The Lockridge device

Author Topic: The Lockridge device (Read 1411 times)

Topic Options

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #175 on: 2012-10-09, 01:23:01 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

OK. I took one of those heater motors. I put a 5/16 slot in between the magnet in side the case. I then turned by hand to check for cogging. By suprise the cogging effect had diminished by i would sai 50-60 percent. I connected it to a battery to check amp draw. That had reduced about 5 hundredths of an amp. So I took it apart again and made the slot just as wide as the magnet gap inside the case about 3/4 inch. This reduced the gogging just to about nothing.

The intersting part is that the whole case be comes magnefied , where as with out the slots theres only one spot on the out side of the case that has some magnetisim to it. So YOURE RIGHT it seperates in to 2 different circuits. That is a wealth of information in just those 2 little slots.

The magnetisim is stronger at the edge of the slots and quite strong. Like putting a magnet on a peice of iron.

ANYTHING ELSE I SHOULD CHECK FOR while Im on this small motor. Motor draw no mods was .24amps. Finished results was .16-.17 amps.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #176 on: 2012-10-09, 15:07:32 »
Newbie Posts: 246	Which motor is this? do you have a picture

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #177 on: 2012-10-09, 15:43:02 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-10-09, 15:07:32

Which motor is this? do you have a picture

This is just a regular 12 volt heater motor out of a vehicle used as a blower fan , blowing air across the heater core for warm air in side of your car. Size is about 3.5 inches wide x 5 inches long. The same type of motors are on the electric cooling fans for the cars radiator. The type i had on hand was for a chrysler product. These motors all have magnets inside for the feild poles.

No dnt have a picture will find one on the net and send you.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #178 on: 2012-10-09, 15:58:36 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2012-10-08, 15:07:10

Can you fellows recommend off-the-shelf high-efficiency motor and generator, for use in some tests I'd like to do? Power at around 100W or so would be fine, I don't need to get into the KW range for this pair for these tests, and I'd like to keep the costs down. Any help would be appreciated.

OOOps I missed a few posts sorry

If I was in the US I would get hold of one of these motor/generators that hiwater has, or just a four pole generator of that type. Generators tend to be higher efficiency than many motors although I understand these units are quite agricultural. Obviously if you can find a 1940 -1950 delco generator of the type used by Mr Lockridge that would be better.

If I am right, once we start to operate all the functions in the lockridge device the efficiency will rise with the improvement being greater in the least efficient devices however to reach "overunity" I think an efficient device must be better to start with.

If we are going to use a motor, find a four pole unit where you can remove any interpoles if they are fitted, Starter motors and golf cart motors often have very heavy windings and may have to be rewound. My best option here is a second hand golf cart motor that I may be able to buy for scrap price.

The motor is the generator and vice versa so no additional unit is required.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #179 on: 2012-10-09, 16:03:27 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: Hiwater on 2012-10-09, 15:43:02

This is just a regular 12 volt heater motor out of a vehicle used as a blower fan , blowing air across the heater core for warm air in side of your car. Size is about 3.5 inches wide x 5 inches long. The same type of motors are on the electric cooling fans for the cars radiator. The type i had on hand was for a chrysler product. These motors all have magnets inside for the feild poles.

No dnt have a picture will find one on the net and send you.

Ah ok.

Can you recommend the part number of a delco generator for Steve. I think it would be a four pole generator if there is one.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #180 on: 2012-10-09, 16:13:40 »
Newbie Posts: 246	It may be simpler to take a four pole generator or motor, remove two poles and leave two poles at 90 degrees to each other. Doing this would mean there is no need to split the case for the tests

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #181 on: 2012-10-10, 01:16:50 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-10-09, 16:13:40

It may be simpler to take a four pole generator or motor, remove two poles and leave two poles at 90 degrees to each other. Doing this would mean there is no need to split the case for the tests

Most of these gnerators can be ordered or gotten fro a salvage yard. They are either 6 or 12 volt delco Generators. the 12 volts say 12 volts on the tag and the tags are usually red and silver. The 6 volts have a black tag and are not marked 6 volt; There are about a 100 different delco numbers on these generators. There are 2 lengths of cases. The longer one is the one you need its 7 inches. The short case is 6 in. long.

There is plenty of them out there used or new. ebay has a lot of them. The shipping gets expensive though.

Ive been looking for a 4 pole delco generator. there might have been some on the older trucks. Either 6-12 volt. Older heavy equipment may have some on. old militery equipment also. those from military surplus might be 24 volts.

the best place would be a salvage yard. then you can get as many as you want in case any of the armatures are bad.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #182 on: 2012-10-10, 07:01:44 »
Newbie Posts: 246	Good information, what type of vehicle are they normally found on? Cars usually have an alternator which is of no use to us. There are almost no tractors here in the Philippines, that is what a carabao (water buffalo) is for.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #183 on: 2012-10-10, 14:44:55 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-10-10, 07:01:44

Good information, what type of vehicle are they normally found on? Cars usually have an alternator which is of no use to us. There are almost no tractors here in the Philippines, that is what a carabao (water buffalo) is for.

Alternators came out , around the mid 60s, I believe. Every one was driving at night with dim lights untill the alternator came out. THE DELCO GENERATORS, were on the General Motors Division vehicles. Most of the tractor did have generators at that time. many different makes. The ones i am accustomed to, that had delcos on were the shorter case ones.

There were some autolite, prestolite that had about the same style of gen on. Most of those armatures will fit the stock delco. Before the negative ground came out most were on the opposite side of the engine because were wound different. (ccw). The reason I put 1 cw-1ccw pole in the one gen Im working on.

As far back as I can remember late 40s- early to mid 60s vehicle had the style were looking for.

The earlier trucks did have a much bigger generator on, Like youwere talking a bout a 4 pole because rpm wasnt that fast. Like on the cars that have higher rpm which are the 2 pole. Like gen heads 1800 rpm and 2 pole 3600 rpm.

Hope this helps. The 4 pole one would be ideal if one could be found. More area inside to work with not so cramped. The motor coils would be ok, Then you could put in wider generator coils in. Then the slots would be easier to position, where they are needed.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #184 on: 2012-10-11, 00:15:46 »
Newbie Posts: 246	I don't think there is much chance of finding anything like that here so I will continue to look for a golf cart motor.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #185 on: 2012-10-13, 01:29:19 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

The person who came up with the lockridge must of had an IQ of 500. I did get a chance to work with the motor coils some today. For some reason I can get one to work. But then when I put the other one in the opposite side. It throws off the first one i put in.

So I took everything out and put in a little narrower motor coils. Which seems to help some. Right now I am still in the process of putting the coils in at a little less than 90 degrees. Just so it just rotates. I done each one by itself to get the right position. So I can connect them together tomorrow to see what happens.

I almost believe those slots in the case have to be in there when positioning the motor coils. But it hard to tell where to put them untill the motor coils are in the and working properly. When both motor coils are in, thay have a different effect than just one installed. That why each one has to be done seperate. Either the magnetisim in the feild pole or the armature changes the effect when both motor coils are in. Will try to get some more done on it tomorrow.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #186 on: 2012-10-13, 12:44:53 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

You could try it with just two field coils, one in the normal position which is the output coil and one in the 90 degree position which is the power coil. The power coil can be wired in parallel with the armature and when powered up should lock the motor, as they are in attraction. when you put a low resistance load on the output coil there should be a little movement of a few degrees under DC. The generator causes the motoring action. With two coils there would be no need for the splits in the case.

If we have this it partially proves the concept.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #187 on: 2012-10-14, 13:59:35 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Steve, If you are looking to experiment with a Lockridge type device and are prepared to do some rewinding I think we could prove a lot of the principals with a four pole car starter motor. I do not think it will be efficient enough to make self running but we may have a chance at getting a COP of greater than one if everything checks out ok.

In the absence of being able to get anything better this is what I will use.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #188 on: 2012-10-14, 15:56:20 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-10-14, 13:59:35

Steve, If you are looking to experiment with a Lockridge type device and are prepared to do some rewinding I think we could prove a lot of the principals with a four pole car starter motor. I do not think it will be efficient enough to make self running but we may have a chance at getting a COP of greater than one if everything checks out ok.

In the absence of being able to get anything better this is what I will use.

My apologies if im stepping here. Ive worked withe the starters mostly GM 12 volt. You can run these on 2 coils , but they have to be at 90 degrees. They wont work at using them at 180 degrees, because of the way the armature is wound. there is quite a lot of vibration because of the bushings. So i put a bearing on each end. Which makes them spin up nicely. I also put a flywheel on the starter drive end which works even better. theres a lot of power there to get it up to speed. It will coast for cclose to 2 minutes. The other i have with the flywheel coasts for 2min 43 seconds.

The weird part is when the flywheel gets to a certain speed all goes quiet around the machine. it can be felt out away from the machine about one and a half feet. It not from vibration being removed either, Because i balanced the flywheel with the rest of the machine.If i keep the power on it comes out of that mode. So now and then i run it trying to regulate the power to keep in that quiet zone trying to figure what goin on. it really is interesting to run when it does that. It just goes quiet you cant hardly hear the motor running the flywheel.

ive been trying to find a generator armature to fit in ti the starter case but havent yet. This is a good area to experiment with. I bellive it has a lot of merit and can tell us alot of the coil about the coils and their positioning.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #189 on: 2012-10-14, 23:14:03 »
Newbie Posts: 246	Quote from: Hiwater on 2012-10-14, 15:56:20 Ive worked withe the starters mostly GM 12 volt. You can run these on 2 coils , but they have to be at 90 degrees. They wont work at using them at 180 degrees, because of the way the armature is wound. Very interesting, what is the part number of this starter?

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #190 on: 2012-10-15, 01:22:54 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Quote from: mbrownn on 2012-10-14, 23:14:03

Very interesting, what is the part number of this starter?

these starters are relatively the same all the way back to the 1950s. at least two different armature sizes. lighter duty for the 6 cylinder and heavier duty for the V8s. One has thicker feild windings compared to the other one.

One has two input wires to the feild coils, the other has only one. The one with the 2 input wires, one wire goes to 2 feild poles and the other wire goes to the other two with the positive brush wires coming off between the (center)the sets of coils.

The other starter, has one input wire and is series wound, with the positive brushes coming off the end coil.

I would recommend the one with the two input wires. The ones I have are all rebuilt and have had a paper stuck to the case with the part no. on.
So i couldnt get a part number for you.most of the tags are gone or numbers unreadable. Ill call tomorrow and get you a part number and let you know.

mbrownn	Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #191 on: 2012-10-15, 13:07:30 »
Newbie Posts: 246	Thanks, once I know which it is I can look at the specs and see how suitable it is

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #192 on: 2012-10-15, 17:05:36 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

I sent you a PM on a link. I have a couple of numbers here. i believe these are the original numbers. (not rebuilt)

The 2 wire 1108769----1H-----17

The one wire 1107274---3----D---29 The first seven numbers are the most important ones. When they are rebuilt they take any case and put in there what they need and then put there own part number on it. Most of these starters fit up to late 80s and early 90s. Untill they started puttin smaller ones on and some with magnets inside. But the earlier ones are pretty much the same except the mounting bracket.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #193 on: 2012-10-16, 00:32:43 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: Hiwater on 2012-10-15, 17:05:36

I sent you a PM on a link. I have a couple of numbers here. i believe these are the original numbers.

Thanks for the info, from what I can tell they are fairly standard starters and there does not seem to be anything special about the windings in them. With one of these we would have to rewind all the coils but it isn't too difficult with the stator as the windings are removable. The problem with starters is that the windings are too heavy and have too small an inductance to make recovery successful. The other problem is that the brushes and bearings are so heavy duty that the friction is high, of course all this can be modified but it will take a little effort.

As the original Lockridge copy had #18 wire on the trifilar coil, I would use the same size for the field coils. Basically all we have to do is weigh one of the field windings and use the same weight of #18 wire for the power field windings and maybe the output windings just for experimental purposes.

I understand from Tesla that if we keep the weight of copper the same in all the windings of a transformer that they will interact more efficiently. This is something we tend not to do today.

For testing purposes we could try to use the standard armature winding but at some stage this too will have to be rewound. Most starters that I have looked at have an odd number of slots on the armature, we would prefer the number to be even, otherwise it will be out of balance the way we need to wind it but for now we will concentrate on the field windings.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #194 on: 2012-10-16, 02:45:34 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

From what i learned today. There is one heck of a transformer action. if I was doing it right. The other day when i was testing the coils, my battry was just about dead.
when using the rotery transformer with 2 diodes to the motor coil and spinning about 4-500 rpms. The generator coil will pull close to 20 amps. this with a heater motor connected across the 2 wires of the generator coil at about 39 volts.

It heats up pretty fast because it pulls 25 amps on the motor coil that way. This is just some quick tests i did this evening after i found out the battery needed charging with the motor coil in the stock position and the gen coil next to it in the direction of rotation.

So tomorrow I will put the motor coil at 90 degrees and put in the gen coil to see how that compares to what I did today. I want to see if the more load i put on the gen coil if the input amps go up. its been a tough day.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #195 on: 2012-10-16, 07:30:31 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

If you are using the setup I am suggesting, drawing more from the output will increase the input but once a certain point is reached the voltage on the output will drop.

It would be nice if you could post a picture so I could see.

I am having an interesting discussion with sucahyo on http://imhotepslabs.freeforums.org/post2329.html#p2329 I will copy and paste it here

Quote

mbrown

This device should, in theory, be able to run with the battery removed or replaced with another capacitor.

The gains are that of the inductive kickback supplying current flow in the motor and therefore additional torque just as in a motor run on PWM. Reusing/recycling the input and inductive kickback as in the Gray motor and the addition of the transformer output with the generated output (if this does indeed happen). This last part is in the patent for the dynomotor but as yet remains undocumented as far as proof. everything else is "normal/standard" electrical principals. The combination of all three is unique.

The efficiency improvements are the use of only one component to carry out all operations whereas we would normally use three. therefore there is only one Iron loss and not three, one bearing loss and not two and one heat loss and not three. BEMF is mitigated by moving it to the output coils by making a geometry change, again it is something that is known about but not applied to motors for some reason.

The method of translating the input voltage is unique and I will explain that in detail when the time comes but basically it is the fact that we charge a choke with a low power input, then disconnect it from the supply and use its inductive kickback to overcome the inductance of the motor. The energy in joules is conserved but the power in watts is magnified. I haven't explained it well but again it is standard accepted technology although not used in powering motors.

Geometry is the key to making all the functions work in unison instead of opposing each other.

Quote

sucahyo

Yes, agree that geometry is important.. The inductive kick back may leak out some zero point energy. This leak need attention to geometry.

I think working at the right amperage is important too.

I mention special capacitor design because Bedini mention that it may be required to obtain self sustaining run.

Keep in mind that copper without current act as drag, but not as much as copper with opposite current.

Good luck.

Quote

mbrown

Most detractors of these types of devices do not accept that there may be an energy input from another source and their eyes glaze over if you mention zero point. They do accept inductive kickback, although they cannot explain where the energy in it comes from, so I use the term they are used to without need to explain it.

Current is vital to motor operations and it is proven that this motoring does not consume current, but I don't make a big point of it because if the detractors thought about it they would deny it.

The type of capacitor may well be important but I am not at a stage to determine anything about it yet.

Yes, copper does cause some drag, especially with big wire sizes. Hopefully we will have sufficient power in out motor to make this insignificant.

Quote

sucahyo

Agree.

If you read harold aspden work, he mention that with ordinary science, we can get gain by utilizing the spesific saturation frame from the coil. We turn off the current before the coil reaching saturation, we turn on the coil before the saturation reach zero. pulse On duration matter the most, not the frequency. This is why core with slow saturation work better. Not sure how to detect saturation, maybe with scope.

In one of his pdf, he mention that the energy stored in coil exceed conventional wisdom. The key for this is layered iron and organic core. More layer is better.

Harold aspden is the consultant of Robert Adam, which obtain motor/circuit that produce heat exceeding normal and get electricity gain by utilizing the heat. Robert report that the heat is not originated from the transistor but manifest around it or something.

Quote

Mbrownn

Interesting, this is similar to what I am starting to test.

If you take two coils of identical inductance and resistance but one is physically larger than the other with a bigger iron core. the larger inductor has the largest amount of energy stored. This is talked about in the new Squires video.

If you are using an inductor to supply pulses into another coil from its inductive kickback, it has to contain a larger mass of iron than the second inductor. Also in this situation it is better to keep the first inductor saturated as there will be lower resistance. the first inductor will then provide sufficient voltage from its inductive kickback, at no extra cost, to overcome the secondary inductance and maintain the current. Energy is conserved but power is not, there is a gain in the power of the pulse.

So we can have 12v at 10A powering the first coil, keeping it in saturation. By periodically disconnecting it from the supply it can then give any voltage that may be required to maintain a 10A current in the the second inductor for a limited period.

Input 12 10A =120w

Output 120v 10A = 1200w

The duration of the first is 100% and the duration of the second is 10% so energy is conserved despite a power gain of 10x

As a motor only requires current we can now put 10A pulses into a motor from a 12v supply where normally we would need to pulse it with 120v to get 10 amps

If we now increase the amount of iron in the core by 10 times a saturated inductor could supply 1200W in theory. this needs to be tested because my instinct tells me it cannot.

Quote

sucahyo

How do you came into 120V and 10A at the same time?

I realize that if we measure it separately, my radiant charger output is 1000V and 200mili Amp. But if I measure it together on 1 ohm resistor it would be 0.5V 200mA or something.

Quote

mbrownn

We run 12v at 10A through a large coil until the core saturates then disconnect it from the supply. The inductive kickback is now fed into the motor, the inductive kickback will raise its voltage until it can flow 10a through the motor, regardless of impedance, for an instant and discharge the coil. So its 12v10amps into the choke coil and maybe 120v10A out. Energy is conserved but power isn't. The power in watts is x10 but the joules remain the same

An inductor will act like an infinite voltage source to try and produce a 10 amp flow until the input energy has been consumed, it is just like a capacitor will act like an infinite current source on a zero ohm resistance until it is discharged.

Quote

sucahyo

I see. 12V10amps in 10 second converted into 120V10Amp in 1 second?

Quote

mbrownn

Yes, energy is conserved but power is multiplied.

Ok you will say that there is no gain in energy and you are correct but look at it like this.

Input 12v at 1 A continuous. output 24v at 1A 50% duty cycle and feed that into a motor in pulses. The motor then has its own inductive kickback equal to the input power less losses. We are now pulsing our motor with 24w pulses and getting 24w inductive kickback. As long as we have current in the motor we have power, that is 24w continuous from a 12w input to the primary coil. In theory you could add more stages in a cascade to continue the gain.

This can only work if we pulse a coil with the inductive kickback from another coil. Does this sound like Tesla? Is that how the magnifying transmitter worked? I don't know but the theory is sound. Energy is conserved in the first coil as it is in the motor but power is not, It is multiplied. The energy in the whole system is also multiplied

This is the function of the trifilar coil on the lockridge.

Now collect the output current and power from the motor in a capacitor and use it to power the next motor pulse. In this case we can now have a 25% duty cycle on the trifilar coil giving 48w pulses to the motor with a 48w recovery that can be used again. If there were no losses this would be a COP of 4.

Now if we add the compensation/transformer function on the motor coils we have doubled it again to a potential cop of 8. Even with a typical universal motor efficiency of 35% we could be into overunity.

I know this is a lot to take in so I am happy to explain it over and over if we need to.

This Is a key part of the lockridge that I have not talked about on other forums.

The simplest way to prove this is to charge a capacitor through an inductor and diode all in series. If you use a 12v supply and your coil and capacitor are matched you will have nearly 24v in the capacitor after the charge. In fact any increase in voltage above the source proves the coil is adding to the system.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #196 on: 2012-10-17, 01:22:01 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

Lots to digest on that last post. Didnt get anything done today. Did find some longer feild poles for the motor coils. Im trying to get them as long as the armature laminations. Cant find any longer ones for the 2 gen coils. The more surface area on the feild pole , the better the induction would be I think.

I did read thru your last post, quite a lot to think over. But I believe its coming together.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #197 on: 2012-10-17, 06:29:33 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

What gives the magnetism is ampere turns, the size of the core determines the saturation of the iron based on the ampere turns. the surface area of the poles effects how much saturation there is plus the angle that the torque can act over.

For testing, we won't be driving the cores to saturation so the different size of core wont make a huge difference, its just the number of turns that we are more concerned with. When we begin the tuning I believe it will be important.

Im sure you can do the test I need with what you have. Put the armature and field coil in paralel then measure the amps and volts across it when it is running. The motor wont run unless there is a load on the output. then measure the volts and amps on the output. If the power field coil and the output has the same number of turns, the voltage on the output should be the same as the input less the voltage drop created by the ohmic resistance. If it is higher It proves that the transformer action and generator action is additive.

Your power supply wants to be a half wave rectified AC so that we get the transformer action. We will do the trifilar coil thing later, I just need to know if there is an addition of the two types of output. If the motor does not turn we will only have the transformer output.

Remember we are comparing the input field coil with the output field coil. The armature wants to be attracting the input field coil and in the position of magnetic lock, this is the opposite to what you would normally do. The output coil will be where you would normally have the power coil. Remove the two other coils as it makes it simpler to do.

Hiwater

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #198 on: 2012-10-18, 01:37:32 »

Full Member

Posts: 137

In your last post you said to put the motor coil in parallel with the armature. If I put one end of the motor coil to the positive brush and the other end to ground its a DEAD SHORT. If I put in series with the positive brush and the armature, Then it will work. Maybe explain this better to me. THANKS

But have run into a problem of having the motor coils the same size and number of winds. With the main motor coil at 90 degrees When putting in 2 coils the same it wont rotate one has to be cw and the other needs to be ccw wound. must be because of the spin above and below the neutral point or equater.

With the motor coil at 90 degrees and the other coil in the stock position, theres no transformer action. The 90 degree motor coil as I move it closer to the positive brush i start to get some transformer action, but then i have to move the gen coil over. But the one to one ratio dont do anything. Wont even raise the needle on the volt meter.

I have a sneaking suspicion one has to be on each side of the positive brush line thru the armature. The other day when I had good transformer action i had the motor coil in the stock position and the gen coil ahead of that with rotation Which had a real good transformer action.

One thing i did do today when I had the m-coil in at 90 degrees and the other coil in and they wouldnt rotate i slotted the case between the m-g coils then I could get it to rotate from the gen coil but it was ccw that how i figured out why you need that one wound the other way. Will recheck this tomorrow. Also will continuie moving the motor coil towards the brush and the gen coil away from the brush to see the effects.

Well this is what i did today, going to keep trying. let me know about that coil being in parallel to the armature. so that i can understand it better.

THANKS.

mbrownn

Re: The Lockridge device « Reply #199 on: 2012-10-18, 10:59:26 »

Newbie

Posts: 246

Quote from: Hiwater on 2012-10-18, 01:37:32

In your last post you said to put the motor coil in parallel with the armature. If I put one end of the motor coil to the positive brush and the other end to ground its a DEAD SHORT. If I put in series with the positive brush and the armature, Then it will work. Maybe explain this better to me. THANKS

But have run into a problem of having the motor coils the same size and number of winds. With the main motor coil at 90 degrees When putting in 2 coils the same it wont rotate one has to be cw and the other needs to be ccw wound. must be because of the spin above and below the neutral point or equater.

With the motor coil at 90 degrees and the other coil in the stock position, theres no transformer action. The 90 degree motor coil as I move it closer to the positive brush i start to get some transformer action, but then i have to move the gen coil over. But the one to one ratio dont do anything. Wont even raise the needle on the volt meter.

I have a sneaking suspicion one has to be on each side of the positive brush line thru the armature. The other day when I had good transformer action i had the motor coil in the stock position and the gen coil ahead of that with rotation Which had a real good transformer action.

One thing i did do today when I had the m-coil in at 90 degrees and the other coil in and they wouldnt rotate i slotted the case between the m-g coils then I could get it to rotate from the gen coil but it was ccw that how i figured out why you need that one wound the other way. Will recheck this tomorrow. Also will continuie moving the motor coil towards the brush and the gen coil away from the brush to see the effects.

Well this is what i did today, going to keep trying. let me know about that coil being in parallel to the armature. so that i can understand it better.

THANKS.

Are you using generator coils or motor coils, I suggest generator coils as these will have similar size wire to the armature (I think). yes it will draw a lot of amps and if these are starter coils it will be too much. You can put them in series with the armature but you need to measure the voltage across the stator coil as we are going to compare it with the output coil. Both the motor and the generator coils want to be the same so we get a direct comparison for the test.

It does not surprise me that it does not spin as the motor is in magnetic lock. We may have to narrow the shoe of the generator coil or move it closer to the motor coil to make it spin but before that we will try moving the position of the brushes to cause the rotation. This is a trial and error experiment but once we have the flux bending like it does in the FEM simulation we should have torque even though the power coil is directly in line with the armature.

You need AC, half wave rectified AC or pulsed DC to get a transformer action, NOT DC. If your still not getting it, check you have the polarity of the armature right because if it is bucking it will cancel it out.

Are you using two coil shoes in the stator or 4. If you have all four in the magnetic circuit the effect will be shorted unless the case is split. That is why I suggested 2 at this point.

Look at the FEMM simulation, Imagine you have taken the lower and right hand shoes off so that the flux has to pass through the generator coil.

If you slotted the case between the motor coil and the generator coil in the same magnetic that is wrong but maybe it started to turn because it forced the flux through 270 degrees of the armature case instead of 90.

Keep experimenting that is how you learn.

It does not matter if the motor is clockwise or counter clockwise, you can reverse polarity to change that. The fact you got a movement with the armature in magnetic lock is the first thing I am looking for, so this is great news