Electric Motor Secrets

[Peter Lindemann]

Please Read the Whole Thread

Hi, I'm hoping someone can answer the following questions:

1) If I put two S-rotors on a spindle 90 degrees out of rotation, or 2 electro-horseshoe magnets around one S-rotor, could the S-Rotor produce a continuous high torque at say 0.5 rpm?

2) In the video Peter mentioned it should be possible to build a generator. Has anyone already posted a diagram of a no back emf generator? I suspect it would use repulsion of permanent magnets?

Dear Necchi,

The simple answer to your question is NO! First of all, I recommend you read this whole thread from the beginning. Most of the design issues have been addresses in the thread. The "S" rotor has problems of early magnetic saturation out in the tips of the "S" structure and did not perform well in bench tests done right after the film was produced. I put a page on my website with the "X" rotor design shortly thereafter as a correction. All of these issues have been discussed in the thread.

The other problem is your requirement of extremely slow speed and high torque. The magnetic forces act quite quickly to produce the attraction stroke, so getting very slow speed would require a large diameter machine with hundreds of small pole faces so that each attraction stroke only advanced the rotor a few degrees of arc. Even then, to get down to such slow speeds as 0.5 rpm would require even further mechanical gear reduction.

I hope this helps.

Peter

[Necchi]

Thanks for the clarification. I was under the impression that the S-rotor didn't perform any better than a bar, not that it didn't work as expected. I did read about a 1/3 of the thread a while ago, so I'll try and continue. Hopefully the answer to my other question is in there somewhere?

[Armagdn03]

Generator

Here is a brilliant example of a generator that uses re-direction of lenz force helping rather than hindering the prime mover. It was created by Inventor Jim Murray, one of the foremost experts on tesla.

Use of this particular generator also makes us of what Murray claims to be a second form of faradays law, current times rate of change of induction.

Just one example, but I hope this helps.

Search for United "States patent 4,780,632"
alternator having improved efficiency

[Necchi]

Thanks for the link Armagdn03

[Armagdn03]

Motoring

I rarely, post..... and Personally im no motor builder, but I think something is being missed by most on this thread.

I have read several people ask about generators, however the motor in its present incarnation is not all it could be, this is most likely to get the home experimenter comfortable with the basics before moving on.

Take for example an AC generator, with field windings, and permanent magnets on the rotor. The field windings could easily be wound into an LC circuit making the motor supposedly run on reactive power. However, what is not immediately obvious is that the rotation of the rotor will impart upon the filed windings an EMF from the magnets directly related to its rotational speed and the number of poles on the rotor. This counter emf per lenz law will create a frequency within the LC at varying speeds (depending on rev-up, down, loading, etc) which will not match its resonant frequency, hence hindering the resonant rise, Q, and overal efficiency of the motor. However if you had a lenz less motor, the result would be a rotation caused by the driving circuit independent of a generated EMF due to the rotation of the rotor. Such a motor could be run by a resonant circuit, returning all power given to it back to the source, in this case, the source might locally constitute a capacitor with an impedance matching the drive coils for a particular frequency. This tank circuit would be allowed to oscillate freely, without having to worry about any stray emf frequencies created by the rotor.

This cannot be easily applied in its present form to the current motor as it stands. The rotation of the current model is dependent on the position of the rotor with respect to the pole projections of the stator. This means that frequency of operation within the drive coils is dependent on rotor speed, meaning it too is tied down to rev-ups, downs, variable loading etc. In order to reach a reactive state at a particular frequency, the rotor would have to spin at a very specific speed.

Also noted, is that the inductive properties of this motor change constantly! which is terrible for such a design. Hence the fact that it is a variable reluctance motor. This property too is detrimental to reactive conditions.

BUT! it has one of the problems solved, and clever geometries and tricks can solve other problems. Such as reactive rotors (Tesla has patented them) constant reluctance rotors (would need a simulated rotating field, where poles switch at a phase less than 180 degrees) and other ideas come to mind.

What you were all given is gold, but it is far from where it could be, and I get a sneaking suspicion that the only thing that is holding Dr Lindeman back from advancing ideas publicly at this point is the overall comprehension, i.e. no point in leaving people behind at this point.

Get clever with similar concepts and you can apply it all to solid state as well, leaving behind the need for kinetic power supplies.
(like I said im no motor builder........ )

And thank you Dr. Lindeman for your work teaching, and taking the time help people out. I have given you an unfair shake in the past.

[Peter Lindemann]

Thank You

I rarely, post..... and Personally im no motor builder, but I think something is being missed by most on this thread.

I have read several people ask about generators, however the motor in its present incarnation is not all it could be, this is most likely to get the home experimenter comfortable with the basics before moving on.

Take for example an AC generator, with field windings, and permanent magnets on the rotor. The field windings could easily be wound into an LC circuit making the motor supposedly run on reactive power. However, what is not immediately obvious is that the rotation of the rotor will impart upon the filed windings an EMF from the magnets directly related to its rotational speed and the number of poles on the rotor. This counter emf per lenz law will create a frequency within the LC at varying speeds (depending on rev-up, down, loading, etc) which will not match its resonant frequency, hence hindering the resonant rise, Q, and overal efficiency of the motor. However if you had a lenz less motor, the result would be a rotation caused by the driving circuit independent of a generated EMF due to the rotation of the rotor. Such a motor could be run by a resonant circuit, returning all power given to it back to the source, in this case, the source might locally constitute a capacitor with an impedance matching the drive coils for a particular frequency. This tank circuit would be allowed to oscillate freely, without having to worry about any stray emf frequencies created by the rotor.

This cannot be easily applied in its present form to the current motor as it stands. The rotation of the current model is dependent on the position of the rotor with respect to the pole projections of the stator. This means that frequency of operation within the drive coils is dependent on rotor speed, meaning it too is tied down to rev-ups, downs, variable loading etc. In order to reach a reactive state at a particular frequency, the rotor would have to spin at a very specific speed.

Also noted, is that the inductive properties of this motor change constantly! which is terrible for such a design. Hence the fact that it is a variable reluctance motor. This property too is detrimental to reactive conditions.

BUT! it has one of the problems solved, and clever geometries and tricks can solve other problems. Such as reactive rotors (Tesla has patented them) constant reluctance rotors (would need a simulated rotating field, where poles switch at a phase less than 180 degrees) and other ideas come to mind.

What you were all given is gold, but it is far from where it could be, and I get a sneaking suspicion that the only thing that is holding Dr Lindeman back from advancing ideas publicly at this point is the overall comprehension, i.e. no point in leaving people behind at this point.

Get clever with similar concepts and you can apply it all to solid state as well, leaving behind the need for kinetic power supplies.
(like I said im no motor builder........ )

And thank you Dr. Lindeman for your work teaching, and taking the time help people out. I have given you an unfair shake in the past.

Dear Armagdn03,

Thank you for your kind and insightful remarks. With regard to your post about the Jim Murray Generator design, I have known Jim Murray for 20 years and we published this patent in Borderland Magazine back in the 1980's. All of the people I worked with in Santa Barbara, including Mike Knox, Eric Dollard, and Chris Carson, met with Jim Murray a number of times after I moved away in 1992. Jim and Eric subsequently solved the solid-state method for converting reactive power back to real power using Jim's methods applied to Eric's FOUR QUADRANT THEORY of electric waves. All of these things you mention have already been accomplished.

While Jim has built working models of this generator, getting all of the electrical and physical resonances in phase is tricky. The machine does NOT exhibit drag free operation until these conditions are all balanced and synchronized. Still and all, it does PROVE that electric motors and generators are NOT converting mechanical energy into electrical energy. The First Law of Thermodynamics does not apply to properly built motors and generators. For those of us who know the truth, this is not a problem.

As you have correctly stated, there is little purpose showing more precise theory in a forum like this when the model building difficulty only gets worse than what has already been shown. I will tell you plainly, however, that the CONSTANT RELUCTANCE MOTOR is the ticket and special geometries are the method of accomplishment. When the reluctance does not change at all during the power stroke, then the inductance of the circuit remains relatively constant as well. This allows for the design of a true, constant speed, synchronous motor that produces maximum mechanical power on 95% reactive power and about 5% real power. This allows a COP=20 operation as technically feasible.

For those who are interested, here is a link to a rare film of Jim Murray speaking on the history of his work. Most of the concepts are quite beyond the beginner level, and the cinematography is D-, but the information is A+++.

Enjoy.

Jim Murray

Peter

[Beshires1]

I think that this is a better solution than the "S" design rotor, being how a magnet is attracted to iron no matter what the thickness of the iron. A three tooth rotor with four coils has a lot of potential.The firing sequence could happen 9 times per revolution. This is just a rough sketch , feel free to modify as you need.
Here is also a link to a two pole iron rotor attraction motor that is as Linderman discribes. But it like the "S" isn't a self starter. But he uses a solenoid and ratchet mechanism to start the motor. Presenting a written and diagram discription of a free energy electric motor - Patent Application 20040212257

[Necchi]

Electric bicycle project

The idea behind my earlier question actually was to put two large wheel sized s-rotors on the rear wheel of an aluminium bicycle 90 degrees out of phase, to do the job of a bicycle hub motor. I thought this might be viable from Peter's comment "the torque is there" in the video, but from Peter's comment above I guess this isn't going to work.

My goal in any case is to put some combination of motor and generator or motor-generator on a bicycle which will at least recharge on flats and declines without mechanical resistance from back emf.

I was trying to avoid a moped design, but from the patent Beshires1 linked to I have a suspicion that none of these designs are going to work at hub motor speeds.

In any case I'm open to suggestions about which motor designs might suit the following bicycle configurations:

1) Standard DCPMM + Generator: Standard DCPMM motor and battery charged by anti-lenz generator

2) Custom DCPMM + Generator: Low rpm anti-lenz hub motor powered by separate anti-lenz generator (advantage would be greater efficiency and robustness than standard DC motor)

3) Geared Motor-Generator: An electric moped based on an anti-lenz motor-generator like the patent Beshires1 linked to.

4) Electric generator + DCPMM: Not sure about this because I want it to start up or start charging from manual power.

[Necchi]

Dear Armagdn03,

For those who are interested, here is a link to a rare film of Jim Murray speaking on the history of his work. Most of the concepts are quite beyond the beginner level, and the cinematography is D-, but the information is A+++.

Enjoy.

Jim Murray

Peter

Are Bill Lyne's ideas about momentum the secret to what's going on? Is it perhaps that the hum generated by permanent magnet motors is evidence of electromagnetic momentum being generated nearly equally in both directions?

[Beshires1]

I was thinking , maybe a round disk attached to the rotor. With small magnets or maybe magnet tape placed around the outer circumference only where the pulse duration should happen, in relation to the rotors three lobes, then the pulses can be timed with a reed switch for each stationary coil.

[Necchi]

Beshires, I'm sorry but I can't read the text on the first image.

About the constant reluctance motor, the only images I could find in google were at this site:

Aeroflex Incorporated: Products | Motion Control Products | Brushless DC Motors

Is Peter using "constant reluctance motor" for something else?

[Beshires1]

Necchi,

Beshires, I'm sorry but I can't read the text on the first image.

Yea I Know, this forum shrinks all uploaded files to much. After the file opens up ,did you try holding the control tab while tapping the + key on the calculator? The thumbnails are fine if they would open files to original size. This forum needs a place where files can be uploaded and viewed by all!

[Necchi]

I should've thought of that! It is just readable if I enlarge it, thanks. Btw the patent you linked to doesn't show up in google or uspto.gov. I wonder if it's in the process of being censored.

[Beshires1]

I should've thought of that! It is just readable if I enlarge it, thanks. Btw the patent you linked to doesn't show up in google or uspto.gov. I wonder if it's in the process of being censored.

I don't think a patent was issued, this is just a patent application. But I find the name of this PDF file interesting. The file 's name is "Electric Motor Secrets" recon whats up wit dat? Copy and past the link in your browser to view PDF. (Clicking on the link only downloads the link). If This doesn't work right click on link and click Open in new window.

[broli]

I kept thinking about electric motors and pulse motors in general and why they were made the way they are. Dr. lindemann's motor kept me asking "why aren't things done this or that way". To keep the story short. The attached image shows a simple idea that can be used similarly to the Lindemann motor. There's only one rotor arm shown for convenience.

The only difference and advantage? is that it uses a C core and permanent magnet. The air gap can be "closed" quite "easily" as you don't need advanced machining to make the air gap arbitrary small, between the core and the PM, because it's flat. Making a very strong magnetic loop. The other difference is obviously the PM's. Will this have any big differnce? Who knows.

The motor has also the advantage of adding more cores without too much trouble.

I also might add that Thane was part of the inspiration by looking at his flywheel that has PM sticked on it .