Garry Stanley Pulse Motor

[SkyWatcher]

Hi Ted, thanks for the reply and information. This is all I could find for now, I assume it's a representation of what was shown in Ben's scope shot when pulsed.

peace love light
Tyson

[garrys]

Ted if you have this set up correctly then you should be able to spin it and get no output from your input wires eg it shouldnt generate any power as a generator if you are getting this then the coil setup is wrong but equally a nice build and you will surely get some interesting results from it as you are effectively taking the "use both ends of the coils fields" and doubling that again using each end field twice, i had the ability to do that on my original motor config but found the extra coils were making it hard to figure out what was going on in the motor and so took them out.

Garry

[gyula]

Hi Ted,

You surely answered my questions, thank you.

Looking at the transistor's collector-emitter (or drain-source) voltage waveform, it shows that the induced voltage in the coils by the moving magnets are just there, they are not utilized because the transistor is off and its collector (or drain) electrode is floating with respect to the ground, hence the induced voltage remains between the coil wire endings.

(The same happens by the way in Ben's case: when the induced voltage is
higher then the level of the supply voltage, then the switching device is off, the extra voltage is just there, unloaded and floating between the coil wire endings.)

However, if we wish to utilize the induced voltage, somehow adding it to the supply voltage, it would mean introducing Lenz drag into the motor, unfortunately.

So I think there remains using more coils and magnet pairs to bring more flux into the system, improving the performance.

In Garry's original motor these induced voltages in the individual coils are mainly cancelled by the paralleled coils, where in any one of the coils pairs one coil is reversed in phase if I put it correctly.

rgds, Gyula

[garrys]

Ted .... looking at your pix and text ...are you running your coils in series or parellal ?

For this to work for you, you can wire them either way but the trick is that one is turned around so that the power into it flows in the opposite direction to create the flux fields required ...this in turn means the induced power flows backwards in this coil and thus counters the induced power in the first resulting in no lenz once you have it running as a motor with little or no output as a generator your scope will start showing you the interesing stuff.
Turning of the coil is the necessary part and this is why this works with just about any motor anyone builds.

[gyula]

Hi Garry,

Ted wrote yesterday he connected them in parallel.

Cheers, Gyula

[garrys]

Hi Guys this is where you are going to find a lot of info about this currently still on the web :

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/f...les/anti-lenz/

if i can figure it out ill put bens pix of scope shots here :



http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/0IZNTDu..._waveforms.jpg

these are the actual scope shots ben posted.

Garry

[Ted Ewert]

Ted if you have this set up correctly then you should be able to spin it and get no output from your input wires eg it shouldnt generate any power as a generator if you are getting this then the coil setup is wrong but equally a nice build and you will surely get some interesting results from it as you are effectively taking the "use both ends of the coils fields" and doubling that again using each end field twice, i had the ability to do that on my original motor config but found the extra coils were making it hard to figure out what was going on in the motor and so took them out.

Garry

Hi Garry,
It spins just fine in freewheel mode if that's what you mean.
The only time it could actually function as a generator is during the "dip", which is when the transistor is on. When the transistor is off, the generated EMF would have to be higher than the supply voltage, and conduction would have to be across a reverse diode bridging the collector/emitter junction.
I'm still trying to figure out what you're doing with your coils that is out of the ordinary. As far as I can tell, they still have to be wired to have the same polarity, which means the current is rotating in the same direction in both coils. What am I missing?

Ted

[garrys]

yes they still have to be wired to have the same flux polarity for it to function as a motor but by turning one coil around you now have to wire this opposite to get the correct flux poles in doing this you not only reverse the input wiring but you are effectively reversing the direction of flow of the induced potential or voltage and thus when the 2 are wired together the cancel each other out ...by canceling out the induced potential you have no voltage for the amperage to flow over and thus no flux is built in the coils to create the lenz effect each coil is effectively completing the circuit of the other and thus you are running with a closed circuit and yet there is no resistance as you would have if you were to close the circuit of a single coil.

n+ ----->----- -s n+---->---- -s 2 coils

n+ ----->----- -s s- -----<---- +n 1 turned around

n+ ----->----- -s n+-----<---- -s second coil still turned but electrical poles reversed to correct flux poles which causes induced current to flow backwards in it thus when paired with the first in either series or parrallel they result in no output but still function to drive.

the closest i can do here is a C and a D when you turn a coil around it goes from clockwise to anti clockwise and this determines the induced current flow.

Garry

[Ted Ewert]

OK, I see what you're doing. By turning around the coil, the current is moving in the same direction (cw or ccw), but one side is flowing from outside towards the center and the other is going from the center to the outside.
Do you mind if we take a closer look at this? I still don't understand how this would cancel anything out. It seems to me that the flux field would be the same for both coils, whether it was created by magnets or electrical current. If you view the coils as a single turn of wire, the two are electrically and magnetically identical as long as the current is flowing in the same angular direction, no matter which way they are flopped.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of exactly what is going on here. My theory doesn't support your reality, so I need to upgrade my theory.

Ted

[garrys]

its ok Ted it took me 2 years to get anyone to pay any attention when i first did this so i know it takes some time to grasp the concept but i assure you it works.

Have a look at the end of a coil and if you see a clockwise wind and then turn it around it is now anti-clockwise my pix using arrows in the previous post were to show the coil still turned around but of course when you turn the wires around you correct the flux poles and it now functions as a single unit except it is now powered from thre center and earthed at the ends (or vice versa ).

This is a bit like a rubics cube extremely simple but still effectively 3d thinking and so its hard to initially grasp.

Though you are working with 2 coils you need to consider this as 1 coil that is cut in half and then one end turned around with the power then turned on this end so that the flux remains the same.

Having a look at this turned coil you will notice that the windings have reversed from clockwise to anticlockwise or vice versa and this in turn requires you to power it the opposite way and also now causes the induction to flow in the opposite direction ...... nothing is anything other than you would expect from either of the coils except the configuration has been changed to better use them ... a better mouse trap if you like ...no rules or laws broken.

Garry

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi garry, thanks for trying to clarify your thoughts more. What you have said about your theory of when the magnet approaches the coil and when pulsed the permanent magnets field gets pulled in a direction aiding input pulse make more sense than the coil flipping idea. The coil flipped and wiring altered to make a normal solenoid coil gives the same induced polarities when passing a magnet by, circuit closed or not. Like I said, if Ben's scope results were what he said, then it would be from your pulse aiding theory in my opinion. Otherwise, the motor is still a great motor in my opinion. Hi Ted, you said.

Hi Tyson. If you look at my scope shot, you'll notice that the voltage takes a big dip right when the pulse fires. That voltage drop at the collector of the transistor means that the magnets have generated a counter EMF equal or to, or greater than the supply voltage. In other words, the coil is generating power back towards the dc source at the same time the transistor turns on. How this motor even works under those circumstances is a little unclear. Nevertheless, I think this is why I'm only drawing a very small amount of current. If I move the timing either way, off dead center of the negative pulse, the motor draws more current. It has a surprising amount of torque for so little current too. Torque has a direct relationship to current so this seems to be another anomaly. Interesting motor.

Yes, it does seem anomalous. I took 2 of the 1/8 inch thick air-core coils i made before with same outer dimensions as coils I'm using now and putting them together to attract one another with 2.4 volts in parallel barely results in any movement at all between the 2 air coils, heck a breeze blowing through would probably move them more, though when a stack of neo magnets is placed on top of the 2 coils it launches off like a rocket. It looks odd seeing it happen.
peace love light
Tyson

[Ted Ewert]

Yes, it does seem anomalous. I took 2 of the 1/8 inch thick air-core coils i made before with same outer dimensions as coils I'm using now and putting them together to attract one another with 2.4 volts in parallel barely results in any movement at all between the 2 air coils, heck a breeze blowing through would probably move them more, though when a stack of neo magnets is placed on top of the 2 coils it launches off like a rocket. It looks odd seeing it happen.
peace love light
Tyson

A basic premise of motor design is flux density. The higher the flux density, the less current is needed to cause torque. The formula to calculate force on a conductor is: F=BIL where F is force in Newtons, B is flux density in teslas, I is amps and L is length in meters.
This shows right away that any increase in flux density will directly result in an increase in force.
Two powerful neodymium magnets, which are close together, can generate a very high flux density (B field). Relatively little current is required to produce a lot of torque. Also, the more (L) wire in contact with the magnetic field, the more torque will be produced. Therefore, larger (thinner) diameter coils as well as bigger magnets will generally produce more torque with the same amount of input power.
Does this give you any ideas?

Cheers,

Ted

[SkyWatcher]

Hi Ted, thanks for reply.

Does this give you any ideas?

It sure does and has for some time now. I know full well how powerful these neo magnets are. My 1" diameter neos when two stacks close to each other have a ferro backing plate and another set on other side of a stator plate like your showing has tremendous power and it bends whatever I have used to attach them to. Question is what two rotor sandwich design like this will hold up to the magnet forces involved. Just for a little wishful thinking, but if I had some of those 2" or 3" diameter by 1" thick neo magnets and we even were able to make it strong enough to put a ferro plate attaching them, that would be one powerful motor. In a case like this, maybe a steel I-beam or triangular mast type of rotor would be required, I will be thinking about this. The way you have yours set up now, can you get the magnets very close without the steel bending.
peace love light
Tyson

[Ted Ewert]

Hi Tyson,
I've been thinking about the same thing: where to get a strong enough disc. I found some barbell weights which might work:



http://www.capbarbell.com/pics/rp.jpg

The 25 lb weight is 1" thick and almost 12" in diameter. This would certainly be strong enough and would provide an excellent conduction path for the magnets.
The problem with barbell weights is that they aren't exactly precision made. The center holes aren't clean and they aren't balanced well. They're also usually made of cast iron, which is hard and brittle and difficult to machine. Drilling is slow and lots of oil is needed.
I can buy 12" square plates of 1/4" thick mild steel locally, but it's pricey. I would also have to machine off the corners and turn them to make them round and balanced. Not particularly difficult, but still a lot of work.
A thinner plate can be reinforced with some angle iron attached on the back as a stiffener. Welding it would be the easiest, but you could also bolt it in place. Six of these pieces attached radially would stiffen up any plate considerably.
I mounted two more coils on my motor yesterday so I'll try and get it running today. I have another drive circuit already installed on the frame so I'll use that for the new coils.

Cheers,

Ted

[Ted Ewert]

I got the second set of coils running, so I decided to do a quick brake check. Here are the numbers:



Not bad, but I was still hoping for better.
I'm still not happy with how the new set of coils is performing. Something goofy there so I'll have to look into it. I also want to see if different timing and duty cycle settings perform any better.
Anyway, there's a reference to start from.

Ted