The Extraluminal Transmission Systems of Tesla and Alexanderson by Eric Dollard

The Secret of Tesla's Power Magnification

Energetic Forum  

Go Back   Energetic Forum > Energetic Forum Discussion > Renewable Energy
Homepage Energetic Science Ministries Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #271 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2010, 11:42 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Speaking about this magnetic darlington pair:


I am not sure it would work, because I suspect that when the small magnets are inserted, all the flux will want to go through that little magnet instead of the intended path. I will thy this out tomorrow also.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #272 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:11 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyula View Post
Hi Folks,

My take on the LaFonte setup in the video is that it is very much a paralell path variant, except the moving magnet has permanent poles while the Flynn setup has electromagnets in the middle and their poles can be changed at will.

Yes all three permanent magnets are magnetized length-wise, the poles face to the bars sides. The upper and lower magnets should have their like poles on the same bar side and the moving magnet has the opposite orientation, this is what I think, otherwise the effect he shows cannot happen like that.
Hi Gyula and all interested.

I tested Butch LaFonte's setup and I don't think it will work.

What I noticed is as soon as the center magnet is introduced each end magnet have about 50% less flux power, which makes sense. My test setup used Two 1" square steel bars that are 6" long. I used 3 sets of three stack 1/2" dia. x 1/8" neo magnets. When I slide the center magnet to one end I notice a reduction of flux power but it does not cancel the flux as the magnet on the other end is also reaching. Making the bars longer would help this but I think would also weaken the magnet field also. Butch is right that it is easy to slide the magnet up and down but that's about all I see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyula View Post
Yes, this setup could also be used for the Paul Noel setups, combining them is ok but how would you move the middle magnet, Luc? maybe with linear motor you started this thread...
That made me

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyula View Post
On your question to replace the pm with a coil across the bars, if it were an air core coil then it would conduct flux when you switch current into it, but if it had a iron core too then it would conduct flux always in itself, except when you switch the current on so that the poles work against that flux. So it would be better to place the coils onto the bar as Flynn shows, not across.

rgds, Gyula
This was not a question I had... it was a reply to David of his suggestion of using a coil across the bars.

Your reply however confirmed what I thought would happen.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #273 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 10:42 AM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Hi all
I just tested if 2mm gap between magnets and iron bars requires less current to redirect the flux and it does, now instead of 4A I need only 3.6A to fully redirect the flux. Also I noticed that if I rise the current some more the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again, so there is a sweetspot there. I guess that when going higher than that sweetspot the steel bars become saturated and there is more flux than it can handle and that is why the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again. BTW, if you haven't seen that already, I have a thread on this running here:
Mostly PM motor - Joe Flynn motor. My attempt to replicate
It is about the Flynn 2 pole motor replication. I finally managed to wind the coils on both stators, took me 3 times to wind because there was always a short between windings and stator itself, that was because of the sharp edges. I had to file them down and cover with epoxy to get a good result. I think the motor will be assembled in next few days
Thanks,
Jetijs
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #274 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 02:46 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Hi all
I just tested if 2mm gap between magnets and iron bars requires less current to redirect the flux and it does, now instead of 4A I need only 3.6A to fully redirect the flux. Also I noticed that if I rise the current some more the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again, so there is a sweetspot there. I guess that when going higher than that sweetspot the steel bars become saturated and there is more flux than it can handle and that is why the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again. BTW, if you haven't seen that already, I have a thread on this running here:
Mostly PM motor - Joe Flynn motor. My attempt to replicate
It is about the Flynn 2 pole motor replication. I finally managed to wind the coils on both stators, took me 3 times to wind because there was always a short between windings and stator itself, that was because of the sharp edges. I had to file them down and cover with epoxy to get a good result. I think the motor will be assembled in next few days
Thanks,
Jetijs
WOW Jetijs

I had no idea of your topic till now!... I'm sure some won't believe that but it's the truth.

It blows me away to think we are both on the FPP.

Amazing skills you have my friend

Cant' wait to see the result of your motor tests

Thanks for sharing your work of Art.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #275 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 06:51 PM
zhorv324's Avatar
zhorv324 zhorv324 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 58
Glotuc , as I say on Jetijs trade you mast use second Laminate bar on Parallel path device because you mast provide flux path when divert flux. In thet case power consumption is much less. My setup use only 3v and 0,25A.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg S4010063.JPG (985.9 KB, 45 views)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #276 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 07:26 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Yes Luc, zhorv324 is right.
Can you do that experiment again and see what the current consumption is if the upper part of your setup has a closed path? Because now when you are redirecting the flux, you are trying to push it through the open end, through the air and air is a great resistance for magnetic field. Of course this increases the current consumption. That is why I was surprised by your current consumption, because there is a video on peswiki where this guy can easily redirect all the flux using only a one small 3v battery.

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #277 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 08:11 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Holly Smokes zhorv324 and Jetijs you're right!!! I wasn't thinking.

I'll redo the tests and post the results.

Stay tuned.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #278 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 08:37 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Okay, here are the correct results

It is just like you said. There is an ideal voltage, go past it and the flux comes back.

My ideal voltage is 2.75 volts @ 0.08ma = 0.22 Watts

I think this is a better score

Give me your comments.

Thanks for your help.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #279 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 08:40 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Thats awesome
This is very encouraging news for me, because it bothered me for a long time. Now I know that the flux can be redirected with a current that small.
Great.
Thank you for the test
Jetijs
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #280 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 09:03 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Thats awesome
This is very encouraging news for me, because it bothered me for a long time. Now I know that the flux can be redirected with a current that small.
Great.
Thank you for the test
Jetijs
Glad it's reassuring for you

Maybe you can help me now! because I have a lot of ideas to test but I'm not quite understanding what is happening in the FPP motor since we have 2 opposite effects happening at the same time. A flux neutralization at one end and a very strong flux at the other end. How are both used in the motor?

Thanks for your time Jetijs

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #281 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 09:15 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Easy



This is the easiest Flynn type motor, I think it is easy to understand. We have four poles on the stator and five poles on the rotor. With no input power both magnets will want to close their path through the stator. But when power is applied on phase one the current goes through the coils in one direction, this Makes all the flux flow through the upper stator poles till the rotor aligns with them. At this time the lower stator poles are non magnetic and the rotor pole on the bottom side goes in between the poles. Now we go to phase 2, the current now flows in opposite direction, this makes the upper stator poles to become non magnetic and all the flux no goes through the bottom stator poles till the rotor aligns to the bottom stator poles. And so this process is repeating. Hope I could explain so that you understood. This design is good for proving the concept, but it has some disadvantages, one of them is that on each phase there is a great load on the shaft that is pulled either up or down, because of the attraction force. That is why 4-pole or 6-pole motors are better, there the attraction force is equal from all sides so no load for the shaft. Also the more poles, the more magnets can be used, thus greater power
This is how a 6-ole motor would look like:

Here there are three magnets working on the phase one and remaining three are helping them, on phase 2 the other three are doing the work and the first three are helping them. Here is a magnetic simulation of that motor:


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #282 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 10:20 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Excellent and simple explanation Jetijs

It is now clear how both effects are used.

So your motor will need AC. Do you have your circuit that will make the AC?

Thanks for taking the time to make this great post that all can easily understand.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #283 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2010, 10:30 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Thanks Luc,
Glad you understood
I will use two MOSFETs triggered by two optoswitches, one for each MOSFET. I wound two strands of wire on my cores so that I can use one MOSFET for each strand. I will use DC current, but wire one strand with positive at the start and ground at the end and the other strand will be connected the other way around. This way I can use simple DC pulse driver to run the motor and there is no need for an AC circuit. This is why you see a birilar coil on each stator piece in the 6-pole motor diagram. There is one strand for every phase. I had limited space on my stator pieces, but if there would be more space I would wind an additional strand of wire for the recovery to capture the spikes.
Oh, I just thought, could you perform the last test again to see if you can get greater energy out of the flyback spike if the upper end of your setup is closed?
We now know that closing the upper end reduces the energy consumption for flux redirection, but does this also help the recovery?

Thanks,
Jetijs
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #284 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 03:38 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Thanks Luc,
Glad you understood
I will use two MOSFETs triggered by two optoswitches, one for each MOSFET. I wound two strands of wire on my cores so that I can use one MOSFET for each strand. I will use DC current, but wire one strand with positive at the start and ground at the end and the other strand will be connected the other way around. This way I can use simple DC pulse driver to run the motor and there is no need for an AC circuit. This is why you see a birilar coil on each stator piece in the 6-pole motor diagram. There is one strand for every phase. I had limited space on my stator pieces, but if there would be more space I would wind an additional strand of wire for the recovery to capture the spikes.
Oh, I just thought, could you perform the last test again to see if you can get greater energy out of the flyback spike if the upper end of your setup is closed?
We now know that closing the upper end reduces the energy consumption for flux redirection, but does this also help the recovery?

Thanks,
Jetijs
Hi Jetijs,

yes it does help with the recovery. I have both ends of the core bridged for the below results.

I set the supply voltage at 3 volts and used my SG to trigger a MOSFET @ 50% Duty Cycle and raised the Frequency to the point where the 225v flyback spikes just start to reduce which ends up at 170Hz.

Here is the input power


Here is the Flyback power collected in a 6000uf Cap and a 10K 2% load so not to increase input power when flyback is connected.


Here is the scope shot @ 50v division & using 100X probe across coil but NOT collecting flyback


and here is the scope shot @ 5v division & using 100X probe across coil but collecting flyback


I this configuration I calculate that 55% of the energy can be collected as long as the collection cap is not loaded more than 55% of the input power. Loading the flyback collection cap any more will only increases the input power. However decreasing the load on the flyback collection cap will not reduce the input power any further as it is at is lowest since when I connect or disconnect the flyback collection cap there is virtually no change to input current. This is the ideal parameters for this particular setup when using 3vdc as input. However if the voltage is increased the Frequency will also need to increase so not to waste power.

Took me a while to figure out the balance point but learned much in doing it

Now the question remains, can we get this device to do work and still collect back 55% of the input power remains to be seen

Hope this helps

Luc

Last edited by gotoluc : 01-19-2010 at 04:15 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #285 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 07:48 AM
zhorv324's Avatar
zhorv324 zhorv324 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 58
HI glotuc your result is better then mine,but you must understand the result depend on setup. Simply your setup hew more turns off thicker wire then mine, and because off nature off parallel path you use less current. In parallel path device your coils mast produce same flux as one off your magnets to divert flux.I built 4 pole motor and spend almost two years in experiment's with parallel path. I be glad to answer off any question
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #286 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 03:32 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Thank you zhorv324,

my coils have thin wire because the total DC resistance is 36 Ohms, however, the amount of turns is very high compared to yours so the Inductance is high @ 370mH. This is the reason I decided to try these ready made coils because looking at the Flyn instructions of only 4 layers and spread out so wide I had a feeling it would use too much current to create the magnet field needed.

There is a well known coil geometry that will produce maximum Inductance for a wire length. I have a program that calculates this. Most of the time the coil layers (height) are about equal to the width and the center of the coil diameter needs to be a larger then most of the coils we wind.

If anyone is interested in this great free coil program here it is: Coil Maestro - freeware coil/solenoid calculator

There are many other parameters that need to be considered when making a coil. An important one that is often overlooked is the time constant. I think when making a motor this one would be important.

Looking forward to everyone's thoughts

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #287 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 04:25 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Thanks Luc
Those are some great tests you made.
Helps a lot!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #288 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 10:44 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Hi everyone,

I have an update video of the Flynn Parallel path device since my first test was not well done. You will see the results are even better in this test 2 video then the previous one.

Link to video: YouTube - Flynn Parallel Path Device test 2

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #289 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 11:04 PM
Jetijs's Avatar
Jetijs Jetijs is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,134
Great test Luc
Is that an iron or steel bar on the top side of the setup? Id so, I guess you would get even better results if you switch that with a silicon steel sheet core.
Great example of the basic process
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #290 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2010, 11:37 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetijs View Post
Great test Luc
Is that an iron or steel bar on the top side of the setup? Id so, I guess you would get even better results if you switch that with a silicon steel sheet core.
Great example of the basic process
Hi Jetijs,

yes, it's a piece of Iron. I'll be working on getting some Silicon steel laminations in the next builds.

Thanks for your positive comment.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #291 (permalink)  
Old 01-23-2010, 05:58 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Hi all,

I have not been able to get any good results (worth sharing) by adding a pickup coil to the Flynn Parallel Path device I have built ... not too sure why but I decided to put it aside for now and replicate an idea Magluvin of the OU forum and I got results as soon as I tested it.

Here is a new video of my testing the Magluvin PM flux gate coil: YouTube - Magluvin PM Flux Gate Coil test 1

Please ignore me saying the coils are 90 degrees out of phase. The coils are just at 90 degrees from each other. It's strange the stuff we say when we are doing a few things at the same time

I really like Magluvin's concept with the coils being at 90 degrees from each other. This prevents the primary pulse to transfer to the secondary. A kind of Isolation between the two. So if there's activity on the secondary we would think that it maybe coming from the PM flux

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #292 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2010, 04:16 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Hi all,

a test I made that maybe of interest

YouTube - GOBO Magnet Motor test 1

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #293 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2010, 01:51 PM
gyula gyula is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotoluc View Post
Hi all,

a test I made that maybe of interest

YouTube - GOBO Magnet Motor test 1

Luc


Hi Luc,

Your setup recalls this drawing by allcanadian here:
No Bemf Motor

I think your ferrite core has also a shape of the letter H and this is beneficial as allcanadian explained. You may wish to change the orientation of your magnets so that both poles of them should attract to the ferrite side, certainly giving more attraction, hence more torque.

All in all, you have done very good step again, thanks for the video.

rgds, Gyula
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #294 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2010, 03:34 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Thanks Gyula for posting your comment and Allcanadian's motor idea. I'll give it a try to see how it does.

I found out after doing the video that the coil core I used has a small amount of magnetism in it that was not in my favor as it was the same pole as my magnets . So I used a coil of a shaded pole motor and stuck two AM radio antenna ferrite bars in for core and got the motor turning faster (315 RPM) and using only 4 ma @ 2.84vdc. I also collect the flyback without effects to performance and have 4vdc on the 10K load. There is also next to no change when I load the motor now.

If you want a new video of the setup now just let me know.

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #295 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2010, 05:48 PM
gyula gyula is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
Hi Luc,

It is rather strange a ferrite core like that may have even a small amount of magnetism. I am aware of specific such ferrite core coils used in monitors or tv receivers (with vacuum cathode ray tubes) that contains a small ferrite magnet attached to the end of the core and it was made rotatable. These small disk magnets were magnetized across their diameter and was used to tune the coil's inductance (they changed the permeability of the core).

Well, if you could make a photo and attach here or elsewhere it would be good, just on the coil - core -magnet position. But if you think a short video is more handy for you, then it is also ok of course.

The good thing in a H shape ferrite core is that when a permanent magnet passes by from sideway, as in your video, the side of the H mainly behave as a shield from the coil point of view and the flux collected in the side wall of the H core mainly remains on the side the magnet passes near to, so that very little flux change can be sensed by the coil, hence the near lack of back emf. How can you do this with the ferrite rods, I wonder?

Thanks, Gyula
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #296 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2010, 05:23 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Here is a new video: YouTube - GOBO test 2 and Allcanadian no BEMF motor test

I'm not sure if my replication of Allcanadian's No BEMF motor design is any good

Hope AC comes by to explain what I may have missed

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #297 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2010, 10:58 AM
gyula gyula is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
Hi Luc,

I think you have built Allcanadian setup correctly, the principle works and the back emf is relatively small. However I understand you may find the 'relatively small' term is still much... with respect to either your ferrite rod test or the one before that.

I can notice these:

-- Because you have got that given sized H shaped core, the distances between the core and any two rotor magnets are longer than would be more beneficial, I mean either the H size core should be bigger or the rotor diameter should be reduced so that the distances could be less. I think Allcanadian used normal mains transformers for his tests, cut the cores to H shape at the appropiate sides, to get an open transformer H core with the original coils on it. This surely involved a higher mechanical size than your present H shape ferrite core. However I do not know how big his rotor was, compared to yours. It would be really good to welcome Allcanadian in this thread too.

-- You use disk magnets on the rotor (obviously wanted to keep the same magnets as used in your first video when they faced the side of the H core). If you had used square shaped magnets instead of the disks, the torque would increase due to the fact that the facing surfaces would be parallel ones, unlike to the disk shape where the surface is curved area, giving a much less attract force due to the facing distance's inherent radial reducement on the rotor disk magnet.

-- Looking at Allcanadian Figure 2 in his attachment,
http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...bemf-motor.jpg
and considering clockwise rotation for the rotor, the line drawn at 4 o'clock position with the Off label should be On instead I think and likewise the line drawn at 5 o'clock position with the On label should be Off, this is how I could imagine the working correctly in that setup. Did you make the reed switch positioning like that?

Thanks, Gyula

Last edited by gyula : 02-06-2010 at 11:00 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #298 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2010, 09:58 PM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
@Gyula or anyone that can help.

could you post some optical switch circuits and components that can be used.

I have one of those night light that turn on when it's dark. Could I use the light sensitive resistor from it to control a mosfet gate? I have both NPN and PNP mosfet's on hand.

Thanks for your help

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #299 (permalink)  
Old 02-09-2010, 10:31 PM
gyula gyula is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
Hi Luc,
Yes you can use the light sensitive resistor as a promtply available device. You may wish to connect this resistor directly to your MOSFET gate and a positive voltage source (to which the drain also connects to via a load like a coil or whatever) and control it with a LED which is driven by your input pulse generator. You may wish to enclose the resistor into a light-tight box , togetger with the LED, to prevent false triggering from surrounding light sources.
I assume your resistor reduces its DC resistance when a normal light illuminates it. If yes, then the connection should be as I wrote above.

Some tests are needed what color LEDs control the most the resistor.

rgds, Gyula

EDIT, LUC, I forget to tell, you have to use a few kiloOhm normal resistor between the MOSFET gate and source to terminate the gate. Sorry for this, I am in a hurry but wanted to give a quick help. The resistor can be 3.3-4.7-5.6kOhm, not so critical. So the light sensitive resistor and this resistor make a voltage divider between the gate source and the upper member of this divider the light sens resistor will get reduced to some hundred Ohms due to illumination from a LED so a positive voltage of 9-12V or so can open the FET when the pulse arrives at the LED.
Tomorrow I will refer to other opto coupler circuits if you wish.

I meant n-channel MOSFETs for the above positive polarity. For p-channels, use a negative 9-12V instead, with respect to the source electrode.

Last edited by gyula : 02-09-2010 at 11:05 PM. Reason: correction
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
Reply With Quote
  #300 (permalink)  
Old 02-11-2010, 05:56 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,028
Hi everyone,

just completed winding my first Toroid coil to start testing the Orbo concept.

I wound my coil in a special way and it seems to be giving some promising results.

Have a look at my GOBO test 3 video which is truly my first Toroid test. Let me know what you think.

Link to video: YouTube - GOBO Magnet Motor test 3

Luc
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Live Bookmark this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!Yahoo Bookmark this Post! share on MyspaceShare on FacebookTweet this thread
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8
2007 Copyright ? Energetic Forum? A Non Profit Corporation - All Rights Reserved