The Lockridge device

Author Topic: The Lockridge device (Read 1280 times)

Topic Options

mbrownn

The Lockridge device « on: 2012-02-23, 02:07:10 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

As you may Know I have been working on this for a while and have started to develop ideas that may make it possible to use an off the shelf motor to perform the same function but I will keep this thread to the original concept. Over on the energetic forum John Bedini has asked if we have ant questions to ask the guy that handed him the device he has http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-32.html#post181090

I have posted some questions and some concepts, hoping John will respond so please take tile to read the thread to the end. I do hope John will take part in the discussion as I consider him a mentor. He also paid tribute to Armagdn03 http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181116

Here are the posts I made

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181133

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181183

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181189

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181193

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181265

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6792-lockridge-device-peter-lindemann-33.html#post181278

As I have several burned out universal motors so I will do a partial reconstruction to test what I have postulated and give you updates as I progress. Please feel free to comment both positively and negatively because it is the negative responses that I can learn from

PhysicsProf

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #1 on: 2012-02-23, 05:50:51 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member

Posts: 3215

I'm very interested in the Lockridge device, and I appreciate that you are experimenting along these lines.

1. Understanding that Bedini has such a device in hand, is he going to disclose -- "open source" -- with details so replications can take place? I hear he is going to do a "show and tell" at his upcoming conference (a big money-maker IMO), but is this an opportunity to provide details? or will he do so sooner than at the conference?

2. I would very much appreciate your comments on the So African development, new report out from Sterling who did some checking. Report is here: http://pesn.com/2012/02/22/9602042_South_African_Fuel-Free_Generator_Preparing_for_Market/
Here's an excerpt:

Quote

What I witnessed, along with three other scientists that I brought along -- all more qualified than myself -- was a 5 kW unit powered by four batteries, running for three hours continuous, driving a load of approximately 4 KW. According to the amp-hour rating of those batteries (102 Ah each), without being recharged from an external source, they should have lasted only 35 minutes before running down completely, no longer able to power the system.

The load was roughly 4 kW, comprised of:

- a two-burner stove, each burner consuming 1 kW (rated power according to manufacturer)
- a toaster that consumed 850 Watts (rated power)
- a pancake maker that consumes 1 kW (rated power)
- A 40-Watt fan (rated power)

The total output was as high as 5 kW, as long as the generator was turned at 3000 rpm, and there was sufficient load. (The generator only produces as much power as is used). One time we plugged in more load than 5 kW and it caused the system to shut down, as it should in that circumstance.

The system was comprised of a series-wound, brushed, DC motor (slightly modified) powered by one bank of two 12-Volt batteries (102 Ah) wired in series for a 24-Volt output. The company says the back-EMF is harvested into a second, identical battery bank, which is also wired in series. These two banks are periodically cycled, trading places in the circuit, and the net charge stays essentially the same, across both banks. The optimized cycling of power and storing of the back-EMF are all controlled by a proprietary circuit board and software developed by the inventor. The motor shaft is connected directly to the shaft of the AC generator, which spins at 3,000 rpm to produce 5 kW of power at 50 Hz, 220-V.

There was no external power cord or fuel going to the system. They lifted the table on which the system was housed, to show that no cords were run through the legs into the floor to a hidden power source. It is a closed system as far as physical devices are concerned.

We didn't have a way to detect whether or not electromagnetic radiation might be in use to power the system inductively or wirelessly; but we did see all around the room as we entered through the first floor underneath the lab, and we could see what was on the other side of three of the four walls, and we could see the roof as we approached the building, which didn't have anything on top of it. The unit was in the middle of the room, maybe 15 feet away from the fourth wall that we didn't look on the other side of.

Data

Here is the data we collected from the third test we ran: [snip]

Do you give this any credence at this time? If you were to choose an AC generator for about 5kW output, what would you suggest? (Something available at a reasonable cost in the US -- and elsewhere! -- would be helpful..)
(Comments from others welcomed, too, of course.)

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #2 on: 2012-02-23, 10:05:07 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2012-02-23, 05:50:51

I'm very interested in the Lockridge device, and I appreciate that you are experimenting along these lines.

1. Understanding that Bedini has such a device in hand, is he going to disclose -- "open source" -- with details so replications can take place? I hear he is going to do a "show and tell" at his upcoming conference (a big money-maker IMO), but is this an opportunity to provide details? or will he do so sooner than at the conference?

2. I would very much appreciate your comments on the So African development, new report out from Sterling who did some checking. Report is here: http://pesn.com/2012/02/22/9602042_South_African_Fuel-Free_Generator_Preparing_for_Market/
Here's an excerpt:

Do you give this any credence at this time? If you were to choose an AC generator for about 5kW output, what would you suggest? (Something available at a reasonable cost in the US -- and elsewhere! -- would be helpful..)
(Comments from others welcomed, too, of course.)

I don't know what JB's intentions are, just that he posted what he did on the forum. If he is going to do a "show and tell" at the conference I hope someone will tape it and let me have a copy, I would love to go myself but I am afraid that won't be possible. If they do make money, I don't have a problem with that, as everyone has to live and it is very difficult to make money in this field at this time. Are they charging a lot for the conference? I don't know but lets face it these people have put a lot of work in to get where they are and deserve some payback for their efforts. I hear John can be difficult to understand and isn't always the easiest to work with, he even admits to being grumpy. I think he is often misunderstood especially when he simplifies things so that we understand it. I really do hope that he will tell all he knows about this and other devices, lets face it with the way things are going we may have nothing to loose and that is my attitude.

On the south African thing. First of all I must say that I believe it is possible or I would not be working on these lines myself.

Sterling sounds very enthusiastic about what he was able to see and to my mind that is promising because he would look to see if there was an obvious scam.

The test results are meaningless and to some extent the loads too because we were not told enough information. For example, were all the loads run directly off the generator? or was there some interface between the generator, the batteries and the loads? I think most of us know it is relatively simple to oscillate a coil in an LC circuit at very high power off a small supply and a large heating element would get hot if it were wired into this circuit but how many watts of heat were being produced? etc. etc. So at this stage I am not going to make any judgements. If they have succeeded, I take my hat off to them and say congratulations and thankyou. For me it is not important about who gets there first, although whoever does deserves credit for it, its about getting it out.

I am interested to know what he means by "slightly modified motor" and what other main components are used such as coils and capacitor banks. The reason being, I believe such a device will include high voltage oscillations in a resonant circuit that is probably bi polar switched, Inductive kickback recovery and a means of translating high voltage into low voltage high current without killing the oscillation. I think I know how the switching must function in basic terms.

The reason for the control circuits is because, I believe, they are operating the motor below its normal operating range and it will be prone to stall in this condition. It would have been easier to just connect the generator to the grid and let the motor rise to the load, therefore no control needed.

As I said at the start, I believe it is possible and it could be done with two 100Ah batteries, so we should take it seriously and request more information. You never know, they might have it.

I have not spent a lot of time on looking at generators although I believe this will be an optimum size of generator. I looked more at the motors that could be used to power them such as the Agni motor and golf cart motors. I would look for low start-up torque and high efficiency.

What do you think of the posts I made about the original lockridge device?

PhysicsProf

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #3 on: 2012-02-25, 01:18:59 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member

Posts: 3215

Thanks for the response, Michael. And I'll let you fellas know if I hear anything particular from Sterling. He lives just six miles from my home...

Michael -- I've enjoyed your posts on the Lockridge device... not that I understand 100%. I don't. But it sounds like you're really getting into this. You wrote:

Quote

where do I tap the inductive kickback? ( I have placed diodes in the possible locations and not all will be used) the sim won't run it easily so only real testing will do and this takes time and money.

Yes, where do you " tap the inductive kickback?" Any more ideas on that? (and not just for the Lockridge -- seems the So African guys are (allegedly) doing this...)

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #4 on: 2012-02-25, 07:33:12 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

I sent Sterling an email asking him if he noticed any similarities to my work but I doubt he will look as he must receive many such emails and it will take time for him to read all the things I have done. I know it is possible and they may have it, but how would you recognize it if you don't know what to look for.

We always take inductive kickback from the negative side of the coil but when you effectively have many coils in series there are oscillations between them that can be tapped too.

Take a look at this test by Jean-Louis Naudin http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/bifvsbuk.htm These are all relevant to universal motors, especially if wave wound, but in the third one you should look at the response if you short out the disconnected coil, an amplification of the oscillations can be created. He does not show this. Please test this yourself. Now look at the second test here http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/biftest.htm The second test on this page is a condition we get on a wave wound rotor at the commutator. These are all inputs that I cannot simulate and this is what I am hinting at, how best to use them.

The inductive kickback can also be collected through a transformer and that is exactly what we have in a comutated wave wound rotor and also in a pair of powered and unpowered field coils. If we make it flow in the same direction as the generated power in in these field coils, we have a gain. That is two outputs for one input.

You might have noticed that this all relates to the original device and not to using an off the shelf motor. So now I have to get into winding and I should be able to start that next week and then build a test rig.

In work that some guys are doing on another thread there is proof that magnetism does not consume power but I don't think they have recognized this and while it does not appear that related to my work it actually is. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/10610-3-battery-generating-system.html running this as a test would be interesting. Measure the power consumed from the source and compare it with the mechanical power of the motor and the charge gained in the third battery. If the motor is above 70% efficient I bet we would have more out than in.

The whole principle is that producing a magnetic field does not itself consume power.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #5 on: 2012-02-25, 08:40:55 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

I need to explain more, the coils in a universal motor are in effect bucking coils if pulsed. so looking at test 4 here http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/bifvsbuk.htm L1 ans L2 represent the motor its just that we don't have a collector coil for the spike. In the lockridge device the two generator field coils are likely to act as the collector coils or L3.

In test three L1 is the armature and L3 the generator field coil with the armature discharging through the collector brushes. It is also possible for us to effectively short L2, the motor coils, with a diode allowing increased oscillations.

Now looking at this page http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/biftest.htm L1 and L2 represent adjacent coils on the armature and L3 the stator. This is when the commutator power brushes are offset from 180 degrees to cause pulsing again the spikes can be collected through the recovery brushes.

There is no wonder that they modified the motors to eliminate this, without collector brushes the arcing would have rapidly burned out the power brushes and commutator.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #6 on: 2012-02-25, 10:15:40 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-02-25, 07:33:12

In work that some guys are doing on another thread there is proof that magnetism does not consume power but I don't think they have recognized this and while it does not appear that related to my work it actually is. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/10610-3-battery-generating-system.html running this as a test would be interesting. Measure the power consumed from the source and compare it with the mechanical power of the motor and the charge gained in the third battery. If the motor is above 70% efficient I bet we would have more out than in.

The whole principle is that producing a magnetic field does not itself consume power.

I forgot to add if this is a pulse motor where we collect the inductive kickback

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #7 on: 2012-02-25, 20:38:33 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

Am reading along here )
Just a bit difficult to visualise some aspects, so it will be great to see your work in build photo's.
What i'm looking at mentally, is a starter motor, with a different ring than the standard commutator and that can be readily removed and adjusted. As to coils, i've always wondered if the Lockridge used 2 coils in the same physical space as 1, either side by side or more likely front and back. The reason would be because 1 of them would have a resistor and cap across to assist the normal dead spot of a changing magnetic field. The thinking comes from watching those magnet only motors with the V lines of magnets.

Regarding your comment of

Quote

there is proof that magnetism does not consume power but I don't think they have recognized this

I noted in this video, that no more input amperage was being used to magnetically spin 4 rotors, than with the rotation of a single rotor. The final speed was exactly the same *. It seems to corroborate your thought and I hope it is of use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9V8BEtqRbg

*the Hummer circuit I developed simply uses the fact that 50/60Hz mains sine wave oscillations will ride on the top of a DC adapter output. Spinning a rotor by hand to start and at an exact RPM, will run the motor...the coil performing just like a pulse motor being switched at that rate. The point being, that the rotor has to turn at an exact rate to run. Introducing the non powered free wheeling rotors one by one gave the video above.

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #8 on: 2012-02-26, 12:19:35 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: Slider2732 on 2012-02-25, 20:38:33

Am reading along here )
Just a bit difficult to visualise some aspects, so it will be great to see your work in build photo's.

I will do

Quote from: Slider2732 on 2012-02-25, 20:38:33

What i'm looking at mentally, is a starter motor, with a different ring than the standard commutator and that can be readily removed and adjusted. As to coils, i've always wondered if the Lockridge used 2 coils in the same physical space as 1, either side by side or more likely front and back. The reason would be because 1 of them would have a resistor and cap across to assist the normal dead spot of a changing magnetic field. The thinking comes from watching those magnet only motors with the V lines of magnets.

I have a starter motor, in unfortunately they have the wrong armature winding and are not built for efficiency although I will probably have a go at rewinding it at some point. Not sure what you mean about the resistor and cap can you explain better please?

Quote from: Slider2732 on 2012-02-25, 20:38:33

Regarding your comment of I noted in this video, that no more input amperage was being used to magnetically spin 4 rotors, than with the rotation of a single rotor. The final speed was exactly the same *. It seems to corroborate your thought and I hope it is of use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9V8BEtqRbg

Remember this is an open magnetic circuit, he could keep adding rotors but at some point he will see the current rise. This is not because the magnetism is drawing current but because the extra rotor magnets will start to saturate the core of his coil reducing the impedance.

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #9 on: 2012-02-27, 02:55:12 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

A standard LRC circuit...coil, resistor, cap.
In a traditional DC motor/generator with 3 windings at 120 degrees, 2 of them are standard. The 3rd is split in two, front and back but both connect to the same motor connections as though they were just 1 regular winding.
The rear one energises and collapses just like the other 2 coils did, but here we see a difference with the other half in front of it. That coil takes longer to unload its magnetic fields and collapse voltage. The short ringing available, because of the capacitor and resistor, allows for a smoothing or damping at an otherwise overly critical brush switching position.
in situations where full or nothing isn't the requirement (such as to have a motor speed limited because of a slow reaction by a transistor 'turn on' time, the signal would still be available after the point at which switching could be missed by microseconds. Load changes, speed changes etc could be less timing critical.
With regard to those V motors with the gate problems - such a system may allow a rotor to at least be less sticky, at that traditionally troublesome gate spot.
So, probably not relevant, but that's an explanation of the thought

Btw, I noted the 'he'...that was one of my vids, was great fun as a simple experiment

Something similar was actually practical as a motor method for R/C planes some while back. One regular 6mm coreless motor with a magnet on the end, spun between two 'dummy' motors. The 'dummy' ones were cylinder neos with pins through as axles and had propellers on the ends. Such that, the spinning of the middle actual motor rotated the two outer ones and in sync. A situation of a 'motor out' or one turning slower than the other couldn't happen.

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #10 on: 2012-02-27, 06:10:29 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Slider, I have never seen a motor generator like that, can you post a link?

If you are interested in doing some tests, I have just seen a video that shows how to wind a wave wound 2 pole armature, It's not mine but shows the basic layout for two poles. The instruction begins 2.44 into the video. He also points out one problem with some wave configurations ie. opposing current.

This pattern will be suitable for testing the commutator configuration, and interactions between the coils. Notice how he splits the coil for balance, It could be improved slightly by winding the two halves of the coil in adjacent slots on the rotor as this will narrow the pole a little but doing this also has the downside of halving the number of coils you can fit which will increase ripple magnitude. You could overlap the coils if you co not totally fill the slots but this may cause differing impedance's as the coils would be wound bigger on the ones that overlap. The speed may also be twice as fast as it allows more turns and or bigger wire. Remember we need very low resistance. In the end all these options need to be tested. http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=Q9CLtlkl6fM

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #11 on: 2012-02-27, 10:11:53 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

The split coil motor is only a vision of the mind....at the moment. It's part of my interest in this whole Lockridge thing, to discover and learn more about configurations.

It's a good video.you linked to, anything like that is always of interest for radio controlled projects

There are a few vehicles made last year that could be testbeds for different winds. Traction and speed needing to come from very simple tough arrangements in model cars.

Hey, let me post this, speaking of visions, but personally it holds similar intrigue to the Lockridge.
This motor was in a dream (yes that's why I haven't mentioned it on public forums LOL). It was running and I sincerely hope you can make sense of it or may have seen it somewhere. I presume i've seen it before and the mind got it to run.
It was brushed, but used what is deemed to be a spark gap separately to brushes. All was set in the late 19th century and the motor was tabletop sized.
The contacts in the middle of the rotor had screw threads on, which means presumably they were movable, could be used to tune. The spark, I would imagine, would act as a flash short or was the motor generating the spark ?
What I found very interesting, was that it had a starting handle ! The handle wasn't moving in the dream, which would mean a slip clutch type of connection. I'm really interested in whether the battery connections were input or output !
The small boxes within the circuit were made of a polished wood, they would seem to be capacitors. Perhaps they're not, Leyden jars probably suiting that timeframe.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/slider27/100_0057-2.jpg

The Lockridge device

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #12 on: 2012-02-27, 11:39:43 »
Newbie Posts: 246	It is true that some old generators used to have adjusters on the commutators back in the days of Tesla and before and these generators did have coils arranged it the way you show http://www.techfestival.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/generator1.jpg Of course it could be from a movie like Frankenstein because those sets were how people imagined Tesla's labs to be

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #13 on: 2012-02-27, 19:08:17 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

WOW

That pic is really very close !
I'm not much of a movie buff, though can easily see that a subliminal input may have gone on at any time in the past.
When I drew it out, it looked like a brushless motor with 'bits on' lol. Thanks for finding that.

Kinda makes one wonder about finding a split coil motor now, perhaps in Doc Browns lab from Back To The Future

But related..here is a quote from your good self:

Quote

Frequency is a double edged sward that can work for us and against us. As it takes time for current to rise in a coil we need the on time to be as long as possible to allow enough current to flow to make the motor turn but if this time is too long the energy that is recovered from the inductive kickback is reduced in comparison to the input. Once we reach a certain frequency the maximum supplied current is inversely proportional to the frequency and this limits our motor current if we allow our inductive kickback to dissipate to zero. Also as frequency rises, the period of time the inductive kickback lasts becomes greater on proportion to the input we provide.

It makes sense that we maximize this so that if we have a motor that is 50% powered by us and 50% powered by the inductive kickback we have just doubled our efficiency.

Sounds like the split coil idea may have a furtherment direction !
People talk of stators with each tooth being individual and being a whole element as a pole. What if we cut the stator in half, to give an adjustable offset ?
The thought also arises to make each tooth L shaped, allowing for the "on time to be as long as possible", but adjustable, such that the L can become a 'T' shape when moved across the traditional tooth face.

Either or both sides of each tooth end piece bar (which would create the 'T') could be wound in a repeated tooth pattern, like we have Star and Delta say, to facilitate the switching time characteristics required. The fields would then be less reliant on switching circuitry, they would 'naturally' rise and fall due to the lagging and advancement of the 'T' shape.
If the motor has adjustable 'T' sections, using the split mentioned, then alignments become tunable.
For a starter motor or generator, the case could be split and a piece inserted, to increase the total length by around an inch and allow the extra assembly to be fitted.
If we wired such pieces bifilar to the tooth windings, then, well it could be very interesting, in the way that a bifilar coil outperforms a single winding..

Found this very interesting just now too, the lost Bob Teal interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj7oD8JG5xU

« Last Edit: 2012-02-27, 20:51:57 by Slider2732 »

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #14 on: 2012-02-28, 14:47:09 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

when we wind the armature as in the video I linked to above, we need to keep the resistance low but get as many turns on as we can I am planning on #22 wire which should give me around 60 turns and around 0.1 ohm. We will need the same amount of turns on one side of the universal motor stator and this works out at about 0.13 ohms as the coil has slightly larger dimensions to get the wire in. The other stator winding need to be about 2.75 times the amount of turns so I will put 3 times as many on because it is easier to remove turns than add them.

Hopefully I will have this done in the next week

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #15 on: 2012-02-29, 12:22:07 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

This is the Lockridge circuit I will be using with the 2 pole universal motor, http://www.falstad.com/circuit/#%24+1+1.0E-6+5.459815003314424+40+5.0+50%0A178+560+432+592+432+0+2+2.0E-9+-5.53E-322+0.05+100000.0+0.02+20.0%0Av+560+464+560+480+0+2+600.0+5.0+5.0+0.0+0.5%0AT+704+384+752+416+0+0.01+1.0+3.768138727056976+3.7681387270569733+0.35%0Ar+704+416+704+432+0+0.1%0Ar+752+416+752+432+0+0.1%0A178+800+432+848+432+0+2+2.0E-9+-5.53E-322+0.05+100000.0+0.02+20.0%0Aw+560+480+800+480+0%0Aw+560+464+800+464+0%0Av+704+448+704+432+0+0+40.0+4.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0Av+752+448+752+432+0+0+40.0+4.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0Aw+800+384+752+384+0%0Aw+704+448+656+448+0%0Aw+656+448+656+432+0%0Aw+656+432+560+432+0%0Aw+752+448+800+448+0%0Aw+800+448+800+432+0%0AT+704+512+752+544+0+0.0050+2.75+7.5362774541147965+-4.068900567303419+0.35%0Aw+512+512+672+512+0%0Aw+928+304+560+304+0%0Aw+512+304+512+416+0%0Aw+864+352+864+400+0%0Aw+864+352+416+352+0%0Aw+704+384+560+384+0%0Ar+672+512+704+512+0+0.13%0Ar+752+512+800+512+0+0.357%0Av+672+544+704+544+0+0+40.0+8.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0Av+800+544+752+544+0+0+40.0+33.0+0.0+0.0+0.5%0Aw+800+512+1008+512+0%0Aw+1008+224+320+224+0%0Aw+800+592+320+592+0%0Aw+320+592+320+416+0%0Ar+272+416+320+416+0+100.0%0Ad+272+368+320+368+1+0.805904783%0Av+208+416+208+368+0+0+40.0+14.4+0.0+0.0+0.5%0As+320+224+320+368+0+0+false%0Ad+928+448+928+304+1+0.805904783%0Aw+848+448+848+464+0%0Aw+848+448+928+448+0%0Aw+848+400+864+400+0%0Aw+704+384+704+368+0%0Aw+704+368+752+368+0%0Aw+752+368+752+384+0%0Aw+752+448+704+448+0%0Aw+384+368+592+368+0%0Aw+592+416+512+416+0%0Aw+512+416+512+512+0%0Ad+416+416+416+352+1+0.805904783%0As+208+416+272+416+0+1+false%0As+208+368+272+368+0+1+false%0Aw+1008+512+1008+224+0%0Aw+672+544+416+544+0%0Aw+416+544+416+416+0%0Ac+320+368+320+416+0+5.0E-4+31.07726511418358%0A181+176+512+176+272+0+300.0000000005227+15.0+30.0+0.0040+0.0040%0As+176+272+320+368+0+1+false%0Aw+176+512+320+416+0%0Aw+800+544+800+592+0%0AT+384+144+416+160+0+0.0010+1.0+-0.0013788238549987675+0.0+0.999%0Aw+336+368+336+144+0%0Aw+336+144+384+144+0%0Aw+384+176+384+368+0%0Aw+336+368+320+368+0%0Aw+416+176+448+176+0%0AT+480+144+512+176+0+0.0010+1.0+0.0+0.0037275688124380757+0.999%0Aw+512+304+512+176+0%0Aw+512+144+560+144+0%0Aw+560+144+560+304+0%0Aw+448+176+480+176+0%0Ad+416+80+448+48+1+0.805904783%0Ad+480+80+448+48+1+0.805904783%0Ad+448+112+416+80+1+0.805904783%0Ad+448+112+480+80+1+0.805904783%0Aw+416+80+416+144+0%0Aw+480+144+480+80+0%0Aw+448+112+1104+112+0%0Aw+1104+112+1104+624+0%0Aw+1104+624+320+624+0%0Aw+320+624+320+592+0%0Aw+448+48+320+48+0%0Aw+320+48+320+224+0%0Aw+320+416+416+416+0%0As+336+368+384+368+0+0+false%0As+512+304+560+304+0+0+false%0Ao+43+64+0+33+28.63890391847496+18.32889850782398+0+-1%0Ao+10+64+0+289+8.749002899132048+11.198723710889022+1+-1%0Ao+26+64+1+291+261.87124863169134+9.765625000000001E-155+2+-1%0Ao+26+64+0+289+18.707220957835556+5.986310706507378+2+-1%0Ao+33+64+1+291+5.83992399055641E-5+9.765625000000001E-205+3+-1%0Ao+17+64+0+289+0.9175488853876983+9.395700586370031+4+-1%0Ao+49+64+0+35+149.65776766268445+5.986310706507378+4+-1%0Ao+51+64+0+35+74.82888383134222+11.972621413014757+4+-1%0Ao+52+64+0+291+74.82888383134222+11.972621413014757+5+-1%0Ao+52+64+1+291+320.0+9.765625E-5+5+-1%0Ao+53+64+1+35+7.62939453125E-5+9.765625E-5+6+-1%0Ao+24+64+1+35+10.0+9.765625E-5+7+-1%0Ao+23+64+1+35+10.0+9.765625E-5+7+-1%0Ao+3+64+1+35+2.5+9.765625E-5+7+-1%0Ao+4+64+1+35+2.5+9.765625E-5+7+-1%0A Although the two stator coils are at opposite poles they are shown as a transformer in the circuit.

Graph 1 = input current
Graph 2 = Recovery current
Graph 3 = Generator output
Graph 4 = Battery power
Graph 5 = Motor current
Graph 6 = Capacitor voltage current and power
Graph 7 = External load
Graph 8 = Resistance losses

The circuit is showing overunity when you compare input power with generator output, why? Because the recovery is powering the motor for half the time just as in PWM plus some more interesting effects I will detail later. PWM has been used for many years to improve the efficiency of motors, in some conditions, almost doubling the efficiency. Nothing new here.

At the same time we are generating and of course the generating power has to be less than the motor power. Our goal is to maximise the reactive power and generate at a rate that is above the input and below the combined input and reactive power So why have we been unable to create overunity motor generators with ease

1 The efficiency of modern motors is low, this is because we build in resistance to prevent a motor burning out too quickly and of course using thinner wire makes the motor smaller and cheaper.

2 We are told it is impossible.

Our next gain in this system is because we do not have the additional friction that we would get with an external generator with its own bearings. To add to this we do not get the additional iron losses that would be generated in an external generator because the cores have already been saturated by the motor function.

The next gain is the transformer effect. When we input the power it will not only create the magnetic field which powers the motor, it will induce a current in the generator in exactly the same way as happens in a transformer and exactly the same thing happens on the coil collapse. This is because while ever the magnetic field is rising or falling a current is induced in the second winding of a transformer. Because of this we cannot allow the current to ramp up as we do in PWM or the rate of change in the transformer effect is reduced.

Now we have had 2 very significant gains on the original power put into the motor or a potential COP of 4. Of course due to resistance and other losses our true figure will be somewhat less.

What can we expect using a universal motor? An off the shelf universal motor runs at about 35% efficient on AC and maybe 45% on DC so it would be reasonable to assume that we will get an efficiency of somewhere in between these two figures. and the pulsing has a potential to almost double that. The increase in efficiency on DC is in part due to reduced Iron losses as the iron does not have to switch from one polarity to the other. This is also true of PWM motors, again nothing new here.

The transformer effect has two benefits, not only providing motor power but it lowers the impedance of the secondary coil allowing more current to flow from the generated output, in fact it works as a negative resistance increasing the generated power.

Our down side comes by the fact that the pole of our motor is not sweeping past the generator coil, it is in fact only moving a few degrees. I expect that because of this we may get poor generation.

As you can see there are many positive effects in this setup but the combination of the negative effects and poor efficiency will likely mean that this motor will not be in overunity and will not run itself. I have chosen to reduce the resistance of the coils to mitigate this somewhat but still expect results that are less than what we want.

This experiment is not likely to be an absolute failure, we will be able to monitor voltages, currents and gains and losses giving us a better understanding of what we need to do to succeed. If we are able to do that I will consider it a success.

What I already know is that we will need a more efficient motor to start with if we are to succeed.

Comments please

PhysicsProf

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #16 on: 2012-02-29, 15:45:17 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member

Posts: 3215

Mike --

"What I already know is that we will need a more efficient motor to start with if we are to succeed."

A while back, I purchased some inexpensive DC motors used in model airplanes -- back to Slider's realm here!

Now this is a far cry from the power needed for the motors you are discussing, yet the efficiency is probably very high. Made in Japan IIRC. You may consider going this route -- for tests, anyway.

Meanwhile, I made some progress yesterday with the sonic boiler... Great working with you guys! We'll breakthrough "the barrier" one of these days.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #17 on: 2012-02-29, 16:43:06 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

To use this method you have to use a universal type motor, permanent magnet motors won't work because you don't have the transformer effects.

To do it with PM motors it is a different approach which I am still working on but controlling it is a problem, the slightest change in load and any gains disappear The other problem is how to turn the gain into motive power without killing it. All I have managed to do is create a gain in heat, maybe I should attach it to your boiler

BTW I made a few errors in the component values and pulse width in the circuit I posted, I had been altering things to see what effect it may have.

I purchased the #22 wire today and started to prepare the commutator for bigger wire although I haven't found any good brush holders yet. I don't want to do a botch job like I did last time, it works out costly in the end and set me back a couple of months. I will keep looking until I find something.

I think a breakthrough with the original Lockridge has been made already, we just have to prove it now. To me its a breakthrough, Its all about reuse and recycle and turning an unwanted side effect into an advantage. I want to squeeze every last joule of energy out of that inductive kickback because that is what comes for free as does the magnetic field that it produces.

The power we are running in the motor is very big when compared to the load we can run off it. I believe the lockridge was probably running at 1.2Kw and only giving up to 300w output, so with a 100w motor I wont be getting much

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #18 on: 2012-03-07, 14:35:53 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

I have just finished winding my rotor for the Lockridge prototype I am building so I thought I would post a few pics for you to look at.

There are 6 coils wound on this rotor and each coil is connected only to two segments of the commutator set at 180 degrees apart. Note that there is a blank segment between each live segment. It is wound with #22 wire and each coil has 30 turns which is around 12milli Henries if I got my maths right. The resistance is considerably less than 1 ohm. It was quite difficult to get all those turns in and they will have to be secured with epoxy before it is run to prevent it flying apart.

Hope the links work, Its the first time I have done this.

https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=a04023352770e252&resid=A04023352770E252!211&parid=A04023352770E252!210&authkey=!ANwaRAWG5YrJQX0
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=a04023352770e252&resid=A04023352770E252!212&parid=A04023352770E252!210&authkey=!AN11oPZz_WL9yHM
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=a04023352770e252&resid=A04023352770E252!213&parid=A04023352770E252!210&authkey=!AHlmTfe2iraSA7Y
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=a04023352770e252&resid=A04023352770E252!214&parid=A04023352770E252!210&authkey=!AEsBeSRsaDY84_I

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #19 on: 2012-03-07, 15:00:35 »
Newbie Posts: 246	The links didn't work so lets try this https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=a04023352770e252&resid=A04023352770E252!210&parid=A04023352770E252!119&authkey=!AP_Obl1yX4P7tJs

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #20 on: 2012-03-07, 15:10:49 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

The links don't work but if you copy and past the whole line into your address bar it should work, let me know if it does not

The Lockridge device

IMG_0029.JPG (1032.3 kB, 2560x1920 - viewed 51 times.)

The Lockridge device

IMG_0028.JPG (979.35 kB, 2560x1920 - viewed 42 times.)

The Lockridge device

IMG_0026.JPG (930.55 kB, 2560x1920 - viewed 38 times.)

The Lockridge device

IMG_0009.JPG (1137.63 kB, 2560x1920 - viewed 38 times.)

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #21 on: 2012-03-07, 23:39:51 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

Lookin' good

Bet you can't wait to fire it up. Epoxy should be fine, as i'm sure you know. Windings held with superglue tend to be eaten over time, when the glue warms and the chemicals are released. Have bust a couple of R/C self wound brushless motors like that

For uploads, I just use the space here and take directly from the camera or desktop. EF forum has a woeful space limit, but here seems fine.
In the 'Additional options' section when posting.

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

Slider2732

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #22 on: 2012-03-08, 05:56:31 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.

You got me thinking, with that winding shown above.
A friend of mine, who I haven't seen for a year or so, brought over a spare part from the Lexus dealership where he works. That was last year. He wondered if I wanted the motor. The assembly, was from the rear boot/trunk/assembly at the back of a new Lexus car. I put the box in the shed and thought about a wind turbine or something for the future.
Well, dragged it out tonight and removed the motor section (geek me used a selfmade 1.5V AA battery to 2W mains lightbulb inverter, to see in the shed lol). The brushes are part of the main assembly, but i'm intending to use my own brush system anyway.

Made by Denso (Nippon Denso ?)
12V, made in 2006. Unfortunately there are a lot of details missing from the lightly paint transferred details section.
It's only about 6" total length, so isn't any form of power house setup.
But, it's wound with 22 gauge and looks a lot like your motor above, at least initially.
The 2 magnets on the part housing, shown in the pic below, are seemingly neodymium. Very strong, unexpectedly so. Presumably they are barium cobalt or some such though. Anyway, i'm intending to try electromagnetics on this thing, with the rotor housed vertically - there is an excellent ball bearing mounted in the back of it, on which to balance. At the front is a ring bearing, which I can put a non ferrous tuning fork type of thing under. It then ends up vertically mounted and relatively easy to dismantle to try things.
It looks like it was only used for running in the motor, the assembly it was attached to still has new greasing around it.

So, Mike, I might be able to help out somewhere with tests or arrangements or something. Just let me know

The Lockridge device

100_0032.JPG (64.2 kB, 640x480 - viewed 9 times.)

« Last Edit: 2012-03-08, 06:22:17 by Slider2732 »

---------------------------

ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #23 on: 2012-03-08, 08:48:55 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Unfortunately the field windings are an integral part of how the Lockridge works but there is another device that works on the same principal you could make. Its Tesla too, are you interested? you will have to rewind the rotor but yours looks big enough to do it with. Claimed cop of 2.7 in the latest patent. the thing is as always everything isn't in the patent so people don't know how it works but now I do. The end of big oil is in sight.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #24 on: 2012-03-08, 15:23:29 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

The information I am about to give is theoretical, I would like you to keep in this group only until we have a working device, I hope you will all respect that.

To understand what a Lockridge device is we need to look at all its functions.

The motor function is well understood but I have come to the conclusion that little or no power is converted to magnetism and that magnetism is a free byproduct of passing a current through a wire. This has no effect on the function of the Lockridge device other than the current causes magnetism and it does not matter where the current comes from. It may become a factor if we use a three battery, Tesla style, power supply.

Inductive Kickback is a function used in PWM to improve efficiency in DC motors and is one of the key requirements of a Lockridge device. This area alone has not been able to increase efficiency enough for us to create a self running device although in theory it should be possible. Inductive kickback gives us a second current in the motor that is in the same direction as the applied current. This current also powers a forward motion in a motor, If there were no losses in a motor, the inductive kickback would be equal to the applied current and so the COP would be 2

The transformer action is a key requirement of the Lockridge device. We know that in an ideal transformer, 100% of the power passed into a transformer in the form of AC or Pulsed DC, can be recovered from the secondary winding. Normally the magnetic forces are held within the core and not used for any other purpose but In a lockridge these magnetic forces are used to power the motor. In a series wound universal motor these forces are cancelled out in a way that no transformer action can occur giving a benefit to the motor function. In other versions of the universal motor it is used to smooth out or flatten the power and speed characteristics, especially under PWM. In a Lockridge device this transformer action is channeled into a second set of field windings where we can draw off the power. The higher the power we draw from these windings the more power we draw from the source, this increases the current flow and so increases the motor action. Now we have an electrical output from the secondary windings equal to the input, less losses, plus a motor function directly proportional to the current. If loading the motor also increases power on the transformer this will also increase the transformer output. This would give us a situation where the more current we draw from the second windings the more power we get in the motor. It remains to be seen if this gives a gain and so tests will have to be done to see if this is the case. This is one of the tests I intend to do with the motor I am building. In the original Lockridge device this was the reason the frame had to be split lengthways, if it were not split there would be a canceling of the effect. If this does give the gain of two outputs for one input again we have a COP of 2 and 2x2 = 4

Generator functions are well documented but if the generator coils output in the same direction as the transformer action we have two outputs for one input. i.e our motor is able to power the generator in a normal way plus the transformer action.

Efficiency. This has been the reason why we cannot make a self running device with PWM on a motor and a generator attached to it. Our losses consisted of two parts friction, one in the motor and one in the generator, two parts iron, one in the motor and one in the generator. The ohmic losses will be the same as will other losses. In a Lockridge device we have only one set of bearings and no additional radial or axial loads so we have effectively halved this loss. This also applies for the Iron losses as the cores will have been saturated by the motor action. If we also take into consideration the transformer action which also has iron losses we can see that our iron loss will be in effect one third of three separate devices. This may not be a gain in terms of power but is a significant gain in terms of efficiency.

Our Universal motor may only be 35% efficient and maybe a little over 42% on DC but PWM will take that up to 84% at best. The transformer action cannot have any iron losses as this has already been taken into account with the motor losses so should be close to zero. This would give us another 100% less ohmic losses or around 184% at best. The generated output will have no friction losses although it will have additional iron losses as it opposes the collapse of the magnetic field. Assuming we have good geometry of the motor and generator we will have another 84% minus this unknown iron loss and ohmic loss. Because we are in effect using a triangle wave in the motor our iron loss cannot be more than half that of the motor and this additional loss may even reduce the iron losses of the motor on the next pulse but let us assume it is half that of the motor. This would mean that we have 96% of 84% or slightly over 80% generated power, 184 + 80 = 264% or a COP of 2.64 less ohmic losses and the friction of the extra brushes.

Please comment $:-\$