Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

just built a Flynn Parallel Path Device and made a test video of it.

Link to video: YouTube - Flynn Parallel Path Device test 1

The coils and cores I used are from shaded pole motors which are used in 50 CFM Bathroom exhaust fans @ $20.ea. I though of trying these before investing too much time and money in this.

I must say that I'm impressed with the results and we also need to keep in mind that my video is only demonstrating the flux release side and not demonstrating the more then double the magnetic flux power of the opposite end when the coils are activated.

Here is a video I found of using this effect in a motor. Notice that when the motor is under load the current does not change. Anyone know why

Link to video: YouTube - Flynn's motor

@Gyula can you comment on this motor video please

Thanks

Luc

[rave154]

GOTO,

lovely Flynn makeup there, thats got to be one of the neatest home-made setups ive ever seen

I dont know if youve ever seen this video before...

YouTube - LaFonteGroup's Channel

after watching, notice that basically the middle magnet is acting as a switch.

instead of using a magnet and physically "moving" it up and down... couldnt two coils be used in place of the middle magnet, one at the top position, one at the bottom position, when the top coil is energised and bottom coil is "off"... this simulates having the NEO at the top position and vice versa... which switches the flux... the black bars he has at top and bottom could be wound with pickup coils and voila...you have a "Flynn-type" motionless generator.

I couldnt tell from the video if he is using diametric neo's or standard top & bottom ( flat surfaces ) polarised neos. ( my guess would be top & bottom polarised )

Hope this helps your thinking and doesnt cloud the issue.

David. D

[Jetijs]

Hi Luc,
great experiment as always.
It is odd that you can not get something useful out of the flyback spike. I made an experiment similar to this, but I did not have cores like you have, I just used iron bars and nevertheless I managed to charge up a capacitor with flyback spike using that setup. Can you do a quick test for me? First of all I would like to know how much energy it takes to fully redirect the flux, not in joules, just put a variable voltage source to the coils and then rise the voltage until one of the end pieces falls off and there is no flux there anymore. See what voltage and current is needed for that. In my iron bar setup it took about 5v and 4A. Then use the same voltage and do an experiment like this:

See if the capacitor will charge up. In my setup I used 10000uF 60v cap and it charged great, about 4-5 spikes was needed to get the cap to 12v. Maybe this is because material used, the iron is not the best thing to use in these setups as it has residual magnetism and lower permeability, so it takes more power to saturate the core.
If you have some free time for this, then please do that experiment for me
Thank you,
Jetijs

[gyula]

Hi Luc,

On your question: The input current does not change but a little because the flux it creates cannot directly connect to the rotor. The flux of the electromagnets are added to the flux of the permanent magnets and this 'flux mixture' works on the rotor as attraction, in the correct time.
Another fact is that the rotor is 'passive', I mean it has no coils with counter flux against the 'flux mixture'. This 'no coil for the output' solution surely helps the input to be independent from the output load changes. OF course I miss output torque measurements (Prony brake test) versus input electric power, from the builders.

Your video demo is excellent, thanks for showing it.

Would like to draw your attention to Paul Noel's ideas on this technology here:
Directory:FPPMT:Paul Noel - PESWiki

and see Parallel Path Backdraft and Parallel path backdraft (2) in the middle of that link. It shows how to connect several PP setups to each other so that you could start from a really small input power to cause and get a much bigger output and the big output cannot reflect back but a very little to the input. (Notice he does not suggest using input coils for changing the flux but small magnets moving them mechanically, i.e. rotating the small bar magnets for instance.)
However I think that embedding at least two PP setups into each other like he shows, and using an electromagnet instead of the permanent bar magnet, the load would reflect in the input but a little. This needs testing of course.
You have to make sure that saturation nowhere occurs in the laminations that guide the flux and this needs fairly big cross section areas for the cores, especially at the output ends where the added flux is expected to appear.
It is good to insert narrow nonmagnetic spacers between two adjacent magnets for instance, this is the simplest way of reducing flux in that path if you suspect saturation.

Thanks, Gyula

[gotoluc]

GOTO,

lovely Flynn makeup there, thats got to be one of the neatest home-made setups ive ever seen

I dont know if youve ever seen this video before...

YouTube - LaFonteGroup's Channel

after watching, notice that basically the middle magnet is acting as a switch.

instead of using a magnet and physically "moving" it up and down... couldnt two coils be used in place of the middle magnet, one at the top position, one at the bottom position, when the top coil is energised and bottom coil is "off"... this simulates having the NEO at the top position and vice versa... which switches the flux... the black bars he has at top and bottom could be wound with pickup coils and voila...you have a "Flynn-type" motionless generator.

I couldnt tell from the video if he is using diametric neo's or standard top & bottom ( flat surfaces ) polarised neos. ( my guess would be top & bottom polarised )

Hope this helps your thinking and doesnt cloud the issue.

David. D

Hi David,

thanks for the positive comment

I'm not sure if the magnet poles are all the same on each bar but it looks to me (I could be wrong) that Butch LaFonte's demo is the same effect as the Flyn Parallel Path. The main difference is he's using a PM instead of EM coils to redirect the PM flux.

If we use coils across the bars instead of the PM would this not create a path (bridge) for the PM flux to cross when the coil is not activated?

Interesting that you came to the same Flyn motionless idea I did 4 days ago.

Here is the post at OU: Solid State Orbo System

Thanks for sharing

Luc

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc,
great experiment as always.
It is odd that you can not get something useful out of the flyback spike. I made an experiment similar to this, but I did not have cores like you have, I just used iron bars and nevertheless I managed to charge up a capacitor with flyback spike using that setup. Can you do a quick test for me? First of all I would like to know how much energy it takes to fully redirect the flux, not in joules, just put a variable voltage source to the coils and then rise the voltage until one of the end pieces falls off and there is no flux there anymore. See what voltage and current is needed for that. In my iron bar setup it took about 5v and 4A. Then use the same voltage and do an experiment like this:

See if the capacitor will charge up. In my setup I used 10000uF 60v cap and it charged great, about 4-5 spikes was needed to get the cap to 12v. Maybe this is because material used, the iron is not the best thing to use in these setups as it has residual magnetism and lower permeability, so it takes more power to saturate the core.
If you have some free time for this, then please do that experiment for me
Thank you,
Jetijs

Okay Jetijs I'll be happy to do the tests for you buddy

I'll post my results a little later.

Luc

[rave154]

GOTO,

ive watched grounloops solid state orbo thread, very interesting...toroids that is ( and were told & taught " ohh...theyre just humble transformer coils.....nothing to see here folks......go home....nothing to see here folks "

since you seem to be "here" right now goto..perhaps you can help me with this... i was about to get my pwm circuits up and running again ( 555 & a 494 circuit )....and i usually test them with a bulb just to make sure they are working , but when i connected the bulb was permanently lit.....as if the mosfet was fried..... so i tried a brand new mosfet not IN the circuit..same thing..... bulb is ON all the time..

see attatcjed circuit...im confused !

[gyula]

@rave154

The gate of the MOSFET is floating, this is the problem.

Connect the gate to the source directly with a piece of wire, your problem will be solved. Of course you can use a few kOhm resistor too, to discharge the gate source nanofarad capacitance.

Gyula

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc,

On your question: The input current does not change but a little because the flux it creates cannot directly connect to the rotor. The flux of the electromagnets are added to the flux of the permanent magnets and this 'flux mixture' works on the rotor as attraction, in the correct time.
Another fact is that the rotor is 'passive', I mean it has no coils with counter flux against the 'flux mixture'. This 'no coil for the output' solution surely helps the input to be independent from the output load changes. OF course I miss output torque measurements (Prony brake test) versus input electric power, from the builders.

Your video demo is excellent, thanks for showing it.

Would like to draw your attention to Paul Noel's ideas on this technology here:
Directory:FPPMT:Paul Noel - PESWiki

and see Parallel Path Backdraft and Parallel path backdraft (2) in the middle of that link. It shows how to connect several PP setups to each other so that you could start from a really small input power to cause and get a much bigger output and the big output cannot reflect back but a very little to the input. (Notice he does not suggest using input coils for changing the flux but small magnets moving them mechanically, i.e. rotating the small bar magnets for instance.)
However I think that embedding at least two PP setups into each other like he shows, and using an electromagnet instead of the permanent bar magnet, the load would reflect in the input but a little. This needs testing of course.
You have to make sure that saturation nowhere occurs in the laminations that guide the flux and this needs fairly big cross section areas for the cores, especially at the output ends where the added flux is expected to appear.
It is good to insert narrow nonmagnetic spacers between two adjacent magnets for instance, this is the simplest way of reducing flux in that path if you suspect saturation.

Thanks, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

thanks for posting your thoughts on the FPP motor current use.

The Paul Noel full PM suggestion and Backdraft are very interesting experiments also. The main problem is saturation as you say. I have no Gauss meter so it maybe difficult to replicate.

Did you read rave154 post above? http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post81292

Could Butch LaFonte's method work as Paul Noel's suggestion of a full PM FPP?

Thanks

Luc

[rave154]

gyula,

thanks, but when the mosfet is IN the pwm circuit.... the gate goes to ground through a lil voltage divider thingy... and of course the source also to ground.....but the bulb still lights when i connect the supply for it ( i have two seprate Ps's one for the pwm circuit....one for the LOAD..both sharing a common ground )...it worked perfectly before.....now it doesnt....i assumed " oh...ive blown a mosfet..try a new one".........same result.. im confused

[gyula]

gyula,

thanks, but when the mosfet is IN the pwm circuit.... the gate goes to ground through a lil voltage divider thingy... and of course the source also to ground.....but the bulb still lights when i connect the supply for it ( i have two seprate Ps's one for the pwm circuit....one for the LOAD..both sharing a common ground )...it worked perfectly before.....now it doesnt....i assumed " oh...ive blown a mosfet..try a new one".........same result.. im confused

Well, the little voltage divider resistor values are the question, maybe they divide just over the threshold gate source voltage?
or something makes a big AC near field radiation that opens the gate?
sorry, no more ideas at the moment, maybe some more details on your schematic the FET is in?
Gyula

[gotoluc]

gyula,

thanks, but when the mosfet is IN the pwm circuit.... the gate goes to ground through a lil voltage divider thingy... and of course the source also to ground.....but the bulb still lights when i connect the supply for it ( i have two seprate Ps's one for the pwm circuit....one for the LOAD..both sharing a common ground )...it worked perfectly before.....now it doesnt....i assumed " oh...ive blown a mosfet..try a new one".........same result.. im confused

David,

Gyula has pointed out something important and that is the DC power source. In many cases it needs to be very flat. Are you using batteries? or a power supply?

Some power supplies have a noisy DC output and can cause this kind of problem.

I've had this happen many times

Luc

[rave154]

gyula, i appreciate your help and my lack of details..its just that....the circuit worked fine before, no problems at all...and now....nothing...

just as i was about to start tesing too....... i swear to god "something" is holding me back here.

[gyula]

You can test separately the MOSFETs in your circuit you attached and close the gate to the source, then the bulb must not light up.
This would be the first thing to do.
If the FETs are ok, Then check one by one your circuit shematic to the actual build, somewhere a bad connection or two wires touching... etc.
Relax and you will short it out sure.
Gyula

[rave154]

Gyula,

thanks, i put it back into the circuit, connected the power on the "load" side, bulb lit, i shorted with a wire from the gate to the source......bulb still lit....

= bad mosfet ?