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 = ACCELERATION

SO 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.