Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power

[Jetijs]

Speaking about this magnetic darlington pair:


I am not sure it would work, because I suspect that when the small magnets are inserted, all the flux will want to go through that little magnet instead of the intended path. I will thy this out tomorrow also.

[gotoluc]

Hi Folks,

My take on the LaFonte setup in the video is that it is very much a paralell path variant, except the moving magnet has permanent poles while the Flynn setup has electromagnets in the middle and their poles can be changed at will.

Yes all three permanent magnets are magnetized length-wise, the poles face to the bars sides. The upper and lower magnets should have their like poles on the same bar side and the moving magnet has the opposite orientation, this is what I think, otherwise the effect he shows cannot happen like that.

Hi Gyula and all interested.

I tested Butch LaFonte's setup and I don't think it will work.

What I noticed is as soon as the center magnet is introduced each end magnet have about 50% less flux power, which makes sense. My test setup used Two 1" square steel bars that are 6" long. I used 3 sets of three stack 1/2" dia. x 1/8" neo magnets. When I slide the center magnet to one end I notice a reduction of flux power but it does not cancel the flux as the magnet on the other end is also reaching. Making the bars longer would help this but I think would also weaken the magnet field also. Butch is right that it is easy to slide the magnet up and down but that's about all I see.

Yes, this setup could also be used for the Paul Noel setups, combining them is ok but how would you move the middle magnet, Luc? maybe with linear motor you started this thread...

That made me

On your question to replace the pm with a coil across the bars, if it were an air core coil then it would conduct flux when you switch current into it, but if it had a iron core too then it would conduct flux always in itself, except when you switch the current on so that the poles work against that flux. So it would be better to place the coils onto the bar as Flynn shows, not across.

rgds, Gyula

This was not a question I had... it was a reply to David of his suggestion of using a coil across the bars.

Your reply however confirmed what I thought would happen.

Luc

[Jetijs]

Hi all
I just tested if 2mm gap between magnets and iron bars requires less current to redirect the flux and it does, now instead of 4A I need only 3.6A to fully redirect the flux. Also I noticed that if I rise the current some more the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again, so there is a sweetspot there. I guess that when going higher than that sweetspot the steel bars become saturated and there is more flux than it can handle and that is why the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again. BTW, if you haven't seen that already, I have a thread on this running here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=5145
It is about the Flynn 2 pole motor replication. I finally managed to wind the coils on both stators, took me 3 times to wind because there was always a short between windings and stator itself, that was because of the sharp edges. I had to file them down and cover with epoxy to get a good result. I think the motor will be assembled in next few days
Thanks,
Jetijs

[gotoluc]

Hi all
I just tested if 2mm gap between magnets and iron bars requires less current to redirect the flux and it does, now instead of 4A I need only 3.6A to fully redirect the flux. Also I noticed that if I rise the current some more the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again, so there is a sweetspot there. I guess that when going higher than that sweetspot the steel bars become saturated and there is more flux than it can handle and that is why the nonmagnetic side becomes magnetic again. BTW, if you haven't seen that already, I have a thread on this running here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=5145
It is about the Flynn 2 pole motor replication. I finally managed to wind the coils on both stators, took me 3 times to wind because there was always a short between windings and stator itself, that was because of the sharp edges. I had to file them down and cover with epoxy to get a good result. I think the motor will be assembled in next few days
Thanks,
Jetijs

WOW Jetijs

I had no idea of your topic till now!... I'm sure some won't believe that but it's the truth.

It blows me away to think we are both on the FPP.

Amazing skills you have my friend

Cant' wait to see the result of your motor tests

Thanks for sharing your work of Art.

Luc

[zhorv324]

Glotuc , as I say on Jetijs trade you mast use second Laminate bar on Parallel path device because you mast provide flux path when divert flux. In thet case power consumption is much less. My setup use only 3v and 0,25A.

[Jetijs]

Yes Luc, zhorv324 is right.
Can you do that experiment again and see what the current consumption is if the upper part of your setup has a closed path? Because now when you are redirecting the flux, you are trying to push it through the open end, through the air and air is a great resistance for magnetic field. Of course this increases the current consumption. That is why I was surprised by your current consumption, because there is a video on peswiki where this guy can easily redirect all the flux using only a one small 3v battery.

[gotoluc]

Holly Smokes zhorv324 and Jetijs you're right!!! I wasn't thinking.

I'll redo the tests and post the results.

Stay tuned.

Luc

[gotoluc]

Okay, here are the correct results

It is just like you said. There is an ideal voltage, go past it and the flux comes back.

My ideal voltage is 2.75 volts @ 0.08ma = 0.22 Watts

I think this is a better score

Give me your comments.

Thanks for your help.

Luc

[Jetijs]

Thats awesome
This is very encouraging news for me, because it bothered me for a long time. Now I know that the flux can be redirected with a current that small.
Great.
Thank you for the test
Jetijs

[gotoluc]

Thats awesome
This is very encouraging news for me, because it bothered me for a long time. Now I know that the flux can be redirected with a current that small.
Great.
Thank you for the test
Jetijs

Glad it's reassuring for you

Maybe you can help me now! because I have a lot of ideas to test but I'm not quite understanding what is happening in the FPP motor since we have 2 opposite effects happening at the same time. A flux neutralization at one end and a very strong flux at the other end. How are both used in the motor?

Thanks for your time Jetijs

Luc

[Jetijs]

Easy



This is the easiest Flynn type motor, I think it is easy to understand. We have four poles on the stator and five poles on the rotor. With no input power both magnets will want to close their path through the stator. But when power is applied on phase one the current goes through the coils in one direction, this Makes all the flux flow through the upper stator poles till the rotor aligns with them. At this time the lower stator poles are non magnetic and the rotor pole on the bottom side goes in between the poles. Now we go to phase 2, the current now flows in opposite direction, this makes the upper stator poles to become non magnetic and all the flux no goes through the bottom stator poles till the rotor aligns to the bottom stator poles. And so this process is repeating. Hope I could explain so that you understood. This design is good for proving the concept, but it has some disadvantages, one of them is that on each phase there is a great load on the shaft that is pulled either up or down, because of the attraction force. That is why 4-pole or 6-pole motors are better, there the attraction force is equal from all sides so no load for the shaft. Also the more poles, the more magnets can be used, thus greater power
This is how a 6-ole motor would look like:

Here there are three magnets working on the phase one and remaining three are helping them, on phase 2 the other three are doing the work and the first three are helping them. Here is a magnetic simulation of that motor:

[gotoluc]

Excellent and simple explanation Jetijs

It is now clear how both effects are used.

So your motor will need AC. Do you have your circuit that will make the AC?

Thanks for taking the time to make this great post that all can easily understand.

Luc

[Jetijs]

Thanks Luc,
Glad you understood
I will use two MOSFETs triggered by two optoswitches, one for each MOSFET. I wound two strands of wire on my cores so that I can use one MOSFET for each strand. I will use DC current, but wire one strand with positive at the start and ground at the end and the other strand will be connected the other way around. This way I can use simple DC pulse driver to run the motor and there is no need for an AC circuit. This is why you see a birilar coil on each stator piece in the 6-pole motor diagram. There is one strand for every phase. I had limited space on my stator pieces, but if there would be more space I would wind an additional strand of wire for the recovery to capture the spikes.
Oh, I just thought, could you perform the last test again to see if you can get greater energy out of the flyback spike if the upper end of your setup is closed?
We now know that closing the upper end reduces the energy consumption for flux redirection, but does this also help the recovery?

Thanks,
Jetijs

[gotoluc]

Thanks Luc,
Glad you understood
I will use two MOSFETs triggered by two optoswitches, one for each MOSFET. I wound two strands of wire on my cores so that I can use one MOSFET for each strand. I will use DC current, but wire one strand with positive at the start and ground at the end and the other strand will be connected the other way around. This way I can use simple DC pulse driver to run the motor and there is no need for an AC circuit. This is why you see a birilar coil on each stator piece in the 6-pole motor diagram. There is one strand for every phase. I had limited space on my stator pieces, but if there would be more space I would wind an additional strand of wire for the recovery to capture the spikes.
Oh, I just thought, could you perform the last test again to see if you can get greater energy out of the flyback spike if the upper end of your setup is closed?
We now know that closing the upper end reduces the energy consumption for flux redirection, but does this also help the recovery?

Thanks,
Jetijs

Hi Jetijs,

yes it does help with the recovery. I have both ends of the core bridged for the below results.

I set the supply voltage at 3 volts and used my SG to trigger a MOSFET @ 50% Duty Cycle and raised the Frequency to the point where the 225v flyback spikes just start to reduce which ends up at 170Hz.

Here is the input power


Here is the Flyback power collected in a 6000uf Cap and a 10K 2% load so not to increase input power when flyback is connected.


Here is the scope shot @ 50v division & using 100X probe across coil but NOT collecting flyback


and here is the scope shot @ 5v division & using 100X probe across coil but collecting flyback


I this configuration I calculate that 55% of the energy can be collected as long as the collection cap is not loaded more than 55% of the input power. Loading the flyback collection cap any more will only increases the input power. However decreasing the load on the flyback collection cap will not reduce the input power any further as it is at is lowest since when I connect or disconnect the flyback collection cap there is virtually no change to input current. This is the ideal parameters for this particular setup when using 3vdc as input. However if the voltage is increased the Frequency will also need to increase so not to waste power.

Took me a while to figure out the balance point but learned much in doing it

Now the question remains, can we get this device to do work and still collect back 55% of the input power remains to be seen

Hope this helps

Luc

[zhorv324]

HI glotuc your result is better then mine,but you must understand the result depend on setup. Simply your setup hew more turns off thicker wire then mine, and because off nature off parallel path you use less current. In parallel path device your coils mast produce same flux as one off your magnets to divert flux.I built 4 pole motor and spend almost two years in experiment's with parallel path. I be glad to answer off any question