Lockridge Device - Peter Lindemann

[woopy]

which is NOT and has nothing to do with the BEMF) and to redirect it in the cap (or other external battery a la Bedini).

But this spike contain very few energy and will never be enough powerfull to power the motor, it is only a usable energy complement (some more gram of black powder)

And i assume that nobody here will attempt to capture the BEMF (counter generated voltage) of the motor pulse ? Because if you try you will ask to the motor to make a work to produce energy and of course you will get nothing in compensation but the heat Joule lost and the motor will slow down without energy gain.

So far i experimented the best is to leave the inevitable (Lenz ) BEMF free to act (for nothing) but keep it as small as possible. Nobody can beat Mister Lenz but everybody can try to keep him as a gnome
It is why we will have imperatively to use only 1 pulse per revolution and the brush MUST only act on ONE collector section without touching any other section (of course conected to eventually remainig winding).

And if we want to collect the flyback spike it is necessary to adjust the brush in a way as it leaves the power collector section exactly as it touches the recup collector section as Peter explain in his very clear drawings some post ago. If we can not do this we will loose some input power in the recup circuit.

Very challenging isn'it ?

Thank's for your attention and always ready to accept any contradiction

Good luck at all

Laurent

[Peter Lindemann]

Need More Data

So hypothetically speaking, the point at which the input and output are equal we no longer have any BEMF or EMF generated.
I know that probably isn't possible at least with a permanent magnetic motor but maybe with an inductive motor. Pushing???

Any insight would be appreciated.

Matt

Matt,

So far, this is speculation. Without being in your shop and testing your motor myself, I don't know exactly what is going on. I am just going by what you are reporting. Right now, your operational reports are extremely encouraging, and I hope you can verify the mechanical power gain, either with a Prony Brake or generator output test, soon. With that, and the specifics of your test set-up, then others can duplicate your results and the thread can move on to the generator side of the system.

Peter

[Matthew Jones]

Hi folks,

Matt's report that his motor is running in "pull" mode instead of "push" mode is very interesting. This also may be why his recovery is better now. Here is a possible explanation.

To run in the "pull mode", the applied current would have to be in the same direction as the generated current, except at a higher level. When the power stroke ends, the winding will be generating the maximum voltage, upon which the recovery pulse now ADDS its voltage. This is the only way the system could be producing voltages above the input source. By running the motor as an attraction motor, it reverses the relationship of the input to the recovery and turns the "back EMF" into an EMF in the same direction as the recovery pulse. By superimposing these voltages on top of each other, the benefit is maximized............
Peter

So hypothetically speaking, the point at which the input and output are equal we no longer have any BEMF or EMF generated.
I know that probably isn't possible at least with a permanent magnetic motor but maybe with an inductive motor. Pushing???

Any insight would be appreciated.

Matt

[Peter Lindemann]

Important Discovery

Hi folks,

Matt's report that his motor is running in "pull" mode instead of "push" mode is very interesting. This also may be why his recovery is better now. Here is a possible explanation.

To run in the "pull mode", the applied current would have to be in the same direction as the generated current, except at a higher level. When the power stroke ends, the winding will be generating the maximum voltage, upon which the recovery pulse now ADDS its voltage. This is the only way the system could be producing voltages above the input source. By running the motor as an attraction motor, it reverses the relationship of the input to the recovery and turns the "back EMF" into an EMF in the same direction as the recovery pulse. By superimposing these voltages on top of each other, the benefit is maximized.

If this is what is happening, then this is a really important discovery about how to run a set-up like this. Recovered voltages above the original input source makes direct recycling of electricity possible, which can further extend battery run times.

WOW.

The only thing we don't know yet is how much mechanical POWER the motor is producing for the input.

Really amazing work, Matt and Mark.

Peter

[Matthew Jones]

Matt,

It sounds like you've found a sweet spot here. Absolutely excellent! I think it would be worth posting the specs so other people could, at least, get this far, to duplicate your results. The specs we need are:

1) the name and model of the motor you started with.
2) the rotor winding configuration (zig-zag or whatever)
3) any other modifications to the rotor, like addition of diodes (including part number)
4) brush configuration and external wiring diagram for both power and recovery
5) power supply (such as six 12 volt batteries, size or AH rating)

Thanks for all of your great work on this.

Peter

No problems Peter. I got all that. I'm working on putting it together.

Thanks Mark.
If the wire is bigger than what I am using and you have 2.2 ohms then we are sitting just about the same spot.
I am going to test another rotor when I get the time to confirm my thought that a hire ohm of resistance on the wire the better the speed, and anything else that might come with that.

Matt

[Mark]

Hey Mark if you get a chance What wire size are you using and whats ohms of resistance on it.

I'll write it up hopefully by this evening.

Matt

The wire came from a coil I got from Rick, it was the thicker of the 2 on a bifilar coil, I'm pretty sure its 23awg (not 26awg like I've been posting). My meters are real cheap so not sure how accurate but I'm getting 2.2 ohms.

[Peter Lindemann]

Sweet Spot

So after all mayhem. And figure out the motor was puller not pusher I tried 3 commutator spots.
5200 rpms from 72 volt .6 amp after start up. 2 ohms of resistance on the wire.

Now its doing something.

Best of all its stepping up the output voltage really nice and filling the 4700 UF cap to 92 volt close to instantly and not growing higher. That means its at the perfect point for stepping up.

If your using the razor scooter motor and you want full run down on everything let me know and I'll put it together.

Matt

Matt,

It sounds like you've found a sweet spot here. Absolutely excellent! I think it would be worth posting the specs so other people could, at least, get this far, to duplicate your results. The specs we need are:

1) the name and model of the motor you started with.
2) the rotor winding configuration (zig-zag or whatever)
3) any other modifications to the rotor, like addition of diodes (including part number)
4) brush configuration and external wiring diagram for both power and recovery
5) power supply (such as six 12 volt batteries, size or AH rating)

Thanks for all of your great work on this.

Peter

[FRC]

If your using the razor scooter motor and you want full run down on everything let me know and I'll put it together.Matt

Sounds great. I was supposed to be getting the motor Pault is using this
weekend. Now that I see your results, maybe I should have got that 24v
razor motor I wanted to get in the first place.

George

[Matthew Jones]

Mine is similar to yours Matt. 5215rpm's .500 amps @72 volts using 2 commutator sections. I only have a small 300 uf cap that when shorted goes instantly to 40 volts and continues to charge up to 90 volts. I have a brand new Monster Scooter motor that I might set up like yours. Yours seems to have better charging than mine. There are a few things I might not be straight on with your motor.
Please share your full run down.
Mark

Hey Mark if you get a chance What wire size are you using and whats ohms of resistance on it.

I'll write it up hopefully by this evening.

Matt

[Mark]

So after all mayhem. And figure out the motor was puller not pusher I tried 3 commutator spots.
5200 rpms from 72 volt .6 amp after start up. 2 ohms of resistance on the wire.

Now its doing something.

Best of all its stepping up the output voltage really nice and filling the 4700 UF cap to 92 volt close to instantly and not growing higher. That means its at the perfect point for stepping up.

If your using the razor scooter motor and you want full run down on everything let me know and I'll put it together.

Matt

Mine is similar to yours Matt. 5215rpm's .500 amps @72 volts using 2 commutator sections. I only have a small 300 uf cap that when shorted goes instantly to 40 volts and continues to charge up to 90 volts. I have a brand new Monster Scooter motor that I might set up like yours. Yours seems to have better charging than mine. There are a few things I might not be straight on with your motor.

Please share your full run down.

Mark

[Matthew Jones]

Got It!!!

So after all mayhem. And figure out the motor was puller not pusher I tried 3 commutator spots.
5200 rpms from 72 volt .6 amp after start up. 2 ohms of resistance on the wire.

Now its doing something.

Best of all its stepping up the output voltage really nice and filling the 4700 UF cap to 92 volt close to instantly and not growing higher. That means its at the perfect point for stepping up.

If your using the razor scooter motor and you want full run down on everything let me know and I'll put it together.

Matt

[Matthew Jones]

Mark
your probably right in wanting to use a larger wire, the problems come in with the setup we are using.
If your inrush current in the beginning exceeds the diode surge then your not going to keep a diode alive long enough to enjoy the extra power.

So you have 3 solutions. A soft start type setup, or use smaller wire to ensure some resistance, or larger diodes.

A larger diode seems the way to go, but it got has got to fit onto the rotor.

Also there is one other thing that I have been noticing in mine. Lower wire resistance is a lower speed. I rewound my rotor with 24 same as the first one but did it with less wire. I wanted the resistance of the wire to be 2 ohm. But the speed is slower.
You said earlier (I think) that you wound with 26 and you were getting speeds in excess of 4000 rpm with 60 volt.
So this is an avenue that need to be explored. At some point the size of wire will reduce the overall performance but it may be a balancing act to get just the right performance out of the given setup so that we get the most power from the motor we are using.

I don't know if you are still running the 26 awg or not but I would encourage you to at least note the Ohms of resistance on the wire or the wire length so that resistance can be calculated.
as we figure out a standard performance these things are going to grow more important.

Cheers
Matt

[Mark]

Peter

From my understanding of the last few posts It would be better to use 20 awg instead of the 26 awg I have currently, is this correct? I also have 18awg should I use this? What are your thoughts of running a quad filler 26awg all in Parallel?

[Peter Lindemann]

Issues with PWM Control

I have been thinking about what we are trying to accomplish here and have some ideas I want to throw out for your consideration. We want to use the most efficient motor we can come up with for our drive and we want to be able to control our output. Or at least be able to get a stable output. One of the most efficient gasoline engines made was the old hit and miss engines. They were huge because of the massive flywheel which they had to keep spinning. They were also very efficient. There are reports of them running all day long on a gallon of gasoline while producing 5 hp or so. So the idea of using a large flywheel to increase efficiency seems to be proved by real life. If you remember the hit or miss engine would fire for a time or two and then coast for several strokes of the piston before firing again. Almost exactly what we want our motor to do.

If we modify our motor to only have one or two pulses per revolution how are we going to control our output? If our input current is high enough to get the motor up to a speed that will turn our generator fast enough to produce an output that will keep the motor running what will prevent the motor from accelerating beyond that speed? I suspect in the original Lockridge device the 300 watt bulbs played a part in the self regulation of the device. As the bulbs get brighter from a higher voltage the resistance of the bulbs will also increase causing a drop in voltage to the cap and thus a slowing of the motor. I think this may have been difficult to get balanced out and probably had to be redone each time a bulb burned out.

With a fixed pulse width the only way to control the motor speed is by varying the voltage applied to the motor. If we use some of our modern technology available to us we can control the motor by varying the pulse width instead of the voltage. Even the little Picaxe 18X has a PWM output which could be used to drive a mosfet motor circuit. If we use a 12 volt DC motor as was first suggested by Peter then we could drive it with high voltage and high current to give us the torque we need and still have control of our speed. Another advantage of the 12 volt starter motor is that it is shunt wound which means when we turn off the current to the motor there is no back EMF.

Using the ADC input to the Picaxe 18X we can monitor the output of our generator and use that info to control the PWM signal for our motor. This means we would only be applying just enough power to our motor to keep the flywheel spinning at the right speed for our generator. Another advantage is we can now leave the armature unmodified and use all the commutator segments instead of only a couple of them.

Please feel free to point out any errors you see in my thinking.

Carroll

Carroll,

All of your thinking about this is excellent. The only issue I see is, if you can make the pulse width shorter or longer, how do you manage the recovery pulse at the different timing places on the commutator? In general, I think you are just getting a little ahead of the situation and are looking for a complex solution to a simple problem.

My current goal is to see if this can be solved like Lockridge did it, with brushes and commutators. If this can be done, and it looks very promising right now, then we can evolve a simple set of parameters for modifying motors for producing mechanical energy at a rate higher than 746 watts = 1 horsepower. If this thread can prove out a way to produce 1 HP for 300 watts or less, then the self-powered home generator is right around the corner.

That is my focus for the near term.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent!!

Matt thank's a lot for the braking test-

I don't see the difference between a pulse motor with brushes or with Any electronic switching.
So far i see , the pulse duration is depending on the length of the contact between the brush and the collector section or the length of the trigger magnet for a Hall sensor.
So if the length of the collector section or the trigger magnet is let's say10 degrees of the revolution . the pulse should be the same. Of course if the electronic circuitry is able to deliver the full power of the source power supply, as a brush does.

So my experiments lead me to the diagram here under.

On the left it is Peter Lindemann graph from his DVD
I understand that this graph is for a DC motor with brushes where each brush is always in contact or with 1 collector section or bridging 2 collector sections. so the power from the source is steadily apply to the rotor windings on all the 360 degrees of rotation.
So on the scope shot you see a steady line of the voltage and in the yellow part is the space for the BEMF to develop depending of speed.And as you can see this space is very large.

On the right graph it is my expectation so far
I understand that the brush is in contact with only 1 collector section per revolution. So it does not bridge on other section. So only one winding is fired per revolution, and this winding gives all the power.
Further more if this winding is of large wire section , it will be able to conduct strong current (torque) and as it has low impedence it will also generate low counter voltage so the place (yellow) is very small for the develloping of the BEMF.
So as Peter explain in the DVD we need winding of very low resistance to accept very high current pulsed once per revolution, to get strong mono-torque to spin the flywheel.
Finally if we use a cap to pulse the motor . the distance between the pulse is time to recharge the cap. So if you pulse more than 1 time per revolution you will have less time to recharge the cap and you will have more space for the BEMF to develop.

The problem with this one pulse motor is that it does not self start, or if you place collector section under the brush and you apply the power, the amperage will be huge, that is why i started the graph not at zero speed.

This my understanding and please don't hesitate to correct me if i miss something

Hope this helps

good luck at all

Laurent

Woopy,

I think you understand it really well!! Just relax your understanding and look at the relationships. Right now, we are just looking at running in "pulse mode" at about 3 times normal voltage, while trying to protect the commutator from arc damage and the rotor winding from over heating. Matt's test motor with only one power pulse per revolution is showing significant power at higher speeds, so this is an indication that the "theory" is correct.

By adding a little bit more mass (flywheel) the performance may improve, especially under a pulsed load, like a generator charging a cap.

Peter