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
  #211  
Old 09-28-2007, 03:59 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Thanks for your question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bah View Post
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
Dear Bah,

Actually, you are confused. A Horse Power is 550 foot-pounds of mechanical work per second. The unit was invented to rate steam engines when they first appeared, so people could understand how many horses the engine would replace for hauling loads. It is generally believed that 746 watts of electricity is EQUIVALENT to a horse power, but electricity itself does not perform physical work and therefore must be CONVERTED into mechanical energy using some APPLIANCE, such as an electric motor. It is taught (incorrectly) that an electric motor CONVERTS electricity into mechanical energy at the RATE of 746 watts = 550 ft-lbs/sec minus any losses in heat. I concede to you that commercially available motors seem to behave this way, but a close observation of these phenomena does not support this conclusion.

Everyone in this forum is well aware of the Laws of Thermodynamics and their apparent limitations. Michael Faraday's direct induction experiment and all of the motors and generators that are derived from this geometry work equally well as either a motor or a generator. In fact, they ALWAYS work as BOTH a motor and a generator, and these functions operate in opposition to each other. This is the limiting factor in these designs. I demonstrate this in detail in my DVD Electric Motor Secrets. By using a different geometry that specifically avoids the arrangement of moving current carrying conductors through magnetic fields, it is possible to build an electric motor that DOES NOT generate any counter effects. The operational efficiencies of these motors can exceed the generally believed limitations of the conversion rates you state.

You are welcome to believe whatever you want. But this forum is for people who voluntarily wish to explore a new phenomenon. There is a great deal of information available, both on my DVD and in this forum, for you to begin to explore a new energy paradigm. You are welcome to join us, or leave, but there is no one here who needs to be "saved" from a state of "confusion" by you.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

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

  #212  
Old 09-28-2007, 04:24 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
FE Student, Welcome

Quote:
Originally Posted by FEstudent View Post
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?
Dear FE Student,

Thanks for joining the forum. Here are some answers to your questions.

1) The Rotary Attraction Motor and the Teal Solenoid Engine both work on the principle of a single electro-magnet attracting a piece of iron to produce mechanical energy. Only exhaustive experimentation will determine which design geometry is superior for the production of torque. One way or the other, the rotary designs have fewer parts and lower friction and these advantages may still make them more desirable in the long run.

2) The solenoid and its surrounding keeper must be made of a material that conducts magnetism AND releases its magnetization when the field is removed. The simplest material to use is Cast Iron, although a wide variety of materials can be used. Teflon, Nylon and aluminum are not useful here to define the magnetic circuit, but may be useful to create supporting structures and guide ways.

3) Yes, Switched Reluctance Motors are the most efficient electric motors available today. They already operate on the magnetic attraction principle and may be able to be converted to operate with some electrical recovery as well.

4) Teal did use very sharp, strong pulses. The high efficiency window of operation will be with magnetic field strengths below saturation of the piston/keeper system.

5) The efficiency of the solenoid engine in the DVD was not measured because it is low. I have measured it and it is about 25%. The point of that demonstration was to show a motor with No Back EMF.

6) You aren't the first to think this way. Patents have issued on this idea but other problems arise when the moving piece closes the gap completely. The impacts eventually deform the pieces and the systems make a lot of noise.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 09-28-2007, 04:49 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Learning curve....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
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
Dear Jetijs,

There is no specific wire size recommendation. Smaller wire size, such as AWG 21 will work just fine. You will find that with that wire you may have to use higher voltages to get enough current through, but you will have more turns on your coil. The total Ampere-Turns is the field strength so there is always a trade-off. The coils with more turns will have a slower rise-time because they will have more counter EMF.

You are not going to be able to build a "final model" right away. You will have to experiment and learn.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 09-29-2007, 01:13 AM
amigo's Avatar
amigo amigo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 744
If I may chime in, it is possible that our "Overlords" have their dirty fingers busy thwarting the attempts of the small alt. energy community from releasing the masses of the world from the Overlord claws. That could be one of the reasons we haven't seen any major developments or commercial models being sold. The stories about suppression could be true, if we believe the accounts of those who have experienced it first hand.

Here's one such account, give it a bit of a read if you can, it is an intriguing story:

The Home Page of Wade Frazier

It would take a blink of an eye for any of the corporate beasts to totally wipe Bedini, Bearden, Lindemann or anyone else off the planet. And they would do it without hesitation or regard for lives of people involved or their families, if their corporate interests become threatened in any way.
__________________
 

Last edited by amigo; 09-29-2007 at 01:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 09-29-2007, 04:12 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,587
Oct 1st - noon to 1pm Mountain time Interview

"On Oct. 1, 2007, from noon to 1:00 pm Mountain time, as part of the Free Energy Now (Free Energy Now -- Weekly Radio Show by PES Network, Inc.) radio series, Sterling D. Allan will conduct a 1-hour interview with Peter Lindemann regarding his Rotary Attraction Motor and related technologies."

Please pass this on...just found this on:
OS:Lindemann Rotary Attraction Motor - PESWiki
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 09-29-2007, 01:44 PM
amigo's Avatar
amigo amigo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 744
What a ... ?

I find it VERY disturbing that moderators here have chosen to remove the post from "Bah" in which he criticizes lack of final solutions and commercially available units based on alt.energy principles.

I did not find anything wrong with that post, it was someone's opinion and point of view. Removing it from the plain sight without even leaving any trails constitutes censorship of the worst kind.

We, as users of this forum, should not have to fear that our thoughts will be censored because someone else does not like what we are saying or thinking. That is just plain wrong and falls among the worst kinds of oppression, and believe me you would not know of it, but I would.

I was born and have lived in a Communist system where such things happen all the time. Witnessing them first hand and then coming here to the so called "free world" having to experience similar things sends cold shivers up my spine.

By removing the post and suppressing someone's thoughts, yet living in a system that boasts the freedom of speech - by law, is hypocritical and if moderators here are going to continue that way I shall have no part of it.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 09-29-2007, 04:54 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Staying Polite, and ON TOPIC

Quote:
Originally Posted by amigo View Post
I find it VERY disturbing that moderators here have chosen to remove the post from "Bah" in which he criticizes lack of final solutions and commercially available units based on alt.energy principles.

I did not find anything wrong with that post, it was someone's opinion and point of view. Removing it from the plain sight without even leaving any trails constitutes censorship of the worst kind.

We, as users of this forum, should not have to fear that our thoughts will be censored because someone else does not like what we are saying or thinking. That is just plain wrong and falls among the worst kinds of oppression, and believe me you would not know of it, but I would.

I was born and have lived in a Communist system where such things happen all the time. Witnessing them first hand and then coming here to the so called "free world" having to experience similar things sends cold shivers up my spine.

By removing the post and suppressing someone's thoughts, yet living in a system that boasts the freedom of speech - by law, is hypocritical and if moderators here are going to continue that way I shall have no part of it.
Dear Amigo,

I asked the Moderator to remove Bah's post because it was off topic and rude.

The purpose of this forum is to create a place where people can come and learn about a new way of building electric motors that produce high torque using magnetic attraction principles (such as in switched reluctance motors) that also take advantage of electrical energy recovery from a collapsing inductor (such as in John Bedini's SG system). Both of these processes are known to work and systems that design them both into the same machine have new advantages.

This is an educational forum for civilized participants. We have no obligation to uphold "free speech" here, or to entertain the uninformed opinions of people with bad attitudes. This is a scientific forum with the specific agenda for sharing and learn new ideas in a supportive environment, free of disruptions and distractions.

Anyone who chooses to post content counter to this agenda will be censored and banned from further posting. There are thousands of other forums where rude, off topic complaining is tolerated and those people can go there. Anyone coming here who is trying to learn the new ideas can enjoy a relatively "on topic" forum as a result.

If anyone feels the need to discuss politics, the limited illusions of "free speech" or communism, please start a different thread.

Peter
__________________
 

Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 09-29-2007 at 05:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 09-29-2007, 05:26 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,587
purpose of Electric Motor Secrets thread

Just to clarify what this particular thread is about, I'll post message #2 in this thread:

"
Electric Motor Secrets Official Discussion Forum
The purpose of this thread is for the discussion of the DVD by Dr. Peter Lindemann called Electric Motor Secrets.

It would be greatly appreciated if you buy your own copy and watch it before posting any messages here as it will answer almost anything you want to know about Bob Teal's Magnipulsion engine.

However, Dr. Lindemann will be contributing some very helpful information here for those of you who are interested in building any of the versions of the the motor(s) discussed in the DVD.

Please keep your posts in this group on topic: Bob Teal, Magnipulsion, Magneteal, Electric Motor Secrets, etc...

If you want to discuss other attraction motor concepts or similar topics but not directly related to Electric Motor Secrets, please feel free to start a new thread."

This can be found here:
Electric Motor Secrets
That has been there since the beginning of this forum.

I have no problem with people being sincere about asking questions or even debating in a respectable way but outright attacking in our home is not tolerated. This isn't censorship. Bah personally attacked two of my good personal friends Peter & John and that isn't allowed.

If he/she were to act respectable as anyone should coming into someone else's home, I'm sure his message would either still be here or at least it would be moved to a new thread in regards to any skepticism about Peter, John's or Tom Bearden's work.

Also, I left Bah's original message and I left your response to it Amigo. I also left your response to his second message so there are indeed "trails" of another message that there was. I have no interest in covering up or hiding things. It was just that one particular post.

We want to keep this forum an enjoyable place for people to visit so please understand this. It was more how he said what he said that I have an issue with and not necessarily his skepticism.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami


Last edited by Aaron; 09-29-2007 at 05:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 09-30-2007, 08:46 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Motor design suggestion.

Hello Peter and all.

I need your input on this one.
Here I might have an idea/suggestion for at least a simple but good quality attraction motor stator. So have a look at this picture.
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/AttractionMotor01.jpg

Nr.1 What we have here is a stator core from a normal induction motor. Seen from the top with the windings removed.

Nr.2 Now I think that it will be necessary to remove each second finger, to make more room for good rotor performance.

Nr.3 Now we rewind the stator with a single wire in this fashion. Make sure that each finger has an opposite polarity.

Nr.4 Shows the desired field layout.

Nr.5 Shows the rotor. Notice that it is desired that the fingers on the rotor are somewhat wider than the fingers on the stator.

So here you have it. What do you think? In a sense it is a normal variable reluctance motor made out of a normal induction motor. Now the fingers might not be that wide in surface contact, but since a motor core is easily like 15cm long you do end up with a very considerable surface. And on top of that there are a lot of finger in a core like these. Plus you can keep the original motor housing. Now the rotor must preferably also made out of laminates, but a proof of concept solid steel one could be machined with ease. This other advantage is that, since the fingers are not that wide you could get away with short pulses which could be easily recovered.

Now I must admit that I have a bit of trouble figuring out if this one will be truly ‘no-backEmf’ according to the ways detailed in Peters DVD. So that is why I need your input on this one.

Thanks.
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 10-03-2007, 03:40 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Fingers on the Rotor.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nali2001 View Post
Hello Peter and all.

I need your input on this one.
Here I might have an idea/suggestion for at least a simple but good quality attraction motor stator. So have a look at this picture.
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/AttractionMotor01.jpg

Nr.1 What we have here is a stator core from a normal induction motor. Seen from the top with the windings removed.

Nr.2 Now I think that it will be necessary to remove each second finger, to make more room for good rotor performance.

Nr.3 Now we rewind the stator with a single wire in this fashion. Make sure that each finger has an opposite polarity.

Nr.4 Shows the desired field layout.

Nr.5 Shows the rotor. Notice that it is desired that the fingers on the rotor are somewhat wider than the fingers on the stator.

So here you have it. What do you think? In a sense it is a normal variable reluctance motor made out of a normal induction motor. Now the fingers might not be that wide in surface contact, but since a motor core is easily like 15cm long you do end up with a very considerable surface. And on top of that there are a lot of finger in a core like these. Plus you can keep the original motor housing. Now the rotor must preferably also made out of laminates, but a proof of concept solid steel one could be machined with ease. This other advantage is that, since the fingers are not that wide you could get away with short pulses which could be easily recovered.

Now I must admit that I have a bit of trouble figuring out if this one will be truly ‘no-backEmf’ according to the ways detailed in Peters DVD. So that is why I need your input on this one.

Thanks.
Steven
Steven,

Interesting design. Why do you believe that the fingers on the rotor need to be as wide as they are drawn?

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 10-03-2007, 05:59 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Rotor explanation.

Well this might be a little hard to explain in plain words.
But is important that the rotor is free to move-on after an attraction to a given pole.

Now the problem is that the fingers of the stator will not ‘instantly’ demagnetize. If you look at if closely, the finger after the electro magnets has been turned off (or any electro magnet steel for that matter) needs some time to become ‘magnetically neutral’ again. This ‘demagnetization speed’ depends on the steel type of the core material and more specific on the hysteresis curve.

Now back to the attraction motor.
The problem exists when the fingers of the stator are as wide as the fingers on the rotor. You see, you want to maximize the ‘attraction interaction’ between the stator and rotor, so you keep the attraction pulse going until top dead center – in other words when the stator and rotor fingers are truly aligned. Now you need to shut off input power, so the rotor is not attracted anymore and is able to continue rotation to the next attraction cycle.
BUT IF you shut off the power at top dead center you have not yet fully demagnetized the poles. Since like I explained above, there is a relaxation time involved which takes time to fully become neutral. So in other words if you shut off power at top dead center you have not fully ‘released’ the rotor from the stators ‘magnetic grip’. And since it is at top dead center it wants, and must rotate onwards. But is ‘cannot’ since the steel is still in its natural process of becoming magnetically neutral, and thus is still somewhat magnetized. And so the free rotation after the attraction cycle becomes retarded to an extent.

See this animated picture:
Movie

Now this is where my suggested ‘wider rotor fingers’ come in.
The coil will shut off when the surface of the rotor fully registers with the surface of the stator. Now with the attraction phase over, the core will start to demagnetize. In this case that is fine since the rotor still has some way to go before it starts to leave the stator core. So by the time the rotor starts to leave the stator finger area, the demagnetization should be complete and thus the rotor can rotate freely and is not retarded. I make it sound like this ‘steel demagnetization’ takes ages, which is not so of course, but it will hinder the free rotation of the rotor if the rotor- and stator fingers are of equal width. This btw is the reason why commercial variable reluctance drives have a short ‘demagnetization pulse’ (just a short opposite-polarity pulse to speed up the core demagnetization)

Hope you can understand what I try to communicate here.
If not, let me know.

And please let me know if this ‘alteration of a normal induction motor setup' will result in a No Back-emf motor, because I have a bit of trouble getting the interaction between the various poles that are being generated.

Kind regards,
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 10-03-2007, 08:11 PM
mrl mrl is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2
Franc Jakelj design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Steven,

Interesting design. Why do you believe that the fingers on the rotor need to be as wide as they are drawn?

Peter

Hi Peter,

What Steven is sort of describing is a motor configuration that was designed by Franc Jakelj in Slovenia. I have his "Alternative Theory of the Fundamental Operating Principles of Electric Motors" paper (translated from Slovenian). I can send it to you if you like. I can't let it loose on the net because there is money being charged for it. But I will send it to you if you give me an email address. You can then read his paper and analyze his design. It's extremely efficient and powerful according to the test numbers he has published.


Mike
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 10-03-2007, 09:07 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Interested

Hi Mike,
Well it goes without saying that I'm interested in that paper as well.
So if you are willing to share it with me it will be much appreciated.

I will drop you a personal message.

Thanks in advance
Kind regards,
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 10-03-2007, 09:47 PM
Panther Panther is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1
Hi Steven,

What program did you use to draw this images?

bestregards,
Mike
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 10-04-2007, 03:13 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Photoshop cs2
Now let's return to the topic.

Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 10-07-2007, 09:15 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Care to comment?

...
Anyone care to comment on the new motor proposal?

Thanks
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 10-07-2007, 10:59 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
No Critique....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nali2001 View Post
Well this might be a little hard to explain in plain words.
But is important that the rotor is free to move-on after an attraction to a given pole.

Now the problem is that the fingers of the stator will not ‘instantly’ demagnetize. If you look at if closely, the finger after the electro magnets has been turned off (or any electro magnet steel for that matter) needs some time to become ‘magnetically neutral’ again. This ‘demagnetization speed’ depends on the steel type of the core material and more specific on the hysteresis curve.

Now back to the attraction motor.
The problem exists when the fingers of the stator are as wide as the fingers on the rotor. You see, you want to maximize the ‘attraction interaction’ between the stator and rotor, so you keep the attraction pulse going until top dead center – in other words when the stator and rotor fingers are truly aligned. Now you need to shut off input power, so the rotor is not attracted anymore and is able to continue rotation to the next attraction cycle.
BUT IF you shut off the power at top dead center you have not yet fully demagnetized the poles. Since like I explained above, there is a relaxation time involved which takes time to fully become neutral. So in other words if you shut off power at top dead center you have not fully ‘released’ the rotor from the stators ‘magnetic grip’. And since it is at top dead center it wants, and must rotate onwards. But is ‘cannot’ since the steel is still in its natural process of becoming magnetically neutral, and thus is still somewhat magnetized. And so the free rotation after the attraction cycle becomes retarded to an extent.

See this animated picture:
Movie

Now this is where my suggested ‘wider rotor fingers’ come in.
The coil will shut off when the surface of the rotor fully registers with the surface of the stator. Now with the attraction phase over, the core will start to demagnetize. In this case that is fine since the rotor still has some way to go before it starts to leave the stator core. So by the time the rotor starts to leave the stator finger area, the demagnetization should be complete and thus the rotor can rotate freely and is not retarded. I make it sound like this ‘steel demagnetization’ takes ages, which is not so of course, but it will hinder the free rotation of the rotor if the rotor- and stator fingers are of equal width. This btw is the reason why commercial variable reluctance drives have a short ‘demagnetization pulse’ (just a short opposite-polarity pulse to speed up the core demagnetization)

Hope you can understand what I try to communicate here.
If not, let me know.

And please let me know if this ‘alteration of a normal induction motor setup' will result in a No Back-emf motor, because I have a bit of trouble getting the interaction between the various poles that are being generated.

Kind regards,
Steven
Steven,

If you read through all of my posts, you will find numerous differences between what you are proposing and what I am proposing. But its your motor design. Its up to you to build it, test it and tell us what it does. I think the design includes a number of features that will limit its performance.

I am disappointed that no one else has commented on your idea. I applaud you for proposing a unique design but will not critique it myself.

Best wishes,

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 10-09-2007, 08:07 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,587
interview available in mp3

For anyone who missed Peter's interview last week, please check this forum for a post for the mp3 link:
Peter Lindemann Radio Interview Oct 1st, Noon to 1pm Mountain time
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 10-11-2007, 01:59 AM
elias's Avatar
elias elias is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,130
Not having magnets may decrease HP

Hello,

Well this is certainly an eye opening DVD, thanks Peter.
I was just wondering about not having magnets in attraction motors which may lead to lower overall HP than normal DC motors which have magnets and which they generate counter electricity.

Normal DC motors never pulse they just change the direction of the current flow on the electromagnet on each half revolution, So that changing of direction requires opposing the collapsed field instead of capturing it which causes more current to be drawn. This is besides overcoming the generator effect of the motor (Am I correct?). (Which one is actually termed as "Back EMF"? maybe both)

But normal DC motors use magnets to increase torque, I mean doesn't eliminating magnets like in attraction motors decrease the overall horsepower (magnets provide free energy).

And another thing I was wondering about. If we can get more horsepower for less electricity then We may be able to do this in reverse: Why not build a generator to produce more electricity than the input mechanical energy required. This may be alot easier.

Thanks
__________________
 

Last edited by elias; 10-11-2007 at 02:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 10-12-2007, 10:51 AM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Hi Peter,
my parts are now ready. I did not post for so long, because my lathe broke down and I had to order some custom made screws to hold the plates together and that took some time. Now all the plates have some layers of varnish on them and the last layer also acts as glue and holds these plates together. Now I just need to drill a bigger hole in the X rotor middle to fit on the shaft tight. Also I need to do some lathe work to fit the rotor into the startor piece, but since my lathe is broken, I will have to get this job done by a local craftsman in his shop. This will take some time as he is always busy Here's a picture:


Thanks
Gatis
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 10-12-2007, 12:54 PM
elias's Avatar
elias elias is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,130
A quote from one of the old books!!

Well,

Here I read a sentence from the book titled "Theory and Calculations of Electrical Circuits" published in 1917:

"Investigations and calculations dealing with one form of
energy only, as electromagnetic energy, or mechanical energy,
usually are relatively simple and can be carried out with very
high accuracy.Difficulties, however, arise when the calculation
involves the relation between several different forms of energy,
as electric energy and mechanical energy. While the elementary
relations between different forms of energy are relatively simple,
the calculation involving a transformation from one form of
energy to another, usually becomes so complex, that it either can
not be carried out at all, or even only approximate calculation
becomes rather laborious and at the same time gives only a low
degree of accuracy.
In most calculations involving the trans-
formation between different forms of energy, it is therefore
preferable not to consider the relations between the different
forms of energy at all,
but to use the law of conservation of energy
to relate the different forms of energy, which are involved."

They have not realized that magnetic energy is not created by electricity and it is a sibling that exists with any electron flow. Thus magnetic fields are not created, but they exist. And we do not "convert" magnetic energy to mechanical, but we use it as a natural force to do mechanical work. The law of energy conservation may be true, but I don't think that any "conversion" takes place in here, that's why they think that it is complex and cannot therefore be calculated.

Elias
__________________
 

Last edited by elias; 10-12-2007 at 12:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 10-12-2007, 02:09 PM
nali2001 nali2001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 82
Looking good

Hi Jetijs,
Good work man. Only one word of 'warning', It is very likely that drilling a hole through the X rotor will not be very precise. Drills tend to wobble and 'search' their own way. You could be a few tenth of a degree off easily. Another method is called "Boring" in machining terms. It is a precise way of making exact holes.

Well like I said, very good work and keep us updated.
Thanks for showing.

Kind regards,
Steven
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 10-12-2007, 02:25 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Steven,
that's why I will have this job done by professionals
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 10-12-2007, 03:53 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Great Quote!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by elias View Post
Well,

Here I read a sentence from the book titled "Theory and Calculations of Electrical Circuits" published in 1917:

"Investigations and calculations dealing with one form of
energy only, as electromagnetic energy, or mechanical energy,
usually are relatively simple and can be carried out with very
high accuracy.Difficulties, however, arise when the calculation
involves the relation between several different forms of energy,
as electric energy and mechanical energy. While the elementary
relations between different forms of energy are relatively simple,
the calculation involving a transformation from one form of
energy to another, usually becomes so complex, that it either can
not be carried out at all, or even only approximate calculation
becomes rather laborious and at the same time gives only a low
degree of accuracy.
In most calculations involving the trans-
formation between different forms of energy, it is therefore
preferable not to consider the relations between the different
forms of energy at all,
but to use the law of conservation of energy
to relate the different forms of energy, which are involved."

They have not realized that magnetic energy is not created by electricity and it is a sibling that exists with any electron flow. Thus magnetic fields are not created, but they exist. And we do not "convert" magnetic energy to mechanical, but we use it as a natural force to do mechanical work. The law of energy conservation may be true, but I don't think that any "conversion" takes place in here, that's why they think that it is complex and cannot therefore be calculated.

Elias
Elias,

This is a great quote. You see, once in a while, in the old books, you'd find an HONEST author who would admit that actually measuring and calculating "energy conversions" doesn't work. I love the author's term here, that it gives "a low degree of accuracy." Then he says that invoking the "Law of Conservation" is simply used as a cover story!

CORRECT!!!

Its like saying that the REAL answer is so complicated to calculate, that everyone should forget about it and go with the IMAGINARY answer.

Its always fun to find it in print.

OK folks. Wake up! Energy Conversions are VERY elastic and COP>1 is allowed by NATURE, if you get the GEOMETRY right.

Thanks for sharing this.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 10-12-2007, 04:12 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
Lookin' Good

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Hi Peter,
my parts are now ready. I did not post for so long, because my lathe broke down and I had to order some custom made screws to hold the plates together and that took some time. Now all the plates have some layers of varnish on them and the last layer also acts as glue and holds these plates together. Now I just need to drill a bigger hole in the X rotor middle to fit on the shaft tight. Also I need to do some lathe work to fit the rotor into the startor piece, but since my lathe is broken, I will have to get this job done by a local craftsman in his shop. This will take some time as he is always busy Here's a picture:


Thanks
Gatis
Jetijs,

This looks very good. Here are a few suggestions for your next steps.

Consider sandwiching the X rotor between two plastic wheels. This will help keep your fingers out of the assembly when it is running, and give you a greater width to mount to the shaft. This will help maintain a perfectly perpendicular mounting. A stepped flange can be left on both plastic wheels so a set screw can be used to tighten the rotor to the shaft. I do not recommend a "press fit" of the X onto the rotor. In a prototype like this, everything should be left adjustable.

Next, create a plastic frame at the back of the stator to hold the wire coil in place. As the coil is wound, it needs to be supported. I've got some systems like this. I'll try to get some pictures posted to show you what I mean.

Keep up the great work.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 10-12-2007, 04:20 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
if each of the "X" arms had its own coil, and a commutator was set to engage each arm (in turn) with the stator, there would be MASSIVE amounts of torque generated in this, all from one little "spike".
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 10-12-2007, 04:30 PM
Peter Lindemann Peter Lindemann is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Liberty Lake, Washington
Posts: 1,191
TRUE, but.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by adam ant View Post
if each of the "X" arms had its own coil, and a commutator was set to engage each arm (in turn) with the stator, there would be MASSIVE amounts of torque generated in this, all from one little "spike".
Bryan,

It's true that the torque can be increased with coils on the rotor, but then you have TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS interacting with each other, creating cross inductions, and the dreaded "BACK EMF". At that point, you have a conventional motor again.

The simplest way to avoid this is to only use one magnetic field at a time. The "power-to-weight" ratio of the motor is a little lower, but the over-all efficiency is higher, and the COP is much higher.

We are purposely sacrificing the benefit of "high power in a small package" for "high power in a medium sized package" with much higher efficiency and COP.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 10-12-2007, 04:54 PM
adam ant's Avatar
adam ant adam ant is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 310
ok, i understand that, i was thinking that the BEMF could be caught with a bifilar wind on two of the arms (opposite each other) with the back EMF being diverted the to the other two coils. then couple that with an external generator coil. (located on the opposite side of the stator coil)
but i see that the BEMF still wouldnt be stopped from travelling back through the innitial trigger wire... hmmm could diodes be used to block BEMF or deflect it backwards?


sorry, im thinking outloud. sometimes i sit and stare at my motors for hours, taking them apart, marking them with pencils, reassembling them, turning them on and off... until ideas pop into my head. i want to make 100% sure of what i intend to do before i start altering this motor... it is the only one i have. if i had money, i could test each of these ideas, but i don't

thanks for the explanation.

bryan
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 10-12-2007, 07:46 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,587
looking great!

That looks great Jetijs!

This goes to show that without the necessary tools to do the job it is difficult for serious progress to be made.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 10-12-2007, 07:48 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,587
awesome quote

Quote:
Originally Posted by elias View Post
Here I read a sentence from the book titled "Theory and Calculations of Electrical Circuits" published in 1917:
Thanks for posting this Elias...very RICH indeed!

I love the older books!
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

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 03:07 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