Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[bistander]

Cogging

...They decrease the amp draw of the motor significantly and increase the output of the generator. ...

I told you the fact (truth) about this and backed it up with a Wikipedia page. You don't believe me and that's alright. How about you changing the wiki article to reflect your version of machine output at speed and load? That ought to bring in few expert opinions.

[Iamnuts]

C.

Turion and friends,
Unless you’re exceeding 100% efficiency, whatever you do, you’re within the rules as far as the physics go.
So what you’re claiming has got to be classed as perpetual motion.
Therefore your device must be capable of running forever, we all know
that eventually batteries and bearings wear out, but you get the general idea?
This is the 64 thousand dollar question, will your device run until something
wears out?
As the photon’s speed (in a vacuum) is C.,that must be taken into account.
Final question is dead simple, do you have perpetual motion? A yes/no answer
is all that’s needed.
John.

[bistander]

Just distraction

Turion,

All you're doing is avoiding the issue. The 1800 watt output/300 watt input machine is the only thing that maters. It is the falsehood you continue to insist you have. I know that is untrue. Prove me wrong. You can not. I don't care about your tricks and methods used to build your generator. I only care about the performance claim: 1800 watt output power with 300 watts input power.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

The old speed up

...
You said if this was for real, Thane Heinz would have made a fortune from it. Not really. First of all, Tesla’s patent on this topic is expired, putting it in the public domain. Thai me has patent applications, not patents. You can’t sell what you don’t own. ...

No, this is what I said.

... So what if shorting a coil causes an increase in speed. That has nothing to do with it. Output power will not exceed input power. If Thaine Heinz had anything of value, why hasn't it been commercialized? He's got nothing of any value.
...

And the fact that he doesn't own a patent on it would enhance the opportunity for commercialization by others. The fact that it has been around for so long with no takers indicates its perceived value. Zilch.

We hashed through this years ago when bromikey was promoting him. I thought it was dead and buried. It should be.

bi

[bistander]

Wrong

...
You got burned on the 3 Battery system.
You got burned on speed up under load
You got burned on magnetic cogging
...

BS. I am right on all three counts. I just don't want to educate you enough for you to understand why. You don't even try to learn the real science

I never wanted to get into the battery systems with you. I know it's a loser. I avoided it for so long but mentioned it once quoting a Jeff Dove post. My mistake. I never claimed you lied about it.

Go back a few years of forum posts and read where I participated in an analysis of Thain Hiens' claims. I'm not searching for it and don't feel the need to prove anything to anybody about it. It doesn't do anything for performance or efficiency at load. Consider that my opinion. I don't care. I know you're mistaken about it but don't recall calling you a liar about it.

Cogging. Again. It, or the elimination of it, makes no difference at speed and at load. Ever notice the cogging torque on the rotor pulls it to the center of the core? Off to one side, it pulls CW. Off to the other side, it pulls CCW. So when the generator is rotating at normal speed with normal load, cogging contributes equal CW and CCW torque. Or in other words, net cogging torque is zero. This means it does not affect the average current or voltage, or average input torque or RPM. Cogging at speed and load appears as torque ripple which is annoying due to noise and vibration, but is not a factor in power conversion performance or efficiency except a possible fraction of a percent loss due to minor loop hysteresis. And again, I say you're wrong in your cogging statements, which isn't calling you a liar.

But, again, all that is distraction, or strawman tactics to avoid the real issue with me. You're lying and fraudulent about having a proven 1800 watt output/300 watt input generator. Prove that. Be a man and back up your statement.

bi

[bistander]

Requested experiment

Turion,

Mr. Potato Head says such an experiment as you described would only demonstrate braking torque due to Eddy currents and core loss. You would need a sensitive torque transducer to actually see the cogging torque. If the drive motor isn't too noisy you might be able to see current ripple caused by cogging. But you knew that, right?

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Know what I'm talking about

There were at least a dozen people who posted videos of this concept back in the day, including myself and UFO. All of them prove the concept works, but Mr Potato Head “Kniws” it doesn’t. He has magical powers. LOL.

Time after time this guy says things don’t work that I have seen working on my bench for YEARS. It it wasn’t so ridiculous it would be funny.

Thanks for posting the video. Just more proof that he has no clue what he is talking about.

Hi Turion,

That is incorrect. I know exactly what I'm talking about. You don't know what I'm talking about. This is what I meant when I said I didn't want to educate you so you could understand what's really happening.

I never said you couldn't eliminate cogging. And yes, you can see the results on your test bench. What I'm telling you, and is fact supported by numerous authors and texts, is that cogging or the elimination of cogging makes no difference to the generator under load at operating speed.

bi

[Sputins]

Bi,

All your effort?

Why?

Your time?

It makes no sense...

Who would even care?

Unless it' s your job...

It is isn't it?

Yes...

We all know...

[bistander]

My job?

Bi,

All your effort?

Why?

Your time?

It makes no sense...

Who would even care?

Unless it' s your job...

It is isn't it?

Yes...

We all know...

Hi Sputins,

I like energy, power, physics, electric machinery and continue to research and learn. Along my journey I attempt to help a few and correct basic misconceptions or in some cases, expose fraud or scam. Not many, but some folks do appreciate my efforts and tell me so. It could just take one light bulb in one guy's mind going off to bring the world saving energy invention out of the mist. Maybe I can help that guy, or maybe that guy is me next week, or maybe it is Turion with his 1800/300 genny. Here, just trying to get Turion to come clean.

Not sure what you mean by job.

Thanks for chiming in.

bi

[bistander]

The trouble with you

bi,
Your right. It has NO effect. The application of magnetic neutralization is ridiculous. The FACT that the amp draw of the motor goes down and the RPM’s of both the motor and the generator go up and the output of the generator increases are obviously a result of faulty equipment or my inability to correctly read a meter. My mistake. If not for your wisdom where would I be? Thank you SO much. Now go along and help someone else see the light. You’ve done your duty here.

See? All of this is crap. It has nothing to do with 1800 watts output from a generator using 300 watts input. It's your way of avoiding to issue. Prove your claim of 1800 watts output from a generator using 300 watts input.

[Iamnuts]

Sorry.

Turion and some others,
I hate to say this but I believe bistander's physics to be sound.
Messing with motors and generators can give encouraging results but,
as I've tried to explain before, you're only altering the efficiency UNLESS
you're getting over 100%.
These days motor designers are managing 99% efficiency in some of
the larger motors running optimum load.
In essence C. O. P. 'is basically concentrating energy from a reservoir
of low grade energy into a useable but much smaller quantity of higher grade
energy. Example, thousands of gallons of ground water into 50. gallons of
warm water in your domestic tank.
I'm willing to say who I am, just PM. me.
I'm also up to being told that everything I say is utter crap, if I'm wrong
I'm wrong and apologise.
John.

[bistander]

Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator Design

Hi Turion,

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/11/7105/htm

This is an interesting paper from 2014 on PMSG design. Physically I think it is about same size as your large genny, I assume the one you claim 1800 watts out/300 watts in. It is designed for slower speed and bit more power. But notice the design process.

Also notice the test rig in figure #13. It looks similar to equipment which I used years ago when developing motors and generators. Ah, the good old days, when men proved their claims.

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

Turion and some others,
I hate to say this but I believe bistander's physics to be sound.
Messing with motors and generators can give encouraging results but,
as I've tried to explain before, you're only altering the efficiency UNLESS
you're getting over 100%.
These days motor designers are managing 99% efficiency in some of
the larger motors running optimum load.
In essence C. O. P. 'is basically concentrating energy from a reservoir
of low grade energy into a useable but much smaller quantity of higher grade
energy. Example, thousands of gallons of ground water into 50. gallons of
warm water in your domestic tank.
I'm willing to say who I am, just PM. me.
I'm also up to being told that everything I say is utter crap, if I'm wrong
I'm wrong and apologise.
John.

low grade energy turned into a high grade?..
but what is energy?..

[Iamnuts]

Fact

low grade energy turned into a high grade?..
but what is energy?..

Just Wikipedia energy and you'll realise how daft the idea of
300 watts in 1800 watts out really is!!!!!
John.

[Iamnuts]

Another way.

Let’s have an alternative look at the problem.
According to Einstein E=MC squared.
Say your generator weighs 20kg.
Do the math and I reckon that gives us about 432,000 kilo ton of
TNT equivalent.
Could someone else check my math?
John.