Your Basic Coil

[shylo]

motor operation

Hi Erfinder and all, My motor uses 8 of the 16 commutator segments, I wound bi-filar coils in the 16 slots provided. My motor coils are completely off before I collect.
Every other comm. segment is empty ,the brushes are spaced so an empty comm section is between each brush.
It is a pulse motor and a pulse generator.
Still trying different coils, but on a side note ran all day testing and batteries are still full. bonus
artv

[shylo]

Generating coils

Hi All, When placing coils that are loaded( that is putting out power), it is best ,that I've seen so far, to orient them 90 degrees to the magnetic field?(less output but no drag)
That's not clear, The coil can not face the magnetic field head on, it needs to be 90 ? degrees offset
I think more than one field needs to be involved. From 2 different sources,or maybe more?

Dave , Try winding a small coil , instead of placing it for max output, turn it 90 degrees , it will put out less , but when loaded , it's drag will not show up.
artv

[Turion]

Shylo,
Are you talking about magnetic attraction to the rotor magnets, or are you talking about the generator not loading down. And what decrease in output are you seeing?

If you are talking about generator not loading down...

You can get the same results with an air core coil bay making the windings sub ohm in resistance.

You can get the same result in an iron core core by making sure the rpm's exceed 1850 and by having the right wire configuration on your coil, and you lose NO output.

But this is interesting. I will have to give it a try.

Dave

[erfinder]

Hi All, When placing coils that are loaded( that is putting out power), it is best ,that I've seen so far, to orient them 90 degrees to the magnetic field?(less output but no drag)
That's not clear, The coil can not face the magnetic field head on, it needs to be 90 ? degrees offset
I think more than one field needs to be involved. From 2 different sources,or maybe more?

Dave , Try winding a small coil , instead of placing it for max output, turn it 90 degrees , it will put out less , but when loaded , it's drag will not show up.
artv

The "ideal" generator has orthogonal or 90° relations between the stator and rotor fields. In addition to this, I have found the following key to producing an practical no drag generator with moderate to high output.

• Dielectric and magnetic polarity of the coils in the system must be unidirectional.
• Inducing magnets must be monopolar configured.
• Coil surface should be saturated by inducing magnetic field.
• Coil bore should be saturated by inducing magnetic field.

Orthogonal machines date back to the 1800s. Machines which were built in line with what I just mentioned didn't exhibit negative effects associated with the induced potential. There was no "Lenz" to contend with. The interesting thing is that even though this topology was well established, there was a push for salient pole typologies, which eventually took over.

Before one dives head first into building machines with 90° coils, one should try answering the following questions.

1. why did those who were familiar with this topology move to salient pole configurations?
2. When they migrated, where they able to engineer the drag-less condition into the "desired", but (from our limited perspective) less than ideal topology?
3. Does the salient topology open the door to other beneficial effects and relations?

Regards

[erfinder]

Considering that the Dynamotor



or some variation of the same was at the heart of Tesla's method of conversion, G in the figure.



I would speculate that there is more to salient pole typologies than we have been led to believe. Something that sets it apart from and possibly above the torodial and or orthogonal typologies. If you ask me, and you didn't, it was recognized by the those skilled individuals that the layman would "eventually" turns his/her coils or their magnets. They however would not, knowing that in addition to the orthogonal, maximum coupling found only in salient configs was also a prerequisite.

Understanding how to establish orthogonal relations while at the same time maximizing coupling, (after comprehending what coupling is) using a salient topology is the mission, my mission. Like the skilled I recognize that proper relations between coils, specifically, relations between the induced fields, both dielectric and magnetic is where one must look.

We must break the symmetry found in off the shelf machines. Not trade one form of symmetry for another (machine which offers maximum drag, for one which offers none....). If all one wants is a dragless generator...... there it is....

Patent US381968 - Electro-magnetic motor - Google Patents

put it together in the proper manner.

If on the other hand, you know what you want, keep looking into the Dymamotor, review all info you can find relating to Tesla's method of conversion, recognize and respect that the source of all the energy circulating in the lower half of the depicted method is provided by "G".

Once you have brainwashed yourself into believing something is there, hidden in plain sight, take a brief pause, and review the operating principles of a device called the Amplidyne. Make the non existing connection between the Dynamotor and the Amplidyne.

Is this post relevant to the topic? I don't know, if you feel it is then please say so, if you feel it isn't I will be more than happy to delete it.


Regards

[Mario]

That is an interesting post for sure. Please don't remove it
I had never heard of this amplidyne generator. I'm reading how it's supposed to work. CHAPTER-10-D
COP 10'000??? Holy ****…

Edit: scrap the cop 10'000, I wasn't done reading...

Mario

[citfta]

No COP of 10,000

Sorry Mario,

That system does NOT have a COP of 10,000. The amplidyne generator has an amplification factor of 10,000. That is not the same as a COP of 10,000. When your input signal to the amplidyne generator goes up the load on the motor driving the amplidyne generator also goes up. You are confusing COP with amplification. They are not the same thing. In an amplifier you are using a small signal to control a large current or voltage to make a large signal. But you have to supply the large current or voltage to start with. So there is no Cop over 1. For a COP of over 1 you have to put in some power and get out more power than you put in. Something all of us would love to have but we are not there yet.

I did find the information on the amplidyne interesting in regards to what erfinder was referring to. The description of the right angle fields used in the amplidyne is something to think about. I want to read and study that some more to see if I can apply it to a generator for power.

Carroll

[Mario]

I know I know…Lol that's why I added the edit to my previous post.

This also seems to be a piece of the puzzle:

https://www.google.ch/patents/US3913...IVC8AUCh2P0gAx

Mario

[citfta]

Lol

You must have added the edit while I was slowly typing.

I am going to have to read slower or type faster.

Sorry about that.

Carroll

[Matthew Jones]

Don't miss Howard R. Johnson's patent. Commonly overlooked by Tesla worshipers. Put out a good shock at 4-5 rpms

Electromagnetic device with cast magnetic path
US 3668585 A

Matt

[Farmhand]

Hi Guys, When I put a load that requires more watts than I'm inputting , I get rpm increase but greater amp draw from supply , If I put a load on, that uses less watts than inputting , the rpm's and the amp draw stay the same, so the load runs for free.
I still use power to run the motor/gen ,but get the output from gen coils as an added bonus.
Currently trying different coils with the big magnet rotor attached to the motor/gen, to get even more free output.
What I'm seeing is don't overload the gens capability.
artv

Still the baseline is being used to claim free energy, that's wrong.

If you run a motor generator with no output and the input is 10 watts then
that is 10 Watts loss. zero efficiency.

That's the baseline, minus 10 Watts in this example case.

Then if you connect a load and the input remains at 10 Watts but you get
5 Watts from the load then that is 50% efficient.

Just because the input does not change when a load is added means very little.
The output is still less than the input.

Regardless of the baseline, the efficiency is always the Total input compared to total output.

So even if the setup is using 10 Watts with no output and when a load is
added the input reduces by 4 Watts and the output is 5 Watts then the total
input is 6 Watts and output is 5 Watts, which is still under unity even though
the input reduced with the addition of the load and the load is 5 Watts.

..

Actual efficiency is always a point of time measurement, if you want to
determine efficiency then measure the input and output at the same time
and divide the output by the input.

Base lines don't come into an actual efficiency determination. All you need is
the input and output power measured under the same conditions eg. at the
same time.
..

You cannot only consider the difference in the input power when a load is
added as the the total input, that's silly.

..

[shylo]

Yes , and as for the air coils at 90deg. The lose in output ,compared to consumption at 0 deg. is less.
I'm still losing on supply , but I'm getting closer.
I'm going to make a counter-rotating magnetic field to insert into my stator.
It should double my output?
artv

[gotoluc]

Regardless of the baseline, the efficiency is always the Total input compared to total output.

Sorry Farmhand. I'm quite sure that's not how generator efficiencies are calculated.

I agree it's a good practice to bring your generator rotors to full RPM with no coils or cores in place to establish the prime mover (PM) input power (IP) and never change it in tests from then on.
Lets say 40 watts is the PM IP baseline.
Now you introduce one coil and it outputs 20 watts without any increase to the PM IP.
This means the generators coil energy conversion is 100% efficient
Now you introduce a second coil and it also produces 20 watts while the first coil also maintains 20 watts output without a change to PM IP.
I would still say the generators coils energy conversion is 100% efficient.
However, if our output is equal to our input we know this is not possible in a normal generator as there must be some losses during conversion, so at this point one should suspect OU.
This would also represent an overall 20% efficiency boost compared to most generators.
Also, keep in mind that generator efficiencies are not even calculated like I described above. They start from idle with no load with coils and cores in place. However, it's a good practice to test it as above since you can better detect the coil losses and mostly if you're using bad cores (lamination shorts) which cause eddy currents which your coil can tap into without affecting the PM IP. This has fooled many, including myself in thinking we have a free lunch. So better stick to the practice above which is based on experience and stay in reality.

If a third coil can be introduce and it outputs 1 or more watts while the other two previous coils maintain a 40 watts output and all without increasing the PM IP, then this is an OU device.

I wish all the best to the ones doing all the hard work and thank you for sharing.

Luc

[Matthew Jones]

Its kinda ridiculous to expect that the prime mover has anything to do with the efficiency of the generator. They are 2 separate objects.
If the PM input is 100 watts and you add a generator that returns 20 watt at a given rpm without increasing or even possibly lowering the prime movers input, the generator is 100% efficient or has COP of 1. At that point it becomes how many coils you use and start up costs for the motor/gen to perform together at ratio higher that 1:1. Efficiency has nothing to do with it at this point.

And there is enough evidence that says it is not only possible but being done.

Matt

[rosehillworks]

Matt
I could not get your link to the Howard Johnson generator patent to work.
Thanks.