This project is a continuation on from my work related to my L.A.G (lenz assisted generator) project.
It is basicly a bigger and easer version of the L.A.G,but has a greater efficiency and a higher rotational torque/RPM factor.
The motor is a 240 volt series wound motor from an old washing machine.
We will only be running the system on 24 volt rectified AC to start with.
The field windings have to be rewound,as they are not wound correctly for the system to opperate at it's maximum efficiency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC4rCChVK8Y
Seems interesting so far. ;)
Mags
This is the first run of the R.T.M
Next we have to rewind the stator coils,so as we can get a better output from the transformer side of the setup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZixHuoVHxc
Very cool. ;) So, did you modify the brush position to get the rotor to run on DC to get the timing for attraction to the iron cores, without use of the stator coils?
When going for charging the battery, does that diode get hot? Maybe a larger one might show a faster climb in voltage of the batt.
I had some arguments a while back with Milehigh and some others on the idea of the Stargate I think it was, where the guy added mags on the outer casing of a normal pm motor, they said that just because the motor had speed up, does not mean that it has more torque, even at lower rpms. I did not do tests on that as of yet.
But if Im seeing what you have correctly, if the stator coils are not loaded, and when you do load them, you get speed up, I have to eliminate the fact that the cores are being saturated, because the cores would be less attractive to the rotor flux and slow down. So, Im picturing that your setup is doing the opposite, using the attraction to run the motor and when you load it, with a 'rectified' load, that the transformer action that is induced in the stators must be causing currents in the stators that produce the opposite magnetic fields to the cores to make them more attractive, thus speedup.
If there 'is' more torgue, and you have measured this, then I say you might have something. It just might have to be in comparison to an identical motor that is left normal and tested for efficiency to have a base line to go off of. Good stuff. ;D
I think. ;)
Mags
^ what he said :)
Is there something weirdly obvious about AC and DC mixing ? As in, the two will skip over each other ?
In Tesla tower experiments, you can detect a wireless field with a loop of wire and LED right up to the wall plug of an adapter fed system...straight through the adapter.
In your motor case, when rectified, the AC energy doesn't get stopped as such, it is redistributed back into the motor windings ?
Quote from: Magluvin on 2013.02.17, 17:22:24
But if Im seeing what you have correctly, if the stator coils are not loaded, and when you do load them, you get speed up, I have to eliminate the fact that the cores are being saturated, because the cores would be less attractive to the rotor flux and slow down. So, Im picturing that your setup is doing the opposite, using the attraction to run the motor and when you load it, with a 'rectified' load, that the transformer action that is induced in the stators must be causing currents in the stators that produce the opposite magnetic fields to the cores to make them more attractive, thus speedup.
If there 'is' more torgue, and you have measured this, then I say you might have something. It just might have to be in comparison to an identical motor that is left normal and tested for efficiency to have a base line to go off of. Good stuff. ;D
I think. ;)
Mags
Now how would we create a transformer action that has no backEMF ? but has a forward EMF to help rather than hinder.
Most would say that this cant be done-to have a generator/transformer with no backEMF,and yet here it is.
As far as torque go's when we add a load to the stator windings-there is much more.
I have unwound the standard winding's,as they were not wound the way we need them to be.
I will be rewinding the stator tonight with two seperate winding's-one on each core.
One will be for high voltage aplications,and the other for low voltage/high amp output.
Sorry to be late into the discussion, the Lockridge device is exactly what you are attempting to make. The lockridge IS a rotary transformer, a motor and a generator in one. Because all three functions occur on the same core, there is only one iron loss thus improving overall efficiency.
Slider is correct that there is AC and DC produced in the output but I think I may have a solution to that but there is more. My solution is a special winding on the output coils.
Stargate's idea of adding magnets to the motor is also a part of the Lockridge although we do not use magnets, we use a coil wrapped around the motor. I am not sure of the theory about this, it is Dollard's work, but may cause a reversed lenz effect causing the AC wave to become a DC wave. As yet this is untested by me and Hiwater, if this is the case then my solution would not be required.
Please take time to read the Lockridge thread in this private forum.
In the lockridge, BEMF is dramatically reduced in the power coil and the BEMF in the generator coil is the output. This is achieved by a 90 degree shift in the position of the motor field coils, yes that means that the motor is in magnetic lock and will not turn. It is the generator that is causing the motoring action, yes it is the generator that is motoring and generating at the same time. The motor field coils are just energizing coils for the motor and transformer. The transformer voltage and generated voltage seem to be additive.
Having four field coils is exactly what you want but we have to split it into two magnetic circuits, hence the splits in the case of the Lockridge.
You probably will need your 30 amps when you run like this as your device will not have BEMF opposing your input voltage, we have been there and done that. Having said that your windings may be much finer than we have been using.
We have exactly the same voltage gain as you with a 1 to 1 winding, this is because there is more going on in this motor than you think, its function is very complex even though the build is relatively simple. There is the generated voltage, the transformer voltage, coil shorting and inductance variations going on in the rotor. Hiwater has achieved arcing suggesting 1000s of volts.
As it is the generator that is giving the torque in our device, increasing a conventional load increases the motor torque, this is a little different from what you are doing. The power you are using is probably the result of the connecting and disconnection of the armature windings as well as the coil shorting in the armature, in other words the transients.
I am not saying you are headed in the wrong direction, what I am saying is we should combine and share our knowledge as there is much we can learn from each other.
Quote from: mbrownn on 2013.02.18, 00:45:58
Sorry to be late into the discussion, the Lockridge device is exactly what you are attempting to make. The lockridge IS a rotary transformer, a motor and a generator in one. Because all three functions occur on the same core, there is only one iron loss thus improving overall efficiency.
Slider is correct that there is AC and DC produced in the output but I think I may have a solution to that but there is more. My solution is a special winding on the output coils.
Stargate's idea of adding magnets to the motor is also a part of the Lockridge although we do not use magnets, we use a coil wrapped around the motor. I am not sure of the theory about this, it is Dollard's work, but may cause a reversed lenz effect causing the AC wave to become a DC wave. As yet this is untested by me and Hiwater, if this is the case then my solution would not be required.
Please take time to read the Lockridge thread in this private forum.
In the lockridge, BEMF is dramatically reduced in the power coil and the BEMF in the generator coil is the output. This is achieved by a 90 degree shift in the position of the motor field coils, yes that means that the motor is in magnetic lock and will not turn. It is the generator that is causing the motoring action, yes it is the generator that is motoring and generating at the same time. The motor field coils are just energizing coils for the motor and transformer. The transformer voltage and generated voltage seem to be additive.
Having four field coils is exactly what you want but we have to split it into two magnetic circuits, hence the splits in the case of the Lockridge.
You probably will need your 30 amps when you run like this as your device will not have BEMF opposing your input voltage, we have been there and done that. Having said that your windings may be much finer than we have been using.
We have exactly the same voltage gain as you with a 1 to 1 winding, this is because there is more going on in this motor than you think, its function is very complex even though the build is relatively simple. There is the generated voltage, the transformer voltage, coil shorting and inductance variations going on in the rotor. Hiwater has achieved arcing suggesting 1000s of volts.
As it is the generator that is giving the torque in our device, increasing a conventional load increases the motor torque, this is a little different from what you are doing. The power you are using is probably the result of the connecting and disconnection of the armature windings as well as the coil shorting in the armature, in other words the transients.
I am not saying you are headed in the wrong direction, what I am saying is we should combine and share our knowledge as there is much we can learn from each other.
Hi Mbrownn
It is good to see you here continuing with your reserch on the lockridge device.
I remember us talking about this on energetic forum-providing you are the mrbrown from there?
As i remember,we were discusing as to wether the lockridge device was fact-or something that JB and mr Linerma-n coocked up ,as we couldnt find any other info on the device that didnt have these two names attached to it.
I will be very straight to the point--I find it very hard to believe that out of every person in the world-the two named above would be the only two who would have information on such a device that existed.
I also find it interesting that these two make money out of information on devices like this.
Has either of them had a video or book for sale relating to the lockridge device?
After leaving energetic,i serched for information on the lockridge device for week's. I got to page 22 on a google serch for the lockridge device,and every link in those 22 pages all had berdini and lindama-n plastered all over it.
Well now that i have that of my chest,i believe that you should give your device your own name.
By keeping the name of a mistical device(the lockridge device)all you are doing is turning all your hard work and reserch into a selling point for the two named above.
Lets say you get it to work-who do you think will lay claim to the right's and glory of the device?-Yep,you guessed it ^^^^^^
But i do agree with you about being able to help each other out-as i believe this was the path we were going down on energetic.
My device is working on a different principle than your device though.
But maybe a combination is what is needed to compleete the task at hand.
I will endevor to read your thread over the next few day's.
Yes I am the same Mbrownn, its good to see you here.
I here what you are saying about the origins of the device but the more I discover the more this thing seems real and it is exactly as the device in the EFV video. Having said that, it is obvious that JB and PL did not know how it worked. The few points I made in the last post are all things they have never talked or even hinted about. I agree that some of the actions of some researchers can be cut throat so maybe your idea of a name change is a good one.
The name Lockridge refers to the American that found and copied it, if we knew what the Germans called it back in WWII we might find more. Maybe I should ask erfinder, he speaks German and is an excellent researcher.
If you have any questions I will freely answer unlike some others, assuming I know the answer hehe.
Yes lets share our thoughts.
Well i have just finished watching pt 14-the lockridge device video.
Never in my life have i seen such crap.
It is obvious that he knows nothing about magnetic fields,and how they react.
He shows that by facing two north or south fields at each other ,you will get a sharp field between them-this part is correct.
But what has that got to do with the way the magnetic fields are created in the so called lockridge device?
In the lockridge device we have 4 stator core's,two north fields and two south field's-as per his description.
Now the two north fields and two south fields do not face each other-so there will be no sharp magnetic field produced as he showed.
The front side of the stator coils(the side facing the rotor)will have one pole,and the back side of the stator coils will have the opposite pole-which will flow around the iron houseing.
There for there is no need for those slots he claims must be there,as the field between all the stator core's is a neutral field.
The reason he didnt give any real description as to how it work's mbrownn-is because he has no idea as to what he is talking about.
He then go's on to say(many time's)that lockridge had disabled people building the device's-as they wouldnt know what they were building.
Realy???-i mean ,come on now--disabled people being used to build an OU device because they wouldnt let the cat out of the bag-just because they are disabled??
Good thing lockridge didnt hire Stephen hawking's back then i guess.
Then when they asked JB who it was that gave them the !! how it worked !! and how it was setup description's-his reply was ofcourse ! i dont want to say !.
Now how did we know that was coming lol.
As far as im concerned,the lockridge device was a contrived contraption by JB and PL simply to add to the money pot.
I mean did it cost anything to get pt 14 wich was about the lockridge device?-who stood to make money from the sale's?
Is there any other information on the internet that dosnt have JB or PL plastered all over it?
I have read most of your thread on the lockridge Mbrownn,and it is clear that you and the team of guy's you have there working on the setup are far more advanced than JB.
But you can be assured that if you succeed in getting it to run,you will recieve a phone call from a certain some one ,inviting you to work with them and put together-how to video's,book,s and probably even kit's-that ofcourse will be for sale at a very high price.
Knowing you-you will refuse,and state that you wish to give the device design's freely-this is when the trouble will start.
They will take credit for all your guys hard work-this is what sleepers do.
This will happen as long as your device is called the lockridge device- a device that is associated with JB and PL.
Now all that being said-im off to do some more work on my rotary transformer.
tinman:
You are very astute and have seen through the smoke of the supposed Lockridge device.
Somehow, using an archival photo of post WWII mopping up in bombed out Germany is used to lend credence to the tale.
Recognizing a snake oil salesman or two in this case is a good thing.
@ ION
I think he started of good in giving us thing's like the ssg-it is a good learning tool.
But some times the pull of money can drag one in,and mythical creature's are born.
Anyway,the video below is the first torque test run with only one secondary winding in place.
I have fitted a fan to the output shaft,so as a clear indication of torque and RPM increase can be seen when a load is placed accross the secondary coil.
I expect the RPM to increase to around 2400-2500 once the second coil is inplace and loaded.
An amp decrease of around 1/2 an amp is also expected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6xRcSkPYn4
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.19, 02:51:59
Well i have just finished watching pt 14-the lockridge device video.
Never in my life have i seen such crap.
It is obvious that he knows nothing about magnetic fields,and how they react.
He shows that by facing two north or south fields at each other ,you will get a sharp field between them-this part is correct.
But what has that got to do with the way the magnetic fields are created in the so called lockridge device?
In the lockridge device we have 4 stator core's,two north fields and two south field's-as per his description.
Now the two north fields and two south fields do not face each other-so there will be no sharp magnetic field produced as he showed.
The front side of the stator coils(the side facing the rotor)will have one pole,and the back side of the stator coils will have the opposite pole-which will flow around the iron houseing.
There for there is no need for those slots he claims must be there,as the field between all the stator core's is a neutral field.
The reason he didnt give any real description as to how it work's mbrownn-is because he has no idea as to what he is talking about.
He then go's on to say(many time's)that lockridge had disabled people building the device's-as they wouldnt know what they were building.
Realy???-i mean ,come on now--disabled people being used to build an OU device because they wouldnt let the cat out of the bag-just because they are disabled??
Good thing lockridge didnt hire Stephen hawking's back then i guess.
Then when they asked JB who it was that gave them the !! how it worked !! and how it was setup description's-his reply was ofcourse ! i dont want to say !.
Now how did we know that was coming lol.
As far as im concerned,the lockridge device was a contrived contraption by JB and PL simply to add to the money pot.
I mean did it cost anything to get pt 14 wich was about the lockridge device?-who stood to make money from the sale's?
Is there any other information on the internet that dosnt have JB or PL plastered all over it?
I have read most of your thread on the lockridge Mbrownn,and it is clear that you and the team of guy's you have there working on the setup are far more advanced than JB.
But you can be assured that if you succeed in getting it to run,you will recieve a phone call from a certain some one ,inviting you to work with them and put together-how to video's,book,s and probably even kit's-that ofcourse will be for sale at a very high price.
Knowing you-you will refuse,and state that you wish to give the device design's freely-this is when the trouble will start.
They will take credit for all your guys hard work-this is what sleepers do.
This will happen as long as your device is called the lockridge device- a device that is associated with JB and PL.
Now all that being said-im off to do some more work on my rotary transformer.
We are told my site admins here that JB objected to his name being used here, and made threats. I will now type B-e-d-i-n-i without the dashes, and see how it looks to you:
Bedini.
There is an "automatic filter" thanks to Juan's threats.
Don't forget the threats of lawsuits, lawyers etc -- with the aim to get serious researchers to SHUT UP.
Likewise, someone asking you to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) for an indefinite time -- to me that is a huge RED FLAG.
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2013.02.19, 15:04:23
We are told my site admins here that JB objected to his name being used here, and made threats. I will now type B-e-d-i-n-i without the dashes, and see how it looks to you:
######.
There is an "automatic filter" thanks to Juan's threats.
Don't forget the threats of lawsuits, lawyers etc -- with the aim to get serious researchers to SHUT UP.
Likewise, someone asking you to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) for an indefinite time -- to me that is a huge RED FLAG.
JB=jack bigglesworth
PL=paul lickmyear
lockridge device=fantasy
pt 14 of what?
hehehe I do detect a hint of skepticism.
You do appear to be totally correct about the description in the EFV video but I have already dismissed that.
My research shows that a device of the same "physical configuration" has anomalous outputs and theoretically could produce more out than in. The slots are needed but not for the reasons described. This leads me to the conclusion that it is possible that the device was real but they did not know how it worked.
Personally I don't think it is a case of smoke and mirrors, I don't think it is a pure hoax, I hope it is not that sinister. I believe it is more of putting it out there to see if someone could figure it out. What does concern me is exactly as you say, because the device was put out in the way it was it could be claimed as intellectual property or something like that.
Anyway, I am not here to put anyone down. Lets heed the advice of Steve.
Take a look at the FEMM picture of the magnetic fields on the Lockridge thread and you will see how I think the magnetics are operating. You will see it is very different from what was described but this is only how the motoring and transformer action comes about. Its all about using the other aspects such as inductive kickback and transients which produces the energy, just as in your device.
Befor we go any further,we need to compair what we have against a modern day motor with a high energy efficiency(86% in this case)
I have placed the small fan blade on a house hold fan.
We then take a watt reading,along with an RPM reading.
This will give us RPMs per watt for this motor.
We then carry out the same test ,useing the same fan blade on our rotary transformer.
I have looped the output of the field coil back into the rotor supply line,useing an L bridge.
This stop's the current flowing back into the field winding's,and stalling the motor part of the device.
The cap is being used to capture the high voltage spike's seen on the scope in the last video,and converting that to a lower voltage-higher current.
It also smooth's out the voltage spike's aswell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVmVtRqwaRc
Some figures from the above video.
Standard 86% efficient motor
36 watts for 1340 RPM = 37.22 Rev's per watt
Rotary transformer in loop mode
26.4 watts for 2055 RPM = 77.84 Rev's per watt.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.20, 15:28:07
Some figures from the above video.
Standard 86% efficient motor
36 watts for 1340 RPM = 37.22 Rev's per watt
Rotary transformer in loop mode
26.4 watts for 2055 RPM = 77.84 Rev's per watt.
Can you provide a simple schematic of your setup? What is your conclusion of rev's per watt increase. Do you consider as a measure of improvement or just data. (we may differ on this depending on the effective load)
Quote from: ION on 2013.02.20, 17:15:35
Can you provide a simple schematic of your setup? What is your conclusion of rev's per watt increase. Do you consider as a measure of improvement or just data. (we may differ on this depending on the effective load)
It is both data and a measure of improvement.
The effective load is the fan itself.
To increase preasure on one side of the fan,and decrease preasure on the other side of the fan -requires more energy.
My test show's that that energy factor has doubled from the standard motor to the rotary transformer.
As the device is yet to be completed,any schematic would be incomplete aswell ! at this time.!
An induction motor is a lot less efficient than you think, the reason it comes out as 80-90% is because it IS a rotary transformer. Remember it is the transformer action that powers the rotor, all we do is power the field coils. We put the current in and it comes out the other side, I consider that current in the output of a transformer as a form of free energy as it is additional new current.
The induction motor is a potential overunity device.
Think about it
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.20, 23:36:15
It is both data and a measure of improvement.
The effective load is the fan itself.
To increase preasure on one side of the fan,and decrease preasure on the other side of the fan -requires more energy.
My test show's that that energy factor has doubled from the standard motor to the rotary transformer.
As the device is yet to be completed,any schematic would be incomplete aswell ! at this time.!
Depending on the motor type, sometimes a load improves efficiency. There is a sweet spot. Motors are sometimes designed to be run most efficiently with a certain slip angle, which does not occur except with the right loading.
Sorry for stating this if it is already known to you.
Which class and type of motor are you using?
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#Specifying_an_electric_motor
tinman,
Why is the fan blade so small in this test? Where is the original fan blade for the high efficiency (HE) fan? Is it a lot larger in diameter?
Assuming that the HE fan is running at 86% efficiency in your test might be an error. As ION mentioned, you may need to have the correct designed-for load on it before it can attain that 86%.
I would suggest another test with the original HE fan blade on both motors.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.20, 15:28:07
Some figures from the above video.
Standard 86% efficient motor
36 watts for 1340 RPM = 37.22 Rev's per watt
Rotary transformer in loop mode
26.4 watts for 2055 RPM = 77.84 Rev's per watt.
Exciting stuff! I want to congratulate you, Tinman!
One way to test for delta-E > 1 (as defined on the other thread), would be to:
1. Measure input power using a power meter.
2. Use the rotating shaft to drive a generator (and measure its power output across a load)
3. OR use the rotating shaft, geared down, to lift a mass. The energy output is then Eout = mgh (very straightforward; except you will lose some energy in the gearing down).
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.02.21, 00:32:20
tinman,
Why is the fan blade so small in this test? Where is the original fan blade for the high efficiency (HE) fan? Is it a lot larger in diameter?
Assuming that the HE fan is running at 86% efficiency in your test might be an error. As ION mentioned, you may need to have the correct designed-for load on it before it can attain that 86%.
I would suggest another test with the original HE fan blade on both motors.
If I were to fit the larger fan to the rotary transformer, I would have to bore the center out- it would no longer fit back on the original motor shaft
As stated on my video, the larger fan draws more current- this would be the case on both motors
I would then need to gear the rotary transformer down aswell- if we are to compare apples to apples
This was just a test to show a difference between the two setups
You must also remember that there is only one secondary coil on the rotary transformer at the moment- the second coil will only improve the efficiency further
This video was not to show anything fantastic, but more my progress so far.
Let me get to the end of the build, wich I will then carry out a prony brake test on the device to determon watts in to watts out.
But for now I welcome all comments and thoughts along the way
Cheers
Thanks for the clarifications, Tinman -- more POWER to you!
I've set up a residential power meter in my basement lab for measuring input power with such systems (120V, 220V can be used also with some mods). Here's the vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-Eaul77Bb0&feature=youtu.be
Quote from: ION on 2013.02.21, 00:08:52
Depending on the motor type, sometimes a load improves efficiency. There is a sweet spot. Motors are sometimes designed to be run most efficiently with a certain slip angle, which does not occur except with the right loading.
Sorry for stating this if it is already known to you.
Which class and type of motor are you using?
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor#Specifying_an_electric_motor
Sorry ION,i should have mentioned this in the post or video.
Thanks for the link,but i am quite at home with electric motor configuration's
The house fan motor is a Squirrel-cage induction motor.
The rotary transformer started out as a universal motor or series wound motor,with a 2 pole stator.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.02.21, 00:32:20
tinman,
Why is the fan blade so small in this test? Where is the original fan blade for the high efficiency (HE) fan? Is it a lot larger in diameter?
Assuming that the HE fan is running at 86% efficiency in your test might be an error. As ION mentioned, you may need to have the correct designed-for load on it before it can attain that 86%.
I would suggest another test with the original HE fan blade on both motors.
Do not be confused with size here,as both fan blades almost do the same amount of work.
The small fan has 7 blades at a very steep angle,and is designed to shif a large amount of air over a small area(it is from a thermo fan setup)
The large fan has 3 blade's of a shallow angle,that is designed to shift air at a lower speed over a larger area.
But to be fair and in the name of reserch,i have carried out the same test with the large fan blade on both devices.
The one thing to remember when you watch the video is that the efficiency of the rotary transformer is lower than that of the last test.
This is due to the fact that i have to run the rotary transformer in reverse (switch polarity)so as the fan blade runs in the same direction as the house fan motor dose.
The brush timeing is not set right to run in this direction,nor can i move the brushes around enough in the right direction to get the timeing right for for this direction of rotation.
This is because the housing bearing blocks are in the way.
But we have run the test reguardless
I will ofcourse post the link to the video as soon as it is uploaded.
Here is the same test,but carried out with the large fan as Poynt99 suggested.
The efficiency of the rotary transformer is down,as i had to reverse the rotation direction-so as to rotate in the same direction as the house fan motor.
The brush timeing is not set to run in the reverse direction-something to keep in mind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szpJ97M58G4
Its my job to ask the dumb questions
sorry
When you say "had to reverse rotation"
do you mean the motor rotation is backwards of your previous run to accommadate the fan?
why can't you flip the blade around and leave the motor rotation and timing issue aside?
Nice weld job ,you have a good eye for balance!
and your movie making is superb ... nice clear and fun to watch [even scary with the weld test at speed scenario O0]
Either you have uncovered some Gross negligence in your country's motor rating system
or you have something here that could get a nice prize [Nobel even......]
BTW
It has come to our attention that folks are harvesting money from the efforts of researchers on these forums
Kickstarter and similar orgs with the best of intentions are paying people for concepts or prototypes they showcase and some nefarious types are stealing and posting things that are not theirs.for financial gain .
of course some will breathe a sigh of relief as they go the patent route ........
however this "WILL" be dealt with at the root..........
make an announcement at anyplace you post this publicly ,
However
I suspect a very strong Push back is heading towards the orgs that unknowingly subsidize these crooks or men of low moral standards.
thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.02.21, 15:53:40
Its my job to ask the dumb questions
sorry
When you say "had to reverse rotation"
do you mean the motor rotation is backwards of your previous run to accommadate the fan?
why can't you flip the blade around and leave the motor rotation and timing issue aside?
Nice weld job ,you have a good eye for balance!
and your movie making is superb ... nice clear and fun to watch [even scary with the weld test at speed scenario O0]
Either you have uncovered some Gross negligence in your country's motor rating system
or you have something here that could get a nice prize [Nobel even......]
BTW
It has come to our attention that folks are harvesting money from the efforts of researchers on these forums
Kickstarter and similar orgs with the best of intentions are paying people for concepts or prototypes they showcase and some nefarious types are stealing and posting things that are not theirs.for financial gain .
of course some will breathe a sigh of relief as they go the patent route ........
however this "WILL" be dealt with at the root..........
make an announcement at anyplace you post this publicly ,
However
I suspect a very strong Push back is heading towards the orgs that unknowingly subsidize these crooks or men of low moral standards.
thx
Chet
Hi Ramset
I could indeed turn the fan around-so as the leading edge was the same as the house fan setup.
But i reversed the direction insted so as the fan is pushing the air away from the motor-to keep in line with the house fan.
Remember that by turning the fan around ,dosnt change the direction of air flow,but only the leading edge of the fan blade.
Now come's the process of elliminating error's that could be within the test.
As the fan is no where near cavitational speed-we can eliminate that from any error's that may be being made here.
The two that stand out are the DMM reading's,and the fact that(as you stated) the efficiency rateing of the fan motor is way out.
So now i have to get the second winding on,and start the process of eliminating error's.
Then ofcourse the prony brake test to confirm numbers we have seen so far.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.21, 15:08:50
Here is the same test,but carried out with the large fan as Poynt99 suggested.
The efficiency of the rotary transformer is down,as i had to reverse the rotation direction-so as to rotate in the same direction as the house fan motor.
The brush timeing is not set to run in the reverse direction-something to keep in mind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szpJ97M58G4
Excellent work, Tinman. Thanks for taking these measurements and showing results.
Are you still running on 24V, rectified AC? (22.22V per your latest vid.)
If so, how sure are you that Pinput = Vin * Ain? RMS measurements?
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2013.02.22, 14:55:55
Excellent work, Tinman. Thanks for taking these measurements and showing results.
Are you still running on 24V, rectified AC? (22.22V per your latest vid.)
If so, how sure are you that Pinput = Vin * Ain? RMS measurements?
Hi PhysicsProf
My scope says that the p/p voltage is about 38 volt's,and the DMM says RMS voltage is 22.22 volts.
As far as amp's go's,i have found in other test useing both low and high frequency's that the DMM dose a preaty good job at averaging the current.
I think i have a smaller 24 volt transformer some where ,which i would think wouldnt have as many losses as the large transformer.
This way i could get a bit closer to actual watts useing the watt meter.
What would be handy right now is a variac transformer,as 24 volts may not be the best voltage for this setup.
Might even have a go at makeing my own.
Much more testing to do yet,and i still have yet to wind the second coil on the stator-which will only increase efficiency!! hopefuly !!
And yes-im still useing rectified ac at 24 volt's.
OK - thanks for the response and for your cutting-edge (IMO) work.
I take it you need pulsed-DC? but could you possibly use a super-cap for the input energy? then E = 1/2CV^2 makes the Ein measurement straightforward.
People are using 555-circuits to go from battery to pulsed DC...
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2013.02.22, 17:22:26
OK - thanks for the response and for your cutting-edge (IMO) work.
I take it you need pulsed-DC? but could you possibly use a super-cap for the input energy? then E = 1/2CV^2 makes the Ein measurement straightforward.
People are using 555-circuits to go from battery to pulsed DC...
At the moment i am useing the rectified AC,this give you a half wave AC or a direct altinating current if you want to call it that.
Meaning that the direction of current flow is single,but the current altinates from 0 to 22.22 volts in this case.
I will be trying a DC pulse setup today,useing my PWM to run the motor.
This will allow for accurate input measurements,and also tell us if the system like pulsed DC.
As far as super cap's go-i have non that are any where near enough to the capacity or voltage needed to do that.
TM
So a control of sorts would be a good goal, If we can access the fan at a local "China mart"and do a run at another location to establish efficiency or better yet the blade?
Who here has 220- 240 at 50 hertz ?
itsu?
Poynt?
AC ?
Mike ?
Groundloop?
?
I am quite sure you have solutions to verify the "Work" end. t would be nice to pick up a 15 dollar fan and just do a quick run.
With out calibration a pony brake and such still has holes in the data ,A good control works wonders .
Just bouncing ideas around to validate ........
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.02.23, 15:24:26
TM
So a control of sorts would be a good goal, If we can access the fan at a local "China mart"and do a run at another location to establish efficiency or better yet the blade?
Who here has 220- 240 at 50 hertz ?
itsu?
Poynt?
AC ?
Mike ?
Groundloop?
?
I am quite sure you have solutions to verify the "Work" end. t would be nice to pick up a 15 dollar fan and just do a quick run.
With out calibration a pony brake and such still has holes in the data ,A good control works wonders .
Just bouncing ideas around to validate ........
Thx
Chet
I would like to know a good way to measure the efficiency of a motor that is accurate,as like you said-the prony brake test can give faulse measurement's.
Short of makeing a wind tunnel with preasure and flow gauges,im not sure?
I can only go on the star rateing of the fan as an efficiency figure for the house fan motor.
I tested the DMM's useing a 23 ohm 10 watt resistor today-they are spot on.
This can mean only two thing's
1-the efficiency rateing of the fan motor is way out
2-we have something worth looking into some more.
Here are some calculations from the last video.
But we are going to drop the efficiency of the house fan down to 80% insted of the 86% it should be-this is just to be on the safe side or the low side of efficiency.
House fan
Input is 33.34 watt's
RPM is 1107
Efficiency rateing on the motor 80%
1107/80 x 100= 1383.75.
1383.75 is the RPMs needed for that motor to be operating at 100% efficiency at the input wattage
This is confirmed by-1383.75 x 80% =1107
So 100% efficiency is 41.50 RPM per watt
This is done by dividing 1383.75 by 33.34 watt's.
Results from the rotary transformer in the last test.
watt consumption-28.57
RPM-1585
so RPM per watt is 1585/28.57=55.47.
As i now know that the DMM's are reading correctly,and the fan's output is linear to rpm(as we are no where near cavitational speed)my first asumption must be that the house fan's efficiency rating is way out.
You asked how to measure the efficiency of a motor that is accurate. I covered this a while back.
First step is to take two identical PM motor/ / generators, shafts coupled.
Run a voltage into the first and a load resistor on the second.
Compute the power in vs power out vs. rpm. Do this for various power input and various load resistors and at different speeds.
You have now approximately half the losses in one motor and half the losses in the generator.
You will have a load line family of curves for future reference.
Now you can use one of the PM motor/generators as a load for your device under test (DUT) since you now know very accurately it's efficiency as a generator. It's output and efficiency is now "calibrated" from the prior steps. It will be a shaft load for your DUT.
This takes a bit of work in the beginning, but is worth it as a tool for future use.
We can get into detail of the finer points if this interests you e.g. how to properly load the generator.
I Like this idea !!
And I love a good Cheap quality Tool,
Especially when we can collect good quality Data that is completely valid!![and Calibrated too].
@ION
Thanks for taking the time to help and Comment !!
@TM
Thank you for being so Darn good at what you do,and also for your "brutal Honesty" when it comes to manning up about
what is actually taking place on your bench!!
There are some wonderful possibilities in a group that can have the ability the will and the tools to really work thru a
project!
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ION on 2013.02.23, 16:36:45
You asked how to measure the efficiency of a motor that is accurate. I covered this a while back.
First step is to take two identical PM motor/ / generators, shafts coupled.
Run a voltage into the first and a load resistor on the second.
Compute the power in vs power out vs. rpm. Do this for various power input and various load resistors and at different speeds.
You have now approximately half the losses in one motor and half the losses in the generator.
You will have a load line family of curves for future reference.
Now you can use one of the PM motor/generators as a load for your device under test (DUT) since you now know very accurately it's efficiency as a generator. It's output and efficiency is now "calibrated" from the prior steps. It will be a shaft load for your DUT.
This takes a bit of work in the beginning, but is worth it as a tool for future use.
We can get into detail of the finer points if this interests you e.g. how to properly load the generator.
Hi ION
I do indeed have 3 x 24 volt PM motors that are identical.
The motors are 400 watt rated-out of electric scooters.
They are a brushed PM motor.
So i would be very interested in makeing one a test bed for load tests.
My immediate question would be this
Lets say that our generator is 80% efficient,and we have it coupled to the motor unloaded.
The motor is drawing say 20 watts to run the setup.
If we pull a 8 watt load from the generator,should this reflect as a 9.6 watt increase in power consumption on the prime mover?
This would make sence to me when looking at a gasoline generator.
Drawing say 3kw would need say a 4kw gas engine to do so.
Any load drawn from the generator requires a higher amount of power input from the prime mover.
So in theroy,any load i draw from the generator should reflect on the prime mover !+ the 20% loss!
Quote from: tinman on 2013.02.24, 01:46:02
Hi ION
I do indeed have 3 x 24 volt PM motors that are identical.
The motors are 400 watt rated-out of electric scooters.
They are a brushed PM motor.
So i would be very interested in makeing one a test bed for load tests.
My immediate question would be this
Lets say that our generator is 80% efficient,and we have it coupled to the motor unloaded.
The motor is drawing say 20 watts to run the setup.
If we pull a 8 watt load from the generator,should this reflect as a 9.6 watt increase in power consumption on the prime mover?
This would make sence to me when looking at a gasoline generator.
Drawing say 3kw would need say a 4kw gas engine to do so.
Any load drawn from the generator requires a higher amount of power input from the prime mover.
So in theroy,any load i draw from the generator should reflect on the prime mover !+ the 20% loss!
Correct, you will always need more power from your prime mover because of the losses in your generator.
Once you can quantify the losses of your scooter motor, you can hook it to any motor of similar size and use the scooter motor in generator mode as a variable brake with the advantage that you now can have a measurement of power (Voltage squared over the load resistance in ohms equals power in watts). You will also know the losses in the scooter motor so any additional loss is from the driving motor.
First step, lets hook two of those scooter motors together, run one from your power supply, load the other with a known value resistor and we can begin to find out the efficiency of these motors.
The power available in your load resistor can tell you much regarding the efficiency of your system.
Total power input= heating loss in driving motor+ Heating loss in braking motor + heating loss (power) in resistor.
Since a 24 volt 400 Watt motor will draw approximately 16.67 Amps, our load resistor will need to be:
At 400 Watts , 1.44 ohms
At 200 watts , 2.88 ohms
At 100 Watts, 5.76 ohms
At 50 Watts, 11.52 ohms
At 25 Watts, 23.04 ohms
Maybe start with a 10 ohm resistor of 60 watt capacity, it will make calculations easier.
Run your power supply up slowly and make power input readings at 6 volt intervals until you reach 24 volts.
Also record voltages across the 10 ohm resistor at each interval.
If possible record RPM's at each interval, it will come in handy later.
This is the calibration / quantification stage.
After this test we will see we have losses in each scooter motor, but can calculate the efficiency of each.
As an example lets say we are putting from our power supply into the drive motor 50 Watts or 24 volts at 2.083 amps.
But on our 10 ohm load resistor we are getting 20 Volts. This is equal to 40 Watts, so since the motors are identical we can roughly assume to be losing 5 Watts in each motor or 10% of our input power in each motor. Our motors are each then around 90% efficient at this loading.
Efficiency will change for higher loading, but we will have the data if we do the test.
Quote from: ION on 2013.02.24, 03:11:12
Correct, you will always need more power from your prime mover because of the losses in your generator.
Once you can quantify the losses of your scooter motor, you can hook it to any motor of similar size and use the scooter motor in generator mode as a variable brake with the advantage that you now can have a measurement of power (Voltage squared over the load resistance in ohms equals power in watts). You will also know the losses in the scooter motor so any additional loss is from the driving motor.
First step, lets hook two of those scooter motors together, run one from your power supply, load the other with a known value resistor and we can begin to find out the efficiency of these motors.
The power available in your load resistor can tell you much regarding the efficiency of your system.
Total power input= heating loss in driving motor+ Heating loss in braking motor + heating loss (power) in resistor.
Since a 24 volt 400 Watt motor will draw approximately 16.67 Amps, our load resistor will need to be:
At 400 Watts , 1.44 ohms
At 200 watts , 2.88 ohms
At 100 Watts, 5.76 ohms
At 50 Watts, 11.52 ohms
At 25 Watts, 23.04 ohms
Maybe start with a 10 ohm resistor of 60 watt capacity, it will make calculations easier.
Run your power supply up slowly and make power input readings at 6 volt intervals until you reach 24 volts.
Also record voltages across the 10 ohm resistor at each interval.
If possible record RPM's at each interval, it will come in handy later.
This is the calibration / quantification stage.
After this test we will see we have losses in each scooter motor, but can calculate the efficiency of each.
As an example lets say we are putting from our power supply into the drive motor 50 Watts or 24 volts at 2.083 amps.
But on our 10 ohm load resistor we are getting 20 Volts. This is equal to 40 Watts, so since the motors are identical we can roughly assume to be losing 5 Watts in each motor or 10% of our input power in each motor. Our motors are each then around 90% efficient at this loading.
Efficiency will change for higher loading, but we will have the data if we do the test.
Ok well my first problem is i dont have a variable power supply any more-as i fried it some time ago.
I do have a 20 amp PWM that i could put a large smoothing cap on the output.
As i live in the country,it means a 4 hour trip (there and back) to pick up a power supply.
I am building one at the moment,in the form of a low voltage variac.
I will start to build a test bed to bolt the two motors on,so as we can start these measurements.
But i must ask you this.
If i have the motor hooked to the generator,and draw6.5 watts from the generator-but only get an increase current draw to the prime mover of 4.8 watt's-what dose this mean?
Thanks for your help ION,and to all.
I have now included a PWM into the system.
It's frequency is 2KHz.
It is running from the 24 volt half wave AC.
So we now have created a 100Hz half wave AC that has 20 pulses in each wave.
Then we also have the comutator switching aswell.
In the video you will see that i have finaly been able to dump the high voltage spikes ontop of the pulsed AC wave,and almost eliminated all the pulse current within the AC wave.
I am yet to check the efficiency of the system with a load on the shaft,but will be doing that tomorow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X163_IilwHk
Quote from: ION on 2013.02.24, 03:11:12
Correct, you will always need more power from your prime mover because of the losses in your generator.
Once you can quantify the losses of your scooter motor, you can hook it to any motor of similar size and use the scooter motor in generator mode as a variable brake with the advantage that you now can have a measurement of power (Voltage squared over the load resistance in ohms equals power in watts). You will also know the losses in the scooter motor so any additional loss is from the driving motor.
First step, lets hook two of those scooter motors together, run one from your power supply, load the other with a known value resistor and we can begin to find out the efficiency of these motors.
The power available in your load resistor can tell you much regarding the efficiency of your system.
Total power input= heating loss in driving motor+ Heating loss in braking motor + heating loss (power) in resistor.
Since a 24 volt 400 Watt motor will draw approximately 16.67 Amps, our load resistor will need to be:
At 400 Watts , 1.44 ohms
At 200 watts , 2.88 ohms
At 100 Watts, 5.76 ohms
At 50 Watts, 11.52 ohms
At 25 Watts, 23.04 ohms
Maybe start with a 10 ohm resistor of 60 watt capacity, it will make calculations easier.
Run your power supply up slowly and make power input readings at 6 volt intervals until you reach 24 volts.
Also record voltages across the 10 ohm resistor at each interval.
If possible record RPM's at each interval, it will come in handy later.
This is the calibration / quantification stage.
After this test we will see we have losses in each scooter motor, but can calculate the efficiency of each.
As an example lets say we are putting from our power supply into the drive motor 50 Watts or 24 volts at 2.083 amps.
But on our 10 ohm load resistor we are getting 20 Volts. This is equal to 40 Watts, so since the motors are identical we can roughly assume to be losing 5 Watts in each motor or 10% of our input power in each motor. Our motors are each then around 90% efficient at this loading.
Efficiency will change for higher loading, but we will have the data if we do the test.
Hi ION
I have orded the drive coupling's,but all i could get was blank's-as they dont make one's with bore's less tha 12mm here-And i need 8mm.
So i will have to pop them in the lathe and bore the 8mm hole-but no problem there.
I have most of the resistors needed,but are only 10 watt resistor's-i am unable to find anyone who supply's the 60 watt resistors?-but im still looking.
In reguards to the DMM's on the input,i have checked there accuracy by removing the rotary transformer and placing a 23.6 ohm resistor across the output.
The meters read 22.3 volts and .942 amp,s
Ohms law says the resistence should be 23.67ohms.
This tells me that the DMM's are very close to being correct.
Is there another way to check to confirm this?
I also have the PWM in the system,so we can now go from 0 to 20 volt's-this PWM wont go any higher that 95% pulse width.
But this should enable us to get the measurements we need -i hope?
Brad
The values I specified don't have to be exact, as long as you can accurately measure what you have on hand. Then E^2/R does the rest.
They do require thermal stability so best to grossly oversize them so there is not too much heating and drift.
I fashion what I need from low drift Manganin wire. Nichrome can be used but it does drift with temperature.
50 watt resistors are standard. If you test at full power, you will need a 400 watt load.
Improvise with what you have on hand, series / parallel combinations.
Once we get started we can determine a course for future tests with various loads etc.
This is the first graph plot for the standart motor and generator setup.
The P/in watts is measured as follows.
Amp meter between FWBR(from transformer)and PWM. PWM frequency is 2kHz
Volt meter is across FWBR-set to DC-pulsed DC setting.Frequency is 100 HTz
DMM readings were confirmed useing a 23.6 ohm 20 watt resistor on P/out of the PWM-and are within .03 watts,using ohms law.
P/out is measured using the following method.
Negative from generator to negative on 1000uf 40 volt cap.
Positive of generator-through amp meter-to positive on cap.
In this test ,a 47ohm 10 watt resistor is placed across the cap as the load.
Volt meter is also across the cap.
The next test graph will be taken using a 23.6 ohm resister as the load.
Good work and nice graph Tinman ,
Overall efficiency seems rather low roughly 20 to 24 % depending on whether idle power is subtracted.
I suspect the rotational losses will increase slightly as RPM's are increased, so maybe a chart of power draw with no load on the generator at higher RPM's will reveal where the low efficiency at low loading is coming from.
As you start to approach 400 Watts, the power needed to satisfy rotational friction loss will be a smaller percentage of power required, so overall efficiency should go up.
So right now it takes approx. 5.7 Watts/2 in each motor just to spin up to 500 RPM, or roughly 2.85 Watts per motor.
Here is a drawing of how I would do it, Amp and Voltmeter post capacitors to prevent false readings.
Hi ION
Problem is,i cant have a cap on the input-as my other motor relies on the rectified wave form to opperate at it's best.
So i was trying to keep the power supply and meters all the same with both test setup's.
This way,even if the DMM's are out slightly-the error would remain the same in both test's.
This would mean that the graphing would still show a correct result between the two setup's-as all meter positions would remain the same.
We wont be going any where near 400 watt's,as the power supply setup i have wont allow it.
Also my rotary transformer wont do that many RPM with the power at the level we have.
I will plot a graph today with no load on the generator,and post here when done.
Here is how i have it set up at the moment-have modiffied your schematic.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.03.03, 01:53:18
Hi ION
Problem is,i cant have a cap on the input-as my other motor relies on the rectified wave form to opperate at it's best.
Ahh. ;) So if you have just smooth DC for input, there would be no 'transformer' action from the armature to the stator secondaries? Very nice. :D
Mags
And, if no transformer action, no special effects. O0
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on 2013.03.03, 02:45:34
And, if no transformer action, no special effects. O0
Mags
You got it Mag-no magnetc reversal of the secondary coil = no attraction to the next rotor field approaching the stator core.
The first graph is P/in with the generator open.
The second graph is with a 23.6 ohm load on the generator.
Hmm, this could be done with a pulse motor setup. Its sorta like a multi pulsed input to an Orbo, but the core is axial not toroid.
Good stuff Tin :D
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on 2013.03.03, 03:46:18
Hmm, this could be done with a pulse motor setup. Its sorta like a multi pulsed input to an Orbo, but the core is axial not toroid.
Good stuff Tin :D
Mags
Indeed it could-if set up right.
How it work's
Lets take two inductors(single wire wound, but just round ones as used in the ssg pulse motors)and face them at each other,with a 2mm gap between them.
We will call one the primary,and one the seconary.
Now if you send a current through the primary with the seconary close-we ofcourse get a backEMF,and the secondary will want tp move away from the primary(lenz force)
Now lets send a pulse of current through the primary-but with the seconary open.
Now we find that the secondary wants to be pulled toward the primary-due to both having steel core's (electromagnetic effect)
So what happens if we pulse the primary with a current,with the seconary open during this pulse-we get an attraction between the two,and no lenz force.
Now although the seconary was open,a magnetic field was still built up within the core.
What we do next is this-at the very same time the primary coil is switched off (become's open)we draw a current from the secondary coil as the magnetic field is collapsing around it.
We then once again get an attraction-but this time it is the primary coil being attracted to the secondary.
The end result is this-we can draw a current from the seconary,and at the very same time create a magnetic field that produces rotational force.
We created a curret without the lenz force effect.
We created an electromagnet without inputing any current into the coil-but by removing the current from the coil.
And we also reduce the P/in-as can be seen in the video bellow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6xRcSkPYn4
Impressive results Tinman.
I have nothing with motors, but nonetheless i can understand what is happening.
Great video series......
Regards Itsu
I suspect you'll be approaching an efficiency of 90% or so, real soon.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.03.03, 15:00:33
I suspect you'll be approaching an efficiency of 90% or so, real soon.
What give's you an indication of that poynt99 ?
Quote from: tinman on 2013.03.03, 15:33:02
What give's you an indication of that poynt99 ?
The efficiency to this point has been low as per your graphs. The latest video demonstrates what appears to be an increase in efficiency. I suspect as time goes on, n will approach 100%.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.03.03, 15:54:51
The efficiency to this point has been low as per your graphs. The latest video demonstrates what appears to be an increase in efficiency. I suspect as time goes on, n will approach 100%.
Ah -ok poynt99,i think there is a misunderstanding here.
The graphs you see are of two identical -off the shelf pm motors.
One is being used as a generator,the other the prime mover.
This is being done so as ION can help me work out the efficiency of the generator.
Once we have worked this out,i will then hook the rotary transformer to the generator,and graph the performance in the same way.
We can then work out the efficiency of the rotary transformer ,as we will know the efficiency of the generator.
If you go back one page in the thread,you will see what we are up to.
But the graphs above are not with the rotary transformer-they are with a stock motor.
OK, thanks for the explanation. My bad.
I do however believe that your transformer is less than 50% efficient without the secondary load, and will approach 90 or 100% as you tweak your added secondary(s).
Yes, the purpose of these tests is to characterize the motor / generator efficiencies by using two identical PM motors, shafts coupled.
Once efficiency at various RPM's and various loads are determined, we can divide the efficiency between the two devices so we know what our losses are.
Then one of the generators can be used as an electronic prony brake, as it will load the DUT according to the resistors it is loaded with.
This should be a fairly precise way to measure improvements in Tinmans rotary transformer project.
I doubt that the present motor generator setup will yield anything near 100% as we have losses attributed to each device.
Quote from: ION on 2013.03.03, 16:25:39
Yes, the purpose of these tests is to characterize the motor / generator efficiencies by using two identical PM motors, shafts coupled.
Once efficiency at various RPM's and various loads are determined, we can divide the efficiency between the two devices so we know what our losses are.
Then one of the generators can be used as an electronic prony brake, as it will load the DUT according to the resistors it is loaded with.
This should be a fairly precise way to measure improvements in Tinmans rotary transformer project.
I doubt that the present motor generator setup will yield anything near 100% as we have losses attributed to each device.
Hi ION
DO we have enough in those graphs to calculate efficiency of the generator?
Once we know the efficiency of the generator,we can the get the efficiency of the motor-although as a pair they will be way below 100%
If needed ,i can chart some more graph's with lower resistor values on the load.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.03.03, 16:37:26
Hi ION
DO we have enough in those graphs to calculate efficiency of the generator?
Once we know the efficiency of the generator,we can the get the efficiency of the motor-although as a pair they will be way below 100%
If needed ,i can chart some more graph's with lower resistor values on the load.
The efficiency would best be calculated with higher loading of the mo-gen test set. Right now the efficiency looks too low because the idle current is a big part of the throughput.
Something around a 10 ohm load would be better but still far below the ratings of the devices. The Y axis of your chart should be readjusted to 0 to 100 watts for this.
Tinman, as an experiment try wrapping about 100 turns of heavy duty wire around the motor case. have this coil in series with the motor. you want as low a resistance as possible, less than an ohm. Think of it like this, you are pre-saturating the iron core using the same power as you use to power the motor. The motor and transformer effects require a certain level of core saturation and saturation, if we can apply extra saturation at little loss, hence very low resistance, we get more from the de-saturation.
Our losses are twofold
1 Ohmic
2 Iron
We cant do much about the iron loss but the more functions we get using the same core the higher the overall efficiency.
Stargate did this with permanent magnets to get the core operating on the right part of the saturation curve but of course with permanent magnets you cant switch them off to increase recovery in the pulses.
TM
I would just like to point out one observation.
your graph above has 22 hits since this AM ,i have never looked ,Steve is driving I doubt he looked
I think there are others looking that do not belong to this Freedom group?
?
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.03.04, 01:45:53
TM
I would just like to point out one observation.
your graph above has 22 hits since this AM ,i have never looked ,Steve is driving I doubt he looked
I think there are others looking that do not belong to this Freedom group?
?
Thx
Chet
!! AGAIN ? !!
Well the only thing they will be seeing here at the moment is two ! off the shelf motors ! -one being calibrated as a generator.
But still.
I just want to make you aware that the agreement we have here is between "us" members.
If others are somehow coming in ??
I suggest at the very least a password change!!
Thx
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2013.03.04, 02:13:41
I just want to make you aware that the agreement we have here is between "us" members.
If others are somehow coming in ??
I suggest at the very least a password change!!
Thx
Chet
We've been hacked ?
Just when you think it's safe to go back into the water.
What do you mean Chet?
99
I will send an email.
thx
Chet
Attached is a photo of a special purpose motor generator test set just recently built for one of our customers.
It's purpose was to demonstrate loading and unloading of a motor, and detection / auto shutdown of unloaded system to save energy.
Quote from: ION on 2013.03.05, 16:56:33
Attached is a photo of a special purpose motor generator test set just recently built for one of our customers.
It's purpose was to demonstrate loading and unloading of a motor, and detection / auto shutdown of unloaded system to save energy.
Nice setup ION
Is this your handy work?
Nice work ION.
Well I looked at the graphs only once...just now.
Perhaps the forum updates the view count on each page load ? has the software been upgraded recently and this is a previously unknown side effect ?
That would explain the 15 views of the suitcase generators above.
Edit - except 37 views to 26 views wouldn't equate out anyway.
The suitcase generator looks superb btw, like a demo unit for conferences or part of a 'bug out bag' for energy.
Nothing more to add, just that it's all intriguing with the setup and finding the correct values of the stock motors is something i'd have had no clue about before this thread. :)
This suitcase demonstrator was built by my son for a client. I was consultant to the job and supplied some parts.
Since we are doing the motor / generator tests here I thought it would be of interest.
I had previously tested a tandem motor generator and posted the results on this forum, but can't seem to find it right now.
I'll have to look in my archives.
Quote from: mbrownn on 2013.03.03, 23:23:53
Tinman, as an experiment try wrapping about 100 turns of heavy duty wire around the motor case. have this coil in series with the motor. you want as low a resistance as possible, less than an ohm. Think of it like this, you are pre-saturating the iron core using the same power as you use to power the motor. The motor and transformer effects require a certain level of core saturation and saturation, if we can apply extra saturation at little loss, hence very low resistance, we get more from the de-saturation.
Our losses are twofold
1 Ohmic
2 Iron
We cant do much about the iron loss but the more functions we get using the same core the higher the overall efficiency.
Stargate did this with permanent magnets to get the core operating on the right part of the saturation curve but of course with permanent magnets you cant switch them off to increase recovery in the pulses.
I may have to give this a try,or even remove the section of core between the two coils-just like the slots in the lockridge device.
I managed to get the second coil wound and gave the rotary transformer a spin up over the weekend.It seems we have hit a bit of an unexpected snag.If i load one coil ,the rotor spins up and current input decreases(as per video's)-If i disconnect the first coil and load the second coil,the rotor speeds up and input current decreases (same effect as first coil).But if i load both coils,the current input decreases further-but the rotor slows down???.So by loading each coil individually,we get the effect we want,but if we load the coils at the same time ! although the current drop's further !we loose torque and rotor speed.At a guess,i think the magnetic flux from the output coils is traveling around the core and interfering with the other coils opperation-but all thoughts on this are welcome.I think i may have to cut the core section out between both output coils-as per the lockridge device?.
All the coils will interact unless you separate the circuits, very complex interactions.
With the setup I believe the Lockridge to be we have two separate magnetic circuits. The motor field coils actually supply no torque, it is the generator coils that are causing the motoring action. This way we have little or no BEMF in the motor coils and get a huge current draw so we have to drop the input voltage. All the "BEMF"is actually generated voltage in the generator coils.
The transformer action partially assists and partially opposes the generated voltage, the trick is to make it all assist the generated voltage.
Here is a drawing I modified to show what is happening.
A, B and the armature are all powered but in attraction. X X is how the case is split and C,D are the generator/transformer output coils. Without this 90 degree configuration there would be no motoring action.
Our output has been low on current but high on voltage but I believe this is because of the opposing action of the transformer for half the wave, otherwise out current could be considerable too.
Much of the voltage gain is given by the complex interaction in the armature and the fact that this voltage has now where to go until we fit recovery brushes.