Zero Force Motor Project

[Allen Burgess]

Quote from bistander:

Magnetic force is not "Henrys". It is not measured in "Henrys".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uP2xEKH4qdc


Here's an example of a bifilar coil in self resonance that is spontaneously building a magnetic field that is measured in "Negative Micro Henrys":

[bistander]

Zfm

Do your research so you can see what John's definition is as applied to the motor and not your own.

I have. I cannot find why it is named or called "zero force". It obviously does have force(s) associated with it. Why call call it zero? Can you answer that? Or provide a link which addresses the zero part. I've watched John B explain how it works. He even talks about mechanical load and torque, which indicates non-zero force.

Thanks,

bi

[citfta]

Hi Carrol
First I just wanted to know If it was allowed to dicuss NSNS configuration and cores here. I don't want a "serious builders" situation.

First issue solved. I right now saw Bro M:s reply. Thanks BroMikey!

Second. I'm going to utilize ALL sides of my magnets and coil ends.

Congrats Carrol; to your good circuit. Two Switch transistors and the two Transformer coupled Coils reduces the power consumption to drive the coil ( motor magnetic impulser unit) to about the same low level as I have, with my used principle and my single winding, without distorting the signal. ( Still about square) I took my coil values and used that x2 in your two coils and made a simulation.
BUT, but with your principle you have to have two windings on the same bobbin. To make them fit there we have to reduce the Cu-wire diameter. ( More Ohms in both coils)
That reduces the Amp-turns with reduces the magnetic power as a result.
Compared to a single wire coil principle, here we have to increase the battery voltage.

If your input pulse signals A and B (not the iterrupting F.G. chopping signal. Not simulated yet) is let say: Cycle time=6ms ,OnA=2ms OffA=4ms, OnB=2ms OffB=4ms and signal B is delayed 3ms
THEN the OUTput will be a 3ms+3ms (50%/50%) zero and 180 degr. square signal. (With my coil values) Do you want that??
BUT with a shorter On-time (A and B) than 2ms the output signals will be a mess, corrupt and stocastic.

And you are right about windage losses and such. I know nothing!

I come to think of one important thing: Your coils are NOT TRANSFORMER COUPLED. Air coils. Uhuuuu Now output signals will be a mess, corrupt and stocastic
AGAIN!!


Regards
Arne

Hello again,

Let me say this again. I am NOT trying to make a "Zero Force Motor". I built the motor I built for the purposes of experimentation. I only posted the video of it to this thread to show Bro. Mikey that an air-cored motor will not run away and does in fact have BEMF.

I appreciate your input about my motor but I have already established my goals and procedures for what I want to accomplish.

As far as your comment about the coils not being transformer coupled because they are air cored, that is incorrect. Air cored transformers are regularly used in RF circuits. And they do not induce corruption or make a mess of the signal.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[seaad]

,,,,COLOR="Blue"

"I am NOT trying to make a "Zero Force Motor". I built the motor I built for the purposes of experimentation."
I thought so also. Becauce of NSNS. My build inspiration comes now from the "Adams motor".

"I appreciate your input about my motor but I have already established my goals and procedures for what I want to accomplish."
Good!

"As far as your comment about the coils not being transformer coupled because they are air cored, that is incorrect. "
More or less. I assume, at these low motor frequencies just high freq. spikes will "jump" over! ("jump"= incorrect word )

"Air cored transformers are regularly used in RF circuits."
I know I have been working with radio most part of my life. Not electrical motors.

"And they do not induce corruption or make a mess of the signal."
But together with the switching transistors they do so in the simulation with somewhat weak coupling.
Does your signals on the output coils mirror the gates signals, on the bench?

Respectfully
Arne

[citfta]

Hi Arne,

In answer to your last question about distortion of the signal applied to the base of the transistors let's look at the schematic. As you see I am using an opto-coupler to apply the signal to the base. I am doing that so that my transistor does not spend much time in between on and off. The opto-coupler gives me very quick on and off times.

If you look at my scope shot you can see the area that looks solid during the on time of the pulse. If you were to expand the scope shot to better see the solid area you would see it is actually made up of a bunch of 2.5 khz pulses. And each pulse is very nearly a perfect square wave at that frequency. If I increase my frequency to about 10 khz or so then I do begin to see some distortion and my output from my generator winding also begins to drop. The signal shown on the scope shot is from the generator winding so it will show if there is any distortion from the air-core coupling.

Thanks for your interest.

Respectfully,
Carroll

One added thought is that maybe the simulation does realistically show the proper coupling of the windings because my coil is actually a trifilar coil and not two separate air coils.

[seaad]

Hi Citfta

Thanks. It's good to have some feedback from reality so I get a feeling of how much I can trust the simulations.

Regards
Arne

[Aaron]

bloch wall

I have. I cannot find why it is named or called "zero force". It obviously does have force(s) associated with it. Why call call it zero? Can you answer that? Or provide a link which addresses the zero part. I've watched John B explain how it works. He even talks about mechanical load and torque, which indicates non-zero force.

Thanks,

bi

It is a zero vector motor - it is a neutral line motor. These are synonymous with zero force motor and are the original terms John used to name it. It is a reference to the magnet's bloch wall.

[Bodkins]

I have. I cannot find why it is named or called "zero force". It obviously does have force(s) associated with it. Why call call it zero? Can you answer that? Or provide a link which addresses the zero part. I've watched John B explain how it works. He even talks about mechanical load and torque, which indicates non-zero force.

Thanks,

bi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4

[Aaron]

optimum setup

My goal from the beginning of the ZFM project is to run it on the three battery methodology and have it turn the Kromrey generator.

Turion evidently has a similar thought.

[BroMikey]

Yes but my problem is that I can't explain the difference between
how a standard pulse motor with iron works vs a zero force one.

These are the characteristics

#1) I know that it runs high RPM's
#2) I know it has no iron
#3) I think the right hand rule does not apply
#4) I know it runs on low amps due to zero iron
#5) I know that by comparison "there is no BEMF associated with it"
#6) Small on torque

These are a few things i have heard but to go to the heart of what
sticks out i am unsure of why this mtr is special. Maybe i forgot something?

[BroMikey]

One:
get a flywheel


Two:
Build it, see what it will do

Three:
it will charge the third battery at a rate GREATER than the
discharge of the primary batteries, something few motors will do.
Build it, run it,

Post #31 tells me to build it and see, it also says to get a flywheel.
The other statements relate to high RPM's so I was right i guess.

In other words there are no explanations yet until more builders
come forth. I like the part about this mtr is just as good as the
Matt Mod Mtr where is does the magic on all the batteries. Not
much of a theological expose but is good enough for me.

On the contrary I don't think that basic requirements or assessments
will bore everyone to sleep so they don't come back to this thread, I
think it is the reason why so many threads lay dormant due to the
lack of reaching a common understanding of what is being suggested.

Hardly anyone will build it. How many do you know building the
Matt Mod Mtr? Zhit- ain't nobody gonna build it especially if they
don't know what it is for.

Your delivery is most exciting, your approach is "THIS IS WHAT IT DOES"
"BUILD IT" telling everyone that it is a good one. Coming from you I would
have to say that it is.

Still I have no clue why.

[bistander]

Bloch wall

It is a zero vector motor - it is a neutral line motor. These are synonymous with zero force motor and are the original terms John used to name it. It is a reference to the magnet's bloch wall.

Felix Bloch (1905-1983) was Stanford's first Nobel Prize winner, 1952 for work in nuclear magnetic resonance techniques. From: Felix Bloch facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Felix Bloch

After spending the academic year 1930–1931 with Heisenberg in Leipzig, Bloch wrote his Leipziger Habilitationsschrift. In this work, he systematically studied exchange-interaction problems and residual magnetization in ferromagnets and, at the same time, developed much of the formalism which has been used ever since in condensed-matter theory and problems of collective phenomena. Beyond its contribution to the theory of domain walls, this work serves as a bridge between the quantum theory of ferromagnetism in the 1930s and present theories of many-particle systems (see Hoddeson et al.). Bloch was also able to work out the thickness and structure of the boundary walls, and the wall structure became known as the Bloch wall.

From the International Electrotechnical Commission:

IEC 60050 - International Electrotechnical Vocabulary - Details for IEV number 121-12-55: "Bloch wall"

Bloch wall
domain wall in which the vector component of the magnetic area moment perpendicular to the plane of the wall is substantially constant, within and on either side of the wall
Note – Bloch walls are normally found only in bulk materials and thick films; in thinner films below a critical thickness, the formation of Néel walls is favourable from energy considerations.

[SOURCE: 221-02-45 MOD]

Words have meaning. "Bloch wall" was used, and had and still has a specific meaning which has little or nothing to do with John Bedini's discussion of an air core coil. John should have called it a Bedini wall.

To me it seems like he did the same thing with "force" and "vector", both are words which already had definitions, and are non-zero in his motor. I have nothing against the thing other than the misuse of terminology. I like see to folks experimenting with electric machinery. I've done so myself for decades and picked up a fair amount of knowledge about the machines and related physics. And I'm willing to share.

Regards,

bi

[Aaron]

John Bedini's model

Felix Bloch (1905-1983) was Stanford's first Nobel Prize winner, 1952 for work in nuclear magnetic or resonance techniques. From: Felix Bloch facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Felix Bloch



From the International Electrotechnical Commission:

IEC 60050 - International Electrotechnical Vocabulary - Details for IEV number 121-12-55: "Bloch wall"



Words have meaning. "Bloch wall" was used, and had and still has a specific meaning which has little or nothing to do with John Bedini's discussion of an air core coil. John should have called it a Bedini wall.

To me it seems like he did the same thing with "force" and "vector", both are words which already had definitions, and are non-zero in his motor. I have nothing against the thing other than the misuse of terminology. I like see to folks experimenting with electric machinery. I've done so myself for decades and picked up a fair amount of knowledge about the machines and related physics. And I'm willing to share.

Regards,

bi

The Bloch Wall is giving a reference to a specific location on a magnet between the poles - that is what it is called by definition. That definition includes an OPINION of what it is and how it operates - nothing more and nothing less like countless other definitions in physics, astronomy, agriculture, etc... that for the purposes of identification, we know what they are regardless of the fact that many of the definitions to define such things are completely WRONG. It is only called a Bloch Wall because of someone's name and in the mind of the conventional viewpoint, that person must automatically know more about the intrinsic nature of it, which is never the rule - in reality.

Whether it is what the conventional viewpoint is or not is one issue and a completely other issue is how John Bedini sees that Bloch Wall operating. No matter what, we know that we are talking about the place on the magnet between the poles and that is indisputable. What is also indisputable is that John Bedini has his own viewpoints, right or wrong, about what is happening at that Bloch Wall, period.

Based on John's viewpoints of what happens there is at the premise of many of his magnetic models and that is also indisputable. Whether he is right or wrong is one issue and is completely separate and irrelevant from the issue of what his viewpoint is.

Now that we know what his viewpoint is, in whole or in part, the Zero Force Motor is a reference to a motor that has a significant if not the most significant relationship with the Bloch Wall of the coils surrounding the rotor and this is also indisputable.

Yes, words have meaning and for good reason but when a word identifies something that is supposed to have a certain meaning based on how it is perceived to operate and we come to a better understanding, then we clarify that definition by upgrading it which John did quite well in brief in the video that Bodkins posted. Noone is required to agree with that understanding.

The same issue exists with the definition of COP or coefficient of performance. I can't tell you how many engineers have tried to argue over the years that it can only apply to heat pumps even though the fact is that it is a ratio between output work compared to what we provide excluding free environmental input - that does not mean we need to create a completely different word (or phrase) for mechanical systems that create more work than we have to input, it doesn't include electrical systems that create more work than we input, it doesn't include chemical systems that create more work than the sum of the input chemicals on their own, etc. We can still use the term COP because it is a reference to a concept or a thing, etc... and we understand that. Therefore, we can expand the definition to go beyond heat systems and can use COP to explain the performance of all systems that produce more work that we have to input.

This is the same thing as Bloch Wall - we know it is that place where the polarities separate so John uses that definition because it is common sense about what he is talking about is a place on a magnet then he goes on to explain how he thinks it operates - very simple.

It shouldn't be called a Bedini Wall because he didn't discover a new place on a magnet, just a way that an already known place on a magnet may actually operate, which is different than originally thought.

You can't define an elephant by grabbing it's tail or its leg, which is analogous to looking at John call this motor the Zero Force Motor, Zero Vector Motor, etc... you have to look at his work holistically and take the entire thing into account as one whole system. Otherwise, you're defining an elephant by only grabbing its leg.

So again, research it, look at John's whole model and see it from his own perspective instead of your own.

[BroMikey]

I told you in that post
1. High speed + flywheel = torque
2. Other configurations with a flywheel HAVE significantly more torque and STILL run on almost NO WATTS
3. High speed means high frequency charging which means ALL WORK DONE BY THIS MOTOR IS DONE FOR FREE

If those aren't enough reasons to build this motor, then DONT. Go find something better. Good luck with THAT.

Okay Okay I got it. Not bad, that sums it up nice and
easy for guys like me to understand the "WHY" ya know not just another
mtr but one with those characteristics should be an advancement.

When I run my SUUL coils the motor needs to go fast. Can one of these
run at normal speeds say 3000-6000rpm's? Or does it need to go over
10,000 rpm's or like Yaro said his runs 13,000? Can they be slowed down
some from 13 grand and still get the energy effect?

In other words does each zero motor build have to reach a specific node
(or as it is called Sweet spot) to be effective?

What if I wanted to run half that speed? That would still be double
the r's of what I got now. The thing is I don't know if I can get the
money for all that machine work for high tolerances.

[James McDonald]

Jame's Zero Force Motor

Okay Okay I got it. Not bad, that sums it up nice and
easy for guys like me to understand the "WHY" ya know not just another
mtr but one with those characteristics should be an advancement.

When I run my SUUL coils the motor needs to go fast. Can one of these
run at normal speeds say 3000-6000rpm's? Or does it need to go over
10,000 rpm's or like Yaro said his runs 13,000? Can they be slowed down
some from 13 grand and still get the energy effect?

In other words does each zero motor build have to reach a specific node
(or as it is called Sweet spot) to be effective?

What if I wanted to run half that speed? That would still be double
the r's of what I got now. The thing is I don't know if I can get the
money for all that machine work for high tolerances.

Hi All --

The easiest way to keep the RPM's down is to keep the voltage input to
the Bedini-Cole circuit under 36 volts. Since everyone will build their Zero Force Motor slightly different the resonance point where your motor coil goes into a 2500 RPM jump in just a few seconds is the scary part. Depending on the reed switch timing I can make my Zero Force Motor do this at 40 volts or at 55 volts. I have pushed the voltage up to 66 volts but only for a few seconds before backing the voltage off. I have had two events where the magnets few off even though they were glued on with some strong epoxy. To get to the higher voltages without using batteries I made a power supply that will go up to 180 volts DC with an adjustable AC input. My Zero Force Motor will start to spin at 2.7 volts. Currently I am working on a special Pulse Width Modulator board to control the speed of the motor. I am looking into buying some shaft to shaft hook up pieces to hook my Zero Force Motor up to a Volkswagen Alternator. Take a look at my YouTube Channel for my videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiMZZ0_0X10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfm5lFc3TI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utjk-PT7mFo


-- James