Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[woopy]

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 ??

best regards and be carefull we all need you

Laurent

[CRANKYpants]

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 SPEED

POWER 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 > 0
WORK CAN BE PERFORMED

DURING DECELERATION THE NET TORQUE IS A NEGATIVE NUMBER < 0
NO 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. 

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

[wattsup]

@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.

[woopy]

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

[mackensteff]

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)