Peter,

No problem. It was obviously a deviation from the thread topic, but I felt your words:

dishonesty will be out of fashion. . . people will want to live together in peace and cooperation.

Caring for others, speaking your truth, and living in integrity is the beginning of this future.

allowed for what I wrote.

I would never want to take away from what you are doing with motors, etc. God knows I can't!

But the clips I posted give what I feel is an excellent overview of a big problem when it comes to world economics and freedom AND it provides a solution. The speaker seems very confident it would work. That positive message seemed worthwhile to me but if you don't feel "attracted" to checking it out, I hold nothing against you

-Jessica

Some old variable reluctance 'Ecklin' info.

http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin9.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin7.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/hyperv1.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/hyperv2.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/hyperv3.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/garrett1.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/garrett2.jpg

http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin1.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin2.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin3.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin4.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin5.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin6.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin8.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin10.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin11.jpg

Steven

Other permanent magnet reluctance machine

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Gen/002.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Gen/003.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Gen/001.jpg

Steven

Steven,

Thanks for putting these links up for people to study. The problem with most of the Ecklin designs is that they DON'T work the way Ecklin imagined they would. He was primarily a theorist, not a model maker. He did NOT test most of these designs. During this period, I was working with Bruce DePalma and Michael Knox in Santa Barbara, California. Either Michael Knox and I or someone else in Bruce's larger circle tried every one of these designs. Many of them, especially the ones with the AC coil and the DC coil on the same piece of iron, don't work! The DC field is too strong in the local area and even opening and closing the gap with the rotating iron piece causes almost NO FLUX CHANGE in the AC coil. In some cases, special changes had to be made to the circuits to make them work at all. But then it wasn't an Ecklin design anymore.

The second set of designs you posted are much better, but they too have loading sensitivities. If you put a simple resistive load on the output of these generators, they experience much of the same back EMF drags as a standard generator. Lenz Law is tricky to side step, but it can be done. If you diode block the electricity generation on the magnetizing cycle and only draw power out of the coil during the field collapse, the system works better. With other minor modifications, the performance of this style of generator can be excellent.

Its good for some of the newbies in the group to understand that the ideas I am presenting are well established in the literature, and people have been working on solving these efficiency issues for decades.

Thanks again for the links. This is the material people should be thinking about and experimenting with if the cost of electricity is to be reduced to a tenth of its current cost.

Peter

Thanks for the reply Peter,
I have always wondered if Ecklin actually build/test 'his' devices.
I mean look at this one:
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin9.jpg
I mean the thing is 12" wide and 36" !! High, totally made from laminates and needs an air gap of less! than 0.003". There is no way in life that one can build that in their garage, that big and accurate fully from laminates...! So I always wonder with these descriptions If he really did test these things. But from what you said I guess he did not. Ok, a real motor factory will have no problem with this motor they just stamp 1 million laminated shapes for you once the dies are made. But it will probably be beyond the financial capability of a home experimenter.

As you can see half down this page, the EBM machine uses also a reluctance switching principle.
Leslie Szabo, Energy by Motion, over-unity, free energy generator

http://www.rexresearch.com/szabo/wo9213.jpg

EBM (Energy By Motion) machine

Steven

Jessica,

My comments DID allow for what you wrote. The intent of my comments was not to suggest anything inappropriate on your part. I was merely saying that "I don't do politics". In my "IDEAL WORLD" I would outlaw politics as a profession, but I don't think the world is about to be remade in a way that I like. In the meantime, it is necessary for each of us to find our own "path of integrity" and do what is "ours to do".

I honor your path, even as I honor my own.

Please feel free to comment as "the spirit moves you". I'll respond in kind.

Peter

Yeah thanks.

Well Sykavy,
small air gaps are indeed much desired. But if you go too crazy with them they can in my opinion become problematic. When you want to get in the range of like 0.02mm you really stet the bat pretty high for yourself. Everything must be machined with top notch precision, and also you must start to think about what the eventual bearing wear will be doing, also metal expansion due to to heating will become considerable. Stator vibration and stretching will also now be an issue.

Now there is another way to combat the need for insane small air gaps. And that is to increase the 'contact' or 'pole' surface. The longer the total pole the more interaction surface you have.

Just look at this render and see the small pole surface:
Infolytica » Gallery » TEAM problem 24 - Nonlinear Time-Transient Rotational Test Rig

Now compare that with the stator of a real use reluctance motor:
http://www.eti.uni-karlsruhe.de/wolf...res/Laufer.jpg

Steven

Would the solenoid piston set up used by teal be an easier feat?

He had two coils in his drawings and I was thinking that maybe he had a set up like a steam engine piston. A coil that drew the piston up and then a coil to pull the same piston down in the same solenoid ( maybe that is why they were so long). By having a constant magnetic circle around the piston then friction would be low, because it would have equal pull on all sides keeping the piston from scraping the sides during the relax time.

Hi Sykavy,
Well I don't really know if the solenoid piston design has significant advantages over the 'normal' switched reluctance motor design. On the one hand one might think there is better flux interactions since the coil encapsulates the piston core. But on the other hand you must have some support system to guide the piston, which results in noise, losses and wear.

There are so many different types of Reluctance motor design out there you wont' believe. Here for example is an interesting addition:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/...126/4/385/_pdf

Also another method for reducing the air gap size is having 'slots' in the stator and rotor core elements, so that the rotating parts kind of interlock or 'mix' with each other.
Like this:
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/SlotRotor/1.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/SlotRotor/2.jpg
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/SlotRotor/3.jpg

Steven

Dear Peter,
I apologize for this somewhat off topic post, but since you and Bedini have history you might know a thing or two about the 'Tesla Switch' and alike systems. I think these systems might be a good addition for these No-back emf motor designs especially since they can be driven like dc low ohmic induction loads. Not much input is lost in the form of heat and such.

For those who do not know what I am talking about read:
THE TESLA SWITCH
And
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D3.pdf
Start at page 25 (to 36)

So this post is kind of a double post. On the one hand I see the Tesla Switch having huge advantages, but on the other hand, except for the Bedini page there is no real info to be found anywhere about this system... Why? well Peter what is your take on the Tesla Switch, and in case Bedini is reading this, please feel free to jump in.

Thanks!
Staven

Steven,

This topic is very important to consider, but is really OFF TOPIC for this forum, since it requires multiple posts to thoroughly discuss it.

Start a new thread and I'll address the answers there.

Peter

Ok thanks, the Tesla Switch topic is now going on(starting) at:
Use for the Tesla Switch

Steven

Hi Steve
You know I was thinking of the slot idea on my own, but I didn't know how to explain it.
What would be the air gap around these slots be?

Plus it looks a lot more complicated to make than just a simple flat air gap. You were saying that one would need a professional die-cast for Peter's air gap but wouldnt slots make it even more complicated?

What if the air gap was filled by a metal/plastic mixed plate. I mean iron filings mix with apoxy and then slowly shaved down till the perfect air gap was reached.

Hi Sykavy,
Yes, making the slots and fingers will be quite a bit harder to make than just a flat surface rotor. But I think it has some big advantages since now the two poles are 'virtually' interlocking. So one might think that the need for the super small air gap will be reduced.

Iron filings have a permeability of next to nothing unless (professionally) pressed. So that would not be a real helpful solution in my opinion.

The main problem here is (as always) money... Like I said a factory where they make motor laminations will have no problem stamping out the laminations needed for a No-Back emf motor. But although I have no idea what it will cost to make such a core for you, I doubt that it is in reach of the 'common man'. Maybe having them laser cut is more do able.

Steven

Dear Adam (Ant),

Yes, there is a error in Teal's patent drawing concerning the correct nomenclature for a battery. In Figure 5 and Figure 8 in Patent #4,093,880 the batteries are drawn with only 5 plates. Since there are no transistors or diodes in the circuit, we don't know which is the Positive (+) terminal, but I have always redrawn it with the Positive terminal up. In Figure 6 in Patent #4,024,421 the Negative terminal is clearly shown in the down position and going to the coil first, while the Positive terminal is shown going to the switch. I have always assumed the circuits in the second patent were essentially the same as in the first patent.

The function of the circuit does require a normal battery connection, and not a battery with two Negative terminals. This is definitely an error in the drawing, not a covert secret methodology.

Thanks for asking.

Peter

Bryan,

Thank you for using your real name. I appreciate that. To the best of my knowledge, the "white space" inside component #76 is AIR. The area defined by the cross-hatch pattern is the part #76 which is defined in the Patent body as the "core". Its mounting to the connecting rod (#78) is screwed into the base of the core. The area above this is empty, or in reality, filled with air. The use of Aluminum is never mentioned in Teal's patents.

These drawings are "symbolic" in many ways, and do not reflect the exact design. You can see, for instance, that all of the photographs show that the tops of the electro-magnets are open so the air can escape when the piston travels up, but Figure 5 does not show this feature, instead showing the top of the cylinder closed.

Please feel free to download these patents and study them carefully. Also look at the photographs of the working units. All of these materials can be accessed on my website at:

Free Energy, Bob Teal | Magnipulsion, Dr Peter Lindemann

Peter

Hello Peter and all,
I wanted to thank you for opening my eyes to this whole new world on motor designs, you dvd was very interesting and I learned grasped alot. I wanted to point something out to everyone and yourself. And I dont know if this has been pointed out before or not, or even if my assumptions are correct, but here goes....

I Tesla patent #568,177 Apparatus for Producing Ozone, if you closely look at the diagram it looks as though it is wired to collect the spark from a collapsing magnetic field,which looks to be arranged in a resonant circuit. The first part being simular to what we are doing here. Also, he states in the patent "....which enable me to produce, without difficulty and AT VERY SLIGHT EXPENSE, ozone in any desired quantity." It continues ".....is CAPABLE OF OTHER AND HIGHLY IMPORTANT USES OF A SIMILAR NATURE...."

Was Tesla trying to tell us that design had more than one use????

What do you guys think, does this make sense or am I off??

Thanks for the great forum, and thank Peter for contributing your knowledge.
Fern

Bryan,

A wide variety of designs are possible. The purpose of showing the C shaped core is merely to convey the principle of operation. It is probable that a motor could be designed that utilized an H shaped iron keeper, but I have never designed one.

Once you thoroughly understand the principles, dozens of new designs are possible.

Peter

Hi, I was intrigued by coral castle as it is an interesting collaboration of concepts by what seems to be one individual. I found his magnetic currents book very interesting. This would really be a topic fit for a new thread (SO I STARTED ONE) as there is sooooooooooo much that is involved with it.

Please stay on topic in this forum. This one is on the Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

Dear Folks,

We have allowed a fair number of diversions in this group in the last few weeks. But PLEASE, let's keep this forum focussed on my DVD Electric Motor Secrets, no back EMF motors, solenoid engines and Rotary Attraction Motors. If you have ideas inspired by these topics, but that are not on the main topics. please start NEW threads to discuss them.

Thanks everybody.

Peter

Bryan,

This forum is an attempt to help people understand the fundamental principles concerning a way to build an electric motor that can produce high torque AND return a sizable percentage of its input electricity, thereby creating an electric power plant able to produce 1 HP for a NET electrical use below 746 watts.

The fact is, off-the-shelf switched reluctance motors, which operate on the rotary attraction process, are some of the strongest and highest torque motors sold today. Many are rated at or above 95% efficient in the conversion of electrical input to mechanical output. But these motors are not designed to return any of their electrical energy.

When this motoring principle is COMBINED with the discoveries of John Bedini and the ability of his motor designs to return up to 95% of their electrical input, an astonishing, new type of motor becomes possible. This is what my DVD is about.

These principles are ENOUGH to focus on in this forum. Whether or not different wire can produce different effects in coils as a pure speculation, is NOT on topic here.

IF you build one of these motors, solve all of the technical issues of small air-gap and proper pulse timing, and get it running in a COP > 1 mode, THEN I would be happy to hear of your EXPERIMENTS using different types of wire IN YOUR WORKING MODEL.

The ideas presented here are, apparently, difficult enough for people to learn to not muddy the waters with off-topic speculations.

Thanks for your understanding. I'd really rather not go over it again.

Peter

Peter,
Is there a wiring diagram available that shows the circuitry of a recovery system?? Is it just a matter of running a diode and a stepdown transformer to run the energy from the collapsed field back to the battery??

Clone,

Recovery is simple. Circuits as simple as a single diode work well in John Bedini's SG motors and in these motors. I have running models using the exact circuit shown here:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

The "commutator" is a series of magnets on a wheel moving passed a "magnetic reed switch" in the position shown. It is sufficient to demonstrate the principles. No "stepdown" transformer is necessary.

Optimizing torque is about minimizing the air-gap and designing the physical structures to maximize the tangential forces. Optimizing the electrical energy return is about pulse control and shutting off the electro-magnet just before magnetic saturation of the core.

My DVD is two and a half hours long, and covers this material in depth.

Peter

Dear Mr Lindemann,
I received your dvd some days ago and I must say, that the video was great and easy to understand. You did a great job with this video. Currently I am working on a model based on your S type core. I just sent my cad drawings to a local laser cutting guy who will cut the parts for me. Here is a model in solidworks:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/s...1189640887.jpg
The rotor sheets will be approx 120mm in diameter (just like CD's) and the air gap will be about 1 milimeter wide. I have already built some Bedini SSG's and have some experience with the recovery circuit. I will keep you informed about my success.
Thank you for the video and all the things you have done
Gatis

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your post and your kind comments. As I have stated in this forum a number of times, tests done on the "S" Rotor after the DVD was produced were disappointing. As soon as we learned this, I posted a page on my website with a design called the "X" Rotor. This basic design is what worked the best in the motor I built back in the 1980's. There is a sticker on the DVD case telling you to visit this up-date page. Here's the link again:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

If you can stop your local laser cutting guy before he starts making the "S" rotor, please do. The "X" rotor works better. Also, a 1 millimeter gap is too large. That is about .025" and not conducive for high mechanical torque production.

Your enthusiasm is good, but please slow down and look through all of the posts here before you build anything. If you still have questions, please post them here.

I want you to succeed.

Peter

ARTICLE FOUND!!! Thanks to someone who made contact from the information recently released about Bob Teal, someone came forth with the LA Times article. Impossible Engine Invented For Real

http://www.esmhome.org/library/bob-t...l_la_times.pdf

Feel free to pass on the link to this PDF to anyone interested in the attraction motor concepts especially Bob Teal's Magnipusion and Peter's Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

Thank's Peter
I will redesign the rotor to the X form and make the air gap thinner. But I think, that I won't be able to make the air gap thiner than maybe 0.5mm, because the tolerance of the laser cutting machine is only 0,15mm. Also the shaft an bearing system must the be very accurate. Or maybe I should cut the X rotor a little bit larger for the startor to fit in and then just machine off the needed thickness with lathe, that way the tolerance of the laser is no longer crucial and I can make the gap even smaller I think, my X type rotor could be about 120mm in diameter so I don't need to redesign the startor core.
Tahnk's,

EDIT:
I made the necessary changes. Here how it looks now:


The rotor cross bar face is 30 degree of an arc, just like in the Attraction Motor Update page.
Fortunately my laser guy has not started to cut the S rotor plates yet. Will send him the drawings now