Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube REGISTER NOW*** 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


Monero XMR


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.

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 04-24-2007, 08:43 PM
Joehan Joehan is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4
PESWiki

@Allan,

why you have the same information on your side ?

Regards
Joehan
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

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

  #32  
Old 04-25-2007, 12:38 AM
Eric Eric is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 54
ok i am going to just say my 2 cents worth here, you wont hardly see me at all on a disscusion group as i have learned that its easy waste a ton of time following various discusion groups on the web. most of my time will be spent actually throwing some money and time "building something" i "think" will work based on what i "learned" from the dvd.
I know what its like not having a lot of money, im not rich, christ im just a pizza delivery driver!! (plus i have no formal background so i am learning and thinking as i move ahead) but what i do know is that it is easy to be afraid to fail.. we all grow up being taught that its bad to fail. you get in trouble for getting D's in school instead of being "encuraged" (a reprimand is discouragement) to use that grade as a starting point to improve. this is one of many examples of how we are taught as we grow up. ironicly (and paradoxilly) if you look at sports, like baseball, a designated hitter who is ranked at 300 is considered a verry sucessful player and also makes waaaaay more money than a 200 hitter. ok now lets look at that 300. that 300 means that out of a 1000 swings he hit the ball 300 times. that means he "failed" 700 times!!! funny how we are taught its bad to fail and the baseball hitter is making more money now because he was willing to go out and "risk" failing the most!! what he knows and you dont is that failure is a nessary building block to achieving!!!

ok why this lenthy discription, because based on what i am reading on this group YOU GUYS ARE LOSING THE FOREST FOR THE TREES, (yes i am yelling to get your attention) LOL i even know there are many of you out there in the world who, in the back of your head, are telling me that i may be a pizza driver with not a lot of money but i(meaning you) have even less money to lose. see you see fear of bad consiquences and a reprimand set in and your reduced to speculation instead of taking a swing at it. look at how you guys are nitpicking peters new dvd. look at how rick is nitpicking the credibility of peter and his dvd. look at how your whining about how there is no reveiled secret in "bob teals" design and...how did rick put it "Teal is made to be the grand savior of the environment and world economy when nothing significant is presented of his work" . jeez its a friggen piston design with tie rods and a crankshaft that will wear out and break. (a simple shafted electric rotary design is much simpler and more elegant) if you didnt sleep through the beginning of the dvd you would have realized the secret lies in harnessing all the unopposed magnetic torque, and recycling energy is an added benifit to this. bedinis monopole "only" focusses on maximizing the energy spike, for torque its gutless. teal was an example not the definative solution. its like you guys want the answer spoon fed to you or something, and you would probably like it for free to boot!! im sorry but if you want a step by step direction list you can follow with out thinking then you should be paying peter waaaay more than 30 dollars so he can think for you! i dont know where i heard this or if its true but i heard "the average person spends only 5 minutes on oriiginal thought in a typical day. it used to be 10 min before television was invented!" sounds scary to me!!

so back to the dvd, you guys completely missed the boat on whats important. the 1 piston motor, the teal design, peters own flux motor design (of which you guys expressed no interest in at all in the previous posts, probly because peter didnt spoon feed you the "how to" directions for that motor in the dvd haha), the executive desk top toys, even the hypothetical s curved rotor at the end of the dvd are all EXAMPLES of past work and present ideas. when i watched the dvd i did not think these wer the heart and soul of the dvd. again you guys missed the forest for the trees, i felt the most amazing and important part of the dvd was the detailed way he went about describing the shortcomings of the present day direct induction motor. and giveing me a picture like understanding of what really goes on in these motors. if i actually get off my armchair for a second and "think" about how much practical mechanical shaft work i can get when i have a motor thats not acting against it self i get exited! then add to the fact that not having money forces me to "think" more creatively. and find a "possible" solution to "relativly cheaply" modify a piece of existing garbage into a motor that might give me a similar result to peters flux motor idea that he allready built in the past! when i finnish it (in about 2 weeks from now) i will run it. compare input watts with "real power" out on a mini dyno test. then if it doesnt work i will learn all i can from it and move on (i wont whine and throw a fit) if it works then thats all i need to build a massive belief in my self and this idea that i can further learn how to calculate what i need to "build it bigger and better" .

there, its long and windy and a little harsh, if offended i appolgize (only if you dont fit the above description otherwise consider the harshness as a tonic)
point is you guys need a wake up call. so go watch the dvd (again for some)
and use your noggin to add something of value to this group. i will not post any more details on my ideas because there mine and you need to focus on your ideas, then if you need help with your ideas post your questions, of which i would gladly help you if i can (remember im learning to) so dont give up if i cant. just find some one who can, be it a highschool teacher or the local garbage man, you never know who has the answer based from there past life experence.

remember that in the dvd all peter did was show us what happens in a direct induction motor, share some history on alternative ideas, and.... this is the most important, he encouraged you to "experement" in the end of the dvd. this means learn to think, dare to try, and be ready and willing to learn!!

cheers!
Eric
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:27 AM
Ted Ewert Ted Ewert is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 597
Give up? Heck no!!! I'm going to build me one of them over-unity dynomometers if it's the last thing I do.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-25-2007, 03:18 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
Bob Teal - Magnipulsion secrets?

Bob Teal obviously had some secrets since the articles, the interview video, etc... show him demonstrating things that are not covered in the patents and he personally seems to have left this information out on how he did it. At least, in a direct way. By talking about collapsing magnetic fields, etc... in the interview and elsewhere are vague enough explanations that anyone "skilled in the art" will get what he is talking about and therefore making it unnecessary to even put them in the patents.

One thing is for sure. Patents don't mean much as far as being an authoritative document to allow duplication of a technology. Inventors are not required to disclose any more than is necessary to protect the concepts. To my underdstanding at least. I know a handful of people who have over 100 patents combined on many different technologies and plenty of them have a "fudge factor" in them. Enough to protect the concepts but not enough to duplicate the secret sauce that makes it do what the inventors are demonstrating.

Bob Teal says in the interview video clip that cemf and the collapsing magnetic field are the same and they are not. The cemf is obviously an active effect while applying the power mostly through induction I suppose and the collapsing magnetic field is a different event AFTER the power is turned off. 2 separate events. So, I think it is easy to see that his explanation of cemf and the collapsing magnetic fields are not entirely accurate, but I think common sense shows that he was aware of the concepts of what he was dealing with.

It appears that the Magnipulsion did not try to motor against itself creating cemf for the fact that lighting bulbs didn't force the input to climb up...the output isn't connected directly to the input. Also, the collapsed magnetic fields seem to be obviously used even in the interview's simple desktop example of that coil pulsing and the collapsed fields were charging that cap to 40volts from 12v input. Just about all of us who has experimented with John's circuits knows that the collapsing fields will charge caps like this so I don't think there is much debate there.

I am NOT implying that Teal was doing it just like John because I think there is no question that John has the world's most efficient way to do it. Teal has a tradeoff with getting torque out of his motor. And with some type of "iron keeper", etc... the spikes probably won't be super radiant like John's. BUT, whatever does happen to be there in the Magnipulsion type motor's collapsed fields will probably be recovered the most efficiently using John's method at least.

Bob Teal may have mentioned magnets but that is exactly what an electromagnetic coil is and that is also exactly what permanent magnets are. Both are magnets. One electromagnetic and one permanant. Since all of his explanations revolve around electromagnetic coils, I believe it is safe to say that when Bob Teal mentions magnets that it is synonomous with electromagnetic coils.

I personally believe that Teal's motor is an open system and his recovery is absolutely not locked into the input. I don't know if Teal charged batteries with the collapsing fields or not, but he obviously charged caps and lit bulbs with it and could do so without increasing the input necessary to power the engine meaning that the load is increased on the overall system but no more is necessary to run the engine. It is kind of a one way system. The input charges the coils and the collapsed fields are funneled to a capacitor/bulb system in one way or another. That output and being able to power bulbs from it obviously isn't dependent on the direct input to the system. How? I don't know exactly how he did it but it is obvious he did it.

Maybe he had some diode leaving the coil to the cap when coil is shut off or maybe he had a secondary winding going to a bridge then to caps. Who knows? Those are the only two ways I can think it was done and that is because those are the only two ways I have done it in my personal attempts of bulding some of John Bedini's circuits and of course that is because that is what John shared with everyone.

With the torque, Teal explains about when the coils are turned on are definitely not at "bottom dead center" but upwards through the swing to take advantage of that force instead of sucking the rod straight up on the crankshaft. That is a very powerful concept and seeing some of the old motors are doing it inline which is very power robbing. Doing it partly through a swing turned on by whatever switch you want seems to be a very significant step towards higher torque in this particular model.

With the collapsed magnetic field, that will not "push" the rod out furthering efficiency, if anything, the collapsing magnetic field will suck the rod in even further and stronger. The iron is not polarized like a magnet so to speak and will just move towards the coil no matter what polarity the coil is at. So, turn the coil on when the rod is moving into the coil, turn it off before it gets all the way in there, the collapse will further suck the rod in plus whatever collapse is there..., a part of it will be recovered to a cap or whatever in addition to providing further mechanical work (when no more power is supplied) at that moment. This is a very powerful concept I think.

no backemf
more torque for less input
recovery of the collapsed fields

Magnipulsion did these.

Are the secrets revealed on how Bob Teal did them?

It is possible since Bob Teal never revealed them himself I suppose. I believe Peter said something like "even if this isn't the exact" method that Teal used, it had to fulfill those certain parameters.

Back efm is back emf and to get around having more cemf when increasing load the motor obviously had to apply certain principles.

More mechanical work with less input with turning on through the stroke and not at the bottom of it plus on the turn off, the collapsed field will further produce more mechanical work in the forward direction.

Recovery of magnetic collapse, Teal did this by what exact method? I don't know but it could have been by 2nd winding through bridge or diode from the coil...people see the diode leaving the collector but I see it as being at the bottom of the coil.

I learned a lot in Electric Motor Secrets because my experience with conventional motors ended with my RC cars back in the late 80's in Japan with the Tamiya kits. I know I push forward on the control and the car moves. That was about it. I have the general understanding of conventional motors, but Peter's video did clear a bunch up for me.

It may be in a lot of conventional language but I think that is a good thing because even though the virtual photon language of Bearden is probably the most accurate explanation for all of it, it is very difficult for many people to grasp and it just has to be in simple language for the masses to get it. Especially conventional motor designers who don't believe it is possible to increase the load without increasing the input amp draw. We have all experienced this with Bedini motors. I think Peter deserves a lot of credit for making it "pallatable" to non "free energy" buffs.

Bob Teal was obviously either holding back in the patents or came to further realizations after those patents as shown in the interview and articles. Whatever the case, I feel it is very worth of further discovery.

On a final note, John asks that everyone please not email him asking him about the Electric Motor Secrets DVD. He is too busy dealing with his own business and technologies. He will just refer you here anyway since this forum is where you ask questions about the dvd. He'll also ask you to just ask Peter since Peter made the DVD. John is swamped with emails about this and doesn't have time. Please respect this. Look what John has already given to the public so how could anyone ask for anything more. If that keeps up, people will start emailing him asking where to get the magnets!

Anyway, on that lighter note just remember that there is nothing like actual experimentation and one experiment is worth a bajillion opinions.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-25-2007, 04:59 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
Bob Teal influence

Bob Teal influence

Bob Teal’s interview influenced me from the time I got it about 7 years ago or so. I didn’t know who it was since I couldn’t make out his name. He talked about collapsing mag fields, etc… and I thought his machine was like a giant school girl motor.

I didn’t really know the difference between cemf and the collapsed field. That interview influenced how I saw John’s machines and especially the original dual battery charger. Instead of 3 wires wrapped the same (trifilar), I wound trigger and power one way and the 3rd wire reversed. I thought that is what the dot at the bottom of the 3rd wire represented. I thought that meant that the wire was reversed to siphon off the cemf to the caps so therefore no cemf and also it was wrapped in the backwards so that it would be in line with the collapse field.

I always got interesting results with the first 2 dual batt chargers with the mechanical pulley, etc… Used to charge large cap banks of several hundred thousand uf’s and charge batts with it on a mechanical pulley switch that was a unique design that I invented and these batts would continue to charge for 45 minutes to 1 hour after I turned the power off! And yes, they would peform work. Enough work that I could put the batts in my electric scooter and head down to John’s shop a few hundred yards down the street and back JFun!

I could light bulbs from the cap on the output, increasing work pulling from the whole system and the input amps would not change.

Anyway, just interesting how this all came back around on the Teal stuff not even knowing the name Bob Teal for about a month now.

Oh well, now I know they are different machines for different purposes. I didn’t pay that close attention to what Bob Teal was saying in the interview and didn’t make it out that they were solenoids basically.

If I were to build a solenoid version of these motors, I would use a Scottish Yoke like in the Bourke Engine. I think that would further increase the efficiency of transferring solenoid action to crankshaft turning a rotor. No connecting rods and fewer moving parts.



__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:06 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
My Two Cents...

Dear Forum Members,

The recent posts by Eric and Aaron have reiterated the essence of what I am trying to convey in my DVD, and I do not wish to address any of these other knit-picky posts.

There is one thing I would like to address, and that is the comment by John Bedini, as follows:

"Also in the NEW movie, I built the engine you see running, I did the switching. as Teal's motor was not capable of charging any battery. the circuit you see with teal's drawing is not for storing energy at all. The circuit is a spark suppression for the points. The teal motor is not capable of charging batteries until you use the monopole circuit for recovery.
I'm not going to say anything more. Remember closing down all the fields is not an open system, no recovery possible.
John"

I agree with everything John says here, but I would like to add more detail to the account. The Solenoid Engine I demonstrate on the DVD was built at John's shop about two years ago, in the Spring of 2005. I was working for John's company at the time. One day I brought my Bob Teal file to work and John, Gary and I had a long and sometimes heated discussion about the possibilities of getting more torque out of one of these designs. I wanted to build it and John agreed to help. But we were at John's shop, and John is the skilled machinist and John is the skilled electronic circuit designer. So, naturally, John actually fabricated the parts that needed machining. We both worked on assembling it. When it came to figuring out how to run the commutator, we decided on an optical-interrupter system. The signal output from this was rather low, so John developed a gain stage to drive the output transistors. I don't show the circuit because it is one of John's unique solutions to a unique situation. It is similar to the SG type of circuit, but there are a few differences as well. Teal's patents suggests he was running a very short input pulse so we started with a very short ON time. That didn't work very well at all. At John's urging, we kept opening up the ON time until we were ON for about 160 degrees and OFF for about 200 degrees.

It was still not very powerful. I suggested that we needed to start folding the magnetic field down around the coil and so I built the plastic donut filled with iron filings. This helped some, but the motor didn't start running fast until we put the iron top piece on. Then the mechanical power started going up. This is shown in the DVD. After studying this motor over time, I realized the full significance of the necessity of closing the magnetic field all the way down in order to get the mechanical energy production up to the maximum. The model, as shown, still has more than ONE INCH of air gap in the magnetic circuit at the top of the stroke and over TWO INCHES of air gap at the beginning of the stroke. That is why I say we are missing 60% or more of the possible mechanical energy from this model. I actually believe this model is missing as much as 90% of the possible mechanical energy available from its electrical input.

I agree that Teal's circuit does not show how any electricity can be recovered from his magnetic field collapse. I venture a speculation, based on what circuit he does show, but I agree with John. Teal's patent does not show how energy can be recovered from his coils. But, obviously there is energy to recover, and Teal does demonstrate doing it in the Interview film, so he was clearly aware of the process and its importance. I still maintain that Teal's working models took advantage of this process and that John's circuits demonstrate how it can be done.

Now let's talk about closing down the magnetic field. John says that you can't get any "recovery" when the field is closed down completely. Its true that the Radiant Voltage Spike coming from the coil collapse is strongest when the coil is open to the environment. The battery charges best when the current pulse is preceded by this very high voltage spike. In contrast to this, the mechanical energy produced by the motor is maximized when the magnetic field is completely closed down and the total air gap between the moving and non-moving parts is only a few thousandths of an inch. Under this circumstance, the Radiant Voltage Spike is almost completely gone and the impulse coming out of the coil collapse is almost entirely electron current. This type of pulse charge will not desulfate the battery or heal it of past damage like the Radiant Spike will. So, you cannot "recover" a battery this way. But it will charge the battery to some degree, so it is not entirely useless. It will charge capacitors just fine. So, there is a trade off in how the electrical and mechanical outputs are engineered, and there are ways to get both effects by carefully studying these processes and engineering the machine accordingly.

So, I hope this clears up some of the confusion about this machine and the accusations that have been made. John built it, I helped a lot, and Teal's patent was on the table when we did it. I acknowledge in the credits at the end of my DVD that John and I built the Solenoid Engine test model, so nothing was ever intended to mislead anybody.

Peter
__________________
 

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 04-25-2007 at 06:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:36 AM
Larz Larz is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Landskrona, sweden
Posts: 4
Air spring

Now we are talking...

I have been thinking hard on this subject for a few days now. And most of the important stuff seems to have been talked about already. So I will not repeat loads of it.

Thinking more torque for a given input is way more important than how much you can recover by the collapsing field. This solenoid motor does seem to be able to create a lot of torque with a small input, but someone has to actually build one and then share the findings with us all.

like aaron said: let the eMagnet pull the piston in, and cut off the power before it reaches the endpoint. The collapsing field will result in one final big pull on the piston, and simultaneusly we can catch this pulse like tesla or john bedini did. (Take a look here if you want to see how tesla catched the collapsing field of a large inductor, to power a tesla-coil from a battery) so we both get to eat the cake and to have it still :-)

now add to this something that I have seen in the patents but are not quite so obvious: the solenoid housing is closed in the end where the piston goes in. this makes it practically an airspring. this is explained by tesla too (im a big fan of him ;-) in his mechanical steam or pressure oscillator. so when you cut of the power the spike will slam the piston towards the end, we catch the kick-back in a Cap, and the airspring will push the rod OUT! Dont forget, another solenoid is actually pulling at this right moment so the force of the airspring is ADDED to the force of the pulling emagnet. summa summarum: MORE TORQUE.
I believe that it is possible to build a motor that uses not very much electrical energy to run, wich creates a lot of torque, and that this engine can turn a conventional generator while recapturing some or most of the input energy. the generator will of course be delivering more out than we put into the motor... I really hope so...

Lars
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-25-2007, 01:33 PM
k4zep k4zep is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 16
Hi Gang,

Did a search on the US Patent site last night and found the two patents for the TEAL engin.

Name:

Teal, Benjimin R. (took me a while to find as R is middle name)

US4,093,880
US4,024,421

The site is free and all you have to have is a TIFF viewer to see them! There is a like at the site to a free viewer if you do not already have it on your computer.

Patent Full-Text and Full-Page Image Databases

Slogged through both, did not find anything particularly new or exotic AS PATENTED. Looking at others that the patents were compared to, some really neat ol solenoid driven engines "Invented" over the years though and going way back!. Oh, I LIKE reading patents! The double talk is usually up to your armpits!

Respectfully,

Ben
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-25-2007, 02:27 PM
k4zep k4zep is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 16
Teal Motor More Thought

Hi Gang,

Reading all the above post it is obvious that the basics of the Teal motor is understood. Peter very clearly showed most of the basics that the motor requires to run and has discovered the secret of the enclosed solenoid field process that increases the output.

If anyone looked at the photo of my motor they will see all the attributes Peter has suggested for a successful motor including very close/closed coupling of the solenoid piston and coil. That is mandatory or the motor is a pip squeek with very low output.

What Peter has missed or has not shown is the effect of a pulse that is of a VERY HIGH POTENTIAL (hence high peak current in coil) and the effect it has on the output of the motor when all of the energy of the pulse is contained in the solenoid!. If you make a L/C circuit out of the solenoid coil and a cap which holds the basic power for one pulse, add a diode across the coil to capture any back emf IN THE COIL, pulse the cap into the coil for a VERY short time at anywhere from 600-1000 VDC, the motor turns into a power house! The LCD of the motor/cap/diode network turns into a PFN network that results in the single high voltage/current pulse and the diode helps kill the ringing.

The easiest way to SEE this effect is to take a 24VDC industrial relay, which basically has an enclosed field in the coil and movable armature. Place a HV diode (1000V at least, 1N4007) across it (this stops the ringing, keeps energy in the coil/solenoid and as it is NOT polarity sensitive, any current in the coil in either direction pulls it in!), observe polarity when you do the next step. Key it with 24 volts observe it's "clunk" as it pulls in, normal operation. Then charge a 1uf HV cap (at least 2000V rating) up to 24 V, remove from supply and connect it across it, keeping polarity right. Nothing happens. Keep going up in voltage, around 80-90 VDC, it will start pulling in weakly. Around 250 VDC it will clunk pretty well. Around 5-600VDC, it will BANG in, around 800-1000VDC it will almost tear the armature off as the Cap. discharges in less than 1-3ms. Another secret is the old Amp/Turns field here, VERY HIGH CURRENT PULSE, LOTS OF TURNS IN COIL=POWER pulse. There is a lot more going on here but that is the basics. The Joules stored in a cap as voltage goes up and the Amp/turns formula I believe result in a non linear output effect. Any higher than about 1000VDC, the coil insulation will start to break down. Due to the contained field, for some reason, you can pulse much higher voltages into the coil and not have a breakdown, I do not know why this happens but it does. If you look at the waveform at 800-1000VDC, you will see a perfect square 3-600us pulse with virtually no ringing (.5v max) as all the back emf is sucked back into the coil and USED. All the above works with a solenoid as in my motor too! I built the motor 6 months or so ago while playing around with GRAY motor theory and was not aware of the TEAL motor at that time. To make a motor of this type run, you simply add the mechanics, a power supply to charge up the cap. between pulses and a timing/firing device. Nothing new, just application of observations from that darn relay.

OH a word of warning, 1000VDC and 1UF will kill you if you get across it. BE VERY CAREFUL.....!!!!!!!!

Respectfully,

Ben
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-25-2007, 05:56 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Thank you Ben!

Hi All,

I am very glad to see the discussion moving on to the science here. Ben has hit the nail on the HEAD! When you look at Teal's commutator on page 3 of the first patent, you can see that he was using very short duration pulses. I suggest in the section of my DVD where I am talking about what features must be present in the solenoid design to get high torque, that Teal used a short, sharp current pulse of a few milliseconds, and that the ampere-turns in the coil equals magnetic field strength. A high energy thrust is transfered to the movable plunger when the crank shaft is in the middle of the stroke.

Ben's idea of applying a capacitor discharge to the solenoid at this point simply maximizes this process. Now, the magnetic thrust vectors applied to the crank are approaching "explosion" velocities, and the power goes way up. And you can still recover most of the electrical input. So the motor can create huge amounts of mechanical energy for the "differential loss" between the amount of electrical energy applied minus the amount of electrical energy recovered. In systems properly designed, this "differential loss" will be under 50 watts per mechanical horse-power produced.

Congratulations Ben!

I will be posting some new drawings on a back page of my website in the next day or so that will show some very simple rotor designs that can produce high torque. The "S" rotor is difficult to machine and in recent tests does not perform better than simple cross bars. More on this soon.

Also, Teal's patents are posted on my Bob Teal page as .pdf files for easy viewing and downloading.

Great work, everybody!

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:04 PM
John_Bedini's Avatar
John_Bedini John_Bedini is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hayden Lake, ID, USA
Posts: 914
Aaron, Peter

Aaron, Peter
Just some things I found out. First Tom Bearden Knew Bob Teal, Tom told me the story. Teal demonstrations were conducted in public, in that public demonstration Bob Teal would ask the engineers to explain how this works. He would fill a bath tub with water drop a wire in the tub put the light bulb in his mouth with the other wire and step into the tub. The engineers could not explain where the power came from. Tom said he never recovered any energy to the batteries in any way, but he was working on it. The power the Teal engine consumed was not much but it did reflect the torque for the power put into it. The failure was, Teal was not able to show any improvements over the DC motors at the time. With the model Peter and I built, it did perform just as Teal's, without building the magnetic shield's for the top and the sides, it performs just like Teal's motor without taking any recovery. The next thing, Peter, you must think I fell off some hay wagon somewhere, Ron Cole and I built many solenoid engines as can be see in my garage and one at the shop and I never take models apart, also the drawing of a dual acting solenoid engine can be seen in Ron's drawings, Hall Switched. The Window Motor out performed all this when it is just a motor with all the coils, and it only takes mili-amps to do it. More research should have been done before the DVD was released. I have better models in my basement which I have not shown to anybody of engines with just Iron rods, so it is not like I'm not intrigued in any of this research, I have been doing this for years.
I have kept most of this out of the public domain for this very reason. Peter might have done this work in the 1970's but you need a machine to prove your point, money is no excuse if you believe in it. The other thing is that I was out of money the same time Peter was, it did not stop me from doing my work. I don't think I should post my notes on all this work, I'm just going to put it into a book and let Tony sell it, as they are simple machines that anybody can build, they all use the recovery to charge batteries. One more thing, I must have said to you, Peter 200 times the monopole is not a motor, it's an Energizer, I have also said this many time's on all the group's. Peter should take his time and do methodical research before doing anything like this, you must know all the answers and not assume anything, as you will fail. Before you expect to build things from just theory you must prove it out as the theory never works the same way. The drawings of the little toy is in no way valid of my monopole machine in any way as it does not recover anything, it uses an autofomer arrangement, so I rest my case until proven otherwise. Peter worked here for a year and he knows I do not think in conventional terms in electronics when it comes to recovering energy, as I see something much different then he does. I have no beef with Peter, except he should have just let Gary and I see the preview like Gary asked. Doing a DVD on DC motors is one thing, as for energy recovery you are playing in a much different ballpark as is know by people who have tried. I admit I did not share everything with Peter or the groups for a very simple reason, most would not be able to use it wisely, so I keep all my models simple, just basic pro-types at the shop. I never change my routine on this, because of what happened with Jim Watson, I never forgot that lesson.
John






Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Dear Forum Members,

The recent posts by Eric and Aaron have reiterated the essence of what I am trying to convey in my DVD, and I do not wish to address any of these other knit-picky posts.

There is one thing I would like to address, and that is the comment by John Bedini, as follows:

"Also in the NEW movie, I built the engine you see running, I did the switching. as Teal's motor was not capable of charging any battery. the circuit you see with teal's drawing is not for storing energy at all. The circuit is a spark suppression for the points. The teal motor is not capable of charging batteries until you use the monopole circuit for recovery.
I'm not going to say anything more. Remember closing down all the fields is not an open system, no recovery possible.
John"

I agree with everything John says here, but I would like to add more detail to the account. The Solenoid Engine I demonstrate on the DVD was built at John's shop about two years ago, in the Spring of 2005. I was working for John's company at the time. One day I brought my Bob Teal file to work and John, Gary and I had a long and sometimes heated discussion about the possibilities of getting more torque out of one of these designs. I wanted to build it and John agreed to help. But we were at John's shop, and John is the skilled machinist and John is the skilled electronic circuit designer. So, naturally, John actually fabricated the parts that needed machining. We both worked on assembling it. When it came to figuring out how to run the commutator, we decided on an optical-interrupter system. The signal output from this was rather low, so John developed a gain stage to drive the output transistors. I don't show the circuit because it is one of John's unique solutions to a unique situation. It is similar to the SG type of circuit, but there are a few differences as well. Teal's patents suggests he was running a very short input pulse so we started with a very short ON time. That didn't work very well at all. At John's urging, we kept opening up the ON time until we were ON for about 160 degrees and OFF for about 200 degrees.

It was still not very powerful. I suggested that we needed to start folding the magnetic field down around the coil and so I built the plastic donut filled with iron filings. This helped some, but the motor didn't start running fast until we put the iron top piece on. Then the mechanical power started going up. This is shown in the DVD. After studying this motor over time, I realized the full significance of the necessity of closing the magnetic field all the way down in order to get the mechanical energy production up to the maximum. The model, as shown, still has more than ONE INCH of air gap in the magnetic circuit at the top of the stroke and over TWO INCHES of air gap at the beginning of the stroke. That is why I say we are missing 60% or more of the possible mechanical energy from this model. I actually believe this model is missing as much as 90% of the possible mechanical energy available from its electrical input.

I agree that Teal's circuit does not show how any electricity can be recovered from his magnetic field collapse. I venture a speculation, based on what circuit he does show, but I agree with John. Teal's patent does not show how energy can be recovered from his coils. But, obviously there is energy to recover, and Teal does demonstrate doing it in the Interview film, so he was clearly aware of the process and its importance. I still maintain that Teal's working models took advantage of this process and that John's circuits demonstrate how it can be done.

Now let's talk about closing down the magnetic field. John says that you can't get any "recovery" when the field is closed down completely. Its true that the Radiant Voltage Spike coming from the coil collapse is strongest when the coil is open to the environment. The battery charges best when the current pulse is preceded by this very high voltage spike. In contrast to this, the mechanical energy produced by the motor is maximized when the magnetic field is completely closed down and the total air gap between the moving and non-moving parts is only a few thousandths of an inch. Under this circumstance, the Radiant Voltage Spike is almost completely gone and the impulse coming out of the coil collapse is almost entirely electron current. This type of pulse charge will not desulfate the battery or heal it of past damage like the Radiant Spike will. So, you cannot "recover" a battery this way. But it will charge the battery to some degree, so it is not entirely useless. It will charge capacitors just fine. So, there is a trade off in how the electrical and mechanical outputs are engineered, and there are ways to get both effects by carefully studying these processes and engineering the machine accordingly.

So, I hope this clears up some of the confusion about this machine and the accusations that have been made. John built it, I helped a lot, and Teal's patent was on the table when we did it. I acknowledge in the credits at the end of my DVD that John and I built the Solenoid Engine test model, so nothing was ever intended to mislead anybody.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #42  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:16 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
John,

Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:16 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
To Lindemann

Hallo Peter,
I have seen your video and find it a positive product and thank you for your input in this field. I know there are a lot more people to be thankful of like Bedini but this one is directed at you.

Anyway I like the Teal concept only the whole mechanical wear and tear of the pistons kind of bothers me. I mean a combustion motor can at least use oil to lubricate the pistons. Also I believe it will be quite noisy. But anyway I was kind of surprised when I saw in the video your ‘flux motor’ now the geometry was kind of familiar to me because I have tried in the past to build Ecklin-brown style variable reluctance generators. They were all made with great care. All made out of laminated material from microwave oven transformers. Machined to size, and each laminate reinsulated and reassembled. Only problem is that I never nearly managed to get the output levels described in this document.

fluxgate generator

But I did not know that you did something along these lines. Now I don’t know what your results were but mine were not really promising. The most I could get out of the best device is like 15 watt. But on the positive side, the thing is not really bothered by Lenz Law, since the coil and magnet are both stationary. And if you test the device and load the output coil the thing actually goes way up in rpm, which is of course the opposite if compared with normal generators which require more input torque once loaded. But like I said my output was ‘nothing’ and had much magnetic cogging and was noisy and all. But on your old picture I see quite some light bulbs so I presume you were getting a good amount out.

But back to the flux motor. I like this design. But you don’t tell much about it in the video. So what were the results? You mentioned on the audio interview that you got speed problems which limited the design to like 500 rpm? Was this due to your switching system or due to the slowness of the steel? Since the steel needs a given time to fully build up and relax again. And although some people thing this is neglectable I must point out that this IS a problem and I have seen it in more devices. Anyway here are some pics of my machines. (Note 00.jpg is not my system)

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/00.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/01.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/02.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/03.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/04.jpg


Regards,
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:25 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
Bob Teal Magnipulsion References

Bob Teal Magnipulsion references

USP #4,024,421 - Magnetically Operable Engine or Power Plant - PDF

USP #4,093,880 - Magnetically Operable Engine - PDF

Magneteal Industries, Inc. Company Literature

Newspaper Articles

"Impossible" Engine Invented for Real", LA Times, May 30, 1976
If anyone has a copy of this article, a copy would be apprecaited.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:51 PM
John_Bedini's Avatar
John_Bedini John_Bedini is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hayden Lake, ID, USA
Posts: 914
I might clear up one more thing. The stroke of the engine in Peters DVD requires that timing, in Teal's patent his stroke is so short this is why you see the short pulse.
Same thing happens in a combustion engine with the burn cycle. The research suggests that, and the working models that you only have power for 1/2 the pole piece. or if a piston is used 1/2 the coil length, you can not get around this physics. Look at what Aaron posted, the makeshift engine , look how long the power cycle is on. I made my point.
John







Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
John,

Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:38 PM
Eric Eric is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 54
steven that looks like some terrific machine work!!
i got a couple of questions to see if i understand your lingo. its called a flux generator, but i am assuming it doesnt output electricity directly, rather it runs as an attraction motor common shafted to a direct induction generator. that said i would agree it looks simmilar to peters but!............... and this is based on what i see in your pictures so more pics may be nesessary if i am wrong, your c shaped stator cores are spot on, but your rotor doesnt appear to close the magnetic loop. it only looks like a little piece of metal on the rotor connects to one "end" of the C shape stator in peters he has a longer bar imbedded in the rotor that connects "both ends" of the c into an O shape closing the magnetic lines in a loop in and around the single coil. alternativly if what i am seeing is actually a piece of metal in the rotor that magneticly connects one end of one c shape to the opposing c shape end then what you have is an O shape with two coils on eather side and then you might have the same problems illustrated in the direct induction motors beginning part of the dvd with with each opposing coil producing a CEMF in each other. again maybe i am drawing the wrong conclusions based on your pictures.

hope this helps!
Eric
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-26-2007, 05:03 AM
rickfriedrich rickfriedrich is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7
Ok, I just found this forum again and thread.

Peter and I have exchanged two private emails in the last few days. I didn't get time to finish my last one, was up till 3am last night for this and don't have the time.

I find the nitpicking statements about me above to be ignorant of what I have shared and the work that I do for free for the benefit of everyone in this research. I have been working 24/7 on this stuff for about 3 years now and like John take it all very seriously and am not ignoring any claims or benefits people show scientifically.

Part of my concern is the same as John's, we tire of speculation not based on experimentation. This is not griping, it is about doing real science here Peter. There is so much claiming without showing, and so much dissapointment because of people not doing enough proper research and experimenting that many throw up their hands and give up because they soon think everyone is just making empty claims. I'm not going to quote the thousands of letters I get from people all over the world in support of this concern.

As any of you know who are on the lists, I spend much time encouraging research in these areas. I own and moderate some 12 or so lists, most of which are about these subjects. Much of my free time is taken up trying to keep them running decently and according to the scientific method. Hundreds of people are now experimenting when previous to this there was more fighting than building. These two fellows once told me it was hopeless for you guys because of how bad things were going. I think we all see some progress now for these efforts.

But I have also built many setups, and you will see some very interesting things not to long from now you can be sure. So please do not take any of my comments as just some triffling prejudice. I'm not nitpicking against the DVD, but you guys are doing that against what I have said. (One friend said to me, why bother, who even cares for the truth?) It is just not presented correctly in the places shown and needs to be changed. Not all of Teal's secrets are shown so that ad needs to be changed. Nothing in the patent is a secrete because it is public. There needs to also be carefulness to avoid overstatement, especially in anything not backed up sufficiently.

The motor shown needs to be removed because Gary and John told him that no Energenx property is to be used in the video because of previous contracts made, and etc. I was there when this was said. This was why they told Peter to show them the video first before publishing it. Am I against the motor? No! I am just saying we need to honor our friends.

Further, I point out that the video makes this motor look like Teal's motor which it is not. That needs to be corrected if Energenx will allow the video to continue to sell.

Again, I'm not against exploring possibilities like Teal. I have my own Teal motor replication in prosess. But I hate to see people confused as to what is what and who is who. If the movie is about Teal's motor being the solution, make sure there is no slight of hand in using Bedini's motor as some kind of proof for that claim. No Teal motor was shown running. No torque measurements were taken to back up the claim that it is better than normal DC. This is much more than a leap in logic. Griping?!? Just another diversion fallacy to add to these first ones.

I hope this is not about the good outweighing the bad. If we are going to progress with science we need to clear up the ambiguous, correct the mistaken, rebuke experimentless speculation, insist upon experimentation and demonstration, and above all, honor our commitments. I don't care for all the smooth talk, flattery, and what have you.

Rick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
John,

Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-26-2007, 06:27 AM
Ted Ewert Ted Ewert is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 597
Can we all please stop this petty griping here. I really don't care to hear all this juvinile infighting. I would rather hear about something productive I could use to build a motor.
Let's see the schematic and specs on your new motor Rick. Tell us how we can build one too.
I hope Ben comes back and tells us more about his motor. That looks like it would be a real fun one to build.

Ted

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickfriedrich View Post
Ok, I just found this forum again and thread.

Peter and I have exchanged two private emails...

Rick
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-26-2007, 06:43 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Rotary Attraction Motor Update

Hi all,

I've posted an update on the design for the rotary attraction motor. It works better and is easier to make than the "S" rotor. This design goes back to the ideas that worked very well in the Flux Motor. I hope this helps more people start building units that work.

Here is the link:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

Peter
__________________
 

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 04-26-2007 at 06:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-26-2007, 09:50 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
On topic discussion

Hi Rick and all,

Welcome to the forum. I'll look forward to your postive contribution here of focusing on your replication attempts on the Teal motor concept if you care to share anything here. If not, that's cool too.

I think everyone knows how everyone feels now so we can focus on the topic.

I'm looking forward to learning more about attraction motor concepts. I'm fascinated by all of this.

Everyone here is welcome to start any threads on whatever "renewable energy" technologies you want. If someone else doesn't, I already have plans to start a new Bedini SG thread here, one that focuses on the plain non-charging school girl, and others. I'll probably even do a Hammel Spinner with a Bedini North Gate thread too because it is an open circuit (human being is part of the schematic, etc...) in that device... simple but demonstrates some profound concepts. More water gas stuff, etc...

I'm pretty busy with building my own business and am switching all my websites to a new server, etc... so I haven't been able to contribute a lot in the past week. After that is done, should be smooth sailing.

Anyway, if there is a specific topic you want to bring up and it doesn't deal with the content of concepts in Peter's DVD, please start a new thread.

I really appreciate all of your contributions. Especially those of you who are posting your experiences with hands on with this stuff. Keep it coming!!!
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-26-2007, 12:16 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
To Eric

Tanks Eric. Well it is a generator and not a motor (well can be both at the same time – driving itself, using a little circuit, but that is not the point right now). To put it simple you have a stationary magnet (can be an electromagnet) and a stationary output coil. But they are not in contact and don't rotate so they don't interact. But on the rotor there are metal laminated parts that close the gap between the magnet source and output coil. So the metal parts on the rotor act as a gate or valve for the flux. So when the rotor rotates it periodically closes the flux loop from the magnets to the output coil. So it generates power. And since the magnet don't move and the coils don't move there is no increased mechanical load on the prime mover once you load the output coils, since Lenz Law does not ‘really’ apply. That theoretically means a model toy car electric motor could drive a huge generator. There is no increased load to the prime mover once you load the generators output coils. Well that is the idea. And like I said the ‘no-Lenz’ action seems to work, only thing is I found it hard to extract any real power from this system. So seen from above it looks like Peters flux motor, but it's not. The working can be understood here:
fluxgate generator
And if you would like to see more pictures for your understanding let me know.

Regards,
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #52  
Old 04-26-2007, 12:31 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
To Lindemann

Hallo Peter I have seen your new design. This indeed would indeed work better maybe. And is more easy to make. But on the other hand we are looking at 'just' a regular Variable- or Switched reluctance motor are we not?
Nothing wrong with that of course, but as far as I see it the Bemf circuit is 'kind of' the only novel thing here. But these variable or switched reluctance drives are somewhat problematic to run and need smart driving circuits that can advance, elongate or retard the pulses on the fly based on system load and speed. Most of them also have a minute 'demagnetization' pulse to help speedup the collapse time of the coil/core section and so allow for higher rpm's. Since 'metal slowness' in flux change can be problematic.

http://www.energie.ch/themen/industrie/antriebe/sr.jpg

Switched Reluctance Drives

http://www.sovereign-publications.co...s/picture1.jpg

http://www.sapiensman.com/ESDictiona...ges/motor1.jpg

SWITCHED-RELUCTANCE MOTOR

SWITCHED RELUCTANCE MOTOR - Google Afbeeldingen Zoekmachine

Regards,
Steven
__________________
 

Last edited by nali2001; 04-26-2007 at 12:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-26-2007, 01:04 PM
k4zep k4zep is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 16
Hi Steven,

What beautiful workmanship on your Ekland/fluxgate Generator......Unbelieveable craftmanship.....Wow! Do you remember how many hours you put into it?

Ben
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-26-2007, 04:19 PM
rickfriedrich rickfriedrich is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Ewert View Post
Can we all please stop this petty griping here. I really don't care to hear all this juvinile infighting. I would rather hear about something productive I could use to build a motor.
Let's see the schematic and specs on your new motor Rick. Tell us how we can build one too.
I hope Ben comes back and tells us more about his motor. That looks like it would be a real fun one to build.

Ted
Ted, you're the one griping and being juvinile. If you don't care about science I can't help you. Now I have said what was necessary and need not say anything further. But I want nothing to do with speculation, hype, or science that is not accountable. If you want to build that is what we are doing and have been for years.

Not sure what new motor you are talking about. There are many setups. While I have special interest in torque and motors because of formerly being a mechanic, the last setup I mentioned was a multifacited Energizer. The motor element will be all used up in charging several batteries while it is self-maintained. I wrote what I did so far and will like to do when I get time. This is nothing new to me but is just a matter of time to clean up the table and wind some more coil and fix a commutator so I can film it without holding it by hand and messy looking string, etc. The addition of the window wire generator part is not a question of working but just how much more addititive will it be, and how much wire do I want to waste $$$ on this setup. No need for a schematic as I shared all the details of what I was doing and that should be fairly obvious. Just a matter of good timing.

I have a good idea of the ultimate setup, and it is similar to this one above but much better (this is all Bedini stuff, and just a combination of them). I have mentioned it recently on my lists, and will keep this info probably there as I don't have time to be on 50 lists that start up every minute.

I will do a full replication of John's latest setup after I get magnets that should be shipped today I believe. Maybe I'll do the earth cells too to verify for myself his research, which I have done many times (every time I have done this it always has turned out exactly the way he said it would--maybe sometimes better). Just don't push me at this time as I am very busy.

My last words on the DVD thing will probably be these, when the revision comes out correcting matters I'll remove the review on Sterling's website.

Rick
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-26-2007, 05:16 PM
Ted Ewert Ted Ewert is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickfriedrich View Post
Ted, you're the one griping and being juvinile. If you don't care about science I can't help you. Now I have said what was necessary and need not say anything further. But I want nothing to do with speculation, hype, or science that is not accountable. If you want to build that is what we are doing and have been for years...
Rick
Thanks for straightening me out on that Rick. Love you too buddy.

Ted
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-26-2007, 07:10 PM
Ted Ewert Ted Ewert is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 597
Nice layout on your web site Peter, thanks. I have a rotor question. As with a solenoid, does the rotor pole piece center itself on the keeper? Would a wider pole piece be pulled along further?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-26-2007, 08:52 PM
Eric Eric is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 54
yes i now have the same question from reading the recomended book "Solenoids, Electromagnets & Electromagnetic Windings" by charles n underhill page 75 section 36 "the calculation of maximum pull due to soleniod" it shows tha in a soleniod and plunger setup if the plunger is longer than the solenoid winding the plunger will continue to move untill its center of mass is lined up with the vertical center of mass of the coil hense more work can be performed. so now i am curious to find out if the same principle will apply to the curved surface of my rotor being pulled into the curved stator brush. meaning wiould a wider rotor just stop when its leading edge meets the ending edge of the stator brush or would the center line on the rotor continue untill it lines up with the center line of the stator brush.

hahaha i have time to write out these speculations as i have to wait untill monday or tuesday for my parts from the machinist!!!!. when i recieve them i will have 3 rotors to try. the stator brush is 70 deg so my 3 choices i planned for are 50,70, and 80 deg arc on the rotors. so i will be able to see if the 80 deg rotor will perform more work! if it doesnt then i will know that an entirely diferent set of rules will need to be found this particular geomitry.

right now while i am waiting for parts i am trying to see if i can use this same book to try and learn to caculate the gauss saturation point in my stator core then i want to see if the existing coil comes close to that point allready or can i go bigger later on. also i would like to wrap my head around the idea of how this saturation point affects my rotor power and speed, learn more about how these gauss lines factor into how the rotor gets pulled in, will the rotor only get pulled enough to provide a big enough race way for the lines of force present or will less lines of force continue in some fashion to perform work on a larger mass rotor untill centered. i did see an interesting question in the above posts about the possiblity of the core material not allowing the magnetic field to colapse fast enough possibly limiting the rpms of the motor. this i would like to learn about as well. although it could be possible to counter that by cutting the pulse duration shorter in the power stroke giving the core material enough time to colapse the field when the rotor finally finnishes its power stroke and needs to be released. hopfully my new tunable optical comutator i am waiting for will answer this as well.

cheers!!
Eric
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-26-2007, 10:50 PM
John_Bedini's Avatar
John_Bedini John_Bedini is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hayden Lake, ID, USA
Posts: 914
Ted, Sorry we were asked to keep this forum to Peter's designs only and the Bedini recovery for that design. Rick has built many different motors, and I might add very advanced one's. If you look you can find many forums on advanced motors. I was asked not to post anything that would take away from what your trying to learn right now on reluctance motors. I will be posting some running machines later in the advanced group's.
Sorry you feel this way as sometimes we all have disagreements with things, it does not mean we are not friends. Peter has collected a wealth of information over the years. People are only now starting to look at the energy field because of the energy situation we face now.
John





Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Ewert View Post
Can we all please stop this petty griping here. I really don't care to hear all this juvinile infighting. I would rather hear about something productive I could use to build a motor.
Let's see the schematic and specs on your new motor Rick. Tell us how we can build one too.
I hope Ben comes back and tells us more about his motor. That looks like it would be a real fun one to build.

Ted
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-27-2007, 12:05 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
New Bedini Threads

Hi John,

I just started about 5 Bedini threads here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/

You can see the list. Schoolgirl, SG Simplified, Oscillators, Cap Discharge versions, and Advanced. Post anything you want in those or even start your own thread. Maybe the Bedini Advanced thread is appropriate for what you can share in the advanced groups.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-27-2007, 12:19 AM
Ted Ewert Ted Ewert is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 597
That's fine with me John. I realize we're all human, and I'm not bothered by any of it. I was just trying to steer the conversation back to motor talk.
I think we would all be eager to hear what your impressions and thoughts are concerning the Teal motor, and also about the solenoid motor you built. I realize you're busy, but we'll take what ever applicable sage bone you toss our way.

Ted

Quote:
Originally Posted by John_Bedini View Post
Ted, Sorry we were asked to keep this forum to Peter's designs only and the Bedini recovery for that design. Rick has built many different motors, and I might add very advanced one's. If you look you can find many forums on advanced motors. I was asked not to post anything that would take away from what your trying to learn right now on reluctance motors. I will be posting some running machines later in the advanced group's.
Sorry you feel this way as sometimes we all have disagreements with things, it does not mean we are not friends. Peter has collected a wealth of information over the years. People are only now starting to look at the energy field because of the energy situation we face now.
John
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:37 PM.


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