Thane Heins Perepiteia Replications

[mackensteff]

That last post of Thane's reminds me of why I am following this (in part) he wants to do the right thing.  As an educator I understand some of Thane's frustration when something is repeated for the Nth time and the same questions continue to arise.  I learned a long time ago that it wasn't the audience that didn't understand, but the I wasn't teaching effectively.  A lot of questions are brought up that Thane tends to brush off with ridicule.  I know it is painful, but a scientific dismissal of a "stupid question" with a properly outlined answer does a lot to shut up the annoying students.  Just passing it over as unimportant or saying the point was missed only piques the students interest in trying to figure out what I am hiding, or erodes confidence that I know what I am talking about.  Personally HT, i_Ron, and Thane are all needed.  HT brings the historical perspective, i_Ron is the practicing skeptic (not just rhetorical, which is of no use like me), and Thane the bull in the experimental china shop, charging forward to get 'er done, with little time left behind for the speculation 'because it works'.

Anyway fun as always, but a little less flaming and more scientific banter would be a good change.  I think we are all hoping for the same thing, at least we can agree on that, and when disagreements arise come back to that point and mover forward.  At least in this thread I think it would be a travesty if someone left due to the banter.  There is something here, lets figure it out and "can't we all just get along"

[i_ron]

Edit: Sorry I was starting to get too rude so have deleted my post

To be more believable, future postings should be in the format, motor/rotor draw with no core for a baseline, draw with the core, draw with the hv coil shorted. As it is the inventor’s theory that the HV coil is driving the rotor the acceptable proving evidence would show…
1)   core drag reduced to zero or significantly below
2)   acceleration, in the case of an induction motor, to over sync speed
3)    the rotor continuing to run after being disconnected from the motor.
4)   Output rectified to DC showing greater output than input

Ron

[LarryC]

@Ron,

I'll let Baroutologos respond to you on your first statement.

"This is not directed solely at you, but at to all the people on the list like Larry and yourself who support Mr Heins 100%, yet without haveing one shred of evidence to support this caim… and despite any evidence to the contrary."

I've never supported T 100%, in fact I had some doubts for a while after my testing, even though they did work, but I did not know for sure the reason. But, when I seen (last fall) that Thane was getting the rotor RPM higher at a particular voltage with the core then is possible without a core in front of the rotor. I believed he had found a possible key to OU.
 

"To be more believable, future postings should be in the format, motor/rotor draw with no core for a baseline, draw with the core, draw with the hv coil shorted. As it is the inventor’s theory that the HV coil is driving the rotor the acceptable proving evidence would show…
1)   core drag reduced to zero or significantly below
2)   acceleration, in the case of an induction motor, to over sync speed
3)    the rotor continuing to run after being disconnected from the motor.
4)   Output rectified to DC showing greater output than input"

What kind of delusional God trip are you on? You seem to be trying to get someone to attack you, just to prove your earlier point.

@All,

But the good news is LarryC has inherited a 6" Ryobi bench grinder. Will test with my old core and rotor, and compare results to my original testing.

Note Thane, that my old Home Depot core was designed to match the size of the magnets. So was my difference in threshold speed due to the cheap higher HP Fred's motor or the core shape?

Regards, Larry     

[CRANKYpants]

I've never supported T 100%, in fact I had some doubts for a while after my testing, even though they did work, but I did not know for sure the reason. But, when I seen (last fall) that Thane was getting the rotor RPM higher at a particular voltage with the core then is possible without a core in front of the rotor. I believed he had found a possible key to OU.

THIS WAS DONE WITH A 4 POLE SPLIT PHASE INDUCTION MOTOR...
FOR BETTER RESULTS - I WOULD SUGGEST PEOPLE USE A 4 POLE MOTOR RATHER THAN THE 2 POLE RYOBI.

"To be more believable, future postings should be in the format, motor/rotor draw with no core for a baseline, draw with the core, draw with the hv coil shorted. As it is the inventor’s theory that the HV coil is driving the rotor the acceptable proving evidence would show…

BEEN THERE DONE THAT SEE SPLIT PHASE MOTOR TESTS FROM A YEAR AGO!

Note Thane, that my old Home Depot core was designed to match the size of the magnets. So was my difference in threshold speed due to the cheap higher HP Fred's motor or the core shape?

Regards, Larry   

IT WAS MOST LIKELY DUE TO THE COIL WIRE GAUGE CHOICE AND THE CHEAP CORES.

IF THE CORE HYSTERESIS CURVE IS TOO WIDE THE CORE WILL NOT REACT FAST ENOUGH AND CORE LOSSES (RELUCTANCE & COERCIVE FORCE REQUIREMENTS) WILL CONSUME THE HV COIL DISCHARGING MAGNETIC FIELD AND NOT IMPACT THE ROTOR FULLY.

MY SUGGESTION GET A MOT TRANSFORMER AND USE THE "I" PORTION AND MACHINE WIND A 30 GAUGE COIL FIRST (HAS TO BE TIGHT OR IT WON'T WORK WELL - TRY A HAND DRILL HERE) - MAKE YOUR COIL 1/2 INCH SQUARE AND ABOUT 3 INCHES LONG - MAKE SURE THE LAMINATION GRAIN IS CORRECT - I.E. ROTOR MAGNET CUTS THROUGH ALL THE LAMINATES EQUALLY NOT CUTTING ACROSS.

CHEERS
T

PS
SAFE YOUR LIGHT BULBS

[baroutologos]

A question to Inventor:

From your experimental experience so far what's your view about HV geometry:

They work better if they are thick and short (say same thickness to length or more) or if they are elongated and narrow (consequently)?


Regards,
Baroutologos