Serious HES derivative project proposal

[Cadman]

bistander,

Please stop now. I'm you asking you nicely. Don't pollute this thread like you have the other Holcomb threads.

Your post is unhelpful, irrelevant, and has one false statement, likely deliberate. The claimed gain is from the alignment of the magnetic domains of iron, as I believe you well know. If you really don't understand the subject...
Educate yourself.

[bistander]

bistander,

Please stop now. I'm you asking you nicely. Don't pollute this thread like you have the other Holcomb threads.

Your post is unhelpful, irrelevant, and has one false statement, likely deliberate. The claimed gain is from the alignment of the magnetic domains of iron, as I believe you well know. If you really don't understand the subject...
Educate yourself.

Hello cadman,
It is not me, but others who are the cause of difficulty.
And the domains are different between finely powdered iron and cold rolled steel. That's exactly my point. Has Holcomb used powdered iron? And if you're attempting to replicate his device/technology, might it not be good not to deviate in the basic claimed energy source/mechanism?
Take or leave my comments as you wish. I'll post where I feel like doing so. Through private messages I know a number of members do find information and opinions from me helpful.
Carry on and good luck.
bi

{edit to add reference}

Some empirically obtained relationships have been obtained, for
example the coercive field is usually considered to be inversely proportional to the grain
diameter, d, [8-13]. However, there is not unanimity in this relation and the inverse of square
root of d fits well too [14, 15]. The strong correlation between grain size and magnetic
properties is believed to be due to magnetic domain structure and domain wall motion being
affected by grain boundaries [16] because grain boundaries can be considered as obstacles to
magnetic domain wall motion [17-19]

Modelling the Effect of Ferrite
Grain Size on Magnetic Properties
Lei ZHOU

[Cadman]

Thanks for your help and input ramset and floodrod.

Towards the feasibility of this build.

The stock stator phases are connected like this first image. This image also shows one section of what I have in mind for the iron powder rotor lamination.

These connections are unsuitable for this build because the HES excitation method rolls the magnetic field across multiple rotor coils of the same polarity in a wave. This was confirmed and demonstrated by SL's CAE preliminary analysis here.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98977#msg98977
See:  Bf-Zxmid-Cont_HES_LinGen_4Coil-ST37_4msON-Time_1ms_SeqLO_01.gif

This roll or wave is the very thing that makes it work where similar builds do not, IMHO.

For any particular group of coils we need to roll the field across them in a first wave of one polarity immediately followed by a wave of the second polarity. This info is taken from one of the HES patents.

So this is the first hurdle towards feasibility:
How can we accomplish this with a minimum of parts and expense?

I have a vague idea of using the PLC's 4 outputs for the required timing sequence, but an Arduino might be easier to use for this. The actual inputs to the coils would be handled by mosfets, perhaps in a half bridge configuration.

I don't recall any mention in the patents of a configuration that uses less than 4 same pole coils in a series. Please correct me if this isn't true.
With that in mind we could connect the stator coil phases as shown in the second image?

I need some experienced input here. Do you think this would be the best way forward?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

[Cadman]

bistander,

This is why your comments about the properties of magnetic steel are irrelevant.
Please read https://overunity.com/19375/serious-hes-derivative-project-proposal/msg574064/#msg574064 and consider this project's goals before posting.

Here's what makes me think this build is feasible.
1: Each rotor magnet pole is surprisingly weak. It wouldn't take much in the way of wire and core material to equal the strength of a pole.

I already know from previous experiments that powdered iron has sufficient magnetic gain to be a viable candidate for this project, up to at least 400Hz.

Build tests will confirm one way or another.

I am still hoping for suggestions and ideas regarding my previous post.

Thank you

[bistander]

bistander,

This is why your comments about the properties of magnetic steel are irrelevant.
Please read https://overunity.com/19375/serious-hes-derivative-project-proposal/msg574064/#msg574064 and consider this project's goals before posting.
I already know from previous experiments that powdered iron has sufficient magnetic gain to be a viable candidate for this project, up to at least 400Hz.

Build tests will confirm one way or another.

I am still hoping for suggestions and ideas regarding my previous post.

Thank you

Hi Cadman,
By "magnetic gain", I presume you mean magnetic permeability, correct? BTW, besides these Holcomb threads, I don't see or can't find articles or definitions stating magnetic permeability is magnetic gain. You might say that is petty, but I actually think it is a core issue. However, let's put that aside.

You say the magnets from the washer motor rotor are weak. No doubt they are compared to neo. There is a large mass of magnet in that motor which needs to be low cost. Other design reasons also dictate that choice of field. But that doesn't mean one should use weak field for a HES replication. In fact, in this case, it will be the the excitation of the coils on the stator teeth (or poles, as some call them) that determine the magnetic field. So the permeability of the material used in the rest of the magnetic circuit needs to be compatible with that used in the existing stator. Powdered iron may be suitable in that respect.

But I suspect that permeability isn't all that is involved with drawing energy from the magnetic domain alignments, as you put it. As I attempted to discuss with SL, the hysteresis characteristics could play a big role. And it is those characteristics, like H_c, which will be affected by the material choice, ie. powdered iron vs cold rolled silicon sheet steel (electrical steel, which Dr. Holcomb mentioned specifically). My opinion is to stick as close as possible to what he did. You, or anybody else, can do whatever.

What is wrong or irrelevant or false about what I've just said?
bi