Dear All.
A recent post from OUR member Erfinder at OU. Com... http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg434014/#msg434014
He is suggesting we look a little deeper into the concept.
From my own knowledge of early DC machines the first thing that stands out as being unconventional, well at least by todays standard, is the position of the Brass mesh brushes. They are not placed on the Armature commutator in line with maximum flux generated by the field coils. Of course this may be due to the way they constructed Armatures back then, or is there something more subtle going on ?
I am attaching the Patent drawing I captured by screen shot and another of Tesla's patent drawings showing an even more unconventional Series wound machine.
Comments from the DC machine aficionados would be most welcome.
Cheers Grum.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.21, 13:30:19
Dear All.
A recent post from OUR member Erfinder at OU. Com... http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg434014/#msg434014
He is suggesting we look a little deeper into the concept.
From my own knowledge of early DC machines the first thing that stands out as being unconventional, well at least by todays standard, is the position of the Brass mesh brushes. They are not placed on the Armature commutator in line with maximum flux generated by the field coils. Of course this may be due to the way they constructed Armatures back then, or is there something more subtle going on ?
I am attaching the Patent drawing I captured by screen shot and another of Tesla's patent drawings showing an even more unconventional Series wound machine.
Comments from the DC machine aficionados would be most welcome.
Cheers Grum.
What do you see Grum? When you find an answer to that question can you please identify how and why the device and concept in the patent is superior to what you are working on?
Regards
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.22, 12:35:27
What do you see Grum? When you find an answer to that question can you please identify how and why the device and concept in the patent is superior to what you are working on?
Regards
Dear Erfinder.
Well for one, the inventor was my unsung hero Nikola Tesla !! :)
My own thoughts are that the so called Lockridge device is tied to this. Today we place brushes over two or three commutator segments to reduce arcing, from memory, Armature reaction ?? It is nigh on 40 years ago that I received my formal training on DC machines, the memory dims !!
I have often thought that picking up individual segments either side of the energised one would be a good idea, but that's as far as I got. I do remember reading that the machines that were built and marketed after WW 2 in the States were based on a Delco Remy Dynamo and when the brushes had worn down to useless, replacements fitted rendered the device inoperable, apparently the makers shaved the brushes originally !!
Well that's enough for today, perhaps other members might like to contribute ??
Cheers Grum.
Here's what I see, though haven't read the Patent itself yet.
In the lower right picture (2nd attachment), the motor has 1 direct connection from the power source, but the other ends in a bi-transformer !
It's wound with the Primary in the middle, then the secondary extends outward in both lateral directions...to thin air.
In the actual motor above it, there seems to be an air transfer, antenna, for that other side of the motor power.
What he would have, is a DC and AC machine, with wireless electricity all rolled into one.
No idea if that's right, but that's what it looks like :)
If it was air transfer, wireless electricity, then where would it get the other side of the needed transformer coil powering from ? unless that is produced by the rotation of the motor ???
I'd also expect round balloon designations to be attached to the antenna assemblies though. Unless, it's electrostatic and in which case the ends would be needle sharp.
Interesting
I would say air is being blown between plates P "capacitor!" and creating charge in the LC. The secondary is also an LC and collecting current from primary to drive the motor.
I think the motor is part of another patent of his!! it is a motor generator!! the whole concept is interesting, I would like to see the motor generator part to see how that was connected
regards
Mike 8)
I have my own perspective on things, I pride myself in that. Matters little to me whether I am right or wrong, in the end all that matters to me is that the idea I share be original, or as close to original as possible.
The circuit controller has several functions, assuming the circuit is operating in resonance in the true sense of therm, the opening of the switch places the output circuit in series resonance, and when its shorted, it places the output in parallel resonance, two forms of resonance operating sequentially....not one....this changes things, this changes everything.
Our preoccupations have the ability to keep us from experiencing that which should be be obvious.
Regards
Erfinder: As a newby here I find your insights to be most informative. May I ask, do you have a working device? I am not asking you to share those details as I understand the huge amount of time and energy it takes to get somewhere in the "ou" field. It is just a general question, Sir.
Quote from: Aking.21 on 2015.01.22, 20:13:12
Erfinder: As a newby here I find your insights to be most informative. May I ask, do you have a working device? I am not asking you to share those details as I understand the huge amount of time and energy it takes to get somewhere in the "ou" field. It is just a general question, Sir.
If you are asking whether I have an OU device, I don't look at things that way. In my opinion there must be a mechanism for the gain, it is not enough to simply say that a device is producing more out than in and use the meters as your proof. The source of the surplus must be identified. The direct answer to your question therefore is no. I do not have an OU device, I have principles which lead me to believe that the search for OU can only begin after unity has been attained.
Added this just in case you get the wrong idea. The aforementioned principles were observed and perfected in machines I have built. I can type, but I also put in work at the bench. I will not teach anyone how to build my devices. You have to do your own research. I am more than likely wrong anyway, deluded some have said...., I don't think so, but who in their right mind would consider themselves deluded?
I do have a kit that I will offer, got to be careful about that though, the last forum I offered it on banned me.....but not before locking the thread where I was discussing how I felt it operated.
Regards
momentum ;)
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.22, 15:52:08
Dear Erfinder.
Well for one, the inventor was my unsung hero Nikola Tesla !! :)
My own thoughts are that the so called Lockridge device is tied to this. Today we place brushes over two or three commutator segments to reduce arcing, from memory, Armature reaction ?? It is nigh on 40 years ago that I received my formal training on DC machines, the memory dims !!
I have often thought that picking up individual segments either side of the energised one would be a good idea, but that's as far as I got. I do remember reading that the machines that were built and marketed after WW 2 in the States were based on a Delco Remy Dynamo and when the brushes had worn down to useless, replacements fitted rendered the device inoperable, apparently the makers shaved the brushes originally !!
Well that's enough for today, perhaps other members might like to contribute ??
Cheers Grum.
Some confused thoughts.....
How a machine is wound determines whether it will function as a capacitance or an inductance, (why did I open this reply with that?) using the inductance as the energy storage, parasitic capacitance is not the coil capacitance, but you can believe it is if you want, and no I have no proof of my theory.
Probably why Tesla suggested winding coils with low resistance and high inductance. That bit about Tesla didn't make sense to me in the beginning, why in the hell would anyone want high inductance and low resistance? High inductance means high opposition to change in current , which equates to low consumption.....stupid when you think about it from the perspective of the circuits opposition to change in current. Brilliant however, when you think about it from the circuits opposition to change in potential, assuming one is in the position to get the circuit to think it has no inductance, and in those instances when it thinks such, current rises without opposition, and assuming the inductance or magnetic energy storage is seen as dielectric energy storage. There is a formula which leaves all with an open mind with the idea that capacitance in Farads and inductance in Henry are one and the same, the exact same variables are used to calculate them, namely....Volts, time in seconds, and amperage, fascinating stuff when you ask me, and you didn't.
The lockridge....not really sure if it existed or not. Not really sure it matters if it did or not. What we know is it didn't necessarily need to be a modified Bosch. We know that the device that Tesla demonstrated in his system of conversion lecture was what we would call a Dynamotor. We all are familiar with the patent associated with this machine. If not.....that's yet another device which should have its own thread.
Regards
Erfinder: Do you have a link to the Tesla convergence lecture please? Or can you remember which publication it was in?
Can you also specify the kit you have available?
Quote from: Aking.21 on 2015.01.22, 21:58:21
Can you also specify the kit you have available?
I'll take whatever banishing may come of this so Erfinder doesn't see a repeat.
Have a look at:
http://forgotten-genius.com/forgotten-genius_003.htm
As you can see, these are finely made machines (test fixtures) you can use to explore many of the topics Erfinder has spoke about.
Quote from: Aking.21 on 2015.01.22, 21:58:21
Erfinder: Do you have a link to the Tesla convergence lecture please? Or can you remember which publication it was in?
Can you also specify the kit you have available?
The lecture:
On Light And Other High Frequency Phenomena - http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1893-02-24.htm
The subject of interest:
On The Apparatus And Method Of Conversion - http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1893-02-24.htm#apparatus_and_method
Large blow up of the conversion diagaram - http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/articles/18930200/fig01.gif
Regrading the kit. There are three main things that should be understood from the very beginning.
First its expensive.
Second, its not an over unity machine until you see it as such.
Third, I don't do the numbers game (calculations), you will find that when you simply remove the systems opposition to change in current, everything goes from sinusoidal to rectangular, time constants go out the window, reactive can become real, no current flows through purely resistive loads, were as it does through reactive loads, the preference being capacitive. Where you going to place your meter......(not a question...)
If you can accept the above conditions you can approach me regarding a kit, otherwise its a waste of your time and mine. As you see on my website, I am trying to move in the direction of practical application, it is my goal to integrate all that I have found into retrofitted conventional machines. The funds I generate through the sale of a kit is directly invested in acquiring and converting a conventional machine, as these are prototypes as well, and there is very little room for error, all work is done by skilled professionals.
The dream of most is a drag-less generator, I can tell you that such a machine is easy to produce, however, the thing is......the drag, or better stated, the mechanism cloaked as drag is what makes a generator effective! You must find the mechanism behind the drag, comprehend it and then re-implement it in a way which is non destructive.
I have come to the understanding that the question of whether energy is transmitted longitudinally or transversely can be answered in the language of the layman, if and when we finally decided to have a "proper" look at how flux operates in a coil. When we do this we find that the flux is operating both longitudinally and transversely, and doing so simultaneously. As it stands, the latter dominates, when we acknowledged that both are operating, and the order of dominance is reversed, everything changes.
Regards
How would any FE forum have an issue with that.?
Are you adverse to showing a demonstration ?
Thx
Chet
Quote from: Chet K on 2015.01.23, 09:19:47
How would any FE forum have an issue with that.?
Are you adverse to showing a demonstration ?
Thx
Chet
Generally....no...
Where I have an issue is when folks who don't know what I'm doing express an opinion and or suggestion about whats taking place in my machines. These comments usually always lead to heated debates regarding how I am wrong, they are right, and everything just goes south from there, the attention to detail in my builds is high, these folks debating issues, most of them are just keyboard jockeys. My intention is not to convince anyone of anything, nor to be convinced by anyone. My desire is to simply share what I have found, in a manner which allows me to progress towards my goal, and to provide those who would like to participate with first hand experience if that be their wish.
What are you interested in seeing demonstrated?
Regards
Dear Matt.
I read a comment you made here . http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg44539#msg44539
This sparked a memory! My own formal training began some 40 years ago, my tutors, probably had 40 years experience, so we go a fair way back.
Now there IS a DC machine that can self destruct !! But for the life of me I can't remember which one. Series or Shunt wound ?
Something to do with the field resistance. My tutor had seen this himself and was quite graphic with his explanation.
Can anyone add to, or confirm my statement ?
Cheers Grum.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 09:45:04
Generally....no...
Where I have an issue is when folks who don't know what I'm doing express an opinion and or suggestion about whats taking place in my machines. These comments usually always lead to heated debates regarding how I am wrong, they are right, and everything just goes south from there, the attention to detail in my builds is high, these folks debating issues, most of them are just keyboard jockeys. My intention is not to convince anyone of anything, nor to be convinced by anyone. My desire is to simply share what I have found, in a manner which allows me to progress towards my goal, and to provide those who would like to participate with first hand experience if that be their wish.
What are you interested in seeing demonstrated?
Regards
Dear Erfinder.
NOT ON MY WATCH !!I am the moderator, you will comply !! :) No seriously, I and many others are here for one reason, well maybe two reasons, Ok there are many, but primarily, to learn. For myself I have a little knowledge on a lot of things. I am a practical guy, better with my hands than my head. So bring it on, let's learn and move forward together.
Cheers Grum.
Oh I see Grumage posted whilst I was plunking away
Erfinder
I know, as I reflect back over the years that what you say is absolutely true about
The opinions and science that would work their way to this page .
And for that reason I do not take this opportunity lightly. And yes I do see it as an opportunity to learn
And not to judge.
Perhaps because I have been a trained mechanic since a very young age,
And maintained that all my life regardless of the my trade.
A runaway condition begs my attention.....
I'd like to know why something needs to be governed or cannot be so easily controlled thru the
"Norm". And why additional input is not the reason for this "condition"
I suppose I have answered ,I would love to see that which you mention, not asking for explosions
Or flying pieces (quite certain you've seen that).
But perhaps Some other request from another member here?(besides seeing the runaway ....)
I truly hope we can see that
Thx
Chet
PS
And as Grum alluded to above at this forum your can be your own moderator (I believe he can moderate this thread since he started it
Or
Just open a thread in your bench section and viola...
Dear All.
It is a pity this guy was not a little more diligent in his P/IN P/OUT measurements !!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs8_appzFg0
This is a little taste of what Nikola Tesla passed on to us.
Now I have sat down and thought a little, the clouds of ages are thinning, I see a little more, Lap wound. Wave wound. These are two methods of armature winding !! I wonder which one Tesla employed, or another style, passed by and no longer used ??
Please see attached.
Cheers Grum.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.23, 13:40:10
No seriously, I and many others are here for one reason, well maybe two reasons, Ok there are many, but primarily, to learn.
Cheers Grum.
On re reading this it reminded me of this classic !! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WJXHY2OXGE
Cheers Grum.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 09:45:04
My desire is to simply share what I have found, in a manner which allows me to progress towards my goal, and to provide those who would like to participate with first hand experience if that be their wish.
What are you interested in seeing demonstrated?
A couple of things:
1. What Erfinder has set for his goal is very similar to my goal. That much I'm pretty certain of.
2. The demonstrations will provoke a flurry of creativity and imagination; this I am also certain of.
For me, having a clue of what to let go and what to keep is most important. Last night I fought desperately with coupling factors, mutual inductance, core reluctance and other "calculations" that took me straight to nowhere. All of this research is clearly an art, that can only be mastered with careful and guided experimentation. I think if people are open to it, Erfinder can assist in this effort greatly.
My particular focus leans more to transformers instead of actual rotating machines, though I do have an interest in M/G devices. I actually think the two have the same fundamental aspects, once understood. If a generator can be altered to become a self-running motor, likewise a transformer could have similar alterations. I may be mistaken, but at this point I really do not know. I'm more than happy to take whatever approach Erfinder recommends. Any logical explanation or conclusion I can learn from is helpful, especially if this new understanding open doors in ways previously blocked.
I for one am not going to argue with Erfinder. I will do the experiments, ask pertinent questions and be civil all the way, same as I would do for PhysicsProf or anyone else willing to teach me something of such great importance. To me this is a real opportunity, maybe once in a lifetime.
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
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.23, 11:30:54
Now there IS a DC machine that can self destruct !! But for the life of me I can't remember which one. Series or Shunt wound ?
Something to do with the field resistance. My tutor had seen this himself and was quite graphic with his explanation.
Can anyone add to, or confirm my statement ?
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.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 08:34:18
The lecture:
On Light And Other High Frequency Phenomena - http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1893-02-24.htm
I found this passage rather interesting...
Very high frequencies are of course not practicable with motors on account of the necessity of employing iron cores. But one may use sudden discharges of low frequency and thus obtain certain advantages of high-frequency currents without rendering the iron core entirely incapable of following the changes and without entailing a very great expenditure of energy in the core. I have found it quite practicable to operate with such low frequency disruptive discharges of condensers, alternating-current motors. A certain class of such motors which I advanced a few years ago, which contain closed secondary circuits, will rotate quite vigorously when the discharges are directed through the exciting coils. One reason that such a motor operates so well with these discharges is that the difference of phase between the primary and secondary currents is 90 degrees, which is generally not the case with harmonically rising and falling currents of low frequency. It might not be without interest to show an experiment with a simple motor of this kind, inasmuch as it is commonly thought that disruptive discharges are unsuitable for such purposes. The motor is illustrated in Fig. 18/182. It comprises a rather large iron core i with slots on the top into which are embedded thick copper washers c c. In proximity to the core is a freely-movable metal disc D. The core is provided with a primary exciting coil C1 the ends a and b of which are connected to the terminals of the secondary S of an ordinary transformer, the primary P of the latter being connected to an alternating distribution circuit or generator G of low or moderate frequency. The terminals of the secondary S are attached to a condenser C which discharges through an air gap d d which may be placed in series or shunt to the coil C1. When the conditions are properly chosen the disc D rotates with considerable effort and the iron core i does not get very perceptibly hot. With currents from a high-frequency alternator, on the contrary, the core gets rapidly hot and the disc rotates with a much smaller effort. To perform the experiment properly it should be first ascertained that the disc D is not set in rotation when the discharge is not occurring at d d. It is preferable to use a large iron core and a condenser of large capacity so as to bring the superimposed quicker oscillation to a very low pitch or to do away with it entirely. By observing certain elementary rules I have also found it practicable to operate ordinary series or shunt direct-current motors with such disruptive discharges, and this can be done with or without a return wire.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.22, 21:30:14
Probably why Tesla suggested winding coils with low resistance and high inductance. That bit about Tesla didn't make sense to me in the beginning, why in the hell would anyone want high inductance and low resistance? High inductance means high opposition to change in current , which equates to low consumption.....stupid when you think about it from the perspective of the circuits opposition to change in current.
No, Tesla knew what he was writing about.
When
this analysis (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692) is considered, it immediately becomes apparent that keeping the resistance low and inductance high, maximizes the L/R time constant in motor circuits and this means that less energy is wasted in the resistance and more energy is transferred to the magnetic field for a longer time.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 08:34:18
, no current flows through purely resistive loads,
Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary proof.
...but wait, you don't do proofs ;)
Quote from: lost_bro on 2015.01.24, 05:52:49
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
Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.24, 11:00:51
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. Bedini 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
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 12:05:28
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.
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 12:05:28
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...
Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.24, 06:52:56
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.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.24, 18:03:37
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.
Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.24, 18:30:34
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.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.24, 19:08:29
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
Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 19:11:20
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.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.24, 19:24:35
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.
Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.24, 19:24:35
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