Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The bistander thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Turion
    replied
    The EXACT same motor was used in three different videos. In one video there were NO coils in the machine. In a second video, there were 4 coils in the machine. In the third video, there were six coils in the machine and we were unable to run it off the power supply because the power supply only produced 13 amps and the motor was drawing more than that to turn the generator unloaded. S we ran it off the batteries. We never showed the machine with all 12 coils in it. What would be the use in that when we already showed that with only HALF the coils it exceeded what the power supply put out? The exact SAME power supply we used to run the motor with all TWELVE coils in place when the magnets were all adjusted. You will never get it. You don't listen.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroMikey
    replied
    Originally posted by bistander View Post


    On the black machine, was the 400 watt input measured with cores and anticogging magnets in place?

    I am saying the black generator having 22 main magnets on the rotor will not draw less input power

    out away from the rotor. Easy to prove me wrong, isn't it?
    bi
    ​​​​​​
    The reading was less than 4 amps at 100v so it is easy to prove you wrong. You need to prove your abilities to follow directions. That battery and box you take pictures of does not prove anything. Anyone can pick up a battery and a box.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    Wrong again oh great and powerful OZ. We ran that EXACT test and even posted the results on Greyland’s machine. (Actually MY machine at Greyland’s shop) Without the opposition magnets the motor draws over 27 amps. With the magnets it was drawing 12. He got it down to 9 amps with tweaking. The RPM of the motor was also lower without the magnets in place. I’ve told you this BEFORE. I’ve given you this information BEFORE. Round and round we go. If you think the CURRENT configuration draws fewer amps, you’re wrong. Because it has 22 magnets on the rotor instead of 12 it actually draws MORE amps without the magnets in place. You forget, I built one of this configuration already, and tested it already.

    You simply CANNOT have that many coils on a machine without the opposition magnets. No matter how much you think you know, there are REASONS nobody has bothered to try and run a generator with an electric motor in the past. That’s the main one. That and Lenz, which we have shown how to avoid.
    I remember that. It was far from the procedure that I outlined which will give an A vs B comparison without disassembly and reassembly. IIRC, you didn't even have the same drive motor for your previous tests.

    On the black machine, was the 400 watt input measured with cores and anticogging magnets in place?

    I am saying the black generator having 22 main magnets on the rotor will not draw less input power at the same equilibrium speed with the anticogging magnets adjusted vs having the anticogging magnets backed out away from the rotor. Easy to prove me wrong, isn't it?
    bi
    ​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    Wrong again oh great and powerful OZ. We ran that EXACT test and even posted the results on Greyland’s machine. (Actually MY machine at Greyland’s shop) Without the opposition magnets the motor draws over 27 amps. With the magnets it was drawing 12. He got it down to 9 amps with tweaking. The RPM of the motor was also lower without the magnets in place. I’ve told you this BEFORE. I’ve given you this information BEFORE. Round and round we go. If you think the CURRENT configuration draws fewer amps, you’re wrong. Because it has 22 magnets on the rotor instead of 12 it actually draws MORE amps without the magnets in place. You forget, I built one of this configuration already, and tested it already.

    You simply CANNOT have that many coils on a machine without the opposition magnets. No matter how much you think you know, there are REASONS nobody has bothered to try and run a generator with an electric motor in the past. That’s the main one. That and Lenz, which we have shown how to avoid.
    Last edited by Turion; 01-10-2021, 11:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    I’ve already RUN that test dozens of times. It’s like the very FIRST test you run to see if your output is greater than your input. ...
    The test which I outlined has nothing to do with electric output from the generator. Re-read what I requested. A simple test of core loss with and without anticogging magnets.

    bi

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    As I said, I have not shown YOU the video. That does not mean the test has not been done. Can't you read? You see what you WANT to see regardless of the facts. Same old story.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    I’ve already RUN that test dozens of times. It’s like the very FIRST test you run to see if your output is greater than your input. I just haven’t shown the videos to YOU. And since YOU are the all powerful (NOT) OZ, you believe the world revolves around YOUR assessment. It doesn’t and it never will. Sorry to give you the bad news. Put on your big boy pants and build it yourself.
    You have never run the test which I outlined in all the posts I've ever seen from you. Such a test would invalidate your magnetic neutralization scheme. You know it. You're afraid to run it as I outlined. It would only take your friend with the twin machine a few minutes to run. A simple test could prove that I am mistaken about core losses and what you call magnetic drag. Here's your chance. Go for it.
    bi

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    I’ve already RUN that test dozens of times. It’s like the very FIRST test you run to see if your output is greater than your input. I just haven’t shown the videos to YOU. And since YOU are the all powerful (NOT) OZ, you believe the world revolves around YOUR assessment. It doesn’t and it never will. Sorry to give you the bad news. Put on your big boy pants and build it yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    Bully for you. And you still don't know squat. LOL
    Run the test. 5 minutes. See who knows what they're talking about. We both know why you won't. You're afraid of the truth.
    bi

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    Bully for you. And you still don't know squat. LOL

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    We keep having the same arguments and conversations over and over. I'm not proving a thing to you. I've given you all I'm going to give. You had your chance and all you have done is ask for more and more and more, and the same stuff over and over. You want to know the truth? Build it and you will see. Several of us have and we know the truth.
    Hi Turion,

    You've never done the tests I've requested or provided real useful data. You're afraid it will demonstrate that I'm right.

    I've conducted motor and generator loss testing in professional labs many times.

    Regards,
    bi

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    We keep having the same arguments and conversations over and over. I'm not proving a thing to you. I've given you all I'm going to give. You had your chance and all you have done is ask for more and more and more, and the same stuff over and over. You want to know the truth? Build it and you will see. Several of us have and we know the truth.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Originally posted by Turion View Post
    Duh, Greyland DID that test and I posted the results a while back. You just choose to forget everything that doesn't support your point of view.
    Hi Turion,

    I am just human. I've forgotten that if it was actually an equivalent or very similar test. I don't recall seeing real power input data from any test you or Mr. Greyland have conducted. Please provide a link to that.
    Thanks,
    bi
    ​​​​​
    {edit}
    Due to the difference in the anticogging magnet configuration, what I am requesting was/is not practical on the machine that Mr, Greyland has.

    {edit#2}
    It shouldn't take more that a few minutes to adjust those magnets and run the test I suggest.

    {edit#3}
    You'd probably be able to back those magnets away while it was running giving a realtime look at input effects.
    Last edited by bistander; 01-09-2021, 10:07 PM. Reason: Addition

    Leave a comment:


  • Turion
    replied
    Duh, Greyland DID that test and I posted the results a while back. You just choose to forget everything that doesn't support your point of view.

    Leave a comment:


  • bistander
    replied
    Turion,

    You recently posted a video of black beauty's twin running at ~5100 RPM. Very nice and smooth. Meters showed ~100V and ~ 4A, IIRC. I assume these are figures for the input to the drive motor. About 400 watts. I did not see any evidence of electric output from the generator.

    Were coils and cores installed? Were the anticogging magnets installed?

    Your friend has done an excellent assembly. A relatively easy and simple test can shed light on cogging/core loss if he's up to it.

    With cores in place and anticogging magnets adjusted, test and record input power to motor at a given speed, say 5000RPM. Next, repeat test with anticogging magnets adjusted all the way out from the rotor, so they have minimal effect. Record input power to the motor for the same speed.

    How about it?

    bi

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X