I found a repair manual that mite be of help to you. Not sure if this is the one you are rebuilding.

http://www.ccmanuals.info/pdf/Delco-...G%20Repair.pdf

This is great. Any additional information like this should be very helpful to
everyone working on this.

George

Thank you very much! I really appreciate the offer, as I have no way of making spinning things well. I have built linear proof of concepts, but none rotational that worked well (imbalance issues). I now live in Golden Colorado, but go back Utah direction every once in a while. I would love to talk with you, we have missed the opportunity several times now, but all good things to those with patience.

I hoped more people would pick up on that design, but nobody really seemed interested past looking it over and giving it a nod.

When John posted that I tried to find information about the PEG motor. I could
not find anything. Do you have any links to this info?

George

It was posted on a private section in another forum. Let me find the information and I will re-post here. I will try and reproduce some of the responses that are relevant too, hope those who contributed do not mind.

I started a thread here

Peg Motor

Thanks Armagdn03 for starting the new thread. I skimmed through it but had trouble understanding some of it. The concept does sound very good and those
interested in the Lockridge device should also be interested in such an efficient
motor as the PEG motor appears to be.

George

To understand it, you must ask yourself....If I were to turn a motor winding into a tank circuit, what would hinder its resonant rise? Know your variables, manage them.

Mbrownn, have you tried out your armature yet. I looked at the pictures. Looks like a nice rewind.

Not yet, my problem is the brushes. I could do it with razor blades as I have done in the past but with the expected current it is likely to "weld" to the commutator and ruin it.

Thanks Mike for your continued dedication to this thread. You have kept interest in it alive and brought new life to it. By the different aspects that
you have brought to everyone's attention, two new threads have now
been started the "three battery generating" thread and now the "peg motor"
thread. These two ideas were brought to our attention here and if it were
not for you keeping things going here, many of us would not have become aware of these very interesting FE systems. Keep up the good work !

George

for the kind words,

I am totally convinced that this is how the original device worked, it is different from what we have seen in that I have modified the armature but if the original had the wave wound armature there would be no need for modification although I believe having a modified rotor, like I have done, will work a little better. The main difference is I have blank segments between the coils.

Other than building it, what needs to be done? optimize the geometry and optimize the windings. I think I am that close. Once I know this for sure I will start to release how to do it with other motors. It is so simple that I find it hard to believe that it took me so long to get there but you would not understand that it could work without understanding what all the parts do and how they interact. The device is simple but the interactions are complex.

I think I could wire an SG to do it so when the time comes I will start a thread on that as this is a simple pulse motor that most of us understand but I am getting ahead of myself. I have to prove it first.

The peg motor works in a totally different way and produces a different energy, hence Johns interest. I will watch with interest but wont participate much until I have this thing sorted.

The three battery system could be used to improve a Lockridge COP, hence my interest but you would need to match the motor to the batteries and we don't know how to produce the bad battery yet.

Get ready to replicate guys, especially if I can do it with a universal motor.

[IMG][/IMG]

A few videos of the dynamometer. It now uses ceramic bearings and a brushless absorber. When used with the balance, it yeilds some very impressive results measuring motors well into the few Watt range.

I have ran tests as high as 25,000 RPM at up to 80 Watts with it.

minidyno.wmv - YouTube

minidyno cal - YouTube

Mini-Dynamometer - YouTube

My first post ever . I've been following this thread since the beginning and have tested several different motor/gens. Is there any more interest in this? I've learned so much from this, would be great to finish this device.
Thanks,
wantomake

Yes, there is at least one group working on this which I am a part of. We are running tests on a motor that will not be self running but are learning what we need to do to make a self runner. After we have gained enough knowledge to understand, we will be posting here but there is little point in posting something that is not going to work as it will lead people up the wrong path. If anything is found that is new or additional to what I have already posted I will update you.

A very misunderstood motor.

I haven't posted for a while so I thought I would put a little light upon what I am doing.

The Universal motor is usually described as simple and similar to a permanent magnet motor and while in appearance it does look simple I can assure you is not.

The two field coils do operate in the same way as permanent magnets but there is much more going on. There are many interactions going on between the two field coils and also the rotor coils and they are transformer like in nature especially on AC and Pulsed DC. In the standard setup which is known as a series wound conductive compensation setup, any inductive effects between the two field coils are cancelled by the transformer action. This has the effect of reducing arcing at the commutator increasing its life and reducing heat in the armature. A similar effect can also be achieved on an AC current when the second field coil is disconnected from the series wound setup and shorted upon itself. This is known as inductive compensation and the action is a transformer action.

These transformer actions are setup to reduce reactance in the armature.

Along with these transformer actions we do have back electro motive force (BEMF) occurring in all three of the coils. This BEMF can be setup so that the transformer action opposes it, or works in the same direction. When it is working in the same direction we get reduced speed, torque and increased arcing as well as much more heat produced. Part of the problem of heat build up is because the armature is in effect one big loop of coils on an iron core (a multi cored shorted transformer). To take advantage of this unison of power we need to change the configuration of the armature and add a second path for the energy to dissipate.

Note that reducing reactive power us usually the opposite of what a free energy researcher wants to do and that combining the transformer functions of a universal motor could be very important when it comes to building a lockridge device (not so subtle hint)

Hi All,

Have watched Peters DVD several times over and now understand what I have been exposed to for years. The Back EMF or negative enrgy force within DC motors when running. So this got me thinking about picking off the the back EMF to build or attempt to build the lockridge devise.

So while contemplating this I thought about what wouild happen when you run a DC motor on Negative energy such as a negatively charged battery. Is the Back EMF still there? Does it exist as another form of Back EMF to counter act the driving negative energy force running the DC motor?

Bud

thanks mbrown,

I've spent hundreds of hours trying to get the PM motor to work. Had small successes, and learned a lot. Heat build up, arching, the different winding configurations. But all of this was a good learning time and fun, but with many let downs.
I do have a 1954 chevy delco generator (rebuilt) and will switch all my energy to it.
On a personal note, I do believe there is a way to do this. With all that we need there is hope in this project.
james

Hi guys.
I have a german friend who saw one of the original devices working and putting out about 300 watts of electricity.
He was 10 years old during the war and people had to go underground very deep because of the bombings.
They used these to light up the place.
He told me that they hand cranked the device and it ran all by itself
without stopping. He said that he heard a clicking sound when it was working. So KEEP AT IT... It did work !

Robert

I read somewhere that the brushes on the delco/remy unit was ground down thinner for the Lockridge device. Not sure how it helps, but it would be easy to test for someone who has one of these units to try.
Randy

I am convinced that the lockridge used a wave wound rotor, if every other segment was disconnected, that would allow for a pulsing circuit provided that the brushes were thinned down so that they could only connect two segments. This means that the brush would only be as wide as one segment. as each brush left the segment, inductive kickback would cause an arc, to prevent this we would need a second set of brushes making contact as the first pair break contact.

I have tested this and the motor was weak running at only about 15 to 20% efficiency with no collector brushes and 20 to 25% efficiency with them. recovery from the collector brushes was in the 15 to 20% range which would bring us up to 45% efficiency at best on the motor I used. A better motor would do better but you can see that this alone isn't enough and there has to be more going on and there is.

So the brushes are narrowed to accommodate effective collection of the inductive kickback and to time the pulse.

There are ways to increase the power and this is part of the problem solved as the efficiency improves a little when we do this but we have to remember the lockridge is a motor generator in the same case, so we don't have any additional generator losses in the iron and the whole generator process is more efficient.

Introducing transformer actions increases current in the coils and so motor torque, provided we have the geometry right. Now we have a motor, a generator and a transformer all in the same case with only one set of friction and iron losses.

This gives us a transformer that powers a motor, the transformer isn't great in its efficiency, maybe 60 to 70% but when combined with the generated power it is now doing something special. I cannot give you figures on this at this time because I am still working on the geometry to get the thing working. I don't expect to get my very inefficient motor into overunity but with a more efficient device I am convinced it can be done.

I have also realized that we do not have to pulse the motor this way but more on that later.

Although this is a very different device the principals of operation are exactly the same except we are pulsing. Read the text as it tells you how it works but it does not tell you about the geometry. http://www.rexresearch.com/alxandr/3913004.pdf

Robert Alexander: Dyna-Motor (US Patent # 3,913,004) Overunity, Free Energy

Very interesting, could you ask your friend more about it?

Sorry i did not see this before, I dont have an internet connection at the moment

Hi.
Henry was about 10yo then and all he remembers is the device was in an open wooden box , no battery , hand cranked and some kind of swithing sound.

But I got him interested in free energy about 4 years ago and he is tinkering with different Bedini like motor-generators. He had one 4 coiler that he built and with only one coil on it , he ran it in closed loop for almost 3 hours without a battery and without any capacitor. It probably died because of bearing friction.

Believe me, if he remembered more he would be working on it himself.

Good luck.
Fun to experiment!

Robert

The number of people that are alive that have seen one of these is very small so any testimony about it is valuable.

Hi Mbrown.

Henry also told me that he saw hi-ranked officers fill their gas tanks with water and then put a white disk of some sort. But that's another thing.
Next time I see him, I'll see if I can get more information from him.

Robert

I bought a delco/remy unit just for this project, and watched john bedini videos several times. I have wondered if there must be a need for external switching, which they had the technology to do this. So happy this thread has started up again. Keep up the good work.
thanks, wantomake

As special brushes were needed along with a particular make and model of generator, I believe there was no external switching on the original; however it may be possible to use a modern unit with external commutation and that is what I am working on now.

Circuit Simulator Applet

take a look at this circuit and tell me what you think

sorry mbrown,
I'm very much a novice in this field of FE. This started as a hobby but has become a passion of mine. I looked at the circuit but again I'm not qualified to give you a thought. As a student I'm trying to learn and build at the same time. But I agree a more modern version would be great. For me at this stage, will try to replicate the old delco/remy.

Keep up the good work,
thanks for sharing
wantomake

Before you pull anything apart, I would try this.

I believe this is the basic motor circuit for the lockridge device and it can be used on most motors and generators, even unmodified ones. Everything on the left of the switches is your motor, everything on the right is the power supply. The switches represent a commutator setup. I would recommend taking a standard motor and making a commutator to go on the output shaft.

Once you have it running you will find it is not very powerful so you may need to increase the input voltage. The capacitor needs to be a type that can reverse polarity and preferably a fast one. The bigger the capacitor, the more power and lower the voltage needed.

I am using a universal motor in my tests but many of the Delco Remy generators will work exactly the same.

Once you have this we can start working on the generation side.