Sharing ideas on how to make a more efficent motor using Flyback (MODERATED)

[MileHigh]

@Milehigh,

What effect does the EMF induced into the high-voltage coil from the passing rotor magnet have on the capacitor discharge curve?

It should slow down the capacitor discharge curve.  This is because the passing rotor magnet induces counter-EMF in the secondary coil as compared to the voltage that the capacitor is putting across the coil.  So that counter-EMF is "stealing" or "eating" some of the voltage put across the coil by the charged capacitor.  Therefore there is less net voltage available to push current through the coil so the capacitor discharge slows down.  It seems counter-intuitive when you first think about it.

In the previous posting to this posting you make reference to something that Laurent did that is apparently opposite to what I am saying.  All that I can say is earlier in the thread I made reference to something similar that Laurent did in his clip that supports what I am saying.

The following comments are about the drive coil and you see it in the first(?) clip:  He is running the motor normally and the capacitor gets charged to say 60 volts.  Then he moves the drive coil away from the spinning rotor, and you notice that now the capacitor gets charged to say 80 volts.  So to repeat the logic:  With the drive coil in place, the passing rotor magnets induce a CEMF in the coil that acts against the applied voltage from the power supply.  So that CEMF "steals" some of the power supply voltage and that reduces the final current flow in the coil before the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 60 volts.   When the drive coil is not in place, there is no CEMF "inside" the drive coil, and therefore there is a "normal" level of current flow when the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 80 volts.

[MileHigh]

I hadnt ever put it together that the flywheel and inductor are both not going to react heavily to impulse hits. Like it would be very hard to get a flywheel to oscillate one way then the other at high freq.  So the cap with the coil would be the flywheel with a spring.  The smaller the cap, similarly the tighter the spring.

You are exactly right about the spring.   In my little treatise the two flywheels stick together, hence they have to have the same RPM after they make contact, which translates into the same current flow through the two coils in series.

Just for the heck of it, let's look at Laurent's clip and model it in the physical domain but let's put it on a frictionless linear track this time and use moving masses for the coils and springs for the capacitors.  Note in Laurent's circuit you have the diode, and the current flow in the two coils is separate and distinct.

So you have a long frictionless linear track.   At the beginning of the track you have a small mass with a firecracker attached with the end cut off to act like a rocket motor.  So when you light the firecracker you get the small mass moving.  That's the drive coil and the initial application of voltage on it when the reed switch is closed.

When the firecracker burns out, that's the equivalent of the reed switch opening.

The small mass is moving and it's on a track with a ratchet so it can't go backwards, only forwards.  That's the diode.

The instant the firecracker burns out, the small moving mass bumps into a spring attached to a large mass.  As you can imagine the spring is the capacitor and the large mass is the secondary coil.

So the small mass starts to compress the spring and the large mass slowly starts to budge, but not by very much.

Eventually the small mass comes to a complete stop, and since this part of the track is ratcheted, it stops dead against the compressed spring and can't move backwards.

Let's look more closely at the instant of time where the small mass comes to a dead stop:  The spring is at maximum compression, and the large mass is moving at a very low velocity.  The large mass got a small "nudge" as the spring was compressing, but it is barely moving.  At this instant in time assume that 99% of the available energy is stored as potential energy in the compressed spring and 1% of the available energy is stored in the very slowly moving large mass.

So now the spring decompresses and starts to transfer all of it's stored energy into the larger mass.   The larger mass is sent on its merry way, and naturally it starts out moving at a slower maximum speed as compared to the maximum speed of the small mass.

The spring keeps pushing the mass along the track at it releases its stored energy.

But, alas, the large mass is not on a frictionless track for this final stretch.  There are added friction pads on the track so the large mass lumbers along and in short order it comes to a dead stop and the experiment is over.

In this case for Laurent's setup the moment the spring gives up all of its stored energy the mass also lumbers to a dead stop.  So that's the capacitor pushing current through the resistance of the secondary coil where the resistance seems to predominate.  Once the capacitor is discharged, the current also stops flowing.

So, it took some thinking to get that right, and I don't think that I made a major mistake.  "Seeing" the circuit operate in the physical domain in the form of moving masses and springs and friction pads on a linear track might help some people understand how the electrical circuit works, and it's kind of fun.

[tinman]

Yes, your mistake as it's impossible for me to delete a post and then re-post it using your user name.
That's the second time you accuse me of something that is not true. So please chill out and stop jumping to conclusions.

You didn't add the part I wrote saying if you don't understand you will once I demonstrate the GTL Gate.



My first post has this warning: "If you wish to post in this topic please keep it on topic and constructive as I reserve the right to edit or delete any post that are not so"

So how can this be a shock when you post about J Bedini stuff and then more posts arguing with others that it's the same thing?... I think you're over-dramatic.  And right now me taking the time to write this is taking away from experiments and also adding pages with useless posts. Do you not see this?

Yes correct, my experiment results lead me to believe a flux gate would be best use of this effect but that doesn't mean there is no other use for it.

The mostly magnet motor was a good learning experiment. It has taught me many things that will be incorporated in the GTL Gate.
I see no reasons you have not started experiments as we I can see you have plenty of stuff to use and make a video of your findings.

Looking forward to seeing ways you can think of using this and your experimenl results

Regards

Luc

So you're cool Joule

Lol-yea. Wonder where he got that name from 

[tinman]

@Citfta,

That sounds pretty scientific. What both you and Tinman are proposing is that it's possible for electrical power to share current and voltage of opposite polarities. This is physically impossible! 

There is no "Left Over" old current in the primary coil after the violence of the magnetic field collapse; There is only new current and voltage of opposite polarity. There is no cause and effect between the old current and the new current. The old current is in the past behind the event horizon. The violence of the field collapse has utterly and with absolute finality obliterated any trace of the old current along with any trace of previous electron paths for eternity. The new current can go in either direction depending on the pathway. Given a pathway of less resistance it will travel that way to it's newly biased ground. That includes an opposite direction. There is no force tendency of any kind at work on the new current from the old current. That's just superstition.

Synchro-your just not getting it,so i will try again one last time.

Picture 1 below shows the current flowing through the primary coil when the reed is closed,and the coil is getting it's current supplied via the battery. The red arrows show the current flow path--this is conventional current flow,as if we use true current flow,then that would lead only to more confusion.
Picture one shows the current flow from the positive of the battery,through the primary coil,and to the negative side of the battery. Current is flowing from the positive potential to the negative potential via the primary coil.

Picture two.
Picture two is when the reed switch opens,and current flow from the battery is interrupted.
So in picture one,we see the current flowing into the top of the primary coil,and exiting out through the bottom. Now with the reed switch open,the voltage polarity of the coil changes/inverts as the magnetic field collapses around the primary coil. So now the bottom of the primary coil is the positive potential,and the top of the primary coil becomes the negative potential. So which way will the current be flowing now?--thats right,from the positive potential to the negative potential. So the current is still flowing in the same direction through the coil,where it enters the top of the coil,and exits the bottom of the coil-->exactly the same way it was flowing through the coil when the reed switch was closed.

Now,before anyone gets started--yes,i know electron current cannot flow through a capacitor. But the current flow is still flowing through the coil due to the depletion of electrons on the positive plate of the capacitor,and the increase of electrons on the negative plate of the capacitor(true current electron flow used here to explain). The current flow through the circuit in this case is via displacement current flow through the capacitor.

So i hope that has cleared that up Synchro.
Current continues to flow in the same direction through the coil when the reed switch is open,and will continue to flow until such time as the magnetic field around the coil has totally collapsed.

[synchro1]

It should slow down the capacitor discharge curve.  This is because the passing rotor magnet induces counter-EMF in the secondary coil as compared to the voltage that the capacitor is putting across the coil.  So that counter-EMF is "stealing" or "eating" some of the voltage put across the coil by the charged capacitor.  Therefore there is less net voltage available to push current through the coil so the capacitor discharge slows down.  It seems counter-intuitive when you first think about it.

In the previous posting to this posting you make reference to something that Laurent did that is apparently opposite to what I am saying.  All that I can say is earlier in the thread I made reference to something similar that Laurent did in his clip that supports what I am saying.

The following comments are about the drive coil and you see it in the first(?) clip:  He is running the motor normally and the capacitor gets charged to say 60 volts.  Then he moves the drive coil away from the spinning rotor, and you notice that now the capacitor gets charged to say 80 volts.  So to repeat the logic:  With the drive coil in place, the passing rotor magnets induce a CEMF in the coil that acts against the applied voltage from the power supply.  So that CEMF "steals" some of the power supply voltage and that reduces the final current flow in the coil before the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 60 volts.   When the drive coil is not in place, there is no CEMF "inside" the drive coil, and therefore there is a "normal" level of current flow when the reed switch opens -> cap charges to 80 volts.

@Milehigh,

Based on your analysis increasing rotor magnet strength would not improve the "Flyback Motor". What effect do you think placing magnets on the auxiliary coil's ferrite U core would have?