Electric Motor Secrets

[Peter Lindemann]

Thanks for your question

Dear Dr. Lindemann,

You state the above as if it were an arbitrarily-discovered characteristic of a certain type of motor. The relationship between Watts and Horsepower is by definition of the units themselves and has nothing to do with any particular machine. Is it your intention to confuse the reader or are you really that confused yourself?

No matter the machine, the efficiency, whatever...a Horsepower is 746W...they are two different units used for expressing power and have a fixed constant relationship like feet and inches, grams and ounces, etc. Your statement is very odd and could be rather confusing to the uneducated.

Bah

Dear Bah,

Actually, you are confused. A Horse Power is 550 foot-pounds of mechanical work per second. The unit was invented to rate steam engines when they first appeared, so people could understand how many horses the engine would replace for hauling loads. It is generally believed that 746 watts of electricity is EQUIVALENT to a horse power, but electricity itself does not perform physical work and therefore must be CONVERTED into mechanical energy using some APPLIANCE, such as an electric motor. It is taught (incorrectly) that an electric motor CONVERTS electricity into mechanical energy at the RATE of 746 watts = 550 ft-lbs/sec minus any losses in heat. I concede to you that commercially available motors seem to behave this way, but a close observation of these phenomena does not support this conclusion.

Everyone in this forum is well aware of the Laws of Thermodynamics and their apparent limitations. Michael Faraday's direct induction experiment and all of the motors and generators that are derived from this geometry work equally well as either a motor or a generator. In fact, they ALWAYS work as BOTH a motor and a generator, and these functions operate in opposition to each other. This is the limiting factor in these designs. I demonstrate this in detail in my DVD Electric Motor Secrets. By using a different geometry that specifically avoids the arrangement of moving current carrying conductors through magnetic fields, it is possible to build an electric motor that DOES NOT generate any counter effects. The operational efficiencies of these motors can exceed the generally believed limitations of the conversion rates you state.

You are welcome to believe whatever you want. But this forum is for people who voluntarily wish to explore a new phenomenon. There is a great deal of information available, both on my DVD and in this forum, for you to begin to explore a new energy paradigm. You are welcome to join us, or leave, but there is no one here who needs to be "saved" from a state of "confusion" by you.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

FE Student, Welcome

I bought the dvd and thought it was really interesting. I watched it many
times and learned a lot. Here are some questions I have for Peter Lindemann
or anybody who wants to respond. Thanks.

1. Is the rotating attraction motor superior to the Teal solenoid motor in torque?

2. What is a suitable material for the cylinder of the solenoid design?
Teflon? Nylon? Aluminum? Does the iron piston actually drag against or touch the iron jacket when it is folded under the coil in the Teal design?
This would help to support the piston.

3. This may be a dumb question, but in the video it is said that some DC
motors get an efficiency in the 95% area. Would it be possible to capture
any significant amount of inductive kick back from these motors to obtain
over 100% since we are only a few percent away?

4. The snubbers in the Teal motor seem to indicate that brief pulses were
applied, but doesn't the saturation of the stator and piston pose an upper
limit as to how strong the field can get, or can this be exceeded buy the
high ampere-turns?

5. Was the COP and efficiency ever measured on the solenoid motor
in the dvd? I was anticipating this but it was not shown. Can you give
details on this?

6. I think that an attracting keeper type of design,where a keeper moves only in a straight line, with a gap that would close to a distance of zero would be very strong wouldn't it?

Dear FE Student,

Thanks for joining the forum. Here are some answers to your questions.

1) The Rotary Attraction Motor and the Teal Solenoid Engine both work on the principle of a single electro-magnet attracting a piece of iron to produce mechanical energy. Only exhaustive experimentation will determine which design geometry is superior for the production of torque. One way or the other, the rotary designs have fewer parts and lower friction and these advantages may still make them more desirable in the long run.

2) The solenoid and its surrounding keeper must be made of a material that conducts magnetism AND releases its magnetization when the field is removed. The simplest material to use is Cast Iron, although a wide variety of materials can be used. Teflon, Nylon and aluminum are not useful here to define the magnetic circuit, but may be useful to create supporting structures and guide ways.

3) Yes, Switched Reluctance Motors are the most efficient electric motors available today. They already operate on the magnetic attraction principle and may be able to be converted to operate with some electrical recovery as well.

4) Teal did use very sharp, strong pulses. The high efficiency window of operation will be with magnetic field strengths below saturation of the piston/keeper system.

5) The efficiency of the solenoid engine in the DVD was not measured because it is low. I have measured it and it is about 25%. The point of that demonstration was to show a motor with No Back EMF.

6) You aren't the first to think this way. Patents have issued on this idea but other problems arise when the moving piece closes the gap completely. The impacts eventually deform the pieces and the systems make a lot of noise.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Learning curve....

Peter,
when you are showing the diagram of a double S rotor setup at the end of the video, I noticed, that the rotor is a little bit thicker than the startor. Is this crucial? Is the rotor thicker because that way it can better absorb those stray magnetic fields on the end of the startor piece?

EDIT: One more question for you Peter, what wire gauge would you recommend for the coil? All I got is AWG 21 wire, but if it's too thin, then I will order a bigger gauge wire, but it usually takes some weeks to deliver the wire form USA (its actually cheaper to buy these wires from ebay.com than to buy them here in my country). Then I could order the wire and it would arrive about as soon as I have finished the work with the motor. I have already made the bearing support blocks, the distancer cylinders and the base plate. There's some problems with the rotor, because when drawing those CAD files, I did not take into account the laser bean cut width. So when I drew those holes with a diameter 4.2mm, the actually came out 4.5mm, that means I will have to drill the holes bigger, because the 4mm diameter bolts are too small and the 5mm diameter bolts are too big for these holes. But that should not be a problem to do.

Thanks,
Gatis

Dear Jetijs,

There is no specific wire size recommendation. Smaller wire size, such as AWG 21 will work just fine. You will find that with that wire you may have to use higher voltages to get enough current through, but you will have more turns on your coil. The total Ampere-Turns is the field strength so there is always a trade-off. The coils with more turns will have a slower rise-time because they will have more counter EMF.

You are not going to be able to build a "final model" right away. You will have to experiment and learn.

Peter

[amigo]

If I may chime in, it is possible that our "Overlords" have their dirty fingers busy thwarting the attempts of the small alt. energy community from releasing the masses of the world from the Overlord claws. That could be one of the reasons we haven't seen any major developments or commercial models being sold. The stories about suppression could be true, if we believe the accounts of those who have experienced it first hand.

Here's one such account, give it a bit of a read if you can, it is an intriguing story:

The Home Page of Wade Frazier

It would take a blink of an eye for any of the corporate beasts to totally wipe Bedini, Bearden, Lindemann or anyone else off the planet. And they would do it without hesitation or regard for lives of people involved or their families, if their corporate interests become threatened in any way.

[Aaron]

Oct 1st - noon to 1pm Mountain time Interview

"On Oct. 1, 2007, from noon to 1:00 pm Mountain time, as part of the Free Energy Now (Free Energy Now -- Weekly Radio Show by PES Network, Inc.) radio series, Sterling D. Allan will conduct a 1-hour interview with Peter Lindemann regarding his Rotary Attraction Motor and related technologies."

Please pass this on...just found this on:
OS:Lindemann Rotary Attraction Motor - PESWiki

[amigo]

What a ... ?

I find it VERY disturbing that moderators here have chosen to remove the post from "Bah" in which he criticizes lack of final solutions and commercially available units based on alt.energy principles.

I did not find anything wrong with that post, it was someone's opinion and point of view. Removing it from the plain sight without even leaving any trails constitutes censorship of the worst kind.

We, as users of this forum, should not have to fear that our thoughts will be censored because someone else does not like what we are saying or thinking. That is just plain wrong and falls among the worst kinds of oppression, and believe me you would not know of it, but I would.

I was born and have lived in a Communist system where such things happen all the time. Witnessing them first hand and then coming here to the so called "free world" having to experience similar things sends cold shivers up my spine.

By removing the post and suppressing someone's thoughts, yet living in a system that boasts the freedom of speech - by law, is hypocritical and if moderators here are going to continue that way I shall have no part of it.

[Peter Lindemann]

Staying Polite, and ON TOPIC

I find it VERY disturbing that moderators here have chosen to remove the post from "Bah" in which he criticizes lack of final solutions and commercially available units based on alt.energy principles.

I did not find anything wrong with that post, it was someone's opinion and point of view. Removing it from the plain sight without even leaving any trails constitutes censorship of the worst kind.

We, as users of this forum, should not have to fear that our thoughts will be censored because someone else does not like what we are saying or thinking. That is just plain wrong and falls among the worst kinds of oppression, and believe me you would not know of it, but I would.

I was born and have lived in a Communist system where such things happen all the time. Witnessing them first hand and then coming here to the so called "free world" having to experience similar things sends cold shivers up my spine.

By removing the post and suppressing someone's thoughts, yet living in a system that boasts the freedom of speech - by law, is hypocritical and if moderators here are going to continue that way I shall have no part of it.

Dear Amigo,

I asked the Moderator to remove Bah's post because it was off topic and rude.

The purpose of this forum is to create a place where people can come and learn about a new way of building electric motors that produce high torque using magnetic attraction principles (such as in switched reluctance motors) that also take advantage of electrical energy recovery from a collapsing inductor (such as in John Bedini's SG system). Both of these processes are known to work and systems that design them both into the same machine have new advantages.

This is an educational forum for civilized participants. We have no obligation to uphold "free speech" here, or to entertain the uninformed opinions of people with bad attitudes. This is a scientific forum with the specific agenda for sharing and learn new ideas in a supportive environment, free of disruptions and distractions.

Anyone who chooses to post content counter to this agenda will be censored and banned from further posting. There are thousands of other forums where rude, off topic complaining is tolerated and those people can go there. Anyone coming here who is trying to learn the new ideas can enjoy a relatively "on topic" forum as a result.

If anyone feels the need to discuss politics, the limited illusions of "free speech" or communism, please start a different thread.

Peter

[Aaron]

purpose of Electric Motor Secrets thread

Just to clarify what this particular thread is about, I'll post message #2 in this thread:

"
Electric Motor Secrets Official Discussion Forum
The purpose of this thread is for the discussion of the DVD by Dr. Peter Lindemann called Electric Motor Secrets.

It would be greatly appreciated if you buy your own copy and watch it before posting any messages here as it will answer almost anything you want to know about Bob Teal's Magnipulsion engine.

However, Dr. Lindemann will be contributing some very helpful information here for those of you who are interested in building any of the versions of the the motor(s) discussed in the DVD.

Please keep your posts in this group on topic: Bob Teal, Magnipulsion, Magneteal, Electric Motor Secrets, etc...

If you want to discuss other attraction motor concepts or similar topics but not directly related to Electric Motor Secrets, please feel free to start a new thread."

This can be found here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...8.html#post916
That has been there since the beginning of this forum.

I have no problem with people being sincere about asking questions or even debating in a respectable way but outright attacking in our home is not tolerated. This isn't censorship. Bah personally attacked two of my good personal friends Peter & John and that isn't allowed.

If he/she were to act respectable as anyone should coming into someone else's home, I'm sure his message would either still be here or at least it would be moved to a new thread in regards to any skepticism about Peter, John's or Tom Bearden's work.

Also, I left Bah's original message and I left your response to it Amigo. I also left your response to his second message so there are indeed "trails" of another message that there was. I have no interest in covering up or hiding things. It was just that one particular post.

We want to keep this forum an enjoyable place for people to visit so please understand this. It was more how he said what he said that I have an issue with and not necessarily his skepticism.

[nali2001]

Motor design suggestion.

Hello Peter and all.

I need your input on this one.
Here I might have an idea/suggestion for at least a simple but good quality attraction motor stator. So have a look at this picture.
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/AttractionMotor01.jpg

Nr.1 What we have here is a stator core from a normal induction motor. Seen from the top with the windings removed.

Nr.2 Now I think that it will be necessary to remove each second finger, to make more room for good rotor performance.

Nr.3 Now we rewind the stator with a single wire in this fashion. Make sure that each finger has an opposite polarity.

Nr.4 Shows the desired field layout.

Nr.5 Shows the rotor. Notice that it is desired that the fingers on the rotor are somewhat wider than the fingers on the stator.

So here you have it. What do you think? In a sense it is a normal variable reluctance motor made out of a normal induction motor. Now the fingers might not be that wide in surface contact, but since a motor core is easily like 15cm long you do end up with a very considerable surface. And on top of that there are a lot of finger in a core like these. Plus you can keep the original motor housing. Now the rotor must preferably also made out of laminates, but a proof of concept solid steel one could be machined with ease. This other advantage is that, since the fingers are not that wide you could get away with short pulses which could be easily recovered.

Now I must admit that I have a bit of trouble figuring out if this one will be truly ‘no-backEmf’ according to the ways detailed in Peters DVD. So that is why I need your input on this one.

Thanks.
Steven

[Peter Lindemann]

Fingers on the Rotor.....

Hello Peter and all.

I need your input on this one.
Here I might have an idea/suggestion for at least a simple but good quality attraction motor stator. So have a look at this picture.
http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/AttractionMotor01.jpg

Nr.1 What we have here is a stator core from a normal induction motor. Seen from the top with the windings removed.

Nr.2 Now I think that it will be necessary to remove each second finger, to make more room for good rotor performance.

Nr.3 Now we rewind the stator with a single wire in this fashion. Make sure that each finger has an opposite polarity.

Nr.4 Shows the desired field layout.

Nr.5 Shows the rotor. Notice that it is desired that the fingers on the rotor are somewhat wider than the fingers on the stator.

So here you have it. What do you think? In a sense it is a normal variable reluctance motor made out of a normal induction motor. Now the fingers might not be that wide in surface contact, but since a motor core is easily like 15cm long you do end up with a very considerable surface. And on top of that there are a lot of finger in a core like these. Plus you can keep the original motor housing. Now the rotor must preferably also made out of laminates, but a proof of concept solid steel one could be machined with ease. This other advantage is that, since the fingers are not that wide you could get away with short pulses which could be easily recovered.

Now I must admit that I have a bit of trouble figuring out if this one will be truly ‘no-backEmf’ according to the ways detailed in Peters DVD. So that is why I need your input on this one.

Thanks.
Steven

Steven,

Interesting design. Why do you believe that the fingers on the rotor need to be as wide as they are drawn?

Peter

[nali2001]

Rotor explanation.

Well this might be a little hard to explain in plain words.
But is important that the rotor is free to move-on after an attraction to a given pole.

Now the problem is that the fingers of the stator will not ‘instantly’ demagnetize. If you look at if closely, the finger after the electro magnets has been turned off (or any electro magnet steel for that matter) needs some time to become ‘magnetically neutral’ again. This ‘demagnetization speed’ depends on the steel type of the core material and more specific on the hysteresis curve.

Now back to the attraction motor.
The problem exists when the fingers of the stator are as wide as the fingers on the rotor. You see, you want to maximize the ‘attraction interaction’ between the stator and rotor, so you keep the attraction pulse going until top dead center – in other words when the stator and rotor fingers are truly aligned. Now you need to shut off input power, so the rotor is not attracted anymore and is able to continue rotation to the next attraction cycle.
BUT IF you shut off the power at top dead center you have not yet fully demagnetized the poles. Since like I explained above, there is a relaxation time involved which takes time to fully become neutral. So in other words if you shut off power at top dead center you have not fully ‘released’ the rotor from the stators ‘magnetic grip’. And since it is at top dead center it wants, and must rotate onwards. But is ‘cannot’ since the steel is still in its natural process of becoming magnetically neutral, and thus is still somewhat magnetized. And so the free rotation after the attraction cycle becomes retarded to an extent.

See this animated picture:
Movie

Now this is where my suggested ‘wider rotor fingers’ come in.
The coil will shut off when the surface of the rotor fully registers with the surface of the stator. Now with the attraction phase over, the core will start to demagnetize. In this case that is fine since the rotor still has some way to go before it starts to leave the stator core. So by the time the rotor starts to leave the stator finger area, the demagnetization should be complete and thus the rotor can rotate freely and is not retarded. I make it sound like this ‘steel demagnetization’ takes ages, which is not so of course, but it will hinder the free rotation of the rotor if the rotor- and stator fingers are of equal width. This btw is the reason why commercial variable reluctance drives have a short ‘demagnetization pulse’ (just a short opposite-polarity pulse to speed up the core demagnetization)

Hope you can understand what I try to communicate here.
If not, let me know.

And please let me know if this ‘alteration of a normal induction motor setup' will result in a No Back-emf motor, because I have a bit of trouble getting the interaction between the various poles that are being generated.

Kind regards,
Steven

[mrl]

Franc Jakelj design

Steven,

Interesting design. Why do you believe that the fingers on the rotor need to be as wide as they are drawn?

Peter

Hi Peter,

What Steven is sort of describing is a motor configuration that was designed by Franc Jakelj in Slovenia. I have his "Alternative Theory of the Fundamental Operating Principles of Electric Motors" paper (translated from Slovenian). I can send it to you if you like. I can't let it loose on the net because there is money being charged for it. But I will send it to you if you give me an email address. You can then read his paper and analyze his design. It's extremely efficient and powerful according to the test numbers he has published.


Mike

[nali2001]

Interested

Hi Mike,
Well it goes without saying that I'm interested in that paper as well.
So if you are willing to share it with me it will be much appreciated.

I will drop you a personal message.

Thanks in advance
Kind regards,
Steven

[Panther]

Hi Steven,

What program did you use to draw this images?

bestregards,
Mike

[nali2001]

Photoshop cs2
Now let's return to the topic.

Steven