx/measuringshaftpower.html. Vince has built one for his Thane motor and can probrably add some insight.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 01, 2008, 08:16:05 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
If this were the case, howerver, then disconnecting the coil would increase the extent and depth of the accelerating speed range and cause the rotor to accelerate further instead of slowing down as it does.
I disagree with that. Don't forget that instability can go in either direction. It can EITHER result in acceleration OR it can result in deceleration. It just depends on which way the system starts to go when the instability first sets in. The point is that it tends to move AWAY from its previously stable speed/torque, but it can be in either direction. That topic was described in the paper I just posted a link to.
Interesting. You would not be able to draw a set of torque vs. speed curves for the motor, disconnected load, and connected load that would allow this to occur. Why do you believe that you could?
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 01, 2008, 08:16:05 AM
I don't see a justification for your statement that the boosting is "not plausible given reasonable estimates of the rotor inertia, coil inductance, and motor torque curve" but if I've missed something, please explain it to me.
I cannot point out your error until you show your work.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
A quick question.
Were can I buy a large Ferrite Toroidal core of say 6 inch diameter?
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 01, 2008, 11:23:57 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 01, 2008, 08:16:05 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
If this were the case, howerver, then disconnecting the coil would increase the extent and depth of the accelerating speed range and cause the rotor to accelerate further instead of slowing down as it does.Ã,Â
... instability can go in either direction. It can EITHER result in acceleration OR it can result in deceleration. It just depends on which way the system starts to go when the instability first sets in. The point is that it tends to move AWAY from its previously stable speed/torque, but it can be in either direction...
...You would not be able to draw a set of torque vs. speed curves for the motor, disconnected load, andÃ, connected load that would allow this to occur...Ã,Â
I think I would. I have in mind, for example, the two curves in figure 12 (page 9) of this paper:
AC Induction Motor Fundamentals (http://www.industrialcontrols.eetchina.com/PDF/2007JUL/ICCOL_2007JUL12_IODR_TA_02.pdf)
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on March 31, 2008, 10:13:54 PM
...not plausible given reasonable estimates of the rotor inertia, coil inductance, and motor torque curve...
Mr. Entropy
What is your reason for thinking that?
PB
Quote from: AbbaRue on April 02, 2008, 02:42:12 AM
A quick question.
Were can I buy a large Ferrite Toroidal core of say 6 inch diameter?
TOROID TECH CAN MAKE YOU ONE AND WIND IT AS WELL IF YOU WISH.
Thane
p.s.
RON I AM GETTING TO YOUR QUESTIONS SOON.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 01, 2008, 11:23:57 PM
I cannot point out your error until you show your work.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
MR. ENTROPY:
I AM WARNING YOU - DON'T DRINK PB's KOOL AID - IT WILL POISON YOUR MIND AND KILL YOUR ENTHUSIASM.
Thane
Quote from: Onygains on April 01, 2008, 02:32:31 PM
SADLY PB DIDN'T BITE ON MY APRIL FOOLS JOKE.
According to tradition, I think that makes
you the "fool".Ã, :-*
PB
Quote from: i_ron on April 01, 2008, 10:04:29 PM
Mr Others back to you here.... lol
This is quite fascinating, especially what appears to be your use of MOT cores and coils.
May I ask some construction pointers?
1) It looks like the single Lee Valley cup, but with two 1/8th thick magnets in it?
YES
2) It looks like two MOT cores with the outside legs cut off?
YES
3)The two cores are mounted on a back steel piece to tie them together?
YES
4) are they clamped down tight or is there a spacer block between the mot core and the transverse
core? (or an air gap?)
NO AIR GAP - MOUNTED TOGETHER
5) are the two mot cores one magnet spacing apart? (do the cores align on each magnet)
YES THE CORES ALIGN
6) are the magnets NSNS or NNNN?
NSNS
7) The two gold coils are the primary and secondary from the Mot?
YES
8) The green coil is hand wound?
YES 1000 ohms worth
To answer your question, I would have to know if the green coil and gold coil are connected....
NOT CONNECTED - ACTIVATED INDIVIDUALLY - TO OBSERVE DIFFERENT EFFECTS
Ron the builder, in sunny Victoria
Quote from: OilBarren on April 01, 2008, 07:25:56 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED THERE IS THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE FROM KEY RECORDS. http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ECN1N26Y
Thane
That was long! You should warn a person ahead of time when they need popcorn. :)
If you had made your observations with the plexiglas rotor and your new discovery with the high current wire before this was filmed, would you have described your basic back-emf theory any differently or modified it in some way?
To save walking up and down the lab you could always buy some multi-stranded enamelled wire:
http://www.wires.co.uk/acatalog/st_wire.html
They do a 60 strands of 0.315mm and 1000 strands of 0.14mm wire all in 500g spools.
For longer lengths just create a "tap" at every 500g and then you have the option of connecting in line or parallel.
ACTUALLY WE HAD SOME ON ORDER BUT WE(LUC) LACKS PATIENCE.
WE ARE WINDING OUR NEW PRIMARY TODAY WITH 175 STRAND X 46 GAUGE LITZ TODAY.
Ryobi 6" bench grinder, about 150 to 250 watts input?
Induction motor?
200 WATTS - DEPENDING ON SPEED - 200 W @ 1000 RPM
What is the voltage on the high current coil?
HV2 output is 100V x 0.5A so that could be 50Watts or if RMS is taken into account 0.707 x 100 x 0.5 = 35 Watts
SORRY AGAIN 100V JUST PRIOR TO SHORTING.
Wild guess here: Shorting the longer length of wire might be to do with the delay in the field collapse of the core material creating less cogging of the rotor but you would also see a reduction in the high current coil.
I WILL CHECK THIS TODAY AND POST THE RESULTS.
Regards
Rob
Quote from: JustMe on April 02, 2008, 11:08:06 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 01, 2008, 07:25:56 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED THERE IS THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE FROM KEY RECORDS. http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ECN1N26Y
Thane
That was long! You should warn a person ahead of time when they need popcorn. :)
I'VE BEEN TOLD SIZE DOESN'T MATTER - NOT SURE WHY I KEEP BEING TOLD THAT THOUGH?
If you had made your observations with the plexiglas rotor and your new discovery with the high current wire before this was filmed, would you have described your basic back-emf theory any differently or modified it in some way?
IT MAY NOT BE BACK EMF AS I THOUGHT - OR IT MAY BE MAGNITUDE DEPENDANT BACK EMF - I.E. TOO MUCH "OF A GOOD THING" CAUSING SATURATION ETC.
OR THERE MAY BE AN IDEAL OPERATING RANGE FOR EACH COIL / MOTOR SETUP.
EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE ABOUT
BALANCE AND FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE AGAIN AND AGAIN AFTER WE CHANGE SOMETHING. LUC IS CONSTANTLY LOOKING FOR THAT BALANCE WITH THE TRANSFORMER - I JUST WANT OUR DUNE BUGGY TO GO 25 - 50% FARTHER.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 02, 2008, 07:31:08 AM
I think I would. I have in mind, for example, the two curves in figure 12 (page 9) of this paper: AC Induction Motor Fundamentals (http://www.industrialcontrols.eetchina.com/PDF/2007JUL/ICCOL_2007JUL12_IODR_TA_02.pdf)
Remember that the shorted coil has to act like a brake. Comparing the two load curves on page 9 in that paper, you can see that the unstable load requires
less torque than the stable load at some speeds. This is inconsistent with the application of a brake.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 02, 2008, 12:51:04 PM
"Remember that the shorted coil has to act like a brake". I HAVE JUST COMPLETED A SERIES OF TESTS WITH THE 2 GOLD COILS AND THE GREEN COIL.
IT TURNS OUT THAT:
THE
HIGH CURRENT GOLD COIL HC1 ALSO PRODUCES ACCELERATION WHEN ITS CORE IS COUPLED TO ANOTHER CORE COMPLETING THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT. (as shown in the photos) THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL HV2 PRODUCES THE MOST ACCELERATION - DUE TO THE FACT THAT ITS INDUCED VOLTAGE IS HIGHER - 100V vs 16V @ 686 RPM (just installed laser tach).
LUC AND I OBSERVED DECELERATION WITH THE HIGH CURRENT GOLD COIL HC1 WHEN IT WAS INSTALLED AS A "STAND ALONE" COIL..
Thane
Thanks for the new info. If you have time to expand on it, I'd like to learn more. How are the cores coupled? Are they still individually shorted, and if so how does the coupling affect that if at all? How does the coupled acceleration compare to the acceleration of it's lower current partner when that partner is accelerating the motor alone? You indicate that the higher acceleration follows from the higher voltage - can you briefly explain why? In general, what is emerging as the biggest factor at play at this point? Is it still back-emf in your view?
With my own quite limited knowledge of this particular science (though I know tons more than when I first read the Star article!) it's getting harder to follow the magnetic and physical properties of this device. I bet there's lots more novice lurkers who aren't chatty like me who would like to be able to keep up, so if you do have some time for Perepetia 101 on occasion I bet it would be more than me who would very much appreciate it. :)
Thanks for the new info. If you have time to expand on it, I'd like to learn more. How are the cores coupled?
THEY ARE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED TOGETHER WITH SOME BACK IRON.
Are they still individually shorted, and if so how does the coupling affect that if at all?
YES INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED.
THE COUPLING CREATES A PERMANENT MAGNET FLUX PATH OFF OF A NORTH POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR THROUGH THE TWO CORES AND BACK TO A SOUTH POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR. THIS IS JUST SIMPLY A MUCH BETTER AND MORE EFFICIENT WAY TO PULL AS MUCH FLUX THROUGH THE COIL/CORE AS POSSIBLE - RATHER THAN HAVING ONE SINGLE COIL SITTING THERE.
How does the coupled acceleration compare to the acceleration of it's lower current partner when that partner is accelerating the motor alone?
THEY SEEM TO PRETTY MUCH IGNORE ONE ANOTHER AND PROVIDE ABOUT THE SAME INDIVIDUAL RESULT IN TANDEM OR INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED. I THINK THE LOWER CURRENT COIL WHEN OPERATING IN "STAND ALONE MODE" WAS NOT PRODUCING ENOUGH MMF TO MAKE IT INTO THE MOTOR AND WAS OPERATING BELOW THE "THRESHOLD" SO ITS FIELD STAYED IN THE AIR GAP BETWEEN THE COIL AND ROTOR MAGNET CAUSING DECELERATION.
You indicate that the higher acceleration follows from the higher voltage - can you briefly explain why?
A HIGHER INDUCED EMF(VOLTAGE) IN THE COIL WILL PRODUCE A HIGHER MMF (CURRENT) WHEN SHORTED AND A STRONGER MAGNETIC FIELD IN THE AIR GAP. LUC AND I WILL WANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO THIS AND DESIGN OUR DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR TO PROVIDE HIGH VOLTAGE AT LOW RPM.
In general, what is emerging as the biggest factor at play at this point? Is it still back-emf in your view?
I ONLY KNOW ABOUT GENERATOR COILS PRODUCING EMF'S AND MMF'S (THERE MAY BE AETHER AS WELL OR RADIANT ENERGY OR ZPE OR SOMETHING ELSE OCCURING ) I JUST DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT STUFF SO I ASSUME IT'S BACK EMF BECAUSE I SEEM TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MANIPULATE IT.
With my own quite limited knowledge of this particular science (though I know tons more than when I first read the Star article!) it's getting harder to follow the magnetic and physical properties of this device. I bet there's lots more novice lurkers who aren't chatty like me who would like to be able to keep up, so if you do have some time for Perepetia 101 on occasion I bet it would be more than me who would very much appreciate it. :)
MAYBE I'LL BE MORE INCLINED TO TELL YOU MORE WHEN "YOUR SENS" GET INTO THE PLAYOFFS??? NOW I'M PISSED JUST THINKING ABOUT IT AND I AM AFRAID TORONTO IS GOING TO HAVE THE LAST LAUGH.
Thane
I AM POSTING THIS PM FROM PB BECAUSE MAYBE HE (OR SHE) FINALLY HAS SOMETHING REALLY WORTHWHILE TO CONTRIBUTE...
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 02, 2008, 01:02:19 PM
Re: EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE ABOUT BALANCE AND FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE AGAIN AND AGAIN AFTER WE CHANGE SOMETHING...
Thane, yes, that's exactly what it's about - from your reactions it seems you think I'm trying to trash what you're doing or trick you or something but, trust me, if you really want to progress this thing you need to dig into the theory in the directions I'm pointing. Each time you change something you have to adjust to find a new metastable point where the system can be pushed into instability by a small perturbation. That's what's behind your observation about "balance".
You're calling it balance; I'm calling it stability/instability. Same thing. Once you have a handle on the torque-speed characteristics of the load and of the motor, then you won't have to do so much guessing because you'll be able to apply what you've learned already to each new variant. Even if you're finding out new stuff, no reason not to benefit from the theory that's already out there. I think that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
PB
FUNNY THING AS MUCH AS I ENJOY TRASH TALKING PB - THERE MAY BE SOME MERIT TO THIS - AFTER ALL LUC WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT BUILDING A PONY BRAKE THIS AFTERNOON.
BACK TO THE THEORY - AND TO BE BLUNT - RIGHT NOW WE ARE SIMPLY LOOKING FOR A QUICK LAY. PROOF OF CONCEPT AND EXCITING VISUAL DEMO'S LIKE THE DUNE BUGGY AND THE TRANSFORMER.
THEORY AND OPTIMIZATION CAN ALL HAPPEN LATER ON WHEN OUR TROOPS ARE SAFE AT HOME AND OIL WARS ARE NO LONGER TOLERATED OR REQUIRED.
Thane
Thane;
Please don't take this as criticism but as genuine interest.
I hope I didn't miss this information on an earlier post but I was wondering what kind of motor you will be using in you Dune Buggy. It obviously is not going to be a fractional horsepower ac induction motor. Even a larger 5 to 10 HP induction motor does not make sense since they are extremely heavy and would require higher voltage therefore more weight with the associated power pack to feed it. A dc motor is the most obvious but my interest is in how you intend on taking advantage of the magnetic coupling effect, when a motor coupled to the drive axle via some form of transmission will spend most of it's time at a some speed ratio of the buggy's speed. In essence the only time the motor could accelerate is on a long run at higher speeds. I guess the regenerative aspect is what your after so that you can recharge the battery. Am I wrong in this assumption or is there more that I'm missing. To get the advantage of increased torque (that I myself witnessed) the motor had to reach a critical minimum speed and only then did it exhibit this. When a dune buggy is moving the motor may not see this sustained speed for a lengthy period, unless you are driving a long straight stretch.
Looking forward to your comments.
Regards
Vince
[Thane;
Please don't take this as criticism but as genuine interest.
DON'T WORRY PB HAS THAT COVERED.
I hope I didn't miss this information on an earlier post but I was wondering what kind of motor you will be using in you Dune Buggy. It obviously is not going to be a fractional horsepower ac induction motor. Even a larger 5 to 10 HP induction motor does not make sense since they are extremely heavy and would require higher voltage therefore more weight with the associated power pack to feed it. A dc motor is the most obvious but my interest is in how you intend on taking advantage of the magnetic coupling effect, when a motor coupled to the drive axle via some form of transmission will spend most of it's time at a some speed ratio of the buggy's speed.
WE HAVE A DC BRUSHED GOLF CART MOTOR WHICH WE ARE BENCH TESTING RIGH NOW.
WE ARE ALSO CONSIDERING A 3 HP INDUCTION MOTOR IF THAT FAILS.
NO TRANSMISSION - DIRECT DRIVE.
In essence the only time the motor could accelerate is on a long run at higher speeds. I guess the regenerative aspect is what your after so that you can recharge the battery.
YES - WE JUST WANT TO AVOID DECELERATION IS ALL.
PERHAPS OUR GENERATOR WILL HAVE TO KICK IN AT 15 MPH - BELOW THAT WE USE IT AS A REGENERATIVE BRAKE.
Am I wrong in this assumption or is there more that I'm missing. To get the advantage of increased torque (that I myself witnessed) the motor had to reach a critical minimum speed and only then did it exhibit this. When a dune buggy is moving the motor may not see this sustained speed for a lengthy period, unless you are driving a long straight stretch.
YA LIKE ON THE WAY TO THE BEER STORE EH?
BUT SERIOUSLY GO BACK TO THE YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEO #4 - TOROID GENERATOR COIL.
WE ARE ONLY LOOKING AT 50% OF THE OVERALL PICTURE SO FAR IN THIS CHATROOM.
FINALLY OUR GOAL IS A MODEST 25 - 50 % IMPROVEMENT.
AND DON'T FORGET THE MORE COILS YOU HAVE AND THE HIGHER THE VOLTAGES PRODUCED THE LOWER YOUR "THRESHOLD" SPEED WILL BE - IT MAY EVEN START AT 1 RPM IF WE ARE FORTUNATE AND DO OUR JOBS RIGHT.
Thane
Looking forward to your comments.
Regards
Vince
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 06:52:34 PM
THEORY AND OPTIMIZATION CAN ALL HAPPEN LATER ON WHEN OUR TROOPS ARE SAFE AT HOME AND OIL WARS ARE NO LONGER TOLERATED OR REQUIRED.
Amen, brother. :)
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 06:52:34 PM
I AM POSTING THIS PM FROM PB BECAUSE MAYBE HE (OR SHE) FINALLY HAS SOMETHING REALLY WORTHWHILE TO CONTRIBUTE... AND TO BE BLUNT - RIGHT NOW WE ARE SIMPLY LOOKING FOR A QUICK LAY.
Thane
Well, that wasn't really what I had in mind :-*
PB
Hi all,
this post is for our dear Polar opposite, aka...polarbreeze. My congratulations to you :D on being one post away from a 200 post score. I must say that I am impressed with your dedication to this topic. In case you guy's and girl's have not noticed, polarbreeze has only posted at this topic and nowhere else.
As I understand it, all efforts have value and over time will give fruit. So my dear polarbreeze, even though I say you are a Polar opposite, maybe because I don't buy 100% of modern day science, doesn't mean anything. North pole has no force without the South polar opposite. So feel free to speak your mind, or even better, come at the O. U. lab and bring in all the measuring equipment you want and measure, probe and chart to your hearts content and post all your findings to help your fellow scientifically minded brothers and sisters. This maybe your best contribution to this topic, real scientific data.
If you don't have a car I'm sure Thane can even pick you up, just let us know.
Stay tuned, polarbreeze maybe coming.
Luc
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 06:52:34 PM
I AM POSTING THIS PM FROM PB BECAUSE MAYBE HE (OR SHE) FINALLY HAS SOMETHING REALLY WORTHWHILE TO CONTRIBUTE... AND TO BE BLUNT - RIGHT NOW WE ARE SIMPLY LOOKING FOR A QUICK LAY.
Well, that wasn't really what I had in mind :-* PB ...
Stay tuned, polarbreeze maybe coming. Luc
OK, NOW THIS IS JUST GETTING OUT OF HAND.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 07:58:34 AM
Luc, a question about the power supply in the toroid experiment. I guess it's coming from the red and black wires that go off the top of the pictures? What is the no-load voltage at that point?
Also, I'm wondering if you've measured the output impedance of that supply - because of course that will have a bearing on what happens to the toroid input voltage when the loading changes. Any figures for that? Thanks.
PB
Luc, any news on this?
Thanks,
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 06:40:33 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on March 31, 2008, 07:58:34 AM
Luc, a question about the power supply in the toroid experiment. I guess it's coming from the red and black wires that go off the top of the pictures? What is the no-load voltage at that point?
Also, I'm wondering if you've measured the output impedance of that supply - because of course that will have a bearing on what happens to the toroid input voltage when the loading changes. Any figures for that? Thanks.
PB
Luc, any news on this?
Thanks,
PB
WHEN WE GET AROUND TO DOING "REAL TESTS" WITH AN OPTIMIZED PRIMARY (WE ARE STILL IN IMPROVEMENT MODE) WE WILL CORRECT THE POWER FACTOR OF THE OTTAWA U LAB VARIAC IF IT IS NOT ALREADY 1 - I SUSPECT THAT IT IS ALREADY CORRECTED BUT WE WILL VERIFY WHEN WE HOOK UP THE SILLY-SCOPE.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 03:45:03 PM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 02, 2008, 12:51:04 PM
"Remember that the shorted coil has to act like a brake".Ã,Â
I HAVE JUST COMPLETED A SERIES OF TESTS WITH THE 2 GOLD COILS AND THE GREEN COIL.
IT TURNS OUT THAT:
THE HIGH CURRENT GOLD COIL HC1 ALSO PRODUCES ACCELERATION WHEN ITS CORE IS COUPLED TO ANOTHER CORE COMPLETING THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT. (as shown in the photos) THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL HV2 PRODUCES THE MOST ACCELERATION - DUE TO THE FACT THAT ITS INDUCED VOLTAGE IS HIGHER - 100V vs 16V @ 686 RPM (just installed laser tach).
LUC AND I OBSERVED DECELERATION WITH THE HIGH CURRENT GOLD COIL HC1 WHEN IT WAS INSTALLED AS A "STAND ALONE" COIL..
Thane
So putting all these various things together (and bearing in mind there's a lot of data missing, so there's some guesswork here), maybe something like this:
1. Stable condition (baseline): the green coil, when shorted, is dragging on the rotor in two places: (a) as a magnet passes its own ("green") core and (b) as a magnet passes the other ("gold") core (because of the magnetic field from the green coil passing through the gold core: they are magnetically coupled).
2. Unstable condition: one or other of the gold coils, when shorted, produces a magnetic field in the gold core which opposes the one (in the gold core) from the green coil, thus reducing the drag on the rotor at that core. This pushes the system into instability. Why is it opposing? Perhaps because of different magnet polarity, or perhaps because of the relative physical positioning on the cores, or perhaps for some other reason. Why is it different for the two gold coils? Perhaps because they have different windings (turns) so one is more effective than the other at cancelling out the "green" field in the gold core; or, again, perhaps because of their different positions on their core.
I'm not sure that the instability mechanism is the most important question though. The more fundamental question is whether pushing the system into instability, however you do it, can actually result in any power gain because as I said before this has to be about power, not about speed.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 06:59:50 AM
The more fundamental question is whether pushing the system into instability, however you do it, can actually result in any power gain because as I said before this has to be about power, not about speed.PB
WHERE'S MICHAEL FARADAY(Faraday's Law of Induction re:
deltaT) WHEN YOU NEED HIM?
Thane
ps
oh look...here he is:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/farlaw.html
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 02, 2008, 12:51:04 PM
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 02, 2008, 07:31:08 AM
I think I would. I have in mind, for example, the two curves in figure 12 (page 9) of this paper: AC Induction Motor Fundamentals (http://www.industrialcontrols.eetchina.com/PDF/2007JUL/ICCOL_2007JUL12_IODR_TA_02.pdf)
Remember that the shorted coil has to act like a brake.Ã, Comparing the two load curves on page 9 in that paper, you can see that the unstable load requires less torque than the stable load at some speeds.Ã, This is inconsistent with the application of a brake.
I wonder then if the motor's torque-speed curve actually has a positive slope, not a negative one, at this point. It seems likely because the motor is running at only about 20% of its rated speed. That doesn't necessarily explain it either, I realize, but see also my post 1457: I'd be interested in your thoughts around that.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 06:59:50 AM
The more fundamental question is whether pushing the system into instability, however you do it, can actually result in any power gain because as I said before this has to be about power, not about speed.PB
WHERE'S MICHAEL FARADAY(Faraday's Law of Induction re: deltaT) WHEN YOU NEED HIM?
Thane
ps oh look...here he is:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/farlaw.html
Power, Thane. Not voltage. Power. Mr Faraday is supportive, as is Mr. Lenz.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 07:19:41 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 06:59:50 AM
The more fundamental question is whether pushing the system into instability, however you do it, can actually result in any power gain because as I said before this has to be about power, not about speed.PB
WHERE'S MICHAEL FARADAY(Faraday's Law of Induction re: deltaT) WHEN YOU NEED HIM?
Thane
ps oh look...here he is:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/farlaw.html
Power, Thane. Not voltage. Power. Mr Faraday is supportive.
PB
POWER = V^2/RTHE FASTER THE GENERATOR TURNS THE MORE POWER IT PRODUCES - deltaT gets smaller.
THE FASTER THE INDUCTION MOTOR TURNS THE LESS POWER IT CONSUMES
SO INFACT IT
IS ALL ABOUT SPEED.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
THE FASTER THE GENERATOR TURNS THE MORE POWER IT PRODUCES
...and the more mechanical power is required to drive it.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
THE FASTER THE INDUCTION MOTOR TURNS THE LESS POWER IT CONSUMES
Not if you're also asking it to deliver more mechanical power to the generator.
PB
Hi Thane and others, I would like to thank you for all this information and effort :D
I'm half way through reading the pages and making lots of notes.
Going to play around with this after i'm done reading this topic.
Peace, V
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 07:49:31 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
THE FASTER THE GENERATOR TURNS THE MORE POWER IT PRODUCES
...and the more mechanical power is required to drive it.
PB
EITHER I AM THE WORST TEACHER IN HUMAN HISTORY OR YOU ARE THE WORST STUDENT?
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 07:13:03 AM
THE FASTER THE INDUCTION MOTOR TURNS THE LESS POWER IT CONSUMES
Not if you're also asking it to deliver more mechanical power to the generator.
PB
OK - YOU ARE THE WORST STUDENT EVER - GO BACK TO PAGE 1 AND START OVER.
I'M DONE...
Thane
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 03, 2008, 07:58:41 AM
Hi Thane and others, I would like to thank you for all this information and effort :D
I'm half way through reading the pages and making lots of notes.
Going to play around with this after i'm done reading this topic.
Peace, V
Dear Vibrovirii,
HAVE FUN - THERE CERTAINLY IS NO SHORTAGE OF INTEREST HERE TO ASSIST YOU IF YOU REQUIRE HELP.
Thane
...
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 06:24:43 PM
MAYBE I'LL BE MORE INCLINED TO TELL YOU MORE WHEN "YOUR SENS" GET INTO THE PLAYOFFS??? NOW I'M PISSED JUST THINKING ABOUT IT AND I AM AFRAID TORONTO IS GOING TO HAVE THE LAST LAUGH.
Thane
Both Boston and Philadelphia lost last night so at least things aren't any worse. Tonight's game is going to be broadcast on the big screen at a local movie theatre as part of a year long series of Leafs games and I've been planning to go all season, but I don't think I'm going to. Toronto is jazzed to stick a fork in them, and I just can't watch that go down 30 feet high in optimal clarity and crispness if that's what results. Just can't.
Thanks for your detailed response to my questions Thane...really appreciated.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 03, 2008, 06:47:02 AM
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 03, 2008, 06:40:33 AM
... I'm wondering if you've measured the output impedance of that supply...Thanks...PB
WHEN WE GET AROUND TO DOING "REAL TESTS" WITH AN OPTIMIZED PRIMARY... WE WILL CORRECT THE POWER FACTOR OF THE OTTAWA U LAB VARIAC ...
That's a great idea but I was asking about the impedance, not just about the power factor.
Thanks, PB.
This motor principle may explain why some people get OU from various devices like the Bidini motor and some people don't.
Maybe this is why some devices don't seem to be reproducible by others.
The ones that do work may be using these same principles without knowing what is different about there machine.
One uses aluminum for the shaft another uses steal.
So the materials used for construction are more important then some would think.
Maybe someone with a bidini motor already built can try applying what we learn here to it.
Just some thoughts.
Both Boston and Philadelphia lost last night so at least things aren't any worse. Tonight's game is going to be broadcast on the big screen at a local movie theatre as part of a year long series of Leafs games and I've been planning to go all season, but I don't think I'm going to. Toronto is jazzed to stick a fork in them, and I just can't watch that go down 30 feet high in optimal clarity and crispness if that's what results. Just can't.
JustMe
SOOOOOO???
JustCan't or JustCan?
Did you go in the end?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 04, 2008, 12:13:22 PM
SOOOOOO???
JustCan't or JustCan?
Did you go in the end?
Thane
In the end it was JustCouldn't. Listened to it on the radio instead, and regretted that enormously by midway through the second. One more thing:
F#ck the Toronto Maple Leafs.
OK, back to being a lady. High hopes for tonight...will be a tougher go. We'll see.
Hi Thane,
All my ordered parts will be here soon, so I'd like to focus on building the best cores. I've seen your recent coil recommendations.
Can you give any recommendation on core size, length, face shape?
Is your laminations, grain oriented silicon steel or Home Depot steel pieces?
Do you have any opinion on why Vince's setup only worked with one long core, instead of the 8 short ones?
In the latest pictures, the gap between cores and magnet seems to be about 10 MM as opposed to the less then .5 MM in a regular motor or generator. Is this part of the requirement to get the motor to accelerate?
Thanks,
Larry
Thane, just got the rotor before I left, currently in an internet cafe (without the cafe) in Queenstown.
Anyway it seems 6 of the magnets escaped the packaging, ideally you could send me more, otherwise what size are they, the 1 inch seems right from memory but as I don't have it here I'm not sure.
When you ran this rotor you sent me with just the 6 magnets how many coils did you use to get the acceleration, just one?
If so some specs could be good, I wound a bunch but suspect all are too small.
And do you recall or have any record of the RPM needed to get the effect with this rotor? (3 times higher than in the videos due to 1/3rd the number of magnets?)
Thanks.
Quote from: aether22 on April 04, 2008, 08:38:53 PM
Thane, just got the rotor before I left, currently in an internet cafe (without the cafe) in Queenstown.
Anyway it seems 6 of the magnets escaped the packaging, ideally you could send me more, otherwise what size are they, the 1 inch seems right from memory but as I don't have it here I'm not sure.
When you ran this rotor you sent me with just the 6 magnets how many coils did you use to get the acceleration, just one?
If so some specs could be good, I wound a bunch but suspect all are too small.
And do you recall or have any record of the RPM needed to get the effect with this rotor? (3 times higher than in the videos due to 1/3rd the number of magnets?)
Thanks.
Hi Aether22,
I can believe that they escaped. Allready got a blood blister from the two magnets I received. In my first order, I got confused with their statement and ordered a 1" magnet set where they specified six pieces. The six pieces are two magnets, two cups and two washers. If you got the Ten inch 6 spoke wheel, you need to order three 1" magnet sets to get everything for the wheel. Anyway, they are packed in a plastic container and would have a hard time escaping. Just be careful when you place them in the cup (N-S), because they cannot be removed without slicing the edge of the cup.
Regards,
Larry
Hi Thane,
All my ordered parts will be here soon, so I'd like to focus on building the best cores. I've seen your recent coil recommendations.
Can you give any recommendation on core size, length, face shape?
SAME SHAPE SAME SIZE AS MAGNET - BEST SHAPE IS A C SHAPE CORE / COIL THAT EXTENDS FROM ONE NORTH POLE MAGNET TO ANOTHER SOUTH ON THE ROTOR.
Is your laminations, grain oriented silicon steel or Home Depot steel pieces?
WE USED BOTH - BUT GRAIN ORIENTED SILICON PROVIDES THE LEAST HYSTERISIS DRAG
HOME DEPOT STUFF IS JUST FASTER AND EASIER TO MANIPULATE..
Do you have any opinion on why Vince's setup only worked with one long core, instead of the 8 short ones?
I DIDN'T SEE AND PHOTOS SO I CAN'T COMMENT.
In the latest pictures, the gap between cores and magnet seems to be about 10 MM as opposed to the less then .5 MM in a regular motor or generator. Is this part of the requirement to get the motor to accelerate?
SORT OF - IT IS TO REDUCE COGGING TORQUE SO THE MOTOR CAN GET ITSELF UP TO A DECENT SPEED (ABOVE THE MINIMUN CRITICAL SPEED AS VINCE CALLS IT). THE COILS CAN BE MOVED IN CLOSER AS THE SPEED INCREASES IF DESIRED.
Thanks,
Larry
Thane, just got the rotor before I left, currently in an internet cafe (without the cafe) in Queenstown.
I HOPE YOU ARE HAVING OR HAD A GOOD VACATION.
Anyway it seems 6 of the magnets escaped the packaging, ideally you could send me more, otherwise what size are they, the 1 inch seems right from memory but as I don't have it here I'm not sure.
THEY ARE 1" FROM LEE VALLEY - I SENT YOU 18 MAGNETS - 6 x 2 ON THE ROTOR + 6 MORE IN A PLASTIC CONTAINER WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN STUCK TO SOMETHING INSIDE THE BOX LIKE THE ROTOR OR THE ARBOUR?
When you ran this rotor you sent me with just the 6 magnets how many coils did you use to get the
acceleration, just one?
JUST 1 - BUT THE MORE THE MERRIER.
If so some specs could be good, I wound a bunch but suspect all are too small.
SO MAKE THEM BIGGER - 200 ohms WORTH OF 26 GAUGE SHOULD WORK VERY WELL - VINCE AND COMMENTS? ALSO PERHAPS THIS PHENOMENON ONLY WORKS IN CANADA - WHICH WAY DOES YOUR MOTOR SPIN WHEN YOU PUT IT IN THE SINK?
And do you recall or have any record of the RPM needed to get the effect with this rotor? (3 times higher than in the videos due to 1/3rd the number of magnets?)
IT DEPENDS ON THE MOTOR AND OTHER FACTORS BUT OURS WILL START TO ACCELERATE AT 200 RPM.
Thanks.
Hi Thane,
How are you today?
Got a question here, the coil core ferro magnetic material. I'm dutch and my english could be better
Is that ferrite? Or is de wire wound around the U shaped metal bar? Got all the parts and except for this little thing
vibrovirii
DEAR VIBROVIRII
PB IS STILL SLEEPING SO I AM GOOD SO FAR.
YES FERRITE MATERIAL - U SHAPED CORE IS GREAT - TRY TO MAKE ONE END OF YOUR CORE CONTACT A NORTH POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR AND THE OTHER END A SOUTH POLE.
DUTCH PEOPLE ARE WONDERFUL - I MARRIED ONE.
Thane
Thane,
Thanks for the info.
Vince's motor at
http://picasaweb.google.com/vincemormile/TorqueTest?authkey=w_64OCgYnxI
His post was #1164 March 25,2008 at 01:52:16 AM. I included the date/time because I don't know if everbody is getting the inserted advertisement.
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: Onygains on April 01, 2008, 02:32:31 PM
I have been watching this thread from the very first post, quietly in the background. Originally, I saw the news article, and then did some additional searching and found http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/2/4/3505063.html which ultimately led me here. I'm highly impressed by the progress that has been made and the collaboration of all those who have offered ideas and attempted to replicate Thane's results. The thread has led to many interesting dinner discussions with both my children and at times friends and peers. My background is and has been in Finance and the development of start-up companies. My interest in this topic is more a hobby than professional in nature and I have often investigated other reports of potential "free energy" claims/projects e.g. "The Searl Effect" "Steorn" etc. I look forward to the daily posts and the test results and am looking forward to Aether's future results.
I just felt I should take the time to say thank you to all those involved and their willingness to post their observations and data.
OK THE DAY IS ALMOST OVER SO I GUESS IT'S TIME TO COME CLEAN. ALL OF THE ABOVE IS 100% TRUE. THE BELOW HOWEVER...
SADLY PB DIDN'T BITE ON MY APRIL FOOLS JOKE. PB YOU ARE BEYOND ANNOYING AND IT IS CLEAR TO EVERYONE THAT YOU HAVE NO REAL INTEREST IN THE RESEARCH BEING DONE. I CAN ONLY PRAY THAT PEOPLE WILL SIMPLY STOP RESPONDING TO YOUR POSTS REGARDLESS OF HOW AGGRAVATING AND NONSENSICAL THEY ARE. THE ONLY POSITIVE THAT YOUR REPETITIVE POSTS HAVE BROUGHT ME IS THE LAUGHTER I ENJOY WHEN THANE MOCKS YOU IN HIS RESPONSES.
I also want to thank Polarbreeze for his continued involvement. His fair and reasonable questions. His desire to learn and bring some order to the discussion and his obvious intellectual openness and thought provoking questions, answers and ideas.
I don't have a problem with Polarbreeze being here. So what if he's asking questions and being skeptical. What's wrong with that? He hasn't been disrespectful to anyone as far as I can tell.
I have taken interest in Luc and Thane's work and will hopefully have something built in the coming months. I only hope that I will replicate what they're doing..(man that's a lot of wire).
Perhaps you should continue staying in the background Onygains until -you- start contributing something; I will attempt to remain there as well.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 02, 2008, 06:52:34 PM
I AM POSTING THIS PM FROM PB BECAUSE MAYBE HE (OR SHE) FINALLY HAS SOMETHING REALLY WORTHWHILE TO CONTRIBUTE...
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 02, 2008, 01:02:19 PM
Re: EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE ABOUT BALANCE AND FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE AGAIN AND AGAIN AFTER WE CHANGE SOMETHING...
Thane, yes, that's exactly what it's about - from your reactions it seems you think I'm trying to trash what you're doing or trick you or something but, trust me, if you really want to progress this thing you need to dig into the theory in the directions I'm pointing. Each time you change something you have to adjust to find a new metastable point where the system can be pushed into instability by a small perturbation. That's what's behind your observation about "balance".
You're calling it balance; I'm calling it stability/instability. Same thing. Once you have a handle on the torque-speed characteristics of the load and of the motor, then you won't have to do so much guessing because you'll be able to apply what you've learned already to each new variant. Even if you're finding out new stuff, no reason not to benefit from the theory that's already out there. I think that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
PB
FUNNY THING AS MUCH AS I ENJOY TRASH TALKING PB - THERE MAY BE SOME MERIT TO THIS - AFTER ALL LUC WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT BUILDING A PONY BRAKE THIS AFTERNOON.
BACK TO THE THEORY - AND TO BE BLUNT - RIGHT NOW WE ARE SIMPLY LOOKING FOR A QUICK LAY. PROOF OF CONCEPT AND EXCITING VISUAL DEMO'S LIKE THE DUNE BUGGY AND THE TRANSFORMER.
THEORY AND OPTIMIZATION CAN ALL HAPPEN LATER ON WHEN OUR TROOPS ARE SAFE AT HOME AND OIL WARS ARE NO LONGER TOLERATED OR REQUIRED.
Thane
Nice answer Thane.
Quote from: The_Angel on April 05, 2008, 10:03:12 AM
I don't have a problem with Polarbreeze being here. So what if he's asking questions and being skeptical. What's wrong with that? He hasn't been disrespectful to anyone as far as I can tell.
I have taken interest in Luc and Thane's work and will hopefully have something built in the coming months. I only hope that I will replicate what they're doing..(man that's a lot of wire).
Perhaps you should continue staying in the background Onygains until -you- start contributing something; I will attempt to remain there as well.
He has on more than one occasion been enormously disrespectful - and manipulative - which is probably why you don't notice.
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 10:13:35 AM
Quote from: The_Angel on April 05, 2008, 10:03:12 AM
I don't have a problem with Polarbreeze being here. So what if he's asking questions and being skeptical. What's wrong with that? He hasn't been disrespectful to anyone as far as I can tell.
I have taken interest in Luc and Thane's work and will hopefully have something built in the coming months. I only hope that I will replicate what they're doing..(man that's a lot of wire).
Perhaps you should continue staying in the background Onygains until -you- start contributing something; I will attempt to remain there as well.
He has on more than one occasion been enormously disrespectful - and manipulative - which is probably why you don't notice.
I don't know why, but I just have this feeling that you insulted me and lied -- all in one sentence. But I'll say no more. I'm sorry I even said anything to begin with.
Quote from: LarryC on April 04, 2008, 05:28:13 PM
Hi Thane,
Do you have any opinion on why Vince's setup only worked with one long core, instead of the 8 short ones?
Thanks,
Larry
I'LL BET LUC'S 1ST TRANSFORMER ROYALTY CHECK THAT:
THE
VOLTAGE INDUCED IN THE LONG COIL IS HIGHER THAN IN 1 OF THE 8 SHORT COILS?
THEREFORE I'M GUESSING THE SMALLER "8 COIL" COIL'S BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD REMAINS IN THE AIR GAP CAUSING DECELERATION RATHER THAN BEING LARGE ENOUGH TO MAKE IT INTO THE MOTOR TO CAUSE ACCELERATION?
SO I IMAGINE - ESSENTIALLY HE IS OPPERATING THE SYSTEM BELOW THE CRITICAL BACK EMF MAGNITUDE / SPEED REQUIREMENT?
I HOPE I AM RIGHT - LUC HAS BEEN WANTING TO BUY NEW ZEALAND FOR A LING TIME.
Thane
Quote from: The_Angel on April 05, 2008, 10:18:48 AM
I don't know why, but I just have this feeling that you insulted me and lied -- all in one sentence. But I'll say no more. I'm sorry I even said anything to begin with.
No lie for sure, no insult intended; effective manipulators don't require easy marks. Anyway, as a person who has been following these proposed technologies with a great deal of interest I'm very glad there is one more person who may move forward with replication and study. Good luck with everything if you proceed, and I'll look forward to your results and assessment.
Quote from: LarryC on April 04, 2008, 05:28:13 PM
Do you have any opinion on why Vince's setup only worked with one long core, instead of the 8 short ones?
Could a single core vs. x number of cores more evenly distributed around the rotor path contribute to a load instability factor that has been considered of late? Could be tested with an evenly distributed number of large cores I suppose.
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 10:13:35 AM
He has on more than one occasion been enormously disrespectful - and manipulative - which is probably why you don't notice.
JM: my posts are out there for anyone to read. Yours are too and I think any disrespect appears in your posts, certainly not in mine. Disrespect and disagreement are not the same thing.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 05, 2008, 10:48:18 AM
JM: my posts are out there for anyone to read. Yours are too and I think any disrespect appears in your posts, certainly not in mine.
PB
I don't have consistent respect for you or your posts - in my opinion nobody really paying attention should. I don't hide those sentiments because I have no agenda here. You on the other hand are far more disingenuous, sneaky and manipulative. Some will see you as the steady, mostly patient, sometimes bemused voice of true science, others have your number. I'm in the latter camp most days.
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 11:02:18 AM
I don't have consistent respect for you or your posts...
Yep, I'd noticed that :)
PB
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 10:46:28 AM
Quote from: LarryC on April 04, 2008, 05:28:13 PM
Do you have any opinion on why Vince's setup only worked with one long core, instead of the 8 short ones?
Could a single core vs. x number of cores more evenly distributed around the rotor path contribute to a load instability factor that has been considered of late? Could be tested with an evenly distributed number of large cores I suppose.
8 COILS WHEN EVENLY DISTRIBUTED SHOULD REDUCE THE COGGING TORQUE OF JUST 1 - BUT THEY HAVE TO BE PROPERLY PLACED.
WHEN A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR IS USED IT WILL ACCELERATE (SLOWLY) WITH 8 COILS BUT WILL DECELERATE WITH ONLY 1
Thane
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR LATEST TRANSFORMER POWER FACTOR PHOTO-DATA HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8ZSJMZRK
JustMe OUGHT TO BE UPLOADING THEM HERE SOON AS WELL AFTER SHE GETS OVER HER "INTO THE PLAYOFFS" HANGOVER.
CHEERS
Thane
Didn't have a drop! But still a happy fan today. :)
Here are the photos...added a closeup of the power analyzer screen in one so those intersted could clearly see what was being measured in each case.
Could somebody jot down how efficiencies can be calculated from this data?
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 12:21:18 PM
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR LATEST TRANSFORMER POWER FACTOR PHOTO-DATA HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8ZSJMZRK
JustMe OUGHT TO BE UPLOADING THEM HERE SOON AS WELL AFTER SHE GETS OVER HER "INTO THE PLAYOFFS" HANGOVER.
CHEERS
Thane
Okay, I'm not going to go wacko yet. Having a hard time making out the decimal place on the ampmeter.
If .01 then .035W out and .019W in. If so, how much for the big honking 5000 watt version?
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 05, 2008, 03:34:21 PM
Okay, I'm not going to go wacko yet. Having a hard time making out the decimal place on the ampmeter.
If .01 then .035W out and .019W in. If so, how much for the big honking 5000 watt version?
Regards,
Larry
.
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 02:20:36 PM
Could somebody jot down how efficiencies can be calculated from this data?
EFFICIENCY% = Output voltage(squared) divided by1000 divided by Input Power X 100
= V^2 / 1000 / Pin X 100
EXAMPLE: CONVENTIONAL TOROIDIAL TRANSFORMER
Vout = 92.2 V
Pin = 9 W
EFFICIENCY% = 92.2 x 92.2 / 1000 / 9 W x 100
=
94.5%Thane
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 02:20:36 PM
Could somebody jot down how efficiencies can be calculated from this data?
The formulas are in the attached spreadsheet. The new data yields:
EI core transformer = 68%
Conventional toroid = 95%
Potential Difference bi-toroid = 38%
PB
Quote from: LarryC on April 05, 2008, 03:34:21 PM
Okay, I'm not going to go wacko yet. Having a hard time making out the decimal place on the ampmeter. If .01 then .035W out and .019W in. If so, how much for the big honking 5000 watt version?
Regards,
Larry
FORGET IT LARRY - AT LEAST UNTIL WE FIND OUT WHAT THE POWER FACTOR IS IN THIS CASE - OUR POWER POWER FACTOR METER DOES NOT MEASURE THAT LOW - ALSO WE REQUIRE MORE TURNS AND HAVE RUN OUT OF WIRE. OUR NEXT POST SHOULD BE OSCILLOSCOPE READINGS.
Thane
Hi Thane,
I had run a test with a small coil/core against the motor shaft length to test the voltage. The core was 1MM thick by 10MM wide by 40MM long. The coil was wound so that the 40MM sides were the poles. It did produce voltage as expected by your N S flipping statement at bottom/top. Unless you allready know and if you have the time, could you measure both sides at the same time with your oscilloscope to see the phase difference and if N S is occurring at the same time?
Still working on my theory and I can't get my stupid version of this song out my head.
Everybody went Flux fu fighting
Those kicks were fast as lighting
In fact it was a little bit frightning
But they fought with expert timing
Thanks,
Larry
NICE tune LAR Chet
Quote from: LarryC on April 05, 2008, 03:34:21 PM
Okay, I'm not going to go wacko yet. Having a hard time making out the decimal place on the ampmeter. If .01 then .035W out and .019W in. If so, how much for the big honking 5000 watt version?
Regards,
Larry
HERE
IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER HOWEVER...
POWER FACTOR IN A TRANSFORMER PRIMARY IS LOAD DEPENDANT, I.E. A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD - POWER FACTOR OF 1 PRODUCES A PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 1 AND
IF THE LOAD POWER FACTOR CHANGES THE PRIMARY ALSO CHANGES.IN OUR TRANSFORMER IT IS NOT - WITH A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD Pf = 1 OUR POWER FACTOR IS JUST 0.26 AND THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC REASON (THAT I KNOW OF) WHY THIS CAN CHANGE JUST BECAUSE THE INPUT POWER DECREASES. LOAD POWER FACTOR IS ALWAYS TRANSFERRED BACK TO THE PRIMARY VIA MUTUAL COUPLING.
WE HAVE ALWAYS ASSUMED THE POWER FACTOR IS 1 (WORST CASE) LET'S ASSUME FOR ARGUEMENT SAKE (AND I AM BEING FACETIOUS BECAUSE WE LIKE TO ARGUE HERE) THAT IT IS 0.26 IN THE LAST PHOTO WITH LUC'S NEW 175 STRAND LITZ WIRE. IF THIS HOLDS OUT TO BE TRUE THEN:
INPUT POWER = 1.921 volts x 0.01 amps x 0.26 Pf
= 0.005 watts
OUTPUT POWER = (5.94 volts)^2 / 1000 ohms
= 0.035 watts
EFFICIENCY = 0.035 watts out / 0.005 watts in
= 705.7%IF ALL GOES WELL WE SHOULD KNOW SUNDAY...
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 07:19:03 PM
INPUT POWER Ã, = 1.921 volts x 0.01 amps x 0.26 Pf
Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, = 0.005 watts
...
Thane
Could you help me understand why it's necessary to take these measurements at such very low inputs currents? There's still that difficulty of the 0.01 amps not being a reliable number because the clamp meter has a +/- 3 digits resolution (ie a reading of 0.01 could actually mean as high as 0.04A). Couple of ways around that:
- run it at a higher input voltage to bring the input current up to, say, 0.5A (or even higher if possible), which would at least get the accuracy into a range of about +/- 10% or so.
and/or
- use the same power meter (DW-6090) as you're using in the latest series of experiments, which has better resolution than the clamp meter (1 digit rather than 3 digits) - or better yet, use an ammeter with better resolution than that.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 05, 2008, 09:09:32 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 07:19:03 PM
INPUT POWER = 1.921 volts x 0.01 amps x 0.26 Pf
= 0.005 watts
...
Thane
Could you help me understand why it's necessary to take these measurements at such very low inputs currents? There's still that difficulty of the 0.01 amps not being a reliable number because the clamp meter has a +/- 3 digits resolution (ie a reading of 0.01 could actually mean as high as 0.04A). Couple of ways around that:
- run it at a higher input voltage to bring the input current up to, say, 0.5A - higher if possible, to get the accuracy into a range of about +/- 10% or better.
and/or
- use the same power meter as you're using in the latest series of experiments, which avoids the clamp meter problem (but of course I don't know if its resolution is any better: what does it go down to?)
PB
TOMORROW WE WILL CHECK THE NEW PRIMARY AT HIGHER CURRENTS.
THE PROBLEM IS THE PHYSICAL SIZE OF OUR PRIMARY CORE IS 5MM SO HIGHER CURRENTS (HIGH ENOUGH TO USE THE Pf METER DON'T WORK WELL AND WE HAVE 200 FEET WOUND ON OUR PRIMARY NOW BUT WE SHOULD HAVE ABOUT 1000 TO GET THE IMPEDANCE DOWN TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN INCREASE THE VOLTAGE WITHOUT MELTING OUR PRIMARY WIRE. - WE ARE USING 175 STRAND 46 GUAGE LITZ - BUT WE WILL GIVE IT A GO AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
ASSUMING YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE CURRENT BEING 0.04 amps THE EFFICIENCY ONLY DROPS TO 177.3% IF THE POWER FACTOR IS 0.26SURELY EVEN YOU MUST BE TAKEN ABACK BY A PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 0.26 WITH A LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1? DEFINATELY
NOT NORMAL TRANSFORMER BEHAVIOR.
THIS IS CLOSE TO DESIGN SPECS WHERE THE PRIMARY POWER FACTOR WILL BE 0 ON NO LOAD AND REMAIN AT 0 WHEN PLACED ON LOAD AND ALL THE CURRENT IN THE PRIMARY WILL BE REACTIVE.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 09:36:39 PM
SURELY EVEN YOU MUST BE TAKEN ABACK BY A PRIMARY POWER FACTOR OF 0.26 WITH A LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1? DEFINATELY NOT NORMAL TRANSFORMER BEHAVIOR.
Thane
I think it can be explained by the action of the additional secondaries in there.
According to your measurements, the PF is 0.2 even with no load - note that the transformer is consuming 25W at no load, which is also "definitely not normal transformer behaviour" unless you have a shorted winding in there - which I think is actually what you have, isn't it? That other winding is responsible for the internal load that both consumes all that power and also reflects such a low power factor to the input.
PB
OilBarren:
Could I ask what country and city you live in,
I noticed a link to Chatham, is that Chatham ON. ?
Or is that link relating to JustMe?
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 09:36:39 PM
...
THE PROBLEM IS THE PHYSICAL SIZE OF OUR PRIMARY CORE IS 5MM SO HIGHER CURRENTS (HIGH ENOUGH TO USE THE Pf METER DON'T WORK WELL AND WE HAVE 200 FEET WOUND ON OUR PRIMARY NOW BUT WE SHOULD HAVE ABOUT 1000 TO GET THE IMPEDANCE DOWN TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN INCREASE THE VOLTAGE WITHOUT MELTING OUR PRIMARY WIRE....
Thane
But the results you just posted used an input current as high as 3.5A - so that shows that even with the existing primary it's possible to get it up that high where solid, reliable measurements can be made. That's far away from the 0.01A that you're using for the other measurements.
If your 177% (or even 700%) at 0.01A is really true (but can't be confirmed because the meter isn't good enough), and we already know that at 3.5A it's 38%, there should be a current between those two extremes which delivers 100%+ and is also at a measurable resolution and measurable PF. This will give you the proof you need.
How about taking a whole series of measurements at different input currents, starting at 0.01A and going on up as high as you can, eg to end up at 3.5A. You'll then have a complete picture of both power factor and efficiency for the whole range of input conditions. By starting at the low end first you'll guard against melting the winding before the experiment is done. And if measurement errors distort the results at the low end, you should be able to draw a curve and extrapolate down there from the more reliable results at the higher currents.
PB
Quote from: AbbaRue on April 06, 2008, 02:42:50 AM
OilBarren:
Could I ask what country and city you live in,
I noticed a link to Chatham, is that Chatham ON. ?
Or is that link relating to JustMe?
He lives in Almonte, just outside of Ottawa, ON, Canada. It's strange how many Canadians there are in this forum, and that a lot of us seem to live in the same urban area of under 2 million people. I wonder if Alsetalokin was from around here, too?
Hey Thane, and all:
You might be interested to know that I have been doing some experiments and math around how flux travels from the primary to the secondary in a transformer over time.
By driving a standard EI isolation transformer well above its design frequency (around 30KHz), I have been able to predict and experimentally verify several of the anomalies reported in this thread, including:
- For resistive loads, output voltage proportional to impedance (constant current), over a wide range of R from 0 through 1KOhm or so. This is very odd, and confirms Thane's assertion that he got less power from smaller loads.
- Output power factor 1, input power factor close to 0.
- Output about 90 degrees out of phase with input. Input is a square wave, output is nearly triangular.
- As the load varies, there is a wide range through which drawing more from the output reduces the input power.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 06, 2008, 10:05:46 AM
He lives in Almonte, just outside of Ottawa, ON, Canada. It's strange how many Canadians there are in this forum, and that a lot of us seem to live in the same urban area of under 2 million people. I wonder if Alsetalokin was from around here, too?
And where is Mr.
P B from again?
r a
i l
c l
k b
a r
s e
s a
k
e
r
Just kidding there...PB
OB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 11:15:25 AM
And where is Mr. P B from again?
Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, Ã, ...
Just kidding there...PB
OB
It's a miracle! Thane's capslock key has unfrozen itself!!! Oh, maybe it's just the spring thaw...
PB thats one of your better funnies Chet
AND WHERE IS MR. P B FROM AGAIN?
R A
I L
C L
K B
A R
S E
S A
K
E
R
BETTER?
Thane
A transformer makes use of Faraday's law and the ferromagnetic properties of an iron core to efficiently raise or lower AC voltages. It of course cannot increase power so that if the voltage is raised, the current is proportionally lowered and vice versa. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/transf.html
DEAR ALL,
I HAVE UPLOADED SOME VERY INTERESTING RESULTS CONCERNING LUC'S LATEST TRANSFORMER PRIMARIES. http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JVO6XAXP
THE INTERESTING THING TO NOTE IS THAT:
FOR A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER FROM NO LOAD TO LOAD THE PRIMARY POWER INCREMENTAL INCREASE IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE OUTPUT POWER INCREASE DISIPATED ACROSS THE LOAD.
THE RATIO IS ALWAYS 1 : (LESS THAN 1) - (1 in and less than 1 out)
UNLESS THE TRANSFORMER IS 100% EFFICIENT THEN THE RATIO WOULD BE 1 : 1
FOR EXAMPLE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM SAYS THE RATIO CAN NEVER - BE 1 : 2
(1 in and 2 out)
TEST # 2 Conventional Laminated Core EI Type 1k
No Load to 1k Load Primary Power Increase Ratio = 1 : 0.94
Pin = increase 4 to 13 = 9 watts
Pout Increase = 8.5 watts
Note: 9 watt primary power input increase yields an 8.5 secondary increase.
TEST # 4 Conventional Toroidial Type 1k
No Load to 1k Load Primary Power Increase Ratio = 1 : 0.94
Pin = increase = 0 to 9 = 9 watts
Pout Increase = 8.5 watts
Note: 9 watt primary power input increase yields an 8.5 secondary increase.
TEST # 5 Potential Difference Inc. Bi Toroid
No Load to 1k Load Primary Power Increase Ratio = 1 : 1.90
Pin = increase = 24 to 30 = 6 watts
P Pout Increase = 11.4 watts
Note: 6 watt primary power input increase yields an 11.4 secondary increase.
TEST # 7 Potential Difference Inc. Bi Toroid
No Load to 1k Load Primary Power Increase Ratio = 1 : 2.15
Pin = increase = 17 to 21 = 4 watts
P Pout Increase = 8.6 watts
Note: 4 watt primary power input increase yields an 8.6 secondary increase.
CHEERS
Thane
So from test #4 we have a conventional toroid that draws near 0 Watts under no load and provides 8.5 Watts out with 94% efficiency.
And from test #7 we have a toroid that draws 17 Watts under no load and provides 8.6 Watts out with 41% efficiency.
QuoteHi Thane. Thanks for sharing all your information and work with us. I want to help and experiment with you and Luc. My friend the electrician is working on our new stadium here in town and my in-law the engineer is out of the country (Japan).
Will you help me? I have some elementary knowledge of electricity and electronics so I shouldn't have too much of a problem when I get started.. but what do you suggest I use for my coils? what gauge and how many turns? What size magnets do you suggest? How do you feed the 'back emf' back into the steel shaft to speed the motor up?
I am excited and happy for your discovery and I hope to meet you someday!!
Take care,
Bill
HEY BILL,
WELCOME ABOARD - DON'T BE SHY TO ASK QUESTIONS EVERYONE HERE WILL HELP YOU.
Thane
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 06, 2008, 09:44:18 PM
So from test #4 we have a conventional toroid that draws near 0 Watts under no load and provides 8.5 Watts out with 94% efficiency.
And from test #7 we have a toroid that draws 17 Watts under no load and provides 8.6 Watts out with 41% efficiency.
LURKER,
WE DON'T SEE THE WORLD AS IT IS
WE SEE IT AS WE ARE.
SO YES YOU CAN LOOK AT IT THAT WAY IF YOU CHOOSE (WHICH IS NEGATIVE)
OR YOU CAN SEE AN:
INPUT INCREASE OF 4 watts AND AN
OUTPUT INCREASE OF 8.6 watts(WHICH IS POSITIVE)
YOUR CHOICE
Thane
THANKS
JM -
NOTE 1: HOW THE CURRENT DROPS 0.14 A WHEN PLACED ON LOAD?NOTE 2: PRIMARY POWER FACTOR SHOULD MIRROR LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1.
IT DOES NOT WHICH IS A VERY ENCOURAGING SIGN THAT SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED MMF'S ARE
NOT MUTUALLY COUPLING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.
Latest transformer pics via Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 05, 2008, 09:17:39 AM
Thane, just got the rotor before I left, currently in an internet cafe (without the cafe) in Queenstown.
I HOPE YOU ARE HAVING OR HAD A GOOD VACATION.
Anyway it seems 6 of the magnets escaped the packaging, ideally you could send me more, otherwise what size are they, the 1 inch seems right from memory but as I don't have it here I'm not sure.
THEY ARE 1" FROM LEE VALLEY - I SENT YOU 18 MAGNETS - 6 x 2 ON THE ROTOR + 6 MORE IN A PLASTIC CONTAINER WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN STUCK TO SOMETHING INSIDE THE BOX LIKE THE ROTOR OR THE ARBOUR?
When you ran this rotor you sent me with just the 6 magnets how many coils did you use to get the
acceleration, just one?
JUST 1 - BUT THE MORE THE MERRIER.
If so some specs could be good, I wound a bunch but suspect all are too small.
SO MAKE THEM BIGGER - 200 ohms WORTH OF 26 GAUGE SHOULD WORK VERY WELL - VINCE AND COMMENTS? ALSO PERHAPS THIS PHENOMENON ONLY WORKS IN CANADA - WHICH WAY DOES YOUR MOTOR SPIN WHEN YOU PUT IT IN THE SINK?
And do you recall or have any record of the RPM needed to get the effect with this rotor? (3 times higher than in the videos due to 1/3rd the number of magnets?)
IT DEPENDS ON THE MOTOR AND OTHER FACTORS BUT OURS WILL START TO ACCELERATE AT 200 RPM.
Thanks.
It's not with me, but I am pretty sure there were only 6 magnets on the wheel and the 6 in the box leaving me 6 short.
I'll have to look into it when I get back I guess but it's bet my left nut on their only being 6 on the rotor, hope it's safe ;)
I'll make larger coils as suggested, 200rpm doesn't sound very high but I have not rigged up any tach yet to be sure.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...OR YOU CAN SEE AN:
INPUT INCREASE OF 4 watts
AND AN
OUTPUT INCREASE OF 8.6 watts
(WHICH IS POSITIVE)
Thane
OK, letÃ,´s look at it that way then. So what about the extra 17W of power thatÃ,´s required to sustain this device (compared to a standard toroid)? You somehow think that doesnÃ,´t count? ItÃ,´s sitting there turning 17W of input power into waste heat, whether the output is loaded or not.
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:05:57 PM
A transformer makes use of Faraday's law and the ferromagnetic properties of an iron core to efficiently raise or lower AC voltages. It of course cannot increase power...
Thane
Exactly right. So whatÃ,´s with all these claims of 177% etc?
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...PRIMARY POWER FACTOR SHOULD MIRROR LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1.
IT DOES NOT WHICH IS A VERY ENCOURAGING SIGN THAT SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED MMF'S ARE NOT MUTUALLY COUPLING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.
We discussed that already. You have multiple secondaries so the impedance and power factor that's reflected to the primary is the combination of all of them, not just of the one that's connected to your resistive load. The extra secondary(ies) are very important (as shown by the fact that they're consuming lots of power, even when your main load is disconnected) and they have a PF of 0.2 - so it's normal that, combined with the resistive load on the main secondary, they'll reflect a PF of somewhere between 0.2 and 1.0 - which is indeed the case: you've measured 0.26. All of this is normal transformer behaviour. (At least, it's normal for a transformer that has those extra power-hogging secondaries built into it).
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 07, 2008, 11:31:23 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...OR YOU CAN SEE AN:
INPUT INCREASE OF 4 watts
AND AN
OUTPUT INCREASE OF 8.6 watts
(WHICH IS POSITIVE)
Thane
OK, let?s look at it that way then. So what about the extra 17W of power that?s required to sustain this device (compared to a standard toroid)? You somehow think that doesn?t count? It?s sitting there turning 17W of input power into waste heat, whether the output is loaded or not.
PB
IF WE TAKE THE CONVENTIONAL TOROID AS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOS POSTED AND CUT ACROSS THE CORE SUCH THAT IT NOW BECAME
"C" SHAPED RATHER THAN
"O" YOU COULD EASILY RECREATE THE EXACT NO LOAD STARTING POINT OF
17 watts SIMPLY BY INCREASING THE CORE RELUCTANCE.
NOW WHEN WE PLACE THIS SAME
"C" TOROID
ON LOAD YOU WILL
NEVER IN A MILLION POLAR DUMBASS LIGHT YEARS GET MORE THAN 1 watt OUT FOR EVERY
ADDITIONAL 1 watt IN.
THE RATIO WILL ALWAYS BE 1 : (TO LESS THAN 1) ACCOUNTING FOR INTERNAL LOSSES.
THE POINT IS FOR ANYONE WHO IS JUST SLIGHTLY MORE PERCEPTIVE THAN PB - YOU WILL NEVER SEE
INTERNAL GAINS LIKE THE ONES WE ARE OBSERVING IN THE LAB AT OTTAWA U FROM A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER.
THE FOCUS OF OVERALL EFFICIENCY AT THIS POINT IS SIMPLY IMMATURE AND PREMATURE - ALBEIT FUN TO IMAGINE.
I HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THE OPERATIONAL CRITERIA AND THE TRANSFORMER ALREADY SURPASSES IT AND WE ARE ALSO DILIGENTLY WORKING TOWARDS SATISFACTORY METERING - WHICH WILL BE PERFORMED BY A THIRD PARTY STARTING THIS WEEK PERHAPS.
THE TRANSFORMER PROTOTYPE IS MEANT TO SHOW PROOF OF CONCEPT ONLY - OF HOW WE CAN ISCOLATE THE PRIMARY FROM SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FIELDS AND HOW WE CAN UPSET THE MUTUAL COUPLING COEFFICIENT AND CAUSE THE SECONDARIES TO SELF REGULATE THEIR OWN VOLTAGES ACROSS THE LOAD. THE PRIMARY POWER DRAW AT NO LOAD IS A FUNCTION OF THE PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING A PRIMARY WHICH IS
REMOVABLE IN ADDITION TO BEING TOO THIN WITH NON OPTIMIZED NUMBER OF PRIMARY TURNS.
FOR ANYONE WHO DOES NOT SUFFER FROM
Perpetual
Boneheadedness THE ADVANCEMENTS PRESENTED HERE SHOULD BE OBVIOUS EVEN IN LIGHT OF THE NON RELEVANT LIMITATIONS.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 07, 2008, 02:13:20 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 06, 2008, 09:59:45 PM
...PRIMARY POWER FACTOR SHOULD MIRROR LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1.
IT DOES NOT WHICH IS A VERY ENCOURAGING SIGN THAT SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED MMF'S ARE NOT MUTUALLY COUPLING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.
We discussed that already. You have multiple secondaries so the impedance and power factor that's reflected to the primary is the combination of all of them, not just of the one that's connected to your resistive load. The extra secondary(ies) are very important (as shown by the fact that they're consuming lots of power, even when your main load is disconnected) and they have a PF of 0.2 - so it's normal that, combined with the resistive load on the main secondary, they'll reflect a PF of somewhere between 0.2 and 1.0 - which is indeed the case: you've measured 0.26. All of this is normal transformer behaviour. (At least, it's normal for a transformer that has those extra power-hogging secondaries built into it).
PB
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, PB YOU KNOW NOTHING - COME TO THE LAB AND LEARN.
Thnae
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 07, 2008, 11:37:50 AM
Exactly right. So what?s with all these claims of 177% etc? Methinks Thane speaks with forked tongue...
PB
Funny. It's actually the majority of YOUR posts that leave me feeling like I've just been slimed by a grinning used car salesman. But I digress.
You've implied that there is deliberate dishonesty here many times, many ways. You have obvious contempt for the entire pursuit, and have from the beginning. This stuff has been deemed a fantasy by you, indeed by most. You all may be right, but many intelligent, industrious and dedicated people all across the globe feel otherwise, and have and will for decades past and future. I very much admire and respect those who dare to try to colour outside the lines regardless of their ultimate success or failure.
This little corner of the internet world should be a shelter from the inherent arrogance and various failings of status quo positions, and yet nearly every meaningful and extended discussion here attracts a skeptic or two who decides it's his or her job to tear the whole thing down in the name of truth, logic and all that is good and right. Sometimes those skeptics manage to make a contribution or two despite themselves, as you have on occasion. Others make themselves bearable by saying and doing unintentionally hilarious things like the skeptic on the Stiffler thread that said "99.9999999% of all purported and reported OU and free energy has turned out to be measurement error".
Thane and others have observed anomalies with atypical transformer setups they feel warrant further investigation, a path for which they surely don't need your approval. He is not willing to assume that his >100% measurements at low power levels must be due to error, though everybody knows that is probable without your ceaseless posts pointing it out over and over again. I'm so very glad for the existence of the past, present and future experimenters who aren't willing to assume, even in the face of ridicule and relentless pressure to do otherwise, and so should everyone be.
"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said 'you can't do this'." -Spencer Silver, on the work on adhesives that led to the humble Post-it note
I like Post-its. Ditto airplanes, spaceflight, AC, my personal computer etc. etc. etc.
Thane,
We know that connecting the load coil makes your motor accelerate.
It is possible that the coils' cores simply introduce a loss that is being reduced when you connect the coils. In that case your motor will accelerate more if you simply remove the whole coil/core assembly and put it a few feet away.
Does your setup permit you to perform this test?
Mr. Entropy,
I believe Vince's setup is flexible in this manner. He did not report deceleration losses when introducing the unloaded coil setup to the motor and rotor/magnets, though I don't know if or how he compared acceleration with and without the unloaded coils present. He reported acceleration with a large coil, and also just by holding unwound laminated cores close to the spinning magnets. The latter seems odd by my novice and tenuous understanding of things, because that shoud have increased drag? Aether's theory was that it would act like a short circuit because of eddy currents. It will be really interesting to pin down just what's happening in each of these cases, and whether it's one explanation or a combination of things, conventional or unconventional.
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
It's actually the majority of YOUR posts that leave me feeling like I've just been slimed by a grinning used car salesman.
There ya go again - such a diplomat!
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
You've implied that there is deliberate dishonesty...Ã,Â
I'm struggling with this one and I'm still not sure. This thing, for example, about taking measurements on that transformer right down in that very low current region where the last-digit accuracy of the meter completely swamps any meaningful result - when a much more accurate meter should be readily available and/or when the current could readily be cranked up to a higher range where it could be properly measured. Were the experimenters just unlucky that it turned out that way or did they plan it that way? I think that's an absolutely fair question to ask. Besides, I have a wager with my spouse on that particular one.
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
You have obvious contempt for the entire pursuit, and have from the beginning.
That, I definitely take issue with. I was very interested and positive at the beginning and off-board emails I sent to Thane about it will confirm that. But, for sure I've become more and more skeptical the more I read about it because there's just no evidence - and here's the real point: it's
very easy to collect objective evidence on something like this. It doesn't depend on opinion or on belief/skepticism or on PB being a "ballbreaker" or not - it can all be objectively measured. Yet the experimental method always is designed to leave ambiguity. Doesn't that strike you as strange?
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
...I very much admire and respect those who dare to try to colour outside the lines regardless of their ultimate success or failure...
Me too, absolutely. So do I and by the same token I object to those who manipulate those people by pretending they're "coloring outside the lines" when really they're not at all. That behaviour pollutes the field for those who really may have breakthrough ideas.
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
...nearly every meaningful and extended discussion here attracts a skeptic or two who decides it's his or her job to tear the whole thing down...
Hard to have a "meaningful and extended discussion" unless there are people on both sides of the issue, don't you think?
Quote from: JustMe on April 07, 2008, 03:20:08 PM
...on the Stiffler thread that said "99.9999999% of all purported and reported OU and free energy has turned out to be measurement error"...
The point I expect he was making - and I think objectively you have to see there might be something in it - is this: It is very striking that the experiments do always seem to be designed such that there remains some factor that promotes ambiguity. And this in a field where measurement should be very easy to do accurately and reliably if the experiment is properly designed and the equipment properly selected.
OilBarren:
I have looked through previous posts in this thread for some kind of schematic diagram of your bi-toroid transformer setup. I found something way back in message #244 (though I could have missed something more recent) which shows a primary winding and two secondaries, both with loads. In the recent photos and posted results I can only see references to a load and measurements on one secondary. Can you shed some light on how the other secondary is connected?
@PerpetualLurker
Post #192.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 07, 2008, 03:33:54 PM
Thane,
We know that connecting the load coil makes your motor accelerate.
It is possible that the coils' cores simply introduce a loss that is being reduced when you connect the coils. In that case your motor will accelerate more if you simply remove the whole coil/core assembly and put it a few feet away.
Does your setup permit you to perform this test?
DEAR MR. ENTROPY,
WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO IS AN EDDY CURRENT BRAKE AND HYSTERISIS BRAKE - NEITHER OF WHICH CAUSE ACCELERATION.
AND YES OF COURSE THE MOTOR WILL ACCELERATE MORE IF THE COILS & CORES ARE REMOVED BUT THEN YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A GENERATOR EITHER.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFO:
Comparison information on eddy current brakes and hysteresis braking operation
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=135753&page=9
LUC IS WORKING ON A DESIGN WHERE THE COILS WILL BE GRADUALLY BROUGHT CLOSER TO THE MAGNETIC ROTOR - TO DETERMINE THE IDEAL AIR GAP DISTANCE FOR EACH COIL USED.
Thane
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 07, 2008, 07:11:21 PM
OilBarren:
I have looked through previous posts in this thread for some kind of schematic diagram of your bi-toroid transformer setup. I found something way back in message #244 (though I could have missed something more recent) which shows a primary winding and two secondaries, both with loads. In the recent photos and posted results I can only see references to a load and measurements on one secondary. Can you shed some light on how the other secondary is connected?
ESSENTIALLY THE TWO SECONDARIES ARE WIRED IN SERIES WITH ONE
DANGLER COIL.
Thane
n00b question here ;D
My coil attrachts instead of pushing the magnets away. Any clue what I did wrong?
I got neo magnets adoesn't matter if i face all N or S of the magnets to the coil.
Made my 1st simple coil with a ferrite core.
If it's not the place to ask here, let me know ;)
Peace, V
Quote from: OilBarren on April 07, 2008, 09:01:34 PM
WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO IS AN EDDY CURRENT BRAKE AND HYSTERISIS BRAKE - NEITHER OF WHICH CAUSE ACCELERATION.
Thane
They do when you "release" them slightly, which is what's happening when you cut in the other coil (in the green-coil-gold-coil thing for example).
PB
Quote from: OilBarren on April 07, 2008, 09:11:00 PM
ESSENTIALLY THE TWO SECONDARIES ARE WIRED IN SERIES WITH ONE DANGLER COIL.
Ok, thanks. You mentioned that one purpose of the current setup is to illustrate how the secondaries self regulate. Can you repeat the test then by changing only the load resistance and post the results you get. If, for example, you have a few more 1K resistors you could add them in series to get a nice set of results for loads of 1K, 2K, 3K, and 4K.
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 08, 2008, 03:53:20 AM
n00b question here ;D
My coil attrachts instead of pushing the magnets away. Any clue what I did wrong?
I got neo magnets adoesn't matter if i face all N or S of the magnets to the coil.
Made my 1st simple coil with a ferrite core.
If it's not the place to ask here, let me know ;)
Peace, Ben
BEN-
GOED VOOR VRAGEN KWESTIE HIERHEEN, SCHUIVEN
PB NEITTEMIN
DOEN JOU HEBBEN FOTOGRAFEREN?
DANKZEGGING
Thane
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 08, 2008, 05:31:58 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 07, 2008, 09:11:00 PM
ESSENTIALLY THE TWO SECONDARIES ARE WIRED IN SERIES WITH ONE DANGLER COIL.
Ok, thanks. You mentioned that one purpose of the current setup is to illustrate how the secondaries self regulate. Can you repeat the test then by changing only the load resistance and post the results you get. If, for example, you have a few more 1K resistors you could add them in series to get a nice set of results for loads of 1K, 2K, 3K, and 4K.
GOED DENKBEELD -
SORRY GOOD IDEA, OUR 3RD PARTY MEASUREMENT EXPERT IS COMING THIS WEEK I BELIEVE AND HE WILL DO THAT AS WELL AS LOOKING AT VARIOUS INPUT LEVELS AND GRAPH THE OUTPUT ACROSS A WIDE RANGE.
Thane
Wanneer ik thuis kom, zal ik mijn doen hebben fotograferen When I get home, I'll make pics.
Any relation to the dutch or just learning?
Have a good day.
Peace
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 08, 2008, 07:04:17 AM
Wanneer ik thuis kom, zal ik mijn doen hebben fotograferen When I get home, I'll make pics.
Any relation to the dutch or just learning?
Have a good day.
Peace
INBIKKEN JOU ENIGREREN
PB ONDER ONS WEES ZO GOED?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 08, 2008, 07:21:03 AM
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 08, 2008, 07:04:17 AM
Wanneer ik thuis kom, zal ik mijn doen hebben fotograferen When I get home, I'll make pics.
Any relation to the dutch or just learning?
Have a good day.
Peace
INBIKKEN JOU ENIGREREN PB ONDER ONS WEES ZO GOED?
THANKS
Thane
Thane,
je Nederlands zuigt. Hou het maar bij Engels.
Wie is de expert?
Quote from: OilBarren on April 07, 2008, 09:01:34 PM
WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO IS AN EDDY CURRENT BRAKE AND HYSTERISIS BRAKE - NEITHER OF WHICH CAUSE ACCELERATION.
AND YES OF COURSE THE MOTOR WILL ACCELERATE MORE IF THE COILS & CORES ARE REMOVED BUT THEN YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A GENERATOR EITHER.
Having the cores close to the rotor brakes the rotor due to various losses incurred by magnetizing the core in oscillating polarities -- hysteresis losses, eddy current losses, etc.
Shorting the coil reduces the magnetization in the core, by Lenz's law, and therefore reduces all of these losses.
The question is whether or not the loss reduction is greater than the new resistive losses in the coil. If it is, then you get acceleration, and it's quite conceivable that there are many configurations in which this occurs.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Quote from: OilBarren on April 08, 2008, 07:21:03 AM
INBIKKEN JOU ENIGREREN PB ONDER ONS WEES ZO GOED?
But then it would be harder for me to come visit...
PB
Quote from: Morgenster on April 08, 2008, 08:06:21 AM
je Nederlands zuigt. Hou het maar bij Engels.
Wie is de expert?
OH MAN THAT'S HARSH!
Thane
Hello! I'm posting this from the computer lab of your old Alma Mater, Heritage College. I first came across this story when that Star article was published and have been following on and off since then. Unfortunately, I have next to nothing to contribute, being a social science student with an amateur's interest in physics and a high school class. But I have read through some of this thread with an inkling of understanding and I see the huge potential of this concept. So I was wondering if it would be possible for myself and a few of my friends to sit in on a demonstration at some point, seeing how we live about 15 minutes away from OttawaU. Thanks in advance for your consideration!
P.S. I even lived in Almonte for a year as a child! ;)
Quote from: Toasty on April 08, 2008, 12:49:55 PM
Hello! I'm posting this from the computer lab of your old Alma Mater, Heritage College. I first came across this story when that Star article was published and have been following on and off since then. Unfortunately, I have next to nothing to contribute, being a social science student with an amateur's interest in physics and a high school class. But I have read through some of this thread with an inkling of understanding and I see the huge potential of this concept. So I was wondering if it would be possible for myself and a few of my friends to sit in on a demonstration at some point, seeing how we live about 15 minutes away from OttawaU. Thanks in advance for your consideration!
P.S. I even lived in Almonte for a year as a child! ;)
I would have Thane use your group to sweep the lab or to wind up the coils.
:)
Quote from: Toasty on April 08, 2008, 12:49:55 PM
Hello! I'm posting this from the computer lab of your old Alma Mater, Heritage College. I first came across this story when that Star article was published and have been following on and off since then. Unfortunately, I have next to nothing to contribute, being a social science student with an amateur's interest in physics and a high school class. But I have read through some of this thread with an inkling of understanding and I see the huge potential of this concept. So I was wondering if it would be possible for myself and a few of my friends to sit in on a demonstration at some point, seeing how we live about 15 minutes away from OttawaU. Thanks in advance for your consideration!
P.S. I even lived in Almonte for a year as a child! ;)
SURE PLEASE COME FOR A DEMO AT YOUR CONVENIENCE - ON YOUR WAY CAN YOU PLEASE STOP BY POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE AND BEAT THE CARP OUT OF HIM - TIE HIM UP - GAG HIM AND BRING HIM ALONG AS WELL - LUC AND I WILL FED EX HIM TO HOLLAND AFTER THE DEMO SO YOU WON'T HAVE TO DRIVE HIM HOME.
THANKS
Thane
PB I don't think you can top that one !!!! very funny
Quote from: OilBarren on April 08, 2008, 08:11:21 PM
BEAT THE CARP OUT OF HIM THANKS
Thane
I always wondered where that fish came from... :D :D :D :D
Anxious to get back home, returning today! (the 9th)
My wire is .5mm, not sure how to access calculator from this internet cafe PC so unsure of length but should have enough to get to 200 ohms, but .5mm is close to 24AWG and Thane prefers 26AWG which is about .40489 mm, so I will need more and fatter turns to get to the same resistance, though maybe I should shoot for the same approx number of turns or aim for a resistance that would be 200 ohms if I were using the right gauge of wire.
I am not sure how far I will get until I manage to get some more magnets, I will give a go getting them locally but otherwise it might be a bit longer of a wait, of course I may get results without adding more magnets.
Thane, you were using an air core coil and magnet as a tach right? Any details might be nice.
Otherwise I'll look into designs for a light based design.
It's been a great holiday (my first real holiday) but I will be soooo happy to get back home!
Quote from: OilBarren on April 08, 2008, 08:11:21 PM
....... ON YOUR WAY CAN YOU PLEASE STOP BY POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE AND BEAT THE CARP OUT OF HIM - TIE HIM UP - GAG HIM AND BRING HIM ALONG AS WELL - LUC AND I WILL FED EX HIM........
THANKS
Thane
@Oilbarren
A little quote from PB in a previous post on this page : "Besides, I have a wager with
my hubby on that particular one." : Bold type highlighted by me ...
Freudian slip, or candid declaration, PB is she, not he ? Not that it matters, except that you don't wan't someone to drop in to PB's house and mistakenly beat the "carp" out of
her unsuspecting hubby, because you thought PB was male, do you ? :D :D ;D ... KneeDeep....
Quote from: hoptoad on April 09, 2008, 03:54:06 AM
@Oilbarren
A little quote from PB in a previous post on this page : "Besides, I have a wager with my hubby on that particular one." : Bold type highlighted by me ...
Freudian slip, or candid declaration, PB is she, not he ? Not that it matters, except that you don't wan't someone to drop in to PB's house and mistakenly beat the "carp" out of her unsuspecting hubby, because you thought PB was male, do you ? :D :D ;D ... KneeDeep....
PB might still be male.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 08, 2008, 12:00:34 PM
Shorting the coil reduces the magnetization in the core, by Lenz's law, and therefore reduces all of these losses.
Try shorting the coils in any normal closed magnetic system generator or alternator while it is running at normal operational speed and SEE WHAT HAPPENS. Lenz's Law will create a breaking effect on short circuit that can bring the driving motor to a standstill, resulting in
increased driver motor current consumption and losses!
The accelerating "effect" currently being studied is only apparent in open generating systems. It has nothing to do with the motor, and everything to do with the generator. Open Magnetic Systems are the key.
This "effect" will be much easier to measure and understand by switching to high speed pmDC motors as the driver, because their torque versus rpm relationship and the current / voltage versus rpm relationship is linear and therefore easy to predict, understand and measure.
Also run the drive motors at full throttle, not in a constricted mode way below their normal operating parameters. This will make power consumption figures easy to measure, and output power will be at a usuable practical level. Measurement errors will be minimal, if working in tens of watts, instead of micro to milliwatts.
Induction motors in particular, do not have flat responses to varying loads under normal operating conditions, let alone when they are deliberately hobbled by current and voltage supply restriction. IMHO, induction motors are a poor choice for use in these experiments.
Also, DC rectify and filter with an electrolytic cap, the O/P of the coil/s (for more accurate O/P measurement under load) and feed it through incremental resistive loads up to and including S/C and you will find that the normally expected breaking effect is not linear as in a closed system, but non linear. At a particular current the breaking effect will cease to increase with increasing load, and instead will decrease (the perceived acceleration effect). The O/P current required for the effect to "kick in", in any given coil configuration, is dependent on the impedance of the coil/s (at a given frequency - i.e. rpm) and the length of the core/s.
Higher (but not necessarily high) impedance coils on long cores will begin to exhibit the effect at a lower frequency (RPM) than lower impedance coils on short cores. Coils which are only wound on 20-25 % of the core length at the end closest to the magnet, will also show a greater "effect" at lower rpm as well.
I found the effect to be very beneficial and useful in my own alternator experiments in 2001-2002. However useful, it will not cause the driving motor to run faster, or exhibit greater torque, than it would without the generator attached at all. It is not an O/U effect, it is a counter mmf phase change effect, which is still very useful.
Cheers all.
Quote from: Morgenster on April 09, 2008, 05:23:09 AM
PB might still be male.
True, still, I think I'd rather be absolutely sure I had the right victim before I "carped" them. :D :D ;) ....... If I were going to, which I wouldn't anyway...... :D :D
Haha LMAO here ;D
Got the coil fixed :) I'm looking for a place where i can order ferrite, any one got a clue, couldn't find what i was looking for.
Ordered new rolls of wire, the rest we got in stock.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on April 09, 2008, 05:55:15 AM
Quote from: Morgenster on April 09, 2008, 05:23:09 AM
PB might still be male.
True, still, I think I'd rather be absolutely sure I had the right victim before I "carped" them. :D :D ;) ....... If I were going to, which I wouldn't anyway...... :D :D
NO DOUBT PB's HUBBY WOULD ENJOY A GOOD CARPING - AFTER DEBATING QUESTIONS WITH PB I OFTEN CARP MY HEAD AGAINST A BRICK WALL UNTIL I PASS OUT.
Thane
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 09, 2008, 06:05:38 AM
Haha LMAO here ;D
Got the coil fixed :) I'm looking for a place where i can order ferrite, any one got a clue, couldn't find what i was looking for.
Ordered new rolls of wire, the rest we got in stock.
Cheers
USE WELDING RODS.
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on April 09, 2008, 05:55:15 AM
Quote from: Morgenster on April 09, 2008, 05:23:09 AM
PB might still be male.
True, still, I think I'd rather be absolutely sure I had the right victim before I "carped" them. :D :D ;) ....... If I were going to, which I wouldn't anyway...... :D :D
HELP STOP
WMD"sWARMONGERS OF MASS DECEPTION YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US HOPTOAD...
THOSE FROGS LEGS OF YOURS WOULD GO NICELY WITH MY FREEDOM FRIES.
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on April 09, 2008, 05:37:44 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 08, 2008, 12:00:34 PM
Shorting the coil reduces the magnetization in the core, by Lenz's law, and therefore reduces all of these losses.
Try shorting the coils in any normal closed magnetic system generator or alternator while it is running at normal operational speed and SEE WHAT HAPPENS. Lenz's Law will create a breaking effect on short circuit that can bring the driving motor to a standstill, resulting in increased driver motor current consumption and losses!
The accelerating "effect" currently being studied is only apparent in open generating systems. It has nothing to do with the motor, and everything to do with the generator. Open Magnetic Systems are the key.
This "effect" will be much easier to measure and understand by switching to high speed pmDC motors as the driver, because their torque versus rpm relationship and the current / voltage versus rpm relationship is linear and therefore easy to predict, understand and measure.
Also run the drive motors at full throttle, not in a constricted mode way below their normal operating parameters. This will make power consumption figures easy to measure, and output power will be at a usuable practical level. Measurement errors will be minimal, if working in tens of watts, instead of micro to milliwatts.
Induction motors in particular, do not have flat responses to varying loads under normal operating conditions, let alone when they are deliberately hobbled by current and voltage supply restriction. IMHO, induction motors are a poor choice for use in these experiments.
Also, DC rectify and filter with an electrolytic cap, the O/P of the coil/s (for more accurate O/P measurement under load) and feed it through incremental resistive loads up to and including S/C and you will find that the normally expected breaking effect is not linear as in a closed system, but non linear. At a particular current the breaking effect will cease to increase with increasing load, and instead will decrease (the perceived acceleration effect). The O/P current required for the effect to "kick in", in any given coil configuration, is dependent on the impedance of the coil/s (at a given frequency - i.e. rpm) and the length of the core/s.
Higher (but not necessarily high) impedance coils on long cores will begin to exhibit the effect at a lower frequency (RPM) than lower impedance coils on short cores. Coils which are only wound on 20-25 % of the core length at the end closest to the magnet, will also show a greater "effect" at lower rpm as well.
I found the effect to be very beneficial and useful in my own alternator experiments in 2001-2002. However useful, it will not cause the driving motor to run faster, or exhibit greater torque, than it would without the generator attached at all. It is not an O/U effect, it is a counter mmf phase change effect, which is still very useful.
Cheers all.
LUC AND I HAVE SPENT THE LAST 2 DAYS BENCH TESTING 2 PM BRUSHED DC MOTORS WITH NO ACCELERATION AT ALL.
TODAY I WILL COUPLE THE DC MOTOR TO THE DRIVE SHAFT OF MY INDUCTION MOTOR SO I CAN USE IT AS A GENERATOR AND PROVIDE DEFINITE DATA ON HOW MUCH ENERGY IS BEING PRODUCED BY THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED GENERATOR DURING ACCELERATION.
HAS ANYONE TRIED THIS WITH A BRUSHLESS DC MOTOR?
THIS IS OUR NEXT STEP.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 08, 2008, 08:11:21 PM
SURE PLEASE COME FOR A DEMO AT YOUR CONVENIENCE - ON YOUR WAY CAN YOU PLEASE STOP BY POLAR BREEZE'S HOUSE AND BEAT THE CARP OUT OF HIM - TIE HIM UP - GAG HIM AND BRING HIM ALONG AS WELL - LUC AND I WILL FED EX HIM TO HOLLAND AFTER THE DEMO SO YOU WON'T HAVE TO DRIVE HIM HOME.
THANKS
Thane
I have my fun and will stay on this thread.
thanks you made me a nice day
helmut
Quote from: OilBarren on April 09, 2008, 06:55:23 AM
LUC AND I HAVE SPENT THE LAST 2 DAYS BENCH TESTING 2 PM BRUSHED DC MOTORS WITH NO ACCELERATION AT ALL.
TODAY I WILL COUPLE THE DC MOTOR TO THE DRIVE SHAFT OF MY INDUCTION MOTOR SO I CAN USE IT AS A GENERATOR AND PROVIDE DEFINITE DATA ON HOW MUCH ENERGY IS BEING PRODUCED BY THE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED GENERATOR DURING ACCELERATION.
HAS ANYONE TRIED THIS WITH A BRUSHLESS DC MOTOR?
THIS IS OUR NEXT STEP.
Thane
Cool looking forward to it :)
Do you bundle multiple welding rod's or is one enough?
Off to the garage to look for rods :)
edit: got my bedini/pulse motor running. Made a small one out of a harddisk to start off with. need to make more coils.
HOPTOAD of course there are OTHER possibilities and whomever PB is {PB its time to come out of your closet now ] IM sure Thane would love to meet at University Chet
Quote from: ramset on April 09, 2008, 08:34:08 AM
HOPTOAD of course there are OTHER possibilities and whomever PB is {PB its time to come out of your closet now ] IM sure Thane would love to meet at University Chet
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT
PB IS ACTUALLY:
PRESIDENT
BUSH?
Thane
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 09, 2008, 08:01:21 AM
Do you bundle multiple welding rod's or is one enough?
Off to the garage to look for rods :)
BUNDLE THEM TOGETHER TO SUIT THE SIZE OF YOUR MAGNETS.
Thane
Quote from: helmut on April 09, 2008, 07:19:21 AM
I have my fun and will stay on this thread.
thanks you made me a nice day
helmut
Helmut, wie geht's. What city do you live in? I'm in Frankfurt all this week at an interior design show. Let me know if you live near here and maybe I'll let you buy me a drink. We can perhaps plot countermeasures for the carp attack - I could use some help.
PB
This is all lots of fun but hidden in all the noise there's one important post (not one of mine, dammit) which should be read by everyone who's truly interested in understanding this technology.
READ POST 1541
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 12:30:48 PM
This is all lots of fun but hidden in all the noise there's one important post (not one of mine, dammit) which should be read by everyone who's truly interested in understanding this technology.
READ POST 1541
PB
NO GOOD - I JUST SENT PHOTOS OF THE
REAL REASON FOR ACCELERATION TO JustMe FOR POSTING. LUC JUST DISCOVERED IT THIS MORNING - IT IS QUITE SURPRIZING AND WILL PROVIDE ALOT OF ANSWERS - PB WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG.
Thane
...
Quote from: OilBarren on April 09, 2008, 12:54:30 PM
LUC JUST DISCOVERED IT THIS MORNING - IT IS QUITE SURPRIZING AND WILL PROVIDE ALOT OF ANSWERS - PB WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG.
Thane
And not a moment too soon. I mean the poor guy has had to completely solve this thing at least four or five times now. No more pretending that he didn't think you were full of shit from the beginning, no more feigning genuine interest, no more obligation to point out (and point out and point out and point out) the obvious, no more need for ad hoc lectures on 6th grade graphing concepts. As a fellow traveller on this road I can't help but be pleased for him.
Thank you PB, for leading the way, for showing us the light. Have fun in Frankfurt + don't hand out any wooden silicon.
Quote from: hoptoad on April 09, 2008, 05:37:44 AM
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 08, 2008, 12:00:34 PM
Shorting the coil reduces the magnetization in the core, by Lenz's law, and therefore reduces all of these losses.
Try shorting the coils in any normal closed magnetic system generator or alternator while it is running at normal operational speed and SEE WHAT HAPPENS. Lenz's Law will create a breaking effect on short circuit that can bring the driving motor to a standstill, resulting in increased driver motor current consumption and losses!
You are mostly correct, hoptoad, but a normal generator is properly designed to be a good generator. Thane's coils are not designed to be a good generator. A good generator will be designed to have few no-load losses and maximum power output, whereas Thane's generator is designed to have a lot of no-load losses and zero power output.
Quote from: JustMe on April 09, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
And not a moment too soon.Ã, I mean the poor guy has had to completely solve this thing at least four or five times now.Ã, No more pretending that he didn't think you were full of shit from the beginning, no more feigning genuine interest, no more obligation to point out (and point out and point out and point out) the obvious, no more need for ad hoc lectures on 6th grade graphing concepts.Ã, As a fellow traveller on this road I can't help but be pleased for him.
Thank you PB,Ã, for leading the way, for showing us the light. Have fun in Frankfurt + don't hand out any wooden silicon.
OK, now we've settled this I can tell you what the real experiment is/was.
Firstly, it's clear to anyone that both the perepeteia and the bi-toroid transformer thing are both BS: and they're BS in exactly the same, transparent way.
Build a weird device that wastes lots of power, do something extra weird to it that causes it to waste less power, act surprised, and then claim that it's an astounding breakthrough. But the real experiment has been a social experiment to determine the following:
Does Thane really believe in it and not realize it's BS - or - is Thane fully aware that it's BS and he's just stringing others along? That's what the wager was with my spouse (who is also posting here BTW, though less obviously than me!). And now we've settled it.
PB
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 02:57:40 PM
Quote from: JustMe on April 09, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
And not a moment too soon. I mean the poor guy has had to completely solve this thing at least four or five times now. No more pretending that he didn't think you were full of shit from the beginning, no more feigning genuine interest, no more obligation to point out (and point out and point out and point out) the obvious, no more need for ad hoc lectures on 6th grade graphing concepts. As a fellow traveller on this road I can't help but be pleased for him.
Thank you PB, for leading the way, for showing us the light. Have fun in Frankfurt + don't hand out any wooden silicon.
OK, now we've settled this I can tell you what the real experiment is/was.
Firstly, it's clear to anyone that both the perepeteia and the bi-toroid transformer thing are both BS: and they're BS in exactly the same, transparent way. Build a weird device that wastes lots of power, do something extra weird to it that causes it to waste less power, act surprised, and then claim that it's an astounding breakthrough.
But the real experiment has been a social experiment to determine the following:
Does Thane really believe in it and not realize it's BS - or - is Thane fully aware that it's BS and he's just stringing others along?
That's what the wager was with my spouse (who is also posting here BTW, though less obviously than me!). And now we've settled it.
PB
I figured that this post needed to be quoted, so there would be a record of it, in case PB decided to come back and edit it, like she (he?) did with so many other of her (his?) posts.
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 02:57:40 PM
Quote from: JustMe on April 09, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
And not a moment too soon. I mean the poor guy has had to completely solve this thing at least four or five times now. No more pretending that he didn't think you were full of shit from the beginning, no more feigning genuine interest, no more obligation to point out (and point out and point out and point out) the obvious, no more need for ad hoc lectures on 6th grade graphing concepts. As a fellow traveller on this road I can't help but be pleased for him.
Thank you PB, for leading the way, for showing us the light. Have fun in Frankfurt + don't hand out any wooden silicon.
OK, now we've settled this I can tell you what the real experiment is/was.
Firstly, it's clear to anyone that both the perepeteia and the bi-toroid transformer thing are both BS: and they're BS in exactly the same, transparent way. Build a weird device that wastes lots of power, do something extra weird to it that causes it to waste less power, act surprised, and then claim that it's an astounding breakthrough.
But the real experiment has been a social experiment to determine the following:
Does Thane really believe in it and not realize it's BS - or - is Thane fully aware that it's BS and he's just stringing others along?
That's what the wager was with my spouse (who is also posting here BTW, though less obviously than me!). And now we've settled it.
PB
THAT'S IT MR. AND MRS. PB YOU GUYS ARE NOW OFFICIALLY OFF MY CHRISTMAS CARD LIST.
Thane
HEY,
I HAVE JUST SENT JM A COUPLE OF PHOTO'S OF LUC'S NEW PRIMARY IN THE SUPER PERMALLOY TOROID WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000. THE PRIMARY CORE MATERIAL Rp = 17,000.
TAKE NOTE OF THE POWER FACTOR AND POWER CONSUMPTION WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO A PROFESSIONALLY MANUFACTURED TOROID AND THE PRIMARY IS JUST HELD IN PLACE WITH TAPE.
LUC IS WINDING THE SECONDARIES AS I TYPE THIS AND WE SHOULD HAVE SOME RESULTS TOMORROW.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 09, 2008, 04:08:37 PM
HEY,
I HAVE JUST SENT JM A COUPLE OF PHOTO'S OF LUC'S NEW PRIMARY IN THE SUPER PERMALLOY TOROID WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000. THE PRIMARY CORE MATERIAL Rp = 17,000.
TAKE NOTE OF THE POWER FACTOR AND POWER CONSUMPTION WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO A PROFESSIONALLY MANUFACTURED TOROID AND THE PRIMARY IS JUST HELD IN PLACE WITH TAPE.
LUC IS WINDING THE SECONDARIES AS I TYPE THIS AND WE SHOULD HAVE SOME RESULTS TOMORROW.
Thane
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 02:57:40 PM
But the real experiment has been a social experiment to determine the following:
Does Thane really believe in it and not realize it's BS - or - is Thane fully aware that it's BS and he's just stringing others along?
That's what the wager was with my spouse (who is also posting here BTW, though less obviously than me!). And now we've settled it.
PB
Could your spouse be the nice The_Angel? After all, The_Angel is the only who has read all the post and thought that you are just a helpful skeptic.
BTW, who won the bet?
Social experiment, are you a psychologist?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 09, 2008, 05:12:39 PM
Could your spouse be the nice The_Angel? After all, The_Angel is the only who has read all the post and thought that you are just a helpful skeptic.
My bet, if it's true at all (and let's face it who knows with this sleaze), is that they're posting under the same nic. The posts have often had this weird schizophrenic feel I could never quite put my finger on that left me with the vague feeling that he had some kind of cognitive impairment. Another possibility is that there is no actual involvement of any spouse, just an attempt at more divisive bullshit.
Quote from: JustMe on April 09, 2008, 05:38:32 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 09, 2008, 05:12:39 PM
Could your spouse be the nice The_Angel? After all, The_Angel is the only who has read all the post and thought that you are just a helpful skeptic.
My bet, if it's true at all (and let's face it who knows with this sleaze), is that they're posting under the same nic. The posts have often had this weird schizophrenic feel I could never quite put my finger on that left me with the vague feeling that he had some kind of cognitive impairment. Another possibility is that there is no actual involvement of any spouse, just an attempt at more divisive bullshit.
WELL I JUST FEEL CHEAP AND SO USED AND SOMEWHAT SAD - I MEAN I AM ACTUALLY GOING TO MISS THE POLAR BITCH AND POLAR BASTARD TAG TEAM. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT'S COMMENT(S) ON LUC'S NEW WORK.
CAN SOMEONE OUT THERE AT LEAST GIVE ME SOME PROPS FOR BEING SO DUMB AS TO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS THING BUT AT MINUMALLY SMART ENOUGH TO FOOL MIT AND OTTAWA U, NOT TO MENTION LUC AND AT ABOUT 20 OR MORE OTHER LEARNED DEMO VIEWERS.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 09, 2008, 10:34:04 AM
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 09, 2008, 08:01:21 AM
Do you bundle multiple welding rod's or is one enough?
Off to the garage to look for rods :)
BUNDLE THEM TOGETHER TO SUIT THE SIZE OF YOUR MAGNETS.
Thane
Thanks, found plenty rods, will play around with it tomorrow, euuu today when i wake up. Just came back from a party. Pfff I should quit my party life/live lol. PB don't you have any girls/guys/GG/BB to score instead of this shit?
I'm off to bed i'm wasted.
Edit: I'm a moron 2nd edit :P
Quote from: OilBarren on April 09, 2008, 07:09:17 PM
WELL I JUST FEEL CHEAP AND SO USED AND SOMEWHAT SAD - I MEAN I AM ACTUALLY GOING TO MISS THE POLAR BITCH AND POLAR BASTARD TAG TEAM. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT'S COMMENT(S) ON LUC'S NEW WORK.
CAN SOMEONE OUT THERE AT LEAST GIVE ME SOME PROPS FOR BEING SO DUMB AS TO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS THING BUT AT MINUMALLY SMART ENOUGH TO FOOL MIT AND OTTAWA U, NOT TO MENTION LUC AND AT ABOUT 20 OR MORE OTHER LEARNED DEMO VIEWERS.
Thane
I understand why you feel cheap, used and sad by being outed by the dynamic PB duo, possibly soon to be infamous.
But as far as your 'BEING SO DUMB' comment, I can only think of a Stargate episode where Samatha Carter was being praised by Thor of the Asgard for her exceptionaly STUPID IDEA that saved the Asgard's destruction from the Replicators. I and many others think that you are SO DUMB that you may help save the planet from the current mess. Also, those that have not seen the earlier news report on Thane's induction motor comments. Old saying follows, It is apparent that Thane has forgotten more about induction motors then all so called induction motor experts on this blog. Read from the beginning and learn.
Regards,
Larry
PS- Vibrovirii you're a hoot!
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 09, 2008, 02:32:39 PM
You are mostly correct, hoptoad, but a normal generator is properly designed to be a good generator. Thane's coils are not designed to be a good generator. A good generator will be designed to have few no-load losses and maximum power output, whereas Thane's generator is designed to have a lot of no-load losses and zero power output.
No disagreement there. Well only partially! A Normal generator is properly designed to be a good generator utilising a closed magnetic system.
Flux leakage in open magnetic systems, is presented as one of the main reasons why efficient systems are generally closed ones.
It's erroneous to assume however, because each system has its plus and minus characteristics. In an open system, there is magnetic potential leakage into the environment. But this is offset by the characteristic phase changing of counter MMF during nominal and excess loading, which reduces the impact of breaking associated with Lenz's law.
Whilst you can theoretically produce a greater voltage and current capability in any given reference coil, than in an open system, the price paid by counter mmf when current is drawn in a closed sytem, is very high. The greater the current output of the generator, the greater the degree of / actual breaking it produces.
In an open system, a short circuit on the o/p may slow the driver, but nowhere near the magnitude as that of a conventional generator, which will break so harshly, that it may stall the driver motor.
In an open system experiment, place incremental loads on the coils, and you will see that the breaking effect is greater when with loads are less than nominal, and decreases as the load approaches and passes nominal loading through to short circuit. With low impedance coils, at very high speeds, a short circuit will present almost the same loading on the driver motor as an open circuit. At all times,
actual breaking for a given power output will be less in an open system.
Only by comparing (literally side by side) the breaking and power output of both (well designed) systems, does it become evident that a closed system is not necessarily the most efficient one.
P.S. Remember, I've always only been talking about a completely open magnetic generating system.
Thane, if you're magnets are inserted into metal cups then you have a semi closed system, because you are redirecting the flux from the rear of the magnet up to the circumference edge of the magnet pole facing the coils. Penetration of the flux from the open magnet pole end to the coil core will be shallow, as it follows the easiest path through the face of the coil core to the opposite pole at the external cup around its circumference.
This is one possibillity why you haven't seen similar results to mine. And perhaps part of the reason your results have been intruiging. No doubt there may be other differing parameters as well. I've already posted links on this thread to my previous experiments twice. So no need to again. I acknowledge that, whilst I believe you are dealing with the same effect as that which I have previously studied, there is still a possibility that it is not the same, or , if it is the same, it's manifestation is different due to any number of variations between our system parameters.
P.P.S Thane If you saw my legs, you might lose your appetite! ........ KneeDeep ....... But just to be sure I might move to Switzerland. They've been neutral for centuries I believe. :D :D :D :D :D
I was trying to find some Iron welding rods for core material, but the rods don't tell you on the box what metal they are.
Only what type of metal they are meant to weld. So how does one know your getting iron rods and not steal, or some other alloy.
Could you give me some rod numbers to go by?
They use 4 digit numbers for the rods.
The following site shows an example of what I'm talking about.
http://www.weldingmaterialsales.com/products.htm
Perhaps someone could tell me which of these numbers would be the right type of rod.
Quote from: LarryC on April 09, 2008, 08:50:07 PM
PS- Vibrovirii you're a hoot!
Just woke up time to make some coils and pick up an oscilloscope from my dad's work.
Which hoot do you mean? I do all of em though ;D
Urban dictionary:
1. Hoot
another word for being sorry, dumb, stupid
"damn blood you hoot'
2. Hoot
A good time.
We had a hoot at the Monster Truck Rally.
3. Hoot
a toke of the marijuana smoke
Hoot this bowl.
Peace, B
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 12:03:16 PM
Quote from: helmut on April 09, 2008, 07:19:21 AM
I have my fun and will stay on this thread.
thanks you made me a nice day
helmut
Helmut, wie geht's. What city do you live in? I'm in Frankfurt all this week at an interior design show. Let me know if you live near here and maybe I'll let you buy me a drink. We can perhaps plot countermeasures for the carp attack - I could use some help.
PB
@polarbreeze
As you can see in my Profile I am living in Duisburg,what is about 250 Kilometer in the North of Frankfurt.
I am afraid,that i am not able to help you out.Because i have no idea about a Carp attac,and many other things to.
The Fishes,that i try to catch,life near the Netherlands and like worms.
If you are near my Area i like to meet you one day.And of corse you will not stay thursty ,
ill prepare you a drink.Dont worry about that.
But i still wonder,how some adulds behave like boys during there adolescenze.
Why you guys are not just compare and test out your mesurement results as dry facts.
It is up to you to PN me your telephone number or skype ID and we can talk
about the matter.But dont expect to much.
helmut
Quote from: helmut on April 10, 2008, 04:34:03 AM
@polarbreeze
As you can see in my Profile I am living in Duisburg,what is about 250 Kilometer in the North of Frankfurt.
I am afraid,that i am not able to help you out.Because i have no idea about a Carp attac,and many other things to.
The Fishes,that i try to catch,life near the Netherlands and like worms.
If you are near my Area i like to meet you one day.And of corse you will not stay thursty ,
ill prepare you a drink.Dont worry about that.
But i still wonder,how some adulds behave like boys during there adolescenze.
Why you guys are not just compare and test out your mesurement results as dry facts.
It is up to you to PN me your telephone number or skype ID and we can talk
about the matter.But dont expect to much.
helmut
Quote from: AbbaRue on April 10, 2008, 03:27:27 AM
I was trying to find some Iron welding rods for core material, but the rods don't tell you on the box what metal they are.
Only what type of metal they are meant to weld. So how does one know your getting iron rods and not steal, or some other alloy.
Could you give me some rod numbers to go by?
They use 4 digit numbers for the rods.
The following site shows an example of what I'm talking about.
http://www.weldingmaterialsales.com/products.htm
Perhaps someone could tell me which of these numbers would be the right type of rod.
ABBARUE,
JUST HOLD A STRONG MAGNET NEAR THE ROD AND MAKE SURE IT ATTRACTS IT.
THE MORE ATTRACTION THE BETTER.
AVOID ALUMINIUM, COPPER & STAINLESS.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 10, 2008, 06:40:39 AM
HELMUT,
WAKE UP MAN IT'S MRS. PB AND SHE'S AT AT AN INTERIOR DESIGN SHOW.- SHE'S LOOKING FOR SOME FINE GERMAN SAUSAGE TO GO WITH THAT DRINK!
VIBROVINII YOU'RE NEXT DUDE WITH ALL YOUR DUTCH DYKES ETC.
Thane
I'm next with what? My brain is a bit rusty today :D
What's up with our poorly maintained dykes? When the water comes i'll be long gone they won't hold for 2 mins haha
I've send you a PM btw, not sure if you read them?
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 10, 2008, 03:49:06 AM
Quote from: LarryC on April 09, 2008, 08:50:07 PM
PS- Vibrovirii you're a hoot!
Just woke up time to make some coils and pick up an oscilloscope from my dad's work.
Which hoot do you mean? I do all of em though ;D
Urban dictionary:
1. Hoot
another word for being sorry, dumb, stupid
"damn blood you hoot'
2. Hoot
A good time.
We had a hoot at the Monster Truck Rally.
3. Hoot
a toke of the marijuana smoke
Hoot this bowl.
Peace, B
1-Nah, 2-Close, 3-Nah,
American slang - Kick ass funny.
Thanks for the laughs.
Larry
PS - Don't look up Nah. It is the American Affleck goat (tv commercial) saying no.
Quote from: LarryC on April 10, 2008, 09:35:18 AM
Quote from: vibrovirii on April 10, 2008, 03:49:06 AM
Quote from: LarryC on April 09, 2008, 08:50:07 PM
PS- Vibrovirii you're a hoot!
Just woke up time to make some coils and pick up an oscilloscope from my dad's work.
Which hoot do you mean? I do all of em though ;D
Urban dictionary:
1. Hoot
another word for being sorry, dumb, stupid
"damn blood you hoot'
2. Hoot
A good time.
We had a hoot at the Monster Truck Rally.
3. Hoot
a toke of the marijuana smoke
Hoot this bowl.
Peace, B
1-Nah, 2-Close, 3-Nah,
American slang - Kick ass funny.
Thanks for the laughs.
Larry
PS - Don't look up Nah. It is the American Affleck goat (tv commercial) saying no.
Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBirwSpLJY
Quote from: hoptoad on April 10, 2008, 02:54:11 AM
P.S. Remember, I've always only been talking about a completely open magnetic generating system.
Thane, if you're magnets are inserted into metal cups then you have a semi closed system, because you are redirecting the flux from the rear of the magnet up to the circumference edge of the magnet pole facing the coils. Penetration of the flux from the open magnet pole end to the coil core will be shallow, as it follows the easiest path through the face of the coil core to the opposite pole at the external cup around its circumference.
This is one possibillity why you haven't seen similar results to mine. And perhaps part of the reason your results have been intruiging. No doubt there may be other differing parameters as well. I've already posted links on this thread to my previous experiments twice. So no need to again. I acknowledge that, whilst I believe you are dealing with the same effect as that which I have previously studied, there is still a possibility that it is not the same, or , if it is the same, it's manifestation is different due to any number of variations between our system parameters.
Hi Hoptoad,
It is a semi closed system with metal cups. This has always intrigued me. Do you have ideas on how that dynamic would play out? It seems that N-S would fight until the opposite face loses. My question is would that be a slow flux loss based on face percentage or an extended battle causing a quick flux release at certain coil charge value? In case you missed this fact in all the clutter, the core/magnet gap is much larger then in a convention motor/generator.
Thanks,
Larry
PS- Thanks adlep.
Thane wrote:
"PB was right all along..."
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 09, 2008, 02:57:40 PM
OK, now we've settled this I can tell you what the real experiment is/was.
Firstly, it's clear to anyone that both the perepeteia and the bi-toroid transformer thing are both BS: and they're BS in exactly the same, transparent way. Build a weird device that wastes lots of power, do something extra weird to it that causes it to waste less power, act surprised, and then claim that it's an astounding breakthrough.
[snip...]
PB
I think PB fell for it hook, line and sinker... hell, she/he/it/whatever even swallowed the frickin' pole. Thane, think you ought to invoice PB for the fishin' pole. Shouldn't we have to pay to have this much fun?
Thane, might want to throw this one back in... let Darwin take care of things.
And regarding the sociology/psychology experiment... kinda makes you wonder who is the 'lab rat' and who is the scientist? ;)
-Mark
Speaking of catching Carp. A lot of US lakes hold Carp rodeos and feed the catch to the animals. Mainly because the foul tasting fish eats the game fish eggs. The best bait to use is strawberry corn. Which is created by adding a package of strawberry Kool-Aid to a can of corn and let it sit overnight. I'm serious, the Carp will come from miles around when used as bait.
Is that why Thane warns people not to drink PB Kool-Aid?
Larry
Quote from: hoptoad on April 10, 2008, 02:54:11 AM
In an open system, there is magnetic potential leakage into the environment. But this is offset by the characteristic phase changing of counter MMF during nominal and excess loading, which reduces the impact of breaking associated with Lenz's law.
Yes, that's true -- I have recently observed it in some experiments, and I'm quite surprised that you know it!
It has been my experience so far, however, that the phase change in the counter MMF is only made possible by this potential leakage (more precisely, it appears that magnetization
diffuses into ferromagnetic materials), and that this phase change can mitigate the energy loss, but not entirely cancel it.
QuoteIn an open system experiment, place incremental loads on the coils, and you will see that the breaking effect is greater when with loads are less than nominal, and decreases as the load approaches and passes nominal loading through to short circuit. With low impedance coils, at very high speeds, a short circuit will present almost the same loading on the driver motor as an open circuit. At all times, actual breaking for a given power output will be less in an open system.
Yes, I have observed this as well, although not the requirement for "low impedance coils". However, it has again been my experience that these open systems have extra losses that make this possible, and the power out is never enough to make up for the braking effect that remains.
This is all consistent with what I said about how Thane gets his acceleration.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Quote from: LarryC on April 10, 2008, 09:45:37 AM
Quote from: hoptoad on April 10, 2008, 02:54:11 AM
P.S. Remember, I've always only been talking about a completely open magnetic generating system.
Thane, if you're magnets are inserted into metal cups then you have a semi closed system, because you are redirecting the flux from the rear of the magnet up to the circumference edge of the magnet pole facing the coils. Penetration of the flux from the open magnet pole end to the coil core will be shallow, as it follows the easiest path through the face of the coil core to the opposite pole at the external cup around its circumference.
This is one possibillity why you haven't seen similar results to mine. And perhaps part of the reason your results have been intruiging. No doubt there may be other differing parameters as well. I've already posted links on this thread to my previous experiments twice. So no need to again. I acknowledge that, whilst I believe you are dealing with the same effect as that which I have previously studied, there is still a possibility that it is not the same, or , if it is the same, it's manifestation is different due to any number of variations between our system parameters.
Hi Hoptoad,
It is a semi closed system with metal cups. This has always intrigued me. Do you have ideas on how that dynamic would play out? It seems that N-S would fight until the opposite face loses. My question is would that be a slow flux loss based on face percentage or an extended battle causing a quick flux release at certain coil charge value? In case you missed this fact in all the clutter, the core/magnet gap is much larger then in a convention motor/generator.
Thanks,
Larry
PS- Thanks adlep.
@Mr.Entropy,
I would also appreciate your comments on my question.
Thanks,
Larry
The difference between iron and steel is: when steel is magnetized it stays magnetized.
But iron only remains magnetized until the magnetic field is removed.
If the core of a transformer remains magnetic after the current is turned off that would resist the
transformer action. That is why it's important to get soft iron for the core.
Otherwise it's like winding a coil around a magnet.
My understanding for using welding rods to make cores is because they are a source of soft iron.
We can buy steel wire or rod for a lot less then the price of welding rods.
I noticed the rod chemistry on that site and it says E7014 rods have a low carbon content C 0.06.
I believe it's the carbon content that makes steel stay magnetized.
Anyone have any more info on this.
I though I seen someone else on this forum using welding rods, on another thread.
.
Quote from: AbbaRue on April 10, 2008, 01:39:00 PM
The difference between iron and steel is: when steel is magnetized it stays magnetized.
But iron only remains magnetized until the magnetic field is removed.
If the core of a transformer remains magnetic after the current is turned off that would resist the
transformer action. That is why it's important to get soft iron for the core.
Otherwise it's like winding a coil around a magnet.
My understanding for using welding rods to make cores is because they are a source of soft iron.
We can buy steel wire or rod for a lot less then the price of welding rods.
I noticed the rod chemistry on that site and it says E7014 rods have a low carbon content C 0.06.
I believe it's the carbon content that makes steel stay magnetized.
Anyone have any more info on this.
I though I seen someone else on this forum using welding rods, on another thread.
Abba, what you say is basically correct, but soft steel (sae 1010/1020) is somewhat like iron in that
it does not stay magnetized. It is hardened steel that retains it's magnetism for a long time.
I have used cast iron for cores which works well at low frequencies.
But to clarify (hopefully) the welding rod situation... the rods with names like E6011 are electric
arc welding rods and they come coated with a hard layer of flux. Also the sizes are generally fairly large. The rods that are usually specified for cores ie: Bedini machines, are OXYACETYLENE
welding rods of around 1/16th of an inch. I didn't see any on that site, perhaps a trip to a welding
supply store...?
Ron
PS: Thane, sorry about the use of capital letters there... it was slip, but I do live in a provincial
capital so must be able to use them on occasion? after all, we don't ALL live in THE capital and
get to use capital letters ALL the time.....lol
Back from holiday (it was nice but very happy to be back), and just got internet back too!
Ok, so I was wrong, there are 12 magnets on the rotor, but in only 6 positions.
I thought it was just the way they had been glued on, I only realized when I tried adding one of the extra magnets to the cupholders that they must be 2 deep! (it really wasn't apparent until then, not that I had long with it before going on my trip)
So I now have an 18 magnet rotor, nice!
So now I need to get the coil right, now I am yet to verify all this perfectly but with by .56mm dia wire it will take over 6Kg of wire or over 2km! that's a seriously large amount of wire, I am questioning is Thane's coils are really that large?
I bought some 'bright' mild steel 1 inch dia. (approx) bar which I will use as a core as soon as I can figure out how to wind wire on it.
But since a coil with the above specs with be very very extreme (using well over $100usd/cad of copper wire) I would like to get from Thane what is the resistance of the most minimal single coil you fully believe will work or has tested to work. (though I don't think you have tested 18 poles on 6 inch so I know it will be a guess)
I will try to exceed the minimum but hope to use less than 200 ohms of wire.
More on coils, first the ones above for instance do not look large enough to be 200 ohms, are they?
One thing is the huge difference between hoptoad's coils and Thanes which while it seemed he got a similar effect the number of turns could not be more different, hoptoads being very diminutive at only a few hundred turns where Thanes would seemingly have numbers in the 40,000 turns based on my calculations.
But then my calculations seem wrong, sure Thanes coils look large but I'm not sure they are as large as that in the videos and photos.
Ah more investigation and here's the answer.
I could not get AWG sizes in NZ, only metric here, and furthermore it is either criminally expensive or in overly expensive sizes.
So I pretty much got what was going, which was some .56mm dia wire (acceptable price and a weight I could JUST afford), where Thane used 26AWG I think which is .4039.
That seemed OK, .4 something .vs .5 something, not a big difference right? But it's a huge difference!
23AWG is the closest analog at .574mm as opposed to .56mm (.014mm difference)
That would be 7.05KG to get to 200 ohms. (counting it as 23AWG)
I would need precisely 9849 ft (well as precise as I can get with a limit of 4 significant digits on the wiretronic calculator)
26AWG or .4039 is the wire Thanes used,
That's only 1.73KG to get to 200 Ohms, or 4875 ft
Less than half the weight and length of the wire that is only 0.1561mm larger, under .16 of a mm, a very tiny difference or so it sounds!
So I am going to have to find some wire that is thinner, am I going to have to fight the temptation to buy stuff even thinner than Thanes to use less?
Thane, why do you use the gauge you do? Would you expect success with a lesser gauge?
Do you only use the gauge you do because it resists breaking?
Of course to some extent maybe I should aim for the same number of turns as Thane (or the same length), while my wire is fatter so I will use more wire getting to the same turns I shouldn't need double the length of wire I don't think (though may need to find a wire building calculator to make sure).
I am going to go out to pickup an optocoupler and use that for RPM measurements as using an aircore coil seemed to give imperfect results.
note: 1.73KG in red since I made an error first time.
.
Whoever keeps changing the subject of this thread, can you maybe not?
It can make it hard to keep track of it!
BTW I bought some .355mm wire, about 1Kg of it, I was hoping to get about .7kg of 30AWG (which would do the 4875 ft) but could only get this which will do about 3500ft, hopefully that will be enough although I may be able to add a bit more of various sizes to it maybe, or I might just buy a tad more if it is insufficient for the effect.
Got the optical tach stuff sorted, should be able to put together in a minute or 2 though I am too tired to do it tonight.
And then I just need to wind wire on my 1 inch 'bright' mild steel core, I am hoping I can get a hole cutter drill bit attachment with an ID just larger that my core and glue/tape etc... various parts until reasonably securely attached, otherwise I will try to drill at least some hole into the steel core.
If anyone has better idea I'm all ears, Thane, how did you wind them? by hand?
Quote from: aether22 on April 10, 2008, 11:42:35 PM
So I am going to have to find some wire that is thinner, am I going to have to fight the temptation to buy stuff even thinner than Thanes to use less?
Thane, why do you use the gauge you do? Would you expect success with a lesser gauge?
Do you only use the gauge you do because it resists breaking?
AETHER22,
WELCOME HOME. I USED 30, 28, 26 GAUGE WIRE.
LATEST TRANSFORMER TESTSI HAVE UPLOADED SOME OF OUR LATEST TRANSFORMER TEST PHOTO-DATA HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ERZR4652 - ALSO JM SHOULD BE POSTING THE PHOTOS SOON AS WELL.
IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE HOW THE PRIMARY IS VIRTUALLY NON RESPONSIVE FROM 1 M ohms RIGHT DOWN TO ABOUT 20 ohms. IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE BUT THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD REMAINS STABLE AT AROUND 2.9 VOLTS THROUGHOUT AS WELL.
A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER RESPONSE CAN BE SEEN HERE:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/tracir.html#c3
LUC WILL BE ADJUSTING THE SECONDARY TURNS # TODAY TO INCREASE THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD - TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT CASE.
Thane
Thane, I have roughly 27 Gauge, about 1Kg of it, that's about 3500 ft and about 180 ohms.
Where as if I assume your 200 ohm coil was 26AWG you had 1.73KG of wire, 4,875 ft.
Basically mine has 28% less length. On the plus side, I should have slightly more than 72% as many turns because as it is slimmer it won't increase the core diameter quite as fast.
Would you expect that to be enough to demo the effect with a single coil? (Give odds if not sure)
Again if you could drop a line or 2 on how you wound your coils, by hand? or with some motorized setup? (winding by hand tends to twist and break wire)
BTW should it prove useful to anyone here are ways to increase the power of the effect:
Number of magnet poles on rotor
RPM
Number of turns
More coils?
Stator closer to rotor poles (it should increase effect as flux and induction should increase)
Better core and coil form (assuming hoptoads observations are relevant)
Shorter more direct path to motor
.
Quote from: LarryC on April 10, 2008, 09:45:37 AM
It is a semi closed system with metal cups. This has always intrigued me. Do you have ideas on how that dynamic would play out? It seems that N-S would fight until the opposite face loses.
@LarryC
Interesting questions and possibilities. ??? The cupped magnet/s would likely induce a complex sinusoidal flux change as it/they move past past the coil core, and not a classical simple sine wave as you would expect. At the core - magnet register point, the magnetic field in the core might even "appear" to momentarily "disappear", as the magnetic field induced into the core face would be radially split by the bloch wall which is formed near the circumference of the magnet face by the metal cup that surrounds it. IMHO, there would be a degree of simultaneous N/S vector opposition influencing the coils which would be counterproductive to efficient electrical generation. But I acknowledge that I do not know for sure. :-\
Quote from: LarryC
My question is would that be a slow flux loss based on face percentage or an extended battle causing a quick flux release at certain coil charge value? In case you missed this fact in all the clutter, the core/magnet gap is much larger then in a convention motor/generator.
I cannot honestly say it is one or the other. ??? Both conditions may be arising at different stages in the magnet - core transition period.
I wish I did know, but I've never experimented with a semi closed system as presented by cupped magnets. Hopefully Entropy or some one else may offer some insight.
P.S. Yes I am aware of the greater air gap, and in fact I have covered this subject on page 5 of my website as it relates to open magnetic sytems.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 10, 2008, 12:09:01 PM
Yes, that's true -- I have recently observed it in some experiments, and I'm quite surprised that you know it!
:D :D I'm surpised I know it too ! :D :D
Quote from: Mr.Entropy
It has been my experience so far, however, that the phase change in the counter MMF is only made possible by this potential leakage (more precisely, it appears that magnetization diffuses into ferromagnetic materials), and that this phase change can mitigate the energy loss, but not entirely cancel it.
Agreed, though you can reduce the loss by such a degree, that what remains is acceptable.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy
Yes, I have observed this as well, although not the requirement for "low impedance coils".
Low impedance coils are not a specific requirement. I was indicating that higher rpm speeds are required for the effect to kick in with low impedance coils. And moreover, that the effect will occur, even in low impedance coils. There is however, as with all things, an optimum range of impedance for which this effect will be useful. If the coil impedance is too high, coil current will be so restricted (choked), even at short circuit, and the effect will not neccessarily manifest, as counter mmf phase transitions are dependent on the coil current. A coil with 40,000 turns will have a huge impedance and is unlikely to yield a practical power output or benefit greatly from any counter mmf phase changes. It will produce very high voltage, but not a lot of current.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy
However, it has again been my experience that these open systems have extra losses that make this possible, and the power out is never enough to make up for the braking effect that remains.
It was initially my experience too, until I started experimenting with hollow cores (solenoids), with the coils wound "heel end" style on the the cores.
Quote from: Mr.EntropyThis is all consistent with what I said about how Thane gets his acceleration.
Yep, pretty much ;)
Cheers all from the Toad who Hops ...... KneeDeep
Quote from: OilBarren on April 11, 2008, 06:44:17 AM
LATEST TRANSFORMER TESTS
IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE HOW THE PRIMARY IS VIRTUALLY NON RESPONSIVE FROM 1 M ohms RIGHT DOWN TO ABOUT 20 ohms. IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE BUT THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD REMAINS STABLE AT AROUND 2.9 VOLTS THROUGHOUT AS WELL.
A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER RESPONSE CAN BE SEEN HERE:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/tracir.html#c3
LUC WILL BE ADJUSTING THE SECONDARY TURNS # TODAY TO INCREASE THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD - TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT CASE.
Thane
Since it's so difficult to read the meters in the photos, can you just report the results in a table similar to the one in the link you provided for conventional transformer response? The photos also cause the overunity.com message pages to take longer to load. One would be enough to show the setup. Thanks.
Quote from: aether22 on April 11, 2008, 07:23:57 AM
BTW should it prove useful to anyone here are ways to increase the power of the effect:
Number of magnet poles on rotor
RPM
Number of turns
More coils?
Stator closer to rotor poles (it should increase effect as flux and induction should increase)
Better core and coil form (assuming hoptoads observations are relevant)
Shorter more direct path to motor
In terms of efficiency parameters ...........
For RPM & number of magnets : simplify to "frequency"
For number (and gauge) of turns, and number of coils: simplify to "impedance"
For air gap : no simplification, because the optimimum gap is dependant on magnet strength and length, and core material and core length.
Better core and coil form : no need to simplify!
Cheers all.
Quote from: aether22 on April 11, 2008, 06:20:34 AM
Whoever keeps changing the subject of this thread, can you maybe not?
It can make it hard to keep track of it!
That's RunningBare. It's a bad idea to carry on a conversation in a thread that he starts, because when the conversation goes in directions he doesn't approve of, he gets peevish about it and tries to kill the thread by changing the subject.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 11, 2008, 10:57:12 AM
That's RunningBare. It's a bad idea to carry on a conversation in a thread that he starts, because when the conversation goes in directions he doesn't approve of, he gets peevish about it and tries to kill the thread by changing the subject.
It's an annoyance for sure. Maybe time to start a new Heins thread with a more helpful title, and just link to this one.
While we're on peevish, nothing beats the completely shameful and outrageous censorship going on in the new Stiffler section. Used to be an interesting conversation to follow, but now it's just mildly creepy. Give me wandering off topic and mild shenanigans any day over being muzzled by a diva under the guise of 'staying focused'.
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 11, 2008, 09:42:10 AM
Since it's so difficult to read the meters in the photos, can you just report the results in a table similar to the one in the link you provided for conventional transformer response? The photos also cause the overunity.com message pages to take longer to load. One would be enough to show the setup. Thanks.
I AM SORRY ABOUT THE OUTPUT VOLTAGE METER READINGS - THAT IS WHY I SAID,
"IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE BUT THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD REMAINS STABLE AT AROUND 2.9 VOLTS THROUGHOUT AS WELL."THE OUTPUT VOLTAGE WAS NOT ALL THAT RELEVANT TO US ANYWAY AT THIS TIME - WHAT
IS RELEVANT IS
THE PRIMARY RESPONSE TO THE SECONDARY LOAD.I JUST SENT CONVENTIONAL TOROID TRANSFORMER PHOTO-DATA TO JM FOR POSTING - YOU WILL NOTICE THE PRIMARY POWER RANGE FROM
0 W AT 1 M ohm LOAD TO
10 W AT 20 ohm LOAD.
ALSO WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO US IS THE VOLTAGE IS
SELF-REGULATED AND DOES NOT COLAPSE ACROSS THE LOAD (2.9 VOLTS) WHEN THE LOAD IS CHANGED (AND NOT AIDED ) BY THE PRIMARY.
IN THE CONVENTIONAL TOROID THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD @
1 M ohms = 19.63 V,
20 ohms = 11.95 V,
1 ohm. = 1.43 V WITH A HUGE PRIMARY POWER INCREASE WHICH DOES NOT OCCUR IN OURS.
Thane
I'll try Lurker's suggestion for the data presentation, and maybe those who have an interest can indicate which they prefer.
Quote from: JustMe on April 11, 2008, 12:41:55 PM
I'll try Lurker's suggestion for the data presentation, and maybe those who have an interest can indicate which they prefer.
VERY NICE JM - IT IT POSSIBLE TO GET THE SAME TABLE FOR THE BI-TOROID?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on April 11, 2008, 11:16:57 AM
It's an annoyance for sure. Maybe time to start a new Heins thread with a more helpful title, and just link to this one.
While we're on peevish, nothing beats the completely shameful and outrageous censorship going on in the new Stiffler section. Used to be an interesting conversation to follow, but now it's just mildly creepy. Give me wandering off topic and mild shenanigans any day over being muzzled by a diva under the guise of 'staying focused'.
The Stiffler section has its good and bad aspects. Good aspect : At least it is staying on topic of a replication thread whereas the Tri-force replication thread turned into another SMOT thread by mostly one poster. :'( Good/Bad aspect : One poster made some relevant and insightful comments about the similarity between Stiffler's work and Tesla's work & patents. This got suppressed pretty fast. A bit heavy handed. On the other hand the chance of the thread turning into another SMOT or Tesla thread will be null which is a good thing since we already have tons of those threads already. Making process usually means 'staying focused'. This thread has been slightly 'humorous' but frankly if Heins makes his own replication thread with a 'constant' title that Stephen would allow Heins to control postings just maybe there would be more willing replicators like myself. It gets a bit tiring and non-productive reading through pages and pages of 'carp' ;D trying to dig out the useful replication information. I am all for Heins starting his own 'controlled' thread and we can keep this one around for 'carping'. :o
Quote from: OilBarren on April 11, 2008, 01:05:35 PM
VERY NICE JM - IT IT POSSIBLE TO GET THE SAME TABLE FOR THE BI-TOROID?
I agree, the table is very good.
I noticed in the photo that you appear to be using an Ohmite Ohm Ranger resistance box to select different loads. If that's the case and it's a model 3420, you should be aware that its power rating is only 1/2 watt. You will overheat and likely damage one or more resistors in the box if you exceed that rating for a sufficient length of time.
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 11, 2008, 04:20:11 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 11, 2008, 01:05:35 PM
VERY NICE JM - IT IT POSSIBLE TO GET THE SAME TABLE FOR THE BI-TOROID?
I agree, the table is very good.
I noticed in the photo that you appear to be using an Ohmite Ohm Ranger resistance box to select different loads. If that's the case and it's a model 3420, you should be aware that its power rating is only 1/2 watt. You will overheat and likely damage one or more resistors in the box if you exceed that rating for a sufficient length of time.
THANKS
PB - ER SORRY
PL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 11, 2008, 11:37:14 AM
ALSO WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO US IS THE VOLTAGE IS SELF-REGULATED AND DOES NOT COLAPSE ACROSS THE LOAD (2.9 VOLTS) WHEN THE LOAD IS CHANGED (AND NOT AIDED ) BY THE PRIMARY.
I have tried to make out all the meter reading from the photos. What I see is that between 100 ohms and 10 ohms load the input power stays fairly constant at around 1 Watt whereas the output power varies from about 0.1 Watts to 0.4 Watts.
What you have is a transformer that maintains a constant input power over a wide range of output power. You have successfully isolated the primary from the secondaries, and this may have some practical use, but so far it comes at a high cost: the output power is considerably less than the input power.
I modified Post #1610 to include the chart data for the bi-toroid. I did it at home with slightly different software, so they're not perfectly aligned, but still suitable for comparison. I didn't bother with the efficiencies because the volts out were not completely readable in most cases, but it has been noted that the efficiencies are not high at this time.
Here is a close up of the new bi-toroid:
Quote from: aether22 on April 11, 2008, 07:23:57 AM
Again if you could drop a line or 2 on how you wound your coils, by hand? or with some motorized setup? (winding by hand tends to twist and break wire)
Hi aether22,
I wind my cores by drilling the core size in a small piece of wood, not completely thru, then drilling a smaller hole size in the wood to insert a shorten nail. The nail is inserted into my variable speed drill chuck. The predrilled wood is attached to the core with tape. The other side is the same setup, but the nail is just inserted into whatever long hole is available. Start off slow and just hand move the wire slowly back and forth. A lot of wire can be loaded in a short time. I use 28 guage wire and don't have any twist or breaks just pulling off the top edge of a large spool sitting on the floor. LIke putting line on a spinning reel.
Good Luck,
Larry
Quote from: JustMe on April 11, 2008, 11:35:04 PM
I modified Post #1610 to include the chart data for the bi-toroid. I did it at home with slightly different software, so they're not perfectly aligned, but still suitable for comparison. I didn't bother with the efficiencies because the volts out were not completely readable in most cases, but it has been noted that the efficiencies are not high at this time.
Here is a close up of the new bi-toroid:
@Thane,
Is your new secondary core coiled soft steel? Does the clamp make a difference in performance? I noticed a large vibration in my bi-rectangular version, does the clamp improve the output?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 11, 2008, 04:20:11 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 11, 2008, 01:05:35 PM
VERY NICE JM - IT IT POSSIBLE TO GET THE SAME TABLE FOR THE BI-TOROID?
I agree, the table is very good.
I noticed in the photo that you appear to be using an Ohmite Ohm Ranger resistance box to select different loads. If that's the case and it's a model 3420, you should be aware that its power rating is only 1/2 watt. You will overheat and likely damage one or more resistors in the box if you exceed that rating for a sufficient length of time.
Wow, how fortunate, this thread has recently loss a Electronic equipment tester expert somewhere in the world, maybe Germany! Now you appear to help up in our blackest hour. Thanks, as Thane doesn't know anything about watt's or snot's or maybe Shots (doubt that), can't remember got bad CRS.
Larry, Thanks very much for the method.
Though I think with a hole saw (unless I switch to a spade bit) I will need to cut the wood through to sever it and then glue the 2 pieces back together, still it's the best idea yet so I think I'll do it, just need to swap the hole saw size I just bought for one slightly smaller. (I'll ensure that the coil can be moved over the core so they coil can be pushed back to the edge of the core once the wooden holder is off it)
I just tested the largest single coil I previously made with all 18 magnets and no acceleration was apparent so it is increasingly clear my .53 (approx 23 gauge) wire is all wrong.
Though it is possible that adding more coils mas a greater effect than adding the same number of turns to a single coil.
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 11, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
What you have is a transformer that maintains a constant input power over a wide range of output power. You have successfully isolated the primary from the secondaries, and this may have some practical use, but so far it comes at a high cost: the output power is considerably less than the input power.
1ST STEP - ISOLATE PRIMARY (check)
2ND STEP - EFFICIENCY OTIMIZATION (in progress)
YESTERDAY LUC MADE AN NEW PRIMARY AND AT A
1 ohm LOAD WE NOW HAVE OUR
BI-TOROID EFFICIENCY AT 65% AND WITH THE
CONVENIONAL TOROID IT IS 18% AT 1 ohms.
POWER FACTOR DOES NOT DEVIATE FROM OPEN CIRCUIT TO SHORT CIRCUIT.
INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY IS NOW A "SIMPLE" MATTER OF INCREASING SECONDARY AND/OR PRIMARY TURNS RATIO.
AS LONG AS THE SECONDARY DOES
NOT SATURATE AND BLEED BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY THE EFFICIENCY CAN BE VIRTUALLY ANY NUMBER BECAUSE THE SECONDARY SELF-REGULATES ITSELF AND THE PRIMARY
ONLY SUPPLIES
REACTIVE CURRENT.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on April 12, 2008, 12:29:00 AM
@Thane,
Is your new secondary core coiled soft steel? Does the clamp make a difference in performance? I noticed a large vibration in my bi-rectangular version, does the clamp improve the output?
Thanks,
Larry
LARRY,
MAGNETIC METALS WERE KIND ENOUGH TO SUPPLY LUC WITH 2 NEW SECONDARY TOROIDS. PERHAPS LUC CAN UPLOAD THE METAL SPECS AT SOME POINT.
WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THE SECONDARY IS SUPER PERMALLOY WITH A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF 200,000 WHICH IS 20 TIMES HIGHER THAN CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER STEEL - THIS PROVIDES THE SECONDARY WITH HIGHER FIELD MAGNIFICATION - LOWER RELUCTANCE - LOWER COERCIVE FORCE - AND LOWER REMNANT FLUX WHICH ALL ADDS UP TO A THINNER HYSTERISIS CURVE.
AGAIN THE PRIMARY IS REMOVABLE - SO THE CLAMP DECREASES THE AIR GAP BETWEEN THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY - REDUCES EDDY CURRENTS AND INCREASES PRIMARY TO SECONDARY FLUX TRANSFER IN OUR PROTOTYPE(which is not optimized to provide efficiency but is designed to demonstrate proof of concept - f_ck!) AND
SO YES IT DOES IMPROVE THE OUTPUT.Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 08:21:03 AM
THE PRIMARY ONLY SUPPLIES REACTIVE CURRENT.
By this do you mean the current in the primary is 90 degrees out of phase with the voltage and the power factor displayed on the meter in your photos as cos theta is essentially zero?
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 12, 2008, 09:17:46 AM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 08:21:03 AM
THE PRIMARY ONLY SUPPLIES REACTIVE CURRENT.
By this do you mean the current in the primary is 90 degrees out of phase with the voltage and the power factor displayed on the meter in your photos as cos theta is essentially zero?
ONCE THE PROTOTYPE IS OPTIMIZED -
THAT IS EXACTLY ONE OF THE OPERATIONAL PARAMATERS.THE PRIMARY IS ISOLATED AND WILL OPERATE WITH A Pf = 0 AND SHOULD NOT DEVIATE FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 09:47:32 AM
ONCE THE PROTOTYPE IS OPTIMIZED - THAT IS EXACTLY ONE OF THE OPERATIONAL PARAMATERS.
THE PRIMARY IS ISOLATED AND WILL OPERATE WITH A Pf = 0 AND SHOULD NOT DEVIATE FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD.
Take as much time as you need to improve the prototype, but when you take the next set of measurements can you apply the 100 ohm load first and set the input voltage high enough to get cos theta readings that are non-zero on the meter.Ã, Then increase the voltage slightly to make them stable.Ã,Â
I suspect the meter defaults to displaying exactly zero when there is insufficient input for it to do its measurements.Ã, In that case zero means indeterminate.Ã, No-one should expect you to produce a power factor of zero; your primary coil still has resistance.
Quote from: PerpetualLurker on April 12, 2008, 10:16:14 AM
Take as much time as you need to improve the prototype, but when you take the next set of measurements can you apply the 100 ohm load first and set the input voltage high enough to get cos theta readings that are non-zero on the meter. Then increase the voltage slightly to make them stable.
I suspect the meter defaults to displaying exactly zero when there is insufficient input for it to do its measurements. In that case zero means indeterminate. No-one should expect you to produce a power factor of zero; your primary coil still has resistance.
Saying "Take as much time as you need to improve the prototype" is pompous and assy. Appointing yourself the meter police (25% of your posts now) is pompous and assy, and no one will hear. Pontificating on protocol is pompous and assy, and no one will follow. Surely you must know all this, which leaves your motivations as elusive as they are tiring. Stating the readily apparent insults *everyone*.
You seem fond of not-so-subtle digs at the competence and genuineness of others, and yet you're well on your way to becoming a caricature (again?). Why don't you try being upfront? People could respect that. Some actual honest and insightful discussion just might ensue. Would be a lot more interesting than round two of a dull cat and mouse game that is likely to see you mostly tuned out, and your contribution marginalized more than your intelligence and interest warrants.
Quote from: JustMe on April 12, 2008, 12:46:00 PM
Saying "Take as much time as you need to improve the prototype" is pompous and assy. Appointing yourself the meter police (25% of your posts now) is pompous and assy, and no one will hear. Pontificating on protocol is pompous and assy, and no one will follow. Surely you must know all this, which leaves your motivations as elusive as they are tiring. Stating the readily apparent insults *everyone*.
You seem fond of not-so-subtle digs at the competence and genuineness of others, and yet you're well on your way to becoming a caricature (again?). Why don't you try being upfront? People could respect that. Some actual honest and insightful discussion just might ensue. Would be a lot more interesting than round two of a dull cat and mouse game that is likely to see you mostly tuned out, and your contribution marginalized more than your intelligence and interest warrants.
AND BEING AN OBVIOUS PENGUINS FAN DOESN'T HELP MUCH RIGHT NOW EITHER.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 01:41:51 PM
AND BEING AN OBVIOUS PENGUINS FAN DOESN'T HELP MUCH RIGHT NOW EITHER.
Thane
NO IT DOESN'T. And you're right. It's totally obvious. P(lays) L(ots) is clearly Sidney Crosby.
Between the Polarbreezes and the %$&#* Penguins, all I want to do is go to the equator and stay there.
Sniff. :'(
Monday is another day.
Quote from: aether22 on April 12, 2008, 06:45:57 AM
Larry, Thanks very much for the method.
Though I think with a hole saw (unless I switch to a spade bit) I will need to cut the wood through to sever it and then glue the 2 pieces back together, still it's the best idea yet so I think I'll do it, just need to swap the hole saw size I just bought for one slightly smaller. (I'll ensure that the coil can be moved over the core so they coil can be pushed back to the edge of the core once the wooden holder is off it)
I just tested the largest single coil I previously made with all 18 magnets and no acceleration was apparent so it is increasingly clear my .53 (approx 23 gauge) wire is all wrong.
Though it is possible that adding more coils mas a greater effect than adding the same number of turns to a single coil.
Wanted to pass some more info about my setup. The spool is 6" in diameter (luckily got it for a Newman motor try in the late 80's) and the largest coil Ohm that I wound was 18. So I'm not sure how a different size spool and 11 times the coil length would effect any possible twist or breaks.
I tape heavy cardboard at a desired distance from each end of the core to act as a temporary bobbin. Needed 10 MM for the transformer members.
Let me know how you do. I'll be winding my 200 in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 12, 2008, 04:32:02 PM
Quote from: aether22 on April 12, 2008, 06:45:57 AM
Larry, Thanks very much for the method.
Though I think with a hole saw (unless I switch to a spade bit) I will need to cut the wood through to sever it and then glue the 2 pieces back together, still it's the best idea yet so I think I'll do it, just need to swap the hole saw size I just bought for one slightly smaller. (I'll ensure that the coil can be moved over the core so they coil can be pushed back to the edge of the core once the wooden holder is off it)
I just tested the largest single coil I previously made with all 18 magnets and no acceleration was apparent so it is increasingly clear my .53 (approx 23 gauge) wire is all wrong.
Though it is possible that adding more coils mas a greater effect than adding the same number of turns to a single coil.
Wanted to pass some more info about my setup. The spool is 6" in diameter (luckily got it for a Newman motor try in the late 80's) and the largest coil Ohm that I wound was 18. So I'm not sure how a different size spool and 11 times the coil length would effect any possible twist or breaks.
I tape heavy cardboard at a desired distance from each end of the core to act as a temporary bobbin. Needed 10 MM for the transformer members.
Let me know how you do. I'll be winding my 200 in the next couple of days.
Thanks,
Larry
Thanks for that, the problem with twising and breaking really only happens to a great degree if you don't rotate the core but just circle the core with your hands, it is especially bad if you are winding smaller diameter coils.
So it doesn't apply to this where the core is rotated.
DEAR ALL,
I JUST SENT JM SOME NEW GENERATOR TESTS PERFORMED TODAY.
THE FIRST COUPLE OF PICTURES SHOW 2 MOTORS CONNECTED TOGETHER VIA
2 FEET OF PVC PIPE.
I ALSO UPLOADED THEM HERE: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=H2J9HSQI
IN CASE JM HAS ALREADY GONE SOUTH OR IN CASE WE DON'T POST PHOTOS ANY LONGER?
THERE IS A SWITCH MOUNTED BETWEEN THE MOTORS TO DETERMINE IF BOTH MOTORS CAN PRODUCE ACCELERATION INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH OTHER - ACTUALLY THE TEST IS TO DETERMINE IF THE MOTOR HAS ANY EFFECT AT ALL?
IT WOULD APPEAR THEY DO NOT DUE TO THE FACT THAT ACCELERATION OCCURS IN BOTH MOTORS VIRTUALLY EQUALLY.
THE NEXT 2 PHOTOS SHOW OUR NEW MICROWAVE TRANSFORMER QUAD COIL WHICH HAS 2 HIGH VOLTAGE WINDINGS (BACK) AND 2 HIGH CURRENT WINDINGS (FRONT).
THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS DECELERATE THE SYSTEM.
WITH 157 W INTO THE MOTOR THE HIGH CURRENT COILS PRODUCE ABOUT 20 W THROUGH A 1 ohm LOAD (NOT SHOWN). THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE SHORTED AND COMPENSATE FOR THE HIGH CURRENT COIL DECELERATION AND ACCELERATION IS OBSERVED RPM = 1500 RPM(approx)
WITH 173 W MOTOR INPUT AND THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS OPEN THE HIGH CURRENT COILS PRODUCE .0.17 W THROUGH A 1 ohm LOAD (NOT SHOWN) RPM = 20 RPM(approx).
Thane
P.S.
THERE IS ROOM FOR 12 COILS/ROTOR OR 24 COILS TOTAL.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 08:28:14 PM
DEAR ALL,
I JUST SENT JM SOME NEW GENERATOR TESTS PERFORMED TODAY.
I have indeed relocated to the equator, and it's quite hot. The good news is if I squint really hard, I can see Aether22. I can still post pictures from here at the equator, but I have to get them first, which I haven't. Did you get them bounced back Thane? If not, try and resend.
Quote from: JustMe on April 12, 2008, 08:58:28 PM
The good news is if I squint really hard, I can see Aether22.
AETHER PULL YOUR PANTS UP YOU RASCAL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 08:28:14 PM
DEAR ALL,
I JUST SENT JM SOME NEW GENERATOR TESTS PERFORMED TODAY.
THE FIRST COUPLE OF PICTURES SHOW 2 MOTORS CONNECTED TOGETHER VIA
2 FEET OF PVC PIPE.
I ALSO UPLOADED THEM HERE: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=H2J9HSQI
IN CASE JM HAS ALREADY GONE SOUTH OR IN CASE WE DON'T POST PHOTOS ANY LONGER?
THERE IS A SWITCH MOUNTED BETWEEN THE MOTORS TO DETERMINE IF BOTH MOTORS CAN PRODUCE ACCELERATION INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH OTHER - ACTUALLY THE TEST IS TO DETERMINE IF THE MOTOR HAS ANY EFFECT AT ALL?
IT WOULD APPEAR THEY DO NOT DUE TO THE FACT THAT ACCELERATION OCCURS IN BOTH MOTORS VIRTUALLY EQUALLY.
THE NEXT 2 PHOTOS SHOW OUR NEW MICROWAVE TRANSFORMER QUAD COIL WHICH HAS 2 HIGH VOLTAGE WINDINGS (BACK) AND 2 HIGH CURRENT WINDINGS (FRONT).
THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS DECELERATE THE SYSTEM.
WITH 157 W INTO THE MOTOR THE HIGH CURRENT COILS PRODUCE ABOUT 20 W THROUGH A 1 ohm LOAD (NOT SHOWN). THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE SHORTED AND COMPENSATE FOR THE HIGH CURRENT COIL DECELERATION AND ACCELERATION IS OBSERVED RPM = 1500 RPM(approx)
WITH 173 W MOTOR INPUT AND THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS OPEN THE HIGH CURRENT COILS PRODUCE .0.17 W THROUGH A 1 ohm LOAD (NOT SHOWN) RPM = 20 RPM(approx).
Thane
P.S.
THERE IS ROOM FOR 12 COILS/ROTOR OR 24 COILS TOTAL.
Hi Thane,
Very interesting results!
Just a little info please. Where are you getting your MOT's and what are you using to make such clean cuts thru the MOT?
Also, can you tell me how much performance improvement was noticed when you went to the double magnets in the cups? Would like to know if I need to order more.
Thanks,
Larry
...
Thane,
Could you clarify the conclusions you drew from your two motor test? I didn't quite get that...are you moving away from the back-emf directly affecting the motor's magnetic fields theory?
Thanks,
JMe
Quote from: JustMe on April 12, 2008, 10:06:38 PM
Thane,
Could you clarify the conclusions you drew from your two motor test? I didn't quite get that...are you moving away from the back-emf directly affecting the motor's magnetic fields theory?
Thanks,
JMe
ACTUALLY I WANTED TO LET PEOPLE DRAW THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS I AM TRYING TO AVOID ANOTHER CRUCI-FICTION JUDGEMENT.
BUT I AM GOING TO HAVE TO GO WITH A
YES ON THAT ONE. THAT MOTOR THAT IS 2 FEET AWAY FROM THE ROTOR ALLOWS ACCELERATION - HARD TO IMAGINE FLUX GOING THAT FAR?
IT WOULD APPEAR THAT BACK EMF ENTERING THE MOTOR MAY NOT BE IT AT ALL.
THERE IS HOWEVER CERTAINLY SOMETHING FUNKY ABOUT THOSE HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSFORMER COILS THOUGH - WHICH POSE A WHOLE NEW SET OF QUESTIONS AND POSSIBILITIES - IT IS NICE TO SEE
REAL POWER AND ACCELERATION.
TOO BAD PB IS UP TO HIS/HER NECK IN SAUERKRAUT. HE-SHE WOULD HAVE A FIELD DAY HERE NOW.
@ LARRYC,
LUC COLLECTS MICROWAVES AND USES A GRINDING WHEEL TO TRIM OFF THE WELDING JOINTS AND IT COMES APART NICELY.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on April 12, 2008, 10:06:38 PM
Thane,
Could you clarify the conclusions you drew from your two motor test? I didn't quite get that...are you moving away from the back-emf directly affecting the motor's magnetic fields theory?
Thanks,
JMe
Thanks a lot JustMe,
I was fat, dumb and happy until you brought that up. Originally, I didn't fully understand the double motor comment from Thane, too interested in those good looking MOT's. You motivated me to read it again and again until I understood. Now my brain is gone to ache all night long (Round and round and round we go, for sure) . Enjoy the beach.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: OilBarren on April 12, 2008, 10:54:19 PM
IT WOULD APPEAR THAT BACK EMF ENTERING THE MOTOR MAY NOT BE IT AT ALL.
I agree wholeheartedly. My own (completely open magnetic system) experiments ruled that out. IMHO, Magnetic Phase Drift is the issue. The counter MMF changes it's oppositional phase relationship with the inducing MMF. Magnetic Phase Drift increases as the load (O/P current) increases to a point where the counter MMF cease to be oppositional.
Quote from: OilBarren
THERE IS HOWEVER CERTAINLY SOMETHING FUNKY ABOUT THOSE HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSFORMER COILS THOUGH - WHICH POSE A WHOLE NEW SET OF QUESTIONS AND POSSIBILITIES ......
The high voltage coils are obviously within the correct impedance range for the RPM and number of magnets (Frequency) available. Even the low impedance coils would eventually exhibit the same characteristics if you were using very high speed motor drivers, because, whilst the DC resistance of the coil remains steady, the impedance of the (any) coil increases with frequency. There appears to be a critical relationship between frequency, impedance and current within the coil, at which the effect kicks in.
The whole purpose of my own high speed experiments in 2001-2002 was to prove exactly that. That
even low impedance coils will work, given the correct design parameters. Why bother with low impedance coils? If you want a constant voltage supply capable of delivering large volumes and variations in current, then low impedance is essential.
I was looking for a more efficient alternator design for replacement in motor vehicles, and aimed all my experiments at the 14 Volt high current region of generation.
Understanding the nature and curvature of this phenomenon has been one of my latent desires since I first studied it in 2001. Understanding the relationship is IMHO the key to building optimized highly efficient open system generators. Lacking any model building capabilities in my current location and circumstances, I have to be satisfied at the moment with watching the outcomes of yours and others experiments. To that end I wish you all good luck. I have always maintained, that this is a useful effect. I'm sure when you've studied it further you will arrive at the same conclusion. :)
Quote from: OilBarren
- IT IS NICE TO SEE REAL POWER AND ACCELERATION.
Speaking from experience, I can only say YEP! Success, of any kind, is always a nice feeling ;) ......... KneeDeep
Cheers all
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 11, 2008, 10:57:12 AM
Quote from: aether22 on April 11, 2008, 06:20:34 AM
Whoever keeps changing the subject of this thread, can you maybe not?
It can make it hard to keep track of it!
That's RunningBare. It's a bad idea to carry on a conversation in a thread that he starts, because when the conversation goes in directions he doesn't approve of, he gets peevish about it and tries to kill the thread by changing the subject.
Fortunately the subject doesn't affect the bookmark so I've found that if I set a bookmark to a thread I can always get back to it whatever it's title.
-Mike
Quote from: polarbreeze on April 05, 2008, 03:55:08 PM
Quote from: JustMe on April 05, 2008, 02:20:36 PM
Could somebody jot down how efficiencies can be calculated from this data?
The formulas are in the attached spreadsheet. The new data yields:
EI core transformer = 68%
Conventional toroid = 95%
Potential Difference bi-toroid = 38%
PB
@polarbreeze
It looks liek the bitoroid is much less efficient that a regular toroid so what's its advantage? Toroid trafos are always extremely efficient, high nineties usually so even with some imporvement I can't see you beating that - what am I missing here?
-Mike
Quote from: springfield on April 13, 2008, 03:51:28 AM
It looks liek the bitoroid is much less efficient that a regular toroid so what's its advantage? Toroid trafos are always extremely efficient, high nineties usually so even with some imporvement I can't see you beating that - what am I missing here?
-Mike
MIKE,
CONVENTIONAL TOROIDS CANNOT EXCEED 100% EFFICIENCY BECAUSE OF
MUTUAL COUPLING. BECAUSE THE BI-TOROID EMPLOYS
UNI-DIRECTIONAL PRIMARY TO SECONDARY COUPLING AND THE SECONDARIES
SELF REGULATE THEIR OWN VOLTAGES ACROSS THE LOAD AND BECAUSE THE PRIMARY POWER DOES
NOT DEVIATE (IS ISOLATED) FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD - THE BI-TOROID CAN BEAT 99% EFFICIENT EASILY.
IF YOU REFER TO THE TABLES AT Reply #1610 YOU CAN NOTE HOW PRIMARY CURRENT RESPONDS TO SECONDARY LOAD DUE TO MUTUAL COUPLING IN A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER.
THE BI-TOROID PRIMARY CURRENT ONLY INCREASES DUE TO SECONDARY SATURATION BLEEDING BACK THROUGH THE PRIMARY.
Thane
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on April 11, 2008, 10:57:12 AM
That's RunningBare. It's a bad idea to carry on a conversation in a thread that he starts, because when the conversation goes in directions he doesn't approve of, he gets peevish about it and tries to kill the thread by changing the subject.
You speak as though I've done this before, would you like to cite the other times I've done this?
I'm having a bit of fun with my thread, boredom is a terrible thing ;D
Quote from: RunningBare on April 13, 2008, 03:28:31 PM
You speak as though I've done this before, would you like to cite the other times I've done this?
I'm having a bit of fun with my thread, boredom is a terrible thing ;D
Well, I dunno about here, but you killed a nice quote exchange thread over at Steorn the same way. As is the case here, other people, i.e., not you, had put a lot into it.
Each instance is exceedingly rude -- it hardly matters how many there are.
Quote from: JustMe on April 11, 2008, 12:41:55 PM
I'll try Lurker's suggestion for the data presentation, and maybe those who have an interest can indicate which they prefer.
@Justme
I like the tabel best. It's good to put just one pic to show the setup tho. The pics havea yellow memter called VOLTS IN but the table doen't inlcude that, it uses the grey box meter - whats the difference, which is the right one for input volts? Also would it be possible to fill in the -?- numbers in the table because there hard to read from the pics. Much appreciate
-Mike
To all those who have put so much into this I am very sorry for messing around with the thread title, it will now be titled "Thane Heins Perepiteia." and will be left alone, again I'm sorry, enjoy folks.
Quote from: springfield on April 14, 2008, 01:38:45 AM
@Justme
I like the tabel best. It's good to put just one pic to show the setup tho. The pics havea yellow memter called VOLTS IN but the table doen't inlcude that, it uses the grey box meter - whats the difference, which is the right one for input volts? Also would it be possible to fill in the -?- numbers in the table because there hard to read from the pics. Much appreciate
-Mike
Hi Mike,
I am assisting with the pictures, which I receive via e-mail. I don't have access to any data outside what I can see on the pictures either, so that's why there are '?' where the digits are unreadable. The pictures are usually quite clear, so any future ones are unlikely have this issue again.
I checked with Thane on the input volts issue before I put the table together and he suggested I use the volts measurement from the power analyzer (grey box) because it was true RMS.
Quote from: RunningBare on April 14, 2008, 04:23:47 AM
To all those who have put so much into this I am very sorry for messing around with the thread title, it will now be titled "Thane Heins Perepiteia." and will be left alone, again I'm sorry, enjoy folks.
Thanks RunningBare - I know that will be appreciated. Thanks also to Aether22 and Mr. Entropy for helping it happen.
Hi Thane,
Has the new setup with the right motor running and the left motor not running, but all still accelerating, been tested with your non-magnetic rotor coupling setup to the left motor?
Thanks,
Larry
Hi Thane,
"Has the new setup with the right motor running and the left motor not running, but all still accelerating, been tested with your non-magnetic rotor coupling setup to the left motor?
Thanks,"
Larry
HEY LARRY (YOU DUMB AND HAPPY FAT BASTARD),
NO IT HAS NOT BEEN TESTED, LUC ORDERED THE DUNE BUGGY MOTOR, TRANSFORMER COILS, AND MAGNETS TODAY AND I FILED THE PATENT ON THE NEW COIL CONFIGURATION (SEE BELOW)
IMPORTANT WARNING PLEASE NOTE: ANYONE WHO READS THIS PATENT APPLICATION MUST FIRST AGREE TO A DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT BY FLIPPING ME THE BIRD. VIOLATORS WILL BE SHOT THEN EATEN.
SO WE ARE FULL STEAM AHEAD IN MOTOR GENERATOR BUILDING MODE - I WILL POST SOME TEST VIDEO ON THE MORROW.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane C. Heins
169 Spring Street,
Almonte, Ontario
CANADA K0A 1A0
(613) 256-4684
The Commissioner of Patents
Ottawa/Hull, Canada
April 14th, 2008
Dear Sir,
Re: New PCT Patent Application
Title; REGENERATIVE BRAKING AND REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION COIL
Applicant; Thane C. Heins, Luc Choquette
Please find enclosed an application for patent filed under terms of the Patent Cooperation Treaty, comprising:
( x ) 1. Abstract on one (1) sheet;
( x ) 2. Disclosure on one (1) sheet;
( x ) 3. Claims on one (1) sheet;
( x ) 4. Drawings on (1) sheet;
( x ) 5. Request Form on (1) sheet
Respectfully submitted,
Thane C. Heins
Applicant
(Subsection 27 (2) of the Patent Act)
Petition for Grant of a Patent
1. The applicant, Thane C. HEINS, whose complete address is 169 Spring Street, Almonte, Ontario CANADA K0A 1A0 (613).256.4684 , requests the grant of a patent for an invention, entitled Regenerative Braking and Regenerative Acceleration Coil , which is described and claimed in the accompanying specification.
2. This application is a division of application number____________________, filed in Canada on____________________.
3. (1) The applicant is the sole inventor.
(2) The applicant is entitled to apply for and be granted a patent by virtue of the following:
(i) Thane Heins (name) of 169 Spring Street, Almonte Ontario, CANADA K0A 1A0 (complete address) is the inventor of the subject matter for which protection is sought by way of this application,
4. The applicant requests priority in respect of the application on the basis of the following previously regularly filed application:
Country of filing Canada Application number Filing date April 14th, 2008
5. The applicant appoints ____________________, whose complete address in Canada is ____________________, as the applicant's representative in Canada, pursuant to section 29 of the Patent Act.
6. The applicant appoints____________________, whose complete address is____________________, as the applicant's patent agent.
7. The applicant believes that in accordance with subsection 3.01(2) of the Patent Rules, the applicant is entitled to pay the fees at the small entity level in respect of this application..
8. The applicant requests that Figure No.1 of the drawings accompany the abstract when it is open to public inspection under section 10 of the Patent Act or published.
REGENERATIVE BRAKING AND REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION COIL
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] The present invention relates to electrical rotating machines and generators.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] In electric generators, when electricity is generated in a wire, the resulting current in the wire also produces a magnetic field. This induced back EMF magnetic field is typically treated as a form of loss or is employed as regenerative braking in electric vehicles. The regenerative action slows down the vehicle.
[0003] Accordingly, different methods of eliminating or employing these fields to create deceleration, acceleration or neither remains highly desirable.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0004] Further features and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the following detailed description, taken in combination with the appended drawings, in which:
[0005] FIG. 1 is a schematic illustration of an exemplary demonstration setup to illustrate aspects of a regenerative braking and acceleration coil of the present invention;
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
[0006] FIG. 1 shows a demonstration setup to illustrate the operation of the present invention. A high current coil 101 and a high voltage coil 102 are set on a ferromagnetic core material 103.
[0007] When the magnetic rotor 104 spins past the coil core 103 magnetic flux is transferred from the rotor to the core material 103 and voltages are induced in each coil according to Faraday?s Law
.
[0008] When a resistive load is placed on these coils, current flows in the coils and a magnetic field is produced by each coil according to Lenz?s Law.
[0009] The high current coil 101 causes the prime mover 105 to decelerate under load and the high voltage coil 102 causes the prime mover 105 to accelerate under load if the high voltage coil has a sufficient turns ratio.
[0010] When the high current coil 101 is loaded the system decelerates and could be employed in an electric vehicle as regenerative braking.
[0011] When the high voltage coil 102 is loaded the system accelerates and this could be employed in an electric vehicle as regenerative acceleration.
[0012] When both coils 101 and 102 are loaded their cumulative effect on the system is zero. Power is supplied to the load(s) but the system experiences neither deceleration nor acceleration.
[0013] The embodiment(s) of the invention described above is(are) intended to be exemplary only. The scope of the invention is therefore intended to be limited solely by the scope of the appended claims.
WE CLAIM:
1. An induction motor drive system, comprising:
- an induction motor drive unit with a stator and a rotor, the rotor coupled with an output drive member, the rotor operative to generate a rotor magnetic field to interact with the stator to deliver an operative torque sufficient to rotate the output drive member;
- a generator rotor unit coupled to output drive member, the generator rotor unit including a peripheral region with a plurality of magnetic pole sectors;
- a coil unit with a pair of conductive winding arrangements which are capable of carrying an induced current at an induced voltage levels therein in the presence of a moving primary magnetic field, the coil unit being located in an operative proximity to the peripheral region,
- the induction motor being operable to deliver sufficient operative torque to the output drive member to rotate the output drive member and the generator unit to generate a moving primary magnetic field in the presence of the coil unit, to generate the induced current in the winding arrangement, thereby to establish a secondary magnetic field in each coil,
ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE
A generating device is disclosed comprising a motor, an axle of the motor projecting from at least one end of the motor, at least one rotor mounted on the axle, at least one magnetic pole mounted on the rotor and a coil mounted in operative proximity with said magnetic pole.
1 of 1
Quote from: OilBarren on April 14, 2008, 07:16:13 PM
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
[0006] FIG. 1 shows a demonstration setup to illustrate the operation of the present invention. A high current coil 101 and a high voltage coil 102 are set on a ferromagnetic core material 103.
[0007] When the magnetic rotor 104 spins past the coil core 103 magnetic flux is transferred from the rotor to the core material 103 and voltages are induced in each coil according to Faraday?s Law
.
[0008] When these a resistive load is placed on these coils, current flows in the coils and a magnetic field is produced by each coil according to Lenz?s Law.
Hey, you guys have been busy little bees.
Okay, considered yourself flipped ..!..
I seem to understand the concept, but, I have a little trouble understanding the above words in bold. Is it just a typo 'When these a' instead of 'When a'? Don't want to be a word-a-hole, as we all make typo's, but I really want your patent to be accepted and I'm not sure if this an exact copy or online typed duplicate of your patent.
Thanks,
Larry
Here is an interesting patent, United States Patent Application 20030210003Tu, Yu-Ta ; et al. November 13, 2003, Apparatus for self-generating a driving force. It does exactly what your "new" invention does only with two cores instead of one, I can name three others as well but I don't think there is any point. I think we are all very lucky the patent examiners could not possibly find there ass with both hands, there is alot of stuff that falls through the cracks if you are looking for it. Tesla had this technology 80 years ago as well, so the saying--- "and the old becomes new again" --- apply's in this and many other cases.
Quote from: JustMe on April 14, 2008, 10:24:44 AM
Quote from: springfield on April 14, 2008, 01:38:45 AM
@Justme
Also would it be possible to fill in the -?- numbers in the table because there hard to read from the pics. Much appreciate
-Mike
Hi Mike,
I am assisting with the pictures, which I receive via e-mail. I don't have access to any data outside what I can see on the pictures either, so that's why there are '?' where the digits are unreadable.
Tx for fast response - so cld somone post the actual numbers then from that experiment? I'm not sure who has them? Tx
-Mike
Quote from: LarryC on April 14, 2008, 08:58:39 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 14, 2008, 07:16:13 PM
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
[0006] FIG. 1 shows a demonstration setup to illustrate the operation of the present invention. A high current coil 101 and a high voltage coil 102 are set on a ferromagnetic core material 103.
[0007] When the magnetic rotor 104 spins past the coil core 103 magnetic flux is transferred from the rotor to the core material 103 and voltages are induced in each coil according to Faraday?s Law
.
[0008] When these a resistive load is placed on these coils, current flows in the coils and a magnetic field is produced by each coil according to Lenz?s Law.
Hey, you guys have been busy little bees.
Okay, considered yourself flipped ..!..
I seem to understand the concept, but, I have a little trouble understanding the above words in bold. Is it just a typo 'When these a' instead of 'When a'? Don't want to be a word-a-hole, as we all make typo's, but I really want your patent to be accepted and I'm not sure if this an exact copy or online typed duplicate of your patent.
Thanks,
Larry
THANKS LARRY,
IT'S JUST A PROVISIONAL SO WE HAVE 13 MONTHS TO FIX IT UP EVEN MORE.
Thane
Quote from: springfield on April 15, 2008, 02:07:15 AM
Tx for fast response - so cld somone post the actual numbers then from that experiment? I'm not sure who has them? Tx
-Mike
LOAD ohms OUTPUT volts
1 M 3
100 3
50 3
30 3
20 3
10 3
1 2
Thane
p.s.
NOW PLEASE, LET'S ALL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR THE SENS WHO FELL 0 - 3
IN THE SERIES TO THE PENGUINS LAST NIGHT.
Quote from: allcanadian on April 14, 2008, 10:02:16 PM
Apparatus for self-generating a driving force. It does exactly what your "new" invention does only with two cores instead of one.
THANKS AC,
I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PATENT - WHEN PLACED UNDER LOAD DOES IT ACCELERATE THE PRIME MOVER AS WELL?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 14, 2008, 07:16:13 PM
NO IT HAS NOT BEEN TESTED, LUC ORDERED THE DUNE BUGGY MOTOR, TRANSFORMER COILS, AND MAGNETS TODAY AND I FILED THE PATENT ON THE NEW COIL CONFIGURATION (SEE BELOW)
IMPORTANT WARNING PLEASE NOTE: ANYONE WHO READS THIS PATENT APPLICATION MUST FIRST AGREE TO A DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT BY FLIPPING ME THE BIRD. VIOLATORS WILL BE SHOT THEN EATEN.
SO WE ARE FULL STEAM AHEAD IN MOTOR GENERATOR BUILDING MODE - I WILL POST SOME TEST VIDEO ON THE MORROW.
Thane
@Thane
I am both pleased with your recent successful change in the direction of your experiments, and your new found sense of confidence,
and very annoyed at your knee jerk action of applying for a patent, because the necessary information leading you to an understanding of the true nature of this "effect" was provided by others and myself in what I at least thought was "open source sharing".
I have "openly shared" my knowledge of "accelerating" coil systems, and knowing the importance of it's capability, I put it into the
public domain (without any patent application, at any time) since the
24th of September 2007. For those who haven't read my experiment and public invitation to others to replicate it, heres a link to my site:
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams Pages 8 and 10 are the relevant pages to this effect. Note that Robert Adams documented this effect in 1977 as it applied to his motor / generator system.
You and many others were very quick to deride and pass judgement on PB, who IMHO was only ever a proponent of seeking the truth. You derided PB for "not understanding" that this was a great effect with huge implications for
motor design?, yet you seem to be very quick to take the glory for later "discovering"
the real reason for the effect is in the generator. That is, after you had already been told numerous times, that it was a generator effect which had nothing to do with the motor.
The truth is, at this very early stage of your experiments, you have not the slightest understanding of this effect, yet you immediately want to personally capitalize on it, to the exclusion of others, and that saddens me a lot. I still wish you good luck with your research however, because better generating systems are needed, in all aspects of use.
But I'm sorry to say I have lost some professional respect for you at the moment.... :(
I really do think you need to
sincerely apologise to PB,
who was more right , though not completely correct, about the origin of the effect, indeed, than you were.
KneeDeep ....... Cheers still..
Quote from: hoptoad on April 15, 2008, 06:40:48 AM
@Thane
I am both pleased with your recent successful change in the direction of your experiments, and your new found sense of confidence, and very annoyed at your knee jerk action of applying for a patent, because the necessary information leading you to an understanding of the true nature of this "effect" was provided by others and myself in what I at least thought was "open source sharing".
I have "openly shared" my knowledge of "accelerating" coil systems, and knowing the importance of it's capability, I put it into the public domain (without any patent application, at any time) since the 24th of September 2007. For those who haven't read my experiment and public invitation to others to replicate it, heres a link to my site:
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams Pages 8 and 10 are the relevant pages to this effect. Note that Robert Adams documented this effect in 1977 as it applied to his motor / generator system.
You and many others were very quick to deride and pass judgement on PB, who IMHO was only ever a proponent of seeking the truth. You derided PB for "not understanding" that this was a great effect with huge implications for motor design?, yet you seem to be very quick to take the glory for later "discovering" the real reason for the effect is in the generator. That is, after you had already been told numerous times, that it was a generator effect which had nothing to do with the motor.
The truth is, at this very early stage of your experiments, you have not the slightest understanding of this effect, yet you immediately want to personally capitalize on it, to the exclusion of others, and that saddens me a lot. I still wish you good luck with your research however, because better generating systems are needed, in all aspects of use.
But I'm sorry to say I have lost some professional respect for you at the moment.... :(
I really do think you need to sincerely apologise to PB, who was more right , though not completely correct, about the origin of the effect, indeed, than you were.
KneeDeep ....... Cheers still..
YO HOPTOAD,
PERHAPS YOU SHOULD HAVE FILED FOR A PATENT - YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT THE PATENT PROCESS. SUCH AS
DISCLOSURE PRIOR TO FILING MAKES THE PATENT APPLICATION
NULL AND VOID.THAT IS WHY I DISCLOSED 2 DAYS PRIOR TO FILING.NOW
NO ONE IN THE WORLD CAN GET A PATENT - INCLUDING ME!
IT IS ON OFFICIAL RECORD AT THE PATENT OFFICE AND OFFICIALLY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
THE REAL TRUTH IS YOU DON'T KNOW ME AT ALL - NOR DO YOU KNOW WHAT MOTIVATES ME - HOW HARD I WORK - OR THE SACRIFICES I MAKE DAILY TO SEE THIS TECHNOLOGY THROUGH TO FRUITION.
THE ONLY APOLOGY I MAKE IS TO MY 2 DAUGHTERS - WHO I SPEND FAR TO LITTLE TIME WITH.
I COULD SAY MORE BUT THERE AREN'T ENOUGH FOUR LETTER WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY.
Thane
WELL we know you now THE RIGHT STUFF !! thanks THANE
Quote from: OilBarren on April 15, 2008, 07:10:27 AM
Quote from: hoptoad on April 15, 2008, 06:40:48 AM
@Thane
I am both pleased with your recent successful change in the direction of your experiments, and your new found sense of confidence, and very annoyed at your knee jerk action of applying for a patent, because the necessary information leading you to an understanding of the true nature of this "effect" was provided by others and myself in what I at least thought was "open source sharing".
I have "openly shared" my knowledge of "accelerating" coil systems, and knowing the importance of it's capability, I put it into the public domain (without any patent application, at any time) since the 24th of September 2007. For those who haven't read my experiment and public invitation to others to replicate it, heres a link to my site:
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams Pages 8 and 10 are the relevant pages to this effect. Note that Robert Adams documented this effect in 1977 as it applied to his motor / generator system.
You and many others were very quick to deride and pass judgement on PB, who IMHO was only ever a proponent of seeking the truth. You derided PB for "not understanding" that this was a great effect with huge implications for motor design?, yet you seem to be very quick to take the glory for later "discovering" the real reason for the effect is in the generator. That is, after you had already been told numerous times, that it was a generator effect which had nothing to do with the motor.
The truth is, at this very early stage of your experiments, you have not the slightest understanding of this effect, yet you immediately want to personally capitalize on it, to the exclusion of others, and that saddens me a lot. I still wish you good luck with your research however, because better generating systems are needed, in all aspects of use.
But I'm sorry to say I have lost some professional respect for you at the moment.... :(
I really do think you need to sincerely apologise to PB, who was more right , though not completely correct, about the origin of the effect, indeed, than you were.
KneeDeep ....... Cheers still..
YO HOPTOAD,
PERHAPS YOU SHOULD HAVE FILED FOR A PATENT - YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT THE PATENT PROCESS. SUCH AS DISCLOSURE PRIOR TO FILING MAKES THE PATENT APPLICATION NULL AND VOID.
THAT IS WHY I DISCLOSED 2 DAYS PRIOR TO FILING.
NOW NO ONE IN THE WORLD CAN GET A PATENT - INCLUDING ME!
IT IS ON OFFICIAL RECORD AT THE PATENT OFFICE AND OFFICIALLY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
THE REAL TRUTH IS YOU DON'T KNOW ME AT ALL - NOR DO YOU KNOW WHAT MOTIVATES ME - HOW HARD I WORK - OR THE SACRIFICES I MAKE DAILY TO SEE THIS TECHNOLOGY THROUGH TO FRUITION.
THE ONLY APOLOGY I MAKE IS TO MY 2 DAUGHTERS - WHO I SPEND FAR TO LITTLE TIME WITH.
I COULD SAY MORE BUT THERE AREN'T ENOUGH FOUR LETTER WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY.
Thane
Ups....
Owned?
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atvobsession.com%2Fpictures%2Fmoab041107%2Fimages%2F117.%2520PWNED%21%21%21.jpg&hash=da1c20d6eecac7fdad2f9209d9259a3486022985)
No?
@Oilbarren
QuoteI AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PATENT - WHEN PLACED UNDER LOAD DOES IT ACCELERATE THE PRIME MOVER AS WELL?
You may find this video interesting----http://www.forgotten-genius.com/03c198996114b5803/03c19899880c15601/index.php---- I was simply amazed that an unpowered device could produce accelerating forces like the ones shown in the video. As far as loading such a device goes we should remember it is "self-generating", there is no reason an external input could not be provided and this input magnified in the same process. We have to start thinking "input becomes output which becomes the next input" not ---- input discharges the source as we have always done.
As well I found a solution to your Bi-toroid, think of what your expectations are of the bi-toroid---what it is you hope to accomplish. Then read this patent--Tesla patent 381970--- the author describes how his invention will overcome all that he see's objectionable in conventional transformers, I believe he has succeeded in this and much more. Teslas patent 381970 has similarities to---Apparatus for self-generating a driving force.
QuoteTHE REAL TRUTH IS YOU DON'T KNOW ME AT ALL - NOR DO YOU KNOW WHAT MOTIVATES ME - HOW HARD I WORK - OR THE SACRIFICES I MAKE DAILY TO SEE THIS TECHNOLOGY THROUGH TO FRUITION.
THE ONLY APOLOGY I MAKE IS TO MY 2 DAUGHTERS - WHO I SPEND FAR TO LITTLE TIME WITH.
We are on the same page then, I have two little angels I made a promise too and part of that promise was to protect there future, and in this respect I will not fail them nor myself. I applaud your efforts and anyone else who is willing to make a difference.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 15, 2008, 07:10:27 AM
THE ONLY APOLOGY I MAKE IS TO MY 2 DAUGHTERS - WHO I SPEND FAR TO LITTLE TIME WITH.
Dear Thane,
Any chance they're any good on defence?
Thanks,
Brian Murray
Quote from: OilBarren on April 15, 2008, 06:32:16 AM
Quote from: springfield on April 15, 2008, 02:07:15 AM
Tx for fast response - so cld somone post the actual numbers then from that experiment? I'm not sure who has them? Tx
-Mike
LOAD ohms OUTPUT volts
1 M 3
100 3
50 3
30 3
20 3
10 3
1 2
Thane
@oilbarren,
Sorry to be picky but he numbres were 3 places eg 2.966, it's just that some of the digits were obscuerd i the photo. Cld u pls post all the numebrs to 3 decimal places? Tx, sorry again for being picky.
-Mike
Quote from: RunningBare on April 14, 2008, 04:23:47 AM
To all those who have put so much into this I am very sorry for messing around with the thread title, it will now be titled "Thane Heins Perepiteia." and will be left alone, again I'm sorry, enjoy folks.
Well done!
Quote from: springfield on April 15, 2008, 10:48:55 AM
@oilbarren,
Sorry to be picky but he numbres were 3 places eg 2.966, it's just that some of the digits were obscuerd i the photo. Cld u pls post all the numebrs to 3 decimal places? Tx, sorry again for being picky.
-Mike
SRRY THR MK BT I CN'T BCSE WE CHNGD R PRMRY TDAY.
BT THE VLTG WS SLF RGULTD. GD ENF 4 US.
THN
Quote from: hoptoad on April 15, 2008, 06:40:48 AM
I really do think you need to sincerely apologise to PB, who was more right , though not completely correct, about the origin of the effect, indeed, than you were.
KneeDeep ....... Cheers still..
Like hell he does. Which of PB's four or five theories do you refer to anyway? PB barely typed the word "generator" without the stifling embrace of those disdainful double quotes - hardly an indication he saw anything remotely important or useful about it's potential contribution. The "generator" was nothing more than an amusing little load on a beleaguered heat spewing motor. He was all about distilling this down to something conventional, useless and ridiculous. The inflexible and exceedingly intellectually arrogant positions of people like Polarbreeze are a key reason potentially important ideas and work do little more than collect dust for decades. That and the fact that sometimes it takes somebody to come along who is audacious and impatient enough to turn it all into something. Sir Alexander Fleming is the guy who gets credit for the discovery of penicillin - 50 years after it was first noted by somebody else. Others conducted extensive research in those preceding years as well, but never patented it. Some people are the type to walk into patent offices, and others are less so. That's just the way it is. Both types drive our collective knowledge forward in equally important ways.
Some new toroid results that Thane can explain more thoroughly. He included the following comments with the pictures:
"Luc is winding a new primary with 1000' - 2000' of the same 30 gauge wire seen in the photos - the results should be even better than these.
The current meter is reading each secondary individually."
Quote from: JustMe on April 15, 2008, 04:14:51 PM
Some new toroid results that Thane can explain more thoroughly. He included the following comments with the pictures:
"Luc is winding a new primary with 1000' - 2000' of the same 30 gauge wire seen in the photos - the results should be even better than these.
The current meter is reading each secondary individually."
WE ARE SIMPLY ENDEAVORING TO INCREASE THE IMPEDENCE OF OUR PRIMARY TO BRING OUR PRIMARY CURRENT DOWN. NEXT WE WILL INCREASE THE SECONDARY TURNS TO INCREASE OUR VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD.
SINCE WE HAVE ESTABLISHED AN ISOLATED PRIMARY THE (SELF REGULATED) VOLTAGE AND POWER ACROSS THE LOAD SHOULD INCREASE WHILE THE PRIMARY REMAINS UNCHANGED.
Thane
DEAR ALL,
SOME UBER COOL NEWS...
IT'S NOT EVERYDAY THAT A PERSON GETS THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO SPEAK TO NEIL YOUNG BUT I JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH HIM AND HE IS PLANNING TO COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO CHECK OUT OUR TECHNOLOGY FOR POSSIBLE INCLUSION IN HIS LINC-VOLT PROJECT. http://www.lincvolt.com/
SOME OF YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN WHAT THEY ARE DOING AS WELL.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 15, 2008, 07:34:37 PM
DEAR ALL,
SOME UBER COOL NEWS...
IT'S NOT EVERYDAY THAT A PERSON GETS THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO SPEAK TO NEIL YOUNG BUT I JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH HIM AND HE IS PLANNING TO COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO CHECK OUT OUR TECHNOLOGY FOR POSSIBLE INCLUSION IN HIS LINC-VOLT PROJECT. http://www.lincvolt.com/
SOME OF YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN WHAT THEY ARE DOING AS WELL.
CHEERS
Thane
This is your shot Thane!
Don't blew it...
:D
It looks like these guys are well connected
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/11/23/video-first-look-at-john-goodwins-diesel-add-on-kit/
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/10/20/biodiesel-turbine-super-capacitor-series-hybrid-hummer-60/
http://www.saeenergy.com/09_about.htm
You DO want to be associated with these folks, so now you will have to work double time to get the go-cart ready.
Edit: Do you need a volunteer type of help? I may consider giving you a hand in a few weeks. I am a computer guy myself and physics is really not my thing, but you may be able to use me for something?
I am sure many of us here on this forum would be wiling to help with busy work at the shop, just tell us what the rules are and maybe come up with a sign-up form.
ha thane ,
i see it now, you must be recontructing the steven marks tpu! now it all makes since! this is just another tpu replication!
right!!! just joking thane keep up the great work. even if it helps those tpu replicators. maybe even thane! i just hope you p- mail me when you do have something overunity to sell. I AM BUYING!!!!!
lol
sam
@AllCanadian
That interesting link at: http://www.forgotten-genius.com/03c198996114b5803/03c19899880c15601/index.php
Looks a lot like the Bedini Motor concept. Don't remember anyone geting the Bedini to run itself though.
Except for the one Mike built, but I don't think anyone has managed to replicate his device.
Maybe you should post that link there, if they haven't already seen it.
Do you know of anyone that has built this and got it to run itself?
Just curious, I live in Sarnia On. Where abouts do you live?
Harold.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 15, 2008, 07:10:27 AM
PERHAPS YOU SHOULD HAVE FILED FOR A PATENT - YOU MAY HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT THE PATENT PROCESS. SUCH AS DISCLOSURE PRIOR TO FILING MAKES THE PATENT APPLICATION NULL AND VOID.
THAT IS WHY I DISCLOSED 2 DAYS PRIOR TO FILING.
NOW NO ONE IN THE WORLD CAN GET A PATENT - INCLUDING ME!
IT IS ON OFFICIAL RECORD AT THE PATENT OFFICE AND OFFICIALLY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
@Thane - Thanks to available information I have learned something. F.Y.I. Patentability Requirements from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office
http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/patents/mopop/ch15-e.pdf
Stated Therein :
15.04 Grace period
The public disclosure of claimed subject matter by the applicant, or by a person who obtained knowledge of this subject matter directly or indirectly from the applicant, will not be used to object to claims for lack of novelty or obviousness unless such disclosure was made
more than one year (grace period) before the Canadian filing date (section 28.2(1)(a) of the Patent Act).
.....................................................................................
It is your right to choose to seek patenting or not, I only hope that you choose to continue to develop this effect in an open source environment. Empirical data is required to gain a greater understanding of the effect and increase the ability to derive the maximum possible benefit. The more data the better. Knowledge of
all the mathematical integrals involved in the acceleration effect is essential to successfully pre-designing and building optimised machines that will utilise it. Building specific power and usage models, requires pertinent knowlege, as is the case with any other motor/generator systems.
Good luck with your research. I hope your successes lead to further success, and an increased collective knowledge.
Quote from: OilBarren
THE REAL TRUTH IS YOU DON'T KNOW ME AT ALL - NOR DO YOU KNOW WHAT MOTIVATES ME - HOW HARD I WORK - OR THE SACRIFICES I MAKE DAILY TO SEE THIS TECHNOLOGY THROUGH TO FRUITION.
Thats all true. I dont know you or what makes you tick. I only know what you have written and shown, and I have responded according to how I tick.
Quote from: OilBarren
THE ONLY APOLOGY I MAKE IS TO MY 2 DAUGHTERS - WHO I SPEND FAR TO LITTLE TIME WITH.
If you spend far too little time with your daughters, then it is your loss as well as theirs. :( Apologies to them and to yourself would best made by spending more time with them. :) As for apologies to anyone else, it's your right to choose to apologise or not to whomever you want. Just as it is my right to offer an opinion, and your right to ignore it or agree or disagree.
Quote from: OilBarren
I COULD SAY MORE BUT THERE AREN'T ENOUGH FOUR LETTER WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY.
The fact that you're a practical hands on tinkerer, questioner and experimenter indicates you're creative, so I'm sure with a little imagination you could invent a few more words if you really needed to. :D :D :D
Good luck.
P.S. I envy you a little for meeting Neil Young. I have been a fan of his since the late 1960's :o
Cheers all
Quote from: hoptoad on April 16, 2008, 05:35:17 AM
P.S. I envy you a little for meeting Neil Young. I have been a fan of his since the late 1960's :o
Cheers all
DEAR HOPTOAD,
DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME BEING ENVIOUS - COME AND MEET HIM WHEN HE COMES?
THAT GOES FOR EVERYONE HERE. I AM SURE MR. YOUNG IS USED TO FANS.
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on April 16, 2008, 05:35:17 AM
Good luck with your research. I hope your successes lead to further success, and an increased collective knowledge.
THIS WHY I AM HERE!
I REMEMBER EARLY ON IN THIS THREAD (PAGES 1-5) SOME PEOPLE BLEW THIS OFF AS A HYSTERISIS BRAKE OR EDDY CURRENT BRAKE AND THAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE LOST WITH LAMINATED CORES.
THE EFFECT IS STILL THERE - IN FACT THE TWO HIGH CURRENT COILS CAUSE
DECELERATION WHEN EMPLOYED IN
PARALLEL AND CAUSE
ACCELERATION WHEN IN
SERIES.
(INTERESTING THING - MY VERY FIRST COIL - BACK IN 2003 WAS A LAMINATED TRANSFORMER CORE VERY MUCH LIKE THE ONES WE ARE USING NOW- I JUST FOUND THEM DIFFICULT TO MANIPULATE QUICKLY).
@ ADLEP,
YES WE COUL USE SOME GREASE MONKEY WORK ON GETTING THE DUNE BUGGY FRAME PREPPED - ARE YOUR HANDS DIRTY?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 16, 2008, 07:01:41 AM
Quote from: hoptoad on April 16, 2008, 05:35:17 AM
Good luck with your research. I hope your successes lead to further success, and an increased collective knowledge.
THIS WHY I AM HERE!
I REMEMBER EARLY ON IN THIS THREAD (PAGES 1-5) SOME PEOPLE BLEW THIS OFF AS A HYSTERISIS BRAKE OR EDDY CURRENT BRAKE AND THAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE LOST WITH LAMINATED CORES.
THE EFFECT IS STILL THERE - IN FACT THE TWO HIGH CURRENT COILS CAUSE DECELERATION WHEN EMPLOYED IN PARALLEL AND CAUSE ACCELERATION WHEN IN SERIES.
(INTERESTING THING - MY VERY FIRST COIL - BACK IN 2003 WAS A LAMINATED TRANSFORMER CORE VERY MUCH LIKE THE ONES WE ARE USING NOW- I JUST FOUND THEM DIFFICULT TO MANIPULATE QUICKLY).
@ ADLEP,
YES WE COUL USE SOME GREASE MONKEY WORK ON GETTING THE DUNE BUGGY FRAME PREPPED - ARE YOUR HANDS DIRTY?
Thane
That would be no problem. I will try to aim to visit in the 2nd, 3rd week of May for a few days. :)
@Abbarue
Take a look at the patent I posted then look at Tesla patent 464666 Electro magnetic motor, the question I think should be asked is why would teslas motor coils have both high current AND high voltage coils on the same core? ---- and what is there relationship to one another. And how does this relate to the nonsense we see happening in conventional electric motors. As this is thane's thread we should also ask why he is using as he says--- both high current and high voltage windings on the same core?
As far as bedini goes--- I was never a big fan of his work. ;D
Im in Alberta, a Power Engineer of 20+ years who quite a few years back figured out that we have it all wrong, energy is conservative in every sense that is the solution not a hinderance to what we desire. At this point I am producing more non-conventional behavior in my circuits than I could possibly understand, so as always it is a work in progress.
Quote from: allcanadian on April 16, 2008, 11:23:11 AM
@Abbarue
Take a look at the patent I posted then look at Tesla patent 464666 Electro magnetic motor, the question I think should be asked is why would teslas motor coils have both high current AND high voltage coils on the same core? ---- and what is there relationship to one another. And how does this relate to the nonsense we see happening in conventional electric motors. As this is thane's thread we should also ask why he is using as he says--- both high current and high voltage windings on the same core?
As far as bedini goes--- I was never a big fan of his work. ;D
Im in Alberta, a Power Engineer of 20+ years who quite a few years back figured out that we have it all wrong, energy is conservative in every sense that is the solution not a hinderance to what we desire. At this point I am producing more non-conventional behavior in my circuits than I could possibly understand, so as always it is a work in progress.
@allcanadian,
glad to see you are looking at this topic ;D. You are very knowledgeable and myself would always consider your advice.
This is the first time I look at Tesla's Patent 464666, I find it interesting. I hope that Thane's accelerating generator could eventually also be a motor (3 in one).
We will see.
Some more good stuff to come.
Stay tuned.
Luc
Quote from: allcanadian on April 16, 2008, 11:23:11 AM
As this is thane's thread we should also ask why he is using as he says--- both high current and high voltage windings on the same core?
WE ARE USING DIFFERENT COILS TO ACHIEVE DIFFERENT REGENERATIVE EFFECTS FOR OUR ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY:
1)
HIGH CURRENT COILS IN PARALLEL = REGENERATIVE BRAKING
2)
HIGH VOLTAGE COILS IN SERIES = REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
3)
HIGH CURRENT COILS IN SERIES = REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
4)
HIGH CURRENT COILS (PARALLEL) AND
HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (SERIES) = REGENERATIVE COASTING
5)
HIGH CURRENT COILS (SERIES) AND HIGH
VOLTAGE COILS (SERIES) = REGENERATIVE BRAKING
6) DC MOTOR IN GENERATOR MODE + ( # 5 ) ABOVE =
MAX REGENERATIVE BRAKINGThane
New photo data of the conventional toroid vs. the new primary from Thane & Luc. Thane added a note that he was sourcing out an oscilloscope current probe to double check the power factor to see if this is indeed over unity.
Quote from: JustMe on April 16, 2008, 11:15:44 PM
New photo data of the conventional toroid vs. the new primary from Thane & Luc. Thane added a note that he was sourcing out an oscilloscope current probe to double check the power factor to see if this is indeed over unity.
I WOULD ADD THAT UNFORTUNATELY WE CANNOT EXCEED 2.8 Vout WITHOUT SATURATING OUR SECONDARY AND CAUSING THE PRIMARY CURRENT TO INCREASE.
OUR CLAMP ON CURRENT METER GAVE US A PRIMARY CURRENT OF < 20 mA..
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS < 0.7 THEN THIS IS OU.
LUC WILL BE WINDING NEW SECONDARIES THURS. AND FRIDAY TO GET THE SECONDARY VOLTAGE UP BEYOND (SHADOW OF DOUBT) UNCERTAINTY RANGE.
ALSO WE PUT THE CONVENTIONAL TOROID IN THERE TO CONVINCE OURSELVES THAT THE POWER FACTOR METER WAS STILL WORKING ALTHOUGH AT SUCH A LOW CURRENT IT MAY BE WACKED.
I DON'T TRUST ANY METER UNTIL I SEE THE SAME NUMBERS 3 DIFFERENT WAYS.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 16, 2008, 10:40:57 PM
1) HIGH CURRENT COILS IN PARALLEL = REGENERATIVE BRAKING
2) HIGH VOLTAGE COILS IN SERIES = REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
3) HIGH CURRENT COILS IN SERIES = REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION
4) HIGH CURRENT COILS (PARALLEL) AND HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (SERIES) = REGENERATIVE COASTING
5) HIGH CURRENT COILS (SERIES) AND HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (SERIES) = REGENERATIVE BRAKING
6) DC MOTOR IN GENERATOR MODE + ( # 5 ) ABOVE = MAX REGENERATIVE BRAKING
Thane
Thane, from your own experiments and results, you can easily see by now, that I have not been misdirecting you with regards to establishing that impedance Vs frequency are the underlying key factors involved here. Of course magnet and core and coil parameters e.g size, length, turns etc are important subsets of those parameters which determine the correct (minimum) frequency for a given impedance, because they determine inductance, field strength etc.
All your above results are consistent with these key factors : impedance and frequency.
1. Two high current (low impedance) coils in parallel = regenerative breaking.
They comprise an impedance value of half the value of only one coil. That is Ztotal = 1 / Z1 + Z2
Where Z is the inductive reactance (impedance) of each coil. So you will have a lower impedance which needs a much higher frequency for the phase shift to cause an accelerative effect and not a decelerative one.
2. Two high voltage (higher impedance) coils in series = regenerative acceleration .
They comprise an impedance value of twice the value of only one coil. That is Ztotal = Z1 + Z2
So you will have a higher impedance which needs lower frequency for the phase shift to cause an accelerative effect (which you have) and not a decelerative one.
3. Two high current (low impedance) coils in series = regenerative acceleration .
They comprise an impedance value of twice the value of only one coil. Again that is Ztotal = Z1 + Z2
Again you will have a higher impedance which needs lower frequency for the phase shift to cause an accelerative effect (which you have) and not a decelerative one.
Note here that your low impedance coils in series form a
total impedance which is obviously enough ( for the rpm you're currently running at), because the accelerating effect is now apparent in the series configuration. You may have noticed in my alternator experiments, that the cores and coils were all individually
very low impedance. But all eight of them were hooked up in series. ;)
4) High current coils in parallel
and high voltage coils in series = regenerative coasting.
Good observation. If the two coil types are connect as two separated circuits, then it is likely the result of each separate coil circuit being slightly out of phase with each other as well as the inducing mmf.
5) High current coils in series
and high voltage coils in series = regenerative breaking.
For the same reasons as in 4 above, if the two coil types are separate circuits, then there will likely be a phase difference between them.
(Post edit) If all four individual coils were on separate cores, then this phase differential between the high and low cores would not be exist, provided all four cores were correctly placed with respect to each other.
In your experimental setup shown in the photos, the high and low impedance coils are located on the same cores but at differing distances from the magnet face. This means they will experience a time lag (phase difference) between them with respect to the changing inducing flux from the magnets. ...........
If all four coils (that is, high voltage and high current coils) are wound in series as a single circuit, the result will very likely be the same as your own examples 2 and 3 above. There is a limit on how high an impedance you can go before the effect is no longer accelerative, but from what I noticed of the coils you've shown, it is unlikely you will encounter that as a problem. Both low current coils in series would only have approximately the same impedance as one single high voltage coil.
6) 6) DC MOTOR IN GENERATOR MODE + ( # 5 ) ABOVE =
MAX REGENERATIVE
BRAKINGYep, exactly what you'd expect from a typical closed system. And if you get acceleration with this then you're a miracle worker. :o :D :D :D
Keep on keepin on.!
Cheers and KneeDeep :)
Quote from: hoptoad on April 17, 2008, 01:24:02 AM
2. Two high voltage (higher impedance) coils in series = regenerative acceleration .
@hoptoad
Cld you (or someone) give me an idea of what is regenerative acceleratoin? I get regenerative
braking but I don't get what the power flow is for regenerative
acceleration. In regenerative braking the buggy gives back its kinetic energy to charge the battery - that's easy. But if the buggy accelerates, it has to
gain kinetic energy which must use power and that power has to come from somewhere - form the batery I guess. So how does the "regenerative" thing come into play? Sorry to ask dumb questions but I'm trying to figure this out.
-Mike
QuoteThane, from your own experiments and results, you can easily see by now, that I have not been misdirecting you
.
I WOULD NEVER SUGGEST THAT YOU WOULD.
QuoteAll your above results are consistent with these key factors : impedance and frequency.
QuoteYou may have noticed in my alternator experiments, that the cores and coils were all individually very low impedance. But all eight of them were hooked up in series. ;)
I MAKE IT A POINT NOT TO REVIEW OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK - I AM AFRAID IT WOULD DISTRACT ME FROM MY OWN INTUITIVE PROCESS - SO I AM SORRY I HAVE NOT SEEN YOUR WORK.
QuoteYep, exactly what you'd expect from a typical closed system. And if you get acceleration with this then you're a miracle worker. :o :D :D :D
ABOVE THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD THIS SCENARIO WILL ALSO ACCELERATE.
THERE SHOULD BE A # 6 WHERE ALL COILS ARE IN PARALLEL WHICH WOULD PROVIDE MAX DECELERATION AND REGENERATION.
Thane
ps
AETHER22 DID TSUNAMI HIT YOUR HOMETOWN?
Quote from: springfield on April 17, 2008, 06:58:45 AM
But if the buggy accelerates, it has to gain kinetic energy which must use power and that power has to come from somewhere - form the batery I guess. So how does the "regenerative" thing come into play? Sorry to ask dumb questions but I'm trying to figure this out.
-Mike
TO PUT IT SIMPLY THE
MOTOR ACTION IN GENERATOR IS REVERSED FROM THE CONVENTIONAL LENZ'S LAW DECELERATION EFFECT TO AN ACCELERATIVE ONE. THE GENERATOR IS ACTING LIKE A GENERATOR
AND A MOTOR DRIVING THE SYSTEM AT THE SAME TIME.
MY AREA OF CONSIDERATION FROM A THEORY PERSPECTIVE HAS TO DO WITH THE VARYING COIL CAPACITANCE.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 17, 2008, 07:10:50 AM
Quote from: springfield on April 17, 2008, 06:58:45 AM
But if the buggy accelerates, it has to gain kinetic energy which must use power and that power has to come from somewhere - form the batery I guess. So how does the "regenerative" thing come into play? Sorry to ask dumb questions but I'm trying to figure this out.
-Mike
TO PUT IT SIMPLY THE MOTOR ACTION IN GENERATOR IS REVERSED FROM THE CONVENTIONAL LENZ'S LAW DECELERATION EFFECT TO AN ACCELERATIVE ONE. THE GENERATOR IS ACTING LIKE A GENERATOR AND A MOTOR DRIVING THE SYSTEM AT THE SAME TIME.
Thane
@oilbarren
Yeh I see that but what I can't see is where the extra energy comes from because after it accelerates it has higher kinetic energy so that extra energy has to be supply from somewhere. For example say teh buggy is 100kg and its running at 5m/s say it has 1250 joules of kintetci energy (1/2mv^2) - then say it accelerates to 10m/s then it has 5000 joules of kinetic energy. The motor-generator has to supply the additional 3750 joules. My quesiton is where does that extra 3750 come from? Must be form teh battery isn't it?
-Mike
@springfield
That is an overly simplistic view of what is required and only applies to the narrow confines of conventional technology, I think what thane is proposing is the non-conventional use of inductance and capacitance in a motor/generator system in which case none of your calculations apply. The "extra" energy is not supplied from anywhere, we conserve the energy we have---that was utilized in the circuit from the start.
@Oilbarren
QuoteMY AREA OF CONSIDERATION FROM A THEORY PERSPECTIVE HAS TO DO WITH THE VARYING COIL CAPACITANCE.
Varied coil capacitance, now your talking my language ;)
I just posted how one would do such a thing in the "Tesla patent 512340 Redux" thread, it seems Tesla had found a way to maximize the inturn capacity to unheard of values in a small volume coil and in the process counteract all self-induction. If self-induction or to be more precise the opposition to changes in current flow in relation to the primary are stored as inturn capacitance in the secondary then we are dealing with energy stored as an electric field between windings--- a capacitor, a transformation of energy.In this case this opposition to change we call Lenz Law has no place as there is no opposition, there is only a change in form. We do not need countless windings on our coils to do this, there is a much easier way.
Quote from: springfield on April 17, 2008, 09:39:56 AM
@oilbarren
Yeh I see that but what I can't see is where the extra energy comes from because after it accelerates it has higher kinetic energy so that extra energy has to be supply from somewhere. Must be form teh battery isn't it?
-Mike
YES OF COURSE FROM A BATTERY (SORT OF) OR MANY INDIVIDUCAL CAPACITORSLET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A
HIGH CURRENT COIL:
HIGH INDUCED REACTION FORCE
LOW DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE CAPACITIVE REACTANCENOW LET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A
HIGH VOLTAGE COILHIGH CAPACITIVE REACTANCE
HIGH DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE INDUCED REACTION FORCE CONSIDER A MAGNET APPROACHING A HIGH CURRENT COILWHEN A MAGNET APPROACHES A HIGH CURRENT COIL, THE COIL PRODUCES A LARGE
REPELLING FIELD -(TRYING TO KEEP THE MAGNET FROM APPROACHING) BECAUSE A LOT OF CURRENT FLOWS IN THE COIL DUE TO THE LOW IMPEDENCE.
WHEN THE MAGNET LEAVES THE COIL THE OPPOSITE OCCURS ? THE COIL THE CURRENT CHANGES DIRECTION AND THE COIL PRODUCES A HIGH
ATTRACTING FIELD ? (TRYING TO KEEP THE MAGNET FROM MOVING AWAY) BECAUSE A LOT OF CURRENT FLOWS IN THE COIL.
CONSIDER A MAGNET APPROACHING A HIGH VOLTAGE COILNOW CONSIDER WHEN A MAGNET APPROACHES A
HIGH VOLTAGE COIL VERY LITTLE CURRENT FLOWS BECAUSE OF THE HIGH IMPEDENCE IN THE COIL SO A
VERY SMALL REPELLING FIELD IS PRODUCED ?
THE MAGNET APPROACHES EASILY.
THE COIL BUILDS UP A CAPACITIVE CHARGE "slowly" AT THE RATE OF MAGNET APPROACH.
THE INSTANT THE MAGNET MOVES AWAY FROM THE COIL - THE COIL PRODUCES A CAPACITIVE DISCHARGE INSTANTLY THROUGH THE COIL RESISTANCE AND THE MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCED BY THE COIL'S CAPACITIVE DISCHARGE PUSHES AWAY THE RECEDING MAGNET WITH ADDITIONAL FORCE THUS ACCELERATING THE PRIME MOVER.
Thane
Quote from: allcanadian on April 17, 2008, 01:03:11 PM
@springfield
That is an overly simplistic view of what is required and only applies to the narrow confines of conventional technology, I think what thane is proposing is the non-conventional use of inductance and capacitance in a motor/generator system in which case none of your calculations apply. The "extra" energy is not supplied from anywhere, we conserve the energy we have---that was utilized in the circuit from the start.
@Oilbarren
QuoteMY AREA OF CONSIDERATION FROM A THEORY PERSPECTIVE HAS TO DO WITH THE VARYING COIL CAPACITANCE.
... we are dealing with energy stored as an electric field between windings--- a capacitor, a transformation of energy.In this case this opposition to change we call Lenz Law has no place as there is no opposition, there is only a change in form. We do not need countless windings on our coils to do this, there is a much easier way.
@AC
I can't make the numebrs workr for that? I'm just working out for that example were looking for 3,750 joules. The energy stored in a capacitor is (C.V^2)/2 so even if the inturn capacitance is 1 microfarad, which would be
extremely large, the voltage would have ot be about 90,000 volts to get that amount of energy!! So I canq't see how anywhere clost to that amount of energy (3,750 joules) could be stored in the inturn capacitance - what am I missing?
-Mike
@springfield
QuoteI can't make the numebrs workr for that? I'm just working out for that example were looking for 3,750 joules. The energy stored in a capacitor is (C.V^2)/2 so even if the inturn capacitance is 1 microfarad, which would be extremely large, the voltage would have ot be about 90,000 volts to get that amount of energy!! So I canq't see how anywhere clost to that amount of energy (3,750 joules) could be stored in the inturn capacitance - what am I missing?
Everyone wants to put Teslas words in there perspective, let's try his words and his perspective for a change. Tesla said--
Quoteas 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.
He did not say 1/2 of CVsquared, he did not say CVsquared divided by 2, he said "the capacity effect is proportionate to the square of this difference"---potential difference. That is E=CVsquared ;)
It's funny nobody gets this whatsoever, here is a hint----- If I apply a 50v alternating current at the resonance of Teslas coil the potential difference between wire A and wire B in patent 512340 is now 100v. I will explain this shortly in the Tesla redux thread, I don't want to get thanes thread off topic.
Quote from: allcanadian on April 17, 2008, 03:57:48 PM
He did not say 1/2 of CVsquared, he did not say CVsquared divided by 2, he said "the capacity effect is proportionate to the square of this difference"---potential difference. That is E=CVsquared ;)
@AC,
Seems to be that's pretty much the same thing - proportionate to CV
2 -Ã, the constant of proportinality just depends on what units you're using. But maybe we're talking at cross purposes. Could you pls post a link to the other thread you mentioned? tx!
-Mike
PS (latr) - I just had a look at the Tesla bi-filar winding patent, here http://www.tfcbooks.com/patents/coil.htm. He talks about the capacitance "neutralizing" the inductance. I think what he's actually talking about is a resonant circuit where the LC time constant is tailored to the operating frequency - and further he's buildin in the capacitance by the way he winds to coil, to avoid the cost of adding extrenal capacitance. Intresting stuff.
@springfield
QuoteSeems to be that's pretty much the same thing - proportionate to CV2 - the constant of proportinality just depends on what units you're using
LOL, thats how I always get in to trouble---assuming things ;D
Here is the link----http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4504.0.html
Quote from: allcanadian on April 17, 2008, 03:57:48 PM
@springfield
QuoteI can't make the numebrs workr for that? I'm just working out for that example were looking for 3,750 joules. The energy stored in a capacitor is (C.V^2)/2 so even if the inturn capacitance is 1 microfarad, which would be extremely large, the voltage would have ot be about 90,000 volts to get that amount of energy!! So I canq't see how anywhere clost to that amount of energy (3,750 joules) could be stored in the inturn capacitance - what am I missing?
Everyone wants to put Teslas words in there perspective, let's try his words and his perspective for a change. Tesla said--
Quoteas 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.
OK, so Tesla says the bifilar winding make (in his example) 250,000 times more effective internal capacitance. But the capacitance is still
very small and I still don't see where there's anywhere to store anything even remotely close on 3,750 joules (which would still need 1 microfrad and 90,000 volt!). And by the way I don't think this is a
source of energy - it's just a place to temporarily
store energy - so I'm still left wonderign where all those extra joules are goign to come from...?
-Mike
Quote from: OilBarren on April 17, 2008, 07:05:24 AM
[ABOVE THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD THIS SCENARIO WILL ALSO ACCELERATE.
@Thane
Have you actually tried this with a DC motor and observed an acceleration effect on S/C? What sort of DC motor? I have not observed it, but then, I used very low impedance commutator switched, shunt wound DC permanent magnet motors for driving and loading comparisons. I'm not surprised that I never observed the acceleration effect with these motors. And conventional theory says I shouldn't have been surprised. I haven't heard or read of anyone else (yet) that has observed this effect in a closed system.
I'm all ears now ! You might be a miracle worker after all ! :D :D
Quote from: OilBarren
THERE SHOULD BE A # 6 WHERE ALL COILS ARE IN PARALLEL WHICH WOULD PROVIDE MAX DECELERATION AND REGENERATION.
Correct. But verify it, if you haven't already. It is the most highly probable outcome, but don't take my word for it. The minor
magnetic phase differences between the low and high impedance coils connected in parallel on the same cores may yield unforseen results. I think that is unlikely, but try it and see. ?
P.S. - Just a minor correction to your considerations below
LET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A HIGH CURRENT COIL:
HIGH INDUCTIVE REACTANCE
should read LOW INDUCTIVE REACTANCE
LOW DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE CAPACITIVE REACTANCE
NOW LET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A HIGH VOLTAGE COIL
HIGH CAPACITIVE REACTANCE
HIGH DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE INDUCTIVE REACTANCE
should read HIGH INDUCTIVE REACTANCE
@All
Inductive reactance (XL) is like resistance (R) except that it only exists in a
varying magnetic or electric field or current, such as the
varying magnetic field of the magnetic rotor.
Inductive reactance (impedance) increases proportional to increases with frequency and/or inductance. A coil which produces
high current is low impedance. It has a low inductive reactance. The length and gauge of the wire determine the resistance, and the number of turns and core mass determine the inductance and inductive reactance. Both coils share the same core material, so the number of turns and gauge determine each coils impedance.
Impedance is always rated for a certain frequency. XL = 2 x pi x F frequency x L inductance that is XL = 2 x pi x F x L
Total impedance Z in a coil is the square root of the sum of the impedance XL squared and the resistance R squared. That is Z = sqrt (XL
2 + R
2)
Cheers all.
ABOVE THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD THIS SCENARIO WILL ALSO ACCELERATE.
QuoteHave you actually tried this with a DC motor and observed an acceleration effect on S/C? What sort of DC motor? I have not observed it, but then, I used very low impedance commutator switched, shunt wound DC permanent magnet motors for driving and loading comparisons. I'm not surprised that I never observed the acceleration effect with these motors. And conventional theory says I shouldn't have been surprised. I haven't heard or read of anyone else (yet) that has observed this effect in a closed systemI'm all ears now ! You might be a miracle worker after all ! :D :D.
MY FEELING IS THAT IF THE ADDITIONAL TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS IN SERIES IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE REQUIRED TO TURN THE DC MOTOR THE SYSTEM SHOULD ACCELERATE.
QuoteP.S. - Just a minor correction to your considerations below
YES WRONG WORD USE THERE - MY "
THEORY OF REVOLUTION" IS ALL ABOUT LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM IN A HOLISTIC WAY AND COMPARING:
A)
A HIGH CURRENT - HIGH INDUCED ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD - SHORTED COIL SCENARIO AND RESULTING DECELERATION (according to Lenz's Law)
VS B)
A HIGH VOLTAGE - HIGH ELECTROSTATIC FIELD - SHORTED COIL SCENARIO AND RESULTING ACCELERATIONIF
LENZ'S LAW APPLIES IN
( A ) ABOVE WHY CAN'T AN
ANTI - LENZ'S LAW APPLY IN
( B ) AS WELL?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 11:40:57 AM
ABOVE THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD THIS SCENARIO WILL ALSO ACCELERATE.
QuoteHave you actually tried this with a DC motor and observed an acceleration effect on S/C? What sort of DC motor? I have not observed it, but then, I used very low impedance commutator switched, shunt wound DC permanent magnet motors for driving and loading comparisons. I'm not surprised that I never observed the acceleration effect with these motors. And conventional theory says I shouldn't have been surprised. I haven't heard or read of anyone else (yet) that has observed this effect in a closed systemI'm all ears now ! You might be a miracle worker after all ! :D :D.
MY FEELING IS THAT IF THE ADDITIONAL TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS IN SERIES IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE REQUIRED TO TURN THE DC MOTOR THE SYSTEM SHOULD ACCELERATE.
A shunt DC motor operating characteristics is to hold a constant speed while serving a changing load, and the load can be entirely removed without danger to the motor.
A series DC motor operating characteristics is to vary its speed inversely to the load, and if the load is completely removed the motor will run away and possibly explode.
The series DC motor is much closer in operating characteristics to the AC induction motor and should produce similar results if the additional force is coming from the rotor.
Also, it is very interesting that Thane was able to get the induction motor above its rated max. At zero slip there is no induction, no current, no torque, because the rotor would be turning at the same speed as the rotating stator magnetic field. It is not capable of run away. How is it possible without some additional force being supplied?
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 11:40:57 AM
A)
A HIGH CURRENT - HIGH INDUCED ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD - SHORTED COIL SCENARIO AND RESULTING DECELERATION
(according to Lenz's Law)
VS
B)
A HIGH VOLTAGE - HIGH ELECTROSTATIC FIELD - SHORTED COIL SCENARIO AND RESULTING ACCELERATION
IF LENZ'S LAW APPLIES IN ( A ) ABOVE WHY CAN'T AN ANTI - LENZ'S LAW APPLY IN ( B ) AS WELL?
Just wondering. Does anyone know how low of a wire gauge was available to Lenz (1804 -1864) ? Lenz law presented in 1834. The insulated wire at that time was covered with cotton or silk.
Thanks,
Larry
QuoteA shunt DC motor operating characteristics is to hold a constant speed while serving a changing load, and the load can be entirely removed without danger to the motor.
A series DC motor operating characteristics is to vary its speed inversely to the load, and if the load is completely removed the motor will run away and possibly explode.
The series DC motor is much closer in operating characteristics to the AC induction motor and should produce similar results if the additional force is coming from the rotor.
Also, it is very interesting that Thane was able to get the induction motor above its rated max. At zero slip there is no induction, no current, no torque, because the rotor would be turning at the same speed as the rotating stator magnetic field. It is not capable of run away. How is it possible without some additional force being supplied?
Regards,
Larry
CLARIFICATION:WE ARE USING A PM BRUSHED DC MOTOR IN OUR VEHICLE. MY FEELING IS THAT IF THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE ACCELERATING HIGH VOLTAGE COILS
AND THE ACCELERATING HIGH CURRENT COILS (WIRED IN SERIES) IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR, THE MOTOR SHOULD ACCELERATE AND START TO ACT AS A GENERATOR .
SORRY WE
NEVER GOT OUR INDUCTION MOTOR ABOVE RATED MAX SPEED -
LUC TRIED AND BLEW UP HIS HOUSE.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 12:34:32 PM
SORRY WE NEVER GOT OUR INDUCTION MOTOR ABOVE RATED MAX SPEED - LUC TRIED AND BLEW UP HIS HOUSE.
Sorry, I got confused by your listing of ignorant statement - factual statement in response #1011 to PB. Didn't know if that was ignorant statement or factual statement, after all with enough added power it could be a fact. Should have understood with THE BEST ONE part of the statement.
THE BEST ONE:
OR THAT A MOTOR THAT IS OPPERATING AT ITS MAXIMUM SPEED AS DICTATED BY THE
LINE FREQUENCY - WILL SOMEHOW ACCELERATE BEYOND THIS MAXIMUM SPEED SO THAT
THE SLIP ANGLE BETWEEN THE ROTOR AND STATOR IS NOW LESS THAN ZERO?
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 18, 2008, 06:40:24 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 12:34:32 PM
SORRY WE NEVER GOT OUR INDUCTION MOTOR ABOVE RATED MAX SPEED - LUC TRIED AND BLEW UP HIS HOUSE.
Sorry, I got confused by your listing of ignorant statement - factual statement in response #1011 to PB. Didn't know if that was ignorant statement or factual statement, after all with enough added power it could be a fact. Should have understood with THE BEST ONE part of the statement.
THE BEST ONE:
OR THAT A MOTOR THAT IS OPERATING AT ITS MAXIMUM SPEED AS DICTATED BY THE
LINE FREQUENCY - WILL SOMEHOW ACCELERATE BEYOND THIS MAXIMUM SPEED SO THAT
THE SLIP ANGLE BETWEEN THE ROTOR AND STATOR IS NOW LESS THAN ZERO?
Regards,
Larry
HEY LARRY,
CAN YOU DO ME A FAVOUR?
CAN YOU CORRECT MY SPELLING MISTAKES WHEN QUOTING CONFUSING IGNORANT/FACTUAL STATEMENTS WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY BE FACT?
RE:OPERATINGTHANKS MAN
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 07:54:09 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 18, 2008, 06:40:24 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 12:34:32 PM
SORRY WE NEVER GOT OUR INDUCTION MOTOR ABOVE RATED MAX SPEED - LUC TRIED AND BLEW UP HIS HOUSE.
Sorry, I got confused by your listing of ignorant statement - factual statement in response #1011 to PB. Didn't know if that was ignorant statement or factual statement, after all with enough added power it could be a fact. Should have understood with THE BEST ONE part of the statement.
THE BEST ONE:
OR THAT A MOTOR THAT IS OPERATING AT ITS MAXIMUM SPEED AS DICTATED BY THE
LINE FREQUENCY - WILL SOMEHOW ACCELERATE BEYOND THIS MAXIMUM SPEED SO THAT
THE SLIP ANGLE BETWEEN THE ROTOR AND STATOR IS NOW LESS THAN ZERO?
Regards,
Larry
HEY LARRY,
CAN YOU DO ME A FAVOUR?
CAN YOU CORRECT MY SPELLING MISTAKES WHEN QUOTING CONFUSING IGNORANT/FACTUAL STATEMENTS WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY BE FACT? RE:OPERATING
THANKS MAN
Thane
More confusion caused on my part. In #1011 you seem to be pointing out false statements (due to ignorance on their part) made by the nay sayers and then pointing out the actual observed facts.
Example:
OR THAT EVEN THOUGH THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAN BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND THE EFFECT STILL REMAINS - IT STILL IS THE CAPACITOR THAT CAUSES THE EFFECTS?
False statement: THE CAPACITOR CAUSE THE EFFECT.
Factual statement: THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAN BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND THE EFFECT STILL REMAINS.
I only meant that when you said THE BEST ONE (of the false statements), I should have realized that you were pointing out the false statement of trying to operate an induction motor above its maximum rpm as dictated by its line frequency. The fact being that you can't have a slip angle less than zero in a normal induction motor. I was confused because if there was enough power back from the rotor it would be possible.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 18, 2008, 09:55:16 PM
More confusion caused on my part. In #1011 you seem to be pointing out false statements (due to ignorance on their part) made by the nay sayers and then pointing out the actual observed facts.
Example:
OR THAT EVEN THOUGH THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAN BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND THE EFFECT STILL REMAINS - IT STILL IS THE CAPACITOR THAT CAUSES THE EFFECTS?
False statement: THE CAPACITOR CAUSE THE EFFECT.
Factual statement: THE STARTING CAPACITOR CAN BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND THE EFFECT STILL REMAINS.
I only meant that when you said THE BEST ONE (of the false statements), I should have realized that you were pointing out the false statement of trying to operate an induction motor above its maximum rpm as dictated by its line frequency. The fact being that you can't have a slip angle less than zero in a normal induction motor. I was confused because if there was enough power back from the rotor it would be possible.
Regards,
Larry
FINE, FINE WHATEVER - HOW'S MY
SPELLING???
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 11:40:57 AM
ABOVE THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD THIS SCENARIO WILL ALSO ACCELERATE.
QuoteHave you actually tried this with a DC motor and observed an acceleration effect on S/C? What sort of DC motor? I have not observed it, but then, I used very low impedance commutator switched, shunt wound DC permanent magnet motors for driving and loading comparisons. I'm not surprised that I never observed the acceleration effect with these motors. And conventional theory says I shouldn't have been surprised. I haven't heard or read of anyone else (yet) that has observed this effect in a closed systemI'm all ears now ! You might be a miracle worker after all ! :D :D.
MY FEELING IS THAT IF THE ADDITIONAL TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS IN SERIES IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE REQUIRED TO TURN THE DC MOTOR THE SYSTEM SHOULD ACCELERATE.
@Thane, I wasn't referring to the acceleration effect of the open system alternator (generator) driven by a DC motor. I was referring to the effect (or lack thereof) when using a
DC motor in generator mode, regardless of what type of motor is driving it.
I achieved the acceleration effect readily using DC pm motors driving my open system alternator, but never once did I witness the effect when using the same DC motors to drive another DC motor in generator mode. This is in agreement with your previous posted statement,
"6) DC MOTOR
IN GENERATOR MODE + ( # 5 ) ABOVE =
MAX REGENERATIVE
BRAKING"
I am really very curious to know; have you actually witnessed, through experimentation, any acceleration effect during current loading,
when using a DC motor as a generator, regardless of driving motor type? If you haven't, do you know of anyone who has?
Cheers and KneeDeep :)
Quote from: hoptoad on April 18, 2008, 11:03:33 PM
I achieved the acceleration effect readily using DC pm motors driving my open system alternator, but never once did I witness the effect when using the same DC motors to drive another DC motor in generator mode. This is in agreement with your previous posted statement,
"6) DC MOTOR IN GENERATOR MODE + ( # 5 ) ABOVE = MAX REGENERATIVE BRAKING"
I am really very curious to know; have you actually witnessed, through experimentation, any acceleration effect during current loading, when using a DC motor as a generator, regardless of driving motor type? If you haven't, do you know of anyone who has?
Cheers and KneeDeep :)
# 6 SAYS
BRAKING TO ME?
WE ARE USING A DC MOTOR AS A PRIME MOVER AND THEORETICALLY IF THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE LOADED COILS IS GREATER THAN THAT SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR, THE MOTOR WILL ACCELERATE BEYOND THE SPEED DICTATED BY THE INPUT POWER AND START ACTING LIKE A GENERATOR - GENERATING POWER.
LUC IS TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF ELIMINATING THE MOTOR ALTOGETHER AND SHORTING COILS TO CREATE A SELF RUNNING SYSTEM - BECAUSE THE MOTOR SEEMS TO ONLY BE REQUIRED TO GET THINGS STARTED.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 11:15:14 PM
Quote from: hoptoad
I am really very curious to know; have you actually witnessed, through experimentation, any acceleration effect during current loading, when using a DC motor as a generator, regardless of driving motor type? If you haven't, do you know of anyone who has?
# 6 SAYS BRAKING TO ME?
WE ARE USING A DC MOTOR AS A PRIME MOVER AND THEORETICALLY IF THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE LOADED COILS IS GREATER THAN THAT SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR, THE MOTOR WILL ACCELERATE BEYOND THE SPEED DICTATED BY THE INPUT POWER AND START ACTING LIKE A GENERATOR - GENERATING POWER.
LUC IS TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF ELIMINATING THE MOTOR ALTOGETHER AND SHORTING COILS TO CREATE A SELF RUNNING SYSTEM - BECAUSE THE MOTOR SEEMS TO ONLY BE REQUIRED TO GET THINGS STARTED.
Thane
I'll assume the answer to my question is no. Good luck LUC with your self running experiment, if you try it. Cheers :)
This picture and description may help clarify how the perepiteia works:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg353.imageshack.us%2Fimg353%2F3678%2Fheinshorsevy6.jpg&hash=9ae1cf3b1323c364107e0ee008ce3253b91f1ecd)
In the steady-state situation the motor-horse and the generator-horse are both running extremely hard but the motor-horse is stronger so the generator-horse is dragged backwards and the apparatus rotates at a steady speed. Both the motor-horse and the generator-horse get very hot because they are expending large amounts of energy driving against each other. If the experimenter then attaches roller skates to the feet of the generator-horse, the apparatus accelerates dramatically while the motor-horse finds that it has to work less hard. This proves that the roller skates provide an as-yet untapped source of energy.
Patents on this idea are pending. However, it has been found that if the cross member is made of brass instead of wood, this cancels out the effect. That aspect is still under investigation. Also, the inventor is proposing an improvement whereby the motor-horse can be removed altogether so that the entire motive force is provided by the generator. This is a very promising approach since it requires only that the generator-horse be trained to trot backwards while on roller skates.
Quote from: OUman on April 19, 2008, 10:25:38 AM
This picture and description may help non-technical people understand how the perepiteia works:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg169.imageshack.us%2Fimg169%2F3488%2Fheinshorsets9.th.jpg&hash=801267b64be732d543ac58ce386c405f729e2963) (http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=heinshorsets9.jpg)
In the steady-state situation the motor-horse and the generator-horse are both running extremely hard but the motor-horse is stronger so the shaft rotates at a steady speed. Both the motor-horse and the generator-horse get very hot because they're expending lots of energy driving against each other. If the experimenter then attaches roller skates to the feet of the generator-horse, the system accelerates dramatically while the motor-horse finds that it has to work less hard. This proves that the roller skates are an as yet untapped source of energy. Patents on this idea are pending. However, it has been found that if the cross member is made of brass instead of wood, this cancels out the effect - this aspect is still under investigation.
Funny
@Oilbarren
QuoteWE ARE USING A PM BRUSHED DC MOTOR IN OUR VEHICLE. MY FEELING IS THAT IF THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE ACCELERATING HIGH VOLTAGE COILS AND THE ACCELERATING HIGH CURRENT COILS (WIRED IN SERIES) IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR, THE MOTOR SHOULD ACCELERATE AND START TO ACT AS A GENERATOR .
SORRY WE NEVER GOT OUR INDUCTION MOTOR ABOVE RATED MAX SPEED - LUC TRIED AND BLEW UP HIS HOUSE.
I think you are on the right track, but I think there are easier ways of achieving the desired results. If you are adding High Voltage Coils in series to your High Current Coils you are simply increasing the electrical inertia of the circuit, that is the self-inductance. I have tried to find easier ways to achieve this goal as tuning resonant circuits is a real pain. I have enclosed a circuit that uses the electrical inertia or self-induction of any DC motor to its advantage, it is simply a store and discharge type of circuit utilizing a relatively small capacitance. The frequency of CC1 is based on the self-inductance of DC motor M. I should mention it is usually necesary to add a large self-inductance(choke) between the source V+ and recifier, this circuit basically replaces the inductor in a DC/DC step up converter with a DC motor, as well the higher the pulse frequency the less motor M acts like a motor and more like an inductor ;), this is simply because the rotor has moved a very small amount relative to the length of the current pulse. . When I look at a circuit I look for three things, the high potential, its opposite the low potential and the neutral center---the center of balance. There is one neutral center between the battery terminals that is (+, 0, -), usually the next neutral center is the DC motor coils, but in this circuit the neutral center is the capacitor C1 and the DC motor coils, the imbalance in the motor coils (charge, 0, inductive discharge) is transfered to the capacitor C1.
This picture and correct version - description will clarify how the Perepiteia works:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg169.imageshack.us%2Fimg169%2F3488%2Fheinshorsets9.jpg&hash=f088605e3f33c39372749c6280a2cc2610821366)
In the steady-state situation the motor-horse is running, the generator-horse is doing nothing as usual and just enjoying the ride. The apparatus rotates at a steady speed. The motor-horse gets very hot because it is expending large amounts of energy driving the generator-horse's fat stupid dumb-ass around and around endlessly day after day.
The experimenter (who is very smart and handsome) then attaches capacitor powered roller blades to the hooves of the generator-horse, the apparatus accelerates dramatically while the motor-horse finds that it has to work less hard because the previously fat dumb-ass generator-horse is now contributing something usefull rather than being dumb-ass dead weight.
This proves that the capacitor powered roller skates provide an exciting new source of energy which the dumb-ass generator-horse never would have dreamed of in a milion years because he would rather sit back on his dumb-ass and get a free ride on some one else's sweat rather than do anything real.
Patents on this idea are pending. However, it has been found that if the cross member is made of brass instead of wood, does not cancel out the effect. It has also been dicovered that lazy, fat, dumb-ass, lying freeloaders drag everything down if not harnessed properly. These aspects are know facts and are no longer under investigation. It has also been discovered that the generator-horse's brain can be replaced by wood - which does not cancel out the effect.
Also, the inventor (who is very smart, handsome and modest) is proposing an improvement whereby the motor-horse can be removed altogether so that the entire motive force is provided by the generator-horse's capacitor powered roller blades. This is a very promising approach since it requires only that the generator-horse do nothing as per usual and it can continue to be a lazy, fat, dumb-ass, lying freeloader who cannot be trusted or trained to do anything new.
The handsome, smart and modest experimenter and the motor-horse are now free to and fulfill their dream of riding off to an interior design show in Germany and searching for the love of his life Polandia Breaznia.
Ottawa Uman
Quote from: OilBarren on April 18, 2008, 11:40:57 AM
B)
A HIGH VOLTAGE - HIGH ELECTROSTATIC FIELD - SHORTED COIL SCENARIO AND RESULTING ACCELERATION
Thane
Electrostatic - shorted coil ??? ::)
In any shorted coil, current is maximum, electrostatic (voltage) potential is minimum .
Quote from: hoptoad on April 20, 2008, 03:30:36 AM
Electrostatic - shorted coil ??? ::) In any shorted coil, current is maximum, electrostatic (voltage) potential is minimum .
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein
@aether22,
I finally got a big honking HV coil finished using the method we discussed earlier. It is 205 Ohms using 28 gauge. It should be 3159 ft, but it's physical size calculates to around 5000. I guess due to uneven winding, no Luc machine. It came off the side of the spool with no twist or breaks, clockwise to clockwise. The only problem I had was the winding would side off to the edges (making them loose) when the level at the edge areas was lower than the center area. This was corrected by slowing the drill down at each end and making sure the edge was at the same level. It would have helped, if I had used a much larger cardboard bobbin at each end.
Regards,
Larry
Hi JustMe,
How are you getting 600 X 400 at 46.71 KB, when I'm only getting 46.88 KB at 320X240?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 20, 2008, 08:23:02 PM
Hi JustMe,
How are you getting 600 X 400 at 46.71 KB, when I'm only getting 46.88 KB at 320X240?
Thanks,
Larry
REALLY NICE JOB THERE LARRY! I HOPE IT GOES WELL FOR YOU.
BTW - JUSTME KNOWS MORE TRICKS THAN A MAGICIAN'S POCKET.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 19, 2008, 01:07:59 PM
The experimenter... then attaches capacitor powered roller blades...
Same issue in the analogy as in the real proposition. A capacitor is NOT a source of power, any more than the fuel tank in a car is a source of power. You have to charge up the capacitor, the same way as you have to fill up the gas tank. And that requires a source of energy. The energy always has to come from somewhere.
Quote from: LarryC on April 20, 2008, 08:23:02 PM
Hi JustMe,
How are you getting 600 X 400 at 46.71 KB, when I'm only getting 46.88 KB at 320X240?
Thanks,
Larry
I'm better than you.
Good luck with all that, and have a great day! ;)
P.S. What software are you using?
For pictures,
You want to use this software:
http://www.irfanview.com/
Open up the picture in it, resize the photo to the desired resolution, and finally compress the jpeg. Most of the time the quality 7-8 is sufficient.
Quote from: OUman on April 21, 2008, 07:07:13 AM
Same issue in the analogy as in the real proposition. A capacitor is NOT a source of power, any more than the fuel tank in a car is a source of power. You have to charge up the capacitor, the same way as you have to fill up the gas tank. And that requires a source of energy. The energy always has to come from somewhere.
IT IS JUST A POSSIBLE AREA OF RESEARCH...
A
LOW IMPEDENCE - HIGH CURRENT COIL IS "CHARGED" BY THE APPROACHING MAGNET & STORES ENERGY IN THE
ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD & CAUSES
DECELERATION.AND THE OPPOSITEA
HIGH IMPEDENCE - HIGH VOLTAGE COIL IS "CHARGED" BY THE APPROACHING MAGNET & STORES ENERGY IN THE
ELECTROSTATIC FIELD & CAUSES
ACCELERATION.BTW - IF WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED RESEARCH.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on April 21, 2008, 09:54:43 AM
I'm better than you.
IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME YOU HAVE RECOVERED JM?
Thane
Quote from: adlep on April 21, 2008, 10:15:08 AM
For pictures,
You want to use this software:
http://www.irfanview.com/
Open up the picture in it, resize the photo to the desired resolution, and finally compress the jpeg. Most of the time the quality 7-8 is sufficient.
Thanks adlep!!!
I got 640 X 480 at 40KB with irfanview. Much clearer picture and now I'm better than JustMe. ;D Well, just until JustMe downloads irfanview.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on April 21, 2008, 11:30:12 AM
Thanks adlep!!!
I got 640 X 480 at 40KB with irfanview. Much clearer picture and now I'm better than JustMe. ;D Well, just until JustMe downloads irfanview.
Regards,
Larry
I use Photoshop, and dial it up to just under 50K on purpose to get the best quality possible, so you get to be better than me forever now.
But good luck getting OU with irfanview...
;D
Quote from: gotoluc on April 21, 2008, 11:12:56 AM
IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME YOU HAVE RECOVERED JM?
Thane
Not yet. Sniff.
Quote from: JustMe on April 21, 2008, 12:15:57 PM
Not yet. Sniff.
I'LL SENT RAY OVER TO CHEER YOU UP?
Thane
Quote from: gotoluc on April 21, 2008, 11:09:23 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 21, 2008, 07:07:13 AM
The energy always has to come from somewhere.
A HIGH IMPEDENCE - HIGH VOLTAGE COILÃ, IS "CHARGED" BY THE APPROACHING MAGNET & STORES ENERGY IN THE ELECTROSTATIC FIELD & CAUSES ACCELERATION.
or alternatively:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg178.imageshack.us%2Fimg178%2F7106%2Fmotorizedrollerbladespaqs3.jpg&hash=3c89659df64e7562e1b1fb50390a02809c8a4484)
Quote from: JustMe on April 21, 2008, 12:12:48 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 21, 2008, 11:30:12 AM
Thanks adlep!!!
I got 640 X 480 at 40KB with irfanview. Much clearer picture and now I'm better than JustMe. ;D Well, just until JustMe downloads irfanview.
Regards,
Larry
I use Photoshop, and dial it up to just under 50K on purpose to get the best quality possible, so you get to be better than me forever now.
But good luck getting OU with irfanview...
;D
If you use Photoshop, resize the picture to the desired resolution and "save as" with a setting of "9". If you are uploading pictures on the web, the quality of "12" is an overkill. Try it yourself...:D
HOW LAME (AND LAZY) IS THAT???
I MEANT SOMETHING LIKE THIS..
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 21, 2008, 02:36:35 PM
HOW LAME (AND LAZY) IS THAT???
I MEANT SOMETHING LIKE THIS..
Thane
That's better - that way you only need one pair of rollerblades - simpler and cheaper.
So, by completing a magnetic circuit via a toroid you could sink a ton of power from the generator coil and the motor wouldn't feel a thing!? That's incredible! I'd love to have a system like this on my flashlight you have to crank to charge because I'm lazy. I need this! If the motor current did increase - why? It wouldn't make any sense if the motor current increased because it wouldn't be doing any extra work.
Quote from: OUman on April 21, 2008, 06:22:16 PM
That's better - that way you only need one pair of rollerblades - simpler and cheaper.
YES AND NO DUMB-ASS DRAGGING THINGS DOWN EITHER.
Thane
Quote from: Super God on April 21, 2008, 06:53:58 PM
So, by completing a magnetic circuit via a toroid you could sink a ton of power from the generator coil and the motor wouldn't feel a thing!? That's incredible! I'd love to have a system like this on my flashlight you have to crank to charge because I'm lazy. I need this! If the motor current did increase - why? It wouldn't make any sense if the motor current increased because it wouldn't be doing any extra work.
NOW HOLD ON A MINUTE THERE SUPER ?GOD?!!!
FIRST THINGS FIRST.
WE ALREADY HAVE
ONE ?GOD? HERE AND I AM PRETTY SURE HE HAS REINCARNATED AS
OUman ? PREVIOUSLY KNOW ALL THE WORLD OVER AS POLAR BREEZE, PERPETUAL LURKER AND POSSIBLY EVEN SPRINGBOARD AND MANY OTHER NAMES WHICH CANNOT BE SPOKEN ALOUD IN PUBLIC UPON PENALTY OF DEATH BY STONING.
IN GERMANY HE IS KNOW AS
ONKEL-VATER, (UNCLE-DADDY).HE IS OMNIPRESENT, OMNIPITENT, IMPOTENT AND HIS NAME IS ?HOWARD?. ?OUR FATHER WHO ART IN HEAVEN,
HOWARD BE THY NAME.? ? THAT SORT OF THING.
AND WE ALL WORSHIP HOWARD - EXCEPT OF COURSE FOR JUSTME WHO IS A HEATHEN
ATHEIST - IT'S JUSTME-ME-ME WITH HER.
IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR NAME TO SUPER DOG, SUPER DOUG, SUPER DAVE - NOT THAT IT MATTERS TO ME - I AM JUST TRYING TO SAVE YOU FROM THE WRATH OF HOWARD IS ALL?
Thane
Super Dave sounds good. I can't change my name however.
Quote from: Super God on April 21, 2008, 07:49:36 PM
Super Dave sounds good. I can't change my name however.
OK FINE BUT I'M BLAMING THE 12 YEAR DROUGHT AND LOCUSTS ON YOU DUDE.
JUSTME ANGERED HIM/HER AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO HER SENS.
Thane
QuoteSo, by completing a magnetic circuit via a toroid you could sink a ton of power from the generator coil and the motor wouldn't feel a thing!?
YES, NOTHING ENTERING THE AIR GAP TO CAUSE DECELERATION.
QuoteThat's incredible! I'd love to have a system like this on my flashlight you have to crank to charge because I'm lazy. I need this! If the motor current did increase - why? It wouldn't make any sense if the motor current increased because it wouldn't be doing any extra work.
YOU WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS IN YOUR
X PRIZE CAR (http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/auto/prize-details) AND GET UNLIMITED MPG"s AND WIN THE $ 10,000,000.00 PRIZE.
Thane
DEAR ALL,
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR LATEST DEMO VIDEO HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SLLA0EGY
AND ON YOUTUBE VIDEO HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
HIGH CURRENT COILS (Prime Mover Deceleration) According to Lenz's Law.
vs
HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (Prime Mover Acceleration)
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 21, 2008, 09:42:33 PM
DEAR ALL,
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR LATEST DEMO VIDEO HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SLLA0EGY
HIGH CURRENT COILS (Prime Mover Deceleration) According to Lenz's Law.
vs
HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (Prime Mover Acceleration)
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
Nice demo. Are you now using 3 -1/8 X 1 Neos at each post?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: OilBarren on April 21, 2008, 11:09:23 AM
IF WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED RESEARCH.
Thane
Huh?
"IF WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED RESEARCH."
Thane
"Huh?"
OUman
THANKS OUman,
BUT THAT TOOK YOU LONG ENOUGH?
I WAS AFRAID YOU WEREN'T GOING TO FALL FOR IT.
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, then would it?"
Albert Einstein
Quote
Hi Thane,
Nice demo. Are you now using 3 -1/8 X 1 Neos at each post?
Thanks,
Larry
SORT OF 2 ON ONE SIDE OF THE CUP AND 1 ON THE OTHER SIDE.
OUR DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR WILL HAVE 2" x 1" NEOS WITH 250 lbs pulling force
AND 24 COILS / 12 ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROTOR.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 22, 2008, 05:20:28 AM
"IF WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING IT WOULDN'T BE CALLED RESEARCH."
Thane
...versus...
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, then would it?"
Albert Einstein
The situations are hardly comparable!
Quote from: OUman on April 22, 2008, 10:50:59 AM
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, then would it?"
Albert Einstein
The situations are hardly comparable!
NO KIDDING NUCLEAR POWER SUCKS!
JUST ASK JAPAN, RUSSIA AND NOW IRAN.
Thane
PB's BACK !!! NEW AND IMPROVED?
QuoteRe: PREVIOUSLY KNOW ALL THE WORLD OVER AS POLAR BREEZE, PERPETUAL LURKER AND POSSIBLY EVEN SPRINGBOARD AND MANY OTHER NAMES...
Thane, I had my say and I realize you're unhappy about that but I stand by it and I don't need to use other pseudonyms to say any more because it's all been said. So please don't blame me for what other people post.
PB.
ACTUALLY PB YOU ARE RIGHT - I AM UNHAPPY BUT NOT ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK..
I AM UNHAPPY ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU (WHOEVER YOU ARE) COME ACROSS AS EDUCATED AND SOMEWHAT KNOWLEDGEABLE WHO COULD REALLY CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING WORTHWHILE TO THIS DISCUSSION (IF IT WERE TRUE).
BUT INSTEAD YOU CHOOSE RATHER TO DECEIVE EVERYONE READING THIS AND SIT BACK IN THE SHADOWS SCHEMING AND FESTERING IN YOUR NARROW MINDED CYNICISM.
I AM UNHAPPY THAT IF YOU DID COME TO THE LAB AT ANYTIME UNDER ANY NAME SINCE I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU REALLY ARE, YOU MAY FIND THAT WE ARE LEGIT AND OPEN AND YOU MIGHT JUST BENEFIT FROM THE EXPERIENCE AS WOULD THE OTHER 45,000 OR MORE PEOPLE WHO READ THIS BLOG BUT YOU CHOOSE NOT TO.
I AM UNHAPPY THAT WE HUMANS LIVE WITH SUCH COMPETITIVE AND COMBATIVE SPIRITS WHEN WE REALLY OUGHT TO LIVE WITH COLLABORATIVE SPIRITS. WE BREATHE THE SAME AIR AND WE WILL ALL SINK OR SWIM TOGETHER - I JOKE AROUND ALOT TO COVER MY PAIN IN THIS REGARD BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK VERY WELL.
SO THE DOOR IS OPEN AS IS MY HEART - COME AS YOU ARE AND HELP IF YOU CAN.
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND BELOW OUR YOUTUBE VIDEO FOR THE LATEST GENERATOR DEMO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
CHEERS
Thane
are thows coils taken out of a couple of microwave transformers? they look very famillier
Quote from: mfred68 on April 22, 2008, 07:00:25 PM
are thows coils taken out of a couple of microwave transformers? they look very famillier
YES THEY ARE - GOOD SPOTTING.
Thane
Sorry if this has been asked before - what exactly is the difference between a 'high current' coil and a 'high voltage' coil? Is it as simple as the the latter having more turns?
Hi All,
I'm posting this to save others wasting time. I tried my HV 205 ohms coil and 6 Lee Valley 1" magnets with and without cups on a ceiling fan induction motor. A ceiling fan induction motor is like a inverse version of the bench grinding induction motor that Thane uses. The shunted bar rotor is on the outside edge instead of in the middle. Using the low speed fan setting ( 27 watts at 605 rpm) there was no acceleration only slight declaration.
Hopefully, I,ll be getting a Ryobi bench grinder soon.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: Super God on April 22, 2008, 09:08:30 PM
Sorry if this has been asked before - what exactly is the difference between a 'high current' coil and a 'high voltage' coil? Is it as simple as the the latter having more turns?
LOTS MORE ON PAGE 43
YES OF COURSE FROM A BATTERY (SORT OF) OR MANY INDIVIDUCAL CAPACITORS
LET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A HIGH CURRENT COIL:
HIGH INDUCED REACTION FORCE
LOW DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE CAPACITIVE REACTANCE
NOW LET?S CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS OF A HIGH VOLTAGE COIL
HIGH CAPACITIVE REACTANCE
HIGH DC RESISTANCE
VERY LOW OR NEGLIGIBLE INDUCED REACTION FORCE
CONSIDER A MAGNET APPROACHING A HIGH CURRENT COIL
WHEN A MAGNET APPROACHES A HIGH CURRENT COIL, THE COIL PRODUCES A LARGE REPELLING FIELD -(TRYING TO KEEP THE MAGNET FROM APPROACHING) BECAUSE A LOT OF CURRENT FLOWS IN THE COIL DUE TO THE LOW IMPEDENCE.
WHEN THE MAGNET LEAVES THE COIL THE OPPOSITE OCCURS ? THE COIL THE CURRENT CHANGES DIRECTION AND THE COIL PRODUCES A HIGH ATTRACTING FIELD ? (TRYING TO KEEP THE MAGNET FROM MOVING AWAY) BECAUSE A LOT OF CURRENT FLOWS IN THE COIL.
CONSIDER A MAGNET APPROACHING A HIGH VOLTAGE COIL
NOW CONSIDER WHEN A MAGNET APPROACHES A HIGH VOLTAGE COIL VERY LITTLE CURRENT FLOWS BECAUSE OF THE HIGH IMPEDENCE IN THE COIL SO A VERY SMALL REPELLING FIELD IS PRODUCED ? THE MAGNET APPROACHES EASILY.
THE COIL BUILDS UP A CAPACITIVE CHARGE "slowly" AT THE RATE OF MAGNET APPROACH.
THE INSTANT THE MAGNET MOVES AWAY FROM THE COIL - THE COIL PRODUCES A CAPACITIVE DISCHARGE INSTANTLY THROUGH THE COIL RESISTANCE AND THE MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCED BY THE COIL'S CAPACITIVE DISCHARGE PUSHES AWAY THE RECEDING MAGNET WITH ADDITIONAL FORCE THUS ACCELERATING THE PRIME MOVER.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on April 22, 2008, 10:34:06 PM
Hi All,
I'm posting this to save others wasting time. I tried my HV 205 ohms coil and 6 Lee Valley 1" magnets with and without cups on a ceiling fan induction motor. A ceiling fan induction motor is like a inverse version of the bench grinding induction motor that Thane uses. The shunted bar rotor is on the outside edge instead of in the middle. Using the low speed fan setting ( 27 watts at 605 rpm) there was no acceleration only slight declaration.
Hopefully, I,ll be getting a Ryobi bench grinder soon.
Regards,
Larry
DID YOU TRY A HIGHER SPEED?
WHAT WAS YOUR COIL OUTPUT VOLTAGE?
DO YOU HAVE PHOTOS?
Thane
Thane can you please tell me if this would work: if i built a generator using magnets on the prime mover and high voltage coils, then take the high voltage from thows coils and put them through a step down transformer to get say 12v but high current and use this power to drive a load, would the rotor still speed up because im using high voltage coils even though im transforming the power into high current?
if this is so, could a pulse motor such as a bedini be used to move the magnets over the coils, and if so could this setup produce OU ?
Quote from: mfred68 on April 23, 2008, 01:19:48 PM
Thane can you please tell me if this would work: if i built a generator using magnets on the prime mover and high voltage coils, then take the high voltage from thows coils and put them through a step down transformer to get say 12v but high current and use this power to drive a load, would the rotor still speed up because im using high voltage coils even though im transforming the power into high current?
if this is so, could a pulse motor such as a bedini be used to move the magnets over the coils, and if so could this setup produce OU ?
I JUST PERFOMED A TEST TO CORRECTLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION - STEPPING DOWN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL'S OUTPUT HAS NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE ACCELERATION PHENOMENON. PLACING THE STEPPED DOWN VOLTAGE ON A LOAD HAS AN EFFECT ON REDUCING THE RATE OF ACCELERATION ONLY.
I.E.
NO LOAD (OPEN CIRCUIT) = NO ACCELERATION
AN INFINITE LOAD (SHORT CIRCUIT) = MAXIMUM ACCELERATION
SORRY I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT BEDINI SYSTEMS SO I HAVE NO COMMENT - PERHAPS SOMEONE ELSE CAN?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 23, 2008, 06:42:54 AM
Quote from: LarryC on April 22, 2008, 10:34:06 PM
Hi All,
I'm posting this to save others wasting time. I tried my HV 205 ohms coil and 6 Lee Valley 1" magnets with and without cups on a ceiling fan induction motor. A ceiling fan induction motor is like a inverse version of the bench grinding induction motor that Thane uses. The shunted bar rotor is on the outside edge instead of in the middle. Using the low speed fan setting ( 27 watts at 605 rpm) there was no acceleration only slight declaration.
Hopefully, I,ll be getting a Ryobi bench grinder soon.
Regards,
Larry
DID YOU TRY A HIGHER SPEED?
WHAT WAS YOUR COIL OUTPUT VOLTAGE?
DO YOU HAVE PHOTOS?
Thane
I did try all three speeds. The rpms at medium and low were high for a fan motor (680, 655, and 605). I guess this is due to the light load without the fan blades. The input watts was 40, 30, and 27. The 680 didn't slow down at all, the 655 to 652, the 605 to 596.
The coil output was 32 Volts at 27 MA.
I also varies the coil distance from 1/2 to 1/8 inch.
The first picture is the motor with the 6 neos on the edge and one small neo taped to the side for the tach sensor.
The second has the coil, watt meter and tach.
Larry
Quote from: OilBarren on April 23, 2008, 03:33:12 PM
Quote from: mfred68 on April 23, 2008, 01:19:48 PM
Thane can you please tell me if this would work: if i built a generator using magnets on the prime mover and high voltage coils, then take the high voltage from thows coils and put them through a step down transformer to get say 12v but high current and use this power to drive a load, would the rotor still speed up because im using high voltage coils even though im transforming the power into high current?
if this is so, could a pulse motor such as a bedini be used to move the magnets over the coils, and if so could this setup produce OU ?
I JUST PERFOMED A TEST TO CORRECTLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION - STEPPING DOWN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL'S OUTPUT HAS NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE ACCELERATION PHENOMENON. PLACING THE STEPPED DOWN VOLTAGE ON A LOAD HAS AN EFFECT ON REDUCING THE RATE OF ACCELERATION ONLY.
I.E.
NO LOAD (OPEN CIRCUIT) = NO ACCELERATION
AN INFINITE LOAD (SHORT CIRCUIT) = MAXIMUM ACCELERATION
SORRY I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT BEDINI SYSTEMS SO I HAVE NO COMMENT - PERHAPS SOMEONE ELSE CAN?
CHEERS
Thane
I'm a little confused, you stated that a short circuit (could this be a heavy power hungry load such as several high wattage bulbs?) will speed up the acceleration of the prime mover, but you also say that placing a load (could this also be a short circuit?) on the stepped down voltage has the effect of reducing acceleration, so you get the oppasite effect?
is it the fact that the stepped down high current voltage has the same effect as with the high current coils?
Do you know how much current and voltage you get out of your high voltage coils that cause acceleration? and if its like 120v or 240v, what would happen to the speed of the prime mover if you connect a 100w bulb instead of a short circuit accross the output?
I'm a little confused,
ME TOO!
MOST OF THE TIME ;)
you stated that a short circuit (could this be a heavy power hungry load such as several high wattage bulbs?)
COULD BE BUT MAKE SURE YOU PUT THEM IN PARALLEL.
will speed up the acceleration of the prime mover,
YES
but you also say that placing a load (could this also be a short circuit?)
YES A SHORT CIRCUIT IS INFINITE LOAD ( 0 ohms ).
AN OPEN CIRCUIT IS NO LOAD ( infinite ohms ) WHERE THE GENERATOR IS CONCERNED.
on the stepped down voltage has the effect of reducing acceleration, so you get the oppasite effect?
I SAID (OR TRIED TO SAY) SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT;
1 - 10 ohm LOAD WILL REDUCE THE RATE OF ACCELERATION AS OPPOSED TO:
10 - 10 ohm LOADS IN PARALLEL DUE TO THE INCREASED CONDUCTIVITY
is it the fact that the stepped down high current voltage has the same effect as with the high current coils?
IT WOULD NOT SAY THAT - I WOULD SAY THAT:
THE LOADED HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION.
THE RATE OF ACCELERATION DEPENDS ON THE LOAD MAGNITUDE.
THE LOADED HIGH CURRENT COILS CAUSE DECELERATION
THE RATE OF DECELERATION DEPENDS ON THE LOAD MAGNITUDE.
HOWEVER HIGH CURRENT COILS WITH AN INFINITE LOAD (SHORT CIRCUIT) WILL ALSO CAUSE ACCELERATION IF THE SPEED OF THE ROTOR IS IDEAL.
Do you know how much current and voltage you get out of your high voltage coils that cause acceleration?
IT VARIES THE HIGHEST ACCELERATED VOLTAGE WAS 1100 V
AND THE LOWEST (STILL CAUSING ACCELERATION) WAS ABOUT 30 V
IT ALL DEPENDS ON CORE MATERIAL, AIR GAP, COIL PLACEMENT (COGGING TORQUE) ETC.
and if its like 120v or 240v, what would happen to the speed of the prime mover if you connect a 100w bulb instead of a short circuit accross the output?
IT DEPENDS ON THE RESITANCE OF YOUR LIGHT BULB,
I.E:
A 1 ohm 100 W BULB WILL CAUSE GOOD ACCELERATION
WHEREAS A 1000 ohm BULB WILL CAUSE POOR ACCELERATION
- BUT 1000 - 1000 ohm LIGHT BULBS IN PARALLEL WILL CAUSE GOOD ACCELERATION.
AND FINALLY AN INFINITE NUMBER OF 1000 ohm LIGHT BULBS IN PARALLEL WILL CAUSE
MAXIMUM ACCELERATION.
CHEERS
Thane
Do you think the prime mover could be replaced with an engine somehow? Or would you need an engine -> generator ->induction motor -> generator type of setup?
Quote from: Super God on April 23, 2008, 09:23:59 PM
Do you think the prime mover could be replaced with an engine somehow? Or would you need an engine -> generator ->induction motor -> generator type of setup?
ASSUMING THE "ACCELERATION EFFECT" IS CONFINED TO THE COILS THEMSELVES (NOT PROVEN YET) - THEN ANY PRIME MOVER SHOULD WORK AS LONG AS THE ADDITIONAL TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE COILS (ASSUMING AS WELL THAT THIS IS WHAT OCCURS) - IS GREATER THAN THE TORQUE REQUIRED TO TURN THE PRIME MOVER ALONE.
THE INDUCTION MOTOR IS GREAT BECAUSE IT IS SO EASY TO TURN - NO BRUSHES, NO PISTONS, NO FLYWHEEL ETC.
Thane
Thane,
I am a former science advisor to Walter Cronkite and CBS news during the Apollo Program, later a NASA consultant at the NASA-Goddard Spaceflight Center (and yes, I have presented before the Goddard Engineering Colloquium Committee ?). I am currently the science advisor to ?Coast to Coast AM? ? a Premiere Radio Networks international program running nightly on approximately 500 affiliates in the United States (and around the world on the internet). We reach several million listeners, each night ....
We have many, many listeners in Canada as well. :)
For many years I was also privileged to work with two great pioneers in the OU/alternative physics field ? Bruce DePalma and Gene Mallove. Sadly, both men are no longer with us to see your own accomplishments. If they were, I?m sure they would be cheering you on ? as I do.
Having read all the threads posted in this forum now (NOT an easy task ?), viewed all the videos (several times ?), based on the experimental work of DePalma in particular, I do have a couple of questions:
What steps are you taking to finally determine whether the ?acceleration effect? is, indeed, coming from the coils/magnets ? or, is in the motor?
And, are you seriously entertaining the idea that, in the end, the ?effect? ? as Aether 22 strongly believes (with good reason ?) -- might not be ?electromagnetic? after all?
Looked at it from DePalma?s considerable experience with rotating systems (including electromagnetic ones ?), I can suggest a couple of small tests for your current motor/generator set-ups which could help significantly narrow the source of the observed rotational acceleration.
In my opinion, this is an essential next step -- BEFORE you attempt to scale up the effect to a significantly larger system.
As an ?immediate technology product,? at the right time, I think the whole ?dune buggy demo? is a super idea; Americans are totally in love with their cars; produce a working proto-type of a true ?extended range electric vehicle," and a LOT of folks will sit up and take serious notice in a hurry ... including at the national political level, in THIS coming presidential election here in the States!
Your twin objectives ? to drastically reduce the political and economic incentives for more ?oil wars,? and to dramatically lower the price of energy for transportation, simultaneously ? are totally ?right on.?
My only concern is that you might be putting ?the dune buggy before the horse,? if you don?t clearly identify the source of the anomalous acceleration ... before you graduate to a much more ambitious engineering system.
To that end, identifying where the ?anomalous torque? is coming from is, in my opinion, essential.
I?m just a bit disappointed that I?m not several thousand miles closer to Ottawa, so I could provide some helpful ?hands-on input? in this regard ? and, maybe, even sweep a few floors. :)
RCH
THANKS RCH,
QuoteWhat steps are you taking to finally determine whether the ?acceleration effect? is, indeed, coming from the coils/magnets ? or, is in the motor?
AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED WE ALREADY ELIMINATED THE MOTOR FROM THE EQUATION WITH THE 2 FOOT LONG PVC PIPE EXPERIMENT. WE KNOW THAT THE INDUCTION MOTOR CHARACTERISTICS HAVE A PART TO PLAY BUT WE FEEL IT CAN ULTIMATELY BE REPLACED BY A DIFFERENT MOTOR TYPE WITH A "REAL" GENERATOR COIL SETUP.
QuoteAnd, are you seriously entertaining the idea that, in the end, the ?effect? ? as Aether 22 strongly believes (with good reason ?) -- might not be ?electromagnetic? after all?
IN MY "HASTY" OPINION IT IS MORE ELECTROSTATIC THAN ELECTROMAGNETIC.
SADDLY I THINK THE MIB"s GOT AETHER22.
QuoteMy only concern is that you might be putting ?the dune buggy before the horse,? if you don?t clearly identify the source of the anomalous acceleration ... before you graduate to a much more ambitious engineering system.
YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT - BUT WE INTEND TO GIVE THAT HORSE ONE HELL OF A "FREE" RIDE.
OUR ENGINEERING SYSTEM WILL BE VERY SIMPLE AND AS CLOSE TO OUR CURRENT PROTOTYPE AS POSSIBLE. IT WILL BE BENCH TESTED EACH STEP OF THE WAY TO ENSURE IT SCALES UP PROPERLY.
QuoteTo that end, identifying where the ?anomalous torque? is coming from is, in my opinion, essential.
GOOD LEAVE THE BROOM AT HOME AND COME AND DO IT FOR US. REMEMBER WE ARE ONLY TWO GUYS WHO OFTEN WORK 7 DAYS A WEEK - 8 TO 12 HOURS/DAY TRYING TO BEAT THE GRIM REAPER AT HIS GAME IN IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN AND ELSEWHERE.
FOR EXAMPLE LUC SPENT 4 SOLID DAYS WINDING OUR LATEST BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER AND NOW HE WALKS LIKE HUNCH BACK OF NOTRE DAME.
WE ALREADY HAVE MORE WORK THAN TIME ALLOWED.
QuoteI?m just a bit disappointed that I?m not several thousand miles closer to Ottawa, so I could provide some helpful ?hands-on input? in this regard ? and, maybe, even sweep a few floors. :)RCH
IF YOU SINCERELY WANT TO HELP - YOU CAN DO SO BY SPREADING THE WORD (OF HOPE) ABOUT WHAT WE AND OTHERS ARE DOING AND THAT THE "WAR PIGS" WHO FEED ON PEOPLE'S FEARS CAN BE PUT ON A DIET.
OFFER PEACE TO OUR PEACE OFFICERS
ENFORCE LOVE
LOVE (AND HOPE) WILL ENDURE WHEN FEAR IS GONE.
IT'S OUR ONLY COLLECTIVE HOPE FOR SURVIVAL.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane,
I was going to ask ... would an in-depth radio interview on "Coast" -- in front of several million receptive listeners, for a few hours [with the key internet-movies available "on demand" (it IS radio, after all :) ] be helpful at this point? Or, do you want to wait ... until the "buggy's" ready?
On the "2-foot-long PVC experiment":
I must have missed THAT video!
Which, of course, brings up the entire "brass coupling ,versus the 3-inch steel insert" in your original machine:
What happened to THAT debate?
IS a ferromagnetic material required or not (the PVC would indicate "not")? So, what about the brass ...? :)
Since you still have the hollow brass coupling available on the original system, why not make up a RANGE of "slugs" which would fit inside that brass tube, and experiment with a variety of OTHER materials -- from other metals, to plastics ... and even various powders ... mercury, sodium ... etc. -- in an effort to see what IS "conducted" into the motor from the coils/magnets ...?
And, before you say it, I know: VERY limited personnel and time.
Which is why I wished I lived closer (as I used to -- in New England), as opposed to where I live now, in the beautiful deserts of New Mexico .... :)
Glad to hear your plan on the "dune buggy demo." It sounds reasonable and workable. If it really can "extend" the range, it will make a helluva public splash in THESE crucial times.
Because, you're right: we don't have much "rope" ... or time ... left.
RCH
QuoteBecause, you're right: we don't have much "rope" ... or time ... left.
RCH
GOD HAS LEFT US WITH JUST ENOUGH ROPE TO HANG OURSELVES WITH.
Thane
QuoteThane,
I was going to ask ... would an in-depth radio interview on "Coast" -- in front of several million receptive listeners, for a few hours [with the key internet-movies available "on demand" (it IS radio, after all :) ] be helpful at this point? Or, do you want to wait ... until the "buggy's" ready?
TO ME WAITING DOES ONLY TWO THINGS:
CREATES MORE BODY BAGS AND KEEPS ME FROM FULFILLING MY DUTIES AS A FATHER OF TWO YOUNG CHILDREN.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO AN INTERVIEW IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE IF NEIL YOUNG AND ULI KRUGER CAN COME ON AS WELL - AND ROUND UP ANYONE ELSE ON THIS THREAD WHO HAVE REPLICATED THIS EFFECT. I WOULD ALSO ASK DR. PETER LINDEMAN TO BE ON AS WELL?
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Peter_Lindemann
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#No_Useful_Output
QuoteOn the "2-foot-long PVC experiment":
I must have missed THAT video!
I DIDN'T POST A VIDEO BUT DID POST PHOTOS AND OBSERVATIONS.
QuoteWhich, of course, brings up the entire "brass coupling ,versus the 3-inch steel insert" in your original machine:
What happened to THAT debate?
IS a ferromagnetic material required or not (the PVC would indicate "not")? So, what about the brass ...? :)
I BELIEVE THAT THE BRASS COUPLING EXPERIMENT WHEN "MAGNETICLLY COUPLED" WITH THE STEEL BAR - RAISED THE INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED TO ABOVE THE CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED REQUIRED TO CAUSE ACCELERATION.
ORIGINAL YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEOS BEAR THIS OUT BECAUSE PART 2 IS ROTATING FASTER THAN PART 1 (READ THE "TACH METER" TO THE RIGHT) WHEN THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED. WE KNOW FROM PART 5 THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED DC MAGNETIC FIELD CAN INCREASE AN INDUCTION MOTOR'S RPM.
QuoteSince you still have the hollow brass coupling available on the original system, why not make up a RANGE of "slugs" which would fit inside that brass tube, and experiment with a variety of OTHER materials -- from other metals, to plastics ... and even various powders ... mercury, sodium ... etc. -- in an effort to see what IS "conducted" into the motor from the coils/magnets ...?
WE CAN GET THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR - AND A MOTOR THAT IS 21/2 FEET AWAY FROM THE COILS USING PVC PIPE AS WELL AS NON FEROMAGNETIC STAINLESS STEAL ROD. THAT IS SIMPLY ENOUGH FOR ME.
THE HOLLOW BRASS COUPLER IS NOW A MUSEUM PIECE.
QuoteGlad to hear your plan on the "dune buggy demo." It sounds reasonable and workable. If it really can "extend" the range, it will make a helluva public splash in THESE crucial times.
RCH
QUASIMODO IS STARTING ON THE DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR TODAY I BELIEVE.
THANKS
Thane
RCH,
MAN OH MAN, YOU PEOPLE ARE ABOUT AS "FAR OUT THERE" AS YOU CAN GO AREN'T YOU?
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guests/16.html
Thane
Wow! It's really cool to see Mr. Hoagland posting here!
I sure hope he will be able to setup an interview for you on CoastToCoast! He's not kidding when he says it has MILLIONS of listeners, me being one of them! :)
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on April 24, 2008, 01:21:55 PM
Wow! It's really cool to see Mr. Hoagland posting here!
I sure hope he will be able to setup an interview for you on CoastToCoast! He's not kidding when he says it has MILLIONS of listeners, me being one of them! :)
Aaron
AARON,
CAN YOU PREPARE 3 SKILL TESTING QUESTIONS FOR RCH TO MAKE SURE IT IS REALLY HIM AND NOT "RCH - PB" IN DISGUISE?
Thane
Hi Thane,
No worries, I can tell it's him from the way he writes his posts! It's exactly the way he speaks on the radio! :)
He really is a good guy as is the CoastToCoast radio show, like you, it's open minded and interested in helping the human race wake up to its true potential!
Aaron
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 07:35:40 AM
QuoteBecause, you're right: we don't have much "rope" ... or time ... left.
RCH
GOD HAS LEFT US WITH JUST ENOUGH ROPE TO HANG OURSELVES WITH.
Thane
Really? and there I thought he was out to save us all, especially sinners, ahh well, to the pits of hell I go. ::)
Quote from: RunningBare on April 24, 2008, 02:22:14 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 07:35:40 AM
GOD HAS LEFT US WITH JUST ENOUGH ROPE TO HANG OURSELVES WITH.
Thane
Really? and there I thought he was out to save us all, especially sinners, ahh well, to the pits of hell I go. ::)
Hi RunningBare,
I think the point is, if the human race doesn't make it, we only have ourselves to blame... (regardless if one believes in god or not) :)
Aaron
Quote from: bitbeam on April 24, 2008, 02:37:17 PM
Quote from: RunningBare on April 24, 2008, 02:22:14 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 07:35:40 AM
GOD HAS LEFT US WITH JUST ENOUGH ROPE TO HANG OURSELVES WITH.
Thane
Really? and there I thought he was out to save us all, especially sinners, ahh well, to the pits of hell I go. ::)
Hi RunningBare,
I think the point is, if the human race doesn't make it, we only have ourselves to blame... (regardless if one believes in god or not) :)
Aaron
Of course we have ourselves to blame, there is only us.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 01:36:41 PM
Quote from: bitbeam on April 24, 2008, 01:21:55 PM
Wow! It's really cool to see Mr. Hoagland posting here!
I sure hope he will be able to setup an interview for you on CoastToCoast! He's not kidding when he says it has MILLIONS of listeners, me being one of them! :)
Aaron
AARON,
CAN YOU PREPARE 3 SKILL TESTING QUESTIONS FOR RCH TO MAKE SURE IT IS REALLY HIM AND NOT "RCH - PB" IN DISGUISE?
Thane
Thane,
I'm (slightly) amused that you would be concerned that I'm "PB."
As Aether 22 so aptly noted, "PB" (or, any of his OTHER incarnations ...) is an obvious "spook." His intent is to insert SO much noise into this on-going discussion/replication, that most folks will go away in either confusion ... or disgust.
In fact, he sounds an awful lot like a spook WE had to put up with, in another forum, on another "frontier investigation" ... several years ago.
So, no, I am NOT "PB." :)
But, I am gratified regarding your healthy political scepticism; most inventors/engineers are so "narrow band" that they don't even begin to appreciate that this field has "enemies" ... until they're totally marginalized (or dead).
You seem to be much more
politically savvy ... which is what has been (mostly) missing from this entire field ....
In terms of "Coast," remember: I am NOT the producer, or the host (that's George Noory). I can only recommend ... But, based on what I have observed here, I will set the process in motion for a potential full-length interview. "Who" will be included will be totally up to the producers.
I am ALSO amused by your reaction to the on-line "Coast" guest-list; as an obvious "pot," I find you're reaction to the other "kettles" here intriguing ....
As PB's reaction has amply demonstrated, most of the world view what we do as simply "beyond the pale." The "Coast" guest list represents, in other fields,
other qwesting folks who -- like you -- have been driven to find and verify "something" which is NOT currently "sanctioned" by those avidly interested in ONLY controlling and degrading our society ... not in advancing it.
So, if we're "too far out" for your tastes ... better let me know now. :)
RCH
Quote
So, if we're "too far out" for your tastes ... better let me know now. :)
RCH
ARE YOU KIDDING - I WOULD LOVE TO SIT YOU DOWN A HEAR YOUR "STORY" I BET IT'S BETTER THAN MINE.
ANYWAY I READ
DAVID ICKE http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/ SO AS LONG AS YOU GUYS DON'T ASK ME IF I AM A SHAPE SHIFTING LIZARD (LIKE THE QUEEN???) THEN WE ARE GOOD TO GO.
Thane
Speaking of lizard queens: http://www.sherryshriner.com/ ::) Now that is out there.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 07:38:55 PM
Quote
So, if we're "too far out" for your tastes ... better let me know now. :)
RCH
ARE YOU KIDDING - I WOULD LOVE TO SIT YOU DOWN A HEAR YOUR "STORY" I BET IT'S BETTER THAN MINE.
ANYWAY I READ DAVID ICKE http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/ SO AS LONG AS YOU GUYS DON'T ASK ME IF I AM A SHAPE SHIFTING LIZARD (LIKE THE QUEEN???) THEN WE ARE GOOD TO GO.
Thane
Thane,
What, for Godsake, are you doing "wasting" your (precious ...) time reading about
David Icke?!You're SUPPOSED to be frantically "winding coils, spinning magnets, cutting metal ... and answering PB ..." -- 24/7 :)
Actually, what you have discovered in Icke is simply a typical example re why "Coast" is the Number One overnight radio talk show ... in the WORLD.
The US First Amendment. :)
Unlike other mainstream media, we put ANYONE on who has a good "story" ... and then let the AUDIENCE decide
on the evidence put forth.
Remarkable -- for a modern media broadcast network, listened to nightly by
millions ... isn't it? :)
If I can swing it, you'll have a unique opportunity to make not only your technical case before our extremely perceptive audience ... but your political case -- for "why this is CRITICAL" -- as well.
Need a "one pager" from you -- explaining in SIMPLE, NON-TECHNICAL language (for my producers -- no Ohms, Reluctance, etc., etc.) WHAT you believe you have discovered. WHY this is unique.
And ... WHY the rest of us "should give a damn."
Do NOT be afraid to bring up "Iraq" (or, as I termed it on the air the other night, "More escalating, endless
resource wars ... unless we do something REALLY DIFFERENT."). :)
Good luck.
RCH
Quote"why this is CRITICAL" -- as well.
And ... WHY the rest of us "should give a damn."
RCH
Here is a start...
Dear Neil and Uli,
I sincerely want to help you guys in any way possible. If that means being in your movie then that is fine also. I will do it. Youtube videos might hurt your message?
My problem is with the X Prize format which pits talented people all over the world, against each other and makes everyone focus on a "prize" which is two years away instead of encouraging everyone to work together and focus on collaborating and solving this issue as quickly as possible. The goal of saving one soldier's life should be the "real prize" in my view.
If you took all the many, many hundreds of millions in X Prize promotion money, prize money and money spent on team budgets and time and energy wasted keeping secrets and hiding technology and applied all that to a solution - today - then I think that could really inspire people ( certainly at least my partner Luc and I ).
No doubt there will be a "happy" winner in this current X Prize but the real losers will be the men and women who suffer and die in Iraq in the mean time waiting for a solution to be unveiled in a future "race" when the technology sits in silence instead because of a $10 million incentive. Would the winner trade this cash and accolades to get those lost lives back?
One of the fist things Uli mentioned to me was that corporations were "the problem" - well to me the X Prize is applying that same "box" of corporate thinking. I just think this issue (humanity's most critical) is too important to be playing games around it.
I think this most important X Prize should go to the team which does the most, shares the most, and produces the best product. I feel this is the new "energy paradigm" (of openly sharing) that humanity needs if it is going to survive the next century. Greed has put us where we are now.
Perhaps I am just naive and dreaming but maybe it's not too late to change the format?
At any rate please feel free to request whatever you desire of me in your endeavours and I will do it since it may end up being the best way for Luc and I to serve our troops and everyone else.
Sincerely
Thane
Thane C. Heins
Co-Founder - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
"Concern for man and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors.
Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations. "
- Albert Einstein
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
- Gandhi
Thane,
This letter (above) kinda "starts in the middle" of the conversation.
My producers (and obviously the "Coast" audience) know NOTHING about your work. So, you have to begin there ....
Maybe ... a rephrasing/expansion of the "NASA letter" (which I need a link to myself ...)? That shouldn't take too long. :)
I know how hard it is to write about yourself -- but this is important (isn't it?). So a little, focused effort here can make a major difference in the lives of a lot of other folks down the road.
RCH
Quote from: RCH on April 24, 2008, 08:39:41 PM
Need a "one pager" from you -- explaining in SIMPLE, NON-TECHNICAL language (for my producers -- no Ohms, Reluctance, etc., etc.) WHAT you believe you have discovered. WHY this is unique.
@RCH
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, Thane did not discover this, he has merely rediscovered what has already been known for some time.
It isn't unique,
but it is useful. How do I know? Because I've been there and done that!
See pages 8 and 10 at this site: http://www.totallyamped.net/adams
Note the date of publication of the information and understand that it is based on experimental work performed in 2001-2002. Also note that the information presented was never meant to fully explain the nature and reason for this effect, but to be a concise guideline for anyone wishing to replicate it themselves.
In spite of giving Thane some direction on the parameters required for this non linear effect, he hasn't even bothered to read (according to his own postings) any of the information I've already volunteered to him about it. Strange for a person who is supposedly seeking the truth about this effect. One would think that any prior information regarding this would be welcome, but Thane seems quite content to re hash that which is already known, whilst postulating unlikely theories regarding electrostatic versus electromagnetic properties of differing coils, as being the cause of the effect ??
Cheers.
Quote from: hoptoad on April 24, 2008, 10:38:52 PM
Quote from: RCH on April 24, 2008, 08:39:41 PM
Need a "one pager" from you -- explaining in SIMPLE, NON-TECHNICAL language (for my producers -- no Ohms, Reluctance, etc., etc.) WHAT you believe you have discovered. WHY this is unique.
@RCH
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, Thane did not discover this, he has merely rediscovered what has already been known for some time.
It isn't unique, but it is useful. How do I know? Because I've been there and done that!
See pages 8 and 10 at this site: http://www.totallyamped.net/adams ....
Cheers.
Hoptoad ,
(For the record, I'm NOT a fan of silly webnames in serious conversations ... but that's just me ....)
All that may be true -- and
totally irrelevant at this point.
Remember the part earlier, where I described "Coast" (paraphrasing) as "a place where guests are invited on to tell their STORIES ... with whatever
supporting evidence they want to present?"
Well, part of Thane's exciting "story" is the fact that he has a
current, viable, "anomalous" working technology to showcase (readily available to see via the Internet); that he's been invited to present live demos of that technology to a number of important media
and scientific institutions; and, that he has now found a current "home" for on-going experimental/development work on that technology at a major University ... which is enabling him to attempt to advance to the next important step "at light speed":
A
practical demonstration of that "anomalous technology" ... an actual, electric "extended range vehicle."
That's a pretty interesting story ... even to this point. :)
If and when Thane appears as an actual guest on "Coast" -- and relates the details of THAT story for ~3 hours to our audience -- some of the additional details that will be asked of him (in front of several million listeners ...) will be
my original questions:
"What makes your (Thane's) discovery
unique (if it is ...)?"
And--
"
How do you think it works?"
If Thane can't (or won't) answer those questions honestly, to the best of his ability -- including citing
prior work (if any ...) -- than THAT response (or lack of it ...) will ALSO become part of his developing
public story ... won't it?
And, during the program, you (and other knowledgable folks) will get a chance to either call in live, send e-mails to the host during the interview, or have ME provide appropriate background documentation of any "prior art" beforehand.
"Coast" is a place and a format where ALL the relevant information will come out --
live. From my reading of all ~1700 plus posts in this thread over several
days (!), and understanding EXACTLY what Thane and Luc are going through in terms of public pressure at this point, I have every confidence that Thane will ultimately do the right thing when his "15 minutes" arrives ....
Thane's public success (if it develops ...) will also become a vehicle for showcasing a lot of OTHER "anomalous technologies" -- if not their equally deserving inventors -- along the way.
So, my suggestion is: relax .... :)
RCH
Quote from: hoptoad on April 24, 2008, 10:38:52 PM
It isn't unique, but it is useful.
It's not useful if it's essentially been abandoned in a garden shed or whatever a thousand miles away. It's not useful parked on a webpage. Thane is trying to make whatever he has discovered - or rediscovered - into something useful. That's why the focus, for better or for worse, is on his project. I wish him every success.
I don't understand hoptoad's point either.
This forum is full from top to bottom of projects seeking to duplicate pioneers in the alternative energy field.
In fact almost everything on this website is based on replication of someone else's technology.
Be it Tesla, stubblefield, bedini, Marks tpu, John Hutchisons crystal Cell.
We are all building on the foundation of these pioneers.
God is always willing to give us the answers, we just aren't listening, remember everything He does is based around faith.
Listen for that small still voice that tells you what to try next. Just listen. You hear that, now try it.
Keep up the great work.
Quote from: JustMe on April 24, 2008, 11:45:15 PM
Quote from: hoptoad on April 24, 2008, 10:38:52 PM
It isn't unique, but it is useful.
It's not useful if it's essentially been abandoned in a garden shed or whatever a thousand miles away. It's not useful parked on a webpage. Thane is trying to make whatever he has discovered - or rediscovered - into something useful. That's why the focus, for better or for worse, is on his project. I wish him every success.
Information is always useful, especially when its freely and openly made available to all and any interested parties, as is the case when posted in an unrestricted open web page. I'm simply puzzled that Thane doesn't seem to be interested in prior knowlege. Navigating your way to the next stage is always easier when you understand where you're currently at, and how you got there.
I have already on a number of occasions wished Thane success, and I still do and will continue to do so.
I just fail to see why he would ignore prior knowledge and information of any sort, that may further aid his progress.
Cheers
Thane,
OK, George told me tonight that he's "interested."
I need that letter (a PM will do ...) -- a good overview of "what" you've got; "how" you found it; "who's" expressed interest and supported it so far (like the Univeristy); and "where" you intend to go with it.
Oh ... and don't forget the "why." :)
RCH
QuoteInformation is always useful, especially when its freely and openly made available to all and any interested parties, as is the case when posted in an unrestricted open web page. I'm simply puzzled that Thane doesn't seem to be interested in prior knowlege. Navigating your way to the next stage is always easier when you understand where you're currently at, and how you got there.
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE APPLIED IN THE LAB NOT IN A CHAT ROOM -
WE COULD USE THE HELP.
WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE AT, HOW WE GOT THERE, AND WHERE WE ARE GOING WITH OUR NEXT STAGE(S) OF DEVELOPMENT.
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE CAN HELP OR IT CAN LEAD ONE ASTRAY - I WANT TO AVOID THE LATTER.
Quote
I have already on a number of occasions wished Thane success, and I still do and will continue to do so.
I just fail to see why he would ignore prior knowledge and information of any sort, that may further aid his progress.Cheers
I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT - BUT I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY MANY, MANY PEOPLE WITH TONS OF "PRIOR KNOWLEDGE" THAT I AM A QUACK AND THIS WILL NEVER WORK AND THAT IT OUGHT TO BE ABANDONED - YOU CAN SEE LOTS OF WELL MEANING PEOPLE EMPLOYING ALL THEIR PRIOR KNOWLEDGE THAT ARE
STILL SAYING THAT TODAY.
SO MY APPROACH IS TO
IGNORE EVERYONE AND THEIR SO CALLED (RIGHT OR WRONG) "PRIOR KNOWLEDGE" AND (CORRECT OR INCORRECT) "INFORMATION" AND (GOOD OR BAD) "MOTIVES" AND FOCUS ON MY OWN IN THE LAB EVERYDAY.
ANYONE WHO WANTS TO HELP IS WELCOME IN THE LAB.
Thane
Hi Thane,
I imagine there are a lot of Ottawa engineering students that would love to help out! Is it possible for you to ask for volunteers, perhaps through the professor that is supporting your project?
I think the effect of being on CoastToCoast will also bring in alot of volunteers, if you ask for them on air! I hope you go for it! :)
Aaron
Pitbeam,
That was one of my thoughts EXACTLY.
Thane obviously needs some serious "worker bees" right now; going on "Coast" will open the door to a LOT of potential volunteers ... as well as other help. :)
RCH
Quote from: hoptoad on March 03, 2008, 02:35:52 AM
On page 8 and page 10 of my site, I dealt with the phenomena of acceleration due to coil loading. But at the end on page 10 I deliberately left my conclusions regarding the reason for this phenomena open, until a time when others might be studying this phenomena independently, and come up with their own conclusions.
Without me tainting their (your) opinions, I might learn something more myself. LOL :D
Seems you have some support for your approach Thane.
Quote from: bitbeam on April 25, 2008, 03:09:38 PM
Hi Thane,
I imagine there are a lot of Ottawa engineering students that would love to help out! Is it possible for you to ask for volunteers, perhaps through the professor that is supporting your project?
Aaron
According to Thane's earlier post, he already has 5 fourth-year Ottawa University students assigned to this project and his results are being reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash. I think that's already quite a lot of highly qualified resource. No doubt more help would be welcome but it's kind of puzzling that with all those people on the job already we are not seeing very much at all in the way of useful results.
PB is that you? moms been looking all over for you !!!! your gonna get grounded for sure
Quote from: OUman on April 25, 2008, 06:46:33 PM
According to Thane's earlier post, he already has 5 fourth-year Ottawa University students assigned to this project and his results are being reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash. I think that's already quite a lot of highly qualified resource. No doubt more help would be welcome but it's kind of puzzling that with all those people on the job already we are not seeing very much at all in the way of useful results.
WELCOME BACK PB!NICE TO SEE YOU OUT FROM UNDER YOUR ROCK.
Thane
Quote from: OUman on April 25, 2008, 06:46:33 PM
According to Thane's earlier post, he already has 5 fourth-year Ottawa University students assigned to this project and his results are being reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash. I think that's already quite a lot of highly qualified resource. No doubt more help would be welcome but it's kind of puzzling that with all those people on the job already we are not seeing very much at all in the way of useful results.
THIS IS ALMOST TRUE (ALBEIT SLIMY).
I HAD TO WHIP LUC TODAY FOR NOT WORKING 8 DAYS A WEEK FOR FREE.
AS FOR THE STUDENTS - THEY ARE ON HOLIDAYS OR IN EXAMS.
I DID NOT INSIST THAT THEY HELP ME BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH THEIR SCHOOL WORK.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 25, 2008, 12:04:50 PM
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE APPLIED IN THE LAB NOT IN A CHAT ROOM -
WE COULD USE THE HELP.
Agreed, however, where you
aquire that knowledge can be from a number of sources and medium type.
I would be glad to (physically) help If I had an unlimited budget to pay for return flights from Victoria (Australia) to Canada on week ends, in between earning a meagre (wage slave) income during the week. :D :D
Good luck. :)
Quote from: hoptoad on April 25, 2008, 07:35:14 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 25, 2008, 12:04:50 PM
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE APPLIED IN THE LAB NOT IN A CHAT ROOM -
WE COULD USE THE HELP.
Agreed, however, where you aquire that knowledge can be from a number of sources and medium type.
I would be glad to (physically) help If I had an unlimited budget to pay for return flights from Victoria (Australia) to Canada on week ends, in between earning a meagre (wage slave) income during the week. :D :D
Good luck. :)
HELL NO - LUC AND I WILL SAIL THERE!
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on April 25, 2008, 04:37:09 PM
Seems you have some support for your approach Thane.
..........
until a time when others might be studying this phenomena independently, and come up with their own conclusions.
......the times, they are a changing ....... Oh yeah.... Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on April 25, 2008, 07:35:14 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on April 25, 2008, 12:04:50 PM
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE SHOULD BE APPLIED IN THE LAB NOT IN A CHAT ROOM -
WE COULD USE THE HELP.
Agreed, however, where you aquire that knowledge can be from a number of sources and medium type.
I would be glad to (physically) help If I had an unlimited budget to pay for return flights from Victoria (Australia) to Canada on week ends, in between earning a meagre (wage slave) income during the week. :D :D
Good luck. :)
This could work out well. We are just down the road from you, in Adelaide. By next week we will have replication of Thane's design ready test. If you you have something to contribute, I am happy to pay your aifrares and accomodation to come over and lend a hand.
Uli
Quote from: OilBarren on April 25, 2008, 07:28:35 PM
Quote from: OUman on April 25, 2008, 06:46:33 PM
According to Thane's earlier post...his results are being reviewed on a daily basis by Dr Habash...
...THIS IS ALMOST TRUE...
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM...
How many times has the prof reviewed your results since you posted that on 14 March?
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 26, 2008, 07:08:26 AM
This could work out well. We are just down the road from you, in Adelaide. By next week we will have replication of Thane's design ready test. If you you have something to contribute, I am happy to pay your aifrares and accomodation to come over and lend a hand.
Uli
WELCOME ULI,
THIS IS A REAL HONOR EVERYONE PLEASE ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE ULI KRUGER - WHO IS WORKING WITH NEIL YOUNG ON THE LINCVOLT PROJECT.
Thane
"Changes come from the power of many, but only when the many come to form that of which is invincible - the power of one."
QuoteHow many times has the prof reviewed your results since you posted that on 14 March?
OUman
EVERY MAJOR IMPROVEMENT - IS SENT VIA EMAIL OR DONE IN PERSON.
SUCH AS THE TABLE
JUSTME KINDLY PROVIDED AND ALL THOSE RESULTS.
OUR NEW COIL CONFIGURATION AND THE 2 FOOT PVC PIPE EXPERIMENT RESULTS WERE ALSO SHARED. ALSO MY (RIGHT OR WRONG) "ELECTROSTATIC THEORY" WAS ALSO SHARED.
AND EVERY VIDEO AS WELL.
EVERYONE SHOULD ALSO BE AWARE THAT I AM ALSO BOUND BY
LUC'S HYPER-INTEGRITY.
I HAVE ALSO BEEN SHARING
ONGOING RESULTS SINCE 2003 WITH:
(partial list)
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA (ROMAC)
McGILL UNIVERSITY
QUEENS UNIVERSITY
RYERSON UNIVERSITY
MIT
CARLETON UNIVERSITY
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY
ELECTRON ENERGY CORPORATION
FILTRAN TRANSFORMERS
TOROID TECHNOLOGIES
BEN-GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV (WHO I SENT A TRANSFORMER FOR TESTING)
THE UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
YORK UNIVERSITY
CANADIAN NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
MICHAEL MOORE
ABB
VIRGIN GREEN FUND
AL GORE
GOOGLE RECHARGE-IT
UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA
UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY
CEGEP - HERITAGE CAMPUS
ALGONQUIN COLLEGE
LIVE EARTH
SCIENCEBASE SCIENCE BLOG
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
DAVID SUZUKI
EARTH DAY OTTAWA
GREEN MOTOR SPORTS
KINECTRICS INC.
ONTARIO HYDRO
THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISION
THE CHINESE MINISTER OF ENERGY
POWER CET CANADA
Advanced Studies at Austin and President
EarthTech International
TESLA MOTORS
AC PROPULSION
ZEN MOTORS
JAY LENO'S GARAGE
POPULAR SCIENCE
THE CANADIAN WILDLIFE FEDERATION
Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy
WESTINGHOUSE
GENERAL ELECTRIC
GENERAL MOTORS
BOMBARDIER
SCIENTIFIC AMERICA
THE SKEPTIC MAGAZINE
WIRED MAGAZINE
TIME MAGAZINE
MOTOR TREND
CAR AND DRIVER
ELECTRIC VEHICLE ASSOCIATION (WORLD HEADQUARTERS)
MAGSOFT CORPORATION
HOME DEPO - RYOBI
LEE VALLEY
UNIVERSITY OF HAMILTON
THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL
THE OTTAWA CITIZEN
THE TORONTO STAR
CTV OTTAWA
NEXUS MAGAZINE
RAMConsulting & Power
Department of Physics University of Virginia
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
US DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL SECURITY
UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO
MAGENN POWER INC.
PLUG IN AMERICA
GLOBAL WITNESS
PEMBINA INSTITUTE
CLEAN GROWTH
ALIVE MAGAZINE
ONTARIO CENTRE FOR ENVIROMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
HYDRO ONE
Fasco Motors Group
WI-LAN CORPORATION
MARK CUBAN
STEVE JOBS
RPM
INFINITE ENERGY MAGAZINE
ROCKWELL AUTOMATION
LOENARDO DICAPRIO
Eric Weisstein's World of Physics
IEEE
NASA
AS WELL... JUST ABOUT:
EVERY UNIVERSITY IN THE WORLD THAT DOES POWER TECHNOLOGIES
EVERY SCIENCE MAGAZINE / NATURE / ENVIRONMENTALÂ
EVERY UNIVERSITY IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES WITH A SCIENCE COURSE
Thane
Thane how many of YUO are there?[triplets or something?] how do you get so much done? your like a superman!!
Well PB 's running around in the parking lot now with his superman costume on mind melding with a fire hydrant {i think] she's definately gonna take away the computer now
Quote from: ramset on April 26, 2008, 09:55:49 AM
Thane how many of YUO are there?[triplets or something?] how do you get so much done? your like a superman!!
I START WORK AT 4 - 6 AM AND WORK VIRTUALLY NON STOP UNTIL 9 PM OR MIDNIGHT MOST DAYS AND I DON'T WATCH TV EXCEPT FOR AMERICAN IDOL.
I WALK DOWN THE STREET AND NO ONE TRIES TO KILL ME OR BLOW ME UP - SO WHEN I GET TIRED OR DISCOURAGED (EVERY 5 MINUTES OR SO) I REMIND MYSELF OF THE MEN AND WOMEN (SOLDIERS AND CIVILIANS) IN IRAQ WHO DON'T HAVE THIS LUXURY AND I GO BACK TO WORK.
I COULD NEVER DO WHAT THEY DO - SO THIS IS
HOW I TRY TO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS.
I ALSO DRIVE A FAIR AMOUNT AND I AM PAINFULLY AWARE THAT THE "LOW PRICE" OF FUEL IS BEING PAID FOR WITH THEIR LIVES. THIS PRICE IS TOO HIGH FOR ME AND I WOULD RATHER NOT BE COMPLICITY INVOLVED IN THIS.
I BELIEVE THIS THING THAT WE ARE COLLECTIVELY WILLING TO KILL AND STEAL FOR (OIL) AS PROMOTED BY OUR
WARMONGERS OF MASS DECEPTION (WMD's) - BY THE UNIVERSAL LAWS OF KARMA AND "AS YOU SOW SO SHALL YOU REAP" CAN ONLY END UP EVENTUALLY KILLING US ALL IN RETURN (GLOBAL WARMING).
Thane
Thane there is nothing I could put into words for what you represent here I personally feel Shame you deserve accolades you are an inspiration and a very special person your daughters will /should be very proud
Quote from: ramset on April 26, 2008, 11:51:54 AM
Thane there is nothing I could put into words for what you represent here I personally feel Shame you deserve accolades you are an inspiration and a very special person your daughters will /should be very proud
THANKS
PLEASE SEND YOUR TAX DEDUCTIBLE CHECKS AND MONEY ORDERS TO...
THE MAKE THANE HEINS A STINKING RICH FAT BASTARD CHARITY IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF THE GLOBAL ELITE ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT FUND.
thane ,
do you have a paypal account?
lol
sam
ps: you rock man!!!!
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM...
Quote from: OUman on April 25, 2008, 07:28:35 PM
How many times has the prof reviewed your results since you posted that on 14 March?
OUman
Quote from: OilBarren on April 26, 2008, 09:27:01 AM
EVERY MAJOR IMPROVEMENT - IS SENT VIA EMAIL OR DONE IN PERSON.
SUCH AS THE TABLE... AND EVERY VIDEO AS WELL...
I HAVE ALSO BEEN SHARING ONGOING RESULTS SINCE 2003 WITH:
(partial list)
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA (ROMAC)
McGILL UNIVERSITY
QUEENS UNIVERSITY...etc
Thane
How many times has the OU prof double checked your results since you posted that on 14 March?
I IMAGINE THAT JUSTME MAY BE POSTING SOME NEW TEST DATA SOON?
THE OSCILLOSCOPE VOLTAGE X AND THE CURRENT Y CALIBRATIONS NEED TO BE ADJUSTED SLIGHTLY.
Thane
Hi Thane,
I wanted to second the thought that you and Luc are amazing! Reading this newsgroup everyday gives me hope for the future! :) It's also cool that the negativity PB and OUMan are trying to infect you with slides right off your back, it must have these spooks really frustrated! Nothing is more powerful against these negative forces than a positive and optimistic view of the future! :)
Aaron
Quote
How many times has the OU prof double checked your results since you posted that on 14 March?
WHT NOT CALL HIM AND FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF?
Thane
YEAH ....helpy... helperton... call him yourself !!!! Or do you just want another 8 bye 10 glossy of Thane for your dart board {I don't know if he's still giving those out with donations to the one world order thingy] Chet
Quote from: ramset on April 27, 2008, 08:37:21 AM
Or do you just want another 8 bye 10 glossy of Thane for your dart board {I don't know if he's still giving those out with donations to the one world order thingy] Chet
SORRY NO 8 x 10 GLOSSIES - WE JUST REMOVE HIS NAME FROM THE "USELESS EATERS"
LIST. (ask RCH about that one)
Thane
Good morning! The following is as per Thane via email. He also forwarded a copy of an email he sent to Dr. Habash with the same data and images. -JMe
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED TESTS PERFORMED TODAY ON LUC'S 2 NEW SECONDARIES - HAND MADE AND HAND WOUND 15 x 30 GAUGE "LITZ".
IT TOOK LUC 4 SOLID DAYS OF WINDING UNTIL HIS FINGERS BLISTERED AND WHILE NURSING SUCH A SORE BACK TO THE EXTENT THAT HE COULD NOT WALK 3 BLOCKS TO THE CAR AT THE END OF THE DAY.
THE METERED POWER FACTOR WAS DOUBLE CHECKED ON THE OSCILLOSCOPE AND THE PRIMARY CURRENT IS PRETTY MUCH REACTIVE - LAGGING THE VOLTAGE BY 90 DEGREES Pf = 0
INPUT POWER = 0 W
OUTPUT POWER = 300mW .
IN TEST #2 AND TEST #3 THE SECONDARIES WERE PUSHED TO SATURATION TO SEE IF THE POWER ANALYZER COULD REGISTER A POWER FACTOR READING.
TEST #4 IS A CONVENTIONAL EI TYPE TRANSFORMER WITH THE SAME INPUT CURRENT AS A COMPARISON TEST.
THANKS
Thane
NEXT STEP:
1) INCREASE PRIMARY TURNS - TO GET CURRENT DOWN EVEN LOWER.
2) ADD LOAD TO SECONDARY 1 - WHICH IS CURRENTLY SHORTED.
3) REDO OSCILLOSCOPE PHOTO.
Thane
I am on the thinnest of thin ice when I wander off into any technical aspects of this stuff, but I read an interesting item on the value of asymmetry in magnetic systems. It was talking about PM motors in this case, but the section that caught my eye said:
The point is this: It isn't the power that we externally input into a coil in a permanent magnet motor, a coil judicially placed in the back mmf section to allow us to break the symmetry of the back mmf region. That asymmetry ? once achieved by any means ? is what actually powers the system! All that inputting our paid-for energy to the coil does, is produce the necessary asymmetry.
And the materials and motor and assembly of the motor system care not one hoot how we get that asymmetry to be there. Get it anyway you wish, and the motor will then power itself and a load, taking its input energy directly from the seething virtual state vacuum via that broken symmetry.
I wondered if the things hoptoad said about the phase relationships in his observations might also be called 'asymmetry'? Could 'asymmetry' and ZPE have any role in what's going on with the generator?
Please forgive me if these questions are naive or otherwise way off base.
The full item is here:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2866
JustMe,
You've nailed it (with a little help from Tom ...). :)
The key is identifying "what" the assymetry "opens the door" to ... when it's somehow established.
Which is why Aether22's "missing in action" status here is becoming increasingly disturbing ....
RCH
Quote from: RCH on April 27, 2008, 03:50:28 PM
JustMe,
You've nailed it (with a little help from Tom ...). :)
The key is identifying "what" the assymetry "opens the door" to ... when it's somehow established.
Which is why Aether22's "missing in action" status here is becoming increasingly disturbing ....
RCH
I was thinking about Aether22 when I was reading that article too. :) I did hear from him about a week ago via e-mail - he said he has been busy generally, and was still stuck gathering materials for his replication attempt. So I think all is well, and hopefully he's still reading here and will pop in soon.
JM,
Thanks.
RCH
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
This was posted nearly 3 months ago and seems to be a very plausible explanation. Have any of the experiments since then produced results inconsistent with that theory?
Quote from: OUman on April 27, 2008, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
This was posted nearly 3 months ago and seems to be a very plausible explanation. Have any of the experiments since then produced results inconsistent with that theory?
@All
Did anybody ever come to a sound conclusion as to why Vince got acceleration by holding up just the steel and laminates to the spinning magnets? Is this not the exact scenario as described above that should have produced drag/deceleration?
JM,
Yes .... :)
So if THAT'S not the (demonstrable) "explanation" ... what IS?
"Inquiring minds" OU ....
RCH
Hint: Go back and Study Depalma ... who, incidentally, went to NZ and worked with Adams ... until his untimely death in 1997.
DePalma is the KEY ....
Quote
@All
Did anybody ever come to a sound conclusion as to why Vince got acceleration by holding up just the steel and laminates to the spinning magnets? Is this not the exact scenario as described above that should have produced drag/deceleration?
I DO ... VINCE WAS ON CRACK THAT DAY. :D
ACTUALLY I WOULD SUGGEST THAT HE MAY HAVE BEEN OPERATING HIS MOTOR AT SLIGHTLY BELOW RATED SPEED? - PLACING THE STEEL NEAR THE ROTOR CAUSED SLIGHT DECELERATION - INCREASING SLIP ANGLE - INCREASING STATOR CURRENT AND CAUSING THE OBSERVED ACCELERATION.
Thane
Quote
I was thinking about Aether22 when I was reading that article too. :) I did hear from him about a week ago via e-mail - he said he has been busy generally, and was still stuck gathering materials for his replication attempt. So I think all is well, and hopefully he's still reading here and will pop in soon.
HE WILL POP UP ALRIGHT - WHEN WE HEAR ABOUT SOME GUY'S HOUSE IN NZ LEVITATING AND A BLACK HOLE FORMING ABOVE IT.
Thane
Today's data...
DEAR ALL,
I RE-DID THE TEST PERFORMED YESTERDAY SO THAT I COULD ENSURE THE POWER FACTOR ON THE OSCILLOSCOPE WAS INDEED 0.00 - OR CURRENT LAGGING THE VOLTAGE BY 90 DEGREES - WHICH MEANS VIRTUALLY ONLY REACTIVE CURRENT IN THE PRIMARY AND NO REAL POWER BEING DISSIPATED IN THE PRIMARY.
THEN I PLACED 100, 22 & 10 ohm LOADS ON BOTH SECONDARIES AND GOT EFFICIENCY NUMBERS WHICH SUGGEST OVER UNITY BECAUSE THE OSCILLOSCOPE POWER FACTOR AGREES WITH THE POWER ANYLIZER.
I WILL BE WINDING A NEW PRIMARY ON MONDAY TO SEE IF I CAN GET THE PRIMARY CURRENT EVEN LOWER.
CHEERS
Thane
@OILBARREN
No Crack, but I did need asperin when the magnets flew off!!!
I think your evaluation is right because I was below rated speed and I did see a slight increase in input current.
Vince
Vince,
So ... set the RPM higher--
And repeat!
Yours was/is a VERY revealing experiment .... :)
RCH
Quote from: OUman on April 27, 2008, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
This was posted nearly 3 months ago and seems to be a very plausible explanation. Have any of the experiments since then produced results inconsistent with that theory?
Shane's latest video demonstration does not fit this scenario at all. The input load to the motor actually decreases (by about 50watt) with increased output speed only when the high voltage coils as well as the high current coils are connected to a load. With the high voltage coils at open circuit and only the high current coils connected to the load,the generator behaves as expected from text book theory. Besides, why would shorting out the coils shield the steel rods from the magnetic field anyway? Every time I have tried this with a permanent magnet generator, it just locks up.
Uli
CF,
As you so rightly note, a major new clue is the "high voltage."
Thanks thinks that his results are now determined by "electrostatics." Not quite ....
In fact, the real focus should be on the voltage gradient within the coils .... And, how that is interacting with the magnets of his "generator." :)
RCH
purely theoretical :(:
arrangement as build by Thane, consisting of a prime mover and Thane's generator.
One coil with little impedance is installed, in close-circuit with a load.
Thane calls such a coil a "high current coil".
System is at rest. With a scope probe at the load (vs. ground) a horizontal line will show up on a scope. I call this
the absolute zero-level of voltage potential. It is the same level as earth ground.
Now the prime mover starts to rotate.
An alternating current is produced in the circuit (i.e. in coil&load).
The voltage which got induced in the coil (when a magnet appeared and disappeared) could completely dissipate through the load as current before the next magnet approaches the coil.
The alternating current can be seen on the scope, alternating around the absolute zero level.
When the next magnet approaches, it gets repelled according to Lenz's law.
arrangement as above, except
one high impedance coil is installed, in close-circuit with a load.
Thane calls such a coil a "high voltage coil".
System is at rest. With a scope probe at the load, the absolute zero-level can be detected. It is the same level as in scenario1.
Prime mover starts to rotate.
Rotation is slow (below 'impedance threshold').
Same things happen as in scenario 1.
same as 2a except
prime mover rotates faster (i.e. RPMs are higher than 'impedance threshold').
The voltage, which got induced in the coil (when a magnet appeared and disappeared), could
not completely dissipate through the circuit, due to the high impedance of the coil and the impedance of the load
while the next magnet is already approaching.
The part of the energy, which was not dissipated got stored in capacitive reactance.
The amount of stored and not dissipated energy gets bigger with increasing RPMs.
The above, so far, is factual, I guess.
Now I would like to know:
- Is there any interaction between this stored (i.e. not dissipated) amount of energy and the magnets?
- If the coil-load-circuit is not grounded, is the zero level of the voltage signal rising compared to the absolute zero level, while the system speeds up in scenario2b?
In other words:
is the theoretical horizontal center line on a scope, above and below which the voltage alternates, rising?
Again in other words:
Is the voltage wave, as observed on a scope, shifting upward while the system speeds up?
(By "shifting upward" I mean compared to the absolute zero level)?
If so, does this mean that an increasing DC voltage potential
and thus DC current is developing in the coil-and-load-circuit with increasing RPMs (having implications on the forces of attraction and repulsion between new approaching magnets and coils)?
edit: I struck the part about 'DC current' as the circuits are not grounded.
edit2: tried to clarify the stuff about the 'zero level'
Quote from: RCH on April 28, 2008, 01:33:30 AM
Vince,
So ... set the RPM higher--
And repeat!
Yours was/is a VERY revealing experiment .... :)
RCH
YES AND IF POSSIBLE LOAD THE MOTOR WITH YOUR STEEL BAR - BEYONG THE
PULL OUT POINT AND IT SHOLD NOT RECOVER.
Thane
Quote from: Gustav22 on April 28, 2008, 05:25:35 AM
The above, so far, is factual, I guess.
Now I would like to know:
- Is there any interaction between this stored (i.e. not dissipated) amount of energy and the magnets?
- Is the "zero level" rising (around which the current in the circuit alternates) while the system speeds up in scenario2b?
MY FEELING IS THE STORED CAPACITIVE REACTANCE IS DISSIPATED INSTANTLY THROUGH THE COIL WHEN THE MAGNET MOVES AWAY.
THIS IN TURN PRODUCES CURRENT IN THE HIGH VOLTAGE WIRE AND AN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD WHICH
AIDS - RATHER THAN HINDERS THE MAGNETS DEPARTURE.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN "ZERO LEVEL" PLZ.
Thane
Quote from: RCH on April 27, 2008, 06:14:59 PM
Hint: Go back and Study Depalma ... who, incidentally, went to NZ and worked with Adams ... until his untimely death in 1997.
DePalma is the KEY ....
You're forgetting, RCH, that Thane has told us he makes a point of NOT studying anyone else's results because he says it interferes with his intuitive processes.
Quote from: JustMe on April 27, 2008, 04:39:31 PM
Quote from: OUman on April 27, 2008, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
This was posted nearly 3 months ago and seems to be a very plausible explanation. Have any of the experiments since then produced results inconsistent with that theory?
@All
Did anybody ever come to a sound conclusion as to why Vince got acceleration by holding up just the steel and laminates to the spinning magnets? Is this not the exact scenario as described above that should have produced drag/deceleration?
Maybe Vince could comment on that and tell us whether that effect was repeatable. Also, how many other people reproduced that effect? In particular, has Thane reproduced that effect?
Quote from: vince on April 27, 2008, 11:33:27 PM
@OILBARREN
No Crack, but I did need asperin when the magnets flew off!!!
I think your evaluation is right because I was below rated speed and I did see a slight increase in input current.
Vince
So that means the hysteresis brake theory still looks solid then.
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:30:22 AM
Quote from: RCH on April 27, 2008, 06:14:59 PM
Hint: Go back and Study Depalma ... who, incidentally, went to NZ and worked with Adams ... until his untimely death in 1997.
DePalma is the KEY ....
You're forgetting, RCH, that Thane has told us he makes a point of NOT studying anyone else's results because he says it interferes with his intuitive processes.
COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT ONCE YOU START - YOU'LL NEVER STOP BECAUSE THERE IS ALREADY SO MUCH BEING DONE "OUT THERE" ALREADY AND BEFORE YOU KNOW IT YOU ARE REPLICATING SOME ONE ELSE'S WORK RATHER THAN REVOLUTIONIZING SOMETHING NEW.
Thane
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 28, 2008, 02:40:54 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 27, 2008, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
This was posted nearly 3 months ago and seems to be a very plausible explanation. Have any of the experiments since then produced results inconsistent with that theory?
Shane's latest video demonstration does not fit this scenario at all. The input load to the motor actually decreases (by about 50watt) with increased output speed only when the high voltage coils as well as the high current coils are connected to a load. With the high voltage coils at open circuit and only the high current coils connected to the load,the generator behaves as expected from text book theory. Besides, why would shorting out the coils shield the steel rods from the magnetic field anyway? Every time I have tried this with a permanent magnet generator, it just locks up.
Uli
Uli, I suggest you dust off your textbooks about magnetic braking. There is nothing whatsoever mysterious about this. The original poster didn't express it very scientifically, that's true, but the theory behind this is very well established.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 28, 2008, 07:40:51 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:30:22 AM
You're forgetting, RCH, that Thane has told us he makes a point of NOT studying anyone else's results because he says it interferes with his intuitive processes.
COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT ONCE YOU START - YOU'LL NEVER STOP BECAUSE THERE IS ALREADY SO MUCH BEING DONE "OUT THERE" ALREADY AND BEFORE YOU KNOW IT YOU ARE REPLICATING SOME ONE ELSE'S WORK RATHER THAN REVOLUTIONIZING SOMETHING NEW.
Thane
As opposed to unknowingly replicating someone else's work and only
thinking you're "revolutionizing something new"? Click here: http://depalma.pair.com
Quote from: OilBarren on April 28, 2008, 06:44:47 AM
...
CAN YOU EXPLAIN "ZERO LEVEL" PLZ.
Thane
I tried to edit my posting
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg92650.html#msg92650
to make it more clear.
Maybe it is still not clear enough, then I will try to clarify on another occasion in the future.
On another topic:
I think hartiberlin should grant you moderator rights, so that you are able to keep PB and his clones in check.
Imagine somebody new getting interested in your tech and having to wade through this thread.Just imagine.
Even if you yourself don't want to delete the detractions, you should be able to transfer the moderator right to a person you trust.
Harti, you should OFFER this to Thane.
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:49:12 AM
As opposed to unknowingly replicating someone else's work and only thinking you're "revolutionizing something new"? Click here: http://depalma.pair.com
That so many others have noted similar things makes Thane's work
more urgent and not less. If there is indeed something of value in these observations scattered over at least three decades, it's well past time for it to come off the bench. The mainstream attention he's gotten may mean that the time is now, and certainly means the opportunity is his. Why add negative pressure?
Quote from: JustMe on April 28, 2008, 10:50:45 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:49:12 AM
As opposed to unknowingly replicating someone else's work and only thinking you're "revolutionizing something new"? Click here: http://depalma.pair.com
That so many others have noted similar things makes Thane's work more urgent and not less. If there is indeed something of value in these observations scattered over at least three decades, it's well past time for it to come off the bench. The mainstream attention he's gotten may mean that the time is now, and certainly means the opportunity is his. Why add negative pressure?
I agree and I don't intend it to be negative pressure - you misunderstand my point. There has been a tremendous amount of work done in this field - many, many people have laboured for years on it over decades. Does it not make sense to learn from all of that very extensive research as a springboard to move forward, rather than deliberately ignoring it? Those previous researchers developed a body of knowledge that could be very useful here; and they also went down a lot of blind alleys that could be avoided here with a knowledge of what they did. De Palma's N-Machine is only one of many examples that could speed this project along with knowledge of what has gone before. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_De_Palma
Quote from: Gustav22 on April 28, 2008, 09:04:59 AM
On another topic:
I think hartiberlin should grant you moderator rights, so that you are able to keep PB and his clones in check.
Imagine somebody new getting interested in your tech and having to wade through this thread.
Just imagine.
Even if you yourself don't want to delete the detractions, you should be able to transfer the moderator right to a person you trust.
Harti, you should OFFER this to Thane.
I understand the frustration and concern, but censorship is rarely a good answer to anything. The best defence against unreasonable detraction is a strong and enthusiastic community. That can be easily built and maintained through communication, openness, progress etc. Small 's' skeptics ask fair and reasonable questions that deserve airing and consideration. I consider myself to have one foot planted firmly on little 's' skeptic soil. Big 'S' (feel free to read that fast) Skeptics add nothing, and marginalize themselves. They don't need to be deleted, and shouldn't be, because that has the potential to supress challenge across the board. This shouldn't be run like a fiefdom.
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 11:02:10 AM
I agree and I don't intend it to be negative pressure - you misunderstand my point. There has been a tremendous amount of work done in this field - many, many people have laboured for years on it over decades. Does it not make sense to learn from all of that very extensive research as a springboard to move forward, rather than deliberately ignoring it? Those previous researchers developed a body of knowledge that could be very useful here; and they also went down a lot of blind alleys that could be avoided here with a knowledge of what they did. De Palma's N-Machine is only one of many examples that could speed this project along with knowledge of what has gone before. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_De_Palma
In theory, yes. In practice, I'm not so sure. The DePalma and Adams versions credited the vacuum or the aether. Hoptoad's work pointed to impedance. Thane started with back-EMF and based on experimental results has moved away from that and is looking at capacitance. None of these past machines were exactly the same, and none had the very specific goal of powering an electric vehicle. It's just as likely that Thane would get bogged down. At this point, he needs to understand the parameters of operation just well enough to build something that outperforms a comparable conventional system. If he builds it, they (the theoreticians) will come, and full understanding and optimization can follow. The most important unsolved question to me right now is 'Can it be made into something practical?'
Quote from: JustMe on April 28, 2008, 12:06:46 PM
In theory, yes. In practice, I'm not so sure. The DePalma and Adams versions credited the vacuum or the aether. Hoptoad's work pointed to impedance. Thane started with back-EMF and based on experimental results has moved away from that and is looking at capacitance. None of these past machines were exactly the same, and none had the very specific goal of powering an electric vehicle. It's just as likely that Thane would get bogged down. At this point, he needs to understand the parameters of operation just well enough to build something that outperforms a comparable conventional system. If he builds it, they (the theoreticians) will come, and full understanding and optimization can follow. The most important unsolved question to me right now is 'Can it be made into something practical?'
HERE'S MY LOGIC:
1) BUILD AND PROVE THE HIGH VOLTAGE GENERATOR WHICH ACCELERATES THE PRIME MOVER UNDER LOAD.
2) BUILD AND PROVE THE TOROID GENERATOR WHICH IGNORES THE LOAD AND DOES NOT DECELERATE THE PRIME MOVER UNDER LOAD.
3) PERFECT THE (ALREADY) OVER 100% BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER WHICH ONLY DRAWS REACTIVE CURRENT.
4) CONVINCE ULI AND MR. YOUNG TO USE ALL THREE TECHNOLOGIES IN THEIR "PINK" LINCOLN
5) WATCH THEM WIN THE X PRIZE.
Thane
QuoteCAN YOU EXPLAIN "ZERO LEVEL" PLZ.
I tried to edit my posting
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg92650.html#msg92650
to make it more clear.
Maybe it is still not clear enough, then I will try to clarify on another occasion in the future.
IT'S OK I GOT IT - I THOUGHT PERHAPS YOU WERE REFERRING TO THIS CRITICAL MINIMUM
THRESHOLD SPEED - WHICH BELOW THE PRIME MOVER DECELERATES RATHER THAN ACCELERATES.
QuoteOn another topic:
I think hartiberlin should grant you moderator rights, so that you are able to keep PB and his clones in check.
Imagine somebody new getting interested in your tech and having to wade through this thread.
Just imagine.
IT WOULD BE COOL IF THERE WAS A COMPUTER PROGRAM OPTION DEVELOPED IN WHICH A PERSON COULD CHOOSE TO "IGNORE ALL" OF COMMENTS BY PB - LIKE A "BLOCK EMAIL" OPTION.
ANY PROGRAMERS IN THE HOUSE?.
QuoteEven if you yourself don't want to delete the detractions, you should be able to transfer the moderator right to a person you trust.
OR DO LIKE I DO JUST DON'T READ HIS/HER SHIT.
UNLESS OF COURSE YOU CAN MAKE A GOOD JOKE OUT OF IT BECAUSE IT IS SO LAME.
Thane
CURRENT AREA OF INVESTIGATION
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/drupal/files/EPQU/JVol13N1/Willems.pdf?download
&
Tellegen's Theorem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tellegen's_Theorem
Thane
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:44:26 AM
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 28, 2008, 02:40:54 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 27, 2008, 04:29:41 PM
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 05, 2008, 09:45:23 PM
Uli, I suggest you dust off your textbooks about magnetic braking. There is nothing whatsoever mysterious about this. The original poster didn't express it very scientifically, that's true, but the theory behind this is very well established.
This is how a hysteresis brake works:
2. Hysteresis- A strongly magnetic driver is attracted to a "weak" magnetic material (like AlNiCo). Torque is transmitted up to a point where the weak material slips. When this happens, the torque transmitted is constant as the weak material is magnetized and demagnetized, and the two parts move realtive to one another. During this process substantial heat may be generated. The slip torque may be adjusted by changing the realative position of opposing strong magnets on either side of the weak magnetic material.
Howard Schwerdlin
Coupling Product Manager
Magnetic Technologies Ltd.
http://www.magnetictech.com/
You will find from the further information on the website that the rate of torque transfer (braking) can be manipulated by either aligning or opposing the magnetic field on either side of the hysteresis disc. Opposing poles produce maximum braking and like poles cause the magnetic flux to pass straight through the hysteresis disc and no braking occurs. This can either be done by aligning permanent magnets on either side of the disc (a per website) or with electromagnets. Electromagnetic hystersis brakes do require power input to he coil to manipulate the magnetic field. Having said that, none of these scenarios apply in Thane's setup. If you shorten out a coil arround a conductor subjected to a changing magnetic field, you will create maximum current and thereby heating in the coils. This is what the textbook says and this is called an electric generator, ok? If what you are describing is a hysteresis brake, than Thane has discovered a new type of hysteresis brake. What is it going to be? The effect which Thane is demonstrating is unusual enough for Dr Habash from Ottawa Uni to research it. Are you suggesting that Dr. Habbash does not know what a hystersis brake is also? Maybe you should tell him that. I am sure he will be glad to be enlightened bu you.
Uli
Quote from: OilBarren on April 28, 2008, 07:49:53 PM
CURRENT AREA OF INVESTIGATION
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/drupal/files/EPQU/JVol13N1/Willems.pdf?download
&
Tellegen's Theorem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tellegen's_Theorem
Thane
Thane,
Getting colder .... :)
RCH
now my head is going to explode please elaborate Chet
QuoteIf what you are describing is a hysteresis brake, than Thane has discovered a new type of hysteresis brake. What is it going to be?
Uli
EXACTLY - A HYSTERISIS BRAKE THAT ACCELERATES.
FYI ULI - OUman IS JIM JONES REINCARNATED.
Thane
OU is coolaid man ? EVILLLLLL
QuoteThane,
Getting colder .... :)
RCH
I KNOW BUT IT MIGHT KEEP OUman BUSY FOR A WHILE?
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED PRE AND POST SATURATION TESTS - PERFORMED TODAY.
THE REAL CRITICAL THING FOR ME IN FIG. 1 AND FIG. 2 IS A 90 DEGREE PHASE ANGLE DIFFERNTIAL BETWEEN THE VOLTAGE AND CURRENT.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 28, 2008, 08:04:04 PM
Quote from: OUman on April 28, 2008, 07:44:26 AM
Uli, I suggest you dust off your textbooks about magnetic braking. There is nothing whatsoever mysterious about this. The original poster didn't express it very scientifically, that's true, but the theory behind this is very well established.
...none of these scenarios apply in Thane's setup. If you shorten out a coil arround a conductor subjected to a changing magnetic field, you will create maximum current and thereby heating in the coils. This is what the textbook says and this is called an electric generator, ok? If what you are describing is a hysteresis brake, than Thane has discovered a new type of hysteresis brake. What is it going to be? The effect which Thane is demonstrating is unusual enough for Dr Habash from Ottawa Uni to research it. Are you suggesting that Dr. Habbash does not know what a hystersis brake is also? Maybe you should tell him that. I am sure he will be glad to be enlightened bu you.
Uli
I disagree with some of your points:
1. I don't think it's an "electric generator" when the coil is shorted because when the coil is shorted you cannot extract any electrical power from it - it's not generating anything except heat.
2. I don't think it's a "new type" of magnetic brake - it's a conventional magnetic brake, which can result in acceleration when you change the loading on the coils, because this reduces the braking.
3. I think if you contact Dr Habash you will find that he is not involved in any of these experiments and does not want to make any comment on them. If you doubt me, please go ahead and call him to verify this.
Quote1. I don't think it's an "electric generator" because when the coil is shorted you cannot, of course, extract any electrical power from it - it's not generating anything except heat.
IF THE SHORTED COIL CREATES FREE ADDITIONAL TORQUE AND MAXIMUM ACCELERATION AS IT DOES AS PROVEN BY OTHERS ON THIS THREAD - THEN THE POWER REQUIRED BY THE MOTOR IS REDUCED BY THAT SAME AMOUNT.
VARYING THE LOAD - SIMPLY VARIES THE RATE OF ACCELERATION.
FOR ANYONE WHO HAS NOT SEEN THE
NEW VIDEOED GENERATOR IMPROVEMENTS PRODUCING SOMETHING OTHER THAN HOT AIR AS PROVIDED BY OUman /PB / Pepetual Lurker / Springboard YOU CAN SEE IT HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
Quote2. I don't think it's a "new type" of magnetic brake - it's a plain vanilla magnetic brake which, of course, can result in acceleration when you change the loading on the coils, because this reduces the braking.
BRAKES DON'T
CAUSE ACCELERATION - THEY SIMPY
VARY THE RATE OF DECELERATION.
ACCELERATION IS CAUSED BY A FORCE OTHER THAN THE BRAKE.
LUC IS PRESENTLY WORKING ON A NEW PROTOTYPE WHICH IS INTENDED TO
ACCELERATE PAST THE RATED SPEED OF THE INDUCTION MOTOR - PAST A SLIP ANGLE OF 0 ALSO AT RATED SPEED MOTOR TORQUE = 0.
AT THIS POINT THE MOTOR POWER INPUT WILL = 0 WATTS.
IF SUCCESSFUL THIS WILL ESTABLISH THAT THE EFFECT IS COMPLETELY ISOLATED TO THE COILS AND THE MOTOR'S CONTRIBUTION WILL BE LIMITED TO PROVIDING BEARINGS FOR THE ROTOR.
ALREADY LUC HAS BEEN ABLE TO GET THE INDUCTION MOTOR RUNNING WITH LESS POWER WITH SHORTED COILS THAN THE MOTOR ON ITS OWN COMPLETELY AWAY FROM ANY COIL OR FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL.THIS VERY IMPORTANT TEST WILL PROVIDE VALUABLE INFORMATION ON THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL TORQUE / COIL WHICH WE CAN EXPECT FROM OUR NEW COILS - IN THE ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on April 29, 2008, 06:54:27 AM
Quote1. I don't think it's an "electric generator" because when the coil is shorted you cannot, of course, extract any electrical power from it - it's not generating anything except heat.
IF THE SHORTED COIL CREATES FREE ADDITIONAL TORQUE AND MAXIMUM ACCELERATION AS IT DOES AS PROVEN BY OTHERS ON THIS THREAD - THEN THE POWER REQUIRED BY THE MOTOR IS REDUCED BY THAT SAME AMOUNT.
That may be so but I was simply saying that if the output is shorted it cannot be providing any electrical power output and so cannot be considered to be an "electric generator". I didn't intend any more than that.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 29, 2008, 06:54:27 AM
Quote2. I don't think it's a "new type" of magnetic brake - it's a plain vanilla magnetic brake which, of course, can result in acceleration when you change the loading on the coils, because this reduces the braking.
BRAKES DON'T CAUSE ACCELERATION - THEY SIMPY VARY THE RATE OF DECELERATION. ACCELERATION IS CAUSED BY A FORCE OTHER THAN THE BRAKE.
Acceleration can also be caused by a reduction in the braking, can it not?
Quote from: OUman on April 29, 2008, 08:14:34 AM
That may be so but I was simply saying that if the output is shorted it cannot be providing any electrical power output and so cannot be considered to be an "electric generator". I didn't intend any more than that.
Well that was pretty much a useless point then. Why waste everybody's time with this kind of thing?
Quote from: OilBarren on April 29, 2008, 06:54:27 AM
[
ALREADY LUC HAS BEEN ABLE TO GET THE INDUCTION MOTOR RUNNING WITH LESS POWER WITH SHORTED COILS THAN THE MOTOR ON ITS OWN COMPLETELY AWAY FROM ANY COIL OR FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL.
THIS VERY IMPORTANT TEST WILL PROVIDE VALUABLE INFORMATION ON THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL TORQUE / COIL WHICH WE CAN EXPECT FROM OUR NEW COILS - IN THE ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY.
Thane
That's great Thane. This whole thing does need to get past any ambiguity with regard to net gain. If there isn't one, you need to know that. If there is one, it'll be exciting to know how much. Luc's observations, along with hoptoad's side-by-side tests and the past work of others make me very hopeful we might hear the end of the 'brake' line of thought soon. Good luck!
Quote from: JustMe on April 29, 2008, 10:04:54 AM
Quote from: OUman on April 29, 2008, 08:14:34 AM
That may be so but I was simply saying that if the output is shorted it cannot be providing any electrical power output and so cannot be considered to be an "electric generator". I didn't intend any more than that.
Well that was pretty much a useless point then. Why waste everybody's time with this kind of thing?
I don't think it justifies that rudeness, JustMe - it seems OK, doesn't it, that if someone suggests that a shorted coil is an electric generator, that someone else would disagree with them? Whether right or wrong, I think it's an OK discussion and if you feel it's a waste of your time, you don't have to read it - still less waste more of your valuable time replying to it!
@OUMan
Quote1. I don't think it's an "electric generator" when the coil is shorted because when the coil is shorted you cannot extract any electrical power from it - it's not generating anything except heat.
This is a very one-sided view of what can happen, If the coils in question have sufficient inter-turn capacity and self-induction then this shorted coil does in fact form a resonant LC circuit within itself in which case the coil will "radiate" a very high frequency alternating field or in the case below a capacitor can be added to the secondaries. Based on your statement I will make the assumption you have no understanding of high frequency electrical theory so I will spell this out for you----- very high frequency alternating currents de-magnetize iron cores ;) they do not change the polarity of the field they expell all external magnetic fields. Now how do you think this would effect a permanent magnet moving away from such a coil? and what would be the optimum time to short such a coil in the presence of a moving permanent magnet?
Here is a neat patent, I wonder what could be happening here?
Quote from: OUman on April 29, 2008, 12:00:47 PM
I don't think it justifies that rudeness, JustMe - it seems OK, doesn't it, that if someone suggests that a shorted coil is an electric generator, that someone else would disagree with them?
It's a stupid, useless point that doesn't change the substance of the original poster's argument one iota. You know very well what he meant. I think it's rude to make stupid, useless points OUman.
Quote from: OUman on April 29, 2008, 12:00:47 PM
Whether right or wrong, I think it's an OK discussion and if you feel it's a waste of your time, you don't have to read it - still less waste more of your valuable time replying to it!
::)
"I suggest that the city manager investigate the feasibility of using only obsolete fire equipment to answer false alarms." ~ San Diego city councilman in a memo addressing the high rate of false alarms(and you can count on me using my valuable time to call out any future stupid, useless points)
TICK TOCK TICK TOCK
Quote from: JustMe on April 29, 2008, 12:19:57 PM
It's a stupid, useless point that doesn't change the substance of the original poster's argument one iota. You know very well what he meant. I think it's rude to make stupid, useless points OUman.
OUch! :)
I just to remind everyone what is at stake here and how importnat it is to keep our heads clear in order to gain a clear understanding of how this technology works. We should not allow ourselfs to get roped in by sceptic dicks such as OU man who do not have their facts right anyway. These poeple get some sadistic enjoyment out of writing completely nonconstructive post to defocus everyone from the real issue. After having achieved that goal, they see that as proof how unprofessional and unscientific the group was in the first place. Please be aware of this game, everyone, and simply ignore this diatribe in the future. If you stop feeding those poeple with replies (as I have been guilty of myself), they go away eventually.
But more to the point, if would be helpful, Thane, if you can publish a load test on the motor with magnetic rotor but no coils near it. 215w seems a little high for a motor with no load. You said you have already done that, but let us know what the results where, please. I do not believe for one minute that we are dealing with a hysteresis brake scenario, since as I pointed out the setup does not resemble a hysteresis brake but a test like this would put all the critics at rest. In the setup I am currently building, I am using a 12V DC motor as a prime mover. The torque characteristics are more linear and no load power consumtion is less than 25W. If the setup works, I am expecting a drop in input current for the some output speed once the high voltage coils are connected. The other thing I would like to try is to connect the high voltage coils to a spark gap. If there is anything about the theory that the high voltage coils act like a capacitor, than a spark discharge (or a neon tube as per Newman) could be beneficial in selftuning the charge/discharge cylcle sweetspot. Ever thought of trying that, Thane?
Uli
QuoteThane, if you can publish a load test on the motor with magnetic rotor but no coils near it. 215w seems a little high for a motor with no load. You said you have already done that, but let us know what the results where, please.
LUC DID THE TESTS AND I WILL ASK HIM TO PUBLISH HIS
PRELIMINARY DATA BEFORE HE SPENDS A WEEK ON THE BEACH IN FLORIDA.
QuoteI am using a 12V DC motor as a prime mover.
MAKE SURE YOU HAVE AN EQUIVALENT INDUCTION MOTOR STANDING BY - DC MOTORS DON'T SEEM TO HAVE THE SAME FREE WHEELING CHARACTERSITICS AS AN INDUCTION MOTOR.
QuoteThe torque characteristics are more linear and no load power consumtion is less than 25W. If the setup works, I am expecting a drop in input current for the some output speed once the high voltage coils are connected.
YES WE SAW A DROP IN CURRENT (WITH OUR DC MOTOR) BUT NO NOTICABLE ACCELERATION BECAUSE OUR COILS WERE TOO WEAK.
QuoteThe other thing I would like to try is to connect the high voltage coils to a spark gap. If there is anything about the theory that the high voltage coils act like a capacitor, than a spark discharge (or a neon tube as per Newman) could be beneficial in selftuning the charge/discharge cylcle sweetspot. Ever thought of trying that, Thane Uli
NO BUT WE HAVE BEEN CONSIDERING USING OUR HV COILS TO CHARGE A CAPACITOR AND THEN A BATTERY - POSSIBLY EMPLOYING LUC'S BACK EMF RELAY CIRCUIT.
Thane
Thane, have you guys ever tried automotive ignition coils for your experiments? High voltage and high current coils on a common core and extremely compact. Seems to be ideal.
Uli
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 30, 2008, 09:53:28 AM
Thane, have you guys ever tried automotive ignition coils for your experiments? High voltage and high current coils on a common core and extremely compact. Seems to be ideal.
Uli
This is an example for a great and constructive feedback (PB and OUman, please take notice)..
Quote from: OilBarren on April 28, 2008, 07:25:49 PM
...DO LIKE I DO JUST DON'T READ HIS/HER SHIT.
UNLESS OF COURSE YOU CAN MAKE A GOOD JOKE OUT OF IT...
Thane
How do you know whether you can make a joke of it if you don't read it? Hmm, that's almost like getting more energy out than you put in...
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 29, 2008, 08:11:06 PM
<snip>
In the setup I am currently building, I am using a 12V DC motor as a prime mover. The torque characteristics are more linear and no load power consumtion is less than 25W. If the setup works, I am expecting a drop in input current for the some output speed once the high voltage coils are connected. The other thing I would like to try is to connect the high voltage coils to a spark gap. If there is anything about the theory that the high voltage coils act like a capacitor, than a spark discharge (or a neon tube as per Newman) could be beneficial in selftuning the charge/discharge cylcle sweetspot.
Uli
Great that there's going to be another pair of hands on this! Hoptoad's work was with DC motors, so his webpages may be a good resource if necessary.
Best of luck with your setup. :)
Hi, newbie here. I can't keep up with you geniuses but this is fascinating me ever since I heard about it. I'm an Ottawa resident. A demonstration for a layman like me would be kind of pointless, it's nice to know there's some brains in town. Makes me want to like, learn science and stuff. :P
Anyways, a few things...
One: it just took me two days just to skim through this thread, and I skipped pages 35-45. Ugh. You people are nuts.
Two. OUMan is acting shady. He posted up above here on "reply #1848" with questions. Fine, but then, judging by the dates of the posts, after Thane responded to 1. and 2., he editted his post ("« Last Edit: April 29, 2008, 11:39:50 AM by OUman »") which now mysteriously contains the section:
"3. I think if you contact Dr Habash you will find that he is not involved in any of these experiments and does not want to make any comment on them. If you doubt me, please go ahead and call him to verify this."
It seems interesting that nobody who answered his point 1. and 2. responded to this, so I just assume that he added it later. So, apply salt liberally when listening to him. Also, don't trust me. Because ratting out a spook is a classic way of gaining trust. It's not what I'm doing, but I damn well could be.
Three, the reason I wanted to post:
(EDIT: Please disregard the rest except as curiosity, I read further and it seems you've had success with the effect that negates my idea completely, it was based simply on your original youtube video mostly)
I'm not sure if you've identified what is causing the acceleration in the device yet, and I wanted to throw something out there. I've read about experiments where large discs spinning at high speeds managed to negate the effects of gravity in small amounts. Is there any possibility that the effect of the magnetic coupling, or aether stream or whatever is happening, is somehow magnifying some kind of effect that changes the mass or at least "effective mass" of the shaft or whats connected to it? Would a reduction of weight or mass connected to the shaft, with no change in input power cause this mysterious acceleration of the motor? I'm not sure if vince's earlier torque measurements would have discounted this.
Feel free to flame away at me if you think I'm here for some malign purpose. If I'm completely off base, that would make sense because I don't actually know what I'm talking about. But we are after all talking about an effect that isn't explained by the *known* laws of physics as we have found so far, so maybe mass/inertia is somehow being diddled by this strange electromagnetic contraption.
Cheers,
Tektite
QuoteWould a reduction of weight or mass connected to the shaft, with no change in input power cause this mysterious acceleration of the motor? I'm not sure if vince's earlier torque measurements would have discounted this.
AFTER RUNNING MORE THAN A THOUSAND TESTS OVER THE PAST 3 YEARS - IT IS MY OPINION THAT SOMETHING IS BEING "ADDED" TO THE SYSTEM RATHER THAN BEING "REDUCED" SUCH A REDUCTION IN LOSSES, FLATTENING OF HYSTERISIS CURVE OR MASS REDUCTION ETC.
THE REASON I SAY THIS IS AT 2500 RPM (COILS LOADED AND ACCELERATING) THE RPM DEPENDANT-MASS DOES NOT "CHANGE" WHEN THE THE LOAD IS REMOVED FROM THE COILS - BECAUSE THE RPM IS THE
SAME AT LEAST MOMENTARILY BUT THEN THE RPM STARTS TO DROP WHEN THE MOTOR IS POWERING THE ROTOR ON ITS OWN.
QuoteFeel free to flame away at me if you think I'm here for some malign purpose. If I'm completely off base, that would make sense because I don't actually know what I'm talking about. But we are after all talking about an effect that isn't explained by the *known* laws of physics as we have found so far, so maybe mass/inertia is somehow being diddled by this strange electromagnetic contraption.[/i]
Cheers, Tektite
DON'T BE SURPRISED IF THIS EFFECT HAS BEEN KNOW FOR QUITE A VERY LONG TIME ALREADY (ALONG WITH MANY OTHER REALLY GREAT TECHNOLOGIES) - BUT DID NOT REPRESENT A GOOD FINANCIAL MEANS OF EXPLOITING THE IGNORANT COMPACENT MASSES ( US ).
Thane
Quote from: cleanfuture on April 30, 2008, 09:53:28 AM
Thane, have you guys ever tried automotive ignition coils for your experiments? High voltage and high current coils on a common core and extremely compact. Seems to be ideal.
Uli
NO BUT THAT IS A GREAT IDEA.
I HAVE ONE SMALL SUGGESTION FOR YOU ULI (AND ANYONE ELSE) WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO REPLICATE THIS.
CHANGE ONLY ONE PARAMETER AT A TIME!IT WILL SAVE YOU ALOT OF TIME AND GRIEF.
Thane
QuoteHow do you know whether you can make a joke of it if you don't read it? Hmm, that's almost like getting more energy out than you put in...OUman
YOU SEE - THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF YOUR WEAKNESS -
YOU DO NOT PAY ATTENTION.
SURE I READ YOUR POSTS - BUT
I READ BETWEEN THE LIES - THUS AVOIDING AND SIDESTEPPING YOUR SHIT.
AT ANY RATE I REALLY LOVE HAVING HAVING OUman AND HIS ILK HERE - NOTHING LIGHTS A FIRE UNDER MY ARSE LIKE SOMEONE TELLING ME I CAN'T DO SOMETHING OR THAT SUCH AND SUCH IS IMPOSSIBLE.
FEAR SAYS - "IMPOSSIBLE!"COURAGE SAYS - I'M POSSIBLE!"CHEERS
Thane
ps
"Man who says something cannot be done should not interfere with the one who is doing it".
Chinese Proverb
QuoteAnother 'incidental'.... Adams said he had survived more than one assassination attempt.
I'M COUNTING ON "THEM" GOING AFTER THE OTHER 49,456 READERS OF THIS THREAD
FIRST BEFORE THEY COME AFTER ME.
I'LL NAME, NAMES IF I HAVE TO.
Thane
Quote from: Nomen luni on April 30, 2008, 08:37:07 PM
My gut feeling is that this is the most promising thread on the site! Keep it up, Thane.
TO CLARIFY -
THIS IS NOT A "ONE MAN SHOW" - WITHOUT TONS OF "BLIND" SUPPORT FROM MANY PEOPLE I WOULD BE NOWHERE AS WOULD THIS WORK.
AND WITHOUT LUC'S COMMITMENT AND HERCULEAN EFFORTS THE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE WAY LESS.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: tektite on April 30, 2008, 06:48:55 PM
...judging by the dates of the posts, after Thane responded to 1. and 2., he editted his post ("? Last Edit: April 29, 2008, 11:39:50 AM by OUman ?") which now mysteriously contains the section:
""
Tektite
Hi, Tektite. Welcome. I probably did make an edit that crossed with Thane's reply but it wasn't anything substantial. In fact, that third point was there right from the first time I posted it and I did not change it. I too thought it odd that Thane did not reply to it but I'm glad you've draw attention to it:
I think if you contact Dr Habash you will find that he is not involved in any of these experiments and does not want to make any comment on them. If you doubt me, please go ahead and call him to verify this.
Quote from: OUman on April 30, 2008, 10:07:33 PM
Hi, Tektite. Welcome. I probably did make an edit that crossed with Thane's reply but it wasn't anything substantial. In fact, that third point was there right from the first time I posted it and I did not change it. I too thought it odd that Thane did not reply to it but I'm glad you've draw attention to it:
I think if you contact Dr Habash you will find that he is not involved in any of these experiments and does not want to make any comment on them. If you doubt me, please go ahead and call him to verify this.
I don't find it 'odd' in the least that Thane wouldn't bother acknowledging it. Why is it that so many who share your general lack of enthusiasm for this find such import in the glaringly self evident? Of course he's not directly involved in the experiments - why would he be? And of course he wouldn't comment on Thane's results at this time because a) those results are incomplete and unverified; and b) the endeavor remains 'alternative' and 'outside the box' so for the sake of his reputation and the institution he represents he must remain removed from the process. They haven't thrown Thane out on his ear either, have they. I am extremely appreciative and proud of those at the University of Ottawa who quietly support (tolerate?) this work, regardless of the end result. It's very courageous, and very forward thinking.
Quote from: tektite on April 30, 2008, 06:48:55 PM
But we are after all talking about an effect that isn't explained by the *known* laws of physics as we have found so far, so maybe mass/inertia is somehow being diddled by this strange electromagnetic contraption.[/i]
Glad you mentioned *known* laws of physics. Thanks to RCH, I reviewed DePalma Homopolar/Unipolar generator research. This was a shock moment to me as everything I had been taught required moving a conductor thru the flux to generate an emf. I was amazed to find that Faraday discovered the effect of a conductor and magnet moving in sync in 1831 generated emf. It was used in DC generators in the late 1800's and then lost out to AC generators as the best long line source. My University and High School Physics text have no mention of the homopolar generator. Apparently because it went against Lenz's law and could not be explained by modern physics. Lately, some universities are interested and testing, great. I'm sure a lot of OU people allready know this fact.
Regards,
Larry
Maybe it is time to explain how these high voltage coils could produce accelerating forces using the known laws of physics, but from a different perspective, one you have never considered. ;D
Many people would see these accelerating coils as nothing more than wires wrapped around an iron core, they can measure voltage, current and the strength of the magnetic field generated--they can measure inductance and capacitance and that is the extent of there reality. But this is only a small part of what I see happening, if you want to understand this you have to see past the "effects" and understand "cause". The cause of this "accelerating effect" could be due to the qualities of the currents and the specific properties of the conductors. The coils have many turns of fine wire as such they they have a high resistance and in the right context a high capacitance.Many people have been led to believe this capacity is a fixed value but it is not, it is variable and dependant on the properties of the conductors and the qualities of the currents in them. We know low voltage currents have different qualities than high voltage currents, there is a progression from magnetic to electric fields. We know the frequency of the currents in the conductor determine the qualities of the fields, that is a low frequency will produce magnetic fields and as the frequency is raised there is a progression to electric fields. In this light we could say a high voltage/high frequency current will produce predominantly electric fields.
If we look at thanes high turn coils we see that a permanent magnet will produce a changing magnetic field in the iron core inducing a voltage in the windings (a transformer), the resistance however will limit current flow increasing the voltage thus the energy is stored as capacitance, as a changing electric field. What has not been considered is the "rate of change"--ie frequency relative to the specific length of the shorted conductor/coil. If the coil is shorted it could be considered a tuned resonant LC circuit in itself as it has both capacitance and self-inductance and if the rate of change should correspond with a lower harmonic of the resonant frequency then the coil could self-oscillate within itself. If we considered the inducing force (changing permanent magnetic field) to be equal to the induced force(voltage) then a high frequency resonant oscillation in the coil would dominate over the PM field because a high frequency field is predominantly an electric field and expells all external magnetic fields.
I understand this is something most people cannot concieve happening, that a known amount of energy can be transormed into something else of equal energy but having different qualities but we can see it everywhere if you look for it. As well I cannot concieve that there could be "extra" energy produced in this machine, it is more likely that the energy gained in attraction is transformed into an opposing condition to expell the magnetic field from the iron core.
Larry C,
So far, so good.
For your next "revelation," study carefully DePalma's discussion of his epic "spinning ball" experiment. Even further clues as to what's really going on in Thane's "spinning generator" are to be found there .... :)
Remember:
DePalma ultimately brought this "fundamental expertise in rotating and magnetic systems" to bear on Adam's final motor designs.
And, Allcanadian:
The energy is not being "created" in the machine; it is simply being transduced -- from a previously inaccessible reservoir -- by the (currently non-understood) actions of Thane's presently designed, highly inefficient versions of his "ultimate" machine ....
RCH
QuoteIf we look at thanes high turn coils we see that a permanent magnet will produce a changing magnetic field in the iron core inducing a voltage in the windings (a transformer), the resistance however will limit current flow increasing the voltage thus the energy is stored as capacitance, as a changing electric field.
THE TOTAL COIL IMPEDENCE ( Zt )WILL LIMIT THE CURRENT FLOW ( We need to acknowledge people who are reading this and learning at the same time - let's be good and clear teachers to each other ).
QuoteAs well I cannot concieve that there could be "extra" energy produced in this machine, it is more likely that the energy gained in attraction is transformed into an opposing condition to expell the magnetic field from the iron core.
VERY INTERESTING ... IN THIS DEMO FOR EXAMPLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
IF WE DISCONNECT THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS AT "FULL SPEED" WHEN BOTH COILS ARE ENGAGED BUT LEAVE THE HIGH CURRENT ONE ENGAGED - THE HIGH CURRENT
LIGHT BULB WILL GLOW MORE INTENSELY JUST BEFORE THE SYSTEM BEGINS TO DECELERATE.
I ASSUMED IT WAS DUE TO THE REDUCTION IN CORE FLUX AND CORE RELUCTANCE BUT THERE MAY BE ANOTHER "STORY".
CAN YOU ELABORATE PLEASE - SO WE ARE NOT MAKING ASSUMPTIONS AND ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE - WITHOUT ABIGUITY:
energy gained in attraction = ?(WHAT ENERGY, WHAT ATTRACTION)
transformed into an opposing condition = ?(TRANSFORMED HOW, WHAT OPPOSING CONDITION)
expell the magnetic field from the iron core ?( WHAT COIL POLARITY AND WHAT MAGNET POLARITY )
THANKS
Thane
P.S.
LUC, ANY CHANCE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO POST YOUR DATA WHEN YOU GET BACK FROM THE BEACH TODAY?
Quote from: RCH on May 01, 2008, 04:13:46 AM
The energy is ... simply being transduced -- from a previously inaccessible reservoir...
RCH
What evidence is there of that?
Quote from: allcanadian on May 01, 2008, 03:20:54 AM
... The coils have many turns of fine wire as such they they have a high resistance and in the right context a high capacitance.Many people have been led to believe this capacity is a fixed value but it is not, it is variable and dependant on the properties of the conductors and the qualities of the currents in them...
Not quite. It is true that the capacitance depends on the properties of the conductors - such as diameter, spacing, number of turns, etc. However, the capacitance does
not depend on the qualities of the current. Capacitance is a property of the materials and construction of the device; it can be measured and is a fixed value (for a given design and construction) which does
not depend on current, or voltage, or any other operating conditions.
Quote from: JustMe on April 30, 2008, 10:33:39 PM
I don't find it 'odd' in the least that Thane wouldn't bother acknowledging it...
The issue, as you well know, is one of integrity. Thane told us in his posting that this U of O prof checks these results on a daily basis before any of them are posted - and he is thereby co-opting the prof's reputation without the prof's permission. If it is not true that the prof is doing that checking, then Thane should not be telling people that he is.
@OUman
QuoteNot quite. It is true that the capacitance depends on the properties of the conductors - such as diameter, spacing, number of turns, etc. However, the capacitance does not depend on the qualities of the current. Capacitance is a property of the materials and construction of the device; it can be measured and is a fixed value (for a given design and construction) which does not depend on current, or voltage, or any other operating conditions.
Ok, take a 2 meter piece of wire and fold it in half, in you connect an direct current to the ends you would find the energy stored as capacitance would equal, Q(energy)=1/2 CVsquared. Now connect an alternating current the frequency is 150Mhz having a half wavelength of 1m, at this point the peak voltage in the middle of the lower wire corresponds with the minimum voltage in the upper wire as the wire is bent in a "U" shape. In this case the potential difference between these two points in the wire has doubled thus the equation for this instance is Q(energy)=CVsquared. Any variation in frequency from this resonant frequency will produce varied levels of capacitance as we are dealing with two points in a single wire under different conditions.
Quote from: allcanadian on May 01, 2008, 09:48:08 AM
@OUman
Ok, take a 2 meter piece of wire and fold it in half, in you connect an direct current to the ends you would find the energy stored as capacitance would equal, Q(energy)=1/2 CVsquared. Now connect an alternating current the frequency is 150Mhz having a half wavelength of 1m, at this point the peak voltage in the middle of the lower wire corresponds with the minimum voltage in the upper wire as the wire is bent in a "U" shape. In this case the potential difference between these two points in the wire has doubled thus the equation for this instance is Q(energy)=CVsquared. Any variation in frequency from this resonant frequency will produce varied levels of capacitance as we are dealing with two points in a single wire under different conditions.
@AC, I don't think you quite understand the concept of capacitance. What you are describing would need to be modeled as a transmission line in order to describe its operation - in other words, a distributed capacitance/inductance/resistance. This in no way changes the fact that the capacitance does NOT depend on the current (nor on the voltage or the frequency etc).
@OUman
LOL ;D, Ouman I mean no disrepect but I have two choices, I can believe what you have read from a text book or I can believe the words of a man who was known as the greatest Electrical Engineer of all time---bar none--having hundreds of patents to his name. In Patent 512430 Nicola Tesla states-----
QuoteIf 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.
"the energy stored in the coil as a whole will now be two hundred and fifty thousand as great", I was wondering if you could explain how one would do such a thing?
And in another section the following quote---
QuoteI 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.
So we could say a current of given frequency will pass with no opposition as though it possessed no self-induction, I wonder what might happen if a coil in an electric motor all of a sudden acted as if it possessed no self-induction where before it may have acted differently?.
As well you are making the asumption that the capacitive effect is limited to "only" the conductor, you may want to read the "Dr.Stiffler" thread.
Quote from: allcanadian on May 01, 2008, 11:38:42 AM
@OUman
LOL ;D, Ouman I mean no disrepect but I have two choices, I can believe what you have read from a text book or I can believe the words of a man who was known as the greatest Electrical Engineer of all time...
The mistake you are making is in mixing up the concepts of (a) "capacitance" and (b) "energy stored in a capacitor". These are not at all the same thing. He uses the archaic term "capacity effect" which may be what's confusing you.
Quote from: OUman on May 01, 2008, 09:18:52 AM
The issue, as you well know, is one of integrity. Thane told us in his posting that this U of O prof checks these results on a daily basis before any of them are posted - and he is thereby co-opting the prof's reputation without the prof's permission. If it is not true that the prof is doing that checking, then Thane should not be telling people that he is.
I don't as-you-well-know anything of the sort. In fact, I don't even understand what your issue is. How does Thane posting results read off a meter co-opt anybody's reputation? I've always assumed that Dr. Habash's position on the transformer tests would be similar to his published position on the generator which was something to the effect of "It accelerates, but we don't have any backing theory", and "At this time I can't support any claim." Receiving Thane's results in no way implies that he thinks they're perfectly accurate or that he agrees with Thane's overunity conclusions or any of his other theories. This is simply ongoing research. If you find "check" too active of a verb, substitute 'reviews' or 'reads over' or whatever returns you to equilibrium on what is to me another mostly pointless point.
Quote from: JustMe on May 01, 2008, 02:26:53 PM
...I don't even understand what your issue is...Â
My issue is that the posting quoted below is misleading. If you don't have an issue with that, fine. But I do.
Quote from: OilBarren on March 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
...WE HAVE OUR WORK (IMPROVEMENTS) DOULBE CHECKED EVERY DAY - BY DR. HABASH BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE POSTING THEM...
Quote from: OUman on May 01, 2008, 02:47:33 PM
My issue is that the posting quoted below is misleading. If you don't have an issue with that, fine. But I do.
Okay. Happy navel gazing then! Enjoy.
@allcanadian,
I respect your opinions and think they could help in this process. Could you please answer Thane's questions instead of getting in a sh*ting contest with OUman. Believe me, it is a waste of time, OUman is not here to help, only to cause distraction. When and if you win an argument, whatever OUman is will ignore that lost and will just change the argument.
Thanks,
Larry
Hey all - back from Hawaii... I just found out that it is really cold in Los Angeles...
See a lot of new faces on the thread - don't see Polar (what happened to him?)...
So that I don't have to spend the next six hours sifting throuhg the banter and insults from the last three weeks, can anyone offer a short summary of where we are at both scientificaly and with regard to the ongoing soap opera? Do we have a perpetual motion machine yet? Can we go back in time? Has JustMe cheated on Thane with Luc and gotten pregnant with the devil's child? Do we have basic efficiency numbers for the generator yet? Is Larry really gay? Has anyone met up with NASA yet? Has anyone met up with some guys in black suits and Ray Bans? Does Aether really exist (don't answer that Aether)? - a summary would be nice...
Does anyone seriously think that Tesla gave a shit about the "textbook"? When he explained his AC motor design to his lecturer at his Uni, he was told not to waste his time and was told: "Everybody knows a motor needs brushes and can't work without them". Read his biography, it's in there. Real progress will not come from the textbook, real progress forces the textbook having to to be re written. Let's just get on with it, please. As Thane says: "If we knew what we where doing, it would not be called research." I am getting really pissed of with people who accuse Thane of misinterpreting the results. The best thing we can do is replicate what he is doing, change one thing at the time and add to the body of knowledge that way. The rest of you, stop wasting Thane's time and stop discouraging him. It does not help. Neither Bedini, Adams, Newman or any of the others ever shared their knowledge as freely as Thane does.
Uli
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED SOME FULL SPEED TEST DATA PERFORMED TODAY ON A 1/4 HP SPLIT PHASE MOTOR.
AS YOU CAN SEE THE MOTOR REQUIRES LESS POWER WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL IS ENGAGED AS OPPOSED TO THE NO LOAD CONDITIONS. (unfortunately only one HV coil was connected and I didn't notice until the end of the day - if I have time Friday I will repeat)
THE (SINGLE) HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ALMOST COMPLETELY COUNTERACTS THE HIGH CURRENT COILS DECELERATION UNDER LOAD.
CHEERS
Thane
Figure 1A - NO LOAD TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 106 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Away From Coils
Speed = 1728 RPM
Figure 1 - NO LOAD TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 106 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Away From Coils
Speed = 1728 RPM
Figure 2 - NO LOAD TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 106 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Facing Coils
Speed = 1729 RPM
Figure 3 - LOADED HIGH CURRENT TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 111 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Facing Coils
Speed = 1721 RPM
Figure 4 - LOADED HIGH CURRENT & HIGH VOLTAGE TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 107 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Facing Coils
Speed = 1724 RPM
Figure 5 - LOADED HIGH VOLTAGE TEST 1/4 HP Split Phase Motor
Motor Input Power = 103 Watts
Rotor Orientation = Facing Coils
Speed = 1741 RPM
Summary Chart
Hi Thane
this is extremely interesting results, i am slowly accumilating all the various parts that it need to try this for myself.
Theres a couple more questions that i hope you can answer me:
with the HC coils connected to the lamp and the motor slows down due to the power draw of the lamp, can you please tell me how much wattage the lamp consumes? and is this lamp wattage directly related to the extra wattage the motor needs to turn the extra load?
now with the HV coils: please can you explain why you are using 4 LED's instead of a filament lamp? as i understand that LED's are very low voltage lamps that consume only miliwatts, how many watts are they drawing from the high voltage coils while the motor speeds up? (i'm guessing that you had to put high value resistors in series with the led's)
please can you explain how the motor reacts if using a filament lamp in place of the led's? have you tried this?
i'de be very interested in your findings.
fred
Hi all,
I just flew down to Florida to help drive back my uncle to Canada, so I will be away for the next 10 days.
Before leaving I built a new test setup that is all mounted in a 3/4" plywood box (for protection). It has a 1/4" thick lexan window to see the face of the rotor turning and be able to use a laser photo tachometer to take accurate RPM readings. We also bought many identical microwave transformers for testing. I cut down 4 of the new transformers and removed all the primaries and 2 of them removed the high voltage secondary and glued them in the other 2. I now 2 high voltage coils per core x 2. See Photos below. I also have a new light 9" lexan rotor with 8 x 1" neo magnets embedded and epoxied in the rotor (see 2nd photo) Also I built an option that I can move the coils closer or further away from the rotor ON THE FLY. You can see that option in photo 3. With all this protection we can now let the induction motor (Prime Mover) run full out 3,600 rpm. I just completed the construction of the box and tested it with Thane the night before flying to Florida. However I had some strange new things happening and could not get good results wet. One of the new problems with this setup is that only 1 of the of the 4 high voltage coils would give the acceleration effect (when shorted). I thought, double high voltage coils per core would give double the effect! but that did not happen, only one works on core one and none work on the second core. I tried them in series and parallel with no change. I ordered a induction and capacitance meter but have not receive it wet, so I can't give a henry readings on the coils wet. One thing I thought could be happening is that both core's are touching each other, could that be the cause? on the first setup we made with the 2 microwave transformers (that Thane is using above), both cores seem to be touching and gives acceleration effect from both core but each core and coil are not identical in size (from different microwaves) could that be the difference? do they need to be all different sizes for the effect to work? maybe they need to be isolated from each other if all identical? anyways it will have to wait till I get back to try to get to the botton of this.
At Thane, great job on the new setup above.
Stay tuned
Luc
@Gotoluc
QuoteI thought, double high voltage coils per core would give double the effect! but that did not happen, only one works on core one and none work on the second core. I tried them in series and parallel with no change. I ordered a induction and capacitance meter but have not receive it wet, so I can't give a henry readings on the coils wet.
You could check the resonant frequency of your coils on the fly with the following non-intrusive circuits .I think one thing we are missing is the role the length of the conductors play in a resonant circuit, the length must be exact to hit resonance at any given frequency. Also every component has a resonant frequency and every conductor within its vicinity and each can effect the other. Personally I have found conventional measuring systems to be "lacking" in that they cannot measure without interference, there are better ways.
Also if you build two charge detectors spaced apart and amplify the voltage drop across the LED then use a differential amplifier across the units and you can tell when a person moves within 30 feet of this circuit and from what direction based on phase shift when 555 timing circuits are included.This is based on the fact the human skin is the most positive in the triboelectric series and static charges on your body. It's a pretty neat circuit, a kind of electrostatic radar based on the same principal as an oscilloscope, it measures the change between detectors using very small divisions of time.
@Thane,Luc,
Great job on the new setup, we'll never keep up.
@All,
Hate to follow that show, but my humble setup has worked. Shorted it at 716 rpm at 107 watts and accelerated to 913 rpm at 105 watts. Don't want to go much faster now as the wheel has a 1/16 wobble side to side and in height. The neos are 1 X 1/4 placed on back of the cup containing a 1 X 1/8.
Larry
This is what happens when you try to help set a civil tone on a thread.
Quote from: jacksatan on May 01, 2008, 06:43:14 PM
Is Larry really gay?
No, I'm not gay, but I would gayly love to stomp your punk ass in the ground. If you're going to make these kinds of personal accusations for a cheap laugh, you should be man enough to do it in person instead of hiding behind the internet.
Larry
you stated that your motor speeded up when you shorted out the HV coil, can you please tell me what happens if you place a normal 120v 60w filament lightbulb across the coil as a load instead of creating a dead short? dose it still speed up?
Quote from: mfred68 on May 02, 2008, 05:58:00 PM
Larry
you stated that your motor speeded up when you shorted out the HV coil, can you please tell me what happens if you place a normal 120v 60w filament lightbulb across the coil as a load instead of creating a dead short? dose it still speed up?
Sure, I'll try that tomorrow as we have a line of thunderstorms coming thru right now. I run my test outside under my house (up on pilings) in case the setup turns into a neo claymore mine thrower per Luc/Thane.
Quote from: LarryC on May 02, 2008, 05:46:48 PM
This is what happens when you try to help set a civil tone on a thread.
Quote from: jacksatan on May 01, 2008, 06:43:14 PM
Is Larry really gay?
No, I'm not gay, but I would gayly love to stomp your punk ass in the ground. If you're going to make these kinds of personal accusations for a cheap laugh, you should be man enough to do it in person instead of hiding behind the internet.
Oh, come on... I'm just looking for someone to catch me up on what's going on so that I don't need to spend six hours reading... I don't REALLY think you're gay... not that there is anything wrong with that...
Quotewith the HC coils connected to the lamp and the motor slows down due to the power draw of the lamp, can you please tell me how much wattage the lamp consumes? and is this lamp wattage directly related to the extra wattage the motor needs to turn the extra load?
GENERATOR OUPUT POWER DEPENDS ON MOTOR SPEED - BUT LUC AND I HAVE SEEN 20 WATTS FROM OUR 2 HIGH CURRENT COILS - AT ABOUT 2000 RPM IN ACCELERATION MODE WITH ABOUT 130 WATTS INPUT TO THE MOTOR.
AND NO THE MOTOR WILL
STALL WITH 200 WATTS GOING TO THE MOTOR AND ONLY 4 WATTS OF COUNTER TORQUE PROVIDED BY A LOAD RESISTOR (OR THE LAMP) - DUE TO THE ROTOR'S LEVER ARM LENGTH.
TORQUE = FORCE x LEVER ARMIN THE LATEST VIDEO LUC POSTED ON YOUTUBE WE DID THE ABOVE 200 WATTS IN AND NO WATTS OUT (VIRTUAL STALL). THEN ACCELERATED THE SYSTEM WITH THE HV COILS AND PRODUCED ABOUT 4 WATTS THROUGH THE LIGHT WITH ONLY 160 OR SO WATTS.
Quotenow with the HV coils: please can you explain why you are using 4 LED's instead of a filament lamp? as i understand that LED's are very low voltage lamps that consume only miliwatts, how many watts are they drawing from the high voltage coils while the motor speeds up? (i'm guessing that you had to put high value resistors in series with the led's)
TO HELP DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN HIGH CURRENT COIL ENGEGEMENT AND HIGH VOLTAGE.
IT'S NOT ABOUT WATTS FOR US RIGHT NOW IT'S ABOUT LOAD AND THE EFFECT IT HAS ON THE PRIME MOVER. I.E. THE LIGHT BULB = 1 ohms = VERY HIGH LOAD AND THE LEDS ARE ABOUT THE SAME - VERY CLOSE TO A DEAD SHORT (VERY HIGH LOAD).
NOPE, NO RESISTORS - THEY WOULD ONLY REDUCE THE EFFECT - AND I AM VERY SURPRISED THEY HAVE LASTED AS LOND AS THEY HAVE.
Quoteplease can you explain how the motor reacts if using a filament lamp in place of the led's? have you tried this?
THE FILAMENT LAMP REQUIRES MORE CURRENT TO LIGHT UP THAN THE LEDS - THE HV COILS PRODUCE ALMOST NO CURRENT.
I HAVE STEPPED DOWN THE HV THROUGH A TRANSFORMER AND LIT A LIGHT BULB HOWEVER WITH GENERATOR ACCELERATION - JUST TO SEE IF I COULD DO IT.
Quotei'de be very interested in your findings.
fred
I HOPE THAT IS HELPFUL.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on May 02, 2008, 06:10:36 PM
Quote from: mfred68 on May 02, 2008, 05:58:00 PM
Larry
you stated that your motor speeded up when you shorted out the HV coil, can you please tell me what happens if you place a normal 120v 60w filament lightbulb across the coil as a load instead of creating a dead short? dose it still speed up?
Sure, I'll try that tomorrow as we have a line of thunderstorms coming thru right now. I run my test outside under my house (up on pilings) in case the setup turns into a neo claymore mine thrower per Luc/Thane.
This is a great news Larry!
Please keep us informed.
Quote from: mfred68 on May 02, 2008, 05:58:00 PM
Larry
you stated that your motor speeded up when you shorted out the HV coil, can you please tell me what happens if you place a normal 120v 60w filament lightbulb across the coil as a load instead of creating a dead short? dose it still speed up?
I AM GOING TO ANSWER THAT FOR LARRY IYDM.
(BTW - WHAT IS THE RESISTANCE OF SAID LIGHT BULB?)
IF THE LIGHT BULB HAD A RESISTANCE OF 1 MEGA OHM - NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN - NO ACCELERATION.
IF THE LIGHT BULB HAD A RESISTANCE OF 1 OHM - THE SYSTEM WOULD ACCELERATE.
RESISTANCE VALUES BETWEEN I M OHM AND 1 OHM WILL VARY RATE OF ACCELERATION.
BACK TO YOU LARRY...
Thane
Quote
Hate to follow that show, but my humble setup has worked. Shorted it at 716 rpm at 107 volts and accelerated to 913 rpm at 105 volts. Larry
LARRY SORRY TO BE A "PB" BUT ARE THOSE WATTS?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 02, 2008, 07:40:15 PM
Quote
Hate to follow that show, but my humble setup has worked. Shorted it at 716 rpm at 107 volts and accelerated to 913 rpm at 105 volts. Larry
LARRY SORRY TO BE A "PB" BUT ARE THOSE WATTS?
Thane
Not a PB, you just pointed out a mistake. Yes, you are right. It is true watts from the wattmeter. Thanks, I'll modify the original.
Do you have the same wobble in the wheel that I stated?
Larry
QuoteAt Thane, great job on the new setup above
Luc
.
THANKS - I GOT ALL YOUR COILS WORKING TODAY WITH THE STEEL WHEEL.
I WILL SEND SOME PHOTOS TO JUSTME SO SHE CAN POST THEM.
THANKS JM
LARRY,
YES ALL THOSE WHEELS ARE THE SAME - I SAW ONE WORK REALLY WELL WHICH WAS BALANCED AND STRAIGHTENED - BUT THEN I BLEW IT UP UNFORTUNATELY.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 02, 2008, 09:23:34 PM
QuoteAt Thane, great job on the new setup above
Luc
.
THANKS - I GOT ALL YOUR COILS WORKING TODAY WITH THE STEEL WHEEL.
I WILL SEND SOME PHOTOS TO JUSTME SO SHE CAN POST THEM.
Thane
Now that is interesting ??? was that the only change you made?
Luc
"Round and round we go ... where we stop, nobody knows ...."
Well, that's not exactly true--
DePalma and Laithwaite did. :)
RCH
Quote from: RCH on May 03, 2008, 01:53:19 AM
"Round and round we go ... where we stop, nobody knows ...."
Well, that's not exactly true--
DePalma and Laithwaite did. :)
RCH
Round and round we go ... where we stop, nobody knows ...
One day we?re here, next day we?re gone
Drifting on currents of time - spirit riders as the wind blows.
Round and round we go ... where we stop, nobody ?
Can follow ? take no possessions, take no flesh
Your body is useless and now quite a mess.
Round and round we go ... where we stop ?
Is really not true ? we are perpetual beings on a perpetual ride
This fact may be argued but the truth can?t be denied.
Round and round we go ... where we ?
Put our focus - is where we end up
Accept it yourself or blame someone else
This merry-go-round keeps turning until we?re fed up.
Round and round we go ?
Eternal and endless ? at the behest of our soul
Where we stop ? God (DePalma and Laithwaite) only knows.
Thane
QuoteNow that is interesting ??? was that the only change you made? Luc
I NEED TO DO MORE TESTING BUT I AM SURE THE MAGNETS (IN STEEL CUPS) ON THE STEEL WHEEL PROVIDE LESS AIR GAP RELUCTANCE AND THEREFORE THE STEEL WHEELED MAGNETS APPEAR "STRONGER" AND PROVIDE MORE FLUX TRANSFER INTO THE COILS.
THE
DUAL ROTOR TEST SETUP IN THE PHOTOS BEARS THIS OUT BECAUSE - THERE IS VERY LITTLE EFFECT AS WELL FROM THE PLEXIGLASS ROTOR - WHEN ORIENTED ON 'MY COILS".
YOU CAN ALSO NOTICE - THAT I REMOVED 1 COIL FROM THE DUAL HV COIL ARRANGEMENT TO SEE WHAT EFFECTS ARE PRESENT.
MAGNETS PERFORM BETTER WHEN BACKING IRON IS PROVIDED.
I MAY MAKE A LEXAN ROTOR WITH CUPS FOR THE MAGNETS TO TEST THIS.
Thane
Quote from: RCH on May 03, 2008, 01:53:19 AM
"Round and round we go ... where we stop, nobody knows ...."
RCH
FYI EVERYONE AND
RCH,
LUC AND I HAVE ALL OUR COMPONENTS REQUIRED TO BEGIN ASSEMBLY OF OUR DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR AND WE ARE IN THE NARROWING DOWN PROCESS OF CHOSING HOW AND WHAT CONFIGURATION WORKS BEST.
Thane
Quote
Hate to follow that show, but my humble setup has worked. Shorted it at 716 rpm at 107 watts and accelerated to 913 rpm at 105 watts. Don't want to go much faster now as the wheel has a 1/16 wobble side to side and in height. The neos are 1 X 1/4 placed on back of the cup containing a 1 X 1/8.
Larry
DEAR LARRY,
VERY NICE WORK - CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT:
1) YOU DID
NOT INCREASE MOTOR INPUT POWER
PRIOR TO ACCELERATION?
2) YOU DID
NOT NOTICE A SPIKE IN MOTOR CURRENT WHEN YOU LOADED YOUR COILS - SUGGESTING INCREASED STATOR CURRENT - CAUSING ACCELERATION?
3) YOUR MOTOR SPEED WAS STABLE BEFORE LOADING (OR SLIGHTLY DECELERATING) AND
NOT SLIGHTLY ACCELERATING?
4) WHAT IS YOUR
CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED - BLEOW WHICH THE SYSTEM
DECELERATES WHEN LOADED?
THANKS
Thane
Hi Thane
1) YOU DID NOT INCREASE MOTOR INPUT POWER PRIOR TO ACCELERATION?
I'm using a fan controller and after adjusting, I let the rpms settle and remain constant for a couple of minutes before shorting.
2) YOU DID NOT NOTICE A SPIKE IN MOTOR CURRENT WHEN YOU LOADED YOUR COILS - SUGGESTING INCREASED STATOR CURRENT - CAUSING ACCELERATION?
Not sure, I'll check this afternoon after this deluge is over. Up to 18" in areas and up to 3 feet on some highways.
3) YOUR MOTOR SPEED WAS STABLE BEFORE LOADING (OR SLIGHTLY DECELERATING) AND NOT SLIGHTLY ACCELERATING?
Same as 1.
4) WHAT IS YOUR CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED - BLEOW WHICH THE SYSTEM DECELERATES WHEN LOADED?
The critical threshold speed is around 716. One big differences is that it will decelerate when shorted at constants rpms up to about 400 or 500 and then from that rpm to 716 it remains the same or very slight change. I don't know if its due to the horsepower (3/4) difference, air gap (5/16), grinding wheel (can remove and retest) or the fan controller. It chops the sine wave instead of working like a variable transformer. Any suggestions?
Regards,
Larry
Thane troubleshooting Luc's Coils on Friday... :)
@Larry: Congrats on your setup...great to have yet another opportunity for testing and observation. Thanks for your effort, and hope you enjoy the work. :)
@Thane: Your recent results were very interesting! If confirmed, they seem to put to rest the theory that the device's effect is primarily created by core/coil induced drag that the subsequent loading somehow attenuates. Do we know how much more power is required to run the motor with the rotor vs without, or is that an oversimplified and/or wrong-headed focus? Also, could you give a brief description of how this technology will be tested in the dune buggy for the non-technical among us? I'm trying (and failing) to figure out how this will all work with acceleration, braking etc. Will the generator be shorted, or will you be able to draw useful current from that to charge the battery or perform some other useful tasks? If so, would that current have to be conditioned somehow to match the 'needs' of the battery etc. I'm so sorry for what are probably exceedingly stupidly worded questions...
@Jacksatan: Welcome back. Hawaii is cold too! I know this because I had to briefly relocate to the equator to escape the dual torment of the Polarbreezes and the Pittsburg Penguins. So, just bundle up and enjoy L.A. I can't remember what happened yesterday, let alone the last three weeks. The highlights include PB telling Thane he thought he and his devices were full of shit, and always had, and had only been trying to determine whether Thane actually knew he was full of shit, or would in fact need PB to illustrate it for him. With that he abandoned his moniker and is now lurking and/or posting as somebody else, or has simply faded back into life and having his bread buttered by EnCana. (an amusing little half-truth, but a truth nonetheless)
As you note, some new faces including cleanfuture (Uli Kruger) who is working with Neil Young on the LincVolt project, and RCH (Richard Hoagland) who works as science advisor to the Coast to Coast radio program, which to my annoyance I discovered is offered on XM and not Sirius, which is what I have. So I can't check it out as easily as I might have, though I'm sure I can find it streaming on the net somewhere. Thane now believes the effect works at the generator and not the motor as he initially postulated. This is now more in line with hoptoad's conclusions, who did similar experiments a few years ago. No perpetual motion machine, but I'm finding the recent results exciting and encouraging and can only hope they continue in this direction.
JM
Here ya go--
http://lightningstream.surfernetwork.com/Media/player/view/ktrs3.asp?call=ktrs&skin=KTRS
George Noory's original St. Louis AM station -- KTRS.
One of about ~500 affiliates nationwide (and in Canada ...).
KTRS carries the program LIVE each night on the Net as well -- at the link above.
Don't know whether there are archives there too .... :)
Enjoy.
RCH
Quote from: mfred68 on May 02, 2008, 05:58:00 PM
Larry
you stated that your motor speeded up when you shorted out the HV coil, can you please tell me what happens if you place a normal 120v 60w filament lightbulb across the coil as a load instead of creating a dead short? dose it still speed up?
The 100 watt bulb is 9.9 ohms. Tried it and no light, no acceleration, no deceleration. The coil volts was 96 and .45 MA at around 716 rpm. So current is too low for an incandescent.
@Thane,
2) YOU DID NOT NOTICE A SPIKE IN MOTOR CURRENT WHEN YOU LOADED YOUR COILS - SUGGESTING INCREASED STATOR CURRENT - CAUSING ACCELERATION?
Didn't observe any spike.
I also removed the grinding wheel on the left and it would not accelerate at 716 rpms at 92 watts when shorted. Went to 1000 rpms and still could not get it to accelerate. Put the wheel back on and it worked at 716 rpms at 107 watts as before. Apparently need more slip to work at that rpm on this single coil unit with a higher horsepower motor.
Regards,
Larry
QuoteI also removed the grinding wheel on the left and it would not accelerate at 716 rpms at 92 watts when shorted. Went to 1000 rpms and still could not get it to accelerate. Put the wheel back on and it worked at 716 rpms at 107 watts as before. Apparently need more slip to work at that rpm on this single coil unit with a higher horsepower motor. Regards,
Larry
I DON'T THINK IT IS A QUESTION OF SLIP I THINK IT'S MOTOR INPUT POWER IN CONJUNCTION WITH YOUR SINGLE COIL.
IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN SET THE
MOTOR INPUT POWER TO 107 WATTS - NO GRINDER WHEEL? OR IS THIS TOO FAST? I THINK THIS IS YOUR
MINIMUM CRITICAL POWER INPUT?
THANKS
Thane
Guys,
"Angular momentum."
Calculate the difference in angular momentum with -- and without -- the grinder wheel. :)
I know it make NO SENSE, in terms of "electrical engineering."
But, as I have tried to point out before (gently ...), this is NOT about "electrical engineering" ... as Laithwaite (one of the master electrical engineers of all time) would CERTAINLY by now agree, in seeing these various permutations of Thane's original set-up ....
You've stumbled over something FAR MORE interesting ... and ultimately "useful."
RCH
Quote@Thane: Your recent results were very interesting! If confirmed, they seem to put to rest the theory that the device's effect is primarily created by core/coil induced drag that the subsequent loading somehow attenuates
.
YES, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO PUT TO REST THE HYSTERESIS BRAKE THEORY.
EQUALLY IMPORTANT IS TO ANSWER WHETHER OR NOT THE MOTOR IS SOMEHOW CAUSING ACCELERATION - WHICH WOULD BE TRUE IF COIL LOADING OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE MOTOR'S PULL OUT POINT ON THE TORQUE CURVE - WE ARE NOW ABLE TO VIRTUALLY STALL THE MOTOR WITH THE HIGH CURRENT COILS - THEN LEAVE THEM "ON" AND CAUSE THE SYSTEM TO ACCELERATE AGAIN BY ENGAGING THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS.
ALSO WE NEED TO ESTABLISH REAL USE-ABLE OUTPUT POWER.
PERHAPS THE ESTEEMED DR. PETER LINDEMANN DSc. MIGHT BE WILLING TO REVISIT HIS CRITIQUE ON PESWIKI.COM - OR EVEN ENLIGHTEN US HERE?http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#No_Useful_Output
AND FINALLY THAT THE EFFECT STILL WORKS WITH LAMINATED CORES - SOME SUGGESTED IT WOULD NOT EARLY ON IN THIS THREAD.
QuoteDo we know how much more power is required to run the motor with the rotor vs without, or is that an oversimplified and/or wrong-headed focus?
PB PUT YOU UP TO THAT QUESTION DIDN'T IT?
IT IS ONE THING TO GET THE COGGING TORQUE (HYSTERESIS, EDDY CURRENT LOSS) QUESTIONS ANSWERED BUT ALL GENERATORS NEED A ROTOR. THE INTERESTING THING IS IT TAKE LESS ENERGY TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM WITH THE HV COILS LOADED THAN UNDER NO LOAD CONDITIONS.
QuoteAlso, could you give a brief description of how this technology will be tested in the dune buggy for the non-technical among us? I'm trying (and failing) to figure out how this will all work with acceleration, braking etc. Will the generator be shorted, or will you be able to draw useful current from that to charge the battery or perform some other useful tasks? If so, would that current have to be conditioned somehow to match the 'needs' of the battery etc.
WE HAVE HIGH CURRENT COILS FOR REGENERATIVE BRAKING.
WE HAVE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS FOR REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION - STEPPED DOWN AND FED INTO THE BATTERY.
WE HAVE HIGH CURRENT COILS IN CONCERT WITH HIGH VOLTAGE COILS FOR REGENERATIVE COASTING - WHERE WE GET MAXIMUM GENERATOR OUTPUT TO OUR BATTERY - AND THE HC DECELERATION IS CANCELLED BY THE HV ACCELERATION.
WE HAVE A COLOSSAL DC MOTOR WHICH WILL ALSO BE EMPLOYED AS A REGENERATIVE BRAKE.
AND I AM CURRENTLY WORKING ON TESTING THE TOROID GENERATOR IN A SCALED UP VERSION - WHICH SHOULD GIVE US ANOTHER OPTION OF CONTINUAL BATTERY REGENERATION - WITH NO CONSEQUENCES.
Thane
Quote from: RCH on May 03, 2008, 08:02:26 PM
Guys,
"Angular momentum."
Calculate the difference in angular momentum with -- and without -- the grinder wheel. :)
I know it make NO SENSE, in terms of "electrical engineering."
But, as I have tried to point out before (gently ...), this is NOT about "electrical engineering" ... as Laithwaite (one of the master electrical engineers of all time) would CERTAINLY by now agree, in seeing these various permutations of Thane's original set-up ....
You've stumbled over something FAR MORE interesting ... and ultimately "useful."
RCH
THE ANGLER FROM MOMENTUMTHERE ONCE WAS AN ANGLER FROM MOMENTUM
WHO CAUGHT A FISH THAT WAS SO BIG THAT IT ATE HIM
SAID THE FISH WITH A GRIN AS HE WIPED OFF HIS CHIN,
"I THOUGH TESLA WAS THE ENGINEER OF THE MILLENNIUM.?"
Thane
DEAR ALL,
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING A PAIR OF TOROID COILS AS PER THE YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEO # 4.
I DID A QUICK TEST AND WITH EACH COIL INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED THE SYSTEM DECELERATES.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH WHEN WIRED IN SERIES AND THEN SHORTED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES.
IDEALLY THE BACK EMF INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO ENTER THE AIR GAP AT ALL - THE LOADED COILS EFFECT ON THE PRIME MOVER SHOULD BE NIL.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 04, 2008, 10:03:57 AM
DEAR ALL,
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING A PAIR OF TOROID COILS AS PER THE YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEO # 4.
I DID A QUICK TEST AND WITH EACH COIL INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED THE SYSTEM DECELERATES.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH WHEN WIRED IN SERIES AND THEN SHORTED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES.
IDEALLY THE BACK EMF INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELDS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO ENTER THE AIR GAP AT ALL - THE LOADED COILS EFFECT ON THE PRIME MOVER SHOULD BE NIL.
Thane
Thane,
I love the way you use off the shelf parts for your experiments!
However a couple of points in this last test... 1) the copper shorting rings are still in place, how does this affect the test? 2) not nearly as much back iron present as in video #4, 3) the back iron that is present is sort of at the bottom of the "toroid", 4) the "toroid" has two air gaps of it's own....sorry, do it again, lol
Ron, aka
PB (Pacific Breeze)
Thane! Luc! I saw Ironman last night at the movies, and I demand that you abandon all this nonsense and make me a big iron suit! Pink please.
Thanks in advance,
JM
Quote from: OilBarren on May 03, 2008, 07:55:09 PM
I DON'T THINK IT IS A QUESTION OF SLIP I THINK IT'S MOTOR INPUT POWER IN CONJUNCTION WITH YOUR SINGLE COIL.
IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN SET THE MOTOR INPUT POWER TO 107 WATTS - NO GRINDER WHEEL? OR IS THIS TOO FAST? I THINK THIS IS YOUR MINIMUM CRITICAL POWER INPUT?
THANKS
Thane
Okay, Took the grinding wheel off, rewired to move the controls farther away and set up a neo shield.
At 107 watts and 1100 rpm, shorted and went to 105 watts and 1197 with coil volts at 117. Slow acceleration, tried other higher rpms and had even less rpm difference. Also, varied the air gap, but the original seemed to be the best.
One other difference that may be useful as RCH suggested. Without the grinding wheel the rpms returned to the original value after unshorting. With the grinding wheel the rpms would remain at or very close to the accelerated rpms after unshorting.
@RCH
Found a lot of interesting info on Eric Laithwaite, especially his reactionless propulsion patent. Is there any working units?
Regards,
Larry
Quote
One other difference that may be useful as RCH suggested. Without the grinding wheel the rpms returned to the original value after unshorting. With the grinding wheel the rpms would remain at or very close to the accelerated rpms after unshorting.
YES THE GRINDING WHEEL ADDS TO THE UNSPRUNG WEIGHT OF YOUR "FLYWHEEL" AND MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE MOTOR TO MAINTAIN THE ACCELERATED SPEED.
Thane
Quote
However a couple of points in this last test... 1) the copper shorting rings are still in place, how does this affect the test?
NOT MUCH - AND I DO INTEND TO CUT THEM OUT - BUT I WANTED TO SEE IF THEY DID ANYTHING INTERESTING FIRST.
Quote2) not nearly as much back iron present as in video #4,
ACTUALLY I HAD A TON IN THERE WHEN I DID THE TEST BUT REMOVED IT FOR THE PHOTOS CAUSE LUC WOULD HAVE A "BIRD" TO SEE HOW CRAPPY IT LOOKED.
Quote3) the back iron that is present is sort of at the bottom of the "toroid",
I AM IN THE PROCESS MOUNTING A PLATE OF LAMINATED TRANSFORMER BACK IRON IN BETWEEN THE TWO "TOROIDS" AND THEN DRILLING A HOLE IN THE MIDDLE FOR THE ROTOR DRIVE SHAFT.
THIS WILL GIVE THE ROTOR FLUX A GOOD AVENUE THROUGH THE COILS AND BACK TO THE ROTOR - SIMILAR TO DEMO # 4 - BUT WITH 2 "TOROIDS" INSTEAD OF JUST 1.
Quote4) the "toroid" has two air gaps of it's own....sorry, do it again, lol
YES BUT THE IDEA AGAIN IS TO PUT ALOT OF BACK IRON ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE ROTOR TO "PULL" AND KEEP FLUX BACK THERE AND AWAY FROM THE AIR GAP BETWEEN THE COILS AND THE ROTOR.
Thane aka "Deciple of Truth"
Larry C,
Fascinating results.
To test the "angular momentum" hypothesis further, you might find a solid wheel of even greater mass (or stack several grinding wheels together) to make a (balanced!) truly MASSIVE disc ... and measure that effect.
For, there IS a method "to this madness." :)
Eric Laithwaite was the foremost British electrical engineer of the 20th Century -- the man who invented the LINEAR induction motor (and thus, the "hovertrain").
At the end of his life, Eric had even been contracted by NASA (in 1997) to design and build a version of his linear levitation system for suspending and accelerating spacecraft into space ... ala that great spaceship scene toward the end of that 1950's classic film, "When Worlds Collide!"
In between, Eric developed an intense interest in -- and unique understanding of -- gyroscopes.
The relevance of this to what's occurring here?
You ... Thane, Vince, Luc, Aether 22 (whatever DID happen to him ...?), and anyone else duplicating Thane's original motor/generator design ... has essentially built a MASSIVE GYROSCOPE.
One powered by an induction motor.
So, here's Laithwaite's genius--
"The equations of a gyroscope are identical to the equations of an induction motor in two-axis form. By analogy, we can relate quantities in the one discipline to their counterparts in the other ... (emphasis added)."
["Give Us a Sign," by Professor E.R. Laithwaite, Electrical Review Vol. 207 No. 3 18 July 1980]
Bruce dePalma (who I had the immense satisfaction of working with ...), and a contemporary of Laithwaite's, also experimented with magnetized gyroscopes ... and discovered (independently) additional, crucial similarities between the two rotating systems ....
So, add more (balanced!) mass to your "Laithwaite gyroscope" ... and see what happens.
Rapid advances at "the edge of engineering" occur only by taking advantage of ALL "prior art" -- so we all don't have to keep "reinventing the wheel" .... :)
Good Luck.
RCH
P.S. To answer your last question:
Just before he died, Eric (according to witness testimony) succeeded in producing a
bonafide demo of a rotating system, capable of "unidirectional" force ... something
that Bruce DePalma also succeeded in doing. There is even a patent for it, here--
http://www.delphion.com/cgi-bin/viewpat.cmd/US05860317__?MODE=fstv&OUT_FORMAT=pdf
Now, THERE'S something "useful" .... :)
We are presently attempting to locate the whereabouts of both actual engineering
models.
Others (according to various web links) seem to have succeeded in (at least, partially ...)
duplicating these extraordinary engineering results, such as here--
http://www.padrak.com/agn/PENDTESTS.html
So, stay tuned.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 04, 2008, 07:21:47 PM
Quote
One other difference that may be useful as RCH suggested. Without the grinding wheel the rpms returned to the original value after unshorting. With the grinding wheel the rpms would remain at or very close to the accelerated rpms after unshorting.
YES THE GRINDING WHEEL ADDS TO THE UNSPRUNG WEIGHT OF YOUR "FLYWHEEL" AND MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE MOTOR TO MAINTAIN THE ACCELERATED SPEED.
Thane
Agreed, but wouldn't you expect an added mass to only slow down the deceleration, not halt it. May be due to flywheel effect along with torque characteristics of the motor :-\
Larry
Larry C,
"There is more in Heaven and Earth than is dreamed of in your ... er ... Newtonian Mechanics."
Laithwaite and DePalma BOTH discovered there are more "mysterious forces" operating on a rotating system ... then on one which is NOT rotating (which is the standard "Newtonian" version of mechanics).
"Mysterious, additional forces" ... which can result -- under certain circumstances -- in ADDED angular momentum ... ADDED electrical energy ... ADDED torque ... etc., etc., etc.
It's ALL in their published results.
So ... don't "reinvent" the wheel -- "borrow" one. :)
I mean: who are you gonna believe -- your own "lyin' eyes" ... or the (non-rotating) textbooks?
RCH
Quote from: RCH on May 04, 2008, 08:26:21 PM
Larry C,
"There is more in Heaven and Earth than is dreamed of in your ... er ... Newtonian Mechanics."
Laithwaite and DePalma BOTH discovered there are more "mysterious forces" operating on a rotating system ... then on one which is NOT rotating (which is the standard "Newtonian" version of mechanics).
"Mysterious, additional forces" ... which can result -- under certain circumstances -- in ADDED angular momentum ... ADDED electrical energy ... ADDED torque ... etc., etc., etc.
It's ALL in their published results.
So ... don't "reinvent" the wheel -- "borrow" one. :)
I mean: who are you gonna believe -- your own "lyin' eyes" ... or the (non-rotating) textbooks?
RCH
Thanks for this and your previous post. Never heard your show, but it is obvious why you are so qualified for your position. I will try to review more of Laithwaite and DePalma info.
Don't know how to add more balanced mass to the current shaft as there is physical restriction on the shaft. May need couplings with additional bearings and balanced mass rotor.
Comment about Laithwaite: It's funny, I have been interested in gyroscopes since 1962. I just don't understand how the Royal Institution in 1974 was so ignorant of basic gyroscope characteristics.
@Nomen luni,
Thanks for the info.
Regards,
Larry
Larry C,
You're quite welcome ... and in for a real treat, as you discover what Bruce and Eric actually found .... :)
Since so much energy is stored in these rotating systems, just be sure you have a VERY balanced mass on your rotor. And no "kluges" to the shaft ....
RCH
P.S. And, what makes you think the Royal Institution DIDN'T know all this in 1974?
Why do you think that Eric Laithwaite's "infamous" gyroscope lecture there was the
ONLY ONE -- in the entire history of the Royal Institution -- NOT to be published afterwards?!
You don't suppose that these "anomalous rotational forces" are among those scientific
discoveries that we're "NOT supposed to know about" ... you do? :)
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED MY FULL SPEED TESTS PERFORMED TODAY.
YOU WILL NOTICE THAT FOR THE HIGH CURRENT COILS THE LOAD POWER IS REFLECTED BACK WITH A CORRESPONDING MOTOR POWER INCREASE
WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE EMPLOYED POWER IS DELIVERED TO THE LOAD WITH LESS POWER THAN THE NO LOAD STARTING POINT.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 02, 2008, 11:18:00 AM
Summary Chart
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D4047.0%3Battach%3D22963%3Bimage&hash=b015b9813c294ef518dd1d4af381304277eef5a8)
Points 1 and 5 .....
@Thane
If you can achieve the same results with a permanent magnet DC prime mover, then I'll go Woooweee! Really Really LOUDLY .. :D :D :D
For that matter, any DC prime mover will be fine.
@All
The possibility of result 5 being due to any non linear characteristics of an induction motor, can easily be laid to rest for good, by using a pm DC motor for the prime mover.
Shunt wound DC motors give the most linear and predictable response.
Good work , Thane and all you other replicators who are finally verifying this effect yourselves.
Years ago, I received ridicule and open hostility from EE peers when I demonstrated this effect and its usefulness in generation. Thats two of a few reasons why I don't use my real name on this site. Alas, in the attitudes and minds of many, nothing changes until change comes knocking at the door.
If any of you can achieve the comparative results of point 1 and point 5 above, using a pm DC motor as the prime mover, then you will have achieved (without any doubt in my mind), additional torque beyond that which is supplied from the driver.
Good luck all .... KneeDeep... :)
Quote
If any of you can achieve the comparative results of point 1 and point 5 above, using a pm DC motor as the prime mover, then you will have achieved (without any doubt in my mind), additional torque beyond that which is supplied from the driver.
Good luck all .... KneeDeep... :)
THANKS HOPTAOD - BUT THE FULL SPEED TESTS (above) SAY WHAT YOU WANT AS WELL?
THOSE 7.7 WATTS IN TABLE # 4 ARE FREE ENERGY - PERSONIFIED.ON YOUR CHOICES TO GIVE AND SHARE YOUR WORK - I OFFER YOU THIS...
"Man only keeps that which he gives away.
The hoarder, who is anxiosly worried anbout losing something,
is psychologically speaking, the poor impoverished man, regarless of how much he has.
Whoever is capable of giving of himself is rich..."- Peace Pilgrim -
AND ON YOUR SO CALLED "PEERS" AND THEIR RIDICUL;E
"When the true geneius appears in the world,
you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."- Jonathan Swift -
Thane
hi all,
very interested to see the direction Thanes investigations are heading - think we could add Aspden to RCHs list of relevant prior research
he discovered the 'Aspden Effect': a motor/flywheel run up for a while then run down & rested for couple of minutes was shown to use less energy on re-running up compared with cold sttart - tends to support the theory that there is a 'vacuum medium/aether' and that inertia (rotational, at least, if not all) is an emergent property of this medium
Aspden has also published some data which indicates that there is anomalous power stored in the air-gaps of magnetic systems, provded by the vacuum medium
Laithwaite was shunned by the EE establishment for suggesting there is something 'going on' energywise with rotational systems
i believe if Thane were able to make the relevant measurements he woud find mass/'weight' anomalies with his test rigs also
good luck in all your efforts everyone - keep at it!
PS soon after graduating i worked in the nextdoor lab to a certain Prof Laithwaite (prior to his Hovertrain fame) & had the dubious honour of standing next to one of his maglev experiments whilst he shot scraps of levitated steel lamination down the length of the lab and embedded them into the plaster wall at the far end - as i watched that amazing experiment all i was thinking was that i worked on the other side of that wall ! happy days
Thane sent this late yesterday and asked me to to post it. It's the high speed test results he's already shared in pdf format.
Quote from: hoptoad on May 05, 2008, 05:51:59 AM
Years ago, I received ridicule and open hostility from EE peers when I demonstrated this effect and its usefulness in generation. Thats two of a few reasons why I don't use my real name on this site. Alas, in the attitudes and minds of many, nothing changes until change comes knocking at the door.
I'm reading a book right now written by British astrophysicist Michael Hawkins called 'Hunting Down the Universe'. In part it examines his view of how vulnerable the presumably dispassionate and objective science of cosmology is to various human frailties. He notes, among many other things, that observational evidence is often ignored or dismissed unless there is an existing theory that explains it. Sadly, it's a part of human nature that I suspect has likely crippled many endeavours.
@Hoptoad
Nul-points,
Absolutely.
Herald Aspden's discovery of the "Aspden Effect" was real and repeatable ... and VERY puzzling to all those who still think a motor is just a "prime mover," and a gyroscope is just a "toy."
Here's his remarkable discovery, in his own words--
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/Le30/le30.html
And, yes, his research into rotating systems -- coupled with that of DePalma and Laithwaite (and Heins?) -- further confirms that "space" is NOT "just an empty vacuum"....
As you said, it will be interesting to see if these same effects reveal themselves in Thane's current machines -- when he begins looking for them -- or, in those of the others on this forum who have managed to partially replicate his results so far ....
Amazing thing, real research. :)
RCH
QuotePrivate Email
Hi! Where are you?! The forum misses you, and there's another big ZPE supporter there who is lonely and worried about you. lol Are you still reading the forum? His name is Richard C. Hoagland and he's associated with some big time alternative radio show called Coast to Coast.
Anyway, we really do miss you. I hope things are good, and that you'll pop by soon.
Things are good, after getting behind in reading posts and frustrated by all the talking I found less interest in talking, sorry about that. (Some just seemed quite off topic)
Also a major part is that I had Thanes kindly sent rotor with lots of extras but nothing to report yet to many waiting to hear of my results I'm sure, I had some real trouble getting the right wire and that and 'living life' took the first few weeks after getting back, then I had just started to work on building the coil with my newly acquired wire when I had a headache that lasted the best part of a week leaving me with the feeling it would come back if I did anything much the next day and then it was the weekend which isn't a great time to get anything done for me.
But yesterday and today I am winding, it's not fast despite using a drill, already had one break.
So enough as to why I have nothing to show yet, happy to 'flake out' anyway, that way RCH's fears are less likely to come true, why assassinate a flake?
It is odd having you introduce me to Hoagland, you are probably one of the few here that had not heard of him, he is an interesting guy, he loves to present stuff that is simply almost impossible to believe but often gives a tantalizing level of evidence.
Possibly the best thing I have seen him present is evidence that the moon landing was not a hoax, not that it's a hard one to disprove, it is the weakest 'conspiracy theory' I have ever heard but he did an excellent job, only to later 'prove' that C-3PO is lying dead in a crater on the moon ;)
But on to more serious things.
First
LarryC, do I understand that you had success when you used a grinder motor?
But what has be most bewildered is what is going on with Thane.
I am not crystal clear on the experiments he has preformed since I went on my holiday, in part because I don't think they have been presented all that clearly.
But I understand somehow he has discounted the idea that anything from the generator is effecting the motor and that it is simply the generator effecting the generator.
I am not sure then how he explains his original discovery, but I am not going to be sent off course, that is what I am chasing.
So
Thane if you could be so good as to try and answer these 2 questions:
1: If you do not believe the results of the initial demo anymore then can you explain those results? If so please explain.
2: What experiment did you do which you felt has disproven that initial experiment? (If it is one using a long length of PVC, can you please go into a decent level of detail, did it work with only one stator or were more needed? etc...)
Finally I must say that I agree with Hoagland, DePalma did very interesting experiments and I got to hear of many of them from the horses mouth, I stayed at his place for a few days and kept in touch until his passing.
Quote from: aether22 on May 05, 2008, 06:47:47 PM
First LarryC, do I understand that you had success when you used a grinder motor?
Hi aether22,
Glad to see you're back.
Well, first I wound a 205 ohm coil, and sent you a post #1712 about the issues.
Then tried and failed to accelerate a ceiling fan motor.
Then I had some success with my current bench grinder. See #1900, #1921, and #1929.
I'm interested in your winding problems. Didn't mention in my original post, but it took about 4.5 hours, 1 hour to set up and 3.5 hours to wind. Also, I had to tape the core to the end holders to keep the core from falling out of the slot.
Good Luck,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 05, 2008, 08:46:21 PM
I'm interested in your winding problems. Didn't mention in my original post, but it took about 4.5 hours, 1 hour to set up and 3.5 hours to wind. Also, I had to tape the core to the end holders to keep the core from falling out of the slot.
Thanks, I'll check out those posts.
My problem with winding is that I am trying to do a very neat coil, almost perfect though the ends becomes a bit messed up. (actually I unwound the first 4 or so layers which just unwinding took about 2 hours, about as long as it took to wind them all because the first layer wasn't vry neat and it was making all the subsequent layers messy.
Thing is it's a very large coil to do almost perfectly.
Had 2 breaks now, both times I have unwound the rest of that layer until I get to an end and then start a new coil, later I can join the ends and even add the extra wire over the top.
On a break for late lunch/breakfast
Aether!
Yes, some of us have been concerned by your prolonged absence .... :)
However, I find your remarks -- on "reappearing" -- somewhat puzzling.
I have always been struck by how even those at one of the true "outer boundaries" of human knowledge -- as in, ultimately believing in even the possibility of "an unlimited source of free energy" -- seem to, in fact, have other boundary issues ... such as, not being able to seriously consider the political (and legal) possibility that NASA "may NOT have been telling us the whole truth all these years, regarding what is really on the Moon" ....
Or, to also seriously consider that 19th Century British biologist, J.B.S. Haldane, could have been absolutely right when he stated decades ago--
"It is my supposition that the Universe is not only queerer than we imagine ... is queerer than we CAN imagine ...."
http://www.csmngt.com/quote_11.htm
In that kind of Universe, is it REALLY any "queerer" to imagine an "unlimited source of free energy," blatantly violating the current (narrowly-defined) Second Law of Thermodynamics (because it ultimately comes from outside the currently defined "Universe" -- i.e. another "dimension?") ... than to consider equally robust, officially acquired (but politically suppressed) evidence from NASA ... that Humankind is NOT alone in that same Universe?
But, I digress .... :)
So you actually got to spend some quality time with Bruce, eh? That's pretty cool.
I found a bunch of DePalma's older "experimental papers" the other day, that he had sent me "for safekeeping" from New Zealand shortly after he arrived. They brought back all of the feelings I have had of late, regarding what we are now missing in these crucial fields, the fact that, in Humanity's "11th hour" -- when we REALLY need giants such as these ... DePalma, Laithwaite ... others -- they're now, sadly, gone.
Glad you're back.
RCH
Quote from: aether22 on May 05, 2008, 08:54:10 PM
Thanks, I'll check out those posts.
My problem with winding is that I am trying to do a very neat coil, almost perfect though the ends becomes a bit messed up. (actually I unwound the first 4 or so layers which just unwinding took about 2 hours, about as long as it took to wind them all because the first layer wasn't vry neat and it was making all the subsequent layers messy.
Thing is it's a very large coil to do almost perfectly.
Had 2 breaks now, both times I have unwound the rest of that layer until I get to an end and then start a new coil, later I can join the ends and even add the extra wire over the top.
Okay, check out my first post as to how to solve the end mess problem. It has a picture of the coil. It is not perfect, but it look pretty good. I didn't try to keep each layer perfectly level, just tried to fill in the small dips as I went along. Also, keep in mind how Thane's manually wound coils looked, it is probably overkill to be perfect. Don't understand the break problem. Are you pulling the wire off the same way as in my post? It never had a twist or tangle using that method.
Thanks,
Larry
Hi All,
Between the writing of Aspden, Laithwaite and DePalma, it would take a good year to read and understand the mountain of information (especially Aspden). The main researchers (Thane and Luc) are get er done type of guys and would never have time to sift thru that mountain for pertaining information. Would any you who are more studied on these individual, like to volunteer a summary document of important information, pertaining to Thane's research? It could be coordinated, if each volunteer stated the document that they have time to create. You don't need all or perfect knowledge, just enough to contribute to the process.
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 05, 2008, 09:40:22 PM
Hi All,
Between the writing of Aspden, Laithwaite and DePalma, it would take a good year to read and understand the mountain of information (especially Aspden). The main researchers (Thane and Luc) are get er done type of guys and would never have time to sift thru that mountain for pertaining information. Would any you who are more studied on these individual, like to volunteer a summary document of important information, pertaining to Thane's research? It could be coordinated, if each volunteer stated the document that they have time to create. You don't need all or perfect knowledge, just enough to contribute to the process.
Thanks,
Larry
Good Call Larry,
I ain't the reading of documentation type of guy, so if anyone can help as Larry is suggesting that would be great.
Great work to date Larry
@aether22, I'm glad to see you're back. Also keep in mind that you can use old microwave transformers to test the effect. With a angle grinder and a thin cut off blade you can have a coil done in about 20 minutes.
Luc
P.S. I'll be back from Florida on the 10th and will resume with more tests to find the better coil setup.
Quote from: RCH on May 05, 2008, 09:07:02 PM
Aether!
Yes, some of us have been concerned by your prolonged absence .... :)
However, I find your remarks -- on "reappearing" -- somewhat puzzling.
I have always been struck by how even those at one of the true "outer boundaries" of human knowledge -- as in, ultimately believing in even the possibility of "an unlimited source of free energy" -- seem to, in fact, have other boundary issues ... such as, not being able to seriously consider the political (and legal) possibility that NASA "may NOT have been telling us the whole truth all these years, regarding what is really on the Moon" ....
I think it's the difference between thinking something is possible or theoretically likely .vs actually believing the consequences of those beliefs.
I have no trouble with NASA lying (I am positive they do), but them having taken a picture of a robot resembling a humanoid lying in a creator seems too fantastic, not to say that I disbelieve any of the things possible for such to be reality, it is simply being faced with such a reality, and furthermore when the evidence is of a grainy photo type, I may not be able to explain away the evidence for C3PO or the glass structures and I may even consider it strong from a certain perspective but it somehow isn't satisfying even if I accept it's proof.
I guess we all have different ways by which evidence can sway us, some in correlations, some in authority, some in mathematical verification, some in grainy photos, and the impact evidence has on us might have little to do with logic.
Quote
Or, to also seriously consider that 19th Century British biologist, J.B.S. Haldane, could have been absolutely right when he stated decades ago--
"It is my supposition that the Universe is not only queerer than we imagine ... is queerer than we CAN imagine ...."
I believe that too.
I think one thing though is different levels of belief, some things I believe are so, others I believe are not so, and many things I say I don't know, and this "don't know" covers everything that I have not been utterly convinced about in either direction, many I might believe mostly, things that are very probably the truth, others I may accept have evidence but feel they are lacking solidity or sometimes simply too 'uncomfortable' to consider as an everyday reality, some things simply take more time, evidence and discomfort to accept.
Quote
http://www.csmngt.com/quote_11.htm
In that kind of Universe, is it REALLY any "queerer" to imagine an "unlimited source of free energy," blatantly violating the current (narrowly-defined) Second Law of Thermodynamics (because it ultimately comes from outside the currently defined "Universe" -- i.e. another "dimension?") ... than to consider equally robust, officially acquired (but politically suppressed) evidence from NASA ... that Humankind is NOT alone in that same Universe?
For a long time I believed in UFO's because the evidence was great and I didn't question it.
Oh, I still believe in UFO's but I have since come to the conclusion that they can not ALL be 'ours', in other words I now believe in Aliens also.
And I believe in ancient technology human and otherwise.
I have even seen enough evidence to believe in ancient bases on the moon.
And obviously a humanoid robot isn't especially far fetched, but really, in those grainy photos? Maybe if you had identified something more mundane say an alien table?
Anyway as you have hopefully grasped I'm not disputing your evidence just admitting some of it is hard to accept, of course it might be C3PO's head but I remain less than fully convinced simply because the evidence isn't quite convincing enough in the way I like my evidence.
Quote
But, I digress .... :)
So you actually got to spend some quality time with Bruce, eh? That's pretty cool.
Yes, sadly though he had some crazy theories about some 'primordial fluid something' and at the time I did not like the idea of anything that smelled like an aether.
Quote
I found a bunch of DePalma's older "experimental papers" the other day, that he had sent me "for safekeeping" from New Zealand shortly after he arrived. They brought back all of the feelings I have had of late, regarding what we are now missing in these crucial fields, the fact that, in Humanity's "11th hour" -- when we REALLY need giants such as these ... DePalma, Laithwaite ... others -- they're now, sadly, gone.
Glad you're back.
RCH
Glad you joined!
Quote from: gotoluc on May 05, 2008, 10:30:29 PM
Quote from: LarryC on May 05, 2008, 09:40:22 PM
Hi All,
Between the writing of Aspden, Laithwaite and DePalma, it would take a good year to read and understand the mountain of information (especially Aspden). The main researchers (Thane and Luc) are get er done type of guys and would never have time to sift thru that mountain for pertaining information. Would any you who are more studied on these individual, like to volunteer a summary document of important information, pertaining to Thane's research? It could be coordinated, if each volunteer stated the document that they have time to create. You don't need all or perfect knowledge, just enough to contribute to the process.
Thanks,
Larry
Good Call Larry,
I ain't the reading of documentation type of guy, so if anyone can help as Larry is suggesting that would be great.
Great work to date Larry
@aether22, I'm glad to see you're back. Also keep in mind that you can use old microwave transformers to test the effect. With a angle grinder and a thin cut off blade you can have a coil done in about 20 minutes.
Luc
P.S. I'll be back from Florida on the 10th and will resume with more tests to find the better coil setup.
Ah, is that what Thane is using, I do have one, will consider it but now I am winding.
As for the breaks it is because I have the reel on a shaft and it is spinning but sometimes the wire wraps it's self around the axle, one I didn't catch it in time, the other time I simply had the drill running a bit too fast.
Quote from: LarryC on April 30, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
...I reviewed DePalma Homopolar/Unipolar generator research. ... My University and High School Physics text have no mention of the homopolar generator. Apparently because it went against Lenz's law and could not be explained by modern physics...
Regards,
Larry
I think the reason you don't see it in textbooks is more straightforward than that. The reason is simply that it didn't work.
Quote from: aether22 on May 05, 2008, 11:31:53 PM
Ah, is that what Thane is using, I do have one, will consider it but now I am winding.
As for the breaks it is because I have the reel on a shaft and it is spinning but sometimes the wire wraps it's self around the axle, one I didn't catch it in time, the other time I simply had the drill running a bit too fast.
Okay, but have you tried laying the wire reel on it side edge(no shaft) and pulling clockwise off the top side edge of the reel and spooling clockwise on the core? Just like loading a fishing spinning reel.
Thanks,
Larry
PS - I'm starting to believe in aether with all this research of Aspden, Laithwaite and DePalma. So maybe wellcome another to the heretic club.
Say hello to our new member, Brother Larry.
Quote from: OUman on May 05, 2008, 11:47:37 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 30, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
...I reviewed DePalma Homopolar/Unipolar generator research. ... My University and High School Physics text have no mention of the homopolar generator. Apparently because it went against Lenz's law and could not be explained by modern physics...
Regards,
Larry
I think the reason you don't see it in textbooks is more straightforward than that. The reason is simply that it didn't work.
Hi OUman,
That was a very weak attack. My University Physics text is from 1982. Harvard, U of Texas, Texas A & M currently all study homopolar generators and some have patents. It does work and several commercial companies offer the homopolar generator. I also read where new college physics student are challenged to explain the results.
Very interesting, you may not be PB as PB was a very good Googler of technical information. Thane, I think we may owe PB an apology.
BTW, it is very easy to replicate. Secure two opposing magnets with spacing in between in a copper tube and spin the tube with electrical contacts at each end. High amps and low volts will be produced.
Maybe not OU, but it is very interesting that the magnetic fields seem to remain static and generate current in the spinning copper tube while the magnets are rotating.
Regards,
Larry
Aether,
"... I may not be able to explain away the evidence for C3PO or the glass structures and I may even consider it strong from a certain perspective but it somehow isn't satisfying even if I accept it's proof ...."
I have NO idea what you mean by that.
Isn't "satisfying?"
What does THAT mean ... that, you don't like the IMPLICATIONS of NASA finding an actual robotic head -- on the Moon?!
Or -- that you don't like the fact that they would lie about what they found ... over all these years ... while pretending to be telling us the truth?
Or, do you mean the evidence itself that I've presented isn't "sufficient" yet for you to make any definitive decision -- regarding the reality or not of "C3PO" ... and "his/its" attendent implications. :)
[In case anyone has missed this remarkable Apollo evidence (having NOT read my latest book, "Dark Mission") here is one of the NASA images we have of "C3PO" (there are actually something like 12, taken by Gene Cernan on Apollo 17 at the time ...), below.]
Based on this official NASA evidence (the available scanned images, from the original Apollo photography, are found on an official NASA website -- http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/), I myself find the case for the reality of "C3PO" pretty convincing at this point -- given that I cannot find a plausible geological reason for a "bilaterally symmetric, humanoid head," complete with "camera iris lenses" for "eyes" ... to be found lying on the airless, radiation-drenched Moon ... and a bright red "identifying" stripe still visible around its neck! :)
Now, in case others doubt the relevance of this digression to the larger topic at hand (remember, Aether brought this up ...) -- has Thane truly found another electrical/mechanical technology to tap into the limiteless potential of "free energy" -- it is simply this:
Our emotional reaction to ANY scientific hypothesis or discovery -- and to the evidence supporting it -- is totally irrelevant to the reality of that hypothesis.
"Extraordinary claims" -- as another friend of mine once mistakenly announced -- do NOT require "extraordinary evidence." They merely require repeatable evidence ....
Aether, with this as background, I find it truly gratifying that you (apparently) have gone from someone who felt that Bruce DePalma "... had some crazy theories about some 'primordial fluid something' and at the time I did not like the idea of anything that smelled like an aether ...." to someone whose public handle now is "Aether 22!"
Progress. :)
Hopefully, in time, you'll find our evidence of "something" truly extraordinary lying on the Moon -- and the consequent overwhelming implications for ALL of us -- equally compelling ... if not "satisfying" ....
RCH
Quote from: RCH on May 06, 2008, 01:42:16 AM
Aether,
"... I may not be able to explain away the evidence for C3PO or the glass structures and I may even consider it strong from a certain perspective but it somehow isn't satisfying even if I accept it's proof ...."
I have NO idea what you mean by that.
Isn't "satisfying?"
What does THAT mean
The brain may be overwhelmed by reason, but that does not always change a mind.
That's what I mean by not satisfied, not truly convinced on all levels.
Belief is not a binary thing, and there are different ways in which someone can believe something.
Quote
... that, you don't like the IMPLICATIONS of NASA finding an actual robotic head -- on the Moon?!
No, I'm Ok with most of the implications in this case.
It's the type of evidence, it feels inconclusive and inexact, it looks like it 'might be' not IS.
Quote
Or -- that you don't like the fact that they would lie about what they found ... over all these years ... while pretending to be telling us the truth?
No, in fact I consider it possible the gravity of the moon is greater than claimed and that LEM is helped out by AG tech.
Quote
Or, do you mean the evidence itself that I've presented isn't "sufficient" yet for you to make any definitive decision -- regarding the reality or not of "C3PO" ... and "his/its" attendant implications. :)
in this case yes, that's what I am saying, not that the evidence you have might not be strong enough that it logically SHOULD be considered conclusive (and I'm not saying that is either) but that belief sometimes needs a weight of evidence or evidence of the type that the persons psyche finds effective at changing a belief, in that respect I don't think we are all the same.
Quote
[In case anyone has missed this remarkable Apollo evidence (having NOT read my latest book, "Dark Mission") here is one of the NASA images we have of "C3PO" (there are actually something like 12, taken by Gene Cernan on Apollo 17 at the time ...), below.]
Based on this official NASA evidence (the available scanned images, from the original Apollo photography, are found on an official NASA website -- http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/), I myself find the case for the reality of "C3PO" pretty convincing at this point -- given that I cannot find a plausible geological reason for a "bilaterally symmetric, humanoid head," complete with "camera iris lenses" for "eyes" ... to be found lying on the airless, radiation-drenched Moon ... and a bright red "identifying" stripe still visible around its neck! :)
Now, in case others doubt the relevance of this digression to the larger topic at hand (remember, Aether brought this up ...) -- has Thane truly found another electrical/mechanical technology to tap into the limiteless potential of "free energy" -- it is simply this:
Our emotional reaction to ANY scientific hypothesis or discovery -- and to the evidence supporting it -- is totally irrelevant to the reality of that hypothesis.
Aether, with this as background, I find it truly fascinating that you (apparently) have gone from someone who felt that Bruce DePalma "... had some crazy theories about some 'primordial fluid something' and at the time I did not like the idea of anything that smelled like an aether ...." to someone who's public handle now is "Aether 22!"
Progress. :)
Indeed, I often cite the fact that I hated the whole new agey invisible airy fairy mysterious concept of aether in an attempt to convey just how conclusive the evidence is, but I get the feeling that it falls on deaf ears so it is good to hear that may not be the case.
Quote
Hopefully, in time, you'll find our evidence of "something" truly extraordinary lying on the Moon -- and the consequent overwhelming implications for ALL of us -- equally compelling ... if not "satisfying" ....
RCH
Ok, but I'm not buying the guns in the pictures from Mars any time soon. (from Spirit or Opportunity)
Anyway what is your position on the face on mars lion reflection thingy? (I saw it on an old video and admit it was impressive if again inconclusive)
Anyway I agree, it is on topic really because it does cover the issue of changing ones beliefs and that is something that can be a real limiting factor for many people.
Aether,
You said:
" ... Indeed, I often cite the fact that I [once] hated the whole new-agey, invisible, airy-fairy mysterious concept of aether, in an attempt to convey just how conclusive the evidence is [now to me], but I get the feeling that it [my previous uncertainty] falls on deaf ears ... so it is good to hear that may not be the case ...." [I hope I've edited this correctly, expanding on your true assessment -- then ... and now.]
With this, I think I see your larger "problem" (which I put quotes around to emphasize that it is NOT unique with you ...).
We (at least those of us here in the United States ...) live in a culture of perceived absolutes: "good/bad" ... "black/white" ... "true/not true" ... "guilty/innocent."
This skewed perception of reality, unfortunately, seems to have "infected" a lot of other cultures ....
However, the Universe (and certainly Science) is filled with uncertainties and ambiguities. And, our human ability to decide on the "reality" of any situation is only as good as the evidence we have acquired, AND the tools we have at the time its gathered for assessing the validity of that acquired evidence.
A fundamental example ... a literal "life and death" example in this country now ... is in our US courts.
How many previously perceived "bad guys" -- convicted murders, rapists, child molesters, etc., etc. -- have been officially released from prison in recent years, by the courts ... all because the introduction of NEW evidentiary techniques proved they were, in fact, INNOCENT--
Despite the jury's original "infallible" guilty verdict?
All ... because an iron-clad "eyewitness" here ... or a "solid ballistics report" there ... was ultimately proven WRONG--
As judged by the NEW "foolproof forensic technique" recently introduced in court proceedings ... DNA?
So, what went "horribly wrong with the US system of justice?"
Nothing.
What went "right" was that the technique for assessing the accuracy of the original evidence produced in court improved -- eyewitness testimony ... blood evidence ... ballistics--
Eventually reducing the inherent uncertainty in the original analysis of that same evidence!
It was our expectation that a court proceeding -- led by fallible humans, and an even more fallible forensics system -- could ever be "infallible" ... which was in error.
Your "problem" -- as I see it here -- is that you seem to expect/need something approaching absolute certainty in making decisions about "reality" ... before you feel "comfortable" with holding onto a specific view (feeling "comfortable") vis a vis a new "discovery" in Science.
In fact, "certainty" in Science (as in Life ...) is an illusion .... It's all in "the eye and mind" of the beholder ....
So, knowing that, my own approach is to accept the possibility of "an ancient, robotic sample of ET technology," found upon the Moon by NASA -- with ALL its implications ... while I simultaneously attempt to gather further, more definitive evidence ....
Or, as the White Queen in "Alice in Wonderland" once bragged--
"Sometimes I've been able to believe as many as six impossible things before breakfast!"
All the while, holding on to the possibility that the evidence may, ultimately, turn out NOT to be real ... when the scientific technology further improves ....
That's how one makes real progress in Science.
And incidentally, that's why I'm here ....
Waiting for Thane and Company to realize that their "impossible generator technology" can ONLY, ultimately, be explained -- let alone successfully exploited -- through a serious investigation of ... the aether. :)
Stay tuned.
RCH
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:57:30 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 05, 2008, 11:47:37 PM
I think the reason you don't see it in textbooks is more straightforward than that. The reason is simply that it didn't work.
Harvard, U of Texas, Texas A & M currently all study homopolar generators and some have patents. It does work and several commercial companies offer the homopolar generator.
The De Palma machine did not work. If you disagree, perhaps you can refer us to the results of its successful demonstration?
Can you cite examples to support any of your other statements? I'm interested to find out how you know those things.
- References in those university curricula or course outlines or course notes?
- Textbooks* more recent than yours where these are mentioned?
- Patent numbers?
- Links to companies and products of that sort?
*But, presence or absence in a textbook is not in itself any indication either way. As Uli/cleanfuture pointed out in post 1889, Tesla wouldn't have been concerned about that. The key issue is whether or not it works - textbook theory is secondary to that.
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:57:30 AM
BTW, it is very easy to replicate. Secure two opposing magnets with spacing in between in a copper tube and spin the tube with electrical contacts at each end. High amps and low volts will be produced.
Maybe not OU, but it is very interesting that the magnetic fields seem to remain static and generate current in the spinning copper tube while the magnets are rotating.
You could do the drop-the-magnet-down-a-copper-tube-look-how-slow-it-goes thing too. Exactly the same forces are at work there.
Quote from: RCH on May 06, 2008, 06:38:36 AM
but I get the feeling that it [my previous uncertainty] falls on deaf ears ... so it is good to hear that may not be the case ...." [I hope I've edited this correctly, expanding on your true assessment -- then ... and now.]
Yes, but maybe it's now missing my point that evidence required to reverse a strongly held opinion must be significant.
Quote
With this, I think I see your larger "problem" (which I put quotes around to emphasize that it is NOT unique with you ...).
We (at least those of us here in the United States ...) live in a culture of perceived absolutes: "good/bad" ... "black/white" ... "true/not true" ... "guilty/innocent."
This skewed perception of reality, unfortunately, seems to have "infected" a lot of other cultures ....
However, the Universe (and certainly Science) is filled with uncertainties and ambiguities.
Indeed.
Quote
And, our human ability to decide on the "reality" of any situation is only as good as the evidence we have acquired, AND the tools we have at the time its gathered for assessing the validity of that acquired evidence.
That all sounds very logical but IMO most people are influenced far far more by authority and peer pressure and every day experiences than by the limits of our senses or evidence.
Quote
A fundamental example ... a literal "life and death" example in this country now ... is in our US courts.
How many previously perceived "bad guys" -- convicted murders, rapists, child molesters, etc., etc. -- have been officially released from prison in recent years, by the courts ... all because the introduction of NEW evidentiary techniques proved they were, in fact, INNOCENT--
Despite the jury's original "infallible" guilty verdict?
All ... because an iron-clad "eyewitness" here ... or a "solid ballistics report" there ... was ultimately proven WRONG--
As judged by the NEW "foolproof forensic technique" recently introduced in court proceedings ... DNA?
So, what went "horribly wrong with the US system of justice?"
Nothing.
Not sure I'd go so far as to say nothing.
Judges and juries can be awful sometimes, there are plenty of examples but the freshest on my mind is a New Zealander who was jailed in the US for some infraction with firearms (it sounded very much like an innocent mistake, he was in the US for his business which was a gun/sporting shop, but I forget the details) and then when being released from jail was immediately arrested and jailed for overstaying as the jail time put him over his max stay!
Quote
What went "right" was that the technique for assessing the accuracy of the original evidence produced in court improved -- eyewitness testimony ... blood evidence ... ballistics--
Eventually reducing the inherent uncertainty in the original analysis of that same evidence!
I forget the details but i have heard of cases where I think in one case the real murderer confessed but it didn't stop an execution, I have heard other cases which defied all reason for the person to have been guilty and yet was executed, not saying this is the rule but there are huge failures.
Quote
It was our expectation that a court proceeding -- led by fallible humans, and an even more fallible forensics system -- could ever be "infallible" ... which was in error.
Your "problem" -- as I see it here -- is that you seem to expect/need something approaching absolute certainty in making decisions about "reality"
No, I don't, many things are in the grey 'not sure' area, but it is an issue for most people I believe.
Quote
... before you feel "comfortable" with holding onto a specific view (feeling "comfortable") vis a vis a new "discovery" in Science.
In fact, "certainty" in Science (as in Life ...) is an illusion .... It's all in "the eye and mind" of the beholder ....
So, knowing that, my own approach is to accept the possibility of "an ancient, robotic sample of ET technology," found upon the Moon by NASA -- with ALL its implications ... while I simultaneously attempt to gather further, more definitive evidence ....
Or, as the White Queen in "Alice in Wonderland" once bragged--
"Sometimes I've been able to believe as many as six impossible things before breakfast!"
All the while, holding on to the possibility that the evidence may, ultimately, turn out NOT to be real ... when the scientific technology further improves ....
How about this one, I was at a Lecture held at the now long gone Adventures Unlimited book store in Auckland (it's how I met DePalma and got to hear a lecture from Adams), and at this specific lecture was a woman who claimed that Astronauts report New Zealand has a purple tint as seen from space.
I considered it a plausibility until Google Earth (what, a decade later) showed up and looking at New Zealand I couldn't help but notice the whole thing is indeed purple, from very to subtly, ocean, lakes, mountains, cities.
I try and find a similar colour bias elsewhere but I can't. (not counting one tiny spot)
So who knows?
note: to me purple and indigo and violet and mauve are all the same colour ;)
Quote
That's how one makes real progress in Science.
And incidentally, that's why I'm here ....
Waiting for Thane and Company to realize that their "impossible generator technology" can ONLY, ultimately, be explained -- let alone successfully exploited -- through a serious investigation of ... the aether. :)
Stay tuned.
RCH
Ok, let's continue this Dialogue but let's shift it to the aether, I'd be happy to tell you what I have learnt if you have any questions to ask and I'd be interested in what you know, I would also be interested if the aether supplants your Hyperspace theory or supplements it or if one is a component of the other, personally I'd suspect it's the geometric/mathematical resonances at these locations that effects the aether.
But as redundant as I suppose it would be to mention, I fully agree that the Aether is the only possible explanation if it is doing anything anomalous or truly useful, the aether (in some form) seems to be the key to every impossible happening in this world and looking elsewhere is a waste of time, and if the aether were not working in Thanes device in the way I envision it simply means it is working in a way other than how I envisioned.
DEAR I_RONman,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE TOROID GENERATOR COILS w/ BACK I_RON AS PROMISED.
I ALSO SKETCHED OUT SOME ANTICIPATED FLUX PATHS FOR THE ROTOR FLUX.
THE ROTOR MAY NEED TO BE A MONO-POLE.
THE DRIVE SHAFT GOES RIGHT THROUGH THE CENTRE OF THE BACK I_RON PLATE.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane asked if I could post his high speed tests directly on the forum, so here they are in one more format:
Hi,
Just a quick preview on the test set up I am putting together. The number f magnets in the rotor can be varied dependent on the test results. The aluminum spacer segments in between the magnets are removable and may be replaced with shorter ones if more magnets are required. A stepped ring from each side prevents the rotor from flying apart at high rpm. The stator core is made from solid iron at this stage. I suspect that I will have to replace this with a laminated core. I am planning to run two each high voltage and high current coils in the tests. The high current coils are microwave coils as Thane suggested. The rotor will be driven with a 250W 12V DC motor with a direct coupling from above.
Uli
The other image did not get through. Here it is again.
Uli
Quote from: OUman on May 06, 2008, 07:05:04 AM
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:57:30 AM
Harvard, U of Texas, Texas A & M currently all study homopolar generators and some have patents. It does work and several commercial companies offer the homopolar generator.
The De Palma machine did not work. If you disagree, perhaps you can refer us to the results of its successful demonstration?
Can you cite examples to support any of your other statements? I'm interested to find out how you know those things.
- References in those university curricula or course outlines or course notes?
- Textbooks* more recent than yours where these are mentioned?
- Patent numbers?
- Links to companies and products of that sort?
*But, presence or absence in a textbook is not in itself any indication either way. As Uli/cleanfuture pointed out in post 1889, Tesla wouldn't have been concerned about that. The key issue is whether or not it works - textbook theory is secondary to that.
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:57:30 AM
BTW, it is very easy to replicate. Secure two opposing magnets with spacing in between in a copper tube and spin the tube with electrical contacts at each end. High amps and low volts will be produced.
Maybe not OU, but it is very interesting that the magnetic fields seem to remain static and generate current in the spinning copper tube while the magnets are rotating.
You could do the drop-the-magnet-down-a-copper-tube-look-how-slow-it-goes thing too. Exactly the same forces are at work there.
Sorry OUman, too busy to answer your extremely difficult questions right now. I'm wrapping my wheel in carbon fiber and plan on setting up a belt system to get the rpms up to 40,000.
@All,
Be careful out there. I think there is going to be an unpredicted neo meteorite storm soon.
Larry
Quote from: cleanfuture on May 06, 2008, 11:46:02 AM
The other image did not get through. Here it is again.
Uli
Hi Uli,
I also had trouble when I first sent images. The software seems to think it is a duplicate when the level names are too long, if it is the same problem. I put the folder under C: and no problems since.
Nice work.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:36:42 PM
@All,
Be careful out there. I think there is going to be an unpredicted neo meteorite storm soon.
Larry
Cool 8)
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on May 06, 2008, 01:06:26 PM
Quote from: LarryC on May 06, 2008, 12:36:42 PM
@All,
Be careful out there. I think there is going to be an unpredicted neo meteorite storm soon.
Larry
Cool 8)
Luc
Unpredicted?
My main daily news source is the Signs of the Times at sott.net .
(which is currently down as of this writing. Hmm. I hope it's not connected to the suspected sexual predator who was attempting to sue them for 5 million dollars for the reposting and commentary on a news article which was hurting his cult business)Anyways, they have been predicting the likelihood of a cosmic swarm for years now and have done a lot of good research into it.
Free energy and the awareness of cyclical catastrophes are the two things that may yet save us.
Not so coincidentally, they're two things that are downplayed and/or viciously attacked and ridiculed by authorities.
Keep up the good fight.
Aether,
Before we shift our discussion, I want to wrap up a couple of loose ends in my previous "court analogy":
I'm NOT saying that the US judicial system is "perfect" (are you kidding?!).
What I was attempting (probably badly ...) to illustrate, was the fact that any HONEST judicial system requires HONEST evidence ... and HONEST forensic interpretation of that evidence.
And that, ultimately, "justice" is totally constrained by the ability of the Courts to make honest "reasoned" decisions, based on honest, state-of-the-art analytical techniques applied to whatever evidence is ultimately presented to them ....
Scientific techniques which have, demonstrably, MARKEDLY IMPROVED with time.
So, "justice" -- far from being unchanging and "divinely ordained" from the Beginning -- continues to be a very fallible, human, "changing commodity" ... with time.
As does "Science."
Evidence analysis which would have easily convicted individuals in previous years, is now being outweighed by NEW scientific analysis techniques (and methodologies ...) -- which can exonnerate those previously "convicted felons" ... and has ... in hundreds of known cases.
In fact, based on the introduction of these new scientific techniques -- such as DNA -- some States in the United States have literally suspended application of the death penalty ... based on the (obvious!) MAJOR "imperfections" discovered underlying the entire forensic basis of the previous convictions!
So, in our much-vaunted US legal "jury system" -- justice is RELATIVE ... with time!
And, this does not take into account (as you so rightly pointed out ...) the structural problems, overwork and understaffing, economic disparities, and general bureaucratic ineptitude of our current legal system (the guy who was kept over his visa by the system, and thereby was held on ANOTHER charge after his initial time was served, being one of many such examples ....).
In Science, so-called "peer review" is a direct cross-over of the legal "jury system" -- with some crucial differences, however.
In a court trial in the US, a defendent -- under the Constitution -- has the Right to directly confront his accuser. In the scientific "peer review" system for scientific publication, a scientist trying to get a paper published on a "controversial" finding or discovery in a "referred scientific publication" can be attacked ... and literally "shot down" ... not in public (as in court), but by ANONYMOUS ACCUSERS ....
And he (or she) may never get to know "who" did them in ... by giving them a "thumbs down," anonymous , bad review behind the scenes ....
So, in Science, not only are the same scientific limitations of analysis and "state-of-the-art" techniques in play as in the Court system ... the entire political system underneath is (deliberately?) "stacked against" revolutionary scientific discoveries that may "make waves!" By allowing "negative anonymous reviews" -- which can effectively, politically, block publication of truly "revolutionary results."
This is why THIS forum (and all the others like it ... all across the World Wide Web) is now SO critical to reestablishing a free-flow of truly independent scientific and experimental information ... such as that occurring here.
I can't help wonder where Bruce DePalma and Eric Laithwaite's revolutionary ideas -- and supporting, extraordinary lab experiments -- would be today ... if THEY had had "the Web" ....
And (plug ... plug) -- also offered access to network radio programs like "Coast to Coast AM." :)
RCH
Quote from: RCH on May 06, 2008, 04:34:15 PMBefore we shift our discussion, I want to wrap up a couple of loose ends....
I can't help wonder where Bruce DePalma and Eric Laithwaite's revolutionary ideas -- and supporting, extraordinary lab experiments -- would be today ... if THEY had had "the Web" ....
And (plug ... plug) -- offered access to network radio programs like "Coast to Coast AM."
All well said.
Quote from: JustMe on May 06, 2008, 09:11:20 AM
DEAR I_RONman,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE TOROID GENERATOR COILS w/ BACK I_RON AS PROMISED.
I ALSO SKETCHED OUT SOME ANTICIPATED FLUX PATHS FOR THE ROTOR FLUX.
THE ROTOR MAY NEED TO BE A MONO-POLE.
THE DRIVE SHAFT GOES RIGHT THROUGH THE CENTRE OF THE BACK I_RON PLATE.
CHEERS
Thane
I would be considered inthane not to give you an attaboy for that! Very nice, very nice and neat indeed. I too would be interested how the different flux paths play out....
Confession is good for the soul, so they say... I tried the previous model with the mot cores and
coils and couldn't get any action/reaction. I used a solid steel rotor, whereas your's seem to be all spoked, would that make the difference?
The present experiment has me on the edge of the chair. It is along the line of several patents
suggesting Lenzless operation and is a most novel setup, why didn't I think of that? I was, time
permitting, wanting to try C cores and a dual rotor setup, but you have beat me to it.
Ron
Aether and Larry C,
A Postscript ....
A few posts ago, our (current) favorite cynic and "agent" -- OUman -- asked Larry provocatively:
"... Can you cite examples to support any of your other statements [re Depalma's N-Machine]? I'm interested to find out how you know those things.
"- References in those university curricula or course outlines or course notes?
"- Textbooks* more recent than yours where these are mentioned?
"- Patent numbers?
"- Links to companies and products of that sort?"
In my earlier post, I outlined the little-discussed "underbelly" of the entire "scientific, peer-review publishing process" -- how scientific discoveries actually make their way into "university curricula ... textbooks ... or receive patents and corporate funds ..."; where, in fact, anonymous "hit men" -- unknown to the authors of "disturbing" scientific papers -- can literally scuttle any publication (and thus, successful replication by other scientists) of any unwanted and/or disquieting scientific assault opon "the status quo."
OUman's question (above) -- in the face of this reality -- is (at best ...) naive.
The fact that this CENSORED "anonymous peer-review" system is THE underlying Reality of Science in the 21st Century, is the "800-pound pink elephant in the room" ... that no one in the scientific community (except for a brave few ...) ever dares to talk about.
So, how serious is this "secret 'voting' system" in peer-reviewed scientific journals -- against publishing true "scientific breakthroughs?"
Simply read Dr. Thomas Van Flandern's footnote (below), to his valiant (though failed) attempts to get a scientific paper on the potential "Intelligently-Designed Artifacts" at Cydonia (on Mars) published in Nature magazine -- probably the world's most prestigeous, peer-reviewed scientific journal.
Wrote Tom, of the "enlightening" experience:
" ... The [Cydonia] paper was submitted to Nature magazine for review and consideration for publication. It was rejected instantly without review. In a request for reconsideration, we learned that the magazine has a list of topics judged 'not suitable for Nature', and that the 'Face on Mars' has been on that list since the 1998 JPL-released image appeared. Upon further inquiry about the type of evidence that would be required to return a subject on that list to 'respectable science', we were told that the risk to the reputation of a commercial publisher such as Nature was too high for evidence alone to change the status of such a subject. A group of 'big name' scientists and their institutions would have to assume the risks involved in such a controversial action [emphasis added] ...."
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/cydonia/asom/pressconf_nyc/Artificial%20Structures%20on%20Mars-NYC.htm
One can only speculate what ELSE is on "the list."
Certainly ... experiments and/or scientific papers relating to "free energy" must be, according to these secret rules, also "totally forbidden" ....
Which is why democratic, world-wide Internet forums -- such as this -- are CRITICAL now ... to any real, further scientific progress!
For, based on Tom Van Flandern's first-person testimony (a world-class, mainstream scientist, who was once in charge of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the US Naval Observatory!) -- true intellectual freedom. to publish "anomalous" scientific EVIDENCE ... no matter how robust! ... in the most visible of mainstream scientific publications--
Has demonstrably been lost ....
RCH
QuoteI would be considered inthane not to give you an attaboy for that! Very nice, very nice and neat indeed. I too would be interested how the different flux paths play out....
NOT INTHANE - JUST RATHER INCONTHANERATE.
JUSTME WILL BE POSTING THE FINAL PRODUCT SOON (PHOTOS) AS SOON AS SHE IS DONE HEXXING ANOTHER HOCKEY FRANCHISE - TEST DATA TO FOLLOW WEDNESDAY.
QuoteConfession is good for the soul, so they say... I tried the previous model with the mot cores and
coils and couldn't get any action/reaction. I used a solid steel rotor, whereas your's seem to be all spoked, would that make the difference?
A
PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND CONFESSIONS.
AND IT MIGHT HELP OTHERS AS WELL.
QuoteThe present experiment has me on the edge of the chair. It is along the line of several patents
suggesting Lenzless operation and is a most novel setup,
THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS ABOUT LENZLESS OPERATION - OR DID YOU SLEEP THROUGH THAT CLASS?
Quotewhy didn't I think of that? I was, time permitting, wanting to try C cores and a dual rotor setup, but you have beat me to it. Ron
SELL YOUR BUSINESS - HAVE YOUR WIFE THROW YOU OUT AND THEN YOU WILL HAVE PLENTY OF TIME.
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE FINISHED TOROID GENERATOR SET-UP.
PRELIMINARY TESTING SUGGEST THAT THERE IS NO EFFECT ON THE PRIME MOVER WHEN THE GENERATOR COILS ARE LOADED - MEANING NO BACK EMF INDUCED FIELDS IN THE AIR GAP.
IN DEPTH TESTING RESUMES ON WEDNESDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: OUman on May 05, 2008, 11:47:37 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 30, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
...I reviewed DePalma Homopolar/Unipolar generator research. ... My University and High School Physics text have no mention of the homopolar generator. Apparently because it went against Lenz's law and could not be explained by modern physics...
Regards,
Larry
I think the reason you don't see it in textbooks is more straightforward than that. The reason is simply that it didn't work. OUman
How quaint that some people are so willing to publicly display their ignorance.
How completely unnecessary when there is so much information available. One could actually
read how the government seized his work? One could actually read the many cases where the government has confiscated an inventors ideas and forbidden further research. Do they do this for inventions that don't work? No. Is there an oil cartel? Yes.
How about Paramahamsa Tewari? His homopolar generator not work either?
Ron
QuoteHow quaint that some people are so willing to publicly display their ignorance.
I_RONIC ALSO.
QuoteHow completely unnecessary when there is so much information available. One could actually
read how the government seized his work? One could actually read the many cases where the government has confiscated an inventors ideas and forbidden further research. Do they do this for inventions that don't work? No. Is there an oil cartel? Yes.
How about Paramahamsa Tewari? His homopolar generator not work either?
Ron
HOW LONG BEFORE THIS SITE IS SHUT DOWN?
SHOULD WE START AN "OFICE" POOL?
Thane
@RCH
It's certain that the peer review process can be an untidy thing. I dated an academic for a number of years and he settled more than one score, both real and imagined, through anonymous peer review. He also used the process to jockey his own position. It was shocking and disenchanting.
Quote from: cleanfuture on May 06, 2008, 11:36:34 AM
The rotor will be driven with a 250W 12V DC motor with a direct coupling from above.
Uli
@Uli
I'm looking forward to your results.
@Thane
There's no doubt Thane that your particular coil arrangement is unique. I'm actually very intrigued, because your magnets within cups represent a semi-closed system within themselves, while your coil assembly is a closed system within itself, but an open ended system with respect to the magnets. As you are aware, I achieved very similar results to you with a completely open system.
One thing that appears to be common to both our systems is the actual air gap between the coil setup and the magnets. From my memory, I believe you found that a greater than usual air gap (but not too great) yielded a better result in your system?
Normal generators, as you would be aware have the minimum air gap possible. Usually around 0.5mm or less. My neo magnet alternator had a 3mm air gap, which is large by any conventional standards.
You seem to think that for this effect to work, there must be minimal flux in the air gap from the induced mmf of the coils ?
I know you've said that you don't like reading other peoples prior work, because it's a distraction to you, but I think you should read
page 5 on my site very carefully. ( http://www.totallyamped.net/adams )
The small section dealing with the "transition wall", is relevant to the air gap, and hence your work.
It is not a minimum of induced flux in the air gap that is required, but a specific flux relationship between the magnets and the core, whereby each component is the magnetic equal of the other with respect to the air gap between them.
In this situation, in a sense, you are right about minimal flux, but, not because it is not there, but rather because the air gap becomes a null point or bloch wall between the magnet and the core, while the magnet and core both have individual bloch walls within them. One bloch wall being permanent (within the magnet) while the other is induced (in the core), and the bloch wall between them (in the transition wall zone) resulting by mutual induction from both the magnet and the core (when the coil is loaded).
If the air gap is too small, the overwhelming influence of the magnet will breach the transition wall and destroy the bloch wall within the core. There will be only one "shared" bloch wall, instead of one permanent, one induced, and one shared mutually induced bloch wall.
What is the transition wall and why is it so important?
Here's a little extract below from Wikipedia that may help to put it in perpective.
..........................
Far away from a magnet, the magnetic field created by that magnet is almost always described (to a good approximation) by a dipole field characterized by its total magnetic moment. This is true regardless of the shape of the magnet, so long as the magnetic moment is nonzero. One characteristic of a dipole field is that
the strength of the field falls off inversely with the cube of the distance from the magnet's center.
Closer to the magnet, the magnetic field becomes more complicated, and more dependent on the detailed shape and magnetization of the magnet. Formally, the field can be expressed as a multipole expansion: A dipole field, plus a quadrupole field, plus an octupole field, etc.
At close range, many different fields are possible. For example, for a long, skinny bar magnet with its north pole at one end and south pole at the other,
the magnetic field near either end falls off inversely with the square of the distance from that pole............................
ref link here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet#Calculating_the_magnetic_force
The transition wall represents an area of change in magnetic state, between a magnet and a paramagnetic substance. (in this case, a ferromagnetic core)
It is the area, where the attraction between the magnet and core changes from an inverse/distance squared relationship, to an inverse/distance cubed relationship.
It is an area where a quantum change occurs in the magnetic relationship of the magnet and core.
When the transition wall is breached, the magnet manifests a greater inductance into the core,(and hence a greater potential output) but also manifested is a much greater mutual drag between the magnet and core, and a greater reluctance within the magnet and core.
Cheers..... and KneeDeep ... :)
Quote@Thane
There's no doubt Thane that your particular coil arrangement is unique. I'm actually very intrigued, because your magnets within cups represent a semi-closed system within themselves, while your coil assembly is a closed system within itself, but an open ended system with respect to the magnets. As you are aware, I achieved very similar results to you with a completely open system.
One thing that appears to be common to both our systems is the actual air gap between the coil setup and the magnets. From my memory, I believe you found that a greater than usual air gap (but not too great) yielded a better result in your system?
Normal generators, as you would be aware have the minimum air gap possible. Usually around 0.5mm or less. My neo magnet alternator had a 3mm air gap, which is large by any conventional standards.
You seem to think that for this effect to work, there must be minimal flux in the air gap from the induced mmf of the coils ?
NO ONE (THAT I KNOW OF) HAS EVER SEEN THIS COIL SET UP BEFORE - NOR HAVE I SO I DOUBT THAT I WOULD HAVE COMMENTED ON THE AIR GAP. AND I DON'T AGREE THAT I EVER SAID THAT ABOUT A "GREATER AIR GAP" BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE. PERHAPS LUC MENTIONED IT?
ALSO THESE ARE PROTOTYPES WITH UNBALANCED COGGING TORQUE SO THE AIR GAP IS ABNORMALLY LARGE TO KEEP VIBRATION TO A MINIMUM.
ALSO ON POST Reply #1890 YOU CAN SEE A RIPPED COIL THE THE RIGHT AND BEHIND THE MOTOR - THIS IS WHERE THE ROTOR CAME OFF AT 1700 RPM AND HIT THE COIL BECAUSE THE AIR GAP WAS TOO SMALL.
IN THIS TOROID GENERATOR - THE AIR GAP REPRESENTS A VERY HIGH RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH TO THE INDUCED COIL MMFS - THERE SHOULD BE ABSOLUTELY NO COIL FLUX THERE AT ALL, SAVE AT SATURATION POINT.
HEY - ARE YOU TAKING ULI UP ON HIS OFFER?
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on May 06, 2008, 11:06:58 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 05, 2008, 11:47:37 PM
Quote from: LarryC on April 30, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
...I reviewed DePalma Homopolar/Unipolar generator research. ... My University and High School Physics text have no mention of the homopolar generator. Apparently because it went against Lenz's law and could not be explained by modern physics...
Regards,
Larry
I think the reason you don't see it in textbooks is more straightforward than that. The reason is simply that it didn't work. OUman
How quaint that some people are so willing to publicly display their ignorance.
How completely unnecessary when there is so much information available. One could actually
read how the government seized his work?
Can you cite your source to back up that statement? I can find no mention anywhere of "the" government (which government?) seizing De Palma's work. I'd be interested to know where you learnt of that.
Quote from: LarryC on April 30, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
How about Paramahamsa Tewari? His homopolar generator not work either?
That's correct. The Tewari system was basically a knock-off of De Palma's so of course it too did not work. If you think differently perhaps you could point us to any reports of its successful demonstration.
Quote from: RCH on May 06, 2008, 10:44:56 PM
Aether and Larry C,
A Postscript ....
A few posts ago, our (current) favorite cynic and "agent" -- OUman -- asked Larry provocatively:
"... Can you cite examples to support any of your other statements [re Depalma's N-Machine]? I'm interested to find out how you know those things.
             "- References in those university curricula or course outlines or course notes?
             "- Textbooks* more recent than yours where these are mentioned?
             "- Patent numbers?
             "- Links to companies and products of that sort?"
In my earlier post, I outlined the little-discussed "underbelly" of the entire "scientific, peer-review publishing process" -- how scientific discoveries actually make their way into "university curricula ... textbooks ... or receive patents and corporate funds ..."; where, in fact, anonymous "hit men" -- unknown to the authors of "disturbing" scientific papers -- can literally scuttle any publication (and thus, successful replication by other scientists) of any unwanted and/or disquieting scientific assault opon "the status quo."Â
OUman's question (above) -- in the face of this reality -- is (at best ...) naive.
My questions were simply directed at specific statements YOU made.
YOU said that this theory is taught in specific universities. I asked you what evidence you have of that.
YOU said that it appears in textbooks. I asked you for examples of that.
YOU said that there are patents issued. I asked you for the patent numbers.
YOU said that there are commercial products on the market. I asked you for details/examples.
It appears that your tirade about corrupt peer review and evil hit men (which may or may not be justified but is a red herring) came just in time to avoid answering those questions.
All,
The reason I responded to OUman with a ridicules joke, was that it was such an obvious trap to waste our time and continue useless arguments. Even if you could reinforce that wheel enough, the vibration at 10 % of that rpm would snap off the welds or the motor shaft.
As far as the questions. A 5 year old could google hundred of examples, the only one that may be difficult is the new text book question. There is over 400 US patents, even some course text is available, reference to university research and companies.
The comparison that the magnet sliding thru a copper tube is the same as a magnet moving in sync with the tube is so laughable. If OUman really didn't understand the difference, there is no one here that could actual explain that obvious difference. I think even some 5 year old may know the difference.
So like Thane would say. Warning, don't drink PB koolaid.
RCH quote: I can't help wonder where Bruce DePalma and Eric Laithwaite's revolutionary ideas -- and supporting, extraordinary lab experiments -- would be today ... if THEY had had "the Web" ....
Regards,
Larry
PS: Real sorry if I offended any 5 year old.
@All,
I don't know how many of you been on the Hilden Brandt thread, but JackH has been diagnosed with ALS and was told that he only has a few years left. Someone has set up a PayPal site to make easy donations. If you're interested check Controller circuit for Hilden Brandt motor needed. If all who could afford it, gave a little, it would help with getting his patent and medical. Even you skeptics, just think, more threads to aggravate :)
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 07, 2008, 09:24:52 AM
The comparison that the magnet sliding thru a copper tube is the same as a magnet moving in sync with the tube is so laughable. If OUman really didn't understand the difference, there is no one here that could actual explain that obvious difference. I think even some 5 year old may know the difference.
Larry
I didn't say it was the same thing. I said that "the same forces are at work". This is a fact. Move an electron (or any charge for that matter) perpendicular to a magnetic field and it will experience a force in a third direction, perpendicular to both the electron's velocity vector and the magnetic field vector. Basic stuff. It's counter-intuitive when you see it in, for example, the Faraday's Disk experiment, or in the copper tube example RCH mentioned. Because it
appears counter-intuitive and paradoxical, teachers sometimes use it as a teaser to get the students thinking. But all these phenomena follow the various EM laws and have been consistently observed to follow them. If you think there's an exception, maybe you could detail it for us.
@JustMe
It looks like you have done a considerable amount of work in your setup posted, few people would have the determination to put this much time and effort into proving a "theory". It's funny how very close you and the others are but there is still a reluctance to see past the the wires and iron cores and understand the "nature" of what you are dealing with, the qualities and properties of energy and the components this energy moves through.
In your setup you have some permanent magnets on a rotor, a high current coil of few windings, a high voltage coil of many fine windings--- you have all the components necessary to succeed but cannot see them from the right perspective. So I have a patent to show you that does something right for a change, there is a picture below and the patent and write-up can be found here-----
http://www.rexresearch.com/alxandr/alexandr.htm
Forget the orientation of the DC commutator in the patent, it is incorrect and I would imagine this was done on purpose ;D. In regards to this patent there is one thing you need to understand which is stated in the patent-----
Quote" whereby transformed and generated power are synchronously combined as increased output power"
Maybe some of the experts here could explain how one would do such a thing?
Quote from: allcanadian on May 07, 2008, 12:05:31 PM
@JustMe
It looks like you have done a considerable amount of work in your setup posted
Thank you! I work hard...I work hard.
Thane, it's your name on the thread. Try to keep up, k?
8)
@All
When considering Robert Alexanders patent some things should be known that are not readily apparent, for one in the diagram both permanent magnets have the north pole facing inward. Another is that this motor/generator could easily be tuned inside/out, that is a permanent magnet rotor could be utilized with the north poles facing outward and the motor/generator windings wound on a immobile stator so there is no need for a commutator or brushes as I have done with a permanent magnet three phase brushless motor.
So what would this "brushless" PM motor/generator look like? Well, it would have a rotor composed of many permanent magnets with the north poles facing outward, it would have both coarse high current windings and many fine high voltage windings on a common core------ It would probably look very similar to John Bedini's north pole motor or Robert Adams motors or the Lutec motor ;)
We have always percieved the input and output as being distinct and seperate but this does not need to be the case, there is much more to this patent than meets the eye, it should be raising questions as to what role the permanent magnets really play in this motor if the core is in fact a transformer.
Best Regards
Quote from: allcanadian on May 07, 2008, 04:46:17 PM
@All
When considering Robert Alexanders patent some things should be known that are not readily apparent, for one in the diagram both permanent magnets have the north pole facing inward. Another is that this motor/generator could easily be tuned inside/out, that is a permanent magnet rotor could be utilized with the north poles facing outward and the motor/generator windings wound on a immobile stator so there is no need for a commutator or brushes as I have done with a permanent magnet three phase brushless motor.
So what would this "brushless" PM motor/generator look like? Well, it would have a rotor composed of many permanent magnets with the north poles facing outward, it would have both coarse high current windings and many fine high voltage windings on a common core------ It would probably look very similar to John Bedini's north pole motor or Robert Adams motors or the Lutec motor ;)
We have always percieved the input and output as being distinct and seperate but this does not need to be the case, there is much more to this patent than meets the eye, it should be raising questions as to what role the permanent magnets really play in this motor if the core is in fact a transformer.
Best Regards
Very interesting. Haven't gotten thru the original patent yet. Do you have input/output statistics on your motor. Does the AC load change the rpms?
Thanks,
Larry
@All,
Did some testing on the rotor today to see if it has any homopolar effects. Not much, but it is there.
I had to cut strapping tape off the rotor edge to contact the steel, leaving only the spoke straps, so I could only bring it up to 600 rpms. Most homopolar rotors run above 10,000.
Best measurement came with the meter probes at the top of the rotor and the center of the rotor.
Found 1.25 MA AC and 1.61 MA DC. Couldn't measure volts as the meter was jumping too much. I had to press the probe very hard against the rotor due to the wobble. That would slow the rotor down and may even contribute to the effect. Made various test to ensure the amps were only coming from the steel conductor rotating with the magnets.
Regards,
Larry
JM,
Not surprised at all ...
Here's another specific example ... this one from no less than Dr. Aspden ....
"... reference was made to the anomalous gravitational acceleration of the space craft Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11. Having written about the theory of gravitation in several of my published works and claimed for many years to have an insight into the true nature of the force of gravity in terms of electrodynamic theory, I was inevitably interested in that discovery. Within days of first reading about it at pp. 28-32 of the 20 July 2002 issue of the U.K. weekly periodical New Scientist, (article by Marcus Brown entitled 'Strange Attraction'), I could see how this discovery gave support to my theory of published record and, on 15 August 2002, I duly sent a brief paper on the subject to the Editor of Physics Letters B who deals with cosmological topics, hoping that it might be accepted for peer review publication.
"His answer, dated 27 August, was simple and gave no substantive reason for rejection. The only words were:
'I'm afraid I cannot accept your manuscript for publication in Physics Letters B.'
"This is an example of the attitude of those who judge the earnest efforts of an individual, efforts aimed solely at helping the scientific establishment to make sense of Nature's mysteries and so improve our knowledge and, indirectly, lead to enhancement of our technological resources. Such is my introduction to this Lecture which I will now begin by presenting the full text of the paper I submitted ...."
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/Le32/Pioneer.html
In my opinion, the anonymous "peer-review system" of current scientific publication is the greatest impediment to serious scientific progress in the 20th/21st Centuries!
Because, highlighted by your own experience, the ability to secretly "do a hatchet job" on someone else -- for whatever reasons -- is obviously "the ultimate dagger at the heart of free scientific information exchange."
Again, I hope all those here value the freely-exchanged data and ideas made possible on forums such as these ....
In an era of increasing, blatant scientific censorship -- they are truly priceless .
RCH
Looks like a sailed right past 200 ohms, instead I have 587 ohms coil of .265mm wire.
Let's hope too high (a voltage/aether velocity) isn't a problem.
But I have another problem, I had planned to slide the coil down to the end of the shaft but my own significant weight, or a hammer blow won't budge the core, so I need to carefully take a grinder to the core. (I figured it might resist but I hadn't expected it would be immovable)
Quote from: RCH on May 07, 2008, 05:44:43 PM
...In my opinion, the anonymous "peer-review system" of current scientific publication is the greatest impediment to serious scientific progress in the 20th/21st Centuries!
Because, highlighted by your own experience, the ability to secretly "do a hatchet job" on someone else -- for whatever reasons -- is obviously "the ultimate dagger at the heart of free scientific information exchange."
Again, I hope all those here value the freely-exchanged data and ideas made possible on forums such as these ....
In an era of increasing, blatant scientific censorship -- they are truly priceless .
RCH
... more than you think - because the power of the internet allows everyone to publish their ideas freely. Thus the junk scientists can no longer hide behind the feeble claim that they are being muzzled by the establishment. What will they do for excuses now?!
Quote from: aether22 on May 07, 2008, 05:57:11 PM
Looks like a sailed right past 200 ohms, instead I have 587 ohms coil of .265mm wire.
Let's hope too high (a voltage/aether velocity) isn't a problem.
But I have another problem, I had planned to slide the coil down to the end of the shaft but my own significant weight, or a hammer blow won't budge the core, so I need to carefully take a grinder to the core. (I figured it might resist but I hadn't expected it would be immovable)
Hi Aether22,
From your previous post, I didn't think you could make 587 ohms with your available wire. Did you pickup more wire?
You may be able to remove one or two individual pieces of steel from the core to relieve the pressure.
Regards,
Larry
I got more wire, I thought I mentioned that on here but maybe I only mentioned it in a private email or 2.
I used a solid 1 inch diameter steel rod as Thane initially used, no laminations to remove, i could try drowning it in CRC/WD-40 or soap and water (but do not want to encourage rust) but I think cutting it is going to be the easiest solution.
Now I'm just putting off a big clean up of the garage I will need to do to regain some space before i can proceed, but I should have absolutely everything now besides of course the space.
Though I have not tested my Tach yet which consists of an IR led, a small led looking thing which is in fact a photo-transistor sensitive to the light from the former and a multimeter.
Quote from: aether22 on May 07, 2008, 06:45:13 PM
I got more wire, I thought I mentioned that on here but maybe I only mentioned it in a private email or 2.
I used a solid 1 inch diameter steel rod as Thane initially used, no laminations to remove, i could try drowning it in CRC/WD-40 or soap and water (but do not want to encourage rust) but I think cutting it is going to be the easiest solution.
Now I'm just putting off a big clean up of the garage I will need to do to regain some space before i can proceed, but I should have absolutely everything now besides of course the space.
Though I have not tested my Tach yet which consists of an IR led, a small led looking thing which is in fact a photo-transistor sensitive to the light from the former and a multimeter.
Okay, I ended up using the 1/8 thick steel pieces from Home Depot in various size to match the cups.
Let me know how your tach works out. I am using a bicycle pedometer (under $20), which is very accurate at lower speeds, but when you get above 1000 the rpm range starts to jump. At 1500 the jump is about 15 rpms. Lately I've been reading about model airplane propeller optical tachs that are very good at higher speeds for around $20.
Regards,
Larry
Oh, good info, thanks Larry!
note: actually too many turns isn't a real concern because due to the breakages I have the following ohm choices: 30, 120, 150, 450, 480, 600 all rounded slightly (smaller numbers happen to be closer to the core and ohm for ohm represent a greater number of turns)
Quote from: OilBarren on May 06, 2008, 11:02:19 PM
A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND CONFESSIONS.
AND IT MIGHT HELP OTHERS AS WELL.
Thane
Here is a re-enactment, not all bolts in place and only one magnet in the pocket...ron
(//)
Quote from: OilBarren on May 06, 2008, 11:02:19 PM
THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS ABOUT LENZLESS OPERATION - OR DID YOU SLEEP THROUGH THAT CLASS?
Thane
Here on the coast we take anything that comes out of Ottawa with a grain of salt,
thanks for the wake up call, LOL
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 07, 2008, 09:27:13 PM
Here on the coast we take anything that comes out of Ottawa with a grain of salt,
thanks for the wake up call, LOL
Ron
RONMEISTER.
HOW MUCH DOES THAT FREAK'N WHEEL WEIGHT?
WHAT IS THE DC RESISTANCE OF YOUR HV COIL(S)?
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 07, 2008, 08:09:26 PM
Oh, good info, thanks Larry!
note: actually too many turns isn't a real concern because due to the breakages I have the following ohm choices: 30, 120, 150, 450, 480, 600 all rounded slightly (smaller numbers happen to be closer to the core and ohm for ohm represent a greater number of turns)
Cool, multi-multi-tap coil. Super-mot! All kinds of testing possibilities.
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 07, 2008, 10:17:49 PM
Quote from: aether22 on May 07, 2008, 08:09:26 PM
Oh, good info, thanks Larry!
note: actually too many turns isn't a real concern because due to the breakages I have the following ohm choices: 30, 120, 150, 450, 480, 600 all rounded slightly (smaller numbers happen to be closer to the core and ohm for ohm represent a greater number of turns)
Cool, multi-multi-tap coil. Super-mot! All kinds of testing possibilities.
Larry
Yeah, too bad there aren't 2 connection options with identical ohm values but a different number of turns, could have been interesting.
Thane, one very simple test you could try.
With the HV coils shorted get to a predefined speed and then cut the power to the motor keeping the HV coils shorted (High current coils assumed open or not present)
Time how long it takes to decelerate to a second lower preselected RPM.
Then try it all the same again only when at that predefined speed simultaneously open circuit the HV secondary coils as you cut power to the motor and time how long it takes to decelerate to the second lower preselected RPM.
That should give some idea as to what is truly generator anti-lenz and what is an effect on the motor.
Also possibly add a grinder disk (flywheel) and possibly try these tests at different speeds. (or alternately video the tacho readout the whole time so the curve of speed over time can be graphed for each)
Thane, what do you think?
Thane,
Appropos of your unique motor/generator design and its "anomalous" rotational/electrical behavior .... found this intriguing additional report by Herald Aspden earlier this evening. :)
" ... There is other evidence of phenomena which involve unusual angular momentum properties or raise difficulties with the principle that action balances reaction ....
"In the laboratory there are, to my knowledge, two reports of anomalous behaviour which are seemingly relevant. In 1972 a demonstration at a meeting of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in U.K. surprised its author. A rotor in a machine speeded up when the power was switched off. It happened and yet could not be reproduced in later efforts to study the phenomenon (E. Laithwaite, 'Unexplained Phenomenon', Electronics & Power', v. 18, p. 360; 1972). It is as if, by some very special circumstance, energy was stored as rotational kinetic energy in the environment of the machine and was fed back to the machine when it was switched off.
"The other report appeared in the German publication Umschau in 1975 (R. G. Zinsser, 'Kinetobarische Effekte - ein neues Phanomen?', Umschau, v. 5, p. 152; 1975). Experiments are here reported as consistently verifying a phenomenon which defies explanation. An energy pulse communicated at high frequency across a capacitative coupling is absorbed in a torsion balance. After the pulse has subsided, a unidirectional torque prevails in the system for up to two hours for no apparent reason. It is as if energy is stored by some kind of unseen flywheel that feeds energy back to the apparatus slowly once the power is switched off in the system [emphasis added] ...."
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le05ap1.htm
H-m-m-mmmmmm ... rotating aether, anyone?
RCH
Aether,
In case you haven't seen this--
Aspden's excellent 1998 "overview" re why "there HAS to be an aether." :)
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm
And, here's another ....
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le26.html
Enjoy.
RCH
Quote from: RCH on May 08, 2008, 12:37:54 AM
Thane,
Appropos of your unique motor/generator design and its "anomalous" rotational/electrical behavior .... found this intriguing additional report by Herald Aspden earlier this evening. :)
" ... There is other evidence of phenomena which involve unusual angular momentum properties or raise difficulties with the principle that action balances reaction ....
"In the laboratory there are, to my knowledge, two reports of anomalous behaviour which are seemingly relevant. In 1972 a demonstration at a meeting of the Institution of Electrical Engineers in U.K. surprised its author. A rotor in a machine speeded up when the power was switched off. It happened and yet could not be reproduced in later efforts to study the phenomenon (E. Laithwaite, 'Unexplained Phenomenon', Electronics & Power', v. 18, p. 360; 1972). It is as if, by some very special circumstance, energy was stored as rotational kinetic energy in the environment of the machine and was fed back to the machine when it was switched off.
"The other report appeared in the German publication Umschau in 1975 (R. G. Zinsser, 'Kinetobarische Effekte - ein neues Phanomen?', Umschau, v. 5, p. 152; 1975). Experiments are here reported as consistently verifying a phenomenon which defies explanation. An energy pulse communicated at high frequency across a capacitative coupling is absorbed in a torsion balance. After the pulse has subsided, a unidirectional torque prevails in the system for up to two hours for no apparent reason. It is as if energy is stored by some kind of unseen flywheel that feeds energy back to the apparatus slowly once the power is switched off in the system [emphasis added] ...."
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le05ap1.htm
H-m-m-mmmmmm ... rotating aether, anyone?
RCH
There is another case of the guy who IIRC in a vacuum found that an accelerating flywheel caused a flywheel opposite it to rotate in the other direction.
There are also many different devices which all create a force from a sudden discharge of electricity (really aether) and they all add up perfectly, they are all the same experiment. (Podkletnov, Morton, Telos, initial Cook Coil, Joe Cell vacuum 'Implosion', Edward Farrow and others. (Including an experiment by DMBoss who along with Peter Lindeman sadly missed the point about Thanes discovery and unfairly criticized it)
Another different type of experiment told to me by Graham Gunderson is a dielectric strip, I think perspex with some foil squares top and bottom, when energized in series to create a 'wave' a thrust was produced. Oh and that leads on to the 'Electric Rocket' which was initially incorrectly reported as from T.T.Brown which was replicated by many and 3-4 of these attempt were successful. (the successful attempt all had an initial sequential energization I believe)
There is a lot of evidence that the aether especially when accelerating or decelerating can place a force on matter which otherwise may not occur when the aether moves through matter.
If this plays a real part in Thane's effect I don't know.
Quote from: RCH on May 08, 2008, 05:09:03 AM
Aether,
In case you haven't seen this--
Aspden's excellent 1998 "overview" re why "there HAS to be an aether."Â Â Â Â Â Â :)
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm
And, here's another ....
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le26.html
Enjoy.
RCH
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 07:45:20 AM
(Including an experiment by DMBoss who along with Peter Lindeman sadly missed the point about Thanes discovery and unfairly criticized it)
QUICK TO MISS THE POINT - QUICK TO CRITICIZE - QUICK TO DISMISS -
AND PERPETUALLY SLOW TO ADMIT THEIR ERROR.
NO CONSPIRACY THEORY HERE - JUST NORMAL HUMAN BEHAVIOR.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 12:20:22 AM
Thane, one very simple test you could try.
With the HV coils shorted get to a predefined speed and then cut the power to the motor keeping the HV coils shorted (High current coils assumed open or not present) Time how long it takes to decelerate to a second lower preselected RPM. Then try it all the same again only when at that predefined speed simultaneously open circuit the HV secondary coils as you cut power to the motor and time how long it takes to decelerate to the second lower preselected RPM. That should give some idea as to what is truly generator anti-lenz and what is an effect on the motor.
Thane, what do you think?
THIS IS A GREAT IDEA AND I WILL ALSO PLOT ACCELERATED SYSTEM SPEED WITH HV COILS vs NO HV COIL.
THANKS
Thane
Talk:Directory:Perepiteia Generator by Potential Difference Inc
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#No_Useful_Output
Comments
[edit]No Useful Output
On Feb. 6, 2008, Peter Lindemann, DSc, writes:
I have reviewed all seven video links. In all fairness, I would like to say that Thane has built some nice demonstrations and spent a lot of time running experiments. That said, the films show nothing important. First of all, the films do not show enough detailed information to evaluate the demonstrations. Second, no free energy is shown. In fact, the generators are never shown producing any useful outputs. They are either shown producing voltage in "open circuit" mode, or they are shown in "short circuit" mode, where the generated voltage drops below one volt. So, ZERO WATTS are produced in either case.
The changes in mechanical drag are due to changes in inductance and hysteresis. Back in the 1980's, both John Bedini and I independently worked with "variable reluctance" generators. We both saw that these designs work like an inverse to a standard induction generator. That is, they produce maximum drag in "open circuit" mode, and minimum drag in "short circuit" mode. John found that the point of maximum benefit in this situation is to charge a battery, where the impedance of the generator "sees" the battery as a "near short circuit". Under these circumstances, the generator free-wheels and the battery charges quickly.
Unfortunately, Thane is not showing any useful benefits from the generator output. So, there is no "efficiency" to calculate because there is no output!
The real problem with these demonstrations has to do with his motor drive. The motor driving his system is a single phase induction motor. This type of motor has almost zero starting torque, and only produces its rated power at rated speed. So, the rated speed of his motor is probably in the neighborhood of 1725 RPM. Running this motor in the 100 RPM range converts 98% of the input electric power to HEAT. He says he has a capacitor in the input circuit to the motor, but this is never shown in schematic, so we don't know how it is hooked up. If the capacitor is connected in SERIES with the motor winding, it will act as a current limiter, and skew the power factor of the motor towards reactive power. This is fine, IF you want to limit the mechanical power of the motor as well. If the capacitor is connected in PARALLEL with the motor winding, it will act to produce reactive power for the motor locally, and reduce the amount of power it draws from the wall. But again, this would only be significant at rated speed.
The effect he shows when a magnetic field is applied to the motor shaft would be undetectable if he was operating the motor correctly. It is a very weak effect. It is probably caused by the external magnetic field interfering with the induced magnetic field of the rotor. This would not happen if the motor coils were not being severely current limited and the rotor was not "slipping" severely in the rotating magnetic field of the stator.
My GUESS is that the capacitor is in SERIES with the motor winding. This will limit the current to the motor to a specific maximum. At the speeds he is running these motors, the only other mechanism to hold back the input current would be the resistance of the wire in the motor coils. If that is all he had, the motor would quickly over-heat and melt the insulation right off the wire. The fact that the motor is running hot is proved in the seventh film where a large black fan is shown blowing on the motor!
From the data presented, my best estimate of the efficiency of the demonstrations is that over 90% of the energy going into the motor is converted to heat. The changes in drag of the generators is standard behavior for variable reluctance topologies, so accelerations or decelerations of the motor DO NOT represent energy production, just changes in HYSTERESIS DRAG. Since no output energies are ever measured, the input to output efficiency ratio is ZERO.
Thane Heins may have more important discoveries in his lab, but they are not demonstrated in these videos.
I'm really sorry to have to comment negatively on Thane's work. He is exploring a new effect, and he is pretty brave to put out his data. It took John and I years to figure out what these kinds of generators were really doing and why. It is not obvious, and it takes a lot of experimenting and thinking to work it out.
Thane really needs to show the complete schematic of his test apparatus, including the strength and orientation of the magnets on his generator wheel, as well as the specifications on his drive motor. There is a lot of important data missing from the demos.
[edit]Nothing more than a hysteresis brake
On Feb. 6, 2008, DMBoss wrote (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg75615.html#msg75615):
Quote from: blindsangamon on Today at 02:45:23 AM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
Hi:
blindsangamon is correct. This is a common phenomenon regards "generators", but one often not commonly known about if you are not working with AC motors and generators all the time. So the professor at MIT may not have this practical engineering savvy to identify the issues at first glance.
An hysteresis brake is one way to describe the apparently anomalous increase in speed when you short the generator coils. What EVERY ferromagnetic core does when exposed to varying magnetic fields is to have it's domains rock or flip direction in accord with the magnetic field changes impinging on them.
This consumes power in the "friction" between domains as they sort of scrape past each other. It results in the material heating up. In addition to this hystersis "loss" is an eddy current effect within bulk steel from the very same time varying magnetic fields, also making heating of the core. These two effects combined are commonly termed "core loss".
Core loss produces a reaction torque in a generator, in that the domain "friction" resists their aligning with the external field - causing more drag torque. Eddy currents make magnetic fields which oppose the fields making the eddy currents too, making more drag torque.
Now "core loss" in any ferromagnetic core material is directly proportional to the induction, B. Put another way the higher the delta flux density, the more core loss you get. (it is also proportional to the frequency, but let's assume a constant freq here, even though it is not at a constant one - it speeds up and slows down, again a neophyte mistake - you must measure things here at common speeds/freqs to make comparisons accurately)
And the induction, B is then what produces the coil voltage via Faraday/Lenz laws. That is voltage is the time derivative of delta flux. So people, when you short a generator coil and it's voltage drops to near zero, you can be certain that the delta B within the coil's core is also near zero!
So if you started with a delta B of say 1,000 gauss at no load on the coils, and your core material produces say 15 watts of core loss per pound of core (solid steel is in this ballpark, which is why we laminate special steels for transformers which takes the core loss down to about 2 watts per pound) then you'd have some serious drag torque experienced by the drive motor with coils open circuit.
Now if you short the coils and drop the delta B down to say 10 gauss, you have REDUCED the core loss by a factor of 1000/10=100 times less core loss when shorted than when open circuited!
This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh)
This is amateur hour gone mad - both in the videos and mostly in these lists! Which does nothing but hurt the cause of getting O/U to the masses in my view, as it simply reinforces to the powers that be in the scientific community that it is a bunch of flakes and idiots making these claims!
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists. BUT you have to do proper energy/power balances to measure this gain. And you have to endeavor to reduce core losses to a minimum and account for core loss change when you heavily load the coils too.
I have one which gets a gain in excess of the entire core loss value, both eddy and hysteresis - therefore the gain cannot be from this artifact that plagues all coil/core systems. But it is a modest gain, and yes the rotor does want to speed up. But you have to manage this speed, and measure the loaded and unloaded condition at the same shaft speed, because friction and windage change too when speed changes.
Then you have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power, including friction, core loss, coil heating and direct electrical output for a complete energy/power balance. In fact there is an IEEE protocol for doing a complete power balance on motors and generators, which includes all these things.
This person did few if none of these things properly and is delusional about the apparent speed increasing meaning it is O/U. There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system, but it is completely overriden by mundane, conventional effects as "blindsangamon" correctly points out.
Sorry for being so terse with you folks, but it is very annoying to watch so many people do harm to the cause by spouting off without really having a grasp of conventional ElectroMagnetics. Both amateur's like in these videos, and indeed a large percentage of the armchair critics populating these lists! Do your homework before putting foot in mouth!
There's a few rational voices out there, blindsangamon being one, and most of you then deride these voices with nonsense and blind faith!
here's a simplified protocol for measuring a generator's complete power balance:
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
1 Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including: 2 Friction alone, meaning with no magnets or mag fields acting on the cores. 3 Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
The difference between 3 minus 2 is the core loss at no load.
4 Measure the DC resistance of all coils as they would be connected in a loaded condition (i.e. series or parallel).
5 Load the generator at the same speed as the no load tests.
6 measure input power via torque times speed. (Newton-meters times RPM times 0.1047 = shaft power in watts)
7 measure True output electrical power. Not with DMM's. but with appropriate True Power meters or analyzers.
8 measure coil current, and calculate coil's "Joule heating" via I^2R.
9 measure and compare coil voltage compared to no load voltage for a ratio with which to discount core loss.
Then take the loaded input shaft power in watts as INPUT to system.
Against this Input, you add the following:
a electrical output in watts
b friction in watts
c core loss via no load core loss times the voltage drop ratio (so if no load core loss were 37 watts, and no load voltage was 125V and loaded voltage is 83V, then the ratio is 0.664. Multiply 0.664 times no load core loss of 37 watts to equal 24.57 watts output core loss)
d coil heating via I^2R
Add up item a through d for the total system OUTPUT.
Now divide Output by Input for your COP. (Coefficient of Performance)
Note friction, core loss and coil heat are legitimate outputs.... they heat the room! Useful output is an arbitrary distinction based on subjective criteria. If you want shaft power then heat is not useful. If however you want a heater, then shaft power is not useful! So to know in the absolute sense if a thing is over unity or not, you have to account for ALL outputs in a balance sheet.
That's another pet peeve of mine - those who dismiss everything they deem as "not useful"! Now suppose you had a system which routinely produces 200% more heat output in coil heating and core heating while it turns a shaft as in some newfangled motor. The shaft power COP is only 35%, but overall the system is 200% gainful. These persons I refer to would dismiss this as not being useful because the shaft power is under unity!
When in fact a home heating system would require a heat exchange mechanism to get heat from your machine to the air, thus it requires a pump - moving air or water or both. So you could make "use" of both the excess heating and the shaft power from said system!
My point is at these early stages it is imperative that you measure all aspects even if you may "think" they aren't useful. For complete energy balances and because overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!
[edit]Improper use of an AC induction motor
On Feb. 11, 2008, DMBoss added:
There is one thing I neglected to mention in the above commentary. That is this Heins fellow may also get this apparent anomalous rotor speed up entirely due to the improper use of an AC induction motor.
His related demonstration of putting a strong NIB magnet near the steel shaft of this induction motor, with said motor's front "C" plate removed and having it's speed increase is telling.
That is removing the C plate leaves the AC motor's fields rather open to external influence. And it's steel shaft is magnetically connected to the AC rotor, comprising steel laminations and several heavy turns of short circuited windings.
The AC induction motor [in this case a split phase motor] works by making the stator fields produce a rotating field, which induces currents and then fields in the rotor windings/core. These rotor fields try to couple to the 60Hz stator field rotation, and tries to synchronize with them. An AC motor never completely syncs though, and some rotor "slip" occurs. The more the slip the more current the stator coils draw, and this tries to lessen the slip this it automatically "throttles" the current to meet the drag torque causing the increased slip.
Anyway these things should never use an AC motor as they are inherently unreliable and non linear regards their power signature vs the output torque. But this chap is going wildly out of the normal operating envelope for an AC induction motor on top of that.
That is a 2 pole AC motor tries to run at 3600 rpm, and a 4 pole at 1800 rpm. And he is running at 50-200 rpm. So he has massive slip between rotor field and stator field. (you can allow a split phase motor to run at low speed by simply plugging it into a Variac and turning down the voltage after the rotor's turning, or give it a shove by hand as he does)
Now the force/torque on the rotor is proportional to the B^2 in the air gap. Yes it's alternating, but it is still proportional to the square of the flux density. Adding an external magnetic field from permanent magnets could very well provide a DC offset in this magnetic field - as a path is formed from the motor case to return to the magnet, and from the magnet's other pole to the shaft, through rotor, across air gap to stators, and into the motor case. (C plate is removed so you can make a complete flux path out to the magnet)
This small change in flux levels would make no difference if force was proportional to flux density. But it is proportional to flux density squared. So it is plausible that this small offset, applied to the motor in this very unusual running mode of extreme amounts of slip - has caused an imbalance in the amount of rotor torque.
In a sense this addition of external flux has made the coupling coefficient of the rotor to stator higher due to the DC offset and squared condition. No absolute power gain has occurred, but you have gotten more of the power applied to make rotor boost torque.
His own numbers belie this - his AC motor if the two stacked power meters are to be trusted, is drawing some 250 watts to run at this low speed. While the shaft friction of such a sized device is reasonably estimated to be below 20 watts, probably below 5 watts of shaft power to meet friction etc. So his coupling is below 10%. Adding the magnetic path from external magnets to the AC motor system, could cause say a 15 or 20% coupling to occur. Making the shaft speed up, but this is NOT a gain in energy!
My initial comments are correct - you can engineer a system which produces a shaft speed up when you have massive core loss and you short the generator coils - as this negates much of this core loss - so if the coil heating upon shorting is low, then the rotor can speed up.
Also his messing with AC motor can be responsible for the speed up alone or in combo with this generator core loss artifact. But neither is anything but mundane and neither cause of shaft speed up necessarily indicates a gain over unity!
[edit]A simple way to test
There's an ultra-simple way to test this thing to see if the device really does cause the motor to run faster. I can't understand why no one has apparently thought of it.
Since the device has no output (the coils are either shorted or open), any power it generates has to be fed back to the motor driving it. So simply remove the device and see if the motor speeds up! If the motor runs faster without the device than it does with the device and the switches closed, then it's safe to conclude that it is a net power drain. But if the motor runs slower, then you might begin to argue that it's doing something useful.
Another comment: somebody above talked about induction motors having a winding, implying just one. This is never true; they always have at least two. Three windings are used in 3-phase motors. These are self-starting because the three windings produce a uniform rotating magnetic field that drags the rotor along. Single phase induction motors have two windings, a running winding and a starting winding. The running winding runs the motor at speed, but it provides NO torque when the motor is stopped. In that case the motor stands still while the winding consumes a large amount of power that will either trip a breaker or burn up the winding. If you give the shaft a twist, it will start and run in that direction.
The starting winding provides this initial "twist". It is fed AC through a capacitor that provides a phase shift so that the internal field rotates roughly in the desired direction. This rotating field is much less uniform than the rotating field in a 3-phase motor, so the starting torque is much less and the vibration and noise are greater, but it's sufficient to start the motor.
Capacitor start motors have switches to cut out the starting winding at speed, while capacitor run motors keep the starting winding in the circuit. The advantage of the former is that the starting winding can use smaller wire, while the latter has somewhat greater torque.
Everyone is correct that Heins is using his AC induction motor in a highly improper manner. He even controls the speed with a Variac, which makes me cringe. At low speed his motor must draw a great deal of power and produce a great deal of heat and very little torque. The right way to control the speed of an induction motor is with a variable frequency, variable voltage inverter or cycloconverter. To increase speed you increase the frequency to speed up the rotating magnetic field. The voltage has to be increased along with the frequency to compensate for the increased inductive reactance from the motor windings. All of these variable speed controls that I'm familiar with drive 3-phase motors, usually from a DC supply. Three-phase induction motors are always preferred when possible, and 3-phase inverters are only slightly more complex than single-phase inverters. Ka9q 15:48, 28 Feb 2008 (EST)
Re: Thane heins is getting some serious attention for is motor
? Reply #46 on: February 06, 2008, 11:49:33 AM ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: blindsangamon on February 06, 2008, 02:45:23 AM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk, and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field, eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
Hi:
blindsangamon is correct. This is a common phenomenon regards "generators", but one often not commonly known about if you are not working with AC motors and generators all the time. So the professor at MIT may not have this practical engineering savvy to identify the issues at first glance.
An hysteresis brake is one way to describe the apparently anomalous increase in speed when you short the generator coils. What EVERY ferromagnetic core does when exposed to varying magnetic fields is to have it's domains rock or flip direction in accord with the magnetic field changes impinging on them.
This consumes power in the "friction" between domains as they sort of scrape past each other. It results in the material heating up. In addition to this hystersis "loss" is an eddy current effect within bulk steel from the very same time varying magnetic fields, also making heating of the core. These two effects combined are commonly termed "core loss".
Core loss produces a reaction torque in a generator, in that the domain "friction" resists their aligning with the external field - causing more drag torque. Eddy currents make magnetic fields which oppose the fields making the eddy currents too, making more drag torque.
Now "core loss" in any ferromagnetic core material is directly proportional to the induction, B. Put another way the higher the delta flux density, the more core loss you get. (it is also proportional to the frequency, but let's assume a constant freq here, even though it is not at a constant one - it speeds up and slows down, again a neophyte mistake - you must measure things here at common speeds/freqs to make comparisons accurately)
And the induction, B is then what produces the coil voltage via Faraday/Lenz laws. That is voltage is the time derivative of delta flux. So people, when you short a generator coil and it's voltage drops to near zero, you can be certain that the delta B within the coil's core is also near zero!
So if you started with a delta B of say 1,000 gauss at no load on the coils, and your core material produces say 15 watts of core loss per pound of core (solid steel is in this ballpark, which is why we laminate special steels for transformers which takes the core loss down to about 2 watts per pound) then you'd have some serious drag torque experienced by the drive motor with coils open circuit.
Now if you short the coils and drop the delta B down to say 10 gauss, you have REDUCED the core loss by a factor of 1000/10=100 times less core loss when shorted than when open circuited!
This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh)
This is amateur hour gone mad - both in the videos and mostly in these lists! Which does nothing but hurt the cause of getting O/U to the masses in my view, as it simply reinforces to the powers that be in the scientific community that it is a bunch of flakes and idiots making these claims!
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists. BUT you have to do proper energy/power balances to measure this gain. And you have to endeavor to reduce core losses to a minimum and account for core loss change when you heavily load the coils too.
I have one which gets a gain in excess of the entire core loss value, both eddy and hysteresis - therefore the gain cannot be from this artifact that plagues all coil/core systems. But it is a modest gain, and yes the rotor does want to speed up. But you have to manage this speed, and measure the loaded and unloaded condition at the same shaft speed, because friction and windage change too when speed changes.
Then you have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power, including friction, core loss, coil heating and direct electrical output for a complete energy/power balance. In fact there is an IEEE protocol for doing a complete power balance on motors and generators, which includes all these things.
This person did few if none of these things properly and is delusional about the apparent speed increasing meaning it is O/U. There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system, but it is completely overriden by mundane, conventional effects as "blindsangamon" correctly points out.
In short his videos are a waste of bandwidth and show nothing conclusive except that author is both ignorant of EM, and of how to perform measurements on said systems.
Sorry for being so terse with you folks, but it is very annoying to watch so many people do harm to the cause by spouting off without really having a grasp of conventional ElectroMagnetics. Both amateur's like in these videos, and indeed a large percentage of the armchair critics populating these lists! Do your homework before putting foot in mouth!
There's a few rational voices out there, blindsangamon being one, and most of you then deride these voices with nonsense and blind faith!
here's a simplified protocol for measuring a generator's complete power balance:
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
1 Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including:
2 Friction alone, meaning with no magnets or mag fields acting on the cores.
3 Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
The difference between 3 minus 2 is the core loss at no load.
4 Measure the DC resistance of all coils as they would be connected in a loaded condition (i.e. series or parallel).
5 Load the generator at the same speed as the no load tests.
6 measure input power via torque times speed. (Newton-meters times RPM times 0.1047 = shaft power in watts)
7 measure True output electrical power. Not with DMM's. but with appropriate True Power meters or analyzers.
8 measure coil current, and calculate coil's "Joule heating" via I^2R.
9 measure and compare coil voltage compared to no load voltage for a ratio with which to discount core loss.
Then take the loaded input shaft power in watts as INPUT to system.
Against this Input, you add the following:
a electrical output in watts
b friction in watts
c core loss via no load core loss times the voltage drop ratio (so if no load core loss were 37 watts, and no load voltage was 125V and loaded voltage is 83V, then the ratio is 0.664. Multiply 0.664 times no load core loss of 37 watts to equal 24.57 watts output core loss)
d coil heating via I^2R
Add up item a through d for the total system OUTPUT.
Now divide Output by Input for your COP. (Coefficient of Performance)
Note friction, core loss and coil heat are legitimate outputs.... they heat the room! Useful output is an arbitrary distinction based on subjective criteria. If you want shaft power then heat is not useful. If however you want a heater, then shaft power is not useful! So to know in the absolute sense if a thing is over unity or not, you have to account for ALL outputs in a balance sheet.
That's another pet peeve of mine - those who dismiss everything they deem as "not useful"! Now suppose you had a system which routinely produces 200% more heat output in coil heating and core heating while it turns a shaft as in some newfangled motor. The shaft power COP is only 35%, but overall the system is 200% gainful. These persons I refer to would dismiss this as not being useful because the shaft power is under unity!
When in fact a home heating system would require a heat exchange mechanism to get heat from your machine to the air, thus it requires a pump - moving air or water or both. So you could make "use" of both the excess heating and the shaft power from said system!
My point is at these early stages it is imperative that you measure all aspects even if you may "think" they aren't useful. For complete energy balances and because overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!
DMBoss
[/quote]
RONMEISTER.
HOW MUCH DOES THAT FREAK'N WHEEL WEIGHT?
WHAT IS THE DC RESISTANCE OF YOUR HV COIL(S)?
Thane
[/quote]
Honorable Minister Thane,
It is a flex plate out of a car, the thickness is around .062. but good for 10k RPM, right?
The ring gear on the OD traps the plastic magnet holder.
It weighs 2000 grams (nearly 5 pounds, including the coupling plate) Less than your pulley I bet...
The coil in the picture is 64 ohms, others run to 90 ohms.
Ron
Such a shame. The net is both good and bad. Massive free flow of information, but it allows those weak in character to throw stones without any fear of retaliation and be proud of what they done :(
@JustDoMe. Just because you couldn't win any arguments with JM, it is not justification for such a personal sexual attack. Be a man and drop it. Otherwise don't expect anybody to read anything that you post.
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
What fools, the heretics who wondered otherwise when those ideas were the implacable truths of their time.
.
Quote from: JustMe on May 08, 2008, 12:19:21 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
What fools, the heretics who wondered otherwise when those ideas were the implacable truths of their time.
Absolutely not - not fools at all. They had a thorough understanding of the existing knowledge of the time that they were disputing. They proposed a clear, self-consistent alternative which they could knowledgeably defend. They made highly refined observations which clearly separated real data from experimental error. If they had been fools, they would have failed to grasp the existing knowledge of the time, they would have produced wishy-washy self-inconsistent alternatives, and they would have made every measurement with a healthy dose of experimental error obscuring its real meaning.
The question of whether or not they were fools is independent of whether or not they were right.
Let's knock Peter and DMBoss's criticsms over, I have communicated with both of them in the past on different subjects and respect them but here they are plain wrong. I'm going to go back to my method of replying by using a different colour, I'll go with Blue.
Talk:Directory:Perepiteia Generator by Potential Difference Inc
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#No_Useful_Output
Comments
[edit]No Useful Output
On Feb. 6, 2008, Peter Lindemann, DSc, writes:
I have reviewed all seven video links. In all fairness, I would like to say that Thane has built some nice demonstrations and spent a lot of time running experiments. That said, the films show nothing important. First of all, the films do not show enough detailed information to evaluate the demonstrations. Second, no free energy is shown. Free energy to some extent is implied but none needs to be shown, the key is the anomoly and there is not much detail required to understand that according to conventional physics supplying an all steel shaft shouldn't cause such a dramatic change, really all that is needed if faith that Thane is not playing a trick on us. In fact, the generators are never shown producing any useful outputs. They are either shown producing voltage in "open circuit" mode, or they are shown in "short circuit" mode, where the generated voltage drops below one volt. So, ZERO WATTS are produced in either case. Untrue, a shorted coil does use maximum electrical energy, and the low voltage is made up for by a rather high current normally, with any normally functioning device maximum energy is used with a dead short. (unless it is an electrical tank circuit)
The changes in mechanical drag are due to changes in inductance and hysteresis. What changes in induction and hysteresis are expected from having a motor and generator connected or not with a ferromagnetic material? None! Back in the 1980's, both John Bedini and I independently worked with "variable reluctance" generators. We both saw that these designs work like an inverse to a standard induction generator. That is, they produce maximum drag in "open circuit" mode, and minimum drag in "short circuit" mode. Thanes device was demonstrated to come to a halt in short circuit mode in the first video! John found that the point of maximum benefit in this situation is to charge a battery, where the impedance of the generator "sees" the battery as a "near short circuit". Under these circumstances, the generator free-wheels and the battery charges quickly.
Unfortunately, Thane is not showing any useful benefits from the generator output. So, there is no "efficiency" to calculate because there is no output! True, but that is missing the point of the anomoly, oh and it was more true than it is now where Thane does power loads.
The real problem with these demonstrations has to do with his motor drive. The motor driving his system is a single phase induction motor. This type of motor has almost zero starting torque, and only produces its rated power at rated speed. So, the rated speed of his motor is probably in the neighborhood of 1725 RPM. I think it's 3,600rpm minus slip actually. Running this motor in the 100 RPM range converts 98% of the input electric power to HEAT. He says he has a capacitor in the input circuit to the motor, but this is never shown in schematic He does not have a capacitor in the circuit, it's just a normal bench grinder motor with the cap start in place. , so we don't know how it is hooked up. If the capacitor is connected in SERIES with the motor winding, it will act as a current limiter, and skew the power factor of the motor towards reactive power. He is however using a Variac. This is fine, IF you want to limit the mechanical power of the motor as well. If the capacitor is connected in PARALLEL with the motor winding, it will act to produce reactive power for the motor locally, and reduce the amount of power it draws from the wall. But again, this would only be significant at rated speed.
The effect he shows when a magnetic field is applied to the motor shaft would be undetectable if he was operating the motor correctly. Agreed, Thane no longer seems to think that magnetic fields getting at the motor are the cause. It is a very weak effect. It is probably caused by the external magnetic field interfering with the induced magnetic field of the rotor. This would not happen if the motor coils were not being severely current limited and the rotor was not "slipping" severely in the rotating magnetic field of the stator.
My GUESS is that the capacitor is in SERIES with the motor winding. Wrong This will limit the current to the motor to a specific maximum. Being done by a Variac anyway. At the speeds he is running these motors, the only other mechanism to hold back the input current would be the resistance of the wire in the motor coils. If that is all he had, the motor would quickly over-heat and melt the insulation right off the wire. The fact that the motor is running hot is proved in the seventh film where a large black fan is shown blowing on the motor!
From the data presented, my best estimate of the efficiency of the demonstrations is that over 90% of the energy going into the motor is converted to heat. Probably a fair estimate. The changes in drag of the generators is standard behavior for variable reluctance topologies Too bad this isn't a variable reluctance topology then., so accelerations or decelerations of the motor DO NOT represent energy production, just changes in HYSTERESIS DRAG. Since no output energies are ever measured, the input to output efficiency ratio is ZERO. That is an overly simplistic and deceptive statement.
Thane Heins may have more important discoveries in his lab, but they are not demonstrated in these videos.
I'm really sorry to have to comment negatively on Thane's work. It is a shame then that you managed to ignore the key effect of Thanes device then. He is exploring a new effect, and he is pretty brave to put out his data. It took John and I years to figure out what these kinds of generators were really doing and why. It is not obvious, and it takes a lot of experimenting and thinking to work it out.
Thane really needs to show the complete schematic of his test apparatus, including the strength and orientation of the magnets on his generator wheel, as well as the specifications on his drive motor. There is a lot of important data missing from the demos.
[edit]Nothing more than a hysteresis brake
On Feb. 6, 2008, DMBoss wrote (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg75615.html#msg75615):
Quote from: blindsangamon on Today at 02:45:23 AM
It appears that the Perepiteia Motor is nothing more than a hysteresis brake. Untrue. Placing the steel rods (wound by coils) near the spinning magnets induces alternating magnetic flux within the rods, True the resulting magnetic hysteresis causes drag on the rotating disk True , and heat losses within the steel rods. Shorting out the coils effectively shields the steel rods from the disk's magnetic field May be true sometimes but as demonstrated in Thanes first demo it is untrue for Thanes device. , eliminating the hysteresis drag. This causes the motor to speed up - but not as much as it would if the steel rods were removed completely.
BUSTED!
Hi:
blindsangamon is correct. This is a common phenomenon regards "generators", but one often not commonly known about if you are not working with AC motors and generators all the time. So the professor at MIT may not have this practical engineering savvy to identify the issues at first glance. If he were some kind of super advanced idiot possibly.
An hysteresis brake is one way to describe the apparently anomalous increase in speed when you short the generator coils. Do you understand the word 'Brake'? What EVERY ferromagnetic core does when exposed to varying magnetic fields is to have it's domains rock or flip direction in accord with the magnetic field changes impinging on them.
This consumes power in the "friction" between domains as they sort of scrape past each other. All very good. It results in the material heating up. In addition to this hystersis "loss" is an eddy current effect within bulk steel from the very same time varying magnetic fields, also making heating of the core. These two effects combined are commonly termed "core loss".
Core loss produces a reaction torque in a generator, in that the domain "friction" resists their aligning with the external field - causing more drag torque. Eddy currents make magnetic fields which oppose the fields making the eddy currents too, making more drag torque.
Now "core loss" in any ferromagnetic core material is directly proportional to the induction, B. Put another way the higher the delta flux density, the more core loss you get. (it is also proportional to the frequency, but let's assume a constant freq here, even though it is not at a constant one - it speeds up and slows down, again a neophyte mistake - you must measure things here at common speeds/freqs to make comparisons accurately)
And the induction, B is then what produces the coil voltage via Faraday/Lenz laws. That is voltage is the time derivative of delta flux. So people, when you short a generator coil and it's voltage drops to near zero, you can be certain that the delta B within the coil's core is also near zero! All good, yes all loaded coils oppose changes in flux.
So if you started with a delta B of say 1,000 gauss at no load on the coils, and your core material produces say 15 watts of core loss per pound of core (solid steel is in this ballpark, which is why we laminate special steels for transformers which takes the core loss down to about 2 watts per pound) then you'd have some serious drag torque experienced by the drive motor with coils open circuit.
Now if you short the coils and drop the delta B down to say 10 gauss, you have REDUCED the core loss by a factor of 1000/10=100 times less core loss when shorted than when open circuited! True, but now you have Coil losses which in Thanes device (and most devices) are far worse as demoed in the first video! His generator slows down seriously when the coils are shorted.
This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh) An otherwise valid criticism sadly made impossible by the demonstrated performance in the first video, did you watch the first video? If so did you think before writing?
This is amateur hour gone mad Indeed, your criticism sucks! - both in the videos and mostly in these lists! Which does nothing but hurt the cause of getting O/U to the masses in my view, as it simply reinforces to the powers that be in the scientific community that it is a bunch of flakes and idiots making these claims!
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists. BUT you have to do proper energy/power balances to measure this gain. And you have to endeavor to reduce core losses to a minimum and account for core loss change when you heavily load the coils too.
I have one which gets a gain in excess of the entire core loss value, both eddy and hysteresis - therefore the gain cannot be from this artifact that plagues all coil/core systems. But it is a modest gain, and yes the rotor does want to speed up. But you have to manage this speed, and measure the loaded and unloaded condition at the same shaft speed, because friction and windage change too when speed changes.
Then you have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power, including friction, core loss, coil heating and direct electrical output for a complete energy/power balance. In fact there is an IEEE protocol for doing a complete power balance on motors and generators, which includes all these things.
This person did few if none of these things properly Needed to do none of them given that the demo is not of energy efficiency. and is delusional about the apparent speed increasing meaning it is O/U. There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system, but it is completely overriden by mundane, conventional effects as "blindsangamon" correctly points out.
Sorry for being so terse with you folks, but it is very annoying to watch so many people do harm to the cause by spouting off without really having a grasp of conventional ElectroMagnetics. Both amateur's like in these videos, and indeed a large percentage of the armchair critics populating these lists! Do your homework before putting foot in mouth! Take your own advice maybe
There's a few rational voices out there, blindsangamon being one, and most of you then deride these voices with nonsense and blind faith!
here's a simplified protocol for measuring a generator's complete power balance:
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
1 Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including: 2 Friction alone, meaning with no magnets or mag fields acting on the cores. 3 Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
The difference between 3 minus 2 is the core loss at no load.
4 Measure the DC resistance of all coils as they would be connected in a loaded condition (i.e. series or parallel).
5 Load the generator at the same speed as the no load tests.
6 measure input power via torque times speed. (Newton-meters times RPM times 0.1047 = shaft power in watts)
7 measure True output electrical power. Not with DMM's. but with appropriate True Power meters or analyzers.
8 measure coil current, and calculate coil's "Joule heating" via I^2R.
9 measure and compare coil voltage compared to no load voltage for a ratio with which to discount core loss.
Then take the loaded input shaft power in watts as INPUT to system.
Against this Input, you add the following:
a electrical output in watts
b friction in watts
c core loss via no load core loss times the voltage drop ratio (so if no load core loss were 37 watts, and no load voltage was 125V and loaded voltage is 83V, then the ratio is 0.664. Multiply 0.664 times no load core loss of 37 watts to equal 24.57 watts output core loss)
d coil heating via I^2R
Add up item a through d for the total system OUTPUT.
Now divide Output by Input for your COP. (Coefficient of Performance)
Note friction, core loss and coil heat are legitimate outputs.... they heat the room! Useful output is an arbitrary distinction based on subjective criteria. If you want shaft power then heat is not useful. If however you want a heater, then shaft power is not useful! So to know in the absolute sense if a thing is over unity or not, you have to account for ALL outputs in a balance sheet.
That's another pet peeve of mine - those who dismiss everything they deem as "not useful"! Now suppose you had a system which routinely produces 200% more heat output in coil heating and core heating while it turns a shaft as in some newfangled motor. The shaft power COP is only 35%, but overall the system is 200% gainful. These persons I refer to would dismiss this as not being useful because the shaft power is under unity!
When in fact a home heating system would require a heat exchange mechanism to get heat from your machine to the air, thus it requires a pump - moving air or water or both. So you could make "use" of both the excess heating and the shaft power from said system!
My point is at these early stages it is imperative that you measure all aspects even if you may "think" they aren't useful. For complete energy balances and because overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!
[edit]Improper use of an AC induction motor
On Feb. 11, 2008, DMBoss added:
There is one thing I neglected to mention in the above commentary. That is this Heins fellow may also get this apparent anomalous rotor speed up entirely due to the improper use of an AC induction motor. Maybe impropper use of an AC induction motor is making the effect more visible, but that's beside the point.
His related demonstration of putting a strong NIB magnet near the steel shaft of this induction motor, with said motor's front "C" plate removed and having it's speed increase is telling.
That is removing the C plate leaves the AC motor's fields rather open to external influence. And it's steel shaft is magnetically connected to the AC rotor, comprising steel laminations and several heavy turns of short circuited windings.
The AC induction motor [in this case a split phase motor] works by making the stator fields produce a rotating field, which induces currents and then fields in the rotor windings/core. These rotor fields try to couple to the 60Hz stator field rotation, and tries to synchronize with them. An AC motor never completely syncs though, and some rotor "slip" occurs. The more the slip the more current the stator coils draw, and this tries to lessen the slip this it automatically "throttles" the current to meet the drag torque causing the increased slip.
Anyway these things should never use an AC motor as they are inherently unreliable and non linear regards their power signature vs the output torque. But this chap is going wildly out of the normal operating envelope for an AC induction motor on top of that.
That is a 2 pole AC motor tries to run at 3600 rpm, and a 4 pole at 1800 rpm. And he is running at 50-200 rpm. So he has massive slip between rotor field and stator field. (you can allow a split phase motor to run at low speed by simply plugging it into a Variac and turning down the voltage after the rotor's turning, or give it a shove by hand as he does)
Now the force/torque on the rotor is proportional to the B^2 in the air gap. Yes it's alternating, but it is still proportional to the square of the flux density. Adding an external magnetic field from permanent magnets could very well provide a DC offset in this magnetic field - as a path is formed from the motor case to return to the magnet, and from the magnet's other pole to the shaft, through rotor, across air gap to stators, and into the motor case. (C plate is removed so you can make a complete flux path out to the magnet)
This small change in flux levels would make no difference if force was proportional to flux density. But it is proportional to flux density squared. So it is plausible that this small offset, applied to the motor in this very unusual running mode of extreme amounts of slip - has caused an imbalance in the amount of rotor torque.
In a sense this addition of external flux has made the coupling coefficient of the rotor to stator higher due to the DC offset and squared condition. No absolute power gain has occurred, but you have gotten more of the power applied to make rotor boost torque.
His own numbers belie this - his AC motor if the two stacked power meters are to be trusted, is drawing some 250 watts to run at this low speed. While the shaft friction of such a sized device is reasonably estimated to be below 20 watts, probably below 5 watts of shaft power to meet friction etc. So his coupling is below 10%. Adding the magnetic path from external magnets to the AC motor system, could cause say a 15 or 20% coupling to occur. Making the shaft speed up, but this is NOT a gain in energy!
My initial comments are correct - you can engineer a system which produces a shaft speed up when you have massive core loss and you short the generator coils - as this negates much of this core loss - so if the coil heating upon shorting is low, then the rotor can speed up.
Also his messing with AC motor can be responsible for the speed up alone or in combo with this generator core loss artifact. But neither is anything but mundane and neither cause of shaft speed up necessarily indicates a gain over unity!
[edit]A simple way to test
There's an ultra-simple way to test this thing to see if the device really does cause the motor to run faster. I can't understand why no one has apparently thought of it.
Since the device has no output (the coils are either shorted or open), any power it generates has to be fed back to the motor driving it. So simply remove the device and see if the motor speeds up! That must be PB's words! clearly the dumbest missing the point critique possible. If the motor runs faster without the device than it does with the device and the switches closed, then it's safe to conclude that it is a net power drain. But if the motor runs slower, then you might begin to argue that it's doing something useful.
Another comment: somebody above talked about induction motors having a winding, implying just one. This is never true; they always have at least two. Three windings are used in 3-phase motors. These are self-starting because the three windings produce a uniform rotating magnetic field that drags the rotor along. Single phase induction motors have two windings, a running winding and a starting winding. The running winding runs the motor at speed, but it provides NO torque when the motor is stopped. In that case the motor stands still while the winding consumes a large amount of power that will either trip a breaker or burn up the winding. If you give the shaft a twist, it will start and run in that direction.
The starting winding provides this initial "twist". It is fed AC through a capacitor that provides a phase shift so that the internal field rotates roughly in the desired direction. This rotating field is much less uniform than the rotating field in a 3-phase motor, so the starting torque is much less and the vibration and noise are greater, but it's sufficient to start the motor.
Capacitor start motors have switches to cut out the starting winding at speed, while capacitor run motors keep the starting winding in the circuit. The advantage of the former is that the starting winding can use smaller wire, while the latter has somewhat greater torque.
Everyone is correct that Heins is using his AC induction motor in a highly improper manner. He even controls the speed with a Variac, which makes me cringe. At low speed his motor must draw a great deal of power and produce a great deal of heat and very little torque. The right way to control the speed of an induction motor is with a variable frequency, variable voltage inverter or cycloconverter. To increase speed you increase the frequency to speed up the rotating magnetic field. The voltage has to be increased along with the frequency to compensate for the increased inductive reactance from the motor windings. All of these variable speed controls that I'm familiar with drive 3-phase motors, usually from a DC supply. Three-phase induction motors are always preferred when possible, and 3-phase inverters are only slightly more complex than single-phase inverters. Ka9q 15:48, 28 Feb 2008 (EST)
[/quote]
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
@OUMan,
From what I know of Relativity theory, both Special (1905) and General (1915), it only diverges significantly from Newtonian mechanics at speeds approaching 'c' (speed of light for all you MBAs and vulture capitalists)! This is due to the Lorentz transformation...
Can't think of any practical, daily applications which REQUIRE relativity theory to operate. Oh wait, particle accelerators!!! Just happen to have one on my kitchen counter, yeah. Always seems to burn the toast! Had to stop using it cuz it blew out power transformers for a half-mile radius. :)
BTW, if you want to expand your world, or universe, a bit, you might want to check into a peer-reviewed journal called Galilean Electrodynamics. It's editorial policy focuses on papers that contradict Relativity theory (RT). The journal prefers empirical papers as opposed to theoretical... but publishes both. I remember a series of articles that used anomalous data from GPS satellites to support a thesis which contradicted RT... and there are numerous others. Of the four 'pillars' (aka, assumptions) that form the foundation of RT, only 2 have any significant empirical evidence, and one is not likely to be put to the test, at least not in our lifetime. I wouldn't want to build my house on that kind of foundation...
-Mark
Quote from: OilBarren on May 08, 2008, 08:24:32 AM
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 12:20:22 AM
Thane, one very simple test you could try....
Thane, what do you think?
THIS IS A GREAT IDEA AND I WILL ALSO PLOT ACCELERATED SYSTEM SPEED WITH HV COILS vs NO HV COIL.
THANKS
Thane
The acceleration curve may well prove useful!
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
@OUMan,
From what I know of Relativity theory, both Special (1905) and General (1915), it only diverges significantly from Newtonian mechanics at speeds approaching 'c' (speed of light for all you MBAs and vulture capitalists)! This is due to the Lorentz transformation...
Can't think of any practical, daily applications which REQUIRE relativity theory to operate. Oh wait, particle accelerators!!! Just happen to have one on my kitchen counter, yeah. Always seems to burn the toast! Had to stop using it cuz it blew out power transformers for a half-mile radius. :)
BTW, if you want to expand your world, or universe, a bit, you might want to check into a peer-reviewed journal called Galilean Electrodynamics. It's editorial policy focuses on papers that contradict Relativity theory (RT). The journal prefers empirical papers as opposed to theoretical... but publishes both. I remember a series of articles that used anomalous data from GPS satellites to support a thesis which contradicted RT... and there are numerous others. Of the four 'pillars' (aka, assumptions) that form the foundation of RT, only 2 have any significant empirical evidence, and one is not likely to be put to the test, at least not in our lifetime. I wouldn't want to build my house on that kind of foundation...
-Mark
The magnetic field produced by a coil of wire is considered to be a relativistic pancaking of the moving electrons electric field. (despite the fact that electrons are accepted to move at a syrupy slow rate)
But there is no evidence for SR that contradicts an entrained aether (as both predict the same results in those cases) and there is a lot of evidence for an entrained aether that disproves SR.
It is worth noting that M-M did detect a drift and that they believed the experiment didn't disprove the aether, and that Einstein believed in an aether even if it as not necessarily the same dynamic aether that I and others have come to accept.
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Can't think of any practical, daily applications which REQUIRE relativity theory to operate. Oh wait, particle accelerators!!! Just happen to have one on my kitchen counter, yeah. Always seems to burn the toast! Had to stop using it cuz it blew out power transformers for a half-mile radius. :)
That was funny! Snort. However, I can think of at least one everyday application that needs relativity theory to operate: GPS
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Can't think of any practical, daily applications...
So you haven't come across nuclear power yet then?
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
Quote from: RCH on May 08, 2008, 05:09:03 AM
Aether,
In case you haven't seen this--
Aspden's excellent 1998 "overview" re why "there HAS to be an aether." :)
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le24.htm
And, here's another ....
http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le26.html
Enjoy.
RCH
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
OUmon,
One should be careful citing the plagiarist Einstein...
http://us.altermedia.info/news-of-interest-to-white-people/albert-einstein-plagiarist-and-fraud_1295.html
I have studied much of Harold Aspden's work on the existence of the aether, it is a logical and reasonable conclusion backed by reproducible experiments, confirmed by many others.
"The 'Ether' as it is often called is the carrier of Radionic and PSI
energies. To demonstrate that the 'Ether' actually exists it is
necessary to demonstrate it scientifically. Here follows some very
simple experiments to prove the existance of etheric forces, or 'bio
plasmic energy' as it is called in Russia. "
http://www.keelynet.com/interact/Arc_1_98-7_98/00002377.htm
http://www.quantumaetherdynamics.com/letters.html
I take your pathetic posts as a cry for help. I hope I can help you open your eyes and come into
the light, you will be welcomed.
Ron
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 07:08:01 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Can't think of any practical, daily applications...
So you haven't come across nuclear power yet then?
Of course, the equivalence of mass and energy (E=mc^2)... like, DUH! ;D
Okay, that's ONE element of RT that has produced something of practical use, but its a FAR CRY from, to quote you, "...a vast number of applications...". If you're a scientist, shame on you! A true scientist is VERY careful about throwing around adjectives like that; as they are with the words, 'always', and 'never'. Perhaps I can think of a few... Hmmmm, what about MIRVs, and nuclear cruise missiles, and it made possible the suitcase nuke!!! Nope, can't count them since they are not, thankfully, in 'daily use'! And certainly aren't practical... unless you're on the 'giving' side of that battle. Has RT solved the problem of eliminating the long-lived nuclear waste that this use generates? What's funny/sad is that it may have, but mainstream science thinks its bogus science! If that isn't Kultural Karma, I don't know what is...
-Mark
@ ULI
SOMEWHERE IN HERE ULI SUGGESTED USING AUTOMOTIVE IGNITION HV COILS - I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GREAT IDEA BECAUSE A MICROWAVE TRANSFORMER EMPLOYS A STEP UP RATIO OF 1:25 OR THERE ABOUTS AND AN IGNITION HV COIL IS 1:3750! SO I PURCHASED ONE TODAY AND SHOULD HAVE SOME INFO TO POST IN A DAY OR TWO.
@ HIS EXCELLENCY - SIR RON OF THE WESTERN PACIFIC
RON CAN YOU OUTLINE YOUR PROCESS - I.E.
FULL SPEED TEST (120 V IN)?
OR 65 V IN - WHICH I LIKE TO DO DEMOS WITH.
(ALSO SEE BELOW)...
@ THE NOW SILENT DM BOSS
YES IT IS THE IMPROPER USE OF AN INDUCTION MOTOR - WHICH IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF OBSERVING THE EFFECT.
AN INDUCTION MOTOR WHICH IS OPERATED OUTSIDE OUTSIDE ITS IDEAL RANGE AND EXPERIENCING MASSIVE SLIP IS JUST HANGING ON BY THE FINGERNAILS SO
SNEEZING ON THE ROTOR WILL SLOW IT DOWN - BUT EQUALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT THE SLIGHTEST ADDITIONAL TORQUE WILL HELP SPEED IT UP.
@ AETHER22
NICE TO HAVE YOU BACK - AND IN MY CORNER!
WHAT IS YOUR ETD? (ESTIMATED TIME OF DEMO?)
@ JUSTME
VERY CLASSY OF YOU NOT TO BITE ON THAT ONE!
@ALL
SO I DID SOME TESTS ON MY TOROID GENERATOR AND IT DECELERATES WHEN INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED (LOADED) AND ACCELERATES WHEN LOADED IN SERIES. NOT SURE WHY THIS DISAPPOINTS ME BUT IT DOES.
I ALSO DID SOME ADDITIONAL TESTING ON THE TRANSFORMER COILS LUC AND I PURCHASED FOR THE DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR (THESE ARE THE COILS LUC PUT IN HIS "BLOW UP PROOF BOX") - BECAUSE THEY DON'T SEEM TO PERFORM AS WELL AS THE "SMALLER" UNITS IN OUR LATEST VIDEO. http://youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
THE LOADED HIGH CURRENT (HC) COILS CAUSE CAUSE MASSIVE DECELERATION - BUT THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS (HV) DO NOT PRODUCE MUCH ACCELERATION AND CERTAINLY DO NOT - COMPENSATE FOR THE HC LENZ EFFECT.
THE CORE SIZE IS ABOUT 75 - 100% LARGER AND THE HV COILS DC RESISTANCE IS 10 OHMS LESS WHICH TRANSLATES INTO MUCH LESS EFFECT PRODUCTION.
MY SUGGESTION TO ULI BASED ON I_RON'S LACK OF ENCOURAGING RESULTS SO FAR, IS TO TRY TO REPLICATE THE EFFECT WITH AN INDUCTION MOTOR FIRST - AND CONVINCE YOURSELF THAT IT IS REAL - AND THEN MOVE ON TO A DC MOTOR - WHERE THE EFFECTS MAY BE VERY SUBTLE AND HARD OR NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO DETECT IF THE COILS ARE WRONG OR SOMETHING ELSE IS AMISS
CHEERS
Thane
@All,
Did some testing on a simple homopolar generator to compare against my previous noted homopolar field effects on the rotor. I used an end cap for a one inch copper pipe and inside were two 1" x 1/4" neos in opposition with three 1/8" plastic washers in between them. Used a Lee Valley washer with a cut nail thru it to chuck into my drill. Copper cap and magnets rotating in sync.
At 300 rpms got 25 MA at 1.8 MV.
At 1600 rpms got 101 MA at 7.2 MV.
The rpms are really low for a homopolar motor, but I expected a little better results. This is partly due to the end cap having a 1 1/8" ID leaving a 1/16 inch gap between it and the magnet. Also, still using the meter probes as commutators, when the actual motors uses liquid metal.
I will try a regular 1" ID copper pipe later. If I can better results, then I will attempt to couple it with the AC motor to observe if there are any effects.
Still low power, but pretty good for a generator that does not work!
Quote from: JustMe on May 08, 2008, 12:19:21 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
What fools, the heretics who wondered otherwise when those ideas were the implacable truths of their time.
Good point JustMe, too bad it was promptly trashed by the spinmasters.
I really don't understand why they are so ignorant as to attempt to slow down this research process. We have a record number of Major hurricanes (Katrina survivor), record number of Super Tornadoes, Winter Hurricanes (many winter storms above hurricane force), record loss of the Arctic ice sheet, record flooding and what next.
We are only trying to research into an observed effect here!!! Even if it is not the OU savior, it may lead to one that is. One day you worthless excuses will wake up to a major disaster like the people in Myanmar, if you and your family are lucky enough to wake up, and then ask yourself "Why was I so stupid trying to slow progress that may have prevented this, just for spook bucks, skeptic creds or ego".
Larry
THANE aether22
@ AETHER22
NICE TO HAVE YOU BACK - AND IN MY CORNER!
WHAT IS YOUR ETD? (ESTIMATED TIME OF DEMO?)
Good question, well everything is made, I got the extra length of steel rod cut off professionally and for free doing a far better job than I could have with an angle grinder, so it's all ready and I'm about to try and put it all together.
But before I got the 2-3 inches of excess core cut off I did try it in a quick test, now I didn't have any Tachometer but I found it produced about 60 volts AC and would give a notable zap but when shorted there was no change either way.
That however means nothing without knowing the RPM and I feel the motor was powered a bit much which I will counteract with a transformer.
But I wonder if I continue to get no results if I_RON and myself both have something different about our setups that might seem unimportant, still hopefully mine will work fine and hopefully before the day is done.
But if not I'll take you up on the offer to send me the bench grinder motor, I'll plead with you to get a 'verified by Thane' coil and have everything the same. (or I'll send you what I have and see if you can figure out where the difference lies, wouldn't it be a pain if it turns out to be defendant of the aetheric component of the grids supply or something mental, but I'm getting WAY WAY ahead of myself here and will test what i've currently got far far more before asking Thane for more favors)
@ALL
SO I DID SOME TESTS ON MY TOROID GENERATOR AND IT DECELERATES WHEN INDIVIDUALLY SHORTED (LOADED) AND ACCELERATES WHEN LOADED IN SERIES. NOT SURE WHY THIS DISAPPOINTS ME BUT IT DOES.
Not sure either, it basically verifies that HV causes acceleration and high current deceleration.
Thane, one question I would really love you to answer.
Can you please detail the experiment where you found that the effect can pass through a very long PVC pipe?
How many HV coils were there? Were they in series or parallel?
Was the effect found not to be present of you used only one coil? (it makes sense that many focused in as it is can create a far more high pressure beam than a single coil, this was proven by Boyd Bushman)
Quote from: OilBarren on May 08, 2008, 08:15:42 PM
ps
RYOBI MOTOR'S PRODUCE THE BEST EFFECT AND CAN BE PURCHASED AT HOME DEPOT - CANADA'S FINEST HARWARE STORE - AT A LOCATION NEAR YOU OR ONLINE AT: www.homedepot.ca/
Indeed that may be why I have failed to get results, I may need to get a Ryobi.
QuoteThane, one question I would really love you to answer.
Can you please detail the experiment where you found that the effect can pass through a very long PVC pipe? How many HV coils were there? Were they in series or parallel? Was the effect found not to be present of you used only one coil? (it makes sense that many focused in as it is can create a far more high pressure beam than a single coil, this was proven by Boyd Bushman)
THE PCV PIPE EXPERIMENT WAS MY ATTEMPT AT RULING OUT THE MOTOR AS CONTRIBUTING TO THE EFFECT - AND ISOLATING IT TO THE COILS.
I WOULD RATHER PROVE MYSELF WRONG THAN HAVE SOMEONE ELSE DO IT.
I USED MY 8 COIL SETUP.
I AM QUITE UN-HAPPY TO BE PROVEN WRONG BY SOMEONE ELSE BUT I AM LEANING TOWARDS THE HV COIL CAPACITANCE vs AETHER IDEA. SO CRUSH MY EGO IF YOU CAN - BUT JUST MAKE IT WORK PLEASE!
Thane
[/quote]
Indeed that may be why I have failed to get results, I may need to get a Ryobi.[/quote]
I THINK THEY MAKE THEM JUST UP THE STREET FROM YOU IN CHINA?
Thane
Thane,
Ah ... your addition of the "HV COIL CAPACITANCE ..." is an "aether idea." :)
RCH
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 08:06:24 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 07:08:01 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Can't think of any practical, daily applications...
So you haven't come across nuclear power yet then?
Of course, the equivalence of mass and energy (E=mc^2)... like, DUH! ;D
Okay, that's ONE element of RT that has produced something of practical use, but its a FAR CRY from, to quote you, "...a vast number of applications...". If you're a scientist, shame on you! A true scientist is VERY careful about throwing around adjectives like that...
-Mark
Nice of you to admit to that one little detail but it goes much further, Mark. It really
is a vast number of everyday applications. You could not build most of today's integrated circuits without knowledge of quantum mechanics. You would not have a computer, we could not be having this conversation...
Quote from: i_ron on May 08, 2008, 07:23:12 PM
I take your pathetic posts as a cry for help. I hope I can help you open your eyes and come into the light, you will be welcomed.
Ron
Thanks for the offer, Ron, but I'll take a raincheck on that. If you or
anyone here manages to create just one result that actually does demonstrates a departure from conventional theory, that is not obscured by wilful experimental error, and that has been replicated by someone else independently, then I'll get back to you. Does that seem reasonable?
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 10:17:21 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 08:06:24 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 07:08:01 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Can't think of any practical, daily applications...
So you haven't come across nuclear power yet then?
Of course, the equivalence of mass and energy (E=mc^2)... like, DUH! ;D
Okay, that's ONE element of RT that has produced something of practical use, but its a FAR CRY from, to quote you, "...a vast number of applications...". If you're a scientist, shame on you! A true scientist is VERY careful about throwing around adjectives like that...
-Mark
Nice of you to admit to that one little detail but it goes much further, Mark. It really is a vast number of everyday applications. You could not build most of today's integrated circuits without knowledge of quantum mechanics. You would not have a computer, we could not be having this conversation...
Who's gonna be the first to say it? I thought your argument was about Relativity, mainly SR.
But Quantum mechanics is a totally different animal, one Einstein did not believe in, one which contradicts SR.
Quote from: LarryC on May 08, 2008, 08:16:46 PM
I really don't understand why they are so ignorant as to attempt to slow down this research process.
Larry
Larry, the research process is accelerated, not slowed down, when knowledge is added that allows the researcher to avoid blind alleys and to learn by others' previous mistakes. De Palma's didn't work. Tewari's didn't work. Adams' didn't work, etc etc. So the rational scientific approach is to learn from their failures and to use that knowledge to speed up the current work. Do you not agree?
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 10:31:45 PM
Quote from: LarryC on May 08, 2008, 08:16:46 PM
I really don't understand why they are so ignorant as to attempt to slow down this research process.
Larry
Larry, the research process is accelerated, not slowed down, when knowledge is added that allows the researcher to avoid blind alleys and to learn by others' previous mistakes. De Palma's didn't work. Tewari's didn't work. Adams' didn't work, etc etc. So the rational scientific approach is to learn from their failures and to use that knowledge to speed up the current work. Do you not agree?
The problem is with your definition of didn't work, which is something like A: 'Hey, I've got something that works', B: No, what you are trying to do is impossible because I said so and therefore was a failure regardless of your test results!
There is a Chinese proverb that covers this nicely, ?The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it?.
Note: Removed a crude Joke I made.
@aether22,
Really enjoyed your crude joke before removal, but your points left are well made.
@All,
I'm very inspired to write a curriculum called Spook Detection 101. I would like to present a range from the helpful skeptic to the professional Spook. I'm sure my narrow experience would only fill part of this course, so any private emails of previous experiences would be helpful :D
In the meantime, please keep in mind that the professional Spook is paid an amount(?) for each response that it provokes. I know it is very difficult to resist, the questions are so tantalizing, so easy to take issue. When it is obvious easy, beware of Spook traps, especially when you have to spend time to rip its ignorant ass apart.
Regards,
Larry
OUman,
You are the epitome of the cliche--
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing ...."
As Aether 22 so correctly pointed out (first, I might add ... because I had a serious reality conflict in my "relativity-driven" PC ...)--
General and Special Relativity have NOTHING to do with "quantum mechanics!"
In fact, they are DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED versions of "reality."
Further ... Relativity (in general ...) has NOTHING to do with your home electronics, quite apart from its total lack of compatability with quantum mechanics; your HDTV ... your Blackberry and your toaster (unless, perhaps, you are trying to keep up with Mark -- who admits to "using a particle accelerator to REALLY burn toast," when the power company doesn't catch him ...) have NO relationship to Einstein's relativity theories. :)
If you doubt any of this (which, of course, in your ignorance you will ...), Einstein himself had MANY highly negative things to say about the relationship between "relativity theory" and "quantum mechanics" in the course of his career -- including this, in 1954, where he doubted the ultimate reality of his own "relativity theories"--
" ... I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air [Relativity], gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics [emphasis and editorial clarification added] ...."
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/quantum-theory-albert-einstein-quotes.htm
RCH
P.S. Larry, didn't see your post until after I made mine, and I agree. But really -- for OUman to implode so publicly ...I guess its hard to get competent help all over these days .... :)
Quote from: OilBarren on May 08, 2008, 08:15:42 PM
@ ULI
@ HIS EXCELLENCY - SIR RON OF THE WESTERN PACIFIC
RON CAN YOU OUTLINE YOUR PROCESS - I.E.
FULL SPEED TEST (120 V IN)?
OR 65 V IN - WHICH I LIKE TO DO DEMOS WITH.
(ALSO SEE BELOW)...
[
CHEERS
Thane
Mein Freund,
I hesitated to mention my rather unscientific test.... I don't have a tack, my device differed in several
respects to yours in that I used a solid disc, that is no spokes and thus no openings in the disc,
no cups for the magnets, and an aluminum base plate.
The completed disc would turn up it's rated 3K with no balance problems but I had it on a control,
as seen in the photo, and ran it at "half speed" and closer to full speed as well as low speed.
So was looking for the controlling factor that caused my experiment to differ from yours?
I had one result as matched yours.... it got hot, lol, I've been called Sir Ron before... but they
usually spell 'sir' with a "Cu* "
Ron
Quote from: RCH on May 09, 2008, 12:15:18 AM
P.S. Larry, didn't see your post until after I made mine, and I agree. But really -- for OUman to implode so publicly ...I guess its hard to get competent help all over these days .... :)
Indeed,
When OUman first showed up I was a little concerned that Thane's project may have been downgraded to a lower risk level. After all, sending an obvious spook newbie to face PB veterans was disconcerting. OUman started out slow and ignorant (agreed due to lack of training) but has recently googled some knowledge and distraction ability, seems to be some what intelligent. What I don't understand is why there is so many intelligent minds around with such weak character? Are we missing something else that is causing this problem?
Regards,
Larry
PS: I continue to be amazed by your vast knowledge.
Larry,
Google is MY friend too .... :)
RCH
There's been a lot of theoretical posturing going on here in last few pages. Now for something completely different!
Does anyone have any more empirical data gleaned from their setups yet?
It would be good to gather some data from all you doers out there at the moment.
Empirical data is really needed (at least by me) to better understand the underlying fundamental principle/s of this effect. (IMHO - oops is that posturing ??? )
Could one of you please try the following experiment. ?
Rectify to DC and filter the HV coil O/P. (either directly or on the stepped down side of a transformer load if you're using one.)
Create a small panel of series connected 1 ohm resistors up to say 40 ohms. (40 resistors, or more if you want.)
Use 2-5 watt rated resistors to avoid blowing them with too much heat if your O/P is relatively high.
Starting at one end of the 40 ohms panel, Put a DC ammeter (high current setting) in series with the panel and one end of the O/P.
Place a voltage meter across the panel at the same end and the other end which is also connected to one end of the O/P.
.
Take incremental O/P voltage and current measurements, starting at Open/C, then connecting the panel at 40 ohms, and then reduce the resistance, one ohm at a time, from 40 ohms down to zero ohms (Short/C).
Also take incremental voltage and current (or direct power measurements using an RMS watt meter) of the input to the prime mover at the same time.
Take a particular note of the point at which the rotor begins to accelerate.
Take RPM readings at every incremental step from O/C to 40 to S/C
Note the number of magnet pairs to determine sine frequency for a given RPM
Measure the inductance of the coil/cores if you have the instrumentaion to do so.
Note the DC resistance, gauge and number of coil turns (where possible if your winding them yourself)
Note the core material and style, (solid, laminated, granular, alloy) shape, length, width, weight, etc.
All the while, if you have an oscilliscope, then create a pictorial of the incremental results. :)
Publish your results please :D
Especially oscilliscope shots of voltage and current traces,. hmmm a dual trace synchronous display of current and voltage would be really great. ....... hmmm I see I've got a wish list going here... I hope it's not too much I'm asking for... ???
Cheers all .. KneeDeep :)
QuoteWhat I don't understand is why there is so many intelligent minds around with such weak character? Are we missing something else that is causing this problem?
Regards,
Larry
YES - STOP DRINKING THE TOXIC COOL-AID.
Thane
A RECENT ARTICLE REQUEST TO TYLER HAMILTON AT THE TORONTO STAR
IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED I CAN SUPPLY ALL THE DOCUMENTS AS PROOF.
Thane
CHUMPS AT THE PUMPS
Dear Tyler,
Can you please do an article on gas pricing and how the Feds charge about 50 cents/litre in tax and that we could all be paying 70 cents/litre if we didn't elect criminals.
I sent you some information a while back on the Constitutional Divisions of Power between the Federal and Provincial Legislatures - and how the Provinces have EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO DIRECT TAXATION - well gas tax is a form of DIRECT TAXATION.
The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld in (1950!!!) that there is NO PROVISION for shared powers between the Feds and Provinces - so if a man has EXCLUSIVE RIGHT to make love to his wife - nobody else can share it right?
My platform in BOTH ELECTIONS was and still is that - the Federal Government is a criminal organization - and you support them with your ignorance everytime you go to the pumps and pay "hidden" and "illegal" tax.
When I presented this info to MP elect - Cheryll Gallant she said, "I know the truth, Stockwell Day knows the truth but if we told Canadians the truth we wouldn't get elected."
I gave this tape recorded info to the RCMP, PM Paul Martin and every MP in Ottawa including Jack Layton but they are all playing us for chumps at the pumps
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 10:41:25 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 10:31:45 PM
Quote from: LarryC on May 08, 2008, 08:16:46 PM
I really don't understand why they are so ignorant as to attempt to slow down this research process.
Larry
Larry, the research process is accelerated, not slowed down, when knowledge is added that allows the researcher to avoid blind alleys and to learn by others' previous mistakes. De Palma's didn't work. Tewari's didn't work. Adams' didn't work, etc etc. So the rational scientific approach is to learn from their failures and to use that knowledge to speed up the current work. Do you not agree?
The problem is with your definition of didn't work, which is something like A: 'Hey, I've got something that works', B: No, what you are trying to do is impossible because I said so and therefore was a failure regardless of your test results!
My definition of "didn't work" is nothing like that. It does not in any way rely on any preconception about whether it's "impossible" or not. The results do not depend on that at all. It goes like this:
1 - Experimenter claims "I have designed a machine that gives more power out than you put in"
2 - Experimenter builds demonstration machine
3 - Experimenter conducts tests and the measurements show much
less power out that goes in.
4 - Experimenter explains that when he's eventually "improved the efficiency" it will work as claimed.
Optionally, replace 3/4 with:
3a - Experimenter conducts tests and the measurements are inconclusive because they are swamped by measurement inaccuracy.
4a - Experimenter explains that when he's managed to get the right measurement tools he's confident the results will support his claim.
If you can provide an example in which the measurements do actually support the claim, then please share it with us.
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 10:27:24 PM
Who's gonna be the first to say it? I thought your argument was about Relativity, mainly SR.
But Quantum mechanics is a totally different animal, one Einstein did not believe in, one which contradicts SR.
Yes, you're right Aether, sorry, I got a bit carried away. We're quite a way off topic anyhow because these coil-and-magnet contraptions don't need relativity and quantum mechanics for an explanation: conventional electromagnetic theory fully describes them all.
(Actually I don't think it's correct to say that QM contradicts SR - I think it would be more accurate to say that they haven't yet been reconciled into a self-consistent model)
Quote from: OilBarren on May 09, 2008, 06:49:56 AM
A RECENT ARTICLE REQUEST TO TYLER HAMILTON AT THE TORONTO STAR
IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED I CAN SUPPLY ALL THE DOCUMENTS AS PROOF.
Thane
Hey, Thane, dusting off your old GST thing? Or was it BST?
(later)...
Quote from: OilBarren on May 09, 2008, 06:49:56 AM
CHUMPS AT THE PUMPS
Thane, how do you reconcile your attempt to fight gas tax with your drive towards saving the planet? Surely the one most effective thing that could be done to cut back on oil dependency and reduce carbon emissions would be to double the price of gasoline. Just watch the market react with conservation measures such as more use of public transit and switching to more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Note also that, based on past experience in the USA, any relief on gas taxes simply makes the oil companies richer because they just raise their prices to absorb the cut in taxes - the end price staying the same.
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 08:00:33 AM
(Actually I don't think it's correct to say that QM contradicts SR - I think it would be more accurate to say that they haven't yet been reconciled into a self-consistent model)
Which is not to be confused with producing "wishy-washy self-inconsistent alternatives". Self-inconsistant alternatives in proper science are bold! Clear! Progressive! Er...consistently self-inconsistent!
Until things are clear, they're not. There is no reason for anyone to abandon the experiments evolving here until it can be determined with certainty whether these observations can translate into a better mousetrap. Not one.
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 09:49:57 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 08:00:33 AM
(Actually I don't think it's correct to say that QM contradicts SR - I think it would be more accurate to say that they haven't yet been reconciled into a self-consistent model)
Which is not to be confused with producing "wishy-washy self-inconsistent alternatives". Self-inconsistant alternatives in proper science are bold! Clear! Progressive! Er...consistently self-inconsistent!
Until things are clear, they're not. There is no reason for anyone to abandon the experiments evolving here until it can be determined with certainty whether these observations can translate into a better mousetrap. Not one.
Well, the difference is the "wishy-washy" part.
@hoptoad
There's been a lot of theoretical posturing going on here in last few pages. Now for something completely different!
You're right, especially when results slow down. We're well know as Thane's Insane Group and proud of it. Oops more posturing!
My setup didn't perform as well as the rest and no oscilloscope, so I'll leave the testing to them.
Rectify to DC and filter the HV coil O/P. (either directly or on the stepped down side of a transformer load if you're using one.)
One observation: After my motor accelerated about 200 rpms, I connected a large 3 amp 120V to 12V transformer and it slowed back down to starting point??? Unusual, because my setup had the odd feature of not slowing down after removing the short.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 09:59:17 AM
Well, the difference is the "wishy-washy" part.
Aspects of Quantum Mechanics are pretty wishy-washy. Current knowledge predicts that we will never, ever be able to determine both the position and velocity of a quantum particle at the same time. If you want to quantify one, you're gonna have to be wishy-washy on the other. Should maybe toss the whole damn wishy-washy thing.
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 10:15:44 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 09:59:17 AM
Well, the difference is the "wishy-washy" part.
Aspects of Quantum Mechanics are pretty wishy-washy. Current knowledge predicts that we will never, ever be able to determine both the position and velocity of a quantum particle at the same time...
That's not wishy-washy. The probability tradeoff in position and time is determined by the wave function and that concept is used routinely to design and build actual microelectronic devices.
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 10:34:29 AM
That's not wishy-washy. The probability tradeoff in position and time is determined by the wave function and that concept is used routinely to design and build actual microelectronic devices.
You gotta love applied wishy-washiness!
Oh, and ambitious, well intentioned and determined research too.
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 10:59:02 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 10:34:29 AM
That's not wishy-washy. The probability tradeoff in position and time is determined by the wave function and that concept is used routinely to design and build actual microelectronic devices.
You gotta love applied wishy-washiness!
Oh, and ambitious, well intentioned and determined research too.
Thank-you :)
Quote from: aether22 on May 08, 2008, 10:27:24 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 10:17:21 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 08:06:24 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 07:08:01 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 08, 2008, 08:11:55 AM
He makes a bold statement, right at the outset: that "Einstein's theory is of no practical use in technology". If he is so ignorant as to be unaware of the vast number of applications of relativity in actual daily use (already in 1998 of course) then one must certainly question his authority to declare that "there HAS to be an aether". Perhaps he also believes that the world is flat or that the sun orbits the earth?
Can't think of any practical, daily applications...
So you haven't come across nuclear power yet then?
Of course, the equivalence of mass and energy (E=mc^2)... like, DUH! ;D
Okay, that's ONE element of RT that has produced something of practical use, but its a FAR CRY from, to quote you, "...a vast number of applications...". If you're a scientist, shame on you! A true scientist is VERY careful about throwing around adjectives like that...
-Mark
Nice of you to admit to that one little detail but it goes much further, Mark. It really is a vast number of everyday applications. You could not build most of today's integrated circuits without knowledge of quantum mechanics. You would not have a computer, we could not be having this conversation...
Who's gonna be the first to say it? I thought your argument was about Relativity, mainly SR.
But Quantum mechanics is a totally different animal, one Einstein did not believe in, one which contradicts SR.
Hi Aether22, you beat me to it! Your statements are dead on!
Yes, OUman just attempted to prop up his failing position by trying to change it from Relativity to QM, because QM does have numerous apps. OUman, you're an amateur, go play somewhere else. You're not going to get away with such feeble attempts to sway reader opinion on this board. Truth will prevail here.
I also find it ironic that QM and Relativity are the major reasons that we don't have a Unified Field theory! More Kultural Karma?
From what I've seen so far, OUman, or should I say, OUchild, is either a Spook who hasn't made it to the point of taking off the 'training wheels', or is a Pathological Skeptic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism). There's a great presentation done by a Nobel Laureate on just this topic, but its way too large a file to post here. OUman, you might want to read it...
Thane, Luc, Aether22, LarryC and all the others who have that true drive to really understand things, keep working to discover what, if anything, is really going on! Most of us are anxious to learn...
-Mark
First, to all those who are here for some real news, I apologize for taking up your download bandwidth...
For all those Pathological Skeptics (PS), please take some time to read thru the material on the following site, http://amasci.com/weird/wclose.html (http://amasci.com/weird/wclose.html). For the Spooks, newbies or experienced, this probably won't make any diff since you get paid to do what you do, but my hope for the PSes is that the material on this site might raise your level of self-awareness and help to moderate your skepticism to a healthy level...
OUman, what a coincidence, this site also has that presentation by the Nobel Laureate, Brian Josephson at Cambridge http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/ (http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/). Here's the link for it, http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JosephsonBpathologic.pdf (http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JosephsonBpathologic.pdf).
-M
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 09, 2008, 03:02:00 PM
... OUman, you're an amateur, go play somewhere else. You're not going to get away with such feeble attempts to sway reader opinion on this board...
-Mark
What makes you think I'm trying to sway opinion? That clearly would be a waste of time since it's crystal clear that you, for example, have no intention of listening to ideas that are in disagreement with your own. No, I'm asking questions because I'm in search of actual data in order to advance my own learning and understanding of this phenomenon. So far, I have seen no data, none at all, that supports the OU hypothesis and I find this frustrating. I also find it hard to comprehend because according to his video Thane has been working on this since a couple of weeks after 9/11. One would have thought at least some supportive data would have been forthcoming in the nearly 7 years since then.
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 04:35:24 PM
No, I'm asking questions because I'm in search of actual data in order to advance my own learning and understanding of this phenomenon.
Oh what a pile of poo. ::)
@markzpeiverson
Thanks for the articles. Interesting and funny.
For those of you that don't have much time, just check out the Characteristics of pseudoskeptics in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism).
How many characteristics are familiar? Does a spook seem more like a Pseudoskeptic?
@JustMe,
LOL.That last one was priceless.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 05:18:28 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 04:35:24 PM
No, I'm asking questions because I'm in search of actual data in order to advance my own learning and understanding of this phenomenon.
Oh what a pile of poo. ::)
BEST POST EVER!
Quote from: JustMe on May 08, 2008, 07:05:56 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Can't think of any practical, daily applications which REQUIRE relativity theory to operate. Oh wait, particle accelerators!!! Just happen to have one on my kitchen counter, yeah. Always seems to burn the toast! Had to stop using it cuz it blew out power transformers for a half-mile radius. :)
That was funny! Snort. However, I can think of at least one everyday application that needs relativity theory to operate: GPS
Meant to reply to this earlier, but no GPS actually contradicts SR.
DEAR EVERYONE (who is not crazy),
I AM REPOSTING THIS DATA BECAUSE I THINK IT BEARS REPEATING.
THE NO LOAD OPERATION IS IN BLACK
THE HIGH CURRENT LOADING AND DECELERATION IS IN RED.
TAKE NOTE OF HOW THE MOTOR DRAWS VIRTUALLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL POWER THAT IS DISSIPATED IN THE LOAD.
WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE ENGAGED (GREEN) THE MOTOR DRAWS LESS POWER THAN THE NO LOAD SCENARIO, ACCELERATES BEYOND NO LOAD SPEED AND DELIVERS POWER TO A LOAD.
FOR ANYONE WHO IS NOT COMPLETELY MAD ? THIS SHOULD BE VIEWED AS SERIOUSLY COOL.
Thane
ATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
AND BTW SINCE 2001 I HAVE:
STARTED AN R & D COMPANY SECURED FINANCING AND ATTRACTED WORLDWIDE ATTENTION AND SUPPORT FOR THE PEREPITEIA GENERATOR.
FILED 6 PATENT APPLICATIONS WITH 2 MORE PENDING
DESIGNED AND BUILT A WATER DISTILLER WHICH EMPLOYS FRACTIONAL DISTILLATION METHODS TO REMOVE AND RECYCLE CHEMICALS DURING THE DISTILLATION PROCESS ? THIS TECHNOLOGY IS GEARED TOWARDS INDUSTRY AND HOSPITALS TO KEEP POLLUTANTS OUT OF THE LAKES AND RIVERS.
CURRENTLY WORKING ON A 100% PASSIVE MAGNETIC BEARING DESIGN GEARED TOWARDS VIOLATING EARNSHAW?S THEOREM.
DESIGNED A TETHERED PONTOON UNDERSHOT WATER WHEEL GENERATING SYSTEM TO BE EMPLOYED IN RIVERS AS AN ECO-FRIENDLY ALTERNATIVE TO HYDRO-ELECTRIC DAMS.
DESIGNED A SOLAR WATER DESALINATION-DISTILLATION PIPELINE THROUGH DEATH VALLEY TO SUPPLY FRESH WATER (AND COLLECT SEA SALT) TO LAS VEGAS AND NEVADA - HAVE BEEN PROMOTING THE SAME TECHNOLOGY TO ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AS A MEANS TO PROMOTE PEACE.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 09, 2008, 08:13:33 PM
DEAR EVERYONE (who is not crazy),
FOR ANYONE WHO IS NOT COMPLETELY MAD ? THIS SHOULD BE VIEWED AS SERIOUSLY COOL.
Thane
ATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
Congratulations Thane on a capital achievement!! (includes both posts)
Could you clarify which motor ... and which rotor... was used in these tests, please?
Thanks,
Ron
Thane,
Film at eleven? :)
RCH
Quote from: aether22 on May 09, 2008, 07:58:03 PM
Meant to reply to this earlier, but no GPS actually contradicts SR.
Great!
What are you talking about? lol
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED MY AUTOMOTIVE IGNITION COIL SET-UP.
VERY INTERESTING STUFF:
HV COIL = 10.9 k ohms THAT'S 10,900 ohms - WOW!
AT ABOUT 1000 RPM THE HV COIL PRODUCES OVER 700 VOLTS AND THE HC COIL PRODUCES ABOUT 7 V.
I PUT SOME BACK IRON IN THERE TO HELP BUT THERE WAS NOT A HUGE AMOUNT OF ACCELERATION.
TOMORROW I WILL START CONSTRUCTION ON THE 6 CORE 12 COIL FULL CIRCLE GENERATOR ARRANGEMENT.
CHEERS
Thane
For your reading pleasure...
http://www.ottawaskeptics.org/local-investigations/121?task=view
Quote from: aether22 on May 09, 2008, 07:58:03 PM
Quote from: JustMe on May 08, 2008, 07:05:56 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 08, 2008, 06:12:49 PM
Can't think of any practical, daily applications which REQUIRE relativity theory to operate. Oh wait, particle accelerators!!! Just happen to have one on my kitchen counter, yeah. Always seems to burn the toast! Had to stop using it cuz it blew out power transformers for a half-mile radius.  :)Â
That was funny! Snort. However, I can think of at least one everyday application that needs relativity theory to operate: GPS
Meant to reply to this earlier, but no GPS actually contradicts SR.
Aether, you missed the point, or got it kind of backwards. The issue is that GPS requires such precision that relativity must be taken into account in order for it to work. For an explanation, see here: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
Quote from: LarryC on May 09, 2008, 10:01:51 AM
My setup didn't perform as well as the rest and no oscilloscope, so I'll leave the testing to them.
One observation: After my motor accelerated about 200 rpms, I connected a large 3 amp 120V to 12V transformer and it slowed back down to starting point??? Unusual, because my setup had the odd feature of not slowing down after removing the short.
Regards,
Larry
While dual scope oscilliscope shots are high on my wish list :D :D, simple incremental voltage and current readings are still important useful data.
Even if you don't have data such as rpm, induction, and a host of other parameters, you (we) can still gain some understanding of the relationship between the coils and the magnets, using graphed power curves based on real time measurements, for both input and output. The greater the number of incrementally stepped load readings, the more enlightening the data will be.
At some stage in the incremental loading, you will observe the acceleration effect which will increase as the load approaches S/C.
Noting where it begins to appears on the O/P power curve is a good start. Publishing your results is beneficial to all, even if the results are of a failed coil system.
Just having data for O/C, a single load setting, and then S/C is not enough for an accurate analysis which could lead to optimizing the effect.
Cheers
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 05:18:28 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 04:35:24 PM
No, I'm asking questions because I'm in search of actual data in order to advance my own learning and understanding of this phenomenon.
Oh what a pile of poo. ::)
Indeed it is, since such data seems to be completely absent.
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 08:06:17 AM
IS a ferromagnetic material required or not (the PVC would indicate "not")? So, what about the brass ...?    :)
I BELIEVE THAT THE BRASS COUPLING EXPERIMENT WHEN "MAGNETICLLY COUPLED" WITH THE STEEL BAR - RAISED THE INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED TO ABOVE THE CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED REQUIRED TO CAUSE ACCELERATION.
ORIGINAL YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEOS BEAR THIS OUT BECAUSE PART 2 IS ROTATING FASTER THAN PART 1 (READ THE "TACH METER" TO THE RIGHT) WHEN THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED. WE KNOW FROM PART 5 THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED DC MAGNETIC FIELD CAN INCREASE AN INDUCTION MOTOR'S RPM.
QuoteSince you still have the hollow brass coupling available on the original system, why not make up a RANGE of "slugs" which would fit inside that brass tube, and experiment with a variety of OTHER materials -- from other metals, to plastics ... and even various powders ... mercury, sodium ... etc. -- in an effort to see what IS "conducted" into the motor from the coils/magnets ...?
WE CAN GET THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR - AND A MOTOR THAT IS 21/2 FEET AWAY FROM THE COILS USING PVC PIPE AS WELL AS NON FEROMAGNETIC STAINLESS STEAL ROD. THAT IS SIMPLY ENOUGH FOR ME.
THE HOLLOW BRASS COUPLER IS NOW A MUSEUM PIECE.
Thane
@Oilbaron,
Per yr previous posts nd the video, the OU effect is caused by EM feedback down the motor shaft back intot he motor. But surely that can't be the case if it works with PVC etc. Sorry to be a bit slow but I don't get any more what the effect is. I'm mostly interested in the OU trnasformer actually becuase I think I can build on of those - the mechanical parts for the motor seem a bit challenging. But even so I'm intrigued by the motor but I don't get the concept of it any more..?
-Mike
INTERETING TIMELINE - AND MORE LIES AND FALSE INFORMATION FROM THE OTTAWA SKEPTICS
I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SKEPTICAL OF SKEPTICS - AND FOR GOOD REASON IT APPEARS.
1)
APRIL 21st, 2008
GENERATOR LOADING VIDEO ] (viewed 283 times)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
2)
MAY 1st, 2008
SPLIT PHASE MOTOR GENERATOR LOADING TESTS (viewed 801 times.)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D4047.0%3Battach%3D22963&hash=90d0029bd648f79d66ae9d5b448b49236462f120)
3)
MAY 4th, 2008
FULL SPEED GENERATOR LOADING TESTS (viewed 484 times.)
ATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4047.0;attach=23208
4)
MAY 4th, 2008
OTTAWA SKEPTICS ARTICLE Written by Seanna Watson
"Most disturbing of all, however, is the fact that there has still been no measurement of the behaviour of the apparatus under physical load - Heins continues to extrapolate from the speed and acceleration characteristics."
Ottawa Skeptics
Written by Seanna Watson
Sunday, 04 May 2008 13:30
http://www.ottawaskeptics.org/local-investigations/121?task=view
5)
MAY 9th, 2008
OUmon
"Indeed it is, since such data seems to be completely absent."
BACK TO THE SKEPTICS...
"Commenting (on overunity.com) about the status of the student's work, Heins wrote (in all caps, as appears to be his custom on that forum):"
AS FOR THE STUDENTS - THEY ARE ON HOLIDAYS OR IN EXAMS.
I DID NOT INSIST THAT THEY HELP ME BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH THEIR SCHOOL WORK.
SO OBVIOUSLY THE OTTAWA SKEPTICS ARE FOLLOWING THIS THREAD - I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW WHY THET ARE LYING AND MISLEADING THEIR READERS AGAIN? - SINCE THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE BEEN CAUGHT IN A LIE - RIGHT JONATHAN?
Jonathan Abrams <jonathan.abrams@ottawaskeptics.org> wrote:
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:43:04 -0500
From: "Jonathan Abrams" <jonathan.abrams@ottawaskeptics.org>
To: "Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Ottawa U Demo
My apologies Mr. Heins, the errors have been addressed. I hope to see
you at Ottawa U at 10am today.
-Jonathan Abrams
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 5:20 AM, Thane C. Heins wrote:
Dear Ottawa Skeptics,
I have some concerns about the false information you posted on your website?
http://www.ottawaskeptics.org/news/56-local-news/86-local-inventor-demonstrates-qperpetual-motion-machineq-updated
Can you please show me where in the Toronto Star article I say, that, "I believe that I have created a perpetual motion machine?"
The TRUTH IS ? I never said this simply because it is not true.
As far as "details of the design not being available" - details of the design were posted on Dr. Habash's website and were uploaded onto youtube? How more detailed do you want?
"It will unfortunately be closed to the public, and to us". Please show me where this statement comes from? I remember saying, "If you would like to join us you are very welcome."
From the emails below you can clearly see that I have extended an open invitation to the Ottawa Skeptics who can't be trusted to publish truthful information.
I don't get it?
Thane
Jonathan Abrams wrote:
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 14:29:00 -0500
From: "Jonathan Abrams"
To: "Thane C. Heins"
Subject: Re: Ottawa U Demo
Friday would work well for us. Where and when should we meet you?
-Jonathan
On Feb 12, 2008 4:30 AM, Thane C. Heins wrote:
Dear Jonathan,
Actually Friday was set up day. I gave a couple of demos yesterday to the OverUnity Forum and Carleton University which went well. (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.135.html)
I will be giving another demo on Wednesday at 10 a.m. to OCETA, Ontario Centre for Environmental Technologies Advancement (www.oceta.on.ca/) . If you would like to join us you are very welcome.
I will also be in the lab on Friday running some tests with my two Ottawa University Engineering students - if that day works better for you.
Cheers
Thane
"Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca> wrote:
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:45:10 -0500 (EST)
From: "Thane C. Heins" <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Snow Day
To: Jonathan Abrams <jonathan.abrams@ottawaskeptics.org>
CC: kcunningham@OCRI.ca
Dear Jonathan,
It is good to be skeptical ? but you also have to be responsible with what you print.
You must get your facts straight, at the very least your readers deserve that much.
The fact of the matter is Potential Difference Inc. has spent close to $50,000 to date on 3rd party evaluations ? geared towards providing present and future investors with some semblance of due diligence on our part because if we don?t do It ourselves no one else can.
Two weeks prior to our MIT trip we postponed a 15 million dollar investment offer until after we heard back from Dr. Zahn. The MIT trip cost us another 5 K with a budget of $20 K for Dr. Zahn?s report.
I am skeptical as well as is Dr. Habash and Dr. Bilaniuk and I am only willing to speak about what can be observed and reproduced.
Dr. Habash and I have been invited to present at NASA and we are working towards that goal and I would never say anything which would compromise our corporate or scientific integrity because too many people have placed their trust in me such as Dr. Habash and the U of O.
My claims are simple:
I claim that an externally applied magnetic field will accelerate an induction motor without the application of additional electric power.
This magnetic field can be a DC passive field from a permanent magnet or it can be an active AC magnetic field from a coil of wire. In the case of the AC field this can apply to either a solenoid or a generator coil under load which are in fact the same thing.
Both of these claims have been proven hundreds of times in many different labs.
I strongly urge you to go to the OverUnity Group's website and see what they are saying about what they observed ? I can assure you that if they were to print misinformation attached to my name I would cease to be associated with them instantly but they are cetrainly free to dismiss the technology if they wish.
I will be in the lab this Monday presenting to Christopher Ives, President of ERIA EcoSystems Inc. www.eria.info, if you would like to join us please do so at 10 a.m.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
Co-Founder - Potential Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
"Credibility can't be invented,
it has to be earned"
Tyler Hamilton - Toronto Star Columnist
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
R. Buckminster Fuller
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 09:42:05 AM
INTERETING TIMELINE - AND MORE LIES AND FALSE INFORMATION FROM THE OTTAWA SKEPTICS
I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SKEPTICAL OF SKEPTICS - AND FOR GOOD REASON IT APPEARS.
1)
APRIL 21st, 2008
GENERATOR LOADING VIDEO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
2)
MAY 1st, 2008
SPLIT PHASE MOTOR GENERATOR LOADING TESTS (viewed 801 times.)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D4047.0%3Battach%3D22963&hash=90d0029bd648f79d66ae9d5b448b49236462f120)
etc etc
Thane, the communication difficulty here is that you are using the word "loading" in a different way. When these folks (and me too) talk about demonstrating the machine under load, what they/we mean is a
physical load into which you are supplying mechanical power. The purpose of that would be to show that the machine can actually supply mechanical power externally, and not simply consume all its power as heat in its own windings. Showing that you can bleed off a very small amount of electrical power to light a bulb still does
not demonstrate mechanical power output.
QuoteThane, the communication difficulty here is that you are using the word "loading" in a different way. When these folks (and me too) talk about demonstrating the machine under load, what they/we we mean is a physical load into which you are supplying mechanical power. The purpose of that would be to show that the machine can actually supply mechanical power externally, and not simply consume all its power as heat in its own windings. Showing that you can bleed off a very small amount of electrical power to light a bulb does not demonstrate mechanical power output.
PLEASE POST YOUR
REAL NAME, REAL HOME ADDRESS AND
REAL HOME PHONE NUMBER - AS I HAVE HAVE DONE... SO I CAN BE SURE WHAT
IDIOT I AM RESPONDING TO.
THANKS
Thane
QuoteATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
Could you clarify which motor ... and which rotor... was used in these tests, please?
Thanks,
Ron
RON,
I USED THE EXACT SET UP SHOWN HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
BUT REPLACED THE LIGHT BULBS WITH RESISTORS.
- TWO MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS TRIMMED DOWN AND SECURED TOGETHER.
6 x 2 MAGNETS ON THE STEEL WHEEL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 09, 2008, 08:13:33 PM
DEAR EVERYONE (who is not crazy),
I AM REPOSTING THIS DATA BECAUSE I THINK IT BEARS REPEATING.
THE NO LOAD OPERATION IS IN BLACK
THE HIGH CURRENT LOADING AND DECELERATION IS IN RED.
TAKE NOTE OF HOW THE MOTOR DRAWS VIRTUALLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL POWER THAT IS DISSIPATED IN THE LOAD.
WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE ENGAGED (GREEN) THE MOTOR DRAWS LESS POWER THAN THE NO LOAD SCENARIO, ACCELERATES BEYOND NO LOAD SPEED AND DELIVERS POWER TO A LOAD.
FOR ANYONE WHO IS NOT COMPLETELY MAD ? THIS SHOULD BE VIEWED AS SERIOUSLY COOL.
Thane
ATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
Here is a version of the table with the efficiencies calculated:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg182.imageshack.us%2Fimg182%2F1535%2Fheinstablemx2.png&hash=3a48e042e17df431301d0f784bd7e4757f0c3fa7)
QuoteATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
Here is a version of the table with the efficiencies calculated:
WOW! YOU CERTAINLY WENT THROUGH AN AWFUL LOT OF TROUBLE TO SHOW 52,000 PEOPLE HOW IGNORANT YOU ARE AND THAT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO CALCULATE EFFICIENCIES?
FOR EXAMPLE:
TABLE 1IT TAKES
135 W TO PRODUCE
4.87 W THROUGH THE 100 ohm LOAD WITH THE
HIGH CURRENT COILS ONLY.
BUT IT ONLY TAKES
121 W TO PRODUCE
2.13 W FROM THE SAME COILS - THROUGH THE SAME LOAD WITH THE
HIGH VOLTAGE COILS SHORTED. YOU DID NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE
8 W REDUCTION IN MOTOR INPUT - YOU IDIOTICALLY ONLY LOOKED AT THE OUTPUT.
NOW I CAN SEE WHY YOU PERSIST AT KEEPING YOUR IDENTITY A SECRET.
Thane
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg182.imageshack.us%2Fimg182%2F1535%2Fheinstablemx2.png&hash=3a48e042e17df431301d0f784bd7e4757f0c3fa7)
IN ADDITION, GENERATOR EFFICIENCY IS ALWAYS CALCULATED AT THE DRIVE SHAFT SIDE ENTERING THE GENERATOR NOT AT THE PRIME MOVER SIDE BECAUSE A GASOLINE ENGINE AS A PRIME MOVER HAS AN EFFICIENCY OF 20 - 30 %.
SO IF WE LOOK AT THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER = SPEED (RPM) / TORQUE IN THE ABOVE TABLE WE SEE SOME VERY INTERESTING THINGS.
THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ADD TO THE DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE WITH COMPLEMENTARY TORQUE BECAUSE THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER ACTUALLY DECREASES WHILE DELIVERING POWER TO A LOAD
WHEREAS PREVIOUSLY THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER INCREASED TO COMPENSATE FOR THE HIGH CURRENT COUNTER TORQUE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IN REALITY THE PRIME MOVER POWER HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE AT ALL IN ANY EVALUATION EVER - WHAT IS OF INTEREST IS WHAT HAPPENS TO THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER, WHAT CAUSES IT TO CHANGE AND WHY.
SO, DON'T BE MISLED BY CON ARTISTS AND LIARS.
Thane
NOW LET'S PUT ONE FINAL NAIL IN OUman"s IGNORAMUS COFFIN.
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
IN TABLE 4 THE LOSSES FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD - HV COIL ENGAGEMENT ARE EXACTLY THE SAME (i.e. 130 WATTS)
1) NO LOAD:
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
0 = 130 W - 130 W
LOSSES AS HEAT FRICTION ETC.= 130 WATTS
POWER OUT = 0 WATTS
2) HC COILS IN SERIES ONLY
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
14.9 = 146 W - 131.1 W
LOSSES AS HEAT FRICTION ETC.= 131.1 WATTS
POWER OUT = 14.9 WATTS
3) HV COIL IN SERIES:
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
7.7 W = 130 W - 130 W (THE MOTOR IS DISSIPATING THE SAME HEAT @ 130 W)
LOSSES AS HEAT FRICTION ETC. = 130 WATTS
POWER OUT = 7.7 WATTS
WHERE DO THOSE EXTRA 7.7 W COME FROM???
POWER IN IS THE SAME
RPM IS THE SAME?
ALL THE LOSSES ARE THE SAME (HEAT, FRICTION ETC.)
POWER OUT IS NOT THE SAME.
DON'T BE FOOLED BY A FOOL - 130 WATTS IS THE LOSS NO MATTER HOW IT'S SPUN.
Thane
ps
IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS THIS MEANS THAT:
(JM THIS IS FOR YOU!)
IF THE HC AND HV COILS ARE BALANCED SUCH THAT ONE COMPENSATES FOR THE OTHER THEN 130 WATTS IN CAN PRODUCE ANY AMOUNT OUT.
The Skeptics report was fascinating to me in it's way. Remember I started my involvement with this on a Skeptic forum, because that's what I thought I was. I have the perfect skeptic profile: computer science grad with the narrow intelligence type our social, economic and education systems reward and validate, so no real reason to push the fundamentals of my own thinking too far out of it's comfortable box. I once scored nearly three standard deviations above the mean on logic and reasoning tests administered in a university psych class I took as an adult a few years ago, and in that same class on another battery of tests I scored well below average on exotic beliefs (UFOs, aliens, ghosts, psychics etc. etc.). I've excelled at a career for 20 years that has required logic, reason, and the ability to organize information and make decisions on it's relevance to a given problem or question instinctively on a daily basis. I've rarely met a conspiracy theory I liked. In short, I am a skeptic. *I* am a skeptic. Those people are for the most part pseudoskeptics, a word I gratefully learned yesterday that has finally provided a label for the unease and frustration I have felt with the kind of arguments that come out of these individuals and their sympathetic diaspora.
You were so right to point out that the 'perpetual motion' stuff came directly from the Skeptic side. That was something I noted from the beginning. In fact Hamilton's articles and blog specifically stated that that was not the claim. That didn't stop Skeptics from trumpeting the term over and over just for it's low investment/high return value in classifying you as a crackpot long before any actual evidence was assessed. A regular from SFN who specializes in clever posts (just ask him!) and mind numbing verbosity fired off a breezy, belittling and data free missive to James Randi that manged to call you a liar and a fool without actually saying it outright, and Randi promptly shared it, without fact checking a single thing, via the SWIFT these people get a special thrill up their leg over appearing in. Some other guy named Bob Park published something almost as read-between-the-lines dismissive - a little wee paragraph of nothing really - and it ends up back over at SFN as evidence. Collectively it is at times a big, irresponsible, intellectually lazy, thoughtless, self indulgent echo chamber.
You did the right thing in taking the time to demonstrate to their group, despite the outcome, because your openness and willingness to submit the system to scrutiny is necessary. The probability that you were ever going to get a fair and balanced assessment of the present state and future potential of your work from the Ottawa Skeptics was always negligible. Maybe nil. I could knit an entire sweater out of the confirmation bias and/or logical fallacies on almost any set of Skeptic collected observations on this matter since I started reading in February. The collective 'you' will continue to be vulnerable to this until you make your data crystal clear and absolutely infallible. This much of their argument cannot and should not be dismissed. If you can do that, it should be done with as little delay as possible.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 01:04:17 PM
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
IN TABLE 4 THE LOSSES FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD - HV COIL ENGAGEMENT ARE EXACTLY THE SAME (i.e. 130 WATTS)
3) HV COIL IN SERIES:
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
7.7 W = 130 W - 130 W (THE MOTOR IS DISSIPATING THE SAME HEAT @ 130 W)
LOSSES AS HEAT FRICTION ETC. = 130 WATTS
POWER OUT = 7.7 WATTS
WHERE DO THOSE EXTRA 7.7 W COME FROM???
POWER IN IS THE SAME
RPM IS THE SAME?
ALL THE LOSSES ARE THE SAME (HEAT, FRICTION ETC.)
POWER OUT IS NOT THE SAME.
At this point you have so clearly explained the excess power, that even a caveman would understand. Anybody arguing with this excess power should need to present proof otherwise, thru their own testing to be taken seriously.
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 01:48:50 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 01:04:17 PM
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
IN TABLE 4 THE LOSSES FROM NO LOAD TO FULL LOAD - HV COIL ENGAGEMENT ARE EXACTLY THE SAME (i.e. 130 WATTS)
3) HV COIL IN SERIES:
POWER OUT = POWER IN - LOSSES
7.7 W = 130 W - 130 W (THE MOTOR IS DISSIPATING THE SAME HEAT @ 130 W)
LOSSES AS HEAT FRICTION ETC. = 130 WATTS
POWER OUT = 7.7 WATTS
WHERE DO THOSE EXTRA 7.7 W COME FROM???
POWER IN IS THE SAME
RPM IS THE SAME?
** ALL THE LOSSES ARE THE SAME (HEAT, FRICTION ETC.) **
POWER OUT IS NOT THE SAME.
At this point you have so clearly explained the excess power, that even a caveman would understand. Anybody arguing with this excess power should need to present proof otherwise, thru their own testing to be taken seriously.
Larry
OK, now we're getting somewhere. The false assumption that's being made is that the amount of heat generated in the system is the
same in those two cases. In fact, it's clearly
not the same because the coil connections have been changed. In the so-called "no load" condition, 130W of heat is being dissipated in the system (motor + generator), and in the particular "loaded" condition cited, only 122.3W of heat is being generated. That's where the 7.7W comes from. It's not "excess power". No amount of upper-case ranting will change that.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 11:53:56 AM
IN ADDITION, GENERATOR EFFICIENCY IS ALWAYS CALCULATED AT THE DRIVE SHAFT SIDE ENTERING THE GENERATOR NOT AT THE PRIME MOVER SIDE BECAUSE A GASOLINE ENGINE AS A PRIME MOVER HAS AN EFFICIENCY OF 20 - 30 %.
SO IF WE LOOK AT THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER = SPEED (RPM) / TORQUE IN THE ABOVE TABLE WE SEE SOME VERY INTERESTING THINGS...
Thane
I agree that's the right way to measure generator efficiency. But you have not measured the torque. You refer to an "above table" - what table is that? I see no table with any torque measurements in it. You have not measured driveshaft power as far as I can see from anything you've posted.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 11:09:33 AM
QuoteATTACHMNET: Test Data May 4th, 2008 - Full Speed Test
Here is a version of the table with the efficiencies calculated:
WOW! YOU CERTAINLY WENT THROUGH AN AWFUL LOT OF TROUBLE TO SHOW 52,000 PEOPLE HOW IGNORANT YOU ARE AND THAT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO CALCULATE EFFICIENCIES?
<sigh>
BTW, it's 52,000
views, not 52,000
people - which is not the same thing at all. Still, an impressive number compared to the views on other threads - and largely, I think, because of this entertaining debate.
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 02:42:01 PM
OK, now we're getting somewhere. The false assumption that's being made is that the amount of heat generated in the system is the same in those two cases. In fact, it's clearly not the same because the coil connections have been changed. In the so-called "no load" condition, 130W of heat is being dissipated in the system (motor + generator), and in the particular "loaded" condition cited, only 122.3W of heat is being generated. That's where the 7.7W comes from. It's not "excess power". No amount of upper-case ranting will change that.
I call unsubstantiated counter-claim!
I LIKE my new pseudoskeptic dictionary.
Kidding aside, this sounds like something you just made up on the assumption that it must add up to 130W, so it does. I think if the philosophical shoe was on the other theoretical foot, you wouldn't let this fly without more substance.
And even if it is a reduction in losses, is that normal? I think what I mostly don't understand with you is that you seem to be operating from the assumption that no matter what the explanation for this is, it will have no application or benefit. That seems both unreasonably pessimistic and premature.
Thane, one thing I wondered about was the fact that we do expect an induction motor going faster to use less power, and the motor was going slightly faster with the HV coils alone. (I think it's really cool that I've learned these new bits of things all because of this!) While it seems unlikely this would account for the entire difference, it does create some muddiness. What do you think about hoptoad's suggestion about the DC motor for these specific high speed tests? What might that tell us that we don't already know now?
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 02:42:01 PM
OK, now we're getting somewhere. The false assumption that's being made is that the amount of heat generated in the system is the same in those two cases. In fact, it's clearly not the same because the coil connections have been changed. In the so-called "no load" condition, 130W of heat is being dissipated in the system (motor + generator), and in the particular "loaded" condition cited, only 122.3W of heat is being generated. That's where the 7.7W comes from. It's not "excess power". No amount of upper-case ranting will change that.
What kind of backwards logic is that? What part of POWER IN IS THE SAME,
RPM IS THE SAME do you not understand? The input from the grid is still 130W to allow the motor to turn it's PHYSICAL LOAD (rotor) at the same RPM. Same heat, smeat, whatever.
If it were possible to feed the 7.7W back to the grid. Then the utility company would only charge us for 122.3W while using 130W. Whoa 8) Now you're generating 130W of heat using 122.3W.
This point cannot be made any simpler. Why not help by doing your own testing to explain this observation or do you just enjoy hiding and throwing rocks?
Quote from: JustMe on May 10, 2008, 05:03:19 PM
What do you think about hoptoad's suggestion about the DC motor for these specific high speed tests? What might that tell us that we don't already know now?
First it will tell you that the effect is not dependant on the prime mover type. Secondly, if you use higher speeds and more magnets (to increase frequency), you will find that the effect will occur in a wider range of impedance from high (not too high) to lower. At this stage, you can only take my word for it, but my own apparatus had 8 very low impedance coils (only 90 turns of 0.63mm wire per coil) in series. The cores were hollow, comprising a tiny fraction of the inductive material that Thane is using, and, as such, presented a
very low inductance (and hence inductive reactance) capability.
Total DC resistance of all eight coils in series was less than 3 ohms.
My results show that HV coils (high impedance) and induction motors are not critical requirements for demonstrating the effect.
At peak electrical O/P, I had approximately 18 watts alternator O/P for 24 Watts prime mover I/P, with the acceleration effect starting at approximately 16 watts O/P. At S/C, the motor used the same input power as it did at O/C, and also ran at the same rpm, (approx 6000 rpm), with 4 magnet pairs giving a sine frequency of 24000 cycles per minute, which translates to 400 hz.
Cheers all
QuoteThane, one thing I wondered about was the fact that we do expect an induction motor going faster to use less power, and the motor was going slightly faster with the HV coils alone
.
JM, IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE (LARGE) TABLE - THE HV COILS WERE
NEVER "ALONE".
THEY WERE ALWAYS EMPLOYED TO COMPENSATE FOR THE HC COILS LOAD INDUCED DECELERATION.
THE HC COILS WERE SUPPLYING THE LOAD IN EVERY TEST.
IN THE SPLIT PHASE MOTOR TEST (SMALL TABLE) THE HV COILS WERE "ALONE" AND YES THE SPEED WAS SLIGHTLY FASTER - THE QUESTION AND THE REALITY IS - WHY DO LOADED COILS CAUSE THE SYSTEM SPEED TO INCREASE WHEN EVERY PHYSICS TEXT BOOK SAYS LOADED COILS CAUSE THE PRIME MOVER TO DECELERATE?
Quote(I think it's really cool that I've learned these new bits of things all because of this!) While it seems unlikely this would account for the entire difference, it does create some muddiness. What do you think about hoptoad's suggestion about the DC motor for these specific high speed tests? What might that tell us that we don't already know now?
A DC MOTOR WON'T PRODUCE ANY BETTER OR MORE TELLING RESULTS THAN THE HIGH SPEED TESTS IN THE "LARGE" TABLE. THE PARADIGM IS SIMPLE - TAKE 10 WATTS OF POWER OUT AND THE POWER BALANCE EQUATION SAYS THAT AN ADDITIONAL 10 WATTS MUST GO BACK IN UNLESS OF COURSE YOU UPSET THAT BALANCE WITH HV COILS.
Thane
"Still, an impressive number compared to the views on other threads."
OUman
THIS IS THE HARSHEST, MEANEST, NASTIEST THING ANYONE HAS EVER SAID TO ME EVER!!!
HOW WILL I EVER GO ON???
OH, LOOK WE HAVE BEER.
CHEERIOS
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 02:42:01 PM
OK, now we're getting somewhere. The false assumption that's being made is that the amount of heat generated in the system is the same in those two cases. In fact, it's clearly not the same because the coil connections have been changed. In the so-called "no load" condition, 130W of heat is being dissipated in the system (motor + generator), and in the particular "loaded" condition cited, only 122.3W of heat is being generated. That's where the 7.7W comes from. It's not "excess power". No amount of upper-case ranting will change that.
What kind of backwards logic is that? What part of POWER IN IS THE SAME,
RPM IS THE SAME do you not understand?
There is no part of that which I do not understand. In fact, I agree with it and if you refer back to my post you will find that this was not the part that I was taking issue with.
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
The input from the grid is still 130W
Yes.
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
...to allow the motor to turn it's PHYSICAL LOADÂ (rotor) at the same RPM.
Yes, although you're still having trouble understanding what the word "load" actually means to an engineer or scientist.
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
Same heat, smeat, whatever.
NO. There is no reason whatsoever to assume that the heat generated in the generator coils is the same in both cases because the loading of the coils was changed. It's a completely unsubstantiated assumption.Â
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
If it were possible to feed the 7.7W back to the grid. Then the utility company would only charge us for 122.3W while using 130W. Whoa 8)Â Now you're generating 130W of heat using 122.3W.
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
This point cannot be made any simpler.
You got that right!
Quote from: JustMe on May 10, 2008, 04:53:44 PM
I think what I mostly don't understand with you is that you seem to be operating from the assumption that no matter what the explanation for this is, it will have no application or benefit. That seems both unreasonably pessimistic and premature.
JM, you seem to be making an unsubstantiated assumption about the assumption I'm operating from ;)
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
Thanks, adlep for filling in with a very appropriate response. I've been busy conversing with rational people, it is so refreshing. But apparently OUman does not want to be one. I'm thinking now, that it is just a waste of time, to get
it to admit the obvious.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
OK, let me spell it out for you. I thought it was obvious but apparently not. Here's the rest of the story. Jimmy follows Larry's math and becomes very excited that he has such business acumen as to have got $7.70 of free money. Jimmy wants to share this good news so he calls adlep. "Adlep", he says, "come on over and count these 130 oranges that I bought for $122.30". Adlep rushes over to Jimmy's place to count the oranges he bought. Now, how many oranges does adlep find at Jimmy's place? He, of course, finds only 122.3 because the other 7.7 are now owned by the restaurant.
The result: Jimmy owns 122.3 oranges at a cost of $122.30, which makes, let's see, exactly $1.00 each.
Quote from: LarryC on May 11, 2008, 01:12:23 AM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
Thanks, adlep for filling in with a very appropriate response. I've been busy conversing with rational people, it is so refreshing. But apparently OUman does not want to be one. I'm thinking now, that it is just a waste of time, to get it to admit the obvious.
Regards,
LarryÂ
Larry, so you agree with adlep's conclusion then. $7.70 of free money, you think? I just posted the rest of the story: check it out and then tell us what's obvious and who's rational.
"THE LADY DOTH PROTEST
TOO MUCH!
METHINKS"
HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY!
Thane
OUmon,
YOU HAVE PLAYED THE ROLE OF THE "GREAT DECEIVER" WELL
BUT IT'S PROBABLY TIME YOU TOOK A HIKE,
OR RESURFACED UNDER ANOTHER IDENTITY...
BUT YOU REALLY AREN'T VERY GOOD AT THIS SO IT CAN'T BE FUN FOR YOU EITHER WAY?
OR WHY DON'T YOU START YOUR OWN - ANTI-THANE THREAD?
BEST WISHES AND GOOD LUCK IN ALL YOUR FUTURE DECEPTIONS.
Thane
I don't understand what's so hard to comprehend about this: less energy to move the motor faster. Easy to understand. I thought this was about watts not oranges. =D
Quote from: OUman on May 11, 2008, 06:53:16 AM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
OK, let me spell it out for you. I thought it was obvious but apparently not. Here's the rest of the story. Jimmy follows Larry's math and becomes very excited that he has such business acumen as to have got $7.70 of free money. Jimmy wants to share this good news so he calls adlep. "Adlep", he says, "come on over and count these 130 oranges that I bought for $122.30". Adlep rushes over to Jimmy's place to count the oranges he bought. Now, how many oranges does adlep find at Jimmy's place? He, of course, finds only 122.3 because the other 7.7 are now owned by the restaurant.
The result: Jimmy owns 122.3 oranges at a cost of $122.30, which makes, let's see, exactly $1.00 each.
U keep changing your story. Do not blame me for your own words:
"Whoa Cool " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
*
DP
*
3P - OU made me do it :-[
@Thane,
I also had found that HIGH SPEED TEST-2 was interesting. Going from 130W at 3444 to 121W at 3461.
On my motor the listed rated max is 3450 or 4.2% slip. This is within the normal unloaded tested limit of ac induction motors of 2% to 10%. Don't know if it is with or without wheels. I can't check as my tach would be too flaky with a magnet on the small shaft at that RPM.
On the Ryobi it states 3600, which is calculated synchronous speed, but it shouldn't be attainable. Do you know or anybody with the Ryobi know what the max rpm is with no wheels? No google info ???
Thanks,
Larry
PS: It would also be a good milestone to set on the way to negative slip. It should get the skeptics howling like mad dogs at the moon.
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 10:36:10 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 11, 2008, 06:53:16 AM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
OK, let me spell it out for you. I thought it was obvious but apparently not. Here's the rest of the story. Jimmy follows Larry's math and becomes very excited that he has such business acumen as to have got $7.70 of free money. Jimmy wants to share this good news so he calls adlep. "Adlep", he says, "come on over and count these 130 oranges that I bought for $122.30". Adlep rushes over to Jimmy's place to count the oranges he bought. Now, how many oranges does adlep find at Jimmy's place? He, of course, finds only 122.3 because the other 7.7 are now owned by the restaurant.
The result: Jimmy owns 122.3 oranges at a cost of $122.30, which makes, let's see, exactly $1.00 each.
U keep changing your story. Do not blame me for your own words:
"Whoa Cool " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
They were not my words - they were Larry's words. Check the posts.
Hello,
First time poster. Background: I got to here from following Steron, and have been following this thread from essentially day one. I am a chemist by training, but have long realized the need for alternative energy sources. I'll will admit readily most of this is far over my head, but I am trying to learn. I know this will sound like I am siding with OUman and that is last thing I want as I see the same formula used by it as by PB, meaning change the argument to stir the pot, which is not what I want to do. I really want to understand and could someone help correct my thinking here: If this generator is operating under nonstandard conditions and produces a lot of heat, when the coils are shorted and the system speeds up or less watts are supplied to keep the same rpm, how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat? If it is making the generator more efficient under these nonstandard conditions, it this setup still useful since so much energy is being lost as heat. I find it fascinating the generator speeds up, but truly how 'efficient' is this set up? Thanks for allowing me to play.
Hey mackensteff...welcome. :) I know just how you feel trying to understand stuff outside of your area of expertise. I find I can 'get' little pockets, but have a hard time connecting the dots and seeing the big picture. This leaves me with questions much like yours, and people here have always tried to answer them for me so I'm sure yours will be greeted in the spirit they're intended as well.
Glad you joined the conversation.
Quote from: OUman on May 11, 2008, 03:03:17 PM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 10:36:10 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 11, 2008, 06:53:16 AM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 12:16:47 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 10, 2008, 11:42:28 PM
OK, so little Jimmy buys 130 oranges from the market in Almonte. They cost a dollar each so he's paid, let's see, $130 for them. He then re-sells 7.7 of these oranges to a restaurant in Renfrew for the same price (he's not a capitalist). So he recoups $7.70 . He calls Larry to have him calculate how much money he's now paid for his 130 oranges. "Whoa 8) " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
Must be the new math, I guess :)
So you have just killed your own point.
If he paid $122.30 for 130 oranges that are selling for $1.00 a piece, then it is very good, because he got $7.70 of FREE money somehow
No?
2nd grade math?
OK, let me spell it out for you. I thought it was obvious but apparently not. Here's the rest of the story. Jimmy follows Larry's math and becomes very excited that he has such business acumen as to have got $7.70 of free money. Jimmy wants to share this good news so he calls adlep. "Adlep", he says, "come on over and count these 130 oranges that I bought for $122.30". Adlep rushes over to Jimmy's place to count the oranges he bought. Now, how many oranges does adlep find at Jimmy's place? He, of course, finds only 122.3 because the other 7.7 are now owned by the restaurant.
The result: Jimmy owns 122.3 oranges at a cost of $122.30, which makes, let's see, exactly $1.00 each.
U keep changing your story. Do not blame me for your own words:
"Whoa Cool " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
They were not my words - they were Larry's words. Check the posts.
I am not trying to be a prick, but maybe, just maybe it is a time to admit that comparing "apples to oranges" or "Watts to Oranges" is not a good idea.
No?
QuoteI really want to understand and could someone help correct my thinking here: If this generator is operating under nonstandard conditions and produces a lot of heat, when the coils are shorted and the system speeds up or less watts are supplied to keep the same rpm, how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat? If it is making the generator more efficient under these nonstandard conditions, it this setup still useful since so much energy is being lost as heat. I find it fascinating the generator speeds up, but truly how 'efficient' is this set up? Thanks for allowing me to play.
DEAR MACKENSTEFF,
(ARE YOU OUman'S NEW ALTER EGO?)
WHO CARES, AS SOON AS YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL POWER GOING TO THE PRIME MOVER YOU ARE DEAD MEAT. (THIS IS OUmon, PB etcs CON GAME)
TALKING ABOUT HEAT IS ALSO A CON ARTIST DISTRACTION TECHNIQUE.
YOU MUST
ONLY LOOK AT THE
RESPONSE TO LOADING.
THE MOTOR'S RESPONSE TO GENERATOR LOADING TO BE PRECISE.
EVERY PHYSICS TEXT BOOK IN THE WORLD TODAY WILL SAY THAT THE AMOUNT OF POWER YOU TAKE OUT OF YOUR GENERATOR - WILL HAVE TO BE REPLACED SOMEHOW - INTO THE PRIME MOVER.WE ARE SAYING HERE THAT THIS IS NO LONGER TRUE.
WE ARE SAYING, SHOWING AND PROVING THAT HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAN UNDO THE CURRENT POWER BALANCING THEORIES IN RED ABOVE AND WE ARE REWRITING THE LAWS OT PHYSICS IN THE PROCESS - ACTUALLY WE ARE PROBABLY ONLY RE-PRESENTING WHAT TESLA KNEW MANY YEARS AGO BUT DID NOT HAVE THE INTERNET TO ASSIST HIM.
JUSTME WILL BE POSTING OUR NEW GENERATOR PHOTOS SOON - WHICH WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE 24 COILS AND PERMANENT MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR WHICH ARE 8 TIMES STRONGER THAN THE ONES CURRENTLY EMPLOYED.
CHEERS
Thane
ps
If you are OUmon be nice for a while to trick us!
Quote from: OUman on May 11, 2008, 03:03:17 PM
Quote from: adlep on May 11, 2008, 10:36:10 AM
U keep changing your story. Do not blame me for your own words:
"Whoa Cool " says Larry - you paid only $122.30 for 130 oranges.
They were not my words - they were Larry's words. Check the posts.
I'm sorry, OUman, but you seem to have become completely delusional. Really sad! I never used fruit in this argument, just you and your little Jimmy pal! I think you should immediately report to the spook help line for treatment and retraining.
Best of luck,
Larry
Thanks for the response. I know I might come off as a PB or OUman, but believe me I am hoping this works out. I remember as a child probably about 12 realizing that there is a finite amount of oil for us to use, and as a chemist that is our supply of starting material as well, and if it goes a lot of materials that we have come to rely on will also go. I lived in England for two years and was exposed to gas at least twice what it is in the states and actually think the gas prices are good, not for the pocket book, but to get people to finally realize that oil is a non replaceable natural resource that needs better management. Anyway I am impressed with Thanes dedication and passion for the project and promise my questions are for my edification and not fault finding and appreciate the time spent by other educating and sharing knowledge. Like I readily admit I am a newbie in more than one way as my exposure to electo/magnestism was a college physics class. Another question for Thane to quench my interest: have you had any personal evidence/experiences that correlate directly to big oil trying to hinder your work (other than a few spooks on the forum) I have heard all the conspiracy theories about big oil buying up tech to avoid it coming to market, and since you are so open I thought I would see if you have seen anything personally. Thanks for the patience and now school is over I am hoping to pick up the physics text and try to get a better grasp on what is being talked about.
Quote from: mackensteff on May 11, 2008, 03:34:47 PM
If this generator is operating under nonstandard conditions and produces a lot of heat, when the coils are shorted and the system speeds up or less watts are supplied to keep the same rpm, how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat? If it is making the generator more efficient under these nonstandard conditions, it this setup still useful since so much energy is being lost as heat. I find it fascinating the generator speeds up, but truly how 'efficient' is this set up? Thanks for allowing me to play.
Hi mackensteff,
Just want to clear up one miss interpretation implied by your NONSTANDARD CONDITIONS statement . The high speed test are obviously done under standard conditions as the unloaded rpm would not have been so close to the theoretical max rpm of the motor if standard power was not used.
Yes, we all love to play with those who believe in discovering the truth.
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: mackensteff on May 11, 2008, 03:34:47 PM
Hello,
First time poster. Background: I got to here from following Steron, and have been following this thread from essentially day one. I am a chemist by training, but have long realized the need for alternative energy sources. I'll will admit readily most of this is far over my head, but I am trying to learn. I know this will sound like I am siding with OUman and that is last thing I want as I see the same formula used by it as by PB, meaning change the argument to stir the pot, which is not what I want to do. I really want to understand and could someone help correct my thinking here: If this generator is operating under nonstandard conditions and produces a lot of heat, when the coils are shorted and the system speeds up or less watts are supplied to keep the same rpm, how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat? If it is making the generator more efficient under these nonstandard conditions, it this setup still useful since so much energy is being lost as heat. I find it fascinating the generator speeds up, but truly how 'efficient' is this set up? Thanks for allowing me to play.
Q: "how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat?"
Good question.
Well you don't, and if this was merely a motor generator that accelerated when the secondaries were shorted far fewer people would be interested including me because it could very well be some mundane effect. (and would likely be assumed to be such)
But to many of us one single experiment sets this apart, it is an experiment that has not been explained, that is of course the initial experiment where the difference between a steel or brass coupling between the generator and motor makes all the difference, and that is a very very worthwhile anomoly!
Because further tests put the nail in the coffin that magnetic flux is what is conveyed through the shaft then any hope of a conventional mundane answer is gone, indeed the only explanation I am aware that even exists is my own aether theory, one that explains primarily what is transferred if not how it then effect the motor, indeed it is possible (if unlikely) that the effect on the motor efficiency conveyed by the aether is mundane and not directly a source of Free Energy.
So we know that something very anomalous and worth of further study IS occurring as no alternative explanation exists, and the odds seem excellent if not conclusive that there is a Free Energy effect in here.
Personally I have no doubt however that if you can correctly use the aether Free Energy is sure to follow and that this device is an important key to aether technology.
BTW, I didn't get anything done on Friday (things came up) and the weekend is never a good time but I have today (Monday) tested my tachometer (costs a grand total of $3.20) and it seems to work well, now I just need to mount the motor and coil which just means drilling a number of holes.
One thing though is I have begun to doubt that a power controller as I and Larry are using is suitable, they of course output only full power (interspersed with no power) and maybe that is incompatible with the effect.
Another thought is that triac's (used in my circuit and I am sure Larry's too) have a habit of getting stuck 'on'.
If the aether is effecting the triac's causing it to get stuck then it may very well remain on as Larry mentioned.
So Larry you may want to do a test to verify that your motor is really pulling less power, maybe a light bulb in parallel with the motor to see if the Triac is indeed not turning off.
QuoteAnother question for Thane to quench my interest: have you had any personal evidence/experiences that correlate directly to big oil trying to hinder your work (other than a few spooks on the forum) I have heard all the conspiracy theories about big oil buying up tech to avoid it coming to market, and since you are so open I thought I would see if you have seen anything personally. Thanks for the patience and now school is over I am hoping to pick up the physics text and try to get a better grasp on what is being talked about.
[/size]
YES BIG OIL IS AFTER ME EVERY FEW DAYS OR SO - WHEN I HAVE TO FILL UP MY GAS TANK.
AND WHY WOULD ANYONE COME AFTER ME - NOW THAT OVER 1/2 A MILLION PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THIS TECHNOLOGY AND ANYONE CAN BUILD IT?
CANADA, USA, JAPAN, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, DENMARK AND ENGLAND I THINK ARE DOING IT OR ARE TRYING. THE SOONER THESE PEOPLE GET WORKING PROTOTYPES THE BETTER OFF WE WILL ALL BE.
LEAVE THE TEXT BOOK ALONE - PICK UP SOME TOOLS - BUILD ONE AND REALLY LEARN SOMETHING AND THEN TEACH THE REST OF US WHAT YOU LEARNED.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 10:15:44 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 09:59:17 AM
Well, the difference is the "wishy-washy" part.
Aspects of Quantum Mechanics are pretty wishy-washy. Current knowledge predicts that we will never, ever be able to determine both the position and velocity of a quantum particle at the same time. If you want to quantify one, you're gonna have to be wishy-washy on the other. Should maybe toss the whole damn wishy-washy thing.
The whole reason for the element of probability in Quantum Mechanics (QM) ala the Uncertainty Principle is because we are dealing with oscillations that are of a very high frequency; many orders of magnitude higher than even our fastest pulsed lasers. The likelihood of our instruments 'illuminating' or catching the oscillation is highest at either extent where the oscillation has to slow down and reverse direction. However, get a fast enough 'strobe' light with the ability to very finely tune frequency and phase, and the probabilistic nature of QM will vanish!
-M
Quote from: LarryC on May 11, 2008, 09:16:51 PM
I'm sorry, OUman, but you seem to have become completely delusional. Really sad! I never used fruit in this argument, just you and your little Jimmy pal! I think you should immediately report to the spook help line for treatment and retraining.
Best of luck,
Larry
He might have better luck as a lecturer at MIT, or an editor for Science and/or Nature!
;)
-M
@JM:
I spent a whole hour drafting a response to OUman's post (Reply #2059 on: May 09, 2008, 08:35:24 PM), and I hit some key combo by accident and 'poof '... Looked Hi and Lo, and no Bits nor Bytes to be found! So instead, I'll defer to your post (Reply #2060 on: May 09, 2008, 09:18:28 PM)... you have a way with words!
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 12, 2008, 01:39:21 AM
Quote from: LarryC on May 11, 2008, 09:16:51 PM
I'm sorry, OUman, but you seem to have become completely delusional. Really sad! I never used fruit in this argument, just you and your little Jimmy pal! I think you should immediately report to the spook help line for treatment and retraining.
Best of luck,
Larry
He might have better luck as a lecturer at MIT, or an editor for Science and/or Nature!
;)
-M
@JM:
I spent a whole hour drafting a response to OUman's post (Reply #2059 on: May 09, 2008, 08:35:24 PM), and I hit some key combo by accident and 'poof '... Looked Hi and Lo, and no Bits nor Bytes to be found! So instead, I'll defer to your post (Reply #2060 on: May 09, 2008, 09:18:28 PM)... you have a way with words!
I think a more concise version of what you were trying to say was posted by JustMe.
"Oh what a pile of poo. ::)"
Quote from: OilBarren on May 10, 2008, 11:53:56 AM
IN ADDITION, GENERATOR EFFICIENCY IS ALWAYS CALCULATED AT THE DRIVE SHAFT SIDE ENTERING THE GENERATOR NOT AT THE PRIME MOVER SIDE BECAUSE A GASOLINE ENGINE AS A PRIME MOVER HAS AN EFFICIENCY OF 20 - 30 %.
Thane
Total system energy transfer is still the defining factor for whether an operational system is efficient or not. Even an electric powered dune buggy is a system. Something (usually current from batteries) drives the electric Motor which drives the Wheels and Generator which ...... well you get the picture.
Total system energy transfer as
torque and / or electrical energy is important and the higher the percentage the better.
Cheers .... KneeDeep
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 12, 2008, 12:35:37 AM
Quote from: JustMe on May 09, 2008, 10:15:44 AM
Quote from: OUman on May 09, 2008, 09:59:17 AM
Well, the difference is the "wishy-washy" part.
Aspects of Quantum Mechanics are pretty wishy-washy. Current knowledge predicts that we will never, ever be able to determine both the position and velocity of a quantum particle at the same time. If you want to quantify one, you're gonna have to be wishy-washy on the other. Should maybe toss the whole damn wishy-washy thing.
The whole reason for the element of probability in Quantum Mechanics (QM) ala the Uncertainty Principle is because we are dealing with oscillations that are of a very high frequency; many orders of magnitude higher than even our fastest pulsed lasers. The likelihood of our instruments 'illuminating' or catching the oscillation is highest at either extent where the oscillation has to slow down and reverse direction. However, get a fast enough 'strobe' light with the ability to very finely tune frequency and phase, and the probabilistic nature of QM will vanish!
-M
You have misunderstood the Uncertainty Principle. The probabilistic nature of QM is NOT to do with the ability/inability of instruments to measure accurately enough. It is much more fundamental than that. Google the subject and you'll find the proper interpretation.
Quote from: aether22 on May 11, 2008, 10:03:45 PM
Q: "how do you know less heat is not being produced and the effect is simply not making the generator more efficient, and producing less heat?"
Good question.
Well you don't, and if this was merely a motor generator that accelerated when the secondaries were shorted far fewer people would be interested including me because it could very well be some mundane effect. (and would likely be assumed to be such)
But to many of us one single experiment sets this apart, it is an experiment that has not been explained, that is of course the initial experiment where the difference between a steel or brass coupling between the generator and motor makes all the difference, and that is a very very worthwhile anomoly!
@aether, I thought that the difference between steel nd brass and also PVC was abandoned now -see below. If I understand corrrectly the whoel idea of "something" feeding abck into the motor down the shaft has been abandoned and instead its concentrating on different coils on the generator. So the basic theory of operation seems to ahve changed completely. Id' appreciate someone posting anupdate of where thats at...?
- Mike
Quote from: OilBarren on April 24, 2008, 08:06:17 AM
IS a ferromagnetic material required or not (the PVC would indicate "not")? So, what about the brass ...? :)
I BELIEVE THAT THE BRASS COUPLING EXPERIMENT WHEN "MAGNETICLLY COUPLED" WITH THE STEEL BAR - RAISED THE INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED TO ABOVE THE CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED REQUIRED TO CAUSE ACCELERATION.
ORIGINAL YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEOS BEAR THIS OUT BECAUSE PART 2 IS ROTATING FASTER THAN PART 1 (READ THE "TACH METER" TO THE RIGHT) WHEN THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED. WE KNOW FROM PART 5 THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED DC MAGNETIC FIELD CAN INCREASE AN INDUCTION MOTOR'S RPM.
QuoteSince you still have the hollow brass coupling available on the original system, why not make up a RANGE of "slugs" which would fit inside that brass tube, and experiment with a variety of OTHER materials -- from other metals, to plastics ... and even various powders ... mercury, sodium ... etc. -- in an effort to see what IS "conducted" into the motor from the coils/magnets ...?
WE CAN GET THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR - AND A MOTOR THAT IS 21/2 FEET AWAY FROM THE COILS USING PVC PIPE AS WELL AS NON FEROMAGNETIC STAINLESS STEAL ROD. THAT IS SIMPLY ENOUGH FOR ME.
THE HOLLOW BRASS COUPLER IS NOW A MUSEUM PIECE.
Thane
Ok, here are the first results, I didn't spend a great deal of time doing tests (as I only got everything together kinda late) so maybe I will have better luck tomorrow, but so far no luck and I have no idea what is wrong.
I run it with the home made Triac based motor speed controller (the rotor is directly on the bench grinder axle) it accelerates slowly when on the lowest power setting, but it does accelerate pretty much the same regardless of the state of the HV coils, shorting the coils makes no change I can notice one way or the other.
When I try stepping it down to 80v (rms) by a transformer it does not accelerate but takes longer to stop when spun up by hand if powered (still not noted difference between OS or SC), I can not by hand reach a high enough speed for any effect to kick in. (assuming it would kick in)
I have not yet setup a switch so shorting the coils is a shocking experience, I will wire one up tomorrow.
I will also try shorting different ohm ranges in the coil in case 587 ohms is simply too high.
From this I conclude that I should find the lowest transformed voltage I can get into it that can make it slowly accelerate, somewhat above 80v but below 240v.
I do have an autotransformer (a variac like transformer which really only has one coil) but it is kind of broken and I am unsure if I will be able to get it to work.
Thane, if you could build a simple Triac motor speed controller and see if it works for you that could be better than me trying to buy an expensive Variac, if you are willing I'll find the plans I used, very simple. (I just breadboarded mine)
Q1: Thane, do you want me to find the Triac plane?
At any rate if I find that improving the input is of no advantage then I'll go to a hardware store and purchase a Ryobi bench grinder, and once verifying it doesn't make any difference I will return it and buy one the same model as Thanes (or ask Thane to send me the one he initially planned).
If none of that works then I'll send Thane my coil to make sure it is not the problem.
Scratch that, first I'd cut over a microwave over transformer. (note: 240v ones likely have fewer turns on the secondary, but maybe not it might just be the primary that differs, Thane or luc can you tell me how many ohms the uwave xformer sec coils read?)
Q2: Thane or Luc, can you measure the resistance of 110v microwave transformer secondaries?
I will also try and make an air core coil as a 'secondary' tachometer to verify the first one isn't wonky, it seems good most of the time but not always.
Thane, in your opinion what RPM should I not need to go above to get the effect to noticeably kick in?
Q3: Thane, what is the highest speed you think I might need to reach to have the effect be obvious if it is in fact working?
The gap between the steel of the coil and the neos on the rotor varies from about 3mm to 9mm due to imperfections in the wheel and welding, 6mm might sound bad but it's far better than anything I managed to put together. (it would not be possible to have the magnets any closer unless I added another set of magnets on top or a set of fatter magnets because otherwise the coil would be cut by the wheel rim)
I WILL get this to work, even if I need to plead with Thane to send me a complete package including coils, or send Thane my setup, or eventually even visit Thane!
But perhaps more immediately expedient, Thane would you be interested in me making a video of my failed attempt. (assuming it remains failed tomorrow)
Q4: Thane, want a video of my setup in action? See if you can spot any error?
I suppose another possibility would be that it is working to a point of balance, meaning that it is causing an equal amount of acceleration and deceleration, if so running it in isolation (non steel shaft which is able to stop the effect in all cases where a single coil has been used) may find shorting the HV coil slows the rotor where running it connected has no effect, not as dramatic but still interesting. (note quite sure I can do as much with 'no effect' though.)
Q3: Also Thane do you think the extra high resistance might be the downfall of my coil?
I know this is a messy email and no fun to reply to, but I've gotta get this working and so far I'm just bamboozled, it has been successfully replicated by most who attempted, in fact my attempt is IMO the only one which appears to be a complete failure without some pretty good idea as to what was wrong. (If I understand I_Ron's attempt correctly it was quite different, and Larry had at least some success)
In the end I wonder if maybe it is a combination of my core material supporting too much in the way of eddy currents (like an extreme shorted high current coil) and the resistance/impedance of my coil being over double anything you have run adding up to a null net effect. If so a microwave transformer may be the best bet as soon as I verify mine will be suited so if you get that ohm figure to me within about 8-12 hours I should be able to test it tomorrow assuming it matches.
Quote from: Super God on May 11, 2008, 10:34:10 AM
...I thought this was about watts not oranges. =D
Yes, very true, it's about watts, not oranges. I was trying to use an analogy to illustrate the flaw in Larry's thinking. So, forget oranges. Back to Larry's original statement:
Quote from: LarryC on May 10, 2008, 06:50:40 PM
If it were possible to feed the 7.7W back to the grid. Then the utility company would only charge us for 122.3W while using 130W. Whoa 8) Now you're generating 130W of heat using 122.3W.
Larry's logic requires that if you sell 7.7W back to the grid, you get to use that 7.7W too in your own system. That's not the case - if you use it in your own system, it's not available to sell back to the grid; or conversely, if you sell it back to the grid, it's not available to use in your own system.
DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR COILS - FOR BENCH TESTING
Thane
Quote from: OUman on May 12, 2008, 07:11:42 AM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 12, 2008, 12:35:37 AM
The whole reason for the element of probability in Quantum Mechanics (QM) ala the Uncertainty Principle is because we are dealing with oscillations that are of a very high frequency; many orders of magnitude higher than even our fastest pulsed lasers. The likelihood of our instruments 'illuminating' or catching the oscillation is highest at either extent where the oscillation has to slow down and reverse direction. However, get a fast enough 'strobe' light with the ability to very finely tune frequency and phase, and the probabilistic nature of QM will vanish!
-M
You have misunderstood the Uncertainty Principle. The probabilistic nature of QM is NOT to do with the ability/inability of instruments to measure accurately enough. It is much more fundamental than that. Google the subject and you'll find the proper interpretation.
That is certainly possible, but I am at least familiar with the explanation you refer to. Care to explain how we are able to measure and distinguish elements which are on the order of the Planck length (10^--34m)? If so, please do it thru email since I don't want to waste more room on what can only be a philosophical debate... The most energetic EM radiation known (gamma rays) has a wavelength of perhaps 10^-21m. That's still over 10 decimal places larger that the dimension of the Planck scale... thus, in my humble opinion, plunging QM into the realm of probability. Let's not even get into the mathematical machinations that QM has had to resort to in order to become an acceptable model. It is an accurate model within its realm, but far from complete. And there are now models gaining favor which do not have to resort to mathematical 'adjustments'...
In case you aren't aware of it, there are numerous interpretations of QM as discussed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics). All the facts, m'am, all the facts.
JMHO,
-M
[duplicate post deleted... sorry 'bout that.]
-MI
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 12, 2008, 12:53:56 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 12, 2008, 07:11:42 AM
You have misunderstood the Uncertainty Principle. The probabilistic nature of QM is NOT to do with the ability/inability of instruments to measure accurately enough. It is much more fundamental than that. Google the subject and you'll find the proper interpretation.
...Care to explain how we are able to measure and distinguish elements which are on the order of the Planck length (10^--34m)?
-M
Where did you read that? Doesn't make sense to me.
@aether, I thought that the difference between steel nd brass and also PVC was abandoned now -see below. If I understand corrrectly the whoel idea of "something" feeding abck into the motor down the shaft has been abandoned and instead its concentrating on different coils on the generator. So the basic theory of operation seems to ahve changed completely. Id' appreciate someone posting anupdate of where thats at...?
- Mike
Not at all, though it is possible Thane may be unsure the experiments speak very clearly for themselves.
I have just 'proven' the effect can not work at all, does my failed attempt do a thing to disprove the other experiments that show an effect, not in the least. (except for in the minds of the most f'd up skeptics possibly)
The experiments Thane mentions discounts simple magnetic flux getting into the motor, but it is fully in line with how the aether acts.
Vince even showed that the motors output IS increasing.
Thane has simply demonstrated that a single coil may be constructed which is sufficient to direct aether down a reasonably continuous path which would be insufficient to conduct flux down a discontinuous path.
But that a whole compliment of coils can increase the aetheric pressure to direct aether through a non ferrous rotor and or PVC shaft. (This agrees well with the likes of Boyd Bushman's magnet-aetheric beamer)
How else can you explain 1 coil being sufficient for the effect when connected by steel, and 8 being required if not connected by steel?
i respect Thane enough to not attack his opinions but that does not mean I agree with them or that he has a monopoly on reason, truth, understanding etc...
>IS a ferromagnetic material required or not (the PVC would indicate "not")? So, what about the brass ...? :)
A continuous and possibly ferrous path is required if the pressure is low, that has been proven and no other experiment or logic can account for any other answer.
No such path is required if the pressure is higher, that is also definitively proven, as is simultaneously is the previous point as the effect no longer worked with a single coil.
I BELIEVE THAT THE BRASS COUPLING EXPERIMENT WHEN "MAGNETICLLY COUPLED" WITH THE STEEL BAR - RAISED THE INDUCTION MOTOR SPEED TO ABOVE THE CRITICAL THRESHOLD SPEED REQUIRED TO CAUSE ACCELERATION.
Why was the speed higher with the steel bar in there in the first place?
Because the coils create some aetheric effect even when not shorted and that was then conducted through to the motor.
Higher speed could increase the effect and make it so that the aether has a high enough pressure to bridge the gap, but personally I doubt that if Thane increased the power to the motor so it reached the same speed without the bar as with that shorting the coils would cause acceleration as we see in the other test. But I doubt Thane is going to go back and retest that. (If not, Thane would you mind sending me that big old coil you used? ;) )
ORIGINAL YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEOS BEAR THIS OUT BECAUSE PART 2 IS ROTATING FASTER THAN PART 1 (READ THE "TACH METER" TO THE RIGHT) WHEN THE STEEL BAR IS INSERTED. WE KNOW FROM PART 5 THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED DC MAGNETIC FIELD CAN INCREASE AN INDUCTION MOTOR'S RPM.
I'd qualify that with 'to an incredibly small level if it has been taken apart and is idling when a powerful neo magnet is brought close by', that is so far from what is present in the test it doesn't hold much water.
It has already been shown that a normal bench grinder is not effected by a magnetic field by another experimenter and my own quick tests, The bench grinder must be pulled apart as in Thanes demo, even then the effect is too weak (to small a change in rpm) and the applied field far to strong to compare.
quote:
"Since you still have the hollow brass coupling available on the original system, why not make up a RANGE of "slugs" which would fit inside that brass tube, and experiment with a variety of OTHER materials -- from other metals, to plastics ... and even various powders ... mercury, sodium ... etc. -- in an effort to see what IS "conducted" into the motor from the coils/magnets ...?"
WE CAN GET THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH A PLEXIGLASS ROTOR - AND A MOTOR THAT IS 21/2 FEET AWAY FROM THE COILS USING PVC PIPE AS WELL AS NON FEROMAGNETIC STAINLESS STEAL ROD. THAT IS SIMPLY ENOUGH FOR ME.
But ONLY when you use a full set of stator coils!
When you ue one the effect vanishes, which is odd since one can work really well when connected to the motor.
THE HOLLOW BRASS COUPLER IS NOW A MUSEUM PIECE.
Thane
That's Thanes opinion, not mine.
Thanes answer is in MY opinion incomplete but I will let the experiments convince Thane rather than argue with him.
Addition: If I agreed with Thane about nothing of consequence being conducted down the shaft then the device could indeed be showing nothing more than a reduction of eddy and hysteresis breaking.
A shorted coil will act to oppose and changes in flux in the core and it will reduce the core losses and if by any chance the coil losses are less than the reduction of core losses then you have shorted a coil which reduced breaking, I would add that this is BELIEVED to be possible and observed reasonably commonly (though it may be Thanes effect at play unknowingly), and hence I could not say for sure under such a circumstance that there would need be anything extraordinary about Thanes device.
However it has been proven that something significant is conducted through to the shaft and having a significant impact.
@aether22,
Tried your light bulb request and the motor wouldn't run at all with 100W bulb and barely ran with a 60W bulb. May need a bulb around 10W to get decent results.
My wobble was similar on my rotor. The rotor center shaft was a little longer than the motor shaft. I cut the wobble to less than half by building up the motor shaft with tape after the drop off before the threading. Thus given it a full length support. Don't know if you have the same problem.
My Triac fan controller was purchased at Lowe's for about $9.00.
Removed the 1 X 1/4" neos on back of the cupped 1/8" neos and just used the cupped 1" X 1/8" neos.
Added a second coil with 20 Ohms.
I was able to get the acceleration effect at a lower RPM of 400 instead of 700 with the larger magnets.
The HC shorted along, reduced the speed rapidly, but still slowly reduced the speed with the HV coil also shorted.
Good Luck,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 12, 2008, 06:01:00 PM
@aether22,
Tried your light bulb request and the motor wouldn't run at all with 100W bulb and barely ran with a 60W bulb. May need a bulb around 10W to get decent results.
Interesting, clearly the Triac is not just turning the power on and of but also somehow reducing the available current???
Of course the bulb is just there to tell you how much power the triac is delivering so a 10 or even 2 watt bulb would do just fine.
Quote
My wobble was similar on my rotor. The rotor center shaft was a little longer than the motor shaft. I cut the wobble to less than half by building up the motor shaft with tape after the drop off before the threading. Thus given it a full length support. Don't know if you have the same problem.
No, my shaft is long enough (is it just me or does that sound dirty?) but the wheel has imperfections.
Still IF my Tachometer is accurate I have had it up to 1800rpm, though I would not want to take it any higher.
Still no apparent effect from shorting the coils.
Quote
My Triac fan controller was purchased at Lowe's for about $9.00.
Removed the 1 X 1/4" neos on back of the cupped 1/8" neos and just used the cupped 1" X 1/8" neos.
Was it you that used JB weld? if so how did you remove 'em?
Quote
Added a second coil with 20 Ohms.
In series or parallel?
Quote
I was able to get the acceleration effect at a lower RPM of 400 instead of 700 with the larger magnets.
Did it still get 'stuck' at the higher speed when you go OC?
Quote from: OilBarren on May 11, 2008, 07:30:52 PM
...AS SOON AS YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL POWER GOING TO THE PRIME MOVER YOU ARE DEAD MEAT.
So why is "power going into the prime mover" the input that you're always measuring and reporting in all your test results?
Quote from: OUman on May 12, 2008, 06:28:25 PM
Quote from: OilBarren on May 11, 2008, 07:30:52 PM
...AS SOON AS YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL POWER GOING TO THE PRIME MOVER YOU ARE DEAD MEAT.
So why is "power going into the prime mover" the input that you're always measuring and reporting in all your test results?
I think Larry is right, don't feed the spooks.
Hell, I think it's just PB under a new guise.
They probably get paid in just the way Larry says, let's ignore and starve them out.
Q1: Thane, do you want me to find the Triac plane?
NO SORRY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO BUILD ONE.
At any rate if I find that improving the input is of no advantage then I'll go to a hardware store and purchase a Ryobi bench grinder, and once verifying it doesn't make any difference I will return it and buy one the same model as Thanes (or ask Thane to send me the one he initially planned).
ANY 1/3 HP CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOT R SHOULD DO?
Q2: Thane or Luc, can you measure the resistance of 110v microwave transformer secondaries?
THIS IS NEVER A GIVEN NOR IS IT A WALK IN THE PARK EITHER.
THAT 6 X 2 COIL MONSTER IN THE PHOTOS DOES NOT ACCELERATE EITHER.
ITS SECONDARIES ARE 86 OHMS SET ON LARGE CORES.
THE MICROWAVE COILS IN THE DEMO HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
WORK VERY WELL BUT THE CORE SIZE IS ABOUT 1/2 AS BIG AND THE COIL RESISTANCE IS 96 OHMS.
Thane, in your opinion what RPM should I not need to go above to get the effect to noticeably kick in?
THAT DEPENDS ON MANY THINGS BUT THE HYSTERISIS CURVE OF YOUR CORE PLAYS A LARGE PART - SINCE WE GET VERY GOOD RESULTS WITH THE TRANSFORMER CORES - BUT WE CAN GET ACCELERATION AROUND 400 RPM.
Q3: Thane, what is the highest speed you think I might need to reach to have the effect be obvious if it is in fact working?
STARTING AT 600 RPM @ 65 V MOTOR INPUT WE CAN ACCELERATE UP TO 2000 RPM EASILY.
I WILL get this to work, even if I need to plead with Thane to send me a complete package including coils, or send Thane my setup, or eventually even visit Thane!
But perhaps more immediately expedient, Thane would you be interested in me making a video of my failed attempt. (assuming it remains failed tomorrow)
PHOTOS ARE OFTEN GOOD ALSO.
Q4: Thane, want a video of my setup in action? See if you can spot any error?
SURE POST IT UNDER MY NAME ON YOUTUBE - TO SATIFY THE SKEPTICS WHO WANT TO SEE THIS FAIL.
I suppose another possibility would be that it is working to a point of balance, meaning that it is causing an equal amount of acceleration and deceleration, if so running it in isolation (non steel shaft which is able to stop the effect in all cases where a single coil has been used) may find shorting the HV coil slows the rotor where running it connected has no effect, not as dramatic but still interesting. (note quite sure I can do as much with 'no effect' though.)
Q3: Also Thane do you think the extra high resistance might be the downfall of my coil?
NO I WAS GETTING ACCELERATION FROM A 10 K OHM COIL.
I know this is a messy email and no fun to reply to, but I've gotta get this working and so far I'm just bamboozled, it has been successfully replicated by most who attempted, in fact my attempt is IMO the only one which appears to be a complete failure without some pretty good idea as to what was wrong. (If I understand I_Ron's attempt correctly it was quite different, and Larry had at least some success)
In the end I wonder if maybe it is a combination of my core material supporting too much in the way of eddy currents (like an extreme shorted high current coil) and the resistance/impedance of my coil being over double anything you have run adding up to a null net effect. If so a microwave transformer may be the best bet as soon as I verify mine will be suited so if you get that ohm figure to me within about 8-12 hours I should be able to test it tomorrow assuming it matches.
MY VERY FIRST TRANSFORMER COIL WAS 388 OHMS.
IF ALL ELSE FAILS I WILL SEND YOU ONE OF THE 12 WORKING COILS I NO LONGER USE.
IF YOU PROMISE YOU GIVE IT BACK SOME DAY I WILL EVEN SEND YOU THE 8 COIL MONSTER - BUT SHIPPING WILL BE NASTY AND YOU MAY GET IT IN PIECES.
IF YOU CAN MATCH THOSE MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS IN THE YOUTUBE VIDEO - AT ABOUT 100 OHMS IN THE SECONDARY AND YOU ADD ANOTHER 100 OHMS YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET IT WORKING AND I WOULD USE AN AIR COIL TACH IF I WERE YOU.
GOOD LUCK
Thane
@aether22,
Removed the 1 X 1/4" neos on back of the cupped 1/8" neos and just used the cupped 1" X 1/8" neos.
Was it you that used JB weld? if so how did you remove 'em?
No, I use strapping tape, strong but easy to cut and remove.
Added a second coil with 20 Ohms.
In series or parallel?
Each coil is set up to short individually.
I was able to get the acceleration effect at a lower RPM of 400 instead of 700 with the larger magnets.
Did it still get 'stuck' at the higher speed when you go OC?
Weird, after removing HV short, it slowly slowed down 10 rpms, then slowly went up 15 rpms, then re-shorted HV and slowly went up another 5 rpms.
Larry
Hey Thane,
Is there a way to incorporate your device with this one?
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamslaughter.com%2Fkore%2Fkore_files%2Fimage001.gif&hash=49d42245a5e3d641c5233d5c973aba40250967be)
http://www.dreamslaughter.com/kore/kore.htm (http://www.dreamslaughter.com/kore/kore.htm)
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4678.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4678.0)
Quote from: aether22 on May 12, 2008, 05:38:24 PM
The experiments Thane mentions discounts simple magnetic flux getting into the motor, but it is fully in line with how the aether acts.
Vince even showed that the motors output IS increasing.
Thane has simply demonstrated that a single coil may be constructed which is sufficient to direct aether down a reasonably continuous path which would be insufficient to conduct flux down a discontinuous path.
But that a whole compliment of coils can increase the aetheric pressure to direct aether through a non ferrous rotor and or PVC shaft.
Addition: If I agreed with Thane about nothing of consequence being conducted down the shaft then the device could indeed be showing nothing more than a reduction of eddy and hysteresis breaking.
A shorted coil will act to oppose and changes in flux in the core and it will reduce the core losses and if by any chance the coil losses are less than the reduction of core losses then you have shorted a coil which reduced breaking, I would add that this is BELIEVED to be possible and observed reasonably commonly (though it may be Thanes effect at play unknowingly), and hence I could not say for sure under such a circumstance that there would need be anything extraordinary about Thanes device.
However it has been proven that something significant is conducted through to the shaft and having a significant impact.
@aether, OK, so what your saying is there IS actaully feedbakc down the shaft but its aetheric not EM - and that means even the brass piece or the long pvc tube can conduct it but needs either higher speed or more coils in the generator - because it doesn't condut aether as well as steel does. And that aether effect is enough to vercome the magnetic breakig in Thanes device so it accelerates intead of slowing down as it normally would. So far so good but is actual movement necessary for the aetheric effect? Because I want to build the torroid transformer thatalso uses Thsnes effect but theres no motion there of course. Sorry, I don't have a good grasp of the aether thing yet.
-Mike
NO I WAS GETTING ACCELERATION FROM A 10 K OHM COIL.
Ah, I wasn't totally clear on that demo, so no real upper limit then Wink
MY VERY FIRST TRANSFORMER COIL WAS 388 OHMS.
IF ALL ELSE FAILS I WILL SEND YOU ONE OF THE 12 WORKING COILS I NO LONGER USE.
Well I'll try some tests first but yeah sounds like it might be a good idea, but my uwave transformer sounds right.
IF YOU PROMISE YOU GIVE IT BACK SOME DAY I WILL EVEN SEND YOU THE 8 COIL MONSTER - BUT SHIPPING WILL BE NASTY AND YOU MAY GET IT IN PIECES.
Tempting, well the first line anyway Wink
IF YOU CAN MATCH THOSE MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS IN THE YOUTUBE VIDEO - AT ABOUT 100 OHMS IN THE SECONDARY AND YOU ADD ANOTHER 100 OHMS YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET IT WORKING AND I WOULD USE AN AIR COIL TACH IF I WERE YOU.
Ah, my microwave secondary is 100 ohms, sounds like it is worth giving it a shot, and you think an extra 100 ohm coil for good measure, will try. (I might just see if I can source a second microwave transformer)
As for the air core tach, do you have it trigger off the rotor magnets and then divide by the number of magnets? Or do you have a single tiny magnet placed somewhere near the shaft for it?
GOOD LUCK
Thane
Thanks.
Quote from: springfield on May 13, 2008, 06:44:27 AM
@aether, OK, so what your saying is there IS actaully feedbakc down the shaft but its aetheric not EM - and that means even the brass piece or the long pvc tube can conduct it but needs either higher speed or more coils in the generator
That is what I believe is happening yes.
Quote
- because it doesn't condut aether as well as steel does
More so as well as a continuous path, maybe steel is better also though.
Quote
. And that aether effect is enough to overcome the magnetic breaking in Thanes device so it accelerates intead of slowing down as it normally would.
Yes, now why the aether does this is another subject with several possible answers, but at this point let's just say the aether can be mysterious and do amazing things and work out the details later. (soon)
Quote
So far so good but is actual movement necessary for the aetheric effect?
It is possible to create an aetheric flow with solid state setups, but creating a reliable effect of a given quality is somewhat beyond where I am at as yet, after all my replication which was as close as I could get still failed, probably because the wire was longer or of a higher resistance than I calculated. (I overshot my ohm target by almost 3 times!?!)
Although then again based on Thanes invaluable reply, maybe the wasn't it, hell maybe I wound the coil in the wrong direction, or..........
Quote
Because I want to build the torroid transformer thatalso uses Thsnes effect but theres no motion there of course. Sorry, I don't have a good grasp of the aether thing yet.
-Mike
That's Ok, I consider I do have a good grasp of the aether and yet I still have no idea what's going on!
I have a bunch of theories as to why my current attempt has not met with success and I don't like any of the theories, in fact I'm going to try one more test (compare plastic .vs steel shaft) in the morning once some glue has dried due to the long shot that the Lenz Law retarding effect is equal to the aetheric acceleration and hence balances out, but if I block the latter then hopefully success.
Sadly I have lost a bunch of light switches I used to have and so shorting the coils is still a highly charged issue for me, hopefully I'll figure out where to get some tomorrow.
Hopefully the microwave secondary is a better choice.
Quote from: OUman on May 12, 2008, 05:22:57 PM
Quote from: markzpeiverson on May 12, 2008, 12:53:56 PM
Quote from: OUman on May 12, 2008, 07:11:42 AM
You have misunderstood the Uncertainty Principle. The probabilistic nature of QM is NOT to do with the ability/inability of instruments to measure accurately enough. It is much more fundamental than that. Google the subject and you'll find the proper interpretation.
...Care to explain how we are able to measure and distinguish elements which are on the order of the Planck length (10^--34m)?
-M
Where did you read that? Doesn't make sense to me.
Not going to use this forum's BW to discuss; move to email if you want...
-M
Sometimes on this forum my questions will not be answered if not direct enough, so just in case:
I WOULD USE AN AIR COIL TACH IF I WERE YOU.
What magnets do you use to run the Tach? The main Rotor magnets and then divide by 6 or 18?
Or do you have a single(?) smaller magnet closer to the shaft?
In part I ask because in generators like these a single pass by a magnet can create a double humped pulse.
MAJOR Update: I taped 2 neos to the shaft of the bench grinder (actually a nut on the shaft) in attraction and used an air core coil and MOST of the time it gave me the correct reading, but stragely if I touched the motor housing it would screw it up.
But the rest of the time it read 49 to 50 hz which is about right (It is also what the optical tach would read, though I wasn't always happy with it's readings), although it is a lower slip than I think the motor Thane is running and maybe too little to show the effect obviously maybe.
I have also secured 3 microwaves and possibly more so my odds of finding another 100 ohm secondary seem very good, I will pick at least one of them up tomorow. With that I lost interest in frustrating myself with more tests of the current setup I felt sure would fail, plus I can pickup some well prices SPST switches from Jaycar when I get the microwave/s.
Hopefully the microwave secondaries will do the trick, if they don't then it is most likely the motor is too high powered or runs on too high a voltage.
Actually it just came to me that possibly the reason my coil failed could be it's shape.
A coil in a generator in effect has a very low effective impedance since it's self induction and the induction from the rotor are for the most part equal and opposite.
However if my coil takes up too much space, or runs too far then it is induced less which in effect increases it's self induction or 'impedance'.
The microwave transformer secondaries are not very deep, they all get induced rather equally.
This also brings me to another point that may be worth mentioning.
Thanes HV coils aren't, they are only really HV when open circuit at which point they have little effect.
When they are shorted they have very little in the way of conventional voltage, which is to say an imbalance of charges, this is because every inch of wire resists current and every inch picks up an induced voltage, If the coil were 'perfect' there would be no 'charge imbalance' voltage.
However that is not the only kind of voltage that in fairness exists, if you know the ohms, the current and the 'left over' impedance you can tell how much voltage there is when shorted (Which IS NOT the same as the open circuit voltage due to the current in the generator coil cancelling the rotors field), and while it will be something it will not be near as much as when it is open circuit. (Another way to tell is to have another cowound coil (of a fractional number of turns) that remains open circuited and measured for voltage the whole time, you can even compare the voltage it has when the other coil is and is not shorted to see the voltage drop)
And what happens when you add 2 such coils together? (refering to 2 HV coils as in the uwave transformer demo)
From a standard electrical view, very little when shorted, the difference between shorting a coil through it's self and through an identical coil induced identically is zero because no charge imbalance voltage is generated.
And this other 'type' of 'voltage' is different in that it does not really add up, 1 + 1 is not 2, it's just 1 over here and 1 over here, A voltage is generated by each inch of wire and is 'expended' over that same inch of wire because the current is allowed to run at it's limit.
An analogy would be the difference between a 90 mile river and a 2 mile river, if water flows at the same speed and volume past a point it does not matter how much more river there is up stream or down stream. (until you build a damn, then it makes a huge difference, depending on how mach area you are willing to flood)
In the same way you will have the same number of electrons flow past a section of wire at the same speed in a 30 gauge wire shorted coil around a time varying magnetic field if it's 1 turn or 1,000 turns. (That is not actually quite true because 1,000 turns will create more counter emf, but a 1,000 single turn loops would be identican to a single 1,000 turn coil)
Thane, if you do not believe me then when being careful to run the motor at the same speed (while leaving the HC coils open) measure the current flowing through the HV coil shorted in series, and each one shorted individually, you will see the same current in both instances)
That is absolute fact ELECTRICALLY, however the aether is another matter entierly!
More turns means a faster more powerful flow.
Thanes recent results still insist an aether (or other 'out there' theory involving 'something else' flowing in the wire besides electric fields and electrons).
YOU CAN SEE HOW I DID IT HERE:
(YELLOW COIL TO THE RIGHT)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogLeKTlLy5E
AND HERE:
WHITE COIL TOP-MIDDLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vX8Cxkrpqs&feature=related
I DID NOT CALIBRATE - JUST USED IT TO VIEW ROTOR SPEED REACTIONS ON THE VOLTMETER.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 13, 2008, 09:26:59 PM
Thanes HV coils aren't, they are only really HV when open circuit at which point they have little effect.
When they are shorted they have very little in the way of conventional voltage, which is to say an imbalance of charges, this is because every inch of wire resists current and every inch picks up an induced voltage, If the coil were 'perfect' there would be no 'charge imbalance' voltage.
However that is not the only kind of voltage that in fairness exists, if you know the ohms, the current and the 'left over' impedance you can tell how much voltage there is when shorted (Which IS NOT the same as the open circuit voltage due to the current in the generator coil cancelling the rotors field), and while it will be something it will not be near as much as when it is open circuit. (Another way to tell is to have another cowound coil (of a fractional number of turns) that remains open circuited and measured for voltage the whole time, you can even compare the voltage it has when the other coil is and is not shorted to see the voltage drop)
And what happens when you add 2 such coils together? (refering to 2 HV coils as in the uwave transformer demo)
From a standard electrical view, very little when shorted, the difference between shorting a coil through it's self and through an identical coil induced identically is zero because no charge imbalance voltage is generated.
And this other 'type' of 'voltage' is different in that it does not really add up, 1 + 1 is not 2, it's just 1 over here and 1 over here, A voltage is generated by each inch of wire and is 'expended' over that same inch of wire because the current is allowed to run at it's limit.
An analogy would be the difference between a 90 mile river and a 2 mile river, if water flows at the same speed and volume past a point it does not matter how much more river there is up stream or down stream. (until you build a damn, then it makes a huge difference, depending on how mach area you are willing to flood)
In the same way you will have the same number of electrons flow past a section of wire at the same speed in a 30 gauge wire shorted coil around a time varying magnetic field if it's 1 turn or 1,000 turns. (That is not actually quite true because 1,000 turns will create more counter emf, but a 1,000 single turn loops would be identican to a single 1,000 turn coil)
Thane, if you do not believe me then when being careful to run the motor at the same speed (while leaving the HC coils open) measure the current flowing through the HV coil shorted in series, and each one shorted individually, you will see the same current in both instances)
That is absolute fact ELECTRICALLY, however the aether is another matter entierly!
More turns means a faster more powerful flow.
Thanes recent results still insist an aether (or other 'out there' theory involving 'something else' flowing in the wire besides electric fields and electrons).
I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A VOTAGE IS SIMULTANEOUSLY INDUCED AND DROPPED ACROSS THE SAME COIL?
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/ohmlaw.html#c2
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 14, 2008, 06:49:36 AM
YOU CAN SEE HOW I DID IT HERE:
(YELLOW COIL TO THE RIGHT)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogLeKTlLy5E
AND HERE:
WHITE COIL TOP-MIDDLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vX8Cxkrpqs&feature=related
I DID NOT CALIBRATE - JUST USED IT TO VIEW ROTOR SPEED REACTIONS ON THE VOLTMETER.
Thane
Hmmm, well why didn't I think of that? ;)
That is more practical since I have noted with every frequency counting meter I have (including a new frequency bench meter!) a tendancy to measure the wrong 'signal' sometimes or become somehow confused at times.
So using voltage should be quite practical and hopefully less prone to error. (BTW if the optical tach was reading correctly at the time I have had the rotor up to 30 hz or 1800rpm without the effect being observed, and that is with 18 magnets on the rotor!)
One thing though, do you always have meters so far away because if they are closer things get screwy, or is it just how you prefer to work or for clarity of demo?
Well in an ideal shoted generating coil there is no voltage drop (or rise) at all, and the microwave coils would be decently close to 'ideal'.
At any rate that 'law' is extremely obvious and has no bearing on my point.
note: it is also possible that my usage of the word 'voltage drop' in the above sentance is compatible only to that link you posted and not applicable to how you or I may have applied the word. (mainly because there is no source of 'voltage' in the sense that website refers to in this cae)
Anyway I hope the point is clear, that electrically there can be no difference (as long as we keep things purely electrical) between a single shorted generating coil or 2 identically induced in series.
One other noteworthy thing is that if my Eyes don't decieve me the microwave setup is almost a magnetically closed circuit which is interesting, in part since if not required for the effect it is more practical.
Quote from: aether22 on May 13, 2008, 09:26:59 PM
Thanes HV coils aren't, they are only really HV when open circuit at which point they have little effect.
When they are shorted they have very little in the way of conventional voltage, which is to say an imbalance of charges, this is because every inch of wire resists current and every inch picks up an induced voltage, If the coil were 'perfect' there would be no 'charge imbalance' voltage.
However that is not the only kind of voltage that in fairness exists, if you know the ohms, the current and the 'left over' impedance you can tell how much voltage there is when shorted (Which IS NOT the same as the open circuit voltage due to the current in the generator coil cancelling the rotors field), and while it will be something it will not be near as much as when it is open circuit.
@aether, I'm not followign this sorry. I thought that if any coil is shorted its voltage must
always be
zero (if its a prefect short of course) - even though the coil itself isn't "perfect" (meanign it has resistance and reactance). What's that other kind of voltage thats not zero? Is it to do with the aether flow? IS there the same effect in the bi-torroid transformer? Can you send me link to get info about all this, sorry to bug you.
-Mike
dup post sorry something broken in website editor prvew thing
@aether22!
Just remembered this morning. My first test didn't work with the 1/4 " wheel wobble and was very disappointed. Amazing how you forget after the excitement of acceleration. When I was able to adjust it to 1/8" and was able to move coil closer, then I got acceleration. It must be a requirement with our less sensitive motor/controller combination.
Good Luck,
Larry
Quote from: aether22 on May 14, 2008, 07:11:18 AM
One thing though, do you always have meters so far away because if they are closer things get screwy, or is it just how you prefer to work or for clarity of demo?
@aether22:
I think he puts the meters so far away so he and the meters don't get hit with flying debris!
Thanesian Evolution: the distant are more likely to survive to reproduce...
:D
-MI
Quote from: springfield on May 14, 2008, 09:44:03 AM
@aether, I'm not followign this sorry. I thought that if any coil is shorted its voltage must always be zero (if its a prefect short of course) - even though the coil itself isn't "perfect" (meanign it has resistance and reactance). What's that other kind of voltage thats not zero? Is it to do with the aether flow?
No, voltage generally refers to potential difference, a charge imbalance.
However if this is our ONLY definition of voltage then we have a problem because electrical power only exists if we count voltage and current, you can not calculate power (or energy) with just current.
And there is voltage in a shorted coil however unmeasurible, and the power in say a shorted coil with 1 amp flowing can only be known by solving ohms law, and as we can not directly measure voltage we must know the resistance and the current, a super conductive coil, or a copper coil or a nicrome shorted coil all with one amp flowing all have very different levels of electrical energy and that difference is voltage only in an unmeasured form or if you like a 'potential' form since unless you increase resistance at one point it isn't conventionally measurible.
Quote
IS there the same effect in the bi-torroid transformer? Can you send me link to get info about all this, sorry to bug you.
-Mike
I know of no link that mentions this.
But one point I would make is that 'electron volt' is used to measure the energy in an electron flying through space and it is a measure of speed not charge imbalance or pressure.
But at this point you will need to either think about it, research it, or just believe me. (or disbelieve me)
Because while I have no doubt that any 'sane' and knowledgible physicist or electrical engineer would agree I can't back up what i am saying other than by logic.
Quote from: LarryC on May 14, 2008, 09:50:45 AM
@aether22!
Just remembered this morning. My first test didn't work with the 1/4 " wheel wobble and was very disappointed. Amazing how you forget after the excitement of acceleration. When I was able to adjust it to 1/8" and was able to move coil closer, then I got acceleration. It must be a requirement with our less sensitive motor/controller combination.
Good Luck,
Larry
That might be it.
I can't reduce the wobble as it is simply the shape of the rotor, but i can get the coil closer.
It had to be a bit distant because the rim of the wheel would cut the wire before the core would be as close as i could get.
I may however try to get the magnets sitting further out either by having a stack or replacing with a thicker magnet.
Also the size of the transforner cores may help reduce sensitivity to being too close. (plus as much as i dislike the wobble it did work for Thane and with fewer magnets, though my wobble is about 1/4 of an inch like your's)
Quoteand that is with 18 magnets on the rotor!)
IS THAT 18 x 1 OR 6 x 3 BECAUSE I WOULD SUGGEST THE LATTER.
QuoteOne thing though, do you always have meters so far away because if they are closer things get screwy, or is it just how you prefer to work or for clarity of demo?
I PUT THE METER BOARD FAR AWAY SO THAT THE PEOPLE I WAS DEMO-ING TO COULD STAND BESIDE ME AND CLEARLY SEE THAT I WAS NOT TRYING TO PULL A "FAST ONE".
IN HINDSIGHT I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN WALKING ON WATER AT THE SAME TIME AS WELL!
Thane
AETHER,
DO YOU HAVE A HARDWARE STORE CLOSE BY WHERE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO PURCHASE THE SAME STEEL PIECES IN MY ORIGINAL PROTOTYPES?
LARRY ARE THESE WHAT YOU USED AS WELL?
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 14, 2008, 07:15:59 PM
IS THAT 18 x 1 OR 6 x 3 BECAUSE I WOULD SUGGEST THE LATTER.
Neither, I went with 8 x 2.
Quote
I PUT THE METER BOARD FAR AWAY SO THAT THE PEOPLE I WAS DEMO-ING TO COULD STAND BESIDE ME AND CLEARLY SEE THAT I WAS NOT TRYING TO PULL A "FAST ONE".
IN HINDSIGHT I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN WALKING ON WATER AT THE SAME TIME AS WELL!
Thane
Come on, clearly he has just taped a bunch of Jesus lizards to his shoes!
And the water isn't turning into wine, only grape juice, what a crock.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 14, 2008, 07:20:52 PM
AETHER,
DO YOU HAVE A HARDWARE STORE CLOSE BY WHERE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO PURCHASE THE SAME STEEL PIECES IN MY ORIGINAL PROTOTYPES?
LARRY ARE THESE WHAT YOU USED AS WELL?
Thane
Please clarify: 'SAME STEEL PIECES IN MY ORIGINAL PROTOTYPES?'
Quote from: OilBarren on May 14, 2008, 07:20:52 PM
AETHER,
DO YOU HAVE A HARDWARE STORE CLOSE BY WHERE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO PURCHASE THE SAME STEEL PIECES IN MY ORIGINAL PROTOTYPES?
LARRY ARE THESE WHAT YOU USED AS WELL?
Thane
Not sure if exactly as your original, but the specs follow:
The core is 5" long using 1/8" thick flat bar from Home Depot to create a 1 1/4" by 1 1/8" oval to try to match the 1 1/8" cups.
Widths in sequence were 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1, 3/4, 1/2 across the outer ends of the core. No 1 1/8" available.
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 14, 2008, 08:12:43 PM
Not sure if exactly as your original, but the specs follow:
The core is 5" long using 1/8" thick flat bar from Home Depot to create a 1 1/4" by 1 1/8" oval to try to match the 1 1/8" cups.
Widths in sequence were 1/2, 3/4, 1, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/4, 1, 3/4, 1/2 across the outer ends of the core. No 1 1/8" available.
Larry
Well if Thane is referring to the coil core, I used a 1 inch diameter quite long mild steel rod.
Quote from: aether22 on May 14, 2008, 07:25:49 PM
Neither, I went with 8 x 2.
Come on, clearly he has just taped a bunch of Jesus lizards to his shoes!
And the water isn't turning into wine, only grape juice, what a crock.
er, 9x2 rather.
For some reason I am unable to edit that post.
Just a test. I have never noticed this before but I seem to be unable to edit anything other than the last 2 posts.
Probably in reply to the rather mean spirited editing I have seen one or twice where someone will delete all of their previous posts.
hmmm, Ok well it is not based on the last 2 posts since now the last 3 are able to be modified, odd.
Thane, can you please clarify how you cut up the transformer core, and are you using any of it in the generator.
Are you telling me that you bought the 'laminations' that we see in the microwave video? (though the microwave generator would not be IMO one of your "ORIGINAL PROTOTYPES")
If so any info on these should help me source them which I expect I can do. (even if that was not what you were talking about it is still clear they are not a part of the cut up transformer core)
Are these hardware store purchased laminations the core the microwave coils are threaded on, or are they on a remaining portion of the transformer core?
I also notice there is a gap between the coil cores and the bridging laminations.
Any clarification would be much appreciated.
I have one transformer and have sourced another 4! microwave ovens and if none of them have working suited sec. coils then I have sourced 2 microwave transformers, one of 92 ohms another of 102 ohms which I can purchase affordable enough.
QuoteAny clarification would be much appreciated.
MY SUGGESTION - FOLLOW LARRY'S ADVICE ABOUT THE CORE MATERIAL.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 14, 2008, 10:15:25 PM
MY SUGGESTION - FOLLOW LARRY'S ADVICE ABOUT THE CORE MATERIAL.
Thane
Well not really possible since Larry created an Oval shaped core to replicate a cylindrical core.
And I am trying to do something utterly different with square cores.
One very easy to answer question: Thane, in the microwave based video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI ) are the HV and HC transformer coils still on the original transformer laminations?
Or did you make up a new core from pieces bought from a hardware store or the likes?
I can now partially reply to my own question.
I picked up 2 microwave oven transformers (herafter called MOT's) and one had a secondary coil of 150, the other was 95.
So now I have 2 which are within a few ohms of 100 ohms and will together be pretty close to 200 ohms total.
So I took the 150 ohm MOT as the odd man out and applied my angle grinder, turns out the I bar is easily removed by grinding the weld that holds the I bar in place, after doing just one side I was able bend the I bar up easily and the welding on the other side broke.
Now I have an E with a primary and secondary on it, the HC primary is on last in all cases and that seems to agree with Thanes video.
While I would have enjoyed clarification what seems to be the case in Thanes video is that the coils are still on the center bar of the E that they came on and still in the same order.
It also appears that Thane has cut off the sides of the E leaving something like a T.
This cut is the one I am a little wary of as you must cut through the whole piece of steel and if you go .2 of a mm too far you will have killed the secondary coil.
I could ask Thane if making this cut is really required, however I guess I am unlikely to get an answer I like since the only answer I would like is "I tested it with them on and it worked so for fun I cut them off anyway".
But feel free to speak up!
I guess the outer corner is the best place to attack as the wire hopefully won't be in the outer corners.
But the safest would be to cut in between the primary and secondary as there is a spaced gap between the coils, but that will only take it off part way.
After writing the word safest above (in relation to angle grinders) my mind welt to the subject that I pulled the guard off my angle grinder years ago, so figured I'd research the subject and sure enough I will be positioning the disk away from me and seriously consider if the $20-$30 cost of buying a new one is worth the danger!
Thane then has some I shaped steel pieces he is using as laminations to act as a bridge between the 2 microwave coils, however if this is required is unclear since there is a gap of 3 or more mm between the coil cores and the bridge, so first I will try it without this bridge unless Thane indicates it is required.
I can't see any reason not to get the microwave version together tomorrow, although my time estimates are not that trust worthy.
BTW RCH, hope you have not left the thread? (admittedly I went quiet far longer)
Quote from: aether22 on May 15, 2008, 04:24:34 AM
I could ask Thane if making this cut is really required, however I guess I am unlikely to get an answer I like since the only answer I would like is "I tested it with them on and it worked so for fun I cut them off anyway".
Does that mean you would prefer and accept a likeable untruth, over an unlikeable truth? :P
no, it means I'd rather just assume it needs it and cut it off risking damage to the coils than increase the odds of failure.
Quote from: aether22 on May 15, 2008, 05:58:51 AM
no, it means I'd rather just assume it needs it and cut it off risking damage to the coils than increase the odds of failure.
Interesting, I also wondered about the complete process of getting the MOT ready. What's keeping the coils from sliding off the E, so you could cut safely? If they don't, you can use a hacksaw for the final cuts.
Also, on your rotor you may be able to get the cups more even by varying there depth according to the wobble position.
Can you post any pictures of your rotor/motor?
On these MOT's it seem they will require cupped rectangular magnets with MOT's at rotor angle to take full advantage.
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 15, 2008, 10:01:06 AM
Interesting, I also wondered about the complete process of getting the MOT ready. What's keeping the coils from sliding off the E, so you could cut safely?
I'm not sure what is stopping them, but it is stopping them. (Tried to use a screw driver to pry the primary off but it would seemingly take more force than I am happy using)
Quote
If they don't, you can use a hacksaw for the final cuts.
Good idea, ever since I saw the episode of the Simpsons where homer changed his name to Max Power I and my family have jokingly used it as a name for me. I honestly hadn't thought of using the hacksaw ;)
Quote
Also, on your rotor you may be able to get the cups more even by varying there depth according to the wobble position.
Tune it by putting washers in the cups you mean?
Problem is that will tend to unbalance the wheel badly giving it bad speed wobbles, although I suppose I could add a washer to the outside of the opposing cup.
Quote
Can you post any pictures of your rotor/motor?
I don't have a digital camera, I do however have a webcam, I can install it onto the laptop and use it to capture video and stills.
However I plan on waiting until I have the microwave experiment runnig, at which point the video will hopefully be of a successful replication.
Quote
On these MOT's it seem they will require cupped rectangular magnets with MOT's at rotor angle to take full advantage.
Larry
Please clarify 'rotor angle'.
As for shape I agree only Thane continued to use the same 1 inch round ones so there is no need to switch.
@All,
Just wanted to add to test data: Using the rotor without the motor running, I tested a cupped 1/8" neo against a non-cupped 1/8" neo and observed the following: The cupped 1/8" neo had approximately 50% increase in attraction to the core as opposed to a non-cupped 1/8" neo?
@aether22,
It seems the post modify availability is now associated with the time elasped since posting and not the number of post after your post.
Regards,
Larry
@aether22
Tune it by putting washers in the cups you mean?
Yes, but use lightweight plastic washers or wood shims and balance as needed.
On these MOT's it seem they will require cupped rectangular magnets with MOT's at rotor angle to take full advantage.
Please clarify 'Rotor angle'.
Rotor angle, same as Thane's recent Mega MOT stator monster which matches his 6 spoke rotor angle. That may be why he's too busy right now to answer many questions.
Larry
Ah, yes naturally, the stators should be 60 degrees apart so that when one is faced with a north the other has a south.
Ah, but I guess you mean also the angle they are on, following the curve of the rotor.
Personally I will not bother since Thane didn't initially.
DEAR A22,
HERE IS A COIL THAT I RIGGED UP FOR YOU AND TESTED THIS MORNING.
I CAN SENT IT TO YOU (1 WEEK - 10 DAYS) OR YOU CAN MAKE ONE JUST AS EASILY THAT IS GUARANTEED TO GIVE YOU ACCELERATION.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 15, 2008, 08:05:22 PM
DEAR A22,
HERE IS A COIL THAT I RIGGED UP FOR YOU AND TESTED THIS MORNING.
I CAN SENT IT TO YOU (1 WEEK - 10 DAYS) OR YOU CAN MAKE ONE JUST AS EASILY THAT IS GUARANTEED TO GIVE YOU ACCELERATION.
Thane
Please do send it.
I do not have a clue why my huge (mostly) super neatly wound almost 600 ohm monster fails but since it does I feel little driving me to wind another one as that may fail for the same unknown reason.
Send away, and sure the microwave attempt might work but I would very much like to have a neat single coil that does the job.
My only thought is if you are going to send it, maybe just send a Ryobi 110v 60hz bench grinder, I can't feed it 60hz but the voltage will need to be transformed anyway so it will remove the last possible cause of failure. (I pretty much have the transformer angle covered)
Larry, if you are following me along on the MOT route, I have a few tips.
First as I said by grinding off the weld of at least one side of the I bar you can pry it up and snap the weld on the other side, I'd add though that some won't play that game and require taking the weld off the other side also and then convincing with a hammer ;)
But as for taking an angle grinder to the sides of the E, please ensure you have the transformer securely in a vice and use both hands to hold the grinder.
I broke a wire in the primary (HC) coil by having the angle grinder kick the transformer on to the floor, and minced some wires in the secondary coil when it flipped the transformer. (as for the primary it doesn't matter much as i was able to find one of the wires that were broken was long enough to use as the new end of the coil so it's only a few turns short. As for the secondary coil somehow miraculously the ohm meters still reads the same, but if the worst comes to the worst I will be able to do much the same)
Quote from: aether22 on May 15, 2008, 10:55:42 PM
Larry, if you are following me along on the MOT route, I have a few tips.
Yes, would like too if you have a good source for cheap MOT's. Would appreciate if Luc (the MOT collector man) knows of any.
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 15, 2008, 11:55:02 PM
Yes, would like too if you have a good source for cheap MOT's. Would appreciate if Luc (the MOT collector man) knows of any.
Thanks,
Larry
Well I rang around appliance repair places, got 2 free ones and another place happy to sell me them for $25 a piece.
I won 2 in online Auctions (not yet picked them up and unless I brick one of these may not need to) for $2 and $10. (both had faults but neither sounded like the HV transformer)
Another is in your kitchen, they are very bad for your health and that has been proven, kill it and use it's parts.
Finally I am not sure if they have them everywhere but in Auckland anyway there are 'inorganics' which is once a year everyone puts out stuff like old electronics, sofas, fridges and other general junk. if you spot one then you can pick up some microwaves. (However when I tried this once I found that the transformers had already been removed by scavengers trying to sell the copper, but still a diode and HV cap if of use possibly, mainly though I was trying to scavenge flybacks at the time)
BTW I have had to stop since my angle grinder has ended up grinding it's self so much that the disk no longer cuts deep enough, so as the disk costs almost as much as a cheapie grinder I may as well get a second one with guard on, makes sense to have one on and one off for when the guard gets in the way.
Quote from: JustMe on May 15, 2008, 08:05:22 PM
DEAR A22,
HERE IS A COIL THAT I RIGGED UP FOR YOU AND TESTED THIS MORNING.
I CAN SENT IT TO YOU (1 WEEK - 10 DAYS) OR YOU CAN MAKE ONE JUST AS EASILY THAT IS GUARANTEED TO GIVE YOU ACCELERATION.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D4047.0%3Battach%3D23401%3Bimage&hash=016faf5505ec0a1009fb54a4fb34980c2fcbf768)
Thane
Open magnetic interface using heel end core configuration with coil at close end to magnet face. Looks very familiar to me. That's a hop in the right direction .. KneeDeep
Quote from: hoptoad on May 16, 2008, 05:28:35 AM
Open magnetic interface using heel end core configuration with coil at close end to magnet face. Looks very familiar to me. That's a hop in the right direction .. KneeDeep
YES THE SAME - ONLY DIFFERENT.
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 16, 2008, 05:59:53 AM
YES THE SAME - ONLY DIFFERENT.
Thane
:D :D :)
P.S. I noticed a lot of empty magnet cups in the photo.
When they are filled, electrical O/P will increase dramatically, but so will rotor/stator drag. However the O/P frequency per RPM will rise in direct relation to the increase in magnet pairs, and you should still achieve acceleration with a meaningful electrical load without a full S/C being required.
Cheers
Quote from: aether22 on May 15, 2008, 08:27:50 PM
My only thought is if you are going to send it, maybe just send a Ryobi 110v 60hz bench grinder,
SURELY THERE MUST BE A CHEAPER ROUTE FOR YOU TO OBTAIN A 1/3 HP CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR - RATHER THAN HAVING ONE SHIPPED HALF-WAY AROUND THE WORLD?
ULI IS SCHEDULED TO COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY IN A WEEK OR TWO - SO CAN I ASK HIM TO BRING IT TO YOU?
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on May 16, 2008, 05:28:35 AM
Open magnetic interface using heel end core configuration with coil at close end to magnet face. Looks very familiar to me. That's a hop in the right direction .. KneeDeep
My failed monster was also, incredibly long heel.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 16, 2008, 07:14:41 AM
SURELY THERE MUST BE A CHEAPER ROUTE FOR YOU TO OBTAIN A 1/3 HP CAPACITOR START INDUCTION MOTOR - RATHER THAN HAVING ONE SHIPPED HALF-WAY AROUND THE WORLD?
Sure, but not one that is 110v.
But don't send it with this coil, but if things don't work out I will look for a 1/3HP cap start induction motor and I won't find any in NZ or even AU so will need it shipped from US/CA. (China seems a poor choice)
Quote
ULI IS SCHEDULED TO COME TO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY IN A WEEK OR TWO - SO CAN I ASK HIM TO BRING IT TO YOU?
Thane
Ah, now that sounds like a good idea.
The cost shipping from AU to NZ should be a lot less.
Quote from: aether22 on May 16, 2008, 07:39:44 AM
My failed monster was also, incredibly long heel.
Obviously something was wrong with your monster, else it wouldn't have failed. ??? :P
Wrong diet perhaps. :D :D
P.S Have you heard the expression.... All things in moderation
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on May 16, 2008, 08:26:28 AM
Obviously something was wrong with your monster, else it wouldn't have failed. ??? :P
Wrong diet perhaps. :D :D
P.S Have you heard the expression.... All things in moderation
Cheers
Toads mostly, I tried to stop him honest!
Most likely either the core supports too much 'low voltage' current or it has too much non induced impedance.
And yet I have little confidence in either theory.
But I got the MOT cores done (mostly) and so should get stuff going in the morning. (hopefully this weekend will be the one I actually have some free time)
Quote from: aether22 on May 16, 2008, 12:28:58 AM
Well I rang around appliance repair places, got 2 free ones and another place happy to sell me them for $25 a piece.
I won 2 in online Auctions (not yet picked them up and unless I brick one of these may not need to) for $2 and $10. (both had faults but neither sounded like the HV transformer)
Another is in your kitchen, they are very bad for your health and that has been proven, kill it and use it's parts.
Finally I am not sure if they have them everywhere but in Auckland anyway there are 'inorganics' which is once a year everyone puts out stuff like old electronics, sofas, fridges and other general junk. if you spot one then you can pick up some microwaves. (However when I tried this once I found that the transformers had already been removed by scavengers trying to sell the copper, but still a diode and HV cap if of use possibly, mainly though I was trying to scavenge flybacks at the time)
BTW I have had to stop since my angle grinder has ended up grinding it's self so much that the disk no longer cuts deep enough, so as the disk costs almost as much as a cheapie grinder I may as well get a second one with guard on, makes sense to have one on and one off for when the guard gets in the way.
Thanks, I'll check some of the sources out.
Don't have a grinder, but I've used a reciprocating saw with a metal cutting blade, after getting the cut started with a hacksaw. Don't think it would work well on the welds, but good on the laminate.
Larry
Quote from: aether22 on May 16, 2008, 08:48:12 AM
But I got the MOT cores done (mostly) and so should get stuff going in the morning. (hopefully this weekend will be the one I actually have some free time)
I have a little proceedure for mot cores.... use a 3/64th Zip cut blade, hold the core in a vise with a
piece of sacrificial angle iron positioned over the weld so as the thin blade rersts on the angle iron as a guide to exactly groove the weld.
Do both welds then strike the weld with a chisel and the "I" section will pop off.
With the core in the vise pry up on all four corners of the primary to break it free and it should lift off. Remove the two shunts and take out the heater winding (the 3 or 4 turn coil) The secondary can be slid off the core at this point... with some difficulty...put it over two blocks and drive the core down out of it. (Remove the ground wire rivet or grind it off, first)
With the core free, use a power metal cutting band saw to cut the legs off. Note that the saw will also pull or loosen the laminations so have a piece of scrap metal clamped on each side of the cut.
When reinstalling the coils use a thin wedge to hold the coil in place or just gaffer tape it to the core.
You get a nice pre-wound coil but the core area is rather large for this application.
Ron
Lord Thane, of the hill
Well I redid my set up... new open rotor, cup magnets and a wooden base.
(//)
At somewhere around 3K RPM it will accelerate when both mot secondary coils are shorted in series.
Note the 'proper' pot magnets with a 1/16th plastic spacer around the magnet?
Ron
The funny thing on the stick is my rpm coil, lol
Quote from: i_ron on May 16, 2008, 01:27:16 PM
Well I redid my set up... new open rotor, cup magnets and a wooden base.
At somewhere around 3K RPM it will accelerate when both mot secondary coils are shorted in series.
Glad you got positive results, but it is odd that you need such speeds.
Not sure what speeds Thane used for the MOT version but I don't think it is that high.
Have you tried to limit the speed more?
If I must get to those RPM's with my MOT setup it's going going to work very well, it will destroy it's self much past 2000 RPM I would guess. (been up to 1800rpm apparently)
I would not add that the reason I am reluctant to try Larry's idea of adding non magnetic spacers to the rotor is that currently only magnetic forces hold the magnets on.
Oh well, hopefully the coil Thane is sending me should work if the MOT's don't.
Quote from: aether22 on May 16, 2008, 05:44:58 PM
I would not add that the reason I am reluctant to try Larry's idea of adding non magnetic spacers to the rotor is that currently only magnetic forces hold the magnets on.
Hi Aether22,
Strapping tape that is commonly available has over 100 LBS per inch strength. If you use 1 cup per spoke with shim, with several wrapping both horizontal to the shaft and vertical to the rim and the cupped magnet within the rim, then the rotor weld or the motor shaft would break first.
Regards,
Larry
PS: Congrat i_ron and thanks for additional MOT cutting info!
Quote from: LarryC on May 16, 2008, 06:33:31 PM
Hi Aether22,
Strapping tape that is commonly available has over 100 LBS per inch strength. If you use 1 cup per spoke, with several wrapping both horizontal to the shaft and vertical to the rim and the cupped magnet within the rim, then the rotor weld or the motor shaft would break first.
Regards,
Larry
PS: Congrat i_ron and thanks for additional MOT cutting info!
Well it worked for you so I'll give it a try.
Quote from: i_ron on May 16, 2008, 01:27:16 PM
Lord Thane, of the hill
Well I redid my set up... new open rotor, cup magnets and a wooden base.
(//)
At somewhere around 3K RPM it will accelerate when both mot secondary coils are shorted in series.
Note the 'proper' pot magnets with a 1/16th plastic spacer around the magnet?
Ron
The funny thing on the stick is my rpm coil, lol
NICE WORK THERE ROCK'IN RONNY HACKJOB!
THAT IS ONE BEAUTIFUL ROTOR - BUT WHY DID YOU LET
RED GREEN FINISH IT OFF FOR YOU? HE HAS HIS OWN OVER UNITY DEVICE? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJJrjDI5xSQ
AT ANY RATE I SUGGEST "SMALLISH" MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS FOR ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO TRY THIS AT HOME.
Thane
@i_ron,
A few questions to compare performance:
1 What are you using to control the speed?
2 What size are your magnets? I got better results with 1/8 cupped neos, then with 1/4 neos on back a cup.
3 What is the weight of your new rotor?
Thanks,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 17, 2008, 09:53:53 AM
@i_ron,
A few questions to compare performance:
1 What are you using to control the speed?
2 What size are your magnets? I got better results with 1/8 cupped neos, then with 1/4 neos on back a cup.
3 What is the weight of your new rotor?
Thanks,
Larry
@i_ron:
4. What's the new rotor made of???
Quote from: aether22 on May 16, 2008, 05:44:58 PM
Glad you got positive results, but it is odd that you need such speeds.
Aether,
If you look back at Thanes chart you will see that he was running at 3400 RPM.
Ron
Quote from: OilBarren on May 16, 2008, 06:57:12 PM
NICE WORK THERE ROCK'IN RONNY HACKJOB!
snip
AT ANY RATE I SUGGEST "SMALLISH" MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS FOR ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO TRY THIS AT HOME.
Thane
Glad you like it Pal,
I feel I am in hysteresis mode now, but one step at a time I guess?
What is the gauge of the wire in that single coil, the one possibly for Aether? is that meter set on ohms?
I had seen the Red Green vid, pretty cool, I can identify with that....
Ron, basking in the spring like coast weather
Hi sir I-Ron
You don't know me 8) but I heard a lot about you! Good quality replications!
I also made a thiny some time ago. See it here:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
You see it accelerate to double rpm while doing a real 50watt load.
No additional (above idle) power is being fed to the motor during the vid.
What ya think?
Steven.
The sanding man
Quote from: LarryC on May 17, 2008, 09:53:53 AM
@i_ron,
A few questions to compare performance:
1 What are you using to control the speed?
2 What size are your magnets? I got better results with 1/8 cupped neos, then with 1/4 neos on back a cup.
3 What is the weight of your new rotor?
Thanks,
Larry
Hi Larry
1) Variac (variable transformer)
2) I am using the Lee Valley 1/8th by 1" neo's, and stacked two high (12 magnets for a six station
wheel) The cup is home made and is 1 1/8th bore and 3/16th deep...(ha ha, those ottawa moguls
though they could legislate us into metric...) with a plastic bush around the two magnets.
3) It is made as a steel fabrication, machined all over and "sort of" balanced, it weighs 2050 Kg's
Ron
That's what I call a rotor!
"it weighs 2050 Kg's"
lol
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 17, 2008, 06:55:20 PM
Hi sir I-Ron
You don't know me 8) but I heard a lot about you! Good quality replications!
I also made a thiny some time ago. See it here:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
You see it accelerate to double rpm while doing a real 50watt load.
No additional (above idle) power is being fed to the motor during the vid.
What ya think?
Steven.
The sanding man
Nali 2K, who ever you are, thank you for posting that incredible link, that is mind boggling,
nice workmanship too!, just wood for the end plates but I can get a hint of some nice machining on
the rotor. Just the way it runs and accelerates shows some care has been taken, good work!
What do I think? I think the hysteresis theory is alive and well. Unless there is more to that
generator than can be seen in the vid...? is it one of those anti Lenz designs? This might account
for a portion of that acceleration.... To be honest with you I just don't know.
I keep hoping that Thane will hit the magic numbers with a formula that we all can duplicate. His
high turns ratio is something I have not tried before... and is proving interesting.
Anyway, welcome to the group and thanks for posting, probably Thane will have some questions?
Cheers,
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 17, 2008, 06:23:32 PM
If you look back at Thanes chart you will see that he was running at 3400 RPM.
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the answers!
Yes, that was the RPM for the high speed test, but look further back, the original acceleration was noted around 400.
Quote from: i_ron on May 17, 2008, 07:00:37 PM
3) It is made as a steel fabrication, machined all over and "sort of" balanced, it weighs 2050 Kg's
Obviously, that was just a typo as we all make. Nobody is rotating a car.
Another question because the results seem a little unusual. What is the air gap between the magnets and the core?
Regards,
Larry
PS: Enjoyed the joke: Ottawa moguls though they could legislate us into metric. Yes, but sometimes we could use the additional accuracy.
Now for something completely different...
I didn't get any work done on it yesterday, in part because my new bed arrived and I was tidying and making it all nice, I had the same bed for over 20 years, it was broken (so I put in bracing) and rather sad but i loved it, but when I found it was growing mold inside it I knew I needed a new bed.
So the first night in a different bed and I didn't fall asleep all that well and I happened on a thought I have had before, a thought maybe half the age of the (old) bed.
But this time I applied it slightly differently and instead of coming to the mildly inconclusive conclusion I normally came to instead I found that it must work.
The first part many people must have thought of before, it is simply that as most people are aware the engines of a plane do not provide enough thrust to counteract it's weight, exceptions such as the Harrier Jump Jet and Osprey are quite rare. but the thrust can give enough forward motion for the wings to lift the plane and even make it swiftly rise.
So let's preform a quick thought experiment.
You are in a tower and you see a plane fly past, you have a spear gun with a rope attached and you shot it at the plane, you tie the other end to a pole and the plane now flies circles around the tower, you observe that the planes propeller provides 10 pounds of thrust for every 100 pounds of the planes weight. (I have no idea if 1/10th is enough but we will say it is for now)
We will say the planes weight is 1,000 pounds.
Now you cut the plane free before the pilot calls the cops on you, and you get out your credit card, make a call and you order a Helicopter to get you off the tower (since aerial spraying had killed all moths in the area anyway, LOTR joke), you note that before you get on it weighs precisely 1,000 pounds with the propeller providing all 1,000 pounds of force to keep it hovering there.
You then consider what would have happened if you stripped the helicopter and the plane down to just the essentials, say 2 planes (for balance) rigidly attached to the tower, drop the fuselage so it's just 2 props and 4 wings providing 2,000 pounds of lift, let's say the 'planes' now weight 1,000 pounds leaving 1,000 pounds of extra lift. (just to make it clear the planes now resemble an extra wide helicopter rotor blade which is propelled by comparatively small propellers)
Now let's do the same with the helicopters, remove the tails so we will again need 2 helicopters, one with rotor blades spinning clockwise and the other counter clockwise, chances are we will have a bit more weight we could not remove due to the larger engines so we will say we have 1,300 pounds of helicopter left with 700 pounds of excess lift.
So now we effectively have 2 helicopters, one made from 2 planes and one made from 2 heli's.
One can take 1,000 pounds of extra payload with propellers providing 200 pounds of trust.
The other can take 700 pounds of extra payload with the rotor blades providing 2,000 pounds of thrust.
Pretty interesting eh?
Now to my mind this would also be OU, but only if a plane is and and it may not be OU any more than the increased force from a lever or gear system is, but one thing it is without doubt is more practical! Getting more lift with smaller engines!
And all that is required for it to be definitively true is for planes to be able to fly in circles without the lift miraculously disappearing, and that seems as close to a sure thing as you can get.
They say a picture is worth 1,000 words so maybe I should have shut up and just posted the picture.
Now this is shamefully off topic and I am just sharing here because I don't care what random people think, I'm curious what you guys think, it's not only not the right thread but almost entirely the wrong site.
In the unlikely event this thing creates any more than about 3 posts it will at least need a thread of it's own and I'll probably ignore said thread because I am far more enthralled with Thanes device.
Which with I_Ron's success I don't think anyone has tried a halfway close reproduction and failed to find the effect beside myself!
One last point is that in a way this is already a reality.
The gyrocopter uses a small prop with not nearly enough power to lift the whole weight of the craft and like a plane uses it to gain speed, which causes the rotor (which is the same as a helicopter rotor) to autorotate fast enough to lift the craft.
The catch is that the Gyrocopter needs forward movement to keep the blades rotating so it can't do VTOL, but if I understand it the blades are with the forward movement turning about fast enough to keep it in the air if it were not moving. (if that makes any sense)
James bond flew a Gyrocopter in 'You only live twice'.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 17, 2008, 07:11:18 PM
That's what I call a rotor!
"it weighs 2050 Kg's"
lol
Steven
LOL, well so it should... it's 300 meters across...obviously I wasn't born to this metric puzzlement, what ever those little things are that add up to nearly five POUNDS... micro kilo grams ? You see
on the scale it says in big letters that it is a KILOGRAM scale.... and the numbers read up to 2000... it is only when you read the very fine print that it says it is a 2.2 Kg scale,
Oh, I guess that should be 300 milli meters, damn, so confusing....lets just say 10 inches.
Ron
QuoteAnyway, welcome to the group and thanks for posting, probably Thane will have some questions?
Cheers,Ron
NO COMMENT - SPIDEY SENSE TINGLING.
Thane
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 17, 2008, 06:55:20 PM
Hi sir I-Ron
You don't know me 8) but I heard a lot about you! Good quality replications!
I also made a thiny some time ago. See it here:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RevUpUnderLoad.wmv)
You see it accelerate to double rpm while doing a real 50watt load.
No additional (above idle) power is being fed to the motor during the vid.
What ya think?
Steven.
The sanding man
@Nali2001
Finally someone achieving similar results to my own. Acceleration with a useful O/P, without resorting to complete short circuit to achieve that acceleration.
Is that a universal motor you're using in your video?
Is it a single O/P coil assembly?
What is the DC resistance of the coil?
Do you know what the inductance of the coil is?
How many magnet pairs on the rotor?
Have you tried incremental loading to see what the minimum amount of O/P power is required from your coil for the acceleration to kick in?
Have you actually measured the voltage/current and therefore O/P power from the coil during loading by the globe?
Have you measured (electrical) I/P power in relation to O/P power to determine total (electrical) system transfer efficiency?
Lot's of questions, I know, but empirical data is desireable in order to develop a greater understanding of the effect.
Cheers and KneeDeep.
Quote from: aether22 on May 17, 2008, 09:58:43 PM
...
So now we effectively have 2 helicopters, one made from 2 planes and one made from 2 heli's.
One can take 1,000 pounds of extra payload with propellers providing 200 pounds of trust.
The other can take 700 pounds of extra payload with the rotor blades providing 2,000 pounds of thrust.
Pretty interesting eh?
Now to my mind this would also be OU, but only if a plane is...
I don’t think you need to consider them in pairs so here’s the way I see it with just one of each. Double up all the numbers for pairs:
The plane:
1. 100 lbs of forward thrust provides 1000 lbs of upwards thrust, in your example.
2. If the plane has a total weight of 1000 lbs, it will fly at a constant altitude.
3. If you reduce the plane’s mass (and therefore weight) by 500 lbs, then if it keeps going at the same forward speed it will accelerate upward because there is excess upwards force. (force = mass x acceleration).Â
4. If you add a payload of 500 lbs, it will stay at a constant altitude because the upward thrust again exactly matches the total weight of the plane + payload.
The helicopter:
1. The rotors provide 1000 lbs of upward thrust in your example.
2. If the helicopter has a total weight of 1000 lbs, it will hover at a constant altitude
3. If you reduce the helicopter’s mass (and therefore weight) by 350 lbs, then if it keeps its rotors turning at the same rate it will accelerate upward because there is excess upwards force. (force = mass x acceleration).
4. If you add a payload of 350 lbs, it will stay at a constant altitude because the upward thrust again exactly matches the total weight of the helicopter + payload.
Note that in both cases, the additional upward thrust (and therefore payload capacity) is accounted for purely and simply by the removal of mass from the machine. The appearance that they behave differently is an illusion.
This is a very instructive analogy because it invokes the same reasoning that all the coil-and-magnet OU devices use. And, as you suggest, if the coil-and-magnet devices are OU, then so is an airplane. Is an airplane an OU device? I don’t think so.
Quote from: LarryC on May 17, 2008, 07:56:09 PM
Hi Ron,
snip
Another question because the results seem a little unusual. What is the air gap between the magnets and the core?
Regards,
Larry
Larry,
The gap is 1/8th (.125 inches, long live imperial!)
Ron
NOW... (above corrected) if I could just tame those decimal points, lol.
Quote from: i_ron on May 18, 2008, 11:42:30 AM
The gap is 1/8th (.125 inches, long live imperial!)
Very nice wheel if you can get that close.
However, it may be to close, causing a clogging effect. You may want to try 1/4, 5/16, 3/8 to see if you can get the effect at a lower rpm. Thane had mentioned previously that to small an air gap can cause a clogging effect.
Larry
Quote from: OUman on May 18, 2008, 09:21:54 AM
Poo
Sorry, I don't reply to spooks, and you totally missed my point which is what you are after all paid to do.
The point is you can make a VTOL vehicle with the efficiency of a plane rather than a helicopter.
And there is a 'Hidden' point also.
But as for the non professional participants of this list I'd like to know what you think, Thane, JustMe, Larry etc... Do you non understand it, not care, think it too off topic? I guess not care.
That's the trick with a 'discovery', you can have something great but the world isn't all that open to ideas, you have people who do their best to misunderstand and tear down, people who might care about you but not the idea, people who care about the subject but would not listen or really want change etc...
And I'm too busy with this to consider mocking up a model to prove my point. (not that anything really needs proving, the concept proves it's self)
And given this how many ideas are lost from disinterest including possibly the person who thought of them?
I could think about that but I don't care I've got a MOT generator to assemble!
Quote from: LarryC on May 18, 2008, 04:29:06 PM
Very nice wheel if you can get that close.
However, it may be to close, causing a clogging effect. You may want to try 1/4, 5/16, 3/8 to see if you can get the effect at a lower rpm. Thane had mentioned previously that to small an air gap can cause a clogging effect.
Larry
LARRY & RON,
I BELIEVE THAT RON'S HIGH SPEED REQUIREMENT IS DUE TO THE "HEIGHT" OF HIS TRANSFORMER CORES - I POSTED A SIX CORE SETUP EARLIER WHICH CAUSED
DECELERATION BECAUSE THE CORES WERE TOO LARGE AND THE TURNS RATIOS WERE TOO SMALL.
I SPENT A WEEK TRYING TO SORT THEM OUT - AND FINALLY TODAY I WAS ABLE TO GET ACCELERATION AFTER BREAKING THEM IN HALF - "HEIGH WISE".
I WILL POST SOME PHOTOS TOMORROW.
LARRY WAS CORRECT WHEN HE SUGGESTED RECTANGULAR MAGNETS FOR THE MOTS.
AFTER A WEEK OF "FAILURES" I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT IF THE CORES ARE TO BIG THERE IS NOT ENOUGH OF A FOCUSED EFFECT ON THE ROTOR'S MAGNETS.
Thane
PS
AETHER MAKE YOUR PLANE THINGY SUCH THAT IT CAN'T CRASH PLEASE.
Quote from: aether22 on May 18, 2008, 05:53:51 PM
The point is you can make a VTOL vehicle with the efficiency of a plane rather than a helicopter.
And there is a 'Hidden' point also.
I could think about that but I don't care I've got a MOT generator to assemble!
Actually, the engineering and aerodynamics were overwhelming.
For instance, it may be fairly easy to set up a support structure for the two heli's to lift the tower with tips at lets say 1 foot distance apart, but the two wings have many problems.
For example, if the two airplane wings were used with the same structure with bearing support to rotate, then if the airplane sections was run at the straight line speed that created the 1000lb lift, it would not come close to the 1000lb lift. Because of the rotational speed difference along the length of the wing, the inside of the wings would have almost no lift, while the outside would have the most, but not even close to 1000lb.
If you tried to increase the speed high enough to get the 1000lb lift, the massive wing would rip itself apart long before. You would be forced to have an extremely long support (bridge) to come close to the lift of the original plane on a straight line. The massive weight of the support structure would lose all benefits.
How's that MOT coming?
Regards,
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 18, 2008, 07:18:26 PM
if the airplane sections was run at the straight line speed that created the 1000lb lift, it would not come close to the 1000lb lift.
Yes but the solution is trivial.
Change the chamber of the wing along the length, or have the average equal to the straight line speed.
Not really an issue IMO.
Quote
Because of the rotational speed difference along the length of the wing, the inside of the wings would have almost no lift, while the outside would have the most, but not even close to 1000lb.
If you tried to increase the speed high enough to get the 1000lb lift, the massive wing would rip itself apart long before.
I disagree, but the answer is to make it more suited.
The fact that a gyrocopter works shows that you can have a plane type thrust and a helicopter type rotor provide the lift so these objections are not really hitting at the heart of the matter, just a few mundane engineering issues.
Quote
You would be forced to have an extremely long support (bridge) to come close to the lift of the original plane on a straight line. The massive weight of the support structure would lose all benefits.
Again I disagree, in fact you could have a saucer shaped caft with a low friction ring around the outside with aerofoils (wings) extending out, with propellers on it keeping the ring wing thing turning.
The engineering challenges which I am personally sure are mundane and easily solved are not the point, the point is that something 'strange' is going on.
Again comparing a helicopter to a gyrocopter, both have lift provided by the same rotor blades but one needs (as a bogus example) 1/10th the power to keep aloft, why?
Why is 1/10th the motor power suddenly enough to turn those blades just because the power is directed sideways?
Quote
How's that MOT coming?
It will be doing better as soon as Thane clarifies 'Halve the height'.
Thane, do you mean you removed half the laminations but left copper coils as they were?
Quote from: aether22 on May 18, 2008, 09:07:53 PM
Yes but the solution is trivial.
Change the chamber of the wing along the length, or have the average equal to the straight line speed.
Not really an issue IMO.I disagree, but the answer is to make it more suited.
The fact that a gyrocopter works shows that you can have a plane type thrust and a helicopter type rotor provide the lift so these objections are not really hitting at the heart of the matter, just a few mundane engineering issues.Again I disagree, in fact you could have a saucer shaped caft with a low friction ring around the outside with aerofoils (wings) extending out, with propellers on it keeping the ring wing thing turning.
The engineering challenges which I am personally sure are mundane and easily solved are not the point, the point is that something 'strange' is going on.
Again comparing a helicopter to a gyrocopter, both have lift provided by the same rotor blades but one needs (as a bogus example) 1/10th the power to keep aloft, why?
Why is 1/10th the motor power suddenly enough to turn those blades just because the power is directed sideways?
It will be doing better as soon as Thane clarifies 'Halve the height'.
Thane, do you mean you removed half the laminations but left copper coils as they were?
It all sounds great, but I think that you should focus on your device. :)
Keep up the good work.
Quote from: aether22 on May 17, 2008, 09:58:43 PM
Now for something completely different...
@aether22. This web page may provide some additional insight into your airplane / helicopter thought experiment:
http://www.heli-chair.com/aerodynamics_101.html
In particular, it shows that the same 300hp engine can generate 1300 pounds of thrust with a 78" airplane propeller and 3400 pounds of thrust with a 30' helicopter rotor.
Quote from: aether22 on May 18, 2008, 09:07:53 PM
Thane, do you mean you removed half the laminations but left copper coils as they were?
Reduce the overall impedance. I've already pointed out that the impedance of the coil/core is due to two things, the amount of core mass and the number of coil turns. And I've also indicated on numerous occasions that high impedance is not required nor is it desirable if you want a useful level of useable O/P
This effect will occur with most coils provided the impedance of the coil is met with the correct RPM (frequency) for that impedance.
If the impedance is too high however, no amount of upward adjustment on the RPM will invoke the effect if it isn't already apparent, and neither will it increase the effect markedly if it is marginally apparent.
Cheers
P.S.
That's because impedance increases with higher frequency. If the impedance is already too high, then it's just going to maintain that "too high" relationship as the frequency increases.
Core to coil mass ratio is a major parameter for optimum O/P performance.
Quote from: hoptoad on May 19, 2008, 02:38:14 AM
Reduce the overall impedance.
It's not the impedance.
It's the aetheric pressure, a smaller diameter makes for a denser swifter aetheric flow. (IMTCOOC)
Quote
I've already pointed out that the impedance of the coil/core is due to two things, the amount of core mass and the number of coil turns. And I've also indicated on numerous occasions that high impedance is not required nor is it desirable if you want a useful level of useable O/P
Then why did the automotive coil work?????
It has a far far larger impedance.
Quote
This effect will occur with most coils provided the impedance of the coil is met with the correct RPM (frequency) for that impedance.
And how does that agree with the observation that something is moving through the shaft from generator to motor?
Quote
If the impedance is too high however, no amount of upward adjustment on the RPM will invoke the effect if it isn't already apparent, and neither will it increase the effect markedly if it is marginally apparent.
I suspect that your effect is the same as Thanes and that due to your design you created a great enough aetheric force it pushed through the plastic which is not unexpected in the least.
Some of your observations may play a role in the effect only under certain conditions, I am not discounting what you found but I do not think thanes device would work if I assumed things work the way you state.
And before anyone orders me back to work, I have got everything setup for the test with the MOT and just need to let glue dry and then it's pretty much done. (Gorilla Grip, not bad, not brilliant, I am wanting to try out the JB weld someone mentioned, plus has my initials!)
Though I am discouraged by i_Ron's 'success' which seems to indicate a requirement for unreachable speeds I am encouraged by Thane's modification in reducing core size, hopefully it is archived in the way I imagine.
Thane, tell me when you send that coil and what the shipping costs are, that and I need to send you a bit more for the Rotor, send to Luc's again?
It seems I should just setup an automatic payment ;)
Or have you got enough funding not to need my my pittance I say hopefully ;)
Quote from: aether22 on May 19, 2008, 04:28:42 AM
It's not the impedance.
It's the aetheric pressure, a smaller diameter makes for a denser swifter aetheric flow. (IMTCOOC)Then why did the automotive coil work?????
It has a far far larger impedance.
Yes it worked, though poorly, at S/C, without any useful O/P, other than observing acceleration. (which is still cool).
It also shows what I've been saying all along, that the effect will occur
in any coil within a range of parameters. The primary parameter related to frequency. (RPM and number of magnet pairs)
Everything has an optimum range, and going too high in impedance will push the effect out of optimum range. Same applies to going too low. The frequency required at very low impedance is much higher which requires higher RPM and/or greater number of magnet pairs.
You should also have noticed in the automotive coil that the high impedance was more a result of the great number of coil turns (with a high DC resistance) hence a greater coil mass compared to a much smaller core mass than the ones Thane was previously using.
Remember, impedance is not just derived from the coil turns, it is derived from the size (mass) of the iron core as well.
An important factor is the ratio of impedance created by the iron core to the impedance created by the copper coil turns.
Another important factor is the actual coil mass to core mass ratio. If you want a useful O/P and acceleration, that is!
In open circuit mode, the automotive coil voltage is very high. But put a mere 10 watt 12 volt globe on the O/P and the voltage will most likely drop well below the 12 volts needed to drive the globe at full wattage, because the DC resistance alone combined with the inductive reactance will inhibit the current immensely.
I have never said that impedance is the cause of the effect. Impedance is one of the keys to understanding both the cause of the effect, and harnessing it usefully.
Quote from: aether22
And how does that agree with the observation that something is moving through the shaft from generator to motor?I suspect that your effect is the same as Thanes and that due to your design you created a great enough aetheric force it pushed through the plastic which is not unexpected in the least.
Some of your observations may play a role in the effect only under certain conditions, I am not discounting what you found but I do not think thanes device would work if I assumed things work the way you state.
I have never once stated that something is moving through the shaft from generator to motor?
Thane may or not have said something to that effect but I have never said that.
As for assumptions, don't make any. Instead, build, gather empirical data, learn from it and share it. You will only be able to predict what is likely to happen with a given configuration, when you do understand the underlying cause of the effect. And that will only happen when you've studied it under a wide range of loading, impedance and frequency conditions. Studying it yourself will either reinforce your aether theory or rule it out.
I personally do not think that aether has the slightest bearing on this effect.
Quote from: aether22
Though I am discouraged by i_Ron's 'success' which seems to indicate a requirement for unreachable speeds I am encouraged by Thane's modification in reducing core size, hopefully it is archived in the way I imagine.
Why would you be discouraged by i_Rons success. ? i_Rons and Nali2001, both had positive results which confirm that the effect is easily achievable with a variety of coils and motors. And 3,000 RPM is everyday stuff, hardly an unreachable speed. The most common speed range for industrial motors is from 1500 to 5000 RPM unloaded. Hardly frightening stuff. Use a smaller diameter rotor if the idea of huge centrifugal forces bothers you.
Thanes reduction in core size amounts to a
reduction in core contributed impedance, and total impedance also, if he wound the same number or less of turns on the smaller core. If he rewound the entire length of wire used on the larger core onto a smaller core, then the coil contributed impedance will have increased significantly due to a greater number of windings over a smaller diameter, but the core contributed impedance would still have reduced. More importantly, the ratio of coil impedance and mass to core impedance and mass, in either case, would have increased.
Cheers
Quote
Yes it worked, though poorly, at S/C, without any useful O/P, other than observing acceleration. (which is still cool).
DEAR HOPTOAD,
I KNOW YOU ARE A KEEN TEACHER - SO I WOULD ASK YOU RESPECTFULLY TO STOP INFERRING THAT THERE IS "
NO USEFUL OUTPUT."
IT HAS
NO EFFECT ON ME AS I KNOW IT TO BE INCORRECT BUT YOU MAY NEGATIVELY INFLUENCE ANOTHER READER - WHICH WOULD PUT YOU IN
PB, OUmon TERRITORY.
THE FACTS ARE:
1)
WHEN PROPERLY MATCHED THE HV COIL CAN COMPLETELY
ELIMINATE THE HC LENZ EFFECT AND PRODUCE ANY AMOUNT OF OUTPUT POWER DESIRED.
2)
HE HV COILS CAN ALSO
EXCEED THE HC LENZ EFFECT AND CAUSE THE SYSTEM TO ACCELERATE UNDER HC LOADING - WITH
CONTINUALLY INCREASING OUTPUT.
3)
THE HV OUTPUT CAN BE
STEPPED DOWN TROUGH AN ADDITIONAL TRANSFORMER OR
STORED IN A CAPACITOR PROVIDING
USEFUL OUTPUT.
4)
THE HV OUTPUT IS OPTIMIZED AT SHORT CIRCUIT IF THAT IS WHAT IS INTENDED (PROVIDING
USEFUL ACCELERATION AS ABOVE) BUT IT CAN ALSO BE
EMPLOYED THROUGH A LOAD WHICH WOULD ONLY SERVE TO DIMINISH THE EFFECT SOMEWHAT - WHICH IS
STILL USEFUL IF IT SERVES A DESIRED PURPOSE.
IT APPEARS THAT YOU HAVE SOME PERSONAL INVESTMENT IN THIS THREAD WHICH SEEMS TO CLOUD YOUR OBJECTIVITY - AND MAKES YOUR POST RATHER COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU TAKE ULI UP ON HIS OFFER AND GO AND ASSIST HIM AND
DO SOMETHING REAL - HAVE YOU CONSIDERED HIS OFFER AND IF NOT WHY? - AGAIN STARTING TO SOUND PBish. TALK IS CHEAP!
ALSO WHY NOT BUILD ONE OF THESE DEVICES AND CONTRIBUTE IN THAT WAY - YOU CAN SEE HOW BADLY AETHER IS F_CKING UP BUT HE IS STILL CONTRIBUTING LOTS OF USEFUL STUFF. I_RON AND LARRY'S POSTS ARE ALSO TANGIBLE AND CREDIBLE BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING THIS -
NOT SOMETHING SAME ONLY DIFFERENT.
NOW AETHER,
CAN YOU TELL US IN 1000 WORDS OR LESS HOW YOU THINK AETHER IS PRODUCED?
WHAT EFFECT IS HAS?
AND HOW IT CAN BE OPTIMIZED?
THE CONCEPT OF AETHER HAS NO RELEVANCE FOR ME AND YOU MAY AS WELL BE TALKING ABOUT BUBBLE GUM.
AND NO - I AM NOT FINANCING YOUR RESEARCH (ANYMORE THAN I ALREADY HAVE) BY DIVERTING MORE FUNDS TO COVER THE COST OF SHIPPING YOU SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN BUILD IN 1 - 2 HOURS - IF YOU FOLLOW THE SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS.
ULI IS COMING THIS WEEK I BELIEVE AND I WILL ASK HIM IF HE WANTS TO DO IT.
FINALLY FOR ANYONE READING THIS WHO WANTS TO HAVE A
GUARANTEED WORKING DEVICE OF THEIR OWN - WITHOUT THE BURDEN OF DOING THE ACTUAL WORK (OR FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS) - BUT WHO
STILL WANTS TO LEARN - THEN LET ME KNOW AND I WILL BUILD AND SHIP YOU ONE WITH THE APPROPRIATE COSTS.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on May 17, 2008, 10:38:42 PM
@Nali2001
Finally someone achieving similar results to my own. Acceleration with a useful O/P, without resorting to complete short circuit to achieve that acceleration.
Is that a universal motor you're using in your video?
Is it a single O/P coil assembly?
What is the DC resistance of the coil?
Do you know what the inductance of the coil is?
How many magnet pairs on the rotor?
Have you tried incremental loading to see what the minimum amount of O/P power is required from your coil for the acceleration to kick in?
Have you actually measured the voltage/current and therefore O/P power from the coil during loading by the globe?
Have you measured (electrical) I/P power in relation to O/P power to determine total (electrical) system transfer efficiency?
Lot's of questions, I know, but empirical data is desireable in order to develop a greater understanding of the effect.
Cheers and KneeDeep.
Hi there Hoptoad,
-Yes that is a 'universal motor' It's from a washing machine and unlike these induction motor they can be 'truly' be set to any rpm.
-Hmm o/p coil? Not sure what you mean. See the attached pictures below.
-There are two coils in parallel and each is 2.3 ohm (20Gauge wire)
-Well the rotor is a double rotor as seen on the pictures. 6 magnets 'pairs' or 12 magnets total (one magnet is 20x40x10mm)
-With this design that acceleration always kicks in as far as I know. I did make another core model and that indeed required at least an 700rpm+ before acceleration happens.
Well the big dumper is that although the acceleration is cool and all. It is only a ?relief? on the eddy drag and such the core sets up to the motor in the first place. I never found a combination where the acceleration (in watts) was more than the drag (in watts) induced due to the solid steel. I mean don't freaking underestimate the eddy currents (and such) in solid steel, it's huge. In this model each core introduces like 50watts+ of eddy currents drag. And in any sensible generator the core must obviously induce more output power then the amount of drag loses, it's own core causes. In his system you see like 50watts out and the motor is pulling like 300 watts. So if you look at it this way the generator has no output. The presents of the core costs like 50watts drag and such, but it outputs also like 50wattt So there is no net gain/output.
Plus the core got freaking hot I tell you. In like 2 minutes the cores are like 70 degrees Celsius. So you say use laminated cores then, well I did and indeed they have 10 times less drag losses and have great output, far exceeding the max output of the solid steel cores. BUT the acceleration is also totally gone. And the thing acts like a normal generator. Load it, and it loads the prime mover down. So in the mean time I have come up with the conclusion. ?Yes you can have a under load accelerating machine, but (in watts) it will only accelerate up to the point that it equals the core drag losses (in watts)?.
Regard,
Steven
QuoteSo you say use laminated cores then, well I did and indeed they have 10 times less drag losses and have great output, far exceeding the max output of the solid steel cores. BUT the acceleration is also totally gone. And the thing acts like a normal generator. Load it, and it loads the prime mover down. So in the mean time I have come up with the conclusion. ?Yes you can have a under load accelerating machine, but (in watts) it will only accelerate up to the point that it equals the core drag losses (in watts)?.
THIS SMELLS LIKE A VERY CAREFULLY PLANNED ATTEMPT TO DERAIL THIS THREAD BUT FORTUNATELY - I (AND I_RON) HAVE BEEN USING LAMINATED CORES FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW AND:
THE ACCELERATION IS
NOT TOTALLY GONE
AND THE THING DOES
NOT ACT LIKE A NORMAL GENERATOR
LOADING THE GENERATOR DOES
NOT LOAD THE PRIME MOVER
IT WILL ACCELERATE
BEYOND THE POINT EQUAL TO CORE DRAG LOSSES.
NICE TRY THERE SCUMBAG!
TRY AGAIN...
Thane
LAMINATED CORES CAUSING ACCELERATION CAN BE SEEN:HEREReply #1926 on: May 04, 2008, 02:03:57 PM
HEREReply #1939 on: May 05, 2008, 09:51:59 AM
HEREhttp://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4047.0;attach=23089
AND HEREhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
Somebody pooed in Thane's cornflakes today. :)
Quote from: JustMe on May 19, 2008, 10:43:09 AM
Somebody pooed in Thane's cornflakes today. :)
YES I AM CHANGING MY NICKNAME TO -
CRANKYPANTS!Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 19, 2008, 10:55:23 AM
YES I AM CHANGING MY NICKNAME TO - CRANKYPANTS!
Thane
Well, Crankypants, this thread can be neither collaborative or constructive if there's nobody left on it. :)
It seems to me that people who do different experiments with different setups and get different results shouldn't be viewed as the enemy. It's all instructive.
Quote from: OilBarren on May 19, 2008, 10:38:41 AM
THIS SMELLS LIKE A VERY CAREFULLY PLANNED ATTEMPT TO DERAIL THIS THREAD BUT FORTUNATELY - I (AND I_RON) HAVE BEEN USING LAMINATED CORES FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW AND:
THE ACCELERATION IS NOT TOTALLY GONE
AND THE THING DOES NOT ACT LIKE A NORMAL GENERATOR
LOADING THE GENERATOR DOES NOT LOAD THE PRIME MOVER
IT WILL ACCELERATE BEYOND THE POINT EQUAL TO CORE DRAG LOSSES.
NICE TRY THERE SCUMBAG!
TRY AGAIN...
Thane
LAMINATED CORES CAUSING ACCELERATION CAN BE SEEN:
HERE
Reply #1926 on: May 04, 2008, 02:03:57 PM
HERE
Reply #1939 on: May 05, 2008, 09:51:59 AM
HERE
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4047.0;attach=23089
AND HERE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7PBavkMGwI
Hi there Thane,
I do not expect to be believed on my word but it is not meant in any way to derail yo stuff or this thread.
This machine and observations were made long before your topic was opened on overunity.com
It was an attempt to replicate patent number 6208061
http://www.google.com/patents?id=AkYGAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6208061 (http://www.google.com/patents?id=AkYGAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6208061)
And then it used solid steel 'closed looped' cores see below pictures. In the pictures you also see a version using two laminated C cores to also close loop Lenz. Which in my tests also did not work for me.
Anyway I never got the same results as the patent described and so I started testing other core types like discussed earlier.
All of the models using solid steel cores did not work due to the reasons I feel valid stated earlier. But believe me that it is from my own observation and like said in the previous message
"I have come up with the conclusion" that means it is my conclusion.
That you got positive indications using laminated cores is good, and the main reason why I keep checking this thread almost daily.
Since you see, I do would like to build a workable no load generator.
Regards,
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 19, 2008, 09:30:00 AM
So in the mean time I have come up with the conclusion. ?Yes you can have a under load accelerating machine, but (in watts) it will only accelerate up to the point that it equals the core drag losses (in watts)?.
@nali, I noticed something interesting in your desing - it looks like the shaft and coupler are made of aluminium. Maybe thats the differnce because if you look a tthe videos you'll see that this machine relies on feedbak down the shaft back into the motor. It behaves diffrenlty is you use a brass shaft versus steel. So maybe if youre shaft is not steel thats why you get different results. Sorry if its a red herring but its just from the pics it looks like its alu.
-Mike
QuoteHi there Thane,
I do not expect to be believed on my word but it is not meant in any way to derail yo stuff or this thread.
This machine and observations were made long before your topic was opened on overunity.com
It was an attempt to replicate patent number 6208061... Which in my tests also did not work for me.
Anyway I never got the same results as the patent described and so I started testing other core types like discussed earlier.
PATENTS ARE WORTHLESS AND DON'T GUARANTEE SUCCESS.
IF YOU ARE SINCERE I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU TAKE A LOOK AT MY YOUTUBE DEMO VIDEO #4 AND THE TOROID GENERATOR PRESENTED HERE USING THE 4 x 2 SHADED POLE MOTORS. ONE EMPLOYS STEEL BARS AND ONE EMPLOYS LAMINATIONS - ONE HAS NO LENZ EFFECT AND THE OTHER ACCELERATES (WHEN IN SERIES).
I HAVE TRIED THE SAME OVAL CORES AS THE PHOTOS YOU POSTED AS WELL ALSO WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS.
QuoteAll of the models using solid steel cores did not work due to the reasons I feel valid stated earlier. But believe me that it is from my own observation and like said in the previous message "I have come up with the conclusion" that means it is my conclusion.
I ONCE BUILT AN AIRPLANE BASED ON AETHER22'S PLANS - AND IT CRASHED INTO OUmon"s HOUSE AND BURNT IT TO THE GROUND KILLING ALL HIS 10 CATS. IT'S MY CONCLUSION THAT AIRPLANES CAN'T FLY SAFELY OVER OUmon"s HOUSE.
YES IT'S A TOTALLY WRONG CONLUCION -
BUT IT'S MY WRONG CONCLUSIONQuoteThat you got positive indications using laminated cores is good, and the main reason why I keep checking this thread almost daily. Since you see, I do would like to build a workable no load generator.
Regards,
Steven
IF YOUR MACHINING WORK IS ANY INDICATION OF YOUR DESIRE THEN I AM CERTAIN THAT YOU WILL SUCCEED!
Thane
Quote from: OilBarren on May 19, 2008, 09:08:30 AM
YOU CAN SEE HOW BADLY AETHER IS F_CKING UP
Hey! What the, well, no no fair enough.
Quote
NOW AETHER,
Sir Yes Sir.
Quote
CAN YOU TELL US IN 1000 WORDS OR LESS HOW YOU THINK AETHER IS PRODUCED?
Aether is not produced it is all present.
Useful effects can be gained from compressing it (rarefying it?), energizing it (agitating it, creating eddies) and moving it. (moving it through matter energizes it also)
Magnets (or possibly the aligned spins) create an aether flow as well as a magnetic field (I think always) and aether flows induce other aether flows at 90 degrees and more so it seems when it it a time varying aether flow.
As passing the magnet past the coil establishes a momentary aether flow through the core, which induces a flow in the shorted coil, the more turns and tighter (ID) this coil is the more powerfully it creates an enhanced aether flow through core eventually enough to push through to the core.
Quote
WHAT EFFECT IT HAS?
It can do various things including sucking/pulling in magnetic (EM) fields or projecting them an unusual distance. (This might be how the motor torque increases)
I can think of many ways of how the aether might be increasing the motors output (as Vince seemingly measured and IMO you have also definitively proven to occur)
To find out what is happening I would suggest experiments that test the aetheric output on different electromagnetic setups, including stalled motors, motors of different types, setups with measurable losses from hysteresis.
The aether can have a million effects depending on what you are looking for and how it is setup.
Quote
AND HOW IT CAN BE OPTIMIZED?
I have answered this before and I may leave off some of the things mentioned last time since maybe they won't come to mind right now.
First there are the obvious and mundane options.
Increasing the number of turns, decreasing the coil/cores inside diameter, increasing the number of coils, increasing the speed and number of magnets, putting more 'Thanerators' in series and parallel, the former increasing how fast the aether flows the latter how much flows.
Finally giving the aether a more optimal path.
Now we have the less mundane ones, let's see.
Placing a sample of radioactive materials by the coils. (I have a collection of radium coated watch hands)
note: Similar effects may be gained by HV being applied in the right way, both of these things energize the aether possibly due to the speeding particles causing turbulence. (preferably 20KV+)
Adding a further shorted coil along the way to enhance it by the 90 degree effect, on the shaft maybe. (possibly in series with the generator coils)
Making a coil or a section of wire composed of wire tightly twisted so that the 2 wires are almost constantly crossing at 90 degrees. (the aforementioned coil could be made this way)
Also any other coil form that has wires cross at and angle, there are a number of them.
Putting metal particles in the path of the aether flow. (It will energize the aether which is a good thing and likely to increase the motors output, however it also slows the aether flow and so it may stop or reduce the effect by stopping the aether from getting to the motor)
Possibly putting something to attract the aether stream. (probably by tuning an element to a dominant aetheric disturbance, most likely this would only attract a thin spectrum of the energized aether. This effect is observed in radionics and in tuning radios with ground antennas, this could be as simple (and hence marginally effective) as a variable inductor/resistor/capacitor from the motor casing to ground.
Another possibility is to replace the solid cores with air cores as Hoptoad has used, this allows a clear path for aether flow.
And then the further possibility of filling the the hole with noble gas, carbon or bismuth, all of which should create an increased aetheric flow.
Another possibility is to have a voltage (of up to say 1KV) between the rotor magnets and the stator coils. (this will cause the aether to spiral as aether generally moves at right angles to an electric field and along a magnetic field)
There are also ways to make it possibly solid state and still produce the aetheric output, and other ways to increase the effect which are possibly more bother than they are worth such as having the magnets and coils radially aligned so the aether flow focuses more effectively in the shaft, and to add another coil to the shaft to stop the aether from being 'wasted' by pouring out the other end of the shaft if in fact that is occurring.
There are many other things that might work but that's a decent start, I will be trying to think of any other ways and keep you posted.
Quote
THE CONCEPT OF AETHER HAS NO RELEVANCE FOR ME AND YOU MAY AS WELL BE TALKING ABOUT BUBBLE GUM.
For me too initially.
Quote
AND NO - I AM NOT FINANCING YOUR RESEARCH (ANYMORE THAN I ALREADY HAVE) BY DIVERTING MORE FUNDS TO COVER THE COST OF SHIPPING YOU SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN BUILD IN 1 - 2 HOURS - IF YOU FOLLOW THE SIMPLE INSTRUCTIONS.
Are you withdrawing your offer to send it? (the coil you posted earlier)
I am happy to pay for everything but I think you are missing the point here. (I only mentioned that because a private message to you asking where you wanted me to send the rest of the money was met with no reply)
I have gone to real expense and effort to make a coil that matches your coil as close as I could, I got a close gauge of wire, a steel rod that except for being longer seems to match the rods you used initially (same diameter as the magnets).
I calculated the length would need to have the same length of wire that you used when you mentioned 27 gauge at 200 ohms. (hence my resistance turned out to be higher as I went with a metric version which is a little fatter than 30 gauge)
And yet I have multiple tap points so I can have a lower resistance and inductance, still nothing.
I had asked for more info on your coil but it was not forthcoming because 'it is easy, just wind it'.
So if you will give me enough info on the coil so I may build it then I will but this time I want much more info than just resistance. (inductance, turning direction, gauge, far more info on the core)
Is it possible I missed the simple instructions you refer to?
And an agreement that if I manage to hit a non working coil again you will send the one that does work.
I have tons of experiments I am waiting to do, mainly in the form of driving the generator by a belt (or maybe just isolating as the grass coupler did) and directing the aether into something other than the motor driving it.
Quote
ULI IS COMING THIS WEEK I BELIEVE AND I WILL ASK HIM IF HE WANTS TO DO IT.
FINALLY FOR ANYONE READING THIS WHO WANTS TO HAVE A GUARANTEED WORKING DEVICE OF THEIR OWN - WITHOUT THE BURDEN OF DOING THE ACTUAL WORK (OR FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS) - BUT WHO STILL WANTS TO LEARN - THEN LET ME KNOW AND I WILL BUILD AND SHIP YOU ONE WITH THE APPROPRIATE COSTS.
THANKS
Thane
Please tell me the costs of you sending a coil verified to work at 400-500rpm and hopefully 6 rotor magnets as the one you recently tested and photographed did.
QuoteIt seems to me that people who do different experiments with different setups and get different results shouldn't be viewed as the enemy It's all instructive..
NO I DON'T AGREE - SOME OF IT IS MEANT TO BE DISRUPTIVE AS WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED BEFORE - WHICH IS THE
ENEMY OF INSTRUCTION.
Thane
AETHER,
I MEAN NO DISRESPECT - F_CKING UP IS THE KET TO MY SUCCESS.
Thane
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 19, 2008, 09:30:00 AM
Hi there Hoptoad,
-Yes that is a 'universal motor' It's from a washing machine and unlike these induction motor they can be 'truly' be set to any rpm.
-Hmm o/p coil? Not sure what you mean. See the attached pictures below.
-There are two coils in parallel and each is 2.3 ohm (20Gauge wire)
-Well the rotor is a double rotor as seen on the pictures. 6 magnets 'pairs' or 12 magnets total (one magnet is 20x40x10mm)
-With this design that acceleration always kicks in as far as I know. I did make another core model and that indeed required at least an 700rpm+ before acceleration happens.
Well the big dumper is that although the acceleration is cool and all. It is only a ?relief? on the eddy drag and such the core sets up to the motor in the first place. I never found a combination where the acceleration (in watts) was more than the drag (in watts) induced due to the solid steel. I mean don't freaking underestimate the eddy currents (and such) in solid steel, it's huge. In this model each core introduces like 50watts+ of eddy currents drag. And in any sensible generator the core must obviously induce more output power then the amount of drag loses, it's own core causes. In his system you see like 50watts out and the motor is pulling like 300 watts. So if you look at it this way the generator has no output. The presents of the core costs like 50watts drag and such, but it outputs also like 50wattt So there is no net gain/output.
Plus the core got freaking hot I tell you. In like 2 minutes the cores are like 70 degrees Celsius. So you say use laminated cores then, well I did and indeed they have 10 times less drag losses and have great output, far exceeding the max output of the solid steel cores. BUT the acceleration is also totally gone. And the thing acts like a normal generator. Load it, and it loads the prime mover down. So in the mean time I have come up with the conclusion. ?Yes you can have a under load accelerating machine, but (in watts) it will only accelerate up to the point that it equals the core drag losses (in watts)?.
Regard,
Steven
Steven, what you observed is what many others have found.
It seems that the shorted coil is doing it's job and reducing core losses (which it should do as coils are induced to counteract (reduce) changes in flux and hence losses derived from changes in flux MUST also be reduced).
And so while it might come as a slight surprise that the new Lenz law losses are less than the reduction in core losses acceleration is not unexpected as losses are being reduced.
This is a point Thane needs to brush up on because on the face of it there is nothing setting Thanes effect apart from the possibly entirely conventional effect found by Steve, hoptoad and many others where shorted or loaded coils produce acceleration. (the greatest evidence in Thanes corner being the need for an all steel shaft in low pressure situations)
Thanes device is interesting because:
Halving the core height increases the effect.
Putting shorted coils in series increases the effect.
HV coils show the effect where HC coils do not.
Because he has show in some instances that the effect is only present when the shaft connecting the motor and generator is all steel.
And Vince has shown that motor torque is measurably increased!
And Thane has shown that one coil is enough with an all steel connection but that with 8 coils everything can be non magnetic.
It scares me when Thane forgets that it is only these nuances that prove his effect is not just a mundane expected conventional effect as he has done by saying that the brass coupler is ancient history (along with and thought that something is moving from the motor to the generator).
Sadly Thane seems directionless, making a gee wizz dune buggy etc... when all the effort should go on one thing only, testing the transmission of ??? (IMO aether) from the generator into the motor.
Do more to prove that something is transferring from the generator to the motor.
I have lots of experiments I have suggested but they have been ignored, clearly I need to carry them out.
QuoteAre you withdrawing your offer to send it? (the coil you posted earlier)
NO - NOT AT ALL BUT YOU COULD HAVE A WORKING MODEL IN A DAY OR TWO AS OPOSED
TO WAITING ANOTHER TEN - PLUS COSTS.
QuoteI am happy to pay for everything but I think you are missing the point here. (I only mentioned that because a private message to you asking where you wanted me to send the rest of the money was met with no reply)
I AM SORRY I THOUGHT I SAID SEND IT TO LUC TO PAY FOR HIS GAS.
QuoteI have gone to real expense and effort to make a coil that matches your coil as close as I could, I got a close gauge of wire, a steel rod that except for being longer seems to match the rods you used initially (same diameter as the magnets).
YES YOU DESERVE SOME CREDIT - CAN YOU POST SOME PHOTOS OF YOUR SET UP - BORROW OR STEAL A DIGITAL CAMERA?
QuoteI calculated the length would need to have the same length of wire that you used when you mentioned 27 gauge at 200 ohms. (hence my resistance turned out to be higher as I went with a metric version which is a little fatter than 30 gauge)
IT'S A BITCH I KNOW - IT TOOK ME 5 YEARS OF WINDING BEFORE I SAW WHAT I WAS AFTER AS WELL - PERHAPS WE CAN GET YOU UP TO SPEED SOONER.
Quote
And yet I have multiple tap points so I can have a lower resistance and inductance, still nothing.
I had asked for more info on your coil but it was not forthcoming because 'it is easy, just wind it'.
So if you will give me enough info on the coil so I may build it then I will but this time I want much more info than just resistance. (inductance, turning direction, gauge, far more info on the core)
Is it possible I missed the simple instructions you refer to?
And an agreement that if I manage to hit a non working coil again you will send the one that does work.
I THINK IT'S YOUR MOTOR OR SOMETHING ELSE?
QuoteI have tons of experiments I am waiting to do, mainly in the form of driving the generator by a belt (or maybe just isolating as the grass coupler did) and directing the aether into something other than the motor driving it.Please tell me the costs of you sending a coil verified to work at 400-500rpm and hopefully 6 rotor magnets as the one you recently tested and photographed did.]
I HESITATE TO CAUSE YOU TO INCUR FURTHER EXPENSE BECAUSE YOU MAY INDEED REQUIRE A DIFFERENT MOTOR - BUT I CAN'T BE SURE?
A RYOBI MOTOR WITH THIS COIL AND THE ROTOR YOU CURRENTLY HAVE WILL GIVE YOU RESULTS INSTANTLY BUT IT WILL COST $ 200 - 300 - MOSTLY IN SHIPPING COSTS. ULI MAY AGREE TO SHIP YOU ONE FOR $ 75 BUT DO YOU WANT TO WAIT OR PAY?
Thane
QuoteSadly Thane seems directionless, making a gee wizz dune buggy etc...
I AM GOING TO DRIVE MY DUNE BUGGY TO NEW ZEALAND AND KICK YOUR BUTT MISTER!
THEN ZAP YOU WITH MY AETHER - RAY GUN!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 19, 2008, 08:12:31 PM
NO I DON'T AGREE - SOME OF IT IS MEANT TO BE DISRUPTIVE AS WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED BEFORE - WHICH IS THE ENEMY OF INSTRUCTION.
Thane
Of couse you don't agree! Crankypantses NEVER agree. Crankypants.
In my opinion nobody you crankypantsed at today deserved it. But you seem much more cheerful now. Carry on. :)
Aether! Please send video of your fuckingupness. With audio! I want to hear you say "Thane - the cheek is in the mail, eh" with that inexcusable Kiwi accent.
Quote from: JustMe on May 19, 2008, 08:46:41 PM
Of couse you don't agree! Crankypantses NEVER agree. Crankypants.
In my opinion nobody you crankypantsed at today deserved it. But you seem much more cheerful now. Carry on. :)
I AGREE!
JM, TELL ME YOU WERE CHEERING FOR THE MOTHERLAND RUSSIA AND I WILL BE HAPY ONCE MORE?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 19, 2008, 08:37:46 PM
NO - NOT AT ALL BUT YOU COULD HAVE A WORKING MODEL IN A DAY OR TWO AS OPOSED
TO WAITING ANOTHER TEN - PLUS COSTS.
Well all in all even if the MOT's (which I am about to go and test as soon as I stop typing replies) do work I would still like to have a single reasonably compact coil that can demo the effect.
And so far I have no more info on how to make a working coil that I did when I made my current failed coil so considering the cost and time involved in a 'not so sure' thing I'd rather pay and call it my birthday present to myself than have to report 2 for 2 failed coils.
Quote
I AM SORRY I THOUGHT I SAID SEND IT TO LUC TO PAY FOR HIS GAS.
I'm sorry, I thought no reply was a sign you didn't care if I paid or not ;)
May have been some wishful thinking though.
Quote
YES YOU DESERVE SOME CREDIT - CAN YOU POST SOME PHOTOS OF YOUR SET UP - BORROW OR STEAL A DIGITAL CAMERA?
I will try the MOT's first which I hope to do today.
Which will hopefully mean the video will be of a successful setup.
No digital camera but I have a webcam and I can borrow a laptop so close enough.
Quote
IT'S A BITCH I KNOW - IT TOOK ME 5 YEARS OF WINDING BEFORE I SAW WHAT I WAS AFTER AS WELL - PERHAPS WE CAN GET YOU UP TO SPEED SOONER.
I hope!
Quote
I THINK IT'S YOUR MOTOR OR SOMETHING ELSE?
I HESITATE TO CAUSE YOU TO INCUR FURTHER EXPENSE BECAUSE YOU MAY INDEED REQUIRE A DIFFERENT MOTOR - BUT I CAN'T BE SURE?
That makes 2 of us.
I will try the MOT's.
If they do not work I will split the laminations in half as you did. (without changing the coil right?)
Quote
A RYOBI MOTOR WITH THIS COIL AND THE ROTOR YOU CURRENTLY HAVE WILL GIVE YOU RESULTS INSTANTLY BUT IT WILL COST $ 200 - 300 - MOSTLY IN SHIPPING COSTS. ULI MAY AGREE TO SHIP YOU ONE FOR $ 75 BUT DO YOU WANT TO WAIT OR PAY?
Thane
I'd say an instant yes to the $75.
I can of course get a Ryobi here but that's meaningless since it's a different voltage and frequency design so it may not compare.
For the $200-$300 the answer would be 'do you take monthly payments?'
It may be the coil.
it may be the motor.
It may be the input to the motor.
It may be the location or me (which doesn't bare thinking about).
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 19, 2008, 08:43:33 PM
I AM GOING TO DRIVE MY DUNE BUGGY TO NEW ZEALAND AND KICK YOUR BUTT MISTER!
THEN ZAP YOU WITH MY AETHER - RAY GUN!
Thane
;)
Seriously though i do think that to get anywhere with this effect we need to know how it comes about.
Continue to verify that something is moving from the generator to the motor.
Study the effect it has on the motor.
See if it has an effect on other things.
One thing though, I'd like to remind you of that test I suggested which you did like the sound of.
The testing the deceleration of the generator with the coils shorted and open.
If it is videoed there is not even a need to measure anything, just cut it at the same approximate speed both times and the sound and time it takes to come to a stop are sufficient to see how shorting effects it.
QuoteIt may be the coil.
it may be the motor.
It may be the input to the motor.
It may be the location or me (which doesn't bare thinking about).
PERHAPS YOU AIN'T GOT NO AETHER DOWN THERE?
PERHAPS CANADA HAS IT ALL
CAUSE WERE SO GOOD AT HOCKEY?
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 19, 2008, 09:18:11 PM
;)
Seriously though i do think that to get anywhere with this effect we need to know how it comes about.
NOPE I DISAGREE CAUSE I'M CRANKYpants AND ERECTIONLESS.
JM EXPECT SOME PHOTOS IN THE AM.
CHEERS
Thane
.
Test 1 with the MOT's is not so hot.
It was a quick and dirty test where I was shorting manually but got nothing.
The multimeter read 180hz when measuring the frequency at the rim, with 6 rotor magnets (previous tests had 18 but the MOT's suit a 6 magnet rotor) that's 3600rpm. (magnets multiply the number by 3 not 6 because, well it's complex but because I said so)
3600 rpm should be the absolute max speed for this so I'm not quite sure I trust it (it didn't seem that fast), but if I do maybe it didn't accelerate by being at almost sych speed already.
Next I'll try it with a little less power (still had to spin it to get it turning and it took over a minute to reach full speed) and with switches.
Oh, and the above test was carried out with the HC coils individually shorted until the end where I unshorted then but changing them from SC to OC made no impact.
So I am thinking it might be the motor.
I was only one able to get a slowdown with a shorted coil and that was (some time ago) when running the motor through the transformer AND the light dimmer which got some effect but still very little. (and the motor was so under powered it would not accelerate on it's own, I had to spin it by hand the the power would stop it from slowing down noticeably except when the coil was shorted which would cause a slow deceleration.
The thing is, IF it is the motor then it is likely to be the voltage and freq it is wired for that is the issue.
I have a Thane certified Rotor, if I get a Thane certified coil then the only thing really left to be wrong would be the motor.
So I'll swap the light dimmer for a transformer (and possibly also light dimmer) and put in switches and report back, I'll also try and run 2 different calibrated methods of determining rpm.
@Thane
DEAR HOPTOAD,
I KNOW YOU ARE A KEEN TEACHER - SO I WOULD ASK YOU RESPECTFULLY TO STOP INFERRING THAT THERE IS "NO USEFUL OUTPUT."
I am not a teacher, professionally or otherwise, unless of course someone learns something from me. :D
Yes I'm keen to see this effect optimised.
I'll qualify my statement that you object to by changing it to "not much useful electrical output".
14.9 watts electrical O/P is hardly something to crow about, if it takes 145 watts to maintain it.
Induction motors are not renowned for high efficiency, but they are still reasonably efficient at rated speed and loading, so that leaves in question the efficiency of the generator, and its contribution as part of the whole system efficiency.
Your own figures show a max total system electrical transfer of only 10.3% efficiency. I know you can do much better that.! And no doubt, you know you can too.
IT HAS NO EFFECT ON ME AS I KNOW IT TO BE INCORRECT BUT YOU MAY NEGATIVELY INFLUENCE ANOTHER READER - WHICH WOULD PUT YOU IN PB, OUmon TERRITORY.
I'm in Ozzie territory. Readers will make up their own minds whether something is negative or not, or erroneous or not etc ...
WHEN PROPERLY MATCHED THE HV COIL CAN COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE HC LENZ EFFECT AND PRODUCE ANY AMOUNT OF OUTPUT POWER DESIRED.
Please accept my advance order for a 60kWatt unit now!
IT APPEARS THAT YOU HAVE SOME PERSONAL INVESTMENT IN THIS THREAD WHICH SEEMS TO CLOUD YOUR OBJECTIVITY - AND MAKES YOUR POST RATHER COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
Of course I have a personal investment in seeing better technology for the future. Everybody does. As for objectivity, and whether my posts are counterproductive, you're entitled to your thoughts and opinions.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU TAKE ULI UP ON HIS OFFER AND GO AND ASSIST HIM AND DO SOMETHING REAL -
Your suggestion is duly noted. I've done something real already. My postings and opinions have not originated from a vacuum, nor are they based on pure theory. Like you, I've already spent a great deal of time, money and energy experimenting with real generating systems. And like you, I have made numerous observations, and come to my own conclusions. They may or may not be correct.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED HIS OFFER AND IF NOT WHY?
Yes
- AGAIN STARTING TO SOUND PBish. TALK IS CHEAP!
Tell that to a lawyer.
ALSO WHY NOT BUILD ONE OF THESE DEVICES AND CONTRIBUTE IN THAT WAY
Just because my models were built years ago, and are not currently available to be shown in a video or photo is a non issue. I have given very simple straight forward, easy to follow specifications, detailing core material, type, coil winding numbers, gauge, rotor type and construction etc ad nauseum.
Anybody who wanted to see for themselves whether my model worked in the way I claimed or not, can easily, without any ambiguity, repeat the model construction and experiment shown. And they can do it with all new materials on a budget of less than $100.
- YOU CAN SEE HOW BADLY AETHER IS F_CKING UP BUT HE IS STILL CONTRIBUTING LOTS OF USEFUL STUFF. I_RON AND LARRY'S POSTS ARE ALSO TANGIBLE AND CREDIBLE BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING THIS - NOT SOMETHING SAME ONLY DIFFERENT.
Is information only a positive contribution if it is derived from current physical models only ?
What about Nali2001? His model was constructed before he posted to this forum. And he showed video and photos. When he gave his honest opinion on what he thought caused the effect and released more detailed information about his setup, you resorted to personal attack by calling him a scumbag. Why?
The fact that he achieved acceleration using a non short circuit load with low impedance coils (in parallel), which also exhibited a reasonably useful level of electrical O/P from the same coils, (not separate coils), at the same time, should be cause for encouragement to him and anybody else wishing to build for themselves. Even if you don't agree with his prognosis of the effect and his conclusions.
Cheers all
I ran the wall power through a transformeer that put out about 130v AC (I forget just what the figure was) and then ran that through the Triac power controller.
I was able to observe a mild slowing down when the HC coils were shorted, but at any speed i was not able to find any speed difference with the HV coils were shorted positive or negative.
I have one question for Thane.
How large is the gap in your MOT generator (the small one preferably).
My thought is that the rotor Thane sent me may have the cups slightly too recessed and along with the wobble the magnets are not having enough of an influence.
I will consider splitting the cores as promised, using half the number of laminations assuming I understand what Thane did.
But first I'll make a video of all this crappy failure.
Which I am cringing at the thought of cause my workshop is very messy!
Quote from: aether22 on May 19, 2008, 11:16:25 PM
I have a Thane certified Rotor, if I get a Thane certified coil then the only thing really left to be wrong would be the motor.
WHAT FREQUENCY DO YOU USE THERE IN BAGGOTVILLE?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 06:59:47 AM
WHAT FREQUENCY DO YOU USE THERE IN BAGGOTVILLE?
Thane
50hz 240v
Quote from: aether22 on May 20, 2008, 06:33:06 AM
How large is the gap in your MOT generator (the small one preferably).
My thought is that the rotor Thane sent me may have the cups slightly too recessed and along with the wobble the magnets are not having enough of an influence.
I will consider splitting the cores as promised, using half the number of laminations assuming I understand what Thane did.
I SENT JM SOME PHOTOS OF COILS FOR POSTING.
AETHER TRY SOMETHING FIRST - CAN YOU MAKE YOUR ROTOR A 6 POLE ROTOR BUT USING 3 MAGNETS TO MAKE 1 POLE i.e. NNN, SSS, NNN, SSS, NNN, SSS ? AND USE WASHERS TO GET THE SPACING RIGHT?
IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY THIS IS THE ONLY WAY I WAS ABLE TO GET ACCELERATION OUT OF A MOT IN MY EARLIER DAYS.
NOW ALSO TRY SOMETHING ELSE - LOOK AT MY GOOD MOT TRANSFORMER PAIR AND NOTE THE AMOUNT OF BACK IRON AND ASK YOURSELF IF THIS HAS ANY EFFECT ON STORING AETHER OR BUBBLE GUM OR WHATEVER?
Thane
Quote14.9 watts electrical O/P is hardly something to crow about, if it takes 145 watts to maintain it.
Induction motors are not renowned for high efficiency, but they are still reasonably efficient at rated speed and loading, so that leaves in question the efficiency of the generator, and its contribution as part of the whole system efficiency.
YOU ARE EITHER IGNORANT OR DELIBERATELY NEGATING - POSTED DATA.
THE OVERALL EFFICIENCY OF THE SYSTEM IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE - WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS WHAT IS THE EFFECT UNDER LOADING.
QuoteYour own figures show a max total system electrical transfer of only 10.3% efficiency. I know you can do much better that.! And no doubt, you know you can too.
I AGREE - YOUR FOCUS HERE (10.3%) IS DECEPTIVE AND MISLEADING
QuoteI'm in Ozzie territory. Readers will make up their own minds whether something is negative or not, or erroneous or not etc ...
NOT TRUE - SOME PEOPLE ARE SWAYED AN THE WRONG DIRECTION AND THEN MAY HAVE TO UNLEARN WRONG TEACHING - WHICH DOES NOT SERVE THEM WELL.
QuoteIs information only a positive contribution if it is derived from current physical models only ?
ON THIS THREAD I WOULD SAY YES TO THAT - JUST AS THIS INFO WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE ON ANOTHER THREAD THAT FOCUSES ON ANOTHER TOPIC.
QuoteWhat about Nali2001? His model was constructed before he posted to this forum. And he showed video and photos. When he gave his honest opinion on what he thought caused the effect and released more detailed information about his setup, you resorted to personal attack by calling him a scumbag. Why?
BECAUSE MY OPINION (MY GUT FEELING) IS THAT NALI2001 IS NOT BEING STRAIGHT WITH US.
IT MAY TAKE SOME TIME TO CHANGE MY OPINION HOWEVER. - JUST LIKE IT IS MY OPINION THAT YOU USE THIS THREAD TO PROMOTE YOUR WORK INSTEAD OF STARTING YOUR OWN THREAD WITH THE APPROPRIATE FOCUS.
QuoteThe fact that he achieved acceleration using a non short circuit load with low impedance coils (in parallel), which also exhibited a reasonably useful level of electrical O/P from the same coils, (not separate coils), at the same time, should be cause for encouragement to him and anybody else wishing to build for themselves. Even if you don't agree with his prognosis of the effect and his conclusions.
- THERE IS ZERO ATTEMPT TO SHOW PRIME MOVE I/P
- NOR IS THERE ANY VERBAL AUDIO -
- AND THE SYSTEM APPEARS TO ACCELERATE BEFORE HE LIGHTS THE LIGHT
- AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT WORKS AS HE SAYS.
BUT THEN THAT'S JUST MY CONCLUSION - AND IT MY BE WRONG BUT AT LEAST I AM HONEST ENOUGH TO PUBLISH MY REAL NAME BEHIND MY WORK - WHICH IS THE REAL CLINCHER ON THE INTERNET WHERE EVERYTHING IS SUSPECT AND ONLY A FOOL WOULD BELIEVE OTHERWISE.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 07:30:43 AM
(re Nali's video):
- THERE IS ZERO ATTEMPT TO SHOW PRIME MOVE I/P
- NOR IS THERE ANY VERBAL AUDIO -
- AND THE SYSTEM APPEARS TO ACCELERATE BEFORE HE LIGHTS THE LIGHT
- AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT WORKS AS HE SAYS.
Thane
You have said on more than one occasion that it's a big mistake to measure the prime mover input - so why do you criticize Nali for not measuring it?
It's true that his acceleration slightly precedes the light. The system starts to accelerate, the voltage starts to rise, the filament starts to heat up, and then the light appears. In that order. That's normal, isn't it?
You don't believe it works as he says? Loading the generator causes the motor to accelerate. This is a replication of the effect you have observed, is it not? That's a
good thing isn't it?
But counter to that last point, if he wanted to fake it, it's possible that he has it wired differently - for example, suppose that his light is connected directly to the coil and the switch is wired across the light so that in position (a) the coil is shorted (and so is the light, so it's "off"), so the coil presents maximum drag; while in position (b) the switch is open-circuit, allowing the coil to supply current to the light, and at the same time
reducing the load and causing the motor to accelerate (standard Lenz). Impossible to tell. But it's impossible to tell from your own videos too - so absent other evidence, why not take his video at face value?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 07:30:43 AM
BUT THEN THAT'S JUST MY CONCLUSION - AND IT MY BE WRONG BUT AT LEAST I AM HONEST ENOUGH TO PUBLISH MY REAL NAME BEHIND MY WORK - WHICH IS THE REAL CLINCHER ON THE INTERNET WHERE EVERYTHING IS SUSPECT AND ONLY A FOOL WOULD BELIEVE OTHERWISE.
Thane
By the way, I might as well introduce myself.
I am on many email lists and make no secret of my name, but on here I'd have to sign my posts for anyone to know and I am simply not in the habit.
My name is John Berry, I'm Damn near 30.
I Live in Auckland New Zealand (Albany to be exact)
And I guess that's that.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 07:08:04 AM
I SENT JM SOME PHOTOS OF COILS FOR POSTING.
AETHER TRY SOMETHING FIRST - CAN YOU MAKE YOUR ROTOR A 6 POLE ROTOR BUT USING 3 MAGNETS TO MAKE 1 POLE i.e. NNN, SSS, NNN, SSS, NNN, SSS ? AND USE WASHERS TO GET THE SPACING RIGHT?
IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY THIS IS THE ONLY WAY I WAS ABLE TO GET ACCELERATION OUT OF A MOT IN MY EARLIER DAYS.
NOW ALSO TRY SOMETHING ELSE - LOOK AT MY GOOD MOT TRANSFORMER PAIR AND NOTE THE AMOUNT OF BACK IRON AND ASK YOURSELF IF THIS HAS ANY EFFECT ON STORING AETHER OR BUBBLE GUM OR WHATEVER?
Thane
I'll try the magnet thing and consider the 'back iron'.
I'll try and get the magnets a bit further out there.
But I am wondering if maybe the motor is either slightly too powerful (not to say I always feed it too much power) and or 240v 50hz designs have too many turns.
Because I should get more deceleration with the HC coils, although that would suggest also that maybe the magnets do not get close enough to the coil core either due to the recessed cups or wobble. (although it worked as is for Thane). And no it's that the coils aren't close enough, actually rubbing slightly as it turns.
Thane, can you tell me what the maximum gap between the rotor magnets and stator should be? (the maximum that you think would still work)
Just some extra info on me sys.
The airgap is over 10mm or else the core will be cooking in no time.
And yes if your system barely manages 50watt at like 10volt then yes a 55watt car bulb will not light up in a flash.
And cuz ya'll so nice:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
@All,
Below is a 123.6 Ohm coil wound in 37 minutes! Of course it took a half hour to set up the complete winding unit shown and I had parts from my first coil wind.
On the top end is a tape covered nail, which is chucked into a hand drill. On the bottom end is a nail, which is inserted in any hole available.
On each side of the coil is a taped cardboard template to retain the wire. Tape is used to pull the cardboard back so the wire doesn't catch.
The taped squares between the nails and cardboard are wooden chucks fitted to hold each end of the flat bar metal core.
Doesn't it look like a tower!
Well, in honor of aether22's flying thingy, I want to name it 'THE TRIVIAL MUNDANE AETHER TOWER OF WINDING POWER'. ;D
Tried some test with my two HV coils, but need more adjustment before reporting.
Larry
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 20, 2008, 05:20:19 PM
Just some extra info on me sys.
The airgap is over 10mm or else the core will be cooking in no time.
And yes if your system barely manages 50watt at like 10volt then yes a 55watt car bulb will not light up in a flash.
And cuz ya'll so nice:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
10mm is I think larger that it ever is on my setup.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 20, 2008, 05:20:19 PM
Just some extra info on me sys.
The airgap is over 10mm or else the core will be cooking in no time.
And yes if your system barely manages 50watt at like 10volt then yes a 55watt car bulb will not light up in a flash.
And cuz ya'll so nice:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
VERY NICE VIDEO - OK, MY SUGGESTION IS TO:
1)
- TRY A
HIGH VOLTAGE LAMINATED COIL AS WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTING HERE RECENTLY
2)
- PUT BACK YOUR
LAMINATED HC COILS/CORES (THAT CAUSE DECELERATION) AND DON'T MELT UNDER LOAD TO PROVIDE YOUR GENERATOR OUTUT POWER.
3)
- USE THE
HIGH VOLTAGE COIL'S ACCELERATION EFFECTS TO COUNTER-ACT THE LAMINATED CORES DECELERATION.IN THIS MANNER YOU SHOULD GET:
- REAL POWER,
- NO MELTED CORES,
- REDUCED EDDY CURRENT LOSSES,
- NO DECELERATION UNDER LOAD
YOU CAN ALSO GET ACCELERATION UNDER LOAD IF YOUR RATIO OF HIGH VOLTAGE COILS TO HIGH CURRENT COILS IS GREATER.
I AM PRESENTLY WORKING ON A "RATIO FORMULA" WHICH WILL PROVIDE EXACT HIGH VOLTAGES TURNS, INDUCTANCE, WIRE GUAGE, RESISTANCE ETC. SO PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF CAN PLUG AND PLAY.
I JUST FINISHED A SINGLE LAMINATED HV COIL TODAY (PICTURES PENDING) WHICH ACCELERATES THROUGH A HC COIL SHORTED WHILE DELIVERING OVER 2.5 AMPS.
IT HAS TAKEN OVER A WEEK TO GET IT RIGHT WITH MANY F_CK UPS ALONG THE WAY BUT IT SHOULD BE READY VERY SOON, (3 - 4 DAYS).
I AM CERTAIN THAT THIS WILL GIVE YOU WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.
GOOD LUCK!
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 20, 2008, 04:51:48 PM
Thane, can you tell me what the maximum gap between the rotor magnets and stator should be? (the maximum that you think would still work)
BE PATIENT UNTIL JM GETS MY LAST BATCH OF PHOTOS PRESENTED.
I HAD SOME GOOD SUCCESS TODAY WICH SHOULD REALLY HELP YOU OUT!
AND HOPEFULLY SHE CAN POST THE NEW ONES SOON ALONG WITH MY CHEEZEWIZ DUNE BUGGY.
Thane
DEAR STEVE,
MY IMMEDIATE IMPRESSION AFTER VIEWING YOUR VERY INFORMATIVE VIDEO IS THAT YOUR IRON CORES ARE MOST LIKELY SATURATING - AND THAT I PROBABLY, MOST LIKELY, MAY IN FACT OWE YOU AN APOLOGY.
ONCE SATURATED YOUR CORES REDUCE THE ROTOR MAGNET'S FLUX PENETRATION AND RESULTANT COGGING TORQUE/EDDY CURRENTS/ HYSTERESIS ETC. AND THE MOTOR SPEEDS UP?
THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OUR EFFECT BECAUSE WE HAVE VIRTUALLY NO CURRENT IN OUR COILS TO SATURATE THE CORES.
ALSO, I OWE OUman AN APOLOGY AS WELL...
OUman I AM SORRY YOU ARE A TOOL.
Thane
Coils that WORK:
Coils that DON'T WORK:
Coils that COOK, CLEAN, DO THE DISHES, MOW THE LAWN AND FIELD PHONE CALLS FROM 7TH GRADE TEACHERS:
Hmmmpf. Thanks for nuthin'.
Thane Heins "Perepiteia generator" does not violate the laws of physics; it appears to be speed modifier for AC induction motors. The synchronous speed of an induction motor is determined by the AC frequency and the number of poles in the motor. The coil and magnets of his generator create a pulsing magnetic field that travels through the induction motor shaft and alters the magnetic relationship between the rotor and stator, causing the induction motor to speed up as if the frequency increased or the number of poles has changed. That is why there is no acceleration when coupled with a plastic shaft instead of a metal shaft. Do not confuse the fact that the motor speed increases when an electrical load is placed on the generator with "free energy". The motor speed is not a true indication of power generated by the motor /generator set. Without actually measuring the actual horsepower and torque produced by his motor/gererator set, there is no other way to find out if it is producing more power than is put in by the electricity. Most likely, there is no magic here, but instead, a method of altering the characteristics of an induction motor. This could possibly allow improving the efficiency of induction motors, but not likely producing free energy.
YOU CAN ALSO GET ACCELERATION UNDER LOAD IF YOUR RATIO OF HIGH VOLTAGE COILS TO HIGH CURRENT COILS IS GREATER.
Or use the HV coils for output (possibly with a transformer) to get output and acceleration.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 07:45:56 PM
AND THAT I PROBABLY, MOST LIKELY, MAY IN FACT OWE YOU AN APOLOGY.
Thane
Good boy, I have never seen a genuine apology out of ottawa before, restores my faith!
Just so happens that, that guy with the NL site is a goed friend of mine. He does some remarkable
work, is honest, straightforward, has a keen inquisitive mind, is generous and empathetic and he has a sense of humor!
Ron, the self starter, no crank needed...
QuoteMost likely, there is no magic here, but instead, a method of altering the characteristics of an induction motor. This could possibly allow improving the efficiency of induction motors, but not likely producing free energy.
GREAT! NOW THAT - THAT'S SETTLED - BACK TO WALLOWING IN OUR OWN IGNORANCE PEOPLE.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on May 20, 2008, 09:24:52 PM
Good boy, I have never seen a genuine apology out of ottawa before, restores my faith!
WAIT WAS THAT AN APOLOGY?
OK, YES IT WAS - MAYBE I'M A LITTLE PB-TRIGGER HAPPY.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 20, 2008, 09:22:36 PM
YOU CAN ALSO GET ACCELERATION UNDER LOAD IF YOUR RATIO OF HIGH VOLTAGE COILS TO HIGH CURRENT COILS IS GREATER.
Or use the HV coils for output (possibly with a transformer) to get output and acceleration.
YES OR STORE IT IN A CAPACITOR PERHAPS.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 07:24:45 PM
BE PATIENT UNTIL JM GETS MY LAST BATCH OF PHOTOS PRESENTED.
I HAD SOME GOOD SUCCESS TODAY WICH SHOULD REALLY HELP YOU OUT!
AND HOPEFULLY SHE CAN POST THE NEW ONES SOON ALONG WITH MY CHEEZEWIZ DUNE BUGGY.
Thane
Looking good, I like #2 and #3, hope you will have a nice write up?
Little freudian slip there Thane... just 'cause JM spoke up and said some very truthful remarks to you
is no reason to call her a wich....LOL
JM, truly an awesome job on the photos, thanks, I have posted a couple and by the time I'm down
to 50 k they look like warmed over toast...
Ron
@ A22,
TO ANSWER YOUR AIR GAP QUESTION - IT VARIES FROM 1/2" TO 1/8".
BUT USUALLY FOR TESTING 1/4".
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on May 20, 2008, 09:37:53 PM
Little freudian slip there Thane... just 'cause JM spoke up and said some very truthful remarks to you
is no reason to call her a wich....LOL
Ron
TO BE HONEST I HAVE BEEN WORKING NON STOP TRYING TO SORT OUT THE DUNE BUGGY GENERATOR "RECIPE" TRYING TO GET SOMETHING THAT IS CONSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE USING LAMINATED CORES. I FINALLY GOT IT DONE TODAY.
I HAVE A BIG WEEK COMING UP WITH A GQ MAGAZINE INTERVIEW TOMORROW, A DEMO FOR CANADIAN BUSINESS MAGAZINE ON THURSDAY AND ULI IS COMING THIS WEEK AS WELL PERHAPS - SO MY NERVES ARE INDEED FRAYED.
SORRY FOR ANYONE I OFFENDED
Thane
QuoteThat is why there is no acceleration when coupled with a plastic shaft instead of a metal shaft.
FYI - THERE
IS ACCELERATION FROM A PLASTIC SHAFT WITH THE MOTOR 2 FEET AWAY. AETHER SAYS IT'S BUBBLE GUM GOING DOWN THE SHAFT BUT I AM NOT SO SURE.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 09:57:28 PM
SORRY FOR ANYONE I OFFENDED
Thane
No offense taken, I'm sure! that was just an poor attempt at humor on my part, sorry
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 20, 2008, 10:15:54 PM
No offense taken, I'm sure! that was just an poor attempt at humor on my part, sorry
Ron
YOU MEAN YOU HAVE HAD
NON-POOR ATTEMPTS?
WHEN?
ON THIS THREAD?
WHERE?
CAN I READ ONE?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 09:57:28 PM
I HAVE A BIG WEEK COMING UP WITH A GQ MAGAZINE INTERVIEW TOMORROW
GQ MAGAZINE! Okay, now you got to be yanking our chain.
Check out http://men.style.com/gq
I hope they are not checking you out for:
The twenty-five most emasculated, disempowered, henpecked husbands on the planetAnd I'm sure your pub experience and mine would help with this:
Descending Wine Course
Fifty things you need to know about wine.
How about:
THE BEST SUITS UNDER $500. Don't know about you, but I have 5 suits for less than $500 in total.
Of course if
Emmanuelle Chriqui is doing the interview, I can understand.
Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 10:02:27 PM
FYI - THERE IS ACCELERATION FROM A PLASTIC SHAFT WITH THE MOTOR 2 FEET AWAY. AETHER SAYS IT'S BUBBLE GUM GOING DOWN THE SHAFT BUT I AM NOT SO SURE.
Thane
To 'prove' it, one of the many ways (maybe not the best) is to go back to the setup in demo 1&2 and verify that when going at the same RPM as it is with the all steel shaft if it will kick into action without the steel.
Again there are many experiments that must be done to help remove more of our ignorance.
Quote from: JustMe on May 20, 2008, 07:55:31 PM
Coils that WORK:
Working coils 1 through 5 have those steel bars, I do not understand 6, is it just 4 coils from induction fan motors in series?
And then 7 has no backing but for some reason is listed as working.
Then there is not working coil 7 which is the same exact coil still no backing.
So is it possible that there is some slight change that makes coil 7 functional or not?
Anyway other than that the images would make me think that maybe the steel bars are a good idea for MOTs since every MOT looking coil that works has them.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 20, 2008, 05:20:19 PM
Just some extra info on me sys.
The airgap is over 10mm or else the core will be cooking in no time.
And yes if your system barely manages 50watt at like 10volt then yes a 55watt car bulb will not light up in a flash.
And cuz ya'll so nice:
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/NormalNoLoad001.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
@Nali2001
Good stuff ! and thanks for the previous info and feedback re your coil characteristics and demo setup.
I think your observations and conclusions put us on the "same page" (or very similar page) regarding the cause/s of this effect.
Nice machining work and multi-media presentation by the way.
Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: aether22 on May 21, 2008, 01:58:34 AM
And then 7 has no backing but for some reason is listed as working.
Then there is not working coil 7 which is the same exact coil still no backing.
So is it possible that there is some slight change that makes coil 7 functional or not?
Anyway other than that the images would make me think that maybe the steel bars are a good idea for MOTs since every MOT looking coil that works has them.
THE LAST 2 COILS ARE THE SAME AND
DO NOT ACCELERATE THE MOTOR.
THE BACK IRON IS ONLY THERE TO REDUCE THE RELUCTANCE IN THE AIR GAP AND PULL MORE FLUX INTO AND THROUGH THE CORE. STRONGER ROTOR MAGNETS WOULD PRODUCE THE SAME EFFECT.
# 6 WAS PRODUCED AND POSTED WHEN YOU WERE AWOL AND IS MY OWN REPLICATION OF THE GENERATOR TOROID COIL - YOUTUBE DEMO # 4.
AS SOON AS JM GET HER COOKING , CLEANING, AND OTHER IMPORTANT CHORES DONE SHE WILL POST THE COILS I PRODUCED YESTERDAY - A 91 OHM COIL AND A 53 OHM COIL.
THE INTERESTING THING THAT SURPRISED ME WAS THAT THE 53 OHM COIL WORKED BEST.
Thane
Quote
I think Nali made an important point when he related that his experiment showed that the shorted coils just reduced the drag and heating effects of their iron cores
.
I DON'T THINK HE SAID THIS EXACTLY, I WOULD IMAGINE
SHORTED COILS INREASE THE CORE HEATING BUT ALSO CAUSE THE MOTOR TO ACCELERATE BECAUSE THE CORES ARE SATURATED AND THE DRAG IS REDUCED BECAUSE ROTOR FLUX CANNOT ENTER THE COIL/CORES.
AGAIN HV COIL EFFECT IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE HV COILS PRODUCE LITTLE OR NO CURRENT WHEN SHORTED AND DO NOT INCREASE CORE FLUX LEVELS TO THE POINT OF SATURATION - AND
HV COILS DO NOT HEAT UP AT ALL.
MY FEELING IS THAT STEVE
"LOST" THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH LAMINATED CORES BECAUSE THEIR
RELATIVE PERMEABILITY IS HIGHER AND THEY
DO NOT SATURATE AS QUICKLY. IRON CAN HAVE A PERMEABILITY OF AROUND 200 WHEREAS LAMINATED CORES CAN BE IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF 10,000.
QuoteCan everyone observing the acceleration under load effect make some measurements to compare:
1. Motor input and rpm when accelerated by loading the coils
2. Motor input and rpm in the presence of no generator coil or cores [i.e. Completely remove the whole coil/core assembly from the presence of the magnetic rotor]
This would lead us to important conclusions one way or another.
I DID TEST THIS A FEW PAGES BACK (PAGE 48) WITH THE SPLIT-PHASE MOTOR TEST.
HV ACCELERATING COILS REQUIRED LESS MOTOR INPUT POWER THAN WITH NO COILS AT ALL.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on May 20, 2008, 11:01:01 PM
GQ MAGAZINE! Okay, now you got to be yanking our chain.
Larry
WHAT?
GENERATORS QUARTERLY MAGAZINE ... RIGHT?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 06:04:06 AM
A 91 OHM COIL AND A 53 OHM COIL.
THE INTERESTING THING THAT SURPRISED ME WAS THAT THE 53 OHM COIL WORKED BEST.
Thane
You'll never hear the end of this from the toad
Quote from: aether22 on May 21, 2008, 06:46:45 AM
You'll never hear the end of this from the toad
53 OHMS OF 30 GAUGE WIRE IS STILL HIGH IMPEDENCE - I BELIEVE HP'S EFFECTS ARE SIMILAR TO STEVE'S (CORE SATURATION RESULTANT ACCELERATION). MY MISTAKE WAS ASSUMING LAMINATED CORES REQUIRED HIGH #'s OF TURNS AS DID IRON CORES.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 06:17:58 AM
.
I DON'T THINK HE SAID THIS EXACTLY, I WOULD IMAGINE SHORTED COILS INREASE THE CORE HEATING BUT ALSO CAUSE THE MOTOR TO ACCELERATE BECAUSE THE CORES ARE SATURATED AND THE DRAG IS REDUCED BECAUSE ROTOR FLUX CANNOT ENTER THE COIL/CORES.
AGAIN HV COIL EFFECT IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE HV COILS PRODUCE LITTLE OR NO CURRENT WHEN SHORTED AND DO NOT INCREASE CORE FLUX LEVELS TO THE POINT OF SATURATION - AND HV COILS DO NOT HEAT UP AT ALL.
Not quite.
Induced magnetic fields act to cancel changes in flux, they will tend to cancel the flux from the rotor. (the magnetic flux in a normal transformer does not actually increase as the current through the primary increases, it stays about the same as the secondary cancels it)
The second point is that HV coils might have 1/100th or 1/1,000th the current but they have 100 or 1,000 more turns than their high current cousins and so their ampere turns is the same and they create an identicle magnetic field.
In fact from an outside perspective there is damn little difference between the 2 if both are shorted conventionally speaking of course.
Quote
MY FEELING IS THAT STEVE "LOST" THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WITH LAMINATED CORES BECAUSE THEIR RELATIVE PERMEABILITY IS HIGHER AND THEY DO NOT SATURATE AS QUICKLY. IRON CAN HAVE A PERMEABILITY OF AROUND 200 WHEREAS LAMINATED CORES CAN BE IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF 10,000.
I DID TEST THIS A FEW PAGES BACK (PAGE 48) WITH THE SPLIT-PHASE MOTOR TEST.
HV ACCELERATING COILS REQUIRED LESS MOTOR INPUT POWER THAN WITH NO COILS AT ALL.
Thane
I missed that, very damn impressive! (I almost wish PB were here for you to rub his nose in it except spooks are not paid to admit anything so it would be as empty as his soul) I think that you and possibly I should each have a web page or document or endlessly editable post that gives in your case your experimental results and for me the case for the aether.
Quote from: aether22 on May 21, 2008, 06:46:45 AM
You'll never hear the end of this from the toad
:D :D :o
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 06:57:14 AM
53 OHMS OF 30 GAUGE WIRE IS STILL HIGH IMPEDENCE - I BELIEVE HP'S EFFECTS ARE SIMILAR TO STEVE'S (CORE SATURATION RESULTANT ACCELERATION). MY MISTAKE WAS ASSUMING LAMINATED CORES REQUIRED HIGH #'s OF TURNS AS DID IRON CORES.
Thane
Assume nothing !
Cheers
BTW the gap between the rotor magnets and stator cores are .4 of an inch on average or there abouts.
I do not have any back iron but the 2 cores are close together with just enough room to put 2 folds (4x thickness) of paper between the 2 transformers so it is pretty good.
Putting back iron with a gap as large as in Thanes test would not significantly increase the magnetic coupling.
But the back iron might be helping out in some other way.
With coils as low as 53 ohms I am wondering if maybe I should wind a coil on the I core pieces.
Still I would far far rather Thane just send me that coil he tested for me. (I would only ask that whatever is sent works with a 6 pole rotor with a half inch gap at 400-500rpm)
If I can get a coil that I know will work I'd be really happy.
Has there been a coil made with all laminated steel (ONLY professional laminates none of those metal strips) that has worked? Or have ALL of the laminated tests that have worked had other metal near by?
If you send it right away it might just arrive in time for my 30th.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 20, 2008, 10:22:53 PM
YOU MEAN YOU HAVE HAD NON-POOR ATTEMPTS?
WHEN?
ON THIS THREAD?
WHERE?
CAN I READ ONE?
THANKS
Thane
(//)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 06:17:58 AM
I DID TEST THIS A FEW PAGES BACK (PAGE 48) WITH THE SPLIT-PHASE MOTOR TEST.
HV ACCELERATING COILS REQUIRED LESS MOTOR INPUT POWER THAN WITH NO COILS AT ALL.
Thane
For some insight into these results, check out this torque-speed characteristic of a typical induction motor:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg529.imageshack.us%2Fimg529%2F4396%2Ftorquespeeduf3.png&hash=ef377d34f3b7318190487486bd358577f44476ee)
At most points of the curve (take for example the 70% point), the torque increases while the speed also increases and the input current
drops. The increased torque allows the system to drive the additional drag of a shorted or loaded coil. Higher load, higher speed, lower power input.
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED
1A - NON WORKING COIL - TOO MANY TURNS MOST LIKELY.
2A - 2 WORKING COILS ON THE SAME CORE - LESS TURNS.
3A - HC COIL SHORTED CURRENT MAGNITUDE
AND A COUPLE OF THE CHEEZEWIZ BUGGY.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on May 21, 2008, 10:48:59 AM
(//)
Hey, who posted the picture of OUman?
;)
-Mark
Thane, you should consider taking say the 53 ohm coil and winding more turns on it to see if you can kill it by adding too many and if once you have added too many if you can still short just the 53 ohm portion to still get the effect.
Or make a multi tap coil with taps every 10 to 20 ohms.
Might get this turn thing sorted a tad faster that way.
@Thane,
Your 1A NON WORKING COIL has the rear core flat bar in a vertical position. I'm not sure of the forward cores orientation from the picture, but the rear core flat bar would have to be in a horizontal position with the forward core in a horizontal position to pass the maximum flux.
From my testing of regular steel laminate positioning, I think the vertical position with obvious warped air gaps would ensure that very little flux is passed between bars.
Simple experiment:
Put six flat bars vertical, not screwed together, next to a north and south neo. How many stay attracted?
Now put six flat bars horizontally next to a north and south neo. How many stay attracted?
Regards,
Larry
QuoteInduced magnetic fields act to cancel changes in flux, they will tend to cancel the flux from the rotor. (the magnetic flux in a normal transformer does not actually increase as the current through the primary increases, it stays about the same as the secondary cancels it)
YOU KNOW WHAT - THIS IS THE MOST INCORRECT THING YOU HAVE EVER SAID.YOU CANNOT USE ONE MAGNETIC FIELD TO CANCEL ANOTHER - MAGNETIC FIELDS ALWAYS FOLLOW THE PATH OF LEAST RELUCTANCE IN AIR
AND INSIDE METAL.
INCREASING FLUX MAGNITUDES INCREASE CORE RELUCTANCE WHICH GIVES THE IMPRESSION OF "CANCELLATION" BUT IT IS NOT SO. TO SUGGEST OTHERWISE IS A GROS MISUNDERSTANDING.
TAKE TWO SEPERATED IDENTICAL ELECTROMAGNETS POINT THEM AT EACH OTHER IN AIR - AND TELL US THE FIELDS CANCEL? ABSURD
NOW POINT THEM AT EACH OTHER THROUGH A METAL BLOCK - WILL THEY CANCEL EACH OTHER - NO WAY! THEY MAY SATURATE OUT INTO THE AIR BUT NEVER CANCEL.
QuoteThe second point is that HV coils might have 1/100th or 1/1,000th the current but they have 100 or 1,000 more turns than their high current cousins and so their ampere turns is the same and they create an identicle magnetic field.
THIS IS NOT TRUE EITHER - CURRENT INDUCED IN A COIL IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ITS
RESISTANCE (IMPEDENCE).
MAGNETOMOTIVE FORCE = N x IAS THE NUMBER OF TURNS INCREASES BEYOND THE COILS Q AND THE WIRE GAUGE IS REDUCED THE IMPEDENCE (WIRE RESISTANCE + REACTANCE) ALSO INCREASES - CURRENT DROPS AS DOES THE COILS MMFs.
Thane
QuoteAt most points of the curve (take for example the 70% point), the torque increases while the speed also increases and the input current drops. The increased torque allows the system to drive the additional drag of a shorted or loaded coil. Higher load, higher speed, lower power input.
NICE TRY DICKWEED - BUT WRONG BECAUSE WE GENERALLY OPERATE
BEYOND THE MOTOR'S PULL OUT POINT - WHICH WOULD HAVE SERVED US ALL WELL IF YOUR POP'S WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS CONCEPT MANY YEARS AGO.
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on May 21, 2008, 10:48:59 AM
(//)
STILL DON'T HAVE THE INSERT IMAGE PROTOCALL DOWN JUST YET - EH I_RON?
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on May 21, 2008, 06:09:37 PM
@Thane,
Your 1A NON WORKING COIL has the rear core flat bar in a vertical position. I'm not sure of the forward cores orientation from the picture, but the rear core flat bar would have to be in a horizontal position with the forward core in a horizontal position to pass the maximum flux.
From my testing of regular steel laminate positioning, I think the vertical position with obvious warped air gaps would ensure that very little flux is passed between bars.
Regards,
Larry
THANKS LARRY,
TOMORROW I AM GOING TO TRIM OFF THE FERROMAGNETIC ENDS OF COIL 1A AND MOUNT IT ON AN ALUMINUM PLATE.
THANKS FOR MAKING ME LOOK AT IT AGIAN!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 08:06:14 PM
YOU KNOW WHAT - THIS IS THE MOST INCORRECT THING YOU HAVE EVER SAID.
Nice to know I am in top form!
Quote
YOU CANNOT USE ONE MAGNETIC FIELD TO CANCEL ANOTHER
It depends on what you mean by cancel, both fields are there but they sum to zero.
their existence becomes theoretical as both are opposite and in the same space, they have the exact opposite effects on anything that responds to a magnetic field.
Now in the example here they do not cancel fully, but the generator coil does significantly reduce the net magnetic influence.
Quote
- MAGNETIC FIELDS ALWAYS FOLLOW THE PATH OF LEAST RELUCTANCE IN AIR AND INSIDE METAL.
Actually they don't follow anything, Magnetic fields to not bend or react to other magnetic fields, their fields simply sum to make it appear so.
But even if we take the slightly inaccurate (layman) point of view that they do the simple fact is that the magnetic field from the rotor is pushed out of the stator core partly by the magnetic field of the coil.
Quote
INCREASING FLUX MAGNITUDES INCREASE CORE RELUCTANCE WHICH GIVES THE IMPRESSION OF "CANCELLATION" BUT IT IS NOT SO. TO SUGGEST OTHERWISE IS A GROS MISUNDERSTANDING.
TAKE TWO SEPERATED IDENTICAL ELECTROMAGNETS POINT THEM AT EACH OTHER IN AIR - AND TELL US THE FIELDS CANCEL? ABSURD
At the mid point there is indeed perfect cancellation.
But more practically the 2 coils reduce the strength of each others field.
If you brought them closer and closer until they were both superimposed on top of each other there would be zero net observable field. (a bucking bifilar)
Quote
NOW POINT THEM AT EACH OTHER THROUGH A METAL BLOCK - WILL THEY CANCEL EACH OTHER - NO WAY! THEY MAY SATURATE OUT INTO THE AIR BUT NEVER CANCEL.
The magnetic field in the exact center will again be canceled, the field elsewhere will be somewhat lessened.
I think you are getting a bee in your bonnet over the term canceled.
The simple fact is that the generator coils reduce the observable rotor flux present in the core.
I will reply to the rest in another post.
Quote from: aether22 on May 21, 2008, 10:13:07 PM
I think you are getting a bee in your bonnet over the term canceled.
I AGREE YOU DON'T MEAN "CANCELLED FIELDS" YOU MEAN "CANCELLED EFFECTS" ON A COIL - SUCH THAT TWO IDENTICAL OPPOSING FIELDS PASSING THOUGH A COIL WILL NOT INDUCE A CHANGE IN FLUX IN THE COIL BECAUSE THE "CHANGE" AS SEEN BY THE COIL IS ALWAYS NET ZERO. RIGHT?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 10:28:20 PM
I AGREE YOU DON'T MEAN "CANCELLED FIELDS" YOU MEAN "CANCELLED EFFECTS" ON A COIL - SUCH THAT TWO IDENTICAL OPPOSING FIELDS PASSING THOUGH A COIL WILL NOT INDUCE A CHANGE IN FLUX IN THE COIL BECAUSE THE "CHANGE" AS SEEN BY THE COIL IS ALWAYS NET ZERO. RIGHT?
Thane
Right.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 21, 2008, 08:25:20 PM
NICE TRY DICKWEED - BUT WRONG BECAUSE WE GENERALLY OPERATE BEYOND THE MOTOR'S PULL OUT POINT - WHICH WOULD HAVE SERVED US ALL WELL IF YOUR POP'S WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS CONCEPT MANY YEARS AGO.
Thane
Everything you have posted so far indicates that you are running the motor w-a-a-y BELOW the pull-out point. In other words, way below the rated rpm of the motor. Are you now saying that is not so?
Quote
Quote
The second point is that HV coils might have 1/100th or 1/1,000th the current but they have 100 or 1,000 more turns than their high current cousins and so their ampere turns is the same and they create an identicle magnetic field.
THIS IS NOT TRUE EITHER - CURRENT INDUCED IN A COIL IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ITS RESISTANCE (IMPEDENCE).
MAGNETOMOTIVE FORCE = N x I
AS THE NUMBER OF TURNS INCREASES BEYOND THE COILS Q AND THE WIRE GAUGE IS REDUCED THE IMPEDENCE (WIRE RESISTANCE + REACTANCE) ALSO INCREASES - CURRENT DROPS AS DOES THE COILS MMFs.
Thane
Let's take 2 coils.
Coil A is 5,000 turns, Coil B is 10,000 turns, both take up the same space which means that coil B's wires must have half the cross sectional area of A's.
It also means B will have 4 times the ohmic resistance, half due to the wire being twice as long and half as fat.
B will also have 4 times the inductance.
B will have double the voltage induced in it.
And B will require only half the current of A to create an equally strong magnetic field since it has twice as many turns.
When used in a generator A and B will both be pulling and sinking the same energy.
The only thing that stops a coil from outputting more current is the ability of it's MMF to counteract the coils experience of the rotors MMF's and so if it was not creating an equally strong MMF then there would be more currrent to pull.
go here:
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
Make 2 circuits to simulate a shorted generator coil. (A and B)
Each circuit needs an AC 2 terminal voltage source to take place of the induction. (give B double the voltage since double the turns induces double the voltage)
Then give each circuit an inductor, give B one that is 4 times larger.
Then complete each circuit by adding a resistor, make B's 4 times larger since we have established it will have 4 times the resistance.
We have now created a high current coil and a high voltage coil analogue complete with the induced voltage, the inductance and resistance.
Then right click the resistors and click 'view in scope'
and look at only the current, you will see that B has (within a rounding error) half the current of A.
But it only needs half the current to create an equivalent magnetic field as A.
Energy and MMF's are the same in HC or HV coils.
Quote Are you now saying that is not so?OUmon
NO I AM SAYING THAT YOU ARE A DICK - FOR WASTING YOUR TALENTS AND INTELLIGENCE PLAYING THE FOOL.
Thane
Quotego here:
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
Make 2 circuits to simulate a shorted generator coil. (A and B)
YOU CAN TELL ME "WHERE TO GO" IF YOU LIKE BUT THIS IS STILL BULL!
YOU TAKE A COIL OF WIRE PUT A FIXED VOLTAGE AND CURRENT INTO IT - MEASURE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD.
NOW ADD TURNS - EVENTUALLY THE COIL'S INDUCED MAGNETIC STRENGTH FIELD WILL PEAK.
NOW KEEP ADDING TURNS BEYOND THE PEAK AND THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH WILL FALL AWAY TOWARDS ZERO.
Thane
YOU CAN TELL ME "WHERE TO GO" IF YOU LIKE BUT THIS IS STILL BULL!
YOU TAKE A COIL OF WIRE PUT A FIXED VOLTAGE AND CURRENT INTO IT - MEASURE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD.
NOW ADD TURNS - EVENTUALLY THE COIL'S INDUCED MAGNETIC STRENGTH FIELD WILL PEAK.
Yes, as an Electromagnet that is very true.
As a generator coil that is totally untrue provided that all of the coil is inside of the induction field.
Because while each turn increases the coils self induction each turn also increases the coils pickup of the rotor field and the to cancel out.
You can't just ignore the math behind it because it doesn't agree with what you thought.
But there is no need to argue because this is a very good thing also, you don't have to have coils that increase rpm and other coils that output usefully, you can have coils that do both.
NOW KEEP ADDING TURNS BEYOND THE PEAK AND THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH WILL FALL AWAY TOWARDS ZERO.
What you are missing is that a properly constructed generator coil or transformer secondary has no effective inductance when it comes to responding to the induced voltage, a single turn or a million makes no difference since as one side of the equasion changes (self induction) so does the other (induction from the rotor or primary).
The only exception is with turns that are outside of the influence of the inducing field.
To put it another way, the rotor creates an EMF.
With a short circuit type situation the generator coil will push more current through if it can.
The only thing stopping it is if the coil is effectively canceling (or mostly) the field from the primary. (from the generating coils point of view, but we have been over that)
If the generating coil's EMF/MMF was not precisely opposite and equal then you could pull unlimited power (amps) since the generating coil would not be able to weaken the rotors emf field.
The fact that you can't pull more power is an indication that the rotors field has been nicely countered.
You can even test this if you do not believe me, put a test coil near/under/on top of the HV shorted coil, test it's OC voltage and then short the HV coil and keep reading it's voltage, you will find that from the coils perspective the MMF/EMF from the rotor has been heavily weakened, that's because the HV coil produces and equal and opposite field.
DEFINE "PROPERLY" IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE ARE DOING?
YOU WILL CONCLUDE THERE IS NO SUCH THING.
"PROPERLY" IS OUmon TERRITORY DON'T YOU THINK?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 22, 2008, 07:36:07 AM
DEFINE "PROPERLY" IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE ARE DOING?
YOU WILL CONCLUDE THERE IS NO SUCH THING.
"PROPERLY" IS OUmon TERRITORY DON'T YOU THINK?
Thane
In the situation where we are comparing 2 coils it means both are of the same weight and size filling the same area. (in other words the same ID, OD and length)
If you can't get your head around the logic of it, then either trust in the math, try experiments or ask someone who you would trust if there is anyone.
But really it's not that hard is it?
As you increase the number of turns you increase the pickup of both the coils own field (self inductance) and that of the rotor.
This really will help you make a better buggy if you understand this, the HC coils should only be used for braking not for power generation.
Quote from: aether22 on May 22, 2008, 07:23:44 AM
YOU TAKE A COIL OF WIRE PUT A FIXED VOLTAGE AND CURRENT INTO IT - MEASURE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD.
NOW ADD TURNS - EVENTUALLY THE COIL'S INDUCED MAGNETIC STRENGTH FIELD WILL PEAK.
Yes, as an Electromagnet that is very true.
As a generator coil that is totally untrue provided that all of the coil is inside of the induction field.
Because while each turn increases the coils self induction each turn also increases the coils pickup of the rotor field and the to cancel out.
@aether and @thane, I think your talking at corss purposes becuase its impossible to keep
both the voltage
and current constant like thane said if youre increasing the turns. You're confused about the operating conditions so your positioins cant be compared - IHMO
-Mike
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 22, 2008, 07:00:33 AM
YOU CAN TELL ME "WHERE TO GO" IF YOU LIKE BUT THIS IS STILL BULL!
YOU TAKE A COIL OF WIRE PUT A FIXED VOLTAGE AND CURRENT INTO IT - MEASURE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD.
NOW ADD TURNS - EVENTUALLY THE COIL'S INDUCED MAGNETIC STRENGTH FIELD WILL PEAK.
NOW KEEP ADDING TURNS BEYOND THE PEAK AND THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH WILL FALL AWAY TOWARDS ZERO.
Thane
Fixing the current or fixing the voltage?
AC or DC?
Quote from: aether22 on May 22, 2008, 08:01:54 AM
If you can't get your head around the logic of it, then either trust in the math, try experiments or ask someone who you would trust if there is anyone.
But really it's not that hard is it?
As you increase the number of turns you increase the pickup of both the coils own field (self inductance) and that of the rotor.
This really will help you make a better buggy if you understand this, the HC coils should only be used for braking not for power generation.
BE HONEST -YOU TRUSTED THE MATH ON YOUR LAST COIL AND WHAT DID IT GIVE YOU?
UNTIL YOU HAVE PLACED 2 OR MORE HV COILS WITH 2 OR MORE HC COILS ON THE SAME BACK IRON OR INDIVIDUALLY LOADED THEM ETC -
YOU ARE TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS.END OF DEBATE.
MY SUGGESTION TO ANYONE READING THIS FORUM IS:
DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING ANYONE TELLS YOU EVER.
UNTIL YOU HAVE VERIFIED IT FOR YOURSELF.THERE ARE SINCERE PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE IGNORANT - AND IGNORANT PEOPLE WHO ARE INSINCERE - YOU REALLY CAN'T TRUST ANY OF THIS
UNTIL YOU DO IT OR SEE IT FOR YOURSELF.
MY MISTAKE UP TO THIS POINT IS THINKING THAT I OUGHT TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO PROTECT THE SINCERE LEARNERS FROM THE CRAP OUT THERE.
YOU KNOW WHAT I REALIZED TODAY -
THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH CRAP!AND I AM WASTING MY TIME AND ENERGY DEBATING CRAP - MAN I'M A SLOW LEARNER - PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TELLING ME TO STOP WASTING MY TIME AT PAGE 15 ON THIS THREAD.
YOU HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU ACCEPT - ON THIS THREAD AND ELSEWHERE.- THAT IS WHY I HAVE SET UP A
CRAP FREE ZONE AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY WHICH IS OPEN FOR DEMONSTRATIONS TO ANYONE AT ANYTIME.
I WILL CONTINUE TO SHARE DEVELOPMENTS ETC BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT - BUT I WILL NO LONGER BE DEBATING CRAP.
CHEERS
Thane
BE HONEST -YOU TRUSTED THE MATH ON YOUR LAST COIL AND WHAT DID IT GIVE YOU?
Thane, you should trust the math because it's right.
But no it wasn't the math that told me, I actually had to figure out if the math did support what I knew intuitively.
And it did!
UNTIL YOU HAVE PLACED 2 OR MORE HV COILS WITH 2 OR MORE HC COILS ON THE SAME BACK IRON OR INDIVIDUALLY LOADED THEM ETC - YOU ARE TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS.END OF DEBATE.
I have.
But I disagree because the math and the logic is and must be right.
Seriously you aren't actually thinking about it because if you did you would see each must be right.
MY SUGGESTION TO ANYONE READING THIS FORUM IS:
DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING ANYONE TELLS YOU EVER.
UNTIL YOU HAVE VERIFIED IT FOR YOURSELF.
THERE ARE SINCERE PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE IGNORANT
What am I ignorant of?
I'll tell you what, this can be easily solved.
If you give me the open circuit voltage and resistance of both the HC and HV coils (assuming both fill pretty much the same area and position as they do with MOT's) and also the short circuit current of each I will take those figures and see if the results compare with the math.
One request though would be for you to have them in the same position on the core so if you take the 2 side by side MOT's if you can switch the order of the HC and HV coils on one of the cores so that the voltage and current figures for both HC and HV coils are based on the same position if possible.
- AND IGNORANT PEOPLE WHO ARE INSINCERE - YOU REALLY CAN'T TRUST ANY OF THIS UNTIL YOU DO IT OR SEE IT FOR YOURSELF.
MY MISTAKE UP TO THIS POINT IS THINKING THAT I OUGHT TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO PROTECT THE SINCERE LEARNERS FROM THE CRAP OUT THERE.
YOU KNOW WHAT I REALIZED TODAY - THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH CRAP!
AND I AM WASTING MY TIME AND ENERGY DEBATING CRAP - MAN I'M A SLOW LEARNER - PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TELLING ME TO STOP WASTING MY TIME AT PAGE 15 ON THIS THREAD.
YOU HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU ACCEPT - ON THIS THREAD AND ELSEWHERE.- THAT IS WHY I HAVE SET UP A CRAP FREE ZONE AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY WHICH IS OPEN FOR DEMONSTRATIONS TO ANYONE AT ANYTIME.
I WILL CONTINUE TO SHARE DEVELOPMENTS ETC BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT - BUT I WILL NO LONGER BE DEBATING CRAP.
Thane, this is not crap.
Ask your professor friend, do the experiments (or I will if you need me to) do the math, do the logic but it really would help you not to be laboring over the incorrect assumption that you can pull more energy out of a high current coil.
Thane, if I may point out a difference.
In the past there have been arguments against your device by people paid to create arguments, arguing with them is worth while only up to the point of showing others that these people are not crafting valid arguments, you will never change their minds since their position is artificial. (They do not believe what they say)
Both of us have gone into bat against such people.
Here we have a big difference, we have an argument where the validity of your device is assured and instead a detail is under scrutiny, and interestingly you are arguing for a reduced effectiveness of your device.
Also please consider the other difference, I am open to experimental data, math, authority and logic to sort out this issue.
And finally unlike most any argument brought about by anyone against the device, here we actually have a point to the argument, your device will work better with more HV coils and no HC coils making your dune buggy more likely to work. (that being the case even though I would have thought more should be known of the effect before making a vehicle out of it, of course the challenges encountered might well prove extremely enlightening)
@All,
Today I was happily testing, using the new 124 Ohm and the old 205 Ohm coil HV coils, getting much better acceleration results, when I noticed that one of the side casing on the motor was cracking. I allways though the wheel would go first!
It turns out my cheap $20 so called heavy duty bench grinder 3/4 HP from Fred's, has a plastic casing on each end holding the bearings and a metal casing in the middle. They apparently relied on the grinding wheel metal guards to keep the plastic together.
I taped the cracked end up and it's gone back to being a one armed bench grinder.
Oh well, It seems perfect timing with Thane's new CRAP FREE ZONE policy. I somewhat understand his frustration, just hope it wasn't MIB putting poison in his koolaid.
I am grateful that Thane will continue to share developments and I hope that Thane will still help testers that have problems with their replications.
Regards,
Larry
I have tested my MOT generator and will post the figures first before I figure out who's argument they support.
One point I will make though is that i was unable to pull a secondary coil from the core so the secondaries remain further from the rotor pole and will hence tend to support Thanes position since the HC coils will have better access to the rotor flux meaning they should out preform and hence not all the difference will be because of more turns, some will be position on the core.
HC HV
2.1 90.7 ohms
5.6 46.3 volts
500 19 milliamps
I tested a single MOT only, the coils were not in series.
I'd rather not edit the above post because I don't want any possibility of claims from thane I changed the numbers to agree with what I believe.
But I just realized my meter can measure inductance, so...
HC HV
10.8m 3.08 Henries
That's 3.008 Henries for the HV coil.
And 0.0108 Henries for the HC coil.
I'll also add that the 500ma figure for the HC coil is not as accurate as that sounds since my meter has a 200ma and 20A scale so since it was too much for the 200ma scale I used the 20A scale which only goes down to a tenth of an amp.
So the HV coils has:
8.26 times more voltage induced
43 times more resistance
1 25th or 26th (or anything around there) the current.
All readings were taken with a single meter and slight rpm changes did occur.
Now I'll try and see what this mess of figures means
On the face of it Thane wins since it's 25th of the current but only 8.26 times more turns. (though I am yet to do the test with the NNN SSS NNN SSS sequence)
Now even if I instead assume that it lost some voltage on the way to the more distant secondary, and assume that the voltage output was 2kv (with 240v in) then that is still only 8.33 times more turns.
I may bump the HV current up to 20ma and the HC down to say 460ma, all perfectly possible given changes in speed and measurement error of margins.
But still 20ma x 8.33 = 166ma .vs 460ms (HC coil would have 2.77 times more ampere turns)
So I tried simulating it, however there is a difference with the simulation, it shows more current flowing in both despite recreating the elements. (the difference is that simulation can pump out as much 'power' as it likes)
Anyway the result of the simulation is that the HV current is one 29th of the HC current in the simulation, this is acceptably close to the 26th figure above. What is odd is I have already verified the math is on my side so what is going on here?
Another oddity is that if I calculate an inductance coil of x number of turns, and then another coil with 8.33 as many turns I get an inductance that is almost 70 times larger when my measured result is 285 times larger. Now admittedly the calculation is for an air core coil but still 285 times larger is really high.
Ah, that must be it.
So now if I change inductor in the HV simulation from from 3.08 to .0108 x 8.33 which is 756mH I get a current of 204ma which if I multiply by 8.33 is 1.7A .vs 1.63A flowing in the HC which is close enough to call a match.
So it seems that I am right about air core coils (I must be since the math agrees) but maybe Thane is right when it comes to ferrous cores, but that answer still doesn't sit right with me it feels utterly illogical and the real world test is imperfect enough due to coil position for me to remain somewhat unconvinced. (the position of the HV coil forces it to have a higher self induction and less access to the rotor flux than the HC coil)
Also if I consider it from the following position I feel I must be right.
Imagine 2 coils, one consisting of 2 turns of wire, naturally it is shorted.
The other consists of 2 wires of the same thickness as the first but 1 turn shorted. (the 2 wires touching or not, another way to say it is we have 2 single turn coils possibly in contact)
note: to put it another way we have 2 single turn coils which in the first instance are in series and in the second instance or in parallel or individually shorted.
The first coil will have twice the voltage of the second induced in it not that is will be measurable in SC.
If 1 amp was flowing in the first coil it would require a total of 2 amps to flow in the second coil/s (1 amp in each wire) to create a magnetic field of the same strength.
Now imagine that the current in both coils rises from 0 amps to 1 amp in each wire, if you look at a section of the first coil you will notice that it sees a changing magnetic field from the other wire as it goes for 0 to 1 amp and feels a voltage from that.
If you look at one on the wires from the second coil, it also sees the magnetic field from the other wire change from 0 to 1 amp and feels a voltage from that.
And it does not take a genius to figure out that each turn of a wire in either coil will feel the same self induced EMF per turn, only one is in series so it's total is double.
This is true no matter what, the math and logic entirely support this, if experiments are not in agreement then either the experiments are imperfect (different positions and sizes etc), or there is something else going on (possibly the aether) that the logic and math can not account for.
Yes, I did above (and choose not to remove) the thought that possibly a ferrous core changes the equation somehow, but it can not possibly do so.
I will endeavor to find a calculator that can calculate inductance on a ferrous core to verify this.
Thane may be right but only if the equations are not holding up, and I consider that to be a real possibility.
Thane, on a totally different subject, there are a few ways you could help me get the effect.
One is to please send me the coil (the motor I would opt for Uli to send from OZ but not the coil).
So if you can please send it I would very much appreciate it.
The second way, well I'm open to suggestions, I was going to ask:
The other would be for you to measure the current when you short one of your HC coils, and the voltage when it's OC, and observe how many RPM it slows down when shorted.
Because I don't feel that I am getting anywhere near as much deceleration when I short the HC MOT coils as you do and I'd like to know how that could be. (if my motor simply isn't as responsive that could be obscuring the effect)
But I somehow can't imagine you doing that test and reporting the results so I am open to what you think I should do to get the effect.
I have built a coil that matches your specs (yes, the resistance is a bit higher but it is multitap and I was trying to get 5,000 ft of wire which is how long your coil must have been to have 200 ohms with 27AWG) without success. After all if the aim is to get 200 ohms not a certain length then I should use nichrome.
And tested with MOT's (About to do the NNN SSS NNN SSS test which I will hopefully report on later today) also no success.
So if you can make a suggestion before the Thane verified coil arrives I would very very much appreciate it!
I have now tested the NNN SSS NNN SSS config (with MOT stators) with no success.
This time I could not even get shorting the HC coils to make any noticeable slowdown, either the rotor is not having enough effect on the stator (the gap is too large) or or the motor powers through the changes in load despite turning slowly and being underpowered.
I am hoping Thane can suggest something but I am wondering if the gap is too great although others seem to have had effects with greater gaps. (mine is under half an inch)
Should I attack the gap? I should get better coupling which would be one of the most convincing reasons for failure, but then to complicate matters the magnets will not be attached directly to the cups so we have a gap which we know can stop Thanes effect dead.
Should I remove laminations from the transformers? Maybe
Should I buy a the closest 240v version of Thanes Ryobi motor I can get?
Should I get a 110v motor from overseas?
Should I wind a coil to Thanes specifications? (if so I will need more info from Thane)
Should I wait for the coil from Thane?
Should I replicate Thanes test with an automobile induction coil? (did it show acceleration)
Opinions welcome from anyone, more so if you have got the effect to work.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 19, 2008, 09:30:00 AM
-Hmm o/p coil? Not sure what you mean. See the attached pictures below.
Sorry, thats a bad habit of mine using abbreviations, like O/P. I know I'll keep doing it though so apologies in advance :D
I meant the Out-Put coil or coils, or pickup coils as some might call them.
The coils which are experiencing induction from the rotor magnets and being used to power an external load. Like your globe ;)
Quote from: Nali2001
-There are two coils in parallel and each is 2.3 ohm (20Gauge wire)
1.15 ohms DC. Good current output capability.
Quote from: Nali2001
-Well the rotor is a double rotor as seen on the pictures. 6 magnets 'pairs' or 12 magnets total (one magnet is 20x40x10mm)
Both ends of your rotor spin simultaneously with respect to each other, so the frequency per rpm only needs representing by one rotor end.
Your rotor uses sets of both magnetic poles, that is, north and south. Each pair of N / S magnets represents 1 true AC sine wave.
Your rotor has 3 N/S pairs at each end, so the AC sine cycle will be 3 per revolution. If your rotor is spinning at 500 rpm , your frequency will be 1500 cpm.
Divide that by 60 (for seconds) and you get 25 HZ ( 25 AC cycles per second ).
Quote from: Nali2001
-With this design that acceleration always kicks in as far as I know. I did make another core model and that indeed required at least an 700rpm+ before acceleration happens.
:o ;)
Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: hoptoad on May 23, 2008, 03:29:55 AM
Your rotor uses sets of both magnetic poles, that is, north and south. Each pair of N / S magnets represents 1 true AC sine wave.
Your rotor has 3 N/S pairs at each end, so the AC sine cycle will be 3 per revolution. If your rotor is spinning at 500 rpm , your frequency will be 1500 cpm.
Divide that by 60 (for seconds) and you get 25 HZ ( 25 AC cycles per second ).
@hoptoad, thats interesting. Do you think there could be some resonance effect with the mains frequency? EG in yr example at 1000 rpm it will be 50 HZ, same asline frequency (in UK) so might be expected some kind of resonance in feedback down the shaft, whether it aether or EM or whatever. So exact motor speed could be critical?
-Mike
I can not explain why the experiments differ, it is possible they differ for some other reason.
But I am going to take one more shot at trying to explain to hoptoad and if he will listen Thane as to why if two coils are the same size weight and shape why more turns will not have a larger inductance if it is a generator or transformer coil. (As hoptoad puts it an OP coil)
If you double the number of turns and put in the same current you will get the same magnetic field, that I hope is not in question from anyone reading, very very basic ampere turns stuff. (at least not by any conventional physics)
So if you have a generating coil which has twice the number of turns but half the current it will create the same magnetic field as the HC one. So what of the extra turns, does it not feel it's self inductance twice as strongly with twice as many turns?
Well yes of course but it also feels the voltage from the primary or rotor twice as strongly.
Actually it is worth noting that it does still have increased inductance, but with an equally higher induced driving voltage current works to keep the same total ampere turns.
You may object that the thinner turns have a higher resistance, yes that doubles the resistance but you only have half the current, it's the current density that matters and that is the same in each (assuming it supports only half the current).
The math and reason and conventional physics is on my side, now I believe in the aether so you can imagine how much I care about the math and conventional view normally (not at all) but here it does support what I am saying.
If experiment disagrees (which has not been accurately demonstrated) in some or all instances I don't know, I do after all believe that the HV coils has a different effect in Thanes device and that is due to the aether, maybe a flowing aether does something else that increases resistance or makes part of the current unobservable by normal means, who knows.
But what I would like to make very clear as it should be from the circuit simulator agreeing with me that according to known electrical principles the number of turns (or inductance) has no effect of the energy that can be pulled from a coil. (indeed if it was a rule every HV transformer would have a shockingly low efficiency and be dramatically larger for a given power which is not the case except of course for better insulation.
Now back to replicating Thanes effect I was hoping to get a reply in the hopes that someone can see what mistake I am making, but in absence of any reply and due to the fact that I can barely show lenz drag with HC coils (hey, maybe the effect is always on ;) ) I have decided to add a 5mm thick 1 inch steel piece to the transformer cores to reduce the airgap to hopefully a quarter of an inch.
And I'll look into adding the back iron since while it's flux coupling abilities would be very poor it might play some other part. But I am not sure if I could find anything like it in a hardware store, unless someone knows what it is called.
Oh yeah, and one other thing.
I am sure many even lowish voltage transformers will have a far higher inductance that the HV coils in Thanes generator and yet many tens of amps flow at low voltages, this is because Thanes HV coils are open magnetic circuits where transformers have closed circuits where the inductance is hugely amplified.
Note: I just tested a transformer with an 80v secondary from 240v, now it did not prove my point as it was .14 Henries but if a better core was used it would not have stopped working suddenly only able to output ma's.
Also it actually is not an 80v output but 2 40v secondaries that in series output 80v, if you measure the inductance in series or singularly they closely match the 4x inductance i mentioned previously.
I would also be very happy to take bets that if it were possible to run it shorted (it would need a current limiter on the primary to safely do so which is doable) you would get half the current if the 2 secondaries were shorted in series than you would get if you only used one or put them in parallel.
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
If you double the number of turns and put in the same current you will get the same magnetic field, that I hope is not in question from anyone reading...
I think you are mistaken. If you double the number of turns with the same current you double the magnetic field.
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
So if you have a generating coil which has twice the number of turns but half the current it will create the same magnetic field as the HC one.
I agree but this is inconsistent with your previous statement.
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
So what of the extra turns, does it not feel it's self inductance twice as strongly with twice as many turns?
Well yes of course but it also feels the voltage from the primary or rotor twice as strongly.
Actually it is worth noting that it does still have increased inductance, but with an equally higher induced driving voltage current works to keep the same total ampere turns.
I can't make sense of these words
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
You may object that the thinner turns have a higher resistance, yes that doubles the resistance but you only have half the current, it's the current density that matters and that is the same in each (assuming it supports only half the current).
The effect of the resistance is simply to introduce resistive losses, which result in heating but do not change the magnetic field at all unless (a) the current changes or (b) the number of turns changes. If you have a higher resistance, then of course you will need a higher voltage to create the same current, that's all.
Quote from: OUman on May 23, 2008, 02:11:32 PM
I think you are mistaken. If you double the number of turns with the same current you double the magnetic field.
I have said it correctly many times, i said it wrong once, I meant to say half the current.
Quote
I agree but this is inconsistent with your previous statement.
Because my previous statement was not what I meant to say.
Quote
I can't make sense of these words
So much for trying to be clear.
I am saying this:
If you double the number of turns you double the voltage picked up. (and if it changed nothing else the current would also double)
And with the current kept the same it will create a magnetic field that is 2 times stronger.
So to keep the magnetic field the same we need to halve the current (say 2 amps to 1 amp instead of 4 amps) despite having twice the voltage (say 10v to 20v) this means we need to multiply by 4 everything that resists the flow of current. (which is ohmic resistance and self inductance, indeed both are multiplied by 4)
100 turns at 2 amps driven from 10 volts requires .1 Henry (Henry figure is made up and may be way out)
200 turns at 1 amp driven from 20 volts requires .4 Henry
In other words if you want half as much current when faced with twice as much voltage you need 4 times the reactive and ohmic resistance. And a coil with twice as many turns of the same size mass shape will have 4 times the reactive and ohmic resistance.
They have different kinds of transformers by the way, some where the coils have a low self inductance to save money by using less copper and steel (this causes it to have a high residual current when unloaded).
Other transformers have a really really high self inductance if they spend a lot of time with the primary powered but the secondary not pulling a load.But just because it has a higher self inductance does not stop current from flowing through both coils when loaded.
Quote
The effect of the resistance is simply to introduce resistive losses, which result in heating but do not change the magnetic field at all unless (a) the current changes or (b) the number of turns changes.
True.
Quote
If you have a higher resistance, then of course you will need a higher voltage to create the same current, that's all.
I follow I have clarified things enough now hopefully.
The results I got with the difference in induced voltage between the HC and HV coil (in my test of the MOT's) do not even come close to agreeing to the difference in self induction between the 2 coils.
That means that something other than the number of turns if effecting the difference between self inductance in the 2 coils, which is position on the core.
After much thought, if anyones cares here is my plan of action.
I will increase the magnetic coupling between the stator and rotor. (increase the energy output and hence also the resultant mechanical loading)
If that does not lead to success at least by creating deceleration on shorting the HC coils then only one of 2 possibilities remain.
Either a FE (or at least enhanced efficiency) type effect is occurring with the HC coils meaning it does not load the generator much. (this sounds reasonably unlikely, and actually something ( may be able to test)
Or maybe more likely the motor is just not right, barely showing a change in speed as electromechanical loads vary.
Finally I will consider buying the time of someone with a working motor so they can carry out tests that I would want to do. (it's maddening not being able to do these experiments)
hmmm, it also strikes me that this kind of insensitivity to varying loads would occur if for whatever reason I must put in too much power to overcome some non varying loss, still there does not seem to be any such thing.
Also I'll add 18 steel 1 inch washers, either between the magnet and the cup for the magnets too recessed, or on the back of the cup to keep the balance for the magnets that aren't..
Quote from: springfield on May 23, 2008, 08:24:40 AM
@hoptoad, thats interesting. Do you think there could be some resonance effect with the mains frequency? EG in yr example at 1000 rpm it will be 50 HZ, same asline frequency (in UK) so might be expected some kind of resonance in feedback down the shaft, whether it aether or EM or whatever. So exact motor speed could be critical?
-Mike
@Springfield
It's certainly possible that resonance is partly responsible for Thanes observations using an inductance motor driver. I hadn't really considered that angle with respect to the importance of frequency.
Probably because I used DC drivers, and frequency is not really a major factor affecting the driver side of the equation. Hmmm. Interesting question though.
However, there is only a
critical minimum speed (frequency) for the "kick in" to occur for any given coil, and any speed above that will always result in an increased electrical and / or accelerative torque O/P. This tends to rule out resonance, because the effect occurs over a wide range of frequency, so long as the frequency is above "kick in" minimum.
Heres a link that explains the relationship of resistance versus reactance (impedance) in an AC power circuit.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/phase.html
The
important factor in the total (Z) impedance of the circuit is the
"phase angle" between voltage and current resulting from the relationship of the resistance and reactance (X
L and X
C) of the coil.
Note that in the explanations shown,the total resistance (Rt) should include the internal resistance (R
IN) of the coil plus the resistance of the load (R
L).
Since all coils also have a small amount of internal capacitance, then the total reactance (X
T) is shown as the inductive reactance (X
L) minus the capacitve reactance (X
C) .
??? important factor....hmmmmm :)
KneeDeep
Recap
Let's start over, I feel that momentum and direction is being lost. (None of this message will be news as such to anyone who has read the whole thread)
I plan on making 2 posts, This one is the case for Thanes generator technology and a bit on what is so far the only explanation that can cover all the evidence: "The Aether" since magnetic flux and generator producing torque have been disproven and no other theory has been proposed or seems likely to be.
note: Magnetic flux was very well disproven by Thane in experiments that used non magnetic rotor and shaft materials with an excess of coils.
Thane has shown that when shorting (or heavily loading) generator coils that consist of many turns an acceleration occurs in Induction motors, he has seemingly also found some effect in universal motors.
And possibly related effects have been found in DC motors.
This by it's self might be plausibly be explained as reducing the losses in the core as the coil reduces the EMF in the core (by creating the opposite EMF) so it WILL reduce core losses and that this improved efficiency may be less than the coils Lenz effect is possibly no surprise at all since unlike the core the coil has no hysteresis losses only inductive.
However 4 facts disprove this mundane conclusion.
First some stators do not cause acceleration unless the generator and motor have an all steel shaft connecting them. (I have argued that Thanes magnetic demo fails to account for the difference due to the feeble nature of that effect and the steps required to demo the effect (removing motor face plate) and with a total lack of objection from Thane I feel the case for magnetic flux pushing it over the required speed to show the acceleration effect is extremely unlikely)
Second Vince (Where are you Vince? and others who have replicated the tech and gone quiet) has shown that the motors torque does indeed increase by measuring the torque on the casing.
Third Thane has demonstrated that the effect requires so called 'High Voltage' coils which consist of a rather large number or turns, this would not be a requirement for a core loss reduction effect.
And finally Thane has demonstrated that the motor turns a little faster with the stator coils shorted than entirely absent! Which is very impressive!
Another possible reason for acceleration on shorting is reduction of cogging torque, I am mentioning it as an artifact to be wary of as it has no ability to explain the vast majority of Thanes effect.
Also the use of laminated cores makes core loss slightly less likely as the core loss effect is generally seen in cores of low quality, however I have also shown that in open magnetic circuits laminated cores still have a significant level of eddy current losses. (Although partially closed magnetic circuits are showing Thanes effect)
Also disproven is that it is any oddity related to induction motors.
While it is established that induction motors are inefficient at low speeds and at high speeds can pull less current while delivering more power, just because it might have enough power were it rotating faster it still needs something to act on it to make it rotate faster in the first place.
And the effect has been demonstrated well beyond the speeds where induction motors have any such characteristic.
It is not yet known (by any evidence I am aware of) if the effect is a 'Free Energy' effect or if it somehow reduces losses in the motor, however either way it seems that a very useful and enlightenibng anomoly is present which is readily replicable and has been successfully replicated by everyone who has made honest attempts of it except yours truly. (I also believe that aetheric technology is easily 'retasked', this could for instance make research into antigravity very easy)
Thane is being funded and is building a Buggy but does not seem interested in doing experiments to uncover the principle cause of the effect at this time, though is steadily uncovering more about the effect.
While I wish Thane were directing his developments in different directions I do wish others who have replicated the effect did not seem to leave soon afterwards with seemingly little interest in advancing the understanding of this vitally useful technology, so let's see what should be done to understand this technology better in the next post I make.
Experiments:
There are 2 types of experiments that I would like to see done, in fact I am even considering paying Luc or Larry or someone to preform some of them if I don't get results myself pretty soon!
One type tries to verify and test the nature of the effect, to deconstruct it.
The other uses aetheric principles to try to increase the effect, this message will focus on the former only.
Measuring the effect:
Small measured mechanical loads, with and without generator. (as fought for by Jacksatan, it has real merit but is limited in usefulness as it puts numbers on the effect but does not tell us anything new about the effect besides it's magnitude, though some feel that looking at performance curves will be enlightening what it can tell us is limited.)
However Thanes test where the free wheeling speed of the generator is greater with the coils shorted then when not present seems to confirm that this results of this test would be positive, and so it's priority is low.
Replicating Vince's brilliant tests to substantiate his results seems like a very worthwhile effort also.
The REAL experiments:
Surrogate Stator:
Energize a coil from the generator (possibly best to be a relatively tight air core coil of not so many turns, although as long as the generator still accelerates when shorted it's Ok) and apply it's flux to another motor (or possibly the motor running the generator if isolated with the brass/pvc coupler or belt) and see if it is effected. (possibly rectified and smooth)
Then switch powering it from a conventional source of electrical power which matches the electrical qualities in the previous test to see if it is just the magnetic field or something else in the current.
Also I recommend trying it rectified and possibly smoothed, see if each pole has the same impact on the motor.
Update: To replicate the coil and magnet config which may prove critical also try a version where a magnet is attached to the motor shaft with the coil pointing at it's face. (the magnet rotating around it's long magnetized axis like a Faraday generator)
This also present opportunities of powering other devices with this electroaetheric power.
The reason few have been able to replicate Teslas effects with TC's is because Tesla used generators which output a fair aetheric component where the grid these days carries little aether component.
Surrogate Motor:
These 3 are a progression, if one fails no use in going further
A: Feed flux from the generator into a motor (try induction and other types) which is not mechanically coupled but has some load on it (The gen. is driven by belt from a separate motor), have the shafts as close as possible or even lightly brushing if possible and rotating in the same direction preferably.
As the evidence for something coming out of the generator shaft and flowing into the motor is strong it seem this experiments would have excellent odds of success while also verifying absolutely that the effect is being applied to the motor.
note: This test can also be done in a quick and dirty version by Larry, Thane or anyone with one of these generators in about a minute, though with a higher chance of failure there is almost no investment.
Simply get the generator running and shorted, then get another motor of any type freely available, apply a load which could possibly be fingers applied to a smooth shaft and possibly something to protect against friction burns, then approach the generator and place this motors shaft against the free end of the generator shaft, or near the coils, rotor magnets or the other end of the bench grinder.
B: Hold the shaft of the motor under test in the above experiment still measuring it's static torque with varying levels of input from the generator.
C: If it works try effectively the same thing but with with a linear motor. (AKA an AC or DC powered coil attracting a piece of steel or magnet, try feeding the steel/magnet or the coil)
Next Step:
If test B or C or the surrogate stator work then these tests become possible:
Make an electromagnet or transformer with large hysteresis losses, see if the generator (aetheric) output can lower the hysteresis. (under the theory that the motor power gain may be due to a reduction of energy wasted due to hysteresis)
There are many other tests that can be done if the Aether can leave the shaft or surrogate coil and effect other devices, you may test various transformers especially types with a loose coupling, radio reception/transmission and so on, this could lead very easily into making a Free Energy electrical generator!
You could test projection of magnetic fields especially when multiple stator coils are in use or from the surrogate coil.
Finally since I copied much of this from an old message I am updating I'll include:
Amplification of the effect when various shorted coil forms are wound over the shaft. (possibly in series with the gen coils) - aether theory
Amplification of the effect by use of radioactive materials, very high voltage electric fields and UV or Xrays. -aether theory (all of these energize the aether)
If you can think of a test to add, then please speak up.
@ Aether
Just to let you know I am still around. I do read this thread everyday to see what is going on. Contrary to what you may think I have not lost interest, just the "Time" to experiment. Spring and Summer Are busy for me, so I have not been able to continue with my efforts. As far as remaining silent on the issue there are several reasons for it. First, my background and education are mechanical engineering and I do not feel qualified to comment on many of the issues that are debated here. Secondly, even if I did have a opinion on any these findings, it is almost intimidating to make a comment for fear of saying something that is either totally obvious or just stupid. It is no secret that the comments can get mean and sometimes personal.
Just to let you know that before I tried my experiments with the small motor I had tried it with a larger 1 HP motor and found it impossible to get any noticeable acceleration if any with it. If I remember correctly you are using larger motor and it may require a lot more coil and windings to really load it to show the effect.
Regards
Vince
Quote from: vince on May 24, 2008, 09:17:15 PM
@ Aether
Just to let you know I am still around. I do read this thread everyday to see what is going on. Contrary to what you may think I have not lost interest, just the "Time" to experiment. Spring and Summer Are busy for me, so I have not been able to continue with my efforts. As far as remaining silent on the issue there are several reasons for it. First, my background and education are mechanical engineering and I do not feel qualified to comment on many of the issues that are debated here. Secondly, even if I did have a opinion on any these findings, it is almost intimidating to make a comment for fear of saying something that is either totally obvious or just stupid. It is no secret that the comments can get mean and sometimes personal.
Just to let you know that before I tried my experiments with the small motor I had tried it with a larger 1 HP motor and found it impossible to get any noticeable acceleration if any with it. If I remember correctly you are using larger motor and it may require a lot more coil and windings to really load it to show the effect.
Regards
Vince
I am very happy that you are still around, and yes the comments can get mean but that should be less true.
First most of the mean stuff was from or to the 'Spooks', the worst of them are gone, I will not debate with them anymore and neither will Thane clearly since I have pissed him off somehow. (I think by him insisting he was right (which may be true in an experimental basis) when simulations following strict electrical rules say I am right)
And Thane would sometimes get understandably sensitive due to the attacks and sometimes think his friends were his foes but again he has 'given up' discussing which though sad and IMO might hurt the discovery means that your comments should not draw any fire.
Thank you very much for the comment on motor power, while I have controlled the power so that it acts in a very puny way maybe it is the power rating of the motor getting in the way, I value that comment!
With the larger motor did you control it with a Variac, transformer or Triac or other power controller? (just to separate the issue of rated motor power .vs actual power input)
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 04:49:15 PM
100 turns at 2 amps driven from 10 volts requires .1 Henry (Henry figure is made up and may be way out)
200 turns at 1 amp driven from 20 volts requires .4 Henry
In other words if you want half as much current when faced with twice as much voltage you need 4 times the reactive and ohmic resistance. And a coil with twice as many turns of the same size mass shape will have 4 times the reactive and ohmic resistance.
Yes, that's true. I agree.
- The reactance is proportional to the inductance, which is
proportional to the square of the number of turns.
- The resistance is inversely proportional to the area (cross-sectional area of the wire), which is inversely proportional to the number of turns (since you are imposing the condition that the total volume of copper remains constant*). Therefore, the resistance is in this case
proportional to the square of the number of the number of turns.- Therefore, if you double the number of turns, you multiply the impedance by 4. (both the reactive and the resistive part, provided you're keeping the total amount of copper constant*).
So, that's all true but I'm not sure where it gets us in terms of new discoveries because that's just conventional text-book calculations. What is the point you were making?
* note: and you're also assuming that the average length (circumference) of each turn is the same in either case, which may not be exactly true but is a second-order effect.
Quote from: OUman on May 24, 2008, 09:51:11 PM
Yes, that's true. I agree.
- The reactance is proportional to the inductance, which is proportional to the square of the number of turns.
- The resistance is inversely proportional to the area (cross-sectional area of the wire), which is inversely proportional to the number of turns (since you are imposing the condition that the total volume of copper remains constant*). Therefore, the resistance is in this case proportional to the square of the number of the number of turns.
- Therefore, if you double the number of turns, you multiply the impedance by 4. (both the reactive and the resistive part, provided you're keeping the total amount of copper constant*).
So, that's all true but I'm not sure where it gets us in terms of new discoveries because that's just conventional text-book calculations. What is the point you were making?
* note: and you're also assuming that the length (circumference) of each turn is the same in either case, which may not be exactly true but is a second-order effect.
My point was to inform Thane that HV coils can output as much energy as HC coils. (By proving that they create the same ampere turns)
And that hence he need not have HC coils in his buggy except for regenerative braking possibly unless his device is not following basic rules of electromagnetism. (which I grant is entirely possible)
DEAR AETHER22,
PLEASE STOP SPECULATING ABOUT MY MOTIVES - I SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE 3 HOURS PER DAY TO DEBATE I HAVE WORK TO DO.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM I_RON/STEVE AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON WITH STEVE'S DEVICE?
I AM INSTALLING NEW MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR WHICH ARE 5X STRONGER THAN THER OLD ONES.
WHEN I HAVE SOMETHING WORTHWHILE TO SHARE I WILL.
Thane
Ah, I forgot, there is one other experiment.
Make a video of 2 tests, in the first case you get Thanes generator up to speed with the HV coil shorted, and then once the speed is at max you open circuit the HV coil as you simultaneously turn the power off to the motor.
In the second you follow the same procedure but when you turn the motor off you keep the HV coils shorted.
If the Generator were providing some motive force directly then the second instance should take a lot longer to decelerate.
However if the generator is increasing the motor power then shorting the coils may not slow deceleration and depending on the core may speed deceleration, especially with a laminated semi closed circuit core.
It has also come to my attention that attepts to increase motor speed beyond sych have failed entirely.
Aether,
I had used a light dimmer switch but I noticed that the speed control was very dependent on the size of the rotor ( flywheel) and it was hard to get good speed control without a properly weighted rotor. If it was too light it did not want to slow down properly and when I used too much it it took a lot more amps to keep it at the lower speed.
Vince
DEAR AETHER22,
PLEASE STOP SPECULATING ABOUT MY MOTIVES - I SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE 3 HOURS PER DAY TO DEBATE I HAVE WORK TO DO.
Sorry, I kind of took what you said personally, and I guess wanted to get you to say something.
I was just trying to find what power your Ryobi is, I recall you saying it was of a lower power than mine but the only mention I can find now is 200 watt but not sure that is right.
My bench grinder is 175w and I just looked at a hardware store and the smallest motor they had was a 200w Ryobi.
So if you can tell me the watt rating that would help.
Also again I'd ask you to send that coil as soon as practicable, I'll pay whatever you require (eventually) I just need to get this working.
Vince, what wattage motor do you have? With mine being lower powered than anything currently available I'm not sure is being too high powered is the issue, maybe motors voltage or number of turns is the issue.
Also Vince, are you still using the light dimmer or did the problems induce you to get a variac?
BTW, to complete the changes to the current generator in hope of getting the effect to start working I need a product called JB weld, well when i looked say a month ago for it i found there was an NZ website for the product, now I can only find the website by archive.org's wayback machine, and searching for it online I find that this guy has been selling thousands on NZ's main auction site for reasonable prices, but no current Auction, the last one ended YESTERDAY!! Hopefully it's because he doesn't put them on again until Monday I hope but if not then it could just be the worst timing ever.
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
... I am going to take one more shot at trying to explain why if two coils are the same size weight and shape why more turns will not have a larger inductance if it is a generator or transformer coil.
Aether, we now agree on the theory; however, I do not agree with your conclusion quoted above. In fact, I think the theory predicts the opposite.
Inductance is proportional to the square of the number of turns. (Assuming the same core material, core dimensions and winding height, which agrees with your own assumptions).Â
Quote from: aether22 on May 23, 2008, 09:05:44 AM
... what I would like to make very clear as it should be from the circuit simulator agreeing with me that according to known electrical principles the number of turns (or inductance) has no effect of the energy that can be pulled from a coil.
I'm not sure what you mean by the term "pulled" but I think I disagree with your conclusion here too. The amount of energy
stored in an inductor for a given current is proportional to its inductance.
Quote from: OUman on May 24, 2008, 09:51:11 PM
So, that's all true but I'm not sure where it gets us in terms of new discoveries because that's just conventional text-book calculations. What is the point you were making?
:D :D :D
No offence aether22 but most of your theories seem to come from the aether!
For a person who hasn't yet succeeded in creating the effect, you sure seem to have a lot of FACTS up your sleeve! ::)
When I first came to this thread I said the effect was due to a phase change in the counter mmf to induction mmf relationship. But I never detailed the reasons, which are very simple and explainable with conventional theory.
If you bothered to check the last link I posted, you will see that induced current lags voltage.
Here it is again. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/phase.html
The voltage (pressure) is produced by the passing magnets (changing pressure), and manifests as current in the coils when there is a load. This load forms part of the impedance (Z) triangle of RLZ in the phasor diagrams shown. When you increase the load (lower the resistance) the phase angle increases.
Counter MMF is produced by the current in the coil, and it also arises out of phase with the coil current that is producing it.
Conventionally speaking, counter mmf is said to be 180 degrees out of phase and is therefore oppositional to the inducing MMF. In reality no inductor is perfect, and the phase is more likely to be between 170 - 179 degrees out of phase depending on the inductors characteristics.
When there is a load placed on the coil, the phase angle of the coil current increases as the resistive load decreases towards S/C.
The resulting counter mmf phase angle changes with respect to the inducing MMF. As the counter MMF approaches 90 degrees out of phase with the inducing MMF it approaches zero opposition.
Frequency plays an important role, because the X
L of the inductor increases with frequency, so the current phase angle will also increase with it.
Whether the counter MMF phase change can be pushed below 90 degrees and produce additional torque, (above the torque with no coil setup present) as Thane says his setup has done, is still open to question to me. It can only be accepted as proof if others are able to replicate this one particular claimed aspect of Thanes setup.
In the meantime, I'm still impressed with Nali2001's results, which showed clearly that HV coils are not a pre requisite for acceleration and practical electrical O/P at the same time from a single coil.
Cheers
Quote from: OUman on May 25, 2008, 07:11:50 AM
Aether, we now agree on the theory; however, I do not agree with your conclusion quoted above. In fact, I think the theory predicts the opposite. Inductance is proportional to the square of the number of turns. (Assuming the same core material, core dimensions and winding height, which agrees with your own assumptions).
I'm not sure what you mean by the term "pulled" but I think I disagree with your conclusion here too. The amount of energy stored in an inductor for a given current is proportional to its inductance.
I guess it's hard to be clear sometimes ;)
What I mean is the change in inductance is offset by the higher voltage and what would otherwise be twice the MMF. (due to doubling the number of turns)
So yes you have 4 times the inductance but double the voltage so only half (not a quarter) the current and with double the turns a constant MMF/ampere turns.
I just mean that the increased inductance has no effect on the fundamental qualities in a generator coil, at least electrically.
I actually said in the same post that inductance is 4 times higher so obviously I did not strictly mean that inductance isn't changed. (but that the counter voltage the coil feels from self induction remains equal and opposite to the primary inducing voltage (from the rotor, assuming a constant ampere turns) in a shorted coil regardless of the number of turns so both appear to cancel out with the same MMF being produced)
Also with more thought I have realized that inductance is not a set figure for a steel cored coil, for instance if you put in a small electrical input inductance will not saturate the core, but if you put in higher it will and inductance will fall.
It also seems plausible that with tiny electrical inputs some cores may not align well if it is a little magnetically hard and have a lower inductance than if you put in a stronger input that would align the domains.
Still that is only relevant if we are talking about a different MMF produced by the coil and here we are not.
note: quite a few tiny edits have been made to stop any further misunderstanding, or possibly word games?
Clearly I am bad at saying things clearly but possibly the most simple is:
If you have the same ampere turns (amps x turns) you produce the same magnetic field. If you disagree with that you really need to read a book!
And if you double the number of turns you double the voltage picked up from both the coils own EMF/MMF and the rotors EMF/MMF so relatively everything remains the same.
Well what you saw in my video's is like over a year old. And never went much further then what is showed. And I have since moved on to other projects. But I'm always on the lookout for new ideas to upgrade old stuff.
Steven
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 24, 2008, 10:03:32 PM
DEAR AETHER22,
PLEASE STOP SPECULATING ABOUT MY MOTIVES - I SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE 3 HOURS PER DAY TO DEBATE I HAVE WORK TO DO.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM I_RON/STEVE AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON WITH STEVE'S DEVICE?
I AM INSTALLING NEW MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR WHICH ARE 5X STRONGER THAN THER OLD ONES.
WHEN I HAVE SOMETHING WORTHWHILE TO SHARE I WILL.
Thane
I'm not crazy about the quote function for a few reasons for more involved back and forth, so I'll use colour again, old text in grey.
No offence aether22 but most of your theories seem to come from the aether!
For a person who hasn't yet succeeded in creating the effect, you sure seem to have a lot of FACTS up your sleeve! ::)
If you mean about inductance that's basic general stuff and not specialized to the effect
When I first came to this thread I said the effect was due to a phase change in the counter mmf to induction mmf relationship. But I never detailed the reasons, which are very simple and explainable with conventional theory.
If you bothered to check the last link I posted, you will see that induced current lags voltage.
Or if I bothered to know anything about electricity, yeah I've known that for well over a decade.
Here it is again. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/phase.html
The voltage (pressure) is produced by the passing magnets (changing pressure), and manifests as current in the coils when there is a load. This load forms part of the impedance (Z) triangle of RLZ in the phasor diagrams shown. When you increase the load (lower the resistance) the phase angle increases.
Counter MMF is produced by the current in the coil, and it also arises out of phase with the coil current that is producing it.
If I understand what you are saying here, then the magnetic field produced by the generator coil is out of phase with the current that creates that magnetic field, the real current consisting of moving electrons. (not fictional conventional current)
Now there is a way for the moving charges and the magnetic field to be noticeably out of phase but only if you are a VERY long way from a very swiftly accelerating and decelerating charge, it's called light or radio waves.
And since you do not mean that then let me assure you, you are confused on this point, but hopefully I misunderstand what you are saying or you typed something you didn't mean to. (which is going around)
Conventionally speaking, counter mmf is said to be 180 degrees out of phase and is therefore oppositional to the inducing MMF. In reality no inductor is perfect, and the phase is more likely to be between 170 - 179 degrees out of phase depending on the inductors characteristics.
Yes
When there is a load placed on the coil, the phase angle of the coil current increases as the resistive load decreases towards S/C.
The resulting counter mmf phase angle changes with respect to the inducing MMF. As the counter MMF approaches 90 degrees out of phase with the inducing MMF it approaches zero opposition.
I do not believe that is possible.
If you have almost no load the induced voltage is at 90 degrees and hence so is the infinitesimal current.
This I found when I first hooked up a dual channel Oscope to the pri and sec of a transformer (secondary was OC) over ten years ago. And it makes sense if you look at how the 'lines' of magnetic force cut the wires.
However and it is going to appear that I am contradicting what I have said about inductance here but I am not, the inductance of the coil stops this. Let's look at a transformer.
As the magnetic field from the primary establishes it's self going from zero to something it induces in the secondary a voltage that pushes electrons in the secondary such that it produces the opposite or repelling magnetic field. If the primary get's to it's maximum current and the backs off the secondary finds a voltage induced that pushes charges in the same direction (as the primary), the observation made is that the secondary is induced in such a way as to oppose any changes in flux from the primary.
However just because the voltage induced from the primary has changed direction does not mean the current can since the secondary has established it's own magnetic field and it can't just collapse it, so unless the secondary creates a very tiny MMF compared to the primary instead of the current reversing it simply starts dropping as the primary does. (although if the primary established a magnetic field, held it up there until the secondaries magnetic field collapsed and then went down then you would have a weird looking 90 deg phase, although this does not otherwise have any relevance with anything else in this message)
Going off on a tangent (If you follow me you may get lost): So it acts to create both a zero net change and zero net field, if the primary and secondary are a single bifilar coil (and if the secondary is shorted and low resistance and the primary current limited by an external inductor) then there is indeed no magnetic field created by either and no field is detectable but any normal means. (though in reality there is slightly more current in the primary since nothing's perfect so a tiny net field
Returning from tangent:
The current in the secondary will lag the current in the primary by precisely 90 degrees if it has no self inductance (impossible) and by precisely 180 degrees if it needs no voltage. (Possible if you use a superconductor, also 180 degrees means the primary or rotor loses no energy although it is only possible to get 180 degrees perfectly if the secondary has no resistance, actually this is important and I will talk about it later)
If you are getting 90 degrees with current then something super strange is happening, and that would also be Free Energy. It would pretty much mean that the secondary had no self inductance, now if the secondary has a tiny current then it could lag by say 91 degrees but that would not be FE, a little lag means a little loss from a little bit of energy generated.
Frequency plays an important role, because the XL of the inductor increases with frequency, so the current phase angle will also increase with it.
Incorrect, as the frequency of the generator coil changes so does the rotors frequency, both MMF's keep pace. Unless you have some inductance outside of the rotors EMF possibly.
Any number of turns with any inductance can be used at any frequency, normally high inductance with high frequency blocks but not when it is generated in the inductor, as the self inductance changes so does the received inductance.
Whether the counter MMF phase change can be pushed below 90 degrees and produce additional torque, (above the torque with no coil setup present) as Thane says his setup has done, is still open to question to me.
There is much supporting evidence that Thanes effect is on the motor (coupler, torque measurements), and there is also evidence that it is not at the generator. (inability to accelerate beyond the motors top speed despite the effect working near the top speed)
It can only be accepted as proof if others are able to replicate this one particular claimed aspect of Thanes setup.
In the meantime, I'm still impressed with Nali2001's results, which showed clearly that HV coils are not a pre requisite for acceleration and practical electrical O/P at the same time from a single coil.
Cheers
And with that I add something else to the mix as previously mentioned.
As I have already mentioned, there are a few mundane ways that a shorted generator may speed up, by reducing core losses as a result of greatly reducing the net EMF in the stator core, and by reducing cogging torque.
By Steve's own statements it seems his only works with very poor cores so reducing core losses is a likely majority cause of his acceleration.
But there is another way, and I'll tell you that this issue has caused me much confusion because it's a subtle point, indeed much earlier in this thread I even proposed it is a possible free energy effect. (in transformer form)
If you have a generator like Thanes, at what point will the rotors magnetic field be at maximum strength in the stator?
The answer is easy, when it's poles face is right up against the stators core.
Ok, so if the stators magnetic field is at 180 degrees phase to the rotors then when will it's field be at maximum?
At the same point.
So what was it and what will it be when the rotor magnet is 1 centimeter either side of the stator? In each case the same strength and still the same polarity (repelling) that it is when centered.
So this is the same as swapping the stator coil for north pole magnets with an all N pole rotor, yes there is some cogging torque but no real loss, the rotor loses energy on the approach due to the repulsion but gains it all back as it moves away.
What happens however is the phase is not 180 as you correctly pointed out, it may be 170, 160, 150, or depending on the design and load 179.
But if it is 180 then the rotor (or primary) does not lose any energy at all. (this is possible with superconductors but only because then the secondary uses no energy)
But it is worth noting that pulling more current might not actually mean more energy pulled from the output coil but less and also less lost from the rotor or primary. (note: in a transformer the current will go up but if current limited pri with a dead short sec the voltage in the secondary will drop to a low voltage with a good short and less energy will be used, also it is worth noting that more current through the primary does not mean energy actually used since it could support a high current with theoretically no loss of energy with a perfect tank circuit)
Quote from: aether22 on May 25, 2008, 04:05:42 PM
note: quite a few tiny edits have been made to stop any further misunderstanding, or possibly word games?
Clearly I am bad at saying things clearly but possibly the most simple is:
A22 - FEEL FREE TO USE MY RANT ABOUT PERPETUAL DEBATES ANYTIME.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 25, 2008, 06:37:31 PM
I'm not crazy ...
ARE YOU SURE?
DEFINITION OF CRAZY(INSANE) - is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Thane
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 25, 2008, 06:35:07 PM
But I'm always on the lookout for new ideas to upgrade old stuff.
Steven
HERE IS SOMETHING YOU MIGHT TRY - IT IS A COIL I STARTED TODAY.
YOU CAN SEE HOW THE ROTOR FLUX FOLLOWS THE PATH THROUGH THE COIL AND AVOIDS THE HIGHER RELUCTANCE "C" AIR GAP.
THE COIL'S BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX TAKES THE LOWER RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH THROUGH THE "C".
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 25, 2008, 07:45:55 PM
A22 - FEEL FREE TO USE MY RANT ABOUT THE FUTILITY OF PERPETUAL DEBATES ANYTIME.
Thane
SORRY THIS WAS MEANT TO BE A "MODIFY" NOT A QUOTE .. ???
Hi Thane,
About your last design.
First off I really applaud people with never ending endurence to keep going at what they want to achieve. So you are doing well. Not that meany people here in this field go beyond the 'lets talk about it' phase. That is not a critique to them since they have their choice and role as well.
My main interest when I started in this field was "Lets beat lenz law' I have designd simulated and tested quite a few designs and devices and still am. Altough it is hard to put in words I have come to the 'believe' that it is not that easy (to say the very least) to redirect the coil's back emf away from the magnetic field that is inducing it in the first place. The one only exists because of the other and in my believe (atm) it does not matter 'where' you let the back emf and rotor magnet's field fight the lenz battle. I have never found a way to seperate the two. Back emf is born in the coil where the rotor's magnetic field is going through and so seperating them is like the dream since the electrical revolution started. Without lenz there would be no relation anymore to input and output, so it is a worthy goal to perusue. Keep on it, I still do. Lately I am more into solid state tech and hildenbrand type systems, as well as anything that sounds promissing. Well to recap, I never have found a convincing methode of beating Lenz law and so creating a no load generator. That does not mean I have given up, far from it. But there is so damn much more to it that we just don't know. Many of these designs seem logical in our mind and some also in simulations. But all I ever saw was nature finding a way to equal cause and effect at best. But we go on untill we get it done. That is out highest goal right. We will get there within a year or 3 I believe, the time seems right.
Steven
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 24, 2008, 10:03:32 PM
snip
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM I_RON/STEVE AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON WITH STEVE'S DEVICE?
I AM INSTALLING NEW MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR WHICH ARE 5X STRONGER THAN THER OLD ONES.
WHEN I HAVE SOMETHING WORTHWHILE TO SHARE I WILL.
Thane
Thir,
I only wish I knew for sure but my guess is that the original patent only used ceramic magnets.
Nali has used Neo's and a very heavy steel construction. Plus it is a twin core twin coil construct.
I have tried all the available core types from cast iron, brake turnings and powdered cast iron in
epoxy and magnetite and epoxy to salvaged laminations. I have run innumerable tests using the
RV as a prime mover to chart the drag and output of these different types. The best material (and in the unobtainium category), is Somaloy which I got from the Aussie inventor that S and I work with.
But using somaloy cores I was unable to duplicate Hop Toad's experiment... go figure...
Tidying up your experiment, I increased the gap to 1/4 of an inch, put up four coils, two HV and
two HC. As the variac was back on the Veljko pendulum experiment, ran it at full speed where
no changes of speed up or down or any deviation from a steady input rate was noted, with any core
connection scheme. I really should cut the core in half as you have done and wind proper coils to
fit the reduced core size. Being a 1/4 inch away, with that mass of core, killed the effect.
So you see I am not the best person to ask what is going on with S's device.
But give me a shout when you have something definite that you think I might be able to handle
and I will give it a spin, K?
Take care mon amie,
Ron
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 25, 2008, 09:29:54 PM
Hi Thane,
About your last design.
First off I really applaud people with never ending endurence to keep going at what they want to achieve. So you are doing well. Not that meany people here in this field go beyond the 'lets talk about it' phase. That is not a critique to them since they have their choice and role as well. Steven
INTERESTING - MY DEMO #4 DOES IT COMPLETELY ALBEIT WITH IRON CORES NOT LAMINATED ONES BUT I HAVE NOT BEEN FOCUSING ON IT AT THE UNIVERSITY BECAUSE IT IS NOT AS "SEXY" AS THE ACCELERATION EFFECT. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpIdu1lWVW0
THIS VIDEO IS INTERESTING BECAUSE WITH 18 MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR - THERE IS NO OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MOTOR TO RECOVER IF DECELERATION WAS INVOLVED.
I ACTUALLY PUT THIS TOGETHER TODAY (FOR FUN) WITH A 235 OHM 30 GAUGE COIL AND GOT ACCELERATION.
Thane
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 25, 2008, 09:29:54 PM
Lately I am more into solid state tech and hildenbrand type systems, as well as anything that sounds promissing. Steven
Hi Steven,
Sorry, off topic, but please check out Luc's motor/rotor design at #45 at NEWS > FREE ENERGY USING MAGNETS and my testing at #78 of the same thread if you're interested in hildenbrand type systems.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: i_ron on May 25, 2008, 09:39:04 PM
But give me a shout when you have something definite that you think I might be able to handle
and I will give it a spin, K?
Ron
WELL AFTER YOU POSTED THAT PICTURE OF YOUR GIRLFRIEND WE CAN ALL SEE THAT YOU HAVE JUST ABOUT ALL YOU CAN HANDLE. :D
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteTidying up your experiment, I increased the gap to 1/4 of an inch, put up four coils, two HV and two HC. As the variac was back on the Veljko pendulum experiment, ran it at full speed where no changes of speed up or down or any deviation from a steady input rate was noted, with any core connection scheme. I really should cut the core in half as you have done and wind proper coils to
fit the reduced core size. Being a 1/4 inch away, with that mass of core, killed the effect.
I_RON,
CAN YOU CLARIFY "NO CHANGES" - DOES THIS MEAN NO DECELERATION FROM THE HC COILS AS WELL?
BECAUSE NO CHANGES AND NO DEVIATION FROM STEADY STATE MEANS NO LENZ EFFECT FROM WHERE I SIT HERE IN OUR NATIONS CAPITAL.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 25, 2008, 09:29:54 PM
Hi Thane,
About your last design.
First off I really applaud people with never ending endurance to keep going at what they want to achieve. So you are doing well. Not that many people here in this field go beyond the 'lets talk about it' phase. That is not a critique to them since they have their choice and role as well.
My main interest when I started in this field was "Lets beat lenz law' I have designed simulated and tested quite a few designs and devices and still am. Although it is hard to put in words I have come to the 'believe' that it is not that easy (to say the very least) to redirect the coil's back emf away from the magnetic field that is inducing it in the first place. The one only exists because of the other and in my believe (atm) it does not matter 'where' you let the back emf and rotor magnet's field fight the lenz battle.
I totally agree, there is no way to make 'logical' free energy devices, only by actually engineering the medium of space can it be done. (not to say that aetheric tech isn't logical, it is but it is not known by most and so very few if any 'logical' designs attempt to use it, most fall over the effect or are inspired to build something they don't understand. (and some of the logic based methods that try to find loopholes actually use the aether, but the effect is often tricky to get working)
But when you effect the aether you don't just get one effect normally, look at the GEET carburetor, well over 100 anomalies including the ability to fog film from a distance.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 25, 2008, 07:51:48 PM
ARE YOU SURE?
DEFINITION OF CRAZY(INSANE) - is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Thane
I'm glad you brought that up.
That is the dumbest definition for anything and I just wanted to tear that cliche a new one!
First it is not the definition of insanity by anyone. (almost any definition of insanity would cover different things entirely)
And second, despite being the definition of Windows ;) (you really can get different results, thanks Bill) it is also the key to most every success (not just being brilliant but persistent and keep on pushing hard), look at all the coils you made, look at the oft quoted 10,000 filaments Edison proved could not work until he found what would.
I would also add that quantum physics and the aether have real issues with this good for nothing cliche.
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 12:08:03 AM
I'm glad you brought that up.
That is the dumbest definition for anything and I just wanted to tear that cliche a new one!
IF READ IN THE
PEOPLE CONTEXT IT WAS MEANT I.E.
ENDLESS EGO DEBATING YOU WOULD NOT SAY THAT - PERSONALLY I PREFER BUCKY'S IDEA...
?You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.??R. Buckminster Fuller
AND MY PERSONAL CRANKYpants MOTO"
"IF YOU BUILD IT - THEY WILL ALL SHUT UP - EVENTUALLY"Thane
PS
THANKS LARRY FOR POSTING THE THREAD - NICE TO SEE HOW IT IS REALLY MEANT TO BE - I.E. PEOPLE ACTUALLY DOING STUFF AND SHARING THEIR RESULTS TOGETHER IN PEACE.
A22, CONCERNING THE COIL YOU WANT ME TO SEND YOU (AT MY EXPENSE)
- BUILD YOUR OWN - IT IS THE BEST WAY TO LEARN.
Quote from: aether22 on May 25, 2008, 11:59:50 PM
But when you effect the aether you don't just get one effect normally, look at the GEET carburetor, well over 100 anomalies including the ability to fog film from a distance.
For GEET click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adqtuj_kGC8
Quote from: OUman on May 26, 2008, 07:41:14 AM
For GEET click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adqtuj_kGC8
Well that was 9 minutes of smug that left me right back where I started, knowing nothing. Nothing in that video demonstrated anything definitive one way or another about the potential value and efficacy of any aspect of GEET engineering. One more pointedly pointless point for the pile.
Maybe someone beat Thane to the punch?
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news5.26.08c.html (http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news5.26.08c.html)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 25, 2008, 08:53:44 PM
HERE IS SOMETHING YOU MIGHT TRY - IT IS A COIL I STARTED TODAY.
YOU CAN SEE HOW THE ROTOR FLUX FOLLOWS THE PATH THROUGH THE COIL AND AVOIDS THE HIGHER RELUCTANCE "C" AIR GAP.
THE COIL'S BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX TAKES THE LOWER RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH THROUGH THE "C".
CHEERS
Thane
What does it do?
Quote from: JustMe on May 26, 2008, 01:19:19 PM
Well that was 9 minutes of smug that left me right back where I started, knowing nothing. Nothing in that video demonstrated anything definitive one way or another about the potential value and efficacy of any aspect of GEET engineering. One more pointedly pointless point for the pile.
Just read the top comment to the video, it's from someone who successfully replicated it, there are tons who have, and MIT copied it.
OUman sure has a funny nick for a spook, but given the timing if s/he isn't PB then it's PB's replacement, all very predictable, and clearly paid based per response if you look at the questions, such as: What does that do?
I even suspect that earlier the spook was talking with it's self with the whole oranges thing trying to get paid for inducing the reply of another persona.
There simply isn't any motivation for anyone to act in the way or hold the changing positions (and changing levels of intelligence) these guys do. (except for the mentally unstable)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 06:51:14 AM
IF READ IN THE PEOPLE CONTEXT IT WAS MEANT I.E. ENDLESS EGO DEBATING YOU WOULD NOT SAY THAT - PERSONALLY I PREFER BUCKY'S IDEA...
?You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.??R. Buckminster Fuller
AND MY PERSONAL CRANKYpants MOTO"
"IF YOU BUILD IT - THEY WILL ALL SHUT UP - EVENTUALLY"
Thane
PS
THANKS LARRY FOR POSTING THE THREAD - NICE TO SEE HOW IT IS REALLY MEANT TO BE - I.E. PEOPLE ACTUALLY DOING STUFF AND SHARING THEIR RESULTS TOGETHER IN PEACE.
@Thane,
Very appropriate quotes and statements. I've always wondered how you have had time to pick up your great quotes, while working so hard on your project.
Regards, Larry
A22,
TODAY I GOT MY NEW MOT COILS PERFECTED AND WORKING BEAUTIFULLY.
TOMORROW I WILL BE MAKING A PHOTO ESSAY OF HOW TO DO IT SO YOU (AND OTHERS) CAN DO IT VERY EASILY IN NO TIME AT ALL. ALSO SOME VIDEO AS WELL - I SHOT SOME VIDEO - BUT DID NOT LIKE THE QUALITY
IT TOOK ME 4 HOURS + 2 WEEKS TO GET IT RIGHT.
IF THIS DOES NOT WORK FOR YOU - I HAVE EVERYTHING READY FOR YOU (INCLUDING THE MOTOR) - TO SEND BACK WITH ULI - BUT I REALLY FEEL IT WOULD SERVE YOU WELL TO DO IT YOURSELF - AND YOU MAY EVEN TEACH US ALL SOMETHING IN THE PROCESS.
I SHOT ANOTHER VIDEO TODAY HIGHLIGHTING THE CURRENT IN THE HC COILS - IT TAKES 0.4 AMPS TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN ONLY THE HC COILS ARE EMPLOYED AND THEN WHEN THE HV COILS ARE EMPLOYED THE SYSTEM CONTINUES TO ACCELERATE THROUGH 1.0 AMPS AND BEYOND. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCvhxHh_ctE
ALSO - THIS TIME I DID NOT DISCONNECT THE HC CURRENT COILS BUT LEFT THEM ENGAGED AND SIMPLY ADDED THE HV COILS "ON TOP".
WITH MY NEW HAND WOUND COILS I CAN ACCELERATE THROUGH 2.5 AMPS AND BEYOND WITH 1 HV COIL.
IN ADDITION THE EFFECTS CONTINUE WHEN I EMPLOY 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR. I CAN FINALLY START BUILDING MY BUGGY GENERATOR WITH CONFIDENCE.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 07:19:36 PM
A22,
TODAY I GOT MY NEW MOT COILS PERFECTED AND WORKING BEAUTIFULLY.
TOMORROW I WILL BE MAKING A PHOTO ESSAY OF HOW TO DO IT SO YOU (AND OTHERS) CAN DO IT VERY EASILY IN NO TIME AT ALL. ALSO SOME VIDEO AS WELL - I SHOT SOME VIDEO - BUT DID NOT LIKE THE QUALITY
IT TOOK ME 4 HOURS + 2 WEEKS TO GET IT RIGHT.
IF THIS DOES NOT WORK FOR YOU - I HAVE EVERYTHING READY FOR YOU (INCLUDING THE MOTOR) - TO SEND BACK WITH ULI - BUT I REALLY FEEL IT WOULD SERVE YOU WELL TO DO IT YOURSELF - AND YOU MAY EVEN TEACH US ALL SOMETHING IN THE PROCESS.
I SHOT ANOTHER VIDEO TODAY HIGHLIGHTING THE CURRENT IN THE HC COILS - IT TAKES 0.4 AMPS TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM WHEN ONLY THE HC COILS ARE EMPLOYED AND THEN WHEN THE HV COILS ARE EMPLOYED THE SYSTEM CONTINUES TO ACCELERATE THROUGH 1.0 AMPS AND BEYOND. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCvhxHh_ctE
ALSO - THIS TIME I DID NOT DISCONNECT THE HC CURRENT COILS BUT LEFT THEM ENGAGED AND SIMPLY ADDED THE HV COILS "ON TOP".
WITH MY NEW HAND WOUND COILS I CAN ACCELERATE THROUGH 2.5 AMPS AND BEYOND WITH 1 HV COIL.
IN ADDITION THE EFFECTS CONTINUE WHEN I EMPLOY 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR. I CAN FINALLY START BUILDING MY BUGGY GENERATOR WITH CONFIDENCE.
CHEERS
Thane
Sounds uniformly awesome, You've lifted my spirits!
Nice vid again.
Also even if I must start again with the MOT's, that's Ok since I have 3 (although I know one to have a 150 ohm sec) unused ones along with the 2 currently in use, very much interested in the photo Essay. (Oh, and I managed to get the J-B weld and am letting the stuff dry right now)
One thought about the Buggy, you may just find that you can charge the battery directly from the HV coils (assuming it does not reduce the acceleration effect too much) rather than using the HC coils, although you may also run into surface charging issues as you are not inputting real power but it's a thought, works for Bedini. (Needless to say after running it through a bridge rectifier)
I know you are just hoping for range extension but I'm hoping you get it so you never, or almost never need to recharge. (I'm not sure just 50% range extension will get enough attention)
QuoteMaybe someone beat Thane to the punch?
UPSIDE YOUR HEAD...?
YOU BETTER HOPE SO MISTER -
"CAUSE I'LL HIT YOU SO HARD YOUR WHOLE FAMILY WILL DIE"(that's another quote in jest there Larry)
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 05:46:22 PM
I even suspect that earlier the spook was talking with it's self with the whole oranges thing trying to get paid for inducing the reply of another persona.
That was Larry and adlep - are you calling them spooks now?!
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 05:46:22 PM
There simply isn't any motivation for anyone to act in the way or hold the changing positions... these guys do.
If you've got the idea that I'm changing my positions, let me be clear:
In my opinion, the device acts as a magnetic brake, dissipating all of the input power as heat. When the coils are configured in a certain way, the braking effect is reduced and the system accelerates. In some cases, a small amount of the power can be bled off to a load such as a lamp; in other cases, the power input to the prime mover is observed to drop slightly at the same time. In
all those instances, the apparent power gain is fully accounted for by a reduction in the waste heat dissipated in the coils and in the motor itself. There is no evidence of any over-unity action going on here.
Is that clear enough?
SO WHY NOT DO US ALL A FAVOR AND JUST PISS OFF THEN ... ?
Hi Thane
Seen the vid, seems like it's in hyperdrive.
There is one thing I would like to ask:
Have you ever reached a level of output that was greater then the drag/losses the cores presents in the system caused in the first place?
So to put it in other words:
Do your cores put out more power then the resistances/losses they cause in the system?
(not talking about lenz, only eddy drag and such)
Steven
QuoteOne thought about the Buggy, you may just find that you can charge the battery directly from the HV coils (assuming it does not reduce the acceleration effect too much) rather than using the HC coils, )
YES ABSOLUTELY JUST DUMP IT ALL INTO A CAPACITOR - WHICH I INTEND TO DO
(CHECK OUT LUC'S AWESOME MOTOR/CAP COLLAPSING FIELD CHARGER HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7BJQebSgYc
I NEED TO BE ABLE TO USE MY BUGGY AS A DEMO/TEACHING TOOL - PEOPLE UNDERSTAND HC COIL DECELERATION AS REGENERATIVE BRAKING - SO I NEED TO HAVE AN INDEPENDANT VARIABLE: COIL CHOICE
DEPENDANT VARIABLE: BATTERY CHARGING/ACCELERATION
CONTROL VARIABLE: EVERYTHING ELSE.
QuoteI know you are just hoping for range extension but I'm hoping you get it so you never, or almost never need to recharge. (I'm not sure just 50% range extension will get enough attention)
IF I GET MY HV COIL HC COIL RATIO RIGHT (AS I ALREADY HAVE) EVERY SINGLE WATT OF HC COIL DECELERATION WILL BE MATCHED OR EXCEEDED BY HV COIL ACCELERATION & CAPACITOR CHARGING.
YOU OUGHT TO SEE THIS IN TOMORROWS VIDEO.
Thane
Quote
Hi Thane
Seen the vid, seems like it's in hyperdrive.
YES YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED ME BACKING AWAY GRADUALLY DURING FILMING!
QuoteThere is one thing I would like to ask:
Have you ever reached a level of output that was greater then the drag/losses the cores presents in the system caused in the first place?
YES FOR SURE WITH THE SPLIT PHASE MOTOR TEST.
I KNOW THIS IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE ASKING BUT IT IS VERY CLOSE.
QuoteSo to put it in other words:
Do your cores put out more power then the resistances/losses they cause in the system?
(not talking about lenz, only eddy drag and such)
Steven
IN THE SPM TESTS BELOW MY GENERATOR COILS CAUSED THE ROTOR TO ROTATE FASTER THAN IT COULD DO AS A STAND ALONE UNIT.
AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AGAIN YES.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 08:03:55 PM
SO WHY NOT DO US ALL A FAVOR AND JUST PISS OFF THEN ... ?
Yes, if you are not being paid, and you believe in OU but not in this particular device as your nane suggests then what motivation do you have to restate the same position that you have had and PB has had the entire time.
Your position is well understood and for various reasons considered disproven by every other regular of the thread, being that neither you nor PB has even tried to answer these reasons it's clear you have nothing more to share.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 26, 2008, 08:21:44 PM
Hi Thane
Seen the vid, seems like it's in hyperdrive.
There is one thing I would like to ask:
Have you ever reached a level of output that was greater then the drag/losses the cores presents in the system caused in the first place?
So to put it in other words:
Do your cores put out more power then the resistances/losses they cause in the system?
(not talking about lenz, only eddy drag and such)
Steven
Yes he has had faster speeds and less drag with shorted coils than with the stators removed all together. (I had not yet read thanes reply saying the same)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 08:24:42 PM
YES ABSOLUTELY JUST DUMP IT ALL INTO A CAPACITOR - WHICH I INTEND TO DO
(CHECK OUT LUC'S AWESOME MOTOR/CAP COLLAPSING FIELD CHARGER HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7BJQebSgYc
I NEED TO BE ABLE TO USE MY BUGGY AS A DEMO/TEACHING TOOL - PEOPLE UNDERSTAND HC COIL DECELERATION AS REGENERATIVE BRAKING - SO I NEED TO HAVE AN INDEPENDANT VARIABLE: COIL CHOICE
DEPENDANT VARIABLE: BATTERY CHARGING/ACCELERATION
CONTROL VARIABLE: EVERYTHING ELSE.
IF I GET MY HV COIL HC COIL RATIO RIGHT (AS I ALREADY HAVE) EVERY SINGLE WATT OF HC COIL DECELERATION WILL BE MATCHED OR EXCEEDED BY HV COIL ACCELERATION & CAPACITOR CHARGING.
YOU OUGHT TO SEE THIS IN TOMORROWS VIDEO.
Thane
Very nice, but my suggestion is to also try shorting the HV coils through a bridge rectifier and straight into a battery with possibly a cap in parallel to smooth but not a periodic dumping, see what works best. (you might find the acceleration from the HV coil is not much effected and that it does a decent job of rejuvenating the battery on an aetheric current, or I may be wrong but it would be easy to test)
You have been doing some excellent work!
Addition:
BTW, I just want to float the thought of tests being done with motor types other than induction for those with success with induction motor versions, the indication is that the effect should not be tied soley to induction motors but that is not something that I think anyone can say with a great deal of confidence. (Yes, Thane reported some positive result with a drill but it sounded like a quick and dirty test with unreported results that I guess were underwhelming or potentially inconclusive)
Actually more seriously, I had not really thought about this before but induction motors are not I don't believe very efficient as electric motors go and are even worse when run at the wrong speed (I think their characteristics are not well suited to driving a vehicle. So Thane you might want to see if you can get some decently efficient and well suited motor type and see if you can get the effect working.
Or if you do want to stick to induction motors maybe 3 phase is the way to go, but I'm not going to pretend that's easy to generate onboard.
I think DC and universal motors are the best bet for decent efficiency over a wide range of speeds, or pulse motors. (though I think pulse motors might be a poor choice for Thanes device)
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 08:40:41 PM
Yes he has had faster speeds and less drag with shorted coils than with the stators removed all together.
@aether, i dont think he said he removed the stators altogether, I think he just moved the coils further away. Also the real test would be to remove the entire generator ie its rotor too nd compare it to that.
-Mike
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 08:56:25 PM
... induction motors are not I don't believe very efficient as electric motors go and are even worse when run at the wrong speed...
@aether, i think you'll find that induction motors are in fact very efficient indeed when operated propely - but your right if their forced to run at the wrong speed they can be very
inefficient indeed.
-Mike
Quote from: springfield on May 26, 2008, 10:22:05 PM
@aether, i dont think he said he removed the stators altogether, I think he just moved the coils further away. Also the real test would be to remove the entire generator ie its rotor too nd compare it to that.
-Mike
'turned away from' is pretty clear IMO, they were removed from the influence of the rotor so in that test they were not involved.
I wasn't aware that induction motor efficiency compared favorably, but if it does as you say it will still be an issue when Thane isn't driving at an efficient speed, even if we assume starting and slow driving are an unimportant portion of the drive, how fast would he need to be going to drive at an efficient speed?
I'm really not sure, but assuming he uses an induction motor and runs it at the frequency god intended (60hz in the US) and assuming what at least 14 inch rims and another 6 inches of tyre minimum (no idea if that's close) and let's say 90% of the synch speed is maximum efficiency (I have no idea, just making up figures here), all up the speed I get is 300kph, or 186 miles an hour.
Now my math may be imperfect but if I'm close with my wonky math that's simply too fast to do without gear reduction.
Now maybe Thanes device improves efficiency enough that you can afford to run it at an otherwise inefficient speed and make it all work but if single phase induction motors with a fixed frequency are what Thane is looking to use I think gear reduction would be highly recommended (Or does Thane care not at all about absolute efficiency only comparable efficiency to the same motor without coils? problem is that shorting coils can lead to acceleration for mundane reasons and I am not sure Thane appreciates that fact and that not every experiment he does rules out such an artifact/explanation)
Anyone care to do a better workup so we can figure out thanes efficiency at various sync speeds without HV coils?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 07:28:29 PM
UPSIDE YOUR HEAD...?
YOU BETTER HOPE SO MISTER - "CAUSE I'LL HIT YOU SO HARD YOUR WHOLE FAMILY WILL DIE"
(that's another quote in jest there Larry)
Oh yes, that's a beauty! You so much remind me of an old Irish friend, great joke telling, drinking buddy of mine, a last name of Donley. ;D
Cheers, Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 07:19:36 PM
TODAY I GOT MY NEW MOT COILS PERFECTED AND WORKING BEAUTIFULLY.
IN ADDITION THE EFFECTS CONTINUE WHEN I EMPLOY 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR. I CAN FINALLY START BUILDING MY BUGGY GENERATOR WITH CONFIDENCE.
CHEERS
Thane
Nice Demo. Good luck with the buggy.
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 11:15:56 PM
.... problem is that shorting coils can lead to acceleration for mundane reasons and I am not sure Thane appreciates that fact and that not every experiment he does rules out such an artifact/explanation) .....
Anyone care to do a better workup so we can figure out thanes efficiency at various sync speeds without HV coils?
Why does mundanity pose a problem? Increased efficiency, no matter how mundanely achieved, can only be viewed positively.
Exotic imaginings may be sexy, but good results from possibly mundane methods are sexier. Thanes latest demo is quite sexy .... oooh :D :D
Perhaps you may do a better workup and figure out thanes efficiency at various sync speeds without HV coils?
KneeDeep
Quote from: hoptoad on May 27, 2008, 03:09:02 AM
Why does mundanity pose a problem? Increased efficiency, no matter how mundanely achieved, can only be viewed positively.
Exotic imaginings may be sexy, but good results from possibly mundane methods are sexier. Thanes latest demo is quite sexy .... oooh :D :D
Perhaps you may do a better workup and figure out thanes efficiency at various sync speeds without HV coils?
KneeDeep
If it were actually useful I would not call it mundane. (even if it's cause was)
None of the mundane ways a generator can accelerate when shorted that I am aware of are of any use.
One is by reducing core losses, however this simply means the core is of poor quality and that usage of a propper core would see this effect vanish. (It's only use would be in making generators out of unusually poor cores more efficient when the generator coils are pulling many ampere turns)
Another is reduction of cogging torque, but that is not a big loss at speed and can be reduced easily by a flywheel or by an odd/even rotor/stator number.
Finally if shorting takes less energy from the coil (and hence the rotor) than placing a load with a higher resistance then that is of no interest as it is not improving efficiency, the acceleration is due to a reduction in the power pulled out.
All of these effects can be ruled out as major factors in Thanes device for many reasons.
Also there is no OU possible with mundane physics.
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 03:42:16 AM
If it were actually useful I would not call it mundane. (even if it's cause was)
I'll happily wait for Thanes buggy results and data before deciding if I think his generation and application of the effect is useful or not, and mundane or not.
Quote from: hoptoad on May 27, 2008, 04:44:26 AM
I'll happily wait for Thanes buggy results and data before deciding if I think his generation and application of the effect is useful or not, and mundane or not.
THE DEMO I POSTED YESTERDAY
SHOWS HC LENZ DECELERATION FROM 0.6 A TO 0.4 A WHEN I SWITCHED IN THE HV COILS - IF I WOULD HAVE LEFT IT ALONE TO WOULD HAVE DECELERATED DOWN TO
0.0 A.
SWITCHING IN THE HC COILS CAUSED ACCELERATION FROM 0.4 A UP TO 1.0 A - WHEN I SHUT THE SYSTEM DOWN AT ABOUT 2000 RPM - IT WOULD HAVE CONTINUED UP TO OVER 2.0 A AT 3000 RPM BUT I WASN'T INTERESTED IN MAKING ANOTHER "CLOVERFIELD" MOVIE.
TODAY MY NEW COILS SHOULD PROVIDE 2.5 - 3.0 AMPS INDIVIDUALLY - THE IDEA IS (AND I HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS) - IS TO USE THE HV COILS TO ACCELERATE THROUGH THE HC COIL 3 A DECELERATION. - THEN REPLACE THE "SMALL" 30 LB STRENGTH MAGNETS w/ 150 LB STRENGTH MAGNETS AND INCREASE MY INDIVIDUAL COIL OUTPUT TO 15 A -
NOW I HAVE ROOM FOR 6 OF THOSE 3 A HC COILS - IF I AM SUCCESSFUL AT CANCELLING EACH HC COIL'S 3 A DECELERATION INDIVIDUALLY IT SHOULD BE ANYTHING LESS THAN MUNDANE - IT WILL BE
MAN-THANE THAT'S COOL! @ OVER 90 A OUT.
NOW BEFORE YOU GET ANY
WRONG IDEAS - YOU SHOULD ALL BE AWARE THAT THE
MOT DISCOVERY BELONGS TO LUC 8) AND IF IT WERE NOT FOR HIM I MIGHT BE STILL DICKING AROUND WITH IRON CORES. :-\
IMAGINE IF THE WORLD WORKED LIKE THAT ... EGO-LESS SHARING
"HELP ALL SERVE ALL" WOW WHAT A CONCEPT!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 06:34:20 AM
TODAY MY NEW COILS SHOULD PROVIDE 2.5 - 3.0 AMPS INDIVIDUALLY - THE IDEA IS (AND
NOW I HAVE ROOM FOR 6 OF THOSE 3 A HC COILS - IF I AM SUCCESSFUL AT CANCELLING EACH HC COIL'S 3 A DECELERATION INDIVIDUALLY IT SHOULD BE ANYTHING LESS THAN MUNDANE - IT WILL BE MAN-THANE THAT'S COOL! @ OVER 90 A OUT.
15 amps, sounds awesome, 90 Amps, Whoa!
What voltage though? (with that we can calc energy, even 5v would be 450w)
I would note that just because one HV and HC coil combo might not decelerate the rotor does not mean that 2 or 6 will have the same effect, could be better or worse.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 08:03:55 PM
SO WHY NOT DO US ALL A FAVOR AND JUST PISS OFF THEN ... ?
Because I'm looking for the evidence - I want to see the OU here.
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 08:38:32 PM
...what motivation do you have to restate the same position that you have had...
My motivation is that you said I keep changing my position - so I just wanted to point out that my position is constant. I am very open to change it, though, if new evidence is brought forward. That's why I'm sticking around.
Quote from: aether22 on May 26, 2008, 08:38:32 PM
Your position is well understood and for various reasons considered disproven by every other regular of the thread, being that neither you nor PB has even tried to answer these reasons...
What "reasons" are they? I can see, as yet, no reason anywhere in this thread to consider there is OU here. I don't know about PB but as far as I'm concerned, there's no reason to be answered. If I've missed something though, please tell me what it is.
Quote from: springfield on May 26, 2008, 10:33:54 PM
@aether, i think you'll find that induction motors are in fact very efficient indeed when operated propely - but your right if their forced to run at the wrong speed they can be very inefficient indeed.
-Mike
95% is routinely achievable with mass-production motors - in fact, the
minimum NEMA standards are in that range. Any new technology will have to show it can boost that significantly at minimal cost increase.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 26, 2008, 07:28:29 PM
UPSIDE YOUR HEAD...?
YOU BETTER HOPE SO MISTER - "CAUSE I'LL HIT YOU SO HARD YOUR WHOLE FAMILY WILL DIE"
(that's another quote in jest there Larry)
Thane
So, any serious replies?
No? Didn't think so.
Ah well. I'll just wait to see how the buggy performs.
Quote from: OUman on May 27, 2008, 09:09:57 AM
What "reasons" are they? I can see, as yet, no reason anywhere in this thread to consider there is OU here. I don't know about PB but as far as I'm concerned, there's no reason to be answered. If I've missed something though, please tell me what it is.
Acceleration beyond the speed of no stators present. (it can't be a reduction of core loss braking when there is no core loss braking in the comparison) look at reply #2366 above to get the figures
Acceleration dependent on path to motor and stator number. (A steel shaft is required, unless many coils are used at which point non magnetic materials are Ok)
A measured increase in torque on the motor casing. (this can only occur if the motor outputs more torque, if the effect was at the generator the torque would tend to drop)
All of these have been well enough tested to be substantial proof that the effect is not at the generator and can be a net gain not just a reduction of losses at the generator. It is also worth noting that another test someone preformed found acceleration on approach of a laminated core to the generator which is also at odds with any braking based theory)
Also the use of closed circuit laminated cores removes removes almost any possibility of a braking based theory since such cores have exceptionally low losses. (as demonstrated by a 1 rpm acceleration when thane had the cores facing in the first mentioned test above)
Also the magnitude of the effect is outgrowing any explanation based on a reduction of braking.
And braking would assume that any 2 shorted coils are much the same, but it has been shown that the effect generally requires HV coils where HC coils act as a brake despite creating a stronger counter MMF. (the counter MMF is what reduces the rotor flux in the stator, the HC coils cause a greater reduction in core braking to whatever extent it is present and yet it slows the rotor to a dead stop)
You have the Nick OUman, may I ask then since you apparently believe in OU/FE what experiments you have done? Devices that you believe are genuine and work? Can you point us to email lists or message boards where you have been a proponent of a Free Energy device?
And why when there is so much evidence for this being OU why you would discard that and choose to oppose it.
you said: "I am very open to change it, though, if new evidence is brought forward. That's why I'm sticking around."
Finally if all you want to do is sit quietly and wait for the evidence rather than disrupt this thread, then why are you doing the latter and not the former?
Quote15 amps, sounds awesome, 90 Amps, Whoa!
What voltage though? (with that we can calc energy, even 5v would be 450w)
I would note that just because one HV and HC coil combo might not decelerate the rotor does not mean that 2 or 6 will have the same effect, could be better or worse.
RIGHT NOW I AM ONLY SHORTING THE HC COILS TO CREATE MAXIMUM DECELERATION (WORST CASE SCENARIO) AND COMPENSATING THIS WITH A SHORTED HV COIL.
I ACCOMPLISHED THIS TODAY WITH 1 HV COIL TO 1 HC COIL - 2.5 AMPS w/ ACCELERATION.
EACH ADDITIONAL COIL I MAKE HAS TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT AND IT HAS TO HOLD UP UNTIL ALL THE COILS ARE SET IN PLACE - HC ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND HV ON THE OTHER - EACH COIL WILL WORK AS I HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE WITH THE IRON CORES AND I NOW HAVE THE LAMINATED CORES SORTED OUT NICELY.
THE COILS WILL EITHER BE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED IN PAIRS OR ALL TOGETHER - WHICH EVER WORKS BEST.
I AM TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF MAKING MY ROTOR WORK LIKE A FLYWHEEL AND USE MY DC MOTOR AS THE REGENERATIVE BRAKE AND ALLOW MY ROTOR TO FREEWHEEL AND CONTINUE CHARGING WHILE SITTING AT THE "TRAFFIC LIGHT".
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 06:04:50 PM
I AM TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF MAKING MY ROTOR WORK LIKE A FLYWHEEL AND USE MY DC MOTOR AS THE REGENERATIVE BRAKE AND ALLOW MY ROTOR TO FREEWHEEL AND CONTINUE CHARGING WHILE SITTING AT THE "TRAFFIC LIGHT".
Thane
I think that's a great idea.
Obviously you can't just accelerate back up to speed by re-engauging the motor so you would need gears and a clutch, and that would allow you to operate the motor at a constant maximally efficient speed and just use gears to build up speed and the DC motor for regenerative braking.
note: But I know stuff all about cars so i can't begin to guess just how doing gears and clutch for such a situation would work, unless the gears were infinitely variable. (such gear do exist but no idea how practical they are for vehicles)
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 06:37:45 PM
I think that's a great idea.
Obviously you can't just accelerate back up to speed by re-engauging the motor so you would need gears and a clutch, and that would allow you to operate the motor at a constant maximally efficient speed and just use gears to build up speed and the DC motor for regenerative braking.
note: But I know stuff all about cars so i can't begin to guess just how doing gears and clutch for such a situation would work, unless the gears were infinitely variable. (such gear do exist but no idea how practical they are for vehicles)
I AM GOING TO MONITOR THE ROTOR RPM AND THE MOTOR RPM ON A COUPLE OF DIGITAL TACHS ON THE DASHBOARD - THERE WILL BE A BELT ON THE MOTOR WHICH I WILL MANUALLY ENGAGE THE ROTOR WITH A LEVER WHEN THE TACH #'S ARE CLOSE ENOUGH NOT TO BURN MY BELT.
GET THE TIMING RIGHT AND I WON'T EVEN NOTICE THE TRANSITION.
Thane
OK, great, so there are then three pieces of evidence suggestive of OU potential:
1. Acceleration beyond the speed of no stators present. (per reply #2366 for the figures)
2. Acceleration dependent on path to motor and stator number. (steel shaft versus other)
3. A measured increase in torque on the motor casing. (can only occur if the motor outputs more torque)
Experiments need to be designed to build on this evidence and fully characterize each of those effects. Personally I think the most promising ones are #1 and #3, especially as there seems to be some dispute about that whole feedback-down-the-shaft thing.
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 05:28:00 PM
...why when there is so much evidence for this being OU why you would discard that and choose to oppose it.
you said: "I am very open to change it, though, if new evidence is brought forward. That's why I'm sticking around."
Finally if all you want to do is sit quietly and wait for the evidence rather than disrupt this thread, then why are you doing the latter and not the former?
I think the evidence you quoted, and that I listed above, is only suggestive, not probative. But it's a good starting point and I can tell you for sure that if
any one of those three points were to be expanded with some really convincing characterization data - with defensible experimental method and with measuring equipment that is sufficiently accurate and properly calibrated - then the world will beat a path to Thane's door.
I'm doing what you call "the latter" rather than "the former" because if progress is to be made, I think somebody needs to be raising these points.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 07:11:03 PM
I AM GOING TO MONITOR THE ROTOR RPM AND THE MOTOR RPM ON A COUPLE OF DIGITAL TACHS ON THE DASHBOARD - THERE WILL BE A BELT ON THE MOTOR WHICH I WILL MANUALLY ENGAGE THE ROTOR WITH A LEVER WHEN THE TACH #'S ARE CLOSE ENOUGH NOT TO BURN MY BELT.
GET THE TIMING RIGHT AND I WON'T EVEN NOTICE THE TRANSITION.
Thane
Sounds good, maybe then combining what you said and what I said (gears), add in a small level of throttle control that varies the speed of the motor within a highly efficient zone, so the throttle makes up for the difference between the gears.
I don't know how much loss a standard manual transmission introduces but I feel it would be less than running the induction motor at an inefficient speed. (especially when starting they are very poor as everyone on here knows)
The only other way to go that I am aware of is to vary the frequency input, but I am not sure just how that would work, can just putting in a different voltage make stator coils efficient at a frequency that is a fraction of the design frequency.
Of course if you have this all worked out and I am just annoying you please ignore.
SORRY DUDE - PM DC MOTOR - GOOD TO UP TO 55 MPH w/ 2 PEOPLE.
AND NO GEARS ETC. FOLLOWING THE KISS RULE :-*.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 06:37:45 PM
... i can't begin to guess just how doing gears and clutch for such a situation would work, unless the gears were infinitely variable. (such gear do exist but no idea how practical they are for vehicles)
Continuously variable gearboxes are quite straighforward and they are certainly applicable to vehicles - they were used in cars by a European company called DAF, which was later sold to Volvo who used it on certain of their models. My Massey garden tractor has one too - they all work by way of moving a drive belt back and forth along a conical pulley.
Electric motors don't need a gearbox though - they drive the wheels at a fixed ratio. I think introducing a gearbox into an electric vehicle would be a big step backwards and negate one of their many advantages.
OK OUman - I AM GOING TO BITE (I JUST KNOW I AM GOING TO HATE MYSELF IN THE MORNING THOUGH).
CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ACCELERATION OF A 10 LB MASS FROM 400 RPM TO 1500 RPM - WITH NO ADDITIONAL ENERGY SUPPLIED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE - ROTATIONAL KINETIC ENERGY.
FOR ANYONE ELSE HERE IS A HINT:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rotwe.html#we
AND
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/work.html
THE RULES - NO ADDITIONAL ENERGY SUPPLIED FROM ANY "KNOW" SOURCE.
OK GO!
LOVE
Thane
A22 - IS IT JUST ME OR IS THERE A TEAM OF "OUmen" SOMEWHERE RUNNING AROUND GOOGLING LIKE CRAZY IN SOME OFFICE, ALL WEARING BLACK SUITS (LIKE THE MATRIX) ALL DEDICATED TO THIS THREAD 24/7?
CHANTING...
"Nothing ever gets done
unless it's done by a fanatic."
Martin Sheen
Thane
Quote from: OUman on May 27, 2008, 07:25:56 PM
OK, great, so there are then three pieces of evidence suggestive of OU potential:
I then went on to list a further 4, so 7 in all that i can think of at this very moment.
Quote
1. Acceleration beyond the speed of no stators present. (per reply #2366 for the figures)
2. Acceleration dependent on path to motor and stator number. (steel shaft versus other)
3. A measured increase in torque on the motor casing. (can only occur if the motor outputs more torque)
Experiments need to be designed to build on this evidence and fully characterize each of those effects.
Agreed.
QuotePersonally I think the most promising ones are #1 and #3,
I like 2 and 3 more.
Quoteespecially as there seems to be some dispute about that whole feedback-down-the-shaft thing.
I think the evidence you quoted, and that I listed above, is only suggestive, not probative.
No, the results, along with the other 4 show that braking is totally unable to account for the effects.
Quote
But it's a good starting point and I can tell you for sure that if any one of those three points were to be expanded with some really convincing characterization data - with defensible experimental method and with measuring equipment that is sufficiently accurate and properly calibrated - then the world will beat a path to Thane's door.
Are we both thinking about the same world? I guess not.
Quote
I'm doing what you call "the latter" rather than "the former" because if progress is to be made, I think somebody needs to be raising these points.
PB already raised them.
And the latter is disrupting the thread and so you have admitted that you are here to disrupt.
I point out that since details of this device are so freely available, and since everyone who has attempted a decent replication has succeeded in doing so (besides myself) then you have little reason to not actually be a help to this thread rather than a disruption.
You must at this point realize that your objections which are identical to PB's have not got through to Thane or me or anyone with a device so obviously they will not.
You may also note that Thane has been very generous with me both in replies and sending a rotor and shafts, asked me questions about my aether theory, and even commended some of the ideas I have had (easy to test) and yet he has not tested a single idea that I or anyone else has had, so if you are waiting on him to test an idea you have well I think you can guess your chances.
So if no one with a device will listen to you (only reply to try and stop damage that idiocy of the type you demonstrate can do) and if you won't make a device, and you admit you are disrupting the progress
then what good do you think you are doing here?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 07:45:41 PM
A22 - IS IT JUST ME OR IS THERE A TEAM OF "OUmen" SOMEWHERE RUNNING AROUND GOOGLING LIKE CRAZY IN SOME OFFICE, ALL WEARING BLACK SUITS (LIKE THE MATRIX) ALL DEDICATED TO THIS THREAD 24/7?
CHANTING...
"Nothing ever gets done
unless it's done by a fanatic."
Martin Sheen
Thane
Yes, though I think they use the crappy M$ Live Search, they couldn't stand Google's corporate motto of not being evil.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 07:32:05 PM
SORRY DUDE - PM DC MOTOR - GOOD TO UP TO 55 MPH w/ 2 PEOPLE.
AND NO GEARS ETC. FOLLOWING THE KISS RULE :-*.
Thane
Ah, Ok, so a DC motor for acceleration and deceleration, gotcha, yes that would keep things easier.
So the universal motor is just for OU recharging of the battery and rolling resistance.
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 07:55:04 PM
Ah, Ok, so a DC motor for acceleration and deceleration, gotcha, yes that would keep things easier.
So the universal motor is just for OU recharging of the battery and rolling resistance.
UNIVERSAL MOTOR?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 07:58:41 PM
UNIVERSAL MOTOR?
Ok, whoops, I didn't notice I said universal motor, I meant to say DC motor but I guess I have universal motors on the brain.
I was going to ask you why not use a universal motor, but I figured you had a reason to say DC.
One advantage is a universal motor has no top speed unlike a DC motor (unless you put in more volts)
But it stands to reason than universal motors should be less efficient since they are using energy to create the stator field.
Also using a universal motor as a generator would require some fiddling.
STATOR FIELD?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 08:03:56 PM
STATOR FIELD?
I guess you know this, but if you don't...
Universal motors are the same as DC motors except they have electromagnetic stators in series with the rotor, they are very good at going very fast since the faster they go the more back-emf they generate so the less current they pull so the stator field gets weaker which means they must turn faster to generate enough back-emf. (That is the conventional explanation and though it seems to have some holes it nicely covers what they are observed to do under no load, basically speed up so much they destroy themselves often, where DC motors have a maximum RPM without raising the voltage no matter how light the load)
Now I'm going to finish up my project of reducing the gap and see if I can demo deceleration on shorting the HC coils.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 27, 2008, 07:41:02 PM
OK OUman - I AM GOING TO BITE (I JUST KNOW I AM GOING TO HATE MYSELF IN THE MORNING THOUGH).
CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ACCELERATION OF A 10 LB MASS FROM 400 RPM TO 1500 RPM - WITH NO ADDITIONAL ENERGY SUPPLIED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE - ROTATIONAL KINETIC ENERGY.
FOR ANYONE ELSE HERE IS A HINT:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rotwe.html#we
AND
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/work.html
THE RULES - NO ADDITIONAL ENERGY SUPPLIED FROM ANY "KNOW" SOURCE.
OK GO!
LOVE
Thane
Thane, are you talking specifically about your actual generator system with the coils and magnets etc or is your question a hypothetical one for an idealized rotating mass?
Quote from: OUman on May 27, 2008, 08:15:37 PM
Thane, are you talking specifically about your actual generator system with the coils and magnets etc or is your question a hypothetical one for an idealized rotating mass?
Ah, I can just hear Thane already regretting it!
Trying to be difficult, who, ME! no...
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 07:48:49 PM
I point out that since details of this device are so freely available, and since everyone who has attempted a decent replication has succeeded in doing so (besides myself) ...
Who?
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 08:17:52 PM
Ah, I can just hear Thane already regretting it!
Trying to be difficult, who, ME! no...
So do
you have an answer for Thane's question then?
Quote from: OUman on May 27, 2008, 08:21:58 PM
So do you have an answer for Thane's question then?
Sorry, I can't reply to your lame ass because I am in my work shop building crap and don't know you have posted.
And if I was still here for any reason such as having quite literally freezing cold feet and a lazy ass I still wouldn't want to reply to you.
And even if I did it would be pointless since you already know my position perfectly since you have read and replied to messages outlining it this very day.
So I guess that it doesn't matter that I'm not here to reply to your sorry self!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 25, 2008, 10:00:59 PM
WELL AFTER YOU POSTED THAT PICTURE OF YOUR GIRLFRIEND WE CAN ALL SEE THAT YOU HAVE JUST ABOUT ALL YOU CAN HANDLE. :D
CHEERS
Thane
Thir,
Now you leave my girlfriend out of this... if my wife finds out I will be in trouble (more than usual)
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 25, 2008, 11:01:18 PM
I_RON,
CAN YOU CLARIFY "NO CHANGES" - DOES THIS MEAN NO DECELERATION FROM THE HC COILS AS WELL?
BECAUSE NO CHANGES AND NO DEVIATION FROM STEADY STATE MEANS NO LENZ EFFECT FROM WHERE I SIT HERE IN OUR NATIONS CAPITAL.
THANKS
Thane
Dear Ottawa University Man...(OUman) (will the real OUman please stand up?)
Why didn't I think of that? That is priceless... you tax my credibility at times!
of course it is... I was only looking for acceleration....duh
OK, I had to go back and redo that. So the setup is the full height mot cores, the HC coil on first
with the HV coil last on (and thus closest to the magnets).
K, I lied to you, with the HV coils open, and the HC coils into a 5 ohm load (2 volts at .36 amps)
the PM (prime mover) uses 330 watts.
With the HV coils shorted in series, the output on the HC load drops to 1.47 volts at .27 amps
and the rpm goes up and the PM draw drops to 270 watts.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A full speed test...
HV open...PM = 220 watts, HC load reading is 2.07 volts at .37 amps (same 5 ohm load)
HV shorted... PM = 202 watts, HC load reading is 1.5 volts at .28 amps
with no apparent acceleration....(or deceleration...)
HV open by the way is 637 volts, or there abouts...
And thats the way it is in the provincial CAPITAL... capital show, wot?
At least I don't have a biker girlfriend like some of you naughty ottawa boyz do... 8)
Ron
Ron man, is it possible that you are using a synchronous motor rather than an induction motor?
As the synch motors do not change speeds under varying loads as the name suggests.
If you are using an induction motor then maybe I should be monitoring power used, but how are you guys calculating power? By measuring the average current through the motor and multiplying that by the volt reading your Multimeter gives you when you do an open circuit test on the ?variac? output? (I am even less sure how to measure a TRIAC based power controller accurately and easily)
That of course ignores phase angle and possibly true RMS readings, still if there is a change there is a change.
I'd also note that my voltages on the secondaries have not got as high as you are reporting, maybe as soon as I finish this job.
Quote from: aether22 on May 27, 2008, 08:30:02 PM
And if I was still here for any reason such as having quite literally freezing cold feet ...
Can't you slip on a nice pair of warm sheep?
Quote from: JustMe on May 27, 2008, 11:01:40 PM
Can't you slip on a nice pair of warm sheep?
That's a mental image I didn't need.
Although I wouldn't need to walk anywhere, I could just put reigns on them.
QuoteK, I lied to you, with the HV coils open, and the HC coils into a 5 ohm load (2 volts at .36 amps) the PM (prime mover) uses 330 watts.
SO 0.8 WATTS FROM 330 WATTS - RIGHT?
YOUR RATIO IS 0.0024QuoteWith the HV coils shorted in series, the output on the HC load drops to 1.47 volts at .27 amps and the rpm goes up and the PM draw drops to 270 watts.
NOW 0.432 W FROM 270 WATTS
YOUR RATIO IS 0.0054ALTHOUGH YOUR ENTIRE SYSTEM IS HORRIBLY INEFFICIENT IT SAYS NUMERICALLY THAT THE RATIO IS APPROACHING A RATIO OF 1.0 (100% SYSTEM EFFICIENCY 1 W IN = 1 W OUT)
NOW IF YOU DID YOUR EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS THE
CORRECT WAY - BY MEASURING POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT PRIOR TO THE GENERATOR YOU WOULD GAUGE EFFICIENCY BY HOW MUCH YOUR
SHAFT SPEED REDUCED (DUE TO GENERATOR HC COUNTER TORQUE) TO THE POWER COMING OUT.
AND YOU COULD TOTALLY BALANCE THIS WITH THE
WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE.
BUT THEN IN THE HV SCENARIO YOU WOULD HAVE TO
THROW THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE (AND THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY) OUT THE WINDOW BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE COMPLIMENTARY HV TORQUE IN YOUR DRIVESHAFT AND
NO COUNTERTORQUE SPEED REDUCTION TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT OUTPUT POWER - AND EVERYONE WOULD TOTALLY FREAK OUT - ASSUMING THEY WERE NOT ALL STUNNED BY USING TOO MUCH IQ LOWERING FLUORIDE TOOTHPASTE.
Thane
PS - I AM MOUNTING MY HV COILS ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND HC COILS ON THE OTHER TO KEEP THE OUTPUT AT A MAXIMUM AND AVOID THE FLUX BATTLE GOING ON INSIDE THE CORES.
BTW YOUR TESTS ARE VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL (REACTION WISE) TO OUR HIGH SPEED TESTS.
NICE JOB - WE ARE THINKINK ABOUT LET YOU WESTIES JOIN CANADA SOME DAY SO KEEP IT UP!
About time!
I added steel pieces to the transformer cores the same diameter as the Neos and aligned with them so that rather that being flush with the rim at best it could get beyond the rim.
I also had washers which I didn't measure but they were a magnetic steel and over 2mm thick, I placed them inside the cups for the magnets that needed boosting and taped them to the back of the cups for the ones that didn't. (NNN SSS NNN SSS pattern)
The end result was magnet to stator gaps that varied from lightly touching to a 5mm gap.
So I fired it up, previously I had been running it through a transformer that pretty much halved the 240v and then put it through the power controller, but with this new tighter gap it was only going to work with the power controller run from the mains.
And so I fired it up and guess what, it works!
When I short the HV coil is speeds up, when i short the HC coil it slows down, when I short both depending on the speed it's at it either speeds up or slows down.
Needless to say I am very very happy!!!
I would love to run more tests but it's late and there is smoke coming out of the motor!
Luke, that money may have to wait a bit longer, my birthday present to myself looks like it's going to be a higher powered motor! (Oh, and I gave in and bought a real tachometer which makes life sooooo much easier than any of the jury rigged methods, totally worth it!)
So yes, may this be a lesson to any replicators, the flux really needs to get in there!
And if it doesn't all the turns in the world or even a closed flux path won't make up for too great a rotor/stator gap.
What is the highest wattage bench grinder anyone has got the effect with? Because if I am going to get one it needs to both put up with the punishment and show the effect, the current one looks to be on it's last legs.
Thane, what do you recommend?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 28, 2008, 06:56:14 AM
ASSUMING THEY WERE NOT ALL STUNNED BY USING TOO MUCH IQ LOWERING FLUORIDE TOOTHPASTE.
I'm soooo happy right now!
But on to more serious matters, the state with the most fluoride in the US has the highest % of people with dentures, and the one with the least fluoride has the lowest %!
Fluoride is used as a rat poison.
And Hitler gave the Jews in the concentration camps fluoride.
So ya gotta know it's good for you, all the evidence shows it's bad for teeth.
But the interesting thing is that finally large numbers of officials and doctors are actually starting to rethink fluoride which is amazing!
Quote from: aether22 on May 28, 2008, 08:10:48 AM
I'm soooo happy right now!
Allright aether22, congrats. That's what happens when you quit spook-busting and aetherizing long enough to
get er done.
About the motor size. My larger motor used half the watts as the 3/8 HP, but it also had slower acceleration and deceleration. I think with a larger motor you would need an even better magnet balance, mine was 3 MM.
Motor smoking! Did you notice the fan that Thane had blowing on the motor in some of his vid's?
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on May 28, 2008, 10:18:11 AM
Allright aether22, congrats. That's what happens when you quit spook-busting and aetherizing long enough to get er done.
I think it was the sheep slippers!
Congrats John. Looking forward to your experiments and results. :)
Quote from: JustMe on May 28, 2008, 11:01:30 AM
I think it was the sheep slippers!
Definitely.
Mighty mundane such footwear.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 28, 2008, 06:56:14 AM
ALTHOUGH YOUR ENTIRE SYSTEM IS HORRIBLY INEFFICIENT
Yes, the magnet area is .785 square inches and the core area is 2.734 square inches
Thane
PS - I AM MOUNTING MY HV COILS ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND HC COILS ON THE OTHER TO KEEP THE OUTPUT AT A MAXIMUM AND AVOID THE FLUX BATTLE GOING ON INSIDE THE CORES.
BTW YOUR TESTS ARE VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL (REACTION WISE) TO OUR HIGH SPEED TESTS.
NICE JOB -
WOW, an atta boy... I am beside myself!
and to think that you know that there is a country on the other side of winnipeg! astounding!!!
Truly an enlightened upper canadian...I am nearly speechless, lol, I like your style, boy.
Now the coils on both side is an interesting concept, do you have the cups on both sides now?
Does this not put the drag way up too? Please post a picture when you are ready.
Aether 22, the watt numbers are just a reference for the individual experimenter to keep track of
how his/her experiment is progressing, not to be taken literally. I use a "circuit test" DCL-280 or
a DT6052, <http://www.multimeterwarehouse.com/DT6052.htm> as in this photo...(induction motor)
(//)
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 28, 2008, 11:42:07 AM
and to think that you know that there is a country on the other side of winnipeg! astounding!!!
Truly an enlightened upper canadian...I am nearly speechless, lol, I like your style, boy.
Hey Ron, do you get all those photoshopped news thingies where we pretend there's actually a guy from Alberta in the PM's office? I hope so! We work hard on them here in Ontario, and they really make us laugh. 8)
Quote from: JustMe on May 28, 2008, 12:40:22 PM
Hey Ron, do you get all those photoshopped news thingies where we pretend there's actually a guy from Alberta in the PM's office? I hope so! We work hard on them here in Ontario, and they really make us laugh. 8)
That would be funny if the person were not so pathetic. If you are referring to that Calgary school
Tavistock clone... then I would suggest he is not even a canadian, rather he is a nu world oder minion, bent on the destruction of us and the land. We had a westerner in office back there once, chap by the name of Dief... but new york pulled the rug out from under him with the destruction of
the AVRO ARROW... bye bye arrow, bye bye canada.
Ron
(//)
Quote from: LarryC on May 28, 2008, 10:18:11 AM
Allright aether22, congrats. That's what happens when you quit spook-busting and aetherizing long enough to get er done.
About the motor size. My larger motor used half the watts as the 3/8 HP, but it also had slower acceleration and deceleration. I think with a larger motor you would need an even better magnet balance, mine was 3 MM.
Motor smoking! Did you notice the fan that Thane had blowing on the motor in some of his vid's?
Regards, Larry
280 watts is usefully larger than 175 so I might upgrade to about the size of your smaller motor.
and yes I did notice it in the vid.
JUSTME,
CAN YOU HELP ME PLEASE!!!
I TRIED TO REPLICATE YOUR SHEEP SLIPPER IDEA?
DO THOSE SHEEP SLIPPERS GO ON HEAD FIRST OR ARSE-OSCOPICALLY? ???
I DID THE LATTER BUT I DON'T RECOMMEND IT TO ANY OTHER REPLICATORS.
Thane
I could try and fake some reason for posting this other than the obvious, but I don't think I need to.
QuoteNow the coils on both side is an interesting concept, do you have the cups on both sides now? Does this not put the drag way up too? .
NO ABSOLUTELY NOT - DRAG WISE.
YOU PLACE THE OPPOSITE SIDE COILS DIRECTLY IN BETWEEN EACH OTHER SO THE COGGING TORQUE IS HALVED.
I.E.
HV HV HV HV HV
------------------rotor----------------------
HC HC HC HC
Thane
PS A22 - CONGRATS!!!
I SENT THE MOTOR & COIL YESTERDAY THE TOTAL COST IS
$385.65.HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO SETTLE THIS?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 28, 2008, 08:36:17 PM
NO ABSOLUTELY NOT - DRAG WISE.
YOU PLACE THE OPPOSITE SIDE COILS DIRECTLY IN BETWEEN EACH OTHER SO THE COGGING TORQUE IS HALVED.
I.E.
HV HV HV HV HV
------------------rotor----------------------
HC HC HC HC
Thane
PS A22 - CONGRATS!!!
I SENT THE MOTOR & COIL YESTERDAY THE TOTAL COST IS $385.65.
HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO SETTLE THIS?
So you didn't wait for Uli?
hmmm, slowly if that's Ok since I technically only 'approved' the shipping of the coil not the motor at this point in time, I will pay at the greatest rate that I can that does not cause undue hardship.
Quote from: aether22 on May 28, 2008, 09:53:17 PM
So you didn't wait for Uli?
hmmm, slowly if that's Ok since I technically only 'approved' the shipping of the coil not the motor at this point in time, I will pay at the greatest rate that I can that does not cause undue hardship.
OK - I'LL TAKE THE OverUnity PRIZE FOR
LEG PULLING @ 14,000 KM! :D
HAPPY B-DAY AND CONGRATS AGAIN!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 28, 2008, 10:05:52 PM
OK - I'LL TAKE THE OverUnity PRIZE FOR LEG PULLING @ 14,000 KM! :D
HAPPY B-DAY AND CONGRATS AGAIN!
Thane
I figured you might be joking, but was leaning towards seriousness.
But Justme saw you coming a mile off though.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 28, 2008, 08:36:17 PM
NO ABSOLUTELY NOT - DRAG WISE.
YOU PLACE THE OPPOSITE SIDE COILS DIRECTLY IN BETWEEN EACH OTHER SO THE COGGING TORQUE IS HALVED.
I.E.
HV HV HV HV HV
------------------rotor----------------------
HC HC HC HC
Thane
PS A22 - CONGRATS!!!
I SENT THE MOTOR & COIL YESTERDAY THE TOTAL COST IS $385.65.
HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO SETTLE THIS?
TRICKYpants, I think you would find the cogging torque to be entirely canceled not just halved assuming same number and core qualities of the 2 coil types (although if the MMF's of the 2 coil types differ then not quite)
Ok, so after measuring the HC and HV coils voltage and current (1 amp from each HC coil and an OC voltage of only 4v, 125v from the 2 hv coils in series at .06 amps, interestingly this means that the each HV coil is producing about 15 times more voltage and 1/15th the current of the HC coils so if everything holds up the same energy from each, in other words I have proven what I stated about HV coils having the same MMF and energy output)
note: I will however admit that 15 times voltage amplification seems a tad much for microwave transformers though I can't say for sure.
So as long as it can be put to use without reducing the effect (without adding too much resistance, although you can always put things in parallel) then the HV coils are better to be used to power loads than the HC coils.
Anyway that wasn't what I am wanting to write about.
I tried the deceleration test and it's hard to do so many things simultaneously with only 2 hands but I found no substantial difference in deceleration as now well expected (the extra torque being placed on the generator contradicts at least 3 experimental results).
I set my new Tachometer to total rotations and at 1,100rpm switched the motor off as I pressed the button on the tach and in half the tests disconnected the HV coil short.
Because it is easier to do 2 things at the same time than 3 things there was a degree of error but shorted coils would have been about 3-4 more revolutions before the rotor came to a total stop in the 2 tests of each I was happy with. (114 revolutions .vs 118 for example)
But this small difference is not meaningful in part due to often accidentally moving the tachometer off the target momentarily as I disconnected the alligator clip from the HV coil, and in part because of reduction of cogging torque at low RPM's seems good for an extra revolution or 3.
I am considering trying tests where I compare deceleration with the HC coils shorted also.
Actually the best way to improve this test would probably be to add a flywheel.
In the end I would not call this result conclusive but the HV coils really do seem to add far more power to the motor when they are shorted than this tiny and possibly non existent result would indicate.
Reasons to believe it's not at the generator (off the top of my head, and yes I've said all this before):
Vinces test measuring torque which would be reduced if the motors work was being offloaded despite his results showing a torque increase.
Ability to accelerate beyond speed of no stators present but inability to accelerate beyond motors max speed.
Path to motor being critical for acceleration unless a full compliment of stators are used. (why would the effect only work when one is shorted with a good path to the motor and work without a good path only when 8? or so are shorted Why does one work sometimes and not others?)
Next I am going to try an isolation test (non magnetic shaft) but that may not be today as glue will need to dry.
update:
hmmm, was going to give it another test at the highest speed I could reach which is 2500rpm, when a washer that was taped to the back side of a cup flew off and I am not able to find it.
I will go to the hardware store and get a few spare washers, an induction motor (this one is not dead yet and a fan and shorter run times are helping but I need 2 to do most of my desired tests).
Hopefully will be able to do the isolation test tomorrow and maybe even the surrogate coil and or surrogate motor tests, if they work that will make for a superb 30th!
Oh yeah, and the top speed rpm in those test was a long way from the real top speed, and the speed did vary a little as there is no such things as a rock solid rpm. And so there were speed differences and I don't know how large since the tach can only be in one mode at a time and so it's last sample seconds old by the time I am ready to switch over, and while it took less that a minute to slow down it is totally possible that different starting speeds can account for the 2-3% difference in rpm's.
But the shorted HV coils make a huge difference in RPM and apparent power,
Quote from: aether22 on May 24, 2008, 10:16:48 PM
... 2 tests, in the first case you get Thanes generator up to speed with the HV coil shorted, and then once the speed is at max you open circuit the HV coil as you simultaneously turn the power off to the motor.
In the second you follow the same procedure but when you turn the motor off you keep the HV coils shorted.
If the Generator were providing some motive force directly then the second instance should take a lot longer to decelerate.
However if the generator is increasing the motor power then shorting the coils may not slow deceleration and depending on the core may speed deceleration, especially with a laminated semi closed circuit core.
@aether, congrats on getting yr system running. Hav eyou thought about doing your comparison deceleration test on it?
-Mike
Mike, the above 2 posts deal with the deceleration test.
The result is that there is no apparent difference between HV coils being shorted or not. (I will do higher speed tests either tonight or tomorrow, maybe include a flywheel or 2 so it spends more time within the zone (rpm) where the HV coils have an effect)
I just did the deceleration test with a speed of arrrox 2,100rpm and a grinding disk as a fly wheel on the other end of the bench grinder, so with far more energy in speed (almost 2 times the velocity so 4 times the energy and more mass on top of that so tons more energy)
II got about 300 revolutions either way, though the margin of error between tries was far larger than before, to be honest mostly just that I was nervous being so close and have it make the sounds it makes. (and everything being shaken off the table)
So if Thane or Luc or anyone else that may believe the force arises at the generator wants to try this experiment to show me I did it wrong I welcome that, but for me personally it confirms all the other experiments, the increased torque arises in the motor.
One suggestion would be to have 2 people co-ordinate, or (and maybe this is what I should have done) have 2 switches next to each other, one for the motor and one for the coil so both can be opened sanctimoniously without effort with a single hand, leaving the other hand to work the tach.
One think I would note is that there seem to be issues getting it to turn as fast, each test it seems to lose top speed (in an irregular fashion) and how long it would rotate for after also seemed to be effected by which run but not by the condition of any coil.
This is probably due to the tape holding the magnets in (the ones where the washer sits in the cup) getting stretched and hence allowing the magnet to smack the stator. (due to a clearance of ziltch on some magnets)
Indeed the tape has stretched.
QuoteTRICKYpants, I think you would find the cogging torque to be entirely canceled not just halved assuming same number and core qualities of the 2 coil types
I AM BEING CONSERVATIVE WITH MY ?HALVED? STATEMENT ? I SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY SAID REDUCED. AND YES I AM CONFIDENT WITH PROPER COIL PLACEMENT THE COGGING TORQUE CAN BE VIRTUALLY ELIMINATED.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on May 29, 2008, 02:51:22 AM
Mike, the above 2 posts deal with the deceleration test.
The result is that there is no apparent difference between HV coils being shorted or not. (I will do higher speed tests either tonight or tomorrow, maybe include a flywheel or 2 so it spends more time within the zone (rpm) where the HV coils have an effect)
@aether so that proves for sure the extra power is coming form the motor not generator. So the wuestion is how changing the generator coil causes the motor ro change its power. I think measuring hte torque on the shaft is the way to find clues to that. Maybe somoen could install a torque meter>
-Mike
Quote from: aether22 on May 29, 2008, 03:59:19 AM
One suggestion would be to have 2 people co-ordinate, or (and maybe this is what I should have done) have 2 switches next to each other, one for the motor and one for the coil so both can be opened sanctimoniously ...
OUMan...are you available?
Quote from: JustMe on May 29, 2008, 09:52:53 AM
OUMan...are you available?
He may be available, but only to work on the Negative ( - ) part of everything.
:-)
P.S. Just kidding OU.
Quote from: JustMe on May 29, 2008, 09:52:53 AM
OUMan...are you available?
JM - CAN YOU PLEASE STOP HITTING ON OUman ;) AND POST THE PHOTOS I SENT YESTERDAY ALONG WITH THE NEW TABLE AND COMMENTS AS SENT TO DR. HABASH THIS AM?
PRETTY PLEASE?
THANKS
Thane
Quote@aether so that proves for sure the extra power is coming form the motor not generator. So the wuestion is how changing the generator coil causes the motor ro change its power. I think measuring hte torque on the shaft is the way to find clues to that. Maybe somoen could install a torque meter>
-Mike
COMPARING SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE DEVIATIONS FROM "NO LOAD" TO "ON LOAD" AS RECORDED BY THE CURRENT INCREASE OR DECREASE WILL GIVE THE TORQUE NUMBERS VERY EASILY.
Cheers
The ThaneMEISTER
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED HV COILS AND HC COILS ON ALTERNATE SIDES OF THE ROTOR w/ 150 LB PULLING STRENGTH MAGNETS TEMPORLARRYCLY ATTACHED WITH PACKAGING TAPE.
THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE HV COILS CAUSE A REDUCTION IN CORE FLUX INDUCED VOLTAGE - WHICH IS EVIDENT IN THE HIGH SPEED TESTS TABLE.
THE ENCOURAGING THING ABOUT THE NEW COIL POSITIONS IS THAT NOW THE SHORTED HV COILS NOT ONLY CAUSE ACCELERATION BUT ALSO INCREASE THE FLUX IN THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR.
THIS IS SHOWN IN PHOTO # 3 WITH THE HC COIL ONLY AND VOLTAGE AC CROSS THE 100 OHM LOAD IS 7.40 VOLTS w/ DECELERATION.
PHOTO # 4 IS HC COIL AND HV COIL w/ ACCELERATION AND THE VOLTAGE AC CROSS THE LOAD HAS INCREASED TO 8.06 VOLTS .
PHOTO # 5 IS ACCELERATED VOLTAGE AT ABOUT 800 RPM AND CLIMBING.
ALSO WITH THE ADDED WEIGHT OF THE NEW MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR - THE MOTOR CANNOT EXCEED 400 RPM WITHOUT BEING AIDED BY THE HV COILS.
I WILL SHOOT SOME VIDEO TOMORROW WITH LIGHTER MAGNETS ON BOTH SIDES SHOWING DECENT RPM.
CHEERS
Thane
Additional information as per Thane's request:
(http://C:%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5CAdministrator%5CDesktop%5CTest_Data_May_4th,_2008_-_Full_Speed_Test_1_-_Revised.pdf)
Quote from: springfield on May 29, 2008, 09:33:34 AM
@aether so that proves for sure the extra power is coming form the motor not generator. So the wuestion is how changing the generator coil causes the motor ro change its power. I think measuring hte torque on the shaft is the way to find clues to that. Maybe somoen could install a torque meter>
-Mike
Vince thought of a better way, he measured the torque on the motor housing as that only increases if the motors power increases, and it did increase.
I am next going to do an isolation experiment (drive the generator with a non steel shaft) and then move onto surrogate experiments where I use either different motors and or coils to generate the effect.
SNAP!
Quote from: aether22 on May 29, 2008, 05:32:49 PM
SNAP!
SNAPPER, I_RUN, & LENNYC
YOU GUYS SHOULDN'T LET THESE RESULTS SLIP BY UNNOTICED...QuoteTHE ENCOURAGING THING ABOUT THE NEW COIL POSITIONS IS THAT NOW THE SHORTED HV COILS NOT ONLY CAUSE ACCELERATION BUT ALSO INCREASE THE FLUX IN THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR.
THE HV INDUCED FLUX IS ENTERING THE HC COIL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND INCREASING THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN THE HC COIL - WHILE ALSO CAUSING ACCELERATION.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 29, 2008, 06:40:56 PM
SNAPPER, I_RUN, & LENNYC
YOU GUYS SHOULDN'T LET THESE RESULTS SLIP BY UNNOTICED...
THE HV INDUCED FLUX IS ENTERING THE HC COIL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND INCREASING THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN THE HC COIL - WHILE ALSO CAUSING ACCELERATION.
Thane
But you told me the coils were staggered? and they are not staggered but on the magnet stations,
yeesh, but hey, you've got a neat setup there now, after you picked up a few tips from red/green :P
'nuther thing I can't really see what you are using for a magnet? and does it overlap the core at all?
Hehehe, lookin good meister Thane, will give it a whirl if some free time comes up....
Ron, pacific breeze
Quote'nuther thing I can't really see what you are using for a magnet? and does it overlap the core at all?
BLACK RECTANGULAR THING STRAPPED TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 29, 2008, 07:38:26 PM
BLACK RECTANGULAR THING STRAPPED TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR.
Thane
I could see that, but is it a ceramic? What confused me was you were saying you were going to use
stronger magnets... but they are on the outside and the ceramic is on the inside? Or is the rectangular
magnet an epoxy coated Neo?
Good numbers mon!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 29, 2008, 08:50:20 PM
I could see that, but is it a ceramic? What confused me was you were saying you were going to use
stronger magnets... but they are on the outside and the ceramic is on the inside? Or is the rectangular
magnet an epoxy coated Neo?
Good numbers mon!
Ron
THE 1" ROUND FLAT MAGNETS HAVE A PULLING STRENGTH OF 30 LBS -
THE RECTANGULAR MAGNETS HAVE A PULLING STRENGTH OF 150 LBS -
I DON'T KNOW THEIR EXACT COMPOSITION HOWEVER.
MAY I GO NOW?
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 29, 2008, 09:52:53 AM
OUMan...are you available?
Potentially, JM - are you?
Quote from: aether22 on May 29, 2008, 05:14:00 PM
Vince thought of a better way, he measured the torque on the motor housing as that only increases if the motors power increases, and it did increase.
Vince's ad-hoc method was ingenious and hats off to him for that. But as he mentioned himself, it's not a dependable way of measuring the torque. I really think that measuring the torque with a calibrated torque sensor is what's needed. It's a crucial piece of evidence and if it's not measured in a dependable way its value is hugely reduced. It's only a matter of buying the appropriate torque meter and attaching it to the shaft.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 29, 2008, 11:24:53 AM
COMPARING SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE DEVIATIONS FROM "NO LOAD" TO "ON LOAD" AS RECORDED BY THE CURRENT INCREASE OR DECREASE WILL GIVE THE TORQUE NUMBERS VERY EASILY.
Cheers
The ThaneMEISTER
That may be possible if you've already calibrated the motor's power-torque-slip-speed characteristics but I don't think you've done that calibration so it is NOT possible to deduce the torque from the current. There are two problems with your proposed method:
1. It is at best an indirect method of inferring what the torque is and so it will be inherently much less accurate than measuring the torque directly. At this stage, when you're measuring only a few percentage points either way, the inaccuracies will kill you.
2. To develop the motor's characteristic curves (which you absolutely need in order to infer the torque from the current), you have to fully characterize the motor, which means that you need to measure the torque anyhow to do the calibration. Which means you need to use a torque meter.
Your whole proposition depends on what torque is being transferred along the shaft between the motor and the generator. So measuring that torque accurately and directly is very important.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 29, 2008, 06:40:56 PM
YOU GUYS SHOULDN'T LET THESE RESULTS SLIP BY UNNOTICED...
THE HV INDUCED FLUX IS ENTERING THE HC COIL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR AND INCREASING THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN THE HC COIL - WHILE ALSO CAUSING ACCELERATION.
Thanks for pointing that out, very interesting, not sure I agree with your cause as it could also be that in the high speed test the HV coils were distorting the flux going into the HC coils causing them to drop power and now that they are on the opposite side they don't have that influence. So now the HC coils, without interference, respond accordingly to the increase in rpm.
TEMPORLARRYCLY! Cool, but I usually strap to the spoke and also from the rim to the bottom of the magnet. I noticed the top left magnet slipped to the side in 2_HC_AND_HC_COILS_ON_ROTOR, rim strapping may help.
BTW, I know this is not said enough, but thanks for all the great testing and for passing on the info.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: OUman on May 29, 2008, 09:54:00 PM
Vince's ad-hoc method was ingenious and hats off to him for that. But as he mentioned himself, it's not a dependable way of measuring the torque. I really think that measuring the torque with a calibrated torque sensor is what's needed. It's a crucial piece of evidence and if it's not measured in a dependable way its value is hugely reduced. It's only a matter of buying the appropriate torque meter and attaching it to the shaft.
Can you find one for sale online?
I just (a few hours ago) killed it, a magnet came flying off (found half of it) and it knocked off one of the steel pieces I JB-Welded to the transformer core.
I could put the half magnet back in, and add a bit of metal to keep the weight right and all would be Ok, but instead I just popped in a magnet that I had which was close enough, it doesn't seem to create more vibration when run so all up it's good.
I am waiting for the JB-Weld to cure on the stator though before I am able to run anymore tests (although I did run one test to see if it would accelerate with one steel piece missing, basically an open magnetic circuit and it did but speed changers were only noticeable with the tach, very very slow) , though I will now setup for the isolation test.
This also induced me to find another solution (one where wobble will not be an issue), so I found and ordered a 25cm cast iron pulley and will try and cook something up with that later, though I will need a different diameter Arbour, luckily the new bench grinder I picked up yesterday has the right size, so I should end up with 2 complete setups.
addition: oh yeah, I forgot.
cut it as it turned into a full post length
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 29, 2008, 09:04:25 PM
MAY I GO NOW?
Thane
When you gotta go you gotta go... yes, you have my permission, ???
As Larry said... thanks for good humored sharing and help to all of us!
Ron
Before magnets and washers and steel was flying across the garage denting plasterboard I took some measurements at a higher RPM than before.
HCV was 8.5v and 7.3v
HCA was 1.5A and ??? (I only measured one of 'em)
HVV was 272v (series)
HVA was .07A
So remembering to cut the HV coil voltage in half the higher of the HV coils is 1/16th the voltage.
And .07A x 16 is 1.12A.
That is quite close to the 1.5A for the HC coil, the difference (and it's a kinda small diff, 23% less but a huge difference in it's effect on the rotor speed) may in part be explained by the fact that the 2 HC coils differed and that I only measured the current of one, and the HV coils were only measured in series.
The remainder of the difference can be accounted for by fact that the HC coils are first on the core and some of the flux will exit the core before it runs through all the HV turns.
So I consider both experimental results and conventional electrical equations to agree, the HC coils are unneeded provided you can either give it loads that suited to the higher voltage, or can put the hV output through a transformer while still pulling enough current so the HV coils work.
So Thane I would strongly recommend you take a closer look at your assumption, consider not just the amps but the volts also and see how different the amps x volts (watts) are in your generator for the 2 coils. (even if the HC coils generated say double the energy which is far from the case in my tests wouldn't you be better having 2 HV coils instead of 1 HV and 1 HC coil? And since it will turn faster you will get more energy than a single HC coil and with less energy into the motor)
At the very least you should look at your HV coils as a valuable source of electrical output and tap them.
And possibly run each through a transformer so both are at the same voltage and see if the HC coils are worth it.
Because based on my results if they have any increased energy output not accounted for by size or mass or position differences on the core it is not very large at all and not worth the deceleration at all.
Ron, since Thane may ignore me on this point I would ask that you take measurements as I have above, I know you have already done so but you need to include the HV amps.
Take all measurements with coils not under test open circuit.
Since I believe you have the HV coils closer to the magnets? (is that right?) you should have probably more ampere turns in your HV coils. (more energy)
Quote from: aether22 on May 29, 2008, 10:32:34 PM
Can you find one for sale online?
I think I posted some links before but Google can find them, for example:
http://www.sensotec.com/torque.asp
http://www.futek.com/product.aspx?t=torque
http://www.sensors.co.uk/products/pages/rwt.html
etc
Quote from: OUman on May 30, 2008, 02:07:20 AM
I think I posted some links before but Google can find them, for example:
http://www.sensotec.com/torque.asp
http://www.futek.com/product.aspx?t=torque
http://www.sensors.co.uk/products/pages/rwt.html
etc
Problem is that from what I can see it would create a break in the shaft, which isn't what we want.
So I think that it would make far more sense to measure the force on the motor housing and i can not think of any way that can give a false positive. (except possibly for the motors torque improving because it is rotating at a speed where it is more powerful, easy to rule out)
So I think a reproduction of Vince's test is the best that can be done, I will try and do it later if an opportunity presents it's self.
Or if Vince recounts how he did it with enough detail.
Quote from: LarryC on May 29, 2008, 10:11:09 PM
Thanks for pointing that out, very interesting, not sure I agree with your cause as it could also be that in the high speed test the HV coils were distorting the flux going into the HC coils causing them to drop power and now that they are on the opposite side they don't have that influence. So now the HC coils, without interference, respond accordingly to the increase in rpm.
Regards, Larry
YOU ARE EIDER WIT ME OR AGAIN ME LENNYC - WATS IT GONNA BE?I USE A SWITCH TO ENGAGE THE HV COIL AND MONITOR THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD - THIS TEST WAS PERFORMED WITH THE HEAVY RECTANGULAR MAGNETS SO IT TAKES 20 SECONDS TO INCREASE 1 VOLT - SO I AM GOOD TO GO WITH MY THEORY.
Thane
ps - thanks to JM as well for her efforts too!
I'd like to ask a question, it is not a question that demands replies, and if you do want to reply then in private may be better than cluttering up the list.
Right now all I have done is replicate Thanes device in the most basic way, I am yet to do any experiments that add to anything about it much. (even the deceleration test wasn't very definitive)
But it is my hope and my belief that I may soon have much worth sharing, and beyond the surrogate tests there are very very interesting possibilities.
And here we come to a problem.
Once I have something worth releasing, I can either do so right away, release the info far and wide.
Or share it with a few (or better yet many) trusted people so it can not be lost but don't share it publicly due to all the possible negative attention (from the status quo) and even possible negative consequences of releasing such tech. (destabilization of the world, misuse of the tech)
The latter also gives me protection of a dead mans switch, only there is no protection if they don't know, and not much reason to keep it secret if they do.
So I guess there are 3 options:
Keep stuff secret until everything is worked out including possibly using the tech for it's intended use and creating an org around it. (could take 5-10 years to get to the public stage though the org could be very 'strong' when it goes public meaning things should go as smoothly as possible, may be almost impossible to keep secret from those wanting to stop it though, dead mans switches don't work if no one knows about it, and the org can be far more easily attacked or infiltrated if it is secret)
Still waiting that long does not seem like a good idea the way the world is.
Make some stuff public and more stuff private only to be leaked if anything funny happens. (this way the dead mans switch if effective since 'they' know you have more they really don't want out, but they must know it's inevitable you will release it one day and there may be unscrupulous people who want the info now and will do anything to get it)
And finally being totally public, problem is if you are still developing the tech they can kill you before you get it really finished and except for fear of creating a martyr they have no real reason not to. (Didn't stop them from killing Marinov and many other FE and AG inventors have had attempts made on them, Maybe having tons of people on the same page replicating as we are doing with Thanes tech increases safety a fair bit, but it is clear that at this point Thane is still making the greatest advances in the tech it seems)
Thane has chosen the bravest of the routes, and it may be the wisest.
And I am sure glad that he has.
So if you don't hear any Eureka! from me after I report on the results of the surrogate coil & motor experiments then you will never know if it's because I have not got any further or it is because I have chosen to go the secretive route.
I am still utterly undecided on what I will do, one thing is for sure though and that is the weight, the obligation, the significance of this can be lessened (making work psychologically easier) if I fantasize about the technology and keeping it secret and not the implications of going public.
So my question is 'what should I do?' and 'what would/will you do?', try and give reasons if you do choose to give an answer.
Ideas or thoughts are also welcome.
And yes, all this is putting the cart before the horse but I do hope to have discoveries in these 2 areas (plus the aether) or else why am I here?
And I could have interesting results within the week, year, decade and these issues will then be more immediate.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 30, 2008, 06:36:45 AM
[b WATS IT GONNA BE?[/b]
The Official
Thane Heins
Shorted coil
Fan Club
Presented on the WEB, May 30th 2008, by the inthanely appreciative West of the Rockies
charter member Pacific Breeze in recognition of Thane's contribution to Electronics, Humor and
the restoration of the environment... ie: The rendering impotent of so many Micro Wave Ovens!
ENJOY!
(//)
Quote from: aether22 on May 30, 2008, 09:05:30 AM
Once I have something worth releasing, I can either do so right away, release the info far and wide.
Or share it with a few (or better yet many) trusted people so it can not be lost but don't share it publicly due to all the possible negative attention (from the status quo) and even possible negative consequences of releasing such tech. (destabilization of the world, misuse of the tech)
I'd keep it under wraps if I were you. The most serious concern would certainly be the destabilization of the world, especially with the overnight collapse of the oil industry. And as far as misuse of the technology, the biggest danger would be a dramatic increase in global warming if a large number of people start using those big heat-generating coils all at once. And don't let anyone know your address - oh, oops, you already have...
Quote from: OUman on May 30, 2008, 01:07:34 PM
I'd keep it under wraps if I were you. The most serious concern would certainly be the destabilization of the world, especially with the overnight collapse of the oil industry. And as far as misuse of the technology, the biggest danger would be a dramatic increase in global warming if a large number of people start using those big heat-generating coils all at once. And don't let anyone know your address - oh, oops, you already have...
While I appreciate your reply, I must say it is the most 'Spooky' response possible, you aren't doing much to persuade me I'm mistaken with a reply like "Don't tell anyone cause bad stuff will happen, especially to Big Oil".
I disagree with the global warming argument, however feel the destabilization is somewhat of a concern although not a bigger concern than things staying the way they are.
And there is the flip side, transforming the world (however awkward or straightforward the transformation is) into a space faring clean green Utopia where no one need be sick (Orgone or life force energy is a straight-forward application of aetheric engineering) sure sounds worth losing a few jobs or disrupting/collapsing the economy to me.
Quote from: aether22 on May 30, 2008, 04:33:25 PM
I disagree with the global warming argument, however the destabilization is somewhat of a concern although not a bigger concern than things staying the way they are.
And there is the flip side, transforming the world (however awkward or straightforward the transformation is) into a space faring clean green Utopia where no one need be sick (Orgone or life force energy is a straight-forward application of aetheric engineering) sure sounds worth losing a few jobs or disrupting/collapsing the economy to me.
That's the fear-invoking excuse the people in control use all the time to justify the status quo. They don't like surprises...
I say, BS! Like Thomas Jefferson said, a little revolution every now and then is necessary! I think the world is long overdue for a good destabilization! Sure, it generates some turmoil in the short term, but that will all settle out and we'll be much better off long term. Think I'll have a beer when I get home and toast "a little bit-o destabe"...
Cheers!
-Mark
Quote from: OUman on May 30, 2008, 01:07:34 PM
I'd keep it under wraps if I were you. The most serious concern would certainly be the destabilization of the world, especially with the overnight collapse of the oil industry. And as far as misuse of the technology, the biggest danger would be a dramatic increase in global warming if a large number of people start using those big heat-generating coils all at once. And don't let anyone know your address - oh, oops, you already have...
There's no reason for this. What pleasure does it give you to be a straight up jerk? Your assumption that your thought processes are superior to those of others we have seen on this forum and in the larger FE community is as unproven as anything else. I've been enormously lucky in that experience has taught me that people who do/think/process much differenty than me are better at some things than I am, including accurate perception of things that escape me entirely. You don't consider for one moment that it in this particular endeavour it might be you who is poorly equipped.
Regardless, people have worked hard and don't deserve this kind of gratuitous meanness.
Here are a few thoughts for anyone replicating...
Go the MOT route if you can. (I use 18 pole NNN SSS NNN SSS neo rotor)
note: If Thane could explain how to cut and mount them the 'easy' way that would be great. (I seemed to go through 1 grinder disk per transformer and to not damage the HV coil I cut most of the way then bent back and forth the remaining bit of steel on each lamination attaching the sides of the E until they broke, all up it's about 20 minutes to do the I bars (just zip along the weld and hammer if needed) and um the best part of a day to remove the sides of the E. (if you don't have the transformer secured by a vice it will flip and fly on to the floor damaging the secondary coil when the grinder catches)
Get a decent Tach, with a multimeter I can resolve down to 60 rpm, with the tach I can resolve to 1 rpm and less. You wouldn't call 1 hz increase per minute success on a multimeter but you may 1 RPM increase every second on a tach.
Make sure there is a closed magnetic circuit for the stators if you can, it really boosts the effect, also hugely important is getting the rotor stator gap down. (it's what made mine work)
I need about 1000 rpm+ currently for the HV coils to start really kicking in. (at 600+ I may have a slight effect but it's not very impressive)
Thane, you were going to release a photo essay weren't you? Or was that already posted by JM?
No progress to report yet today, still getting it working right after the incident yesterday but think I've got it pretty good.
BTW Ron, I'd still love to see that current measurement of your shorted HV coils.
They are put on last right? (closer to the rotor magnets than the HC coils)
Quote from: OUman on May 30, 2008, 01:07:34 PM
I'd keep it under wraps if I were you. The most serious concern would certainly be the destabilization of the world, especially with the overnight collapse of the oil industry. And as far as misuse of the technology, the biggest danger would be a dramatic increase in global warming if a large number of people start using those big heat-generating coils all at once. And don't let anyone know your address - oh, oops, you already have...
er - i think you guys'll find this is sarcasm - but OUman couldn't find an icon for it in the 'smiley' list
...used to have a problem with being sarcastic myself (before i became older - and hopefully wiser) ;)
all the best
sandy
PS looking forward to hearing about developments on the Thane-mobile and the Aether-net
QuoteThane, you were going to release a photo essay weren't you? Or was that already posted by JM?
ACTUALLY I PUT TOGETHER ONE - BUT THEN YOU WERE HAVING YOUR "MOMENT" IN THE LIME LIGHT SO I WAITED - ALSO YESTERDAY I SPLIT
YET AGAIN THE ALREADY HALVED MOT CORE AND I AM IN THE PROCESS OF WINDING A COIL ON 1/4 OF THE ORIGINAL CORE SIZE.
IF I GET MORE POSITIVE RESULTS I WILL BE ABLE TO SHOW (WHAT YOU AND I ALREADY SUSPECT) THAT A THINNER CORE PROVIDES A MORE FOCUSED EFFECT.
I AM A LITTLE BEHIND SCHEDULE AND "WHIPPED" DUE TO
I_RENE'S FAN CLUB - COMING OUT PARTY!!! :P
Thane
QuoteGet a decent Tach, with a multimeter I can resolve down to 60 rpm, with the tach I can resolve to 1 rpm and less. You wouldn't call 1 hz increase per minute success on a multimeter but you may 1 RPM increase every second on a tach.
A22,
CAN YOU PLEASE
VERIFY PUBLICLY THAT YOUR MOTOR IS
NOT DRAWING ADDITIONAL CURRENT WHEN YOU GET ACCELERATION FROM YOUR HV COIL(S)?
IF IT IS YOU'RE SCREWED.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on May 30, 2008, 04:57:09 PM
There's no reason for this. What pleasure does it give you to be a straight up jerk? Your assumption that your thought processes are superior to those of others we have seen on this forum and in the larger FE community is as unproven as anything else.
Hey, JM, it was just a joke, lighten up. Nowhere have I said that my "thought process are superior". You've said that about me several times (in a disparaging way of course) but that doesn't make it right. I do have a point of view about these things though and I think it's fair enough that the other side gets an airing on this forum. And I think poking a little fun is OK too - after all, I've been on the receiving end of that here many times and you don't hear me whining about it.
Quote from: nul-points on May 31, 2008, 01:45:07 AM
er - i think you guys'll find this is sarcasm - but OUman couldn't find an icon for it in the 'smiley' list
Ahem, using an icon for sarcasm defeats the purpose - it should be done with a straight face, just like in real life.
IF JM WERE A HOCKEY PLAYER - ME THINKS SHE WOULD BE AN ENFORCER...
AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE ANYWHERE ELSE BUT ON HER TEAM!
Thane
HERE IS YOUR ANSWER FROM ME A22! :)
CHEERS
Thane
Do just one brave thing today...and then run like hell!
Quote from: aether22 on May 30, 2008, 02:31:16 AM
Problem is that from what I can see it would create a break in the shaft, which isn't what we want.
So I think that it would make far more sense to measure the force on the motor housing and i can not think of any way that can give a false positive. (except possibly for the motors torque improving because it is rotating at a speed where it is more powerful, easy to rule out)
So I think a reproduction of Vince's test is the best that can be done, I will try and do it later if an opportunity presents it's self.
Or if Vince recounts how he did it with enough detail.
No, there's no break in the shaft - those sensors work by way of some kind of a strain gauge built into the shaft that passes through them. Besides, Thane indicated that even a 2-foot PVC isolation does not kill the effect.
Reproducing Vince's method wouldn't be very instructive because as he said himself, it's not accurate enough to draw real conclusions from. I really think than using a professional sensor designed for the job is the way to go.
This ought to be top of the list because Thane keeps telling us that measuring the prime mover input power doesn't mean anything - yet that's the way the input power is actually measured in all the tests posted to date. Thane also said that what matters is the torque in the shaft - yet that is not being measured in ay of these tests.
Quote from: OUman on May 30, 2008, 02:07:20 AM
I think I posted some links before but Google can find them, for example:
http://www.sensotec.com/torque.asp
http://www.futek.com/product.aspx?t=torque
http://www.sensors.co.uk/products/pages/rwt.html
etc
Odd that you thought you posted some links before. You haven't. Not to any types of meters. Why would you think that?
There WAS this one:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.msg86933.html#msg86933
Polarbreeze was very fond of meter links.
LOL
QuoteThis ought to be top of the list because Thane keeps telling us that measuring the prime mover input power doesn't mean anything - yet that's the way the input power is actually measured in all the tests posted to date. Thane also said that what matters is the torque in the shaft - yet that is not being measured in ay of these tests.
ANYONE WHO IS
NOT DELIBERATELY AND CONVENIENTLY AND PERSISTENTLY RETARDED BEYOND ALL REASON - KNOWS THAT THE MOTOR STATOR CURRENT IS AN EXTREMELY GOOD INDICATOR OF SHAFT TORQUE - BECAUSE IT IS REFLECTING SLIP ANGLE % - ACTUAL NUMBERS MEAN DIDDLY SQUAT AND ONLY NEED TO SHOW IF THE COIL IS DECELERATING TO PRIME MOVER OR ACCELERATING IT UNDER LOAD -
INCREASED STATOR CURRENT = COUNTER TORQUE =
DECELERATION
DECREASED STATOR CURRENT = COMPLIMENTARY TORQUE =
ACCELERATIONSO FOR ANYONE OUT THERE WHO IS
NOT DELIBERATELY AND CONVENIENTLY AND PERSISTENTLY RETARDED BEYOND ALL REASON - KEEP AN EYE ON THE MOTOR INPUT POWER (CURRENT IS BETTER THOUGH) AND USE IT TO GAUGE PERFORMANCE - I.E. ACCELERATION OR DECELERATION UNDER LOAD.
CHEERIOS
Thane
P.S.
A22 - I_RULE,
IF YOU ARE
NOT DELIBERATELY AND CONVENIENTLY AND PERSISTENTLY RETARDED BEYOND ALL REASON I WOULD SUGGEST USING 3 STACKED MAGNETS WITH YOUR MOTS AND INCLUDING SOME BACK IRON IF YOU CAN - I DID THIS TODAY AND PRODUCED BRUTAL ACCELERATION - SO MUCH SO THAT I LOST A MAGNET IN THE HEATING VENTS UP IN THE RAFTERS IN MY LAB.
I WILL BE SENDING JM THE PHOTO ESSAY OF MY MOT PROCEDURE SHORTLY.
ALSO A22 - I WOULD GRIND OFF ALL BUT 6 CUPS OFF YOUR WHEEL AND LEAVE THE ONES CONNECTED TO THE SPOKES ONLY.
Quote from: OUman on May 31, 2008, 10:44:07 AM
Ahem, using an icon for sarcasm defeats the purpose - it should be done with a straight face, just like in real life.
True but everything you said would have sounded like sarcasm from an OU believer but utterly serious from someone who seems to be against OU which ironically you seem to be.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 06:29:45 PM
I WOULD SUGGEST USING 3 STACKED MAGNETS WITH YOUR MOTS AND INCLUDING SOME BACK IRON IF YOU CAN - I DID THIS TODAY AND PRODUCED BRUTAL ACCELERATION - SO MUCH SO THAT I LOST A MAGNET IN THE HEATING VENTS UP IN THE RAFTERS IN MY LAB.
Congrats Thane on your award, it looks like a shaft and I can't think of anyone more deserving. ;D
Brutal acceleration!!! Very interesting, but would like to know why that at one point you were using a solid metal encased 3/8 HP motor and now you are back to using the Ryobi? Just want to make the right investment if I attempt to experiment again.
@A22,
Please forget about OUman and follow Thane's advice about the six cups (balanced).
Regards, Larry
Quote from: OUman on May 31, 2008, 11:28:35 AM
No, there's no break in the shaft - those sensors work by way of some kind of a strain gauge built into the shaft that passes through them. Besides, Thane indicated that even a 2-foot PVC isolation does not kill the effect.
Reproducing Vince's method wouldn't be very instructive because as he said himself, it's not accurate enough to draw real conclusions from. I really think than using a professional sensor designed for the job is the way to go.
This ought to be top of the list because Thane keeps telling us that measuring the prime mover input power doesn't mean anything - yet that's the way the input power is actually measured in all the tests posted to date. Thane also said that what matters is the torque in the shaft - yet that is not being measured in ay of these tests.
There is and must be a brake in the shaft and while I don't know if it is steel to steel with a sub millimeter gap or 2 or something more serious I know it is there.
I suspect that besides the possibility of the sensor attenuating the transmission of aether that it is likely to be a bit too costly.
So unless I find one for about $30-$40NZ I will not get one unless you choose to contribute, and since you spend so much time in this thread I suppose that maybe quite suited with your significant interest level.
Personally I believe that by replicating the isolation experiment and surrogate experiments any further verification of motor torque increase is not needed.
I would also say I disagree with Thane, motor current is only a good indicator of motor torque if you know the RPM and every other factor relating to efficiency.
If it were possible for the aether to increase motor torque without increasing current then obviously Thanes assumption would be untrue and since he doesn't know aether from bubblegum I don't think he can answer that question when even I am straining to do so.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 06:29:45 PM
A22 - I_RULE,
IF YOU ARE NOT DELIBERATELY AND CONVENIENTLY AND PERSISTENTLY RETARDED BEYOND ALL REASON
I'm a human aren't I?
Quote
I WOULD SUGGEST USING 3 STACKED MAGNETS WITH YOUR MOTS
And now an opportunity to demonstrate retardedness.So I should stack 3 neo rotor magnets on the rotor to increase strength?
See, repeating something said back to the author to indicate surprise and disbelief.But if I do that they will fly off the rotor (more than usual).
And stating obvious problems rather than looking for own solution to such problems.Quote
AND INCLUDING SOME BACK IRON IF YOU CAN - I DID THIS TODAY AND PRODUCED BRUTAL ACCELERATION
Now I'm salivating liker a retarded moron.
Quote
- SO MUCH SO THAT I LOST A MAGNET IN THE HEATING VENTS UP IN THE RAFTERS IN MY LAB.
I WILL BE SENDING JM THE PHOTO ESSAY OF MY MOT PROCEDURE SHORTLY.
ALSO A22 - I WOULD GRIND OFF ALL BUT 6 CUPS OFF YOUR WHEEL AND LEAVE THE ONES CONNECTED TO THE SPOKES ONLY.
I'll make sure it works first though. Not sure what grinding them off will do to help if they are not being used.
The 3 magnets thing thing makes me want to use these magnets that are only a bit under 1 inch in diameter and more than an inch long, so maybe with the pully I'm getting I'll put big magnets on one side and normal one on the other.
But already I feel more questions coming, mainly how did Ron and Luc secure ther magnets when if I am right they used no cup holders. (I have some ideas but it's nice to go the proven route)
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 12:29:52 AM
BTW Ron, I'd still love to see that current measurement of your shorted HV coils.
They are put on last right? (closer to the rotor magnets than the HC coils)
sorry, I had missed that one... I get .15 amps on the meter, surprisingly (to me) that stays the same
at the increasing RPM as it winds up to speed and also shows .15 A on a 10 ohm load... not surprising
the volts are only 1.3 volts AC at this 10 ohm load....
Yes the HV coils are next to the magnets
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 10:04:31 AM
A22,
CAN YOU PLEASE VERIFY PUBLICLY THAT YOUR MOTOR IS NOT DRAWING ADDITIONAL CURRENT WHEN YOU GET ACCELERATION FROM YOUR HV COIL(S)?
IF IT IS YOU'RE SCREWED.
THANKS
Thane
I'll check but IMO it would be very unlikely and if it were happening it would seemingly be still a useful anomaly because since the reverse should be occurring (higher speeds means less current) then it means that something from the generator is changing the electromagnetic conditions in the stator.
But I am still drooling over your brutal acceleration!
Quote from: i_ron on May 31, 2008, 07:31:22 PM
sorry, I had missed that one... I get .15 amps on the meter, surprisingly (to me) that stays the same
at the increasing RPM as it winds up to speed and also shows .15 A on a 10 ohm load... not surprising
the volts are only 1.3 volts AC at this 10 ohm load....
Yes the HV coils are next to the magnets
Ron
Whoops, I realize I need another 2 figures for my calculations, HC volts open circuit (please state if it's series or individual) and HC amps short circuit.
I thought you provided these but I had not noticed the load.
Never the less an incomplete.15A
HC load reading is 2.07 volts at .37 amps (same 5 ohm load)
HV open 637 volts, HV short .15A
Normally I would divide the HV voltage by the HC voltage, but we don't have HC voltage in open circuit, let propose it is 1/20th of the HV voltage or 31v, that is generous looking compared to the 2.07 voltage above (not sure it that is HC coils in series or not) and will hurt the relative energy producing ability of the HV coils and hence I am being generous with the opposition.
So if we now multiply the HV current by 20 times we get 3 amps, that's more ampere turns and more energy than the HC coils. (a greater MMF)
Let's say we go from the other direction, we will use the current to figure out the voltage, we will assume that the HC amps is 10 times higher than stated if shorted rather than through a 5 ohm load, so 3.7A .vs .15A, that's an HC current that is 24.7 times higher, and so the HC voltage would need to be 25V in open circuit to have as many ampere turns, that is over 10 times the voltage measured with a 5 ohm load.
Finally let's base it on an estimation of the turns and flux coupling ratio figure out what would be needed for them to have the same ampere turns, let's say the transformer produces 2,000 VAC when used as intended and when fed with 110v, that would require an 18 to 1 turn ratio, now let's also assume the HV coils have a 25% better flux coupling with the HC coil, so for every volt in the HC coil we have 21.6 volts in the HV coil and for every turns in the HC coil we have 18 in the HV.
So taking these still generous figures if we have an OC voltage of 637 in the HV then the HC would be 29v (both in series).
To have the same ampere turns is each we would need 3.25 amps in the HC coils but for the same energy we would only need only 2.7 amps I believe.
And in just the figures above we see that with the same or even double the load the HV coils produce only half the current of the HC coils but their higher voltage means that unless the acceleration effect is highly non linear with current there is far more energy from the HV coils as you could increase the resistance a fair bit while having little effect on the current, remember Thane has used coils with many hundreds of ohms and the acceleration effect has still worked.
.15A at 637v requires 4246 ohms so adding even a hundred ohms or more should not kill the acceleration effect but it will raise the voltage across the load to useful levels.
Although it is possible that even if the effect is highly non linear with current that a step down transformer may change the equation possibly and allow energy to be used while acceleration is generated.
So in short from my own figures it seems that the HV are not far from producing the same energy, the same ampere turns as the HC coil.
And from Ron's figures even if I boost the HC coils voltage and current reading a lot (so they conform to open and short circuit values) they still come in at most around the level of the HV coils but most probably have far fewer ampere turns, less energy induced into them.
In other words the evidence is that HC coils are only of use to show an important feature of the effect that differentiates it from other artifacts but is not useful in a generator utilizing this effect as the HV coils are more that effective at producing just as much energy if otherwise given equal access to the flux, and naturally loads suited for higher voltages and lower currents.
I will also add that the HV coils can give a quite nasty shock and they should be treated as potentially lethal, I could feel the current!
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 07:17:21 PM
There is and must be a brake in the shaft and while I don't know if it is steel to steel with a sub millimeter gap or 2 or something more serious I know it is there.
You mean "break", I assume, not "brake". And, no, there is NOT a break in the shaft, nor does here need to be. The way they work is with a strain gauge built into the shaft.
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 07:17:21 PM
I suspect that besides the possibility of the sensor attenuating the transmission of aether that it is likely to be a bit too costly.
Well, if a 2-foot-long PVC pipe can't stop it, then I don't think a little torque sensor will stop it, will it? As for cost, that seems to be kind of nickel-and-diming it since the implications of proving out this technology are so enormous.
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 07:17:21 PM
I would also say I disagree with Thane, motor current is only a good indicator of motor torque if you know the RPM and every other factor relating to efficiency.
You're right about that - you can always tell when Thane gets into a rant that he's blowing smoke to avoid measuring things that might give an unambiguous measure of the performance of this thing.
Quote from: OUman on May 31, 2008, 07:52:28 PM
You mean "break", I assume, not "brake"
er, yes.
QuoteAnd, no, there is NOT a break in the shaft, nor does here need to be. The way they work is with a strain gauge built into the shaft.
Maybe we are defining break differently, I may have slipped up in typing the right work but I think maybe you are slipping up in seeing one. (I don't mean a gap necessarily)
I will admit though my complaint is partly over cautious bollocks but I am not aware of any way anyone can measure strain of steel as if it were quartz.
The images of one I found online used rubber and holes which are in varying degrees of alignment depending on torque
But I will look harder at the links you sent to see if any can measure the strain on a meal shaft without interrupting it.
Quote
Well, if a 2-foot-long PVC pipe can't stop it,
Well I am sure 20 ft can't interrupt it if the pressure is high enough (and it might be that 2 inches or 20 feet make little difference) but Thane also showed that an inch or 2 can stop it if the pressure is lower.
Of course when I try the isolation test it may fail if laminations create a higher pressure effect that normal steel. If that happens and if the surrogate tests don't work I may try running it with a belt and is that fails I will get a torque sensor.
Plus I may be able to significantly improve on the deceleration tests with my new setup, who knows.
Quote
then I don't think a little torque sensor will stop it, will it? As for cost, that seems to be kind of nickel-and-diming it since the implications of proving out this technology are so enormous.
Yeah, well I'm broke.
Mainly because if I tried to have a day job and a life I really couldn't devote my life to this, think 'starving artist' minus the possibility of selling your work, well to anyone who won't suppress it.
But hey if to you that's nickle and dime stuff...
Quote
You're right about that - you can always tell when Thane gets into a rant that he's blowing smoke to avoid measuring things that might give an unambiguous measure of the performance of this thing.
having you agree with my makes me feel all dirty, I need a shower. (Or maybe that was not having one yesterday)
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 07:39:56 PM
Whoops, I realize I need another 2 figures for my calculations, HC volts open circuit (please state if it's series or individual) and HC amps short circuit.
I thought you provided these but I had not noticed the load.
Funny thing, when I do the quote on this post It shows up as a long post?
Anyway I see there is lots of room for error in my numbers... as you are quoting me verbatim and
I was giving one set of numbers for full speed and another set for a partial speed test.
So to clarify for the full speed test...
The coils are in series
There are two magnets in each station, in home made cups. The depth of the cup is 3/16th of
an inch. There is a full height plastic sleeve over the OD of the magnets. The steel cup does not
touch the OD of the magnet.
Full speed is 36000 rpm (120 volts, 60 Hz)
HV open voltage is 790 volts AC
HV short amps is .15
HV 10 ohm load amps is .15 @ 1.whatever volts it was?
HC open voltage is 5.56 volts AC
Better?
And as stated, these dismal numbers are the result of the full height mot cores where the magnet
is .785 square inches and the core area is 2.734 square inches. As a rule of thumb I think the
core area should only be the same as, or less than, the magnet area. Thane seems to on the right track with cutting his mot cores down to half and now even less...
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 31, 2008, 09:19:24 PM
Funny thing, when I do the quote on this post It shows up as a long post?
Because I had just edited it prattling on and on and on.... As I am now doing with this one.
Quote
Anyway I see there is lots of room for error in my numbers... as you are quoting me verbatim and
I was giving one set of numbers for full speed and another set for a partial speed test.
So to clarify for the full speed test...
The coils are in series
There are two magnets in each station, in home made cups. The depth of the cup is 3/16th of
an inch. There is a full height plastic sleeve over the OD of the magnets. The steel cup does not
touch the OD of the magnet.
Full speed is 3,600 rpm (120 volts, 60 Hz) <corrected your speed
HV open voltage is 790 volts AC
HV short amps is .15
HV 10 ohm load amps is .15 @ 1.whatever volts it was?
HC open voltage is 5.56 volts AC
Better?
I would still need the HC short circuit current to do justice to the calculations.
Never the less with 142! times more voltage from the HV coils you need only a 142nd of the current that flows in the HC coils to equal the same energy, that would mean a current of 21.3A from the primary coils if the energy was the same.
For Thane to be wise in using HC coils then there would need to be 4 times more energy from them at least (or real issues in using the HV energy which so far seems not to be the case).
Instead with popper placement we see there is probably far more energy from the HV coils.
And it accelerates which means you use up less energy to run the motor rather than more with the HC coils, and you are then getting more voltage due to the faster rotation so even more voltage and current.
Even if the HV coils had half the energy output it would be better to have 2 HV coils and use energy from both of them than have a shorted HV coil and a loaded HC coil slowing it down because with the 2 HV coils you have more output than with the single HC coil due to the increased RPM and you can also 'add on' an additional number of watts saving from the input side to make HV coils the clear winners.
The HV coils would need to produce less that 1/3rd the energy, say 1/4 or less before HC coils might be a good idea, and unless I am mistaken Thane has not sufficiently explored pulling energy from the HV coils.
If I am wrong the voltage and current figures are not backing that up, if I am wrong then the electrical formulas are not backing that up, if I am wrong then the logic is not backing that up.
If I am wrong and I may well be then there would need to be something unknown and unpredictable going on.
I may be wrong but I see no evidence indicating I am, I won't harp on about this (other than to do a final workup with Ron's figures) but I strongly encourage Thane to do some tests with current and voltage of his HV and HC coils, and put loads suited to the various characteristics.
Otherwise eventually I will prove it but my current setup is not awfully well suited to doing so.
Basically dividing the HC short circuit current by the HV short circuit current and then multiply the HC load's resistance by that figure and use that for the HV coils load, measure the current through each load and the voltage across each load, take the voltage and amperage and multiply them, compare the 2, if the coils are on the same core the one closest to the rotor will have a higher wattage.
Ron's rotor is not only very heavy but also very fast!
"Full speed is 36000 rpm"
Sorry R I had'ta 8)
Steven
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 09:00:21 PM
...I am not aware of any way anyone can measure strain of steel as if it were quartz.
Strain gauge... check here: http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage008.html - you just apply a strain gauge to the surface of the shaft. It's the same principle as is used to apply strain sensors to the girders in bridges, for example.
Quote from: aether22 on May 31, 2008, 09:00:21 PM
...having you agree with me makes me feel all dirty...
Sorry :-*
Quote from: OUman on May 31, 2008, 09:59:21 PM
Strain gauge... check here: http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage008.html - you just apply a strain gauge to the surface of the shaft. It's the same principle as is used to apply strain sensors to the girders in bridges, for example.
Sorry :-*
I managed to find prices, they seem to be $800-$1000 at the lower end although it is far easier to find them than find prices so it is possible there are cheaper but it seems out of my price range especially when there are so many other better ways to isolate the effect.
So since I guess the odds of you ponying up $700+ cash are about as good a snow flakes chances in hell we may as well drop the torque sensor subject.
QuoteThane seems to on the right track with cutting his mot cores down to half and now even less...
Ron
I_ROC,
THE 1/4 MOTS DON'T WORK AS WELL AS THE I/2 MOTS.
LARRY IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SPLIT- PHASE MOTOR - I MUCH PREFER (AND SUGGEST) A DRIVE SHAFT WITH THREADED ENDS BECAUSE ROTORS CAN COME OFF SOMETIMES AS WELL WHICH IS MESSY.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 06:29:45 PM
STATOR CURRENT IS AN EXTREMELY GOOD INDICATOR OF SHAFT TORQUE
It's an "extremely good indicator" only if you've characterized your motor so that you known in advance of your experiment how the current and the torque are related for your specific motor. Otherwise it's just a rough guide.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 06:29:45 PM
ACTUAL NUMBERS MEAN DIDDLY SQUAT AND ONLY NEED TO SHOW IF THE COIL IS DECELERATING TO PRIME MOVER OR ACCELERATING IT UNDER LOAD
If all you need to show is whether it's accelerating or decelerating, you can get that from the tachometer. But that tells you nothing about power. What's important is power.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 06:29:45 PM
INCREASED STATOR CURRENT = COUNTER TORQUE = DECELERATION
DECREASED STATOR CURRENT = COMPLIMENTARY TORQUE = ACCELERATION
Yes, that's right, see the graph below, which I think you must have missed the first time I posted it.
So what?!
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg529.imageshack.us%2Fimg529%2F4396%2Ftorquespeeduf3.png&hash=ef377d34f3b7318190487486bd358577f44476ee)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 10:28:39 PM
LARRY IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SPLIT- PHASE MOTOR - I MUCH PREFER (AND SUGGEST) A DRIVE SHAFT WITH THREADED ENDS BECAUSE ROTORS CAN COME OFF SOMETIMES AS WELL WHICH IS MESSY.
Thanks, point well taken, now how can we get others from wasting time drinking OU Kool-Aid?
Regards, Larry
Quote from: OUman on May 31, 2008, 10:46:18 PM
If all you need to show is whether it's accelerating or decelerating, you can get that from the tachometer. But that tells you nothing about power. What's important is power.
More power please Scotty, then beam me up .......
What do you mean, "Ahmm not suurrre about the power, Skipper" ?
Aether you got more power or aether you don't ?
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 31, 2008, 09:31:51 PM
Ron's rotor is not only very heavy but also very fast!
"Full speed is 36000 rpm"
Sorry R I had'ta 8)
Steven
Steven, I deliberately multiply my numbers by an 'X factor" to see if anyone is paying attention, right?
Hey, just you wait till you are as old as me.... :P
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 01, 2008, 12:17:10 AM
Steven, I deliberately multiply my numbers by an 'X factor" to see if anyone is paying attention, right?
Hey, just you wait till you are as old as me.... :P
Ron
i_ron, I'm probably older than you, I just can't remember when!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on May 31, 2008, 10:28:39 PM
I_ROC,
THE 1/4 MOTS DON'T WORK AS WELL AS THE I/2 MOTS.
Thane
How I_ron_ic, well I will have to manufacture a new theory then to cover this...."one must keep the
volume of steel high enough to prevent saturation, when using neo magnets"
Ron
QuoteIf all you need to show is whether it's accelerating or decelerating, you can get that from the tachometer. But that tells you nothing about power. What's important is power.
ANYONE OUT THERE WHO IS NOT
DELIBERATELY AND CONVENIENTLY AND PERSISTENTLY RETARDED BEYOND ALL REASON - KNOWS THAT A TACHOMETER
ONLY READS SPEED - WHEREAS MOTOR STATOR CURRENT INDICATES SPEED AS WELL (IF YOU KNOW HOW TO READ IT) - BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY FROM
THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE YOU NEED POWER (OR A STATOR CURRENT INCREASE) TO TAKE THE ROTOR FROM ONE RPM LEVEL TO A HIGHER ONE - TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INCREASED ENERGY STORED AS INERTIA.
BUT JUST LOOKING AT CURRENT MAY NOT BE ENOUGH ALSO BECAUSE IF THE
MOTOR POWER FACTOR IS
INCREASING WHILE THE STATOR CURRENT IS
DECREASING THE OVERALL POWER CONSUMED BY THE MOTOR MAY BE GOING
UP.
SO WE HAVE CONFIRMED IN OUR TESTS THAT THE MOTOR POWER FACTOR DOES NOT CHANGE AND SO MONITORING CURRENT DEVIATIONS IS A VERY GOOD SPEED AND TORQUE INDICATOR - SPECIAL CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO ENSURE THAT STATOR CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE AT ALL WHEN THE HV COILS ARE ENGAGED - IF IT DID THAT WOULD BE AN INDICATION THAT THE MOTOR IS CAUSING ACCELERATION AND THAT THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE & THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY ARE VALID IN THE SYSTEM.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 08:38:49 AM
SPECIAL CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO ENSURE THAT STATOR CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE AT ALL WHEN THE HV COILS ARE ENGAGED - IF IT DID THAT WOULD BE AN INDICATION THAT THE MOTOR IS CAUSING ACCELERATION AND THAT THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE & THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY ARE VALID IN THE SYSTEM.
Thane
Yes but even if it were how could such an effect be explained?
Only by some exotic phenomena being conducted from the generator into the motor could account for a paradoxical increase of current with a simultaneous increase of speed.
One question Thane if I may.
Do you recognize that the following 2 coils are equivalent in energy (power output) and MMF (magnetic strength) output:
Coil 1: 1v 10A 10 turns
Coil 2: 10v 1A 100 turns
That is all, I just want to know what I would have to experimentally show, not looking to start a discussion.
QuoteThanks, point well taken, now how can we get others from wasting time drinking OU Kool-Aid?
Regards, Larry
HE IS OUR VERY OWN
HOUtel CaliforniaAND IT'S NATURAL SELECTION LARRY - THIS IS HOW WE
CULL THE HERD AND WEED OUT THE "USELESS EATERS". Creepy
Bilderberg Group quote for ya there Larry...
Thane
QuoteYes but even if it were how could such an effect be explained?
Only by some exotic phenomena being conducted from the generator into the motor could account for a paradoxical increase of current with a simultaneous increase of speed.
IT IS NORMAL INDUCTION MOTOR BEHAVIOUR - WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS AN INCREASE IN SHAFT TORQUE LOADING WILL CAUSE - A DECREASE IN SPEED - WHICH WILL CAUSE - AN INCREASE IN STATOR CURRENT - WHICH WILL CAUSE - AN INCREASE IN SPEED.
AND THAT IS WHAT IS OCCURRING IN THIS SYSTEM IT'S ALL NORMAL - DON'T YOU KNOW ANYTHING?
Thane
QuoteDo you recognize that the following 2 coils are equivalent in energy (power output) and MMF (magnetic strength) output:
Coil 1: 1v 10A 10 turns
Coil 2: 10v 1A 100 turns
KEEP ADDING TURNS UNTIL YOU GET THIS:
Coil 3: ?v
0.001 A ?turns
THEN WE CAN DISCUSS -
APPLES TO ORANGES.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 08:38:49 AM
YOU NEED POWER (OR A STATOR CURRENT INCREASE) TO TAKE THE ROTOR FROM ONE RPM LEVEL TO A HIGHER ONE - TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INCREASED ENERGY STORED AS INERTIA.
That's right but you have not set up any way of measuring that temporary increase in power so you have no way of telling where it's supplied from. You are only measuring steady-state speed, current, power etc, not the transitionary values. The small power boost to supply the extra rotational kinetic energy only happens during the period of acceleration - once the new speed is attained, it does not require any extra power to keep it going at the new speed (except for a very small increase in friction losses of course).
Quoteyou have not set up any way of measuring that temporary increase in power so you have no way of telling where it's supplied from. You are only measuring steady-state speed, current, power etc, not the transitionary values
HERE'S THE DEALIO,
A 0.01 A DECREASE IN STATOR CURRENT MEANS ACCELERATION AND COMPLIMENTARY TORQUE SUPPLIED TO THE MOTOR FROM THE COILS.
WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW WHERE IT IS COMING FROM - BUT WE CAN CONCLUDE WHERE IT IS NOT COMING FROM I.E. THE MOTOR BECAUSE...THE MOTOR CURRENT WOULD HAVE TO
INCREASE BY MORE THAN 0.01 AMPS TO CAUSE ACCELERATION AND THIS DOES NOT OCCUR.
WRONGIO - WE MEASURE STEADY STATE A AND TRANSITION AND STEADY STATE BIN FACT THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM OPEN HV COIL TO SHORTED HV COIL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL OBSERVATION TIME WHERE WE CONCLUDE:
A WORKING HV COIL = 0.01 A DECREASE IN STATOR CURRENT
A NON WORKING HV COIL = 0.01 A INCREASE IN STATOR CURRENTTHANEIOS
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 01:39:45 PM
A WORKING HV COIL = 0.01 A DECREASE IN STATOR CURRENT
A NON WORKING HV COIL = 0.01 A INCREASE IN STATOR CURRENT[/color][/b]
There are three states:
1. Before the acceleration
2. During the acceleration
3. After the acceleration
What happens to the current for each of these
three states? You keep referring to only two.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 09:11:49 AM
KEEP ADDING TURNS UNTIL YOU GET THIS:
Coil 3: ?v 0.001 A ?turns
THEN WE CAN DISCUSS - APPLES TO ORANGES.
Thane
My and Ron's HV coils are outputting far more that .001A
But you have not answered my question, but if you need me to restate here goes:
Coil1: 5v 1A 100 turns
Coil 2: 62.5v .08A 1250 turns
I assure you each will have the same energy output and produce an equal magnetic field.
My question to you is if I or someone else can show parameters such as the above if you will accept that as evidence that slowing HC coils are not needed.
Or would I need to run the HV through a transformer so it is outputting close to the same amps and volts as the HC coil?
This isn't apples and oranges, it is all electrical power of the same energy and a magnetic field from each coil that assuming the coils are of the same volume and metal should be indistinguishable.
QuoteThere are three states:
1. Before the acceleration
2. During the acceleration
3. After the acceleration
What happens to the current for each of these three states? You keep referring to only two.
1) BEFORE ACCELERATIONWE TAKE THE MOTOR UP TO A STEADY STATE SPEED - THEN REDUCE THE VOLTAGE JUST ENOUGH TO ENSURE THAT THE SYSTEM IS
DECELERATING EVER SO SLIGHTLY - SUCH THAT THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN OUR COIL(S) IS
DECREASING.
STATOR CURRENT IS STABLE.
THEN SHORT OUT THE HV COIL(S)
2) DURING ACCELERATIONONCE THE HV COIL HAS BEEN ENGAGED - EITHER THE STATOR CURRENT INCREASES (DECELERATION) OR IT DECREASES (ACCELERATION)
IF THE HV COIL IS CAUSING ACCELERATION (NOT THE MOTOR) THE CURRENT WILL START TO DROP IMMEDIATELY - NOT EVEN A 0.01 AMP INCREASE IN STATOR CURRENT.
3) AFTER ACCELERATIONAFTER ACCELERATION HAS PEAKED THE HV COIL IS DISENGAGED AND IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE SYSTEM BEGINS TO DECELERATE WITH A CORRESPONDING INCREASE IN STATOR CURRENT - WHICH INDICATES THAT THE MOTOR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE NEW ACCELERATED SYSTEM SPEED.
The Thane of Cawdor
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 01:39:45 PM
WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW WHERE IT IS COMING FROM - BUT WE CAN CONCLUDE WHERE IT IS NOT COMING FROM I.E. THE MOTOR BECAUSE...
THE MOTOR CURRENT WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE BY MORE THAN 0.01 AMPS TO CAUSE ACCELERATION AND THIS DOES NOT OCCUR.
Thane, I want to make it clear that I am not being disloyal by disagreeing with you, I am just being loyal to old Thane who observed a decrease in current and an increase in motor torque.
In demo 1 and 2 you disproved what you are now saying, you found the motor needed an all steel shaft with a single coil, something you re-verified later also with fully non magnetic shafts and rotors not working with a single coil.
My understanding is that you have discounted the result of demo 1&2 because you simply feel the steel shaft by giving an initially higher rpm the HV coils have enough power to do their thing.
But did you ever check to see if you speed up the gaped version to the same speed as the all steel version if it would kick into action?
I hope to get that test done today.
QuoteMy question to you is if I or someone else can show parameters such as the above if you will accept that as evidence that slowing HC coils are not needed.
GREAT - BUT WHEN
YOU GO TO MIT OR UVA OR MSU ETC, ETC AND MAKE YOUR VIDEO THAT SOMEONE UPLOADS ON TO YOUTUBE AND SMART PEOPLE LIKE DR. WHATSHISNAME TELL EVERYONE THAT THERE IS
NO USEFUL OUTPUT - DON'T COME CRYING TO ME.
Thane
QuoteI hope to get that test done today
GREAT NO NEED TO DEBATE ENDLESSLY THEN.
QuoteBut did you ever check to see if you speed up the gaped version to the same speed as the all steel version if it would kick into action?
MY FEELING NOW - IS THAT THE MOTOR ROTOR FLUX WAS ENHANCING THE PM STRENGTH ON THE GENERATOR ROTOR WITH THE STEEL BAR INSERTION.
YESTERDAY I GOT VERY LITTLE ACCELERATION FROM MY COILS WITH 2 STACKED MAGNETS AND THEN WITH THREE - ALL HELL BROKE LOSE.
IN THE EARLY DAYS IN MY BASEMENT I COULD GET ACCELERATION WITH THE BRASS COUPLER STEEL BAR ETC DURING THE EVENING - COME BACK THE NEXT DAY AND
NOT BE ABLE TO REPEAT THE VERY SAME TESTS PERFORMED THE NIGHT BEFORE UNTIL I RAN THE MOTOR FOR A WHILE AT A HIGHER SPEED TO "FLUX UP" THE DRIVE SHAFT A BIT.
CHEERS
The NEW AND IMPROVED Thane
QuoteI am just being loyal to old Thane who observed a decrease in current and an increase in motor torque.
THE OLD THANE IS OBSOLETE AND DEAD - HE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO A NOW CYNICAL, JADED AND BITTER SHADOW OF HIS FORMER NAIVE SELF.
WHAT THE OLD FART HAS-BEEN THANE OBSERVED WAS AN INCREASE IN "SYSTEM" TORQUE - INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED TO THE MOTOR.
N.A.I.T
P.S.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION YES I DID TRY AND NO IT DID NOT KICK IN BUT I DID LOOK FOR IT.
ALSO I JUST REMEMBERED - WHEN YOU LOAD THE HV COILS THROUGH A RESISTIVE LOAD YOU REDUCE THE ACCELERATION EFFECT WHICH CAN GIVE THE APPEARANCE OF DECELERATION AS PER A CONVENTIONAL COIL - SO FOR DEMO PURPOSES IT IS GOOD TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE HV vs HC.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 05:34:19 PM
GREAT - BUT WHEN YOU GO TO MIT OR UVA OR MSU ETC, ETC AND MAKE YOUR VIDEO THAT SOMEONE UPLOADS ON TO YOUTUBE AND SMART PEOPLE LIKE DR. WHATSHITSNAME TELL EVERYONE THAT THERE IS NO USEFUL OUTPUT - DON'T COME CRYING TO ME.
Thane
First I'll preface this, you see I don't know what you know and what you don't, I don't know if you understand that 100 turns at 1 amp is the same as 1 turn at 100 amps which is the same as 10,000 turns at .01 amps when it comes to producing a magnetic field. (amps x turns)
Or that in all the coils mentioned above the ratio of self induction with induction of an external field remains at the same ratio and ratio is all that matters. (this means that a coil of ANY inductance will work to generate a useful output normally since the driving voltage raises along with the counter voltage)
I don't know what you know about electrical power, I don't know if you have gaps in your knowledge (I sure do) or if you are going to be insulted by these obvious points.
Do you know that .01 amps at 500v has the same power as 10 amps at .5v? (and that with the wrong load the former will appear to output no power?)
Ok, well here's the thing, forgetting about the acceleration (and position on the core) the only difference between the HV and HC coils is how much resistance is required to make use of their output.
Here we have 240v mains, I have read similar voltages from the HV coils.
The difference is the mains can supply an infinite current almost, however the HV coils can't create a stronger magnetic field inside of their turns than the inducing field and as such it is current limited and therefore the difference between the mains and the HV coil is that the mains will always give you (to the point of destruction) more power with less resistance, but the HV coils will only give more power if you increase the resistance so their limited current can develop a useful voltage across your load.
To pull power from them you must have resistance that allows you to pull close to the short circuit current while maintaining a decent voltage. If you get it right you may get close to the short circuit current and the open circuit voltage simultaneously. so 0.07 amps and 272 volts could be close to 19 watts.
My point is that you will indeed appear to have no power if you have a load that does not generate a decent voltage, but you can increase the resistance with little change in the current which is why Ron found the same current through a 10 or 5 ohm (or 0 ohm) resistor on his HV coil, the 10 ohm resistor has twice the voltage and so he has just doubled the power output. (BTW he found .15A with his close to the rotor HV coils, if they have a 200 ohm resistance then that's 30watts of ohmic heating! that not not 'No power')
You need a load on the HV coils that is at least in the hundreds of ohms. but possibly thousands. (Ron's impedance would have been in the 4k ohms range)
If the HC coils were producing 10v and 1A a 10 ohm load would suit to pull 10w.
If the HV coils were producing 100v and .1A you would need a 1,000 ohm load to pull 10w, with a 10 ohm load you'd have only .1w!
Assuming you actually read I don't know if I am telling you stuff you know, or if this is a revelation to you or if you object to it all.
But I am increasingly of the opinion that showing you the voltage across a carefully selected resistor will not convince you of the power present and if that is so I would need to use a step down transformer.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 05:40:23 PM
\IN THE EARLY DAYS IN MY BASEMENT I COULD GET ACCELERATION WITH THE BRASS COUPLER STEEL BAR ETC DURING THE EVENING - COME BACK THE NEXT DAY AND NOT BE ABLE TO REPEAT THE VERY SAME TESTS PERFORMED THE NIGHT BEFORE UNTIL I RAN THE MOTOR FOR A WHILE AT A HIGHER SPEED TO "FLUX UP" THE DRIVE SHAFT A BIT.
@N.A.I.T.
Now you've done it! That's the Aspden Effect, now aether's really going to get excited when he gets over his HV/HC discussion. Actually, I noticed it also, but to weird to mention.
QuoteAssuming you actually CAN read I don't know if I am telling you stuff you know, or if this is a revelation to you or if you object to it all
MY OBJECTION TO THE "TRUTH" DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY LESS TRUE.HOWEVER IF OUman OBJECTS THEN IT MUST
NOT BE TRUE - SO I WILL WAIT TO SEE WHAT HE/SHE SAYS.
Thaner
Ah, Ok, much valuable info!
MY FEELING NOW - IS THAT THE MOTOR ROTOR FLUX WAS ENHANCING THE PM STRENGTH ON THE GENERATOR ROTOR WITH THE STEEL BAR INSERTION.
YESTERDAY I GOT VERY LITTLE ACCELERATION FROM MY COILS WITH 2 STACKED MAGNETS AND THEN WITH THREE - ALL HELL BROKE LOSE.
Interesting, 2 sucks but 3 rules. 2 almost sounds worse than 1 since I would not say you normally have 'very little' acceleration. Curious.
IN THE EARLY DAYS IN MY BASEMENT I COULD GET ACCELERATION WITH THE BRASS COUPLER STEEL BAR ETC DURING THE EVENING - COME BACK THE NEXT DAY AND NOT BE ABLE TO REPEAT THE VERY SAME TESTS PERFORMED THE NIGHT BEFORE UNTIL I RAN THE MOTOR FOR A WHILE AT A HIGHER SPEED TO "FLUX UP" THE DRIVE SHAFT A BIT.
Ah, that makes sense from an aetheric perspective also.
CHEERS
The NEW AND IMPROVED Thane
Still a fan of Thane Classic!
THE OLD THANE IS OBSOLETE AND DEAD - HE HAS BEEN UPGRADED TO A NOW CYNICAL, JADED AND BITTER SHADOW OF HIS FORMER NAIVE SELF.
WHAT THE OLD FART HAS-BEEN THANE OBSERVED WAS AN INCREASE IN "SYSTEM" TORQUE - INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED TO THE MOTOR.
N.A.I.T
P.S.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION YES I DID TRY AND NO IT DID NOT KICK IN BUT I DID LOOK FOR IT.
Ah, yes that indicates that a slightly higher speed was likely not the reason the test with the steel shaft worked. You must admit IF aether is accepted to exist in the way I state it better explains all the evidence than any generator based source of increased torque.
I would also add one thing, old Thane was correct in that the current and phase angle are not the only contributors to motor power, that may be one way to increase motor power but it's not the only one, your demo with the magnet near the split phase motor proved that.
ALSO I JUST REMEMBERED - WHEN YOU LOAD THE HV COILS THROUGH A RESISTIVE LOAD YOU REDUCE THE ACCELERATION EFFECT
Now the question here is 'how much of a load?' (resistance wise)
This is a subject I realize I need to do some experimentation in, though really there is no bad result.
The coils resistance is 200 ohms so if adding say a 10-20 ohm loads slows acceleration significantly that is evidence of the aether as such an insignificant ohm change should not be electrically significant.
If however the resistance is hundreds or thousands of ohms or more then that is Ok and indicates that the HV coils can be used to pull useful power accepting that if you reduce current too much the effect will naturally diminish.
WHICH CAN GIVE THE APPEARANCE OF DECELERATION AS PER A CONVENTIONAL COIL - SO FOR DEMO PURPOSES IT IS GOOD TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE HV vs HC.
Or acceleration HV coils and load HV coils, but anyway yes for demo purposes only showing the difference between HV band HC coils is very instructiveness of the unique qualities of the tech.
Now I really need to get into the Labrage, Garagatory?
QuoteThat's the Aspden Effect
GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE LARRY - ARE YOU SERIOUS???
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 07:22:00 PM
MY OBJECTION TO THE "TRUTH" DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY LESS TRUE.
HOWEVER IF OUman OBJECTS THEN IT MUST NOT BE TRUE - SO I WILL WAIT TO SEE WHAT HE/SHE SAYS.
Thaner
Hahaha, Ok, you CAN read but I can't write!
I did not mean to say "assuming you actually
can read" I meant to say "assuming you actually read this". I wasn't taking a jab at you.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 01, 2008, 07:36:11 PM
GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE LARRY - ARE YOU SERIOUS???
T
Yes, more specifically when you restart within several minutes. Flux helping holes from Hell baby! A heated up motor should slow down, not speed up for the same load with the same watts.
Well my results with the isolation test show acceleration with and without the full steel shaft. (strangely it was more without I think)
Since Thane has established that laminated cores work best with coils of somewhat fewer turns, down to 53 or so ohm coils working better than larger coils I am not surprised that the laminated coils make a stronger aether flow that can break through an air gap. (But happily Thane verified that regardless of speed he could not get the effect without the steel and his single coil so he busted his own speed theory which IMO was simply a rationalization he needed to make since he saw no other answer not being a fan of bubble gum theory)
So sadly this test will not give me any useful differentiation, maybe when I put together the new rotor I'm picking up in a day or two I will be able to get my monster coil to work and that will show the effect with a solid core...
I now have the following tests to do (the surrogate tests can only be run with my new motor which is unproven to show the effect so I may push those tests back a bit).
Surrogate motor tests. (Wave an induction motor near the possible aether beams)
Surrogate coil tests (note: because I can't stop the drive motor from showing the effects I need to test it on a surrogate motor also)
Tests to determine if the magnitude of the effect is related in any sensible way to the magnitude of current in the HV coils, and to see the effects of various inductors and resistors.
Tests to see how much power can be pulled from the HV coil.
Tests to verify the induction motor current decreases on shorting the HV coil. (I have zero doubt that it will but will do this test for Thane)
And then Aether tests to see if I can amplify the effect with any Aetheric principles.
I can also run other tests using the aetheric current output from the HV coil for various tests.
In fact Luc if you are reading this why don't you see if you can power your 'cold electricity producing coil' with Thanes HV coil output (possibly chopped at a suitable freq, BTW consider adding carbon electrodes to the spark gaps! but if it no longer accelerates you have killed the aetheric current so you may need to change your coil and core or wind a primary powered by the HV coil that induces the coil) and then add a shorted battery to the coil to create a DC magnetic field, see if you can suck the field it creates with a tuned coil and capacitor, or better yet touch it and see if you can conduct the magnetic field through your body, many have shown it is possible, here is one (I've collected a list of 20 or so cases):
I was building a electromagnet and It was starting to look good. I had put a switch on it to divert the power at my will. Also, I had added a minuter Tesla coil to the design for optimal power. When I hooked it up to a 9 volt battery and I held up the screwdriver which I had wrapped the wire around to magnetise. I was able to take my other hand and metal objects would attract to it as if my hand were a magnet.
USA - Monday, January 25, 1999 at 03:55:25 (PST)
http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/exper.html
Magnetic fields can hitch a ride on aether streams, as can electric currents.
Quote from: LarryC on June 01, 2008, 07:46:28 PM
Yes, more specifically when you restart within several minutes. Flux helping holes from Hell baby! A heated up motor should slow down, not speed up for the same load with the same watts.
THAT'S JUST CRAZY TALK THERE LARRY!!!
I'M GOING TO BED.
A22 - I THINK I HAVE CREATED - RATHER WOKEN UP A MONSTER - HAVE FUN DUDE!
Mr. T.
...
Love the photo instructions Just Thane Me.
How many ohms and wire gauge are you currently liking for the coil?
I'm going to run a few more experiments before I 'upgrade' the rotor into the 3x magnet stack version. (or assuming it's nothing more than 'more flux the better' I might just do it on my new version)
Actually I just thought of the ultimate surrogate setup, have the rotor and stator too far away, or insufficient turns on HV coil for any or at least a decent acceleration, and then connect that coil up with another complete stator on a nearby and 'Brutally Accelerating' Thanerator to see if the effect can be transferred. (much like putting HV coils in series to get acceleration)
BTW on that front, a single HV 100 ohm MOT coil does just fine shorted by it's self at creating acceleration.
PM Current Tests:
The motor current was initially at .87A and when I shorted it the speed steadily dropped and with it slowly the current dropped by .01 amp increments until the acceleration peaked. (about .79A IIRC)
I then opened the HV circuit and the motor speed dropped and with it the current slowly went up but not as high as when it started until it reached the speed at which it was happy to sit with the HV coils open. I then reshorted and the current again slowly dropped as the speed increased, this time to about .77A and I then did this cycle one more time but got only about .01 of an amp lower and so gave up trying to get it any lower.
It is interesting that the current would drop and not return even when back to the same RPM again.
Going to have to warm up a bit before the next experiment, running fans in winter is not really a great idea, though what I call winter and what Thane and JustMe calls winter is an entirely different thing, I'm a big hot house whimp.
Thane, do I understand that you have noted instantaneous current changes that do not seem to be due to any change in RPM?
I tested various resistors and found that while 6 or 100 ohm resistors do not stop the acceleration effect (or attenuate it to an extent that I noticed not that I'm sure I would notice) they also generated in my setup a limited voltage of .36 and 6v respectively (the latter being a mere .27w) as expected.
However when I tried a 1k ohm resistor I got 47v and .03A (.015 less then the previous tests 1.41w) but now there was seemingly no acceleration at all, despite the fact that the current was only slightly reduced.
So it seems that you can't pull much energy from a HV coil until the acceleration effect reduces, disappears or actually turns into a net deceleration. Still it would make sense using coils that have some acceleration effect however compromised or even if only when not being used to power a load they can be used to accelerate the rotor.
But the more interesting point is that the acceleration seems to have a non-linear relationship with current, although at this point I have not established just how much so and if the effect is at the motor as I believe and feel all the evidence indicates then the possible increase in Lenz Law as the phase of the current changes would also reduce the acceleration effect further. (Actually a torque sensor would come in handy for fast accurate reads on the magnitude of the effect as well as removing any remaining doubt as to where the new torque comes from, Thane if you have decent funding you might seriously consider getting yourself one just to give a fast accurate read on the effect)
I also connected up the primary of a 240v transformer to the HV coils but that killed the acceleration and dropped the current, actually that reminds me I forgot to test with secondary shorted...
Yes, as expected the secondary being shorted reestablished the acceleration effect while increasing the current nicely to .34A (It's a 240v to 40v step down transformer)
I have also figured that if I fill the hose connecting the motor and generator with materials that resist the aether's flow I will either energize the aether (not sure what that will do) or block it. (or possibly block it only for a time, or attenuate it, tons of possibilities)
Oh yeah, and the HV coil can be shorted through an air core coil and provided it isn't massive the acceleration will be as expected, this is good news for the surrogate coils tests to come.
QuoteHow many ohms and wire gauge are you currently liking for the coil?
53 OHMS @ 30 GAUGE WIRE - THE OTHER COIL IS 145 OHMS - WORKS BETTER AT HIGHER RPM
QuoteSo it seems that you can't pull much energy from a HV coil until the acceleration effect reduces, disappears or actually turns into a net deceleration. Still it would make sense using coils that have some acceleration effect however compromised or even if only when not being used to power a load they can be used to accelerate the rotor.
HENCE WHY WE USE A HV COIL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A HC COIL - IN A BALANCED MODE OR EVEN WITH ACCELERATION TO GET 20 WATTS w/ ACCELERATED POWER THOUGH A HC COIL - WHERE IT WOULD STOP THE PRIME MOVER DEAD IF EMPLOYED ON ITS OWN.
PLACING THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR HAS POSITIVE BENEFITS AS WELL.
YOU CAN TAKE LOTS OF POWER FROM A HV COIL IF YOU HAVE MANY OF THEM AND YOU USE THEM ALL TO ACCELERATE YOUR ROTOR - THEN LOAD SOME OF THEM AND USE THE OTHERS TO MAINTAIN THE NEW HIGHER STEADY STATE SPEED.
Thanal Glands.
QuoteUser 'hartiberlin1' has exceeded the 'max_questions' resource (current value: 100000)
DOES ANYONE ELSE GET THIS ERROR MESSAGE AS OFTEN AS I DO?
(like 10 times so far this morning and being online for 15 minutes)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 06:34:50 AM
53 OHMS @ 30 GAUGE WIRE - THE OTHER COIL IS 145 OHMS - WORKS BETTER AT HIGHER RPM
HENCE WHY WE USE A HV COIL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A HC COIL - IN A BALANCED MODE OR EVEN WITH ACCELERATION TO GET 20 WATTS w/ ACCELERATED POWER THOUGH A HC COIL - WHERE IT WOULD STOP THE PRIME MOVER DEAD IF EMPLOYED ON ITS OWN.
PLACING THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR HAS POSITIVE BENEFITS AS WELL.
YOU CAN TAKE LOTS OF POWER FROM A HV COIL IF YOU HAVE MANY OF THEM AND YOU USE THEM ALL TO ACCELERATE YOUR ROTOR - THEN LOAD SOME OF THEM AND USE THE OTHERS TO MAINTAIN THE NEW HIGHER STEADY STATE SPEED.
Thanal Glands.
Yes, and chances are when pulling the same power HV coils will have somewhat reduced overall lenz drag even if they have gone negative.
And yes I am getting it tons at thins kind of time. (resource message)
QuoteYes, and chances are when pulling the same power HV coils will have somewhat reduced overall lenz drag even if they have gone negative.
YES - DON'T CONFUSE LACK OF HV ACCELERATION - WITH HC LENZ DECELERATION - IT FOOLED THE "OLD" THANE AT FIRST.
NAIT
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 06:34:50 AM
53 OHMS @ 30 GAUGE WIRE - THE OTHER COIL IS 145 OHMS - WORKS BETTER AT HIGHER RPM
HENCE WHY WE USE A HV COIL IN CONJUNCTION WITH A HC COIL - IN A BALANCED MODE OR EVEN WITH ACCELERATION TO GET 20 WATTS w/ ACCELERATED POWER THOUGH A HC COIL - WHERE IT WOULD STOP THE PRIME MOVER DEAD IF EMPLOYED ON ITS OWN.
PLACING THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR HAS POSITIVE BENEFITS AS WELL.
YOU CAN TAKE LOTS OF POWER FROM A HV COIL IF YOU HAVE MANY OF THEM AND YOU USE THEM ALL TO ACCELERATE YOUR ROTOR - THEN LOAD SOME OF THEM AND USE THE OTHERS TO MAINTAIN THE NEW HIGHER STEADY STATE SPEED.
Thanal Glands.
Oh yeah, the fact that the HV coils being shorted instantly effects the pickup coil on the other side before and rpm changes occur if very very much a sign of aether at work, there is no sensible way this can be explained without the sillyness of the aether.
If fact this would make me want to test other things such as to see if a transformer coupling on the rotor or something might be enhanced by the aetheric effect of shorting the Hv coils.
I will have to meditate on this effect further.
Was in bed but I couldn't stop planning my next experiment which I'll likely try in the morning. (my Bday)
And I've come to a snag, I need to know the details of the increased HC coil output.
Thane:
Was it a voltage increase when they were open circuit?
A current increase under short circuit?
Or a Volt/Amp/Watt increase over a load? (say a light bulb)
My current plan is to wind a coil on the shaft that will be a secondary to a stationary secondary, and the secondary coil short to another coil wound over the nut, and then a pickup coil a cm or so away will measure the increase in power from this electromagnet when the HV coil is shorted.
This simply takes the same effect and moves it's position and which flux source is enhanced.
Since there is no way that the HV coil could be positively influencing the HC coils on the other side based on flux alone this experiment should stand a real chance of working, I hope.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 06:41:06 AM
DOES ANYONE ELSE GET THIS ERROR MESSAGE AS OFTEN AS I DO?
(like 10 times so far this morning and being online for 15 minutes)
T
Yes, I do. At last we've found something in common!
BTW, I've noticed recently that nested quotes are broken, has anyone else noticed that?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 06:34:50 AM
PLACING THE HC COIL ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROTOR HAS POSITIVE BENEFITS AS WELL.
Has anyone tried putting the magnets on the outer rim, facing radially out, and the coils rotated 90 degrees from the norm so they too are oriented radially to the shaft? Just something about the 90deg rule that makes me wonder... ???
Norm:
|
==M===========M==
C C
Proposed:
|
C M=================M C
Can't rotate the C and M by 90deg, so don't take their orientation to represent the N-S pole alignment. Pole alignment is horizontal in Proposed fig, and vertical in Normal config.
-Mark
By the way, I have thought of a possible conventional source of the HC voltage increase that Thane mentions.
If you have all shorted HV cores on one side they will lend to repel the rotor a little at least compared to them being open circuit, this could tend to deform the wheel a bit and push the other side closer making it generate a higher voltage.
If the other side also has shorted coils this would become somewhat less likely to be the cause but if they are open circuit then it sounds about right.
Quote from: OUman on June 02, 2008, 11:28:29 AM
Yes, I do. At last we've found something in common!
BTW, I've noticed recently that nested quotes are broken, has anyone else noticed that?
Yes, nested quotes are broken as you can see^
And yes Mark, I have thought of that and it could improve the effect but would make mounting more than a single coil a bit harder and it would make mounting magnets harder also.
It has also come to my attention that Thane and OU/PB(Wo)man both have noses! And breath air!
Quote from: markzpeiverson on June 02, 2008, 02:17:18 PM
Has anyone tried putting the magnets on the outer rim, facing radially out, and the coils rotated 90 degrees from the norm so they too are oriented radially to the shaft? Just something about the 90deg rule that makes me wonder... ???
MARK,
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF WINDING A "U" SHAPED COIL TO GO AT THE OUTER EDGE OF THE ROTOR TO CONTACT THE MAGNET FROM BOTH SIDES - SHOULD HAVE IT DONE TUESDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 07:16:38 PM
MARK,
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF WINDING A "U" SHAPED COIL TO GO AT THE OUTER EDGE OF THE ROTOR TO CONTACT THE MAGNET FROM BOTH SIDES - SHOULD HAVE IT DONE TUESDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Now that's thinkin' outa the box!!!
Anxious to read your report on this 'variation on a theme'...
BTW, did you happen to give your crankypants to A22?
-Mark
HEY BE NICE IT'S HIS B-DAY.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOHN!
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
"we bow down - we're not worthy"
happybirthdaytoyouhappybirthdaytoyouhappybirthdaydearjohna22nzlandmanhappyb-daytoyou...andmanymore!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 09:21:40 PM
HEY BE NICE IT'S HIS B-DAY.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOHN!
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
"we bow down - we're not worthy"
I appreciate it!
Well I tried to get the increased induction effect but not luck, but I'm not yet sure if you were measuring open circuit voltage or something else. (I'll admit though that my setup was not quite flash, I'll try and do better soon)
Have you considered my magnetic tilting theory? Do you believe that could explain the results? (obviously I'm hoping it can't)
QuoteDo you believe that could explain the results?
MY BELIEF DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY MORE BELIEVABLE.
I AM JUST WAITING FOR OUman/woman/alien/bushjockey TO TELL ME WHAT I SHOULD BELIEVE.
GOOD NITE JOHN-BOY!
Mr. T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 09:34:11 PM
MY BELIEF DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY MORE BELIEVABLE.
I AM JUST WAITING FOR OUman/woman/alien/bushjockey TO TELL ME WHAT I SHOULD BELIEVE.
GOOD NITE JOHN-BOY!
Mr. T
I am happy to have your best guess, even if not OUman certified. Sleep well!
But yeah, if you still feel the effect is probably genuine and not effected by uneven forces on the rotor i'll put more effort and money into replication.
And also when you wake up the measurement details on the HC coils on just how you measured the instant increase.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 09:21:40 PM
HEY BE NICE IT'S HIS B-DAY.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOHN!
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
"we bow down - we're not worthy"
happybirthdaytoyouhappybirthdaytoyouhappybirthdaydearjohna22nzlandmanhappyb-daytoyou...andmanymore!
Your greeting was fancier, but I sent him hotmail sheep. Now back to our regularly scheduled hockey game.
Quote from: JustMe on June 02, 2008, 09:38:34 PM
Your greeting was fancier, but I sent him hotmail sheep. Now back to our regularly scheduled hockey game.
You win but due to hot
femaleness, not emailed sheep.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 02, 2008, 06:48:20 AM
Yes, and chances are when pulling the same power HV coils will have somewhat reduced overall lenz drag even if they have gone negative.
YES - DON'T CONFUSE LACK OF HV ACCELERATION - WITH HC LENZ DECELERATION - IT FOOLED THE "OLD" THANE AT FIRST.
NAIT
Nait alie,
Generally I like to convert to DC for generator tests, but just some raw AC numbers here...
With both HV and HC coils open it was drawing 227 watts
With an Ohmite brown devil 1200 ohm #1822 T-20 load resistor on the HV coils, the draw
went to 246 watts
The load resistor had 197 volts at .14 amps across it for approximately 27 watts.
The draw only increased 19 watts for this 27 watt output.
HOWEVER, just shorting the HV coil dropped the draw to 206 watts...
Note: all full speed tests.Series HV coils, one 70 ohm, one 90 ohm.
Note 2: The wimpy little resistor got mighty hot in just one minute so I do believe the watts
are real watts.
Ron, just coasting
Steven.... that was 270 watts on a 12000 ohm load resistor, 'divide by ten ron', LOL
Quote from: i_ron on June 02, 2008, 09:43:33 PM
Steven.... that was 270 watts on a 12000 ohm load resistor, 'divide by ten ron', LOL
Very nice, as you only dropped the current a tiny tiny bit from the .15A quoted earlier that means you could have likely sacrificed a bit more current for a far higher voltage and wattage if you went to a 2 or 3k ohm resistor. Very nice. yes there is useful energy coming from the HV coils and in a practical designed aimed at OU (maybe not what Thane is going for in his Buggy) it seems HV coils would make the most sense and even if they had the same net mechanical loading watt for watt as a HC coils (as unlikely as that would be) simply because you can can choose to have any combo of generator and accelerator coils you choose with the flick of a switch. (plus there must be a point where they have no net effect either way mechanically either way and yet output some useful energy)
Quote from: i_ron on June 02, 2008, 09:43:33 PM
Nait alie,
Generally I like to convert to DC for generator tests, but just some raw AC numbers here...
With both HV and HC coils open it was drawing 227 watts
With an Ohmite brown devil 1200 ohm #1822 T-20 load resistor on the HV coils, the draw
went to 246 watts
The load resistor had 197 volts at .14 amps across it for approximately 27 watts.
The draw only increased 19 watts for this 27 watt output.
HOWEVER, just shorting the HV coil dropped the draw to 206 watts...
Note: all full speed tests.Series HV coils, one 70 ohm, one 90 ohm.
Note 2: The wimpy little resistor got mighty hot in just one minute so I do believe the watts
are real watts.
Ron, just coasting
Steven.... that was 270 watts on a 12000 ohm load resistor, 'divide by ten ron', LOL
Those numbers don't work together. 1200 ohms - 197 volts - 0.14 amps. This deviates from Ohms law by nearly 20% - so either there's something wrong with your measurements of resistance, current and/or voltage or the load resistor has a significant inductive component - which you would then have to adjust for to determine real power. This is not being picky - 20% is a
very large discrepancy considering that the "excess" power of 8W is only about 3% of your total power input.
Also, several other pieces of information are required to understand what's going on, for example:
- What happened to the motor speed for each of those three conditions?
- Did you keep the input voltage exactly constant or did you adjust it?
- Did you measure the power factor at the input and did you adjust the power readings for that?
- What is the power input when the coils are removed completely?
In addition, it would be very interesting to plot the power input against various values of load resistor. There may well be a more optimum load than 1200 ohms and it would be easy to find that by doing such a series of measurements.
volts and ohms
197v
0.1641 A
1200ohms
32.34w
volts and current
197
0.14
1407
27.58
ohms and current
168
0.14
1200
23.52
Sure maybe the resistor has inductance, or maybe it is out by 20%? (Silver ones have a 10% accuracy maybe his 'Ohmite brown devil' was out by more? that along with small reading errors with the current and voltage would account for the difference in conjunction with a tiny bit of inductance)
But it must be remembered that his HV coils use another 3.13w too at .14A (I remember I gave a higher value in a previous post but I realize that was an error as I was taking the impedance not the ohmic resistance, whoops!)
But the overunity-ness of these readings don't mean a huge amount until they are compared with HC coils outputting the same amount because I'm not convinced personally that 30 watts out and 19 extra watts in is necessarily anomalous, although I have no doubt at all of the OU possibilities of Thanes device
addition: So if we assume the current is accurate at .14A and the resistance at 1200 and assume that the resistor has a highish inductor so we don't trust the voltage reading for our power calc. then we have 23.5 watts and then add 3w for the HV coil so we have 26.5w instead of Ron's initially reported 27w.
Adding metal powder to the hose (to possibly block the aether) didn't seem to make a difference.
I am pretty much done testing the first generator (can't think of any other tests unless someone has an idea), I could do the surrogate tests but before I do them I want to either check that my new bench grinder motor responds to the acceleration effect or alternately get it running up as the generator (with my new pulley rotor) and use my old motor as the surrogate, and I want to test Thanes increased HC induction discovery but I had tested it with the old motor and no effect (and even though it was my bday and I asked nice Thane wouldn't give me the secret recipe) so it may need a stronger acceleration effect or better stator setup, so either way I am on to the new motor, rotor and probably stators as I have 3 other MOT's just waiting to be used.
The new rotor will also give me a chance to try this stacked magnet discovery of Thanes too ("Brutal" acceleration, mmmmmmm drool), which I couldn't try with the other one because he again wouldn't give me the recipe for doing such without having magnets fly everywhere, and he knows I need EVERYTHING spelled out ;)
So tomorrow I will be putting the new gen together, oh and one other thing.
I realize I have everything required to run the generator via a pulley, well almost, I need a nut removed from an automotive alternator. Hopefully then I can stop the acceleration effect, although I should have another decent chance of making my monster coil work with the new rotor.
BTW so far my plan is to make my new rotor a wooden disk with holes cut for the magnets, so wooden cup holders effectively but the bottom being the iron of the pulley. (though I may ass steel also)
2 other things.
I have emailed a company that rents torque sensors, to see if they are affordable for a months rental.
And if that doesn't happen and if the others tests fail to show the torque is from the motor as I hope then I will put the HV coils on my oscilloscope and track the rotation of the rotor with the other magnet so I know precisely what phase of the HV coil is with respect to the rotor to ensure it isn't leading the rotor.
BTW until I have anything worth showing I am not going to go to the bother of borrowing a laptop (not mine) installing my webcam on it and using it as an awkward video camera (complete with crappy manual focus).
But if anyone doubt I'm really doing these tests or just really wants to see my setup just ask and I'll do it.
Oh, and if anyone has any experiment ideas ask away.
Quote from: aether22 on June 02, 2008, 11:10:26 PM
addition: So if we assume the current is accurate at .14A and the resistance at 1200 and assume that the resistor has a highish inductor so we don't trust the voltage reading for our power calc. then we have 23.5 watts and then add 3w for the HV coil so we have 26.5w instead of Ron's initially reported 27w.
Umm, no, I don't think so. That
internal 3W or so is a separate issue and it must always be added on top of whatever number is the correct one externally. The fact is that there's a 20% discrepancy among the
external measurements so that needs to be reconciled. We don't have to guess about the resistance value - it can be measured accurately. As for the inductance, that can be measured too (although I expect it's much to small to account for this discrepancy).
Quote from: OUman on June 03, 2008, 05:48:23 AM
Umm, no, I don't think so. That internal 3W or so is a separate issue and it must always be added on top of whatever number is the correct one externally. The fact is that there's a 20% discrepancy among the external measurements so that needs to be reconciled. We don't have to guess about the resistance value - it can be measured accurately. As for the inductance, that can be measured too (although I expect it's much to small to account for this discrepancy).
Yes but it restores it back to within half a watt from Ron said, mainly 26.5/27w of heating and 19w motor load increase = 7.5/8w FE (kinda)
But hey if you want me to say 30w and 11w FE as would be the case if his resistor was beyond 1200ohms, or the 35.3w and 16.3w FE if we assume it was his current reading that was off by .02A then sure.
But yes, the inductance seems unlikely to be high enough to effect it alone, the voltage would have to be too far off (almost 30v), a 20% inaccuracy in the resistor seems unlikely (apparently the ohmites from what I can see are 5% or better in anything like that range) but a .02A current error seems quite plausible to me, in which case the total watts is the 35.3w I stated above.
Quote from: OUman on June 02, 2008, 10:43:49 PM
Those numbers don't work together. 1200 ohms - 197 volts - 0.14 amps. This deviates from Ohms law by nearly 20% - so either there's something wrong with your measurements of resistance, current and/or voltage or the load resistor has a significant inductive component - which you would then have to adjust for to determine real power. This is not being picky - 20% is a very large discrepancy considering that the "excess" power of 8W is only about 3% of your total power input.
snip
I did not post these numbers to argue about. I clearly stated they were RAW numbers... merely to
indicate a TREND
The Brown Devil is wire wound resistor and if you consider six magnet stations at the stated 3600
RPM then one should consider the impedence of this component, yet you, without any evidence
to the contrary, have stated a 20% error in my numbers. That is bullshit.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 03, 2008, 11:00:36 AM
I did not post these numbers to argue about. I clearly stated they were RAW numbers... merely to
indicate a TREND
The Brown Devil is wire wound resistor and if you consider six magnet stations at the stated 3600
RPM then one should consider the impedence of this component, yet you, without any evidence
to the contrary, have stated a 20% error in my numbers. That is bullshit.
Ron
Sorry, Ron, nothing personal was intended. But that combination of measurements (1200 ohms - 197 volts - 0.14 amps) deviates from Ohm's Law by about 20%. So either there's an error in the measurements or else the load is not purely resistive. That's what I said and it's not bullshit, sorry.
True but really it doesn't matter, the HV coil DOES produce real energy and it's OU as I had expected making it the best choice for an OU design where the HC coil would be assumed not to be.
But my thought is that at this point someone needs to rewire a 'normal' generator (or motor used as one) to Thanes HV specs because that would be far more efficient than what everyone is doing so far.
Sure the losses in the stators have been reduced but the losses on the rotor have not been looked at.
The first intermediate test that could be tried would be to add DC energized coils to the rotor and remove the neo's to ensure the effect still works, though I am not sure anyone has a rotor suited to such a test yet.
Quote from: aether22 on June 03, 2008, 05:12:52 PM
...the HV coil DOES produce real energy and it's OU...
I don't understand at all how you can draw that conclusion from the reported results. There's 200+ watts of power going into this thing and so far the max that's been extracted is 27 watts. Doesn't sound very OU to me. What's your definition of OU?
I'm bored, so what the hell.
It is OU relative to the loading increase on the motor.
And if you count the losses that were occurring unless you can show that they somehow were reduced by loading the coil then it means the machine has gone OU overall in heat, sound and mechanical vibration etc output.
But I did say 'kinda OU' previously.
Basically what the experiments seem to indicate is that if you added more coils, and reduced various losses in the system it could be made OU, possibly in conjunction with some shorted HV coils for pure acceleration. (and a few watts of heating, which seems attractive about now)
Of course you knew precisely what I meant, but I have some time to kill so it's good to keep focused on the subject.
You make a good point though, the system isn't doing too well putting 200+ watts into friction, moving air around, heating, and noise in an unloaded state.
Since Thane has shown it can be faster with coils shorted than with coils away from the rotor then it is clear it isn't losses inherent with the generator and hence they could and need to be cleaned up to make it OU. (although with the 'Brutal' acceleration Thane noted if multiplied a bit then maybe 'need' is too strong a word)
There should be some effort into running a generator rotor (with stators absent) with just a few watts not pretty close to 200w as it currently is. If that is done making it OU could be very easy!
LARRY COME QUICK !!!!
A22 IS DRINKING OU KOOLAID !!!
AND ITS INDUCING VOMITTING IN ME !!!!
Quote from: i_ron on June 03, 2008, 11:00:36 AM
I did not post these numbers to argue about. I clearly stated they were RAW numbers... merely to
indicate a TREND That is bullshit.
Ron
I_RANT,
SERIOUSLY - WHERE CAN I PURCHASE A NICE VARIAC LIKE YOURS?
With Kindest Regards
Thaner
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 03, 2008, 07:28:14 PM
LARRY COME QUICK !!!!
A22 IS DRINKING OU KOOLAID !!!
AND ITS INDUCING VOMITTING IN ME !!!!
Hahaha.
I had yesterday picked up my pully, but left it in the car (too full after my Bday dinner to do any work) and so I had to get a bus to where the car (not mine) was, and I had time to kill before the bus.
But yeah, no more koolaid for me.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 03, 2008, 08:08:31 PM
I_RANT,
SERIOUSLY - WHERE CAN I PURCHASE A NICE VARIAC LIKE YOURS?
With Kindest Regards
Thaner
Case of the pot calling the kettle black again, be nice or I'll sic OUmon on you, lol
It is a Powerstat, model 116BU,
120 volts 50/60 cycle in, 0-140 volts out, 10 amp, 1.4 KVA
It was given to me by someone that didn't know what it was other than it was something electrical....
and he knew I dabbled in such. I have since priced them and it is scary! I have had it for years and
only lately, well with the start of an Aspden concentric capacitor experiment, have I found several
uses for it. You move to BC and I'll let you borrow it....
Your humble servant,
Ron
MUUUUUST DRINNNK KKKKK KOOOOLAIIIIIID..........
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 03, 2008, 08:08:31 PM
I_RANT,
SERIOUSLY - WHERE CAN I PURCHASE A NICE VARIAC LIKE YOURS?
With Kindest Regards
Thaner
Here is one for 50 bux...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/49h2gk
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 03, 2008, 07:28:14 PM
LARRY COME QUICK !!!!
A22 IS DRINKING OU KOOLAID !!!
AND ITS INDUCING VOMITTING IN ME !!!!
Since you have not been in physical contact with A22, the only possible explanation is that your nausea is being induced through the aether. You may be able to isolate yourself from it if you sit on top of a long PVC pole. Larry should take the same precaution.
Quote from: aether22 on June 03, 2008, 07:05:52 PM
There should be some effort into running a generator rotor (with stators absent) with just a few watts not pretty close to 200w as it currently is. If that is done making it OU could be very easy!
How about an experiment along the lines of what you suggested earlier? Use the motor only to get the rotor up to speed. Then release it (physically, need some kind of clutch mechanism) and observe the rate of deceleration of the rotor under various coil conditions. This removes the unknown variable of the base motor power altogether and so should clearly reveal the relative power added or subtracted by the generator. To demonstrate OU, all you need to do is find a coil condition that decelerates less than the base (no-coils) condition, using a measurement system that brings the measurements well clear of any margin for error. There can be no argument with a clear demonstration like that and there is virtually no additional cost to set it up.
Tempted to bid on that Variac.
But we don't want a bidding war between list members so if Thane wants it I won't, but it's a deal.
Although shipping to NZ might push the price up that is a mighty cheap and powerful autotransformer.
Quote from: aether22 on June 03, 2008, 11:50:34 PM
Tempted to bid on that Variac.
But we don't want a bidding war between list members so if Thane wants it I won't, but it's a deal.
Although shipping to NZ might push the price up that is a mighty cheap and powerful autotransformer.
Aether twotwo, I thought that myself.. wouldn't it be funny if everyone bid on it? not funny at all...
No, the problem with ebog is the price seems right, then just as it expires all the automatic bidding
programs kick in and it goes sky high... should be a law
Then the cost of shipping equals the final bid... :'(
Ron
For some reason the talk about Variac's got me thinking about oscilloscopes, and induced me to check that mine was in good health (not a thing you use every day) and it is.
So some time, although probably not immediately, I plan on putting a 1 ohm or so resistor across the HV coils so I know the phase of the current and with it the magnetic field it produces.
And with the other channel look at the position of the rotor, to verify that it is indeed lagging and producing some Lenz effect.
But I have not thought of a good way to detect alignment between the rotor magnet and the core, if anyone has a good idea speak up
Hmmm, scratch that, I can use the optical based home made tach for the rotor position channel.
Though I have to get the new rotor constructed first....
Addition:
I very much prefer to get experiment lists completed before I am ready to do the experiments because once I get to that point my imagination dies, and I feel like this black guy I saw on TV once who had just won some mega lottery and suddenly has no clue what to do with his new found (financial) ability.
Optical Tach and HV coil resistor on scope experiment to determine magnetic phase or stator to rotor.
Deceleration v2 (better rotor and stator interface may clarify results)
HC coil induction increase. (THANE, HOW DID YOU MEASURE THE INCREASED INDUCTION? WAS IT OPEN CIRCUIT VOLTAGE, CLOSED CIRCUIT CURRENT OR BULB LOADED POWER? I'M LAZY TOO ONLY NOT SO MUCH WITH TYPING BUT EXPERIMENTS)
Surrogate (3 versions: external coil, motor and full and the subsequent series of tests if results are positive) <Most important test IF they work!
Pulley isolation of drive motor.
Rotor loading (reducing power consumed in basic rotation of rotor with and without stators to make OU easier)
Comparison of HV and HC coils ability to generate X watts and the loading on the motor that entails
Torque sensor, or measuring reaction torque on motor housing. (to verify Vince's results)
Testing alternate motor types to drive the generator. (including possibly an ICE?)
Additional rotor test, basically make an HC rotor and stator and an HV coil rotor and stator (the HC can be a normal DC motor/gen), if it runs better with the HV rotor present than absent then try 2 HV's to see if that is better yet.
Trials of Satan! Try JS's mechanical load test to see if a given load (maybe shorting HC coils) creates less increased current draw when run at the same RPM with and without HV coils brutally empowering the rotation.
Finally various aetheric based test which are not going to be high on the list until the results I am getting truly indicate aetheric operation, though Vine's and Thanes tests have suggested aetheric operation mine have so far been more ambiguous at best.
Many of these tests could become redundant based on results of other tests in the list.
Quote from: aether22 on June 03, 2008, 11:50:34 PM
Tempted to bid on that Variac.
But we don't want a bidding war between list members so if Thane wants it I won't, but it's a deal.
Although shipping to NZ might push the price up that is a mighty cheap and powerful autotransformer.
Yes, I'll hold off in bidding also, it is close to the type that I had before Katrina ate it. Would love to have it now, funny how a global warming storm has slowed research against global warming.
Also, I believe any Bday people are allowed to be disoriented for several days afterwards. Could be too much carbs though cake or other sources.
Now, this is strange, but I semi agree with OUman. I don't like to suggest to the real testers when I am not able to test, but I have thought of the clutch mechanism previously. I don't think it is at all easy as OUman suggest, but if it could be done it would help to show OU. Any ideas!
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 04, 2008, 01:01:44 AM
Yes, I'll hold off in bidding also, it is close to the type that I had before Katrina ate it. Would love to have it now, funny how a global warming storm has slowed research against global warming.
Also, I believe any Bday people are allowed to be disoriented for several days afterwards. Could be too much carbs though cake or other sources.
Now, this is strange, but I semi agree with OUman. I don't like to suggest to the real testers when I am not able to test, but I have thought of the clutch mechanism previously. I don't think it is at all easy as OUman suggest, but if it could be done it would help to show OU. Any ideas!
Regards, Larry
Katrina victim beats Birthday boy!
IT'S OK GUYS - I DON'T LIKE EBAY - I AM GETTING ONE OF THESE...
CHEERS
Thane
http://www.torontosurplus.com/redirect.php?middleframe=http://www.torontosurplus.com/ind/ind70.htm
Superior Electric 116CT Powerstat Variable Autotransformer / Variac, 0-140 V, 10 A
$ 150.00 US Please visit: www.torontosurplus.com for further details.
Input: Single Phase, 120 VAC, 50/60 Hz. 1 Ph
Style: Enclosed with Knob and Electrical Box for Hard Wiring.
1 in Stock
$ 150.00 US
Staco Energy L1010 Variable Transformer / Variac, Fully Enclosed, 0-140 V, 10 A - BRAND NEW in BOX
$ 295.00 US Please visit: www.torontosurplus.com for further details.
Input: 120 VAC, Single Phase, 50/60 Hz
Ouptut: 0-140 VAC, 10 A Max
Dimensions approx: 9.5"H x 6.5"W x 6.25"D
9 in stock
$ 295.00
Are you sure you wouldn't like a nice hot pink 2A one for only $187USD? http://tinyurl.com/57v9b5
"The best way to kill a good idea - is to put a committee on it"
Lee Iaccoca
AS FOR TESTING METHODS I SUGGEST - LOADING THE HC COIL WITH A LIGHT OR RESISTIVE LOAD - CAUSING DECELERATION WHICH IS OBVIOUS.
THEN EMPLOY THE HV COILS ONLY TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM THROUGH THE HC COIL LOAD - AGAIN OBVIOUS.
THEN I SUGGEST POSTING YOUR RESULTS ON YOUTUBE OR HERE AND WATCH PEOPLE IGNORE THE OBVIOUS - FOR REASONS WHICH ARE NOT OBVIOUS ???
ONCE YOU SEE THAT YOU CAN CONTROL AND OR NEGATE LENZ'S LAW AT YOUR WILL THE IMPLICATIONS WILL BE OBVIOUS.
OTTAWA VALLEY POT!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 06:41:04 AM
"The best way to kill a good idea - is to put a committee on it"
Lee Iaccoca
AS FOR TESTING METHODS I SUGGEST - LOADING THE HC COIL WITH A LIGHT OR RESISTIVE LOAD - CAUSING DECELERATION WHICH IS OBVIOUS.
THEN EMPLOY THE HV COILS ONLY TO ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM THROUGH THE HC COIL LOAD - AGAIN OBVIOUS.
I have of course done that much.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 06:41:04 AM
... OBVIOUS ...
Do you think that writing bold-caps "obvious" next to your statements somehow gives them greater scientific merit?
All the acceleration and deceleration stuff is, of course, obvious - it's easy to see and to measure and it's great Youtube material. But the issue is that it's not the acceleration/deceleration itself that matters. It's the
power flows. I know it sounds like a broken record but that's the point that you're persistently ignoring.
There is a way, though, to do it by the acceleration/deceleration method and still be measuring power reliably. A few posts up I referred to a method that can actually use deceleration as a defensible means of measuring the power flow in the generator. The reason it works is that the prime mover is completely disconnected during the measurement phase and so cannot be responsible for any of the power flows, nor for any of the changes in speed - so whatever happens is necessarily done by the generator. It was originally A22's idea and it's bullet-proof as far as I can see. If you can demonstrate OU with that method you'll certainly have me convinced.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 06:41:04 AM
THEN I SUGGEST POSTING YOUR RESULTS ON YOUTUBE OR HERE AND WATCH PEOPLE IGNORE THE OBVIOUS - FOR REASONS WHICH ARE NOT OBVIOUS ???
I wasn't interested in a free rotor, no motor for a measurement test. A HV shorted coil maintaining the rpm's of a free rotor would convince
ALL, even the most ignorant.
QuoteStaco style Variac Transformer, 0-132 V, 3.0 A max, 0.4 kVA, without Knobs & Brush
$ 25.00 US each Please visit: www.torontosurplus.com for further details.
Need a handy variable AC source? How about this compact variac?
Input: 120V, 50/60 Hz.
Dimensions: 2" L x 2 3/4" diameter
Used condition - Without Knob & Brush
approx. 16 in stock.
$ 25.00 US each
Does anybody know what they mean by without
Brush, what Brush?
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 04, 2008, 09:52:50 AM
A HV shorted coil maintaining the rpm's of a free rotor would convince ALL, even the most ignorant.
Indeed it would and based on Thane's comments I feel I can speak for that elite group. ;)
Quote from: LarryC on June 04, 2008, 09:52:50 AM
Does anybody know what they mean by without Brush, what Brush?
Just guessing but I reckon it's probably the piece that moves against the variac coils to make contact (like a motor brush).
Quote from: LarryC on June 04, 2008, 09:52:50 AM
I wasn't interested in a free rotor, no motor for a measurement test. A HV shorted coil maintaining the rpm's of a free rotor would convince ALL, even the most ignorant.
Does anybody know what they mean by without Brush, what Brush?
Regards, Larry
it's a tiny brush for cleaning it if it gets dirty.
no seriously it's a carbon brush as in DC motors, it is the moving contact on the coil.
larry, only 6 or so mins left in auction
If you read this don't bid, I'll win the bid and if you want it I'll let you have it.
note I won't go above $55 though, so if someone bids beyond that and you still want it just bid.
Ah, ok, I see you won it, good, I actually did bid another dollar or 2 there, didn't think you were bidding but you were looks like I cost you $4
Quote from: LarryC on June 04, 2008, 09:52:50 AM
I wasn't interested in a free rotor, no motor for a measurement test. A HV shorted coil maintaining the rpm's of a free rotor would convince ALL, even the most ignorant.
Regards, Larry
Hmmm, well we know that putting the shorted stator coils in place can increase the rpm and decrease the input energy beyond no stator, and so the only thing possibly standing in the way of the whole rotor assembly giving more than it takes and hence showing a clear path to OU and if the acceleration occurs at the generator (sofar not supported by most evidence) the ability to free wheel is the air drag experienced by the rotor.
So if the force is at the generator then evidence would support (based on the net acceleration demoed by Thanes split phase test) the idea of a clutch decoupled air drag reduced (aerodynamic and or in light vacuum) rotor (with decent bearings) powering it's self.
Quote from: aether22 on June 04, 2008, 07:12:25 AM
I have of course done that much.
THAT'S CAUSE YOU ARE A DAY AHEAD OF THE REST OF US!
Quoteauthor=aether22 link=topic=4047.msg102359#msg102359 date=1212615381]
larry, only 6 or so mins left in auction
If you read this don't bid, I'll win the bid and if you want it I'll let you have it.
note I won't go above $55 though, so if someone bids beyond that and you still want it just bid.
Ah, ok, I see you won it, good, I actually did bid another dollar or 2 there, didn't think you were bidding but you were looks like I cost you $4
Sorry, didn't read in time, but thanks for the try, just barely got the bid in. My internet provider service has been bouncing up and down like a yoyo, also my dish network, solar/aether storms?. Did win at $60 + 20.00 shipping. The shipping policy only seems reasonable for the US, no telling how much they would have charged you or Thane.
Thanks, Larry
QuoteDo you think that writing bold-caps "obvious" next to your statements somehow gives them greater scientific merit?
NO SCIENTIFIC MERIT HERE - JUST A
FUN CHAT ROOM! (bold-caps with an exclamation mark gives greater chat room merit).
QuoteIf you can demonstrate OU with that method you'll certainly have me convinced.
WE DON'T WANT TO CONVINCE YOU - WE MAY END UP (GASP) RESPECTING YOU OR SOMETHING EQUALLY HIDE
OUS LIKE HAVING TO BE NICE TO YOU ETC.
T
THIS ONE'S FOR YOU OUman - IT IS FROM A VERY SINCERE AND NON-CONDESCENDING PhD FRIEND OF MINE.
I HOPE YOU ALL FIND IT ACCESSIBLE TO YOUR TINY INTELLECTS.
THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO THE FULL SPEED DATA I SENT.
T
Hi Thane,
Here's an approach to induction motor behaviour
that is graphical and
therefore accessible to you. The attached
torque-speed plot is typical
of commercial single-phase induction motors, in
other words most small
induction motors including the Ryobis you are
using are roughly like this.
The plot shows torque vs speed, and on it I have
superimposed what
happens to efficiency. Torque would go to zero at
zero speed if the
motors didn't have some sort of asymmetry such as
a capacitor starting
coil, but most of them do have that asymmetry. As
it is, there tends to
be a low-speed range around 20% of synchronous
speed in which the motor
is very inefficient, and the operation there is
unstable. I have
labelled this the "starting point?" because I
believe that by reducing
the voltage using the variac, you are initially
putting the motor in
this range of operation. The motor can increase
in speed and torque AND
AT THE SAME TIME decrease the amount of power it
consumes, because the
efficiency increases as you move towards the top
right on the curve.
Once you reach the breakdown rpm at about 80-90 %
of the synchronous
speed, the speed, torque, and efficiency stop
increasing - and
efficiency always stops well short of 100%.
All that is happening in your experiments with
the Perepiteia generator
is that the induction motor is drifting up from
about the 20% of synch
speed to the 80% of synch speed mark, while
improving in efficiency (so
the power consumption drops). That's your
Perepiteia effect. You were
completely unable see to that effect when you
tried a DC motor, because
they have their maximum torque at zero speed, and
their torque declines
nonlinearly but monotonically with increasing
speed. This is the
behaviour you would intuitively expect from
motors.
The reason why none of the wise men like
Professors Zahn and Habash
pointed this out to you earlier is that most
universities stopped doing
any research on induction motors decades ago. As
a result, the details
of induction motor behaviour are not fresh on any
academic's mind, and
when you put a professor on the spot, he will try
to give you the
benefit of the doubt. But in the end, there is
nothing special about the
Perepiteia generator that can't be explained by
the behaviour of the
induction motor attached to it. Sorry.
Therefore, grab investors' money while you can
still find investors who
can't be bothered doing technical due diligence,
and launch your
company. Use the money to do some useful electric
motor related
research. When you do get that far, prof. Zahn
and Habash (or I) would
be able to point you in some productive
directions.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 07:33:08 PM
THIS ONE'S FOR YOU OUman - IT IS FROM A VERY SINCERE ANDF NON-CONDESCENDING PhD FRIEND OF MINE. I HOPE YOU ALL FIND IT ACCESSIBLE TO YOUR TINY INTELLECTS.
T
Hi Thane... Huge brain fart....
See OUman, you can happily leave now knowing everything has been solved and that there is nothing to any of this.
BTW I wasn't aware Thane had tested it with DC motors and failed to get an effect, that could be a verification of extra torque coming from the motor not the generator which all evidence agrees with.
Quote from: aether22 on June 04, 2008, 07:42:42 PM
BTW I wasn't aware Thane had tested it with DC motors and failed to get an effect, that could be a verification of extra torque coming from the motor not the generator which all evidence agrees with.
CALM DOWN A22 - THIS WAS DONE WITH 1 SINGLE SMALL COIL - AND DC MOTORS DON'T HAVE THE SAME FREE WHEELING (NOT FREE WILLY) EFFECT THAT AN INDUCTION MOTOR HAS - ALSO IT IS VERY HARD TO SPIN A DC MOTOR BY HAND - WHAT
WAS NOTICABLE IS THE DC MOTOR DREW MORE CURRENT WITH THE HC COIL AND NO ADDITIONAL AMPS WITH BOTH THE HC AND HV.
OUmum IS IT OK TO
UNDERLINE - OR IS THAT SO YESTERDAY AS WELL?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 07:33:08 PM
THIS ONE'S FOR YOU OUman - IT IS FROM A VERY SINCERE AND NON-CONDESCENDING PhD FRIEND OF MINE.
I HOPE YOU ALL FIND IT ACCESSIBLE TO YOUR TINY INTELLECTS.
THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO THE FULL SPEED DATA I SENT.
...
It is amazing really, those with letters after their names are hacks, and those of us without qualifications are mostly quite sane and logical.
The things engineers have given as reasons for the result have been utterly non-nonsensical.
I didn't expect the academics to really listen but their replies are so poor, so straightforwardly wrong it came as a surprise, I thought they would complicate things to the point that you would need to earn a few doctorates just to understand their objection and a few more to explain where they went wrong but no, it's just very simple and stupid objections, worthy of hacks like PB.
Quote from: aether22 on June 04, 2008, 09:44:23 PM
It is amazing really, those with letters after their names are hacks, and those of us without qualifications are mostly quite sane and logical.
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE JOURNEY - AND THERE ARE RARE JEMS AS WELL LIKE DR. HABASH AND OTHERS - THIS DOC MAY NOT SUPPORT THE WORK BUT HAS BEEN VERY KIND AND SUPPORTIVE IN MANY OTHER WAYS.
BACK AT IT TOMORROW!
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE "U" COIL I MADE TODAY (Yesterday now! -JM).
I WAS ABLE TO GET 10 W OUT OF THE HC COILS w/ ACCELERATION.
10 W - HC COILS ONLY - STOPS THE SYSTEM.
TOMORROW I PLAN ON MAKING ANOTHER VERSION AND LOOKING TO INCREASE MY 10 W TO 20 W WITH AN ADDITIONAL COIL.
ALSO HERE IS A PHOTO OF A NEW GRINDER MOTOR w/ SPEED CONTROL BUILT IN - IT IS A DELTA GR 275.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 04, 2008, 07:10:31 PM
WE DON'T WANT TO CONVINCE YOU - WE MAY END UP (GASP) RESPECTING YOU OR SOMETHING EQUALLY HIDEOUS LIKE HAVING TO BE NICE TO YOU ETC.
I think you guys might have hit the theoretical ceiling with Larry's 'semi agree'...
:)
PS The Pittsburg Penguins looked fantastic with mascara and snot running down their crushed faces. Thus ends the 2007/2008 season, and my hockey trash talk. Sigh.
I have just got my new rotor up and running, I am using customwood disks to hold the magnets, i have a few more to make so I can try different magnet configs but now I have the first one as a pattern it's all very easy.
I tried it with my old stators and the results are slightly worse maybe? than with the rotor Thane sent but that's the difference between 6 magnets and 18, I will soon try Thanes 3 stack.
I have 3 other MOT's so I should be set there, however I don't have a ton of suited wire so I may not split and rewind more than one or 2 coils at most initially and try the other as is.
Quote from: OUman on June 04, 2008, 07:38:41 AM
Do you think that writing bold-caps "obvious" next to your statements somehow gives them greater scientific merit?
All the acceleration and deceleration stuff is, of course, obvious - it's easy to see and to measure and it's great Youtube material. But the issue is that it's not the acceleration/deceleration itself that matters. It's the power flows. I know it sounds like a broken record but that's the point that you're persistently ignoring.
There is a way, though, to do it by the acceleration/deceleration method and still be measuring power reliably. A few posts up I referred to a method that can actually use deceleration as a defensible means of measuring the power flow in the generator. The reason it works is that the prime mover is completely disconnected during the measurement phase and so cannot be responsible for any of the power flows, nor for any of the changes in speed - so whatever happens is necessarily done by the generator. It was originally A22's idea and it's bullet-proof as far as I can see. If you can demonstrate OU with that method you'll certainly have me convinced.
I tried a deceleration experiment again with the new rotor, the result is still inconclusive.
The decelerations seem a bit slowed maybe (just did 1 test each with and without coils shorted, though the variation from test to test may be greater than the difference), but a few % but not much.
And the cogging torque is a lot reduced so it seems entirely that by reducing that is the cause for another 8% or so revolutions in the most recent test with the new rotor. (yes, I really should do more than one of each)
IMO and based on the best evidence the acceleration comes from the motor.
addition:
Ok, I did a few more tests.
rpm 2870-2875 (sometimes it goes right to 2875 other time it won't budge above 2870)
open shorted (in later tests only shorted while rotor is at decent speed)
1103 1196
1042 1052
1054 1110
1052 1134
1069 1099
I ran more open circuit tests than shorted, I removed a string of open circuit tests in a row where it was under 1,000 (as low as 977) revolutions since they are outside the normal results for open circuit and were all in a row.
Since in the later tests I disconnected the HV coil at lower rpm's to reduce the higher cogging torque effect, maybe the fact that the results aren't lower for the shorted means it worked because more energy should seemingly be lost, but even at higher speeds cogging torque creates vibration that is reduced by shorting, also hysteresis and eddy current losses in the stator and rotor are reduced by shorting.
To me those results seem too small to account for the acceleration noted when the motor is running, that can turn a deceleration into a relatively robust acceleration but I feel unconvinced either way by these results.
Quote from: aether22 on June 05, 2008, 04:44:33 AM
IMO and based on the best evidence the acceleration comes from the motor.
best evidence ? ::)
Hmmm, you might be right, since most motors
are built to accelerate from stop to go ! :P :D
Cheers and KneeDeep
Interesting.
Was running a few test and found that if I put the multimeter on AC amps and connect one end to the HV coil and put my hand (I'm not touching any wires) over the multimeter I can get it to read up to .09A and for a moment .2A
This seems to me to indicate where Ron's .02A might have come from.
note: corrected error above
One other note, not sure anyone cares but my new bench grinder is a 300w GMC with a 16mm arbor, and it accelerates just fine.
Quote from: JustMe on June 04, 2008, 11:14:12 PM
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE "U" COIL I MADE TODAY (Yesterday now! -JM).
I WAS ABLE TO GET 10 W OUT OF THE HC COILS w/ ACCELERATION.
10 W - HC COILS ONLY - STOPS THE SYSTEM.
TOMORROW I PLAN ON MAKING ANOTHER VERSION AND LOOKING TO INCREASE MY 10 W TO 20 W WITH AN ADDITIONAL COIL.
ALSO HERE IS A PHOTO OF A NEW GRINDER MOTOR w/ SPEED CONTROL BUILT IN - IT IS A DELTA GR 275.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane, it is worth noting that Ron has pulled close to 30w with a MOT pair (HV) thanks to a load that though not perfect was reasonably effective at pulling most of the current while raising the voltage, if you find the open circuit voltage on your generator coils far exceeds the voltage across a load when loaded and yet the current isn't far from short circuit current then that's a sign that you don't have enough resistance to pull the most power, a dead short does not pull the max power. (because at a dead short the magnetic phase of the stator gets closer to 180 degrees which is just cogging torque not Lenz lLaw)
So I strongly suggest you try some resistors of various values, measure voltage and current, make a graph and you will find the point where you get the most energy (and the most deceleration on the rotor), that might be several times higher than your current 10W.
Oh yeah, and again I warn these HV coils are dangerous! Of course it is me that needs to learn that lesson as I keep on getting bit but it is hundreds of volts and at currents above .1A it really is lethal, only 60mA MA is required for fibrillation and most of us are getting more than that, Ron 2.5 times more.
THEY GROW UP SO FAST DON'T THEY?
ON WEEK YOU'RE SPOON FEEDING THEM COILS AND ROTORS,
AND THE NEXT THEY ELECTROCUTING THEMSELVES.
I FIGURE THEY'LL BE PUTTING ME OUT TO PASTURE WITH THE SHEEP SOON.
T
Quote from: aether22 on June 04, 2008, 07:42:42 PM
...Huge brain fart...
Congratulations on your surgically precise summary of his carefully worded argument ;)
Quote from: aether22 on June 04, 2008, 09:44:23 PM
It is amazing really, those with letters after their names are hacks, and those of us without qualifications are mostly quite sane and logical.
The things engineers have given as reasons for the result have been utterly non-nonsensical.
I didn't expect the academics to really listen but their replies are so poor, so straightforwardly wrong...
And your specific disagreements with his analysis are what exactly?
Quote from: aether22 on June 05, 2008, 04:44:33 AM
I tried a deceleration experiment again with the new rotor, the result is still inconclusive...
rpm 2870-2875 (sometimes it goes right to 2875 other time it won't budge above 2870)
open  shorted (in later tests only shorted while rotor is at decent speed)
1103Â Â 1196
1042Â Â 1052
...
To me those results seem too small to account for the acceleration noted when the motor is running, that can turn a deceleration into a relatively robust acceleration but I feel unconvinced either way by these results.
A22, the experiment as I see it needs to be a little different from that. To set a baseline you first need to measure the deceleration
with the coils removed completely. The task will then be to find some coil configuration (open, short, whatever) which reduces that deceleration. If you find such a configuration, this provides proof that extra power is being delivered by the generator. If you can find no such configuration, that suggests that the generator is not providing extra power - leaving open the possibility of your theory about the motor being the source.
QuoteA22, the experiment as I see it needs to be a little different from that. To set a baseline you first need to measure the deceleration with the coils removed completely. The task will then be to find some coil configuration (open, short, whatever) which reduces that deceleration. If you find such a configuration, this provides proof that extra power is being delivered by the generator. If you can find no such configuration, that suggests that the generator is not providing extra power - leaving open the possibility of your theory about the motor being the source.
THIS WEEKEND I WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A "MODIFIED PRONY BRAKE" WITH A DIGITAL KITCHEN SCALE AND A LEVER WHICH APPLIES PRESSURE TO THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT BY ADDING WEIGHT TO THE SCALE.
I WILL SHOW HOW MANY KILOS/POUNDS IT TAKES TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AND STOP IT COMPLETELY - NO COILS INVOLVED.
THEN I WILL ENGAGE THE HV COILS WITH THE SAME WEIGHT MOTOR I/P ETC AND SHOW HOW MUCH THE HV COILS CAN "POWER THROUGH".
BADDA BING - BADDA BOOM!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 05, 2008, 06:52:52 PM
THIS WEEKEND I WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A "MODIFIED PRONY BRAKE" WITH A DIGITAL KITCHEN SCALE AND A LEVER WHICH APPLIES PRESSURE TO THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT BY ADDING WEIGHT TO THE SCALE.
I WILL SHOW HOW MANY KILOS/POUNDS IT TAKES TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AND STOP IT COMPLETELY - NO COILS INVOLVED.
THEN I WILL ENGAGE THE HV COILS WITH THE SAME WEIGHT MOTOR I/P ETC AND SHOW HOW MUCH THE HV COILS CAN "POWER THROUGH".
BADDA BING - BADDA BOOM!
T
I'd always thought you folks across the pond were a little nutty - I suppose it must be those cold winters...
And your specific disagreements with his analysis are what exactly?
PS Ever think so hard about 'those cold winters' it feels like you're right there?
::)10
Quote from: JustMe on June 05, 2008, 08:39:34 PM
And your specific disagreements with his analysis are what exactly?
My disagreement is that it does not eliminate the motor as a variable in the experiment. The results of the experiment that he is proposing will be inconclusive (as usual!).
Quote from: OUman on June 05, 2008, 02:02:13 PM
And your specific disagreements with his analysis are what exactly?
With all the things I have said many many times don't pretend you couldn't write that answer just as well as I, it would be utter redundancy for me to go over it yet again and bore everyone even more, if you really were so mentally deficient to have forgotten everything I have said what good would it do for me to say it again?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 05, 2008, 06:52:52 PM
THIS WEEKEND I WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A "MODIFIED PRONY BRAKE" WITH A DIGITAL KITCHEN SCALE AND A LEVER WHICH APPLIES PRESSURE TO THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT BY ADDING WEIGHT TO THE SCALE.
I WILL SHOW HOW MANY KILOS/POUNDS IT TAKES TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AND STOP IT COMPLETELY - NO COILS INVOLVED.
THEN I WILL ENGAGE THE HV COILS WITH THE SAME WEIGHT MOTOR I/P ETC AND SHOW HOW MUCH THE HV COILS CAN "POWER THROUGH".
BADDA BING - BADDA BOOM!
T
Sounds excellent.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 05, 2008, 06:52:52 PM
THIS WEEKEND I WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A "MODIFIED PRONY BRAKE" WITH A DIGITAL KITCHEN SCALE AND A LEVER WHICH APPLIES PRESSURE TO THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT BY ADDING WEIGHT TO THE SCALE.
I WILL SHOW HOW MANY KILOS/POUNDS IT TAKES TO DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AND STOP IT COMPLETELY - NO COILS INVOLVED.
THEN I WILL ENGAGE THE HV COILS WITH THE SAME WEIGHT MOTOR I/P ETC AND SHOW HOW MUCH THE HV COILS CAN "POWER THROUGH".
BADDA BING - BADDA BOOM!
T
BTW you may want to try a test without the rotor, just the motor and brake. (just a thought, not much value though it may reduce some complaints)
Also if the generator is providing enough torque to rotate it's self and the motor and brake then detaching the motor and brake (since it is net drag) should indeed let it power it's self, though personally I think the torque comes from the motor and as such the test would fail.
Quote from: aether22 on June 05, 2008, 09:52:57 PM
With all the things I have said many many times don't pretend you couldn't write that answer just as well as I, it would be utter redundancy for me to go over it yet again and bore everyone even more, if you really were so mentally deficient to have forgotten everything I have said what good would it do for me to say it again?
You have not made any argument that refutes what that fellow is saying. I won't re-post his points because it's long and it would be redundant. However, I think it was detailed, logical, well supported and well reasoned - and I think if you have counter-arguments it deserves more than your dismissive "he's a hack". I think the reason why you refuse to detail your counter-arguments is that they have no substance. But I'd be happy to be proved wrong.
To recap, there are four theories on the table:
1. The generator is creating EM feedback along the motor shaft which stimulates the motor into producing more power out for less power in. (Thane's original theory, now abandoned I think).
2. The generator is creating aether feedback into the motor which stimulates the motor into producing more power out for less power in. (A22's theory, I think, pls correct me if I'm wrong).
3. There is nothing special about the Perepiteia generator that can't be explained by the behaviour of the
induction motor attached to it (ie inherent torque-speed characteristics). (Thane's PhD friend).
4. The generator itself is tapping into unconventional power sources, independently of the motor, to provide OU behaviour. (Thane's current theory, which I may have mis-stated slightly because I'm not really sure of the details now).
I think #3 is the only one that is supported by the experimental evidence presented so far.
3 stacked magnets on rotor, utterly crappy acceleration!
I tried it with my new pulley rotor since I could not imagine of any way to stack 3 magnets on the one thane sent without losing all the magnets as they fly off the rotor.
While the pulley rotor does well with enough with 1 x 6 magnets (about the same generally as Thanes rotor did with 18 NNNSSS), it does poorly with the 3 x 6 stack, I could get it so that deceleration was 1 rpm every reading, and when shorted it accelerated about 1rpm every read (readings are a bit less than a second a part) where with 1 x 6 it could be decelerating by 5 rpm every reading and accelerating by about 10rpm every reading on shorting.
The voltage was higher than I recall seeing before and the short circuit current was up to .1A
I should try and see if maybe the rotor/stator gap was too small creating too much cogging torque, and I'll also try a 2 stack, which preformed poorly for Thane.
The most likely reason for the different results compared to Thanes outstanding (brutal was being overused) results is the stator and the gap, of course you can't rule out rotor (my rotor might have a worse core losses) and possibly motor differences.
Probably my next test will be with my monster coil to see if it will work with 1 or 3 stacks.
Ok, I just tried my monster coil, and IT'S ALIVE!! Ah aha ha ha ha come quickly igor come.
It is indeed of too many turns, I can't measure it's voltage when I reduce the gap as it soon starts reading 800v and as the meter can only be taken safely to 750v I had to stop there.
But even with HUGE gaps it accelerates the coil when shorted, now maybe some of this is the fact that the tach can really clarify smaller changes, or the fact that this rotor happily goes at 2800+rpm without sounding like the world's gonna end but I think much of it is the power from the stacked magnets even though it totally kills my MOT performance.
It accelerates quite well no matter what tap points I short. (not really compared the results yet though)
I will do more tests in the morning, I didn't get to measure it's current but dollars to donuts it should be far far below the lethal MOT HV currents, in fact I may have to read it on a different range. (20ma range probably)
It is so odd that until I did everything I could to reduce the gap I couldn't get the effect but now I can get the effect even with gaps of over a cm! (probably a few cm but I didn't measure it, it also worked fine with tiny gaps)
In fact because I very much want to replicate Thanes isolation experiment and since I can't readily put this new rotor on the isolation axle (I don't think) I will put some other stronger (thicker) magnets in Thanes rotor I have lying around which should help me get the effect with Thanes rotor and hopefully with the solid core and multi choice of coil tappings I should be able to replicate the test showing that the effect is of aether (or something) getting to the motor I hope.
I just hope acceleration still occurs with Thanes rotor. (also I'd put decent odds of the transformer stators improving acceleration with the 3x stack if the gap was larger)
So to get the effect (in case anyone reading this might want to, actually replications seem to have dried up):
Strong magnetic field that projects further (thicker Neo's)
Faster is better (the effect always works more powerfully at higher rpm's but not too close to the synch speed, another clue it's the motor)
More alternating magnet poles means more effect.
Smaller gap and gap variation between rotor and stator..
Reduce cogging torque, rotor stator rubbing, vibration and others even if it means increasing the gap it will work if you have strong magnets.
Either a solid core coil or for higher efficiency laminations, the latter possibly not suited to replication of the isolation experiments Thane first demoed.
Coils with many turns, so many they can have ohms as high as a few hundred (500 and above), or as low as 50, more turns is not always better, at least not when it increases impedance more than inducing voltage. (resistance of the coil is simply an easy way to keep track of it, what is wanted is more turns in the rotors inductive field)
Large MOT cores (although if you are just using the laminations and going to wind your own coil then any transformer of an agreeable size will do) work better if split in half so not too large. It seems likely that flux density in the core should be high but not beyond saturation and face large enough to pull in the majority of the rotor flux.
Put multiple coils insufficient to create the effect around a rotor and the effect can kick in, especially if they are in series with adding voltages.
Close the stators magnetic path.
Must use a real tachometer, Larry, I order you to go out and buy one, sooo incredibly glad I bought mine.
Use a bench grinder induction motor (175w-300w 240v or 110v) , and use a variac or triac to control speed, the latter is cheap and easily bought/made. Cast iron spoked pulley's and suited bushings make a very nice precision quality rotor that behaves well at high speeds. customwood or steel magnet holders are easily made.
Quote from: OUman on June 06, 2008, 07:06:19 AM
You have not made any argument that refutes what that fellow is saying. I won't re-post his points because it's long and it would be redundant. However, I think it was detailed, logical, well supported and well reasoned - and I think if you have counter-arguments it deserves more than your dismissive "he's a hack". I think the reason why you refuse to detail your counter-arguments is that they have no substance. But I'd be happy to be proved wrong.
I could point you to past posts I have made but what honestly is the point, there needs to be some reason for me to say the same old, so how about this.
If I give reasons that show his argument can't possibly cover the majority if any of what has been observed will you leave, for good, not come back? (provided you can't counter everything I say point by point with facts and everybody (Thane, JM, Larry, Ron, Steve) agree that you have done so.
Or I'll give you an alternative, read posts 2325 page 59 and see what evidence I give in that post contradicts that phd's theory, I could have written a wonderful criticism in the time it took to find that post, but I do not want to actually argue with you, I could even write a single line which is the whole faulty premise it is based on and it would be shorter than this line, but you see you aren't a genuine person and actually writing anything intelligent for you to read is like casting pearls before swine, only far far worse.
It would be like debating with my computer, no chance of getting anywhere. now swearing at my computer may at least make me feel good. (note: I love my PC, mostly, even my totally (not) genuine Vista! i swear that OS doesn't get enough love)
Now if anyone else wants to know where the phd went wrong I would be more than happy to tell you.
@Aether22,
Wow, what a fountain of testing information! Can you give me more detail on your tachometer?
@Thane,
You didn't just create a monster, more like a Thanemanian Devil. :D
Regards, Larry
Quote from: aether22 on June 06, 2008, 10:07:26 AM
If I give reasons that show his argument can't possibly cover the majority if any of what has been observed will you leave, for good, not come back? (provided you can't counter everything I say point by point with facts and everybody (Thane, JM, Larry, Ron, Steve) agree that you have done so.
OK, I agree to that. Go ahead.
Quote from: aether22 on June 06, 2008, 10:07:26 AM
I love my PC, mostly, even my totally (not) genuine Vista! i swear that OS doesn't get enough love)
Click here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=knxqqrrEEmI
Quote from: LarryC on June 06, 2008, 10:44:05 AM
@Aether22,
Wow, what a fountain of testing information! Can you give me more detail on your tachometer?
Laser optical, it can resolve a 1/10 of an rpm as lower rpm's (several hundred) and then switches to 1rpm resolution, it also counts up revolutions. It sadly only goes to 100,000 rpm but at least that is high enough for Thanerator testing, although by putting it on total revolutions and holding the button down for x seconds could give you far higher rpm's with the bother of a watch and a calculator. It cost me $80NZD and was worth every penny for the comparativly accurate and trustworthy results.
I doubt the brand matters in the least but if I can find the box I'll update this post.
Quote from: OUman on June 06, 2008, 11:27:05 AM
OK, I agree to that. Go ahead.
Excellent!
Ok, well let's see if I can sum it up, it's the same argument PB and you have made.
The theory is that since induction motors have both a greater torque and lesser current (energy) input at higher speeds than lower speeds over some of it's operational range, that therefore accounts for the acceleration.
The first problem is that it makes no sense, the fact that if it were rotating faster it would have a greater torque and lower current pull does not suddenly make something accelerate, now you can increase the energy into the motor for a while and get it up to the higher speeds then set it back and it will begin to accelerate, but it takes energy to get it there.
The other reason is that of it is dropping say from 1,000 rpm, and then you short the HV coils and it accelerates a few hundred rpm and then you open the HV coils again guess what? It will decelerate showing that there really is not enough energy anywhere near that speed range. On rare occasions I have however accelerated it with the HV coils and then opened them up to find that it indeed has enough power to keep accelerating but this however is somewhat rare to find and requires just the right ranges.
Also acceleration from HV shorting works even near full rpm, 50hz = 3,000rpm, the motors max speed is listed as 2,800 but goes to almost 2,900 (maybe a tad higher if I removed the grinder disk from the other end but it's a nice surface to put the tacho reflective tape on) and even at the high ends on 2,800's shorting the HV coils causes acceleration despite this being far past the pull out or whatever you want to call it speed.
The remaining points are that:
Vince found an increase in torque and none have been able to imagine any way his reading could be errored.
Thane found a steel shaft connecting the motor and generator is required with some stator coils.
Thane was able to accelerate it beyond the speed of no stators by putting a stator there and shorting it.
There may be more and this message may be added to but breakfast is ready.
Addition:
Ok, now let me make your argument for you, first you could argue that the speed increases because of a reduction in losses from cogging torque and core losses (hysteresis and eddy currents) from shorting.
However
that would not be the theory the good doctor was proposing,
it is also a theory that is disproven by Vince's torque measurements, by Thanes steel shaft experiments and contradicts with the requirement for high voltage coils and it also contradicts with Thane accelerating the rotor beyond the speed of no stator present.
Also the use of laminated cores creating closed flux circuits reduces hysteresis and eddy losses significantly and cogging torque has little impact at higher rpm's.But do not argue that because it has no relevance to the subject which is specifically the Ph.D's theory and not other failed attempts to explain away Thanes results.
Since Thane's friendly Ph.D suggests a theory that fails to account for how the acceleration could even begin you have therefore lost, now please go since there is no valid reply possible, and don't come back with a different name/gender.
Not sure how I didn't realize this earlier (well I do kinda, it's the way the meter is layed out) but my multmeter has a range that I hadn't noticed, a 200 ma range. So with the monster coil it's 28.9ma .0289 of an amp, nice to have that extra resolution.
I did finally also see what the max voltage was and my meter lived to tell the tale, 980 volts and that is RMS mind you so peak will be a bit higher, actually maybe as much as 1.5kv due to the distance between the magnets in the rotor. (the larger the gap the more off time there will be and the lower the average voltage will be)
@ The sheep lovers on this thread:
New Zealand scientists have developed a "flatulence inoculation" aimed at cutting down on the massive amount of methane produced by its sheep and cows.
http://watthead.blogspot.com/2008/06/no.html
@OUman,
You should have heeded my warning about the Thanemanian Devil.
Regard, Larry
Quote from: aether22 on June 06, 2008, 05:22:14 PM
Excellent!
Ok, well let's see if I can sum it up, it's the same argument PB and you have made.
The theory is that since induction motors have both a greater torque and lesser current (energy) input at higher speeds than lower speeds over some of it's operational range, that therefore accounts for the acceleration.
The first problem is that it makes no sense, the fact that if it were rotating faster it would have a greater torque and lower current pull does not suddenly make something accelerate, now you can increase the energy into the motor for a while and get it up to the higher speeds then set it back and it will begin to accelerate, but it takes energy to get it there... etc
Aether, I can see now what your issue is. It's hard to visualize what happens in an unstable or metastable system like this so let's take it step by step:
1. Suppose you have a system which is rotating at a constant speed under the influence of a constant torque. The speed is constant because the torque is exactly enough to balance the friction and other braking effects. This is our starting point.
2. Suppose also the the motor has a rising torque-speed curve, which is typical of the motors being used in these experiments. A rising torque-speed curve means that as the speed increases the torque also increases.
3. Now, suppose there is a
tiny random increase in speed. That results in a tiny increase in torque, which increases the speed further, which increases the torque, and so on, in a feedback loop. This results in the observed acceleration.
3A. Alternatively, suppose there is a tiny random increase in torque. This causes a tiny speed increase and the same feedback occurs, also resulting in acceleration.
4. What sets it off? Any little random nudge can do it but in practice, the perturbation that sets off the instability in these experiments is usually the throwing of the switch on the coils.
5. The acceleration will continue of its own accord, either indefinitely or until the shape of the torque-speed curves of the motor and the load bring about a new equilibrium. It is
NOT necessary to "increase the energy to the motor for a while" - it's sufficient for a tiny random variation to set it off as described above.
6. You're correct that it does "take energy to get there" - that energy is supplied by the increasing torque. The motor is supplying more power to the generator because its torque is increasing. At the same time the motor is drawing
less power from the mains: the reason for this is that its efficiency is increasing as its speed increases, which is a well established fact for motors of this sort.
Before I address the rest of your post I'd like to get us straight on this first part because it's fundamental to the rest. If you don't believe me about it, do some Googling on the subject of stability of systems and I think you'll be able to verify it. It's a concept that's happening all around us all the time in all kinds of natural and man-made systems. I'm not pulling your leg...
You're the kind of guy that brings a gun to a knife fight aren't you.
Quote
Aether, I can see now what your issue is. It's hard to visualize what happens in an unstable or metastable system like this so let's take it step by step:
1. Suppose you have a system which is rotating at a constant speed under the influence of a constant torque. The speed is constant because the torque is exactly enough to balance the friction and other braking effects. This is our starting point.
2. Suppose also the the motor has a rising torque-speed curve, which is typical of the motors being used in these experiments. A rising torque-speed curve means that as the speed increases the torque also increases.
3. Now, suppose there is a tiny random increase in speed. That results in a tiny increase in torque, which increases the speed further, which increases the torque, and so on, in a feedback loop. This results in the observed acceleration.
3A. Alternatively, suppose there is a tiny random increase in torque. This causes a tiny speed increase and the same feedback occurs, also resulting in acceleration.
Sure, but what about the tiny random decreases in speed/torque that causes a feedback resulting in continued deceleration?
How is shorting HV coils unbalancing randomness?
But assuming somehow it is (ridiculous) why when the HV coil is opened does the speed drop back down? Either the motor does not have enough increased torque at that new speed after all to maintain the speed once the HV coil is opened (which means the increased torque was not primarily a function of the torque speed curve). or hey maybe it is making up for all the tiny improbably unidirectional increases in torque/speed with a bunch of tiny unidirectional decreases in torque/speed, kind of restoring probability, Thane has invented the infinite improbability drive!
The problem is your (insane) idea IS NOT the idea the Ph.D proposed, it is you own contraption, er concraption.
He simply did not bother to consider that the speed must be reached before the increased torque comes into force.
Quote
4. What sets it off? Any little random nudge can do it but in practice, the perturbation that sets off the instability in these experiments is usually the throwing of the switch on the coils.
"
Brutal Acceleration" .vs little random nudge hmmm, doesn't seem quite compatible.
The thing is if a torque/speed variation is unidirectional it is not called 'random nudges' it is called power, it is called acceleration and it only happens if there is real energy behind it.
Quote
5. The acceleration will continue of its own accord, either indefinitely or until the shape of the torque-speed curves of the motor and the load bring about a new equilibrium. It is NOT necessary to "increase the energy to the motor for a while" - it's sufficient for a tiny random variation to set it off as described above.
You make it sound like a butterfly flapping it's wings could make it happen, let me assure you that is not even slightly compatible with the practice.
There are very few ranges where a small rpm increase lets an otherwise decelerating rotor into a swiftly accelerating one.
And if such a zone was hit then opening up the HV coils would not send the rpm's crashing, it would continue accelerating or stabilize, but in the majority of occasions (it depends on the power input, the coil setup and the pre and post shorting rpm's) the moment you open the JV coil the rotor decelerates right back to what it was doing before you shorted the HV coils., the increased torque from the higher rpm if present are not nearly enough to slow the rapid drop deceleration.
The fact that acceleration works just fine outside of any such zone puts another nail in the coffin, of course i told you all of this in the previous message, you are retarded.
Quote
6. You're correct that it does "take energy to get there" - that energy is supplied by the increasing torque.
And that increasing torque is supplied by the aether enhanced motor.
Quote
The motor is supplying more power to the generator because its torque is increasing.
And we still agree, at least in words technically.
QuoteAt the same time the motor is drawing less power from the mains
Yes, yes.
: the reason for this is that its efficiency is increasing as its speed increases[/quote]
No, no.
Did it take out a loan on future projected earnings?
What is not being debated is that induction motors have ranges of operation where speed and torque increase as current drops, however the effect works outside of such zones and on opening the HV coil the speed in most tests drops right back down to the previous speed.so clearly it was not a factor.
Quote
, which is a well established fact for motors of this sort.
Before I address the rest of your post I'd like to get us straight on this first part because it's fundamental to the rest. If you don't believe me about it, do some Googling on the subject of stability of systems and I think you'll be able to verify it. It's a concept that's happening all around us all the time in all kinds of natural and man-made systems. I'm not pulling your leg...
You are so full of shit, how can you stand it?
Well I posted my critique of the Ph.D's opinion, and you have not addressed my points but ignored them since you found them unassailable and so created a new theory for the acceleration, the terms you agreed to is that it would be your last post unless the regulars of the thread all agreed you won the argument, I'll let them chime in if they think so but I think I have far far better chance of getting $3k out of you for a torque sensor than you have of getting them to side with you.
Therefore I will expect no more posts from you on this thread and if there are any I will point out where you agreed to the terms to Stefan and he can kick you, I'll also ask him if your IP is the same as was PB's if he has such records.
"Good day! I said good day!!" fez, That 70's Show
Ah, nice, I've got a pulley system sorted, though it needs better mounting than 'sitting on my knee' everything is ready to go belt and pulley wise, so tomorrow I should be able to do the ultimate induction motor isolation test.
Now I wouldn't say that acceleration would rule out any possibility that a part or all of Thanes OU effect is aether getting to the motor but it really would make it unlikely to say the least, though it is possible there are 2 (aether derived) effects, one on the rotor and one on the motor (actually that is extremely possible), I also would not rule out the aether POSSIBLY getting to the motor anyway but this test should give a pretty decently definitive result either way.
To re-restate the case for the accelerative force occurring at the motor...
Thane found a steel shaft was required with his original stator setup and disproved his own theory that the speed simply wasn't high enough in the non-steel tests. Thane found he could break through and get the effect but only by adding many more stators (which makes no sense that a generator borne force would require more stators wo work suddenly if the shaft is not all steel?????), I have also found laminated stators break through a gap as I would have reasonable expected. (thinner aether guides tend to accelerate the aether more)
Vince found the torque on the motor housing increased significantly on shorting where as if the acceleration force came from the generator this force would have decreased, no one has been able to suggest any possible error with Vince's technique.
Despite Thane showing that the acceleration force can manifest more powerfully than the drag induced by the stators presence, and despite the effect working better at higher speeds and working right up to the max speed of the motor there has been no success in getting the speed beyond the top speed of the motor, it will not get to synch, also despite a net acceleration from the presence of the stator and 'brutal' acceleration and a low drag from an off motor free wheeling or curiously long slowdowns have not been noted with shorted HV coils.
Evidence for acceleration effect not coming from the motor...
I was unable to block the aether from the motor by a gap even filled with material (steel filings) that can have a slowing effect.
While the variation from test to test was larger than the difference I seemed to find a 5% greater number of revolutions being completed on shutdown of the motor if the HV coil was shorted during the acceleration, this result however has other possibly explanations and seems too small to cover the apparent magnitude of the acceleration effect and was in the range of variation or error.
Back-emf is pretty well ruled out from contention leaving no choice for anything non-exotic to communicate the effect.
So far the weight of evidence IMO favors the motor as the source of the acceleration quite strongly, hopefully my experiment agrees because if not this thing is going to get harder to understand, not to mention it should lead to immediately more fascinating experiments and applications if I am right so my fingers are firmly crossed.
Damn I can talk, nobody reads this stuff huh, oh well it helps me formulate my thoughts ;)
DEAR A(4.69^2),
I READ EVERY WORD - BUT I DON'T AGREE ABOUT YOUR "MOTOR THEORY" AND IT'S NOT WORTH DEBATING SINCE NOW WE CAN BOTH GO ABOUT PROVING WHERE THE ACCELERATION COMES FROM.
CHEERS
Thane
PS -
LEAVE THE KOOLAID (DEBATE) AND WALK AWAY DUDE!
GO DO SOMETHING REAL AND SHARE THAT...
WE ARE WITH YOU!
Quote from: aether22 on June 07, 2008, 02:41:24 AM
The problem is your (insane) idea IS NOT the idea the Ph.D proposed, it is you own contraption, er concraption.
Umm, Aether, yes it is
exactly what he was proposing. I am simply trying to explain to you how the concept works since you didn't get it when you read his post. You are absolutely wrong in your assessment of this. If you really want to understand it, you'll have to educate yourself on it. If you instead want to believe in fairy tales, then I guess that's what you'll continue to do.
Quote from: aether22 on June 07, 2008, 02:41:24 AM
Well I posted my critique of the Ph.D's opinion, and you have not addressed my points but ignored them since you found them unassailable...
I did address the first of your points and if/when you finally manage to understand that one, I'll continue with the others.
Quote from: aether22 on June 07, 2008, 06:12:36 AM
So far the weight of evidence IMO favors the motor as the source of the acceleration quite strongly,
The irony is that you, I and "the PhD" all agree about that part! Of course it's in the motor.
Thane apparently disagrees. I wonder where others stand.
LEAVE THE KOOLAID (DEBATE) AND WALK AWAY DUDE(SSES)!
GO DO SOMETHING REAL AND SHARE THAT...
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 07, 2008, 08:04:42 AM
DEAR A(4.69^2),
I READ EVERY WORD - BUT I DON'T AGREE ABOUT YOUR "MOTOR THEORY" AND IT'S NOT WORTH DEBATING SINCE NOW WE CAN BOTH GO ABOUT PROVING WHERE THE ACCELERATION COMES FROM.
CHEERS
Thane
Good and good. I have just had fun realizing that despite the difference sizes there are tons of ways I can put together the motors, rotors and pulleys and shafts of various sizes so tomorrow should be fun, I should be able to both isolate the (more powerful) drive motor by pulley, and then see if the new rotor with a stator can effect a second inline motor under some load (probably your rotor and some HC coils), and I should also be able to replicate your with and without steel shaft test with the new rotor (which is important) and the monster coil.
If the results indicate you are right then I will probably replicate Vince's test, and do the stator current .vs rotor phase analysis (easy) and then attempt a self running version.
By the way I would love to see the 'brutal' acceleration so if you can video it so we can compare it to other video's or put some numbers to it. What do you think caused it, just greater flux coupling? I also think that such a video could be a good draw to attract some new people.
I encourage anyone to suggest experiment ideas, I've got a nice list but I want to keep it topped up!
Quote from: aether22 on June 07, 2008, 08:58:46 AM
Good and good.
I encourage anyone to suggest experiment ideas, I've got a nice list but I want to keep it topped up!
What OUmon says is to the point. The best starting point is to run the rotor not only with no coils but
no CORES. This gives a base line reading.
Then run the rotor with the cores and take the second reading.
Note when you short the HV coils the reading does not go below the initial no core reading.
It is primarily the reduction of steel core drag that is initiating the RPM acceleration.
This can be shown with a HV coil with a Somaloy core... there is no acceleration, only lenz reaction.
"SINCE NOW WE CAN BOTH GO ABOUT PROVING WHERE THE ACCELERATION COMES FROM."
This is what I am waiting to see, lay it on me Mr
T you have not as yet shown me how this
can be achieved.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 07, 2008, 10:52:10 AM
What OUmon says is to the point.
It is primarily the reduction of steel core drag that is initiating the RPM acceleration.
Ron
Model
T and all,
This is further confirmed in that Hoptoad's comprhensive experiment also fails with Somaloy cores.
So both Thane's and Hop Toad's experiments can be narrowed down to specific core material and core dimensions and show that at some point there is a reduction of the negative Lenz Principle.
Ron
Quote from: OUman on June 07, 2008, 08:51:48 AM
The irony is that you, I and "the PhD" all agree about that part! Of course it's in the motor.
Thane apparently disagrees. I wonder where others stand.
I stand bemused. How you, or the PhD, or anyone else can look at the collective observations of this group and others and state such definitive negative conclusions is beyond me. If this is how mainstream science has evolved I suspect as one of it's consequences a graveyard of ideas withered and dead well before their potential contribution is known. What a stunning abundance of rigidity and arrogance, and worse - a near complete dearth of curiousity.
While it's certain that the distinct operational properties of an induction motor impact this experiment with, wait for it - an induction motor, it's highly (and improbably) speculative that the action at the coils warrants little or no investigation. If we consider hoptoad's almost certainly related experiments with a motor with a very different torque-speed curve, you and others seem to be asking us to conclude - without anything approaching proof - that these two similar and unexpected result sets have completely divergent but equally innocuous explanations. It's certainly in the realm of possibility, but it's hardly so logically attractive that a reasonable person would toss over further experimentation on that basis alone. It's pretty ridiculous actually.
I still have no idea what the conclusion to all this will be or whether anything that can be applied will result. I'd be extremely pleasantly surprised at OU, but I'd also be surprised if it turns out that there was nothing at all new or interesting to learn. If it turns out in the end you were correct it's not going to be because you're a superior thinker or more knowledgeable person, it's going to be that there just happened to be nothing where you decided not to go look. Just luck and a lack of imagination is all. Not much to congratulate yourself on I don't think.
Quote from: JustMe on June 07, 2008, 12:19:53 PM
I stand bemused.
snip
Not much to congratulate yourself on I don't think.
Just You,
You write very well, I couldn't have said it better. I too, am leaning toward OU man/woman is just one
of those people who once taught something believe firmly in that fact without ever leaving the door open for a future re examination as to whether the fact was true, relevant or expandable.
I did the Hop toad experiment B T (before Thane) and suffered the usual disappointment.But as I have learned before now, once you change the parameters of an experiment one is on new ground and
shouldn't cast aspersions at the inventor!
What I find interesting with Mr T's invention is the possibility he may be on to something. As you recall from my previous posts, the HV coil on a mot core showed a lesser amount of expended energy to generate the 27watts, similar to Hop Toad's published work. With a single coil on a Somaloy core the results were as per usual, 10 watts out for an increase on the prime mover of 14 watts. So there must be at some point a modification of the expected Lenz or Le Ch?telier Principle
with Mr T's HV coil on a steel or laminated steel core.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 07, 2008, 10:52:10 AM
What OUmon says is to the point. The best starting point is to run the rotor not only with no coils but
no CORES. This gives a base line reading.
Sadly it's not quite that easy since unless you remove cogging torque and core losses it is likely to fail.
Thane managed to impressively beat no stator cores by a little at a given speed but that would not work over the whole speed range as the acceleration effect only kicks in at speed, also I have not been able so far to get it faster shorted than with none at all. (which does not surprise me since Thane has the effect quite a bit stronger than I).
The only way the idea would not lead to almost sure failure is if there was 'brutal' acceleration and if only a speed range where acceleration was found to be greater than losses from the cores presence.
This would require a recording of rotational rates (via a data logging oscilloscope or similar) so that the valid speed range can be analyzed.
Sadly this takes it far outside of the easy test that I first envisioned and it does not seem entirely worth it anymore, still if you want to run the test (preferably with a data logging method so that it is known precisely how long it took to get to each rpm then that could be of value.
Quote
Then run the rotor with the cores and take the second reading.
Note when you short the HV coils the reading does not go below the initial no core reading.
I fail to comprehend what you mean by "reading does not go below the initial no core reading".
Do you mean the total revolutions during deceleration reading or some other reading?
When you say "does not go below" are you predicting experimental results? you lost me.
Quote
It is primarily the reduction of steel core drag that is initiating the RPM acceleration.
So you are saying that the reduction of core losses play a majority part on the acceleration effect.
Now it does play a very possible part but it is a part just as present in the HC coils shorting and all they do is slow the rotor.
I would not say that reduction in core losses is a major or primary component, although since Thane has switched to closed circuit laminated cores and differentiated the effect by HV and HC and found 'Brutal' acceleration I feel safe in saying that during the right range it is merely a small component and nothing more, now outside of that range and in more marginal result levels it is indeed something to be wary of.
In fact if I do not pay close attention to that today I might get false positives and see the effect when really I am seeing only a conventional core loss reduction.
Quote
This can be shown with a HV coil with a Somaloy core... there is no acceleration, only lenz reaction.
I would be interested in hearing more of this test as it is the first I have heard of it, however you are mistaken.
The effect is clearly not only or even in majority due to reduction of corer losses as you seem to be saying.
You should be aware that Thane has been able to increase rpm beyond the no core speed.
You also know perfectly well that the HV coils generate more energy than they increase motor pull and that the HC coils with in your case a lesser ampere turns than the HV coils have a decelerative effect.
So I am quite unsure why you now seem to be saying the effect is just (or primarily) artifact.
And that seems to go against the point of the message which was to run a sans core deceleration test which would fail miserably if you are right.
WE HAVE A COOL GROUP OF CHARACTERS HERE ;)
AND DESPITE ALL THE NONSENSE HERE - REAL STUFF IS HAPPENING ALSO.
ENJOY!
CHEERS
T
PS
HOPEFULLY J.A.S. CAN REDUCE THE FILES AS THEY ARE TOO BIG.
Subject:
From: "Raptis Theofanis"
<rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr>
Date: Fri, 6 June, 2008 9:12 am
To: "zahn@mit.edu" <zahn@mit.edu>
Cc: "rhabash@site.uottawa.ca"
<rhabash@site.uottawa.ca>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear professors
I have recently become aware of your involvement in a peculiar area of investigation concerning Thanes Heinsch accelerating generator ("perepiteia"). I would like to inform you on the content of a similar research at a theoretical
level concerning the existence of instabilities in electromagnetism of very different origin than those appearing in
gravitational theories. This research is intimately connected with the possibility of geometrization of EM field theories. It is based on an attempt to construct a very general homotopy class for vector fields (see EM-0 Demo Report) and is connected with a kind of projective bundles when applied to Maxwell equations.
It also ended with a number of experimental propositions for a number of different possible constructions that would
shed some light on the peculiarities of this subject. As this is an area of the highest importance given present environmental and socio-economical global conditions I would like to express here my deepest concerns for the ultimate fate of such a research and urge you to make your contribution the sooner possible.
Please, take a look on our efforts and if you find any similarity with the object of your research on "accelerating"
generators send me a feedback. Thank you in advance.
my best regards
Theophanes Raptis
Physicist-Scientific Software Developer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ag. Paraskevi, Attikh, Greece
tel : +30 210 6514544/6511020 (secr)
mob : +30 6938051028
http ://cag.dat.demokritos.gr/raptis.php
e-mail: rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr
t_raptis2005@yahoo.gr
National Center for Scientific Research
''DEMOKRITOS''
Division of Applied Technologies
Quote from: aether22 on June 07, 2008, 06:19:50 PM
Sadly it's not quite that easy since unless you remove cogging torque and core losses it is likely to fail.
snip
And that seems to go against the point of the message which was to run a sans core deceleration test which would fail miserably if you are right.
Let me put some numbers to that and see if it comes through better...
With just the rotor at full speed the input draw is say 1.58 amps. This I call the baseline,
this is the friction loss and windage losses for the motor and rotor.
With the coils and cores in position the input draw is say 1.89 amps, (no load, no short)
Now with the two HV coils shorted in series the draw is reduced to 1.72 amps.
The difference between 1.89 and 1.72 is the reduction in core drag.
The speed didn't change noticeably because it was already near sync speed.
But the reduction in draw did not go below the baseline 1.58 amps.
My definition of cogging and drag is cogging manifests its self at low speed and "apparently" diminishes at speed. Where as core drag is minimal at low speed and increases with speed.
It is directly related to number of poles, double the number of poles and the drag is doubled.
I was more specific as to where I was going with that in my reply to 'just her' (JAS)
I didn't want to use the H (brake) word and give OU any ammunition. lol
One can't do a, "sans core deceleration test" so no problem there....
Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a very crude build, Perhaps Mr T's numbers go
below the base line as has been show... but all I am saying is, mine doesn't at this point.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 07, 2008, 09:37:28 PM
Let me put some numbers to that and see if it comes through better...
With just the rotor at full speed the input draw is say 1.58 amps. This I call the baseline,
this is the friction loss and windage losses for the motor and rotor.
With the coils and cores in position the input draw is say 1.89 amps, (no load, no short)
Now with the two HV coils shorted in series the draw is reduced to 1.72 amps.
The difference between 1.89 and 1.72 is the reduction in core drag.
The speed didn't change noticeably because it was already near sync speed.
I really need to get in the lab, but anyway.
Yes your results indicate that the acceleration was not as great as the deceleration from core losses.
However this does not mean the source of acceleration was a reduction in overall losses (and every indication that shorting increases losses in most cases) and this has been very well disproven as the primary cause of acceleration, including tests where the acceleration is greater than and deceleration.
Quote
But the reduction in draw did not go below the baseline 1.58 amps.
My definition of cogging and drag is cogging manifests its self at low speed and "apparently" diminishes at speed. Where as core drag is minimal at low speed and increases with speed.
It is directly related to number of poles, double the number of poles and the drag is doubled.
I was more specific as to where I was going with that in my reply to 'just her' (JAS)
I didn't want to use the H (brake) word and give OU any ammunition. lol
One can't do a, "sans core deceleration test" so no problem there....
Please keep in mind that these numbers are from a very crude build, Perhaps Mr T's numbers go
below the base line as has been show... but all I am saying is, mine doesn't at this point.
Ron
And I have no issue with you saying that, but the fact that it does not go below baseline powerdraw does not mean the the acceleration was a result of a reduction in core losses primarily.
This post is just me thinking aloud, it may not be very interesting at all so I don't recommend really um, reading it.
I have my mot-gen setup in the first config which I won't go into but it's a test to get specific acceleration on shorting info with the same mechanical resistance that will exist when the motor is isolated by a pulley.
And I started to really question how I can separate the different possible conventional causes for acceleration from Thane's effect, they are of course reduction of cogging torque (unbalanced magnetic forces creating vibration), hysteresis and eddy current losses on shorting of coils, although there is Lenz force which counters these savings.
Since it is established that shorting coils can lead to a reduction of core losses that is greater than the Lenz force it is important that this effect not be confused for Thane's effect, and so here I will attempt to list all the differences, every possible way to tell the 2 apart.
The conventional effect is somewhat rare requiring generally rather precise conditions, one requirement is very poor cores, most of the time the effect has shown up it had disappeared as soon as a decent laminated core was used. (the exception possibly being Adam's and Hoptoad as their cores though imperfect are not awful, their effect may be Thanes effect or the conventional effect or a bit of both)
Closed magnetic circuits made of high quality laminated steel has never to my knowledge manifested this effect, although it is worth noting that to a lesser degree the rotor is still vulnerable as it is not laminated.
Still my monster coil can't guard against such a possibility, not my current monster coil anyway.
As for cogging torque that is also reduced by shorting but is not reduced by high quality cores, the effect is large enough at low speeds to stop the motor and while it's influence at high speeds is reduced I don't believe anyone has shown it's influence to entirely disappears and no one has a clue as to the magnitude, it probably does not account for the more energetic high speed accelerations but it might account for the 1 rpm a second type accelerations.
Another is that reduction of core loss does just fine with coils of a few ohms, low voltage high current coils demo the effect just fine, however Thanes effect only comes into play with large numbers of turns generally generating relatively high voltages in open circuit often over 100v.
I can not add a high current coil to my HV coil, I could have while winding it but it's too late now, I could however wind a high current coil on the same type of core and compare side by side! I might do that.
Also if I place this other coil just right cogging torque should be eliminated .
If the same ampere turns leads to a different reaction then that is pretty sure that the HV coil is genuinely demonstrating Thanes effect.
Another is that Thanes effect can accelerate the rotor beyond the speed attained when no stator is present, however it wasn't a very large effect in Thanes last documented test and while I could look harder so far I don't think I have had a setup suited to replicating this effect, in fact Thane if you are listening I'd really like enough info to replicate this maybe, I'm not even sure why you specify 'split phase', do you mean split phase motor start (cap in motor used to create rotating stator field required at low speeds) or do you mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_phase ?
Another possibility is to remove the effect by isolating the motor from the generator by a pulley or non magnetic shaft, however that is under dispute and so for the time being is ineffective as a test.
Torque sensors or experiments to measure torque changes on the motor housing would nicely tell the 2 apart, however neither of these are awfully practical, also they would first have to again prove that the torque comes from the motor, an issue not currently settled.
So the most reasonable way would seem to be the addition of a high current coil that also removes cogging torque.
With high quality cores, HC and HV coils for comparison, with balanced cogging then without any further effort Thanes effect may be accurately separated from the pretenders, I will have to settle for 2 out of 3 with my current tests as I hope to use solid core coils as they are the type that can potentially be blocked by a break in the shaft.
Oh, and on that note the reason for all this was that with the break in the shaft my monster coil still caused acceleration, an effect Thane was not able to get, it is likely due to the overkill evident in the coil increasing the aetheric pressure/speed too much, but it could also be that the effect I noted was not Thanes effect but the more conventional type.
Oh, and again I will note that while not fully relevant to the subject of this message it is worth noting that a short circuited coil can use less power and cause less Lenz drag than one which has a load more suited to the generator (but not less than an OC coil) due to both the current limited nature of generators and the stator assuming an almost 180 degree phase to the rotor which applies no force to decelerate the rotor. (though it is hard to know just how close the practice can get to the theoretical ideal)
Oh, BTW, this from Stefan:
He is banned now also with his other
name polarbreeze-
Thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
QuoteWith just the rotor at full speed the input draw is say 1.58 amps. This I call the baseline,
this is the friction loss and windage losses for the motor and rotor.
RON_NESIA - MY DATA SAYS
106 WATTS BASELINE - JUST ROTOR - SPEED = 1728 RPM
QuoteWith the coils and cores in position the input draw is say 1.89 amps, (no load, no short)
106 WATTS AGAIN - COILS & CORES IN POSITION - SPEED = 1729 RPM
QuoteNow with the two HV coils shorted in series the draw is reduced to 1.72 amps.
103 WATTS HV COILS SHORTED - SPEED = 1741 RPM
QuoteThe difference between 1.89 and 1.72 is the reduction in core drag.
The speed didn't change noticeably because it was already near sync speed.
But the reduction in draw did not go below the baseline 1.58 amps.
3 WATTS BELOW BASELINE - SPEED INCREASE OF 12 RPM ABOVE BASELINE
HC COILS ONLY MOTOR I/P =
111 WATTS - SPEED = 1721 RPM
*** HC COILS and HV COILS I/P =
105.9 WATTS (SAME AS BASELINE) - SPEED = 1724 RPM ( - 4 BASELINE)
****** MY HIGH SPEED TESTS SHOW IDENTICAL NUMBERS I.E.
130 WATTS BASELINE AND
130 WATTS WHILE DELIVERING
7.7 WATTS (TABLE #4).
SO THIS IS MY GOAL - A BALANCE BETWEEN -
HC DECELERATION UNDER LOAD COMPENSATED
WITH HV COIL ACCELERATION - IT IS EASY TO DO AND SIDETEPS ALL THIS ENDLESS YADDA - YADDA - DINGDONG ...
CHEERS
Thane
PS
I WILL SHOOT SOME VIDEO OF MY NEW TEST-BED TODAY (SUNDAY) WHERE I AM BUILDING AND TESTING COILS TO GIVE ME THE BALANCE I DESIRE.
I WILL SHOW
NOW SEPARATED HC AND HV COILS - AND HOW THE HC COIL CAUSES SYSTEM DECELERATION THROUGH A 10 OHM LOAD AND HOW I CAN - THEN ACCELERATE THROUGH THIS DECELERATION BY ENGAGING ONE HV COIL - AND HOW ACCELERATION IS INCREASED WHEN I ENGAGE THE SECOND HV COIL. (all this cogging torque stuff is a waste of time to me personally)
NOW I HAVE 5 HV COILS MADE SO FAR AND THEY WORK EVEN BETTER WITH A 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
AS IT IS I CAN INITIATE ACCELERATION FROM A 53 OHM / 30 GAUGE WIRE COIL WHEN THE COIL IS AT ABOUT 24 VOLTS (NO LOAD) - THIS IS WHAT I NEED ALSO - LOW RPM ACCELERATION FOR MY CHEEZEWIZZ DUNE-BUGGY.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 08, 2008, 09:14:20 AM
RON_NESIA - MY DATA SAYS 106 WATTS BASELINE - JUST ROTOR - SPEED = 1728 RPM
106 WATTS AGAIN - COILS & CORES IN POSITION - SPEED = 1729 RPM
103 WATTS HV COILS SHORTED - SPEED = 1741 RPM
3 WATTS BELOW BASELINE - SPEED INCREASE OF 12 RPM ABOVE BASELINE
HC COILS ONLY MOTOR I/P = 111 WATTS - SPEED = 1721 RPM
*** HC COILS and HV COILS I/P = 105.9 WATTS (SAME AS BASELINE) - SPEED = 1724 RPM ( - 4 BASELINE) ***
*** MY HIGH SPEED TESTS SHOW IDENTICAL NUMBERS I.E. 130 WATTS BASELINE AND 130 WATTS WHILE DELIVERING 7.7 WATTS (TABLE #4).
SO THIS IS MY GOAL - A BALANCE BETWEEN - HC DECELERATION UNDER LOAD COMPENSATED WITH HV COIL ACCELERATION - IT IS EASY TO DO AND SIDETEPS ALL THIS ENDLESS YADDA - YADDA - DINGDONG ...
CHEERS
Thane
PS
I WILL SHOOT SOME VIDEO OF MY NEW TEST-BED TODAY (SUNDAY) WHERE I AM BUILDING AND TESTING COILS TO GIVE ME THE BALANCE I DESIRE.
I WILL SHOW NOW SEPARATED HC AND HV COILS - AND HOW THE HC COIL CAUSES SYSTEM DECELERATION THROUGH A 10 OHM LOAD AND HOW I CAN - THEN ACCELERATE THROUGH THIS DECELERATION BY ENGAGING ONE HV COIL - AND HOW ACCELERATION IS INCREASED WHEN I ENGAGE THE SECOND HV COIL. (all this cogging torque stuff is a waste of time to me personally)
NOW I HAVE 5 HV COILS MADE SO FAR AND THEY WORK EVEN BETTER WITH A 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
AS IT IS I CAN INITIATE ACCELERATION FROM A 53 OHM / 30 GAUGE WIRE COIL WHEN THE COIL IS AT ABOUT 24 VOLTS (NO LOAD) - THIS IS WHAT I NEED ALSO - LOW RPM ACCELERATION FOR MY CHEEZEWIZZ DUNE-BUGGY.
Thane of the hill,
Now those are some impressive numbers. If I could even approach these results I would be a happy
camper. Thanks for the reply, you have trained us to note that when someone takes a poke at you
you come back with lots of real answers, so with PB gone someone has to step up to the plate
and do the dirty.... :P
Sorry for all the blather, I was trying to get through to A tootoo this time but your response is very
encouraging and I look forward to some visual info on this new setup.The only point of disagreement
in your post is where you claim to want to ignore cogging torque. This is, unfortunately, part of
life and can't be ignored! It is like cracks in the sidewalk... to step on them or not? are you
prepared for the consequences? ;D
Keep your pecker up!
Ron
Quote from: JustMe on June 07, 2008, 12:19:53 PM
I stand bemused. How you, or the PhD, or anyone else can look at the collective observations of this group and others and state such definitive negative conclusions is beyond me. If this is how mainstream science has evolved I suspect as one of it's consequences a graveyard of ideas withered and dead well before their potential contribution is known. What a stunning abundance of rigidity and arrogance, and worse - a near complete dearth of curiousity.
The way I see it, science is absolutely
full of curiosity and absolutely
full of new, stimulating ideas. So full, in fact, that those new ideas must necessarily compete for supremacy and acceptance. The way they do that is through a process called scientific method. It's the Darwinism of scientific progress, if you like. A new idea has to be shown to work and/or to provide a more precise theory (explanation) for observed results in order to gain acceptance. I think we can all agree that peer-review is somewhat flawed in making that happen; nonetheless, there are other mechanisms, including the free market (profit motive) and, now, the liberation provided by the internet, that make it more effective all the time. I agree with you there's also plenty of rigidity and arrogance but the beauty of scientific method is that properly designed experiments can speak for themselves, can be replicated, can be refuted, all of which takes place independently of the mental state of the experimenter.
Quote from: JustMe on June 07, 2008, 12:19:53 PM
While it's certain that the distinct operational properties of an induction motor impact this experiment with, wait for it - an induction motor, it's highly (and improbably) speculative that the action at the coils warrants little or no investigation. If we consider hoptoad's almost certainly related experiments with a motor with a very different torque-speed curve, you and others seem to be asking us to conclude - without anything approaching proof - that these two similar and unexpected result sets have completely divergent but equally innocuous explanations. It's certainly in the realm of possibility, but it's hardly so logically attractive that a reasonable person would toss over further experimentation on that basis alone. It's pretty ridiculous actually.
That's not what's being said. People who are very knowledgeable and intimately familiar with induction motor behaviour are stating that the results that have been observed can be explained 100% by the torque-speed characteristics of the induction motor (not simply that they "impact the experiment" as you put it). None of the results presented by anyone on the forum here provides any evidence whatsoever that this is not the case. Since nothing "unexpected" is happening, there is no reason to invoke any theories of operation other than those that are already established - and, by the way, that have been used for decades to create millions of actual systems and products that all obligingly conform to the established theory.
It's not a question of presence/absence of curiosity, or imagination, or open-mindedness. Why do you think it "improbable" that conventional theory explains it all? There's is no logical reason for that statement; it's just wishful thinking. There is no evidence whatsoever of something other than conventional behaviour going on - so what reason is there to search for other explanations? If someone comes up with one experimental result that can
not be explained by conventional theory I'll be the first to join the hunt for a new theory. But it's not there - and you know it's not there. You hope it is, and good for you for that, but so far it's not.
Quote from: JustMe on June 07, 2008, 12:19:53 PM
...If it turns out in the end you were correct it's not going to be because you're a superior thinker or more knowledgeable person, it's going to be that there just happened to be nothing where you decided not to go look. Just luck and a lack of imagination is all. Not much to congratulate yourself on I don't think.
I agree completely, except for the "decided not to look" part. Seems to me I'm doing lots of "looking" - haven't found anything of substance here yet though!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 08, 2008, 09:14:20 AM
I WILL SHOOT SOME VIDEO OF MY NEW TEST-BED TODAY (SUNDAY) WHERE I AM BUILDING AND TESTING COILS TO GIVE ME THE BALANCE I DESIRE.
I WILL SHOW NOW SEPARATED HC AND HV COILS - AND HOW THE HC COIL CAUSES SYSTEM DECELERATION THROUGH A 10 OHM LOAD AND HOW I CAN - THEN ACCELERATE THROUGH THIS DECELERATION BY ENGAGING ONE HV COIL - AND HOW ACCELERATION IS INCREASED WHEN I ENGAGE THE SECOND HV COIL. (all this cogging torque stuff is a waste of time to me personally)
NOW I HAVE 5 HV COILS MADE SO FAR AND THEY WORK EVEN BETTER WITH A 5x STRENGTH MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
I may still make my HC solid core coil, but I think you may have persuaded me that the best action I could take right now might be to make the strongest accelerating setup I can as that is the best way to tell what is what, but still have HC and HV coils in a balanced setup.
QuoteThane of the hill,
Now those are some impressive numbers. If I could even approach these results I would be a happy
camper. Thanks for the reply, you have trained us to note that when someone takes a poke at you
you come back with lots of real answers, so with PB gone someone has to step up to the plate
and do the dirty....
Sorry for all the blather, I was trying to get through to A tootoo this time but your response is very
encouraging and I look forward to some visual info on this new setup.The only point of disagreement
in your post is where you claim to want to ignore cogging torque. This is, unfortunately, part of
life and can't be ignored! It is like cracks in the sidewalk... to step on them or not? are you
prepared for the consequences?
Keep your pecker up!
Ron
DEAR
WEST_RON CANADA,
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF UPLOADING SOME VIDEO...
IN AN EFFORT TO COMPLETE MY SMACKDOWN OF WEST_RON CANADA, I_RAN SOME TESTS TODAY WITH THE HC AND HV COILS IN PLACE AND REMOVED TO DETERMINE HV COIL COGGING TORQUE.
AND YES WITH THE HV COILS GONE THE COGGONG TORQUE IS LESS -
THEN I HAD AN EPIPHANY - WTF! - THIS IS PD-IOTIC ... IF I REPLACE THE TWO HV COIL/CORES WITH IDENTICAL SIZED HC COIL/CORES THE COGGING TORQUE WILL BE EXACTLY THE SAME ??? BUT THE PERFORMANCE WILL BE VERY - VERY DIFFERENT.
COGGING TORQUE IS A MANUFACTURING DESIGN ISSUE IT IS NOT A PERFORMANCE RELATED ISSUE - YOU CAN GO ABOUT ELIMINATING VIRTUALLY ALL COGGING TORQUE WITH GENERATOR DESIGNS GEARED TOWARDS THAT END BUT YOU WILL
NOT PRODUCE ACCELERATION.
NOW TAKE THAT "IDEAL GENERATOR DESIGN" AND
ADD ACCELERATING HV COILS AND YOU REALLY HAVE SOMETHING ... N'EST PAS?
I_REST MY CASE
T
PS
HERE IS A LITTLE SOMETHING YOU CAN DO ... PLACE A THIRD HC/HC COIL SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR CURRENT HC/HC COILS (ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROTOR OR UP TOP) AND WATCH THE COGGING TORQUE DROP TO NEAR 0.
Thane,
All valid but it is worth noting that shorting coils reduces cogging torque which can result is apparent acceleration.
And the best way to remove this artifact is with a balanced rotor design as you mention, if it never exists you can't remove it.
Quotebut still have HC and HV coils in a balanced setup.
SO YOU HAVE A LENZ FREE GENERATOR THEN ? WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR MAN GO TO THE PRESS - YOU DON'T NEED A GUN TO END THE KILLING AND SUFFERING IN IRAQ, IRAN, DARFUR, SAUDI ARABIA, AFGHANISTAN ... ETC, ETC.
Thaner
QuoteAll valid but it is worth noting that shorting coils reduces cogging torque which can result is apparent acceleration.
AS YOU WELL KNOW - I AM NOT CREATING NO STINKIN
APPARENT ACCELERATION WHEN MY HC COILS ARE DECELERATING THE SYSTEM AND THEN I PLACE ADDITIONAL "LOAD" WITH THE HV COILS AND IT ACCELERATES THROUGH SAID LOAD.
AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT COGGING TORQUE IS REDUCED IN IRON CORES DUE TO SATURATION - WHICH DOES NOT OCCUR IN LAMINATED CORES.
T
Quoteif it never exists you can't remove it
APPERENTLY y
OU CAN'T EVEN REMOVE IT THEN EITHER :P
CAN SOMEONE CARPET BOMB CARP PLEASE?
T
@ WEST_ONE CANADAM & A3.0
VIDEO 4 YA - 1 of 3 SHOT TODAY NOT GOING TO WIN ME AN OSCAR BUT MAYBE A RASPBERRY.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHJOwjQV1lw
CHEERS
Thane
@ Thane,
Whoa! Now that was brutal acceleration. :) Obvious, the rotor has around a 1/8 wobble, unbalanced, but still working great.
Great test, Larry
PS: Does it accelerate the same when HV2 is turned on before HV1?
What a hoot! slackass99 ;D
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 08, 2008, 10:28:04 PM
@ WEST_ONE CANADAM & A3.0
VIDEO 4 YA - 1 of 3 SHOT TODAY NOT GOING TO WIN ME AN OSCAR BUT MAYBE A RASPBERRY.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHJOwjQV1lw
CHEERS
Thane
No raspberrys for you! Good vid!
the WEST_WON, (Ron)
Thane, nice work!
I notice that the 53.3 ohm coil does little to accelerate the rotor when shorted, I guess that is because it works better at high speed? it should be pretty straightforward to wind coils with multiple tap points which by using a multi selector switch can be shorted at the best level for each speed.
Also I note that you have no longer got the HV coils magnetically shorted through each other, have you found that closing the flux path may not be needed after all? I am currently replicating the coils and was just about to JB weld them to some I bars so the 2 halves of the core are stuck on each other, would you now recommend not going with the back iron flux shorting for the most energetic acceleration? (or is it not needed now you have gone for 5! stack rotors? Still I recommend closing flux paths if you can since it reduces core losses in laminated cores)
Also to clarify, about the cogging torque while it is clearly not the main effect you demo it is for sure a component unless you cancel it by stator placement, what happens of course is that the rotor is not as strongly attracted to a steel core electromagnet that is in repulsion as one that is off, the coils field tends to reduce cogging torque. (From what you said on the last page it was not clear if you understood that)
Now on to winding, do you wind them by hand? I guess I will be unless you have something to share. (the shape isn't compatible with drill mounting as far as I can tell)
Addition:
I also notice the voltage on the load jump as you short HV coil 2, but not with 1.
Currently it looks to work only if the HC coil is directly opposite the HV coil. (previously I had assumed the effect was that they were on opposite sides, though it is still possible the effect is a result of rotor tilt)
QuoteAlso to clarify, about the cogging torque while it is clearly not the main effect you demo it is for sure a component unless you cancel it by stator placement, what happens of course is that the rotor is not as strongly attracted to a steel core electromagnet that is in repulsion as one that is off, the coils field tends to reduce cogging torque. (From what you said on the last page it was not clear if you understood that)
YOUR STATEMENT IMPLIES THAT YOU
STILL ARE AN "OLD DOG..." -
UNLESS I AM WRONG HV COILS DO NOT CREATE REPULSION AS PER A HC COIL - AND WITH A HC COIL YOU HAVE REPULSION - THEN COGGING - THEN ATTRACTION (AS THE MAGNET TRIES TO MOVE AWAY).
I WOULD NEVER SAY THAT THE REPULSION FIELD CANCELS THE COGGING TORQUE - THAT WOULD BE LIKE REPLACING SOMETHING BAD WITH SOMETHING WORSE - LIKE REPLACING PB WITH
OUmonotony.
BTW - I AM UPLOADING ANOTHER RE-SHOOT OF THE SAME VIDEO (SANS NARRATION) WITH THE I/P REDUCED SLIGHTLY BECAUSE THE HC COIL DECELERATION WAS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR MY LIKING - AS I WAS OPPERATING THE MOTOR IN THE WRONG "ZONE"..
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 05:14:52 AM
YOUR STATEMENT IMPLIES THAT YOU STILL ARE AN "OLD DOG..." - UNLESS I AM WRONG HV COILS DO NOT CREATE REPULSION AS PER A HC COIL - AND WITH A HC COIL YOU HAVE REPULSION - THEN COGGING - THEN ATTRACTION (AS THE MAGNET TRIES TO MOVE AWAY).
Well there are a few issues here, quite a few.
First we know that the HV coil does have a current and creates a significant MMF, the phase of that has not been analyzed but if it were working conventionally then it would be between 90 and 180 degrees behind the rotors phase, since it is shorted it will be closer to 180 and hence have less Lenz force, however it would still create a repulsion force that due to the attraction of the rotor to the stator core acts to lessen cogging torque.
Now it may be (although I have real doubts, but I can easily test it) that the stator coils field is such that it is outside the normal and is sat at 189 degrees say, now this would not appear to make sense however, if that were so then the cogging torque could be increased by shorting, however I have observed the cogging torque rattle to decrease immediately on shorting although I'll grant you that is far from bulletproof.
And I'd like to make it clear that for any who may doubt Thanes effect has far surpassed any possibility of being a result of various losses.
Quote
I WOULD NEVER SAY THAT THE REPULSION FIELD CANCELS THE COGGING TORQUE - THAT WOULD BE LIKE REPLACING SOMETHING BAD WITH SOMETHING WORSE - LIKE REPLACING PB WITH OUmonotony.
Starting to sound like semantics, but if you have a non energized electromagnet and place a permanent magnet near it will attract, if you energize the electromagnet to oppose the magnets field then you can turn off the attraction or even create a repulsion, a pickup coil will not under and normal circumstance be able to turn attraction into a repulsion but it can lessen an attractive force.
Quote
BTW - I AM UPLOADING ANOTHER RE-SHOOT OF THE SAME VIDEO (SANS NARRATION) WITH THE I/P REDUCED SLIGHTLY BECAUSE THE HC COIL DECELERATION WAS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR MY LIKING - AS I WAS OPPERATING THE MOTOR IN THE WRONG "ZONE"..
T
Nice.
I have Just finished a multitap coil wound on a split MOT core.
QuoteAlso I note that you have no longer got the HV coils magnetically shorted through each other, have you found that closing the flux path may not be needed after all? I am currently replicating the coils and was just about to JB weld them to some I bars so the 2 halves of the core are stuck on each other, would you now recommend not going with the back iron flux shorting for the most energetic acceleration? (or is it not needed now you have gone for 5! stack rotors? Still I recommend closing flux paths if you can since it reduces core losses in laminated cores)
CLOSING THE FLUX PATH INCREASES THE EFFECT - BUT THIS SETUP IS FOR QUICK COIL TESTING.
BACK IRON REDUCES AIR GAP RELUCTANCE AND I WOULD EMPLOY IT WHERE WEIGHT IS NOT AN ISSUE.
T
Quotebut if you have a non energized electromagnet and place a permanent magnet near it will attract, if you energize the electromagnet to oppose the magnets field then you can turn off the attraction or even create a repulsion
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU HAVE A HV COIL ELECTROMAGNET - WILL IT REPEL THE PM?
CAN YOU TRY THIS TODAY WITH A HC COIL, HV COIL AND DC?
I WILL AS WELL IF I HAVE TIME...
1) PULSE DC THROUGH A HC COIL AND ATTRACT THE MAGNET.
2) PULSE (THE SAME) DC THROUGH A HV COIL (SAME TURNS DIRECTION) AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MAGNET?
3) PUT THE COIL AND MAGNET ON A RULER SCALED PAPER TO GUAGE DIFFERENT FIELD STRENGTHS AS WELL.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 06:18:14 AM
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU HAVE A HV COIL ELECTROMAGNET - WILL IT REPEL THE PM?
CAN YOU TRY THIS TODAY WITH A HC COIL, HV COIL AND DC?
I WILL AS WELL IF I HAVE TIME...
1) PULSE DC THROUGH A HC COIL AND ATTRACT THE MAGNET.
2) PULSE (NOT THE SAME) DC THROUGH A HV COIL (SAME TURNS DIRECTION) AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MAGNET?
3) PUT THE COIL AND MAGNET ON A RULER SCALED PAPER TO GUAGE DIFFERENT FIELD STRENGTHS AS WELL.
T
In the HV case you need to apply as many times voltage as there are turns compared to the HC coil.
So if the HC coil is 100 turns and you apply 10v, and the HV coil is 1,500 turns then you must apply 150v across it. (that is how it in the generator, 10 times the turns will have 10 times the induced voltage)
QuoteI have observed the cogging torque rattle to decrease immediately on shorting although I'll grant you that is far from bulletproof.
COGGING TORQUE RATTLE DECREASES w/ INCREASED SPEED AS WELL - IS THIS WHAT IS OCCURING?
AT ANY RATE THE NEW VIDEOS ARE UPLOADED BUT NOT PROCESSED YET - GOTTA RUN.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 06:35:20 AM
COGGING TORQUE RATTLE DECREASES w/ INCREASED SPEED AS WELL - IS THIS WHAT IS OCCURING?
AT ANY RATE THE NEW VIDEOS ARE UPLOADED BUT NOT PROCESSED YET - GOTTA RUN.
CHEERS
Thane
No, it's instantaneous.
I guess though more important that talking about a mere artifact (one removed by correct design anyhow as all are) is talking about the acceleration.
My theory as you know is that the generator creates an aether/bublegum stream that runs through the wire in the coil and through the core, shaft and enhances the motor thanks to it's magic powers or somesuch.
Your theory is that the acceleration force somehow comes from the generator, but so far I have not found you be more specific than that. (not that I'm pointing fingers on issues of specificity)
Do you believe the force to occurs because somehow the HV coils are producing a magnetic field that attracts or repels the rotor in such a way as to create acceleration? Seemingly you must.
If so then that means that the current in the HV coils would not be in the expected phase (unless the stator current isn't producing the stators magnetic field), the expected phase is anywhere from 90 degrees to 180 degrees behind the rotor phase, for acceleration to occur the magnetic field and current producing it must be from 181 to 359 degrees behind the rotor phase (or if you prefer 1 to 179 degrees ahead of it).
This is rather simple to test, the university should be able to lend you an oscilloscope surely, I have one but the experiment is not at the top of my list but it should only take an hour or 2 to work it out.
For comparison you could put a scope on a high current coil, but better yet would be to have something that tells you the precise stator position.
There are a few issues though with the current being anywhere in this region, first is that it is in opposition to the rotors driving field (perhaps though one could claim that the stators core lags rotors field that induces it? but that's hysteresis and minimized by laminated cores) that means that the emf induced by the rotor would constantly be opposing not driving the current in the HV coils leaving a question of just what is driving it.
It would also mean that the HV coil is supportive of the rotors flux, instead of trying to suppress the change of flux created by the rotor it should enhance it if it's anywhere from 181-359 degrees behind, this however is the exact opposite of what is found by looking at the induced field in another (HC) coil on the same core.
The fact that the HC has less voltage when the HV is shorted is a sign that the HV has countered the rotors flux.
Really the fact that it reduces the HC coils voltage means that both are competing with each other for the same inductive flux and that both are in the same general phase.
When I say stuff I make sure I know what I am talking about (and if I don't now I shut up or ask), and there is just no way, about the only way it could happen is if the aether somehow changed repulsive fields to attract or otherwise attenuated the intensity of the repulsion to result in acceleration but still keep the field created by the coils unchanged (because as I say above if the HV coil's field if 179-359 then it would not cause the drop in induced voltage in the HC coil), sounds unlikely though, or maybe the aether applies a non magnetic accelerative force to the generator somehow.
But since any theory posing an exclusively generator sourced acceleration must get past your results (blocking) and Vince's results (torque measurements) and other anomalies that don't make sense (deceleration and max motor speed mostly unchanged) then It seems to me to be more likely to be the force comes from the motor, though I am trying to keep an open mind.
..
Quote from: aether22 on June 09, 2008, 08:20:19 AM
My theory as you know is that the generator creates an aether/bublegum stream that runs through the wire in the coil and through the core, shaft and enhances the motor thanks to it's magic powers or somesuch.
I believe! I believe! :o
:)
QuoteFor comparison you could put a scope on a high current coil, but better yet would be to have something that tells you the precise stator position.
WE HAVE SCOPE TESTING SLATED FOR TUESDAY IF ALL GOES WELL.
AS I HAVE POSTED PREVIOUSLY - MY FEELING IS THAT THE
HC COILS STORE ENERGY IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD (LIKE AN INDUCTOR) AND THE
HV COILS STORE ENERGY IN THE ELECTROSTATIC FIELD (LIKE A CAPACITOR)WHEN THE MAGNET APPROACHES THE HV COIL VOLTAGE IS INDUCED AND THE CURRENT IS KEPT LOW DUE TO THE THE COIL'S HIGH IMPEDANCE. AS THE VOLTAGE IN THE COIL GROWS THE ELECTROSTATIC CHARGE INCREASES AS WELL.
WHEN THE COIL MOVES AWAY THE SHORTED "CAPACITOR"/COIL DISCHARGES THROUGH THE COIL AND PUSHES THE RECEDING MAGNET AWAY WITH ADDITIONAL FORCE.
THAT'S MY THEORY AND I AM STICKING WITH IT FOR NOW.
T
JM - HUBBA BUBBA, BAZOOKA, BUBLEISHOUS OR MY FAVE - HOCKEY CARD GUM?
Quote from: JustMe on June 09, 2008, 04:50:16 PM
I believe! I believe! :o
:)
See See!!
I have a few new ideas I have added to my test list.
Diode shorting. See if the HV coil is shorted through a diode if it works at all, I mean a single diode so only half the waveform can exist, try diode both ways. Very simple test.
Battery shorting. Use a full wave bridge rectifier and then connect a battery as if the generator were charging it, only the battery should already be charged, the aim is to have the battery voltage and the generator voltage equal so no current flows but hopefully the aether still does and creates acceleration with almost no current. (get current as low as possible and measure and compare with current when directly shorted)
Removable coil. A HV coil on an open core that can be removed as the generator is running, the aim is to see if an open circuit coil helps in the least, admittedly doubtful but possibler, it is worth noting that acceleration has been noted without shorting although if the coil ever played a part is not known.
Make coils that have too few turns at the given speed to get the effect (push through to the motor) but do aetheric things to enhance them.
I would also note that a core made of many more fine steel wires would with fewer turns likely create a swifter aether flow, just as the laminated cores need fewer turns than solid ones. Is it possible that a fine enough laminate/wire core would need no coil? (as someone indeed found! though I don't recall who)
Here is the rest of the list:
Pulley isolation of drive motor, then move into redirecting into surrogate devices:
Step 1: Isolate effect from prime mover.
Step 2: Direct effect into second motor (slowed down possibly by a rotor experiencing Lenz drag from HC coils)
Step 3: Direct effect into second motor from external coils. (coil surrogate)
Step 4: Same but with external coil/s mounted around second motors rotor. (full surrogate, acceleration from shorting second motors stator coil alone must be either non existent or light so an improvement if present is apparent, putting coils in series has been shown to apparently increase the effect, this will tell us if the relative phase of the rotor and main stator component is important)
Step 5: Direct effect into stalled motor and various other tests.
Make new split MOT coils (multitap), with back iron, try to replicate Thanes 'brutal' acceleration. <Made and JB weld is drying as I type
Optical Tach and HV coil resistor on scope experiment to determine magnetic phase of stator to rotor. < I now consider the result of this experiment to most assuredly show that the phase of the HV coil does not differ from what would be expected of a conventional HC coil.based on the reasoning in the previous post I made.
HC coil induction increase. (on shorting HV coils, see if it works when they are on opposite sides of the shaft, if so that give another promising line of experiments)
Closed loop attempt:
Reduce air drag, then measure minimum energy to keep it spinning at high speed without stator present, then try to add stators and have it take less energy with it shorted (as Thane has done), See how many balanced or accelerated watts you can generate, then try and add another identical no net load watt generating rotor stator set. Try to keep the energy input if possible the same as it is with out any rotor at all. (although a vacuum can remove this loss)
Torque sensor, or measuring reaction torque on motor housing. (to verify Vince's results)
Testing alternate motor types to drive the generator.
Rewind a conventional mot/gen to create acceleration on shorting.
Copy Thane, Make a prony brake. Thane, did you not manage to get it working?
Hopefully by the end on the day I will have done a few of these tests.
QuoteDiode shorting. See if the HV coil is shorted through a diode if it works at all, I mean a single diode so only half the waveform can exist, try diode both ways. Very simple test.
WHAT IS AN LED - DUDE?
T
QuoteMake coils that have too few turns at the given speed to get the effect (push through to the motor) but do aetheric things to enhance them.
OR START THE SYSTEM w/ THE HV COILS SHORTED AND WATCH IT CONFORM TO LEZ'S LAW.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 05:35:14 PM
WE HAVE SCOPE TESTING SLATED FOR TUESDAY IF ALL GOES WELL.
AS I HAVE POSTED PREVIOUSLY - MY FEELING IS THAT THE HC COILS STORE ENERGY IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD (LIKE AN INDUCTOR) AND THE HV COILS STORE ENERGY IN THE ELECTROSTATIC FIELD (LIKE A CAPACITOR)
Um, don't want to burst your bubble or come off like the thought police but seriously a shorted HV coil has little capacitance to any current induced in it's turns, you can believe that if you want but I know it's not possible.
Quote
WHEN THE MAGNET APPROACHES THE HV COIL VOLTAGE IS INDUCED AND THE CURRENT IS KEPT LOW DUE TO THE THE COIL'S HIGH IMPEDANCE. AS THE VOLTAGE IN THE COIL GROWS THE ELECTROSTATIC CHARGE INCREASES AS WELL.
I'm a frayed knot.
If you were injecting energy into a HV coil from the outside then yes, it would stop the current and a voltage gradient would form (not that that would solve anything), but as each turn is equally induced by the rotors EMF and it's own counter EMF each turn is in the same (metaphorical) boat, each turn gets pretty much the same EMF encouraging current flow and the same back EMF discouraging it, all are equal and as such there is barely a hair of any HV field near the thing, voltage difference only arrives with an actual difference, one difference is in the end of the coil are not shorted but are open or have a load, then a voltage will be generated, but in short circuit there is no potential difference (ironically, you know with the name and all).
If every inch of wire is pretty much homogeneous, generating, resisting, inducting all the same then there is no voltage, no unbalanced charges no electric fields.
Quote
WHEN THE COIL MOVES AWAY THE SHORTED "CAPACITOR"/COIL DISCHARGES THROUGH THE COIL AND PUSHES THE RECEDING MAGNET AWAY WITH ADDITIONAL FORCE.
THAT'S MY THEORY AND I AM STICKING WITH IT FOR NOW.
Actually I suggest that you do, but if you do that oscilloscope test the right way you will find out otherwise.
But it is probably rather helpful to think that you understand it, keeps the hands busy and the mind quiet.
More speriments!
QuoteCopy Thane, Make a prony brake. Thane, did you not manage to get it working?
NO - SORRY I SPENT THE WEEKEND PREPARING FOR AN INVESTOR DEMO TODAY.
IF I WERE TO DO IT I WOULD MOUNT THE SCALE (WITH A LEVER ATTACHED) ON A PLATE THAT CAN BE RAISED VIA A THREADED BOLT FROM BELOW.
LEVER_____________O ------------ ROTOR DRIVE SHAFT
SCALE PLATE/
/ THREADED BOLT
/
/
/
BASEAS YOU RAISE THE SCALE THE LEVER PUTS PRESSURE ON THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH IS REGISTERED ON THE METER.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 06:35:19 PM
WHAT IS AN LED - DUDE?
T
Did you have it half wave though? I figured you had an LED each way so that both current directions were conducted, sure seemed that way unless you had 4 individual HV coils.
QuoteActually I suggest that you do, but if you do that oscilloscope test the right way you will find out otherwise. But it is probably rather helpful to think that you understand it, keeps the hands busy and the mind quiet.
YOU ARE FUNNY - ARE YOU REALLY THIS CONDESCENDING IN PERSON OR IS IT BEING LOST IN THE TRANSLATION?
BE HONEST YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU BOTH, INDUCE AND DROP VOLTAGE ACROSS A COIL'S RESISTANCE
AT THE SAME TIME ANY MORE THAN I DO...
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 07:20:37 PM
YOU ARE FUNNY - ARE YOU REALLY THIS CONDESCENDING IN PERSON OR IS IT BEING LOST IN THE TRANSLATION?
I was just trying to state my piece and yet respect your views as of value even if I believe them to be wrong.
Really I am just not sure you are really ready for the oddness of the aether yet, rightly or wrongly I feel you'd rather stay closer to something resembling normal physics.
Quote
BE HONEST YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU BOTH, INDUCE AND DROP VOLTAGE ACROSS A COIL'S RESISTANCE AT THE SAME TIME ANY MORE THAN I DO...
I am not sure what you mean by 'induce and drop'.
What I do know is that since the HC coil is induced by the rotors flux and that since a common core HC coils induction drops when the HV is shorted that can only mean one thing, that the current in the HV coil is somewhere from 1 to 179 degrees behind the rotor flux and hence having a Lenz law deceleration on the rotor.
Wait, no, let me think about this a bit harder, I have made a diagram that shows what is going on.
So there is a possible 181 to 269 degree range the HV coil phase could exist in and reduce the HCC's access to the rotor flux while accelerating the rotor, however in such a phase the rotors EMF would be fighting the current in the HV coil and you would need to have it induced by something other than the rotor flux, something the HC coil does not 'see'. I thought however that the reduction of induction to the HC coil was proof that the HV's phase was such that it could not cause acceleration, but I guess I was a tad tired and I was out by 90 degrees.
Still the chance of you finding the current being beyond 180 degrees is slim though having realized that reduction of rotor flux and acceleration do overlap it's not categorically impossible.
Quote from: JustMe on June 09, 2008, 11:01:47 AM
..picture post
Nice pictures again, Thane.
Now I don't want to be a nu_Thanes, but when I run the rotor against a core there is a price to pay.
The rotor alone runs on 179 watts
Add one core and the watts used is 205
Add one more core for a total of two and it uses 230 watts
This is core drag. This would vary with the gap distance and speed (3600 RPM). These numbers are at 3mm (1/8th of an inch)
I would say that each core costs 25 watts to run at this speed and this gap distance.
The motor is inherently unstable below breakdown torque which is around 70% of full speed. So
the tests with the Ryobi should be run above 2500 RPM to be valid.
So there... did I manage to slide out from under the slap down?
Ron, the west coast # one
QuoteNow I don't want to be a nu_Thanes, but when I run the rotor against a core there is a price to pay.
The rotor alone runs on 179 watts
Add one core and the watts used is 205
Add one more core for a total of two and it uses 230 watts
This is core drag. This would vary with the gap distance and speed (3600 RPM). These numbers are at 3mm (1/8th of an inch)
I would say that each core costs 25 watts to run at this speed and this gap distance.
The motor is inherently unstable below breakdown torque which is around 70% of full speed. So
the tests with the Ryobi should be run above 2500 RPM to be valid.
So there... did I manage to slide out from under the slap down?
Ron, the west coast # one
NO NOT QUITE ... TELL ME IF THIS MAKES SENSE?
IF YOU ARE LIKE ME YOU HAVE YOUR TWO MOTS POSITIONED SUCH THAT THEY LINE UP WITH A NORTH AND A SOUTH POLE ON THE ROTOR - CORRECT?
IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN INTRODUCE ANOTHER CORE IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER NORTH AND SOUTH POLE PAIR ON THE ROTOR SUCH THAT THE INITIAL CORE DRAG IS DECREASED BECAUSE THE 1ST CORE DRAG IS BALANCED BY THE 2ND?
THE CORES SHOULD ALSO BE LAMINATED CORES - YOU CAN'T DO MUCH ABOUT HYSTERISIS AND EDDY CURRENTS.
"MAKE IT SO #1"
T
QuoteI was just trying to state my piece and yet respect your views as of value even if I believe them to be wrong.
GOOD I BELIEVE THEM TO BE WRONG ALSO - UNTIL PROVEN RIGHT.
QuoteReally I am just not sure you are really ready for the oddness of the aether yet, rightly or wrongly I feel you'd rather stay closer to something resembling normal physics.
VERY TRUE - I AM STILL GETTING USED TO THE ODDNESS OF AETHER22... ;)
QuoteI am not sure what you mean by 'induce and drop'.
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL)The voltage changes (RISES OR DROPS) around any closed loop must sum to zero. No matter what path you take through an electric circuit, if you return to your starting point you must measure the same voltage, constraining the net change around the loop to be zero. Since voltage is electric potential energy per unit charge, the voltage law can be seen to be a consequence of conservation of energy.
SO YOU HAVE A HV COIL SIMULTANEOUSLY INDUCING AND DISSIPATING A VOLTAGE - WITH LITTLE OR NO CURRENT COMPARED TO A CONVENTIONAL HC COIL'S PERFORMANCE. DOES THIS NOT SOUND LIKE THE ANODE AND CATHODE OF A CAPACITOR TO YOU?
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AT A LOW SPEED (FREQUENCY) THE HV COIL ACTS LIKE A NORMAL LENZ DICTATED COIL AND SLOWS THE ROTOR - THEN ABOVE A CERTAIN FREQUENCY (ROTOR SPEED) IT CHANGES PERFORMANCE 180 DEGREES.
IM MY LITTLE BRAIN THIS IS WHEN THE COIL'S IMPEDANCE CHOKES THE CURRENT FROM INCREASING BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT AND THE COIL STARTS ACTING MORE LIKE A CAPACITOR.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 12:03:20 AM
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law (KVL)
The voltage changes (RISES OR DROPS) around any closed loop must sum to zero. No matter what path you take through an electric circuit, if you return to your starting point you must measure the same voltage, constraining the net change around the loop to be zero. Since voltage is electric potential energy per unit charge, the voltage law can be seen to be a consequence of conservation of energy.
Ah, well that's the thing.
Kirchhoff's law is regarding voltage drops (or rises), but really in a shorted coil there are no rises or drops.
You only get a rise or a drop is you have differences in a circuit, if one part is better at generating a current (a battery) and another part is better at resisting a current (a resistor) then the current initiated by the battery will have trouble flowing through the resistor as fast as it did through the battery, this means a pressure or potential difference will occur, on one side of the resistor the electrons will be packed tight (as tight as the batter can) and on the other side the electrons will be deficient.
But with a coil every turn does the same as every other turn, it has a voltage induced in it by the rotor and it produces a magnetic field of it's own that it also responds to, and it has a tiny bit of resistance.
And so as every part is the same no part really puts out more or less, resists more or less what you get is (assuming it is shorted) a circuit without any drops or rises in voltage.
Quote
SO YOU HAVE A HV COIL SIMULTANEOUSLY INDUCING AND DISSIPATING A VOLTAGE - WITH LITTLE OR NO CURRENT COMPARED TO A CONVENTIONAL HC COIL'S PERFORMANCE.
Don't say no current, that's simply untrue, and it is more than enough to kill.
And you can put that current through a step down transformer and have plenty of current.
It's the same energy, it is important you understand that, Ron got about 30w from his HV coil, that's more than anyone has pulled from the HC coil of a Thanerator yet.
But yes, it is less current but may I make another point, it has the same ampere turns (Magneto motive force).
So what this means basically is that the HV coil (not really high voltage when shorted) has the same number of electrons orbiting the stator core as the HC coil, it create a magnetic field just as strong as the HC coil and from a conventional understanding identical to it even if we know that's not the whole answer.
The difference is simply how dizzy an electron gets before it's made the whole journey through the coil and if his friends are in front and behind mostly (HV) or more at his side (HC).
Quote
DOES THIS NOT SOUND LIKE THE ANODE AND CATHODE OF A CAPACITOR TO YOU?
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AT A LOW SPEED (FREQUENCY) THE HV COIL ACTS LIKE A NORMAL LENZ DICTATED COIL AND SLOWS THE ROTOR - THEN ABOVE A CERTAIN FREQUENCY (ROTOR SPEED) IT CHANGES PERFORMANCE 180 DEGREES.
IM MY LITTLE BRAIN THIS IS WHEN THE COIL'S IMPEDANCE CHOKES THE CURRENT FROM INCREASING BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT AND THE COIL STARTS ACTING MORE LIKE A CAPACITOR.
T
Um, problem is that does not make sense or agree with conventional electromagnetism or agree with measurements so far.
The impedance does not choke the coil. (the exception would be if you had 2 very different coils, if for instance part of the HV coil was not induced much or at all by the rotor and only induced it's self then it would choke it)
If you double the number of turns the sensitivity to it it's own field is doubled (self inductance/impedance), this is true, but so does the voltage induced from the rotor, and so it ends up with the same mmf/ampere turns, the same energy.
Now if you were to add an
external inductor to the HV coil, one that was not induced by the rotor then you would have everything you say, but none of that applies to any of the HV coils you have so far made.
The importance of being right (not).
Here's the thing, I know you are wrong. I know your theory is flawed.
I do NOT KNOW that the acceleration effect occurs at the motor but there is lots of evidence that has not been discounted that it does and no real evidence to the contrary. (nor a likely sounding theory)
I KNOW that if the effect is real (which I consider to be proven BTW) it is based on manipulation of the aether, most likely by primarily having it improve motor performance.
And guess what, all of that is totally unimportant, well almost.
Because I have known more than you about how Free Energy and Antigravity devices work for say a decade or longer.
And yet my greatest success to date was replicating the generator you made.
And that is why I say that maybe it is best that you hold on to an idea that is wrong but let's you work rather than one that confounds you, because the difference between you and I is not how right we are or how much we know but rather how much we experiment, and how well.
You experiment lots because you have a better work ethic, and you are not as easily discouraged and because you likely had an edge at hands on stuff (and because you don't 'Live' in your mind, which causes analysis paralysis), and you found this effect, I did not.
I was simply not good at the psychological impact of failed experiments so I tried fewer and gave up earlier, in part because I know just how mysterious and fuzzy the aether can be. (luckily you have a highly reliable experiment that can be replicated rather well)
So while I hope that my understanding can help direct this research into something much greater much sooner than would be possible without it I really don't think it is important that you understand what you are doing if you don't want to, I can give you 1,000 ideas to improve the effect that may not work simply because I do not have enough detailed in depth info (doubtful but go wit it), and yet you can stumble on something even without understanding why it works.
And there isn't too much advantage us both covering the same experiments, so you trying stuff that I wouldn't think of isn't a bad thing.
If you finally become curious enough and choose to really adopt the aether then I will be happy to tell you, but your work laboring under a misconception (as even you view the 'old Thane' to be mistaken) has been more fruitful than mine despite me being totally right, which as it turns out is by it's self worthless!
Disclaimer:
To outsiders, INTJs may appear to project an aura of "definiteness", of self-confidence. This self-confidence, sometimes mistaken for simple arrogance by the less decisive, is actually of a very specific rather than a general nature; its source lies in the specialized knowledge systems that most INTJs start building at an early age. When it comes to their own areas of expertise -- and INTJs can have several -- they will be able to tell you almost immediately whether or not they can help you, and if so, how. INTJs know what they know, and perhaps still more importantly, they know what they don't know.
The importance of deleting double posts.
QuoteYou experiment lots because you have a better work ethic, and you are not as easily discouraged and because you likely had an edge at hands on stuff (and because you don't 'Live' in your mind, which causes analysis paralysis), and you found this effect, I did not.
GOOD OBSERVATIONS - I DIDN'T GET ANYWHERE (FOR 3 YEARS) UNTIL I GOT MY HANDS DIRTY.
QuoteI was simply not good at the psychological impact of failed experiments so I tried fewer and gave up earlier
YEP, I WAS CRUSHED MANY TIMES - WENT TO BED DISCOURAGED AND ALWAYS WOKE UP WITH A NEW AND BETTER IDEA TO KEEP ME TRYING - THAT AND THE FACT THAT I ALSO NEEDED TO CREATE "A NEW LIFE" FOR MYSELF CAUSE I WASN'T GOING BACK TO THE OLD ONE.
SO YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DISTILL YOUR THEORY DOWN INTO SOMETHING EVERYONE CAN "SEE" IN THEIR MINDS EYE.
T
NOW IS YOU CHANCE THE WORLD IS WAITING...?
WHAT SAY YOU?
T
----- Original Message -----
From: Raptis Theofanis <rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr>
To: Kim Cunningham
Cc: Thane.Heins@yahoo.ca <Thane.Heins@yahoo.ca>
Sent: Mon Jun 09 22:04:43 2008
Subject: RE: Generator Technology
Dear gentlemen
Thank you for replying. I am somewhat perplexed from your description of the device. While I understand
the magnetic coupling, I dont quite get the significance of the extra high voltage coil. Is this the second
wheel-like ring in the opposite side of the generator? Could we find a schematic of the overall configuration
in your website?
To my understanding, there would be no other way to get more energy out of a closed system than the one put in
than by absorbing an amount of the so called ZPF or vacuum energy. Even this requires to show how would it be
possible for a field configuration to resonate with this substrate. Others may call this a gauge symmetry breaking
but it is not clear how would this take place at such a low energy level in a macroscopic scale.
There are some theories about "hidden momentum" when magnets are involved, in which case conservation laws
still hold but in the case of electromagnetism they contain three terms of which the 3d is simply "radiation reaction".
In that sense I would expect a kind of radiation with strong opposite angular momentum to counteract the appearing
acceleration. Have you checked that with any instrument?
best regards
Theophanes Raptis
Physicist-Scientific Software Developer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ag. Paraskevi, Attikh, Greece
tel : +30 210 6514544/6511020 (secr)
mob : +30 6938051028
http ://cag.dat.demokritos.gr/raptis.php
e-mail: rtheo@dat.demokritos.gr
t_raptis2005@yahoo.gr
________________________________________
From: Kim Cunningham [KCunningham@ocri.ca]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:26 PM
To: Raptis Theofanis
Cc: Thane C. Heins; Markus Zahn; rhabash@uottawa.ca
Subject: Generator Technology
My name is Kim Cunningham. I am the Vice President of Communications for Potential Difference. Thank you for your email inquiry.
The technology continues to evolve. We have prepared this updated and current information to provide as an update to interested parties. As a courtesy, please find attached recent data and video taken at the University of Ottawa.
The essence of the invention is using high voltage coils to counteract the effects of the high current coils (used in every generator in the world). The high current coils cause deceleration under load but the high voltage coils cause acceleration under load.
Please find attached a link to the latest video and some relevant test data obtained earlier in May which was performed on the Perepiteia Generating system depicted in the videos attached.
The videos demonstrate our ability to create "regenerative acceleration" in a generator which will ultimately be employed in an electric vehicle. Currently electric vehicles employ regenerative braking to recharge batteries during operation - this however should actually be called "degenerative acceleration" because as the vehicle decelerates the regenerative capabilities diminish towards zero.
Our ultimate goal is to create a full generating system as shown in Table # 4 - where we showcase our proven ability to create a generator where power is delivered to the battery with no "cost" to the system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaf9v0K-rZw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCvhxHh_ctE
If you are interested in additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Kim Cunningham
Damn!
I made a new coil yesterday only to find today that it is internally shorting at high voltages!
I did scrape insulation off at some points to test resistance, it seems that the single layer of insulation is not enough, or maybe it's because I did not insulate the turns from some portions of the core (the inner part is but some side bits of the E were left on and uninsulated).
On the other half I used the HV coil from transformer core I cut and split, on shorting there was no acceleration and possibly deceleration, but I don't know if I should be disappointed or happy at that result because right now the motor is isolated by a hose and while my previous MOT based HV coil setup broke through that (was 2 x 100 ohm coils, this is a single one and the wrong size for the now split core) maybe this one is not, although it is also possible that the stacked Neo's is hurting the results as it did all but kill the effect for my previous MOT setup though not the monster coil.
Sadly that's that for experimenting today, probably will give a shot at saving the shorted coil.
Too bad, tons of experiments I'd love to do.
I'm pretty sure I've fixed the coil with a bunch of tape, phew!
Insulate those cores well!
Quote from: aether22 on June 10, 2008, 02:21:32 AM
You experiment lots because you have a better work ethic, and you are not as easily discouraged and because you likely had an edge at hands on stuff (and because you don't 'Live' in your mind, which causes analysis paralysis), and you found this effect, I did not.
I was simply not good at the psychological impact of failed experiments so I tried fewer and gave up earlier,
Well said Aether mon, you speak for many of us!
Ron
Maybe a dumb question: what is the Pout / Pin ratio ?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 06:40:39 AM
GOOD OBSERVATIONS - I DIDN'T GET ANYWHERE (FOR 3 YEARS) UNTIL I GOT MY HANDS DIRTY.
YEP, I WAS CRUSHED MANY TIMES - WENT TO BED DISCOURAGED AND ALWAYS WOKE UP WITH A NEW AND BETTER IDEA TO KEEP ME TRYING - THAT AND THE FACT THAT I ALSO NEEDED TO CREATE "A NEW LIFE" FOR MYSELF CAUSE I WASN'T GOING BACK TO THE OLD ONE.
SO YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DISTILL YOUR THEORY DOWN INTO SOMETHING EVERYONE CAN "SEE" IN THEIR MINDS EYE.
T
Maybe my experiments took longer to build (more expensive), or maybe there were fewer ideas to try once they had failed, or maybe I have an 'issue' with failure, but they would knock me back worse that a day day or 2.
Hopefully that is more past now, but the people who get somewhere are those that keep on trying and keep on pushing harder. And in the things I have been able to do that again and again I have always got somewhere. With the aether I still did not give up but eventually had a 'go slow' policy with experiments. (which was good as I did grow my understanding of the aether more and more)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 06:40:39 AM
SO YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DISTILL YOUR THEORY DOWN INTO SOMETHING EVERYONE CAN "SEE" IN THEIR MINDS EYE.
T
Assuming by theory you mean 'Aether theory'.
Well it's not a theory, it's an observation.
Fire for instance is an observation, what fire is is a theory.
I have not created a theory, a theory is a projection of where the evidence leads, theories are projections in the mind of what data may be telling us.
But observations leading to inescapable conclusions, that's not a theory, if you are shown fire and all you try and do is understand it's effects and how to build it and stop it and control it that is not theory. Explaining the why's is when you get into theory.
One of the problems is that I have refused to project beyond what is plainly shown by observation and so my understanding of the aether though accurate to a very high degree is only so because it is fuzzy, obviously sometimes I will hold a tiny 'theory' to the side of why doing x does y but I keep that separate from what I know.
It is unreasonable for me to expect you to listen to all the evidence and unreasonable for you to expect me to show you and as this is more than you can take someones word on the only ones who will agree are those who have done the research and found the same truth (as had RCH).
However if you find that the torque does occur at the motor then maybe you will be ready to listen, but then again understanding the aether has not helped me exploit it much (although I had some seeming successes), and it may not help you either to be working with such a tenuous concept.
Hopefully it no longer sounds as condescending?
By the way, it seems that Stefan really did verify that Polarbreeze and OUman were one and the same.
QuoteMaybe a dumb question: what is the Pout / Pin ratio ?
WELCOME ALAN,
NOT A DUMB QUESTION (ALBEIT TOUCHY AREA) - BUT JUST NOT RELEVANT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE ARE NOT WORKING WITH FULL GENERATORS.
IF YOU GO BACK A FEW PAGES YOU WILL SEE THAT THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN POSTED A NUMBER OF TIMES BY A CRIMINALLY INSANE COMPULSIVE LIAR WITH A SPLIT PERSONALITY / BI-POLAR DISORDER.
IT HAS ALSO BEEN ANSWERED.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 09, 2008, 11:22:58 PM
Ron, the west coast # one
NO NOT QUITE ... TELL ME IF THIS MAKES SENSE?
IF YOU ARE LIKE ME YOU HAVE YOUR TWO MOTS POSITIONED SUCH THAT THEY LINE UP WITH A NORTH AND A SOUTH POLE ON THE ROTOR - CORRECT?
IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN INTRODUCE ANOTHER CORE IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER NORTH AND SOUTH POLE PAIR ON THE ROTOR SUCH THAT THE INITIAL CORE DRAG IS DECREASED BECAUSE THE 1ST CORE DRAG IS BALANCED BY THE 2ND?
THE CORES SHOULD ALSO BE LAMINATED CORES - YOU CAN'T DO MUCH ABOUT HYSTERISIS AND EDDY CURRENTS.
"MAKE IT SO #1"
T
T 4 2,
It is not easy is it? lol. I get different readings on different days, even on the same day!
But generally speaking each core seems to draw 13 to 15 watts and this adds up for each core added
with just two cores, one on a pole and one in the middle I had a best run of 12 watts per coil.
Two cores aligned and one in the middle was 240 watts whereas three cores aligned was 237 watts?
Interesting in that the initial baseline run was 185 watts but at the end of the experiment the unit
was hot and the aether had settled into a pattern, the draw had dropped to 176 watts!
The one single core was 1.590 sq inches and drew 13 watts
The mot core, run as a single, is 2.750 sq inches and drew 15 watts
So I still stand by my statement that the cores have drag, that this drag adds for each extra core.
R_1
The coil now works well, at generating power anyway. if I put the MOT secondary and the coil I wound myself in series I get .15A and tons of volts and that is without moving the rotor especially close to the stator. If i hold the aligator clips near each other I get a small arc which heats up the alligator clip to glowing.
But there is deceleration! despite my coil being 92 ohms and the MOT coil being 148 or so ohms.
It seems that with the 3 stack of magnets none of these laminated cores are giving me acceleration.
And yet my monster coil workes just fine.
So I am going to take the induction motor off isolation, this email just gives everything a chance to cool down and me to cool down from the sound of noisey generators.
Quotemaybe I have an 'issue' with failure
PERHAPS YOUR REAL "ISSUE" IS WITH YOUR PERCEPTION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A FAILURE.
FOR ME GIVING UP = FAILURE.
NO LIE - MY BEST BREAKTHROUGHS COME RIGHT AFTER THE WORST "FAILURES"
BY NOT GIVING IN TO THE ILLUSION OF "FAILURE".
QuoteHopefully it no longer sounds as condescending?
CAN YOU DRAW ME A PICTURE w/ ARROWS ETC. SO IT IS ACCESSIBLE TO ME ???
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on June 10, 2008, 07:46:51 PM
So I still stand by my statement that the cores have drag, that this drag adds for each extra core.
R_1
I_DRAG,
DON'T MAKE ME WORK PLEASE I AM TIRED...
IS THE DRAG GREATER THAN THE INCREASE IN POWER PROVIDED WITH THE HV COILS?
ALSO CAN WE AGREE THAT THE DRAG IS A FUNCTION OF THE CORE MATERIAL AND IF THE WORLD'S BEST CORE MATERIAL WERE USED THE DRAG WOULD BE LESS THAN YOUR MICROWAVE OVEN TRANSFORMER CORE (WHICH IS NOT IDEAL) AND THAT ALL GENERATORS (WITH CORES) HAVE DRAG.
- CAN WE MOVE ON TO WIRE RESISTANCE, AIR FRICTION, BEARING FRICTION, NOISE LOSSES, AND HARPER LOSSES NOW PLEASE?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 08:03:15 PM
I_DRAG,
snip
- CAN WE MOVE ON TO WIRE RESISTANCE, AIR FRICTION, BEARING FRICTION, NOISE LOSSES, AND HARPER LOSSES NOW PLEASE?
T
Harper losses? now thats a killing drag for the whole country, I don't think we want to go there...
Ron
Quoteunit was hot and the aether had settled into a pattern
ET TU BRUTUS?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 10:01:45 PM
ET TU BRUTUS?
T
Moi aussiR
ps: Aether you believe it or not... but it is there, rejoice!
Re Alans question: \"Maybe a dumb question: what is the Pout / Pin ratio ?\"
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 07:31:52 PM
WELCOME ALAN,
IF YOU GO BACK A FEW PAGES YOU WILL SEE THAT THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN POSTED A NUMBER OF TIMES BY A CRIMINALLY INSANE COMPULSIVE LIAR WITH A SPLIT PERSONALITY / BI-POLAR DISORDER.
T
Alan, the ratio Pout/Pin is the efficiency of the system. Typical standard induction motors have an efficiency of about 95% - the systems under discussion here have an efficiency of typically less than 30%.
Is it just me or did everyone just feel a cold breeze?
My new coils suck, although I have not yet tested them with the rotor directly on the motor, I have been running it through the isolation axle with a steel rod in the pipe and it now accelerates and not awfully but nothing impressive either. (I also switched the rotor to a single stack)
Worse yet I am finding that my home made motor speed controller while nice due to it's cheapness sadly even as the lowest level it's giving me about 2,600rpm currently which is possibly due to using a larger motor and possibly a smoother stator config.
I am not sure if the answer is to make a better speed controller or to put paying Luc off further and sink all my dough into a Variac, I guess I'll research ways to make the speed controller more variable first.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 10, 2008, 10:01:45 PM
ET TU BRUTUS?
T
I know the feeling, remember I hated the whole concept of an aether ;)
I was looking for correlations in devices finding few until I could not help but see the aetheric correlations, how the devices all only made sense with an aether.
To you the aether might as well be bubblegum, to me the aether might as well have been a turd so your cognitive dissonance should be a lot less than mine was.
Oh, and I successfully modified my power controller, too easy!
But now I'm going to spend some time to make my device safer!
Carpet
I bet that's a word no one expected me to start a message with.
I have been looking at ways to make my device safer, quieter and more secure.
And the noise was getting to me and so I grabbed a mat of the floor and put it under the motor and coil and Viola far far less noise and vibration! amazing how much.
Things may even stay on the table now, and I bet it increases efficiency by putting less energy into sound but even if that's not so the increased quiet will be appreciated by all.
Also make a separator so the coils can't come too near the rotor (something the same size as the minimum safe gap that can be placed between the base of the coils and the base of the motor)
And I'm going to copy Thanes electrical board things seen in thew latest vid.
Quote from: OUmon on June 11, 2008, 12:17:06 AM
Re Alans question: \"Maybe a dumb question: what is the Pout / Pin ratio ?\"
Alan, the ratio Pout/Pin is the efficiency of the system. Typical standard induction motors have an efficiency of about 95% - the systems under discussion here have an efficiency of typically less than 30%.
:o KneeDeep :D :D
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 12:55:06 AM
Is it just me or did everyone just feel a cold breeze?
Thats just the cool rationale of perceived truth. All the
electrical data posted so far shows a less than 30%
electrical system transfer efficiency.
Thane has been focusing on the Acceleration effect in terms of Torque for use in automotive transport,, e,g the buggy!
Imho the low electrical transfer efficiency is secondary to his current goal of increasing Drive Torque.
However, without gathered experiment torque data, there is no way of knowing the Total System Torque, nor establishing system torque transfer efficiency during mechanical loading ..
The sooner Thane gets torque data and/or his buggy together, the better.
Real world experiments require real world testing.
I bet Thane's just itchin for a cut loose drive in the buggy anyhow!. :D
Totally unsatisfied with my new cut down MOT coils, I have been able to get okish acceleration from about 1,100rpm and up, it will jump about 5-7 rpm a reading at best (oh, and a very very tiny gap is required) but not as good as either of my previous coils so I think I'll go back to them. (that's with both in series, either alone is worse)
Why did it work so well for Thane when it works so poorlt for me? Or perhaps the question is why did my previous MOT core work so well for me when Thane had some issues with MOT's until he cut them down?
Rather than try and do experiments tonight I'm going to try and get everything working as well as possible for the morning, after I get the effect decently with some stator selection I'll attempt some of those experiments including hopefully finally for real the isolation test.
My current results are such that if it wasn't for some of the tests Thane and others have done I'd just put it down to reduction of vibration/cogging torque on shorting, it does become quieter.
So far to me more turns always looks better.
hmmm, I have a thought!
I wonder if you could take a high current coil (at least a low voltage one) and short it, not get the effect, and then put lots of such coils on the same core and short them all and get the effect?
Might work, might not.
Continuing on from that thought a bit more, the coils should really resemble HV coils, the same gauge of wire should probably be used and just as many turns only spread out over 10 or 20 individual coils, or one HV coil with lots of tap points. (My monster coil has too many turns between taps and the new one is too crappy)
Another thought is that multi core wire or litz wire may even be used possibly.
From an aetheric POV I'm not sure if that would be as good as a HV coil or not.
And not continuing on from that, I have verified that my 'poor but it works' coil will decelerate of you short the 2 closest points together, so if I short the start with the first tap point it will slow it, and the first tap point to the second and so on, now I just need to figure a way to connect about 8 wires together at the same time, either that or do it the slow way, but currently I don't probably have enough leads for the slow way.
Thanks for the welcome.
So the system is less than 30% efficient, so the electrical system has COP=0.3?
In what part of the system has a COP>1 (COP=70?, 7000% remember :) ) been observed?
Is it observed that torque decreases when RPM increases? hence Power = torque * rpm.
I am interested in this project, but this discussion is too long. Maybe progress and discussion should be seperated, by placing all progress and data on a seperate web page? (No rudeness intended)
Woohoo!
Ok, now how about this!
I theorized above that the voltage is not the thing but rather the number of turn in series or parallel.
And that if you had enough coils which above I called high current but in reality are just low power (volts and amps) that you would get the effect. Actually high current would be valid as long as you only shorted one of them and had decent cooling.
Anyway I hoped to try it with my failed multitap HV coil, but I was going to have to short out every tap point with the one either side, it was going to use up all my leads and take a bit longer than I like to test with (you want to disconnect, reconnect again and again to see the rise and fall isn't chance).
But above I did point out another conclusion of this idea, that you could just maybe use a multistrand wire, sure the coils would not be insulated from one another but why would that really matter?
Well I just happened to have a length of a really nice fat multistrand wire (to clarify each strand is really think which is probably important to aether velocity), not sure how many wires are in it but it's gotta be over 100, maybe 200 or 300 (I have not even looked yet to see if it says).
I wound that over the free end of my monster coil core (it has a really really long tail!) about 26 turns (x ?00 strands) and put that as close to the (now 1x6 magnet) rotor and I got it up to somewhere above 2,500 rpm I think and once the speed reading on the tach stabilized I shorted the fat multistrand coil with my fingers and the speed rose! I disconnected and it dropped, I reconnected and it rose, I disconnected and it dropped.
It did pretty well!
The inductance of the coil is so low there is no spark when you break the circuit, I checked it out and the voltage was just 0.86v but the current (shorted through my multimeter since Idon't have a clamp meter) is an impressive (unless you count all the strands) 5A.
I am going to try and wind a coil made of the same number of turns of the fattest (single strand) conductors I can get and verify that that does not work, hopefully it would have the same resistance and inductance and current but a deceleration effect.
This sure seemed like the same effect, but the coil was MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to wind!
This verifies why some such as Don Smith and Kipper coil dude stress the use of wire like this, lots of very high speed aether, oh and to a lesser extent Steve Marks TPU too.
Thane, get thee behind to Ye Olde Wire Emporium ASAP!
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 08:02:37 AM
I am going to try and wind a coil made of the same number of turns of the fattest (single strand) conductors I can get and verify that that does not work, hopefully it would have the same resistance and inductance and current but a deceleration effect.
If you use the same amount of copper in both coils, then that would be a very interesting result.
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 01:55:52 AM
To you the aether might as well be bubblegum, to me the aether might as well have been a turd so your cognitive dissonance should be a lot less than mine was.
Would have made the whole Photoshop idea far less appealing for sure...
BTW the cable is 630 x .12mm
The coil is then similar to a 16,380 turn coil. (630x26)
Oh, I just realized I have some nice thick wire that I had forgotten about, that can make the other coil.
it's 2mm diameter, I probably won't make the other coil of the same weight for a number of reasons, but what I will do to verify that it's not the lower resistance of the multistrand, I'll use a length of the 2mm wire the same length as each coil to short the multistrand so it's resistance is slightly higher, that should do it.
Fingers crossed, but so far I must say every coil that has worked has been made of thin wire and many turns (even if now only many in a paralleled sense) so it would be a shocker, a real blow to find a simple 26 turn solid single strand coil cause acceleration.
Quotea real blow to find a simple 26 turn solid single strand coil cause acceleration.
CONGRATULATIONS JOHN !!! - WELL DONE !!!
PLEASE CONSIDER YOUR BILL "PAID IN FULL".
8) 8) 8) I AM SENDING MY SMILES STRAIGHT THROUGH THE EARTH SO THEY GET TO YOU SOONER! 8) 8) 8)
CHEERS
Thane
Oh balls!
Damn, I was truly over the moon for a night there.
I just tried the 2mm wire at 26 (25?) turns, and got acceleration. (and also sparks and 5.6A on the multimeter)
How the hell is such fat wire causing acceleration? The HC coils on the microwave cores don't, nor does a single section of my multitap coil, it decelerates.
It's either that I have gone too far with coil fatness (although the MOT HC coil is 1mm dia of Aluminium wire, or at least the one in my hand is), or coils of fewer turns work but medium numbers not so much, or maybe it is the solid steel stator core.
It may be Thanes effect, or it might be a conventional (mundane ;) ) effect involving reduction of core losses.
Gah, couldn't I have left that lest until a bit later in the day!
One odd thing is that it didn't accelerate when I first shorted it, no idea what was up but the reaction wasn't immediate, at least that points generally to an aether effect.
QuoteIt may be Thanes effect, or it might be a conventional (mundane ) effect involving reduction of core losses.
OR CORE SATURATION - TRY WINDING IT ON A MOT CORE.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 11, 2008, 06:21:47 PM
PLEASE CONSIDER YOUR BILL "PAID IN FULL".
CHEERS
Thane
No take backsies!
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 05:49:41 PM
...... so it would be a shocker, a real blow to find a simple 26 turn solid single strand coil cause acceleration.
No shock or surprise to me. I've stated all along that HV (high impedance) coils are not a strict pre-requisite for acceleration to occur.
And neither is a complete short circuit required if you have the correct coil parameters for your rotor.
Cheers
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 11, 2008, 06:52:34 PM
OR CORE SATURATION - TRY WINDING IT ON A MOT CORE.
Thane
I will, but I think what I need to do is do the experiment this one was based on.
I take my multitap coil and reverify that connecting and one tap point to the one either side will cause deceleration, and reverify that shorted end to end it accelerates.
I can then try shorting all points simultaneously and see if that causes acceleration or deceleration.
I will then try wrapping the multistrand around the MOT core for a further test, and I have another idea which if it works will take me back to that happy place I was in just moments ago.
What the fudding hell!
I have the motor at just, I forget the figure but it's in the 700's rpm's range, a lowish speed test. (the above tests were all done above 2,600 rpm, I simply hadn't tested them at these low speeds, no real reason)
And I setup my MOT core, the original one with which I first got acceleration, and I did a test I had done before, I shorted out a HC coil. Guess what.
Acceleration!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not happy, rather pissed of at the utter inconsistency, I had shorted them before and like Thane in the video got deceleration, but not now, now I get acceleration.
There are 2 things worth noting.
First is that this HC MOT coil is actually copper, the other 2 are Al but this one is copper.
The other point is that when I previously did the shorting test I had on the other core (because it's 2 full MOT cores as in Thane and Luc's first MOT core video) the other MOT HCC, where in this test I had 11 turns of that 2mm wire (the same length of wire that I did the lest earlier with) on the other core, but I didn't get to shorting it since the 'control' (really a control of a control) caused acceleration.
The possibilities are almost endless, it could be that I never tested deceleration with the new (cast iron pulley) rotor, it could be that the rotor has become aetherized, or charged with orgone to such a point that HCC's work (but if so why the positively crappy results from my new coil?) or that the gap and speed are just such that vastly different coils are now working.
One thing is for sure, and I know Thane, Larry, Ron and Vince will all agree, sometimes you just don't get the same results twice!
Addition:
I think I'm going to go back to my new mot core since that one showed deceleration most recently, i am not sure if I will be happier with or without deceleration from it, if there is acceleration from HC shorting then at least that would prove that the rotor has become charged and it now giving consistently different results (similar to Thane's 'gotta flux the shaft' comment) .
However if it shows deceleration then I should be able to redo my test.
Addition2:
One other notable is that the gap in the previous tests were as tiny as I could get them, but this test had a far larger gap. And yes still 1x6 rotor, so low RPM, bigish gap, single shorted copper MOT HCC causing acceleration when before under similar circumstances it has shown marked deceleration. Very freaking odd.
Before I pulled the stator out I tested it more and found the MOT HCC causes deceleration below 700rpm, but acceleration above 700rpm.
And the 11 turn coil caused deceleration at lower speeds and caused no observable change at higher rpm's. (1.5A current)
For now that's it but it is kinda nice to know I can still get deceleration because this all becomes harder if i always get acceleration and the only measure of success is 'how much'.
Oh, and one other thought came to me, the 2mm HCC on the end of the monster coil's core only caused acceleration after I hooked it up to my multimeter to measure the current, the multimeter is of course thin multistrand wire. (if that counts I have no idea, but obviously it doesn't compare to the 630 strand stuff, oh, i feel another test coming on...)
QuoteOne thing is for sure, and I know Thane, Larry, Ron and Vince will all agree, sometimes you just don't get the same results twice!
NO KIDDING IN MY LAST 2 VIDEOS - COIL # 1 GAVE ACCELERATION FROM DAY 1 - COIL # 2 TOOK 2 WEEKS OF NOT WORKING WHICH KILLED ME BECAUSE I WOUND IT THE SAME DAY WITH SAME WIRE ETC. THEN I GOT SO PISSED I RAN IT 1T 3500 RPM FOR A LONG TIME AND NOW IT WORKS AS WELL OR BETTER THAN COIL # 1 ???
AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO COIL #2 WORKS WELL STARTING AT 500 RPM - WHEN FIRST WOUND IT WOULD GIVE MODERATE ACCELERATION BUT ONLY NEAR FULL RPM. NOW COIL #1 AND #2 GIVE VERY BRISK AND CONSISTENT ACCELERATION - SO MUCH SO I USED THEM IN MY INVESTOR DEMO THIS PAST MONDAY.
TODAY I RAN COIL #2 WITH THE 150 LB STRENGTH MAGNETS AND GOT SO MUCH ACCELERATION SO QUICKLY THAT IT SCARED THE SH_T OUT OF ME.
CURRENTLY - COIL # 3, 4 AND 5 ALL HV COILS DON'T WORK AT ALL BUT MAKE WONDERFUL BRAKES!
I NOTICED THIS VERY EARLY ON IN MY BASEMENT SOME - OFTEN NEW COILS WOULD NOT WORK FOR A BRIEF PERIOD AND THEN WORK VERY WELL AFTER SOME TIME - WHEREAS OTHERS WOULD WORK RIGHT AWAY.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 11, 2008, 10:12:20 PM
NO KIDDING IN MY LAST 2 VIDEOS - COIL # 1 GAVE ACCELERATION FROM DAY 1 - COIL # 2 TOOK 2 WEEKS OF NOT WORKING WHICH KILLED ME BECAUSE I WOUND IT THE SAME DAY WITH SAME WIRE ETC. THEN I GOT SO PISSED I RAN IT 1T 3500 RPM FOR A LONG TIME AND NOW IT WORKS AS WELL OR BETTER THAN COIL # 1 ???
Thane, that is SO the aether, no kidding!
Utterly typical if annoying.
So yes, we should assume that coils, rotors, motors (some or all of the above) can be aetherically conditioned, no other conclusion seems sensible.
Quote
AS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO COIL #2 WORKS WELL STARTING AT 500 RPM - WHEN FIRST WOUND IT WOULD GIVE MODERATE ACCELERATION BUT ONLY NEAR FULL RPM. NOW COIL #1 AND #2 GIVE VERY BRISK AND CONSISTENT ACCELERATION - SO MUCH SO I USED THEM IN MY INVESTOR DEMO THIS PAST MONDAY.
TODAY I RAN COIL #2 WITH THE 150 LB STRENGTH MAGNETS AND GOT SO MUCH ACCELERATION SO QUICKLY THAT IT SCARED THE SH_T OUT OF ME.
CURRENTLY - COIL # 3, 4 AND 5 ALL HV COILS DON'T WORK AT ALL BUT MAKE WONDERFUL BRAKES!
I NOTICED THIS VERY EARLY ON IN MY BASEMENT SOME - OFTEN NEW COILS WOULD NOT WORK FOR A BRIEF PERIOD AND THEN WORK VERY WELL AFTER SOME TIME - WHEREAS OTHERS WOULD WORK RIGHT AWAY.
T
Ok, very clear that coils can be conditioned. (or is it moreso the cores?)
Glad this stuff is coming out, I knew the aether was without a doubt involved (it would have to be if there was anything real here) but except for the evidence that the extra torque originates at the motor there wasn't all that much evidence of it.
Now this gives me an idea I simply must try (have wanted to try from the start actually), and yet the aether is complex enough and fuzzy enough to deny me the effect if it isn't in the mood (getting the feeling the aether is about as incomprehensible as a woman?) and that is to wind a coils around the coil, obviously there must be a gap between the core and coil for this to work, hopefully by either shorting in series or by it's self I can get this coil to effect the coil it's wound around.
We can't be afraid of reporting the oddities!
Yeah, you guessed it, I can't do my experiment with my new split mot coils because.....
I can't get any acceleration from them.
I might if I put them a bit closer (previously I only got acceleration when they were a bit too close I think) but i am growing wary that too close might cause saturation (not that I am really clear of how that would cause apparent acceleration).
So I get decent acceleration from a MOT HC coil (on a twin full MOT core) and no acceleration from a HV coil on a split core.
Oh, and if I short the individual points yes there is deceleration, and if I short the whole thing I get no change.
I don't believe that this effect is necessarily tied to HV coils anymore, sure they may be more likely to work maybe sometimes but I can get fine acceleration that has the same characteristics as Thanes effect with HCC's (could be but do not seem to be the conventional artifact effects).
The fact that there are 'conventional artifacts' that could be screwing these results up is really annoying, sure they seem unlikely and can be ruled out in same cases but how do you know for sure? I guess one way to know it's the real thing is if it 'appears' suddenly.
Naturally as I type this I am trying to condition my new coil as Thane said he did.
Oh, btw did I mention that mat's/carpet helps clamps not rattle loose?
I am going to look at effects that can't be explained by artifacts, that 90 degree coils over the coil thing and drive motor pulley isolation.
Still I remain upbeat, I knew generators like this could generate an aether current and it is clear that this thing is doing so, sooner or later a real breakthrough will come, and maybe the multistrand wire really is a valid discovery.
@All testers,
Received the Ebay variac today, little bit of a problem. Little old, but very sturdily built, the problem was the 10Amp bakelite fuse box was badly broken. Opened it up, rewired an inline fuse and it correctly varied the voltage across the 0-140 range. Great! I'll be adding heavy strapping to the split plastic housing end of my motor and run some test to compare the variac controller to the variable fan triac controller.
Larry
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 10:49:26 PM
We can't be afraid of reporting the oddities!
Hey, I tried, but Thane said it was crazy talk! Now he's talking crazy.
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 11:40:39 PM
Yeah, you guessed it, I can't do my experiment with my new split mot coils because.....I can't get any acceleration from them.
I might if I put them a bit closer (previously I only got acceleration when they were a bit too close I think) but i am growing wary that too close might cause saturation (not that I am really clear of how that would cause apparent acceleration).
Saturation has no bearing on the effect. In the low impedance coils on solenoid (hollow) cores that I used, the total core metal of all eight cores amounts to only a tiny fraction of the metal in just one core that Thane has been demonstrating.
Individually and together, each and all core/s would have been fully saturated, but, each alone, showed no capability of generating the acceleration effect.
When connected together in series however, the total coil/core inductance (and hence inductive reactance) demonstrated the effect, albeit at reasonably high rpm (frequency).
Quote from: aether22
I don't believe that this effect is necessarily tied to HV coils anymore, .........
Some things seem to take a while, better late than never. ::) Frequency/Impedance .... mundanity
From the Toad who Hops, "Master of the obvious and the mundane !"
Cheers
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 11:40:39 PM
I guess one way to know it's the real thing is if it 'appears' suddenly.
??? Like Casper the friendly ghost perhaps ???
Quote from: aether22
.... maybe the multistrand wire really is a valid discovery.
Hmmmm, it could be !? ... KneeDeep
Well I went out and got a few things I need including some switches so I can do my multitap coil test, even though I can barely get any coil on that core to give acceleration at least I have the difference between deceleration .vs no change. If I can get no change by shorting every tap point that could be interesting. (still it could possibly be explained by my 'shorting creates less lenz effect than a load' argument)
I am more than a little concerned that except for the most crappy acceleration with the split core (when put all too close to the Neo's) I have not had acceleration with a quality core. (meaning a laminated closed magnetic circuit, anything else has losses that WILL be reduced by shorting which may reduce the total loading)
The first MOT only worked once I added steel pole pieces to it so it would intrude further into the rotor Thane sent, and those solid steel pieces have remained since in all their lossy brilliance.
And unlike Thane (who no longer believes in isolation) I have not been able to create isolation as a way to 'bust' core loss possibilities. (though I have nothing stopping me from trying isolation, but it seems like a poor choice when I don't have any effect I feel confident isn't just conventional)
After running a few more tests on the origonal MOT stator I might knock the steel pieces off to see how much that was effecting the results, I can't help but wonder if Thane's 'back iron' was really a way to add some low quality steel that would be susceptible to eddy currents and hysteresis. (at the same time I would not rule out the possibility that the aether is enhanced by these losses)
So while the results (not mine but overall) prove that there IS far more to all of this than just the reduction of losses from hysteresis and eddy currents and unbalanced magnetic forces etc... the results also indicate that at least sometimes they may be the culprit in part or entirely (or I would need to assume such a possibility currently since I have HV and HC coils working on solid cores and no coils working on the only high quality closed circuit core), either that or HCC's from microwaves are just fine for generation of the effect? (at least they cause just fine acceleration on my setup now even if that wasn't previously the case)
BTW I tried the multistrand over the new MOT and on shorting it I got 7.5A and deceleration, maybe that is an indication the wire idea is not compatible with this effect, but then again neither is the microwave HV coil or my multi-tap so all in all I don't think I can make any judgment on it based off these results.
I do have experiments I want to try and I will likely do so, but I am also right back to possibly trying to get the effect to work for real, for sure.
One piece of good news is that I can now take photos of the device easily and short videos far more easily than would have been the case, only catch is that now there isn't much worth seeing seemingly, will have to work on that.
Damn, Thanes gonna double my bill for all this downer talk!
Thane, I would be interested in replicating the split phase tests you did, they are totally bulletproof but currently all I have on the tests is the table with the results, I do not even know what 'split phase' means.
Quote from: hoptoad on June 12, 2008, 12:29:36 AM
When connected together in series however, the total coil/core inductance (and hence inductive reactance) demonstrated the effect, albeit at reasonably high rpm (frequency).
What kind of RPM are you talking about?
QuoteHey, I tried, but Thane said it was crazy talk! Now he's talking crazy.
WELL WHEN COILS SEEM TO WORK BETTER AND BETTER "WITH AGE" THEN THAT IS JUST CRAZY - I THINK.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 06:11:12 AM
WELL WHEN COILS SEEM TO WORK BETTER AND BETTER "WITH AGE" THEN THAT IS JUST CRAZY - I THINK.
T
And yet you notice it happen, there really is no hope of any 'conventional' answer to such a result, but materials becoming patterned, conditioned, charged aetherically is well evidenced. but again can't be explained by conventional physics.
How far can this be explained by conventional physics?
Quote from: alan on June 12, 2008, 09:32:23 AM
How far can this be explained by conventional physics?
Welcome back PB
Interesting point here is I called "OUman", "OUmon"... in one post, well when pb and ouman where
banned by Harti, 'they' are back as oumon ... and alan???
At least the same line of questioning, even quoting each other, really fooled a lot of people, right?
Alan my apologies if you are real but the evidence certainly shows that you are only a junior member,
yet you have 74 posts already? You came on this list with sixty something and on your second or
third post here you are at 74? How many groups are you infecting?
Please send us some pictures of your build, and your findings of how it is working.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 12, 2008, 10:39:07 AM
... and alan???
At least the same line of questioning, even quoting each other, really fooled a lot of people, right?
Alan my apologies if you are real ...
Ron
Alan isn't me. Just because he ventures to wonder how conventional physics may explain this phenomenon, you think it's the same guy?
I just ignore the clone comment.
I just wanted to know till what point conventional physics may explain the effects and from where it becomes exotic, and ultimately co-explaining it using math, which, imho should also be a goal. I think OUman thinks the same.
There is nothing wrong with known physics, it's just incomplete.
What is your definiton of infecting the forum? I'm not behaving skeptic or flaming in the tech forums, just thinking along, critically.
Oh, and where are the schematics and drawings, maybe i will build it, though I lack the experience.
@aether22
QuoteAnd yet you notice it happen, there really is no hope of any 'conventional' answer to such a result, but materials becoming patterned, conditioned, charged aetherically is well evidenced. but again can't be explained by conventional physics.
I think this will be explained by "conventional" physics it just depends on who you are talking to and what you consider "conventional". Let's say you saw a ufo and it sped off into space at a fantastic rate of acceleration--- you would say this is unconventional and quite impossible. But I am quite sure the person driving this machine would think differently, he, she or it would find it quite conventional and obvious. So the only thing seperating you from the ufo pilot is understanding and perspective, personally I have seen too many things everyone around me finds impossible. My favorite is the transmission of power through one wire(there is no ground point) --- enough to light 10 or more LED's over 20 feet away. Intelligent, educated people I know just stand there and stare and they cannot wrap there mind around how one would do such a thing---it is "unconventional" if not impossible for them, I however have no problem with this it is quite conventional and its operation obvious. In time I am sure you will see your device in this same light, when you see past material and consider the fields generated and the properties of these fields this device of yours will be easy to understand -- for you anyways.
Best of luck
Quote from: i_ron on June 12, 2008, 10:39:07 AM
Welcome back PB
Interesting point here is I called "OUman", "OUmon"... in one post, well when pb and ouman where
banned by Harti, 'they' are back as oumon ... and alan???
At least the same line of questioning, even quoting each other, really fooled a lot of people, right?
Alan my apologies if you are real but the evidence certainly shows that you are only a junior member,
yet you have 74 posts already? You came on this list with sixty something and on your second or
third post here you are at 74? How many groups are you infecting?
Please send us some pictures of your build, and your findings of how it is working.
Ron
I_Rx
"PB" IS NOT A PERSON - "PB" IS A MENTAL CONDITION...
LIKE:
SKEPTIC
OUMANIA,
PHSYCO-
PBATHIC
OUMELONOBIA,
FRONTAL-LA
PBOT
OUME,
SOSI
OUPBATHIC CLEPT
OUMANIAC,
ARSEH
OULESK
OUPBIC-SHITS
OUFRENIA,
PBROBLEMATIC HEM
OURAGIC B
OUIL TYPE CYST.
AND THE INFECTION CAN BE CURED WITH THE CORRECT
BULLET ,
AXE,
DULL CHAINSAW,
GREAT WHITE SHARK, MEDICATION.
BTW - YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION...
IS YOUR CORE DRAG (WATTS) GREATER THAN YOUR ACCELERATION GAIN (WATTS)
T
You are right, it doesn't make sense in my eyes that this is obvious for the experimenter.
If it is really is obvious then he should be able to give a good explanation, the inspiration and insights for these devices do come from somewhere, they aren't build accidentily.
Now I asked for an explanation with reference to the known physics, maybe it DOES fit the picture an we are just fooling ourselves ;) . Where it does not fit the picture, new theories can be made and linked to known alternative theories (for instance bearden's and the references he uses) and these theories can be proven, and replicated.
For instace, have you ruled out that the wireless led's are not fed with regular EM wave energy @ resonance and that it really is something else, like scalar waves? For you no proof is needed, because you believe it is so, or am I wrong here?
The chinese proverb is still valid. Don't harras the one trying to accomplish the impossible. 8) Even (only?) if his life is at risk :P
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 01:21:14 PM
I_Rx
AND THE INFECTION CAN BE CURED WITH THE CORRECT BULLET , AXE, DULL CHAINSAW, GREAT WHITE SHARK, MEDICATION.
Or a ban, which I won't get :P
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 01:21:14 PM
I_Rx
"PB" IS NOT A PERSON - "PB" IS A MENTAL CONDITION...
snip
LOL
BTW - YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION...
IS YOUR CORE DRAG (WATTS) GREATER THAN YOUR ACCELERATION GAIN (WATTS)
T
Dr T,
In a word... yes.
I didn't answer 'cause it is taking so long for ou.com to load!!!
Good one? no?... OK, so I forgot, but my system is not refined to any degree so don't feel badly.
Ron,
support our troops! ...they don't have a leg to stand on in this illegal war
Quote from: aether22 on June 11, 2008, 08:40:01 PM
...
And I setup my MOT core, the original one with which I first got acceleration, and I did a test I had done before, I shorted out a HC coil. Guess what.
Acceleration!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not happy, rather pissed of at the utter inconsistency, I had shorted them before and like Thane in the video got deceleration, but not now, now I get acceleration.
I think it's because the acceleration/deceleration exploits the instability that was referred to earlier. Here's a thought experiment:
Place a rollercoaster car at the very peak of its track and position it carefully so that it sits there motionless. Shake the track enough to get it to start rolling. Which slope will it roll down?
Quote from: allcanadian on June 12, 2008, 12:41:46 PM
...My favorite is the transmission of power through one wire (there is no ground point) --- enough to light 10 or more LED's over 20 feet away. Intelligent, educated people I know just stand there and stare and they cannot wrap there mind around how one would do such a thing---it is "unconventional" if not impossible for them, I however have no problem with this it is quite conventional and its operation obvious...
That's a good analogy. So would you care to share with us the explanation for the LED observation?
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 06:10:28 AM
What kind of RPM are you talking about?
Approximately 6,000 RPM (High speed DC motor driver)
Cheers
@All testers,
I found some interesting differences between the triac and the variac controllers:
1. The acceleration had similar rpm increase (50 - 100), but 3 times as fast with the variac, not brutal, but closer to Thane's original demos.
2. With the triac there was very little deceleration or none at all after un-shorting. The variac decelerates to the original speed after shorting.
3. The motor rpm's are easier to stabilize for testing.
These test were done with the 1/8 neo cupped. I'll try adding the 1/4 neos for my next testing.
Regards, Larry
I think I ramble a bit more more than usual in this post, but here goes...
After spending a night of relative depression (well directionless and confused might be a better closer) I thought...
I can discount (without knowing the details, the details could trash my theory) Thanes observed need for HV coils, I can argue that if you have enough wire you get a low current density/low resistance path and that is required to get the phase angle near to the low lenz 180 phase, so maybe my results of yesterday trash most/all of Thanes solid steel core results.
But wait wait wait wait, I thought, this doesn't make ANY sense, something's fishy.
Thane has experimented the hell outta this shit (excuse my french) and he never got acceleration with a single solid core coil in isolation.
If all of this is a straight forward effect of reducing core losses then WHY was Thane UNABLE to get acceleration with the generator isolated? (with a single core)
That makes no sense!
So I have an alternate theory, and that is that my results yesterday with the 2mm wire, and multistrand, and shorted HCC that they are all in fact Thanes effect, and so may Steve's generator he made based off that patent.
Because for all we know shorting causing a net reduction of losses may in fact be a total fiction and almost every occurrence including Steve's motor might be using Thanes effect in reality.
And the difference as to why Thane needs many turns and Steve and I can get away with few?
Different rotors, my theory is that Thanes rotor is actually very poor at getting aether into the motor, it is a far from optimal design, I can tell that from the one I have.
My rotor has a brush that squeezes to the shaft, I think my rotor is an aetheric super highway and Thanes is a little narrow alley, he needs more turns to push through.
The other possible reason is that to an extent acceleration may require reduction of Lenz force to be noticeable and reduction of Lenz force for a shorted coil would be possible based on my figuring if a very very low resistance path was offered and low resistance means not actually fewer turns but lower current density which is achieved by increasing the number of turns or the gauge of the wire. This theory basically assumes Thane never used thick enough wire in his lower turn coils, in other words he needed more copper and he only looked at supplying that by increasing the number of turns. (The MOT operation in Thanes vid can be explained by enough flux leaving the core before the HV coil gets to it, more flux requires more copper. The HV and HC coils worked the way they did due to their position. This theory can't exolain Rons results though)
Sorry you guys know I have a tendency to run long.
So the point is that if Thane didn't get acceleration when he used isolation (my acceleration with isolation can be explained as all my tests fell far outside of Thanes conditions) even if Thane is doubtful of the results now it really does not seem that he nor anyone can explain why at any speed he could only get the acceleration with a single coil with a full steel shaft so my results MUST be real!
My results must be real because if they aren't real then Thane's solid core results can't be real (too similar for Thane not to be getting the same artifact), If they were not real then how the HELL could Thane have not noticed acceleration when he shorted a solid steel rod with his rotor in isolation? And that would also mean that all early results are bunk and Thane later tripped over a real effect that resembled the 'fake' one with the solid cores.
So really there are only 2 possibilities from here.
Either ALL of Thanes results with solid steel cores were in fact a MUNDANE artifact brake effect (causing cheering from the OU/PB spook) and he just tripped over a real effect later or pretty much ALL of the acceleration from shorting coils on solid steel are valid, and if they are then we can do away with any idea that many turn turns are always required.
Since Thane and others have gone on since those experiments to demo things far beyond any possibility of a conventional explanation I say it makes FAR more sense to assume that all the acceleration is really Thanes effect and that that the belief that shorting coils can cause acceleration due to a net reduction of losses is in almost every case busted. (admittedly at this point only busted by assuming Thane's solid core results are real, if the artifact were real that experiment would be a breeding ground for it)
This now makes doing the pulley experiment high on my list of things to do.
The only problem is that in Thanes view the acceleration should occur with Pulley isolation as he no longer believes in his own results, and from my new perspective if I get the effect with pulley isolation I will have busted many of Thanes results which is not what I am going for. (of course Thanes opinion would be unchanged)
If I do end up busting most of Thanes solid core results then I will have to change tac and try and replicate the totally unassailible 'faster rpm with coils present and shorted than absent' since there is no way that can be discounted (whatever core types were used) besides assuming poor work from Thane which The PB's of this world will automatically assume but I won't ever. (not that PB acts anything like a real person with a single view, in fact it might not be a single person)
So I am now much happier but with a real feeling of caution, because if the pulley test gives acceleration I am going to have generated evidence against the effect not for it, and I would have to accept that acceleration with shorting can be an artifact than can explain many of the less bulletproof experiments and that yet in the whole mess there is still a real effect waiting to be separated from the confusion.
Quote from: LarryC on June 12, 2008, 05:50:27 PM
@All testers,
I found some interesting differences between the triac and the variac controllers:
1. The acceleration had similar rpm increase (50 - 100), but 3 times as fast with the variac, not brutal, but closer to Thane's original demos.
2. With the triac there was very little deceleration or none at all after un-shorting. The variac decelerates to the original speed after shorting.
3. The motor rpm's are easier to stabilize for testing.
These test were done with the 1/8 neo cupped. I'll try adding the 1/4 neos for my next testing.
Regards, Larry
All good Larry but while I don't have the comparison so much of that might be true there are differences between your TRIAC and mine, when I open the circuit I get deceleration. Maybe your triac has poor snubber action.
Maybe I do need to look at a decent variac.
Quote from: OUmon on June 12, 2008, 04:08:05 PM
I think it's because the acceleration/deceleration exploits the instability that was referred to earlier. Here's a thought experiment:
Place a rollercoaster car at the very peak of its track and position it carefully so that it sits there motionless. Shake the track enough to get it to start rolling. Which slope will it roll down?
Oh boy, you are such a lying untruthful scumbag, your word is worthless.
And here too you are stupid, if I open the coil again it decelerates (I stop shaking does the rollercoaster climb back up the track?), and you knew that busts your argument but you still said it, you said you would leave but your word is worthless, the official banning of your IP just makes you use a proxy. No, instead what I'll do is I will reply once per page to your sorry ass with a quick paragraph so no one can read much of this and fail to recognize you and your arguments for what it is. One sip of koolaid per page.
Quote from: alan on June 12, 2008, 09:32:23 AM
How far can this be explained by conventional physics?
When I first said you were a spook everyone seemed a little skeptical, now I think everyone fully agrees, of course having Stefan verify that your PB and OUwoman personalities were one in the same helped, but hardly a surprise.
Yeah, I said one post per page but I meant one reply, it didn't include gloating, pointing and laughing at just how transparent your efforts are.
Seriously, don't read this, I'm making too many posts, but never the less if I'm gonna make a list of experiments I plan to do I might as well type them on here.
Do test to try and get initial deceleration results with the Old MOT stator, try and see what changes to make deceleration into acceleration assuming I can actually get deceleration with the HC coils on it again.
Replicate the test where I reported very underwhelming results with a 3x6 stack rotor, if the effect is conventional why would that have hurt it? (unless maybe rotor based losses are being effected, but nah)
Diode test; Just curious and it's so simple, why have I not grabbed a diode out of curiosity in all this time?
I'd note that thanes LED's don't count a they were bi directional and so never stopped half the coils action.
90 degree test: If this test works it would be very cool since no conventional explanation could possibly be given.
Pulley Test, as I said it has increased importance but I am a bit chicken and scared of acceleration turning up so I may do other tests first but I'll do it before Monday
Multitap test, shoting all tap points. (also do rotor/stator phase analysis to see if when a single tap point is causing deceleration if the phase is further from 180 than when no deceleration or acceleration is noted)
Torque sensor, or measuring reaction torque on motor housing. (to verify Vince's results)
The rest of these I have all already posted, but what they hey...
Battery shorting. Use a full wave bridge rectifier and then connect a battery as if the generator were charging it, only the battery should already be charged, the aim is to have the battery voltage and the generator voltage equal so no current flows but hopefully the aether still does and creates acceleration with almost no current. (get current as low as possible and measure and compare with current when directly shorted)
Removable coil. A HV coil on an open core that can be removed as the generator is running, the aim is to see if an open circuit coil helps in the least, admittedly doubtful but possibler, it is worth noting that acceleration has been noted without shorting although if the coil ever played a part is not known.
Make coils that have too few turns (er, too little mass???) at the given speed to get the effect (push through to the motor) but do aetheric things to enhance them.
I would also note that a core made of many more fine steel wires would with fewer turns likely create a swifter aether flow, just as the laminated cores need fewer turns than solid ones. Is it possible that a fine enough laminate/wire core would need no coil? (as someone indeed found! though I don't recall who)
Pulley isolation of drive motor, then move into redirecting into surrogate devices:
Step 1: Isolate effect from prime mover.
Step 2: Direct effect into second motor (slowed down possibly by a rotor experiencing Lenz drag from HC coils)
Step 3: Direct effect into second motor from external coils. (coil surrogate)
Step 4: Same but with external coil/s mounted around second motors rotor. (full surrogate, acceleration from shorting second motors stator coil alone must be either non existent or light so an improvement if present is apparent, putting coils in series has been shown to apparently increase the effect, this will tell us if the relative phase of the rotor and main stator component is important)
Step 5: Direct effect into stalled motor and various other tests.
HC coil induction increase. (on shorting HV coils, see if it works when they are on opposite sides of the shaft, if so that give another promising line of experiments)
Closed loop attempt:
Reduce air drag, then measure minimum energy to keep it spinning at high speed without stator present, then try to add stators and have it take less energy with it shorted (as Thane has done), See how many balanced or accelerated watts you can generate, then try and add another identical no net load watt generating rotor stator set. Try to keep the energy input if possible the same as it is with out any rotor at all. (although a vacuum can remove this loss)
Testing alternate motor types to drive the generator.
Rewind a conventional mot/gen to create acceleration on shorting.
Copy Thane, Make a prony brake.
That's a lot of tests!
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 06:47:48 PM
When I first said you were a spook everyone seemed a little skeptical, now I think everyone fully agrees, of course having Stefan verify that your PB and OUwoman personalities were one in the same helped, but hardly a surprise.
Yeah, I said one post per page but I meant one reply, it didn't include gloating, pointing and laughing at just how transparent your efforts are.
The one I like is:
Oh, and where are the schematics and drawings, maybe i will build it, though I lack the experience.There are two wires coming out of the coil and a switch or jumper across these two... and this person who asks for the p/in and p/out and is so technically superior, asks for a schematic.....?
A22, I liked your phase gif in post 2665, good one, makes one think
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 12, 2008, 07:42:21 PM
A22, I liked your phase gif in post 2665, good one, makes one think
Ron
Yes, I found I pretty much needed to make a diagram to keep it straight in my head.
It really should be used as a learning aid to understanding these types of generators.
One note though and that is with the lenz force, and the attraction/repulsion that the further away you get from the center of the effect the weaker it becomes, it's obvious if you understand the diagram but not sure I made that clear. At 179 degrees Lenz law is almost gone, but so is almost all induced voltage (it's barely helping the current) so to get there you need low losses witch means low current density which means lots of copper.
And that is part of why Thanes device works, the Lenz law effect (along with the energy) is almost abolished which makes any beneficial effect appear as acceleration, clearly part of the beneficial effect is aetheric and OU and hopefully not much else.
QuoteThis now makes doing the pulley experiment high on my list of things to do.
The only problem is that in Thanes view the acceleration should occur with Pulley isolation as he no longer believes in his own results, and from my new perspective if I get the effect with pulley isolation I will have busted many of Thanes results which is not what I am going for. (of course Thanes opinion would be unchanged)
If I do end up busting most of Thanes solid core results then I will have to change tac and try and replicate the totally unassailible 'faster rpm with coils present and shorted than absent' since there is no way that can be discounted (whatever core types were used) besides assuming poor work from Thane which The PB's of this world will automatically assume but I won't ever. (not that PB acts anything like a real person with a single view, in fact it might not be a single person)
DEAR A(484/22),
MY VERY FIRST PROTOYPE EMPLOYED A PULLEY BUT IT WASTED TOO MUCH ENERGY.
THAT IS WHY I WENT TO THE PVC PIPE.
ALSO I GOT ACCELERATION FROM SOLID STEEL CORES.
T
Again, don't read this, I've said it all before and I am just trying to come to terms with the results of the past 2 days, I'm thinking aloud at least as much as you can with a keyboard. it's therapy!
I got acceleration with a 1 inch steel core and a coil that though overdone is in line with Thanes HV coil, the magnets are the same as Thane uses.
I then used coils on the same core FAR FAR different to what Thane uses, and still got acceleration.
There are therefore a few possible conclusions.
One would be that my tests are both likely showing acceleration for the same reason. (sure, could be different reasons but the odds seem to be in favor of the same reason)
Another would be that since there are so many similarities between my test and Thanes that both of our tests work for the same reasons.
Another conclusion would be that if acceleration in either of my tests (HV or HC) is due to apparently conventional reduction of core loss braking effect then likely all experiments with those cores and magnets would also show the same effect. (seems the setups are too similar not to)
But if the latter is the case then there is no way in hell (excuse the french again) Thane should have missed such an effect, although I have no real idea as to what Thanes theory is as to why his brass coupler (and previous PVC coupler) experiments failed since he no longer believes those results are valid (and he ruled out rpm) but for the moment I'm going to put it down not due to him realizing he did some really crappy experiments as much as an act to rationalize what was happening without evoking the aether.
Also if those early solid core experiments show acceleration due to a conventional effect then again how come his effect is so obviously real in other experiments? Could he really have started out with an artifact and worked his way into a similar real effect? Stranger things have happened but that sounds unlikely.
Ok, Vince, I said no one read this but if you do notice you name can you lay a few details on me.
What kind of cores did you use for your stators?
And can you draw a quick diagram or explain how you did those torque measurements?
Pressing post is part of the therapy ;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 08:47:53 PM
DEAR A(484/22),
MY VERY FIRST PROTOYPE EMPLOYED A PULLEY BUT IT WASTED TOO MUCH ENERGY.
THAT IS WHY I WENT TO THE PVC PIPE.
ALSO I GOT ACCELERATION FROM SOLID STEEL CORES.
T
Yes, but you did but you DID NOT get acceleration from solid steel cores without a solid steel shaft until you added umpteen stator coils.
And the 'conventional' acceleration effect if it really exists and applies under the conditions in our experiments should not go away just because you don't have an all steel shaft, then again neither should it with your generator sourced theory.
What my experiments yesterday showed was that acceleration can be achieved with a low number of turns which has the same quality as your effect, we have from that 1 of 2 likely conclusions:
Your effect with steel cores is real and can be achieved with coils of just a few turns, or
Your effect with steel cores is an artifact (or has a sizable artifact component that can cause false positives).
One piece of evidence that the latter is not the case you no longer accept (isolation)
Another piece of evidence you also no longer accept (Vince's torque).
Leaving by my count only the HV/HC thing which this experiment has pretty much busted and....
Your 'split phase' result of a higher rpm and lower current pull with stators present and shorted than not present.
There may be other pieces of evidence I am not aware of or not thinking of right now.
Oh, coil crazyness counts although it's not the most shiny piece of evidence and you couldn't use it to back up your theory of operation with anyone who isn't an aether head.
One thing is if I were you I'd seriously look at either dropping the claim that the acceleration force is applied from the generator (break the brass coupler out of the museum), or do another test with stators present and shorted or moved away to demo a net gain from the magnetic interaction as the previous test though bulletproof wasn't as impressive as it should be for pretty much the sole uncontested piece of evidence.
Your warning against the pulley is a bit of a drag (pun not intended), because thus far isolation has not worked for me with an inline coupler.(who knows, maybe your brass coupler was actively blocking the aether? and maybe your PVC experiments weren't as polished, pun subconsciously intended I'm sure)
Oh, BTW in the back of my mind is that for all you know I'm just another PB like spook who pretends to be for it then slowly smashes it, well if there is any doubt you can find my long history in the alt sci field, Keelynet and Beaty's vortex list (from like '97 or '98)and other lists, oh and more recently Joe Cell and so on, also while otherwise they hardly seem worth showing I can now easily enough (I hope) make a video of the HCC accelerations I was getting if you want 'proof' of them.
QuoteYour warning against the pulley is a bit of a drag (pun not intended), because thus far isolation has not worked for me with an inline coupler.(who knows, maybe your brass coupler was actively blocking the aether? and maybe your PVC experiments weren't as polished, pun subconsciously intended I'm sure)
WE WONDERED IF IN THE 2 FT PIPE EXPERIMENT IF PERHAPS THE MOTOR DIDN'T REQUIRE POWER TO CREATE ACCELERATION BUT JUST ROTATION ???
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 09:52:38 PM
WE WONDERED IF IN THE 2 FT PIPE EXPERIMENT IF PERHAPS THE MOTOR DIDN'T REQUIRE POWER TO CREATE ACCELERATION BUT JUST ROTATION ???
T
Not sure I get what you mean.
But to clarify, in the experiments where you got acceleration with a plastic rotor or shaft you always had to be using 6 or so coils right? 1 or 2 would not do? (sheesh, now I'm rhyming)
And you still can't explain that?
Quote from: alan on June 12, 2008, 09:32:23 AM
How far can this be explained by conventional physics?
Well, Alan, the acceleration effect alone has a pretty simple explanation, which I gave an approximation to in post 1541 in this thread. Since then I've thought about it some more, and come to the definite conclusion that there is certainly an eddy current effect that can produce acceleration. It works like this:
- When a magnet passes by a core with no coil or an open coil, eddy currents are generated.
- The eddy currents counteract the changing magnetic field. The amount of current generated is exactly enough to reduce the changing field until it produces exactly enough voltage around the eddy current loop to produce the current according to Faraday's law.
- The energy lost in the eddy current depends on (among other things) the resistivity of the material. This is NOT a linear relationship. If the core is superconducting, then the current produced is enough to entirely cancel the magnetic field, but the resistance to that current is zero, so (by P=IR), no energy is lost. On the other hand, if the core is non-conducting, then no current is produced, and again no energy is lost. For every resistance value in between, there will be some loss, and there will be an R value where the energy loss is maximal.
- Now, when you put a big wad of copper around the core, and allow it to carry an eddy current (by shorting it, if it's a coil), you provide a low resistance path for a current that can counteract the magnetic field in the core. Copper is a very good conductor -- a lot closer to superconducting than ferromagnetic materials, so (by Faraday's + Ohm's laws) most of the eddy current will be generated in the copper. There will be more of it, but certainly no more than is required to cancel the magnetic field in the core, and that is limited, and since copper is a good conductor, the P=IR losses will be relatively low. There are bound to be many configurations in which shorting the coil will reduce the load on the motor.
--
NOW... before any of you spew, I will mention that there are
other effects that have been reported in this thread that I can't explain, including:
- putting some iron in the shaft that connects the motor to the rotor increases acceleration;
- acceleration to speeds
greater than those achieved when the coils+cores are removed entirely; and
- performance of certain coils changing over time for no good reason.
However, nobody is really concentrating on these effects, so they have not been reproduced consistenly and robustly. If I start seeing more documentation on these things reproduced against careful controls, I will be impressed. Aether22 seems to be more disciplined in his experimentation, so now that he's producing results, maybe we'll get it.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Quote- acceleration to speeds greater than those achieved when the rotor is removed entirely; and
I THINK THIS SHOULD SAY
COIL(S) - AT LEAST IN MY CASE IT WOULD APPLY
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 12, 2008, 10:09:40 PM
I THINK THIS SHOULD SAY COIL(S) - AT LEAST IN MY CASE IT WOULD APPLY
Thane
Changed to coils+cores. thanks. You did remove the cores too, right?
He did
Also worth noting that when the torque on the motor casing was measured it was found to increase on shorting, still that is pretty much the totality of the evidence as I know it right now.
As for disciplined we'll see, I'm still sitting here typing with too many possibilities to test.
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 10:16:45 PM
Also worth noting that when the torque on the motor casing was measured it was found to increase on shorting, still that is pretty much the totality of the evidence as I know it right now.
If you can reproduce that, it's important to know whether the torque increase happens immediately, implying something freaky, or slowly as the RPM increases, which is expected of an induction motor.
AND A22 REMOVED PB/OUnoman BUT SADLY HE DID NOT FACTOR IN PB'S REMNANT FUX FACTOR - SO HE'S STILL WITH US.
T
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 12, 2008, 10:25:18 PM
If you can reproduce that, it's important to know whether the torque increase happens immediately, implying something freaky, or slowly as the RPM increases, which is expected of an induction motor.
Indeed!
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 06:47:48 PM
When I first said you were a spook everyone seemed a little skeptical, now I think everyone fully agrees,
Keep your hair on, A22. As I said, I'm not alan, and alan isn't me.
OUmon.
Quote from: OUmon on June 12, 2008, 11:14:10 PM
Keep your hair on, A22. As I said, I'm not alan, and alan isn't me.
OUmon.
You'd have said you weren't PB either.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 12, 2008, 09:59:54 PM
Aether22 seems to be more disciplined in his experimentation, so now that he's producing results, maybe we'll get it.
Wow, now that's great praise for all of your disciplined accomplishments!
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 12, 2008, 09:59:54 PM
Now, when you put a big wad of copper around the core, and allow it to carry an eddy current (by shorting it, if it's a coil), you provide a low resistance path for a current that can counteract the magnetic field in the core. Copper is a very good conductor -- a lot closer to superconducting than ferromagnetic materials, so (by Faraday's + Ohm's laws) most of the eddy current will be generated in the copper. There will be more of it, but certainly no more than is required to cancel the magnetic field in the core, and that is limited, and since copper is a good conductor, the P=IR losses will be relatively low. There are bound to be many configurations in which shorting the coil will reduce the load on the motor.
MrE
...this may be relevant to your discussion above - Aspden quotes findings of anomalies in eddy-current losses discovered decades ago & apparently not followed-up by mainstream science - unsurprisingly, given the
intellectual inertia displayed by the attitude of 'the
OUmen' ...say, wasn't that a film about a very scary character? ;)
Aspden's paper on this subject can be found at: http://www.energyscience.org.uk/le/le18.htm
here's a little taster:
"I began my Ph.D. research on the eddy current anomaly at Cambridge in 1950 and spent three years on experiments probing all aspects of the problem that I could think of. Some of my tests revealed anomaly factors as high as 6 applicable during parts of the magnetization cycle. By this I mean that calculation of the instantaneous power dissipated as eddy current loss, as determined at different stages in the cycle of magnetization, was only one sixth of the corresponding measure of that form of power loss at that same instant.
Now I say here that I probed all aspects of the problem that I could think of at the time, but I confess, in retrospect, that there was one aspect that I should have thought of but didn't. It never occurred to me that the heat being generated as loss could regenerate itself as electricity in a way which augments the EMFs driving the eddy currents. Had I thought of that possibility, I would in all probability have dismissed it immediately from my mind, because it would have involved challenging the Second Law of Thermodynamics. However, I am, I believe, now a wiser being and I will here redeem myself by surveying the evidence which supports that contention." H Aspden, 1998
PS alan's visited my thread a few times and i believe he's consistently interested in finding & giving serious consideration to examples of OU phenomena - possible that he may be located in the Netherlands (just a guess on my part)
rock steady,
T'
eddysandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
@nul-points,
Thanks for your input. Not addressed to me, but yes, I have previously read the Aspden's papers. I do believe the Aspden effect does occur as I have again seen it earlier today with repeated motor testing. But, it is fleeting and hard to prove with all the variables that we are faced with. Besides, the spooks would jump all over it if we brought it up, since they are to chickenshit to do actual testing, they would have no ability to comprehend.
Regards, Larry
Larry, are you sure this is the same subject? I think the eddy current thing is not the same as the motor speed up issue but I could be mistaken. (still you read his papers, I have not)
Anyway I finally decided to 'man up' and just run an experiment, I figured I'd keep true to my list and preform the old mot deceleration experiment first, but the first problem is all of a sudden I can't get a fracking stable motor speed, and then since it's moving anyway it's hard to say but it seems to have little effect, not the acceleration I found yesterday I don't think.
I tried a medium large gap then a 'kinda small gap, I am going to probably create some tools for setting replicable gaps one of these days so i can give a pretty accurate mm reading.
One of the things with my 'larger coil mass reduces lenz law' logic is that the lower the current density the more likely you will get acceleration and therefore the smaller the change in flux over time the less current.
And yet that reasonably disagrees with the observation of the effect.
With the motor speed controller seemingly giving me issues and Larry's joy with the Variac I am seriously thinking of getting one. hmmm I see one on an nz based auction site, hope I can win it.
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 12, 2008, 09:59:54 PM
Aether22 seems to be more disciplined in his experimentation, so now that he's producing results, maybe we'll get it.
Sorry guys and gals, but from what I've seen here, none of you are all that disciplined! Please don't take this the wrong way, as I am keenly interested in what's going on here, but I feel the reason some of you are getting discouraged/depressed/frustrated is because you aren't methodical. When dealing with a complex, multi-variable system, rigorous scientific method REQUIRES that the experiments be designed and conducted in such a way that ONLY ONE THING AT A TIME IS CHANGING! I would guess that at least 5 to 10 variables are being changed between any two sets of experiments that you've done! No wonder you're feeling frustrated... there are many variables in this system, and the mutual interactions of some or all makes it even more complex; too complex for even the human mind to decipher those interactions. Thus, you're not able to formulate any definite, repeatable conclusions; "it just doesn't make sense!"
A disciplined, methodical scientific process applied to this phenomenon will be a long and laborious one, but if done right, it should accelerate the process of discovering just what variables are important, and thus how best to optimize for a given effect.
Just one simple example:
Hypothesis:
Does the size/length of the core material make a diff?
Procedure:
Do a series of experiments starting out with a 4-inch length core (of whatever material); run at least 4 or 5 reps of the exact same test (whatever that is) making good notes on all monitored variables (Pin, Pout, rpm, accel/decel, etc.) ; cut off 1/4 inch and redo the tests and data logging, doing your best to keep all other things in the system exactly the same, and your test procedure exactly the same, including being so anal as to keep the number of seconds between steps in the test procedure the same; repeat the shortening of core and retesting until you're down to the last .25" of core; do the test, log data, then remove the core completely and run the tests. Now plot your data... and really learn something.
Repeat this exact same experiment, but with a HC coil, a HV coil, a MOT coil... and there are a sh*tload of variations given that we're talking 20 or more variables in this system.
-Mark
Quote from: markzpeiverson on June 13, 2008, 03:23:16 AM
Sorry guys and gals, but from what I've seen here, none of you are all that disciplined! Please don't take this the wrong way, as I am keenly interested in what's going on here, but I feel the reason some of you are getting discouraged/depressed/frustrated is because you aren't methodical. When dealing with a complex, multi-variable system, rigorous scientific method REQUIRES that the experiments be designed and conducted in such a way that ONLY ONE THING AT A TIME IS CHANGING! I would guess that at least 5 to 10 variables are being changed between any two sets of experiments that you've done! No wonder you're feeling frustrated...
While I'm not disagreeing that I/we could/should be more disciplined (And I am working on it) I only change 1 or 2 variables deliberatly each time, the problem is some are fuzzy such as gap which is currently unmeasured, just eyeballed.
And motor power which currently consists of turning a potentiometer nob where the only indication of hitting the same value is hitting the same speed which is almost impossible.
Furthermore there are changes that happen from experiment to experiment, even when Thane handed his machine to some engineers they complained that there were variations they could not remove and some of this may be due to aetheric variations such as the 'Aspden effect'.
On a related issue I do intend on keeping better records of experiments than I have been.
Quote
there are many variables in this system, and the mutual interactions of some or all makes it even more complex; too complex for even the human mind to decipher those interactions. Thus, you're not able to formulate any definite, repeatable conclusions; "it just doesn't make sense!"
No, between getting deceleration with the 'old mot' and and acceleration yesterday I had changed only 3 variables (the triac setting variable is not very notable) the gap (not deliberately) and I had taken the other twin HC coil off and wound an 11 turn one on the other side (either way open circuit and hence likely inert) and I had flipped the copper HC coil over so the contacts were more accessible, I believe that's all.
But I have a hard time imagining that the absence of the other HC coil or the presence of the new one will make a bit deal.
Never the less you have encouraged me to keep a closer track of everything.
BTW the instability has continued, if I get a seeming stability I will short the coil and it will say rise, I will then disconnect but it will continue rising leaving me unsure if the rise was the result of the coil at all, and if so if the continued rise is possibly just the induction motor torque increase effect.
In fact it precisely describes the recent OUman theory and Thanes Ph.D's theory, only it WAS NOT how things were, before if I shorted I got acceleration/deceleration and on unshorting the speed would go back to what it was and very rarely would it keep accelerating/decelerating like it's doing now.
I'm thinking I need to take a 'mental health weekend' and not think about this too much, I have been meaning to go see indy since I got a ticket for my Bday.
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 11:37:32 PM
You\'d have said you weren\'t PB either.
I don\'t think I ever said that. In any case, if you don\'t believe me, just ask alan.
Quote from: aether22 on June 12, 2008, 06:33:58 PM
Oh boy, you are such a lying untruthful scumbag, your word is worthless.
And here too you are stupid, if I open the coil again it decelerates (I stop shaking does the rollercoaster climb back up the track?)...
If I read carefully between the lines I think I can discern that you\\\'re not completely in agreement with me. :)
You\'re taking the analogy the wrong way. What you\'re doing when you change the coil configurations is you\'re actually \"bending the rollercoaster track\" and putting its peaks and valleys in different places. This, of course, will cause the car to move around, and the direction it moves will depend on its position at the time you do the bending. I don\'t want to stretch the analogy too far though - the only way you can really understand it is to get into the math.
You seem convinced I\'m trying to sabotage you - believe me, I\'m not - I\'m just trying to share some insights into this phenomenon of instability because I\'m convinced that explains what\'s going on here. I think you at least need to figure out which part of it is due to instability in order to know which part remains that needs to be explained by aetheric principles or whatever. Like taking fingerprints of innocent bystanders in order to eliminate them as suspects.
--
Quote from: i_ron on June 12, 2008, 07:42:21 PM
The one I like is:
Oh, and where are the schematics and drawings, maybe i will build it, though I lack the experience.
There are two wires coming out of the coil and a switch or jumper across these two... and this person who asks for the p/in and p/out and is so technically superior, asks for a schematic.....?
A22, I liked your phase gif in post 2665, good one, makes one think
Ron
Good you like it.
where did _you_ start with his project... :-X you started building from the video's?
(seen the drawings in this forum, didn't need to ask it... but maybe someone could point me out without thinking to the right page out of 70)
Quote from: OUmon on June 13, 2008, 06:59:12 AM
I don\'t think I ever said that. In any case, if you don\'t believe me, just ask alan.
Who cares, he is the only one paranoid about it.
When I do come back on Monday (and this is not a good start to staying away) I will focus on experiments that are:
Impossible amplifier (something that increases the effect that has no conventional explanation)
Impossible reducer (something that decreases or eliminates but has no conventional explanation)
Measurement of effect at motor.
Delivery of effect into surrogate device. (another motor for instance)
I think my confusion was in part loosing sight of these goals.
Larry, aether22
...just to clarify about my reference above to Aspden...
i think Larry has seen the decreased-energy motor-restart anomaly called the 'Aspden effect' in his tests
the reference & link i've given above is actually something separate, as i believe a22 suspected, and is dealing with anomalous energy lumped under 'eddy losses' - the additional energy being of the order of 200% - 1000% above that predicted, depending largely on operating frequency (low 10s of Hz)
Aspden's take on the anomaly is that there is regenerative activity going on in the 'core between heat and electrical energies
i wondered if the presence & behaviour of this anomaly might support the suggestions Mr E was making above relating to eddy-loss
all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
Quote from: alan on June 13, 2008, 08:05:24 AM
Good you like it.
where did _you_ start with his project... :-X you started building from the video's?
(seen the drawings in this forum, didn't need to ask it... but maybe someone could point me out without thinking to the right page out of 70)
snip
The joke was only a joke if you are some sort of PB incarnation, the identification to PB was
because of the near identical questions, K?
I started with the Garry Stanley anti lenz coil way back when. I have since built many generators so
have a pretty good feel for what a generator does. Much of the Thane effect can be attributed to the
hysteresis brake effect but there are just enough anomalies to be of special interest, the old, "but
what if he is right" trip.
So to do the experiment we are not concerned with efficiencies. What is of interest is the behaviour
of the coil as built by Thane. You need some sort of induction motor, a rotor and magnets and a
coil.
The motor can be a small bench grinder, or any capacitor run induction motor, not necessarily a
separate centrifugal switch start motor but with the caveat that induction motors are inherently
unstable below the breakdown torque point which is around 70% of the rated RPM, see attached...
So a 1720 RPM motor would be quite suitable if your rotor is not of bullet proof construction.
The core can be just about anything, but what has been used extensively is the laminations from
old microwave ovens, even using the existing coil. However the core is a bit on the large size and
could be cut in half height wise. This means a rewind of the coil, which I have not as yet done.
It helps if you have some mechanical skills and a modest work shop, but the journey of a thousand
miles starts with the first step. If you have done some experiments then it gets easier each time.
It is a personal learning experience!!! You can not get your total learning from a book, To remain
grounded one MUST do the hands on stuff. Who cares whether Thane's theory is real or pie in the
sky? It exercises the old think box. That is the benefit. Here we are lucky to have an intelligent man, with a keen sense of humor, with lots of ideas, who is willing to share, what more can anyone ask?
I am here to learn from him, you can too.
Ron
(//)
Quote from: alan on June 13, 2008, 08:05:24 AM
where did _you_ start
Alan
There are so many simple ways to get hands on experimenting time. Here are a couple of links
to very interesting experiments that might be of interest?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA-6PSO2A_k
http://www.stifflerscientific.com/
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/index.html#top
Ron
Thanks 8)
@A22,
Well, I hit the brutal acceleration spot today. It is just a matter of reaching that sweet spot, where the motor is straining very hard against a heavy load and then released by the coil shorting. The setup follows:
1. Six 1/8 cupped neo plus 1/4 neos on top.
2. Two HV coils with 1" cores.
3. Air gap with 1/8" wobble was 3/16" to 5/16"
4. Motor running at 670 rpm's using 173 watts. Almost full voltage thru variac.
5. Shorted coils and rpm's rapidly accelerated to 1840!
Tending to agree with i_ron:
QuoteMuch of the Thane effect can be attributed to the
hysteresis brake effect but there are just enough anomalies to be of special interest, the old, "but
what if he is right" trip.
@Mark,
I normally record most of the stats that you stated. I originally posted them here when I first started getting results. Now, I only post them when there is a significant change. I'm sure most other testers are doing the same.
Regards, Larry
I'm not here to read your post naturally, but if brutal acceleration comes from brutal braking that's not an awfully positive sign, we know shorted coils can reduce losses (or should anomalies aside) and so it sounds like a partly conventional effect.
But Thane didn't get acceleration with an isolated shaft, he has accelerated beyond braking and Aspden has shown anomalous eddy current energy so there is something real here for sure but it might be a good idea to only look at experiments that eliminate any possible conventional explanation (artifact) otherwise this research is going to be mired with valid objections that are going to only be subjectively defended against without exceedingly careful measurements none of us are up to making. (such as Aspden's figuring out how much eddy current is expected and what is beyond expectation)
So again when I 'come back' on Monday I will focus on (and I am encouraging all experimenters to join me):
Impossible amplifier (something that increases the effect that has no possible conventional explanation)
Impossible reducer (something that decreases or eliminates but has no conventional explanation, such as shaft isolation)
Measurement of effect at motor. (Vine's test, or torque sensor, though at $3,000 new you way want to rent, sadly there are people who put more into their car stereos than many FE researchers have to spend on their work, backwards world!)
Delivery of effect into surrogate device. (another motor for instance)
And not on my 'to do' list currently unless Thane lays new info on me but very valid:
Acceleration beyond speed attained with absent stator.
Anything else would be a waste of electrons!
Quote from: aether22 on June 13, 2008, 06:58:07 PM
Anything else would be a waste of electrons!
You might want to check for the Aspden effect (not that I believe in the Aspden effect, mind you :-). Turn it on with shorted coils, turn it off, let it run down, wait, turn it on, and see if the wait time has any effect on how long it takes the rotor to get up to some predefined speed, like 75% of max RPM.
Hello Folks...
I am not an expert on this subject at all...
But here is my question:
Is there any way the "T's Effect" comes from Neo Permanent Magnets?
I know that this idea is not really popular, but I consider permanent magnets to be a medium of storing energy, just like a battery is....
Consider this:
Electromagnet is a type of magnet in which the magnetic field is produced by the flow of an electric current (for example from a battery). The magnetic field disappears when the current ceases.
But is it possible to "reverse" the process somehow?
If you have a strong permanent magnet, is it possible to force the electrons to flow from the permanent magnet back to the battery and hence recharge it?
Currently it is impossible
But maybe Thane's device/configuration does just that...?
QuoteYou might want to check for the Aspden effect (not that I believe in the Aspden effect, mind you :-). Turn it on with shorted coils, turn it off, let it run down, wait, turn it on, and see if the wait time has any effect on how long it takes the rotor to get up to some predefined speed, like 75% of max RPM.
I DID THIS TEST QUITE A WHILE AGO DUE TO PROMPTING FROM A22...
DECELERATION 2000 - 470 RPM (BELOW 470 HC AND HV COILS BOTH COILS ACT AS BRAKES)
COIL ENGAGED TIME HC COILS ONLY 13 seconds
HC COILS & HV COILS 32 sesonds
HV COILS ONLY 42 seconds
NO COILS 52 seconds NO CORES 158 seconds
If someone else could redo these tests it would be great - I may have got these numbers inverted?
IN ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO RESPECTFULLY SMACK-DOWN I_RECK ONCE AND FOR ALL - YESTERDAY I WOUND HV COILS
ON TOP OF THE HC COILS ON THE SAME CORE - SO NOW THERE IS
NO EXTRA CORE LOSSES TO LOWER THE OUTPUT.
I GOT 1.8 WATTS WITH JUST THE HC COILS AND 10.4 WATTS (AND MORE AS ACCELERATION WAS CONTINUING) FROM THE HC COILS w/ HV COILS ENGAGED THROUGH A 10 OHM LOAD. HC COIL O/P DROPPED SLIGHTLY WHEN THE HV COIL WAS SHORTED BUT IT CAME BACK WITH MORE ONCE ACCELERATION KICKED IN.
BTW - I WAS USING AN OLD DIESEL ENGINE OUT OF A 1982 VW AS MY PRIME MOVER - RUNNING A GENERATOR WHICH WAS 10 KM FROM THE LAB - TO RUN MY INDUCTION MOTOR SO MY EFFICIENCY IS 0.00003 % - IN CASE ANY
OUNE WANTS TO KNOW.
THANE
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 09:02:55 AM
NO COILS 52 seconds
NO CORES 158 seconds
IN ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO RESPECTFULLY SMACK-DOWN I_RECK ONCE AND FOR ALL
THANE
Finally... some truth out of ottawa!!!
I know now the joy that PB felt when he had you in his sights, lol. Mr
T, the old bullet maker, you have given me the ammunition I was dreaming off. From your own pen... the admission that
the cores do have drag, hehehe, I am delirious, 158 seconds for no cores versus 52 seconds with
cores.
But not being a "told you so" kinda guy I will just let this opportunity to rag you slip by almost
un-noticed, and gently point out out that the asked for test was with the rotor being brought
up to speed, to test the Aspden Effect, not a run down test. It may or may not be valid... but if so would
certainly help to account for the wonderful variation in the test numbers.
Back to the lab,
Ron, the west coast PB
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 09:02:55 AM
snip
YESTERDAY I WOUND HV COILS ON TOP OF THE HC COILS ON THE SAME CORE - SO NOW THERE IS NO EXTRA CORE LOSSES TO LOWER THE OUTPUT.
I GOT 1.8 WATTS WITH JUST THE HC COILS AND 10.4 WATTS (AND MORE AS ACCELERATION WAS CONTINUING) FROM THE HC COILS w/ HV COILS ENGAGED THROUGH A 10 OHM LOAD. HC COIL O/P DROPPED SLIGHTLY WHEN THE HV COIL WAS SHORTED BUT IT CAME BACK WITH MORE ONCE ACCELERATION KICKED IN.
snip
THANE
Interesting... I liked the tests also where you had one of the coils in the center of the leg. What
where the numbers on some of those tests? any conclusions? was that a workable solution?
On this test, I don't know if I will allow the speed up to compensate for the shorting loss... I will
accept reduced PM draw at the same speed however, so you can rest easy....
Ron
QuoteBut not being a "told you so" kinda guy I will just let this opportunity to rag you slip by almost
un-noticed, and gently point out out that the asked for test was with the rotor being brought up to speed, to test the Aspden Effect, not a run down test. It may or may not be valid... but if so would certainly help to account for the wonderful variation in the test numbers.
Back to the lab,
Ron, the west coast PB
SORRY I DIDN'T HAVE MY CRYSTAL BALL WITH ME WHEN I RAN THESE TESTS. ALSO MY ONLY
FOCUS IS REDUCING AND OR ELIMINATING LENZ'S LAW IN OUR GENERATOR - WHICH HAS CORES AND CORE DRAG AS ALL GENEAROS DO - AIR CORE TESTS PENDING IN THE FUTURE.
QuoteInteresting... I liked the tests also where you had one of the coils in the center of the leg. What
where the numbers on some of those tests? any conclusions? was that a workable solution?
On this test, I don't know if I will allow the speed up to compensate for the shorting loss... I will
accept reduced PM draw at the same speed however, so you can rest easy....
I WANT TO CREATE A GENERATOR WHICH IS CRITIQUE FOOL PROOF SUCH AS WINDING HV COILS ON TOP OF HC COILS WHICH DOES NOT ADD ADDITIONAL CORE AREA (OR MUCH COST) OR CREATE ANY ADDITONAL CORE LOSSES WHICH CAN CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR MYSELF WHEN PRESENTING TO INVESTORS AND THEIR HIRED PITBULLS - WHO JUST WANT TO SHRED THE TECHNOLOGY AND WIN BROWNY POINTS.
THE "GOOD NATURED" AND (BAD NATURED) CRITIQUES HERE ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN PUSHING US TO HAVE ALL OUR DUCKS LINED UP WHEN THE "REAL" DEMOS OCCUR AND MONEY IS ON THE LINE.
EDDY CURRENT LOSS REDUCTION, CORE LOSS REDUCTION, AETHER EFFECT, COIL CAPACITANCE, BUBBLEGUM THEORY ... ETC - THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS TO US IS - DOES THE GENERATOR PRODUCE MORE POWER WITH THE HV COIL INCLUSION THAN WITHOUT? - AND DOES IS THE COST INCREASE JUSTIFY THE POWER GAIN
ANSWER = YES - YES
OU - MAN
T N
T I
A V
W E
A R
S
I
T
Y
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 12:27:09 PM
snip
THE "GOOD NATURED" AND (BAD NATURED) CRITIQUES HERE ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN PUSHING US TO HAVE ALL OUR DUCKS LINED UP WHEN THE "REAL" DEMOS OCCUR AND MONEY IS ON THE LINE.
EDDY CURRENT LOSS REDUCTION, CORE LOSS REDUCTION, AETHER EFFECT, COIL CAPACITANCE, BUBBLEGUM THEORY ... ETC - THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS TO US IS - DOES THE GENERATOR PRODUCE MORE POWER WITH THE HV COIL INCLUSION THAN WITHOUT? - AND DOES IS THE COST INCREASE JUSTIFY THE POWER GAIN
ANSWER = YES - YES
OU - MAN
T N
T I
A V
W E
A R
S
I
T
Y
Thane, Thir,
The Aspden effect is where when you (is that english?) spin up the flywheel a second time, it's speed
to final RPM is less... because "it" (the aether) remembers the previous rotation. This is presented here as a very convincing proof of the existence of the aether. A22 twain is away so I get to play!
and keep the aether ball up in the air, so to speak.
One might think the flywheel is a solid... but, on examination, it is only composed of little swirls of
energy floating in a sea of little squiggles of energy (the aether) This is natures building block, so
to recognize the aether just gives one a broader glimpse of the wheel works of nature. Nothing to
be ashamed of, like a belief in UFO's and/or masturbation, lol
Ron, the aether mon (while 'two two' is away)
QuoteMr T, the old bullet maker, you have given me the ammunition I was dreaming off. From your own pen... the admission that the cores do have drag, hehehe, I am delirious
I_RETRACT,
MY PEN OF TRUTH IS MIGHTIER THAN THY SWORD OF HEHE DELIRIUM...
I DON'T THINK I EVER SAID CORES DON'T HAVE DRAG - I BELIEVE I SAID CORE DRAG IS A
MACHINE/PHYSICAL DESIGN ISSUE AND BEST CORE MATERIAL PRODUCING LEAST DRAG.
- WHEREAS LENZ DECELERATION UNDER LOAD IS A
PERFORMANCE ISSUE WHICH IS AMPLIFIED BY BEST CORE MATERIAL USE BECAUSE THE FIELD IS MULTIPLIED BY THE CORE'S INCREASED RELATIVE PERMEABILITY.
SO YOU CAN DECREASE CORE LOSSES IN MANY WAYS BUT THIS WON'T CAUSE SYSTEM ACCELERATION LIKE HV COILS DO - DESPITE HC LOADING.
Thane of the Eastern Promises
Quote from: i_ron on June 14, 2008, 01:47:38 PM
The Aspden effect is where when you (is that english?) spin up the flywheel a second time, it's speed
to final RPM is less... because "it" (the aether) remembers the previous rotation. This is presented here as a very convincing proof of the existence of the aether.
Also, the second spin up should be started within several minutes. The effect is reduced over time.
Another "two two" assist.
QuoteUFO's and/or masturbation
IS MASTURBATING IN A UFO OK?
T
QuoteAlso, the second spin up should be started within several minutes. The effect is reduced over time.
GEEZ GUYS I DUNNO - I COULD HAVE DONE THAT WHEN I WAS YOUNGER...
T
QuoteAlso, the second spin up should be started within several minutes. The effect is reduced over time.
SO IN TRUTH THE MOTOR SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO AS FAST BECAUSE IT IS HOT?
BUT IT DOES BECAUSE IT IS SPINNING IN AN AETHER VORTEX?
WHICH RETAINS MAGNETIC MOMENTUM?
THAT DIMINISHES GRADUALLY?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN A
VACUUM?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 02:10:15 PM
SO IN TRUTH THE MOTOR SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO AS FAST BECAUSE IT IS HOT?
BUT IT DOES BECAUSE IT IS SPINNING IN AN AETHER VORTEX?
WHICH RETAINS MAGNETIC MOMENTUM?
THAT DIMINISHES GRADUALLY?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN A
VACUUM?
T
Close, the first run should be long enough to make the motor hot, but what is being measured is the time it takes on the first run and second run for the motor to reach a certain rpm. The second run should be shorter if the effect is there. Aether vortex talk, A22 will be in a tizzy!
Like that auto centering option.
L
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 02:06:22 PM
IS MASTURBATING IN A UFO OK?
T
There is no Hard and fast answer for this question. Most religions specifically forbid it.
But I believe it is alright if you are circumspected...
R
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 02:10:15 PM
SO IN TRUTH THE MOTOR SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO AS FAST BECAUSE IT IS HOT?
BUT IT DOES BECAUSE IT IS SPINNING IN AN AETHER VORTEX?
WHICH RETAINS MAGNETIC MOMENTUM?
THAT DIMINISHES GRADUALLY?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN A
VACUUM?
T
Oh you (OU) are as bad as that other fellow... an armchair experimenter, yeesh
Do the experiment and prove it to yourself, LOL,
when I did it, the first run took 26 seconds (to full speed when the clamp on dropped to 1.47A)
and left running for 4 minutes 49 seconds, should really have been a longer run....
the second run, ...ready? only took 23 seconds. Absolute proof that the aether exists!!!
Two two will be so upset that he missed this... but so proud of us...
Aether Ron or Larry
QuoteThere is no Hard and fast answer for this question. Most religions specifically forbid it.
But I believe it is alright if you are circumspected...
R
GREAT THANKS - THAT INFO WILL COME IN HANDY AT SOME POINT.
T
Holy smack. Sometimes a cigar shaped UFO is just a cigar shaped UFO...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 09:02:55 AM
HV COILS ONLY 42 seconds
NO COILS 52 seconds
It's a good thing I'm not here, because if I was I'd ask you if maybe you are ready to reconsider your position that the acceleration comes from the generator and not the motor.
Also good news is:
HC COILS & HV COILS 32 seconds
NO COILS 52 seconds
This smacks down the 'shorted coils reduce drag' theory.
Aether theory is consistent with all the evidence thus far produced, which is no surprise because it is like that with pretty much everything it is applied to.
Quote from: JustMe on June 14, 2008, 04:50:58 PM
Holy smack. Sometimes a cigar shaped UFO is just a cigar shaped UFO...
but what if it leaves a calling card?
(//)
Quote from: aether22 on June 14, 2008, 06:21:36 PM
This smacks down the 'shorted coils reduce drag' theory.
Not really, it should be stated as the 'shorted HV coil above a critical rpm reduces drag' theory. Below that critical rpm a shorted HV coil has a slow down effect like a shorted HC coil.
L
Quote from: LarryC on June 14, 2008, 07:17:50 PM
Not really, it should be stated as the 'shorted HV coil above a critical rpm reduces drag' theory. Below that critical rpm a shorted HV coil has a slow down effect like a shorted HC coil.
L
I meant the 'any shorted coil reduces hysteresis and eddy current and other conventional losses' theory, not the 'hv coils are awesome' theory.
And he did stop the tests before the speed got especially low, something I didn't try to do since I had decided to count total revolutions so my tacho was in use.
QuoteIt's a good thing I'm not here, because if I was I'd ask you if maybe you are ready to reconsider your position that the acceleration comes from the generator and not the motor.
I AM READY TO CONSIDER THAT A ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCES A MAGNETIC VORTEX (LIKE WATER OR AIR ETC) AND THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED MAGNETIC FIELD (HV COIL) AT THE CORRECT MAGNITUDE / ANGLE / PHASE / PULSE FREQUENCY ??? CAN INCREASE THE SPEED OF THE VORTEX WHICH IN TURN INCREASES THE SPEED OF THE ROTOR.
ALSO IT IS IMPORTANT
NOT TO IGNORE INFORMATION WHILE WISHING TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY -
FOR MY POSTS TO BE VALID THEY OUGHT TO BE VALIDATED BY SOMEONE ELSE - THAT IS WHY I POST THEM HERE.
IT IS SIMPLY NOT SCIENTIFIC NOR DICIPLINED TO IGNORE ANY INFORMATION WHEN HIGHLIGHTED AS I HAVE DONE QuoteIf someone else could redo these tests it would be great - I may have got these numbers inverted?
I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING POSTED HERE (AND NOR SHOULD ANYONE ELSE) UNTIL I SEE IT FOR MYSELF AND OFTEN NOT EVEN THEN UNTIL I HAVE REPEATED IT 100 TIMES OR MORE.
SO I_RONARRYTHER22 - IF MY POST IS RELEVANT PLEASE REPEAT.
THANKS
T
PS HOW WAS INDY?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 07:56:30 PM
SO I_RONARRYTHER22 - IF MY POST IS RELEVANT PLEASE REPEAT.
Sure, will test tommorrow afternoon. Saturday evening, Sunday morning not a good time. And my situation is such that I can not leave my test system setup handily outside as the environment here can cause
plastic to rust.
L
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 09:02:55 AM
I DID THIS TEST QUITE A WHILE AGO DUE TO PROMPTING FROM A22...
DECELERATION 2000 - 470 RPM (BELOW 470 HC AND HV COILS BOTH COILS ACT AS BRAKES)
COIL ENGAGED TIME
HC COILS ONLY 13 seconds
HC COILS & HV COILS 32 sesonds
HV COILS ONLY 42 seconds
NO COILS 52 seconds
NO CORES 158 seconds
If someone else could redo these tests it would be great - I may have got these numbers inverted?
snip
THANE
One of my problems is that I have no Tachometer, so it becomes very problematic for me to
attempt to verify these numbers. You may have noted my previous posts are all stated as
'full speed' tests, for this very reason.
But from my limited exposure to the Ryobi powered six magnet rotor, I would say that these
numbers are believable, in the park anyway. I have no quibble with them.
Ron
PS: please let me know if I have to buy a laser tach to stay in the club... oar if I can just coast?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 07:56:30 PM
I AM READY TO CONSIDER THAT A ROTATING MAGNETIC FIELD PRODUCES A MAGNETIC VORTEX (LIKE WATER OR AIR ETC) AND THAT AN EXTERNALLY APPLIED MAGNETIC FIELD (HV COIL) AT THE CORRECT MAGNITUDE / ANGLE / PHASE / PULSE FREQUENCY ??? CAN INCREASE THE SPEED OF THE VORTEX WHICH IN TURN INCREASES THE SPEED OF THE ROTOR.
Almost sounds like an aether theory, only you said magnetic, but wtf is a magnetic vortex?
Quote
ALSO IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO IGNORE INFORMATION WHILE WISHING TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY -
FOR MY POSTS TO BE VALID THEY OUGHT TO BE VALIDATED BY SOMEONE ELSE - THAT IS WHY I POST THEM HERE.
IT IS SIMPLY NOT SCIENTIFIC NOR DISCIPLINED TO IGNORE ANY INFORMATION WHEN HIGHLIGHTED AS I HAVE DONE
Not sure what you mean, do you mean "as I have done" to indicate that you have ignored info? or are you saying that you have highlighted and someone else has ignored info, and if so do you mean me? If you do I don't know what I have ignored.
Quote
I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING POSTED HERE (AND NOR SHOULD ANYONE ELSE) UNTIL I SEE IT FOR MYSELF AND OFTEN NOT EVEN THEN UNTIL I HAVE REPEATED IT 100 TIMES OR MORE.
SO I_RONARRYTHER22 - IF MY POST IS RELEVANT PLEASE REPEAT.
THANKS
T
PS HOW WAS INDY?
Good although there was a plasticish feel to much of it.
It wasn't as good as the past ones though.
BTW I may end up taking Monday off kinda too, I didn't get a chance to tidy the garage/lab/workshop and I had an idea for an easy to put together project, one that is very 'dear' to me. (a really effective way of creating a rotating electrical output, so a circle of coils can create a rotating field which can if used correctly create a solid state device that rotates the aether)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 14, 2008, 12:27:09 PM
... THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS TO US IS - DOES THE GENERATOR PRODUCE MORE POWER WITH THE HV COIL INCLUSION THAN WITHOUT? - AND DOES IS THE COST INCREASE JUSTIFY THE POWER GAIN
ANSWER = YES - YES
I think that the questions are not properly formulated and so they will not satisfy the investors' "pitbulls" as you call them. The two questions should instead be:
1. Does the system deliver a greater overall efficiency with the HV inclusion than without?
2. Is this increase in efficiency greater than the loss of efficiency incurred by the attachment of the device to the system in the first place?
I think you have evidence to answer "yes" to the first question but all the evidence posted to date says that the answer to the second question is "no".
And your tongue-in-cheek reference to the highly inefficient prime mover does
not make this issue go away because you can do experiments to explore both those questions whatever the efficiency of the prime mover is.
I'm not making these points to needle you - I'm making them because you've asked people on this forum to help you wring out the proposition so that it's convincing to prospective investors.
QuoteI'm not making these points to needle you - I'm making them because you've asked people on this forum to help you wring out the proposition so that it's convincing to prospective investors.
IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY PROVEN YOURSELF TO BE A LYING SCUMBAG MORE THAN ONCE ON THIS THREAD - I WOULD ALMOST AGREE AND ALMOST RESPECT YOU - BUT ALAS YOU ARE A LYING SCUMBAG.
ON FRIDAY I PUT THE HV COILS
ON TOP OF THE HC COILS SO THAT THEY DO NOT REQUIRE ANY
ADDITIONAL CORE LOSS CAUSING CORE AREA - JUST SOME
ADDITIONAL COPPER WIRE TO PROVIDE LENZ FREE OPERATION.ALL LYING SCUMBAGS WOULD WANT TO IGNORE THIS FACT.
Thane
PS
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK I_RID FOR POINTING THIS OUT - ALTHOUGH I DON'T AGREE THAT IT IS OCCURING HERE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaf9v0K-rZw - THE ADDITIONAL CORE AREA (AND LOSSES) REQUIRED BY THE HV COILS IS LESS THAN THE POWER GAIN - BUT EVEN SO PLACING THE HV COILS ON TOP IS AN EVEN BETTER SOLUTION.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 15, 2008, 03:27:04 PM
... I WOULD ALMOST AGREE AND ALMOST RESPECT YOU - BUT ALAS YOU ARE A LYING SCUMBAG...
You seem to be somewhat ambivalent about my suggestion! I think you may find, when the "pitbulls" ask the same questions, it will not be very productive to call them "lying scumbags" - you may be well advised to develop a more scientifically based response. It's also worth considering that they'll be reading this thread too and forming opinions from that.
QuoteYou seem to be somewhat ambivalent about my suggestion! I think you may find, when the "pitbulls" ask the same questions, it will not be very productive to call them "lying scumbags" - you may be well advised to develop a more scientifically based response. It's also worth considering that they'll be reading this thread too and forming opinions from that.
"Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth." John F. Kennedy
WE DIRECT
EVERYONE HERE...
INTELLIGENT SINCERE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL CORE AREA LOSSES TO NEGATE THE INCREASE IN OUTPUT ENERGY IF THE HV COILS ARE WOUND ON TOP OF THE HC COILS.
IT IS EXACTLY THIS KIND OF IMPROVEMENT WHICH IS THE FRUIT OF GENUINE WILLING EXPOSURE AS I AM DOING HERE DAILY - THIS WAY THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE TECHNOLOGY (AND JOY) CAN BE SHARED AMONGST ALL CONTRIBUTORS AND THE ROUTE TO COMMERCIALIZATION CAN BE EXPEDITED.
AT ANY RATE YOU ARE A LYING SCUMBAG NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE IT - WHO IS SOON TO BE BOOTED OFF THIS FORUM ONCE AGAIN.
AS FOR ME... MY DESIRE TO BRING THE TECHNOLOGY TO FRUITION WILL SPEAK FOR ME. T
"The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were." John F. Kennedy
Thane's test using 3/8 HP motor:
DECELERATION 2000 - 470 RPM (BELOW 470 HC AND HV COILS BOTH COILS ACT AS BRAKES)
COIL ENGAGED TIME
HC COILS ONLY 13 seconds
HC COILS & HV COILS 32 sesonds
HV COILS ONLY 42 seconds
NO COILS 52 seconds
NO CORES 158 seconds
Larry's test using 3/4 HP motor:
DECELERATION 1700-700 RPM (BELOW 700 HC AND HV COILS BOTH COILS ACT AS BRAKES)
COIL ENGAGED TIME
HC COILS ONLY 17.39 seconds
HC COILS & HV COILS 17.79 seconds
HV COILS ONLY 19.58 seconds
NO COILS 18.02 seconds
NO CORES 35.59 seconds
I included the hundred as they would be more relevant with my shorter times. I'm sure, it is not that accurate but they should be all relative to my button pressing speed. My HC coil is only a 3/4 by 3/4 by 6" steel lamination bar with a 1 ohm coil, so it may account for the lesser HC effect. Part of the shorten time is due to the shorten rpm range, can only guess at the other reasons.
Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 15, 2008, 03:27:04 PM
IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY PROVEN YOURSELF TO BE A LYING SCUMBAG MORE THAN ONCE ON THIS THREAD - I WOULD ALMOST AGREE AND ALMOST RESPECT YOU - BUT ALAS YOU ARE A LYING SCUMBAG.
snip
Thane
Thane, I view this as an overreaction. OUmon's comments were considered and reasonable.
The stated purpose was to be helpful. I like you because you are honest and not afraid to speak
your mind. But I fear you have overstepped yourself here and could have taken a politer approach.
Ron
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 01:01:28 PM
I think that the questions are not properly formulated and so they will not satisfy the investors' "pitbulls" as you call them. The two questions should instead be:
1. Does the system deliver a greater overall efficiency with the HV inclusion than without?
2. Is this increase in efficiency greater than the loss of efficiency incurred by the attachment of the device to the system in the first place?
I think you have evidence to answer "yes" to the first question but all the evidence posted to date says that the answer to the second question is "no".
You make a good point... wait, I'm gonna hurl!
What might make sense is if Thane takes an electrical generator and modifies it, though this is a bit further down the line what he'd do is...
Take 2 generators and power them via electric motors, something with a good efficiency under the conditions (speed) required.
leave one as is, but with the other add HV wire over the current coils.
The problem is that likely wouldn't be possible since there probably would not be enough room left for extra wire, there are several possible fixes (depending on the generator selected), none perfect.
So then the next best is to make 2 generators, both up to conventional efficiency standards (possibly have a 3rd generator to demo that fact) and then show that the one that includes the HV windings can become/is putting a smaller load on the motor for the same otr greater electrical output.
It might be an idea to use DC/Universal/Sync motors as they don't have induction motors issue.
However at the same time they may or may not actually benefit from the effect of the aetheric flux from the generator.
BTW when I get back into it I have concluded that the first test I will do is to measure the torque on the motor housing.
@i_ron,
Tachometers:
I am using a cheap (20$ including shipping) magnetic based tach based on a bicycle tach. It seems to be very accurate, but as speeds get higher the reading will jump say from 1800 to 1812, with no in between. So you have to average. Also the highest it will go is 3000 rpm. You can check out at http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/.
The model in the article is not currently sold, but the CATEYE VELO 8 is the current version.
Other testers have used hobby airplane propeller mini-tachometers which are just as cheap. Check out http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/WTI0095P?FVSEARCH=lxpt31&search=Go. Don't know about any problems.
Quote from: i_ron on June 15, 2008, 05:58:36 PM
Thane, I view this as an overreaction. OUmon's comments were considered and reasonable.
The stated purpose was to be helpful. I like you because you are honest and not afraid to speak
your mind. But I fear you have overstepped yourself here and could have taken a politer approach.
CRANKYpants does go overboard at times, but it is caused by a long build up of relentless attacks by the powers that want his endeavors to fail. They come in many forms and try to hide their stripes by appearing well meaning. Hint: their most obvious trait is that when they are attacked, they never get mad or upset as a normal human would, they just try to slickly move on or change the subject.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 15, 2008, 07:02:02 PM
Hint: their most obvious trait is that when they are attacked, they never get mad or upset as a normal human would, they just try to slickly move on or change the subject.
You don't say ;)
Now where have we seen that?
BTW excellent quote Thane. ("The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were." John F. Kennedy )
Quote from: LarryC on June 15, 2008, 07:02:02 PM
@i_ron,
Tachometers:
I am using a cheap (20$ including shipping) magnetic based tach based on a bicycle tach. It seems to be very accurate, but as speeds get higher the reading will jump say from 1800 to 1812, with no in between. So you have to average. Also the highest it will go is 3000 rpm. You can check out at http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/.
The model in the article is not currently sold, but the CATEYE VELO 8 is the current version.
snip.
Regards, Larry
Thanks, Larry
I had seen that bike tach and was tempted, but like so many things it went by the boards...
I did a search though and Allelectronics has a nice unit for $48
http://www.allelectronics.com/make-a-store/item/TCH-4/LASER-DIGITAL-TACHOMETER/-/1.html
Very very tempted this time, but I don't really need it for anything else that I can think of?
What holds me back is UPS banditry, I pay the regular fee for delivery then at the door they
have a ransom fee and you pay again... kinda runs the price up
Just having a friendly poke at Mr T, but good of you to jump in, in his defense, lol. That is a good
observation on the lack of madness on the part of the disrupter's, I had noticed it but yes that is
a definite clue for sure. As you say normal people would get angry ... and even leave the group!!!!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on June 15, 2008, 07:43:43 PM
What holds me back is UPS banditry, I pay the regular fee for delivery then at the door they
have a ransom fee and you pay again... kinda runs the price up
Very interesting statement. Where do you live and how can we help to stop these a-holes?
Regards, Larry
Quote from: i_ron on June 15, 2008, 05:58:36 PM
Thane, I view this as an overreaction. OUmon's comments were considered and reasonable.
The stated purpose was to be helpful. I like you because you are honest and not afraid to speak
your mind. But I fear you have overstepped yourself here and could have taken a politer approach.
Ron
OUmon, the lying scumbag, long ago lost his claim to polite responses from all but the gullible or those that share his poorly masked contempt.
Quote from: JustMe on June 15, 2008, 08:02:04 PM
OUmon, the lying scumbag, long ago lost his claim to polite responses from all but the gullible or those that share his poorly masked contempt.
JM, sweetheart, right on cue! So what lies might those be m'dear?
Quote from: LarryC on June 15, 2008, 07:56:33 PM
Very interesting statement. Where do you live and how can we help to stop these a-holes?
Regards, Larry
The high price of being a canadian, Larry. UPS has what they fondly call a "brokerage fee" where
they charge a percentage of the item's cost. On a recent order to the states, just numbers off the
top of my head now... I paid the seller $44 plus $14 dollars shipping and at the door paid the bandits
another $17 dollars to get the package out of his hand into mine. To be fair they do collect the canadian ripoff GST tax (6.5% of US$34) but still it rankles. UPS were the first with the brokerage fee scam but fed x and the others are all doing it now, once they had killed off all the canadian delivery sevices. $50 US to ship one ounce from NY to Victoria is not unheard of. USPS is still the cheapest but so many companies will only ship UPS?
Ron
QuoteOUmon, the lying scumbag, long ago lost his claim to polite responses from all but the gullible or those that share his poorly masked contempt.
THANKS JM - MY POINT IS THAT A LIAR AKA PB, OUman, OUmon HAS TO LIE TO HIM OR HERSELF FIRST AND THEN MAINTAIN THAT LIE (EVEN AFTER IT BECOMES CLEAR AS BEING A LIE) WHICH PUTS THE LIAR INTO THE SCUMBAG TERRITORY - BEYOND THE ORIGINAL LIAR STATUS.
IF THIS TECHNOLOGY IS SO CRAPPY AS SAID LIAR WANTS EVERYONE TO BELIEVE THEN WHY NOT JUST MOVE ON ???
PERHAPS THAT
IS THE POINT... PERHAPS THE TECHNOLOGY IS
NOT SO CRAPPY AND HENCE WHERE THE SCUMBAG COMES IN AND WHY SAID SCUMBAG WORKS SO HARD?
T
QuoteThane's test using 3/8 HP motor:
VERY NICE JOB THERE LARRY - THANKS!
I WILL REDO MINE AGAIN TOMORROW.
ISN'T MY MOTOR A 1/3 HP MOTOR THOUGH?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 09:11:41 PM
JM, sweetheart, right on cue! So what lies might those be m'dear?
You might be able to get somebody to play that game with you, but it won't be me. Anybody paying attention knows precisely the heights to which your disingenuousness soars on the creepy meter.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 15, 2008, 10:08:04 PM
ISN'T MY MOTOR A 1/3 HP MOTOR THOUGH?
Yep, my bad, misstated again!
Quote from: JustMe on June 15, 2008, 08:02:04 PM
OUmon, the lying scumbag, long ago lost his claim to polite responses from all but the gullible or those that share his poorly masked contempt.
Just You,
I was looking up, 'if you don't believe in freedom of speech for your enemies.... etc'
and came across these marvelous one liners...
Always keep your words soft and sweet, just in case you have to eat them.
For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.
If we don?t protect freedom of speech, we will never know who the assholes are.
It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.
Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy.
The person who knows how to laugh at himself will never cease to be amused.
http://www.vegard.net/one-liners/
enjoy, Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 15, 2008, 10:04:05 PM
THANKS JM - MY POINT IS THAT A LIAR AKA PB, OUman, OUmon HAS TO LIE TO HIM OR HERSELF FIRST AND THEN MAINTAIN THAT LIE (EVEN AFTER IT BECOMES CLEAR AS BEING A LIE) WHICH PUTS THE LIAR INTO THE SCUMBAG TERRITORY - BEYOND THE ORIGINAL LIAR STATUS.
IF THIS TECHNOLOGY IS SO CRAPPY AS SAID LIAR WANTS EVERYONE TO BELIEVE THEN WHY NOT JUST MOVE ON ???
PERHAPS THAT IS THE POINT... PERHAPS THE TECHNOLOGY IS NOT SO CRAPPY AND HENCE WHERE THE SCUMBAG COMES IN AND WHY SAID SCUMBAG WORKS SO HARD?
T
For me the scumbag comes in with the manipulativeness, the aforementioned disingenuousness, and the degree to which this is pure sport for him. No respect for the field, it's diversity, and certainly no respect for you, the board or the group. I am no fan of censorship or ostracism, but folks who post under multiple nics are the bottom feeders of the internet and they deserve to be banned.
The fact that he is a scumbag is separate from the value of the technology because while we know he's a scumbag, we don't yet know if anything that can be applied will result from your research. We hope, we support your hard work, we support your goals, but we don't yet know whether what you've discovered is conventional or unconventional and whether or not it can be exploited to improve existing technologies or create new ones. Not yet.
Quote from: i_ron on June 15, 2008, 10:37:07 PM
Just You,
I was looking up, 'if you don't believe in freedom of speech for your enemies.... etc'
and came across these marvelous one liners...
Always keep your words soft and sweet, just in case you have to eat them.
For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.
If we don?t protect freedom of speech, we will never know who the assholes are.
It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.
Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy.
The person who knows how to laugh at himself will never cease to be amused.
http://www.vegard.net/one-liners/
enjoy, Ron
For the record:
-I do believe in freedom of speech for all, and have stated that here on more than one occasion in relation to this thread and in relation to the outrageous censorship that I believe killed the Stiffler thread.
-I have no fear of ever having to eat my words directed at Mr. Sybil as they are related only to his crappy character.
-It is not my goal to be tactful with him. He got tact early on from me, right up until he didn't deserve it anymore. I have no desire to play diplomat to a guy who grins at you with a mouth full of shit.
-I laugh at me all the time! :)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 15, 2008, 10:04:05 PM
...HAS TO LIE TO HIM OR HERSELF FIRST AND THEN MAINTAIN THAT LIE (EVEN AFTER IT BECOMES CLEAR AS BEING A LIE) WHICH PUTS THE LIAR INTO THE SCUMBAG TERRITORY - BEYOND THE ORIGINAL LIAR STATUS...
And what lie might that be exactly?
Quote from: JustMe on June 15, 2008, 10:49:43 PM
...folks who post under multiple nics are the bottom feeders of the internet...
Uh-oh, have you been keeping count of how many nics CRANKYpants has used?
Quote from: JustMe on June 15, 2008, 11:04:55 PM
-I do believe in freedom of speech for all, and have stated that here on more than one occasion in relation to this thread and in relation to the outrageous censorship that I believe killed the Stiffler thread.
JM, JM, here's the thing. Who most deserves to be censored - (a) one who politely states legitimate opposing views, providing detailed reasoning, or (b) one who proposes no technical value of their own, yet flings around insults such as "lying scumbag", "bottom feeder", etc?
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 11:11:44 PM
Uh-oh, have you been keeping count of how many nics CRANKYpants has used?
Point taken bottom feeder. Amending bottom feed behaviour to 'posting under multiple nics non-transparently'.
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 11:22:05 PM
JM, JM, here's the thing. Who most deserves to be censored - (a) one who politely states legitimate opposing views, providing detailed reasoning, or (b) one who proposes no technical value of their own, yet flings around insults such as "lying scumbag", "bottom feeder", etc?
Nobdy deserves to be censored BF. But people who salt their passive agressive disruptions with feigned and tactical 'politeness' in the course of stating legitimate(ish) opposing views deserve to be called on it. It's true that the sum of my technical knowlege in this area could fit in the same thimble in which you store your personal honesty, but that's not my contribution and interest here. I've decided I deplore the bully pulpit of psuedoskepticism, and it makes me want to push back. So that's what I do.
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 11:11:44 PM
Uh-oh, have you been keeping count of how many nics CRANKYpants has used?
See this if a fine case in point of something that bugs me. (about many arguments in general, not just this thread of PBman)
By saying this you know you are full of it, we all know you are full of it and you know we know (and so on).
But people will still happily win arguments 'technically' despite being apparent to all sides that it isn't a genuine 'victory'.
By claiming you are a woman in your old nick, and then coming on here with a nick ending in 'man' it is clear no one thought you were Polarbreeze at least not right away. (And if anyone was sure right away it was only due to great perceptiveness)
Garage still only half done...
Quote from: JustMe on June 15, 2008, 11:43:07 PM
... I've decided I deplore the bully pulpit of psuedoskepticism, and it makes me want to push back. So that's what I do.
Whatever turns you on, I guess. Not my cuppa tea though.
Quote from: aether22 on June 15, 2008, 11:47:30 PM
By saying this you know you are full of it, we all know you are full of it and you know we know (and so on).
Relax, A22, it's just a bit of fun. But the technical info I post is for real and can all be readily substantiated with just a bit of googling.
Quote from: OUmon on June 15, 2008, 11:53:09 PM
Relax, A22, it's just a bit of fun.
I think it might be fun to you, even a sport.
To us it isn't about fun, we put our money, time, blood sweat and even sometimes tears into this due to the importance of the cause, which is not to make money but to profoundly help the world (literally humanity and earth) and advance science against those who would rather science and humanity stagnate.
And while we do find some fun in doing what we are driven to do we could be having quite a bit more fun and profit doing other things.
I have a few questions.
Could Thane or JustMe visit you in Carp, just to verify that you really do live there?
Do you believe Free Energy/UO is real/possible/likely with current technology? (I would note that the 'created' .vs 'extracted from a seemingly unlimited and non obvious source' is a philosophical issue up there with the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin, it can never be settled or known and hence is of no value here)
Since there is no way to 'explain away' many of the results that have been found with this device (you have just ignored these facts) beyond accusing the experimenter of lying, error or very poorly conducted experiments do you give this a chance of being the real thing?
Do you think you will ever attempt a replication and have you in the past ever tried to build any OU/FE device?
What do you think of the part you play in the FE effort, how would you describe it? Tyre kicker?
What would you say your motivation is for haunting the thread?
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 01:04:59 AM
(I would note that the 'created' .vs 'extracted from a seemingly unlimited and non obvious source' is a philosophical issue up there with the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin, it can never be settled or known and hence is of no value here)
philosophical issue ??? oh no ... croak :-\
Science is all about the When and How of What. "What" being the
"object/ive" of observation.
Philosophy is all about the Who and Why, and is therefore highly subjective. Let's stick with science ... please ... it's easier .. KneeDeep :D :D :)
Quote from: hoptoad on June 16, 2008, 03:28:39 AM
philosophical issue ??? oh no ... croak :-\
Science is all about the When and How of What. "What" being the "object/ive" of observation.
Philosophy is all about the Who and Why, and is therefore highly subjective. Let's stick with science ... please ... it's easier .. KneeDeep :D :D :)
Not quite sure if you mean you disagree that it is a philosophical issue, but no one can disprove that energy may be created since you can't prove a non specific negative. (especially outside of pure math)
And no one could prove that if energy is appearing seemingly having been created that energy is not never the less being lost elsewhere in equal portions.
So it comes down to a philosophical issue, what you choose to believe.
To know the answers to these questions is impossible because to do so you would have to know all that is and know that there is nothing outside of your knowledge, one could even argue that would be a tall order for even a/the God to know that there is nothing that could possibly be outside of his knowledge.
As I say, it's philosophy not science.
Since no one can disprove that Free Energy may be created by one of the 2 methods then no one can say that FE is a waste of time and be speaking about anything other than a personal opinion of how likely they feel such a discovery would be.
What must be remembered by anyone being fair is that Free Energy has been discovered many times but failed to get a foot hold due to the hostile reception both from those that don't believe and more so from those that do and wish to protect various status quo's, those who contribute only criticism are not looked on kindly especially when they show signs of not being interested in the truth but merely attacking.
And when they show they are manipulative and incredibly persistent despite a total lack of payoff one may even reason the payoff lies somewhere else.
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 03:52:56 AM
Not quite sure if you mean you disagree that it is a philosophical issue, ...........
I agree that
it can be a philosophical issue. But I do think the stated issue is more likely to arouse passionate scientific rather than philosophical debate.
I would just prefer that the thread content remained the domain of gathered experimental results, accompanied with observational, and empirical data.
Oh yeh, and the occasional bit of non-abusive SHOUTING and good humour :D
Hoptoads are pretty low on philosophical understanding but we can slurp a fly at 10 cm .... KneeDeep ... please keep it simple for me.... :) :P
QuoteUh-oh, have you been keeping count of how many nics CRANKYpants has used?
4ThaneC (middle name Christopher)
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 01:04:59 AM
Do you believe Free Energy/UO is real/possible/likely with current technology? (I would note that the 'created' .vs 'extracted from a seemingly unlimited and non obvious source' is a philosophical issue...
Yes, absolutely. There are lots of different unconventional technologies under active development with considerable success in weaning the world off oil dependence and cleaning up the atmosphere - photovoltaic, wind, wave, tidal, geothermal to name but a few. Not to mention conservation, which is the largest untapped free energy source one could ever imagine.
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 01:04:59 AM
Since there is no way to 'explain away' many of the results that have been found with this device (you have just ignored these facts) beyond accusing the experimenter of lying, error or very poorly conducted experiments do you give this a chance of being the real thing?
"A person who says it cannot be explained should not stand in the way of the person who is successfully explaining it."
And counter an explanation by experimentation, even if it is just for yourself, attacking a serious attempt to explanation is lame.
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 03:52:56 AM
What must be remembered by anyone being fair is that Free Energy has been discovered many times but failed to get a foot hold due to the hostile reception both from those that don't believe and more so from those that do and wish to protect various status quo's...
Yes, this is the part of your position that I'm having trouble grasping.
There are plentiful counter-examples. Numerous unconventional energy sources have been discovered, have been shown to have promise, are currently under active development and are receiving plentiful support and funding from governments and industry all around the globe. This seems to belie the conspiracy theory, don't you think?
One wonders what could be the difference between those actively developing sources and the already-discovered-but-suppressed free energy sources that you refer to. Any ideas?
Quote from: alan on June 16, 2008, 08:21:54 AM
And counter an explanation by experimentation, even if it is just for yourself, attacking a serious attempt to explanation is lame.
No wonder you were accused of being another PBersonality, you sound like the parrot on his shoulder.
Anyone following this topic who would like some basic background information on how AC motors work may find these chapters from the Grundfos Motor Book helpful:
http://net.grundfos.com/doc/webnet/cr_mpc/pdf/1_Electric_motor_basics.pdf
http://net.grundfos.com/doc/webnet/cr_mpc/pdf/2_Single_phase_motors.pdf
http://net.grundfos.com/doc/webnet/cr_mpc/pdf/3_Motor_torque_and_power.pdf
@everybody
Listen very carefully, I shall only say this once:
Could you guys PLEASE stay on topic and just "IGNORE" all remarks made by OUmon etc..
Don't get so distracted. Just stop waisting time on him/her/them. You're playing "THEIR" game by helping them pollute this topic
I know it's hard to ignore such irritants, but please just do.
Consider it as an itch (Itch (Latin: pruritus) is defined as an unpleasant sensation that evokes the desire or reflex to scratch.) but if you scratch it, it will get worse..
:-X
--------------------------------------------------
If patience is a virtue, and ignorance is bliss, you can have a pretty good life if you're stupid and willing to wait.
Quote from: aether22 on June 16, 2008, 03:14:39 PM
No wonder you were accused of being another PBersonality, you sound like the parrot on his shoulder.
I won't comment anymore, think my suggestions are not useful. best of luck 8)
Quote from: mark_my_words on June 17, 2008, 02:17:31 AM
@everybody
...
Consider it as an itch (Itch (Latin: pruritus) is defined as an unpleasant sensation that evokes the desire or reflex to scratch.) .
Steady, Larry, you know what JM says about people who use multiple nics!
I'm sorry, that was a bit rude of me.
Let me introduce myself.
My Name is Mark . I live in the Netherlands.
I'm a Software Engineer and I know very little of electronics.
What I do know is that if we don't do something about the oil crisis (like inventing a Over Unity device) we're not about to see cheap car fuel soon, and that's probably not the least of our problems (different topic).
So I'm very interested in the test results and your findings on this Perepiteia.
I don't have any input on this matter and I won't be able to replicate any of your tests. So you probably won't here much of me again.
I just like to read and learn and be all exited about this new discovery.
Keep up the good work.!
Good luck to you Thane.
Best regards,
Mark
Quote from: mark_my_words on June 17, 2008, 08:34:18 AM
I'm sorry, that was a bit rude of me.
Let me introduce myself.
My Name is Mark . I live in the Netherlands.
I'm a Software Engineer and I know very little of electronics.
What I do know is that if we don't do something about the oil crisis (like inventing a Over Unity device) we're not about to see cheap car fuel soon, and that's probably not the least of our problems (different topic).
So I'm very interested in the test results and your findings on this Perepiteia.
I don't have any input on this matter and I won't be able to replicate any of your tests. So you probably won't here much of me again.
I just like to read and learn and be all exited about this new discovery.
Keep up the good work.!
Good luck to you Thane.
Best regards,
Mark
I completely agreed with your post, however I find it very ironic that you failed to resist and replied to OUmon.
Quote from: mark_my_words on June 17, 2008, 08:34:18 AM
I'm sorry, that was a bit rude of me.
Let me introduce myself.
My Name is Mark . I live in the Netherlands.
I'm a Software Engineer and I know very little of electronics.
What I do know is that if we don't do something about the oil crisis (like inventing a Over Unity device) we're not about to see cheap car fuel soon, and that's probably not the least of our problems (different topic).
So I'm very interested in the test results and your findings on this Perepiteia.
I don't have any input on this matter and I won't be able to replicate any of your tests. So you probably won't here much of me again.
I just like to read and learn and be all exited about this new discovery.
Keep up the good work.!
Hi Mark,
I can understand why OUman though that it was me as I have presented your sentiments previously when he may have been PB. I am also an ex software engineer, but differently have a medium understanding of electronics. I agree that the OUman type are a pain in the ass, but they also help too keep an interest in this thread. Plus some of the members enjoy the joust that they present.
Regards, Larry
PS: If you look at some of the other threads, there is much worst than OUman.
Quote from: aether22 on June 17, 2008, 04:37:50 PM
... I find it very ironic that you failed to resist...
...and so too did you, A22!
Quote from: OUmon on June 17, 2008, 11:04:04 PM
...and so too did you, A22!
Um, no I didn't, I replied to Mark you huge freaking moron.
um, ok THIS is failing to resist replying to you. what was my point again?
Quote from: aether22 on June 17, 2008, 04:37:50 PM
I completely agreed with your post, however I find it very ironic that you failed to resist and replied to OUmon.
;D
Good you agree. So what's the status on your findings sofar?
I recall a list of tests you were about to do. Can you give me/us an update?
Quote from: mark_my_words on June 18, 2008, 02:04:37 AM
;D
Good you agree. So what's the status on your findings sofar?
I recall a list of tests you were about to do. Can you give me/us an update?
I made a long list, then I realized I needed to have results that would clarify not confuse and made a short list, and finally I figured that one experiment was better than all others and so I am trying to replicate Vince's test where he measured a torque increase on the motor housing. (I still plan of doing the others naturally but it tops my list)
Nothing to report yet though, still got glue drying on the ball bearings (being set into wood) and I may need to visit a hardware store before I finish yet, but I should get it done for tomorrow.
Also I am very interested in Jeff Cooks device, he is now selling them and it seems his steel coils could be used in a Thanean generator to possibly great effect.
Quote from: aether22 on June 18, 2008, 02:36:06 AM
Also I am very interested in Jeff Cooks device, he is now selling them and it seems his steel coils could be used in a Thanean generator to possibly great effect.
Hi A22,
What is Jeff Cooks device?
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 18, 2008, 05:59:41 PM
Hi A22,
What is Jeff Cooks device?
Thanks, Larry
http://www.jeffreyncook.com/jeff%20cook%20effect/jeff%20cook%20effect%20video.htm
I followed it from the very beginning many years ago, he first claimed it created a gravitational like pulse similar to the Morton/Podkletnov/Telos experiments (in reality an aether pulse), although the effect seemed to be hit and miss replication wise.
Then more recently he had announced that he can get a magnet to float in air above or below a modified version of his device.
This should not be possible according to conventional physics due to Earnshaw's Theorem of magnetic instability, what he claims is that he can make a steel coil out of very thin wire (which I now believe increases aether velocity) and have a permanent magnet repelled from this coil which can only be explained by superconductive currents in the steel coil.
Exceptions to Earnshaw's Theorem:
Conventional: Superconductor, AC Eddy current induction, Magnets used with diamagnetic materials, Permanent magnets with controlled electromagnets to maintain balance.
Unexplained: Levitron, Jeff Cook Effect.
Like the stator coils in Thanes device Jeff's coils have an aether current induced in the wire due to the presence of a magnetically sourced primary aether flow through the coil, and so I hope to make one of his coils and try it on Thanes generator as both effects would be present at the same time.
Jeff Cook is now selling a thing he calls a 'Wizard lamp' which is an implementation of his discovery, a green glowing ceramic magnet floating above or below an arrangement consisting of one of his steel coils and some other magnets. ($29 rrp but he is selling 6 of them for $105 USD)
@A22,
No problem. Threw a Jeff Cook magic lamp together. Not green glowing, could be painted, but easy to build. 18 Gauge wire coil (not 30 as indicated. Slow aether?) in original package. 3- 1" by 1/4" neos all with same pole facing inward. 1- 1" by 1/4" neo floating in the lee valley container, with lee valley green foam packing around the container keeping it centered. Cool, my first anti-grav. Turn it upside down and the neo just hangs there.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 18, 2008, 08:49:38 PM
@A22,
No problem. Threw a Jeff Cook magic lamp together. Not green glowing, could be painted, but easy to build. 18 Gauge wire coil (not 30 as indicated. Slow aether?) in original package. 3- 1" by 1/4" neos all with same pole facing inward. 1- 1" by 1/4" neo floating in the lee valley container, with lee valley green foam packing around the container keeping it centered. Cool, my first anti-grav. Turn it upside down and it just hangs there.
Regards, Larry
To state the obvious it's not really antigrav, at least not at that point.
And to state the other obvious point, the magnet should be able to float without touching the sides of the container.
Nice work, now can you remove the container and still make it work? (or at least verify that it can float without touching the sides)
Still it looks like you have it working or else the magnet should flip.
Now to bring this back on topic try using it (minus the floating and possibly backing magnet, but keep the side ones maybe) as a generator coil, bring it slowly near the rotor and see what it does. (it may plausibly cause acceleration further away and deceleration closer or something)
Quote from: aether22 on June 18, 2008, 09:11:37 PM
To state the obvious it's not really antigrav, at least not at that point.
And to state the other obvious point, the magnet should be able to float without touching the sides of the container.
Nice work, now can you remove the container and still make it work? (or at least verify that it can float without touching the sides)
Still it looks like you have it working or else the magnet should flip.
Now to bring this back on topic try using it (minus the floating and possibly backing magnet, but keep the side ones maybe) as a generator coil, bring it slowly near the rotor and see what it does. (it may plausibly cause acceleration further away and deceleration closer or something)
No fair changing the rules. In Jeff's two videos, it has a plastic container and seem to always be touching the sides.
Tried precise centering, but it is always want to slide to a side. May work better with magnets all around.
Test unit not set up. The wire is uncoated and would short if used as a generator.
No magic just normal magnetic attraction. The outside magnets are all facing North inward. The bottom of the floating magnet is South and floats just above the top surface of the coil. Three sides of the coil must be attacting it almost evenly, thus the effect.
Larry
Quote from: LarryC on June 18, 2008, 09:47:01 PM
No fair changing the rules. In Jeff's two videos, it has a plastic container and seem to always be touching the sides.
Tried precise centering, but it is always want to slide to a side. May work better with magnets all around.
Test unit not set up. The wire is uncoated and would short if used as a generator.
No magic just normal magnetic attraction. The outside magnets are all facing North inward. The bottom of the floating magnet is South and floats just above the top surface of the coil. Three sides of the coil must be attacting it almost evenly, thus the effect.
Larry
Not quite, according to Jeff the coil is repelled from a magnet, so if you have just the coil with no magnets attached and approach it with a magnet you will find it repelled not attracted to the steel.
That is seemingly an indication of induced superconducted eddy currents.
added:
Oh yeah, I forgot to add that obviously it being shorted doesn't mean it can't be used as the coils are meant to be shorted.
It simply means the only 'control' you can run is to run is with steel coil removed.
I would also add that various other anomalies are associated with this device including projection of EM(P). (Tim Ventura found with a pulsed version)
Torque measurements, well the results mainly indicate I need a better setup to have real confidence in the results.
I seemed to find a slight reduction in the reading (indicating an apparent reduction in motor torque) at higher speeds but this was not awfully clear and mainly occurred in the first test which was just to see if everything was working.
I found the scale to measure torque and most of it's readings made sense, but sometimes the readings would point more to imperfections in the method used.
Anyway though not as clear as I would have liked, Yes, there was a clear increase in the weight (reaction torque) from the motor at speeds from 700rpm and up though at some point as mentioned above the effect seems to turn around, possibly a sign that the effect at higher speeds is more of a braking reduction effect.
The effect was instantaneous, it was most certainly not related to any higher torque at higher speeds issues induction motors have.
However I would like to remove as many of the oddities and get cleaner results, though to an extent that might require making a far far flasher setup, still I'll put some thought into removing various artifacts to get cleaner readings.
The results agree with Vince's measurements and agree with all the other evidence and reasoning for the torque increase occurring at the motor, they are the opposite of what would otherwise be expected to occur if the acceleration was from the generator, however I would not rule out that the effect witnessed could possibly be an artifact of the stator pulling on things in such a way to to cause a bogus reading.
I will give myself the rest of tonight to think about that and play with the effect but if I haven't got a plan to give cleaner results I will just go ahead and make a video of what I have so far.
I would like to think of some way to measure the forces on both sides (pushing down and pushing up) because I would not be shocked to find many/all artifacts are ones that would not read if true torque were being read rather than just weight on one side.
I figured the best way to get rid of the main cause of doubt expressed in the previous message was to measure the effect from the other side, though I can't do it simultaneously as I only have one suitable scale.
And sure enough while the other side gets heavier on coil shorting this side gets lighter, this verifies that it is a real increase in torque on the motor housing in the opposite direction to the increase in torque apparent from the acceleration.
If this were an artifact then it would need to be one that increases the scale reading one one side as it decreases it on the other, and then you have to factor Vince getting the same results despite having a different system.
The odds of this being some kind of erroneous reading aren't very high.
I will try a few more tests including seeing if I can feel it by hand, if I can feel real torque increase when I hold both sides of the motor that will give me real confidence, although that will require an assistant to control the switch.
Hey Thane,
Where the hell are you? Does your disappearance have something to do with your new notaspicegirl persona?
Regards, Larry
Maybe he's just getting perplexing experimental results and is too busy scratching his head?
Quote from: aether22 on June 20, 2008, 06:14:50 PM
Maybe he's just getting perplexing experimental results and is too busy scratching his head?
Not likely, why wouldn't he let us brothers know what's going on?
Quote from: aether22 on June 20, 2008, 05:59:51 AM
And sure enough while the other side gets heavier on coil shorting this side gets lighter, this verifies that it is a real increase in torque on the motor housing in the opposite direction to the increase in torque apparent from the acceleration.
Interesting result, A22! I'm looking forward to your video.
Larry: you have one of these, right? Care to try the same test?
Congrats,
Mr. Entropy
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 20, 2008, 08:18:52 PM
Interesting result, A22! I'm looking forward to your video.
Larry: you have one of these, right? Care to try the same test?
Sorry Mr. Entropy, It is interesting and I do have Thane's original setup, but I'm not set up for torque testing and currently having some lower back problems, so it could be a while before I can even attempt a torque setup. Vince is the most likely if he is watching. It is unfortunate timing, just received a new digital camera, with decent video capability, wish I could.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 20, 2008, 08:18:52 PM
Interesting result, A22! I'm looking forward to your video.
Larry: you have one of these, right? Care to try the same test?
Congrats,
Mr. Entropy
Today isn't looking good for the video (nor is tomorrow necessarily) but soon enough, if you can hold out for Monday I figure you'll get it.
If someone else can do the same tests and also get a torque increase from the motor, and on both sides that should be pretty definitive at least to my point of view (Skeptics and even Thane may never be persuaded by this torque evidence), the only explanation besides increased torque from the motor would be some kind of artifact but I don't think any artifact would be replicable (multiple experimenters with different setups should not get the same quirks) or show an increase of weight on one side and a decrease on the other as that should only be the result of a genuine motor torque increase.
I do hope to get a quick test done today where I hold the motor and feel the increase of torque and if I feel what I hope I would feel that to be pretty definitive to me anyway.
So then moving on to the next test, probably see if the multistrand and the 2mm wire create the same effect on the motor, and if they do then I will retry isolation both with a non-steel shaft and pulley.
The next natural jump from there would be seeing if it can feed the effect into an induction motor that isn't driving the generator.
That test is extremely important because if I can actually get that to work then we have a nicely separated effect which allows us to study what it is doing to the induction motor, see what other applications it could have and so on.
At this point I can say it is looking highly probable (and if the motor holding test works I would say practically definitive) that it is an aetheric effect conducted through to the motor that increases torque by either an increase of inductive coupling from the stator to the rotor (could be an OU effect) or by a reduction of hysteresis or a reduction of resistance.
That much must be true if the acceleration comes from the motor as so far all tests indicate, and if that is true this effect is perfect for further experimentation, experimentation that should lead rather directly to at least the creation of a transformer that can be made OU by feeding it aether from such a generator.
Quote from: LarryC on June 20, 2008, 06:55:12 PM
Not likely, why wouldn't he let us brothers know what's going on?
SORRY GUYS & GALS,
I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON OUR
PEREPITEIA GENERATOR PAPER - DRAFT 1YOU CAN FIND THE ENTIRE DRAFT HERE: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TOQP60AO
I WILL BE SENDING JM THE DRAWINGS WHICH SHE CAN POST WHEN CONVENIENT.
IT HAS NOT BEEN PROOF READ - LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR COMMENTS!
CHEERS
Thane NASG
ps I am also posting this as a NEW thread for those who avoid this thread for obvious reasons. ;)
Perepiteia Generator Operation Explanation ? Draft 1 ? June 20th, 2008
High Voltage Coil Eddy Current Effects
Thane C. Heins
IntroductionThe Perepiteia Generator employs high voltage coils to counteract the effects associated with Lenz?s Law and the Law of Conservation of Energy. Whereas a conventional generator high current coil design causes the prime mover to decelerate under load ? the Perepiteia high voltage coil design causes the prime mover to accelerate. If high current and high voltage coils are employed simultaneously, the acceleration provided by the high voltage coils can completely eliminate Lenz?s Law (deceleration) effects and even provide additional acceleration despite high current coil loading.
This paper is intended to explain (only) one aspect of how this acceleration may be occurring with respect to how high voltage wire eddy currents affect the coils ability to produce an induced magnetic field as dictated by Lenz?s Law. There of course are other possible reasons for the observed acceleration (including core loss reduction) which will be dealt with in greater detail at another time.
Basic Observations, Critical Minimum Rotor Speed/FrequencyConventional generators employ low gauge ? high current (HC) wire to reduce losses associated with resistance and eddy currents. Figure 1 shows how current is distributed through a typical HC coil. The current flows evenly throughout the entire conductor and the induced magnetic field emanates out in a radially symmetrical pattern.
The high voltage coil (HV) in Figure 2 on the other hand shows what happens in the HV coil as the rotor speed exceeds the critical minimum velocity.
Rotor Speed Critical Minimum Velocity
Above a certain rotor speed or frequency the HV coils
cause system acceleration in violation of Lenz?s Law.
Below this rotor RPM or frequency the HV coils act in
accordance with Lenz?s Law and cause the system
to decelerate under load.
The question is why?
What occurs as frequency rises to
change the coils? performance?
High Frequency Eddy Current Effects in HV ConductorsWhen the generator rotor speed exceeds the coil?s critical minimum frequency the current in the coil undergoes a transformation from Figure 1 performance to Figure 2. The dashed lines represent the uniform low frequency current distribution as seen in Figure 1. When this current changes rapidly, as it will at higher frequencies, the flux within the wire must also change rapidly. The changing flux induces a voltage loop, or eddy, as shown by the solid lines near the wire surface. Since this induced voltage is within the conductor, it causes an eddy current coincident with the voltage. Note how this eddy current reinforces the main current flow at the surface but opposes it towards the centre of the wire. [1]
The result is that as frequency rises in the HV wire, the current density increases at the conductor surface and decreases toward zero at the centre. The current tails off exponentially within the conductor. [2] Although the current density tails off exponentially from the surface, the high frequency resistance and loss is the same as if the current density were constant from the surface to the penetration depth. [3]
If a rapidly rising current is applied to the HV wire, the voltage across the wire is quite large, mostly across Lx ( Lx is the inductance of the wire at high frequencies). Internal inductance ( Li ) blocks the current from the wire interior forcing it to flow at the surface. (Inductance is a measure of an electrical circuit?s ability to store magnetic energy). [4] This fast rising current distribution distortion, affects the HV coils ability to produce a magnetic field in accordance with Lenz?s Law because the magnetic field time interval is delayed slightly and current distribution is not uniform throughout the HV conductor. This differs from the HV coil?s high gauge HC coil counterpart which produces a magnetic field unhampered by excessive eddy current influences and complies with Lenz?s Law.
At low frequencies (and with HC conductors) the reactance of the internal inductance Li is negligible compared to Ri (Ri is the wire resistance, distributed through the wire from surface to centre [5]). Current flow is uniform throughout the wire and resistance is minimum. However with HV conductors, current flow will be greatest at the surface, tailing off exponentially toward the centre. Penetration depth (skin depth) is clearly relevant in the frequency domain and in the wire gauge domain. At any increased frequency or wire gauge, the penetration depth reveals the percentage of wire area that is effectively conducting current uniformly ? and likewise producing a uniform magnetic field. [6]
Conservation of EnergyAt any moment of time, the current within the conductors and the resultant magnetic field are distributed so as to minimize the energy dissipated. In other words, uniform conductor current distribution and radially symmetrical magnetic field propagation is the ?preferred? scenario.
When the critical minimum frequency is exceeded the HV coil internal eddy current effects take over and coil?s ability to produce a uniform external magnetic field is diminished. Energy is gradually transferred from the magnetic field into the eddy current voltage loops as the HV current is pushed to the exterior regions of the HV conductor and held there as long as the external influence (rotating magnetic field) is in effect and is applying the force required. If the externally applied and excessively quickly changing magnetic field were removed or reduced slightly (to below the critical minimum) the HV conductor current would have no reason to be pushed to the exterior and it would redistribute itself throughout the wire evenly ? and once again produce a uniform magnetic field in accordance with Lenz?s Law.
Removal of Externally Influencing Magnetic FieldFigures 3 through 6 below show what happens when a magnet approaches a HC coil and a HV coil at a frequency that is above the critical minimum. The HC coil stores energy in the external magnetic field and the HV coil stores energy in the eddy current voltage loops.
At Figure 5 the magnet is neither approaching nor receding from the coil and for a brief moment in time the current in the conductor stops flowing. This is the moment just prior to the current changing direction in the conductor where frequency = 0 (clearly below critical minimum frequency). At this precise moment there is nothing holding the eddy currents in place the HV coil and the currents redistribute themselves throughout the conductor.
When this HV conductor current redistribution occurs it once again acts like a conventional coil and brings with it a magnetic field according to Lenz?s Law which begins to push on the now just receding magnet (rotation which is aided by the prime mover). As the HV conductor?s internal inductance is released - its stored energy is also released and it produces a magnetic field of increasing magnitude pushing away on the receding ?North Pole? magnet while simultaneously attracting the rotor?s approaching ?South Pole?.
In this manner the HC coils add to the torque supplied by the prime mover and reduce power required to work against the HC coil counter-torque as dictated by Lenz?s Law and the Law of Conservation of Energy.
This may be one reason why in the Full Speed Test Data below, why the Perepiteia Generator is capable of supplying power to the load with a decrease in prime mover input rather than a Law of Conservation of Energy required increase.
References[1] ? [6]
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
Copyright 2003 Texas Instruments Incorporated.
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup197/slup197.pdf
YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaf9v0K-rZw
Additional Information: thane_heins@yahoo.ca, kcunningham@OCRI.ca
I may be the first to point this out but I won't be the last.
Skin effect is an issue at high frequencies with fat conductors (or at extremely high frequencies with thin conductors) but it is not an issue with the HV coils.
If you look at this table: http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm
You can see that at about 150 hz (3,000 rpm / 60 x 3) a wire must be over .46in or 10mm thickness to have any skin effect.
note: x3 because while there are 6 magnets on the rotor there are only 3 of each pole facing the coil and so it comes out as 150hz not 300hz, not that is matters as 1 AWG wire is 'thin' enough to have no skin effect at 300hz.
I also would point out that there is no future trying to explain overunity (assuming that is the goal) with conventional physics or effects, the skin effect has no way to cause any FE effect.
@A22,
Have you checked out:
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
It not as simple as your chart indicates. We have serious layer issues!
Regards, Larry
PS: Should we all move over to Thane's new thread, where he would have some control?
Quote from: LarryC on June 21, 2008, 04:59:51 PM
@A22,
Have you checked out:
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
It not as simple as your chart indicates. We have serious layer issues!
Regards, Larry
PS: Should we all move over to Thane's new thread, where he would have some control?
PROXIMITY EFFECT"WHEN ANOTHER CONDUCTOR IS BROUGHT INTO CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE FIRST, THEIR FIELDS ADD VECTORALLY. FIELD INTENSITY IS NO LONGER UNIFORM AROUND THE CONDUCTOR SURFACES, SO HIGH FREQUENCY CURRENT FLOW WILL NOT BE UNIFORM."I DON'T WANT CONTROL - I JUST WANTED TO GIVE OTHERS A CHANCE TO DEBATE WHO WOULD OTHERWISE AVOID THIS THREAD AND TOPIC.
SO ANYWAY THIS IS MY FIRST REAL STAB AT EXPLAINING WHY HV COILS CAN DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AT 999 RPM AND THEN ACCELERATE IT AT 1000 RPM. I DON'T FEEL THAT IT HAS TO BE 100% CORRECT.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on June 21, 2008, 04:27:29 PM
Skin effect is an issue at high frequencies...
... and it may be helpful to go to original article that much of this text was extracted from, to put it in context:
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup197/slup197.pdf
ACTUALLY ...
References
[1] ? [6]
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
Copyright 2003 Texas Instruments Incorporated.
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup197/slup197.pdf
AND FOR GOOD REASON...
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE OTHERS A CHANCE TO DEBATE WHO WOULD OTHERWISE AVOID THIS THREAD AND TOPIC.
Diagrams, as requested:
THERE IS AN ARTICLE IN THE CANADIAN BUSINESS MAGAZINE'S "SPECIAL SUMMER INNOVATION ISSUE" WHICH PROFILES THE PEREPITEIA GENERATOR FOR THEIR SECOND GREAT CANADIAN INVENTION COMPETITION.
CHEERS
Thane
That's great Thane!
Are you feeling closer to having something where your work can be seen in an application of some sort? I think that's really going to be key in getting to any next significant stage.
Is Luc still working with you? He's been rather quiet!
:)
Quote from: notaspicegirl on June 21, 2008, 09:43:46 PM
References
[1] ? [6]
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
Copyright 2003 Texas Instruments Incorporated.
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup197/slup197.pdf
I think the issue you'll need to address if you want to apply Dixon's work to this is the question of frequency. I don't think you are operating at frequencies high enough for the skin effect to be an issue. If you refer to Dixon's equation 6, the skin depth in cm is given by 7.5/sqrt(f) and that works out to 0.024 cm at 100kHz, and so can be significant in the Dixon applications (switching power supplies that operate up at those frequencies). However, you are operating in the range of 100 - 1000 Hz, which would give you a skin depth of about 2 to 5 mm. Your wire thicknesses are way thinner than that so there will be no appreciable skin effect at all as far as I can see. FWIW.
Quote from: JustMe on June 22, 2008, 02:03:16 PM
That's great Thane!
Are you feeling closer to having something where your work can be seen in an application of some sort? I think that's really going to be key in getting to any next significant stage.
Is Luc still working with you? He's been rather quiet!
:)
MAGAZINE ARTICLES ARE FUN AND BRING GOOD EXPOSURE (
GQ MAGAZINE IS ALSO COMING OUT WITH AN ARTICLE SOON AS WELL ) BUT THE REAL GOOD NEWS IS THAT THE UNIVERSITY IS CURRENTLY CANVASING "CANADIAN UNIVERSITY ENERGY PHD'S" TO HEAD UP A GOVERNMENT RESEARCH GRANT PROPOSAL DUE TO THE LATEST PROMISING TEST DATA ETC.
THIS (HOPEFULLY) WILL OPEN THE DOOR TO "REAL EXPOSURE" WITH CONCRETE OBJECTIVES AND LEGITIMATE VERIFICATION WHICH TRANSCENDS THE INTERNET HOOPLA.
MY GOAL IS STILL TO BUILD A GENERATOR FOR THE DUNE BUGGY BUT I AM ONCE AGAIN A ONE MAN SHOW AS LUC HAS RETURNED TO HIS OWN RESEARCH.
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteI think the issue you'll need to address if you want to apply Dixon's work to this is the question of frequency.
DEAR
ASTROTURFERman,
I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN APPLYING ANYONE'S WORK. THE EFFECTS PRODUCED BY THE HV COILS INCLUDE A COMBINATION OF:
INCREASED FREQUENCY
WIRE GUAGE REDUCTION - INCREASED IMPEDANCE - AND EDDY CURRENTS
TURNS RATIO - PROXIMITY EFFECTS
AND HOW ALL OF THESE CONTRIBUTE TO A SUPRESSION OR DELAY OF THE MAGNETIC FIELDS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THE LENZ EFFECTS AND HOW THEY MIGHT BE RETARDED JUST ENOUGH TO CREATE LEMON AID.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 22, 2008, 02:59:14 PM
I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN APPLYING ANYONE'S WORK...
Oh, OK, sorry. I'd assumed that as you'd cited Dixon as a reference and quoted chunks of his text and diagrams in your paper that you felt his work was relevant to what you're doing. In any case, I do think that your frequencies are way too low for the skin effect to come into play. That's just my opinion although I do think it's supported by Dixon's math.
Quote from: notaspicegirl on June 21, 2008, 06:44:42 PM
SO ANYWAY THIS IS MY FIRST REAL STAB AT EXPLAINING WHY HV COILS CAN DECELERATE THE SYSTEM AT 999 RPM AND THEN ACCELERATE IT AT 1000 RPM. I DON'T FEEL THAT IT HAS TO BE 100% CORRECT.
Thane
It's a good thing you don't feel that the explanation is 100% correct, since the explanation seems to assume there is an innate difference between a low impedance coil and a high impedance one other than the impedance itself.
The explanation does little to show why a high impedance coil will give an acceleration effect and a low impedance coil will not (according to Thane), especially when it has already been shown that a low impedance coil can give exactly the same acceleration as a high impedance coil.
E.G Nali2001's low impedance coil causing acceleration when under partial load due to powering a globe.
Cheers
QuoteThe explanation does little to show why a high impedance coil will give an acceleration effect and a low impedance coil will not (according to Thane), especially when it has already been shown that a low impedance coil can give exactly the same acceleration as a high impedance coil.
LOW IMPEDANCE COILS DO NOT CAUSE ACCELERATION WHEN LAMINATED CORES ARE USED - PERIOD.
THE SUPPORTING DIXON ARTICLE DEALT WITH EDDY CURRENTS AND HOW A WIRE WITH HIGH EDDY CURRENTS BLOCKS CURRENT FROM THE CONDUCTOR CORE.
MY EXPLINATION ( 1st DRAFT ) DEALT WITH HOW EDDY CURRENTS CAN DISTORT THE CURRENT FLOW IN A HV COIL - AND EDDY CURRENTS CAN BE PRODUCED IN MORE THAN ONE MANNER.
IF YOU EMPLOY THE WATER ANALOGY AND GRADUALLY DECREASE THE "FLOW AREA" YOU MIGHT SEE AN INCREASE IN EDDY CURRENTS ON THE SIDES OF THE CHANNEL. - IF THIS OCCURS AS WELL IN AN ELECTRIC CONDUCTOR YOU MAY SEE A REDUCTION IN COIL INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELDS AND A REDUCTION IN THE COIL'S ABILITY TO PRODUCE A MAGNETIC FIELD AS PER LENZ'S LAW.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 22, 2008, 08:29:03 PM
LOW IMPEDANCE COILS DO NOT CAUSE ACCELERATION WHEN LAMINATED CORES ARE USED - PERIOD.
Thane
Funny about that PERIOD!
It was acceleration observed from a low impedance laminated pick-up core/coil in one of my Adams motors in the late 1990's that led me to studying this effect (in isolation from an Adams motor), and designing my own generator utilizing solenoid cores
(very low impedance), which also exhibited the acceleration effect.
Adams himself, noted and documented the acceleration effect (as early as 1977) in his low impedance laminated core pick-up coils.
Cheers
MY BAD,
LOW IMPEDANCE COILS ON A SALIENT POLE GENERATOR DESIGN DO NOT CAUSE ACCELERATION WHEN LAMINATED CORES ARE USED WHILE SUPPLYING POWER TO A LOAD AT THE UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA - PERIOD - BUT HIGH IMPEDANCE ONES DO - PERIOD.
CHEERS
(REAL PERSON USING REAL NAME - TRYING TO PRODUCE REAL RESULTS - NOT HIDING BEHIND A NICKNAME - PERIOD.)
Thane
Quote from: hoptoad on June 22, 2008, 08:49:21 PM
It was acceleration observed from a low impedance laminated pick-up core/coil in one of my Adams motors in the late 1990's that led me to studying this effect and designing my own generator utilizing solenoid (very, very low impedance) cores.
From what you've read here do you think all the various flavours of this effect (yours, Adams', Thane's, Steven's etc.) share the same cause? Or would you describe them more precisely as 'related'?
Also, on your webpages you described your findings as neither strictly within or strictly outside current teachings, and stated outright here that you felt your own work definitely was not OU. That said, do you share Thane's belief that there is a violation of the conservation of energy principle?
Finally, if your conclusions from your own work are completely correct would you describe that knowledge as new? If so, would it be a major revision to currently accepted knowledge, a footnote of sorts, or something much less than either of those?
Curious in Ontario
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 22, 2008, 09:03:22 PM
CHEERS
(REAL PERSON USING REAL NAME - TRYING TO PRODUCE REAL RESULTS - NOT HIDING BEHIND A NICKNAME - PERIOD.)
Thane
@Thane
If you think that knowing or not knowing who I am is somehow relevant, then ask Uli for my details, (he has my email address, my full name, and my phone number), then accept that I have my own reasons for remaining anonymous and please respect my wishes to stay that way.
Quote from: JustMe on June 22, 2008, 09:05:31 PM
From what you've read here do you think all the various flavours of this effect (yours, Adams', Thane's, Steven's etc.) share the same cause? Or would you describe them more precisely as 'related'?
Also, on your webpages you described your findings as neither strictly within or strictly outside current teachings, and stated outright here that you felt your own work definitely was not OU. That said, do you share Thane's belief that there is a violation of the conservation of energy principle?
Finally, if your conclusions from your own work are completely correct would you describe that knowledge as new? If so, would it be a major revision to currently accepted knowledge, a footnote of sorts, or something much less than either of those?
Curious in Ontario
@JustMe
I think that the effect is created from the same cause/s. I do not think that it is O/U, nor do I think that there is a violation of conservation of energy. I would be glad to be proved wrong. But so far, I'm not convinced that a violation of C of E exists or has been presented.
I wouldn't describe knowledge of this effect as new, but I would descibe the knowledge as being overlooked, understated, and not openly discussed or presented (taught) in normal electrical curriculums. I regard my own work on this phenomena as a mere footnote to existing knowledge.
I still believe that the effect can be utilised for positive outcomes.
Cheers
Quote from: LarryC on June 21, 2008, 04:59:51 PM
@A22,
Have you checked out:
Lloyd H. Dixon Jr.
Eddy Current Losses in Transformer Windings and Circuit Wiring
It not as simple as your chart indicates. We have serious layer issues!
Regards, Larry
PS: Should we all move over to Thane's new thread, where he would have some control?
I don't think so Larry, though I will say right up front I'm no expert on high frequency skin effect, I really have not looked at it until reading that pdf, but it is not addressing serial turns but parallel ones.
Basically what it states is that you can't make a low skin effect fat conductor by putting bundles of thin conductors together even if they are insulated because current loops will complete where they are in fact joined, the only way around this is to have the position of every strand in the package occupy every position equally over a given length so they are all equal.
It does not mean that a long HV coil of a thin conductor will suddenly gain a skin effect, assuming I understand it correctly which I think I do however minimally, though I have not read it close enough to be 100% and I do not have a sufficient intuitive understanding of the skin effect to say that that is not the case, still I am more that a little skeptical.
I am about to shoot a quick video of the torque increase measurement though I have a test I want to do first.
Quote from: hoptoad on June 22, 2008, 09:56:33 PM
@JustMe
I think that the effect is created from the same cause/s. I do not think that it is O/U, nor do I think that there is a violation of conservation of energy. I would be glad to be proved wrong. But so far, I'm not convinced that a violation of C of E exists or has been presented.
I wouldn't describe knowledge of this effect as new, but I would descibe the knowledge as being overlooked, understated, and not openly discussed or presented (taught) in normal electrical curriculums. I regard my own work on this phenomena as a mere footnote to existing knowledge.
I still believe that the effect can be utilised for positive outcomes.
Cheers
It would be worth noting however that hoptoads conclusions do not work if we consider much of the evidence generated by various Thanerators as valid.
We would also need to discount Adam's conclusions and evidence, as well as probably throwing aside basic principles of electromagnetism. (Hopfully I misunderstood him, but he seemed to say in one place that a coils magnetic field can be out of sync with the current producing it!)
Assuming I misunderstood him on that point then I guess you could say there is a slim chance he is right and many results are inexplicably bogus, but it would be a reap
leap of faith.
Quote from: aether22 on June 23, 2008, 12:49:46 AM
(Hopfully I misunderstood him, but he seemed to say in one place that a coils magnetic field can be out of sync with the current producing it!)
Assuming I misunderstood him on that point then I guess you could say there is a slim chance he is right and many results are inexplicably bogus, but it would be a reap leap of faith.
Yes, I think you have misunderstood what I was saying about the magnetic field (of the core) being out of phase with the coil current.
Although the changing magnetic field around the wire that forms a coil on the ferromagnetic core is in phase with the wires own current, the reluctance of the ferromagnetic core causes changes to it's own magnetic flux to lag changes in current of the coil (or magnetic field of magnet) producing it.
If flux induced into an inductive ferromagnetic core instantly reached the levels dictated by the current, and then instantly demagnitised when current ceases, and then instantly reached opposite polarity flux levels dictated by current in the opposite direction, then there would be no such thing as a hysterisis loop or BH curve/s in the first place.
But ferromagnetic materials do not instantly change their magnetic flux in direct relationship with either current changes or inducing magnetic field changes, instead, they always lag behind to a degree which is determined by the reluctance / permeability characteristics of the core.
Cheers
Why no video? Well the effect has left me, and I was going to make a video anyway but I noticed smoke coming from the (300w) motor and so stopped it and am calling it a day (er, night).
I first tried to measure the effect in a different way but the effect didn't appear, so I tried it the old way but the effect didn't appear, maybe the speed was a tad low?, but acceleration was still occurring on shorting the coils only no changes in motor torque either way. (if the generator is creating the acceleration the motor torque would decrease, if the motor creates the acceleration the motor torque would increase, no change really just indicates my means of measuring isn't sensitive enough suddenly)
With these still ambiguous results I am wary of the next planned experiments (isolation) for fear their results will be just as potentially unclear. (acceleration could be explained many ways while even no acceleration would at best only replicate Thanes results which he now discounts, and if he can discount it (not that there is any coherent theory as to how) then what really would my replication prove?)
This makes me want to consider the surrogate experiment next finally where while a negative result won't be definitive a positive (accelerating) result in the surrogate motor would be proof positive without any possible doubt.
I will make a video tomorrow if I can show the effect or not, though if I can't it might just be the most boring video to ever appear on youtube.
QuoteYes, I think you have misunderstood what I was saying about the magnetic field (of the core) being out of phase with the coil current. Although the changing magnetic field around the wire that forms a coil on the ferromagnetic core is in phase with the wires own current
WHO SAYS IT IS IN PHASE?
WHY WOULD A HC COIL BE IN PHASE - AND CAUSE DECELERATION.
AND HV COILS BE IN PHASE AND CAUSE ACCELERATION BUT ONLY ABOVE A CERTAIN FREQUENCY?
MY HUNCH HAS ALWAYS SUGGESTED THE HV COIL'S INCREASED ??? (PUT YOUR OWN IDEA HERE)
IS CAUSING ENOUGH OF A DELAY TO CREATE ACCELERATION. IT MAY BE A DELAY IN FIELD PRODUCTION
OR CORE LAG ETC - BUT THE EFFECT IS REAL.
REAL ENOUGH TO OVERCOME LENZ'S LAW EFFECTS (AT NO ENERGY COST OR LESS) AND LIGHT THE LIGHTBULB AND DELIVER POWER TO A LOAD WHEN NEITHER OF THESE WERE POSSIBLE PRIOR TO ENGAGING THE HV COILS.
SO BRINGING THESE KINDS OF IDEAS AND RESULTS TO THE LIGHT OF DAY IS NOT EASY AS ANYONE CAN CLEARLY SEE - BUT THE PEOPLE WHO DID SO PREVIOUSLY - DID NOT DO IT WHILE
HIDING UNDER A LILLY PAD - BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT AS I DO THAT THE INFORMATION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THEIR FEAR - MORE IMPORTANT THAN THEIR INFINITELY SHORT (AND OTHERWISE MEANINGLESS) LIVES.
SO DO I RESPECT YOUR RIGHT TO BE ANONYMOUS - NO.
DO I THINK YOU HAVE ZERO CREDIBILITY BECAUSE YOU ARE FEARFUL - YES.
ARE YOU GOING TO DIE - YES
IS LIVING IN FEAR WORSE THAN DEATH - YES
YOUR PERSISTENT COWARDLINESS ONLY JUSTIFIES WHY TERRORISM EXISTS AND CONTINUES - INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THAT IS THE
REAL REASON WHY I AM DOING WHAT I AM DOING.
Thane
Quote from: aether22 on June 23, 2008, 05:03:19 AM
Why no video? Well the effect has left me [...]
Ach, disappointing.
Quoteif the generator is creating the acceleration the motor torque would decrease
Not so, I'm afraid. When the generator causes acceleration by reducing losses, the motor torque stays the same. It is the difference between motor torque and generator back-torque that accelerates the rotor.
So... this result quite contradicts your earlier one. Do you know what changes you may have made that might affect it?
Quote from: Mr.Entropy on June 23, 2008, 02:05:33 PM
Ach, disappointing.Not so, I'm afraid. When the generator causes acceleration by reducing losses, the motor torque stays the same. It is the difference between motor torque and generator back-torque that accelerates the rotor.
So... this result quite contradicts your earlier one. Do you know what changes you may have made that might affect it?
There are no changes.
But I disagree, if I am pushing a car and someone realizes the hand brake was on just a bit and takes it off the car will accelerate but I can not transmit as much force to it anymore.
It still accelerates but the pressure must reduce as acceleration is the act of the thing being pushed moving away from the thing pushing it.
The only way it could remain constant would be if more current flowed through the stator but that does not happen.
Now I am not saying the different would be huge but it is real, except possibly for induction motors quirky torque increase at higher rpm's.
Quote from: aether22 on June 23, 2008, 04:32:25 PM
... if I am pushing a car and someone realizes the hand brake was on just a bit and takes it off the car will accelerate but I can not transmit as much force to it anymore.
It still accelerates but the pressure must reduce as acceleration is the act of the thing being pushed moving away from the thing pushing it...
Not true, A22. There's nothing to stop you "transmitting as much force to it" - it will just accelerate more, that's all.
Your statement "acceleration is the act of the thing being pushed moving away from the thing pushing it" is incorrect. The correct definition is given by this equation, which is not the same thing at all:
acceleration = force / mass
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 23, 2008, 07:27:58 AM
WHO SAYS IT IS IN PHASE?
WHY WOULD A HC COIL BE IN PHASE - AND CAUSE DECELERATION.
AND HV COILS BE IN PHASE AND CAUSE ACCELERATION BUT ONLY ABOVE A CERTAIN FREQUENCY?
MY HUNCH HAS ALWAYS SUGGESTED THE HV COIL'S INCREASED ??? (PUT YOUR OWN IDEA HERE)
IS CAUSING ENOUGH OF A DELAY TO CREATE ACCELERATION. IT MAY BE A DELAY IN FIELD PRODUCTION
OR CORE LAG ETC - BUT THE EFFECT IS REAL.
REAL ENOUGH TO OVERCOME LENZ'S LAW EFFECTS (AT NO ENERGY COST OR LESS) AND LIGHT THE LIGHTBULB AND DELIVER POWER TO A LOAD WHEN NEITHER OF THESE WERE POSSIBLE PRIOR TO ENGAGING THE HV COILS.
SO BRINGING THESE KINDS OF IDEAS AND RESULTS TO THE LIGHT OF DAY IS NOT EASY AS ANYONE CAN CLEARLY SEE - BUT THE PEOPLE WHO DID SO PREVIOUSLY - DID NOT DO IT WHILE HIDING UNDER A LILLY PAD - BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT AS I DO THAT THE INFORMATION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THEIR FEAR - MORE IMPORTANT THAN THEIR INFINITELY SHORT (AND OTHERWISE MEANINGLESS) LIVES.
SO DO I RESPECT YOUR RIGHT TO BE ANONYMOUS - NO.
DO I THINK YOU HAVE ZERO CREDIBILITY BECAUSE YOU ARE FEARFUL - YES.
ARE YOU GOING TO DIE - YES
IS LIVING IN FEAR WORSE THAN DEATH - YES
YOUR PERSISTENT COWARDLINESS ONLY JUSTIFIES WHY TERRORISM EXISTS AND CONTINUES - INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THAT IS THE REAL REASON WHY I AM DOING WHAT I AM DOING.
Thane
::) .... Oh what a hero !
And yes you are right - information is important. More important than ones own ego.
Public knowledge of identities is not important - unless you're touting for other peoples money (funding) which I am not. And if you want the glory / accolades for bringing information to light - which I don't.
I have
never said that your effect is not real. I simply disagree with your explanation for the effect.
Good luck with your efforts - With your attitude, I think now, more than ever, you will need it!
QuoteI am pushing a car and someone realizes the hand brake was on just a bit and takes it off the car will accelerate but I can not transmit as much force to it anymore.
WHAT IF HOPTOAD REALIZED OUmon WAS ACTUALLY STUCK UNDER THE CAR BACK IN 1940 AND IT WASN'T THE HANDBRAKE AT ALL - BUT NO ONE CARED BECAUSE HE HAD NOU CREDIBILITY?
MONDAY TEST RESULTSFURTHER TO MY "INCREASED FREQUENCY HYPOTHESIS" I CHANGED MY 6 POLE ROTOR TO AN 18 POLE ROTOR TODAY - 18 x 2 MAGNETS.
GENERALLY I CANNOT GET ACCELERATION BELOW 75ish VOLTS TO THE MOTOR STATOR.
WITH 36 MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR AND 3 TIMES THE WEIGHT I AM NOW ABLE TO GET ACCELERATION AT 56 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR WITH A DECREASE IN ROTOR SPEED BUT AN INCREASE IN COIL FREQUENCY.
ALSO:FROM TABLE 4 OF THE FULL SPEED TEST DATA PREVIOUSLY POSTED THE HC POWER DROPPED FROM 14.9 WATTS TO 7.7 WHEN THE HV COILS WERE ENGAGED. NOW WITH THE ADDED MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR THE VOLTAGE ACROSS A 1 OHM LOAD DROPPED BY 0.2 VOLTS ONLY WHEN THE HV COIL WAS ADDED.
THANKS TO I_RON'S CONTRIBUTIONS I AM NOW WINDING MY HV COILS ON TOP OF THE HC COILS AND BOTH ARE STARTED IN TANDEM SO CORE LOSSES ARE MINIMIZED.
THIS IS IMPORTANT FROM A CHEEZE WIZZ DUNE BUGGY POINT OF VIEW BECAUSE THE GENERATOR CRITICAL MINIMUM SPEED (BEFORE BRAKING STARTS) IS REDUCED
AND CORE LOSSES ARE REDUCED
AND GENERATOR OUTPUT IS INCREASED.
Thane
QuoteI simply disagree with your explanation for the effect.
YOU HAVE NO GROUNDS TO DISAGREE ONLY AN ANONYMOUS OPINION - YOU DON'T NEED TO MAKE ME WRONG SO YOU CAN BE RIGHT - THAT'S PB'S JOB.
ANYWAY I ALREADY KNOW I AM NOT 100% RIGHT AND I DON'T CARE.
MY EXPLANATION IS ONLY A STARTING POINT WHICH IS MEANT TO OPEN THE SUBJECT UP FOR DEBATE AND TESTING. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO CONTRIBUTE CONCERNING EDDY CURRENTS IN HIGH GAUGE HIGH IMPEDANCE WIRE I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT.
IF I_RON, LARRYC, OR A22 DISAGREE AFTER DOING SOME WORK WHICH IS RELATED TO THIS TOPIC NOT SOMETHING OFF TOPIC THEN I WOULD HAVE AN ATTITUDE OF GRATITUDE EVEN IF I DID NOT LIKE WHAT THEY ARE SAYING.
I AM SORRY WE LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE OUR POLITICIANS AND CORPORATIONS ACT WITHOUT BEING ACCOUNTABLE - I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THE INTERNET POT SHOTS I GET ON AN ONGOING BASIS - SO I OVERREACTED -
MY APPOLOGIES GEORGE CARLIN MADE ME DO IT!I HAVE TO ADMIT I DO ENJOY FROGS LEGS WITH GARLIC BUTTER THOUGH! :P
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 23, 2008, 06:19:48 PM
I HAVE TO ADMIT I DO ENJOY FROGS LEGS WITH GARLIC BUTTER THOUGH! :P
Thane
So do I, but my wife says the butter doesn't match my natural skin colour ! :D
@Thane,
A little more info on your new 18 pole rotor would be appreciated. And I am also looking forward to seeing the results of oscilloscope testing of the two coil types using remote coil sensors. Still during the Tim Conway shuffle, so don't how long it will be before I can test again.
Regards, Larry
PS: Do them frog legs Cajun style, hot peppered, battered and fried chicken style. Love them! Taste like fried chicken ;D
QuoteStill during the Tim Conway shuffle
DORF in SHOCK?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 23, 2008, 07:37:00 PM
DORF in SHOCK?
No, Tim Conway as Mr. Tudball on Carol Burnett Show. Only took baby steps.
L
Quote from: hoptoad on June 23, 2008, 03:04:38 AM
Yes, I think you have misunderstood what I was saying about the magnetic field (of the core) being out of phase with the coil current.
Although the changing magnetic field around the wire that forms a coil on the ferromagnetic core is in phase with the wires own current, the reluctance of the ferromagnetic core causes changes to it's own magnetic flux to lag changes in current of the coil (or magnetic field of magnet) producing it.
@Aether
I just thought I'd re word my previous post to
hopefully clarify it a little better.? See below.
Although the magnetic field surrounding a current carrying wire is in phase with the current that is producing it, the reluctance of the ferromagnetic core causes a lag between changes to it's own magnetic flux and changes in current through the coil.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on June 24, 2008, 05:31:14 AM
@Aether
I just thought I'd re word my previous post to hopefully clarify it a little better.? See below.
Although the magnetic field surrounding a current carrying wire is in phase with the current that is producing it, the reluctance of the ferromagnetic core causes a lag between changes to it's own magnetic flux and changes in current through the coil.
Cheers
Yes I got what you meant and agree obviously.
The point I would make is that hysteresis lag slows the rotor and I can't see the shorted generator coil change that although maybe it can?
Quote from: aether22 on June 24, 2008, 06:05:06 AM
Yes I got what you meant and agree obviously.
The point I would make is that hysteresis lag slows the rotor and I can't see the shorted generator coil change that although maybe it can?
A22 - MAKE A LIST OF ALL THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A HC COIL AND A HV COIL.
THEN NARROW IT DOWN TO WHAT CHANGES AS FREQUENCY CHANGES.
THE YOU HAVE A STARTING POINT IN YOUR ANALYSIS.
HOW DOES AETHER PRODUCTION VARY FROM A HC COIL TO A HV COIL?
T
Proximity effect is the tendency for current to flow in loops or
concentrated distributions due to the presence of magnetic fields generated by nearby conductors. In transformers and inductors, proximity effect losses are generally more significant than skin effect losses. In Litz wire windings, proximity effect may be sub-divided into internal proximity effect (the effect of other currents within the bundle) and outer proximity effect ( the effect of the current in other bundles). The reason for twisting or weaving Litz wire, rather than just grouping fine conductors together, is to ensure that the strand currents are equal. Simple twisted bunched conductor wire can accomplish this adequately where proximity effect would be the only significant problem with solid wire. Where skin effect would also be a problem, more complex Litz wire constructions can be used to ensure equal strand currents. Therefore, in a well-designed construction, strand currents are nearly equal.
concentrated distributions I HAVE BEEN PLAYING AROUND WITH THIS IDEA LATELY BY DELIBERATELY WINDING MY COILS IN A NON-UNIFORM MANNER TO CREATE CONCENTRATED FIELDS IN DIFFERENT SPOTS ON THE CORE TO SEE ANY UNUSUAL EFFECTS.
QuoteNo, Tim Conway as Mr. Tudball on Carol Burnett Show. Only took baby steps.
L
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF LARRYC!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 23, 2008, 07:27:58 AM
WHO SAYS IT IS IN PHASE?
The phasing I was talking about in this instance is the phase relationship between the (induced) current in the shorted coil and the magnetic field that surrounds the wire of the coil. The establishment says so ! Who am I to argue ;) :P
It is a different phase relationship to the direct relationship between the (inducing) magnets and the core, or the relationship between coil current and the magnetic field it wants to create in the core in opposition to the field induced by the magnets.
Quote from: CRANKYpants
WHY WOULD A HC COIL BE IN PHASE - AND CAUSE DECELERATION.
AND HV COILS BE IN PHASE AND CAUSE ACCELERATION BUT ONLY ABOVE A CERTAIN FREQUENCY?
Neither the HC coil current nor the HV coil current is in phase with voltage produced by the inducing magnets. They both will have current lagging the voltage. At short circuit they are both at their maximum phase shift for that particular frequency. It's a matter of how many degrees.
For any given frequency each core will be out of phase, but the actual phase angle is dependent on the impedance and resistance of the coil.
The higher the impedance (inductive reactance) to resistance ratio is, the greater the phase angle. The maximum (theoretical) phase angle is 90 degrees.
The HV coil will have a higher phase angle for any given frequency than the HC coil up to a maximum of 90 degrees, so it will react more favourably at lower frequencies than the HC coil.
Because your HC coils are very high guage, low impedance coils, you will need a very high frequency for the acceleration effect to kick in.
Give the rotor enough revs and magnet pairs to increase frequency, and eventually it will, because the impedance will rise with increased frequency, and with it the impedance/resistance ratio will increase, resulting in increasing phase angle.
There is a threshold phase angle at which acceleration will manifest. The hard thing to predict here is the actual threshold angle for any given inductor.
Because the effect is non linear, it is hard to study (as you have been finding out) and even harder to formulate a basis for mathematical behavioural predictions.
For your current practical and experimental requirements, you seem to have found impedance ranges you are happy with.
Quote from: CRANKYpants
MY HUNCH HAS ALWAYS SUGGESTED THE HV COIL'S INCREASED ??? (PUT YOUR OWN IDEA HERE)
IS CAUSING ENOUGH OF A DELAY TO CREATE ACCELERATION. IT MAY BE A DELAY IN FIELD PRODUCTION
OR CORE LAG ETC - BUT THE EFFECT IS REAL.
A delay is what a current phase angle is. A delay between pressure (induced voltage) and reaction to that pressure (induced current). The higher the impedance the higher the delay.
Quote from: CRANKYpants
REAL ENOUGH TO OVERCOME LENZ'S LAW EFFECTS (AT NO ENERGY COST OR LESS) AND LIGHT THE LIGHTBULB AND DELIVER POWER TO A LOAD WHEN NEITHER OF THESE WERE POSSIBLE PRIOR TO ENGAGING THE HV COILS.
Yes it's real, and potentially very useful !
Quote from: CRANKYpants
GENERALLY I CANNOT GET ACCELERATION BELOW 75ish VOLTS TO THE MOTOR STATOR.
WITH 36 MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR AND 3 TIMES THE WEIGHT I AM NOW ABLE TO GET ACCELERATION AT 56 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR WITH A DECREASE IN ROTOR SPEED BUT AN INCREASE IN COIL FREQUENCY.
Your latest test results with increased magnet pairs bears out this dependency on frequency / impedance, with your rotor exhibiting acceleration at a lower RPM and motor voltage, but an overall higher rotor frequency. It is exactly what I predicted to you would happen if you increased the rotor frequency by increasing magnet pairs.
Cheers .... KneeDeep
Quote from: aether22 on June 24, 2008, 06:05:06 AM
Yes I got what you meant and agree obviously.
The point I would make is that hysteresis lag slows the rotor and I can't see the shorted generator coil change that although maybe it can?
I think the hysterisis lag is a minor though active player in this effect. The current lag and core lag are additive with respect to the timing of the production of counter mmf. The counter mmf produced by the induced current is normally the greatest oppositional factor. A change in the phase of the current results in a change in the phase of the counter mmf.
Cheers
Jeez dudes, all fine that you're having this disagreement,
but it seems quite simple to me: if the perepeteia concept works,
such a generator should produce more output than input.
Test it, see if it does. If so, then it does. If not, then it doesn't.
Who cares what you think the explanation is? The important thing is
to know if it works or not. You can ponder possible explanations later,
while you're sitting in your nice perepeteia-generator-powered house
under a similarly powered lamp. ;) ;D
And I can't help to point out that TYPING EVERYTHING IN CAPITAL
LETTERS IS VERY ANNOYING! ;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 23, 2008, 07:27:58 AM
SO BRINGING THESE KINDS OF IDEAS AND RESULTS TO THE LIGHT OF DAY IS NOT EASY AS ANYONE CAN CLEARLY SEE
Thane
That's what has struck me - and educated me - more than anything in the months that I've been following. When your observations went from intriguing to Dr. Marcus Zahn to something he wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole overnight, I sat up and noticed. Mainstream science gets so many things so wonderfully right, but it doesn't do this stuff well at all. If this effect can indeed be applied for positive outcomes then it is extremely regrettable that related observations and work may have been marginalized or dismissed outright for more than three decades.
There are some here who have made little secret of their disdain for some of your particular idiosyncrasies, but those characteristics come from the same palette as your unique effectiveness at bringing, sustaining and building attention and support from quarters that matter. If this technology proves worthy of develoment you will deserve so much credit for this aspect of things, without which you'd still be in your basement and nobody would be talking about any of it. It's a real and significant accomplishment that is noteworthy independant of the eventual outcome.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 24, 2008, 06:25:29 AM
A22 - MAKE A LIST OF ALL THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A HC COIL AND A HV COIL.
THEN NARROW IT DOWN TO WHAT CHANGES AS FREQUENCY CHANGES.
THE YOU HAVE A STARTING POINT IN YOUR ANALYSIS.
HOW DOES AETHER PRODUCTION VARY FROM A HC COIL TO A HV COIL?
First electrically one thing that changes as speed increases is electrical frequency and the induced voltage, although again as for the skin effect you need hugely thick conductors to get it at frequencies from 35hz (6 pole 700rpm) to 150hz (6 pole 3,000rpm) and the thin thin wire you use is good to some very high frequencies.
Aetherically, there are 2 changes.
First as the aetheric rate of change increases so does the aetheric version of voltage (speed/pressure), although the difference is that aetheric induction is at right angles to the inducing flow unlike electrical induction.
Secondly aetheric flow through a conductor (aetheric guide) tends to be faster the thinner the guide is. (really I know thinner is better I just don't know if there is a limit or not, or some tradeoff)
All of these things help create a stronger right angle aether flow into the rotor and through the shaft.
One possibility is that I was able to get the acceleration with HCC because my rotor offers a lower aetheric resistance and hence required less aetheric speed/pressure, if you buy a large spoked cast iron pulley and bush like Luc and I have you may well find that coils of fewer turns are working. (and again I'll remind you that you have already glimpsed such before where a single (non-laminated) HV coil would not work in an isolation test but given a lesser challenge it powers through)
Quote
Proximity effect is the tendency for current to flow in loops or concentrated distributions due to the presence of magnetic fields generated by nearby conductors. In transformers and inductors, proximity effect losses are generally more significant than skin effect losses. In Litz wire windings, proximity effect may be sub-divided into internal proximity effect (the effect of other currents within the bundle) and outer proximity effect ( the effect of the current in other bundles). The reason for twisting or weaving Litz wire, rather than just grouping fine conductors together, is to ensure that the strand currents are equal. Simple twisted bunched conductor wire can accomplish this adequately where proximity effect would be the only significant problem with solid wire. Where skin effect would also be a problem, more complex Litz wire constructions can be used to ensure equal strand currents. Therefore, in a well-designed construction, strand currents are nearly equal.
concentrated distributions
If you think about what is being talked about there I think it's clear.
it is not about series coils but parallel coils or multistrand conductors.
If the induced voltage in one is greater than the other the induced voltages will not be equal and you will create a current loop, it is like putting 2 batteries in parallel when one is better charged, it will waste power putting current into the other battery.
That is why it says to move the wires around inside the package because each must be equally induced over a length (before they come together).
However the HV wire is so thin that at the frequencies used it's a million miles from any skin effect or uneven induction.
Quote from: hoptoad on June 24, 2008, 06:46:21 AM
The HV coil will have a higher phase angle for any given frequency than the HC coil up to a maximum of 90 degrees, so it will react more favourably at lower frequencies than the HC coil.
Why?
Quote
Because your HC coils are very high guage, low impedance coils, you will need a very high frequency for the acceleration effect to kick in.
again why? what is the difference?
Quote
Give the rotor enough revs and magnet pairs to increase frequency, and eventually it will, because the impedance will rise with increased frequency, and with it the impedance/resistance ratio will increase, resulting in increasing phase angle.
Ah, now have you not bothered to listen to a damn thing I have said?
Or do you have an answer I am unaware of?
BTW I would like to momentarily cite the flyback transformer and autoignition coil and neon sign transformer as technologies that wouldn't be able to output power if you were correct.
More turns done mean a greater impedance yes, but the voltage is amplified at the same rate as are the number of turns etc, everything vital stays the same.
Quote
There is a threshold phase angle at which acceleration will manifest.
I think by acceleration here you mean 'reduction of braking effect'.
Quote
The hard thing to predict here is the actual threshold angle for any given inductor.
Because the effect is non linear, it is hard to study (as you have been finding out) and even harder to formulate a basis for mathematical behavioral predictions.
For your current practical and experimental requirements, you seem to have found impedance ranges you are happy with.
A delay is what a current phase angle is. A delay between pressure (induced voltage) and reaction to that pressure (induced current). The higher the impedance the higher the delay.
Yes it's real, and potentially very useful !
Your latest test results with increased magnet pairs bears out this dependency on frequency / impedance, with your rotor exhibiting acceleration at a lower RPM and motor voltage, but an overall higher rotor frequency. It is exactly what I predicted to you would happen if you increased the rotor frequency by increasing magnet pairs.
Cheers .... KneeDeep
Almost any theory of what is occurring would conclude that more rotor magnets means more effect generally.
Quote from: aether22 on June 24, 2008, 04:57:59 PM
Why? again why? what is the difference?
More turns done mean a greater impedance yes, but the voltage is amplified at the same rate as are the number of turns etc, everything vital stays the same.
Do you understand the relationship between the resistance and the inductive reactance of the coil, and the role each plays in phase angle. ?
The amplitude of the voltage in a coil has no direct relationship to the phase angle between the voltage and current.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/phase.html
Quote from: hoptoad on June 24, 2008, 06:12:45 PM
Do you understand the relationship between the resistance and the inductive reactance of the coil, and the role each plays in phase angle. ?
The amplitude of the voltage in a coil has no direct relationship to the phase angle between the voltage and current.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/phase.html
I'm sorry that I can't comment on this right now, but my new secretary turned abruptly and
knockered me into next week ;D
Almost walking normally, L
Quote from: LarryC on June 24, 2008, 06:49:44 PM
I'm sorry that I can't comment on this right now, but my new secretary turned abruptly and knockered me into next week ;D
Almost walking normally, L
You lucky bast...d ! :D :D
THAT'S MORE LIKE IT ... LAUGHTER IS THE BREAST MEDICINE!
SORRY FOR THE CAPS AND BEING A SEXIST PIG - BUT IT DOES GO IN LINE WITH THE TUDBALL THING.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on June 24, 2008, 02:59:17 PM
That's what has struck me - and educated me - more than anything in the months that I've been following. When your observations went from intriguing to Dr. Marcus Zahn to something he wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole overnight, I sat up and noticed. Mainstream science gets so many things so wonderfully right, but it doesn't do this stuff well at all. If this effect can indeed be applied for positive outcomes then it is extremely regrettable that related observations and work may have been marginalized or dismissed outright for more than three decades.
Hi, JM - great photo, by the way!
I think it would be as well to allow for the possibility that Dr Zahn, and others, rejected this on the basis of a rational analysis rather than through some irrational bias of the mainstream establishment. After all, those folks know a great deal more about how this stuff works than you, or me, or Thane, or anyone else on this forum for that matter. And you'd have thought that after decades of this concept being "out there" at least one of those smart guys would have latched onto it and made his fortune, wouldn't you?
So when multiple people with letters after their names keep repeating the observation that this effect is completely explained through magnetic braking applied to the torque-speed curve of the standard induction motor, then I think one should at least consider the possibility that they may be, well, right. At the very least, it sets the scene for very simple experiments that could be done to refute their explanation - for example, to demonstrate the effect with a prime mover other than an induction motor, let's say?
SPEAKING OF PIGS - RIGHT ON CUE THERE DUDE(SS).
T
If anybody wants to see the interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJIh70IZua8 ;D ;D
LarryC trying to walk, just watch the beginning, rest is boring:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5BMVmOWzfk ;D
This will kill you, Elephant stories:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qqE_WmagjY ;D ;D ;D
Enjoy, L
Quote from: OUmon on June 24, 2008, 07:44:53 PM
Hi, JM - great photo, by the way!
Thanks baby...you too!
Quote from: JustMe on June 25, 2008, 12:01:49 AM
Thanks baby...you too!
The
Thanemanian Devil Club members have met and now decree that you are forthwith the
Divine Miss JM. Live long and prosper, and may there be no limit to your powers, Divinest.
Your loyal subjects, L,T,A,I,H,S, etc.
Quote from: OUmon on June 24, 2008, 07:44:53 PM
Hi, JM - great photo, by the way!
I think it would be as well to allow for the possibility that Dr Zahn, and others, rejected this on the basis of a rational analysis rather than through some irrational bias of the mainstream establishment. After all, those folks know a great deal more about how this stuff works than you, or me, or Thane, or anyone else on this forum for that matter. And you'd have thought that after decades of this concept being "out there" at least one of those smart guys would have latched onto it and made his fortune, wouldn't you?
So when multiple people with letters after their names keep repeating the observation that this effect is completely explained through magnetic braking applied to the torque-speed curve of the standard induction motor, then I think one should at least consider the possibility that they may be, well, right. At the very least, it sets the scene for very simple experiments that could be done to refute their explanation - for example, to demonstrate the effect with a prime mover other than an induction motor, let's say?
Rational analysis? Dr. Zahn wanted nothing to do with it - overnight - because it got publicly associated with quackery. From the Toronto Star follow-up after Zahn withdrew his active interest, paraphrased from the rather stern original: "I told him I would having nothing to do with it if he mentioned perpetual motion". Worth mentioning here too that the only people I noted calling it perpetual motion were the skeptic organizations. This is not meant to disparage Dr. Zahn, indeed Thane only speaks well of him, but to restate that mainstream science can't be relied on to bless all pursuits equally. It's naive and silly to imagine otherwise. Naive and silly to think that 'Science' and it's people and methods are infallible and invulnerable to fundamental human nature.
To me your reasoning is weak all the way down. Appeal to authority is never a particularly strong argument, especially when that authority has a demonstrable bias against an idea, however grounded in popular wisdom that bias may be. And it's pretty tough to latch on to something if you ignore it in the first place.
Anybody could be right about anything, including you. But once one moves from simply claiming (correctly) that Thane hasn't proven his hypothesis to providing an alternate explantion the onus moves to the person making the alternate claim to provide the proof. It seems to me that this is a basic tenet of skepticism. Proof here will not come from pictures of torque-speed curves, no matter how 'accessible' they may be. Thane doesn't have to take on the burden of proving anybody else wrong, he only has to prove himself right. Is it a long shot? Probably. Are his goals worthy ones deserving of our support? I think they are.
Quote from: hoptoad on June 24, 2008, 06:12:45 PM
Do you understand the relationship between the resistance and the inductive reactance of the coil, and the role each plays in phase angle. ?
The amplitude of the voltage in a coil has no direct relationship to the phase angle between the voltage and current.
I think I may be guilty of assuming your argument is much the same as Thanes argument that the self inductance of a HV coil is higher and that stops current from flowing and hence I could use similar arguments). (I should say enough current from flowing to deliver an equivalent power)
No, instead why don't you explain to me why a HV coil with it's greater impedance will have a different phase?
Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 02:12:26 AM
I think I may be guilty of assuming your argument is much the same as Thanes argument that the self inductance of a HV coil is higher and that stops current from flowing and hence I could use similar arguments). (I should say enough current from flowing to deliver an equivalent power)
No, instead why don't you explain to me why a HV coil with it's greater impedance will have a different phase?
It will
very likely have a greater Inductive Reactance X
L proportional to its Resistance R, even though the Resistance R will be greater than that of the HC coil. If so, the phase angle of the Impedance
Z will be greater. If the
proportion is less, then the phase angle will be less.
In any event, the proportion will not be the same, and therefore the angle will differ.
Z being the square root of the sum of X
L squared and R squared. (simplified)
I've ignored the Xc component - the capacitive reactance caused by the coil winding capacitance, but it is also represented in the full equation in the phasor diagram shown below.
In both coils, without an external resistive load (short circuited instead), the only Resistance R, is the internal resistance of the coil/s. At these relatively low frequencies (up to few hundred Hz) , the value of resistance will remain largely unchanged (stable) with any increases in frequency, but the X
L will increase with frequency, and so will the phase angle of Z as a result.
When using an external incrementally variable resistive load, you will see an increase in resistance (less load) leads to angle decrease and deceleration, and a decrease in resistance (more load) leads to angle increase and acceleration.
Note that it is the
proportion of the X
L and R which is important to the final value of the phase angle.
The actual value of Z is not the primary consideration. The acceleration effect will occur in lower impedance coils when the
proportion of X
L and R creates the necessary threshold phase angle.
See phasor diagram attached. Increase X
L - angle increases, decrease X
L - angle decreases.
P.S.
It is not impossible for both the HV and HC coils to have the same phase angle, but the huge difference in coil parameters, e.g. guage, number of turns and layers, (resistance and inductance) etc, create very high odds against that coincidence occuring.
Cheers KneeDeep :)
Quote from: hoptoad on June 25, 2008, 04:50:23 AM
It will very likely have a greater Inductive Reactance XL proportional to its Resistance R, even though the Resistance R will be greater than that of the HC coil. If so, the phase angle of the Impedance Z will be greater. If the proportion is less, then the phase angle will be less.
In any event, the proportion will not be the same, and therefore the angle will differ.
I do not see why the inductive reluctance (I like the term 'self inductance' more but anyway) is going to outpace the increase of resistance, but anyway I agree that by having less resistance relative to it's inductive reactance will use less of the energy and move the phase closer to 90 deg.
Quote
Z being the square root of the sum of XL squared and R squared. (simplified)
I've ignored the Xc component - the capacitive reactance caused by the coil winding capacitance, but it is also represented in the full equation in the phasor diagram shown below.
In both coils, without an external resistive load (short circuited instead), the only Resistance R, is the internal resistance of the coil/s. At these relatively low frequencies (up to few hundred Hz) , the value of resistance will remain largely unchanged (stable) with any increases in frequency, but the XL will increase with frequency, and so will the phase angle of Z as a result.
Agreed.
Quote
When using an external incrementally variable resistive load, you will see an increase in resistance (less load) leads to angle decrease and deceleration, and a decrease in resistance (more load) leads to angle increase and acceleration.
I have already written posts about this saying the same things but anyway...
Quote
Note that it is the proportion of the XL and R which is important to the final value of the phase angle.
The actual value of Z is not the primary consideration. The acceleration effect will occur in lower impedance coils when the proportion of XL and R creates the necessary threshold phase angle.
See phasor diagram attached. Increase XL - angle increases, decrease XL - angle decreases.
You really failed to answer my question, if you double the number of turns both the inductance and resistance will be 4 times greater and the phase will be the same.
ALSO WORTH CONSIDERING IS COIL CAPACITANCE IN THE HV WINDINGS AND HOW THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE PERFORMANCE WITH RESPECT TO CREATING A RESONANCE EFFECT.
ALSO WOULD COIL CAPACITANCE AND INDUCTANCE BE IN SERIES OR PARALLEL AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A CAPACITOR DISCHARGES THROUGH AN INDUCTOR?
WHAT IF THE COIL CAPACITANCE DELAYED THE COILS INDUCED VOLTAGE JUST ENOUGH TO CREATE THE LENZ REQUIRED MAGNETIC FIELD WHEN THE MAGNET WAS RECEDING FROM THE COIL RATHER THAN APPROACHING? (THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY FAVOURITE POSSIBILITY - SINCE I CAN "SEE" IT HAPPENING).
SOMEONE TELL ME WHY THIS IS NOT PAUSIBLE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 25, 2008, 07:00:49 AM
SOMEONE TELL ME WHY THIS IS NOT PAUSIBLE.
T
2 reasons.
The first is that if the phase moves beyond 90 degrees the rotor will not be assisting the stators current but hurting it, you simply won't get it beyond 90 deg.
And if you did it would mean that the coils were getting power from elsewhere not from the rotor. (obviously this is defined as a motor)
The second is far more general and it is that there really are no holes in the conservation of energy until you go and change the rules, the rules can't be changed with inductance and capacitance etc...
You need to actually engineer the medium of matter and energy. (although inductors and capacitors correctly designed can affect the aether)
In short there are no logical loopholes, there are no 'mistakes', you can't out think the universe and trick it into giving you more energy, you need to work with it to redefine the rules of the game.
That is the overwhelming truth I have come to accept.
Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 06:42:41 AM
You really failed to answer my question, if you double the number of turns both the inductance and resistance will be 4 times greater and the phase will be the same.
@Aether
If you double the number of turns (in a single layer), the total resistance will be doubled
not quadrupled. Take two identical pieces of wire of equal length and measure their resistance. If each length of wire was 1 ohm, do you seriously think when you put them together in series they will suddenly make 4 ohms ???
The last I time I did my math I was sure 1 ohm plus 1 ohm equals 2 ohms. :P
In a multilayer inductor, the resistance will be slightly more than doubled, because consequent layers have an increasing diameter, which is the equivalent of having one of the two wires slightly longer than the other.
But the total inductance will increase proportional to the total number of turns squared. So it will be quadrupled (sort of - other variables contribute : See the formula table in the link below. Every different formula for a coil shows the number of turns squared is inherent to calculating induction so in that respect (only) you are right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductor
Cheers
Hold on a minute...
the Peripiteia came into the spotlight because the thing
behaves in a way that it should not according to theory,
in that it receives a "kick" instead of getting slowed down... right?
At least, that's what was claimed about it.
So either it does or it doesn't...
How can it be that the inventor is still arguing about the theoretical
possibility of his invention,
after he has already build it and shown that it works?
Were the claims false? Does the motor not produce a "kick"
where it should "brake", and does it not produce more output
than it should?
If it does not work at all, then why is the discussion still active?
And if it does work, then why don't the guys with theoretical
objections replicate it and try to answer the theoretical questions
themselves?
If they don't build and test it because they believe it is impossible
on the grounds of theory, then it is useless to argue with them
anyway because they do not believe that the inventor actually
has a working version, they don't believe it is possible, and they will
continue to present their circular argumentation, which will never
admit the possibility.
If they don't believe the theoretical interpretation by the inventor
because they have built and tested it and found it not to work at all,
then at least there is solid reason to disagree with the inventor.
But I don't really see anyone building the thing, I just see people
repeating that it can't work and I see the inventor repeating that it does.
Well, at least he built his version... And I can understand his conviction
that it works if he has a working version in font of him.
In any case, it seems to me that bickering over how a claimed effect
does not accord with the laws of nature is not very productive.
Every important electrical effect was originally discovered because of the
fact that it produced "anomalous" phenomena that did not accord with
estblished natural "laws" as they were understood at that time.
Scientific progress lives on anomalies and on discrepancies between reality
and theory.
To dismiss a possible newly discovered effect as impossible because it
does not appear to accord with natural laws at first glance is not as obvious
as some seem to think. If everyone had done so, we would not have been
able to refine the hypotheses into the quite nicely formulated and detailed
theory of electromagnetism to begin with. ;)
And I just cant help it:
THANE, THERE IS A KEY ON YOUR KEYBOARD THAT READS "CAPS LOCK",
PLEASE PRESS IT AND YOU'LL SEE THAT your text stops looking annoying and
reads a lot easier. ;)
Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 08:01:58 AM
So either it does or it doesn't...
How can it be that the inventor is still arguing about the theoretical
possibility of his invention,
after he has already build it and shown that it works?
It depends what you mean by that little word "works". Does it "work", you asked previously...
I don't think there's much doubt about the observations and replicating the setup exactly would yield the same results. What's up for debate though is what those observations mean...
Does it produce more power out than in, you asked previously? Answer: no - it's actually only about 30% efficient. BUT, it can be set up so that it consumes, say 100W (I forget the exact numbers) for zero output and then with a different coil configuration it'll produce, say, 5W out while the input power drops to, say, 95W. This has been interpreted by some as being OU behaviour: 5W of useful power out, with a reduction of input power of 5W means that 10W of additional power appeared from somewhere.
Well if that is really all there is to it, then "it works" in the sense
that a functioning setup can be replicated which shows the same effects.
And "it doesn't work" in the sense that there is any OU.
Come on, is that really what all the fuss was about?
So you managed to make a really inefficient device that turns
the input into zero output, and when you alter the coil configuration
it becomes slightly less inefficient and the input output ratio shifts
from 100:0 to what, 100:5,25 or something ?
How in the world is that OU?
That's not even plain U.
The road from there to even a little bit OU at something like 95:100
is still quite long... it seems to me.
Well if that's really all there is to the "Perepiteia" generator,
then I must say the word pretentious to describe the name is
an enormous understatement,
and I'll just leave you guys to arguing. ;) :)
oh, and SORRY FOR BUGGING YOU ABOUT THE CAPS THANE ;) ;D
Quote from: hoptoad on June 25, 2008, 07:44:59 AM
@Aether
If you double the number of turns (in a single layer), the total resistance will be doubled not quadrupled.
Only if you are a fool.
As a permenant magnet generator has a limit to how much MMF it can induce in the secondary there would be no point in having a wire that is now twice as large and a coil that is twice as large as it should be.
And so anyone would choose a wire with half the cross section and hence current carrying capability as only half the current would be put through it.
Also as the coil would be the same size it would fit in the same area as the previous HC coil it is replacing, all of that seemed too obvious for me to bother pointing out.
Quote
Take two identical pieces of wire of equal length and measure their resistance. If each length of wire was 1 ohm, do you seriously think when you put them together in series they will suddenly make 4 ohms ???
The last I time I did my math I was sure 1 ohm plus 1 ohm equals 2 ohms. :P
In a multilayer inductor, the resistance will be slightly more than doubled, because consequent layers have an increasing diameter, which is the equivalent of having one of the two wires slightly longer than the other.
But the total inductance will increase proportional to the total number of turns squared.
Only in a closed flux path.
In an open flux path the outer turns will find less voltage induced per turn.
QuoteSo it will be quadrupled (sort of - other variables contribute : See the formula table in the link below. Every different formula for a coil shows the number of turns squared is inherent to calculating induction so in that respect (only) you are right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductor
Cheers
Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 10:23:00 AM
Well if that's really all there is to the "Perepiteia" generator,
then I must say the word pretentious to describe the name is
an enormous understatement,
and I'll just leave you guys to arguing. ;) :)
oh, and SORRY FOR BUGGING YOU ABOUT THE CAPS THANE ;) ;D
That isn't all there is.
There is much I could cite about the rest of what there is about this but unless you ask me I'll save my fingers.
I will however point out that it has been demonstrated that the rotor turns faster and uses less energy with the stator present than absent in some tests.
In other words assuming the results of that experiment be trusted then the stator coils are somehow adding energy to the system.
Much of the debate is if they are applying accelerative forces directly to the rotor or if 'something' is getting into the motor to increase output.
I am not aware of any evidence or logic that can support the theory that the acceleration comes from forces applied at the generator.
i am aware of much evidence and logic for how it may occur at the motor.
Thane initially believed the motor was the source of the acceleration but once his pet theory was killed he stopped believing that however and unless he knows something I don't he has no evidence supporting a generator based theory and no real argument against the motor based evidence.
As for this being a long way from OU. well if acceleration can be greater than the deceleration from the stators as already demoed then it seems that OU would be predictably reached by having enough of such stators.
Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 08:01:58 AM
So either it does or it doesn't...
How can it be that the inventor is still arguing about the theoretical
possibility of his invention,
after he has already build it and shown that it works?
The arguments are not to if it accelerates on shorting, the arguments are 'why' it does.
There are some conventional answers that can explain some of what has been found but there is more evidence that can not possibly be explained by conventional theory.
Quote
Were the claims false? Does the motor not produce a "kick"
where it should "brake", and does it not produce more output
than it should?
If it does not work at all, then why is the discussion still active?
And if it does work, then why don't the guys with theoretical
objections replicate it and try to answer the theoretical questions
themselves?
The likes of PB (OUmon) will never replicate as he is only here to try and kill it, the only question is if he is paid or just deranged.
Many of us have successfully replicated it, there are 5-7 replications and another 2 who have possibly found the same or similar effect with a different setup.
Quote
If they don't build and test it because they believe it is impossible
on the grounds of theory, then it is useless to argue with them
anyway because they do not believe that the inventor actually
has a working version, they don't believe it is possible, and they will
continue to present their circular argumentation, which will never
admit the possibility.
If they don't believe the theoretical interpretation by the inventor
because they have built and tested it and found it not to work at all,
then at least there is solid reason to disagree with the inventor.
But I don't really see anyone building the thing
Only because everyone already built one.
Quote, I just see people
repeating that it can't work and I see the inventor repeating that it does.
Well, at least he built his version... And I can understand his conviction
that it works if he has a working version in font of him.
In any case, it seems to me that bickering over how a claimed effect
does not accord with the laws of nature is not very productive.
Every important electrical effect was originally discovered because of the
fact that it produced "anomalous" phenomena that did not accord with
estblished natural "laws" as they were understood at that time.
Scientific progress lives on anomalies and on discrepancies between reality
and theory.
Indeed.
My argument that you may be referring to is not that it doesn't work, just that it works in a way other than the inventor believes.
I am keenly interested in anomaly.
Quote
To dismiss a possible newly discovered effect as impossible because it
does not appear to accord with natural laws at first glance is not as obvious
as some seem to think. If everyone had done so, we would not have been
able to refine the hypotheses into the quite nicely formulated and detailed
theory of electromagnetism to begin with. ;)
And I just cant help it:
THANE, THERE IS A KEY ON YOUR KEYBOARD THAT READS "CAPS LOCK",
PLEASE PRESS IT AND YOU'LL SEE THAT your text stops looking annoying and
reads a lot easier. ;)
He does it for speed, and I doubt he's gonna stop.
it would be nicer if he simply never had any uppercase characters, as that only looks wrong at the i's.
Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 03:54:05 PM
Only if you are a fool.
As a permenant magnet generator has a limit to how much MMF it can induce in the secondary there would be no point in having a wire that is now twice as large and a coil that is twice as large as it should be.
And so anyone would choose a wire with half the cross section and hence current carrying capability as only half the current would be put through it.
Also as the coil would be the same size it would fit in the same area as the previous HC coil it is replacing, all of that seemed too obvious for me to bother pointing out.Only in a closed flux path.
In an open flux path the outer turns will find less voltage induced per turn.
Quote from: aether22
... if you double the number of turns both the inductance and resistance will be 4 times greater and the phase will be the same.
@Aether
You just love changing the rules regarding answers to your questions, as you go, don't you!. Your statement only suggested what doubling the number of windings would do. You gave no other parameter requirements to be considered, e.g changing the guage. My answer is consistent with just the statement / question - what will happen when doubling the number of turns.
Quote from: hoptoad on June 25, 2008, 05:33:10 PM
@Aether
You just love changing the rules regarding answers to your questions, as you go, don't you!. Your statement only suggested what doubling the number of windings would do. You gave no other parameter requirements to be considered, e.g changing the guage. My answer is consistent with just the statement / question - what will happen when doubling the number of turns.
I was maybe lazy due to having stated it in many previous messages, I always mentioned a coil of the same mass and volume.
Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 06:20:07 PM
I was maybe lazy due to having stated it in many previous messages, I always mentioned a coil of the same mass and volume.
No argument there. But I'm not assuming for one minute, that the HV and HC coils that Thane is using are the same mass and volume. Nor am I assuming they are not. But the fact that, at a given frequency, his HV coil accelerates and his HC doesn't, is a good indication that the current phases for each are different.
Cheers
From: OUmonimmanuel <Oumonimmanuel1@gazeta.pl>
Subject: READ CAREFULLY FROM MR. OUmon IMMANUELTo:
Received: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 3:50 AM
The Chief Auditor/Information manager,
In-Charge of Foreign Unit
Bank Out OF Africa,( B OU A)
Ouaga. Burkina-Faso,
Telephone +226 7512 8962
Dear friend,
(I NEED TRUST)
I am Mr. OUmon Immanuel,The Chief Auditor/Information Manager,In-Charge of Foreign Unit of our bank and i have had the intent to contact you over this financial transaction/transfer worth the sum of Nineteen Million Three Hundred Thousand U.S Dollars (US$19.3M)for your progress and richness.
At the bank's last accounts/auditing evaluations, my staff came across an old account which was being maintained by a foreign client, an International Billionaire late Aether Two-Two, who used to work with shell-Development Company in Africa.On April 25th 2005, the deceased customer,his wife and three children were involved in a train accident in Japan during their visit to Japan which all the families were dead.Here is some news about the train accident:
Click on the web address:.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042500187.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4480031.stm
Since then I have made several enquiries to your embassy to locate any of the deseased customer's extended relatives, but this has also proved unsuccessful.After several attempts to locate a member of his family,hence I contacted you.
now and the deceased has been unable to run his account since his death due to the fact that he is dead.The account has remained dormant without the knowledge of his family since they too are all dead it was put in a safe deposit account in the bank for future investment by the beneficiary.
I was opportuned to see the deceased deposit file bearing this huge amount of money when i was inspecting the dated and current customers files in other to sign and submit to the entire bank management for an official validation/ re-documentation against the statement approval to the account holders for the year.In a swift investigation carried out by me,i found out that non of the deceased relative is aware of the abandoned fund except his late wife who is also dead. As a result of that,it is an extremely confidential matter between me and you - so let's not tell the wife who is dead.
Although personally,I keep this information secret within myself and partners to enable the whole plans and idea be Profitable and successful during the time of your execution. The said amount was U.S $19.3M (ninetheen million three hundred United States dollars). As it may interest you to know, I got your impressive information through the Bukinab chamber of commerce on foreign business relations here in Ouaga. Burkina-faso Gay Adult Video section.
Meanwhile all the whole arrangement to put claim over this fund as the bonafide next of kin to the deceased, get the required approval and transfer this money to a foreign account has been put in place and directives and needed information will be relayed to you as soon as you indicate your criminal interest and willingness to assist us in lying and stealing and also benefit your self to this great business opportunity.
In fact I could have done this deal alone but because of my position in this country as a civil servant(A Banker),we are not allowed to operate honestly a foreign account and would eventually raise an eye brow on my side during the time of transfer because I work in this bank. This is the actual reason why it will require a second party or fellow who will forward claims as the next of kin with affidavit of trust of oath to the Bank and also present a foreign account where he will need the money to be re-transferred into on his request as it may be after due verification and clarification by the correspondent branch of the bank where the whole money will be remitted from to your own designation bank account.
I have decided the sharing as following:-I will not fail to inform you that this transaction is 100% risk free for me. On smooth conclusion of this transaction, you will be entitled to {39%}being US$7,527,000.00)will be your share in respect of the account provision and your assistance rendered during the transfer of the fund into your bank account,{ 52% } being (US$10,036,000.00) will be my share being the codinator and the pillar of the transaction while the rest { 9% } being (US$1,737,000.00) will be shared to the respectable Organisations Centers such as Charity Organisation, Motherless Babies homes (here in Africa many babies are borth without mothers), and helpless disabled people in the World like the now nipple crippled LarryC.
I will be monitoring the whole situation here in this bank until you confirm the money in your account and ask me to come down to your country for subsequent sharing of the fund fraud according to percentages previously indicated and further investment, either in your country or any country you advice us to invest in. All other necessary vital information will be sent to you when I hear from you. And i want you to assure me solemnly that you are a trsutwothy,reliable,honest and capable to avoid cheating me in this business.If you are really sure of your integerity,
Reply through my private email ( zombre.immanuel1@sify.com ) immediatelly you receive this mail for more detailed information on how to process the transfer of the fund into your account will be.Am looking forward hearing from you.
I look forward to receive your phone number and email so that I get back to you.
Please also do provide your bank account and password in this private matter.
Yours faithfully,
Mr.OUmon Immanuel
NOW FOR SOMETHING SERIOUS.
NEW DEMO VIDEO - HC COIL WOUND ON TOP OF HV COIL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
CHEERS
Thane
Hi aether 22
could you check your private mail
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 25, 2008, 07:45:00 PM
NOW FOR SOMETHING SERIOUS.
NEW DEMO VIDEO - HC COIL WOUND ON TOP OF HV COIL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
CHEERS
Thane
Didn't you also report HV on top of HC previously or is my memory failing me, what with being dead and all.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 25, 2008, 07:45:00 PM
NOW FOR SOMETHING SERIOUS.
NEW DEMO VIDEO - HC COIL WOUND ON TOP OF HV COIL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
CHEERS
Thane
Nice development - well done, keep up the good work, it seems you're progressing nicely.
Cheers
Quote from: aether22 on June 25, 2008, 08:03:35 PM
Didn't you also report HV on top of HC previously or is my memory failing me, what with being dead and all.
YES BUT EVERY TIME PREVIOUSLY THE HC COIL OUTPUT DROPPED (UP TO 50%) WHEN THE HV COIL WAS ENGAGED (IT CAME BACK AFTER ENOUGH ACCELERATION HOWEVER) - SO MY GOAL TODAY WAS THREEFOLD :
1) CREATE HV ACCELERATION - DESPITIE HC COIL LOADING
2) MAINTAIN HC COIL OUTPUT (HC COIL O/P INCREASED AS PREVIOUSLY IT DECREASED)
3) DO IT ALL WITH MINIMAL CORE AREA.
SO I FINALLY (AFTER 5 WEEKS) HAVE SOMETHING I AM REALLY HAPPY WITH ON ALL LEVELS.
T
ALSO...
I HAVE BEEN HAVING SOME CONCERNS LATELY THAT ACCELERATION MIGHT BE DUE TO (OR ASSUMED TO BE DUE TO) A REDUCTION IN CORE FLUX (BECAUSE OF THE HV POWER DROPPING EFFECTS) AND POSSIBLY A REDUCTION IN CORE HYSTERISIS OR AN INCREASE IN CORE RELUCTANCE - SO I WANTED TO ELIMINATE THESE POSSIBILITIES (CORE EFFECTS) FROM THE EVALUATION PROCESS.
THE FACT THAT THE POWER NOW GOES UP INSTEAD OF DOWN IS BETTER THAN I EXPECTED.
QuoteNice development - well done, keep up the good work, it seems you're progressing nicely.
Cheers
I MUST SAY THAT MY WILLINGNESS TO PUT MY NECK ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK IS NOT EASY - BUT I KNOW IT IS A KEY COMPONENT OF THE PROGRESS WE ARE
ALL SHARING HERE.
AS MUCH AS I RESIST FROM TIME TO TIME (PRETTY MUCH ALWAYS) I DO TRY TO PUT MY EGO AWAY WHEN I ENTER THE LAB AND DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE TECHNOLOGY.
SO IF THERE IS A POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT HERE - IT IS IN VERY LARGE PART DUE TO ALL THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THIS GROUP.
THANKS FOR CARING ENOUGH TO IGNORE MY CRAP.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 25, 2008, 10:22:52 PM
SO IF THERE IS A POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT HERE - IT IS IN VERY LARGE PART DUE TO ALL THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THIS GROUP.
THANKS FOR CARING ENOUGH TO IGNORE MY CAP.
Thane
You are very generous, don't forget you sure do take plenty of crap. But yes we do take lots of cap from you ;).
Yesterday I cleaned my garage fully, for real this time.
Today I tested and sadly think I killed Luc's neo magnet discovery. (not related to generators)
So for the rest of today and tomorrow I want to figure out what's next.
I really should just assume the motor is effected due to all the evidence and move on to experiments that use that fact.
However with Thanes results with the HV coils being shorted not dampening the energy induced into the HC coils maybe I can't rule out that the phase is not what is expected, but if that is so then that seemingly means they aren't being induced by the rotor!
Maybe I should do an oscilloscope phase test, will be much easier with a tidy Labrage.
Then again as I am currently getting the effect with high current coils can I even be sure that the effect I am getting is the same as Thanes?
Interesting to note that the HV coil also raised in voltage when you shorted the HC coil, that is very counterintuitive, and it would seem to backup the thought that the HV coil is somehow not being induced by the rotor flux because the rotor flux must be diminished by the effect of the HC coil.
Hmmm, it would be very interesting for both of us to do phase tests with oscilloscopes and see if we get the same results what with differing results from HC coils.
Quote from: aether22 on June 26, 2008, 02:20:04 AM
Interesting to note that the HV coil also raised in voltage when you shorted the HC coil, that is very counterintuitive, and it would seem to backup the thought that the HV coil is somehow not being induced by the rotor flux because the rotor flux must be diminished by the effect of the HC coil.
Hmmm, it would be very interesting for both of us to do phase tests with oscilloscopes and see if we get the same results what with differing results from HC coils.
I CAN DO THE SILLYSCOPE READINGS NOW THAT I AM HAPPY WITH MY COIL DESIGN FINALLY.
JUST SO YOU DON'T GO OFF ON A TANGENT - THE HV COIL IS SET ON THE CORE - THEN THERE IS ANOTHER LAYER OF CORE MATERIAL AROUND AND ON TOP OF THE HV WINDING - THE HC COIL IS WOUND ON TOP OF THIS SECOND CORE SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS: (SIDE VIEW)
HC WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HV WINDING
PRIMARY CORE
HV WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HC WINDING
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteBut yes we do take lots of cap from you
CRAP DISHING OUT PROPORTIONS HAVE A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO LABORATORY STRUGGLES.
I.E.
CDO = LS / OTHER PEOPLE TO BLAME
QuoteThen again as I am currently getting the effect with high current coils can I even be sure that the effect I am getting is the same as Thanes?
ARE YOU USING LAMINATED CORES?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 26, 2008, 06:09:53 AM
I CAN DO THE SILLYSCOPE READINGS NOW THAT I AM HAPPY WITH MY COIL DESIGN FINALLY.
JUST SO YOU DON'T GO OFF ON A TANGENT - THE HV COIL IS SET ON THE CORE - THEN THERE IS ANOTHER LAYER OF CORE MATERIAL AROUND AND ON TOP OF THE HV WINDING - THE HC COIL IS WOUND ON TOP OF THIS SECOND CORE SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS: (SIDE VIEW)
hmmmm, this does not really remove the concerns of extra core having losses since the HV coil does use an extra core however stealthily hidden.
I think the results make more sense now although that assumes that the flux direction in the outer core is the opposite of the HV coils flux direction, assuming it is backwards then they would tend to reinforce each other, or would they, maybe not, Ok this is confusing.
Still an interesting but more confusing and more difficult to analyze design.
Quote
CRAP DISHING OUT PROPORTIONS HAVE A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO LABORATORY STRUGGLES.
I.E.
CDO = LS / OTHER PEOPLE TO BLAME
Well then, feel free to offload, kick the dog, and by dog I mean OUmon, he will be so glad to know he is making a positive contribution after all.
You did notice I said 'CAP' not 'CRAP' right?
FYI Vancouver Gadgeteers Adams Motors 4 sale - 604.739.7717
The Vancouver Gadgeteers club is shipping TODAY, to anybody (except 200V pulsers, those only to tech-types) energy devices that no one else is making available, such as Stanley Meyer toroids, chokes, and inductors.
Gadgeteer Rob Matthies was in the same page in Canadian Business magazine's "intriguing inventions of 2008" and realized that there are similarities between the Perepiteia Generator and the modified Adams magnet motor that the Gadgeteers club is willing to make for anyone (as listed in a classifieds ads.)
If you've wanted to get your hands on a Thane Heins device, consider the Gadgeteers Adams motor and/or the "how it works" DVD.
The club meetings were videotaped from several cameras and even blog-cast. However, the blogcasts were automatically erased by BlogTV after a certain time. Too bad, those were free.
The explanation of the intricacies of an Adams motor and scoping shots were shown in Gadgeteers' meetings.
Several members independently tested the test motors (more than one!) and were amazed to see a resistor go colder than ambient; perhaps similar to the Heins' generator accelerating(?) under load.
We do not claim over-unity. For one thing, the size of our prototypes are too small to be put on a dyno. Also, any test should be adjusted for power factor.
Although the Gadgeteers' Adams motor is not a Steorn device, the power, to touch, seems to be much stronger than the miniscule number of watts drawn, as shown on multiple test meters. You'll also see that we recorded the entire test, including wires getting set up.
By getting your an Adams motor from the Gadgeteers club, you may be able to reverse engineer it, and improve or mass-produce the prototype on a commercial scale.
If you need consulting services, the Vancouver Gadgeteers can offer that, as well.
What we'd like to see: "Anybody Can Make Energy!"
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 26, 2008, 06:28:09 AM
ARE YOU USING LAMINATED CORES?
T
I an using the original MOT cores so yes, but they have steel pieces at the face which I attached previously and I have been reluctant to remove them mainly because I fear the effect will become crap as it is with my cut down core version.
I would note that many/most of your MOT cores have solid steel somewhere such as your back iron. (which may vaguely resemble but isn't the same thing as a transformer lamination)
Excellent post there!
Witnessing a resistor get cold.
How can that be explained? (It has been found many times with these motor/generators)
Seriously think about it, how can electrons move through a carbon resistor in such a way as to remove heat from it and seemingly break a thermodynamic law?
Anyone who believes it is just electricity flowing please tell me what these 'cold electrons' are?
This is only one example but many others are found over and over, these things simply can not be explained without an: aether/radiant energy/orgone/scalar/torsion type theory.
And the only theory that covers them all is the aether, it also explains most other mysteries.
Yes it is tempting to ignore the aether, and indeed Thane if I or your device manages to convince you of the reality of the aether maybe you should keep it to yourself (well tell me ;) ) because it's not going to be a selling point.
But I think if you are honest with yourself you will have to agree that you have witnessed enough stuff that is difficult or impossible to explain without an aether type theory.
Because maybe you shouldn't admit to agreeing to the aether on list I will take no answer or a denial that you believe the aether is at work as an indication that you have accepted an aether model. ;)
Quotehmmmm, this does not really remove the concerns of extra core having losses since the HV coil does use an extra core however stealthily hidden.
YES - HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT...
I AM QUITE SURE THE PRIMARY CORE CAN NOW BE SMALLER - REDUCING CORE LOSSES.
IT IS THE SIZE IT IS BECAUSE I WANTED TO ACCOMODATE ROTOR, HC AND HV FLUX WITHOUT ANY DROPS.
NOW I CAN GO BACK AND REDUCE THE PRIMARY CORE EVEN MORE.
MY HIGH SPEED DATA TABLE #4 OUGHT TO GIVE ME GREATER THAN 14.9 WATTS AS OPPOSED TO MY PRESENT DROP DOWN TO 7.7 WATTS.
ALL IN ALL - SOME GOOD PROGRESS FINALLY.
T
QuoteBut I think if you are honest with yourself you will have to agree that you have witnessed enough stuff that is difficult or impossible to explain without an aether type theory.
YOU REMIND ME OF "GUS" THE FATHER IN "MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING" MOVIE WHO COULD TRACE EVERY WORD BACK TO IT'S ROOTS IN GREEK ORIGIN AND THAT WINDEX HEALS EVERYTHING... ;)
IS THERE A WAY TO QUANTIFY - MEASURE AND SHOW AETHER?
IF NOT IT COULD JUST AS WELL BE EXPLAINED BY A GOD TYPE THEORY.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 26, 2008, 07:34:37 AM
YOU REMIND ME OF THE FATHER IN "MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING" MOVIE WHO COULD TRACE EVERY WORD BACK TO IT'S ROOTS IN GREEK ORIGIN AND THAT WINDEX HEALS EVERYTHING... ;)
IS THERE A WAY TO QUANTIFY - MEASURE AND SHOW AETHER?
IF NOT IT COULD JUST AS WELL BE EXPLAINED BY A GOD TYPE THEORY.
T
Well a NZ version (Mr. Muscle and a few others) does an excellent job of killing flies if you spray them, better than fly sprays, of course that's more 'kills' that 'heals'.
Yes there are ways to objectively demonstrate the aether.
Quoteobjectively demonstrate
???
MEASURE, SHOW, PROVE, METER?
IF SO HOW?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 26, 2008, 08:02:53 AM
???
MEASURE, SHOW, PROVE, METER?
IF SO HOW?
T
Well if you can get aether moving fast enough in a coil the coil will gain gyroscopic properties as Steve Marks has shown, in theory your generator coils could be connected to a coil designed to show gyroscopic properties and these gyroscopic forces could be detected.
Although your device likely creates an alternating aether direction in the coils, this might? be fixed by using only N poles facing the coils, interestingly this might be all that is needed for you to find the cooling of resistors that is associated with Adams and Bedini tech as they use all n pole rotors, or a bridge rectifier may? rectify the aether flow while leaving it otherwise unmolested?
The next issue would be if you have enough aether moving fast enough, if not make a stronger generator and a more sensitive method to detect gyroscopic forces.
Another method would be to run the generator by a belt so the drive motor is not in line and have the aetheric output enter another device, initially a motor where the aetheric output can be studied.
Also possible would be adding a coil to the rotor or near the rotor so as to use the rotor as a core and impress a frequency on the coil that is dissimilar to any that would be generated otherwise and see if you can pick this frequency up with a pickup coil connected to a scope better when the HV coils are shorted although I can see a few issues with this experiment that may make it not work.
It is also possible to meter an aetheric/orgone output by measuring the leakage of a bifilar coil.
The best results apparently occur with silk covered iron wire, but lamp cord formed into a spiral coil can work too apparently, although there are issues with changes in capacitance, the classic test is to connect one end of a battery to a volt meter, and the other ends of the volt meter and battery to the 2 insulated strands of the bifilar coil, the volt meter reads more voltage as the infinitesimal current increases.
It is actually possible to get a decent current through insulators with aetheric assistance, the TMB (so-called Thermal Magnetic Battery from ATGroup/Stiffler) is just such a device.
The other interesting thing is that the tiny tiny current from this device is so aether infused that even though it is only a few mV it has a fat cold blue arc when connected and disconnected.
http://www.stifflerscientific.com/tmb.asp
To sum it up.
Magnetic field projection/pulling, carrying a current through an insulator (also see Boyd Bushman's arc through many feet of air with a far too low voltage), gyroscopic (and also other gravitational like forces) possible (yes I know basically how to create a gravity like force, how to create antigravity basically but no idea what gravity is!), making resistors cold (it is proof since it proves something other than electrons flows through the wire).
I think that pretty much covers it, the basics anyway.
Quote from: aether22 on June 26, 2008, 05:51:39 PM
To sum it up.
Magnetic field projection/pulling, carrying a current through an insulator (also see Boyd Bushman's arc through many feet of air with a far too low voltage), gyroscopic (and also other gravitational like forces) possible (yes I know basically how to create a gravity like force, how to create antigravity basically but no idea what gravity is!), making resistors cold (it is proof since it proves something other than electrons flows through the wire).
A22, you seem to be very deep into this so - have you personally observed any of these effects or measurements?
Latest progress info and pics from Thane ( a day or so late - sorry!)
JM
NEW TEST RESULTS AND VIDEO FOR THE GROUP
TODAY I REWOUND A COIL WITH THE HC COIL DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THE HV COIL IN AN EFFORT TO REDUCE CORE LOSSES AND TO REDUCE THE ALMOST 50% DROP IN HC COIL OUTPUT WHEN THE HV COILS ARE ENGAGED. RE: TABLE # 4 HIGH SPEED TESTS - 14.9 WATTS DOWN TO 7.7 WATTS.
THE RESULTS ARE VERY ENCOURAGING.
AS YOU CAN SEE (IN THE VIDEO) WHEN THE HC COIL IS LOADED (JPEG #3) THE SYSTEM DECELERATES - WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED (JPEG #5) THE HC COIL OUTPUT INCREASES FROM 2.64 V UP TO 2.78 WITH ACCELERATION.
PREVIOUSLY THE HC COIL WOULD DROP BY ALMOST 50% SO A GOOD DAY ALL ROUND.
Quote from: OUmon on June 27, 2008, 09:10:58 AM
A22, you seem to be very deep into this so - have you personally observed any of these effects or measurements?
Yes, but I have in the past been a pretty crap experimenter so not as much as I'd like.
The reality of all of the effects mentioned are very well established however.
Quote from: aether22 on June 27, 2008, 03:51:41 PM
Yes, but I have in the past been a pretty crap experimenter so not as much as I'd like.
The reality of all of the effects mentioned are very well established however.
Which of these effects in particular have you personally measured/observed?
What is the evidence that the effects are "very well established"?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 26, 2008, 06:09:53 AM
THE HV COIL IS SET ON THE CORE - THEN THERE IS ANOTHER LAYER OF CORE MATERIAL AROUND AND ON TOP OF THE HV WINDING - THE HC COIL IS WOUND ON TOP OF THIS SECOND CORE SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS: (SIDE VIEW)
HC WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HV WINDING
PRIMARY CORE
HV WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HC WINDING
An interesting twist to the tale and turn of events ! ??? :)
Quote from: hoptoad on June 28, 2008, 01:23:25 AM
An interesting twist to the tale and turn of events ! ??? :)
YESTERDAY I WOUND A 61 ohm HV COIL ON A 10 mm OD - 3 mm IRON PIPE AND THEN AM PLACING MY HC COIL ON TOP OF ANOTHER 40 mm - 3 mm PIPE SO THE SIZE HAS BEEN REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY.
IT SO COOL TO WATCH THE HC OUTPUT INCREASE WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED - PREVIOUSLY THE HC COIL OUTPUT WOULD DROP DOWN TO ABOUT 0.8 volts UNDER THE SAME TEST CONDITIONS - NOW IT
INCREASES BY 0.2 volts.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 28, 2008, 09:27:10 AM
YESTERDAY I WOUND A 61 ohm HV COIL ON A 10 mm OD - 3 mm IRON PIPE AND THEN AM PLACING MY HC COIL ON TOP OF ANOTHER 40 mm - 3 mm PIPE SO THE SIZE HAS BEEN REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY.
IT SO COOL TO WATCH THE HC OUTPUT INCREASE WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED - PREVIOUSLY THE HC COIL OUTPUT WOULD DROP DOWN TO ABOUT 0.8 volts UNDER THE SAME TEST CONDITIONS - NOW IT INCREASES BY 0.2 volts.
Hi Thane,
Yes, that is good news. In your latest document, the explanation for the difference in the HV and HC coils, made a lot of sense to me. Do you have any idea on how the new setup is working? At first, when you said you going to overlap them, it seemed like there would be just a big flux fu fight. Having two coil/cores together, and each coil/core being able to effect each other along with the magnets is mind bending.
Also wondering if you tried the new mag setup with your old HC and HV coil setup? I am still amazed at how the HV's coil short could possibly reduce the HC's voltage.
Kinda quiet here, I think Luc got the spooks sweating buckshot right now.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on June 28, 2008, 09:27:10 AM
YESTERDAY I WOUND A 61 ohm HV COIL ON A 10 mm OD - 3 mm IRON PIPE AND THEN AM PLACING MY HC COIL ON TOP OF ANOTHER 40 mm - 3 mm PIPE SO THE SIZE HAS BEEN REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY.
IT SO COOL TO WATCH THE HC OUTPUT INCREASE WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED - PREVIOUSLY THE HC COIL OUTPUT WOULD DROP DOWN TO ABOUT 0.8 volts UNDER THE SAME TEST CONDITIONS - NOW IT INCREASES BY 0.2 volts.
Thane
It would appear that one possible moral of the story is : don't get paranoid, get solenoid ! :D :D :D :D
Cheers, good luck and KneeDeep ;)
Quote from: LarryC on June 28, 2008, 06:48:57 PM
At first, when you said you going to overlap them, it seemed like there would be just a big flux fu fight. Having two coil/cores together, and each coil/core being able to effect each other along with the magnets is mind bending.
@Larry,
Its strating to look like the overunity transformer setup of Thanes - maybe its the same effect at work perhaps a toroid is whats needed here. I want to try the transformer thing but nothing seems to be happenign on that on this forum. It should be easier to do the experiments with the transofmrer, no moving parts.
-Mike
Quote from: LarryC on June 28, 2008, 06:48:57 PM
Hi Thane,
Yes, that is good news. In your latest document, the explanation for the difference in the HV and HC coils, made a lot of sense to me. Do you have any idea on how the new setup is working? At first, when you said you going to overlap them, it seemed like there would be just a big flux fu fight. Having two coil/cores together, and each coil/core being able to effect each other along with the magnets is mind bending.
Also wondering if you tried the new mag setup with your old HC and HV coil setup? I am still amazed at how the HV's coil short could possibly reduce the HC's voltage.
Kinda quiet here, I think Luc got the spooks sweating buckshot right now.
Regards, Larry
I SENT A DRAWING TO JM FOR POSTING BUT I AM SURE SHE IS AT THE COTTAGE ON THIS CANADIAN LONG WEEKEND - CANADA DAY.
AT ANY RATE IF YOU DRAW THE FLUX COMING OUT OF THE HV COIL AND THE FLUX COMING OUT OF THE HC COIL YOU WILL SEE THAT THEY INDEED "FEED" EAT OTHER.
IMPORTANT: THIS DOES NOT WORK UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME HC CORE MATERIAL ON TOP OF THE HV COIL.
ACTUALLY THAT IS AN "OLD" MAGNET ROTOR - IT IS THE FIRST ONE I MADE - 2 YEARS AGO.
QuoteI am still amazed at how the HV's coil short could possibly reduce the HC's voltage.
TO ME IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF CORE RELUCTANCE - WHICH INCREASES WITH FLUX MAGNITUDES.
QuoteKinda quiet here, I think Luc got the spooks sweating buckshot right now.
I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE A SPOOK - GOING UP AGAINST LUC IS NOT GONNA WORK!
T
Quote from: hoptoad on June 28, 2008, 08:19:47 PM
It would appear that one possible moral of the story is : don't get paranoid, get solenoid ! :D :D :D :D
Cheers, good luck and KneeDeep ;)
@ EVERYONE,
SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE - I HAVE BEEN UNDER TONS OF PRESSURE!
AND I FEEL AS THOUGH - TOGETHER "WE" HAVE CREATED A REAL "DIAMOND" OF A DESIGN - IN WHICH EVERYONE SHOULD BE AWARE AND SHARE - EVEN PB!
GQ MAGAZINE IS PUTTING OUT AN ARTICLE NEXT MONTH AND MIT HAS REQUESTED MORE INFO AFTER AN OUGHTRIGHT REJECTION SOME MONTHS BACK. NIEL YOUNG, NASA, AND THE GREEK ARMY MAY BE IN THE PICTURE AS WELL TO VARYING DEGREES - ONLY TIME WILL TELL.
SO THE MORAL OF THE STORY IS SHARE AND BE-AWARE
GREED AND FEAR ARE EVERYWHERE
BUT - IF WE ALL WORK TOGETHER THERE - MAY BE SOME HOPE AFTER ALL
FOR THIS SHIT HOLE WE ALL SHARE.
CHERRIOS
T
Quote from: Koen1 on June 25, 2008, 08:01:58 AM
Hold on a minute...
the Peripiteia came into the spotlight because the thing
behaves in a way that it should not according to theory,
in that it receives a "kick" instead of getting slowed down... right?
At least, that's what was claimed about it.
So either it does or it doesn't...
How can it be that the inventor is still arguing about the theoretical
possibility of his invention,
after he has already build it and shown that it works?
Were the claims false? Does the motor not produce a "kick"
where it should "brake", and does it not produce more output
than it should?
If it does not work at all, then why is the discussion still active?
And if it does work, then why don't the guys with theoretical
objections replicate it and try to answer the theoretical questions
themselves?
If they don't build and test it because they believe it is impossible
on the grounds of theory, then it is useless to argue with them
anyway because they do not believe that the inventor actually
has a working version, they don't believe it is possible, and they will
continue to present their circular argumentation, which will never
admit the possibility.
If they don't believe the theoretical interpretation by the inventor
because they have built and tested it and found it not to work at all,
then at least there is solid reason to disagree with the inventor.
But I don't really see anyone building the thing, I just see people
repeating that it can't work and I see the inventor repeating that it does.
Well, at least he built his version... And I can understand his conviction
that it works if he has a working version in font of him.
In any case, it seems to me that bickering over how a claimed effect
does not accord with the laws of nature is not very productive.
Every important electrical effect was originally discovered because of the
fact that it produced "anomalous" phenomena that did not accord with
estblished natural "laws" as they were understood at that time.
Scientific progress lives on anomalies and on discrepancies between reality
and theory.
To dismiss a possible newly discovered effect as impossible because it
does not appear to accord with natural laws at first glance is not as obvious
as some seem to think. If everyone had done so, we would not have been
able to refine the hypotheses into the quite nicely formulated and detailed
theory of electromagnetism to begin with. ;)
<snip>
Thanks, Koen1. I couldn't agree more. BTW, I was there in Thane's lab at Ottawa U., and his device, demonstrated for me,
worked as claimed. In that case, a few months ago, Thane shorted the stator coils - and I
do mean
shorted, by a series of typical steel-levered toggle switches - and the claimed RPM increase occurred. It
works as claimed!!However, some tentative theory is necessary to develop the device further, and therefore, the attempted theory is, in such a case, an assumption. This means, of course, it is subject to change, when phenomena and/or events turn out to be other than what the experimenter/developer expected. In my subject area, sociology, that type of thing happens all the time, and is part of the discipline.
I wish I was at the cottage! Soon enough. Just now I am busy hosting my dad who is visiting me from i_ron territory for the first time in 25 years. First time he has seen my teenaged son, me as an adult etc. etc. He and my son are out bonding at Canadian Tire at the moment doing some sort of mysterious guy stuff, freeing me up to catch up on Thane's note from yesterday. It follows:
DEAR ALL,
SO AFTER MORE THAN 6 WEEKS OF WINDING AND TESTING I FINALLY HAVE A COIL DESIGN WHICH WORKS ON ALL LEVELS FOR ME.
I WILL BE POSTING PHOTOS AND NEW TEST DATA IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.
CHEERS
THANKS JM, HAPPY BELATED FATHER'S DAY!!!
IT WAS REALLY COOL TO SEE THE 2 ENGINEERS EYES LIGHT UP AT THE LAB AT THE U of O ON THURSDAY WHEN I DEMOED THE NEW COIL.
THE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THE ABOVE DIAGRAM/DESIGN IS THAT NOW I WOULD EXPECT THAT EVEN THE HC COIL'S BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX WOULD RATHER FORM THE SHORTEST CLOSED FLUX PATH ROUTE THROUGH THE HV COIL'S CORE THAN HANG AROUND IN THE AIR GAP BETWEEN THE HC CORE AND THE APPROACHING MAGNET.
QuoteHowever, some tentative theory is necessary to develop the device further, and therefore, the attempted theory is, in such a case, an assumption. This means, of course, it is subject to change, when phenomena and/or events turn out to be other than what the experimenter/developer expected. In my subject area, sociology, that type of thing happens all the time, and is part of the discipline.
THANKS FOR THAT INSIGHT THERE MODERNSTEAM ???
INDEED TENTATIVE "ASSUMPTIVE" THEORY HELPS TO FOCUS DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS - WHICH IS FROM THE GREEK WORD:
ASSUMPTUOUS ;)
MEANING - NOTICABLE, EYE CATCHING, FOLLOWING OR ASSUMPTULICHIOUS.
T
So where's the dunebuggy?
Is anybody around this place anymore?
Quote from: JustMe on June 29, 2008, 12:48:40 PM
I wish I was at the cottage! Soon enough. Just now I am busy hosting my dad who is visiting me from i_ron territory for the first time in 25 years.
snip
I WILL BE POSTING PHOTOS AND NEW TEST DATA IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS....SO?
Thanks for sharing your joy with us Just You, that was sweet, course if he is from around here he
can't be all bad... right?
QuoteIs anybody around this place anymore?
Nope, just us chickens
Ron, forced to live in a west coast paradise!
ps, maybe the mibs got him?
Quote from: i_ron on July 08, 2008, 07:12:22 PM
Thanks for sharing your joy with us Just You, that was sweet, course if he is from around here he
can't be all bad... right?
Nope, just us chickens
Ron, forced to live in a west coast paradise!
ps, maybe the mibs got him?
I_RON I THOUGHT YOU WERE ON VACATION?
WHAT IS YOUR CONNECTION TO THE BATTERY REVIVER GUY?
IS THAT YOU IN THEIR VIDEO - BC GAGETEERS?
AS FOR ME I AM BACK WORKING ON THE TRANSFORMER AND MAY HAVE SOME DATA TO SHARE IN A FEW DAYS - I AM GETTING SOME GOOD RESULTS.
I THINK JM HAS SOME PICTURES TO POST WHEN SHE GETS BACK FROM HER VACATION?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: Morgenster on July 07, 2008, 09:21:50 AM
So where's the dunebuggy?
I HAD SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO MAKE ON THE GENERATOR COIL DESIGN SHOWN HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
I AM WORKING ON REDUCING THE SIZE - NOW THAT I AM HAPPY WITH THE PERFORMANCE.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 08, 2008, 09:48:32 PM
I_RON I THOUGHT YOU WERE ON VACATION?
WHAT IS YOUR CONNECTION TO THE BATTERY REVIVER GUY?
IS THAT YOU IN THEIR VIDEO - BC GAGETEERS?
CHEERS
Thane
Good to hear you are still there mon!
Hey, everyday is a vacation here.
No connection, besides, I don't know much about them? Glad to hear you are still working the
transformer, that showed promise also...
Been quiet 'cause I was checking out Hildenbrand and the similar genesis patent, lol
Ron
Good to hear someone else is around. It felt like the over unity rapture and I was the only one left behind, or even worse the spooks were knocking everybody on this board off one at a time and I was next even though I had only posted a couple times. I forgot that the rest of the world takes July/August off for holiday.
Quote from: mackensteff on July 08, 2008, 11:48:07 PM
Good to hear someone else is around. It felt like the over unity rapture and I was the only one left behind, or even worse the spooks were knocking everybody on this board off one at a time and I was next even though I had only posted a couple times. I forgot that the rest of the world takes July/August off for holiday.
You don't have to feel that way, us brother's are always around, observing and pulling for Thane even if we have other avenues to explore. We will not forget and will help if requested(especially now that my back is back to normal).
@Thane,
Great professional style test, looking forward to JM post.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on July 09, 2008, 12:02:56 AM
@Thane,
Great professional style test, looking forward to JM post.
Regards, Larry
I THINK JM WILL JUST BE POSTING SOME "HOW TO" PHOTOS.
I HAVE NOT FELT THE NEED TO DO ANY REAL DATA COLLECTION ON THE NEW COIL JUST YET.
AS FOR THE TRANSFORMER I NEED 10 VOLTS ACROSS MY LOAD TO BE AT OVER UNITY AND I AM AT 3 V RIGHT AT THE MOMENT - AND WHEN I ENGAGE THE LOAD THE PRIMARY CURRENT DROPS BY 0.03 AMPS - SO IT IS LOOKING GOOD SO FAR.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 09, 2008, 06:48:18 AM
I THINK JM WILL JUST BE POSTING SOME "HOW TO" PHOTOS.
I HAVE NOT FELT THE NEED TO DO ANY REAL DATA COLLECTION ON THE NEW COIL JUST YET.
AS FOR THE TRANSFORMER I NEED 10 VOLTS ACROSS MY LOAD TO BE AT OVER UNITY AND I AM AT 3 V RIGHT AT THE MOMENT - AND WHEN I ENGAGE THE LOAD THE PRIMARY CURRENT DROPS BY 0.03 AMPS - SO IT IS LOOKING GOOD SO FAR.
Hope JM will be showing a front edge picture of your knew combo HV/LV coil.
Regards, Larry
TRANSFORMER UPDATE:
IT SEEMS AS THOUGH EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG HAVE OVERUNITY DEVICES ON THIS FORUM SO I AM HESITANT TO POST MY LATEST BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER TEST RESULTS BUT I AM 104% AS OF TODAY!
THIS IS NOT HIGH ENOUGH TO CLAIM SUCCESS YET - TOO MUCH MARGIN FOR ERROR.
I WILL BE POSTING SOME PHOTOS SOON W/ OSCILLOSCOPE PHOTOS ONCE I REWIND THE PRIMARY IN AN EFFORT TO GET OVER 110%.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on June 27, 2008, 02:36:46 PM
Latest progress info and pics from Thane ( a day or so late - sorry!)
JM
JM ARE YOU MIA - AND IF SO FOR HOW MUCH LONGER?
THANKS
Thane
@All,
Sorry for the delay in posting the pics. I will be away for the weekend again, but back next week.
Quote from: JustMe on July 12, 2008, 11:11:01 AM
@All,
Sorry for the delay in posting the pics. I will be away for the weekend again, but back next week.
Not a problem Just You, good things are worth waiting for....
Hey boy, that is senthanetional news on the transformer... and all those beautiful coils!
See you are back to the six magnet wheel. Looks like a viable design with the coils.
But poor old PB is frozen in, or something, so I'll have to pitch in....you have left the barcode on!
(picture two) horrors! That is a negative energy source, hehehe, anyway, here's a quote for you...
"If you dowse a bar code with a pendulum you will detect negative energy, this energy is unbalanced energy. The numbers 666 and the straight lines in a barcode represent male energy there is no female energy in a barcode. The 3rd dimension that we live in is a dimension of duality, this means the vibrational energies that make up the 3rd dimension balance each other out to create harmony for example male and female, negative and positive, summer and winter.
?The powers that be? want to create disharmony that?s why they implemented barcodes, they are suppressing the female energy and promoting the male energy in this dimension. Everything that has a barcode attached to it will be unbalanced, just think of all the food in the supermarkets with barcodes attached vibrating out of balance, when you eat this food it will throw you out of balance and lower your vibration and thus disconnect you from the higher vibrations, that are available to you in this 3rd dimension. To connect with the higher vibrations in this 3rd dimension you need to be in a state of harmony and balance.
To rebalance a barcode you need to draw a line through the middle of the lines so the line is at right angles to the vertical lines, you can use a black biro or marker pen. I have been doing this for a couple of years now and I have noticed a big improvement in my overall well being I?m never ill and I never worry about anything its like my vibration has raised above the frequency where negativity vibrates. Anything in your possession with a barcode on it draw a line through it. Who knows it might put a smile on your face."
Hope this is helpful,
Ron Positive
Quote from: i_ron on July 12, 2008, 07:04:45 PM
Not a problem Just You, good things are worth waiting for....
Hey boy, that is senthanetional news on the transformer... and all those beautiful coils!
See you are back to the six magnet wheel. Looks like a viable design with the coils.
But poor old PB is frozen in, or something, so I'll have to pitch in....you have left the barcode on!
(picture two) horrors! That is a negative energy source, hehehe, anyway, here's a quote for you...
"If you dowse a bar code with a pendulum you will detect negative energy, this energy is unbalanced energy. The numbers 666 and the straight lines in a barcode represent male energy there is no female energy in a barcode. The 3rd dimension that we live in is a dimension of duality, this means the vibrational energies that make up the 3rd dimension balance each other out to create harmony for example male and female, negative and positive, summer and winter.
?The powers that be? want to create disharmony that?s why they implemented barcodes, they are suppressing the female energy and promoting the male energy in this dimension. Everything that has a barcode attached to it will be unbalanced, just think of all the food in the supermarkets with barcodes attached vibrating out of balance, when you eat this food it will throw you out of balance and lower your vibration and thus disconnect you from the higher vibrations, that are available to you in this 3rd dimension. To connect with the higher vibrations in this 3rd dimension you need to be in a state of harmony and balance.
To rebalance a barcode you need to draw a line through the middle of the lines so the line is at right angles to the vertical lines, you can use a black biro or marker pen. I have been doing this for a couple of years now and I have noticed a big improvement in my overall well being I?m never ill and I never worry about anything its like my vibration has raised above the frequency where negativity vibrates. Anything in your possession with a barcode on it draw a line through it. Who knows it might put a smile on your face."
Hope this is helpful,
Ron Positive
DEAR I_RONVELATION,
THE POWERS THAT BE ARE NOT IN CHARGE HERE...
THEY HAVE BEEN DUPED.
UNIVERSAL INTELLIGENCE IS IN CHARGE - PERIOD.
EVERYTHING IS A VARIATION OF GOD (OR GOOD) - EVEN THE SO CALLED NEGATIVE "POWERS THAT BE".
THE "OUTWARD" EXPRESSION OF NEGATIVITY FROM THE POWERS THAT BE SIMPLY EXISTS TO SHOW US OUR OWN "INNER" NEGATIVITY. WHEN WE ALL COLLECTIVELY ELIMINATE OUR OWN NEGATIVE TENDENCIES - INCLUDING BELIEVING THAT SUCH AND SUCH IS "NEGATIVE" THE POWERS THAT BE WILL DISAPPEAR. IT IS UP TO EACH OF UN ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WANT TO STOP GLOBAL TERRORISM WE SHOULD FIRST STOP TERRORISM IN OUR OWN MINDS AND HOMES.
ONCE I GET THE TRANSFORMER WORKING TO MY SATISFACTION - BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT - I WILL COVER IT WITH BAR CODES THAT I AM NOW COLLECTING AND I WILL SHOW YOU THAT - THE DARKNESS OF NARROW SELF SERVING HUMAN IGNORANCE IS
NO MATCH FOR THE LIGHT OF INFINITE SEVICE TO ALL..
(I think we just lost a ton of readers)
CHERRIOS
Thane
ps
TO ME PUTTING A LINE TROUGH A BAR CODE IS IN EFFECT GIVING IT MORE "POWER" AT LEAST FOR YOU.
FROM NOW ON WHEN I SEE A BAR CODE I WILL THANK GOD FOR SHOWING ME THAT OUR COLLECTIVE HUMAN FAMILY IS STILL DYSFUNCTIONAL AND THAT AS MY BRTOHER'S KEEPER I SHOULD KEEP WORKING UNTIL I AM WORM FOOD.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 12, 2008, 09:16:12 PM
FROM NOW ON WHEN I SEE A BAR CODE I WILL THANK GOD FOR SHOWING ME THAT OUR COLLECTIVE HUMAN FAMILY IS STILL DYSFUNCTIONAL AND THAT AS MY BRTOHER'S KEEPER I SHOULD KEEP WORKING UNTIL I AM WORM FOOD.
KneeDeep :D
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 12, 2008, 09:16:12 PM
DEAR I_RONVELATION,
THE POWERS THAT BE ARE NOT IN CHARGE HERE...
THEY HAVE BEEN DUPED.
UNIVERSAL INTELLIGENCE IS IN CHARGE - PERIOD.
EVERYTHING IS A VARIATION OF GOD (OR GOOD) - EVEN THE SO CALLED NEGATIVE "POWERS THAT BE".
Good one! It (mine) was just a tongue in cheek, mostly cheek, lol, but you always surprise me with your ability to see beyond the norm. It was almost OT but as this is about energy then it was right
on topic.
The only thing I would change in your above statement is, "
We have been duped" meaning
most of us!
So it doesn't hurt experimenters such as ourselves to have a basic, rudimentary understanding of
the aether and the manipulation of energy symbols. This is a misnomer actually because the
manipulation of energy symbols is nothing of the kind but rather an awakening in the individual.
So I will get off this kick and leave you with one glimpse of Reiki.... CHO KU REI
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on July 13, 2008, 11:07:46 AM
It was almost OT but as this is about energy then it was right on topic.
The only thing I would change in your above statement is, "We have been duped" meaning
most of us!
Ron
NO DOUBT WE ARE
ALL ABOUT FINDING
"PERPETUAL MOTION" IS SOME FORM OR ANOTHER TO SAVE HUMANITY AND OUSELVES.
BUT OFTEN OUR OWN HUMAN
PERPETUAL e-MOTION (FEAR AND DOUBT) STOPS US.
IF WE COULD FIND A WAY TO REPLACE HUMAN FEAR WITH UNIVERSAL LOVE (
FREE ENERGY) THEN I THINK WE WILL FIND WHAT WE ALL SEEK (PEACE).
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 08, 2008, 09:52:41 PM
I AM WORKING ON REDUCING THE SIZE - NOW THAT I AM HAPPY WITH THE PERFORMANCE.
Thane
Thane Thir,
Are the last coil pics this reduction in size?
Did you post some numbers, or did I miss them?
I know you said ... but I can't find it on a quick search, is the big pipe nipple 1/2 or 3/4 inch?
Ron
Hello Thane
Congratulations for your last impressive achievements.
Please consider improving the system by adding magnets wheels and coils as explained in Stage B and C in the attached diagram. I guess it maybe can increase the performance several times.
Cheers,
Zayith
N.B: Magnets wheels must be identical in dimensions, magnets number, and magnets positions.
Quote from: Zayith on July 13, 2008, 06:40:21 PM
Hello Thane
Congratulations for your last impressive achievements.
Please consider improving the system by adding magnets wheels and coils as explained in Stage B and C in the attached diagram. I guess it maybe can increase the performance several times.
Cheers,
Zayith
N.B: Magnets wheels must be identical in dimensions, magnets number, and magnets positions.
THANKS FOR THIS ZAYITH!
ACTUALLY I HAVE DONE WHAT YOU SUGGESTED BUT I PLACED THE COIL BESIDE THE MOTOR AND HAD ONE ROTOR ON EACH SIDE OF THE MOTOR.
THE SYSTEM ACCELERATED AND PROVIDED POWER BUT MY CRITICS TOLD ME THAT THE COIL'S MAGNETIC FIELD WAS INTERFERING WITH THE MOTOR'S STATOR FIELD AND IT DIDN'T WORK - EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ACTUALLY WORKING?
MY PERSONAL FAVORITE COIL DESIGN IS A "U" SHAPED COIL WHICH CONTACTS BOTH SIDES OF THE ROTOR MAGNET AT THE SAME TIME.
UNFORTUNATELY OUR NEW COIL DESIGN SHOWN HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCUIS NOW SOMEWHAT COMPLICATED TO MAKE BY HAND - SO IT IS SLOWING US DOWN SOMEWHAT.
Thane
CHECK PLEASE!!!
HERE IS THE DATA FOR OUR LATEST BI-TOROID PROTOTYPE(It is the same design as previously employed but with a more efficient primary to secondary delivery.)
INPUT 10.34 volts
0.74 amps
Power Factor = 0.13
Power = 0.995 watts
OUTPUT ACROSS 100 ohm LOAD14.14 volts
Power = 2.0 watts
Efficiency = 200.9%I will be posting some photos once I return from Toronto.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 12, 2008, 09:16:12 PM
DEAR I_RONVELATION,
THE POWERS THAT BE ARE NOT IN CHARGE HERE...
THEY HAVE BEEN DUPED.
UNIVERSAL INTELLIGENCE IS IN CHARGE - PERIOD.
EVERYTHING IS A VARIATION OF GOD (OR GOOD) - EVEN THE SO CALLED NEGATIVE "POWERS THAT BE".
THE "OUTWARD" EXPRESSION OF NEGATIVITY FROM THE POWERS THAT BE SIMPLY EXISTS TO SHOW US OUR OWN "INNER" NEGATIVITY. WHEN WE ALL COLLECTIVELY ELIMINATE OUR OWN NEGATIVE TENDENCIES - INCLUDING BELIEVING THAT SUCH AND SUCH IS "NEGATIVE" THE POWERS THAT BE WILL DISAPPEAR. IT IS UP TO EACH OF UN ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WANT TO STOP GLOBAL TERRORISM WE SHOULD FIRST STOP TERRORISM IN OUR OWN MINDS AND HOMES.
ONCE I GET THE TRANSFORMER WORKING TO MY SATISFACTION - BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT - I WILL COVER IT WITH BAR CODES THAT I AM NOW COLLECTING AND I WILL SHOW YOU THAT - THE DARKNESS OF NARROW SELF SERVING HUMAN IGNORANCE IS NO MATCH FOR THE LIGHT OF INFINITE SEVICE TO ALL..
Sorry, I did not realize your full understanding. Let me know if I can help brother.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 13, 2008, 07:33:55 PM
CHECK PLEASE!!!
HERE IS THE DATA FOR OUR LATEST BI-TOROID PROTOTYPE
(It is the same design as previously employed but with a more efficient primary to secondary delivery.)
INPUT
10.34 volts
0.74 amps
Power Factor = 0.13
Power = 0.995 watts
OUTPUT ACROSS 100 ohm LOAD
14.14 volts
Power = 2.0 watts
Efficiency = 200.9%
I will be posting some photos once I return from Toronto.
Cheers
Thane
Now that is out fricking standing! Great job Thane.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on July 13, 2008, 07:46:05 PM
Sorry, I did not realize your full understanding. Let me know if I can help brother.
Regards, Larry
I CAN TALK THE TALK LARRY - STILL LEARNING TO WALK THE WALK THOUGH.
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF UPLOADING OUR 180% EFFICIENT BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER.
COMMENTS WELCOME.
NEW BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER VIDEOhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cka7qb0zoc8
CHEERS
Thane
Hi all,
Thane sent me an article a couple of weeks ago that I couldn't get small enough for the limit. The article is now online:
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/article.jsp?content=20080611_72329_72329
:)
Quote from: JustMe on July 13, 2008, 11:39:02 PM
Hi all,
Thane sent me an article a couple of weeks ago that I couldn't get small enough for the limit. The article is now online: http://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/article.jsp?content=20080611_72329_72329
:)
THAT GUY IS A CRACKPOT!
THANKS
JM
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 13, 2008, 07:33:55 PM
CHECK PLEASE!!!
HERE IS THE DATA FOR OUR LATEST BI-TOROID PROTOTYPE
(It is the same design as previously employed but with a more efficient primary to secondary delivery.)
Cheers
Thane
Congratulations! I knew you could do it.
And this looks like you have come up with a very practical device! My hats off Thir!!!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on July 14, 2008, 06:42:33 PM
Congratulations! I knew you could do it.
And this looks like you have come up with a very practical device! My hats off Thir!!!
Ron
WELL IT IS A GOOD ATTEMPT - BUT NOT YET IDEAL - THAT METER I AM USING IS NOTORIOUSLY TRICKY AND CAN FOOL PEOPLE. JUST BECAUSE IT "APPEARS" TO BE OVER-UNITY - IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE PROOF - BUT IT IS FUN NONE THE LESS.
WHEN YOU SEE "
BAR CODES" YOU'LL NOW IT'S DONE.
I AM NOW WORKING ON THE NEXT BI-TOROID EVOLUTION.
JM WILL POST SOME PHOTO DATA SOON TAKEN TODAY AND I WILL POST DRAWINGS FOR THE NEW DESIGN.
CHEERS
Thane
Hi there Thane,
I'm watching this with interest!
Why the low power? Have you tried something like 25 > 50 watts yet?
Good work.
Regards,
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on July 14, 2008, 07:30:08 PM
Hi there Thane,
I'm watching this with interest!
Why the low power? Have you tried something like 25 > 50 watts yet?
Good work.
Regards,
Steven
IT'S A BITCH STEVEN - GETTING THE TURNS RIGHT, THE LOAD RIGHT, THE PRIMARY AIR GAP RIGHT (THERE IS AN ADJUSTABLE 1/8 " AIR GAP INSIDE THE PRIMARY COIL TO VARY RELUCTANCE) AND I AM USING 30 GAUGE WIRE FOR THE SECONDARY - MY PRIMARY CURRENT IS TOO HIGH - BUT IF I ADD TURNS MY OUTPUT GOES DOWN BECAUSE MY PRIMARY WIRE IS TOO SMALL AT 20 GAUGE (I HAVE ALREADY CHANGED IT 3 TIMES).
I WOUND, UNWOUND AND REWOUND THIS THING BY HAND OVER THE PAST 3 DAYS AND HAVE NOW (I THINK) I FOUND A BETTER WAY TO MAKE IT ??? SO I WILL START OVER WHEN I GET SOME MORE TOROIDS IN.
WHEN I GET SOMETHING THAT SHOWS PROMISE - I TRY TO BE SATISFIED FOR AT LEAST 1 DAY - SO THAT WAS YESTERDAY.
IT IS NOT NEAR PERFECT AND I THINK IT CAN BE MUCH BETTER STILL.
AND LAST OF ALL I DON'T TRUST THAT METER - BUT IT IS ALL I HAVE AT THE MOMENT.
MAYBE I'LL REWIND THE PRIMARY TOMORROW?
THANKS FOR THE SUGGESTION.
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on July 13, 2008, 11:39:02 PM
Hi all,
Thane sent me an article a couple of weeks ago that I couldn't get small enough for the limit. The article is now online:
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/article.jsp?content=20080611_72329_72329
:)
At the top of the webpage...
"The next great Canadian idea: Peripiteia generator
Sharda Prashad
From the
July 21, 2008 issue of Canadian Business magazine"
Missing time? Oh sh*t, I've been abducted...
"this can't be happening... this can't be happening... this can't be happening"
Must call Scully...
-M
OMG 75 pages and ....19.5 hours later, i have finally read the thread all the way thru! Very impressive and informative.
Congrats to Thane for a great invention with much potential.... And you certainly get my vote for "Most Entertaining Inventor in a Mini-Series" ;)
The free energy world, like politics, has WAY too little humor in it ;)
...And great work done by all the skilled replicators!
Something i was reading just the other day from Ed Leedskalnin's book "
Magnetic Current" (http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_coralcastle2.htm) that struck me when i saw the new coaxial design of your coils:
Quote"To get more magnet out of a coil put the coil in steel or iron tube, then the tube outside the coil will be a magnet the same as the coil's core, but the magnet poles will be opposite. it means at the same coil end if the core end is North Pole the tube end will be South Pole. In this way you will get almost again as much magnet out of the coil and in the core and tube. You can do better yet, join one end of the coil's core end with the same metal, joining core with tube. make two holes in end of metal for the coil wire ends to go out, fasten a ring on top, now you have the most efficient electric magnet for lifting purposes. It wastes no magnets that come from your battery or dynamo."
Enjoyed the thread and wish i lived closer to O. U. (the university, not the naysayer :) )
Quote from: jibbguy on July 15, 2008, 01:40:54 AM
OMG 75 pages and ....19.5 hours later, i have finally read the thread all the way thru! Very impressive and informative.
Congrats to Thane for a great invention with much potential.... And you certainly get my vote for "Most Entertaining Inventor in a Mini-Series" ;)
The free energy world, like politics, has WAY too little humor in it ;)
...And great work done by all the skilled replicators!
Something i was reading just the other day from Ed Leedskalnin's book "Magnetic Current" (http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_coralcastle2.htm) that struck me when i saw the new coaxial design of your coils:
Enjoyed the thread and wish i lived closer to O. U. (the university, not the naysayer :) )
THANKS THERE JIBBGUY!
SOME PEOPLE PREFER A CENSORED THREAD (AMERICAN MEDIA/COVERT COMMUNIST STYLE) BUT I LIKE IT "RAW AND UNCUT" - JUST SEEMS MORE REAL TO ME - SO THANKS - GLAD YOU ENJOYED IT.
I HOPE YOU DON'T MIND ME STEALING YOUR COAXIAL COIL OBSERVATION - I NEVER THOUGHT OF IT THAT WAY!
PEACE
Thane
"We don't see the world as it is... We see it as we are."
The Talmud
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 13, 2008, 07:33:55 PM
CHECK PLEASE!!!
HERE IS THE DATA FOR OUR LATEST BI-TOROID PROTOTYPE
(It is the same design as previously employed but with a more efficient primary to secondary delivery.)
INPUT
10.34 volts
0.74 amps
Power Factor = 0.13
Power = 0.995 watts
OUTPUT ACROSS 100 ohm LOAD
14.14 volts
Power = 2.0 watts
Efficiency = 200.9%
I will be posting some photos once I return from Toronto.
Cheers
Thane
How aboot using two or three of these coils on the same wheel?
Anyway, Thane, unlike some other researchers on this forum I admire your tenacity, openness, and consistency in doing this.
And I sincerely hope you have found what it looks to be from these measurements. Too bad there's so much room for error still.
Oh, and someone knowledgeable on another board suggested using this equipment to do the measurements:
http://www.clarke-hess.com/2335.html
Just wondering about the types of meters being used take measurements here. Is there a list of brands and models? Are power meters lab grade, and able deliver true RMS readings regardless of frequency and wave shape? Also wondering about power factor effects (not sure how inductive or capacitive your loads or measurement equipment are. My humble apologies if you have been asked this question a million times, but, as you know, taking accurate electrical measurements is a treacherous task.
Quote from: Morgenster on July 15, 2008, 07:39:09 AM
How aboot using two or three of these coils on the same wheel?
Anyway, Thane, unlike some other researchers on this forum I admire your tenacity, openness, and consistency in doing this. And I sincerely hope you have found what it looks to be from these measurements. Too bad there's so much room for error still.
THANKS MORGENSTER,
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE ACTUAL POWER FACTOR IS MORE LIKE 0.7 OR 45 DEGREES RATHER THAN WHAT THE METER IS SHOWING (O.11) NOW THAT THE TRANSFORMER PRIMARY HAS BEEN DOUBLE CHECKED ON THE OSCILLOSCOPE AT THE LAB.
THAT BEING SAID THERE IS ENOUGH POSITIVE DATA FROM THIS PROTOTYPE TO SUGGEST THAT WITH SOME FURTHER TWEAKING - WE WILL GET THERE.
THANKS FOR THE METER LINK - THAT IS VERY MUCH NEEDED.
Thane
I agree with Morgenster that the Clarke Hess 2335 is a mighty fine instrument ( DROOL) :P
I'll be green with envy if you able to get your mitts on one of these. I would have to sell a ton of my legendary Alien/CIA/MIB ray proof tin foil hats to afford one for myself...
From the Clarke-Hess Website:
"Customers of the Clarke-Hess Wattmeters include NIST, I.B.M., General Electric, Philips, Underwriter's Laboratories, the Canadian Standards Association, Branson Ultrasonics and General Motors ..."
Quote from: derricka on July 15, 2008, 08:18:21 PM
I agree with Morgenster that the Clarke Hess 2335 is a mighty fine instrument ( DROOL) :P
I'll be green with envy if you able to get your mitts on one of these. I would have to sell a ton of my legendary Alien/CIA/MIB ray proof tin foil hats to afford one for myself...
PERHAPS YOU CAN LICENCE YOUR "ELITE STATUS MODIFIER PROGRAM" WITH JUST 21 POSTS? HOW DOES THAT WORK?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: derricka on July 15, 2008, 07:07:01 PM
Just wondering about the types of meters being used take measurements here. Is there a list of brands and models? Are power meters lab grade, and able deliver true RMS readings regardless of frequency and wave shape? Also wondering about power factor effects (not sure how inductive or capacitive your loads or measurement equipment are. My humble apologies if you have been asked this question a million times, but, as you know, taking accurate electrical measurements is a treacherous task.
NO WORRIES - GOOD QUESTIONS BUT STILL PREMATURE. (JUSTME WILL BE POSTING SOME PHOTO DATA SOON WHICH SHOULD HELP). WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT HOWEVER, ALL READINGS WILL BE DONE WITH TRUE RMS METERS @ 60 HZ.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 15, 2008, 08:39:30 PM
NO WORRIES - GOOD QUESTIONS BUT STILL PREMATURE. (JUSTME WILL BE POSTING SOME PHOTO DATA SOON WHICH SHOULD HELP). WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT HOWEVER, ALL READINGS WILL BE DONE WITH TRUE RMS METERS @ 60 HZ.
Looking forward to that, 1/8 inch air gap! My Bi-square transformer test was bleeding flux and losing watts all over the place until I tightened the air gap.
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on July 15, 2008, 08:59:19 PM
Looking forward to that, 1/8 inch air gap! My Bi-square transformer test was bleeding flux and losing watts all over the place until I tightened the air gap.
Thanks, Larry
DID YOU PLACE YOUR AIR GAP UNDER THE PRIMARY WINDINGS?
Thane
Quote
>>CRANKYpants: PERHAPS YOU CAN LICENCE YOUR "ELITE STATUS MODIFIER PROGRAM" WITH JUST 21 POSTS? HOW DOES THAT WORK?
I know I had helped Harti out with some RF measurement questions, and I posted a PCB schematic for one of Dr. Stifflers "Thomas Oscillator" circuits, but I will be the first to admit that's not worth 6 stars ( 3 maybe...) . So, It must have something to do with narcism, greed, and that tattered copy of "Hacking for Dummies" under my pillow...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 15, 2008, 09:25:51 PM
DID YOU PLACE YOUR AIR GAP UNDER THE PRIMARY WINDINGS?
Thane
Okay, you really got my brain spinning there. Or you saying that your primary winding has a 1/8" non magnetic substance between the primary winding and the primary core?
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on July 15, 2008, 09:33:24 PM
Okay, you really got my brain spinning there. Or you saying that your primary winding has a 1/8" non magnetic substance between the primary winding and the primary core?
Thanks, Larry
NO I AM SAYING THE PRIMARY TOROID IS "C SHAPED" (BUT THE OPENING IS 1/8 OF AN INCH AND ALSO ADJUSTABLE) AND THE TWO TOROIDS ARE PLACED TOGETHER LIKE THIS "OO" AND THE PRIMARY WINDINGS ARE WOUND OVER THE GAP.
THE FINISHED PRODUCT LOOKS LIKE THIS:
___OOTHE THEORY IS THAT THE PRIMARY MAGNETIC FIELD WILL "HELP" CARRY FLUX ACROSS THE AIR GAP - BUT IT IS A ONE WAY STREET BECAUSE THE SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX UNDER LOAD HAS TWO FLUX PATH CHOICES AND HOPEFULLY IT CHOOSES THE LOWER RELUCTANCE SECONDARY ROUTE?
ALSO THERE ARE TWO FERROMAGNETIC BRIDGES CONNECTING THE TWO SECONDARIES SO THAT THE SECONDARY INDUCED FLUX CAN BYPASS THE PRIMARY. IF YOU ARE USING SQUARE CORES YOU MAY WANT TO AUGMENT YOUR BRIDGE A LITTLE.
NOW THE NICE THING ABOUT USING TOROIDS IS THAT WHEN YOU CUT OUT THE AIR GAP YOU CAN PEEL AWAY THE INNER CORE LAMINATIONS AND CREATE THE BRIDGE WHICH HELPS REDUCE SECONDARY TO SECONDARY EDDY CURRENT LOSSES.
YESTERDAY I REWOUND MY PRIMARY - BUT THE GAP WAS 1/16 " AND THIS PROVED TO BE TOO SMALL (BECAUSE PRIMARY CURRENT AND Pf CHANGED UNDER LOAD) - IT SHOULD NOT CHANGE AT ALL.
I SENT JM SOME PHOTOS WHICH WILL BE POSTED WHEN SHE HAS TIME.
CHEERS
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE PHOTO DATA FROM YESTERDAY THE DAY BEFORE THAT.
WHEN I WOUND THIS PRIMARY I MADE THE MISTAKE OF TAKING OUT MY 1/16 INCH SHIM FROM INSIDE THE COIL. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE PHOTOS THE PRIMARY IS NOT ISOLATED AND THE SCOPE POWER FACTOR OF ABOUT 0.7 AND
DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE METER Pf OF 0.11.
PREVIOUS TESTS WITH THE SHIM IN PLACE SHOWED THE PRIMARY CURRENT DROPPING BY 0.02 - 0.03 AMPS WHEN LOADED.
SO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD!
I WILL BE TAKING STEVEN'S SUGGESTION AND REWINDING THE PRIMARY TODAY WITH DOUBLE STRANDS AND I WILL REPLACE THE PLASTIC SHIM.
CHEERS
Thane
DEAR ALL,
I STARTED CONSTRUCTION ON A NEW BI-TOROID TODAY AND HERE IS A PHOTO OF HOW I AM GOING ABOUT IT.
THIS TIME I WILL HAVE A REMOVABLE AND VARIABLE PRIMARY AIR GAP SHIM.
I WILL ALSO BE MAKING THE PRIMARY CORE SMALLER YET ABOUT 1/2 THE SIZE AS SHOWN.
THERE IS A LAMINATED "BRIDGE" WHICH GOES BETWEEN THE TWO TOROIDS TO HELP "ENCOURAGE" COIL INDUCED FLUX TO FLOW INTO THE OPPOSING COIL RATHER THAN DOWN THE HIGH RELUCTANCE PRIMARY LEG.
I WILL ALSO BE CONTINUING THE SECONDARY WINDINGS ONTO THE BRIDGE AND PUTTING THEM AS CLOSE TOGETHER AS POSSIBLE.
CHEERS
Thane
Some fantastic work to date Thane.
Can I just make sure I understand this... and ask you kindly to fill in the gaps (no pun intended ;))
thanks
Lee
Quote from: waterhouse24 on July 16, 2008, 06:24:25 PM
Some fantastic work to date Thane.
Can I just make sure I understand this... and ask you kindly to fill in the gaps (no pun intended ;))
thanks
Lee
JUSTME WILL BE POSTING SOME OF TODAYS CONSTRUCTION PHOTOS IN DUE COURSE WHICH OUGHT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS IN LESS THAN 1000 WORDS.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on July 15, 2008, 09:33:24 PM
Okay, you really got my brain spinning there. Or you saying that your primary winding has a 1/8" non magnetic substance between the primary winding and the primary core?
Thanks, Larry
LARRY, I_RON OR A22,
I JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO HERE:
"12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system" I WAS WONDERING IF SOMEONE COULD PLACE THE MAGNETS ON A PENDULUM.
IN ONE CASE LENZ'S LAW SHOULD SLOW IT DOWN
IN THE OTHER CASE IT SHOULD "ACCELERATE" OR AT LEAST NOT DECELERATE AS RAPIDLY?
I WILL DO IT NEXT WEEK (AFTER I AM FINISHED WITH THE TRANSFORMER) - BUT I THINK IT COULD BE INTERESTING IF ONLY TO SHOW A NEGATION/REDUCTION OF LENZ'S LAW.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 17, 2008, 07:37:50 AM
LARRY, I_RON OR A22,
I JUST WATCHED THE VIDEO HERE:
"12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system"
I WAS WONDERING IF SOMEONE COULD PLACE THE MAGNETS ON A PENDULUM.
IN ONE CASE LENZ'S LAW SHOULD SLOW IT DOWN
IN THE OTHER CASE IT SHOULD "ACCELERATE" OR AT LEAST NOT DECELERATE AS RAPIDLY?
I WILL DO IT NEXT WEEK (AFTER I AM FINISHED WITH THE TRANSFORMER) - BUT I THINK IT COULD BE INTERESTING IF ONLY TO SHOW A NEGATION/REDUCTION OF LENZ'S LAW.
Hi Thane,
Couldn't click on a site on your post. Went to the thread from the forum, but 20 pages. Then I checked http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/ seen his mechnical setup and the new exciting Hemorrhoid Toilet Seat. Checked that vid out and must be a big deal in that country to make Fox news. Oh well, they were always into crap. Did see that I_Ron has a post. Could you give a Reply # ?
Great new transformer design, using the coil to block the flux leakage. Are we getting close to a actual
Flux Capacitor. Anyway glad you are so persistance.
Know why you did it, but how much did the doubling of the secondary core size help? Asking, because if I did this on a bi-rectangular version (EI core) it wouldn't work as well because of the laminations being horizontal. I know the special torroid are much more efficient, but don't want to spend the big bucks, just want to make a cheap replication as an additional backup proof.
Regards, Larry
Quote
Hi Thane,
Couldn't click on a site on your post. Went to the thread from the forum, but 20 pages. Then I checked http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/ seen his mechnical setup and the new exciting Hemorrhoid Toilet Seat. Checked that vid out and must be a big deal in that country to make Fox news. Oh well, they were always into crap. Did see that I_Ron has a post. Could you give a Reply # ?
HERE IS THE LINK THAT GAVE ME THE IDEA:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-1)_full_video_presentation.wmv
I_RON HAS A THREAD?
Quote
Great new transformer design, using the coil to block the flux leakage. Are we getting close to a actual Flux Capacitor. Anyway glad you are so persistance.
GET THE FLUX OUTA HERE LARRY!
FLUX CAPACITOR NO-WAY - I AM AFTER AN
IRON MAN GENERATOR SO I CAN FLY OVER TO JM'S AND A22 HOUSE(S) AND SEE WHAT'S UP ???
QuoteKnow why you did it, but how much did the doubling of the secondary core size help? Asking, because if I did this on a bi-rectangular version (EI core) it wouldn't work as well because of the laminations being horizontal. I know the special torroid are much more efficient, but don't want to spend the big bucks, just want to make a cheap replication as an additional backup proof.
Regards, Larry
I AM ON TO A DIFFERENT DESIGN NOW - WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE JM WILL BE POSTING.
EXPECT SOME PHOTOS MONDAY OR SO.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 17, 2008, 07:07:02 PM
I_RON HAS A THREAD?
I_ron posts 'occasionally' on "12 times more output than input, etc"
I_ron does not have a thread
I_ron works closely with Veljko and is an honorary member of the Novi Sad crew.
I_ron has a vid of his machine...
http://www.driveway.com/a8e6e8f3h8
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on July 17, 2008, 07:34:00 PM
I_ron posts 'occasionally' on "12 times more output than input, etc"
I_ron does not have a thread
I_ron works closely with Veljko and is an honorary member of the Novi Sad crew.
I_ron has a vid of his machine...
http://www.driveway.com/a8e6e8f3h8
Ron
I_RON HAS A NEW FAN IN ME!!!
CHEERIOS
Thane
Stumbled across this interesting read at this location:
http://twinkle_toes_engineering.home.comcast.net/~twinkle_toes_engineering/induction_motor.htm (http://twinkle_toes_engineering.home.comcast.net/~twinkle_toes_engineering/induction_motor.htm)
about why induction motors were not fully understood until someone attempted to use them as you would a servo motor. Torque 'ringing' due to the rotor time constant...
Excerpt from the full article is below...
-Mark
------------------------------------------
Baffled by the rotor time constant
For several years all attempts at getting servo-like performance from the induction motor failed. A step of torque (really a fast ramp) would be requested, but the motor if it made the torque step at all would then 'ring' the torque for a half second or so. No one could figure out how to stop the ringing.
All conductors have resistance (R) and inductance (L). Inductance is a measure of the strength of the magnetic field generated by the current flowing in the conductor. The ratio of L/R has the units of time and forms a natural time constant that is a measure of how fast the current and magnetic field of the conductor can change. The rotor of an induction motor has embedded in it a conducting loop of copper in which current flows round and around. It was known that the 'ringing' seen in the induction motor matched the rotor time constant, so it was pretty clear the rotor time constant was in some way causing the ringing. The rotor time constant of the typical induction motors is about 0.1 to 0.3 seconds.
No one really understands how the induction motor works
The failure to tame the rotor time constant was indicative of the fact that even the experts did not 'really' understand how the induction motor worked. At least they didn't understand it dynamically. The induction motor, while complicated, had long been written up in the motor text books, and the text books were accurate as long as things didn't change too fast. Think how remarkable this is. The world's most common motor and almost a century since its invention, and no one really understands how it works!
One of the difficulties in understanding the induction motor is that it is not a linear device; it often operates with partial saturation in its iron. This non linearity in the motor frustrated the efforts of the mathematically oriented researchers to understand the motor by writing out its equations. They had some limited success. Their equations would be valid for small signal changes about an operating point, so in those limited regions the desired fast, clean torque step was obtained, but in the general case the torque response remained contaminated by the dreaded rotor time constant ring.
Dynamics are figured out
Here is where my work comes in.... I solved the ring problem, and by doing so improved the understanding of the induction motor dynamically. My employer at the time, Draper Laboratory, a large research and development laboratory in Cambridge MA, filed for a patent on this work in 1980 with me as sole inventor and in 1982 the patent was granted. (US patent 4,348,627).
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 17, 2008, 09:16:29 PM
I_RON HAS A NEW FAN IN ME!!!
CHEERIOS
Thane
You are too kind, mon ami
Ron
.
Quote from: waterhouse24 on July 16, 2008, 06:24:25 PM
Some fantastic work to date Thane.
Can I just make sure I understand this... and ask you kindly to fill in the gaps (no pun intended ;))
thanks
Lee
DEAR LEE,
I HOPE THE NEW PHOTOS POSTED BY JUSTME ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS?
THE AIR GAP IS ABOUT 1/4 INCH.
THERE IS NO AIR GAP BETWEEN THE TOROIDS.
EVERYTHING ELSE YOU GOT RIGHT.
THANKS
Thane
HEY,
HAS ANYONE NOTICED THE SMILEY IN THE BOTTOM TORIOD IN THE PHOTO? :)
A SIGN PERHAPS?
CHEERS
Thane
FYIQuoteWow,
well done Thane!
Does this work just with 60 Hz sinewave AC or are you using some kind of pulsed input ?
YES 60 HZ MAINS POWER.
QuoteHow do you measure exactly the input power ?
I AM USING THE POWER METER SHOWN IN THE VIDEO AND PHOTOS.
THEN DOUBLE CHECK THE POWER FACTOR ON THE OSCILLOSCOPE.
QuoteWhat kind of meter do you use and do you use it in a range, where not much big error
could occur for the 1 Watt range ?
THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE READINGS ARE GOOD - THE METER HAS TROUBLE WITH THE Pf THOUGH - SO THAT IS WHY I DOUBLE CHECK WITH THE SCOPE.
Quote
P.S: Just saw, that you had a cos phi power factor issue in the other thread...
So is the measurement still valid ? Please clarify
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
NO THE MEASUREMENTS ARE NOT VALID.
WHEN I PLACED THIS TRANSFORMER ON THE SCOPE THE Pf IS ACTUALLY 0.7 OR ABOUT 45 DEGREES. AFTER REWINDING THE PRIMARY - I NOW HAVE HAD IT DOWN TO 0.26.
I AM REWINDING YET AGAIN THIS WEEKEND.
IDEALLY ONCE WORKING PROPERLY THE PRIMARY CURRENT AND POWER FACTOR WILL NOT INCREASE WHEN PLACED UNDER LOAD BECAUSE THE SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX WILL FOLLOW THE LOWER RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH INTO EACH SECONDARY AND AVOID THE PRIMARY FLUX PATH ALL TOGETHER.
ALSO THE PRIMARY SHOULD BE OPERATED AS CLOSE TO SATURATION AS POSSIBLE.
THIS SCENARIO WILL DO 2 THINGS:
IT WILL SELF REGULATE THE OUTPUT POWER AND THE DIVERTED FLUX WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE CAUSE THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE TO DROP - CAUSING IT TO DRAW ADDITIONAL CURRENT AND POWER FROM THE SUPPLY - WILL NOT BE REQUIRED.
STILL TRYING TO GET THE WIRE GAUGE TURNS RATIO MIX RIGHT.
.
PLEASE DON'T THINK I AM RUDE BUT I ONLY HAVE TIME TO DO ONE THREAD AT A TIME SO I WILL BE FOCUSING AND POSTING MY RESULTS ON THE OTHER THREAD.
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 18, 2008, 06:54:43 PM
DEAR LEE,
I HOPE THE NEW PHOTOS POSTED BY JUSTME ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS?
THE AIR GAP IS ABOUT 1/4 INCH.
THERE IS NO AIR GAP BETWEEN THE TOROIDS.
EVERYTHING ELSE YOU GOT RIGHT.
THANKS
Thane
Those pictures speak more than a 1000 words, thanks Thane!
Lee
FYI Part 2Quote from: alan on July 19, 2008, 05:21:16 AM
Do you want to explain this, please?
thanks
THE POWER FACTOR OF AN IDEAL INDUCTOR IS 0 OR VOLTAGE AND CURRENT BEING 90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE.
IN A TRANSFORMER WITH A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD THAT HAS A POWER FACTOR OF 1 - THE LOAD POWER FACTOR WILL BE TRANSFERED BACK TO THE PRIMARY AND THE PRIMARY WILL ALSO HAVE A POWER FACTOR OF 1.
THIS MEANS THE POWER DISIPATED BY THE PRIMARY UNDER LOAD IS P = VI or V^2/R..
IF THE POWER FACTOR IS NOT 1 THEN THE POWER DISIPATED BY THE PRIMARY IS
P = VI cos(ANGLE BETWEEN VOLTAGE AND CURRENT) OR
P = VI cos(theta).
SO IN OUR DEMO VIDEO OUR METER SHOWS A POWER FACTOR OF 0.11 AND THE OSCILLOSCPE SHOWS A POWER FACTOR OF 0.7 OR 45 DERGEES OUT OF PHASE.
IN THIS CASE THE METER IS WRONG - BUT ALL IS NOT LOST BECAUSE THE POWER FACTOR SHOULD BE 1 BECAUSE THE LOAD IS PURELY RESISTIVE. THIS IS THE GOOD NEWS AND THE BAD NEWS IS THAT IT IS NOT OVER UNITY - YET.
HOWEVER BY CHANGING THE WIRE GAUGE AND # OF TURNS ETC WE NOW HAVE THE POWER FACTOR DOWN TO 0.26 WITH A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD - MORE GOOD NEWS.
UNFORTUNATELY OUR PRIMARY IS STILL NOT COMPLETELY ISOLATED - WHICH WE ARE WORKING ON CORRECTING.
CHEERS
Thanelite
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 18, 2008, 08:00:24 PM
FYI
PLEASE DON'T THINK I AM RUDE BUT I ONLY HAVE TIME TO DO ONE THREAD AT A TIME SO I WILL BE FOCUSING AND POSTING MY RESULTS ON THE OTHER THREAD.
THANKS
Thane
Could someone tell me the addy of the other thread please?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on July 19, 2008, 12:56:57 PM
Could someone tell me the addy of the other thread please?
Ron
Hi Ron,
Here you are: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,5159.0/topicseen.html
Gyula
Quote from: i_ron on July 19, 2008, 12:56:57 PM
Could someone tell me the addy of the other thread please?
Ron
I'M SORRY,
MY MISTAKE THAT REQUEST WAS FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND SHARE AND ASK QUESTIONS HERE - NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
THANKS
Thane
FROM STEFAN ON YOUTUBE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU&feature=email
QuoteHmm,
200 Watts input and only about 1 Watt output ?
That still could be explained all by impedance matching.
Did you get with your rotary machine already anywhere with more coils about 200 Watts output already ? Maybe use a more efficient motor like a Newman motor... Then you will maybe only use 10 Watts input power and if you connect more output coils you should get real overunity operation...
Regards, Stefan.
THIS PROJECT WAS NEVER ABOUT CREATING AN OVERUNITY DEVICE. IT WAS AND STILL IS ABOUT REDUCING THE EFFECTS OF LENZ'S LAW IN A GENERATOR.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE VIDEO LENZ'S LAW CAUSES THE SYSTEM TO DECELERATE WHEN ONLY THE HIGH CURRENT COILS ARE EMPLOYED AND A LOAD IS PLACED ON THE GENERATOR.
DECELERATION IS REVERSED WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE EMPLOYED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE LOAD IS STILL PRESENT.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE LEZ'S LAW HAS BEEN NEGATED.
Thane
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND BELOW THE LINK TO PART 2 OF THE TRANSFORMER VIDEO WITH A NEW PRIMARY: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYYfGwU60_0
IN A CONVENTIONAL TRANSFORMER THE POWER FACTOR WOULD BE 1 (FOR A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD AS USED HERE) - MEANING THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE ARE IN PHASE WITH EACH OTHER.
THIS TRANSFORMER IS NOT IN PHASE BECAUSE THE BRIDGE DIVERTS SOME OF THE SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX. THIS DIVERTED FLUX ENTERS THE OPPOSING SECONDARY IN THE SAME DIRECTION AS THE PRIMARY FLUX AND HELPS MAINTAIN THE VOLTAGE ACCROSS THE LOAD. SO NOW WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE DIVERTED BACK EMF FLUX IS DOING "WORK" THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE HAD TO BE SUPPLIED BUT THE SOURCE.
THIS DIVERTED FLUX WOULD OTHERWISE CAUSE THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE TO DROP AND CAUSE IT TO DRAW MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE.NOW IT DOESN'T HAVE TO AND THE SAVINGS CAN NOW BE APPLIED TO THE LOAD.
WITH A MORE EFFICIENT BRIDGE, SLIGHTLY LARGER WIRE, AND ADDITIONAL BI-TOROID "SPLITTING" THIS TRANSFORMER WILL CONTINUE TO IMPROVE.
CHEERS
Thane
Nice work Thane!
Looking forward to some nice pictures of the setup.
The OU is starting to taste SWEET! ;)
BEST TRANSFORMER RESULTS YET!
(same as video only lower input)
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED WHAT I CONSIDER THE TRANSFORMER DATA YET!
(JM WILL BE POSTING PHOTO DATA SOON).
INPUT VOLTAGE = 38.13 VOLTS
INPUT CURRENT = 0.02 AMPS
POWER FACTOR = 28.6 DEGREES OR 0.876 (USING OSCILLOSCOPE)
INPUT POWER = 0.668 WATTS
OUTPUT = 10.75 VOLTS OR 1.16 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 174%
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT THE BEST "BRIDGE" BUT A MAKE SHIFT MASH-UP - HOWEVER THAT BEING SAID - EVEN IF THE POWER FACTOR WAS 1 (WHICH IT CLEARLY IS NOT) AND THE CURRENT WAS 0.03 A - IT WOULD STILL BE OVER UNITY.
TO ANSWER STEVE'S EARLIER QUESTION ABOUT HIGHER POWER - THE PRIMARY SATURATES ABOVE 0.04 AMPS.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: waterhouse24 on July 22, 2008, 03:45:40 PM
Nice work Thane!
Looking forward to some nice pictures of the setup.
The OU is starting to taste SWEET! ;)
DEAR WATERHOUSE,
IS THAT HOUSE BOAT OR OUTDOOR WATER CLOSET? :D
ANYWAY I UPLOADED SOME PHOTOS FOR YOU HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=17RP9ZYV
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 22, 2008, 09:09:49 PM
DEAR WATERHOUSE,
IS THAT HOUSE BOAT OR OUTDOOR WATER CLOSET? :D
Thane
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uncp.edu%2Fhome%2Facurtis%2FCourses%2FPhotographySpr04%2Fimages%2FStudentPhotos%2FZackMay%2FWaterHouse.jpg&hash=0fc8630d66a582a6ad147f61643f1dee2b84fc01)
nope just a house on water ;)
BEST TRANSFORMER RESULTS YET!
DEAR ALL,
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED WHAT I CONSIDER THE BEST PHOTO DATA YET!
INPUT VOLTAGE = 38.13 VOLTS
INPUT CURRENT = 0.02 AMPS
POWER FACTOR = 28.6 DEGREES OR 0.876
INPUT POWER = 0.668 WATTS
OUTPUT = 10.75 VOLTS OR 1.16 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 174%
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT THE BEST "BRIDGE" BUT A MAKE SHIFT MASH-UP - HOWEVER THAT BEING SAID - EVEN IF THE POWER FACTOR WAS 1 (WHICH IT CLEARLY IS NOT) AND THE CURRENT WAS 0.03 A - IT WOULD STILL BE OVER UNITY.
CHEERS
Thane
THANKS JM!
NOW LET'S TAKE SOME LIBERTIES WITH THE ABOVE PHOTO DATA
1) ASSUME POWER FACTOR = 21.6 DEGREES OR 0.93
INPUT POWER = 0.71 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 10.75^2 / 100.5 = 1.15 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 162 %
2) ASSUME INPUT CURRENT = 0.03 AMPS
INPUT POWER = 1.01 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 1.15 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 114 %
3) ASSUME INPUT CURRENT = 0.03 AMPS & POWER FACTOR = 0.93
INPUT POWER = 1.06 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 1.15 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 108 %
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF REWINDING THE TRANSFORMER WITH A LARGER HIGHER GAUGE WIRE AND SECONDARY CORE WHICH OUGHT TO DIVERT EVEN MORE BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX - THIS WILL HAVE A TWOFOLD EFFECT OF LOWERING THE POWER FACTOR AND LOWERING THE INPUT CURRENT.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 23, 2008, 10:33:51 AM
3) ASSUME INPUT CURRENT = 0.03 AMPS & POWER FACTOR = 0.93
INPUT POWER = 1.06 WATTS
OUTPUT POWER = 1.15 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = 108 %
CHEERS
Thane
@cranky,
Very impressiv - thats overuntiy!! Just to make sure nobody can dispute it how about using a more accurate meter to measre the inpout current? That clampmeter is only accurate to 3 digits so if its reading 0.02, then the real numebr could be as high as 0.05, which would then NOT be overuntiy. So getting the proof needs a better meter - how about that grey bench meter in the earlier photos - it also measures pf directly. ITs headline news if you can get the proof measurements.
- Mike
Hi Thane,
Great work. But just wondering after seeing the last couple of bridges. In the previous photos it appeared that the gaped toroids were made up of bands of special magnetic material. Would it be possible to get a roll of the material from the manufacturer and wrap it completely around the two gaped toroids, making a smooth bypass and no limit to the size.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: springfield on July 24, 2008, 09:52:05 PM
@cranky,
Very impressiv - thats overuntiy!! Just to make sure nobody can dispute it how about using a more accurate meter to measre the inpout current? That clampmeter is only accurate to 3 digits so if its reading 0.02, then the real numebr could be as high as 0.05, which would then NOT be overuntiy. So getting the proof needs a better meter - how about that grey bench meter in the earlier photos - it also measures pf directly. ITs headline news if you can get the proof measurements.
- Mike
THE GREY METER YOU SUGGEST SHOWED AN INPUT CURRENT OF 0.03 AMPS IT ALSO SHOWED A POWER FACTOR OF 1 SO I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT BECAUSE THE POWER FACTOR IS CLEARLY NOT 1.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on July 24, 2008, 10:08:15 PM
Hi Thane,
Great work. But just wondering after seeing the last couple of bridges. In the previous photos it appeared that the gaped toroids were made up of bands of special magnetic material. Would it be possible to get a roll of the material from the manufacturer and wrap it completely around the two gaped toroids, making a smooth bypass and no limit to the size.
Regards, Larry
YES IS AM CURRENTLY REWINDING THE SECONDARIES ON A NEW TOROID BRIDGE WHICH IS A SOLID PIECE. THE BRIDGE IN THE PREVIOUS PHOTOS WAS A TOROID CUT IN HALF AND THEN REJOINED AS AN OVAL - NOT THE BEST EFFICIENCY WISE.
ALSO IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE PRIMARY TOROIDS ARE NOT GAPPED BUT NOW SOLID.
THE AMOUNT OF SECONDARY BACK EMF "DIVERSION" DICTATES HOW FAR OVER UNITY THE UNIT CAN GO.
THE ULTIMATE DESIGN WILL LOOK LIKE A MOLECULE - WITH THE PRIMARY "NUCLEUS" IN THE CENTRE AND A SERIES OF SECONDARY TOROIDS ORBITING THE PRIMARY (MAGNETICALLY JOINED IN THE CENTRE) - SO NOW THE SECONDARY BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX WILL RADIATE OUTWARD AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY ALTOGETHER LOWERING THE POWER FACTOR AND THE PRIMARY CURRENT INCREASE EVEN MORE UNDER LOAD. ANY AMOUNT OF RETURN FLUX (TO THE PRIMARY) WILL BE LIMITED BY AND BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER AND SIZE OF OUTER SECONDARY COILS AND BY PRIMARY CORE SATURATION - WHICH WOULD AGAIN CAUSE BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX TO CONSTANTLY RADIATE OUTWARD AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY. THE BI-TOROID SECONDARIES WOULD SELF REGULATE THEIR OWN LOAD VOLTAGES.
CHEERS
Thane
That's looking real good Thane!
What does your local University of Ottawa professor say about these readings?
"BIG BANG"
Bi-Toroid Transformer Construction and Model Photos
I HAVE SENT JM SOME "BIG BANG" BI-TOROID PHOTOS FOR POSTING - I ALSO POSTED THEM HERE:http://www.megaupload.com/?d=I7ZP0Q2L
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: Morgenster on July 25, 2008, 09:37:49 AM
That's looking real good Thane!
What does your local University of Ottawa professor say about these readings?
ASSUMING THE NEW PROTOTYPE PERFORMS AS WELL OR BETTER THAN THE OLD ONE - I WILL BE PRESENTING IT TO THE UNIVERSITY "OFFICIALLY" ON MONDAY.
THERE IS NO "OFFICIAL" COMMENT UNTIL ALL POSSIBLE FALSE MEASUREMENT READINGS ARE RULED OUT SO THAT COULD TAKE SOME TIME AS WELL.
Thane
Quote from: LarryC on July 24, 2008, 10:08:15 PM
Hi Thane,
Great work. But just wondering after seeing the last couple of bridges.
Regards, Larry
NEW BRIDGES MY-OVER-UNITY COUNTY...DEAR ALL,
I HAVE UPLOADED THE NEW 1027% BI-TOROID PHOTO DATA HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RY9LUR2V
Input voltage = 38.7 volts, current = 0.002 amps Pf = 0.88 INPUT POWER = 0.07 watts
Load voltage = 8.5 volts LOAD POWER = 8.5^2/100.5 = 0.72 watts
Efficiency = 1027 % (voltages recorded with true RMS meter).
CHEERIOS
Thane
Hi Adam
you can find all patent pages and updates about Thans Heins at my hubpage
http://hubpages.com/hub/The-full-patent-blueprint--Perepiteia-motor
You can rightclick and download the full new patent page by page,
or mail me at
Info.adjust@gmail.com and I will send you the pdf
I try to put the pages in a video at you tube but the file was too big. :'(
But i upload a video at youtube with a direct ling to the page with the new patent photos ::)
the name of the video is: NEW 2008 !!! PEREPITEIA MOTOR THE FULL PATENT BLUEPRINTS
Thanks for your support
Adjust
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 25, 2008, 04:50:06 PM
Efficiency = 1027 % (voltages recorded with true RMS meter).
AMAZING THANE! 1in 9out!!!! Thank you for all your pioneering work, you're the man;D.
Your motor work has been impressive enough but this bi-toroid is even more exciting to me as it's solid state and should hopefully enable high power density devices to be made by all.
I am keen to replicate this, do you think it would be worth me trying to make the core component out of soft iron wire bundles with tape round or do you need specific iron?
All the best, Fraser.
Quote from: Yucca on July 26, 2008, 06:51:45 AM
AMAZING THANE! 1in 9out!!!! Thank you for all your pioneering work, you're the man;D.
Your motor work has been impressive enough but this bi-toroid is even more exciting to me as it's solid state and should hopefully enable high power density devices to be made by all.
I am keen to replicate this, do you think it would be worth me trying to make the core component out of soft iron wire bundles with tape round or do you need specific iron?
All the best, Fraser.
THANKS AND NO - YOU NEED TOROIDS - 3 OF THEM TO BE EXACT.
2 SMALL ONES FOR THE PRIMARY AND 1 LARGE ONE FOR THE SECONDARY BRIDGE.
THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY FLUX PATHS HAVE TO BE VERY EFFICIENT -
THIS IS WHERE WE GOOFED UP PREVIOUSLY IN ME THINKING THE PRIMARY RELUCTANCE NEEDED TO BE HIGH.
THOSE PRIMARY TOROIDS WERE SOURCED OUT BY GOTOLUC - I WOULD SUGGEST YOU ASK HIM WHERE HE GOT THEM - THEY WERE FREE! THEY HAVE A RELATIVE PERMEABILITY OF AROUND 200,000 SO THEY PRODUCE A STONG FIELD WITH LITTLE INPUT CURRENT.
ALSO TOROIDTECH IN TORONTO CANADA CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THE SECONDARY TOROID.
IT MAY BE A FEW BUCKS.
GOOD LUCK
Thane
Quote from: adjust on July 26, 2008, 05:33:49 AM
Hi Adam
you can find all patent pages and updates about Thans Heins at my hubpage
http://hubpages.com/hub/The-full-patent-blueprint--Perepiteia-motor
You can rightclick and download the full new patent page by page,
or mail me at
Info.adjust@gmail.com and I will send you the pdf
I try to put the pages in a video at you tube but the file was too big. :'(
But i upload a video at youtube with a direct ling to the page with the new patent photos ::)
the name of the video is: NEW 2008 !!! PEREPITEIA MOTOR THE FULL PATENT BLUEPRINTS
Thanks for your support
Adjust
DEAR ADJUST,
YOU HAVE A
TYPO - HOLY GRAY - SHOULD READ
HOLY GRAIL.
ALSO THOSE PATENTS ARE NOW PRETTY MUCH OUT OF DATE.
YOU OUGHT TO UPDATE YOUR INFO WITH OUR NEW COIL DESIGN AND LINKS TO THE MAY AND JUNE GENERATOR VIDEOS AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY.
ONE FINAL THING - I WOULD SUGGEST YOU CALL IT THE "
PEREPITEIA GENERATOR" SINCE THAT IS WHAT I CONSIDER IT TO BE BUT OF COURSE IT IS UP TO YOU.
CHEERS
Thane
Photos! :)
Have you also tried pulsed DC?
Maybe it gives a clearer result if a known quantity of current is put in the device, for instance:
Capacitor -> charge pump -> opamp sine generator -> sine voltage
Just a thought, keep up the good work.
Quote from: alan on July 26, 2008, 10:47:09 AM
Have you also tried pulsed DC?
Maybe it gives a clearer result if a known quantity of current is put in the device, for instance:
Capacitor -> charge pump -> opamp sine generator -> sine voltage
Just a thought, keep up the good work.
I AM NOT SURE HOW MUCH CLEARER YOU WANT IT?
WHEN I DOUBLE CHECKED THE METER LOAD CURRENT WITH THE SAME METER (BECAUSE I COULD NOT BELIVE WHAT I WAS SEEING) - THE METER SHOWED 0.086 A AND THE CALCULATED LOAD CURRENT IS:
Ir = 8.57 / 100.5
Ir = 85.3 mA
GOTOLUC HAS BEEN USING THIS METER FOR QUITE A WHILE AND I AM SURE HE CAN VOUCH FOR ITS ACCURACY.
NEVERTHELESS ALL THIS
MUST BE VETTED BY THE UNIVERSITY SO IT MAY ALL BE IN ERROR - WE WILL SEE?
I AM TAKING A LITTLE VACATION UNTIL THEN.
(PLEASE FORGIVE MY "SPOOK-O-METER" BUT SUGGESTING THAT THERE IS AN UN-"known quantity of current" IS A TYPICAL SPOOKISH TACTIC OF CREATING
DOUBT WHERE
NO DOUBT EXISTS AS IS SUGGESTING ALTERNATE CONVOLUTED TESTS TO MAKE THINGS "CLEAR" WHEN A SIMPLE APPLICATION OF OHMS LAW WILL SUFFICE).
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 26, 2008, 11:06:13 AM
I AM NOT SURE HOW MUCH CLEARER YOU WANT IT?
WHEN I DOUBLE CHECKED THE METER LOAD CURRENT WITH THE SAME METER (BECAUSE I COULD NOT BELIVE WHAT I WAS SEEING) - THE METER SHOWED 0.086 A AND THE CALCULATED LOAD CURRENT IS:
Ir = 8.57 / 100.5
Ir = 8.53 mA
GOTOLUC HAS BEEN USING THIS METER FOR QUITE A WHILE AND I AM SURE HE CAN VOUCH FOR ITS ACCURACY.
HI Thane,
Sorry to draw your attention to a typo but 8.57 / 100.5 = 0.0853 A
and it is 85.3mA, not 8.53mA, right? This nicely corresponds to your measured 0.086A (which is 86mA).
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on July 26, 2008, 11:34:04 AM
HI Thane,
Sorry to draw your attention to a typo but 8.57 / 100.5 = 0.0853 A and it is 85.3mA, not 8.53mA, right? This nicely corresponds to your measured 0.086A (which is 86mA).
Thanks, Gyula
GOT IT! :P
THANKS
Thane
I'm talking about the input.
Output is double checked and does seem correct, I only suggested a method to double check the input.
Input a known charge quantity or input current limiter, so nothing passes by unnoticed.
I wouldn't rely only on an amp meter using inductance, while the whole device is based on inductance and shows OU.
Don't need it to be any clearer, just sharing my ideas.
Good luck monday when you present it at U.
If you really have achieved OU, then 1 should be able to run 10 of these. Just need to transform the voltage to 38V again.
Quote from: alan on July 26, 2008, 11:50:01 AM
I'm talking about the input.
Output is double checked and does seem correct, I only suggested a method to double check the input.
Input a known charge quantity or input current limiter, so nothing passes by unnoticed.
I wouldn't rely only on an amp meter using inductance, while the whole device is based on inductance and shows OU.
Don't need it to be any clearer, just sharing my ideas.
Good luck monday when you present it at U.
I WILL DOUBLE CHECK THE INPUT CURRENT WITH THE OSCILLOSCOPE.
IN SOME PREVIOUS PHOTOS YOU MAY HAVE SEEN A POWER ANALYZER WHICH I WAS ALSO USING FOR THIS TEST - ITS CURRENT READING WAS 0.00 A AND IT CANNOT READ TO THE THIRD DECIMAL - IF THE INPUT CURRENT WAS EQUAL TO OR ABOVE 0.005 THE METER WOULD HAVE READ IT AS 0.01 A BUT IT DID NOT.
AGAIN IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT WOULD BE SO LOW - BUT WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE SIZE OF THE SECONDARY CORE AND THE FACT THAT THE PRIMARY IS ALREADY BEGINNING TO SATURATE (YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCOPE HOW THE CURRENT WAVEFORM IS ALREADY A LITTLE FUNKY) - HOW AND WHY WOULD SECONDARY BACK EMF FLUX MAKE IT BACK TO THE PRIMARY UNDER THESE CONDITIONS?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: JustMe on July 26, 2008, 10:23:11 AM
Photos! :)
Hi JustMe,
Stefan increased the size of the uploadable photos from 50kB to 100kB a few weeks ago. I mention this so that you may not have to fiddle to much with the photos to downsize them below 50kB and the picture quality can remain even better. (Not that quality is a problem with the 50kB limit, you do an excellent job!)
( http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4207.msg103973.html#msg103973 )
Thanks, Gyula
hi Thane
very encouraging to see these latest developments on the bi-toroid Xfr!
i was experimenting with multi-toroids a year or so ago, inspired by the Jensen 'Uni-Directional Transformer', and although i was able to get regular transformer action, i didn't see any evidence of avoiding Lenz effects
i'm attaching a couple of pics of my xfr (tri-former, as i called it) - the toroids are approx 1.25" OD, primary is approx 200 turns of approx .2mm mag wire, two secondaries give approx 1:1 offload (when connected in series)
in your opinion, what are the key elements to achieve the Lenz-less type operation?
- scale up to greater turns & current operation?
- move from pulsed DC to Sine waveforms?
- take outputs from secondaries and rectify separately, rather than series? (so that secondary back-emfs oppose each other)
- use different cores?
any pointers much appreciated!
keep up the good work - all the best with the presentation
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
Hi Thane,
If I follow this recipe then do you think I stand a good chance of seeing a Lenz violation?:
(1)
Make a bitoroid core using a high permeability material (coiled metglass tape, width 25mm, thickness 0.04mm).
(2)
Make the secondary big toroid of the bitoroid much taller and fatter than the 2 primary coils so it can handle more flux, this would be done by stacking two metglass tape winds together to yield a 50mm high toroid. Also each layer would have more metglass winds than the primaries, so a big fat secondary!
(3)
Make and mount the three toroids such that the top two primaries are angled up like a roof in order to physically seperate the primary and secondary flux paths.
(4)
Do a 1:1 turns ratio, or in this case 1:1:1. turns and gauge sufficient to handle a power high enough to push the primary toroids well into saturation.
(5)
Power it up with variac and purely resistive load.
(6)
Adjust the input voltage aso that the primaries are just below saturation.
(7)
Measure inp/out and calc PF using 2ch oscope:
ch1 accross coil for voltage,
ch2 accross shunt in series for current.
P.S.
Sorry to hassle you with queries.
All the best, Fraser.
Hi Thane,
so how did the professor respond? I read that you were doing some demo on monday?
Greets
QuoteHi Thane,
If I follow this recipe then do you think I stand a good chance of seeing a Lenz violation?:
FIRST OF ALL AS FAR AS I KNOW - FOR A TRANSFORMER TO WORK YOU NEED LENZ'S LAW.
I HAVE UPLOADED OUR NEW COIL DESIGN HERE: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NDC0KJ5O
I WILL ALSO SEND IT TO JM SO SHE CAN DO HER THING.
Quote(1)
Make a bitoroid core using a high permeability material (coiled metglass tape, width 25mm, thickness 0.04mm).
I WOULD SUGGEST A LOWER PERMEABILITY PRIMARY CORE AND A HIGHER SECONDARY.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE NEW DESIGN - WE ARE EMPLOYING MULTIPLE BI-TOROIDS WITH INCREASING OUTER CORE AREA(S) TO "SUCK" THE LOAD INDUCED BACK EMF OUT AND AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY. THE MORE OUTER TOROIDS THE GREATER THE OUTPUT POWER AND THE LESS RETURN FLUX TO THE PRIMARY.
Quote(2)
Make the secondary big toroid of the bitoroid much taller and fatter than the 2 primary coils so it can handle more flux, this would be done by stacking two metglass tape winds together to yield a 50mm high toroid. Also each layer would have more metglass winds than the primaries, so a big fat secondary!
THIS IS OUR APPROACH BUT WITH CONVENTIONAL CORES.
Quote(3)
Make and mount the three toroids such that the top two primaries are angled up like a roof in order to physically seperate the primary and secondary flux paths.
I THINK THAT FLUX FOLLOWS THE PATH OF LEAST RELUCTANCE SO IF YOUR PRIMARY CORE AREA IS SMALL (RELATIVE TO THE OUTER CORE) AND IS OPERATING JUST BELOW SATURATION - THEN IT STANDS TO REASON THAT THE SECONDARY INDUCED FLUX IS GOING TO TRY TO "FILL" THE OUTER CORE AREAS BEFORE HEADING BACK TOWARDS THE CENTRE PRIMARY.
Quote(4)
Do a 1:1 turns ratio, or in this case 1:1:1. turns and gauge sufficient to handle a power high enough to push the primary toroids well into saturation.
(5)
Power it up with variac and purely resistive load.
(6)
Adjust the input voltage aso that the primaries are just below saturation.
(7)
Measure inp/out and calc PF using 2ch oscope:
ch1 accross coil for voltage,
ch2 accross shunt in series for current.
P.S.
Sorry to hassle you with queries.
All the best, Fraser.
THIS IS PRETTTY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE EXOTIC CORES.
CHEERS
Thane
Quotein your opinion, what are the key elements to achieve the Lenz-less type operation?
- scale up to greater turns & current operation?
- move from pulsed DC to Sine waveforms?
- take outputs from secondaries and rectify separately, rather than series? (so that secondary back-emfs oppose each other)
- use different cores?
any pointers much appreciated!
keep up the good work - all the best with the presentation
sandy
DEAR SANDY,
AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY AT LEAST FOR THIS TRANSFORMER DESIGN - YOU NEED LENZ'S LAW TO MAINTAIN THE FLUX UNDER LOAD CONDITIONS OR THE VOLTAGE WILL COLLAPSE AND YOU WILL SUPPLY LITTLE OR NO POWER.
THIS IS WHY WE USE TWO OPPOSING COILS TO "FEED" EACH OTHER THE FLUX REQUIRED TO "SELF REGULATE" THE LOAD VOLTAGE.
NOW THE TRICKY PART IS ENCOURAGING THE
SECONDARY
LOAD
INDUCED
BACK
EMF TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE RETURN FLUX PATH INTO THE PRIMARY - WHICH WE FEEL WE HAVE ACHIEVED WITH THE MULTI SECONDARY BI-TOROID SCENARIO - WHERE THE "
S.L.I.B.E" IS AUTOMATICALLY DRAW OUTWARDS TOWARDS THE LARGER LOWER RELUCTANCE CORES AND RESISTS THE TEMPTATION TO MOVE TOWARDS THE PRIMARY HIGH RELUCTANCE CORE.
HOPE THIS HELPS?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: Morgenster on July 30, 2008, 08:56:06 AM
Hi Thane,
so how did the professor respond? I read that you were doing some demo on monday?
Greets
ONCE OUR NEW TRANSFORMER PROTOTYPE ( http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NDC0KJ5O ) IS READY WE WILL BE CHECKING THE INPUT CURRENT WITH A
TOPWARD METER - THE PROBLEM WITH THE CLAMP METER USED IS THAT IT IS SENSITIVE TO EXTERNAL MAGNETIC FIELDS WHICH ARE EVERYWHERE SO WE GET DIFFERENT CURRENT READINGS AT EVERY DIFFERENT LOCATION WE PLACE THE METER. SO WE WAIT AGAIN...
Thane
BTW since I was in this thread for so long I figured I'd explain why I'm not right now.
Basically the results I was getting kept on suggesting that I was getting the 'conventional' effect and not the other one whatever that might be, so figured I'd try my enhanced flux coupling ideas in a more pure way but before I got to do that I tripped on a correlation and posted it, Stiffler and Ben/K4zep have made it work and so that's going swimmingly.
But I must say, very nice results Thane!
Well done! It does all seem to be coming together does it not?
Quote from: aether22 on July 31, 2008, 05:08:53 AM
BTW since I was in this thread for so long I figured I'd explain why I'm not right now.
Basically the results I was getting kept on suggesting that I was getting the 'conventional' effect and not the other one whatever that might be, so figured I'd try my enhanced flux coupling ideas in a more pure way but before I got to do that I tripped on a correlation and posted it, Stiffler and Ben/K4zep have made it work and so that's going swimmingly.
But I must say, very nice results Thane!
Well done! It does all seem to be coming together does it not?
Thanks A22 and yes I find things usually start to come together around the 10 year mark.
Thane
Does your AC power supply have a current limiter?
Sorry if I annoy you with repeating questions.
Quote from: alan on July 31, 2008, 07:05:35 AM
Does your AC power supply have a current limiter?
Sorry if I annoy you with repeating questions.
IF I DIDN'T ENJOY SHARING AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS, PERHAPS I SHOULDN'T BE HERE.
AND NO WE DON'T HAVE A CURRENT LIMITER AND WOULD NOT USE ONE AT THIS TIME
SINCE PRIMARY CURRENT INCREASE (OR LACK THEREOF) FROM NO LOAD TO ON LOAD IS OUR INDICATION OF SUCCESSFUL FLUX DIVERSION.
CHEERS
Thane
I wrestled this down to < 50 K before I remembered Gyulasun told me I could do 100 now (thanks :)). Next time.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on July 30, 2008, 11:06:23 PM
DEAR SANDY,
AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY AT LEAST FOR THIS TRANSFORMER DESIGN - YOU NEED LENZ'S LAW TO MAINTAIN THE FLUX UNDER LOAD CONDITIONS OR THE VOLTAGE WILL COLLAPSE AND YOU WILL SUPPLY LITTLE OR NO POWER.
THIS IS WHY WE USE TWO OPPOSING COILS TO "FEED" EACH OTHER THE FLUX REQUIRED TO "SELF REGULATE" THE LOAD VOLTAGE.
NOW THE TRICKY PART IS ENCOURAGING THE SECONDARY LOAD INDUCED BACK EMF TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE RETURN FLUX PATH INTO THE PRIMARY - WHICH WE FEEL WE HAVE ACHIEVED WITH THE MULTI SECONDARY BI-TOROID SCENARIO - WHERE THE "S.L.I.B.E" IS AUTOMATICALLY DRAW OUTWARDS TOWARDS THE LARGER LOWER RELUCTANCE CORES AND RESISTS THE TEMPTATION TO MOVE TOWARDS THE PRIMARY HIGH RELUCTANCE CORE.
HOPE THIS HELPS?
CHEERS
Thane
thanks Thane
appreciate your separate reply - your answers to Yucca's subsequent, more detailed questions, really covered all the bases
looking at the construction of my old 'tri-former' above, the message i'm getting is just to arrange an asymmetrical core geometry between primary & secondaries, as opposed to the symmetrical arrangement i used - and ensure the primary is operated near saturation
topologically, however it looks like i'd hit the target! :)
going to have to resurrect this one
annoying problem with the clamp meter - hope the Topward system gives you clear results
all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
Quote from: nul-points on July 31, 2008, 10:58:29 PM
thanks Thane
appreciate your separate reply - your answers to Yucca's subsequent, more detailed questions, really covered all the bases
looking at the construction of my old 'tri-former' above, the message i'm getting is just to arrange an asymmetrical core geometry between primary & secondaries, as opposed to the symmetrical arrangement i used - and ensure the primary is operated near saturation
topologically, however it looks like i'd hit the target! :)
going to have to resurrect this one
annoying problem with the clamp meter - hope the Topward system gives you clear results
all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
DEAR SANDY,
HERE IS A PICTURE OF THE "BLUE" SECONDARY TOROID.
JUST TO CONVEY THE SIZE DIFFERENTIALS - THE PRIMARY AND TWO "GREEN" SECONDARIES' WILL BE GOING IN THE CENTRE AT 90 DEGREES - WHICH IS A 12 CM OPENNING. THE "GREEN" TOROIDS WILL BE SET ON TWO 5 CM TOROIDS.
SO THE PRIMARY IS DESIGNED TO SATURATE AND THE "BLUE" TOROID IS HUGE IN COMPARISON.
CHEERS
Thane
hi Thane
yes, i see - that will be one massive secondary arrangement! interesting that you can get the two pairs of secondaries to couple with an arrangement like that
funny, when i was trying to get my head round the primary/secondary interaction of my tri-former i drew it out as nested rectangles in 2D to help visualize the mag paths - it actually looked very close to one of your recently-posted assemblies (the one with gapped IIys?)
i think it was around that stage of your progression to which i must have come closest - but without the Iy / IIy reluctance differentials
i'm actually interested more in pulsed applications at the moment (i have a switched cap thing going on) - do you have any comparative results between the continuous & pulsed waveform behaviour of any of your multi-toroids?
at a guess, the implications of the latest large coil & core content would be sluggish response to pulsed energy
all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
Quote from: nul-points on August 01, 2008, 06:50:58 PM
hi Thane
yes, i see - that will be one massive secondary arrangement! interesting that you can get the two pairs of secondaries to couple with an arrangement like that
funny, when i was trying to get my head round the primary/secondary interaction of my tri-former i drew it out as nested rectangles in 2D to help visualize the mag paths - it actually looked very close to one of your recently-posted assemblies (the one with gapped IIys?)
i think it was around that stage of your progression to which i must have come closest - but without the Iy / IIy reluctance differentials
i'm actually interested more in pulsed applications at the moment (i have a switched cap thing going on) - do you have any comparative results between the continuous & pulsed waveform behaviour of any of your multi-toroids?
at a guess, the implications of the latest large coil & core content would be sluggish response to pulsed energy
all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
WITHOUT REALIZING IT THERE SANDY - YOU HAVE STUMBLED ONTO A DESIGN CRITERIA THAT I HOPE WILL PAN OUT FOR US!
WE ARE BUILDING A PROTOTYPE WHICH REPRESENTS THE "BLUE" SECTIONS IN THIS MODEL.
AS YOU MOVE AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY COIL TO "BLUE", "YELLOW", "BLACK AND SO ON THE HYSTERISIS CURVE FOR EACH CORE DELAYS THE OUTERMOST COIL'S MAGNETIC FIELD BUILD UP SLIGHTLY.
WE HOPE THIS WILL WORK IN OUR FAVOUR IN CREATING A SCENARIO WHERE THE PRIMARY FREQUENCY IS CHANGING BEFORE THE OUTER COILS HAVE
PEAKED.
IN SUCH A CASE THE
S.L.I.B.E. (SECONDARY LOAD INDUCED BACK EMF) WILL ALWAYS BE MOVING OUTWARD AND NOT INWARD - IN THEIR EFFORT TO "FILL" THE OUTER METAL CORES.
AS FAR AS COUPLING IS CONCERNED WE COUPLE THE PRIMARY FLUX AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE AND CREATE A "FLUX VACUUM" WHERE THE S.L.I.B.E. HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO MOVE TO THE OUTER CORE AREAS - AND HOPEFULLY BY THE TIME IT STARTS TO WORK ITS WAY BACK ... THE PRIMARY WOULD HAVE ALREADY CHANGED DIRECTION.
OUR TECHNOLOGIES ARE MEANT TO BE AS "KISS" AS POSSIBLE AND ALSO MEANT TO BE A CONSUMER PRODUCT WHICH YOU WOULD PURCHASE AT A HARDWARE STORE TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE POWER REQUIRED IN YOUR AIR CONDITIONER OR CLOTHES DRYER AT HOME. PULSED DC ADDS TO THE COMPLEXITY - SO IF WE CAN MAKE THINGS WORK WITH WIRES AN CORES ON SIMPLE AC THEN ALL THE BETTER.
CHEERS
Thane
FYI - NEW REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vruf7s9PaA
WHICH WE WILL BE PRESENTING TO SOME OF THE 100 MPG X PIZE TEAMS OVER THE COMING WEEKS.
IF TIME ALLOWED THE "CONVENTIONAL" GENERATOR LOAD WOULD CAUSE THE SYSTEM
TO CONTINUE TO DECELERATE DOWN TO ALMOST A COMPLETE STOP AND PRODUCE ONLY 0.09 WATTS OF OUTPUT POWER.
HOWEVER WHEN OPERATED IN THE "PEREPITEIA" MODE THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE GENERATOR PRODUCES 1.98 WATTS - THIS REPRESENTS A 2100% INCREASE IN OUTPUT POWER AND IT OCCURS WITH A MOTOR INPUT REDUCTION OF 25 WATTS.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 01, 2008, 10:05:13 PM
FYI - NEW REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vruf7s9PaA
WHICH WE WILL BE PRESENTING TO SOME OF THE 100 MPG X PIZE TEAMS OVER THE COMING WEEKS.
IF TIME ALLOWED THE "CONVENTIONAL" GENERATOR LOAD WOULD CAUSE THE SYSTEM
TO CONTINUE TO DECELERATE DOWN TO ALMOST A COMPLETE STOP AND PRODUCE ONLY 0.09 WATTS OF OUTPUT POWER.
HOWEVER WHEN OPERATED IN THE "PEREPITEIA" MODE THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE GENERATOR PRODUCES 1.98 WATTS - THIS REPRESENTS A 2100% INCREASE IN OUTPUT POWER AND IT OCCURS WITH A MOTOR INPUT REDUCTION OF 25 WATTS.
CHEERS
Thane
Good luck Thane!
Thank you for keeping us updated. I prolly should ask you for an autograph now, just to be on a safe side... :D
hi Thane
QuoteAS FAR AS COUPLING IS CONCERNED WE COUPLE THE PRIMARY FLUX AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE AND CREATE A "FLUX VACUUM" WHERE THE S.L.I.B.E. HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO MOVE TO THE OUTER CORE AREAS - AND HOPEFULLY BY THE TIME IT STARTS TO WORK ITS WAY BACK ... THE PRIMARY WOULD HAVE ALREADY CHANGED DIRECTION.
ah, ok, your're engineering the phase relationships / introducing time slip - very cool!
QuoteOUR TECHNOLOGIES ARE MEANT TO BE AS "KISS" AS POSSIBLE AND ALSO MEANT TO BE A CONSUMER PRODUCT WHICH YOU WOULD PURCHASE AT A HARDWARE STORE TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE POWER REQUIRED IN YOUR AIR CONDITIONER OR CLOTHES DRYER AT HOME. PULSED DC ADDS TO THE COMPLEXITY - SO IF WE CAN MAKE THINGS WORK WITH WIRES AN CORES ON SIMPLE AC THEN ALL THE BETTER.
neat application 'engineering' too - incremental energy saving for consumers - smart move Mr H ;)
as you can deduce from the coils posted above, i'm dealing with higher-freq, lower-current effects - i'm encouraged now, by your results, to see if i can make my tri-former a per-former! :)
watched the latest YT vid - very nice demo, very clear action - looking forward to vehicle trials when you're ready
thanks for the time-out on the Xfr discussion - and in general for what you're doing (not easy in the current scientific climate)
all the best with your development
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
Thane,
Just wathced latest motor vid of regenaritive acceleration, impressive demo with little room for doubt!
RE Bi-Toroid:
I've got 5kg of metglass tape (25mm * 0.04mm) coming from Canada. Before I get busy cutting and winding it, do you think the design pictured below would work.
(1)
Am I correct in thinking that the Pout/Pin ratio will increase as the secondary/primary thickness ratio increases?
(2)
If I don't make the primaries skinny enough on the first wind to get saturation with my primary coil then do you think I could add magnets as shown in the 3rd piccy in order to encourage saturation and thus discourage S.L.I.B.E?
All the best, Fraser.
@nul-points (Sandy)
RE. The little tri-former you made in the past, maybe you could push two of your toroids close to saturation by placing magnets next to them? and then the backEMF would prefer the remaining secondary toroid?
Fraser.
hi Fraser
yes, in fact for some while i was operating my setup with magnets attached to the toroids
when i was using the tri-former with negistor circuits i put some small button Neos on the outside edge of two or three of the toroids - it used to increase the voltage pk-pk a few % - but also increased the current draw - no overall power gain
on switched coil circuits i placed a single, lower strength Neo in the divide between the two toroids at the primary -wedged between the two without direct contact - i could tune the position for most acoustic noise at which point it would maximise the coil flyback pk volts - again, it appeared to increase overall circuit current draw, so i discontinued
interested to hear how you get on with your metglass rig
all the best guys
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc
QuoteThane,
Just wathced latest motor vid of regenaritive acceleration, impressive demo with little room for doubt!
WELL WE HAVE A WIND GENERATOR MANUFACTURER PRETTY CONVINCED SO THAT IS GOOD! NOW TO MAKE IT WORK WITH A PROPELER?
QuoteRE Bi-Toroid:
I've got 5kg of metglass tape (25mm * 0.04mm) coming from Canada. Before I get busy cutting and winding it, do you think the design pictured below would work.
(1)
Am I correct in thinking that the Pout/Pin ratio will increase as the secondary/primary thickness ratio increases?
WELL THE CORE'S ABILITY TO HANDLE FLUX INCREASES WITH INCREASED SIZE AND
THE RELUCTANCE DECREASES WITH INCREASED SIZE AND
THE RELUCTANCE INCREASES WITH FLUX MAGNITUDE INCREASE SO HOPEFULLY A LARGE SECONDARY CORE CAN HANDLE MORE FLUX WITH LESS RELUCTANCE AND A SMALL PRIMARY CORE CAN ONLY HANDLE A SMALL PRIMARY FLUX WITH HIGHER RELUCTANCE?
NOW WE WANT THE S.L.I.B.E. TO HAVE
NO CHOICE BUT TO MOVE OUTWARD.
:-\ UNFORTUNATELY YOU OR I WON'T BE "CORRECT" OR "INCORRECT" BY THINKING ??? - YOU HAVE TO BUILD IT AND THEN WE CAN TELL EACH OTHER WHAT IS FACT. ;)
Quote
(2)
If I don't make the primaries skinny enough on the first wind to get saturation with my primary coil then do you think I could add magnets as shown in the 3rd piccy in order to encourage saturation and thus discourage S.L.I.B.E?
All the best, Fraser
OR YOU COULD CREATE A SATURABLE REACTOR USING A DC CONTROL WINDING (AS USED IN MAGNETIC AMPLIFIERS) IN YOUR PRIMARY ALTHOUGH THIS IS GETTING MESSY FOR MY LIKING.
IF I WERE YOU I WOULD BUILD MY LARGE SECONDARY BRIDGE USING MY 1,000,000 PERMEABILITY? METGLASS AND I WOULD USE CONVENTIONAL TOROID CORE MATERIAL WITH A PERMEABILITY AROUND THE 12,000 RANGE FOR THE 2 PRIMARY TOROID CORES.(Call Saverio at ToroidTech in Toronto for your conventional toroid cores if you go this route)
THIS WAY YOU STILL HAVE A VERY EFFICIENT PRIMARY AND A "SUPER" BRIDGE WHICH SHOULD MAKE ANY SECONDARY TO PRIMARY S.L.I.B.E. MIGRATION IMPOSSIBLE.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: Yucca on August 02, 2008, 09:23:54 AM
@nul-points (Sandy)
RE. The little tri-former you made in the past, maybe you could push two of your toroids close to saturation by placing magnets next to them? and then the backEMF would prefer the remaining secondary toroid?
Fraser.
ADDING MAGNETS TO THE CORE INCREASES THE RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH FOR THE RETURN SECONDARY FLUX BUT IT ALSO INCREASES THE PRIMARY'S FLUX PATH RELUCTANCE AND PRIMARY MAGNETIZING CURRENT - THIS IS WHY I TRIED CUTTING AN AIR GAP IN MY PRIMARY ORIGINALLY.
I LIKE THE SECONDARY "FLUX VACUUM" IDEA BETTER.
Thane
.
THANKS JM!
SO NOW IT'S OFFICIAL ... THE ABOVE GENERATOR PERFORMANCE DATA (AND VIDEO) HAS BEEN SENT TO ALL THE 10 TOP X PRIZE CONTENDERS RECENTLY FEATURED IN THE AUGUST POPULAR MECHANICS ISSUE.
CHEERS
Thane
New Generator Technology for X Prize Entrants
Dear Tesla Motors,
My name is Thane Heins and I am the inventor of the Perepiteia Generator which has the proven capacity to recharge electric automobile batteries during 100% of the car's operation - not just in regenerative braking mode.
Our generator technology does not cause any deceleration under load (according to Lenz's Law) in fact our generator causes the prime mover to accelerate. Please see enclosed Ottawa University test data and demo video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vruf7s9PaA
Recently we have been featured in the Canadian Business Magazine and GQ Magazine is covering our technology in their October "Green Issue". We have presented our technology to MIT and NASA has also requested a demonstration.
Neil Young has been in touch with us several times and he has expressed interest in using our generator technology in his X Prize LincVolt entry. We would like to offer our technology to your company's X Prize team as well.
I hope you find this interesting.
Sincerely
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
(613) 256.4684
(613) 795.1602 (cell)
p.s.
PART 1 can be viewed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaf9v0K-rZw&feature=related
PART 2 here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU&feature=related
"Concern for man and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations. "
- Albert Einstein
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
- Gandhi
Cool, congrats. hopefully they won't be too sceptic.
Write to them too:
http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/
Quote from: alan on August 02, 2008, 05:43:24 PM
Cool, congrats. hopefully they won't be too sceptic.
Write to them too:
http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/
DONE!
CAN YOU TELL ME PLEASE, WHY YOU THINK SOMEONE WOULD BE SKEPTICAL AND HOW TO CHANGE MY (GENERATOR) PRESENTATION TO HELP REMOVE DOUBT?
THANKS
Thane
Well, first lemme say that "I'm a believer" ! * Doff's his goofy Mike Nesmeth knit watch cap *
Regarding the X-Prize; i am skeptical that you can convince people in the competition to use AC induction motors, that will be a hard sell i think. But as for the power transformer technology itself, you may have better luck.. It's lookin' purty cool ;)
You would need to make sure they "get it" as to its possible stand-alone advantages to them without the AC motor. Many people just view something as - is and don't think intuitively to the next step ahead without a bit of gentle push in the right direction first ;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 03, 2008, 12:54:50 PM
DONE!
CAN YOU TELL ME PLEASE, WHY YOU THINK SOMEONE WOULD BE SKEPTICAL AND HOW TO CHANGE MY (GENERATOR) PRESENTATION TO HELP REMOVE DOUBT?
THANKS
Thane
I have decided to gift your question with the full weight of my bottomless knowledge of the field. :)
I think you have to move it to a practical application where it does something more effectively than the best application of the technology that you propose to replace. The simpler and clearer the better. If there are barriers to that for some reason, you need to remove them.
Your welcome!
JustMe,
Non-inventor Extraordinaire
Quote from: JustMe on August 03, 2008, 03:00:48 PM
I have decided to gift your question with the full weight of my bottomless knowledge of the field. :)
I think you have to move it to a practical application where it does something more effectively than the best application of the technology that you propose to replace. The simpler and clearer the better. If there are barriers to that for some reason, you need to remove them.
Your welcome!
JustMe,
Non-inventor Extraordinaire
NOT SURE YOU WANT TO USE THE WORDS "FULL WEIGHT" AND "BOTTOMLESS" IN THE SAME SENTENCE THERE JM? :D
SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THEN IS, IF I CAN "REMOVE" SAID "BARRIERS" - THEN THE THE OPPOTUNITIES ARE "TOPLESS" AND THE SKY IS THE LIMIT? ;)
AND THE CLEANER AND MORE EFFECTIVE THE
BREAST BEST APPLICATION IS THE SIMPLER IT WILL BE FOR PEOPLE TO "COME" TO TERMS WITH ITS IMPOTANCE? :P
(FOR ANYONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW JM AND I HAVE BEEN SLEEPING TOGTHER SINCE PAGE 14 I THINK? BUT I CAN NEVER REMEMBER OUR ANNIVERSARY WHICH IS TYPICAL) :o
OR HAVE I JUST BEEN WATCHING TOO MUCH "CALIFORNICATION" LATELY?
Thane
HERE IS THE REAL DEAL...
IN PREPARATION FOR OUR UPCOMING WIND GENERATOR MANUFACTURER DEMO, I INTEND TO TRY TO PUT A LARGE FAN BLADE ON THE ROTOR'S DRIVE SHAFT AND USE ANOTHER FAN TO TURN THE BLADES/ROTOR - WITH ANY LUCK THE GENERATOR'S HIGH CURRENT COILS WILL DECELERATE THE SYSTEM - AND THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS WILL NEGATE THE DECELERATION...
ALSO I INTEND TO PUT A HAND CRANK ON AS WELL TO SEE IF THIS MAKES THINGS CLEAR.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 03, 2008, 12:54:50 PM
DONE!
CAN YOU TELL ME PLEASE, WHY YOU THINK SOMEONE WOULD BE SKEPTICAL AND HOW TO CHANGE MY (GENERATOR) PRESENTATION TO HELP REMOVE DOUBT?
THANKS
Thane
Someone would be skeptical, because you are demonstrating, in a video, not irl, something 'impossible'.
Honestly I am not very familiar with the workings and why it violates Lenz' law and need to rewatch the video's before ranting nonsense :) .
I take a better look at your presentation later to answer the last question.
Maybe you should create a website with an explanation and why it works. Concentrate on the theories and even the math, professors and engineers like math :P
Quote from: alan on August 04, 2008, 08:11:59 AM
Someone would be skeptical, because you are demonstrating, in a video, not irl, something 'impossible'.
Honestly I am not very familiar with the workings and why it violates Lenz' law and need to rewatch the video's before ranting nonsense :) .
I take a better look at your presentation later to answer the last question.
Maybe you should create a website with an explanation and why it works. Concentrate on the theories and even the math, professors and engineers like math :P
WE HAD AN OTTAWA UNIVERSITY HOSTED WEBSITE FROM THE START (RIGHT AFTER WE WENT TO MIT) AND SOMEONE HACKED IN AND TOOK IT DOWN - (PROBABLY
NOT A SKEPTIC) WE ARE WORKING ON A NEW ONE.
THANKS
Thane
PS
CAN YOU DEFINE WHAT YOU MEAN BY "IMPOSSIBLE"
QuoteSomeone would be skeptical, because you are demonstrating, in a video, not irl, something 'impossible'.
WE
HAVE DONE MANY "REAL LIFE" DEMOS FOR MANY UNIVERSITY PROFS AND ENGINEERS - IF THE UNIVERSITY WAS SKEPTICAL OR COULD FIND FAULT - I WOULD BE GONE - A RESPECTED FORUM MEMBER HERE - "GOTOLUC" CAME TO VERIFY THE TECH AND WAS IMPRESSED ENOUGH TO STAY FOR 3 OR 4 MONTHS TO HELP - SO I AM CURIOUS - IF I AM DEMONSTRATING "THE IMPOSSIBLE"
IRL THEN WHAT IS HOLDING PEOPLE BACK?
Makes you wonder why it was hacked. Looking forward to the new website.
By impossible I mean violating CEM laws and showing overunity by electrodynamic means.
What is holding people back? Maybe a practical demonstration or higher watt output, or some wow effect :) can't really tell.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 04, 2008, 09:58:36 AM
snip
THANKS
Thane
PS
- SO I AM CURIOUS - IF I AM DEMONSTRATING "THE IMPOSSIBLE" IRL THEN WHAT IS HOLDING PEOPLE BACK?
Me would like to second just me, well stated. Also the motor causes a problem for many, if one
can get it to speed up the slightest little bit the input draw automatically diminishes.
So the effect is not clearly separated from the noise floor "seemingly" and needs to be shown to
be head and shoulders above measurement error and the hysteresis effect.
Did you name the bycoil after Bytown? nice place, bin dere....
Ron, PB
Quote from: i_ron on August 04, 2008, 06:07:55 PM
Me would like to second just me, well stated. Also the motor causes a problem for many, if one
can get it to speed up the slightest little bit the input draw automatically diminishes.
So the effect is not clearly separated from the noise floor "seemingly" and needs to be shown to
be head and shoulders above measurement error and the hysteresis effect.
Did you name the bycoil after Bytown? nice place, bin dere....
Ron, PB
THANKS FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS GOOD PEOPLE - I AM ACTUALLY JUST PULLING ALL YOUR LEGS - SINCE I AM A VERY FAITHFUL BELIEVER IN "DIVINE TIMING" WHICH
ELIMINATES REDUCES HELPS TO DIMINISH EASES A TINY LITTLE BIT - FRUSTRATION AND IMPATIENCE.
"When proof is possible, faith becomes impossible!
And when proof is impossible, faith becomes possible!"...Robert Schuler
"
I know this world is ruled by infinite intelligence. Everything that surrounds us- everything that exists - proves that there are infinite laws behind it. There can be no denying this fact. It is mathematical in its precision." Thomas A. Edison
CHEERS TO SHARING
Thane
PS
STAY TUNED FOR THE
"BI-IRonCo COIL" COMING SOON - IT IS A 1/2" SQUARE, HIGH VOLTAGE COIL CORE WITH A THIN 1/8" x 4" TOROID CORE FOR THE HIGH CURRENT COIL!
"Everything comes to him who hustles while he waits". Thomas A. Edison
THANE what you have done Mystifies ME seems like we should be carrying you around on our shoulder's yelling FINALY OVERUNITY [in a big way] or throwing rose petals at your feet Devine timing is here Maybe some Devine marketing is next? Chet
Quote from: ramset on August 05, 2008, 12:17:40 PM
THANE what you have done Mystifies ME seems like we should be carrying you around on our shoulder's yelling FINALY OVERUNITY [in a big way] or throwing rose petals at your feet Devine timing is here Maybe some Devine marketing is next? Chet
NOT SO FAST BUCKO!IT'S NOT OVER UNTIL THE FAT LADY SINGS.
ANYWAY THAT CURRENT METER CAN
NOT BE TRUSTED BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH STRAY MAGNETIC FIELDS AROUND WHICH GIVES ERRONEOUS READINGS. SO WHEN WE GET THE NEW TRANSFORMER WOUND WE WILL USE THE TOPWARD METER AND SEE WHAT WE SEE.
THAT BEING SAID THE FAT LADY MIGHT BE WARMING UP NOW THAT I AM GETTING
"REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION" WITH A
DC MOTOR AS THE PRIME MOVER TODAY.THE YOUTUBE VIDEO MAY BE READY FOR VIEWING...? 8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X5FvSVdf58
THANKS
Thane
Speaking of fat ladies maybe P.B. and a few others should have to pick the rose's [ THORNS] Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 05, 2008, 06:34:28 PM
I AM GETTING "REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION" WITH A DC MOTOR AS THE PRIME MOVER TODAY.
Finally you're using a DC motor as the prime mover! This should make proving the effect and taking comparative power measurements so much easier for you, and much harder for skeptics to point to non linear characteristics of the inductive motor as a reason for disbelieving the generator characteristics
Quote from: CRANKYpants
THE YOUTUBE VIDEO MAY BE READY FOR VIEWING...? 8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X5FvSVdf58
Unfortunately, nothing is showing -- yet ?
Cheers and KneeDeep
That's great Thane! Very exciting to see what new experimental and theoretical possibilities this opens up. I'm not at all surprised, as hoptoad's previous results always made it pretty clear this was not going to be just an induction motor trick.
Thanks for the video...well demonstrated as always.
Quote from: JustMe on August 05, 2008, 08:00:44 PM
That's great Thane! Very exciting to see what new experimental and theoretical possibilities this opens up. I'm not at all surprised, as hoptoad's previous results always made it pretty clear this was not going to be just an induction motor trick.
Thanks for the video...well demonstrated as always.
THANKS JM!
I THINK THIS PUTS TO REST ALOT OF "GREY AREAS" AND OF COURSE THIS IS JUST A FIRST GO AT IT.
IN THE MORNING I WILL BE REPLACING THAT HEAVY IRON ROTOR WITH MY LIGHTER STEEL ONE AND I OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO REV UP TO 1800 RPM WHERE THE EFFECTS OF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ARE MOST NOTICEABLE.
THANKS TO I_RON AND HOPTOAD FOR "PUSHING" ME WHERE I KNEW I NEEDED TO GO BUT STILL RESISTED. THANKS TO YOU JM FOR YOUR "ARTWORK" AND EVERYONE ELSE FOR THEIR ENCOURAGEMENT, SUGGESTIONS, AND COMMENTS (ESPECIALLY THE DIFFICULT ONES). AND THANKS TO LUC - THE "UNSUNG HERO" IN ALL THIS.
THIS IS REALLY GOOD INFO FOR THE X PRIZE PEOPLE. ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
Allright DC motor with a cool paint job. Just wondering what is the wind type of the motor, series, shunt, or compound?
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on August 05, 2008, 10:34:40 PM
Just wondering what is the wind type of the motor, series, shunt, or compound?
I'm curious too.
If its not a shunt wound
permanent magnet DC motor, its torque characteristics will produce a parabolic non linear curve.
A compound motor will exhibit the least amount of torque non linearity.
But, unlike an AC induction motor, there is no "slip" zone and no "pullout zone" and also no power factor to take into account when measuring input power.
If Thane is using DC with PWM switching to control the initial speed, then duty cycle correction must be applied to the power input measurement figures.
But I doubt Thane needs anyone to tell him that! :D
@Thane : you're on more solid ground now with a DC motor. This effect worked when I did it with a pm dc shunt wound motor, it worked for nali2001 with a universal motor, and for you with an AC induction motor, so you can safely assume, now that you've also changed to a DC motor, that the effect is in the generator, irrespective of the prime mover. Now you can concentrate on optimizing the generator,
knowing beyond any doubt, that is where
all the action is !
Even better, now you can set up two systems side by side, and demonstrate that to the profs and EE's, etc, in real time.
Your generator is the perepetia, the motor is just a mover.
Show them the AC induction system first, let them react and put their opinions out there, then unveil the DC system and see there reaction again.
KneeDeep ... Wish I could be there with a camera :D :D :D
Quote from: LarryC on August 05, 2008, 10:34:40 PM
Hi Thane,
Allright DC motor with a cool paint job. Just wondering what is the wind type of the motor, series, shunt, or compound?
Thanks, Larry
IT IS CAPABLE OF ALL THREE BUT IT IS IN SERIES MODE IN THE VIDEO.
FOR ANYONE WHO WANT TO KNOW MORE:
http://www.micromotcontrols.com/htmls/Motor%20characteristics.html
CHEERS
Thane
Quote
@Thane : you're on more solid ground now with a DC motor. This effect worked when I did it with a pm dc shunt wound motor, it worked for nali2001 with a universal motor, and for you with an AC induction motor, so you can safely assume, now that you've also changed to a DC motor, that the effect is in the generator, irrespective of the prime mover. Now you can concentrate on optimizing the generator, knowing beyond any doubt, that is where all the action is !
KneeDeep ... Wish I could be there with a camera :D :D :D
THE BEST PART FOR ME IS IT OPENS THE DOOR TO ELECTRIC CAR MANUFACTURERS WHO USE DC MOTORS - NOW THEY CAN SEE THAT THE GENERATOR WILL WORK IN THEIR VEHICLES.
OPTIMIZING AS WE SPEAK!
QuoteIf Thane is using DC with PWM switching to control the initial speed, then duty cycle correction must be applied to the power input measurement figures.
RIGHT NOW I AM SIMPLY FOCUSING ON CONVENTIONAL LOAD INDUCED DECELERATION AND ACCELERATION AS PROVIDED BY THE HV COIL.
IS WISH YOU ALL COULD BE THERE - WE WILL HAVE TO MEET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WORLD SOMETIME AND GET TOGETHER. I'M BUYING! :)
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 05, 2008, 09:18:04 PM
THANKS TO I_RON AND HOPTOAD FOR "PUSHING" ME WHERE I KNEW I NEEDED TO GO BUT STILL RESISTED.
CHEERS
Thane
You are welcome! It is not every day that one of us peons has a minor input into OTTAWA.
And an ELITE member yet, yeesh, power to the people.
But don't think you are off the hook completely, we're still watching!
Pacific
Breeze
Quote from: i_ron on August 06, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
You are welcome! It is not every day that one of us peons has a minor input into OTTAWA.
And an ELITE member yet, yeesh, power to the people.
But don't think you are off the hook completely, we're still watching!
Pacific Breeze
HI_RON,
PLEASE DON'T UNDER ESTIMATE YOUR CONTRIBUTION AND WITH THAT I BID YOU...
PART 5 REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION - 18 pole Rotor & DC Motorhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYC0X5AP5Y4 (new balanced rotor pending) :P
Perepiteia Generator August 6th, 2008
"BEST OF FOUR WORLDS" DEMOSteady State No Load Speed = 917 RPM
Motor Input Current = 862 mA.
High current coil loading causes system deceleration according to Lenz's Law - down to 888 RPM = power supplied to 10 ohm load decreases down to 0.34 W. Motor input current increases = 896 mA.
High voltage coil loading causes system acceleration in violation of Lenz's Law -- up to 916 RPM - power supplied to 10 ohm load increases -- up to 0.36 W. Motor input current decreases down to 859 mA.
High voltage coil boosts high current coil load voltage from 1.831 V up to 1.870 V while defying Lenz's Law with acceleration.
Loaded high current coil produces 0.40 W with a motor input current of 860 mA --2 mA less than NO LOAD.
"BEST OF FOUR WORLDS" =1) High Voltage Coil Acceleration
2) Negation of Lenz's Law and Regenerative Acceleration
3) High Current Coil Boosting High Current Coil Output Power.
4) DC Motor / Prime Mover Input Current Decrease.
Cheers
Thane
Just had to note that when I clicked on the parent page of this thread to see if there was anything new here there were 77777 views on this thread. I'm feelin' lucky!
Quote from: JustMe on August 06, 2008, 10:55:13 PM
Just had to note that when I clicked on the parent page of this thread to see if there was anything new here there were 77777 views on this thread. I'm feelin' lucky!
WELL I HOPE YOU HAVE YOUR $ 42,000,000.00 LOTO TICKET IN HAND! :D
Thane
Happily, I bought 27 of them for our group at work this evening. Will check them tomorrow, and happily pretend I'm already a 77777 multimillionairess tonight.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 06, 2008, 10:46:43 PM
HI_RON,
"BEST OF FOUR WORLDS" =
1) High Voltage Coil Acceleration
2) Negation of Lenz's Law and Regenerative Acceleration
3) High Current Coil Boosting High Current Coil Output Power.
4) DC Motor / Prime Mover Input Current Decrease.
Cheers
Thane
The numbers on that last vid are actually starting to look good. Your tenacity and audacity are
starting to pay off! I am proud of you.
Is the HV coil just a full short? Which coil is this, the new I_Ronico coil? or just your old faithful?
Anyway, good work, worth the price of admission!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on August 06, 2008, 11:25:46 PM
The numbers on that last vid are actually starting to look good. Your tenacity and audacity are
starting to pay off! I am proud of you.
Is the HV coil just a full short? Which coil is this, the new I_Ronico coil? or just your old faithful?
Anyway, good work, worth the price of admission!
Ron
YES I KNOW I AM SLOW - BUT I GOT SIDE TRACKED WITH THE DC MOTOR TESTING.
I WILL BE STARTING ASSEMBLY AND TESTING OF MY NEW MODIFIED
BI_RONCO COIL
ON THE MORROW AND A NEW BALANCED 18 POLE ROTOR BY MONDAY.
WHAT'S YOUR GET-TOGETHER BEER OF CHOICE - ALLCANADIAN IS BUYING!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 06, 2008, 11:41:07 PM
WHAT'S YOUR GET-TOGETHER BEER OF CHOICE - ALLCANADIAN IS BUYING!
Thane
Hint hint, I just happen to live on Vancouver Island....
http://www.owfs.com/
http://www.bovwine.ca/awards.html
http://www.bcwine.ca/
Ron, How dry I am....
Quote from: JustMe on August 06, 2008, 10:55:13 PM
Just had to note that when I clicked on the parent page of this thread to see if there was anything new here there were 77777 views on this thread. I'm feelin' lucky!
Also noticed the 777 rpm in the video? ;D
And PART 5 REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION shows 77 views.
coincidence? :)
Quote from: alan on August 07, 2008, 08:24:09 AM
Also noticed the 777 rpm in the video? ;D
And PART 5 REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION shows 77 views.
coincidence? :)
SO HERE'S THE DEAL, THIS MIGHT FREAK YOU OUT BUT I JUST POSTED MY 7th "NEW" VIDEO TODAY WHICH IS THE 7th OF AUGUST AND THE VIDEO HAS 7 ANNOTATIONS.
MY DAUGHTER CAME OVER TODAY AND GAVE ME SOME MONEY 45 cents FOR MY 47th BIRTHDAY WHICH IS ON AUGUST 10th - SO WE WENT TO THE STORE AND BOUGHT A SUPER 7 LOTO TICKET WHICH IS $10 MILLION THIS WEEK AND THE DRAW IS ON 08, 08, '08!
HERE'S THE VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsBMPZimzoU IT IS TAILORED FOR THE
$ 10 MILLION - 100 MPG XPRIZE ENTRY WHO CONTACTED ME TODAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane watching your most recent vid MY HEAD ALMOST EXPLODED Can we do the carry around thing yet with the roses on the path? Chet
Quote from: ramset on August 07, 2008, 10:28:15 PM
Thane watching your most recent vid MY HEAD ALMOST EXPLODED Can we do the carry around thing yet with the roses on the path? Chet
NO DOUBT - HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ACCELERATION w/ BATTERY CHARGING,
HIGH CURRENT COIL & HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ACCELERATION w/ BATTERY CHARGING,
AND HIGH CURRENT COIL BRAKING w/ BATTERY CHARGING.
WHEN THIS INFO IS SO MAIN STREAM THAT IT FORCES OUR SO-CALLED LEADERS TO
"OFFER PEACE TO OUR PEACE OFFICERS" THEN PERHAPS MAYBE YES - BUT I AIN'T NO HERO - OUR TROOPS ARE!
I'M STAYING CRANKY UNTIL THEN.
T
Well you definately have all the right stuff [hero stuff] Yes end the dying and maiming of our boys and Gals Chet
Good Luck Thane!
You can make a very simple demo video where your entire setup gets the power to run only from a battery powered UPS or just a regular car battery.
Then you let your DC Motor just run without doing anything to it and without applying your configuration.
You record the run time of the DC motor until it drains the UPS or car battery.
This becomes your baseline.
Now run the experiment again, but this time your regenerative acceleration config is used to supply the power back to the battery as implied in your recent demos.
You record the run time of the DC motor until it drains the UPS or car battery.
Very simple, convincing arrangement. In both cases the amount of kwhr used in the experiment is the same, because it comes from identical, fully charged UPS or car battery.
Quote from: adlep on August 07, 2008, 11:54:09 PM
Good Luck Thane!
You can make a very simple demo video where your entire setup gets the power to run only from a battery powered UPS or just a regular car battery.
Then you let your DC Motor just run without doing anything to it and without applying your configuration.
You record the run time of the DC motor until it drains the UPS or car battery.
This becomes your baseline.
Now run the experiment again, but this time your regenerative acceleration config is used to supply the power back to the battery as implied in your recent demos.
You record the run time of the DC motor until it drains the UPS or car battery.
Very simple, convincing arrangement. In both cases the amount of kwhr used in the experiment is the same, because it comes from identical, fully charged UPS or car battery.
I AM THE 78080 VIEWER OF THIS THREAD... ARE THERE ANY NUMEROLOGISTS OUT THERE?
THANKS FOR THE GREAT SUGGESTION AND - YES THIS EXACTLY OUR INTENTION ALSO AND WAS / IS OUR PLAN WITH THE ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY (WHICH I FORGOT ABOUT). I JUST HAVE TO GET MY ASS IN GEAR AND BUILD SOME MORE HIGHER OUTPUT COILS. :P
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 09:45:55 AM
I AM THE 78080 VIEWER OF THIS THREAD... ARE THERE ANY NUMEROLOGISTS OUT THERE?
THANKS FOR THE GREAT SUGGESTION AND - YES THIS EXACTLY OUR INTENTION ALSO AND WAS / IS OUR PLAN WITH THE ELECTRIC DUNE BUGGY (WHICH I FORGOT ABOUT). I JUST HAVE TO GET MY ASS IN GEAR AND BUILD SOME MORE HIGHER OUTPUT COILS. :P
T
If the configuration #2 works even a
second longer than the setup #1 and you have these videos on youtube, you gonna have yourself what you are asking for:
A mass of angry scientists trying to debunk the setup in your lab (and you should film their reactions too). I hope to be like
you with my idea - just like a hurricane that builds up a strength by feeding off a
negative feedback...
Quote from: adlep on August 08, 2008, 10:03:57 AM
I hope to be like you with my idea - just like a hurricane that builds up a strength by feeding off a negative feedback...
I USED TO DESIGN T-SHIRTS AND GIVE THEM AWAY AS GIFTS,
HERE IS ONE OF MY FAVORITES:
FEAR SAYS,
"IMPOSSIBLE!!!"
Love says,
"I'm possible".
FUNNY THING ABOUT YOUR CHARACTER OBSERVATION OF ME...
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE GENERATOR AND TRANSFORMER ARE DESIGNED TO DO -
RECYCLE "NEGATIVE" ENERGY AND CREATE "POSITIVE" ENERGY FROM IT.
CHEERS
Thane
Oh and I am sorry to say that too, but now - when everything goes as planned, be careful.
I do not wear a tin foil cap, but still; until your idea is widely debated and known - take care of yourself and don't travel much - to minimize the risk.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 10:15:00 AM
FUNNY THING ABOUT YOUR CHARACTER OBSERVATION OF ME...
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE GENERATOR AND TRANSFORMER ARE DESIGNED TO DO -
RECYCLE "NEGATIVE" ENERGY AND CREATE "POSITIVE" ENERGY FROM IT.
CHEERS
Thane
Both things are evident when you follow developments in this thread. I am sure that 70,000 + viewers have similar observations...
Good for you - just don't forget about us down here once you get to the top...
:)
Maybe I should ask you for an autograph NOW before it is too late?
:P
Quote from: adlep on August 08, 2008, 10:20:34 AM
Oh and I am sorry to say that too, but now - when everything goes as planned, be careful.
I do not wear a tin foil cap, but still; until your idea is widely debated and known - take care of yourself and don't travel much - to minimize the risk.
WHEN YOU COMPARE THE LENGTH OF A HUMAN LIFETIME TO THE TOTALITY AND INFINITY OF ALL TIME - THE CONCLUSION IS...
A HUMAN LIFETIME IS INFINITELY SMALL AND IS BUT A DREAM FOR OUR SOUL.SO, WHY BE ATTACHED TO A DREAM?
IN ANY EVENT YOU PEOPLE HERE ARE NOW THE "KEEPERS" OF THIS TECH. SO IF I GO BY - BY THE INFORMATION LIVES ON...
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 09:45:55 AM
I AM THE 78080 VIEWER OF THIS THREAD... ARE THERE ANY NUMEROLOGISTS OUT THERE?
Look at the page numbers ;D
Just passed 78
Todays date is 08-08-08.
Maybe you should buy a Super7 ticket for tonights draw. :)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 09:45:55 AMARE THERE ANY NUMEROLOGISTS OUT THERE?
Probably, but you can't count on them.
:-X
Thane makes his own LUC [another great man] and good luck it is Chet
Quote from: JustMe on August 08, 2008, 03:38:41 PM
Probably, but you can't count on them.
:-X
SORRY - JM YOUR BRILLIANT JOKE IS TOO FAR OVER OUR HEADS!
T
P.S.
I_RON CAME OVER TODAY FOR A GLASS OF VIDAL BEER ??? HE'S SNAZZY!
AND I FINALLY FOUND OUT WHO HOPTOAD REALLY IS...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dkx3_energie-libre-moteur-magnetique-
WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH THESE DUDES?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 08:47:42 PM
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dkx3_energie-libre-moteur-magnetique-
WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH THESE DUDES?
T
Dunno.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4956.0;topicseen
http://www.lutec.com.au
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 08, 2008, 08:47:42 PM
AND I FINALLY FOUND OUT WHO HOPTOAD REALLY IS...
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4dkx3_energie-libre-moteur-magnetique-
WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH THESE DUDES?
T
They've been making the same claims now for over 15 years in various forms. Robert Adams wanted to sue them at one stage, for patent transgressions.
They've been investigated by ASC in the past for prospectus fraud and have failed to deliver anything but promises to their dissatisfied investors.
Investigative journalists have described them as being at best, extremely self deluded, and at worst, scoundrels and frauds! Their past investors apparently believe the latter!
KneeDeep .... sorry Thane, but thats not me :D
Quote from: hoptoad on August 09, 2008, 03:51:31 AM
KneeDeep .... sorry Thane, but thats not me :D
BUT I'M SURE THAT'S YOU ??? LOOK AGAIN @ 223 IN THE VIDEO - ON THE TV IN THE BACKGROUND - ISN'T THAT YOU IN THE BLUE SHIRT ON OPRAH OR SOMETHING?
T
Quote from: hoptoad on August 09, 2008, 03:51:31 AM
Investigative journalists have described them as being at best, extremely self deluded...
Oh oh! That's what the Ottawa Skeptics said about Thane.
I want my Canadian Tire money back! :-[
One more thing - I would not worry about the buggy for now.
A simple experiment as suggested by me earlier is SUPER effective in my opinion and you are not wasting time dealing with gears, weight, movement, potential accidents, and powertrain issues. Also the table setup is really easy to take apart by the skeptics.
Feel free to call it adlep's experiment too :P
I have a strange feeling that it will make you famous.
Quote from: adlep on August 09, 2008, 07:42:29 PM
One more thing - I would not worry about the buggy for now.
A simple experiment as suggested by me earlier is SUPER effective in my opinion and you are not wasting time dealing with gears, weight, movement, potential accidents, and powertrain issues. Also the table setup is really easy to take apart by the skeptics.
Feel free to call it adlep's experiment too :P
I have a strange feeling that it will make you famous.
OR
INFAMOUS...
I HAD TO JUMP IN THERE BEFORE JM GOT TO IT! :D
T
SO, I'M HAVING A 10" STEEL DISK MADE WITH 18 x 1" HOLES DRILED AROUND THE OUTER EDGE.
ON ONE SIDE WILL BE A STRONG MAGNET AND ON THE OTHER SIDE A COIL RIGHT AT WHERE THE HOLES ARE...
1)
AS THE STEEL DISK SPINS;
A) SOME FLUX PASSES FROM THE MAGNET TO THE COIL
B) THROUGH THE HOLE AND INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE COIL...
C) OTHERWISE IS "BLOCKED" BY THE STEEL BETWEEN THE HOLES
( I may even place a magnet at the far side of the coil to pull PM flux through the hole ).
2)
A) WHEN A LOAD IS PLACED ON THE COIL,
B) THE BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD IS ATTRACTED TO THE STEEL WHEEL BUT
C) HAS NO EFFECT ON THE SPEED OF ROTATION...
3)
THE COIL CAN BE INFINATELY LARGE...
THOUGHTS?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 09, 2008, 10:16:49 PM
SO, I'M HAVING A 10" STEEL DISK MADE WITH 18 x 1" HOLES DRILED AROUND THE OUTER EDGE.
ON ONE SIDE WILL BE A STRONG MAGNET AND ON THE OTHER SIDE A COIL RIGHT AT WHERE THE HOLES ARE...
1)
AS THE STEEL DISK SPINS;
A) SOME FLUX PASSES FROM THE MAGNET TO THE COIL
B) THROUGH THE HOLE AND INDUCES A VOLTAGE IN THE COIL...
C) OTHERWISE IS "BLOCKED" BY THE STEEL BETWEEN THE HOLES
( I may even place a magnet at the far side of the coil to pull PM flux through the hole ).
2)
A) WHEN A LOAD IS PLACED ON THE COIL,
B) THE BACK EMF INDUCED FIELD IS ATTRACTED TO THE STEEL WHEEL BUT
C) HAS NO EFFECT ON THE SPEED OF ROTATION...
3)
THE COIL CAN BE INFINATELY LARGE...
THOUGHTS?
T
I have a thought. Are you posting using an Apple II? If not, is there another reason you are stuck on capslock?
You will have to get used to the all caps. I have been following this thread from near day one, and I doubt you will be the one to convince him to turn it off. After awhile it is some what endearing (with the plus that you can quickly identify Thane's posts). All great geniuses (crazy people) have some idiosyncrasies.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 09, 2008, 09:13:07 AM
BUT I'M SURE THAT'S YOU ??? LOOK AGAIN @ 223 IN THE VIDEO - ON THE TV IN THE BACKGROUND - ISN'T THAT YOU IN THE BLUE SHIRT ON OPRAH OR SOMETHING?
Sorry Thane ... Not even close ..... but this
may help you identify the elusive hoptoad ! ???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3ENUqV5-bw
Cheers and KneeDeep :D :D :D
P.S. If that was no use, maybe try this ??
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hoptoad&search_type=&aq=f
:)
But I'm not sure if anything is actually referenced to the real me ! Doh !
@thane
The wheel could work, but I'd say, explore the phenomenons of the bi-toroid first, I think that is the most promising invention of yours.
Ever read this?:
http://www.newelectromagnetism.com/
Quote from: alan on August 10, 2008, 06:43:13 AM
@thane
The wheel could work, but I'd say, explore the phenomenons of the bi-toroid first, I think that is the most promising invention of yours. Ever read this?: http://www.newelectromagnetism.com/
THANKS FOR THE READ...
AND YES I AGREE THE BI-TOROID AND NOW THE MULTI-BI-TOROID WOULD MOST LIKELY BE THE BEST AND SIMPLEST OU DEVICES OUT THERE - THAT IS WHY I HAVE BEEN EXPLORING IT FOR THREE YEARS NOW AND WILL CONTINUE UNTIL IT'S DONE.
CHEERS
Thane
hi Thane,
Re on your spinning steel disk idea:
First I would suggest you make a test by rotating the steel disk you intend to use for the task in front of the magnets and make sure the eddy current heating effect is negligible.
If you have excessive heating, then choices are you have to use transformer lamination-like materials or ferrite sheets to minimize eddy currents (unfortunately both the lamination and ferrits sheets involve mechanical problems to fix them at higher RPMs but it may be solvable).
I agree with alan first you are to improve the bi-toroid transformer (thinking of looping its output to its input when possible) and may the force be with you in all your efforts!
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 09, 2008, 10:16:49 PM
SO, I'M HAVING A 10" STEEL DISK MADE WITH 18 x 1" HOLES DRILED AROUND THE OUTER EDGE.
ON ONE SIDE WILL BE A STRONG MAGNET AND ON THE OTHER SIDE A COIL RIGHT AT WHERE THE HOLES ARE...
snip
THOUGHTS?
T
Your earlier rotors had some of this effect with the magnet in a cup. This is called a pot magnet for
those not familiar with the term.
But if the magnet is too far back nearly all the flux will be shorted through the rotor. Possibly if the
hole was bigger and the magnet was brought through the hole somewhat so as the BLOCK WALL
was entrained in the hole? Note how in a pot magnet the outer cylinder wall is clear of the magnet.
So the hole may be too tight at one inch... try it, I liked the hybrid two core coil better...
Ron
In other words... if you put the magnet in a cup or pot and sank that down flush with the rotor face...
the rotor face could be all south with only the north poles of the magnets showing.. so the coil core would see the north pole but the coil would be interacting already with the south pole of the rotor
(//)
If anyone here know's JustMe's last name or telephone number or physical address or anything like that can you please contact me?
It's probably nothing but I would like to somehow check on her, at least until she pops online to tell me to stop worrying.
Quote from: aether22 on August 10, 2008, 06:09:09 PM
If anyone here know's JustMe's last name or telephone number or physical address or anything like that can you please contact me?
It's probably nothing but I would like to somehow check on her, at least until she pops online to tell me to stop worrying.
You have far too many computers. :)
I'm assuming you didn't get my MSN messages.
Thanks for your concern, and all is well.
(To all those wondering what on earth could be up I had a frightening experience in the middle of night last night at my home, and I was fortunate to have my friend aether22 to chat with me in his daylight through the last hours of darkness here until it was light out and I wasn't scared to go to sleep)
Quote
But if the magnet is too far back nearly all the flux will be shorted through the rotor. Possibly if the
hole was bigger and the magnet was brought through the hole somewhat so as the BLOCK WALL
was entrained in the hole? Note how in a pot magnet the outer cylinder wall is clear of the magnet.
So the hole may be too tight at one inch... try it, I liked the hybrid two core coil better...
Ron
WHADDAYAMEAN BETTER?
WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING AT THE SAME TIME - HYBRID BI-COIL, BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER AND SOON "HOLED ROTOR".
HERE'S TO HOPING JM HAS A PEACEFUL NIGHT! :)
Thane
Just testing my signature, JM helped me refine it a little.
Hey, what do ya know, it updates every post I ever made.
Aether your gonna get tired dragging that around all day [Signature] Chet
Yes, I have thought about that, but screw it.
The thoughts are not just ones I put together in 20 mins, they have been put together over a lot of time as some of the most significant issues, hopefully people will read it and some might actually pick up on it's message, a 'plan to change the world' compressed into a signature.
Quote from: aether22 on August 10, 2008, 11:20:02 PM
Yes, I have thought about that, but screw it.
The thoughts are not just ones I put together in 20 mins, they have been put together over a lot of time as some of the most significant issues, hopefully people will read it and some might actually pick up on it's message, a 'plan to change the world' compressed into a signature.
Heads Up,
I respect your thoughts and what not, but please - consider that this is a public forums rather than your personal blog...
We should focus on posts, content, data values, and not on signatures...
My $.02
Yes but the signature is very much on topic.
Most of it relates directly to FE tech, and why it isn't 'out there' and how to get it out there. (skepticism, lack of unity or money meaning a lack of power to get the tech out, persistence etc...)
It is a bit big but you don't have to read it. (it fits within the allowed sig size with room to spare)
But really I'm not going to change it so if you need to then practice tolerance and understanding, another important quality.
Quote from: aether22 on August 11, 2008, 12:06:25 AM
Yes but the signature is very much on topic.
Most of it relates directly to FE tech, and why it isn't 'out there' and how to get it out there. (skepticism, lack of unity or money meaning a lack of power to get the tech out, persistence etc...)
It is a bit big but you don't have to read it. (it fits within the allowed sig size with room to spare)
But really I'm not going to change it so if you need to then practice tolerance and understanding, another important quality.
The problem with your signature is that it is full of banalities. For example, "we cannot solve problems using the same system that created them." Sounds good, but this is patently false. You can indeed solve problems using the same system that created them.
For example, take dog breeding. Dogs have been selectively bred for certain behaviors and certain looks. The dog is a very malleable species, and we humans have been very successful in making a huge variety of different breeds that all look very different and behave in different ways. However, a big problem has crept up. As a result of breeding, many recessive genes, resulting in inherited disorders, have been allowed to persist, due to the way the dogs have been bred. Dalmatians are a particular example of this.
However, it is widely acknowledged that just as dogs have been selectively bred with undesired results, with any effort at all, we can selectively breed dogs and all but eliminate these inherited disorders. We know what genes are recessive, and can simply continue to breed dogs until the recessive gene is all but gone, or at least has a miniscule chance of finding a matching recessive, which would result in the disorder.
So, selective breeding can be used for good or bad. The system is the same, we just have to change the goals of the system.
You are taking things further off topic than I had.
But the issues with inbreeding is largely an issue of genetic diversity and I don't believe that an answer which fails to take into account such an important factor is truly effective especially in the long term, it may remove a few targeted issues but it will not lead to general good health IMUE. (In My Unexpert Estimation)
Also I have heard and suspect it may have some truth, that the children of interracial couples can have a certain vibrancy about them.
But your analogy however true or false it may be is missing the point because clearly I am not talking about inbreeding but the economic and political systems which are indeed creating problems and are supported by the problems and are not going to suddenly hand over power to the people and the solutions to their rule.
Addition:
Also systems create things no matter the goal.
For instance the Stanford prison experiment.
By taking normal people, putting some in guard and others into inmate uniforms the result is precisely what occurs in prisons, the system has a powerful effect on people actions.
Take also the Milligram experiment where most people would under instruction from an authority figure deliver what they believed to be a lethal electrical shock to an innocent person just because instructed.
Money as a goal corrupts motivation, and so farmers grow poison, doctors become killers.
Don't get me wrong, it has been hugely powerful to get us the benefits we have today but it has problems that occur and it is systemic, one thing corrupts another.
Now IF you have some plan for storming the businesses and governments of the world and kicking those running them with better motivations I stand corrected but a better and more realistic is to create alternate power structures, one that neither concentrates resources and power from many to few (wealth is becoming more concentrated as time passes.
Nor dilutes it from the few to the many (many charities largely face a problem far larger then their ability to fix it).
But one in which individuals empower each other, not just 'anyone' but those living to the same social agreement.
Quote from: aether22 on August 11, 2008, 12:06:25 AM
Yes but the signature is very much on topic.
Most of it relates directly to FE tech, and why it isn't 'out there' and how to get it out there. (skepticism, lack of unity or money meaning a lack of power to get the tech out, persistence etc...)
It is a bit big but you don't have to read it. (it fits within the allowed sig size with room to spare)
But really I'm not going to change it so if you need to then practice tolerance and understanding, another important quality.
@ aether22
We need to get off YOUR topic. Its taken over the last several
posts and gone right away from Thane's purpose here.. and I for
one personally am here to read what Thane has to say.. and not
to have your humungous signature thrust in my face every other
post or so.
If you want to save the world please do it the normal way. Go and
write your thesis in full somewhere else (instead of in total in your
signature) and then use the signature in the accepted and sensible
(and appreciated) manner by giving people the link to your treatise.
A simple 'to the point' one or two or three lines at most is all you'll
need for your signature to get it back to normal.. out of everyone's
faces... and get back a lot of that goodwill and acceptance you've
already lost and are losing more of post by post. Your 'normalised'
signature will still be read by everyone (they ALWAYS are) and the
new readers will be able to click on the link and go to your tome to
read it in its own time and place as it should be. Those of us who
already have waded through it don't want it shoved in our faces 'ad
nauseum' in the arrogant manner you have stated above.
Bad enough that you are in this thread and taking over the thread
space for your own ends and imposing your agenda but you're also
in quite a few other threads with the same attitude. There's a right
way to go about your agenda aether22 and its all laid out for you in
the above paragraph. Don't come here to push your agenda.. if you
want to come here (or to all the other threads) come with the right
intent.. to support Thane in what he is striving so hard to do in his
own way.. to 'save the world' literally and physically for those of us
who don't have the mind and skills to do what he can do.
You say you want a plan!
You would be far better off to go start your own thread and expand
your digest thesis and gain your own following of readers and real
supporters of your views and gain their admiration and support and
whatever else you can lead them into that fills your day with joy and
satisfaction. I certainly don't get any joy or satisfaction out of any of
your big-sig posts so far.. and not really expecting to in the future.
I'd rather read one Thane post with all its practical value.. than dozens
of aether22 posts with all their off topic big-sig pontificatings. For all
your protest that the big-sig is on topic.. it isn't. Trying to make your
big-sig subject so general (that you think you can use it to piggy-back
and take over all the threads you choose to invade and push your own
philosophy and ride them like some grotesque octopus) is denying the
truth that you don't belong here in this thread in the manner you are
prescribing. Nor in any of the other threads for the same reason.
Shrink your sig (ego?) down to normal.. give people here the courtesy
of 'choosing for themselves' whether to follow the link.. and get back on
topic by supporting Thane instead of invading this thread. The rest of
us want to get on with supporting Thane uninterrupted by your babblings.
Go Thane GO.. Looking forward to more of your amazing posts with great
fascination and humble wonder..
Enjoy The Day.. Make It So.. :D
ffonz 8)
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
`
`
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 10, 2008, 09:40:52 PM
HERE'S TO HOPING JM HAS A PEACEFUL NIGHT! :)
Thane
Thanks Thane...I did. :)
Mmmm...I love the smell of nonsense in the morning.
It's a signature, and people get to put whatever the want in them, these blocks of texts of varying size convenienty located at the bottom of posts for easy skipping by all that wish to.
Seriously ffonz, you can still count all your posts on with both hands, and you run off on a rude, multi paragraph rant about thread jacking, irrelevance and appropriate posting? Oh the irony.
At least several dozen of aether22's hundreds of technical posts are on this thread, so it's quite appropriate that he dropped by to share something that was meaningful to him, and that he clearly hoped would be meaningful to others. That's quite often why people choose to include signatures, and Thane himself often shares quotes and truisms on this very thread reflecting philosophies relating to broad themes about human nature and mankind.
@aether22 - Because we discussed your sig before you put it up, I know your intentions were good ones. If you find a rather uniform negative response to it perhaps you can think about approaching it in another way. Maybe take one point at at time and develop it into a sentence or two and switch it out on a weekly basis or something. Alternately, you could leave it just the way it is, just as our caps lovin' Thane Heins remains impervious to the occasional call to start acting like the rest of us. What you called 'independence' the other day when we were talking about the thing we admired about Thane.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 10, 2008, 10:42:44 AM
THANKS FOR THE READ...
AND YES I AGREE THE BI-TOROID AND NOW THE MULTI-BI-TOROID WOULD MOST LIKELY BE THE BEST AND SIMPLEST OU DEVICES OUT THERE - THAT IS WHY I HAVE BEEN EXPLORING IT FOR THREE YEARS NOW AND WILL CONTINUE UNTIL IT'S DONE.
CHEERS
Thane
3 years, thanks for the persistence!
Have you already got an idea why it works (the bi-toriod), do you have a theory?
Do the new electromagnetism theories fit the phenomenon?
Already measured the input with the other meter to get rid of all doubt?
Many thanks.
Quote from: ffonz on August 11, 2008, 08:23:50 AM
@ aether22
We need to get off YOUR topic.
So much babbling, and it has only caused me to reply naturally.
I didn't start a subject on my large (but still within the limit with room to spare) sig, I am only replying to those like you and I am doing so in such a way as to discourage any further interruption from my sig than is required.
Yes I did make a single post here to test my sig (before I found it was added to all historical posts) and it was also so JM (who helped a bit) and possibly other regulars of the thread I have affection for would see it.
As for why I have not done more, well because I am not ready to yet, that's why it's a sig.
It won't be removed by complaints however it can show up more if you induce me to reply in regards to it, because however reluctant I may be I do find it hard not to reply.
Besides, nothing can kill this thread or Thanes tech progress.
On reading JM's post I see many of my points were made better already, oh and I will trim it eventually. But if it gets in peoples faces a bit at least it will be noticed.
Quote from: aether22 on August 11, 2008, 12:06:25 AM
It is a bit big but you don't have to read it. (it fits within the allowed sig size with room to spare)
But really I'm not going to change it so if you need to then practice tolerance and understanding, another important quality.
U can do whatever you want. I won't tell you what you can/can't do. Was just giving you some independent "heads-up" that it is a bit difficult to read. But if it is THAT important to you, so be it.
As an alternative - you could just establish a personal blog and link to it in your profile, but again - I don't care.
I appreciate your hard work on validating "Thane's Effect" btw - good work. :)
Quote from: JustMe on August 11, 2008, 10:33:19 AM
Thanks Thane...I did. :)
GOOD TO HAVE A22 IN YOUR CORNER EVEN IF HE IS A LONG WINDED BABBLER - WE ALL NEED
CARING LONG WINDED BABBLERS AT 4 IN THE MORNING.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote3 years, thanks for the persistence!
3 YEARS IS NOTHING, THE GENERATOR TOOK 8 :P
QuoteHave you already got an idea why it works (the bi-toriod), do you have a theory?
Do the new electromagnetism theories fit the phenomenon?
YES AND YES - AND IT IS NOT A THEORY IT IS FACT WHICH HAS BEEN EXPLAINED MANY TIMES HERE SO FAR.
QuoteAlready measured the input with the other meter to get rid of all doubt?
FIRST WE ARE BUILDING A NEW ONE (TO GET RID OF MY DOUBT) THEN PEER REVIEWED MEASUREMENTS WITH THE TOPWARD METER.
QuoteMany thanks
.
MANY WELCOMES
Thane
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
Gandi
Quote from: aether22 on August 11, 2008, 03:24:31 PM
On reading JM's post I see many of my points were made better already, oh and I will trim it eventually. But if it gets in peoples faces a bit at least it will be noticed.
Well please trim it SOON... it's a pain in the ...
actually I just scroll down to the next post, I'm with ffonz
Ron
(//)
OMG!!!!
I_RON THANKS FOR THE GREAT LAUGH!
I ALMOST CHOKED ON MY POTATO SALAD....
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/145193/solid_potato_salad_the_ross_sisters/
(WARNING don't try this at home)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 11, 2008, 10:24:00 PM
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/145193/solid_potato_salad_the_ross_sisters/
(WARNING don't try this at home)
Whoa, that was truly talented women. The last scene with the three rotating Ross's had to be OU!
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on August 11, 2008, 11:57:04 PM
Whoa, that was truly talented women. The last scene with the three rotating Ross's had to be OU!
Regards, Larry
Yes, but it seems like it might be more of a headache than it's worth ;)
I guess the same could be said about the sig! (that is if the world was not important)
This message was not about the sig and I want to cut discussion of it off right here, so if you want to reply about that DO IT BY PM or else it will just multiply!
Besides I tend to talk too much anyway, the sig will make me think twice. (I now wish I had about this one liner)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 11, 2008, 10:24:00 PM
OMG!!!!
I ALMOST CHOKED ON MY POTATO SALAD....
T
LOL, I see you are a man who appreciates great talent!!!
That was nearly as incredible as some of your vids,
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on August 12, 2008, 10:45:53 AM
LOL, I see you are a man who appreciates great talent!!!
That was nearly as incredible as some of your vids,
Ron
THOU HATH SEEN NOTHING YET MI_RON OF THE WEST...
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF UPLOADING SOME VIDEO OF THE
"MOTIONLESS PLATE GENERATOR" WHICH IS NOT AFFECTED BY LEZ'S LAW ONE IOTA!
VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/my_videos
HERE ARE SOME PICS WHICH ARE ALSO ON THEIR WAY TO JM_DANDY. ;)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EZWFM8LB
CHEERIOS
Thane
Gonna be hard to upstage the potato salad Is that your coil winding crew? Chet
Quote from: ramset on August 12, 2008, 08:17:33 PM
Gonna be hard to upstage the potato salad Is that your coil winding crew? Chet
IF THEY WERE - I DOUBT THAT I WOULD HAVE
ANY COILS YET! :P
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 12, 2008, 08:00:10 PM
VIDEO OF THE "MOTIONLESS PLATE GENERATOR" WHICH IS NOT AFFECTED BY LEZ'S LAW ONE IOTA!
VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/my_videos
Nothing showing yet ??
Cheers
HOP the potatoe girls are still taking their bows PATIENCE Chet
Quote from: hoptoad on August 12, 2008, 08:46:33 PM
Nothing showing yet ??
Cheers
TRY HERE: ???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_8c7McrgRk
Thane
Join the queue
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&client=pub-5062770644724806&cof=FORID%3A1%3BGL%3A1%3BLBGC%3A73B59C%3BBGC%3A%23c5dbcf%3BT%3A%23330033%3BLC%3A%23000000%3BVLC%3A%23ff6600%3BGALT%3A%23003324%3BGFNT%3A%23333300%3BGIMP%3A%23333300%3BDIV%3A%2366CC99%3B&domains=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keelynet.com%2F&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&q=lenzless+generator&btnG=Search
I recall first seeing a variable reluctance lenzless generator back in 1999. It was patented by a Russian fellow. I can't remember his name though. I first saw it on Keelynet.com , but a search for it today didn't find anything about it. Perhaps they're not hosting information on it anymore.
Cheers
Its a shielding/unshielding technique. The problem is that the force the magnets place on the spinning wheel is huge. So the motor takes all the load even though the coil produces electricity - seemingly without back emf. I don't think this technique would work with one wheel, you'd need two connected to the same shaft but 90 degrees out of phase so the forces balanced themselves along the axial.
Unfortunately, lorentz law does affect these devices - you won't see that in the video because the motor is so grosely loaded by the magnets that the small back EMF of the coil is not noticeable. Once the forces on the shaft are balanced, you will see the back emf slowing down the rotation. This happens because the steel shield that is in the wheel magnetizes with the same polarity as the coil's iron core. So as the shield moves downward to "block" the flux of the magnet, the iron core of the coil (which is also magnetized by the permanent magnet) is at the same magnetic polarity as the shield, and the shield and the core repel each other. What makes it worse is that the coil will see the polarity of the permanent magnet decrease as the shield is moving down. The coil counters this by increasing with the opposite polarity of the permanent magnet. Unfortunately, the shield is at the same polarity as the core, so the repulsion between the core and the shield only increases as the back emf of the coil amplifies the polarity of the core. I made a small drawing to better show what I'm talking about.
This is the main reason why shielding techniques do not work. I have long since abandoned this idea.
ADD: It should be noted that the Black and White poles (N and S) on the core and shield, respectfully, are induced magnetic poles from the attraction forces of the permanent magnets (PM - shown in yellow). The red poles are due to the back EMF of the coil and they add to the induced poles of the core - compounding the repulsion forces between the core and shield.
Quote
Its a shielding/unshielding technique. The problem is that the force the magnets place on the spinning wheel is huge.
YES AND THAT IS WHY OUR ROTOR WILL BE MADE OF DIAMAGNETIC BISMUTH OR EVEN LEAD OR CARBON GRAPHITE.
THE FORCE ON THE WHEEL IS ALSO A FUNCTION OF THE HYSTERSIS CURVE OF THE WHEEL MATERIAL WHICH HAS TO BE OVERCOME BY THE MOTOR.
IF THE ROTOR IS MADE OF SUPERPEMALOY OR SOMETHING SIMILAR THE COERCIVE FORCE REQUIRED TO CHANGE THE POLE DIRECTION (INSIDE THE ROTOR) WILL BE REDUCED.
TODAY I WILL BE MAKING MY ROTOR FROM LAMINATED TRANSFORMER CORE MATERIAL TO REDUCE MAGNETIC DRAG.
Magnetic Susceptibilities of Paramagnetic and Diamagnetic Materials at 20?C
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/tables/magprop.html#c1
ALSO NOTE THAT I AM USING A WHEEL WITH A BAR -
NOT JUST A BAR .
ONE MAN'S ABANDONMENT IS ANOTHER MAN'S GAIN.
WE WILL SEE WHAT WE SEE... ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Diamagnetic bismuth or pyrolytic graphite is a very feeble effect. You will not produce a large enough flux change to get anything from the coils. Improving the shielding material will help but if you want to reduce drag, just counter balance the axial by placing another wheel on the opposite side and make it 90 degrees out of phase. So the magnets on one side are trying to pull the wheel, while the magnets on the other side are trying to keep it center - you get a balancing force.
Look at my drawings! EVEN IF YOU BALANCE THE FORCES AND REDUCE MAGNETIC DRAG, YOU WILL HAVE BACK EMF ISSUES. The shield will always magnetize with the same polarity as the core - adding graphite will not stop this (I tried). The graphite is too weak an effect and even if it wasn't, it would setup a field on the inside to do the exact same thing - repel against the core. Go ahead and try it - maybe you can find a trick to get around these issues. But I've built a generator almost exactly like this (only it was a vertical design that kept the shield inside the magnetic field which reduced drag and made it so I didn't need a counter balance). Think about how the fields will setup between the core and the shield.
All your going to end up with is a crappier version of a standard electric generator. I say crappier because the coupling between the permanent magnet and coil is much lower than in traditional generators. The electrical energy produced from the coil will be much lower because of this. Plus, the device still suffers from back EMF. You'll find this out once you've reduce the magnetic drag enough. I'm just trying to give you a heads up because I spent almost a year on this design before I began to see why it wouldn't work. This is an old idea too, it appears all over the internet. There is a reason why these generators aren't powering the world today.
QuoteAll your going to end up with is a crappier version of a standard electric generator. I say crappier because the coupling between the permanent magnet and coil is much lower than in traditional generators. The electrical energy produced from the coil will be much lower because of this. Plus, the device still suffers from back EMF. You'll find this out once you've reduce the magnetic drag enough. I'm just trying to give you a heads up because I spent almost a year on this design before I began to see why it wouldn't work. This is an old idea too, it appears all over the internet. There is a reason why these generators aren't powering the world today.
DEAR CV,
THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP - BUT IF YOU HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS THREAD AT ALL YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT GENERALLY I DON'T LISTEN TO ANYONE ESPECIALLY I_RON ( I PREFER TO LEARN THE HARD WAY).
THE "TRICK" IS TO GIVE THE COIL'S BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX AN ALTERNATE ROUTE -
I.E. THROUGH THE RING.I HAVE BEEN DOING TESTS ALL DAY WITH A MAGNETICALLY BALANCED LOW DRAG ROTOR AT 10 TO 3500 RPM AND A COIL PRODUCING 50 V WITH AN INDUCTION MOTOR AND MONITORING THE MOTOR CURRENT DOWN TO 100 mA - AND FROM NO LOAD DOWN TO A DEAD SHORT THERE IS NOT EVEN 1/100th OF AN AMP INCREASE IN MOTOR CURRENT.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH (DIVERTING AND FAILING TO DIVERT) BACK EMF FOR 10 YEARS NOW SO I KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR - THERE IS NONE.
MY "CRAPPIER" VERSION HAS AN AIR GAP OF 1/4 INCH WITH A 1/8 INCH ROTOR AND ZERO BACK EMF EFFECTS.
THE REASON WHY THESE GENERATORS AREN'T POWERING THE WORLD TODAY IS BECAUSE PEOPLE GIVE UP TOO SOON, WE MUST BE PREPARED TO FAIL 10,000 TIMES AT THE VERY LEAST BEFORE SUCCESS SHINES ON US. :P
EVERYTHING OLD IS NEW AGAIN.
THANKS FOR TELLING ME IT CAN'T BE DONE -
NOW I'M REALLY MOTIVATED! :D
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 13, 2008, 06:39:36 PM
snip
THANKS FOR TELLING ME IT CAN'T BE DONE - NOW I'M REALLY MOTIVATED! :D
CHEERS
Thane
Thane Meister,
Oh mon, you fooled me on that one... I was babbling away not realizing you intended the magnets
AND the coils to be stationary! But like CV says, it is not going to work, hehehe.
My bud Al Francoeur has one that works though.
Your conscience
Quote from: i_ron on August 13, 2008, 07:40:41 PM
Thane Meister,
My bud Al Francoeur has one that works though.
Your conscience
CAN YOU DEFINE "WORKS"?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 13, 2008, 06:39:36 PM
THANKS FOR TELLING ME IT CAN'T BE DONE - NOW I'M REALLY MOTIVATED! :D
CHEERS
Thane
Dear Thane,
You sending my one thousand dollars per month, along with season's tickets to my Sens, CANNOT BE DONE!
CANNOT! Nuh uh and no way.
JM
Quote from: JustMe on August 13, 2008, 08:46:00 PM
Dear Thane,
You sending my one thousand dollars per month, along with season's tickets to my Sens, CANNOT BE DONE!
CANNOT! Nuh uh and no way.
JM
I'VE SIMPLY BEEN WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME IF YOU WANT "BEHIND THE BENCH" SEATS OR YOUR OWN EXECUTIVE SUITE, WHAT KIND OF BEER YOU WANT IN THE FRIDGE AND WHAT COLOUR YOU WANT YOUR FREAKIN LIMO TO BE ???
TELL ME - AM I ASKING TOO MUCH HERE PEOPLE?
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 13, 2008, 08:59:11 PM
I'VE SIMPLY BEEN WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME IF YOU WANT "BEHIND THE BENCH" SEATS OR YOUR OWN EXECUTIVE SUITE, WHAT KIND OF BEER YOU WANT IN THE FRIDGE AND WHAT COLOUR YOU WANT YOUR FREAKIN LIMO TO BE ???
TELL ME - AM I ASKING TOO MUCH HERE PEOPLE?
Thane
Once you've got JM sorted, is there any chance you could send me some Hen's Teeth ?? :D :D
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on August 13, 2008, 09:11:57 PM
Once you've got JM sorted, is there any chance you could send me some Hen's Teeth ?? :D :D
Cheers
SORRY IN CANADA WE CAN'T MAIL BEER...
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 13, 2008, 08:35:49 PM
CAN YOU DEFINE "WORKS"?
THANKS
Thane
There has been some claim as to self running... but that sounds like Ottawa talk to me....
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/interference.htm
A lot of the info that was out there is gone now, as the latest version has become a bit more propitiatory. He was using fingers, rather than holes. His vapor carb work is also notable.
BC Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 13, 2008, 09:18:01 PM
SORRY IN CANADA WE CAN'T MAIL BEER...
T
Well, we can, technically. But somehow it never makes it to the post office.
(Behind the bench on weekdays, Suite on weekends, Canadian and/or Corona w/lime, pink)
QuoteI HAVE BEEN DOING TESTS ALL DAY WITH A MAGNETICALLY BALANCED LOW DRAG ROTOR AT 10 TO 3500 RPM AND A COIL PRODUCING 50 V WITH AN INDUCTION MOTOR AND MONITORING THE MOTOR CURRENT DOWN TO 100 mA - AND FROM NO LOAD DOWN TO A DEAD SHORT THERE IS NOT EVEN 1/100th OF AN AMP INCREASE IN MOTOR CURRENT.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH (DIVERTING AND FAILING TO DIVERT) BACK EMF FOR 10 YEARS NOW SO I KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR - THERE IS NONE.
In that case close the loop. If there is no back EMF then your generator should power itself. If your coil is producing 50V (at what RPM?) then that is plenty enough to operate a small motor to spin the shaft - especially since you have "
A MAGNETICALLY BALANCED LOW DRAG ROTOR". Try a 6-9V motor to spin the shaft at the required RPMs.
Honestly though, what you are claiming is not what I observed. I also had a place to send the flux. Your idea of "balanced" is probably different from mine though. Does it turn with the slightest push and revolve as though the magnets are not even there? That is my definition of balanced. If there is a force required to turn the rotor, then it is not balanced.
Here is my design - its the same principle but the arrangement is slightly different. Since the shield stays in the field, it is balanced at all times. I observed back EMF in this device, and I proved its operation by measuring and mapping how the flux sets up during operation. I used fairly good materials (a $2000 dollar ultra low carbon steel shield specially made by a shielding company - don't worry, tax payer money paid for it haha!) The polarity of the shield and core are always the same and they cause a repulsion, which adds when the coil is loaded. The back EMF itself is weak because the coupling factor between the coil and PM is low (in my design the shield was closer ~1/8" and thicker but the coupling was still low). Magnetic drag will easily overshadow the back EMF. Try looking at current changes on the order of 1mA. It will be best to power your motor with a battery to reduce ripple. Or, simply close the loop and see if it can power itself. If it works - congrats, if not figure out why.
I did not give up on the search for a reactionless generator, I gave up on this design. Its good to be stubborn, just don't keep trying the same idea over and over when you see it not working, move on. However, you seem to be getting results so keep it up and good luck!
Quote from: JustMe on August 13, 2008, 10:49:40 PM
Well, we can, technically. But somehow it never makes it to the post office.
(Behind the bench on weekdays, Suite on weekends, Canadian and/or Corona w/lime, pink)
Gee, I did my best to raise the class level of the group by mentioning BC wine... but I see it was a
wasted effort.... but fear not, I have found a car for you beer drinkers to match your tastes!
A nice Burberry Maserati, its always hard to beat a class act!
whiner from BC
(//)
I should probably add that the coil and magnet in my design (shown above) were also stationary. Only the shield (which was ~1/4" thick would spin).
Quote from: JustMe on August 13, 2008, 10:49:40 PM
Well, we can, technically. But somehow it never makes it to the post office.
I'll drink to that ! Cheers :D
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 13, 2008, 11:43:54 PM
I should probably add that the coil and magnet in my design (shown above) were also stationary. Only the shield (which was ~1/4" thick would spin).
Charlie,
That is a very clever design. Am I correct in assuming the area with the connecting side bars is a low
flux transmitter and flux is passed in the plain area? What's the output like, decent?
Ron
QuoteGee, I did my best to raise the class level of the group by mentioning BC wine... but I see it was a wasted effort....
WHY SO SNARKY I_RON ???
YOU LOOKED HAPPY (AND SNAZZY) THE OTHER DAY WHEN YOU CAME OVER FOR A "VIDAL" BEER?
ANYWAY HERE IS WHAT I AM MAKING IN MY EFFORTS.
AS YOU CAN SEE THE NORTH POLE COIL INDUCED BACK EMF WILL HAPPILY ENTER THE
MAGNET SOUTH POLE AND
NOT AFFECT THE ROTOR AT ALL. (FYI - CV YOUR COIL INDUCED FLUX SHOULD BE GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION IN YOUR DIAGRAM - SEE LENZ "INDUCED FIELD").
THE MAGNETS ARE SHOWN TOUCHING BUT MAY END UP BEING SEPARATED SLIGHTLY.
CHEERS
Thane
Great Thane, can you make a video with a scope connected to a coil (or both to show phase diff.) to show how it behaves when rpm changes?
The way I drew it is correct. As the shield moves over the north pole, the coil sees a DECREASING north pole. This is the same as the lower left image of your Lenz drawing. It is the same as pulling the north pole magnet away, the coil is going to set up the flux so that the core polarity facing the north pole is south - just as I drew it. Unfortunately, the shielding is also south, which causes a repulsion.
The design I showed worked fine, but it was not back EMF free.
Quote from: alan on August 14, 2008, 09:30:41 AM
Great Thane, can you make a video with a scope connected to a coil (or both to show phase diff.) to show how it behaves when rpm changes?
SURE BUT THE PHASE SHIFT IS GOING TO BE A REFLECTION OF THE LOAD - SO IF I USE A PURELY RESISTIVE LOAD THE PHASE SHIFT WILL BE "1" OR
IN PHASE - NOW WE SHOULD EXPECT BOTH THE CURRENT AND VOLTAGE SINE WAVE AMPLITUDES AND FREQUENCY TO INCREASE.
OFF LOAD THE PHASE SHIFT SHOULD "IDEALLY" BE "0" OR
90 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE BUT IN REAL LIFE SHIFTED SLIGHTLY TOAWRDS "1" DUE TO THE COIL'S DC RESISTANCE.
Thane
QuoteThe way I drew it is correct. As the shield moves over the north pole, the coil sees a DECREASING north pole. This is the same as the lower left image of your Lenz drawing. It is the same as pulling the north pole magnet away, the coil is going to set up the flux so that the core polarity facing the north pole is south - just as I drew it. Unfortunately, the shielding is also south, which causes a repulsion.
OK NOW I UNDERSTAND.
QuoteThe design I showed worked fine, but it was not back EMF free.
WHAT IF YOU PUT A RING AROUND YOUR SHIELD AS I HAVE DONE - CAN YOU SEE HOW THIS MAY WORK DIFFERENTLY?
Thane
HOPEFULLY BY TOMORROW I WILL HAVE MY NEW EFFORT INSTALLED IN MY 5500 TURNS/SIDE TOROID.
Thane
QuoteWHAT IF YOU PUT A RING AROUND YOUR SHIELD AS I HAVE DONE - CAN YOU SEE HOW THIS MAY WORK DIFFERENTLY?
My design has a ring around it - two actually. The top and bottom of the shield is a ring (as you can see in the 3D image). So what I drew you was actually a solution to the core and shield repulsion problem. Unfortunately, the flux change was only about 10 Gauss - which was too feeble. By that point I was so tired of fooling with a device that yielded such crappy flux change that I abandoned it for a different mechanism. I warp the fields of the magnets now instead of diverging them. This gives much better flux change and reduces the size of the device.
I retract what I said earlier. You might have something with your design - I finally see what you are talking about. I like your design better because the magnets' poles are facing the core. But you need to have 2 wheels. Make the exact same setup but on the other side of the motor, and put the shields 90 degrees from the other wheel. This way you will have a perfectly balanced axial and you can use a much smaller motor to spin the wheel. Also, the ring area appears small compared to the core area - in the video atleast. Shouldn't they be the same?
If you have the coil producing 50V's then balance that axial and close the loop! Make sure the wire you are using can support ~300mA. A good tape cosset motor is 6V at 300mA no load. If your axial is balanced then this little motor should be able to spin the wheels just fine - it might need help getting started of course. But they go up to like 2000 RPMs easy.
Later,
Charlie
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 14, 2008, 02:26:46 PM
I retract what I said earlier. You might have something with your design - I finally see what you are talking about. I like your design better because the magnets' poles are facing the core. But you need to have 2 wheels. Make the exact same setup but on the other side of the motor, and put the shields 90 degrees from the other wheel. This way you will have a perfectly balanced axial and you can use a much smaller motor to spin the wheel. Also, the ring area appears small compared to the core area - in the video atleast. Shouldn't they be the same?
If you have the coil producing 50V's then balance that axial and close the loop! Make sure the wire you are using can support ~300mA. A good tape cosset motor is 6V at 300mA no load. If your axial is balanced then this little motor should be able to spin the wheels just fine - it might need help getting started of course. But they go up to like 2000 RPMs easy.
Later,
Charlie
BASED ON YOUR SUGGESTIONS - I BOUGHT ANOTHER WHEEL YESTERDAY BUT DIDN'T INSTALL IT YET - BUT WHAT I DID DO IS CONTINUE MY MAGNETS INTO A RING SO THE ROTOR SHIELD HAS LESS COGGING TORGUE (A RING OF MAGNETS INSTEAD OF JUST A PAIR) - NOW I CAN SPIN IT WITH 1 FINGER - SO NOW WITH 2 WHEELS IT OUGHT TO BE EVEN BETTER.
AS FAR AS THE RING SIZE ??? I NEVER ARGUE WITH WHAT WORKS.
CHEERS
Thane
Have you been able to measure the flux change that the coil sees with a gauss meter? It would be interesting to note how much it changes. You have to be getting quite a bit to produce 50 Volts - or you have a bazillion turns haha. At what RPM do you get 50 Volts? How many turns are in your coil and what is the cross sectional area of your coil's core? We can back calculate the flux change if you don't have a gauss meter.
I'm in the process of building a generator that operates on a different phenomenon. I'd like to compare the flux change between the two techniques. I'm still not fully convinced what I'm building is going to be back EMF free but using permanent magnets to simulate a coil seemed to give really good results. Hopefully there is more than 1 way to skin a cat!
One last question, when your coil is outputting 50V and you dead short it, what is the current flow?
Good night,
Charlie
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 14, 2008, 07:53:59 PM
Have you been able to measure the flux change that the coil sees with a gauss meter? It would be interesting to note how much it changes. You have to be getting quite a bit to produce 50 Volts - or you have a bazillion turns haha. At what RPM do you get 50 Volts? How many turns are in your coil and what is the cross sectional area of your coil's core? We can back calculate the flux change if you don't have a gauss meter.
I'm in the process of building a generator that operates on a different phenomenon. I'd like to compare the flux change between the two techniques. I'm still not fully convinced what I'm building is going to be back EMF free but using permanent magnets to simulate a coil seemed to give really good results. Hopefully there is more than 1 way to skin a cat!
ACTUALLY I AM NOW UP TO 61.5 VOLTS @ 3500 RPM AND THE MOTOR CURRENT DROPS AND THE MOTOR ACCELERATES SLIGHTLY UNDER INFINITE LOADING - SEE HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy-N6dxX-u0 AND HERE:http://www.megaupload.com/?d=33TN49SX
I HAVE SKINNED THE SAME CAT 4 TIMES NOW.
CHEERS
Thane
@ Thane...
I am sorry, but after seeing your last demo above - I have to admit that I am very anxious to see the battery test demo...
Look like you are ready man!
Go for it!
What is the infinite load current in the coil - can you measure that for me? Also, be very careful Thane! The reduction in current and increase of the rotor speed could be another effect. If there is magnetic drag on the shield, the magnetic flux produced from the coil could place the shield into a saturation mode in which case the magnetic drag would lower, you would see an increase in the rotor speed and a decrease in current - be very careful! Otherwise, I think you are moving in the right direction.
Really try to counter balance that rotor so you can reduce the motor size. By the way, what is the voltage supply on the motor right now - 120V?
Regards,
Charlie
PS I like your shop!
QuoteWhat is the infinite load current in the coil - can you measure that for me?
22 mA WITH A MOTOR I/P VOLTAGE OF 80 VOLTS - SPEED = 2500 RPM (approx) - SYSTEM ACCELERATES. (VIDEO MOTOR I/P = 83 V I THINK)?
34 mA AT 112 VOLTS IN SPEED = 3500 RPM - SYSTEM STILL ACCELERATES SLIGHTLY.
QuoteReally try to counter balance that rotor so you can reduce the motor size. By the way, what is the voltage supply on the motor right now - 120V?
Regards,
Charlie
FIRST I AM GOING TO WIND ANOTHER COIL WITH 24 GAUGE WIRE TO BRING THE CURRENT UP AND SEE IF THAT HAS ANY DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS.
AS FAR AS THE ACCELERATION IS CONCERNED I THINK I AM BACK TO MY ORIGINAL THEORY OF COIL FLUX ENHANCING THE INDUCTION MOTOR FIELD - THOSE MAGNETS AND COILS ARE VERY CLOSE AND
ALL THE SUPPORT MATERIAL IS STEEL.
THAT COIL IS A "HIGH VOLTAGE" COIL WHICH WOULD NOT WORK IN MY ACCELERATION EXPERIMENTS AND CAUSED HUGE DECELERATION UNDER LOADING - WHICH IS WHY I CHOSE IT FOR THIS TASK.
QuotePS I like your shop!
YES ME TOO - COMPLIMENTS OF OTTAWA UNIVERSITY! :)
CHEERS
Thane
Cool, thanks for the measurements. I'm assuming your using a thinner gauge than 24? 24 will definitely increase the current capacity - should be interesting.
QuoteAS FAR AS THE ACCELERATION IS CONCERNED I THINK I AM BACK TO MY ORIGINAL THEORY OF COIL FLUX ENHANCING THE INDUCTION MOTOR FIELD - THOSE MAGNETS AND COILS ARE VERY CLOSE AND ALL THE SUPPORT MATERIAL IS STEEL.
Just keep in mind it could be the steel magnetically saturating. If the steel saturates, then any kind of magnetic drag you had would reduce. In your situation I think this is a good thing.
Are you a student or professor - I assume thats the University of Ottawa in Canada? Hehe, if your a professor I'd be surprised, professors never do hands on research like this.
Thane teaches the professors [I don't know that it pays very well] Chet
QuoteCool, thanks for the measurements. I'm assuming your using a thinner gauge than 24? 24 will definitely increase the current capacity - should be interesting.
30 GAUGE w/ ANOTHER 200 TURNS OF 20 GUAGE (PUT ON AFTER TO SEE IF I COULD CAUSE DECELERATION).
I COULD NOT.
QuoteJust keep in mind it could be the steel magnetically saturating. If the steel saturates, then any kind of magnetic drag you had would reduce. In your situation I think this is a good thing.
YOU WOULD THINK THAT AT SATURATION THE VOLTAGE INDUCED IN THE COILS (OR LOAD - I HAVE TRIED 1 K DOWN TO 0 OHMS) WOULD PEAK WOULDN'T YOU? SO FAR IT HASN'T.
QuoteAre you a student or professor - I assume thats the University of Ottawa in Canada? Hehe, if your a professor I'd be surprised, professors never do hands on research like this.
I AM THE PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER OF
POTENTIAL +/- DIFFERENCE INC. A R & D COMPANY. WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO DESIGN A LOW RPM - 50 RPM AND UP WIND GENERATOR FOR AN INTERNATIONAL COMPANY. OUR HV "ACCELERATING COIL DESIGN" PREFERS HIGH RPM SO THIS IS WHAT I CAME UP WITH - I THINK IT IS DIFFERENT ENOUGH TO AVOID ANY PATENT ISSUES THAT I_RON AND HOPTOAD HAVE MADE ME AWARE OF.
(ACTUALLY DURING OR TUESDAY DEMO OUR NEW BI-COIL HV COIL CAUSED ACCELERATION UNDER HC LOADING AT 200 RPM WHICH WAS VERY SUPRISING TO ME BUT STILL NOT LOW ENOUGH)OUR COMPANY HAS BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO FIND AN OPEN MINDED KIND HEARTED PROFESSOR AT OTTAWA U WHO SUPPORTS OUR EFFORTS AND WANTS TO HELP US DEVELPOP OUR CREDIBILITY WITH TECHNOLOGY WHICH HAS THE CAPACITY TO TEMPORARILY DESTROY CREDIBILITY (WHICH THIS TECH HAS DONE SOMEWHAT SO FAR).
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
why don't you just build a big flywheel, e.g.
10 kg heavy and just spin this up and
put a few of your HV coils across it and power a few LEDs
from the coils and show us, that the flywheel will never stop
and even accelerate ?
I guess that would be the final proof,
that you have beaten the Lenz law..
Thanks, regards, Stefan.
QuoteYOU WOULD THINK THAT AT SATURATION THE VOLTAGE INDUCED IN THE COILS (OR LOAD - I HAVE TRIED 1 K DOWN TO 0 OHMS) WOULD PEAK WOULDN'T YOU? SO FAR IT HASN'T.
The voltage would peak if the core was saturating, but I'm talking about your shield. If the shield saturates, then the magnetic drag on the shield would reduce. The amount of flux change through the shield would remain the same, but because the drag has reduced, the rotor speed would increase and the current consumption of the motor would reduce. The output current in the coil should increase a little too due to the increased speed of the rotor.
I think all this is a good thing. It would only be bad if your shield was saturating at lower rpms, or if the shield was saturated at startup. Because if this was the case, then the amount of flux change the coil would see would be small and the coil's output would suffer.
The biggest challenge I see is going to be trying to get the output power greater than the input power - ha, isn't that always the challenge? Taking the case of the rotor spinning at 3500rpms, the motor is running 112V at around 2amps (based on the current shown in the video). So the input power is roughly 224Watts. The coil however has an open circuit voltage of 61.5V and a short circuit current of 0.034amps, so the approximate output power of the coil is 2Watts. Even without back EMF, the motor is working too hard (either the drag on the shield or the motor itself is just too big). However, if a 6V motor running at 300mA (and 3500rpms) can turn the shield, then the input power would be 1.8 and the output power would be 2. Thane, didn't you mention earlier that you had used a bunch of magnets to balance the rotor? Do you think your at a point where you could reduce the motor size or still too early?
Best Regards,
Charlie
Quote
I guess that would be the final proof, that you have beaten the Lenz law..
Thanks, regards, Stefan.
THANKS FOR THE SUGGESTION.
THE TROUBLE IS EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN VERSION OF "PROOF".
WHEN LUC AND STEVE CAME TO THE LAB THEY BROUGHT LIGHT BULBS BECAUSE THAT WOULD PROVIDE "PROOF".
NOW WE HAVE LIGHT BULBS BUT STILL NO "PROOF".
SO WE PLACE A LOAD ON THE "CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR" AND IT DECELERATES - THEN ENGAGE THE HV COILS, ACCELERATE
THROUGH THE LOAD AND SUPPLY SURPLUS POWER TO THE LOAD - BUT STILL NO "PROOF".
IN MY NEXT DEMO I AM GOING TO ACCELERATE THROUGH A LOAD WHILE WALKING ON WATER WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PARTING THE RED SEA AND RUNNING 100 METERS IN 9.65 SECONDS.
CHEERS
Thane
To me, proof comes when the device can drive itself. Whether you get extra power for loads doesn't matter to me. If a machine can keep itself going until the parts wear out, thats proof enough for me.
QuoteIN MY NEXT DEMO I AM GOING TO ACCELERATE THROUGH A LOAD WHILE WALKING ON WATER WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PARTING THE RED SEA AND RUNNING 100 METERS IN 9.65 SECONDS.
Meh, doing all that while standing on your head would be more impressive. :D
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 17, 2008, 11:53:12 AM
To me, proof comes when the device can drive itself. Whether you get extra power for loads doesn't matter to me. If a machine can keep itself going until the parts wear out, thats proof enough for me.
Meh, doing all that while standing on your head would be more impressive. :D
WELL I AM UP TO 20 V @ 1 A (SHORTED) WITH MY NEW COIL USING 24 GAUGE WIRE (54 OHMS WORTH) AND THE MOTOR STILL ACCELERATES WHEN LOADED. I AM GOING TO MAKE A NEW "PLATE" WITH LAMINATED TOROID CORE STEEL AND HAVE THE WHOLE THING ON A DC MOTOR WITH A BATTERY BY FRIDAY.
BEAR IN MIND I CHECK AT VARIOUS SPEEDS AND MANY DIFFERENT LOADS - I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DETECT
ANY LENZ ACTION AT ALL.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 16, 2008, 10:44:16 PM
The voltage would peak if the core was saturating, but I'm talking about your shield. If the shield saturates, then the magnetic drag on the shield would reduce. The amount of flux change through the shield would remain the same, but because the drag has reduced, the rotor speed would increase and the current consumption of the motor would reduce. The output current in the coil should increase a little too due to the increased speed of the rotor.
I think all this is a good thing. It would only be bad if your shield was saturating at lower rpms, or if the shield was saturated at startup. Because if this was the case, then the amount of flux change the coil would see would be small and the coil's output would suffer.
The biggest challenge I see is going to be trying to get the output power greater than the input power - ha, isn't that always the challenge? Taking the case of the rotor spinning at 3500rpms, the motor is running 112V at around 2amps (based on the current shown in the video). So the input power is roughly 224Watts. The coil however has an open circuit voltage of 61.5V and a short circuit current of 0.034amps, so the approximate output power of the coil is 2Watts. Even without back EMF, the motor is working too hard (either the drag on the shield or the motor itself is just too big). However, if a 6V motor running at 300mA (and 3500rpms) can turn the shield, then the input power would be 1.8 and the output power would be 2. Thane, didn't you mention earlier that you had used a bunch of magnets to balance the rotor? Do you think your at a point where you could reduce the motor size or still too early?
Best Regards,
Charlie
WHERE CAN I GET THE MOTOR YOU SUGGEST?
THANKS
Thane
Hi,
May I chime in with these motor suggestions for driving the shield: http://circuitspecialists.com/level.itml/icOid/8158
or http://www.robotobjects.com/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=413
and also here: http://www.electronicsurplus.com/dictionary/cat2062.htm
There are many other DC motors of course, though the above ones seem too small, hopefully their torque is enough for the job...
rgds, Gyula
Yes the motors gyulasun posted are what I was talking about. These are basically toy or hobby motors. Old tape cossets have pretty decent motors in them too - also small. These would be the perfect if the rotor is balanced and everything, but you probably have to work down to something this small.
I really hate winding coils, I'm coiling on one tonight for a project I'm working on. Its going to be ~1000+ turns of 20 gauge.
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 17, 2008, 08:43:14 PM
Yes the motors gyulasun posted are what I was talking about. These are basically toy or hobby motors. Old tape cossets have pretty decent motors in them too - also small. These would be the perfect if the rotor is balanced and everything, but you probably have to work down to something this small.
I really hate winding coils, I'm coiling on one tonight for a project I'm working on. Its going to be ~1000+ turns of 20 gauge.
AS A POINT OF REFERENCE THE YELLOW DC MOTOR IN THE LAB VIDEOS DRAWS 20 WATTS OR LESS WHICH IS COMPARABLE TO ABOUT 200 W FOR THE RYOBI INDUCTION MOTOR - I JUST MIGHT BE ABLE GET REAL CLOSE WITH MY NEW COIL.
THANKS GYULASUN FOR THE INFO AND GOOD LUCK CV! ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 17, 2008, 09:14:34 AM...THE TROUBLE IS EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN VERSION OF "PROOF"...
@Thane
Dont be mislead by these red herrings - proof is very clear, only one thing measure power in and power out, show power out is greater then power in with accurate meters and unmistakeable operting conditions then nobody can argue.The porblem so far is every time you always have too much meauement inaccuracy or unclear operating conditions. Your close, just do the measurements right!
-Mike
Which is why if you close the loop and have the device power itself without stopping you will never have issues with "accuracy" error.
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 18, 2008, 02:19:05 PM
Which is why if you close the loop and have the device power itself without stopping you will never have issues with "accuracy" error.
True.
This is exactly what I have been suggesting above.
I expect to see a significant increase in running time of the DC Motor when Thane's coils are engaged because they SHOULD be able to charge back the main source of energy - the car battery or a computer UPS...
However, I do not expect overunity. The device will come to a stop at some point due to heat energy loss.
Still, if Thane is only able to increase the run time by 10% it will equal to a tremendous achievement....
20% increase in the run time when on battery would be as big as the electric motor invention itself...
Anything more than 20% will qualify Thane for a Nobel Prize in Physics...
For example...
Lets suppose that Thane connects a fully charged car battery to his DC Motor. It runs for 20 minutes at 2000 RPM and it comes to a stop.
Then Thane connects a fully charged car battery to his DC Motor and engages his coil setup than negates the Lenz Law. Coils are able to recharge the battery.
If the run time of such a setup is 22 minutes before it comes to a stop gives Thane a 10% increase in the energy efficiency vs. the baseline.
If the run time of such a setup is 24 minutes before it comes to a stop gives Thane a 20% increase in the energy efficiency vs. the baseline.
Very easy,no arguing about the precision, and it is also an effecitve presentation tool for the "business people" investors who do not really care about the Lenz Law or the Electrical Engineering Aspects of the device...
Kind of a "black box" testing...
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 18, 2008, 02:19:05 PM
Which is why if you close the loop and have the device power itself without stopping you will never have issues with "accuracy" error.
YOU GUYS ARE ALL MAKING VALID SUGGESTIONS BUT YOU ARE A BIT AHEAD OF US SINCE WE ARE STILL OPTIMIZING THE DESIGNS AND YES THE VIDEOS ARE NOT IDEAL AND ARE NOT MEANT TO BE - THEY ARE MEANT TO SHOW THE EVOLUTION.
HOPEFULLY BY NEXT WEEK I WILL BE ABLE TO PRESENT ADLEP'S SUGGESTION IN A VIDEO WITH A BATTERY - IT WON'T BE OU BUT A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 19, 2008, 09:04:33 AM
YOU GUYS ARE ALL MAKING VALID SUGGESTIONS BUT YOU ARE A BIT AHEAD OF US SINCE WE ARE STILL OPTIMIZING THE DESIGNS AND YES THE VIDEOS ARE NOT IDEAL AND ARE NOT MEANT TO BE - THEY ARE MEANT TO SHOW THE EVOLUTION.
HOPEFULLY BY NEXT WEEK I WILL BE ABLE TO PRESENT ADLEP'S SUGGESTION IN A VIDEO WITH A BATTERY - IT WON'T BE OU BUT A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
CHEERS
Thane
I don't think that people are expecting OU Thane.
At this point even a 1% increase in running time/efficiency typically equals to a
multimillion dollars R&D effort, so if you can achieve that without having access to such funds/resources it will be an awesome achievement...
Personally 1% increase in running time is all I am looking for.
And now....
Something slightly OFF topic, but still interesting...
A person have managed to convert his truck to run on hho:
http://gmy.news.yahoo.com/v/9344805
If it is so easy to install AND it doubles the MPG how come it is not widely known and used around the world?
Where did everybody go???
It is the OU rapture. They cracked the secret and left the rest of us behind.
Thane's go-cart was last seen heading west at an ever increasing rate of speed!! ;)
Quote from: mackensteff on August 25, 2008, 04:26:58 PM
It is the OU rapture. They cracked the secret and left the rest of us behind.
ACTUALLY WE ARE BUSY HEADING INTO PRE-PRODUCTION MODE FOR THE BI-COIL PEREPITEIA GENERATOR NOW THAT 27 OF OUR 31 PATENT CLAIMS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CANADIAN PATENT OFFICE.
CONSIDERING WHAT MR. NEWMAN WENT THROUGH WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 25, 2008, 10:24:02 PM
ACTUALLY WE ARE BUSY HEADING INTO PRE-PRODUCTION MODE FOR THE BI-COIL PEREPITEIA GENERATOR NOW THAT 27 OF OUR 31 PATENT CLAIMS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CANADIAN PATENT OFFICE.
CONSIDERING WHAT MR. NEWMAN WENT THROUGH WE ARE VERY FORTUNATE.
CHEERS
Thane
Fortunate indeed... my congratulations!!!
Ron
ps: here is a toast for you, lol
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on August 26, 2008, 09:31:38 PM
Fortunate indeed... my congratulations!!!
Ron
ps: here is a toast for you, lol
THANKS RON BUT I PREFER MY YEAST IN LIQUID FORM OUT OF THE FRIDGE - TIC TACK TOAST IS OVER RATED ANYWAY -
HOP (Single Malt) SCOTCH IS THE GAME OF CHOICE IN OUR HOUSE (that's us playing on the bridge).
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
If I understand correctly, with your invention I can power my home with a pack of battery and instead of having solar panel or wind turbine I will be able to recharge my battery pack with your generator?
And your generator is powering by itself ?
Regards
Quote from: albator10 on August 27, 2008, 12:22:31 PM
Hi Thane,
If I understand correctly, with your invention I can power my home with a pack of battery and instead of having solar panel or wind turbine I will be able to recharge my battery pack with your generator?
And your generator is powering by itself ?
Regards
NOT QUITE YET - RIGHT NOW WE ARE FOCUSED ON IMPROVING OUR TECNOLOGIES WHIICH INCLUDE THE BI-COIL GENERATOR, THE TOROID GENERATOR, THE PLATE GENERATOR AND THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER.
WE ARE NOW ACTIVELY CANVASSING GENERATOR MANUFACURERS TO DESIGN AND BUILD THE BI-COIL GENERATOR FOR VARIOUS APPLICATIONS.
ALSO OUR TECHNOLOGY IS MEANT TO SUPPORT CURRENT ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LIKE SOLAR WIND ETC - NOT REPLACE THEM, ALTHOUGH IT WOULDN'T HURT TO REPLACE COAL AND NUCLEAR.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on August 27, 2008, 07:02:36 AM
THANKS RON BUT I PREFER MY YEAST IN LIQUID FORM OUT OF THE FRIDGE - TIC TACK TOAST IS OVER RATED ANYWAY - HOP (Single Malt) SCOTCH IS THE GAME OF CHOICE IN OUR HOUSE (that's us playing on the bridge).
CHEERS
Thane
Them's good HOPS .......scotch with a dash of soda water ........ mmmmm.... Is that my lillypad swaying ? KneeDeep ;)
@ Stringuy,
You could just build one yourself. This is the basic design Thane is using. Not drawn is another magnet and coil on the other side of the ring shield.
Quote from: Charlie_V on August 29, 2008, 07:38:56 AM
@ Stringuy,
You could just build one yourself. This is the basic design Thane is using. Not drawn is another magnet and coil on the other side of the ring shield.
Thanks for the simple drawing. This reminds me a lot of the Interference Disc electrical generator created by Alan L. Francoeur except Thane's design is a solid ring instead of a holed ring.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/interference.htm
In one of the yahoo forums that I read I remember that Alan posted a statement a long time ago of getting his unit to be self running. I do not remember if that was with or without batteries which would make a big difference.
I did noticed that Alan Francoeur was also Canadian.
I did find the claim about self runner by Alan. It was on Naudin's website..
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/francoeu.htm
BTW.. Great work Thane. Perhaps a self running is possible.
@ Hydro:
Al has since went silent about it too. Has also made it plain he wont discuss it either. Now why does that not surprise me.
@ Thane:
Your last post here was all good to the end words of replacing coal and nuke. Coal they might put up with, but you start trying
to obsolete the nuke power plants and that will cause a flap. Who will pay the closeing tabs? All the lost monies they cant suck
out of the people. Take Hanford for instance, we the people got to pay for it. Like it or not in rate hikes. All reminds me of the spice
trade in the movie Dune. "He who controls the spice, controls the universe." Oil and Power companies. Step lightly my friend.
thaelin
Quote from: Thaelin on August 30, 2008, 11:21:17 PM
@ Hydro:
Al has since went silent about it too. Has also made it plain he wont discuss it either. Now why does that not surprise me.
@ Thane:
Your last post here was all good to the end words of replacing coal and nuke. Coal they might put up with, but you start trying
to obsolete the nuke power plants and that will cause a flap. Who will pay the closeing tabs? All the lost monies they cant suck
out of the people. Take Hanford for instance, we the people got to pay for it. Like it or not in rate hikes. All reminds me of the spice
trade in the movie Dune. "He who controls the spice, controls the universe." Oil and Power companies. Step lightly my friend.
thaelin
I THINK IT WAS IN DILIP HIRO'S BOOK, "
BLOOD OF THE EARTH THE BATTLE FOR THE WORLD'S VANISHING OIL RESOURCES" HE TALKS ABOUT HOW THERE IS ONLY ABOUT 50 YEARS WORTH OF URANIUM LEFT ANYWAY - AND AS FAR AS COAL IS CONCRENED I IMAGINE CHINA MIGHT BE HAPPY TO SEE THEIR COAL PLANTS GO BYE BYE OR IF NOT THEN PERHAPS 25 - 50% MORE EFFICIENT? WHICH EQUATES TO MORE $ FOR THE OWNERS. AND THAT GOES AS WELL FOR NUKE ENERGY SUPPLIERS.
I AM NOT SILENT - JUST BUSY WE ARE ABOUT 1 MONTH AWAY FROM COMMERCIALIZATION IF ALL GOES WELL.
T
P.S.
DEAR ALL, I HAVE POSTED ALL THIS INFORMATION HERE TO ENSURE THAT IT NEVER GETS LOST - THANKS THANE
We need to remember that Nuke power plants still use steam turbines and conventional electric generators.
The Nuke fuel is only used to heat the water for steam, so an increase in efficiency of the generator unit
would greatly benefit them as well.
I live in Sarnia, ON. which is a border town with the USA and lately I see a lot of wind generators shipping on the highways here.
The wind generators will benefit greatly from this technology too.
I see a good future for this unit.
Apologies for being so late to the party but is this device an over-unity device or PMM? I just discovered this thread only a few hours ago from reading about overunity projects/experiments.
Quote from: CobbleStone on September 11, 2008, 11:09:41 PM
Apologies for being so late to the party but is this device an over-unity device or PMM? I just discovered this thread only a few hours ago from reading about overunity projects/experiments.
I don't believe that it will be OU. As the DC motor spins it looses a lot of energy due to heat, there is just no way around that.
However, I believe that Thane's setup provides for at least 10% better efficiency vs the baseline DC motor (this is just a guess).
Also, looking at Thane's last post, it seems that he has much more information that he is willing to share at the moment, meaning that his idea has evolved into a serious business potential.
In order for such a design to have a serious commercial value, it has to be able to improve current designs by at least 10%. So that is why I am guessing 10% improvement or more (?).
Thane, you don't have to share you values, but did you actually manage to run "my" experiment with a battery?
Simple yes/no answer is fine with me...
QuoteI don't believe that it will be OU. As the DC motor spins it looses a lot of energy due to heat, there is just no way around that. However, I believe that Thane's setup provides for at least 10% better efficiency vs the baseline DC motor (this is just a guess).
UNLESS OF COURSE THE MAGNETIC COUPLING OF THE GENERATOR COIL TO THE MOTOR CAUSES THE MOTOR TO ACCELERATE (WHICH IT DOES), THEN AS THE MOTOR ACCELERATES THE GENERATOR PROVIDES INCREASING AMOUNTS OF BACK EMF INDUCED FLUX AND THE POWER REQUIRED BY THE MOTOR DECREASES ACCORDINGLY.
QuoteAlso, looking at Thane's last post, it seems that he has much more information that he is willing to share at the moment, meaning that his idea has evolved into a serious business potential.
In order for such a design to have a serious commercial value, it has to be able to improve current designs by at least 10%. So that is why I am guessing 10% improvement or more (?).
WAY MORE ...
THE COILS CAN BE ANY SIZE AND PRODUCE ANY OUTPUT POWER.
THE MOTOR POWER REQUIRED IS MINIMAL, 5 WATTS OR LESS DEPENDING ON THE PLATE SIZE THICKNESS ETC..
QuoteThane, you don't have to share you values, but did you actually manage to run "my" experiment with a battery? Simple yes/no answer is fine with me...
YES AND NO ...
YES I INTEND TO DO IT BUT NO I HAVE NOT HAD TIME YET.
I AM INSTALLING A NEW ROTOR THIS WEEKEND (I HOPE) SO PERHAPS BY MONDAY I WILL HAVE SOME VIDEO.
CHEERS
Thane
Thanks for the update...
These are challenging but fascinating times we live in...
Hi Thane,
Are there any "off the shelf" coils (or solenoids) you know of, that would work as your HV coil and show the "Heins effect"?
I am thinking specifically of the kind of coil found in brushless AC induction motors, like those used in kitchen range hood fans.
While a suitable coil, would make replication much easier, the real reason I ask, is that I er, (cough) hate winding coils by hand.
(Besides, I would much rather work out my "Issues" with a hacksaw.) ;)
P.S. also looking forward to any and all comments you make about your commercialization experiences.
Hi Thane,
I read a newspaper article that said you and Neil Young might be working on powering his old Lincoln with one of your motors? Any word on that so far? I'm big into the green movement and also a car buff, so I'm always interested in anything that helps improve mileage. I doubt the big Detroit car makers are very excited about overunity technology, but if you can get a private car manufacturer like Telsa Motors to produce free energy motors, the big car makers will have to follow eventually.
Quote from: cyclopz on September 14, 2008, 02:40:11 AM
Hi Thane,
I read a newspaper article that said you and Neil Young might be working on powering his old Lincoln with one of your motors? Any word on that so far? I'm big into the green movement and also a car buff, so I'm always interested in anything that helps improve mileage. I doubt the big Detroit car makers are very excited about overunity technology, but if you can get a private car manufacturer like Telsa Motors to produce free energy motors, the big car makers will have to follow eventually.
I thought Thane was working with Carl Shelby of the super car fame. ;D
http://www.shelbysupercars.com/news-071208.php
QuoteThe drive train under development will feature a revolutionary power source allowing for extended time between charging intervals with the possibility of several years between charging.
Quote
Hi Thane,
Are there any "off the shelf" coils (or solenoids) you know of, that would work as your HV coil and show the "Heins effect"? (Besides, I would much rather work out my "Issues" with a hacksaw.) ;)
YES OF COURSE YOU CAN USE MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS AS I_RON AND LARRYC HAVE ALREADY DONE. BUT YOU MAY PREFER TO USE AN ANGLE GRINDER.
Quote
P.S. also looking forward to any and all comments you make about your commercialization experiences.
I CAN'T GIVE ANY DETAILS (DUE TO SIGNED NDA'S) BUT I CAN TELL YOU WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT TO RETROFIT A GENERATOR FOR A WIND GENERATOR COMPANY AND ANOTHER POSSIBLE X PRIZE ENTRANT IS COMING FOR A DEMO THIS WEEK.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote
Hi Thane,
I read a newspaper article that said you and Neil Young might be working on powering his old Lincoln with one of your motors?
WE MAY BE TOO EARLY STAGE FOR NEIL YOUNG BUT AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO IMPRESS THE OTHER X PRIZE ENTRANT WHO ALSO MONITORS THIS THREAD.
Thane
Quote from: hydrocontrol on September 14, 2008, 07:17:03 AM
I thought Thane was working with Carl Shelby of the super car fame. ;D
http://www.shelbysupercars.com/news-071208.php
I WISH THEY WERE 8) AND IF SO THEY "SEVERAL YEARS BETWEEN CHARGING" WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED WITH "NEVER REQUIRING EXTERNAL RECHARGING"
DUE TO THE FACT THAT OUR GENERATOR
DRIVES THE MOTOR. T
QuoteThe drive train under development will feature a revolutionary power source allowing for extended time between charging intervals with the possibility of several years between charging.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 14, 2008, 09:03:53 AM
I WISH THEY WERE 8) AND IF SO THEY "SEVERAL YEARS BETWEEN CHARGING" WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED WITH "NEVER REQUIRING EXTERNAL RECHARGING"
DUE TO THE FACT THAT OUR GENERATOR DRIVES THE MOTOR. T
most likely what was meant was, "several years between CHANGING - the government"
Now if this was a hot air machine I would have much more confidence that it would work, considering
your location.... LOL
Ron, basking in the beautiful west coast weather
PS: is it possible the PM has been following your work and is running scared enough to call
an election?
QuoteI WISH THEY WERE AND IF SO THEY "SEVERAL YEARS BETWEEN CHARGING" WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED WITH "NEVER REQUIRING EXTERNAL RECHARGING"
DUE TO THE FACT THAT OUR GENERATOR DRIVES THE MOTOR. T
Here's hoping that your generator, not only drives the motor, but the entire economy as well !
@ iRon: Are you still doing anything with microwave oven transformer coils, or are you now leaning towards hand wound coils.
Quote from: derricka on September 16, 2008, 04:56:00 PM
@ iRon: Are you still doing anything with microwave oven transformer coils, or are you now leaning towards hand wound coils.
derrika,
I hesitate to hand wind a 'high voltage' coil. (lazy) Two other projects require large coils and so I bit the bullet and have been building a coil winder with a stepper motor traverse.
Just doing up a video now, so in a couple of days will have it up on youtube... I will post the
link here. My first stepper motor project, so has taken some study and head scratching.
Thanks for the interest,
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on September 16, 2008, 06:48:34 PM
derrika,
Just doing up a video now, so in a couple of days will have it up on youtube... I will post the
link here. My first stepper motor project, so has taken some study and head scratching.
Thanks for the interest,
Ron
FOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T ALREADY WITNESSED (THE TALENTED) I_RON IN ACTION - HERE HE IS LEARNING THE ROPES ON HIS LAST MOTORIZED DEVICE - WITH HELP AND SYMPATHY FROM HOPTOAD. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-HBtFwPIW4
ENJOY!
THIS LAUGH HAS BEEN BROUGH TO YOU BY
"THE ANNOYING THANE"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfjG1e_VbJk&feature=related
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 16, 2008, 08:16:02 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T ALREADY WITNESSED (THE TALENTED) I_RON IN ACTION - HERE HE IS LEARNING THE ROPES ON HIS LAST MOTORIZED DEVICE - WITH HELP AND SYMPATHY FROM HOPTOAD. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-HBtFwPIW4
LOL ...... KneeDeep
QuoteFOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T ALREADY WITNESSED (THE TALENTED) I_RON IN ACTION
Are you sure that's I_Ron? I could have sworn someone had hacked into my webcam... maybe I've gone inThane. :) (sorry, couldn't resist!)
Quote from: derricka on September 16, 2008, 09:31:43 PM
Are you sure that's I_Ron? I could have sworn someone had hacked into my webcam... maybe I've gone inThane. :) (sorry, couldn't resist!)
SORRY THERE DERRICKA YOU ARE CONFUSED - THAT'S YOU IN THE PYJAMAS - YOU FORGOT TO TURN OFF YOUR VIDEO CAMERA AFTER PARIS LEFT.
T
LOL "I (we) will always have Paris!" (In my best Humphrey Bogart voice....)
Hi Thane, have you considered testing with high torque PM DC brushless motors like those used by electric RC airplane hobbyists.
They are usually very efficient compared with brushed motors. Also, easy to get speed controllers for these, again high efficiency.
( electric RC airplane hobbyists are very choosy when it comes to motors, as they only have limited weight allowance for batteries).
AXI makes amazingly good motors.
http://www.hobby-lobby.com/brushless_axi.htm
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 16, 2008, 08:16:02 PM
FOR ANYONE WHO HASN'T ALREADY WITNESSED (THE TALENTED) I_RON IN ACTION - HERE HE IS LEARNING THE ROPES ON HIS LAST MOTORIZED DEVICE - WITH HELP AND SYMPATHY FROM HOPTOAD. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-HBtFwPIW4
ENJOY!
THIS LAUGH HAS BEEN BROUGH TO YOU BY "THE ANNOYING THANE"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfjG1e_VbJk&feature=related
CHEERS
Thane
(//)
Thane...
Not to be a pest, but did you have a chance to run the experiment with a fixed power source (the battery or a computer UPS)?
:P
Quote from: adlep on September 17, 2008, 11:56:08 PM
Thane...
Not to be a pest, but did you have a chance to run the experiment with a fixed power source (the battery or a computer UPS)?
:Pd
NOT EXACTLY BUT I DO HAVE SOME NEW TEST DATA WHICH IS POSTED HERE AT:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7QVL3H90.
THESE ARE TEST RESULTS PERFORMED TODAY FOR A CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMPANY XXX XXX XXX WHO CAME TO THE LAB FOR A DEMO AND WHO ALSO "QUIETLY" VIEW THIS FORUM.
WE ARE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A COMERCIALIZATION/LICENCING AGREEMENT WITH A WIND TURBINE COMPANY SO MY "PLAYING AROUND" TIME IS NOW LIMITED AND MUCH OF WHAT WE ARE NOW DOING IS semi-SECRET - UNLESS OF COURSE OUR CUSTOMERS WANT TO PUBLICLY DISCLOSE WHAT WE ARE DOIN'G - BUT I DOUBT THEY WILL. (YOU GUYS ALL HAVE THE INFO HERE ANYWAY) ;)
I WAS ALSO INSTRUCTED BY POSSIBLE INVESTORS (AFTER VIEWING OUR LIVE DEMOS) TO
PULL MY VIDEOS OFF YOUTUBE AND PUBLICLY (LIE) AND SAY I WAS TRICKING YOU ALL AND IT IS ALL FAKE - SO FOR ANYONE EXCEPT, I_RON, LARRYC, VINCE AND PERHAPS A22 - I AM A LIAR BY TELLING YOU IT IS ALL A LIE..
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 18, 2008, 12:43:27 AM
NOT EXACTLY BUT I DO HAVE SOME NEW TEST DATA WHICH IS POSTED HERE AT:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7QVL3H90.
THESE ARE TEST RESULTS PERFORMED TODAY FOR A CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMPANY XXX XXX XXX WHO CAME TO THE LAB FOR A DEMO AND WHO ALSO "QUIETLY" VIEW THIS FORUM.
WE ARE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A COMERCIALIZATION/LICENCING AGREEMENT WITH A WIND TURBINE COMPANY SO MY "PLAYING AROUND" TIME IS NOW LIMITED AND MUCH OF WHAT WE ARE NOW DOING IS semi-SECRET - UNLESS OF COURSE OUR CUSTOMERS WANT TO PUBLICLY DISCLOSE WHAT WE ARE DOIN'G - BUT I DOUBT THEY WILL. (YOU GUYS ALL HAVE THE INFO HERE ANYWAY) ;)
I WAS ALSO INSTRUCTED BY POSSIBLE INVESTORS (AFTER VIEWING OUR LIVE DEMOS) TO
PULL MY VIDEOS OFF YOUTUBE AND PUBLICLY (LIE) AND SAY I WAS TRICKING YOU ALL AND IT IS ALL FAKE - SO FOR ANYONE EXCEPT, I_RON, LARRYC, VINCE AND PERHAPS A22 - I AM A LIAR BY TELLING YOU IT IS ALL A LIE..
CHEERS
Thane
Good 4 you Thane...
So basically "our" time is over and at the current stage you are moving on with plans to start implementing your technology on a mass scale...
I am very happy for you.
I can also see why your "Lenz Law eliminating setup" is a holly grail for all wind turbine designs - where they can capture ALL the available power....Very simple, logical application.
I am still hoping for "my" experiment one day - as I wanna be famous dammit!
Again - there is a lot of value in it as it is simple to understand for the "business people" who usually do not care about Lenz Law and Electrical Engineering. You could just point at the battery and say: Here is your Chevy Volt - without my setup it's running time is 20 minutes and with my setup engaged, its running time is ....(insert a number here)...
And then you could just end the presentation...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 18, 2008, 12:43:27 AM
NOT EXACTLY BUT I DO HAVE SOME NEW TEST DATA WHICH IS POSTED HERE AT:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7QVL3H90.
CHEERS
Thane
Any chance of posting that data here ? KneeDeep ;)
Quote from: adlep on September 18, 2008, 01:21:50 AM
I am still hoping for "my" experiment one day - as I wanna be famous dammit!
Good luck, and don't worry, there's still a lot of room for new ideas from would be "famous" new kids on the block. ;) :D
Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: adlep on September 18, 2008, 01:21:50 AM
I am still hoping for "my" experiment one day - as I wanna be famous dammit!
Again - there is a lot of value in it as it is simple to understand for the "business people" who usually do not care about Lenz Law and Electrical Engineering. You could just point at the battery and say: Here is your Chevy Volt - without my setup it's running time is 20 minutes and with my setup engaged, its running time is ....(insert a number here)...
And then you could just end the presentation...
OK - LET'S USE THE NUMBERS FROM OUR CALIFORNIA GENERATOR CO. EXECUTIVE DEMO:
THE RUNNING TIME FOR THE CHEVY VOLT IS 20 MINUTES.
NOW INCREASE THE RUNNING TIME BY 43%.
RUNNING TIME IS NOW 26.6 MINUTES.
NOW INCREASE THE GENERATOR OUTPUT BY 300% WHILE
SIMULTANEOUSLY DECREASING THE MOTOR POWER BY 43%.
IF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS ARE DESIGNED TO NEGATE ALL THE GENERATOR LENZ EFFECT WHICH
WE HAVE PROVEN CAN NOW BE DONE VERY EASILY THE RUNNING TIME IS QUITE SIMPLY INFINITE.
NO LIE!
Thane
Hi Thane,
Congrats, please let us know when a production wind turbine is available with your Lenz eliminating effect. I think in Louisiana we could supply the whole country with power during hurricane season.
I know that you never did this to be famous, mainly just to help save the planet from ourselves. You are certainly one of the most tenacious, determined, hardworking individuals on the planet and truly deserve any rewards you receive.
Still looking forward to a Super Thane Toroid powering my house. Nice low humming noise with no maintenance ever. That comment was brought on because today I did my annual after hurricane season (hopefully) spark plug and oil change for our generator after Ike and Gustav usage.
Regards, Larry
http://www.iqharmony.com
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 14, 2008, 08:28:54 AM
YES OF COURSE YOU CAN USE MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS AS I_RON AND LARRYC HAVE ALREADY DONE. BUT YOU MAY PREFER TO USE AN ANGLE GRINDER.
CHEERS
Thane
How many microwave transformers do you suggest ?
Any pointers to pictures of I_ron and LarryC setup ?
Thanks.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 18, 2008, 12:43:27 AM
snip
I WAS ALSO INSTRUCTED BY POSSIBLE INVESTORS (AFTER VIEWING OUR LIVE DEMOS) TO
PULL MY VIDEOS OFF YOUTUBE AND PUBLICLY (LIE) AND SAY I WAS TRICKING YOU ALL AND IT IS ALL FAKE - SO FOR ANYONE EXCEPT, I_RON, LARRYC, VINCE AND PERHAPS A22 - I AM A LIAR BY TELLING YOU IT IS ALL A LIE..
CHEERS
Thane
Butt Thane, there is no need to do that as we ALL know that this won't work. PB proved beyond a shadow of doubt that it was all measurement error and H brake effect! So no need to tell fibs and
make up MORE stories just to cover up STORIES!!!
Seriously Sir it has been a Slice! Great to work with a man of honor and humor. I will miss your
cranky pants snide remarks... and your sharing your research with us, it has been noted!!!
I did promise a vid for you, so if you will promise not to laugh (or throw up) here tiz...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdH1Agz8g
Take Care Guy
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on September 19, 2008, 07:34:38 PM
Butt Thane, there is no need to do that as we ALL know that this won't work. PB proved beyond a shadow of doubt that it was all measurement error and H brake effect! So no need to tell fibs and
make up MORE stories just to cover up STORIES!!!
Seriously Sir it has been a Slice! Great to work with a man of honor and humor. I will miss your
cranky pants snide remarks... and your sharing your research with us, it has been noted!!!
I did promise a vid for you, so if you will promise not to laugh (or throw up) here tiz...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdH1Agz8g
Take Care Guy
Ron
Ron,
Outstanding, should we call you Sir I_Wind from now on ;D
Regards, Larry
Hi Thane:
I am glad to hear investors are interested in your device. But I wanted to say I am really puzzled at what you said about them.
I can't see any advantage to their request to have you remove the videos and state publicly that the device doesn't work.
This sounds like a possible trick, once you state the device doesn't work, it could make in very difficult for you to sell the device to others.
You have a device that can make any company very wealthy, and you don't need to bow to any ones demands.
YOU have what they want not the other way around.
If you tell them to hit the road I'm sure you will have plenty of other companies knocking on your door.
Companies that won't make demands of you, before they are willing to invest in your idea.
If I had the money to invest in your device I wouldn't place any demands on you, in fact the more videos you post and the more
you tell people it works the better for my business and the more credible it becomes.
Something really smells fishy about these folks.
I don't want to see you end up like many others, whose ideas have been suppressed.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on September 19, 2008, 11:45:15 AM
How many microwave transformers do you suggest ?
Any pointers to pictures of I_ron and LarryC setup ?
Thanks.
I WOULD START WITH 2 AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE MAGNETICALLY COUPLED SUCH THAT 1 SIDE FACES THE NORTH POLE ON YOUR ROTOR AND ONE FACES THE SOUTH POLE.
I USE SMALL MICROWAVES IN FACT I JUST PICKED UP 3 AT THE SALVATION ARMY THRIFT STORE FOR $16. I AM USING THEM TO BUILD A UNIT FOR OUR CALIFORNIA CUSTOMER.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on September 19, 2008, 07:34:38 PM
Butt Thane, there is no need to do that as we ALL know that this won't work. PB proved beyond a shadow of doubt that it was all measurement error and H brake effect! So no need to tell fibs and
make up MORE stories just to cover up STORIES!!!
Seriously Sir it has been a Slice! Great to work with a man of honor and humor. I will miss your
cranky pants snide remarks... and your sharing your research with us, it has been noted!!!
I did promise a vid for you, so if you will promise not to laugh (or throw up) here tiz...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdH1Agz8g
Take Care Guy
Ron
DEAR SIR I_WIND
WOW AND WOW!!! 8)
HOW MUCH WOULD YOU SELL THEM FOR BECAUSE I MAY BE ABLE TO INTRODUCE YOU TO A COUPLE OF CUSTOMERS?
CHEERS
Thane
PS
QuoteSeriously Sir it has been a Slice! Great to work with a man of honor and humor. I will miss your
cranky pants snide remarks... and your sharing your research with us, it has been noted!!!
ARE YOU COMING TO MY FUNERAL THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET ???
Quote from: AbbaRue on September 20, 2008, 12:34:29 AM
Hi Thane:
I am glad to hear investors are interested in your device. But I wanted to say I am really puzzled at what you said about them. I can't see any advantage to their request to have you remove the videos and state publicly that the device doesn't work. This sounds like a possible trick, once you state the device doesn't work, it could make in very difficult for you to sell the device to others.
You have a device that can make any company very wealthy, and you don't need to bow to any ones demands.
YOU have what they want not the other way around.
If you tell them to hit the road I'm sure you will have plenty of other companies knocking on your door.
Companies that won't make demands of you, before they are willing to invest in your idea.
If I had the money to invest in your device I wouldn't place any demands on you, in fact the more videos you post and the more you tell people it works the better for my business and the more credible it becomes. Something really smells fishy about these folks. I don't want to see you end up like many others, whose ideas have been suppressed.
I PUBLISHED THE INFORMATION HERE (AND ON OUR OTTAWA U WEBPAGE) TO MAKE SURE IT COULD NEVER BE HIDDEN OR BOUGHT OUT AND SHELVED.
ALSO I HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO ESTABLISH CREDIBILITY IN AN OFTEN CREDIBILITY-LESS AREA WHERE SINCERE INVESTORS ARE OFTEN DUPED BY SLEEZY INENTOR SALES PITCHES.
YOU NEED NOT WORRY - THE INVESTORS THAT WILL BE ATTRACTED TO ME/US AND WHO WILL COMMIT TO THIS TECHNOLOGY WILL
NOT BE THE "HIDDEN AGENDA" TYPES BECAUSE MY OPENNESS WILL MAKE ME TOO MUCH OF A RISK.
I DID THIS DELIBERATELY TO ATTRACT INVESTORS WITH HEARTS WHO ARE CONSCIOUS ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THAT
MONEY CANNOT BE EATEN.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 20, 2008, 09:50:51 AM
snip
CHEERS
Thane
PS
ARE YOU COMING TO MY FUNERAL THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET ???
NOPE, but let me know when Harpoor has one and I'll come....LOL, ...the way you spoke it sounded
like your lips were sealed and you weren't going to talk to us any more... but I shoulda known....
if your lips were sealed, how would you drink beer?
Ron, the
whiner...winer... winner... got it right!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 20, 2008, 09:50:51 AM
DEAR SIR I_WIND
snip
HOW MUCH WOULD YOU SELL THEM FOR BECAUSE I MAY BE ABLE TO INTRODUCE YOU TO A COUPLE OF CUSTOMERS?
CHEERS
Thane
Thanks for the compliments! But to be honest with you it is sort of a one man machine... a bit fiddly
and requires patience in setting up. I just put it out as an idea piece. Now it needs somebody a
little more smarter than I am to take this to the next level... hello micro processor?
Anyway the example is there... if I can do it so can you...
The problem areas are the stops and gaining or losing of sync... to fix the first one I am making
micrometer adjustable stops for it this day. To fix the sync problem I need to put a small handwheel
on the stepper motor because the main motor can be stopped on a dime and the stepper adjusted
manually to restore it's correct position.
Ron
Speaking of funerals and bleeding hearts...
For those people opening up microwave ovens, don't trust the bleeder resistor! (Sometimes they burn out)
First thing upon opening up microwave, use the proper HV discharge technique to drain (short) the high voltage capacitor.
This capacitor can carry 3000 or more volts, and can be LETHAL, even with the oven turned off and unplugged.
I would prefer not to read about the funeral of a fellow forum member, either online, or on paper made from the last tree....
Thane, you should try to get your motor on the market ASAP so they can't cover it up!! I would buy one and I'm sure everyone in the world would want one too.
Hello Ron,
you wrote about PB delivering proof of a H break-effect.
Can you please give me a link to this work of PB ?
I can not find any hint here on this H Break effect.
Regards
Kator
PS : Does anynone know who this Mr. Dixon is who wrote this eddy-current losses in transformer ? Is he an engineer at TI ?
Quote from: Kator01 on September 21, 2008, 04:58:50 PM
Hello Ron,
you wrote about PB delivering proof of a H break-effect.
Can you please give me a link to this work of PB ?
I can not find any hint here on this H Break effect.
Regards
Kator
snip
Kator,
That was written as a spoof. In the early pages of this list are some of Polar Breeze's posts.
He/she would take the opposite point of view on many of Thane's posts and drive poor Thane to
distraction. So I was being not nice and pouring salt in the wound. Thane and I are never serious...
except when we have a serious point to make and even then you should look for the 'tongue in cheek'.
However the effect referred to as the "Hysteresis Brake effect" can be seen discussed in the first dozen pages, or more, of this list. Actually many other people wrote on this subject, not only PB.
Regards
Ron
Hi Ron,
thank you very much for making things clear. I really got the wrong impression not knowing about this history because I was concentrating on the technical reports.
Hope a few of you will proceed with this concept.
Regards
Kator
Hello there
We are a group of students from Queen's University Engineering Physics.
We chose to study Hanes' generator for a project in a lab course, and help in the understanding of the effect.
We are actually aiming to build a similar set up and get data out of it.
Since little can be found about specific specs of the generator, we were wondering if people in the forum(or Thane himself)
would be able to answer some questions to make our design as close as possible:
* Is it absolutely imperative that the wheel holding the magnets be made of steel? has anyone thought of using aluminum?
* For the coils, does anyone know the ideal number of turns? Should the core be ferromagnetic or high ur??
Thanks for your help
-Pedro A. Molina
@Thane,
Is this your fine tech moving us into the future? ;)
QuoteNow here’s the kicker â€" the press statement reads: “The drive train under development will feature a revolutionary power source allowing for extended time between charging intervals with the possibility of several years between charging.â€
Engineering details are yet undisclosed but SSC expects to roll out its first prototype in February 2009. As for the revolutionary drive train, well, we have no idea what is planned and …
http://www.gizmag.com/worlds-fastest-production-car-to-go-electric--with-several-years-between-charging/10070/ (http://www.gizmag.com/worlds-fastest-production-car-to-go-electric--with-several-years-between-charging/10070/)
tak
( an i_ron neighbour, but he doesn't know it )
Quote from: pdr2_esmolbra on September 25, 2008, 08:28:52 AM
Hello there
We are a group of students from Queen's University Engineering Physics.
We chose to study Hanes' generator for a project in a lab course, and help in the understanding of the effect.
We are actually aiming to build a similar set up and get data out of it.
Since little can be found about specific specs of the generator, we were wondering if people in the forum(or Thane himself)
would be able to answer some questions to make our design as close as possible:
* Is it absolutely imperative that the wheel holding the magnets be made of steel? has anyone thought of using aluminum?
* For the coils, does anyone know the ideal number of turns? Should the core be ferromagnetic or high ur??
Thanks for your help
-Pedro A. Molina
HELLO PEDRO,
NO THE PERMANENT MAGNET ROTOR CAN BE MADE OF A NON FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL - WE HAVE ONE MADE OF PLEXI-GLASS.
THE IDEAL NUMBER OF TURNS IS DEPENDANT UPON THE CORE MATERIAL, CORE SIZE, MAGNET STRENGTH, WIRE GAUGE, TURN DENSITY, ROTOR FREQUENCY, # OF ROTOR POLES ETC.
MY SUGGESTION TO YOUR GROUP - IS FOR YOU ALL TO JUMP IN A CAR AND TAKE A DRIVE UP TO MY LAB AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY ANY TIME. THIS IS THE QUICKEST ROUTE TO UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS.
I'LL GIVE YOU A UNIT TO TAKE BACK WITH YOU ALSO...
BUT THERE IS ONE
CAVEAT - PLEASE TRY TO SEE IF DR. BAKHASHI OF QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY WILL COME WITH YOU?
I GAVE HIM A DEMO ABOUT 6 YEARS AGO IN OTTAWA AND HE SAID THIS,
"IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO INCREASE TODAY'S GENERATOR'S
TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE BY ONLY 2% - THAT IS TOO MUCH."
DR. BAKHASHI OF QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY
OUR RECENT TEST DATA SHOWS A
300% INCREASE IN GENERATOR OUTPUT WITH A
43% DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT.
I HAVE POSTED THE DATA HERE: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HW3GT8HI
CHEERS
Thane
For anyone needing a "shopping list", this is what I have so far. Not sure if Thane has an "official" list, but if anyone has a moment to
fill in any gaps where I have question marks, it would be appreciated. Prices are in Canadian dollars (.94 US)
Lee Valley Tools: http://www.leevalley.com/
10" x 3/4" 6-Spoke Wheel, ea.
Part # 03K65.10
$25.50
(Modified by welding metal disks or cups (source? size?) for magnet mounting using (type?) welding rods.)
Lee Valley Tools: http://www.leevalley.com
1"X1/8" Magnet
Part # 99K32.13
$11.90 (5Pack) ($8.90 for 3 or more packs)
Home Depot http://www.homedepot.ca
Ryobi 6 In. Bench Grinder Model: BGH616
Internet/Cat #: 932134
Part #: Home Depot Store SKU #: 17094
$49.95
Surplus:
2 Microwave oven transformers
(Brand? Pri 125V Sec 4000V ?)
(Modified by removing outer cores using angle grinder, (coolant?) leaving coil with inner core (cut flush to coil?)
Quote from: derricka on October 01, 2008, 06:09:10 PM
For anyone needing a "shopping list", this is what I have so far. Not sure if Thane has an "official" list, but if anyone has a moment to
fill in any gaps snip
Surplus:
2 Microwave oven transformers
(Brand? Pri 125V Sec 4000V ?)
(Modified by removing outer cores using angle grinder, (coolant?) leaving coil with inner core (cut flush to coil?)
What I have found expedient when salvaging MOT's is to clamp a piece of angle iron just at the weld
to guide the blade. This makes a neater cut and even allows one to rewind the core for different projects, not needed in this case. What I use is a "Walther, ZIPCUT" blade, 115 x 1.2 x 22mm
Be sure to wear eye protection and hearing protection.
Then a couple of raps with a cold chisel in the newly cut grooves and the bottom comes off. You can
then remove the coils if you wish before cutting the outside legs down.
Probably size is the best criteria, the smaller ovens being the best choice. Note that a pry bar will
break the primary loose, first one side, then the other and then work it up and off. Then remove the
two shunts, then with the mot upside down drive the secondary off, usually the hardest to do if you
want to save it...
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on October 01, 2008, 08:46:42 PM
Then a couple of raps with a cold chisel in the newly cut grooves and the bottom comes off. You can
then remove the coils if you wish before cutting the outside legs down.
i_ron, do you cut through all the way across to the beige tape that shows in the photo, or do you only need cut past the weld?
Do you use a wet cloth, or anything, to keep the cutting heat from burning the windings?
Quote from: derricka on October 01, 2008, 06:09:10 PM
For anyone needing a "shopping list", this is what I have so far. Not sure if Thane has an "official" list, but if anyone has a moment to
fill in any gaps where I have question marks, it would be appreciated. Prices are in Canadian dollars (.94 US)
Lee Valley Tools: http://www.leevalley.com/
10" x 3/4" 6-Spoke Wheel, ea.
Part # 03K65.10
$25.50
(Modified by welding metal disks or cups (source? size?) for magnet mounting using (type?) welding rods.)
Lee Valley Tools: http://www.leevalley.com
1"X1/8" Magnet
Part # 99K32.13
$11.90 (5Pack) ($8.90 for 3 or more packs)
Home Depot http://www.homedepot.ca
Ryobi 6 In. Bench Grinder Model: BGH616
Internet/Cat #: 932134
Part #: Home Depot Store SKU #: 17094
$49.95
Surplus:
2 Microwave oven transformers
(Brand? Pri 125V Sec 4000V ?)
(Modified by removing outer cores using angle grinder, (coolant?) leaving coil with inner core (cut flush to coil?)
DON'T FORGET YOUR
MAGNET CUP HOLDERS DERRIKA, AND TRY NOT TO WELD OVER THE HOLE IN THE BACK SO YOU CAN REMOVE MAGNETS IF NEEDED.
I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST MAKING 1 - 6 POLE ROTOR AND 1 - 18 POLE ROTOR BECAUSE FREQUENCY IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT IN OPERATION.
FOR EXAMPLE FOR WITH LARRYC - HIS HIGH VOLTAGE COILS DECELERATE THE PRIME MOVER LIKE ANY CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR BELOW ABOUT 700 RPM AND CAUSE ACCELERATION ABOVE IT.
AND DON'T KILL YOURSELF DISCONNECTING THOSE TRANSFORMERS
AND
NEVER STAND IN THE TRAJECTORY PATH OF THE ROTOR MAGNETS DURING OPERATION - RIGHT LARRY? :D .
WITH THE 18 POLE ROTOR WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE ACCELERATION IN AROUND THE 200 RPM RANGE.
GOOD LUCK! ;)
Thane
PS DO YOU KNOW A MR. WHITE (Ph.D. STUDENT) FROM QUEEN'S?
Quote from: derricka on October 02, 2008, 02:15:40 AM
i_ron, do you cut through all the way across to the beige tape that shows in the photo, or do you only need cut past the weld?
Do you use a wet cloth, or anything, to keep the cutting heat from burning the windings?
In this example I was suggesting to disassemble the MOT by just grinding a little ditch through the weld about 3/32 of an inch deep... on both sides. You can see the joint line across the end of the core? this top piece will lift off after the above operation.
However, as we are not going to reuse the transformer in its present configuration one could cut the legs off at the other end. In which case heat could be a problem. I disassemble as described, then cut the legs off in a power bandsaw. I clamp a sacrificial piece of metal over the cut then the laminations don't come adrift.
What ever works for you! Keeping in mind that Thane has possibly moved on to the bi core coil...
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on October 02, 2008, 01:25:29 PM
What ever works for you! Keeping in mind that Thane has possibly moved on to the bi core coil...
Ron
I_RON, DON'T FORGET TO EXPLAIN YOUR
"HOT AIR" DENSITY THEORIES TO SIR DERRICKA. WHICH WILL HELP THEM IN THIS PROJECT ;)
T
NEVER STAND IN THE TRAJECTORY PATH OF THE ROTOR MAGNETS DURING OPERATION - RIGHT LARRY? :D .
You must be talking about that unforcasted Neo Meteorite storm that I created and Luc also did a great exploding claymore Neo box. Watch out for the ATF!
DON'T FORGET YOUR MAGNET CUP HOLDERS DERRIKA, AND TRY NOT TO WELD OVER THE HOLE IN THE BACK SO YOU CAN REMOVE MAGNETS IF NEEDED.
Another tip, the magnets are extremely hard to remove from the cups even with the hole in back. Lee V. recommends that a slit is cut in the side (seen a few of these slits in Thanes older pic's) to help pry the magnet out without breaking. I cut a piece of thin transformer laminate steel to fit the bottom of the cup and placed the magnet on top. With that it is easy to push them out thru the back hole with a rod.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 02, 2008, 03:39:25 PM
I_RON, DON'T FORGET TO EXPLAIN YOUR "HOT AIR" DENSITY THEORIES TO SIR DERRICKA. WHICH WILL HELP THEM IN THIS PROJECT ;)
T
Right!, it helps to understand the work if know that the capital of Canada is Ottawa, 'sometimes' known as, "the place of hot air". Proof of this is in T-mon's pictures... always many C clamps to hold things down, as things tend to float in all that hot air. So if you live in the more remote polar regions of the country you only need half as many clamps, its a breeze... out of country, say Oz for instance, it is more of a catch 22 situation, sort of an aether or situation requiring one to look through
the Lenz from a different perspective....
I hope this helps
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on October 02, 2008, 06:24:44 PM
Right!, it helps to understand the work if know that the capital of Canada is Ottawa, 'sometimes' known as, "the place of hot air". Proof of this is in T-mon's pictures... always many C clamps to hold things down, as things tend to float in all that hot air. So if you live in the more remote polar regions of the country you only need half as many clamps, its a breeze... out of country, say Oz for instance, it is more of a catch 22 situation, sort of an aether or situation requiring one to look through
the Lenz from a different perspective....
I hope this helps
Ron
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH... ???
I MEANT YOUR
"BEER STAYS COLDER IN THE BOTTOM OF THE FRIDGE THEORY" DUDE! (and I'm not going anywhere near Larry's sexist slit comments)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 02, 2008, 06:42:37 PM
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH... ???
I MEANT YOUR "BEER STAYS COLDER IN THE BOTTOM OF THE FRIDGE THEORY" DUDE!
T
Oh, that one...yes I do think its nice, when you get to the bottom of a theory, to see it backed up with substantial evidence, butt it is not cool to drink too much beer... wine is much better for you!
R
Quote from: i_ron on October 02, 2008, 06:57:11 PM
Oh, that one...yes I do think its nice, when you get to the bottom of a theory, to see it backed up with substantial evidence, butt it is not cool to drink too much beer... wine is much better for you!
R
Nice pair of high potential coils! And every well-stacked lab fridge gotta have whipped cream... definitely helps with gettin them coils warmed up! ;D ::)
-Mark
Quote from: i_ron on October 01, 2008, 08:46:42 PM
snip
Probably size is the best criteria, the smaller ovens being the best choice. Note that a pry bar will
break the primary loose, first one side, then the other and then work it up and off. Then remove the
two shunts, then with the mot upside down drive the secondary off, usually the hardest to do if you
want to save it...
Ron
A sad word of caution... the newer ovens DON"T have transformers in them anymore.
Grab them ol' ovens before they are extinct!!!
Sort of a switching (flyback?) type power supply in the newer MO's as see below, (in comparison with a regular MOT transformer)
If the oven is really light... put it back on the curb...lol
(//)
Very interesting!
I wonder how those new ovens can put out 1000 watts of microwaves without the big transformer in them.
This may be worth studying further.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 02, 2008, 06:42:37 PM
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH... ???
I MEANT YOUR "BEER STAYS COLDER IN THE BOTTOM OF THE FRIDGE THEORY" DUDE! (and I'm not going anywhere near Larry's sexist slit comments)
T
One thing that I have noted in your many setups of the unaware, is that you must be a very experienced Canadian Trapper. I'm sure you know the following similar Beaver trap.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 04, 2008, 12:56:30 AM
One thing that I have noted in your many setups of the unaware, is that you must be a very experienced Canadian Trapper. I'm sure you know the following similar Beaver trap.
Regards, Larry
The unwary Larry and Ron at the T-mon's beaver trap... (again)
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on October 03, 2008, 09:04:43 PM
A sad word of caution... the newer ovens DON"T have transformers in them anymore.
Grab them ol' ovens before they are extinct!!!
Sort of a switching (flyback?) type power supply in the newer MO's as see below, (in comparison with a regular MOT transformer)
If the oven is really light... put it back on the curb...lol
I ordered four from Ebay since I do not have time to drive around town checking out Microwaves on the curb. The local Goodwill store does not accept Microwaves anymore.. At least from Ebay you get a picture of what you are getting. I ordered ones that looked like the ones i_iron was showing without having a clue about the power ratings. Once I get them and grind off the weld what is the next step ?
Thanks for the pictures i_iron. Keep them coming. I am more of a picture guy. I also like Thanes beer fridge picture.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on October 06, 2008, 09:29:45 AM
I ordered four from Ebay since I do not have time to drive around town checking out Microwaves on the curb. The local Goodwill store does not accept Microwaves anymore.. At least from Ebay you get a picture of what you are getting. I ordered ones that looked like the ones i_iron was showing without having a clue about the power ratings. Once I get them and grind off the weld what is the next step ?
Thanks for the pictures i_iron. Keep them coming. I am more of a picture guy. I also like Thanes beer fridge picture.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU FOCUS MORE SO ON THE
INDUCTANCE OF THE COILS RATHER THAN THE POWER RATING (SEE BELOW)... YOU ARE LOOKING TO CREATE A SELF RESONANCE EFFECT IN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL. ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Electrical resonanceFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Electrical resonance occurs in an electric circuit at a particular resonance frequency when the impedance between the input and output of the circuit is at a minimum (or when the transfer function is at a maximum). Often this happens when the impedance between the input and output of the circuit is zero and when the transfer function equals one.
Resonance with capacitors and inductorsResonance of a circuit involving capacitors and inductors occurs because the collapsing magnetic field of the inductor generates an electric current in its windings that charges the capacitor, and then the discharging capacitor provides an electric current that builds the magnetic field in the inductor, and the process is repeated continually. An analogy is a mechanical pendulum. In some cases, resonance occurs when the inductive reactance and the capacitive reactance of the circuit are of equal magnitude, causing electrical energy to oscillate between the magnetic field of the inductor and the electric field of the capacitor.
At resonance, the series impedance of the two elements is at a minimum and the parallel impedance is at maximum. Resonance is used for tuning and filtering, because it occurs at a particular frequency for given values of inductance and capacitance. It can be detrimental to the operation of communications circuits by causing unwanted sustained and transient oscillations that may cause noise, signal distortion, and damage to circuit elements.
Parallel resonant or near-to-resonance circuits can be used to prevent the waste of electrical energy, which would otherwise occur while the inductor built its field or the capacitor charged and discharged. As an example, asynchronous motors waste inductive current while synchronous ones waste capacitive current. The use of the two types in parallel makes the inductor feed the capacitor, and vice versa, maintaining the same resonant current in the circuit, and converting all the current into useful work.
Since the inductive reactance and the capacitive reactance are of equal magnitude, ωL = 1/ωC, so:
MORE... AT: http://www.electronics-tutorials.com/basics/inductance.htm
Self Resonant Frequency of an Inductance
All coils also exhibit a degree of self-capacitance caused by minute capacitances building up around and between adjacent windings.
Depending upon the application this may be of considerable concern. This self-capacitance combined with the natural inductance will form a resonant circuit (self-resonant frequency) limiting the useful upper frequency of the coil. There are special winding techniques to to use on occassion to minimise this self capacitance.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 06, 2008, 07:33:54 PM
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU FOCUS MORE SO ON THE INDUCTANCE OF THE COILS RATHER THAN THE POWER RATING (SEE BELOW)... YOU ARE LOOKING TO CREATE A SELF RESONANCE EFFECT IN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL. ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Fascinating, direct question... were you tuning the HV coil with a capacitor at any time?
How broad is the tuning window? Is that why you recommended the rotor with many magnets?
Does the HV coil in resonance then re radiate a flux field that the HC coil sees?
I realize you under non disclose so a highly fictitious answer will be taken as confirmation...
Take Care,
Ron, (in the rain) still, its better than snow, lol
quote]Fascinating, direct question... were you tuning the HV coil with a capacitor at any time?[/quote]
NO THE HV COIL HAS ITS OWN SELF CAPACITANCE AND WHEN THE ROTOR SPEED REACHES THE RIGHT SPOT - YOU GET RESONANCE AND ACCELERATION UNTIL THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES OUT OF THE RESONANCE REGION.
QuoteHow broad is the tuning window? Is that why you recommended the rotor with many magnets?
THE WINDOW IS A FACTOR OF THE COILS INCUCTANCE AND SELF CAPACITANCE. MORE MAGNETS SIMPLY GET YOU UP TO THE RESONANT FREQUENCY (CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD) FASTER.
QuoteDoes the HV coil in resonance then re radiate a flux field that the HC coil sees?
WE NOW HAVE TWO COILS - THE PARALLEL BI-COIL (LUC'S MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS)
AND THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL (MY DESIGN)... TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THE HC COIL IN THE PARALLEL BI-COIL "SEES" A SLIGHT MOMENTARY DECREASE IN FLUX DUE TO THE HV COIL'S FLUX AND THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL "SEES" A SLIGH INCREASE
SO YES - THE HV COIL DOES RE-RADIATE A FLUX FIELD THAT THE HC COIL CAN USE.I realize you under non disclose so a highly fictitious answer will be taken as confirmation...
NO NON-DICLOSURE HERE - AND THANKS TO QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY Ph.D. STUDENT STEVE WHITE (DERRICKA'S INTRODUCTION WHO CAME FOR A DEMO ON SATURDAY) WHO HELPED PUT THE FINAL THEORY PUZZLE PIECES IN PLACE.
QuoteTake Care,
Ron, (in the rain) still, its better than snow, lol
TAKING CARE...
T
P.S. I'LL TAKE SNOW!!! :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66CldXqESLA
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 06, 2008, 09:20:22 PM
quote]Fascinating, direct question... were you tuning the HV coil with a capacitor at any time?
snip
WE NOW HAVE TWO COILS - THE PARALLEL BI-COIL (LUC'S MICROWAVE TRANSFORMERS)
AND THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL (MY DESIGN)... TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THE HC COIL IN THE PARALLEL BI-COIL "SEES" A SLIGHT MOMENTARY DECREASE IN FLUX DUE TO THE HV COIL'S FLUX AND THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL "SEES" A SLIGH INCREASE SO YES - THE HV COIL DOES RE-RADIATE A FLUX FIELD THAT THE HC COIL CAN USE.
snip
NO NON-DICLOSURE HERE - AND THANKS TO QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY Ph.D. STUDENT STEVE WHITE (DERRICKA'S INTRODUCTION WHO CAME FOR A DEMO ON SATURDAY) WHO HELPED PUT THE FINAL THEORY PUZZLE PIECES IN PLACE.
TAKING CARE...
T
That is great news son, I am proud of you!
So I would root for the concentric bi coil, this would seem to have the most potential (no pun)
Ron
Quote from: hydrocontrol on October 06, 2008, 09:29:45 AM
I ordered four from Ebay since I do not have time to drive around town checking out Microwaves on the curb. The local Goodwill store does not accept Microwaves anymore.. At least from Ebay you get a picture of what you are getting. I ordered ones that looked like the ones i_iron was showing without having a clue about the power ratings. Once I get them and grind off the weld what is the next step ?
Thanks for the pictures i_iron. Keep them coming. I am more of a picture guy. I also like Thanes beer fridge picture.
The microwave transformer is more for the historical continuity aspect, to show what has gone before.
It is merely one way to demonstrate the "Thane Theory" For the way forward I would go back and look
for the Bi coil that T showed us. I looked for it but my attention span got used up,lol
But as you can see in the following photo, it is best to carefully remove the coils as then one may
put them back on in the reverse configuration with the secondary in front and/or different config's.
The secondary, as I mentioned, is the hard one to get off without damage. Why I suggest its
removal is because one can use the wire to wind BI coil, understood? it is the right gauge and
resistance for the HV coil in whatever configuration that you wish to pursue.
Thanks for the appreciation of the pics, small potatoes to what T has posted... nevertheless....
Ron
PS: shown on a dreaded piece of aluminum, T would use some great ugly chunk of i_ron, note also
the coil on the left has a wooden wedge to lock it in place.
Note also the CANADIAN signature Robertson head screw holding the two cores together.. without
this I doubt that it would work....LOL
(//)
Hello CRANKYpants,
I understand from your video-presentations that the HV-Coil is shorted for the accellerating effect. How can it be that a shorted coil has selfresonance-behaviour ?
Kator
QuoteThat is great news son, I am proud of you!
SO FAR IT'S GOOD NEWS. BTW THANKS FOR YOUR... "Fascinating, direct question"PREVIOSLY.
QuoteSo I would root for the concentric bi coil, this would seem to have the most potential (no pun)
Ron
STRANGE THAT YOU MISSED THE (PUN x 2) OPPORTUNITY TO MENTION
"POTHANETIAL"?
YOU ARE SLIPPING
MASTER I_B_RON COQUITLAM.
T
Quote from: Kator01 on October 07, 2008, 05:29:33 PM
Hello CRANKYpants,
I understand from your video-presentations that the HV-Coil is shorted for the accellerating effect. How can it be that a shorted coil has selfresonance-behaviour ?
Kator
YOU HAVE A HV COIL WITH A VERY HIGH IMPEDANCE - SO VIRTUALLY NO CURRENT FLOWS - WHEN A ROTOR MAGNET APPROACHES IT,
IT STORES ITS ENERGY IN THE ELECTROSTATIC FIELD LIKE A CAPACITOR.
WHEN THE ROTOR MAGNET IS TOP DEAD CENTRE TO THE COIL - NEITHER APPROACHING NOR RECEDING - THE SHORTED "CAPACITOR" HV COIL DISCHARGES THROUGH THE COIL'S RESISTANCE AND CREATES A MAGNETIC FIELD (RESONANCE) - WHICH BY THIS TIME IS DELAYED AND IT PUSHES AWAY ON THE NOW RECEDING MAGNET AND SIMULTANEOUSLY ATTRACTS THE APPROACHING ONE.
FOR THE HV COIL TO WORK THE INDUCTANCE HAS TO BE RIGHT, COIL IMPEDANCE/RESISTANCE HAS TO BE RIGHT AND ROTOR FREQUENCY HAS TO BE RIGHT,
AND THE POLITICAL ACTORS McCAIN AND HARPER MUST NOT BE ELECTED OR WE ARE ALL SCREWED - HUMAN BEING AND NATURE EXPLOITING CORPORATIONS AND WARMONGERS WIN.
CHEERS
Thane
Hello again Thane,
what happens when you put more of these coil blocks around the rotor?
- Does the currentdraw stay the same or increases?
- How does it accelerate/decelerate compared to 1 block?
- Does the overall efficiecy increase or decrease? (if it increases, can it be increased to OU??)
Just some thoughts, hope I make sense.
Hi Thane,
thank you for explaning ths. Now I know what you mean by resonance. The max flux-change must not pass unnoticed by the coil. You talk here about the current-voltage-phaseshift.
Yes, I think we are already screwed - even here in Europe.
Some good info here :
http://www.tbrnews.org/ (http://www.tbrnews.org/)
Go to the archive and read TBR News October 3, 2008
Also interesting the curriculum vitae of the person ( Neel Kashkari ) entrusted with controlling the distrubution ot the bail-out-money :
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ (http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/) - topic : "Top Area 51 Stargate commander..."
Both he and H.Paulson are former Goldman & Sachs Managers.
Look here :
http://www.treas.gov/organization/bios/kashkari-e.html (http://www.treas.gov/organization/bios/kashkari-e.html)
Now we know whom we are dealing with and where the "vanished" money went.
Regards
Kator
Hi Thane,
I think testing the basic behaviour of the HV-Coil would be necessary
I would like to setup a solid-state test-rig - that is - a pulsing hc-coil opposing an hv-coil - both in fixed position. In this way I have better possibillities in altering the key-parameters like puls-frequency, puls-.duration, di/dt etc and watch at the same time the reaction of the hv-coil via an hall-sensor or the voltage-drop over a very low resistor ( 0.2 to 1 ohm ) embedded in series in the shorted coil.
Can you give me an hint, what core-material of the hv-coil is suited best ? I could imagine we are working here in the range of 20 to 15 KHz so a flyback-core-type would do it ?
And what material for the hc-coil which is sitting on the outside area of hv-coil ?
Thank you for all this hard work Thane. I wish you all the best.
Kator
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 08, 2008, 06:26:42 AM
snip
STRANGE THAT YOU MISSED THE (PUN x 2) OPPORTUNITY TO MENTION "POTHANETIAL"?
YOU ARE SLIPPING MASTER I_B_RON COQUITLAM.
T
Dang, I must be slipping! so to make amends... here is the 'pun of the day'
***THE DEAD BATTERIES WERE GIVEN OUT FREE OF CHARGE***
Ron
Dead batteries, yuck, but hooking them back on to a charger, even more revolting.
THIS FROM A FRIEND WHO IS ASSISTING US WITH THE EVALUATIONS...
OUR PLAN OF ATTACK NOW IS TO PUT A VARIABLE CAPACITOR ACROSS THE HV COIL TO SEE IF WE CAN LOWER THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD BY ALTERING THE RESONANT FREQUENCY.
THANKS LEN!
T
Thane,
The ability to obtain consist results by using a coil with the same inductance is a major advance. To confirm these results suggest you wind another coil with larger diameter wire but the same inductance since this will give your coil a higher Q at resonance.
If your explanation of a resonance circuit is correct, then an alternating current is induced in the coil as the magnets pass by the coil. As we discussed for a moter speed of 900 revolutions per second and based on 18 poles the frequency will be 16,200 cycles/sec. At resonance, the capacitance of the coil is given in the attached word Document. Altering the capacitance across the coils should change the resonance frequency.
Len
f= 1/2B SQUARE ROOT LC
or C=1/4B^2 f^2 L
for f =16,200 Hz
L= 300 mH = .3 Henries
Then C= 322uuf
I'LL GET BACK TO YOU LATOR KATOR ;)
Hi Thane,
Have you saw this video : (A LENZLESS TYPE GENERATOR)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE9V90d6eNA
Quote from: albator10 on October 08, 2008, 08:42:33 PM
Hi Thane,
Have you saw this video : (A LENZLESS TYPE GENERATOR)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE9V90d6eNA
YES I HAVE SEEN IT THANK YOU - AND IT IS ONE THING TO MAKE A PROTOTYPE BUT PROPER TESTING IS CRITICAL, I.E. TESTING UNDER LOAD WHILE PRODUCING REAL POWER THROUGH A RESISTIVE LOAD.
APPERENTLY ACCORDING TO A PREVIOUS POSTER HERE... THESE GENERATORS (WHICH ARE ALMOST 40 YEARS OLD) DON'T WORK (GO BACK A FEW PAGES) - THAT IS WHY THE RING IS THERE TO MAKE SURE THE BAR DOES NOT "SHOW" A FIELD WHICH COULD IMPEDE PERFORMANCE.
AT ANY RATE WE HAVE BEEN PRODUCING UP TO 70 VOLTS @ 3500 RPM (MAX SPEED & NEAR ZERO MOTOR TORQUE) PRODUCING
REAL WATTS THROUGH A LOAD WITH NO DECELERATION AT ALL.
WE HAVE MADE SOME OTHER DESIGN CHANGES WHICH IMPROVE THE OUTPUT POWER - WHICH I WILL POST AFTER OUR PATENTS ARE FILED.
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteHello again Thane,
what happens when you put more of these coil blocks around the rotor?- Does the currentdraw stay the same or increases?
THE OUTPUT POWER OF THE GENERATOR INCREASES AND THE INPUT POWER TO THE MOTOR DECREASES.
Quote- How does it accelerate/decelerate compared to 1 block?
2 EQUAL HV COILS WILL PRODUCE ABOUT TWICE THE ACCELERATION AS WITH JUST ONE JUST AS TWO HC COILS WILL PRODUCE TWICE THE LENZ DECELERATION.
Quote- Does the overall efficiecy increase or decrease? (if it increases, can it be increased to OU??)
RIGHT NOW WE ARE GETTING A 300% OUTPUT POWER INCREASE WITH A 43% INPUT POWER DECREASE.
MY GUESS IS YES BUT THERE MAY STILL BE SOME UNFORSEEN HURDLES OUT THERE ALONG THE WAY.
QuoteJust some thoughts, hope I make sense.
DITTO FOR MY ANSWERS - HOPE THEY HELP.
T
For V.P. Mr. Cheney RE:Canadian Technology Solution to U.S. National Security Issues
Thursday, October 9, 2008 10:39 AM
From: "Thane C. Heins"
To: vice_president@whitehouse.gov
Cc: The.Secretary@hq.doe.gov, kcunningham@ocri.ca
Bcc: "Hamilton, Tyler" <thamilton@thestar.ca>
Message contains attachmentsPD Company Overview and Highlights.pdf (1397KB)
Dear Vice President Cheney and the Secretary of Energy,
My name is Thane Heins and I am the President and Founder of a Canadian company called Potential Difference Inc. I know your time is precious so I will get right to the point considering that this is a National Security Issue for the United States where energy is concerned.
My company is conducting privately funded research at the University of Ottawa and we have successfully produced a new kind of electric generator which has the capacity to increase to output energy by a factor of 300% with a reduction of the input energy driving the generator by 43% over conventional generator technology currently employed. (Please refer to page 18 of the enclosed document for lab test verified data)
We also have a Channel on You Tube where our technology can be viewed.http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
Test Data Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps5BqEiFK74
I am sending you this information today an an effort to safegaurd your military's soldiers now fighting in Iraq and Afganistan and oil based terrorist aggression against your citizens at home and abroad. I sincerely hope this information reaches you with utmost haste and our technology can play a part in returning peace and prosperity to your country in crisis.
Sincerely
Thane
P.S. Please feel free to contact Kimberly Cunningham at the Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation at 613.828.6274 x 256, kcunningham@OCRI.ca if the United States Department of Energy would interested in a live demonstration.
Thane C. Heins
Co-Founder - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
"Concern for man and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations. " - Albert Einstein
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
- Gandhi
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 09, 2008, 10:54:52 AM
[snip
I am sending you this information today an an effort to safegaurd your military's soldiers now fighting in Iraq and Afganistan and oil based terrorist aggression against your citizens at home and abroad. I sincerely hope this information reaches you with utmost haste and our technology can play a part in returning peace and prosperity to your country in crisis.
Sincerely
Thane
snip
"Leave no stone unturned" gets you some marks but this hardly qualifies as "Taking Care"
You are three steps ahead of us, no one on the group has qualified your results and you go and
poke sticks at the bear? To be your protection requires a knowledge on our part of your model,
not just numbers. I will send you my regular email addy if you wish to inform several of us of the
makeup of your last model off list.
Would you write to Harpoor? I think not, yet this is his BOSS...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10491
Distressed Ron
Quote from: i_ron on October 09, 2008, 11:20:30 AM
"Leave no stone unturned" gets you some marks but this hardly qualifies as "Taking Care"
You are three steps ahead of us, no one on the group has qualified your results and you go and
poke sticks at the bear? To be your protection requires a knowledge on our part of your model,
not just numbers. I will send you my regular email addy if you wish to inform several of us of the
makeup of your last model off list.
Would you write to Harpoor? I think not, yet this is his BOSS...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10491
Distressed Ron
THANKS FOR YOUR CONCERN RON - BUT I DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT TAKING CARE IF TAKING CARE RISKS A SOLDIER'S OR CIVILIAN'S LIFE AND I KNOW VERY WELL THAT CHENEY IS A WAR CRIMINAL.
WATCHING THE GENERATOR PERFORM IN THE LAB ON A DAILY BASIS AND THEN COMING HOME TO HEAR ABOUT MORE DEAD SOLDIERS IS JUST SIMPLY KILLING ME SLOWLY.
I SENT THAT LETTER TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND ALL MY MEDIA CONTACTS.
LUC'S COMING TO THE LAB TODAY - PERHAPS HE CAN HELP?
THANKS
Thane
Hi Thane,
Your concern about our soldier and our planet is very nice, but sending letter to governement is useless.
They are thousand of energy saving invention that exist, but we almost never heard about them. Thousand of patents about free energy, water car and more are sleeping in some cabinets.
What you have to do is to produce units and sell them !
Don't keep this technology in a lab.
Reading about your technology is very interesting, but what I want is one of your generator.
I am the owner of an electric car and if your price is reasonnale I wish to buy a unit from you and put in in my car.
You are the inventor and you have the right to make money with this invention, but to help our planet you have make this technology available.
Regards
Hi Thane and all.
Just wondering about something you wrote some time ago:
"THIS FROM A FRIEND WHO IS ASSISTING US WITH THE EVALUATIONS...
OUR PLAN OF ATTACK NOW IS TO PUT A VARIABLE CAPACITOR ACROSS THE HV COIL TO SEE IF WE CAN LOWER THE CRITICAL SPEED THRESHOLD BY ALTERING THE RESONANT FREQUENCY.
THANKS LEN!
T
Thane,
The ability to obtain consist results by using a coil with the same inductance is a major advance. To confirm these results suggest you wind another coil with larger diameter wire but the same inductance since this will give your coil a higher Q at resonance.
If your explanation of a resonance circuit is correct, then an alternating current is induced in the coil as the magnets pass by the coil. As we discussed for a moter speed of 900 revolutions per second and based on 18 poles the frequency will be 16,200 cycles/sec. At resonance, the capacitance of the coil is given in the attached word Document. Altering the capacitance across the coils should change the resonance frequency.
Len
f= 1/2B SQUARE ROOT LC
or C=1/4B^2 f^2 L
for f =16,200 Hz
L= 300 mH = .3 Henries
Then C= 322uuf
I'LL GET BACK TO YOU LATOR KATOR"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
900 revolutions per second...? does that mean you switched to a 54000 rpm motor?
Or is this for a new-to-be project?
And do silicon steel cores support a freq of 16.2 Khz?
Or am I missing something?
Thanks!
Steven
QuoteHi Thane,
Your concern about our soldier and our planet is very nice, but sending letter to governement is useless.
They are thousand of energy saving invention that exist, but we almost never heard about them. Thousand of patents about free energy, water car and more are sleeping in some cabinets.
What you have to do is to produce units and sell them !
Don't keep this technology in a lab.
Reading about your technology is very interesting, but what I want is one of your generator.
I am the owner of an electric car and if your price is reasonnale I wish to buy a unit from you and put in in my car.
You are the inventor and you have the right to make money with this invention, but to help our planet you have make this technology available.
Regards
WE HAVE 2 LICENCING AGREEMENTS IN THE WORKS AT THIS TIME - AND WE ARE COMMUNICATING WITH AN ENGINEERING FIRM TO QUANTIFY THE DESIGN FOR MASS PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION. SO WE DO HOPE TO MAKE MONEY FROM THIS.
I SENT THIS LETTER AS A MATTER OF
PUBLIC RECORD - I ALSO SENT IT TO ALL THE MEDIA I KNOW AND WHO KNOW ME - SO NOW THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T PLAY DUMB AS EASILY.
THIS TECHNOLOGY (IN MY VIEW) HAS THE CAPACITY TO SAVE HUMAN LIVES AND IT IS MY BURDEN TO MAKE THIS KNOW
IT IS NOT A NEW TOOTHBRUSH DESIGN.
I EXIST BETWEEN TWO PERMANENT LEVELS OF FRUSTRATION...
1) WHEN THE DESIGNS DON'T WORK (DIFFICULT)
2) WHEN THE DESIGNS DO WORK (WORSE)
GETTING THE TECHNOLOGY TO MARKET IS A SLOW PROCESS WHERE EVERY NEW PLAYER WANTS TO PROTECT HIS OR HER PIECE OF THE PIE AND IN THE MEAN TIME I HAVE TO WAIT.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING AND WAITING SINCE 1999 AND SOME TIMES I JUST FREAK OUT.
T
Quote900 revolutions per second...? does that mean you switched to a 54000 rpm motor?
Or is this for a new-to-be project?
And do silicon steel cores support a freq of 16.2 Khz?
Or am I missing something?
Thanks!
Steven
GOOD POINT STEVEN,
IT SHOULD READ 900 RPM
PERHAPS EXCEEDING THE CORES FREQUENCY CAPACITY IS PART OF THE DESIGN CRITERIA?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 09, 2008, 01:04:52 PM
snip
I HAVE BEEN WORKING AND WAITING SINCE 1999 AND SOME TIMES I JUST FREAK OUT.
T
snip
T
Time then to take your mind of these petty problems and see what is going on in the world!
This should bring a smile to your face... an old friend came by yesterday and took me down to the
village coffee shop... as we came out to cross the street this woman accosted me and thrust a
pamphlet into my hand and turning... introduced me to Bob Ray!!! I shook his hand, can you believe
that? So if you need any strings pulled just contact me and I'll see what I can do... as I have connections!
Did you enjoy the link to the vid that I sent?
Ron
CRANKYpants, if you have the time you should watch the movie in a thread I made;
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5775.0;topicseen
If the financial market crashes (I hope it does) then all these patent hungry people will have nothing. I understand you want to survive off this but why bring such a huge change to the world but not change the whole thing while you're at it. Building upon the current system will just greater the fall. The financial market is on the brink of a crash so maybe you should think twice about that "making money" statement.
Quote from: i_ron on October 08, 2008, 04:18:30 PM
Dang, I must be slipping! so to make amends... here is the 'pun of the day'
***THE DEAD BATTERIES WERE GIVEN OUT FREE OF CHARGE***
Ron
Given their limited value, no one was shocked.
Quote from: JustMe on October 09, 2008, 05:09:26 PM
Given their limited value, no one was shocked.
HOWEVER A BATTERY OF CHARGES WERE LAID ON THE PERPETRATORS
FOR ASSAULT AND BATTERY WHICH POLARIZED THE JURY
LEADING TO A SHORT DELIBERATION
AND FINALLY A RELAYING OF ALL THE CHARGES.
WHICH WAS MET WITH LITTLE RESISTANCE
AND WHICH OCURRED IN PARALLEL WITH INDUCED VOMITING AT THE BUS TERMINAL.
(NOW CURRENTLY BEING INVESTIGATED).
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 09, 2008, 07:26:21 PM
HOWEVER A BATTERY OF CHARGES WERE LAID ON THE PERPETRATORS
FOR ASSAULT AND BATTERY WHICH POLARIZED THE JURY
LEADING TO A SHORT DELIBERATION
AND FINALLY A RELAYING OF ALL THE CHARGES.
WHICH WAS MET WITH LITTLE RESISTANCE
AND WHICH OCURRED IN PARALLEL WITH INDUCED VOMITING AT THE BUS TERMINAL.
(NOW CURRENTLY BEING INVESTIGATED).
You are out of your cell, hehehe
"Given their limited value, no one was shocked", groan...
To jump off a bridge in Paris, THANE WOULD BE IN SEINE
Quote from: i_ron on October 09, 2008, 07:46:46 PM
You are out of your cell, hehehe
"Given their limited value, no one was shocked", groan...
To jump off a bridge in Paris, THANE WOULD BE IN SEINE
NOT IF EIFFEL PARIS AND SHE JUMPS WITH ME...
Don't jump Thane! It's a messy way to die! If I want to see "Heins" Ketchup I would rather look in the fridge! Oh wait, nothing but beer in the fridge, and my girlfriend trying to decide what brand... never mind.
Hello Folks,
I had a question lately and I like to repeat it here since there was no answer :
"Can you give me an hint, what core-material of the hv-coil is suited best ? I could imagine we are working here in the range of 20 to 15 KHz so a flyback-core-type would do it ?
And what material for the hc-coil which is sitting on the outside area of hv-coil ?"
Thane ?
Regards
Kator
QuoteHello Folks,
I had a question lately and I like to repeat it here since there was no answer :
ANSWER: GET USED TO IT...
QuoteCan you give me an hint, what core-material of the hv-coil is suited best ?
ANSWER: UNKNOWN
QuoteI could imagine we are working here in the range of 20 to 15 KHz so a flyback-core-type would do it ?
ANSWER: UNKNOWN
QuoteAnd what material for the hc-coil which is sitting on the outside area of hv-coil ?"
ANSWER: DUCT TAPE
QuoteThane ?
ANSWER: RETARD
QuoteRegards
Kator
ANSWER: WE'LL SEE.
Thane,
this is very strange : after all this tedius work you have presented in your videos you do not know which core-material you used ?
I have to be more precise : not ... suited best ... but which one did you use ?
I understood from your comments that there must be a secondary ring-core-material at the outer surface of the HV-Coil not duct tape - otherwise the delay of the kick-back does not show up.
You remember ?
QuoteCoil-Configuration:
CAN DO THE SILLYSCOPE READINGS NOW THAT I AM HAPPY WITH MY COIL DESIGN FINALLY.
JUST SO YOU DON'T GO OFF ON A TANGENT - THE HV COIL IS SET ON THE CORE - THEN THERE IS ANOTHER LAYER OF CORE MATERIAL AROUND AND ON TOP OF THE HV WINDING - THE HC COIL IS WOUND ON TOP OF THIS SECOND CORE SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS: (SIDE VIEW)
HC WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HV WINDING
PRIMARY CORE
HV WINDING
SECONDARY FERROMAGNETIC CORE MATERIAL
HC WINDING
CHEERS
Thane
Regards
Kator
THOU ART TOO SERIOUS MY MAN... ;)
Quote"Can you give me an hint, what core-material of the hv-coil is suited best ?
SO FAR I HAVE BEEN GETTING GOOD RESULTS WITH A MICROWAVE TRANSFORMER CORES AND AC MIG WELDING RODS BUT YOU CAN SEE THE EFFECT WITH SIMPLE IRON CORES BUT YOUR HYSTERESIS CURVE WILL BE WIDE SO ANY ACCELERATION YOU GET WILL BE OFFSET BY CORE DRAG.
QuoteI could imagine we are working here in the range of 20 to 15 KHz so a flyback-core-type would do it ?
POSSIBLY - IN FACT THIS IS NEXT ON MY AGENDA LIST - SINCE I HAVE SEVERAL COLOUR TVS WAITING TO BE CANNIBALIZED.
QuoteAnd what material for the hc-coil which is sitting on the outside area of hv-coil ?"
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL DESIGN?
IF SO IT IS RECYCLED MICROWAVE TRANSFORMER BOTTOMS - SIZED TO FIT AND PLACED AXIALLY AROUND THE HV COIL (LAID OUT ON THE WORK TABLE FIRST AND PLACED ON THE STICKY SIDE OF DUCT TAPE).
I WILL BE TRYING TOROID CORE MATERIAL IN THE NEAR FUTURE WINDING IT RADIALLY LIKE WIRE...
CHEERS
THANE
QuoteI could imagine we are working here in the range of 20 to 15 KHz so a flyback-core-type would do it ?
POSSIBLY - IN FACT THIS IS NEXT ON MY AGENDA LIST - SINCE I HAVE SEVERAL COLOUR TVS WAITING TO BE CANNIBALIZED.
I have thought about flyback transformers and have my doubts about them for the following reasons.
1) When working on a TV set you must discharge the HV anode on the picture tube. The picture tube has some capacitance, and like a MO capacitor, can store a lethal charge. ( I was nearly killed by one of these. Lucky only to get instant charley horse on entire arm! )
2) High voltage diodes are often built in on the secondary - This will probably be a source of loss, unless you are able to short or remove them. Some flybacks also include a HV adjust pot, another potential source of loss.
3) Multiple primaries (Think dual center tapped transformer inputs) may be useful if used, but probably lossy if unused.
4) Possibly more dangerous due to ability to produce 4-5 times higher voltage than microwave transformer. (If short fails) Arcs can leap about an inch in air! You can receive a shock just getting close! Very similar to a Taser.
Perhaps old style automotive ignition coils may be a better bet, but I've never opened up the can.
Quote from: derricka on October 11, 2008, 05:51:15 AM
I have thought about flyback transformers and have my doubts about them for the following reasons.
Possibly more dangerous due to ability to produce 4-5 times higher voltage than microwave transformer. (If short fails) Arcs can leap about an inch in air! You can receive a shock just getting close! Very similar to a Taser.
Perhaps old style automotive ignition coils may be a better bet, but I've never opened up the can.
I HAVE USED AN IGNITION COIL - BUT MOSTLY I AM INTERESTED IN THE CORE MATERIAL RATHER THAN THE WINDINGS.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 11, 2008, 08:50:23 AM
I HAVE USED AN IGNITION COIL - BUT MOSTLY I AM INTERESTED IN THE CORE MATERIAL RATHER THAN THE WINDINGS.
T
If you have a Micheal's there, they have what they call "flower wire" and is i_ron wire, painted green
and comes in different gauges... ideal for winding the secondary core... disregard this message if you
are already familiar with this product ..
Ron
1/4 pounder
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on October 11, 2008, 11:24:24 AM
If you have a Micheal's there, they have what they call "flower wire" and is i_ron wire, painted green
and comes in different gauges... ideal for winding the secondary core... disregard this message if you
are already familiar with this product ..
Ron
I THINK YOU ARE TRYING TO LEAD US DOWN THE GARDEN PATH OF TURMOIL AND FRUSTRATION THERE MY HAPRER-HATER BC BOASTER?
"FLOWER WIRE" WOULD HAVE AN EXCESS OF HYSTERISIS DRAG (NO/YES?) SO DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT IS I_RONIC AND I_NSENSITIVE TO BE PRESENTING THIS IDEA AT A TIME WHEN OUR BANKS ARE GOING ON WELFARE?
DO YOU HAVE APOLOGY LEGISLATION IN BC? YOU MUST SINCE YOU GET ALL THE GOOD WEATHER.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 11, 2008, 11:43:12 AM
I THINK YOU ARE TRYING TO LEAD US DOWN THE GARDEN PATH OF TURMOIL AND FRUSTRATION THERE MY HAPRER-HATER BC BOASTER?
"FLOWER WIRE" WOULD HAVE AN EXCESS OF HYSTERISIS DRAG (NO/YES?) SO DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT IS I_RONIC AND I_NSENSITIVE TO BE PRESENTING THIS IDEA AT A TIME WHEN OUR BANKS ARE GOING ON WELFARE?
DO YOU HAVE APOLOGY LEGISLATION IN BC? YOU MUST SINCE YOU GET ALL THE GOOD WEATHER.
T
Minister Thane,
Actually, to be truthful with you, the weather is not all that great some days... it is just so much
better than Ottawa weather!
The flower wire is as good or better than the welding wire that you tried, so there....you can lead a horse to water... but you can't make him think... yeesh
Your faithful servant, (that's a laugh...hehehe)
Ron
non canadians can skip this next bit....
"Prime Minister Stephen Harper's appearance at the New York City based Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) on 25 September 2007, was an official endorsement and expression of solidarity on the North American Union agenda."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10438
"The truth is that Stephen Harper has already laid out an agenda that would fundamentally change this country - in ways most Canadians would oppose.
While this agenda is not "secret," my guess is few Canadians know about it. That's because Harper, realizing it would be unpopular, unveiled it when Canadians weren't paying attention - in fact, we were sleeping. Sometime in the dark of night last June 20, the Harper government posted a plan on the Department of National Defence's website - called Canada First Defence Strategy - to spend an eye-popping $490 billion over the next 20 years on the military."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10484
Hi Thane,
yes sometimes I am very serious and have to get used to your kind of teasing dialog.
Living amongst the "leather pants" ( trouser ) wearing bavarian cannibals - they mostly eat pigs ( hint what kind of species they are ) - leaves me a bit insensitive to these teasing plays. Forgive me my seriousness .
But thank your for your answers.
Off topic :
For giving you an impression of the mentality of the bavarian tribe the best thing I can do is to present you a characteristic joke - although there is the risk that you might not laugh at this one :
Situation is occuring in a famous spot within Munich downtown. Two leather-pants wearing bavarian lingering near a subway-entrance during Octoberfest-time are approached by a hectic Prussian ( in these jokes these two species are always used because they hate each other ) asking for the route to the Hofbräuhaus ( this is the spot where they flush down their throat the pig-meat with gallons of beer ).
Thy both stare at the Prussian giving no answer. Now the Prussian repeats his question in english language. No answer. Repeats in french and italian . . still no answer. Frustrated the Prussian leaves the scene.
Now one of the bavaran gives his comment. He says to this fellow-bavarain: " what a smart and intelligent guy he is, isnt he ?
Says the other leather-pants bavarian : ..and , did this helped him ?
Regards
Kator
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 11, 2008, 11:43:12 AM
"FLOWER WIRE" WOULD HAVE AN EXCESS OF HYSTERISIS DRAG (NO/YES?)
Actually, the greatest T of all (Tesla) used iron wire fence cable to build some of his toroid transformers. Agree the hysteresis drag would be worst than silicon steel laminate, but eddy currents would be much less.
I_ron garden wire may be a good material to create cheap test beds for multidimensional transformer toroid.
@Kator,
You're handling it well. T is a quirky eccentric genius/jokester at times, but worth the effort of working with him. After all, he is man enough to call himself CRANKYpants.
Regards, Larry
For those interested, a good description of transformer core types and core materials.
http://www.butlerwinding.com/core-types/index.html
THE WORLD IS AN INSANE ASYLUM AND THE MORE INSANE YOU ARE THE MORE "FIT" YOU ARE TO RUN THE SHOW SO "HARPER'S SCARY AGENDA" COMES AS NO SURPRISE.
"'New World Order'
A terrorist is broadly defined by the architects of the North American Union, as any individual or group which opposes the New World Order agenda."
ONE WONDER'S IF HUMANITY CAN TURN THE CORNER - AND HOW IT CAN COME ABOUT?
T
Joseph Stalin: The supreme ruler and communist leader of the Soviet Union who ruled for 25 years until his death in 1953. His views and ideals for industrialization and agriculture resulted in the suffering and deaths of millions. Not content, he ordered the executions and imprisonment of literally thousands who were deemed to be 'enemies' of himself and his people.
Mao Tse Tung: Successful in creating a united and recognized China, his methods of achieving this would result in millions of deaths as he strived to modernize the country. A communist ruler between 1949 and his death in 1976 his cultural revolution caused damage to China's society and economy, but he remains a controversial figure, even after death, as some people favour what he did in developing the country, and others look at how he controlled the nation and caused unnecessary suffering to the people.
Adolf Hitler - A dictator who declared himself to be the ' Fuhrer' of Germany and leader of the Nazi Party during the 1930's until 1945. He declared the concept of racial hygiene as set up policies to eradicate those who were not deemed to be 'pure.' Responsible for the deaths of up to 15 million people, from Jews to the handicapped, using mass executions and concentration camps. Starvation and disease was advanced in his use of slave labour to build an 'ideal' Germany.
Ivan the Terrible - Known as the 'Tzar' of Russia between 1533 and 1547. Becoming mentally unstable in the latter years of his reign led to his orders to followers of mass executions and violence. A tyrant that ruled with no limits to his barbaric attitude of rapes and murders he chose the 'Oprichniki' (faithful followers) who carried out a bloody campaign against the masses.
Pol Pot - The Cambodian leader whose rule of slave labour and murder can be contributed to the deaths of up to 1.5 million during his reign as Prime Minister between 1976 and 1979. A dictator whose policies led to starvation, disease and murders.
Idi Amin Dada - President of Uganda who rule after a coup in 1971 until 1979 is littered with human rights abuse and the persecution of ethnic minorities was deemed responsible for up to 500,000 deaths.
Tamerlane - In the 14th Century Timur (he used several names) conquered large parts of Central and Western Asia. His armies slaughtered millions through the conquests of battle. One notable record is his ordering that a pyramid be built out of 70,000 skulls of the human dead.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 12, 2008, 09:54:20 AM
snip
ONE WONDER'S IF HUMANITY CAN TURN THE CORNER - AND HOW IT CAN COME ABOUT?
T
My fellow terrorist,
When more people are willing to open their eyes, to see what is going on,
connect up the dots and understand that this is their fate if they don't speak up...
R
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"First, they came for the Communists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . .
And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
Maybe all politicians should come with prescriptions for Zyprexa. :) :) :)
Quote from: derricka on October 13, 2008, 03:07:16 AM
Maybe all politicians should come with prescriptions for Zyprexa. :) :) :)
I THINK I NEED SOME OF THAT...!!!
SINCE I JUST SPENT THE LAST 2 FULL DAYS WINDING SECONDARIES ON A NEW TRANSFORMER "FIGURE 8 CORE" AND WOKE UP THIS MORNING REALIZING I FORGOT THE RETURN CROSS MEMBER (CORE CIRCLE AROUND THE "8 CORE") WHICH CARRIES THE INDUCED SECONDARY FLUX BACK TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE SECONDARY. I AM DARING TO THINK NOW THAT - A VERY SHORT AIR CORE PRIMARY IS THE TICKET!!?
I AM USING A 15" TOROID CORE WHICH IS COMPRESSED AT THE CENTRE DOWN TO LESS THAN 1" WHERE THE
AIR CORE PRIMARY IS PLACED.
I AM GETTING OVER 40 (NO LOAD) VOLTS OUT OF MY SECONDARIES WITH 1.4 VOLTS @ 0.45 AMPS INTO THE PRIMARY. I ASSUMED THE CORE WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE INDUCED FLUX BUT I WAS WRONG. BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.
HAPPY THANKS GIVING TO ALL!
Thane
AM I DO FOR ANOTHER BC SHIT STORM ON MY HEAD OR WHAT ???
-- On Mon, 10/13/08, Thane C. Heins <thane_heins@yahoo.ca> wrote:
From: Thane C. Heins <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Request for Visit Invitation
To: Centre for Research on Globalization / Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation
Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Director, Editor of GlobalResearch.ca
Email: crgeditor@yahoo.com
Received: Monday, October 13, 2008, 10:23 AM
Dear Professor Chossudovsky,
Please accept this invitation to visit me at my lab at Ottawa U at your convenience or please allow me to visit you some time.
Following the events of 9/11 I set out to eliminate oil as an energy source. We now have an electric generator which in our Ottawa U lab which provides a 300% increase in output energy with a 43% decrease in input energy. The generator has the capacity to turn itself (by a small fraction) in other words and provides free energy (which we are in the process of developing some backing theory for).
Free energy on the world stage in my hopes will do much to create world peace, end oil wars and the "War on Terrorism" fraud.
Please find (enclosed) our company Overview and Highlights and (bellow) a letter sent recently to Vice President Cheney.
Sincerely
Thane
Thane C. Heins
Co-Founder - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
Perepiteia Generator Inventor
"Concern for man and his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations. " - Albert Einstein
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi
DOUBLE POST - SORRY!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 13, 2008, 10:31:56 AM
AM I DO FOR ANOTHER BC SHIT STORM ON MY HEAD OR WHAT ???
snip
Sir Thane,
Quite the contrary. Michel Chossudovsky is undoubtedly the most aware, concerned citizen this
country has. His writings are extremely well researched, well written, timely, and much appreciated
by the few true Canadians left in this vast morass of wannabe americons.
You have my FULL approval to speak with this gentleman.
You have my permission to mention his BC supporter, ( and yours...) as I tend to welcome
any effort by real Canadians, such as yourself's, who try to make a difference to the quality of
our everyday life.
Sincere regards
Ron P
“Behold the rain which descends from heaven upon our vineyards; there it enters the roots of the vines, to be changed into wine; a constant proof that God loves us, and loves to see us happy
benjamin franklin
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting it to come out different"
david boswell
@cranky
please forgive my ignorance:
Quote
a 300% increase in output energy with a 43% decrease in input energy.
Isn't the input energy still higher than the output energy? :-[
for example: 300% increase of 5 watt = 15watt is still lower than 43% of 50watt=21watt
Where am I missing the point?
I was considering using 22 AWG soft steel wire to make transformer cores.
Just wind a coil out of it to the size core I want and then wind the copper wire around it.
How would this do? What works better, using thiner or thicker wire?
QuoteInsert Quote
I was considering using 22 AWG soft steel wire to make transformer cores.
Just wind a coil out of it to the size core I want and then wind the copper wire around it.
How would this do? What works better, using thiner or thicker wire?
The game here, is to avoid eddy currents induced in the core, by the coil. Eddy currents waste power and produce unwanted heat. If using wire, best bet would be a very tightly bound bundle of thinly insulated iron wires, and not a coil. This is the reason most transformer cores are sheet laminations or ferrites (bound iron dust) The excerpt I found (below) is a more technical description of what is going on.
Assume that a changing magnetic flux is passing through a certain square cross sectional area of the transformer core. Look at a loop of current enclosing that flux. The power dissipated in that particular loop is proportional to the square of the area enclosed by that loop (A) divided by the length of the path (L). If you divide that square into two rectangles by laminating the core, the area enclosed in the loop will be cut in half while the length will be reduced to 3/4 of the original length. The result will be two loops of current with a total power dissipation of 2X(.5A)^2/.75L. That makes the sum of the power dissipated in the two smaller loops two thirds of the power dissipated in the original loop. More laminations reduce the dissipation even more.
Quote from: alan on October 13, 2008, 11:38:58 AM
@cranky
please forgive my ignorance:Isn't the input energy still higher than the output energy? :-[
for example: 300% increase of 5 watt = 15watt is still lower than 43% of 50watt=21watt
Where am I missing the point?
CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR HIGH CURRENT COIL TEST #1(Generator High Current Coil output with High Voltage Coil open circuit)I/P = 237 W
O/P = 0.6 W
HIGH VOLTAGE COIL TEST #2 (Generator High Current output with High Voltage Coil short circuit)I/P = 166 W
O/P = 2.41 W
I/P POWER % DECREASE = 237 - 166/237 x 100 =
30% DECREASEO/P POWER INCREASE = 0.6 - 2.41/0.6 x 100 =
302% INCREASETHE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TEST#1 AND TEST #2 IS THE APPLICATION OF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS - WHICH ACCELERATE THE GENERATOR ROTOR AND CAUSE THE PRIME MOVER POWER TO DECREASE AND THE HIGH CURRENT COILS' OUTPUT TO INCREASE.
TEST #1 CONFORMS TO LENZ'S LAW and TEST#2 DOES NOT.
THE PRIME MOVER INPUT POWER IS A REFLECTION OF THE MOTOR'S EFFICIENCY AND THE KEY POINT OF INTEREST IS THE MOTOR'S REACTION TO LOADING. - IF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS WERE ALSO CONFORMING TO LENZ'S LAW THEY WOULD ALSO CAUSE DECELERATION.
THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION BECAUSE THEIR HIGHER IMPEDANCE CAUSES THEM TO FUNCTION AS CAPACITORS RATHER THAN INDUCTORS AND THEY STORE ENERGY IN THEIR ELECTROSTATIC FIELD BETWEEN THE WIRES RATHER THAN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD AROUND THE WIRES - AS PER LENZ'S LAW.
BE PATIENT WITH YOURSELF ALAN AND KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS - YOU MAY BE SUFFERING FROM A RARE FORM OF
POLARBREEZEDIMENTIA - THERE IS A CURE BUT WE MAY HAVE TO REMOVE 1/2 YOUR BRAIN IF IT PERSISTS.
p.s. THANKS FOR THE QUESTION MY MATH WAS WRONG... :P
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteBE PATIENT WITH YOURSELF ALAN AND KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS - YOU MAY BE SUFFERING FROM A RARE FORM OF POLARBREEZEDIMENTIA - THERE IS A CURE BUT WE MAY HAVE TO REMOVE 1/2 YOUR BRAIN IF IT PERSISTS.
As I have already had both hemispheres of my brain removed (due to a gardening accident), I now find the best cure for POLARBREEZEDIMENTIA is just eating a Klondike bar. :)
NEW MULTI-LAYER HIGH VOLTAGE COIL w/ FREQUENCY VARIATIONS HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=ThaneCHeins
WARNING: Adult content, strong language, nudity.
T
@crank
But that would leave me with 1/4 of my brain, I like it this way. Fortunately I am patient, like a hungry spider ;)
It starts to make sense.
So it accelerates because there are no contra forces that normally slows the rotor down. These are absorbed by the HV coil as capacitance, so no magnetic interference.
Something like that, still foggy, but understanding will come. Need to recheck electromagnetic theory.
I think this thing could be modelled mathematically (you done that I see), maybe it could even be made solid stade, but these are premature assumptions of mine, need more understanding.
Quote from: alan on October 14, 2008, 08:23:44 AM
@crank
But that would leave me with 1/4 of my brain, I like it this way. Fortunately I am patient, like a hungry spider ;)
It starts to make sense.
So it accelerates because there are no contra forces that normally slows the rotor down. These are absorbed by the HV coil as capacitance, so no magnetic interference.
Something like that, still foggy, but understanding will come. Need to recheck electromagnetic theory.
I think this thing could be modelled mathematically (you done that I see), maybe it could even be made solid stade, but these are premature assumptions of mine, need more understanding.
ACTUALLY ALAN, THE HIGH CURRENT COIL MAGNETIC DRAG VIS-A-VIS LENZ'S LAW DECELERATION COUNTERTORQUE OR
COUNTER ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE IS
STILL THERE BUT THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL COIL CAPACITANCE INDUCED
COMPLIMENTARY ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE IS STRONGER IN THE VIDEOS WE SHOW HERE: http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=ThaneCHeins
SO IN YOUR OWN WORDS "THE MAGNETIC INTERFERENCE IS STILL THERE" BUT WE OVER POWER IT.
HOWEVER IN THIS VIDEO WE USE IT TO OUR ADVANTAGE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
CHEERS
Thane the CRANK
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 14, 2008, 07:45:06 AM
NEW MULTI-LAYER HIGH VOLTAGE COIL w/ FREQUENCY VARIATIONS HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=ThaneCHeins
WARNING: Adult content, strong language, nudity.
T
Wow, that is a great looking pair of motors and with matching Irwin clamps, nice touch.
The other motor has gears, is it buggy bound?
Also, you seem to have a bad case of woodpeckers or bullet holes on the support board. Seems like many of us mad scientist have that problem.
Actually, that was a very interesting test of frequency variation. But, I would be interested in seeing the board formulas in more detail, little fuzzy. It looked like one of them used an Lc.
Regards, Larry
QuoteWow, that is a great looking pair of motors and with matching Irwin clamps, nice touch.
I_RON MAN LIKES THE CLAMPS SO I PUT THEM IN THERE FOR HIM. ;)
QuoteThe other motor has gears, is it buggy bound?
ACTUALLY THAT IS PART OF THE TACHOMETER SENSOR.
QuoteActually, that was a very interesting test of frequency variation. But, I would be interested in seeing the board formulas in more detail, little fuzzy. It looked like one of them used an Lc.
Regards, Larry
YES THAT'S THE FORMULA FOR:
RESONANANT FREQUENCY = I / 2 PI SQUARE ROOT OF LARRY C.T
Hi Thane,
Could you tell me the brand and model number of your fancy new motors?
Forgive me if you have already told everybody, but both hemispheres of my brain are still missing.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 14, 2008, 06:47:57 PM
RESONANANT FREQUENCY = I / 2 PI SQUARE ROOT OF LARRY C.
Okay, as you know, just kidding about the Frequency formula, but you got my curiosity up enough about the rest to start reviewing my manuals, hate that.
Could you please list the L formula in the lower left on the board? That one is actually very difficult to read. It would normally be L = 1 / 4 pi squared F squared C. It looks totally different, but can't make it out. Considering you don't have an actual capacitor, just creating capacitance, it would have to be very different. Can kinda see a 4 pi and maybe henries. Henries in the formula seems likely.
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 15, 2008, 09:40:38 PM
Okay, as you know, just kidding about the Frequency formula, but you got my curiosity up enough about the rest to start reviewing manuals, hate that.
Could you please list the L formula in the lower left on the board? That one is actually very difficult to read. It would normally be L = 1 / 4 pi squared F squared C. It looks totally different, but can't make it out. Considering you don't have an actual capacitor, just creating capacitance, it would have to be very different. Can kinda see a 4 pi and maybe henries. Henries in the formula seems likely.
Regards, Larry
L = 0.4 x PI x N^2 x CORE PERMEABILITY x A / l x 10 ^ -8 (HENRIES)
INDUCTANCE = 0.4 x PI x # OF TURNS SQUARED x CROS SECTIONAL AREA DIVIDED BY CORE LENGTH x 10 TO THE MINUS 8 HENRIES.
THIS FORMULA IS THERE TO SHOW THAT FOR FERROMAGNETIC IRON CORE INDUCTANCES, THE PERMEABILITY OF THE CORE IS NOT CONSTANT SO THE INDUCTANCE IS ALSO NOT CONSTANT.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FLUX DENSITY B, AND FIELD INTENSITY H, IS DETERMINED BY THE HYSTERISIS LOOP OF THE CORE MATERIAL.
IT AS ALL PART OF THE "AS FREQUENCY INCREASES..." BEHAVIOR OF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 15, 2008, 10:15:10 PM
L = 0.4 x PI x N^2 x CORE PERMEABILITY x A / l x 10 ^ -8 (HENRIES)
INDUCTANCE = 0.4 x PI x # OF TURNS SQUARED x CROS SECTIONAL AREA DIVIDED BY CORE LENGTH x 10 TO THE MINUS 8 HENRIES.
THIS FORMULA IS THERE TO SHOW THAT FOR FERROMAGNETIC IRON CORE INDUCTANCES, THE PERMEABILITY OF THE CORE IS NOT CONSTANT SO THE INDUCTANCE IS ALSO NOT CONSTANT.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FLUX DENSITY B, AND FIELD INTENSITY H, IS DETERMINED BY THE HYSTERISIS LOOP OF THE CORE MATERIAL.
IT AS ALL PART OF THE "AS FREQUENCY INCREASES..." BEHAVIOR OF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COILS.
T
CORRECTION SHOULD READ
INDUCTANCE = 0.4 x PI x # OF TURNS SQUARED
x CORE PERMEABILITY x CROS SECTIONAL AREA DIVIDED BY CORE LENGTH x 10 TO THE MINUS 8 HENRIES.
THANKS LARRY
T
Hi all,
in this forum's German language section user lancaIV posted, that an inventor just a short while ago filed a utility patent for specially wound coils.
The patent's title is:
"Kapazitive Wicklung für Elektromotoren, Transformatoren und Elektromagneten"
which would be:
"Capacitive windings for electric motors, transformers and electromagnets"
The patent claims that these coils have no inductance and neither inductive resistance or in other words they only have capacitance and behave just like capacitors.
The patent describes, that this winding style can easily replace the normal windings of electrical motors, with no need to change the mechanical setup.
I just wanted to pass on this info.
I don't really understand electrical motors but I gather, that if the described windings are put in place, a motor would run on AC frequency and voltage only, with almost no need for current.
Maybe the kind of coils/windings described in the patent can help to further enhance Thane's setup (when used in the prime mover !? and/or to replace the permanent magnets !?)
You can find and download the patent here (unfortunately only in German language):
http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE202008009291U&F=0&QPN=DE202008009291U
YOUTUBE VIDEO ADDITIONS TODAY...
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION
At the critical threshold speed or frequency (dictated by the coils impedance) the high voltage coil ceases to act as an INDUCTOR (storing energy in the electromagnetic field and producing a Lenz's Law repelling reaction to the approaching magnetic field) and begins to act as a CAPACITOR (storing energy in the electrostatic field between the wires).
This is clearly shown in the video FREQUENCY VARIATIONS & MULTI LAYER HV COIL ACCELERATION: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
When a North Pole magnet approaches a high voltage coil above the critical threshold speed/frequency a North Pole repelling magnetic field as per Lenz's Law is not produced because the coil's impedance has impeded the current flow within the coil sufficiently. Voltage is built up in the coil and stored in the electrostatic field, between the wires like a capacitor.
When the North Pole magnet is TDC - Top Dead Centre - neither approaching nor receding away from the coil - the coil's stored voltage, which is now at a maximum, is released through the coil's DC resistance and a magnetic field is produced according to Lenz's Law (at this split second at TDC the AC sine wave is changing direction and as far as the coil is concerned frequency is breifly 'zero' and coil impedance is zero so current is allowed to flow - thus producing a delayed North Pole magnetic field which now pushes away on the receding magnet and simultaneously attracts the approaching opposite South pole on the rotor.
Cheers
Thane
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&hl=en
Http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
( Warning do not watch videos if you value "ignorance is bliss")
Quote from: Gustav22 on October 18, 2008, 01:20:10 AM
Hi all,
in this forum's German language section user lancaIV posted, that an inventor just a short while ago filed a utility patent for specially wound coils.
The patent's title is:
"Kapazitive Wicklung für Elektromotoren, Transformatoren und Elektromagneten"
which would be:
"Capacitive windings for electric motors, transformers and electromagnets"
The patent claims that these coils have no inductance and neither inductive resistance or in other words they only have capacitance and behave just like capacitors.
The patent describes, that this winding style can easily replace the normal windings of electrical motors, with no need to change the mechanical setup.
I just wanted to pass on this info.
I don't really understand electrical motors but I gather, that if the described windings are put in place, a motor would run on AC frequency and voltage only, with almost no need for current.
Maybe the kind of coils/windings described in the patent can help to further enhance Thane's setup (when used in the prime mover !? and/or to replace the permanent magnets !?)
You can find and download the patent here (unfortunately only in German language):
http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE202008009291U&F=0&QPN=DE202008009291U
VERY - VERY INTERESTING Gustav22 THANKS!
Thane
Quote from: Gustav22 on October 18, 2008, 01:20:10 AM
You can find and download the patent here (unfortunately only in German language):
http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE202008009291U&F=0&QPN=DE202008009291U
Yes, it is very interesting, if this works as stated it is a major game changer.
Can anyone help with the german translation. Would like to test and wondering if the capacitors are the same as AC motor type.
Thanks, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 18, 2008, 07:26:52 PM
Yes, it is very interesting, if this works as stated it is a major game changer.
Can anyone help with the german translation. Would like to test and wondering if the capacitors are the same as AC motor type.
Thanks, Larry
They give the volts amps coil size and cap value on page 3 and 4 in 'descriptions'
50mfd for example and 50 Hz is mentioned so I would guess oil filled motor 'run' caps would be OK.
Keep us posted
Ron
@Gustav22
I wonder if that German circuit would work using a regular transformer instead of winding a special coil.
Quote from: AbbaRue on October 18, 2008, 11:25:23 PM
@Gustav22
I wonder if that German circuit would work using a regular transformer instead of winding a special coil.
According to my understanding of the patent, a normal transformer can not be used (unless it was re-wound), as the winding style described in the patent requires
two parallel wound wires (much like a 'bifilar' coil), so that the parallel 'strands' act like the two plates of a capacitor.
This points to the fact that finally all neighboring strands form a multi layered capacitor - with an additional capacitor at each end and these two 'terminal caps' presumably are put in place to regulate/adjust/calibrate the capacitance of the whole.
Normal transformers are not wound like that - as usually the complete primary and secondary are wound independently and on top of each other - and so presumably a normal transformer will not work as required to achieve the effect described in the patent.
Quote from: Gustav22 on October 19, 2008, 04:55:39 AM
According to my understanding of the patent, a normal transformer can not be used (unless it was re-wound), as the winding style described in the patent requires two parallel wound wires (much like a 'bifilar' coil), so that the parallel 'strands' act like the two plates of a capacitor.
This points to the fact that finally all neighboring strands form a multi layered capacitor - with an additional capacitor at each end and these two 'terminal caps' presumably are put in place to regulate/adjust/calibrate the capacitance of the whole.
Normal transformers are not wound like that - as usually the complete primary and secondary are wound independently and on top of each other - and so presumably a normal transformer will not work as required to achieve the effect described in the patent.
...SO THE "CAPACITORS" CHARGE AT RESONANCE WHEN THE INDUCTIVE REACTANCE AND CAPACITIVE REACTANCE CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT... AND THEN DICHARGE THROUGH THE COIL'S DC RESISTANCE TO PRODUCE A MAGNETIC FIELD ???
LARRY - WHAT ABOUT MAKING A PRIMARY LIKE THIS AND INCLUDING IT IN MY BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER DESIGN?
Thane
CRANKYpants,
you don´t need to make it complicate. Give it a try just with one core and wind the primary like this and the secondary as a normal single wire. But do not wind the seconday on the primary. With this you learn more what is going on.
But you have to first measure the Capacitance of the two strands only with all 4 ends open. I think it will be in the range of a few nano_Farads with 900 turns. Also the inductance has to be measured with all 4 ends closed. Then you can determine the series-LC-Circuit-frequency. The 50 myko might be the correct value but we have to find out.
i will do tests with higer frequency up to 16 KHz as I have a flyback-setup already in a state by which I just have to change 10 to 20 primary windings.
Regards
Kator
DEAR ALL,
HERE IS A COOL COMPANY WHO INTRODUCED THEMSELVES TO US RECENTLY...
http://www.anewinstitute.pl/
T
Hi Thane,
from what I have seen this one here is the best Wind-Tourbine-Design. Someone posted it here in another thread.
http://www.tesnic.com/ (http://www.tesnic.com/)
Kator
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 19, 2008, 09:59:46 AM
LARRY - WHAT ABOUT MAKING A PRIMARY LIKE THIS AND INCLUDING IT IN MY BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER DESIGN?
Sounds like a winner, but I don't have any multi-dimentional toroid as used in your latest versions. So I would have to use I-ron garden wire to build ;D
Anyway, It appears Kator has more knowledge than me in this area and better equipment, so I'll step back and watch his results first.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 19, 2008, 06:24:45 PM
Sounds like a winner, but I don't have any multi-dimentional toroid as used in your latest versions. So I would have to use I-ron garden wire to build ;D
Anyway, It appears Kator has more knowledge than me in this area and better equipment, so I'll step back and watch his results first.
Regards, Larry
DEAR LARRY,
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS...?
I JUST SENT IT TO A FRIEND IN THE US.
T
Hey Bill,
I just heard that the Bushestapo is planning another "terrorist attack" on you people and maybe us as well so he can cancel the elections and initiate his martial law plan.
Have you heard any of this?
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Men occasionally stumble over the TRUTH, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill
"Ignorance is NOT Bliss"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&hl=en
Http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 19, 2008, 06:39:29 PM
DEAR LARRY,
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS...?
T
No knowledge, he believes that God told him to be president, and no one knows what he thinks God is telling him now.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 19, 2008, 07:09:27 PM
No knowledge, he believes that God told him to be president, and no one knows what he thinks God is telling him now.
Regards, Larry
DRINK THE KOOL AID GW
DRINK THE KOOL AID...!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 19, 2008, 09:59:46 AM
...SO THE "CAPACITORS" CHARGE AT RESONANCE WHEN THE INDUCTIVE REACTANCE AND CAPACITIVE REACTANCE CANCEL EACH OTHER OUT... AND THEN DICHARGE THROUGH THE COIL'S DC RESISTANCE TO PRODUCE A MAGNETIC FIELD ??? ...
Hi Thane and all,
I am sorry, but I have no knowledge about how or why this works.
However, your idea to use the said winding style for a primary in your transformer project may be a good one.
After all the inventor holding the patent - his name is Pavel Imris and I don't know him but only read about his work in this forum - also holds an older patent on a special transformer (German patent DE19927355).
The primary of this transformer consists of a capacitor - made of two stacked foils which he calls 'ribbon capacitor' - wound onto the transformer core.
So one can see that in the older patent he used a capacitor made of foils as the primary winding, whereas in the meantime he seems to have found out, that he can achieve the same effect by 'simply' winding two parallel copper strands and adding a capacitor to each end of such a double helix.
His old patent for the transformer is here:
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE19927355&F=0
Note: Only the abstract is in English, all the other text is in German only.
Another overlap between the older transformer patent and the new patent for the special 'capacitive winding style' is the following:
- in the old patent he claims that due to the foil-capacitor-winding, the reacitve/wattless current can be exploited as real current.
- in the new patent he claims (claim 007, page 2:) "... Ferner ist es Aufgabe der Erfindung, den Blindstrom in der kapazitiven Wicklung in mechanische Wirkleistung eines Elektromotors umzuwandeln "
which translated would be
"...it is furthermore a task of the present invention to transform the reactive power in the capacitive winding into real mechanical work performed by an electric motor."
DEAR EVERYONE,
I EMAILED THE FOLLOWING LETER TO EVERYONE I KNOW - INCLUDING MY MEDIA CONTACTS, SO LET'S HOPE THERE IS STILL TIME FOR "
GOD TO BLESS AMERICA" WITH PEACE.
When I think of more to do I will do it.
Thane
How to Avoid the Planned Martial Law & Election Cancellations
due to the "Economic Crisis" in the U.S.A.
The so called "Economic Crisis" in the United States will be used as a pretext to initiate Martial Law and a cancellation of the upcoming elections, (see below, Martial Law video).
There is a way to avoid this by reading, viewing and understanding the simple and easy to understand explanation on
How the Perepiteia Generator High Voltage Coils Cause Acceleration (also provided below) and most importantly - sharing it with your media..
The energy and complimentary torque provided by the generator's High Voltage Coils comes a no cost to the system and as a result is FREE energy. Please request Test Data proof if you require it.
According to the video the U.S.A. has about 1 week of freedom left if that and Canada is not far behind.
Martial Law Videohttp://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15028.cfm
HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION At the critical threshold speed or frequency (dictated by the coils impedance) the HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ceases to act as an INDUCTOR (storing energy in the electromagnetic field and producing a Lenz's Law repelling action to the approaching magnetic field) and begins to act as a CAPACITOR (storing energy in the electrostatic field between the wires).
When a North Pole magnet approaches a HIGH VOLTAGE COIL above the critical threshold speed/frequency a North Pole repelling magnetic field as per Lenz's Law is not produced because the coil's impedance has impeded the current flow within the coil sufficiently. Voltage is built up in the coil and stored in the electrostatic field like a capacitor.
When the North Pole magnet is TDC - Top Dead Centre - neither approaching nor receding away from the coil - the coil's stored voltage, which is now at a maximum, is released through the coil's DC resistance and a magnetic field is produced according to Lenz's Law (at this split second at TDC the AC sine wave is changing direction and as far as the coil is concerned frequency is briefly 'zero' and coil impedance is zero so current is allowed to flow - thus producing a delayed North Pole magnetic field which now pushes away on the receding magnet and simultaneously attracts the approaching opposite South pole on the rotor. Video :
FREQUENCY VARIATIONS & MULTI-LAYER HV COIL ACCELERATIONhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
All Potential Difference Inc. videos:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=ThaneCHeins
Sincerely
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Men occasionally stumble over the TRUTH, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill
"Ignorance is NOT Bliss" Videoshttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&hl=en
Http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
@Gustav22
Quote- in the old patent he claims that due to the foil-capacitor-winding, the reacitve/wattless current can be exploited as real current.
Wattless current LOL, if you only knew what a contradiction in terms that is. Here is an overview of the Pavel circuit operation.
The AC source provides current moving from left to right (point 6 to 7 in circuit) current in conductor 2 charges capacitor 3, current in conductor 1 charges capacitor 4. Next when AC source 5 current alternates the current direction is from right to left (point 7 to 6 in circuit), the charged capacitor 3 is now in series with the source 5 through conductor 2, the charged capacitor 4 is now in series with the source 5 through conductor 1. This series potential in conductors 1 and 2 is now double the source potential. As I see it the main benefit of this circuit is to use the capacitance to counteract inductive reactance. But the term inductive reactance should be clarified to understand why capacitance is needed. An induced magnetic field in an armature acts like a flywheel, the armature will oppose a current rise and a current fall in the armature. This produces a phase lag when a load is attached to the motor, when the current is supposed to be increasing in the armature it is opposed by the inductive nature of the armature-- this circuit adds a charged capacitance in series with the source to increase potential thus current flow counteracting the opposition. When the current is supposed to be decreasing in the armature the inductive nature of the armature opposes this decrease by raising its voltage---this circuit adds a capacitance to store this increasing voltage and resist the voltage rise proportionally as a capacitor so often does. The function of the capacitance is to make the current source 5 see the inductance in the armature as nothing more than a small capacitance having very little resistance. The question I would ask is---- If the motor current and voltage rise and fall is perfectly matched with the source generator where is the so called "work" involved to drive the motor? Because the only work the AC generator ever performed was fighting to maintain it's current and voltage levels equal with that of the AC motor, which the capacitance is now doing for the generator. It should be obvious that the capacitance must vary with the AC motor load ---- Or we could just vary the inductance to match the capacitance which would be the better choice, use a larger capacitance than is required and a variable inductance.
Just recently I have developed a circuit to prove this point, I have found that a DC permanent magnet motor can be fully loaded and the only losses are ohmic resistance and thermal losses---What we consider as energy,the current flow, the watt-seconds are recovered-- in which case I had to ask what is it exactly that is powering the load?. I am posting this here because I think old crankypants is going to kick some ass in the near future and we should help him in any way we can.
QuoteI am posting this here because I think old crankypants is going to kick some ass in the near future and we should help him in any way we can.
HEY AC - START BY GIVING US YOUR LEARNED OPINION ON MY "HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION" EXPLANATION. :-\
NOBODY HAS CHALLENGED ME YET - WHICH IS NO FUN AT ALL... ???
THANKS
Thane
The real question is why aren't replications from other people or a part list to do so on here. Or even a readable pdf file that bundles the whole principle for "average" people.
Quote from: broli on October 20, 2008, 06:13:45 PM
The real question is why aren't replications from other people or a part list to do so on here. Or even a readable pdf file that bundles the whole principle for "average" people.
I_RON, LARRYC, AND MYSELF ARE SO DEPERATELY BELOW AVERAGE THAT AVERAGE PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND OUR GIBBERISH RANTING.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 20, 2008, 06:21:54 PM
I_RON, LARRYC, AND MYSELF ARE SO DEPERATELY BELOW AVERAGE THAT AVERAGE PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COMPREHEND OUR GIBBERISH RANTING.
T
In fact, you seen us in Geico commercials.
BTW, I'm the handsome one. The other two are butt ugly. Also, I am the only one of us with a Doctorate in Gibberation from Cave Tech U ;D
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on October 20, 2008, 06:40:50 PM
In fact, you seen us in Geico commercials.
BTW, I'm the handsome one. The other two are butt ugly.
Regards, Larry
THANKS FOR THAT HAIRRYC!
T
Quote from: LarryC on October 20, 2008, 06:40:50 PM
In fact, you seen us in Geico commercials.
BTW, I'm the handsome one. The other two are butt ugly. Also, I am the only one of us with a Doctorate in Gibberation from Cave Tech U ;D
Regards, Larry
BUTT, when we wash our faces and comb our hair you can see our hearts of gold...
Ron
(//)
@Crankypants
QuoteHEY AC - START BY GIVING US YOUR LEARNED OPINION ON MY "HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION" EXPLANATION.
NOBODY HAS CHALLENGED ME YET - WHICH IS NO FUN AT ALL..
Your explanation posted prior to my last one ,
QuoteHOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION
, has it pretty much covered. Simply put, if induced energy can be stored in a form(capacitance) which cannot be effected by the energy state which induced it then transformed into a form that can (current) we have a one way reaction. Below is a patent I have tested which works in a similar way(Robert Alexander:self-sustaining generator at rexresearch.com), LOL the coil orientation is what throws everyone off track. Notice the coils should be wrapped on an armature core not shown and this armature core is energized at or near the bloch wall of the PM stator field as depicted by the orientation of the commutator brushes.The primaries are energized in a neutral field which makes the armature a transformer and the PM field will produce a force on the armature but cannot induce a current in it----one way reaction. The armature accelerates due to this primary force and a current is induced in the high voltage secondaries by the stator PM's in which case it is a generator. Motor/transformer/generator in that order twice per revolution but in this case all of what constitutes the input in the primaries is added to the output of the generated current in the secondaries. I am not sure what the exact setup is that you are using at the present date but any input energy must become an output for efficient operation as well as any generated energy regardless of what form it may take.
Regards
AC
AND BUTT BUT NOT LEAST...
Cranky, I have watched this ongoing experiment with great interest. It was my greatest hope that this was leading somewhere, and it might still, however I will ask the question no one else will. Your output compared to input sucks and I am wondering if there is data somewhere that shows a gain over normal efficiency of a normal generator. Just now in the shop I belted together two DC treadmill motors and clamped them to a table saw. The motor pulled 1.03 amps at 12.30 volts while driving the other one loaded as a generator. The load was the first 10 ohm resistor on the bench. The output was 3.94 volts at 1.24 amps. This was not meant to be an exhaustive study but did confirm for me that your efficiency is way way down. My generator with mismatched load is 38% efficient while in the California data you show .25% efficiency for your normal generator and 1.45% efficiency for the lenzless version. Cranky you asked one time how to enhance your presentation for companies coming to visit. You should start with a 95% efficient generator as a baseline and increase the efficiency and accelerate yours to beat it. If I have missed something I apologize.
ALL KIDDING ASSIDE...PLANS, DATA, VIDEOS ETC CAN BE FOUND HERE:
REPLY # 's
2947
2950
2951
2958
2964
2972
& YOUTUBE VIDEOS"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vruf7s9PaA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X5FvSVdf58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYC0X5AP5Y4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsBMPZimzoU
T
Quote from: iflewmyown on October 20, 2008, 07:51:07 PM
Cranky, I have watched this ongoing experiment with great interest. It was my greatest hope that this was leading somewhere, and it might still, however I will ask the question no one else will. Your output compared to input sucks and I am wondering if there is data somewhere that shows a gain over normal efficiency of a normal generator. Just now in the shop I belted together two DC treadmill motors and clamped them to a table saw. The motor pulled 1.03 amps at 12.30 volts while driving the other one loaded as a generator. The load was the first 10 ohm resistor on the bench. The output was 3.94 volts at 1.24 amps. This was not meant to be an exhaustive study but did confirm for me that your efficiency is way way down. My generator with mismatched load is 38% efficient while in the California data you show .25% efficiency for your normal generator and 1.45% efficiency for the lenzless version. Cranky you asked one time how to enhance your presentation for companies coming to visit. You should start with a 95% efficient generator as a baseline and increase the efficiency and accelerate yours to beat it. If I have missed something I apologize.
DID YOUR GENERATOR CAUSE YOUR MOTOR TO ACCELERATE?
NOOR DID YOUR GENERATOR CAUSE YOUR MOTOR TO DECELERATE?
YESI AM NOT CONCERNED WITH EFFICIENCY AND NEVER HAVE BEEN - I AM CONCERNED WITH ENHANCING OUR GENERATOR COILS ABILITY TO
ACCELERATE THE PRIME MOVER WHILE DELIVERING POWER - AND WHILE ENHANCING MY ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND IT AND EXPLAIN IT TO OTHERS WHEN THE TIME COMES TO DO SO.
NOW, I AM CONCERNED WITH ENHANCING OUR CONCENTRIC BI-COIL'S HIGH VOLTAGE COIL'S ABILITY TO ACCELERATE THE PRIME MOVER WHILST AT THE SAME TIME FEEDING IT'S DELAYED INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD INTO THE HIGH CURRENT COILS AND ENHANCING THEIR GENERATED OUTPUT... ACTUALLY BEEN THERE DONE THAT... THE NEXT STEP IS FINDING THE UPPER LIMITS AND BEST DESIGN PARAMETERS. SO I WILL BE READY WHEN AC'S PROPHECY COMES TRUE ABOUT ME LICKING SOME BUTT.
T
@Crankypants
QuoteSO I WILL BE READY WHEN AC'S PROPHECY COMES TRUE ABOUT ME LICKING SOME BUTT
Your one twisted sister Crankypants, well gotta run walmarts having a 1/2 price sale on satanic figurines and christmas is right around the corner.
Later
AC
Quote from: allcanadian on October 20, 2008, 08:18:55 PM
@CrankypantsYour one twisted sister Crankypants, well gotta run walmarts having a 1/2 price sale on satanic figurines and christmas is right around the corner.
Later
AC
DON'T FORGET MY PRESENT - THE BEST CHRISTMAS STORY EVER TOLD VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeEX-M7rHAc&feature=related
T
Hi allcanadian,
thank you for the explanation of the workings of the Pavel Imris capacitance driven electromagnets. I think I understand your explanation and I accept it as correct.
Quote from: allcanadian on October 20, 2008, 02:28:03 PM
.... I have found that a DC permanent magnet motor can be fully loaded and the only losses are ohmic resistance and thermal losses---What we consider as energy,the current flow, the watt-seconds are recovered-- in which case I had to ask what is it exactly that is powering the load?.
On www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/ user gmeat wrote:
"I'm so glad theres no conservation of work law"
I personally am also glad about that.
As to your question "what is it exactly that is powering the load?". I think the work to power the load is done by the force.
Which force?
Well, I think a force is the same as a potential difference. And you yourself explained, that with a capacitor one can obtain double the potential difference of the AC source potential.
So at certain moments within one cycle you have double the force at your disposal. This doubled force will do the work.
No?
However, to come up with a simple system, that incorporates this principle and can be built by almost anybody, remains a real challenge.
Quote from: allcanadian on October 20, 2008, 02:28:03 PM
I am posting this here because I think old crankypants is going to kick some ass in the near future and we should help him in any way we can.
Knock on wood.
Anyway, in case he does not do it soon, I hope you will.
DEAR ALL,
LUC SENT ME THIS EMAIL AND SEE MY REPLY...
IF YOU WANT TO HELP - PLEASES DO SO.
THANKS
Thane
Hi Thane,
I want to give you an update since we met.
The day I went to see you I saw a video that amazed me so I started working on replication of it to see if it really does what is seen in the video's below.
Here are the 2 videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idey7O0WlU0
I am happy to say that it does do exactly what is seen in the video. It took a while to understand but today I fully replicated the effect.
Here is my video demo:
http://www.energetictube.com/play/Energy__Unsorted/Resonance_test_3
Luc
Dear Luc,
Please do come by or I can pick you up?
I watched the videos and asked him to show the power going into the signal generator?
Do you think you might be able to find a way to make this work with the transformer i.e. the primary at resonance feeding the secondaries? I have been trying to create a "news story" to stop the next planned terrorist attack in the USA but I have failed so far.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Men occasionally stumble over the TRUTH, but most of them
pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill
"Ignorance is NOT Bliss" Videos
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&hl=en
Http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
Bush's Power Grab
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jatpX6kuxHQ&feature=related
US Pending Martial Law Video
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15028.cfm
US Prision Camps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4
Hi Thane,
I came across this here :
http://www.16pi2.com/eddy_currents.htm (http://www.16pi2.com/eddy_currents.htm)
Something to consider in this contex.
Regards
Kator
And I came across this, after looking at other video's by gotoluc:
http://www.mariner.connectfree.co.uk/html/e_m_inertia.html
Btw, thanks for the link, that site looks interesting
Hi all. especiallty to Luc,
no,. no no.Grave error here. Missing basic knowledge about incandescant bulbs. They are acting like PTC´s.
No OU here. This is a typical trap many are falling in. You lead people astray.
Please study this :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb)
Go to paragraph : Electrical characteritics
... and understand it once and for all that you can have verly large current at lower voltage ( bulb is dark ) and lower current at higher Voltage ( bulb is lit ) but wattage is bigger in the dark input-bulb.
In order to have proof it is a must to use normal resistors and not bulbs.
Use two identical resistors with identical values at the input and the output side and compare the voltage using a scopeand not a digi-Meter.
Come back then and give your report.
Kator
Hi Thane
Have you see that ?
Seems similar of your experiements
http://www.apexdrivelabs.com/
Quote from: albator10 on October 23, 2008, 12:51:55 PM
Hi Thane
Have you see that ?
Seems similar of your experiements
http://www.apexdrivelabs.com/
THANKS ALBATOR!
BUT NOPE - OUR GENERATOR IS NOT
RED...BUT IT DOES HAVE MAGNETS AND COILS LIKE THIS ONE AND IT IS INTERESTING HOW THET ARRANGE THE MAGNETS TO REDUCE COGGING TORGUE.
ALSO I DOUBT THIS GENERATOR ACCELERATES UNDER LOAD BECAUSE THOSE COILS ARE HIGH CURRENT TYPES.
IT WOULDN'T TAKE MUCH TO RETROFIT IT THOUGH - I WILL CONTACT THEM AND GET BACK TO YOU ON WHAT THEY SAY.
THANKS
Thane
@thane
what happens when you load the wheel, for instance by braking the wheel with your hand or with a heavier flywheel or a generator?
Quote from: alan on October 23, 2008, 02:52:04 PM
@thane
what happens when you load the wheel, for instance by braking the wheel with your hand or with a heavier flywheel or a generator?
LOADING THE GENERATOR AS SEEN HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsBMPZimzoU
WITH THE
HC COIL CAUSES THE SYSTEM TO
DECELERATE.LOADING THE SAME GENERATOR WITH THE
HV COIL CAUSES THE SYSTEM TO
ACCELERATE.LOADING THE SYSTEM WITH THE
HC COIL AND THE
HV COIL CAUSES THE SYSTEM TO
ACCELERATE AND THE
HV COIL INCREASES THE HC COIL'S INDUCED VOLTAGE.LOADING THE HV COIL HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
CAUSES THE SYSTEM TO
DECELERATE BELOW 600 RPM AND
ACCELERATE ABOVE 600 RPM .
BREAKING THE WHEEL BY HAND AT 400 RPM GIVES A 100 dB SQUEEL AND AT 1200 RPM IS ACCOMPANIED BY A 200 dB BLOOD CURDLING SCREAM AND A BLOOD SPEWING ARC.
BREAKING THE HEAVIER CAST IRON WHEEL AT 1200 RPM MAKES ME WISH I WERE AMBIDEXTROUS.
CHEERS
Stubs
But Thane,
since blood is paramagnetic in nature it will all stick to the rotating magnets - no spilling. New clean blood-sucking weapon.
What a horrible tool ! New weapon for Terminator 8 or so - if racicst Schwarzenegger will ever make it.
Kator
Quote from: Kator01 on October 23, 2008, 05:37:34 PM
But Thane,
since blood is paramagnetic in nature it will all stick to the rotating magnets - no spilling. New clean blood-sucking weapon.
What a horrible tool ! New weapon for Terminator 8 or so - if racicst Schwarzenegger will ever make it.
Kator
YES I CAN BE A HORRIBLE TOOL SOME TIMES...AND I CAN'T SPELL EIDER (I MEANT BRAKE
NOT BREAK).
OK I'LL BITE WHY RACIST?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 23, 2008, 05:51:27 PM
YES I CAN BE A HORRIBLE TOOL SOME TIMES...AND I CAN'T SPELL EIDER (I MEANT BRAKE NOT BREAK).
OK I'LL BITE WHY RACIST?
T
And you can't even spell FOOL properly either, lol
He is a racist because they are RACING to ARMAGEDDON
Ron
Hi Thane ,
I had to do a search in english websites. In german newspapers there are many statemens of him which give a good insight into his simple character.
So look here :
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/08/13/164125.php (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/08/13/164125.php)
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/1446 (http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/1446)
But I will not start any political discussion here.
You have to understand german language in order to read all this in the media
Regards
Kator
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 23, 2008, 03:41:27 PM
Stubs
;D
Think I didn't formulate the question correct.
What happens when you increase mechanical load?
You can put kinetic energy into the equation.
The effects you describe are similar to the bedini generator:
Acceleration while input current drops.
Quote from: alan on October 24, 2008, 10:38:09 AM
;D
Think I didn't formulate the question correct.
What happens when you increase mechanical load?
You can put kinetic energy into the equation.
The effects you describe are similar to the bedini generator:
Acceleration while input current drops.
IF YOU HAVE ACCELERATION WITH A CORRESPONDING DROP IN MOTOR INPUT CURRENT THEN TWO THINGS ARE OCCURRING, EITHER CORE DRAG IS BEING DECREASED (STEVE SAW THAT BY SATURATING HIS SOLID IRON CORES I THINK) OR YOU ARE CREATING AN EXTRA TORQUE SOMEWHERE OR BOTH CAN BE HAPPENING ALSO AND BOTH ARE BENEFICIAL.
AS FAR AS BEING SIMILAR TO BEDINI - I DOUBT THAT SINCE WE TRY TO DO EVERYTHING WITH
ONLY THE COIL BY MANIPULATING, COIL IMPEDANCE, CAPACITANCE - NO ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS AT ALL TO WEAR OUT OR BREAK DOWN.
AS FAR AS
"WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU INCREASE MECHANICAL LOAD" COMPARED TO A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR THAT
IS ALSO AFFECTED BY CORE DRAG AND LENZ'S LAW - WE SHOW THAT IN JUST ABOUT EVERY VIDEO I.E. IT CAN BE ELIMINATED OR AT THE VERY LEAST REDUCED AND BEST OF ALL HV COIL LENZ'S LAW INDUCED FIELD CAN BE USED TO INCREASE HC COIL COIL OUTPUT.
BACK TO STEVE: HE SAW HIS ACCELERATION VANISH WHEN HE CHANGED TO LAMINATED CORES BECAUSE THEY SATURATE LATER AND BECAUSE HIS WATER GOES DOWN THE DRAIN IN A COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION JUST BECAUSE HE'S SPECIAL. ;)
T
YO, MO-FO'S,
I JUST UPLOADED A NEW VIDEO - FIRST ATTEMPT (WITHOUT TEXT YET) BUT WE ARE TAKING POWER OFF THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL THROUGH A STEP DOWN TRANSFORMER GETTING HV COIL POWER ACROSS A 10 OHM LOAD AND HC POWER ACROSS A 10 OHM LOAD WITH ACCELERATION AS WELL.
WE ARE USING AN AC MIG WELDING ROD AS THE HV COIL CORE. AS HAS BEEN SEEN PREVIOUSLY THE HV COIL AIDS THE HC COIL OUTPUT AND VISE VERSA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYnhUCN_I6w
CHEERS
Thane
Is your step down transformer in parallel with the high voltage coil, or are you using it like a series tap?
If you wind your own high voltage coils, would you create a tap in the windings to draw power from, or is it better to have separate coils?
I just watched some of your demo video's Thane and one common thing I noticed is the lack of sound quality when the motor is started up. Here's something I recommend for you and anyone else doing demo's in loud environments...
http://cgi.ebay.com/New-Cordless-Wireless-Microphone-Headset-Mic-Receiver_W0QQitemZ250304047486QQihZ015QQcategoryZ80183QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
QuoteIs your step down transformer in parallel with the high voltage coil, or are you using it like a series tap?
THE TRANSFORMER IS IN SERIES.
QuoteIf you wind your own high voltage coils, would you create a tap in the windings to draw power from, or is it better to have separate coils?
THIS IS VIRGIN TERRITORY - YOU TELL ME ???
OUR NEXT STEP IS TO MAGNETICALLY COUPLE THE HV COIL THROUGH ANOTHER HV COIL AND CLOSE THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT ON THE ROTOR POLES TO SEE IF WE CAN INCREASE THE HV OUTPUT AND ACCELERATION.
HAPPY SUNDAY!
Thane
P.S. VIDEO ANNOTATIONS HAVE NOW BEEN ADDED.http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ThaneCHeins&view=videos
Quote from: broli on October 26, 2008, 07:44:43 AM
I just watched some of your demo video's Thane and one common thing I noticed is the lack of sound quality when the motor is started up. Here's something I recommend for you and anyone else doing demo's in loud environments...
THANKS BROLI - BUT I DON'T TALK ANYMORE CAUSE I SOUND LIKE A DORK! :-\
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 26, 2008, 09:45:23 AM
THANKS BROLI - BUT I DON'T TALK ANYMORE CAUSE I SOUND LIKE A DORK! :-\
Thane
Well you will just have to get over it! You are no radio announcer, TG, but you have done an excellent
job to date. you speak well, you speak clearly, you speak with with an intimate knowledge of the
subject... who else can do this? Carry on, we expect nothing less!
Ron, (who really does sound like a dork on his vid....)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 26, 2008, 09:45:23 AM
THANKS BROLI - BUT I DON'T TALK ANYMORE CAUSE I SOUND LIKE A DORK! :-\
Thane
Actually, I'm confused, according to Wikipedia:
The word dork can mean:
Slang for an inept person.[1] It may also have the following meanings:
Slang for "Pen!s"
Among Poser users, slang for the Poser 3 and Poser 4 standard man CGI model
"Dork fish", is Western Australian name for the Australasian snapper fish (Chrysophrys auratus)
What type are you ???
Regards, Larry
Quote from: i_ron on October 23, 2008, 06:32:55 PM
And you can't even spell FOOL properly either, lol
He is a racist because they are RACING to ARMAGEDDON
Ron
OK - POINT TAKEN...
SO I HAVE BEEN PRETTY FREAKED OUT LATELY CONCERNING THE CONTINUED BUSHWHACKING OF AMERICA - AND I HAD A WONDERFUL INSIGHT YESTERDAY WHILE WINDING MY COILS... AND THINKING ABOUT I_RON'S, "
RUNNING TOWARDS ARMAGEDDON" STATEMENT. IT BROUGHT ME PEACE AND PERHAPS TO YOU ALL AS WELL? :)
THE BANKERS AND SHADOW GOVERNMENTS OF THE WORLD REPRESENT A FORM OF CANCER ON HUMAN SOCIETY - AND AS WE ALL KNOW, IF GONE UNDETECTED CANCER WILL EVENTUALLY KILL THE HOST.
THE ONLY WAY TO HEAL AND ULTIMATELY SURVIVE IS TO DETECT AND REMOVE THE CANCER - BUT FIRST THE CANCER HAS TO "SHOW ITSELF" IN SOME WAY.
SOON THE GREED INFECTED PUSS FILLED THINKING OF THE DISEASED FEW, WILL OOZE OUT INTO THE LIGHT OF DAY FOR
ALL TO SEE - WHERE IT CAN FINALLY BE SEEN (AND NO LONGER IGNORED) FOR WHAT IT IS AND THEN CAN BE REMOVED ONCE AND FOR ALL.
THE ARMAGEDDON HERE IS THEIR ARMAGEDDON :'( NOT OURS. :D
Thane
Hello Thane,
I just watched your new video and noticed that in the frrst section your mixed up HV and HC-Coil- comment. Your comment-tag contains the message
"Hight Voltage-Coil-Output" while you switched ON the 10 Ohm- load to the HC-Coil ( Yellow Digi-Meter ).
It gets more interesting Thane. You are due for the bavarian leather-trouser-nobel-price - if there is any.
Kator
Hi Folks,
you watched these interviews here with Bob Dean ?
In oder to know what he was involved in you first have to see the frist 2 Vids of him ( not Marcias )
http://www.projectcamelot.net/bob_dean.html (http://www.projectcamelot.net/bob_dean.html)
It gets more bizarre. We are living in a zoo..
Enjoy it
Kator
Oke I have a few basic questions now to see if I understand this whole thing correctly.
You spin the rotor with the permanent magnets and hold a coil in front of it. What I find confusing are quite some things.
1) In the early demos you showed how the coil decelerates the motor bringing it to a full stop which is according to Lenz's law. But then later you "push" the induced flux in to the rotor by replacing that bras. Can you make some sort of top view illustration of this?
2)In your later demos you seemed to have abandoned this idea? It seems like to me you were showing how lenz's law applies only to a certain RPM while above that limit the law breaks?
3)What is the difference between the HV and HC coil?
4)Instead of looking it up but I'll just assume that an induction motor runs as fast as the AC frequency that's given to it? So if the motor is accelerating, what's happening to the stator coils of the motor? Isn't their frequency constant depending on the input?
I have much more things to ask but I would really appreciate your time on answering these.
Even though you already showed a lot I believe you can do so much simpler and more appealing which I'm willing to help with the more I understand.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 26, 2008, 12:11:47 PM
OK - POINT TAKEN...
THE BANKERS AND SHADOW GOVERNMENTS OF THE WORLD REPRESENT A FORM OF CANCER ON HUMAN SOCIETY - AND AS WE ALL KNOW, IF GONE UNDETECTED CANCER WILL EVENTUALLY KILL THE HOST.
Thane
It is good to see your thinking. Hopefully this forum of yours will have some influence on the many.
To see what is in store for us we have but to look and see what the scum bags have done to others...
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/10.08/tshtf1.html
Argentina shows exactly how this will play out in Canada. (and the UK, and the US, etc etc )
Ron
Oh, incidentally, the Deutsch patent was a washout for me as a transformer and as a generating coil.
Did anyone have any success to tell?
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on October 26, 2008, 02:53:48 PM
It is good to see your thinking. Hopefully this forum of yours will have some influence on the many.
I HAVE SOME SUCCESS TO TELL ;)
HERE IS SOME MORE OF MY NEW THINKING AND TALKING:
HIGH CURRENT COIL ACCELERATION VIDEO:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m80QfkHDUzI
TODAY WE FOUND A WAY TO GET OUR HIGH CURRENT COILS TO ACCELERATE...
CHEERS
(a tired)
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 26, 2008, 06:59:58 PM
I HAVE SOME SUCCESS TO TELL ;)
snip
TODAY WE FOUND A WAY TO GET OUR HIGH CURRENT COILS TO ACCELERATE...
CHEERS
(a tired)
Thane
Very good Sir!
A bit hard to see the construction in the vid but great to have the masters voice back!
Cheers
(a retired)
Ron
Quote from: broli on October 26, 2008, 02:20:49 PM
Oke I have a few basic questions now to see if I understand this whole thing correctly.
You spin the rotor with the permanent magnets and hold a coil in front of it. What I find confusing are quite some things.
1) In the early demos you showed how the coil decelerates the motor bringing it to a full stop which is according to Lenz's law. But then later you "push" the induced flux in to the rotor by replacing that bras. Can you make some sort of top view illustration of this?
OLD NEWS - NOT WORTH MENTIONING...
2)In your later demos you seemed to have abandoned this idea? It seems like to me you were showing how lenz's law applies only to a certain RPM while above that limit the law breaks?
OLD NEWS - NOT WORTH MENTIONING...
3)What is the difference between the HV and HC coil?
A V AND A C
4)Instead of looking it up but I'll just assume that an induction motor runs as fast as the AC frequency that's given to it? So if the motor is accelerating, what's happening to the stator coils of the motor? Isn't their frequency constant depending on the input?
NO AN INDUCTION MOTOR RUNS AS FAST AS THE AC FREQUENCY MINUS ROTOR SLIP ANGLE %.
I have much more things to ask but I would really appreciate your time on answering these.
Even though you already showed a lot I believe you can do so much simpler and more appealing which I'm willing to help with the more I understand.
SIMPLE IS APPEALING!
T
In a way you left me as clueless as when I asked those questions.
Quote from: broli on October 27, 2008, 04:05:31 AM
In a way you left me as clueless as when I asked those questions.
EXPLANATION VIDEOShttp://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ThaneCHeins&view=videos
Perepiteia Generator Operation Explanation â€" Draft 1 â€" June 20th, 2008
High Voltage Coil EffectsThane C. Heins
IntroductionThe Perepiteia Generator employs high voltage coils to counteract the effects associated with Lenz’s Law and the Law of Conservation of Energy. Whereas a conventional generator high current coil design causes the prime mover to decelerate under load â€" the Perepiteia high voltage coil design causes the prime mover to accelerate. If high current and high voltage coils are employed simultaneously, the acceleration provided by the high voltage coils can completely eliminate Lenz’s Law (deceleration) effects and even provide additional acceleration despite high current coil loading.
This paper is intended to explain (only) one aspect of how this acceleration may be occurring with respect to how high voltage wire eddy currents affect the coils ability to produce an induced magnetic field as dictated by Lenz’s Law. There of course are other possible reasons for the observed acceleration (including core loss reduction) which will be dealt with in greater detailn at another time.
Basic Observations, Critical Minimum Rotor Speed/FrequencyConventional generators employ low gauge â€" high current (HC) wire to reduce losses associated with resistance and eddy currents. Figure 1 shows how current is distributed through a typical HC coil. The current flows evenly throughout the entire conductor and the induced magnetic field emanates out in a radially symmetrical pattern.
The high voltage coil (HV) in Figure 2 on the other hand shows what happens in the HV coil as the rotor speed exceeds the critical minimum velocity.
Rotor Speed Critical Minimum VelocityAbove a certain rotor speed or frequency the HV coils cause system acceleration in violation of Lenz’s Law.
Below this rotor RPM or frequency the HV coils act in accordance with Lenz’s Law and cause the system to decelerate under load.
The question is why?
What occurs as frequency rises to change the coils’ performance?
HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION At the critical threshold speed or frequency (dictated by the coils inductance) the HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ceases to act as an INDUCTOR (storing energy in the electromagnetic field and producing a Lenz's Law repelling action to the approaching magnetic field) and begins to act as a CAPACITOR (storing energy in the electrostatic field between the wires).
This is clearly shown in the video FREQUENCY VARIATIONS & MULTI LAYER HV COIL ACCELERATION: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
When a North Pole magnet approaches a HIGH VOLTAGE COIL above the critical threshold speed/frequency a North Pole repelling magnetic field as per Lenz's Law is not produced because the coil's impedance has impeded the current flow within the coil sufficiently. Voltage is built up in the coil and stored in the electrostatic field between the wires like a capacitor.
When the North Pole magnet is TDC - Top Dead Centre - neither approaching nor receding away from the coil - the coil's stored voltage, which is now at a maximum, is released through the coil's DC resistance and a magnetic field is produced according to Lenz's Law (at this split second at TDC the AC sine wave is changing direction and as far as the coil is concerned frequency is briefly 'zero' and coil impedance is zero so current is allowed to flow - thus producing a delayed North Pole magnetic field which now pushes away on the receding magnet and simultaneously attracts the approaching opposite South pole on the rotor
Thane
Hi i_ron,
what did you do ? Can you show a simple hand-drawing of your transformer-setup and describe your findings ?
Measurements ? Is this a microwave-oven-transformer you have shown in your picture ?
I have done some tests with a flyback-transformer using 20 turns for a double-string primary-coil and about 800 turns for the secondary. First tests with a rectangular waveform have not been very successful . Now I will develop a sinus-waveform-oscillator for the range 5 KHz to 30 KHz for further tests.
Regards
Kator
Hi there Thane,
To support ya case, here is a video showing the acceleration effect based on a minimum speed threshold.
Indeed, too low speed and ya get no acceleration. Go over the speed turnover point and there is acceleration.
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
SO I KNOW I AM A DORK - BUT NOW I AM A VERY CONFUSED DORK?
(while trying to track down Steve's website)
FROM: allcanadian
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/alternative-energy/85076-free-energy-generator.html
--Latest replication video-- http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv
A generator which accelerates under load, LOL, how original. The generator shown above is a good example of the new technologies which will utilize the electric force to improve efficiency. Quite simply--- Lenz's law has no application when energy is generated and stored as capacitance, an electric field. In the near future Mr.Heinz is going to realize that the HV coil can be precharged to any level by utilization of high voltage/high frequency impulses. He will also understand that there is no such thing as overunity, you cannot violate the conservation of energy. The supposed "extra" energy utilized was always present but we have never set the proper electrical conditions to utilize it.
Regards
AC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by allcanadian; Today at 09:21 PM.
Quote from: Nali2001 on October 27, 2008, 03:37:26 PM
Hi there Thane,
To support ya case, here is a video showing the acceleration effect based on a minimum speed threshold.
Indeed, too low speed and ya get no acceleration. Go over the speed turnover point and there is acceleration.
http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv (http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv)
Regards,
Steven
SO NOW I AM REALLY FUCKED UP?
SORRY STEVEN - I CAN'T OPEN YOUR MOVIE FOR SOME REASON.
IS IT A JEST AS WELL OR IS IT SINCERE?
Thane
OK NOW I GOT IT TO WORK :)
BUT I AM NOT TERRIBLY CONVINCED... :-\
IS IT THE SAME VIDEO SHOWN PREVIOUSLY?
LAMINATED CORES OR SOLID IRON?
HIGH CURRENT WIRE?
IF THEY ARE SOLID IRON (AND HC WIRE) THE CORES WOULD HAVE A LARGE HYSTERISIS EFFECTS WHICH WOULD DIMINISH UPON SATURATION AND CAUSE ACCELERATION SO IDEALLY YOU WOULD HAVE TO MONITOR OUTPUT CURRENT AS WELL.
I AM OPERATING AT LOW POWER LEVELS BECAUSE I AM VERY COGNISANT OF CORE SATURATION AND TRYING TO AVOID IT WITH LAMINATED CORES.
T
Hi all.
Quote "--Latest replication video-- http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv"
Nah nothing 'latest or replication' about it, that video is like over 2 years old.
Its the same gen (other vid though) I showed some time ago and what you see is the solid steel hc device running them 50watt bulb.
Well I saw you text "Rotor Speed Critical Minimum Velocity" and I though hey I saw that effect as well back then.
So I decided to put up the vid. Didn't try to prove any point here.
Hmm well if a core from a 1200watt mot saturates at 50watt use then something is not right.
Anyway the vid will be removed in a few days because the last time I posted a vid I had complains about bandwidth limit being exceeded and such.
Regards,
Steven
Quote from: Kator01 on October 27, 2008, 08:50:36 AM
Hi i_ron,
what did you do ? Can you show a simple hand-drawing of your transformer-setup and describe your findings ?
Measurements ? Is this a microwave-oven-transformer you have shown in your picture ?
I have done some tests with a flyback-transformer using 20 turns for a double-string primary-coil and about 800 turns for the secondary. First tests with a rectangular waveform have not been very successful . Now I will develop a sinus-waveform-oscillator for the range 5 KHz to 30 KHz for further tests.
Regards
Kator
Kator,
Yes, it is a trusty old mot. I used the original primary as a secondary. I wound a new bifilar primary.
This was line driven, that is 120 volt 60 Hz to the variac and 20...70 volts to the DUT (transformer)
The capacitors were 20 mfd in this experiment although this is the second primary. The first one
had fewer turns and larger gauge wire. I used up to 48 mfd for each side on that model.
Interesting in its behavior... in that at some point it will 'jump' and start flowing high amps.
Input, 20 watt.........output, 12.8 watt....eff, 64%
Input, 58 watt.........output, 28 watt..... eff, 48%
Jump
Input, 206 watt.......output, 55 watt......ef, 26%
So you can see, I was not to impressed.
Ron
(//)
Quote from: Nali2001 on October 27, 2008, 09:11:34 PM
Hi all.
Quote "--Latest replication video-- http://www.krystyna.nl/Machine/RPM_test.wmv"
Well I saw you text "Rotor Speed Critical Minimum Velocity" and I though hey I saw that effect as well back then. So I decided to put up the vid. Didn't try to prove any point here.
Regards,
Steven
THE POINT IS ...
YOU MENTIONED NEAR THE BEGINNING OF THIS THREAD THAT WHEN YOU REPLACED THE
SOLID IRON CORES WITH LAMINATED ONES THE ACCELERATION DISAPPEARS.
THE POINT IS - IT DOES NOT DISAPPEAR...
Thane
Quote
« Reply #48 on: February 06, 2008, 02:11:00 PM »
"But the main problem is that these bad cores don?t seem to be able to give a bigger output then the losses they have. So the solid steel cores were replaced with good silicon steel laminations, but you guessed it, the accelerating effect is now gone.
So you can kinda say it like this. If you have a core with lots of core losses, Lenz will fight them and cause less drag on the rotor under speed (but only up to a balance between the two) but due to the bad core you can forget any o.u potential. So you say let?s use good cores then, like silicon steel or metglass? well you now have the potential of real good output? but unfortunately the no load effect is now gone. So again nature has found a way to put ?it? just out of our reach.
Regards,
Steven
Quote from: Kator01 on October 27, 2008, 08:50:36 AM
Hi i_ron,
what did you do ? Can you show a simple hand-drawing of your transformer-setup and describe your findings ?
Measurements ? Is this a microwave-oven-transformer you have shown in your picture ?
I have done some tests with a flyback-transformer using 20 turns for a double-string primary-coil and about 800 turns for the secondary. First tests with a rectangular waveform have not been very successful . Now I will develop a sinus-waveform-oscillator for the range 5 KHz to 30 KHz for further tests.
Regards
Kator
Kator,
With Mr T's kind permission as this patent was a suggested driver for the T transformer....
here is a better pic showing more of the test setup... if anyone has a solution for where I went wrong?
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on October 27, 2008, 09:47:32 PM
here is a better pic showing more of the test setup... if anyone has a solution for where I went wrong?
Ron
NO BEER FRIDGE!
GNIGHT ALL
T
IT DOES NOT DISAPPEAR...
It will once you start getting/taking reasonable power levels out.
Well with my stuff that is. But I never used multi coils and such.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 27, 2008, 09:38:54 PM
THE POINT IS ...
YOU MENTIONED NEAR THE BEGINNING OF THIS THREAD THAT WHEN YOU REPLACED THE
SOLID IRON CORES WITH LAMINATED ONES THE ACCELERATION DISAPPEARS.
THE POINT IS - IT DOES NOT DISAPPEAR...
Thane
Nor does it disappear with low impedance (HC) coils - the threshold frequency requirement is simply higher..... KneeDeep
Quote from: hoptoad on October 28, 2008, 02:08:31 AM
Nor does it disappear with low impedance (HC) coils - the threshold frequency requirement is simply higher..... KneeDeep
WELL IF YOU EXCEED THE CORES ABILITY TO TRANSFER FLUX AT HIGH FREQUENCIES THEN YOU GET NO OR A REDUCED OUTPUT ALONG WITH YOUR ACCELERATION SO WHAT IS THE POINT IN THAT?
OUR CONCENTRIC BI-COIL (ALL LAMINATED CORES) STARTS ACCELERATING AT 30 Hz SO REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS HAVE TO BE KEPPT IN MIND.
T
NO WORD FROM
"DC" aka DeceptiveCanadian...?
CANADA'S TOP POLLUTERS ONLY THE USA AND AUSTRALIA IS WORSE - WE WILL BE CONTACTING THEM ALL... T
Where do the worst of these emissions come from? The power and energy companies that heat our homes and fuel our cars, with companies based in Ontario and Alberta leading the way. Several of them are coal-fired plants that generate "dirty" energy, which speaks to the need for alternative energy solutions in Canada for the demands of such things as winter heating.
"The shift needs to be in changing technology," said de Leon.
Ontario Power Generation’s coal-powered Nanticoke Generating Station was our top air polluter in 2005, releasing more than 17.6 million tonnes of greenhouse gases.
The remaining top nine were:
• The Sundance Generating Facility/Plant in Alberta, owned by TransAlta Utilities Corporation, with almost 16.2 million tonnes,
• Syncrude Canada’s Mildred Lake and Aurora North Plant sites in Alberta, with more than 10.3 million tonnes,
• The Genesee Thermal Generating Station in Alberta owned by EPCOR Power Development Corporation, with more than 8.9 million tonnes,
• Ontario Power Generation’s Lambton Generating Station with more than 8.7 million tonnes,
• Suncor Energy Inc.’s Oil Sands in Alberta, with almost 7.7 million tonnes,
• Saskatchewan Power Corporation’s Boundary Dam Power Station, with more than 6.7 million tonnes,
• The Sheerness Generating Station owned by Alberta Power (2000) Ltd., wth more than 6.5 million tonnes,
• The Keephills Generating Plant in Alberta owned by TransAlta Utilities Corporation, with more than 6.1 million tonnes, and
• The Battle River Generating Station owned by Alberta Power, with almost 5.5 million tonnes.
That’s just greenhouse gases. What about pollutants listed as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, such as hydrochloric acid; hydrogen fluoride, sulphuric acid, or mercury?
The HBM&S Co. Ltd. Metallurgical Complex in Manitoba owned by Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting won the dubious distinction of leading the toxic top 10 with more than 203.2 million kilograms of toxins.
It was followed by:
• Inco’s Copper Cliff Smelter Complex in Ontario, with more than 192.5 million kilograms,
• Inco’s Thompson Operations in Manitoba, with more than 182.5 million kilograms,
• Syncrude Canada’s Mildred Lake Plant site in Alberta, with more than 99.3 million kilograms,
• Ontario Power Generation’s Nanticoke Generating Station also made this list, releasing more than 93.5 million kilograms,
• SaskPower’s Boundary Dam Power Station in Saskatchewan, with more than 67.8 million kilograms,
• TransAlta Utilities Sundance Generating Facility in Albert with more almost 58.8 million kilograms,
• Nova Scotia Power’s Lingan Generating Station, with more than 56.8 million kilograms,
• SaskPower’s Poplar River Power Station, with more than 50.7 million kilograms and
• The Sheerness Generating Station in Alberta owned by Alberta Power (2000) Ltd., with more than 49.9 million kilograms.
According to Pollution Watch, emissions of oxides of nitrogen associated with smog rose 19 per cent in 2005 to more than 615.6 million kilograms from just over 518 million kilograms in 2002, while emissions of particulate matter linked to respiratory illnesses increased 7 per cent to more than 51.9 million kilograms from almost 48.4 million kilograms. Levels of sulphur dioxide grew 4 percent to more than 1.9 million kilograms from just under 1.9 million in 2002.
The release of mercury into our air dropped 9 percent from 5,183 kilograms to 4,711. But that was more than negated by the increase in mercury released onto land â€" which rose 848 percent to 36,536 kilograms from 3,850.
Quote from: Nali2001 on October 27, 2008, 10:05:32 PM
Well with my stuff that is. But I never used multi coils and such.
AGAIN THE POINT IS: THANK FULLY I AM NOT WORKING ON YOUR STUFF, HOPTAD'S STUFF, BEDINI'S STUFF, ETC, ETC, AND ALSO THANKFULLY I DON'T LISTEN TO ANYONE, EVER.
HAPPY INVENTING!
Thane
Hi Ron,
thank you for the pics and description. No, I have no answer at the moment as I have to build first a sinus-oscillator.
I myself once encountered a big measurement-error of about 50 % while using a energy-meter on a transformer-test-setup. This meter was sold by a professional electronic-company. So I do not question your results but how did you measure the power ? By an incandescant bulb in series at input-terminal and comparing this with the output ?
Did you control input-power via increasing voltage of variac ? I would do tests with your standard-grid-voltage 120 Volt and change the bulb ( using a 20 Watt, 40 Watt and 60 Watt - bulb). The reason is that incandescant-bulbs at highter Voltage can have less power and shine brighter than at low voltage ( and almost beeing dark) because they have much lower inner resistance while the filament is cold thus passing more current.
Did your caps got hot when this strange jump occurs ? Which parts got warm ? The energy-loss must show up somewhere ( core-losses, cap-losses etc. )
How many bifilar windings as compared to the first primary ?
Try to use as many bifilar-windings as the original primary. A lot of work - I know but you have to calculate the ampere-windings for the primary adapted so it is the same ampere-windings as the original primary as this Transformer is contructed that way.
For me it looks as if you exceeded the saturation-level, but at 200 watt-input ? Very strange.
Ron, it is necessary to normalize all parameters otherwise we do not understand how this setup works.
Kator
Quote from: Kator01 on October 28, 2008, 12:36:09 PM
Hi Ron,
thank you for the pics and description. No, I have no answer at the moment as I have to build first a sinus-oscillator.
I myself once encountered a big measurement-error of about 50 % while using a energy-meter on a transformer-test-setup. This meter was sold by a professional electronic-company. So I do not question your results but how did you measure the power ? By an incandescant bulb in series at input-terminal and comparing this with the output ?
Did you control input-power via increasing voltage of variac ? I would do tests with your standard-grid-voltage 120 Volt and change the bulb ( using a 20 Watt, 40 Watt and 60 Watt - bulb). The reason is that incandescant-bulbs at highter Voltage can have less power and shine brighter than at low voltage ( and almost beeing dark) because they have much lower inner resistance while the filament is cold thus passing more current.
Did your caps got hot when this strange jump occurs ? Which parts got warm ? The energy-loss must show up somewhere ( core-losses, cap-losses etc. )
How many bifilar windings as compared to the first primary ?
Try to use as many bifilar-windings as the original primary. A lot of work - I know but you have to calculate the ampere-windings for the primary adapted so it is the same ampere-windings as the original primary as this Transformer is contructed that way.
For me it looks as if you exceeded the saturation-level, but at 200 watt-input ? Very strange.
Ron, it is necessary to normalize all parameters otherwise we do not understand how this setup works.
Kator
Kator,
In the patent they speak of how efficient this system is and how when a solenoid coil was duplicated
using this method they used smaller gauge wire and fewer turns. So I don't believe my changing the
turn ratio was any cause for the dismal results. Admittedly I was only using a clamp-on to measure
amps... but note the sine wave on the scope, it is a very nice sine wave output and should not be a
factor. Plus the different runs with different size bulbs was confirmed more or less with the meter
readings corresponding with the bulb brightness.
It also preformed very poorly in the generator coil test also. So IF there is any magic here, with this patent, then there was not a glimmer of evidence that it works as stated.
I will be very happy to see your experiments show a better performance.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on October 28, 2008, 07:15:51 PM
Kator,
In the patent they speak of how efficient this system is and how when a solenoid coil was duplicated
using this method they used smaller gauge wire and fewer turns. So I don't believe my changing the
turn ratio was any cause for the dismal results. Admittedly I was only using a clamp-on to measure
amps... but note the sine wave on the scope, it is a very nice sine wave output and should not be a
factor. Plus the different runs with different size bulbs was confirmed more or less with the meter
readings corresponding with the bulb brightness.
It also preformed very poorly in the generator coil test also. So IF there is any magic here, with this patent, then there was not a glimmer of evidence that it works as stated.
I will be very happy to see your experiments show a better performance.
Ron
RON I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT VALUES THE:
NO LOAD CURRENT
ON LOAD CURRENT
AND SHORT CIRCUIT CURRENT ARE..?
THERE SHOULD BE A REASONABLY DIRECT RELATIONSHIP FROM NO LOAD TO ON LOAD I.E. IF THE OUTPUT GOES UP BY 10 WATTS THE INPUT SHOULD GO UP BY 10 OR MORE.
I WOULDN'T SUGGEST YOU DO SHORT CIRCUIT BUT THIS IS HOW WE DETERMINE IF OUR BI-TOROIDS ARE DIVERTING INDUCED FLUX AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY OR NOT.
CHEERS
Thane
@thane
I have been contemplating your invention, and I came up wth some thoughts and suggestions you could try if you feel like to:
1 The input current decreases, because the acceleration causes the motor to go out of sync (slip getting ahead of the field instead of being dragged along, or something like that), thus consuming and producing amps, which results in a net amp that is being measured.
Maybe the effect wont occur on a DC motor? (You _are_ using AC right?)
2 Test suggestion: put a second cranky-coil in front of the wheel and observe rpm and input current. Does the rpm reach a higher limit?
3 Test suggestion: When reached top rpm, disconnect input power and observe. I guess it decelerates from this point, but you still could try.
4 Same as 3, in this setup, try measuring output power over a (resistive,reactive?) load, on the motor input, which is now the output.
Maybe it equals the power with which the input drops in acceleration mode. I-in - I-generated = I-measured as suggested @ point 1.
5 Couple a second motor to the first motor, 2nd is then working as a generator driven by the first.
Determine the minimum rpm from which it accelerates.
Put a variable load on the generator and adjust until a stable rpm is reached (counterforce by lenz = force by cranky-coil acceleration), which is still above the minimum rpm needed for acceleration.
Observe for any magic and measure load :P
Predicitons? Dunno, maybe you can without even testing.
Just some toughts of mine, maybe you are far ahead.
8)
@Crankypants
QuoteAGAIN THE POINT IS:
THANK FULLY I AM NOT WORKING ON YOUR STUFF, HOPTAD'S STUFF, BEDINI'S STUFF, ETC, ETC, AND ALSO THANKFULLY I DON'T LISTEN TO ANYONE, EVER
.
LOL, I don't either, the moment I started thinking for myself is the moment I started getting results.
@Iron
QuoteIn the patent they speak of how efficient this system is and how when a solenoid coil was duplicated
using this method they used smaller gauge wire and fewer turns. So I don't believe my changing the
turn ratio was any cause for the dismal results. Admittedly I was only using a clamp-on to measure
amps... but note the sine wave on the scope, it is a very nice sine wave output and should not be a
factor. Plus the different runs with different size bulbs was confirmed more or less with the meter
readings corresponding with the bulb brightness.
It also preformed very poorly in the generator coil test also. So IF there is any magic here, with this patent, then there was not a glimmer of evidence that it works as stated.
When I look at the patent in question there is one thing that is not shown but obviously must happen in order to produce the desired results. The potential on the capacitors must be substantially greater than the source potential and this "extra" potential must carry the load. In this case the inertia of the current must be released, that is the source must be disconnected or the rate of change of the alternating current modified. Many people seem pre-occupied with the pure sine wave and alternating current but in fact we can modify any aspect of this current to suit our needs through control measures. For example we can trade current for potential in one quarter of the alternation by effecting the rate of change of the current thus the inductive collapse and final potential developed.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 28, 2008, 07:53:31 PM
RON I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT VALUES THE:
NO LOAD CURRENT
ON LOAD CURRENT
AND SHORT CIRCUIT CURRENT ARE..?
THERE SHOULD BE A REASONABLY DIRECT RELATIONSHIP FROM NO LOAD TO ON LOAD I.E. IF THE OUTPUT GOES UP BY 10 WATTS THE INPUT SHOULD GO UP BY 10 OR MORE.
I WOULDN'T SUGGEST YOU DO SHORT CIRCUIT BUT THIS IS HOW WE DETERMINE IF OUR BI-TOROIDS ARE DIVERTING INDUCED FLUX AWAY FROM THE PRIMARY OR NOT.
CHEERS
Thane
Good questions boss mon, because it is a whole different animal with these tests!
low watt test:
IN, .44A @ 27V................OUT, .22A @ 32volts (60watt lamp load)
IN, .38 A @ 27V...............no load
--------------------------------------------------------
hi watt test:
IN, 1A @ 60 V.................OUT, .4A @ 82 V (60 watt lamp load)
IN, 3A @ 60,8 V..............no load
-------------------------------------------------------------
These tests with a load were before the "jump"...( .4 amp out was just under jump)
but it seems that it goes into jump mode with no load?
Make any sense to you?
Ron, the half english, half welsh canadian
Quote from: allcanadian on October 29, 2008, 11:21:43 AM
snip.
@IronWhen I look at the patent in question there is one thing that is not shown but obviously must happen in order to produce the desired results. The potential on the capacitors must be substantially greater than the source potential and this "extra" potential must carry the load. In this case the inertia of the current must be released, that is the source must be disconnected or the rate of change of the alternating current modified. Many people seem pre-occupied with the pure sine wave and alternating current but in fact we can modify any aspect of this current to suit our needs through control measures. For example we can trade current for potential in one quarter of the alternation by effecting the rate of change of the current thus the inductive collapse and final potential developed.
All C
'fraid you lost me?
Ron
Quote from: adlep on August 19, 2008, 11:34:25 AM
And now....
Something slightly OFF topic, but still interesting...
A person have managed to convert his truck to run on hho:
http://gmy.news.yahoo.com/v/9344805
If it is so easy to install AND it doubles the MPG how come it is not widely known and used around the world?
That link was to a story about a water tower converted into a house. Did I miss the joke?
I did find this website with free ebook and videos.
http://www.mindstrain.com/
Quote from: i_ron on October 29, 2008, 07:38:38 PM
Good questions boss mon, because it is a whole different animal with these tests!
low watt test:
IN, .44A @ 27V................OUT, .22A @ 32volts (60watt lamp load)
IN, .38 A @ 27V...............no load
--------------------------------------------------------
hi watt test:
IN, 1A @ 60 V.................OUT, .4A @ 82 V (60 watt lamp load)
IN, 3A @ 60,8 V..............no load
-------------------------------------------------------------
These tests with a load were before the "jump"...( .4 amp out was just under jump)
but it seems that it goes into jump mode with no load?
Make any sense to you?
Ron, the half english, half welsh canadian
ANY POSSIBILITY OF SEEING POWER FACTOR ON THY SCOPE? NO LOAD TO ON LOAD?
I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF THE PF IS 1 ON NO LOAD EVEN THOUGH IT OUGHT TO BE CLOSE TO O. THE LOAD POWER FACTOR OF 1 SHOULD BE REFLECTED BACK INTO THE PRIMARY WHEN "ON LOAD" BUT ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN THE "HIGH WATT TEST" THE CURRENT DROPPED 2 AMPS FROM NO LOAD TO ON LOAD? iF SO THAT IS VERY COOL...
Thane THE HALF WIT
Quote from: allcanadian on October 29, 2008, 11:21:43 AM
@Crankypants .
LOL, I don't either, the moment I started thinking for myself is the moment I started getting results.
SO WHAT IN THE BLUE BLAZES WERE YOU DOING OVER THERE ON ELECTRO-TECH?
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/alternative-energy/85076-free-energy-generator.html
WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN EASIER TO BANG YOUR HEAD AGAINST A BRICK WALL?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 29, 2008, 09:37:33 PM
ANY POSSIBILITY OF SEEING POWER FACTOR ON THY SCOPE? NO LOAD TO ON LOAD?
snip
ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN THE "HIGH WATT TEST" THE CURRENT DROPPED 2 AMPS FROM NO LOAD TO ON LOAD? iF SO THAT IS VERY COOL...
Thane THE HALF WIT
Then you must be from ottawa? lol
Hey bud, you've got this role reversal going and its not right... I'm supposed to be harassing you!
K, did one more test and with no load it does the jump at about .8 amp and 55 volts, hence your
wildly optimistic statement above is, hmmmm, not quite right.
Ron, AC, (All Confused)
Quote from: i_ron on October 29, 2008, 10:28:58 PM
Then you must be from ottawa? lol
Hey bud, you've got this role reversal going and its not right... I'm supposed to be harassing you!
K, did one more test and with no load it does the jump at about .8 amp and 55 volts, hence your
wildly optimistic statement above is, hmmmm, not quite right.
Ron, AC, (All Confused)
HARASS ME ABOUT OUR DUMP OF SNOW AND ME HITTING FREAKIN BLACK ICE AT 100 K TONIGHT ON THE WAY HOME...!
ANYWAY I AM LOOKING FOR A REASON AS TO WHY I OUGHT TO TRY THIS PRIMARY IN THE BI-TOROID. BUT WITHOUT PRIMARY POWER FACTOR NUMBES - I AM MISSING 1/3 OF THE EQUATION. NOT THAT IT WOULD MATTER I WOULDN'T BELIEVE YOU UNTIL I SAW IT FOR MYSELF ANYWAY.
NEW "NEGATING LENZ'S LAW" VIDEO ON MY CHANNEL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmrAbUiih3w
CHEERS
Thane DC, (DEADBEAT CHRISTIAN)
Isn't Black Ice fun! Not!
I once tried crossing the Willingdon overpass in Burnaby, slowing down to walking speed because I could see several abandoned cars at funny angles. As I passed the first abandoned car, I hit black ice, and my steering wheel became utterly useless. I then ended up hitting the second abandoned car, putting a small ding in the driver side rear panel. As the car was abandoned, I left a note (yeah, damn my guilty conscience...), and my business card, under the wiper blade. The next day I got a call from ICBC Insurance telling me that I would be considered responsible for 10% of the damage, and that my share would cost about $80 and no lost points. I asked why only 10%, and was told that after I left, at least three other people had hit the same car in exactly the same spot, and not to mention, much harder.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 28, 2008, 06:43:58 AM
WELL IF YOU EXCEED THE CORES ABILITY TO TRANSFER FLUX AT HIGH FREQUENCIES THEN YOU GET NO OR A REDUCED OUTPUT ALONG WITH YOUR ACCELERATION SO WHAT IS THE POINT IN THAT?
And if you don't exceed the cores ability ?
30 hz is very low, even 600 hz is very low, and most lamination materials for transformer cores have good flux transfer ratings in the mid to high kilohertz range.
E.G. laminations for audio transformers must have a good response up to 30 kilohertz minimum to perform their function in a manner which produces an output acceptable to the human ear. In reality, they have good flux transfer responses well above 100 kilohertz
Quote from: CRANKYpants
OUR CONCENTRIC BI-COIL (ALL LAMINATED CORES) STARTS ACCELERATING AT 30 Hz SO REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS HAVE TO BE KEPPT IN MIND. T
Real world applications range from slow moving, low rev / high torque requirements such as those of the heavy transport industry to high speed / high rev high torque requirements in the auto racing sports industry, with various speed/rev and torque requirements for all manner of vehicles in between those extremes.
Low revs / low frequency will not always be the most suitable for all situations.
What happens with your generator coil assembly, when the drive motor is already running at full (high) speed (i.e without variac or any other speed control limiting) without a load, and then a load and / or s/c is applied ?
Do you see an increase in RPM above full speed (with no speed controller) .?
Is this RPM higher than the motor speed (with no speed controller) would be without the generator coil assembly attached at all. ?
P.S. How goes the buggy ???
Cheers and KneeDeep
P.P.S - You may want to check out yet another version peripitea.
It's a little poor on presentation quality and skimpy on technical and electrical data, but watch the video and see what happens.
http://atlantiansolutions.com/videos.htm
Thread started by author here : http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5939.msg135099#msg135099
Note that he says the globe is connected to the drive coil. I suspect it's a pulse motor - Adams style, with a diode or /full wave bridge output on the drive coil going to the globe.
Some reasons it runs well one way and not the other is probably related to the firing position with respect to register point, and or the pickup coil angle with respect to the firing coil angle. Also, if he's using solid sate switching, the polarity of the supply connection will make an obvious difference to circuit performance, due to the polarity requirements of the semiconductors.
.
The shorted coil - impedance unknown, does exactly the same thing as it does in Thanes demonstrations. It accelerates the rotor, with a decrease in motor input current at the same time.
The advantage of the pulse motor is that the power from the flyback will increase with speed as the input power decreases. No need for 2 separate high and low impedance output pickup coils.
Still, if you can pickup any extra energy by having a bi-coil (Thane style) pick up arrangement then go for it.
IMO (having built many Adams motors in the past) this is a perfect example of an Adams pulsed motor/generator showing the same acceleration effect as Adams demonstrated and documented in 1977.
PPPS - The Author (MEM) says on his Overunity thread that it's a pulsed DC motor/generator. Definitely Adams revisited!
Not original, but it certainly highlights the acceleration effect with a shorted output coil that Adams produced with his pulsed motors.
Cheers
Quote
What happens with your generator coil assembly, when the drive motor is already running at full (high) speed (i.e without variac or any other speed control limiting) without a load, and then a load and / or s/c is applied ?
AT FULL SPEED WHEN A HC LOAD IS APPLIED WE GET DECELERATION.
WHEN A HV SHORT IS APPLIED WE GET ACCELERATION ABOVE NO LOAD SPEED.
WE ALSO GET ACCELERATION ABOVE NO LOAD SPEED EVEN WITH A DC MOTOR.
QuoteDo you see an increase in RPM above full speed (with no speed controller) .?
YES
Is this RPM higher than the motor speed (with no speed controller) would be without the generator coil assembly attached at all. ?
YES
QuoteP.S. How goes the buggy ???
Cheers and KneeDeep
SINCE I AM KNEEDEEP IN TESTING AND WINDING (AND SUFFERING FROM "WINDING ELBOW") THE BUGGY IS NOT A HUGE PRIORITY.
T
QuotePPPS - The Author (MEM) says on his Overunity thread that it's a pulsed DC motor/generator. Definitely Adams revisited!
Not original, but it certainly highlights the acceleration effect with a shorted output coil that Adams produced with his pulsed motors.
Cheers
I AM SURE THAT IN THE FUTURE WE WILL HAVE FREE ENEGRY DEVICES LIKE DIFFERENT CAR BRANDS - MY GOAL(S) IS TO PRODUCE A GENERATOR AND MEG WHICH HAS NO "BREAKABLE" COMPONENTS SUCH AS DIODES, CAPACITORS AND CORE SATURATION MAGNETS WHICH DEMAGNETIZE OVER TIME. (THE MAGNETS ON MY ROTOR WILL BE REPLACED BY ELECTROMAGNETS SOON SO IT CAN RUN AS A MOTOR AND OR A GENERATOR OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH.)
GOOD COILS WHEN USED PROPERLY CAN LAST 50 OR MORE YEARS.
I ALSO BELIEVE WE HUMANS WILL "GROW UP" SOME DAY WHEN FORCED INTO IT AND WE WILL DESIGN THINGS TO LAST LIKE WE USED TO BEFORE ACCOUNTANTS TOOK OVER.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 29, 2008, 10:44:23 PM
HARASS ME ABOUT OUR DUMP OF SNOW AND ME HITTING FREAKIN BLACK ICE AT 100 K TONIGHT ON THE WAY HOME...!
ANYWAY I AM LOOKING FOR A REASON AS TO WHY I OUGHT TO TRY THIS PRIMARY IN THE BI-TOROID. BUT WITHOUT PRIMARY POWER FACTOR NUMBES - I AM MISSING 1/3 OF THE EQUATION. NOT THAT IT WOULD MATTER I WOULDN'T BELIEVE YOU UNTIL I SAW IT FOR MYSELF ANYWAY.
NEW "NEGATING LENZ'S LAW" VIDEO ON MY CHANNEL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmrAbUiih3w
CHEERS
Thane DC, (DEADBEAT CHRISTIAN)
I love the snow... especially when it is back east!
Sorry about the "no power factor info" but that is a step above my ability. What I didn't achieve with
my version of the patent is a great number of turns, my first primary was only 140? turns, the second
270 turns (each strand) so as some person was suggesting 900 turns, maybe this would bear some
influence... all I was doing was to show you how not to do it.Nor did I drive it with a diode....
Nice vid, but hard to see how you have that coil wound, need to see one or two of those excellent
JPG's you 'used' to post... is the high current coil looped around the entire OD?
Ron, NS [no snow...(job this time)]
@Crankypants
QuoteSO WHAT IN THE BLUE BLAZES WERE YOU DOING OVER THERE ON ELECTRO-TECH?
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/alternative-energy/85076-free-energy-generator.html
WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN EASIER TO BANG YOUR HEAD AGAINST A BRICK WALL?
LOL, I wish you would have warned me not to leave our cozy little forum ;D. I wanted to prove a point I already knew, that is most average people have made up there minds irregardless of the facts presented to them and become down-right hostile to anything that threatens there reality. I was stupid to even think they give a damn, as well I am sorry I posted your info there and realize I should have asked you first. LOL, from my first post there everything just went south but I learned a valuable lesson about human behavior which was why I was there in the first place--testing the waters. Never again----they will understand there stupidity when this technology is on the front page of a newspaper.
On the subject of your motor, I have used a small portion of the output from the HC coil to precharge a high self inductance external coil, this coil is forced to collapse inductively into a low turn primary on the HV coil prior to register with the PM increasing the capacitance.
@I_ron
Regarding your experiment, I think thane has given a very good example with his motor as to why "quality" matters. The property of capacitance is nearly uneffected by a magnetic field so we could say the applied energy relates to electric fields. The stored energy of the capacitance depends on the quality of the applied current, that is a high voltage will store more energy on a static surface area. As well a large surface area will store more energy but will lower the potential unless the applied energy completely charges the capacitance. This is why Tesla always used a large inductance and a small capacitance to increase the stored potential relative to the source.
The patent you are replicating is stated as a "Capacitive winding for electric motors,transformers and electromagnets" so I think the circuit as a whole should reflect the qualities inherent in any capacitance. This would require a high voltage in the working circuit to increase the magnitude of energy stored as capacitance increasing the effect, a large surface area at lower voltages decreasing proportionately to an increasing voltage to maintain the desired potential. A capacitor is defined as two conductors in close proximity normally having equal mass and surface area so the windings should have these properties. This is an LC circuit or rather an LCC circuit so I think the natural resonance must be established first then the source must match this frequency and vary from this natural frequency with any loads applied. What may be most important is what happens when we remove the source as shown below--a capacitive series circuit where energy induced as inter-winding capacitance would seem to have no where to go? until it acts in series with the source.
Quote from: allcanadian on October 30, 2008, 03:52:06 PM
@CrankypantsLOL, I wish you would have warned me not to leave our cozy little forum ;D. I wanted to prove a point I already knew, that is most average people have made up there minds irregardless of the facts presented to them and become down-right hostile to anything that threatens there reality. I was stupid to even think they give a damn, as well I am sorry I posted your info there and realize I should have asked you first. LOL, from my first post there everything just went south but I learned a valuable lesson about human behavior which was why I was there in the first place--testing the waters. Never again----they will understand there stupidity when this technology is on the front page of a newspaper.
On the subject of your motor, I have used a small portion of the output from the HC coil to precharge a high self inductance external coil, this coil is forced to collapse inductively into a low turn primary on the HV coil prior to register with the PM increasing the capacitance.
WHEN I FIRST STARTED THIS PROJECT I JOINED AN "REAL" ENGINEERING FORUM LIKE THAT ONE AND ASKED A "WHAT IF QUESTION" ... "WHAT IF YOU COULD REDUCE OR EVEN ELIMINATE BACK EMF IN A GENERATOR?"
I WAS MET WITH THE SAME RESPONSE, NAME CALLING ETC. UNTIL FINALLY THEY BANNED ME FROM THE FORUM. THAT'S WHEN I LEARNED THAT SCIENCE WASN'T ABOUT LEARNING OR CREATING SOMETHING NEW.
I ALSO HAVE LEARNED THAT:
THE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY ISN'T ABOUT HEALTH - BUT SELLING DRUGS AND MAKING MONEY.
THE LEGAL SYSTEM ISN'T ABOUT THE TRUTH - BUT BUYING AND SELLING THE "TRUTH".
THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T ABOUT CARING FOR ITS CITIZENS - BUT POWER AND MONEY.
THE RELIGIOUS SYSTEM ISN'T ABOUT GOD - BUT CONTROL PEOPLE THROUGH FEAR.
THE EDUCATION SYSTEM ISN'T ABOUT TEACHING A LOVE OF LEARNING - BUT CRUSHING INDIVIDUALITY .
SO I CONSIDER MYSELF VERY FORTUNATE TO STILL BE MOVING FORWARD THROUGH ALL THIS MESS WE HAVE CREATED FOR OURSELVES.
CONCERNING YOUR TOPIC - IF YOU WANT US TO UNDERSTAND YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SHOW US WITH PICTURES, VIDEO, PHOTOS ETC. I AM "SLOW" AT THE OF THE DAY.
CONCERNING WHAT PEOPLE WILL ACCEPT...
"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary.
For those who do not believe , no explanation will suffice."
T
Quote from: allcanadian on October 30, 2008, 05:28:02 PM
@I_ron
Regarding your experiment, I think thane has given a very good example with his motor as to why "quality" matters. The property of capacitance is nearly uneffected by a magnetic field so we could say the applied energy relates to electric fields. The stored energy of the capacitance depends on the quality of the applied current, that is a high voltage will store more energy on a static surface area. As well a large surface area will store more energy but will lower the potential unless the applied energy completely charges the capacitance. This is why Tesla always used a large inductance and a small capacitance to increase the stored potential relative to the source.
The patent you are replicating is stated as a "Capacitive winding for electric motors,transformers and electromagnets" so I think the circuit as a whole should reflect the qualities inherent in any capacitance. This would require a high voltage in the working circuit to increase the magnitude of energy stored as capacitance increasing the effect, a large surface area at lower voltages decreasing proportionately to an increasing voltage to maintain the desired potential. A capacitor is defined as two conductors in close proximity normally having equal mass and surface area so the windings should have these properties. This is an LC circuit or rather an LCC circuit so I think the natural resonance must be established first then the source must match this frequency and vary from this natural frequency with any loads applied. What may be most important is what happens when we remove the source as shown below--a capacitive series circuit where energy induced as inter-winding capacitance would seem to have no where to go? until it acts in series with the source.
SEE THIS IS THE KINDA SHIT I NEED TO HEAR IF I AM GOING TO WIND A PRIMARY THAT HAS A HOPE OF WORKING! ;) THANKS T
And those who want to believe, want to understand, and an explanation is most welcome ;D
HEY ALL,
SUGGESTIONS COMMENTS ON HOW TO AVOID BRUSH OFFS?
ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR GOOD PROTOTYPING SHOPS AS PER THEIR SUGGESTIONS?
THANKS
Thane
--- On Fri, 10/31/08, ORNL@ornl.gov> wrote:
From: ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Subject: RE: Technology Support Request for NASA Demonstration
To: thane heins
Received: Friday, October 31, 2008, 1:06 PM
Mr. Heins:
Thank you for your interest in the PEEMRC. Our prototyping facilities are limited in terms of motor/generator development and we often use outside shops for much of the fabrication effort. Because we are required by DOE to charge at full cost recovery rates for work done for others I believe that our services would prove to be prohibitively costly for production of a prototype unit. Since we would probably have a significant fraction of the work done by local shops it would likely be more cost-effective for you to contract with local motor/generator shops to do your prototype fabrication.
ORNL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MY RESPONSE
Dear ORNL,
I appreciate your concern although I am sorry I don't understand what "prohibitively costly" means to you? I decided to contact ORLN because of your reputation and "costly" simply infers a good investment to me. I would prefer to leave the cost decision to our Board of Directors since that is their job not mine (or yours in fact).
I am sorry if our satellite lab and teaching facility at Ottawa University gives the impression of a popper status (it's deliberate). I can assure you that we have substantial and adequate financial backing and commitment. Cutting corners at this stage serves none of our interests here. We also wish to make the absolute best presentation to NASA as we possibly can since this technology began at ROMAC's UPS flywheel facility.
Please take a moment to review some of the material concerning our "Regenerative Acceleration Technology" where we design in and employ the self-capacitance of our generator coils to reduce and or eliminate Lenz's Law in our generator. I would much prefer a rejection of our partnership request on these grounds. Thanks again for your consideration.
Sincerely
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc.
ORIGINAL LETTER
From: Thane C. Heins
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 7:39 AM
To: ORNL
Subject: Technology Support Request for NASA Demonstration
Dear Power Electronics and Electrical Power Systems Research Center & ORNL,
My name is Thane Heins and I am the President of Potential Difference Inc., a small R & D firm near Ottawa Canada . I am wondering if we might be able to procure services from ORNL to assist us in prototyping our generator technology to meet a request from NASA as well other companies who want to licence our technology.
Our technology pertains to what we call "Regenerative Acceleration Technology" where we alter the conventional performance of a generator coil and make it do the opposite of what is commonly know. (I have included a brief description below) To date our technology has been shown to increase energy output by 300% while decreasing the input energy required by up to 30%.
As of now we have two licensing agreements under way (one California Power company and a Canadian wind turbine manufacturer). We have other interest from Brazil , Holland and as I mentioned a demonstration request from NASA. Most of the current interest is from wind generator manufacturers, electric automobiles and stand alone diesel generators. We would also require a prototype to be developed and eventually delivered to NASA, (see NASA REQUEST below) and possibly to Neil Young's LincVolt XPrize team as well. We have lots of interest but no engineering facility to meet demand yet.
Here is our You Tube Channel with all our videos.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
Focus attention on "REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION VIDEOS"
Our research is presently being carried out at the University of Ottawa where Dr. Riadh Habash is our University liason.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President
Potential +/- Difference Inc.
169 Spring St.
Almonte ON
K0A 1A0
Perepiteia Generator Operation Explanation â€" Draft 1 â€" June 20th, 2008
High Voltage Coil Effects
Thane C. Heins
Introduction
The Perepiteia Generator employs high voltage coils to counteract the effects associated with Lenz’s Law and the Law of Conservation of Energy. Whereas a conventional generator high current coil design causes the prime mover to decelerate under load â€" the Perepiteia high voltage coil design causes the prime mover to accelerate. If high current and high voltage coils are employed simultaneously, the acceleration provided by the high voltage coils can completely eliminate Lenz’s Law (deceleration) effects and even provide additional acceleration despite high current coil loading.
This paper is intended to explain (only) one aspect of how this acceleration may be occurring with respect to how high voltage wire eddy currents affect the coils ability to produce an induced magnetic field as dictated by Lenz’s Law. There of course are other possible reasons for the observed acceleration (including core loss reduction) which will be dealt with in greater detail at another time.
Basic Observations, Critical Minimum Rotor Speed/Frequency
Conventional generators employ low gauge â€" high current (HC) wire to reduce losses associated with resistance and eddy currents. Figure 1 shows how current is distributed through a typical HC coil. The current flows evenly throughout the entire conductor and the induced magnetic field emanates out in a radially symmetrical pattern.
The high voltage coil (HV) in Figure 2 on the other hand shows what happens in the HV coil as the rotor speed exceeds the critical minimum velocity.
Rotor Speed Critical Minimum Velocity
Above a certain rotor speed or frequency the HV coils cause system acceleration in violation of Lenz’s Law.
Below this rotor RPM or frequency the HV coils act in accordance with Lenz’s Law and cause the system to decelerate under load.
The question is why?
What occurs as frequency rises to change the coils’ performance?
HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION
At the critical threshold speed or frequency (dictated by the coils inductance) the HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ceases to act as an INDUCTOR (storing energy in the electromagnetic field and producing a Lenz's Law repelling action to the approaching magnetic field) and begins to act as a CAPACITOR (storing energy in the electrostatic field between the wires).
This is clearly shown in the video FREQUENCY VARIATIONS & MULTI LAYER HV COIL ACCELERATION: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
When a North Pole magnet approaches a HIGH VOLTAGE COIL above the critical threshold speed/frequency a North Pole repelling magnetic field as per Lenz's Law is not produced because the coil's impedance has impeded the current flow within the coil sufficiently. Voltage is built up in the coil and stored in the electrostatic field between the wires like a capacitor.
When the North Pole magnet is TDC - Top Dead Centre - neither approaching nor receding away from the coil - the coil's stored voltage, which is now at a maximum, is released through the coil's DC resistance and a magnetic field is produced according to Lenz's Law (at this split second at TDC the AC sine wave is changing direction and as far as the coil is concerned frequency is briefly 'zero' and coil impedance is zero so current is allowed to flow - thus producing a delayed North Pole magnetic field which now pushes away on the receding magnet and simultaneously attracts the approaching opposite South pole on the rotor
NASA REQUEST
Subject: re: previous phonecall
From: @cne-mail.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, February 12, 2008 8:48 am
To: @site.uottawa.ca
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riadh,
I had contacted you this previous Saturday about trying to procure an
abstract on the work you are doing with Thane Heins. The magnetics lab here at Goddard expressed some interest in having you come down to do a colloquium, but would like to get an abstract on the work done so far before moving ahead. Let me know when you could provide this, so we can look at posibilities moving forward.
--
NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center
Bldg 18 Room 200 Mailstop 730.0
Greenbelt , MD 20771
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 31, 2008, 09:36:35 PM
HEY ALL,
SUGGESTIONS COMMENTS ON HOW TO AVOID BRUSH OFFS?
ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR GOOD PROTOTYPING SHOPS AS PER THEIR SUGGESTIONS?
THANKS
Thane
Translated into proper english that says.... "DON"T CALL US, WE WILL CALL YOU"
Not an unexpected response when you consider that NASA was set up to LIMIT space advancement.
Not an unexpected response when you observe how a prestigious U like MIT was able to STOP
cold fusion in it's tracks.
Welcome to the real world Thane, we support you.... and that is about it....
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on November 01, 2008, 11:03:09 AM
Welcome to the real world Thane, we support you.... and that is about it....
Ron
NOTHING INSPIRES ME MORE THAN NEGATIVE PEOPLE SAYING SOMETHING CAN'T BE DONE - HOWEVER I JUST HOPE IT WON'T TAKE ANOTHER TEN YEARS - YOU WON'T HAVE ANY TEETH LEFT TO EAT YOUR WORDS WITH, THERE
RONDA. :-*
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 01, 2008, 02:31:06 PM
NOTHING INSPIRES ME MORE THAN NEGATIVE PEOPLE SAYING SOMETHING CAN'T BE DONE - HOWEVER I JUST HOPE IT WON'T TAKE ANOTHER TEN YEARS - YOU WON'T HAVE ANY TEETH LEFT TO EAT YOUR WORDS WITH, THERE RONDA. :-*
T
Far from being a negative person just because I prefer wine to beer, what I was suggesting was that if
you were to examine how the SYSTEM is set up to fail an endevour like yours, you would not so
naively approach the evil people at the head of the pyramid in anticipation of succor.
Dr Eugene Mallove is a good study for you...
<http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf>
He was an enthusiast of coldfusion. He had all the facts and was willing to go against the system
and point out the criminal nature of MIT, DOE, etc. They did not appreciate his efforts to promote
truth, honesty, and the FACT that coldfusion actually worked.
He is dead, before his time.
Nor is he the only one to be aided to the other world....
<http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/deadbiologists.html>
The list of inventors who have been suppressed, harassed, and even had their allotted time fore-
shortened is endless... do you wish to go on this list?
So I don't think it is being negative to point out the obvious.... that we are willing to do what we can,
but the evil people in illuminati organizations such as the us government departments, darpa, nasa... universities such as mit are not going to look with favor on any 'energy saving device' that you come up with.
You might just as well approach
crime prime minister harpoor.... lol
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 01, 2008, 02:31:06 PM
NOTHING INSPIRES ME MORE THAN NEGATIVE PEOPLE SAYING SOMETHING CAN'T BE DONE - HOWEVER I JUST HOPE IT WON'T TAKE ANOTHER TEN YEARS - YOU WON'T HAVE ANY TEETH LEFT TO EAT YOUR WORDS WITH, THERE RONDA. :-*
T
Gee Mr T, my last post may have been a bit negative, hehehe, so to put a more positive spin on things, how about in ten years you will have your name RIGHT UP THERE, alongside chuck's...
Ron
Jan. 3, 1935 J1-A,1,21 CARBURETION, POGUE, Pat.#353538 (Canadian) Charles N. Pogue is issued a Canadian Patent for a High Mileage Carburetor. (see 1/7/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors)
Apr. 9, 1935 J1-A,1,19 CARBURETION, POGUE, Pat.#US01997497 Charles N. Pogue is issued a Patent for a High Mileage Carburetor. (see 1/7/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors) Want to know more?...Article US01997497 drawing.
Jan. 7, 1936 J1-A,1,16 CARBURETION, POGUE, Pat.#US02026798 Charles N. Pogue is issued a Patent for his newer High Mileage Carburetor. Pogue used the carburetor for about ten years on his car and produced about 200 carburetors thru the Economy Carburetor Co. (see 4/30/36; 8/10/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors) Want to know more?...Article US02026798 drawing.
early 1936 J1-A,18 CARBURETION, POGUE BREEN MOTOR CO., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: Tests the POGUE Carburetor on a Ford V-8 Coupe and got 26.2 miles on one pint of gasoline. The performance of the car was 100% in every way. Under 10 mph the operation much smoother than a standard carburetor. T.G. Green, President of the BREEN MOTOR CO., did the tests. (see 1/7/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors)
Apr. 30,1936 J1-A,18 CARBURETION, FORD MOTOR CO. FORD MOTOR CO., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: Tests the POGUE Carburetor and is at "a loss to understand" how the carburetor got "25.7 miles on one pint of gasoline"! (That's approximately 205 mpg). Mr. W.J. Holmes and Mr. Purdy conducted the test for FORD MOTOR CO. (see 1/7/36)
Aug. 10,1936 J1-A,18 CARBURETION, POGUE S. Stockhammer tested the POGUE Carburetor on a 1934 Ford V-8 Coupe and got 28 miles per pint of gas. "I can say the performance was all anyone could desire in every shape of form." (see 1/7/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors)
Dec. 12, 1936 J1-A,26 CARBURETION, POGUE Canadian Automotive Magazine states that the standard carburetor gets about 25 mpg at only 9% efficiency. Therefore the POGUE carburetor is 72% efficient overall at 200 mpg. (see 1/7/36) (See 1981, Ultra-Lean carburetors)
Quote
you would not so naively approach the evil people at the head of the pyramid in anticipation of succor.
I AM NOT NAIVE - MAN'S FIRST SIN WAS JUDGEMENT OF GOOD AND EVIL. THERE IS
NO EVIL - JUST DIFFERENT SHADES OF GO
OD
QuoteHe is dead, before his time.
HE IS NOT DEAD - HE IS JUST NOT HERE.
QuoteNor is he the only one to be aided to the other world....
WE ARE ALL (eternal) SPIRITUAL BEING HAVING AN (infinitely short) HUMAN EXPERIENCE.
NO ONE WILL WANT TO BE HERE IF MARTIAL LAW IS DECLARED? NOT ME!
WHO IS NAIVE?
Quotethat we are willing to do what we can,
Ron
LOOK AROUND - OBVIOUSLY COLLECTIVELY WE ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH.
SO COLLECTIVELY WE ARE ABOUT TO REAP WHAT WE SOWED.
SORRY I AM HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME IMAGINING WHAT IS COMING - I HAVE KNOW ABOUT ALL THIS (MICROCHIPPING ETC.) SINCE 1995 AND DEDICATED ALL MY EFFORTS SINCE 1999 TO TRY AND AVOID IT.
IF GOING TO THE "OTHER WORLD" COULD MAKE ME NOT HAVE TO WITNESS (FEMA DEATH CAMPS IN THE USA) - I WOULD WELCOME IT.
T
Quote from: stringguy on November 01, 2008, 06:50:43 PM
well i tell all i can about how many people are experimenting now days, on OU forum and youtube and the like, and they tend to agree that with so many publishing their stuff, surely the days of knocking them off are gone?
thane, its a big world, nice to keep stuff local, but if you cant, then try europe or chindia. go for it dude.
p.s. i check this topic several times a day, as i am totally stoked with your project. if i was a kazillionair.....
thanks for sharing !
power on man !
THE SAME LETTER SENT TO THE OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY WAS ALSO SENT AROUND THE WORLD (OVER 200 TIMES) FROM AUSTRALIA, NEW ZAELAND, JAPAN EVEN GREENLAND ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE SOMEONE IR RESEARCHING ELECTRIC VEHICLES.
WE HAVE 2 POSITIVE REPIES ALREADY SO I AM HOPEFUL BUT WORRIED (ABOUT BUSHLER) AT THE SAME TIME.
IN MY CASE KNOCKING ME OFF MIGHT BE THE BEST WAY TO MOVE THINGS FOREWARD?
PB YOU KNOW WHERE I LIVE...
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 01, 2008, 06:20:51 PM
snip
LOOK AROUND - OBVIOUSLY COLLECTIVELY WE ARE NOT DOING ENOUGH.
SO COLLECTIVELY WE ARE ABOUT TO REAP WHAT WE SOWED.
SORRY I AM HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME IMAGINING WHAT IS COMING - I HAVE KNOW ABOUT ALL THIS (MICROCHIPPING ETC.) SINCE 1995 AND DEDICATED ALL MY EFFORTS SINCE 1999 TO TRY AND AVOID IT.
snip
T
Now who is being negative? Maybe we are having some effect? They had the "next" war planned to start in August... but then it slipped to October... now it has slipped to January 21... their window
was only so wide... now it is closing... they have made so many miscalculations!
While it might seem like they are winning... they have already lost, be interesting to see which
charlatan wins the charade on the 4th?
Be of good cheer
Ron
http://ep.espacenet.com/advancedSearch
entering
DE10737047 in german, translation possibility Martin Hauck
DE19532731 " " " " "
US3398370 LLoyd Crump
US3955201
Earth-cell: the process behind -and beyond ?
S
CdL
Quote from: i_ron on November 01, 2008, 09:28:23 PM
While it might seem like they are winning... they have already lost, be interesting to see which
charlatan wins the charade on the 4th?
Be of good cheer
Ron
NEW USA COIL AND DEDICATION VIDEO HERE:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr9WoYRr0Bg
HOW TO PHOTOS HERE:http://www.megaupload.com/?d=F35P1NPG
NOW KISS MY ASS AND LET'S HAVE SOME PEACE AND PROSPERITY FOR A CHANGE!
God Bless it!
WITH PRAYERS!
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 02, 2008, 06:41:18 PM
NEW USA COIL AND DEDICATION VIDEO HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr9WoYRr0Bg
HOW TO PHOTOS HERE:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=F35P1NPG
snip
God Bless it!
WITH PRAYERS!
Thane
Thank you for the very informative DOC and VID. Nicely filmed sequence of building in the doc.
With Mr T's permission here is number five from the doc...
It gives
us a (hehehe, "US A"...) good look at the core structure but raises a question...
How many magnets, or better yet, what is the magnet spacing on the rotor? I presume NSNS,
so what I was getting at... has the N pole left the core before the S pole arrives?
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on November 02, 2008, 10:15:58 PM
Thank you for the very informative DOC and VID. Nicely filmed sequence of building in the doc.
With Mr T's permission here is number five from the doc...
It gives us a (hehehe, "US A"...) good look at the core structure but raises a question...
How many magnets, or better yet, what is the magnet spacing on the rotor? I presume NSNS,
so what I was getting at... has the N pole left the core before the S pole arrives?
Ron
(//)
THERE ARE ACTUALLY 3 CORES & CORE ALIGNMENT
1) LANINATED HC CORE - SOUTH
2) AC MIG WELDING ROD CORE - NORTH
3) LAMINATED HC CORE - SOUTH
THE CORES AND MAGNETS ARE ALIGNED SO AS TO CLOSE THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT BETWEEN THE ROTOR POLES
NOW TO BE EVEN MORE PRECISE THE LOWER ROTOR POLE IS SKEWED SLIGHTLY (FALLS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BOTTOM CORE) TO REDUCE COGGING TORQUE.
THE 3 CORES ARE TIED TOGETHER AT THE BACK WITH A MOT TRANSFORMER TOP PLATE OFF AN "E" CORE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 03, 2008, 05:54:44 AM
THERE ARE ACTUALLY 3 CORES & CORE ALIGNMENT
1) LANINATED HC CORE - SOUTH
2) AC MIG WELDING ROD CORE - NORTH
3) LAMINATED HC CORE - SOUTH
THE CORES AND MAGNETS ARE ALIGNED SO AS TO CLOSE THE MAGNETIC CIRCUIT BETWEEN THE ROTOR POLES
snip
T
Thank you... so the pole spacing off the triple core matches the magnet spacing of the rotor?
Now you know this won't work!
Could it be that as the magnet approaches the top core the winding is only on the top surface and
the same polarity magnet that is approaching the bottom core has no winding on the side facing
the approaching magnet? In concert then the two halves of the outer winding winding are acting as
one coil. Yes, that must be it, fascinating.
Ron
ps: disregarding the center pole for the moment...pic six is laid on its side, ie: magnet approach
from the side...
(//)
QuoteThank you... so the pole spacing off the triple core matches the magnet spacing of the rotor?
YES BUT AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY ONE OF THE "SOUTH POLE" MAGNETS FALLS IN BETWEEN THE MIG CORE AND THE LAMINATED CORE TO REDUCE COGGING TORGUE.
QuoteNow you know this won't work
DON'T TELL ANYONE OK?
QuoteCould it be that as the magnet approaches the top core the winding is only on the top surface and the same polarity magnet that is approaching the bottom core has no winding on the side facing
the approaching magnet? In concert then the two halves of the outer winding winding are acting as
one coil. Yes, that must be it, fascinating.
Ron
YOUR LOGIC IS TWISTED TO ME BUT I THINK YOU GET IT.
I.E. SHOOT NORTH POLE FLUX INTO THE MIG CENTRE CORE AND IT COMES OUT THE TWO LAMINATED CORES BACK TO THE SOUTH POLES ON THE ROTOR.
THE MIG CORE IS NOT THE BEST CORE CHOICE AS IT OUGHT TO BE LAMINATED BUT I WANTED TO SEE HOW SMALL IT COULD BE.
T
Quote from: i_ron on November 01, 2008, 05:24:49 PM
Far from being a negative person just because I prefer wine to beer, what I was suggesting was that if
you were to examine how the SYSTEM is set up to fail an endevour like yours, you would not so
naively approach the evil people at the head of the pyramid in anticipation of succor. snip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wP7Q_Q22on0&feature=related
Timely....
Ron
Hi Thane,
may I draw your attention to reply #37 of user capthook for new ideas of winding coils here :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5929.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5929.0)
Regards
Kator01
FYI
- WE DIDN'T WIN THE "NEXT GREAT CANADIAN INVENTION" CONTEST.
PRETTY HARD TO WIN WHEN THE JUDGES WON'T EVEN LOOK AT YOUR INVENTION.
http://www.nytric.com/articles.php?nwsid=43
T
What did you expect.
Say thane how far are things in general now. What's the roadmap to be more exact. Since I'm a bit clueless where you're heading with your lenz defying motor.
Quote from: broli on November 07, 2008, 06:19:03 PM
What did you expect.
Say thane how far are things in general now. What's the roadmap to be more exact. Since I'm a bit clueless where you're heading with your lenz defying motor.
WE HAVE 2 LICENCING REQUESTS UNDER WAY,
WE HAVE 2 OR THREE ENGINEERING FIRMS INTERESTED IN BUILDING GENERATORS,
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF MOTIVATED INVESTORS AND A CONSUTING FIRM WHO IS PARTNERING WITH US TO MANAGE THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
WE HAVE AN EVOLVED CONCENTRIC BI-COIL IN WHICH THE OUTPUT POWER THROUGH THE LOAD IS
QUADROUPLED (X4) 1 VOLT to 4 VOLTS! WHEN THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL IS ENGAGED AND
PRIOR TO THE ROTOR ACCELERATING. (WILL SEND PHOTOS OR VIDEO TODAY) - CURRENTLY THE ONLY WAY TO QUADROUPLE A GENERATOR'S INDUCED VOLTAGE WHILE RUNNING IS TO QUARDOUPLE THE SPEED - THIS IS NOT REQUIRED AND IS VERY EXCITING FOR US!
WE HAVE 6 OTTAWA UNIVERSITY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS AND 3? QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY ENGINEERING PHYSICS STUDENTS WRITING REPORTS ON THE GENERATOR.
I AM PUTTING THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON THE NEW COIL (I_RON HAS PHOTOS BUT IS HOGGING THEM) ;) AND PERHAPS NEXT WEEK IT GOES TO GET SCALED UP AT AN OUTSIDE SHOP.
Thane
FINAL RESPONSE FROM THE ORNLDear Mr. Heins
I am responding to your request addressed to Mr. Frank Damiano. I am aware that you have also contacted the ORNL Power Electronics and Electric Machinery Research Center and you may have received a separate response from them. In reviewing your information we have not found a strong alignment between your request and our current research agenda. We are unable to take on projects that are not fully complementary to our own work. Therefore regretfully, we must decline your request for collaboration.
We wish you every success in your endeavors.
Sincerely yours,
Alan Liby
__________________________
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Manager, Industrial and Economic Development Partnerships
Thanks Liby,
I took Mitchel Olszewski's advice and found someone local and more qualified anyway.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 08, 2008, 08:13:29 AM
snip
I AM PUTTING THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON THE NEW COIL (I_RON HAS PHOTOS BUT IS HOGGING THEM) ;) AND PERHAPS NEXT WEEK IT GOES TO GET SCALED UP AT AN OUTSIDE SHOP.
snip
Thane
snip
Two reasons Sir, one, they came through at around 600 X 400 but still said 182 Kb and wouldn't post.
Took me awhile to find out I could just save then in Canvas and it kept the 400 X 600 but put it under the 100 Kb cutoff... OK?
Second, you never answered my questions in my email reply, so there, thhhhhuuuuuuuupt
So I hope you read the list before you post these again... hehehe, but here are some I thought interesting.... note the readings are in Henries and Ohms...on the meter
Ron
(//)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 08, 2008, 08:13:29 AM
I AM PUTTING THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON THE NEW COIL (I_RON HAS PHOTOS BUT IS HOGGING THEM) ;)
Thane
COPY of private post to Thane...
Danke für die Abbildugen!
I was being a smart ass and went to a 11 X 18 mm laminated core... but only 55mm long....
It came out at 60 some ohms and .9 H
But no acceleration at any speed... so got pissed off and went back to me HBG (hildenbrand/Genesis)
So interesting to see your new core and readings!
(pic 1)
(pic 2)
The bit of black plastic is to keep them apart as there are no clamps...
What is your PCD on your rotor? How many magnets? (I know, you have said...)
Take care Ron
Note: I had made this core before I had seen Mr T's...but I see my resistance is only half and same
with the henries...duh also this is the same rotor that didn't work the very first tests I did... could
the pot magnets have something to do with this?
(//)
Quote
COPY of private post to Thane...
Danke für die Abbildugen!
I was being a smart ass and went to a 11 X 18 mm laminated core... but only 55mm long....
It came out at 60 some ohms and .9 H
IF FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED - GO BACK AND FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS.
YOU NEED VOLTAGE BABY!
MY HV COIL PRODUCES 240 VOLTS @ 1100 RPM AND REALLY TAKES OFF WHEN ENGAGED.
QuoteBut no acceleration at any speed... so got pissed off and went back to me HBG (hildenbrand/Genesis)
So interesting to see your new core and readings!
(pic 1)
(pic 2)
QuoteThe bit of black plastic is to keep them apart as there are no clamps...
What is your PCD on your rotor? How many magnets? (I know, you have said...)
I AM STUNNED - PCD?
18 MAGNETS
QuoteTake care Ron
Note: I had made this core before I had seen Mr T's...but I see my resistance is only half and same
with the henries...duh also this is the same rotor that didn't work the very first tests I did... could
the pot magnets have something to do with this.
THAT'S LIKE MY WIFE ASKING ME, "DOES THIS DRESS MAKES ME LOOK FAT?" "NO YOUR FAT ASS MAKES YOU LOOK FAT!"
SO NO THE POT MAGNETS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT IT IS YOUR LOW VOLTAGE/STORED CAPACITIVE ENERGY AND POSSIBLY YOUR LOW FREQUENCY.
IN MY TESTS A 87 OHM COIL AS ABOVE DOES NOT PRODUCE ACCELERATION - BUT A 124 OHN ON E DOES NICELY.
CHEERIOS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 08, 2008, 06:39:45 PM
snip
I AM STUNNED - PCD?
18 MAGNETS.
snip
CHEERIOS
T
Stunned? I guess so... I am too...Here I thought I was talking to an educated, intelligent, mechanical engineer..."PCD" stands for...PITCH CIRCLE DIAMETER. So if you were to measure from the center of one magnet across the rotor to the center of the opposite side magnet, that would be the PCD, in other words, the diameter of the circle you laid out the magnets on....
K, now we are even, lol, I will try for an 88 ohm coil then, hehehe
Ron
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on November 08, 2008, 06:59:06 PM
K, now we are even, lol,
Ron
OK, to be very serious for a moment... a warm feeling of belonging came over me as I admired Mr T's
grand pictures... in particular the one below showing the Robertson head screw!
Many non canucks viewing this photo might miss this proud canadian moment so I will reference it for you... you can insult our beer or our prime minister.... but boy, never insult our screws!!!
Canadians make the best screws!
http://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/Ontario/robertson_screws.htm
Ron, last of the canucks
(//)
Quote from: i_ron on November 08, 2008, 11:52:20 PM
Canadians make the best screws!
http://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/Ontario/robertson_screws.htm
Ron, last of the canucks
(//)
NO KIDDING CANADA ALSO MAKES THE BEST INK... T
Canada Inks the US Greenbacks?http://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/Canada/canada_inks_the_us_greenbacks.htm
COUPLE OF NEW VIDS FOR NASA;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czXmazZ4obs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXKO8r-3xrw
Cheers
Thane
In that last video the speed of the rotor seemed to increase much faster than past videos.
But is there a reason why you didn't let it rise in the video till its max?
Why didn't you also let it slow down till it was constant without coils, you seemed to quickly switch the coils on and off without letting us see the minimum speeds and maximum speeds.Speaking of which what is the theoretical maximum speed? Is there a saturation point duo electrical limits or due air friction? If it's the latter than in theory in vacuum space the rotor would speed up till it bursts apart? Is there enough power right now to close the loop? And finally, what happens if you had the same setup of coils on the other side of rotor, would this enhance everything?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on October 20, 2008, 08:10:46 PM
SO I WILL BE READY WHEN AC'S PROPHECY COMES TRUE ABOUT ME LICKING SOME BUTT
Saw that over at eletro-tech-online whose butt do you plan on licking? Why do you type in all caps? Are you shouting?
Quote
In that last video the speed of the rotor seemed to increase much faster than past videos.
YES WE HAVE A NEW LAMINATED CORE FOR THE HV COIL WHICH WORKS BEAUTIFULLY - LOT OF ACCELERATION
QuoteBut is there a reason why you didn't let it rise in the video till its max?
THOSE ROTOR MAGNETS ARE NOT GLUED - THEY WILL BE TOMORROW.
I HAVE HAD IT UP TO 1700 RPM SO FAR WITH A STEADY STATE SPEED OF 10 RPM (SAME MOTOR INPUT). AND THE NEW COIL STARTS TO ACCELERATE AT 30 RPM!
GOOD NEWS FOR OUR WIND TURBINE CUSTOMERI WILL POST VIDEO TOMORROW.
QuoteWhy didn't you also let it slow down till it was constant without coils, you seemed to quickly switch the coils on and off without letting us see the minimum speeds and maximum speeds.Speaking of which what is the theoretical maximum speed?
I CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH IN 5 MINUTES.
I WILL SHOW MAX AND NIN VALUES TUESDAY SINCE THIS NEW COIL IS AWESOME.
DON'T KNOW MAX YET - BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT WHEN THE HIGH CURRENT COILS ARE ENGAGED DURING HV COIL ACCELERATION WE NOTICE AN INCREASE IN RATE OF ACCELERATION - DUE TO THE HC COIL FLUX ENTERING THE HV COIL AND BOOSTING ITS EFFECT.
QuoteIs there a saturation point duo electrical limits or due air friction? If it's the latter than in theory in vacuum space the rotor would speed up till it bursts apart? Is there enough power right now to close the loop? And finally, what happens if you had the same setup of coils on the other side of rotor, would this enhance everything?
NOT ENOUGH POWER TO CLOSE THE LOOP - WE ARE STILL IMPROVING THE COIL . YES -IDEALLY THERE WILL BE COILS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROTOR.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: blueroomelectronics on November 10, 2008, 04:55:53 PM
Saw that over at eletro-tech-online whose butt do you plan on licking? Why do you type in all caps? Are you shouting?
YOURS!
WHY SO AGGRESSIVE?
NO I AM NOT SHOUTING...
NOW PISS OFF!!!!!(JUST KIDDING)THAT'S SHOUTING... NOW GO BACK TO YOUR "INSIDE THE BOX" THINKING GROUP.
CHEERS
I_RON OF THE COLUMBIAS
Thanks for the answers Thane, keep up the cool work.
Quote from: stringguy on November 10, 2008, 07:04:29 AM
heya thane,
everytime i see that motor rev up i just get so excited ! brilliant work indeed.
how fast have you let it run to? ie. rpm's
also, i'm a bit puzzled,
in one of your first vids you used a brass or bronze shaft connector and then switched to a steel connector and demonstrated the difference, then somewhere in this forum it says that one can make the disk out of anything, ie: not magnetic.
so, i am confused as per usual. if the system requires magnetic connection to the motor, then it wont work with a wind driven device? ie: no electric motor. . . . eeeks,,,,help
many thanks for your patience
andy
DEAR ANDY CAP,
NO MAGNETIC CONNECTION REQUIRED - THAT WAS SO YESTERDAY.
GO SEE THE NASA VIDEO # 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czXmazZ4obs
YES WE ARE DESIGNING IT TO WORK WITH WIND.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: broli on November 10, 2008, 05:26:43 PM
Thanks for the answers Thane, keep up the cool work.
SO I AM UPLOADING A COUPLE OF NEW VIDEOS RIGHT NOW...
SHOULD BE READY IN 20 MINUTES.
UNCHANGED MOTOR INPUT(actually it is less at higher RPM)
THE NO LOAD MOTOR SPEED < 10 RPM.
HC COIL OUTPUT ACROSS THE 10 OHM LOAD = 86 MILIVOLTS
THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED SPEED > 1560 RPM
HC COIL OUTPUT ACROSS THE 10 OHM LOAD = 1.5 VOLTS.
THIS REPRESENTS A PERFORMANCE INCREASE OF OVER 1600%
I AM TEMPTED TO CALL THE HV COIL A
"SELF ENERGIZED MOTOR COIL".ANY THOUGHTS?
CHEERS
Thane
Thane maybe it's a camera effect but the motor at the end of Part 3 seemed to be spinning at atleast 60 RPM that is one rotation per second. Your tachometer seemed to not like this slow rotation for some reason?
But nonetheless that's quite shocking that the input could barely rotate the motor :o. Is that normal? What was the input? Is the input constant during accel. and deaccel?
Correct me if I'm wrong here. I mean making a self energizer out of that wouldn't be that hard.
Again impressive work Thane ;).
Quote
Thane maybe it's a camera effect but the motor at the end of Part 3 seemed to be spinning at atleast 60 RPM that is one rotation per second. Your tachometer seemed to not like this slow rotation for some reason?
But nonetheless that's quite shocking that the input could barely rotate the motor :o. Is that normal? What was the input? Is the input constant during accel. and deaccel?
THIS IS THE WHOLE POINT -
THE INPUT IS UNCHANGED.QuoteCorrect me if I'm wrong here. I mean making a self energizer out of that wouldn't be that hard.
Again impressive work Thane ;).
IT IS ALREADY A SELF ENERGIZING MOTOR COIL IN THAT IT HAS A "MOTOR EFECT" WITH NO EXTERNAL ELECTRIC INPUT OF POWER.
T
NEW NASA ABSTRACT
Dear Erik,
This abstract is meant to satisfy your earlier request to Dr. Habash. Please note that the Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORNL has agreed to evaluate our technology so if your magnetics lab wants to see us first please advise.
Cheers
Thane
Abstract - Work Performed to Date
Since 2001 Potential Difference Inc. has be investigating various methods to reduce armature reaction (Lenz's Law effects) in electric generators. At the present time PD Inc. employs High Voltage / High Impedance Coils as self excited "motor coils" in its salient pole generator design to accelerate the generator rotor under load while simultaneously collecting the HV coil's induced magnetic field and magnetically coupling it with the load supplying, High Current / Low Impedance Coils and vice versa. With its new Concentric Bi-Coil design Potential Difference has successfully eliminated the "negative" effects associated with Lenz's Law.
We have produced 4 "NASA" videos - to show the developments:
Video #1 EXPLANATION - HIGH VOLTAGE COIL MOTOR EFFECTS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czXmazZ4obs
Video #2 DEMO - NEW COIL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXKO8r-3xrw
Video #3 DEMO - PRIME MOVER CONTRIBUTION
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ9KLfusQPg
Video #4 DEMO - MINIMUM ACCELERATION SPEED
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7s4q5LdJJw
Perepiteia Generator Operation Explanation High Voltage Coil "Motor" Effects
November 11th, 2008
Thane C. Heins
Introduction
The Perepiteia Generator employs high voltage coils to counteract the effects associated with Lenz’s Law (armature reaction). Whereas a conventional generator high current coil design causes the prime mover to decelerate under load â€" the Perepiteia high voltage coil design causes the prime mover to accelerate. If high current and high voltage coils are employed simultaneously, the acceleration provided by the high voltage coils can completely eliminate Lenz’s Law (deceleration) effects and even provide additional acceleration despite high current coil loading.
This paper is intended to explain (only) one aspect of how this acceleration may be occurring with respect to how high voltage wire eddy currents affect the coils ability to produce an induced magnetic field as dictated by Lenz’s Law. There of course are other possible reasons for the observed acceleration (including core loss reduction) which will be dealt with in greater detail at another time.
Basic Observations, Critical Minimum Rotor Speed/Frequency
Conventional generators employ low gauge â€" high current (HC) wire and low impedance windings to reduce losses associated with resistance and eddy currents whereas the high voltage coil (HV) employed by Potential Difference Inc employs high gauge, high impedance wire.
Rotor Speed Critical Minimum Velocity
Above a certain rotor speed or frequency the HV coils cause system acceleration in violation of Lenz’s Law. Below this rotor RPM or frequency the HV coils act in accordance with Lenz’s Law and cause the system to decelerate under load.
HOW GENERATOR HIGH VOLTAGE COILS CAUSE ACCELERATION
At the critical threshold speed or frequency (dictated by the coils inductance) the HIGH VOLTAGE COIL ceases to act as an INDUCTOR (storing energy in the electromagnetic field and producing a Lenz's Law repelling action to the approaching magnetic field) and begins to act as a CAPACITOR (storing energy in the electrostatic field between the wires).
This is clearly shown in the video FREQUENCY VARIATIONS & MULTI LAYER HV COIL ACCELERATION: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YReGJEMmkJA
When a North Pole magnet approaches a HIGH VOLTAGE COIL above the critical threshold speed/frequency a North Pole repelling magnetic field as per Lenz's Law is not produced because the coil's impedance has impeded the current flow within the coil sufficiently. Voltage is built up in the coil and stored in the electrostatic field between the wires like a capacitor.
When the North Pole magnet is TDC - Top Dead Centre - neither approaching nor receding away from the coil - the coil's stored voltage, which is now at a maximum, is released through the coil's DC resistance and a magnetic field is produced according to Lenz's Law (at this split second at TDC the AC sine wave is changing direction and as far as the coil is concerned frequency is briefly 'zero' and coil impedance is zero so current is allowed to flow - thus producing a delayed North Pole magnetic field which now pushes away on the receding magnet and simultaneously attracts the approaching opposite South pole on the rotor.
Potential Difference Inc. is currently designing coils where the delayed field from the High Voltage (HV) coil is magnetically coupled into the High Current (HC) coil increasing the flux change in the HC core and increasing the HC coil's induced voltage and power across the load.
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Men occasionally stumble over the TRUTH, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill
Another thing I noticed is the fact you're using only one pole of the coils. What do you think will happen if you put another motor on the other side of the coils with no input? Will this destroy the effect or multiply it for free?
Quote from: broli on November 12, 2008, 06:04:55 AM
Another thing I noticed is the fact you're using only one pole of the coils. What do you think will happen if you put another motor on the other side of the coils with no input? Will this destroy the effect or multiply it for free?
ACTUALLY I AM USING 3 ROTOR POLES / COIL.
YES YOU CAN PUT ANOTHER ROTOR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BI-COIL.
T
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE "FINAL" "E"VOLUTION OF THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL.
THE HV COIL IS 170 OHMS @ 30 GAUGE WIRE.
THE ACCELERATION ON THE TACH INCREASES IN 20 RPM CHUNKS.
IT IS VERY POWERFUL DUE TO THE CLOSED MAGNETIC CIRCUIT AND UNBROKEN FLUX PATH.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 12, 2008, 06:34:51 PM
PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED THE "FINAL" "E"VOLUTION OF THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL.
THE HV COIL IS 170 OHMS @ 30 GAUGE WIRE.
THE ACCELERATION ON THE TACH INCREASES IN 20 RPM CHUNKS.
IT IS VERY POWERFUL DUE TO THE CLOSED MAGNETIC CIRCUIT AND UNBROKEN FLUX PATH.
CHEERS
Thane
It does bear some resemblance to that core in #3487, but I must admit, it is much nicer looking!
Good work son...
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on November 12, 2008, 07:24:56 PM
It does bear some resemblance to that core in #3487, but I must admit, it is much nicer looking!
Good work son...
Ron
THANKS BUT - NICE LOOKING MEANS SQUAT - IT'S GOTTA WORK!
T
Is this the coil setup you've used for the Nasa video's? Or is this one already a 2nd generation of that :P.
Wouldn't the back emf (or released current) of the high impedance coil induce a flux in the low impedance coils and cancel out some of their output?
Seems like a cool idea. Keep up the good work!
Charlie
PS, I work at ORNL, but I am just a lowly graduate student.
Quote from: Charlie_V on November 12, 2008, 10:32:43 PM
Wouldn't the back emf (or released current) of the high impedance coil induce a flux in the low impedance coils and cancel out some of their output?
That depends on the current / flux phase.
Quote
I am just a lowly graduate student.
Don't underestimate or berate yourself, it merely invites others to do the same. .... Cheers and KneeDeep
Quote from: broli on November 12, 2008, 09:17:04 PM
Is this the coil setup you've used for the Nasa video's? Or is this one already a 2nd generation of that :P.
THE NASA VIDS USE THE SAME DESIGN - BUT ALL THE CORE PIECES ARE INDIVIDUAL BECAUSE I WAS TESTING FOR THE BEST SIZE.
T
Good to know. One last thing, what happens when you unplug the input at a certain RPM, shouldn't it technically keep running seeing how little the input is helping out.
QuoteWouldn't the back emf (or released current) of the high impedance coil induce a flux in the low impedance coils and cancel out some of their output?
YES IT DOES IF YOU DO IT WRONG - BUT AS HP POINTED OUT - THE DELAYED INDUCED FIELD OF THE HIGH IMPEDANCE COIL RELEASES JUST BEFORE THE MAGNET MOVES AWAY FROM T.D.C..
SO IF YOU HAVE AT TDC
CORE SOUTH
CORE NORTH
CORE SOUTH THEN YOU HAVE AS MAGNETS
MOVE AWAYCORE NORTH (APPRAOCHING)
CORE NORTH (DISCHAGING)
CORE NORTH (APPROACHING)
NOTE: A
SOUTH POLE MOVING AWAY =
NORTH POLE APPROACHINGSO YOU CAN SEE FROM THE ABOVE THAT - WHEN THE
SOUTH POLE MAGNETS ARE
MOVING AWAY - THE DIRECTION OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD INSIDE THE HIGH IMPEDANCE CORES IS THE SAME AS IF A
NORTH POLE MAGNET WAS
APPRAOCHING.
THE DISCHARGING DELAYED
INDUCED NORTH POLE FROM THE HIGH IMPEDANCE (CENTRE) COIL:
1) PUSHES AWAY THE NOW RECEDING
NORTH POLE (CENTRE) MAGNET -
2) ENTERS THE HIGH IMPEDANCE CORES (INCREASING THE
NORTH POLE FLUX MAGNITUDE)
3) ATTRACTS THE APPROACHING
SOUTH POLE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR. (THIS MAY HAVE A MINIMUM EFFECT BECAUSE THE DISCHARGING HIGH IMPEDANCE FIELD WOULD ATTRACT BOTH SOUTH POLE MAGNETS BACK TO THE CENTRE CORE - PREVIOUSLY MY TOP CORE DESIGNS PROTRUDED OUT FARTHER THAN THE BOTTOM CORE TO ENCOURAGE FLUX TO GO THE TOP ROUTE INSTEAD OF THE BOTTOM.
ALSO - NONE OF THIS WORKS IF THE LOW IMPEDANCE / HC COIL CORES ARE TO OMITTED...QuoteSeems like a cool idea. Keep up the good work!
Charlie
PS, I work at ORNL, but I am just a lowly graduate student.
YOU ARE FORTUNATE DUDE!
QuoteDon't underestimate or berate yourself,
YES - PLEASE LET US DO THAT FOR YOU! :D
WE HAVE BEEN PRACTICING ON UNDERESTIMATING AND BERATING HP FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND ARE QUITE GOOD AT IT NOW! :-*
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: broli on November 13, 2008, 06:21:53 AM
Good to know. One last thing, what happens when you unplug the input at a certain RPM, shouldn't it technically keep running seeing how little the input is helping out.
MAYBE - MAYBE NOT?
YOU WOULD REQUIRE A VERY POWERFULL HV COIL.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE NASA VID #3 THE MOTOR IS NOT OFFERING MUCH TORQUE.
YESTERDAY I WAS ACCELERATING MY NEW "E" HV COIL AT ABOVE 1600 RPM WITH THE MOTOR INPUT AT 55 VOLTS - SO AS THE HV COIL GETS STRONGER THE MOTOR INPUT REQUIRED GETS LESS AND LESS.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 13, 2008, 07:13:23 AM
YESTERDAY I WAS ACCELERATING MY NEW "E" HV COIL AT ABOVE 1600 RPM WITH THE MOTOR INPUT AT 55 VOLTS - SO AS THE HV COIL GETS STRONGER THE MOTOR INPUT REQUIRED GETS LESS AND LESS.
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
what about torque, does it also become less and less?
Remember, Power = torque * angular speed
If rpm increases, torque should decrease, but does that happen in your experiments?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 13, 2008, 07:13:23 AM
YESTERDAY I WAS ACCELERATING MY NEW "E" HV COIL AT ABOVE 1600 RPM WITH THE MOTOR INPUT AT 55 VOLTS - SO AS THE HV COIL GETS STRONGER THE MOTOR INPUT REQUIRED GETS LESS AND LESS.
Outstanding new coil results T!
My last testing from this earlier this year when we were using separate HV/HC coils was only getting 1700 RPM at 120 volts with half as many magnets on the rotor.
That coil is working like a supercharger.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: alan on November 13, 2008, 07:33:18 AM
Hi Thane,
what about torque, does it also become less and less?
Remember, Power = torque * angular speed
If rpm increases, torque should decrease, but does that happen in your experiments?
AT 55 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR IS LESS THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED TO TURN THE ROTOR AT 100 RPM.
FROM 100 RPM TO 1600 RPM THE TORQUE REQUIRED IS SUPPLIED BY THE HV COIL.
OR
THE HV COIL IS ELIMINATING CORE LOSSES AND THE MOTOR IS ACCELERATING THE ROTOR
WHICH IS SIMPLY IDIOTIC TO ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN IT AND DOES NOT USE FLUORIDE TOOTHPASTE.
T
Quote from: LarryC on November 13, 2008, 12:38:48 PM
Outstanding new coil results T!
My last testing from this earlier this year when we were using separate HV/HC coils was only getting 1700 RPM at 120 volts with half as many magnets on the rotor.
That coil is working like a supercharger.
Regards, Larry
THANKS LC,
I THINK IT IS THE REDUCED SIZE OF THE CORE - LASER BEAMING THE FLUX IN A CONDENSED FIELD, WHEREAS THOSE LARGE MOTS DISPERSED IT..
I WAS GOING TO SHOOT SOME VIDEO OF THE NEW COIL ACCELERATING IN 2O RPM SEGMENTS TODAY BUT I SHORTED A WIRE INSIDE MY COIL SO I HAVE TO REWIND ANOTHER ONE - MAYBE FRIDAY.
CHEERS
T
hey buzz,
they better not bring it to my mountain eithier! there are some thiings still worth fighting for . CRANKY PANTS, just might be one of them!
lol
sam
Quote from: TheBuzz on November 15, 2008, 11:12:31 PM
Hi Thane,
I just got my core and wire today and am ready to get started with a replication attempt. Two quick questions and anyone can answer so as to not distract Thane from his work:
1. Is this being done open source or do you have a patent? How to license is the question.
2. What is the large mass that you attach the core to? Magnets?
Keep up the good work.
PS - Don't worry about FEMA death camps. While you guys were busy making those cool square head screws, we made and bought 200 million guns. The military is deploying on the streets here now and after they fire the first shot, they will have the shelf life of a bug.
Quote1. Is this being done open source or do you have a patent? How to license is the question.
WE HAVE PATENT APPLICATIONS FILED - THERE IS NO GUARANTEE OF ACTUAL PATENTS THOUGH. AND THAT SHOULD NOT STOP ANYONE FROM REPLICATING. PATENTS ARE BULL ANYWAY - THEY ONLY GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO SUE SOMEONE - WE FILE THEM TO ESTABLISH INVENTORSHIP.
Quote2. What is the large mass that you attach the core to? Magnets?
THAT IS BACK IRON - WHICH REDUCES THE RELUCTANCE IN THE AIR GAP AND HELPS TO PULL MORE FLUX INTO YOUR CORES - THIS IS IMPORTANT IF YOUR COILS DON'T FORM A CLOSED MAGETNIC CIRCUIT.
WTF! - THE MILITARY IS DEPLOYONG ON YOUR STREETS?!?!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 16, 2008, 08:40:35 AM
snip
WTF! - THE MILITARY IS DEPLOYONG ON YOUR STREETS?!?!
T
Yep, combat troops on the streets
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/aclu-demands-answers-3-000-us-army-combat-troops-working-crowd-control
http://www.wariscrime.com/2008/09/27/news/army-deploys-its-most-blooded-combat-unit-in-us/
But it gets even worse..."they" will be here next....
"U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, left, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, signed a Civil Assistance Plan that allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency. The signing took place at U.S. Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Feb. 14, 2008."
Ron
(//)
These 'civil assisters' will be nearly indispensable, in assisting citizens to locate the appropriate internment facility.
Regards...
Quote from: i_ron on November 16, 2008, 07:20:29 PM
But it gets even worse..."they" will be here next....
"U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, left, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, signed a Civil Assistance Plan that allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency. The signing took place at U.S. Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Feb. 14, 2008."
Ron
Check out the gold fringe on BOTH flags.....
"The gold-fringed flag only stands inside military courts that sit in summary court martial proceedings against civilians and such courts are governed in part by local rules, but more especially by "The Manual of Courts Martial", U.S., 1994 Ed., at Art. 99, (c)(1)(b), pg. IV-34, PIN 030567-0000, U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash. D.C. The details of the crimes that civilians can commit, that are classed as 'Acts of War,' cover 125 pages in the Manual of Courts Martial."
Quote from: i_ron on November 16, 2008, 07:46:23 PM
Check out the gold fringe on BOTH flags.....
"The gold-fringed flag only stands inside military courts that sit in summary court martial proceedings against civilians and such courts are governed in part by local rules, but more especially by "The Manual of Courts Martial", U.S., 1994 Ed., at Art. 99, (c)(1)(b), pg. IV-34, PIN 030567-0000, U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash. D.C. The details of the crimes that civilians can commit, that are classed as 'Acts of War,' cover 125 pages in the Manual of Courts Martial."
Okay, enough is enough, you guys are playing with fire. What if T comes down here with his Thanerator V2.587972 ray gun!!!!! Ya, that won't be so funny, especially for my evil uglier twin JackN.
Quote from: LarryC on November 16, 2008, 11:57:54 PM
Okay, enough is enough, you guys are playing with fire. What if T comes down here with his Thanerator V2.587972 ray gun!!!!! Ya, that won't be so funny, especially for my evil uglier twin JackN.
ACTUALLY I HAVE BEEN FITTING -
AEON FLUX - WITH A
NEW V3 TURBO.587972 RAY GUN AND SHE'S ALMOST READY FOR YOU THERE LC...
"
I PITY THE FOOL" MR.T
Didn't they warn for this? They also warned that the next step is martial law. >:(
Quote from: stringguy on November 17, 2008, 01:15:31 PM
arrrgh,
you know you are close to success when the "pretend militants and one world gov people" (for want of a better world) are posting on your thread,
snip
By the sound of it you wouldn't know one if one came up and bit you!
I was merely posting that canada is no more, sad but true. The a-merry-cons can now just walk in
here and keep the peace ... as they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Look around you if you want to see one world gov people... despite the referendum Ireland will just
be toast. Can you say "EU"? Resistance is futile... you will be assimilated.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on November 17, 2008, 03:20:24 PM
By the sound of it you wouldn't know one if one came up and bit you!
I was merely posting that canada is no more, sad but true. The a-merry-cons can now just walk in
here and keep the peace ... as they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Look around you if you want to see one world gov people... despite the referendum Ireland will just
be toast. Can you say "EU"? Resistance is futile... you will be assimilated.
Ron
lol, keep the peace.
Holland had a referendum for the Lisbon treaty/european constitution, the people said no, but the MP pushed it to a yes.
Quote from: stringguy on November 17, 2008, 04:52:02 PM
just wanna see more of master thanes work and less shyte
NEW VID FOR ALL YOU MASTER-DEBATERS...! ;)
SELF ACCELERATING - SELF EXCITED MOTOR COILhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8Pprl1Ri18
HC COILS ON THE MORROW.
THANER
SO LARRYC AND I WERE GOING TO FLY TO I_RON'S HOUSE TODAY - THEN THIS HAPPENED.
T
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-ca&brand=sympatico&tab=m1209589337391&vid=dbef1054-386d-4726-aa67-a2b02438ed15&playlist=videoByTag:tag:encacomedy_encastupidvideos:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:mk:en-ca:sf:DailyCount:st:1:vs:0&from=msnhpslider
Now that's what I call a damn good flier to pull that off. :o
Hope the guy that ran out there had some wipe with him. Gonna
need it for sure. ;D :D
thaelin
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 17, 2008, 09:38:50 PM
SO LARRYC AND I WERE GOING TO FLY TO I_RON'S HOUSE TODAY - THEN THIS HAPPENED.
T
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-ca&brand=sympatico&tab=m120r
LOL, saw that on youtube recently... I wondered as a couple of things didn't add up for me...
So if you google this... this is what you get...it's a fake
http://www.reggiepaulk.com/2008/10/killathrill-generates-huge-buzz-with.html
http://rofasix.blogspot.com/2008/10/not-his-day-to-die-or-great-fake.html
Real World Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 17, 2008, 08:21:37 PM
NEW VID FOR ALL YOU MASTER-DEBATERS...! ;)
SELF ACCELERATING - SELF EXCITED MOTOR COIL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8Pprl1Ri18
HC COILS ON THE MORROW.
THANER
Thaner, could you be planer on your explainer?
Are the three coils wound on top of each other on the center leg?
Does the reduced resistance on each segment allow for a stronger effect?
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 17, 2008, 09:38:50 PM
SO LARRYC AND I WERE GOING TO FLY TO I_RON'S HOUSE TODAY - THEN THIS HAPPENED.
T
Okay, okay, you are the King master-debater. All hail to the king, baby. I've attached a recent picture.
Anyway, the acceleration was truly brutal, looking forward to +HC results.
PS: But, you missed that the Thanerator V2.587972 ray gun had a Tri-toroid design!
Regards, Larry
I read the beginning of this thread and skipped to the end. I can't seem to find any information showing replications of the Torroidal transformer that increases power output. I noticed that Thane has made prototypes, but has anyone replicated them? I have some tiny torroids. I would like to build a transformer if it is worth doing so.
Please tell me what I need to construct an over unity transformer, if it can be done with normal materials?
Thanks guys! This has been great reading!
Quote from: supermuble on November 18, 2008, 12:53:24 AM
I read the beginning of this thread and skipped to the end. I can't seem to find any information showing replications of the Torroidal transformer that increases power output. I noticed that Thane has made prototypes, but has anyone replicated them? I have some tiny torroids. I would like to build a transformer if it is worth doing so.
Please tell me what I need to construct an over unity transformer, if it can be done with normal materials?
Thanks guys! This has been great reading!
1) START WITH A
HUGE TOROID AND WIND TWO SEPARATE COILS ON IT.
2) DRILL A HOLE IN BETWEEN THE TWO COILS AND PLACE AN AC WELDING ROD IN THE HOLE.
3) PUT SOME PRIMARY WINDINGS ON THE WELDING ROD.
4) PUT AC INTO THE WELDING ROD PRIMARY.
5) LOAD THE SECONDARY COILS.
6) MONITOR PRIMARY CURRENT AND POWER FACTOR.
7) IF CURRENT OR PF INCREASES - INCREASE TOROID SIZE.
8) REPEAT.
9) IF PRIMARY CURRENT AND PF DO NOT INCREASE...
10) MAKE A NEW PRIMARY WITH TWO OR THREE RODS.
11) REPEAT.
12) KEEP CHANGING PRIMARY UNTIL YOUR PRIMARY CURRENT AND PF INCREASE UNDER LOAD.
13) REDUCE PRIMARY CORE SIZE A BIT UNTIL PRIMARY DOES NOT CHANGE UNDER LOAD.
14) MAKE SURE SECONDARY SELF REGULATES THE VOLTAGE AC CROSS THE LOAD. (BEMF FROM S1 FEEDS S2 AND VICEY VERSA).
15) KEEP TWEAKING (WIRE GAUGE , # OF TURNS) YOUR PRIMARY UNTIL YOU GET THE BEST Q.
16) KEEP ADDING SECONDARY TUNS TO MAX OUTPUT POWER.
17) TELL EVERYONE WHEN YOU GET OVERUNITY.
18) ACT SURPRIZED WHEN NO ONE BELIEVES YOU.
GOOD LUCK
T
Quote
Are the three coils wound on top of each other on the center leg?
YES - ONE AFTER THE OTHER
NOT SIMULTHANEOUSLY.
QuoteDoes the reduced resistance on each segment allow for a stronger effect?
Ron
NO - THAT'S ALL THE WIRE I HAD AT THE TIME - THE SECOND AND THIRD WINDINGS WOULD PROBABLY WORK BETTER WITH ADDITIONAL TURNS.
THAT WAS A DEMO COIL FOR THE OTTAWA UNIVERSITY ENGINEERING STUDENTS WHO ASKED ABOUT HOW TO INCREASE RPM AFTER THE A COIL MAXXED OUT.
BTW: A SINGLE COIL W/ 160 OHMS DOES NOT ACCELERATE - BUT TWO SEPARATE 80 OHM COILS DOES BEAUTIFULLY
ALSO WINDING THREE 80 OHM COILS SIMULTANEOUSLY DOES NOT WORK EITHER.
THANER THE EXPLAINER
CAN I MAKE THIS PLAINER?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 18, 2008, 07:14:35 AM
YES - ONE AFTER THE OTHER NOT SIMULTHANEOUSLY.
THANER THE EXPLAINER
CAN I MAKE THIS PLAINER?
T
Excellent, even right down to correcting my spelling! You da mon.
Thats the good news... the bad?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1954933468700958565&hl=es
Ron
Quote
Anyway, the acceleration was truly brutal, looking forward to +HC results.
Regards, Larry
Part 2 NEW SELF EXCITED, SELF ACCELERATING MOTOR COIL VIDEO HERE:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn0x1li2vMA
WEDNESDAY I WILL LET THE MOTOR ACCELERATE UP TO FULL SPEED WITH THE 10 OHM LOAD ON... IT SHOULD BE INTERESTING.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 18, 2008, 11:40:36 PM
WEDNESDAY I WILL LET THE MOTOR ACCELERATE UP TO FULL SPEED WITH THE 10 OHM LOAD ON... IT SHOULD BE INTERESTING.
Hi T,
Sounds great and looking forward to that test, but sorry to bring this sadness,
My father in law, not much older than us, but earlier today (2:47 Ct AM), I was awaking by a phone call from the hospital with my father in laws unsuspected death and my wife's (his daughter) extreme sadness. So I may be out of touch for a while.
So please people, get er done while you're here, for your family and the world, before your ability to do so is going!
Regards, Larry
Quote from: i_ron on November 18, 2008, 11:11:25 AM
Excellent, even right down to correcting my spelling! You da mon.
Thats the good news... the bad?
Ron
USUALLY I DON'T LIKE TO SOUND LIKE JOSEPH NEWMAN BUT I SENT THIS TO TYLER HAMILTON - THE REPORTER AT THE TORONTO STAR WHO STARTED ALL THIS WITH HIS STORY WHEN WE WENT TO MIT.
I KNOW I AM CRAZY BUT WOULDN'T THE NEWS OF A MOTOR COIL THAT DRIVES ITSELF AND ACCELERATES ITSELF WITHOUT EXTERNAL POWER CHANGE THE FATE OF THE UNITED STATES?
From: Thane C. Heins <thane_heins@yahoo.ca>
Subject: Have you seen an AMERO yet?
To: "Hamilton, Tyler" <thamilton@thestar.ca>
Received: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 10:30 PM
Fw: Have you seen an AMERO yet?
Dear Tyler,
The AMERO is here, soon to be ushered in by the collapse of the American dollar.
This new "SELF EXCITED MOTOR TECHNOLOGY" has the capacity to change what is coming.
Sincerely
Thane
AMERO and Pending US CURRENCY DEVALUATIONhttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1954933468700958565&hl=es
Quote from: LarryC on November 19, 2008, 01:27:23 AM
Hi T,
Sounds great and looking forward to that test, but sorry to bring this sadness,
My father in law, not much older than us, but earlier today (2:47 Ct AM), I was awaking by a phone call from the hospital with my father in laws unsuspected death and my wife's (his daughter) extreme sadness. So I may be out of touch for a while.
So please people, get er done while you're here, for your family and the world, before your ability to do so is going!
Regards, Larry
Sorry to hear about your family's loss Larry.
I wish I could finish my adventure here and return to the Real Reality as well...
Sincerely Thane
Hi Thane,
concerning your post #3543 :
Quote1) START WITH A HUGE TOROID AND WIND TWO SEPARATE COILS ON IT. etc
Can you please post a handwritten sketch as I do not get a clear idea of the position of the holes and the welding-rod dimesions ( and shape : is is circular or just a stick ? )
Thank you Thane
Regards
Kator
@Stringguy take a chill pill. Blasting people off like that will not make you very popular. He only asked a simple question.
@Thane once again splendid work. I so want to be in that lab.
Quote from: stringguy on November 19, 2008, 06:54:39 PM
u r right, i'm an idiot, and apologize sincerely.
really, very sorry,
i think i'd better remove my membership. i am genuinely sorry, just cant help my self.
i apologize to all.
i am a talented harp making/playing idiot. and shouldnt be typing.
love from me and best of luck to ou guys and thane.
signing off
andy gowan
Hey, not a problem Andy. we are all allowed one mistake on this list and so many people don't
write so IMHO we can use up some of those too! Carry on
Ron
(//)
Quote
Anyway, the acceleration was truly brutal, looking forward to +HC results.
Regards, Larry
NEW HIGH SPEED VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3z6_xWUsGs
NO HV COILS = 900 RPM with 0.27 WATTS GENERATOR OUTPUT
WITH HV COIL ACCELERATION = 2900 RPM with 8.2 WATTS GENERATOR OUTPUT.
% INCREASE = 2900 %T
I'm trying to understand this thread and am having difficulty, but am still curious.
I understand the implication that you are making a generator much more efficient, because you are comparing generator efficiency before engaging your coils (with Len's Law in effect), and after (with an acceleration effect).
In addition to this comparison, I would like to know how much power is being dumped into the prime mover from the wall socket, and how much power is being output from your generator with your coils engaged so as to try and understand what the overall picture is...
I really don't know much about electronics, so if the following question doesn't make sense--sorry! With your coils engaged, can you load the system down so that you maintain a steady spin rate and compare the power you are dumping into the prime mover to the power your are outputting from your generator? What is the ratio?
Thanks.
Hey Thane, I have a question about your second video. When you engage the high voltage coil, it speeds up to 1500 rpm. And you get more voltage in the high current coil. But when you turn off the high voltage coil, the high current drops back to 2V almost instantly yet it takes time for the speed of the motor to drop, why is this?
The voltage of the high current coil should be dependent on the rpms of the motor. So you would see the voltage in it drop proportional to the speed, not instantaneously like it does. Just wondering why this is? Also, what is the input power to your motor - it seems like a pretty powerful motor and I imagine the input is far greater than 8W? I take it you are getting a boosting effect but are still under the over-unity mark, otherwise you would have closed the loop by now? Self exciting is a little misleading because it implies (to me anyway) that the output coils are powering the input of the motor. I would say that it was just self accelerating - which is still way cool.
Please don't think I'm putting you down. I just have some stupid questions after watching the video. I believe in time you'll be closing the loop.
Good luck,
Charlie
Every man who has tried to "close the loop" either ends up with millions of dollars, or dead in a short time from unnatural causes.
Don't close the loop!!!
QuoteHey Thane, I have a question about your second video. When you engage the high voltage coil, it speeds up to 1500 rpm. And you get more voltage in the high current coil. But when you turn off the high voltage coil, the high current drops back to 2V almost instantly yet it takes time for the speed of the motor to drop, why is this? The voltage of the high current coil should be dependent on the rpms of the motor. So you would see the voltage in it drop proportional to the speed, not instantaneously like it does. Just wondering why this is?
WE ARE COUPLING THE HIGH VOLTAGE COIL FLUX WITH THE HIGH CURRENT CORES SO WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED IT'S DISCHARGED FLUX BOOSTS UP (TRIPLES) THE HC COIL'S OUTPUT. SO WHEN THE HV COILS ARE DISENGAGED - THE HC OUTPUT ACROSS THE LOAD IS
INSATANTLY DE-BOOSTED.
QuoteAlso, what is the input power to your motor - it seems like a pretty powerful motor and I imagine the input is far greater than 8W? I take it you are getting a boosting effect but are still under the over-unity mark, otherwise you would have closed the loop by now? Self exciting is a little misleading because it implies (to me anyway) that the output coils are powering the input of the motor. I would say that it was just self accelerating - which is still way cool.
AS I HAVE DEMONSTRATED THE HC COIL LOADED SPEED OF THE SYSTEM IS LESS THAN 900 RPM - PRODUCING 0.25 W.
THE SAME HC COIL LOADED SPEED OF THE SYSTEM IS MORE THAN 3000 RPM - PRODUCING OVER 8 W.
THE ACCELERATION IS CAUSED BY THE SELF EXCITED HIGH VOLTAGE MOTOR COIL WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY EXTERNAL INPUT POWER.- YOU CAN SAY WHAYEVER YOU WISH AS WILL I.
QuotePlease don't think I'm putting you down. I just have some stupid questions after watching the video. I believe in time you'll be closing the loop. Good luck,
Charlie
FOR ME IT IS IMPORTANT TO FOCUS ON WALKING BEFORE RUNNING SO I DON'T END UP FLAT ON MY FACE.
CLOSING THE LOOP IS FOR CHILDREN WHO HAVE NO IMAGINATION AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE ADVANCING THE SCIENCE OF WHAT WE ARE DOING - I DOUBT I WILL EVER DO IT SIMPLY BECAUSE TOO MANY PEOPLE DEMAND IT AS IF I NEED TO
PROVE SOMETHING AS IS TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY THE MOTOR INPUT IS IRRELEVANT (AS LONG AS IT IS NOT INCREASING).
WHY WORRY ABOUT OVER-UNITY ANYWAY? CHECK THE INTERNET, EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG HAS AN OVERUNITY DEVICE - MY COUSIN IN POLAND HAS TWO IN HIS GARAGE.
CHEERS
CRANKY
QuoteIn addition to this comparison, I would like to know how much power is being dumped into the prime mover from the wall socket, and how much power is being output from your generator with your coils engaged so as to try and understand what the overall picture is...
NO LOADING: SOME DUMPED
HC LOADING: MORE DUMPED
HV & HC LOADING: LESS DUMPED
HV LOADING:
WAY LESS DUMPED
QuoteWhat is the ratio?
Thanks
.
RATIO = MORE/LESS = LESS
(MORE OR LESS)
T
Damn I thought the motor was going to explode if it kept going higher. Very fascinating to see indeed. What's planned next?
QuoteWHY WORRY ABOUT OVER-UNITY ANYWAY? CHECK THE INTERNET, EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG HAS AN OVERUNITY DEVICE - MY COUSIN IN POLAND HAS TWO IN HIS GARAGE.
Haha true but none of them work actually work. So far all the ones I've built haven't worked - and of course I'm still trying :D
I have another question. How fast does the motor spin when you take away all the coils so that it can spin freely without interacting with the iron cores? If the motor spins at 2500rpms without the iron being present, then you place iron (from the cores of the coils) near the magnet wheel and it slows down to 900rpms, the drag is considerable. So if you start to energize the coils, the flux in them can saturate the iron and basically reduce the mechanical load the motor sees - causing it to spin faster like it would without the iron and coils being present.
However, if the motor is regulated to only spin at 900 rpms, despite the iron being there or not, then that is more impressive. Its the difference in showing that the setup is adding energy from apparently no where, or designing a system that has extremely low efficiency starting out, and the efficiency improves somewhat when electrically loaded. Both are cool but the first has a greater initial impact while the later needs more work. The latter system could be made to act like the first if the forces involved can be balanced so the initial drag is almost zero. Then it would be just as easy rotation at the start as at the end.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 20, 2008, 06:41:28 AMAS I HAVE DEMONSTRATED THE HC COIL LOADED SPEED OF THE SYSTEM IS LESS THAN 900 RPM - PRODUCING 0.25 W.
THE SAME HC COIL LOADED SPEED OF THE SYSTEM IS MORE THAN 3000 RPM - PRODUCING OVER 8 W.
THE ACCELERATION IS CAUSED BY THE SELF EXCITED HIGH VOLTAGE MOTOR COIL WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY EXTERNAL INPUT POWER.- YOU CAN SAY WHAYEVER YOU WISH AS WILL I.
Ok, the
acceleration does not require any input power... excellent. But, what is the input power to begin with then?
QuoteSo if you start to energize the coils, the flux in them can saturate the iron and basically reduce the mechanical load the motor sees - causing it to spin faster like it would without the iron and coils being present.
WE CAN GET ACCELERATION FROM A COIL AT 200 RPM - PRODUCING LESS THAN 25 VOLTS USING LAMINATED CORES - SATURATION IS A NON ISSUE HERE BECAUSE THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD (AND HV COIL VOLTAGE) CONTINUE TO INCREASE - THEY WOULD NOT INCREASE BEYOND SATURATION - IF THEY WERE SATURATING WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
QuoteHowever, if the motor is regulated to only spin at 900 rpms, despite the iron being there or not, then that is more impressive
.
WE GET SIMILAR RESULTS WITH A DC MOTOR.
THE AC INDUCTION MOTOR IN THE VIDEO IS A 1/3 HP RATED AT 3500 RPM.
THE VOLTAGE IN THE LAST VIDEO WAS SET AT 82 VOLTS.
T
Quote from: broli on November 20, 2008, 07:12:52 AM
Damn I thought the motor was going to explode if it kept going higher. Very fascinating to see indeed. What's planned next?
SAME DEMO FRIDAY FOR:Colorado Energy Research Institute:http://www.ceri-mines.org/
SAME DEMO & TECHNICAL EVALUATION (IN THE NEW YEAR) FROM: The United States Department of Energy ay Oak Ridge National Laboratory http://peemrc.ornl.gov/ The Oak Ridge National Laboratory's (ORNL) Power Electronics and Electric Machinery Research Center (PEEMRC) is the U.S. Department of Energy's premiere broad-based research center for power electronic and electric machinery development
SOME NEW "TEST" COILS FROM A LOCAL TRANSFORMER MANUFACURER TO BE MADE INTO A FULL SIZE GENERATOR.
WORKING TOWARDS COMPLETING THE PROTOTYPE REQUESTS FROM OUR LICENCING PARTNERS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: efoda on November 20, 2008, 12:17:01 PM
Ok, the acceleration does not require any input power... excellent. But, what is the input power to begin with then?
THE ACCELERATION DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY
ADDITIONAL INPUT POWER - IN FACT IT REQUIRES
LESS..
1/4 HP DC MOTOR = 10 - 15 WATTS
1/3 HP INDUCTION MOTOR = 200 - 400 WATTS
5 HP GAS LAWNMOWER ENGINE = 3730 WATTS
90 HP DIESEL ENGINE = 20,000 WATTS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 20, 2008, 01:24:46 PM
THE ACCELERATION DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL INPUT POWER - IN FACT IT REQUIRES LESS..
1/4 HP DC MOTOR = 10 - 15 WATTS
1/3 HP INDUCTION MOTOR = 200 - 400 WATTS
5 HP GAS LAWNMOWER ENGINE = 3730 WATTS
90 HP DIESEL ENGINE = 20,000 WATTS
T
Yes, I understand what you're saying. And what I'm asking, is what input power you're running before any acceleration occurs (which does not require any additional input). Is that ryobi a 1/4 HP? So is it drawing 10-15 watts? You said your output was 8.2w at 2900 RPM. So, peak efficiency best case from those numbers is ~80%?
I understand that it requires no additional input, so have you pushed the RPM's output past the input? I would think that would be an interesting experiment. How does input power react once RPM output power exceed's input power. Is this even possible? Does it draw more if reached, does it fail, etc...
QuoteWE CAN GET ACCELERATION FROM A COIL AT 200 RPM - PRODUCING LESS THAN 25 VOLTS USING LAMINATED CORES - SATURATION IS A NON ISSUE HERE BECAUSE THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD (AND HV COIL VOLTAGE) CONTINUE TO INCREASE - THEY WOULD NOT INCREASE BEYOND SATURATION - IF THEY WERE SATURATING WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
Saturation is not a cut off point, you would still see an increase, but it would be smaller than when not saturated. But, assuming there is no saturation (which I'm sure your right and there isn't) the effect of acceleration does not seem to increase the output beyond the input. This means there is something that is restricting it. A true Lenzless operation theoretically could go beyond the input, right?
What happens when you remove the core?
Let me repeat it here as well ;D.
Thane have you ever thought of combining your work with Lindemann's work. His no back EMF motor would give much better results than the induction motor you're using now. No?
Quote from: broli on November 21, 2008, 06:50:13 PM
Let me repeat it here as well ;D.
Thane have you ever thought of combining your work with Lindemann's work. His no back EMF motor would give much better results than the induction motor you're using now. No?
I MIGHT IF HE WAS A MAN OF INTEGRITY. ALAS HE IS NOT, THIS CRITIQUE HAS NEVER BEEN UPDATED NOR HAS HE EVER BEEN TO THE LAB.
T
No Useful Output & Nothing Important On Feb. 6, 2008, Peter Lindemann, DSc, writes: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc#No_Useful_Output
I have reviewed all seven video links. In all fairness, I would like to say that Thane has built some nice demonstrations and spent a lot of time running experiments. That said, the films show nothing important. First of all, the films do not show enough detailed information to evaluate the demonstrations. Second, no free energy is shown. In fact, the generators are never shown producing any useful outputs. They are either shown producing voltage in "open circuit" mode, or they are shown in "short circuit" mode, where the generated voltage drops below one volt. So, ZERO WATTS are produced in either case.
The changes in mechanical drag are due to changes in inductance and hysteresis. Back in the 1980's, both John Bedini and I independently worked with "variable reluctance" generators. We both saw that these designs work like an inverse to a standard induction generator. That is, they produce maximum drag in "open circuit" mode, and minimum drag in "short circuit" mode. John found that the point of maximum benefit in this situation is to charge a battery, where the impedance of the generator "sees" the battery as a "near short circuit". Under these circumstances, the generator free-wheels and the battery charges quickly.
Unfortunately, Thane is not showing any useful benefits from the generator output. So, there is no "efficiency" to calculate because there is no output!
The real problem with these demonstrations has to do with his motor drive. The motor driving his system is a single phase induction motor. This type of motor has almost zero starting torque, and only produces its rated power at rated speed. So, the rated speed of his motor is probably in the neighborhood of 1725 RPM. Running this motor in the 100 RPM range converts 98% of the input electric power to HEAT. He says he has a capacitor in the input circuit to the motor, but this is never shown in schematic, so we don't know how it is hooked up. If the capacitor is connected in SERIES with the motor winding, it will act as a current limiter, and skew the power factor of the motor towards reactive power. This is fine, IF you want to limit the mechanical power of the motor as well. If the capacitor is connected in PARALLEL with the motor winding, it will act to produce reactive power for the motor locally, and reduce the amount of power it draws from the wall. But again, this would only be significant at rated speed.
The effect he shows when a magnetic field is applied to the motor shaft would be undetectable if he was operating the motor correctly. It is a very weak effect. It is probably caused by the external magnetic field interfering with the induced magnetic field of the rotor. This would not happen if the motor coils were not being severely current limited and the rotor was not "slipping" severely in the rotating magnetic field of the stator.
My GUESS is that the capacitor is in SERIES with the motor winding. This will limit the current to the motor to a specific maximum. At the speeds he is running these motors, the only other mechanism to hold back the input current would be the resistance of the wire in the motor coils. If that is all he had, the motor would quickly over-heat and melt the insulation right off the wire. The fact that the motor is running hot is proved in the seventh film where a large black fan is shown blowing on the motor!
From the data presented, my best estimate of the efficiency of the demonstrations is that over 90% of the energy going into the motor is converted to heat. The changes in drag of the generators is standard behavior for variable reluctance topologies, so accelerations or decelerations of the motor DO NOT represent energy production, just changes in HYSTERESIS DRAG. Since no output energies are ever measured, the input to output efficiency ratio is ZERO.
Thane Heins may have more important discoveries in his lab, but they are not demonstrated in these videos.
I'm really sorry to have to comment negatively on Thane's work. He is exploring a new effect, and he is pretty brave to put out his data. It took John and I years to figure out what these kinds of generators were really doing and why. It is not obvious, and it takes a lot of experimenting and thinking to work it out.
Thane really needs to show the complete schematic of his test apparatus, including the strength and orientation of the magnets on his generator wheel, as well as the specifications on his drive motor. There is a lot of important data missing from the demos.
PL is a very smart doctor, see what his library consists of
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fenergyfromthevacuum.com%2Fimages%2FPeterLindemannsm.jpg&hash=4bbcd353fd02dad3a0e76815267cea43a527ac88)
(esotheric and money-making ::) )
That doesn't change the fact that his work is very useful to Thane.
@thane
from the lenz canceling topic:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=dboCAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6169343#PPA7,M1
The invention includes an apparatus to improve the efficiency of motors and generators by reducing counter electro motive force, including rotary and reciprocating piston embodiments constructed and arranged such that the motion is aided by the magnetic field rather than hindered.
Maybe useful for your work.
Quote from: alan on November 22, 2008, 11:29:50 AM
@thane
from the lenz canceling topic:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=dboCAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6169343#PPA7,M1
The invention includes an apparatus to improve the efficiency of motors and generators by reducing counter electro motive force, including rotary and reciprocating piston embodiments constructed and arranged such that the motion is aided by the magnetic field rather than hindered.
Maybe useful for your work.
THANKS ALAN,
LET ME KNOW IF YOU FIND AN ACTUAL WORKING UNIT.
T
Thane, could you please answer these questions a few of us have had:
Input power of last test?
Have you tried pushing RPM's to the point output reaches or exceeds input?
QuoteThane, could you please answer these questions a few of us have had:
SURE
QuoteInput power of last test?
IRRELEVANT
QuoteHave you tried pushing RPM's to the point output reaches or exceeds input?
NO - BUT THE MOTOR INPUT WOULD BE ZERO IF THE HV COIL ACCELERATED THE MOTOR ABOVE THE RATED SPEED OF 3500 RPM.
CHEERS
Thane
Hello Thane
I am a newbie from europe and i would like to congratulate you for the great work and the amazing progress you have done since the beginning of this topic.
If i understand right, i can replace the electric prime mover with anything else, for example à water turbine or windturbine etc...
And if i have also seen right, by engaging the 3 concentric HV coils , the HC coil generator can go from 0.27 watt to 8.2 watts without adding any energy.
And if I assume for fun, that the 0.27 watt of theHC coil at 900 rpm could represent the energy needed to power a house (very very small house ::)), by simply engaging the 3 concentric HV coils, the HC coil by accelerating, could provide up to 8.2 watts or could power more than 30 of these very very small houses
So if i have a windturbine in my garden to power my house, and this turbine is coupled to a Thane's generator, (and assuming the same wind speed ), i can dramatically reduce the diameter of my propeller to get the same amount of energy as without your system.
Or better, i can keep the same propeller diameter to turn a much bigger Thane's generator and power not only my house but all the village.
.
Whoooow !! that is absolutely fantastic ! I can simply say BRAVO, and hope that i can buy or replicate a Thane's generator as soon as possible. Keep up the good job, this is very promising and thank you for sharing.
I will go on following this thread with a lot of interest
Laurent
QuoteIf i understand right, i can replace the electric prime mover with anything else, for example à water turbine or windturbine etc...
THAT IS RIGHT - BUT YOU NEED TO BE ABOVE THE CRITICAL MINIMUM SPEED FOR THE HV COILS TO WORK.
QuoteAnd if i have also seen right, by engaging the 3 concentric HV coils , the HC coil generator can go from 0.27 watt to 8.2 watts without adding any energy.
THIS IS A DEMONSTRATION PROTOTYPE FOR THE STUDENTS AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY - YOU ONLY NEED 1 HC COIL BUT YOU CAN ALSO HAVE 3 OR MORE IF YOU PREFER.
QuoteAnd if I assume for fun, that the 0.27 watt of theHC coil at 900 rpm could represent the energy needed to power a house (very very small house ::)), by simply engaging the 3 concentric HV coils, the HC coil by accelerating, could provide up to 8.2 watts or could power more than 30 of these very very small houses
OR MAKE 10 CONSENTRIC BI-COILS AND PRODUCE 1000 WATTS AT 3000 RPM.
QuoteSo if i have a windturbine in my garden to power my house, and this turbine is coupled to a Thane's generator, (and assuming the same wind speed ), i can dramatically reduce the diameter of my propeller to get the same amount of energy as without your system. Or better, i can keep the same propeller diameter to turn a much bigger Thane's generator and power not only my house but all the village.
.
FIRST YOUR VILLAGE THEN EUROPE.
QuoteWhoooow !! that is absolutely fantastic ! I can simply say BRAVO, and hope that i can buy or replicate a Thane's generator as soon as possible. Keep up the good job, this is very promising and thank you for sharing.
I will go on following this thread with a lot of interest
Laurent
HOPEFULLY YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO PURCHASE WIND GENERATORS BY NEXT SUMMER IF ALL GOES WELL.
CHEERS
Thane
QuoteQuoteInput power of last test?
IRRELEVANT
Why?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 23, 2008, 06:48:32 PM
IRRELEVANT
Irrelevant? Ok. If your motor is drawing 10-15 watts to output .27, and then requires no ADDITIONAL power to output 8.2 watts while still requiring 10-15 watts to run, then maybe it's just me, but this doesn't seem all that amazing. If you can explain more why it's irrelevant, I'd like to hear it.
Quote
NO - BUT THE MOTOR INPUT WOULD BE ZERO IF THE HV COIL ACCELERATED THE MOTOR ABOVE THE RATED SPEED OF 3500 RPM.
Yes, I understand what the results might imply. Do you have any plans in performing this test? If you did and the results showed a runaway motor acceleration condition whereby output exceeded input, then I'd most definitely agree with you that input power is irrelevant.
thanks Thane for replying so fast
and another time whoow and bravo for the possibilities i can see
Now, If i consider the posts of Charlie V and Efoda (and lot of people on this thread) and the question about input versus output, I have to understand this :
If i have in my garden a windturbine of a given propeller diameter (let's say 5 meters diameter) coupled to a
good "normal s" generator
And i assume that, at a steady windspeed of 30 kmh this "normal" generator can easily power my house.
Now, i replace this "normal" generator by a brand new Thane's generator (of course capable to spin the rotor at the right speed to animate the HV coils properly).
Can I expect that with the same propeller (5 meters diameter) and same wind speed ( steady 30 kmh) , this new Thane's generator can power not only my house but also all my village (about 30 more houses) ? and perhaps more ??
If i look right to your videos it seems to be possible, and pardon me to be estonished , i am not only estonished, i am completely upsidedown...and very happy to see that this world can reserve very good surprise to a sleeping human beeing
hope the best and i am looking forward to see more and more
thanks
Laurent
QuoteIrrelevant? Ok. If your motor is drawing 10-15 watts to output .27, and then requires no ADDITIONAL power to output 8.2 watts while still requiring 10-15 watts to run, then maybe it's just me, but this doesn't seem all that amazing. If you can explain more why it's irrelevant, I'd like to hear it.
IT'S JUST YOU...
AND IT'S STILL IRRELEVANT.
If your motor is drawing 10-15 watts to output .27 watts AND BARELY TURNING @ 800 RPM, and then requires no ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL ELECTRICAL power to output 8.2 watts (AND HAS SOME HOW ACCELERATED UP TO MORE THAN 3000 RPM BUT ALL THE PARAMETERS ARE STILL THE SAME EXCEPT THAT THE MOTOR IS GETTING COLDER AND DRAWING LESS ENERGY) while still requiring LESS THAN 10-15 watts to run, then maybe it's just me, but this doesn't seem all that amazing - IT'S A FREAKIN MIRACLE. If you can explain more why it's irrelevant, I'd like to hear it - I MEAN THIS IS A TOTAL VIOLATION OF THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE. HOW CAN A FIXED MASS INCREASE FROM ONE POINT OF STORED ROTATIONAL INERTIA TO A HIGHER ONE WITH A ZERO INCREASE IN INPUT ENERGY WHILE AT THE SAME TIME DOING INCREASING AMOUNTS OF WORK ON A LOAD? DOES IT WALK ON WATER AS WELL - NOW
THAT WOULD BE AMAZING!
T
QuoteNow, If i consider the posts of Charlie V and Efoda (and lot of people on this thread) and the question about input versus output, I have to understand this :
If i have in my garden a windturbine of a given propeller diameter (let's say 5 meters diameter) coupled to a good "normal s" generator And i assume that, at a steady windspeed of 30 kmh this "normal" generator can easily power my house.
Now, i replace this "normal" generator by a brand new Thane's generator (of course capable to spin the rotor at the right speed to animate the HV coils properly).
Can I expect that with the same propeller (5 meters diameter) and same wind speed ( steady 30 kmh) , this new Thane's generator can power not only my house but also all my village (about 30 more houses) ? and perhaps more ??
thanks
Laurent
THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS YES.
TO ANSWER YOUR SINCERE QUESTION ABOUT INPUT VS OUTPUT.
THE INPUT TO THE GENERATOR HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MOTOR POWER CONSUMPTION.
THE INPUT TO THE GENERATOR IS THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT WHICH IS TORQUE TIMES SPEED - PB'S FAT GRANDMOTHER IN TIGHTS SMOKING CAMELS AND EATING POUTINE ON A TREADMILL, COULD REPLACE THE MOTOR AS THE PRIME MOVER BUT SHE AIN'T GONNA BE VERY EFFICIENT.
CHEERS
T
The way I see it,
The reason why your system is at idle is running on say 700rpm at say 50watt is because of the eddy drag this core is putting up. If you would not change any input to that idle state and remove the core, it will boost in rpm. Since the eddy drag (and such) is now gone.
Now I might be mistaking but you are using a 1 phase induction motor right? Run from the variac at a lower than hz sync speed. Now I have used these as well and I found the their rpm vs power in not to be linear when driven out of sync. That means that when the motor gets more into the range of its intended operating rpm the thing seems to "jump" faster and faster into it non-slip rpm range. In other words at some point a little more input to the system (or a little less drag) causes a increasing rpm increase the more it gets to its own 'designed for rpm' range. Anyway for that reason I went to 'universal motors' http://www.globe-usa.com/images/mtrassytom2.gif (http://www.globe-usa.com/images/mtrassytom2.gif) like washing machine motors http://www.homespare.com/Pictures/thumb/50185a.jpg (http://www.homespare.com/Pictures/thumb/50185a.jpg) which can respond more 'true' to volt rpm control. Since induction motors get their rpm from the applied hz.
Since your watt-in versus watt-out is irrelevant, what would really interest me is if your system could do this:
- Setup you motor and it's magnet wheel alone without a core near the thing.
- Choose an input watt level that seems right to you, say 50watt, in for 1000rpm. So you know that the motor with magnet wheel alone does 1000rpm at 50watt.
- Now place the generator core(s) near the wheel like you normal would do/have.
- In the mean time do not change the input to the motor.
- Now engage the coils/load and stuff at the best level possible.
- The system will accelerate like you showed many times.
- Now tell me has it passed the initial stating 1000 rpm?
To summarize you can only speak of 'true acceleration" is the system with the cores and all rigged on it, under load revs up past the rpm the motor at the same input level would alone.
Or els it is just "load lessening" - well ok, even if you do not get any 'load lessening' or acceleration, but be able to output more watts then in, than also it would be a win-situation.
Believe it or not but this all is on "suggestion" base and not "bomb Canada" base, since I have a good friend there lol.
Regards,
Steven
yes understood
very easy
i simply have to find a lot of PB's grandmas ( the number will replace the efficiency) give them a threadmill coupled to a Thane's gen and Bingo
Europe will not only be powered but all european grandmas will be more fit and happy and as we all know "if grandma is happy is everybody happy"
Thane you are the Master
Thanks for the great laugh of this evening
Laurent
QuoteThe way I see it,
The reason why your system is at idle is running on say 700rpm at say 50watt is because of the eddy drag this core is putting up. If you would not change any input to that idle state and remove the core, it will boost in rpm. Since the eddy drag (and such) is now gone.
YES BUT YOU ONLY HAVE ONE EYE AND CAN'T SEE OUTTA THE OTHER. ;)
WITH ONE CORE YES - BUT WITH A BALANCED FULL ARRANGEMENT OF COILS - COGGING TORQUE DROPS TO NEAR ZERO - CORE HYSTERISIS IS A FACT OF LIFE BUT IS STILL MINIMAL.
IF YOU REMOVED THE TRANSMISSION FROM YOUR CAR THE MOTOR WOULD RUN FASTER AS WELL - IT WOULD BE STUPID NONE THE LESS.
QuoteNow I might be mistaking but you are using a 1 phase induction motor right?
YOU ARE MISTAKEN. WE GET SIMILAR RESULTS WITH A 1/4 HP DC MOTOR.
AND SIMILAR RESULTS AT FULL SPEED (3500 RPM)
QuoteSince your watt-in versus watt-out is irrelevant, what would really interest me is if your system could do this:
- Setup you motor and it's magnet wheel alone without a core near the thing.
LIKE A CAR WITH NO ENGINE?
Quote- Choose an input watt level that seems right to you, say 50watt, in for 1000rpm. So you know that the motor with magnet wheel alone does 1000rpm at 50watt.
RUN THE CAR MOTOR IN MY BACK YARD...
Quote- Now place the generator core(s) near the wheel like you normal would do/have.
- In the mean time do not change the input to the motor.
- Now engage the coils/load and stuff at the best level possible.
- The system will accelerate like you showed many times.
- Now tell me has it passed the initial stating 1000 rpm?
NO ONE CARES...
THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE GENERATOR'S (GENERATOR = COIL + CORE)
REACTION TO LOADING...
NOT
WHAT'S THE MOTOR'S REACTION TO GENERATORING...
QuoteTo summarize you can only speak of 'true acceleration" is the system with the cores and all rigged on it, under load revs up past the rpm the motor at the same input level would alone. Or els it is just "load lessening" - well ok, even if you do not get any 'load lessening' or acceleration, but be able to output more watts then in, than also it would be a win-situation.
AGIAN NO ONE CARES - AN ELECTRIC AUTOMOBILE ROLLING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT 100 KM/HR WILL DECELERATE IF YOU TRY TO CHARGE THE BATTERIES. THE IDEA IS TO MAKE IT
NOT DECELERATE. REMOVING THE GENERATOR WOULD CERTAINLY MAKE IT
NOT DECELERATE BUT IT WOULDN'T BE VERY SMART.
QuoteBelieve it or not but this all is on "suggestion" base and not "bomb Canada" base, since I have a good friend there lol.
Regards,
Steven
DON'T BOMB CANADA JUST BOMB BC!
AND ALL THE WORLD BANKS!
T
Quote from: woopy on November 24, 2008, 07:11:58 PM
yes understood
very easy
i simply have to find a lot of PB's grandmas ( the number will replace the efficiency) give them a threadmill coupled to a Thane's gen and Bingo
Europe will not only be powered but all european grandmas will be more fit and happy and as we all know "if grandma is happy is everybody happy"
Thane you are the Master
Thanks for the great laugh of this evening
Laurent
DUDE - YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT POUTINE IS DO YOU? :D
T
poutine poutine..
fed fed private or public interest bankers
money dollars collapse
manipulation
the one that control the energy will control the world ???
imagine that PB's grandma is pedaling so strong that she could control even yourself Thane
hi hi ::) :P ;D
good night
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 24, 2008, 07:13:12 PM
DON'T BOMB CANADA JUST BOMB BC!
AND ALL THE WORLD BANKS!
T
Oh sour grapes, just 'cause BC didn't get a RECORD SNOW FALL, Oh Thane, I just LOVE the
snow.... when it falls in Ottawa....its so pretty... on the camera, hehehe
I thought Steven's suggestion made sense. No tulips for you this Xmas!
Satan Santa says
you must be good all year!!!
Ron
PS: However, your bank suggestion holds merit, as long as the bankers were in them at the time...
Quote
Oh sour grapes, just 'cause BC didn't get a RECORD SNOW FALL, Oh Thane, I just LOVE the
snow.... when it falls in Ottawa....its so pretty... on the camera, hehehe
I thought Steven's suggestion made sense. No tulips for you this Xmas! Satan Santa says
you must be good all year!!!
Ron
PS: However, your bank suggestion holds merit, as long as the bankers were in them at the time...
YES IT WOULD MAKE SENSE ASSUMING I WAS INTERESTED IN THE MOTOR'S REACTION TO GENERATING.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 24, 2008, 05:22:15 PM
... IT'S STILL IRRELEVANT.
If your motor is drawing 10-15 watts to output .27 watts AND BARELY TURNING @ 800 RPM, and then requires no ADDITIONAL EXTERNAL ELECTRICAL power to output 8.2 watts (AND HAS SOME HOW ACCELERATED UP TO MORE THAN 3000 RPM BUT ALL THE PARAMETERS ARE STILL THE SAME EXCEPT THAT THE MOTOR IS GETTING COLDER AND DRAWING LESS ENERGY)while still requiring LESS THAN 10-15 watts to run
If my question about input power is irrelevant, then why are you referring to input power as relevant data that you are using to prove a point?
You're making non-specifc claims that the input power is 'LESS THAN' and 'DRAWING LESS ENERGY'. By saying this, you are communicating that you are measuring it and that it IS relevant. So, it is only fair then that someone can ask... well then how much less?
Why is input power only relevant when you are referring to it as proof of efficiency and anomalous effects, but irrelevant when someone asks about it? ???
Quote from: efoda on November 24, 2008, 08:04:29 PM
Why is input power only relevant when you are referring to it as proof of efficiency and anomalous effects, but irrelevant when someone asks about it? ???
Good question.
Cheers
QuoteIf my question about input power is irrelevant, then why are you referring to input power as relevant data that you are using to prove a point?
You're making non-specifc claims that the input power is 'LESS THAN' and 'DRAWING LESS ENERGY'. By saying this, you are communicating that you are measuring it and that it IS relevant. So, it is only fair then that someone can ask... well then how much less?
Why is input power only relevant when you are referring to it as proof of efficiency and anomalous effects, but irrelevant when someone asks about it? ???
THE MOTOR INPUT POWER (MORE SPECIFICALLY CURRENT) IS
ONLY RELEVANT AS IT PERTAINS TO THE
GENERATOR'S REACTION TO LOADING - IF FOR EXAMPLE THE
MOTOR POWER INCREASED (REACTED) WHEN THE HV COIL IS ENGAGED (EVEN BY 1 mA) THEN I WOULD STILL BE IN MY BASEMENT TWEAKING AND NOT PREPARING TO PRESENT THE TECHNOLOGY TO THE USA DOE.
Quotewell then how much less?
TODAY THE STUDENTS AT OTTAWA UNIVERSITY SAW A PRIME MOVER INPUT DROP OF 60 WATTS FOR
IDENTICAL GENERATOR OUTPUTS - WITH THE (OLD DESIGN) MOT BI-COIL EMPLOYING THE HV COILS.
1) WITH THE NEW CONCENTRIC BI-COIL WE PRODUCED 5 "SAFE" WATTS AT 1200 RPM WITH THE
HC & HV COILS ENGAGED. MOTOR INPUT WAS ABOUT 275 WATTS.
2) WITHOUT THE HV COIL,
HC COIL ONLY AND INCREASING THE MOTOR SPEED MANUALLY BY INCREASING THE INPUT POWER WE COULD ONLY MUSTER 1.1 WATT AT 2000 RPM AND ABOUT 425 WATTS MOTOR INPUT .
THE INDUCTION MOTOR SLIP ANGLE % IS A VERY USEFUL INDICATOR OF LOAD TORQUE AS TO WHETHER IT IS COMPLIMENTARY (1 ABOVE) OR COUNTER (2 ABOVE).
2 ABOVE: THE MOTOR WAS WORKING HARD AGAINST THE HC COIL ARMAUTRE REACTION
1 ABOVE: THE MOTOR WAS WORKING EASILY AGAINST MORE THAN (5X) HC COIL ARMATURE REACTION AND ACCELERATING EFFORTLESSLY.
T
Quote from: hoptoad on November 24, 2008, 08:44:12 PM
Good question.
Cheers
WHAT NO KNEE-DEEP?
@ . . @
(-------)
< I I >
" "T
QuoteNO ONE CARES...
THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE GENERATOR'S (GENERATOR = COIL + CORE) REACTION TO LOADING...
NOT
WHAT'S THE MOTOR'S REACTION TO GENERATORING...
Why use a generator whose most efficient when fully loaded and even then is 50% less than the conventional? Just because it spins faster when fully loaded has nothing to do with how good it is. Generators and motors (in the way we build them) are energy CONVERTERS. You convert one form of energy to another. Bogging it down in the beginning is the same as bogging it down in the end, your still converting one energy to another - and the main goal is to see the ratio between the input and the output, that is the relevance in these machines.
What is interesting is developing a generator whose bogged down at the start, and then balance the forces so that it is no longer bogged down in the beginning. This drastically reduces the energy requirement in the beginning - allowing the device to produce more energy than it takes to run. When you can do this, I will be impressed. Seeing a rotor spin faster when loaded just means it had considerable drag in the beginning.
By the way, using a HV coil is not the only way to do this - there is a simpler way.
Tells you one thing how efficient power conversion you have in you hc systems if your input increases 425-(275+60) = 90watt of 1.1watt out.
How can that even be, it's not like a 1.1watt output can set up a 90watt (or whatever it (above 1.1watt) exactly is) lenz drag once loaded, but hey maybe Nasa can explain?
Your "Generator's reaction to loading":
In Hc mode sux
In Hc+Hv mode sux less, but that is not a difficult increase since there is lot of 'overhead' in ya Hc conversion part.
He doesn't have the generator balanced yet. I think the 90 watts difference is big step in the right direction. I think Thane just didn't want to talk about input efficiency because he thought people might get turned off by it. You have to start somewhere.
Quote from: Charlie_V on November 24, 2008, 09:10:18 PM
He doesn't have the generator balanced yet. I think the 90 watts difference is big step in the right direction. I think Thane just didn't want to talk about input efficiency because he thought people might get turned off by it. You have to start somewhere.
ONLY IGNORANT PEOPLE GET TURNED OFF BY IT, WELL INFORMED PEOPLE LOOK PAST IT SINCE IT IS IRRELEVANT AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T INCREASE.
T
People are brain washed to show skepticism to new ideas. Those that are brain washed ridicule new ideas over and over and never once contribute to anything. Then when the final product works, these skeptics act like they believed it all along and even take credit for building the device in question! People..... WAKE THE HELL UP. Watch some David Icke videos... Don't believe what he says, just listen to his ideas. He can help you out of the "RUT" of negativity and skepticism.
Here is a David Icke video to watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoXkTg-Uoz4
IT IS VERY SIMPLE. About 90% of the drag created in a motor is caused by Lenz's law. Remove that, and you have a motor that requires 90% less power to operate. NOW, You can produce any amount of energy that is conceivable without any power source whatsoever. It is indeed a Miracle.
QuoteIT IS VERY SIMPLE. About 90% of the drag created in a motor is caused by Lenz's law. Remove that, and you have a motor that requires 90% less power to operate. NOW, You can produce any amount of energy that is conceivable without any power source whatsoever. It is indeed a Miracle.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer
Quote from: Charlie_V on November 24, 2008, 09:00:38 PM
By the way, using a HV coil is not the only way to do this - there is a simpler way.
Indeed there is a simpler way; Nali2001 and myself have both found in our own experiments, that it is unnecessary to have separate shorted high impedance coils to deliver a useful level of output through a low impedance coil. Nali2001 and myself have both achieved acceleration with low impedance coils, without resorting to a complete short circuit, using normal globes as loads. Nali2001 used solid cores in his setup, while I used hollow (solenoid) cores.
As for input being irrelevant, well it would be, if the input power cost nothing. But I don't get my electricity for nothing (or any other driving engine fuel), so as a consumer, it matters to me. If I spent 100 watts to get 1 watt out, it will matter very little to me how fast the generator / motor is turning, because I've just lost 99 watts for the pleasure of watching a rotor / motor spin whilst performing no other visibly useful mechanical or electrical work for that 99 watt loss.
Cheers
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 24, 2008, 08:52:40 PM
WHAT NO KNEE-DEEP?
@ . . @
(-------)
< I I >
" "
T
Sorry..... KneeDeep.....By the way, that's a good likeness!
Quote from: hoptoad on November 24, 2008, 10:44:28 PM
As for input being irrelevant, well it would be, if the input power cost nothing. But I don't get my electricity for nothing (or any other driving engine fuel), so as a consumer, it matters to me. If I spent 100 watts to get 1 watt out, it will matter very little to me how fast the generator / motor is turning, because I've just lost 99 watts for the pleasure of watching a rotor / motor spin whilst performing no other visibly useful mechanical or electrical work for that 99 watt loss.
Cheers
START WITH A COIL THAT
DECELERATES THE PRIME MOVER WHILE PROVIDING 1 WATT.
CREATE A COIL THAT
ACCELERATES THE PRIME MOVER WHILE PROVIDING 1 WATT.
IMPROVE THE DEIGN SUCH THAT THE
DECELERATION IS NOW GIVING ONLY
0.25 WATTSAND THE
ACCELERATION IS PROVIDING
10 WATTS. IGNORE ALL AND BE HAPPY.
SHARE
INGNORE ALL AND BE HAPPY.
T
Hi Thane,
why don´t you just use a heavy flywheel
as the drive to test your devices ?
Then you can exactly measure,if the flywheel
will accelerate or slow down...
Will free you of all uncertainities about the drivemotor..
Just give the flywheel a good spin, measure its RPM
via a laser meter and see, if it spins up
or slows down, when you engage your coils.
Good luck.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 26, 2008, 05:38:23 AM
Hi Thane,
why don´t you just use a heavy flywheel
as the drive to test your devices ?
Then you can exactly measure,if the flywheel
will accelerate or slow down...
Will free you of all uncertainities about the drivemotor..
Just give the flywheel a good spin, measure its RPM
via a laser meter and see, if it spins up
or slows down, when you engage your coils.
Good luck.
Regards, Stefan.
THANKS FOR THE SUGGESTION STEFAN BUT WE GET THE SAME EFFECT FROM A DC MOTOR.- SO THERE IS NO UNCERTAINTY.
ALSO ME HAVE MADE HUNDRED OF COILS AND MADE THOUSANDS OF TESTS - THE INDUCTION MOTOR SLIP ANGLE CURRENT READING CANNOT BE FAKED OR MISREAD BECAUSE WE MONITOR IT RIGHT DOWN TO 0.001 AMPS.
WE ARE A BUSINESS - IN BUSINESS TO DEVELOP AND MARKET THE BEST REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION COILS POSSIBLE - NOT TO MAKE A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE ALTHOUGH THIS WOULD BE GRAVY.
OUR COMMITMENT TO OUR INVESTORS IS TO ENSURE WE I_RON OUR OUR DESIGN AND PRODUCE THE BEST WE CAN - IT IS A SLOWER PROCESS - BUT BASED ON WHAT I HAVE SEEN OVER THE PAST NINE MONTHS (ON THIS FORUM AND ELSEWHERE) - EVEN IF WE WERE PRODUCING 7.2 WATTS OUT WITH 5.3 WATTS INTO OUR DC MOTOR I WOULDN'T MENTION IT OPENLY.
OUR GOAL IS MAINSTREAM SCIENCE ACCEPTANCE - WE HAVE THE THEORY AND THE DEMO AND ARE GAINING THE TRUST - THIS IS NO TIME TO HAVE ANOTHER
"HEINS DEMOS PERPETUAL MOTOIN TO MIT" ARTICLE.CHEERS
THANE
Quote from: TheBuzz on November 26, 2008, 01:09:40 AM
Hi Thane,
First let me say you da man! Love what you are doing and how you are doing it.
I would like to replicate the bi-toroid and will post my results and anything I can add. Can you point me at a good starting place for the details?
Thanks
THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PLACE TO START, I THINK THERE IS A WAY TO READ ONLY MY POSTS?
SO GO THROUGH THEM AND READ AND LEARN - IT IS ALL THERE...
GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN! (IT OUGHT TO BE DIFFICULT BUT FUN AND EDUCATIONAL)
CHEERS
Thane
@hoptoad
Quoteusing normal globes as loads
What is a normal globe? The opposite of a strange globe? haha!
Thane your attitude is a bit conflicting. On one hand you promote this as a pro peace and pro free energy device. And on the other you're you're ignoring all suggestions of closing the loop. Isn't that what free energy is mostly about? Being completely independent from the grid or external influences. What Stefan suggested is completely realistic and imo not so hard to do. Once the flywheel is up to speed it'll act as the input maintainer while the HV coil's do their job at accelerating it. You should consider who you're real clients are...some corporate entity or the world.
Quote from: Charlie_V on November 26, 2008, 12:23:03 PM
@hoptoad
What is a normal globe? The opposite of a strange globe? haha!
Good point! Perhaps I should have said, common in lieu of normal. Like a common 18 watt motor vehicle tail light globe. Then again, this might upset all the "royal" globes who don't like to be called common.
Cheers
Folks,
especially @hoptod et al. : I have watched the discussion for a while and feel obliged to ask a few questions here :
If any person in this discussion critizices technical detailes despite the facts shown in the vidos and at the same time claims to have found a easier way of beating the Lenz-Law - so how about presenting your configuration here and explain it ?
It is an old saying in germany : the one who acts much is critizied much, because the one how acts much is liable to make a lot of mistakes which is not the case here
Some of you really have to review their attitude.
Show your coin and contribute here.
According to a 5 year - delevopment and test-experience I went through where I had two good teachers :
I support Thane´s methode. It is close to mine because I can see the systematics in his development. Systematic innovative development must be learned the hard way or you have good teachers.
In either way slow step-by-step development will teach you walking and minimize failures.
I also do not see any need now to work on a closed loop - because this is far too early and will lead only to frustration because you can only reach this goal - if ever - if you have fully understood the principles at work.
@hopetod : have you understood your design to the extend that you can close the loop ? Can you present the in-between-steps here in case you have not ? Are you willing to share everything - as Thane does here - what you have found and expose yourself to the risk of beeing confronted with critical comments ? No ?
I really would appreciate you would do this.
Regards
angry >:( >:( >:( >:about behaviour- Kator01
Kator01, don't be mistaken...this is still overunity.com. If find it funny how sometimes mentioning to close the loop is considered a taboo not allowed mentioning. If you can't close the loop to deliver true free energy then what's the point of being here?
As for ;
Quotebecause this is far too early and will lead only to frustration because you can only reach this goal - if ever - if you have fully understood the principles at work.
That doesn't make much sense. You can never fully understand something. The effect is now pretty well known and the main variables that are involved are too. So trying to close the loop should be a straight forward step to take. I know that Thane's sponsors are not interested in this fact, but that doesn't mean people on here aren't.
Not everyone has Thane's privilege. A lab, the equipment and the time. So telling people to build their own bridge to cross the river instead of using the existing one is not very productive.
Quote from: Kator01 on November 26, 2008, 05:23:17 PM
@hopetod : have you understood your design to the extend that you can close the loop ? Can you present the in-between-steps here in case you have not ? Are you willing to share everything - as Thane does here - what you have found and expose yourself to the risk of beeing confronted with critical comments ? No ?
I really would appreciate you would do this.
Regards
angry >:( >:( >:( >:about behaviour- Kator01
If you haven't already, then you should have read all this thread from the beginning rather than jump to conclusions about peoples views or behaviours and getting angry.
No I have not tried to close the loop. Why? Because none of my experiments ever pointed to O/U.
Not surprising to me because I do not "believe" in the concept of O/U.
But I do believe in striving towards the greatest efficiency at the minimum cost with the least negative environmental impact.
So why am I here from time to time? Put simply, there is always the possibilty of learning something new, and I am always happy for my views to be
proven wrong.
As for sharing, I've posted this link many times on this thread already - http://www.totallyamped.net/adams
Pages 8 and 10 are directly related to the subject in this thread.
My own experiments were carried out (years ago) for the sole purpose of trying to create more efficient generators that used less materials and could be produced less expensively.
Cheers
Quote from: broli on November 26, 2008, 02:19:47 PM
Thane your attitude is a bit conflicting. On one hand you promote this as a pro peace and pro free energy device. And on the other you're you're ignoring all suggestions of closing the loop. Isn't that what free energy is mostly about? Being completely independent from the grid or external influences. What Stefan suggested is completely realistic and imo not so hard to do. Once the flywheel is up to speed it'll act as the input maintainer while the HV coil's do their job at accelerating it. You should consider who you're real clients are...some corporate entity or the world.
FIRST OF ALL POSTING ON THIS FORUM HAS BEEN VERY IMPORTANT IN DIRECTING MY EFFORTS AND CRYSTALLIZING THE PRESENTATION AND WORKING THROUGH THE THEORY AS IT UNFOLDS, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE IT FOR THAT.
HOWEVER MOST PEOPLE ON THIS SITE WOULD RECOGNIZE FREE ENERGY IF IT JUMPED UP AND BIT THEM ON THE ARSE. THIS FORUM IS SELF SPOOKING.
A FULL 5 MONTHS AGO I POSTED A YOUTUBE VIDEO WHERE I SHOWED DECELERATION DUE TO LENZ'S LAW AND THEN ACCELERATION WITH INCREASING (SMALL AMOUNTS) OF GENERATOR OUTPUT ENERGY - WITH ZERO - I REPEAT
ZERO ADDITIONAL INPUT ENERGY TO THE PRIME MOVER.
NOW MY LATEST VIDEO SHOWS A GENERATOR COIL'S OUTPUT TRIPLING (x3) WITH THE FLICK OF A SWICH AND VIRTUALLY ZERO INCREASE IN RPM AND CERTAINLY ZERO CURRENT INCREASE TO THE PRIME MOVER - ON TOP OF THAT WE SEE FURTHER ACCLERATION (x4) (AGAIN IN THE FACE OF LENZ'S LAW - WITH ZERO INCREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT) AND ANOTHER 32 FOLD INCREASE (x32) IN OUTPUT ENERGY.
THIS MY MYOPIC FRIEND IS FREE ENERGY - PURE AND SIMPLE BECAUSE THERE IS NO - I REPEAT - NO ADDITIONAL INPUT COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADDITIONAL OUTPUT ENERGY. I CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY FAULTFINDER'S INABILITY TO SEE FREE ENERGY DANGLING OFF THEIR BUTT CHEEKS. CLOSING THE LOOP WON'T CHANGE ANYTHING EXCEPT CREATE ADDITIONAL NEW SKEPTICS WITH ENDLESS NEW SUGGESTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR "PROOF" WHICH CAN
NEVER EVER BE SATISFIED ON A FREAKIN CHAT ROOM.
MY ATTITUDE HAS BEEN ATTACKED MANY TIMES HERE BUT I STILL WORK SEVEN DAYS A WEEK - OFTEN 10 OR MORE HOURS A DAY AND I WELCOME YOUR HELP IN THE LAB - OR WHERE YOU ARE TO GET THE MESSAGE OUT TO THE WORLD.
I HAVE SENT HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF UPDATES TO EVERY SCIENCE MAGAZINE ON THE PLANET, UNIVERSITIES, GENERATOR MANUFACTURERS, ELECTRIC CAR COMPANIES, AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. MOST PEOPLE ARE TO STUNDED TO UNDERSTAND OR
DO UNDERSTAND BUT DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS ENOUGH TO ACT.
NOW GO BACK TO SLEEP...
I SEE JESUS COMING DOWN THE ROAD AND I HAVE TO SAVE HIM BEFORE THE CHRISTIANS KILL HIM.
CHEERS
RANTYpants
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on November 26, 2008, 06:17:25 PM
FIRST OF ALL POSTING ON THIS FORUM HAS BEEN VERY IMPORTANT IN DIRECTING MY EFFORTS AND CRYSTALLIZING THE PRESENTATION AND WORKING THROUGH THE THEORY AS IT UNFOLDS, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE IT FOR THAT.
HOWEVER MOST PEOPLE ON THIS SITE WOULD RECOGNIZE FREE ENERGY IF IT JUMPED UP AND BIT THEM ON THE ARSE. THIS FORUM IS SELF SPOOKING.
A FULL 5 MONTHS AGO I POSTED A YOUTUBE VIDEO WHERE I SHOWED DECELERATION DUE TO LENZ'S LAW AND THEN ACCELERATION WITH INCREASING (SMALL AMOUNTS) OF GENERATOR OUTPUT ENERGY - WITH ZERO - I REPEAT ZERO ADDITIONAL INPUT ENERGY TO THE PRIME MOVER.
NOW MY LATEST VIDEO SHOWS A GENERATOR COIL'S OUTPUT TRIPLING (x3) WITH THE FLICK OF A SWICH AND VIRTUALLY ZERO INCREASE IN RPM AND CERTAINLY ZERO CURRENT INCREASE TO THE PRIME MOVER - ON TOP OF THAT WE SEE FURTHER ACCLERATION (x4) (AGAIN IN THE FACE OF LENZ'S LAW - WITH ZERO INCREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT) AND ANOTHER 32 FOLD INCREASE (x32) IN OUTPUT ENERGY.
THIS MY MYOPIC FRIEND IS FREE ENERGY - PURE AND SIMPLE BECAUSE THERE IS NO - I REPEAT - NO ADDITIONAL INPUT COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADDITIONAL OUTPUT ENERGY.
I CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY FAULTFINDER'S INABILITY TO SEE FREE ENERGY DANGLING OFF THEIR BUTT CHEEKS. CLOSING THE LOOP WON'T CHANGE ANYTHING EXCEPT CREATE ADDITIONAL NEW SKEPTICS WITH ENDLESS NEW SUGGESTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR "PROOF" WHICH CAN NEVER EVER BE SATISFIED ON A FREAKIN CHAT ROOM.
MY ATTITUDE HAS BEEN ATTACKED MANY TIMES HERE BUT I STILL WORK SEVEN DAYS A WEEK - OFTEN 10 OR MORE HOURS A DAY AND I WELCOME YOUR HELP IN THE LAB - OR WHERE YOU ARE TO GET THE MESSAGE OUT TO THE WORLD.
I HAVE SENT HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF UPDATES TO EVERY SCIENCE MAGAZINE ON THE PLANET, UNIVERSITIES, GENERATOR MANUFACTURERS, ELECTRIC CAR COMPANIES, AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. MOST PEOPLE ARE TO STUNDED TO UNDERSTAND OR DO UNDERSTAND BUT DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS ENOUGH TO ACT.
NOW GO BACK TO SLEEP...
I SEE JESUS COMING DOWN THE ROAD AND I HAVE TO SAVE HIM BEFORE THE CHRISTIANS KILL HIM.
CHEERS
RANTYpants
Thane
/clap /clap /clap :D
Quote from: TheBuzz on November 28, 2008, 06:55:31 PM
O.K... Hey, I emailed you a word document about a week ago with a tutorial on it about toroids and how to replicate magnetic fields and they were connected together with shorted coils. Did you get that?
NO SORRY, I DIDN'T GET IT - CAN YOU RESEND IT OR POST IT HERE FOR EVERYONE?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: Kator01 on November 26, 2008, 05:23:17 PM
If any person in this discussion critizices technical detailes despite the facts shown in the vidos and at the same time claims to have found a easier way of beating the Lenz-Law - so how about presenting your configuration here and explain it ?
Show your coin and contribute here.
According to a 5 year - delevopment and test-experience I went through where I had two good teachers :
I support Thane´s methode. It is close to mine because I can see the systematics in his development.
Have you posted what is close to Thane's work or was it the process of development you are talking about?
Hi Meltdown,
I was referring to the methodology and the process of innovative development.
I had to learn it the hard way. I lost much time in doing things too fast.( Like : make a quick test to close the loop and get lost in that effort and frustrated etc ) You need psychological control of yourself. We tend to look more for short-cuts than for spending the effort to first understand the principle at work.
This is why I myself built a small transformer and put a lot of effort in understanding the behaviour of the HV-HC-Coil interaction. It will take some time. If I know what is going on only then I will make the next step.
Regards
Kator01
Ms. Mai Zubeht
Photon Conservation Society
1313 Shadowy Road
Washington D.C. 20575
Dear Mr. Heins,
It has been brought to our attention that your are in violation of article 21 of the UN Resolution 6636 Photon Conservation Agreement resulting from the use of all capitol letters in your online comunication.
As I am sure you know, the willful waste of energy used to produce the photons is sourced primarily in carbon based fuels. An additional side effect is photon pollution and increased global warming upon absorption.
Therefor and here wit you are ordered to pay a US $300,000.00 carbon tax or enter the photon diversion program which will allow you reflect an equal quantity of photons away from the Earth. You may select one of the following photon mitigation or reflection options in lieu of paying the fine ordered herein:
1. Wear a reflective aluminum helmet for a period of 6 months between sun up and sun down while outdoors.
2. You may paint a section of your automobile white. We recommend painting "Jesus is Lord" in large white letters on both sides of your car.
3. Absorb the CO2 found in a 12-pack of beer and spew the methane you produce in Allcanadian's face weekly for 1 month.
4. Drown Allcanadian in a 5 gallon pail of warm water like a defective puppy. The CO2 he no longer produces from breathing, you will then be free to use as you see fit.
Should you fail to meet the demands placed upon you herein, the United States will have no choice but to bring democracy to your capital.
Please indicate in writing how you intend to comply.
Respectfully,
Ms. Mai Zubeht
Executive Director Photon Conservation Society
PS - Keep up the good work and let us know how you are doing.
Quote from: MeltDown on December 02, 2008, 03:40:55 AM
Ms. Mai Zubeht
Photon Conservation Society
1313 Shadowy Road
Washington D.C. 20575
Dear Mr. Heins,
It has been brought to our attention that your are in violation of article 21 of the UN Resolution 6636 Photon Conservation Agreement resulting from the use of all capitol letters in your online comunication.
As I am sure you know, the willful waste of energy used to produce the photons is sourced primarily in carbon based fuels. An additional side effect is photon pollution and increased global warming upon absorption.
Therefor and here wit you are ordered to pay a US $300,000.00 carbon tax or enter the photon diversion program which will allow you reflect an equal quantity of photons away from the Earth. You may select one of the following photon mitigation or reflection options in lieu of paying the fine ordered herein:
1. Wear a reflective aluminum helmet for a period of 6 months between sun up and sun down while outdoors.
2. You may paint a section of your automobile white. We recommend painting "Jesus is Lord" in large white letters on both sides of your car.
3. Absorb the CO2 found in a 12-pack of beer and spew the methane you produce in Allcanadian's face weekly for 1 month.
4. Drown Allcanadian in a 5 gallon pail of warm water like a defective puppy. The CO2 he no longer produces from breathing, you will then be free to use as you see fit.
Should you fail to meet the demands placed upon you herein, the United States will have no choice but to bring democracy to your capital.
Please indicate in writing how you intend to comply.
Respectfully,
Ms. Mai Zubeht
Executive Director Photon Conservation Society
PS - Keep up the good work and let us know how you are doing.
LO fn L ... KNEEDEEp ....... :D
Quote1. Wear a reflective aluminum helmet for a period of 6 months between sun up and sun down while outdoors.
I ALREADY HAVE A GROWING SOLAR S E X PANEL ON THE TOP OF MY HEAD DOES THAT COUNT?
Quote2. You may paint a section of your automobile white. We recommend painting "Jesus is Lord" in large white letters on both sides of your car.
AND "HE DIED
BECAUSE OF OUR SINS NOT FOR? THEM..."
Quote3. Absorb the CO2 found in a 12-pack of beer and spew the methane you produce in Allcanadian's face weekly for 1 month.
DO YOU WANT THAT GAS - LIT OR UNLIT?
Quote4. Drown Allcanadian in a 5 gallon pail of warm water like a defective puppy. The CO2 he no longer produces from breathing, you will then be free to use as you see fit.
THAT WOULDN'T WORK - ALLCANADIAN'S BEER STEIN IS 5 GALLONS - HE WOULD JUST THINK IT IS A NEW DRINKING GAME. ???
QuoteShould you fail to meet the demands placed upon you herein, the United States will have no choice but to bring democracy to your capital.
YEP - BLOW UP THE PLACE, KILL HALF THE PEOPLE, R A P E AND STARVE THE REST, STEAL OUR NATURAL RESOURCES AND MAKE US ALL SLAVES -
WELCOME TO DEMOCRACY MTHRFCKR...QuotePlease indicate in writing how you intend to comply.
COMPLIANCE IS FUTILE... READ MY FINGER... :-*
QuoteRespectfully,
Ms. Mai Zubeht
Executive Director Photon Conservation Society
PS - Keep up the good work and let us know how you are doing.
WE ARE PREPARING 3 PROTOTYPES FOR THE PENDING ORLN PRESENTATION,
1) THE "OLD" LIGHT BULB PROTOTYPE
2) TRIPLE CONCENTRIC HV BI-COIL PROTOTYPE
3) A NEW CONCENTRIC BI-COIL WITH A DC MOTOR PRIME MOVER FOR THE DISMISSIVE TYPES LOOKING TO IGNORE THE OBVIOUS
CHEERS
Thane
PS - IS THERE A NEW PROFANITY FILTER ON THIS SITE...?
S E X AND R A P E ARE NOW BANNED WORDS?
WHAT'S NEXT?
LET'S ALSO BAN GOD, THRUTH, LOVE, FREEDOM...
CAN WE HAVE A LIST OF THE BANNED WORDS PLEASE DADDY HALI?
@meltdown
or should I say "thebuzz" , your like one of those jahovas that keep coming by my place --- different face --same robe. LOL, how many alter ego's do you have ;D TheBuzz has some cavitation theory that he thinks explains everything in the universe and is quite relentless in pushing it.
@thane
QuoteTHAT WOULDN'T WORK - ALLCANADIAN'S BEER STEIN IS 5 GALLONS - HE WOULD JUST THINK IT IS A NEW DRINKING GAME.
Hey, it's ok to insult me but not my drinking habits, Im a member of DAMM
"Drunks Against Mad Mothers"
I made a new circuit a few days ago along the lines of your bi-toroid, LOL, there are a million ways to do this. Have you read any patents that makes mention of this effect specifically---other than any you may have ;D.
Quote
@thane
Hey, it's ok to insult me but not my drinking habits, Im a member of DAMM
"Drunks Against Mad Mothers"
I made a new circuit a few days ago along the lines of your bi-toroid, LOL, there are a million ways to do this. Have you read any patents that makes mention of this effect specifically---other than any you may have ;D.
INDEED SOME DAY THERE WILL BE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS (IN THIS INFINITE UNIVERSE)TO MAKE FREE ENERGY...
OR ELSE IT WOULD NOT BE FREE!
TO INFINITY AND BEYOND...
T
Off topic for sure but if you want rid of the jehova witness's, just tell them your catholic.
I have never figured out what it does to them but they usually never come back. If you meet
them at the door with a beer in hand then they just figure you need saved from yourself.
;D ::)
thaelin
Violation of what?
Need I remind you all that Mr. Heins is in violation of nothing. It is you instead.
Should you choose to display his text in anything but black - you are the ones in violation!
I, for one, am an old RTTY typist. For a long time there was no other option ;D
Quote from: BEP on December 04, 2008, 07:11:13 AM
Violation of what?
Need I remind you all that Mr. Heins is in violation of nothing. It is you instead.
MR. HEINS IS IN VIOLATION OF
ARTICLE 21 OF THE UN RESOLUTION 6636 - MORON CONSTIPATION AGREEMENT - HENCE THE NAME
CRANKY-PANTS...
BTW - I INSTALLED ANOTHER COIL YESTERDAY -
HV COIL OUTPUT = 10 W @ 1600 RPM AND 20 W @ 3000 RPM SAME MOTOR INPUT WITH A STEADY STATE SPEED = 500 RPM - NO HV COIL (JUST MOTOR ALONE) = 0 WATTS @ 0 RPM
BUT IT'S
NOT FREE ENERGY CAUSE IT'S NOT SELF RUNNING SO FOR NOW WE CAN CALL IT A
FREAK ENERGY MACHINE - CAUSE IT'S FREAKIN' AWESOME!
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 04, 2008, 11:40:48 AM
NO HV COIL (JUST MOTOR ALONE) = 0 WATTS @ 0 RPM
CHEERS
Thane
FINALLY, some Ottawa numbers that I can believe in!!!
If it's not asking too much... I would like to put you in charge of the whole country...
just while the government is out, mind you, you would have to give it back at the end of January
...is this agreeable with you?
Ron
Hi,
I don´t understand it, at least it´s free-effort-energy of the people in this forum, is´nt it ?
Kator01
Quote from: i_ron on December 04, 2008, 10:51:49 PM
FINALLY, some Ottawa numbers that I can believe in!!!
If it's not asking too much... I would like to put you in charge of the whole country...
just while the government is out, mind you, you would have to give it back at the end of January
...is this agreeable with you?
Ron
I AM TOO SLOW - IT HAS TAKEN ME 1500 HOURS TO GET TO THIS POINT (6 MONTHS) SO I WOULD NEED TO RULE THE COUNTRY UNTIL AT LEAST JUNE.
BY THAT TIME THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A
COALITION (ALL PARTIES) SET UP TO OUST ME - ALLCANADIANS WORKING TOGETHER FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF THE COUNTRY - HOW NOVEL WOULD THAT BE?
T
Quote from: Kator01 on December 05, 2008, 06:55:08 AM
Hi,
I don´t understand it, at least it´s free-effort-energy of the people in this forum, is´nt it ?
Kator01
THE 0 WATTS @ 0 RPM IS THE GENERATOR UNDER LOAD STOPING THE MOTOR DUE TO LENZ'S LAW.
THE 20 WATTS @ 3000 RPM IS THE ENERGY PRODUCED WHEN THE HV COILS ARE ENGAGED AND THE MOTOR IS DRAWING 200 WATTS LESS ENERGY BECAUSE THE ROTOR IS NOT LOCKED.
THE CONCLUSION IS: MORE CONCENTRIC BI-COILS = GREATER ACCELERATION AND MORE GENERATOR OUTPUT POWER.
SO NOW THE QUESTION... IS IT FREE? OR
Quotefree-effort-energy of the people in this forum?
.
IF YOU OPEN THE PRISON GATES AND THE PRISONERS DON'T LEAVE THE PRISON THEN ARE THEY FREE?
IF YOU HAVE TO "FORCE" THEM OUT OF THE PRISON - ARE THEY FREE? SHOULDN'T THEY "BE FREE" TO STAY IN PRISON?
THE "PRISON" HERE IS IGNORANCE - AND THE FREEDOM HERE IS ASLO TO ACCEPT IT OR REJECT IT.
SO FAR THE ANSWER IS REJECTION (AND NOT JUST HERE) - WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE IT IS SO FREAKIN" OBVIOUS?
AND IT JUST MAKES ME CRANKY BUT THAT'S ONLY BECAUSE I AM NOT "FREE OF MY DESIRE" TO MAKE US ALL FREE WHICH IN TURN MAKES
ME A PRISONER.
T
Thane It makes you quite a selfless person A Freakin HERO
Someone that changed the world .And while they may not give you a chair in parlament .you will definitely have a place [a nice place]
Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 05, 2008, 06:55:19 AM
BY THAT TIME THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A COALITION (ALL PARTIES) SET UP TO OUST ME - ALLCANADIANS WORKING TOGETHER FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF THE COUNTRY - HOW NOVEL WOULD THAT BE?
T
I would vote for that!
But it is not likely, with this group of quislings at the top. Isn't it amazing how such sworn enemies
could overnite come together to "overthrow" the government? Just like they were all reading from
the same cue card... now we are without a government (supposedly) until the end of January???
But the scary thing here Thane, is this sets a time line that you may not be able to meet... in that
the "big one" is already set to happen before O'bungler is sworn in and while we have no government.
Cheerful Ron, the west coast don
Quote from: ramset on December 05, 2008, 08:15:19 AM
Thane It makes you quite a selfless person A Freakin HERO
Someone that changed the world .And while they may not give you a chair in parlament .you will definitely have a place [a nice place]
Chet
JUST MAKE SURE IT'S NOT AN ELECTRIC CHAIR - PLEASE?
T
Quote from: i_ron on December 05, 2008, 11:34:32 AM
I would vote for that!
But it is not likely, with this group of quislings at the top. Isn't it amazing how such sworn enemies
could overnite come together to "overthrow" the government? Just like they were all reading from
the same cue card... now we are without a government (supposedly) until the end of January???
But the scary thing here Thane, is this sets a time line that you may not be able to meet... in that
the "big one" is already set to happen before O'bungler is sworn in and while we have no government.
Cheerful Ron, the west coast don
RELAX - GOD IS IN CHARGE...
KEEP AN EYE ON DECEMBER 10TH. I HAVE ALSO BEEN WORKING ON ANOTHER PROJECT SINCE 1999 WHICH IS DUE TO BE RELEASED TO THE WORLD ON THAT DATE, AND IT WILL LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD (FOR THE LOVERS OF GOODNESS AND TRUTH) LIKE NOTHING ELSE EVER HAS BEFORE AND QUITE LITERALLY LEVEL THE LOVERS OF EVIL AND FALSEHOOD. :D
T
WHO FEEL'S LIKE A CHRISTMAS POEM...?
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ONE AND ALL!
T
A Christmas Gift
Today is the day that Jesus was born.
He died for our sins
and wore a crown full of thorns.
The star in the night sky,
shining so bright.
A message to all the King was in sight.
The ruler of man,
whose heart was so pure.
He led by example and His gift would endure.
Whatever we suffer, our treasure awaits.
To those who believe, redeemed at the gates.
This season we call Christmas,
full of holly and joy
and a house full of children,
who await all those toys.
We give and we give
and give till it hurts.
Shop till we drop.
Did we get enough stuff?
I'll give you these presents,
could that be enough?
So you'll know that I love you,
that's what they say.
The words on our lips,
but that price we won't pay.
To love is a gift.
It's value, no price.
If I spend all my money,
would you think that it's nice?
Or could I just say...
That on this great day,
I am blessed to be with you.
To share all the joy,
that God has bestowed us,
when He sent His sweet boy.
The ultimate gift,
came down from the sky.
We carry it with us,
till the day that we die.
Joy among joy
and love among love,
when I give at Christmas,
it's to Him up above.
What I give this year,
I give from the heart.
I give you my love,
till whenst we must part.
Our lives are so brief,
and time here so short.
The gift that I give could never distort.
The true meaning of Christmas,
that sometimes seems lost,
when the bills finally come in
and we add up the cost.
This year at Christmas I won't spend a dime.
Yet I'll promise you this gift,
that has taken some time.
To put down in words,
and hopefully rhyme,
a gift for all seasons,
to your heart from mine.
Precious words I shall offer,
whenever we meet.
I will not be subtle nor I discrete,
when I'll say that I love you
when we're at,
Jesus' feet.
Merry Christmas
Thane Christopher Heins 1999
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 05, 2008, 09:15:22 PM
RELAX - GOD IS IN CHARGE...
KEEP AN EYE ON DECEMBER 10TH. I HAVE ALSO BEEN WORKING ON ANOTHER PROJECT SINCE 1999 WHICH IS DUE TO BE RELEASED TO THE WORLD ON THAT DATE, AND IT WILL LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD (FOR THE LOVERS OF GOODNESS AND TRUTH) LIKE NOTHING ELSE EVER HAS BEFORE AND QUITE LITERALLY LEVEL THE LOVERS OF EVIL AND FALSEHOOD. :D
T
It is my birthday on December 10. Send me a nice present. Will be 72.
Chris
Quote from: tishatang on December 05, 2008, 09:57:44 PM
It is my birthday on December 10. Send me a nice present. Will be 72.
Chris
OK CHRIS,
I AM SENDING YOU A NICE SILVER AUDI TT...
ENJOY THE RIDE!
T
Hi T,
Outstanding multi-coil results! Love the TT's and looking forward to the December 10th deliverance!
Regards, LarryC
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 05, 2008, 10:14:45 PM
OK CHRIS,
I AM SENDING YOU A NICE SILVER AUDI TT...
ENJOY THE RIDE!
T
Looks like I'm in for a wild ride whatever I choose.
Thanks,
Chris
December 10th now is it. Out of curiosity, can it be your special transformer ???. Or to not spoil it. Is it solid state or mechanical :D.
WHAT? NO LITERARY CRITICS OUT THERE WHO WANT TO COMMENT ON MY POEM THAT I WROTE ONE NIGHT BACK IN '99 WHILE I STILL HAD MY RESTAURANT - WHILE WATCHING GROUP AFTER GROUP USE THE "CHRISTMAS PARTY" AS AN EXCUSE TO GET DRUNK?
T
Quote from: broli on December 06, 2008, 05:05:43 AM
December 10th now is it. Out of curiosity, can it be your special transformer ???. Or to not spoil it. Is it solid state or mechanical :D.
IT IS SOMETHING I CONTRIBUTED TO - BUT THE TIMING IS OUT OF MY HANDS - I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT DECEMBER 10 IS THE BIG DAY - SO WE HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 06, 2008, 09:04:57 AM
WHAT? NO LITERARY CRITICS OUT THERE WHO WANT TO COMMENT ON MY POEM THAT I WROTE ONE NIGHT BACK IN '99 WHILE I STILL HAD MY RESTAURANT - WHILE WATCHING GROUP AFTER GROUP USE THE "CHRISTMAS PARTY" AS AN EXCUSE TO GET DRUNK?
T
Ok, but remember, YOU ASKED FOR IT! ;D
A "LITERARY" critique of Thane's poem by A. Grinch
There are few words to describe the awfulness of the text which is an insult to any paper it written on, rendering it useless even for lining bird cages, let alone wrapping fish. Being forced to read this poem, seemingly at gunpoint, will make one realize that it is just plain dismal, depressing, and utterly lacking in any artistic or social worth. My advice would be not to even start reading this putrid exercise in scatology, as there is simply never a wrong time to flush a turd. Anyone who fails to take warning, will soon mourn the tragic, un-recoverable loss of minutes to their lives, leading to a fatal self infliction, or a lifetime prescription of anti-depressants. No doubt, these fates being far too good for the talentless hack of a poet, who condemned English words to such a collusion of misery. In polite summary, the verses of this doggerel intertwine like the ropes of a tangled parachute, and all the helpless reader can do is look on aghast as the whole abortive fiasco plummets toward Earth.
Quote from: derricka on December 07, 2008, 12:13:36 AM
Ok, but remember, YOU ASKED FOR IT! ;D
A "LITERARY" critique of Thane's poem by A. Grinch
There are few words to describe the awfulness of the text which is an insult to any paper it written on, rendering it useless even for lining bird cages, let alone wrapping fish. Being forced to read this poem, seemingly at gunpoint, will make one realize that it is just plain dismal, depressing, and utterly lacking in any artistic or social worth. My advice would be not to even start reading this putrid exercise in scatology, as there is simply never a wrong time to flush a turd. Anyone who fails to take warning, will soon mourn the tragic, un-recoverable loss of minutes to their lives, leading to a fatal self infliction, or a lifetime prescription of anti-depressants. No doubt, these fates being far too good for the talentless hack of a poet, who condemned English words to such a collusion of misery. In polite summary, the verses of this doggerel intertwine like the ropes of a tangled parachute, and all the helpless reader can do is look on aghast as the whole abortive fiasco plummets toward Earth.
VERY NICE WORK...! NOT THAT I THINK YOU CAN TOP THIS ONE BUT, AS A POINT OF REFERENCE CAN I GET YOUR CRITIQUE OF, "IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE"?
CHRISTMAS CHEERS!
Thane
Quote from: pdr2_esmolbra on September 25, 2008, 08:28:52 AM
Hello there
We are a group of students from Queen's University Engineering Physics.
We chose to study Hanes' generator for a project in a lab course, and help in the understanding of the effect. We are actually aiming to build a similar set up and get data out of it.
-Pedro A. Molina
DEAR PEDRO,
JUST CURIOUS - HOW DID THING GO FOR YOUR PHYSICS GROUP - ASSUMING THEY "WENT" AT ALL?
CHEERS
Thane
Pedro probably got scolded by his professor.
@ EVERYONE:
HOW ABOUT SOME POETRY IN MOTION THEN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5z1zpajulU
THIS IS OUR LATEST COIL - TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF OUR PREVIOUS MISTAKES AND MAKING A REAL MONSTER!
CHEERS
Thane
That motor accel would be a scarey thing if I was standing beside it.
I bet that they still refuse to accept it is happening. Going to be real hard
to disavow it now. Rock on mate.
thaelin
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 06, 2008, 09:04:57 AM
WHAT? NO LITERARY CRITICS OUT THERE WHO WANT TO COMMENT ON MY POEM THAT I WROTE ONE NIGHT BACK IN '99 WHILE I STILL HAD MY RESTAURANT - WHILE WATCHING GROUP AFTER GROUP USE THE "CHRISTMAS PARTY" AS AN EXCUSE TO GET DRUNK?
T
I only read down to the part where I got to the baby Jesus stuff and had pull the eject handle. That being said...
I would rather fire bomb a house filled with orphans about to be adopted and then proceed to put the flames out with my own piss than ever read another poem by CrankyPants.
I would rather throw baby seals out of a helicopter hovering over a petting zoo filled with small children dying of cancer than ever read another CrankyPants peom.
I would rather succumb to AllCanadian's pleas to gay marry me in Tijuana while the donkey does the ho on stage behind us.
You get my drift.
Thein, is there any reason why you can't use more cores, HV and HC coils in your system? Your rotor seems large enough that you could place 4 coils(8hv and 4 HC) to multiply the output of the HC coils by a factor of 4? because for 3/4's of the rotation the magnets aren't experiencing the push that they do when they are passing by your 1 coil. i presume you've already thought of this and are just trying to get the best acceleration with 1 coil set and then upscale it after you've found the coil specs you want?
Just a thought Thein, your the man!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 07, 2008, 08:14:21 PM
@ EVERYONE:
HOW ABOUT SOME POETRY IN MOTION THEN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5z1zpajulU
THIS IS OUR LATEST COIL - TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF OUR PREVIOUS MISTAKES AND MAKING A REAL MONSTER!
CHEERS
Thane
I am in awe, you are the man. Can we have some details and start replicating?
Do you think the high voltage coils stacked on top of each begin to act with each other and pull that field out more and more? Could it be that there is really no limit to how many you could wrap since at some point they are completely out of phase with the original inductor?
Hey Thane, did you get that toroid free energy paper I sent you twice now?
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on December 08, 2008, 02:14:09 AM
Thein, is there any reason why you can't use more cores, HV and HC coils in your system? Your rotor seems large enough that you could place 4 coils(8hv and 4 HC) to multiply the output of the HC coils by a factor of 4? because for 3/4's of the rotation the magnets aren't experiencing the push that they do when they are passing by your 1 coil. i presume you've already thought of this and are just trying to get the best acceleration with 1 coil set and then upscale it after you've found the coil specs you want?
Just a thought Thein, your the man!
EVENTUALLY THERE WILL BE 12 COILS - 6 ON EACH SIDE BUT AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE VIDEOS THE COIL'S EVOLUTION WAS STILL CHANGING. AT 3000 RPM THAT SHOULD GIVE ABOUT 50 WATTS / COIL.
OUR DESIGN IS FINALLY IN "REAL WORLD" TERRITORY AND THE HV COIL PARAMETERS ARE SET FOR COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION.
FOR ANYONE REPLICATING... EACH LAYER OF HV WINDING WAS SET IN PLACE WITH CONTACT CEMENT AND WOUND AS TIGHLY AS POSSIBLE (BY HAND).
CHRISTMAS CHEERS
T
Quote from: MeltDown on December 08, 2008, 02:42:34 AM
I am in awe, you are the man. Can we have some details and start replicating?
Do you think the high voltage coils stacked on top of each begin to act with each other and pull that field out more and more? Could it be that there is really no limit to how many you could wrap since at some point they are completely out of phase with the original inductor?
Hey Thane, did you get that toroid free energy paper I sent you twice now?
YES I DID GET YOUR TOROID PAPER THAT YOU SENT TWICE NOW - BUT I WOULD RATHER BE BURRIED UP TO MY NECK IN SAND AND HAVE MAGGOTS EAT OUT MY EYE BALLS THAN READ ANOTHER PAPER FROM YOU! :D
ACTUALLY IT LOOKS GOOD BUT I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO GIVE IT JUSTICE. I STILL SUGGEST YOU POST IT ON MEGA-UPLOAD AND LET THE
FREE-ENERGY MEATGRINDER COMMENT ON IT FOR YOU.
QuoteCould it be that there is really no limit to how many you could wrap since at some point they are completely out of phase with the original inductor?
THE LIMIT TO HV COIL STACKING IS SPACE BETWEEN THE MIDDLE AND OUTER "E" CORE FINGERS. I COULD HAVE PUT ANOTHER HV COIL ON THE "CHRISTMAS COIL" BUT I DON'T CARE AT THIS POINT.
T
Quote from: Thaelin on December 08, 2008, 01:23:30 AM
That motor accel would be a scarey thing if I was standing beside it.
I bet that they still refuse to accept it is happening. Going to be real hard
to disavow it now. Rock on mate.
thaelin
ACTUALLY IT IS VERY SCARY - BUT THE BEST PART IS THE UNDENYABLE LENZ DECELERATION WHEN THE HV COILS ARE DISENGAGED.
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
I knew you would be hurt by my review but you did ask and I figured since you have Canadian balls the size of Jupiter you could handle the truth.
Hey, I am not going to publicly disclose anything and will give it to you to add to your patent rights if verified but I built a variant of your toroid. When I hooked it up to my adjustable power supply it didn't just kill it, it blew the op amp that sets up the frequency of the power supply off the board - literally. Strange huh?
This is why I think it is good to have a mechanical device such as your motor in between. If you go OU even 1% without that buffer, whatever happens is going to happen instantly without that mechanical device.
I know you have claimed that the extra energy comes from adding capacitance to the coil. But.. if you ever close the loop, where will you claim the energy came from that filled up that capacity?
I have two theories but as an American with balls like grapes I am not going to run it through the "free energy meat grinder." After a few more experiments I should have a better idea.
If you ever get bored and want an interesting experiment to do that may answer one of my theories, let me know. It would take half an hour if you have a HHO cell handy.
On a serious note - Thank you so very much for openly sharing your information and for the courage you have shown. Even under attack, you kicked on the caps, shouted a bit louder and never lost your amazing sense of humor. You were different and didn't sell out.That is admirable and you deserve more credit than 100 Meyer's or Hubbards, etc.
Many people quote the words of Gandhi but very few live into them. So while I don't love your poetry, I do love your life and how you express it. - Merry Christmas to you and yours
PS - Was the Christmas coil the December 10th announcement you alluded to?
Great work Thane.
How about adding some load, so rpm lowers and (kinetic) energy rises: a stable load (heavy flywheel) and/or a variable one (second motor(=generator) with load + lenz effect)?
You then can see if the power output is related to load by wheel weight or by rpm only.
Quote from: alan on December 08, 2008, 11:07:27 AM
Great work Thane.
How about adding some load, so rpm lowers and (kinetic) energy rises: a stable load (heavy flywheel) and/or a variable one (second motor(=generator) with load + lenz effect)?
You then can see if the power output is related to load by wheel weight or by rpm only.
GOOD IDEA - I HAVE BEEN PLANNING A PRONY BRAKE EXPERIMENT FOR QUITE SOME TIME BUT OTHER THINGS KEEP GETTING PRIORITY. BUT NOW THAT I MENTION IT THE ALTERNATOR
IS A PONY BRAKE.
T
QuoteDear Thane,
I knew you would be hurt by my review but you did ask and I figured since you have Canadian balls the size of Jupiter you could handle the truth.
I DON'T GET HURT WHEN PEOPLE HAVE OPINIONS - I HAVE SOME ALSO.
QuoteI have two theories but as an American with balls like grapes I am not going to run it through the "free energy meat grinder." After a few more experiments I should have a better idea.
THE PROCESS OF DEFENDING YOUR IDEAS HELPS TO REVEAL FAULTS IN LOGIC.
On a serious note - Thank you so very much for openly sharing your information and for the courage you have shown. Even under attack, you kicked on the caps, shouted a bit louder and never lost your amazing sense of humor.
I SHOULD PROBABLY JUST LET THE WORK SPEAK FOR ITSELF... BUT THEN I LIKE A GOOD FIGHT AS MUCH AS A GOOD LAUGH.
QuoteMany people quote the words of Gandhi but very few live into them. So while I don't love your poetry, I do love your life and how you express it. - Merry Christmas to you and yours
DITTO BACK AT YA.
QuotePS - Was the Christmas coil the December 10th announcement you alluded to?
WE ALL GOTTA WAIT...
T
Thane you're walking a very familiar path that many great people have walked, mainly Tesla. That is, finding something completely out of the norm. Then exploring it with a lot of curiosity. After that follows harnessing it. And finally completely mastering it. I believe you're reaching the final stage. Congratulation.
Quote from: broli on December 08, 2008, 07:10:07 PM
Thane you're walking a very familiar path that many great people have walked, mainly Tesla. That is, finding something completely out of the norm. Then exploring it with a lot of curiosity. After that follows harnessing it. And finally completely mastering it. I believe you're reaching the final stage. Congratulation.
THANKS, AND FUNNY YOU SHOULD SAY THAT ABOUT THE "FINAL STAGE" I JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH
AERO 2012 http://www.aero2012.com/en/index.html AND I MENTIONED THE SAME THING ABOUT HOW THE PEREPITEIA CONCENTRIC BI-COIL DESIGN IS PEAKING OR ENTERING INTO THE FINAL STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO I HOPE IT ALL WORKS OUT WELL - MY ONLY WISH IS FOR ALL OUR TROOPS TO COME HOME SAFELY ASAP!
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 08, 2008, 08:31:55 PM
THANKS, AND FUNNY YOU SHOULD SAY THAT ABOUT THE "FINAL STAGE" I JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH AERO 2012 http://www.aero2012.com/en/index.html AND I MENTIONED THE SAME THING ABOUT HOW THE PEREPITEIA CONCENTRIC BI-COIL DESIGN IS PEAKING OR ENTERING INTO THE FINAL STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT.
CHEERS
Thane
Silly twit, just another greer incarnation...
Disclosure Project, NEC, Advanced Energy Research, Orion Project....yeesh
I thought I warned you about hobnobbing with the enemy?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on December 08, 2008, 09:14:35 PM
I thought I warned you about hobnobbing with the enemy?
Ron
ENEMY MINE
Quote from: i_ron on December 08, 2008, 09:14:35 PM
Silly twit, just another greer incarnation...
Disclosure Project, NEC, Advanced Energy Research, Orion Project....yeesh
I thought I warned you about hobnobbing with the enemy?
Ron
@ I_RON Personally I don't trust anything that originates from Virginia. Is this greer thing a front for something other than what it claims to be?
The email address for the IP address went to a domain ntelos.net which I take to mean INTELos. The spooks love their little puzzles and riddles.
Quote from: MeltDown on December 09, 2008, 07:06:07 AM
@ I_RON Personally I don't trust anything that originates from Virginia. Is this greer thing a front for something other than what it claims to be?
The email address for the IP address went to a domain ntelos.net which I take to mean INTELos. The spooks love their little puzzles and riddles.
Believe what you want but I tend to favor this as being a good start...
"Reportedly plagiarizes the UFO work of others and sells as his own, sells do-it-yourself ET contact kits - now you too can steer in extraterrestrial spacecraft with a flashlight and never record them just like Doc Greer does. Made claims of contacting extraterrestrials through meditation. Claimed that U.S. military forces attacked a Colorado ET base inside a mountain using nerve gas, no evidence to back claim. Had dinner with CIA Director and spun tale of having briefed CIA Director about ETs for hours. Hosted press conference with credible UFO witnesses on Capitol Hill - ruined it and his own credibility by selling the work of others with his name on it and using bogus witnesses. Allegeldy attempted to charge Washington State MUFON members $2500.00 each to demonstrate how he can vector in UFOs - Greer got to choose the location and the time...mmmmmm.
SEE: Doc Greer Sells The Truth,
Greer: UFOlogy's Own Worst Enemy,
CSETI, Greer's claim of military attacking ET underground base with nerve gas,
and a refutation of Greer's claims of having briefed the CIA on UFOs."
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on December 09, 2008, 10:46:01 PM
Believe what you want but I tend to favor this as being a good start...
"Reportedly plagiarizes the UFO work of others and sells as his own, sells do-it-yourself ET contact kits - now you too can steer in extraterrestrial spacecraft with a flashlight and never record them just like Doc Greer does. Made claims of contacting extraterrestrials through meditation. Claimed that U.S. military forces attacked a Colorado ET base inside a mountain using nerve gas, no evidence to back claim. Had dinner with CIA Director and spun tale of having briefed CIA Director about ETs for hours. Hosted press conference with credible UFO witnesses on Capitol Hill - ruined it and his own credibility by selling the work of others with his name on it and using bogus witnesses. Allegeldy attempted to charge Washington State MUFON members $2500.00 each to demonstrate how he can vector in UFOs - Greer got to choose the location and the time...mmmmmm.
SEE: Doc Greer Sells The Truth,
Greer: UFOlogy's Own Worst Enemy,
CSETI, Greer's claim of military attacking ET underground base with nerve gas,
and a refutation of Greer's claims of having briefed the CIA on UFOs."
Ron
I am not surprised. One of the favorite counter intel techniques is called poisoning the well and is a way to discredit anything that is real and good. These free energy web sites play host to these spooks and they NEVER get banned. It is always the person spilling good information that after getting the snot beat out of them begin to react to it. They use that reaction as a excuse to ban the person disclosing real information.
After watching these people operate for 10 years, you can predict their next move with a high degree of precision.
Thane scored huge points with me for "handling" them and never losing his sense of humor while he did it.
But me thinks Thane is tired and needs some time to relax and enjoy the holidays. Enjoy yours too.
"No one is to be called an enemy; all are your benefactors, and no one does you harm.
You have no enemy except yourselves..." - Saint Francis of Assisi
"None but myself ever did me any harm..." - Napolean Bonaparte
"The fire you kindle to destroy your enemy often burns you first..." - Anonymous
Quote from: TheBuzz on November 26, 2008, 12:14:51 AM
Here is a good example of a shorted coil being used to produce 150% OU that I just spotted and does the magnetic field duplication:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cka7qb0zoc8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cka7qb0zoc8)
That's very interesting. I did the math, and it's in agreement with the input meter -->
First stage: The input meter shows 10.9V, 0.66A, 0.42 PF = 3.0 (3.02) watts, which is in agreement with the 3W reported by the input meter.
Second stage: The input meter shows 10.9V, 0.34A, 0.54 PF = 2.0 (2.00) watts, which is in agreement with the 2W reported by the input meter.
Third stage: The input meter shows 9.9V, 0.14A, 0.70 PF = 1.0 (0.970) watts, which is in agreement with the 1W reported by the input meter.
I have no idea if the frequency is within the meters range, but the meters are showing more output than input, period.
I hope Thane Heins keeps up the good work, regardless of the outcome. There's no shame in trying. Looks like he may be on to something.
PL
Thane don't tell us you have spoiled the 10th December surprise with your last video.
Quotehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cka7qb0zoc8
Does anyone have any details how to replicate his 150% efficient toroid device?
PL
Quote from: stringguy on December 10, 2008, 08:46:41 AM
heya thane,
i was wondering about square wire, as it would have more copper per cubic mm than round..what do you think? would the capacitance work the same or better or worse?
i'm waiting til i can afford some square wire and i guess i'll find out..
thanks
ooo, i just noticed that its the 10th today..... :)
Litz wire has more capacitance than round or square. If that is what makes this work than that would be the way to go. It would be an interesting test if nothing else.
Hey Thane,
Three questions:
1. It is December 10th. I have been good. Is there anything you want to tell me today?
2. On the California Christmas coil. If you connected the two HV coils in series would you get the same acceleration? (Relates to that layer question)
3. I can't believe you quoted Napoleon. Did you sell your soul to the devil recently?
Who's posting as Thane?
QuoteHey Thane,
Three questions:
OK THREE ANSWERS...
Quote1. It is December 10th. I have been good. Is there anything you want to tell me today?
# 1 YES YOU ARE NOT DEAD.
Quote2. On the California Christmas coil. If you connected the two HV coils in series would you get the same acceleration? (Relates to that layer question)
# 2 I DON'T KNOW BUT I'LL TRY IT AND SEE.
Quote3. I can't believe you quoted Napoleon. Did you sell your soul to the devil recently?
# 3 I CAN'T BELIEVE - YOU CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ?
QuoteDid you sell your soul to the devil recently?
# 4 SORRY BUT THAT'S FOUR QUESTIONS.
T
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 10, 2008, 10:47:19 AM
Does anyone have any details how to replicate his 150% efficient toroid device?
PL
DEAR PAUL,
NEVER BELIEVE ANYTHING HERE OR ELSEWHERE UNTIL YOU HAVE VERIFIED IT FOR YOURSELF.
THE TRANSFORMER DESIGN IS NOT FINISHED (NOT ENOUGH TIME) AND THE PROTOTYPE VIDEOS ARE SINCERE DEMONSTRATIONS BUT THE RESULTS HAVE NEVER BEEN VALIDATED YET. THEY ARE POSTED LIKE ALL OUR OTHER VIDEOS - TO SHOW A DEVELOPMENTAL PROGRESSION FROM POINT A TO POINT M OR N ETC.
FOR EXAMPLE ANYONE CAN VIEW UP TO DATE GENERATOR VIDEO PERFORMANCE, WHICH IS "LIGHT YEARS" AWAY FROM WHERE IT STARTED LAST FEBRUARY.
THIS THREAD HAS ALL THE TRANSFORMER INFORMATION YOU COULD EVER WANT TO KNOW BUT YOU NEED TO GO AND FIND IT...
CHEERS
Thane
I think everyone should post in uppercase! It's easier to read. Who create sIlLy eNgLiSh teXt, consisting of lower/upper case?
my 2 cents
PL
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 10, 2008, 06:05:03 PM
OK THREE ANSWERS...
# 1 YES YOU ARE NOT DEAD.
# 2 I DON'T KNOW BUT I'LL TRY IT AND SEE.
# 3 I CAN'T BELIEVE - YOU CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ?
# 4 SORRY BUT THAT'S FOUR QUESTIONS.
T
That last question was an after thought but you confirmed my suspicion. I will give you another soul (slightly used since it is mine) if you tell me about the December 10th surprise.
Quote from: MeltDown on December 10, 2008, 07:02:55 PM
That last question was an after thought but you confirmed my suspicion. I will give you another soul (slightly used since it is mine) if you tell me about the December 10th surprise.
THE DECEMBER 10th SURPRISE WILL BE AS MUCH OF A HAPPY SURPRISE FOR ME IF IT ACTUALLY DOES GOES GO THROUGH... (I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR ALMOST 10 YEARS NOW) IF IT DOES, YOU WON'T NEED TO ASK ME ABOUT IT SINCE IT WILL BE ALL OVER THE NEWS EVERYWHERE HOPEFULLY BY MONDAY.
CHEERS
Thane
Thane, the news is controlled by the same guys that kept it from everyone in the first place!
QuoteTHE DECEMBER 10th SURPRISE WILL BE AS MUCH OF A HAPPY SURPRISE FOR ME IF IT ACTUALLY DOES GOES GO THROUGH... (I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR ALMOST 10 YEARS NOW) IF IT DOES, YOU WON'T NEED TO ASK ME ABOUT IT SINCE IT WILL BE ALL OVER THE NEWS EVERYWHERE HOPEFULLY BY MONDAY.
Ewww, a bit of some suspense. Sounds exciting whatever it is.
PL
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on December 10, 2008, 10:18:58 PM
Thane, the news is controlled by the same guys that kept it from everyone in the first place!
Some say so is this web site. Here is the general suppression process:
1. Inventor after years of toil finds cool effect and tries to share that with the world at a free energy web site.
2. A small "cabal" of people going under a bunch of usernames attack, discredit and generally drive insane the inventor. Now the inventor thinks that free energy people are the dumbest people on Earth and hates them all. Some are and deserve it.
3. About that time the inventor is overwhelmed and in come the heroes. Investors, a management team and lots of news interviews by those same people to pump up that damaged ego and take control of the inventor. The adoration and respect are addictive to someone that just got put through the free energy meat grinder.
4. Then they bring the inventor inside and make the person feel like part of the team. No more public disclosures. And usually a nice piece of eye candy to seal the deal and keep him busy like a nice monarch girl. Monica Lewinski ring a bell?
EXAMPLE: Stan Meyer developed all kinds of meaningless stuff for a military that has superluminal space flight and antigravity. It was busy work to learn all about him and get him out of the public eye.
5. Now the inventor is controlled. He is hooked on the easy money, the power and the people that are stroking his ego. Out of sight, out of mind.
6. Next the inventor is discredited through a sham trial when the investors sue. That way people can just say he was a scam artist when he becomes the next urban legend.
7. Then inventor suffers an accident.
They use three things to get you to talk:
1. Flattery.
2. Se x .
3. Money.
They patent anything around the invention to keep it from going to market in the mean time. You go broke if you try.
The only way this planet will ever see free energy and the freedom that comes with that is when someone remembers the free part. Since the economic and legal system are run by the enemy of all mankind, they can use that to destroy you.
Thane could easily create a step by step but he doesn't. He tells you to read 360 pages of posts. I read them all and it took days. I still don't know how to replicate the bi-toroid. I just got done testing my first attempt and it failed. I took me a week and over 100 dollars to build. And so I like many people will eventually give up and move on.
The impression I got from reading one post was that you drill a hole through a toroid, wind a HV coil on a small rod in the center and short it out. I got the impression that a primary was wound on one half and the secondary on the other half and the HV coil split them.
There is a Google video but it does not really look like what I described. The video shows why Thane named it the bi-toroid but does not give details.
Not saying this has happened to Thane yet since I don't know, but if you really think they are going to let him sell free energy generators, you have not been paying attention to the last hundred years of free energy device suppression. It isn't going to happen anymore than some big national press release on a free energy device.
The 10th has come and the 10th has gone and so too will thane I suspect. But I hope not because it would be a game changer and the only thing that could change the game. You can't stop an army of civilians working toward a common good or defense and Iraq, Afganistan and Viet Nam prove that.
They are now deploying preditor drones on the border with Canada. It is not to keep people from getting in, it is to keep us from getting out. Will Canada will be next?
Lots of people feel Meyer got what he deserved in the end for selling out to the devil. In the end, he created nothing and left nothing behind but confusion and misery and then died in a pool of his own vomit in a parking lot. We reap what we sow.
QuoteThane could easily create a step by step but he doesn't. He tells you to read 360 pages of posts. I read them all and it took days. I still don't know how to replicate the bi-toroid. I just got done testing my first attempt and it failed. I took me a week and over 100 dollars to build. And so I like many people will eventually give up and move on.
(EDITED)
REPOST1) START WITH A HUGE TOROID AND WIND
TWO SEPARATE SECONDARY COILS ON IT.
2) DRILL A HOLE IN BETWEEN THE TWO COILS AND PLACE AN AC WELDING ROD IN THE HOLE (OR ANOTHER SMALL CORED PRIMARY).
3) PUT SOME PRIMARY WINDINGS ON THE WELDING ROD.
4) PUT AC INTO THE WELDING ROD PRIMARY.
5) LOAD THE SECONDARY COILS.
6) MONITOR PRIMARY CURRENT AND POWER FACTOR.
7) IF CURRENT OR PF INCREASES (THEN SECONDARY BEMF IS COUPLING BACK TO THE PRIMARY) - INCREASE TOROID SIZE TO REDUCE SECONDARY RELUCTANCE SO MORE SECONDARY BEMF STAYS IN THE SECONDARY - RATHER THAN GOING BACK TO THE PRIMARY..
8) REPEAT.
9) IF PRIMARY CURRENT AND PF DO NOT INCREASE...
10) MAKE A NEW PRIMARY WITH TWO OR THREE RODS TO INCREASE THE PRIMARY FLUX GOING TO THE SECONDARY.
11) REPEAT.
12) KEEP CHANGING PRIMARY UNTIL YOUR PRIMARY CURRENT AND PF
DO CHANGE UNDER LOAD.
13) REDUCE PRIMARY CORE SIZE A BIT UNTIL PRIMARY
DOES NOT CHANGE UNDER LOAD.
14) MAKE SURE SECONDARY SELF REGULATES THE VOLTAGE AC CROSS THE LOAD. (BEMF FROM S1 FEEDS S2 AND VICEY VERSA).
15) KEEP TWEAKING (WIRE GAUGE , # OF TURNS) YOUR PRIMARY UNTIL YOU GET THE BEST Q.
16) QUIT AFTER YOU SPEND $100.00 OR CERTAINLY AFTER YOUR FIRST ATTEMPT...
17) WHINE LIKE A BABY OR KEEP AT IT UNTIL IT STARTS TO SHOW SIGNS OF WORKING (PLAN TO SPEND 1000 HOURS OR MORE AND 1000'S OF ATTEMPTS ON SOMETHING WHICH MAY NEVER WORK FO
YOU) BUT MAY WORK FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
18)
WHEN IT WORKS GET FLATTERED, GET LAID AND GET RICH OR DEAD (MYERS) OR POOR (TESLA) OR JUST LET SOMEONE ELSE DO IT WHILE YOU SIT AND WATCH... (LIKE MANY DO WITH EVERY OTHER THREAD ON THIS FORUM - WHICH IS VERY OK)
T
@Crankypants
Quote17) WHINE LIKE A BABY OR KEEP AT IT UNTIL IT STARTS TO SHOW SIGNS OF WORKING (PLAN TO SPEND 1000 HOURS OR MORE AND 1000'S OF ATTEMPTS ON SOMETHING WHICH MAY NEVER WORK FO YOU) BUT MAY WORK FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
I read a article that said, almost anyone can be an "expert" at almost anything after 10,000 hours practice. This was based on research into people who have succeeded or were considered experts in their field----- like they say practice makes perfect ;D
Or as you said we can sit and watch the world go by---- ;D
I have found this gets easier and easier with every day and there are basically only a few simple rules to follow.
1)Harness the act of power as well as the reaction to it.
2)Energy must enter the system from "somewhere", most often this energy constitutes what we consider a "static" field of force ie....electrostatic, magnetic or gravity.
3)Don't count your chickens before they have hatched, LOL.
Regards
AC
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 11, 2008, 07:16:28 AM
16) QUIT AFTER YOU SPEND $100.00 OR CERTAINLY AFTER YOUR FIRST ATTEMPT...
17) WHINE LIKE A BABY OR KEEP AT IT UNTIL IT STARTS TO SHOW SIGNS OF WORKING (PLAN TO SPEND 1000 HOURS OR MORE AND 1000'S OF ATTEMPTS ON SOMETHING WHICH MAY NEVER WORK FO YOU) BUT MAY WORK FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
18) WHEN IT WORKS GET FLATTERED, GET LAID AND GET RICH OR DEAD (MYERS) OR POOR (TESLA) OR JUST LET SOMEONE ELSE DO IT WHILE YOU SIT AND WATCH... (LIKE MANY DO WITH EVERY OTHER THREAD ON THIS FORUM - WHICH IS VERY OK)
Now...
Let me be the one to ask....
Why don't you supply it in kit form ;D
Ok. Drop that question. It was stupid but someone will ask it. Just thought I would get it over with so no one else need ask.
Very nice instructions. Reminds me of a step-by-step I posted some years ago on what to do with a spork. They didn't like my repeated use of the word 'repeat'.
I must admit your instructions seem more constructive ;)
Quote from: BEP on December 11, 2008, 07:53:47 AM
Now...
Let me be the one to ask....
Why don't you supply it in kit form ;D
Ok. Drop that question. It was stupid but someone will ask it. Just thought I would get it over with so no one else need ask.
Very nice instructions. Reminds me of a step-by-step I posted some years ago on what to do with a spork. They didn't like my repeated use of the word 'repeat'.
I must admit your instructions seem more constructive ;)
THE BI -TOROID TRANSFORMER IS THE HARDEST-EASY DESIGN OUT THERE.
WE ARE ABOUT 2/3 OF THE WAY THERE BUT ONE NEVER KNOWS WHAT'S AROUND THE CORNER.
T
thane if you really want to see your work get out, give us the specs on you coils, you don't actually think your going to be sucessful with a patent do you? You aware that it's going to fall under national security right? Because they don't want Terrorists(civillians) to have free energy. how many turns on your HV coils? how are they wound on the E core?
YES its alot like the little red Hen fairy tale {with a few twists]
Now that your all done with the hard stuff, can I have a piece of bread??[maybe a crumb]
Chet
Not at all, If you ever tried to get a patent you'll know how it's out to screw the inventors. Oh well, to each his own. Thane gets his patent expect to never see it in reality.
Oh and I almost forgot since it is almost Christmas
P.B. wanted me to ask you if he could get ANOTHER 8x10 glossy of you [for the dart board] his is all used up
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: ramset on December 11, 2008, 10:05:23 AM
Oh and I almost forgot since it is almost Christmas
P.B. wanted me to ask you if he could get ANOTHER 8x10 glossy of you [for the dart board] his is all used up
Thanks
Chet
LOL, good one! Thane, did you get the point?
Ron
Yeah, because information should be hoarded to show the greed in humanity.
Blistering
No!! Thane should be rewarded
He's a national treasure up there [they just don't know it yet!!} and has a family to feed, as well as justify all the years he has put into this
Like its been said before" Thank you" just doesn't cover it
Chet
What to do with the GOLDEN GOOSE?
Thane will figure a way
Hi Thane,
If you don't mind me asking, where do you buy your toroid cores used for your bi-toroid?
Thanks a million,
PL
@ Thane TheBuzz AKA MeltDown was banned yet again yesterday.. He said to say thanks for the step by step info. That was what he found in the posts regarding the bitoroid but decided to try an experiment.
He did not make his toroid to Thanes specs. He was doing an experiment to try and find the effect and learn what is causing it. He used a split 2" toroid and wound three coils on each half. 4 stands of #24 - 4 stands of #28 and 10 stands of #36 wire.
He tried shorting and got a slight effect and then connected caps and diode to the outer coils and just powered the load on the drop side of the two primaries. He tried everything and it didn't work but this only bolstered his theory on why Thane's version does work. He is winding another one and will continue to share his results whether they fail or succeed. Learning what does not work teaches us something valuable too.
He always has to come back under a different username because he get's banned weekly after he reacts to being attacked by many of the same people that drove Thane nuts. It is what they do to people that disclose useful information here.
He sounds like he could be a tremendous ASSET to Thanes research!!!
Chet
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 11, 2008, 11:49:30 AM
Hi Thane,
If you don't mind me asking, where do you buy your toroid cores used for your bi-toroid?
Thanks a million,
PL
You can't buy a core like that but you can buy iron wire from the hardware store - that would be my guess. If you want to buy a ferrite core and drill it out and follow Thane's instructions, Amidon makes cores that are available at about every electronics supplier.
https://www.amidoncorp.com/?gclid=CMHumOuIuZcCFQMCagod5CKKRw (https://www.amidoncorp.com/?gclid=CMHumOuIuZcCFQMCagod5CKKRw)
A good source of wire on a small spool is tougher to find. If it is something I use a lot of then I buy a 20LB spool of wire that has not been re-spooled. Russian copper usually goes for 145.00 plus shipping. Respooling kinks the wire and nicks the insulation.
You can also get a free VGA monitor on craigs list and spool up the degausing coil found around the front of the tube. Usually around 1/2 pound of #24 and usually really nice soft wire with a good insulation layer. In fact is is always my favorite wire to use since it is so soft it lays on the core perfectly and has super insulation because of the high voltage/static environment is was used in.
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 11, 2008, 11:49:30 AM
Hi Thane,
If you don't mind me asking, where do you buy your toroid cores used for your bi-toroid?
Thanks a million,
PL
FINALLY A REAL QUESTION!
THE TOROIDS I AM CURRENTLY USING WE GIVEN TO US FOR FREE FROM TOROID-TECH IN TORONTO CANADA.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 11, 2008, 12:22:52 PM
FINALLY A REAL QUESTION!
THE TOROIDS I AM CURRENTLY USING WE GIVEN TO US FOR FREE FROM TOROID-TECH IN TORONTO CANADA.
CHEERS
Thane
But what about a real answer Mr. Thane? Was it ferrite or laminate or what? Would they have more they could sell?
Quote from: stringguy on December 11, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
so my square wire question wasnt real? hmmm oh well, prob asking the wrong person, sorry
Hey I think it is a real question and the litz wire is one too. He is just working out the rough stuff now and so he probably won't know for some time. Let's not bug him anymore than we have to and maybe he will be more helpful.
He truly is on to something and it deserves a lot of focus. Anything we can do to try different things will be helpful if we document what we do and ship it to him if we come up with something new that is related so he can test it. Many hands make light work.
I bought 5 toroids yesterday and plan to try this and that and create something that is cheap and simple to replicate step by step. That gets people involved and if anything is to succeed, you have to get people involved but people need a solid starting point.
Slowly but surely if a set prototype is properly documented we can spreadsheet enough empirical science from variations of that to create the science needed to perfect it.
Quote from: stringguy on December 11, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
so my square wire question wasnt real? hmmm oh well, prob asking the wrong person, sorry
SORRY YES YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON ... I THOUGHT YOU MEANT SQUARE WAVE - AND I HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH EITHER, SQUARE WIRE OR SQUARE WAVES - I DO HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH SPONGE-BOB-SQUARE-PANTS THOUGH.
T
Quote from: stringguy on December 11, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
so my square wire question wasnt real? hmmm oh well, prob asking the wrong person, sorry
wow your thred has growen THANE.... lol ;D
i want some bigggggggg torides lol
torontro eh just a hop step and jump 4 me ;)
any how square is verry important
dont mind my chiming in in here 8)
lets even go better yet
GO GET QUARTZ DUST...... and some square wire .... ;)
BYE!!!!!
ist!
i atached a pic lets go nano.... ;)
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=thane+heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f#q=thane%20heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f&start=20 (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=thane+heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f#q=thane%20heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f&start=20)
I found this video on Google. It shows what look to be three standard round toroids insulated with aluminum foil. A picture is worth a thousand words - 500 if they are all caps.
Too funny Heins. No wonder you never had a chance to review that word document that Meltdown sent you. You don't suppose that if it is true they don't collapse at the same time their is a cavitation resulting in AB effect and mass to atomic energy conversion do you?
The energy has to come from somewhere and cavitation will produce acceleration and void the law of force to produce the afore mentioned conversion.
Ever measured a ratio of the BETA emission to power and compared it to the toroid without the beer can and rock and roll show in the middle? Bet you a dollar the BETA emission is not proportional.
Quote from: CabinBoy on December 11, 2008, 12:37:46 PM
But what about a real answer Mr. Thane? Was it ferrite or laminate or what? Would they have more they could sell?
YES THEY HAVE PLENTY SINCE THEY MANUFACTURE LAMINATED CORES ON SITE.
SO HERE'S THE DEAL:
1)
YOU NEED TO CREATE A GOOD - LOW RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH FROM THE PRIMARY TO THE SECONDARY TO KEEP THE PRIMARY CURRENT LOW.
2)
THE SECONDARY TO PRIMARY RETURN FLUX PATH HAS TO BE HIGHER SO THAT THE SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF MAGNETIC FIELD STAYS IN THE SECONDARY AND SELF REGULATES THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD.
3)
IF YOUR PRIMARY CURRENT OR POWER FACTOR INCREASES UNDER SECONDARY LOADING YOU ARE SCREWED.
4)
HAVE A LITTLE CRYING FIT AND THEN START AGAIN BY MAKING A PRIMARY WITH A HIGH ENOUGH RELUCTANCE TO DELIVER PRIMARY FLUX WITH LOW POWER BUT NO "ROOM" FOR SECONDARY INDUCED FLUX TO COUPLE BACK TO THE PRIMARY.
5)
THE PRIMARY SHOULD BE OPERATED AT OR VERY NEAR SATURATION.
IT MAY BE ADVISABLE TO USE A DC FIELD TO HELP SATURATE THE PRIMARY FLUX PATH.
6)
"GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE"OR BUILD THE "BIG BANG" BI-TOROID SO THE BEMF INDUCED FLUXES ARE ATTRACTED TO THE OUTER CORES AND THE HYSTERISIS CURVES OF THE CORE MATERIAL DELAY THE SECONDARY FLUX ENOUGH BEFORE IT IS ALLOWED TO MAKE IT BACK TO THE PRIMARY AND CAUSE THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE TO REDUCE THUS DRAWING MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CabinBoy on December 11, 2008, 01:13:28 PM
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=thane+heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f#q=thane%20heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f&start=20 (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=thane+heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f#q=thane%20heins&emb=0&aq=f&aq=f&start=20)
I found this video on Google. It shows what look to be three standard round toroids insulated with aluminum foil. A picture is worth a thousand words - 500 if they are all caps.
Too funny Heins. No wonder you never had a chance to review that word document that Meltdown sent you. You don't suppose that if it is true they don't collapse at the same time their is a cavitation resulting in AB effect and mass to atomic energy conversion do you?
The energy has to come from somewhere and cavitation will produce acceleration and void the law of force to produce the afore mentioned conversion.
Ever measured a ratio of the BETA emission to power and compared it to the toroid without the beer can and rock and roll show in the middle? Bet you a dollar the BETA emission is not proportional.
I bet you two dollars that the BETA emission is not a true BETA emission.
Energy comes from the mass, but is not an actual conversion of the physical mass. The mass is not consumed - it is not a nuclear reaction - not radiation.
So Grumpy, are you betting two bucks that it would possibly be a magical BETA emission? Never heard of this before. Also if you could invalidate E=MC2 I would love to hear about that as well. :-)
Mass is made of lumps of spinning energy we call particles and the three particles (electrons, neutrons and protons) are the three bricks that all mass is made of. Mass and energy is all that there is and it is the same thing in two states.
Mass is formed by a compression of energy made of two opposing longitudinal waves and it is converted back into energy through cavitation which destroys that self pinching wave form. You can't destroy it in either form, mass or energy. You can only convert it back and forth.
That core contains enough atomic energy to run all of Canada for a day. If you used that core for 1000 years, you still could not measure the small amount of mass that is missing with todays scales. This is why Albert Einstein said "Not everything that counts is countable."
Some very credible science has been done and peer reviewed on this subject by people much smarter than all of us put together. You can't rabbit out of an empty hat, there is no magic in science.
Regards.
Quote from: CabinBoy on December 11, 2008, 01:52:33 PM
So Grumpy, are you betting two bucks that it would possibly be a magical BETA emission? Never heard of this before. Also if you could invalidate E=MC2 I would love to hear about that as well. :-)
Mass is made of lumps of spinning energy we call particles and the three particles (electrons, neutrons and protons) are the three bricks that all mass is made of. Mass and energy is all that there is and it is the same thing in two states.
Mass is formed by a compression of energy made of two opposing longitudinal waves and it is converted back into energy through cavitation which destroys that self pinching wave form. You can't destroy it in either form, mass or energy. You can only convert it back and forth.
That core contains enough atomic energy to run all of Canada for a day. If you used that core for 1000 years, you still could not measure the small amount of mass that is missing with todays scales. This is why Albert Einstein said "Not everything that counts is countable."
Some very credible science has been done and peer reviewed on this subject by people much smarter than all of us put together. You can't rabbit out of an empty hat, there is no magic in science.
Regards.
I have never cared much for "particles" (electrons, neutrons, protons) - which are then broken down into other "particles" (quarks, gluons, etc.) - especially when the "particles" are just energy in some "state" which is a term that I do like.
BETA detectors measure charge which tells you very little about what caused the charge. BETA detectors will also detect "other events" that induce or impart a charge in the detector.
BETA particles travel at about 98% the SoL - the detector does not discern between slower or faster particles or events.
BETA particles typically come from radioactive decay - pretty hard to get that out of some of the devices perported to be OU.
BETA particles are deflected by a magnetic field. The BETA detector does not untilize this effect to determine if the detected particle is a really a BETA particle - it just knows a charge appeared.
If mass is not converted during a conversion, perhaps it is converted from potential energy, which is quite ample across the universe. Is energy supplied to mass to maintain it's existence?
In any event, I think you are on the right track. I just wanted to point out that not all things are as they seem, even when dealing with particles.
Quote from: CabinBoy on December 11, 2008, 01:52:33 PM
Some very credible science has been done and peer reviewed on this subject by people much smarter than all of us put together. You can't rabbit out of an empty hat, there is no magic in science.
Regards.
there only relationships .... we currently do not understand fully.....
ist
Quote from: Grumpy on December 11, 2008, 02:21:39 PM
I have never cared much for "particles" (electrons, neutrons, protons) - which are then broken down into other "particles" (quarks, gluons, etc.) - especially when the "particles" are just energy in some "state" which is a term that I do like.
BETA detectors measure charge which tells you very little about what caused the charge. BETA detectors will also detect "other events" that induce or impart a charge in the detector.
BETA particles travel at about 98% the SoL - the detector does not discern between slower or faster particles or events.
BETA particles typically come from radioactive decay - pretty hard to get that out of some of the devices perported to be OU.
BETA particles are deflected by a magnetic field. The BETA detector does not untilize this effect to determine if the detected particle is a really a BETA particle - it just knows a charge appeared.
If mass is not converted during a conversion, perhaps it is converted from potential energy, which is quite ample across the universe. Is energy supplied to mass to maintain it's existence?
In any event, I think you are on the right track. I just wanted to point out that not all things are as they seem, even when dealing with particles.
Hey grumpy,
Thanks for the push back and a good one at that.
I suppose a lot of what I base that BETA emission suspicion on is that French patent on the isotropic transmutation of FE56 to FE54 at the ferro nuclear magnetic resonant frequency.
You can resonate a core at half that frequency and get the core to resonate at 21MHZ and produce more energy than it should. So where did energy come from?
I know that you are a believer in Aether being a source of energy.
So let's look at Dayton Miller's Earth entrained aether field. It is real and measurable. In fact, it would almost be foolish to not assume it was there before it was measured. Not all the grains of sand on the beach are the same size and perhaps that is why an electron is called an electron cloud.
The Aether is a physical energy field in that it is made of particles. It cannot be measured without action at a distance. Maybe you could reference this for me but I think it was Maxwell that stated the smallest particle was 10 -23 power of the size of the atom.
I spent a few years figuring out why PI didn't resolve. I came to conclusion that when we get to the end of the circle, we begin to split an atom and PI will resolve when it has 10 -23 power decimal places.
The scalar wave breaks into sub harmonics and continues to do so for 10 -23 power. (Something like a million billion million) And so I think that all large masses eject this small cosmic dust including our own Sun and Earth as well. It would explain why spacecraft slow down as they pass the Earth to slingshot off to Mars - something NASA is pondering these days.
But does that produce free energy? There has never been any evidence of that, only belief by people that were alive prior to the understanding of nuclear physics. Even Einstein went from an Aether believer to one that denied it because it would invalidate special relativity.
The fact of the matter is, we can measure BETA radiation. All matter radiates energy and if that BETA emission was proportionally different, that would be a scientific test that would help paint a picture and the most well defined pictures are made of many colors of paint.
I know that probably sounds like that Chancy Gardner from the movie "The Gardener" but it is true.
Grumpy wrote:
"BETA particles typically come from radioactive decay - pretty hard to get that out of some of the devices perported to be OU."
All transformers produce BETA emission. If you could show me a free energy device that does not convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass I would very much appreciate that. Which devices are you referring to?
BTW - Hartman has unbanned MeltDown but I would prefer to discuss this in the cavitation thread and leave Thanes thread alone. I am waiting to discuss cavitation under the username that I originally disclosed it under TheBuzz in the proper thread. Doing this just gets me in trouble and I have had enough of that.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 11, 2008, 01:19:37 PM
YES THEY HAVE PLENTY SINCE THEY MANUFACTURE LAMINATED CORES ON SITE.
SO HERE'S THE DEAL:
1)
YOU NEED TO CREATE A GOOD - LOW RELUCTANCE FLUX PATH FROM THE PRIMARY TO THE SECONDARY TO KEEP THE PRIMARY CURRENT LOW.
2)
THE SECONDARY TO PRIMARY RETURN FLUX PATH HAS TO BE HIGHER SO THAT THE SECONDARY INDUCED BEMF MAGNETIC FIELD STAYS IN THE SECONDARY AND SELF REGULATES THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD.
3)
IF YOUR PRIMARY CURRENT OR POWER FACTOR INCREASES UNDER SECONDARY LOADING YOU ARE SCREWED.
4)
HAVE A LITTLE CRYING FIT AND THEN START AGAIN BY MAKING A PRIMARY WITH A HIGH ENOUGH RELUCTANCE TO DELIVER PRIMARY FLUX WITH LOW POWER BUT NO "ROOM" FOR SECONDARY INDUCED FLUX TO COUPLE BACK TO THE PRIMARY.
5)
THE PRIMARY SHOULD BE OPERATED AT OR VERY NEAR SATURATION.
IT MAY BE ADVISABLE TO USE A DC FIELD TO HELP SATURATE THE PRIMARY FLUX PATH.
6) "GET THE FLUX OUTTA HERE"
OR BUILD THE "BIG BANG" BI-TOROID SO THE BEMF INDUCED FLUXES ARE ATTRACTED TO THE OUTER CORES AND THE HYSTERISIS CURVES OF THE CORE MATERIAL DELAY THE SECONDARY FLUX ENOUGH BEFORE IT IS ALLOWED TO MAKE IT BACK TO THE PRIMARY AND CAUSE THE PRIMARY IMPEDANCE TO REDUCE THUS DRAWING MORE CURRENT FROM THE SOURCE.
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
It is me TheBuzz, MeltDown and yes.. CabinBoy. :-) I kept getting banned but I am hooked on free energy so I had to get all techno to get my OU fix.
Thanks for all that information. It is clear that you understand this really well and have devoted a lot of time and thought to it. I am planning to do the same and hopefully contribute something to your work.
I started with a laminated core out of a grow light and didn't finish. I'll try to finish that this week and let you know how it works out. Don't hold your breath since magnetics is not where my experience is but I have always held the magnetics people in high respect. It is as much an art as a science.
If I wasn't banned from Canada for a little marijuana incident back in the 70's I would bring some beer to Ottawa and spend the day bugging you. In fact I would be a Canadian right now since I was all set to marry a girl from BC until that came up. Dodged a bullet there huh? :-)
Thane, I know you are busy but did you ever get a chance to connect the HV coils on the California Christmas coil in series and compare output? I think that could teach us something.
your banned bull sh!t from canada ..... for weed !!!!! lololololol now i have herd it all :D
bring your pot smoken ass back and get to work!!!!!
ist
unless of course you were invloved is some big TROUBLE ::) pot is a joke as is the laws regarding it :P
FRIENDS OF MINE WERE 1 OF THE FIRST 5 IN CANADA TO HAVE THERE TICKET ;)
ok my friends parents how is that ;) go read up on it lol lol you should know better than to doubt me ;)
sorry THANE....
a visit to meet you is still on my list .... :)
Quote from: innovation_station on December 11, 2008, 05:25:31 PM
FRIENDS OF MINE WERE 1 OF THE FIRST 5 IN CANADA TO HAVE THERE TICKET ;)
I just find that so difficult to believe.
QuoteThanks for all that information. It is clear that you understand this really well and have devoted a lot of time and thought to it. I am planning to do the same and hopefully contribute something to your work.
IT IS ALL ABOUT BALANCE WITH THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER - BALANCING PRIMARY CORE RELUCTANCE WHILE
NOT SACRIFICING PRIMARY POWER AND CREATING A SECONDARY WITH LOW ENOUGH RELUCTANCE THROUGHOUT THE LOADING RANGE.
THIS IS WHY THERE IS NO "COOKIE CUTTER" KIT - EACH TOROID, EACH PRIMARY, WIRE CHOICE, SECONDARY LOADING, SOURCE FREQUENCY, COUPLING CO-EFFICIENT, CORE SIZES AND CORE PERFORMANCE HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY IN THE BALANCING ACT.
T
Thane
That sounds easy!! ???
Do you still have hair left on your head?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 12, 2008, 08:05:03 AM
IT IS ALL ABOUT BALANCE WITH THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER - BALANCING PRIMARY CORE RELUCTANCE WHILE NOT SACRIFICING PRIMARY POWER AND CREATING A SECONDARY WITH LOW ENOUGH RELUCTANCE THROUGHOUT THE LOADING RANGE.
THIS IS WHY THERE IS NO "COOKIE CUTTER" KIT - EACH TOROID, EACH PRIMARY, WIRE CHOICE, SECONDARY LOADING, SOURCE FREQUENCY, COUPLING CO-EFFICIENT, CORE SIZES AND CORE PERFORMANCE HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY IN THE BALANCING ACT.
T
Dear Thane,
What if you only connect HV COILS and eliminate High Current coils? Then connect an efficient DC alternator on the shaft?
You can also switch in and out HV coils as the loading changes on alternator.. You can place maybe 18 HV coils or more..
Merry XMAS!
Nuri, Turkey
Quote from: samedsoft on December 12, 2008, 08:32:59 AM
Dear Thane,
What if you only connect HV COILS and eliminate High Current coils? Then connect an efficient DC alternator on the shaft?
You can also switch in and out HV coils as the loading changes on alternator.. You can place maybe 18 HV coils or more..
Merry XMAS!
Nuri, Turkey
YES NURI, THAT IS A VERY GOOD IDEA - HOWEVER IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS IN THE VIDEO BELOW - WHEN THE HV COILS ARE ENGAGED... WE GET ACCELERATION AND THE GENERATOR OUTPUT INCREASED BY 10 TIMES - 1 WATT TO 10 W. YOU WON'T GET THAT WITH AN ALTERNATOR OR GENERATOR ON THE SHAFT.
SO WE ARE CREATING A SELF EXCITED - SELF ACCELERATING MOTOR COIL AND COLLECTING THE MOTOR BEMF INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD AT THE SAME TIME.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5z1zpajulU&feature=channel_page
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AS WELL!
SORRY BUT I AM GOING TO BE EATING YOUR COUNTRY FOR DINNER ON THE 25th.
T
Quote
Sounds suspiciously like that toroid hubbard coil tutorial and how you can't draw more than the idle current.
IF YOU DRAW MORE THAN THE IDLE CURRENT - IT AIN'T WORKING...
Quote
If you figured all that out empirically it could explain your baditude. I cry like baby every time I have to hand wind a toroid. I'm crying right now.
I HAVE SPENT UP TO 30 HOURS WINDING ONE-BITOROID ONLY TO SEE IT FAIL.
YOU CAN SACRIFICE ONE TOROID (AND SOME EFFICIENCY) AND CUT IT IN HALF - WHICH MAKES WINDING A LITTLE EASIER. - THEN CLAMP IT BACK TOGETHER ...
I AM SORRY THAT I HAVE A VIRUS IN MY COMPUTER OR I WOULD POST GOTOLUC'S AND MY BI-TOROID VIDEO WHERE THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE AND CURRENT ACTUALLY DROP WHILE THE SECONDARY LOAD POWER INCREASES BY 1800%.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 12, 2008, 10:15:45 PM
THE SECONDARY LOAD POWER INCREASES BY 1800%.
does the energy increase as well?
I have a question but it might be a little off topic. Doesn't the number of poles of a generator increase its efficiency? Increase it in the sense that 1 rotation can produce x times more than a generator with less poles. So the output voltage is higher - I'm talking conventional here. But I believe they typically limit the poles because it makes the size of the generator bigger and more expensive to construct - right?
Dynamos usually have many poles.... Anyway sounds like your research is going well Thane. I don't know what you mean by eating our country the 25th. That's probably not a good idea considering all the pollution haha.
QuoteI AM SORRY THAT I HAVE A VIRUS IN MY COMPUTER OR I WOULD POST GOTOLUC'S AND MY BI-TOROID VIDEO WHERE THE PRIMARY VOLTAGE AND CURRENT ACTUALLY DROP WHILE THE SECONDARY LOAD POWER INCREASES BY 1800%.
I want to see that one. Now I know you don't like these kinds of questions, but with 1800% increase, would it be possible to close the loop? (runs for cover)
Seriously though, could it be possible (just possible) or does more work need to be done? Just a yes or no answer would do.
Thanks,
Charlie
For those who have computer problems, here is a quick guide from a guy who fixes PCs for living.
1. Make sure to have at least 1GB of RAM memory under Windows XP and at least 2 GB in Windows Vista.
2. Make sure to have at least free antivirus software like AVG 8.0 available from here:
http://www.filehippo.com/download_avg_antivirus/ (http://www.filehippo.com/download_avg_antivirus/)
During the setup of AVG don't install the AVG toolbar and disable daily scanning. Typically a full scan once a week is just fine.
3. Get decent antispyware programs. I use 2 of them:
http://www.filehippo.com/download_superantispyware/
http://www.malwarebytes.org/
Scan your PC using these two programs and remove all objects detected by these. Also, make sure to download updates prior to running the scan.
4. Download and install Mozilla Firefox web browser. Much better and safer than the IE from Microsoft.
5. Make sure to run a disk defragmenter.
6. Is any kind of Norton software installed on your PC? If yes, remove it all with the exception of the "2009" branded Nortons. These "can" stay.
7. Missing a program?
I really like this site:
http://www.filehippo.com/ (http://www.filehippo.com/)
It lists only very useful and free PC utilities.
That's all...
Good luck.
:)
The official AVG website -->
http://free.avg.com/download-avg-anti-virus-free-edition
Be careful about downloading files except from the official website.
PL
Quote from: TheBuzz on December 13, 2008, 05:16:48 AM
Nice... You just gave me a boner. In a purely technical sense of course. Can't wait to see the video.
IF YOU CONTACT GOTOLUC - HE MIGHT KNOW WHERE A COPY OF THE VIDEO IS?
THE PROBLEM WE HAD WAS THE PRIMARY TO SECONDARY FLUX LINKAGE WAS POOR SO THE IDLING POWER WAS HIGH. IT WAS VERY INTERESTING TO SEE THE VOLTAGE AND CURRENT GO BACKWARDS UNDER LOADING HOWEVER...
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: samedsoft on December 12, 2008, 08:32:59 AM
Dear Thane,
Merry XMAS!
Nuri, Turkey
CHARLIE_V DO YOU LIVE IN TURKEY AS WELL?
T
Quote
I have a question but it might be a little off topic. Doesn't the number of poles of a generator increase its efficiency? Increase it in the sense that 1 rotation can produce x times more than a generator with less poles. So the output voltage is higher - I'm talking conventional here. But I believe they typically limit the poles because it makes the size of the generator bigger and more expensive to construct - right?
HERE IS A GOOD ARTICLE FOR YA...
http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/stator.htm
Quote
Seriously though, could it be possible (just possible) or does more work need to be done? Just a yes or no answer would do.
Thanks,
Charlie
MORE WORK ALWAYS HAS TO BE DONE...
T
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 13, 2008, 12:55:46 AM
The official AVG website -->
http://free.avg.com/download-avg-anti-virus-free-edition
Be careful about downloading files except from the official website.
PL
This is true
But in this case, I have explained the reason behind listing the filehippo site as a mirror. This specific site is safe, fast, and very useful.
If anyone gets a laminated core price quote from ToroidTech, http://www.toroidtech.com, then by all means please post it.
Many thanks,
PL
Quote from: TheBuzz on December 13, 2008, 05:16:48 AM
Nice... You just gave me a boner. In a purely technical sense of course. Can't wait to see the video.
HERE IS THE NEW - OLD BI-TOROID VIDEO, JUST FOR FUN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP7zmk1t2gI&feature=channel_page
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 13, 2008, 10:27:29 PM
HERE IS THE NEW - OLD BI-TOROID VIDEO, JUST FOR FUN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP7zmk1t2gI&feature=channel_page
CHEERS
T
Hi Thane,
Thanks for showing this video and returning to this toroid transformator topic. I understand what you say but there is one thing I cannot get. You say the followings in the video at 2:52 :
"... now we are producing approximately a little over 1 Amp to a 1k load." If you really say this (sorry if not, English is my second language), then you must have a little over 30 milliAmper to the 1k load, once the voltmeter shows the (hopefully) true RMS voltage value of 30.8V across the 1 kOhm load resistor.
I also understand the significance of this transformer setup that the primary input power seems to get reduced when you increase the output voltage (hence the output power) at the secondary, though here I would have a suggestion.
I assume you use a variac transformer plugged into yours mains and the variac's output drives your toroid primary coil, is that right?
If yes, may I suggest using a conventional mains down transformer of say 30-40 VA (or higher) power capability between the variac and your toroid primary coil input.
Virtually any mains transformer with 3-24V secondary voltage and with 30-40 VA power capabilty would be good.
This way you could drive the toroid primary directly (and at a low impedance level) from the secondary coil of the mains transformer and the variac could drive the primary coil of the inserted mains transformer.
The advantage would be that you do not have to use the variac's wiper at its very bottom, where it can already get uncertain contact, turned almost to the fully down position area where a very small knob turn already means some volts jumping all of a sudden, instead, the variac could work in its upper range, giving plenty of fine voltage adjustment appearing at the main transformer secondary output.
Of course this is a suggestion. :)
Regards,
Gyula
Hey Gyla,
using the secondary of a transformer ( both variac or fixed step-down-transformer )to drive the primary of another transformer is an absolute no-go.
I once was discussing this with a very experienced electronic specialist ( more than 40 years of experience in different electronic branches) because I was doing this and had such a strange behaviour that I asked this person for advice.
Please bear in mind : How can you ever know the behaviour of two coil´s reluctance/inductance in conjunction with each other ?
Looking a the schematic of such a design ( secondary to primary ) you have created a complicated bandfilter with unknown characteristics. No electronic specialist will do this with transformers driven at grid-frequency.
bandfilter-design is a very complicated subject in hf-electronics
As I said : absolute NO-GO !.
This is the reason I built a variable wien-oscillator ( 20 HZ to 20 KHz ) which drives a push-pull output-stage.
The supply-voltage for the output-stage can be varied between 12 and 100 volt. The output-impedance
is just ohmic an can be designed as low as 4-2 Ohms ( driving a speaker for example )
Only then you can be sure about any measurement-values belonging only ( since there is no inductive backlash at the low-impedance emitter-output ) caused by the test-object ( bitoroid transformer in this case ).
The other possibility is to drive the primary directly from the grid and measure the amps/voltage and phase-angle
with a scope.
I even do not trust those powermeters you can by. I had used such a device by a professional electronic-company here in germany and it had an 15 % error in amps, so it made me believe I had OU.
I measure the dc-output of a switched power-supply at a linear-ohmic load and was scratching my head because of the measure output-to input-ratio ( 120 % ).
Then I used an analogue-meter for the current-reading which made it clear where the error was.
Bet Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on December 14, 2008, 04:33:36 PM
Hey Gyla,
using the secondary of a transformer ( both variac or fixed step-down-transformer )to drive the primary of another transformer is an absolute no-go.
I once was discussing this with a very experienced electronic specialist ( more than 40 years of experience in different electronic branches) because I was doing this and had such a strange behaviour that I asked this person for advice.
Please bear in mind : How can you ever know the behaviour of two coil´s reluctance/inductance in conjunction with each other ?
...
Hi Kator01,
Thanks for the explanations I can accept them, the setup (mains --> variac --> down transformer --> bitoroid primary) may cause problems but then the situation Thane may have used (mains --> variac --> bitoroid primary) can also be problematic in itself, at least according to your description above.
I based my advice on my practice of using a variac from the mains when findings faults in older CRT television receivers that was installed inside with a 1:1 isolating mains transformers to make it truly ground independent from the mains ground in a television studio. And I never ever found any problem when controlling the variac and feeding the isolation mains transformer's primary input with the variac turned down even to 50-60V AC temporarily, this lower AC voltage always nicely appeared at the isolation taransformer's secondary and then feed the switched mode power supply mains input in the television set.
This is why I though of giving a simple solution for changing the AC input voltage to the bitoroid primary input.
I do think if variac is used in itself only for getting the low voltage AC of 2-3 Volts to drive the bitoroid's primary, then it is a situation I would avoid by all means for reasons I explained in my previous mail.
Best Regards,
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
yes I agree, if you have just an application to test output-voltage in this 1:1 transformer-setup you described. But if it comes to power-factor, phase-angles between current and voltage then it is a no-go.
Quotecan accept them, the setup (mains --> variac --> down transformer --> bitoroid primary) may cause problems but then the situation Thane may have used (mains --> variac --> bitoroid primary) can also be problematic in itself, at least according to your description above.
Yes, that its what I mean. But I simply do not know the supply-source-type thane was using in this demo.
So we have to wait until thane or gotoluc come forward with an explanation, especially if this big toroid is a standard-transformer and how he attached the primary-core to the main-core.
Best Regards
Kator01
FYI LADIES AND GENTS,
I POSTED THE TOROID VIDEO IN REFERENCE TO A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION EARLIER ON IN THIS THREAD. UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GET INVOLVED IN AN INDEPTH DISCUSSION DUE TO A PROTOTYPE WHICH I AM TRYING TO GET FINISHED AND THE FACT THAT I DON'T HAVE A COMPUTER RIGHT NOW.
I HOPE THE VIDEO WILL INSPIRE OTHERS WHO ARE CONSIDERING BUILDING A BI-TOROID - THERE IS LOTS TO LEARN AND EXPERIMENT.
THAT TOROID HAS 5 X 1000 TURNS/SIDE AND THE ONLY DOWNSIDE WAS THE PRIMARY TO SECONDARY COUPLING WHICH CAUSED IT TO BE INEFFICIENT BUT STILL FUN. THANKS TO GOTOLUC FOR HELPING. :)
CHEERS
Thane
Hi Thane,
"IT IS SOMETHING I CONTRIBUTED TO - BUT THE TIMING IS OUT OF MY HANDS - I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT DECEMBER 10 IS THE BIG DAY - SO WE HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE?"
My latest Popular Science has an article about a machine that they state 'MIGHT SAVE THE WORLD'. It is a home brewed fusion proof-of-concept device in Burnaby, British Columbia by Michel Laberge a French Canadian.
Is this the 'Big Day' device?
Regards. Larry
Hi Larry,
I found this here :
http://www.hobbyspace.com/Links/sciTech4.html (http://www.hobbyspace.com/Links/sciTech4.html)
Move down to the link in the topic "Magnetized Target Fusion" :
"Acoustic Wave Driven MTF Fusion Reactor (pdf) by Dr. Michel Laberge"
and here :
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2665 (http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2665)
Is this the work you are referring to ?
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on December 15, 2008, 06:46:05 PM
Hi Larry,
I found this here :
http://www.hobbyspace.com/Links/sciTech4.html (http://www.hobbyspace.com/Links/sciTech4.html)
Move down to the link in the topic "Magnetized Target Fusion" :
"Acoustic Wave Driven MTF Fusion Reactor (pdf) by Dr. Michel Laberge"
and here :
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2665 (http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2665)
Is this the work you are referring to ?
Yes, good research.
Regards, Larry
Dr. Michel Laberge is the president of General Fusion Inc. http://www.generalfusion.com/
Astonishingly (for me anyway), their address is only about 15 minutes WALK from where I live!
Quote from: derricka on December 16, 2008, 12:33:00 AM
Dr. Michel Laberge is the president of General Fusion Inc. http://www.generalfusion.com/
Astonishingly (for me anyway), their address is only about 15 minutes WALK from where I live!
Amazing, but please keep in mind that Thane's work is much closer to helping the world. The new fusion technique will take much longer according to the PS article.
Regards, Larry
Yeah, I would be surprised if a fusion power plant delivers power to the grid before 2030.
A nice easy to build and maintain generator given free to the world would
be a very nice way to bring in the new year. I still have hopes and dreams.
thaelin
Thaelin
Never give up on those hopes and dreams
Chet
I agree. Never give up! I have the proof that diodes produce continuous power, which according to most physicists would violate conventional physics. If I was Stefan, I would implement the forum "Karma" feature. A debunker with too much forum Karma would be prohibited from posting. Their IP range would be blocked.
PL
HEY ALL,
SOME PICS OF THE PROTOTYPE WE ARE BUILDING AND SENDING TO OUR CALIFORNIA CUSTOMER AND FOR OUR DEMO TO THE USA DOE IN THE NEW YEAR.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 17, 2008, 06:55:47 AM
HEY ALL,
SOME PICS OF THE PROTOTYPE WE ARE BUILDING AND SENDING TO OUR CALIFORNIA CUSTOMER AND FOR OUR DEMO TO THE USA DOE IN THE NEW YEAR.
CHEERS
Thane
Looks good, is that still the 6 inch Ryobi? it looks bigger, maybe 'cause the pictures are small....
How many magnets stacked, two? Where do you get a double cup to hold them?
Have you tried separate HC coils, or is the coil over all three legs the best producer?
Good Luck
Ron
Dear Thane,
I closely studied the past days the forum overunity.com (it took me too much time) where your posting are regarding the Perepiteia
Correct me if I am wrong.
PART 1
you say: the motor must run well below its max rmp. Why is that? If net mechanic output is created it has notning to do with motor max output rpm.
you say also: a piece of iron can create a lot o cogging torque. That means the unsorted coils can easily act as plain iron cores that brakes the whole system from its very start and when shorted the coils, somehow release the brake?
Perhaps this phenomenon (break release) occurs both to HV coils and HC coils. Consider the following regarding the VC coil that is the heart of Perepiteia energy creator.
LOW VELOCITY of rotor
HV coil at low velocity -> unshorted (has drag, and motor has decreased speed than no coils at all present) -------------------------> motor has less rpm than no coils and cores around.
(Core losses drag = x)
HV coil at low velocity -> shorted (drag is diminished due to shorting , but enough current is flowing and produces Lenz's Law drag far more intense than previously unshorted "brake drag" -------------> motor deccelarates
Core losses drag-> near zero, Lenz's Law ---> Y, so x <<Y
HIGH VELOCITY rotor
HV coil at High velocity -> unshorted (has drag, and motor has decreased speed than no coil present) (always has)
------------->motor less rpm than no coils and cores around.
(Core losses drag = x1)
HV coil at High velocity -> shorted (drag is diminished due to "brake release", but not enough current is flowing thanks to coil impedance thus not signifficant opposing force according to Lenz' Law is created.
In other words at this high frequency virtualy no current is flowing (even though high voltage measurements are taken) thanks to the "inertia" of the current to pass through high impedance at this small fraction of time. Making a dead generator (HV coil).
Concluding the producing Lenz's Law effect is way lower than the lifted drag ------------> motor speeds up, but not to above its max rpm (as Thane stated)
(Core losses drag -> near zero, but Lenz's Law -> near zero)
Now the combination of HV coil and HC coil is a mix of "brake release" gains and Lenz's law losses.
PART 2
Bottom Line, if the self excited motor coils are as said; how much mechanic output contribution has each one? 10 of them? In a bench grinder the friction loses are quite low, so why is there the need to keep the motor running so as HV coils operate? If self excited when employed they should create torque. Above some critical point, they should be able at least to maintain the rpm of the rotor, overcoming any frictions (since they produce energy) without the help of the motor, but I am afraid this is not the case. Is not it?
I hope I am wrong..
I speak without bad intention, since such observations became obvious to me from trying to replicate your prototype. Pls if you have any answers and you want to share with me, feel free to.
As always I look forward your reply.
Kind Regards,
Panos
-----------------------------------
hoping to a brighter future
Quote
Looks good, is that still the 6 inch Ryobi? it looks bigger, maybe 'cause the pictures are small....
How many magnets stacked, two? Where do you get a double cup to hold them?
SAME MOTOR, 1 MAGNET x 18.
QuoteHave you tried separate HC coils, or is the coil over all three legs the best producer?
Good Luck
Ron
SO FAR I CAN GET 25 WATTS @ 2300 RPM (WITH HV ACCELERATION) WITH THE "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS" CONCENTRIC BI-COIL WITH THE MOTOR VOLTAGE SET AT 85 V - INCREASING THE MOTOR INPUT TO 130 VOLTS AND NEGATING THE HV COILS PRODUCES ONLY 2.5 WATTS @ 3000 RPM.
COUPLING THE HV COIL WITH THE HC COIL IS NOW THE MAIN FOCUS AND TRYING TO BE PREPARED...
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.†...CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 18, 2008, 06:35:29 PM
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.†...
CHEERS
T
Victoria can now be considered as part of Canada...
I promise not to make fun of your weather...(for a short period of time, lol)
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on December 22, 2008, 05:30:51 PM
Victoria can now be considered as part of Canada...
I promise not to make fun of your weather...(for a short period of time, lol)
Ron
IS THAT "ENEMY SNOW"?
T
I am in Portland Ore. and we got about 12". Goes to prove global warming right?
cant find my pic of rotflmao ;D
But we do have rain on the way and it will all melt off and flood all over the place.
thaelin
Quote from: Thaelin on December 23, 2008, 11:52:46 AM
I am in Portland Ore. and we got about 12". Goes to prove global warming right?
cant find my pic of rotflmao ;D
But we do have rain on the way and it will all melt off and flood all over the place.
thaelin
maybe you could make some *shoe* shaped snow balls :D
Top notch b0rg...rates a guffaw.
Regards...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 22, 2008, 08:58:13 PM
IS THAT "ENEMY SNOW"?
T
Nope. But snow is very silent
Just like the sound of silence, which is the enemy
http://www.rense.com/general84/edvv.htm
Ron
I wondered about those DTV adds...so accommodating they are.
This is very ominous and the subject should have its own thread.
Regards...
Quote from: i_ron on December 23, 2008, 11:09:56 PM
Nope. But snow is very silent
Just like the sound of silence, which is the enemy
http://www.rense.com/general84/edvv.htm
Ron
Sounds of Silence Night
Sounds of Silence Night,
Holy WTF-ing night!
All is calm, all is bright
I_ron yon Virgin Mother and Child
Holy Infant so tender and mild...
(on the inside with a crispy coating outside)
Sleep in heavenly pieces
Sleep in heavenly pieces
In your FEMA coffins
Sounds of Silence night,
Holy WTF-ing night!
Mind numb human-sheep quake at the sight
Glories stream from heaven afar
Un-Heavenly host puppet-masters sing Alleluia! ("we gotcha now you mother-f_ckers")
Christ, the Obomaviour is born
Christ, the Obomaviour is born
Sounds of Silence night,
Holy WTF-ing night!
Son of a B_tch - Oh my God???
Love of money's pure de-light
Radiant beams from Thy holy farce
With the blood-red dawn of redeeming dis-grace
Jesus, Lord, at Thy birth
Jesus, Lord, at Thy birth
Sounds of Silence night,
Holy WTF-ing night!
We need a miracle if we are going to survive
Pay or Pray just to see one more day...
Time is at hand...
The Flood didn't work, neither did Babel
If I give you my forehead - do I get a Bar Code Label?
Hear that sound...?
That's the sound of billions of souls
praying and
working for
PEACE.
Unfortunately the "outer" world is simply a reflection of our collective "inner" world.
So, here's to hoping we have our act together finally. :P
Cheers & Merry Christmas
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 24, 2008, 11:06:20 PM
Hear that sound...?
That's the sound of billions of souls praying and working for PEACE.
Unfortunately the "outer" world is simply a reflection of our collective "inner" world.
So, here's to hoping we have our act together finally. :P
Cheers & Merry Christmas
Thane
Thane, you are a character! ...and as Bill said, "all the world is a stage" so you are right,
lets act together, play our parts well to make this sorry world a better place, a place full of love and compassion, a place where a man's potential can generate a current of love and wellbeing for all.
... and a happy new year, Ron
Hello Thane
Another thanks for sharing your great work.
I am back from Africa where i participated to a movie on animals with an electric motorised ultralight airplane.
I got 2 problems:
1.- the local generators were of so poor quality that it took me almost one day to recharge the 40 AH power battery
2.-it was so hot that it was almost impossible to cool the electric motor during and after the flights
And each day i told me that we can do better.
As the concentric bicoils works as a generator, would it be possible to reverse the system and use it as a motor ? And in this case can we expect that by replacing the HC coils of an existing brushless motor with a Thane's concentric bicoil the motor would run cooler and more powerfull ? I am very inrterested to do some test in that direction.
I wish You all the best and happy new year
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on December 28, 2008, 10:02:32 AM
Hello Thane
As the concentric bicoils works as a generator, would it be possible to reverse the system and use it as a motor ?
I wish You all the best and happy new year
Laurent
DEAR LAURENT ET AL,
NICE TO SEE THAT YOU ARE
"OUT OF AFRICA".BUT I GUESS I HAVE NOT BEEN A VERY GOOD INSTRUCTOR... :-\
THE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL IS
BOTH AN
AC MOTOR (HV COIL)
AND AN
ALTERNATOR (HC COIL) ALL IN ONE.
WE HAVE ALL BEEN LOOSEY GOOSEY WITH THE CORRECT TERMS (an alternator = AC and a generator = DC)
THE HV MOTOR COIL WORKS IN A SIMILAR FASHION AS AN AC INDUCTION MOTOR WHERE THE "ROTATING" STATOR FIELD IS REPLACED WITH PERMANENT MAGNETS.
ONE COULD ALSO THINK OF THE HV COILS AS A MODIFIED HALLBACH ARRAY https://www.llnl.gov/str/Post.html BUT WITH A TWIST - WHERE THE HV COILS "MOTORIZE" THE ROTOR.
AS OF NOW WE HAVE GONE TO A LOCAL TRANSFORMER COMPANY WHO WILL BE MANUFACTURING THE CONCENTRIC BI-COILS FOR US AND WE SHOULD SOON BE ABLE TO SHIP THEM TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO "PLAY" AROUND AND EXPERIMENT - NOT TO MENTION ANYONE WHO WANT TO BUILD A FULL SCALE ALTERNATOR...
CHEERS
Thane
MR.HEINS
SWEET!!
Chet
Quote from: i_ron on December 22, 2008, 05:30:51 PM
Victoria can now be considered as part of Canada...
Not sure it will show up in the reply, but that's a beautiful photo of Canada! I live in Los Angeles, California, USA, and can hardly wait till Feb. 2010 to go to the XXI Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada!
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 28, 2008, 11:34:38 AM
Not sure it will show up in the reply, but that's a beautiful photo of Canada! I live in Los Angeles, California, USA, and can hardly wait till Feb. 2010 to go to the XXI Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada!
Regards,
Paul
I_RON IS VERY NICE AND I AM SURE HE WILL BE THERE TO MEET YOU AS HE DOES OFTEN... :D
T
Thanks for the explanation
dont worry you are a very good and patient prof and it is a pleasure to read your lecture and look at your fantastic videos
As i see in the last video, the HV motor acceleration is very strong and then you desengage the HV coils very soon
If you do not desengage the HV coils and assuming that the rotor will not explode, can i understand (sorry i am a very slow student :-\ ) that the HV motor coils could be fast and strong enough that it would be possible to decrease the input power on the prime mover and the system would go on accelerating ? In that case it would be possible to regulate the speed of the system by varying the load on the HC coil ?
I think that 2009 will bring us a very bright gift and I am on the list for the first delivery of the demo concentric bi-coil in Europe ;)
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 28, 2008, 12:20:29 PM
I_RON IS VERY NICE AND I AM SURE HE WILL BE THERE TO MEET YOU AS HE DOES OFTEN... :D
T
Yes, surely i_ron often meets people. I'll be certain to have a live internet video stream when we meet. :D
PL
QuoteAs i see in the last video, the HV motor acceleration is very strong and then you desengage the HV coils very soon
I DISENGAGE THE HV COIL AS A SAFETY PRECAUTION BECAUSE IT ACCELERATES FASTER THAN I EXPECTED.
QuoteIf you do not desengage the HV coils and assuming that the rotor will not explode, can i understand (sorry i am a very slow student :-\ ) that the HV motor coils could be fast and strong enough that it would be possible to decrease the input power on the prime mover
YES I HAVE HAD THE PRIME MOVER AS LOW AS 55 VOLTS - BEFORE ACCELERATION STOPS.
Quoteand the system would go on accelerating ?
FOR THIS TO OCCUR THE HV MOTOR TORQUE WOULD HAVE TO EXCEED THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE INDUCTION MOTOR - THIS IS OUR NEXT GOAL.
QuoteIn that case it would be possible to regulate the speed of the system by varying the load on the HC coil ?
YES VARY THE LOAD ON THE HC COIL OR
PLACE LOAD ON THE HV COIL THUS REDUCING THE COIL CURRENT AND INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD IT WILL BE ABLE TO PRODUCE.
OR IF YOU HAVE MANY HV COILS - SIMPLY SWITCH OUT SOME COILS UNTIL THE DESIRED SPEED IS MAINTAINED.
QuoteI think that 2009 will bring us a very bright gift and I am on the list for the first delivery of the demo concentric bi-coil in Europe ;)
Laurent
HOPEFULLY THINGS WILL REMAIN "PEACEFUL" LONG ENOUGH TO GET THE JOB DONE.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 28, 2008, 02:36:10 PM
YES I HAVE HAD THE PRIME MOVER AS LOW AS 55 VOLTS - BEFORE ACCELERATION STOPS.
FOR THIS TO OCCUR THE HV MOTOR TORQUE WOULD HAVE TO EXCEED THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE INDUCTION MOTOR - THIS IS OUR NEXT GOAL.
Previously quote from November 13, 2008:
'AT 55 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY THE MOTOR IS LESS THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED TO TURN THE ROTOR AT 100 RPM.
FROM 100 RPM TO 1600 RPM THE
TORQUE REQUIRED IS SUPPLIED BY THE
HV COIL.
OR
THE HV COIL IS ELIMINATING CORE LOSSES AND THE MOTOR IS ACCELERATING THE ROTOR
WHICH IS SIMPLY IDIOTIC TO ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN IT AND DOES NOT USE FLUORIDE TOOTHPASTE.'
I'm glad you mentioned 55 Volts again, because I had wanted to do a backup test previously, to help people understand that 1600 rpm at 55 Volts is amazing.
Please note in the pic that the variac is at 55 Volts and the tachometer is at 395 rpm. The rotor has half the magnets that Thane has on his current rotor and there is
no core coil, as I don't have the new concentric bi-coils. So the only load is the rotor. This shows that Thane's setup is doing much more than eliminating the forces between the core and the rotor magnets.
BTW, that was a great picture of I_Ron, he must have had a good hair day.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on December 28, 2008, 06:31:43 PM
That was a great picture of I_Ron, he must have had a good hair day.
Regards, Larry
Oh stop, stop, you are making me inthanely jealous... I just wish I had hair!
Ron
Quote from: LarryC on December 28, 2008, 06:31:43 PM
I'm glad you mentioned 55 Volts again, because I had wanted to do a backup test previously, to help people understand that 1600 rpm at 55 Volts is amazing.
Regards, Larry
LC, I HOPE YOUR CHRISTMAS WAS OK CONSIDERING...?
I SHOULD HAVE SAID 55 VOLTS @ 3000 RPM WITH THE LATEST "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS COIL" - UNFORTUNATELY WHILE WORKING ON THIS MONSTER I BROKE A WIRE INSIDE IT.
I WILL TRY TO GET A VIDEO OF ME GRADUALLY LOWERING THE INPUT TOMORROW. I WILL ALSO TRY TO POST A VIDEO WITH 2 CONCENTRIC BI-COILS - WE SHOULD EXPECT ABOUT 20 + 18 OR CLOSE TO 40 WATTS @ 3000 RPM. WE SHOULD ALSO EXPECT DOUBLE THE ACCELERATION.
Quote from: i_ron on December 28, 2008, 07:21:06 PM
Oh stop, stop, you are making me inthanely jealous... I just wish I had hair!
Ron
I_RON HAVEN"T YOU HEARD OF
"THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF HAIRNERGY"? WHEREBY:
"HAIR CAN NEITHER BE CREATED NOR DESTROYED - IT SIMPLY CHANGES LOCATION."
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 28, 2008, 08:06:15 PM
I_RON HAVEN"T YOU HEARD OF "THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF HAIRNERGY"?
WHEREBY:
"HAIR CAN NEITHER BE CREATED NOR DESTROYED - IT SIMPLY CHANGES LOCATION."
T,
You genius hairologist, that is so insightful. My hair is moving from away from the top of my head into my ear canals. But, it does make for a frightful combover!
Regards, Larry
Okay, I'm sure there is an intense ear hair search gone on. So, I'm here to show a I_Ron pic before he turned into a giant bigfoot umbrella holding hairless man.
Please apply the comments in this list to the picture below:
My gorilla girlfriend loves this stuff. -- John Fee
Just a little trim, please. -- Ron Raedeke
You ought to see my ass. -- Wade LeVander
Do you think I can do a comb-over? -- Charlie Cole
Ick. -- Jeff Ericson
Fuzzy Wuzzy was my cousin. -- Christine Otam
This is what my nose hair looked like before I trimmed it. -- Tom Fredericks
Either my ears haven't evolved as fast as the rest of me, or my Propecia dripped in there. -- Chris Jonnes
All the better to "hair" you with, my dear. -- Dave Schumacher
What's the matter with you Americans? Never seen ear hair before? -- Win Miller
Let's see Mike Tyson bite this! -- Alfredo Ameiva
And now I'll show you a really beautiful braided hair style. -- Sheri Dahlke
When my head of hair thins, I can comb up! -- Sharon Hindahl
The Rogaine
So, there is hope for us who have hair transportation issues!
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on December 28, 2008, 09:37:36 PM
So, there is hope for us who have hair transportation issues!
Regards, Larry
Hi Thane Heins,
Someone in this forum theorizes "free energy" machines are nuclear cavitation. Just wondering, have you tested your machines with a Geiger counter?
Here's one for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-CDV-715-1A-Radiation-Detector-Geiger-Counter_W0QQitemZ160306325904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item160306325904&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-CDV-715-1A-Radiation-Detector-Geiger-Counter_W0QQitemZ160306325904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item160306325904&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2%7C65%3A15%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318)
Here's another for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-Instrument-Geiger-Counter-CDV-717-Model-1_W0QQitemZ190259748656QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item190259748656&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-Instrument-Geiger-Counter-CDV-717-Model-1_W0QQitemZ190259748656QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item190259748656&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2%7C65%3A15%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318)
It's no big deal. Just wondering. It's a long shot, but if by small chance, then you could shield your devices. We wouldn't want you to turn into a mutant ninja turtle or something. ;D
Regards,
PL
You're a bit off there Paul, he would look more like this...
Nice one broli! I love it!! Nice work.
PL
A CNN news member caught a recent photo of Thane ;D -->
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 11:53:31 AM
Hi Thane Heins,
It's no big deal. Just wondering. It's a long shot, but if by small chance, then you could shield your devices. We wouldn't want you to turn into a mutant ninja turtle or something. ;D
Regards,
PL
FOR SOMEONE TO SAY IT IS "ONLY" THIS OR THAT IS JUST LIMITED THINKING LIKE ME SAYING THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO FLY.
MY THEORY IS:
THAT THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES OUT THERE OR WAYS TO MAKE THEM...
JUST LIKE THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS TO FLY - OR CRASH OR MAKE A LIGHT BULB.
AND OBVIOUSLY SOME ARE BETTER (AND SAFER) THAN OTHERS AND INFINITELY MANY ARE YET TO BE DISCOVERED.
AS FOR BEING A MUTANT - MOST WOULD AGREE I AM.
I DEFINITELY FEEL OUT OF PLACE AT LEAST.
T
Quote from: broli on December 29, 2008, 01:07:06 PM
You're a bit off there Paul, he would look more like this...
LOL - YOU PEOPLE ARE CRAZIER THAN ME!!!
THANKS FOR THE LAUGH.
CAN I PUT THAT ON A T-SHIRT?
T
Actually, you can get a Thane shirt made. Just go to http://www.cafepress.com/
Just fill out some forms, upload your image artwork, and pay with a credit card.
CafePress also acts as as store for you, so if others buy your shirt (or sweatshirt, mug, etc.) you can get a commission.
They provide links that you can add to your own website, for the items you wish to sell.
Happy New Year everyone !
I'm sure broli doesn't mind. He's probably just away. I think he did a great job on the art work.
PL
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 28, 2008, 12:20:29 PM
I_RON IS VERY NICE AND I AM SURE HE WILL BE THERE TO MEET YOU AS HE DOES OFTEN... :D
T
Now that is one raspy old fart. Would love to meet him some time.
thaelin
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 28, 2008, 10:51:57 AM
AS OF NOW WE HAVE GONE TO A LOCAL TRANSFORMER COMPANY WHO WILL BE MANUFACTURING THE CONCENTRIC BI-COILS FOR US AND WE SHOULD SOON BE ABLE TO SHIP THEM TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO "PLAY" AROUND AND EXPERIMENT - NOT TO MENTION ANYONE WHO WANT TO BUILD A FULL SCALE ALTERNATOR...
CHEERS
Thane
How much will they cost ? I can hardly wait to order one to play with. I always look forward to the UPS delivery. ;) I guess that is why I ebay so much... lol...
YOU PEOPLE ARE HAVING TOO MUCH FUN... :D
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF UPLOADING A DOUBLE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL VIDEO.
UNFORTUNATELY MY LATEST "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS COIL" IS NOT AS GOOD A PERFORMER AS THE PREVIOUS ONE.
HERE IS THE TITLE: Double Concentric Bi-Coil Demo, Dec 30, 2008
I AM GOING TO BED.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 30, 2008, 10:41:25 PM
YOU PEOPLE ARE HAVING TOO MUCH FUN... :D
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF UPLOADING A DOUBLE CONCENTRIC BI-COIL VIDEO.
UNFORTUNATELY MY LATEST "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS COIL" IS NOT AS GOOD A PERFORMER AS THE PREVIOUS ONE.
HERE IS THE TITLE: Double Concentric Bi-Coil Demo, Dec 30, 2008
I AM GOING TO BED.
CHEERS
Thane
nice vid , nite and happy new year ;).
"EVERYONE IS BORN A GENIUS,
BUT THE PROCESS OF LIVING DE-GENIUSES THEM"
- Buckminster Fuller -
FYI - JUST FINISHED THE PROTOTYPE FOR THE COMPANY IN CALIFORNIA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xcpUlirfqw
I WISH EVERYONE A PEACEFUL, AND LEARN-FUL NUDE YEAR!
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on December 31, 2008, 09:13:42 PM
FYI - JUST FINISHED THE PROTOTYPE FOR THE COMPANY IN CALIFORNIA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xcpUlirfqw
I WISH EVERYONE A PEACEFUL, AND LEARN-FUL NUDE YEAR!
CHEERS
Thane
Lookin good Mr T... lets hope the prototype is going to people who are on side.
How long is the center core? please.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 01, 2009, 06:24:24 PM
Lookin good Mr T... lets hope the prototype is going to people who are on side.
How long is the center core? please.
Ron
HERE IS WHAT I DID...
1)
TOOK A MOT AND CUT OFF THE PLATE EXPOSING THE "E" CORE.
2)
TOOK THE COILS OFF THE "E" CORE
3)
CUT THE "E" CORE IN HALF (SO NOW I HAVE TWO THIN "E" CORES)
4)
TOOK ONE HALF AND CUT THE OUTER FINGERS OFF THE "E" CORE SO I NOW HAD A "T" SHAPE.
5)
TOOK THE 3" x 1" SQUARE INNER "T" FINGER FOR THE HV COIL.
WOUND IT AND MADE SURE IT WORKED.
6)
MOUNTED THE HV "T" COIL ON THE MOT PLATE SAVED FROM #1 ABOVE.
7)
TOOK THE OTHER HALF OF THE "E" CORE AND CUT OUT THE INNER FINGER SO NOW I HAVE TWO "L" FINGERS.
8)
MOUNTED THE TWO "L" FINGERS ON THE PLATE LIKE SO; I_I_I (HV "T" CORE IN THE MIDDLE, "L" CORES OUTER = MODIFIED "E" CORE)
9)
IMPORTANT, THE HV CORE IS TURNED 90 DEGREES AND THE "L" CORES ARE MOUNTED FLUSH UP TO THE HV CENTRE CORE ON THE BACKING PLATE. IT DOESN'T WORK BY TYPING BUT IT GOES...
"L" "T" "L"
BACK PLATE
10)
YOU CAN ALSO MOUNT THE CORE LIKE SO; _I_I_I_ (HV "T" CORE IN THE MIDDLE WITH THE TWO OUTER "L" CORES)
11)
I SEPARATED THE CORES SO THAT I COULD GET A GOOD WORKING HAND WOUND COIL. I FOUND OUT THE HARD WAY THAT IF THE HV COIL IS NOT WOUND TIGHT ENOUGH THEY DON'T WORK WELL.
12)
NOW ONCE I HAD A GOOD WORKING HV COIL WITH THE OUTER "E" FINGERS MOUNTED - I TESTED IT AGAIN AND SHAVED OFF ABOUT 1/16 - 1/8 OF AN INCH OF BOTH OUTER "E" FINGERS TO FOCUS THE COIL'S ACTION ON THE INNER HV CORE WHICH NOW PROTRUDED OUT FARTHER THAN THE OUTER FINGERS.
13)
THEN I WOUND THE HC COIL AROUND THE OUTER "E" FINGERS AND TESTED AGAIN - AND IF REQUIRED SHAVED A LITTLE MORE OFF THE OUTER FINGERS TO ENCOURAGE HC COIL INDUCED FLUX TO HEAD TOWARDS THE CENTRE HV CORE.
(YOU CAN GET THE SAME OVERALL EFFECT BY USING A 100 OHM LOAD INSTEAD OF 10 OHM BUT I WANTED TO KEEP THE LOAD THE SAME FOR ALL THE VIDEOS.)
14)
IF THE HC COIL PRODUCED TOO MUCH LENZ DECELERATION WHICH OVERPOWERED THE HV ACCELERATION I KEPT SHAVING OFF THE OUTER "E" FINGER TIPS UNTIL THE HV ACCELERATION WAS PARAMOUNT.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THE CENTRE CORE IS 3" BUT IT WILL DEPEND ON THE MOT USED.CHEERS
T
Quote from: i_ron on January 01, 2009, 06:24:24 PM
Lookin good Mr T... lets hope the prototype is going to people who are on side.
I_QUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW...?
CALIFORNIA DUDE... WHO'S SIDE ARE YOU ON?T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 01, 2009, 10:45:35 PM
5)
TOOK THE 3" x 1" SQUARE INNER "T" FINGER FOR THE HV COIL.
WOUND IT AND MADE SURE IT WORKED.
CHEERS
T
Thanks Thane.
Happy New Year to you.
Very impressive video and results. Thanks for posting.
Your directions are very clear and now I am getting a clearer idea of how this is constructed.
Can you give us an idea of the gauge of wire and number of turns used for the HV coil.
Thanks.
Dear Thane,
Could you post complete electrical circuit drawing?
Also do you convert HC coil output to DC?
Nuri
Thane next time take pictures as you go building the coils. My brain got all twisted reading the textual instructions alone.
Quote from: samedsoft on January 02, 2009, 02:40:25 AM
Dear Thane,
Could you post complete electrical circuit drawing?
Also do you convert HC coil output to DC?
Nuri
IT IS NOT COMPLICATED,
1)
HV COIL CONNECTED TO TOGGLE SWITCH AND SHORTED.
2)
HC COIL CONNECTED TO 10 OHM LOAD AND SWITCH IN SERIES.
THAT''S IT.
NO AC TO DC CONVERTING.
T
Quote from: broli on January 02, 2009, 07:50:26 AM
Thane next time take pictures as you go building the coils. My brain got all twisted reading the textual instructions alone.
I DID POST PICTURES SOME TIME AGO.
ALSO I FORGOT TO MENTION I MODIFIED (CUT UP) THE "E" CORE SO THAT I COULD MANUALLY LINE UP ALL THE FINGERS WITH THE MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
IDEALLY THE BEST METHOD WOULD BE TO MAKE A BOBBIN LIKE I_RON DID AND SIMPLY SLIDE IT ON THE MIDDLE FINGER OF THE "E" CORE AND LEAVE THE "E" INTACT (LESS AIR GAPS = BETTER PERFORMANCE) - THAT IS THE NEXT STEP NOW THAT I HAVE THE KINKS WORKED OUT.CHEERS
T
Quote from: hydrocontrol on January 01, 2009, 11:11:26 PM
Thanks Thane.
Can you give us an idea of the gauge of wire and number of turns used for the HV coil.
Thanks.
I ONLY USE 30 GAUGE WIRE FOR THE HV COILS. THERE ARE BETWEEN 1200 - 1500 TURNS I THINK (I ONLY COUNTED THEM ONCE). I USE COIL RESISTANCE AS A GUIDE AND USE BETWEEN 80 - 150 OHMS DEPENDING ON THE CORE DIAMETER AND LENGTH. CORE SIZE IS 1" SQUARE X 3" OR SO.
A TIGHTER MACHINE WOUND COIL MAY REQUIRE LESS TURNS BECAUSE IT IS COIL IMPEDANCE THAT MAKES THE HC COIL DO WHAT IT DOES SO THE INDIVIDUAL WIRES NEED TO BE CLOSE TOGETHER.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 02, 2009, 08:44:36 AM
A TIGHTER MACHINE WOUND COIL MAY REQUIRE LESS TURNS BECAUSE IT IS COIL IMPEDANCE THAT MAKES THE HC COIL DO WHAT IT DOES SO THE INDIVIDUAL WIRES NEED TO BE CLOSE TOGETHER.
T
Typo, typo, didn't you mean HV coil? Can't you get anything right? YEESH
Hehehe, Mr T, thank you so much for the excellent description. I know you have said a lot of this
before but repetition certainly helps... as you can see by the response, it brought a ray of light to
many of us. OK, got it, I am held up with "other" things at the moment but want to build a new
rotor...and good mot core are getting hard to come by.
Now one point I want to make is I am quite sure you rotor construction is playing a contributing
factor to the working of your machine... prove me wrong!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 02, 2009, 11:24:02 AM
Typo, typo, didn't you mean HV coil? Can't you get anything right? YEESH
YES THANK YOU HV COIL.
QuoteNow one point I want to make is I am quite sure you rotor construction is playing a contributing
factor to the working of your machine... prove me wrong! Ron
CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC?
BUT, I THINK YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE WE GET BETTER ACCELERATION FROM A LIGHTER PLEXIGLASS ROTOR BUT FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT - I DON'T LIKE THE EXPLODING PLEXI ROTOR EFFECTS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 02, 2009, 09:12:05 PM
YES THANK YOU HV COIL.
CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC?
BUT, I THINK YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE WE GET BETTER ACCELERATION FROM A LIGHTER PLEXIGLASS ROTOR BUT FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT - I DON'T LIKE THE EXPLODING PLEXI ROTOR EFFECTS.
CHEERS
T
I am not so sure a 'proof of concept' motor needs to be large or complex. A couple of years ago there was this guy "Mike" that made a self running Bendini type motor that had multiple windings and some odd SCR parts.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=1988.0
At first he was giving directions to people on how he did it but no one was unable to duplicate. Of course the 'this can be faked group' took hold and Mike finally gave up trying to help others while never stating he faked it. Looking at his post they were very sincere unlike most of the fakery ones. One of the problems he had was that the circuit diagram he provided was udderly confusing and did not match with the wiring from the pictures and videos. In looking back now I think one of his three windings was more like a "high voltage coil' since it had triple or more turns then the other two windings.
So lets look at a what if...
What if the HV winding was internally shorted close to the termination point and the rest of the circuit attached to that winding was really useless. Everyone was presuming the circuit actually had to do something and were trying all sorts of variations of the circuit without success. Maybe it was as simple as a shorted winding. The other two lower turned windings (HC ?) might have produced enough power to charge the capacitor and keep the motor running while the shorted "high voltage' winding helped to cancel Lenz. Maybe Mike just had it right by accident. That would explain why when he tried to duplicate the motor it would not work. Just a thought for others to ponder.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on January 02, 2009, 11:34:35 PM
I am not so sure a 'proof of concept' motor needs to be large or complex. A couple of years ago there was this guy "Mike" that made a self running Bendini type motor that had multiple windings and some odd SCR parts.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=1988.0
At first he was giving directions to people on how he did it but no one was unable to duplicate. Of course the 'this can be faked group' took hold and Mike finally gave up trying to help others while never stating he faked it. Looking at his post they were very sincere unlike most of the fakery ones. One of the problems he had was that the circuit diagram he provided was udderly confusing and did not match with the wiring from the pictures and videos. In looking back now I think one of his three windings was more like a "high voltage coil' since it had triple or more turns then the other two windings.
So lets look at a what if...
What if the HV winding was internally shorted close to the termination point and the rest of the circuit attached to that winding was really useless. Everyone was presuming the circuit actually had to do something and were trying all sorts of variations of the circuit without success. Maybe it was as simple as a shorted winding. The other two lower turned windings (HC ?) might have produced enough power to charge the capacitor and keep the motor running while the shorted "high voltage' winding helped to cancel Lenz. Maybe Mike just had it right by accident. That would explain why when he tried to duplicate the motor it would not work. Just a thought for others to ponder.
WOW - THAT IS A VERY GOOD AND IMPORTANT OBSERVATION!!!THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES DURING OUR TESTING THAT THE SYSTEM WILL ACCELERATE CLOSE TO 3000 RPM WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE INPUT TO THE MOTOR IS CONSTANTLY REDUCED ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 55 VOLTS WITHOUT THE HV COILS BEING ENGAGED WHEN IN FACT THERE WAS A SHORT IN ONE OF THEM. THESE WERE THE DAYS WHEN I RECYCLED WIRE MORE THAN ONCE.
THEN WHEN I ENGAGED THE HV COILS THE SYSTEM WOULD DECELERATE - CONFUSING THE HECK OUT OF ME.
PROPER PREPARATION OF THE CORE AND CARE IN WINDING SHOULD NOT BE UNDERESTIMATED - EVEN A SMALL NICK IN THE HV WINDING WHICH WILL GIVE VARYING RESISTANCE VALUES FROM ONE DAY TO THE NEXT - AND MAY CAUSE INTERNAL ARCING (SHORTING) CAUSING THE ENTIRE COIL TO CEASE TO FUNCTION.
CASE IN POINT: THE FIRST "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS COIL" PRODUCE OVER 1200 VOLTS AND MASSIVE ACCELERATION (IT WAS MADE WITH RECYCLED WIRE) - IT WORKED VERY WELL ONE MINUTE AND THEN IT QUIT WORKING FOR GOOD WHICH WAS HARD TO ACCEPT.
THANKS FOR THAT HC! :-*
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 03, 2009, 08:25:56 AM
CASE IN POINT: THE FIRST "CALIFORNIA CHRISTMAS COIL" PRODUCE OVER 1200 VOLTS AND MASSIVE ACCELERATION (IT WAS MADE WITH RECYCLED WIRE) - IT WORKED VERY WELL ONE MINUTE AND THEN IT QUIT WORKING FOR GOOD WHICH WAS HARD TO ACCEPT.
Try either placing the no-longer-working device in a corner by itself or outdoors for several days, or if you are antsy, try some ad-hoc degaussing (HV and magnetic) of the entire device to try to "reinitialize the patterns".
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 02, 2009, 09:12:05 PM
CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC?
BUT, I THINK YOU ARE WRONG BECAUSE WE GET BETTER ACCELERATION FROM A LIGHTER PLEXIGLASS ROTOR BUT FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT - I DON'T LIKE THE EXPLODING PLEXI ROTOR EFFECTS.
CHEERS
T
Just an observation from my my first rotor which was Delrin with a steel back plate. It didn't have any
effect yet when I went to the open steel rotor with magnet cups the effect was there... same coil.
We have touched on this before. I was sort of holding off on building a new rotor with 16 magnets
'cause I was unsure of the results. But if your plexi rotor worked I might give it a try. Lexan is of
course a better choice than plain plexi. Both Lexan and Delrin are around 10,000 PSI tensile.
Reinforced Nylon runs even higher.
Here is a rotor of this construction made with Delrin screwed to a 1/8th steel disc, mounted on a
five horse RV'ed three phase motor... drawing about 60 watts...
Ron
Hello Thane Hello I_ron,
I have done some research in my old german physics-book dated 1940 and found some explanation for
the experience you ( I_ron ) have made with this steel-backplate.
I have put all relevant info in this document with my own words and hope it contributes to our understanding of the process of this Peripiteia-Setup.
The file is placed here in the download-section on page 15.
Name of the File
E_mag-Fe-Air.doc
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on January 03, 2009, 06:56:36 PM
Hello Thane Hello I_ron,
I have done some research in my old german physics-book dated 1940 and found some explanation for
the experience you ( I_ron ) have made with this steel-backplate.
I have put all relevant info in this document with my own words and hope it contributes to our understanding of the process of this Peripiteia-Setup.
The file is placed here in the download-section on page 15.
Name of the File
E_mag-Fe-Air.doc
Regards
Kator01
Hallo Kator,
Well, live and learn! Always before in coil testing the steel back plate 'doubled' the output of the coil.
But as you so clearly state, not with Thane's Perpiteia. Thank you very much for doing the research
on this, it is much appreciated. The theory seems to fit the facts.
Vielen Dank, Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 03, 2009, 11:15:22 AM
Just an observation from my my first rotor which was Delrin with a steel back plate. It didn't have any
effect yet when I went to the open steel rotor with magnet cups the effect was there... same coil.
WERE BOTH ROTORS THE SAME WEIGHT? AND WAS YOUR RPM THE SAME IN BOTH CASES?
IF YOUR OPEN ROTOR WAS LIGHTER AND THE RPM HIGHER YOU MAY HAVE BEEN OPERATING ABOVE THE CRITICAL MINIMUM SPEED.
THE HV COILS IN THE LAST VIDEO DECELERATE BELOW 600 RPM AND ACCELERATE ABOVE IT.
QuoteHere is a rotor of this construction made with Delrin screwed to a 1/8th steel disc, mounted on a
five horse RV'ed three phase motor... drawing about 60 watts...
Ron
CAN YOU ADOPT ME PLEASE!!! :D
CHEERS
T
Hey I_ron,
ah ha, Sie sprechen deutsch ? !
Next time I post in german here.
Gute Nacht ( as it is 2 am here in germany )
Kator
Quote from: i_ron on January 03, 2009, 11:15:22 AM
Here is a rotor of this construction made with Delrin screwed to a 1/8th steel disc, mounted on a
five horse RV'ed three phase motor... drawing about 60 watts...
Ron
HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST ME FOR A NICE SETUP LIKE THAT? I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING ANOTHER PROTOTYPE TO GO WITH MY NEW MANUFACTURED COILS. ALSO WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO ASSISTING CALIFORNIA DUDE'S TEAM WITH THEIR X PRIZE CAR?
ALSO WHAT IS THE RPM @ 60 WATTS?
VIELEN DANK FUR IHRE GEBOREN HUMAN
T
Quote from: Kator01 on January 03, 2009, 08:17:56 PM
Hey I_ron,
ah ha, Sie sprechen deutsch ? !
Next time I post in german here.
Gute Nacht ( as it is 2 am here in germany )
Kator
Nien, Ich spreche Deutsch nicht....
My seven year old grandson is part German and I have been brushing up on mien Deutsch in an
effort to encourage him to learn... as his Mutter and Oma both speak the language.
Interesting to see you quoting from a '40's technical book. How many people realize that German
science and engineering was head and shoulders above the rest of the world at that time... yet in
a few short years all this intellectual property would be stolen, along with the personal, and dispersed
across the world?
Schlafe Gut,
Ron
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The theft of intellectual property is not new, but the extent and
ruthlessness of what the "wannabe" superpowers did in Germany from
1945 to 1948 was unprecedented. The United States and the Soviet Union
literally stole the entire extant store of German patents, designs,
inventions and trademarks. Germans who were not forthcoming in
informing the U.S. Occupation Forces of the existence and location of
such records could be imprisoned, punished and even threatened with
death for "insufficient reporting." To ensure that the Allies would
have an insurmountable head start in exploiting the patents, the
Germans were even forbidden to use or refer to their own inventions
after they were confiscated. The German Patent Office was closed by
the Allies and not reopened for several years. When it did reopen, the
first number assigned was 800,001, indicating that some 800,000
original patents had been looted by the Allies. As a result, in the
immediate postwar years, with Germany prostrate and robbed of its
intellectual property, America and Russia soon emerged as the two
superpowers in a bipolar world.
http://tinyurl.com/8emp65
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 03, 2009, 08:37:52 PM
HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST ME FOR A NICE SETUP LIKE THAT? I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING ANOTHER PROTOTYPE TO GO WITH MY NEW MANUFACTURED COILS. ALSO WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO ASSISTING CALIFORNIA DUDE'S TEAM WITH THEIR X PRIZE CAR?
ALSO WHAT IS THE RPM @ 60 WATTS?
VIELEN DANK FUR IHRE GEBOREN HUMAN
T
Bitte schön, but it is you that has been leading the way!
That picture is from my RV (roto verter) days and is/has been my mule and acts as a half assed dynamometer, in that core drag and lenz drag shows up as an increased watt draw somewhat
proportional to the actual numbers. Not at all accurate but handy when comparing apples and apples.
I have a three and a five horse but both are only 1740 RPM which is a bit limiting. I have had the
three horse running in the low 20's and the five runs with no load at 45 watts? but with the rotor on
it is up in the 50's... I was just going on memory and so rounded it up to 60 to be on the safe side.
But it runs at line frequency so there is no variable speed allowed, (like with a variac)
If you wish further info on this...
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Rotoverter
That said, I think your DC motors are the way forward, as for the rotor, Kator's info is of prime
importance and it seems that luck has been with you all along and why I was suggesting that you
not depart from the winning formula... or at least be aware of the part that the "skeleton" rotor and
the cups play in flux coupling. I was thinking that a steel rotor is still possible but with the stipulation
that it be fingered, that is one finger for each magnet and experiment with the amount of coupling
allowed to achieve the maximum "thane effect" follow me?
I am not really in a position to build anything for you, or california... but am willing to assist in 'other'
ways (free advise)... but that's quite a compliment, thank you.
And as for the adoption... forget it, one square head in the family is enough...es tut mir leid, LOL
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 03, 2009, 10:17:34 PM
That said, I think your DC motors are the way forward, as for the rotor, Kator's info is of prime
importance and it seems that luck has been with you all along and why I was suggesting that you
not depart from the winning formula...
Ron
SOME SMART GUY TELL ME THIS... IF YOU ARE ROTATING A DC MOTOR WITH DC INPUT AND THEN MANUALLY ACCELERATE THE SAME MOTOR - DC INPUT STILL THERE, WOULDN'T THE DC MOTOR START ACTING LIKE A DC GENERATOR SENDING DC OUT THE OUTPUT OF THE MOTOR WHIST DC IN STILL COMING IN?
THANKS
T
It sounds like a rhetorical question :D. I would say yes, There's a back emf in the motor coils which lowers the input from the source. This is why I'm curious on whether acceleration without a motor would ever become possible here and then using a motor to get energy out instead of using it as the input.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 04, 2009, 08:42:23 AM
SOME SMART GUY TELL ME THIS... IF YOU ARE ROTATING A DC MOTOR WITH DC INPUT AND THEN MANUALLY ACCELERATE THE SAME MOTOR - DC INPUT STILL THERE, WOULDN'T THE DC MOTOR START ACTING LIKE A DC GENERATOR SENDING DC OUT THE OUTPUT OF THE MOTOR WHIST DC IN STILL COMING IN?
THANKS
T
Yes, that is correct.... up to a point. The law of diminishing returns sets in and you would find that the
DC motor as a generator is not terribly efficient, 35%, 75%? but the theory is correct, as Broli says...
CHECK YOUR MAIL
Raspy Ron
Hi I_Ron,
Yes, I know this. What I did not know is this publication. Thank you.
Quoteaside from the "holocaust," which remains immune from critical studies, almost any
aspect of the war, however embarrassing to the victors (e.g., the
strategic bombing campaign), may now be studied without fear of
retribution.
I found this one interesting here. Some member here discovered this :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=976870941610001004&ei=qZxWSbjAKIiG2wLp4Kk_&q=david+cole+auschwitz (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=976870941610001004&ei=qZxWSbjAKIiG2wLp4Kk_&q=david+cole+auschwitz)
There are 2 parts. Research done by a young Israeli. Very interesting.
Now back to the book. This physics-text-book was printed in Leipzig ( East-Germany ) 1940 - 21 years before the iron curtain was build. I remember the first pictures of this event published on our first Black/White-TV-Set when I was 12 years old.
The interesting thing in this book is that the concept of ether was still valid and the word ether is used in many topics like : "Elektrische Erregung des Welt-Ã,,thers" ( electrical exitation of the world-ether ) etc.
It is a good teaching book with many revealing practical experiments which open better and easier access to the
physical principles at hand.
Especially the spark-inductor reveals some important aspects which I have transferred and translated in my last document including the way to escape the Lenz-Backlash-effect ( ! )
Ron, if you are interested to have this paragraph as a copy here, I will place it in the download-section.
I think this paragraph is very important and I will translate this if there is time.
look at the pics.
@thane : have you ever compared your coil-setup with the magneto-design of the early 30´s ? I did.
I was doing a research on magnetos for another reason. When I saw these pictures here ( please forgive me its in german, but the pics are clear) the coin dropped :
Working priciple of the Tecumseh-Magnetic-Ignition.Please notice that the secondary-coil is not shon in pic 2 and 3. Secondary is wound on the primary in this principle :
http://www.motoruf.de/mo/info/Arbeitsweise_der_Zuendanlage.php (http://www.motoruf.de/mo/info/Arbeitsweise_der_Zuendanlage.php)
Now here is a graphic of the meagneto-power compared to our standard-ingnition-systems used
in our cars. This is the reason that this magneto-ignistion is use in flight-mortors:
http://bt-h.biz/terrytweaks.htm (http://bt-h.biz/terrytweaks.htm)
The pole-wheels in the following link carry the magnets in the inner rim. The advantage of this design :
1) centrifugal forces hold magnets in place ( pole-wheel is made of brass )
2) pole-wheel has bigger mass-intertia and can be scaled to any size.
http://www.motelek.net/zundanlagen/ebay_mhkz.html (http://www.motelek.net/zundanlagen/ebay_mhkz.html)
http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/demontage1.jpg (http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/demontage1.jpg)
http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/uld1l_polrad.jpg (http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/uld1l_polrad.jpg)
These magentos were used in old german Kreidler-Motorcycles I can remember the guys working hard on the mechanical kicker in order to start the motor and saw the flicher of the light because motorcycles at that time had no batteries and the magneto was also supplying the power for the light.
Here are the Kreidler-Freaks :
http://www.kreidler-verein.de/ (http://www.kreidler-verein.de/)
Go to the "Bildergalerie" and have a look a these old-fashioned motorcycles
Very powerful. This was the reason they called it "Lichtmagnetzünder" (dynamo magneto):
Bosch-History here :
http://histor.ws/dmag/desintro2.htm (http://histor.ws/dmag/desintro2.htm)
Now, do you know what I have in mind ?
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on January 04, 2009, 03:49:36 PM
Hi I_Ron,
Ron, if you are interested to have this paragraph as a copy here, I will place it in the download-section.
snip
Regards
Kator01
I am glad you found the link interesting. I was sure you were aware of the true situation but included
that link so that you would know that there are one or two canadians also aware of the true facts.
Most canadians never stop to look at the hate laws of this country nor the deceitful people who have
put them into law. Most people are of a see no evil, hear no evil frame of mind and just read the
controlled press... http://www.davidduke.com/general/jewish-extremist-control-over-canadian-news-information_3756.html
Thus the Jewish genocide of the Palestinians goes under the banner of ridding the world of terrorists
How sad...what a coincidence that our two countries hate laws are so similar? How sad that "they"
can take a canadian from this country and imprison him in germany? ...for telling the truth.
Interesting to see in the vid how the professor was not allowed to testify in court... justice?
Fascinating book, mein Freund, yes, please post further translations when you have time...
Fascinating also your information on the magneto... this should contribute to an explanation of Thane's present generator although the HV coil does work on just a single core....
Ron
Quote:
" Thus the Jewish genocide of the Palestinians goes under the banner of ridding the world of terrorists, How sad. "
These people are not 'jews'...they only present themselves as such - in order to incite wars.
What they really are...are members of a rich 1% of the population...who are mostly satanic in nature.
They will wear which ever robe or uniform is needed in order to move the masses.
To quote famous philosopher Robert Homme -- "Look up...look way up".
Regards...
Quote from: Erfinder on January 05, 2009, 03:47:45 AM
I do..... ::)
@Thane,
I sent you a private message, and unfortunately I have not received a response. :'( I would really like to ask you a question or two......please consider emailing, or instant messaging me at:
erfinder2@yahoo.com
Its in reference to your work, I have followed with great interest. You have revealed a great deal, however a question which relates to my own research remains unanwsered. Thanks in part to the insights of a very good friend of mine (armagdn03), I believe I understand to a certain extent, the wonderful effect which is manifesting itself in your machine once certain prerequisite have been satisfied. Please email or instant message me at the email address I provided above. Please aid me in satisfying my curiosity.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Regards
CAN YOU PRESENT ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS IN THIS OPEN FORUM?
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 05, 2009, 03:17:36 AM
I don't claim to know anything about motors or even this subject but I did succeed in replicating the effect Thane has put forward.
Congratulations! It is good to see construction!
While I might not fully endorse your theories I do applaud your effort. What were you driving it with?
Did it show signs of lower input?
Ron
Buzz,
How can you get rid of the rotating disk? Can you replace it with electromagnets?
How much gain can be reasonably expected from this arrangement?
Seems as though a better core material would be beneficial - metglas? - perhaps even a mixture of ferromagnetic
particles suspended in a dielectric.
(Hmm - this looks a little like a MEG with rotating excitation rather than pulsed...)
If you change to a crossed arrangement, you could hit the brickwall (HV coil) twice.
With a multi-pole arrangement you could hit it several times. (parallel - more of B)
With a stacked, multi-pole arrangment - you hit several brick walls (series - more of A)
Just a guess, but taking the broader approach, no rotation, bias fields, and good core and I suspect that 1:100 is obtainable.
(There is recipricating generator from about 100 years ago that is similar in some respects.)
Doesn't the core vibrate?
(EDIT: added image)
Does the following image correctly explain the cavitation effect as it applies to this device?
Quote from: Erfinder on January 05, 2009, 03:47:45 AM
...
Thanks in part to the insights of a very good friend of mine (armagdn03), I believe I understand to a certain extent, the wonderful effect which is manifesting itself in your machine once certain prerequisite have been satisfied. Please email or instant message me at the email address I provided above. Please aid me in satisfying my curiosity.
...
The wonderful effect is called "cavitation", or if you follow the work of Walter Russell and many other's then the effect is "decompression" followed by "compression" which is exactly what occurs in a "direct" cavitation, so cavitation for short.
This is what they suppress and as far as I know it works with ANY medium.
Hi Thane,
I have made a small bitoroid core using iron wire for the primaries and metglass tape for a secondary. In the hope that the metglass will be a more attractive path for the SLIBE monster to take.
Many thanks for sharing your great research. A good 2009 for you. :)
Cheers, Yucca.
edit:removed question about winding config, I realised that it doesn't matter which way they are wound, polarity can be hardwire changed later if necessary.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 12:11:56 PM
Damn Grumpy, that was a lot of information. I thought we were not going to try and be helpful to Thane because:
1. He is from some third world country called "Canada" Heard of it?
2. His poetry falls well below tagging in artistic content.
3. He hasn't done anything for us lately.
Add to that list:
1. He is building stuff for the US Dept. of Energy but has no time for this thread.
2. He makes videos for NASA.
He has clearly been sucked into the blackness of the "Most Evil Empire". What's next with this guy, phallic worship, human sacrifice, puppy juggling and drinking directly from the milk jug?
I was thinking about three different ways to wind that center HV coil that would change the way it reacts but I ain't spilling nothing for Thane because I started a toroid and he wouldn't even answer a simple question verifying 500 or 5000 turns. So now it sits in my junk box half done because I don't feel like playing hope and poke with hand winding a toroid.
I am an intuitive information gatherer. I tune in, the information comes in and I tune out.
Helpful to one is helpful to all. The "help" is watered down anyway. It is still good help in the 1:100 sense, but it ain't the 1:1000 kind of help that good people truly deserve and the big secret for that is written here too, but I didn't point it out as such.
Still thinking about it, but I think you could make it a continuous action rather than reciprocating.
Buzz you crack me up! Tesla has a patent on a prime mover less generator. Just need to spin the exciter and the rotating magnetic field about the annular ring does pretty much the same thing as steam engines whirring around magnets. Fucking bozo's down at xyz power and light are too fucking retarded to think beyond replacing the bearings and packing in the old steam turbine. Otherwise they have been ripping us off and putting some exhaust up the stacks from the endless employee party's they have while watching a NON_MECHANICAL alternator work.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 12:58:57 PM
In the last image of that toroid tutorial you posted (which Thane has 2 copies of) has an outer ring that is a storage ring and it is magnetically gapped from the center primary. Is that what you mean by continuous?
No, um, having the cavitation move in a circle rather than back and forth.
It's patent #390721. In this patent he describes it as a transformer. GK and local joe did alot of work busting down a series of patents Tesla submitted around 1888 concerning this machine. Anyway there is one I reviewed further down the road that uses absolutely no rotor and is called a straight out generator using a mechanical exciter and a torroidal ring as the generator. Real interesting stuff unless you work for greedy assholes that like to sell dead trees then it becomes dangerous stuff. Even Westinghouse wouldn't back him on this one. By then they were way too busy making money manufacturing steam converters to ac power alternators. Who would need one if all you had to do is get the exciter spinning in the morning and and dust her off once or twice a week. The exciter puts out ac pulses to windings positioned around the torroid. This induces a real not apparent rotating field (monopolar too cause the bfield closes straight in on it's own behind)
of varying magnitude or apparent poles. This is like rotating a wheel with a whole bunch of paddles on it that slap the magnetic field around inside the output windings. No drag because you are staying in the inertial frame of the torroid which has shit to do with the inertial frame of the Earth. Guys messing around with permanent magnets have got to stop wasting their time. Only way to get power out of a permanent magnet is beat the crap out of it and throw it at somebody.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 02:15:40 PM
Not sure I follow. You can break the speed limit and produce a cavitation two ways. Slam two objects together at 1/2 C of cavitation or accelerate 1 object to the C of cavitation.
would this device produce cavitation is the field rotates around the ring?
http://www.magneticpowerinc.com/pdf/MPI-patentapplication.pdf
Hello Mr Heins,
I've just happened to come across your invention and i'm glad that someone has got the right idea. I've been toying with something similar to your invention. I've noticed a few sceptics have said what is the point of using a electric generator to power a motor that's powering said generator. Well if they can figure that out, I think they need to go back to school. My idea is very similar to yours but not too similar. I do believe my idea could be made to be extremely efficient. I don't want to go into any detail as I like to keep the competition strong. :D
Just thought I'd share,
Daz
Quote from: Pageygeeza on January 06, 2009, 04:01:22 PM
Hello Mr Heins,
I've just happened to come across your invention and i'm glad that someone has got the right idea. I've been toying with something similar to your invention. I've noticed a few sceptics have said what is the point of using a electric generator to power a motor that's powering said generator. Well if they can figure that out, I think they need to go back to school. My idea is very similar to yours but not too similar. I do believe my idea could be made to be extremely efficient. I don't want to go into any detail as I like to keep the competition strong. :D
Just thought I'd share,
Daz
Competition is actually
SIN, as people like to say here. Competition gives rise to greed, corruption and bankruptcy. The saying is simple here"Give and Receive."
I was hoping for my 15 mins of fame. lol
Thing is i've not patented anything, but I know that my system could be assembled to generate enough power for a house. Thing is, I never did too well at school, but I've trained my brain to visualise physics. Sounds a bit weird I know. Imagine some noob like me going to patent a machine like that, they'd just laugh at me and tell me to "bugger off". maybe I'm just being defeatist.
Daz
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 01:36:13 PM
Off topic I know, but since Thane is too busy helping the baby bakers to answer my 500 or 5000 turn question, it is somehow related.
YO BUZZTURD WINER BABY - 5000 TURDS! ER TURNS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 02:15:40 PM
Analogy:
I was in a jet flying along at 367 MPH and we flew head on into the jet stream which was also going 367 MPH. This made the jet go mach 1 and tore the wings off due to cavitation. There was one parachute and 1 gun on the jet. I took a vote and after a "quick show of hands" it was decided that I should take the parachute because I understood cavitation and someone needed to do the paperwork. It is also worth noting I was the one with the gun.
SO YOU JUMPED OUT OF A CRASHING JET PLANE AT MACH 1 - STREAKED ACROSS THE SKY LIKE A BUZZ SAW LANDED IN A PILE OF MANURE AND ENDED UP HERE SPOUTING
CRAPITATION THEORIES ALL OVER THE PLACE...?
T
Quote from: broli on January 06, 2009, 04:09:03 PM
Competition is actually SIN, as people like to say here. Competition gives rise to greed, corruption and bankruptcy. The saying is simple here"Give and Receive."
ACTUALLY IT WAS ROCKEFELLER WHO SAID, "Competition is a Sin" MEANING HE OUGHT TO OWN EVERYTHING.
@ DAZ - KEEP AT IT MAN, THERE IS MORE THAN ONE WAY TO BUZZ A CAT!
T
Quote from: Yucca on January 06, 2009, 12:09:45 PM
Hi Thane,
I have made a small bitoroid core using iron wire for the primaries and metglass tape for a secondary. In the hope that the metglass will be a more attractive path for the SLIBE monster to take.
Many thanks for sharing your great research. A good 2009 for you. :)
Cheers, Yucca.
HEY YUCCA,
THAT LOOKS REALLY GOOD!
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU AS WELL!
THE NICE THING ABOUT THAT WIRE (EVEN THOUGH IT IS LESS EFFICIENT) IS THAT YOU CAN CUT WIRES IN THE PRIMARY CORE CAUSING THE RELUCTANCE TO INCREASE AND THUS MAKE THE SECONDARY FLUX PATH ALL THAT MORE INVITING.
PLEASE WORK WITH A SPIRIT OF ENTHUSIASM WITH YOUR PRIMARY GOAL BEING THE JOY OF DISCOVERY - THAT WAY YOU CAN AVOID FRUSTRATION AND "SEE" THE IMPORTANT STUFF WHEN IT PRESENTS ITSELF TO YOU. IF YOU ARE FOCUSED ON THE END RESULT YOU MAY MISS A CRITICAL STEP ALONG THE WAY.
BEST WISHES.
CHEERS
T
DEAR ALL,
I AM POSTING YET ANOTHER THEORY BELOW (FROM ANONYMOUS) ... WHICH IS VERY WELL THOUGH OUT!
GOES ALONG WITH AETHER22'S THEORY, BUZZ'S THEORY AND NARIVASANT'S SPINWAVE THEORY...
"Whenever there are electromagnetic interactions at frequencies high enough that the 1/4 wave length is close to the gap width between rotor and stator then counter EMF is no longer counter but becomes contributing EMF. Spinwaves within magnetic materials can develop coherence and radiate electromagnetic signals at a high enough frequency to see this effect. It causes acceleration.
This is when people see "free energy" effects. "
FROM ANONYMOUS
Hi Thane,
I almost thought you weren't going to get back to me.....Thanks for your response. Sorry but I can't say that I am in agreement with your explanation, as I see something else going on here. Nonetheless, I thank you for providing me with your interpretation, and deeper insights as to why you believe a bifilar coil isn't a better alternative.
As I mentioned in the last message, I have been reviewing your findings on and off for some time now and recently have noticed the shorted high impedance windings in one of your videos. This caught my attention immediately because my project has at its core this very same shorted high impedance winding. I had been meditating over its true purpose for some time, as it relates to my own project, and was blown away when I saw your video. By the way, I learned the trick from Tesla. I am currently working on replicating one of his motors.
In something I read, you remarked that the coil in question, the HV coil, is a self excited coil. I humbly disagree with this title, I am of the opinion that the coil isn’t self exciting; it is in fact brought into action by the passing magnets in the rotor, in other words, simple induction. What makes this configuration special is that it takes induction to the next level. Meaning, speaking from my research, Tesla demonstrated that by using a shorted low resistance, high inductance winding, (choke) and driving it till its impedance property is fully manifested, conditions are established within the coil which make it possible for the establishing of an electric stress field, which after the threshold is reached, completely replaces the magnetic field. This is what I really believe is happening. An electric field will displace an approaching magnetic field. At this point, we have officially begun utilizing what could be termed “Cold Current†and or displacement current, depending on who you choose to believe. Owing to the closed loop, the potential is allowed to reach levels which are impossible to achieve in a coil which isn’t closed on itself. Potential in this use of the term relates to the size and strength of the electric field which is produced, and not to the voltage.
Lowering the frequency of the induced current corresponds to a drop in impedance, which results in the reestablishment of the coils magnetic properties, and the reduction size of the manifested electric field.
At the end of the day when we really look at and comprehend what’s actually taking place, it should be plane to see that we are not circumventing Lenz’s Law at all! We are in a chapter in the physics books where the authors chose to use invisible ink!
Recapping, this particular coil is special in my opinion because of its high inductance, low resistance, and no load (closed loop configuration). Resonance isn’t even a factor at this point!
Now in relation to the four points you brought up.
HV coil:
Delays the repelling magnetic field as per Lenz’s Law.
My two cents in blue.
If what I mentioned has any merit, then the established electric field will repel both magnetic polarities, in other words the electric field of the stationary HV coil will repel both approaching magnet polarities regardless of its own polarity, whereas, the alternating magnetic polarity of the high current coil will alternately attract and repel approaching magnet poles. There is therefore twice (way understated) as much power working against (repelling) the approaching magnets as there is attractive force.
Releasing of the delayed field causes acceleration of the rotor by
a. Pushing away the closer magnet (to the coil)
b. Attracting the next magnet on the rotor
See previous comment.
The delayed induced magnetic field from the HV coil is "fed" into the HC coil increasing the power across the load by a factor of 10x so far - 20x if you include accelerated power increase.
1. So you can see the most important component of the HV coil IS the INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD albeit delayed by 90 degrees
See previous comment. We can discuss your view in more detail if you like, but I want you to know that I sincerely see something different taking place here.
Looking forward to hearing back from you, remember what I said about our conversations, you can do what you like, just know, if I am right, you may want to test things out, comprehend and apply things yourself before you just give it away!
Regards Anonymous
CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THE KARMA THING PLEASE?
ALSO IS THAT A "BREAST MILK FREE ENERGY" AD IN THE MARGIN TO OUR LEFT?
T
That small (big in some ways) ad caught my eye too! ;D
Karma is a forum system whereby you can "applaud" someone (+1) if you like what they say or "smite" them (-1) if you don´t.
edit:
Should´ve kept my mouth shut, just got smited :D
Quote from: Pageygeeza on January 06, 2009, 04:01:22 PM
Hello Mr Heins,
snip
Just thought I'd share,
Daz
Did I miss it? share what?
Ron
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 09:31:41 PM
Yes.. there is a Walmart in hell.
YOU MEANT WALMART
ISN'T HELL???
QuoteHey Heins, you stated that the "anonymous" theory was well thought out. Ha! It only proves you have gone beyond that cheap BC weed and found the good stuff from Humbolt County made in America.
THAT'S
CANAMEXICO NOW BUCKO - AND I THOUGHT AMERICA FARMED OUT ALL THEIR MANUFACTURING TO CHINA?
BTW BC's WEED IS INEXPENSIVE
NOT CHEAP.
T
@Grumpy
The only problem I see with that patent application is (other than being ripped off from Telsa's patent 390721) is how do you get rid of the core magnetic retainance. I thought a flyback was a pretty good voltage gainer and had the sawtooth wave exploitation already worked out pretty well. Gives you a damn good electric field polarization for the buck too. I just melted down a flurescent tube screwing around with the plasma inside the bulb. Damn I swear I was watching the whole deal in slow motion. The tube melting realslow with the luminescense still glowing away as the melted glass curled slowly back towards the anode. Seemed like it took at least two or three seconds before the broken glass hit the floor. Fuck it I'm not playing with anymore mercury vapor tubes and highvoltage and dense magnetic fields anymore. Have no clue where that mercury ended up. Mercury can't be much worse than the chlorine and sodium hydroxide the bozos dump in the water round here. Telsa gives us an Ozone generator that runs off of milliamps and it goes totally unappreciated because it's easier to pump poison in our drinking water than maintain an ozone plant.
Quote from: sparks on January 06, 2009, 10:20:54 PM
@Grumpy
The only problem I see with that patent application is (other than being ripped off from Telsa's patent 390721) is how do you get rid of the core magnetic retainance. I thought a flyback was a pretty good voltage gainer and had the sawtooth wave exploitation already worked out pretty well. Gives you a damn good electric field polarization for the buck too. I just melted down a flurescent tube screwing around with the plasma inside the bulb. Damn I swear I was watching the whole deal in slow motion. The tube melting realslow with the luminescense still glowing away as the melted glass curled slowly back towards the anode. Seemed like it took at least two or three seconds before the broken glass hit the floor. Fuck it I'm not playing with anymore mercury vapor tubes and highvoltage and dense magnetic fields anymore. Have no clue where that mercury ended up. Mercury can't be much worse than the chlorine and sodium hydroxide the bozos dump in the water round here. Telsa gives us an Ozone generator that runs off of milliamps and it goes totally unappreciated because it's easier to pump poison in our drinking water than maintain an ozone plant.
I just found out that the conversion of potential to kinetic energy is what is really occurring. Stopped the damn electrons in their tracks and I still got the goods. Avramenko be blessed.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 09:31:41 PM
Hey Heins, you stated that the "anonymous" theory was well thought out. Ha! It only proves you have gone beyond that cheap BC weed and found the good stuff from Humbolt County made in America.
First off, the theory is hardly that since it is more a description of events. Secondly, the claim is made that the HV coil lags 90 degrees. Really? That isn't my experience. See attached scope shot.
Fact of the matter is, I can get the increased voltage effect just fine with only magnets passing over one HC inductor and nothing passing over the HV or other HC leg. So much for some of that well thought out anonymous theory bullshit.
"More than one way to skin a cat?" WTF? I hear my cat jump up on the piano all the time but that doesn't mean she knows how to play it - whatever that means. Bottom line, mercury is not a good substitute for toothpaste. Stop that.
Karma is like Canadian tire money only you can't buy anything until you die. In your case since you have developed negative karma, you will have a nice selection of flammable materials to choose from in hell. Yes.. there is a Walmart in hell.
Appalachian weed is the best in the world.
That makes the shorted coil a reflector - ;)
Question now is, is the reflection opposite or same?
Is current also reflected in same way as voltage or is it reversed?
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 06:42:30 AM
A "visual aid?" Pathetic, you have anything to show and anyone with two neurons can see that.
OK NOW I AM STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THE STATEMENT:
"I keep getting banned" TheBuzzT
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 07:28:15 AM
Hey he started it, I just finished it.
So as long as you are so interested in debate Heins, what about that question regarding capacity?
NOT INTERESTED IN "
SELF SERVING EGO" DEBATES AT ALL - I PREFER TO LET LAB DATA, LAB OBSERVATIONS AND PROTOTYPE PERFORMANCE AND "TEACHING" VIDEOS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
TO BE HONEST HOWEVER, I DO LIKE A LITTLE TRASH TALK AND KIDDING AROUND NOW AND THEN BUT YOU TAKE THE CAKE :-*
IT MUST BE DIFFICULT BEING SO INSECURE.
T
Thebuzz just because you're working on a replica doesn't make you less of an ass.
Wow. This thread is better than Jerry Springer! Mix it will a little "redneck weed" and it's better than satallite!
So, let's see now:
If Erfinder is correct, and the "Thane effect" is "displacement current" then there are several methods of obtaining this that are much easier to produce.
A shorted coil is a reflector of sorts - a spring - self-explanatory.
If the capacitance of the coil was "increased" - the effect will be "decreased" - try your bifilar and see for yourself. So, pretty sure that explanation isn't valid. Maybe the inductance of the coil is increased. How? Modification of the space around it - 'nough said - it actually ties into Erfinder's displacement current explanation, buit is a different aspect.
As for whether or not "cavitation" is occuring I ask this: is the HV coil polarized in one direction and then this direction is reversed, and the reversal is stronger than the normal coil collapse would be? Yes it is and that is a cavitation - I posted a simple image explaining it a page or two back. So, the basic premise of cavitation is to polarize and then reverse it suddenly and then it returns stronger - sort of like BEMF on steroids.
Hello Thane
First of all happy new year to you and all the perepitiers in this world.
Second thank's for the replication's info. I think there will be soon some more replications and results. Once the results are there , it will be time to tune, retune and fine tune the theoretical part.
As i can see in the last video, the 2 "california chrismas coils" are very powerfull in accéleration and when you disengage all the HV coils, the system don't decelerate so fast as in the previous video with only one "california christmas coils" is that a result of the coupling ??
Did you make the test of progressively decreasing the input power at full acceleration (test you mentionned on page 379) ? The result of this test would be very demonstrative.
I am working on my E core from a MOT, can i begin with a HV coil with only one winding or is it necessary to wind two ore more winding in the HV coil as you did in the California christmas coils?
All the best
Laurent
I guess a common direction of the apparent magnetic and electric field disuption is a good thing. If we wind a coil of high selfinduction and pulse it with a smart wave. By that we have a pickup somewhere along the coil and as soon as the core saturates we shut the input down. Would this give us some gain from time to voltage? Like a sawtooth input they use in a flyback for a tv.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 06, 2009, 11:15:18 PM
So here are the photos of my coil working with just one HC leg barely catching a single magnet and the last photo I taped a laminate between the HV leg and the other HC leg:
There in lies the problem... Thane's earlier coils were single pole but had you followed more recent
developments you would see that the present experiment uses three core and three magnets in
alignment. Have a look at the magneto drawing as posted by Kator and you will see what the action
should be.
You need to get more magnets on your rotor, let me know what difference this makes as I am
working on this also...
Ron
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 01:07:44 PM
Ever noticed that Sparks doesn't post to a specific person and it always kind of general in his info.?
I think he is really one of those new fangled artificial intelligence boxes developed over at NSA running on Spark stations. I'm a programmer, let's do a test shall we?
This would put him in the catagory above trolls that I mentioned a couple of weeks ago.
I see this hread is as hard to follow as ever.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 05:38:56 AM
4. Since you are so damn smart, why don't you answer this simple question for Thane:
If as Thane claims, the toroid works OU by increasing the capacitance of the coil, then where did the free energy come from that filled up that capacitance he created.
What if you open the HV coil and place a cap across it? What then?
Quote from: Erfinder on January 06, 2009, 07:44:05 PM
...
Meaning, speaking from my research, Tesla demonstrated that by using a shorted low resistance, high inductance winding, (choke) and driving it till its impedance property is fully manifested, conditions are established within the coil which make it possible for the establishing of an electric stress field, which after the threshold is reached, completely replaces the magnetic field. This is what I really believe is happening. An electric field will displace an approaching magnetic field. At this point, we have officially begun utilizing what could be termed “Cold Current†and or displacement current, depending on who you choose to believe. Owing to the closed loop, the potential is allowed to reach levels which are impossible to achieve in a coil which isn’t closed on itself. Potential in this use of the term relates to the size and strength of the electric field which is produced, and not to the voltage.
...
"Cold current" becomes "diffferent" when it encounters ferromagnetic materials. It becomes a different kind of current. So, "something" "enhances" the magnetic field rather than replaces it.
Quote from: Gobaga on January 07, 2009, 03:35:06 PM
I see this hread is as hard to follow as ever.
YES PROBABLY BETTER TO FORGET IT AND START A NEW ONE, I HAVE CHANGED MY OPINION ON HAVING MODERATOR PRIVILEGES.
Quote
What if you open the HV coil and place a cap across it? What then?
WHY INCREASE THE EXPENSE, COMPLEXITY AND REDUCE THE DURABILITY BY ADDING SOMETHING NOT REQUIRED?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 07, 2009, 05:25:40 PM
YES PROBABLY BETTER TO FORGET IT AND START A NEW ONE, I HAVE CHANGED MY OPINION ON HAVING MODERATOR PRIVILEGES.
QuoteWhat if you open the HV coil and place a cap across it? What then?
WHY INCREASE THE EXPENSE, COMPLEXITY AND REDUCE THE DURABILITY BY ADDING SOMETHING NOT REQUIRED?
CHEERS
T
So, you tried adding a cap across the HV coil and it didn't work or just didn't help?
Just trying to get my brain around this thing.
Thanks
Quote from: Gobaga on January 07, 2009, 05:49:22 PM
So, you tried adding a cap across the HV coil and it didn't work or just didn't help?
Just trying to get my brain around this thing.
Thanks
I HAVE TRIED MANY THINGS AND AT ONE POINT WE FELT THAT WE COULD COLLECT THE HV COIL'S INDUCED VOLTAGE INTO A CAPACITOR - IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY IT CAUSED DECELERATION - IT MAY HAVE BEEN THE WRONG SIZED CAP. I ADMIT I WAS NOT ALL THAT CURIOUS ANYWAY SINCE I AM ALL ABOUT MAKING IT A SIMPLE AND DURABLE AND COST EFFECTIVE AS POSSIBLE.
SOME DAY WHEN OU DEVICES ARE AS WELL KNOWN AND VARIED AS KLENEX - THE WINNING FORMULA WILL BE: CHEAP + DURABLE + EASE OF MANUFACTURE + EASE OF MAINTENANCE. WHAT COULD BE EASIER THAN COILS OF WIRE WHICH WILL FUNCTION FOR 100 YEARS IF TREATED WELL?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: woopy on January 07, 2009, 10:51:12 AM
Hello Thane
As i can see in the last video, the 2 "california chrismas coils" are very powerfull in accéleration and when you disengage all the HV coils, the system don't decelerate so fast as in the previous video with only one "california christmas coils" is that a result of the coupling ??
I AM NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BUT IF I DISENGAGED THE HV COILS WHEN THE HC COIL WAS STILL PROVIDING POWER TO THE LOAD THEN WE HAVE COGGING TORQUE & LENZ'S LAW DECELERATING THE ROTOR - IF BOTH THE HV & HC COILS ARE DISENGAGED THEN WE ONLY HAVE COGGING TORQUE PROVIDING THE DECELERATION (WHICH WOULD BE LESS OF COURSE).
Quote
Did you make the test of progressively decreasing the input power at full acceleration (test you mentionned on page 379) ? The result of this test would be very demonstrative.
NO I DID NOT SORRY I RAN OUT OF TIME DUE TO FINISHING AND SHIPPING THE PROTOTYPE TO CALIFORNIA.
QuoteI am working on my E core from a MOT, can i begin with a HV coil with only one winding or is it necessary to wind two ore more winding in the HV coil as you did in the California christmas coils?
MY
STRONG SUGGESTION IS TO WIND A SINGLE "I" COIL AND GET IT WORKING (ACCELERATING) - THEN BOLT IT TO A BACK PLATE AND THEN PUT THE TWO "L" CORES IN PLACE - COMPLETING THE "E" SHAPE.
THIS WAY IF THE "I" COIL WORKS AND THEN THE "E" DOESN'T - YOU CAN NARROW DOWN WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES.
Quote
All the best
Laurent
THANKS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU AS WELL.
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 07, 2009, 06:06:37 PM
I HAVE TRIED MANY THINGS AND AT ONE POINT WE FELT THAT WE COULD COLLECT THE HV COIL'S INDUCED VOLTAGE INTO A CAPACITOR - IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY IT CAUSED DECELERATION - IT MAY HAVE BEEN THE WRONG SIZED CAP. I ADMIT I WAS NOT ALL THAT CURIOUS ANYWAY SINCE I AM ALL ABOUT MAKING IT A SIMPLE AND DURABLE AND COST EFFECTIVE AS POSSIBLE.
SOME DAY WHEN OU DEVICES ARE AS WELL KNOWN AND VARIED AS KLENEX - THE WINNING FORMULA WILL BE: CHEAP + DURABLE + EASE OF MANUFACTURE + EASE OF MAINTENANCE. WHAT COULD BE EASIER THAN COILS OF WIRE WHICH WILL FUNCTION FOR 100 YEARS IF TREATED WELL?
CHEERS
T
Thanks much Thane. I would expect the capacitor to have a adverse effect.
@buzz and grumpy
Maybe you guys are right and my reality is some kind of matrix generated input output loop. That being stated if anyone can hack the matrix and find my address please pm me about specific changes in the program I really need at this point. This may not be too far off from the real deal cause back on some windowpane in the 70's or it could have been alot of Mr.Natural I was tripping and got stuck in this shithole dormitory room in college and figured out it was there that my true self always resided and the rest of my life was just dillusions.
Anyway I don't think Bush is a homo just some sort of fuckedup Elf and Osama isn't under any carpet he's diddling little boys like most religious fanatics end up doing. Sorry for misting the thread but I still don't see any value in getting a patent on this device cause a) I got one and their nice to put on the wall so you always remember what theiving assholes lawyers are and b) Do you realize the scaleup problems here? I guarantee the technology for cold fusion is doable demonstrated patented and licensed to any number of death corporations.
Finally NASA is leaking that they got Ion propulsion systems up and at em. Discovery channel last night yakking about moving asteroids out of alignment.
You get the voltage up there high enough you can cause shit to turn into shitwith a different atomic weight and get some fast moving ions out of it. Send em through a permanent magnetic field and recycle em so you dont loose your propellant.
Plasma engines whatever. Then a few channels down you got the supposed leader of the United States talking windmills and solarpanels. Oh well time to get programmed. NAP
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 10:12:53 PM
Aharonov Bohm effect which is an electromagnetic cavitation
which is also the conversion of potential energy into kinetic energy
That being the case, cavitation IS the "key" to anomolous energy conversion and no laws are violated.
@Buzz
You ever check out Stan Meyo. He has this coil mockup that looks just like Thane's. He also put a bunch of Tesla xformers about the size you get out of plasma novelty lights in a ring and series connected em. The units look like torroidal choke coils with a long solenoid coil going straight up placed right through the hole of the donut. (Inverted T). The primaries or chokes are all series connected and pulsed at the same time. Now inside this outer ring and a little higher up is another ring like the first. Then inside that ring is another ring.
Looks like a pretty strong compression effect inside this deal especially if the whole thing is smacked at once. Gotta feeling Tesla had his vacuum rectifier tubes in a ring too. I gotta try ringing up some vac rectifier tubes in reverse polarity pulsed mode and take some flurescent bulbs and see if I can getem to light up at different spots inside and outside of the pulsed ring. hmmm
@Buzz
Good post on the Stan Meyers. I screwed up and forgot the guys name.
Stan Deyo maybe? Gotta go but alot of these ou devices got a bunch of heavy duty inductors inside of pulsed primaries all in a ring with a core inductor in the middle.
Quote from: TheBuzz on January 07, 2009, 07:28:15 AMHey he started it, I just finished it.
TheBuzz (prometheus), why don't you leave this thread and Thane's alone.
PL
Cabinboy would prefer you did not speak to Saint Buzz in this sacreligious tone.
@Thane
My first post on this thread. Geez.
I found this paper on optimizing coil windings. Thought it may be of interest.
http://thayer.dartmouth.edu/inductor/papers/optshape.pdf
Also, you mentioned a DC motor. Standard DC motors will not be able to permit flyback capture as one would hope because they are commutator driven with only two brushes that are wider then one segment. But they are easier to use if you plan on looping back the output back to the drive end, this wold eliminate any power conversion stage. If you need a DC motor I have a 1/2 hp - 24 volts - 20 amp and 1750 rpm motor. My brother will be coming to Montreal on the 18th and return to Ottawa on the 21st. I could always leave it with him for you to pick-up or he could drop it off.
However, I am sure @Erfinder would recomment usage of a reluctance drive motor which would be perfect to drive your system using the Tesla ozone patent method and wiring it in place of the fan motor. You would be consumming next to nothing on the drive end since such a motor configured per Tesla's patent would permit real flyback. Plus you would have production on your HV/HC side, plus you would have production off of a separate working transformer. Can't get much better then that.
Quote from: wattsup on January 08, 2009, 03:45:43 PM
@Thane
My first post on this thread. Geez.
I found this paper on optimizing coil windings. Thought it may be of interest.
http://thayer.dartmouth.edu/inductor/papers/optshape.pdf
Also, you mentioned a DC motor. Standard DC motors will not be able to permit flyback capture as one would hope because they are commutator driven with only two brushes that are wider then one segment. But they are easier to use if you plan on looping back the output back to the drive end, this wold eliminate any power conversion stage. If you need a DC motor I have a 1/2 hp - 24 volts - 20 amp and 1750 rpm motor. My brother will be coming to Montreal on the 18th and return to Ottawa on the 21st. I could always leave it with him for you to pick-up or he could drop it off.
However, I am sure @Erfinder would recomment usage of a reluctance drive motor which would be perfect to drive your system using the Tesla ozone patent method and wiring it in place of the fan motor. You would be consumming next to nothing on the drive end since such a motor configured per Tesla's patent would permit real flyback. Plus you would have production on your HV/HC side, plus you would have production off of a separate working transformer. Can't get much better then that.
THANKS FOR THIS WATTSUP,
DOES ANYONE KNOW THIS GUY? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7521009332782890341&hl=en
SURE IF YOU WANT TO LEND ME A MOTOR I WON'T SAY NO TO THAT! :D
THANKS
Thane
Quote from: PaulLowrance on January 08, 2009, 11:23:39 AM
TheBuzz (prometheus), why don't you leave this thread and Thane's alone.
PL
I HAVE MADE A REQUEST TO HALI TO BAN THEBUZZ & CABINBOY - SO WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
THIS GUY MAKES SPOOKS LOOK
GOOD. :P
T
Thane
I can remember in the beginning[of this thread] and many times thereafter,members here wanting you thrown out of the park.
Practically calling you a heretic
I personally don't believe in 3rd party censorship
Tell the guy to Buzzoff if you don't want him here
Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpantsDOES ANYONE KNOW THIS GUY? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7521009332782890341&hl=en
SURE IF YOU WANT TO LEND ME A MOTOR I WON'T SAY NO TO THAT! :D
THANKS
Thane
Is this their website -->
http://www.kundelmagnetics.com/
PL
Quote from: ramset on January 08, 2009, 06:25:47 PM
Thane
I can remember in the beginning[of this thread] and many times thereafter,members here wanting you thrown out of the park.
Practically calling you a heretic
I personally don't believe in 3rd party censorship
Tell the guy to Buzzoff if you don't want him here
Chet
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THE
OU CHURCH HERETIC THING...?
I LIKE THAT. ;)
T
Heresy is an introduced change to some system of belief, especially a religion, that conflicts with the previously established canon of that belief.
The study of heresy is heresiology. The founder or leader of a heretical movement is called a heresiarch. One who espouses heresy is called a heretic.
Heresy is a religious opinion held to be contrary, to the Christian Church or that of any church, creed, or religious system.
Thane
it was a big joke[your claims]
They wanted your head on a stick
Seemed like blasphemy [almost] heresy at the very least
come on you remember!!
creeps throwing stones at the men in the field[you and Luc]
Chet
who ruined my Karma record?, I was goin for the tittle
PS you can change your vote!!
@The Buzz and CabinBoy,
please stop with your vulgar language and please report
your findings in an ethical manner.
I had some complaints about you from some other members
and if it does not stop I have to ban again.
Please calm down.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Saint Buzz,
You are a true "troll slayer" bro!
It it refreshing to see someone with the fortitude to stand in front of the trolls, hack through the BS, and give the facts.
You are welcome to The New Kingdom of Moria at any time (yeah, we killed all the trolls and rebuilt it)
Quote from: ramset on January 08, 2009, 06:40:33 PM
Thane
it was a big joke[your claims] They wanted your head on a stick Seemed like blasphemy [almost] heresy at the very least
come on you remember!! creeps throwing stones at the men in the field[you and Luc]
Chet
who ruined my Karma record?, I was goin for the tittlePS
you can change your vote!!
ACTUALLY I WAS TOTALLY NAIVE - I ONLY REMEMBER PB AND I ACTUALLY THOUGHT HE WAS JUST PLAYING DEVILS ADVOCATE. FUNNY I ALSO THOUGHT I WAS WELCOMED, SO WHAT IS THE WORD ON THE STREET NOW?
HEY - YOUR KARMA IS WORSE THAN MINE (-20) - READ ONLY SOON BUDDY! :D
T
T
I know PB was a roll
Yeah my days are numbered [who's aren't?]
a couple creeps sticking pins in my eyes
No matter what ,you are the man
God speed THANE HIENZ you are a HERO!!
Thats the word on the street, even THE BUZZ will tell you that [if he is honest]
Chet
@THANE
Please keep up the work. As a business man, I understand that even with someone who has some knowledge they can make things worse, as in thebuzz's case. I see it all the time. If, in fact, that person was as intelligent as they want you to believe they would know that their actions take away from the goal.
Buzz has an ego. He doesn't understand or care about how to present his ideas in a way which benefits all. Even though you have a smart mouth, you do not present yourself as above others. You understand the "dudes code".
I have been following your thread for a long time and feel I understand where you are coming from. Wish I could help other than just follow.
How about a free case of beer? That may slow progress for a while, but you work hard.
Please keep up the good work and smartass remarks. It's been exciting and fun to watch the progress.
Brad
ps. I am serious about the beer. PM me with your address and what kind of beer you want.
Quote from: icanbeatbob on January 08, 2009, 08:37:49 PM
Brad
ps. I am serious about the beer. PM me with your address and what kind of beer you want.
THANKS BRAD,
BUT YOU CAN'T MAIL BEER.
SOME DAY WHEN YOU ARE IN OTTAWA WE'LL GO FOR A PINT.
MAYBE JUSTME WILL JOIN US?
T
Quote from: ramset on January 08, 2009, 07:26:22 PM
God speed THANE HIENZ you are a HERO!!
Chet
ONLY 1/2 A HERO - LUC'S THE OTHER 1/2 - HE CAME ALONG AT THE EXACT RIGHT TIME AND TOOK THINGS TO ANOTHER LEVEL AND ONLY BARELY LET ME PAY FOR HIS GAS.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 08, 2009, 09:09:40 PM
THANKS BRAD,
BUT YOU CAN'T MAIL BEER.
SOME DAY WHEN YOU ARE IN OTTAWA WE'LL GO FOR A PINT.
MAYBE JUSTME WILL JOIN US?
T
What's up with that? No delivery?!! I have wine sent to me all the time. Must be a Canadian thing.
I did come up with something that I may contribute to the cause. I design printed circuit boards and have access to extremely inexpensive fabrication. If you ever need layout done from your schematic, it's on the house. It would be kinda cool to say someday, "Hey I helped with Thanes Perepiteia."
Brad
The tragic consequences of not being able to mail beer (legally).
Remember the cute woman looking into the fridge (for a beer), that you saw on this thread a number of pages back?
Because a guy can't mail beer to his friends, extra beer began building up in the fridge.
Yes, she drank that extra beer... and went from "Tomb Raider" to "Fridge Raider".
Quote from: PaulLowrance on December 10, 2008, 08:48:58 AM
Quotehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cka7qb0zoc8
That's very interesting. I did the math, and it's in agreement with the input meter -->
First stage: The input meter shows 10.9V, 0.66A, 0.42 PF = 3.0 (3.02) watts, which is in agreement with the 3W reported by the input meter.
Second stage: The input meter shows 10.9V, 0.34A, 0.54 PF = 2.0 (2.00) watts, which is in agreement with the 2W reported by the input meter.
Third stage: The input meter shows 9.9V, 0.14A, 0.70 PF = 1.0 (0.970) watts, which is in agreement with the 1W reported by the input meter.
I have no idea if the frequency is within the meters range, but the meters are showing more output than input, period.
I hope Thane Heins keeps up the good work, regardless of the outcome. There's no shame in trying. Looks like he may be on to something.
PL
Thane Heins, I hope you don't mind that I added your above video to my Major Accomplishments Award list -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=39.0
I think that video of yours is fascinating! Maybe you'll get a Nobel prize one day. ;D
For those who make it to the "Confirmed" list should get an award. What should that award be?
Regards,
PL
I added a new board for this thread and set the inventor Thane Heins
as the moderator, so he can now clean out
some annoying posts, if he wishes so.
Hope this helps.
Regards, Stefan.
wow!!!
Chet
Quote from: PaulLowrance on January 10, 2009, 12:44:49 PM
What should that award be?
Regards,
PL
A LIFE WHERE WE
ALL WORK TOWARDS HELPING EACH OTHER IN CREATING A SAFE AND SECURE ENVIRONMENT FROM WHICH TO LIVE AND GROW AND RAISE OUR CHILDREN.
THAT WOULD BE REWARD ENOUGH FOR ME.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: ramset on January 10, 2009, 07:01:31 PM
wow!!!
Chet
I am surprised you are still allowed to post comments :D - how high did your spites go?
T
COMING ATTRACTIONS...
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING TWO NEW ROTORS. ONE DC MONOPOLE AND ANOTHER AC ROTOR USING 1/2 INCH LEXAN.
I AM ALSO HAVING ANOTHER STEEL ROTOR MADE AS WELL.
I PURCHASED SOME HIGH QUALITY LAMINATIONS AND AM IN THE PROCESS OF TESTING THEM OUT WHILE MACHINE WOUND COILS ARE BEING MANUFATURED LOCALLY.
I HAVE ALSO PURCHASED 32 & 34 GAUGE WIRE TO SEE WHAT EFFECTS THEY HAVE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 10, 2009, 09:08:51 PM
I HAVE ALSO PURCHASED 32 & 34 GAUGE WIRE TO SEE WHAT EFFECTS THEY HAVE.
Why such small wire? What size wire are you using now?
One effect would be more power dissipation compared to a larger wire, say #18 AWG.
P = I
2R
So using smaller wire increases resistance thereby increasing power dissipation - reducing efficiency and increasing power lost.
Are you thinking a smaller wire means more turns thus greater effect? Will it overcome the increased power dissipation? Usually it will not.
Smaller wire/more turns is usually a means to an end: achieving a required (higher) voltage.
Quote from: capthook on January 11, 2009, 01:47:04 AM
Why such small wire? What size wire are you using now?
One effect would be more power dissipation compared to a larger wire, say #18 AWG.
P = I2R
So using smaller wire increases resistance thereby increasing power dissipation - reducing efficiency and increasing power lost.
Are you thinking a smaller wire means more turns thus greater effect? Will it overcome the increased power dissipation? Usually it will not.
Smaller wire/more turns is usually a means to an end: achieving a required (higher) voltage.
"
TO SEE WHAT EFFECTS THEY HAVE" IN ACTUAL LAB TESTING TheBuzz, RATHER THAN DEBATING USELESS THEORY.
BUT TO ESTABLISH LAB VERIFIED DATA POINTS FOR THE DESIGN.
T
Thane since you're going to start from scratch again. Please take pictures as you go. So then later you can bundle them in a nice HOW TO tutorial pdf file and link people to them. This would be a nice research log and people wouldn't need to dig through countless pages to find the info.
Quote from: broli on January 11, 2009, 08:21:49 AM
Thane since you're going to start from scratch again. Please take pictures as you go. So then later you can bundle them in a nice HOW TO tutorial pdf file and link people to them. This would be a nice research log and people wouldn't need to dig through countless pages to find the info.
YOU HAD TO SAY IT DIDN'T YOU? :P
YES I AM STARTING FROM SCRATCH YET AGAIN - NEW LOW HYSTERISIS CORES - HAND WOUND AND MACHINE WOUND (3 WEEKS DELIVERY) - NEW ROTORS, 1 WITH DOUBLE STRENGTH MAGNETS.
AND YES I AM TAKING PICTURES AS I GO.
ATTACHED IS THE CORE MATERIAL BEING USED...
T
Quote from: PaulLowrance on January 10, 2009, 12:44:49 PM
Thane Heins, I hope you don't mind that I added your above video to my Major Accomplishments Award list -->
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/forum/index.php?board=39.0
I think that video of yours is fascinating! Maybe you'll get a Nobel prize one day. ;D
For those who make it to the "Confirmed" list should get an award. What should that award be?
Regards,
PL
DEAR PAUL,
THANKS FOR THE KIND WORDS - BUT PLEASE TAKE NOTE; THAT THE DATA PRESENTED IN THOSE VIDEOS HAS NOT BEEN INDEPENDANTLY VERIFIED BY A THIRD PARTY AND I POST THINGS TO SHOW A PROGRESSION (OFTEN INCLUDING FAILURES) TO SHOW PEOPLE THAT IT IS ALL PART OF THE PROCESS.
MY CONLUSION FROM THOSE TESTS LED ME TO THE "BIG BANG" DESIGN WHERE THE SECONDARY INDUCED BACK EMF WOULD BE LITERALLY SUCKED OUT TO THE OUTER SECONDARIES AND AWAY FROM RETURNING TO THE PRIMARY.
CHEERS
Thane
T
Not the S.O. words, GEESH YOU GOT STAMINA BOY
You need one of those hand held automatic winder things [I thought broli posted on another link]
Maybe we could chip in and buy you one for Kwansa [I think that is still going on]
Anyway its a sweet device [doesn't come with LUC[not totally sure about that]
OH and BTW I think I was SMOTE 42 times [couple times right in the eye
Chet
.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on September 18, 2008, 12:43:27 AM
NOT EXACTLY BUT I DO HAVE SOME NEW TEST DATA WHICH IS POSTED HERE AT:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7QVL3H90.
THESE ARE TEST RESULTS PERFORMED TODAY FOR A CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMPANY XXX XXX XXX WHO CAME TO THE LAB FOR A DEMO AND WHO ALSO "QUIETLY" VIEW THIS FORUM.
WE ARE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING TOGETHER A COMERCIALIZATION/LICENCING AGREEMENT WITH A WIND TURBINE COMPANY SO MY "PLAYING AROUND" TIME IS NOW LIMITED AND MUCH OF WHAT WE ARE NOW DOING IS semi-SECRET - UNLESS OF COURSE OUR CUSTOMERS WANT TO PUBLICLY DISCLOSE WHAT WE ARE DOIN'G - BUT I DOUBT THEY WILL. (YOU GUYS ALL HAVE THE INFO HERE ANYWAY) ;)
I WAS ALSO INSTRUCTED BY POSSIBLE INVESTORS (AFTER VIEWING OUR LIVE DEMOS) TO
PULL MY VIDEOS OFF YOUTUBE AND PUBLICLY (LIE) AND SAY I WAS TRICKING YOU ALL AND IT IS ALL FAKE - SO FOR ANYONE EXCEPT, I_RON, LARRYC, VINCE AND PERHAPS A22 - I AM A LIAR BY TELLING YOU IT IS ALL A LIE..
CHEERS
Thane
Very similar design to the Bill Muller motor from 1996.
--giantkiller
Quote from: giantkiller on January 11, 2009, 11:24:03 AM
Very similar design to the Bill Muller motor from 1996.
--giantkiller
No comparison at all. Entirely different concept, design, function....
Ron
Quote from: ramset on January 11, 2009, 10:58:53 AM
T
Not the S.O. words, GEESH YOU GOT STAMINA BOY
OH and BTW I think I was SMOTE 42 times [couple times right in the eye
Chet
WELL, START OVER IN THE SENSE THAT WE ARE CHANGING THE CORE AND THEN THE ROTOR AND THEN THE MOTOR AND THEN GETTING RID OF THE MOTOR ALTOGETHER (X PRIZE CAR & WIND TURBINE) - WORKING OUR WAY UP TOWARDS OPTIMIZATION.
RON - YOU MAY HAVE SOMETHING WITH YOUR ROTOR THEORY... 2 DAYS OF TESTING WITH LEXAN ROTORS = ZERO ACCELERATION AND OFTEN DECELERATION - SO I WILL MAKE ANOTHER LEE VALLEY WHEEL BARREL WHEEL ROTOR AND RETEST (WHILE WAITING FOR MY NEW "STATE OF THE ART ROTOR TO BE DELIVERED).
SORRY CHET, I THINK I SMOTE YOU A FEW TIMES AS WELL - NOT WEARING MY GLASSES AND THINKING IT SAID
SMILE :)
INSTEAD OF SMOTE? :(
T
It wasn't just me then...I thought it was 'smile' also...and I'm gradually facing the fact that my eyes aren't what they usta be, and I need glasses.
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on January 11, 2009, 07:43:19 PM
It wasn't just me then...I thought it was 'smile' also...and I'm gradually facing the fact that my eyes aren't what they usta be, and I need glasses.
Regards...
WE SEE WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE...
I THOUGHT IT WAS KIND AND NICE AND "EVOLVED" TO SEE TWO FORMS OF "GOOD" ONLY.
T
I am also pleased when my first inclination is a positive expectation...particularly in view of my background and all the forensic political sites I visit.
Regards...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 06, 2009, 07:44:05 PM
DEAR ALL,
I AM POSTING YET ANOTHER THEORY BELOW (FROM ANONYMOUS) ... WHICH IS VERY WELL THOUGH OUT!
GOES ALONG WITH AETHER22'S THEORY, BUZZ'S THEORY AND NARIVASANT'S SPINWAVE THEORY...
hmmm... I beg to differ ... I have had reason to do some recent pulse studies on large coils (3,600 m of 0.3mm wire 0.5H). You can forget about any analysis based on lumped circuit design. Think about this -- if you apply a pulse to a coil and the pulse is a fraction of the transmission time of the coil then what inductance does the coil exhibit?
Clearly as the pulse is just entering the coil (it has not completed even one turn yet) it sees almost zero inductance. Then as the pulse progresses along the wire it sees an increasing inductance.
Now think about the opposite end of the coil to where you applied the pulse -- long before the current ever reaches it it will experience the rising magnetic field and there will be an induced counter pulse generated.
The net result is that you have to think of a very large coil as a solid state transmission medium when you are applying fast pulses to it... and there are some very strange results if you look closely at what is really happening.
Now -- in a motor configuration where you have very fast rising magnetic field... This is speed up by the presence and interaction of a low impedance coil... you find that you are already in the realm of having to consider the transient (transmission) response of the large coil.
Sigh -- In for a penny, in for a pound ... Get rid of the physical rotor and speed up the "motor" an order of magnitude or a few and see what happens. This moves you into a regime where the "large" coil really is large and the "anomalous" effects can be greatly amplified.
Oh -- and a rotating field has angular momentum in case you are worried that without a rotating mass it wont work. You just need an efficient way of generating the rotor field. It's never been published but I have a simple way for creating a passive three phase resonator -- this is just one way of creating your fast rotor. ... but don't rule out doing it mechanically -- I made a serpentine (not published) motor a while back that was both efficient and had a large number of poles -- 64 from memory. It really isn't hard to crank up the rise time on a mechanical version at least an order of magnitude from where you are -- and then you can probably get another order of magnitude with the right magnetic (low inductance) coil design.
PS - *really* think out of the box. Look closely at the interface of the two coils. You wont find any free energy in classical theories or any simple variation of them... don't even assume that you are dealing with electrons flowing through copper conductors as the source of anomalous energy.
@CRANKYpants
Thanks for the lam specs.
Found their web site.
http://www.magmet.com/page1.php
Lots of goodies.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on January 11, 2009, 08:38:00 PM
PS - *really* think out of the box. Look closely at the interface of the two coils. You wont find any free energy in classical theories or any simple variation of them... don't even assume that you are dealing with electrons flowing through copper conductors as the source of anomalous energy.
THANKS FOR THIS MARK - AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED THERE IS
NO BOX (I AM OPEN TO ANYTHING) AND I DON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME (GETTING LOST) TRYING TO FIGURE WHY IT WORKS - BUT RATHER HOW TO CONTINUE MAKING IT WORK - AS WE FINE TUNE THINGS AND MOVE FORWARD.
T
NEWS FLASH !!!
WHEN DOING SOME RESEARCH - FOLLOWING UP ON AN INTRODUCTION KINDLY OFFERED BY NURI - I FOUND THIS...
WHICH COULD BE INVALUABLE TO BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER REPLICATORS FOR THE PRIMARY:
"SATURABLE REACTORS
Saturable reactors utilize the large change between unsaturated and saturated permeabilities of their cores to delay current for a preset period of time. Similarly, once saturated in the forward direction, they act as a diode temporarily blocking current in the reverse direction. (see figure, below)" http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_1_3.htm
FOR ANY "SMARTY PANTS" OUT THERE A THYRISTOR CIRCUIT MAY ALSO WORK? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyristor
OR EVEN A TRIAC? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIAC
CHEERS
Thane
Dear Thane,
As you increase RPM,
1. You have higher voltage collected in the HC coil correct?
2. And as RPM increases frequency of the collected AC signal will increase?
3. Core has to be compliant with the higher frequency AC signal?
4. Can you present the AC signal collected on HC coil with Oscilloscope as the rpm increases?
Lastly, Have you ever tried to disconnect the power supply of the Primary motor after 2000 rpm (when system is accelerating)?
Nuri Temurlenk
God Bless Humanity
Istanbul, TURKEY
Quote from: samedsoft on January 12, 2009, 03:01:15 AM
................ Have you ever tried to disconnect the power supply of the Primary motor after 2000 rpm (when system is accelerating)?
Nuri Temurlenk
God Bless Humanity
Istanbul, TURKEY
Better still, buffer the motor and generator rotor axle connection (transmission) with a one way bendix drive clutch between them.
That way, when you disconnect the power, the motor itself can come to a complete standstill without impeding the rotational inertia and / or additional torque of the rotor. (barring a tiny amount of friction from the bendix clutch bearing).
If the coils are introducing additional RPM dependant torque, the generator rotor would be much more likely to continue accelerating without the added burden of the inertial weight of the motor (and friction from its bearings).
Cheers .... KneeDeep
Hello,
in addition to the topic of saturable-reactor puls-compression I found this here :
http://www.mag-inc.com/pdf/twc-s7.pdf (http://www.mag-inc.com/pdf/twc-s7.pdf)
Regards
Kator
QuoteDear Thane,
As you increase RPM,
1. You have higher voltage collected in the HC coil correct?
CORRECT
Quote2. And as RPM increases frequency of the collected AC signal will increase?
CORRECT
Quote3. Core has to be compliant with the higher frequency AC signal?
CORRECT - FROM 30 Hz - 1050 Hz
Quote4. Can you present the AC signal collected on HC coil with Oscilloscope as the rpm increases?
YES - WILL TRY TO GET IT DONE TODAY.
QuoteLastly, Have you ever tried to disconnect the power supply of the Primary motor after 2000 rpm (when system is accelerating)?
YES AND WITH ONLY ONE COIL CAUSING ACCELERATION IT STOPS WHEN THE MOTOR IS DISCONNECTED.
BEAR IN MIND THAT OUR FOCUS IS AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE - WHERE THE ROTATIONAL TORQUE IS SUPPLIED BY THE VEHICLE INERTIA OR A WIND TURBINE -
NON DECELERATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN OUR ONLY GOAL - ACCELERATION IS THE UNIVERSES WAY OF CATCHING YOUR ATTENTION.
T
Quote from: hoptoad on January 12, 2009, 03:49:19 AM
Better still, buffer the motor and generator rotor axle connection (transmission) with a one way bendix drive clutch between them.
That way, when you disconnect the power, the motor itself can come to a complete standstill without impeding the rotational inertia and / or additional torque of the rotor. (barring a tiny amount of friction from the bendix clutch bearing).
Cheers .... KneeDeep
AWESOME KNEEDEEP -
WHEN CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
THANKS FOR THE OFFER AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!
T
Quote from: Kator01 on January 12, 2009, 07:40:39 AM
Hello,
in addition to the topic of saturable-reactor puls-compression I found this here :
http://www.mag-inc.com/pdf/twc-s7.pdf (http://www.mag-inc.com/pdf/twc-s7.pdf)
Regards
Kator
NICE ONE KATOR!
WHAT DO YOU THINK OF STARTING A NEW THREAD?
"SATURABLE-REACTOR OR PULSE COMPRESSION FOR THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER"T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 11, 2009, 07:29:28 PM
RON - YOU MAY HAVE SOMETHING WITH YOUR ROTOR THEORY... 2 DAYS OF TESTING WITH LEXAN ROTORS = ZERO ACCELERATION AND OFTEN DECELERATION - SO I WILL MAKE ANOTHER LEE VALLEY WHEEL BARREL WHEEL ROTOR AND RETEST (WHILE WAITING FOR MY NEW "STATE OF THE ART ROTOR TO BE DELIVERED).
T
Awesome Mr Tee, message number 3934 on page 394!!! You have the most prolific list running!!!
A dozen of my 'other' lists are DEAD... keep up the good work
Well that is good news on the Lexan rotors, oops, I mean sorry to hear about the Lexan rotors...
gee, thats too bad, hehehe. Kator and I tried to tell you....now was that with the KJ countersunk
magnets as well as the LV magnet in a cup?
Your rotor completed as far as I can go without the cups, my rotor done and I have made cups for mine the same as I did on my original one. Remember I said the bought cups are to close to the
OD and act as a short to the flux? Well mine are 1 1/8th" inside diameter and will have a plastic
spacer around them, good to have mine up to your level of completion as I want to have a shoot out before I ship yours... incidentally you can post the pics of yours if you wish...
Your cups 'should' come soon, this week? and I can "get it done". Just have to make the plastic wind deflectors to day...with any luck.
Damn, I hate these kind of jobs... I always get side tracked on "improvements". I took the IRD
dynamic balancing course (back when I used to work and do full time balancing to Naval standards) and all these rotors I build have always bothered me when it came to the balancing of them. This one no exception... well in researching the problem I have "found" the ADXL320 accelerometer chip, WOW, the answer to a maidens prayer. So Sunday, my day of rest, found me designing a balancing machine.... can I keep your rotor another two or three weeks while I build a balancing machine? LOL
Ron
Damn snow never lasted? back to warm rain and will have to think about cutting the grass soon...
Quote from: i_ron on January 12, 2009, 11:30:48 AM
Well that is good news on the Lexan rotors, oops, I mean sorry to hear about the Lexan rotors...
gee, thats too bad, hehehe. Kator and I tried to tell you....now was that with the KJ countersunk
magnets as well as the LV magnet in a cup?
SORRY GUYS GOT IT WORKING TODAY. :D
LEE VALLEY MAGNETS IN CUPS.
QuoteYour rotor completed as far as I can go without the cups, my rotor done and I have made cups for mine the same as I did on my original one. Remember I said the bought cups are to close to the
OD and act as a short to the flux? Well mine are 1 1/8th" inside diameter and will have a plastic
spacer around them, good to have mine up to your level of completion as I want to have a shoot out before I ship yours... incidentally you can post the pics of yours if you wish...
WILL DO - I AM WINDING A "NEW CORE" COIL TOMORROW.
QuoteSo Sunday, my day of rest, found me designing a balancing machine.... can I keep your rotor another two or three weeks while I build a balancing machine? LOL
KEEP IT IF YOU THINK YOU WANT TO MAKE IT BETTER.
FYI - HERE IS WHAT WE DO DOWN HERE IN THE OTTAWA VALLEY WHEN WE AIN'T SHOVELLING SNOW...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBS6jh_UJV0
CHEERS
T
@ iRon,
I have a couple of extra MOT's that I can give you for free, if you are interested. ( I seem to recall you live near Coquitlam.)
All windings are fully functional, but you can use them just for the cores if you wish.
Just let me know if you want them.
Hey Thane,
these fiddlers are great, I like this.
Well, concernig your proposal of starting a new thread : Who would moderate this ?
Usually I would only moderate a topic I am involved in on a practical side, meaning that I would explore this topic practically - building the electronics myself etc.
Here a person must have some experience in this old-fashioned design.
But this is not possible at that time as I have to look for new project-work in my field of business (it-consultant ).
I will focus on involving some very well versed professionels in your findings - especiallly the implementaion or better integration of your coil-setup in the old magneto-technique.
There is another document I will upload here in the file-section which could be a good starting-point for whoever dares to get involved into this saturable-reactor-thingy.
Look for the file named : "MagneticAmplifiersPrinciplesAndApplications1960.pdf"
The role here- as i experience this here over the last months - is a bit different, thane, its hard to explain.
I am connecting dots and doing basic research.
Regards
Kator
and co
Quote from: derricka on January 12, 2009, 07:53:12 PM
@ iRon,
I have a couple of extra MOT's that I can give you for free, if you are interested. ( I seem to recall you live near Coquitlam.)
All windings are fully functional, but you can use them just for the cores if you wish.
Just let me know if you want them.
That would be great derricka... only problem is I am over on the Island, Victoria to be exact.
Not over to the big island very often but if you are over this way or know someone who is coming over?
Thanks, Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 12, 2009, 07:28:52 PM
KEEP IT IF YOU THINK YOU WANT TO MAKE IT BETTER.
CHEERS
T
I am disappointed, I was trying to twist your crank and you never went for the bait, I must be slipping!
Good news on the Lexan success. In the new LV catalog they show just what I was on about...
Magnets with a plastic surround, See, the OD is 1 1/4". I wouldn't recommend these though as
the magnet is only 15/16ths AND THEY HAVE A HOLE right through them... if you use a STEEL
bolt through this type of magnet you effectively SHORT out the flux, right? I hope you didn't use
a steel bolt on the KJ magnets... you have to use a non magnetic stainless steel bolt. You could
use a brass bolt but your strength is way down and doesn't compare in strength with Grade 8
Allen bolts that I will be using on the "cup has the counter bevel" model.
This is from the January 2009 Lee Valley catalog... if you look closely you can just make out the
magnet, a plastic ring, then the steel cup. In the old style, which unfortunately I have ordered for
you because thats what you have been using, the cup comes right up the side of the magnet and
acts as a short.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 12, 2009, 09:19:52 PM
I am disappointed, I was trying to twist your crank and you never went for the bait, I must be slipping!
YOU ARE NOT SLIPPING - SINCE I AM HAVING ANOTHER STEEL ROTOR WELDED AS WELL - SO NOW I WILL BE TESTING;
OLD STEEL ROTOR
YOUR NEW I_MANAL ULTRA BALANCED STEEL ROTOR
LEXAN ROTOR
LEXAN MONO-POLE ROTOR
QuoteGood news on the Lexan success. In the new LV catalog they show just what I was on about...
Magnets with a plastic surround, See, the OD is 1 1/4". I wouldn't recommend these though as
the magnet is only 15/16ths AND THEY HAVE A HOLE right through them... if you use a STEEL
bolt through this type of magnet you effectively SHORT out the flux, right?
YOUR THEORY COMES UP A BIT "SHORT"
I BOUGHT SOME OF THESE AND THEY WORK FINE AND YOU DON'T SHORT OUT THE FLUX YOU INTENSIFY IT'S STRENGTH WITH A STEEL BOLT. THOSE MAGNETS HAVE A PULL STRENGTH OF OVER 60 LBS WITH THE CUPS AND AROUND 30 WITHOUT. ALL THAT BEING SAID I STILL USED STAINLESS STEEL #10 BOLTS BECAUSE THEY ARE EASIER TO DEAL WITH.
QuoteThis is from the January 2009 Lee Valley catalog... if you look closely you can just make out the magnet, a plastic ring, then the steel cup. In the old style, which unfortunately I have ordered for you because thats what you have been using, the cup comes right up the side of the magnet and acts as a short.
Ron
THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH THESE MAGNETS IS THEY ARE ALL MOUNTED THE SAME WAY IN THE CUPS - I.E ALL NORTH POLES SO YOU CAN'T GET AC WITH THEM.
I NEED TO GO BACK TO AND FOLLOW THE TRIED AND TRUE FORMULA OF CHANGING
ONE PARAMETER AT A TIME SO SAME STEEL ROTOR WITH WORKING MOT CORE, THEN NEW CORE MATERIAL AND SO ON.
THEN WHEN YOUR ROTOR GETS HERE I WILL HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 13, 2009, 06:58:10 AM
THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH THESE MAGNETS IS THEY ARE ALL MOUNTED THE SAME WAY IN THE CUPS - I.E ALL NORTH POLES SO YOU CAN'T GET AC WITH THEM.
T
It was a lesson in what a "proper" cup looked like. Yes the holding strength is increased but you are
not after holding strength. You want a maximum flux transfer to the coil core. This does not happen
if the sides of the cup are in contact with the magnet. All I was saying is, this is how I build my cups...and lee vee has 'finally' caught on as to how to build a proper cup!
Here is a pic of progress, your rotor is the ugly one, mine is shown on top... with the home made
cups. The magnet with the plastic around is from the old rotor and is too long for these single
magnet cups. I have to make new plastic rings yet and drill extraction holes through the rotor and
cup...It is static balanced and might even get to give it a run up today... no coil core for it yet either.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 13, 2009, 11:15:49 AM
Here is a pic of progress, your rotor is the ugly one, mine is shown on top... with the home made
cups. The magnet with the plastic around is from the old rotor and is too long for these single
magnet cups. I have to make new plastic rings yet and drill extraction holes through the rotor and
cup...It is static balanced and might even get to give it a run up today... no coil core for it yet either.
Ron
RON THAT IS CRAZY NICE WORK...!
COME ON PEOPLE GIVE IT UP FOR MASTER RON!ON ANOTHER POSITIVE NOTE - WE ACHIEVED ACCELERATION WITH OUR NEW CORE MATERIAL TODAY WITH A LEXAN ROTOR - SO THAT QUESTION IS ANSWERED.
Thane
Top notch work is like normal for xrR,
You are a lucky man Thane.
Looking Good Ron, wut are the elongated slots for though?
-=Edit sorry my bad, it's probably a bike disk brake right?=-
Still keeping an interested eye on this place!
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on January 13, 2009, 07:40:15 PM
Top notch work is like normal for xrR,
You are a lucky man Thane.
Looking Good Ron, wut are the elongated slots for though?
-=Edit sorry my bad, it's probably a bike disk brake right?=-
Still keeping an interested eye on this place!
Steven
It follows from my first rotor, which had a solid backing plate, not working
but when I made a skeleton rotor in imitation of the wheel barrow wheel ... it worked
So this is an experiment to duplicate the openness of the barrow wheel ... in plate.
Look at a Thane barrow wheel rotor and you can see that there is no flux bridge between
magnets, only from the rim at the outside...
Thanks for the kind words...
Ron
Quote from: Nali2001 on January 13, 2009, 07:40:15 PM
Top notch work is like normal for xrR,
You are a lucky man Thane.
Looking Good Ron, wut are the elongated slots for though?
-=Edit sorry my bad, it's probably a bike disk brake right?=-
Still keeping an interested eye on this place!
Steven
I AM SIMPLY BLOWN AWAY - CALIFORNIA (X PRIZE) DUDE IS WATCHING.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 13, 2009, 09:29:44 PM
I AM SIMPLY BLOWN AWAY - CALIFORNIA (X PRIZE) DUDE IS WATCHING.
T
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
If it doesn't work as well as the barrow rotor then its just a pretty paper weight, right?
R
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 12, 2009, 07:49:23 AM
AWESOME KNEEDEEP - WHEN CAN YOU SEND ME ONE?
THANKS FOR THE OFFER AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!
LOL .... Fair Question !
It'd cost more to send you one than what it would to buy one new locally. But no need for a new one for experimental purposes.
Try leaning on some local friends who are into motor-cycles, if you know any. You might be able get a second hand motor-cycle bendix drive starter motor for nothing.
Modify that. Throw away the coil armature and housing and use the remaining shaft / clutch assembly.
Cheers
P.S. suggestions always offered free. :P
Hello All,
There has not been much time that i have made a post ( http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.3760 ) that during much study of the Perepiteia motor I concluded then that the apparent accelaration, was originated from the core losses drag lifted by the shorting of the HV coil.
Having studied hard from then the Bedini, Adam, and Newman motor elementary designs, i have concluded that this may not be the case.
In fact in may actually provide INPUT expressed as accelaration of the rotor.
I want you to confirm this: Have you ever put a high impedance (as high as suitable) and low resistance (as much as possible) coil near the spinning magnets. This setup MUST make the maximum accelaration. Does it?
Have you tried it?
ps: A typical Bedini "Energizer" or HIGH VOLTAGE COIL in you case, will be a 30 ohms coil, made of 21 gauge wire! That's a lot of Inductunce and impedance. Making a coil weighing about 2 pounds!
Quote from: baroutologos on January 14, 2009, 06:16:52 AM
Hello All,
There has not been much time that i have made a post ( http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.3760 ) that during much study of the Perepiteia motor I concluded then that the apparent accelaration, was originated from the core losses drag lifted by the shorting of the HV coil.
Having studied hard from then the Bedini, Adam, and Newman motor elementary designs, i have concluded that this may not be the case.
In fact in may actually provide INPUT expressed as accelaration of the rotor.
I want you to confirm this: Have you ever put a high impedance (as high as suitable) and low resistance (as much as possible) coil near the spinning magnets. This setup MUST make the maximum accelaration. Does it?
Have you tried it?
ps: A typical Bedini "Energizer" or HIGH VOLTAGE COIL in you case, will be a 30 ohms coil, made of 21 gauge wire! That's a lot of Inductunce and impedance. Making a coil weighing about 2 pounds!
RIGHT NOW OUR HV COILS ARE TYPICALLY 150 OHMS OF 30 GAUGE WIRE BUT WE ARE CONSTANTLY EXPERIMENTING WITH DIFFERENT GAUGES AND # OF TURNS TO FIND THE BEST MIX.
BUT AS YOU SAY THE COIL OUGHT TO HAVE HIGH ENOUGH IMPEDANCE (TO REDUCE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD SUFFICIENTLY) AND LOW ENOUGH RESISTANCE TO PRODUCE A SUITABLE DELAYED MAGNETIC FIELD.
I THINK IT IS SAFE TO PUT THE "SHORTED HV COIL CAUSING ACCELERATION BY REDUCING CORE LOSS THEORY" TO BED NOW - BUT EVEN IF IT WASN'T - ANY LOSS REDUCTION IS A BENEFIT.
CHEERS
T
RIGHT NOW OUR HV COILS ARE TYPICALLY 150 OHMS OF 30 GAUGE WIRE BUT WE ARE CONSTANTLY EXPERIMENTING WITH DIFFERENT GAUGES AND # OF TURNS TO FIND THE BEST MIX.
BUT AS YOU SAY THE COIL OUGHT TO HAVE HIGH ENOUGH IMPEDANCE (TO REDUCE THE INDUCED MAGNETIC FIELD SUFFICIENTLY) AND LOW ENOUGH RESISTANCE TO PRODUCE A SUITABLE DELAYED MAGNETIC FIELD.
I THINK IT IS SAFE TO PUT THE "SHORTED HV COIL CAUSING ACCELERATION BY REDUCING CORE LOSS THEORY" TO BED NOW - BUT EVEN IF IT WASN'T - ANY LOSS REDUCTION IS A BENEFIT.
CHEERS
T
Hello again Mr. Heins
I think i have a better understanding in device you made.
According my point of view, the fast spinning of the magnets produces high voltage pulses to the HV coil. Since the magnet passes the dead spot over the coil and volatge drops to zero, there MUST BE a peculiar property of the inductors that create a current from the sudden voltage pulse that somehow amplifies far more the initial pulse in terms of energy. In your case when the voltage is applied, (magnet incomming) almost no current flows thanks to inductunce, but when voltage pulse collapses (magnet is over coil), a current must be present (as a high voltage/ high current spike) that will create a coil polarity opposite to the magnet.
I do not know, exactly, but i have a feeling that is the case. I will study furthermore and see what i can find.
To all replicators (including the creator) Please consider those suggestions and report findings :
,
1) I trust that if you apply a suggested typical 30ohms resistance of 21 AGW as a high voltage coil, the results will be astounding. (Bedini energizer) besides those specifications, the higher the inductunce and the lower posible the resistance the better the results.
2) Consider putting an OSCILLOSCOPE connected to your shorted HV coil. This will clarifies things even further.
3) An easy task. Connect the HV to fluorescence bulbs. They have to be lit (at some degree) while the accelaration effect goes on
4) Consider putting a very heavy flywheel (heavy mass to the rotor - can be placed on the other free end of the grinder...) and view results..
I do not try to be smart, but I reached to such conclusions by endless reading. (Since i lack any laboratory...)
One more thing i do not yet understand, but i am working on it... Why it is not sustainable? Has to be a why...
Regards
Hi Baroutologos,
concerning your explanation on the hv-coil-operation :
from what I have measured with my scope I can say that voltage is not very high if the the hv-coil is under a 10 ohm load. I was measuring a 150 Ohm coil which was magnetically coupled to the hc-coil which was triggered by another hc-coil. If you short the hv-coil you will see no voltage at all that should be clear. It is not possible to measure any voltage without any reference-point. You only can do this with a 1 to 10 Ohm Load. By this you can see the phase-shift of the current generated in the hv-coil in relation to the current of the hc-coil.
The current you are able to observe is the final state into which eddy-currents ( which you will not be able to measure ) develop in a certain time-span ( see Dixon-Papier.pdf )
Also something important : You can not measure the magnetic-back-drag directly since the trigger - and generated fields are coupled both in the specific space- and time-frame ( here it is the air-gap at the time a magnet is passing by) . You only notice the variation of input-current ( prime-mover) and in this case accelleration instead of decelleration of the drive-wheel
For a better understanding of this eddy-current-process I suggest that you go to the Download-Section here in the "General documents and files" page 15 and read the "Dixon-Papier".
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=cat1;tpstart=140 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=cat1;tpstart=140)
You must be logged in to have acess to this download-section.
The clue of the process is described in the first 3 pages.
Best Regards
Kator01
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 14, 2009, 06:55:28 AM
I THINK IT IS SAFE TO PUT THE "SHORTED HV COIL CAUSING ACCELERATION BY REDUCING CORE LOSS THEORY" TO BED NOW - BUT EVEN IF IT WASN'T - ANY LOSS REDUCTION IS A BENEFIT.
CHEERS
T
Good news Mr Tee, The cups came this afternoon! I hope they didn't push the dogs too hard?
Couple places near the end of the run here where there is no snow, pretty rough sledding... ::)
Anyway, the pieces seemed to fit the ugly one and managed to stay in place at 3600 RPM.
Just a conventional coil in the test... the old rotor with 12 magnets in six stations put out 47 volts.
MY rotor with the 18 magnets in 18 stations pumped out 99.2 volts,( with the plastic surround!)
YOUR new rotor only managed a dismal 90.7 volts
So there is what, 10% improvement with the 1 1/4 OD cup and plastic surround?
Shown here at speed but stopped by the flash... Canon A590, love it
I will need an addy for shipping... don't want this cluttering up the shop, lol
Ron
THAT'S REALLY NICE WORK THERE RON!
I WILL TAKE THE UGLY ONE ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!
I CAN'T WAIT TO TAKE MY NEW ROTOR TO CALIFORNIA WHEN I GO. :)
THE ONLY PROBLEM IS IT MAKES ME SHY TO SHOW MY WORK. :P
HERE IS MY NEW LEXAN ROTOR & CORES.
THANKS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 14, 2009, 07:23:48 PM
THE ONLY PROBLEM IS IT MAKES ME SHY TO SHOW MY WORK. :P
HERE IS MY NEW LEXAN ROTOR & CORES.
THANKS
T
Your new rotors are not too shabby? Looks pretty good, like the plastic around the magnets, 8)
How fast you bin running them?
Ron
Edit: more to the point, how does the output compare between the Lexan and Barrow?
Quote from: i_ron on January 14, 2009, 07:39:14 PM
Your new rotors are not too shabby? Looks pretty good, like the plastic around the magnets, 8)
How fast you bin running them?
Ron
Edit: more to the point, how does the output compare between the Lexan and Barrow?
AFTER SEEING LUC'S EXPLODING RAZOR SHARP PLEXI-GLASS ROTOR FROM HELL - I AM A NERVOUS NELLY, SO I HAVE NOT GONE ABOVE 1600 RPM.
I STILL THINK THE STEEL ROTOR IS SUPERIOR AND I AM HAVING ANOTHER BARROW ROTOR WELDED TO SEE FIRST HAND.
THE STEEL ROTOR CONNECTED TO THE STEEL MOTOR & AND I_RON BASE ATTRACTS THE HV COILS DELAYED FIELD AND IMPROVES PERFORMANCE IN MY VIEW - BUT WE WILL SEE SOON.
YOUR ROTOR IS SIMPLY THE ICING ON THE CAKE!
WHAT I WAS TESTING TODAY WAS VARIOUS WIRE GAUGES 26, 28, & 30 GAUGE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 14, 2009, 08:00:08 PM
AFTER SEEING LUC'S EXPLODING RAZOR SHARP PLEXI-GLASS ROTOR FROM HELL - I AM A NERVOUS NELLY, SO I HAVE NOT GONE ABOVE 1600 RPM
T
Better to be safe than sorry....
Butt you could run each at say 1600 and record the output with the same coil
Or you could send a motor and rotor to the PM and/or the defense minister and ask them to run
it up to an over speed condition for you, as to certify it was safe?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 14, 2009, 09:03:49 PM
Better to be safe than sorry....
Butt you could run each at say 1600 and record the output with the same coil
Or you could send a motor and rotor to the PM and/or the defense minister and ask them to run
it up to an over speed condition for you, as to certify it was safe?
Ron
THE PROBLEM IS;
IF THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IT'S SAFE - YOU CAN BE DAMN SURE IT'S
NOT LIKE:
THALIDOMIDE,
VACINES,
FLUORIDE,
RENDERED MEAT PROTEIN,
BOVINE GROWTH HORMONE
ETC.
AND ON THE OTHER HAND - IF THEY SAY IT'S DANGEROUS IT'S BECAUSE SOMEONE WHO'S FINANCIAL INTERESTS ARE THREATENED ARE PAYING THEM TO SAY IT - SO IT CAN BE BANNED - LIKE VITAMIN C OR KILLED LIKE NATIVE CANADIANS.
AND THAT'S THE SORRY TRUTH.
QuoteBut you could run each at say 1600 and record the output with the same coil
I_RAN EACH COIL FROM 1400 RPM AND NOTED THE BEST ACCELERATION.
T
@ iRon
How are you getting such clean holes in the Lexan? Are you using Forstner bits? Coolant? Flame polishing? or are you just sandwiching your Lexan between a couple of scrap sheets? Enquiring minds want to know.
You are certainly impressing us all with your wunderbar Schön fabrication skills.
Quote from: derricka on January 14, 2009, 10:21:06 PM
@ iRon
How are you getting such clean holes in the Lexan? Are you using Forstner bits? Coolant? Flame polishing? or are you just sandwiching your Lexan between a couple of scrap sheets? Enquiring minds want to know.
You are certainly impressing us all with your wunderbar Schön fabrication skills.
Thank you!
Lexan actually machines quite nicely without the chipping and shattering of plexi.
But the secret is the home made mill, lol, I don't have a picture of a lexan disc in the mill but what I
do is go around with a spot drill and mark the 18 holes... then put it in the drill press and spade drill
it, in my case to 1 1/8th... then back in the mill and bore it to the final size with a boring bar and single point tool set to the final size of the 1 1/4 cup plus 3 or 4 thou for clearance...
Aren't you glad you asked? LOL
Ron
PS: Steven... I should have said, I have to ship it air freight so the slots are to make it lighter, OK?
Quote from: i_ron on January 14, 2009, 11:26:30 PM
But the secret is the home made mill, lol
Great picture Ron.
Ditto for a good chuckle, because I also happen to making a home made mill. Four days ago, I bought a compound slide table on sale for 99 bucks at Busy Bee. I am going to bolt this onto my drill press. If I get really ambitious, I might even bolt on some bicycle gears and a couple of stepper motors I took out of my old inkjet printer. Dirt cheap CAM (if I succeed!).
Quote from: derricka on January 15, 2009, 01:22:03 AM
Four days ago, I bought a compound slide table on sale for 99 bucks at Busy Bee.
Small world... that slide came from Busy bee, the head is an old Fiat differential, a little more rigid
than a drill press. Hard to compete though now with the price of equipment... my toy lathe that I made
did me for years but last spring I bought a 300 by 914 lathe from House of Tools... wow what a treat!
Less than 3k bux on sale, but I am lucky in that my wife understands the need for more toys... ;D
Good luck
Ron
HERE IS SOME GOOD BED-TIME READING FOR EVERYONE OUT THERE IN DEBT LAND:
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/downloads/How_I_06.pdf
T
Thanks Thane...an excellent piece.
That should be required reading for everybody before they are permitted to vote.
Regards...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 15, 2009, 09:20:15 PM
HERE IS SOME GOOD BED-TIME READING FOR EVERYONE OUT THERE IN DEBT LAND:
http://www.davidickebooks.co.uk/downloads/How_I_06.pdf
T
I hesitate to do this, but given the importance of this issue, I'll make an exception...
To give the doc that Thane mentions even more credibility and impact, here are some excerpts from U.S. court cases (many being Supreme Ct) regarding the term 'income'...
“No attempt has ever been made by Congress to define with specificity the term ‘income’ as it is used in the sixteenth amendmentâ€
Conner v. U.S, 303 F. Sup.1187, 1189.
“The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code,â€
U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404.
The reason that Congress has never defined “income†is because it has no authority to do so,
“Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution.â€
Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, page 206
Congress CANNOT redefine a word used in the Constitution once the Sup.Ct. has defined that term!!!!
The meaning of income, as used in the 16th Amendment and in all of the taxing statutes in Title 26, is confirmed by a number of Supreme Court decisions,
which have never been reversed or repealed. The 1921 Supreme Court decision of Merchant’s Loan & Trust Co v.Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509, could not have not said it more clearly when it held on pages 518-519:
“The word (income) must be given the same meaning in all of the Income Tax Acts
of Congress that was given to it in the Corporation Excise Tax Act (of 1909) and what
that meaning is has now become definitely settled by decisions of this court.â€
Therefore, the meaning of “income†in our revenue laws means a corporate profit as is clearly stated in the above decision and as confirmed in the following five other Supreme Court decisions.
"As has been repeatedly remarked, the Corporation Tax Act of 1909 was not intended to be and is not
in any proper sense an income tax law. This court had decided in the Pollock Case that the income tax law of 1894 amounted in effect to a direct tax upon property, and was invalid because not apportioned according to population as prescribed by the Constitution. The act of 1909 avoided this difficulty by imposing not an income tax, but an excise tax upon the conduct of business in a corporate capacity, measuring, however, the amount of tax by the income of the corporation…" (Citations omitted). Stratton’s Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 414. (Emphasis added)
'Certainly the term “income†has no broader meaning in the 1913 Act than in that of 1909
(See Stratton’s Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 416, 417), and for the present
purpose we assume there is no difference in it’s meaning as used in the two acts.'
Southern Pacific v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330 (1918)(Emphasis added)
'It was not the purpose or effect of that (16th) Amendment to bring any new subject within
the taxing power. Congress already had power to tax all incomes. But taxes on incomes
from some sources has been held to be “direct taxes†within the meaning of the constitutional
requirement as to apportionment…. “Income†has been taken to mean the same thing as used
in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, in the Sixteenth Amendment and in the various
revenue acts subsequently passed.' (Citations omitted)
Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U.S. 170, 174 (1926) (Emphasis added)
'And before the 1921 Act this Court has indicated (see Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, 207),
what it later held, that “income,†as used in the revenue acts taxing income, adopted since the Sixteenth Amendment, has the same meaning that it had in the Act of 1909.'
Merchant’s Loan &Y Trust Co. v. Smientanka, 255 U.S 509, 519;
see Southern Pacific Co. v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330, 335
Burnet v. Harmel, 287 U.S.103, (1932)
'Whatever difficulty there may be about a precise and scientific definition of ‘income†it imports,
as used here, something entirely distinct from principal or capital either as a subject of taxation or
as a measure of the tax; conveying rather the idea of
gain or increase arising from corporate activities.'
Doyle v. Mitchell Bros., 247 U.S. 179, (1918) (Emphasis added)
Therefore, there can be no doubt that “income†within the meaning of the U.S. revenue laws means gain or profit “arising from corporate activities.†Therefore, “corporate profit†and “income†in the “constitutional sense†both mean the same thing.
After many years of researching this on my own and reading all of these and many more court cases, I came to the conclusion that what these excerpts are saying is exactly what it sounds like... Wake up America!!!
-Mark
Now back to your irregularly non-scheduled program...
;)
The reason this machine shows energy conversion is at the expense of time.
A coil of highselfinduction (t's highvoltage coil) is gonna take more time to have it's induced voltage appear at the terminals. Therefore when they are shorted the current is going to flow at a different time which allows the sliding magnets to receive a push instead of a buck. The low voltage coils are only inductively linked to the highvoltage coils and will experience the magnetic field disruption of the hv coils and not that of the prime mover. Timing is everything when it comes to Lenz Law. Induced voltage effects do not have to occur at a time when the prime mover magnets will be subjected to a lenzlaw induced current. Lenz only states that a current will arise in the coil that will produce a magnetic field that opposes the prime mover magnetic field. IT DOES NOT SAY WHEN.
Tesla discovered this many many years ago and I studied a patent of his that exploits this principal. The energy is coming from the atomic dipole moment alignment which is generated by it's spin. In a permanent magnet this is done already for you. Tesla demonstrates that electromagnets can be used also but the core magnetic response to an exciter dc pulse gets kinda tricky.
Hi Mr Kator01
It seems that your technical knowledge on the electricity and its technical aspects is far superior than mine :) But please consider the following. THERE has to be an peculiar property of the inductors when pulsing. otherwise, Mr Heins could not experienced any accelaration.
Regarding the oscilloscope, my mistake, perhaps i did not expressed clearly. Can you measure please, with that equipment, the voltage wave when the two legs of the coil are open ? (rotor full speed, HV coil unshorted of course) If so can you post a picture of that? -
(someone in a similar setup noticed that the voltage output of the HV coil was greatly amplified (x100) when a rectifier high voltage bridge was connected to the HV coil and the negative *ground* leg was actually grounded!! I think perhaps the bridge is not even necessary. just groundind the one coil leg and take measure... :) )
Secondly, with the o-scope, can measure current wave? I think it can. Can you serialy connect the o-scope to the HV coil (thus shorting the coil and having accelaration) - again rotor full speed. Can you post the those current images? - No resistor needed.
Last, but not least, i think we are dealing with a phenomenon that the official science text books are delibertely have ommited. If that is so, reasons could vary from political to financial :)
I looking forward your findings
Kind regards,
Baroutologos
ps: keep the good work!
NEW PICS, NEW STEEL "BARROW" ROTOR, NEW "E" CORE, NEW EFFICIENT CORE.
.
.
.
.
CHANGING COILS TO GET BEST PERFORMANCE - 30 G @ 160 ohms, 28 G @ 67 ohms, 26 G @ 30 ohms.
T.
NEW VID HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPnbPaMyzbI
CHEERS
T
I_RON'S NEW ROTOR AND NEW CORE VID HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cybrS6oyMUQ&feature=channel_page
THANKS RON! :-*
T
houlala!!!! :o
once again BRAVO it is totally amazing
I am slowly taking off my chair and looking forward for the next video
Laurent
I was calculating the incremental increase in RPM. and it seemed to me it had an exponential behavior. The steps kept getting bigger and bigger the faster it got. This shows that there is indeed a point where it will run off by itself without any input until a break stops either through induction or mechanical. This is truly interesting. Thane I know you thinking about this and that your whole wind energy talk is just a cover to have some investors to develop it further to reach that point of no input acceleration.
Hello,
Nice Video with Ron's rotor. (masterpiece indeed). So, i wanna notice one thing...
the more the HV coil the merrier ;D (imagine putting as many as half magnets - hey it's just my oppinion)
No more comments...
Regards,
Baroutologos
Hi everyone!
I'm reading your thread for almost 2 month and it's amazing the progress you made with this device. In your last video the rotor accelerate from 1200rpm to 3170rpm! It's almost 2000rpm of difference! And the voltage input was reducing but what appened to the current input? Increase? Decrease? Did you ever put it on a dyno just to be sur that the increase of rpm is not reducing the torque of the rotor?
I think about something that can explain what we see with this concept, I don't know if it's a good explanation but i'll try to do my best. When we put electricity in a coil, the magnetic flux take a little time to grow at it's full power, according to Len'z law, this coil produce the same flux but opposite side so this flux is combatting the *input* magnetic flux. Maybe Len'z law as the same response time that the magnetic field to grow so when we are experiencing with high rpm, the response time of Len'z law is to low and it's effect take place when the magnet has already passed the crucial point and then the Len'z law is pushing away this magnet not keeping it as the normal effect...
Sorry for my bad english i'm a french canadien and this is my second language
fred
Dear Thane,
Can you pictorize HV coil windings and which combinations you have had best results so far? (Gauge and Ohm, L values)
Will you use the other side of the rotor?
God Bless Humanity,
Nuri Temurlenk
TURKEY
I notice in the videos (beyond the mechanical harmonic problems definitely frequencys to be avoided) that about the time the motor reaches it's full load rpm it gets shutoff. The proof in the pudding is if the rotor can be driven faster than the input rotating magnetic field. If so you got yourself an induction generator feeding off the permanent magnets and a winner as long as you don't need 20,000 pounds of copper and steel to light up a 100watt bulb.
@Thane
I have the same type of question regarding the power used by the drive motor, which in itself is not the best efficiency. I am wondering if you took amperage readings off the drive side and also if you have a load on the stator output if you have amperage reading on that side also.
If the output coil is wound as one wire, that should explain the 500 volts of the output but I am wondering about the amperage available and if your next output coil can have the same number of turns but as 6 or more coil windings all put in parallel, that should increase your amperage.
Based on your design, I took the liberty last night to draw a design I had in mind as soon as I saw your set-up but did not have time to elaborate. I am always looking to exploit as much of the drive side energy as possible. Regular drive motors are nefarious is energy wastage.
The idea is to use both sides of the drive coils A to turn two magnet rotors B that impart output on two stator disks C. Only the two magnet rotors would be on bearings and the center shaft does not turn, plus the one drive and two stator disks are fixed and do not turn. All that is needed is to pulse the drive coils to make it work.
Oh yeh, my brother is in town and tomorrow I will be giving him a DC motor to bring to Ottawa as you mentioned you needed one. I will PM you with Archie's cell number so you can call him as of Tuesday and make arrangements. He's a real good guy and knows alot of people in Ottawa. Especially if you are looking for any kind of nick-nacks, he's the guys to ask. Anyways, when you're finished with the motor (and if it is still alive) just call him and he can pick it up or whatever.
wattsup
Quote from: broli on January 18, 2009, 11:29:42 AM
I was calculating the incremental increase in RPM. and it seemed to me it had an exponential behavior. The steps kept getting bigger and bigger the faster it got. This shows that there is indeed a point where it will run off by itself without any input until a break stops either through induction or mechanical. This is truly interesting. Thane I know you thinking about this and that your whole wind energy talk is just a cover to have some investors to develop it further to reach that point of no input acceleration.
THAT MAY BE TRUE BROLI - BUT BEAR IN MIND THAT AS THE MOTOR ACCELERATES IT ENTERS ITS OPTIMAL TORQUE REGION -
THAT'S WHY I CONSTANTLY REDUCE THE INPUT VOLTAGE - TO MAKE SURE I TAKE THE MOTOR OUT OF THE "EQUATION" AND KEEP THE ACCELERATION RELEGATED TO THE HV COILS.
I AM CURRENTLY UPLOADING A NEW VIDEO WITH HV COILS.
I WILL ADD ANNOTATIONS AFTER I SHOVEL MY DRIVEWAY.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: sparks on January 18, 2009, 03:01:59 PM
I notice in the videos (beyond the mechanical harmonic problems definitely frequencys to be avoided) that about the time the motor reaches it's full load rpm it gets shutoff. The proof in the pudding is if the rotor can be driven faster than the input rotating magnetic field. If so you got yourself an induction generator feeding off the permanent magnets and a winner as long as you don't need 20,000 pounds of copper and steel to light up a 100watt bulb.
I AM ALONE IN THE LAB ON THE WEEKENDS AND I HIDE BEHIND A BRICK WALL DURING HIGH SPEED TESTING - BUT IT IS HARD TO SHOOT VIDEO FROM THERE.
T
Quote from: fred2890 on January 18, 2009, 01:18:27 PM
Hi everyone!
I'm reading your thread for almost 2 month and it's amazing the progress you made with this device. In your last video the rotor accelerate from 1200rpm to 3170rpm! It's almost 2000rpm of difference! And the voltage input was reducing but what appened to the current input? Increase? Decrease? Did you ever put it on a dyno just to be sur that the increase of rpm is not reducing the torque of the rotor?
Sorry for my bad english i'm a french canadien and this is my second language
fred
CHER FRED,
THE INPUT CURRENT MUST DECREASE OR WE WOULD BE FINITO! ;)
S'IL VOUS PLAÎT EXCUSE MON ITALIENNE - JE SUIS UN ANGLAIS QUÉBÉCOIS ET MA LANGUE EST ENCORE UN PEU CARRE. :-[.
SALUT
T
NEW HIGH CURRENT COIL LOADING VID HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1E2Ms2198&feature=channel_page
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 18, 2009, 10:41:26 PM
NEW HIGH CURRENT COIL LOADING VID HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1E2Ms2198&feature=channel_page
CHEERS
T
Well congratulations on a good test, congratulations on a great forum!
4000 messages on a 400 page list, wow, nobody can match that, you can be very proud!
Seems to be holding together, I ran it at 3600 several times. My best guess is it should do 5 k
safely and start losing the cups at 7.5...but I've been wrong before... I thought I had made a mistake
but I hadn't....lol
edit: to be on the safe side, weigh a cup and magnet and give the engineering staff the weight,
30 grams, the radius, 4.5 inches, and the fact that it is a grade eight 10-32 Allen screw...they,
or one of our fellows on the list, should be able to give you a ball park figure....
Ron
houlalalalala!!! :o
no more word
after the taking off of yesterday , i crash back on my chair and bite my lips......Perepitea is a very dangerous sport
that's too good !!
at this point i am sure that, if you put , for example, a clutch between the rotor and the prime mover, you will never dare to let the rotor rotate freely at 3100 rpm ............ just for fun....hi hi!!! ::)
bravo bravo and bravo and many thanks for sharing
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on January 19, 2009, 05:49:08 AM
houlalalalala!!! :o
no more word
after the taking off of yesterday , i crash back on my chair and bite my lips......Perepitea is a very dangerous sport
that's too good !!
YES I_RON'S NEW STRAIGHT AND STIFF ROTOR IS A THING OF BEAUTY! ;)
Quoteat this point i am sure that, if you put , for example, a clutch between the rotor and the prime mover, you will never dare to let the rotor rotate freely at 3100 rpm ............ just for fun....hi hi!!! ::)
YOU KNOW THERE WOOPY YOU MAY BE RIGHT AFTER ALL THAT IS AN 8 POUND ROTOR AND QUITE A GOOD FLYWHEEL.
I MAY RUN IT UP TO FULL SPEED AGAIN TODAY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS?
Quotebravo bravo and bravo and many thanks for sharing
Laurent
SHARING IS THE KEY TO SUCCESS - NOT ONLY HERE BUT THE ENTIRE WORLD.LET'S HOPE WE CAN LEARN IT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE?
ALL FOR ONE, AND ONE FOR ALL.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 12:01:14 AM
Seems to be holding together, I ran it at 3600 several times. My best guess is it should do 5 k
safely and start losing the cups at 7.5...but I've been wrong before... I thought I had made a mistake
but I hadn't....lol
Ron
SO WHEN CAN I EXPECT MY 6 SPOKE JOB?
OR DO YOU INSIST THAT I "WASTE TIME" PROVING IT TO YOU FIRST WITH THIS SPOKED CAST I_RON ROTOR HERE? :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X5FvSVdf58&feature=channel_page
THANKS
Thane
Awesome stuff thane! i'd be working on a replica right now but i gotta get a car and get back on the road, then the replica comes! should be starting replica in a month or so i hope.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on January 19, 2009, 07:16:46 AM
Awesome stuff thane! i'd be working on a replica right now but i gotta get a car and get back on the road, then the replica comes! should be starting replica in a month or so i hope.
I CAN SEND YOU THIS STEEL "BARROW" ROTOR HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPnbPaMyzbI&feature=channel_page
THE COST IS $300 CAD AS SHOWN + SHIPPING.
SHOULD BE AROUND $350 IF YOU WANT IT OVERNIGHT.
ALSO, I CAN SEND "I" CORE MATERIAL TO WHICH YOU CAN SLIDE A 30 GAUGE BOBBIN ON AND YOU ARE OFF TO THE RACES.
ADD 50 BUX IF YOU WANT THE CORE AS WELL, ADD 40 MORE IF YOU WANT THE PRE-WOUND COIL.
IT SEEMS LIKE ALOT BUT IT WILL SAVE YOU WEEKS IF NOT MONTHS IN REPLICATION TIME AND IT SOULD WORK RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: samedsoft on January 18, 2009, 02:52:26 PM
Dear Thane,
Can you pictorize HV coil windings and which combinations you have had best results so far? (Gauge and Ohm, L values)
Will you use the other side of the rotor?
God Bless Humanity,
Nuri Temurlenk
TURKEY
BEST RESULTS?
THAT COULD BE YEARS BEFORE WE KNOW...
CURRENTLY I AM USING A DOUBLE HV COIL WITH 160 ohms/coil.
QuoteWill you use the other side of the rotor?
IF I_RON LET'S ME ???
T
Quote from: wattsup on January 18, 2009, 03:51:24 PM
@Thane
Oh yeh, my brother is in town and tomorrow I will be giving him a DC motor to bring to Ottawa as you mentioned you needed one. I will PM you with Archie's cell number so you can call him as of Tuesday and make arrangements. He's a real good guy and knows alot of people in Ottawa. Especially if you are looking for any kind of nick-nacks, he's the guys to ask. Anyways, when you're finished with the motor (and if it is still alive) just call him and he can pick it up or whatever.
wattsup
LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR
PRIME
MINISTER.
THANKS
T
Thane is the torque on the rotor always the same? That is if you double the radius will you have more torque and thus faster acceleration?
hoho!! ;D
thanks for the reply and looking fowartd for the future promising results
I am also very interested to buy your borrow rotor + new material E and I core + one or two hv coils and eventually a complete bicoil to replicate the system as soon as possible
let me know if it is possible and how to organise the deal
regards
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 19, 2009, 06:41:18 AM
SO WHEN CAN I EXPECT MY 6 SPOKE JOB?
OR DO YOU INSIST THAT I "WASTE TIME" PROVING IT TO YOU FIRST WITH THIS SPOKED CAST I_RON ROTOR HERE? :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X5FvSVdf58&feature=channel_page
THANKS
Thane
I feel I must be firm with you, but yes, I remember that rotor. What you fail to show is 18 magnets
on it? Can't see in the vid.
You are like a kid in a candy store... eat whats in your mouth first. That rotor was meant as a MULE.
IT has development possibilities. You have not exhausted it's life yet. When you have a firmer
understanding then we can talk. For example that rotor can be made double sided. I won't repeat
my arguments and suggestions I made off list but lets wait until your feet touch the ground again.
Ron ... having fun with you :P
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 11:20:13 AM
snip
Here is a number, 87
The significance? that is the weight in pounds that it took to break the #10-32 bolt at the end of
a 45 inch arm where the fulcrum was two inches beyond that. That is a ratio of 2:45 or 22.5 times
87 pounds which is 1957 pounds. So the bolt fails at nearly a ton of weight!
For the metric folk that is 889.5 Kgs. So for a 100% safety factor "we" should limit the force on this
bolt to 444 Kg.
OK all you math wizards at what rpm does a 40 gram weight, at a radius of 115 mm, weigh 444 KG?
Picture of the destructive test setup....
Ron
I may take you up on that offer Thane but it'll be a month to 2 atleast. Need a vehicle first and then we'll talk.
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 02:34:51 PM
OK all you math wizards at what rpm does a 40 gram weight, at a radius of 115 mm, weigh 444 KG?
OK, I will answer my own question...
using the formula "Force = .000341 WRN* (N squared)
http://www.muller.net/mullermachine/docs/clutch1.html
I get 155 pounds for the 1.5 ounce weight at 3600 RPM
As half of 1957 is 978 pounds that is not to be exceeded, then155 is very reasonable.
Our cut off speed will be 9000 RPM. This works out to 971 pounds.
This is for a two times safety factor...if you want a three times safety factor then red line at
7000 RPM which puts 587 pounds on the bolt.
You are welcome
Ron
PS: the least all of you can do is to check my math... I have not always put decimal points in
the right place... but to correct my earlier statement... it should be good to 7000 RPM and start
to chuck magnets at a little over 12000 RPM
Edit: note that the 1957 lb break point is not that of the bolt alone, but includes the fact that the
magnet cup is clamped against the disc so as long as the bolt is intact one must include the
friction of the clamped area under the cup... so keep your bolts at the proper torque, thats is
don't exceed Young's Modulus of Elasticity when tightening the bolts.
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 07:09:15 PM
As half of 1957 is 978 pounds that is not to be exceeded, then155 is very reasonable.
Our cut off speed will be 9000 RPM. This works out to 971 pounds.
This is for a two times safety factor...if you want a three times safety factor then red line at
7000 RPM which puts 587 pounds on the bolt.
You are welcome
Ron
edit: note that the 1957 lb break point is not that of the bolt alone, but includes the fact that the
magnet cup is clamped against the disc so as long as the bolt is intact one must include the
friction of the clamped area under the cup... so keep your bolts at the proper torque, thats is
don't exceed Young's Modulus of Elasticity when tightening the bolts.
OK - LET'S SEE IF I GOT THIS RIGHT?
I GOT MY '57 CHEVY BELAIR VERT WHICH IS BASICALLY HALF...
I CAN REV IT TO 9000 RPM BUT TO BE SAFE - LIMIT TO 7000...
TO KEEP THE BOLTS ON WITH ALL THAT TORQUE - I OUGHT TO GET YOUNG OVER HERE ASAP?
RIGHT?
T ???
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 11:20:13 AM
I feel I must be firm with you, but yes, I remember that rotor. What you fail to show is 18 magnets
on it? Can't see in the vid.
You are like a kid in a candy store... eat whats in your mouth first. That rotor was meant as a MULE.
IT has development possibilities. You have not exhausted it's life yet. When you have a firmer
understanding then we can talk. For example that rotor can be made double sided. I won't repeat
my arguments and suggestions I made off list but lets wait until your feet touch the ground again.
Ron ... having fun with you :P
I DUNNO MAN - FIRST YOU WANT TO MOUNT MY COIL,AND NOW YOU ARE GETTING FIRM WITH
ME! YIKES,
I MEAN - I LOVE YOU LIKE A FATHER BUT
NOT FATHER BENDOVER OR FATHER PHILMECREVICE
ANYWAY, I EAT WITH BOTH HANDS...!
HERE SHE BE! ;)
DO YOU WANT VIDEO WITH THAT?
FYI: YOUR ROTOTR IS 1000 TIMES BETTER!
THANKS
T
.
.
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 02:34:51 PM
OK all you math wizards at what rpm does a 40 gram weight, at a radius of 115 mm, weigh 444 KG?
OK, I will answer my own question... Our cut off speed will be 9000 RPM.
PS: the least all of you can do is to check my math...
Very nice rotor i_ron with incredible results from Thane.
Yes I get 9291RPM using metric numbers.
Note:
Speed of a thrown mag would be approx 400 kph :o
Equation used:
==================
centrifugal force in Newtons = m*r*w*w
m = mass in kg.
r = radius in m
w = rotational speed in rad/sec.
Known values:
==================
fmax = 444kg equates to 4354.308N in earth gravity
m = 0.04 kg
r = 0.115 m
Working:
==================
fmax = m*r*w*w
4354.308 = 0.04 * 0.115 * w * w
4354.308 / (w * w) = 0.0046
w * w = 4354.308 / 0.0046
w = sqrt(946588.696)
w = 972.928 rad/sec
RPM = w / (2*PI) * 60 = 9291 RPM
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 19, 2009, 08:08:33 PM
TO KEEP THE BOLTS ON WITH ALL THAT TORQUE - I OUGHT TO GET YOUNG OVER HERE ASAP?
RIGHT?
T ???
Hehehe, just wanted to prove I could bull sh**t with the best of them. Non mechanical people often
make the mistake of over tightening or under tightening their nuts. In this case, if you under tighten
there is not the required clamping friction... and if you over tighten you would stretch the bolt past
its elastic point, Young's Modulus. When you do that when you loosen off the bolt it doesn't collapse
down to its original length. So if when it was running and the bolt loosened just slightly there would
be no clamping pressure left on the cup.
But I see that to over cum your fears of high RPM, a new design is required where the rotor has a shallow female locating pocket that the male spigot of the cup would fit into. This would make it
pretty well fool proof, which is what I was aiming for.
Oh I see what you were babbling about now with the six spoke rotor. BUT I still don't know if I would
approve of this design. You see the inner row of magnets is going at such a slow velocity that one
throws away any advantage with a small diameter like we are using. It would work quite well at
the diameter of the sundance generator <http://www.befreetech.com/techpage.htm> SCAM SCAM
Not saying yours is a scam, just using the magnet layout as a comparison.
So If you come up with some winning numbers I might think about it more... maybe after the crash...
I will have more time and more need for $$$.
Ron
Quote from: Yucca on January 19, 2009, 08:48:39 PM
Very nice rotor i_ron with incredible results from Thane.
Yes I get 9291RPM using metric numbers.
Thanks Yucca, that makes me feel better. And that is half the breaking force which "should" allow
some error margin, still 7K might be deemed safer.
Incidentally Mr Tee, my cups come in at 40 grams and your present cups are only 30 grams so even
better, speed wise...
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 19, 2009, 09:41:44 PM
Thanks Yucca
Ron
That was a good exercise as I had never stopped to figure out the forces involved in such a seemingly simple device as a rotor at speed.
So much so that it scared the shit out of me, to think that that insignificant little lump could weigh a
half a ton and vacate the premises at 400 Km/hour is mind numbing. There would be no stopping it!
Witness the the recent failure of a universal joint on a monster truck in Seattle where a six year old
boy was killed while sitting high up in the stands, hundreds of feet away.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/17/national/main4731468.shtml
So first thing this AM I got busy and added a further bolt to the cups on my rotor and put in a stop
work order to Thane until his is brought up to a safer standard.
The little #10-32 bolt has a good strength at nearly 2000 lbs but it is like having all your eggs in one
basket were the failure of a 30 cent component could lead to devastation. I have chosen to add a
1/4 fine thread grade 8 bolt to the cup from the back. This bolt, by it's self, has a tensile (breaking)
strength of 5450 lbs, to get sheer I have taken 57% for 3000 lbs, the two together then have a failure point of 5000 lbs.
If we take half of this... 2500 pounds ... this would indicate a red line speed of 14500 RPM
Or, to be on the safe, conservative side, a maximum working speed of 9500RPM
Are we all in agreement?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 20, 2009, 04:13:28 PM
Are we all in agreement?
Ron
HUMORPaypal just notified me that my credit card will expire and to please update...
It came in January but I hadn't looked closely at it...the new expiry date is
11/2012Do you think somebodies trying to tell me something? LOL
Ron
@i_ron
Your work is impressive, the new fasteners look and sound much safer! Yep the numbers are pretty scary, probably even dangerous after ricochet. and I suppose if it threw one it might cause such an imbalance that some more might come off.
The spec for the Ryobi grinder is unloaded speed of 2850RPM with two stones on it. Speeds beyond that on wall current (whilst drawing output coil power) show something good is going on. Speeds close to or beyond 3600RPM (zero slip) on 60Hz input would be plain wierd as you should then be able to unplug the motor without it stopping.
This thread is great stuff, I´m a regular reader and watch all the vids.
Quote from: i_ron on January 20, 2009, 04:13:28 PM
did an edit on my previus message to correct the numbers, R
Quote from: Yucca on January 20, 2009, 06:27:26 PM
@i_ron
Your work is impressive, the new fasteners look and sound much safer! Yep the numbers are pretty scary, probably even dangerous after ricochet. and I suppose if it threw one it might cause such an imbalance that some more might come off.
The spec for the Ryobi grinder is unloaded speed of 2850RPM with two stones on it. Speeds beyond that on wall current (whilst drawing output coil power) show something good is going on. Speeds close to or beyond 3600RPM (zero slip) on 60Hz input would be plain wierd as you should then be able to unplug the motor without it stopping.
This thread is great stuff, I´m a regular reader and watch all the vids.
Interesting, I didn't know that and was just quoting the name tag RPM, 3600. So the rotor is
easily the equivalent of two stones, adds a whole new meaning to Mr Tee's test. Must send away
for that Tach ...
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.18239
Ron
Quote from: Yucca on January 20, 2009, 06:27:26 PM
@i_ron
Your work is impressive, the new fasteners look and sound much safer! Yep the numbers are pretty scary, probably even dangerous after ricochet. and I suppose if it threw one it might cause such an imbalance that some more might come off.
The spec for the Ryobi grinder is unloaded speed of 2850RPM with two stones on it. Speeds beyond that on wall current (whilst drawing output coil power) show something good is going on. Speeds close to or beyond 3600RPM (zero slip) on 60Hz input would be plain wierd as you should then be able to unplug the motor without it stopping.
This thread is great stuff, I´m a regular reader and watch all the vids.
SO RON,
CAN I TEST BEYOND 3500 RPM OR WHAT?
WILL THE CUPS GO THROUGH CINDER BLOCKS?
THANKS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 20, 2009, 07:17:27 PM
SO RON,
CAN I TEST BEYOND 3500 RPM OR WHAT?
THANKS
T
NOPE re- call in effect!
Ron
PS: well nothing over 4500 RPM and keep the people out of the line of fire...
Quote from: RunningBare on February 04, 2008, 09:02:26 AM
Interlude (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm), drinks and popcorn are available at the confectionary desk.
What goes around comes around....
Quote from: i_ron on January 21, 2009, 10:45:56 PM
What goes around comes around....
ALL'S QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT...
QuotePS: well nothing over 4500 RPM and keep the people out of the line of fire...
WHAT ABOUT THE FRENCH?
I ALREADY NAILED THIS GUY, ???
T
no news, good news
are you cracking the wall ?? ;)
Laurent
Got an idea. ?? What if you took a simple bicycle rear chain clutch assembly and used it for the interface between the Ryobi motor and the wheel. You could then place a smaller rotor on the other shaft end of the Ryobi motor to measure motor RPM independent of rotor wheel RPM. By having the system clutched it would help move the motor out of the equation. If you engaged the HV coil and the RPM of the rotor wheel took off and the RPM of the motor stayed the same that really be something to show in a video ;).
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 22, 2009, 06:54:34 AM
ALL'S QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT...
WHAT ABOUT THE FRENCH?
I ALREADY NAILED THIS GUY, ???
T
I have to hand it to you, your sense of humor is MAGNIFIQUE... ;D, I would say 'forget the French'
but then we would have an uprising on our hands...LOL,
R
How many driver rotors would it take to get say 10hp out of this pulse motor.
Tesla did this thing with a rotating magnetic field (replaced spinning magnets) then he put a wound rotor inside the rotating magnetic field and put a brake to it. This then made his ouput go up just like making a generator spin faster. Then in a patent a little later (damned if I can find it again) he gets rid of the rotor all together and uses just coils in place of the armature. He comes right out and calls it a generator at this point. Of course he still had the exciter producing ac pulses but he calls this torroidal ring with 4 distinct solenoids wrapped around the ring an armatureless generator. He does this under the pretext that he is trying to overcome the limitations of a generator because of the primemovers inablility to go fast. Of course this problem was overcome in standard generators by increasing the magnetic flux density of the rotor and increasing the torque requirements of the prime mover. How fast can a rotating magnetic field go before it blows apart? Your bolt torque tests filling the thread reminded me of this.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on January 22, 2009, 08:31:33 AM
Got an idea. ?? What if you took a simple bicycle rear chain clutch assembly and used it for the interface between the Ryobi motor and the wheel. You could then place a smaller rotor on the other shaft end of the Ryobi motor to measure motor RPM independent of rotor wheel RPM. By having the system clutched it would help move the motor out of the equation. If you engaged the HV coil and the RPM of the rotor wheel took off and the RPM of the motor stayed the same that really be something to show in a video ;).
THIS IS A GOOD IDEA BUT WHY DOES THE "MOTOR HAVE TO BE MOVED OUT OF THE EQUATION"?
ISN'T IT SAFE TO SAY THAT AS THE MOTOR ACCELERATES IT IS MOVING ITSELF OUT OF THE EQUATION - APPROACHING FULL SPEED @ 3600 RPM WHERE SLIP ANGE = 0 DEGREES AND THE STATOR CURRENT IS APPROACHING 0.
NOW COMPARE THIS WITH THE GENERTAOR'S HC COIL WHICH IS INCREASINGLY IMPOSING ITSELF AGAINST THE ROTOR.
NOTE:
CONVENTIONAL HC MODE - 0.1 WATT CAUSES DECELERATION
PEREPITEIA HV MODE - HC + HV COILS - 21 WATTS CAUSES ACCELERATION WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE MOTOR HAS REMOVED ITSELF TO THE TUNE OF 104 WATTS.
WE ARE PLANNING TO EMPLOY A CLUTCH FOR THE ROTOR IN THE X PRIZE CAR SO THAT THE ROTOR IS FREE-WHEELING EVEN WHEN THE CAR IS SITTING AT A STOPLIGHT.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 22, 2009, 07:47:17 PM
WE ARE PLANNING TO EMPLOY A CLUTCH FOR THE ROTOR IN THE X PRIZE CAR SO THAT THE ROTOR IS FREE-WHEELING EVEN WHEN THE CAR IS SITTING AT A STOPLIGHT.
CHEERS
Thane
Dear Thane,
Why don't you just put 5 coils on one side and another 5 coils other side of the rotor and then try to see how much torque is being gained?
You should also put high quality torque sensor on the shaft, I wish..
It is quite reasonable to keep system simple as much as possible.
Will you couple shaft to the clutch?
Nuri Temurlenk
God bless humanity..
hello Thane
If i read you right, can i understand that you let the system (as it is in your last video) accelerate up to 3600 rpm and perhaps more? :o
cheers
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 22, 2009, 07:47:17 PM
THIS IS A GOOD IDEA BUT WHY DOES THE "MOTOR HAVE TO BE MOVED OUT OF THE EQUATION"?
ISN'T IT SAFE TO SAY THAT AS THE MOTOR ACCELERATES IT IS MOVING ITSELF OUT OF THE EQUATION - APPROACHING FULL SPEED @ 3600 RPM WHERE SLIP ANGE = 0 DEGREES AND THE STATOR CURRENT IS APPROACHING 0.
NOW COMPARE THIS WITH THE GENERTAOR'S HC COIL WHICH IS INCREASINGLY IMPOSING ITSELF AGAINST THE ROTOR.
NOTE:
CONVENTIONAL HC MODE - 0.1 WATT CAUSES DECELERATION
PEREPITEIA HV MODE - HC + HV COILS - 21 WATTS CAUSES ACCELERATION WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE MOTOR HAS REMOVED ITSELF TO THE TUNE OF 104 WATTS.
WE ARE PLANNING TO EMPLOY A CLUTCH FOR THE ROTOR IN THE X PRIZE CAR SO THAT THE ROTOR IS FREE-WHEELING EVEN WHEN THE CAR IS SITTING AT A STOPLIGHT.
CHEERS
Thane
Perhaps a bad choice of phrasing. The motor introduces drag upon the system once the HV coil is shorted so removing it from the system by way of a clutch should cause the rotor to spin up even faster. Less drag & faster spin = improvement.
Quote from: samedsoft on January 23, 2009, 02:14:45 AM
Dear Thane,
Why don't you just put 5 coils on one side and another 5 coils other side of the rotor and then try to see how much torque is being gained?
Nuri Temurlenk
God bless humanity..
ACTUALLY WE ARE PLANNING 6 COILS PER SIDE.
T
Quote from: woopy on January 23, 2009, 03:28:13 AM
hello Thane
If i read you right, can i understand that you let the system (as it is in your last video) accelerate up to 3600 rpm and perhaps more? :o
cheers
Laurent
NO - I AM TOO CHICKEN.
THE HIGHEST WAS 21 WATTS OUT BUT IT WAS NOT FULL SPEED (AND IT IS NOT WHAT WE WANT TO SHOW AT THIS POINT EITHER ANYWAY).
BECAUSE
0.1 WATT W/ DECELERATION @ 75 VOLTS & 255 WATTS & > 1000 RPM COMPARED TO
21 WATTS W/ ACCELERATION @ 75 VOLTS & 135 WATTSREPRESENTS A:
20900% OUTPUT GAIN WITH A 47% INPUT REDUCTION & < 3200 RPMI WOULD BE AMAZED IF IT CAN GO ABOVE 3600 RPM WITHOUT INCREASING THE LINE FREQUENCY - BUT WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL WE GET I_RON'S REINFORCED ROTOR BACK FROM CALIFORNIA.
ALSO IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT:FROM 1000 RPM OR SO TO ABOVE OR NEAR 3500 RPM - THE INPUT POWER IS DECREASING (WHEN IT OUGHT TO BE INCREASING IN TANDEM WITH THE OUTPUT).
WE STILL HAVE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR THE WATTS/HOUR WHILE THE FLYWHEEL IS DECELERATING BACK DOWN TO 1000 RPM - AND THEN AGAIN WHEN THE REGENERATIVE BRAKING MODE KICKS IN BELOW THE MINIMUM THRESHOLD SPEED.
T
Quote from: hydrocontrol on January 23, 2009, 03:49:11 AM
Perhaps a bad choice of phrasing. The motor introduces drag upon the system once the HV coil is shorted so removing it from the system by way of a clutch should cause the rotor to spin up even faster. Less drag & faster spin = improvement.
I WOULDN'T DISCOUNT THE MOTOR TOO SOON...
IN OUR ELECTRIC CAR APPLICATION WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO REDUCE THE VOLTAGE TO THE 3 PHASE AC INDUCTION MOTOR
BUT RAISE THE STATOR FREQUENCY. DO YOU FOLLOW ME?
THE MOTOR'S ROTOR WILL BE AIDED BY THE HV COILS AND ALSO TRY TO AGIGN ITSELF WITH THE STATOR FREQUENCY. THE COST OF INCREASING THE STATOR FREQUENCY WILL BE MINIMAL.
YES WE DO INTEND TO EMPLOY A CLUTCH ALSO - BUT WE ALSO WANT A GOOD FLYWHEEL EFFECT SO TO MOTOR'S ROTOR INERTIA MAY BE IMPORTANT HERE AS WELL - WE MAY END UP HAVING TWO CLUTCHES.
1 TO DISENGAGE THE MOTOR FROM THE DRIVETRAIN
AND
1 TO DISENGAGE THE MOTOR FROM THE ROTOR.
THIS ENTIRE PROJECT STARTED AS A UPS - FLYWHEEL ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage
SO WE WILL TRY TO EMPLOY AS MUCH OF THAT TECHNOLOGY AS POSSIBLE.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 23, 2009, 06:39:02 AM
I WOULD BE AMAZED IF IT CAN GO ABOVE 3600 RPM WITHOUT INCREASING THE LINE FREQUENCY - BUT WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL WE GET I_RON'S REINFORCED ROTOR BACK FROM CALIFORNIA.
You should use G10 for construction. You can also add a wrap of carbon fiber tow under tension around the circumference as well. I have done this in other rotating motor/generator designs some years back. The results are far superior to steel construction. the G10 has less movement than steel, it's non magnetic and you can go to much higher speeds -- about the only problem with the G10 is it;s expensive in the higher thicknesses and it's abrasive on all your tools.
cheers
mark.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 23, 2009, 06:27:23 AM
ACTUALLY WE ARE PLANNING 6 COILS PER SIDE.
T
As usual I am properly horrified. This is pie in the sky with the present build.But not being privy to
your plans all I can do is suggest that the present build is too tiny, too puny to run with this load
hung around its neck. The maximum build for this model is three?
Ron
@i_ron
Now I know where you got your name from. lol
Good work.
thanks for the reply
very informative as usual
I am always interested to buy your old "barrow" rotor with all the necessary coils and core to make, with the most chance of succes, a replication and show your work and its potential to interested friends here in europe.
regards
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on January 23, 2009, 05:49:42 PM
thanks for the reply
very informative as usual
I am always interested to buy your old "barrow" rotor with all the necessary coils and core to make, with the most chance of succes, a replication and show your work and its potential to interested friends here in europe.
regards
Laurent
SORRY BUT CANADIAN LAW PROHIBITS US FROM SHIPPING ROUND THINGS TO EUROPE.
T
Hello Ron,
QuoteAs usual I am properly horrified. This is pie in the sky with the present build.But not being privy to
your plans all I can do is suggest that the present build is too tiny, too puny to run with this load
hung around its neck. The maximum build for this model is three?
I agree. The present rotor is not fitted to this load.This is the reason why I was suggesting the Magneto-Design. Here you have the advantage of the magnets hold in place by centrifugal forces in the inner side of a rotating brass-drum.You can scale it up with many coil-sets aligned on one -stator-axis with a bigger ( longer) brass-drum where the magnets are placed radial in successive levels.
In addition to this it has a lot of spinning mass. Carbon-Fibre would be counterproductive athough the mechanical strength is superior.
I think you can visualize it.
Regards
Kator01
So how much current can you draw from the HC coils before the HV coils stop compensating? This looks neat, so, if I were to gear this up so I could spin a rotor 2000 rpm with a hand crank, I could generate power without doing that much work? Or at lest make it less work? Am I totally wrong or sort of right or totally right?
Quote from: Kator01 on January 23, 2009, 08:00:59 PM
Hello Ron,
I agree. The present rotor is not fitted to this load.This is the reason why I was suggesting the Magneto-Design. Here you have the advantage of the magnets hold in place by centrifugal forces in the inner side of a rotating brass-drum.You can scale it up with many coil-sets aligned on one -stator-axis with a bigger ( longer) brass-drum where the magnets are placed radial in successive levels.
In addition to this it has a lot of spinning mass. Carbon-Fibre would be counterproductive athough the mechanical strength is superior.
I think you can visualize it.
Regards
Kator01
Hallo Kator,
Thank you for your support. What you say makes sense. I had pondered what I could suggest to
Mr Tee in ways to scale this up but I have pretty well reached the maximum model size now in my
basement shop. However the drum approach would be a win win all around.
You suggest brass but there can be problems here also. I used what is commonly called "brass"
plate in a past experiment and there was tremendous drag from the magnets, somewhat like aluminum, as the plate was more like bronze. The proper stainless might work? Harder to work with of course. Anyway, thanks for the ideas...
Ron
Brass is typically mostly copper (being a copper zinc alloy) As both Copper and Aluminum alloys tend to be excellent conductors, you will get a braking effect around moving magnets.
As for whats sold as stainless steel, some is magnetic, some not. You probably won't get reproducibility unless you specify an exact alloy type.
If you want a super tough (but still machineable) plastic for a rotor, there is always Tecamax. Just don't expect it to be cheap, or available at Home Depot.
http://www.sdplastics.com/ensinger/Tecamax_SRP.pdf
Ha Ha!
there is no problem, put the round thing in a square box ;)
OK OK i will make the rotor with à scooter brake disk but are the concentric bicoil and core square enough to be sent to Europe ?? ::)
looking forward to next the great results
cheers
Laurent
Anyone serious about improving performance should use G10. This is the epoxy glass fibre board material used for circuit boards. It is available in sheet form from 0.5mm up to 50mm in thickness.
G10 is available in every major city. It is stiffer than steel and has almost no thermal movement. However it is abrasive -- so your tools wont last long, but you machine it just like you would steel.
Here is a picture of a rotor I made years ago for a serpentine generator/motor.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on January 24, 2009, 07:09:56 AM
Anyone serious about improving performance should use G10. This is the epoxy glass fibre board material used for circuit boards. It is available in sheet form from 0.5mm up to 50mm in thickness.
G10 is available in every major city. It is stiffer than steel and has almost no thermal movement. However it is abrasive -- so your tools wont last long, but you machine it just like you would steel.
Here is a picture of a rotor I made years ago for a serpentine generator/motor.
THANKS MARK!
I_RON WHAT SAY YOU?
T
Thane what rpm is the barrow rotor good for you know? it looks nice. not as nice as i_rons tho, good job i_ron.
Quote from: woopy on January 24, 2009, 03:58:40 AM
Ha Ha!
there is no problem, put the round thing in a square box ;)
OK OK i will make the rotor with à scooter brake disk but are the concentric bicoil and core square enough to be sent to Europe ?? ::)
looking forward to next the great results
cheers
Laurent
I CAN MAKE YOU A ROTOR IF YOU LIKE BUT THE LATEST (BLACK ONE) HAS BEEN PROMISED TO blisteringanomaly'.
THE GOOD NEW IS - OUR MANUFACTURED COILS ARE READY AND I WILL BE TESTING THEM NEXT WEEK SO THEY CAN BE SHIPPED TO ANYONE ANYWHERE.
LOOK FOR THIS BOX...! ;)
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on January 24, 2009, 08:23:17 AM
Thane what rpm is the barrow rotor good for you know? it looks nice. not as nice as i_rons tho, good job i_ron.
I HAVE HAD IT AT 3500 RPM,.
AND YES I_RON'S IS LIGHT YEARS AHEAD OF MINE.
ASK HIM IN A PM IF HE'LL MAKE YOU ONE...
T
Quote from: Super God on January 23, 2009, 08:19:56 PM
So how much current can you draw from the HC coils before the HV coils stop compensating? This looks neat, so, if I were to gear this up so I could spin a rotor 2000 rpm with a hand crank, I could generate power without doing that much work? Or at lest make it less work? Am I totally wrong or sort of right or totally right?
THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION - BUT IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO GET ANSWERED
- AND THERE WILL BE AS MANY ANSWERS AS THERE ARE COMBINATIONS OF:
WIRE LENGTH,
WIRE GAUGE,
CORE SIZE,
CORE GRADE,
MAGNET SIZE,
MAGNET STRANGTH,
ETC.
YOU ARE TOTALLY RIGHT - AT 2000 RPM A PROPERLY MADE GENERATOR WITH THE RIGHT NUMBER OF COILS - YOUR GENERATOR
MIGHT END UP CRANKING YOU. :o
WE HAVE ALREADY SHOWN HOW THE HV COIL TRIPLES THE HC OUTPUT ACROSS THE LOAD
- NOW WE ARE FOCUSSING OUR ATTENTION IN THE OTHER DIRECTION
- SO THE HC FLUX INCREASES THE HV INDUCED VOLTAGE RATHER THAN ENTERING THE AIR GAP AND DECELERATING THE ROTOR.
- THAT WAY THE COIL FLUXES WOULD BE ALMOST ENTIRELY SYMBIOTIC. :)
SO IN EFFECT WE ARE ATTEMTING TO CREATE A PHYSICAL MODEL OF JOHN NASH'S
"EQUILIBRIUM SOLUTION THEORY" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium
WHEREBY:
THE POSITIVE OUTCOME OF THE WHOLE IS ASSURED
WHEN
THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCES OF THE FEW ARE EMPLOYED IN NEW "POSITIVE" WAYS. ;)
CHEERS
T
Dear Thane,
On your NEW HV, HC COIL,, ROTOR & CORES video, you indicate 21Watts output with 24,8V on 47 OHM load @2930 Rpm.
Since P = V x I x CosPhi, then do you have highly reactive output? IF my calculation is correct?? then,
There are some people from Rotoverter world like KoneHeadX , AshTweth to convert this reactive power to active power by means of DC conversion. They do have special circuitry for this job.
Ref. : http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Muller_Dynamo:Replication:Ron_Classen
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Zpe_res_collect_circuit.png
http://home.mchsi.com/~actt2/logic.htm
You guys should really check out Tesla's patents like 382282 and 390721. These patents overcame your mechanical constraints a long time ago. Please also checkout how to run a loaded electric motor in a resonant electrical circuit of whatever amplitude you desire. The input energy only needed to overcome ohmic losses.
Quote from: samedsoft on January 24, 2009, 09:53:33 AM
Dear Thane,
On your NEW HV, HC COIL,, ROTOR & CORES video, you indicate 21Watts output with 24,8V on 47 OHM load @2930 Rpm.
Since P = V x I x CosPhi, then do you have highly reactive output? IF my calculation is correct?? then,
NO I AM SORRY YOUR CALCULATIONS ARE INCORRECT:
THE CERAMIC 47 OHM RESISTOR IS PURELY NON-REACTIVE AND HAS A POWER FACTOR OF 1.
24.8 V EQUALS
V^2/R
24.8 x 24.8/47
= 13.1 WATTS
I DID SAY IN THE VIDEO IT WILL ACCELERATE TO 31 VOLTS BUT I AM UNDER THE TABLE AT THAT POINT AND NOT SHOOTING VIDEO.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 24, 2009, 08:12:41 AM
THANKS MARK!
I_RON WHAT SAY YOU?
T
I say... beautiful rotor Mark! However in Mr Teaze's rotor there is a partial flux path through the steel,
so not necessarily a detriment. For an axial rotor, steel is still tops, for machining, and strength.
edit:
*The problem was not with the strength of the rotor but the incorrect way I had designed and built
the thing where undue stress was placed on a fastener. The magnet cup should have been pocketed
into the rotor so as to have only tensile strength required of the bolt.*
What really gets my attention though is derrika's post on Tecamax, looks like an easier material to
work with, especially for a drum rotor...
Ron
Edit 2: Dust generated during grinding, cutting, or drilling fiber glass reinforced plastic produces
respirable fiber shaped plastic (organic) particles whose concentration increases proportionally
with dust concentration. These particles are not classified as carcinogenic by IARC or NTP.
However, prolonged inhalation of dust can produce lung disease.
yes
very good news :)
OK i confirme my order for 3 concentric bicoils + the adhoc cores + if you have time ,one complete rotor . Why 3 ,...so i can test one plus one plus one ... i am a practical man and i love touching things by myself ;D
If the box is not exactly square, it will be accepted by the Swiss custom law, as we are not totally integrated in the european community :-\
what i will do is very simple.....
first .. my job consist of imagining than realising and than testing flying ultralights
the last baby is the" woopy" (attach photo with electric engine) so im am very involved in every thing that could improve the electric flying capabilities
second... i am sure that the"Perepiteia" can do much more ...!!!
cheers
Laurent
.
Quote from: woopy on January 24, 2009, 05:36:24 PM
yes
i am a practical man and i love touching things by myself ;D
cheers
Laurent
UM, OK THERE LAURENT - THAT'S A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION THAN WE NEEDED TO HEAR... :-*
WE CAN "FIRM" THINGS UP WHEN THE COILS COME IN.
T
BTW
VERY NICE HOT AIR-PLANE BALLON THING
LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE NO TROUBLE GETTING IT "UP" - WHICH IS GOOD AND VERY PRACTICAL
Quote from: i_ron on January 24, 2009, 01:49:34 PM
What really gets my attention though is derrika's post on Tecamax, looks like an easier material to
work with, especially for a drum rotor...
Ron
It is indeed my great good fortune to count as a friend the world renowned Dutch artist, Steven.
I merely suggested to him my ideas for the drum rotor and in the space of a few hours these
magnificent drawings arrived in my inbox. Thanks again S, I am delighted. Now the thing is... not
only does he draw like this but his machine work is even better. Really pisses me off at times and
so I have had to clean up my act just to keep one foot on the ladder.
I think the drawings are pretty self explanitory..I asked for only two legs to keep it simple, but
three legs could be incorporated for the people with a three leg fetish. I asked for no magnet hold
downs, again to keep it easy to view.
Ron
3D hooray. Is someone going to build that design?
Quote from: broli on January 24, 2009, 07:34:44 PM
3D hooray. Is someone going to build that design?
OMG - THAT IS REALLY - REALLY SOMETHING!!! 8)
WHAT ABOUT PUTTING THE MAGNETS ON THE INSIDE OF A DRUM AND THE COILS INSIDE?
THAT WAY THE DRUM HELPS TO HOLD THEM IN PLACE?
THANKS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 24, 2009, 09:48:43 PM
OMG - THAT IS REALLY - REALLY SOMETHING!!! 8)
WHAT ABOUT PUTTING THE MAGNETS ON THE INSIDE OF A DRUM AND THE COILS INSIDE?
THAT WAY THE DRUM HELPS TO HOLD THEM IN PLACE?
THANKS
T
Yep, sort of like the Fisher Paykel...
seen here as a windmill conversion
R
ha ha !! good laugh this morning ;D
as i can see i have not only to improve my electric motors but also my french to english translation. :-\ sorry for the practical confusion
OK i hope to be in the first place fo the delivery of the manufactured coils when they arrive
for information i enclose a picture of the modified Lynch motor (see Wikipedia) we use for the ultralight. It is a pancake electric motor with radial winding and fixed magnet on both side of the winding . In the patent of Cedric Lynch they speak about "grain oriented material " to improve the magnetic flux ?? perhaps it can help.
cheers
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on January 25, 2009, 05:53:34 AM
ha ha !! good laugh this morning ;D
as i can see i have not only to improve my electric motors but also my french to english translation. :-\ sorry for the practical confusion
OK i hope to be in the first place fo the delivery of the manufactured coils when they arrive
for information i enclose a picture of the modified Lynch motor (see Wikipedia) we use for the ultralight. It is a pancake electric motor with radial winding and fixed magnet on both side of the winding . In the patent of Cedric Lynch they speak about "grain oriented material " to improve the magnetic flux ?? perhaps it can help.
cheers
Laurent
Your english is pretty good Laurent, not to worry.
Nice motor. Now you have a very efficient motor to begin with... not much room for improvement there
Is this an original Lynch motor from before he lost his company? I see he is having them built in
India now after starting a new company. <http://www.agnimotors.com/home/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1>
How did you modify this motor? Sorry for all the questions
but I have long wished to see one of these motors!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 24, 2009, 10:45:26 PM
no quote
Required reading
I know that we on this list are an eclectic bunch, with many and varied interests. Always on the
lookout for information that leads to greater understanding. Here is a link then that speaks of
"ESSENTIAL ENERGY" (AETHER) which I hope you will find as interesting as did I.
It gives some theory, then from pages 19 to 37 tells how to build a "window motor" ala bedini.. but
with the proper theory and one that works. It is a big download, 20 megs but worth it for the motor
Note too the similarity of purpose between Thane's work and 'STOP'....Ron
RapidShare - Keppe_Motor_Manual_ver1.pdf.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/188616503/Keppe_Motor_Manual_ver1.pdf.rar.html
Keppe Motor Manual - Working Principles 45
Cláudia B. S. Pacheco, Founder
and President of the STOP The
Destruction of the World Association
Hello all,
@thane :
Quote
WHAT ABOUT PUTTING THE MAGNETS ON THE INSIDE OF A DRUM AND THE COILS INSIDE?
THAT WAY THE DRUM HELPS TO HOLD THEM IN PLACE?
Exactly this is what I was proposing based on the magneto-design.
Coils are the stator and magnet are on the inside of the rotating drum.
@ron : interesting what you write about the magnetic drag concerning brass-material. But can you tell me, if in you setup then the magnets were placed inside the brass-material ? how was the arrangement ?
Here again the german Kreidler-Forum on magnetos :
http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/demontage1.jpg (http://www.motelek.net/bosch/wartung/polrad/demontage1.jpg)
You can also see that there is an inner ring obviously made by a different material which keeps the magnets at a distance from the steel-housing.
I will try to find out what this material is
On one website it is stated that they used steel-rotors( Stahlrotor )
http://www.motelek.net/zundanlagen/motoplat1.html (http://www.motelek.net/zundanlagen/motoplat1.html)
Heading states : " Fehlereingrenzung bei Motoplat Zündungen mit
Stahlrotor"
Regards
kator01
Hi Ron,
I ran into a rapidshare-error stating that this document is not allolocated to a Premium- or Collector's Account and can therefore downloaded only 10 times - the limit of which is reached already.
On his homepage there is a lot of blah blah and no description of the principle and of course you must by his books :
http://www.keppemotor.com/index.php (http://www.keppemotor.com/index.php)
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on January 25, 2009, 03:42:46 PM
Hi Ron,
I ran into a rapidshare-error stating that this document is not allolocated to a Premium- or Collector's Account and can therefore downloaded only 10 times - the limit of which is reached already.
On his homepage there is a lot of blah blah and no description of the principle and of course you must by his books :
http://www.keppemotor.com/index.php (http://www.keppemotor.com/index.php)
Regards
Kator01
Yes, sorry about that, Mark J suggested I put it up on sendspace... which I have done
sendspace tells me it is there for a "limited time"
http://www.sendspace.com/file/y1ljhd
Took ten minutes to upload at 38 Kb/sec
so sendspace is no speed ball
Ron
A shorted highimpedance coil current will happen at a different time than the exciting magnetic saturation change. This phenomenon can be exploited on a solid state level also. Input spike on input winding saturates the core while inducing a voltage in a shorted highself induction coil. The current in this coil is delayed not effecting the impedance of the core to the exciter signal. Then current flows in shorted coil and is inductively coupled to the load windings. You could use two torroidal high frequency transformers for this. Pulse the primary on one. Feed the high voltage secondary to the primary of the second torroid. Feed the load from the secondary of number 2 torroid. Make sure to use a resonant lc setup to feed the pulses into the primary or exciter torroid. An active element like an avalanche diode in series with the exciter torroid output winding and the output torroid primary will help the tendency of the circuit to drift as the core magnetic parameters change. Active tuning of the oscillator always helps but the circuit should run with gain.
Quote from: sparks on January 25, 2009, 06:18:04 PM
A shorted highimpedance coil current will happen at a different time than the exciting magnetic saturation change. This phenomenon can be exploited on a solid state level also. Input spike on input winding saturates the core while inducing a voltage in a shorted highself induction coil. The current in this coil is delayed not effecting the impedance of the core to the exciter signal. Then current flows in shorted coil and is inductively coupled to the load windings. You could use two torroidal high frequency transformers for this. Pulse the primary on one. Feed the high voltage secondary to the primary of the second torroid. Feed the load from the secondary of number 2 torroid. Make sure to use a resonant lc setup to feed the pulses into the primary or exciter torroid. An active element like an avalanche diode in series with the exciter torroid output winding and the output torroid primary will help the tendency of the circuit to drift as the core magnetic parameters change. Active tuning of the oscillator always helps but the circuit should run with gain.
THANKS SPARKS,
I AM QUITE CONFIDENT THAT IF A RESONANT PRIMARY PAIR OF COILS WERE CONSTRUCTED FOR THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER
IT WOULD GO OU QUITE EASILY.
T
@ iRon
Do you know what 3D software your Dutch friend Steven is using? Looks like it could be SolidWorks, or Cobalt by Ashlar, but there are a ton of 3D modeling packages out there.
Quote from: derricka on January 25, 2009, 11:42:44 PM
@ iRon
Do you know what 3D software your Dutch friend Steven is using? Looks like it could be SolidWorks, or Cobalt by Ashlar, but there are a ton of 3D modeling packages out there.
IT'S CALLED
SCUMBAGS B-WARE 3D :-[
T
Quote from: sparks on January 25, 2009, 06:18:04 PMYou could use two torroidal high frequency transformers for this. Pulse the primary on one. Feed the high voltage secondary to the primary of the second torroid. Feed the load from the secondary of number 2 torroid. Make sure to use a resonant lc setup to feed the pulses into the primary or exciter torroid. An active element like an avalanche diode in series with the exciter torroid output winding and the output torroid primary will help the tendency of the circuit to drift as the core magnetic parameters change. Active tuning of the oscillator always helps but the circuit should run with gain.
@Sparks,
I like the sound of your idea, is this what you mean? The exciter toroid to manifest the effect, the output toroid for an isolated draw?
edit: In the diagram I don't mean high frequency as in radio HF, but just high for tansformers.
Hi,
It's 3d studio max, with Vray as render engine.
Quote from: derricka on January 25, 2009, 11:42:44 PM
@ iRon
Do you know what 3D software your Dutch friend Steven is using? Looks like it could be SolidWorks, or Cobalt by Ashlar, but there are a ton of 3D modeling packages out there.
Hello Ron
First bravo to you for the magnifique rotor which seams to improve very much the Perepitea effect
Yes this is an original Lynch motor. this one has more than 1000 hours of heavy duty on electric rental gokart. The modification comes from a german paraglider manufacturer. As you can see they keep only the rotor and the brush older, all the rest including stator magnet are remanufactured so the weight decrease from 11 kg to 7.5kg.
But this are prototype and in Africa we had some problem with the magnets. On one motor the nikel protection covering the neodym magnet delaminated and one magnet simply exploded during a take off (see picture). The motor did not stop and the pilot could land safely. After that missadventure i noticed that other magnets were no more fixed on the stator and i noticed the delaminations (see pictures ). I don't know wat happen with this motor and i have to investigate if it comes from a bad gluing or too much heat or bad quality magnet or... If somebody have an idea.
but anyway flying magnets are really dangerous so be very carefull with rotor and don't trust the nikel protection :P
last word around the drum rotor idea .I enclose a picture of an other electric motor which is called "out runner" as the magnet are glued inside rhe rotating external drum-rotor ...see the ventilated laminated core between the coils
hope this helps
cheers
Laurent
@Yucca
That is the idea. The torroid high frequency transformers will be arranged so that the impedance of the primaries are low. The primary on the output torroid will appear as a short to the secondary of the input torroid. The voltage once it rises above the avalanche diode threshold will conduct a current through the output torroid primary. The lower the resistance of the ouput torroid primary the better so a rewind to a bigold fat primary and bigold fat secondary (one to one if the voltage gain is too much) may be necessary in the final design. The input oscillator should be adjusted to a frequency that allows for the circuit to stabilize before the next exciter pulse is imposed. The torroid magnetic saturation parameters will be such that it sheds the magnetic polarization of the core at a design frequency. You therefore only need to maintain the waveform of the input pulse which can appear at intervals of lower frequency but proportional amplitude.
The whole system can be looked upon as a magnetic amplifier whose bias or supply is provided by the near earth field.
Thankyou for the diagram.
Quote from: woopy on January 26, 2009, 10:23:30 AM
Hello Ron
last word around the drum rotor idea .I enclose a picture of an other electric motor which is called "out runner" as the magnet are glued inside rhe rotating external drum-rotor ...see the ventilated laminated core between the coils
hope this helps
cheers
Laurent
Yes Laurent, very interesting and very helpful.The "out runner" in particular... who makes this?
Are the coils on any sort of core or is that core in between the coils the only one? Fascinating.
Can you give me a rough idea as to how big the rotor is?
Thanks, Ron
@Sparks,
Do you think this one toroid idea would stand a chance of working. I wonder if high spec components would give low enough impedance to make the highV coil do it's magic?
Edit: I wonder if these solid state ideas are clogging the Perepetia thread, maybe a new thread should be started for solid state versions like bitoroid etc?
high Ron
this motor is a BIG REX from a german producer (Flyware)
i got this one after one year of insisting and i don't know if they produce it any more but there is a lot of brushless outrunner producer in this world. Look also with Google for "torque motor" perhaps you find something almost ready to use.
here the answers to your questions , plus a picture of an original Lynch rotor
this is the same laminated core in and out the coils .This is a stack of discs with slots to insert the coils. It seems that the cores outside the coils interacts with the magnets. They probably contribute to guide the flux to magnets next to the coil... but i am far from beeing an expert and may be wrong . ???
cheers
Laurent
@Woopy,
WOW! big outrunner, here's my smallest outrunner:
@Yucca
I think that it will be tricky to get the output circuit to look like a dead short. The hv coil current needs to do two things. One is desaturate the exciter torroid core. This is the push that Thane is seeing on his rotor. The other is to drive the load torroid. Any voltage drop or impedance is going to be tricky. The load output is going to have to be magnetically close coupled to the pulse from the exciter hv winding. Otherwise the high voltage coil on the exciter is going to see the ouput primary coil as impeded and not truly a short circuit. This will result in alot of current draw from the input as the exciter core will saturate before the signal has returned to O potential on the next input. Of course this whole process can be actively controlled with core saturation feedback signals and pulse width modulation etc. As it is this circuit needs to be run at full load to work right therefore requiring feedback and input pulse regulation in response to load demand.
Quote from: Yucca on January 26, 2009, 12:06:46 PM
@Sparks,
Do you think this one toroid idea would stand a chance of working. I wonder if high spec components would give low enough impedance to make the highV coil do it's magic?
Edit: I wonder if these solid state ideas are clogging the Perepetia thread, maybe a new thread should be started for solid state versions like bitoroid etc?
KEEP IT HERE IS MY VOTE - I DON'T HAVE TIME TO BOUCE AROUND THE FORUM - NOR DO I HAVE TIME TO WORK ON THIS SO I ENJOY SEEING YOU GUYS DO IT. IT IS VERY INTERESTING.
T
FYI @ ALL,
I PICKED UP THE MANUFACTURED E COILS TODAY AND THEY WORK VERY WELL.
THE PROBLEM IS I CAN'T DO MUCH CAUSE I'LL BE SLACKING OFF IN CALIFORNIA TILL NEXT WEEK.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: woopy on January 26, 2009, 01:15:13 PM
high Ron
here the answers to your questions , plus a picture of an original Lynch rotor
cheers
Laurent
Thanks again Laurent for the pictorial answer! I have not seen this design before and it is very clever.
So is the Lynch... but it is not something one could build at home, ... :'(
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 26, 2009, 07:03:34 PM
KEEP IT HERE IS MY VOTE - I DON'T HAVE TIME TO BOUCE AROUND THE FORUM - NOR DO I HAVE TIME TO WORK ON THIS SO I ENJOY SEEING YOU GUYS DO IT. IT IS VERY INTERESTING.
T
Sounds good to me.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 26, 2009, 06:39:06 AM
IT'S CALLED SCUMBAGS B-WARE 3D :-[
T
Yup, that would be the software for me. How did you know? I've just finished illegally downloading it from SleazyTorrents.com . Thanks big T. ;)
@Sparks,
I see what you mean, so a really low impedance (effectively a short) needs to draw on the HV coil for it to, dare I say cavitate. I wonder if putting a beefy really low ohm current shunt accross the HV coil would be a first good step in single toroid research? Then the power through the shunt could be calculated and see if Pout/Pin can be made higher than a regular trafo by using certain drive signals.
One crazy thought I had is to close loop a single toroid: connect the HV output coil directly to the HC (high current) input coil through a low impedance saturatable reactor. Then the HV coil and saturatable reactor combo may introduce enough delay to the HV output pulse so that it could hit the input tank at zero crossing and thus pump it. If the whole thing was tuned correctly maybe it would selfrun after starting it with a pulse from a precharged cap. For power takeoff perhaps a second HC coil could be wound under or over the HV windings. In such a scheme even small phase lag or lead problems with the feed back pulses could cause heating problems. It wouldn´t like to power reactive loads. Hmmm sounds quite TPUish.
Quote from: derricka on January 26, 2009, 09:09:17 PM
Yup, that would be the software for me. How did you know? I've just finished illegally downloading it from SleazyTorrents.com . Thanks big T. ;)
LOL, RIGHT ON!!!
@Yucca
And cook coils too.
Quote from: sparks on January 26, 2009, 09:57:03 PM
@Yucca
And cook coils too.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Speaking of coils.. and efficiency etc.. I wonder if this
link has anything of value to contribute toward moving
the fascinating work you are all doing in the direction
you are aiming for? I hope it contributes something..
even if only a new idea or concept?
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Keppean_Scalar_Motor
I haven't a clue what you guys are doing quite frankly
but I look to the day a usable product emerges. In the
meantime I enjoy my regular visits to see 'what's up'
and appreciate the opportunity to be fascinated by it all.
ffonz.. 8)
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
@Thane
Hehe...good news ....can i choose the color of my coils... next week;D
@Yucca
very nice small outrunner "et vive" the indoor flying !
@Thane and Ron
my two cents if you intend to drum the Perepiteia
YES WOOPY THAT WAS MY IDEA TO I_RON AS WELL - BUT ALAS HE DIDN'T AGREE WITH ME SO HE PULLED OUT HIS ULTRA-HIGH TECH HANDY DANDY "OLDSCHOOL" SOFTWARE AND SENT ME A DRAWING WITH THE MAGNETS AND COILS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE DRUM (although I can't post it due to copyright laws and also due to the fact that his software is too BIG) - WHICH IS MOST LIKELY A BETTER IDEA ANYWAY.
WE WOULD USE MAGNETS WITH MOUNTING HOLES IN THEM AND I EXPECT THE E COILS WOULD GO SIDEWAYS RATHER THAN LENGTHWISE AROUND THE DRUM.
T
Thane you sure are raping the forum features.
Quote from: broli on January 27, 2009, 07:24:08 AM
Thane you sure are raping the forum features.
IS THAT GOOD ??? OR ILLEGAL :(
OR GOOD AND ILLEGAL 8)
T
CAN I GET A SHOW OF HANDS...?
THE CHIP IS FINALLY HERE!
http://www.interac.ca/chip.php
MAKE SURE YOU TELL THEM YOU WOULD RATHER HAVE YOURS IMPLANTED ...
ALONG WITH THE "KILL THE HOST" PROGRAM.
YIKES
T
@Thane
gulp !!!
but if you put the coil *sideway* outside or inside the drum ... how does the theory work ???
in your Nasa video part 1 i understood that during the HV discharge, the flux attracted the next magnet while repeling the preceeding one so the magnets have to traject along the coil and not sideway
did i miss something? :-\
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 27, 2009, 07:21:09 AM
YES WOOPY THAT WAS MY IDEA TO I_RON AS WELL - BUT ALAS HE DIDN'T AGREE WITH ME SO HE PULLED OUT HIS ULTRA-HIGH TECH HANDY DANDY "OLDSCHOOL" SOFTWARE AND SENT ME A DRAWING WITH THE MAGNETS AND COILS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE DRUM (although I can't post it due to copyright laws and also due to the fact that his software is too BIG) - WHICH IS MOST LIKELY A BETTER IDEA ANYWAY.
WE WOULD USE MAGNETS WITH MOUNTING HOLES IN THEM AND I EXPECT THE E COILS WOULD GO SIDEWAYS RATHER THAN LENGTHWISE AROUND THE DRUM.
T
HEY, big
T, don't get me wrong. I am not rigid... in my thinking, and often say to the wife, I am
very flexible these days, not at all as I once was!
What Laurent has posted is exactly what I have been campaigning, and it is you who has miss-
understood, as usual. Kudo's Laurent for the previous photo's and this cleverly presented work.
I agree... actually with both of you... although only 2/3 with Mr T. I am wondering if three poles are
really necessary? Would not two do the same thing? In the magneto (as posted by kator) there
are only two magnets but three poles. It is the sudden flux reversal of the center pole that generates
the high potential. Where is this in Teaze's work? All that is happening is both outside poles are
using the center pole as a return? Can anyone define an advantage in the three pole core?
Puzzled Ron
Quote from: woopy on January 27, 2009, 08:37:37 AM
@Thane
gulp !!!
but if you put the coil *sideway* outside or inside the drum ... how does the theory work ???
in your Nasa video part 1 i understood that during the HV discharge, the flux attracted the next magnet while repeling the preceeding one so the magnets have to traject along the coil and not sideway
did i miss something? :-\
Laurent
Lauent,
I don't think so... 'cause there is still a different polarity magnet approaching and one receding, right?
All,
Third and final "old style" rotor hot off the 3D replicator. A little better engineering on this one where
the rotor has pockets and the cups have a boss that fits into the pocket... more better!
Hope to get some testing in with this one... my previous one spun up so fast it flew off into the sky...
Heard from a usually reliable source that it landed in California somewhere.... woo wee... gonna
send out the posse (Mr T) to look for it....
Ron
hi Ron
first i am sure that your latest disk is very very strong so please let it spin and spin so fast that, if it it happens to fly off :o i am sure it will go the right direction this time eastly and high enough to overfly switzerland moutains and why not land in my garden ( I have a good workshop to repare the eventual damages)
bravo very nice piece of machinery
OK back to our purpose
concerning the drum-sideway montage of the coil.
have i to understand that when the center HV coil "discharges" the effect goes not only to the both HC cores but while doing this the HC cores get also the ability and power to atract the approaching magnet and repel the receding magnet sideway ?
so a single HV discharge could influence an " acting zone " of 6 sideway magnets ?
very interesting
Laurent
HEY EVERYONE,
THIS INPUT IS ALL REALLY AWESOME! ;)
AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT... - BUT THE SAME.
I MADE A DISCOVERY TODAY THAT THE HV COIL COULD BE ELIMINATED AND HAVE TWO HC COILS INSTEAD.
THIS ARRANGEMENT DOES NOT ACCELERATE NOR DOES IT DECELERATE SO FAR (still early).
THE NEW E CORE CONTAINS DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THE ORIGINAL B-ITOROID GENERATOR COIL AND THE PLATE GENERATOR AND WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL ROTOR MATERIAL OUTSIDE THE MAGNET. ULTIMATELY THE ROTOR WOULD BE MADE OF LAMINATED MATERIAL.
QUICK INITIAL TESTING SHOWED NO DECELERATION EVEN WITH SHORTED HC COILS - BUT MORE TESTING IS REQUIRED WHEN I GET BACK FROM CA.
ALSO THIS COULD BE MODIFIED SO THAT IT EMPLOYS ONLY ONE MAGNET AT THE HV COIL AND THE HC WOUND AROUND IT AND THE BEMF INDUCE HC FLUX COMPLETES ITS FLUX RETURN PATH THROUGH THE ROTOR AND DOES NOT COME NEAR OR AFFECT ANY MAGNETS ON THE ROTOR.
I_RON I AM GOING TO MAIL YOU A COIL TOMORROW SO YOU CAN MOUNT IT AND PLAY WITH YOURSELF IN YOUR SHOP.
T
IN THE ABOVE DIAGRAM:
THE ROTOR MAGNET FLUX VIRTUALLY SATURATES THE PRIMARY LEG AT TDC - THUS ENSURING NO HC COIL INDUCED BEMF FLUX CAN TRAVEL DOWN AND IMPEDE THE MAGNET ON THE ROTOR.
THE BEMF INDUCED HC COIL FLUX FOLLOWS THE PATH OF LEAST RELUCTANCE INTO THE OUTER CORE LEGS WHICH ARE LARGER AND ALWAYS AT A LOWER RELUCTANCE THAN THE PRIMARY CORE LEG.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: woopy on January 27, 2009, 05:09:15 PM
OK back to our purpose
concerning the drum-sideway montage of the coil.
have i to understand that when the center HV coil "discharges" the effect goes not only to the both HC cores but while doing this the HC cores get also the ability and power to atract the approaching magnet and repel the receding magnet sideway ?
so a single HV discharge could influence an " acting zone " of 6 sideway magnets ?
very interesting
Laurent
DEAR LAURENT,
I HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT THE SIDEWAYS COIL MOUNT WORKS EARLIER THIS WEEK.
PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY AS YOU DREW IT ALSO. :)
I_RON YOUR WORK GIVES ME A WOODY! ;D
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 27, 2009, 06:24:34 PM
I MADE A DISCOVERY TODAY THAT THE HV COIL COULD BE ELIMINATED AND HAVE TWO HC COILS INSTEAD.
THIS ARRANGEMENT DOES NOT ACCELERATE NOR DOES IT DECELERATE SO FAR (still early).
T
Thats it, I like it!!!
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 27, 2009, 07:11:59 PM
Thats it, I like it!!!
Ron
IT'S ABOUT FREAIN' TIME THERE MISTER - I AM ALREADY HALF WAY THROUGH THAT POSSE YOU SENT OVER HERE. 8)
ps
can someone please explain this to me?
"Thane you sure are raping the forum features".THANKS
T
Quote from: woopy on January 27, 2009, 05:09:15 PM
hi Ron
first i am sure that your latest disk is very very strong so please let it spin and spin so fast that, if it it happens to fly off :o i am sure it will go the right direction this time eastly and high enough to overfly switzerland moutains and why not land in my garden ( I have a good workshop to repair the eventual damages)
Laurent
Laurent, there might be a stack of these old rotors looking for a good home after to days news!
My brain hurts....
Ron
Hehe this is not an easy one to conceptualize. So what's everyone lay terms explanation of this? Looks like very rapid changing fields do weird things here.
You may have seen the video of a heavy magnet being dropped on an aluminum plate with little impact, due to the braking effect of the aluminum.
With that in mind...what if the magnets on the above wheel were arranged in 2 rings...1 inner ring, and 1 outer ring along the outer edge of the wheel - with the wheel being stationary, and situated in front of a spoked aluminum wheel, which turns at a variable RPM.
Located closely behind the spoked wheel are 2 air coils directly across from the 2 magnet rings.
Now the question is...will the braking caused by the rapidly passing spokes alter the magnetic flow to the coils sufficiently to induce some type of high frequency current in the coils ?
Just though I'd toss that out there, just in case it may mean something.
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on January 27, 2009, 08:03:42 PM
You may have seen the video of a heavy magnet being dropped on an aluminum plate with little impact, due to the braking effect of the aluminum.
With that in mind...what if the magnets on the above wheel were arranged in 2 rings...1 inner ring, and 1 outer ring along the outer edge of the wheel - with the wheel being stationary, and situated in front of a spoked aluminum wheel, which turns at a variable RPM.
Located closely behind the spoked wheel are 2 air coils directly across from the 2 magnet rings.
Now the question is...will the braking caused by the rapidly passing spokes alter the magnetic flow to the coils sufficiently to induce some type of high frequency current in the coils ?
Just though I'd toss that out there, just in case it may mean something.
Regards...
THANKS CZR, BUT YOU KNOW MOST OF US ARE BRAIN DEAD AND VISUALIZATION IMPARED - CAN YOU SPARE US A PICTURE?
THANKS
T
Sorry Thane...I don't have the facility to do a visual...remember this is just an idea that occurred to me.
Essentially, its a spoked aluminum wheel spinning...with 2 rings of magnets in front and in behind the wheel, 2 opposing coils of the same diameter of their opposing magnet ring.
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on January 27, 2009, 08:44:20 PM
Sorry Thane...I don't have the facility to do a visual...remember this is just an idea that occurred to me.
Essentially, its a spoked aluminum wheel spinning
Regards...
OK GWOT IT!
HOW MAWY SPOKEYS DWID YOU SWAY?
TWANE
The number of spokes would have to be determined...as well as the right RPM.
I kind of wonder what type of current would come from that arrangement.
Would the current cycle in TPU like fashion ?
Seems like something worth exploring the more I think about it.
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on January 27, 2009, 09:16:19 PM
The number of spokes would have to be determined...as well as the right RPM.
Seems like something worth exploring the more I think about it.
Regards...
A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND POSTS...
T
Well, I guess I may as well get started...996 more posts to go :)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 27, 2009, 06:24:34 PM
I MADE A DISCOVERY TODAY THAT THE HV COIL COULD BE ELIMINATED AND HAVE TWO HC COILS INSTEAD.
THIS ARRANGEMENT DOES NOT ACCELERATE NOR DOES IT DECELERATE SO FAR (still early).
Discovery ? ::)
Over 200 pages ago, I said you didn't need HV coils. Nali2001 even showed you a video of his own low impedance solid core system accelerating with a useful electrical output into a nominal load (globe). Short circuit not required ......... KneeDeep.
P.S. I'm not suggesting you return to using solid cores, just that your "discovery" is second hand.
Quote from: hoptoad on January 27, 2009, 11:19:22 PM
Discovery ? ::)
Over 200 pages ago, I said you didn't need HV coils. Nali2001 even showed you a video of his own low impedance solid core system accelerating with a useful electrical output into a nominal load (globe). Short circuit not required ......... KneeDeep.
P.S. I'm not suggesting you return to using solid cores, just that your "discovery" is second hand.
NALI2001 SHOWED US ALL A VIDEO OF
CORE SATURATION CAUSING
EXCESSIVE HEAT AND
ACCELERATION DUE TO HYSTERISIS DRAG REDUCTION DUE TO THE SATURATION. THIS DESIGN WAS A GOOD TEACHING VIDEO BUT NO WAY NEAR USEABLE IN REAL APPLICATIONS.
NALI2001 ALSO STATED THAT WHEN HE REPLACE THE SOLID CORES WITH LAMINATED ONES - THE ACCELERATION DISAPPEARED - OBVIOUSLY DUE TO NON SATURATION IN THE HIGHER GRADE LAMINATED MATERIAL.
WHAT I DISCOVERED YESTERDAY WAS A POSSIBLE DESIGN FOR A NO BACK EMF COIL WHICH IS ALSO WHAT NALI2001 WAS AFTER - AND IT WAS DUE TO THE KINDNESS AND GENEROSITY OF I_RON FOR MAKING AND SENDING ME THE SOLID STEEL ROTOR..
IF NOT FOR I_RON'S ROTOR IT WOULD HAVE GONE UN-NOTOICED.
AGREED, ALL OUR HUMAN DISCOVERIES ARE SECOND HAND BEING FIRST INVENTED BY DOG.
T
@CRANKYpants
We all walk on the shoulders of others.
Did you happen to get my PM of several days ago?
@ Thane and Ron
yes i like simplicity :)
would it be possible to use an aluminium or reenforced plastic or spoked disc ...or drum and screw on them a laminated rectangular high quality core under the track of the E core ? The length and width of this rectangular core would fit the length and width of the E core.
Just a supposition to replace the central laminated core of the E core by a soft iron bolt
would it be better for saturation ?? and this bolt could be used to fix the (what is the name of this new setup coil) on his base
are the HC coil shorted in serie or separately
make a good (but short) journey in CA it would be a real pitty to lose I-ron because brain cavitation. ;D
Laurent
Hi Laurant,
I like the way you pick up here on this magneto-design. Also very intersting motors you showed us here.
Where do you live in swizerland ? In a french-speaking Kanton?
I live near the starnberg-lake in southern-germany.
@thane : Now thing get a bit clearer - at least for me.
Hey, where can I buy a dog like the one you mentioned ?
Regards
Kator01
I might have missed them but did anyone ever posted scope shots? It would be very interesting to see how the HV coil behaves on a scope.
Quote from: woopy on January 28, 2009, 09:21:26 AM
@ Thane and Ron
yes i like simplicity :)
would it be possible to use an aluminium or reenforced plastic or spoked disc ...or drum and screw on them a laminated rectangular high quality core under the track of the E core ? The length and width of this rectangular core would fit the length and width of the E core.
Laurent
Bonjour,
Yes, I like the quick way you pick up on these ideas also!
Mr Tee's explanation of Nali's generator is basically correct, but I wondered, at the time, if it was
the unequal timing of the flux energizing the twin cores that would have resulted in the Lenz nullification?
But here in Mr Tee's latest discovery we see the proper way (or one way, hehehe) to get twin coils
to generate while blocking lenz feedback to the causative magnet. This is a major discovery, my
hats off to the master!
And this is far easier to understand than Tesla's anti lenz generator with all it's coils and caps.
Now the down side, from my experiments, will be to get a decent output from the coils. It has
been my observation that the most potential is always generated at the core/magnet interface.
Here we have the induced voltage taking place at the far end of the food chain, as it were.
That is a good drawing Laurent... with the exception that the two outside legs shouldn't be switched,
the outside legs need to have a continuous gap (same gap/contact) so the outside of each should be a ring.
I was thinking along the line of a car brake drum, if you can still find such...but there again, the
backing for the magnets should not be continuous, but discontinuous...that is, there should be
no flux backing plate linkage between magnets, only in a transverse cross drum direction.
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on January 28, 2009, 07:15:11 AM
NALI2001 SHOWED US ALL A VIDEO OF CORE SATURATION CAUSING EXCESSIVE HEAT AND ACCELERATION DUE TO HYSTERISIS DRAG REDUCTION DUE TO THE SATURATION. THIS DESIGN WAS A GOOD TEACHING VIDEO BUT NO WAY NEAR USEABLE IN REAL APPLICATIONS.
NALI2001 ALSO STATED THAT WHEN HE REPLACE THE SOLID CORES WITH LAMINATED ONES - THE ACCELERATION DISAPPEARED - OBVIOUSLY DUE TO NON SATURATION IN THE HIGHER GRADE LAMINATED MATERIAL.
WHAT I DISCOVERED YESTERDAY WAS A POSSIBLE DESIGN FOR A NO BACK EMF COIL WHICH IS ALSO WHAT NALI2001 WAS AFTER - AND IT WAS DUE TO THE KINDNESS AND GENEROSITY OF I_RON FOR MAKING AND SENDING ME THE SOLID STEEL ROTOR..
IF NOT FOR I_RON'S ROTOR IT WOULD HAVE GONE UN-NOTOICED.
AGREED, ALL OUR HUMAN DISCOVERIES ARE SECOND HAND BEING FIRST INVENTED BY DOG.
T
In dog we trust
Hello Thane,
well I was pondering on this picture and your explanation... and it is not quite clear for me now.
Two questions :
1) Are the to coils switched in parallell, in series or shunted seperatly ?
2) What would be the position of the following magnet ?
Let us assume you just have this one magnet on your driver-plate.
If the magnet passes HC-Coil 1 on the left and then leaves to arrive in the middle position there is just one Back - EMF-Fluxpath ( blue arrows ) because HC-coil 2 was not energized yet.
This is the reason for question 1)
To ponder furtheron ( now we have to be very precise on this ) :
There is a difference between Back-EMF and and Reactive-EMF ( which occures when the magnet leaves the HC-Coil 1 -position) as these two phaenomea happen at two different phases ( in time)
While the magnet energizes Coil 1 which is shunted ( 10 Ohm) back-EMF appears the very moment current starts to rise in the coil . At this moment the magnet has not left for the middle position.
This Back-EMF can not be avoided under standard-conditions. There must be a drag on magnet 1 while it is in alignement with coil1.But what about the reactive-EMF which is caused when the magentic-energy stored in the coil and the core collapses upon the leaving of the magnet ?
There is something different going on.
My understanding : The drag is compensated in the next phase ( middle to hc-coil2 - position)
This would explain why there is no accelleration and no decelleration.
Question 2) relates to the future design . How many magnet-arrarys will be possible ?
Regards
Kator01
@thane : nice ( god )-dogs. Have they arrived in your backyard already ?
Kator I'm on the same boat. Typical Lenz is being violated badly. I have no clue what is happening in that core or coil. But a scope shot which also points out TDC would explain at least what the HV coil is doing.
Quote from: Kator01 on January 28, 2009, 07:09:59 PM
Hello Thane,
Let us assume you just have this one magnet on your driver-plate.
If the magnet passes HC-Coil 1 on the left and then leaves to arrive in the middle position there is just one Back - EMF-Fluxpath ( blue arrows ) because HC-coil 2 was not energized yet.
Regards
Kator01
I was waiting for T to answer... but ....
Looking at his drawing, if you imagine the motion of the magnet TOWARDS YOU (his masters
voice) NOT SIDE TO SIDE, then it becomes clearer, or should, the two outside legs are always
just the flux return path. As the center core is centering over the magnet the flux is diverted to
each of the outside cores and returned though the backing plate... in each case the counter
EMF finds it's path through the opposite side core and not through the saturated center core.
The single magnet does not transverse the outside cores (legs), only the center core..
I trust this has been of some help?
Ron
Current does not flow instantaneously in a coil of high impedance. You make that coil with enough turns and the current could flow up to a second later. Electrons got inertia.
@Ron
so my understanding
in the first drawing the drum would be magnetic (laminated or not).
the holes perforation could perhaps also be retrofit to the already made (old) disk ( yes exactly remember the ones you intended to let fly off to my garden) ;) so i could play with the both Concentric bi coils and the new setup and make efficiency comparison.
the second drawing could be a non magnetic material against which high quality Laminated U-core could be fixed to constitute the magnetic track ( this idea perhaps to limit the weight and cost) The laminated U-core could be slightly curved to perfectly fit the drumcurvature and line up each other
@Kator01
yes in the french part of Switzerland near Geneva lake. I have 3 dogs and ,,,es lebt Münchner Oktoberfest ;D
Laurent
I_ron,
ok now we have some hot stuff to discuss here :
If this is the direction of movement of the magnet then the question is :
Why would the on-magnetisation ( red lines ) follow a different path than the Back-EMF ( blue-dotted lines) ?
The flow-path-condition are not changed during the onward movement and away-movement of the magnet.
Why should the back-emf follow a longer path ( blue-dotted line in the rotor-area ) ?
I will take the shortest route heading directly to the backside of the magnet.
I am talking here about the back-emf not the reactive-emf which happens later upon the magnet leaving the alignment.
Now something of importance I was posting already ( @broli ) : Even if i would try to measure with a scope I will not be able to track the back-emf. Onward-magnetisation and back-emf occur in the same field-location at the same time-frame.
What I mean is that you can not watch these two phaenomena seperately. This is very complicated stuff and we need to be very precise ( I repeat myself ).
Why do I mention this ? We loose time if we follow the wrong path. And according to the daily experience of
people working "hands on" (as Thane and I_ron do ) a concept is just 1 % of the effort. 99 % is used up in practical work.
Please bear with me folks. This development-phase is very important. Short-cut-decisions are dangerous in this respect.
The reactive-emf occures at a point in time the magnet is already displaced from alignement ( I_ron : watch out- it is heading twowards your face ) and thus the decreasing ( breakdown of magnetic field ) magnetic field enters the blank rotor-plate. The magnet will not be affected. Now the question is : what is the result of the reactive-component entering a iron rotating-plate ( even if it is laminated) ? Another drag I would guess.
Nevertheless - I agree @broli - we need skope-measurements in order to watch the point in time the reactive-emf occures and how this affects the coil-current.
So Laurent´s setup by using just small insular iron-pads on a plastic-drum ( or plate) -- where the magnet is mounted on - would bring us new insights. Where does the reactive-emf rising up in the coils go then ?
I would expect a better result using a plastic-drum because the magn-field has no way to exert another drag.
If you would use a scope I would expect a negative voltage-spike which simply adds to the output-energy.
@Laurent : Have you been at the Oktoberfest and experienced the mass of drunken (human)dogs ?
Whoaaa...Whoaaa.. I have not been there since 20 years now..althogh it is just around the corner. I
do not like to dwell among drunken people.
Regards
Kator01
@Thane
just sorry to disturb this thread with something probably completly off topic
but at this point of highest tension and intense brain storming, i propose a small break ,just 5 minutes
today DEK my jungest dog leave some papers on my desk. He knows that apart of a high efficiency alternator i am looking for a better electric motor for my ultralights.
so he suggested to consult the eminences of this thread to know if this stuff can be of any interest or perhaps as already been studied ,by whom and on which thread if any and if not is it worth to open a specific one?
It took me about 10 minutes to realise a very basic testing proto which i can't prevent me to expose here under
thanks for your patience,
@Kator01
no but i visited Marienplatz and had good eating underground ;)
Quote from: Kator01 on January 29, 2009, 09:48:52 AM
I_ron,
ok now we have some hot stuff to discuss here :
Regards
Kator01
Laurent,
Excellent drawings (again) I like the first one best, but this could also be turned to an axial one with
a brake rotor. I like the way you pick up on the suggestions (holes)!
kator, and all
I just don't know...but if what T reports is reproducible then something is happening with the Lenz
vector. There are several patents on "something" similar taking place with "lenz less" generators,
so it is a possibility.
Yes, I agree, the counter electromotive force (lenz vector) is almost exactly instantaneous with the
applied flux, but, like the applied vector will take a path of least resistance. So maybe Mr T is
correct and feeding two cores from one core that is half the size or less does lead to a bottleneck
for the returning lenz vector?
We will have to do some tests for sure.
I completed the third rotor yesterday and want to wind a coil for it today. So I hesitate to jump
right in on this "new" concept until I have some numbers for the HV coil.
Big T is in California I imagine...did a trace on the rotor and it was delivered at 9:34 on the 27th.
Was offered a choice of two day service for Ca$123 or three day service for Ca$27... took a chance
on the three day... duh, didn't figure out 'till I got home that that was ground... still it seems to have
worked...only took four days... who can you believe?
So pretty exciting times for Mr T, Great that he is sharing so much with us. I won't hear any more
now until you do, so hang in there!!!
Bis späeter und Liebsten Gruße
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on January 28, 2009, 11:28:40 AM
It has been my observation that the most potential is always generated at the core/magnet interface.
Here we have the induced voltage taking place at the far end of the food chain, as it were.
Ron
FROM SUNNY CALIFORNIA... 8)
I_RON, DON'T FORGET THE INDUCED FLUX FROM EACH COIL IS ADDING TO THE INDUCED VOLTAGE IN EACH COIL...
CHEERS
T
Quote from: i_ron on January 29, 2009, 11:45:36 AM
Laurent,
Yes, I agree, the counter electromotive force (lenz vector) is almost exactly instantaneous with the
applied flux, but, like the applied vector will take a path of least resistance. So maybe Mr T is
correct and feeding two cores from one core that is half the size or less does lead to a bottleneck
for the returning lenz vector?
Ron
GOOD...
LEAST RELUCTANCE IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN LEAST RESISTANCE.
THE CORE RELUCTANCE INCREASES AS FLUX MAGNITUDES RISE.
SO AT TDC (magnet neither approaching nor receding) THE PRIMARY CORE LEG OUGHT TO BE SATURATED OR VERY CLOSE TO IT, THAT WAY ANY INDUCED COIL FLUX MUST FLOW TO THE OUTER COIL LEGS.
SOME INITIAL FLUX MAY BACKTRACK DOWN THE PRIMARY LEG BUT IT MAY GET "CUT OFF" AT SOME POINT AS THE RELUCTANCE RISES.
INDEED MORE TESTING REQUIRED.
@ LAURENT: NICE TO SEE YOU RUNNING WITH THIS... ;)
T
Lenz law is talking about the counter electric motive force. The induced voltage in the coil not the current flow in the coil. You have to change the magnetic core parameters to induce the voltage. You do not have to pull the current immediately.
The alternators of today do because they have lowimpedance coils to keep the resistive losses down.
Quote from: i_ron on January 29, 2009, 11:45:36 AM
I completed the third rotor yesterday and want to wind a coil for it today.
I_RON, 100 - 150 OHMS 30 GAUGE WIRE
- START WITH THE HV COIL AND GET IT WORKING FIRST BEFORE YOU MOVE ONTO ADDING THE OUTER E FINGERS OR TURN YOUR E COIL SIDEWAYS SO ONLY HV COIL IS INTERACTING WITH ROTOR MAGNETS.
MAKE SURE THE OUTER E FINGERS ARE SLIGHTLY RECESSED (1/8") TO ENCOURAGE HC FLUX TO GO INTO THE HV COIL AND NOT INTO THE ROTOR MAGNET'S PATH. (SORRY I BOXED YOU A COIL YESTERDAY BUT RAN OUT OF TIME TO MAIL IT.)
AND MAKE SURE THE HV CORE IS NOT TOO HIGH - IF IT IS TOO HIGH I.E INTERACTING WITH MORE THAN ONE MAGNET AT A TIME IT WON'T WORK.
HERE IS A PIC OF THE NEW MANUFACTURED COIL - YOU CAN SEE HOW I HAD TO GRIND AWAY SOME CORE MATERIAL TO GET IT TO ACCELERATE (WHEN PREVIOUSLY IT DECELERATED - BECAUSE THE CORE WAS TO HIGH).
ALSO TURNED SIDEWAYS (& NARROWER OR THINNER) IT ACCELERATES VERY WELL.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A GOOD WORKING COIL AND A NON WORKING COIL IS VERY SUBTLE.
CHEERS
T
@sparks
Yep. Not to confuse with flyback.
@all
As usual, I am always looking at what guys do and try to find things that are already made.
So to keep with my tradition - lol - what if the HC and HV coils were simply taken by using a regular microwave transformer.
If you look at the 4th and 5th images located here;
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3972.msg129277#msg129277
All you do is wind an outer coil over this one. You can then have both a primary and secondary coil to draw from and wind the outer one. Just wondering.
Hi Laurent,
concerning your coil-disc-setup :
what kind of disc is this : a haddrive-disc or a CD-disc ?
Now just using straight dc is not effective. My idea here would be a hall-sensor placed near the magnet as it passes the coil in order to switch current off and in succesion switch a load on the coil to use the reactive-emf magnetic field to push the magnet away.( But this is Bedini-stuff )
What are your results so far ?
What do you mean by Ultralight ?
The same suggestion applies to thanes coil. For improvement I would use a hall-sensor for timing the load in the hv-coil. This would be my next systematic step because is is not necessary to change the coil, just to add a switching circuit which Luc could provide, I guess. Up to now the hv-coil is under load all the time.
What do you say @thane ?
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: wattsup on January 29, 2009, 01:12:07 PM
what if the HC and HV coils were simply taken by using a regular microwave transformer.
@ wattsup
Thane and i_ron have already tried microwave oven transformers. According to Thane, they work, and you can get acceleration , but of course, custom made coils generally work better.
If you read the earlier posts (around page page 329) you will see the MOT stuff. And yes, for anyone attempting replication, MOTs are a great way to get started.
@derricka
Thanks for the heads up. I hate needles and am allergic to hay. If they worked, then it shows that it may be a question of sizing. The MOT probably requires bigger magnets on the rotor and a larger wheel to interact longer with its obvious greater laminate mass. Hmmmm.
@woopy
Good work. Will the magnets really hold.
I put something up on the forum that may give you some other ideas.
Thread: Canceling Lenz's Law - Methods
Self charging Impulse Coil
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6116.msg141524#msg141524
Added: The zenor should not be used. Use reed contacts instead.
@Thane
just to present you DEK a very clever dog
but DEK's idea is out off this topic and as i see, this thread has to stay concentrated very much to get something usable probably very soon for the perepitiea fantastis possibilities
btw i made a test on the very very crude prototype of the DEK U-coil coreless idea to see if it could get some possibility to counteract Lenz's law and built a very basic setup which i pulsed by compressed air.
so my proposition, if you didn't already tried it, why not compressed air motorising the rotor of the Perepiteia it is very simple to get a constant air input in a lab and so all the questions of electric prime mover and induction slips and all the bla bla could be avoided and you could "practicaly" simulate a windmill prime mover!!!
@Kator01
thank's for interest but i don't want to disturb this thread and i will probably open a special topic next week to detail the DEK u-coil coreless idea
sharing is probably the THE way to go forward
thanks to all in this forum
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on January 30, 2009, 05:36:32 PM
thank's for interest but i don't want to disturb this thread and i will probably open a special topic next week to detail the DEK u-coil coreless idea
Laurent
I WOULN'T WORRY TO MUCH THERE WOOFY - BECAUSE THIS THREAD WENT TO THE "DOGS" LONG AGO...
T
Is this a picture of LarryC's dog sleeping (spread eagle) or LarryC ???
Hint: LarryC is a Louisiana Cajun.
All correct guesstermators (bushism) will receive a vacuum sealed bag of dog(?) manure. This offer is only good in the Continental US and to states without a blasonofavitch for a governor. For a special bonus gift, which is the only qualifying state? ;D
Thane
You are showing us that delaying Lenz's law may accelerate rotor with permanent magnets. Do you think , just theoretically that someday we would be able to accelerate rotating magnetic fields like those in AC induction motors ? Is it possible to influence magnetic field alone not a source ?
Quote from: LarryC on January 31, 2009, 10:02:39 AM
Is this a picture of LarryC's dog sleeping (spread eagle) or LarryC ???
Hint: LarryC is a Louisiana Cajun.
All correct guesstermators (bushism) will receive a vacuum sealed bag of dog(?) manure. This offer is only good in the Continental US and to states without a blasonofavitch for a governor. For a special bonus gift, which is the only qualifying state? ;D
Larry, I must protest the discrimination against our great country.. the premier of BC is well qualified
to compete on equal terms with the EX Blagie, the prime minister of the country is a war criminal too, maybe not as notorious as boosh but right up there in deceit and killing "lesser" people.
And doesn't our hand in glove nato "co-operation" where we helped you guys bomb and DU the
Serbian people count"? This must be worth some small token? Maybe a couple of freeze dried bags?
Actually if you were to pelletize the "product", you could sell it as, SMARTENING UP PILLS
As long as the proper disclaimer was on the package... "don't step in that Elmer....thats...etc"
But a really great idea would be to make the "product" into BELLS to be hung around each of our
politicians necks... then when we wanted their attention.. we could just ring the bell... and it would
go... DUNG.
Ron
Now before all the do gooders have a tizzy fit, I should point out this is a work of art, on public
display... so just relax. It is posted to point out the difference between Larry and myself ::)
You see I don't have as much hair... and I am not in a cage...
Quote from: i_ron on January 31, 2009, 11:52:02 AM
I am old enough to remember what the country was like before these quislings destroyed it. People that worked for the government were paid by the government, now people that work for the government are paid by IBM... our government gives IBM billions of dollars and IBM, out of the goodness of their hearts, dole out millions to the workers. What a gigantic scam! Privatization my foot, it is PIRATE- atization. We had fair government but that didn't please the Elite, so they had the RCMP run a sting op and run our good premier out on a rail so they could install this joker...
http://thetyee.ca/News/2005/05/09/DavidMaclean/
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=S_JWxltjm_k
http://www.itworldcanada.com/a/Daily-News/755e2abe-190f-480d-b50f-aa4701f14319.html
"Since Gordon Campbell took power in May 2001, there have been over 20,000 industry jobs lost in the mills and woods, including the permanent closures of at least 43 wood-processing facilities in province. Another 6 mills are down indefinitely,†said Hunt. “The unwritten future legacy of the Campbell government promises to be the hollowing out and destruction of the BC forest industry.â€
In the same seven-year period, some 30 million cubic meters of raw logs have been exported from BC, assisting competitors in the U.S. and economic development in foreign countries."
Same story with the fishing industry and the mining industry.
And the sad part is... it is probably the same in your country, state, province... right?
Ronnie's rant is over for now...
Ron
You got frogs legs!!
Better stay away from Louisiana
Chet
A good name for that piece wood be 'Hangin' Six'. ;D
Regards...
@ Thane
as i can see there will be no problem to disturb this thread with the last DEK's drawing about the U-CorelessCoil (UCC)
the very first crude tests i made today are positive Lenz boxing against Lenz seems to be "match nul"
very interesting :)
Laurent
Laurent,
what did you do ?
Did you drive the disc with a motor and short the coil ?
Or did you fire the coil with the battery and put a break on the rotating disc - and then measure the current-inflow-difference?
I really wonder how the spacial distribution of magnetic fluxlines look like in this setup.
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on January 31, 2009, 06:31:48 PM
Laurent,
what did you do ?
Did you drive the disc with a motor and short the coil ?
Or did you fire the coil with the battery and put a break on the rotating disc - and then measure the current-inflow-difference?
I really wonder how the spacial distribution of magnetic fluxlines look like in this setup.
Kator01
Quite clever actually... my take is he is powering it with compressed air... then as the north pole
which had been approaching the first leg of the coil, passes through, it becomes a south pole and the
induced voltage is in the same direction Meanwhile the north pole has now reached the far leg
and the sequence repeats. Almost reminds me of a Dave Squires generator...
Close Laurent? I am not too sure how you have the polarity....
Ron
@I-ron and Kator01
here the 2d flux path i could determine with a crude compass
here also a (one hour work ) DEK motor setup
the orange wheel and the electronic are the rest of an unsuccessfull Hall switching
than i used a simple reedswitch and it works quite well (max RPM with 4.5 volt battery = 1250 rpm) i tried to mesure the amps but it was impossible with my meter (blinking reading) perhaps because bemf
notice that i made 3 slots (each at 60 degrees) in a stack of 3 cd and insert squared magnet
the U-corelesscoil in also square
very interesting 8)
Laurent
sorry
i made a small mistake on the above photos
the magnets are of course at 120 gegrees and not 60
here a photo with the rotor stopped
the reed switch is simply clamped so i can tune it easily
if somebody can post a very simple circuit to see if there is some bemf to get back to recharge a battery or lit a bulb or led
thank's
Laurent
Should do it:
Hi Laurent,
you did not tell us how you start the whole thing rotating. The reed-switch is only closed if it approaches the magnet.
So did you spin it up manually or as Ron said by compressed air ?
So when the disc is started to accellerate ( regardless whatever methode you use ) to you have to continue to move it manually ?
I simply miss the description of the process.
Help, help help !!!!
Kator01
Hi Laurent,
please see my short sketch I made.
If you have no scope then you have a problem because - as I understand your process - youl will have
pulsed mode and therefore any digimeter or even analogue-meter will not be of any help.
If you can measure with a scope-probe across R1 then this will give you the voltage-spike, the time the voltage is
switched on and the period betwenn each pulse. Then you will get the mean-value of current by voltage / R2 x puls-time / T ( see pic MeanV.jpg)
Let us assume you measure a 2 volt-pike and this spike is lasting 1 milli-sec ( 1exp-3) and the time between the each pulse is T = 5 milli-sec the you must calculate mean-value of current i :
i = 2 volt / 10 ( ohm) x 1 exp-3 / 5 exp-3 = 0.01 x 1exp-3 / 5 exp-3 = 0.02 Ampre .
Using the attached layout will recharge your battery directly. I would recommend that you will drive this circuit with a rechargeable NiCd-Akku ( 4 in series = 4.8 Volt ) Then you can watch during days of runtime if the NiCd - Voltage increases or decreases.
Better diodes : fast switching diodes,but even a standard 1N4148 will do it for the small currents I assume to flow here. If one diode get too hot put two or three in parallell.
Best wishes
Kator01
Kator01,
I have an idea. If you can see magnetic flux lines around inductor or compute them just about the time it collapses, then why not treating it like simple magnet ? That way by placing permanent magnet nearby with poles so placed that will support magnetic field of inductor just before collapse (like two magnets stacking N-S to each other forming stronger magnet). You will be able to couple magnetic field for collapse.
OF course that would probably limit ordinary square wave impulses but who knows if back emf spikes are most important. Rotary magnet configuration would solve that problem but isn't that what Bedini is doing ? ;D
good day all
thank's Nali2001 i tried your circuit and it works i used 1N5408 + a cap 400v 4.7micro f + a small dc motor 3 volt nominal fited with a small prop (that is probably not the best matos but i made with what i had and i am not electronicor)
be sure that my set up will not take off ;D but the prop spin pretty well. ( with the rotor spining at 1100 rpm the small prop spin1680 rpm)
notice that on this setup i wound a stronger UCC with 44 turns 0.5 mm copper wire and something bigger than the previous one
@Kator01
you are right i have to buy a scope to see what happens. I made an amps mesure with an ampclampmeter it gave me around 0.3 amp but as the current is pulsed can i thrust this mesurement ?
now i have to scale all this stuff the work really begins + working on the perepiteia
Laurent
Hi forest,
I could not fully grasp your idea. Can you use this pic u-coil-fluxpath and edit the magnets in there ?
Have you a software for this ( corel or adobe ) ? or make a handdrawing ?
When I look at the fieldlines it seems to me that it resembles two magnets in a S-S or N-N configuration.
So when the magnet is sucked in ( coming from the left ) and the reed switches off in the middle-position you will then have the ractive EMF on the right coil-side in the same polarisation as on the left part where it was attracted in the first step.
But this can only occur if after switch off by the reed you instantly short the coil in order to get the opposite magnetic field. A open coil just will have a reactive-Voltage,see ?
@Laurent : You will need a a circuit which puts the coil under load ( 10 ohm ) or short it right after the reed opens.
Can you get what I propose ? You will then get an opposed magnetic field which accelaerates the
magnet a second time and then decays.
This is one of the reasons why accelleration occurs in thanes setup because hv-coil is shorted
during the process. It would however run better ( accoring to my understanding) if he would time the
shorting of the hv-coil ( I already posted this )
I really would like to discuss this further but by now I would ask Laurent to open a new thread on this.
@Laurent : ask stephan, to open a thread, I think if this traffic increases on this interesting setup of yours we owe
it to thane to not use more space here on this.
Or we move it to one of the bedini-threads which exist already
Regards
Kator01
@all
as Mr Thane seems to apreciate is " vacation" in CALIFORNIA ;D i profited from this entract to present a Perepiteia complementary possibility with the UCC
but as i mentionned earlier i would not disturb the real aim of this thread
so i opened a dedicated thread
btw as somebody any news of Thane i am really in big worry where are my blue coils?? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Laurent
yeah, kind curious where he is also. Supposed to be sending me my rotor sometime this week, getting anxious.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on February 02, 2009, 05:49:55 PM
yeah, kind curious where he is also. Supposed to be sending me my rotor sometime this week, getting anxious.
STILL ALIVE...! :P
GOOD TRIP TO CA - SIGNED A DEAL.
BEING INTERVIEWED TUESDAY ON CBC RADIO TO BE BROADCAST WEDNESDAY.
WE ARE HAVING A MINI DRAGONS DEN HERE IN OTTAWA AND OUR COMAPNY IS 1 OF 3 OUT OF 47 CHOSEN TO PRESENT TO THE DRAGONS.
TORONTO STAR IS PREPARING FOR A "1 YEAR LATER" FOLLOW-UP ARTICLE.
PUT I_RONS' NEW ROTOR ROTOR ON THE CA PROTOTYPE (LEE VALLEY MAGNETS) AND GOT ACCELERATION WITH AS LITTLE AS 48 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR @ ABOUT 2500 - 3000 RPM.
PUT THE OTHER NEW ROTOR (75 LB PULLING WEIGHT MAGNETS) ON AND GOT 10 WATTS OF OUTPUT @ 1000 RPM OR 30 W AT 3000 RPM.
BENT THE MOTOR SHAFT TRYING TO HAMMER OFF A HOT ROTOR/DRIVE SHAFT AND HAD TO SEND OUT FOR A NEW MOTOR.
HAVING I_RON'S ROTOR SENT HERE W/ 75 LB-ER MAGNETS AND EXPECT TO GET ABOUT 50 - 60 WATTS FROM MY LATEST (LOW COGGING - LOW HYSTERISIS) COIL - CORE.
CHEERS
CHEAP- ASS-CRANKYpants ;)
awesome stuff thane! Read everything before you sign anything tho!
ouf !!
and yeepee! very good news ;D
bravo again
waiting for your next video
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 02, 2009, 07:02:34 PM
STILL ALIVE...! :P
CHEAP- ASS-CRANKYpants ;)
Butt traveling very close to the edge of being returned to the other world....
Damn, I try my best to make my rotors "idiot proof" but I never allowed for the barbarians... ???
suffering Ron, after having a naughty trick pulled on his gullible, unsuspecting self, but who will know
better next time, if there is a next for Ottawa tricksters... There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, it's probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. It fool me. We can't get fooled again.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 02, 2009, 07:02:34 PM
HAVING I_RON'S ROTOR SENT HERE W/ 75 LB-ER MAGNETS AND EXPECT TO GET ABOUT 50 - 60 WATTS FROM MY LATEST (LOW COGGING - LOW HYSTERISIS) COIL - CORE.
CHEERS
CHEAP- ASS-CRANKYpants ;)
Only one problem there... did you think to ask i_ron if you could?
Is that not a loaner that was to be returned after the ca trip?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on February 02, 2009, 08:55:23 PM
Only one problem there... did you think to ask i_ron if you could?
Is that not a loaner that was to be returned after the ca trip?
Ron
ASK I_RON WHAT...?
I'M STILL IN ca.
T
Hi folks, I've been studying Thanes experiments and have seen a similar result in the past using permanent magnets on a rotor and I am again seeing the same type of results. I wound a dual coil onto a bolt meaning a coil back to back piggy back style on a bolt like the previous coil geometries used by Thane. Tests show the usual lentz drag upon shorting the first coil which is right next to rotor neo magnet, then when shorting second coil piggy backed to first coil input current then drops to just about the no load current input. Now when only shorting the second coil which is the piggy back coil furthest away from rotor input current drops below unloaded input current draw showing added speed of rotor or torque. Now i am aware this setting back of the coil away from the rotor magnet idea was used by N. Tesla in a dynamo generator so it seems im replicating that design. Although maybe with increased speed i can load both coils and see an increase in speed or decrease in input current draw as Thane is seeing. tests were done with the one dual coil and 2 magnets on rotor in unipolar fashion so both like poles on one side and now im flipping other magnet to test alternating current and see if results are similar. output current of second piggy back coil was 1.2A shorted and 2.2V unloaded 18awg wire .5 ohms or less probably less.
Just thought those results thus far, you folks might find useful.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on February 02, 2009, 11:53:03 PM
..... output current of second piggy back coil was 1.2A shorted and 2.2V unloaded 18awg wire .5 ohms or less probably less.
;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 02, 2009, 07:02:34 PM
STILL ALIVE...! :P
BENT THE MOTOR SHAFT TRYING TO HAMMER OFF A HOT ROTOR/DRIVE SHAFT AND HAD TO SEND OUT FOR A NEW MOTOR.
CHEAP- ASS-CRANKYpants ;)
RE: Bending the motor shaft...
Reminds me of an ol' saying:
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail!"
;D
Seriously, all great news Thane!
-Mark
@I_RON:
That was Scottie off of Startrek. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me for allowing it to happen again.
Should have seen it comming.
@ Thane:
Just remember thane, the "standard" agreement there at the Dragons Den is 50% it seems. All the guy has to do is get
one more percent and then he can "tell you" what he is going to do with your invention. Nasty business but that is most likely
how they got to be where they are today. Stand firm on 40 and give him not a shilling more.
Thaelin
Hi skywatcher 123,
I have a problem visualizing the construction of your "back to back piggy back coil" one of which is displaced or better at a bigger distance from the magnets.
Do you have a picture or can you draw a sketch of how this looks like ?
Reference to a description of Teslas setup concerning this ?
Thank you
Kator01
Quote from: Thaelin on February 03, 2009, 06:18:51 AM
@I_RON:
That was Scottie off of Startrek. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me for allowing it to happen again.
Thaelin
Hi Thaelin,
Yup, it is an old saying in english... but the contorted mixed up mess I quoted is that of Bush's
now famous fractured speech...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ux3DKxxFoM
Favorite George W Bush sayings
"Is our children learning"
"I believe that human beings and fish can coexist"
"You misunderestimated me"
"It will take time to restore chaos"
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 02, 2009, 07:02:34 PM
BENT THE MOTOR SHAFT TRYING TO HAMMER OFF A HOT ROTOR/DRIVE SHAFT AND HAD TO SEND OUT FOR A NEW MOTOR.
CHEERS
CHEAP- ASS-CRANKYpants ;)
This is a complex problem but with simple resolution. To get the rotor on and off requires that the
rotor be just slightly bigger in the bore than the shaft. Too big and it will not locate accurately
Not knowing the level of skill in California I had assumed some level of competence but for future
reference here is the story...
Any metal to metal fit should never be made dry. There are a mirade of product, from engine oil,
vaseline, white grease, lithium grease, silicone grease, C5A, Lubri Plate, SKF grease, EP Grease,
Krytox, the list is endless. Just a smear... then wipe off...got it?
The Ryobi spindle is .499 inches in diameter. The next step up, that is the part of the shaft that goes into the motor is .590. In other words the rotor seats against a step that is only .045 per side, a fat
millimeter. IF one were to over tighten the nut one can easily swage this step into the rotor hub. Too
loose and the rotor can spin and fire to the shaft at this junction.
In my rotors, therefore, I use a setscrew to retain the rotor, and merely snug up the nut for insurance.
I shipped the rotors to Ottawa and Ca with the instruction that the setscrew was OPTIONAL...BUT
if the setscrew was used then a flat must be filed on the motor shaft... otherwise the setscrew will
raise a burr that will prevent the rotor removal...
So just guessing from this distance... but it seems one or more of these simple engineering
practices were not followed.
IF it was from heat expansion then the solution is to cool the part with an air hose, or wait, but
never hammer off a part that is supposed to be a precision fit. In my design, the six screws that
hold the disc to the rotor can be removed, the disc slid back far enough to allow a three legged puller to be used to remove the hub.
Ron
Check out 'Red Wing' lathes used in the dental lab industry...they have a threaded cylinder that slides on over the shaft for safely removing metal to metal rotors.
When removing the rotor, just use the affixed lever arm to simply back the the threaded cylinder away from the motor, simultaneously forcing the rotor evenly off the shaft.
I don't imagine it would be too difficult to attach this little tool to any motor.
Regards...
Quote from: i_ron on February 03, 2009, 10:50:27 AM
Hi Thaelin,
Yup, it is an old saying in english... but the contorted mixed up mess I quoted is that of Bush's
now famous fractured speech...
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ux3DKxxFoM
Favorite George W Bush sayings
"Is our children learning"
"I believe that human beings and fish can coexist"
"You misunderestimated me"
"It will take time to restore chaos"
Ron
I'm rolling on the floor there. Fractured speech? That nit wit couldn't do anything
unless daddy told him exactly how to do it. Sorry, just had to.
And now we return you to your previously scheduled banter....... ;D
thaelin
Hi folks, hi Kator. I dont have on hand any text alluding to Teslas dynamo, i recall Peter Lindemann explaining it briefly in one of his lecture videos and if you really need this reference it would take a while to dig up the video but i could if you wish, but it may be in a Tesla patent. Here is a quick cad drawing and im shortly going to test with the neo magnets in alternating polarity configuration.
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on February 03, 2009, 12:10:40 PM
Check out 'Red Wing' lathes used in the dental lab industry...they have a threaded cylinder that slides on over the shaft for safely removing metal to metal rotors.
When removing the rotor, just use the affixed lever arm to simply back the the threaded cylinder away from the motor, simultaneously forcing the rotor evenly off the shaft.
I don't imagine it would be too difficult to attach this little tool to any motor.
Regards...
ATUALLY WE JUST TURNED THE MOTOR AROUND AND USED THE OTHER DRIVE-SHAFT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MOTOR.
T
Quote from: i_ron on February 02, 2009, 08:55:23 PM
Only one problem there... did you think to ask i_ron if you could?
Is that not a loaner that was to be returned after the ca trip?
Ron
NOT SURE IF I AM BEING PLAYED HERE - SO I WILL RESPOND SINCERELY...
(I hope I am ((being played)) but still not willing to take any chances)
YES - I DID THINK TO ASK RON, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THE "LOANER" ARANGEMENTS MADE BY RON TO THE LOANEE AND THEN IT SLIPPED MY MIND (WHICH IS A VERY SLIPPERY PLACE THESE DAYS).
IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SHIPPED YET - IN WHICH CASE PERMISSION IS REQUESTED.
SINCERELY
GROVELINGpants
Quote@I_RON:
That was Scottie off of Startrek. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me for allowing it to happen again.
I REMEMBER HEARING A SHRINK EXPLAIN THAT BUSH IS MENTALLY AND EMOTIONALLY INCAPABLE OF EXPRESSING GUILT OR SHAME - THEREFORE HE CAN'T UTTER THE WORDS - "SHAME ON ME" IN ANY CONTEXT.
Should have seen it comming.
Quote@ Thane:
Just remember thane, the "standard" agreement there at the Dragons Den is 50% it seems. All the guy has to do is get
one more percent and then he can "tell you" what he is going to do with your invention. Nasty business but that is most likely
how they got to be where they are today. Stand firm on 40 and give him not a shilling more.
Thaelin
IT IS A "FRIENDLY" SCALED DOWN VERSION OF THE REAL THING - WE DID A SHORT INTERVIEW TODAY AND WILL BE ON CBC OTTAWA WEDNESDAY MORNING AROUND 7:30 AM (ALSO ONLINE ANYTIME AFTER THAT).
T
Thank you skywalker123,
that makes it pretty clear, No need of digging further in Teslas work.
So the bolt was extending to the left about the lenght of one coil ? Was there a backplate where the coil-setup fastened or did you use just a support ( non ferrous) ?
You know this is very important. The reason I ask is that in this configuration the created fieldstrenght is very high
( no closed fluxpath as in thanes setup ) and available immediatly.
I learned of this when I studied the old spark-inductor-design in a german physics-textbook daten 1940.
Fieldstrenght H is > 1000 to 2000 in air than in iron. A spark-inductor is always driven with both ends ot the bolt ( iron-core) open.
But if you short the coil far away form the magnet in your drawing there might be a delay of the rising reactive magnetic field.
Very intereresting, indeed.
Thnaks again Skywalker123
.
Kator01
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 03, 2009, 06:21:50 PM
NOT SURE IF I AM BEING PLAYED HERE - SO I WILL RESPOND SINCERELY...
(I hope I am ((being played)) but still not willing to take any chances)
YES - I DID THINK TO ASK RON, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THE "LOANER" ARANGEMENTS MADE BY RON TO THE LOANEE AND THEN IT SLIPPED MY MIND (WHICH IS A VERY SLIPPERY PLACE THESE DAYS).
IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SHIPPED YET - IN WHICH CASE PERMISSION IS REQUESTED.
SINCERELY
GROVELINGpants
Lets do the laundry off list
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on February 03, 2009, 07:36:10 PM
Lets do the laundry off list
Ron
FINE BUT IT'S STILL GOING IN THE MOVIE... 8)
BASED ON YOUR SCULPTURE YOU WILL BE PLAYED BY JOHN HOLMES.
T
Hi kator, heres a pic that may help. the bolt is a 1/2 dia., 3-1/4L., with 1-1/4" hanging off back of rear coil which is threaded with a nut, rear coil depth is 3/4" X 2" dia. with 1-1/4" from front of coil to front of bolt head.
I also tested today the alternating neo magnet configuration and results are the same which are decreased input current below unloaded input current when coil shorted.
Don't know if this has any relevance, but I dug this out of my files on magnetics...
Note the date of the article!
-Mark
Variation in the Longitudinal Incremental Permeability due to a Superimposed Circular Field
Retyped from NATURE Page 795, October 29, 1938
During the course of an investigation of the variation of the longitudinal incremental permeability by a superimposed circular magnetic field, some rather interesting results were obtained with certain ironnickel alloys. The ferromagnetic materials under investigation were of wire form and served as the core of long slender solenoid. Direct current was passed through the core to produce the circular field, and the longitudinal permeability was calculated from inductance measurements on the solenoid.
Using well-annealed alloys, it was found that rather large increases in longitudinal incremental permeability could be obtained as a function of relatively small superimposed circular field, while upon twisting the conducting core a gradual change from an increase to a decrease in the incremental longitudinal permeability as a function of a superimposed circular field was obtained.
These effects are shown in Fig. 1 where curve (a) gives the variation of the inductance of the solenoid as a function of the direct current through the conducting core of an unstrained sample. Curve (b) is that obtained after the core has been twisted the 120 degrees. Here the inductance of the solenoid without any core is 1.3 millihenries. In all measurements, the effect of the earth's field was reduced to a minimum and the sample were completely demagnetized before each run.
Page 1 of 4
Hello Mark,
very interesting. Is this the full content ?
I did research on nature.com and found this here, but it is only an abstract and you have to pay for full content I guess.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v142/n3600/pdf/142795a0.pdf (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v142/n3600/pdf/142795a0.pdf)
Anybody has acess to the original writing ?
@skywalker123 : thank you for this pic. Do you have a view about your setup which shows how the magnets are driven. This perspective does not give me a clue. I looks for me as if the driving axis leads directly through the coil.
I only can imagine that the coil is mounted on the left rectangular wooden plate and is displaced in direction to the viewer and the motor-driven axis crosses the rectangular wooden frontplate through a hole and drives the wooden disc with the magnets.
Is that so ?
One thing you could test is to take a longer core-shaft so that you have a bigger mass situated to the left coil.
I propose this because it could give us a indication if it is possible to get an increase of the time-delay.
I would assume that the spontaneous magentisation spreads ( longitudianl incrementation) in a non-uniform way and consumes up more time spreading to the left that to the right.
It is no big deal to do the change in this setup.
In a next step I would make the corelength eaqal to the coil-length and embedd the coil in a fitting (hole) in your wooden frontplate ( left plate )
What so you think ?
Thank you for your effort
Kator01
Hello all,
I have to revise my schemativ posted in Replay #4158 on page 416 because of an error.
Diode was wrongly placed.
Here is the revised circuit.
Thank you Gyula for remembering me.
Rgrds
Kator01
Hi Kator, yes your description seems accurate and i was thinking as well of increasing ferromagnetic core mass as well. I've been thinking about why the input current is decreasing below unloaded input current and I think I may have an idea. When say the north pole of neo magnet approaches the coil lets say an air core, we have lentz drag and if we set back the coil we still have lentz drag but less intense, now bring the coil back close to the magnet and insert a ferromagnetic core and again we have lentz drag, but now if we set back the coil with the core inserted as the magnet approaches its north pole field prefers the steel bolt as a flux route and the bolt is now a south polarity because thats how ferromagnetic materials work compared to diamagnetic materials like copper which will create the same polarity. So we now have a south pole at bolt core which induces a south pole in set back coil up to a certain point in the approach phase which enhances attraction to bolt core and explains the reduced input current or increase speed/torque. If there is a delay in reactive currrent as you say I cant visualize how that explains the results im seeing and you would have to make that clear to me, however I think my idea fits the observed results. What you folks think.
Hi,
Does someone have the link to listen the interview of Thane on CBC ?
Well, Steorn has finally come out of the closet! The R&D closet that is...
http://www.steorn.com (http://www.steorn.com)
To quote their website:
QuoteHow Orbo Works
Orbo is based upon time variant magnetic interactions, i.e. magnetic interactions whose efficiency varies as a function of transaction timeframes.
It is this variation of energy exchanged as a function of transaction time frame that lies at the heart of Orbo technology, and its ability to contravene the principle of the conservation of energy. Why? Conservation of energy requires that the total energy exchanged using interactions are invariant in time. This principle of time invariance is enshrined in Noether's Theorem.
The time variant nature of Orbo interactions can be engineered using two basic techniques. The first technique utilizes a method of controlling the response time of magnetic materials to make them time variant. This is achieved by controlling the MH position of materials during permanent magnetic interactions.
The second technique decouples the Counter Electromotive Force (CEMF) from torque for electromagnet interactions. This decoupling of CEMF allows time variant magnetic interactions in electromagnetic systems.
Orbo 1.0, the first commercial release of our platform technology, is based upon our electromagnetic implementation. Orbo 1.0 will be made available initially under license to 300 engineering companies and to the wider product development community later during the course of 2009.
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/technology (http://www.steorn.com/orbo/technology)
Times are getting
very interesting, indeed!
-Mark
Quote from: albator10 on February 05, 2009, 01:36:01 AM
Hi,
Does someone have the link to listen the interview of Thane on CBC ?
http://www.cbc.ca/ottawamorning/archives.html
GO TO "LOCAL ENTERPENEURS SEEK FAME..."
T
Hi skywalker123
For clearing up some important points :
see my Reply #4127 on page 413 :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.4120 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.4120)
Now if you short a coil while the magnet is passing drag ( back-EMF ) can not be avoided. There must exist some compensation-factor which comes into play time-delayed.
As I said, it is not possible to measure the Back-EMF as a seperate phaenomeneon apart from the forward-magnetisation - only the end-result.
We could speculate on and on ...
It is best to experiment.
As a next step - after you have tried to increase the core-mass - I would suggest to wrap a iron-core-material around both coils. You also can take iron-fence-wire. I will come back with a pic of a iron-core-material I removed
from a toroid-transformer. I had discovered that this special type uses a wrapped steel-lamination.
i do not know where you live and where you can get such a material, but soft-iron-wire would do it.
By this the fieldstrengh will be confined within this wrapping and the two coils have a better flux-sharing.
You will notice a big difference.
Regards
Kator01
Hi Kator, I have some floral steel wire coated green from craft store that might work, I will try your ideas soon enough I just want to try a couple of the geometry changes i have in mind. I would like to add to my thoughts on the how this may be working. Ok the north pole is attracting to the ferromagnetic core inducing a south pole in core and in turn inducing a south pole in set back coil as magnet nears alignment with core bolt is almost fully a north polarity and we now have a brief repulsive kick due to collapsing south field in coil and the fact that the core is now north polarity due to collapse and full alignment of magnet, so whichever the reason for a possible repulsive kick i think it exists because there should be an equality between enhanced attraction on approach and departure and this repulsion at tdc and after for whatever the duration of this repulsion might explain the decrease in current input or increased speed/torque. I highlight a simple test that Bill Muller showed in a video of a steel ball A attached to a magnet and when he allowed another steel ball B to be abruptly attracted to the other steel ball A, steel ball B then repelled violently away from steel ball A. I think something along similar lines may be occurring here, although i agree with you experiment is always the best test but at some point its ok to at least form an idea of whats occurring to improve on design. Kator do you agree with my idea that as a north pole magnet approaches ferromagnetic core that at least for some duration of attraction because coil is set back we have an induced south in pole in core and coil and could this be the delay you speak of, after all the core is a separate entity from the coil and has different properties not normally noticed until separated such as in the setting back of a coil.
Hello Skywalker,
of course I agree. When the north approaches the elemental-magnets in the core begin to flip with south to the magnets northpole( alignement of spontaneous magnetisation) . This wave then spreads longitudinaly down the length of the core to the far end.
What happens in the coil is that by the coil-reactance forward-current is rising slow ( back-emf). A fully shorted coil at the far side makes it even worse - my guess - because back-emf is stronger and thus counteracts in return. It simply makes the flipping of the elemental-magnets harder to happen. Then drag is experienced ( from the viewpoint of the magnet) as a stronger force which must be spent in order to flip the elemental magents.
Now i think we have to split the process ( in our visualisation) in two or even three phases.
You have bear with me, but the scene is somehow appearing in this insant before my mental eye.
1) fast flipping of elemetal magnets( el-mag) near the gap at the front of the core ( thus attraction)
2) Longitudinal spread of permability ( magnetic viscosity) to the far left end ( like a wave going to the left)
3) if permability-wave approaches the shorted coil then by the strong rising current and its back-emf a sudden counteraction occures in the core.
I could imagine that this counterforce is so strong that the longitudinal wave of flipping el-mags is reflected
near the shorted coil and in bouncing back towards the air-gap flips the el-mags backwards north facing the
north-pole of the magnet.
If the timing is correct it will hit at the moment the magnet is receding.
So we would be in need of small hall-sensors placed along the core ( better within) to monitor this process.
I really like this setup of yours. It is a good object for study. Hope I have not made it too complicated, but dynamics are.
Regards
Kator01
I DID A QUICK TEST WITH THE HC E COIL TODAY - HERE ARE SOME PICS.
LENZ DECELERATION WAS NOTED WITH AS LITTLE AS 0.5 WATTS OUT.
NEXT STEP IS TO REDUCE THE MIDDLE LEG SIZE AND INCREASE THE OUTER LEGS.
CHEERS
T
PS - FROM A FRIEND...
Thought of the Day
February 6, 2009
THE AVERAGE PERSON WOULD HAVE QUIT AT THE FIRST FAILURE.
THAT'S WHY THERE HAVE BEEN MANY AVERAGE MEN AND ONLY ONE EDISON.
Thomas Edison once observed that the reason most folks don't recognize opportunity when it comes knocking is that it is often dressed in coveralls and looks like work. Edison knew that anything worthwhile never comes easily; if it were easy, anyone could do it.
Because he persisted far beyond the point the average person would consider reasonable and rational, he produced inventions that even the most learned people of the day considered impossible. Great advances in knowledge are often achieved by people with an almost fanatical devotion to finding the solution to a problem. Flashes of inspiration alone are not enough to ensure success; they must be followed by determined, persistent action.
Heins thanks for sharing that experiment. It would be indeed smart to continue on with different shapes and sizes untill you hit the nail.
Btw don't forget the dark side of Edison. For some as revolutionary as him he did a lot to make sure Tesla wouldn't succeed, that's being close minded and greedy imo.
Quote from: NikolaTeslaIf Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search... I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.
whaouuuuu¨!!!! :o
i really love simplicity
less coils +less magnets + more brain energy = more results that's exactly what this world needs Heepee! ;D
go on man go on
Laurent
Quote from: broli on February 06, 2009, 04:39:37 PM
Heins thanks for sharing that experiment. It would be indeed smart to continue on with different shapes and sizes untill you hit the nail.
Btw don't forget the dark side of Edison. For some as revolutionary as him he did a lot to make sure Tesla wouldn't succeed, that's being close minded and greedy imo.
I AM GUESSING THAT THE MIDDLE LEG CAN BE QUITE SMALL AND THE OUTER COILS VIRTUALLY ANY SIZE - IF THE MIDDLE ONE SATURATES. THIS IS A ROTATING VERSION OF THE BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER.
EDISON DID A LOT TO MAKE SURE HE AND HIS COMPANY SUCCEEDED, INCLUDING CRUSHING THE COMPETITION - WHICH IS WHAT FORD, CHRYSLER, CHEVROLET, AND EVERY OTHER COMAPNY DOES TO THIS DAY.
JOHN NASH (Nobel Laureate in Economics) PROVED MATHEMATICALLY THAT THIS BUSINESS MODEL IS UNSUSTAINABLE - THE ABOVE COMPANIES STILL CAN'T "GET IT".
T
hi folks, I am testing a dual rotor design that works even better than the single rotor. output voltage has almost tripled to 6.2V unloaded and 2.1A coil shorted, also the air gaps are about 3/16" on each side. So this design like the previous has reduced input current below that of unloaded input current when coil shorted, also each rotor has 6 1" dia. neo magnets. I am now wondering how this might work as a motor. here is cad pic of simple design. I think its possible something similar is happening with this geometry that is also occurring in thanes setup.
Hi folks, ok just thought i would post this cad pic of newest test setup. It seems that this works even better than having the coil in the center between neo magnets. I am getting 2.6A @ 7.5V with this arrangement even with large airgaps and still much reduced input current below that of unloaded input current draw. I hope this is helping someone out there.
peace, love, light
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on February 07, 2009, 11:44:26 PM
Hi folks, ok just thought i would post this cad pic of newest test setup. It seems that this works even better than having the coil in the center between neo magnets. I am getting 2.6A @ 7.5V with this arrangement even with large airgaps and still much reduced input current below that of unloaded input current draw. I hope this is helping someone out there.
peace, love, light
Looks good skywatcher. (edit... just learning to spel... hehehe)
Can we scale this drawing, I mean is the core three times as long as the coil?
Still just using a steel bolt for this build? Is the amp measurement a shorted test?
Ron
Looks good shywatcher.
Can we scale this drawing, I mean is the core three times as long as the coil?
Still just using a steel bolt for this build?
Is the amp measurement a shorted test?
ARE YOU GETTING ACCELERATION OR DECELERATION?
WHAT IS THE GAUGE OF YOUR WIRE?
NOT_Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 08, 2009, 04:21:37 PM
Looks good shywatcher.
Can we scale this drawing, I mean is the core three times as long as the coil?
Still just using a steel bolt for this build?
Is the amp measurement a shorted test?
ARE YOU GETTING ACCELERATION OR DECELERATION?
WHAT IS THE GAUGE OF YOUR WIRE?
NOT_Ron
Aaaaahh, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, I like you!
Here I'm trying to be more like you and you are trying to be more like me....what a wonderful world!
(even my wife says I am very trying....you 2?)
Real_Ron
Hi thane, ron. I dont know if it could be scaled until tested that way but i would imagine it could, i am still using the same coil/core which is a 3-1/4" long X 1/2" dia.steel bolt. Yes those test results are for a shorted coil 2.6A and the 7.5V is unshorted and the input current drops around 300 millamps below no load input current. It does sound as if the rpm increases to a degree although i dont have at this time a reliable rpm meter. The coil is 18awg. at around .5ohms or below. the coil depth is 3/4" X 2" dia.. and as previous tests, if i did not use the rotor to the left and just used the right rotor there is lentz drag. However with the dual rotors i can have the right rotor next to the magnet and the other rotor more than compensates.
peace, love, light
Hi again, oops just noticed a text mistake. I can have the right magnet rotor directly next to the coil core and by having the left rotor in place as well it not only negates the lentz but adds torque which shows in the reduced input current. So this geometry seems the best balance for getting output and decreased input below unloaded input.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on February 08, 2009, 07:50:00 PM
It does sound as if the rpm increases to a degree although i dont have at this time a reliable rpm meter.
Electronic test equipment can be very expensive, and not everyone is blessed with spare capital.
For the purpose of your experiments, you probably don't need to know what the exact RPM is, just whether or not the RPM has changed.
If you cannot afford an RPM meter, it doesn't matter. It is very cheap and easy to make (or buy) a small pancake air cored coil for voltage sensing and make (or buy) a small Full Wave Bridge.
Place your sensor coil near one of your rotors (but as far away from your generator coil/s as possible, to avoid inductive interference) and connect it via a full wave bridge to a DC voltmeter.
The meter will give a voltage reading proportional to the rpm. If the RPM increases, so will your Voltage reading, if it drops, so will your voltage reading.
Cheap, easy, and more accurate in assessing RPM
changes than your hearing (especially my hearing !!).
Cheers
Hi folks, hi hoptoad. thanks for the suggestions ill give that a try. Thing is what else could cause a decrease in loaded input current below unloaded input current other than a speed up of rotor, i think the thoughts are that the effect in this design may only operate within a certain window up to a point, like negating magnetic drag of core or some other effect. That could be the case, however even if it is would not this simple design be superior to existing generators just as thanes design is surely superior. What im saying is that this design, even if its not speeding up, would be almost identical in function to something like an ecklin generator without the inefficiencies associated with those designs in generating high output. By the way im not in any way trying to distract from thanes work, im just trying to compliment them with what ive found in my testing of these simple geometry modifications of coils, cores and magnets.
peace, love, light
WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK OF THIS CAR - WITH THIS MOTOR TECHNOLOGY?
AND OUR REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION TECHNOLOGY.
T
Hi Thane,
I am still waiting for your technologie to put in my electric car......
buurkkk! :P
i don't like car i prefer flying machine much more interesting hu!!
but i would of course be very happy to transform that hugly wheels in practical coils plus that hawfull aileron in practical wings and............. ;D
and what next Mister T
cheers
Laurent
Quote from: albator10 on February 09, 2009, 04:35:39 PM
Hi Thane,
I am still waiting for your technologie to put in my electric car......
I THOUGHT THE CHITTY-CHITTY-BANG-BANG HAD IT'S OWN SPECIAL POWER SOURCE?
T
Quote from: i_ron on February 08, 2009, 06:36:01 PM
(even my wife says I am very trying....you 2?)
Real_Ron
ACTUALLY BUSH WOULD SAY THAT, YOU ARE
EXASPER-I_RON-ATING.I MAY HAVE A NEW ROTOR FOR YOUR SKILLFUL HANDS.
CAN YOU MACHINE A WOUND TOROID IF I HAVE A TOROID MACHINE WOUND FOR YOU?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 09, 2009, 08:18:57 PM
CAN YOU MACHINE A WOUND TOROID IF I HAVE A TOROID MACHINE WOUND FOR YOU?
T
Actually I can machine just about anything.... except the brake of day
Also I'm not very good with "rorors"
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on February 09, 2009, 08:44:54 PM
Also I'm not very good with "rorors"
Ron
http://homepage3.nifty.com/roror/
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 09, 2009, 09:47:59 PM
http://homepage3.nifty.com/roror/
Yes see? you can easily put your finger on the problem...the limpidity of the actuating member!
This at one time was never noticeable, but has become more apparent with the aging of the
equipment and possible over use or even misuse of the functionality component that allowed repeated
goals, when new, but now suffers from lack of goal achieving due to a certain lack of vigor in the scoring
member. see<http://homepage3.nifty.com/roror/>
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 09, 2009, 06:48:58 PM
I THOUGHT THE CHITTY-CHITTY-BANG-BANG HAD IT'S OWN SPECIAL POWER SOURCE?
T
No Chity-Chity-Bang-Bang use 10 x 12V. deep cycle battery with an 8" Advance DC motor with a max speed of 80MPH
And she don't fly ;D
Quote from: albator10 on February 10, 2009, 02:05:07 PM
No Chity-Chity-Bang-Bang use 10 x 12V. deep cycle battery with an 8" Advance DC motor with a max speed of 80MPH
And she don't fly ;D
DO YOU CALL HER THE
INCAP-ALBATROSS?
T
Quote from: i_ron on February 10, 2009, 11:20:18 AM
Yes see? you can easily put your finger on the problem...the limpidity of the actuating member!
This at one time was never noticeable, but has become more apparent with the aging of the
equipment and possible over use or even misuse of the functionality component that allowed repeated
goals, when new, but now suffers from lack of goal achieving due to a certain lack of vigor in the scoring
member. see<http://homepage3.nifty.com/roror/>
Ron
THE ONLY WAY I'M PUTTING MY FINGER ON THAT PROBLEM IS IF MY FINGER IS ATTACHED TO A TEN FOOT POLE - NO SORRY NOT EVEN THEN - YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN I AM AFRAID.
YOU FORGOT PERMANENT DAMAGE DUE TO HABITUALLY EXCESSIVE SELF INDUCED JACKING OF THE PRESSURE RELEASE NOZZEL.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 10, 2009, 06:09:03 PM
YOU FORGOT PERMANENT DAMAGE DUE TO HABITUALLY EXCESSIVE SELF INDUCED JACKING OF THE PRESSURE RELEASE NOZZEL.
T
Goosh, it is so nice to talk with some one who has had hands on experience with this...
I feel much better now, knowing I am not alone.
Ror ror ror your roror, gently up the stream,
merrily merrily merrilymerrily, life is but a dream...
I_Ron
NOW FOR SOMETHING NOT X RATED :P
ROTOR EXPERIMENT WITH OUTER E FINGER MAGNETS REMOVED DID NOT PRODUCE THE 900% POWER JUMPS w/ ACCELERATION AS WE ARE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING.
T
Hi folks, I just want to say how thankful i am that there are folks such as you thane doing this work and for the support from the university. I would like also to point out what i have now fully realized is that the design ive been testing is actually what Bill Muller was doing at least the coil set back principle. just wanted to make that clear and say thanks.
peace, love, light
Quote from: i_ron on February 10, 2009, 07:13:01 PM
Goosh, it is so nice to talk with some one who has had hands on experience with this...
I feel much better now, knowing I am not alone.
Ror ror ror your roror, gently up the stream,
merrily merrily merrilymerrily, life is but a dream...
I_Ron
OKAY - U_RULE!
T
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on February 10, 2009, 11:49:58 PM
Hi folks, I just want to say how thankful i am that there are folks such as you thane doing this work and for the support from the university.
Just wanted to make that clear and say thanks.
peace, love, light
THANK YOU FOR NOTICING SKYWATCHER.
I BELIEVE THE ONLY WAY HUMANITY IS GOING TO SURVIVE IS IF WE REMOVE THE COMPETITION URGE IN ALL OF US AND LEARN TO WORK TOGETHER.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 11, 2009, 07:03:03 AM
THANK YOU FOR NOTICING SKYWATCHER.
I BELIEVE THE ONLY WAY HUMANITY IS GOING TO SURVIVE IS IF WE REMOVE THE COMPETITION URGE IN ALL OF US AND LEARN TO WORK TOGETHER.
T
I agree 900%.
Quote from: broli on February 11, 2009, 07:28:40 AM
I agree 900%.
THANKS BROLI! ;)
I REALLY DO SEE THIS COIL DESIGN AS A PHYSICAL MODEL FOR THE WORLD...
LENZ LAW = OUR HUMAN RESISTANCE TO CHANGE OR FEAR OF CHANGE
CORE RELUCTANCE = RELUCTANCE TO CHANGE IDEAS AND SEE OR EVEN TRY NEW THINGS
COERCIVE FORCE = ENERGY REQUIRED TO MAKE PEOPLE CHANGE THEIR MINDS - REMOVING PREJUDICES.
HYSTERISIS = THE ENERGY WASTED RESISTING NEW WAYS OF THINKING OR SEEING.
NOW IN OUR PEREPITEIA GENERATOR = (EVERYTHING YOU ONCE THOUGH WAS TRUE IS NOW FALSE)
SO WHEN WE GET EVERYTHING WORKING IN HARMONY = HV COIL AIDING ROTOR AND AIDING HC COIL AND HC COIL AIDING HV COIL THEN OUR EVENTUAL ENERGY GAIN IS 20,000% AND THAT IS JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBURG.WE EVEN USE WIRE RESISTANCE AND IMPEDANCE IN A POSITIVE WAY...
SO THIS WORK IS ALL MY PRAYERS IN PROGRESS.
CHEERS
T
Lol ;D. The Perepiteia Bible. Will it be sold along side the Perepiteia?
I-ron sounds like a good machinist so he would probably be able to build a double output motor like below. Instead of stressing mounts and such you tie down the stator with a counter-load. It doubles your output. The stator/auxillary rotor has to be balanced and the motor has to be a double shafted one. The whole assembly is supported on pillow blocks and you need to add sliprings to the stator and a pulley.
Quote from: sparks on February 11, 2009, 08:25:34 AM
I-ron sounds like a good machinist so he would probably be able to build a double output motor like below.
YES I_RON SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD MACHINIST AND HE LOOKS LIKE ONE TOO ALL HANDSOME AND SUCH,
UNTIL YOU NOTICE HE ONLY HAS A THUMB REMAINING ON HIS RIGHT HAND...
WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?
TOO MUCH HABITUAL SELF INDUCED JACKING OF THE PRESSURE RELEASE NOZZEL - THAT'S WHAT!
I_still_RULE
Man that's sick.
Thanks Thane! I Actually have ring magnets that will fit in the cups so i can bolt them in, instead of gluing them. Guess i'm getting a variac asap.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on February 15, 2009, 06:33:57 PM
Thanks Thane! I Actually have ring magnets that will fit in the cups so i can bolt them in, instead of gluing them. Guess i'm getting a variac asap.
BLISTERINGANOMALY JUST RECEIVED: 1 MOTOR, 1 ROTOR, 1 MACHINE WOUND HV COIL AND 3 E COILS. SO HE SHOULD BE HAVING SOME FUN SOON!
GOOD LUCK BLISTERINGANOMALY - PLAY SAFE!
T
Yeah, think i'm gonna order more of my ring magnets so i can bolt them in and not have to worry so much about them flying out.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on February 16, 2009, 04:48:36 PM
Yeah, think i'm gonna order more of my ring magnets so i can bolt them in and not have to worry so much about them flying out.
YOU CAN ALSO EPOXY THEM IN AND GET SOME GOOD PACKAGING TAPE AS INSURANCE - I HAVE HAD MAGNETS IN PLACE FOR 6 MONTHS WITH DEMOS AT 3500 RPM SO I DOUBT THEY WILL COME OUT - BUT IT IS BEST TO KEEP IT UNDER 2500 RPM AS WELL.
LET'S ALL LEARN FROM I_RON AND LARRYC!
CHEERS
T
DEAR ALL,
POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE INC. HAS BEGUN THE LICENSING PROCESS.
HERE IS OUR PRELIMINARY LICENSING MODEL.
CHEERS
T
POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE TECHNOLOGY LICENSING BUSINESS MODEL
Feb 2009
1. The business model is based on John Nash’s Nobel Prize winning economic math model which basically states that competition as a business plan is not sustainable in the long run. The only way for any company to ultimately succeed is through cooperation and support.
2. Potential Difference Inc will be employing this cooperative approach in the development and licensing of their Peripeteia regenerative acceleration generator technology, as well as all future technologies related to the generator and otherwise.
3. Our business plan revolves around creating a network of licensees, distributors and end user sales outlets whereby the main objective is non exploitive support of each others’ specific abilities.
4. All licensing agreements have no up front costs associated with them and are essentially “free.†Each licensee will identify their own application(s) and will incur the expense of developing the hardware internally or purchasing from a participating member of the network. The licensing model includes fair and equitable revenue sharing.
5. All future developments, enhancements or new technologies will be offered to the participating members under the same conditions. The same would apply to a participating member who adds technological value or products or services to the group. The idea here is that if company X develops a new product or enhancement to an existing product, their distribution, marketing and sales routes are already firmly established.
6. A company that decides to acquire licensing rights will have to identify their application and develop the generator to fit their application. They will be entitled to all the support possible from the network members or if they decide to do it in house on their own they would have 100 per cent technological support from Potential Difference.
7. All licensing arrangements with Potential Difference will have a 50/50 revenue sharing percentage and a one year duration period. At the end of each year the licensing agreement will be renewed, the revenue sharing portion will be reviewed and a performance-based system will be established with the goal of eventually reducing Potential Difference’s percentage down to 10 per cent. This will encourage participating members to add value to the cooperative network and to maximize their sales and distribution each year while also increasing their net revenue.
8. This business model is designed to encourage mutually beneficial business arrangements to discourage competition and the stress and wasted energy associated with that. It is definitely not an “open-source†business model where the user becomes dependent on the initially free product but then must purchase subsequent developments and enhancements. All future technological developments that make the current technology obsolete will be offered in the same sincere mutually beneficial way.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 11, 2009, 07:03:03 AM
THANK YOU FOR NOTICING SKYWATCHER.
I BELIEVE THE ONLY WAY HUMANITY IS GOING TO SURVIVE IS IF WE REMOVE THE COMPETITION URGE IN ALL OF US AND LEARN TO WORK TOGETHER.
T
I agree with an overunity of 110%
::)
hello Thane
very good i like the way you intend to go on i think that i can agree with this way of doing the future i do not only think but i am convinced that it IS a very good way
ok and now how do we go to the next step ?
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on February 18, 2009, 06:16:40 PM
hello Thane
very good i like the way you intend to go on i think that i can agree with this way of doing the future i do not only think but i am convinced that it IS a very good way
ok and now how do we go to the next step ?
Laurent
THE NEXT STEP IS A UNIT WHICH PRODUCES MORE OUT THAN IS REQUIRED GOING IN.
WE WILL KEEP ADDING COILS UNTIL WE GET THERE.
I WILL POST SOME PICS AND DATA SOON.
CHEERS
T
So you finally decided to state it in public ;D.
Quote from: broli on February 18, 2009, 07:23:21 PM
So you finally decided to state it in public ;D.
YES - I_RON IS MY FATHER, HE GAVE ME UP FOR ADOPTION MANY YEARS AGO AFTER HE WENT OVER TO THE DARK SIDE OF CANADA.
T
Quote from: broli on February 18, 2009, 07:23:21 PM
So you finally decided to state it in public ;D.
:
WE HAVE BEEN COMMISIONED TO BUILD A 4 COIL PROTOTYPE WITH THE GOAL OF OUTPUTTING ABOUT 120 WATTS WITH AN INPUT OF ABOUT 40 WATTS OR SO AT FULL SPEED. THIS MAY OR MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE - WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL WE TRY? :P
THERE MAY BE SOME SORT OF MAGNETIC "SOUND BARRIER" WHEN WE APPROACH OU? 8)
ONE THING IS CERTAIN HOWEVER - THE PERFORMANCE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN CONVENTIONAL HC MODE AND HV MODE WILL BE INFINITY BECAUSE THE SYSTEM WILL BE AT A DEAD STOP WITH 4 LOADED HC COILS.
SO YES - EITHER WAY, WE WILL BE OPENING THE CLOSET DOOR REACHING INTO PANDORA'S BOX AND LETTING THE "CAT OUT OF THE BAG"
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 18, 2009, 08:05:17 PM
YES - I_RON IS MY FATHER, HE GAVE ME UP FOR ADOPTION MANY YEARS AGO AFTER HE WENT OVER TO THE DARK SIDE OF CANADA.
T
Obviously an oxymoron...if I had been your father there wouldn't have been anything left living to adopt!
Wooo wee, an admission that there are parts of Canada other than UPPER and LOWER Canada...
Ron
hehe!!
no problem for me let the cat out of the bag
i have 3 and why not one more ;)
Laurent
Quote from: i_ron on February 19, 2009, 01:26:45 PM
Obviously an oxymoron...if I had been your father there wouldn't have been anything left living to adopt!
Ron
YES YOU BROUGHT ME INTO THIS WORLD - SO YOU CAN TAKE ME OUT AS WELL... :P
When I read this thread I have to remind myself you people are humans.
Quote from: broli on February 19, 2009, 05:51:34 PM
When I read this thread I have to remind myself you people are humans.
Speak for yourself...
But when the mother ship arrives I can put in a good word for you?
Ron
Quote from: broli on February 19, 2009, 05:51:34 PM
When I read this thread I have to remind myself you people are humans.
WELL SHAPE SHIFTING HUMANOIDS FROM THE PLANET PUSSYGALORE THAT IS.
T
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clCeqwevLXc
Quote from: aTg on February 22, 2009, 05:52:30 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clCeqwevLXc
very good
Quote from: aTg on February 22, 2009, 05:52:30 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clCeqwevLXc
NICE WORK AAAALEXISSS!
AT SOME POINT IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE
BEFORE and
AFTER DATA...
SUCH AS:
MOTOR INPUT CURRENT
before LIGHT BULB LOADING = ?
MOTOR INPUT CURRENT
after LIGHT BULB LOADING = ?
THIS WILL GIVE THE VIEWER AN IDEA OF HOW THE MOTOR IS REPONDING TO LOAD.
ALSO IF YOUR MOTOR IS TOO POWERFUL IT MAY NOT BE AFFECTED BY A SMALL LOAD?
CHEERS
Thane
Hello, Thanks for your interest in my video. will soon upload a video better documented.
My configuration is;
Small induction motor-2900RPM max 150W
30x5mm-diameter magnets
coil-0.6mm diameter (correcterd)
First test, the engine powered 60vAC connecting the load directly or 12v bulb and 5w to
resistance decelerates the engine to stop.
Second and video evidence, then add a rectifier and an electrolytic capacitor 100v 4700nF low engine
But revolutions are not stopped, the capacitor holds a charge and increases gradually increasing also the brightness of the bulb.
In my experiment, the rotor accelerates slowly but does not reach the same speed with no load on the coil, or at least to my knowledge.
The trial has lasted very little and got loaded up in the condenser 3v also lit the lamp.
I have something to improve security before the imam comes out flying somewhere near my face:)
Quote from: aTg on February 22, 2009, 08:49:30 AM
Hello, Thanks for your interest in my video. will soon upload a video better documented.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! 8)
T
Quote from: aTg on February 22, 2009, 08:49:30 AM
Hello, Thanks for your interest in my video. will soon upload a video better documented.
Hi,
thanks for sharing this.
I do like your setup which separates the "kinetic mass"
from the electro-magnetical part of the system.
Thanes dentist would hate this kind of experimentation.. *grin*
2cent,
sushi
Quote from: aTg on February 22, 2009, 08:49:30 AM
Hello, Thanks for your interest in my video. will soon upload a video better documented.
My configuration is;
Small induction motor-2900RPM max 150W
30x5mm-diameter magnets
coil-4mm diameter
Very nice test setup aTg, You should be able, with just a single coil, to show the Thane effect
if you can wind a coil with many turns of much finer wire....
Take Care,
Ron
Found this today in one of my places I frequent on a regular basis..
and if this doesn't tell us what the universal benefits of free energy
are.. then I don't know what it takes to prove we all desperately need
the likes of what you are all working on with these free energy devices
and getting something workable in the hands of the people as soon as.
We're already decades too late for these coal ash problems. This is a
very scary read to put it bluntly.. and who knows what else the EPA etc
are hiding from us all in every other industry out there like this one.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1144/
All the best to you guys with finding the solutions to finally get these
devices working -- and the knowledge of it all finally figured out so you
can move on to even better versions and concepts and devices for the
people. You are doing a great and a marvelous work here.
ffonz 8)
PS.. I continue to keep watch on your progress in the hope that I can
see a successful conclusion to your work in my lifetime (nearly over I'd
guess at this stage -- seeing I'm past my allotted 3 score years & 10).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[]
I DID A QUICK "RUN-DOWN" TEST TODAY WHERE I LET THE LOADED HC COIL DECELERATE THE SYSTEM DOWN TO STEADY STATE AND THE GRAPHED IT AGAINST THE HV COIL/LOADED HC COIL ACCELERATION.
WITH A SET MOTOR INPUT:
CONVENTIONAL MODE GENERATOR O/P = 0.003 WATTS @ 25 RPM
PEREPITEIA MODE GENERATOR O/P = 21 WATTS @ 3500 RPM
PERCENTAGE POWER GAIN = 700,000%
CHEERS
T
Hi ya'll.
Well here I go again speaking my mind.
Thane, I don't know how you "sell" your systems to tech interested investors and such, but stating that your system has a 700.000% gain over conventional power generating -aka 'lenz active' methods is a bit bold, to say the least. It is only that immensity effective compared to the way you have implemented the conventional way. To me is seems you conventional mode is rather inefficient, to say the least, and so not really a honest representative of the 'conventional way' This situation seems like having a worst case burned out car performing versus a good car.
Also the fact that your system in conventional mode decelerates noticeably from a 0.003watt load (I mean that's like 175th of a led power level...) should tell you that it is not really a good 'representative' of the conventional way.
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on February 23, 2009, 09:58:23 PM
Hi ya'll.
Well here I go again speaking my mind.
Thane, I don't know how you "sell" your systems to tech interested investors and such, but stating that your system has a 700.000% gain over conventional power generating -aka 'lenz active' methods is a bit bold, to say the least. It is only that immensity effective compared to the way you have implemented the conventional way. To me is seems you conventional mode is rather inefficient, to say the least, and so not really a honest representative of the 'conventional way' This situation seems like having a worst case burned out car performing versus a good car.
Also the fact that your system in conventional mode decelerates noticeably from a 0.003watt load (I mean that's like 175th of a led power level...) should tell you that it is not really a good 'representative' of the conventional way.
Steven
Agreed.
And once again, no Motor INPUT Power measured against Generator OUTPUT Power to show total system transfer efficiency.
Cheers
QuoteThane Heins Perepiteia. « 1 2 ... 425 426 » RunningBare 4259 148156 Last post Today at 03:27:44 AM
by hoptoad
I noticed I had some ideas about this thread when it first began. I've forgotten what I thought then but I promise I'll review the beginning and comment.
I'd like to ask anyone if they could bring me up to speed without my having to look at 4260 posts that have been viewed 148,156 times. Surely there's someone out there that has been following this willing to offer some cliff notes on this thread. :)
This is perpetual insanity!! Stop it!
At this point my thoughts are this: If there is any merit in any idea, there has to be a practical demonstration of it. I might change my mind about that if someone could help me understand what's going on here.
What the hell is going on??!?
Bessler007
Cmdr, MiB
Hello Thane
I am not sure to have understood right
so my understanding
1-the system spins let say at 2500 rpm than you engage the HC coil and the HV coils are not engaged so the system decelerates slowly from 2500 rpm down to 25 rpm and go on spining at that 25 rpm and at that 25 rpm it produces 0.003 watts.
2-the system spins at the 2500 rpm as above than you engage the HC coil and the HV coils and the system accelerate linearly up to 3500 rpm producing at that 3500 rpm 21 watts
During the 2 above situations the prime mover has the necessary input power to spin the system at 2500 rpm(example) under no load and this input power does not change during the 2 above process ?
In the second situation did you stop the input power at 3500 rpm ? or does the system arrive at a its maximum possibility.? If i look at the very linear progression in your graphic i am pushed to imagine that the system will easily accelerate far beyond the 3500 rpm until the limit due to air friction and general friction or total destruction. Or better said (ideal situation) if the system is strong enough , and it spins on frictionless bearings and in a vaccuum chamber, it could accelerate to infinity ??:o
best regards and be carefull we all need you :)
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on February 24, 2009, 03:45:07 AM
Hello Thane
I am not sure to have understood right
Laurent
DEAR Saint Laurent,
LET ME TRY AND EXPLAIN IT TO YOU.
A GENERATOR CONVERTS MECHANICAL POWER INTO ELECTRICAL POWER.
THE
MECHANICAL POWER IS MEASURED IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AND
EQUALS DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE x DRIVE SHAFT SPEED x (2pi).
POWER = TORQUE x SPEEDPOWER IS DEFINED AS: THE ABILITY TO DO WORK, OR THE RATE AT WHICH WORK IS BEING PERFORMED, OR ENERGY TRANSITTED, OR THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY REQUIRED OR EXPENDED FOR A GIVEN UNIT OF TIME - SO IF YOU CAN'T DO ANY WORK THERE IS
NO POWER BEING TRANSMITTED.
AT STEADY STATE SPEED THE NET TORQUE IN THE DRIVE SHAFT = 0 WORK CAN BE PERFORMED
DURING ACCELERATION THE NET TORQUE IS A POSITIVE NUMBER > 0WORK CAN BE PERFORMED
DURING DECELERATION THE NET TORQUE IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER < 0NO WORK CAN BE PERFORMED
SO WHEN WE HV-ALLY ACCELERATE THE SYSTEM UP TO 3500 RPM, WE CAN DO 21 WATTS (OR MORE) OF WORK - BECAUSE
WE HAVE TORQUE AND POWER.WHEN WE DISENGAGE THE HV COILS THE SYSTEM DECELERATES - WE HAVE
NO ABILITY TO DO WORK - BECAUSE
WE HAVE NO TORQUE AND NO POWER.WHEN THE MOTOR FINALLY TRANSMITS TORQUE TO THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM - WE NOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO 0.003 WATTS OF WORK -
BECAUSE WE HAVE TORQUE AND POWER.A DYNAMOMETER ON THE DRIVE SHAFT WOULD BEAR THIS OUT TO BE TRUE BUT WE CAN ALSO DEDUCE IT LOGICALLY -
IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE LOGICAL AND ARE NOT HAMPERED BY THE MENTAL HYSTERESIS EFFECTS OF PERSISTANT REMNANT PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS REQUIRING MUCH COERCIVE FORCE AND WASTED ENERGY TO OVERCOME THEM. :P
NOT THAT IT WOULD MATTER TO ANYONE HERE ON THE OVER-UNITY FORUM ;) BUT IF WE CALCULATED THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM (INPUT) AND COMPARED IT TO THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 3500 RPM
PLUS THE 21 WATTS BEING DELIVERED TO THE LOAD (OUTPUT) WE WOULD FIND THAT WE ARE OPERATING AT OVER-UNITY.
AND FINALLY - THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY AN INDUCTION MOTOR (and energy cost) IS A FUNCTION OF SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE.
AT 25 RPM SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE = MAXIMUM
AT 3500 RPM SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE = MINIMUMSO THERE IS
ACTUALLY MORE MOTOR TORQUE (AND MORE ENERGY COST) IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM THAN THERE IS AT 3500 RPM.
CHEERS
T
@CP
Seems to me that you can't really say there is a COP >1 if you are only comparing two outputs at two rpm levels. You have to also provide the input power to the drive motor at each of the extremes. It is only then that you can calculate any type of COP at each extreme. I think this is what most guys are waiting for. So why not just put an ammeter and volt meter on the drive motor and re-do your measurements.
Unless you can show that at 3500 rpm the output is 21 watts, but the input to the drive motor must be less then 21 watts. That's COP >1.
I agree with the thread length is just untenable for anyone to get a good grasp of this.
Thanks for the explanation
I have receive the message 5 on 5
But your graph questions me further the ratio between the wattage and the rpm is very linear it seems to be as if the prime mover would act as an "extended elastic" with strong force(torque) at low speed and than losing force as the speed increase .
so at 3500 rpm the primemover torque is very near to zero (no more slip) ( the elastic is returned to zero energy) and the rotor is always in acceleration and does not need the power from the primemover any more to go on
So did you try to let the system accelerate further than the minimum slip angle of the primemover i mean 3600 rpm or more ?? and if yes what happen with the graph and ratio W/rpm? I make A B and C supposition have you any proposition ?
thank's for your patience :)
Laurent
Followed from the start and I think read every post. Disclosure I'm a chemist and this hurts my head, but trying to understand. From the start there has been encouragement to measure power in and out or variations thereof. I don't think any have been made to the forums general satisfaction if I have understood correctly. My gut tells me there is something here, but either I am or some data is missing (likely me). In a simplified understanding it looks like a brake is applied to the system, the brake is released and the system returns to normal or greater rotation. If normal rotation, is this unique because it can be done with magnets in opposition to Lenz's law. If greater than normal rotation I can start to see the point. In the end I think us casual readers (who are pulling for a break through) can't see how this is better than the current 'state of the art' even though I think we would agree it is interesting and thought provoking. However, what is applicable or better than what we have? Is that the hope on the horizon with this or did I miss the applicable breakthrough. PS what happened to the exciting announcement back in December (was it the 11th)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 24, 2009, 06:11:51 AM
snip
NOT THAT IT WOULD MATTER TO ANYONE HERE ON THE OVER-UNITY FORUM ;) BUT IF WE CALCULATED THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM (INPUT) AND COMPARED IT TO THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 3500 RPM PLUS THE 21 WATTS BEING DELIVERED TO THE LOAD (OUTPUT) WE WOULD FIND THAT WE ARE OPERATING AT OVER-UNITY.
AND FINALLY - THE TORQUE SUPPLIED BY AN INDUCTION MOTOR (and energy cost) IS A FUNCTION OF SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE.
AT 25 RPM SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE = MAXIMUM
AT 3500 RPM SLIP ANGLE PERCENTAGE = MINIMUM
SO THERE IS ACTUALLY MORE MOTOR TORQUE (AND MORE ENERGY COST) IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM THAN THERE IS AT 3500 RPM.
CHEERS
T
Great job Thane,
Perhaps the above quote, with a picture, a diagram, and links to your latest youtube video would be a great first page of a new thread. Perhaps a paragraph or two of the expansion of vision of your experimentation. Then, after the new thread is started, lock this one, or ask Stefan to, if you are unable. People will still be able to read this novel, but no longer post to it. Only to the new one.
Thanks for sharing, it is appreciated!
Bruce
hi,
This is my new test with 0.2mm coil wire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JC0UwnZrcU
Lenz's law working. :(
frrrrrreeeezzzzzzzz
Saint Laurent is not only frozen in Canada but also in Switzerland
i have about one meter snow in front of my windows (very nice indeed)
and standard frozen Laurent is waiting for an answer to the graph evolution ...
cheers
Laurent
and you know what ?
this afternoon i went to a good friend of mind ,to whom i showed your great work
and after some time he said to me this
if we could store the accelerating energy of the motorising HV coils ( with or without the HC coil plus or minus working ) in a very heavy very loose and efficient flywheel (let's say 2 meters diameter and 300 kg at 10,000 rpm rotating in vaccuum) during the night we could use this kinetical energy back to get a smooth average energy all day long so in other words coupling the rotor of the perepiteia to a very heavy fly wheel could be an interesting idea to get constant energy output who know's ? ;)
good night
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 24, 2009, 06:11:51 AM
NOT THAT IT WOULD MATTER TO ANYONE HERE ON THE OVER-UNITY FORUM ;) BUT IF WE CALCULATED THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 25 RPM (INPUT) AND COMPARED IT TO THE POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AT 3500 RPM PLUS THE 21 WATTS BEING DELIVERED TO THE LOAD (OUTPUT) WE WOULD FIND THAT WE ARE OPERATING AT OVER-UNITY.
OU ...... ??? without any reference to input power to the motor driving the system ??
To be OU, your 21 watts electrical output and shaft torque (mechanical output) combined must be greater than the input power consumed by the driving motor.
Without input power data versus output power (including shaft torque measurements) data, your claim of "WE ARE OPERATING AT OVERUNITY" is extremely tenuous.
Cheers
Quote from: hop toad on February 25, 2009, 06:17:24 PM
OU ...... ??? without any reference to input power to the motor driving the system ??
To be OU, your 21 watts electrical output and shaft torque (mechanical output) combined must be greater than the input power consumed by the driving motor.
Without input power data versus output power (including shaft torque measurements) data, your claim of "WE ARE OPERATING AT OVERUNITY" is extremely tenuous.
Cheers
Both if you may have valid arguments. It depends on how efficiently the motor conserves the electric energy to mechanical at 25rpm.
Quote from: hoptoad on February 25, 2009, 06:17:24 PM
OU ...... ??? without any reference to input power to the motor driving the system ??
To be OU, your 21 watts electrical output and shaft torque (mechanical output) combined must be greater than the input power consumed by the driving motor.
Cheers
OK, THE MOTOR AND GENERATOR ARE BOTH 100% EFFICIENT AND ALL THE ELECTRICAL POWER IS CONVERTED INTO MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THEN ELECTRICAL POWER IN THE GENERATOR (WE USE MAGNETIC BEARINGS IN A VACUUM).
WITHOUT THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE MOTOR CONSUMES 0.003 WATTS TO PRODUCE 0.003 WATTS,
EFFICIENCY = 100% WITH THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE FIXED MOTOR INPUT = 0.003 WATTS (ACTUALLY IT IS GENERALLY ABOUT 50% LESS WITH HV ACCELERATION BUT FORGET THAT PART) AND THE GENERATOR OUTPUT = 21 WATTS.
21/0.003 x 100 = EFFICIENCY 700,000% CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 07:37:37 PM
OK, THE MOTOR AND GENERATOR ARE BOTH 100% EFFICIENT AND ALL THE ELECTRICAL POWER IS CONVERTED INTO MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THEN ELECTRICAL POWER IN THE GENERATOR (WE USE MAGNETIC BEARINGS IN A VACUUM).
WITHOUT THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE MOTOR CONSUMES 0.003 WATTS TO PRODUCE 0.003 WATTS, EFFICIENCY = 100%
WITH THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE FIXED MOTOR INPUT = 0.003 WATTS (ACTUALLY IT IS GENERALLY ABOUT 50% LESS WITH HV ACCELERATION BUT FORGET THAT PART) AND THE GENERATOR OUTPUT = 21 WATTS.
21/0.003 x 100 = EFFICIENCY 700,000%
CHEERS
T
1 million % would have been rounder. I think you'd pass that if you did divide by 2 AND considered the kinetic energy of the rotor.
Quote from: aTg on February 25, 2009, 10:30:31 AM
hi,
This is my new test with 0.2mm coil wire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JC0UwnZrcU
Lenz's law working. :(
VERY NICE VIDEO! 8)
LENZ NAMED HIS LAW AFTER HIS WIFE - WHO WAS A PERSISTENT BITCH! :-\
MAY I SUGGEST 100 OHMS OF 30 GAUGE WIRE ON AN AC MIG WELDING ROD?
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: broli on February 25, 2009, 07:41:53 PM
1 million % would have been rounder. I think you'd pass that if you did divide by 2 AND considered the kinetic energy of the rotor.
WELL OF COURSE I WANTED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND NOT RUFFLE ANY FEATHERS... :-[
Quotekinetic energy of the rotor
NO KIDDING A 10 LB ROTOR ACCELERATING UP TO 3500 RPM FROM 25 RPM
WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL POWER TO THE MOTOR - WHILE DELIVERING POWER TO A LOAD AT THE SAME TIME - BOTH - GOING UP AND COMING DOWN.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 07:37:37 PM
OK, THE MOTOR AND GENERATOR ARE BOTH 100% EFFICIENT AND ALL THE ELECTRICAL POWER IS CONVERTED INTO MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THEN ELECTRICAL POWER IN THE GENERATOR (WE USE MAGNETIC BEARINGS IN A VACUUM).
WITHOUT THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE MOTOR CONSUMES 0.003 WATTS TO PRODUCE 0.003 WATTS, EFFICIENCY = 100%
WITH THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE FIXED MOTOR INPUT = 0.003 WATTS (ACTUALLY IT IS GENERALLY ABOUT 50% LESS WITH HV ACCELERATION BUT FORGET THAT PART) AND THE GENERATOR OUTPUT = 21 WATTS.
21/0.003 x 100 = EFFICIENCY 700,000%
CHEERS
T
Sounds terrific ...... now all you need is independant measurement verification and Stephan may soon be parting with his OU prize.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 25, 2009, 08:02:26 PM
Sounds terrific ...... now all you need is independant measurement verification and Stephan may soon be parting with his OU prize.
Cheers
HEY WAIT .................BROLI TOLD ME THAT WAS A SCAM - AND HARTI IS REALLY A MIB ???
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 08:09:48 PM
HEY WAIT .................BROLI TOLD ME THAT WAS A SCAM - AND HARTI IS REALLY A MIB ???
T
Do you really believe that ?
There's only one way to find out. Get independant verification then try claiming the prize.
Cheers and KneeDeep
Hi Thane
I wish to buy one of your generator
How much ?
Or do you sell plan to make one ?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 08:09:48 PM
HEY WAIT .................BROLI TOLD ME THAT WAS A SCAM - AND HARTI IS REALLY A MIB ???
T
I just got off the phone with personnel concerning the application Harti submitted to join MIB. The application was denied for 2 reasons. The first was he couldn't pass the security clearance. That's not the most egregious reason. Even Obama couldn't get a security clearance and he's president.
The primary reason Harti couldn't join MIB is he just doesn't look good in black.
Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
fantastic :)
and i stay always very interested to get some coils and rotor in Europe
do you intend to market some demo proto to show your work overseas?
bravo and go on
Laurent
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 07:37:37 PM
OK, THE MOTOR AND GENERATOR ARE BOTH 100% EFFICIENT AND ALL THE ELECTRICAL POWER IS CONVERTED INTO MECHANICAL POWER IN THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THEN ELECTRICAL POWER IN THE GENERATOR (WE USE MAGNETIC BEARINGS IN A VACUUM).
WITHOUT THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE MOTOR CONSUMES 0.003 WATTS TO PRODUCE 0.003 WATTS, EFFICIENCY = 100%
WITH THE HV COILS ENGAGED THE SYSTEM ACCELERATES AND THE FIXED MOTOR INPUT = 0.003 WATTS (ACTUALLY IT IS GENERALLY ABOUT 50% LESS WITH HV ACCELERATION BUT FORGET THAT PART) AND THE GENERATOR OUTPUT = 21 WATTS.
21/0.003 x 100 = EFFICIENCY 700,000%
CHEERS
T
Please, please tell me I have not read what I just read. What are you talking about man. Does not make any sense. The drive motor is definitely not running on .003 or .0003 watts with or without the HV/HC or whatever. Come on already. And nothing is 100% efficient. So I don't get it at all. Sorry. Something is wrong here when it could be sooooooooooooo simple.
First thing you need to do is change the batteries in your voltage and amp meters to make sure your instruments are not giving you erroneous data. @CP this is serious shit and your attitude of taking it so lightly is puzzling. If that motor was consuming only .0003 watts, you should be able to run it with a 1.5 volt battery. I just don't get it. After 429 pages, I am as numskulled as ever. 700,000% efficient.... WHAT????
Power in versus power out is what counts. Geez, forget about torque on shaft and all this other talk. Just measure all the input power. One going to the drive motor and any other coil used to drive the rotor, add up this energy in watts, then measure what the generator is producing. Can't be any simpler then that. Then you should come back and report the results as follows.
INPUT at ________ rpm
Drive Motor: Volts ____ Amps _______
HV Coil: Volts ____ Amps _______
OUTPUT at same rpm with a suitable load
Generator Coil: Volts ____ Amps _______
If what you are saying is seemingly true, then you should be able to get rid of the drive motor and just put the shaft on a vice and start turning the rotor manually to 25 rpm then engage the HV coil to make it run and you should still have tremendous overunity.
Do they call Thane the Old Pot Stirrer, because he was the Chef in his restaurant or does he just enjoy dropping a bomb and watching the objects flail about ???
Times up!
Thane and I_Ron on a recent trip enjoying there two favorite hobbies ;D
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 25, 2009, 07:55:34 PM
WELL OF COURSE I WANTED TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND NOT RUFFLE ANY FEATHERS... :-[
NO KIDDING A 10 LB ROTOR ACCELERATING UP TO 3500 RPM FROM 25 RPM WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL POWER TO THE MOTOR - WHILE DELIVERING POWER TO A LOAD AT THE SAME TIME - BOTH - GOING UP AND COMING DOWN.
T
Why of course we all believe you!
Ron
Quote from: LarryC on February 26, 2009, 10:46:17 AM
Times up!
Thane and I_Ron on a recent trip enjoying there two favorite hobbies ;D
Whoops,
mistaken identity there Larry... thats Steven Harpoor with Thane ...and Ottawa in the background.
Ron
I just received a photo from my good friend Hu Flung Dung, one of the chief commanders of MIB organization. Apparently he snuck into Thanes lab last night and took photos of the actual load that Thane used for his last generator test.
See attached photo below.
Cheers
None of what you guys just posted is even close to being funny. It's actually very ignorant and far from being productive. I was not trying to ridicule @CP or any such action as I don't care who or what the story is, we all deserve mutual respect just for being involved in the OU activity. He's showed his credentials many times over in my book so he deserves better then this "crap". All we want to know is the facts as they are really presented and there is no need to resort to this base "dungamungery".
I'm trying the experiment, with a 95 Oms 0.2mm coil and magnetic center, getting 60V at the input and generating output in 12v and a single LED as a load coil in the engine slows down much.
I can show it on video.
Quote from: wattsup on February 26, 2009, 04:55:54 PM
All we want to know is the facts....
Me too ... but I'm not holding my breath. Besides, Thane has no problem dishing out the odd bit of humerous BS, in fact he seems to thrive on it. You only have to look at the number of postings he has made which are nothing more than banter. If you removed all the banter and only stuck to facts, the thread would only be a couple of pages long. Easier reading for sure, but not as interesting. Lighten up ! I'm sure if Thane was upset about it he would ask Stephan to delete most of the postings, after all it is his thread.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2009, 05:14:29 PM
Me too ... but I'm not holding my breath. Besides, Thane has no problem dishing out the odd bit of humerous BS, in fact he seems to thrive on it.
Cheers
So while we may be the butt of many jokes,
it would be foolish to pooh-pooh our talents.
Ron
Quote from: wattsup on February 26, 2009, 04:55:54 PM
None of what you guys just posted is even close to being funny. It's actually very ignorant and far from being productive. I was not trying to ridicule @CP or any such action as I don't care who or what the story is, we all deserve mutual respect just for being involved in the OU activity. He's showed his credentials many times over in my book so he deserves better then this "crap". All we want to know is the facts as they are really presented and there is no need to resort to this base "dungamungery".
THAT'S SICK!
T
Quote from: hoptoad on February 26, 2009, 05:14:29 PM
Me too ... but I'm not holding my breath. Besides, Thane has no problem dishing out the odd bit of humerous BS, in fact he seems to thrive on it. You only have to look at the number of postings he has made which are nothing more than banter. If you removed all the banter and only stuck to facts, the thread would only be a couple of pages long. Easier reading for sure, but not as interesting. Lighten up ! I'm sure if Thane was upset about it he would ask Stephan to delete most of the postings, after all it is his thread.
Cheers
THIS IS A CHAT ROOM PEOPLE ;) IT SHOULD BE FUN 8)
THE YOUTUBE VIDEOS GIVE FACTS, HOW TOO-S AND NOTHING LESS.
AND STEPHAN GAVE ME MODERATOR PRIVILEGES BUT THEN IT JUST FEELS LIKE "BURNING BOOKS" TO ME.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 26, 2009, 07:34:47 PM
THIS IS A CHAT ROOM PEOPLE ;) IT SHOULD BE FUN 8)
T
Yeah so enough chitter chat and back to the game. Ran the new rotor up and was able to get a
quick pic before the basement went into a different time warp...
R
Quote from: i_ron on February 26, 2009, 07:51:42 PM
Yeah so enough chitter chat and back to the game. Ran the new rotor up and was able to get a
quick pic before the basement went into a different time warp...
R
AHA!
So it was you, who purchased the used Marx generators from Sandia Labs (and I thought that I had the highest bid on Ebay). No doubt though, you will WANT to escape into a different time continuum, when you get your electric bill at the end of the month!
Quote from: derricka on February 26, 2009, 08:46:59 PM
AHA!
So it was you, who purchased the used Marx generators from Sandia Labs
NO THAT'S I_RON'S BRAIN ON
CRAP WHICH HE DIGS UP IN HIS BACK YARD. :o
T
<Results of decrapification>
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 26, 2009, 09:14:16 PM
NO THAT'S I_RON'S BRAIN ON CRAP
WHICH HE DIGS UP IN HIS BACK YARD. :o
T
Sorry T, this is not funny anymore, what the hell is your problem? I_Ron and LarryC are out of here.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on February 26, 2009, 11:20:33 PM
Sorry T, this is not funny anymore, what the hell is your problem?
Regards, Larry
NOT MY FAULT...
TOO MUCH MAGNETIC FIELDS AND NUCLEAR BOMB FALLOUT... 8)
I HAVE RECENTLY BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH INCURABLE
OU TERRETS :P
AND I OFTEN LEAVE HOME WITHOUT WEARING ANY PANTS, JUST MY RED NYLONS WHICH IS REALLY EMBARRASING.
T
I WILL BE POSTING ANOTHER VIDEO TODAY OF A HV COIL TEST FOR THE 4 POLE GENERATOR THAT I AM BUILDING FOR ANOTHER POTENTIAL LICENSEE.
THERE ARE 4 x 85 OHM 30 GAUGE COILS.
THIS COIL IS REALLY HYPER-PSYCHO IN THAT IT ACCELERATES IN 200 RPM CHUNKS ON THE TACHOMETER.
(previous best was 100 rpm chunks - California Christmas coil youtube vid).
THIS COIL ACCELERATES TWICE AS FAST AND IS TRULY BRUTAL AND IS A RESULT OF I_RON'S FINE WORK.
I WILL ACCELERATE IT UP HV-ALLY, REDUCING THE MOTOT I/P AS I GO AND THEN TAKE THE HV COILS OFF AND IT LET IT RUN DOWN UNTIL THE MOTOR KICKS IN - WHICH WILL BE CLOSE TO A DEAD STOP.
THIS SHOULD GIVE US AN IDEA OF THE MOTOR TORQUE IN THE DRIVE SHAFT.
CHEERS
T
@CP
Well I tried giving you the benefit of the doubt but I now realize you are only playing a funny game. You can do what you want thinking torque means anything special without a dynamo meter and input power measurements, that is your business, but when you post business offerings such as on page 324, then the game changes. You cannot use this venue as credibility of this forum and its members to make such offerings, especially without having first satisfied it's members of your claims.
The most capital piece of information that any intelligent OUer would eagerly already have on hand and gladly provide to all interested..........eludes you. WHY would you have trouble with such a simple concept? Power in - Power out - Duhhhhhhhh.
There is nothing wrong with tabulating true data and showing either you are OU or very close to OU. Both are perfectly acceptable. But when someone wants to deviate from or simply ignore this main issue, it falls into the realm of major shystering and that is not acceptable.
The "POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE" between a real OU device and a want-to-be is..................PROOF?
None of your videos provides this PROOF.
You only see what you want to see and ignore what is really relevant by ridiculing others saying it's joking around. Yeh, sure.
Therefore, I formally ask you to remove the following post immediately until such time as you have satisfied this Forum's due diligence. And even then, you will have to get Stefans' further permission to post such a "commercial position" on this open source Forum.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg157984#msg157984
To whom it may concern.
This thread is drifing into some strange direction.
After a lot of documentation and visualisation, suddenly Thane is going into some "licensing" scheme
supported by some well known "old economy" business-company (which is basicly somehow understandable)
and wattsup is urged to ask some very valid questions (which is very understandable).
This following community is left with lots of questionmarks on all of this.
I do enjoy funny stuff too in order to recreate a bit,
but at the end, nobody wants to be the joke himself
due to the lack of serious stuff.
Thane, wattsup?
??? ??? ???
sushi
Greetings,
The licensing model Thane is talking about simply means that he will not be in business of producing these generators himself. Rather he will let other companies use his technology to refine the product and then charge them a small part of their "profit".
So, if manufactures that are selling Thane tech based generators are not making any money, he will not be making any money as well...
It seems like it is a very generous business model. Kind of like a franchising.
@ Thane...
Please consider conducting "my" simple experiment with the battery that I have proposed few months ago. I have no doubt that it will show real gains coming out of your setup and it should quiet the PB types for a while but without disturbing your work schedule.
Such an experiment will not be difficult at all to conduct.
1. Get a car battery that is fully charged.
2. Connect it to the DC or AC motor.
3. Observe a run time.
Then
4. Recharge the battery.
5. Connect it to the DC or AC motor that employs your coil setup.
6. Observe a run time.
Such a run will give you a very impressive material to show to the business executives that do not care about technical details or Electrical Engineering.
@all
as a junior member i have surely not the immense experience of the senior 's one
but i like new thing i like new oportunities and i am inclined to believe that we can improve our human beeing
@ wattsup
if you think that Thane is simply a faker why do you insist to get the PROOF simply change the frequency to other threads on this forum and as you said yourself very correctly " after all this is his thread"
if i see other threads on this forum, there are lots of dreaming things and this very good like this is'nt it ??
Thane show us his work and a lot of videos with very interesting and apparently amazing results
so if you don't want to believe it it is your problem
let Thane go on his very particular way to communicate . I personaly have very good time to see somebody on this forum providing a lot of visual stuff and i think that one picture or better one video is much worth hundreds of "parole"
You seems to be irritated by the licensing way he intends to go if you don't aggree you are free are we intelligent people or not ? do we need restriction i think exactly the contrary we are at the time where we have to extract the best of ourself and for that we have to take the risk at any price it's up to you
ok i agree with you and Sushi i would also be very pleased if Mr T would answer our questions and especially for me 1- the continuum of the graph and 2- is it posible to get this bloody coils
all the best to all
laurent
I do believe that Thane was purposely staying away from the OU claim and leaving that to others to make or confirm by replication. Why ? Just look at others on this forum that have claimed OU or possible OU or even an idea for OU. See how they get torn into pieces by armchair observers. Just like wolves circling the sheep. I do not blame Thane for staying away from any such OU claim.
What Thane is claiming is an improvement in efficiency. This is significant. Take your typical gas power generator. It can produce around 4400 watts using a 6.5 HP engine. Now what if you can improve that generator so it can produce 4400 watts using a 1 hp weed eater engine. You are now talking about using a lot less gasoline to produce the same amount of energy. See it does not have to be OU to be very beneficial. All it needs to do is increase efficiency so it requires less of one form of energy to generate another form of energy. I believe that is all Thane is claiming and showing in his videos.
Quote from: woopy on February 27, 2009, 04:29:37 PM
@all
as a junior member i have surely not the immense experience of the senior 's one
but i like new thing i like new oportunities and i am inclined to believe that we can improve our human beeing
@ wattsup
if you think that Thane is simply a faker why do you insist to get the PROOF simply change the frequency to other threads on this forum and as you said yourself very correctly " after all this is his thread"
let Thane go on his very particular way to communicate .
all the best to all
laurent
Words of wisdom from the junior member! Words that some of the senior members missed.
Yes Laurent, you are right, for it to be a better world then we have to be more forgiving of other
peoples idiosyncrasies, especially if the sole complaint is, "I wouldn't have done it that way"
Take Care,
I'm Ron
edit: after talking it over with other senior members it was decided to give the poor guy another chance. But let it be understood if there are any future complaints to the committee, we will say
to Hull with it and he shall be put in a weighted sack and dropped in the river!
[for people in far away lands, more "in" humor... Hull is right across the river from Ottawa. Next to
the parliament buildings is a bridge, when the wife and I where there we walked out on the bridge
and the view of the parliament buildings and Hull is spectacular!!!]
http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?t=5563
Quote from: hydrocontrol on February 27, 2009, 05:29:59 PM
I do believe that Thane was purposely staying away from the OU claim and leaving that to others to make or confirm by replication. Why ? Just look at others on this forum that have claimed OU or possible OU or even an idea for OU. See how they get torn into pieces by armchair observers. Just like wolves circling the sheep. I do not blame Thane for staying away from any such OU claim.
What Thane is claiming is an improvement in efficiency. This is significant. Take your typical gas power generator. It can produce around 4400 watts using a 6.5 HP engine. Now what if you can improve that generator so it can produce 4400 watts using a 1 hp weed eater engine. You are now talking about using a lot less gasoline to produce the same amount of energy. See it does not have to be OU to be very beneficial. All it needs to do is increase efficiency so it requires less of one form of energy to generate another form of energy. I believe that is all Thane is claiming and showing in his videos.
It's even more fundamental than that...
What Thane seems to have shown is that a fundamental law of electrodynamics involving generators under load, namely Lenz's Law or BEMF, is NOT an inevitable negative to the system. It can be either reduced/eliminated, or 'rerouted', so that it is, at the very least, not a drag on the prime mover (motor), and perhaps can even be put to positive use.
When you consider the single fact that Lenz's Law is not as simple (and always negative) as taught in ALL text books, then it opens a whole can of worms as to how to utilize it for new and novel devices... couple that new knowledge with human creativity and sound engineering, and you have entire new industries being created. If what appears to be true here, is true, this will have a very profound (positive) impact on the power generation industry.
Powerful sh*t, man!
PS:@wattsup, if you'd look at a number of the videos, you'll see that Thane has used an AC analyzer on many occasions. This instrument shows input voltage, current, PF (power factor), and watts. Since you fail to mention PF as a requirement for your desire to see power in, power out data, perhaps you should do a little more homework before jumping down Thanes throat...
-Mark
Quote from: wattsup on February 27, 2009, 09:05:15 AM
@CP
Therefore, I formally ask you to remove the following post immediately until such time as you have satisfied this Forum's due diligence. And even then, you will have to get Stefans' further permission to post such a "commercial position" on this open source Forum.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg157984#msg157984
THAT'S SICK!
T
Quote from: markzpeiverson on February 27, 2009, 07:01:39 PM
, perhaps you should do a little more homework before jumping down Thanes throat...
- Mark
GIVE ME A BREAK PLEASE MARK ???
THERE AIN'T NO WAY IN HELL - WATTSUP IS GOING DOWN MY THROAT! :P
THAT'S JUST SICK!
T
Quote from: i_ron on February 27, 2009, 06:14:02 PM
Words of wisdom from the junior member! Words that some of the senior members missed.
[for people in far away lands, more "in" humor... Hull is right across the river from Ottawa. Next to
the parliament buildings is a bridge, when the wife and I where there we walked out on the bridge
and the view of the parliament buildings and Hull is spectacular!!!]
HEY!
SEE THE MUSEUM OF CIVILIZATION IN YOUR PICTURE?
I USED TO BE THE EXECUTIVE CHEF THERE...
UNTIL I GOT FIRED.
T
HERE'S THE DEAL PEEPS,
I AM WORKING 12-14 HOURS PER DAY, EVERY DAY TRYING TO GET A NEW PROTOTYPE FINISHED AND I CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE REQUESTS FOR THIS THAT AND THE OTHER THING - SORRY NO KIDDING :-[
PERHAPS PEOPLE CAN ASK blisteringanomaly SINCE HE SHOULD BE CLOSE TO BE UP AND RUNNING WITH HIS NEW STUFF?
ALSO I COULDN'T GET THE TESTS DONE TODAY EITHER - SINCE I WAS GIVING A DEMO.
SORRY AGAIN
T
PS
MIKE ARE YOU OR YOUR BROTHER COMING TO THE LAB SOMETIME?
Quote from: adlep on February 27, 2009, 02:57:28 PM
Greetings,
@ Thane...
Please consider conducting "my" simple experiment with the battery that I have proposed few months ago. I have no doubt that it will show real gains coming out of your setup and it should quiet the PB types for a while but without disturbing your work schedule.
Such an experiment will not be difficult at all to conduct.
1. Get a car battery that is fully charged.
2. Connect it to the DC or AC motor.
3. Observe a run time.
Then
4. Recharge the battery.
5. Connect it to the DC or AC motor that employs your coil setup.
6. Observe a run time.
Such a run will give you a very impressive material to show to the business executives that do not care about technical details or Electrical Engineering.
DEAR ADLEP,
YOU ARE GOING TO GET YOUR WISH - BUT NOT FROM ME.
THE PROTOTYPE I AM CURRENTLY BUILDING IS A 4 COIL UNIT WHICH WILL BE RUN UP TO FULL SPEED AND MAY OR MAY NOT GO BEYOND THE 3600 MAX SPEED RATING OF THE MOTOR - WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE ABOUT THAT. I AM BUILDING A 1/2 INCH BULLET PROOF LEXAN CASE FOR TESTING JUST IN CASE IT WANTS TO PULL A "GOTOLUC - EXPLODING NEO SHITSTORM".
IT IS HOWEVER, INTENDED TO PRODUCE MORE POWER (ACROSS A LOAD - HOPEFULLY 40 - 50 WATTS/COIL @ 200 WATTS)
THAN WHAT THE MOTOR WILL BE CONSUMING AT CLOSE TO ZERO SLIP @ 90 WATTS OR LESS..
THEY PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING IT WILL THEN RECTIFY THE OUTPUT, FEED IT INTO A BATTERY AND THEN RECTIFY IT AGAIN BACK TO 60 HZ AC AND TRY TO SELF RUN THE SYSTEM. THEY ALSO WANT TO USE A DC MOTOR AS WELL I THINK.
SO ALMOST EVERYBODY WILL BE SATISFIED SOON I HOPE? ;)
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 27, 2009, 09:48:51 PM
DEAR ADLEP,
YOU ARE GOING TO GET YOUR WISH - BUT NOT FROM ME.
THE PROTOTYPE I AM CURRENTLY BUILDING IS A 4 COIL UNIT WHICH WILL BE RUN UP TO FULL SPEED AND MAY OR MAY NOT GO BEYOND THE 3600 MAX SPEED RATING OF THE MOTOR - WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE ABOUT THAT. I AM BUILDING A 1/2 INCH BULLET PROOF LEXAN CASE FOR TESTING JUST IN CASE IT WANTS TO PULL A "GOTOLUC - EXPLODING NEO SHITSTORM".
IT IS HOWEVER, INTENDED TO PRODUCE MORE POWER (ACROSS A LOAD - HOPEFULLY 40 - 50 WATTS/COIL @ 200 WATTS)
THAN WHAT THE MOTOR WILL BE CONSUMING AT CLOSE TO ZERO SLIP @ 90 WATTS OR LESS..
THEY PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING IT WILL THEN RECTIFY THE OUTPUT, FEED IT INTO A BATTERY AND THEN RECTIFY IT AGAIN BACK TO 60 HZ AC AND TRY TO SELF RUN THE SYSTEM. THEY ALSO WANT TO USE A DC MOTOR AS WELL I THINK.
SO ALMOST EVERYBODY WILL BE SATISFIED SOON I HOPE? ;)
CHEERS
T
Outstanding T, a great effort on your part and very much looking forward to your results.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: hydrocontrol on February 27, 2009, 05:29:59 PM
.........Now what if you can improve that generator so it can produce 4400 watts using a 1 hp weed eater engine. You are now talking about using a lot less gasoline to produce the same amount of energy. See it does not have to be OU to be very beneficial.
Bad example hydrocontrol, because 746 watts equals 1 horsepower, so if you were able to get 4400watts from a 1 horsepower weed eater, then you would be getting 6 times more output than input, which would obviously be OU.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 27, 2009, 11:21:56 PM
Bad example hydrocontrol, because 746 watts equals 1 horsepower, so if you were able to get 4400watts from a 1 horsepower weed eater, then you would be getting 6 times more output than input, which would obviously be OU.
Cheers
So Hoptoad, according to your theory, now that I purchased a 16 seer heat pump and saving over $150 on average a month over the old 10 seer unit then I must be getting OU and not an increase in efficiency ??? So please explain!
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on February 27, 2009, 11:55:23 PM
So Hoptoad, according to your theory, now that I purchased a 16 seer heat pump and saving over $150 on average a month over the old 10 seer unit then I must be getting OU and not an increase in efficiency ??? So please explain!
Regards, Larry
No, not at all. I'm simply pointing out to hydro that he presented a bad example because he was implying that getting 4400 watts out of a 746watt motor is not O/U but merely higher efficiency.
Read what hydro wrote again ... (bold lettering - my edit)
Quote:"author=hydrocontrol link=topic=4047.msg160352#msg160352 date=1235773799"
.........Now what if you can improve that generator so it can
produce 4400 watts using a 1 hp weed eater engine. You are now talking about using a lot less gasoline to produce the same amount of energy.
See it does not have to be OU to be very beneficial. "
EndQuote
Now if anyone were able to get 4400w out from 746w in, then they obviously have
higher efficiency and O/U.I have no idea how efficient your old 10 seer was (whatever that is), but its obviously not as efficient as your new 16 seer, for the load you are expecting it to drive, otherwise you wouldn't have the savings you're now getting.
Of course you can have higher efficiency without O/U, but you cannot have O/U without higher efficiency. After all, O/U is more than 100% efficiency, is it not?
Also, it is simple math, not theory.
1 horsepower = 746 watts : 6 horsepower = 6 x 746 which is 4476 or (4400 rounded down).
If that 1 horsepower motor was 100% efficient then the maximum output would be 1 horsepower (746 watts).
If anyone were getting 4400w (6 horsepower) out of their 1 horsepower motor then they would be getting O/U.
Tell me where I can a get a 1 horsepower motor that can output 6 horsepower and I'll jump at the chance to buy it.!!
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on February 27, 2009, 11:21:56 PM
Bad example hydrocontrol, because 746 watts equals 1 horsepower, so if you were able to get 4400watts from a 1 horsepower weed eater, then you would be getting 6 times more output than input, which would obviously be OU.
Cheers
First off I was just doing a "loose comparison" for the sake of explanation by doing a google of a standard gas generator to get a rough 4400 watts for 6.5 hp.
Second. we have to look at how 746 watts equals 1 horsepower and how it was derived.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm
" It is that arbitrary unit of measure that has made its way down through the centuries and now appears on your car, your lawn mower, your chain saw and even in some cases your vacuum cleaner."
So we have "horse power" as an arbitrary unit. So what if we have a "super horse" that could generate 4400 watts of energy instead of 746 watts. A horse on steroids. Seems to happen to athletic players all the time. ;D Now you have a horse on steriods that can change that "arbitrary unit " definition of "746 watts equals 1 horsepower" to a higher value. Does that mean OU. No. It means you have a better horse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7EouRfGvN4
Quote from: aTg on February 28, 2009, 08:42:54 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7EouRfGvN4
Your comment less posts leave a lot to be desired. I believe what we should get out of this is "My setup shows how nicely Lenz law is in effect without any acceleration." ?
Well, if the configuration is what is supposed to produce acceleration in the engine and it works exactly the law of Lenz.
Quote from: aTg on February 28, 2009, 09:30:20 AM
Well, if the configuration is what is supposed to produce acceleration in the engine and it works exactly the law of Lenz.
If your not doing this allready the Bike Tach can be set to read RPM's, just follow this article.
http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/
My unit wouldn't accelerate until around 500 RPM.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 27, 2009, 09:48:51 PM
DEAR ADLEP,
YOU ARE GOING TO GET YOUR WISH - BUT NOT FROM ME.
THE PROTOTYPE I AM CURRENTLY BUILDING IS A 4 COIL UNIT WHICH WILL BE RUN UP TO FULL SPEED AND MAY OR MAY NOT GO BEYOND THE 3600 MAX SPEED RATING OF THE MOTOR - WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE ABOUT THAT. I AM BUILDING A 1/2 INCH BULLET PROOF LEXAN CASE FOR TESTING JUST IN CASE IT WANTS TO PULL A "GOTOLUC - EXPLODING NEO SHITSTORM".
IT IS HOWEVER, INTENDED TO PRODUCE MORE POWER (ACROSS A LOAD - HOPEFULLY 40 - 50 WATTS/COIL @ 200 WATTS)
THAN WHAT THE MOTOR WILL BE CONSUMING AT CLOSE TO ZERO SLIP @ 90 WATTS OR LESS..
THEY PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING IT WILL THEN RECTIFY THE OUTPUT, FEED IT INTO A BATTERY AND THEN RECTIFY IT AGAIN BACK TO 60 HZ AC AND TRY TO SELF RUN THE SYSTEM. THEY ALSO WANT TO USE A DC MOTOR AS WELL I THINK.
SO ALMOST EVERYBODY WILL BE SATISFIED SOON I HOPE? ;)
CHEERS
T
Fantastic news Thane. I am no expert so it is very nice to learn that someone is going to apply a similar idea to mine in order to test your solution. As always good luck with everything and keep us updated.
Quote from: aTg on February 28, 2009, 08:42:54 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7EouRfGvN4
Yes aTg, a word or two of explanation is always helpful.
The description could have read, "HC coil shown in action"
Now if you had more turns (over a 100 ohms) and more voltage (550 volts?) and possibly
just a bit more RPM, then this might be a more valid test of a thane coil.
edit: "Well, if the configuration is what is supposed to produce acceleration in the engine and it
works exactly the law of Lenz."
But you show an HC coil in the vid... not an HV coil?
Nevertheless, good work... thanks for sharing, keep on
Ron
PS: be careful measuring at the over one hundred volt level... it can give you a nasty shock!!!!
When you are at this level take precautions, "keep one hand in the pocket is a good rule"
One can survive a shock between the fingers or up your arm... but a shock between your hands
that crosses the chest can stop the ticker....
http://www.altair.org/hazard.html
.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on February 28, 2009, 05:57:26 AM
First off I was just doing a "loose comparison" for the sake of explanation by doing a google of a standard gas generator to get a rough 4400 watts for 6.5 hp.
Second. we have to look at how 746 watts equals 1 horsepower and how it was derived.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm
" It is that arbitrary unit of measure that has made its way down through the centuries and now appears on your car, your lawn mower, your chain saw and even in some cases your vacuum cleaner."
So we have "horse power" as an arbitrary unit. So what if we have a "super horse" that could generate 4400 watts of energy instead of 746 watts. A horse on steroids. Seems to happen to athletic players all the time. ;D Now you have a horse on steriods that can change that "arbitrary unit " definition of "746 watts equals 1 horsepower" to a higher value. Does that mean OU. No. It means you have a better horse.
That's right, a horespower is simply an arbitrary unit of measurement. You can change your definition of horespower as much as you like, but in the words of shakespeare, a rose by any other name is a rose just the same. Just by changing your unit of measurement doesn't mean you have more or less of an actual mass or amount of energy. Just a different unit of measurement. A horespower doesn't literally refer to a horse, it refers to a specific amount of power required, to do a specific amount of work, over a specific duration of time.
Cheers
My last post on this thread.
Sorry if it is long.
@woopy
Quote
if you think that Thane is simply a faker
I never used that word or inferred any such thing. My use of the word "shyster" was not to imply anything categorical but that the whole method of providing information and steering away from the most important issue gives one the impression of. It's just natural for anyone to think this way because of the way the information is given.
@markzpeiverson
Quote
PS:@wattsup, if you'd look at a number of the videos, you'll see that Thane has used an AC analyzer on many occasions. This instrument shows input voltage, current, PF (power factor), and watts. Since you fail to mention PF as a requirement for your desire to see power in, power out data, perhaps you should do a little more homework before jumping down Thanes throat...
Many guys here know that I have a bad habit of being pretty exhaustive when I decide to investigate something. Before I asked anything to @CP of which nothing was answered by the way (just a "that's sick" response), I did exactly that. I went through ALL the videos, took a good part of one whole night. Do I have to make a video by video critique. There are some places were we see a 4.? amps but no volts, most everywhere we see volts but no amps, then we see output volts but no amps and where we do see amps/volts it is under no load. None of the videos left you with a concrete knowledge that there is any OU happening (or not) and most of the motor speed effects can be accomplished with capacitors, switches and coils to make a motor accelerate under "no load" by recapturing the flyback. I could put a furty coil on an accelerating motor magnet that will quickly give me 300 volts, then say the motor is using 200 watts and the generator is making 300 volts. Is that OU. I does not mean it is OU or even that it is not OU. That means nothing.
Look I am not saying @CP is a bad guy. He's on the contrary a real good guy that has done a shit load of work and I am only very impressed at his set-ups. But I have seen many guys like him wanting to believe in their way. But I find it extremely sad that through all these videos that one would have to wade through one by one, the switching sequences are very confusing, there are wires all over the place that could be used for so many other things, that no one in their right mind can come out of it with a CLEAR understanding of both the phenomenon that he is trying to explain and the potential OU coming from it. Most all his tests were on no coil loads, nothing visible to the naked eye like a bank of light bulbs, etc. Seems more like a pile of hyper-confusion and this is the main quandary that if cleared up, would be beneficial to many, especially to @CP himself.
Example of his PEREPITEIA GENERATOR DEMO VIDEO - Part 5 - which came close, we can finally understand something and hope to hear some real numbers but then at 6:09 he says coil2 is producing 257 volts and the drive motor is using 235 watts. So what about the Generator amps. Again nothing. No mention as if it is normal to compare drive motor watts to generator volts and expect people to come to a knowledgeable conclusion. It means NOTHING. I could do that with my eyes closed and this is the main problem.
Example in the PART 1 PEREPITEIA DEMO VIDEO OTTAWA UNIVERSITY MAY 2008 video he shows the prime mover turning the magwheel over two series connected HV and HC coils. At no load the motors turns at X rpm then he connects a small bulb onto the HC coil and the motor starts losing rpm. He disconnects the bulb on the HC coil and connects the Leds on the HV coils and the motor rpm increases. He then connects the bulb back to the HC coil and the motor still increases. Great. BUT this is not OU, far from it and again means nothing. He then generalizes that the HV coil increases rpm while the HC coil is loaded with the bulb. Yes but he was consuming all along at least 220 watts on the drive motor and there was never 220 watts of light emitted by all the lights. So why don't you then add another 2 or 3 bulbs onto the HC coil while the HV is also on and see what happens. This was not done. Too bad because this is what we want to know. With 220 watts of power you can have a lot of leeway. When the HV coil increases, it is only because the HC coil is loaded with a furty little bulb that is not that bright. So where is the magic. There is none. This is again standard things that anyone that has played with motors, gears, capacitors, generators, flyback switches and the others like the RV guys have seen.
What creates greater stall, putting a drag of 1 onto a generator that is directly in line with the prime mover or putting a drag of 1 onto a prime mover that has a 1 foot diameter wheel and the generator is at the edge of the wheel. Figure it out.
I don't really care how the motor is driven in its many potential ways. What interests me is the final result. Put the unit on an isolated table and remove all those wires and connect directly, drive the thing to its optimum, however it is, measure input volts and amps (all the inputted volts and amps means the energy used in the drive motor and if outside energy was also used in one of the coils), put a real load like a bank of 100 watt light bulbs on the generator and measure volts and amps. That's all we need to know and this has not been done. Yes it has been done is so many "indirect" ways, with HV, with HC, without HV, without HC but as of now, none of those videos could truly imply any form of OU or not. Reactive power, ever hear of that. You can fool a meter but you can't fool a light bulb.
Now take all this unknown and put it beside a cockamamie offer of licensing. Licensing what? An OU unit, an almost OU unit or a far from OU unit. We don't know. This is the first time in my business career that I have seen someone license an unknown. Usually, someone comes up with a device that has a concrete use and operation and performance and then he can license it to interested manufacturers. But in this case, there is NOTHING. I recommend you consider the legal ramifications of such an offering and maybe you will really reconsider that post.
Anyways, take what you want. I will not post here anymore because it is obvious that any form of critique is not welcome. I have better ways to use my time. So have it your way and enjoy the ride. I will only say that the post I referred to earlier should be removed and if @CP does not do it willingly then it will be up to @Stefan to decide, but regardless, people should realize that the post in question is not endorsed by the Overunity.com Forum and/or its members.
So you guys figure it out yourselves.
Added:
This guy has something to teach that you may learn from and use here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmLGm_ayqio&feature=channel
NEW FLICK & PICS...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT2qi9ITcls&feature=channel_page
CHEERS
T
Quote from: wattsup on February 28, 2009, 08:59:20 PM
My last post on this thread.
YIPEE!
DON'T LET YOUR CRAPPY ATTITUDE HIT YOU IN THE ARSE ON THE WAY OUT!
HAPPY TRAILS
T
This is a "systemic" problem that plagues 99% of the folks on this forum who make claims of overunity, efficiencies over 100%, and COP>1.
The underlying problem is that most electrical FE researchers out there have little or no formal technical electronics training, or have just not learned the basics if they have had the training. They do not know how to measure, they do not know what to measure, and they do not know why certain measurements need to be performed. It's as simple as that. There is one other possibility explaining the lack of proper measurements, but that would assume mal intent. We must assume the former as the actual reason.
CP's licensing offer is not the problem imo. Anyone with half a wit about them will "have it checked out" before committing themselves in any way, so don't worry about that (remember the magnacoaster?) The real problem is that Stefan has not established a formal protocol for members to follow who intend to make any kind of claims that would be considered out of the ordinary. Without fail, this would put to rest any doubts regarding what a person is claiming.
There is a great deal of learning that can be had from one's own experimentation and from that of other's as well. However, people should not lead themselves nor unsuspecting others down the garden path, and unless people start using proper power measurements, this is going to continue. Experimentation is helpful to all, but incorrect assumptions are quite the opposite.
A piece of lab gear is currently being developed that will alleviate all doubts regarding power and COP measurements. The intent is to offer it as open source in hopes that some will build and use it. I certainly hope they do, and perhaps one day Stefan will establish a protocol for claims and insist on it. Stay tuned.
As a final note, rather than judge whether a device is ou or not (because either is possible imo), I'm offering tools to help FE researchers discover for themselves if they've got it or not. It's up to them whether or not they use them.
Regards,
.99
Quote from: hoptoad on February 28, 2009, 06:39:12 PM
That's right, a horsepower is simply an arbitrary unit of measurement. You can change your definition of horsepower as much as you like, but in the words of Shakespeare, a rose by any other name is a rose just the same. Just by changing your unit of measurement doesn't mean you have more or less of an actual mass or amount of energy. Just a different unit of measurement. A horsepower doesn't literally refer to a horse, it refers to a specific amount of power required, to do a specific amount of work, over a specific duration of time.
Cheers
Those 'arbitrary unit of measurement' are so much fun. Actually a horsepower was derived from the comparison of what a 'common draft horse' could lift compared to a steam engine. When electric motors were invented the comparison was then extended to those motors by the same method.
"In Watt's judgement, one horse can do 33,000 foot-pounds of work every minute."
An electric motor was made to lift the equivlent of 33,000 foot-pounds of work every minute then the power was measured that was being used by the motor. So from that power measurement 1 horsepower is equivalent to 746 watts. Does that mean the electric motor used for the test was the best configuration for an electric motor or was 100 % efficient. Considering the electric motor was invented in 1821 it is doubtful.
In any event you have to have a starting point for a reference even if that reference is an
'arbitrary unit of measurement' and all values are derived from that measurement. It is impossible to go rewrite all the billions of books that have 1 horsepower is equivalent to 746 watts so you live with what you have.
I really do agree with your argument. My example may have not been the best. A better example would be to use a standard wind generator. Lets reference this one for simplicity sake.
http://www.e-marine-inc.com/products/wind_generators/airxmarine.html
"Output: 400 watts at 28 mph (12.5 m/s) "
Now lets change the generator configuration to be like the one Thane is trying to develop. What if it now gets 2000 watts at the same 28 mph (12.5 m/s) input wind using the same blade. Does it mean OU ? No. It does means a vast improvement that can be extremely beneficial for everyone and can be applied immediately to wind generators under development. YES. Thanes development really does not have to be OU to be useful.
What I see Thane trying to do is use a AC motor to replicate the wind and supply a constant input to his generator while he changes his generator configuration to get the best output. Is this the best approach ? I do not think I would do it that way but until I start doing my own replication it is not my call.
Quote from: poynt99 on February 28, 2009, 10:37:51 PM
This is a "systemic" problem that plagues 99% of the folks on this forum who make claims of overunity, efficiencies over 100%, and COP>1.
The underlying problem is that most electrical FE researchers out there have little or no formal technical electronics training, or have just not learned the basics if they have had the training. They do not know how to measure, they do not know what to measure, and they do not know why certain measurements need to be performed. It's as simple as that. There is one other possibility explaining the lack of proper measurements, but that would assume mal intent. We must assume the former as the actual reason.
Regards,
.99
THANKS FOR THIS POYNT99, AND I AGREE AND NOBODY HERE KNOWS HOW TO EVALUATE GENERATOR PERFORMANCE - SO FAR AS I CAN TELL.
IF YOU LOOK AT MY LAST VIDEO YOU WILL SEE THAT THE
NET DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE:
(MOTOR TORQUE - GENERATOR COUNTER TORQUE = 0) IN THE CONVENTIONAL MODE
DRIVE SHAFT POWER = TORQUE x SPEED x 2pi = 0
GENERATOR INPUT POWER = 0
IN THE HV COIL ACCELERATION MODE
NET TORQUE IS LESS THAN ZERO (MOTOR SLIP IS LESS = LESS TORQUE) GENERATOR INPUT POWER = 0
GENERATOR OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
EFFICIENCY = INFINITY.
CHEERS
T
ps
I_RON CAN YOU MACHINE A CROSS PLEASE - I'M GOING TO BE CRUCIFIED BY THE OU ENERGY CHANGERS SOON! :'(
Quote from: hydrocontrol on February 28, 2009, 10:59:29 PM
What I see Thane trying to do is use a AC motor to replicate the wind and supply a constant input to his generator while he changes his generator configuration to get the best output. Is this the best approach ? I do not think I would do it that way but until I start doing my own replication it is not my call.
ACTUALLY HYDROCONTROL - I AM USING THE AC MOTOR TO REPLICATE AN AC MOTOR...
LIKE THE ONES USED IN THE TESLA ROADSTER, MINI COOPER EV, RUFF PORSCHE EV, AC PROPULSION EV ETC.
WE ARE NOT ALL THAT INTERESTED IN WIND UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS A WIND TURBINE THAT SPINS FASTER THAN THE WIND BLOWS. 8)
AND FORGET ABOUT KNEEDEEP - "YOU CAN'T TEACH AN OLD FROG NEW TRICKS."
CHEERS
T
Thane,
I'm not aware of your exact setup, but the meter being developed will work with any device that uses an AC or DC electrical input power source and an AC or DC electrical output power source to a load. This includes AC and DC motors and generators.
Certain aspects of the meter's design would need to be beefed up to handle the 1000's of Watts present in motors and generators, but that's a straight forward engineering problem.
.99
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 28, 2009, 11:01:02 PM
GENERATOR INPUT POWER = 0
So you don't need a driving source then? No rotory mechanical input to induce current ? Just watch the generator start up on its own and start outputting power. ::)
Quote from: wattsup on February 28, 2009, 08:59:20 PM
[deletions...]
So you guys figure it out yourselves.
@wattsup
RE: "So you guys figure it out yourselves."
That's exactly what TH and others on this thread have been doing since the beginning!!! Your desire for an UO device is too strong. We all would like to see OU achieved, but fortunately TH's desire to UNDERSTAND was stronger than his desire to 'achieve the impossible (OU)'.
The path that TH has taken, although slow and somewhat obscure to most, frustrating to many, is to not miss anything, to learn all he can about the 'system', and thus, give him the best shot at success. The exact same requests as yours were around in the early days of this thread, and TH was NOT interested in 'proving' OU. It all started when he came across a situation that was contrary to established physics, and all his work and prototypes, successes and failures, since then have been to help UNDERSTAND what is happening, and how the variables interact. Now that he has a much better understanding, and I think he might agree that it is not yet complete, he is going to give OU a shot.
If he would have done it your way, I bet he would have hung it up long ago, and not learned what he has; and not taught those with the desire and patience to learn, things that you won't find in a textbook. I have to wonder how many others have taken your advice and given up too early because they got discouraging results before understanding the system enough to optimize it??? What a shame...
-Mark
PS: If you're so smart, perhaps you can answer this question...
This system in really quite basic: AC induction motor connected to a primitive generator composed of a flywheel with permanent magnets and for the stator, two types of coils. Oh, and don't forget the core/core material. When the HC (high current) coils are connected to a load (typically a power resistor of 10 ohms), the induction motor slows down thanks to good ol' Lenz! Yep, everyone knows that you can't get past ol' Lenz. Then you short the HV (high voltage) coil and the system begins accelerating, in one prototype as much as 100rpm/sec!
Where's ol' Lenzy baby now? ???
whoaooooohhhh!!! :o
fantastic video lot of my old questions are answered and now there are new ones how does it work and where is our Mr, Lenz in this story ?
if i hear right, the acceleration increase strongly when you engage the HC coil the coupling HC-HV seems very effective
looking forward to tomorrow to see the effect of the HC winding on the new 3wounded HV coil it will probably be "formidable"
and you know what tomorrow is my birthday ;D
all the best
Laurent
Quote from: hoptoad on March 01, 2009, 12:17:31 AM
So you don't need a driving source then? No rotory mechanical input to induce current ? Just watch the generator start up on its own and start outputting power. ::)
THE GENERATOR INPUT (mechanical) DRIVE SHAFT POWER IS
NOT THE SAME AS THE PRIME MOVER INPUT (electrical) POWER.
POWER CONSUMED BY THE MOTOR IS A REFLECTION OF THE MOTOR'S EFFICIENCY AND HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GENERATOR.
THE MECHANICAL INPUT POWER TO THE GENERATOR IS
ZERO IF THERE IS ZERO ROTATION OR SPEED AND ZERO WORK BEING PERFORMED BY THE GENERATOR.
OF COURSE THE MOTOR IS WORKING HARD AT PROVIDING DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE AND COULD BE CONSUMING A MILLION WATTS BUT THE FACT REMAINS -
A LOCKED DRIVESHAFT CANNOT PERFORM ANY WORK. INPUT POWER = 0 OUTPUT POWER = 0
I THINK YOU WOULD AGREE IF I WAS HOLDING THE DRIVESHAFT WITH MY HAND - YOU WOULD CLEARLY SEE THAT THERE IS NO MECHANICAL POWER (input) GOING TO THE GENERATOR AND THERFORE NO OUTPUT.
INPUT = 0
OUTPUT = 0
THE MOTOR TORQUE IS MAXIMUM, BUT THE
NET DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE = 0 AND NO ROTATION RESULTS (which by the way is a steady state condition - Steady State condition: NET Torque must = 0).
AT 3600 RPM THE MOTOR TORQUE IS MINIMUM, VIRTUALLY ZERO (BECAUSE MOTOR SLIP = 0 or very close to it), BUT NET DRIVE SHAFT TORQUE IS MAXIMUM (the new
required torque is provided by the HV coils and NOT the motor because at full speed motor torque is almost zero)
ROTATION IS MAXIMUM.
SO NOW OUR LOGIC COMES FULL CIRCLE AGAIN.
AT FULL SPEED: 8)
GENERATOR INPUT (drive shaft power) = 0 WATTS
GENERATOR OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 28, 2009, 10:20:17 PM
YIPEE!
DON'T LET YOUR CRAPPY ATTITUDE HIT YOU IN THE ARSE ON THE WAY OUT!
HAPPY TRAILS
T
LoL
Thane, you are MY man.
Your new stuff is showing some fresh bucks in the pockets, hu?
Good progress.
;D
TORONTO STAR PART DEUX
http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/594471
"The only thing impossible to open,
is a closed mind".
Could not resist.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 08:07:59 AM
AT FULL SPEED: 8)
GENERATOR INPUT (drive shaft power) = 0 WATTS
GENERATOR OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
CHEERS
T
Sorry but that is so very wrong.
AT FULL SPEED: 8)
GENERATOR INPUT (drive shaft power) = It may be 0 torque (don't know but I doubt it) but not 0 watts because the drive motor is still consuming 220-240 watts to maintain what you would call a full speed neutral shaft torque condition.
Why do you think that particular grinder motor only has grinder wheels of a specific diameter. Because if the diameter of the grinder wheel was any wider, the motor would not turn when asked to grind something. The wider you go the less tension on the end is required to create the same stall level on the drive motor.
GENERATOR OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
If this is based on the output voltage of around 250 volts that we have seen, then it is only 0.034 amps that is often seen with what we would call reactive power. Been there, done that, many times.
***************************************
You are not comparing apples to apples. That's why I am saying forget about all this talk. If you really want to learn about this, do the simple test I mention on my previous post. This is the only way you will learn what's really going on, what may not be happening and only then could you tackle the "real" problem to increase the efficiency.
Hint: If the mag wheel had less diameter, then the HC coil will have less potential to stall it under the same conditions as under the wider wheel. But the trade off will be less speed of magnet travel over the HC and HV coils at the same rpm.
If the drive motor at full speed has 0 torque, then by shorting the HV coil you have simply made a wheel that turns Magnet Wheel to Auto Excited Electro Magnet HV coil which simply boils down to being a Magnet to Magnet that will be subject to the same slippage phenomenon as any magnet to magnet motor being loaded by a generator. Since it boils down to magnet to magnets you still have the sticky spot to content with and that's where the drive motor is assisting in adding just enough to overcome it. That's why the rpm increases.
So in fact, to be able to use the present system and have the HV coil auto generate a condition aiding in increase of drive motor speed, this condition is costing 220-240 watts. Now if you put two 100 watt bulbs on the generator they should light full brightness, and have 8.5 watts to spare, but I am sure they will not.
From that neutral torque condition given a finite added momentum of the HV coil being shorted, you are in fact increasing speed but you are still decreasing available torque. Meaning what? If your starting point is let's say 1000 rpm with no load, then you short the HV and connect the generator, then at 1001 rpm you will have maximum torque that was added by the HV coil and as the rpm increases the torque availability from the HV coil will still decrease from that new set-point. So there is nothing special there. You are just transfer the start point from the O rpm at the drive motor to the 1000 rpm magwheel/HV combo.
As soon as the system is turned on, you have an automatic deficit of 220-240 watts. The generator would have to produce 228.5-248.5 watts output for your 8.5 watts to be valid. If I put this in the same output equivalent as an alternator output, at 248 watts it would have to produce 12vdc at 20.666 amps. The drag that the HC coil would have to produce to make 248 watts will be so great, and the fact that it is located at the edge of the mag wheel meaning a little drag on the edge creates much drag to the drive motor, I am sure it will not turn. I have done it so many times it ain't funny. Over 250k$ worth of tests in that direction. lol
So what I was saying is if you look at the "real" problem, you will have a chance to figure out the "real" solution. I like the HV coil auto accelerating idea but again, this has been done before with other configurations. From the video link I put up, one could surmise that if you have two smaller mag wheels with the HC/HV coil in between them, maybe then there is a chance if the ten times output with two magnets video is correct and only if the output is stable and not reactive power. Volts means nothing, it's amps that counts. If the HC coil had 20 or so shorter wires wound in parallel, I think this will give you a better results but again, this requires some experimenting. But in my experience if one coil is wound over the other (which is not necessary because the same effect could be had with a separately placed HC and HV coil) the outer coil will create a cloaking effect over the inner coil as it gets energized and that may be a negative situation and that may explain why your are only getting 8.5 watts output.
Now.................... if you agree to remove that licensing post, I will agree to being more positive (but still a realist) and/or stop breathing down your neck so to speak and if you then look to what Tesla has done to drive his many motors, you will learn that there are other ways of driving that drive motor watts hog so you will have a standing chance. There is a way to drive the motor and return the power used to drive it back to source. This again has been done before. So the question is how can you drive the motor with practically no watts. That's where the OU starts.
Hint #2: No standard off the shelf motor will ever give you OU. Their inherent design flaw is there is no potential for flyback return. That's why they get hot.
Hint #3: You can get the same 0 torque by using the Rotoverter method and only consume 28-50 watts. lol
Look man, if there is anyone on the Forum that truly believes OU is possible, I'm one of them. Each new thing I learn helps me waste less time on other ideas because we get to know already what the results will be. You have a good working ethic which is highly commendable plus you have the tools to create what you have in the mind, that is the ideal situation. Now all you need is to expand your knowledge or learn to listen to others that have some knowledge in the matter. I paid my dues dearly as we have all. You can take it or leave it.
Question: How do you expect to learn something if no one challenges your method.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on February 28, 2009, 10:20:17 PM
YIPEE!
DON'T LET YOUR CRAPPY ATTITUDE HIT YOU IN THE ARSE ON THE WAY OUT!
HAPPY TRAILS
T
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UUXGvQ3q8s
Butt Thane, wattsup was asking the right questions. We need people like that.
Here are some numbers from my test today…
The first part of the video shows the rotor only, no coil/core, running on 72 watts.
This is the base line. Note the 3419 RPM.
Next, the rotor, with core and open coil, running on 148 watts.
The difference then is the core drag, which lowers the speed to 3217 RPM.
Finally, with the switch to the HV coil closed, the rotor accelerates to 3330 RPM and the
draw reduces to 123 watts.
Now this is with a solid rotor but the obvious conclusion is that the drag is
reduced but the rotor does not reach the free run speed and the wattage does not reduce to free run draw. Incidentally the coil resistance is 123 ohms and the voltage on the analog meter reads 900 volts.
So if your HV coils do better than this I look forward to the numbers. But these are the numbers that everyone is asking for, so please post your numbers in this format. Obviously I have not included the HC coils contribution to this process; I leave that up to you to explain. Because in my mind this is an important point that really is the heart of the matter.
Ron
Thane in the news:
http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/594471 (http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/594471)
QuoteElectric motor polarizes opinion
CHRISTOPHER PIKE/FOR THE TORONTO STAR
Ottawa inventor Thane Heins is steadily winning supporters for his electrical motor, which he claims can produce more energy than it consumes. While many are skeptical of the theory, no one has been able to disprove it. (Feb. 12, 2009)
Fierce debate rages around entrepreneur Thane Heins' dogged pursuit of green engine
February 28, 2009
Tyler Hamilton
ENERGY REPORTER
Thane Heins, tired and a little grumpy after a long flight from California, walks onto the stage of an Ottawa conference room and begins a sales pitch that usually raises more eyebrows than money.
One of three entrepreneurs chosen earlier this month to present at a “Pitch The Dragons†contest, a spin on the CBC show Dragons’ Den, Heins has invented a technology that he says will put out more energy than it consumes. His invention, he boldly claims, offers a way to make electric cars that can travel hundreds of kilometres from the energy in a small, inexpensive battery.
It’s a tough crowd. One of the contest judges is TV-show judge Robert Herjavec, a multimillionaire who just minutes earlier shared with the audience his own story of success and the life it now funds - the fancy gas-guzzling cars, the mansion, the luxurious yacht.
The two men are oil and water. Heins, who wants to help the world kick its fossil-fuel addiction, immediately gets his back up. Herjavec is dismissive from the get-go.
“It turned into a shouting match in front of 300 people,†Heins says later that day. “I didn’t mind him kicking sand in my face, but the thing that really got me is when he said I don’t get it. He pushed me a little too far and I fought back.â€
It was just another day for this underdog entrepreneur, a man trying to convince mainstream society he has discovered something real, which in this case means it has broken a major law of physics.
The Star first profiled Heins and his controversial invention a year ago. In a nutshell, he had figured out a way to eliminate the electromagnetic friction that typically limits the performance of an electrical generator â€" an effect known as “Back EMF.†Not only that, but he also learned how to redirect that magnetic energy so that, instead of causing resistance, it gave an electrical motor connected to the generator a significant boost.
The result, as far as Heins was concerned, violated Lenz’s law or what’s often called the law of diminishing returns. For many, that equates to a perpetual motion machine, an impossible claim in the conventional field of physics.
Within no time the story spread globally across the Internet, became chatter on blogs, and triggered a flood of email to this reporter’s inbox â€" some praising Heins for his determination, others calling the Star irresponsible for giving credibility to his claim. The story, love it or hate it, was the second-most read article on TheStar.com in 2008.
Much has happened over the past 12 months. Heins still operates out of a lab out at the University of Ottawa, he continues to evolve his invention, and he routinely demonstrates those improvements to the world by posting videos on YouTube.
“The last video I watched still showed evidence of some fundamental misunderstandings of physics, combined with wishful thinking,†said Seanna Watson, an electrical engineer who is also a member of a scientific group called Ottawa Skeptics.
Heins gave the group a demonstration of his technology shortly at the Star’s story was published. Two months later Watson posted a critique online titled “In This Town We Obey The Law of Thermodynamics.†Yes, she admitted, the electrical motor does speed up without any increase in input power, but increased speed does not automatically mean an increase in mechanical work.
“Heins appears earnest and basically honest, but persistently self-deluded,†Watson wrote. “While the speed-up behaviour of the generator currently lacks an established explanation, there is no reason to think that it represents any challenge to currently known laws of physics.â€
It’s a criticism Heins has heard before: You haven’t proved you’re right, so you must be wrong. At the same time, nobody has been able to prove he’s wrong.
Some want to believe, or have kept an inquiring mind. Heins has been contacted by NASA, he’s had several investors, entrepreneurs, engineers and academics show up at his lab for a demonstration. Heins always obliges -- he says he has nothing to hide.
At one point last spring, rock legend Neil Young wanted to adapt Heins’ invention to power a 1959 Lincoln Continental MK IV, which is being entered into the $10-million automotive X-Prize â€" a contest in search of the world’s most efficient automobile.
Heins, Young, and his engineer Uli Kruger had much dialogue over email and telephone about the rock star’s “LincVolt†project. At one point, Heins sent Young some information by email on the performance of his generator and copied the message to dozens of other people unrelated to Young’s project.
Young replied to Heins that he didn’t appreciate his private email being broadcast to the world. “Please do not do this again!†he wrote, but then quickly breezed over the incident. “This in no way negates my enthusiasm and curiosity about your project,†he assured Heins.
Heins, not one to worship the famous, sent a terse response: “I just sent you an email with proof that my generator violates the Law of Conservation of Energy and you are worried about your private email? Are you serious?†He accused Toronto-born Young of being shallow.
The relationship eventually fizzled. Two week after that exchange, Young, in an email to the Star, was still gracious in his assessment of Heins’ invention. “I am impressed… it is on our list of things to watch.â€
Day by day, bit by bit, Heins’ passion and persistence is steadily gaining him supporters â€" people convinced that what they’re seeing is important enough to move the technology out of the lab and into real-world applications.
Through his Ottawa-based company Potential Difference Inc., Heins has been in serious talks with a designer of small wind turbines in Montreal, a senior engineer from a large utility in Turkey, and a small manufacturer of electrical equipment in Toronto. He’s altered the design of his prototype as well by developing a high-voltage “self-excited†motor coil.
“We can use it to accelerate (the motor shaft) from 100 revolutions per minute to 3,500 without adding an ounce of power,†according to Heins.
His most promising partnership so far is with California Diesel & Power, a $10-million company that sells back-up generators for cellphone towers throughout California. AT&T is one of its largest customers.
Owen Charles, head of technology at California D&P, viewed Heins’ demonstration videos on YouTube last year and was intrigued. He flew to Ottawa for a live demonstration and was convinced the technology worked, at least enough to pursue it further.
“There’s acceleration, but what I don’t see is being able to harness more power out than power in,†said Charles during a phone interview. “But Thane is starting to get more and more watts, more power, out of the coil, in addition to the acceleration.â€
Heins’ made a prototype for Charles, who’s been demonstrating it to customers and contacts throughout California. During a demonstration to some AT&T contacts the motor was spinning at its full rated capacity using only 75 watts of power, when normally it takes 250 watts to do the same work. “To me, that makes the motor a hell of a lot more efficient.â€
In the diesel generator business, it means Heins’ technology â€" at the very least â€" can be used to get much more work out of a generator using the same amount of fuel. That’s enough for Charles, who wants to license the innovation. “We’re trying to become a West Coast hub for this type of technology.â€
But is it perpetual motion? “It has the potential to be that,†said Heins. “But there are many hoops we have to jump through before we get there.†Still, he believes that getting “there†is achievable. To add credibility to his claim, he plans to pay the U.S. Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory to evaluate the technology.
It doesn’t help, however, that Heins often undermines what credibility he has earned. At times he seems to exaggerate the significance of certain events and relationships. He’s written emails to former U.S. vice presidents Dick Cheney and Al Gore claiming he’s got a way to eliminate the world’s dependence on oil and bring the troops home from Iraq. It’s the kind of behaviour that makes people turn away, not pay attention.
He’s also working with The Orion Project, a non-profit group founded by conspiracy theorist Steven Greer, who has founded several UFO groups and claims to have been in contact with extraterrestrials. Greer believes the government is aware that perpetual motion machines exist and that there has been a massive global cover-up.
Still, all the doubt and scepticism could vanish if California D&P actually makes a more efficient generator. The company has also entered the automotive X-Prize with plans, like Neil Young once had, to use Heins’ generator.
“Within a month or two months, we should have that generator in a car,†said Heins. “All we’re going to try to do is run the car in the conventional mode, measure the number of miles we get out of it, then put our generator in and see if we can get more miles out.â€
If it demonstrates the dramatic improvement Heins expects to see, maybe Al Gore will pay attention.
tak
OK Ron, as he gained ground on the brake friction that causes the magnetic center of the coil but this is not to produce an acceleration higher than the engine itself inductor.
I got the same thing using electronic as you can see the back but in no case I have not managed to overcome the speed at which the motor turns freely.
It is a failure.
PD: You are very brave or foolhardy with the rotor at that speed in front of your face, xD Suerte.
Thank you i_ron.
As has been stated by others, but in another way:
1. you take a motor(x) that runs at 'x' watts
2. put the coils(y) next to it, motor runs at 'x+y' watts
3. activate(z) the coils, motor runs at 'x+y-z' watts and produces 'w' watts. Net = (x+y-z) + w
To be OU #3 needs to outperform #1
What has been shown over and over is how #3 outperforms #2.
Meaning you have made your now inefficient motor (because of #2) less inefficient due to #3.
Now the HC coil should be added into the mix with numbers presented as by i_ron.
High praise to you all for the hard work and sharing it!
BTW:
Quote from: i_ron on March 01, 2009, 12:55:40 PM
The first part of the video shows the rotor only, no coil/core, running on 72 watts.
Think you wrote it down wrong. The meters read: 1.19A x 80.7V = 95 watts
Quote from: capthook on March 01, 2009, 02:40:07 PM
Thank you i_ron.
BTW:
Think you wrote it down wrong. The meters read: 1.19A x 80.7V = 95 watts
Thanks!
Oh, btw, yes you are correct, it should be 96 watts (or so) I put that in like that to see if anyone
was paying attention.... do you believe that? lol
Ron
Quote from: tak22 on March 01, 2009, 02:14:58 PM
Thane in the news:
http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/594471 (http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/594471)
tak
Nice story...I'm glad your hard work is pushing this forward to possible applications Thane. As always, really hope it all works out.
Quote from: JustMe on March 01, 2009, 07:43:52 PM
Nice story...I'm glad your hard work is pushing this forward to possible applications Thane. As always, really hope it all works out.
JUSTME, NICE TO HEAR FROM YOU AFTER ALL THIS TIME - I FIGURED YOU MOVED TO NEW ZEALAND AND STARTED MAKING BABIES WITH A22 OR SOMETHING?
AND WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU DOING HERE ANYWAY ??? IF YOU ARE NOT MAKING BABIES YOU CERTAINLY OUGHT TO BE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR FREACKIN' SENS. :P OR ELSE WE WILL ALL HAVE TO LEAVE TOWN FOR SHAME.
I HOPE ALL IS WELL WITH YOU!
CHEERS
T
VERY NICE SETUP THERE - PLEASE TELL ME YOU ARE WEARING BODY ARMOR ???
QuoteThe first part of the video shows the rotor only, no coil/core, running on 72 watts.
This is the base line. Note the 3419 RPM.
THIS IS
NOT BASE LINE - THIS IS
NOT A PERMANENT MAGNET GENERATOR WITH REAL COGGING TORQUE AND CORE LOSSES IT IS A OPEN AIR FLYWHEEL WITH NO USE AT ALL.
QuoteNext, the rotor, with core and open coil, running on 148 watts.
The difference then is the core drag, which lowers the speed to 3217 RPM.
THIS
IS THE BASELINE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION CORE QUALITY (WHICH
COULDN'T BE LOWER IF YOU ARE USING A VERY CHEAP CHINESE MOT).
SO YES CHEAP CORES COST YOU - ANSWER USE BETTER CORES WITH NARROWER HYSTERESIS CURVES.
ALSO YOU HAVE TO BALANCE THE COGGING TORQUE WITH MORE THAN 1 CORE - IDEALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE 18 COILS ALL STAGGERED CORRECTLY.
QuoteFinally, with the switch to the HV coil closed, the rotor accelerates to 3330 RPM and the draw reduces to 123 watts.
SO YOU ACCELERATED A 10 LB(?) MASS FROM 3217 RPM TO 3330 RPM AND INCREASED THE STORED INERTIA (ENERGY) IN THE FLYWHEEL WITHOUT ADDING ANY ADDITIONAL ENERGY TO THE MOTOR -
BRAVO YOU JUST VIOLATED THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE AND THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY!QuoteNow this is with a solid rotor but the obvious conclusion is that the drag is reduced but the rotor does not reach the free run speed and the wattage does not reduce to free run draw. Incidentally the coil resistance is 123 ohms and the voltage on the analog meter reads 900 volts.
NOW TAKE THE ROTOR OFF - AND YOU WILL GET AN EVEN BETTER FREE RUN SPEED - SHOULD BE ABOUT 3600 RPM - IT HAS NO USE AT ALL BUT IS SOUNDS COOLER 8)
QuoteSo if your HV coils do better than this I look forward to the numbers. But these are the numbers that everyone is asking for, so please post your numbers in this format. Obviously I have not included the HC coils contribution to this process; I leave that up to you to explain. Because in my mind this is an important point that really is the heart of the matter.Ron
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO SEND YOU SOME REAL SILICON BASED CORE MATERIAL RATHER THAN SOMETHING MADE FROM AN OLD B52 BOMBER?
YOUR ACCELERATION WILL BE IMPROVED AND YOUR CORE LOSSES REDUCED.
TEST:
PUT A SOLID CHUNK OF HARD STEEL IN YOUR COIL AND LET US KNOW HOW CRAPPY YOUR RESULTS ARE THEN.
T
Hi everyone,
I think that, even if the motor need 200w to run, with heins device, we can get out 8-9watt without any change in the 200w to the motor /or at least, no elevation of demand power to drive the motor. So if we put his device between a motor and the transmission of a car, the motor doesn't feel that we are taking 8-9watt and all his power go trought the wheels, so there a 8-9watt *free* and it can be more if a lot more of HV/HC coils are use.
For the people that doesn't agree with thane when he said that his *generator* is OU, you forgot one thing: the shaft is turning. We can extract more energy with a conventionnal generator, or with thane generator. The fact that you cant disagree with, is that the input power doe's not increase when we extract power...
200w= x rpm (kinetic energy)
200w= y rpm (kinetic energy)+ 8-9watt
It's not only the comparison between 200w and 8-9w, because there is kinetic energy in the shaft... you learned that is physic class no?
fred
good work everybody!
Quote from: fred2890 on March 01, 2009, 10:21:11 PM
Hi everyone,
I think that, even if the motor need 200w to run, with heins device, we can get out 8-9watt without any change in the 200w to the motor /or at least, no elevation of demand power to drive the motor. So if we put his device between a motor and the transmission of a car, the motor doesn't feel that we are taking 8-9watt and all his power go trought the wheels, so there a 8-9watt *free* and it can be more if a lot more of HV/HC coils are use.
For the people that doesn't agree with thane when he said that his *generator* is OU, you forgot one thing: the shaft is turning. We can extract more energy with a conventionnal generator, or with thane generator. The fact that you cant disagree with, is that the input power doe's not increase when we extract power...
200w= x rpm (kinetic energy)
200w= y rpm (kinetic energy)+ 8-9watt
It's not only the comparison between 200w and 8-9w, because there is kinetic energy in the shaft... you learned that is physic class no?
fred
good work everybody!
THANK YOU FRED - WILL YOU MARRY ME? :)
THAT 8 OR 9 WATTS COULD JUST AS EASILY BE
8 OR 9 HUNDRED WATTS WITH THE SAME 200 WATTS OF KINETIC ENERGY. ;)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 10:18:37 PM
NOW TAKE THE ROTOR OFF - AND YOU WILL GET AN EVEN BETTER FREE RUN SPEED - SHOULD BE ABOUT 3600 RPM - IT HAS NO USE AT ALL BUT IS SOUNDS COOLER 8)
T
Be serious for a minute, run the rotor only up to a given voltage, record the amps and the RPM,
this is your baseline.
Put a crappy mot core on and run it up to the previous voltage and record the amps and RPM… this is your core drag for that material.
Now put your new core material on and do the same thing… this will give you
the core drag of the new material.
You can then look at the numbers and do a “how much less drag the new material has†comparison.
But you start with a baseline, then as you add one core... two cores or more then you have some
idea of what the cost is...
Ron
Quote from: fred2890 on March 01, 2009, 10:21:11 PM
.............
For the people that doesn't agree with thane when he said that his *generator* is OU, you forgot one thing: the shaft is turning. We can extract more energy with a conventional generator, or with thane generator.
But is the "world" ready for OU... :o I still think hooking up a Thane's generator to a windmill would "look" more acceptable to the general populace even if it is turning twice as fast as the wind. ;) Everyone would jump on the "renewable energy" bandwagon and I might even get a tax deduction for a OU "renewable energy" windmill in my backyard. A windmill producing power is a lot easier to explain than the OU generator in the basement. I can now see why the "wind turbine" industry wants the technology. A wind turbine is perfect disguise for generating power that gets tax breaks and promotes "renewable energy" while at the same time it produces more power than it would normally. What a brillant plan.. They get the tax money. They get the money for selling kilowatts. They get the "green" stamp from the populace. A Win-win for them.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 10:18:37 PM
IDEALLY YOU SHOULD HAVE 18 COILS ALL STAGGERED CORRECTLY.
T
Using mot cores with a drag of 52 watts per core then 18 would require 936 watts to run... a bit dicey
for the Ryobi wot? Same thing with doubling the strength of your magnets in CA... it wouldn't run, right? But had you worked from a baseline then this could have been foreseen.
If you would, do this test for the group then... what is the core drag for one leg of a mot, three legs
of a mot, one leg of the new material, three legs of the new material?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 01, 2009, 11:27:43 PM
Be serious for a minute, run the rotor only up to a given voltage, record the amps and the RPM,
this is your baseline.
Ron
NOPE SORRY - YOU CAN'T CHANGE PARAMETERS MID STREAM AND SAY YOU DIDN'T.
UNLESS YOU ARE BUILDING AN AIR CORE GENERATOR - THEN GO AHEAD - BUT SINCE YOU ARE NOT THEN YOU CAN'T DO IT WITH ANY EXPERIMENTAL VALIDITY.
BUILD YOUR GENERATOR WITH COILS AND CORES AND TEST THE GENERATOR'S REACTION TO LOADING.
DECELERATION = LENZ LIVES
ACCELERATION = DEAD LENZ
IF LENZ IS DEAD THEN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE IT USEFUL, THEN BETTER, AND BETTER ETC.
HAVE FUN AND IGNORE EVERYONE ALL THE TIME!
UNLESS OF COURSE YOU ARE MARRIED TO THEM AND THEY ARE NAKED.
T
QuoteSame thing with doubling the strength of your magnets in CA... it wouldn't run, right? But had you worked from a baseline then this could have been foreseen.
WRONG AGAIN MY_OBI_RON - CA WORKED FINE WITH NEW CORES WHICH IS WHAT I AM USING NOW.
CHEAP CORES EAT FLUX AND DON'T CHANGE POLARITY WELL... KIND OF LIKE STOBORN PEOPLE WHO WASTE ENERGY AND WON'T CHANGE THEIR MIND.
CHEAP CORES WASTE ROTOR KINETIC ENERGY AND WASTE HV COIL DELAYED "ACCELERATING" FLUX.
T
QuoteIf you would, do this test for the group then... what is the core drag for one leg of a mot, three legs of a mot, one leg of the new material, three legs of the new material?
DEAR GROUP OF ONE OR IS IT THE I_RON GROUP?
YOU DO IT - YOU ARE THE RETIRED GROUP HERE. AND WHILE YOU ARE AT IS DO A GRAPH OF CORE DRAG vs SPEED AT 0 RPM ALL THE WAY UP TO 3500 RPM OR SO AND YOU WILL SEE HOW MUCH IT DIMINISHES WITH INCREASING RPM.
I BET YOUR CORE DRAG IS CLOSE TO 500 OR MORE WATTS AT 0 RPM.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 10:18:37 PM
SO YOU ACCELERATED A 10 LB(?) MASS FROM 3217 RPM TO 3330 RPM AND INCREASED THE STORED INERTIA (ENERGY) IN THE FLYWHEEL WITHOUT ADDING ANY ADDITIONAL ENERGY TO THE MOTOR - BRAVO YOU JUST VIOLATED THE WORK ENERGY PRINCIPLE AND THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY!
T
One way to look at it but this and what I have been saying needs a qualifier. Because the nature
of this motor is part of the problem. As the motor is "allowed" to speed up the draw of the motor
decreases. So to be precise, the experiments should be run at a constant RPM. When for example
the HV coil is engaged the rpm should be held constant by reducing the input to the motor. Then the
before and after wattage readings compared. But then you have heard all this before....
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 01, 2009, 11:27:43 PM
Be serious for a minute, run the rotor only up to a given voltage, record the amps and the RPM,
this is your baseline.
Put a crappy mot core on and run it up to the previous voltage and record the amps and RPM… this is your core drag for that material.
Now put your new core material on and do the same thing… this will give you
the core drag of the new material.
You can then look at the numbers and do a “how much less drag the new material has†comparison.
But you start with a baseline, then as you add one core... two cores or more then you have some
idea of what the cost is...
Ron
@I_Ron
Three times already I have asked Thane if his generator causes the rotor to speed up to or beyond its maximum speed attainable by the driving motor when there is no coil or core presented to the rotor. Each time he has said YES. But this is the one aspect of comparative testing he has not showed in any of his videos. Gee, I wonder why ?
Perhaps if he spent less time trying to insult and ridicule those who ask these valid questions and put them to the test, he might already have allayed many criticisms of his comparative methods and his interpretation of the resultant data.
Cheers
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 12:02:33 AM
But then you have heard all this before....
Ron
FINALLY I CAN AGREE WITH YOU ON SOMETHING.
GOOD NIGHT!
T
Ron, Nice research and data. Great build job.
You have made some good points in your research and some valid arguments.
I know Thane is now looking for the "OU" grail but perhaps the first step is an improvement in generator design for practical "real world" purposes.
What really counts is how much power you can get out of the HC setup with a load versus a HC setup with a load and with a shorted HV coil. The reason it needs to be tested like this is because in the "real world" a generator is powered by something such as a gas engine, the wind, the water,etc A spinning rotor, wind turbine blade, water turbine blade, etc without being hooked up to a generator head to produce energy is not too useful. Once any generator head is attached it will load the system. So the starting point is a loaded system for a valid comparison. Then it boils down to how much power is produced using a standard generator head compared to a generator head with HV coils shorted. If the HV shorted coils produce more power under the same load than a normal generator head than that is a basic improvement.
As you can tell from my previous post I am more interested in getting more power out of a wind generator than of getting OU. Sure OU would be nice and I am rooting for Thane but just an improved wind generator would make me happy until Thanes basement OU generator gets finished.
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 12:02:33 AM
But then you have heard all this before....
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 12:15:59 AM
FINALLY I CAN AGREE WITH YOU ON SOMETHING.
GOOD NIGHT!
T
You may have heard it all before, but do you listen ???
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 10:18:37 PM
VERY NICE SETUP THERE - PLEASE TELL ME YOU ARE WEARING BODY ARMOR ???
T
I didn't mean to scare anyone... but this rotor is safe to well over 16000 RPM. As the speed safety factor is exponential, it has a safety factor of two at 12,000, four at 8,000, six at 5,000 and a safety factor of at least eight at the speed in the video. This is probably safer than crossing the street.The first rotor, which has not yet been returned for upgrade, only has a safety factor of two or three,
which didn't seem to slow you down too much...? or cause you to rush it back for the mod?
Ron
Quote from: hoptoad on March 02, 2009, 12:11:13 AM
Gee, I wonder why ...
I FORGOT THE
SPLIT-PHASE MOTOR COGGING TORQUE TESTS OF MAY 4TH 2008 POSTED HERE ON THIS THREAD WHEN THE ROTOR FACING AWAY FROM THE ROTATED AT 1728 RPM AND THEN 1741 RPM WITH THE HV COIL ENGAGED.
CHEERS AND NECK-DEEP
T
QuoteYou may have heard it all before, but do you listen
ARE YOU NAKED?
I REST MY CASE.
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 12:26:17 AM
I didn't mean to scare anyone... Ron
OK THEN, BUT NEXT TIME REMEMBER YOUR PANTS WHEN SHOOTING VIDEOS.
THIS ISN'T NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC YOU KNOW.
GOOD NIGHT FRIEND AND FOE ALIKE!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 12:28:44 AM
I FORGOT THE SPLIT-PHASE MOTOR COGGING TORQUE TESTS OF MAY 4TH 2008 POSTED HERE ON THIS THREAD WHEN THE ROTOR FACING AWAY FROM THE ROTATED AT 1728 RPM AND THEN 1741 RPM WITH THE HV COIL ENGAGED.
CHEERS AND NECK-DEEP
T
ARE YOU NAKED?
I REST MY CASE.
Then show a video of the power consumption of the motor/rotor at full speed unimpeded by the variac and the presence of your coil system and then show the power consumption of the motor with the coil system present, with and without the HV connected. (without the speed being impeded/controlled by the variac)
Should be simple enough.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 02, 2009, 12:41:52 AM
Should be simple enough.
Cheers
YOU ARE RIGHT!
SO GO AHEAD AND DO IT?
T
MORE PICS...
T
Hi Thane,
Nice setup !
Where come the power to run the Ryobi motor ? 110V AC outlet?
Thank's
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 10:18:37 PM
NOW TAKE THE ROTOR OFF - AND YOU WILL GET AN EVEN BETTER FREE RUN SPEED - SHOULD BE ABOUT 3600 RPM - IT HAS NO USE AT ALL BUT IS SOUNDS COOLER 8)
.
T
Yes, you are correct, take the rotor off... This then becomes a first baseline.
In my case the motor sans rotor, runs on 80.5 volts @ .57 amps = 46 watts.(3569 rpm)
Now I know that the rotor uses 50 watts to run... if I changed rotors then I would have a baseline
to know IF the new rotor used more or less.You could do the same thing... how much does the
open barrow rotor use? how much does the windage cost? how much does the #2 rotor use?
Incidentally, it also points out that the Ryobi, running with no load on line voltage, is not that efficient.
On 117 volts it uses .92 amps, wow, 107 watts! (no rotor! 3580 rpm)
Butt Thane, this first baseline is only of use if you were comparing rotors. To compare coil/cores
it is most useful to put the baseline at having the rotor on the motor. Then you don't have to make
up stories... you said on list that the new rotor would barely get to 1000 rpm in CA, Owen told me
the same thing, why then say that it did run fine but then change the scene to Ottawa ... with the
new core material? Here is something we would all be interested in... what is the core drag
reduction with the new core material? Grab yourself a proper baseline and tell us!
At least tell us the specs on the new material... I remember you saying you were going to send
me some... that it was in a box all ready to ship....
Ron
Hi,
I_ron is not going to marry you, thane, if you bare your teeth like this ;D
Kator01
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 06:30:23 AM
YOU ARE RIGHT!
SO GO AHEAD AND DO IT?
T
Sure, just send me your tools, your workshop, your motor and rotor and measuring equipment. Oh, and don't forget the coils/cores.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 02, 2009, 03:10:26 PM
Sure, just send me your tools, your workshop, your motor and rotor and measuring equipment. Oh, and don't forget the coils/cores.
Cheers
Sounds a bit sleazebagish. If anyone had experimentation tools we would be visiting other galaxies by now. Either get off that dildo you "accidentally" sat on and shut your trap or start building a lab.
Quote from: broli on March 02, 2009, 03:43:43 PM
Sounds a bit sleazebagish. If anyone had experimentation tools we would be visiting other galaxies by now. Either get off that dildo you "accidentally" sat on and shut your trap or start building a lab.
Sure, just send me the funding so I'm not just living from pay to pay.Sheesh - We don't all have access to labs, equipment or the funding for both. Thane is already set up to run any number of minor tests.
By the way, your own comments are a prime example of sleaze.
Cheers
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 01, 2009, 09:43:06 PM
JUSTME, NICE TO HEAR FROM YOU AFTER ALL THIS TIME - I FIGURED YOU MOVED TO NEW ZEALAND AND STARTED MAKING BABIES WITH A22 OR SOMETHING?
AND WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU DOING HERE ANYWAY ??? IF YOU ARE NOT MAKING BABIES YOU CERTAINLY OUGHT TO BE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR FREACKIN' SENS. :P OR ELSE WE WILL ALL HAVE TO LEAVE TOWN FOR SHAME.
I HOPE ALL IS WELL WITH YOU!
CHEERS
T
Nope! Still here, still keeping up with the thread and hoping all this comes to something interesting and applicabale both because of your work and in spite of it. ;D
I love my Sens, still. Even though.
JM
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 11:07:48 AM
Yes, you are correct, take the rotor off... This then becomes a first baseline.
In my case the motor sans rotor, runs on 80.5 volts @ .57 amps = 46 watts.(3569 rpm)
Now I know that the rotor uses 50 watts to run... if I changed rotors then I would have a baseline
to know IF the new rotor used more or less.You could do the same thing... how much does the
open barrow rotor use? how much does the windage cost? how much does the #2 rotor use?
Incidentally, it also points out that the Ryobi, running with no load on line voltage, is not that efficient.
On 117 volts it uses .92 amps, wow, 107 watts! (no rotor! 3580 rpm)
GOOD USEFUL NUMBERS.
Butt Thane, this first baseline is only of use if you were comparing rotors. To compare coil/cores
it is most useful to put the baseline at having the rotor on the motor. Then you don't have to make
up stories... you said on list that the new rotor would barely get to 1000 rpm in CA, Owen told me
the same thing, why then say that it did run fine but then change the scene to Ottawa ... with the
new core material? Here is something we would all be interested in... what is the core drag
reduction with the new core material? Grab yourself a proper baseline and tell us!
BARELY GET TO 1000 RPM DEPENDING ON AIR GAP... AND CRAPPY CORE, AND HUGE EDDY CURRENT LOSSES IN COIL MOUNTING MATERIAL.
OTTAWA SCENE: NEW CORE W/ NO CRAPPY EDDY CAUSING STEEL = GREAT RESULTS.
Quotewhat is the core drag reduction with the new core material?
WHO KNOWS THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF VARIABLES SUCH AS AIR GAP AND SO ON.
QuoteAt least tell us the specs on the new material... I remember you saying you were going to send me some... that it was in a box all ready to ship....Ron
YES IT IS STILL IN THE BOX WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME YOU WANT IT?
T
Quote from: hoptoad on March 02, 2009, 03:10:26 PM
Sure, just send me your tools, your workshop, your motor and rotor and measuring equipment. Oh, and don't forget the coils/cores.
Cheers
DEAL!
BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE ME AS WELL...
- MY WIFE CALLED ME A WORKAHOLIC - SO I WISH I HAD THE TIME YOU ALL THINK I HAVE.
T
Can someone provide a plot summary for the 438 pages of this thread?
;) Thanks in advanced!
-James
Quote from: albator10 on March 02, 2009, 09:56:32 AM
Hi Thane,
Nice setup !
Where come the power to run the Ryobi motor ? 110V AC outlet?
Thank's
VARIAC
CHEERS
T
Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 02, 2009, 06:34:16 PM
Can someone provide a plot summary for the 438 pages of this thread?
;) Thanks in advanced!
-James
BOY (Thane) MEETS GIRL (JustMe),
BOY SENDS GIRL PICTURES,
BOY LOSES GIRL,
GIRL MISSES BOY,
GIRL COMES BACK TO BOY,
BOY HAS TO COMPETE WITH ENTIRE HOCKEY TEAM,
BOY LOSES GIRL,
BOY JOINS HOCKEY TEAM TO WIN BACK GIRL,
BOY PLAYS HOCKEY IN FIGURE SKATES,
CHERRY GOES NUTS,
GIRL LOSES BOY.
con't... ;)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 06:08:57 PM
YES IT IS STILL IN THE BOX WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME YOU WANT IT?
T
Damn, I'm new here and hadn't figured out how the system worked...OK...
1) I want #1 rotor back for an upgrade.
2) I want $100 for the "borrowed" #2 rotor
3) I want an "E" core as promised
4) I want more respect
5) I want you to measure properly... without whining
6) I want__________________________________________, (to be filled in later)
Henny Ronman
If at first you don't succeed... so much for skydiving.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 06:32:29 PM
DEAL!
BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE ME AS WELL...
- MY WIFE CALLED ME A WORKAHOLIC - SO I WISH I HAD THE TIME YOU ALL THINK I HAVE.
T
Done ... I'll even put you up rent free as an exchange. If you need a holiday Torquay Victoria is a wonderful place to have one.
In fact it's a wonderful place to be even if you don't need a holiday.
I have no doubt that you are time poor. My suggestions for certain tests are exactly that - just suggestions. No hurry or demands to see them fulfilled.
Cheers
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 07:05:23 PM
6) I want__________________________________________, (to be filled in later)
LIKE THE 2 GAY SCOTSMEN?
Ben Meover
and
Phil Macrevice
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 02, 2009, 08:00:52 PM
LIKE THE 2 GAY SCOTSMEN?
T
NO... thats rude... more like this...
Does anyone here know how the Thane Heins Perepiteia works? ...I am wooed by your thread, but the latest 10 pages have been ...random.
Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 03, 2009, 12:15:23 AM
Does anyone here know how the Thane Heins Perepiteia works? ...I am wooed by your thread, but the latest 10 pages have been ...random.
IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS LIGHThttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps5BqEiFK74&feature=channel_page
THEN I_RON SAID LET THERE BE A NEW ROTORhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1E2Ms2198&feature=channel_page
THEN CAME THE "POPE MOBILE"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT2qi9ITcls&feature=channel_page
AND FINALLY A VIRGIN SHOWED U.S. INFINITE GAIN POSSIBILITIESCONVENTIONAL GENERATOR = PRIME MOVER DECELERATION
(REGENERATIVE BRAKING) O/P =
0.0 WATTSPEREPITEIA GENERATOR = PRIME MOVER ACCELERATION
(REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION) O/P =
INFINITY WATTSCHEERS
Thane
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 10:00:13 PM
NO... thats rude... more like this...
THAT''S RUDE, OK GOT IT! - I HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN YOU INVITE ME DOWN TO THE BAR FOR A PINT - SO I DON'T ASK YOU, "IF I CAN PUSH IN YOUR STOOL". :-\
NOW IF I CAN ONLY FIGURE OUT A WAY TO TELL YOU THAT I AM PUTTING YOUR STEEL IN MY BOX ALONG WITH SOME CASH SO YOU CAN MOUNT IT WHEN IT COMES TO YOU ??? WITHOUT GETTING MYSELF THROW IN JAIL FOR ENGAGING IN INTERNET "GERIATRIC P0RN".
T
:P wooo crazy forums.
Ok, first of all hello everyone, hope everyone is having a lovely monday.
Now that thats out of the way, my name is Cole Pluzak, I'm a 23 year old EET (elec eng tech)
Anyway, Mr. Heins, watching the movies of your machine makes my eyes go very wide and my mind starts rapidly accelerating much in the way your rotor does.
Now, for a little back story, im sort of a nerd motors freak, and I've spent the last 3 years building a really robust, efficient and fully featured motor controller, 3phase and SVM and the works. To help me in my dream of opening an electric car conversion shop here in toronto.
So, basically, I would like to load up my van friday night with my gf and dog, drive to ottawa at a contstant velocity not less than 140kph, get a motel and then spend all saturday and perhaps sunday pestering you with questions or tinkering with your test rig. (and visiting my younger brother, hes going to algonquin college)
I can bring tools and help you make the lexan enclosure you were talking about, I have done stuff like that before.
Electronics and motors are like my specialty, but im just a young punk, I don't know anything, and I have spent the last 3 days pretty much non stop reading all the speculation about this device. I just need to see it for myself, and I would love to talk about licensing so I can immediately start building a prototype and running experiments. I would just do it already but I'm not ripping off anyones ideas, fuck ive got enough of my own and trying to keep them from getting ripped off is a pain in the ass.
So essentially, saturday? What are you upto? Beers are on me in the evening.
Cheers
-Cole
Quote from: Coleston on March 03, 2009, 08:04:39 AM
:P wooo crazy forums..................................
...................................
Electronics and motors are like my specialty, but im just a young punk
................. Beers are on me in the evening.
Cheers
-Cole
Crazy .......... Young...........Beers....
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 03, 2009, 07:19:39 AM
THAT''S RUDE, OK GOT IT! - I HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT....ALWAYS BE NICE TO RON!
T
Mr T, you are a prince, I shall check the mail every day to see if they have come yet!
What goes around comes around but there was no mention of rotor #1being included?
Maybe it will come another day?
Aahhh, happiness is coming!
Ron
Quote from: Coleston on March 03, 2009, 08:04:39 AM
:P wooo crazy forums.
ok Coleston
welcome in the arena
Quote from: i_ron on March 03, 2009, 10:54:41 AM
Mr T, you are a prince,
OTThere had been some discussion as to the best method to input power to a Veljko Milkovic
pendulum. One of the methods recently discussed was to shift the pivot point from side to side.
Here is a proof of concept video, self explanatory I hope, showing just such an arrangement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9P3Rh3Q_gI
Ron
Quote from: tagor on March 03, 2009, 01:47:02 PM
ok Coleston
welcome in the arena
thank you, thank you
delete me please
Quote from: i_ron on March 02, 2009, 07:05:23 PM
4) I want more respect
SORRY BUT WE ARE ALL OUT OF RESPECT, MAY I INTEREST YOU IN SOME FALSE FLATTERY, OR PATRONIZING PRAISE? WE HAVE A SPECIAL ON SARCHASM, BELITTLING AND PASSIVE AGRESSIVENESS AND OF COURSE AS ALWAYS OUR 2 FOR 1 FALSE PROMISE - BUT YOU HAVE TO COME BACK TOMORROW AND PICK UP.
T
LANGLEY PART 2 HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEmec2c46ts&feature=channel_page
QUICK FACTS:
LANGLEY 1
REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION MODE
@ 85 VOLTS / 217 WATTS TO PRIME MOVER - OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
LANGLEY 2
REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION MODE
@ 85 VOLTS / 193 WATTS TO PRIME MOVER - OUTPUT = 19.6 WATTS
PERCENTAGE NET IMPROVEMENT = 413%
LANGLEY 1 & LANGLEY 2 CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR MODE - OUTPUT = 0.0 WATTS
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 03, 2009, 10:48:40 PM
SORRY BUT WE ARE ALL OUT OF RESPECT, MAY I INTEREST YOU IN SOME FALSE FLATTERY, OR PATRONIZING PRAISE? WE HAVE A SPECIAL ON SARCHASM, BELITTLING AND PASSIVE AGRESSIVENESS AND OF COURSE AS ALWAYS OUR 2 FOR 1 FALSE PROMISE - BUT YOU HAVE TO COME BACK TOMORROW AND PICK UP.
T
RESPECT: OUT OF STOCK
To help iRon make a choice from the remaining items Thane still has in stock, I have decided to provide some examples.
FALSE FLATTERY:"In addition to a getting Nobel prize, Thane is sure to make the cover of GQ"
PATRONIZING PRAISE"The Perepiteia is a wonderful invention. I can't wait to power my electric can opener with it"
SARCHASM:"One day, he may even learn to spell it SARCASM"
BELITTLING:"Thane's bench grinder is only a 6 incher"
PASSIVE AGGRESSIVENESS:"Well I could insult Thane even more, but I've decided to sulk instead"
2 FOR 1 FALSE PROMISE""I promise never to be mean to Thane."
"I promise never to be mean to Thane."
:)
Thane is the Ottawa lab all yours? I'm thinking of going to a local uni and try to use their labs as well. How did you convince them to let you work there?
That enclosure looks great wow! And you made it out of lexan? Cause if is just plexi it might be a little underbuilt for the impacts it would be expected to handle.
But lexan'd be plenty strong, and its made so nicely, excellent.
Now the movie of the tach hitting >3k rpm? omg ill cream my pants.
As well, Thane, did you see my post on the last page? What are you doing saturday?
Cheers
-Cole
Quote from: broli on March 04, 2009, 03:44:08 AM
Thane is the Ottawa lab all yours? I'm thinking of going to a local uni and try to use their labs as well. How did you convince them to let you work there?
YOU NEED A MIRACLE - AND ENDLESS "EGO-LESS" PATIENCE AND SOME DUMB LUCK AND DIVINE TIMING!
NO KIDDING - I ASKED EVERY UNIVERSITY IN CANADA AND THE USA AND MANY IN EUROPE FOR YEARS TO HELP - MOST IGNORED ME - MANY SAID I WAS NUTS. OTHERS TOOK OR DEMANDED MONEY AND DID NOTHING (MIT, UVA, MSU, TA&M)
THEN, THE PRESIDENT OF OCRI - THE OTTAWA CENTRE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, WHO IS FRIENDS WITH THE DEAN OF ENGINEERING AT OTTAWA U - MADE A REQUEST ON MY BEHALF.
THEN, DR. HABASH (WHO IS A RARE JEWEL OF A SOUL) STEPPED UP BECAUSE HE WANTED TO HELP (THIS IS THE KEY) AND BECAUSE HE SAW IT AS "HIS DUTY TO HELP" (ANOTHER KEY) AND THAT IT WAS HIS DUTY AS AN EDUCATOR TO NOT BE
AFRAID LEARN NEW THINGS (THE BIGGEST KEY) AND THAT HE OUGHT NOT TO BE PAID (GET THE JEWEL PART YET?).
THEN, I HAD TO BE WILLING TO PUT ASIDE MY OWN EGO AND DOUBT AND GO BACK TO OTTAWA U WHERE I WORKED MANY YEARS AGO (UNHAPPILY BUILDING PROTOTYPES FOR OTHERS) - A UNIVERSITY WHO I FELT DIDN'T HAVE THE POWER ENGINEERING BASE WE REQUIRED - AND WHERE I HAD SOME BAD MEMORIES.
WHEN I WAS YOUNG AND IN COLLEGE STUDYING ELECTRONICS - I GOT A JOB AT OTTAWA U AND MY "BOSS" PRESSURED ME INTO WORKING MORE AND MORE HOURS FOR HER SO SHE COULD GET HER THESIS DONE ON TIME - AND OF COURSE BEING YOUNG AND DUMB - I COMPLIED - WHICH MEANT I FELL MORE AND MORE BEHIND ON MY SCHOOL WORK AND I EVENTUALLY
HAD TO DROP OUT BECAUSE I FAILED EVERY CLASS AND COULDN'T DO MY OWN WORK.
WEIRD THING IS MY NEW LAB IS JUST DOWN THE HALL FROM MY "LAB FROM HELL" 30 YEARS AGO AND NOW WHEN STUDENTS ASK ME IF THEY CAN HELP - I TELL THEM TO GRADUATE FIRST - THEN THEY CAN HELP.
SO - TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION - FIRST ASK THE UNIVERSE FOR HELP AND GUIDANCE - AND THEN NEVER-EVER TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER -
HAVE AN IRON WILL AND A COMPASSIONATE HEART AND IT WILL WORK OUT FOR YOU AS IT IS MEANT TO. FINALLY IT IS DR. HABASH'S POWER TEACHING LAB - HE KINDLY GAVE ME ONE TABLE AND NOW I HAVE EXPANDED INTO HALF THE LAB.
GOOD LUCK AND BEST WISHES.
Thane
Quote from: Coleston on March 04, 2009, 07:47:13 AM
As well, Thane, What are you doing saturday?
Cheers -Cole
GEE, UM, SORRY THERE COLE BUT I AM MARRIED (TO A WOMAN)! :)
THOSE GAY REFERENCES WERE JUST TO JOKE AROUND WITH I_RON ;)
- I THINK LARRYC IS FREE THOUGH? :-*
T
"WEIRD THING IS MY NEW LAB IS JUST DOWN THE HALL FROM MY "LAB FROM HELL" 30 YEARS AGO AND NOW WHEN STUDENTS ASK ME IF THEY CAN HELP - I TELL THEM TO GRADUATE FIRST - THEN THEY CAN HELP."
I'm graduated, can I help? Should i just call?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 04, 2009, 08:05:09 AM
GEE, UM, SORRY THERE COLE BUT I AM MARRIED (TO A WOMAN)! :)
THOSE GAY REFERENCES WERE JUST TO JOKE AROUND WITH I_RON ;)
- I THINK LARRYC IS FREE THOUGH? :-*
T
hahaha, all the rebuttals I can think of just end up sounding more gay, so I'm just gonna roll my eyes here silently instead.
Seriously though, if you could let me know so I can finalize my plans that would be great, I need to see this thing with my own eyes
Quote from: Coleston on March 04, 2009, 08:08:00 AM
I'm graduated, can I help? Should i just call?
ARE YOU A STALKER?
T
Quote from: Coleston on March 04, 2009, 08:19:11 AM
hahaha, all the rebuttals I can think of just end up sounding more gay, so I'm just gonna roll my eyes here silently instead.
Seriously though, if you could let me know so I can finalize my plans that would be great, I need to see this thing with my own eyes
SURE COME BY SATURDAY
AND ITS OK THAT YOU ARE GAY (WE DON'T JUDGE) MY STARBUCKS COFFEE CUP IS PINK.
SEND ME A PM TO ARRANGE THE TIME AND PLACE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 04, 2009, 08:21:23 AM
ARE YOU A STALKER?
T
No merely persistant lol, Like I said Im a young (23) electronics nerd, and I want to make electric cars, and watching movies of this thing makes ideas start forming in my head at a rate greater than I can deal with ha, I need to figure out where to focus my thoughts, you know?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 04, 2009, 08:24:54 AM
SURE COME BY SATURDAY AND ITS OK THAT YOU ARE GAY (WE DON'T JUDGE) MY STARBUCKS COFFEE CUP IS PINK.
SEND ME A PM TO ARRANGE THE TIME AND PLACE.
T
my eyes are rolling furiously here ahahaha.
PM will be forthcoming. wooo. Ottawa trip. This is going to be great, my family used to live in ottawa, haven't been there in ages.
Quote from: derricka on March 04, 2009, 02:15:59 AM
RESPECT: OUT OF STOCK
To help iRon make a choice from the remaining items Thane still has in stock, I have decided to provide some examples.
FALSE FLATTERY:
"In addition to a getting Nobel prize, Thane is sure to make the cover of GQ"
PATRONIZING PRAISE
"The Perepiteia is a wonderful invention. I can't wait to power my electric can opener with it"
SARCHASM:
"One day, he may even learn to spell it SARCASM"
BELITTLING:
"Thane's bench grinder is only a 6 incher"
PASSIVE AGGRESSIVENESS:
"Well I could insult Thane even more, but I've decided to sulk instead"
2 FOR 1 FALSE PROMISE"
"I promise never to be mean to Thane."
"I promise never to be mean to Thane."
:)
LOL, right on!
I hate to disturb this hootin' Annie but I'd like to make a point. . .
Joe interrupts saying, "aught Seven, this is a hoe Down, not a hottin' Annie".
007: For crying out loud, Joe, call it what you want. I just want to make one point.
Joe: I want to call it what it is, a hoe Down. And I want you to call it what it is also or I just might have to kick your arse. Now say it, "hoe Down".
007: ok, hoe, get Down out of my face and let me make my point.
Huge, octagon scuffle ensues.
aught Seven releases Joe from an MIB sleeper and gets back to the single point:
QuoteAny practical idea eventually has a manifestation in reality. A working model of the idea can be built.
If you consider the idea of the below-unity yet free energy device of a windmill you can see them all over the world in reality being built and being used. That's one example. Sail boats are another example of harnessing the free energy of the wind.
If an initial, large and unlimited source of energy, the wind or sun for example, can be tapped and converted into a usable form of energy it will. There are many manifestations in reality. The conversion doesn't require overunity to be practical.
So the question I have is this:
QuoteWhere is the manifestation of this idea in reality?
This thread's been viewed more times than The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory has been used to explain the cost of rice in China.
Habeas model!
Let the hootin' Annie or hoe Down continue.
Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
post script: I did review the thread to get an idea of what's being talked about. If anyone would like a good idea read the first 5-7 pages. That should give you the necessary background.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 04, 2009, 07:59:34 AM
YOU NEED A MIRACLE - AND ENDLESS "EGO-LESS" PATIENCE AND SOME DUMB LUCK AND DIVINE TIMING!
NO KIDDING - I ASKED EVERY UNIVERSITY IN CANADA AND THE USA AND MANY IN EUROPE FOR YEARS TO HELP - MOST IGNORED ME - MANY SAID I WAS NUTS. OTHERS TOOK OR DEMANDED MONEY AND DID NOTHING (MIT, UVA, MSU, TA&M)
Very inspiring, Thane! Thanks for sharing your story.
Also loved your new " Perepiteia World Cup" video, truly amazing to see the motor power consumption actually go down with the addition of another coil set, resistively loaded, no less! Assuming no significant changes in power factor, or measurement errors due to meter fooling non sinusoidal current (harmonics), that's nothing short of incredible.
"The people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do."
and something more :o
If the set up in your last video is exactly the same as in the previous one (Plus of course the HC winding on the "italian" coil ) where you got 8.5 watts on the HC coil at the 3000 rpm on 217 watts
do i think right that with less than that 217 watts at that same around 3000 rpm you can now not only get the 8.5 watts from the France coil (as per the previous video) but + 19.6 watts more from the Italien' one
that is to say that in this set up each time you add a new europeean country HV-HC coil you will get more output power without adding more than that original 217 watts ?? :)
and you hesitate to send me the europeans coils perhaps i have the secret to make them more powerfull who knows ;)
anyway bravo and go on
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on March 04, 2009, 04:34:21 PM
and something more :o
and you hesitate to send me the europeans coils perhaps i have the secret to make them more powerfull who knows ;)
anyway bravo and go on
Laurent
YES SOON WE WILL HAVE THE EUROPEAN OVER-UNITY UNION. GERMANY IS NEXT.
T
took me some time, but i now have my variac(decided to go with the light switch dimmer) and the magnets epoxied in, mounting the bench grinder and coils on friday. Still need a tach tho, any suggestions on where to get it? :| would love a panel tach but don't really have the cash.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on March 04, 2009, 10:41:05 PM
took me some time, but i now have my variac(decided to go with the light switch dimmer) and the magnets epoxied in, mounting the bench grinder and coils on friday. Still need a tach tho, any suggestions on where to get it? :| would love a panel tach but don't really have the cash.
Check this out, bike tach's are cheap:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Tachometer-made-from-a-bicycle-speedometer-cycloc/
Quote from: woopy on March 04, 2009, 04:34:21 PM
and something more :o
If the set up in your last video is exactly the same as in the previous one (Plus of course the HC winding on the "italian" coil ) where you got 8.5 watts on the HC coil at the 3000 rpm on 217 watts
do i think right that with less than that 217 watts at that same around 3000 rpm you can now not only get the 8.5 watts from the France coil (as per the previous video) but + 19.6 watts more from the Italien' one
that is to say that in this set up each time you add a new europeean country HV-HC coil you will get more output power without adding more than that original 217 watts ?? :)
and you hesitate to send me the europeans coils perhaps i have the secret to make them more powerfull who knows ;)
anyway bravo and go on
Laurent
hello Laurent
where do you come from ?
I am in Paris and you ?
A++
Can you make a HC with 10-12 strands of 23-25awg insulated magwire twisted 4-6 turns per inch then wound onto the core.
The twisting will reduce the outer field of the HC and make more like an energy funnel with less drag field and the parallel strands will provide more amps and less volts.
One of the first questions I would have after designing any such HC/HV coil is how much juice could I really pull from it regardless of the input consumption. But that question will never be answered with a punny grinder motor trying to turn a large diameter wheel with drag developed on the end of the wheel, with or without the HV influences, since the HV can only influence or increase the rotation from a zero state (not 0 rpm) but only until the HC starts drawing any real power.
So it is very important to know if that HC coil can even produce enough to light a few 100 watt bulbs? That's the first and foremost question because it could possibly be that the inherent HC design is such that it can only produce 20 watts maximum regardless of how much horsepower and rpms are used to start with and then all the other testing is just wasting time and going in the wrong direction. I would put a 4-5 HP 220-460vac motor on the mag wheel and then load the HC to its maximum to drive the hell out of it and take the measurements to see what these coils can really dish out before doing anything further. You have to confirm the HC maximum potential and learn at what drag level is required to produce the juice. Once this is known, I am sure it will change your complete outlook on the device and how to go about working it. Or maybe even how to go about designing a better more responsive HC coil.
If the twisted magwire coil HC works better, maybe this will cancel the need for the HV or permit the HV to initiate and "maintain" a more aggressive rpm increase since it would not have to compete as much with the HC field.
Also, what are you actually doing when you short the HV. Yes, you are actually putting a FULL LOAD on the HV coil. So instead of shorting the HV coil, why not put its output through two or three 110vac light bulbs, since the effect of the mag field around the HV coil will be the same, but now you can use that energy instead of just shorting it to produce heat, and light some bulbs or add it to the output of the HC coil or use some of it to help run the drive motor. Hmmmmmmmm. You could even put the HC and HV coils to be switched into series and take that single output on a suitable load to see the result.
If you can get your hands on a 3-5 hp, 3 phase, 460 volts 3600rpm drive motor, you can then use this to find the maximum output of the HC as mentioned above and then you can use it with the Rotoverter (RV) method and drive it with only 110 volts, by putting one of the phases in series with a switched capacitor bank.
Here's a photo of one set-up I made, using this method with a 5hp motor driven using only about 40-50 watts at idle or zero state. http://www.purco.qc.ca/ftp/Wattsups'%20stuff/rotoverter/wattsup-roto1.JPG
About testing the full potential of the HC coil before doing anything else, before I did these RV tests with an alternator, I took the alternator to an alternator shop and they put it on their testing rig that has a 25hp motor. The alternator produced over 1000 watts of power so I knew I was OK to go and not only rely on the specs. I had to see it for myself. Unfortunately, the RV method could not swing it because I found out that the hard way that such an alternator produces soooooooooooooo much drag, no wonder you would need a car to run it and in a real car setting it is never producing 1000 watts. If you wanted 1000 watts in your car with this sucker, be prepared to spend much more for gas.lol
The RV capacitor bank permits you to switch the caps to start, then switch the caps to find the idling speed, then switch again under load to find the best driving potential. Just google or utube rotoverter. It is not the do all and end all but it is an alternative to consider.
Another alternative is the use of gears to switch the rpm levels and this permits the drive motor to run at a lower but stronger rpm level. This is one link on this forum where you can see the relationship of big wheel/small wheel/flywheel. Look at the 3-6-9 wheels. I am building a garage this summer and will finally make the 3-6-9 when I have this new space available. More fun.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3260.msg48499.html#msg48499
Playing with such toys is a game of advantages. More often then not, when one aspect is an advantage, another aspect becomes a greater disadvantage and finding how to pull the minimum and push the maximum is not so easy while it is often very easy to miss the nuances. The grinder drive motor sucks in efficiency and in my opinion should continue be used only as a grinder. It is way to small to have a fighting chance at this. The rotor mag wheel HC/HV may have some advantages that would have to be better understood "once their full potentials" are known. Any time you make a new HC you must test it to full capacity with a bigger drive motor. If their full potentials are meager, then at least you will know this from the start .................or from now on. This then may imply that adding more hc's is required or change the HC design.
For the mag wheel being a flywheel, this is not the case. A flywheel is driven from the center shaft or small pulley and the output energy is transferred at maximum midway or less through the radius (or vise versa), leaving the remaining outer radius that holds the greater mass to act as a flywheel being capable of producing and storing some inertia. Putting the magnet at the end of the wheel means it is not a flywheel but simply a large gear trying to turn a small gear that is the HC in this case. Large wheel turning a very small wheel is not good because any drag will be multiplied backwards onto the motor. Meaning a drag of 1 on the mag wheel shaft will produce a drag of 1 on the drive motor, but a drag of 1 on the mag wheel rim will produce a drag of maybe 5 or more on the drive motor. To keep the same magnet distance from the center, the wheel would have to be at least double what it is now and 70% of its mass on the outer rim to have any potential as a true flywheel. Also, regardless of how it is made, the mag wheel should be secured on its own independent shaft and supported from both sides on good quality zero friction bearings so it does not stress the motor shaft at all, otherwise this again will cost in efficiency. The drive motor should only turn the wheel shaft and not have to maintain the wheels linearity while it is spinning against the mutually stressed and vibrating influences between the magnets/HC/HV which again will cost in efficiency.
It's all a learning process.
Sorry again for long post.
PS: You may want to find out if the UofO can provide tax receipts against equipment donations to the University and if yes, how to go about it. This would make it easier for you to find more equipment from companies. Also, note that the Canadian Government has a R&D program where they will pay 50% of a salary (and I think equipment) used for R&D.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on March 04, 2009, 10:41:05 PM
took me some time, but i now have my variac(decided to go with the light switch dimmer) and the magnets epoxied in, mounting the bench grinder and coils on friday. Still need a tach tho, any suggestions on where to get it? :| would love a panel tach but don't really have the cash.
is twenty dollars too much?
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.18239
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 05, 2009, 11:23:38 AM
is twenty dollars too much?
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.18239
Ron
China rules! Too bad their products break fast. So be nice to Chinese plastic. Btw it's a tad cheaper here...
http://cgi.ebay.com/Digital-Laser-Photo-Non-Contact-Tachometer-RPM-Test-US_W0QQitemZ270353428968QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item270353428968&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318#ShippingPayment
Unless thane decides to break the 99999 RPM limit this is a very good deal I daresay.
What happened Mr T? I made a post and it disappeared, along with a whole bunch of other
interesting posts from Gaby, Hans, and the like...?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 05, 2009, 03:27:28 PM
What happened Mr T? I made a post and it disappeared, along with a whole bunch of other
interesting posts from Gaby, Hans, and the like...?
Ron
I HAVE NOTICED THE SAME THING - AND I DIDN'T DO IT.
ALOT OF EARLY POSTS DISAPPEARED WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE - LIKE TEARING PAGES FROM A BOOK.
TO ME THIS IS A VALUABLE RECORD OF THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 05, 2009, 03:34:55 PM
I HAVE NOTICED THE SAME THING - AND I DIDN'T DO IT.
ALOT OF EARLY POSTS DISAPPEARED WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE - LIKE TEARING PAGES FROM A BOOK.
TO ME THIS IS A VALUABLE RECORD OF THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY.
T
Put in a question to Harti and see if they are recoverable?
R
TO THE HONOUABLE Mr. I
DEAR Mr. I:
I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND DISQUISITION:
ARE YOU PREPARED TO COMMENT ON MY LATEST VIDEO WHICH SHOWS A 200% INCREASE IN GENERATOR OUTPUT WITH A 24 WATT REDUCTION IN MOTOR INPUT - WITH THE ADDITION AND PROPER ALIGNMENT OF THE SECOND COIL & CORE?
AND, ARE YOU PREPARED TO SPECULATE THAT THIS TREND WILL CONTINUE WITH THE ADDITION OF A THIRD AND FORTH COIL?
RESPECTFULLY YOURS
Mr. T
Your national flags fetish is showing again.
Quote from: broli on March 05, 2009, 08:07:46 PM
Your national flags fetish is showing again.
I KNOW - I CAN'T WAIT FOR THAT ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT FLAG.
T
THANE
Is that POLAR BREEZE??
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 05, 2009, 09:03:03 PM
THANE
Is that POLAR BREEZE??
Chet
ACTUALLY IT'S ME BEFORE MY MORNING COFFEE!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 05, 2009, 08:01:32 PM
TO THE HONOUABLE Mr. I
DEAR Mr. I:
I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND DISQUISITION:
ARE YOU PREPARED TO COMMENT ON MY LATEST VIDEO WHICH SHOWS A 200% INCREASE IN GENERATOR OUTPUT WITH A 24 WATT REDUCTION IN MOTOR INPUT - WITH THE ADDITION AND PROPER ALIGNMENT OF THE SECOND COIL & CORE?
AND, ARE YOU PREPARED TO SPECULATE THAT THIS TREND WILL CONTINUE WITH THE ADDITION OF A THIRD AND FORTH COIL?
RESPECTFULLY YOURS
Mr. T
Who is this honorable Mr I? gee, I wish I could get that kind of respect.
No, I wouldn't like to comment as there is no baseline number and I am not that confident
in the numbers to hazard a guess... could be, could be, maybe, maybe not...possibly, possibly not,
we'll see...
Ron
SUCCESS
It can lead to a fall
but will remain a success
if you don't give up
and then land on your feet
Quote from: i_ron on March 05, 2009, 09:12:02 PM
No, I wouldn't like to comment as there is no baseline number
Good logical thinking.
Cheers
FROGS CAN'T PROCESS LOGIC...
The Boiled Frog
They say that if you put a frog into a pot of boiling water,
it will leap out right away to escape the danger.
But, if you put a frog in a kettle that is filled with water that is cool and pleasant,
and then you gradually heat the kettle until it starts boiling,
the frog will not become aware of the threat until it is too late.
The frog's survival instincts are geared towards detecting sudden changes.
This is a story that is used to illustrate how people might get themselves into terrible trouble.
This parable is often used to illustrate how humans have to be careful to watch slowly changing trends in the environment, not just the sudden changes. Its a warning to keep us paying attention not just to obvious threats but to more slowly developing ones.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 05, 2009, 09:33:53 PM
SUCCESS
It can lead to a fall
but will remain a success
if you don't give up
and then land on your feet
Oh, that wasn't meant personally! just that I like pussies and tail and I thought that was kinda cute.
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 05, 2009, 10:14:00 PM
FROGS CAN'T PROCESS LOGIC...
The Boiled Frog
They say that if you put a frog into a pot of boiling water,
it will leap out right away to escape the danger.
But, if you put a frog in a kettle that is filled with water that is cool and pleasant,
and then you gradually heat the kettle until it starts boiling,
the frog will not become aware of the threat until it is too late.
The frog's survival instincts are geared towards detecting sudden changes.
This is a story that is used to illustrate how people might get themselves into terrible trouble.
This parable is often used to illustrate how humans have to be careful to watch slowly changing trends in the environment, not just the sudden changes. Its a warning to keep us paying attention not just to obvious threats but to more slowly developing ones.
Frogs and Toads are used by modern environmentalists as indicators of the health of the environment in much the same way that canaries were used by miners to warn them of environmental dangers in the mines. Thats because frogs and toads, like canaries, are sensitive to toxins and react very quickly to even minor negative changes in the environment.
They are good indicators that something is wrong!
Frogs and Toads may not have a very good sensitivity to slight changes in temperature, but they sure are sensitive to any bullshit that's thrown into their pond.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 05, 2009, 11:03:20 PM
Frogs and Toads may not have a very good sensitivity to slight changes in temperature, but they sure are sensitive to any bullshit that's thrown into their pond.
Cheers
AND OBVIOUSLY ATTRACTED TO IT LIKE FLIES.
T
Quote from: hoptoad on March 05, 2009, 11:03:20 PM
but they sure are sensitive to any bullshit that's thrown into their pond.
Even a Perepiteia?
Quote from: broli on March 06, 2009, 06:01:04 AM
Even a Perepiteia?
THANE IMPERSONATING HOPTOAD... ;)
Especially a mother-freakin' Perepiteia !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
After all, I invented the damn thing 27 years ago already.
C_an t_hat p_ussy I_Ron! 8)
Cheers and Kneedeep
Quote from: i_ron on March 05, 2009, 11:01:24 PM
Oh, that wasn't meant personally! just that I like pussies and tail and I thought that was kinda cute.
Ron
YES YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY HEAD OVER HEALS!
T
@tagor
from Switzerland
and as you can see there is also winter here not only in Canada :( and a lot of free energy spark all around;D
@Thane
but not enough coils to power my machine and i have to push it manually it's a shame :'(
waiting for spring
all the best at all
Laurent
All,
looks as if there are a a lot of frogs and toads here , eh ?
@thane : this is a very good analogon to upcoming events.
Kator01
Quote from: woopy on March 06, 2009, 03:48:58 PM
@tagor
from Switzerland
waiting for spring
all the best at all
Laurent
Laurent, canada is a very big country. so we divided it up into sections and we here on the west
coast built a great wall (known in the vernacular as the Rockies) to keep the snow and ice and
freezing conditions where they belong... in Ottawa mostly! A history footnote... "they" chose
Ottawa as the coldest least desirable place in Canada, one the americons would be hard pressed
to work up any enthusiasm to invade... and it worked for the longest time!
But here in paradise the season is changing and it will be grass mowing time before you know it!
Ron,
(taken this day, 1300 hours)
Quote from: i_ron on March 06, 2009, 09:17:08 PM
But here in paradise the season is changing and it will be grass mowing time before you know it!
Ron, (taken this day, 1300 hours)
DOES YOUR CRUELTY HAVE NO LIMITS SIR - WHERE'S YOUR HUMANITY?
T
A true sadist
Chet
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 06, 2009, 10:00:05 PM
DOES YOUR CRUELTY HAVE NO LIMITS SIR - WHERE'S YOUR HUMANITY?
T
A true sadist
Chet
----------------------------------------
My heart is made of stone!
Oh alright, there is a snow fall warning for most of the island to nite... but it shouldn't last for more than
a half a day! But the flowers don't listen to the forecast...they just do there thing...
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 06, 2009, 10:00:05 PM
DOES YOUR CRUELTY HAVE NO LIMITS SIR - WHERE'S YOUR HUMANITY?
T
Answer: Stolen by the cat. The stone cat in iRon's garden may look cute, but at night, it comes alive, sneaks into the house, and devours iRon's soul!
Quote from: derricka on March 06, 2009, 11:59:19 PM
Answer: Stolen by the cat. The stone cat in iRon's garden may look cute, but at night, it comes alive, sneaks into the house, and devours iRon's soul!
Yes, I had soul one time... didn't really like it that much, I much prefer halibut,
so not too concerned if the cat got itRon
Quote from: woopy on March 06, 2009, 03:48:58 PM
@tagor
from Switzerland
and as you can see there is also winter here not only in Canada :( and a lot of free energy spark all around;D
hello Laurent
I was in Quebec in october 2008 : the first snow
are you going to replicate Thane's coil ?
Quote from: tagor on March 07, 2009, 04:56:05 AM
are you going to replicate Thane's coil ?
NOBODY HAS TO REPLICATE THEM...
ONCE WE SORT OUT THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS WITH OUR TRANSFORMER WINDING COMPANY
ANYONE WHO WANTS ONE CAN ORDER THEM DIRECTLY.
WHICH IS EASIER THAN HIKING TO THE TOP OF THAT MOUNTAIN.PERHAPS WE CAN EVEN TALK I_RON INTO MAKING ROTORS FOR PEOPLE AS WELL? :-\
IMHO - ANYONE SHOULD BE WILLING TO PAY I_RON NO LESS THAN $500.00 FOR HIS FINE WORK. 8)
BTW - RAINBOW TROUT LIGHTLY FLOURED AND SAUTED IN CLARIFIED BUTTER BEATS THEM ALL!
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 07, 2009, 06:16:47 AM
PERHAPS WE CAN EVEN TALK I_RON INTO MAKING ROTORS FOR PEOPLE AS WELL? :-\
IMHO - ANYONE SHOULD BE WILLING TO PAY I_RON NO LESS THAN $500.00 FOR HIS FINE WORK. 8)
CHEERS
T
Sounds good, except, I am retired and don't wish to start a business. IF I could do one in 20 hours
and charged $25 an hour that is $500. But on a one off basis, if you took that into a shop with the
proper equipment and they were able to do it in 14 hours at an $85 charge out rate, that's $1200.
So to be viable, this generator has to put out the watts!!! This has not been demonstrated yet.
Let me know when the output matches the input and I will get more interested.
Real World Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 07, 2009, 11:21:15 AM
his has not been demonstrated yet.
Let me know when the output matches the input and I will get more interested.
Real World Ron
Ironically that will probably be up to you. Bigger rotor = more coils = more output at same input. This phenomenon needs to be hacked into some software so tweaking can be done at lightning speed. Thane chop chop, you must spit out a formula that will allow to do this. After you die it'll become Thane's law and my kids will not accept it as a law and will drop college.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 07, 2009, 06:16:47 AM
PERHAPS WE CAN EVEN TALK I_RON INTO MAKING ROTORS FOR PEOPLE AS WELL? :-\
For anyone who needs a custom parts made, check out http://www.emachineshop.com/
You download the free CAD software and design your part. Then you upload the drawing file back to emachineshop.com.
The part is computer cut for you by emachineshop.com on their CNC manufacturing equipment, which they can send to you via Fedex etc., usually, within a few days.
You can have one item made, or thousands, and pricing is very often cheaper than if you made it yourself (being paid a reasonable hourly wage). You get a price quote when you upload your drawing.
The drawing file can be posted or emailed, so others can have parts made, or customize your design.
All,
may i interrupt your happy-go-lucky-talk by presenting some serious document, user AhuraMazda placed in another
thread :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get249 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get249)
Looks as if this repulsive and accellerating phaenomenon was know already in 1887 (by Prof. ELIHU THOMSON. )
We now also have a name for it : "electro-inductive-repulsion"
@AhuraMazda : great find, thank your
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on March 07, 2009, 04:15:30 PM
All,
may i interrupt your happy-go-lucky-talk by presenting some serious document, user AhuraMazda placed in another
thread :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get249 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get249)
Looks as if this repulsive and accellerating phaenomenon was know already in 1887 (by Prof. ELIHU THOMSON. )
We now also have a name for it : "electro-inductive-repulsion"
@AhuraMazda : great find, thank your
Regards
Kator01
BASICALLY THIS PERTAINS TO A STRONG ELECTROMAGNET WHICH INSTEAD OF ATTRACTING A PIECE OF STEEL - REPELS IT BECAUSE THE HIGH REMNANT FLUX STEEL BECOMES MAGNETIZED WITH THE SAME POLARITY IS THE ELECTROMAGNET
AND THE "NEW" REPELLING ACTION IS GREATER THAN THE "OLD" ATTRACTING ACTION BECAUSE THE COIL'S MAGNETIC FIELD CHANGES FASTER THAN THE STEEL'S IN THE TIME DOMAIN.
The Action of a High-Frequency Alternating Magnetic Field on Suspended Metallic Rings and Disks
Taylor, P.K.
Proceedings of the IRE
Volume 22, Issue 7, July 1934 Page(s): 886 - 896Digital Object Identifier
Summary: An experimental study of the torque on suspended nmetallic rings and solid disks caused by a high-frequency alternating magnetic field indicates (1) that G. W. Pierce's expression for the torque on a ring is valid over a wide range of frequencies, and (2) that, as a function of frequency, intensity of field, thickness, and conductivity, the torque on a disk is sufficiently similar to that for a ring to suggest that it varies as Ï,,p2Hv2/R(1+Ï,,2p2) in which Ï,, is the time constant of the disk, R, its effective resistance, and p is 2Ï€ times the frequency of the applied magnetic field whose virtual intensity is Hv. Measurement of this torque on a ring or disk apparently constitutes a convenient and practicable method of measuring the intensity of a high-frequency magnetic field. Comparative measurements on a ring and disk indicate that the greater part of the induced circular current in a disk at high frequencies flows near its periphery, primarily because of the shielding action of the peripheral currents, a result in agreement with experimtents made previously by Zenneck. A reproducible depression in the torque-frequency curve of a thin silver disk was observed at 700 kilocycles.
T
Quote from: i_ron on March 07, 2009, 11:21:15 AM
So to be viable, this generator has to put out the watts!!! This has not been demonstrated yet.
Let me know when the output matches the input and I will get more interested.
Real World Ron
A GENERATOR CONVERTS MECHANICAL POWER TO ELECTRICAL POWER.1) THE
MECHANICAL POWER IN = TORQUE x SPEED x 2PI
2) THE
ELECTRICAL POWER OUT = V^2 / R
3) IF THE IS SPEED = 0 RPM THERE IS
NO POWER IN AND
NO POWER OUT ALTHOUGH THE TORQUE MAY BE
IFINITELY HIGH.
4) IF THE SPEED = 3500 RPM THERE
IS TORQUE AND POWER BUT THE REQUIRED
NEW TORQUE DOES NOT
COME FROM THE MOTOR BECAUSE THE STATOR CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE.
5)
THE EFFICIENCY OF AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR = ELECTRICAL POWER OUT / MECHANICAL POWER IN.6) WHEN THE HV COILS ACCELERATE THE MOTOR & ROTOR & DELIVER POWER TO THE LOAD - THEY DO SO WITH
LESS
TORQUE AND LESS POWER THAN IS BEING PROVIDED BY THE DRIVE SHAFT IN SCENARIO (3) OR 0 WATTS.
7) THE MECHANICAL POWER IN = 0 WATTS WITHOUT THE HV COIL, TORQUE AND POWER RESULTING ACCELERATION AND
POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD(S).
THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE UNIVERSITY ON FRIDAY - WITHOUT ARGUEMENT OR CONTRADICTION SO FAR.Quote
Let me know when the output matches the input and I will get more interested.
SEE # 3 ABOVE.CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 07, 2009, 06:08:07 PM
THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE UNIVERSITY ON FRIDAY - WITHOUT ARGUEMENT OR CONTRADICTION SO FAR.
CHEERS
T
This comes under the explanatory heading of,
Bullshit Baffles Brains. lol
Number three is correct and there is no argument from me...
except that it does not apply in this case.
What is evident from the video's is that the HV coil 'seems' to be working as stated, the motor
input does reduce and the output coil 'does seem' to increase it's output in symbiosis with the
HV coil, yet the actual output is not presented as a percentage of input at any time making it
difficult to judge the actual effectiveness of the two coils. What I would like to see is a proper
baseline and then the impact each coil has on the drag and input/output numbers for each case.
Ron
Thane I'm always the late one at the party buuuuuut if the motor is running at 60hz then why do you expect it would run faster than 3600 RPM! Isn't the frequency not allowing higher rpm's? If I'm being ignorant please punish me.
Quote from: i_ron on March 07, 2009, 09:05:24 PM
This comes under the explanatory heading of, Bullshit Baffles Brains. lol
.......What I would like to see is a proper baseline and then the impact each coil has on the drag and input/output numbers for each case.
Ron
Once again, for the umpteenth time, I'll second that.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 07, 2009, 10:32:09 PM
Once again, for the umpteenth time, I'll second that.
Cheers
hoptoad, thank you for your support, I appreciate your positive responses.
Ron
Edit: I was worried for a minute if there was such a word as "
explanatory" and if there was...
did I use it correctly? So had to look it up ...and breath a sigh of relieve. So I see what I have been doing is to try and
explicate this matter... which wouldn't be required if only Mr T would
elucidate more clearly. LOL
Quote from: i_ron on March 07, 2009, 11:55:42 PM
hoptoad, thank you for your support, I appreciate your positive responses.
Ron
Edit: I was worried for a minute if there was such a word as "explanatory" and if there was...
did I use it correctly? So had to look it up ...and breath a sigh of relieve. So I see what I have been doing is to try and explicate this matter... which wouldn't be required if only Mr T would elucidate more clearly. LOL
@I_Ron
I clearly understand what you're saying and agree wholeheartedly. LOL
Cheers
Quote from: i_ron on March 07, 2009, 09:05:24 PM
This comes under the explanatory heading of, Bullshit Baffles Brains. lol
Number three is correct and there is no argument from me...
except that it does not apply in this case.
Ron
OK MR. "OLDSCHOOL" BAFFLED BRAIN THAT CREATES BULLSHIT,
PLEASE TELL US HOW YOU WOULD GO ABOUT EVALUATING THE PERFORMANCE EFFICIENCY OF A WIND GENERATOR?
RESPECTFULLY YOURS (just barely)
T
A GENERATOR CONVERTS MECHANICAL ROTATIONAL POWER TO ELECTRICAL POWER.1) THE MECHANICAL POWER IN = TORQUE x SPEED x 2PI
2) THE ELECTRICAL POWER OUT = V^2 / R
3) IF THE IS SPEED = 0 RPM THERE IS NO POWER IN AND NO POWER OUT ALTHOUGH THE TORQUE MAY BE IFINITELY HIGH.
4) IF THE SPEED = 3500 RPM THERE IS TORQUE AND POWER BUT THE REQUIRED NEW TORQUE DOES NOT COME FROM THE MOTOR BECAUSE THE STATOR CURRENT DOES NOT INCREASE.
5) THE EFFICIENCY OF AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR IS = ELECTRICAL POWER OUT / MECHANICAL POWER IN.
6) WHEN THE HV COILS ACCELERATE THE MOTOR & ROTOR & DELIVER POWER TO THE LOAD - THEY DO SO WITH LESS TORQUE AND LESS POWER THAN IS BEING PROVIDED BY THE DRIVE SHAFT IN SCENARIO (3) OR 0 WATTS.
7) THE MECHANICAL POWER IN = 0 WATTS WITHOUT THE HV COIL, TORQUE AND POWER RESULTING ACCELERATION AND POWER DELIVERED TO THE LOAD(S).
Quote from: broli on March 07, 2009, 09:06:29 PM
Thane I'm always the late one at the party buuuuuut if the motor is running at 60hz then why do you expect it would run faster than 3600 RPM! Isn't the frequency not allowing higher rpm's? If I'm being ignorant please punish me.
WE ARE DESIGNING AND BUILDING A FREQUENCY DOUBLER SO WE CAN INCREASE THE INPUT TO 120 hz - THEN THE MOTOR'S NATURAL TENDENCY WILL BE TO RUN UP TO 7200 RPM.
EVEN AN INDUCTION MOTOR ACTS LIKE AN ALTERNATOR WHEN DRIVEN BY AN EXTERNAL SOURCE - SO WE SUSPECT THAT THE MOTOR IS WORKING AGAINST THE HV COILS AND PRODUCING A LIMITING EFFECT ON ACCELERATION AT 60 hz.
CHEERS
T
T
you carry a heavy burden
HOW MUCH DO THESE GUYS WEIGH??
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 08, 2009, 08:29:43 AM
T
you carry a heavy burden
HOW MUCH DO THESE GUYS WEIGH??
Chet
"HE AIN'T HEAVY - HE'S MY (myopic) BROTHER(S)".PERHAPS COLESTON WILL ELABORATE MORE ON THIS WHEN HE GETS BACK HOME TO TORONTO? ;)
HE SPENT 4 HOURS IN THE LAB - WHILE HIS FIANCEE WAITED IN THE CAR - HE EVEN WENT OUT FOR A SMOKE AND DIDN'T EVEN INVITE ME. ??? I FINALLY I HAD TO KICK HIM OUT SO I COULD GET SOME "REAL" WORK DONE AND TO SAVE HIS MARRIAGE.
I HOPE IT WAS WORTH THE 10 HOURS OF DRIVING COLESTON? 8)
CHEERS AND THANKS FOR THE BEER INVITE!
T
Myopia as metaphor:The terms myopia and myopic (or the common terms short sightedness or short sighted) have also been used metaphorically to refer to cognitive thinking and decision making that is narrow sighted.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 08:18:58 AM
RESPECTFULLY YOURS (just barely)
T
6) WHEN THE HV COILS ACCELERATE THE MOTOR & ROTOR & DELIVER POWER TO THE LOAD - THEY DO SO WITH LESS TORQUE AND LESS POWER THAN IS BEING PROVIDED BY THE DRIVE SHAFT IN SCENARIO (3) OR 0 WATTS.
Well put something on... I feel uncomfortable talking to naked men.
I have a real problem with number six
Ron, aka Pacific Breeze
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 08:18:58 AM
PLEASE TELL US HOW YOU WOULD GO ABOUT EVALUATING THE PERFORMANCE EFFICIENCY OF A WIND GENERATOR?
T
"Mechanical power in is calculated from torque and speed of the driving source ( prime mover). With a conventional alternator you will have direct mechanical losses from friction and windage that you can't avoid. If it is an iron cored machine then you will have iron loss in the form of eddy and hysteresis loss which you also can not avoid.
As soon as you connect a load then you also have a copper loss that is load dependent."
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 08, 2009, 12:38:10 PM
"Mechanical power in is calculated from torque and speed of the driving source blah, blah, blah...
Ron
RIGHT FINALLY! :P
MECHANICAL POWER IN IS CALCULATED FROM THE TORQUE AND SPEED OF THE DRIVING SOURCE - I.E. DRIVE SHAFT.
T 8)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 08:18:58 AM
A GENERATOR CONVERTS MECHANICAL ROTATIONAL POWER TO ELECTRICAL POWER.
1) THE MECHANICAL POWER IN = TORQUE x SPEED x 2PI
2) THE ELECTRICAL POWER OUT = V^2 / R
And HOW do you get your mechanical rotational power (1)?
You use ELECTRICAL POWER IN to achieve your mechanical power.
WHY DO YOU CONTINOUSLY REFUSE TO INCLUDE THE ELECTRICAL POWER IN?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 08:36:37 AM
"HE AIN'T HEAVY - HE'S MY (myopic) BROTHER(S)".
PERHAPS COLESTON WILL ELABORATE MORE ON THIS WHEN HE GETS BACK HOME TO TORONTO? ;)
HE SPENT 4 HOURS IN THE LAB - WHILE HIS FIANCEE WAITED IN THE CAR - HE EVEN WENT OUT FOR A SMOKE AND DIDN'T EVEN INVITE ME. ??? I FINALLY I HAD TO KICK HIM OUT SO I COULD GET SOME "REAL" WORK DONE AND TO SAVE HIS MARRIAGE.
I HOPE IT WAS WORTH THE 10 HOURS OF DRIVING COLESTON? 8)
CHEERS AND THANKS FOR THE BEER INVITE!
T
Myopia as metaphor:
The terms myopia and myopic (or the common terms short sightedness or short sighted) have also been used metaphorically to refer to cognitive thinking and decision making that is narrow sighted.
Wooo wooo, I'm back now, so first just for the non exiting bits.
A client of mine loaned me thier '02 BMW 328i, so actual driving time was 3.5 hours there, 3 hours back. Avg speed was about 180 the whole way, which was very exciting. There was a sweet bit on the way home where some chick in a yellow mazda spent about a half hour trying to catch me, then about 20 minutes trying to pass me while I weaved like a fucking basketmaker at 180+. Epic failure, I wish I couldve followed her home so I could lambaste her with a healthy dose of smacktalk, but she never even got a chance to even attempt to pass me. Booyeah, and then there was the 300C that attempted to play for a while too, but the driver was thoroughly outclassed, just didn't have the same youthful reckless abandon I guess.
I didn't realise you smoked, and in my defense how am I supposed to remember social niceties and politeness when smoke is coming out of my ears from the runaway oscillations in the ol' brainpan?
And I appreciate your concern, I should specify that technically she is only my girlfriend because I haven't given her a ring yet, but you'll be invited to the wedding, shes a keeper. And she was only in the car for like an hour, the rest of the time she was walking our dog.
PLEASE TELL US HOW YOU WOULD GO ABOUT EVALUATING THE PERFORMANCE EFFICIENCY OF A WIND GENERATOR?
Power in the wind: (density of air) x (turbine blade diameter)^2 x (velocity of wind)^3 x (a constant = C)
power in = d x D^2 x V^3 x C What about that constant, C?
It's there because what we are really interested in is
the Area swept by the blades of diameter, D.
The area is calculated by multiplying the
number Pi (approximately 3.14159)
times the diameter squared
divided by 4.
This is the
power
IN.
THE DRIVE SHAFT
Then measure your power OUT. Divide: OUT/IN = Efficiency
IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT
"BLESSED ARE THEY - THAT GO AROUND IN CIRCLES
FOR THEY SHALL QUALIFY AS WHEELS"
T
So for what Thane mentioned a simple frequency doubler will up the max RPM's quite a bit. Space vector modulation to a 3 phase AC motor will put the variac and the split phase motor out to pasture. See ya!
With the new mosfet switching speeds I betcha I can beat any world record for a spinning wheel. 500K RPM? A mil? Just depends if we can get the rotor (flywheel at that stage) made to the same or higher level of precision as hard drive platters.
But none of you poor buggers got to hear the thunk. It was freaking incredible.
And all the Pin vs Pout is completely irrelevant at this point, tis merely a prototype. All it needs is a few more coils and a 3 phase motor, then you can do a power in vs power out analysis that actually means something in simple terms.
It doesnt mean anything at this point because the Pin isnt enough to spin the rotor at 3400 rpm. Just cant do it. (well maybe if you span it with your hand and allowed it a couple days to accelerate it just might be able too, but I dont think so.) The thing running is using more energy that is going into it. It consumes over unity. Woah!
I would say give Thane more time to put the new properly made (no offense) coils in, and start harvesting usable energy from it.
Anyway, in my personal opinion after an intense analysis of the system this is the most important breakthrough in the history of electronics. Since Faraday discovered the law of induction.
And its so simple, magically turn an inductor into a capacitor. Wooo. (no I'm joking about the magic)
OMG I just get tingly thinking about it hooked up to a SVM controller and a 3phase motor, with a larger rotor with 4-5 times the magnet density AND a ton more coils harvesting usable energy from it, and eventually no motor at all ;) but I'll leave that one to Thane, I think he wants to get the 3phase one done before physically making the evolution, but he has it all planned out, holy jesus.
Anyways, what a great trip. Oh and my lady and I went to see watchmen, that was a freaking crazy movie.
Hmmm- why is it YOU would edit MY POST?
Sensorship is unbecoming of you... especially to edit someone else's post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:(
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 04:50:14 PM
IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT
T
This is the key right here, if you rebuilt the windturbine with massive ridiculous coils, nothing would be able to turn it. You would be choking it out. IE grinder trying to turn heavy ass rotor inside a strong magnetic fields..And then all of a sudden you flip a switch and the thing flies up to massive RPM's
Quote from: Coleston on March 08, 2009, 04:40:54 PM
Avg speed was about 180 the whole way, which was very exciting.
WANNA KNOW WHAT'S EVEN MORE EXCITING? - WHEN THE OPP 8) TOW YOUR CAR AWAY - TAKE YOUR LICENCE AND PUT YOU UP FOR THE NIGHT IN A JAIL CELL UNTIL SOMEONE COMES AND GETS YOU.
AS THE FORMER 18 YEAR OLD IDIOT DRIVER OF A '63 BEETLE WITH A PORSCHE 914 MOTOR JAMMED IN THE BACK AND THE ABILITY TO DO 120 MPH ( 200 KM/HR ) WITH NO SEAT BELTS ON BIAS PLY TIRES - AND PHOTOS OF MY CAR IN THE HULL QUEBEC POLICE STATION WITH ORDERS TO TOW ON
ANY VIOLATION - I WOULD KNOW. >:(
T
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 05:19:04 PM
Hmmm- why is it YOU would edit MY POST?
Sensorship is unbecoming of you... especially to edit someone else's post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:(
SORRY YOU ARE RIGHT - I PRESSED THE WRONG ICON.
MY APPOLOGIES
T
This is the key right here, if you rebuilt the windturbine with massive ridiculous coils, nothing would be able to turn it.
You would be choking it out.
IE grinder trying to turn heavy ass rotor inside a strong magnetic fields..
And then all of a sudden you flip a switch and the thing flies up to massive RPM's
Coleston
SO, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN I ASKED YOU TO TURN THE ROTOR WITH YOUR 2 FINGERS?
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 05:25:04 PM
WANNA KNOW WHAT'S EVEN MORE EXCITING? - WHEN THE OPP 8) TOW YOUR CAR AWAY - TAKE YOUR LICENCE AND PUT YOU UP FOR THE NIGHT IN A JAIL CELL UNTIL SOMEONE COMES AND GETS YOU.
AS THE FORMER 18 YEAR OLD IDIOT DRIVER OF A '63 BEETLE WITH A PORSCHE 914 MOTOR JAMMED IN THE BACK AND THE ABILITY TO DO 120 MPH ( 200 KM/HR ) WITH NO SEAT BELTS ON BIAS PLY TIRES - AND PHOTOS OF MY CAR IN THE HULL QUEBEC POLICE STATION WITH ORDERS TO TOW ON ANY VIOLATION - I WOULD KNOW. >:(
T
Actually now with the new street racing rules they tow your car right to a junkyard and crush it.
That sounds like a badass ride tho tres 8)
"IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT "
NOPE AND WRONG! You still have POWER IN. You just have 0% effeciency at converting that power in.
And I would repost my content that you edited and deleted.... but at this point ...............why frikin bother!!!!!!!
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 05:31:38 PM
SO, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN I ASKED YOU TO TURN THE ROTOR WITH YOUR 2 FINGERS?
T
exerting all my force and grip of steel I could barely BARELY turn the damn thing, and after 2 revolutions my fingers hurt so much I had to stop.
And I can certainly freaking apply a HELL of a lot more than a 1/3 hp with my bare hands
Quote from: Coleston on March 08, 2009, 05:32:21 PM
Actually now with the new street racing rules they tow your car right to a junkyard and crush it.
That sounds like a badass ride tho tres 8)
QUICKER 0-60 THAN A VETTE, CAMARO, FIREBIRD - JUST ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE ROAD BACK IN THE '80's.
T
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 05:36:00 PM
"IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT "
NOPE AND WRONG! You still have POWER IN. You just have 0% effeciency at converting that power in.
YOU HAVE TORQUE - BUT NO POWER...
KINDA LIKE HAVING A BRAIN BUT NO IQ. :-*
T
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 05:36:00 PM
"IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT "
NOPE AND WRONG! You still have POWER IN. You just have 0% effeciency at converting that power in.
And I would repost my content that you edited and deleted.... but at this point ...............why frikin bother!!!!!!!
http://fc73.deviantart.com/fs24/f/2008/022/6/5/facepalm_gif_by_thatweirdo7.gif
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 05:36:00 PM
And I would repost my content that you edited and deleted.... but at this point ...............why frikin bother!!!!!!!
RIGHT - NO POINT POSTING NONSENSE TWICE - ONCE IS BAD ENOUGH, EH?
MAKE IT SO - NUMBER 1T
SO REALLY COLESTON - HOW WAS YOUR TRIP TO OTTAWA?
WHAT DID YOU EXPECT TO SEE?
WHAT DID YOU SEE?
DID YOU HAVE A NICE TIME IN OUR NATION'S CAPITAL?
WAS IT WORHT IT?
HOW BADLY DID I TRICK YOU?
T
SO REALLY COLESTON - HOW WAS YOUR TRIP TO OTTAWA?
WHAT DID YOU EXPECT TO SEE?
Uhh, expectations are dangerous, sir.
I was prepared for a giant motor under the table tho, lol, belt connected to the ryobi, lol. It was not there thankfully, I hate having to kill people ;)
WHAT DID YOU SEE?
A motor spinning a rotor that was too heavy to be spinning, and furthermore spinning it way too fast.
2 weeks ago I would have said something like "No way, you would need a huge ass motor, at the very least a few horses to spin a large rotor that fast and bring it up to speed that quickly."
DID YOU HAVE A NICE TIME IN OUR NATION'S CAPITAL?
I did indeed, I haven't been back in a long time. We went to the Elephant down in the market. I was very unimpressed, although the small portion did seem to fill me up satisfactorily. I would account that to the high mushroom content of the pasta I ordered.
Also, the roads are insane and make no sense and are as confusing as fuck. If I didn't have GPS on my phone I would've been completely hopeless, lol. What a ridiculous road layout.
I went to visit my brothers who live in nepean, and attend algonquin college.
They had just bought halo wars and have been playing it nonstop since it came out, and I kicked my brothers ass after a long and intense game, so that was really nice. My girl later told me she thanked my brother after because I would have been grumpy all night if I had lost. I think this is debatable, but nonetheless cute ahaha.
I had to pick up my bro from the Museum of Civilization, which I was really not at all impressed with, except for the GIANT totem poles inside, that was insanely cool.
Ottawa is gorgeous of course, beautiful architecture everywhere you look, really really aesthetically pleasing vistas.
WAS IT WORTH IT?
Yes, furthermore I wish to inquire with you about maybe putting my gifted but aimless brother to work, he needs some focus in his life, and I would really like to make that focus the same as mine, to make it easier to convince him to come live with me in toronto. but I digress. It was very very worth it.
HOW BADLY DID I TRICK YOU?
The old videos with the stator back emf channeling claims and bitoroid coils mislead me quite a bit, but now that you've more accurately figured out what is really going on, I was quick to toss all that bad speculation out. Also you stutter and pause much more in your movies than in real life, so you were more animated and quick of wit than I had thought
T
Thane, is the frequency doubling hard? I would see this as the most simplest and effective way to amp up the COP. Higher frequency requires even lower voltage no? Although I have to recheck how rotor speed acted compared to voltage of HC coil. Was this linearly?
One last try:
You give the torque/RPM of the shaft as power in.
What is needed/relevant/important is the power input required to achieve that torque/RPM.
Lock your shaft to prevent turning.
Plug the motor in.
Power in: wattage drawn from the AC outlet to your motor = maximum (say 100W)
Power out: 0W
Efficiency: 0/100 = 0%
But according to your logic, there is no power in, no power consumed.
Now let your shaft turn at whatever torque/RPM you desire.
Power in is STILL: wattage drawn from the AC outlet to your motor
Power out: whatever it is you can generate
The request made many, many times, and unanswered by you, it to show POWER IN - WATTAGE DRAWN FROM THE AC OUTLET BY YOUR MOTOR.
Without POWER IN measured, calculating efficiency is impossible.
You have shown 8.5 watts out? With how much ELECTRICAL POWER consumed by your motor? 100W? (better to stick your head in the sand and ignore this?)
8.5/100= 8.5% efficiency.
Have a nice day and best of luck.....................
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 05:36:00 PM
"IF THE DRIVE SHAFT IS NOT TURNING WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING 100 km/hr THERE IS NO POWER IN & NO POWER OUT "
NOPE AND WRONG! You still have POWER IN. You just have 0% effeciency at converting that power in.
And I would repost my content that you edited and deleted.... but at this point ...............why frikin bother!!!!!!!
Welcome to the club... I have had two of mine "edited" but caught them in time to 'modify' them
back to original. It is abuse of moderator power and a word to Harti would soon fix that.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 08, 2009, 06:57:47 PM
Welcome to the club... I have had two of mine "edited" but caught them in time to 'modify' them
back to original. It is abuse of moderator power and a word to Harti would soon fix that.
Ron
Maybe.
I DID promptly send Stefan a scathing PM right after it happened........
To selectively edit the content of MY POST and thus have them represented as MY WORDS is WRONG!!!!!
edit: P.S. For the record, he has since apologized and agreed that editing posts in that manner is not proper and was 'accidental'. Apology accepted.
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 06:52:25 PM
Now let your shaft turn at whatever torque/RPM you desire.
wow you have got to be joking or something.
Your gonna let your motor? MOTOR I COMMAND YOU TO TURN.
Or perhaps something more like Motor, you have my permission to turn. Motor I allow you to turn.
Presto!
It doesn't freakin work like that buddy, motor shafts locked in place.
Magic perhaps? TURNEY SESAME?
no.
So therefore 100 watts in 0 watts out = 0% efficient.
So there you go, Thanes motor is not powerfull enough to turn the rotor, so its 0% efficient. Ok, false claim. Total BS, No OU here, move along, nothing to see, just another quack with a hokey machine.
But wait! Theres output watts? How the fuck?! What in tarnation?
0% efficient generator putting out 8.5 watts. Doesn't that give you pause for a second? Or are you gonna go back to TURNEY SESAME!
According to math, and physics and everything input x efficiency = output right?
100 x 0 = 0 or perhaps 100 x 0 = 8.5 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The motor accelerates ITSELF under load. As far as I know theres never been anything else thats ever done that in the history of the world. You totally miss this and immediately try to apply standard formulas.
Ok no problem, standard formulas are easy. the motors 0% efficient. Done. Dont dare try to call it 8.5% or anything like that, thats impossible.
You can't see the forest through the trees is whats going on here, I'm afraid.
THERE IS A COSMIC JOKE BEING PLAYED ON ALL THE OU PEOPLE HERE...
WHO ARE BLIND 8) AND CAN'T RECOGNIZE SOMETHING WHEN IT IS SITTING RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT SOME PRESCRIBED FORMULA. ???
OU PEOPLE WHO ARE EVERY BIT AS RIGID AND EMBEDDED IN DOGMA AS CONVENTIONAL SCIENTISTS WHO THEY CRITICIZE. :'(
I SWEAR THIS IS THE VERY REASON JESUS DOESN'T SHOW HIS FACE AROUND CHRISTIANS - WHO WOULD KILL HIM
INSTANTLY.
CHEERS TO
ALL
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 08, 2009, 08:23:16 PM
THERE IS A COSMIC JOKE BEING PLAYED ON ALL THE OU PEOPLE HERE...
WHO ARE BLIND 8) AND CAN'T RECOGNIZE SOMETHING WHEN IT IS SITTING RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT SOME PRESCRIBED FORMULA. ???
OU PEOPLE WHO ARE EVERY BIT AS RIGID AND EMBEDDED IN DOGMA AS CONVENTIONAL SCIENTISTS WHO THEY CRITICIZE. :'(
I SWEAR THIS IS THE VERY REASON JESUS DOESN'T SHOW HIS FACE AROUND CHRISTIANS - WHO WOULD KILL HIM
INSTANTLY.
CHEERS TO
ALL
Thane your formula's where fine to me it was your chicken dance that wasn't on par with OU standards. Please practice and try again.
200w=x(rpm)+0w ->when the coils en disengaged
200w=y(rpm)+9w ->when coils are engaged
normally, these equation to be true, x(rpm) need to be superior than y(rpm) ok?
But here, x<y humm... ??? I don't know why, but that it..
You are all right when you said that power in vs power out is not very good ... but imagine that the 9w we get with the coils are used for power in, so the real power in from an electric source is 191w. (if we always give 200w to the motor)
200w=x(rpm)
191w=y(rpm)
ok?
how can that setup give us a x(rpm) smaller than y(rpm)??
there is something somewhere not normal....
but! it's a good news because with this special phenomenon, we can reduce input power to turn a shaft at y(rpm)
Now, imagine that we use a lot more and bigger coils, maybe that we can reduce the input power to 100w?50w? 10w? for the same rpm...
AFTER that, we can use a conventional generator to convert those rpm in electricity power...
when all that is finished, now we can measure the Pin vs Pout and maybe we'll get an OU system?
maybe that system is only a transition phase between a motor and a generator??
One test you could make M.T, just put a conventional generator on your motor, without engaging the coils and after try with coil shorted... you could just read the power out from the generator + the power from the HC coils... we'll see how much your system is vs only a generator??
But, if you have other coils left, try with a lot more coils ...
Fred
Quote from: Coleston on March 08, 2009, 07:07:03 PM
The motor accelerates ITSELF under load. As far as I know theres never been anything else thats ever done that in the history of the world.
You obviously missed my explanation of a low impedance generator doing this ( http://www.totallyamped.net/adams pages 8 and 10) posted nearly 18 months ago, before Thane started this thread, and you also obviously missed Nali2001's motor/low impedance generator combo doing it, and you've obviously never contructed an Adams motor utilizing the flyback circuit through a load, which also does this - albeit much more efficiently!
Note also that Robert Adams presented this phenomena (shorted coil acceleration) in 1977, while Tesla used a shorted coil in one of his "novel" induction motors.
Cheers
Quote from: capthook on March 08, 2009, 06:52:25 PM
The request made many, many times, and unanswered by you, it to show POWER IN - WATTAGE DRAWN FROM THE AC OUTLET BY YOUR MOTOR.
Without POWER IN measured, calculating efficiency is impossible.
I am wrong. You HAVE presented electrical power in. With the large amount of posts/info guess I (and others?) missed it. My apologies.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg161419#msg161419
"LANGLEY 1
REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION MODE
@ 85 VOLTS / 217 WATTS TO PRIME MOVER - OUTPUT = 8.5 WATTS
LANGLEY 2
REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION MODE
@ 85 VOLTS / 193 WATTS TO PRIME MOVER - OUTPUT = 19.6 WATTS"
19.6/193 = 10% efficiency (electrical power out/electrical power in)
Only other thoughts to offer - I'll leave you to your work ;)
A 100ohm HC coil is dissipating alot of power. A larger gauge wire and the smaller P=IR^2 loss to increase efficiency and then winding the HV coils larger or with smaller wire to increase the HV voltage to negate the increase of HC current.
Increasing magnet size/depth to increase the flux.
Minimizing core size to minimize rotor drag. I haven't followed this enough to know your process/thinking and I'm sure you've considered this greatly.... but that sure is a huge chunk of metal next to those magnets.
Have you ever considered an air core design? Dual-rotor axial flux Hugh Piggot style? If it's the HV COILS giving you acceleration, then the cores should not be the critical component?
HAVE you determined it's the COILS working on LENZ and not the coils reducing the drag of the cores?
(it appears from the nasa videos you HAVE conclusively determined it's LENZ)
Quote from: capthook on March 09, 2009, 04:50:39 AM
I am wrong. You HAVE presented electrical power in. With the large amount of posts/info guess I (and others?) missed it. My apologies.
AND MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT IT - GOOD!
Quote
19.6/193 = 10% efficiency (electrical power out/electrical power in)
WITHOUT HV COILS OUTPUT = 0.0 WATTS
YOUR 10% FACTORS IN THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MOTOR WHICH HAS NO INTEREST TO US.
Quote
Only other thoughts to offer - I'll leave you to your work ;)
A 100ohm HC coil is dissipating alot of power. A larger gauge wire and the smaller P=IR^2 loss to increase efficiency and then winding the HV coils larger or with smaller wire to increase the HV voltage to negate the increase of HC current
WE GO WITH WHAT WORKS AND THEM MODIFY - WHEN COLESTON WAS IN THE LAB HE SAW HV COILS USING 26 GAUGE WIRE @ 25 OHMS WHICH REALLY WORK WELL BUT THE MINIMUM ROTOR SPEED IS HIGHER.
Quote
Increasing magnet size/depth to increase the flux.
Minimizing core size to minimize rotor drag. I haven't followed this enough to know your process/thinking and I'm sure you've considered this greatly.... but that sure is a huge chunk of metal next to those magnets.
Have you ever considered an air core design? Dual-rotor axial flux Hugh Piggot style? If it's the HV COILS giving you acceleration, then the cores should not be the critical component?
HAVE you determined it's the COILS working on LENZ and not the coils reducing the drag of the cores?
(it appears from the nasa videos you HAVE conclusively determined it's LENZ)
THOSE CORES ARE VERY HIGH QUALITY TRANSFORMER LAMINATES - WHEN PROPERLY MOUNTED WITH 2 OR MORE COILS THE COGGING TORQUE DROPS TOWARDS ZERO.
ALSO THESE TESTS ARE ONLY MEANT TO SHOW
THE GENERATOR REACTION TO LOADING - NOT - EFFICIENCYBY MATCHING THE HC COIL WITH THE CORRECT LOAD - I.E. FRANCE COIL WITH 25 OHM LOAD RATHER THAN 47 OHMS - THE VOLTAGE ACROSS THE LOAD REMAINS AT 27 VOLTS OR 29.2 WATTS (UP FROM 8.5 WATTS) WITH 197 WATTS TO THE MOTOR AND THE ITALIAN COIL IS 64 WATTS - THE AIR GAP HAS ALSO BEEN REDUCED.
ONCE AGAIN GENERATOR OUTPUT = 0.0 WATTS WITH NO HV COILS.
T
Hello hopetod,
tried to view your link but just get a controll-line at the top of the website listing page 1 to page 10.
It seems the "get javascript"-command does not return anything.
All switches in my firefox-settings are on ( javascript allowed, even my online-watch does allow this )
Is your site down ?
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on March 09, 2009, 07:35:45 PM
Hello hopetod,
tried to view your link but just get a controll-line at the top of the website listing page 1 to page 10.
Is your site down ?
Regards Kator01
SORRY BUT I "ACCIDENTALLY" DELETED IT!
T
Quote from: Kator01 on March 09, 2009, 07:35:45 PM
Hello hopetod,
tried to view your link but just get a controll-line at the top of the website listing page 1 to page 10.
It seems the "get javascript"-command does not return anything.
All switches in my firefox-settings are on ( javascript allowed, even my online-watch does allow this )
Is your site down ?
Regards
Kator01
Hi Kator - here's the link again. ( http://www.totallyamped.net/adams )
I don't know why you're having problems with Javascript? I've tested the site on IE, Firefox and Opera without problems.
It's a pretty simple site. A one line link-menu at the top which loads content via an IFrame into a span layer below the menu, when a page link is pressed.
Cheers
P.S you can try loading individual pages directly using the following links or typing in the pages you want to read:
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/page8.html
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/page10.html
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/page11.html
etc.....
RADIANT ENERGY DEMO AT OTTAWA U
MY FRIEND PALSNESS http://www.youtube.com/user/Palsness WILL BE DEMONSTRATING HIS TESLA RADIANT ENERGY HAIRPIN CIRCUIT AT THE UNIVERSITY ON FRIDAY.
THIS IS VERY INTERESTING BECAUSE THE ENERGY FLOWS INTO THE LIGHT BULBS FROM THE ATMOSPHERE NOT FROM THE COPPER PIPE BECAUSE THERE IS A DEAD SHORT AT THE TOP. ALSO HE CAN TOUCH BOTH SIDES OF THE RAILS WITHOUT GETTING HURT.
THERE IS A VACUUM CREATED IN THE SPARK GAP WHICH SUCKS ELECTRON FREE - NUTRINO ENERGY INTO IT AND LIGHT BULBS AND LIGHTS THE LIGHTS IN THE PROCESS
CHEERS
T
BULB IN WATER 10 KV - DEAD SHORT & NON INSULATED LEADS
!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE5g6x6OOb0&feature=channel_page
MORE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF - The Tesla Hairpin Circuit, Dead short Circuit oF 10 000 Volts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDWF50fUoYY&feature=channel
Dear Thane,
I don't think he achieves OU, does he?
He should present what is the voltage and current reading in order to claim 10kV exists right?
He is very nice personality I guess indeed.
Can you send me SMS via my cell phone?
God Bless Humanity.
Turkey
Nice,
this is the well known Lecher-Antenna-System.
What you see is the current and voltage-distribution ( Wave-structure) along the lecher-lines. Very well described im my old physiscs-textbook 1940.
There is no mystery energie sucked in from the vakuum.
Regrads
Kator
Here is something that comes in a timely manner, and might be relevent to this thread...
-Mark
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_The_Case_in_Magnetisam_Where_Newton_Law_is_Not_Valid.pdf (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_The_Case_in_Magnetisam_Where_Newton_Law_is_Not_Valid.pdf)
ABSTRACT
The goal of this work is to point out to some facts in the electromagnetic
field concerning validity of Newton’s third law. Although it is a known fact in
theory of magnetic field that Newton’s law of action and reaction is not valid for
Ampere Force Law for two small elements it is valid for closed current circuits.
However, it is neglected fact that the same problem exist for two electric charges
moving perpendicular to each other. The significance of avoiding Newton’s third
law is of utmost importance for construction of so called over-unity electro
generators where the output energy of the machine is greater than mechanical
energy invested on the input side of the machine.
In this work the author will try:
- To point to the case where Newton’s law of action and reaction is not
valid for two dotted electrical charges in movement,
- To connect the above case with getting energy surplus in Joe Cell,
- To prove that in the case where third Newton’s law is not valid, more
energy can be obtained on output side than energy invested on input
side of an electro generator,
- To discuss the significance concerning ratio of Voltage against
Amperage and length of wire, for existence of energy surplus in an
electric generator,
- To point to a mechanical analogy of the above case with the two stage
mechanical oscillator of Veljko Milkovic,
- To explain “special case†used by Gary Wesley and Bill Muller,
- To discuss issue with the first law of thermodynamics.
@Thane
You have to see this
http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=flux+gating+generator&hl=fr&emb=0&aq=f#
A flux gating system that provides 'anti Lenz Law effect'
Quote from: Kator01 on March 10, 2009, 07:28:28 PM
What you see is the current and voltage-distribution ( Wave-structure) along the lecher-lines. Very well described im my old physiscs-textbook 1940.
Indeed! I remember reading a "QST" (or was it "QSL"? - old HAM magazines) that showed using one as a filter among many other uses. Lecher was the inventor ... 1880's?
Quote from: markzpeiverson on March 10, 2009, 07:42:41 PM
Here is something that comes in a timely manner, and might be relevent to this thread...
-Mark
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_The_Case_in_Magnetisam_Where_Newton_Law_is_Not_Valid.pdf (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_The_Case_in_Magnetisam_Where_Newton_Law_is_Not_Valid.pdf)
THANKS MARK,
WE WILL BE ABLE TO ADD THIS INFO TO OUR PATENT APPLICATIONS.
CHEERS
Thane
Quote from: albator10 on March 10, 2009, 10:11:16 PM
@Thane
You have to see this
http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=flux+gating+generator&hl=fr&emb=0&aq=f#
A flux gating system that provides 'anti Lenz Law effect'
THANKS ALBATOR,
THIS IS AWESOME - BUT HOW DOES A COMPUTER SIMULATION DEMONSTRATE ANTI-LENZ?
T
Quote from: Kator01 on March 10, 2009, 07:28:28 PM
Nice,
this is the well known Lecher-Antenna-System.
What you see is the current and voltage-distribution ( Wave-structure) along the lecher-lines. Very well described im my old physiscs-textbook 1940.
There is no mystery energie sucked in from the vakuum.
Regrads
Kator
THANKS KATOR,
THE VACUUM IS ACTUALLY MY BRAIN :-\
HERE IT IS AGAIN http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecher_lines FOR ANYONE WHO CAN'T READ GERMAN (and are less than 69 years old).
CHEERS
T
I wondered if Thane's rotor system would eventually produce an OU effect how would you hide it since main stream would tend to "kill it". I mentioned a few post back that having it disguised as a wind generator would keep everyone happy. It seems that someone may have already done that.
http://pesn.com/2009/03/11/9501531_Boswell_windless_turbine/
"Boswell Power Production Unit Runs Continuously Even Without Wind"
As the article points out it keeps everyone happy as being an acceptable WIND energy source instead of a OU device..
"Wind Incentives
Because it is a "wind turbine", you can take advantage of the incentives available, depending on what state or country you're in, speeding up the payback period. Also, you're not going to be inundated with questions from neighbors or the utilities. You don't have to wait for the government to validate and come up with some new classification of energy device to include in their incentives. It's not like this is deceptive or fraudulent. It's still very much in keeping with the spirit of the incentives to encourage renewable energy installation."
Of course it comes back to "is this guy and his technology legit". Time will tell but if Thane ever gets his system to "loop back" at least we have a way to "disguise" the technology to be more acceptable to the general public.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 11, 2009, 08:39:03 AM
I wondered if Thane's rotor system would eventually produce an OU effect how would you hide it since main stream would tend to "kill it". I mentioned a few post back that having it disguised as a wind generator would keep everyone happy. It seems that someone may have already done that.
http://pesn.com/2009/03/11/9501531_Boswell_windless_turbine/
"Boswell Power Production Unit Runs Continuously Even Without Wind"
As the article points out it keeps everyone happy as being an acceptable WIND energy source instead of a OU device..
"Wind Incentives
Because it is a "wind turbine", you can take advantage of the incentives available, depending on what state or country you're in, speeding up the payback period. Also, you're not going to be inundated with questions from neighbors or the utilities. You don't have to wait for the government to validate and come up with some new classification of energy device to include in their incentives. It's not like this is deceptive or fraudulent. It's still very much in keeping with the spirit of the incentives to encourage renewable energy installation."
Of course it comes back to "is this guy and his technology legit". Time will tell but if Thane ever gets his system to "loop back" at least we have a way to "disguise" the technology to be more acceptable to the general public.
Apparently this Jim Boswell inventor in this article was running for Mayor of Fresno California in 2008.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2669700/7818564 (http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2669700/7818564)
http://www.myspace.com/jimboswell2008 (http://www.myspace.com/jimboswell2008)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=141&topic_id=28871&mesg_id=29980 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=141&topic_id=28871&mesg_id=29980)
Quote from: PhiScience on March 11, 2009, 10:30:39 AM
Apparently this Jim Boswell inventor in this article was running for Mayor of Fresno California in 2008.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2669700/7818564 (http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2669700/7818564)
http://www.myspace.com/jimboswell2008 (http://www.myspace.com/jimboswell2008)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=141&topic_id=28871&mesg_id=29980 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=141&topic_id=28871&mesg_id=29980)
Hummmm... A potential politician... And we all know how much we trust our politicians.. ;)
Like I stated.. "is this guy and his technology legit".. lol..
Still if Thane can achieve what he believes is doable then "hiding" the technology in plain sight as a wind generator can keep a lot of the questions down and reap some tax benefits as well. Luckily where I live the wind blows almost all the time so no one would suspect that the spinning blades were a byproduct and not the driving force..
Bep,
just had to look in my book again : in 1890 - to be exact - Lecher pubished this two-parallell-wire system .
Hope I have the time to post the two relevant pages of my book here.
Regards
Kator01
thane,
QuoteTHE VACUUM IS ACTUALLY MY BRAIN
this condition has not only affected your brain.. I am struggling all day long to overcome this condition although
I have to admit that sometimes I enjoy it when I watch tv-soaps ( which happens one of two times in a month ) ::)
Regards
Kator01
Hydrocontroll
it it hard for me to resist :
QuoteAs the article points out it keeps everyone happy as being an acceptable WIND energy source ????
Intestinal gases ?? hhm
eating a lot garlic or onions might do it.
Hope your wife can cope with it :o
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on March 11, 2009, 11:26:27 AM
Hydrocontroll
it it hard for me to resist :
Intestinal gases ?? hhm
eating a lot garlic or onions might do it.
Hope your wife can cope with it :o
Kator01
BEANS !!! ;) ;) :)
Wife has been known to kick me out of the room. ;)
Hydro,
in case it was too cold outside... you know how to fire up your generator .. ;D
Kator
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 11, 2009, 10:56:51 AM
Hummmm... A potential politician... And we all know how much we trust our politicians.. ;)
HEY I RAN FOR POLITICAL OFFICE - TWICE - ONCE FEDERALLY AND ONCE PROVINCIALLY FOR THE GREEN PARTY...
MY PLATFORM WAS:
"THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT IS A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION"
AND
"FEDERAL INCOME TAX IS ILLEGAL"CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 11, 2009, 07:11:50 PM
HEY I RAN FOR POLITICAL OFFICE - TWICE - ONCE FEDERALLY AND ONCE PROVINCIALLY FOR THE GREEN PARTY...
MY PLATFORM WAS:
"THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT IS A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION"
AND
"FEDERAL INCOME TAX IS ILLEGAL"
CHEERS
T
Well there is always that one ODD politician in the bunch. ;)
Interesting platform.... Any votes ?
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 11, 2009, 08:09:05 PM
Well there is always that one ODD politician in the bunch. ;)
Interesting platform.... Any votes ?
NOT REALLY - MY MESSAGE WAS AS WELCOME THEN AS IT IS HERE NOW ;)
T
Nice pictures...
At least no one should say your are not putting 110% effort into the research build.. It will be interesting to see the results.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 11, 2009, 07:44:01 AM
THANKS ALBATOR,
THIS IS AWESOME - BUT HOW DOES A COMPUTER SIMULATION DEMONSTRATE ANTI-LENZ?
T
Hi Thane,
I don’t know if this computer simulation can show “anti lenz law effectâ€. You are the one with a “big head†and a lab in an University.
I have found this concept (flux gating system) in my research on the net and just wanted to share it with you. I believe in your work and if this can help you.....
I don't have the knowledge and time to try it, may be you have.
I try to do my part for the planet on my side by making an HHO furnace an a cavitation heater.
I still hope that one day I will put your technology in my electric car !
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 09, 2009, 07:32:21 AM
YOUR 10% FACTORS IN THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MOTOR WHICH HAS NO INTEREST TO US.
I'm sure Ryobi would be real delighted with your insinuation that their bench grinder motor was only 10% efficient.
If it was, it certainly wouldn't get any of the efficiency labels proscribed by the following (Washington USA) standards document. Perhaps Ryobi don't sell in the USA ???
http://www.energy.wsu.edu/ftp-ep/pubs/engineering/motors/EfficiencyStandards.pdf
Cheers
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 11, 2009, 08:31:36 PM
Nice pictures...
At least no one should say your are not putting 110% effort into the research build.. It will be interesting to see the results.
TEST RESULTS & SPECULATIONThere are 4 E coils here and 1 "accelerator coil". I mount them in pairs for ease of testing.
Closing the air gap has increased coil power from 8.5 to 21 watts and it's only 2/3's of the way there so hopefully it continues to 51.8 watts / per coil. (The "Italian" coil went from 11 to 38 watts but it has a short inside and has to be rewound and retested). The mounting face of the enclosure has to be reinforced before we can close the air gap. I think 100 watts / coil is do-able.
All the coils are different and now I have to unwind them and rewind them all according to the best performer.
The "accelerator coil" is a HIGH TORQUE - High Voltage Coil meaning it is wound with 26 gauge wire rather than 30 gauge and only accelerates above 1600 RPM but it really kicks the rotor - you can actually hear the flux hit the rotor when it's engaged. Below 1600 RPM it is a massive brake. Ultimately there will be 4 "accelerator" coils and 4 Concentric E coils.
My friend GOTOLUC is considering building us a frequency doubler for the motor to run from 60 Hz to 120 Hz.
Thanks
Thane
Quote from: albator10 on March 11, 2009, 11:05:11 PM
Hi Thane,
I don’t know if this computer simulation can show “anti lenz law effectâ€. You are the one who gets “big head†and a lab in an University.
I WAS THINKING BACK TO MY "MOTIONLESS PLATE GENERATOR" WHERE SOMEONE HERE SAID THAT THE
FINGERS BECOME MAGNETIZED AND PRODUCE LENZ EFFECTS.
THANKS BUT I WISH I
WAS GETTING BIG HEAD IN THE LAB BUT I AM TOO BUSY SPINNING IN CIRCLES.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: hoptoad on March 12, 2009, 04:51:26 AM
I'm sure Ryobi would be real delighted with your insinuation that their bench grinder motor was only 10% efficient.
If it was, it certainly wouldn't get any of the efficiency labels proscribed by the following (Washington USA) standards document. Perhaps Ryobi don't sell in the USA ???
http://www.energy.wsu.edu/ftp-ep/pubs/engineering/motors/EfficiencyStandards.pdf
Cheers
IF YOU LOOK AT THE ENTIRE "SYSTEM" AS A BLACK BOX (OR IN THIS CASE A CLEAR BOX) THEN THE OVERALL EFFICIENCY IS ONLY 10% -
BUT THIS HAS LITTLE OR NO REFERENCE AT ALL TO THE MOTOR.WE ALWAYS OPERATE THE MOTOR AT 85 OR SO VOLTS WHICH SERIOUSLY COMPROMISES THE MOTOR'S ABILITY TO PRODUCE TORQUE AND RUN EFFICIENTLY. OUR SYSTEM TORQUE COMES FROM THE HV COILS INSTEAD.
ACTUALLY WE HAVE NOTIFIED RYOBI OF OUR RESEARCH, THE USE OF THEIR MOTORS AND HAVE INFORMED THEM OF HOW STOUT THEIR MOTORS ARE - WE STILL HAVE THE ORIGINAL MOTOR WHICH STILL WORKS EVEN THOUGH THE STATOR COILS ARE BLACK, THE BEARINGS CREAKING A BIT, LABEL BUBBLING AND PAINT FADING DUE TO HEAT.
CHEERS
T
Those pictures look really slick, is the coil on the spool the accel coil? How does the extra coil affect the acceleration? Faster? Did the thunk get louder?
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 12, 2009, 07:10:16 AM
The mounting face of the enclosure has to be reinforced before we can close the air gap. I think 100 watts / coil is do-able.
From what I saw this is an insanely important step, eh? 100 watts is promising, but is that the low speed output?
5x jump from 20 watts I would think you would need to increase the RPM's and decrease the airgap.
With the 3 magnets configuration instead of the 1 magnet configuration how much gain is that going to provide?
Whats the limiting factor in coil o/p power? Heat?
I was doing some sums with some buds last night, and we figured we could fit 6 connected 12" diameter rotors in the space where the driveshaft used to be, I think we could just squeeze 8 coils in per side, so 8 x 2 x 6 = 96 coils,
96 coils at 100 watts = 9600 watts so almost 10Kw output. If input lowering remains true then who knows how low the input energy would need to be.
9600 watts / 746 = 12.9 so 13 HP.
Larger rotors might be needed, but 13 hp would be agreat start.
And furthermore, using the power harvesting coils as non - continuous duty cycle may allow us to harvest huge amounts more. IE overrev the hell out of the motor, dump a massive coil melting amount of power into the wheels, accelerate up to speed then coast while the engine cools down, then 13 HP is more than enough to maintain 100KPH+ on flat ground, until you need to accel or climb a hill in which case you over rev the motor again and repeat the process.
Also, if you get a free second do you think you could fire me off the dimensions of the coils and magnets you are using, I want to try some ideas in Sketch Up. Cheers
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 11, 2009, 08:39:03 AM
http://pesn.com/2009/03/11/9501531_Boswell_windless_turbine/
"Boswell Power Production Unit Runs Continuously Even Without Wind"
Hmm, has anyone seen one of these things built? Installed? Running? Working?
This is interesting too, new cathode material for LiIonPho batteries which allows charge and discharge characteristics equivalent to ultracapacitors.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/nyregion/11about.html?_r=3 And since the power density is 3x ultracaps, goodbye ultra caps.
Quote from: Coleston on March 12, 2009, 09:41:45 AM
This is interesting too, new cathode material for LiIonPho batteries which allows charge and discharge characteristics equivalent to ultracapacitors.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/nyregion/11about.html?_r=3 And since the power density is 3x ultracaps, goodbye ultra caps.
Your link had nothing to do with batteries or ultracapacitors.
Do you have a valid link ?
Maybe you meant this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/business/yourmoney/11stream.html?scp=4&sq=new%20batteries&st=cse
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 12, 2009, 04:51:27 PM
Your link had nothing to do with batteries or ultracapacitors.
Do you have a valid link ?
Maybe you meant this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/business/yourmoney/11stream.html?scp=4&sq=new%20batteries&st=cse
omg ahahahhaa, what a blunder, lol. Thats what I get for having 10,000 tabs.
The article you mentioned is not the right one either,
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22280/
thats the right one
Quote from: Coleston on March 12, 2009, 08:41:02 AM
From what I saw this is an insanely important step, eh? 100 watts is promising, but is that the low speed output?
EVERYTHING REMAINS THE SAME - JUST SMALLER AIR GAP AND EMPLOYING REAL E CORES RATHER THAN STACKED I's.
Quote
5x jump from 20 watts I would think you would need to increase the RPM's and decrease the airgap.
With the 3 magnets configuration instead of the 1 magnet configuration how much gain is that going to provide?
ASK ME AGAIN AFTER WE DO IT!
Quote
Whats the limiting factor in coil o/p power? Heat?
THE COILS ONLY GET HOT IF YOU MAKE THEM WRONG - AND WHO CARES NOW THAT WE CAN IMMERSE THEM IN MINERAL OIL. 8)
Quote
I was doing some sums with some buds last night, and we figured we could fit 6 connected 12" diameter rotors in the space where the driveshaft used to be, I think we could just squeeze 8 coils in per side, so 8 x 2 x 6 = 96 coils,
96 coils at 100 watts = 9600 watts so almost 10Kw output. If input lowering remains true then who knows how low the input energy would need to be.
DON'T FORGET IF YOU INCREASE THE MAGNET STRENGTH YOU INCREASE THE OUTPUT - DOUBLING THE MAGNET STRENGTH DOUBLES THE OUTPUT.
Quote
And furthermore, using the power harvesting coils as non - continuous duty cycle may allow us to harvest huge amounts more. IE overrev the hell out of the motor, dump a massive coil melting amount of power into the wheels, accelerate up to speed then coast while the engine cools down, then 13 HP is more than enough to maintain 100KPH+ on flat ground, until you need to accel or climb a hill in which case you over rev the motor again and repeat the process.
OR ROTATE COILS IN AND OUT OF USAGE...
Quote
Also, if you get a free second do you think you could fire me off the dimensions of the coils and magnets you are using, I want to try some ideas in Sketch Up. Cheers
THIS WEEKEND I'LL DO IT.
T
Quote from: Coleston on March 12, 2009, 08:41:02 AM
From what I saw this is an insanely important step, eh?
YOU FORGOT TO TELL PEOPLE ABOUT THE FLUX HITTING THE ROTOR "THING"!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 12, 2009, 10:50:35 PM
EVERYTHING REMAINS THE SAME - JUST SMALLER AIR GAP AND EMPLOYING REAL E CORES RATHER THAN STACKED I's.
ASK ME AGAIN AFTER WE DO IT!
THE COILS ONLY GET HOT IF YOU MAKE THEM WRONG - AND WHO CARES NOW THAT WE CAN IMMERSE THEM IN MINERAL OIL. 8)
DON'T FORGET IF YOU INCREASE THE MAGNET STRENGTH YOU INCREASE THE OUTPUT - DOUBLING THE MAGNET STRENGTH DOUBLES THE OUTPUT.
OR ROTATE COILS IN AND OUT OF USAGE...
THIS WEEKEND I'LL DO IT.
T
Ok, cool. I will definitely ask again, I'm dying to know.
If the coils don't get hot / mineral oil bath, than whats the limiting factor? Why would we not be able to get 500watts out of each coil? If we could do that it'd be freaking brilliant. Just up the RPM's of the whole system = more power. We could get 50 hp's out of the car motor design. WOOOOO
In regards to magnet, your already using N52 grade magnets, lol, I had thought N45 grade was the highest. How do you propose to double the strength of the strongest magnets I've ever seen?
Also in regards to magnets, what handling advice do you have for actually putting the magnets into the holes in the rotor so near eachother without losing any fingers?
And in terms of the clunk thing, omg peoples of this forum. Just wait till you hear it. When the HC coils get loaded down not only does the rotor NOT immediately speed plateau, it continues to accelerate albiet more slowly, AND theres a crazy noise. The whole thing goes THUNK as the coils start taking power right from the magnets without significant back EMF.
If you could measure the nice machine made coils that you are getting set up from the manufacturer, that would be the best. Once I get the dims I can figure out what size the rotors need to be.
Thanks Thane
-Cole
another interesting development: better batteries
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-03/uom-uom_1031109.php
Spintronics ha
Dear All,
Please find enclosed photo-data for the new E CORE orientation that I tested today.
Compared to the previous "I" - Modified - E Cores we have saved close to 100 input wattsand our chances for success have increased 100%.
This is due to reducing eddy current lossed in the core. I am sorry I didn't do this earlier - but better late than never. ;)
So now we should be at "system" over-unity with 4 HC coils producing only 26 watts/coil which I have already been able to produce - in fact I expect close to 50 or more watts/coil due to more efficient flux transfer. 8)
I will also be employing 4 of the High Torque HV coils as insurance.
Again, sorry for the delay.
Cheers
Thane
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 15, 2009, 06:55:26 PM
Dear All,
Please find enclosed photo-data for the new E CORE orientation that I tested today.
Compared to the previous "I" - Modified - E Cores we have saved close to 100 input wattsand our chances for success have increased 100%.
This is due to reducing eddy current lossed in the core. I am sorry I didn't do this earlier - but better late than never. ;)
So now we should be at "system" over-unity with 4 HC coils producing only 26 watts/coil which I have already been able to produce - in fact I expect close to 50 or more watts/coil due to more efficient flux transfer. 8)
I will also be employing 4 of the High Torque HV coils as insurance.
Again, sorry for the delay.
Cheers
Thane
Kudo's for showing us your latest coil improvements. I can't wait to see your next YouTube demonstration. You are certainly correct in identifying more efficent flux transfer as a means of getting more power. Even 1mm can make a huge difference. Not sure what kind of a rotor gap you are running now, but there are some tricks you can use, like swapping your rotor with a sanding disk to equalize the core faces, or using a mixture of ferrite powder and molten beeswax to build up the face of a shy core. Of course, for tighter tolerances, your test rig frame will also need to be as rigid as possible, and the rotor balanced for minimum wobble.
As for use of the word "overunity", fine in this forum, but the bigger your claims get, the more vicious your critics will become, even here. The second law of thermodynamics is heavily defended in most university physics departments. To win the hearts of academics, openness, and transparency are paramount. Make the best measurements you can, and use the best lab grade meters you can reasonably get. (Physicists aren't impressed by power measurements from department store grade DVM's, especially, when taken through a rat's nest of alligator clips). Your meters are better quality industrial grade, but research lab grade (like Clarke-Hess) would be better still. Putting a decent torque sensor on the rotor shaft, would also reinforce your measurement data, and set some constraints, to where power is going. Anyway, nuff said. Keep up the great work!
Quote from: derricka on March 15, 2009, 11:54:25 PM
Not sure what kind of a rotor gap you are running now, but there are some tricks you can use, like swapping your rotor with a sanding disk to equalize the core faces, or using a mixture of ferrite powder and molten beeswax to build up the face of a shy core.
Sanding or grinding the core faces flush may seem like a good idea, but the burring on the edges of each plate on the cores will defeat the purpose of using laminations in the first place. The burring provides an electrical path between plates and will increase eddy currents.
When a lamination plate is cut, shaped or drilled, care needs to be taken to remove all edge burrs, and a small amount of laquer needs to be applied to any freshly cut or exposed surfaces, and allowed to dry.
It would be better if all plates are neatly aligned at the face ends to start with, and the integrity of the insulation coating of each lamination plate is maintained.
You can tell a cheap power transformer just by looking at the way any mount bracket points are created. If a transformer has welded bracket mounts anywhere on the core laminations, instead of insulated stem screw mounts, then its a cheap noisy (lot's of hum) heap of shi.......
@Thane, you're in need of I_Ron's precision metal working skills.! ;D
Beeswax?. Wouldn't it melt as the cores eventually build up heat under continuous load.?
Cheers
Quote from: derricka on March 15, 2009, 11:54:25 PM
..............
To win the hearts of academics, openness, and transparency are paramount. Make the best measurements you can, and use the best lab grade meters you can reasonably get. (Physicists aren't impressed by power measurements from department store grade DVM's, especially, when taken through a rat's nest of alligator clips). Your meters are better quality industrial grade, but research lab grade (like Clarke-Hess) would be better still.
.....................
Eventually you are going to need something like this computer interfaced NIST traceable Single Phase Reference Standard to measure the input and output power.
http://www.radianresearch.com/products/ref-stand/RD-23.html
It looks like Radian Research has a several different models of reference standards that maybe able to do the measurements.
or option number 2
getting your setup to run itself without any batteries or power utility line hookup would be another possibility. Even after "self running" you are still going to need some sort of better power measurement equipment to see exactly how much more power out verses power in you are achieving.
Quote from: hoptoad on March 16, 2009, 02:27:20 AM
Sanding or grinding the core faces flush may seem like a good idea, but the burring on the edges of each plate on the cores will defeat the purpose of using laminations in the first place. The burring provides an electrical path between plates and will increase eddy currents.
When a lamination plate is cut, shaped or drilled, care needs to be taken to remove all edge burrs, and a small amount of laquer needs to be applied to any freshly cut or exposed surfaces, and allowed to dry.
YES THOSE HAND CUT LAMINATIONS ARE NOT IDEAL YET - BUT ARE A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
Quote
@Thane, you're in need of I_Ron's precision metal working skills.! ;D
Cheers
SADLY I THINK I_RON PACKED UP HIS MILL AND LEFT THE BUILDING. :'(
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 16, 2009, 07:25:17 AM
SADLY I THINK I_RON PACKED UP HIS MILL AND LEFT THE BUILDING. :'(
T
I often thought that the banter that I_RON gave Thane achieved a good balance. Perhaps I_RON is just engrossed in preforming some measurements with his setup for supportive data. I would certainly miss his input if he has left the building.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on March 16, 2009, 11:58:45 AM
I often thought that the banter that I_RON gave Thane achieved a good balance. Perhaps I_RON is just engrossed in preforming some measurements with his setup for supportive data. I would certainly miss his input if he has left the building.
Well I_ron is in a holding pattern at the moment. Still no sign of an E core or cheque for the # 2
rotor, still no sign of # 1 rotor coming back for it's upgrade? # 1 or 2 should be here to do the
shootout on the unslotted # 3 rotor?
I was patiently waiting.... maybe today?
me_ron, still in the building, and spring break has happend, so the grandson to entertain this week!
Quote from: i_ron on March 16, 2009, 12:50:15 PM
Well I_ron is in a holding pattern at the moment. Still no sign of an E core or cheque for the # 2
rotor, still no sign of # 1 rotor coming back for it's upgrade? # 1 or two should be here to do the
shootout on the unslotted # 3 rotor?
I was patiently waiting.... maybe today?
me_ron, still in the building, and spring break has happend, so the grandson to entertain this week!
I certainly hope you guys can work out something. It looks like Thane has benefited from your excellent machining work. At least it has not blown apart in Thanes face yet.. It looks like you could benefit from materials and techniques Thane is developing. Hope some arrangement can be made that keeps everyone happy. This project is only one of a very few limited projects that shows some promise so I hope it continues. I am waiting for Thane to get close enough that I can order some already wound cores that I can start testing on a Suncat electric scooter. The scooter gets around 15 miles on a charge using two giant deep cycle Optima batteries. If I can get that distance up to 30 miles on a charge using the same batteries I would consider that an major improvement even if it is not OU.
Quote from: i_ron on March 16, 2009, 12:50:15 PM
Well I_ron is in a holding pattern at the moment. Still no sign of an E core or cheque for the # 2
rotor, still no sign of # 1 rotor coming back for it's upgrade? # 1 or 2 should be here to do the
shootout on the unslotted # 3 rotor?
I was patiently waiting.... maybe today?
me_ron, still in the building, and spring break has happend, so the grandson to entertain this week!
GOOD JOB! :P
TEACH THE GRANDSON HOW TO HOLD HIS BREATH UNTIL HE GETS WHAT HE WANTS LIKE GRAMPA'S PATTERN. :(
HOLDING PATTERN UPDATE:
- ASKED CALIFORNIA CO. TO PAY YOU
- ORDERED SOME NEW ROTORS FROM THE UNIVERSITY - COULD TAKE 1 MONTH.
- NOT SENDING E CORE UNTIL ALL SORTED OUT TO AVOID FURTHER BALONEY.
STORYTELLER T
PS
NEW DATA:NO HV COIL: OUTPUT = 1.6 VOLTS or 0.256 WATTS - SYSTEM REACTION =
DECELERATIONWITH HV COIL: OUTPUT = 11.52 VOLTS or 13.3 WATTS - STSTEM REACTION =
ACCELERATION MOTOR INPUT REDUCTION = 13%
GENERATOR OUTPUT INCREASE = 5084%TIME DELAY = 2 SEC.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 16, 2009, 07:25:17 AM
SADLY I THINK I_RON PACKED UP HIS MILL AND LEFT THE BUILDING. :'(
T
Yep, I saw him leaving the building with some dude named Elvis...
-M
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 16, 2009, 10:01:20 PM
STORYTELLER T
4373
Quote
At least tell us the specs on the new material... I remember you saying you were going to send me some... that it was in a box all ready to ship....Ron
YES IT IS STILL IN THE BOX WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME YOU WANT IT?
4378
1) I want #1 rotor back for an upgrade.
2) I want $100 for the "borrowed" #2 rotor
3) I want an "E" core as promised
4384
NOW IF I CAN ONLY FIGURE OUT A WAY TO TELL YOU THAT I AM PUTTING YOUR STEEL IN MY BOX ALONG WITH SOME CASH SO YOU CAN MOUNT IT WHEN IT COMES TO YOU
4387
Mr T, you are a prince, (Edit: pronounced prick) I shall check the mail every day to see if they have come yet!
What goes around comes around but there was no mention of rotor #1being included?
4538
- ASKED CALIFORNIA CO. TO PAY YOU
- NOT SENDING E CORE UNTIL ALL SORTED OUT TO AVOID FURTHER BALONEY.
- ------------------------------------------------
DMBoss in post 46, on page 4, raised some serious questions that have never been answered. It was my intention to adhere, as much as possible, to his protocol in testing. I can see that you are afraid to send me any core material because of this. “To avoid further baloneyâ€, says it all.
Just to take my second rotor without payment is theft.
To not honor my request to return the first rotor, which you did pay for, for a safety upgrade, is foolhardy.
I think (hope) most people can see what is going on here.
Ron
PS: In private correspondence, 1- 17- 09...
I will send you an E coil like the one in the video and all you have to do is mount it.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
Quote from: i_ron on March 17, 2009, 11:45:37 AM
DMBoss in post 46, on page 4, raised some serious questions that have never been answered. It was my intention to adhere, as much as possible, to his protocol in testing. I can see that you are afraid to send me any core material because of this. “To avoid further baloneyâ€, says it all.
What the squabble is about. This was basically a private matter but as MR T has brought it to your attention I should explain…
Mr T wanted me to build him a rotor similar to this 15 inch one, only 12 inches in diameter. I refused on the grounds that it was impossible as the inner row of magnets is down at the connecting bolt level and would over lap each other, plus I could not cut out the slots, as California had done such a nice job on. I asked several times that he should draw it out, no response, except to say that the inner magnets would only be half an inch. Thereupon I pointed out that the core itself would still overlap more than one magnet at a time and sent him a sketch to show this.
This design is just not practical. The velocity of the inner row of magnets is miles away from the outer, the inner magnet is over the core many degrees before the outer magnet is anywhere near it’s magnet. My suggestion was to true up and balance these gift rotors and use a larger motor on them.
But by refusing to make something in which I have no faith in and would duplicate what he had on hand…it would seem I have been shown the door.
Ron
You 2 were a great team, but being a follower from day 1 I can't say I didn't see this coming. It seems several other valuable contributors have 'left'. With the random deletion and editing of posts it seems that Thane has changed since his initial idealistic posts about changing the world. Like I say about Obama "If this is change I don't want it!"
Quote from: i_ron on March 17, 2009, 11:45:37 AM
DMBoss in post 46, on page 4, raised some serious questions that have never been answered.
For anyone interested, post 46 now appears on page 5.
DMBoss isn't alone in raising some serious unanswered questions.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on March 17, 2009, 06:54:16 PM
For anyone interested, post 46 now appears on page 5.
DMBoss isn't alone in raising some serious unanswered questions.
Cheers
Hi HT,
The page four thing is probably a mistake on my part! Thank you for the correction.
No, I wasn't ignoring your contribution, it was just that DMBoss said it so eloquently and all in
one post, and as a friend had recently brought this to my attention, it was fresh in my mind.
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 17, 2009, 07:47:49 PM
No, I wasn't ignoring your contribution, it was just that DMBoss said it so eloquently and all in
one post, ...............
Ron
Yep, it was rather eloquent. LOL
Cheers and KneeDeep
I'LL LEAVE THE LAST WORD TO OUR FORMER PRIME MINISTER...
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 17, 2009, 08:04:33 PM
I'LL LEAVE THE LAST WORD TO OUR FORMER PRIME MINISTER...
T
Then there's this fascinating quote from the former Prime Minister and ontological theorist,
"Mr. Speaker, I talked with President Clinton and earlier today I talked with the Prime Minister of Great Britain. The goal that we all have is to make sure that Saddam Hussein respects the resolutions of the UN and stops the production of armaments like biological weapons and so on that are extremely dangerous. We have
proof that they were producing and are still producing them and we want to terminate this production. It is extremely dangerous for countries around the world if we do not stop Saddam Hussein with this production." .... "As everybody knows, there are a lot of people who are trying to persuade Saddam Hussein to change his position. In order to have him change his position we have to show with determination that if he does not change his position we will be there to make sure that he stops the production of this absolutely unacceptable armament
he is building at this time." (Source: Hansard,�February 9, 1998)
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 17, 2009, 09:34:27 PM
Then there's this fascinating quote from the former Prime Minister and ontological theorist,
"Mr. Speaker, I talked with President Clinton and earlier today I talked with the Prime Minister of Great Britain. The goal that we all have is to make sure that Saddam Hussein respects the resolutions of the UN and stops the production of armaments like biological weapons and so on that are extremely dangerous. We have proof that they were producing and are still producing them and we want to terminate this production. It is extremely dangerous for countries around the world if we do not stop Saddam Hussein with this production." .... "As everybody knows, there are a lot of people who are trying to persuade Saddam Hussein to change his position. In order to have him change his position we have to show with determination that if he does not change his position we will be there to make sure that he stops the production of this absolutely unacceptable armament he is building at this time." (Source: Hansard,�February 9, 1998)
Ron
So unfortunate for all the innocent people who've needlessly suffered because of that particular "proof".
Cheers
"This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh)
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists.
You have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power.
There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including:
Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!"
DMBoss
"As has been stated by others, but in another way:
1. you take a motor(x) that runs at 'x' watts
2. put the coils(y) next to it, motor runs at 'x+y' watts
3. activate(z) the coils, motor runs at 'x+y-z' watts and produces 'w' watts. Net = (x+y-z) + w
To be OU #3 needs to outperform #1
Thanks!"
Ron
??? "You have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power". ???
DMBoss
"Ryobi, running with no load on line voltage, is not that efficient.
On 117 volts it uses .92 amps, wow, 107 watts!"
Ron
"Oh, btw, yes you are correct, it should be 96 watts (or so) I put that in like that to see if anyone
was paying attention.... do you believe that? lol"
Ron
"What the squabble is about. This was basically a private matter"….
Ron
"PS:
Any information received will be treated as confidential and held as if an NDA had been signed. RHP"
Ron
"it would seem I have been shown the door"
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 18, 2009, 06:52:48 AM
"This means 100 times less drag torque felt by the drive motor! (therefore the common shaft speeds up when coils are shorted, duhhhh)
Now I will also say, that heavily loading certain geometry of generator, can produce some gain. I have several examples on the bench which do. But they are proprietary and I don't care to share this with lists.
You have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power.
There could be a small amount of gain in his sloppy and amateurish system
Pick or know the optimal final speed of the system. Use only this shaft speed for all measurements.
Measure all parameters in a generator "no load" condition including:
Then include the mag fields and measure the input drag power (torque times angular velocity).
overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!"
DMBoss
"As has been stated by others, but in another way:
1. you take a motor(x) that runs at 'x' watts
2. put the coils(y) next to it, motor runs at 'x+y' watts
3. activate(z) the coils, motor runs at 'x+y-z' watts and produces 'w' watts. Net = (x+y-z) + w
To be OU #3 needs to outperform #1
Thanks!"
Ron
??? "You have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power". ???
DMBoss
"Ryobi, running with no load on line voltage, is not that efficient.
On 117 volts it uses .92 amps, wow, 107 watts!"
Ron
"Oh, btw, yes you are correct, it should be 96 watts (or so) I put that in like that to see if anyone
was paying attention.... do you believe that? lol"
Ron
I think if we just work this through, a step at a time... like the economy... everything will be fineRon
Quote from: i_ron on March 18, 2009, 11:11:02 AM
I think if we just work this through, a step at a time... like the economy... everything will be fine
Ron
An Olive branch...... with thorns...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 18, 2009, 08:01:14 AM
"What the squabble is about. This was basically a private matter"….
Ron
"PS:
Any information received will be treated as confidential and held as if an NDA had been signed. RHP"
Ron
"it would seem I have been shown the door"
Ron
Yes, I should not have posted the Ca rotor pic without your permission but it was germane to the
implication you posed and is not an NDA disclosure. It does not reveal any "secret" workings of
your invention. You repeatedly stress full disclosure so I had felt that it fitted those guidelines.
"You can always tell the statue of a leader by the quality of the people he attracts around him.
Whereas a leader who collects only sycophants and yes men is surely of low order."
A Ron saying
Quote from: i_ron on March 18, 2009, 11:39:36 AM
You can always tell the statue of a leader by the quality of the people he attracts around him.
Whereas a leader who collects only sycophants and yes men is surely of low order.
A Ron saying
Yes. You're absolutely right. Yes. Absolutely! Yes.
:P
P.S. Thane, stop being mean to Ron!
P.P.S. Ron, stop being mean to Thane!
Can't we all just get along?!? :'( For the children's sake. Actually I am serious, you two were a good team, and although I am skeptical I read everyday, not for the soap opera, or humor, but because Thane's original motivation and mission statements I completely agreed with and saw something you don't see often, humanity. It is unfortunate that the canadians will prove once again there are no heros, idols, or role models. (I was a huge Ben Johnson fan, and that was the last sports figure I ever admired, and have found continually since there are no role models for the greater good, but there sure are a large group of people I don't ever want to be associated with, and this groups only gets bigger!)
Okay guys,
Is there still a phone system in Canada? If so, how about one of you being man enough to call and hash this out, or do you want to leave this impression?
Regards, Larry
Looks like someone turned off the HV coil in this thread...hehe get it??? GET IT?? Cause HV coil gives happy faces....
I'm such a loser.
.
"DMBoss isn't alone in raising some serious unanswered questions.
Yep, it was rather eloquent. LOL"
Cheers and KneeDeep
"You have to measure True power at the shaft input via torque sensing and speed, against True output power".
"overunity may not come in the form you wish it to!"
DMBoss
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/sensotec/apnotes.asp?art=13
"What is torque?
It's a measure of the forces that cause an object to rotate. Reaction torque is the force acting on the object that's not free to rotate. An example is a screwdriver applying torque to a rusted screw.
With rotational torque, the object is free to rotate. Examples include industrial motor drives and gear reducers.
Torque and RPM determine horsepower, and horsepower determines system efficiencies".
Honeywell Scientific
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 18, 2009, 10:10:01 PM
"What is torque?
It's a measure of the forces that cause an object to rotate. Reaction torque is the force acting on the object that's not free to rotate. An example is a screwdriver applying torque to a rusted screw.
With rotational torque, the object is free to rotate. Examples include industrial motor drives and gear reducers.
Torque and RPM determine horsepower, and horsepower determines system efficiencies".
Honeywell Scientific
Yes, we are on the same page.
The most foolproof method is, as they say, done with torque sensors. This is not to say it can't be
done using watts. But accurate measurement in AC is somewhat problematic with leading lagging
phase angles (power factor) and such. The most accurate then is where both sides of the equation
are preformed in DC.
So it is output (counting output heat...but input heat stays on the input side) over input = efficiency, agreed?
That is for overall efficiencies... but nothing says you can't break the system down further and talk
about different coil efficiencies... as long as you put in the disclaimer that this is not system
efficiencies...only individual part efficiencies. Then when doing comparison efficiencies one must
stick with comparing apples to apples and not apples to fig trees, lol
Ron
holy smokes, that new rotor is very different, can't wait to see the numbers
@ LI_RON,
IN THE FOLLOWING VIDEO THERE ARE ONLY 2 POSSIBLE OUTCOMES:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT2qi9ITcls&feature=channel_page
1)
HC COIL ONLY:
EFFICIENCY = 0/0
BECAUSE SPEED = 0
2)
HC COIL & HV COIL
EFFICIENCY NOT 0
BECAUSE SPEED > 0
HOW MUCH POWER IS IN THE DRIVE SHAFT IN SCENARIO 1? - ANSWER ZERO
AT 85 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR THE DRIVE SHAFT POWER = ZERO
HOW MUCH POWER IS IN THE DRIVE SHAFT IN SCENARIO 2? - ANSWER NOT ZERO
AT 85 VOLTS TO THE MOTOR THE MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT POWER = ZERO
WHERE DOES THE ADDITIONAL TORQUE/POWER COME FROM TO DRIVE 21 WATTS (OR MORE) OF OUTPUT LOAD
- WHEN AT 85 VOLTS THE MOTOR CANNOT SUPPLY EVEN 1 WATT?
"HEAVILY LOADED COILS?" DMBOSS
(sorry but he only thing missing from DMBOSS is U if you still believe a shorted HV coil represents core loss reduction causing motor acceleration when 1 HV coil & 1 E coil - when properly balanced can accelerate the motor @ 95 watts / 4 coil fingers and a 10 lb rotor? ???)
HV COILS HAVE VIRTUALLY NO CURRENT - BUT DO HAVE HIGH VOLTAGE SPIKES.
HIGH CURRENT = HEAVY LOAD
SORRY BUT YOU ARE BUYING BAD INFO FROM THE SALESMAN SHOWN BELOW AND TRYING TO SELL IT HERE AND QUESTIONING MY INTEGRITY IN THE PROCESS - NOT THAT I MIND BUT THE (younger and perhaps less educated) READERS OF THIS THREAD SHOULD NOT BE LED ASTRAY IN THE PROCESS!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 19, 2009, 05:55:02 PM
@ LI_RON,
IN THE FOLLOWING VIDEO THERE ARE ONLY 2 POSSIBLE OUTCOMES:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT2qi9ITcls&feature=channel_page
T
I'm sorry Mr T, my mistake... we are not on the same page. We seem to differ in our
measurement protocol. When my E core and number one rotor come back I will do
some measurements, until then, cheers
Ron
Still running at 60Hz? Get that thing on 120Hz already ;). Also I wouldn't worry about the motor going beyond its rated speed as it can handle it. Don't quote me on that if it explodes.
Quote from: broli on March 19, 2009, 07:40:32 PM
Still running at 60Hz? Get that thing on 120Hz already ;). Also I wouldn't worry about the motor going beyond its rated speed as it can handle it. Don't quote me on that if it explodes.
I KNOW! 8) GOTOLUC SAID HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO MAKE ME A FREQUENCY DOUBLER IF TIME PERMITS AND THEN WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE SOME REALLY COOL RESULTS.
CHEERS
T
Perhaps this is a little off topic, apologies in advance, but it relates to efficiency.
In an article written by Nikola Tesla entitled "The problem of increasing human energy", first published in June 1900 by Century Illustrated Magazine, on pages 196 and 197, there are a few paragraphs devoted to the value (or not) of iron in electrical current generation and transmission.
The following quote is word for word, but the bold highlighting is my edit.
Quote:
"Unless we should make a radical departure in the character of the electric currents employed, iron will be indispensable.Yet the advantages it offers are only apparent. So long as we use feeble magnetic forces it is by far superior to any other material; but if we find ways of producing great magnetic forces, then better results will be attainable without it.
In fact I have already produced electric transformers in which no iron is employed, and which are capable of performing ten times as much work per pound of weight as those with iron. This result is attained by using electric currents of a very high rate of vibration, produced in a novel way, instead of the ordinary currents now employed in the industries."
End Quote:
With rare earth supermagnets such as NIB's now becoming cheap and commonly available, Teslas comments above, should be given greater attention when contemplating the design of more efficient motors and generators.
Ironically, Neodymium Iron-Boron magnets (NIB's) do contain some iron. But Tesla wasn't commenting about the material characteristics of the source of a strong magnetic field, he was referring to the materials of the inductive coils/cores and housing assembly used for generating electric current from the strong magnetic field and also transmitting it to a load.
Particular attention should be given to Tesla's comment on the use of electric currents with a high rate of vibration (frequency) for use with his ironless transformer.
Regarding motors, the most efficient motor /generator developed for the "civilian" world thus far was developed by the CSIRO and ultimately produced in 1996-7 for use in the Australian Solar Car Challenge entry vehicle called the "Aurora".
Note the ironless specs of the motor in the pdf link below.
http://www.totallyamped.net/adams/AuroraSolarCarMotor1997.pdf
Cheers ... KneeDeep.... and who among us, would argue with Tesla?
Quote from: hoptoad on March 20, 2009, 06:22:15 AM
Cheers ... KneeDeep.... and who among us, would argue with Tesla?
$$$ J.P MORGAN $$$T
Quote from: i_ron on March 19, 2009, 07:21:05 PM
I'm sorry Mr T, my mistake... we are not on the same page. We seem to differ in our
measurement protocol. When my E core and number one rotor come back I will do
some measurements, until then, cheers
Ron
INDEED DENY_Ron,
YOUR PAGE SADDLY NOW SAYS,
"SEEING IS BELIEVING" :-\
OR "THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING"
MY PAGE SAYS,
"BELIEVING IS SEEING" 8)
BUT FIRST WE HAVE TO BE
WILLING TO TRY AND MAKE THE PUDDING.
AND WILLING TO FAIL IF NEED BE.
CAUSE...
"YOU CAN'T GET THE PROOF IF YOU WON'T MAKE THE PUDDING".A bad THANE QUOTE.
“Don't be afraid to go out on a limb. It's where all the fruit is.†Shirley MacLaine
T
P.S.
ARE YOU GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN YOUR NEGATIVITY AND LIE (by omission) AND "HOLD" BACK YOUR IMPORTANT ASSISTANCE AFTER I HAVE SHOWN THAT I CAN NOW ACCELERATE A 10 LB ROTOR WITH 70 LB STRENGTH MAGNETS (AGAINST 2 CORES) UP TO 3358 RPM WITH 20 VOLTS LESS & LESS POWER THAN
YOUR OWN 85 VOLT BASELINE ???
hoptoad,
thank you for this motor-info. Very interesting spec.
Since you have brought up this info here my question would be : is this motor - according to your knowledge - commercially available or was it just a prototype which they do not sell on a commercial basis.
Any additional links you have ?
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: hoptoad on March 20, 2009, 06:22:15 AM
Perhaps this is a little off topic, apologies in advance, but it relates to efficiency.
In an article written by Nikola Tesla entitled "The problem of increasing human energy", first published in June 1900 by Century Illustrated Magazine, on pages 196 and 197, there are a few paragraphs devoted to the value (or not) of iron in electrical current generation and transmission.
The following quote is word for word, but the bold highlighting is my edit.
Quote:
"Unless we should make a radical departure in the character of the electric currents employed, iron will be indispensable.Yet the advantages it offers are only apparent. So long as we use feeble magnetic forces it is by far superior to any other material; but if we find ways of producing great magnetic forces, then better results will be attainable without it.
In fact I have already produced electric transformers in which no iron is employed, and which are capable of performing ten times as much work per pound of weight as those with iron. This result is attained by using electric currents of a very high rate of vibration, produced in a novel way, instead of the ordinary currents now employed in the industries."
End Quote:
(snip)
Cheers ... KneeDeep.... and who among us, would argue with Tesla?
While doing magnetometer experiments, Tesla discovered huge magnetic waves, extending out far from thunderstorms. In later experiments, he found that these huge magnetic waves could be tapped into, at certain specific high frequencies. He then later, used those frequencies, to tap into these huge magnetic waves, using vacuum tubes, and was able with the proper circuit potential, to give demonstrations of "power from nowhere".
Skeptical? Check out "marco's dancing magnets" on yahoo video. And when you do, remember that it is set for VLF (very low frequency) Imagine the tap, in the the VHF magnetic waves.
Cheers,
Bruce
Quote from: hoptoad on March 20, 2009, 06:22:15 AM
"Unless we should make a radical departure in the character of the electric currents employed, iron will be indispensable.Yet the advantages it offers are only apparent. So long as we use feeble magnetic forces it is by far superior to any other material; but if we find ways of producing great magnetic forces, then better results will be attainable without it.
Agreed. Thus my previous recommendation Thane at least consider a dual rotor, axial flux design. The result is a small reduction in flux but a huge reduction in core/rotor drag = greater efficiency.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 18, 2009, 09:20:56 PM
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4047.0;attach=31811;image
Wait a minute, should not have a magnetic connection between the magnets and the motor shaft to create the effect of regenerative acceleration?
@ Bruce
RE Telsa Quote first published in June 1900 by Century Illustrated Magazine
In fact I have already produced electric transformers in which no iron is employed, and which are capable of performing ten times as much work per pound of weight as those with iron. This result is attained by using electric currents of a very high rate of vibration, produced in a novel way, instead of the ordinary currents now employed in the industries."
Tesla's comment was really an observation, that less inductance is required in a transformer at higher frequencies, to handle a given level of power, than at lower frequencies. High frequencies were extremely difficult to work with in Tesla's day. With today's high power, high frequency semiconductors, such tasks are now commonplace. Modern PC's have switching power supplies, operating at high frequencies, so the transformer itself, can be tiny and lightweight. Tesla's vision fullfilled.
Quote from: Kator01 on March 20, 2009, 09:51:44 AM
hoptoad,
thank you for this motor-info. Very interesting spec.
Since you have brought up this info here my question would be : is this motor - according to your knowledge - commercially available or was it just a prototype which they do not sell on a commercial basis.
Any additional links you have ?
Regards
Kator01
Unfortunately Kator01 I've been unable to find any more relevant information about this particular motor. I don't know whether this has been produced commercially or not. Every search I've done so far leads to a dead end.
Cheers
LIFE & INVENTING 101
LESSON #1
SOMETIMES YOU CAN REACH TOO FAR!
LESSON #2
AND WHEN YOU FIND YOURSELF OVER-EXTENDED AND YOU'RE STUCK IN A SITUATION THAT YOU CAN'T GET OUT OF,
THERE IS ONE THING YOU SHOULD ALWAYS REMEMBER.......
IRONICALLY - NOT EVERYONE WHO SHOWS UP......
IS THERE TO HELP YOU!!!!
DON'T GET SCREWED!!!
T
T
some would call that opportunity KNOCKING [
[very funny and true!!]
Chet
Omg thane that is awesome!
been working alot and doing other stuff, but i have my variac and tach now i just need to secure the motor and coils in place. i kinda procrastinate lol.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 20, 2009, 08:03:06 PM
LESSON #2
AND WHEN YOU FIND YOURSELF OVER-EXTENDED AND YOU'RE STUCK IN A SITUATION THAT YOU CAN'T GET OUT OF,
THERE IS ONE THING YOU SHOULD ALWAYS REMEMBER.......
IRONICALLY - NOT EVERYONE WHO SHOWS UP......
IS THERE TO HELP YOU!!!!
DON'T GET SCREWED!!!
T
So thane you really honestly believe that Ron machined the rotors to "not help" you? Plus I doubt that you are the one getting 'screwed' since nothing being taken away from you, seems more the other way around. But whats is up with the rotors is between Ron and you. Hope you can come to a solution and agree to disagree. Anyway I have know Ron for years now and for what my word is worth to you, I can assure you that he is a good man and is very helpful towards others. That is all there is to it, and if you amuse yourself being the big victim here then you are mistaken. I hope you can get to some agreement with Ron and perhaps maybe an apology would be nice but thatzz up to you and your pride.
Regards,
Steven
Quote from: Nali2001 on March 20, 2009, 10:12:13 PM
and perhaps maybe an apology would be nice
Regards,
Steven
YES AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE!
T
Once again, I'm pulling for you Thane. Not knowing what is going on behind the scenes and just from reading the posts here Thane you are coming off as a post #4562. Something has changed and maybe the spring weather will help, but it has been awhile since the original heinstein was around, and I personally miss that one. Cranky pants has been a self-fulfilling prophecy.
QuoteOnce again, I'm pulling for you Thane. Not knowing what is going on behind the scenes
10 - 12 HOURS OF WORK / DAY, SIX DAYS A WEEK FOR 10 YEARS.
EVERY NEW DEVELOPMENT MET WITH AN EQUAL NEW CHALLENGE.
QuoteSomething has changed and maybe the spring weather will help, but it has been awhile since the original heinstein was around, and I personally miss that one.
I DON'T - HEINSTEIN WAS NAIVE.
Quote
Cranky pants has been a self-fulfilling prophecy.
YES I'M THINKING OF CHANGING MY NAME TO:
SWIMMING-UP-STREAM-AND-WANTING-TO-CHANGE-THE-WORLD-WHILE-BEING-LIED-TO-BY- CORRUPT-UNIVERSITY-PROFESSORS-WHO-ONLY-WANT-MONEY-MISREPRESENTED-BY-THE-MEDIA-IP-ATTEMPED-2-B-STOLEN-BY-INVESTORS-AND-PARTNERS-OFFERED-MONEY-TO-LIE-ABOUT-TECHNOLOGY-INVESTMENT-MONEY-WITHELD-AS-FORCED-MANIPULATION-KICKED-OUT-BY-WIFE-LOSING-CHILDREN-BLACKLISTED-BY-FAMILY-OFFERED-SCHEMES-TO-LIE-BY-PhD'S-FOR-MONEY-LIED-TO-BY-EVALUATION-COMPANIES-PAID-TO-HELP-AND-ENDLESSLY-CRITICIZED-BY-PEOPLE-WHO-HAVE-NOT-SEEN-NOR-UNDERSTAND-THE-TECHNOLOGY-pants,OR
SUSAWTCTWWBLTBCUPWOWMMBTMIPA2BSBIAPOMTLATIMWAFMKOBWLCBBFOSTLBPFMLTBECPTHAECBPWHNSNUTTpantsOR
SUS-NUTTpants FOR SHORT.
BUT IT DOESN'T FIT IN THE LITTLE BOX THING. ;)
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 21, 2009, 08:50:03 AM
YES I'M THINKING OF CHANGING MY NAME TO:
SWIMMING-UP-STREAM-AND-WANTING-TO-CHANGE-THE-WORLD-WHILE-BEING-LIED-TO-BY- CORRUPT-UNIVERSITY-PROFESSORS-WHO-ONLY-WANT-MONEY-MISREPRESENTED-BY-THE-MEDIA-IP-ATTEMPED-2-B-STOLEN-BY-INVESTORS-AND-PARTNERS-OFFERED-MONEY-TO-LIE-ABOUT-TECHNOLOGY-INVESTMENT-MONEY-WITHELD-AS-FORCED-MANIPULATION-KICKED-OUT-BY-WIFE-LOSING-CHILDREN-BLACKLISTED-BY-FAMILY-OFFERED-SCHEMES-TO-LIE-BY-PhD'S-FOR-MONEY-LIED-TO-BY-EVALUATION-COMPANIES-PAID-TO-HELP-AND-ENDLESSLY-CRITICIZED-BY-PEOPLE-WHO-HAVE-NOT-SEEN-NOR-UNDERSTAND-THE-TECHNOLOGY-pants,
OR
SUSAWTCTWWBLTBCUPWOWMMBTMIPA2BSBIAPOMTLATIMWAFMKOBWLCBBFOSTLBPFMLTBECPTHAECBPWHNSNUTTpants
OR SUS-NUTTpants FOR SHORT.
BUT IT DOESN'T FIT IN THE LITTLE BOX THING. ;)
Outstanding, that is classic T, and should be added to your biography. Thanks for the ;D
Regards, Larry
Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2009, 09:39:15 AM
Outstanding, that is classic T, and should be added to your bibliography. Thanks for the ;D
Regards, Larry
WE SHOULD ALL
DANCE AROUND, AND
SING TOGETHER - ARMS ARE FOR HUGGING!!!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 20, 2009, 10:48:21 PM
YES AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE!
T
Copy of a recent post to Thane...
Dear Thane,
Please return my number two rotor. The loan period is over. Box it up and get it to the courier on Monday, will be fine. Ground will be OK, please notify me when it ships, and fwd the tracking number
Or you may purchase it from me as you had indicated. You said it was worth $500, I offered it to you for $100.
Quote from 5 03 09...
"Also please expect your coil cores & cheque next week.
Cheers
Thane "
However this failed to materialize, my selling price today is $200
Respectfully yours
Ron
-----------------------------------------------------
My cost on the number one rotor was $75 and $50 air freight to Ottawa. I presented a bill to Thane for $125. Thane sent a cheque for $175, which I thought was nice of him. He took this rotor to CA and left it there with Owen after I had asked for it's return for the safety upgrade. This despite the fact that I said he could use it in it's present form... but not to leave it with a third party. This rotor has never come back. This rotor was paid for, yet he wanted Owen to pay me?
The second rotor was loaned to CA for the tests and was to be returned to me at the conclusion of the demo. Thane left instructions for this rotor to be sent to Ottawa. I managed to drag a request out of him to "borrow" this rotor and once he asked me, I gave Owen permission to ship it to Ottawa.
Yet this is the same rotor you see in the plexi box as being all set to be shipped to VA??? hello?
Ron
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 20, 2009, 10:48:21 PM
YES AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE!
T
Up until this moment I had not refused to build a new rotor or work with Thane. What he had asked was a three abreast rotor of the same size. I said it was impossible as the inner row of magnets would come right on top of the bolts and even at half inch magnets would be side by side and the core would over lap more than one magnet at a time. Again I asked him to draw it out... but this was obviously taken as my refusing to think outside the box and refusing to build this rotor for him.
To show me up, he built the three abreast plexi rotor. But if you note he has dropped back to 16 magnets and only 8 on the inner ring!!!! How this will ever work is beyond me. Yet it does confirm my statement that I could not build a rotor of this size with 18 magnets on the inner ring. Was I wrong to say this? Was I wrong to refuse to build this? I think not.Should I be singled out for vilification?
I think not.
Ron
YES AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE - BUT I DON'T NEED ONE...
LOVE MEANS NEVER HAVING TO SAY YOU'RE SORRY. :-*
T
--- On Tue, 1/20/09, Ron wrote:
Good luck with the demo's!
Get it back to me as soon as is convenient.
Yep, I'm not using it so 'could' ship it anywhere you want, (BUT NOT OTTAWA ???) didn't quite follow who "they" were?
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on March 21, 2009, 11:19:22 AM
Should I be singled out for vilification?
I think not.
Ron
WHAT MAKES YOU SO SPECIAL MISTER ???
CRANKYpants VILIFIES ALL!"NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!!"
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 21, 2009, 07:46:31 PM
Yep, I'm not using it so 'could' ship it anywhere you want, (BUT NOT OTTAWA )
Ron
Son, convenient meant WITHIN A FEW DAYS OF THE END OF THE DEMO.
NOT sometime next year ... If the demo ended at five o'clock I didn't expect it shipped by 6:00,
understand now what I was saying? I was saying the following week would be fine to have the
rotor shipped back to me. Owen did ask me if he could keep your rotor "until the end of the week"
as he was, I am sure, aware that it was to be returned to me for it's upgrade.I said sure... but
how long ago was that? (since I started this campaign Owen has been in touch and asked for
an extension... to which I agreed)
The one place my rotor was not to go was Ottawa!!!!! So where did you order it to go???? OTTAWA!!!
engrish not your first language?
OK, for anyone still following this thread I have had a, "more than I asked for offer", for the rotor,
so am feeling hopeful at this moment in time....
Ron
FOR ANYONE FOLLOWING THIS THREAD WHO IS ACTUALLY INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD WITH TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENTS - HERE IS A NEW ROTOR DESIGN THAY I TRIED TODAY.
IT HAS 70 LB STRENGHT MAGNETS ON THE OUTER RING AND 35 LB ON THE INNER RING.
THE OUTER RING EMPLOYS HV COILS AND THE INNER HC COILS.
THE INCREASED LEVER ARM AND MAGNET FORCE OF THE OUTER RING COMPENSATES VERY NICELY FOR THE HC LENZ DRAG - I GOT OVER 50 WATTS W/ ACCELERATION WITH THE UGLY COIL SHOWN IN THE PICTURE.
NEXT STEP IS TO INCREASE THE MAGNET STRENGTH ON THE OUTER RING AND TO MAKE "C" COILS.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: hoptoad on March 21, 2009, 10:19:24 PM
Hmmmmm ...... KneeDeep :(
YES YOU TOO FROGGY!
SOME DAY YOU GONNA WAKE UP IN A WHEEL CHAIR - WHILE THE REST OF US ARE EATING FROGS LEGS WITH HEINZ KETCHUP.
T.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 21, 2009, 10:48:42 PM
YES YOU TOO FROGGY!
SOME DAY YOU GONNA WAKE UP IN A WHEEL CHAIR - WHILE THE REST OF US ARE EATING FROGS LEGS WITH HEINZ KETCHUP.
T.
Croak ...
hey, but that happens with the magnetic connection is assumed that the magnet has to have with the motor shaft?
is no longer necessary?
Well, i have it all set up and i am getting acceleration with just the one coil, just running it at 55V and low rpms, not too keen on magnet death. gotta clean up the garage so i can have a spot to work but Thanks thane! It does what you say! :)
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on March 22, 2009, 04:35:13 PM
Well, i have it all set up and i am getting acceleration with just the one coil, just running it at 55V and low rpms, not too keen on magnet death. gotta clean up the garage so i can have a spot to work but Thanks thane! It does what you say! :)
WE DON'T BELIEVE YOU - GOT ANY PICS FOR PROOF?
CONGRATS
T
Quote from: hoptoad on March 22, 2009, 12:36:59 AM
Croak ...
RIP
May He - Rest in Pieces
HOPTOAD
1940 - 2009
"TOAD-LAND" BIKIE GANG LEADER - EATEN ALIVE BY RIVAL "SNAKE" GANG MEMBERS
Takes 15 "Snakes" and 47 Bullets to Subdue Feisty Toad-Land Leader.
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/index.php?rn=222561&cl=12603625&ch=8103076
T
yeah they'll come soon, i need more coils tho.
Quote from: blisteringanomaly on March 22, 2009, 09:45:08 PM
yeah they'll come soon, i need more coils tho.
If possible, In addition to the pictures, please include any measurement info for the coils you have. Wire type, number of turns, resistance and inductance (if you have a meter for it). This kind of information makes replication much easier.
"If possible, In addition to the pictures, please include any measurement info for the coils you have. Wire type, number of turns, resistance and inductance (if you have a meter for it), ADDRESS, HOME PHONE NUMBER, SISTER'S NAME, PHOTOS AND AGE. This kind of information makes repRODUCTtion much easier.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on March 23, 2009, 08:37:43 PM
"If possible, In addition to the pictures, please include any measurement info for the coils you have. Wire type, number of turns, resistance and inductance (if you have a meter for it), ADDRESS, HOME PHONE NUMBER, SISTER'S NAME, PHOTOS AND AGE. This kind of information makes repRODUCTtion much easier.
T
Now that I see the photo, forget reproduction. Jail is not for me :-[ I would rather wait 17 years, and be known as a "dirty old man" :P
Well, i have it all set up and i am getting acceleration with just the one coil, just running it at 55V and low rpms, not too keen on magnet death. gotta clean up the garage so i can have a spot to work but Thanks thane! It does what you say! Smiley
Greetings.
Way to go!!!
Your garage sounds like mine!!!
Can you send us a picture or two?
What part of the world are you in?
Will be looking for that pict/drawing/whatever
Good Luck
J
@Judges
what material is your plate where the magnets are mounted on made of?
SOMETHING OF INTEREST PERHAPS...?
http://trias-innovations.com/inductionmotor.aspx
T
Is this a hint that it cant be overunity at all?
lol @ kilovars watch out for those.
So the crazy rotor with mismatched numbers of magnets is being sent off to yankee land?
And your new rotor has different coils interacting with different strength magnets? Thats interesting.
I wonder how scaleable it is.
Anyways keep up the good work.
The gentle man that made these devices lives in Toronto. If you can link with him, maybe his input can be helpful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDP-3Tcq58w&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0RUzDtdZR0&feature=channel
DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS A STUDENT TOUR NEXT WEEK I CLEANED UP THE LAB A BIT. ;)
CHEERS
T
AND THE NEW HV COIL SET-UP WITH TOROID BACKING PLATE AS PER THE SHADED POLE MOTOR STATOR CORE.
CHEERS
T
Hello Thane
i suppose that no news, good news ;)
what about your last set up which is very promising
do you intend to post a video
thank's
Laurent
Hi folks, ok i finally decided to try and replicate to some degree what Thane is doing. And I'm happy to say having success, the other experiments i posted in this thread now make a little more sense i think. the other experiments were focused on the setting back of the coil a distance from the magnets and this seemed to provide similar effects, maybe along the lines of what Bill Muller was doing, delayed reaction or whatever the cause using 18 guage wire. The test i just ran was with 24 guage wire at around 2000 rpm with the neo magnets right at the coil face, also i wonder if Calvin Bahlmanns power wheel was using this same effect in its operation because i believe he was using high impedance coils as well and not getting any lentz drag. Also when i use 18 guage wire and try the same thing with the magnet right next to the coil it has lentz drag when coil shorted although it seems as we go higher in wire guage or higher impedance something happens and aids the drive motor so i dont see this as being hysterisis related at this point because the 18 guage wire should do the same thing so this is something different as Thane is showing us. I am now going to wind 30 guage wire onto the core which is a bolt and see what i get.
peace love light :)
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 02, 2009, 07:39:05 PM
Hi folks, ok i finally decided to try and replicate to some degree what Thane is doing. And I'm happy to say having success, the other experiments i posted in this thread now make a little more sense i think. the other experiments were focused on the setting back of the coil a distance from the magnets and this seemed to provide similar effects, maybe along the lines of what Bill Muller was doing, delayed reaction or whatever the cause using 18 guage wire. The test i just ran was with 24 guage wire at around 2000 rpm with the neo magnets right at the coil face, also i wonder if Calvin Bahlmanns power wheel was using this same effect in its operation because i believe he was using high impedance coils as well and not getting any lentz drag. Also when i use 18 guage wire and try the same thing with the magnet right next to the coil it has lentz drag when coil shorted although it seems as we go higher in wire guage or higher impedance something happens and aids the drive motor so i dont see this as being hysterisis related at this point because the 18 guage wire should do the same thing so this is something different as Thane is showing us. I am now going to wind 30 guage wire onto the core which is a bolt and see what i get.
peace love light :)
Keep at it. I think you are going the right direction. The reason I think this was a couple of years ago I ran across a group of people/students on-line that were trying to duplicate a Muller motor/generator. There was a web page with a video and a contact person. When I emailed the contact person about "did they ever get it self running" the response was to watch the video and at a certain time in the video to make note of the comment about throwing the switch for the "loop". Apparently that "loop" comment was throwing the switch from the battery to generator coils at a certain speed at the which point it was not battery powered. The video keep going for several more minutes without any apparent slow down in the rotor. That web site stayed around for a couple more months then disappeared and the email address went unanswered. There was never enough information posted about how to replicate or any real proof offered so it appeared to be a dead-end. Until Thane's work showing some real information came around I figured it was just more smoke and mirrors. Your replication effort does show that Thane's work here has some validity and is an avenue that is worth pursuing. Good work. Been awhile since we heard from Thane. Hope all is well.
Hi folks, Hi hydrocontrol, thanks for the reply and it doesnt surpise me about the dead end in regards to the Muller generator those folks were replicating, seems alot of that has occured in the past lets hope the now and future will be on the side of freedom. I'm winding the other 30 guage coil/core right now but heres a pic of the crude test setup with the 24 guage coil/core and those are 1" dia. neo's 3/4" deep.
peace love light
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 02, 2009, 11:47:45 PM
Hi folks, Hi hydrocontrol, thanks for the reply and it doesnt surpise me about the dead end in regards to the Muller generator those folks were replicating, seems alot of that has occured in the past lets hope the now and future will be on the side of freedom. I'm winding the other 30 guage coil/core right now but heres a pic of the crude test setup with the 24 guage coil/core and those are 1" dia. neo's 3/4" deep.
peace love light
Looking good. I was hoping by now that Thane would have items for sale somewhat like Dr. Stiffler did with his system. It was nice to just spend a little bit of money to jump start research with a basic platform that worked out of the box. If Thane had already made coils and cores that matched his present research I would likely purchase them provided they had a reasonable cost. I could get the rotor made locally and install the magnets myself. The coil/core construction looks a bit trickier. I did get some MOT's off of ebay then Thane switched gears to new cores and a configuration that showed more promise. I figured I would wait to the dust to settle a bit more with Thane's research before continuing. Anyway your setup is looking good.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 03, 2009, 07:30:14 AM
If Thane had already made coils and cores that matched his present research I would likely purchase them
yes , me too , if Thane would to send coils to france , i can purchase them ?
Quote from: tagor on April 03, 2009, 08:06:29 AM
yes , me too , if Thane would to send coils to france , i can purchase them ?
IF YOU PAY FOR THE SHIPPING COSTS - I CAN SENT COILS TO FRANCE ;)
BUT I HAVE TO DELIVER THEM IN PERSON WITH MY BODY GUARD (MY WIFE) AND WE WILL HAVE TO MEET FIRST AT THE EIFFEL TOWER AND THEN AGAIN ON THE FRENCH RIVIERA. 8)
IS IT A DEAL?
T
Quote from: woopy on April 01, 2009, 04:31:34 PM
Hello Thane
i suppose that no news, good news ;)
what about your last set up which is very promising
do you intend to post a video
thank's
Laurent
THE ONLY NEWS IS THAT MY WIFE KICKED ME OUT BECAUSE OF I_RON ;) AND I HAD TO MOVE INTO A NEW HOUSE! :'(
ACTUALLY WE MOVED TO A HORSE FARM AND DON'T HAVE A PHONE OR INTERNET YET AND I AM ONLY NOW BACK AT WORK.
INTERESTING THING THOUGH WHEN WE WERE MOVING IN THEY WERE SPRAYING CHEM TRAILS OVER OUR HOUSE TO WELCOME US. http://www.bariumblues.com/
T
ANYONE INTERESTED IN THIS TECHNOLOGY DON'T DELAY!!! :-[
BREAK & ENTER ATTEMPT AT OU LAB... :P
ALSO, NEW VID ON YOUTUBE CHANNEL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_UXcNMBGTA&feature=channel_page
T
very good news :)
in the way to simplicity bravo
if i understand right , in your last video you use 2 C cores with each have 2 HV coils that is 2 units of C core that is 4 HV coils which are indepently engaged ?
and by the mean of step down transformers you don't need any more the HC coil
fantastic way to simplicity another time very good progress
thank's for sharing and always interested to get coils from you just for fun i have no Eifel tower but very good Swiss FONDUE with very top white wine and pure air and you are welcome ;) and we accept nice bodygard too ;D
its up to you
Laurent
Thane,
I finally got time to watch your entire video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_UXcNMBGTA&feature=channel_page
Well done. Actually excellent. I am surprised that others here have not grasped the significance. In fact others are playing / fighting over a PMM that maybe a great desktop curiosity if it ever worked but will not power your car or house.
It looks to me that if you put another rotor on the other end of the motor and added another series of HV coils that feed step down transformers then you can extract more energy without any penalty. In fact you could have a several series of rotors on one drive shaft and extract energy from each rotor without any penalty. Wait.. Did I state without "penalty".. That would mean that at some point the power you could extract from multiple rotors / coils would be more than the energy to get it up to the "magic" RPM speed..
So for a legit "wind energy project" that would give a tax credit then it would be best to wind the coils as HV coils and then put a step down transformer in the wind tower base. This way the "wind" would not have any Lenz drag ;) Of course to get to the "magic" RPM I might have to gear the prop up. 2500 RPM seems a bit much.. It would be nicer to have the effect at 500 RPM
Which cores are the best for the HV coils and where can I buy some ?
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 02, 2009, 11:47:45 PM
Hi folks, Hi hydrocontrol, thanks for the reply and it doesnt surpise me about the dead end in regards to the Muller generator those folks were replicating, seems alot of that has occured in the past lets hope the now and future will be on the side of freedom. I'm winding the other 30 guage coil/core right now but heres a pic of the crude test setup with the 24 guage coil/core and those are 1" dia. neo's 3/4" deep.
peace love light
Any news on the replication with 30 gauge wire ?
I am starting to accumulate the materials needed to make this generator so I can attach it to a windmill ;)
This thread really needs a starting place with only one updated file for replication effort. Thane has tried so many things I have lost track of all details. Details like :
Size and strength of magnets ?
Purchase source for magnets ?
Rotor size ?
Magnet placement on rotor ?
Are all magnets poles facing the same direction ?
Distance of coils from magnet face ?
What is the core material of the coils and where can it be purchased ?
What is that backing ring of the coils that Thane has in the latest videos ? Looks like some large
lamented transformer coil with more lamented pegs sticking out with the coils place on the pegs.
Things I can figure out. Wire size. Number of turns based upon resistance of Thane's coils shown in video. Basic concept understood. Can this be scaled down to fit inside a 12"in round x 24"in long wind will generator box ? ;) Time to start getting hands dirty. Need a little more refined direction.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 07, 2009, 09:17:01 PM
Thane,
Of course to get to the "magic" RPM I might have to gear the prop up. 2500 RPM seems a bit much.. It would be nicer to have the effect at 500 RPM
Which cores are the best for the HV coils and where can I buy some ?
YOU CAN HAVE A DRIVESHAFT SPINNING AT 500 RPM BUT HAVE A ROTOR WITH 100 POLES (MORE OR LESS) WHICH WILL PROVIDE THE FREQUENCY REQUIRED TO INCREASE THE COIL IMPEDENCE HIGH ENOUGH WHICH WILL REDUCE THE CURRENT LOW ENOUGH - SUCH THAT LENZ'S LAW IS COMPLETELY ABSENT.
WE CAN GET THE EFFECT AND HAVE SHOWN (IN THE VIDEOS) ACCELERATION @ 100 RPM.
NOW WE ARE FOCUSSING ON DEFINING THE WIRE GAUGE, MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH, & FREQUENCY BOUNDRIES FOR EVENTUAL MANUFACTURING AND PRODUCTION.
SO AS YOU SAY:
- A WINDMILL WOULD EMPLOY THE 100 RPM ACCELERATION DESIGN
- AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE WOULD USE THE 2500 RPM DESIGN - EMPLOYING REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION & REGENERATIVE BRAKING IF REQUIRED.
CORE MATERIAL:
GO ONLINE AND FIND REALLY GOOD QUALITY CORE M2, OR M3 HERE IS SOME GOOD INFO: http://www.kryfs.com/tech_articles.htm
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 08, 2009, 10:48:49 AM
YOU CAN HAVE A DRIVESHAFT SPINNING AT 500 RPM BUT HAVE A ROTOR WITH 100 POLES (MORE OR LESS) WHICH WILL PROVIDE THE FREQUENCY REQUIRED TO INCREASE THE COIL IMPEDENCE HIGH ENOUGH WHICH WILL REDUCE THE CURRENT LOW ENOUGH - SUCH THAT LENZ'S LAW IS COMPLETELY ABSENT.
WE CAN GET THE EFFECT AND HAVE SHOWN (IN THE VIDEOS) ACCELERATION @ 100 RPM.
NOW WE ARE FOCUSSING ON DEFINING THE WIRE GAUGE, MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH, & FREQUENCY BOUNDRIES FOR EVENTUAL MANUFACTURING AND PRODUCTION.
SO AS YOU SAY:
- A WINDMILL WOULD EMPLOY THE 100 RPM ACCELERATION DESIGN
- AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE WOULD USE THE 2500 RPM DESIGN - EMPLOYING REGENERATIVE ACCELERATION & REGENERATIVE BRAKING IF REQUIRED.
CORE MATERIAL:
GO ONLINE AND FIND REALLY GOOD QUALITY CORE M2, OR M3 HERE IS SOME GOOD INFO: http://www.kryfs.com/tech_articles.htm
CHEERS
T
Thanks Thane,
So it looks like the four microwave transformers I had purchased earlier for replication could be cut up and used with two HV coils for each inverted transformer core. Of course they would not be as good as your reference cores above but I already have them.. Now to get a boat load of 30 gauge wire and create a machine to wind the spools. I wonder how much I_ron would charge me to build a rotor ?
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 08, 2009, 10:14:41 AM
Any news on the replication with 30 gauge wire ?
I am starting to accumulate the materials needed to make this generator so I can attach it to a windmill ;)
This thread really needs a starting place with only one updated file for replication effort. Thane has tried so many things I have lost track of all details. Details like :
Size and strength of magnets ?
Purchase source for magnets ?
Rotor size ?
Magnet placement on rotor ?
Are all magnets poles facing the same direction ?
Distance of coils from magnet face ?
What is the core material of the coils and where can it be purchased ?
What is that backing ring of the coils that Thane has in the latest videos ? Looks like some large
lamented transformer coil with more lamented pegs sticking out with the coils place on the pegs.
Things I can figure out. Wire size. Number of turns based upon resistance of Thane's coils shown in video. Basic concept understood. Can this be scaled down to fit inside a 12"in round x 24"in long wind will generator box ? ;) Time to start getting hands dirty. Need a little more refined direction.
ALWAYS START WITH THE LATEST VIDEO...
WE ARE HAVING TOROID CORES MANUFACTURED THAT WILL HAVE THE COIL FINGERS ATTACHED (TAC WELDED) TO THEM TO MINIMIZE EDDY CURRENTS.
EVERY PARAMETER IS A VARIABLE AND EVERY VARIABLE PRODUCES DIFFERENT RESULTS SO THE DESIGN PARAMETERS I.E. (WHAT TASK YOU WANT THE GENERATOR TO PERFORM) HAS TO BE DEFINED UP FRONT.
SO IF YOU WANT A 1 KW GENERATOR THAT WILL NOT PRODUCE LENZ DECELERATION ABOVE X? RPM YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY IT - THEN...
HOW MANY POLES AND HOW BIG CAN THE ROTOR PHYSICALLY BE ETC.
NOW ONCE YOU DECIDE ON THE NUMER OF PERMANENT MAGNET POLES (AND STRENGTH) YOU CAN THEN NARROW DOWN THE WIRE GAUGE AND # OF TURNS REQUIRED TO BE LENZ FREE BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO DEFINE THE BATTERY LOAD BOUNDRIES AND STRIVE TO OPERATE BETWEEN THEM.
ALSO YOUR BLADE SIZE WILL DETERMINE THE UPPER MASS LIMIT OF YOUR ROTOR - WHICH IN TURN LIMITS MAGNET SIZE & WEIGHT. NOW IF YOU DECIDE TO MAGNETICALLY SUSPEND YOUR ROTOR THEN - THIS IS ANOTHER STORY ENTIRELY. ;)
CHEERS
T
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 08, 2009, 10:58:36 AM
Thanks Thane,
So it looks like the four microwave transformers I had purchased earlier for replication could be cut up and used with two HV coils for each inverted transformer core. Of course they would not be as good as your reference cores above but I already have them.. Now to get a boat load of 30 gauge wire and create a machine to wind the spools. I wonder how much I_ron would charge me to build a rotor ?
THOSE CORES ARE ONLY GOOD ENOUGH TO BE USED AS DOOR STOPS FOR YOUR SHOP - NOTHING ELSE!
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 08, 2009, 11:08:40 AM
THOSE CORES ARE ONLY GOOD ENOUGH TO BE USED AS DOOR STOPS FOR YOUR SHOP - NOTHING ELSE!
T
Actually one transformer is doing that right now. LOL
I will look into better cores now. Got a part #...
Thanks
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 08, 2009, 11:06:04 AM
WE ARE HAVING TOROID CORES MANUFACTURED THAT WILL HAVE THE COIL FINGERS ATTACHED (TAC WELDED) TO THEM TO MINIMIZE EDDY CURRENTS.
Got an idea on the cost ? Maybe I could tack onto your order to keep the cost down..
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 08, 2009, 11:18:16 AM
Got an idea on the cost ? Maybe I could tack onto your order to keep the cost down..
WELL WE WILL REQUIRE MILLIONS OF ALL DIFFERENT SIZES AND POLE #'s (I HOPE) :P
I WILL HAVE A CUSTOM PRICE BY NEXT WEEK - TRY TO SECURE YOUR ROTOR IN THE MEAN TIME...
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 08, 2009, 11:33:13 AM
I WILL HAVE A CUSTOM PRICE BY NEXT WEEK - TRY TO SECURE YOUR ROTOR IN THE MEAN TIME...
very good news !
welcome , if you want to visit paris
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 08, 2009, 11:33:13 AM
WELL WE WILL REQUIRE MILLIONS OF ALL DIFFERENT SIZES AND POLE #'s (I HOPE) :P
I WILL HAVE A CUSTOM PRICE BY NEXT WEEK - TRY TO SECURE YOUR ROTOR IN THE MEAN TIME...
CHEERS
T
I can start on the rotor. I will pattern after what you are currently using since yours is working. Not sure if you are still using I_ron's rotor so I need a few questions answered..
Rotor material ?
Rotor diameter ?
Magnets being used ?
Magnets location in rotor ?
Thanks
Hi folks, Hi hydrocontrol. I did test an identical setup with the 30 guage wire and it gave similar results although it did seem to take less rpm to show signs of rotor speed increase, the 30awg coil was about 110 ohms similar mass, where as the other tests with 24 guage was at around 8 ohms. About more recent tests ive made with 2 coil/cores of 24 guage wired in series with dual rotors sandwiching the coil/cores provided impressive very noticeable audible speed increase which reduced current input to drive motor from 3A to 2.47A @ 24V which is about 12W input decrease, also tried wired in parallel and results were not quite as good but still increased speed. I also tried the transformer load takeoff method and it works good as long as proper load is applied. By the way my rotor magnets are all same polarities facing coils of course with opposite rotor in dual rotor setup being all opposite polarity in relation to other rotor. However right now since im using bolts as cores, which are ok since im not using alternating permanent magnet rotor poles, the threaded ends are still there which means one rotor is at a distance from one side of coils similar to Bill Mullers ideas.
I am now starting to wonder why this effect couldnt be replicated in some solid state form and i did see a video from Thane although im not sure if he was copying the same type effect with the device i saw in the video.
peace love light :)
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 08, 2009, 11:55:31 PM
Hi folks, Hi hydrocontrol. I did test an identical setup with the 30 guage wire and it gave similar results although it did seem to take less rpm to show signs of rotor speed increase, the 30awg coil was about 110 ohms similar mass, where as the other tests with 24 guage was at around 8 ohms. About more recent tests ive made with 2 coil/cores of 24 guage wired in series with dual rotors sandwiching the coil/cores provided impressive very noticeable audible speed increase which reduced current input to drive motor from 3A to 2.47A @ 24V which is about 12W input decrease, also tried wired in parallel and results were not quite as good but still increased speed. I also tried the transformer load takeoff method and it works good as long as proper load is applied. By the way my rotor magnets are all same polarities facing coils of course with opposite rotor in dual rotor setup being all opposite polarity in relation to other rotor. However right now since im using bolts as cores, which are ok since im not using alternating permanent magnet rotor poles, the threaded ends are still there which means one rotor is at a distance from one side of coils similar to Bill Mullers ideas.
I am now starting to wonder why this effect couldnt be replicated in some solid state form and i did see a video from Thane although im not sure if he was copying the same type effect with the device i saw in the video.
peace love light :)
One form I believe your are referring to the Steven Marks device or the TPU which claims to create a similar effect. I do know Thane was working on a solid state version with a different twist but have not heard about that for awhile. The mechanical device, although not as compact as a solid state version I suspect, can be used to keep too many questions from arising if it hooked up to a wind source. I really see no reason that both sides of the rotor could not have HV coils on it producing power. In viewing Thanes video he starts off by stating he will be only using "these two cores" which he points at in the video. He then has a load on one coil by way of a transformer then he shorts three more coils. I am presuming that each core has two coils so if he is using two cores then he has four coils. From looking at his setup he has more than enough cores already to generate some serious power. It does appear that the output is around 24 volts but I could not tell if AC or DC. If AC then all he has to do is rectify it with some diodes and feed it to a super cap for filtering and storage. The super cap then feeds a 24vdc to 110vac inverter for powering standard 110 volt items like a Ryobi motor ;) Oh wait.. I forgot.. That is not possible... Yes. you can power your lights instead.. That's it.. Lights.. We all need lights..
Looking forward to Thane's next video.. Always interesting.
Hi Hydro, thanks for reply. In regards to thanes "april fools joke" video, it looked to me as though he was using 2 coils on 2 of the toroid core extensions meaning 1 coil per extension piece from toroid for generation and since rotor magnets i assume are mounted in alternating polarity fashion when rotor magnets align with cores he has a closed magnetic loop. Yes that would be interesting if we looped the power back into the drive motor, since it would accelerate giving even more output and accelerating even further, hmmm could be very interesting for motor propulsion drive not mention all the other possibilities.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 09, 2009, 01:26:16 AM
Hi Hydro, thanks for reply. In regards to thanes "april fools joke" video, it looked to me as though he was using 2 coils on 2 of the toroid core extensions meaning 1 coil per extension piece from toroid for generation and since rotor magnets i assume are mounted in alternating polarity fashion when rotor magnets align with cores he has a closed magnetic loop.
It was an "april fools joke" video so it may be hard to tell exactly. I do remember he stated at the start of the video that even though he had all these cores attached he was only going to be using only two. Then later in the video he is flipping a switch to turn on the lights shorting out one of the coils by way of the transformer then he shorts three more coils with jumpers that are not attached to transformers. Each jumper increases the RPM. If the other output coils were tied to transformers as well and loaded then each output would potentially be 24 volts. So the total of 24 volts for each of the four coils equals 96 volts possible output from just these four coils. You may also noted that the voltage Thane had ramped down to run the motor was around 96 volts (might have been a little less). Thane could jump in here and clear this up.
And then again he may not since he would have to put on his flame proof suit. ;)
I also noticed that two of his magnets had writing on them which I thought indicated the poles. It would appear that they had the same poles facing out. He might have had two magnets at a time facing out so it might be N N S S N N S S or it might be N S N S N S N S. Again Thane could clear that up.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 09, 2009, 01:26:16 AM
Yes that would be interesting if we looped the power back into the drive motor, since it would accelerate giving even more output and accelerating even further, hmmm could be very interesting for motor propulsion drive not mention all the other possibilities.
Careful... You may not want to mention that here in this forum.. There are "eyes" everywhere... Lets just view it as the "April Fools Joke" video that it was meant to be ;)
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 09, 2009, 08:29:20 AM
It was an "april fools joke" video so it may be hard to tell exactly. I do remember he stated at the start of the video that even though he had all these cores attached he was only going to be using only two. Then later in the video he is flipping a switch to turn on the lights shorting out one of the coils by way of the transformer then he shorts three more coils with jumpers that are not attached to transformers. Each jumper increases the RPM. If the other output coils were tied to transformers as well and loaded then each output would potentially be 24 volts. So the total of 24 volts for each of the four coils equals 96 volts possible output from just these four coils. You may also noted that the voltage Thane had ramped down to run the motor was around 96 volts (might have been a little less). Thane could jump in here and clear this up.
And then again he may not since he would have to put on his flame proof suit. ;)
I also noticed that two of his magnets had writing on them which I thought indicated the poles. It would appear that they had the same poles facing out. He might have had two magnets at a time facing out so it might be N N S S N N S S or it might be N S N S N S N S. Again Thane could clear that up.
Careful... You may not want to mention that here in this forum.. There are "eyes" everywhere... Lets just view it as the "April Fools Joke" video that it was meant to be ;)
N N S S N N S S - IS CORRECT
I AM ONLY USING 2 COILS SINCE I ONLY HAD 1 TRANSFORMER FOR THE VIDEO.
EACH COIL PRODUCES 38 W OR MORE w/ ACCELERATION THROUGH A TRANSFORMER.
8 COILS WILL PRODUCE ABOUT 38 WATTS EACH OR MORE AND WE WON'T BE DOING ANY "REAL" DATA COLLECTION TESTS UNTIL WE HAVE OUR NEW STATOR RING AND PROPER STEP DOWN TOROID TRANSFORMERS (BETTER EFFICIENCY).
THIS PROJECT HAS A FINAL OBJECTIVE OF BEING A SELF RUNNER.
THE COIL OUTPUT WILL EITHER BE FED INTO A CAPACITOR OR A BATTERY AND THEN FED BACK INTO THE MOTOR.
TO ACHIEVE THE ABOVE STATED GOAL WE NEED CORRECTLY DESIGNED STATOR CORE AND CORRECTLY WOUND COILS.
EVERYTHING UP TO NOW HAS BEEN AD-HOC SO IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW IT ALL PANS OUT - BUT THE CORRECT APPROACH TAKES MORE TIME.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 09, 2009, 04:15:50 PM
THIS PROJECT HAS A FINAL OBJECTIVE OF BEING A SELF RUNNER.
THE COIL OUTPUT WILL EITHER BE FED INTO A CAPACITOR OR A BATTERY AND THEN FED BACK INTO THE MOTOR.
CHEERS
T
Wow.. A self runner... That's a tall order ;). Actually looks like you are almost there with your current setup.
A capacitor or super cap would be best for that self runner.
Maybe a couple of these type of super audio caps (10 farads) in series.
http://cas07.businessflow.ms/Current/media/item_image_sheet.aspx?domain=audiosavings.com&item_guid=91afea2b-20ea-463c-a45f-d20897af8994&image_guid=29a4db76-ffd8-4184-82dd-9c9447a656aa
Those pesky batteries always seem to be controversial especially if going the self running route. Now if I can just come up with a small table table model with Radio Shack wire, magnets and parts ;)
Hi folks, Thanks for the info Thane, if you are using that rotor magnet geometry nn ss nn ss going around the rotor i notice that there would be a cancellation of polarities in a coil or bucking when a north is departing a coil and a south is approaching same coil although not when a north is departing and a north approaches and vice versa because polarities would compliment then. My thoughts on possible function was that as the current rise time of a coil is matched to a particular rotor magnet strength that when the proper rotor speed is attained the current build up is delayed until top dead center or after then gives a quick repulsive kick to magnet due to current rise timed not to buck the incoming magnet and when same magnet is departing again current is delayed in other direction until magnet is a distance from core and then current rises after delay and either doesnt effect magnet as much to pull it back via lentz and or field collapses and repulsively kicks it again. Anyway whatever the effects function im seeing it with all same polarities so it appears nn ss nn ss is one way to skin a cat among others.
peace love light :)
Hi folks, one quick thing. Hydrocontrol as understandable as it may seem to be fearful of some things in this world it should be obvious I do not fear these ones you speak of Quote : "Careful... You may not want to mention that here in this forum.. There are "eyes" everywhere... Lets just view it as the "April Fools Joke" video that it was meant to be". Of course i understand whats been going on and what still is for not much longer however understand these,'eyes watching', you speak of derive most of their power from the very thing you would have us do is 'fear' and its apparent Thane has much courage providing all the info he does and i am grateful. Ive posted this because im noticing a trend of some people on forums these days trying to instill this fear in everyone. Someone said 'all that we have to fear is fear itself' and that is fairly true.
peace love light :)
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 10, 2009, 01:27:29 AM
Hi folks, one quick thing. Hydrocontrol as understandable as it may seem to be fearful of some things in this world it should be obvious I do not fear these ones you speak of Quote : "Careful... You may not want to mention that here in this forum.. There are "eyes" everywhere... Lets just view it as the "April Fools Joke" video that it was meant to be". Of course i understand whats been going on and what still is for not much longer however understand these,'eyes watching', you speak of derive most of their power from the very thing you would have us do is 'fear' and its apparent Thane has much courage providing all the info he does and i am grateful. Ive posted this because im noticing a trend of some people on forums these days trying to instill this fear in everyone. Someone said 'all that we have to fear is fear itself' and that is fairly true.
peace love light :)
HEY HYDRO-CONTROL IS THE NAME AND HE IS ALL ABOUT
CONTROL ;)
SO-PLEASE LET'S ALL STOP AND TRY TO CONTROL OUR OWN "EJACULATION PRECOCE" THIS EASTER...! :-\
THERE IS NOTHING WORSE THAN EVERYONE SITTING AROUND THE EASTER DINNER TABLE AND "EJACULATION PRECOCING"
ALL OVER THE PLACE FOR PETE'S SAKE! :P
THAT'S NOT WHAT GRAMMA IS ASKING FOR WHEN SHE SAYS, PASS THE GRAVY! :-[
SO I SHOT A NEW DEMO VIDEO TODAY (BUT I CAN'T SEEM TO UPLOAD IT) - ANYWAY IT IS AN E COIL WHICH HAS 2 HV COILS AND NO HC COIL - IT IS VERY COOL AND I WILL TRY TO UPLOAD IT TOMORROW...
CHEERS
AND HAPPY EASTER TO ALL!
T
Stop Ejaculation Précoce
Débarrassez Vous des Ejaculations Précoces Définitivement et Surement
Débarrassez Vous des Ejaculations Précoces Définitivement et Surement
stop-ejaculation-precoce.fr
Hi folks, lol not quite sure the meaning there Thane although im sure its light hearted humor. Yes have a nice easter whatever it is.
Oh by the way, what did anyone think of my ideas on what the cause of the speed up effect may be.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 10, 2009, 07:21:51 PM
HEY HYDRO-CONTROL IS THE NAME AND HE IS ALL ABOUT CONTROL ;)
CHEERS
AND HAPPY EASTER TO ALL!
T
Thane,
Well I could just be a DAMN OPERATOR.... Like HYDRO... Like DAM... ;) I guess that could be considered a form of control.. The floodgates are opening.... The floodgates are closing....
Thane...Happy Easter.. Careful with that gravy...
Skywatcher.. Well... somebody did try to break into Thane's workshop... and you have those MIB visiting Mylow.. LOL... ;D
Actually I was more referring to the amount of 'noise' generated by some forum members about anything that hints at Overunity which is funny since this is an Overunity forum.. :-\. You figure if the thought of OU bothers some people so much why do they hang out here.. ??? Lately Thane's thread has been fairly silent so I figured the "sharks" went away. Of course they are still around and were circling Mylow... :P Now that Mylow has been effectively been eaten I think they will look at other threads that show signs of life. Now that Thane has stated he is going for a self-runner that opens up the floodgates again so it could be another 100 pages of flames and name calling. :(.. I was just getting use to the video updates of Thane's progress and the replications... I have started rereading this thread and am taking notes of useful information.. This thread could be condensed into thirty pages of useful information if you eliminate all the "noise".. That continuing "noise" is really what I was fearful of with Thane's proclamation.. ;D
Hi Hydrocontrol, thanks for clearing that up, well call it water engineer, hehe. Somehow I think things will be different from now on, but remember no fear. So what do you think of my ideas of how the effect may be working in Thanes device.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 09, 2009, 09:03:56 PM
My thoughts on possible function was that as the current rise time of a coil is matched to a particular rotor magnet strength that when the proper rotor speed is attained the current build up is delayed until top dead center or after then gives a quick repulsive kick to magnet due to current rise timed not to buck the incoming magnet and when same magnet is departing again current is delayed in other direction until magnet is a distance from core and then current rises after delay and either doesn't effect magnet as much to pull it back via lentz and or field collapses and repulsively kicks it again. Anyway whatever the effects function im seeing it with all same polarities so it appears nn ss nn ss is one way to skin a cat among others.
peace love light :)
This "delay" concept is what I had been kicking around in my head as well. It does not violate Lenz's Law but uses the effect of the speed of electricity to use Lenz's for your benefit..
"Lenz's Law states that the magnetic field of any induced current opposes the change that induces it."
So as a magnet approaches a coil the magnetic field that forms in the coil is opposite of the approaching magnet and wants to push the approaching magnet back. The closer the magnet gets to the coil the larger the field forms in the coil so the larger the push back of the approaching magnet. Makes sense.
Now the "What if"
What if you could delay that formed magnetic field in the coil until the magnet is top dead center (TDC) over the coil. Well it would push back the approaching magnet at the very time the magnet is exiting so the "push" is in the "correct" direction of rotation. Thus we have a speed (RPM) increase only when we get to a certain starting RPM. If you allow the magnetic field to form in the coil at too slow of an RPM it creates the field before TDC and pushes the approaching magnet back. Once you get to the "magic" starting RPM the field forms at TDC and pushes the magnet along the route of rotation instead of back.
Now the "Why"
So why is it when Thane shorts more coils the RPM keeps going up. Shorting the coil allows the magnetic field to form in the coil. In Thane's setup the coils are exactly over all the magnets at the same time so we have an accumulative effect. The effect is like adding another team of horses to the cart. You get more push. At some point you get a limited rate of return which means that adding more horses get you nothing more except a higher feed bill. In Thane's case the RPM will reach a maximum level after adding X number of coils. After adding X+1 then the RPM will remain the same as X or the same as X+2. The reason is that the coil field will only become a certain size and the RPM speed of the magnet will cause the TDC to be way past TDC and therefore will not have any useful effect on pushing the rotor magnet.
Now the "How".
Electricity travels at the speed of light. The longer the path the longer it takes. This is very apparent if you call your friend on the cell phone who is standing next to you. You get that "delay" effect of speech. The same thing is happening in Thane's coils. The more turns of finer gauge wire on the coil the longer it takes for the magnetic field to form. Delay the magnetic field enough and it forms at TDC to help push the rotor magnet. Delay the field too much and it forms way past TDC and does not give you a push..
Some more "What if"
What if you made a coil that is "elliptical. ? The TDC might form in a larger range and you might get the best of both worlds of a higher RPM and more usable power output.. ;) You also might try Air Coils after the Cored coils to pick up more power. So many variables to try.
CALL FOR MASSIVE REPLICATION
Dear ALL,
It is time to act and help out Thane via replicating his work and presenting on Youtube to MIB's.
I am trying to get in touch with Turkish and Canadian Energy Ministers to support Thane's work.
Today I have to disclose one secret of mine.
ON 2004 CIA OFFICIALS OFFERED ME TO WORK FOR THEM WHEN I WAS IN BUFFALO, NY.
BUT TODAY THEY WONT LET ME TO VISIT CANADA... WHY????
THIS IS TOTALLY BLOCKAGE !!! WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE FACT.
AMERICAN DEEP GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WANT MAGNETIC ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS (MECS) TO BE REVEALED.
THEY STUPIDLY DENIED MY VISA APPLICATION TO VISIT CANADA! BECAUSE I TRIED TO VISIT HIM.
WE HAVE TO ACT ASAP. LET IT REPLICATED AND LET THANE FREE OF MIB'S..
LET OBAMA'S, CHUKANOV'S, HEINS', TEMURLENK'S DREAM COME TRUE!
LET HUMANITY BECOME UNITY!
Nuri Temurlenk, Turkey
+90 533 501 7166
Quote from: samedsoft on April 11, 2009, 09:18:13 AM
CALL FOR MASSIVE REPLICATION
Dear ALL,
It is time to act and help out Thane via replicating his work and presenting on Youtube to MIB's.
I am trying to get in touch with Turkish and Canadian Energy Ministers to support Thane's work.
Today I have to disclose one secret of mine.
ON 2004 CIA OFFICIALS OFFERED ME TO WORK FOR THEM WHEN I WAS IN BUFFALO, NY.
BUT TODAY THEY WONT LET ME TO VISIT CANADA... WHY????
THIS IS TOTALLY BLOCKAGE !!! WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE FACT.
AMERICAN DEEP GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WANT MAGNETIC ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS (MECS) TO BE REVEALED.
THEY STUPIDLY DENIED MY VISA APPLICATION TO VISIT CANADA! BECAUSE I TRIED TO VISIT HIM.
WE HAVE TO ACT ASAP. LET IT REPLICATED AND LET THANE FREE OF MIB'S..
LET OBAMA'S, CHUKANOV'S, HEINS', TEMURLENK'S DREAM COME TRUE!
LET HUMANITY BECOME UNITY!
Nuri Temurlenk, Turkey
+90 533 501 7166
WOW!!!!!!
NURI IS OUT OF THE CLOSET FOLKS!!!!!
THANKS NURI - BUT I AM NO FRIEND OF THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT SINCE RUNNING FOR ELECTION (TWICE) ON THE PLATFORM THAT:
"THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT IS A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION"AND GOING TO COURT TO DEFEND MYSELF AFTERWARDS.
SO I HOPE YOU CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT...?
I HAVE UPLOADED A NEW VIDEO DEVELOPMENT http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins AND ARE GETTING VERY CLOSE TO AN OPTIMIZED DESIGN. - THE VIDEO SHOULD BE READY SOON.
CHEERS
T
LATEST VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp2x6Vtu9Kg
HAPPY EASTER TO ALL! - HERE'S TO HOPING WE ARE ONE STEP CLOSER TO BEING RESURRECTED TO OUR TRUE ANGELIC NATURE.
T
You may remember me from a while back. I finally managed to get the coil operational. The funny thing is this, I was determined to get a dc output from the coil to create power for the motor. But as an upshot of that it doesn't create DC but AC! I've tried to get a DC reading but I get nothing, but for AC i'm getting 0.020 volts from 2 magnets and low rpms, (hand spun!) I'm intending on putting 20 6kg force magnets onto my wheel to see how much oomph I get. Admittedly I think the coil wire may be a bit on the thick side, would that have an effect on my output? I think I know how I accidentally got AC instead of DC, But I want to see how much I can improve my design before I strip it and rewire it for DC usage. Though for pure efficiency I think a toroidal coil would work best. Any thoughts?
Oh and for trying to sort out this acceleration mystery........ Is it possible that under load the feedback is causing the coils to act as magnets, but in opposite polarity? So in essence the alternator under load is acting as a motor?, could it work?
Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 11, 2009, 06:35:27 PM
Oh and for trying to sort out this acceleration mystery........ Is it possible that under load the feedback is causing the coils to act as magnets, but in opposite polarity? So in essence the alternator under load is acting as a motor?, could it work?
Yes. This is what I was trying to explain above. When the coil is shorted either by a jumper or being hooked up to a transformer it obeys Lenz law. The approaching magnet to the coil causes a magnetic field to form in the coil that is the same as the approaching magnet. Since like poles repel and opposite poles attract the normal effect would be for the approaching rotor magnet to slow down. Because of the delay in the forming of the magnetic field in the coil from the finer wire and the type of core material used in construction the magnet field is delayed until the rotor magnet is top dead center at which point the formed field acts to push the rotor magnet in the direction of rotation. Due to the how Thane has his rotor magnets of NN SS NN SS it gives a good increase of RPM. The double NN gives a much longer time duration. I think if Thane had it NNN-space-SSS-space it would increase even more in RPM. The other way I think would work is to have an elongated coil so instead of a coil looking like O it would look like (___) which would give a longer active magnetic field while the rotor magnet is under the coil giving the rotor a longer push..
Hi folks, nice updated test in video Thane. Thanks hydrocontrol for that great expansion on my thoughts of how Thanes device may be working, i figured if we keep it simple and look at the facts of operation were probably pretty close as to the speed up effects function. The only thing that concerns me is that i did make a simple test by holding an air core with 30 guage wire by the rotor as it rotated and it caused lentz drag, now maybe it didnt have enough turns or holding it by hand caused a problem or without a ferromagnetic core the current rise time speed is faster and so more rotor speed is needed. i think i will setup my hugh piggot style air core gen. again, although i will test with same rotors being all same polaritys while of course the air coils are exposed to the high density flux of the opposite rotor magnets attracting. It sure would be nice if aircore works as well but well see.
peace love light :)
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 11, 2009, 10:22:33 PM
Hi folks, nice updated test in video Thane. Thanks hydrocontrol for that great expansion on my thoughts of how Thanes device may be working, i figured if we keep it simple and look at the facts of operation were probably pretty close as to the speed up effects function. The only thing that concerns me is that i did make a simple test by holding an air core with 30 gauge wire by the rotor as it rotated and it caused lentz drag, now maybe it didn't have enough turns or holding it by hand caused a problem or without a ferromagnetic core the current rise time speed is faster and so more rotor speed is needed. i think i will setup my huge piggot style air core gen. again, although i will test with same rotors being all same polarity while of course the air coils are exposed to the high density flux of the opposite rotor magnets attracting. It sure would be nice if aircore works as well but well see.
peace love light :)
Part of the effect of the core is that it attracts the rotor magnet even through the coil is forming a magnetic field that repels the approaching rotor magnet. The effect of the core helps to cancel the Lenz effect of the coil because of the normal core to rotor magnet attraction. Once the coils magnetic field starts to generate it uses the core to generate a larger repelling magnetic field. This is why the rotor has to be spinning at a certain RPM for the effect to occur. I just watched Thanes newest video and in effect he did what I throwing out in my previous posting of using a elongated coil instead of a round coil. I think if he changes his magnets to NNNNSSSS instead of NNSSNNSS it will produce more of a variance in RPM speed. Tilting the approaching rotor magnets at an angle to the coils or stepping the E fingers distance at increasing values would have the effect of squeezing a tube of toothpaste from the bottom up instead of from the middle evenly down. Tilting the E coil so that the first finger is closer to the approaching rotor magnet and the next finger is slightly further away and the last is even further may also provide the rotor with a better "ride the wave effect". Lots of variable to play with.
Great observations and ideas hydrocontrol...all it takes is one guy (Thane) to light the fire.
Regards...
Hi, congratulations on your progress, a question. The speed reaches the rotor on your last experiment is the same, higher or lower than it reaches the magnetic rotor without any friction? I mean, totally free without any coil. Thanks for this doubt cleared.
Dunno how seriously you can take this question...... Is it possible to create a single phase AC alternator from just a continual strand of wire?
Hello,
I am possitively surprised to see your thread still active over here. I see you have made progress, but the real issue of demonstrating OU still you miss it.
If you want my piece of advice is you have nothing to gain by demonstrating it. let others do it for you. Let the people speak. I sorry to upset you that you could not patent this type of technology and expect be rich and famous :(
The greatest inventor of humanity i.e. Nicola Testla miserably failed to propagate the free energy technology. Why you think will succeed?
Besides the poetic words, I think it is time to mass replicate your device. I have been given much though and i realized that even though the HV coils could generate some 10-30 watts of power, this is nothing compared to the 100-200 watts consumed by the grinder motor.
So the bottom line is IF any of Perepiteia anthousiasts want to harvest any considerable and usefull effects you must replace the induction motor with a pulsed permanent magnet motor or still better for greater efficiency with a Adams motor or even better Bedini SG motor type. (this advice goes for the inventor also).
For now i am gathering resources...
By the way... Happy Easter
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: baroutologos on April 13, 2009, 03:48:56 AM
Besides the poetic words, I think it is time to mass replicate your device. I have been given much though and i realized that even though the HV coils could generate some 10-30 watts of power, this is nothing compared to the 100-200 watts consumed by the grinder motor.
I believe what Thane is trying to do is optimize and maximize the power output. This can only be done with data collection and research of different coil/core combination. At some point you have to just "go for it" but if Thane had attempted to be content with using the Microwave transformers he would have not reached a higher potential like he has with the newer core materials and the newer coils. That form of research takes a lot time.
Quote from: baroutologos on April 13, 2009, 03:48:56 AM
So the bottom line is IF any of Perepiteia anthousiasts want to harvest any considerable and usefull effects you must replace the induction motor with a pulsed permanent magnet motor or still better for greater efficiency with a Adams motor or even better Bedini SG motor type. (this advice goes for the inventor also).
Actually I believe there is no need to change out the motor or even have a motor. The rotor magnets with his current cores/coils combination should be usable to get the rotor spinning. All Thane would have to do is add some rotor position sensors then pulse all the HV coils externally at the proper time to get the rotor spinning. Once at the needed RPM just disengage 3/4 of the coils and use only one to keep the rotor spinning. The other cores/coils can harvest the power. Part of that power can feed the remaining coil that keeps the rotor spinning.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 13, 2009, 09:22:52 AM
Actually I believe there is no need to change out the motor or even have a motor.
Hi Hydro,
I guess you are right about that. But in case we are dealing with inefficient systems or frictions are too much or..... don't know what, an efficient motor will always be beneficial.
anyway, experimenting will tell
Quote from: baroutologos on April 13, 2009, 09:41:22 AM
Hi Hydro,
I guess you are right about that. But in case we are dealing with inefficient systems or frictions are too much or..... don't know what, an efficient motor will always be beneficial.
anyway, experimenting will tell
I agree that an "efficient motor will always be beneficial". I would also say that a Ryobi motor on a variac is not an efficient motor. If Thane could actually get the output of the coils to feed the Ryobi without a battery in between that would pretty much assure that major improvements could be made.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 13, 2009, 10:32:18 AM
I agree that an "efficient motor will always be beneficial". I would also say that a Ryobi motor on a variac is not an efficient motor. If Thane could actually get the output of the coils to feed the Ryobi without a battery in between that would pretty much assure that major improvements could be made.
UNTIMATELY WE WON'T NEED A MOTOR AND ARE WORKING TO ELIMINATE IT ALL TOGETHER AND USE THE GENERATOR COILS AS THE "MOTOR" TO BRING THE SYSTEM UP TO SPEED AND THEN SWITCH OVER TO GENERATOR MODE AND THAT'S IT. ;)
AT THAT POINT OUR INPUT WILL BE ZERO!!! 8)
UNFORTUNATELY THIS STUFF TAKES MORE TIME THAN SPECULATION AND ARMCHAIR INVENTING...
ENCLOSED OUR NEW STATOR CORE.
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 13, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
UNTIMATELY WE WON'T NEED A MOTOR AND ARE WORKING TO ELIMINATE IT ALL TOGETHER AND USE THE GENERATOR COILS AS THE "MOTOR" TO BRING THE SYSTEM UP TO SPEED AND THEN SWITCH OVER TO GENERATOR MODE AND THAT'S IT. ;)
AT THAT POINT OUR INPUT WILL BE ZERO!!! 8)
T
Humm.. I seem to have said the same thing in my response message 4657 to Baroutologos.
Quote from: baroutologos on April 13, 2009, 07:48:56 AM
So the bottom line is IF any of Perepiteia anthousiasts want to harvest any considerable and usefull effects you must replace the induction motor with a pulsed permanent magnet motor or still better for greater efficiency with a Adams motor or even better Bedini SG motor type. (this advice goes for the inventor also).
my response was..
Actually I believe there is no need to change out the motor or even have a motor. The rotor magnets with his current cores/coils combination should be usable to get the rotor spinning. All Thane would have to do is add some rotor position sensors then pulse all the HV coils externally at the proper time to get the rotor spinning. Once at the needed RPM just disengage 3/4 of the coils and use only one to keep the rotor spinning. The other cores/coils can harvest the power. Part of that power can feed the remaining coil that keeps the rotor spinning.
.......................
Thane, thanks for the rotor layout. I now have some prints I can build from.. Can I use Aluminum or does the rotor need to be Steel ?
thanks,,,
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 13, 2009, 05:34:11 PM
UNFORTUNATELY THIS STUFF TAKES MORE TIME THAN SPECULATION AND ARMCHAIR INVENTING...
Good morning.
As always you have your way of saying things right. But give us a break Mr Thane :)
Personally i luck much of your experience in electromechanic art (apart form resources) But i plan to follow.
Anyway consider me as a supporter of yours.
Regards,
Baroutologos
ps:keep the good work going.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 13, 2009, 09:28:29 PM
Humm.. I seem to have said the same thing in my response message 4657 to Baroutologos.
my response was..
Actually I believe there is no need to change out the motor or even have a motor. The rotor magnets with his current cores/coils combination should be usable to get the rotor spinning. All Thane would have to do is add some rotor position sensors then pulse all the HV coils externally at the proper time to get the rotor spinning. Once at the needed RPM just disengage 3/4 of the coils and use only one to keep the rotor spinning. The other cores/coils can harvest the power. Part of that power can feed the remaining coil that keeps the rotor spinning.
.......................
Thane, thanks for the rotor layout. I now have some prints I can build from.. Can I use Aluminum or does the rotor need to be Steel ?
thanks,,,
EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE (WELL ALMOST BUT WITH A TWIST) ... BUT AS I SAID SPECULATION OR IDEA MANIFESTATION IS MUCH FASTER THAN PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION - SINCE WE HAD TO GET THE COILS RIGHT AS THE FIRST STEP.
ALSO BUILDING A MOTOR IS NOT ON MY WISH LIST OF THINGS TO DO... BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MUST BE DONE NOW. :-[
QuoteThane, thanks for the rotor layout. I now have some prints I can build from.. Can I use Aluminum or does the rotor need to be Steel ?
BTW - THAT IS A LAMINATED STATOR CORE w/ A TOROID AS THE BACKING PLATE AND EIGHT SOLENOID FINGERS.
CHEERS
T
P.S.
THE TWISTWE WILL USE THE E OR TOROID DESIGN WHERE WE EMPLOY AN
INNER AND AN
OUTER HV COIL.
THE INNER COIL WILL BE THE MOTOR COIL (UP TO A POINT) AND A GNERATOR COIL LATER ON...
HOWEVER IN BOTH CASES WE WILL BE COLLECTING THE INNER COILS' DISCHARGED MAGNETIC FIELD INTO THE OUTER CORE LEG AND USING THIS TO BOOST UP THE GENERATOR OUTPUT AT ALL TIMES. FUN TIMES! 8)
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 14, 2009, 10:43:56 AM
EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE... BUT AS I SAID SPECULATION OR IDEA MANIFESTATION IS MUCH FASTER THAN PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION - SINCE WE HAD TO GET THE COILS RIGHT AS THE FIRST STEP.
ALSO BUILDING A MOTOR IS NOT ON MY WISH LIST OF THINGS TO DO... BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MUST BE DONE NOW. :-[
BTW - THAT IS A LAMINATED STATOR CORE w/ A TOROID AS THE BACKING PLATE AND EIGHT SOLENOID FINGERS.
CHEERS
T
I completely understand. I applaud your effort and your research. Yes, I can dream up ideas faster than I can build them but I do build some. ;).. The last couple, Mike's PPM and the whipmag, ended up not being successful but that was not from lack of trying.
After I had posted I realized that your prints were not the rotor. Interesting symmetry of where you are placing your coils. I presume your rotor is going to be the same one you are using which has evenly spaced magnets so I am guessing you have an idea to try out concerning coil placement in regards to magnet spacing.
Thanks for being so upfront and informative with your research.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 14, 2009, 11:15:21 AM
I completely understand. I applaud your effort and your research. Yes, I can dream up ideas faster than I can build them but I do build some. ;).. The last couple, Mike's PPM and the whipmag, ended up not being successful but that was not from lack of trying.
After I had posted I realized that your prints were not the rotor. Interesting symmetry of where you are placing your coils. I presume your rotor is going to be the same one you are using which has evenly spaced magnets so I am guessing you have an idea to try out concerning coil placement in regards to magnet spacing.
Thanks for being so upfront and informative with your research.
THE COIL/CORE PLACEMENT IS DESIGNED TO REDUCE COGGING TORQUE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
THE ROTOR MAGNETS ARE SEPARATED BY 20 DEGREES AND THERE ARE 8 CORES SO EACH CORE IS SEPARATED BY 2.5 DEGREES ALL THE WAY AROUND THE STATOR.
CHEERS
T
QuoteThanks for being so upfront and informative with your research.
IT IS ENTIRELY A SELF PRESERVATION MOVE! ;)
THE MIPB'S WILL HAVE TO TRACK DOWN ALL THE MEMBERS ON THIS FORUM ALONG WITH ALL THE YOUTUBE VIEWERS AND QUIETLY OFF THEM BEFORE THEY COME FOR ME.SO AS NOT TO RAISE THE ALARM. 8)
THEY KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE!
T
Hi folks, Thanks for the updates Thane, good ideas there and your welcome for us being your disposable bait for the dark clowns. you make me laugh. ::)
Hello,
Just in the effort to replicate your work, some key points are needed to be mention.
Ok, i have read much of this thread but when it comes to the set up of your own, matters arise that you never give much thought.
So, the point is to spin magnets fast in front of a high impendance coil fast enough till Lenz law ceases to exist. In fact those coils above some critical rpm, assist rotation. Ok plain and simple. Instrcuctions now: :)
1) Magnet arrangement. Ok any magnet arrangement with suficient rpm will do the trick i suppose. But the most efficient in order to initiate the process for a given coil is NSNS configurations?
2) Number of magnets.
I suppose for a given rpm of rotor the more magnets (in a reasonable mode) the better the effect.
BUT, does this effect correlate with magnet SPEED over the coil OR just the FREQUENCY of them? Higher frequency means higher speed of course but, what i am saying is if for a given set up the process of accelaration starts at 1500 rpm (say) with 16 magnets will be the same rpm with 6 magnets? (no output measuremnets just process start)
that's for now. perhaps later may have some more...
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: baroutologos on April 15, 2009, 03:46:10 AM
I suppose for a given rpm of rotor the more magnets (in a reasonable mode) the better the effect. BUT, does this effect correlate with magnet SPEED over the coil OR just the FREQUENCY of them? Higher frequency means higher speed of course but, what i am saying is if for a given set up the process of accelaration starts at 1500 rpm (say) with 16 magnets will be the same rpm with 6 magnets? (no output measuremnets just process start)
Regards,
Baroutologos
FREQUENCY.
T
I made up another coil ring today, using thinner core wire, less passes over the face, but more runs and got a 15% increase in power output. Now I could easily add more wire, 18 more magnets and way more rpm to the equation. For an AC output on my second try I think is pretty good. The good thing about it, is I can use it as a motor too. :D
Considering no one is really talking, a serious question.....
Consider this: 100meter length of wire chopped exactly halfway. On one wire make one coil and on the other make two joining coils. What wire would consume more power? Or would they both consume the same?
Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 15, 2009, 02:26:05 PM
I made up another coil ring today, using thinner core wire, less passes over the face, but more runs and got a 15% increase in power output. Now I could easily add more wire, 18 more magnets and way more rpm to the equation. For an AC output on my second try I think is pretty good. The good thing about it, is I can use it as a motor too. :D
Hello,
could you explain your set up and the observations you have till now?
Regards
Baroutologos
Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 15, 2009, 03:49:47 PM
Considering no one is really talking, a serious question.....
Consider this: 100meter length of wire chopped exactly halfway. On one wire make one coil and on the other make two joining coils. What wire would consume more power? Or would they both consume the same?
WHAT COLOR IS THE WIRE?
T
Cranky: Dunno if yer being funny, but....... 32swg 0.280mm. Light orange.
Barout: Hard to explain this one without pictures, but: It'a a continual coil that is wound around a circular hole, the coils pass across the inside face of the hole at exact points to create the phases. The idea was made accidentally as I was hoping to make a DC generator and not an AC one, the first ones phases were far too close to each other.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 14, 2009, 10:43:56 AM
EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE (WELL ALMOST BUT WITH A TWIST) ... BUT AS I SAID SPECULATION OR IDEA MANIFESTATION IS MUCH FASTER THAN PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION - SINCE WE HAD TO GET THE COILS RIGHT AS THE FIRST STEP.
ALSO BUILDING A MOTOR IS NOT ON MY WISH LIST OF THINGS TO DO... BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MUST BE DONE NOW. :-[
BTW - THAT IS A LAMINATED STATOR CORE w/ A TOROID AS THE BACKING PLATE AND EIGHT SOLENOID FINGERS.
CHEERS
T
P.S.
THE TWIST
WE WILL USE THE E OR TOROID DESIGN WHERE WE EMPLOY AN INNER AND AN OUTER HV COIL.
THE INNER COIL WILL BE THE MOTOR COIL (UP TO A POINT) AND A GNERATOR COIL LATER ON... HOWEVER IN BOTH CASES WE WILL BE COLLECTING THE INNER COILS' DISCHARGED MAGNETIC FIELD INTO THE OUTER CORE LEG AND USING THIS TO BOOST UP THE GENERATOR OUTPUT AT ALL TIMES. FUN TIMES! 8)
Lol, stop changing your design on me and I'll have a SVM PWM controller for you in no time. This recent change looks like it has alot of potential, those transformers you added in the last video almost gave me an aneurysm and I am glad to see them gone, ha.
Ok, so E-Coil config, with 2 coils. Both coils are HV coils now, no more HC coils?
So in my mind the heat concern just increased about a thousand fold, but thats alright, we'll work it out.
For just driving the HV (interior) coil) what sort of power are we going to deal with? We can probably go up to 400 volts fairly easily, without getting into really fancy stuff, do you think that will be sufficient?
There'll be a ton of trial and error while we figure out the PWM frequency, but I can just program that into the chip and figure out which works best, cycle through different frequencies until we find the golden one.
The flux density analysis will probably help us with this quite a bit.
anyway its back to the drawing board for me, the staggered magnet placement totally destroys my SVM tables so I'm going to have to think up something elegant to deal with it.
ugh, i've got to bite the bullet and just make one and start running tests, my machinest buddy is chomping at the bit to make me one of these rotors, any suggestions as to which I should get made?
Cheers
-Cole
QuoteLol, stop changing your design on me and I'll have a SVM PWM controller for you in no time. This recent change looks like it has alot of potential, those transformers you added in the last video almost gave me an aneurysm and I am glad to see them gone, ha.
THE TRANSFORMERS ARE THERE TO STAY! - MY HARD DRIVING WHIPPERSNAPPER. UNLESS OF COURSE GOTOLUC SETS
ME UP WITH SOME CAPACITORS TO DUMP THE HIGH VOLTAGE INTO... INSTEAD OF THE STEPDOWN TRANSFORMER.
QuoteOk, so E-Coil config, with 2 coils. Both coils are HV coils now, no more HC coils?
RIGHT AND SOMETIMES THE INNER HV COIL WILL BE USED AS MOTOR COIL(S)...
QuoteSo in my mind the heat concern just increased about a thousand fold, but thats alright, we'll work it out.
NO HEAT - WE ARE DEALING WITH QUICK CURRENT PULSES NOT PROLONGED CURRENT FLOW (PRODUCING HEAT).
QuoteFor just driving the HV (interior) coil) what sort of power are we going to deal with? We can probably go up to 400 volts fairly easily, without getting into really fancy stuff, do you think that will be sufficient?
IT DEPENDS ON THE MAGNET STRENGHT USED - BUT I WAS ABLE TO ROTATE THE ROTOR WITH JUST 5 VOLTS FROM A FUNCTION GENERATOR YESTERDAY.
QuoteThere'll be a ton of trial and error while we figure out the PWM frequency, but I can just program that into the chip and figure out which works best, cycle through different frequencies until we find the golden one.
CAN'T WE USE A REED SWITCH CONNECTED TO A TRANSISTOR?
QuoteThe flux density analysis will probably help us with this quite a bit.
YOU MEAN THE PROGRAM FROM YOUR BUDDIES AT SUNOCO?
Quoteanyway its back to the drawing board for me, the staggered magnet placement totally destroys my SVM tables so I'm going to have to think up something elegant to deal with it.
ugh, i've got to bite the bullet and just make one and start running tests, my machinest buddy is chomping at the bit to make me one of these rotors, any suggestions as to which I should get made? Cheers-Cole
MAKE THE I_RON ROTOR PERHAPS IF YOU PM HIM HE MIGHT SEND YOU THE BLUEPRINTS?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 16, 2009, 04:06:34 PM
IT DEPENDS ON THE MAGNET STRENGHT USED - BUT I WAS ABLE TO ROTATE THE ROTOR WITH JUST 5 VOLTS FROM A FUNCTION GENERATOR YESTERDAY.
Wow... What else can I say... Function generators put out squat for power output.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 16, 2009, 04:06:34 PM
CAN'T WE USE A REED SWITCH CONNECTED TO A TRANSISTOR?
Life expectancy of a reed switch at high RPMs is very short (around minutes) and the delay time is large. HALL devices are much better. Better yet use the output of your coil to drive the electronics that drive the driver coil. Think Magneto effect used on a small engine...
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 16, 2009, 04:06:34 PM
MAKE THE I_RON ROTOR PERHAPS IF YOU PM HIM HE MIGHT SEND YOU THE BLUEPRINTS?
Hummm.. I think maybe I will do that.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 16, 2009, 04:41:12 PM
Wow... What else can I say... Function generators put out squat for power output.
Life expectancy of a reed switch at high RPMs is very short (around minutes) and the delay time is large. HALL devices are much better. Better yet use the output of your coil to drive the electronics that drive the driver coil. Think Magneto effect used on a small engine...
Hummm.. I think maybe I will do that.
YES HALL EFFECTS SENSOR - THAT IS WHAT I MEANT - THANKS HC!
GOTOLUC HAD A REED SWITCH ON HIS MOTOR SO IT HAS BEEN STUCK IN MY HEAD EVER SINCE.
CHEERS
T
THE TRANSFORMERS ARE THERE TO STAY! - MY HARD DRIVING WHIPPERSNAPPER. UNLESS OF COURSE GOTOLUC SETS
ME UP WITH SOME CAPACITORS TO DUMP THE HIGH VOLTAGE INTO... INSTEAD OF THE STEPDOWN TRANSFORMER.
I would definitely think a bridge rectifier and a big cap would be much better, although I'm not sure, the outputs of the coils, whether rectified or straight sinusoidal the energies need to be combined somehow, and I'm not sure whats the best way to do that. With the old magnet pattern the phases would be offset by a constant amount, which would allow them to be combined, modulated almost, then rectified. The staggered magnets are warping my noodle even trying to consider this.
RIGHT AND SOMETIMES THE INNER HV COIL WILL BE USED AS MOTOR COIL(S)...
Indeed, but in order to get the sort of RPM's required to achieve the inductance becoming capacitance affect were going to need a fairly significant magnetic field density, which is a function of current, not voltage.
NO HEAT - WE ARE DEALING WITH QUICK CURRENT PULSES NOT PROLONGED CURRENT FLOW (PRODUCING HEAT).
As frequency increases the cooldown periods between those pulses is going to approach 0.
IT DEPENDS ON THE MAGNET STRENGHT USED - BUT I WAS ABLE TO ROTATE THE ROTOR WITH JUST 5 VOLTS FROM A FUNCTION GENERATOR YESTERDAY.
Did you just hook a square wave across the coil?
CAN'T WE USE A REED SWITCH CONNECTED TO A TRANSISTOR?
Like some sort of rotary encoder? I would think that would work with a N S N S arrangement but you have a NNSS arrangement.
So if the magnet trips the hall effect sensor, current can flow through a fet into the inner HV coil and repulse or attract the coil, then it turns off, hmm. Sort of a pulsing motor drive, and having the direct linkage would allow the frequency of pulsing to increase with the angular velocity.
Ok, let me try to work this out imagining the setup with just one coil.
YOU MEAN THE PROGRAM FROM YOUR BUDDIES AT SUNOCO?
I am not affiliated with Sunoco in any way (disclaimer)
But indeed, I know of what you speak, and when we get the magnetic flux density analysis for the entire range of operation we'll know alot better what exactly is going on. I have a nagging feeling in my head that the flux from the first coil will affect the outside coil more than the rotor. Arghh no way to know until experimenting.
And if the spinning magnets are already inducing a current into the inner coil, are we going to need to, um, like, flush out the current, in order to be able to set up our own flux lines?
Dammit, I'm confusing myself.
MAKE THE I_RON ROTOR PERHAPS IF YOU PM HIM HE MIGHT SEND YOU THE BLUEPRINTS?
Ok, will do. Symmetrical magnets are way more my style.
CHEERS
T
Quote from: Coleston on April 16, 2009, 07:53:10 PM
MAKE THE I_RON ROTOR PERHAPS IF YOU PM HIM HE MIGHT SEND YOU THE BLUEPRINTS?
Ok, will do. Symmetrical magnets are way more my style.
I think you are still confused. The rotor is still the same one that Thane has been using. The drawings that Thane showed a few post back are of his new pickup coil-core arrangement not a new rotor arrangement.. I was confused about that as well.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 16, 2009, 08:41:23 PM
I think you are still confused. The rotor is still the same one that Thane has been using. The drawings that Thane showed a few post back are of his new pickup coil-core arrangement not a new rotor arrangement.. I was confused about that as well.
well thats good news, that means that the SVM tables just need to be custom, finding the values will be a pain but it does not require anything above and beyond straight SVM.
Thanks for the heads up, mate. Appreciated.
(QUOTE)
well thats good news, that means that the SVM tables just need to be custom,
finding the values will...
(END QUOTE)
Support Vector Machine (SVM)?
Please keep us posted on this.
Joe.
I'm hoping to have a fully working prototype within the next couple of weeks. I'm hoping to get it to sustain a set speed. It's running a principal close to Thanes, but it's quite different in a lot of ways.
Quote from: Judges on April 16, 2009, 10:16:03 PM
(QUOTE)
well thats good news, that means that the SVM tables just need to be custom,
finding the values will...
(END QUOTE)
Support Vector Machine (SVM)?
Please keep us posted on this.
Joe.
Space Vector Modulation
Dear All,
Please find enclosed the new Stator ring we started assembling today. We should have some test/performance data by Wednesday if all goes well.
Each coil here has the capacity to produce about 50 watts w/ acceleration - through the step down transformer - there will be eight coils in total.
Next step is to have Toroid Tech in Toronto copy this design and to have a double sided rotor (magnets on both sides) w/ two pairs of stator coils totalling 16 coils with an estimated output of about 800 W.
If our preparation is correct the cogging torque and eddy current losses should be minimal and the motor should be consuming less than 200 watts at full speed.
Electron Corporation of Pennsylvania will be making the new rotor w/ magnets for us.
Is the short term we will endeavor to finish the Orion prototype with the current rotor and perhaps this stator core - coil assembly.
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."
- George Bernard Shaw
oh wow, cool. How are the vertical cores adhered to the giant stator ring?
Quote from: Coleston on April 20, 2009, 07:19:16 PM
oh wow, cool. How are the vertical cores adhered to the giant stator ring?
From looking at the pictures I would say the cores are being held in place by Gravity at the current time ;D ;D ;D
Just found something very wonderful out! My design can utilise as many magnets as i want!!
Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 21, 2009, 11:41:25 AM
Just found something very wonderful out! My design can utilise as many magnets as i want!!
Sounds interesting. Got a picture of this design ? Got some data ?
The first prototype wasn't producing enough, think I was getting about 12v AC with about .1 Amps
The next one, the coils will be elongated so i can have more coils passing over the surface.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on April 20, 2009, 11:07:10 PM
From looking at the pictures I would say the cores are being held in place by Gravity at the current time ;D ;D ;D
Here are the last photos and I have uploaded an new video ("EARTH DAY DEMO which may be ready for viewing in about 20 minutes from now - 9:20 am). http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
We are now getting 30 watts (or more / coil) with a total of 8 coils = 240 watts out.
The eddy current and cogging torque losses are now fixed (it won't go any higher with the addition if coils of any size) and the motor input = 223 watts.
With the correct sized and lower eddy current stator ring from Toroid Tech - we can safely expect 50 watts / coil - which is our goal right now, - 400 watts out and about 200 watts in.
We could easily have a double sided rotor with two stator rings & coils producing around 800 watts. There really is no limit now!
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."
- George Bernard Shaw
Thane sorry that you maybe have answered this already, is that rectified dc current you are measuring on the output?
After following this thread forever now...it would seem that Thane has got it! When can I get my generator? Are there any skeptics anymore?
Fred
Quote from: broli on April 22, 2009, 09:45:52 AM
Thane sorry that you maybe have answered this already, is that rectified dc current you are measuring on the output?
NEW EARTH DAY VIDEO HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg&feature=channel_page
ONE OF THE MANY "NEXT STEPS" IS TO RECTIFY THE AC OUTPUT AND CHARGE A BATTERY AS WELL AS CHARGE A CAPACITOR TO ENSURE THAT THE ACCELERATION EFFECTS
REMAIN.
HAPPY EARTH DAY!
CHEERS
T
Happy Earth Day, (even if you are not from earth)
Thane, you getting warm. Note the similarity of your new toroid design to this er, gravito torus thingy from er, somewhere far away.
Weird enough 4U ?
;D
I think it's about time I gave some input about my creation/abomination.
Basically it's a continually wound coil but it only crosses the inside face which the rotating mass spins past. The wires cross from top to bottom then bottom to top and continually like that. All the magnets face the same way, but they are lined up to the same pass of wire. I had a 20 pass setup, so ten magnets were used and were lined to the down pass. That was how I got my AC phase. Basically from that simple setup I could get about 20VAC by hand turning and about 0.1 Amps. I intend on increasing the inner surface of the drum so that the wires run longer over the longer face, by doing that I can add many more magnets.
Any comments?
Quote from: Fred Flintstone on April 22, 2009, 11:42:51 AM
After following this thread forever now...it would seem that Thane has got it! When can I get my generator? Are there any skeptics anymore?
Fred
LET'S DO SOME MATH WITH FRED...
WHEN I WAS 11 YEARS OLD, I USED TO WATCH MR. FLINTSTONE ON TV AT LUNCHTIME...
THAT WAS 36 YEARS AGO...
PEBBLES WAS ABOUT 2 YEARS OLD AT THAT TIME...
SO WHAT I REALLY WANT TO KNOW NOW IS WHAT DOES SHE LOOK LIKE NOW IN A BIKINI?
CHEERS
T
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 22, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
NEW EARTH DAY VIDEO HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg&feature=channel_page
ONE OF THE MANY "NEXT STEPS" IS TO RECTIFY THE AC OUTPUT AND CHARGE A BATTERY AS WELL AS CHARGE A CAPACITOR TO ENSURE THAT THE ACCELERATION EFFECTS
REMAIN.
HAPPY EARTH DAY!
CHEERS
T
What a
historic accomplishment! Thanks T, for your hardwork, tenacity, determination and genius.
Happy Earth day!
LarryC
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 22, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
NEW EARTH DAY VIDEO HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPMbWzNuMOg&feature=channel_page
ONE OF THE MANY "NEXT STEPS" IS TO RECTIFY THE AC OUTPUT AND CHARGE A BATTERY AS WELL AS CHARGE A CAPACITOR TO ENSURE THAT THE ACCELERATION EFFECTS
REMAIN.
HAPPY EARTH DAY!
CHEERS
T
My prediction, based on what I have seen so far, is that a DC load will actually be
required for acceleration, on the DC capacitor that is hooked up to the rectified output of a high voltage coil. As the capacitor charges towards the peak voltage of the HV coil, the more the HV coil is likely to behave as open circuit. I am assuming full wave rectification here, but it would also be interesting to see the effects of a single diode in either direction. It certainly seems counter intuitive, like if you borrowed money from a bank, and actually got PAID interest based on how much you borrowed, rather than saved. Interesting stuff, can't wait to see the meter readings as more coils get added.
I 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.
....I remember some time ago, (December I think) that i was firstly saw your invention, I was positively surprised by Perepiteia and spent lots of time following the Novel type thread of yours. :)
I must not conceal the fact that in some point i had reached the conclusion (as many others) that the rotor accelaration was due to eddy currents halt by the HV coil action. By this is not true of course as it was pointed out.
Reading about some inventions that claim OU, (i marked a stunning similarity with Bedini Magneto or Energizer of Free energy Generator. You could take a look in this ;) purely for historical pursposes) i realized that your Peripeteia eliminated the need for pulsing and timing equipment for initiating the current flow (reeds etc) by simply - Congratulations to the Inventor here - employing a HV coil and certain frequency voltage stimulation (AC).
But it not end here. This thing will not only create power for less input but the creation of the power will asssist rotation. In other words you created a positive feedback system in creating energy to a degree of course (correct me if i am wrong please!)
Thats is indeed a paradox according to enstablished view.
No need to repeat things further. sorry for that too, but i felt like i had too (confesion here :P)
Anyway, the point is clearly made and the path for further experimentation is open.
I wait to see further progress Thane.
Regards,
Baroutologos
ps: Take care dude
So a steel rotor connected to the motor is neccessary to observe an acceleration effect? Am I reading right?
OVER-UNITY DEMO at OU - May 3rd, 2009 @ 11am
Dear All,
Based on the results of our last video - I would like to present a public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.
Bill and Ted as per our contract, you must be notified and present since this is a media attended event and it is your prototype that will be demonstrated.
There will be 11 coils as shown in the attached photos each producing 31 Watts each for a total output of 322 Watts with an input to the motor of 234 Watts.
Please let me know if this date works for you?
LATEST VIDEO:http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=thanecheins&aq=f
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."- Michael Faraday
Thane, what would it take to close the loop? Also I would like to resuggest doubling the input frequency. This "might" double the results with very little effort.
It is good idea to start system on grid, run its own and cut off grid at least 2-3 minutes to prove OU...
Sorry Thane I can't join party as you know...
God Bless Humanity...
Nuri Temürlenk
Hi here Thane,
Looking good!
Have you ever considered cap tuning your motor?
With just a few different value parallel run caps you can probably cut your motor watt draw by a real good amount, and optimize the power factor. In some of my cases an unloaded induction motor will at idle cut back from 400 to 75watt. (very much depends on the load) But you might give it a try. Just some switches to make different cap combo's to see what works best and off you go.
The cap banks might also be placed before the variac, test it for best results.
Regards,
Steven
hmmm, i kinda wanna take that drive up there to see this! still watching with intent, just work and other stuff getting in the way :(.
Quote from: Nali2001 on April 25, 2009, 03:08:50 PM
Hi here Thane,
Looking good!
Have you ever considered cap tuning your motor?
With just a few different value parallel run caps you can probably cut your motor watt draw by a real good amount, and optimize the power factor. In some of my cases an unloaded induction motor will at idle cut back from 400 to 75watt. (very much depends on the load) But you might give it a try. Just some switches to make different cap combo's to see what works best and off you go.
The cap banks might also be placed before the variac, test it for best results.
Regards,
Steven
This is excellent advice Thane, I would also recommend giving this a try.
Quote from: CRANKYpants on April 25, 2009, 10:18:18 AM
OVER-UNITY DEMO at OU - May 3rd, 2009 @ 11am
Dear All,
Based on the results of our last video - I would like to present a public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.
Bill and Ted as per our contract, you must be notified and present since this is a media attended event and it is your prototype that will be demonstrated.
There will be 11 coils as shown in the attached photos each producing 31 Watts each for a total output of 322 Watts with an input to the motor of 234 Watts.
Please let me know if this date works for you?
LATEST VIDEO:http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=thanecheins&aq=f
Cheers
Thane
Thane C. Heins
President - Potential +/- Difference Inc.
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."- Michael Faraday
Hi Thane
This is fantastic news
is there going to be live streaming of this historic moment, for all those that can't make it and have been following your work
cat
Hi Thane
Is your demonstration is open to public or only journalist?
Can I go see it by myself ?
Thank's
Hello Mr Thane.
Your lights pls... :) I am trying to replicate Perepiteia. So, although i consider myself a good theorist, have not a single clue in actual experimentation with perepiteia outline (noob state) ;D
So, starting with the rotor. I plan at making a relatively small one, 10' diam alluminum with 12 neo magnets 1' each, spaced at 30 degrees, with alternative polarity (i.e NSNS etc) that will run at an estimated 1500-2500 rpm window.
Does it sounds good for a starting point of view? Have you concluded that another setup has much more advantage?
Suggestions are always welcomed.
Regards,
Baroutologos
with 12 magnets you will need either higher impedance coils or a higher RPM, there appears to be a maximum frequency that a coil will operate under lenz law, beyond that frequency thane happens :P 147.6 ohm with 18 magnets passing by at 1400?rpm accelerate. my suggestion is add more magnets to raise the frequency.
Does anyone know what time the demo will take place? If the demo proves more power out then in...then will it make national news?
Fred
@all
is there anyone here that can update us on the public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.
cat
Quote from: powercat on May 03, 2009, 03:26:36 PM
@all
is there anyone here that can update us on the public OVER-UNITY DEMONSTRATION at the lab at Ottawa University on May 3rd, 2009 (May Day) at 11 am.
cat
Hi there,
No news from Thane since he make the annoncement of is demonstration.
I have asked him if I can be there on may 3, but not answer from him.
May be he got some trouble from the MIB, or may be He is dead ?
Quote from: albator10 on May 03, 2009, 09:44:35 PM
Hi there,
No news from Thane since he make the annoncement of is demonstration.
I have asked him if I can be there on may 3, but not answer from him.
May be he got some trouble from the MIB, or may be He is dead ?
Clicking on his profile it states last login :
May 03, 2009, 09:14:28 PM
so it appears he is still alive. Maybe the demonstration did not go according to plan.
How did the demonstration go? Any videos? ;D
Hi All
I to hope the demo went ok,looking forward to the results.
Can any one tell me if a "solid state Thane" would work,2 coils,1 fed with a sine wave,at the right hz.and 1 picking up the juice?
or have I got it all wrong?
peter
Where, oh where, can Cranky Pants be
Oh where, oh where is he
He promised us all on Mayday
Some electrical Over Unity
Where, oh where, can Cranky Pants be
Oh where, oh where is he
It has been a week since we have heard from he
I am afraid the MIB strung him up a tree :'(
(Bad, I know. ::) But I know Thane can't resist bad poetry) ::)
Lets hope that Mr. Thane and his invention are fine.
They guy is a bit eccentric and difficult to deal with, but I have seen nothing but good intentions coming out of him. I wish him nothing less than all the best.
Hopefully everything worked out and Thane is currently preparing a nice update for all of us...
Quote from: adlep on May 04, 2009, 03:49:54 PM
Lets hope that Mr. Thane and his invention are fine.
They guy is a bit eccentric and difficult to deal with, but I have seen nothing but good intentions coming out of him. I wish him nothing less than all the best.
Hopefully everything worked out and Thane is currently preparing a nice update for all of us...
I suppose there are two possibilities.
1) It worked and Thane is working on editing and uploading a new video.
2) It did not work and Thane is working on understanding and solving the reason why it did not work.
I think we all are hoping it is #1 but even if it is #2 all is not lost. I am sure it will work eventually. Thane did do a self imposed demo date and there was a lot of work left to do just from his last update to get the system fully populated. It could be there was just too much to do in the time frame available to get to the self running point. If he gives us a self running demo sometime in May I would be happy. We all have waited this long. A bit more time is not going to hurt anyone...
Thane - if you're running short on time, just give us a quick overview of the demo. Many of us are very anxious for an update....
Fred
Hello @ All,
I am waiting as most of you Thane's demo results. Anyway, you should not expect much to happen since even succesful though might be, things seldom change like that.
I was pondering the other days with Perepiteia and compared it to Adams motor. After all, they are magnets & coils right? :p
So venturing in this site http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk, under chapter 2, Adam motor section i stumbled across this (see attached image)
Then i had a laughter :D.
I merely compare it with the HV coils of Thane's setup that all have a common magnetic "ground" in toroid, boosting there power by 37% each.
So, this has been observed and done before. by no means i try to dwarf Thane's creativity and invention. But what i am trying to say is that this kind of technology is surpressed or to put it mildy ignored enough to be forgotten, so every time we RE-INVENT the wheel.
Have a look.
regards,
Baroutologos
ps: Thane we wait your news!
Quote from: baroutologos on May 05, 2009, 05:21:55 AM
So, this has been observed and done before. by no means i try to dwarf Thane's creativity and invention. But what i am trying to say is that this kind of technology is surpressed or to put it mildy ignored enough to be forgotten, so every time we RE-INVENT the wheel.
regards,
Baroutologos
There are differences but there is a lot in common. I think the key that Thanes found was using fine wire to cancel / delay the Lenz effect. Every Adams motor I have seen used heavier gauge wire so there was always a limit that would allow the Lenz to kick in. The key is that for Lenz to work it has to have current to flow and not voltage to flow. So if you have voltage flowing without the current then Lenz does not kick in (as bad). The conversion from voltage to current occurs elsewhere so the rotor is not effected.
Hi Hydro,
Yes you are right about that. There are serious differences. :) i am not an anihhilist. i agree. But... see it from another perspective.
Imagine you want to replicate Peripeteia, ok? you gonna use thick gauge wires for the motor power coil (that's the grinder) and finer gauge wire for the accelaration part. (HV coils) You should agree by now.
Image you want to eliminate the two different kind of coils so you want a SIGNLE COIL that combines HV acceleration and power creation in a delicate balance.
I think that's the original Adam's motor.
I hope i did not confuse you. Anyway, Thanes smart setup distinguises the accelaration part from the motor part. This achieved to better and more efficiently (i think) make the two different systems.
Of course, that is my oppinion. :D
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: baroutologos on May 05, 2009, 10:21:42 AM
Hi Hydro,
Yes you are right about that. There are serious differences. :) i am not an anihhilist. i agree. But... see it from another perspective.
Imagine you want to replicate Peripeteia, ok? you gonna use thick gauge wires for the motor power coil (that's the grinder) and finer gauge wire for the accelaration part. (HV coils) You should agree by now.
Image you want to eliminate the two different kind of coils so you want a SIGNLE COIL that combines HV acceleration and power creation in a delicate balance.
I think that's the original Adam's motor.
I hope i did not confuse you. Anyway, Thanes smart setup distinguises the accelaration part from the motor part. This achieved to better and more efficiently (i think) make the two different systems.
Of course, that is my oppinion. :D
Regards,
Baroutologos
I think there are several variations of this setup that may work. The key is to get it to self-run once then to duplicate. Thane has shown us it is not "magic" like so many other people have claimed. It is understanding the underlying principles of cause and effect which Thane has done so nicely shown in numerous videos. I do believe that "Mikes PMM" did self run with only a capacitor. The key was that he used a lot of turns of fine wire woven with his thicker drive wires. This is a lot like Thanes dual wire core approach. What Mike did not understand was that his fine wire was shorted somewhere and helped cause the effect. Most of Mikes circuit had very little to do with his motor self running and that is why it did not make sense to anyone.. It was one of those hidden "gotchas" that Mike did not see so when he tried to duplicate the motor it failed. Once the duplication failed Mike just disappeared since he knew that if he could not duplicate the motor the chance of anyone else duplicating was null. There are so many things that can go wrong such as having the wire short out in exactly the correct place for the effect to occur. In Thanes case it is more science rather than blind luck. Being science it can be explained and duplicated with success instead of being "magic". I think Thane is on the right track and it will be easy for others to duplicate once a few more "unknowns" are worked out. My guess is that Thane found another unknown that he has to work out in order to continue. At least now I am getting a handle on how it all comes together to work. Thanks to Thane.
I am in the process of mounting the magnets and seeing this thread i have been somewhat confused.
I am after at obtaining the most easiest way for producing the accelaration effect.
What magnet configuration is optimum for this? standard alternating NSNS?
I saw that recently Thane used NNSS setup. This initiates the phenomenon easier? What about a all N faces out? (like BEdini's FEG?)
Some advice here is welcomed.
Regards,
Baroutologos
I only wanted to state that my experience in what Thanes working on is limited but from what I understand it does sound extremely exciting. I find myself running each day to this forum to see if Thane has a new video or statements on his success.
It is a wonderful dream to make this world self sufficient in energy and take away power from the corruption that goes on because we are surviving on the Oils.
Just want to Thank you Mr. Heins for giving us real hope and making possibilities that says we are being held back from our true potential.
Brilliant Canadians which in the future might be Honoured as they should be:
Thane Heins for the Perepitea and a man Rick Simpson rediscovered the Cure for Cancer as well as many other maladies Curing Diabetes, All skin Cancers etc. just by ingesting his Oil. It is an amazing miraculous story that continues to grow more truth as each year goes by.
Covey WhiteGold
i know i have missed much of this Thread, but i notice something. Pls comment also.
Thane said that he is using standard 30 agw @ 150 ohms as HV coils.
From the last pictures of the coils mounted on the toroid i noticed that this is NOT the case.
There sees to be coils with more or less those specs:
inside diameter: 25mm (or 2,5 cm)
coil height: 65mm
estimated wire used: 24 awg or 22 but NOT 30 AGW
estimated coil diameter: 80mm
estimated wire layer thickness: 30mm
using the COil maestro software i estimated those also:
estimated wire resistance: 70 ohm
estimated coil weight: 3-4 pounds
see his post and view pictures. then take in consideration what i say.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.4680
Any comments?
Well coils can vary obviously according his different setups. The question is what is magnet polarity?
Quote from: minde4000 on May 07, 2009, 10:15:55 AM
Well coils can vary obviously according his different setups. The question is what is magnet polarity?
According to his post around 6 pages ago the rotor magnets for the 8 magnet rotor setup was NN-SS-NN-SS. I believe his newer setup with 18 magnets is NNN-SSS-NNN-SSS-NNN-SSS.
Hello,
I have been following this from the start (of this forum, that is as Thane has been invested in this for years). Thane promised an exciting announcement in Dec that never materialized, and now the OU demonstration appears to be abust.
I don't think Thane is being intentionally pernicious, but it seems like the same result for all these 'big new discoveries'. When push comes to shove, and the big show is promised; either nothing (Peripetia?), didn't work because of technical difficulties (Steorn), or the hype is proven as a fraud (Indian laptop for $10).
So is no news good news, or should I move on and start cheering for Mylow and his new motor?
Quote from: mackensteff on May 07, 2009, 01:26:53 PM
Hello,
I have been following this from the start (of this forum, that is as Thane has been invested in this for years). Thane promised an exciting announcement in Dec that never materialized, and now the OU demonstration appears to be abust.
I don't think Thane is being intentionally pernicious, but it seems like the same result for all these 'big new discoveries'. When push comes to shove, and the big show is promised; either nothing (Peripetia?), didn't work because of technical difficulties (Steorn), or the hype is proven as a fraud (Indian laptop for $10).
So is no news good news, or should I move on and start cheering for Mylow and his new motor?
The only time table is the one that Thane creates. As far as I know there are no deadlines or milestones to achieve. I am sure Thane has high expectations and looking at his progress he certainly has high motivation. So he missed a self declared deadline. So what. ??? I have missed a few self delcared deadines in my life as well. Just chill. I am sure Thane will be back. It is not like Thane has to answer to any of us. It is a bit strange that Thane has not even logged in here in 5 days. :'( Maybe he is battling the swine flu ;) In the meantime others here are looking at the replications of Thanes work so I am sure there will be more chatter. I feel that Thane's setup has a lot more promise of doing useful work when compared to Mylows motor. In this realm of OU there is plently of room for numerous methods so go ahead and start cheering for Mylow and when Thane returns you can cheer for him as well.. 8)
Quote from: mackensteff on May 07, 2009, 01:26:53 PM
Hello,
I have been following this from the start (of this forum, that is as Thane has been invested in this for years). Thane promised an exciting announcement in Dec that never materialized, and now the OU demonstration appears to be abust.
I don't think Thane is being intentionally pernicious, but it seems like the same result for all these 'big new discoveries'. When push comes to shove, and the big show is promised; either nothing (Peripetia?), didn't work because of technical difficulties (Steorn), or the hype is proven as a fraud (Indian laptop for $10).
So is no news good news, or should I move on and start cheering for Mylow and his new motor?
I'm not into sports but you do remind me of one of those people who change to whatever side is the winning side and sadly I think we have WAY to many of people like that.
I don't know the man Thane anymore than any of you but from the time I have spent looking into people over the years making claims of different natures that could also be OU ends up disappearing into the wind. The difference hear is this man Thane is sharing everything he knows openly as far as I can tell and that maybe the difference in why none of these possibilities made it into existence. When its all about the money then the powers that be can destroy your credit or your reputation or your family.
This man lost his family has no credit and is not in it for the money seems like this maybe the true possibilities and even if it is not at least we can all agree that the motor is way more efficient at least.
Even from my limited knowledge, I've taken down information to make it possible to replicate these first demonstrations.
They cannot hide this information if it becomes truth and Thane will become wealthy from the fame which will come after should it come to past.
Good Luck Thane!
Thane...throw us a bone here...I might even send you a pic of Bam Bam in that bikini. Yeah...she's hot!
Fred
His drawing boards show NSNS but thats little "old" info so I am not sure. I plan to glue magnets in so both poles could be usable. Misdirecting them would be very expensive mistake... would cost new rotor and magnets. ???
i have my magnets epoxied in nsns, it works. in process of winding more coils and looking at using welding rods for cores.
Hi All
Has anyone tried beading wire as a core,very thin,nylon coated,shown as stainless steel,but the cheap stuff is feromagnetic,the "good" stuff isn't.
www.beadsmith.com
peter
Same thoughs also regarding mistakes, but if you believe in this technology you will thoroughly experiment with and not take into great consideration the costs and time.
So, i am at making at an 20'' my rotor made at 6 neo 1'' at first all North faces out. Why is that? I remember the very first demos that Thane had with his six poles rotor. THEY HAD quite a nice performance.
I am a little bit unconvinced that the accelaration effect is caused by the frequency. I believed it is caused by the sheer speed of the magnet over coil's face. Anyway, has to prove it myself.
Secondly all N faces out because Bedini's Free generator machine has an incredible resemblence with Perepiteia and suggests 6 magnets all N faces out.
Secondly, IMO Thane started with plain NSNS config and moved towords NNSS and NNNSSS. So it seems that when going plain NNNNN may be far better.
And last but not least the member Skywatcher made it that way and had success.
By the way, i will made the motor in that fashion that later on could be manufactured to accomodate 12 magnets with alternating polarity if necessary.
Regards,
Baroutologos
ps: We should begin massively replicate that thing
ps2: PLS upload photos and give figures (output etc) for given setups
Quote from: baroutologos on May 08, 2009, 07:50:56 AM
ps: We should begin massively replicate that thing
ps2: PLS upload photos and give figures (output etc) for given setups
Replication is the key but we have to be careful what we are replicating. Once we have a solid WORKING design is when we need exacting replication. That was one of the reasons I was waiting for Thane's latest results. Every time I start this replication, like getting the Microwave transformers, then Thane jumps way ahead with better materials and results. I really want to replicate but I would prefer the dust to settle a bit before spending a ton more money on materials that are obsolete by the time I get them. Maybe this weekend Thane will post results.
@all
I think what has happened, and I am basing this on the last video Thane put up before his Sunday Demo, is one of two things. First one is someone at that demo went to him and told him that they will buy him out or something like that and that he should no longer look to do this open source. That is the first one obviously.
But the second one is what i am more inclined to think and that is based on his video. During the video he uses 5 generator coils but only one is actually loaded by the bulb and counting the amps/volts in versus the amps/volts on the lit bulb, he then did a simple multiplication times 5 to get his generated output, but this is only theoretical. He says he did something like engaged the four other coils on the generator during the video but I never understood what that really meant. I think during the Demo, if it was done in the same way, someone there that knows about this stuff may have insisted on putting a real load on the four other coils and when that was done, it was probably too much for his motor and the drag just seized the motor, especially if the drag was exerted on the outer periphery of the turning magnets. I know the rpm is supposed to increase when the generator is loaded but again, load is load and the motor, regardless of an increase potential will have its limits. Based on this second point, if true, then he must be brainstorming trying to work out this thing.
I hope to hell the reason is the first one or any other positive reason. I really do because the Thane has shown an above average zest and determination that is more then admirable and I can only wish him well, either way.
Added:
Or I could be paddling up the creek. lol
Oh well. The main idea is posted already and is possesed by thousands of people. As well as several succsessful replications by others (according the posts). Not a single word about may 3rd from thane seems strange considering amount of time already passed. On the other hand we are YET to see the first overunity device to reach general public. Lets hope open source will continue.
Regards Minde
Quote from: wattsup on May 08, 2009, 11:00:04 PM
During the video he uses 5 generator coils but only one is actually loaded by the bulb and counting the amps/volts in versus the amps/volts on the lit bulb, he then did a simple multiplication times 5 to get his generated output, but this is only theoretical. He says he did something like engaged the four other coils on the generator during the video but I never understood what that really meant.
Engaging the four other coils is the same as shorting the coils. Thane did this by flicking a switch that basically shorted each of the coils one by one. Each flick of the switch that shorted each generator coil increased the rotor RPM more. The coil with the light bulb load is basically shorted by putting a transformer across the generator coil instead of a dead short by way of a switch. The reasoning was that it did not matter if you shorted the coil directly by way of a switch or a transformer you could increase the rotor RPM. By using a transformer you could get useful work (lighting multiple bulbs) out of the system while increasing the rotor RPM. It stood to reason that instead of shorting the four other generator coils with a switches you could short them using a transformer for each coil and harvest the energy. Based upon the output of the one generator coil being shorted with a transformer Thane figured the other four coils being shorted with a transformer along with adding four additional coils would produce more power output than the system was using to run the Ryobi motor. Sounded simple enough but there was a lot of work to do to meet his self imposed May 3rd demo deadline.
What is really strange is that Thane always was very open and posted good or bad results. Now he is not posting anything or logging in for over a week..
Hi Hydro
I think he also said he only had the one transformer,so he just shorted the other coils.
peter
Quote from: petersone on May 09, 2009, 06:40:16 AM
Hi Hydro
I think he also said he only had the one transformer,so he just shorted the other coils.
peter
True. In his video you can see four transformers. Perhaps they were the wrong type of transformers so he could not hook them all up. Maybe he was waiting for better transformers to hook up. All speculation at this point until Thane confirms. At least Thane left us a direction to go in. I just wished he left us with a bit more details.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on May 09, 2009, 05:25:27 AM
Engaging the four other coils is the same as shorting the coils. Thane did this by flicking a switch that basically shorted each of the coils one by one. Each flick of the switch that shorted each generator coil increased the rotor RPM more. The coil with the light bulb load is basically shorted by putting a transformer across the generator coil instead of a dead short by way of a switch. The reasoning was that it did not matter if you shorted the coil directly by way of a switch or a transformer you could increase the rotor RPM. By using a transformer you could get useful work (lighting multiple bulbs) out of the system while increasing the rotor RPM. It stood to reason that instead of shorting the four other generator coils with a switches you could short them using a transformer for each coil and harvest the energy. Based upon the output of the one generator coil being shorted with a transformer Thane figured the other four coils being shorted with a transformer along with adding four additional coils would produce more power output than the system was using to run the Ryobi motor. Sounded simple enough but there was a lot of work to do to meet his self imposed May 3rd demo deadline.
What is really strange is that Thane always was very open and posted good or bad results. Now he is not posting anything or logging in for over a week..
@hydrocontrol
I had figured that shorting the four was part of it but when you do live demos, observers will want to confirm things like if you are multiplying the bulb output by 5, then they will want to verify that the resistance (short) across the four other coils are identical to that of the bulb/transformer. But other things can then happen.
So, there is also the possibility that while doing this demo they all realized that by simply shorting the four other coils, this keeps the energy inside the coil and acted something like when he was using his HV/HC setup using the HV coil to increase RPM but not to produce output.
One coil produces energy that is consumed while the four other coils are just shorted, not really consumed but directly returned inside the four coils. Can this be equated to true power output of the 5 combined? I don't know but I have a feeling this has something to do with it.
So maybe one question is what is the difference of the magnetic environment around a generator coil and its influence on the magnet rotor when it is loaded by a power consuming device like a light bulb versus when it is simply shorted.
Too answer this question they could have then really loaded the 5 coils and that's where they may have run into some unexpected problems. Anyways this is pure speculation on my part since I was not there but these questions would logically, in my view, be asked and while guys are on location, Thane may have felt compelled to try and address them only realizing that you can increase coil magnetism or increase coil output on a real load, but not both to the same extent.
But again, I may even be further up the creek by now.
@Wattsup
At this point we are both speculating. Until either one of us starts a serious replication or Thane gives us an update we could scratch our heads all day coming up with a lot of "what if's" . Thane is by far the best person to answer how the results played out and it would be nice if he came back with an answer if the self running attempt worked or not. Frankly if it did not self run I would not be too surprised but I believe it could be really close. This generator setup looks to be a lot more viable than most "over the counter" wind generators and that was the direction I was going to take. If I could replace the Ryobi motor with a wind turbine and get a few more watts out than a standard wind generator then that would be great. If the wind just spun a fake turbine and the generator self ran.... well that would be great as well... Either case is a win for most people and I will take that win anyday...
Here's something weird, if you search for Overunity through Google.com and click on it, it takes you to a porn site http://nnovclub.ru/?topic=4047.msg95149 .
I was looking up info on Thane through Google and when I clicked on Google's link it took me to the site listed above. It looks like it's only Google and yes I tried it on my systems then called family to make sure I wasn't being redirected. I am a Network Admin, (mostly tech now) so sometimes I do know what I'm talking about and this is the case now. I checked through yahoo.com search and no prob but any link that takes you here from Google.com and you end up here, http://nnovclub.ru/?topic=4047.msg95149.
Maybe I should contact the admin for this site..
anyway, just thought people would like to know..
Quote from: Covey on May 09, 2009, 11:01:04 PM
Here's something weird, if you search for Overunity through Google.com and click on it, it takes you to a site http://nnovclub.ru/?topic=4047.msg95149 .
I was looking up info on Thane through Google and when I clicked on Google's link it took me to the site listed above. It looks like it's only Google and yes I tried it on my systems then called family to make sure I wasn't being redirected. I am a Network Admin, (mostly tech now) so sometimes I do know what I'm talking about and this is the case now. I checked through yahoo.com search and no prob but any link that takes you here from Google.com and you end up here, http://nnovclub.ru/?topic=4047.msg95149.
Maybe I should contact the admin for this site..
anyway, just thought people would like to know..
Very interesting indeed. I just tried it and it did the same for me as well. The very first link claims "overunity.com" but it takes you to the Russian site. One of the mulitple popups is the same teen bad site that popped up from selecting the Thane thread directly from Overunity.com before. Perhaps this "hijacking" is causing Thane from updating results.
Stephan really needs to fix this ASAP as it will affect his forum greatly.
Wow. I cant find much about thane or his projects either on google or yahoo or altavista (just a few days ago google search offered multiple working links about him and his project) . Wiki posts dissapeared also . The only "overunity.com" link does take me to russian site too. Some of the links including videos from other sites do work if searched including full name.
I'm trying to understand what some of the critics keep stating. Is it that while the RPM's are increasing, there is no torque to push you up hill?
For example in his first and second demo if I was to grab the brass coupler or steel shaft I would be able to slow it down quickly because their is no power?
So what he has to show is ability to make the motor do work as well as increasing RPM's?
Or is it the Over unity of less in and more out in Voltage?
or are they the same he's just trying to prove this theory with the last video?
Really a newbie and I learn things in layman's terms.
Covey ???
I'm trying to see and understand what Thane is accomplishing in layman's theorem to what is possible with the first presentation. A windmill defiantly seems to at least be way more efficient if not to say perpetual which I won't say yet till it's proven but I do wish for it a great deal.
Otherwise a propeller on a airplane or a boat. Does the system continue running faster limited to the construction materials or is their a limit on the acceleration based on voltage applied?
I would love to be able to follow on a small scale to play with just to understand what I am seeing. I think this might be a fun venture to learn about.
OK, I think I'm understanding the induction motor and what he's been attempting has nothing to do with increasing RPM velocity because he never surpasses the Ryobi bench grinder RPM limit 3600. He's been showing how his generator is actually producing it's own voltage to a point where it's taking less voltage to run everything including the induction motor and potentially able to bring more voltage out. He's getting more back out per each coil in total making it surpass what's going in by putting more coils.
Covey
Quote from: minde4000 on May 09, 2009, 11:41:37 PM
Wow. I cant find much about thane or his projects either on google or yahoo or altavista (just a few days ago google search offered multiple working links about him and his project) . Wiki posts dissapeared also . The only "overunity.com" link does take me to russian site too. Some of the links including videos from other sites do work if searched including full name.
@ minde4000
There must have been something wrong with your query as all the links to Thane's work and newspaper articles are still available on Google when I queried the following:
Query = Thane Heins Perepiteia:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=Thane+Heins+Perepiteia&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=
Query = Thane Heins Perepeteia:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ei=CMUGSqu6HYOHtgflzdmcBw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=Thane+Heins+Perepeteia&spell=1
News:
http://news.google.ca/archivesearch?pz=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=Thane+heins&cf=all
All my searches were performed from Canada, are you performing the searches from another country? If so why would they be blocking it I wonder?
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: Covey on May 10, 2009, 03:16:30 AM
OK, I think I'm understanding the induction motor and what he's been attempting has nothing to do with increasing RPM velocity because he never surpasses the Ryobi bench grinder RPM limit 3600. He's been showing how his generator is actually producing it's own voltage to a point where it's taking less voltage to run everything including the induction motor and potentially able to bring more voltage out. He's getting more back out per each coil in total making it surpass what's going in by putting more coils.
Covey
Thane is trying to show multiple things at the same time using his Ryobi demostration unit. The Ryobi was not chosen for efficiency but as a handy rotor drive mechanism. One of the biggest things that Thane has shown is that you can "cheat" Lenz law. You have to have current flowing in order to have Lenz take effect. If you only have voltage flowing and not current then the Lenz is not as bad. In order to have only voltage and very little current you have to wind coils with lots of very fine (30 to 40) gauge wire. The additional benefit is that the Lenz that develops in the setup is delayed by using finer wire and that allows the resulting magnetic field that forms in the coils/cores to push the rotor magnets along in the path of rotor rotation. This only will start to happen at a certain RPM depending on several conditions and is why in his demos you will see the rotor slow down if the rotor RPM is not above a certain threshold.
The effect should work on a smaller scale but it would require a fair amount of trial and error.
In reviewing the last video that Thane posted that has his huge backing core with fingers I think I see a potential ;D problem. I think once he gets over half the new system populated with coils it will no longer speed up but will in fact slow down. This is because his huge backer core will act as a magnetic short for the entire system. I think he will have to segment (cut) the core into 1/3 or 1/4 parts in order to keep the rotor effect increasing.
I really wish Thane would update us with more news.
oops..to many responds ::)
It seems to only happen when I query through Google.com and after clicking on any links listed for Overunity.com when clicked on through Google search takes you to a porn site.
I just happened to be clicking on the forum for Thane, I think all links on Google for Overunity does it.
And I live in Canada as well..
Quote from: Goat on May 10, 2009, 08:24:17 AM
@ minde4000
There must have been something wrong with your query as all the links to Thane's work and newspaper articles are still available on Google when I queried the following:
Query = Thane Heins Perepiteia:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=Thane+Heins+Perepiteia&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=
Query = Thane Heins Perepeteia:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ei=CMUGSqu6HYOHtgflzdmcBw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=Thane+Heins+Perepeteia&spell=1
News:
http://news.google.ca/archivesearch?pz=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=Thane+heins&cf=all
All my searches were performed from Canada, are you performing the searches from another country? If so why would they be blocking it I wonder?
Regards,
Paul
Thanks hydro for the info, I do understand the len's law and his effect to overcome it. I guess I was looking for practical applications to better understand what was going on and the potential. I'm to far from understanding the technical side because my electrical experience was very limited. I haven't even referd to any of what I have learned for 15 years and even then mostly it was the beginnings of basic electrical theory.
So as I understand his over coming the lenz law will in effect do as he's been showing in his video's and the system is carried in momentum with the help of the magnets and speeds the system up. So it's not about pushing the motor beyond it's limits it's more the fact that he can get back from what he puts in?
You know as I re read what you've stated it really does sound like a perpetual motion machine because in a sense it sounds like it's able to rotate itself with only the power of the magnets. After overcoming the lenz law which means the system should slow down, it instead speeds up. So their still is voltage but a minimal amount to run it and it speeds up instead of slowing down. When he puts the coil into effect the normal effect should be that the opposites repel and create drag but at the right RPM the opposite happens and from that he's trying to understand it himself by seeing if it is a potential by in some way like in the last video to try and have a greater output of voltage out. Can he some how feed that back into the system and then show it as a perpetual?
Is that also what he's been showing us?
It's almost as if their is something greater here lurking just beyond the box of creativity and should one of us see it, we'll fully understand what truly is going on. I see why the almost anal retentive approach to trying to make this understood.
You know if I could afford it this would be my new venture, seems interesting.
I guess that will be for tomorrow.
It's fun to speculate but I really want to get my hands dirty..
I wish I could try it myself.
Covey
Quote from: hydrocontrol on May 10, 2009, 08:52:49 AM
Thane is trying to show multiple things at the same time using his Ryobi demostration unit. The Ryobi was not chosen for efficiency but as a handy rotor drive mechanism. One of the biggest things that Thane has shown is that you can "cheat" Lenz law. You have to have current flowing in order to have Lenz take effect. If you only have voltage flowing and not current then the Lenz is not as bad. In order to have only voltage and very little current you have to wind coils with lots of very fine (30 to 40) gauge wire. The additional benefit is that the Lenz that develops in the setup is delayed by using finer wire and that allows the resulting magnetic field that forms in the coils/cores to push the rotor magnets along in the path of rotor rotation. This only will start to happen at a certain RPM depending on several conditions and is why in his demos you will see the rotor slow down if the rotor RPM is not above a certain threshold.
The effect should work on a smaller scale but it would require a fair amount of trial and error.
In reviewing the last video that Thane posted that has his huge backing core with fingers I think I see a potential ;D problem. I think once he gets over half the new system populated with coils it will no longer speed up but will in fact slow down. This is because his huge backer core will act as a magnetic short for the entire system. I think he will have to segment (cut) the core into 1/3 or 1/4 parts in order to keep the rotor effect increasing.
I really wish Thane would update us with more news.
Hello,
I was reading the other days the Perepiteia article in wikipedia. Quite interesting one! It depicts Thane's CV in a nut shell.
A brief summury...
Thane works on Perepiteia since 2003. He tried unsuccesfully to Patent it in Canadian patent office.
After that, he enstablished his company in order to commercially exploit Perepiteia's design even though without a patent (?)
He is somekind obssesed with Peripeteia and he is totally conviced that he has a invaluable machine to his hands.
He had been working on it endless hours and knows about everything in practical terms.
He invited a proffesor from Ottawa University to see and judge and he admited it works.
The in turn that Professor consulted the MIT and another proffesor came. He also admited it works also although till then he had no any apparent explanation.
I wish not in repeating the whole wikipedia article, but i want to emphasize that anyone no matter how skilled is on the electromechanic art, and seen Perepiteia admited it works (pls inform me if somebody found out it is not :p )
The critics of Peripeteia are found among the theorists only!
So its more than obvious we deal with something at least extraordinary and still awfully simple in principle.
I urge anyone interested in OU to take on from here.
This is the purpose of sites like this in the bottom line.
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: Covey on May 10, 2009, 10:40:16 AM
Thanks hydro for the info, I do understand the len's law and his effect to overcome it. I guess I was looking for practical applications to better understand what was going on and the potential.
Practical application. The extreme application would be a rotor that spins, and produces more power than consumed. That would be OU. Stick one of these in your electric car and just drive across country until the next bathroom break. ;) Stick one in your house and unplug from the grid.
The more likely practical application would be to replace the Ryobi motor with a wind turbine, hydro turbine, solar driven turbine, etc and produce more power than you would with a normal generator head. Not OU but if you can increase the power out without increasing overall drag then the you can produce more power at lower wind speeds or lower water speeds, etc.
Lots of real world economic rattling possibilities if it was OU that I am sure would frighten everyone if you really looked at the ramifications. Lets say you put one in your car and drove all year without having to buying gas. Great for you but not so great for your countries economy. Get enough people doing this and the tax collected for road improvements drops to the point where the roads can not be maintained. Not only that but the only reason to stop at a gas station would be to buy a slurpy so a lot of gas stations would close. More people unemployed. Less taxes collected. Roads falling apart. Not good for an industrialized country. Chaos takes over. You can apply this same logic to home power generation. No need to run power lines so no sales of power line wire. No linemen needed to fix the power lines. No power substations. No fossil fueled generators so no more coal mining or oil drilling. No taxes for the sale of energy or the construction of equipment needed for energy generation. No taxes on the people supporting the energy infrastructure. Once again Chaos takes over.
So what do you think any government faced with massive unemployment and less taxes because someone created a OU system would do ? Embrace it ?? Accept it ??? Yeah.. Right...
Me. I would just power my house and my car and keep my mouth mostly shut. Make it look like my house is being powered by the wind. Maybe release the information on the internet for free so others can do the same thing. At least give people a lot of hints so they can figure it out. A small revolution but if it gets too big than chaos kicks in and anarchy follows.
The above comment is incorrect. So despite being completely off-topic, i felt the need to correct this fallacy.
Throughout History, innovation has meant greater prosperity, not less.... And there are certainly proofs of this. In the 1900's and 1910's ; thousands made their fortunes by moving from the horse and carriage trade over to selling or supporting automobiles. Thousands more did it by moving from lamp oil to electricity. These people made much more money in their new endeavors than was ever possible in the old trades, This will also be true when the clean, safe, and cheap energy technologies start to appear... Whether the buggy whip manufacturers and whale oil salesmen want them to or not ;)
Those that claim disaster and despair when free energy comes to us have nothing to base these predictions of doom on.... AT ALL.
It appears some around the internet are now waging a psy-ops campaign to frighten us into NOT WANTING free energy... Because they realize that is the only way to stop it from happening ;)
The reality is that such devices will be a tremendous boon to the economy, in many ways. First, there still will be a need for petroleum and coal: Over 33% of it is not used for energy purposes. It just means their 100 years of easy profits, and their control over the entire world... Will be over. Thank God, it won't come too soon! They've nearly destroyed it already.
Second, there is the incredible boost it will give to our nearly-destroyed domestic manufacturing base.... Creating huge numbers of new good-paying jobs for the poor and middle class. This creates much more tax revenue than any lying, suppressing, polluting, and tax cheating trans-national corporation ever did ;) ... We don't get to declare ourselves "offshore", we can’t hide our money in Swiss or Cayman bank accounts, we actually pay taxes and buy things here ;)
Imagine a country with unemployment at World War Two levels again.... This in turn stabilizes the economy and the Dollar by ending the huge deficits... So the wall street gamblers and international banker extortionists can no longer hold us for ransom: With an economy based on manufacture and new entrepreneurs, no one will care what those criminals on the stock exchange do anymore.... They will lose the ability to control our entire society and our lives. Good riddance to bad rubbish! They will be lucky if they don't get strung up by piano wire in the piazza... As they really deserve. Loss of trillions in easy profits, and the ability to run everyone's life, will hurt them enough to make me happy lol.
It will take 20 years or more to explore and fully saturate all the parallel applications from these new energy technologies, and in the meantime, our citizens and businesses will enjoy the benefits of cheap and plentiful energy.... Allowing small business to compete with the huge corporations that have dominated markets and suppressed competition for so long.
And perhaps the best thing of all is, the secret tax we pay for energy... Larger and more regressive than any tax every levied by a government.. One that is forced on us by lying criminals, never elected by anyone, who control the energy markets with illegal insider stock trading and secret trust cartels... Will finally end. And we will finally begin to have an opportunity for independence and prosperity that we could only dream of before.
... Maybe all this is what they don't want to see?
So go on folks, believe the gloomy tales of disaster of what would happen if our "friends and benefactors" the oil and coal barons are de-throned..... Even though there is no evidence for those tales at all. Believe it because that is easier and "safer" than considering the chance of your own real freedom... Your own real independence from the energy cartels... Your own chance at a more prosperous life free from wars, free from pollution, and free from unseen control by an un-elected elite hiding behind a curtain. And in so doing, reject the promise of these technologies, that DO EXIST and ARE COMING whether they want them to or not. Because in the end, it will be our choice: To be slaves forever, or to have the balls to be truly free.
Hi Jibbguy,
Perhaps I am too much gloom and doom. I could have gone into a lot more pros/cons of a conversion to a better energy system. In the long term it would work out better for everyone. It is the short term that is problem.
You stated "It just means their 100 years of easy profits, and their control over the entire world... Will be over. Thank God, it won't come too soon! They've nearly destroyed it already."
Do you have any idea how big they have become in the last 100 years ? Do you think that they will be happy to let go of their death grip and control. They control a huge aspect of our civilization and to think they will meekly just give up 65 % (Over 33% of it is not used for energy purposes) is like an ostrich sticking its head in the sand thinking the danger will go away. Why do you think they are investing heavily with their billions of profits into wind, hydro, and solar production instead of more oil exploration. They do not want to let the "control" to slip away. Just watch. Whatever materials are needed for a OU machine will suddenly become scarce or extremely expensive. More than likely it will be both extremely expensive and scarce. They have the money to buy up those resources. We gave them the money. Your not happy with it. I am not happy with it. The change will have to be grass roots and it will have to be quick. The problem is that the grass roots do not have the resources to be quick.
Hi folks, very very good post Jibbguy and i could not have said it better. Hydrocontrol, i think the one piece of the puzzle your overlooking is the unseen and this unseen is also another elite controller act of suppression and coverup, which is the many ships in the sky that have been seen throughout earths history. And as usual the world controllers have tried to make us fear them, even though the greater majority of our space brothers and sisters have been looking out for us and the planet. Actually i think the mere fact were all still here should be a pretty good indicator that higher forces from our creator are at work to keep things in balance till times such as now when the world controllers are stripped of their power to control humanity any longer and engineered lack is over. I'm rather amused at some of their disinformation agents who claim its the peoples fault for not having enough money or necessities of life because they attract lack to themselves by thinking they lack. Although this has an element of truth, its being used to maintain the status quo and i notice some religions carry this same theme by causing people to feel guilt and shame. Our creator and all creation supplies more than enough of everything to supply the population of this world, but as i said Jibbguy covered that story.
peace love light
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on May 12, 2009, 01:30:34 AM
Hydrocontrol, i think the one piece of the puzzle your overlooking is the unseen and this unseen is also another elite controller act of suppression and coverup, which is the many ships in the sky that have been seen throughout earths history.
I am sure we are all overlooking pieces of the puzzle. ;D ;D
I was not trying to start a viewpoint war or change the purpose or topic of this thread. There are already many threads here with topics like the direction this is going. I should have just answered Corvey with my first couple of paragraphs on applications and left the speculative ramifications out of it. My feelings are that both mine and Jibbguys views are correct. Mine being a short term view and Jibbguys being a long term view.
Since Thane has not logged in here since May 3rd it now looks like the replicators are the only ones left to carry on. I have my aluminum rotor done. Now on to mounting.
You know I have to agree with all of you on this one. Hydro you are right about the fear the government has in losing control and I completely agree with you on how I would send out the information. I would use the energy for myself and outsource the knowledge to everyone freely much like Thane is doing. It is the safest because we all agree the powers that be can and will destroy you and your life and your families and any other evil means of controlling or stopping you forever. Thane gave out the info and we all know how to duplicate it, should they try and shut him up we all know enough to continue his work. From what we've already seen if he was successful with the last demo then he most assuredly has created OU and that we all can duplicate. If I was the evil powers that be and I new the Genie was out of the bottle and I needed to get it back in because of this situation with Thane and his open source I would have him be threatened and have him come out in public and tell everyone it was a failure so none of us would even remotely continue because we believe him but the truth is he is being threatened and to do anything otherwise would be death for him or his family or both. So if he comes out and says it was a failure I intend to continue just to prove to myself I am or not becoming a conspiracy nut. :)
Covey
We all dream of the day when the paradigm shift begins and all the corruption is done away with. We no longer venture out for our own particular greed and instead grow together as one but individually. We as a Race can succeed and do anything and once we no longer are under control for energy we truly can reach out beyond the stars. We can show how much potential Mankind has to find the final frontier, Truth, Knowledge and Understanding.
Does this setup use back EMF to power the voltage coil? If so, closed loop overunity, yes?
I've was looking at potentials in such things as Algae/Oil. It's was the only logical direction from what I've looked into. It takes up land not needed to compete with agriculture and with this new company I seen that is capable of 33000 gal per acre per year compared to anything else nothing competes. They are in their infancy and they say they can compete with .80/l right now.
They use closed bio loops that grow the Algae most efficiently.. I was looking into things like this when I stumbled onto Thanes Demonstrations.
It sounded interesting because my personal consumption is far less than I would need if I purchased my dream starter acreage. It seemed logical until Thane's work I am hoping he'll come back with news good or bad..
I actually tried to bring up him on 411.ca and gave a call but some little girl answered said he wasn't their. Since he's single I imagine the only number for Thane is incorrect.
Oh well..
Covey
@Covey : Are so sure Thane is being suppressed? I have seen nothing to indicate this yet: There are many possible reasons for his not being here lately. He is a Canadian, and if you look at that fellow countryman, the guy with the "Fat people are harder to kidnap" tee-shirt (sorry i forgot his name) who was on the "Dragon" program with his generator, he has apparently been left alone so far... And he actually claimed "OU" loudly while Thane has not.
@Sky : Thanks M8. I think what it will take is for us to not waiver, and to be strong in the face of intimidation. The only way we can fail is if they convince us it's useless to try ;)
@Hydro : They certainly have much power; and the kind that matters... And the pols are all in their pockets. However, they also have to play the game of "facade" ("plausible deniability").. Or they will be quickly overthrown. The fact is, they are more vulnerable than they would like to admit ;) . It comes down to us in the Open Source movement having the ability to succeed where secretive and greedy inventors have always failed in the past. We CAN do this, and the way to do it is to make it less comfortable and "safe" for them to continue suppressing, than to release. We are getting there ;)
And yes, i certainly agree that grass roots activism is the way to defeat them. It is all about public awareness: And perception. That is why i try to "fight" that perception of fear and inevitability whenever i see it. It really won't take much: Even only the FEAR, the possibility, of our success could make it all happen ;)
Regarding their hoarding and making it difficult to pursue these technologies: The Meyer system of ultra-efficient Hydroxy production and combustion can't be stopped that way (lol only sat on by a major corporation who has shelved it). Nor can an all-magnet motor (should this ever be realized lol): They can, and actually already do, control the Rare Earth magnet production... But ceramic magnets cannot be controlled nor "cornered" (they are too easy to manufacture, and no one has a "lock" on the techology)... So they will end up selling Neo's and Cobalts anyway ;)
A wise man once said: "The most powerful lie they ever got us to believe was that we can't change anything."
Quote from: Covey on May 12, 2009, 10:41:37 AM
I actually tried to bring up him on 411.ca and gave a call but some little girl answered said he wasn't their. Since he's single I imagine the only number for Thane is incorrect.
Covey
Funny. I actually was looking in their local paper. I figure I would check the obits. I typed in Thane Heins in the search window and it brought up some article of a guy dying from falling off his apartment balcony cleaning his outside balcony window. After reading the article there was no mention of a name let alone Thane's name. Really strange. I went to a different section of the paper and typed his name in the search engine again and this time nothing came up except some internet web links on the right. A bit freaky.
I am sure we can all agree we need to move this forward. It just would be nicer if Thane was here for updates. Maybe he just went on an extended vacation after a successful demo.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on May 12, 2009, 12:03:36 PM
Funny. I actually was looking in their local paper. I figure I snip
I am sure we can all agree we need to move this forward. It just would be nicer if Thane was here for updates. Maybe he just went on an extended vacation after a successful demo.
I was in contact with Thane on the weekend and he is fine,
very busy he said... he and his wife have moved, and he does
not have an internet connection at this time...there was no mention of the demo...
Take Care,
Ron P
Quote from: hydrocontrol on May 12, 2009, 12:03:36 PM
...I typed in Thane Heins in the search window and it brought up some article of a guy dying from falling off his apartment balcony cleaning his outside balcony window.
The new Thane conspiracy:
If Thane fell from his balcony, then he was probably pushed, most likely by iRon or myself (other suspects would include Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet, and Professor Plum). Note: iRon's latest post is simply a ploy to reassure, create confusion, and buy more get-away time.
Quote from: derricka on May 12, 2009, 06:15:47 PM
The new Thane conspiracy:
If Thane fell from his balcony, then he was probably pushed, most likely by iRon or myself (other suspects would include Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet, and Professor Plum). Note: iRon's latest post is simply a ploy to reassure, create confusion, and buy more get-away time.
Oh spit, you caught on too quick. Yes, when I was talking to him he was busy crating up the gold bullion for the move...
and while not specifically mentioned, I got the feeling that
the destination was the British
Virgin Islands...he warned me to keep my mouth shut... but for only $17.54 ...?
a man has his pride... I didn't accept the offer and so am free
to tell all I know...
which isn't much, thought I should get that
in there before the mibs come nosing around...
Ron (tongue in cheek)
"British Virgin Islands: the 2000 KPMG report to the United Kingdom government indicated that the British Virgin Islands was the domicile for approximately 41% of the world's offshore companies, making it by some distance the largest offshore jurisdiction in the world by volume of incorporations."
------------------------------------------------------
See? I've warned everybody before... you can't trust Ottawa
people... it starts right at the top...
"OTTAWA (AFP) - Former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney testified Tuesday he did nothing illegal in accepting cash from a German arms dealer, but tried to keep it secret to avoid attacks on his reputation.blah blah blah"
Well iRon, it's a good thing you have your principles, because just two days ago (Mothers day), I would have sold my mother to Somali pirates for $17.54 You see, I made the mistake of taking my magnet motor shut up payment from Big Oil in diamonds, instead of gold bullion. I laughed at Thane, and told him he would get a hernia hauling around all those heavy gold bricks. But no, I was the stupid one, I left my package of diamonds on the bus by mistake. Once I realized my error, it would have only taken $17.54 in cab fare to catch up with the bus, but I was traveling incognito, without any credit cards or ID, so I didn't have the money. Anyway gotta go, like you, I am only one step ahead of the MIB, who will probably attach electrodes to my "Goldmember" to find out what secrets I sold to Big Oil.
I'm very happy to hear everything is fine and he continues working forward, so if I was to guess then the Demo didn't turn out exactly what he expected because he probably came home with more questions then answers, I'm guessing..
I think
and give us a little break people yes the conspiracy theories start flying but what do you expect, I've heard of many people who have made a break through only to have them disappear into the wood works or worse mysteriously die..
you start to wonder..
I think you would have to be naive if you don't take things like the fear of these people in power losing control on a large scale. They would not be happy and yes they have the power to make you go away.. be it with death or dishonor..
I guess doing this open source definitely would make things more complicated and this as everyone has agreed is wonderful and great, all the others seem to hold onto their secrets with both hands.
Very Very happy to hear Thanes work is to continue..
Quote from: derricka on May 12, 2009, 09:11:17 PM
Well iRon, it's a good thing you have your principles, because just two days ago (Mothers day), I would have sold my mother to Somali pirates for $17.54 You see, I made the mistake of taking my magnet motor shut up payment from Big Oil in diamonds, instead of gold bullion. snip
Who needs Thane, eh? One can see now that the true humor
came from the ranks...well at times the humor was a bit rank..
Ron
Quote from: Covey on May 13, 2009, 12:57:17 AM
Very Very happy to hear Thanes work is to continue..
Yes Covey, we all like to think that we are masters of the situation but often it is that when we play a tune the 'man'
who is paying for it gets to say when it shall be played and
sometimes even if it will be played...
That could be the situation here... so we have to be patient
and see how this plays out....
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 13, 2009, 11:10:03 AM
Yes Covey, we all like to think that we are masters of the situation but often it is that when we play a tune the 'man'
who is paying for it gets to say when it shall be played and
sometimes even if it will be played...
That could be the situation here... so we have to be patient
and see how this plays out....
Ron
Yes I_Ron you are so correct. Obviously Thane is not doing this out his garage so there are other supporting factors in play here. Considering his progress, the amount of materials involved, and the location involved there appears to be a fair amount of "outside" support so I am sure that support has some "say" in the matter.
The good news in all this, is that there really are no secrets being kept here. All the information needed to replicate Thanes work is posted here in this forum or in his YouTube videos.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
If you are observant while watching Thane's YouTube video's (especially the earlier ones) you will notice he has things like schematics and magnet configurations on a white board behind him. All you have to do is freeze the video and do a screen capture, as many (if not most) of these drawings are quite legible at times.
Quote from: derricka on May 14, 2009, 04:29:16 AM
The good news in all this, is that there really are no secrets being kept here. All the information needed to replicate Thanes work is posted here in this forum or in his YouTube videos.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins
If you are observant while watching Thane's YouTube video's (especially the earlier ones) you will notice he has things like schematics and magnet configurations on a white board behind him. All you have to do is freeze the video and do a screen capture, as many (if not most) of these drawings are quite legible at times.
Yes, this is true but if you have watched this unfold you see
Mr T has steadily grown his knowledge of this concept.
Starting from the flux through the motor shaft up to the
more refined combination HC/HV coil. So the early work will
give you an understanding but the latest concepts are the meat.
The 18 magnet rotor has gone through several incarnations
the latest being an acknowledgment that 18 magnets at 3300 RPM generates a very high frequency output, over 900 Hz.
Doubling up the magnets in a NNSS manner brings this back in alignment with 400 Hz iron cored transformers.
But this leaves a 'not the most efficient rotor', so room for improvement yet, either through different magnet shapes or a
lower RPM motor, ie: 1740 RPM RV.
So pay attention to the latest experiments and think how
you can achieve a similar build, knowing what we know now.
All the best,
Ron
Magnet poles ... First thing - 18 magnets cannot go NNSS because you will end up with NNNN at the end. T made it clear that he wants to increase amount of the magnets in order to increase pulse frequency and reduce min working rpm. His las video demonstrates some 50khz per coil if magnets are NSNS @ 3000rpm. His 18 magnet rotor is most likely NSNS or possibly NNNSSS but this is unlikly considering the fact that he was looking for frequency increase. I wish T could put his word on this particular matter.
Regards Minde
@ I_ron
I have been following this thread for some time now. I think you have been involved in peripeteia with mr Heins, even though you have your differences.
I am asking. Do you think magnet frequence is one of the factors for acceleration or magnet speed?
Today, i re-viewed the youtube video of thanes "Regenerative accelaration part 1"
There a 6 magnet rotor is employed and yet accelaration is being acheived from some 1200 rmp. I assume coil configuration to be more or less the same with the 18 magnet rotor.
For me if it was frequency, the 6 magnet accelaration would required some x 3 rpm in contrast to the 18 one. So? What do you think about that?
Regards,
Baroutologos
Hi Baroutologos
The only thing I can say is maybe there is even more acceleration with a higher frequency.
peter
Quote from: minde4000 on May 14, 2009, 01:23:03 PM
Magnet poles ... First thing - 18 magnets cannot go NNSS because you will end up with NNNN at the end. T made it clear that he wants to increase amount of the magnets in order to increase pulse frequency and reduce min working rpm. His las video demonstrates some 50khz per coil if magnets are NSNS @ 3000rpm. His 18 magnet rotor is most likely NSNS or possibly NNNSSS but this is unlikly considering the fact that he was looking for frequency increase. I wish T could put his word on this particular matter.
Regards Minde
Oops, sorry, I missed that, but yes you are right. I usually
work with 16 or 24 magnet rotors and didn't do my homework.
18 magnets times 3000 RPM... first divide the rev per minute
by 60 to revs per second and you get 50. Multiplie 50 by 18
and you get 900 Hz.
MOT transformers and all in north america are usually 60 Hz.
So the 900Hz output will not work too efficiently into these.
Ron
PS: mis-spelling is to defeat the adds!
Quote from: baroutologos on May 14, 2009, 03:12:48 PM
@ I_ron
I am asking. Do you think magnet frequence is one of the factors for acceleration or magnet speed?
What do you think about that?
Regards,
Baroutologos
It would just be my personal opinion as I haven't done the
experiments... but I think there is a minimum window only.
Ron
@i_ron
Wow my math was 60x off rofl. 900hz it is with 18 magnets @ 3000rpm. Damn rpm/min... :P
Thanks
Quote from: petersone on May 14, 2009, 03:23:04 PM
Hi Baroutologos
The only thing I can say is maybe there is even more acceleration with a higher frequency.
peter
I think that also. IMO, magnet speed initiates the event alone. Magnet frequency as i perceive it has to do with output. (more magnets per pass, less coil idle time = more output = better accelaration) :) But, that is theorizing to the moment. No hard evidence yet.
............................
Regarding transformer inefficiency i can verify that. I am a builder and owner of a simple bedini SSG. It runs at 300 to 400 rpm with 18 ferrite magnets on the circuference and comsumes some 3 watt.
When i add an high voltage coil, (29awg @ 340ohms) , it outputs 100vAC and 20mA when shorted. The notable effect is that when shorted it does not slow the rotor down, whereas it doen not accelarate it also.
When an 10Kohm resistor is connected there is a current of 7mA through it. Note 20 mA shorted (340ohms coil resistance) and 7mA through a 10Kohm resistor.
So, by doing the math it outputs some 0.6 watt. The little resistor becomes very hot also.
When i used a step-down transformer it hardly could light an 6volt 50mA bulb. So much of energy is wasted on the rather small trasformer.
BUT.. when i use a capacitor, 2200uf could be charged at 60volt in 12 secs. So... with proper arrangement that small lightbulb could be sustained to be lit.
Bottom line, for small setups, transformers are lossy. Caps are better.
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: minde4000 on May 14, 2009, 11:12:46 PM
@i_ron
Wow my math was 60x off rofl. 900hz it is with 18 magnets @ 3000rpm. Damn rpm/min... :P
Thanks
No prob, bin dehr dun dat
R
Hi Baroutologos
The set up you described is running at about 7khz where as heins is running at about 25kz which is perhaps why you are not seeing any acceleration.
peter
@ Peter
Excuse me Peter, but am I not measure it correctly? 7 Kilo-herz? Per what? Per minute?
I said 18 magnets pass over coil at a rate of 5-7 rotations per sec (depends the input). That's a frequency of 90-125 Hz. Not 7 Khz.
Hertz frequency is measure on second basis.
Regards,
Baroutologos
Hi Baroutologos
Sorry,you are right,Heins is about 400hz,as you said your's is about 100hz,have I got it right now? if so there is a big differance.
peter
@Baroutologos
Keep up the good work man.
Nice to see ppl are still moving forward with this project.
Cheerz
Dan.
Could someone please advice where could I buy 28cm diam toroidal core? I have tried toroidtech and few others and all say its too big or they dont sell cores at all. I tought T mentioned that he got his from toroidtech?? Also he did mention about http://www.kryfs.com Anyone know a descent store to buy one?
Regards Minde
Online core shop:
http://www.alphacoredirect.com/index.html?lmd=39634.474294 (http://www.alphacoredirect.com/index.html?lmd=39634.474294)
They don't stock these ultra large sizes but they do take special requests. Prices are good.
Quote from: Nali2001 on May 19, 2009, 03:33:01 PM
Online core shop:
http://www.alphacoredirect.com/index.html?lmd=39634.474294 (http://www.alphacoredirect.com/index.html?lmd=39634.474294)
They don't stock these ultra large sizes but they do take special requests. Prices are good.
Awesome Nali2001! I emailed them and got my answer already:
"" Here is the pricing for bare core PN TCOR7x15394 including the stress relief annealing .
1 pc-$146.12
5pc- $122.58
10pc-$110.32
ID OD HT BUILD GAPP
[in] 7.000 11.000 2.000 2.000
[mm] 177.80 279.40 50.80 50.80 mm 0.00 mm
Material is M3-009 grain oriented steel and the weight of 1 core is 29.66 lb.
We can ship in 3-5 working days.
Regards ""
Big thanks for info. Thats the only company that gave me a positive response in a few days. Sounds like a serious company to me. Will order one tommorow ;)
Regards Minde
I hope Thane drops by soon this forum is in sleep mode which I hope means many people are finding the time to repeat his work.
Covey
Its not easy to make a minimum setup for exploring Thane's work.
Mine setup, consists of two rotors on a saft that makes an axial pulsed super-efficient motor and to the other rotor the perepiteia HV coils design.
This setup has cost me so far - magnets ferrites & neos coils, rotor-shaft machining, transistors, capacitors etc some 500 euros and keep counting :P
I experience some difficulty in making the pulse motor so as to achieve some 3000 rpm in a 28 diam twin rotor shaft. (Ruobi grinder is the easy solution. Raw power!) but i will resolve this sooner or later.
While i am working whenever i can on this unit, i remember Thane's saying... "Arm chair inventing is easy..." :)
Regards,
Baroutologos
Quote from: baroutologos on May 22, 2009, 03:32:34 AM
Its not easy to make a minimum setup for exploring Thane's work.
Mine setup, consists of two rotors on a saft that makes an axial pulsed super-efficient motor and to the other rotor the perepiteia HV coils design.
This setup has cost me so far - magnets ferrites & neos coils, rotor-shaft machining, transistors, capacitors etc some 500 euros and keep counting :P
I experience some difficulty in making the pulse motor so as to achieve some 3000 rpm in a 28 diam twin rotor shaft. (Ruobi grinder is the easy solution. Raw power!) but i will resolve this sooner or later.
While i am working whenever i can on this unit, i remember Thane's saying... "Arm chair inventing is easy..." :)
Regards,
Baroutologos
Hey Baruotologos,
Its nice to see you working on it too. All I have is toroidal ring underway wire and bobbins. Rotor will be the most expensive part of the deal I think. The dc pulse driving motor is another headache wich I might leave on a side for now. Lets keep in touch Baroutologos. Anyone else trying this pm please for confidential or open share.
Regards Minde
Quote from: Covey on May 21, 2009, 05:59:53 PM
I hope Thane drops by soon this forum is in sleep mode which I hope means many people are finding the time to repeat his work.
Covey
Covey, not just ordinary sleep, but I would say the final sleep, I doubt he will be back. The few who are replicating should save a few things to their hard drifes and maybe form a lose
coalition off line.
Ron
If you miz spell the word then you don't get the stupid ad in the middle of your post, lol
So after a year of following this religiously this is how the story ends. A promise, broken, and hints this was all a hoax. I'm a pretty cynical person, but something told me Thane's story was different. In the end he was different, he actually had me convinced and pulling for him. I actually thought I was watching a man about to change the world. In the end the world is the same, if not worse as one more person fell to ...
Quote from: mackensteff on May 22, 2009, 07:56:29 PM
So after a year of following this religiously this is how the story ends. A promise, broken, and hints this was all a hoax. I'm a pretty cynical person, but something told me Thane's story was different. In the end he was different, he actually had me convinced and pulling for him. I actually thought I was watching a man about to change the world. In the end the world is the same, if not worse as one more person fell to ...
No hoax machensteff, and all the information to replicate was given. In the two years we were privileged to see this project grow and take shape and the man grow in knowledge along with it. It was a great ride, right?
But a man has to eat and take care of his family also, maybe a bigger company bought the smaller company and the word is now no more list... period. Possibly the demo was postponed to a later date... whether it has happened yet I don't know. More than that I can't say. I was told some info but also asked to keep certain things confidential, so walking a fine line here. edit, The last post I received was mostly to family.
As you may recall 'just me' used to poste pictures for him... then he sent some pictures to me that I failed to post and got shit because I didn't. Then when more pictures were sent to me I posted a couple and was then accused of breach of NDA... but I felt he should have made a statement to us following the "non demo", so failing that I am feeding in little 'what ifs' just to keep the list from taking the wrong path.
Take care all,
Ron
edit: right on Hydro, I too say Thanks Mr T, all the best!!!
Quote from: i_ron on May 22, 2009, 09:17:27 PM
No hoax machensteff, and all the information to replicate was given. In the two years we were privileged to see this project grow and take shape and the man grow in knowledge along with it. It was a great ride, right?
Yes it was a great ride. The information is still here for replication. Grab it while you can. Grab Thanes videos while you can. Thane did what he promised. Full Disclosure. Not a hoax. Not a failure. Just because he is not here to hold the replicators hand does not mean he dropped the ball. A public OU forum is not the best way to make continued progress. Check out Dr. Stifflers thread. He finally gave up on the public forum as it is 95% armchair people that generate "noise" which keeps the 5% that actually want to make progress at bay and in a confused state. A much smaller and tighter group of people that has members doing "hands on building" makes a lot more positive progress. Out of all the people reading and making comments on Thanes thread there at maybe 8 people that are replicating in some fashion. That is a low percentage.
I wish Thane well in his future whatever direction that may take.
Quote from: i_ron on May 22, 2009, 07:10:57 PM
Covey, not just ordinary sleep, but I would say the final sleep, I doubt he will be back. The few who are replicating should save a few things to their hard drifes and maybe form a lose
coalition off line.
That's to bad very sad to hear that Thane is not coming back to the forum. The last time he logged in was on the day of his Demo , I wonder if he was hesitant to say something to us.
I did download his first videos and I'll start grabbing all his newer ones, really love that free program YouTube Downloader. It works great..
I can't afford to do any of the things that's being done but it's definitely being stored for the time and I'll keep looking into the forum from time to time. Interesting how he was so involved and poof things changed so quickly, if it was a failure he said he would be the first person to admit it. Mind you I don't know if that's his true personality but if it is he would've told us it was a bust, at least. So it all comes down to if any of us know his true personality and it was honorable; would make this suspicious or was he the person who was to prideful to admit failure.
Oh my God I'm a conspiracy theorist.. lol
Anyway good luck on those of you who continue I look forward to hearing more replicated successful approaches of Thane's work.
See you in the future!!
Covey WhiteGold
Quote from: Covey on May 22, 2009, 10:57:01 PM
That's to bad very sad to hear that Thane is not coming back to the forum. The last time he logged in was on the day of his Demo , I wonder if he was hesitant to say something to us.
I did download his first videos and I'll start grabbing all his newer ones, really love that free program YouTube Downloader. It works great..snip
Anyway good luck on those of you who continue I look forward to hearing more replicated successful approaches of Thane's work.
See you in the future!!
Covey WhiteGold
Covey, now don't quote me on his not coming back, ya just never know?
But as for the tech, it is nothing mysterious. See Hop toads work and even my post of 2541 page 255 pre dates Mr T's last coil setup... 27 watts out for a cost of 19 watts. This on a very non optimized set up. So look at lots of turns and bring
the voltage out high, although the frequency is way up there and the cores were never sized properly... even at 400Hz the cores should have been way smaller... look it up, 400Hz was a standard and you can buy 400Hz transformers...
You or any of the other replicators that what to stay in touch please do so. (off line) I am not working on this myself at this time but might some time in the future ....?
Ron
Quote from: Covey on May 22, 2009, 10:57:01 PM
That's to bad very sad to hear that Thane is not coming back to the forum. The last time he logged in was on the day of his Demo , I wonder if he was hesitant to say something to us.
It is hard to say if Thane will come back. Considering he was not totally in control of his research might be part of reason. All one has to do is look at a few points.
1. Where was Thane doing his research ? A University. Where do most larger Universities like where Thane was at get their funding ? Universities like to keep a noncontroversial image to keep their funding. Think Fleischmann-Pons cold fusion research and funding. It may work but in may change the world too quickly to control. Those in control want to stay in control.
2. Thane was making great progress. Progress cost $$$. $$$ has to come from somewhere. Thane was not independently wealthy and was not doing this out of his garage. So someone or some organization was funding this.. If $$$ goes away so does progress.
3. Unless you can control every aspect of a project from location to $$$ then someone else is going to call the shots. Those shots may not be the shots you want but you have to feed yourself and your family so what choice do you have.
I never felt it was a hoax. Where I felt led astray was in Thane's idealistic approach to stick to the man. I understand about taking care of family, but my point was Thane appeared at first to be one of those revolutionaries that would change the world, because it needs to. I the end it does all come down to money, control, and power. No matter what our ideals are at some point we all end up 'playing the game' with someone elses rules. I wanted Thane to write the rules. No disrespect intended as I realize Thane has made sacrifices, just looking for that someone to set the world on a new path.
Quote from: mackensteff on May 23, 2009, 03:24:58 AM
I wanted Thane to write the rules. No disrespect intended as I realize Thane has made sacrifices, just looking for that someone to set the world on a new path.
We all wanted Thane to write the rule. The problem is the "game" has gotten too big for just "someone" to write the rules. It will have to be "some group" and that group will have to be appear to be outside the "game" to re-write the rules. Something like an active independent group of replication builders.
Quote from: i_ron on May 22, 2009, 11:41:52 PM
But as for the tech, it is nothing mysterious. See Hop toads work and even my post of 2541 page 255 pre dates Mr T's last coil setup... 27 watts out for a cost of 19 watts. This on a very non optimized set up.
Hey I_ron is there any chance of you posting a link to 2541 page 255 ? Curiosity always gets the toad. ?
27 Watts for 19 Watts (70.3 % cop) is actually a pretty good electrical transfer (transmission) from an electrical motor (with its inherent loss) coupled to a generator (with its inherent loss). Using a conventional motor and generator to transfer electrical energy is notoriously inefficient, and off the shelf systems rarely achieve greater than 60 % total system cop.
Any increase, and / or broadening of the cop over a wider output load range is a good thing.
My observation of this "acceleration" phenomena with different core materials shows that high voltages (high impedance coils) are not essential to optimise the output, though they may be appropriate for particular and possibly even general applications.
I found it is better if the minimum amount of ferro-core material is used. The opposite direction to that which Thane's research has taken.
Just enough core material to significantly raise the Q factor of the inductor, but without significantly raising the inherent magnetic drag of the core. This means using a GREATER RATIO OF COPPER MASS TO IRON MASS to achieve the best inductive characteristics of the coils.
A higher voltage output (high impedance coil) will cause acceleration at lower RPM, but it will not necessarily deliver greater electrical energy "out" of the system (power output:VxI) into a resistive load (at any given RPM) compared to low impedance coils with high Q to reluctance ratio cores.
The ratio of coil inductance to coil resistance plays a more important role than the actual coil impedance or inductance.
The higher the ratio the better. However, air cored coils do not exhibit the same peculiar
phenomenon
Cheers all. keep on keepin on..
Quote from: hoptoad on May 23, 2009, 09:59:23 AM
Hey I_ron is there any chance of you posting a link to 2541 page 255 ? Curiosity always gets the toad. ?
27 Watts for 19 Watts (70.3 % cop) is actually a pretty good electrical transfer (transmission) from an electrical motor (with its inherent loss) coupled to a generator (with its inherent loss). Using a conventional motor and generator to transfer electrical energy is notoriously inefficient, and off the shelf systems rarely achieve greater than 60 % total system cop.
snip
Cheers all. keep on keepin on..
Yes hop, you see I have studied your work, lol
Now the coil test does not take into account the 200 plus watts of the driver, just the additional cost of generating that 27 watts. This is a cop of 1.42, incidentally and compares, as you say, very favorably with some of my usual coil test where the efficiency did/does range from 20% to 80%. I don't think Mr T took any notice of this post and came on his result by himself... I just was pointing it out as an 'irony' :P
Still the rest of what you say is most correct and is the way forward for those continuing this quest.
Always a pleasure talking with you HT
Ron
Oh, sorry about the lack of a link, it took me 10 minutes to get to page 255 and I never thought to make a link... the new setup is really a pain to navigate
Quote from: hoptoad on May 23, 2009, 09:59:23 AM
Hey I_ron is there any chance of you posting a link to 2541 page 255 ? Curiosity always gets the toad. ?
hi, here it is
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg101906#msg101906
Quote from: gyulasun on May 23, 2009, 12:45:09 PM
hi, here it is
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4047.msg101906#msg101906
@gyulasun
thanks for the link.
@I_ron
oops, I made the mistake of reading your previous post too quickly and I transposed the order and significance of 27 and 19 respectively.
Cheers and kneedeep
Public Domain always seemed a strange way to document this kind of project. Because ultimately you really want the working model to be yours and no ones elses. How would you feel if you spent years theorising/making your generator, only to find that while you were being nice and sharing your ideas, someone was taking you ideas to propel themselves to the goal quicker? I know my design will create OU easily and is more compact and less complicated than Thanes, but i'm very wary about putting my findings and ideas up here. I'm glad Thanes wised up a bit and gone private, but it would be nice for the guy to come back and say hello. WORD
Quote from: Pageygeeza on May 24, 2009, 04:13:36 PM
Public Domain always seemed a strange way to document this kind of project. Because ultimately you really want the working model to be yours and no ones elses.
If everyone were only self interested and self serving, then you would be paying not only for your internet provider connection, but also for a license royalty to actually use the internet.
The concept and programming code that gave birth to the internet was "gifted" to the world by it's inventor. Same applies to Linux.
Thankfully, not everyone is concerned only with their own personal advancement.
Cheers
Quote from: hoptoad on May 24, 2009, 08:29:29 PM
If everyone were only self interested and self serving, then you would be paying not only for your internet provider connection, but also for a license royalty to actually use the internet.
The concept and programming code that gave birth to the internet was "gifted" to the world by it's inventor. Same applies to Linux.
Thankfully, not everyone is concerned only with their own personal advancement.
Cheers
My compliments, well stated, Toad who hops.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: hoptoad on May 24, 2009, 08:29:29 PM
If everyone were only self interested and self serving, then you would be paying not only for your internet provider connection, but also for a license royalty to actually use the internet.
The concept and programming code that gave birth to the internet was "gifted" to the world by it's inventor. Same applies to Linux.
Thankfully, not everyone is concerned only with their own personal advancement.
Cheers
I 2nd that ;)
Luc
Hats off to Thane for his efforts and all the gift he gave us. Great guy deserves all repect.
Cheers Minde
I concur Hoptoad. :)
Ok, I do agree with that. But, what are everyone's goals with OU? Are you doing it for a hobby, or to create usable OU? I'll give my reasons now and you can think what you will: About 5 years ago I was thinking of the idea of making an ultra efficient motor, high torque and speed, but over the years it's mutated into my current idea/project. But essentially it's been OU, but at the time I didn't realise that. I've lead a pretty shitty life, did crappy at school, all my mates have done something better. And i've just thought to myself, when I die, I want to remembered for contributing something to the world that really helped. I'd personally like to make a bit of profit from this so I can at least live a nicer life than I have, but that's just my personal reasons.
Quote from: Pageygeeza on May 25, 2009, 06:07:51 AM
Ok, I do agree with that. But, what are everyone's goals with OU? Are you doing it for a hobby, or to create usable OU? I'll give my reasons now and you can think what you will: About 5 years ago I was thinking of the idea of making an ultra efficient motor, high torque and speed, but over the years it's mutated into my current idea/project. But essentially it's been OU, but at the time I didn't realise that. I've lead a pretty shitty life, did crappy at school, all my mates have done something better. And i've just thought to myself, when I die, I want to remembered for contributing something to the world that really helped. I'd personally like to make a bit of profit from this so I can at least live a nicer life than I have, but that's just my personal reasons.
Hi,
It is ok but how you wish to make a bit of profit from your OU device?
One problem is the moment you come out with a really working device it will be immediately copied and manufactured by much powerful individuals or companies, even if you may have already an issued patent on your principle. You do not wish to spend your life on defending your patent or your interests.
My opinion is that I would organize a manufacturing team from my family and friends circle and invest in components and produce as many devices as my team agrees on the possible profit from the sellings, considering a market price for what the device is capable of, etc etc. This process is also risky of course but maybe still managable due to the small number of people involved. But you need money for a start.
Here is a link how Stefan Hartmann thinks: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2157.msg31408;topicseen#msg31408
So how you think?
rgds, Gyula
Being hired out by a big company sounds like the best route to me. I tried getting in touch with Honda as I have a few contacts there, but it's not going too well. :S
@ Pagey.
Man, i FULLY relate to your situation about yourself/everyone-else/shitty upbringing deal. as i'm coming from a similar place.
But.
I reckon one of the Biggest divisions, not only in our own towns etc but World wide that can tip the balance for a person is fair access to resources namely Coal and Oil. (Light Bulbs are cheap)
If you have the guts to GIVE this to the world you WILL be remembered as great.
If you get on board with a huge company the SELL'S this to the world. Why make it any cheaper per Watt than Oil or Coal? It's Green that will mean you can charge MORE for power. There is no motivation to make it cheaper or FREE! :'(
Unless..... Said company was competing against numerous home based / micro company's who can make the same thing for much much less. ;D
It's all about profit.
If i were you I'd be struggling with the same problem.
Good Luck,
Dan.
In his last video, if I remember correctly the one coil that was on the bulb was producing 34 watts.
But here is what has puzzled me for a very long while. If I was designing a new type of magnet rotor and coil arrangement, the first thing I would want to know is what is the maximum juice I could get from them coils regardless of the input wattage. So I would take a 5 or 10 hp motor offering much more torque then that grinder motor, turn the thing and apply the maximum load I could put on those coils measuring the wattage out.
This would first confirm a host of things I would never know by sticking with my grinder motor. So imagine after such a test that each coil could provide 340 watts, or imagine after all that hoopla that the each coil could still only provide 48 watts each. This test could answer so many questions you would NEED TO KNOW to better understand the coils parameters to then better continue the overall effort.
So let's say the outcome was each coil produces 180 watts at xxxx rpm. Now at least you know the maximums and then working with a grinder motor, rpm increase, coils loaded, etc., you can confidently work it and work it and work it to maximize the output because you have confirmed the coils can produce this while working on the other end to minimize the input.
But if the final outcome was only 38 watts from each coil (that's only 4 watts more then on the grinder motor), then at least you know from the start that the coils have this as a maximum and it may be better to consider either optimizing the coil design NOW instead of spending countless more hours trying to then make something that is impossible to do to begin with, with those coils.
This should be standard practice in such motor schemes to not waste loads (pun intended) of time. Design a coil, test it with maximum HP motor. Understand the parameters, then apply it to the Perepetia.
Right now, I feel for many months it is like testing poles made for 20 foot pole vaulting by only jumping five feet. Please do not take this as a criticism, It is only my "opinion".
Also in terms of producing more amplitude and less voltage, I am convinced the magnets should not be all around the wheel. You would be better off splitting the magnets in two rotors with magnets at every second position on each turning on the outer end of centrally placed pick-up coils. This way the fields go down to zero after each magnet pass and hits the coil hard at each contact and pass. By placing each rotor so they turn in succession from one side, then the other, then back to the other, you get continuous magnet passage plus full zero out of the field for greater re-entry impact.
Anyways, although I may have had some divergence with Thane, I have always considered him to be a great doer. My brother lives in Ottawa and does a lot of office machine repair work for all the Government Agencies as well as the Universities. Maybe I should ask him to stop in there one day to see if his equipment is still there or not. I just have this funny feeling that things did not pan out the way he wanted because of many of the issues I had raised in the past. You see I have been through such an adventure myself so I know what can happen when the anvil falls. I sincerely hope i am wrong but reality has a way of catching up with them loose ends.
@ watt'sup
Hello,
the constructive critique is a good thing, but it is not to remain in theorizing. if you feel to, and believe in peripeteia as a working device, then join the effort of replication.
Replication IMO should not be made in a blind copy cat basis. You could put your best at exploring Perepiteia in high speed, high torque rotor schemes without considering much the input, just to clarify some things.
On the other hand, i plan to employ perepiteia in very low torque, pulse motor scheme to firmly confirm myself if the accelaration effect is adding mechanical energy to the rotor etc
Then, here, we can combine knowledge and take the device 10 steps further than Thane could possibly do him alone.
Of course, this is my oppinion, but after that's the reason forums as this one are supposed to exist for.
Regards,
Baroutologos
Hi Wattsup
i think you are right in the "less is more" no point in having a mag. coming in when the last one has not finished it's job,I tried a Little setup with 2 mags.,it worked ok,so,tried it with 8 mags.it was not as good.
peter
My set-up could consist of 200 mags, (if I could afford it.) Each mag would have an additional effect.
Hi Pageygeeza
IMHO you can have as many as you like,as long as one has finished it's job before the next one starts,other wise you will get to the point of all most no flux change.So it depends on the size of the rotor,more mags,more rotors,or bigger rotor.
Just my take.But I am willing to be corrected.
peter
I got mine doing the same thing at the same time. :-\
Hi Pageygeeza
What doe's"I got mine doing the same thing at the same time"mean?
peter
All the magnets pass A field at the same time.
Hi Pageygeeza
Are they the same pole,or,nsns--?
peter
NSNS, from a smaller version I got 24VAC from the generator with 29 mags, even if I don't get OU, i've got an ultra efficient generator. And it was only handspun at low rpm.
Tut, 20 mags. :-[
Hi Pagetgeeza
Ok,how far are the mags. apart,and,what physical size coil?
peter
as long as the mags pass the coils at the same time, yer onto a winner. Umm, and to confuse things further, basically it's the same coil.
Hi Pageygeeza
So,have you got 1 coil,with a n pole passing one end,and at the same time a s pole passing the other end? like 10 pairs of ns mags?
The problem,as I see it is,as say a n pole leaves the coil it will make that end of the coil a s pole,so, the other end of the coil is a n pole,if you have a s pole approaching the coil at the other end,at the same time,it will try and make the coil a s pole,so cancelling what is already there.If that makes sense.
peter
..
@ all,
It will be greatly appreciated if this thread is not to turn to a chat room log.
Instead IMO, each one could take his/her time to explain his working setup (photos are great BTW) and present findings.
Regards,
Baroutologos
ps: I apologize for the double post
My opinion my opinion my opinion...... Seems like as time will go here will be so many opinions here that it might get very confusing. Personally I dont give a dam about these "opinions" I will start where T left (altho with stronger magnets and no cups) and then go from there. I think trying to improve something or add your own design right on the very first model might be a mistake when at the end it might not work properly.
On the other hand its nice to read findings photos and other data from people who are trying to replicate. I think it is very imporatant to start from as exect copy of "confirmed" working model as possible. So if you are not building or really understand how it works your wacky opion might hurt others. I think an idea of multiple rotor setup driven by the same prime mover should be really interesting. All will come with time.
Regards Minde
P.S. Here is a rotor I would like to try out. Rotor is 304 SS non-magnetic .5" thickness with 1"x1" magnets glued as shown. I am kind of affraid that this .5" thick rotor might be too heavy for bearings.. Other specs per T.
@baroutologos
Thanks for your post. Although I would really like to step into this and work out some parallel ideas, I am sort of tied up these days with this Mylow thing, had my own wheel made (cost a heep) and also am now waiting for my magnets to arrive.
I have no machining equipment so everything has to be shopped out each time I need a part or whatever. But I will consider it seriously.
My main idea is for the coil to be wound using multi-insulated strands of wire that are twisted then wrapped on the coil. This will provide the best anti-drag between the magnets and the coils since the field in the coil will want to stay inside the winding and not be imparted against the magnets.
One member @IST tried this lately with his MK3 build, or something like that.
Maybe someone should open a new thread called "Thane Heines - Perepetia - Replications" (or other) and start from scratch, so as not to really mix things up on Thanes thread.
Quote from: wattsup on May 26, 2009, 02:10:33 PM
Maybe someone should open a new thread called "Thane Heines - Perepetia - Replications" (or other) and start from scratch, so as not to really mix things up on Thanes thread.
That makes a lot of sense wattsup, It has been one month now since Thane posted, so the writing is on the wall.
Could we get Harti to lock this one and keep it as an archive?
Ron
Has anyone tried to call Thane to see what he is up to?
@i_ron
Just send a PM to @stefan and he will lock it. he can always unlock it if Thanes comes back.
Quote from: i_ron on May 26, 2009, 06:51:03 PM
That makes a lot of sense wattsup, It has been one month now since Thane posted, so the writing is on the wall.
Could we get Harti to lock this one and keep it as an archive?
Ron
I second that.
I am also concerned that maybe Thane would come back and erase everything since he had moderator privileges. With a new "replicators" thread we could at least use this thread as reference without the fear of relevant post disappearing.
If Thane is the thread moderator, he unfortunately has all privileges. Let's just hope he doesn't HAVE to pull the thread. But anyway, If a new thread hasn't been started yet, can someone do it soon please? "Thane Heins Perepiteia Replication Thread", sounds pretty apt. A nice place to put musings, theory's, Inventions that all involve Thanes ideas in some shape or form. When this thread is closed there should be a link to the new thread, to save a lot of confusion about where to go.
Just my 2 pennies worth. I won't post again until the new thread is started.
Thanks,
Daz
I 4th everyone's opinions here ::)
Has anyone archived this themselves? and if so how big is the file?
If not I'll consider doing manually..... But, 485 pages.... you know.
Cheerz
Dan.
Quote from: Pageygeeza on May 27, 2009, 04:32:01 AM
If Thane is the thread moderator, he unfortunately has all privileges. Let's just hope he doesn't HAVE to pull the thread. But anyway, If a new thread hasn't been started yet, can someone do it soon please? "Thane Heins Perepiteia Replication Thread", sounds pretty apt. A nice place to put musings, theory's, Inventions that all involve Thanes ideas in some shape or form. When this thread is closed there should be a link to the new thread, to save a lot of confusion about where to go.
Just my 2 pennies worth. I won't post again until the new thread is started.
Thanks,
Daz
Hi All,
I wrote to Stefan last nite (PDST) and so I imagine the first thing he will do is try to contact Thane...
The last announcement that I had from Thane (5/17)was to several members of his family, a reported at the Toronto Star and myself. I contacted the reporter yesterday and he has not written this up, as he was waiting for confirmation from Thane. So I shan't say anymore until it has been reported.
Ron
Quote from: Harmonic33 on May 27, 2009, 07:00:57 AM
I 4th everyone's opinions here ::)
Has anyone archived this themselves? and if so how big is the file?
If not I'll consider doing manually..... But, 485 pages.... you know.
Cheerz
Dan.
Hi Dan,
In actual fact there is not much meat in those 485 pages.
So just the last few models need be copied, JPG's of rotor, coil, text of wire gauge's and turns and the little explanations, if found....
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 27, 2009, 02:48:13 PM
Hi Dan,
In actual fact there is not much meat in those 485 pages.
So just the last few models need be copied, JPG's of rotor, coil, text of wire gauge's and turns and the little explanations, if found....
Ron
You are so right about those 485 pages. About 30-50 worthwhile pages in this thread. If someone can just get the highlights than maybe we can post those in a new thread as the starter page which will also serve as a backup for this thread in case it goes away.
Yeah I know I'm replying, but................ This can't be right.
I tested my new rig and found this out. Hand turning it I got 5VAC and 0.1A. Now theoretically I could get it to go 4 times faster and I'm going to have x10 more magnets in it.
Going by my calculations, that's 200VAC at 800Watts. Or have I calculated it all wrong?
Help me please!
Quote from: Pageygeeza on May 27, 2009, 04:16:36 PM
Yeah I know I'm replying, but................ This can't be right.
I tested my new rig and found this out. Hand turning it I got 5VAC and 0.1A. Now theoretically I could get it to go 4 times faster and I'm going to have x10 more magnets in it.
Going by my calculations, that's 200VAC at 800Watts. Or have I calculated it all wrong?
Help me please!
Yes you are right... you have calculated it wrong. Just adding 10 magnets will not necessarily give 10 times the output,
and 4 times speed won't necessarily give you 4 times output.
Then to your meter is optimizer for 50 Hz (60Hz) so ten more magnets and 4 times more speed will put your meter into error
mode...
Some interesting information on the wind generator sites...
http://www.windstuffnow.com/main/generator.htm
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 27, 2009, 10:48:19 AM
Hi All,
I wrote to Stefan last nite (PDST) and so I imagine the first thing he will do is try to contact Thane...
The last announcement that I had from Thane (5/17)was to several members of his family, a reported at the Toronto Star and myself. I contacted the reporter yesterday and he has not written this up, as he was waiting for confirmation from Thane. So I shan't say anymore until it has been reported.
Ron
That sounds kind of ominous Ron. Now I'm kind of worried about him. Can you assure us at least that all is well with him and family?
Quote from: JustMe on May 27, 2009, 09:04:25 PM
That sounds kind of ominous Ron. Now I'm kind of worried about him. Can you assure us at least that all is well with him and family?
Not ominous if the anouncement was about how your company had been so successful that a much larger company had offered to go into partnership with you and you were telling your family that you were a success...finally
But very ominous if you were looking forward to a universal FE device and you now saw your hopes and fantasies being swallowed up, perhaps never to see the light of day, spending an eternity in "development" like the aussie device or the perendev device, or the blacklite device etc etc...
Ron
Quote from: i_ron on May 27, 2009, 09:29:50 PM
Not ominous if the announcement was about how your company had been so successful that a much larger company had offered to go into partnership with you and you were telling your family that you were a success...finally
You are right. That is not ominous. That was almost to be expected. ;D Thane rides off into the sunset a richer man. He may not be happier but that being richer part can sometime make up for that happier part. :o Happens all the time. Bigger fish eat the smaller fish. ::)
Quote from: i_ron on May 27, 2009, 09:29:50 PM
But very ominous if you were looking forward to a universal FE device and you now saw your hopes and fantasies being swallowed up, perhaps never to see the light of day, spending an eternity in "development" like the aussie device or the perendev device, or the blacklite device etc etc...
Ron
I am not sure that this is all that ominous either. Considering that Thane came here freely and shared all this information which is still here might mean that his "research" can continue on and be beneficial even if Thane does not participate. :(
If I read correctly what Ron is stating here then Thane is most likely off on some tropical beach sipping a cool drink and not worrying where his energy is coming from having signed a NDA that keeps him quite. :o Now maybe the rest of us can continue the replication and get to that last step that Thane can no longer proclaim. It could be a win/win for us all. Thane rides off into the sunset set for life and he still fullfills what he set out to do with the goal of a FE device.. So what do we have here.. we are served lemons.. Lets make lemonade... :D
i_ron: My rig design allows for as many magnets as I can afford. Adding more magnets wouldn't nessiserily change the frequency, just have an additional effect to what it's already producing.
Quote from: hydrocontrol on May 28, 2009, 02:31:04 AM
I am not sure that this is all that ominous either. Considering that Thane came here freely and shared all this information which is still here might mean that his "research" can continue on and be beneficial even if Thane does not participate. :(
If I read correctly what Ron is stating here then Thane is most likely off on some tropical beach sipping a cool drink and not worrying where his energy is coming from having signed a NDA that keeps him quite. :o Now maybe the rest of us can continue the replication and get to that last step that Thane can no longer proclaim. It could be a win/win for us all. Thane rides off into the sunset set for life and he still fullfills what he set out to do with the goal of a FE device.. So what do we have here.. we are served lemons.. Lets make lemonade... :D
Thanks hydro, couldn't have said it better!
I get the feeling he is still still very much in control of the research, just that the "former" sponsor may not be active and a new more formal arrangement with a new group with tighter control may be in place. Thus it might well be that the University and the new group have forbidden public demonstrations and forum postings of further research.
Ron
PS: no word from Stefan... everybody feel free to write him...
he might just be ignoring me as he usually does...lol
i was catching up with this thread's history, and saw some discussion concerning HV coils and arrenge them in series.
can someone explain a little more this? Findings will be better.
Series, means all coils in phase? Series connected have any different properties (i.e accelaration or power output) than signle coils combined ?
Regards,
Baroutologos
Here is the Replication thread.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7530.0