Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adams motor

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

  • Adams motor

    Hi..

    I had someone comment on my SSG page that the Adams motor came before the Bedini ...


    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...l.htm#Drawings


    I was wondering if anyone was familiar with this, it has the same basic design as Peter' X shape it appears..
    See my experiments here...
    http://www.youtube.com/marthale7

    You do not have to prove something for it to be true. However, you do have to prove something for others to believe it true.

  • #2
    Close Friend of Robert Adams

    Originally posted by theremart View Post
    Hi..

    I had someone comment on my SSG page that the Adams motor came before the Bedini ...


    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...l.htm#Drawings


    I was wondering if anyone was familiar with this, it has the same basic design as Peter' X shape it appears..
    Dear Mart,

    I was a close friend of Robert Adams. Robert died a few years ago, in his mid-80's. Currently, John Bedini is about 60 and I am 57. Certainly, Robert was working on this type of technology before John, but their respective discoveries are NOT the same, and should NOT be confused with each other.

    The secret to Robert's motors is a process of running the circuits in a "parallel resonance" condition. The secret to the Bedini SG is the simple self-triggering circuit, coupled with a coil whose inductance does not change very much during operation, so the amount of energy in the inductive collapse is high with regard to the input, coupled with the benefits of charging batteries with these pulses. No "parallel resonance" present or needed for high efficiency operation.

    Since the technologies are significantly different, it doesn't matter "who was first".

    Also, Robert's motor designs are not similar to my rotary attraction motors because he uses permanent magnets in his rotor and I use a passive iron rotor.

    Every one of these machines behaves differently, in spite of there superficial similarities. Each one requires different specific design details to be highly refined to get it to run in its specific "high efficiency" window.

    I hope this helps,

    Peter
    Peter Lindemann, D.Sc.

    Open System Thermodynamics Perpetual Motion Reality Electric Motor Secrets
    Battery Secrets Magnet Secrets Tesla's Radiant Energy Real Rain Making
    Bedini SG: The Complete Handbook Series Magnetic Energy Secrets

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
      Dear Mart,

      I was a close friend of Robert Adams. Robert died a few years ago, in his mid-80's. Currently, John Bedini is about 60 and I am 57. Certainly, Robert was working on this type of technology before John, but their respective discoveries are NOT the same, and should NOT be confused with each other.

      The secret to Robert's motors is a process of running the circuits in a "parallel resonance" condition. The secret to the Bedini SG is the simple self-triggering circuit, coupled with a coil whose inductance does not change very much during operation, so the amount of energy in the inductive collapse is high with regard to the input, coupled with the benefits of charging batteries with these pulses. No "parallel resonance" present or needed for high efficiency operation.

      Since the technologies are significantly different, it doesn't matter "who was first".

      Also, Robert's motor designs are not similar to my rotary attraction motors because he uses permanent magnets in his rotor and I use a passive iron rotor.

      Every one of these machines behaves differently, in spite of there superficial similarities. Each one requires different specific design details to be highly refined to get it to run in its specific "high efficiency" window.

      I hope this helps,

      Peter

      What in theory might be more efficient, either to use pulses to attract iron rotor in Peter's design, or to use pulses to attract and repel magnet rotor in Adam's design. I am not considering pulse energy recovery and re-use.

      Which approach is better ? one has to be...

      Thanx
      Last edited by aladinlamp; 05-15-2008, 07:57 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        RE: adams..

        Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
        Dear Mart,

        I was a close friend of Robert Adams. Robert died a few years ago, in his mid-80's. Currently, John Bedini is about 60 and I am 57. Certainly, Robert was working on this type of technology before John, but their respective discoveries are NOT the same, and should NOT be confused with each other.

        The secret to Robert's motors is a process of running the circuits in a "parallel resonance" condition. The secret to the Bedini SG is the simple self-triggering circuit, coupled with a coil whose inductance does not change very much during operation, so the amount of energy in the inductive collapse is high with regard to the input, coupled with the benefits of charging batteries with these pulses. No "parallel resonance" present or needed for high efficiency operation.

        Since the technologies are significantly different, it doesn't matter "who was first".

        Also, Robert's motor designs are not similar to my rotary attraction motors because he uses permanent magnets in his rotor and I use a passive iron rotor.

        Every one of these machines behaves differently, in spite of there superficial similarities. Each one requires different specific design details to be highly refined to get it to run in its specific "high efficiency" window.

        I hope this helps,

        Peter
        ===============
        Thanks Peter, my condolences for loosing a friend.

        I had no idea about it, just that someone was very impressed with the motor, and posted the info on my page.

        Thanks for filling me in..

        Mart
        See my experiments here...
        http://www.youtube.com/marthale7

        You do not have to prove something for it to be true. However, you do have to prove something for others to believe it true.

        Comment


        • #5
          that guy posted the same thing on all my vids... got excited when i saw there were so many new comments

          thanks for clearing that up peter!
          "Theory guides. Experiment decides."

          I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... Such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything.
          Nikola Tesla

          Comment


          • #6
            OK,

            Then you have seen Devtoobe as well.... that guy writes books on videos... I have 3 friends that are angry about his messages...

            Mart

            This new guy at least pointed me to a new motor I did not know anything about, and is credible.... That is a plus.
            See my experiments here...
            http://www.youtube.com/marthale7

            You do not have to prove something for it to be true. However, you do have to prove something for others to believe it true.

            Comment


            • #7
              I know all about drevtoobe....I introduced him to the bedini ssg last year and he thought it was a permanant magnet motor... now he thinks he is an expert even though he has done nothing in the way of experimentation. In fact he has sworn never to build one and yet he still posts "books" about them on any interesting vid. Obviously a skeptic with unclear motives and one to watch out for though best ignored.

              I knew of the adams motor though was unsure of the difference in operation to the ssg. From what I understood previously it depended more on the induced current then the flyback voltage for charging.

              Though there is something I am still curious about.

              Why did bedini get a patent but Adams couldn't?
              Last edited by Sephiroth; 05-16-2008, 05:24 PM.
              "Theory guides. Experiment decides."

              I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... Such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything.
              Nikola Tesla

              Comment


              • #8
                Why patent.

                Originally posted by Sephiroth View Post
                I know all about drevtoobe....I introduced him to the bedini ssg last year and he thought it was a permanant magnet motor... now he thinks he is an expert even though he has done nothing in the way of experimentation. In fact he has sworn never to build one and yet he still posts "books" about them on any interesting vid. Obviously a skeptic with unclear motives and one to watch out for though best ignored.

                I knew of the adams motor though was unsure of the difference in operation to the ssg. From what I understood previously it depended more on the induced current then the flyback voltage for charging.

                Though there is something I am still curious about.

                Why did bedini get a patent but Adams couldn't?
                I would say Bedini said, " Battery Charger"

                I bet Adams said, " Free energy device or pepetual motion "

                all the difference in the world, but Peter may be able to fill in the details better.

                Mart
                See my experiments here...
                http://www.youtube.com/marthale7

                You do not have to prove something for it to be true. However, you do have to prove something for others to believe it true.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
                  coupled with a coil whose inductance does not change very much during operation, so the amount of energy in the inductive collapse is high with regard to the input

                  Hello Peter,

                  Could you please elaborate some more on this statement? Does that mean that inductance of open core or air coils does change to lesser degree when exposed to external magnetic flux than in the ones with magnetic core (and even more in the close core ones).

                  If that is so, I don't quite understand how would that affect the IN/OUT energy ratio of inductive collapse? I mean it is much easier to reach saturation of coil when using open core or air core configurations and demagnetization is much faster. Practically that means that magnetic hysteresis curve of such coil is rather narrow. That means that less current is needed to fully saturate coil and the inductive collapse voltage is higher.

                  However I got a feeling that you meant something more profound than the stuff I just described?
                  http://www.nequaquamvacuum.com/en/en...n/alt-sci.html
                  http://www.neqvac.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not Available

                    Originally posted by lighty View Post
                    Hello Peter,

                    Could you please elaborate some more on this statement? Does that mean that inductance of open core or air coils does change to lesser degree when exposed to external magnetic flux than in the ones with magnetic core (and even more in the close core ones).

                    If that is so, I don't quite understand how would that affect the IN/OUT energy ratio of inductive collapse? I mean it is much easier to reach saturation of coil when using open core or air core configurations and demagnetization is much faster. Practically that means that magnetic hysteresis curve of such coil is rather narrow. That means that less current is needed to fully saturate coil and the inductive collapse voltage is higher.

                    However I got a feeling that you meant something more profound than the stuff I just described?
                    Lighty,

                    Excellent question. Unfortunately, I am not going to be available to answer this for about two weeks. Sorry for the delay.

                    Peter
                    Peter Lindemann, D.Sc.

                    Open System Thermodynamics Perpetual Motion Reality Electric Motor Secrets
                    Battery Secrets Magnet Secrets Tesla's Radiant Energy Real Rain Making
                    Bedini SG: The Complete Handbook Series Magnetic Energy Secrets

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @Peter

                      I saw that you're posting again in the Electric Motor thread so I was wondering if you could elaborate some more on this discussion?
                      http://www.nequaquamvacuum.com/en/en...n/alt-sci.html
                      http://www.neqvac.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The return of the Doctor,

                        Hey Doc Peter

                        Good to see that you are back, I hope your travels were productive.

                        I am happy that I now have the grinder converted over to work with the new rotor design while you were gone.

                        I am wondering about that Adams motor and its history.

                        Look forward to your insights...

                        Mart
                        See my experiments here...
                        http://www.youtube.com/marthale7

                        You do not have to prove something for it to be true. However, you do have to prove something for others to believe it true.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I was interested in the Adams motor when I first started out. Here is a patent pic that may explain it a little more. Notice the generator windings share the same rotor as the drive windings.
                          Last edited by ren; 07-27-2008, 06:10 AM.
                          "Once you've come to the conclusion that what what you know already is all you need to know, then you have a degree in disinterest." - John Dobson

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Constant Reluctance vs Variable Reluctance

                            Originally posted by lighty View Post
                            Hello Peter,

                            Could you please elaborate some more on this statement? Does that mean that inductance of open core or air coils does change to lesser degree when exposed to external magnetic flux than in the ones with magnetic core (and even more in the close core ones).

                            If that is so, I don't quite understand how would that affect the IN/OUT energy ratio of inductive collapse? I mean it is much easier to reach saturation of coil when using open core or air core configurations and demagnetization is much faster. Practically that means that magnetic hysteresis curve of such coil is rather narrow. That means that less current is needed to fully saturate coil and the inductive collapse voltage is higher.

                            However I got a feeling that you meant something more profound than the stuff I just described?
                            Dear Lighty,

                            Sorry it has taken me a while to get back to this question of yours. First, let's look at the basic physics of the situation, and then let's look at our specific applications.

                            In our rotary attraction motor, the electrical input pulse is being applied to the stator when the air-gap is large, or when the iron rotor is out of alignment. With a large air-gap in the inductor, the amount of energy it takes to produce the magnetic field in the system is "high". When we turn the coil OFF and attempt to recover the energy of the collapsing inductor, the rotor has moved more into alignment with the stator poles, and now the air-gap in the inductor is much smaller. The total energy represented by a magnetic field in an inductor with a small air-gap is "less" than the original condition. This is WHY if you recover 70% of the electrical energy in one of these motors YOU ARE DOING VERY WELL!

                            In a Bedini SG motor, the air-gap around the coil does not change appreciably between the input pulse and the recovery pulse. Since the magnet on the wheel is in opposition to the field of the coil produced by the input current, it has very little effect on the total reluctance of the coil. This is why it is possible to recover 85-95% of the electricity from the inductive collapse of an SSG.

                            So, what are the trade-offs. The SSG motors are very efficient, and let you recover a very high percentage of the electrical input, but they don't produce very high torque. This has been discussed for years, and is not news here. My rotary attraction motors produce more torque (if the air-gap is extremely small between the rotor and stator) but this same condition limits the amount of the electrical recovery, because of the change of reluctance in the inductor in the time between the input and the output pulses. The electrical loss is about 20%, due to the lowered "energy state" of the magnetic field as the air-gap closes. But the benefit is that two to three TIMES more torque can be produced, if the motor is optimized.

                            So, under the right circumstances, this is a useful trade-off, especially when it is coupled to a "no back EMF" motor configuration.

                            I hope this little discussion helps.

                            Peter
                            Peter Lindemann, D.Sc.

                            Open System Thermodynamics Perpetual Motion Reality Electric Motor Secrets
                            Battery Secrets Magnet Secrets Tesla's Radiant Energy Real Rain Making
                            Bedini SG: The Complete Handbook Series Magnetic Energy Secrets

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I thought that most of the return energy of the Bedini Energizer is Radiant energy and not conventional current, because I have not been able to get more than 40% conventional current back on none of my SSGs.
                              Humility, an important property for a COP>1 system.
                              http://blog.hexaheart.org

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X