It is currently Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:13 am



Welcome
Welcome to imhotep's labs

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:07 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
Has anyone considered building peter Lindemanns rotary attraction motor?

http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Lindema ... tion_Motor

Quote from http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable ... ml#post943

"Assuming a moderate load, it seems reasonable, then, to conclude that it may be possible to create a 1 hp motor that only draws 200 watts. If the electrical recovery system can return 85% of this, then the machine will run on 200 watts, produce 1 hp of mechanical energy, and return 170 watts to the batteries. This suggests that 1 hp of mechanical energy may be able to be produced for 30 watts."

Doh and if we power a 1hp generator with that motor, at 80% efficiency we will have an electrical output of 596.8 watts

596.8+170=766.8 watts

Thats a COP of 3.834


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:27 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
My first Lindemann attraction motor.

Using an old washing machine motor I have removed the old windings and wound four coils with #23 wire at 80 turns each at 90 degree intervals. Their resistance is very low and too low to measure with my cheap meters.

The rotor has had four slots milled into it.

The air gap is 0.8mm or 0.4 per side

I have not removed the squirrel cage at this time.

I intend to use car ignition points for switching as this should give sharper rise and fall times plus lower resistance when compared to transistors.

More updates as I progress.


Attachments:
Image.jpg
Image.jpg [ 32.24 KiB | Viewed 2705 times ]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2011 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 1:44 am
Posts: 397
Has thanked: 6 time
Have thanks: 12 time
My concern, from that peswiki quote:
It will run in either direction. The movement of the rotor is independent from the input (e.g. loading the rotor does not increase the amperage going to the motor) -- a true "no back EMF motor".

Shorted is considered the highest load for conventional circuit. That would mean the motor will consume worse if we load it.

Notice that there is no mechanical load testing when the recovery path is open. Because I bet that would show that mechanical load will ADD consumption. Load testing should be done without load too. That is fake "no back EMF motor".


From EF, by Aaron:
In one of these, the current drops when attaching a light bulb as a load.

YouTube - Peter Lindemann Rotary Attraction Motor - First demo
YouTube - Peter Lindemann Rotary Attraction Motor 2a
YouTube - Peter Lindemann Rotary Attraction Motor 2b

We filmed those a few years ago.


Notice the wrong conclusion. Of course the current will drop, they are comparing shorted with light bulb! They should be comparing lightbulb with open connection! I don't think shorted representing true BEMF behaviour in a motor too.

While mechanical load do not change consumption. It is clear that lower impedance / heavier load increase current consumption.

Electrically, rotary attraction motor consume more with load. Shown here (1=shorted radiant output, 2=light bulb load, 3=battery load):
Image
Image


Lindemann statement on EF is wrong:
The collapse of the magnetic field will induce a new current of electricity that can be recaptured by the circuitry, and re-applied to the battery system, thus recovering up to 90% of the input electrical energy.

There is no "new current", because when this "new current" being utilized, the current consumption increase at the same rate as the use. This is not anomaly, it is normal to has consumption increase when you use it more.


With stingo, a lower impedance load (1.5V nicad) draw less than a higher impedance load (12V):
YouTube - Stingo, reduced current consumption with lower load impedance


But, I will look forward for your progress. Lindemann do not answer when I ask him to provide data for mechanical load testing with the recovery path OPEN. I hope you can provide information.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:13 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
Yes, I agree that peter does not always give all the information, but lets face it he is not a paid researcher. He is just like we are, a working man with an interest in creating free energy.

I do not know of a way that we can create an electric motor totally free of BEMF, All motors have it. The point is, to either minimise the BEMF where it works against us and/or use it where it helps us.

With a motor such as this, the amount of electricity consumed should remain almost constant regardless of speed. This is because there are no magnets pushing against the magnetic field produced by the current flow.

Also inductive kickback from the coils is collected instead of being allowed to flow in the opposite direction in an adjacent coil causing a counter magnetic force.

Eddy currents in the rotor and stator will still be there but as in standard motors this is minimised.

The current consumption of a standard motor can be measured when the motor is stalled. As soon as the motor turns it acts as a generator forcing current to oppose the input, the difference is the amount of current the motor uses. It is not the case that the motor uses more current when it is slowed. The motor impedance increases as it generates electricity and therefore uses less current as the speed increases. Do you see the differance?

This is exactly the same for torque.

So if there were no BEMF (or friction) in a motor the current draw and the motor torque would remain constant regardless of speed.

A 1hp motor normally draws much more than 1hp when stalled, this is why they burn out in a stalled condition.

None of this gives any overunity just a more efficient motor.

As you know we can collect the inductive kickback from a coil and in Ideal conditions this can be 90+%

So in an attractive pulse motor with minimal BEMF we can power it with 1hp and collect most of it back. It is still a 1hp motor. A standard motor with similar impedance windings would drain 1hp at start up and drop to much less as the speed rose, usually to about 0.35hp

If we were able to collect the inductive kickback from the motor and store it, we would have to deduct this stored energy from the input. We can actually feed this power back to the input using a bifilar coil, bridge rectifier and capacitor.

Now the motor would consume the recovered energy plus a top up from the power supply to cover the losses.

Do you see what is happening here? We are powering the losses, Not the load. Magnetic energy is a free by-product of running a current through a coil.

The electricity has not been converted to torque; it has been converted to heat or recovered. Magnetism and therefore indirectly the torque is the free by-product of the circuit. Just like the Bedini motor/energizer.

Hellooo, the mathematical model for motors is wrong.

You are right, there is no NEW current, it was always there, it is just that we are collecting it now. Once we realise this was shorted out and creating counter magnetism and therefore another loss, we were always powering the loss and not the load.

Now I take your point and agree that Peter was not clear on the mechanical output. This is why I have decided to run the experiment myself.

I will not be surprised if the mechanical power is less than expected. I think peter may have overlooked this to some extent. The rotor and the stator are made up of iron rings and inevitably eddy currents will be present that will absorb some of the electrical/magnetic energy. This is likely to be higher than before as there is nowhere else for it to go other than be collected.

To perfect this we need a non conductive, magnetic material for the rotor and stator frames.

The Lockridge device is likely to have consumed a large amount of power (say 1.2kW), recovered and fed back to the source most of that (say 800W) and then generated in conventional fashion 300w, while having losses generating heat.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 1:44 am
Posts: 397
Has thanked: 6 time
Have thanks: 12 time
mbrownn wrote:
With a motor such as this, the amount of electricity consumed should remain almost constant regardless of speed. This is because there are no magnets pushing against the magnetic field produced by the current flow.
Are you sure about this? I believe that rotary attraction motor will consume worse if mechanically loaded with the output open.

mbrownn wrote:
It is not the case that the motor uses more current when it is slowed. The motor impedance increases as it generates electricity and therefore uses less current as the speed increases. Do you see the differance?
I am confuse. Conventional motor do use more current when it slowed down. All speed vs current diagram of motor that I see show faster speed use less current. I think rotary attraction motos is conventional motor.

I thought my stingo motor is unique that it draw less when it is slowed down. Will look forward what your motor behave.


mbrownn wrote:
So if there were no BEMF (or friction) in a motor the current draw and the motor torque would remain constant regardless of speed.
[/quote]Here is video showing power consumption of stingo motor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrfyNdIII5g

idle consumption is same as max speed but without the torque. Lower during speed up or slow speed or drag. That is still unmodified harddisk motor. I only use the available terminal, bypassing controller. Current is relatively constant, torque is not constant.

I will look forward for your result.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:50 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
Ill try to explain better.


With a no BEMF motor, if the duty cycle was 50 percent, and the motor was run for 1 minute, at 1 RPM the coil would be on for 30 seconds and off for 30 seconds. At any other speed it would be the same, the coil will be on for only half the time the motor is running as the duty cycle is 50%. Therefore current consumption is not related to speed. With BEMF in a motor as speed rises it opposes the current and then the consumption falls and vice versa.

So if we have two identically wound motors, one with BEMF and one without. When they are switched on they would draw the same current and would have the same torque. As the speed rises the motor with BEMF would reduce its current and also its torque until the torque could no longer accelerate the motor. With the no BEMF motor it would continue to accelerate until its speed was creating so much friction that it balanced the torque, this motor would have a higher speed.

The issue of collecting the BEMF is different. Ideally the pulse would be short enough so that the coil is not saturated, that way most of the energy can be recovered. Once coil saturation is reached any additional current would not be released in the coil collapse.

Peters motor was designed, so that the magnetic field of the coil collapse assisted the motor action. If the energy was not collected you would not have as much torque and therefore its efficiency would be lower.

What I believe was happening with Peters motor is, when the BEMF is not being collected, the energy was partially causing eddy currents in the frame and rotor and that this would interact with motor efficiency.

I think Peter’s model is correct but oversimplified as there will be other interactions between the rotor and the frame due to these eddy currents. To test this hypothesis we would have to cut the frame in half and insulate the two halves electrically and see if we can measure a current when we connect them together electrically.

It may be that cutting the frame in half partially cures one of Peter’s problems but then we have introduced another air gap.

That stingo motor is very cool, what is its charge efficiency?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 1:44 am
Posts: 397
Has thanked: 6 time
Have thanks: 12 time
mbrownn wrote:
So if we have two identically wound motors, one with BEMF and one without. When they are switched on they would draw the same current and would have the same torque. As the speed rises the motor with BEMF would reduce its current and also its torque until the torque could no longer accelerate the motor. With the no BEMF motor it would continue to accelerate until its speed was creating so much friction that it balanced the torque, this motor would have a higher speed.
Interesting.


mbrownn wrote:
Peters motor was designed, so that the magnetic field of the coil collapse assisted the motor action. If the energy was not collected you would not have as much torque and therefore its efficiency would be lower.
That is not what I see. The motor speed / mechanical efficiency is lower when there is light bulb in the load compared to none.


mbrownn wrote:
That stingo motor is very cool, what is its charge efficiency?
Charge efficiency is in inverse relationship with motor speed. On fastest speed at resonant oscillation, charge is almost zero during rotation, maybe 70% if the motor is stopped.

7imix report 25% faster motor driven with stingo on same current consumption.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:42 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
Hmmmmm I see what you are saying, he did get a higher speed and lower input when charging a battery than he did on the bulb and the worst case was the short . However; if you calculate watts you see that the battery circuit is lowest on input power, but we cannot do a motor efficiency without torque figures.

If the best mechanical efficiency results are open circuit and the worst are a short, we have a trade off which is of little use. Open circuit causes burning of contacts and blown semiconductors, closed circuit causes high amps. The speed is similar so the torque should be similar but we don’t know, he never gave torque figures for all these tests which is why I am going to run the tests myself.

Based upon input power and speed the best looks as though it is the battery charging circuit.

I know my contact points will consume power and will not operate properly at very high speeds but this eliminates any problems with lag in a read switch magnetic influence and any semiconductor anomalies. They work fine on a motorcycle opening and closing once per revolution on a wasted spark system at up to 8000 rpm so I think they will be good enough for a test.

I don’t expect any overunity because I think the frame and rotor eddy currents are a problem but we wont know unless we test it.

The lockridge device replication owned by Bedini has a slot in the case but it is a replication and not a working device. What if the stator was split and insulated not just slotted? Can you see where Im going with this?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 1:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 1:44 am
Posts: 397
Has thanked: 6 time
Have thanks: 12 time
mbrownn wrote:
Hmmmmm I see what you are saying, he did get a higher speed and lower input when charging a battery than he did on the bulb and the worst case was the short . However; if you calculate watts you see that the battery circuit is lowest on input power, but we cannot do a motor efficiency without torque figures.
Isn't it normal if we consider the battery as load with the most resistance? So if we see it from impedance perspective we see it as:
shorted < light bulb < battery.

Isn't it normal the input current drop if the load have higher resistance?


mbrownn wrote:
I know my contact points will consume power and will not operate properly at very high speeds but this eliminates any problems with lag in a read switch magnetic influence and any semiconductor anomalies. They work fine on a motorcycle opening and closing once per revolution on a wasted spark system at up to 8000 rpm so I think they will be good enough for a test.
I think it will limit the current that can be used to drive the motor. Around 100mA?

mbrownn wrote:
The lockridge device replication owned by Bedini has a slot in the case but it is a replication and not a working device. What if the stator was split and insulated not just slotted? Can you see where Im going with this?
Yes, I will look forward for your result :).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rotary attraction motor
PostPosted: Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:59 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 1016
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 27 time
I think a lead acid battery is lower impedance. For example my 12v 9Ah motorcycle reads 10v at 30A on a 0.2 ohm load. Using V=I*R, the resistance would be V/I which is 0.3333 ohms. I know the load is 0.2 so the resistance of the battery is 0.1333 ohms. That would be equivalent to a 300w bulb. A car break light is 12v 21w

Test 1 was shorted so this is anomalous, if it was open circuit it makes sense but that is not the case.

If BEMF is inversely proportional to impedance what is happening and why is the amp draw low on the battery when based on its impedance should be high. And what is happening in the motor to explain the different amp draws.

This is not a no BEMF motor, we have BEMF but not directly in the rotor opposing the rotation. It is in the stator.

Why is the BEMF greater on the short and bulb than on the battery? It is the amount of energy consumed by the load on the output side.

When we put current through a load the only part of it that is consumed is the part that converts to heat or light, a radiant energy.

I would bet that in the case of the short, the motor will get warm, in the case of the bulb; both the motor and bulb get warm and the amount of heat and light produced will be proportional to the amp draw.

In the case of the battery we will get heat in proportion to the amp draw but now the current has been stored and only the current that passed through the battery is consumed in the motor coils to produce heat.

How much is passing through the battery? It depends upon the battery charge efficiency; if the charge efficiency is 80% then 20% will pass through producing heat.

Is mechanical torque is directly proportional to amp draw? Is it is directly proportional to consumed power i.e. heat? Is it proportional to the difference? We will have to do tests to find out.

The BEMF does seem to be low in this motor as the shorted speed was only a little lower than the battery.

The energy consumed by the contacts will be mechanical. The current draw will only limited by impedance, BEMF and duty cycle. My maximum duty cycle is about 40 percent at 4 pulses per rev but I will start at 1 pulse per rev. My resistance is 0.001 on the contacts and 0.6 per coil and these can be placed in parallel. So in theory I will be running at 12/0.6x0.1 = 2A less BEMF using 1 coil.

Having said all that, Big thanks to Peter Lindemann, without his work and willingness to share I would not be able understand.

Keep asking questions my friend; you are really helping me work this out.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
suspicion-preferred