This forum is preserved as a permanent archive. The community continues at eMedia Press.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Electric Motor Secrets

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Aaron
    replied
    On topic discussion

    Hi Rick and all,

    Welcome to the forum. I'll look forward to your postive contribution here of focusing on your replication attempts on the Teal motor concept if you care to share anything here. If not, that's cool too.

    I think everyone knows how everyone feels now so we can focus on the topic.

    I'm looking forward to learning more about attraction motor concepts. I'm fascinated by all of this.

    Everyone here is welcome to start any threads on whatever "renewable energy" technologies you want. If someone else doesn't, I already have plans to start a new Bedini SG thread here, one that focuses on the plain non-charging school girl, and others. I'll probably even do a Hammel Spinner with a Bedini North Gate thread too because it is an open circuit (human being is part of the schematic, etc...) in that device... simple but demonstrates some profound concepts. More water gas stuff, etc...

    I'm pretty busy with building my own business and am switching all my websites to a new server, etc... so I haven't been able to contribute a lot in the past week. After that is done, should be smooth sailing.

    Anyway, if there is a specific topic you want to bring up and it doesn't deal with the content of concepts in Peter's DVD, please start a new thread.

    I really appreciate all of your contributions. Especially those of you who are posting your experiences with hands on with this stuff. Keep it coming!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Lindemann
    replied
    Rotary Attraction Motor Update

    Hi all,

    I've posted an update on the design for the rotary attraction motor. It works better and is easier to make than the "S" rotor. This design goes back to the ideas that worked very well in the Flux Motor. I hope this helps more people start building units that work.

    Here is the link:

    Rotary Attraction Motor Update

    Peter
    Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 04-26-2007, 06:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ted Ewert
    replied
    Can we all please stop this petty griping here. I really don't care to hear all this juvinile infighting. I would rather hear about something productive I could use to build a motor.
    Let's see the schematic and specs on your new motor Rick. Tell us how we can build one too.
    I hope Ben comes back and tells us more about his motor. That looks like it would be a real fun one to build.

    Ted

    Originally posted by rickfriedrich View Post
    Ok, I just found this forum again and thread.

    Peter and I have exchanged two private emails...

    Rick

    Leave a comment:


  • rickfriedrich
    replied
    Ok, I just found this forum again and thread.

    Peter and I have exchanged two private emails in the last few days. I didn't get time to finish my last one, was up till 3am last night for this and don't have the time.

    I find the nitpicking statements about me above to be ignorant of what I have shared and the work that I do for free for the benefit of everyone in this research. I have been working 24/7 on this stuff for about 3 years now and like John take it all very seriously and am not ignoring any claims or benefits people show scientifically.

    Part of my concern is the same as John's, we tire of speculation not based on experimentation. This is not griping, it is about doing real science here Peter. There is so much claiming without showing, and so much dissapointment because of people not doing enough proper research and experimenting that many throw up their hands and give up because they soon think everyone is just making empty claims. I'm not going to quote the thousands of letters I get from people all over the world in support of this concern.

    As any of you know who are on the lists, I spend much time encouraging research in these areas. I own and moderate some 12 or so lists, most of which are about these subjects. Much of my free time is taken up trying to keep them running decently and according to the scientific method. Hundreds of people are now experimenting when previous to this there was more fighting than building. These two fellows once told me it was hopeless for you guys because of how bad things were going. I think we all see some progress now for these efforts.

    But I have also built many setups, and you will see some very interesting things not to long from now you can be sure. So please do not take any of my comments as just some triffling prejudice. I'm not nitpicking against the DVD, but you guys are doing that against what I have said. (One friend said to me, why bother, who even cares for the truth?) It is just not presented correctly in the places shown and needs to be changed. Not all of Teal's secrets are shown so that ad needs to be changed. Nothing in the patent is a secrete because it is public. There needs to also be carefulness to avoid overstatement, especially in anything not backed up sufficiently.

    The motor shown needs to be removed because Gary and John told him that no Energenx property is to be used in the video because of previous contracts made, and etc. I was there when this was said. This was why they told Peter to show them the video first before publishing it. Am I against the motor? No! I am just saying we need to honor our friends.

    Further, I point out that the video makes this motor look like Teal's motor which it is not. That needs to be corrected if Energenx will allow the video to continue to sell.

    Again, I'm not against exploring possibilities like Teal. I have my own Teal motor replication in prosess. But I hate to see people confused as to what is what and who is who. If the movie is about Teal's motor being the solution, make sure there is no slight of hand in using Bedini's motor as some kind of proof for that claim. No Teal motor was shown running. No torque measurements were taken to back up the claim that it is better than normal DC. This is much more than a leap in logic. Griping?!? Just another diversion fallacy to add to these first ones.

    I hope this is not about the good outweighing the bad. If we are going to progress with science we need to clear up the ambiguous, correct the mistaken, rebuke experimentless speculation, insist upon experimentation and demonstration, and above all, honor our commitments. I don't care for all the smooth talk, flattery, and what have you.

    Rick

    Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
    John,

    Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

    I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

    These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

    Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

    I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

    Peter

    Leave a comment:


  • Eric
    replied
    steven that looks like some terrific machine work!!
    i got a couple of questions to see if i understand your lingo. its called a flux generator, but i am assuming it doesnt output electricity directly, rather it runs as an attraction motor common shafted to a direct induction generator. that said i would agree it looks simmilar to peters but!............... and this is based on what i see in your pictures so more pics may be nesessary if i am wrong, your c shaped stator cores are spot on, but your rotor doesnt appear to close the magnetic loop. it only looks like a little piece of metal on the rotor connects to one "end" of the C shape stator in peters he has a longer bar imbedded in the rotor that connects "both ends" of the c into an O shape closing the magnetic lines in a loop in and around the single coil. alternativly if what i am seeing is actually a piece of metal in the rotor that magneticly connects one end of one c shape to the opposing c shape end then what you have is an O shape with two coils on eather side and then you might have the same problems illustrated in the direct induction motors beginning part of the dvd with with each opposing coil producing a CEMF in each other. again maybe i am drawing the wrong conclusions based on your pictures.

    hope this helps!
    Eric

    Leave a comment:


  • John_Bedini
    replied
    I might clear up one more thing. The stroke of the engine in Peters DVD requires that timing, in Teal's patent his stroke is so short this is why you see the short pulse.
    Same thing happens in a combustion engine with the burn cycle. The research suggests that, and the working models that you only have power for 1/2 the pole piece. or if a piston is used 1/2 the coil length, you can not get around this physics. Look at what Aaron posted, the makeshift engine , look how long the power cycle is on. I made my point.
    John







    Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
    John,

    Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

    I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

    These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

    Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

    I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

    Peter

    Leave a comment:


  • Aaron
    replied
    Bob Teal Magnipulsion References

    Bob Teal Magnipulsion references

    USP #4,024,421 - Magnetically Operable Engine or Power Plant - PDF

    USP #4,093,880 - Magnetically Operable Engine - PDF

    Magneteal Industries, Inc. Company Literature

    Newspaper Articles

    "Impossible" Engine Invented for Real", LA Times, May 30, 1976
    If anyone has a copy of this article, a copy would be apprecaited.

    Leave a comment:


  • nali2001
    replied
    fluxgate generatorhttp://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/00.jpg

    http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/01.jpg

    http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/02.jpg

    http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/03.jpg

    http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/04.jpg


    Regards,
    Steven

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Lindemann
    replied
    John,

    Thanks for joining the group. It is sad to see some of your comments about me. You know I don't think you just fell off a hay wagon. You know that's not how I think about you. You are one of the great geniuses of our time. If you decide to publish your notes and release it as a new book, all of us would welcome that and I will be the first to buy a copy. Please include Ron Cole's motor that produces 1 hp for 13 watts. People should understand that design too. (Just so everyone knows, the motor I am referring to has a totally closed down magnetic field at least half the time.)

    I do not apologize for publicizing what I know about these types of motors. That you would have done it differently is noted. My purpose is to educate and get people to think about these processes. My DVD accomplishes this purpose. I am not going to build a prototype, start a company, try and convince people that it works, raise money and file patents. That is what you are doing, and it is insanely hard. Instead, I hope to help thousands of people understand these principles so they can design and build their own.

    These motors can produce super-efficient torque even without the recovery, but can be 9 times better with recovery. Your methods of recovery are the best ever developed and I acknowledge that in the DVD.

    Please help us develop the best recovery circuits for these magnetic attraction motors. You know how to do this in your sleep, but we all still have a lot to learn from you.

    I don't know what you didn't tell me, John. I have never questioned your motives for what you do. If you don't want to help because of what happened to Jim Watson, that's perfectly OK. But it would be really nice if you and Rick would quit griping because the rest of us are learning something and moving forward.

    Peter

    Leave a comment:


  • John_Bedini
    replied
    Aaron, Peter

    Aaron, Peter
    Just some things I found out. First Tom Bearden Knew Bob Teal, Tom told me the story. Teal demonstrations were conducted in public, in that public demonstration Bob Teal would ask the engineers to explain how this works. He would fill a bath tub with water drop a wire in the tub put the light bulb in his mouth with the other wire and step into the tub. The engineers could not explain where the power came from. Tom said he never recovered any energy to the batteries in any way, but he was working on it. The power the Teal engine consumed was not much but it did reflect the torque for the power put into it. The failure was, Teal was not able to show any improvements over the DC motors at the time. With the model Peter and I built, it did perform just as Teal's, without building the magnetic shield's for the top and the sides, it performs just like Teal's motor without taking any recovery. The next thing, Peter, you must think I fell off some hay wagon somewhere, Ron Cole and I built many solenoid engines as can be see in my garage and one at the shop and I never take models apart, also the drawing of a dual acting solenoid engine can be seen in Ron's drawings, Hall Switched. The Window Motor out performed all this when it is just a motor with all the coils, and it only takes mili-amps to do it. More research should have been done before the DVD was released. I have better models in my basement which I have not shown to anybody of engines with just Iron rods, so it is not like I'm not intrigued in any of this research, I have been doing this for years.
    I have kept most of this out of the public domain for this very reason. Peter might have done this work in the 1970's but you need a machine to prove your point, money is no excuse if you believe in it. The other thing is that I was out of money the same time Peter was, it did not stop me from doing my work. I don't think I should post my notes on all this work, I'm just going to put it into a book and let Tony sell it, as they are simple machines that anybody can build, they all use the recovery to charge batteries. One more thing, I must have said to you, Peter 200 times the monopole is not a motor, it's an Energizer, I have also said this many time's on all the group's. Peter should take his time and do methodical research before doing anything like this, you must know all the answers and not assume anything, as you will fail. Before you expect to build things from just theory you must prove it out as the theory never works the same way. The drawings of the little toy is in no way valid of my monopole machine in any way as it does not recover anything, it uses an autofomer arrangement, so I rest my case until proven otherwise. Peter worked here for a year and he knows I do not think in conventional terms in electronics when it comes to recovering energy, as I see something much different then he does. I have no beef with Peter, except he should have just let Gary and I see the preview like Gary asked. Doing a DVD on DC motors is one thing, as for energy recovery you are playing in a much different ballpark as is know by people who have tried. I admit I did not share everything with Peter or the groups for a very simple reason, most would not be able to use it wisely, so I keep all my models simple, just basic pro-types at the shop. I never change my routine on this, because of what happened with Jim Watson, I never forgot that lesson.
    John






    Originally posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
    Dear Forum Members,

    The recent posts by Eric and Aaron have reiterated the essence of what I am trying to convey in my DVD, and I do not wish to address any of these other knit-picky posts.

    There is one thing I would like to address, and that is the comment by John Bedini, as follows:

    "Also in the NEW movie, I built the engine you see running, I did the switching. as Teal's motor was not capable of charging any battery. the circuit you see with teal's drawing is not for storing energy at all. The circuit is a spark suppression for the points. The teal motor is not capable of charging batteries until you use the monopole circuit for recovery.
    I'm not going to say anything more. Remember closing down all the fields is not an open system, no recovery possible.
    John"

    I agree with everything John says here, but I would like to add more detail to the account. The Solenoid Engine I demonstrate on the DVD was built at John's shop about two years ago, in the Spring of 2005. I was working for John's company at the time. One day I brought my Bob Teal file to work and John, Gary and I had a long and sometimes heated discussion about the possibilities of getting more torque out of one of these designs. I wanted to build it and John agreed to help. But we were at John's shop, and John is the skilled machinist and John is the skilled electronic circuit designer. So, naturally, John actually fabricated the parts that needed machining. We both worked on assembling it. When it came to figuring out how to run the commutator, we decided on an optical-interrupter system. The signal output from this was rather low, so John developed a gain stage to drive the output transistors. I don't show the circuit because it is one of John's unique solutions to a unique situation. It is similar to the SG type of circuit, but there are a few differences as well. Teal's patents suggests he was running a very short input pulse so we started with a very short ON time. That didn't work very well at all. At John's urging, we kept opening up the ON time until we were ON for about 160 degrees and OFF for about 200 degrees.

    It was still not very powerful. I suggested that we needed to start folding the magnetic field down around the coil and so I built the plastic donut filled with iron filings. This helped some, but the motor didn't start running fast until we put the iron top piece on. Then the mechanical power started going up. This is shown in the DVD. After studying this motor over time, I realized the full significance of the necessity of closing the magnetic field all the way down in order to get the mechanical energy production up to the maximum. The model, as shown, still has more than ONE INCH of air gap in the magnetic circuit at the top of the stroke and over TWO INCHES of air gap at the beginning of the stroke. That is why I say we are missing 60% or more of the possible mechanical energy from this model. I actually believe this model is missing as much as 90% of the possible mechanical energy available from its electrical input.

    I agree that Teal's circuit does not show how any electricity can be recovered from his magnetic field collapse. I venture a speculation, based on what circuit he does show, but I agree with John. Teal's patent does not show how energy can be recovered from his coils. But, obviously there is energy to recover, and Teal does demonstrate doing it in the Interview film, so he was clearly aware of the process and its importance. I still maintain that Teal's working models took advantage of this process and that John's circuits demonstrate how it can be done.

    Now let's talk about closing down the magnetic field. John says that you can't get any "recovery" when the field is closed down completely. Its true that the Radiant Voltage Spike coming from the coil collapse is strongest when the coil is open to the environment. The battery charges best when the current pulse is preceded by this very high voltage spike. In contrast to this, the mechanical energy produced by the motor is maximized when the magnetic field is completely closed down and the total air gap between the moving and non-moving parts is only a few thousandths of an inch. Under this circumstance, the Radiant Voltage Spike is almost completely gone and the impulse coming out of the coil collapse is almost entirely electron current. This type of pulse charge will not desulfate the battery or heal it of past damage like the Radiant Spike will. So, you cannot "recover" a battery this way. But it will charge the battery to some degree, so it is not entirely useless. It will charge capacitors just fine. So, there is a trade off in how the electrical and mechanical outputs are engineered, and there are ways to get both effects by carefully studying these processes and engineering the machine accordingly.

    So, I hope this clears up some of the confusion about this machine and the accusations that have been made. John built it, I helped a lot, and Teal's patent was on the table when we did it. I acknowledge in the credits at the end of my DVD that John and I built the Solenoid Engine test model, so nothing was ever intended to mislead anybody.

    Peter

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Lindemann
    replied
    Thank you Ben!

    Hi All,

    I am very glad to see the discussion moving on to the science here. Ben has hit the nail on the HEAD! When you look at Teal's commutator on page 3 of the first patent, you can see that he was using very short duration pulses. I suggest in the section of my DVD where I am talking about what features must be present in the solenoid design to get high torque, that Teal used a short, sharp current pulse of a few milliseconds, and that the ampere-turns in the coil equals magnetic field strength. A high energy thrust is transfered to the movable plunger when the crank shaft is in the middle of the stroke.

    Ben's idea of applying a capacitor discharge to the solenoid at this point simply maximizes this process. Now, the magnetic thrust vectors applied to the crank are approaching "explosion" velocities, and the power goes way up. And you can still recover most of the electrical input. So the motor can create huge amounts of mechanical energy for the "differential loss" between the amount of electrical energy applied minus the amount of electrical energy recovered. In systems properly designed, this "differential loss" will be under 50 watts per mechanical horse-power produced.

    Congratulations Ben!

    I will be posting some new drawings on a back page of my website in the next day or so that will show some very simple rotor designs that can produce high torque. The "S" rotor is difficult to machine and in recent tests does not perform better than simple cross bars. More on this soon.

    Also, Teal's patents are posted on my Bob Teal page as .pdf files for easy viewing and downloading.

    Great work, everybody!

    Peter

    Leave a comment:


  • k4zep
    replied
    Teal Motor More Thought

    Hi Gang,

    Reading all the above post it is obvious that the basics of the Teal motor is understood. Peter very clearly showed most of the basics that the motor requires to run and has discovered the secret of the enclosed solenoid field process that increases the output.

    If anyone looked at the photo of my motor they will see all the attributes Peter has suggested for a successful motor including very close/closed coupling of the solenoid piston and coil. That is mandatory or the motor is a pip squeek with very low output.

    What Peter has missed or has not shown is the effect of a pulse that is of a VERY HIGH POTENTIAL (hence high peak current in coil) and the effect it has on the output of the motor when all of the energy of the pulse is contained in the solenoid!. If you make a L/C circuit out of the solenoid coil and a cap which holds the basic power for one pulse, add a diode across the coil to capture any back emf IN THE COIL, pulse the cap into the coil for a VERY short time at anywhere from 600-1000 VDC, the motor turns into a power house! The LCD of the motor/cap/diode network turns into a PFN network that results in the single high voltage/current pulse and the diode helps kill the ringing.

    The easiest way to SEE this effect is to take a 24VDC industrial relay, which basically has an enclosed field in the coil and movable armature. Place a HV diode (1000V at least, 1N4007) across it (this stops the ringing, keeps energy in the coil/solenoid and as it is NOT polarity sensitive, any current in the coil in either direction pulls it in!), observe polarity when you do the next step. Key it with 24 volts observe it's "clunk" as it pulls in, normal operation. Then charge a 1uf HV cap (at least 2000V rating) up to 24 V, remove from supply and connect it across it, keeping polarity right. Nothing happens. Keep going up in voltage, around 80-90 VDC, it will start pulling in weakly. Around 250 VDC it will clunk pretty well. Around 5-600VDC, it will BANG in, around 800-1000VDC it will almost tear the armature off as the Cap. discharges in less than 1-3ms. Another secret is the old Amp/Turns field here, VERY HIGH CURRENT PULSE, LOTS OF TURNS IN COIL=POWER pulse. There is a lot more going on here but that is the basics. The Joules stored in a cap as voltage goes up and the Amp/turns formula I believe result in a non linear output effect. Any higher than about 1000VDC, the coil insulation will start to break down. Due to the contained field, for some reason, you can pulse much higher voltages into the coil and not have a breakdown, I do not know why this happens but it does. If you look at the waveform at 800-1000VDC, you will see a perfect square 3-600us pulse with virtually no ringing (.5v max) as all the back emf is sucked back into the coil and USED. All the above works with a solenoid as in my motor too! I built the motor 6 months or so ago while playing around with GRAY motor theory and was not aware of the TEAL motor at that time. To make a motor of this type run, you simply add the mechanics, a power supply to charge up the cap. between pulses and a timing/firing device. Nothing new, just application of observations from that darn relay.

    OH a word of warning, 1000VDC and 1UF will kill you if you get across it. BE VERY CAREFUL.....!!!!!!!!

    Respectfully,

    Ben

    Leave a comment:


  • k4zep
    replied
    Hi Gang,

    Did a search on the US Patent site last night and found the two patents for the TEAL engin.

    Name:

    Teal, Benjimin R. (took me a while to find as R is middle name)

    US4,093,880
    US4,024,421

    The site is free and all you have to have is a TIFF viewer to see them! There is a like at the site to a free viewer if you do not already have it on your computer.

    Patent Full-Text and Full-Page Image Databases

    Slogged through both, did not find anything particularly new or exotic AS PATENTED. Looking at others that the patents were compared to, some really neat ol solenoid driven engines "Invented" over the years though and going way back!. Oh, I LIKE reading patents! The double talk is usually up to your armpits!

    Respectfully,

    Ben

    Leave a comment:


  • Larz
    replied
    Air spring

    Now we are talking...

    I have been thinking hard on this subject for a few days now. And most of the important stuff seems to have been talked about already. So I will not repeat loads of it.

    Thinking more torque for a given input is way more important than how much you can recover by the collapsing field. This solenoid motor does seem to be able to create a lot of torque with a small input, but someone has to actually build one and then share the findings with us all.

    like aaron said: let the eMagnet pull the piston in, and cut off the power before it reaches the endpoint. The collapsing field will result in one final big pull on the piston, and simultaneusly we can catch this pulse like tesla or john bedini did. (Take a look here if you want to see how tesla catched the collapsing field of a large inductor, to power a tesla-coil from a battery) so we both get to eat the cake and to have it still :-)

    now add to this something that I have seen in the patents but are not quite so obvious: the solenoid housing is closed in the end where the piston goes in. this makes it practically an airspring. this is explained by tesla too (im a big fan of him ;-) in his mechanical steam or pressure oscillator. so when you cut of the power the spike will slam the piston towards the end, we catch the kick-back in a Cap, and the airspring will push the rod OUT! Dont forget, another solenoid is actually pulling at this right moment so the force of the airspring is ADDED to the force of the pulling emagnet. summa summarum: MORE TORQUE.
    I believe that it is possible to build a motor that uses not very much electrical energy to run, wich creates a lot of torque, and that this engine can turn a conventional generator while recapturing some or most of the input energy. the generator will of course be delivering more out than we put into the motor... I really hope so...

    Lars

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter Lindemann
    replied
    My Two Cents...

    Dear Forum Members,

    The recent posts by Eric and Aaron have reiterated the essence of what I am trying to convey in my DVD, and I do not wish to address any of these other knit-picky posts.

    There is one thing I would like to address, and that is the comment by John Bedini, as follows:

    "Also in the NEW movie, I built the engine you see running, I did the switching. as Teal's motor was not capable of charging any battery. the circuit you see with teal's drawing is not for storing energy at all. The circuit is a spark suppression for the points. The teal motor is not capable of charging batteries until you use the monopole circuit for recovery.
    I'm not going to say anything more. Remember closing down all the fields is not an open system, no recovery possible.
    John"

    I agree with everything John says here, but I would like to add more detail to the account. The Solenoid Engine I demonstrate on the DVD was built at John's shop about two years ago, in the Spring of 2005. I was working for John's company at the time. One day I brought my Bob Teal file to work and John, Gary and I had a long and sometimes heated discussion about the possibilities of getting more torque out of one of these designs. I wanted to build it and John agreed to help. But we were at John's shop, and John is the skilled machinist and John is the skilled electronic circuit designer. So, naturally, John actually fabricated the parts that needed machining. We both worked on assembling it. When it came to figuring out how to run the commutator, we decided on an optical-interrupter system. The signal output from this was rather low, so John developed a gain stage to drive the output transistors. I don't show the circuit because it is one of John's unique solutions to a unique situation. It is similar to the SG type of circuit, but there are a few differences as well. Teal's patents suggests he was running a very short input pulse so we started with a very short ON time. That didn't work very well at all. At John's urging, we kept opening up the ON time until we were ON for about 160 degrees and OFF for about 200 degrees.

    It was still not very powerful. I suggested that we needed to start folding the magnetic field down around the coil and so I built the plastic donut filled with iron filings. This helped some, but the motor didn't start running fast until we put the iron top piece on. Then the mechanical power started going up. This is shown in the DVD. After studying this motor over time, I realized the full significance of the necessity of closing the magnetic field all the way down in order to get the mechanical energy production up to the maximum. The model, as shown, still has more than ONE INCH of air gap in the magnetic circuit at the top of the stroke and over TWO INCHES of air gap at the beginning of the stroke. That is why I say we are missing 60% or more of the possible mechanical energy from this model. I actually believe this model is missing as much as 90% of the possible mechanical energy available from its electrical input.

    I agree that Teal's circuit does not show how any electricity can be recovered from his magnetic field collapse. I venture a speculation, based on what circuit he does show, but I agree with John. Teal's patent does not show how energy can be recovered from his coils. But, obviously there is energy to recover, and Teal does demonstrate doing it in the Interview film, so he was clearly aware of the process and its importance. I still maintain that Teal's working models took advantage of this process and that John's circuits demonstrate how it can be done.

    Now let's talk about closing down the magnetic field. John says that you can't get any "recovery" when the field is closed down completely. Its true that the Radiant Voltage Spike coming from the coil collapse is strongest when the coil is open to the environment. The battery charges best when the current pulse is preceded by this very high voltage spike. In contrast to this, the mechanical energy produced by the motor is maximized when the magnetic field is completely closed down and the total air gap between the moving and non-moving parts is only a few thousandths of an inch. Under this circumstance, the Radiant Voltage Spike is almost completely gone and the impulse coming out of the coil collapse is almost entirely electron current. This type of pulse charge will not desulfate the battery or heal it of past damage like the Radiant Spike will. So, you cannot "recover" a battery this way. But it will charge the battery to some degree, so it is not entirely useless. It will charge capacitors just fine. So, there is a trade off in how the electrical and mechanical outputs are engineered, and there are ways to get both effects by carefully studying these processes and engineering the machine accordingly.

    So, I hope this clears up some of the confusion about this machine and the accusations that have been made. John built it, I helped a lot, and Teal's patent was on the table when we did it. I acknowledge in the credits at the end of my DVD that John and I built the Solenoid Engine test model, so nothing was ever intended to mislead anybody.

    Peter
    Last edited by Peter Lindemann; 04-25-2007, 06:25 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X