PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-09-24, 06:07:05
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Nikola Tesla's DC Machines.  (Read 8644 times)
Full Member
***

Posts: 186
Hi All

I agree, I would gladly look , listen  and learn........

Check out the attached excerpt from *one* of Tesla's many writings.

I do not know from where it came.  I have had this on my computer now for a number of years.  I think it came from a Russian forum, don't remember exactly.
'
Interestingly, the Primary and Secondary configuration is the same as the pics that Grum posted.  This is the same configuration used by 'Salty Citrus' in China last year with his Don Smith replication which ran over 1000watts of incandescent lamps from a 4 amp/hr- 12v- battery.

If anyone knows which writing this came from, please enlighten me.

take care, peace
lost_bro


Hi lost_bro,

That writing came not directly from Tesla but from a book: The theory, design and construction of induction coils - by Henri Armagnat.  The chapter that includes page 160 is on Tesla transformers/coils.  You can freely read or download the full book from here:
https://archive.org/details/theorydesignand00kenygoog  

Gyula
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 113
Odd, I just gave my affirmation to Erfinder that I would listen, learn and do the experiments he speaks of.  So I come back here after reading some Tesla lectures he recommended and in less than 24 hours I see post 325, in my own thread no less.  Bad form verpies.  Please try to use some restraint.  Maybe I'm the only one that cares what Erfinder has to express.  Be that the case, you are more than welcome to read our dialog, just disconnect your TX signal and all will be good.  Preferably, I'd rather see you contribute.  Here's a statement that would be perfect for you to take a closer look at:
I personally find this a very interesting statement.  I've been working on a device that I named the Lenz Locker Transformer, the objective is to add an alternate flux path for the Lenz flux to take instead of reaching the primary.  I've been testing this device with sharp impulses to get an idea of its inner workings.  One of the things I did that completely surprised me was to wind a pickup coil on this alternate flux path; my expectation is that I would not see any impulse make it's way to this path without a connected circuit on the secondary.  What I discovered was completely opposite.  I actually saw more signal on this pickup coil with the secondary open than I did with it closed.  Which brings me back to Erfinder's statement.  In my test setup, I cannot see any other way this could happen unless what he says is correct.  It also invalidates my understanding that you can only induce a voltage, where current must come from a closed-loop resistance via Ohm's Law.

I appreciate your willingness to partake in this bitter drink I'm offering.  What I want is in the literature, albeit, it takes some reading and twisting of this and that to get to it.  What I want is in the lessons shared by some of the alternative energy gurus of today and yesterday, here again, reading and twisting of this and that is a prerequisite.  As there are no straight questions, there can be no straight answers.  

I am not making claims, I am calling it as it is presented to me.  I cannot say that I am neutral, my ideas are biased, and for this reason, I share impressions gained through experience on and off the bench.  I am not interested in facts because as far as I am concerned, there are none.  To sight an example, "the" mother of all examples, before Einstein the existence of the aether was fact (to the then top of the pecking order), after Einstein arrived on the scene, academia "proved" that the aether didn't exist (if nothing else, history is a record of hostile takeovers).  Now many years after his death, its existence is questioned yet again?  None of the supporters of the status quo (operating on this and similar platforms) question the motives and or integrity of those who double think in high places.  No request for undisputed proof is asked of them.  Its the pecking order in operation.  Those who ask the lawless ones for proof are qualified to do so, but they aren't qualified to question academia.  I feel sorry for them, in their own right they are brilliant, what they refuse to see is that they are using their intelligence to perpetuate ignorance, and the the idea and practice of slavery.  

The statement regarding longitudinal operating magnetism isn't something that I made up.  Its not something I am going to prove to anyone, all the proof anyone needs is found right in that coil of wire, all that's required to see it is the willingness to see something you didn't see before.  The burden of proof is therefore on the individual willing to accept that he/she may have overlooked something fundamental.  Between the turns of a coil the magnetic field is in opposition to itself.  Its as if you have two magnets with like poles facing, and then compressed.  ###### a name which has been all but banned from being mentioned on this platform, showed you this configuration in his super pole magnet configuration.  A standard generator is screaming this principle at you, the approaching magnet induces a potential into a coil, the current operating in that coil sets up a magnetic field which opposes the approaching magnet.  Most frown at this, spitting and pouting like spoiled children, pointing their little finger at the man whom they say wronged them.  These poor souls are completely missing the point, they are oblivious of the fact that this situation is a replication of the events taking place between the turns of the coil itself.  It is clear (to me anyway....) that in the coil there is no phase misalignment, the relations between turns and layers prohibit this.  There is a phase misalignment between the inducing and the induced, between the last turn or turns (layered coil) in the series and the like approaching or receding rotor magnet.  In present day systems the point of maximum induced potential, the point of maximum change in flux, is located just outside, on either side, of the point of maximum flux density.  This offset must be corrected, so as to bring maximum induced potential, or the point of maximum change in flux/current, into coincidence with the point of maximum flux density, the reason for this is obvious when your perspective is from that of the coil, specifically between its turns.  

Regarding transformers.  I use them in my circuits, I call them reactors.


Regards
   
Group: Guest
I appreciate your willingness to partake in this bitter drink I'm offering.

I have concluded that what I think I know has hurt me far more than anything I have yet to learn.  So yes, this journey may be bumpy, but the jolts may be just what I need.

Between the turns of a coil the magnetic field is in opposition to itself.  Its as if you have two magnets with like poles facing, and then compressed.

This is some coincidence.  I have been tearing through everything I can get my hands on regarding self-inductance.  How we typically wind coils of wire just doesn't sit right with me.  At least not for all circumstances.  If you want a device that responds as a typical inductor does, then fine, a typical winding will do.  But if you want a device that can snag a magnetic field and convert it to a difference of potential, some sort of re-engineering is needed.  I have no idea as yet what this new device would look like, but I do see a need for it.

I hadn't considered the whole reason we get a Lenz reaction is because the coils do this themselves.  That is very profound.  It also affirms my gut feeling about coils in general.  They need a serious facelift.  I think I will do some scribbling in a notepad for a while.  Certainly there must be a better way.  If I can find it and it is something that can be easily retrofitted in an off-the-shelf motor, hmmm, there's some possibilities...
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1637


Buy me a cigar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx45QwT39EI&t=70

Of course this is assuming you have a relatively unlimited current source driving the motor.

I have a nice Baldor CD5318 shunt wound motor I use for experimenting with.  This motor appears to have an inline series wound coil too (called an interpole & not accessible), which is noticeable when you try to reverse direction by just reversing the armature windings, which makes it in reality a compound wound motor.

Dear Matt.

Many thanks for that reminder! So Series wound can go into self destruct mode, unloaded. From what I remember the reason why the standard Universal motors don't do this is because we run them on AC.

That video really took me back !! Armature reaction, twisting of the magnetic field between the poles under load condition, so is this the reason why Tesla placed the brushes on the armature in the position shown on the lower drawing of my first post ? Lots of questions, answers locked in the past !

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Group: Guest
Many thanks for that reminder! So Series wound can go into self destruct mode, unloaded. From what I remember the reason why the standard Universal motors don't do this is because we run them on AC.

A shunt wound DC motor will also run on AC, at least mine does.  I'm pretty certain this and a Universal Motor is one in the same.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1637


Buy me a cigar
A shunt wound DC motor will also run on AC, at least mine does.  I'm pretty certain this and a Universal Motor is one in the same.

Dear Matt.

Nope, pretty certain " Universal " pertains to series wound only.  Your video link suggested your Baldor is a compound machine.

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 113
Dear Matt.

Nope, pretty certain " Universal " pertains to series wound only.  Your video link suggested your Baldor is a compound machine.

Cheers Grum.

All universal motors I have worked with were shunt wound, and ran on AC or DC.

Regards
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1637


Buy me a cigar
All universal motors I have worked with were shunt wound, and ran on AC or DC.

Regards

Dear Erfinder.

Perhaps Wikipedia can straighten this out ??   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_motor

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 113
Dear Erfinder.

Perhaps Wikipedia can straighten this out ??   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_motor

Cheers Grum.

I repeat....all universal motors I have worked with were shunt wound, and ran on AC or DC.  No need to straighten me out, I am fully aware of what I was working with when I was working with it.
   
Group: Guest
Perhaps Wikipedia can straighten this out ??   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_motor

Well Grum, now I understand your previous question better.

Russ told me my shunt wound motor could run on AC and it did, so...  I figured the other type couldn't.  Whoops.

You got me wondering now, will a universal motor runaway on AC?   I've haven't witnessed one do it, but to be honest, I really don't know.  I suspect my wife will chew me real good if I smoke the vacuum cleaner finding out.  hehe.   My son will be happy though.  ;D
   
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-09-24, 06:07:05