Electric Motor Secrets

[Jetijs]

Peter,
I resoldered everything on a new soldering plate. I decreased tha optotrigger bridge resistance to 500 Ohm. Now I ran the motor with only one transistor at a time, to verify that each one of them has the same performance. First transistor got the RPM's up to 480. The second transistor performed the same. The third transistor was a little weaker and got the RPM's to 475.5 (4.5 RPM's less than other two). Now I connected them in parallel, here are the results:

# of transistors | Current draw |RPM's

1_______________0,55A_______480
2_______________0,55A_______527
3_______________0,55A_______538

Does this mean I need to remove some more turns from the startor coil?
Thank you,
Jetijs

[Aaron]

thread topic?

Hi Elias,

Please post a response to me here of a subject of a new thread to move your posts over to and I'll do that for you and then I'll delete the posts in this thread.

I love your posts and they're a great contribution to this forum. We just want to keep this thread super on topic.

[sykavy]

just started my first steps

I just wound my coil to start my Lindemann motor experiment. It is going to be easier for me to do the piston set-up you diagramed on your DVD. I hope this is allowed. I have finished my coil today and hope to finish the rest soon but I am very busy and very slow.
I was thinking of doing the piston set-up before Elis posted his comments. His solinoid is different from the DVD drawings. Plus from what I can understand they both work on the same basic atraction principale only the geometry is changed (which could effect strength but I don't know plus that isn't important to me now all I want to do is get something started). I'll hopefully move on to the rotary one later.
Keep your fingers crossed that I don't get distracted.

[mrl]

Gone dead

Whatever happened to the project? No one seems to be posting very much.

Has the project gone dead?

[Jetijs]

Hi everybody.
Today I went to a bearing shop and bought the best bearings they had for my purpose. I replaced the bearings and started the motor. If with previous bearings I could reach speeds up to 538 RPM at 0,55 A current draw, then with these bearings I could get up to 1376 RPM at only 0,31A current draw The first time I was afraid that the whole thing will fly away
Here are my results now with the new bearings:
One transistor Current draw - 0,30A Speed - 1335 RPM Voltage 24V
Two transistors Current draw - 0,31A Speed - 1363 RPM Voltage 24V
Three transistors Current draw - 0,31A Speed - 1376 RPM Voltage 24V

The speed increases over a period of 1 minute or so till it reaches the maximum. Also the current draw decreases slowly in this time, till it reaches the minimum draw. It seems that the faster the rotor turns, the less current it draws. Also I noticed another cause of inefficiency - the screws on my rotor also retain some magnetism, I should change them. I will make a video tomorrow and upload it on youtube
Thanks for now
Jetijs

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent!

Hi everybody.
Today I went to a bearing shop and bought the best bearings they had for my purpose. I replaced the bearings and started the motor. If with previous bearings I could reach speeds up to 538 RPM at 0,55 A current draw, then with these bearings I could get up to 1376 RPM at only 0,31A current draw The first time I was afraid that the whole thing will fly away
Here are my results now with the new bearings:
One transistor Current draw - 0,30A Speed - 1335 RPM Voltage 24V
Two transistors Current draw - 0,31A Speed - 1363 RPM Voltage 24V
Three transistors Current draw - 0,31A Speed - 1376 RPM Voltage 24V

The speed increases over a period of 1 minute or so till it reaches the maximum. Also the current draw decreases slowly in this time, till it reaches the minimum draw. It seems that the faster the rotor turns, the less current it draws. Also I noticed another cause of inefficiency - the screws on my rotor also retain some magnetism, I should change them. I will make a video tomorrow and upload it on youtube
Thanks for now
Jetijs

Jetijs,

Try advancing the timing a little and see if the speed increases. The fact that your power draw and speed do not increase by adding the second and third windings still suggests that there is too much inductive delay (slow current rise-time). The speed up over time is just the bearings warming up.

This is where having a fast (1ghz), digital scope with a current probe is really nice, to see the current wave form and the voltage wave form simultaneously. The next best thing is to take a 1/100th of an ohm resistor and put it in line with one of the windings and put a second voltage probe across it in the millivolt scale. This should give you an idea of the inductive rise-time of the coil in relation to the total ON time of the pulse.

Make sure the low ohm resistor is only in the INPUT section of the circuit and not in the OUTPUT section.

Great work!!!

Peter

[Jetijs]

Peter,
I have a scobe, but unfortunately I don't have a current probe, so I will try out your suggestion with a resistor. I will probably use some high ommage wire for the resistor, couple inches of that wire should do fine. My friend has some of that wire, I will meet him friday and make the tests then
Thanks

[lighty]

@Jetijs

Peter gave you an excellent advice- if you don't have current probe you could put 0.1 ohm resistor in series and look at the current consumption curve directly. You should use carbon or metal film resistors though- the wirewound resistors (if not wounded in bifilar manner) will introduce their reactive response in the picture since they're inductive. So if you get the resistance wire don't wind it at all if possible or at least wind it in bifilar manner in order to avoid introducing the reactive response into measurement.


@Peter

I guess Jetijs could play with timing until he finds a point of maximum coil (or to be more precise) saturation? In that case he could simply advance the timing and make ON time longer and watch the current consumption curve until current reaches the core saturation plateau (it's easily visible). After the point of saturation is reached there would be no point in prolonging the ON time.

Am I correct in my assumption?

[Peter Lindemann]

Correct...

@Jetijs

Peter gave you an excellent advice- if you don't have current probe you could put 0.1 ohm resistor in series and look at the current consumption curve directly. You should use carbon or metal film resistors though- the wirewound resistors (if not wounded in bifilar manner) will introduce their reactive response in the picture since they're inductive. So if you get the resistance wire don't wind it at all if possible or at least wind it in bifilar manner in order to avoid introducing the reactive response into measurement.


@Peter

I guess Jetijs could play with timing until he finds a point of maximum coil (or to be more precise) saturation? In that case he could simply advance the timing and make ON time longer and watch the current consumption curve until current reaches the core saturation plateau (it's easily visible). After the point of saturation is reached there would be no point in prolonging the ON time.

Am I correct in my assumption?

Lighty,

Yes, the idea is to advance the timing AND look at the current wave form to see where the current tops out. That tells you what the inductive rise-time of the coil is. Then just calculate how many turns must come off the coil to give you a rise-time capable of turning the motor at, say 6,000 RPM, or some other speed the bearings are capable of. With a rapid rise-time, each of the coils should be able to add more current to the total ampere-turns of the field strength.

The idea is to produce HALF of your mechanical torque from the ON-TIME current and the other half of the mechanical torque from the current produced by the collapsing field. This is the magic moment in this motor where the electricity you are recovering is still motoring the motor forward.

One step at a time. We'll get there.

Peter

[Jetijs]

Hi,
I uploaded a video as promised. Here's the link:
YouTube - Lindemann attraction motor

You can see how the amp draw decreases to 0.31A as the motor is gaining speed, also notice the charging battery voltages (on the left) before and after the motor is switched on. There is a parasitic noise in the bearings, but that's ok since this is only a conceptual model.
Thanks,
Jetijs

[Peter Lindemann]

Please Start a New Thread

Hi Peter and Aaron,

Sorry for the delay, actually my internet account was expired, thus It took time for my response.

If I thought that it is off topic I never had posted it in this thread. But if you insist I will delete them and start a new thread. I totally respect this forum and I never intend to post junk here (I don't have so much extra time to waste ). My sole purpose is to assist this free energy movement, by offering any ideas that come to my mind or I read in book or website.

If we're dealing with maximizing motor torque in this thread then my posts are in fact very relevant to the topic. This thought actually came to me as a simple fact when I was browsing Naudin's website (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/2magpup.htm), as I have described it in my previous posts.

Rotary motors tend to utilize more magnetic force when the rotor is smaller. Piston operated motors have the capability to utilize most of the magnetic force for torque production as Bob Teal managed to do so. I think that almost more than half of the force the magnetic field exerted is wasted in an attempt to push the rotor perpendicularly away and only a small portion of it is used to make the rotor slide and rotate. Naudin's experiments verify this.

Still I am ready to create a new thread if you think that it's better to do so ...

Kindest Regards,
Elias

Elias,

Both Aaron and I understand your point. We also respect your valuable contribution to these forums and look forward to your continued participation.

But this forum is being handled differently. We are keeping a very tight focus on electric motors that operate on an ATTRACTION principle between an IRON movable member, either a rotor or a solenoid piston, and an electro-magnet in the stator. There are no permanent magnets in these designs and no PUSHING forces. The information at your link does not relate to this situation at all.

Please remove your posts from this thread and start a new thread where discussion can follow the ideas you are presenting. That is all we are asking.

Thank you for your understanding.

Peter

[elias]

Now I got it

Elias,

Both Aaron and I understand your point. We also respect your valuable contribution to these forums and look forward to your continued participation.

But this forum is being handled differently. We are keeping a very tight focus on electric motors that operate on an ATTRACTION principle between an IRON rotor and an electro-magnet in the stator. There are no permanent magnets in these designs and no PUSHING forces. The information at your link does not relate to this situation at all.

Please remove your posts from this thread and start a new thread where discussion can follow the ideas you are presenting. That is all we are asking.

Thank you for your understanding.

Peter

Well,

Thanks Peter, maybe it is all my own fault that I was not able to perfectly project my ideas here (I have lived about 5 years in England, but maybe I am not so experienced in explaining technical material in English). You discussed thoroughly that the air gap has a significant effect on motor torque. I want to bring other analogies for producing even more torque. I want to present two scenarios for discussion in torque production in ATTRACTION motors:
1- The effect of the size of the rotor on the COP of the motor. Shorter the diameter of the rotor respect to the size of the stator is, the more torque seems to be produced.
2- The comparison of torque production in rotary motors and in piston operated motors.

Detailed explanation:
There exists some lines of force around an electromagnet. The attraction of an iron bar occurs along those lines of force. But are those lines of force perfectly aligned with the movement of the rotor? Of course not. Not all of the attraction goes for producing mechanical work. Most of it is wasted while exerting force to the shaft of the motor.
For simplicity lets assume that an electromagnet can only exert forces in two perpendicular directions:

.........^
.........|
.........| F_slide
.........|
.........|.........(((((electromagnet(((((
......|IronBar|------->
.................... F_pull

(the dots are fake only to make the spaces, the forum does not allow too many spaces)
Depending on the position of the Iron Bar relative to the electromagnet the forces F_slide (Sliding Force) and F_pull (Pulling Force) will differ, ok?

Then what the experiments in Naudin's website demonstrated is that F_pull seems to be more than two times greater than F_slide, at a proximity of about 1mm, maybe F_pull will be much larger than F_slide with very smaller air gaps. This must be verified by experimenting. In rotary motors F_slide is utilized more than F_pull to produce torque. In piston operated motors F_pull is utilized only. This is due to the geometry of the motor and the direction at which the Iron is allowed to move. Now a question arises: Is more torque produced when we are using a piston, or a rotor?

Now we must find a way and design our motor geometry to effectively use both of the forces for producing torque. My idea is using smaller rotor diameters. Because the smaller the diameter of the rotor is respect to the stator, more of F_pull is used for rotating the rotor. If the diameter of the rotor is INFINITY F_pull will have no effect in rotating the rotor, only F_slide is used. So we want to use more of the greater force (F_pull) for obtaining more mechanical output.

I think that I have clarified how my posts were related to the topic.
I actually want to build one of these motors, so I am gathering as much information as possible to be able to get the most out of it, I don't want it to be another SSG for me, because I want to prove to myself that the electricity inside the coil is not converted to the mechanical output at all and we are only using it. I want to get a great deal of torque out of it, so I need professional machining of the parts for stability and reliability. Because my main field of study was computer architecture I don't have the necessary skills for constructing the mechanical parts. I am looking for a friend to help me construct them. Or maybe I'll get solid works and start learning mechanical engineering as well.

Eager to hear ideas and suggestions.

Elias

[Jetijs]

Ok Peter,
Here are my scope shots:

Here with a different voltage settings to see the vaweform better:

And here's a shot of the vaweform when I loaded the motor down with my hand:

I used a high wattage 0.5 Ohm resistor between the primary battery + terminal and the coil. I used only one coil/transistor for this test.

Can you explain me what I am seeing?
For what I understand from the first two pictures, the current rise time is just a little bit longer than a half of the impulse
Thanks,
Jetijs

[lighty]

You can see the flat "plateau" on the third picture. That means a maximum saturation of the core is achieved and further prolonging the ON time wouldn't result in more core saturation. So the best point to turn OFF coil would be right at the moment the coil is reaching the maximum core saturation or in other words right at the moment when the current is reaching the flat plateau. It's of course remains to be seen what Peter will advise.

[Peter Lindemann]

What You Are Seeing..

Jetijs,

Thanks for the scope shots. I will gladly give you my interpretation of the scope shots after you show me WHERE in the circuit you put your current measuring resistor. I'm pretty sure I understand the wave form, but I want to make sure. The wave-form looks like it is showing both input current AND output current on the coil.

Lighty may be right about the magnetic saturation of the core, but it might be something else. I believe it may represent the maximum current limitation based on Ohm's Law in relation to the applied voltage and the resistance of the wire in the coil. Since you have wound 250 turns of wire and it is drawing .31amps on average, the PEAK current is probably about 8 times that value, (due to rise-time and duty cycle) or about 2.50 amps. That would equate to a total of 620 ampere-turns of magnetic force. I doubt if this is enough to saturate your core, but it might be.

In any event, the wave-form suggests the SPEED limitation is rise-time related since the rise-time FILLS the entire ON-TIME of the commutator unless it is artificially slowed down by mechanical loading.

Please post a schematic of the circuit showing where your measurement resistor is inserted, at which point I can make a more complete determination of what the wave-form may mean.

Peter