Electric Motor Secrets

[Peter Lindemann]

Iron Lip in the Solenoid...

Does it make a difference to taper the iron like you showed in your video on the lip of the solenoid? I thought that less iron made less attraction. Was I wrong?

Sykavy,

In my DVD, the intruding lip of iron inside the solenoid is not necessarily the best design. I used this to illustrate my point that Teal's Magnipulsion Engine used SOME design feature to accomplish a close air-gap alignment at the beginning of his power stroke when the crank was still in mid-stroke. Since making the DVD I have thought of other designs that are even simpler, that accomplish the same thing.

There is nothing magical about tapering the iron. In some designs, it helps shape the magnetic field to produce an advantage. In other designs, it doesn't help at all. These things are best worked out in your test models.

Peter

[sykavy]

Steven,

I appreciate your experience in this field, as I know you have built and tested multiple machines in this genera, but my understanding of the benefits of placing the coils right in front of the gaps is slightly different than yours. I do not believe the benefit is due to lowering the steel losses since the total flux going through the steel is the same regardless of coil placement. I believe the benefit is due to lowering the amount of stray flux that might find its way around the coil in the air when the coil is on the back leg. This loss is quite low as soon as the iron piece starts filling the gap for the motoring process to begin. Jetijs has a viable design with the coil on the back leg and this will work well as a first model for him. I used this method with the Flux-Motor in 1983 and it works well.

Also, in my experience, there really is nothing that can compensate for not having the very close air-gaps. The closer the tolerances, the higher the mechanical energy production at no extra running cost. Since "free mechanical energy production" is what this motor project is about, why not go for the max?

Peter

Does it make a difference to taper the iron like you showed in your video on the lip of the solenoid? I thought that less iron made less attraction. Was I wrong?

[Peter Lindemann]

A slightly different take.....

Just to drop a design note in:
It also in advantageous to put the coils just at the 'contact' surface.
Like this:
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Core.jpg
By doing that you eliminate a lot of 'travel' for the flux to reach the 'point of action'. Which means far less steel losses, better response and stronger interaction. Also will this slightly lessen the need for sub micron airgap sizes.
Anyway it's only a slight design change but it has 'huge' (relative term) benefits.

Regards,
Steven

Steven,

I appreciate your experience in this field, as I know you have built and tested multiple machines in this genera, but my understanding of the benefits of placing the coils right in front of the gaps is slightly different than yours. I do not believe the benefit is due to lowering the steel losses since the total flux going through the steel is the same regardless of coil placement. I believe the benefit is due to lowering the amount of stray flux that might find its way around the coil in the air when the coil is on the back leg. This loss is quite low as soon as the iron piece starts filling the gap for the motoring process to begin. Jetijs has a viable design with the coil on the back leg and this will work well as a first model for him. I used this method with the Flux-Motor in 1983 and it works well.

Also, in my experience, there really is nothing that can compensate for not having the very close air-gaps. The closer the tolerances, the higher the mechanical energy production at no extra running cost. Since "free mechanical energy production" is what this motor project is about, why not go for the max?

Peter

[nali2001]

Core design

Just to drop a design note in:
It also in advantageous to put the coils just at the 'contact' surface.
Like this:
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/Core.jpg
By doing that you eliminate a lot of 'travel' for the flux to reach the 'point of action'. Which means far less steel losses, better response and stronger interaction. Also will this slightly lessen the need for sub micron airgap sizes.
Anyway it's only a slight design change but it has 'huge' (relative term) benefits.

Regards,
Steven

[Peter Lindemann]

Smallest Gap, any way you can..!

[QUOTE=Jetijs;8557]Thank's Peter
I will redesign the rotor to the X form and make the air gap thinner. But I think, that I won't be able to make the air gap thiner than maybe 0.5mm, because the tolerance of the laser cutting machine is only 0,15mm. Also the shaft an bearing system must the be very accurate. Or maybe I should cut the X rotor a little bit larger for the startor to fit in and then just machine off the needed thickness with lathe, that way the tolerance of the laser is no longer crucial and I can make the gap even smaller I think, my X type rotor could be about 120mm in diameter so I don't need to redesign the stator core.
Thanks,



Dear Jetijs,

Yes, the new design will work well for you. Your idea of cutting the rotor pieces a little over-sized, and then machining them back on a lathe is the right way to think about it. If the rotor pieces are made of standard motor lamination material, they are very difficult to machine. You will need the hardest ceramic cutting tools in the lathe that you can find. Also, its an "interrupted cut" so the stresses on your rotor can be pretty high. Just take very small cuts, like .001" or less at a time. If you can do this, you should be able to practice a .1mm gap on both sides for a total gap of .2mm. (Also, don't forget, when you take a .001" cut on a lathe, you are taking .001" off the RADIUS, which is actually .002" off the DIAMETER of your material.)

When you get to designing the circuit part, post that here to so I can help you with that as well.

I'm committed to your success. Every mistake we can catch BEFORE you spend any money is cheaper to fix!

Peter

[Jetijs]

Thank's Peter
I will redesign the rotor to the X form and make the air gap thinner. But I think, that I won't be able to make the air gap thiner than maybe 0.5mm, because the tolerance of the laser cutting machine is only 0,15mm. Also the shaft an bearing system must the be very accurate. Or maybe I should cut the X rotor a little bit larger for the startor to fit in and then just machine off the needed thickness with lathe, that way the tolerance of the laser is no longer crucial and I can make the gap even smaller I think, my X type rotor could be about 120mm in diameter so I don't need to redesign the startor core.
Tahnk's,

EDIT:
I made the necessary changes. Here how it looks now:


The rotor cross bar face is 30 degree of an arc, just like in the Attraction Motor Update page.
Fortunately my laser guy has not started to cut the S rotor plates yet. Will send him the drawings now

[Aaron]

Impossible Engine Invented For Real - Bob Teal - LA Times Article Found

ARTICLE FOUND!!! Thanks to someone who made contact from the information recently released about Bob Teal, someone came forth with the LA Times article. Impossible Engine Invented For Real

http://www.esmhome.org/library/bob-teal/bob_teal_la_times.pdf

Feel free to pass on the link to this PDF to anyone interested in the attraction motor concepts especially Bob Teal's Magnipusion and Peter's Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

[Peter Lindemann]

"S" rotor up-date

Dear Mr Lindemann,
I received your dvd some days ago and I must say, that the video was great and easy to understand. You did a great job with this video. Currently I am working on a model based on your S type core. I just sent my cad drawings to a local laser cutting guy who will cut the parts for me. Here is a model in solidworks:

http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/strunti2/orig/1189640887.jpg

The rotor sheets will be approx 120mm in diameter (just like CD's) and the air gap will be about 1 milimeter wide. I have already built some Bedini SSG's and have some experience with the recovery circuit. I will keep you informed about my success.
Thank you for the video and all the things you have done
Gatis

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your post and your kind comments. As I have stated in this forum a number of times, tests done on the "S" Rotor after the DVD was produced were disappointing. As soon as we learned this, I posted a page on my website with a design called the "X" Rotor. This basic design is what worked the best in the motor I built back in the 1980's. There is a sticker on the DVD case telling you to visit this up-date page. Here's the link again:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

If you can stop your local laser cutting guy before he starts making the "S" rotor, please do. The "X" rotor works better. Also, a 1 millimeter gap is too large. That is about .025" and not conducive for high mechanical torque production.

Your enthusiasm is good, but please slow down and look through all of the posts here before you build anything. If you still have questions, please post them here.

I want you to succeed.

Peter

[Jetijs]

Dear Mr Lindemann,
I received your dvd some days ago and I must say, that the video was great and easy to understand. You did a great job with this video. Currently I am working on a model based on your S type core. I just sent my cad drawings to a local laser cutting guy who will cut the parts for me. Here is a model in solidworks:

http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/strunti2/orig/1189640887.jpg

The rotor sheets will be approx 120mm in diameter (just like CD's) and the air gap will be about 1 milimeter wide. I have already built some Bedini SSG's and have some experience with the recovery circuit. I will keep you informed about my success.
Thank you for the video and all the things you have done
Gatis

[Peter Lindemann]

Simple Recovery

Peter,
Is there a wiring diagram available that shows the circuitry of a recovery system?? Is it just a matter of running a diode and a stepdown transformer to run the energy from the collapsed field back to the battery??

Clone,

Recovery is simple. Circuits as simple as a single diode work well in John Bedini's SG motors and in these motors. I have running models using the exact circuit shown here:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

The "commutator" is a series of magnets on a wheel moving passed a "magnetic reed switch" in the position shown. It is sufficient to demonstrate the principles. No "stepdown" transformer is necessary.

Optimizing torque is about minimizing the air-gap and designing the physical structures to maximize the tangential forces. Optimizing the electrical energy return is about pulse control and shutting off the electro-magnet just before magnetic saturation of the core.

My DVD is two and a half hours long, and covers this material in depth.

Peter

[clone477]

Peter,
Is there a wiring diagram available that shows the circuitry of a recovery system?? Is it just a matter of running a diode and a stepdown transformer to run the energy from the collapsed field back to the battery??

[Peter Lindemann]

Stay focused

i honestly considered my question about different coil materials to be directly relavant to your DVD.

Bryan,

This forum is an attempt to help people understand the fundamental principles concerning a way to build an electric motor that can produce high torque AND return a sizable percentage of its input electricity, thereby creating an electric power plant able to produce 1 HP for a NET electrical use below 746 watts.

The fact is, off-the-shelf switched reluctance motors, which operate on the rotary attraction process, are some of the strongest and highest torque motors sold today. Many are rated at or above 95% efficient in the conversion of electrical input to mechanical output. But these motors are not designed to return any of their electrical energy.

When this motoring principle is COMBINED with the discoveries of John Bedini and the ability of his motor designs to return up to 95% of their electrical input, an astonishing, new type of motor becomes possible. This is what my DVD is about.

These principles are ENOUGH to focus on in this forum. Whether or not different wire can produce different effects in coils as a pure speculation, is NOT on topic here.

IF you build one of these motors, solve all of the technical issues of small air-gap and proper pulse timing, and get it running in a COP > 1 mode, THEN I would be happy to hear of your EXPERIMENTS using different types of wire IN YOUR WORKING MODEL.

The ideas presented here are, apparently, difficult enough for people to learn to not muddy the waters with off-topic speculations.

Thanks for your understanding. I'd really rather not go over it again.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Please, Stay on Topic....

Dear Folks,

We have allowed a fair number of diversions in this group in the last few weeks. But PLEASE, let's keep this forum focussed on my DVD Electric Motor Secrets, no back EMF motors, solenoid engines and Rotary Attraction Motors. If you have ideas inspired by these topics, but that are not on the main topics. please start NEW threads to discuss them.

Thanks everybody.

Peter

[Aaron]

keep on topic

Please stay on topic in this forum. This one is on the Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

[Aaron]

coral castle

Hi, I was intrigued by coral castle as it is an interesting collaboration of concepts by what seems to be one individual. I found his magnetic currents book very interesting. This would really be a topic fit for a new thread (SO I STARTED ONE) as there is sooooooooooo much that is involved with it.