Motor Generators

[bistander]

In the case of an engine, power is also a similarly "evaluative" characteristic. In this case, we can say that the engine's work is essentially torque. After all, the engine's job is to turn the crankshaft. So, torque and power are interrelated. The generator has electromagnetic torque, but this is all about the mechanical power generated by the rotor rotation to overcome the electromagnetic attraction of the rotor and stator. If you rotate the magnetic poles by switching electromagnets in a constant continuous current mode, you get the same thing without the mechanical power.

"If you rotate the magnetic poles by switching electromagnets in a constant continuous current mode, you get the same thing without the mechanical power."

That's nonsense. You don't get electromechanical energy conversion and therefore no more electric output than the electric input.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

In the case of an engine, power is also a similarly "evaluative" characteristic. In this case, we can say that the engine's work is essentially torque. After all, the engine's job is to turn the crankshaft. So, torque and power are interrelated. The generator has electromagnetic torque, but this is all about the mechanical power generated by the rotor rotation to overcome the electromagnetic attraction of the rotor and stator. If you rotate the magnetic poles by switching electromagnets in a constant continuous current mode, you get the same thing without the mechanical power.

[bistander]

Rakarskiy says
"Does it matter if it is rotated mechanically or by switching armature windings in the manner of a DC motor armature."

Yes it matters. Switching currents to induce a moving magnetic field onto a series of coils housed in a device can impart mechanical force onto the structure. However, if said structure allows no motion, there can be no mechanical power. Motion is a necessary component of mechanical power. Therefore that device cannot fit the definition of an electric generator, a device which converts mechanical power into electric power. The device using switched currents to produce the rotating magnetic field without mechanical motion would be considered a transformer with electric power input and electric power output.
bi

[bistander]

Do you have different components for torque and mechanical power? You surprise me even more.
The frequency of generation depends on the speed of rotation of the two-pole rotor of the turbine generator. Does it matter if it is rotated mechanically or by switching armature windings in the manner of a DC motor armature.

What?
I learned torque and mechanical power from conventional physics. Torque is the rotational analogue to force. The S.I. unit is the newton meter abbreviation Nm assigned as a vector. Torque is a necessary component of rotational power, which is found by the product of torque times angular velocity. Angular velocity carries units of radians per second, r/s. The product of torque times angular velocity yields the mechanical power with units of watts.
Basic stuff. No?
bi

[Rakarskiy]

Do you have different components for torque and mechanical power? You surprise me even more.
The frequency of generation depends on the speed of rotation of the two-pole rotor of the turbine generator. Does it matter if it is rotated mechanically or by switching armature windings in the manner of a DC motor armature.

[bistander]

Dear bistander ,

You either deliberately ignore or your professional level does not allow you to make judgments.
The production of electricity through the rotation of a magnetic rotor in the stator of a mechanical alternator is not the transformation of mechanical power [P=Fv] into electrical power [W=IU].
This is the greatest disenformation of people on the planet, in which you are participating intentionally or through stupidity.

The production of electricity consists of two parts, electromagnetic induction [E=-dФ/dt] -generation, in the phase conductor when the magnetic field changes, and ensuring the rotation of the excited constant magnetic flux [Ф] in the magnetic system of closed alternator circuits. Thus, simply replacing the physical rotation of the anchor magnetic field with the switchable rotation of the magnetic field in the armature inserted into the stator with phase windings, we exclude the expensive method of physical rotation of the field.

Let them wipe their asses with what physicists and marauders of people have taken for a constant.

It works very well if everything is done correctly, at least to provide mechanical switching of brushes and collector lamellas when the brushes rotate around the non-rotating anchor. Now to make a consumer machine, an engineering approach is needed.

Why is there no proof?

You posted this:
"active power is determined by the turbine speed and its torque"

It means that turbine's torque and speed (the product of which is mechanical power) is converted into the alternator's electrical output power. The magnetic excitation just facilitates this conversion process.

Wake up.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

Dear bistander ,

You either deliberately ignore or your professional level does not allow you to make judgments.
The production of electricity through the rotation of a magnetic rotor in the stator of a mechanical alternator is not the transformation of mechanical power [P=Fv] into electrical power [W=IU].
This is the greatest disenformation of people on the planet, in which you are participating intentionally or through stupidity.

The production of electricity consists of two parts, electromagnetic induction [E=-dФ/dt] -generation, in the phase conductor when the magnetic field changes, and ensuring the rotation of the excited constant magnetic flux [Ф] in the magnetic system of closed alternator circuits. Thus, simply replacing the physical rotation of the anchor magnetic field with the switchable rotation of the magnetic field in the armature inserted into the stator with phase windings, we exclude the expensive method of physical rotation of the field.

Let them wipe their asses with what physicists and marauders of people have taken for a constant.

It works very well if everything is done correctly, at least to provide mechanical switching of brushes and collector lamellas when the brushes rotate around the non-rotating anchor. Now to make a consumer machine, an engineering approach is needed.

[bistander]

Also, Rakarskiy,
You said
"We provide rotation of the excitation field in the stator without mechanical rotation we get direct efficiency."

Doesn't work, does it? All you get is a transformer with sucky efficiency.
bi

[bistander]

I don't think you know anything about power generation. Excitation is the creation of an excitation magnetic field. And the magnetic field induces EMF. It is explicitly stated that excitation for a turbine generator is 3% of the output power of the generation. It is not difficult to calculate the efficiency, which is 3333%.
And the steam turbine drive is a condition for rotation of the excitation electromagnet in the stator of the turbine generator. We provide rotation of the excitation field in the stator without mechanical rotation we get direct efficiency.

Just about the method of generation in such an oscillator without phyical rotation is my publication.
https://www.patreon.com/user/shop/mo...970?u=75063604

Dear Rakarskiy,
You have been misinformed. The power required for excitation is just a portion of the total input power. In the case of an alternator using permanent magnet field, excitation power is zero. Calculate efficiency for that.

"active power is determined by the turbine speed and its torque"

Above is a quote from yesterday's post by you. It is in the same paragraph which told 3% excitation.

A generator, or alternator, is a device which converts mechanical energy into electrical energy. Any excitation, or control, power is considered as portion of the total power input, or most often simply routed from the device's output, thereby disappearing from the classic efficiency formula, efficiency = real power output / input power. Look it up.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

I don't think you know anything about power generation. Excitation is the creation of an excitation magnetic field. And the magnetic field induces EMF. It is explicitly stated that excitation for a turbine generator is 3% of the output power of the generation. It is not difficult to calculate the efficiency, which is 3333%.
And the steam turbine drive is a condition for rotation of the excitation electromagnet in the stator of the turbine generator. We provide rotation of the excitation field in the stator without mechanical rotation we get direct efficiency.

Just about the method of generation in such an oscillator without phyical rotation is my publication.

https://www.patreon.com/user/shop/motionless-alternator-1041970?u=75063604

[bistander]

I've always wondered if it's innate or feigned. By the way, all the adherents of the Commission on Combating Pseudoscience had a clear instruction to ignore me and silence me.

https://uk.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80

Excitation is very important for generator operation, as the setting of the excitation current controls the final voltage spread and therefore the reactive power that the generator can supply to the grid (active power is determined by the turbine speed and its torque). For turbine generators, the excitation power is approximately 0.5% to 3% of the generator output.

Power factor correction is not OU.

BTW, I support free speech, worldwide, including you. But you are wrong about some basics and about your method.

Please point out specifically where any of this shows real power output exceeding power input (overunity). Thanks.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

I've always wondered if it's innate or feigned. By the way, all the adherents of the Commission on Combating Pseudoscience had a clear instruction to ignore me and silence me.

https://uk.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80

Excitation is very important for generator operation, as the setting of the excitation current controls the final voltage spread and therefore the reactive power that the generator can supply to the grid (active power is determined by the turbine speed and its torque). For turbine generators, the excitation power is approximately 0.5% to 3% of the generator output.

[bistander]

I am definitely not going to prove anything to anyone, convince or dissuade anyone. The question is why? I have given enough information!
If someone doesn't want to think, then I made a project with calculations (core, windings, the simplest electronic controller), which you can make yourself. You can change it at your own discretion. Making your own core will cost you a decent amount of money.
Any synchronous generator based on closed magnetic systems works on this principle.




Another drawing of mine that I gave to explain the magnetic system of Robert Holcomb's generator back in 2021.



Everyone gets out of being fooled on their own. Moreover, the general education system of teaching electromagnetism to the average student will not help you with this.



A very clear example of an anapole moment, when the core closes a magnetic closed flux in itself, when this core is broken, an EMF impulse will arise at the ends of the conductor. Edward Leedskalnin - Magnetic-Current | PDF | Nature
"Magnetic Current/Magnetic Keeper" by Edward Leedskalnin.

This is exactly the thesis that I gave in my research, explaining the actions of the anapole moment when it changes. The invention of the electromagnetic generator | Patreon

Edward Leedskalnin Perpetual Motion | Magnetic Currents & Polarity Change

When changing the magnetic intensity H (magnetic flux B ) in the focus, the electric field vector E appears . When superimposed on the model of a closed magnetic circuit, in the focus of which a conductor is laid, we have the induction of an electric field limited by the volume of this focus. Thus, if simply in the hole of a closed ferromagnetic core, in which the field moment of magnetic intensity H changes , an electric moment is formed in the focus of this core. If there is a conductor in the focus of the magnetic circuit, a difference in electric potentials appears on it. Which is actually a contactless method of electromagnetic induction.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


The American version of this action is called differently and is veiled a little differently, but it is the same phenomenon
Dynamic toroidal dipole - Wikipedia

Anapolle moment in American physics terminology Toroidal moment - Wikipedia

Magnetic toroidal moment and its relation to the magnetoelectric effect
The presence of a magnetic toroidic dipole moment T in condensed matter is due to the presence of a magnetoelectric effect: Application of a magnetic field H in the plane of a toroidal solenoid leads via the Lorentz force to an accumulation of current loops and thus to an electric polarization perpendicular to both T and H. The resulting polarization has the form Pi = εijkTjHk (with ε being the Levi-Civita symbol). The resulting magnetoelectric tensor describing the cross-correlated response is thus antisymmetric.

Very interesting but I see nothing to support your claim "Any alternator in terms of inducing EMF is overunity". Please point out specifically where any of this shows real power output exceeding power input (overunity).
Thanks.
bi

[Rakarskiy]

I am definitely not going to prove anything to anyone, convince or dissuade anyone. The question is why? I have given enough information!
If someone doesn't want to think, then I made a project with calculations (core, windings, the simplest electronic controller), which you can make yourself. You can change it at your own discretion. Making your own core will cost you a decent amount of money.
Any synchronous generator based on closed magnetic systems works on this principle.




Another drawing of mine that I gave to explain the magnetic system of Robert Holcomb's generator back in 2021.



Everyone gets out of being fooled on their own. Moreover, the general education system of teaching electromagnetism to the average student will not help you with this.



A very clear example of an anapole moment, when the core closes a magnetic closed flux in itself, when this core is broken, an EMF impulse will arise at the ends of the conductor. Edward Leedskalnin - Magnetic-Current | PDF | Nature
"Magnetic Current/Magnetic Keeper" by Edward Leedskalnin.

This is exactly the thesis that I gave in my research, explaining the actions of the anapole moment when it changes. The invention of the electromagnetic generator | Patreon

Edward Leedskalnin Perpetual Motion | Magnetic Currents & Polarity Change

When changing the magnetic intensity H (magnetic flux B ) in the focus, the electric field vector E appears . When superimposed on the model of a closed magnetic circuit, in the focus of which a conductor is laid, we have the induction of an electric field limited by the volume of this focus. Thus, if simply in the hole of a closed ferromagnetic core, in which the field moment of magnetic intensity H changes , an electric moment is formed in the focus of this core. If there is a conductor in the focus of the magnetic circuit, a difference in electric potentials appears on it. Which is actually a contactless method of electromagnetic induction.


----------------------------------------------------------------------


The American version of this action is called differently and is veiled a little differently, but it is the same phenomenon
Dynamic toroidal dipole - Wikipedia

Anapolle moment in American physics terminology Toroidal moment - Wikipedia

Magnetic toroidal moment and its relation to the magnetoelectric effect
The presence of a magnetic toroidic dipole moment T in condensed matter is due to the presence of a magnetoelectric effect: Application of a magnetic field H in the plane of a toroidal solenoid leads via the Lorentz force to an accumulation of current loops and thus to an electric polarization perpendicular to both T and H. The resulting polarization has the form Pi = εijkTjHk (with ε being the Levi-Civita symbol). The resulting magnetoelectric tensor describing the cross-correlated response is thus antisymmetric.

[Rakarskiy]

Getting intercurrent mutual induction is also very possible if you do the electronic controller wrong. But if you put the correct armature from a DC motor, and organise the rotation of the brushes around the collector, you will get just the generation. My friend was also puzzled why at mechanical commutation generation, but having already replaced by transistors got mutual induction. I had to explain the difference in excitations. This question can be checked only practically.