Electric Motor Secrets

[nali2001]

Hi Sykavy,
Yes, making the slots and fingers will be quite a bit harder to make than just a flat surface rotor. But I think it has some big advantages since now the two poles are 'virtually' interlocking. So one might think that the need for the super small air gap will be reduced.

Iron filings have a permeability of next to nothing unless (professionally) pressed. So that would not be a real helpful solution in my opinion.

The main problem here is (as always) money... Like I said a factory where they make motor laminations will have no problem stamping out the laminations needed for a No-Back emf motor. But although I have no idea what it will cost to make such a core for you, I doubt that it is in reach of the 'common man'. Maybe having them laser cut is more do able.

Steven

[Peter Lindemann]

You've got a Good Eye..

hello all,

this is my first official post and i thought this would be a good place to start. i just finished watching Mr. Lindemann's DVD and i was very impressed. i studied motors and generators back in 1996 with the US Navy, but their courses are so packed together and in such a short time frame, that i only retained about 10% of that knowledge. after watching that DVD, and also reading these posts, i can say that im glad i lost that garbage "science".

Mr. Lindemann, i must ask, in your DVD as you begin to mention Teals' circuits for his patent, and mentioned that their is a battery hooked up. I wondered if you noticed that his schematic drawing of a battery is showing negative (-) facing OUT on both sides. (both + terminals are touching)

is this a typ-o on Mr Teals part, or is he trying to say something here?

thank you

Dear Adam (Ant),

Yes, there is a error in Teal's patent drawing concerning the correct nomenclature for a battery. In Figure 5 and Figure 8 in Patent #4,093,880 the batteries are drawn with only 5 plates. Since there are no transistors or diodes in the circuit, we don't know which is the Positive (+) terminal, but I have always redrawn it with the Positive terminal up. In Figure 6 in Patent #4,024,421 the Negative terminal is clearly shown in the down position and going to the coil first, while the Positive terminal is shown going to the switch. I have always assumed the circuits in the second patent were essentially the same as in the first patent.

The function of the circuit does require a normal battery connection, and not a battery with two Negative terminals. This is definitely an error in the drawing, not a covert secret methodology.

Thanks for asking.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Pistons are Iron

thank you Mr Lindemann for your explanation, you clarified this error for me.

another thing that i found, towards the end of the video you show the mechanical drawing of Teal's motor.(showing the solenoid)
in that picture, there is component #76, im assuming is supposed to be the actual piston. however, there is a little white space in the center of this, a line at the top, and more white space at the top of piston drawing, which is probably supposed to be empty space.
in the actual photo, with the piston fully exposed, there is no hollow area to the piston head. could component #76 actually be an aluminum sleeve, and the white space is the iron?
earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that an aluminum disc hit with a hard electro-magnet spike will shoot it way up into the air.
i would imagine that as the coil energizes, the iron part of the piston would be drawn up into the coil, and when the armature reaches full extension, a huge spike violently repel the aluminum sleeve back out of the coil. this would give direct force to the piston travel both in AND out, virtually doubling your torque.(or more)

if i am way off, please forgive my ignorance, it has been years(12) since i last studied any of this.

thank you for your previous answer.

-adam ant (bryan)

Bryan,

Thank you for using your real name. I appreciate that. To the best of my knowledge, the "white space" inside component #76 is AIR. The area defined by the cross-hatch pattern is the part #76 which is defined in the Patent body as the "core". Its mounting to the connecting rod (#78) is screwed into the base of the core. The area above this is empty, or in reality, filled with air. The use of Aluminum is never mentioned in Teal's patents.

These drawings are "symbolic" in many ways, and do not reflect the exact design. You can see, for instance, that all of the photographs show that the tops of the electro-magnets are open so the air can escape when the piston travels up, but Figure 5 does not show this feature, instead showing the top of the cylinder closed.

Please feel free to download these patents and study them carefully. Also look at the photographs of the working units. All of these materials can be accessed on my website at:

Free Energy, Bob Teal | Magnipulsion, Dr Peter Lindemann

Peter

[clone477]

Tesla's Patent???

Hello Peter and all,
I wanted to thank you for opening my eyes to this whole new world on motor designs, you dvd was very interesting and I learned grasped alot. I wanted to point something out to everyone and yourself. And I dont know if this has been pointed out before or not, or even if my assumptions are correct, but here goes....

I Tesla patent #568,177 Apparatus for Producing Ozone, if you closely look at the diagram it looks as though it is wired to collect the spark from a collapsing magnetic field,which looks to be arranged in a resonant circuit. The first part being simular to what we are doing here. Also, he states in the patent "....which enable me to produce, without difficulty and AT VERY SLIGHT EXPENSE, ozone in any desired quantity." It continues ".....is CAPABLE OF OTHER AND HIGHLY IMPORTANT USES OF A SIMILAR NATURE...."

Was Tesla trying to tell us that design had more than one use????

What do you guys think, does this make sense or am I off??

Thanks for the great forum, and thank Peter for contributing your knowledge.
Fern

[Peter Lindemann]

Designs are symbolic...

Mr Lindemann,
in your DVD, you describe a "c" shaped iron keeper for your rotary attraction motor. could the use of an "H" shaped iron keeper work better, utilizing BOTH sides of the coil at the same time? (the coil would go on the cross member of the "H")

Bryan,

A wide variety of designs are possible. The purpose of showing the C shaped core is merely to convey the principle of operation. It is probable that a motor could be designed that utilized an H shaped iron keeper, but I have never designed one.

Once you thoroughly understand the principles, dozens of new designs are possible.

Peter

[Aaron]

coral castle

Hi, I was intrigued by coral castle as it is an interesting collaboration of concepts by what seems to be one individual. I found his magnetic currents book very interesting. This would really be a topic fit for a new thread (SO I STARTED ONE) as there is sooooooooooo much that is involved with it.

[Aaron]

keep on topic

Please stay on topic in this forum. This one is on the Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

[Peter Lindemann]

Please, Stay on Topic....

Dear Folks,

We have allowed a fair number of diversions in this group in the last few weeks. But PLEASE, let's keep this forum focussed on my DVD Electric Motor Secrets, no back EMF motors, solenoid engines and Rotary Attraction Motors. If you have ideas inspired by these topics, but that are not on the main topics. please start NEW threads to discuss them.

Thanks everybody.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

Stay focused

i honestly considered my question about different coil materials to be directly relavant to your DVD.

Bryan,

This forum is an attempt to help people understand the fundamental principles concerning a way to build an electric motor that can produce high torque AND return a sizable percentage of its input electricity, thereby creating an electric power plant able to produce 1 HP for a NET electrical use below 746 watts.

The fact is, off-the-shelf switched reluctance motors, which operate on the rotary attraction process, are some of the strongest and highest torque motors sold today. Many are rated at or above 95% efficient in the conversion of electrical input to mechanical output. But these motors are not designed to return any of their electrical energy.

When this motoring principle is COMBINED with the discoveries of John Bedini and the ability of his motor designs to return up to 95% of their electrical input, an astonishing, new type of motor becomes possible. This is what my DVD is about.

These principles are ENOUGH to focus on in this forum. Whether or not different wire can produce different effects in coils as a pure speculation, is NOT on topic here.

IF you build one of these motors, solve all of the technical issues of small air-gap and proper pulse timing, and get it running in a COP > 1 mode, THEN I would be happy to hear of your EXPERIMENTS using different types of wire IN YOUR WORKING MODEL.

The ideas presented here are, apparently, difficult enough for people to learn to not muddy the waters with off-topic speculations.

Thanks for your understanding. I'd really rather not go over it again.

Peter

[clone477]

Peter,
Is there a wiring diagram available that shows the circuitry of a recovery system?? Is it just a matter of running a diode and a stepdown transformer to run the energy from the collapsed field back to the battery??

[Peter Lindemann]

Simple Recovery

Peter,
Is there a wiring diagram available that shows the circuitry of a recovery system?? Is it just a matter of running a diode and a stepdown transformer to run the energy from the collapsed field back to the battery??

Clone,

Recovery is simple. Circuits as simple as a single diode work well in John Bedini's SG motors and in these motors. I have running models using the exact circuit shown here:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

The "commutator" is a series of magnets on a wheel moving passed a "magnetic reed switch" in the position shown. It is sufficient to demonstrate the principles. No "stepdown" transformer is necessary.

Optimizing torque is about minimizing the air-gap and designing the physical structures to maximize the tangential forces. Optimizing the electrical energy return is about pulse control and shutting off the electro-magnet just before magnetic saturation of the core.

My DVD is two and a half hours long, and covers this material in depth.

Peter

[Jetijs]

Dear Mr Lindemann,
I received your dvd some days ago and I must say, that the video was great and easy to understand. You did a great job with this video. Currently I am working on a model based on your S type core. I just sent my cad drawings to a local laser cutting guy who will cut the parts for me. Here is a model in solidworks:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/s...1189640887.jpg
The rotor sheets will be approx 120mm in diameter (just like CD's) and the air gap will be about 1 milimeter wide. I have already built some Bedini SSG's and have some experience with the recovery circuit. I will keep you informed about my success.
Thank you for the video and all the things you have done
Gatis

[Peter Lindemann]

"S" rotor up-date

Dear Mr Lindemann,
I received your dvd some days ago and I must say, that the video was great and easy to understand. You did a great job with this video. Currently I am working on a model based on your S type core. I just sent my cad drawings to a local laser cutting guy who will cut the parts for me. Here is a model in solidworks:
http://www.bildez.lv/bildes/jetijs/s...1189640887.jpg
The rotor sheets will be approx 120mm in diameter (just like CD's) and the air gap will be about 1 milimeter wide. I have already built some Bedini SSG's and have some experience with the recovery circuit. I will keep you informed about my success.
Thank you for the video and all the things you have done
Gatis

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your post and your kind comments. As I have stated in this forum a number of times, tests done on the "S" Rotor after the DVD was produced were disappointing. As soon as we learned this, I posted a page on my website with a design called the "X" Rotor. This basic design is what worked the best in the motor I built back in the 1980's. There is a sticker on the DVD case telling you to visit this up-date page. Here's the link again:

Rotary Attraction Motor Update

If you can stop your local laser cutting guy before he starts making the "S" rotor, please do. The "X" rotor works better. Also, a 1 millimeter gap is too large. That is about .025" and not conducive for high mechanical torque production.

Your enthusiasm is good, but please slow down and look through all of the posts here before you build anything. If you still have questions, please post them here.

I want you to succeed.

Peter

[Aaron]

Impossible Engine Invented For Real - Bob Teal - LA Times Article Found

ARTICLE FOUND!!! Thanks to someone who made contact from the information recently released about Bob Teal, someone came forth with the LA Times article. Impossible Engine Invented For Real

http://www.esmhome.org/library/bob-t...l_la_times.pdf

Feel free to pass on the link to this PDF to anyone interested in the attraction motor concepts especially Bob Teal's Magnipusion and Peter's Electric Motor Secrets DVD.

[Jetijs]

Thank's Peter
I will redesign the rotor to the X form and make the air gap thinner. But I think, that I won't be able to make the air gap thiner than maybe 0.5mm, because the tolerance of the laser cutting machine is only 0,15mm. Also the shaft an bearing system must the be very accurate. Or maybe I should cut the X rotor a little bit larger for the startor to fit in and then just machine off the needed thickness with lathe, that way the tolerance of the laser is no longer crucial and I can make the gap even smaller I think, my X type rotor could be about 120mm in diameter so I don't need to redesign the startor core.
Tahnk's,

EDIT:
I made the necessary changes. Here how it looks now:


The rotor cross bar face is 30 degree of an arc, just like in the Attraction Motor Update page.
Fortunately my laser guy has not started to cut the S rotor plates yet. Will send him the drawings now