Lockridge Device - Peter Lindemann

[pault]

... The pulley I had in the garage and machined to fit my motor has a circumference of 7 3/4". Could someone explain how to perform the math with that pulley? ...

If you are using the leather sling dynamometer that Peter builds in vid #1 (which I might be incorrectly calling a Prony brake), then,

7.75 / 12 --> # of feet for one rev of the pulley

#-of-feet-for-one-rev X RPS X lbs. --> ft-lbs per second = work

(where RPS is revs per second = RPM / 60).

Thanks to Matt's explanation to me: you want to find a voltage range where the motor operates, e.g. 3 batteries (roughly 36V), then, you want to run a bunch of dynamometer tests with various loadings and pick the point at which the motor is most efficient.

So, you need a way to "ratchet" the load and keep it steady while you take all 4 readings (V, A, speed, weight), then ratchet some more and take another set of readings.

efficiency = output power / input power

input power HP = (V X A) / 746
output power HP = ft-lb/s / 550

I'll create a second message describing the Rube Goldberg contraption I built...

pt

[Robbush]

prony brake all set up

So I now have things set up to perform dyno testing, but need one question answered (Peter Lindemann). The pulley I had in the garage and machined to fit my motor has a circumference of 7 3/4". Could someone explain how to perform the math with that pulley? I have also done some no load runs to see speed and at 48 volts input the motor is spinning over 8000 rpm and recovered 36 volts to a pair of 76000mfd caps in series. I will do some load testing today at different voltages to get the numbers I need, then do the output math later. Will post results later. Peace
rawbush

Well I have some numbers to post, but the motor died in the last test at 48 volts (4 batteries). I have not taken it apart yet but, suspect the commutator has been burned up? Any how

one battery

no load volts 12.49
amps 1.8
rpm 1761
loaded volts 12.22
amps 5.00
rpm 770
grams 400

two battery

no load volts 24.94
amps 2.2
rpm 4220
loaded volts 24.47
amps 5.00
rpm 2430
grams 400

three battery

no load volts 37.51
amps 2.0
rpm 6635
loaded volts 36.76
amps 5.00
rpm 4401
grams 380

four battery

no load volts 49.60
amps 2.4
rpm 8660
loaded volts 48.80
amps 5.00
rpm 55?? motor died here
grams 340

off to open the motor up will share my findings.

[Mark]

[ATTACH]7846[/ATTACH]

results will follow on testing, Peter and members could not do it without you, here we go ... Thanks

Looks good Goreggie. Looks like small wire with a lot of winds but hard to tell with the picture. I would like to know more specs, wire size, wraps, how many commutator sections etc. Keep up the good work! I look forward to your testing results.

Mark

p.s. Looks like you have wound 4 seperate coils? I could be wrong, but what winding pattern are you using?

[goreggie]

windings of 2 pole motor



results will follow on testing, Peter and members could not do it without you, here we go ... Thanks

[citfta]

@ Kenowen, please check your PM's

Carroll

[Kenowen]

Thanks

Dear Kenowen,

Welcome to the thread. I have seen and studied the Notebook. As I said in the lecture, the gentleman who compiled it was trying to piece the design back together by interviewing people who had owned or seen units in operation. When that failed, for lack of details, he tried to take what he knew and run some experiments. But he lacked a "theory of operation" and therefore, didn't really know which way his experiments should go. Eventually, he realized he had taken the project as far as he could, and gave the whole thing to John. His contribution is that he kept the idea of the machine alive and passed it to us!

My lecture was an attempt to put forward a "theory of operation" based on the mechanical power gain available by running a standard electric motor on high voltage pulses (capacitor discharges is the case of the Lockridge Device). This thread is exploring running slightly modified motors by this new method, and the power gains do seem to appear, as the theory predicted. In fact, Matt and others have demonstrated this a number of time in their posts.

If you wish to participate in this thread, it would be helpful if you would take the time to read the whole thread and then attempt to build an experimental model yourself, as many others are doing here.

Science is NOT a purely intellectual exercise. You must also run the experiment yourself to see what happens, or you will always be left "believing" what you already think. Only the results of the experiment can provide you with NEW information about the nature of reality to authoritatively challenge what you have believed before.

If it is of any value to you, I can say with certainty, that the theory is correct, and the machine works. There are numerous variations on the machine that have different benefits. The original "Lockridge Device" was set up to run itself and light a few light bulbs. A much more interesting variation is a machine that runs itself and charges batteries. This is where this thread is going after more people understand the basics.

Peter

Thanks Peter,
I have been following the thread and hope it does stay on subject. I fully understand the logic and design of what you are trying to teach people.
I myself have gone another direction and am wondering what thread to put my information under or should I start another thread. Like you I have a job to eat some of my time to pay the bills. I have been collecting information for several years and being that I have been working in electronics since 1970 believe I have succeeded in capturing a Maxwell demon this last week in a solid state device to charge a battery. Now to complete the circuity by design and testing. I do not feel that I am ready to publish yet but would be willing to discuss this in private.
Kenowen

[Peter Lindemann]

Matt is Right

I have watched both of Lindemann's 2 videos and this one from John Bedini:
"energy from vacuum 14 lockridge device"
John mentioned that he was not going to release the information that the person had collected on the Lockridge device.

My question is if it cannot be built why not publish the notes and maybe someone would succeed?

We need another N. Tesla! Maybe one of us.

Dear Kenowen,

Welcome to the thread. I have seen and studied the Notebook. As I said in the lecture, the gentleman who compiled it was trying to piece the design back together by interviewing people who had owned or seen units in operation. When that failed, for lack of details, he tried to take what he knew and run some experiments. But he lacked a "theory of operation" and therefore, didn't really know which way his experiments should go. Eventually, he realized he had taken the project as far as he could, and gave the whole thing to John. His contribution is that he kept the idea of the machine alive and passed it to us!

My lecture was an attempt to put forward a "theory of operation" based on the mechanical power gain available by running a standard electric motor on high voltage pulses (capacitor discharges is the case of the Lockridge Device). This thread is exploring running slightly modified motors by this new method, and the power gains do seem to appear, as the theory predicted. In fact, Matt and others have demonstrated this a number of time in their posts.

If you wish to participate in this thread, it would be helpful if you would take the time to read the whole thread and then attempt to build an experimental model yourself, as many others are doing here.

Science is NOT a purely intellectual exercise. You must also run the experiment yourself to see what happens, or you will always be left "believing" what you already think. Only the results of the experiment can provide you with NEW information about the nature of reality to authoritatively challenge what you have believed before.

If it is of any value to you, I can say with certainty, that the theory is correct, and the machine works. There are numerous variations on the machine that have different benefits. The original "Lockridge Device" was set up to run itself and light a few light bulbs. A much more interesting variation is a machine that runs itself and charges batteries. This is where this thread is going after more people understand the basics.

Peter

[Matthew Jones]

I have watched both of Lindemann's 2 videos and this one from John Bedini:
"energy from vacuum 14 lockridge device"
John mentioned that he was not going to release the information that the person had collected on the Lockridge device.
My question is if it cannot be built why not publish the notes and maybe someone would succeed?
We need another N. Tesla! Maybe one of us.

It can be built. We are discussing just that in this thread. Read through we are working not wondering.

Matt

[Kenowen]

no lockridge info

I have watched both of Lindemann's 2 videos and this one from John Bedini:
"energy from vacuum 14 lockridge device"
John mentioned that he was not going to release the information that the person had collected on the Lockridge device.

My question is if it cannot be built why not publish the notes and maybe someone would succeed?

We need another N. Tesla! Maybe one of us.

[pault]

1.5 turn strategy

Can you please clarify what you mean by "1 1'2 turn strategy" ? I finally got
my motor today but have not done anything with it yet.

FRC

I haven't worked this out, but it is my feeling that there should be a "better" way to distribute the x-overs and pack more wire onto the armature.

The way I wound the armature resulted in all of the x-overs being in one slot and none of them in the other slot. Here's the 1st three windings, the way I did it:

1a) start at commutator, put wire in slot #1
1b) lay wire over top of armature, to the right of the shaft
1c) put wire into slot #6
1d) lay wire over bottom of armature, to the right of the shaft

2a) put wire in slot #1
2b) lay wire over top of arm. to the left of the shaft
2c) put wire into slot #6
2d) lay wire over bottom of arm. to the left of the shaft

3a) put wire in slot #1
3b) lay wire over top of arm. to the right of the shaft
3c) put wire in slot #6
3d) lay wire over bottom of arm. to the right of the shaft

...

If you try this, you will find that the cross-overs happen at (2a) and (3a), always in slot #1.

The original goal was to make sure that the wire was evenly balanced on each side of the shaft.

I think that it should be possible to do something like:

1a) start at commutator, put wire in slot #1
1b) lay wire over top of armature, to the right of the shaft
1c) put wire into slot #6
1d) lay wire over bottom of armature, to the right of the shaft
1e) put wire into slot #1
1f) lay wire over top of armature, to the right of the shaft

then repeat 1a-1f on the left side of the shaft. 3 rights, then 3 lefts.

I haven't tried this, but I think it will result in an even number of strands on each side of the shaft, plus it will have the same number of x-overs in slot #1 and slot #6.

I think that the best way to test my theory is to try it. If it doesn't work, maybe the solution will still be obvious.

At the moment, I don't have an empty armature to try it myself, but, if you have trouble I'll unwind one and we can try to suss it out together.

If you try it, let us know.

pt

[FRC]

Clarification

When I wound my armature with a single winding, the result was that one slot was bulked up more than the other (volume-wise, not copper-wise).

The reason is that I slavishly went one turn right of the shaft, one turn left, and so on. I switched sides every time in the same slot. In the end, one slot contains all of the criss-crosses and the other contains none (and, hence, is laid more neatly and has lots of unused room left over).

I would suggest winding the single coil armature with some sort of 1 1/2 turn strategy, if that's possible, to even out the criss-crosses and, maybe getting to pack more turns into the whole thing.

pt

Can you please clarify what you mean by "1 1'2 turn strategy" ? I finally got
my motor today but have not done anything with it yet.

FRC

[Peter Lindemann]

I do not Presume

Hi Peter Lindemann

Can you confirm that the armature winding pattern I posted up (link below) is the correct winding pattern as presumed used for the Lockridge device, i.e. the Delco-Remy armature shown by John B and yourself?

Link to post:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post120167

Regards

John

John,

Neither John Bedini nor I have ever seen a real "Lockridge Device". All we have seen are the parts of the attempted replication and the notebook.

If your research says that is the winding pattern for the Delco-Remy generator, then that is what it is. At this point, I don't see what that has to do with what this thread is investigating.

Sorry I can't help.

Peter

[n84dafun]

Kids bike wheel flywheel

New video of my system with everything except an actual load attached. I placed the output of both the generator and the recovery leads on the bank of 4-series capacitors, rated at 20V each and 110,000 uF each. In otherwords, I was trying to loop the system. The generator was connected to 1 cap, and the recovery leads were across the 4 caps.

The system draws around 6 amps at 72V at the high end and around 2 to 3 amps at 24V.

YouTube - motor with 12 inch kids bike wheel flywheel

Brian

[john_g]

Winding Pattern for Lockridge Device

Hi Peter Lindemann

Can you confirm that the armature winding pattern I posted up (link below) is the correct winding pattern as presumed used for the Lockridge device, i.e. the Delco-Remy armature shown by John B and yourself?

Link to post:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post120167

Regards

John

[n84dafun]

Motor circuit walk-through

Here's a video I made explaining how my motor works with my particular setup. I'll be making another video soon with the new flywheel using the 12 inch kid's bike wheel and all the diodes and capacitors connected.

YouTube - Motor circuit walkthrough

Brian