Electric Motor Secrets

[sykavy]

Well I received the DVD on really good time, seeing it had to get to the UK.

So popped it in my laptop case and thought I would have a look at it in my Hotel Room one evening this week, as working away from home alot at the moment.

But it will not play in my Laptop DVD , I think this is probably because it is not a pressed DVD but just a DVD-R.

Will try it it my DVD Player when I get home, but what a bummer as actually found a free night to watch it and now even more intrigued to view it after reading this thread.

I am sure it will be worth the wait

Regards

Sean.

I had simular problems when i recieved DVDs when i lived in Europe. You'll in region 2 USA is in region 1. Microsft will usualy play a region 1 DVD 4x then never again. Try it on a multy systems palyer

[Peter Lindemann]

Basic Electricity

hahaha yes i wouldnt actually use the microwave tube in the oven or the HV winding in the transformer but the core in the transformer with out the existing coil might be useful. as for the monopole.. use the simplified circut in the monopole3 yahoo discusion group, as peter said for learning about the recovery circut. the cap setup is more advanced. i built that one myself but i am backpeddling even further right now and reading about how a transistor works because yes i built the monopole but now i realize i still dont fully understand how the circut components interact with each other!! All About Circuits : Free Electric Circuits Textbooks my neighbor found this link for me to study transistiors its pretty readable. and i am still trying to locate a copy of the book peter refers to in his dvd "electricity basics"

cheers!
Eric

Eric,

The book you are looking for is Basic Electricity. Amazon.com has 6 copies in hardbound and 54 new and used copies in paper back. Here's the link:

Amazon.com: Basic Electricity: Complete Course, Volumes 1 Through 5: Books: Nooger & Neville Inc. Van Valkenburgh

Good luck,

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

DVD in NTSC format

Well I received the DVD on really good time, seeing it had to get to the UK.

So popped it in my laptop case and thought I would have a look at it in my Hotel Room one evening this week, as working away from home alot at the moment.

But it will not play in my Laptop DVD , I think this is probably because it is not a pressed DVD but just a DVD-R.

Will try it it my DVD Player when I get home, but what a bummer as actually found a free night to watch it and now even more intrigued to view it after reading this thread.

I am sure it will be worth the wait

Regards

Sean.

Sean,

Sorry you couldn't watch my DVD in your laptop. The DVD is professionally duplicated, but it is in NTSC format, not PAL. I hope you can find a player that plays both formats. It plays very well on computers here in the USA.

Once again, sorry for the problem.

Peter

[Tripled]

Solenoids, Electromagnets, and Electromagnetic Windings by Charles N. Underhill

There are a handful of used copies there.

Solenoids, Electromagnets, and Electromagnetic Windings by Charles N. Underhill,

Internet Archive: Details: Solenoids, electromagnets and electro-magnetic windings ... 223 illustrations

pdf, djvu, text

Here's another reference i found,

Elementary Lectures on Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses, and other Transients (1911):

Internet Archive: Details: Elementary lectures on electric discharges, waves and impulses, and other transients

Tripled

[sykavy]

Peter
I just saw your video it came in the mail yesterday. All i can say is you have a talent to teach. I understood almost all of it.

I do have a few questions that i had trouble with. How does one handle the possible friction in the Teal piston. When it is in the relaxed mode and not being magnetized, what would keep it from scraping the sides?

Would alluminum work to hold in the magnitism as well as iron? I was thinking that the extra weight could off-set the increase in power.

Btw the tork of the teal example didn't seem strong.

It was a very interesting DVD and i think trade high schools should get a copy of it. There is definitely some more work to be done on the perfection of the electric motor

[Peter Lindemann]

Thank you!

Peter
I just saw your video it came in the mail yesterday. All i can say is you have a talent to teach. I understood almost all of it.

I do have a few questions that i had trouble with. How does one handle the possible friction in the Teal piston. When it is in the relaxed mode and not being magnetized, what would keep it from scraping the sides?

Would alluminum work to hold in the magnitism as well as iron? I was thinking that the extra weight could off-set the increase in power.

Btw the tork of the teal example didn't seem strong.

It was a very interesting DVD and i think trade high schools should get a copy of it. There is definitely some more work to be done on the perfection of the electric motor

Sykavy,

Thanks for the compliment. Yes, friction in the electric solenoid engine designs is a problem. Special structures must be put in place to minimize the friction. This is why I have suggested going back to the rotary designs where friction can be minimized more easily.

Aluminum does NOT contain the magnetic field like iron and cannot be substituted as the magnetic keeper in these motors.

Yes, the torque in the piston engine design I showed was weak. I said as much in the film. The reason it was weak was that the magnetic field still had over 1 inch of air gap at the end of the stroke. To get the mechanical power out of these motors, you must fold the magnetic field all the way down into the moving iron piece. Total air gap at the end of the power stroke should be no more than .010 inches.

I showed that motor for two reasons. The first reason is that it did show the NO BACK EMF behavior in direct contrast to the induction motor. The second reason is that I could demonstrate that the more I folded the magnetic field down, the more mechanical energy it produced WITHOUT drawing more electricity. Both of these are important PRINCIPLES for you to understand if you want to design a motor for yourself.

Thanks for your questions,

Peter

[sykavy]

Sykavy,

Thanks for the compliment. Yes, friction in the electric solenoid engine designs is a problem. Special structures must be put in place to minimize the friction. This is why I have suggested going back to the rotary designs where friction can be minimized more easily.

Aluminum does NOT contain the magnetic field like iron and cannot be substituted as the magnetic keeper in these motors.

Yes, the torque in the piston engine design I showed was weak. I said as much in the film. The reason it was weak was that the magnetic field still had over 1 inch of air gap at the end of the stroke. To get the mechanical power out of these motors, you must fold the magnetic field all the way down into the moving iron piece. Total air gap at the end of the power stroke should be no more than .010 inches.

I showed that motor for two reasons. The first reason is that it did show the NO BACK EMF behavior in direct contrast to the induction motor. The second reason is that I could demonstrate that the more I folded the magnetic field down, the more mechanical energy it produced WITHOUT drawing more electricity. Both of these are important PRINCIPLES for you to understand if you want to design a motor for yourself.

Thanks for your questions,

Peter

The motor was great , I know it was just an illistration. Sorry if i sounded like i thought it was a proto-type.

It is such a simple idea i don't know why more people haven't followed this way of thinking.
I loved the point of separating the EMF and the mechanical.

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile?

The reason I ask is that id like to get some students involved. They will enter a solar energy race with manned boats. If i could get a motor to run on less energy and get back the emf and dump it into another motor instead of a battery it could be pretty impressive.

[sykavy]

The motor was great , I know it was just an illistration. Sorry if i sounded like i thought it was a proto-type.

It is such a simple idea i don't know why more people haven't followed this way of thinking.
I loved the point of separating the EMF and the mechanical.

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile?

The reason I ask is that id like to get some students involved. They will enter a solar energy race with manned boats. If i could get a motor to run on less energy and get back the emf and dump it into another motor instead of a battery it could be pretty impressive.

After looking at the other discussions here, i apologize for my silly questions. Im still working on getting my SSG going and others here are way ahead in the experiments and training.

[Peter Lindemann]

No Problem...

Sykavy,

No problem. Thanks for the apology. In this life, we ALL start at the beginning and learn at our own pace. Building your own machines and running your own experiments is very important if you are going to learn this material. Be patient with yourself. Learning happens. It cannot be forced.

Your efforts are not less important because you are at a different position on the "learning curve". It is your commitment to learn it that raises your value in the conversation. Any of us are glad to share what we know, and are doubly glad when you are willing to take responsibility for coming up to speed by your own effort.

Keep up the good work.

Peter

[lighty]

Another question, would the iron start to become magnetized after awhile?

It depends on the kind of material you're using and the strength of the magnetic field you're applying to it. If you use the ordinary iron, sure it would soon got to be magnetized. If you use some soft steel (soft in the sense of it's magnetic hysteresis characteristic) it probably won't happen at least not if you don't apply to it some extremely strong magnetic field. Finally if you use some narrow hysteresis characteristic material if would never get to be magnetized.

You can learn more about magnetic hysteresis here Hysteresis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I apologize if I barged in this discussion but I'm just trying to help.

[sykavy]

It depends on the kind of material you're using and the strength of the magnetic field you're applying to it. If you use the ordinary iron, sure it would soon got to be magnetized. If you use some soft steel (soft in the sense of it's magnetic hysteresis characteristic) it probably won't happen at least not if you don't apply to it some extremely strong magnetic field. Finally if you use some narrow hysteresis characteristic material if would never get to be magnetized.

You can learn more about magnetic hysteresis here Hysteresis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I apologize if I barged in this discussion but I'm just trying to help.

Dont apologize i welcome your imput, especially in the Radiant Energy thread, which sounds like youve got it. (Vy mate velmy dobry English tesh.) Thanks for the link! Im trying to learn.

[Peter Lindemann]

Flux-Gate Generator

Hallo Peter,
I have seen your video and find it a positive product and thank you for your input in this field. I know there are a lot more people to be thankful of like Bedini but this one is directed at you.

Anyway I like the Teal concept only the whole mechanical wear and tear of the pistons kind of bothers me. I mean a combustion motor can at least use oil to lubricate the pistons. Also I believe it will be quite noisy. But anyway I was kind of surprised when I saw in the video your ‘flux motor’ now the geometry was kind of familiar to me because I have tried in the past to build Ecklin-brown style variable reluctance generators. They were all made with great care. All made out of laminated material from microwave oven transformers. Machined to size, and each laminate reinsulated and reassembled. Only problem is that I never nearly managed to get the output levels described in this document.

fluxgate generator

But I did not know that you did something along these lines. Now I don’t know what your results were but mine were not really promising. The most I could get out of the best device is like 15 watt. But on the positive side, the thing is not really bothered by Lenz Law, since the coil and magnet are both stationary. And if you test the device and load the output coil the thing actually goes way up in rpm, which is of course the opposite if compared with normal generators which require more input torque once loaded. But like I said my output was ‘nothing’ and had much magnetic cogging and was noisy and all. But on your old picture I see quite some light bulbs so I presume you were getting a good amount out.

But back to the flux motor. I like this design. But you don’t tell much about it in the video. So what were the results? You mentioned on the audio interview that you got speed problems which limited the design to like 500 rpm? Was this due to your switching system or due to the slowness of the steel? Since the steel needs a given time to fully build up and relax again. And although some people thing this is neglectable I must point out that this IS a problem and I have seen it in more devices. Anyway here are some pics of my machines. (Note 00.jpg is not my system)

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/00.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/01.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/02.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/03.jpg

http://home.planet.nl/~sintt000/pics/04.jpg


Regards,
Steven

Dear Steven,

Sorry I never replied to this post. With everything else happening at that time, it just slipped through the cracks. So anyway, here is my reply.

The resemblance of the generators shown at the end of Electric Motor Secrets and the one's in your "fluxgate generator" link are NOT a coincidence. Actually, I am the inventor! It's ancient history now, but here's what happened.

In 1980, John Ecklin began offering a $500 prize to anyone who could design a viable generator to circumvent Lenz law. His original Stationary Armature Generator patent was the beginning of this search. I was 28 and living in Hilo, Hawaii. I ran dozens of experiments and eventually designed a machine I called the "Mechanical Rotary Transformer" in September of 1981. I sent copies of the design to John Ecklin and Bruce DePalma and asked for their advice. DePalma showed my design at an alternative energy conference in Toronto, Canada in late October, 1981 and it was seen by Pete Charles, an electrical engineer in the Sacramento area.

In a letter I received back from John Ecklin on November 21, 1981, John writes "I don't know how to advise you on a patent. I use the patent disclosure document program...." He also writes "Your MRT-1 is a well engineered device." All of my correspondence with John Ecklin is still in my files.

I took John Ecklin's advice and filed a patent disclosure document on the design on December 1, 1981. My original copy was stamped Received in the Patent Office Mail Room on December 4, 1981, file #104580. In that document I state "The device, called the Mechanical Rotary Transformer (MRT) consists, in its simplest configuration, of two "magnetic distributors" and four transformer cores and coils firmly bolted together."

Meantime, Pete Charles was back home building the first unit. He had it running by January 1982. He got my phone number from Bruce DePalma and called me. Unfortunately, a guest in the house picked up the phone and didn't write down the message, so I didn't know that Pete had called. When I didn't call Pete Charles back, he just figured I wasn't interested. In March, a young engineer showed up at Pete's place interested in testing the generator. That person was Paul Brown. The infamous "Paul Brown Report" issued on June 15, 1982. In the credits at the end, he states "We would like to express our thanks to Moss Research who made this project possible." Moss was Pete Charles' wife's maiden name and an alias he used once in a while.

I was first alerted to the existence of the "Paul Brown Report" when I received a letter from John Ecklin dated September 12, 1982. In it he writes: "Dear Peter, Have you seen the Paul Brown Report for Moss Research? It sure looks like your Rotary transformer...."

The damage was done. In the days before the internet, nobody cared that I had documents stamped in the patent office 7 months before the "Paul Brown Report" issued. By that time, Paul was famous and I was just a "nobody". To this day, 26 years later, most people still have no idea who designed this machine. Mostly it has been called "Paul Brown's Magnetic Distributor Generator". Your re-edited copy of the "Paul Brown Report" document calls it the Brown Ecklin Fluxgate Generator, but your document has taken Paul Brown's name off the back of the report above the date.

The historic truth is, I worked out the design for this machine in the summer of 1981 in Hilo, Hawaii. Pete Charles built the first working model in Sacramento, California in January of 1982. Paul Brown published the first written report on a preliminary set of tests results in June of 1982, which included a number of exaggerations. The machine is NOT capable of 300% operation. 120% efficiency is about tops! And yes, these machines make lots of obnoxious noise! The unit I show in the DVD was built by Michael Knox and is capable of about 700 watts output. The picture shows a low power test, as you may notice, the light bulbs were not to full brightness.

I moved to Santa Barbara in 1982 and with Michael Knox continued to work with these designs for both generators and motors. Of all the variations on the four coil/core configuration, the Flux Motor was the most important innovation. Again, totally my design, built by Michael Knox.

At some point, I may scan all of these documents from my files and put up a page on my website.

Until then, that is the history of the "Paul Brown Report" and the "Magnetic Distributor Generator".

If you have any questions about these machines, I'd be happy to discuss them in a different forum.

Peter

[Drexel]

Lenz and attraction motors

Dear Dr. Lindemann,

Your discussion of your "Magnetic Distributor Generator" triggered a question: how is it that the attraction motor circumvents Lenz's law? As the piece of iron is attracted towards the electromagnet coil, magnetic fields will be induced into the iron that interact with those produced by the electromagnet. By Lenz's law, won't opposing currents then be induced back into the electromagnet coil?

I have watched your "Electric Motor Secrets" DVD video now twice and find it fascinating. However, I am learning so I may have missed the answer to my question even with two DVD views.

I have just ordered "Secrets of Cold Electricity" DVD and look forward to its arrival.

Sincerely,

Drexel

[Peter Lindemann]

Good Question!

Dear Dr. Lindemann,

Your discussion of your "Magnetic Distributor Generator" triggered a question: how is it that the attraction motor circumvents Lenz's law? As the piece of iron is attracted towards the electromagnet coil, magnetic fields will be induced into the iron that interact with those produced by the electromagnet. By Lenz's law, won't opposing currents then be induced back into the electromagnet coil?

I have watched your "Electric Motor Secrets" DVD video now twice and find it fascinating. However, I am learning so I may have missed the answer to my question even with two DVD views.

I have just ordered "Secrets of Cold Electricity" DVD and look forward to its arrival.

Sincerely,

Drexel

Drexel,

Thanks for asking this question. I'm sure others have been a little confused by this as well. The question is, does the attraction of the iron rotor piece produce any Lenz's Law effects in the stator coils? The answer is YES, it does. The next questions is, how much? The answer to this is, less than 1% as much as if the iron rotor had a coil on it and was allowed to produce electricity as it was attracted into alignment. The absence of any electricity producing coil on the iron rotor is the important difference.

The magnetic field induced in the iron rotor is totally passive and is responding exclusively to the magnetic field produced by the stator coil windings. Therefore, it has no power to cause a reverse influence. So, there is nothing in the rotor/stator relationship to cause a reverse induction in the stator coils.

The reluctance of the magnetic path is changing as the iron rotor comes into alignment, so there are changes in the inductance of the circuit, but this is not the same as a Lenz's Law reverse induction.

I hope this helps you understand the difference.

Peter

[Drexel]

Further thought

Dear Dr. Lindemann,

Thank you for the clear explanation, now the "missing" Lenz effects make sense. To approach this problem from an energy viewpoint, the iron rotor piece requires no energy from the coil via transformer action so no energy is needed from the coil, except for the small losses induced in the iron rotor caused by eddy currents. It also appears that the eddy losses in iron may be the small Lenz effect you discussed - is this correct?

Taking this a step further, what if the passive iron rotor piece was replaced by a permanent magnet? This change now seems to make things much more complicated. With the right polarities the approaching attraction part should be enhanced, but now the leaving magnetic fields are going to want to induce currents into the coil to oppose the motor action. If the coil circuit is opened at that point then very high voltages should result. Does this make sense?

Thank you for your patience with beginners.

Sincerely,

Drexel