Lockridge Device - Peter Lindemann

[Mark]

Well
I guess I am going to the machine shop.

Got the flywheel on it 1lbs and went to run the motor with it attached. I actually was running on 60 volt for about 1 minute. I am not sure what happen but the thing went for ride vertically around my shop about 6 times.

The torque is tremendous off of the new motor. This thing has got to be pushing more than stock.

Soon as I get flywheel made I'll be back.

Cheers
Matt

LOL, went for a ride huh. The whole motor and flywheel or did it spin the nut off the end and just the flywheel went for a ride. Look forward to more info on your "fly"wheel. I knew if we used thicker wires or a bi or trifiliar we'd get more speed but never thought you'd get 8500 rpm's. You might want to start out with 24 volts and keep bumping it up while its spinning. If you start with too much torque its liable to bust things apart. Just a suggestion you might want to try, thats how I've been running mine so it doesn't twist out of my hand or jump off the table.

Great work so far, I'll be watching for more updates!

Mark

[Matthew Jones]

Well
I guess I am going to the machine shop.

Got the flywheel on it 1lbs and went to run the motor with it attached. I actually was running on 60 volt for about 1 minute. I am not sure what happen but the thing went for ride vertically around my shop about 6 times.

The torque is tremendous off of the new motor. This thing has got to be pushing more than stock.

Soon as I get flywheel made I'll be back.

Cheers
Matt

[Matthew Jones]

Still working on the connection to the flywheel but I wanted to point out that I burns commutator up yesterday and rewound another motor.
I used the same brush plate but I had to use a bigger case to fit the rotor in.

The new one is a little sweet and a little sour.
You decide.

YouTube - 8500+RPM_lockridgeMotor.MPG

I'll have the flywheel on sometime today.

Matt

[Matthew Jones]

....If anyone comes up with and easy to bolt on flywheel please post it!
Mark

I have got a solution.

You need 2/12 " hole saw, and a paddle bit or better yet Forstner.

You need some 1/2 od 3/8 ID plastic pipe, 1/2 coupling (They make real simple ones with one set screw sold at lowes), And some wood or plastic sheet. Also some 2.5 inch long machine screws with bolts and washer.

!!!!YOUR PADDLE OR FORSTNER BIT NEEDS TO BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE OUTSIDE OF THE COUPLING!!!!

I don't have pictures but I'll take some while I am putting it together.

Start with your sheet board. Drill a hole halfway through with the Paddle or forstner bit.
Then switch to hole saw. Line the whole saw up center guide hole. Cut a circle.
Now do this again about 3 more times. BUT take 2 of them after cut it with the hole saw and finish with the paddle or forstner bit.
So you'll have 3 pieces total 2 with little holes and 2 with big holes.

Now tape them all together mark 4 spots around the parameter of the ring and drill them out to fit your machine bolts. Make a good cylinder
Now untape them after you know the screw will fit.

Now take the plastic pipe. Slip it over shaft of the motor. Make sure it does not cover the threads.
Take your coupling and slip it over that so the Allan bolt aligns with the flat spot. Slip the coupling over the pipe (Very hard be patient maybe use a socket and hammer). Tighten allan bolt in coupling.

Next take one of the discs you made with the small hole. Put the machine screws through it point away from the motor.
Make it thread over the motors reverse thread until it seats firmly against the coupling. COUPLE SHOULD BE IN THE PARTIALLY DRILLED BIGGER HOLE.
Then use the STOCK bolt and a washer to bolt the disc to the motor.
Then slip the rest of the disc's onto the machines screws.

Save the last disc for you connection to the flywheel.

Or what ever you gotta do.

I know its hard to picture from text but I'll come back and add some pictures.

I think its going to work really well with out having to modify the shaft in anyway.

Matt

[Mark]

I've spent the last 3 days trying to come up with a good flywheel. I've pretty much given up on one for the motor I've already modified because the gear it came with was attached with a roll pin! The other 24 volt motor does have a threaded end and it came with a left handed thread nut. I tried to find an extra one, its not standard size, I thought it was metric but know one has any that I can find.

One thing that I did find was an old metal pots and pan lid. Had a small hole in the middle. Its not very heavy but I bolted it to a stock motor and powered it up. After I disconected the power it coasted for quite a bit before it came to a stop, so not too bad but needs to be a bigger one or need to add a little more weight.

The other problem I think we will see is with vibration. When pulsing one time per revolution and the bearing on one end has a piece of rubber around it for dampening I believe its going to vibrate quite a lot.

If anyone comes up with and easy to bolt on flywheel please post it!

Mark

[Matthew Jones]

What about using a small car front brake rotor for a flywheel ? They usually have some weight. Or if that is still to big, how about one from a motorcycle
or motorbike. That is what I was thinking of using. Maybe it would not work
for this small of a motor. Just a suggestion.
FRC

Ya I got pocket rocket frame sitting here that I could steal the rotors off of, so that might be an idea. I built a heavy wood one yesterday so I am going to try it.
The big thing is How to couple the stuff together. The thread on the motors are backward and are not metric or standard. Nothing I have fits them.

I got an old rotor from another motor and I am going to try to thread the shaft today. I tried one last night but it didn't do so well.
Then I'll have to do the same to a generator. I don't want have to use a chain cause it robs you a bit in friction.

Hi Matt
I need to change my glasses, because by relooking more deeply in your drawing and more attentively , i see that you are completely right and i am effectively wrong sorry.
I was completely obsessed by the one collector section to get only one pulse per revolution. But of course your system is effectively a ONE long pulse and totally correct .
And second mistake from me , effectively you let one collector section after the 3 powering's one and with your 90 degree collector brushes you collect the radiant spike and not the BEMF as i thought previously . Really clever indeed.
So i am sorry to have mistaken on your great set up.
I will go to my optician ASAP
And another time thank's for sharing the great work
Bravo
Laurent

Thats alright woopy. I got eye problems too.

Cheers
Matt

[woopy]

I need to change my glasses

I think you probably have to build one to see. It works rather well. As far as torque now I am in the process of testing that.
I would have to say that you are probably wrong. I have never seen such speed at such a low amount of power. And of course the power draw will go up as the motor starts to do work, but that is not the concern here. The goal is to do 1 hp or a fraction of for less than 746 watts per hp and do it with a regular motor. Period.
And the lower the better.

Matt

Hi Matt

I need to change my glasses, because by relooking more deeply in your drawing and more attentively , i see that you are completely right and i am effectively wrong sorry.

I was completely obsessed by the one collector section to get only one pulse per revolution. But of course your system is effectively a ONE long pulse and totally correct .
And second mistake from me , effectively you let one collector section after the 3 powering's one and with your 90 degree collector brushes you collect the radiant spike and not the BEMF as i thought previously . Really clever indeed.

So i am sorry to have mistaken on your great set up.
I will go to my optician ASAP

And another time thank's for sharing the great work

Bravo

Laurent

[FRC]

What about ?

@Mark.... Photoshop

Had a bad morning. My plan didn't work. But lesson learned.
YouTube - DoNotDoThis.MPG

Cheers
Matt

What about using a small car front brake rotor for a flywheel ? They usually have some weight. Or if that is still to big, how about one from a motorcycle
or motorbike. That is what I was thinking of using. Maybe it would not work
for this small of a motor. Just a suggestion.

FRC

[woopy]

sorry it was the post 487

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

Sorry Peter ,i am also confused and i read on the wrong line, it is your post 487 quoted above.

I have to slow down my enthusiasm on this very challenging project
And as my grandma always sayd, "Don't try to go faster than the music"

good luck at all

Laurent

[Eric]

hello
so after coming home from the energy conference in november and burying my self in a charge management circuit project for the monopole kit i recieved (yes its working without me hovering over it and no i am not going to discuss it on this forum so PM me if you have questions because its off topic here) i have now decided to take a peak at this forum.... 17 pages
allready quite the activity. it took a chunk of a day to read through it! i noticed the predictable reaction to the dvd to start trying to reproduce the literal lockridge device, i appreciate the change in direction and focus on seeking to understand/teach some principals via the "torque enhanced motor" that Peter has started, and the results to Matthew Jones work is fasinating!! i guess i have some catching up to do!
so to start with i do have a motor collecting dust on my shop shelf it came out of an old electic lawnmower. i had a bunch of specs on it saved on a harddrive that later crashed quite awhile after i junked the rest of the mower components so now all i have to work with is a sticker on the motor that says 24v and 971051-001(serial number?/part number?) google didnt turn anything up in a quick search. i think i remember reading on the mower deck houseing that is was 1hp but thats only from memory. the permenent mag stator is very strong i really had to pull hard to seperate it from the rotor.

motor specs i could measure
some pictures i attached below
some beginning questions to consider before "passing the point of no return" when i strip the original winding off

motor length via shaft length end to end 8"
motor diameter 3 7/8"
shaft diameter .675" (just under 11/16th)

iron stator housing length 4.5"
iron stator housing thickness .2" (or a little more than 3/16")
magets are .5" thick 3 1/8" long
2 pole stator 1 north 1 south magnet
inside stator diameter 2.479" (little more than 15/32)

rotor iron is 2 3/8" long, diameter is 2.4"(.4 is shy of 13/32")
rotor iron brush width is 13/32", gap between brushes .143"(just under 5/32")
rotor iron has 14 brush secions

air gap 2.479-2.4= .079" (a little under 8 thousands of an inch?)

existing wind diameter is .045"
awg gauge table shoes this to be closest to 17 gauge (who sells/uses 17gauge?)
16 gauge 0.0508
17 gauge 0.0453
18 gauge 0.0403
turns and length per winding section i wont know untill i unwind one
i "think" i was able to count 7 or 8 turns on 1 winding section? i could have missed some turns

copper comutator has 14 segments an even number so 1 section at 180deg apart is satisfied but 14 is not evenly divisible by 2 so i dont think i can do 4 pulses per rev but that might be too many anyway for this motor so i will focus on 2 windings and 2 pulses per rev.
comutator diameter is 1.165"
1 cumutator section is .692" long .235" wide(note width measured from a caliper does include curvature of section)
comutator circumference is c=d*pie c=1.165*3.14=3.658"
so 2 sections divided by 14 sections is .1428 or 14% duty cycle
(.235*2) divided by 3.658 is .1285 or about 13% might be more accurate.
existing carbon brushes
width(side occupying part of the circumference) .35"
depth(side occupying length of comutator section) .412"
length(whats left of the carbon brush life time) .521"


plastic brush/comutator/bearing endcap housing length 1.5"
i think theres just enough room for me to add 2 more brushes for recovery
nice ball bearings smooth no slop or rough action

test run unloaded/idle
@ 12.84volts input about2.5amps(0 to 30 gauge hard to read precision) 1690rpms
@ 25.19volts input about2.5amps 3430rpms

the next test i did was to spin up the rotor in my vertical mill at 3 set rpms and record the voltage output, this would be the BEMF
1155rpm 8.3v 1155/8.3=139.157 rpms per volt
1871rpm 13.4v 1871/13.4=139.626
2821rpm 20.15v 2821/20.15=140.0

here are some questions i would like to consider before starting

1.these ratios appear to be really close. either my readings are a little off and this trully is a linear function or its not a linear function and the math is more compilcated. does anyone have the math formula for calculating generator output useing variables like stator field strength, rpms, airgap interactions, wire gauge, number of turns..... am i missing anything? is it a linear equation?

2. can i use this calculation to find the magnet field strength(in gauss) of my existing motor so i can use that gauss variable for future winding calculations?

i was thinking for the first test i could leave the last 2 existing windings on the rotor and wire them in series to the to comutator sections that leave the N/S poles of the windings perpendicular to the n/s poles of the stator like was shown in the drawing in post 279.

3. because as the rotor spins the first pulse is 1 polarity +/- on the comutator sections then the second pulse the polarity flips -/+ then in order for there to be opposing poles pushing against each other the direction of each winding in series must be important (cw or ccw) is this correct? and if so should the direction of each winding if in series be the same (ie cw/cw) or opposite (cw/ccw) my guess is its the same (cw/cw) because the 2 windings in series act like 1 coil with a north and south pole that flips its poles as the comutator sections flip there polarity. would this be the same case if i were to make the 2 windings parrallel instead of series?

4. this zig zag winding idea is very interesting it looks like really a big loop thats folded in half? does this mean that 1 pole (say the south pole) is folded in on it self and only one pole (say the north pole) is facing out toward the stator magnets?
if so would that mean that since the magnets are N/S that this would be a push/pull type of action? and would that work on a motor type like mine where each magnet occupies half the stator instead of 1/4 the stator?
could this be why matt has had to use a diode on his winding and use 1 pulse per rev instead of 2 where the polarity would flip?
it would seem to me that if a push/pull action is whats happening than not having the diode in the winding which would allow a polarity flip would also reverse the push/pull to a pull/push and depending on where the rotor is oriented when the power is engaged(timing) would cause a magnetic dragging action instead of a motoring action. after all if we run the motor in its "stock" configuration and switch the power wires(polarity) the moter runs in the other direction.
anouther way to look at it would be if matt used a bifilar winding each winding useing 1 diode but the ends of the second winding would be soldered to the reverse commutator sections of the first winding and without the diodes this would basicly be a magnetic short doing us no good. but with the diodes only 1 winding would fire at a time. in fact if it was wired
this way could the inductive collapse (since the polarity flips at the moment the power is disengaged) fire into the second winding before the next pulse? if so would we need the second set of brushes for recovery if we can "deal" with the colapse and subsequent sparking internally on the rotor?

5. continuing with the consideration of the inductive collapse if i just want to deal with it on the rotor and not use recovery brushes other than other bifillar(or seperate winding) possibilities could i just mount a diode in series with a light bulb or block resistor or maybe some sort of controlled sparkgap(like the ne2 neon bulb in a bedini system only bigger accross the winding contacts(so long as the resistance is higher than my winding so i dont create a short that prevents my winding from powering up) and safely "dump" the collapse and eliminate brush sparking allowing us to stick with just the 2 brushes further simplyifing the mechanical alterations of the motor?


7. understanding some maximum design peramiters. and building a comparison
we know that at 25.19 my test motor idles at 3430rpms, half that is 1750rpms, thats really close to my 1871rpm BEMF test run if i use 1871/13.4=139.626 than 1750/139.6=12.536volts(eerrrgg!!! making the assumption that BEMF is linear) so (guessing again). if my motor is 1 hp than all that output comes from 25.19-12.53=12.66volts times whatever the amps are at that loading rpm... i dont have a safe way to break it to that rpm yet.
but the point i will make here is that the work is being done continuously for the entire dutycycle. in the "torque enhanced motor" mode the power comes from the 13% duty cycle.... this means the power involved(volts-BEMF*amps) in that 13% has to accomodate the load+(drag losses when freewheeling).....so i have 3 questions pertaining to this 13%

1.max limits for the commutator for the on pulse
i guess i would look at the brush size and comutator size first to consider how much amps for the amperturns we can give it during the 13% window.
so if i have the dimensions for the carbon brushes and the comutator sections how would i find out how much current would be considered a safe max level for the on time? is there a rating chart for what dimensioned carbon can take and is that for continueous duty/can i push higher for a 13% timeframe

2. after knowing what amps i can cummute, next would be winding type vs voltage and what might harm the stator magnets..... in the standard mode with 14 sections that means the brushes move to 7 different serialed coil pairs per rev right? so each pair of coils delivers 1/7th the total power per rev minus the BEMF and inductive discharges in the winding.
so if i use 2 of the existing coils in series and recovery brushes and keep the rotor braked to 1750rpms and i use 8 times the effective voltage minus the BEMF 12.66*8-12.53=88.75volts then divide by 2 since i have 2 pulses per rev 88.75/2=44.37volts would this then give me 2 pulses in amperturns equivilent to or bigger than the 7 pulses in the stock motor at its "effective" voltage? i see this as the highest voltage senario (if we are talking about keeping same amperturns as the stock version compressed into a smaller time window).
the other direction is to rewind with bigger gauge wire same number of turns to lower the BEMF and increase the amps per volt untill this will run into the comutator amperage limit. this would be the lowest voltage senarieo.
so far i have tried to consider reshaping the motor so the magnetic stators still see the same amperturns per rev just compressed into 2 pulses at a 13% duty cycle. in terms of what the magnets see there should be no change in amperturns per rev
but suppose i increase the turns in the winding and/or shoot for higher voltages how would i look for some upper limits that might harm the magnets are there any symptoms/observations that might point to "overdriving the magnets" or is the upper limit so high i need not consider it.

3. rest time in between pulses for the coils to demagnetize?....
it seems there needs to be a rest period so our coils dont turn into crispy critters. are there any symptoms/observations to look for that might show that the rest time is to short? power drop off? larger amps accompanying some heat? magnetic drag?

ummm ok i think i have spent too much time thinking about what to put in this post and then typing it up..... i should just throw it out there and and see where i go from here.

thanks for your patience if you got all the way through this post.

Eric

[Peter Lindemann]

Still Confused

OOuups

sorry Peter it was your post 959 and not 957

and for my other post , please see my aim

i am not trolling here (as my youtube video are showing my work and results.)

I am really trying to get result and be sure i am far from a theoriser.

Ok but it is your thread and i apologise to disturb really sorry

good luck at all

Laurent

Woopy,

I'm still confused. This thread is on POST #510. What thread are you talking about for POST #959?

Peter

[woopy]

Hi Matt

TOTALLY with you

And surely "bravo " for your fantastic work

YOU ARE A MAKER and i am sure you will find a good result


All the best to you and i will rejoin you on the "bouncer experiment "

Laurent

[woopy]

OOuups

sorry Peter it was your post 959 and not 957


and for my other post , please see my aim

i am not trolling here (as my youtube video are showing my work and results.)

I am really trying to get result and be sure i am far from a theoriser.

Ok but it is your thread and i apologise to disturb really sorry

good luck at all

Laurent

[Matthew Jones]

Hi all
Hi Matt
thank's a lot for sharing your great work. and i am sorry that your big fly wheel does not bring you the power you expected.
But if i look at your shematic, i see that you fire 3 consecutives collector sections,
which greatly consume current and this ,on a long time and the longer the consuming time is leaving a longer place to Mister Lenz (counter generated voltage ) to oper, and this against you.
And secondly as your brushes are 90 degree of each other , as per your shematic ,they do not contact at the right place for the recuperation of the BACKSPIKE (radiant energy ) but they are recuperating the counter BEMF ( this is exactly what Mister Lenz expected you would do ) which slow your rotor down.
Sorry to insist on the point
but we need ONE SINGLE "GUN SHOT" PULSE per revolution, and nothing else.
Each time we try to gain some more pulse ,Mister Lenz is behind the corner, and will slam his baseball bat right in your face. So do not let any chance to Mister Lenz to be TALLER try to keep him at the gnome size.
My point of view
And if i am out of this thinking here ,please mention and i will stop my intervention.
Good luck at all
Laurent

I think you probably have to build one to see. It works rather well. As far as torque now I am in the process of testing that.
I would have to say that you are probably wrong. I have never seen such speed at such a low amount of power. And of course the power draw will go up as the motor starts to do work, but that is not the concern here. The goal is to do 1 hp or a fraction of for less than 746 watts per hp and do it with a regular motor. Period.
And the lower the better.

Matt

[Peter Lindemann]

No Post 957

Hi all


Hi Peter

i reread a lot of pages ago to restructure ma mind on this project

And on post 957 ,

i would like that you further explain your mind, because i see a great possibility of improvement here

Thank's

Laurent

Woopy,

Sorry, but there is NO POST 957.

Peter