Electric Motor Secrets

[vzon17]

Some technical data for attraction motors

I found this nice PDF file that has lots of data on reluctance motors which are what the peter lindeman attraction motor is. lots of ideas and formulas and they even have a section on recovering some of the energy.

http://photoman.bizland.com/SwitchedReluctanceMotor.pdf

[Jetijs]

Hello all.
It has been a while since my last post in this thread. I just want to say that I have not abandoned the work on my motor, it is just that I am working on a different project that is not related to free energy and that kills almost all my free time. It will be over at the end of june (I hope). This is why I might not answer your PM's in time. Meanwhile, since I have not received the spring scales yet, I am working on a housing for my speed reducer that I got from ebay. It will reduce the motor speed 15 times and in the same time increase the torque 15 times. This is because I want to hook my permanent magnet alternator to the motor eventually. At 5000 RPM my permanent magnet alternator would produce an unnecessary high voltage that would not be practical to use. My alternator produces 12v already at just 120 or so RPMs, so the speed reducer will take care of that
Thanks,
Jetijs

[Aaron]

parallel windings

they were jsut hooked in parallel.

The other possibliity is that he wound the second coil the opposite direction to the first. I dont hear anybody talking about that ever.

So other possibilites are that if one could open the circuit of just one of the coils and then switch it to a different circuit it would hook the two coils in series and the collapse of the field would then be going through double the length of wire. kind of like switching the setup from parallel to series suddenly.

Anywway thats enough of the speculation on my part.

The Teal patent does show them hooked in parallel.

With reversing a winding, I think I'm the only one who has done that on Bedini trifilars...the recover winding I had reversed on 2 different coils.

Anyway, on the double stroke idea, no matter how the coils are wound together or in relation to each other, it can only be an incoming stroke since no matter the polarity of the field in the coil(s), it will simply attract an iron rotor or rod.

What we know as far as the schematics are shown, assuming it is as the motor was really built, the 2 windings are in parallel. What is the chronology of each and every step from those 2 windings being charged then having the power turned off?

I would really like to see this exact concept thoroughly evaluated

[vzon17]

Incoming stroke

Well there being only one incoming stroke depends on how you have it setup. If one would trigger the attraction stroke with the rod coming in and then have the rod go past the center and then trigger the coil again when its coming back towards the center then you could double up on the strokes, another alternative is to have two or three coils seperated by a flux barrier and a three part piston then as each piston section comes into its coil the coil gets fired. In fact I did a small jig with a piece of pipe and a couple coils. If one had a three section piston with gaps between them and two coils you could get a single coil power stroke followed by two double coil power strokes on the incoming stroke, and one double coil power stroke on the return stroke, so you could have 3 double power pulses and 2 single ones each time it goes in and out. you can make a mockup with some paper pieces and a pen.
the top piston wolud extend past the top coil one position and that gives you one more double power pulse and one more single pulse on the return.

you could get quite a few degrees of rotation under power that way. times that by 2 or 4 pistons and you may have a powerful machine. Also use the scotch yoke instead of the connecting rod setup. you can put three piston pairs on one crank throw with the scotch yoke. Could be a powerful engine. Now if one could just get the nice control circuit to operate it along with recapturing the collapse it wolud be a beautiful thing.
You would get 10 power pulses per revolution. And depending on your stroke length you could add more coils and pistons. for more power pulses per revolution.

[vzon17]

Double power stroke

On a post that shows the Bourke engine on this page.
Electric Motor Secrets - Page 2

Look at the diagram where the ports come into th cylinder at approximately the middle of the cylinder, notice the piston moves almost equally past the ports on both the top the and bottom of stroke. this would be the location of the coil/s and then you can easily have a power pulse going both directions and the advantage of having the power stroke there is that the crank is then at the most advatageous part of its rotation furthest away from top dead center so there is most efficient transfer of the force to the rotation of the crank, now imagine there are three coils there in the middle and the piston has 4 section to it so you could stretch out the power application over most of the stroke on both sides of top dead center.

[Aaron]

Scottish Yoke Attraction Motor

I see what you're saying for a return stroke in solenoid style.

I drew this up quite a while back:

[chityaman]

motor laminations

Where is a good source for getting motor laminations custom cut to your specs and a reasonable price. I am working on the attraction motor and a linear alternator to use with a thermoacoustic engine. I need to get some laminations cut and don't have a clue as to where to look. I don't think I will be able to canibalize any microwave tranformers for this project. Any help is greatly apprectiated in advance.

Sincerely,

George

[vzon17]

Nice drawing.

I see why you could not have a return stroke on that setup becaues you iron rods the full length. I was thinking to have a stainless steel shaft and then have a larger diameter iron cylinder/piston mounted on it, that way it can go past the coil in both directions.

[vzon17]

Motor Laminations

Maybe they have something here.
AMC - Alloy Magnetic Cores

[vzon17]

laminations

Whoops that address was in south africa. here is one in the USA

EDCOR Electronics Corporation - Audio Transformer & Equipment Manufacture

[grizli]

So if using back emf gains excess energy than WHY Flyback transformer gives no more energy out than in ?

Cause flyback transformer works on colapsing filed....



Sperrwandler


Than if back EMF occurs whan pulse starts on opposite direction , and collapsing filed is something else than , it occurs when field collapses

...

So WHY using motor if we can the same effect on TRANSFORMER !!! Question is HOW

[Peter Lindemann]

Sorry for the Confusion

So if using back emf gains excess energy than WHY Flyback transformer gives no more energy out than in ?

Cause flyback transformer works on colapsing filed....



Sperrwandler


Than if back EMF occurs whan pulse starts on opposite direction , and collapsing filed is something else than , it occurs when field collapses

...

So WHY using motor if we can the same effect on TRANSFORMER !!! Question is HOW

Dear Grizli,

Actually, no one is saying that there is excess energy in an inductive collapse. If you would have read the whole thread you would know this. What we ARE SAYING here is if you make a motor with an iron rotor and an inductor as a stator, and then attract that rotor into alignment during the time you are charging and discharging your inductor, then the COMBINED energy of the system can be COP>1. In a constant inductance system, the amount of electrical energy that is recoverable is on the order of 95%. In a variable inductance system, like our motors, the amount of electrical energy that is recoverable is on the order of about 70%. So, if the motor section can produce mechanical energy at a rate exceeding 31%, the conditions for COP>1 are met.

If you are interested in posting here, please read the thread from start to finish.

Thanks,

Peter

[grizli]

Dear Grizli,

Actually, no one is saying that there is excess energy in an inductive collapse. If you would have read the whole thread you would know this. What we ARE SAYING here is if you make a motor with an iron rotor and an inductor as a stator, and then attract that rotor into alignment during the time you are charging and discharging your inductor, then the COMBINED energy of the system can be COP>1. In a constant inductance system, the amount of electrical energy that is recoverable is on the order of 95%. In a variable inductance system, like our motors, the amount of electrical energy that is recoverable is on the order of about 70%. So, if the motor section can produce mechanical energy at a rate exceeding 31%, the conditions for COP>1 are met.

If you are interested in posting here, please read the thread from start to finish.

Thanks,

Peter

Yes , I know the difference and I did read about motor. but I wonder would it be posible with transformer, cause I dont see any significant difference...
Maybe it would be better to make separate topic for constructive discussion on "transformer" (or inductor)

Cause motor uses pretty low duty cycle (only two peaks for about 25° just guessing) , maybe the same should be done in transformer...

WE DONT need continuous operation , cause than clasic "laws" occurs, but for sure something "strange" is happening in peaks, the moment of very fast voltage rise and drop(edge of square)





There is difference : transformer or inductor have constant inductance !!

If I am corrent Bob Tiel uses inducotrs with movable rods ..

So my question for all you here whether is OU possible with transformer ?

Instead of energy that motor gives we have separate winding(secondary) one with direct and one with opposite diode.
or maybe we could have load in series with primary...
when there is pulse on the primary , than in primary back emf pulse occurs in primary (so maybe series load with primary can harness that energy). when primary voltage is on core becomes polarised. than when primary voltage drops there also occurs the same "radian peak" , and than energy (used for polarising core) is drained through diode on secondary (that is reversed and prevetns current goes when primary has on voltage)




Again , sorry if my post was on the wrong place here, didnt mean to say anything "negative" to the motor design and operation.

[Eric]

Yes , I know the difference and I did read about motor. but I wonder would it be posible with transformer, cause I dont see any significant difference...
Maybe it would be better to make separate topic for constructive discussion on "transformer" (or inductor)

Cause motor uses pretty low duty cycle (only two peaks for about 25° just guessing) , maybe the same should be done in transformer...

WE DONT need continuous operation , cause than clasic "laws" occurs, but for sure something "strange" is happening in peaks, the moment of very fast voltage rise and drop(edge of square)





There is difference : transformer or inductor have constant inductance !!

If I am corrent Bob Tiel uses inducotrs with movable rods ..

So my question for all you here whether is OU possible with transformer ?

Instead of energy that motor gives we have separate winding(secondary) one with direct and one with opposite diode.
or maybe we could have load in series with primary...
when there is pulse on the primary , than in primary back emf pulse occurs in primary (so maybe series load with primary can harness that energy). when primary voltage is on core becomes polarised. than when primary voltage drops there also occurs the same "radian peak" , and than energy (used for polarising core) is drained through diode on secondary (that is reversed and prevetns current goes when primary has on voltage)




Again , sorry if my post was on the wrong place here, didnt mean to say anything "negative" to the motor design and operation.

hi there!!
nice to see new people here!
perhaps i can help.......
the significant difference between our motor and a transformer is that the "extra energy" is "mechanical" and needs to be measured accordingly I.E. a dyno test then "compared" with the "reduced input"(input-recycled BEMF) we pay for electrically. a regular coil on a core transformer has no moving parts to take advantage of this "mechanical" benefit... i went through this line of thought myself awhile ago. hehehe

hope this helps!!
Eric

[Eric]

fun fun fun!

lol i had some fun by dumping the bEMF from my second motor into to large caps and i was able to run my first (smaller) motor on the kickback energy alone and further collected the BEMF from the (smaller) motor into 2 other caps.
but that gave some interesting ideas for my 2 pole motor. i am now building the circut so each pole is totally isolated from each other. each pole starts with its own 24v battery pack, has its own transistor circuit, and now i am working on using a duel optoisolator so i can use 1 reed switch to control both circuits. then
maybe i can dump the BEMF of 1 pole onto the primary side of the other pole!