Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube ONLY 13% OF SEATS AVAILABLE!!!*** 2017 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator
Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 03-21-2016, 03:32 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Lockridge, or 2x Von Siemens ?

Hi Pals,

Since this might be different from the thread about the Lockridge's device as envisionned by our friend and mentor Peter Lindemann, I'm opening this new thread as an alternative path.

I'm currently wondering if the Lockridge device could have been a double Werner von Siemens device with a capacitor in the middle...

See here why, and please feel free to give your opinion :

https://www.siemens.com/history/en/n...principles.htm


Here is an an "exploded view diagram" :







Thanks.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 11:31 AM.
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #2  
Old 03-21-2016, 04:29 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
There, he writes some broad considerations about his discovery :

http://www.siemens.com/recollections...ollections.pdf

(in the part about his dynamo-electric machine) :

Quote:
from page 351 :
(...) the
question occupied my mind whether it would not be possible by suitable employment of the so-called extra current to intensify considerably the induction current.
It became clear to me that an electromagnetic machine, whose working power is very much enfeebled by the induced currents arising in its coils, because these induced currents considerably diminish the energy of the galvanic
battery, might conversely strengthen the power of the latter if it were forcibly turned in the opposite direction by an external force. This could not fail to be the case, because the direction of the induced currents was at the same time
reversed by the reversed movement. In fact, experiments confirmed this theory, and it appeared that there always remains sufficient magnetism in the fixed electro magnets of a suitably contrived electromagnetic machine to produce
the most surprising effects by gradually strengthening the current generated by the reversed rotation.
This was the discovery and first application of the dynamo-electric principle underlying all dynamo-electric machines.
(...)
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-23-2016, 01:47 AM
wantomake's Avatar
wantomake wantomake is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Hi Pals,

Since this might be different from the thread about the Lockridge's device as envisionned by our friend and mentor Peter Lindemann, I'm opening this new thread as an alternative path.

I'm currently wondering if the Lockridge device could have been a double Werner von Siemens device with a capacitor in the middle...

See here why, and please feel free to give your opinion :

https://www.siemens.com/history/en/n...principles.htm



Thanks.
Marseye,
Could you break this comparison down a little more?

I tried for a year to build and fund the Lockridge device with limited success so I'm really interested in your comparison. I spent hours studying John Bedini and Peter Lindemann videos but neither helped much. At lest for me.

Hope you have more success than I did.
wantomake
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-23-2016, 10:50 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Hi Wantomake,

it's been years now that I'm playing sometimes with some ideas, hoping to get rid of the heavy baterries. No success for me neither.

Being fed of browsing the internet for every "Lockridge" occurence that I could find, and these mostly describing again and again the same thoughts and considerations (but with no successfull replication in sight either), I always scratched my head about who, previously to the soldier Lockridge who found a device, could possibly have laid the bases for the device to exist.

Obviously, it had to be at least a german, or more broadly an european (Internet was quite...laggy in these days , and more : it was a severe war time and zone).

Bedini showed us that solid magnets weren't the path to follow for the Lockridge device (LD). He clearly stated that there was enough residual magnetism in electro-magnets to start with.

And lately, i just found this Ernst Werner von Siemens who's said to be the father of the self excitable dynamo-electric generator, in which the electro-magnets are gradually strenghtening their curent by reverse rotation !
Of course, one has to consider that von Siemens was thinking of rotating the shaft from an external source (pulley).

But, hey, can't we extrapolate better now, thinking about the LD with 2 electro-magnets poles pairs, which was enough to hand start, then was slowly, gradually, continuing to gain speed ? Any load had to wait for 10 minutes before it could be plugged in.

And Von Siemens states that his reinforcing current effect was obtained from the "reversed rotation" event... Remember that all the coils are in series, by each electro-magnet pair, relative to a facing drum on the turning shaft. ? (one can also think : by NS electro-magnetic circuit)

And LD had S/N/N/S poles arrangements ? Is that coincidence ?

I'm quite broke these days, and have no workshop at all. So I can just be dreaming.... But I can't help my mind racing...

Talented workmanship welcome ! Tests needed. Please help, pals.



Can we picture this with 90° apart electromagnets, S/N/N/S , with pairs made of opposite poles ?
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 12:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-23-2016, 11:20 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
And about the tri-fillar coils, Peter Lindemann had thought of an impedance matching system.

But what if it was in fact a two-fillar coils, one being center tapped ? Quite a radiant transformer, maybe... We must keep in mind that this was a (burst) dc generator, which was common in these times. But if there was current growing, sparks (or so) could occur, right ?

Just my 2 cents again.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 11:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-23-2016, 12:17 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117


Quote:
Machine dynamo-électrique à courant continu et induit Siemens
Période d'utilisation: 1875-1900
Fabriquant: Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques (SACM)
(...)
Cette machine dynamo-électrique de Gramme de type supérieur, en diffère par le bobinage de son induit qui est réalisé en tambour plutôt qu'en anneau. Elle a été mise en œuvre afin d'optimiser la puissance du champ magnétique inducteur. Son principe général est de transformer l'énergie mécanique (rotation) en énergie électrique grâce au phénomène d'induction. D'aprés l'inscription sur la machine "Belfort G56", il s'agirait d'une dynamo bipolaire du type G fabriquée par la Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques (SACM) de Belfort à partir de 1895. Cette machine dynamo-électrique comporte : un inducteur fixe à deux bobines dont les noyaux sont fixés sur le socle de la machine et sont munis de pièces polaires entourant l'induit situé à la partie supérieure de la machine ; un induit, mobile autour d'un axe horizontal, bobiné en tambour et relié à un ensemble collecteur-balais, lesquels balais sont réglables manuellement en position. L'induit est protégé par une grille en cuivre. L'inducteur alimenté en courant continu produit un champ magnétique au niveau des conducteurs de l'induit. Ceux-ci, lorsqu'ils tournent, sont le siège de forces électromotrices alternatives qui sont transformées en une tension quasi-continue par l'intermédiaire de l'ensemble collecteur-balais. Cette machine peut donc fonctionner en génératrice et délivrer un courant continu, lorsque son induit est entraîné en rotation. Inversement, lorsque l'induit est alimenté à travers l'ensemble balais-collecteur par une source extérieure à courant continu, elle peut aussi fonctionner en moteur.

Utilisation : Cette machine était utilisée en moteur ou générateur pour la conversion électromécanique. L'induit en tambour a été inventé par W. Siemens dès 1875 mais son utilisation ne s'est généralisée qu'à la fin du dix neuvième siècle.
"Le principal avantage de ce type de bobinage réside dans une meilleure utilisation du fil de cuivre; par contre il présente l'inconvénient du croisement des fils, ce qui augmente les difficultés de construction et de réparation…"
Hauteur: 82cm
Longueur: 110cm
Poids: 68kg

src: Machine dynamo-électrique Ã* courant continu et induit Siemens
Quote:
Siemens Dynamo-electric induced DC machine
Period of use: 1875-1900
Manufacturer: Alsatian Society of Mechanical Constructions (SACM)
(...)
This dynamoelectric machine of Gramme superior type differs in its armature winding which is made of drums rather than rings. It was implemented to optimize the power of the inductive magnetic field. Its general principle is to convert mechanical energy (rotation) into electrical energy through induction phenomenon. From the "Belfort G56" registering on the machine , it would be a bipolar dynamo type G manufactured by the Alsatian Society of Mechanical Constructions (SACM) Belfort from 1895. This dynamo-electric machine includes : a fixed inductor with two coils whose cores are attached to the machine base and are provided with pole pieces surrounding the armature located at the upper part of the machine; a movable armature about a horizontal axis, wound with drum fashion and connected to a manifold assembly of brushes, which are manually adjustable in position. The armature is protected by a copper grid. The inductor supplied with direct current generates a magnetic field at the conductors of the armature. Thereof, when rotating, are the site of alternative electromotive forces which are transformed into a quasi-DC voltage via the collector-brushes.

This machine can operate as a generator and is outputting a direct current, when the armature is rotated. Conversely, when the armature is fed through the entire brush collector by an external source to DC, it can also operate as a motor.


Use : This machine was used as motor or generator for electromechanical conversion. The inductive drum armature was invented by W. Siemens in 1875 but its use didn't become widespread until the late nineteenth century.
"The main advantage of this type of coil is a better use of the copper wire, but has the disadvantage of crossing threads, which increases the difficulties of construction and repair ..."
Height: 82cm
Length: 110cm
Weight: 68kg
Hope this translation attempt helps.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 07:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-23-2016, 12:45 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Here is the shematic of a drum armature. I couldn't insert it directly, nor publish it anywhere, so it's on my GDrive.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-23-2016, 03:04 PM
wantomake's Avatar
wantomake wantomake is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 579
Many types

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
And about the tri-fillar coils, Peter Lindemann had thought of an impedance matching system.

But what if it was in fact a two-fillar coils, one being center tapped ? Quite a radiant transformer, maybe... We must keep in mind that this was a (burst) dc generator, which was common in these times. But if there was current growing, sparks (or so) could occur, right ?

Just my 2 cents again.
M.E.,
Nice picture and translation. I guess.

The tri-filar coil was wrapped onto same spool as the capacitor. My experiments (many) with a size that fits over the Lockridge housing. I believe this is the power source of the machine. I built exactly as John Bedini discussed on the video. But didn't use copper for the capacitor. Instead for fund reasons used aluminum duct tape 4" wide with wax paper.
Sad but not surprised, the capacitor would not hold much voltage or be influenced by the surrounding tri-filar coil.
The motor/generator did produce voltage but the coil capacitor would not build up or hold enough amperage to turn the motor.

Funds, knowledge base, shop machinery, and time all slowed that project to a stop.

But it really was great to learn and experience from that project.
wantomake
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-23-2016, 04:38 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
marseye, like you I have spent much time on this device, and finding little historic evidence and information I gave up on that type of research. Instead I studied the pictures of the device John Bedini had, looked at the geometry and started to test different aspects of what I could see.

There is enough that works in the pictures for me to believe it is a real device and I believe I have some of it worked out. I do believe residual magnetism is enough to get it going but being attached to a battery would guarantee instant energisation, and once energised, no battery would be needed. Its a bit like a diesel welding set, once the generator is turning and there is a circuit the machine will self energise.

The Drum armature is actually not greatly different from what I have proposed and tested. I will need to study the Siemens Device for a while to fully understand it.

As for the use of the trifler coil there are many possibilities and just as with the rest of the machine, I believe trial and error is the way to identify its exact function. One thing I have established is that the generation assists the torque and this as been confirmed by wantomake amongst others.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-23-2016, 05:10 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Hi mbrownn,

I have been away from this forum for a long time... Could you please post a link to what you have proposed and tested, just for reference, or through pm?

@ all : everything I have reported here are my latest findings, just for info. I think this is all complementary to John Bedini's explanations (except for the comment about the trifiler coil, which was just an instant thought of mines).

I'm just hoping (like everyone here thinking that it can happen) that we can find this holy grail soonner or later.

Cheers
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 05:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-23-2016, 10:31 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Thinking out loud : Can't we see, in the Siemens device, sort of a Leedskalnin closed horseshoe too ?... (with an electro-magnetic shaft turning inside the bottom leg)
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-23-2016 at 10:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-24-2016, 01:29 AM
Hiwater Hiwater is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 44
From what Mbrownn and I have figured out is that the geometry of the coils is the key to get the motor running. It starts out slow and picks up speed as it rotates to about 5000 rpms. You can set the brushes so that you have to give it a spin for it to start rotating. Now if you had a flywheel on it you would either need to spin it by hand or use a pull rope to get it going.
The tri coil is where Im stuck at right now. Been a couple of monthe since I last worked on it.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-24-2016, 01:49 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiwater View Post
From what Mbrownn and I have figured out is that the geometry of the coils is the key to get the motor running. It starts out slow and picks up speed as it rotates to about 5000 rpms. You can set the brushes so that you have to give it a spin for it to start rotating. (...)
Ok, Hiwater. I need to understand : not yet a self-runner, right ? You have to hook a battery, isn't it ? Please forgive my questions, but I prefer to be sure, rather than making assumptions... Or I'd be amazed
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-24-2016, 05:56 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Hi mbrownn,

I have been away from this forum for a long time... Could you please post a link to what you have proposed and tested, just for reference, or through pm?

@ all : everything I have reported here are my latest findings, just for info. I think this is all complementary to John Bedini's explanations (except for the comment about the trifiler coil, which was just an instant thought of mines).

I'm just hoping (like everyone here thinking that it can happen) that we can find this holy grail soonner or later.

Cheers
I cant point to any single thread where I have put everything I know, Obviously if you search my posts on this forum you will find a lot. Earlier posts are different from the later ones so you can see how my ideas have evolved over time. Take a look at my posts here Lockridge Device - Peter Lindemann The DC operation of the machine is here Interesting Motor You may find this easier to understand the generating concept but it does not cover the transformer actions that are going on. In this thread we have more, again my latest posts are the latest ideas of how it works and I no longer believe it works like i said in the early posts. Imhotep's Lab Interactive FAQ - View topic - The lockridge device

I do not believe it works how John Bedini or Peter lindemann describes it but it appears just like the device John and Peter have shown

I am happy to share all I know.

It is not a motor but a self exciting generator that produces torque as a byproduct. It can run on AC or DC with a variety of armature windings. It can be modified into a self pulsing DC device with the use of other armature windings.

AC and DC outputs are found in the same output winding which causes some difficulties.

At the moment it does not self run, It does not have the Trifilar coil fitted, nor a capacitor. Its a work in progress.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-24-2016, 11:01 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
@ mbownn : yeah, I know how ideas can be living and evolving by themselves, with the constant interaction of other people's own clues... It takes time !

Thank you for you took of your time to compose this condensé.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-24-2016, 01:49 PM
Hiwater Hiwater is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Ok, Hiwater. I need to understand : not yet a self-runner, right ? You have to hook a battery, isn't it ? Please forgive my questions, but I prefer to be sure, rather than making assumptions... Or I'd be amazed
No by far not a self sustained m/g device. It take 5 years to get this far. Like Mbrownn said it can run on AC or DC. The brushes can be set to run on only AC OR DC. Battery can be used, but the armature has to be pulsed. There has to be a transformer action for the generator coils to work properly.

Maybe you can help follow the links Mbrownn provided.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-25-2016, 02:56 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Ok, the Siemens machine had the auto-excited type.

Here, a page about the electro-magnetism and the inductive current machines (in French, too long for me to translate, but using an online translator shouldn't confuse too much).

It's quite interesting, with most type represented, "old school" drawings. The auto-excited inductive phenomenon is explained, here again, by the residual magnetism of the inductors' soft iron core, which is enough to produce more electric strength as soon as a movement of the rotor is initiated ; and that feeds the electro-magnets to the max...

What puzzles me stil is that one doesn't need any real magnets to produce electricity. That info simply reinforce my faith in the re-discovery of the Lockridge device.

In my mind now, and since we're certainly talking now of a DC system , then maybe : gen part / resistors (coil 1 & 2) / capacitor / output (through resistor-coil 3 : to loads (of which : the motor part).

Or the motor part has enough with the whole BEMF of reverse electric sign (stator + electro-coils, all in series, as with the Siemens dynamo), hence the polar arrangement S/N///N/S (/// being the case's slots, like cells in batteries ?)

JB said that 2 of the 4 field coils are bigger than the other pair...

Rhaaaaaaa ! I want to know !!!
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-25-2016 at 03:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-25-2016, 01:34 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Ok, the Siemens machine had the auto-excited type.

Here, a page about the electro-magnetism and the inductive current machines (in French, too long for me to translate, but using an online translator shouldn't confuse too much).

It's quite interesting, with most type represented, "old school" drawings. The auto-excited inductive phenomenon is explained, here again, by the residual magnetism of the inductors' soft iron core, which is enough to produce more electric strength as soon as a movement of the rotor is initiated ; and that feeds the electro-magnets to the max...

What puzzles me stil is that one doesn't need any real magnets to produce electricity. That info simply reinforce my faith in the re-discovery of the Lockridge device.

In my mind now, and since we're certainly talking now of a DC system , then maybe : gen part / resistors (coil 1 & 2) / capacitor / output (through resistor-coil 3 : to loads (of which : the motor part).

Or the motor part has enough with the whole BEMF of reverse electric sign (stator + electro-coils, all in series, as with the Siemens dynamo), hence the polar arrangement S/N///N/S (/// being the case's slots, like cells in batteries ?)

JB said that 2 of the 4 field coils are bigger than the other pair...

Rhaaaaaaa ! I want to know !!!
I wont give you it all in one post, it would be very hard to take in, but try to imagine this.

Imagine the coils on the stator as transformer coils, two of them set at 180 degrees, and the armature act as the primary of the transformer. The other two coils have many more turns and are the secondary. Now if we put AC or Pulsed DC into the primary windings, We get AC in the secondary windings. This is one of our outputs. The motor turning is a second output. Then as a result of the armature sweeping at least one of the secondary coils we have a conventional generated DC output which is a third output for one input.

Increasing the current in the armature and primary field coils, Increases the transformer action and induced current in the secondaries, this also increases the torque and the generated current.

Does this make sense to you?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-25-2016, 06:13 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
(...) Does this make sense to you?
Yep, it does. But seems to me that this tranformer still needs big current to work.

----------------------------------------------

The following is out of the main present subject, just about a dc motor-transformer effect, for the record :


I've been playing for long now with a dc 4-12v 2 magnets poles motor with 3 commutator segments (and as much drums) [dc drill type].

I had rewound it a star armature : all the ending terminals were connected to a ring belonging to the upper shaft, which was electrically connected to the frame by the shaft through the roll-bearings , thus making the frame a 3rd "permanent" contact (the 2 firsts are the brushes).

Having sanded the edges of the cover that holds the brushes, it can be rotated easily). But then, the maximun usable values (or it would burn down) was around 6v - 1.5amps. I generally fed it with 3 to 4 v.

Well anyway, I could at least observe a transformer effect : feeding one brush and the case, there's always a slight higher voltage, approximately 1/4 higher, between the 2 brushes (but less output current, of course). They could light a low dc bulbs (little cars's lamps) better than directly to the battery while it ran the motor. Plus, of course, the motor's shaft was running (I used to fit to it the long middle of a cork wine stopper, as a flywheel).

I estimate the electric transformation efficiency was maybe around 70% (maximum, depending on the extra load; from the half "maximum" real capacity of the AA Ni-Mh batteries perspective ) for 3v. The torque stayed anemic. Speed is then irrelevant.

Any capacitor was worsening the efficiency. This configuration couldn't recharge any "external" cell (as much as the diode for it didn't help it neither). So; really, just here for the record.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-25-2016 at 08:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-26-2016, 12:33 PM
wantomake's Avatar
wantomake wantomake is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn View Post
I wont give you it all in one post, it would be very hard to take in, but try to imagine this.

Imagine the coils on the stator as transformer coils, two of them set at 180 degrees, and the armature act as the primary of the transformer. The other two coils have many more turns and are the secondary. Now if we put AC or Pulsed DC into the primary windings, We get AC in the secondary windings. This is one of our outputs. The motor turning is a second output. Then as a result of the armature sweeping at least one of the secondary coils we have a conventional generated DC output which is a third output for one input.

Increasing the current in the armature and primary field coils, Increases the transformer action and induced current in the secondaries, this also increases the torque and the generated current.

Does this make sense to you?
mbrown,
No showing everything in just one post would take too much space.

What about some simple picture's or better yet a YouTube video of this transformer action.

A picture speaks a thousand words.....
wantomake
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-26-2016, 04:11 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Yep, it does. But seems to me that this tranformer still needs big current to work.

----------------------------------------------

The following is out of the main present subject, just about a dc motor-transformer effect, for the record :


I've been playing for long now with a dc 4-12v 2 magnets poles motor with 3 commutator segments (and as much drums) [dc drill type].

I had rewound it a star armature : all the ending terminals were connected to a ring belonging to the upper shaft, which was electrically connected to the frame by the shaft through the roll-bearings , thus making the frame a 3rd "permanent" contact (the 2 firsts are the brushes).

Having sanded the edges of the cover that holds the brushes, it can be rotated easily). But then, the maximun usable values (or it would burn down) was around 6v - 1.5amps. I generally fed it with 3 to 4 v.

Well anyway, I could at least observe a transformer effect : feeding one brush and the case, there's always a slight higher voltage, approximately 1/4 higher, between the 2 brushes (but less output current, of course). They could light a low dc bulbs (little cars's lamps) better than directly to the battery while it ran the motor. Plus, of course, the motor's shaft was running (I used to fit to it the long middle of a cork wine stopper, as a flywheel).

I estimate the electric transformation efficiency was maybe around 70% (maximum, depending on the extra load; from the half "maximum" real capacity of the AA Ni-Mh batteries perspective ) for 3v. The torque stayed anemic. Speed is then irrelevant.

Any capacitor was worsening the efficiency. This configuration couldn't recharge any "external" cell (as much as the diode for it didn't help it neither). So; really, just here for the record.
Generally speaking it is accepted that motors require current to work. (I accept that some do work on voltage with little current) The Universal motor requires current, doubling the current doubles the torque etc. Similarly transformers do the same. Don’t be afraid of current unless it exceeds the capabilities of the windings. Not only that but our devices also require current.

I don’t know where the excerpt is from so cant really comment on it other than this. When we have multiple coils on the same magnetic circuit, they will interact provided their circuits are closed. Ie transformer interactions. These interactions can be blocked or exploited as required. If blocked your efficiency will likely be low and if exploited as in the induction motor then efficiency will be relatively high.

I have run 12v motors producing significant torque at 3 or 4 volts because I used the motors designed current.

If you have a 12v motor held at stall, it only takes 3 or 4 volts to produce rated torque, so only 3 or 4 volts are needed to do the work. If we eliminate BEMF we can run a 12v motor at full power at 3 or 4 volts. So the voltage above does not surprise me.

Capacitors generally have a poor efficiency, generally 50% so saying that capacitors reduce efficiency makes sense.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-26-2016, 04:20 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by wantomake View Post
mbrown,
No showing everything in just one post would take too much space.

What about some simple picture's or better yet a YouTube video of this transformer action.

A picture speaks a thousand words.....
wantomake
I hear what your saying but I dont think we need to go that far at the moment, besides im not sure how to do it. Maybe my son can help me

The simplest experiments are like the ones I told you about with a motor out of an electric drill. Lock the armature and power the armature in series with one of the field windings with AC (not too high a voltage, 12 to 24 is usually enough to see the effects). Then measure the voltage and current coming out of the other field winding and compare the input with the output. Then do the same with the armature free to rotate.

These basic tests prove transformer interactions as well as generation.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-26-2016, 11:33 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
(...) Now if we put [AC or ] pulsed DC into the primary windings, We get AC in the secondary windings. (This is one of our outputs...)
Of course, bemf is released at the current flow interruption (for a coil in which a circuit is eventually opened), and it's of reversed sign. (Anyone who has an oscilloscope can see this, except that, for [a circuit closing/rising energy flow momentum + circuit opening/ falling energy momentum], one has to use a corresponding cap in order for them to be equivalent, at best).

I'm presently trying to get infos about induction, and more generally about transformers then. Since they're officially not 100% efficients, I'm currently in the process to try to perceive a difference between induction and commutation, in terms of efficiency... Will keep posted my (possible good) "comprehensions" up there...

Wikipedia (and its references) may be a first starter as a good helper...
("Mine", in French, seems to have deeper insights, compared to the English version... Will see.)

But, hey, as you made a remark about it , in the case of a "motor transformer", as you already said, there is the motor (the shaft's momentum) which is runing... May it compensate for the known losses (impedances) ? ... To be continued... (As much as the Lockridge device must generate first).
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-29-2016 at 10:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-27-2016, 01:26 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Lets look at John Bedini's Lockridge device and see if we can see anything that makes sense.

The case is split at approximately the 12 and 6 oclock positions. The coils are not laid out in a symmetrical manor and coils D and B appear to be wound in flat bar copper while C and A appear to be copper wire.

Naturally this would give a difference in the number of turns for similar sized coils, but we can also see that A appears much bigger than C

Lets assume their positions are correct.

I also assumed that the armature was a simple type and that it was wound across the horizontal plane 9pm to 3pm.

If we energise coil D the flux will pass through the armature but cannot return through the right hand side of the stator because of the slots in the case. The easiest path is through coil A and back to D This way only the left side of the stator is being used, and if coil D was pulsed with DC, coil A would have a form of AC induced in it though it wont be a sine wave. This is the transformer action.

If we energise the armature coil at the same time as coil D, but in attraction we have effectively increased the number of turns in our primary, but no torque is applied to the armature by coil D.

As the flux will pass around the armature coil and return through coil A, it makes a sharp bend around the armature coil. This flux prefers a more direct route and so applies a torque on the armature causing the armature to rotate anti clockwise.

As there is current in the armature as it rotates past coil A, It produces a current in coil A. ie it generates a current in coil A.

Thus from a pulsed input we achieve AC in coil A and apply a torque to the armature at the position of coil A. The current in the armature causes generation in coil A in the same direction as the first half of the transformer action.

What do we have?

Coil D only acts as an energiser and plays no part in the motoring of this device other than to produce a strong flux.

The generator is causing the torque and generated current in coil A at the same time. As there is no coil sweeping past coil D there is no BEMF in that coil. and lastly we have an AC current in coil A

The AC will be equal to the input in power less losses.

The rotational power is higher than the average 35% that is expected from a Universal type motor from which this design is produced because of reduced BEMF.

The generated power is equal to the rotational power less losses.

All this from one input.

Can you follow this?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Electric Motor.jpg (41.8 KB, 23 views)
__________________
 

Last edited by mbrownn; 03-27-2016 at 01:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-27-2016, 06:45 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
(...)Can you follow this?
I think I can. Would have to experiment to grasp it fully, and I'm not equiped for that...



I'm thinking of the following : (in simple terms, simplistic logic)

The Siemens device shows that an induction takes place (creates a current) from the interaction between the shaft's coil moving in front of the electro-magnets.

Let's say that the Lockridge device's 3 external coils (trifilar) are intended as an impedance matchers ; for the sake of simplification, let's consider only 2 of them (pretending they do the job).

We know there is a big capacitor too, in th form of 2 copper layers. What can be the capacitance here ? 1, 2, 3... farads ?



Here's "my" possible wiring version (for now) : (in textual description, because my drawing attemps all were awfuls)

From the first leg of the capacitor,
connect the impedance matchin coil 1;
it outputs to the brush A to the shaft's coil 1, that outputs to the brush A',
which feeds the first field electro-magnetic coil.

There, already, when the shaft's coil is launched by hand in front of the field electro-magnet (external force) , should have been generated a current between cap's leg1 and field electro-magnetic coil pair 1's output (Siemens device principle).

Let's input the latter output to the second field electro-magnetic coil pair 2, which outputs to the shaft's coil 2 (through the brushes B-B', in attraction mode)

Let's finally output the brush B' to the impedance matching coil n°2, which ends in the second leg of the capacitor.

Now the capacitor is charged (at least by the bemf), ready to discharge.

The turning shaft exchanges again its coils to be exposed, which closes the circuit again, while the running shaft's momentum re-generates an additional electric burst again.




Conclusion :

As this whole serial cuircuit can be fed again by the now charged capacitor, it should "suffice" to find how to generate big enough in order to allow a compensating motoring action back.

The matter of permanent magnets is that they have permanent strong opposing field resistance to the shaft's coil which is "incoming from the wrong direction" (remember : for the Siemens generator to produce current, the coil must pass its corresponding field coil in "reverse direction").

But here, because we're dealing with electro-magnetic coils (thoses which opposes and attracts the shaft's coils), the commutation off-state moment helps further the non-impeded momentum of the shaft.

Anyway, because of the general induction, there's an augmented current burst due to the very nature of the external trifilar, adding to their impedance matching intention.

Does that make sense ?

I have nothing to try my idea for now (I don't have any suitable induction brushed motor at hand).

Let's keep in mind that the generated current must be enough for a motoring action AND feeding a moderate external load !

But we know that it's been made before... Don't we ?


(please pardon my gibberish)
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-27-2016 at 09:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-28-2016, 03:47 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
I think I can. Would have to experiment to grasp it fully, and I'm not equiped for that...
Correct, its the only way to grasp what is happening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
The Siemens device shows that an induction takes place (creates a current) from the interaction between the shaft's coil moving in front of the electro-magnets.
Correct, standard generation .

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Let's say that the Lockridge device's 3 external coils (trifilar) are intended as an impedance matchers ; for the sake of simplification, let's consider only 2 of them (pretending they do the job).

We know there is a big capacitor too, in th form of 2 copper layers. What can be the capacitance here ? 1, 2, 3... farads ?
OK

The capacitance is unknown as the gaps between the butcher paper and copper are variable in a hand made capacitor. I did do the calculations and the capacitance was smaller than I expected. I cant remember off hand what I came up with but it wasn’t even in the ball park based upon what I thought at the time.



Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Here's "my" possible wiring version (for now) : (in textual description, because my drawing attemps all were awfuls)

From the first leg of the capacitor,
connect the impedance matchin coil 1;
it outputs to the brush A to the shaft's coil 1, that outputs to the brush A',
which feeds the first field electro-magnetic coil.
Series wound?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
There, already, when the shaft's coil is launched by hand in front of the field electro-magnet (external force) , should have been generated a current between cap's leg1 and field electro-magnetic coil pair 1's output (Siemens device principle).
OK

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Let's input the latter output to the second field electro-magnetic coil pair 2, which outputs to the shaft's coil 2 (through the brushes B-B', in attraction mode)
You have lost me, which is the latter? Spell it out like you did in the last paragraph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Let's finally output the brush B' to the impedance matching coil n°2, which ends in the second leg of the capacitor.

Now the capacitor is charged (at least by the bemf), ready to discharge.

The turning shaft exchanges again its coils to be exposed, which closes the circuit again, while the running shaft's momentum re-generates an additional electric burst again.
I dont get it because I cant visualise your previous paragraph, Please try again.




Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Conclusion :

As this whole serial cuircuit can be fed again by the now charged capacitor, it should "suffice" to find how to generate big enough in order to allow a compensating motoring action back.

The matter of permanent magnets is that they have permanent strong opposing field resistance to the shaft's coil which is "incoming from the wrong direction" (remember : for the Siemens generator to produce current, the coil must pass its corresponding field coil in "reverse direction").

But here, because we're dealing with electro-magnetic coils (thoses which opposes and attracts the shaft's coils), the commutation off-state moment helps further the non-impeded momentum of the shaft.

Anyway, because of the general induction, there's an augmented current burst due to the very nature of the external trifilar, adding to their impedance matching intention.

Does that make sense ?
I think I know what your getting at but I want to understand so please try to explain a bit like your explaining it to a child, then there is no assumptions and misinterpretations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
I have nothing to try my idea for now (I don't have any suitable induction brushed motor at hand).

Let's keep in mind that the generated current must be enough for a motoring action AND feeding a moderate external load !

But we know that it's been made before... Don't we ?


(please pardon my gibberish)
Dont worry about that, your theories can be tested verbally before you go to the expense of building something. Testing Ideas verbally is frowned upon by some, so if you get unnecessary criticism just ignore it.

The next stage will be so simulate it, there are several circuit simulators free on line. Dont try to simulate the whole thing, just each individual stage, one after the other.

Then when we have the concrete ideas we can choose a donor device and start to work with that. We would be coming from a position of understanding that way, far too many just jump in and try to make something and then dont understand why it does not work.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-28-2016, 09:55 AM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
Hehe ! I knew my Gibberish could prove problematic

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
Series wound?
Yep : Inductive electro-magnetic dynamo can be wired series as well as parallels. Siemens' is series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
You have lost me, which is the latter? Spell it out like you did in the last paragraph.
Hehe, This I have modified several times to try to be less heavy... I should have prefered to stay unequivoqually understood instead (too, because i perfectly know that my English sucks, since I'm not a native nor regular practitionner of it - reading/understanding quite well is not writing/expressing near good).

So : "the latter" intended to mean "the last point of the series where we just had stopped to observe our generated current" ("latter", like in old patents describing mode), that's : the output of the field electro-magnetic coil pair 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
I dont get it (...) Please try again.
So be it.

Here's the whole rephrased attempt :

Quote:
(This quote was augmented too)

The Siemens device shows that an induction takes place (creates a current) from the interaction between the shaft's coil moving in front of the electro-magnets.

Let's say that the Lockridge device's 3 external coils (trifilar) are intended as an impedance matchers ; for the sake of simplicity, let's consider only 2 of them (pretending they do the job).

We know there is a big capacitor too, in the form of 2 copper layers. What can be the capacitance here ? 1, 2, 3... farads ?
And let's suppose the shafts has 2 distinct rotor coils, attached each to 2 commutator's segments (hence a total of 4 commutator segments, for simplicity again here too).

Here's "my" possible wiring version (for now) : (in textual description, because my drawing attemps all were awfuls)

Connect the first leg of the capacitor to the impedance matchin coil 1 input;
The matching coil 1 outputs to the brush A to the shaft's coil 1, that outputs to the brush A',
which feeds the first field electro-magnetic coil pair 1 input


There, already, when the shaft's coil is launched by hand in front of the field electro-magnet (external force) , should have been generated a current between cap's leg 1 and field electro-magnetic coil pair 1's output (Siemens device principle).

So, let's output this current from the electro-magnetic coil 1 output to the second field electro-magnetic coil pair 2 input, which coil pair outputs to the shaft's coil 2 (through the brushes B-B', in attraction mode, which aims at assisting that which was impulsed directly by hand).

Let's finally output the brush B' to the impedance matching coil n°2, which ends in the second leg of the capacitor, and the loop is looped, so that the whole series is not a short circuit.

Hence the capacitor has current somewhere somehow to feed it, making it a pulsating battery ?

The turning shaft exchanges again its coils to be exposed, which closes the circuit again, while the running shaft's momentum re-generates an additional electric burst again to the whole series, the capacitor being quite at the electric center of the whole serie, thus dividing/balancing the electric circuit like it is , for example, in any dc brushed motor connected to a battery.

In that, it may be practical to remark a parallel with the motor/battery couple, figured out by the similar balance between attraction/repulsion of each of the device's halves.

Hey, nothing really new under the sun here, I know (and I was taught in school that a self sustaining device is impossible. But...)




Conclusion :

As this whole strictly series cuircuit can be energized again by the running shaft, because of its Siemens device's component which is the approximate half of our series, it should "suffice" to find how to generate a "big enough" energization in order to allow an helping compensating motor action back.

The inconvenience of permanent magnets is that they have effectively permanent strong opposing field impedance to the shaft's coil which is "incoming from the wrong direction" (remember : for the Siemens generator to produce current, the shaft's coil must pass in front of its corresponding field coil in "reverse direction").

But here, because we're dealing with electro-magnetic coils (those which opposes and attracts the shaft's coils), the commutation off-state moment frees further (helps) the non-impeded "unplugged" momentum of the shaft.

Anyway, because of the general induction, there's an augmented current burst due to the very nature of the external trifilar, which is at least a double -coil that must react with both currents positive and negative when they're incoming from opposite directions, hence adding some more energy.

Maybe we can further hypothesize that the (remaining) third coil is the real impedance matching component.

Anyway, the very same problems must arise when trying to drive a motor and another distinct "external" generator through a belt... The Sciense says it can't be done. Some already proved the opposite, ie : the self sustained water pump system (video).

I'm just aiming here at further simplifying again (like the Lockridge device previously had) the same principle.

So, does my present understanding (yet) make sense ?
Here was my best output ! I'm quite confident in my wiring idea (but less of my English... Ok, I'm now stoping to apologize for being a french in France. But never fear to bash my phrasings, as long as you point out the correct sentences which feel "better").


Now is left to dimension the field electro coils according to their awaited own roles, and the trifilar and the capacitor. Not the simplest thing to achieve, is it ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by mbrownn
(...)your theories can be tested verbally before you go to the expense of building something. Testing Ideas verbally is frowned upon by some, so if you get unnecessary criticism just ignore it.
I don't fear no one, nothing, except of failing. It's certain that I profoundly prefer the sane collaboration of alike minds.

Thanks for your consideration.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-28-2016 at 11:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-28-2016, 02:42 PM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Im still not sure, maybe its me, but there are things that you have said which are similar to what I have done, im still listening.

The pelton wheel device I have seen before and as a hydraulics engineer, I am confident it is a hoax.

Do you see similarities between the Siemens device and what I have posted? You mentioned attraction, is that the same way as I described?

I know in the descriptions put out by PL and JB, they talk about the trifler having one winding connected to the input and another to the output, but what output is not mentioned.

I have tested and discussed having the output from the generator feed through the armature and stator windings to compensate for load. If this also went through one winding of the trifler it could effectively assist the input from the source using a transformer action. If the third winding were shorted upon itself could it be that it would impedance match would provide sufficient to power the machine. Personally I don’t think it is enough.

Charging a capacitor through an inductor does appear to place as much energy in the capacitor as was discharged into the inductor, but this is only because the inductive kickback provides the second half of the energy. Could this be what the capacitor on the lockridge is for? I don’t think the capacitor is large enough unless we get to voltages in excess of 400v.

This causes a problem as the device itself seems to run off 4 volts.

If the trifler is impedance matching that would require a drop of 100x and increasing the amps by a similar amount. I am fairly certain that the wire of the trifler could could not carry such a current without instantly melting.

Is capacitive discharge part of it? I dont know.

I am not ready yet to run these trifler and capacitor tests although I know some of the other guys are trying a few things. Im still figuring out the full workings of all the windings in the motor case.

Keep the ideas coming and the odd sketch would help. maybe using "print screen" you could capture a basic circuit from a simulator. I have used this simulator applet to do that in the past. Circuit Simulator Applet
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-28-2016, 05:55 PM
marseye marseye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 117
mbrownn,

From the picture of the JB's "possible" Lockridge you gave, I have some remarks :
- First, we're sure that THIS device... never worked as a Lockridge Device it was a failed attempt, dumped at JB by the eentually harassed people, after they've been scratching their heads for long before this).
- Secondly, if we think of a U magnet, we know that its poles are at the edge of each leg, with a parallel gap between the legs and their "bloch wall" on the rounded base of the u, right ?

Can we then say consequently that the two openings on the case sides could figure a similar configuration ? If yes, the electro magnets pairs may not be constituted what we're thinking the pairs are...

Follow me : on your picture, what if the brushes pairs 1-2 and 3-4 correspond to the field coils sequence : B-D / A-C ? Can you see the case openings between each stator coil pair as expressed here ? The "round base bloch wall zone" of the u magnet could then be figured by the cases' extremities ?



On another hand : you assumed that the rotor wiring was universal. If yes, you mean all of it's coils are globally "shunted" (the whole armature wiring is one thread, with the ending terminal joining back the starting terminal, like in the universal dc motors) ?

My proposal is that the rotor coils are independant pairs, not connected with the others, with only 2 terminals : input AND output. Since I suspect the series of the Siemens device (generator) is going to feed the motor part, there certainly the transformer action that I've previously here described above as "irrelevant, just for the record" !!! I might have been wrong in such statement... But I have further tests to conduct now about it (with my 3 posts star wind motor, that I need to make again first, in order to validate some data that I'm hoping to find, now that I think I know what to look for. Unfortunately, this test will have real magnets, instead of electro-magnets. And as I have only a 3 poles rotor inside the two magnets stator, the two magnets will have to be the same polarity N-N or S-S... with a battery. But the voltmeter will be handy for what I'm looking for...).

But if that shows encouraging, it might be that we would possibly have the stator poles pairs made of a 2 field coils being the sames in each pair (S-S and N-N)... I have to go testing now.

[** I have an idea that some unbalance must exist and alternate..... ** A BIG and small field coils in pair for each 2 pairs is maybe relevant here !!! **]

For a simulation : I checked and doubt that the applet you're advising me can allow a motor schematic... Will see, or figure out something else maybe.

I'll keep here posted.
__________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
M.E. Who else ?...

Last edited by marseye; 03-29-2016 at 08:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-29-2016, 09:13 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
mbrownn,

From the picture of the JB's "possible" Lockridge you gave, I have some remarks :
- First, we're sure that THIS device... never worked as a Lockridge Device.
Correct, It was an attempted modification that never worked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
- Secondly, if we think of a U magnet, we know that its poles are at the edge of each leg, with a parallel gap between the legs and their "bloch wall" on the rounded base of the u, right ?
Maybe, magnets may be much more complex than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Can we then say consequently that the two openings on the case sides could figure a similar configuration ?
I suspect not, In my tests it became obvious that the splits in the case were there to separate two magnetic circuits. At least if it operates in the way I suspect


Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
If yes, the electro magnets pairs may not be constituted what we're thinking the pairs are...

Follow me : on your picture, what if the brushes pairs 1-2 and 3-4 correspond to the field coils sequence : B-D / A-C ? Can you see the case openings between each stator coil pair as expressed here ? The "round base bloch wall zone" of the u magnet could then be figured by the cases' extremities ?
I did not not wire them like that, maybe you could try it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
On another hand : you assumed that the rotor wiring was universal. If yes, you mean all of it's coils are globally "shunted" (the whole armature wiring is one thread, with the ending terminal joining back the starting terminal, like in the universal dc motors) ?
A 4 pole universal type motor or generator would be a good donor device to get the parts from. Whether the field winding is shunt or series has not yet being established but as the current could potentially be 100+ amps I favour series to keep the current down a little. Standard armatures are a continuous loop and we know there was something unusual about the Lockridge armature. I used a simple armature with separate coils and no interconnectivity. As well as being relatively easy to wind, these armatures have no compromises like standard Lap and Wave wound armatures. They produce strong fields and do not heat up as fast as looped armatures. They arc and build up high voltages that can be harvested. Standard armatures are very difficult to harvest power from as the currents find it easier to pass around the armature than to go through brushes to a separate circuit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
My proposal is that the rotor coils are independant pairs, not connected with the others, with only 2 terminals : input AND output.
I agree either single windings or pairs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marseye View Post
Since I suspect the series of the Siemens device (generator) is going to feed the motor part, there certainly the transformer action that I've previously here described above as "irrelevant, just for the record" !!! I might have been wrong in such statement... But I have further tests to conduct now about it (with my 3 posts star wounded motor, that I need to make again first, in order to validate some data that I'm hoping to find, now that I think I know what to look for. Unfortunately, this test will have real magnets, instead of electro-magnets. And as I have only a 3 poles rotor inside the two magnets stator, the two magnets will have to be the same polarity N-N or S-S... with a battery. But the voltmeter will be handy for what I'm looking for...).

But if that shows encouraging, it might be that we would possibly have the stator poles pairs made of a 2 field coils being the sames in each pair (S-S and N-N)... I have to go testing now.

[** I have an idea that some unbalance must exist and alternate..... ** A BIG and small field coils in pair for each 2 pairs is maybe relevant here !!! **]

For a simulation : I checked and doubt that the applet you're advising me can allow a motor schematic... Will see, or figure out something else maybe.

I'll keep here posted.
I think there are differences between what I have done and what you propose. I will help if I can as it is always good to share knowledge so that it does not become lost or hidden in patents.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
lockridge, siemens, von

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers