Lockridge Device - Peter Lindemann

[Hiwater]

Mbrownn. On a regular Gm generator. The standard brushes are already in the advanced part of the commutator for generation. Seems to me that the original brushes would have to be moved back to make it motorise first. then put our extra set of brushes for the gen side or just have two wide primary brushes contacting two segments of the commutator for the motor and gen action. Another way would be to have just two primary brushes on one wide commutator bar utilising both the motor and gen action.

motorising these generators and connecting one 12 volt bulb to the gen to make it glow will decrease the rpm considerably. Also these generators need to be run in a clock wise manner for them to generate. Then the residual magnetisim will work for us when the power is removed to let them coast. This allows the generator side to kick in, to be used in the charge cycle. But on the charge cycle armature reaction comes in to play defeating our main purpose that is to keep the armature moving ahead.

[mbrownn]

For those who have been following my work, you will know I have been deviating from the original setup so that we can use a standard off the shelf motor. I am going to add here the reasons the original design would have been easier than what I am doing. I will also give you some of the key information that will help those who are able to find a Delco Remy generator of the correct type, to convert it into the original Lockridge device. This part is to do with commutation and the rotor, later I will go into the motor and generator coils in the stator and the trifilar coil as I get my head around it.

Before we can make an overunity device with a commutated motor we have to understand the commutator and what it is doing. It is not a simple switch so let us look at a standard commutated setup.

We have brushes that are somewhat wider than one segment and this has many implications because part of the time three segments of the commutator will be connected and two segments will always be connected. On a modern motor this is not a bad thing as far as how they want the motor to work as it allows more surface area of contact for easier current flow.

A modern motor also has a series wound rotor, making a complete loop of inductors all around the rotor so that when our commentators are connected half of the current flows in one direction and half in the other. This causes the rotor to have a north and south pole in the same fashion as a motor with a single coil on the rotor. Its “advantage is that any inductive kickback is passed around the rotor and dramatically reduced arcing at the commutator. Another effect of having two current paths is to reduce resistance allowing double the current flow for the same number of turns.

In old designs of motors there was a single winding between each pair of segments on the commutator, as each segment loses contact with the brush the inductive kickback had nowhere to go and was forced to jump the gap between the segment and the brush causing rapid burn out of the brush trailing edge and pitting of the commutator segments.

On this aspect the modern motor could be said to be a superior design but this gain came with a loss too, the inductive kickback passing around the rotor in a modern motor opposes the current on the opposite side of the rotor reducing the motor power and efficiency. This has been mitigated by increasing the number of coils and segments so that the inductive kickback effect is only a fraction of the applied current. Circuit Simulator Applet

In our old design of motor, we have two segments connected and so two coils giving the same resistance and current benefits as the modern motor and when compared to a motor with a single winding it has superior performance. When the third segment kicks in, we have even more current and more power with the resistance even lower still, but as the first segment disconnects we have our inductive kickback problem.

An alternative solution would have been to add a third and fourth brush that can make contact with the segments that are about to disconnect from the primary brushes. Through these brushes the inductive kickback can be allowed to flow adding to the mechanical output with the only disadvantage being extra friction from the additional brushes. This could also be done using three brushes where the input brush is normal width and the output and collector brushes are narrowed.

In this setup it is possible to use the inductive kickback in many ways, the simplest of which is a diode leading back to the input much like the diode on a PWM circuit. It could also be used to power lights, motors or charge a battery in a similar way to how JB uses it, while still adding to the forward motion. This was probably what happened with the original device. The third option, using the double diode setup as I explained before on this thread, could put this power into a capacitor in the source, reducing the input while adding to the motive power.

If we settled on the four brush setup, after the inductive kickback had gone, we would have a period of generation flowing in the opposite direction that would be assisted (I believe but I could be wrong) by a transformer action caused by the current flow in the other coils of the rotor. As each segment passed the brushes the process would be repeated. Of course the generation would be lower in power than the power going into the coils but this generation could be put into the source capacitor with the inductive kickback or used in another way.

[mbrownn]

Turion

I just watched your video, nice setup by the way, and I think my previous explanation is correct. If you get to run the inverter without depleting the batteries I will remain baffled

[mbrownn]

Sorry I missed your reply

QUOTE=Turion;179022]I believe you might get better results from the pulsed DC motor of Dr. Lindemann's design. [/QUOTE]

Agreed, but that isn't an off the shelf motor. My variant of that motor was far to inneficient but a better built one should be in the ball park.

I had a battery that when I placed it in the third position the voltage would jump to 24 volts, go slowly down to 18. Then the motor would start. The voltage would go slowly down to around 9 volts, and then the motor would shut off. The voltage reading would immediately jump back to 24 and the cycle would repeat itself.

I bet this is a gel battery and if I am right it will be dead soon as in no capacity. Its the gel drying out.

I believe that impedance matching, at least in the system the way I am running it, is critical. I believe with a pulsed motor of Dr. Lindemann's design, connected to an energizer to produce power and which also acts as a flywheel because of the magnets at the outside edge of the rotors, you have all the key elements of the Lockridge device and the Watson Machine. And that using this circuit to power it is the key.

Well its not really Lockridge but is more like my variant, Ill post some of the reasons why shortly. I don't know much about impedance matching but I believe it could be a part of it.

I believe you can recover the input current by passing it directly through the motor to another battery, and that if you have impedance matching on your loads, the losses you see on batteries one and two are almost nothing, and the batteries recover in a short period of time when allowed to rest between runs. I am running my motor for thirty minutes at a time with rests in between for recover on my batteries and am seeing no losses on batteries one and two. NO losses that they can't recover from that is. During these runs I am able to harvest the power created from my energizer. My friend is able to do BOTH of these plus run 40 watt bulbs off of battery 3 through an inverter because of the load he has on the motor. I am in the process of stepping up my load to get to that point. I am using an energizer as my load, and until I have enough rotors and coils on it to slow it down sufficiently, I cannot put larger loads on battery 3. But I will get there

I have tried this but I am not fully convinced as it just causes a voltage drop but with pulsing of the right frequency and duration you do get interesting results.

Two of us have this setup running and this is what we are seeing. But we have been running this off and on for only a few weeks. I have not done all the extensive testing that needs to be done, but have been spending the time and money to put together a setup that can do exactly that. I just wanted to share in the hopes that some others might give this a shot and see what happens.

I wish you luck with this, keep up the good work

[Turion]

FRC

Two batteries in series, connected to a third battery which would be in series except that it is reversed. If you do it right this leaves a positive on each end of the chain to connect the motor to.
Load the motor down by connecting something to its shaft. I have an energizer on mine to produce power. You could use a pulley belt arrangement with a turnbuckle to create tension so the motor doesn't turn as easily. You MUST have a load on the motor.

Connect light bulbs directly to the terminals of battery three to try and balance with the load to get the motor to kick into the "zone" (for lack of a better word) perhaps resonance would be better, but I'm not positive that's what it is. I ALWAYS have a dome light (12 volts) connected to battery 3 to keep it from charging up. Even when the system is off, so this battery is as dead as I can make it without shooting it with a gun.

Thats it. I believe the motor acts not only as a motor to drive the system, but as a generator at the same time. I know people say this is not possible, but neither is running the thing for weeks and still having a full charge on my primary batteries. Oh, in case I did not make it clear, I had a different energizer hooked to my motor. This one is NEW and I haven't run it yet. If you zoom in on the picture you will see wires that aren't yet connected. That's why. Finishing that up today and will begin test runs tonight or tomorrow with THIS energizer. It has 16 coils and two rotors. My previous one had only four working coils. Not quite the same thing.

I forgot to mention, I have some videos posted on YouTube that probably explain some of this. Look at the 3 Battery experiment video 1.
11Turion's Channel - YouTube

[Turion]

I am trying to visualize the setup, Is this a pulse motor or a plain DC motor?

I believe you might get better results from the pulsed DC motor of Dr. Lindemann's design. I have three of them I have built and intend to try them, but for right now I am using a standard off the shelf brushed DC motor with a wound rotor and stator.

how is the energizer connected and what type is it?

I have a direct connection between the motor shaft and the shaft of my energizer. I have two 7" plastic rotors (the largest I can cut out on my table top band saw) with 7, 1" by 3/8 neo magnets around the outside. I built an octagon shaped frame around the rotors and mounted 8 coils around each one. I intend to mount 8 more rotors on this shaft, and have them made, but await magnets and the time to wind 64 more coils. The existing 16 coils are 200 feet of #23 wire wrapped on 3 1/2 by 3" spools with a 3/4 inch arbor filled with cut welding rods.

It sounds something like the simple Tesla switch battery arrangement, if so the reason why the motor does not start right away is because the battery impedance is too high on the bad battery, as it takes the charge the impedance lowers and allows sufficient current to flow to cause the motor to spin. When you first throw the switch the voltage between the good battery pair and the bad battery will try to equalize through the motor. Because of the bad batteries impedance their is insufficient current to make the motor spin but don't be fooled into thinking nothing is happening. At this point the bad battery is a bit like a capacitor, so now with the good batteries, the bad battery and the coils of the motor we have an osculating tank circuit. this will desulphate a bad battery to some extent. As the sulphation drops away the impedance will lower and current will flow eventually enough to cause the motor to spin. This is what I understand

.

I had a battery that when I placed it in the third position the voltage would jump to 24 volts, go slowly down to 18. Then the motor would start. The voltage would go slowly down to around 9 volts, and then the motor would shut off. The voltage reading would immediately jump back to 24 and the cycle would repeat itself. It would do this all day long. This was a "magic" battery, and I ver much want to find another one that does the exact same thing. Desulphation does not explain what I have been seeing. At least I don't believe so. I was wrong once before, back in the third grade, but I've never forgotten it. :-)

With the bulbs on battery three, I can understand why a load on the motor causes the bulbs to brighten, this is because the BEMF is lowered allowing more current to flow because of the increased forward voltage but I must admit, the other part has me baffled.

Are you suggesting that the generator part of the Lockridge device could be an energizer and that a key part of the system is impedance matching?

I believe that impedance matching, at least in the system the way I am running it, is critical. I believe with a pulsed motor of Dr. Lindemann's design, connected to an energizer to produce power and which also acts as a flywheel because of the magnets at the outside edge of the rotors, you have all the key elements of the Lockridge device and the Watson Machine. And that using this circuit to power it is the key.

Are you also suggesting that there is recovery of the input current via a capacitor and these bulbs also have a part to play in the circuit? I know Peter has suggested this about the bulbs.

I believe you can recover the input current by passing it directly through the motor to another battery, and that if you have impedance matching on your loads, the losses you see on batteries one and two are almost nothing, and the batteries recover in a short period of time when allowed to rest between runs. I am running my motor for thirty minutes at a time with rests in between for recover on my batteries and am seeing no losses on batteries one and two. NO losses that they can't recover from that is. During these runs I am able to harvest the power created from my energizer. My friend is able to do BOTH of these plus run 40 watt bulbs off of battery 3 through an inverter because of the load he has on the motor. I am in the process of stepping up my load to get to that point. I am using an energizer as my load, and until I have enough rotors and coils on it to slow it down sufficiently, I cannot put larger loads on battery 3. But I will get there

Two of us have this setup running and this is what we are seeing. But we have been running this off and on for only a few weeks. I have not done all the extensive testing that needs to be done, but have been spending the time and money to put together a setup that can do exactly that. I just wanted to share in the hopes that some others might give this a shot and see what happens.

The picture I posted is simply of my energizer. My motor is on the other side of it and the long shaft is for more rotors, and is connected directly to the motor. The wires on this particular energizer have not even been connected up yet. I'm doing that today. I have been running five rotors, each with only one coil on it and the whole makeshift arrangement screwed to my bench top. I just finished building this energizer yesterday and ran it for only a few minutes to make sure all my magnets cleared all 16 of my coils. Today will be my first run of this energizer.

Right now everything I get out of the energizer is free, because the batteries recover. I hope it will be the same with the new energizer, as well as when I have added 8 more rotors. I believe as long as I can keep the loads matched, that is exactly what will happen. Only time will tell.

[mbrownn]

What if there were an even easier way to collect the inductive kickback along with reusing the initial charge used to run the motor? I believe this would work even better with the motor modified as Dr. Lindemann asked us to do, but it also works with off the shelf motors. This system uses lead acid and ONLY lead acid batteries. I am running the 7.5 amp hour batteries as my two primary batteries. Take your off the shelf DC motor and connect one wire to the positive of battery 1. Connect the negative of battery 1 to the positive of battery 2. Connect the neg of battery 2 to the negative of battery 3. Connect the positive of battery 3 to the other wire on the motor. The motor is now connected between the positives of two batteries. Battery 3 should be a "bad" battery. One that doesn't want to hold more than 4 to 6 volts. It may take some time to FIND such a battery because as you hook batteries into this system, it may restore them to usable condition in many cases. The shaft of your motor should be running your energizer, because you need a LOAD ON THE MOTOR for this to work. The motor that Dr. Lindemann had us modify in the Lockridge thread may be even better than an off the shelf motor.

Measure the voltages in your two primary batteries before you begin and RECORD it. Here is what should happen. When you flip the switch the very first time, the motor should not start immediately. (If it does, you do not have a battery that will work in the third position so DON'T WASTE your time. Go out and find another battery. I have been told that the reason the motor does not start is because of the potential difference between the set of two and the single battery, and that it takes a few minutes for that to change. I have also been told that it doesn't start because there is not enough juice in the third battery to complete a circuit. Keep reading and you will see why I don't agree with either of these reasons. In a few minutes the motor will start running. If it doesn't, the battery you have is so bad, it is beyond hope for this project.

If you have an analogue meter on battery 3, you should see the voltage jump when the switch is thrown to 24+ volts. It will go slowly down to around 18 volts, and then the motor will start. The voltage will go down to around 12 or 13 volts, and stabilize. IF the voltage continues to go down to around 9 volts, and the motor shuts off, the voltage jumps back up to 24 volts and the cycle repeats, please contact me immediately, because YOU have something very special, and there are some things you need to know. (This should take no more than 15 minutes, so if it hasn't happened in 15 minutes, it isn't going to)

This is experiment number one to make sure you have the RIGHT kind of battery for this system. At this point you need to stop and let your primary batteries sit and rest overnight. You also need to drain battery three by connecting a light to it and leaving it overnight. The two primary batteries may or may not recover to their original voltage by the next day. If they do not, recharge them with a conventional charger and record the voltages in each battery after they have recharged and rested.

Reconnect everything, this time with a small load on battery 3. I use an auto dome light connected between the terminals. Flip the switch to start the system and you will find that this time it starts immediately. If the delay in starting you saw yesterday were because of a difference in potential between the set of two and the single battery, when could that potential possibly be more different than when you have just charged the two main batteries while at the same time, discharging the bad battery all night long with a bulb on it? If the delay was because there was not enough juice in the bad battery, how could there possibly be LESS juice than there is right now, when you have drained the bad battery all night long? And yet the motor started immediately. It is my belief that we are talking about some kind of magnetic alignment that takes place in a bad battery and continues as long as there is a load on the battery, and also lasts for a few days after the load is removed. Take the bad battery out of the system and charge it on a conventional charger. If you have not "fixed" it and made it a good battery, you can let it sit for a week, hook it back into the system, flip the switch, and once again the motor will not start immediately. That "alignment" has gone away. Which is what makes me believe it is some kind of forced magnetic alignment.

I have done all of these experiments plus another one. With a bad battery in position 3, I flipped the switch and the motor did not start. Rather than wait, I grabbed one of the rotors on my energizer and gave it a spin. The motor turned slowly because I had spun it, but to my surprise, it continued to slowly spin at the same rate, gradually picking up speed until it reached regular running speed. That's just a possibly unrelated piece of information I have.

Once you have the two batteries fully charged, the bad battery drained, and a small load connected between the terminals on battery 3, you are ready for the experimenting to really begin, and here is where all the really hard work comes in. You have a load on your motor in the form of an energizer connected to it. You must MATCH that load with a load on battery 3. I use a bunch of small bulbs with switches to add each one into the system. Flip a switch to turn on one of these lights connected to battery 3 and the motor will immediately speed up. It will run at the increased speed. Let it run for five minutes. If the loads are matched, the motor will suddenly speed up AGAIN. If it does, make sure you KNOW how much load you had on battery three when this happened, so you don't waste time next time you run the system. When the motor gets into this second zone the speed and torque will be awesome. You can continue to add loads to battery three, but add a load, wait five minutes, add a load, wait five minutes. At some point the load will cause the motor to drop out of the "zone" Now you have two choices. Reduce the load on battery 3, or INCREASE the load on the motor to get it back in the zone. If you increase the load on the motor, notice how the lights you have attached to battery 3 get brighter. SO when you put a load on the motor, the lights connected to battery 3 get brighter. When you add lights to battery three, the motor runs faster. All these increases and loads running should really be draining your primary batteries, right? If your loads are NOT balanced with each other.......!!!

You can play around and run the system. I have done no runs longer than 30 minutes. How much can you pull out of your energizer during that time? How much was used to run the lights on battery 3? How much was used to run the motor? Check your primary batteries. Let them rest for an hour or two and check them again. If you have to, let them rest overnight and check them. What is the reading you have now compared to what you had when you started? Do this every day, several times, for several weeks as I have, and then measure your primary batteries again.

I had an energizer with three rotors and 3 coils on it, but am in the process of building one with 80 coils and 10 rotors. Each coil puts out between 4.5 to 6.5 volts AC, depending on motor speed, with about a 93% conversion to DC. You have all the information I have. What I have done is given you all the shortcuts and information I have to help you be successful. I make no promises and share no results. You are going to build an energizer anyway, right? Why not give this a shot and see what happens. Please let me know how it turns out. I have three sets of two good batteries. I have only one bad battery. My intention was to rotate through a use cycle. One set running, one set charging, one set resting. SO far I am still on my first set, but I have an energizer now that could be used to charge a second set of batteries as needed.

I have a friend who has been successfully running an inverter off battery 3 and powering standard 40 watt light bulbs. I haven't had enough load on my motor to do that and keep it balanced, so have not done that experiment. My lights have only remained lit for minutes. He also reports full recovery on his batteries after runs of five or so minutes. Frequent runs. Every day. For a few weeks now.

If you are serious enough about building a Watson Machine or a Lockridge Device to have built an energizer, give this a shot I doubt you will be disappointed. If nothing else, it is an avenue of exploration.

I am trying to visualize the setup, Is this a pulse motor or a plain DC motor? how is the energizer connected and what type is it?

It sounds something like the simple Tesla switch battery arrangement, if so the reason why the motor does not start right away is because the battery impedance is too high on the bad battery, as it takes the charge the impedance lowers and allows sufficient current to flow to cause the motor to spin. When you first throw the switch the voltage between the good battery pair and the bad battery will try to equalize through the motor. Because of the bad batteries impedance their is insufficient current to make the motor spin but don't be fooled into thinking nothing is happening. At this point the bad battery is a bit like a capacitor, so now with the good batteries, the bad battery and the coils of the motor we have an osculating tank circuit. this will desulphate a bad battery to some extent. As the sulphation drops away the impedance will lower and current will flow eventually enough to cause the motor to spin. This is what I understand.

With the bulbs on battery three, I can understand why a load on the motor causes the bulbs to brighten, this is because the BEMF is lowered allowing more current to flow because of the increased forward voltage but I must admit, the other part has me baffled.

Are you suggesting that the generator part of the Lockridge device could be an energizer and that a key part of the system is impedance matching?

Are you also suggesting that there is recovery of the input current via a capacitor and these bulbs also have a part to play in the circuit? I know Peter has suggested this about the bulbs.

[FRC]

Turion

Could you make a schematic of the motor/battery/load connections ? I know
your explanation of it is very straight forward, but a drawing would also help.

George

[Turion]

What if there were an even easier way to collect the inductive kickback along with reusing the initial charge used to run the motor? I believe this would work even better with the motor modified as Dr. Lindemann asked us to do, but it also works with off the shelf motors. This system uses lead acid and ONLY lead acid batteries. I am running the 7.5 amp hour batteries as my two primary batteries. Take your off the shelf DC motor and connect one wire to the positive of battery 1. Connect the negative of battery 1 to the positive of battery 2. Connect the neg of battery 2 to the negative of battery 3. Connect the positive of battery 3 to the other wire on the motor. The motor is now connected between the positives of two batteries. Battery 3 should be a "bad" battery. One that doesn't want to hold more than 4 to 6 volts. It may take some time to FIND such a battery because as you hook batteries into this system, it may restore them to usable condition in many cases. The shaft of your motor should be running your energizer, because you need a LOAD ON THE MOTOR for this to work. The motor that Dr. Lindemann had us modify in the Lockridge thread may be even better than an off the shelf motor.

Measure the voltages in your two primary batteries before you begin and RECORD it. Here is what should happen. When you flip the switch the very first time, the motor should not start immediately. (If it does, you do not have a battery that will work in the third position so DON'T WASTE your time. Go out and find another battery. I have been told that the reason the motor does not start is because of the potential difference between the set of two and the single battery, and that it takes a few minutes for that to change. I have also been told that it doesn't start because there is not enough juice in the third battery to complete a circuit. Keep reading and you will see why I don't agree with either of these reasons. In a few minutes the motor will start running. If it doesn't, the battery you have is so bad, it is beyond hope for this project.

If you have an analogue meter on battery 3, you should see the voltage jump when the switch is thrown to 24+ volts. It will go slowly down to around 18 volts, and then the motor will start. The voltage will go down to around 12 or 13 volts, and stabilize. IF the voltage continues to go down to around 9 volts, and the motor shuts off, the voltage jumps back up to 24 volts and the cycle repeats, please contact me immediately, because YOU have something very special, and there are some things you need to know. (This should take no more than 15 minutes, so if it hasn't happened in 15 minutes, it isn't going to)

This is experiment number one to make sure you have the RIGHT kind of battery for this system. At this point you need to stop and let your primary batteries sit and rest overnight. You also need to drain battery three by connecting a light to it and leaving it overnight. The two primary batteries may or may not recover to their original voltage by the next day. If they do not, recharge them with a conventional charger and record the voltages in each battery after they have recharged and rested.

Reconnect everything, this time with a small load on battery 3. I use an auto dome light connected between the terminals. Flip the switch to start the system and you will find that this time it starts immediately. If the delay in starting you saw yesterday were because of a difference in potential between the set of two and the single battery, when could that potential possibly be more different than when you have just charged the two main batteries while at the same time, discharging the bad battery all night long with a bulb on it? If the delay was because there was not enough juice in the bad battery, how could there possibly be LESS juice than there is right now, when you have drained the bad battery all night long? And yet the motor started immediately. It is my belief that we are talking about some kind of magnetic alignment that takes place in a bad battery and continues as long as there is a load on the battery, and also lasts for a few days after the load is removed. Take the bad battery out of the system and charge it on a conventional charger. If you have not "fixed" it and made it a good battery, you can let it sit for a week, hook it back into the system, flip the switch, and once again the motor will not start immediately. That "alignment" has gone away. Which is what makes me believe it is some kind of forced magnetic alignment.

I have done all of these experiments plus another one. With a bad battery in position 3, I flipped the switch and the motor did not start. Rather than wait, I grabbed one of the rotors on my energizer and gave it a spin. The motor turned slowly because I had spun it, but to my surprise, it continued to slowly spin at the same rate, gradually picking up speed until it reached regular running speed. That's just a possibly unrelated piece of information I have.

Once you have the two batteries fully charged, the bad battery drained, and a small load connected between the terminals on battery 3, you are ready for the experimenting to really begin, and here is where all the really hard work comes in. You have a load on your motor in the form of an energizer connected to it. You must MATCH that load with a load on battery 3. I use a bunch of small bulbs with switches to add each one into the system. Flip a switch to turn on one of these lights connected to battery 3 and the motor will immediately speed up. It will run at the increased speed. Let it run for five minutes. If the loads are matched, the motor will suddenly speed up AGAIN. If it does, make sure you KNOW how much load you had on battery three when this happened, so you don't waste time next time you run the system. When the motor gets into this second zone the speed and torque will be awesome. You can continue to add loads to battery three, but add a load, wait five minutes, add a load, wait five minutes. At some point the load will cause the motor to drop out of the "zone" Now you have two choices. Reduce the load on battery 3, or INCREASE the load on the motor to get it back in the zone. If you increase the load on the motor, notice how the lights you have attached to battery 3 get brighter. SO when you put a load on the motor, the lights connected to battery 3 get brighter. When you add lights to battery three, the motor runs faster. All these increases and loads running should really be draining your primary batteries, right? If your loads are NOT balanced with each other.......!!!

You can play around and run the system. I have done no runs longer than 30 minutes. How much can you pull out of your energizer during that time? How much was used to run the lights on battery 3? How much was used to run the motor? Check your primary batteries. Let them rest for an hour or two and check them again. If you have to, let them rest overnight and check them. What is the reading you have now compared to what you had when you started? Do this every day, several times, for several weeks as I have, and then measure your primary batteries again.

I had an energizer with three rotors and 3 coils on it, but am in the process of building one with 80 coils and 10 rotors. Each coil puts out between 4.5 to 6.5 volts AC, depending on motor speed, with about a 93% conversion to DC. You have all the information I have. What I have done is given you all the shortcuts and information I have to help you be successful. I make no promises and share no results. You are going to build an energizer anyway, right? Why not give this a shot and see what happens. Please let me know how it turns out. I have three sets of two good batteries. I have only one bad battery. My intention was to rotate through a use cycle. One set running, one set charging, one set resting. SO far I am still on my first set, but I have an energizer now that could be used to charge a second set of batteries as needed.

I have a friend who has been successfully running an inverter off battery 3 and powering standard 40 watt light bulbs. I haven't had enough load on my motor to do that and keep it balanced, so have not done that experiment. My lights have only remained lit for minutes. He also reports full recovery on his batteries after runs of five or so minutes. Frequent runs. Every day. For a few weeks now.

If you are serious enough about building a Watson Machine or a Lockridge Device to have built an energizer, give this a shot I doubt you will be disappointed. If nothing else, it is an avenue of exploration.

[mbrownn]

The basic concept of this motor as I understand it is this.....

Run the motor at a low speed high torque point. This allows the motor to have minimal BEMF from the generator portion of the motor. This means that the pulses fed to the stator coils can be returned in the form of BEMF to be fed to a capacitor for the next pulse.

Note there are two BEMF's acting here. One refers to the counter EMF from the generator portion of the motor. The other is the collapsing magnetic field created in the stator from our pulses.

Does anybody have the graphs from the original lecture that Dr. Lindemann gave? This would greatly help me explain things.

This is a big balancing act in my opinion. The faster our motor spins, the more BEMF from the rotation we have and the less torque and greater speed we have. The slower our motor spins, and the less BEMF from the generator action happens, and we have greater torque and less speed. The Work done by the motor is greatest somewhere in between.

The size of the capacitor will determine the voltage across it after it collects the collapsed magnetic stator field. Large capacitor equates to smaller voltage across. Small capacitor equates to higher voltage across. Both will contain the same energy, but in different forms. We are trading capacity for voltage. Therefore, we want to choose a cap which is placing the voltage somewhat above the input pulse voltage.

This motor is going to have an optimal speed, an optimal capacitor size based on input voltage, stator inductance etc.

I do not think you will do well with an off the shelf universal motor. I would suggest going back and watching Lindemann's presentation once again. I do not have it, but was at the conference and have a very good memory.

This will have limitations also, you are not going to be able to load down this motor like a standard motor, a change in speed ruins everything! it will have a sweet spot.

The motor will have to be run in the low speed high torque area of its power curve to mitigate BEMF, I am not considering the generator at this point as I will have an external generator as it is easier to do.

I am not attempting to use BEMF at at all and I just consider it as a loss. It is the inductive kickback that I am sending to the capacitor. The inductive kickback flows in the same direction as the applied current therefore it adds to the motive force but instead of just allowing it to be passed across a diode back to the coil, I am passing it across a capacitor in the source therefore reducing the applied power to the circuit while maintaining the power in the coils. This is your DC tank circuit.

Because of the poor actual efficiency of modern motors this alone does not take us into overunity and if we increase frequency up to resonance the current drops reducing the motor output. Remember it is the current that gives us the magnetic force.

My problem was how to convert the voltage gain in resonance into current flow and I think your coil does that. so now we are pulsing your coil in a DC resonant circuit to see if we can still get all the effects shown in your video while reducing the input further. On this test we can run the motor off the third winding with either AC or DC and compare the results. We can also place a diode across the motor such as in pulse width modulation and achieve the gain given by that or possibly try and feed that to the source line so there are lots of things to test.

We can experiment with different values for the capacitor to see the effects and losses with different values from large to small.

You are right, off the shelf motors are not ideal, too high an ohmic resistance or too few turns.

I have Electric motor secrets part 1 and 2, are these the videos you refer to?

The way the motor runs is opposite to normal, any increase in load will stall the motor as the motor will not like to rise to the load. This is because I don't want the current to ramp up as in normal PWM or the gains are lost.

If we have a single phase AC motor on the grid and accelerate it, it begins to generate. If we accelerate this generator with our motor we have the type of load we need, one that requires less torque as speed drops allowing our motor to run at the best speed and output set by the conditions, at some point a balance will be reached and we have our fixed load.

My research has been into the motor functions of the Lockridge device and even though I cannot find that type of generator here, to convert to a motor, I don't think it is a problem as such. It is apparent to me that we can operate a normal motor in this fashion.

The basic principals are this.

In resonance in a coil you get a voltage gain with no increase in current. I was trying to use this voltage gain to force current to flow in the motor but the pulse frequency and inductance limited the current even though the power entering the motor was sufficient. The result being a very inefficient motor action for the power supplied. Your coil gets around this.

In inductive kickback you get a current gain that can be recycled, it is new current as the old current has already passed through the motor and it is current that truly gives power to a motor. I can reduce the input power by collecting and reusing the current in inductive kickback while still adding to motive force.

Not sure I have explained well, please ask me what you don't understand and give me any reasons you think this might not be the case.

[mbrownn]

The short answer is no. If you consider general oscillation, it is a rotation around a zero point, where polarity reverses every half cycle. DC motors require constant polarity in one direction, if it reverses, the coils pull then push against the magnet, causing a zero net force in one direction.

Now a little food for thought....How can you have a one way tank circuit? One in which the polarity of the capacitor never reverses?

I have done exactly that. Circuit Simulator Applet

[Armagdn03]

Thanks for the reply, the reason I asked about the capacitor is because I haven't figured out exactly how it is used on the Lockridge device and there are a number of possibilities.

When we pulse the primary we should be able to collect the inductive kickback and feed it to the source reducing the input and this may even increase the amount of energy in the secondary if I am right. This is where the first gain is, reduced input and possible gain due to the current in the inductive kickback of the primary. This would require that the primary has to be at a harmonic of the secondary.

If our universal motor is run on pulsed DC from the third coil and it is of the same resonant frequency, then the inductive kickback will add to sustain the current in the motor giving another gain. Two gains for the cost of one pulse or three times the current assuming no losses. I don't know but it may be possible to run the universal motor at the resonant frequency of the coils and maybe there will be a gain there, I don't know, but now you can see why I asked the question.

It does seem that this may be the coil we are looking for, every time I say that it reminds me of starwars "these are not the droids you are looking for" hehe.

I can't thank you enough for your input here

The basic concept of this motor as I understand it is this.....

Run the motor at a low speed high torque point. This allows the motor to have minimal BEMF from the generator portion of the motor. This means that the pulses fed to the stator coils can be returned in the form of BEMF to be fed to a capacitor for the next pulse.

Note there are two BEMF's acting here. One refers to the counter EMF from the generator portion of the motor. The other is the collapsing magnetic field created in the stator from our pulses.

Does anybody have the graphs from the original lecture that Dr. Lindemann gave? This would greatly help me explain things.

This is a big balancing act in my opinion. The faster our motor spins, the more BEMF from the rotation we have and the less torque and greater speed we have. The slower our motor spins, and the less BEMF from the generator action happens, and we have greater torque and less speed. The Work done by the motor is greatest somewhere in between.

The size of the capacitor will determine the voltage across it after it collects the collapsed magnetic stator field. Large capacitor equates to smaller voltage across. Small capacitor equates to higher voltage across. Both will contain the same energy, but in different forms. We are trading capacity for voltage. Therefore, we want to choose a cap which is placing the voltage somewhat above the input pulse voltage.

This motor is going to have an optimal speed, an optimal capacitor size based on input voltage, stator inductance etc.

I do not think you will do well with an off the shelf universal motor. I would suggest going back and watching Lindemann's presentation once again. I do not have it, but was at the conference and have a very good memory.

This will have limitations also, you are not going to be able to load down this motor like a standard motor, a change in speed ruins everything! it will have a sweet spot.

[Armagdn03]

You mention if using an AC motor, then the motor is also in resonance. With
the roto verter the motor and generator must be in resonance. Is it possible
to get a DC motor and DC generator in resonance also ? I hope I do not
sound too stupid for asking this.

George

The short answer is no. If you consider general oscillation, it is a rotation around a zero point, where polarity reverses every half cycle. DC motors require constant polarity in one direction, if it reverses, the coils pull then push against the magnet, causing a zero net force in one direction.

Now a little food for thought....How can you have a one way tank circuit? One in which the polarity of the capacitor never reverses?

[mbrownn]

Garrypm, on your first tests of pulsing a motor you should have seen how my diode arrangement reduces the input. The power of the motor is higher than when it is pulsed with no recovery but lower than when it is pulsed with a diode across the motor. I think this is the arrangement to pulse the primary of the trifilar coil.

I hope you are taking in the implications of Armagdn03's post.

I think the primary coil needs to have a resonant frequency significantly higher than the secondary although my statement about it being at a harmonic may be incorrect as my head is buzzing with thoughts at the moment. The third coil needs to be tunable so that we can find the resonant frequency of the motor coils. I don't know if the inductive kickback of the motor would be better fed back to the source capacitor or just across the motor like in PWM.

I think we are close but the hard part will be tuning everything

I need to find a signal generator.

[mbrownn]

You mention if using an AC motor, then the motor is also in resonance. With
the roto verter the motor and generator must be in resonance. Is it possible
to get a DC motor and DC generator in resonance also ? I hope I do not
sound too stupid for asking this.

George

I haven't given too much thought to the generation side of the device but as they were inside the same frame on the Lockridge device this may be very relevant.