Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE - ALL SEATS SOLD OUT!

2018 Energy Science & Technology Conference
Sponsored by Teslacoin Foundation

Teslacoin Foundation

http://tesla-coin.com


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
  #181  
Old 09-13-2007, 04:03 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Smallest Gap, any way you can..!

[QUOTE=Jetijs;8557]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 stator core.
Thanks,



Dear Jetijs,

Yes, the new design will work well for you. Your idea of cutting the rotor pieces a little over-sized, and then machining them back on a lathe is the right way to think about it. If the rotor pieces are made of standard motor lamination material, they are very difficult to machine. You will need the hardest ceramic cutting tools in the lathe that you can find. Also, its an "interrupted cut" so the stresses on your rotor can be pretty high. Just take very small cuts, like .001" or less at a time. If you can do this, you should be able to practice a .1mm gap on both sides for a total gap of .2mm. (Also, don't forget, when you take a .001" cut on a lathe, you are taking .001" off the RADIUS, which is actually .002" off the DIAMETER of your material.)

When you get to designing the circuit part, post that here to so I can help you with that as well.

I'm committed to your success. Every mistake we can catch BEFORE you spend any money is cheaper to fix!

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

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

  #182  
Old 09-13-2007, 06:56 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Core design

Just to drop a design note in:
It also in advantageous to put the coils just at the 'contact' surface.
Like this:
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Core.jpg
By doing that you eliminate a lot of 'travel' for the flux to reach the 'point of action'. Which means far less steel losses, better response and stronger interaction. Also will this slightly lessen the need for sub micron airgap sizes.
Anyway it's only a slight design change but it has 'huge' (relative term) benefits.

Regards,
Steven
__________________
 

Last edited by nali2001; 09-13-2007 at 06:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 09-15-2007, 04:51 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
A slightly different take.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nali2001 View Post
Just to drop a design note in:
It also in advantageous to put the coils just at the 'contact' surface.
Like this:
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Core.jpg
By doing that you eliminate a lot of 'travel' for the flux to reach the 'point of action'. Which means far less steel losses, better response and stronger interaction. Also will this slightly lessen the need for sub micron airgap sizes.
Anyway it's only a slight design change but it has 'huge' (relative term) benefits.

Regards,
Steven
Steven,

I appreciate your experience in this field, as I know you have built and tested multiple machines in this genera, but my understanding of the benefits of placing the coils right in front of the gaps is slightly different than yours. I do not believe the benefit is due to lowering the steel losses since the total flux going through the steel is the same regardless of coil placement. I believe the benefit is due to lowering the amount of stray flux that might find its way around the coil in the air when the coil is on the back leg. This loss is quite low as soon as the iron piece starts filling the gap for the motoring process to begin. Jetijs has a viable design with the coil on the back leg and this will work well as a first model for him. I used this method with the Flux-Motor in 1983 and it works well.

Also, in my experience, there really is nothing that can compensate for not having the very close air-gaps. The closer the tolerances, the higher the mechanical energy production at no extra running cost. Since "free mechanical energy production" is what this motor project is about, why not go for the max?

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 09-18-2007, 01:13 AM
sykavy sykavy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Steven,

I appreciate your experience in this field, as I know you have built and tested multiple machines in this genera, but my understanding of the benefits of placing the coils right in front of the gaps is slightly different than yours. I do not believe the benefit is due to lowering the steel losses since the total flux going through the steel is the same regardless of coil placement. I believe the benefit is due to lowering the amount of stray flux that might find its way around the coil in the air when the coil is on the back leg. This loss is quite low as soon as the iron piece starts filling the gap for the motoring process to begin. Jetijs has a viable design with the coil on the back leg and this will work well as a first model for him. I used this method with the Flux-Motor in 1983 and it works well.

Also, in my experience, there really is nothing that can compensate for not having the very close air-gaps. The closer the tolerances, the higher the mechanical energy production at no extra running cost. Since "free mechanical energy production" is what this motor project is about, why not go for the max?

Peter
Does it make a difference to taper the iron like you showed in your video on the lip of the solenoid? I thought that less iron made less attraction. Was I wrong?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 09-18-2007, 03:54 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Iron Lip in the Solenoid...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sykavy View Post
Does it make a difference to taper the iron like you showed in your video on the lip of the solenoid? I thought that less iron made less attraction. Was I wrong?
Sykavy,

In my DVD, the intruding lip of iron inside the solenoid is not necessarily the best design. I used this to illustrate my point that Teal's Magnipulsion Engine used SOME design feature to accomplish a close air-gap alignment at the beginning of his power stroke when the crank was still in mid-stroke. Since making the DVD I have thought of other designs that are even simpler, that accomplish the same thing.

There is nothing magical about tapering the iron. In some designs, it helps shape the magnetic field to produce an advantage. In other designs, it doesn't help at all. These things are best worked out in your test models.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 09-19-2007, 06:15 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Red face

Peter,
just received my parts from the laser cutting guy. Here are some photos:




Here's a close up. You can see that the quality of the cut is very good:




The sheets are 1mm thick. They were cut using O2 gas for cooling. The quality would be greater in they were using N2, but that would be more expensive and the cut with O2 is already almost ideal. The material is not a standard transformer iron, because they did not have such material. This is regular steel with some carbon content. It is magnetic. I made an experiment, I put a strong neodymium magnet on one of the plates, then I removed it and put a small needle on that plate I pulled the needle slowly in the air and noticed, that the plate tends to lift a little bit. That means that the plate became magnetized. I know, that this is not good. What do you think? Will it still work? Is it wise to continue with the construction if this material is used? Or should I start to look for other materials?
Thank you,
Gatis
__________________
 

Last edited by Jetijs; 09-19-2007 at 06:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 09-20-2007, 02:53 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Iron has residual magnetism

Jetijs,

Your motor core parts look excellent. While it is true that the residual magnetism in this steel will reduce the efficiency of the motor, it will still operate. Since this is your first unit, you could still learn a lot by going ahead with what you have. It's a shame to waste the money on the wrong core material, but since the money is already spent......

Its your choice.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 09-20-2007, 09:45 AM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Smile

Ok, I will carry on, since the core material is the most expensive part of this setup and I already have everything else. I will cover the plates with a thin layer of varnish to isolate them form each other. Then I will screw the parts together and do a little lathe work to get the rotor a correct spacing.
As you said, I will at least learn a lot
I will inform you about my success.

EDIT: I am glad to tell you, that it was a false alarm with that rotor material magnetizing. Turns out, that not the rotor plate remained magnetized, but the iron needle. I tried this test again with more needles and this time I did not allow the needle to interact with the magnet directly, only with the rotor plate That's a big relief for me, I have even considered to heat treat the plates to change the material properties, but now I wont need to do that

Thank you,
Gatis
__________________
 

Last edited by Jetijs; 09-20-2007 at 03:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 09-20-2007, 04:48 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Good News

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Ok, I will carry on, since the core material is the most expensive part of this setup and I already have everything else. I will cover the plates with a thin layer of varnish to isolate them form each other. Then I will screw the parts together and do a little lathe work to get the rotor a correct spacing.
As you said, I will at least learn a lot
I will inform you about my success.

EDIT: I am glad to tell you, that it was a false alarm with that rotor material magnetizing. Turns out, that not the rotor plate remained magnetized, but the iron needle. I tried this test again with more needles and this time I did not allow the needle to interact with the magnet directly, only with the rotor plate That's a big relief for me, I have even considered to heat treat the plates to change the material properties, but now I wont need to do that

Thank you,
Gatis
Jetijs,

Good news that your iron pieces release their magnetism completely. When you are ready, I'd love to see your plans for the circuit.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 09-20-2007, 07:25 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Lightbulb

Peter, I am not ready for the circuit now. I will first put all the mechanical stuff together I have come up with such a design:






The shaft will be made of stainless steel and will be supported by two bearings. The long distance between bearings is to minimize the wobling of the rotor that is caused by inaccuracies in bearings. Each bearing will be put between two aluminum holders. I think I will make the base plate out of hard laminated plywood. The dark cylinders are spacers, that hold the startor in exact same height as the rotor. By adding or removing washers on the distancers it will be possible to adjust the height. I think that I wont have any problems in making these parts with my homemade cnc machine. I already have some experience in building a similar device with magnets as my Bedini SSG, here's a picture:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/v...1187211446.jpg
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/v...1187211881.jpg

Please tell me what you think. Maybe you have some suggestions?
I am sorry about my english in specific terms, I'm from Latvia.
Thank's,
Gatis
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 09-21-2007, 04:19 AM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Potential Problems.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Peter, I am not ready for the circuit now. I will first put all the mechanical stuff together I have come up with such a design:

The shaft will be made of stainless steel and will be supported by two bearings. The long distance between bearings is to minimize the wobling of the rotor that is caused by inaccuracies in bearings. Each bearing will be put between two aluminum holders. I think I will make the base plate out of hard laminated plywood. The dark cylinders are spacers, that hold the startor in exact same height as the rotor. By adding or removing washers on the distancers it will be possible to adjust the height. I think that I wont have any problems in making these parts with my homemade cnc machine. I already have some experience in building a similar device with magnets as my Bedini SSG, here's a picture:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/v...1187211446.jpg
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/v...1187211881.jpg

Please tell me what you think. Maybe you have some suggestions?
I am sorry about my english in specific terms, I'm from Latvia.
Thank's,
Gatis
Jetijs,

The idea of mounting the rotor on a block with bearings that won't wobble is excellent and necessary to hold the systems close air-gap. However, supporting the iron core up on thin mounting posts, especially right next to the rotor interface, will not be able to resist the hundreds of pounds of magnetic attraction across the gap! This stator mount method will fail, for sure.

Each side of the stator interface to the rotor should be mounted firmly on a block of thick plastic that bolts firmly to the base plate. When the coil magnetizes the core, the stator pieces that face the rotor must not be able to move AT ALL!!! Don't assume that the shape of the iron stator will not de-form under the extreme magnetic attraction forces present.

This part of your frame design MUST be reconsidered.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:04 AM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Red face

Thank's Peter
You are right, I have not considered that factor and will redesign that frame part. As you said, I assumed, that the thick iron startor piece wont deform.
EDIT:
Ok Peter,
what about this design:



I reduced the lenght of the spacers and increased their diameter. Also I lowered the rotor/bearing assembly closer to the base plate. I think, that such thick distancers will do better than those thin ones in previous design. And if the nuts on the leadscrew through the distancers are screwed on very tight, then I think there should be no problems at all with the startor movement. The use of distancers also gives space for the coil. Is that ok or still not too good? Because I have some other ideas as well

Thank you,
Gatis
__________________
 

Last edited by Jetijs; 09-21-2007 at 12:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 09-21-2007, 03:17 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Much Better!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Thank's Peter
You are right, I have not considered that factor and will redesign that frame part. As you said, I assumed, that the thick iron startor piece wont deform.
EDIT:
Ok Peter,

I reduced the lenght of the spacers and increased their diameter. Also I lowered the rotor/bearing assembly closer to the base plate. I think, that such thick distancers will do better than those thin ones in previous design. And if the nuts on the leadscrew through the distancers are screwed on very tight, then I think there should be no problems at all with the startor movement. The use of distancers also gives space for the coil. Is that ok or still not too good? Because I have some other ideas as well

Thank you,
Gatis
Jetijs,

Much better. This will probably work. What I was thinking of would be even stronger. My suggestion is to produce larger, square blocks of plastic that bolt to the base plate. Then, machine a slot in the top of the plastic mount plates that the iron sections fit into. Then top that with another plastic piece that clamps down on the top of the iron and screws into the plastic block. This leaves no room for movement. All of the stress is at the rotor/stator interface, so these plastic blocks only need to be out at the ends, still leaving an open space for your coil on the central leg. What do you think of this idea?

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 09-21-2007, 05:35 PM
bmind bmind is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4
Thumbs up Thank you Peter

First I would like to thank Peter Lindemann for releasing the DVD. I saw about 45 minutes last night and got me very excited. I can not wait to go back home and finish it. I am very interested in magnetics and am reading whatever I can get my hands on. I have decided to build a motor with circuit of Peter suggestion posted on "Rotary Attraction Motor". Peter, I would really appreciate if you can tell me which materials (for rotor/motor) would be best suited for maximum torque? In the design you mention Iron. Since there are different types of Iron; is there specific requirements (for Iron) to achieve the maximum torque? I am an engineer and have access to machines that can hold tolerances up to 0.05mm (per side). I really wanted to test some of this theory to get a better understanding of magnetics.
Peter release of this DVD should be applauded. I understand the claims of some people that have worked on this and I agree with them. But I still think that the right thing to do is to give people the knowledge and not let it die with you. Get people excited, together we can achieve much more then individually could ever have hoped for.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 09-21-2007, 06:11 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
i just aquired a VERY old AC motor(pre 1940's, cloth covered wire) that has a layout almost identical to Mr. Lindemanns except instead of a "X" rotor it has a cylinder. the stator is almost the same, and even the coil is placed in the same spot.

another difference is that the iron stator "arms" completely surrounds the rotor.

what advantage is there of an "X" over a cylinder? i would assume that a cylinder would have a more constant turn.

the reason i ask, is because i was considering having the rotor machined into an "X", and the closed part of the stator trimmed a bit, but i wanted to confirm with Mr. Lindemann before i alter this motor.


Jetijs, i hope you dont mind, i used you pic to illustrate the motor i have.
here is the picture



if this is not better, then i will cut the yellow and blue sections away. and rewind the coil. actually, rewinding the coil the way it is is extremely hard. i would have to feed the wire through the small opening for every single wind.

thoughts??

-bryan
__________________
 

Last edited by adam ant; 09-21-2007 at 08:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 09-21-2007, 06:19 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Peter,
did you mean something like this?





If yes, then I must say, that this approach would be a bit tricky to make, because the slot in that plastic piece must the be very precise. If it will be too wide, then the startor will move inside it. If the slot is too narrow, there will be problems getting the startor inside. This design is harder to make (at least with tools available to me). My previous design is easier to build (at least for me ). I think I will stick to my design and see how it works. When it will be assembled I will just need to attach the coil to a battery and see if the startor is moving or not. If everything will be ok, then we know, that this design works
Thank you for your support
Gatis
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 09-21-2007, 06:26 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
i just received my tachometer today, so i will run some tests on this motor before i start cutting anything. this way i wil have figures to compair against. i had to jerry rig the connection to an extension cord, when i pulgged it in, it purred like a kitten. but after a few minutes, it started getting really hot and then vibrated hard. i held a screw driver over the coil and i could feel the magnetic vibrations without even touching the motor.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 09-21-2007, 06:37 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Bryan,
no problems, you can use my images if you want.
About your motor, did you mean something like this?

Because at first I had the same idea. But you can see how the flux flows in such arrangement. some of the flux bypasses the ball in the middle and flows around it. I used vizimag trial software to simulate this. See how the flux flows without that adittional piece:

You can see, that the flux lines are more dense and compact and all the flux flows through the ball in the middle.
But see what happens if you add an adittional coil:

I really don't know if that's better
Thank you,
Gatis
__________________
 

Last edited by Jetijs; 09-21-2007 at 07:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 09-21-2007, 07:58 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
i had mentioned this before, an "H" or "8" style motor, i was just told that i need to experiment.

if im not mistaken, arent your + and - in the wrong spot? wont that be displayed at the ends of the coil? or is that your dipiction of the winds?



the motor that i aquired is exactly the way i shaded in your picture above, but before i got that motor, my idea was similar to your 3rd graphic, circular rotor, and "8" style, double coiled.

here is my take on your magnetic flux lines



NOTE: the straight lines are only there to show direction, the thumbnails are too small to draw all of the exact detail. yellow would be positive+ red is negative-.

you see, i believe there are TWO different kinds of magnetic flux (actually three) you have the positive, and negative. (and a nuetral) just like a yin yang, there is always white/black, positive/negative, good/bad, and this applies to magnetism, electricity, gravity, superconductivity, manifestation (intent), and anything else in nature.

-bryan


btw, this is how i see a bar magnets flux

__________________
 

Last edited by adam ant; 09-21-2007 at 08:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 09-21-2007, 08:03 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Bryan,
the + and - in my pictures represent the coil wire windings in cross section.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #201  
Old 09-21-2007, 08:17 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
ok, i thought that is what it was, but i want to be sure.
what do you think of my pics? (errr, your pics with my additions)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 09-21-2007, 08:36 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Bryan,
my english is not the best, I am not sure, that I understood your picture and explanation completely. What did you mean with the red + and the yellow -? Were those supposed to be coil windings? The flux in my pictures is represented by those lines. The arrow shows the direction, but the line density shows the strength of the magnetic field - the more lines, the stronger the field also the darker the red color. There is much interesting stuff about magnets, for example how the real field around a permanent magnet looks like. In school we are shown the experiment with magnet and iron fillings and how they form lines of force around magnet. But there is a theory that these lines are not exactly what they ares supposed to be, because in a magnetic field, the iron fillings become a magnet themselves and can freely move to a needed position. Actually a field around a magnet is a bit different. The magnetic lines come out of the N pole of the magnet, but instead of going in the S pole, they go to the middle of the magnet. The same happens to the other pole. To see if it is really so, I bought a magnetic field viewing film and put it on a strong neodymium magnet. See for yourself:

This happens because the small particles in that film cannot freely move, only turn around themselves. That shows the real field. This is the principe how the Perendev motor should work.
I do not want to speculate about this and also this theme is offtopic for this thread. Lets talk about that in my perendev motor topic
Anyone tried to build a Perendev motor?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 09-21-2007, 09:14 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
you are right, i dont want to take away from this thread.

but my questions to Mr. Lindeman (from above) still are valid to this thread.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 09-22-2007, 02:36 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Welcome to the Forum

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmind View Post
First I would like to thank Peter Lindemann for releasing the DVD. I saw about 45 minutes last night and got me very excited. I can not wait to go back home and finish it. I am very interested in magnetics and am reading whatever I can get my hands on. I have decided to build a motor with circuit of Peter suggestion posted on "Rotary Attraction Motor". Peter, I would really appreciate if you can tell me which materials (for rotor/motor) would be best suited for maximum torque? In the design you mention Iron. Since there are different types of Iron; is there specific requirements (for Iron) to achieve the maximum torque? I am an engineer and have access to machines that can hold tolerances up to 0.05mm (per side). I really wanted to test some of this theory to get a better understanding of magnetics.
Peter release of this DVD should be applauded. I understand the claims of some people that have worked on this and I agree with them. But I still think that the right thing to do is to give people the knowledge and not let it die with you. Get people excited, together we can achieve much more then individually could ever have hoped for.
Dear bmind,

The best type of iron for the rotor and stator is cast iron. This is "true cast iron" and not re-cast with a mish-mash of steel and other grades mixed in. Real cast iron loses 100% of its magnetism after a magnet is withdrawn from contact, and this is the most important feature you are looking for.

Thanks for your enthusiasm and support. As you build your model, stay involved in this forum so others can see your process.

Thanks,

Peter
__________________
 

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 09-22-2007 at 03:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 09-22-2007, 02:54 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Precisely.....almost

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Peter,
did you mean something like this?





If yes, then I must say, that this approach would be a bit tricky to make, because the slot in that plastic piece must the be very precise. If it will be too wide, then the startor will move inside it. If the slot is too narrow, there will be problems getting the startor inside. This design is harder to make (at least with tools available to me). My previous design is easier to build (at least for me ). I think I will stick to my design and see how it works. When it will be assembled I will just need to attach the coil to a battery and see if the startor is moving or not. If everything will be ok, then we know, that this design works
Thank you for your support
Gatis
Jetijs,

Yes, this is almost what I had in mind. You are still bolting the whole assembly together and to the base plate with the same bolts. What I was trying to describe was a system that bolts the bottom piece directly to the base plate. Then, if the slot is just slightly over-sized, the stator sections drop right in. Then, if the top piece has a slight clearance to the bottom piece when the stator is in place, then the clamping action of tightening the top down holds the whole thing in place. The top piece is designed to bolt to the bottom piece independently of the bottom piece's mounting to the base plate. The assemblies can be held together with brass hardware so the whole frame is non-magnetic. I have used systems like this in other models I have built and they work very well.

But like you said, the system you proposed in your previous post will probably work, and should be tried first.

Keep up the great work!

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 09-22-2007, 03:10 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Induction Motor

Quote:
Originally Posted by adam ant View Post
i just aquired a VERY old AC motor(pre 1940's, cloth covered wire) that has a layout almost identical to Mr. Lindemanns except instead of a "X" rotor it has a cylinder. the stator is almost the same, and even the coil is placed in the same spot.

another difference is that the iron stator "arms" completely surrounds the rotor.

what advantage is there of an "X" over a cylinder? i would assume that a cylinder would have a more constant turn.

the reason i ask, is because i was considering having the rotor machined into an "X", and the closed part of the stator trimmed a bit, but i wanted to confirm with Mr. Lindemann before i alter this motor.


Jetijs, i hope you dont mind, i used you pic to illustrate the motor i have.
here is the picture



if this is not better, then i will cut the yellow and blue sections away. and rewind the coil. actually, rewinding the coil the way it is is extremely hard. i would have to feed the wire through the small opening for every single wind.

thoughts??

-bryan
Bryan,

From what I can tell of your description, it sounds like you have an AC Induction Motor. The age is not relevant, as this is a Tesla design from the 1880's. They build motors exactly like this today.

This motor produces a "rotating magnetic field" and drags the rotor around behind it by a combination of induced currents and hysteresis. In spite of the physical design similarities, the operating principle is totally different. Attempts to modify this motor to run on the new principles discussed in this forum will require a lot of work.

They would include modifying the shape of the stator sections where they interact with the rotor and replacing the rotor with an iron rotor with a close gap. Plus, a commutator still needs to be added to switch the stator fields on and off at the appropriate times, along with the switching circuit and energy recover system.

So, it can be done.

Glad to see you are going to build a model!

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 09-22-2007, 04:21 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
thanks Mr. Lindemann for your input.,

the commutator shouldnt be a problem, and i just received enough parts for the circuit.

cutting the stator will be alright, the cost of a new laser cut one will be my motivation !! this will make rewinding the coil much easier as well.

the rotor is going to be an issue though, but i do believe it is already iron.
the air gap is so tight that i cannot push a piece of paper through it. there are VERY tiny brass shims that maintain its integrity, and the bearings still seem to be in excellent shape. they are positively lubricated by cloth discs that are on the shaft.

-bryan
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 09-23-2007, 04:20 AM
FEstudent FEstudent is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4
Question some questions

I bought the dvd and thought it was really interesting. I watched it many
times and learned a lot. Here are some questions I have for Peter Lindemann
or anybody who wants to respond. Thanks.

1. Is the rotating attraction motor superior to the Teal solenoid motor in torque?

2. What is a suitable material for the cylinder of the solenoid design?
Teflon? Nylon? Aluminum? Does the iron piston actually drag against or touch the iron jacket when it is folded under the coil in the Teal design?
This would help to support the piston.

3. This may be a dumb question, but in the video it is said that some DC
motors get an efficiency in the 95% area. Would it be possible to capture
any significant amount of inductive kick back from these motors to obtain
over 100% since we are only a few percent away?

4. The snubbers in the Teal motor seem to indicate that brief pulses were
applied, but doesn't the saturation of the stator and piston pose an upper
limit as to how strong the field can get, or can this be exceeded buy the
high ampere-turns?

5. Was the COP and efficiency ever measured on the solenoid motor
in the dvd? I was anticipating this but it was not shown. Can you give
details on this?

6. I think that an attracting keeper type of design,where a keeper moves only in a straight line, with a gap that would close to a distance of zero would be very strong wouldn't it?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 09-24-2007, 02:55 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Peter,
when you are showing the diagram of a double S rotor setup at the end of the video, I noticed, that the rotor is a little bit thicker than the startor. Is this crucial? Is the rotor thicker because that way it can better absorb those stray magnetic fields on the end of the startor piece?

EDIT: One more question for you Peter, what wire gauge would you recommend for the coil? All I got is AWG 21 wire, but if it's too thin, then I will order a bigger gauge wire, but it usually takes some weeks to deliver the wire form USA (its actually cheaper to buy these wires from ebay.com than to buy them here in my country). Then I could order the wire and it would arrive about as soon as I have finished the work with the motor. I have already made the bearing support blocks, the distancer cylinders and the base plate. There's some problems with the rotor, because when drawing those CAD files, I did not take into account the laser bean cut width. So when I drew those holes with a diameter 4.2mm, the actually came out 4.5mm, that means I will have to drill the holes bigger, because the 4mm diameter bolts are too small and the 5mm diameter bolts are too big for these holes. But that should not be a problem to do.

Thanks,
Gatis
__________________
 

Last edited by Jetijs; 09-26-2007 at 10:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 09-28-2007, 10:03 AM
Bah Bah is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Eric,

...It is well established that the energy conversion rate for the direct induction machine is 746 watts = 1 horse power = 550 foot-pounds per second of mechanical energy...
Dear Dr. Lindemann,

You state the above as if it were an arbitrarily-discovered characteristic of a certain type of motor. The relationship between Watts and Horsepower is by definition of the units themselves and has nothing to do with any particular machine. Is it your intention to confuse the reader or are you really that confused yourself?

No matter the machine, the efficiency, whatever...a Horsepower is 746W...they are two different units used for expressing power and have a fixed constant relationship like feet and inches, grams and ounces, etc. Your statement is very odd and could be rather confusing to the uneducated.

Bah
__________________
 

Last edited by Bah; 09-28-2007 at 10:21 AM.
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 01:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers