I am experimenting with PPMMs. They are build according to PPMT patented by J. Flynn.
Some of the tests are on my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo
Any suggestions, co-operation proposals etc. ?
Wow, best video demo so far on a motor setup. Great and clear text comments within the video.
It was not blurry or strange as most other videos from free energy nutcases.
Congratulations on a great PPMT build, sorry I mean two great PPMT builds...
I look forward to see your upcoming design progress and videos.
Suggestions and questions:
Perhaps the PPMT motor is not well suited as an efficient generator.
You could test a well proven and efficient pancake generator with a know efficiency curve.
What is the No-Load current of the PPMT motor at 30V?
When testing this please remove the generator to get rid of unwanted drag load.
The No-Load current is a constant due to motor inefficiencies and does not vary by load, only RPM.
It must be kept very small by clever design in order to reach high efficiency.
What type of steel are you using in the motor?
Regular laminated transformer steel?
You could improve efficiency greatly by replacing the steel sheets by MPP powder core technology.
How is the efficiency affected by removing the magnets in the motors?
Just for a test... If there is no efficiency difference, the magnets add no gain.
Quotepatented by J. Flynn.
which patent is that?
tom
just for reference "Parallel Path Effect" in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/user/KekkoAlkemi#p/u/0/r4PWiyN1G7I
And Flynn motor:
http://www.youtube.com/user/KekkoAlkemi#p/u/3/nzVXAm_ONIk
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMI look forward to see your upcoming design progress and videos.
I will be publishing more videos if anything interesting in my tests appears.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMPerhaps the PPMT motor is not well suited as an efficient generator.
I feel the same. I am going to use other alternators and 3 phase motors with capacitors and even DC motors, whatever I can get my hands on.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMWhat is the No-Load current of the PPMT motor at 30V?
That strictly depends on the position of the sensor, that is the switching time related to the rotor position. The motors you see on the videos I made run at 30 V drawing anything from 0,4 A to over 10 A, just by moving the sensor (changing the pulses timing ). Very flexible. The higher amp draw, the higher rotation from a few hundred to several thousands.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMWhat type of steel are you using in the motor?
In fact, I don't know. My friend made the motors for me. He said it is a "transformer steel".
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMRegular laminated transformer steel?
Probably jest, "regular" and laminated 0.5mm.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 08, 2010, 04:34:47 AMHow is the efficiency affected by removing the magnets in the motors?
I didn't try it. I would need to dismount the motor to take the magnets out.
Quote from: scianto on September 08, 2010, 03:00:13 PM
I will be publishing more videos if anything interesting in my tests appears.
Yes, please do!
Quote from: scianto on September 08, 2010, 03:00:13 PM
I am going to use other alternators and 3 phase motors with capacitors and even DC motors, whatever I can get my hands on.
It seems your motor is 81% efficient. You are using two equivalent PPMT motors in your setup and the test shows 65% peak efficiency.
But this is using dual similar motors and according to physics the efficiency is divided across both units.
So, one motor is 81% efficient => 0.81 x 0.81 = 0,65 (65%) as shown by your setup.
Quote from: scianto on September 08, 2010, 03:00:13 PM
That strictly depends on the position of the sensor, that is the switching time related to the rotor position. The motors you see on the videos I made run at 30 V drawing anything from 0,4 A to over 10 A, just by moving the sensor (changing the pulses timing ). Very flexible. The higher amp draw, the higher rotation from a few hundred to several thousands.
The No-Load current is mostly caused by drag losses from eddy currents and hysteresis in the steel.
Some losses is I2R in the wiring and some else is simply wind drag and ball bearing losses.
Anything that contributes to free running losses is shown as the No-Load current.
Eddy currents and hysteresis can almost be 100% eliminated by using a powder core stator and rotor.
Winding losses can by minimised by using heavy duty Liz wiring at low resistance.
Wind drag is minimised by a smooth stator and rotor design that doesn't "grab hold" to the air.
Bearing losses is improved by good ceramic ball bearings.
Quote from: scianto on September 08, 2010, 03:00:13 PM
I didn't try it. I would need to dismount the motor to take the magnets out.
Please do, if you find some spare time for this test. It's would be very interesting to see.
Has nobody already tried this ? How about Flynn? I don't believe he hasn't. Could be just a loss of time. But nice setup anyway. I fajnie, że wreszcie jakaÅ› porzÄ...dna polska robota ;)
Nice motor generator set-up! They look very well built.
As you have found out, duty cycle and timing will have the greatest effect on your efficiency. You will also find that loading your motor should increase your efficiency. This is because of the increase in "on time" which allows the magnets to do their work.
You may also want to put a prony brake on the output shaft of your motor instead of the generator. That will give you an absolute measurement of your torque, which you can then easily translate into power.
Once you have that, then you can graph your power curve related to RPM. This will tell you more about the performance characteristics of your motor than anything else. It also gives you a reference to compare with the power in.
Great work.
Ted
Quote from: wings on September 08, 2010, 10:02:03 AM
just for reference "Parallel Path Effect" in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/user/KekkoAlkemi#p/u/0/r4PWiyN1G7I
description here - The Astronaut's Magnetic Boots :
http://www.cheniere.org/misc/astroboots.htm
Quote from: tbird on September 08, 2010, 10:01:49 AMwhich patent is that?
I am aware of three patents where this technology is described:
2446446 E. F. Wargin "Breakerless Magneto" year 1948
2456475 E. F. Wargin "Ignition System" year 1948
and
6246561 Flynn "Methods for controlling the path of magnetic flux from a permanent magnet and devices incorporating the same." year 2001
I guess, there are more patents about this.
Quote from: Airstriker on September 09, 2010, 08:38:42 AMHas nobody already tried this ?
There are some replications on youtube, especially the Italian ones.
Quote from: Airstriker on September 09, 2010, 08:38:42 AMI fajnie, że wreszcie jakaÅ› porzÄ...dna polska robota ;)
Jedna z wielu, różni się tym, że opublikowana. Też coś robisz w tym kierunku?
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 09, 2010, 08:00:38 AMIt seems your motor is 81% efficient.
Doing several hundred measurements I got some with efficiency 82 to 83% in this setup. It was quite difficult to find the sweet spots.
I am going to make a spreadsheet with graphs to show some characteristics of this setup.
Thanks for suggestions about minimizing losses. I will do what I can.
i have been trying to sort out how this unit was constructed. since a particular patent wasn't stated as the one used in construction, i've had to read about each that i could find (what a job!!).
patrick kelly's e-book (download here http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKBook.html) has 2 of flynn's patents in it. patent 6246561 (june 2001) and patent 5455474 (oct 1995). a third, patent 6342746 (jan 2002) is linked here...
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Flynn_Parallel_Path_motor
this is Mike Schukel's replication which claims ...
The motor has 3.5 times more output power relative to input, compared to a conventional motor, as well as being compact, high torque, all while operating at ambient temperatures.
i have a problem with fppp being effective when used this way. Mike also gives a "Flynn Parallel Path principle project." here...
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:FPPP:Assembly
in here he says..
"One thing to note: The end bar on the active side of the devcice must be in place or the parallel path effect will not take place. In other words if a flux path is not provided on the active side of the device when you apply power. You will not see the flux focus to one side. So make sure you have both end bars in place when you test the device. "
this makes me think the starting force is no more than the electromagnet would have by itself. so no benefit until it's time to release (and you have to use power to do this), then it's too late. i could be wrong.
another thing that bothers me is for this to be efficient, you should have enough metal to keep the flux from saturating and spilling out. without this, won't the distance of attraction be limited? thus the reason for the above comment ("..must be in place..") by mike.
patent 5455474 (oct 1995) on the other hand uses magnets on the stator and rotor with coils on top of the stator magnets to modify the fields. kelly does a good job of explaining this unit.
in kelly's e-book where he covers patent 6246561 (pages a-338 to a-410), more than 1 design motor is covered. lots of info here.
after all this, i still have to ask, what design did you use?
tom
A lot of work, thank you for posting this informations here.
I also did study it for a few hours, read the patents and watch the films on youtube before experimenting. As always, theory is one way and practical tests not always give expected results.
Quote from: tbird on September 14, 2010, 12:42:03 PMafter all this, i still have to ask, what design did you use?
I am using the 6 pole design.
Here:
http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM2/
are construction details and some films from the tests.
Quote from: tbird on September 14, 2010, 12:42:03 PM
..."One thing to note: The end bar on the active side of the devcice must be in place or the parallel path effect will not take place. In other words if a flux path is not provided on the active side of the device when you apply power. You will not see the flux focus to one side. So make sure you have both end bars in place when you test the device. "
this makes me think the starting force is no more than the electromagnet would have by itself. so no benefit until it's time to release (and you have to use power to do this), then it's too late. i could be wrong.
What was quoted is true, but only for establishing a new flux path. The flux can be redirected in a motor across the gap, but only for as long as the coils are active. After that the flux reverts back to whichever pathway offers the least reluctance.
With the size and number of magnets this motor has it should be way over 100% efficient. 81% is typical for a regular motor of that size. The only conclusion one can derive is that the magnets are not being utilized in this design. I've seen the same thing in other Flynn motors too.
This motor is beautifully constructed. There is nothing wrong with the materials either. In theory it should perform as predicted; it should be way over unity, but it isn't. Why?
Because you can't switch flux from a permanent magnet instantly through a coil. There is a lag time, and if you don't wait through the lag no flux gets switched. IMHO, the Flynn motor is switching way too fast for the PM flux to do any work.
This could be tested quite "easily" by removing the magnets and replacing them with steel inserts. If the same efficiency level is observed, then you know the magnets are not being utilized.
This is a beautiful motor but lets be honest, 81% just doesn't cut it. We should be seeing 200 to 400%. We need to figure out how to efficiently switch and utilize the magnets, or this is all for nothing.
I'm actively working on this very problem and will gladly share whatever results I find.
Cheers,
Ted
"We should be seeing 200 to 400%."
Nice wish !
Flynnresearch is today www.qmpower.com
Please accept their own work,with efficiencies under 100% !
Sincerely
CdL
Quote from: lancaIV on September 14, 2010, 05:43:17 PM
"We should be seeing 200 to 400%."
Nice wish !
Flynnresearch is today www.qmpower.com
Please accept their own work,with efficiencies under 100% !
Sincerely
CdL
Why bother with any motor unless it has the potential for over unity?? I can go buy a motor off the shelf with 90% plus efficiency, so what's the attraction?
If they're used in a motor properly, magnets can provide enormous amounts of extra power. This is no idle wish either. Switched flux works slowly, and has to be used that way. It's just going to take a little more research to figure out an efficient drive configuration.
Ted
Quote from: Ted Ewert on September 14, 2010, 07:54:05 PM
Why bother with any motor unless it has the potential for over unity?? I can go buy a motor off the shelf with 90% plus efficiency, so what's the attraction?
If they're used in a motor properly, magnets can provide enormous amounts of extra power. This is no idle wish either. Switched flux works slowly, and has to be used that way. It's just going to take a little more research to figure out an efficient drive configuration.
Ted
Here is why you want to use Flynn's motors:
"QM Power motors, generators and actuators offer the highest commercially available peak and average efficiencies of any electromechanical device.
A common misperception is that motors "are already 80-90% efficient so there might not be that much technological improvement needed". However, as shown below, this marketed “peak†efficiency is only achieved at speeds where most motors are seldom actually operated In fact, for most “variable†speed applications (electric vehicles, power tools etc), the highest “peak†efficiency is actually below 60%. Since these applications are also variable, the actual “average†efficiency is often less than 30%.
Most PPMT motors have peak efficiencies in excess of 90%. In addition, even if normalized down to the same peak efficiency as an existing/conventional system, the average efficiency of a PPMT variable speed and/or load application is still often 1.75 or times or more as efficient as conventional alternatives. Average efficiency is directly proportional to battery life.
Since PPMT's peak efficiency is available near its peak power, it also eliminates the requirement for motors to be oversized to achieve high efficiencies in fixed speed applications substantially reducing cost ."
Furthermore there are things which are not said by the experimentators. For example, my previous model (photos and films here, not yet in youtube: http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM1/) was really strong. With 10V 0.1A input (=1W) running without any load, I was not able to stop it by holding the shaft with leather gloves. The input current went to max 2.5A (=25W) and the motor slowed down a lot, but no way I couldn't stop it. To compare it with other motors, I could easily stop a 75 W 3 phase motor when holding the shaft with the same hand.
I did a dozen of tests with motor-alternator windings connection of SRSM3.
Winding 1-3-5 were powering the motor and winding 2-4-6 (the same motor, the same stator) were working as an alternator. The film below shows another setup, windings 1,4 are powering the motor and windings 2,4,5,6 are used as an alternator so that power is drawn out of them.
Maximum efficiency I could attain was 64% so quite law. But it's
just a beginning of this tests and I believe more will be seen.
Still the question is, how much power is now on the shaft?
I just uploaded a short film from these tests, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ8TrIrVJ1Q
Very interesting setup you made.
The motor being alternator as well, kind of having a compact motor/generator machine.
As you mention, you only get 64% efficiency, very close to the 65% you got from a separate alternator.
Somehow I strongly feel you have maxed out the performance from your design and it is approx 81%.
When two equal or similar units are used in series the efficiency is divided across both units.
New setup: 0.8 x 0.8 = 0.64 = 64%
Old setup: 0.81 x 0.81 = 0.656 = 65.6%
Adding an external alternator to the shaft (besides the internal load) will only slow down the motor even
more and any alternator output will be seen as less output from the internal windings.
The outputs will simply balance each other depending on which load is the greatest.
I have one important question for you, if you don't mind.
If you let your motor Free Run without load at 30V and 1.1 amp No-Load current....
How hot will the motor become after some time has passed, let's say 1-2 hours?
You see, the 30V x 1.1A input at No-Load = 33W lost and this will heat the motor.
The main problem of the losses is the hysteresis and eddy currents of transformers steel.
When the steel passes a magnetic field it tend to brake a bit due to these losses.
This braking is comparable to you braking the shaft by a load and see an increase of input.
Remove the internal dullness of SiFe steel and suddenly you have greatly increased efficiency.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please read this:
I have tested toroidal powder cores vs toroidal silicon transformer steel inside a circular magnetic field.
The setup was a 30V DC motor with extremely low no-load input, that turned a shaft with the toroid's
inside the alternating magnetic field of sourrounding magnets.
The motor No-Load current at 30V and 3000RPM, without the magnets in place, was approx 7mA.
With the silicon steel toroid placed inside the fields, the No-Load increased to 100mA.
When a powder core was used the No-Load input increased only 1-3mA, depending on the type used.
Conclusion:
SiFe Steel = 100mA increase due to eddy currents and large hystersis.
Any good powder core = maximum 3mA increase. (Good cores are MPP, SMSS, Kool-Mu, Hi-Flux)
The worst powder core was a regular cheap iron powder toroid. It increased input to approx 30mA.
Powder core motors is being in the focus right now by several large manufacturers.
When used together with heavy duty Litz winding the efficiencies can reach 97-98% over a wide RPM range.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 17, 2010, 01:54:10 AMAdding an external alternator to the shaft (besides the internal load) will only slow down the motor even more and any alternator output will be seen as less output from the internal windings.
That is what happened when I load the shaft with an alternator, but I didn't make power out measurements in that time.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 17, 2010, 01:54:10 AMIf you let your motor Free Run without load at 30V and 1.1 amp No-Load current....
How hot will the motor become after some time has passed, let's say 1-2 hours?
I never let it run for so long, but it would be interesting to do that. Now it is shaft coupled to an old Russian DC generator, but later, between experiments, I am going to try, let it run for an hour without any load.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 17, 2010, 01:54:10 AMYou see, the 30V x 1.1A input at No-Load = 33W lost and this will heat the motor.
The main problem of the losses is the hysteresis and eddy currents of transformers steel.
I also feel there timing, which is now duty 50/50% is too long. I want to build a circuit that can vary the time on and off, so a PWM, duty or pulse with regulation. Any suggestion about such circuit?
Quote from: FatChance!!! on September 17, 2010, 01:54:10 AMAny good powder core = maximum 3mA increase. (Good cores are MPP, SMSS, Kool-Mu, Hi-Flux)
I really want to have other cores, the best ones, but where to take them from?
Quote from: scianto on September 17, 2010, 02:33:23 AM
I really want to have other cores, the best ones, but where to take them from?
This place.....
http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=206
The cores lined up, from best to worst. Never use less permeability than 125u. Higher is better.
MPP, Sendust, Hi-Flux, Iron Powder, Mega Flux (the last has to low permeability to fit a motor)
Forget any ferrite core. They can't be machined into desired shape and they don't handle high flux.
Just for your curiosity!
Here's a guy that built a small powder core slotless outrunner with extrem efficiency for its size.
http://www.powercroco.de/slotless_outrunner.html
Please use google translate if needed.
Here's a forum discussion on this particular motor.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=972859
Thanks, FatChance!!!.
I have told my friend, who build the motors, about the materials and he is willing to build another motor using much better core, maybe one of these you mentioned. I wonder how they are called in Polish and if they are available here in Poland.
The motor is really amazing. I am reading the translation.
I just uploaded a short video of another tests, in which the parallel path magnet motor SRSM3 is shaft coupled with 1 kW old military soviet DC generator.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDyPNVHYaJw .
Quote from: scianto on September 19, 2010, 04:46:34 PM
I just uploaded a short video of another tests, in which the parallel path magnet motor SRSM3 is shaft coupled with 1 kW old military soviet DC generator.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDyPNVHYaJw .
Interesting test, and well done. Thank you for making all the measurements clear and easy to read, (and for the use of subtitles).
You mentioned that the generator had it's highest efficiency at 3k rpm. During the 39 volt test, the system showed a 30% overall efficiency under load. When you dropped the voltage down to 29 volts, the RPMs decreased further and the generator presumably became even less efficient. Yet the overall efficiency went up to 36% into the same load. How would you account for this?
Ted
Quote from: Ted Ewert on September 20, 2010, 01:25:15 PMYou mentioned that the generator had it's highest efficiency at 3k rpm.
I probably was not clear, I wanted to say that this machine is a 3000 rpm DC generator build, but I don't know at what rpm it has the highest efficiency. I guess it is 3000, as it was build for, but I never run it so fast, so I don't know.
Quote from: Ted Ewert on September 20, 2010, 01:25:15 PMYet the overall efficiency went up to 36% into the same load. How would you account for this?
As far as my experience with this and other motors and generators, this kind of changing efficiency with decreased speed is nothing extraordinary. In this particular case I explain that at the higher voltage the motor was supplied too much power for the load. If I increased the load the efficiency would grow. The motor core is more oversaturated at higher voltage.
BTW, the highest overall efficiency of this setup I succeeded to measure was 56%
Another video showing my first prototype running at different speeds, max 10667 rpm, in relation to the supplied voltage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKfoY-D-rw
Next test, parallel path magnet motor model SRSM3 is running/turning the shaft of a DC permanent magnet motor working here as a DC generator:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFzK2z3MV4c
scianto,
just to be clear, how are the magnets set next to the coils? are the poles like or opposite?
also, are you planning to run test without the magnets?
tom
Quote from: tbird on September 22, 2010, 09:02:21 AMjust to be clear, how are the magnets set next to the coils? are the poles like or opposite?
They are NS-SN-NS-SN-NS-SN-
Quote from: tbird on September 22, 2010, 09:02:21 AMalso, are you planning to run test without the magnets?
Yes, I want to do that. With this motor I cannot take them out because they are supporting the stator. So I need to ask my friend to make metal blocks of the same size -- it depends on him, when he will find time to do that.
Thank you, tom.
This test may also be interesting to you. Here the setup was reversed, this time a DC motor runs one of my parallel path magnet motors working as an alternator:
http://www.youtube.com/user/scienculo?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/OyUbSddKcms
This is an electric motor to PP built about two years ago has a couple very strong
and a low rpm and absorbs only 28 watts.
But it is not overunity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL8KvOXWuWU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL8KvOXWuWU)
Leo48
Continuing the testing and increasing the efficiency. Now up to 84%, that is, compared to previous 67%, increase by 17%.
100% approaching fast :)
Any suggestions?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8W1n5fPLa4
My regular Magmotor S28-400 also gives 84% efficiency. Nice but no big deal.
I really think you need to invest in some large design improvements to reach
better efficiency or just check whether the magnets do any useful work or not.
Step 1) Replace the magnets with fitted SiFe steel pieces and remake the tests.
Step 2) Get big powder core toroid's and mill out the same shapes & pieces to fit the motor.
Then wind the motor with multi stranded Litz wire instead of regular round wire.
Make the tests and notice the efficiency improvement.
Are you using tight airgaps between the rotor and stator. A thumb rule is 0.1-0.2mm airgap.
I've seen motor tests where 25% torque was lost at 0.2mm compared to 0.1mm airgap.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on October 04, 2010, 06:12:42 AMMy regular Magmotor S28-400 also gives 84% efficiency. Nice but no big deal.
I agree, it's hopelessly low. Normal solid state circuit where you pulse the motor coil gives me 96% efficiency (the shaft is not turning).
Quote from: FatChance!!! on October 04, 2010, 06:12:42 AMStep 1) Replace the magnets with fitted SiFe steel pieces and remake the tests.
Step 2) Get big powder core toroid's and mill out the same shapes & pieces to fit the motor.
I already told my friend about it, he said he will do that with next model. I don't know when he finds time. Since I have no machines to do it myself, I must wait for him.
Quote from: FatChance!!! on October 04, 2010, 06:12:42 AMAre you using tight airgaps between the rotor and stator. A thumb rule is 0.1-0.2mm airgap.
Well when I look at the distance between the rotor and stator it seems to me it's really large, maybe 1 mm.
Quote from: scianto on October 04, 2010, 02:03:35 PM
Well when I look at the distance between the rotor and stator it seems to me it's really large, maybe 1 mm.
Thanks for all your answers. I guess we will have to wait for him to help you out.
Regarding the airgap you should try keeping this as small as possible in your next model.
No more than 0.2mm if possible.
Good luck. I will patiently wait to read about your progress.
Thanks for your support FatChance!!!.
I am experimenting with what I have and trying different setups, solutions, implementing different ideas etc. And there is a lot to check. Until my friend is ready with a new device, I have plenty of things to try. Hopefully it will give us something usable.
BTW, to all reading this, if you have any PPMT device and if you are willing to lend it to me, so that I can make tests on it; please, contact me.
Here are the two schematics, circuits I am using to run the PPMMs:
http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM2i3_sterowanie_rys1.png
and
http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM2i3_sterowanie_rys12.png
Found massive collection of information about parallel path tech!
Look here:
http://www.001-lab.com/001lab/index.php?topic=1406.0
Sadly posts are in russian but you could use Google Translate.
Most interesting post is this:
http://www.001-lab.com/001lab/index.php?topic=1406.msg20300#msg20300
Tens of patents!!!
Tried to read other posts of this guy on the forum and looks they
are beating him to half death and noone is really commenting
the patents and stuff. Just beating and saying to go away.
Extremely strange.
What do you think?
Thanks for that resources. For me it is interesting to see information based on experimenting. I am studding it using web translator.
I am still working with my models but until my friend makes mechanical improvements to my motors or/and I find not neodymium magnets of the right size, I am limited in things that I need to check.
Version 5 under testing, just starting, using weaker magnets. But first, what is interesting, the Parallel Path Magnet Motor works well even without any magnets. In this case it is Switched Reluctance Motor.
This is what you've suggested me -- thanks.
Three short films:
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/2/95Mnqhys0YU
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/1/78wkLsIJZL8
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/0/Z-fp_K-Zy74
Have you measured motor performance without using the magnets?
I removed big magnets from the stator and inserted small ones. Before one magnet was 2x2x3 cm, now it is a round one 1.5 x 2 cm only. This makes a huge difference, the motor can be run on 1 V and 0.1 A that makes 0.1 W.
SRSM6 motor runs from AAA battery. And, I need to hold the shaft very strong to stop it!
See yourself these two short videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3taHe7Fsxg (may be still converting)
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/0/3sH2-I8jTng
Quote from: FatChance!!! on October 30, 2010, 11:04:38 AM
Have you measured motor performance without using the magnets?
No, I left it for latter testing. I only run it to see that it runs. I will go back to it after doing a series of tests with the new magnets, see my above post.
Quote from: scianto on November 03, 2010, 05:11:44 AM
I removed big magnets from the stator and inserted small ones. Before one magnet was 2x2x3 cm, now it is a round one 1.5 x 2 cm only. This makes a huge difference, the motor can be run on 1 V and 0.1 A that makes 0.1 W.
SRSM6 motor runs from AAA battery. And, I need to hold the shaft very strong to stop it!
See yourself these two short videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3taHe7Fsxg (may be still converting)
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/0/3sH2-I8jTng
wow
Well, it works even at 0.6 V :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj9EIEOVkNk
To make it clear and avoid confusion (I deleted one file from youtube and editet the others), here again.
Parallel Path Magnet Motor version 6 (in Polish: Silnik RównolegÅ,ych Åšcieżek Magnetycznych SRSM6):
1.
powered by AAA battery 1.5 V drawing ~0.1 A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sH2-I8jTng
2.
how it works at input voltage from 1 V to 30 V
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Png5o_Ft67c
3.
works at input voltage as low as 0.6 V
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj9EIEOVkNk
Updated schematic I am using from version 6:
http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM2i3_sterowanie_rys1_2.png
Hi scianto
take a look here
http://www.energeticambiente.it/prototipi-privati-di-veicoli-elettrici/14723137-mk12-motore-deviazione-di-flusso-magnetico.html
you will find a lot of info, and cut time on your project, these two university students have done a lot of R and D on it, plus they have a new patent on it, yes a new patent but the all thing is open book, the tread is in Italian, use any of the web translator, i hope this helps you out
regards
Thank you. I did, a few weeks ago, went through the entire text with translation to English. But I didn't find any patent file. Also I didn't find schematic or other technical info that I can use to progress in my experiments. Maybe I missed it?
I would like to directly contact them and talk.
Hi Scianto
you have to register on that forum to access pictures and files, check the first page they talk about the patend.
Mike
Continuing my research with PPMM (Parallel Path Magnet Motor) version 7. The difference is that this motor has ferrite magnets, as you suggested. They are much weaker compared to the previous ones, neodymium, but same dimensions.
What I can see is that the overall efficiency of the entire setup is higher. The rest you can imagine.
But I am not claiming OU, it still needs more research.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvo2y6J0Tks
I just finished uploading and making English subtitles for the short videos. Please, see them here:
SRSM7_1
Parallel path magnet motor SRSM7 version 7 of nominal ~ 1 kW power -- a test how it works from 0.7 V to 30 V, when drawing power starting from 0.15 W. This version differs from the previous ones with magnets, now ferrite magnets are used, not neodymium ones.
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/a/u/2/0dc-ZYejMV0
SRSM7_2
Parallel path magnet motor version SRSM7. The input is set up so as the entire system consumes 30 W. The energy recovery subsystem consumes 27 W, so the motor itself practically is using only 3 W.
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/u/3/Nvo2y6J0Tks
SRSM7_3
Parallel path magnet motor version SRSM7 of nominl power ~ 1 kW, goes on a button battery from a calculator or a watch!!! :)
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/u/1/2b7B8EHGkbI
SRSM7_4
Parallel path magnet motor version SRSM7 of nominal power ~1 kW, goes on AAA battery
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo#p/u/0/gW7qRb8pWTA
I am testing now a new circuit. The schematic is here:
http://servilo.website.pl/laboratorio/esploroj/rownolegle_strumienie/SRSM7_sterowanie_rys30.png
You can see that in this circuit almost all energy from the input power is used for the motor coils and there is almost no need to recover the inductive spike. There is some similarity with H bridge.
I think this should also work well with other pulse motors, for example, with SRM, but the timing would be much more critical.
Also, I am sure, it will work with one phase inductive motors, both without or with capacitor.
Or course, the circuit is nothing new, an old and well working solution used in electronics.
Here is and example of how parallel path magnet motor can be run on unidirectional impulses. I never before saw it functioning like that, because normally it has to be powered by impulses of alternating direction.
Here is my new toy.
http://www.youtube.com/user/scienculo?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/_Ii6_mKO92Y
Quote from: scianto on September 08, 2010, 02:50:32 AM
I am experimenting with PPMMs. They are build according to PPMT patented by J. Flynn.
Some of the tests are on my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/scienculo
Any suggestions, co-operation proposals etc. ?
Maybejovich you should speakowitch Englichova please? Nice machine you got there anyways :)
This example shows, as far as I understand the oscilloscope traces, that parallel path magnet motor can be run and function very well, when it is powered with only unidirectional impulses. So, no transistor H bridge or other circuit producing alternating direction current impulses are needed, as I have thought till now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxhJlKuZgfA
In this example you can see, that 50% of the cycle the motor winding are pulsed and the other 50% of the cycle they generate current. What is most important here is, that the generating current is powering the motor, so it created the other 50% of the cycle running the motor.
Theoretically it means that half of the power is needed to run the motor compared with circuits running it with alternating current impulses.
Note it down and use it with other motors. Now we know that DC motors, pulse motors and even 3 phase induction motors can be run using this kind of powering.
Now you can call it tuning and saving as much as possible but still run motors at that give same amount of power on shaft.
Practical implementation.
Here is an example of a small parallel path magnet motor turning a bicycle wheel, that I did yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYzfF7aPacY
I am using this circuit to drive parallel path magnet motors, also the one build in my bicycle:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10387
Please, try it with your motor, tell me how it works.
This is another test in which a small parallel path magnet motor turns bicycle wheel in my work shop:
YouTube - scienculo's Channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/scienculo?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/dWGYeI-98gs)
I am still using unidirectional impulses (circuit above) to run the motor.
Hi scianto,
very good and serious work. I really would love to understand what you a takling about in your vids. But unfortunately most of us do not understand your language, so do I. Is it possible to just make one basic video-demo in english ?
Are you willing to machine and sell such generator for other members here in the forum?
I would appreciate if you contact me via pm if you do not like to answer me here in the public sectionof the forum
Regards
Kator01
Kator01
>> But unfortunately most of us do not understand your language
*
I've been working in communication field and I know how much suffering is the mankind because of misunderstandings. That is why I am supporting the neutral auxiliary language Esperanto that I also speak :)
>> so do I. Is it possible to just make one basic video-demo in english ?
*
My spoken English pronunciation may be difficult to understand and I will not be able to say all that I want to say when it comes to my mind.
>> Are you willing to machine and sell such generator for other members here in the forum?
*
This one was made for me by my friend, I don't have any workshop / tools to make this kind of stuff. So, no, sorry.
These are my last 3 short films showing a small parallel path magnet motor installed on a bicycle. Short indoor tests.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejf50kenDkc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eja7W9t5RHQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ9_b9vYWMk
Hi scianto,
very sad... if you have been working in the communicating field I really wonder why you leave us people here with videos we do not understand. . No one here speaks Esperanto. What do you want to demonstrate - whom do you want to reach ? This forum here is a platform for open source-ideas and for me it does only make sense if these ideas can be clearly communicated in a way, most of us understand.
For example: in your videos about the bicycle I do not understand the function of the front-accumulator-setup with the halogen-light-sticks. What is the purpose of this setup ?
Have you ever tried to present just one of videos in english ? Do not lay too many restrictions upon yourself in being absolutely perfect in what you want to present.
I definitely get the impression of some very good work presentred by you, but again : I really want to understand what you are doing with this bicycle-setup
Best Regards
Kator01
What I can never understand, is why people use car batteries or any kind of batteries, plenty of wire etc. when trying to proove they have found a way to make free energy. If these motors REALLY can produce excess electricity, there is no need to proove that the setup can charge a battery with more power than it consumes.
Remove the battery and proove that it really IS excess energy - by just looping the setup for a perpetuall motion WHITHOUT batteries. It is as simple as that. If it doesn't work without the battery there, there is no excess energy.
Vidar
>> why you leave us people here with videos we do not understand.
*
I am explaining as much as I can in written texts. I am ready to answer your questions and I do it with pleasure, being happy that I can help you.
On the other hand I do not see high value in what I have presented, just simple experiments, may be some people are interested, but there is no OU or things like that. So I am just sharing some of the tests I am doing, just in case there might be people interested in doing something similar.
>> No one here speaks Esperanto.
*
Not sure. One man wrote to me in Esperanto on my yt channel :)
>> I do not understand the function of the front-accumulator-setup with the halogen-light-sticks.
*
The purpose of this setup is to collect energy that is recovered from the motor coils, store it and use it later to power the system, after the two battery sets are swapped.
After the "front-accumulator-setup" (I call it Bd) is charged, I put it in place of the Uzm (batteries that were powering the system), and, of course, Uzm goes to the "front-accumulator-setup".
This, actually, is nothing new, it is like you do when experimenting with Bedini motor setups.
The light on the "front-accumulator-setup" are just to protect the batteries against exploding. The charging current is so high, that they start to almost boil within seconds, the voltage increases to 60 V. So to protect them, not to destroy them, I am discharging them fast enough.
Actually, this is only temporary bad solution. Final solution is that the recovered energy entirely goes directly to the powering batteries. I still need to find a solution that is enough efficient.
>> Have you ever tried to present just one of videos in english ?
*
No, I am not so confident about my spoken English. I suppose that not every body will understand it. Sorry.
>> I really want to understand what you are doing with this bicycle-setup.
*
Do not hesitate to ask whatever you like to know concerning my experiments.
>> Remove the battery and proove that it really IS excess energy - by just looping the setup for a perpetuall motion WHITHOUT batteries.
*
As I said, there is no OU, so, no excess energy in this setup. At least I don't find it. The main goal of these experiments with the bicycle was to prove to myself that a small PPMM can run a bicycle.
Quote from: scianto on February 27, 2011, 02:15:36 PM
Question asked: "I do not understand the function of the front-accumulator-setup with the halogen-light-sticks"
Your answer: "The light on the "front-accumulator-setup" are just to protect the batteries against exploding. The charging current is so high, that they start to almost boil within seconds, the voltage increases to 60 V. So to protect them, not to destroy them, I am discharging them fast enough"
Do not hesitate to ask whatever you like to know concerning my experiments.
Ok, this is what I was finding so interesting and don't quite understand.
If your recovery batteries are getting overcharged if you don't have resistors (halogen bulbs) then to me it seems you have more energy coming out then going in.
Can you please replace the bulbs with 2 of 10 Ohm 50 watts resistors and measure the voltage across them and post your findings.
Can you also post your input voltage and current at the same time.
Thank you for sharing your work
Luc
gotoluc
I disassembled everything some time ago, did not continue the experiments because other work had to be done since it was more important.
According to my experience I suppose the charged batts didn't receive more energy than was put in the setup from running bats.
Before the bicycles I did experiments with similar electric setup (different PPMMotors) and the maximum efficiency I got was 98,6% or so.
Okay scianto
thanks for the reply
One thing I wanted to ask you. It looks like you were mostly sending pulses of 50% duty cycle. Did you try it with less?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Luc
When testing I tried form almost zero to 100% duty cycle. As far as I remember at heavy loads around 50% gave best efficiency. Every motor at every optical sensor position and at every voltage had its own set of other parameters to work its best efficiency. So most of the game was about tuning and tuning it. Quite tedious work :)
Thanks scianto for your reply.
I feel there is something we are missing in these Parallel Path Magnet Motor. Maybe the core stays magnetized for too long?
Anyways, thanks for taking the time to share your research
Luc