No Bemf Motor

[Allcanadian]

I designed this no Bemf motor quite a while ago and thought you may find this interesting. This motor develops a scary amount of torque for a relatively small duration input because it utilizes two poles of the rotor PM's in the same instance. In figure 1 on the lower left we see what is basically a 120/12volt transformer with the sides cut off to form an "H" shaped inductor. This inductor is between the opposite poles of two of the rotor magnets lying on a green line which is the bloch wall of the two PM poles. The bloch wall is a point where two magnetic fields meet, it is also a point where there is no polar magnetism it is a impolar region. Each PM has it's own bloch wall and between each PM a bloch wall is created designated by a green line. If this inductor is energized it is simultaneously repelled from the blue south pole and attracted to the red north pole.
Next in figure 1 to the right is another "H" inductor on the bloch wall of one of the rotor PM's. We can see that the PM field will couple to the inductor but the field will not enter the inductor windings because this is not the shortest magnetic path back to the PM's opposite pole, as such the inductor can produce a magnetic force on the rotor PM's but the rotor PM's cannot induce a current in the inductor windings. This means there can be no Bemf as there is no generator function acting on the inductor windings or better stated the PM field cannot cut the inductor windings producing a counter emf.
In figure 2 the two inductors bottom and right are shown having there poles designated by a blue(south pole) or red(north pole). The inductors are only energized within a small sector designated with (on-off) which roughly corresponds to the bloch wall between each pair of rotor PM's. Therefore if one inductor was used this inductor would be energized four times per revolution of the rotor.
On a less technical note, I see many people continually doing the same thing with the same designs and expecting different results each time when Im not sure there can be any change in there results. I have found through research and experiment that it is very difficult to utilize the magnetic pole of a permanent magnet and come out ahead in any way, so why do it? It is much easier to utilize the bloch wall to produce a dual force, both attraction and repulsion in the same instance and not have to deal with Bemf. A motor should act like a motor in every way and a generator should act like a generator in every way to be effective. There is also the problem of inductive inertia and residual magnetism that is not being dealt with in current motors. You cannot swap polarities at register without substantial losses, it is much more effective to energize an inductor at or near the bloch wall and have the after effects of energizing the inductor accelerate the rotor instead of de-accelerating it. I would like to mention that this rotary motor was designed after reading a patent by Wesley Gary for an oscillating motor. I am pretty sure Mr.Gary knew many things our enginners have yet to learn.

[Allcanadian]

Another simple variation of the motor posted earlier is also showing up in many patents as a generator, I have no doubts that this is the same design that Lutec is utilizing. If you watch there latest video it is hard not to see the striking similarities. It is also interesting that Lutec only patented a means for controlling a motor/generator/transformer and not a generator in itself. In the picture below the outer stators are inductors or what could be called "open transformers" as they have primary and secondary windings. If we consider that the rotor PM will produce an opposite polarity in the stator then we get a better picture of the very simple process involved. If the bottom rotor PM has just passed the stator then this stator will have an opposite induced polarity to the rotor PM. If this stator has an induced current flow and this current is applied to an inductive load then the load current will resist any change but in this case the load current can only accelerate the rotor as it leaves the stator because the poles are like poles in repulsion. The load current in the stator will repel the outgoing rotor PM and the rotor PM will also be attracted to the next stator having an opposite pole reinforced by the load current. In this case the reaction is opposite to what we know in conventional generators. In conventional generators any load current will produce a back drag on the rotor because the load current reinforces the stator polarity which is attracted to the opposite polarity of the rotor PM directly in front of it which seems kind of silly. As well this load current in a conventional generator also ensures that the the rotor will not only be pulled backward but it will also be repelled by the next stator section of like polarity. The conventional generator would seem to be a lose-lose proposition at the best of times, is it any wonder it takes so much power to drive them. There is also another neat trick concerning the stator transformers, when a stator is in a neutral field (the bloch wall between rotor PM's) then the stator is free to act as an pure inductor or a transformer without interaction from a magnetic pole or poles. In this generator we can see that all the rotor PM's are in repulsion with the next PM and a bloch wall is formed between each set of PM's in repulsion. To accelerate the rotor all that is needed is to apply a small current to the stator when the stator is in the bloch wall (a neutral field) between the rotor PM's. The rotor PM is then attracted to the next stator and repelled from the one it just passed, the transformer action in a neutral field allows the input to be combined with the stator output. In this case input equals transformer output + induced stator output plus the load current accelerating the rotor which is very cool.

[Jetijs]

Thank you Allcanadian for this topic.
It gave me lot of things to think about

[Jetijs]

So as far as I understand, conventional generators would work like this:



Lets look at the upper right magnet and lets suppose that all the stator coils are shorted. As the magnet approaches the stator coil, it induces a current flow in the stator coil. This current flow now creates a magnetic field that is opposite in polarity to the magnet, like in pic2, this makes a repulsion and slow the rotor down. Now, if the magnet is aligned to the stator coil and starts to leave the coil, the current flow in the coil reverses and this makes also the coils magnetic field to reverse its polarity. Now the coil is attracting the magnet that leaves the stator coil and in the same time repulsing the incoming new magnet. Right? So how can we make it so that the coil does not change the polarity as the magnet leaves the stator coil? What do you mean with an inductive load?
I am trying to understand this
Thanks,
Jetijs

[roxaz]

To disable magnetic field inversion you put a diode just before a coil. Remember, there was thread about bedini motor with no lentz drag

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent!!!

I designed this no Bemf motor quite a while ago and thought you may find this interesting. This motor develops a scary amount of torque for a relatively small duration input because it utilizes two poles of the rotor PM's in the same instance. In figure 1 on the lower left we see what is basically a 120/12volt transformer with the sides cut off to form an "H" shaped inductor. This inductor is between the opposite poles of two of the rotor magnets lying on a green line which is the bloch wall of the two PM poles. The bloch wall is a point where two magnetic fields meet, it is also a point where there is no polar magnetism it is a impolar region. Each PM has it's own bloch wall and between each PM a bloch wall is created designated by a green line. If this inductor is energized it is simultaneously repelled from the blue south pole and attracted to the red north pole.
Next in figure 1 to the right is another "H" inductor on the bloch wall of one of the rotor PM's. We can see that the PM field will couple to the inductor but the field will not enter the inductor windings because this is not the shortest magnetic path back to the PM's opposite pole, as such the inductor can produce a magnetic force on the rotor PM's but the rotor PM's cannot induce a current in the inductor windings. This means there can be no Bemf as there is no generator function acting on the inductor windings or better stated the PM field cannot cut the inductor windings producing a counter emf.
In figure 2 the two inductors bottom and right are shown having there poles designated by a blue(south pole) or red(north pole). The inductors are only energized within a small sector designated with (on-off) which roughly corresponds to the bloch wall between each pair of rotor PM's. Therefore if one inductor was used this inductor would be energized four times per revolution of the rotor.
On a less technical note, I see many people continually doing the same thing with the same designs and expecting different results each time when Im not sure there can be any change in there results. I have found through research and experiment that it is very difficult to utilize the magnetic pole of a permanent magnet and come out ahead in any way, so why do it? It is much easier to utilize the bloch wall to produce a dual force, both attraction and repulsion in the same instance and not have to deal with Bemf. A motor should act like a motor in every way and a generator should act like a generator in every way to be effective. There is also the problem of inductive inertia and residual magnetism that is not being dealt with in current motors. You cannot swap polarities at register without substantial losses, it is much more effective to energize an inductor at or near the bloch wall and have the after effects of energizing the inductor accelerate the rotor instead of de-accelerating it. I would like to mention that this rotary motor was designed after reading a patent by Wesley Gary for an oscillating motor. I am pretty sure Mr.Gary knew many things our enginners have yet to learn.

Allcanadian,

Yes, the work of Wesley Gary (also Canadian) is vitally important. Energizing the coils when the magnets are as far away as possible should help. Whether or not this design behaves as a true "no back EMF" motor will depend on a number of things. Obviously, if the coils can be "OFF" when the magnets make their closest approach to the coils that will dramatically reduce any "direct generator" effects. So the COP of the system will depend on the combination of how much torque the motor will produce and how much electricity can be recovered when your inductors are shut off. This second point, the inductive collapse, is the main issue. Two circuit parameters will determine this.

1) Is there a change in INDUCTANCE in the coil between the point of turn ON and the point of turn OFF? If there is, then the total quantity of energy that can be recovered will be different than the total quantity of energy required for the input. Depending on the geometry of the situation, this "difference" can either be a benefit or a liability. In most cases, it is a liability.

2) If there is a change in inductance, then how can this be MINIMIZED by making the input pulse as short a duration as possible. This requires using methods developed by Bob Teal where a very high current pulse is applied for a very short duration to produce a large mechanical thrust AND a very efficient electrical return.

This is the "window of opportunity" that should be explored.

Keep up the great work. I really believe you are going in the right direction with this.

Peter

[hh1341]

Thanks

Thanks for directing me to this thread, AC

Carl

[Peter Lindemann]

Wesley Gary

Hi folks,

For those of you who may not be familiar with the work of Wesley Gary, here is a link to a file on his permanent magnet motors and low drag generator designs at Rex Research.

Wesley Gary's Magnetic Motor

Peter

[Allcanadian]

Yes, the work of Wesley Gary (also Canadian) is vitally important. Energizing the coils when the magnets are as far away as possible should help. Whether or not this design behaves as a true "no back EMF" motor will depend on a number of things. Obviously, if the coils can be "OFF" when the magnets make their closest approach to the coils that will dramatically reduce any "direct generator" effects. So the COP of the system will depend on the combination of how much torque the motor will produce and how much electricity can be recovered when your inductors are shut off. This second point, the inductive collapse, is the main issue. Two circuit parameters will determine this.

Hello Peter
LOL, I didn't know Wesley Gary was canadian, I built Mr.Gary's patent number 190,206 almost 5 years ago and I can tell you I learned many important lessons in the process. The first was that the applied force should constitute a dual force as all forces are dual in nature, the reaction to the applied force is attraction an effect of the applied force is repulsion and both can occur in the same instance. As well the design itself defines efficient operation, the armature is energized at or near the bloch wall, the armature never leaves the permanent magnetic field and the applied force occurs in a near constant linear permanent magnetic field.
Regards AC

[patmac]

Adams + Hall IC

I'm testing a Adams motor, using last generation component, Hall IC effect and MOSFET, Back EMF to recharge battery is strong. My coil is a powerfull 30 ohm AWG 27 monofilar, run to room temperature MOSFET is cold too, 12 volts gives good BEMF, 24 volts high speed and relatively good torque, I want to step up to 36 volts, but I've first install a voltage regulator to my Hall, (is last) I burned five trying to make it run.

The effectively best performance is when Hall IC is adjusted a little after of magnets on the stator.

Running on 12 volts X 0.03 amps free wheel. and 0.12 amps trying getting slow the rotor (but BEMF is higher ).

With rotor totally stopped and magnets over HallIC 0.34 amps max

Adams was a genius....

[Allcanadian]

@Jetijs

Lets look at the upper right magnet and lets suppose that all the stator coils are shorted. As the magnet approaches the stator coil, it induces a current flow in the stator coil. This current flow now creates a magnetic field that is opposite in polarity to the magnet, like in pic2, this makes a repulsion and slow the rotor down. Now, if the magnet is aligned to the stator coil and starts to leave the coil, the current flow in the coil reverses and this makes also the coils magnetic field to reverse its polarity. Now the coil is attracting the magnet that leaves the stator coil and in the same time repulsing the incoming new magnet. Right? So how can we make it so that the coil does not change the polarity as the magnet leaves the stator coil? What do you mean with an inductive load?
I am trying to understand this

The picture below is the process timing of the generator posted. What I mean by inductive load is that a large inductance will act as a flywheel maintaining current flow in one direction, it will oppose change. We also know from a DC/DC converter circuit that an inductance when disrupted can also discharge its energy near instantly at high potential. You should notice that the two different properties of an inductance just mentioned would seem at odds with each other. Both of these properties are utilized in the stator coils. The trick here is to ignore what you see , you are only looking at the magnetic poles when the bloch wall is what we should be looking at.
There is one more concept that will help more than anything I believe and we should not overcomplicate this concept any more than we have to. In physics there are four variables--1)Position, 2)Velocity, 3)Acceleration and 4)Control or rate of change of acceleration. The Control function is what we should be concerned with, forces can have equal and opposite reactions but we can to some extent "control" the rate at which the action/reaction happens. For example a large inductance can charge slowly the effect is a magnetic force and discharge near instantly the effect is an electric force, the control or rate of change is very different in the charge and discharge conditions and we can control when this happens.
Regards
AC

[Allcanadian]

Here is an interesting circuit which has application in both the generator above and non-Bemf motors. In this circuit an intermittent current input will maintain the polarity of the inductor over a large time frame. In one instance the DC motor is acting as a motor and the moment the source current is disconnected the DC motor will act as a generator maintaining the current flow. The DC motor is a low turn/resistance PM motor and the inductance is the 120v windings of a transformer cut down to form an inductor.

[hh1341]

Recovery

Hi AC,

Does this design have energy recovery?

Is it easy on the juice or is it a hog?

I am interested in developing a motor for an electric boat.

Peter, I think wisely, has steered me away from the solenoid design.

Do you think yours would show promise for my application?

Carl

Motor.jpg
Double click on the pic

[Allcanadian]

@hh1341

Peter, I think wisely, has steered me away from the solenoid design.
Do you think yours would show promise for my application?
Carl

The solenoid motor has one benefit many other motors do not and that is time. Everyone has assumed that an electric current must be applied during the duration of the solenoid power cycle. If a current pulse is applied during the start of the cycle and this current maintains itself thus the magnetic field through the cycle then the input energy has no relation to the torque or power generated. For instance what would happen if a 1/10th second pulse would produce a magnetic field that remained constant for 2 seconds or more?

[hh1341]

@hh1341

The solenoid motor has one benefit many other motors do not and that is time. Everyone has assumed that an electric current must be applied during the duration of the solenoid power cycle. If a current pulse is applied during the start of the cycle and this current maintains itself thus the magnetic field through the cycle then the input energy has no relation to the torque or power generated. For instance what would happen if a 1/10th second pulse would produce a magnetic field that remained constant for 2 seconds or more?

AC,

Would that result be,.... less power consumed for plenty of torque created.....equals efficient?

BTW......Can i take this as a slight encouraging push in the solenoid direction?

Carl