Roto Verter

[aladinlamp]

Hi all,
Forgive me for maybe a stupid question, but how can an AC induction motor run as a generator? I mean, in order to generate current, you need a moving magnetic field, but I have not seen any magnets on a induction motor rotor - only steel laminations. So how can the rotation of steel laminations create current in stator windings? Or is the magnetic flux provided via the steel shaft form the connected motor as a prime mover?
Thanks,
Jetijs

Induction Generator

[aladinlamp]

Ash,



The second RV motor is turned and run as a generator driving into a capacitor. This produces large circulating currents, but because they are out of phase with the voltage produced, this does NOT create any substantial mechanical loading on the generator due to the magnetic field functions.

Peter

Hi

what in theory can be done to help align current with voltage in the phase>?

thanx

[theremart]

Took the RV out for a spin today.

I decided to run the RV as long as was reasonable with my battery.

It ran for four hours. 14.00 V start 12.5 under load 12.1 under load finish

What blew me away after the motor heated up the amps Dropped.

It was running at .89 amps from the inverter on the ac side.

The draw on the battery was 1.25 amp to -1.30. with the 12.5 to 12.1 range. This really shook me up because the motor is running thru an inverter.

The motor got warm not hot, but very warm still could put my hand on it with no problem.

So I am thinking I can run this motor for well over 4 hours easily. It is a deep cycle battery, so I could of went down to 11 V but decided to stay in the green.

[Peter Lindemann]

No Stupid Questions!

Hi all,
Forgive me for maybe a stupid question, but how can an AC induction motor run as a generator? I mean, in order to generate current, you need a moving magnetic field, but I have not seen any magnets on a induction motor rotor - only steel laminations. So how can the rotation of steel laminations create current in stator windings? Or is the magnetic flux provided via the steel shaft form the connected motor as a prime mover?
Thanks,
Jetijs

Jetijs,

There are no stupid questions. There are only people too stupid to ask them! Always "risk" looking stupid, because if you don't, you will lose an opportunity to learn something.

At first glance, it does seem odd that the induction motor can work as a generator. After all, there are just stator windings and laminations. And, if the iron laminations are perfectly de-magnetized, the machine will NOT start to generate electricity if turned. It takes just a small amount of residual magnetism in the iron to get the process going. Or, if it doesn't start spontaneously, you can quickly connect and disconnect a battery across one of the windings. This will impose a magnetic field in the system and get the oscillations started. After that, it keeps going on its own.

Peter

[Jetijs]

Thats great, Peter
Now I understand. Thank you.
And thank you aladinlamp for your link, I found it interesting and useful
Jetijs

[aladinlamp]

Hi


on RV alternator side, are we trying to align voltage with current to phase without reflecting to prime mover ?

OR

are we trying to extract usable energy, while voltage and current is off phase(virtual power,reactive power) without reflecting to prime mover ??

Thanx

[Peter Lindemann]

RV Alternator

Hi


on RV alternator side, are we trying to align voltage with current to phase without reflecting to prime mover ?

OR

are we trying to extract usable energy, while voltage and current is off phase(virtual power,reactive power) without reflecting to prime mover ??

Thanx

aladinlamp,

In all of the literature I have seen, the RV Alternator is set up to produce reactive power, which is voltage and current OUT OF PHASE with each other. The coil of the alternator (L) and the capacitor load (C) produce an LC resonant tank circuit where energy freely oscillates back and forth. Since there are no Watts of Real Power present, this energy oscillation does not produce a mechanical load on the Prime Mover. Then, using various circuits, they work toward converting some of this energy back to a useful form in a way that does not dampen out the resonant behavior of the LC tank circuit.

I hope this helps you understand this aspect of the RV method.

Peter

[aladinlamp]

aladinlamp,

In all of the literature I have seen, the RV Alternator is set up to produce reactive power, which is voltage and current OUT OF PHASE with each other. The coil of the alternator (L) and the capacitor load (C) produce an LC resonant tank circuit where energy freely oscillates back and forth. Since there are no Watts of Real Power present, this energy oscillation does not produce a mechanical load on the Prime Mover. Then, using various circuits, they work toward converting some of this energy back to a useful form in a way that does not dampen out the resonant behavior of the LC tank circuit.

I hope this helps you understand this aspect of the RV method.

Peter

OK thanx, but there are circuits out there, which are trying to extract useful energy from alternator side as well as from prime mover.In case of prime mover there has to be real power, since its doing real work.Correct me if i am wrong, but in prime mover we have both, real power which turns the shaft as well as reactive power-LC resonance, which we are trying to capture without affecting real power consuption and LC resonance.
In case of alternator, we have just LC resonce, which we are trying to catch without affecting it.

Thanx

[Peter Lindemann]

That Is Correct

OK thanx, but there are circuits out there, which are trying to extract useful energy from alternator side as well as from prime mover.In case of prime mover there has to be real power, since its doing real work.Correct me if i am wrong, but in prime mover we have both, real power which turns the shaft as well as reactive power-LC resonance, which we are trying to capture without affecting real power consuption and LC resonance.
In case of alternator, we have just LC resonce, which we are trying to catch without affecting it.

Thanx

aladinlamp,

You are right. Some of the experimenters are reporting on their attempts to harvest energy from the reactive power circulating in the LC tank on the Prime Mover side as well. Since the motor requires both Real Power and Reactive Power to operate, a certain amount of Reactive Power is available for this purpose. This is also an interesting line of research. Some of these circuits are pretty clever, and I look forward to learning more about this work.

The underlying principle here, aladinlamp, is that ANYWHERE you have an LC tank with Reactive Power circulating in it, you can attempt these methods. Some are even doing it with just a transformer and a capacitor. These experiments are sometimes called the "Transverter".

If you look here: http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/articles/18930200/fig01.gif Tesla is showing the basic methodology. The first drawing on the left (Ib) shows resonating the AC power in a capacitor directly from the generator and drawing off voltage peaks through the spark-gap and dumping this to a second stage load consisting of light bulbs and motors. In the next drawing, (IIb) Tesla shows the same basic process, but resonating a local transformer with a capacitor on the secondary. In fact, in the body of the article where he describes these circuits, he states that example IIb is the most practical and cost effective method of the six examples.

These circuits were not design by Tesla to "convert Reactive Power back to Real Power". Strictly speaking, they were designed for the purpose of manipulating Reactive Power for the release of Radiant Energy. The QUALITY of the energy coming off the back end of these circuits is fundamentally different than the "normal electricity" used in the LC tank. That is what makes "closing the loop" so difficult. Tesla never showed how to do this (that I am aware of), but we all suspect he figured it out, and used it to power the Pierce Arrow car in the 1920's.

Peter

[ashtweth]

HI Peter , Aaron et all.

Whoops, sorry i meant to say PF correcting through the RV method is superior, meaning PF correcting for energy savings , but i got an awesome education from Peter just then so what can i

Yup sure, also the mechanical Dyno tests would be good, we will have a Drill and water pump to do some comparisons for Peter, Dont forget taking Freq driven RV mode into account.

Now Aaron i think you need a Trafo and to run it at 1/4 of the rated voltage for RV mode, we have a single phase Sch in the energy saving comp, am not too sure what yr asking, are you asking how to run that in RV mode? sorry guys have been busy working and had a few late nights

[Peter Lindemann]

Speak English, Please

HI Peter , Aaron et all.

Whoops, sorry i meant to say PF correcting through the RV method is superior, meaning PF correcting for energy savings , but i got an awesome education from Peter just then so what can i

Yup sure, also the mechanical Dyno tests would be good, we will have a Drill and water pump to do some comparisons for Peter, Dont forget taking Freq driven RV mode into account.

Now Aaron i think you need a Trafo and to run it at 1/4 of the rated voltage for RV mode, we have a single phase Sch in the energy saving comp, am not too sure what yr asking, are you asking how to run that in RV mode? sorry guys have been busy working and had a few late nights

Ash,

I like you. You seem like a smart guy. You are considered the "RV Master" in this forum. So, I say this with all due respect.

A "drill and water pump" comparison is NOT a dynamometer test. A dynamometer is a CALIBRATED, scientific instrument that produces a measurement in KNOWN UNITS. Why do you RV guys insist on all of this "scotch tape and bubble gum" pseudo-science? Measure the d*** torque of the RV with a dynamometer, and quit fooling around! You will SEE for yourself that the COP>1, the mythology will be put to rest, and EVERYBODY can move on.

Also, I have already discussed the problem of the RV literature using JARGON. You have said you would clean it up. But right here, you continue the practice. There are less than 100 people on the planet who know what a TRAFO is, and only the Lord himself knows what you mean by "we have a single phase Sch in the energy saving comp".

Ash, if I am not getting through to you, then I hope I am getting through to the others who are reading this forum. Science is a discipline. Its various parts include: 1) the proposal of a hypothesis. This proposal must be defined in a language of commonly used terms whose definitions are shared by everybody. 2) An experiment is then conducted, based on the hypothesis, and the results of this experiment are PUBLISHED. 3) Dis-interested third parties read this account, and then become interested in the experiment. 4) Some of these third parties then try to duplicate the experiment, and PUBLISH their experimental results, as well.

The RotoVerter has sort of been through this process, but not really. The hypothesis is that "wiring a 3-phase motor by the method proposed creates superior motor efficiency". Many tests have been run showing energy savings and many people have duplicated the experiments, but in all of this time, no one has published QUANTIFIED EVIDENCE that the efficiency of the motor (conversion of electrical input to mechanical output) is actually increased. From what I have seen, all you have proved is that most induction motor applications WASTE a lot of energy needlessly. You have NOT proved your method is more efficient, it is simply LESS WASTEFUL!

This is a very useful finding, but it does NOT support the original hypothesis!

Do the science correctly, and you will see what it is. Then report the experimental results to the rest of us, in a language we understand. Then we will know the facts as well.

Peter

[theremart]

RE: Do the Science

I agree with you Peter, we need to get real measurements to get a good handle of what is happening. I would really like to see you bring your measuring devices to bear on the RV. Or, we should find an industry standard measuring device for torque / HP, and apply it to the RV.

I believe Ash has in some since demonstrated some of this because he has shown the RV can do the same tasks of other motors at a given rating ( drill thru wood metal etc. )

To me the real science is does my electric bill go down? Or, did I spend so much in chasing free energy that it would of been cheaper just to pay for extra electricity. How long does it take for the RV to pay for itself.

I am still counting the cost of the benefits of the RV, verses what other avenues present.

I am wondering, if I go to the next level, ( get an inverter made ) would I be any futher ahead than if I simply bought a DC motor, converted it to Peter's motor design, and ran it. This would have the advantage of not needing an inverter, but has the disadvantage of trying to work on the rotor and getting it machined just right.

I like Peter's motors, but it is an unproven field for me, I have no measured results of a specific motor off the shelf I can compare to. I do see the demonstrated motors in the videos, but I don't have an exact of a motor that is recommended for this task, so I will have to do some digging to find it, and explore myself. On the other hand the RV has specific motors tried and pioneered.

To Peter's point, I agree we need a real test of what the RV can do, and I think a test with various types of RV, those with the frequency generated inverter, those plugged into the wall. Etc...

I would like to see the same with Peter's motors, that is done with the RV. Specific models that have been converted, and a webpage that shows the steps to get there, like now exists with the RV.

Just some thoughts...


mart

[Peter Lindemann]

Clear Understanding

I agree with you Peter, we need to get real measurements to get a good handle of what is happening. I would really like to see you bring your measuring devices to bear on the RV. Or, we should find an industry standard measuring device for torque / HP, and apply it to the RV.

I believe Ash has in some since demonstrated some of this because he has shown the RV can do the same tasks of other motors at a given rating ( drill thru wood metal etc. )

To me the real science is does my electric bill go down? Or, did I spend so much in chasing free energy that it would of been cheaper just to pay for extra electricity. How long does it take for the RV to pay for itself.

I am still counting the cost of the benefits of the RV, verses what other avenues present.

I am wondering, if I go to the next level, ( get an inverter made ) would I be any futher ahead than if I simply bought a DC motor, converted it to Peter's motor design, and ran it. This would have the advantage of not needing an inverter, but has the disadvantage of trying to work on the rotor and getting it machined just right.

I like Peter's motors, but it is an unproven field for me, I have no measured results of a specific motor off the shelf I can compare to. I do see the demonstrated motors in the videos, but I don't have an exact of a motor that is recommended for this task, so I will have to do some digging to find it, and explore myself. On the other hand the RV has specific motors tried and pioneered.

To Peter's point, I agree we need a real test of what the RV can do, and I think a test with various types of RV, those with the frequency generated inverter, those plugged into the wall. Etc...

I would like to see the same with Peter's motors, that is done with the RV. Specific models that have been converted, and a webpage that shows the steps to get there, like now exists with the RV.

Just some thoughts...


mart

Mart,

I agree with most of what you say. "My" motor ideas are still in their formative stage of development. When more refined designs are worked out, they will have to be subjected to all of the scientific standards required to determine their overall COP. The units I have demonstrated in the YouTube clips show a "window of opportunity" for high COP operation, but do not demonstrate high COP operation. The motor Jetijs is building should solve many of the issues of high torque production and efficient energy recovery. If it works out, we will be able to get some firm measurements on his motor.

But the RV has been around for a long time and many claims have been made for its performance. So let's look at the RV situation. You say "I believe Ash has in some since demonstrated some of this because he has shown the RV can do the same tasks of other motors at a given rating ( drill thru wood metal etc. )" This is true. But I have a drill press that draws about 500 watts doing nothing. Left running for 15 minutes, the motor gets really hot. This drill press motor is wasting 95% of the electricity going into it. I have proved to myself, that if I just dial down the applied voltage with a VARIAC, the motor will still perform all of its work requirements on 60 volts. Cutting the voltage in half also cuts the current in half, so the total power is cut by 75%. Now, the motor is only drawing 125 watts, it runs cool, and still drills anything I ask it to. This is before Power Factor Correction, which can even save more. This is before re-lubricating the bearings, which can lower the input even more.

The point here is that these are power management techniques. The questions are: 1) Does it save money? YES, 2) Does the RV optimize all of these savings methods? YES, 3) Is there still sufficient mechanical energy produced to operate the drill and perform all of its necessary functions? YES, 4) Has the "efficiency" (ratio of input electrical energy to output mechanical energy) of the motor increased? I don't think so. 5) Has every drop of wasted energy been eliminated? YES. Is this method of energy savings worth doing? YES.

Is the RV method a "Free Energy" method? Here is where the definition of words is extremely important. In ECONOMIC terms, the RV definitely provides significant energy savings, and ANYTIME you can produce the same amount of useful work for less input, you have freed yourself of the economic burden of purchasing that amount of energy. This IS free energy in economic terms. But in terms of PHYSICS, does the machine produce more energy than it consumes, or operate at a COP>1? The answer is........ in the dynamometer tests that have not been run yet! I believe the answer will be NO, for the reasons I have stated before.

The bottom line is that lowering bearing friction and Power Factor Correcting your various tools and appliances is WELL WORTH DOING, and can save you lot's of money over their useful life. IF you have appliances that have large 3-phase motors in them, converting them to the RotoVerter wiring scheme may well be worth doing. But the economics of replacing all single-phase motors with large 3-phase motors that are wired this way, and remounting them in your appliances MAY NOT be worth all of the time, money and effort simply for the energy saved. It IS worth doing as an EXPERIMENT, to learn about it. If the issue here is economics, and not physics, then the path that saves the most money is the best path.

Peter

[sykavy]

I think this is relevant to this thread. Peter's motor is related to Switch Reluctant Motors

Reluctance motor : AC MOTORS

And The American Society of Mechanical Engineers sings its praises.(below link)
The rise of VSR motors
So Peter isn't just chasing a pipe dream it also has a history and present day applications, though his motor may have slight differences.( I'm not so knowledgeable about these differences, but I know there is a relationship in principle)

[Peter Lindemann]

Members Only

I think this is relevant to this thread. Peter's motor is related to Switch Reluctant Motors

Reluctance motor : AC MOTORS

And The American Society of Mechanical Engineers sings its praises.(below link)
The rise of VSR motors
So Peter isn't just chasing a pipe dream it also has a history and present day applications, though his motor may have slight differences.( I'm not so knowledgeable about these differences, but I know there is a relationship in principle)

Sykavy,

Excellent!! The first link is relevant here and in the EMS forum. There is a lot to learn here for beginners as far as how the different GEOMETRIES affect the behavior of different motors. This is a primary theme in my EMS DVD.

The second link seems to be limited to Members Only. I do not encourage pirating restricted material, so i guess the rest of us can't view this, but at least you can see that Switched Reluctance Motors are very powerful and rising in popularity.

Thanks for the links.

Peter