Resonance in motors

[mbrownn]

This thread is to explore the problems in achieving an LC circuit to power a motor. It relates to AC and DC motors as a method to produce an overunity motor.

With an LC circuit we can create an oscillation in a coil whose magnitude is bigger than the supply, that is the energy in watts oscillating in the LC circuit is bigger than the watts sustaining it from a source.

Why is this important? it is because the magnetic force produced by a coil is proportional to the ampere turns of the coil and therefore torque produced by a motor.

We can have, for example, 20 amps oscillating in a coil with a supply being only a tiny fraction of that to cover the losses. Nothing new here, just stating a fact. This single fact tells us that an AC overunity motor is possible if the AC is in an LC circuit with the motor as the inductor.

The problem begins when we introduce further losses by giving the coil an iron core. In a motor we may only have 5% losses in the coil due to ohms law but the motor may have up to 80% losses in all.

The other losses consist of friction, cogging depending upon the motor and iron losses etc.

Our other problem is the frequency of the oscillation, the mains frequency gives us around 1500RPM in a 4 pole motor but the resonant frequency of that motor may be in the kHz range requiring an induction motor speed of enormous magnitude making it impossible to reach. Let us assume we can get our hands on a motor with enough poles to slow the motor down to a reasonable speed, or we use a Universal motor. Now we only have to consider the iron losses.

I have been running some tests on a Universal motor using DC, Pulsed DC and AC. I don't have accurate measurements of the efficiencies but it is obvious that the universal motor performs best on DC for a given voltage and amperage. I believe it is the iron losses that is the cause of this.

As we need AC or pulsed DC to create a resonant circuit we are fighting the iron losses.

Do any of you have any knowledge on this subject as this is the problem I am trying to overcome at the moment.

[wrtner]

This thread is to explore the problems in achieving an LC circuit to power a motor. It relates to AC and DC motors as a method to produce an overunity motor.

We have a driving mains frequency of 50Hz (or 60Hz).

What is the probable range of inductance that we are dealing with
with most motors?

[john_g]

Hi Mbrownn

I had toyed with the idea of a ‘resonant motor’ for the Lockridge device. My idea was to use a battery as the primary energy source. Use a vibrator circuit to pump up a capacitor (either via a bifilar coil or transformer) and discharge this capacitor via a sparkgap into the motor circuit. The motor circuit being a series motor placed across another capacitor.

I guess what has held me back is knowing the correct capacitors to use and also I was disheartened by the amount of friction caused by the brushes.

Regards

John

[Web000x]

There is one big problem with your idea. A motor has a property called synchronous reactance. This means that due to the ever changing flux paths within the iron core structures of the motor. The inductance of the winding that you are trying to create a resonant circuit out of will never be able to constantly stay in resonance since you inductance will be never be constant.

Dave

[nueview]

hi all
it is good to talk about all the reasons this concept will fail for first as i myself have been playing with this idea for a long time.
but i think it is the ways energy works as interacting forces that are the biggest problem. it could also be the solution.
the drive circuit energy cost and its function will probably be the biggest loss in operation.
the intial motor construction that is choosen for use on this type of endevor will probably be the biggest reason for success or failure. i will not say every motor is a generator as there are some designs now that are strictly motors or generators but in general this is true so the choice for a project should be carefully considered.
the lockridge device chose to start with a generator rather than a motor. i think this is the best place to start even if one uses a motor i think it's generator properties should be considered first as this will be the output limit for the most part.
Martin

[mbrownn]

We have a driving mains frequency of 50Hz (or 60Hz).

What is the probable range of inductance that we are dealing with
with most motors?

The motors I have looked at are in the range from 200uH to 22mH

[mbrownn]

Hi Mbrownn

I had toyed with the idea of a ‘resonant motor’ for the Lockridge device. My idea was to use a battery as the primary energy source. Use a vibrator circuit to pump up a capacitor (either via a bifilar coil or transformer) and discharge this capacitor via a sparkgap into the motor circuit. The motor circuit being a series motor placed across another capacitor.

I guess what has held me back is knowing the correct capacitors to use and also I was disheartened by the amount of friction caused by the brushes.

Regards

John

Hmm an interesting concept.

On brush friction, whilst it is significant, it seems to lessen as a percentage with the power of the motor. Most motor manufacturers use excessive pressure on the brushes to prevent spiking during use as this may destroy a controller and cause radio interference, my experience shows we can reduce this pressure and therefore friction significantly.

The Lockridge device does seem to be a resonant motor {hence this thread), I have many circuits for it and can show significant overunity in a simulator.

[mbrownn]

There is one big problem with your idea. A motor has a property called synchronous reactance. This means that due to the ever changing flux paths within the iron core structures of the motor. The inductance of the winding that you are trying to create a resonant circuit out of will never be able to constantly stay in resonance since you inductance will be never be constant.

Dave

Yes you are right to a great extent, this is why our pulse frequency has to be many times faster than the speed of the motor so that there is insignificant change during the rise and discharge of the coil. I don't know if what I am about to say is true but the high frequency may cause more iron losses and this is what I am working on now.

I am thinking about a motor speed of 1500 to 3000 rpm and a frequency of many kHz, possibly hundreds of KHz, alternatively we can have a lower duty cycle. That is say a 5% pulse with its associated discharge time combined with a long period of no electrical activity, of course there needs to be a flywheel effect in this design.

[mbrownn]

hi all
it is good to talk about all the reasons this concept will fail for first as i myself have been playing with this idea for a long time.
but i think it is the ways energy works as interacting forces that are the biggest problem. it could also be the solution.
the drive circuit energy cost and its function will probably be the biggest loss in operation.
the intial motor construction that is choosen for use on this type of endevor will probably be the biggest reason for success or failure. i will not say every motor is a generator as there are some designs now that are strictly motors or generators but in general this is true so the choice for a project should be carefully considered.
the lockridge device chose to start with a generator rather than a motor. i think this is the best place to start even if one uses a motor i think it's generator properties should be considered first as this will be the output limit for the most part.
Martin

You are right about using the generator as a motor, this is because of the relatively high inductance and low resistance, just what we need in a resonant circuit.

The reason I am looking at a universal motor is because the BEMF is constant on a magnet motor at a given speed, whereas the BEMF rises and falls in a universal motor with the forward EMF. This means that the BEMF will never be more than the forward EMF when we pulse it unlike a permanent magnet motor. Notice the Lockridge device was a universal type motor.

Theory wise, I know how to build it but because of all the other factors involved in motor losses I am not there yet. This is the purpose of this thread, to solve the other problems caused when trying to operate a motor in a resonant circuit.

The Lockridge device recycles energy in a Bipolar switched resonant circuit, reducing the required input for a given motor power. This is where the overunity is in this device. The more efficient the resonant circuit is the more overunity is possible but we also have to overcome friction and iron losses. The iron losses on a Lindeman rotary attraction motor are big and this is true of any motor that uses frequency, becaise of this we have to get a very high COP in the electrical circuit or find a way of eliminating some of these losses.

[mbrownn]

I was just thinking about Tesla, he said something about putting iron in a motor is a waste of energy, maybe this thread is some of what he was talking about

[mbrownn]

Mr. Brown,


Have you thought of a "VFD" inverter drive for your motor to increase the hrtz
operating range ....1/4 hp range er lower?

I believe these could be modified to give the requirements needed. each motor will have a unique set of settings for a desired output.

I don't think any of this stuff is new its just a matter of tuning once we know what the requirements are. I know from talking to motor manufacturers that they are aware of the overunity aspect; its just not talked about. There are only a few people in the world that have all the knowledge required to do it but maybe they haven't put 2 and 2 together yet. If they have then this is being deliberately suppressed. The other aspect is using the resonant circuit to give the multiplication of the power and how to do it with either AC or pulsed DC drives.

AC seems easier but as Webooox says there are problems. a lot of these can be eliminated with pulsed DC but people working on pulsed DC try to avoid resonance because of the magnitude of the inductive spikes as they destroy electronics. For DC you need bipolar switching and a capacitor for the resonant circuit, this is the only thing I haven't seen on commercial controllers. The nearest is the H bridge but they don't close the return from the motor because they don't know what to do with the spike and just use it for regenerative charging of the source, no resonance.

Aviso's car is the AC method I believe, I am working on the DC one.

An electronic controller will have to vary two different things simultaneously to avoid blowing the capacitor and electronics, pulse width and frequency.

I don't see how we can do that mechanically so we have to get the motor up to speed before engaging the capacitor. Because of the part of the power curve the motor will have to run in it will be adversely effected by changes in load, any increase will cause stall and blowing up the capacitor and a decrease will result in over-speed. On a mechanical device a fixed load will be a must.

The high voltage can be separated from the inductive kickback to protect the electronics and I have seen the device on Aviso's car as well at the Lockridge device. This device may have other functions too as I have discussed on my thread http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post143009

The principal is simple, making it work is somewhat more complicated.

[nueview]

MBrown
i am going to stick with the ac method but would think if i were to go the dc pulsed i would give a look at some of the rail gun circuits as they can produce very high speed excelleration and i think they can also use some feed back storage of the circuits for efficiency but i do not want to post this on an open forum as could care less about a better weapon being made.

you all mentioned the iron being the main problem but i would say i have mixed feelings as to this the problem is the motor construction itself.
some of the new ac and stepper motors with permanent magnet rotors seem to have the best chance in my opinion.

i am thinking along the joule ringer concept of sorts. i have sen resonant drive in induction motors fail due to squirrel cage rotors as they are a whole for energy that cannot be filled making the load a constant drain for the input power. after allot of study it has become evident to me that a permanent magnetic rotor is the only solution for overcoming this loss.
Martin

[wrtner]

Put this formula into an Excel spreadsheet, into cell E18:

=1/(2*3.1416*SQRT(E15*E16))

Then put into E15 the figure 0.0022 (this being 22 millihenries)
and 0.00046 into cell E16 (this being 460 uF), then we get
a frequency, in cell E18 of about 50Hz.

And so, if we have a motor of 22 millihenry field coils and place in
the circuit a cap of 460 microfarad, then we should have resonance.
for those in the UK or anywhere with 50hz mains.

It would be interesting to see how the motor responds as the value
of the cap is varied.

[Farmhand]

I think the rotating magnetic field is the answer, here is some text which
leads me to believe it. Still the iron core is limited to the lower frequencies I
think. But I don't see that as a problem. The only practical way I can see to
utilize a resonant motor is at a constant speed with constant load, I don't see
that as a problem either. The rotating field doesn't weigh anything but it can
drag the rotor around that's got to be efficient the way I see it.

The inventions, researches and writings of Nikola Tesla, with special reference to his work in polyphase currents and high potential lighting : Martin, Thomas Commerford, 1856-1924 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

This is from pages 24-25 of the book linked above. There is so much info on
motors in there I'm surprised people interested in motors have not read it. The
transformers and motors are basically the same thing except the motors have
an armature, then it can be a generator to, synchronous and torque motors
are described in different parts of the book.

This system possesses
this advantage, besides others, resulting from simplicity.
At full loads the motors show an efficiency fully equal to that of
the continuous current motors. The transformers present an
additional advantage in their capability of operating motors.
They are capable of similar modifications in construction, and will
facilitate the introduction of motors and their adaptation to practical
demands. Their efficiency should be higher than that of
the present transformers, and I base my assertion on the following
:
In a transformer, as constructed at present, we produce the
currents in the secondary circuit by varying the strength of the
primary or exciting currents. If we admit proportionality with
respect to the iron core the inductive effect exerted upon the
secondary coil will be proportional to the numerical sum of the
variations in the strength of the exciting current per unit of time;
whence it follows that for a given variation any prolongation of
the primary current will result in a proportional loss. In order
to obtain rapid variations in the strength of the current, essential
to efficient induction, a great number of undulations are employed
; from this practice various disadvantages result. These are :
Increased cost and diminished efficiency of the generator ; more
waste of energy in heating the cores, and also diminished output
of the transformer, since the core is not properly utilized, the
reversals being too rapid. The inductive effect is also very small
in certain phases, as will be apparent from a graphic representation,
and there may be periods of inaction, if there are intervals
between the succeeding current impulses or waves. In producing
a shifting of the poles in a transformer, and thereby inducing
currents, the induction is of the ideal character, being always
maintained at its maximum action. It is also reasonable to assume
that by a shifting of the poles less energy will be wasted
than by reversals.

Cheers

[mbrownn]

MBrown
i am going to stick with the ac method but would think if i were to go the dc pulsed i would give a look at some of the rail gun circuits as they can produce very high speed excelleration and i think they can also use some feed back storage of the circuits for efficiency but i do not want to post this on an open forum as could care less about a better weapon being made.

you all mentioned the iron being the main problem but i would say i have mixed feelings as to this the problem is the motor construction itself.
some of the new ac and stepper motors with permanent magnet rotors seem to have the best chance in my opinion.

i am thinking along the joule ringer concept of sorts. i have sen resonant drive in induction motors fail due to squirrel cage rotors as they are a whole for energy that cannot be filled making the load a constant drain for the input power. after allot of study it has become evident to me that a permanent magnetic rotor is the only solution for overcoming this loss.
Martin

If you apply my principals to a stepper or parallel path motor the results would be fantastic, the problem is they have too few a number of poles thus requiring great motor speed. This would mean friction is taking up all the power even if you could get it to run that fast without burning it up.

You could not reach the speed with a poly phase motor and you are right about the squirrel cage robbing you of the power.

Modern motors seem to be designed to make running them in this way difficult, they have too high a resistance, insufficient turns in the coils and the wire is too thin. OK that makes them cheaper to make but does not help me. My best success was with an 800w 220v universal motor but even then the resistance was too high, I am looking for a more powerful one now as the resistance will be lower. Resistance robs us of the power in the resonant circuit, even a few ohms is a problem.

I tried using 12v motors because of their low resistance but ended up putting excessive amounts of power into them to get the desired current, lots of smoke


I know that the Lockridge device must have been real from my experiments but I can see that it is a fine balance to achieve the goal.

The AC method should work on a universal motor but I think the efficiency will drop which is not good as they are only 35% efficient to start with. That's the same problem with DC too, The Lockridge device was a form of universal motor so I will persist and it does offer reduced BEMF properties too. To reduce the BEMF further we need to run the motor at slow speeds so a universal motor with 16000rpm speed can be run at 3000 RPM powering our generator. The BEMF will be around 37 to 40 volts if using a 220v motor. The speed is controlled by the load.

Once we have the reduced resistance and reduced BEMF it is only the iron losses that is holding us up. A universal motor with a ferrite rotor and stator would be good I think but I don't think they exist. Coreless motors would be good too but they are too small.