Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc,

How fast you are! Very good and many thanks for this test. Yes your test sounds ok to me (I assume that connecting the primary coils in series resulted in a current consumption of about half an Amper from the 3 12V batteries.)

Now we have to understand the setup DMPOWER showed in his drawing. You have made a DC test and DMPOWER's first drawing shows the DC setup where two - two electromagnet pairs are shown. He seems to indicate brushes at the center shaft of his drawing for switching the current on and off when it is just needed. Thinking loudly, maybe more than two-two coil pairs would be needed for a smooth operation and all these coils are to be connected in series, to run the same current through them. And because of the repel forces being the strongest when the coil pairs are just facing and these repel forces act radially towards and away from the shaft, we should fix the coils in an angled (twisted) position to utilize the repel force the most in the wanted rotation, and leave a minimal force towards the shaft.

Of course, first two-two coil pairs (four electromagnets) would be enough for building a pulse motor for testing purposes.

Let's try to understand what happens when you load the shaft of such a pulse motor? After your test it is sure that the current consumption cannot increase for the shaft loading because there is no induction backwards we have got used to it so well, very unusual property, no? The RPM would probably get reduced but input power would remain more or less the same.

I think this is the next step for testing. I cannot be 100% sure this setup will be giving out more power than what is needed to run it, sorry for this, this setup is also new to me, I also have to fully understand its properties, including the AC feeding behavior too. Any other member here are welcome to comment.

Thanks Luc!

Gyula

Okay Gyula,

I'll build a 4 coil wheel and 4 coil stator to test this design.

I'm not too sure of your coil angle explanation... can you make some kind of illustration so I have a visual of it.

Are you thinking that current won't go up when you load this motor design? ... if so, how can that be? If a load slows down the rpm of the motor the the coils will stay on longer and is the result not more current draw?

Also, I'm not sure about coils in repel mode have as much force as when they are in attraction mode. If I use the same test as I did above but connect the coils in attraction mode I cannot separate the coils using both hands with all my force. However, when they are in repel mode I can easily hold them together with one hand. What am I missing why such difference?

Luc

[Inquorate]

Attraction vs repulsion

@ Gotoluc, what you've observed makes sense to me. Considering the magnetic lines of force from magnet or electromagnet as streams of aetheric nature, we can visualize that when attracting, the lines of force join together in a tight bundle; the 'stream' is quite strong.
When repulsing, the magnetic field lines don't meet, and like two water hoses' streams meeting, must diverge.

Love and light

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

I just completed a new video to demonstrate a new switching circuit I made for the motor to work on its own DC supply of what ever voltage I chose to input which should be based on the load the motor would be under.

With this new switching circuit I should be able to get better power data. I used 3.80vdc @ 40ma as it makes the coil move back and forth every second which means the .9 pound coil traveled 12" = 1 foot per second with a 0.15 Watt input. I think this is a better score then previously calculated. You may also notice that the back and forth is just a little faster then every second, so I think it would be safe to say it moves 1 pound 1 foot every second for a 0.15 Watt input and could be better with a bearing system.

Link to video: YouTube - Mostly Permenent Magnet Motor test 2

Luc

[gotoluc]

Can someone help with foot pound-force per second.

I'm looking for the Watt value for moving 1 pound 1 foot in 1 second and the below is what I found. Is this correct?

1 ft.lbf/s = 1.35582 Watt

which would add to 746 Watts for 1 HP if 550 ft.lbf/s = to 1 HP

If this is correct and my motor is moving the 1 pound coil 1 foot per second with 0.15 Watt how does this fit in

Thanks for your help.

Luc

[Inquorate]

Conversion calculator

Watts to Foot Pound-Forces/Second Conversion Calculator

[gotoluc]

Thanks Inquorate

this online calculator confirms the amounts I posted above

Now why does it come up with only 0.111 pound when I enter my motors 0.15 Watt consumption when I'm pushing 1 lb. per ft/s

I'll need someone to explain me this

Luc

[Inquorate]

Gravity?

Does it assume 'moving the mass' is against gravity (aether stream shown in extended Michaelson Morley experiment)???

We need an expert to point out what is going on.. Or failing that, um.

@Gotoluc - can you recycle the radiant spike thru diode back into coil for this one?
Reason I ask is I'll have to figure out the same when I get round to using the dielectric emf recycler (aka tesla switch) to pulse a bedini coil.

the challenge is making it pulse both ways and still be able to use a recovery diode. Otherwise I'll have to use two coils with diodes to negative each way.

[sucahyo]

Sorry if this is off topic

Just opening some harddisk and find the coil position over magnet is rather interesting.

Is the very fine wire the key for harddisk head controller precision? I still don't get how it the controller move over the flat neo magnet. Very wide coil almost covering north to south?

The harddisk controller should consume very small power considering it's wire size? But it can move very fast during operation.

[petersone]

Hi Luc and all
As I think I mentioned earlier,the foot/lb per sec.is vertical movement,so try your setup in a vertical pos.it should come out about right on the numbers.
Also,if you had 2 setups,with the coils wired in a bucking manner,moving in unison there should be no bemf.I think that would apply to any 2 coil in almost any motor,attraction, bedini,etc
I don't understand why bemf is a bad thing in motors,I must be missing something,as I see it,with no bemf we are "paying" 100% up front,so the juice used will not rise when under load,but load or no load we are paying 100%,with bemf as the load rises the juice used rises,that seems reasonable.
I we could get rid of the unwanted motor effect in a genny now that would be worth having.No matter what, I find your tests are very enlightning,and will follow them with interest.If my thoughts on any/all the above are incorrect,please put me right!!I learn best by being wrong.
peter

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Well then it seems that maybe 'Creative Science and Research' and their motor plans that use electromagnets on rotor and electromagnets on stator if wired correctly would be canceling the back emf. The plans are then useful if this cancellation occurs, which I will be testing dmm's post, even though I thought I tested this already with all the motors I've built, but now that I think of it I always used permanent magnets. Seems Ed Gray's motor wasn't that complicated after all, removing back emf would have made his motor very efficient.
peace love light
Tyson

[gyula]

Okay Gyula,

I'll build a 4 coil wheel and 4 coil stator to test this design.

I'm not too sure of your coil angle explanation... can you make some kind of illustration so I have a visual of it.

Are you thinking that current won't go up when you load this motor design? ... if so, how can that be? If a load slows down the rpm of the motor the the coils will stay on longer and is the result not more current draw?

Also, I'm not sure about coils in repel mode have as much force as when they are in attraction mode. If I use the same test as I did above but connect the coils in attraction mode I cannot separate the coils using both hands with all my force. However, when they are in repel mode I can easily hold them together with one hand. What am I missing why such difference?

Luc

Hi Luc,

I have attached a drawing how I thought to fix the cores at an angle wrt the radial direction on a rotor disk, unfortunately this would involve cutting the cores' facing ends at a certain angle too, they could not be with 90 degrees corners. I think the most repel force can be received only this way between a rotor and a stator where the facing areas are flat and not with any arc.

Obviously this setup surely will works if cores are not cut at an angle but left with 90 degree corners but I think useful torque will be lost in the wanted direction of rotation because in this case most of the repel forces will go towards the radial direction. Also when the corners are left in normal 90 degree shape, the facing areas between rotor and stator cores reduce as the rotor turning advances, hence useful repel forces get reduced even rapidly, wrt the slanted cut core ends.

Of course there is relationship between the thickness of the core and angle of the cut, so that the very edges of both the slanted cut rotor and stator cores should not touch each other when rotating; this involves keeping a certain distance (an air gap) between the rotor and stator core, and unfortunately the higher this gap the more repel force is lost.

Re on your 'current will not go up' question: you can test this by your hands, moving one of the cores (in repel mode) towards the other and at a very near facing position suddenly reduce the moving speed (imitate a cogging situation) and watch the current meter. I do hope you will not notice any current change (after your test yesterday). Remember this is intended to be a switched (i.e. a pulsed) motor and I think the switch(es) should only be ON from just after the facing position for a small time duration to establish the repel kick-out force, then OFF again.
Maybe I do not interpret correctly the DC setup drawing of DMPOWER, but that is how I would think it works. Nevertheless, I cannot see any back induction possibility when the rotor suddenly slows down due to a increased load because this should have already manifested in your yesterday test.

Re on your repel and attract mode question: if you mean that in repel mode you are able to keep the two cores pressed totally together with one hand easily, (using the same current as in the attract case mode), well this is interesting to say the least... I mean I would not have thought for as a big difference between a repel and attract force of two identical electromagnets as you have found.
Maybe this could be utilized by making a DC polarity change switch for the series coils: when on approch they receive an attract polarity current and after TDC they get a repel polarity current, this is what suddenly I can think of as a 'remedy'...

On your latest video: maybe fixing springs at the endings of the steel rod to conserve most of the bumping energy that otherwise would dissipate would also increase your efficiency, besides using bearings. Very good test!!

rgds, Gyula

[gotoluc]

Does it assume 'moving the mass' is against gravity (aether stream shown in extended Michaelson Morley experiment)???

We need an expert to point out what is going on.. Or failing that, um.

@Gotoluc - can you recycle the radiant spike thru diode back into coil for this one?
Reason I ask is I'll have to figure out the same when I get round to using the dielectric emf recycler (aka tesla switch) to pulse a bedini coil.

the challenge is making it pulse both ways and still be able to use a recovery diode. Otherwise I'll have to use two coils with diodes to negative each way.

Hi Inquorate,

it is much more complicated of a circuit to recover coil flyback when using AC but not impossible. At this time it does not concern me to waste it as it's not a high frequency device yet

Luc

[jeanna]

Luc,
I am way over my head with many of the posts here, but what keeps striking me is that you have made a sort of coil gun. (except yours goes back immediately.

I had the same take on your motor that inquorate had, which is that the bemf would be helping, but...

In the case of a coil gun the projectile is stopped by the collapsing mag field IF it is still inside the coil, but if it is already outside the trajectory is not hurt, and, I am not sure, it might be helped.

But the whole deal to get a coil gun to work well is to time the length of the pulse and the intervals (frequency) well with the aim that the collapse happens late enough.
Barry says it like this:

Another goal is to get the correct timing. If the coil current is too short, then the projectile barely moves before the current is gone. If the current is too long, the projectile is pulled back again after it passes the middle. You must get the right timing for your particular combination of coil and projectile!

So, you could try to time the pulse and its length between pulses such that the coil is on the other side of the bar before the collapse slows it down.

I bet you are doing this already, since you seem to be getting good results.

I think when you do time it perfectly to shoot and reload at the right intervals, you might have an increase in speed, like some bedini motors, and you will need to back off a bit.

Barry's theory page with links
and
click the link for RLC for a great java applet
Thank you,

jeanna

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc and all
As I think I mentioned earlier,the foot/lb per sec.is vertical movement,so try your setup in a vertical pos.it should come out about right on the numbers.
Also,if you had 2 setups,with the coils wired in a bucking manner,moving in unison there should be no bemf.I think that would apply to any 2 coil in almost any motor,attraction, bedini,etc
I don't understand why bemf is a bad thing in motors,I must be missing something,as I see it,with no bemf we are "paying" 100% up front,so the juice used will not rise when under load,but load or no load we are paying 100%,with bemf as the load rises the juice used rises,that seems reasonable.
I we could get rid of the unwanted motor effect in a genny now that would be worth having.No matter what, I find your tests are very enlightning,and will follow them with interest.If my thoughts on any/all the above are incorrect,please put me right!!I learn best by being wrong.
peter

Thanks Peter,

I wasn't sure about this since Peter L. was saying that my motor was in the normal ballpark from looking at my horizontal test video. I did not understand how he could calculate that from the coil weight going from side to side.

I purchase a longer steel bar to test it vertically. Should have a setup in the next day or so.

Not sure I understand your 2 coils wired in a bucking manner ... is that repel mode? I only have one coil and it takes about a day to make one since every layer is epoxied.

I'm also unclear of the benefits of no BEMF motor but ready to test it if feasible

Thanks for your interest and posts

Luc

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc,

I have attached a drawing how I thought to fix the cores at an angle wrt the radial direction on a rotor disk, unfortunately this would involve cutting the cores' facing ends at a certain angle too, they could not be with 90 degrees corners. I think the most repel force can be received only this way between a rotor and a stator where the facing areas are flat and not with any arc.

Obviously this setup surely will works if cores are not cut at an angle but left with 90 degree corners but I think useful torque will be lost in the wanted direction of rotation because in this case most of the repel forces will go towards the radial direction. Also when the corners are left in normal 90 degree shape, the facing areas between rotor and stator cores reduce as the rotor turning advances, hence useful repel forces get reduced even rapidly, wrt the slanted cut core ends.

Of course there is relationship between the thickness of the core and angle of the cut, so that the very edges of both the slanted cut rotor and stator cores should not touch each other when rotating; this involves keeping a certain distance (an air gap) between the rotor and stator core, and unfortunately the higher this gap the more repel force is lost.

Re on your 'current will not go up' question: you can test this by your hands, moving one of the cores (in repel mode) towards the other and at a very near facing position suddenly reduce the moving speed (imitate a cogging situation) and watch the current meter. I do hope you will not notice any current change (after your test yesterday). Remember this is intended to be a switched (i.e. a pulsed) motor and I think the switch(es) should only be ON from just after the facing position for a small time duration to establish the repel kick-out force, then OFF again.
Maybe I do not interpret correctly the DC setup drawing of DMPOWER, but that is how I would think it works. Nevertheless, I cannot see any back induction possibility when the rotor suddenly slows down due to a increased load because this should have already manifested in your yesterday test.

Re on your repel and attract mode question: if you mean that in repel mode you are able to keep the two cores pressed totally together with one hand easily, (using the same current as in the attract case mode), well this is interesting to say the least... I mean I would not have thought for as a big difference between a repel and attract force of two identical electromagnets as you have found.
Maybe this could be utilized by making a DC polarity change switch for the series coils: when on approch they receive an attract polarity current and after TDC they get a repel polarity current, this is what suddenly I can think of as a 'remedy'...

On your latest video: maybe fixing springs at the endings of the steel rod to conserve most of the bumping energy that otherwise would dissipate would also increase your efficiency, besides using bearings. Very good test!!

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

thanks for the illustration ... very easy to understand now

I do trust from my repel tests that this kind of setup will not cause generator effect (BEMF) but I do not agree that it will not increase in current draw when under load.

The coils will be turned on and off at the ideal timing setting found, right?

This on off timing period will changes with motor RPM (longer at start up and shorter at full speed) right?

So if the length of the on off timing periods change with RPM then when it is under load and RPM reduces and coil on off time increases would you not think the current will increase?

I will make a video to show you the difference between repel mode and attraction mode using the same power input and you can make a decision.

Thanks for your time

Luc