Note: If you are not at all familiar with basic electronics, you might find it easier to understand this chapter if you read chapter 12 first.
There are three categories of pulsed system and we will consider each in turn. These are drive-pulsed systems, energy-tapping pulsed systems and gravity free-energy pulsing systems. Here we will look at systems where an electrical pulse is used to cause the device to operate by creating a temporary magnetic field caused by electric current flowing through a coil or “electromagnet” as it is often called. Many of these systems are rather subtle in the way that they operate. One very well-known example of this is
The Adams Motor. The late Robert Adams, an electrical engineer of New Zealand designed and built an electric motor using permanent magnets on the rotor and pulsed electromagnets on the frame of the motor. He found that the output from his motor exceeded the input power by a large margin (800%).
The diagram of his motor intended to show the basic operating principle is shown here:
If a motor is built like this, then it will most certainly work but it will never reach 100% efficiency let alone exceeding the 100% mark. It is only with a specific configuration which is hardly ever publicised that high performance figures can be achieved. While Robert has shown several different configurations, in order to avoid confusion I will describe and explain just one of them. I am indebted to several of Robert's friends and colleagues for the following information and I should like to express my thanks to them for their help and support in bringing you this information.
First and foremost, high performance can only be achieved with the clever use of power collection coils. These coils need to be positioned accurately and their power collection restricted to just a very short arc of operation by connecting them to, and disconnecting them from, the output circuit at just the right instant so that the back EMF generated when the current draw stops, actually contributes to the drive of the rotor, speeding it on it's way and raising the overall efficiency of the motor/generator as a whole.
Next, the shape of the magnets used is important as the length to width proportion of the magnet alters the pattern of it's magnetic fields. In direct opposition to the diagram shown above, the magnets need to be much longer than their width (or in the case of cylindrical magnets, much longer than their diameter).
Further, a good deal of experimentation has shown that the size and shape of the electromagnets and pick-up coils has a major influence on the performance. The cross-sectional area of the core of the pick-up coils should be four times that of the cross-sectional area of the permanent magnets in the rotor. The reverse is true for the cores of the drive coils as their cores should have a cross-sectional area of just one quarter of the rotor magnet cross-sectional area.
Another point which is almost never mentioned is the fact that big circuit gains will not be achieved unless the drive voltage is high. The minimum should be 48 volts but the higher the voltage, the greater the energy gain, so voltages in the 120 volts (rectified US mains voltage) to 230 volts (rectified mains voltage elsewhere) should be considered. Neodymium magnets are not recommended for drive voltages under 120 volts.
This is one of Robert's test circuits:
Notice that the cores of the "generator" pick-up coils are very much wider than the cores of the drive coils. Also notice the proportions of the magnets where the length is much greater than the width or diameter. The four generator windings are mounted on a single disc allowing them to be moved through an angle to find the optimum operating position before being locked in position and the two drive coils are mounted separately and held clear of the disc. Notice also that the power pick-up coils are much wider compared to their length than the drive coils are. This is a practical feature which is explained in greater detail later.
The DC input is shown passing through Robert's custom-made contactor switch which is mounted directly on the shaft of the motor/generator. This is a mechanical switch which allows an adjustable On / Off ratio, which is known as the "Mark/Space Ratio" or, if the "On" period is of particular interest, the "Duty Cycle". Robert Adams indicates that when the motor is running and has been adjusted to it's optimum performance, then the Mark/Space ratio should be adjusted to minimise the On period and ideally get it down to about 25% so that for three quarters of the time, the input power is actually switched off. There are various ways of achieving this switching while still having a very sharp turn on and turn off of the power.
Robert considered mechanical switching of the drive current to be a very good option although he was not opposed to using the contact to power a transistor to do the actual switching and so reduce the current through the mechanical contacts by a major factor. His reasons for his preference for mechanical switching are that it gives very sharp switching, needs no electrical power to make it operate and it allows current to flow in both directions. The current flow in two directions is important because Robert produced various ways of getting the motor to feed current back into the driving battery, allowing it to drive the motor for long periods without lowering its voltage hardly at all. His preferred method of switching is shown here:
This switching gear operates as follows: The timing disk is bolted securely to the drive shaft of the motor and its position is set so that the electrical switch-on occurs when the rotor magnet is exactly aligned with the drive coil core. Adjustment of that timing is done by loosening the locking nut, rotating the disc very slightly and clamping the disc in position again. A spring washer is used to keep the assembly tight when the device is running. The disc has a star-shaped piece of copper sheet set into its surface and two silver-tipped, copper arm "brushes" slide across the surface of the copper star.
One of these two brushes is fixed in position and slides across the copper star near the drive shaft, making a permanent electrical connection to it. The second brush slides alternatively on the non-conducting surface of the disc and then over the conducting arm of the copper. The second brush is mounted so that its position can be adjusted and, because the copper arms taper, that alters the ratio of the "On" time to the "Off" time. The actual switching is achieved by current flowing through the first brush, through the copper arm and then through the second brush. The brush arms shown in the diagram above rely on the springiness of the copper arm to make a good brush-to-copper electrical connection. It might be preferred to use a rigid brush arm, pivot it and use a spring to ensure a very good contact between the brush and the copper star at all times.
The adjustment of the On to Off time, or "Mark/Space Ratio" or "Duty Cycle" as the technical people describe it, could perhaps do with some description. If the moveable brush is positioned near the centre of the disc, then, because of the tapering of the copper arms, the part of the non-conducting disc that it slides over is shorter and the part of the conducting copper arm with which it connects is longer, as the two sliding paths are about the same length, the current is on for about the same length as it is off, giving a Mark/Space ratio of about 50% as shown here:
If, instead, the moveable brush is positioned near the outside edge of the disc, then because of the tapering of the copper arm, the On path is shorter and the non-conducting Off path is very much longer, being about three times as long as the On path, giving a Mark/Space ratio of about 25%. As the moveable brush can be positioned anywhere between these two extremes, the Mark/Space ratio can be set to any value from 25% to 50%.
The two brushes can be on the same side of the drive shaft or on opposite sides as shown. One important feature is that the brushes touch in a position where the disc surface is always moving directly away from the brush mounting, causing any drag to be directly along the arm and giving no sideways loading on the brush. The diameter of the device is usually one inch (25 mm) or less.
You will also notice that the output is switched although the diagram does not give any indication of how or when that switching takes place. You will notice that the diagram has angles marked on it for the optimum positioning of the pick-up coils, well, an Adams Motor builder with a forum ID of "Maimariati" who achieved a Coefficient Of Performance of 1,223, found that the optimum switching for his motor is On at 42 degrees and Off at 44.7 degrees. That tiny 2.7 degree part of the rotor turn gives a substantial power output and cutting the output current off at that point causes the back EMF of the coils to give the rotor a substantial additional boost on its way. His input power is 27.6 watts and his output power is 33.78 kilowatts
Now for some practical details. It is suggested that a good length for the power pick-up coils can be determined by using the “paper clip test”. This is done by taking one of the permanent magnets used in the rotor, and measuring the distance at which that magnet just begins to lift one end of a 32 mm (1.25 inch) paper clip off the table. The optimum length of each coil from end to end is exactly the same as the distance at which the paper clip starts to lift.
The core material used in the electromagnets can be of various different types including advanced materials and alloys such as ‘Somalloy’ or 'Metglas'. The power pick-up coil proportions are important as an electromagnet becomes less and less effective as its length increases, and eventually, the part furthest from the active end can actually be a hindrance to the effective operation. A good coil shape is one which you would not expect, with the coil width being, perhaps 50% greater than the coil length:
Contrary to what you would expect, the device draws in energy from the local environment better if the end of the pick-up coil farthest from the rotor is left unaffected by any other part of the device and the same applies to the magnet facing it. That is, the coil should have the rotor at one end and nothing at the other end, that is, no second rotor behind the coil. The speed at which the voltage is applied to, and removed from, the coils is very important. With very sharp voltage rises and falls, additional energy is drawn from the surrounding environmental energy field. If using transistor switching, then the IRF3205 FET has been found to be very good and a suitable driver for the FET is the MC34151.
If using a Hall-effect semiconductor to synchronise the timing, say the UGN3503U which is very reliable, then the life of the Hall-effect device is much improved if it is provided with a 470 ohm resistor between it and the positive supply line, and a similar 470 ohm resistor between it and the negative line. These resistors in series with the Hall-effect device effectively “float” it and protect it from supply-line spikes".
Here, two electromagnets are driven by the battery via Robert's 4-arm commutator which is mounted on the rotor shaft. Some of the recommendations given by Robert are the opposite of what you would expect. For example, he says that a single rotor construction tends to be more electrically efficient that one where several rotors are mounted on a single shaft. Robert is against the use of reed switches and he recommends making one of his commutators.
At one stage, Robert recommended the use of standard transformer shims for constructing the cores of the electromagnets. This has the advantage that matching bobbins for holding the coil windings are readily available and can still be used for pick-up coils. Later on, Robert swung towards the use of solid cores from the old PO Series 3000 telephone relays and eventually said that electromagnet cores should be solid iron.
The diagrams presented by Robert show the magnets located on the rim of the rotor and pointing outwards. If this is done, then it is essential that the magnets in the rotor are firmly attached on at least five of their six faces and the possibility of using a ring of non magnetic material such as duct tape around the outside should be considered. That style of construction also lends itself to streamlining the rotor by having a completely solid construction, although it might be remarked that the motor would run better and more quietly if it were enclosed in a box which had the air pumped out of it. If that is done, then there will be no air resistance and because sound can't pass through a vacuum, quieter operation is bound to result.
While this may sound a bit complicated, there is no reason why it should be. All that is needed is two discs and one central disc which is the thickness of the magnets, with slots cut in it, the exact size of the magnets. The assembly starts with the lower disc, magnets and central disc. These are glued together, probably with epoxy resin, and that holds the magnets securely on four faces as shown here:
Here, the magnets are attached on the lower face, the right and left faces, and the unused pole face, and when the upper disc is attached, the upper faces are also secured and there is the minimum of air turbulence when the rotor spins:
There is a "sweet spot" for the positioning of the power pick-up coils and it will usually be found that this is two or three millimeters away from the rotor. If that is the case, then there will be room for an outer band of duct tape on the rim of the rotor to provide additional protection against the failure of the magnet attachment method.
High-power versions of the motor/generator need to be enclosed in a metal box which is earthed as they are quite capable of generating a substantial amount of high frequency waves which can damage equipment such as oscilloscopes and create TV reception interference. There would probably be an improvement in performance as well as a reduction in sound if the box was airtight and had the air pumped out of it. If that is done, then there will be no air resistance as the rotor spins and since sound does not pass through a vacuum, quieter operation is possible.
Experienced rotor builders do not like the radial magnets style of construction because of the stresses on the magnet attachments if high rotational speeds are reached. It should not need to be said, but it is obviously a major requirement to keep your hands well away from the rotor when the motor is running as it is perfectly possible to be injured by the high-speed movement if you are careless. Please remember that this presentation must not be considered to be a recommendation that you build or use any device of this nature and it must be stressed that this text, in common with the entire contents of this eBook, is intended to be for information purposes only and no representations or warranties are implied by this presentation. Should you decide to construct, test or use any device, then you do so entirely at your own risk and no liability attaches to anybody else if you sustain any kind of injury or property damage as a result of your own actions.
Because of the mechanical stresses caused during rotation, some experienced constructors feel that the magnets should be embedded in the rotor as shown here where they are kept well clear of the rim of a rotor which is made from a tough material. This is so that the outer strip of the material prevents the magnets breaking loose and becoming dangerous high-speed projectiles, which at best would destroy the electromagnets and at worst could injure someone quite badly:
It needs to be remembered that the proportions of the magnets are for the magnet length to be more than the diameter, so in cases like this where circular magnet faces are to be used, the magnets will be cylindrical and the rotor needs to have a significant thickness, which will depend on the magnets which are available locally. The magnets should be a tight push-fit in their holes and securely glued in place.
Robert Adams has used this construction style as well. However, if an arrangement like this is used, then there will be a substantial sideways pull on the rotor as it reaches the electromagnet core, tending to pull the magnets out of the rotor.
It is important that the rotor should be perfectly balanced and have the minimum amount of bearing friction possible. This calls for precision construction and either roller or ball bearings. The construction style shown above has the distinct advantage that it has an open end to both the magnet and the coils and this is believed to facilitate the inflow of environmental energy into the device.
It may be my ignorance showing here, but I have a problem with this version. The difficulty as I see it is that the magnet/core pull and the subsequent drive thrust when the coil is powered, form a "turning couple" as they both try to rotate the axle in the same direction. This places a substantial loading on the axle bearings, usually amplified by the radius of the rotor being greater than the distance from the rotor to the axle bearings. This load will be in the tens of kilograms range and will be applied and reversed perhaps forty times per second. To me, that appears like a vibration load and is directly opposed to the "perfectly balanced" rotor operation being sought. The radial magnet arrangement generally shown by Robert Adams does not have any of this kind of loading at all because the coils are exactly opposite each other and their loads cancel each other out exactly. The choice is, of course, up to the builder and his assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of the different styles of construction.
Robert Adams has produced some additional notes on his motor/generator design:
By Dr. Robert G. Adams, New Zealand.
Once construction of an Adams Motor Generator is completed and successful running has been attained, should the reader desire to carry out an efficiency analysis, he should use conventional measuring instruments AS A GUIDE ONLY. At this point I refer the reader to reading the section entitled 'Established Methods of Testing Electric Motor and Transformer Efficiency' and other relevant information in this update. On reading this section, it will become clear to the reader that establishment teaching of THERMODYNAMICS and testing procedures using the conventional measuring instrumentation DO NOT COMPUTE WITH THE TRUTH, with either conventional motors or the Adams Motor.
The question is - 'how can any electrical device claim to operate around the order of 70 - 90% efficiency and yet require a cooling facility, whether it be a motor or a transformer, without which the device would disintegrate?'
If an Adams motor can operate on load alongside a conventional motor of the same rating and, load for load, at a temperature of less than half that of the conventional machine with a claimed efficiency rating of 70 - 90%, then the Adams device will be operating around the order of 3 times that of the conventional motor, and it is, in addition, not required to radiate wasted energy with a cooling fan.
The correct method in testing a switched reluctance motor is to integrate E x Iav with the machine switching frequency using standard measuring instruments, the result of which is often ironically very close, if not identical, with results of the calorimetric tests, and this is obtained using the equation first outlined in the Adams Motor Manual, i.e., Iav x E x Duty Cycle, corroborated by the New Zealand Electricity Department 1976 and Lucas Electrical Industries, Research Division, United Kingdom 1976.
If you construct an Adams Motor which appears to be running well and is operating under load without getting hot, i.e., around the order of 20 - 15 degrees or less above ambient of 20 degrees, then it will, if calculations are carried out correctly, be operating beyond unity.
Calorimetric testing analyses, as outlined in this Addendum, is an expensive, time-consuming exercise, is complex to calculate and requires considerable experience and skill. This procedure is not recommended to those who are not very, very well prepared with the above prerequisites.
THE ADAMS SUPER-POWER MULTI-POLAR MAGNET
I have for many years, theorised the existence of four poles interacting in any magnet. There is little doubt that two poles dominate from what is observed, and taught, in classical texts.
However, since my discovery of engineering magnets into forming four poles - and, in so doing, quadrupling the energy - surely some light has been shed on the theory of the existence of four poles. Bruce Cathie and I will investigate this further when time permits.
A rectangular or cube magnet, when engineered into the Adams technology, becomes a unit consisting of four twin poles, each face containing a north and a south pole, separated by a zero vortex in the centre of each of the four twin poles, and all displaying similar energies.
Ironically, but not unexpectedly, this super twin-pole magnet is a very valuable adjunct to further advancement of the Adams Motor technology. The energy found on the edges of each of the four faces is very high-25 per cent of the total energy of the full face.
The present lab magnets are approximately three-quarters-of-an-inch cube. The edge of any face will hold a five-kilogram steel or iron block in mid-air. When the full face of the magnet is attached to metal, a force of beyond 20 kg is required to remove it. In my presentation to the NEXUS Conference, I advised tests would be carried out this month to determine the load required to remove the magnet.
The dice-sized magnet was attached to a steel plate on a ceiling rafter and, with the aid of a chain, a 15-kilogram block was first attached to it; then a 4.7-kg block added on with a nylon rope; then another 200-gram block was attached; then, a fourth 200-gram block. The magnet still hanging fast, a 100-gram block was added; then...wait for it...CRASH to the floor. The magnet was still attached to its anchor on the roof-rafter!
A magnet, approximately three-quarters-of-an-inch cube, weighing only 60 grams. capable of holding a weight of beyond 20 kilograms in mid-air. 333.333 times its own weight? Will this at last have something of an effect on the closed ignorant minds of conventional science?
The way now must surely be clear that space/gravity energy via electromagnetic forces of permanent magnets is not impossible nor difficult to harness. The space/gravity energies are clean, non-exhaustible and free. The Adams technology has proved this and leaves no grounds for dispute.
Einstein's sacrosanct theories of relativity, and the laws of thermodynamics, are the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations ever recorded in scientific history. These draconian false teachings have been instrumental in impeding the process of science towards free, clean energy.
The classical theory of magnetism from the textbooks attributes the phenomenon to the motion of electrons within the atoms of molecules. There is evidence that the orbital electrons in an atom not only revolve about the nucleus of the atom, but also each individual electron spins about an axis through its centre. It is believed that in highly magnetic materials, each atom has many more electrons spinning in one direction than in another.
In the sub-microscopic region, i.e., the "domain", many of these atoms with electron spin in one direction create a magnetic field which effectively supplements the field engendered by the revolving electrons. Each domain thus becomes a tiny magnet. When the domains are in random state, the substance as a whole is not a magnet. The application of an external magnetic field will reorient the domains and produce a magnet in the way described above.
When the application of an external magnetic force has been applied and all the domains have been aligned, the condition of MAGNETIC SATURATION has been reached, and any further increase in strength of the external force field will not increase the magnetisation any further, With the advent of the Adams Permanent Magnet Technology, is it not further evidence that conventional text teachings have reached the stage when they should be rewritten?
From the observations of certain lab experiments with ball-bearings, it is the opinion of the discoverer that the elections circulate in conjugate pairs and have a spin opposite to that of rotation, and that the spin is four times greater than that of the orbital rotation. I note also that conventional texts prefer not to state direction of spin, nor velocity relative to orbital motion.
I do not therefore subscribe to the statement that "in highly magnetic materials, each atom has many more electrons spinning in one direction than in another I feel such a condition cannot pertain in light of my discoveries.
Also to be addressed is the matter of the massive energy increase resulting from the Adams applied technology. Are man-made scientific laws once again violated? If the magnetic material is saturated when subjected to an external energy source, the Adams technology must then be gating space/gravity energy.
There is overwhelming evidence that space/gravity energy can be concentrated, focused and/or magnified by permanent magnets.
© 1995 Robert Adams
Whakatane, New Zealand
THIS REPORT REFERS TO AN INHERENT CHARACTERISTIC OF PERMANENT MAGNETS DISCOVERED SOME 19 YEARS AGO, BY ROBERT ADAMS OF NEW ZEALAND AND RECENTLY VALIDATED: A LENGTHY AND IN DEPTH PROGRAMME OF THE TESTING OF MANY MAGNETS OF DIFFERENT ENERGY PRODUCT AND COMPOSITIONS IN ADAMS MOTORS HAS NOW BEEN COMPLETED. THIS REPORT COVERS EARLIER SIMILAR TESTS CARRIED OUT DURING 1976 AND 1979 AND DURING THE PAST YEAR OF 1994 - 1995.
AS I AM COLLABORATING WITH DR. HAROLD ASPDEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM IN THE ABOVE AND OTHER MATTERS, BOTH DR. ASPDEN AND MYSELF HAVE DECIDED THAT IT IS NOW THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO BRING THIS NEWS REPORT INTO THE NEXUS READERSHIP ARENA, SINCE OUR COLLECTIVE FINDINGS OF THE EXTENSIVE TEST ANALYSES, CARRIED OUT IN THE MOST RECENT PERIOD, HAVE CONCURRED.
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVEMENTIONED, I WAS, EARLIER THIS YEAR, COMMISSIONED BY A JAPANESE CORPORATION TO BUILD AN ADAMS MOTOR INCORPORATING THEIR Y.T. SUPER MAGNETS, WITH THEIR VIEW TO INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ADAMS MOTOR. THIS PROGRAMME WAS DULY CARRIED OUT. THE RESULTS WERE AS I HAD PREDICTED, I.E., THERE WAS NO INCREASE IN EXCESS ENERGY FOUND.
THIS REPORT IS IMPORTANT FROM TWO DIFFERENT ASPECTS. FIRSTLY, IT PUTS TO REST ERRONEOUS CLAIMS BY CERTAIN INVENTORS, ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS ALIKE THAT POWERFUL MAGNETS BUILT INTO ELECTRIC MOTORS WILL YIELD VERY HIGH EFFICIENCY OR BEYOND UNITY. THIS NOTION IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN ASSUMPTION ADOPTED LETHARGICALLY OVER THE YEARS. SECONDLY, IT WILL SAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE A LOT OF TIME AND DISAPPOINTMENT IN PURSUING HIGH EFFICIENCY FROM MAGNETS OF HIGH ENERGY PRODUCT AS CLAIMED POSSIBLE BY CERTAIN PEOPLE. I WOULD REFER THE READER, AT THIS POINT, TO MY PAPER PUBLISHED IN NEXUS MAGAZINE, APRIL - MAY 1993 ISSUE, PAGE 47.
RULE NO. 1: NO MAGNET, IRRESPECTIVE OF IT"S INHERRENT ENERGY COUNT CAN, IN ANY WAY, GOVERN THE EFFICIENCY RESULTS OF AN ELECTRIC MOTOR.
RULE NO. 2: INPUT POWER REQUIREMENT CLIMBS IN PROPORTION TO THE ENERGY PRODUCT OF THE MAGNET/S USED, WHICH AUTOMATICALLY CANCELS OUT ANY POSSIBILITY OF INCREASE IN EFFICIENCY. FOR GREATER EFFICIENCY ONE MUST PURSUE THE IMPROVEMENT OF OTHER IMPORTANT LOGICAL FACTORS, I.E., MACHINE DESIGN, ETC.
NOTE: THE LAWS OF THE PERMANENT MAGNET, LIKE THE LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE, POINT TO CERTAIN CONSTANT INHERENT CHARACTERISTICS, ONE OF WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT EFFICIENCY REMAINS CONSTANT WHEN MAGNETS ARE EMBRACED IN A MAN-MADE DEVICE, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE MAGNET ENERGY PRODUCT.
FOR SUCCESSFUL HIGH EFFICIENCY RESULTS IT IS SUGGESTED THAT ONE BRUSHES ASIDE THE IMPORTANCE OF MAGNETS IN RELATION TO EFFICIENCY AND CONCENTRATES ON MATERIALS, ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL DESIGN IN THE REST OF THE MACHINE AND, OF COURSE, CONSIDER THAT INGENUITY IS A PRIME INGREDIENT IN THIS EXERCISE.
DURING THE 1970'S I DISCOVERED, ON CHANGING MAGNETS OF LOWER ENERGY PRODUCT FOR HIGHER ENERGY TYPES IN MY PULSED MOTOR/GENERATOR, THAT THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN POWER OUTPUT, BUT NO CHANGE IN MOTOR EFFICIENCY. THERE WAS, DURING THE EARLY SEVENTIES, MUCH TALK AND SPECULATION OF GREATER EFFICIENCIES BEING POSSIBLE WITH THE ADVENT OF MORE POWERFUL MAGNETS APPEARING OVER THE HORRIZON IN THE NEAR FUTURE. WHEN EVENTUALLY SAMARIUM-COBOLT CAME ON THE SCENE IN THE USA, IT WAS, HOWEVER, A LONG WAY FROM BECOMING GENERALLY AVAILABLE ELSEWHERE.
WHEN I EVENTUALLY OBTAINED A SUITABLE SET OF SAMARIUM-COBOLT MAGNETS, I INSTALLED THEM IN ONE OF MY MOTORS AND WAS NOT SURPRISED TO FIND, ONCE AGAIN, THAT THE MACHINE POWER INCREASED BUT THE EFFICIENCY STILL REMAINED UNCHANGED.
IN MORE RECENT TIMES I HAVE CARRIED OUT A PROGRAMME USING SEVERAL DIFFERENT KINDS OF MAGNETS OF VARYING ENERGY PRODUCT FIGURES, FROM A FEW HUNDRED GAUSS TO MEGAGAUSS SUPER POWER MAGNETS. NOW THAT MY PROGRAMME ON CHECKING MANY DIFFERENT MAGNETS IS COMPLETED, WHICH INCLUDES THE MOST POWERFUL MAGNETS AVAILABLE IN THE WORLD TO DATE, TO WHICH I AM PRIVY, IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT MY ORIGINAL DISCOVERY IN 1976 VALIDATES THE FACT THAT THE ENERGY PRODUCT OF MAGNETS HAS NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER ON THE RESULTS/OUTCOME OF A PERMANENT MAGNET ELECTRIC MOTOR'S EFFICIENCY. THERE WILL BE MUCH DISAPPOINTMENT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE TO LEARN THAT MAGNET ENERGY PRODUCT DOES NOT GOVERN EFFICIENCY IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER.
THERE IS A CONSOLATION HOWEVER, FOR US ALL, IN THAT THERE ARE TWO VERY SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGES IN THE USE OF SUPER POWER MAGNETS. ONE IS THE HIGH REDUCTION IN VOLUME AND THE SECOND IS THE EQUALLY HIGH REDUCTION IN WEIGHT. THESE TWO FACTORS, THOUGH NOT ELECTRICAL EFFICIENCIES PER SE, CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL EFFICIENCY IN THE SENSE THAT THEIR USE IN THE MANUFACTURE OF ELECTRIC MOTORS AND GENERATORS MINIMISES PRODUCTION COSTS, WHEREBY MATERIALS AND LABOUR ARE DRASTICALLY REDUCED, HENCE PRODUCING LIGHTER, SMALLER AND CHEAPER MOTORS AND GENERATORS.
WITH THE USE OF SUPER MAGNETS IN FUTURE MACHINES, THERE IS PROMISE OF SOMEWHERE AROUND THE ORDER OF HALF OF A KILO HORSEPOWER POSSIBLE - EXCELLENT NEWS FOR PORTABLE POWER GENERATORS.
MOTOR AND TRANSFORMER EFFICIENCY
In this section I challenge the method/s used in science and industry alike in relation to the testing of electric motor and power transformer efficiencies. The methods referred to are in the form of the well known and the outdated establishment teachings. The establishment will not attempt to take up my challenge because they know full well that my claims are proven.
These outmoded methods have gone on forever over the ages and been taken as gospel never to be questioned. The time has come to pass that these outmoded methods be subject to review. With new energy devices over the horizon, application of establishment testing procedures for these do not and can not give accurate results any more than they do for present day conventional devices.
It is well past time that the establishment science and industry alike be taken to task on this matter, particularly in relation to electric motors and transformers. Test results from universities and establishment facilities of new energy devices I have encountered are not worth the paper they are written on. Let's start with power transformers. A simple no-moving-parts device. Claims of upwards of 98% efficiency!
I ask one question. Why, in the case of large power transformers, as used for the National grid systems, claiming ratings of around the order of 98% efficiency, do they have to be immersed in large tanks of special transformer cooling oil to keep the transformer at a safe operating temperature? And, in addition, the transformer tank is fitted with oil circulating fins around it's outer perimeter which, in turn, cool the hot circulating oil and, so too, in many cases these transformers ALSO require a circulating pump? 98% efficiency? If the so-claimed transformer was indeed around the order of 98% efficiency, it certainly would not be required to be immersed in an oil tank, with it's ancillary devices, to keep it cool!
Now electric motors.
I ask the same one question. Why do motor manufacturers, claiming upwards of 90% efficiency, provide cooling fans in their machines with their attendant losses in order to keep the machine within a safe operating temperature? Simply because of the heat generated in the machine due to inherent inefficiency losses? What 90% efficiency? If the fan/s were not provided, then the machine would surely self-destruct due to the excessive heat generated.
So much for establishment teachings of efficiency ratings of electric motors and power transformers. I have acquired and tested scores of AC and DC electric motors over many years and failed to find a single one which conforms to the manufacturers data claims.
Having been involved in the field of electric motor inventions and investigating efficiency claims by manufacturers and motor inventors alike for the past 30 years, I have failed to find in any of their literature pertaining to technical specification and efficiency figures, any reference of the temperature of the said machines operating under full load conditions.
One may ask - has this most important factor been lost sight of or is it conveniently side-stepped?
The latter I suspect.
You may ask - why?
Would the answer to this possibly be, that to quote operating temperature of the motor in question might give rise to the question in itself as to the true efficiency of the machine?
It is to be heeded that specified efficiency ratings will be inaccurate and deceptive if the vital factor of temperature of the machine running under full load is not stated. It must also be remembered that the DC resistance of the internal windings increases with temperature rise.
Exercising my experience in calorimetry I have checked scores of different AC and DC motor efficiencies and found all of them deficient as regards accuracy - evidence which points to the fact that temperature of the machine running under full load has not been taken into account.
Conventional electric motors, whether AC or DC, in the work force are abysmally low in efficiency, including those claiming around the order of 60-90%.
And here is why :
If a conventional motor with a claimed efficiency of, say, 70% and 10 watts output and a motor of beyond unity and 10 watts output are both loaded equally in an ambient temperature of 20°C, the conventional motor, after 20 minutes running, will have reached a temperature of beyond 100°C; the unconventional motor (beyond unity motor), at the end of 20 minutes, would barely have reached 38°C.
The "loaded operating temperature" of motors around the order of unity and beyond is such that they do not require a cooling fan, nor do they require to be constructed of metal to dissipate the enormous loss of energy as in conventional machines. There is an obvious advantage here too, in that volume and weight are substantially reduced.
Calorimetry is an exacting and critical science. It requires timeless observance of it's principles and precepts and an almost religious attendance to the diagnostics demanded of it's nature. And so, many hundreds of hours of work and substantial monies have been applied to the "final solution" and scepticism may take a bow and accept indeed at least a share of the credit for the results - it's prayer has been answered, albeit "volte face". All calorimeter-testing analyses and temperature parameter research carried out by myself over the past years, both on the Adams motor as well as other various types of motors, have strongly come out in favour of evidence in support of the fact that these sceptics' methods of testing the Adams Machine, and others, are outmoded and grossly inaccurate. It is almost obligatory to challenge one's sceptics, just, if for no other reason, than for the fun of it: but there is no one I know able to challenge calorimetry.
I have strived for years in an endeavour to explain to people, who really should know better, that the temperature of electric motors at work is of paramount importance and that electrical parameters are of no consequence or even required to be considered. Also that conventional mathematical/electrical measurements do not apply to switched reluctance motors; if applied, they are flawed by straight out accurate temperature measurement of the machine.
1) Use only pure iron for stator/drive windings, not laminated steel core.
2) Wind stators with a resistance in the range of ten to twenty ohms each for a small model.
3) For 2) above, use voltage/s of between 12 and 36.
4) For small machine make contactor star disk one inch maximum diameter.
5) Keep wiring short and of low resistance.
6) For small machine install fuse/holder 500 m.a. to 1 amp.
7) Install switch for convenience and safety.
8) Use small bearings. Do not use sealed bearings as these are pre-packed with a dense grease which causes severe drag.
9) Use only silver contacts for pulse switch.
10) If using high-energy-product magnets, vibration becomes a serious problem if constructional materials and design are faulty.
11) Air gap is not critical; however reduction will increase torque and also increase input power in proportion.
12) For higher speed, lower current, series-connected stators recommended.
13) a) If machine stator windings are of low resistance and drawing high current at higher input voltage, it is advisable to install a switching transistor which will completely eliminate sparking at points.
b) On calculating input power, however, the transistor switch burden must be subtracted from total input.
14) a) Points tuning and pressure are vitally important; experiment will indicate optimum settings.
b) If, however, all electronic switching process is preferred, i.e., using photo, magnetic, hall effect, etc., then the above in a) is completely eliminated.
15) If constructing a large model involving large super power magnets, note the following:-
The greater the magnetic energy product, the greater the power required to drive the machine, the greater the torque, the greater the vibration problem, greater copper content, greater cost etc. Read section on "Permanent Magnets and Efficiency' by Dr. Robert Adams 1996 "Also published in NEXUS April / May 1996 Issue).
ANALYSIS REPORT FROM (PH.D. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SCIENTIST) OF DETROIT, OHIO
This is a "Vax" computer system analysis together with computer graphs of the parameters and analysis carried out by the above Scientist, confirming the validity of various claims made by the inventor. The graphs are very comprehensive and therefore of considerable value to aid design work, particularly of the motor proper, of the "Adams" Motor Generator. The following analysis are results of the original Mark I Adams Motor Generator, taken in a magnetic attraction mode.
BY THE INVENTOR
Note on battery tests:
I have done a battery charging test and I enclose the results for your examination. As you can see, the input battery voltage stayed virtually constant over the time involved, while the output battery voltage climbed considerably. Are you interested in what the device I was using between the two batteries was? It was a "conventional" RESISTOR. Yes, I actually duplicated your battery charging curves using a resistor, not an Adam's Machine. I hope you find this informative.
I am including some printouts from my simulation program confirming several of the features you describe in your literature. The plots with angle on the horizontal axis are showing 1/4 of a revolution by one degree increments. The plots with speed on the horizontal axis are showing the effect on the variable speed changes. As you see from the TORQUE-ANGLE PLOT, positive torque is indeed applied twice during each cycle, as you state. The EFFICIENCY VS SPEED PLOT shows the "resonance effect" in a rather dramatic way, don't you think? (Here the lighter shaded area is the area of OVER-UNITY operation). The TORQUE-SPEED PLOT is quite interesting, since the load line intersection with it determines at which speed the motor will run. The simulated coil voltage and coil current waveforms shown are similar to those observed on my scope (and yours according to your diagrams), confirming the basic validity of the simulation equations I have developed. The BATTERY CURRENT VS ANGLE PLOT shows current flowing back into the battery, again as you indicated.
Isn't it interesting that the simulations show areas of operation under certain conditions which will produce over unity results? Maybe we don't have to throw out as much of "conventional" physics as you think we do. Maybe "over unity" has been hidden in conventional physics all along and we just haven't seen it, because we haven't looked in the right way with eyes to see.
THE ADAMS THERMO MOTOR GENERATOR - MARK 022/3
New ETHER ENERGY DEVICES are now a reality and the ivory tower protectionism of the Laws of Thermodynamics and Einstein's Relativity has all but collapsed.
Research and development in this new/old vast field is fast gathering momentum worldwide. These new devices include electric motor/generators and solid state units. Present day methods of power generation are destined for the scrap heap.
The scientific establishment has built its imposing edifice of quantum electrodynamics on the basis of secondary results produced from electricity and electromagnetics already in action.
From these actions observed, they forma hypothetical picture, theoretical models of which have consequently consistently served as being reliable for MOST electromagnetic devices, but not all, as when these dogmatic laws were conceived today's inventors and scientists had not as yet invented these new revolutionary electromagnetic devices capable of gating ETHER ENERGY, with one exception being Tesla on the close of the last century, who was suppressed.
If the scientific establishment dogma in relation to NEWTON'S LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS and EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY were correct, then none of these new energy devices, including UFOs, could have been invented.
Einstein's sacrosanct theories of relativity and the Laws of Thermodynamics are the most remarkable and inexplicable aberrations ever recorded in scientific history. These draconian false teachings have been instrumental on a wholesale scale in impeding the progress of science towards free clean energy in a propitious era which has since had the fossil fuel magnates laughing all the way to the bank.
There is overwhelming evidence that ether/space energy can be concentrated, focused and/or magnified by permanent magnets. I, for one, have proved this in my original motor generator, 4-pole super power magnets, the Adams Thermo Motor/Generator and other inventions and electromagnetic discoveries not yet disclosed. My success in precipitating heat from ether/space energy manifesting within the stators of the Mark 022/3 Adams Thermo Electric Motor and successfully harnessing this energy, has proved to be a very significant and exciting event for a world starving for clean economical energy.
The 'ADAMS THERMO MOTOR GENERATOR' is but one of the new energy devices on the horizon with enormous potential. The device is so named as an illustration of it's ability, in addition to it supplying very efficient electrical or mechanical power, to also provide water heating, both at unprecedented economical figures.
Heat is a source of immense energy loss in conventional motors. It was this principal factor in mind that first prompted me to invent a motor that would overcome this energy waste and hence the birth of the original Adams Motor Generator Mark 001 (1968). Ironically, in contrast, over the intervening years, much of my mental research went into the idea of tapping ether energy, in the form of heat, into my original machine. With this task most prominent in my mind, I constantly pondered over the idea of inventing a motor that would, in addition to rendering a very high degree of efficiency, provide etheric energy in the form of heat within the machine which I could then harness by way of heating water.
To achieve this I felt a pressing message to direct most of my efforts into the design of a unique rotor as having, through the years, found little chance, if any, of improving the lot of electric motor stator systems, as has been attempted by many, with most only showing little, if any, improvement in the gaining of higher efficiency.
Two unique engineering factors came to mind quite quickly and were duly implemented into this rotor. The results of the first trial runs were well beyond my expectations; for the size and electrical parameters of the machine, the energy gated from the ether in the form of heat was massive and spontaneous. These results were very exciting.
To construct a machine of this kind requires considerable experience and skill in the design of unconventional new energy devices, in addition to the requirement of experience in the science of thermodynamics, calorimetry and water heating systems. All measures must be exercised to preclude and/or reduce losses as these are many and can be high and include the following:
Conduction, radiation, windage, bearings, magnetics, transistor switching, high windage loss at stator pole faces due to high speeds of 2500 - 4000 rpm of the rotor causing considerable cooling effect - i.e., irretrievable loss of ETHER ENERGY, and thermo insulation losses in stator jackets, holding tank and piping circuitry.
The unique rotor, briefly described, comprises of four neodymium magnets and is driven by only two 180° stators with a large air gap of 1.25mm, has a rotor diameter of 140mm and 19mm in width and the stator faces are small at only 15mm diameter.
The high heat energy referred to, that is gated from ETHER/SPACE, concentrates at the stator windings. The manner in which this heat energy is harnessed from the stator is unique and very efficient, and the result is a machine which develops mechanical power for industrial use and provides hot water in addition a world first in its class. It represents a boon to industry, hospitals, institutions and domestic dwellings alike. For any particular application it can be designed for power supply generation in addition to providing hot water at economy figures undreamed of. The applications are endless and for the consumer the big bonus is its sheer economy whether you take a small power boat or an ocean-going vessel - fuel costs and weight would be slashed to the bone not to mention the reduced fire risks and as with hospitals, production plants, mills, mining and industry in general, the same benefits would apply.
The machine, because of its unique free water heating advantage, will, of course, be of greater volume than a conventional motor due to the necessary installation criteria of the associated componentry required to harness this primary source of free energy.
The prospect of being now in the position to harness these energies from magnetic forces provides us with a vast new clean source of energy free for the taking.
CALORIMETRIC TEST, TRANSISTOR SWITCH
DISSIPATION, AND ELECTRICAL INPUT
AND ETHER ENERGY OUTPUT
Total Transistor Switch dissipation - 45 watts.
Total Electrical input - 33 watts.
Ether Energy output of hot water - 137 watts.
Now 45 watts of transistor switch is the total dissipation of both the machine and switch, so we are faced with a paradox in that electrical calculation total input power = 33 watts versus 45 watts of the transistor total input (calorimetrically measured). This to me indicates that etheric energy is somehow entering the switching circuit as it gets far hotter than it should for the amount of current which it is switching. This possibility should not be ignored as etheric energy moves and collects on both insulators and conductors alike and collectively in a manner totally foreign to the way in which electricity, as we know it, flows in an electrical circuit.
There is mounting evidence showing up in this unique machine that indicates we have much exciting learning ahead in this new field of energy. For instance, I will cite the following anomaly taken from my day book dated 2.6.96:
Throughout a test run on the above date, as is usual, random checks were taken of the stator jackets' water temperature and it was found throughout the one hour test run that the NORTH POLE had now taken the higher heat potential from the SOUTH POLE - with a difference, however; instead of the usual 2 to 3 degree variation from one day to another between the two poles, on this occasion the NORTH POLE was operating at a temperature of 33 degrees beyond that displayed by the SOUTH POLE. There were no electrical instrumentation variations whatsoever during this period of the test run and, further, there was no sign of variation in machine performance. These anomalous discoveries are not new to me; they simply convince me further that "It is highly probable that, at any or all times in the future, the most any of us will ever know about nature is nothing" (Dr. Robert Adams 1996).
UNLOADED PERFORMANCE TEST - It is to be noted that the outlined test run was carried out free-running, i.e., the machine was operating without mechanical or electrical load applied. On application of loading, however, input power increase is minimal, where ether heat energy increases dramatically in proportion.
A new machine of higher power, greater dimensions and of anticipated improved efficiency is, at present, under construction. The results of its performance will be interesting to see and they also will be published internationally in due course.
MODERN AETHER SCIENCE by Dr. Harold Aspden (downloadable from www.free-energy-info.com)
PHYSICS WITHOUT EINSTEIN by Dr. Harold Aspden - Saberton Publications, P.O. Box 35, Southampton S016, 7RB, U.K. (downloadable from www.free-energy-info.com)
THE COSMIC PULSE OF LIFE by Trevor J. Constable. Borderland Sciences Research Foundation, Gaberville, California, ISBN 0-945685-07-6 U.S.A.
THERMODYNAMICS AND FREE ENERGY by Peter A. Lindemann. 28 Williams Boulevard. Tijeras, New Mexico, 87159, U.S.A.
One can build an Adams motor and prove that over-unity operation is a reality. However, most academic researchers would deem this to be a waste of time since it is recognised as being a 'crank' pursuit seen as an attempt to create a 'perpetual motion' machine.
My task, experimentally, therefore is to present something far more straightforward that can be assembled and tested in a school physics laboratory or at home using a standard transformer kit costing a few dollars. All one then needs is an instrument to read amps and volts and a variable mains power voltage supply.
I did this experiment to satisfy myself that what I said at the Denver meeting in Colorado holds up. I am glad I did the experiment because it told me something new and important.
I had thought that, in order to access free energy from ferromagnetism, I would need to power the magnetic core above the 'knee' of the B-H curve, where the magnetism builds up by the atomic electron spins being forced into alignment rather than merely flipping through 180°. Here I have to be careful because I have a very thorough grounding in ferromagnetism and I should avoid terminology unfamiliar to readers.
It must be said, however, that there is no way forward for anyone involved in real research on free energy from ferromagnetism unless that person understands the physics of the subject. The hit and miss ventures of those who build permanent magnet 'free energy' machines and get them to work anomalously only guide others equipped with the right training to take the research forward. I say 'only' because this is a simple situation. Those with the knowledge do not want to believe that 'free energy' is possible. Those without the knowledge cannot prove their case, because they cannot speak the scientific language that applies. However, once on the scent and believing in what is possible, but not knowing why, those 'experts' on magnetism will move rapidly in advancing the technology in the real commercial world.
So, here I aim to point at an introductory lesson or experiment and, to back this up, I commend those attempting this to read about the basic principles of magnetism as explained by an engineer - not a physicist! The best book that I know of for this purpose is one authored by a professor who was one of the examiners of my Ph.D. thesis. His book tells the reader in simple language how magnetism develops as domains reorientate their action and further his book tells the reader about anomalous energy aspects, including the unsolved mystery of extremely high loss anomalies (a factor of 10 greater than theory predicts). I refer to a book sold in students paperback edition by the Van Nostrand Company (Princeton, New Jersey), published in 1966 and authored by F. Brailsford under the title: Physical Principles of Magnetism'.
If the reader belongs to a university and that book can be accessed from the library, then that reader will, I feel, after performing the following experiment, be able to make sense of the 'free energy' opportunities now confronting the world of magnetism. The Brailsford book is not, of course, necessary as a preliminary to the experiment but it can help in onward thinking. Indeed, as an aside, I mention that when I spoke recently about the Floyd Sweet device to one of our mutual collaborators here in U.K. I was gratified to hear that he too has a copy of the Brailsford book.
The experiment is simplicity itself, considering the energy issue involved. Take a standard transformer kit and assemble the laminations so that there is what is virtually an air gap in the core. Be prepared to reassemble the core partially with different width gaps. I cut pieces of card of 0.25 mm thickness and performed the experiment in ten repeat assembly stages, using 0 to 9 card thicknesses.
The idea of the experiment is to create an excited core state in which there is a known amount of energy stored in the air gap. If the AC frequency is 60 Hz this means that in 1/240th of a second an amount of energy is supplied as inductance energy that can meet the needs of the air gap. Note that I consistently made estimates of energy that were worst-case from our 'free energy' perspective. Therefore, the extra energy supplied that is stored as inductance in the ferromagnetic core itself, rather than the air gap, is ignored. The plan is to compare that energy with the mechanical energy that we could take from the gap if the poles thereby formed were to close together and do work as if in an electromagnet. Textbooks tell us that the energy determined by the flux density in the gap represents that mechanically available energy. So, we need, for each air gap thickness, to measure the flux that crosses the air gap. We do this by wrapping a search coil around the part of the core that is on the side of the air gap remote from the magnetising coil and measuring the voltage induced in that search coil. It may be verified, by having a separate search coil on the magnetizing coil side of the gap , that the flux traversing the gap and linking the test search coil is nearly the same but a little less than that on the magnetizing side. So, in our worst-case analysis we may rely on the mechanical energy calculated from the weaker flux measured in the test search coil. That flux must be less than the flux in the gap.
By adjusting the current at successive gap thicknesses to ensure that the voltage sensed by the test search coil is always the same, we then know that the gap energy available as mechanical work increments linearly with gap thickness. For each such measurement we record the current registered as input to the magnetising coil.
If we now multiply the current by the voltage measured, allowing for the turns ratio as between the magnetizing winding and the test search coil, we can find the volt-amp input, which in the absence of losses is the reactance or inductive power. This allows us to compare the power output potentially available mechanically from such an air gap, if it were in a reluctance motor structure, compared with the reactive power supplied to set up that potential.
It is found that the mechanical power is appreciably greater than the input power, thereby demonstrating that 'free energy' is to be expected.
Now, one does not even need to worry about the calculations to find the reactive power input by multiplying volts and amps and allowing for the coil turns ratio. It suffices to plot the curve of current for different air gap thicknesses. Since the flux crossing the gap has fixed amplitude, as measured by a constant voltage reading, that means linear increase in mechanical power with air gap, so if the current were to increase at a rate that curves upwards with increasing air gap we would see a discrepancy representing a loss but if it curves downwards then that means that there is a 'free energy' source.
The experiment is very positively in showing the downward curve and so gives the 'free energy' answer, but, to my surprise, with the coil arrangement shown in Fig. 2, I found that the 'free energy' becomes available well below the knee of the B-H curve at quite normal flux densities! Even at one fifth of magnetic saturation levels the excess free energy potential can exceed the input power and give a twice-unity factor of performance. It is, therefore, no wonder that at higher flux densities one can aim for a 700% performance, as the Adams motor has shown.
On reflection, the reason, of course, is that magnetism set up by a coil on a magnetic core progresses as flux around the core circuit by virtue of a 'knock-on' effect owing to internal domain flux rotation. This is essential and is usually attributed to a flux leakage reaction, as otherwise magnetism remote from a magnetising coil could not navigate the bends in the core. That flux rotation, which is dominant above the knee of the B-H curve, for a system with a magnetising coil coextensive with the length of the core, is brought into effect at low flux densities if the coil only embraces one part of the core.
I regard the experiment just described as a crucial experiment proving the viability of over-unity-performing reluctance drive motors and believe it should become standard in all teaching laboratories concerned with electrical engineering and eventually, as physicists see the aether in its new light, also in all high school physics laboratories.
On April 16, 1993, the first day of the New Energy Symposium in Denver on which participants heard about the 'free energy' motor of New Zealander Robert Adams, the Financial Times in U.K. published an article on 'switched reluctance motors'. This article described how a U.K. company Switched Reluctance Drives Limited has become the world leader in that field.
The significance of this as a news item is that there has been a rapid convergence on the transition point at which the electronics needed to control the reluctance motor becomes so cheap that it is predicted that induction motors will soon be replaced on a large scale.
Those of us interested in the 'free energy' theme should see this as opening the door for the new energy technology based on the principles used in the Adams motor. There is a window of opportunity which has been opened by the arrival of the conventional switched reluctance motor at the breakeven point where it can replace the conventional motor on a cost comparison basis. This new kind of motor is one which relies on the magnetic pull across the pole faces to set up the drive torque. It is not one needing force interaction between magnetic field and current in a winding. Accordingly, this is the technology of the Adams motor which allows the extra pull powered by the 'free energy' drawn through the ferromagnetic flux-rotation of the quantum spins to be accessed.
In the light of the report in the Financial Times and the recent media attention to the Adams motor in Australia I have, on my return from the Denver meeting, drawn the Adams motor to the attention of the U.K. power industry magazine 'Electric Review'. As a result their reporter on new technology published an article entitled 'Reluctance motor has 100%-plus efficiency' in 9th July 1993 issue.
The article should arouse U.K. engineering interest in the 'free energy' possibility, since I have shown the design feature by which one can understand the 'free energy' source and so calculate its input. As might be expected the leading U.K. 'switched reluctance expert' consulted on this proposition has been reluctant to concede that one might go above 100% in electrical generating efficiency, but in the light of the next comment one wonders if a crack has now opened in the establishment defences.
When getting ball-race bearings for an application like this, please be aware that "closed" bearings such as these are not suitable as supplied:
This is because this type of bearing is usually packed with dense grease which completely destroys its free motion, making it worse as a bearing than a simple hole-and-shaft arrangement. However, in spite of this, the closed or "sealed" bearing is popular as the magnets tend to attract dirt and dust and if the device is not enclosed in a steel box as is necessary for the high power versions, then having the seal is considered to be an advantage. The way to deal with the grease packing is to soak the bearing in an isopropyal solvent cleaner to remove the manufacturer's grease, and then, when it has dried out, lubricate the bearing with two drops of a high quality thin oil. If it is intended to house the motor/generator in an earthed, sealed steel box then an alternative type of bearing which might be suitable is an open design like this:
especially if the air is removed from the box. Some constructors perfer to use ceramic bearings which are supposed to be immune to dirt. One supplier is here but as with everything else, these choices have to be made by the builder and will be influenced by his opinions.
I'm not sure where it came from, but here is a circuit diagram showing a transistor drive and the return of the back EMF of the drive coils to the driving power supply. Using this method, about 95% of the drive current can be returned, lowering the current draw enormously:
The diode feeding the power back to the supply is a Schottky type because of it's high-speed operation. It needs to be able to handle the peak pulse power and so should be one of the more robust types. What this circuit does not have is the very important switching on the output coils circuit. Another strange item is the way that the FET sensor is arranged with two sensors rather than one and with an additional battery. While it must be admitted that the current draw of the FET gate should be very low, there still does not seem to be much reason to have a second power supply. One other peculiarity in this diagram is the positioning of the drive coils. With them offset as shown, it has the effect of them being at an angle relative to the rotor magnets. It is not at all clear if this is an advanced operating technique or just poor drawing - I am inclined to assume the latter although I have no evidence for this other than the circuit design and the low quality of the original drawing which had to be improved considerably to arrive at the diagram shown above.
The coil generator output should be fed into a capacitor before being passed to whatever equipment is to be powered by the device. This is because the energy is being drawn from the local environment and is not conventional energy. Storing it in a capacitor converts it to a more normal version of electrical power, a feature which has also been mentioned by Don Smith and by John Bedini although their devices are quite different in operation.
The DC resistance of the coil windings is an important factor. The overall resistance should be either 36 ohms or 72 ohms for a complete set of coils, whether they are drive coils or power pick-up coils. Coils can be wired in parallel or in series or in series/parallel. So, for 72 ohms with four coils, the DC resistance of each coil could be 18 ohms for series-connected, 288 ohms for parallel connected, or 72 ohms for connection in series/parallel where two pairs of coils in series are then wired in parallel.
To help with assessing the wire diameter and length which you could use, here is a table of some of the common sizes in both American Wire Gage and Standard Wire Gauge:
So far, we have not discussed the generation of the timing pulses. A popular choice for a timing system is to use a slotted disc mounted on the rotor axle and sensing the slots with an "optical" switch. The "optical" part of the switch is usually performed by UV transmission and reception and as ultra violet is not visible to the human eye, describing the switching mechanism as "optical" is not really correct. The actual sensing mechanism is very simple as commercial devices are readily available for performing the task. The sensor housing contains both a UV LED to create the transmission beam, and a UV dependent resistor to detect that transmitted beam.
Here is an example of a neatly constructed timing mechanism made by Ron Pugh for his six-magnet rotor assembly:
This device happens to be one which is supplied here under their product code number : OP-5490-14327-00. As the slotted disc rotates, one of the slots comes opposite the sensor and allows the UV beam to pass through to the sensor. That lowers the resistance of the sensor device and that change is then used to trigger the drive pulse for whatever length of time the slot leaves the sensor clear. You will notice the balanced attachment method used by Ron to avoid having an unbalanced rotor assembly. There can be two timing discs, one for the drive pulses and one for switching the power pickup coils in and out of the circuit. The slots in the power pick-up timing disk will be very narrow as the switch-on period is only about 2.7 degrees. For a six-inch diameter disc where 360 degrees represents a circumference length of 18.85 inches (478.78 mm) a 2.7 degree slot would be only 9/64 inch (3.6 mm) wide. The arrangement for an axial magnet rotor set-up could be like this:
So to recap, the things which are necessary for getting an Adams Motor output into the serious bracket are:
If you want the original drawings and some explanation on the operation of the motor, then two publications from the late Robert Adams can be bought from www.nexusmagazine.com where the prices are quoted in Australian dollars, making the books look much more expensive than they actually are.
Here is a really impressive collection of well-informed practical material on building and using an Adams motor with details of sensors and how they work, core materials and their performances and how to locate the "sweet spot" - very highly recommended web site.
In 1999, two Australian men, John Christie and Ludwig Brits took Robert Adams’ design and patented it, calling it the Lutec. Their patent was issued in 2003 and considering that the 1995 patent of Robert Adams and Harold Aspden was in place, it is not clear to me how the Lutec patent could have been issued. However, it is encouraging to see a successful implementation of Robert’s design. They achieved COP=5 at a net one kilowatt power output, but made the major mistake of attempting to manufacture and sell the generators which would have cut into the profits of the oil companies, and as a result, they no longer offer the units and as far as I am aware, never sold one. The idea was that these 1 kilowatt modules could be stacked one on top of the other to generate higher outputs.
Here is a re-worded extract from their patent:
System for Controlling a Rotary Device
A system for controlling a rotary device, the system comprising a controller and a rotary device, which has a stator and rotor, wherein the controller is connected to the rotary device to control rotation of the rotary device, and wherein the controller is adapted to periodically energise the energising coils of the device to create a magnetic field of a polarity which induces the rotor to rotate in a single direction and wherein the controller is switched off so as to de-energise the energising coil when other forces, being forces other than those resulting from the energising coil, produce a resultant force which induces rotation of the rotor in that direction.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to motors which are used for generating a torque and generators which are used for generating electricity.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
A typical electric motor consists of a stator and rotor. The operation of an electric motor is based on the principle that an electric current through a conductor produces a magnetic field, the direction of current in an electro-magnetic such as a coil of wire determines the location of the magnets poles and like magnetic poles repel and opposite magnetic poles attract.
The stator which is typically called the field structure establishes a constant magnetic field in the motor. Typically, the magnetic field is established by permanent magnets which are called field magnets and located at equally spaced intervals around the rotor. The rotor or armature typically consists of a series of equally spaced coils which are able to be energised to produce a magnetic field and thus north or south poles.
By keeping the coils energised the interacting magnetic fields of the rotor and the stator produce rotation of the rotor. To ensure that rotation occurs in a single direction, a commutator is typically connected to the windings of the coils of the rotor so as to change the direction of the current applied to the coils. If the direction of the current was not reversed, the rotor would rotate in one direction and then reverse its direction before a full cycle of rotation could be completed.
The above description typifies a DC motor. AC motors do not have commutators because alternating current reverses its direction independently. For a typical AC motor such as an induction motor the rotor has no direct connection to the external source of electricity. Alternating current flows around field coils in the stator and produces a rotating magnetic field. This rotating magnetic field induces an electric current in the rotor resulting in another magnetic field. This induced magnetic field from the rotor interacts with the magnetic field from the stator causing the rotor to turn.
An electric generator is effectively the reverse of an electric motor. Instead of supplying electricity to coils of either the stator or rotor, the rotor or armature is rotated by physical forces produced by a ‘prime mover’. In effect a generator changes mechanical energy into electrical energy.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention is aimed at providing an improved rotary device which operates with improved efficiency compared to conventional rotary devices. The present invention is also concerned with providing a system for controlling a rotary device which is able to generate electrical and/or mechanical energy.
According to the present invention there is provided a system for controlling a rotary device, the system comprising a controller and a rotary device which has a stator and rotor, wherein the controller is connected to the rotary device to control rotation of the rotary device, and with the controller adapted to energise periodically, at least one energising coil of the device to create a magnetic field of a polarity which induces the rotor to rotate in a single direction and where the controller is switched off so as to de-energise the energising coil when other forces, being forces other than those resulting from the energised energising coil produce a resultant force which induces rotation of the rotor in the single direction.
Preferably the controller is adapted to energise the energising coil for a period during which the resultant force from the other forces acts to rotate the rotor in the opposite direction, whereby the force applied by the energising coil overcomes, being greater than, the resultant force. The controller is preferably adapted to switch off to de-energise the energising coil before the resultant force is zero. The controller preferably is adapted to switch off to de-energise the energising coil for a period before the resultant force is zero, and to allow back EMF induced by other forces to urge the rotor to rotate in the single direction before the resultant force is zero. Preferably, the resultant force excludes forces arising from back-EMF.
The energising coil may be adapted to be energised by the controller through a predetermined angle of a complete revolution of the rotor. Alternatively the energising coil is adapted to be energised by the controller for a predetermined period of time for each revolution of the motor. Preferably then, each energising coil is energised more than once during a single revolution (cycle) of the rotor. Each energising coil may be energised each time the resultant force applies a force to the rotor in the opposite direction. Each energising coil may be energised by a periodic pulse applied by the controller. The periodic pulses are preferably all of the same sign.
Each of the energising coils are energised whenever the resultant force is in the opposite direction and then for a period less than the period during which the resultant force changes from zero to a maximum and back to zero.
In one embodiment, the stator has at least one energising coil. The rotor may have at least one magnetic field generator which is able to generate a magnetic field which interacts with the magnetic field generated by each energising coil when energised, to apply a force to rotate the rotor in one direction. Each energising coil preferably includes a magnetic interaction method which is adapted to either repel or attract the magnetic field generator.
In another embodiment, the magnetic interaction means is adapted to attract the magnetic field generator. The magnetic interaction means may comprise a ferrous body or body of another substance which is attracted by a magnet. The magnetic field generator may be a permanent magnet. The magnetic interaction means may be an iron core or a permanent magnet. Preferably the magnetic field generator comprises a permanent magnet, or member attracted to a magnet.
The stator preferably comprises a plurality of energising coils evenly spaced around the rotor. Each energising coil is preferably an electromagnet. Preferably each energising coil includes the magnetic interaction means through its coil. Preferably the rotor comprises a plurality of evenly spaced magnets.
In one embodiment, the rotor comprises a plurality of evenly spaced permanent magnets which may all be of the same polarity. The evenly spaced magnetic field generators may be energisable coils simulating magnets. Preferably the poles of the magnetic field generating means are all the same. The magnetic poles produced by energised energising coils may be the same as that for the magnetic field generators.
The magnetic field generators for the stator may be permanent magnets. Preferably the rotor has several energising coils and a commutator. The rotor may be an armature and the stator may be a field winding. Preferably the rotor magnetic field generator is energised by an external power supply being DC or AC current. The stator magnetic interaction means may be energised by coils operating on AC or DC current.
According to one embodiment the stator includes at least one induction coil which is adapted to have a current induced in it by the magnetic field generator of the rotor. Each induction coil may be separate from each energising coil. Each induction coil may also be an energising coil. Each energising coil may be adapted to be connected to an output circuit whereby current induced in each energising coil is output to the output circuit.
It is preferred that switching circuitry is adapted to rectify current induced in the induction coils and that the rectifying occurs just before each energising coil is energised by the power supply. Preferably current output to the output circuit is adapted to be used to run an electric device. The controller preferably comprises a switching circuit which is adapted to connect each energising coil to an output circuit when no current is generated to energise the energising coil and the controller provides a switching circuit. The controller may be a rotary switch with at least one contact which is aligned with each magnetic field generator and with at least one contact aligned with the permanent magnets of the rotor.
The rotary switch may have the same number of contacts as the number of Magnetic field generators; normally being magnets. Each contact may have a width that varies with vertical height and taper in width from the top to the bottom. Ideally, the rotary switch comprises adjustable brushes which are able to be moved vertically. The rotary switch and rotor may be located on coaxial central axis and mounted on a common axial. Preferably the rotor switch is mounted in a separate chamber from the rotor.
In one embodiment, each energising coil is positioned so as to repel an adjacent magnet when energised. Each energising coil may be adapted to be energised by back-EMF only for a predetermined period of each cycle which occurs after current to the energising coil is switched off.
In a further embodiment, each energising coil is adapted to attract the magnetic field generator of the rotor. The present invention contemplates a number of variations to the components making up the systems described above. For example the current, voltage, magnetic field generated, the number of poles of magnets for the rotor/stator may all vary and accordingly will effect the timing of switching of the energising coils. The rotary device may have a greater number of magnetic poles generated on the stator/field winding than in the rotor/armature or vice versa. In one embodiment, the number of poles on both of these are the same.
It is preferred that the switching of the energising coils, which is controlled by the controller, is adapted to maximise the influence of back-EMF produced. It is preferred that the energising coils are effectively provided with a pulsed electric current of minimum duration, which duration is enough to maintain rotation of the rotor and produce a desired output of torque or current.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Preferred embodiments of the present invention will now be described by way of example only with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
Fig.1 shows a cross-sectional front view of a rotary device as a control therefore in accordance with a first embodiment of the invention;
Fig.2 shows a top view of the controller shown in Fig.1.
Fig.3 shows a side view of the controller shown in Fig.1
Fig.4A shows a schematic view of a system for controlling rotary device in accordance with the first embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.4B shows a schematic view of the rotary device shown in Fig.4A;
Fig.5 shows a graphical representation of force versus angular position of permanent magnet M1 of the system shown in Fig.4A;
Fig.6 shows a series of four graphs of input current versus angular movement of each permanent magnet of the system shown in Fig.4A;
Fig.7 shows a graphical representation of input voltage versus input current for each coil of the rotary device shown in the system of Fig.4A;
Fig.8 shows a schematic diagram of variation of natural magnetic attraction versus angular displacement of a rotor having a single permanent magnet and a stator having a single energising coil, in accordance with a second embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.9 shows a graphical representation of magnetic field versus angular displacement in accordance with the second embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.10 shows a graphical representation of induced induction versus angular displacement of the permanent magnet in accordance with the second embodiment of the present invention; and
Fig.11 shows a further graphical representation of induced induction electro-magnetic force versus angular displacement of the permanent magnet in accordance with the second embodiment of the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
As shown in Fig.4A according to the first embodiment of the invention a system is provided consisting of a rotor 11 having four permanent magnets M1, M2, M3, M4 which are evenly spaced at 90° with respect to each other. The system includes a stator 12 consisting of three electromagnet energising coils A, B, C which are spaced 120° apart from each other.
Each of the coils A, B, C is connected in circuit with a power supply of 54 volts and a switch RS1, RS2, RS3. Each of the contacts RS1, RS2, RS3 are part of a rotary switch 13 having contacts 14, 15, 16, 17 which are spaced apart at 90° with respect to an adjacent contact.
The rotary switch 13 is provided with contact brushes 18, 19 and is mounted on an axle 20 which is the same or common with the axle of the rotor 11.
Each of the contacts 14, 15, 16, 17 is specially configured with a trapezoidal shape, with the two non-parallel sides consisting of a straight side 21, and a tapered side 22 which tapers outwards from top side 23 to bottom side 24. The result is that each contact increases in a width moving from the top side to the bottom side 24.
The brush 18 is able to be moved vertically relative to the contacts 14, 15, 16, 17 while the brush 19 is in constant contact with the base. Although Fig.1 only shows the rotary switch 13 having a single series of four contacts 14, 15, 16, 17, for the three-coil stator shown in Fig.4A, there would in fact be, preferably, three contact discs on the axle 20. Each contact disc would have contacts for a respective one of the coils A, B, C, but each brush for the other discs would be offset by 30° and 60° respectively.
A description of the operation of the system shown in Fig.1 to Fig.4A will now be set forth below. If it is assumed that the magnets M1, M2, M3, M4 are initially aligned as shown in Fig.4A with magnet M1 opposite one end of coil A, coil A is energised whenever one of the magnets M1 to M4 is aligned opposite it and for a predetermined time after the permanent magnet has passed it.
As shown in Fig.6 coil A is energised by contact RS1 providing an electrical connection through the rotary switch 13. This occurs by one of the contacts 14 to 17 being aligned in contact with brush 18. At this time, current is applied from the power source VA and continues to be applied until the brush 18 is no longer in contact with one of the contacts 14 to 17.
For the three coil/four pole arrangement of the first embodiment, it is preferred that the brushes are moved to a vertical position where the width of each contact is sufficient for each of the switches RS1, RS2 and RS3 to be closed for 12° 51′ 50″ of the rotation of the rotor 11. After this time the switches RS1 to RS3 are open and no more current is delivered to any one of the coils A to C. When the current to each of the coils is switched off a back-EMF is induced in each of the coils A to C and then back EMF represented by item Z results in current being maintained in each of the coils for an additional small period of time after the contacts RS1 to RS3 are opened. By switching the coils A to C in the above manner the rotor 11 can be induced to rotate with a lower amount of input current to the stator than would be required if current was delivered constantly to the coils A to C.
Table 1 below shows the resultant force on the rotor 13 for angular positions of the magnets M1 to M4 for angular displacements of magnet from 5° to 30°.
As shown when the magnets of the rotor 13 are rotated 50 at a time the resultant force on the rotor changes from a counter clockwise force from 5° to 15° to a clockwise force from 15° to 30°. At 0°, 15° and 30° the resultant force on the rotor is 0 so that if the permanent magnets of the rotor were aligned in any of these orientations there would be no resultant force to urge the rotor either clockwise or anti clockwise.
As shown in Fig.5 a plot of magnitude of resultant force applied to the rotor against angular displacement of the rotor shows a sinusoidal curve having a cycle of 30°. For a full 360° rotation of the rotor the rotor would experience 12 cycles of variation in resultant force.
What Table 1 and Fig.5 show is that unless an additional force is applied to rotate the rotor clockwise or counter-clockwise, the rotor will not be able to spin continuously in either direction. If it is desired to rotate the rotor clockwise, then the force must overcome the counter-clockwise resultant force which occurs from 0 to 15°, 30° to 45°, 60° to 75° etc through the whole 360° rotation of the rotor.
Because each of the coils A to C has an iron core even when the coils are not energised the natural magnetic attraction occurring between each magnet and the iron cores results in each magnet M1 to M4 attempting to move in a direction to the closest iron core. Whenever a magnet is opposite an iron core the magnetic attraction is greatest and there is no force applied by that magnet to move the rotor either clockwise or counter-clockwise. Likewise when a magnet is positioned midway between adjacent iron cores, there is also a resultant force of 0 which translates to no resultant force being applied to the rotor to rotate it in either direction by that magnet.
As shown in Fig.5 and Table 1, if magnet M1 is moved 5° clockwise, there is a natural attraction between the magnet M1 and iron core of coil A to pull the magnet M1 in a counter-clockwise direction. If the resultant forces applied by the other magnets were sufficient to overcome the attraction between permanent magnet M1 and the iron core of coil A the rotor would still manage to move clockwise. However, as shown in Table 1 the angular position of the other magnets M2 to M4 results in an overall counter-clockwise resultant force. To overcome the resultant force, it is necessary to produce a pole X at coil A of like polarity to magnet M1 and thus push M1 away from coil A.
As shown in Fig.5 the strength of the magnetic repelling action between coil A and magnet M1 must be sufficient to overcome the resultant force urging the rotor to move counter-clockwise.
A current could be applied to the coil A for an angular displacement of 15° of magnet M1, but it is preferred that coil A be energised only for 12° 51′ 50″ angular displacement of magnet M1. By applying current to coil A for this period of angular displacement a minimum amount of current is applied to coil A in order to overcome the counter-clockwise resultant force which occurs for 0° to 15° of angular displacement of magnet M1.
Although current can be applied to coil A for longer than this period it has been discovered that by applying current for this period a back-EMF is induced in coil A which adds to the repulsive force applied to magnet M1 by coil A. Every time one of the magnets M1 to M4 is aligned with coil A at 0°, coil A is energised for 12° 51′ 50″ of angular displacement of that magnet. Thus as shown in Fig.6, current ends up being applied to coil A at 0° to 12° 51′ 50″, and from 90° to 102° 51′ 50″ and from 180° to 192° 51′ 50″ and from 270° to 282° 51′ 50″.
A similar switching pattern is applied to coils B and C. For example coil B is energised when magnet M2 has moved 30° to when it has moved 42° 51′ 50″ and likewise coil C is energised when magnet M3 has moved 60° to 72° 51′ 50″. It is preferred that the rotor has a diameter of 230 mm and that each coil has a resistance of 6.8 ohms
Fig.7 shows a graphical representation of input voltage versus input current for a coil resistance of 6.8 ohms and for a four pole rotor which is 230 mm in diameter. The exact timing sequence for switching coils on and off will vary depending on the parameters of the rotary device and the controller. Accordingly by varying the input voltage, coil resistance and overall impedance of the input circuit for each coil the duration during which a coil must be turned on will change. In fact, there are many factors which can change the timing sequence of switching the coils on, and some of these are summarised below:
The variables include the choice of material used in constructing the stator iron core, the number of stator iron cores and their positioning as well as the physical size, section area and shape of the stator iron cores.
The physical size and magnetic strength and shape of the polarised permanent magnetic body as contained in the rotor, the number of polarised permanent magnetised bodies being contained in the rotor, the positioning and spacing of the same, the use of all like polarities of permanent magnetic bodies or the use of alternating polarities for the permanent magnetic bodies.
The physical size of the coils being positioned on to the stator iron core, the type of wire used to wind the coils, such as copper, silver, aluminium or others. The shape and cross-sectional areas of the winding wire, such as round, square, triangular, rectangular and others; the number of turns and layers wound on to the coil and consequent ohms resistance; the method of winding on to a coil holder, single winding, double winding, double winding same direction, double winding opposite direction, left to right or right to left, interwoven winding, whether the above examples would be wound on to a single coil holder.
Speed of Rotor
This can be controlled by the length of the directed (input) DC current (on and cut-off period) and/or the control of the supply voltage used to supply the stator coils.
Other variations that may be made to the system include the following:
a. The coils can be connected in series, parallel, or series parallel.
b. It is only when the north/south arrangements of the permanent magnets are used in the rotor that even numbers of permanent magnets are necessary, but not necessarily even numbers of pairs of stator coils positioned in the stator. Furthermore the direction DC current Supplied to the stator coils in the north south arrangement above must be synchronised, meaning that the magnetic field as needed in the stator coil(s) must be of corresponding polarity to the stator coil(s), iron core end, which faces the permanent magnets.
c. When using permanent magnets which are all of the same polarity, then any number of permanent magnets in the rotor may be used providing there is sufficient room to contain them at even spacings on the rotor.
d. The spacings between the permanent magnets must be exact, if too close to each other the directed DC current will become less effective, if too far apart the full potential will not be obtained.
e. It is possible to have various combinations of permanent magnet and stator coil iron cores similar but not restricted to the following:
i. Three magnets in the rotor, one to three stator coils can be used.
ii. Five permanent magnets in the rotor, one to five stator coils can be used.
iii. Nine permanent magnets in the rotor one to three or nine stator coils can be used.
iv. The output varies with each combination.
v. Regardless of the rotor containing even or uneven numbers of permanent magnets the stator can operate with only one stator coil and stator iron core and still be highly efficient but with reduced total output.
f. The stator and rotor should be made from non magnetic materials like wood, plastic, bronze and similar non-magnetic materials.
Although switching is performed in its preferred form by a mechanical rotary switch, it can also be performed by solid state electronics or other switching devices. The length of the ON period for each coil is the physical length ratio. When the brushes are in contact with the conductive part of the rotary switch and the non-conductive part. This ratio is referred as the frequency or number of ratios in one second. The output produced by the rotary device can be mechanical and electrical at the same time or may be mainly electrical or mainly mechanical. The reason for this will be explained with reference to the second embodiment in which it is assumed the stator has a single energising coil with an iron core and the rotor has a single permanent magnet.
When the rotor’s permanent magnet is rotated very slowly by hand in the clockwise direction it is possible to determine the point where the natural magnetic attraction between the rotor’s permanent magnet and the stator’s iron core occurs. When the leading edge of the permanent magnet has reached point A as shown in Fig.8, the Natural Magnetic Attraction begins and increases exponentially until the centre of the permanent magnet is aligned at point B opposite the iron core 30. If the permanent magnet is rotated away from point B the Natural Magnetic Attraction will be at a maximum at point B and then decrease exponentially from that maximum until the trailing edge of the permanent magnet has reached point C where it then ceases.
When the rotor is moved clockwise at a constant speed and an oscilloscope is connected to the stator coil it is possible to observe the movement of the permanent magnet between point A and point B and then between point B and point C as shown in Fig.9.
An induced induction curve is then apparent on the oscilloscope and this induced induction produces a sine wave curve 31. Furthermore the induced induction between point A and point B is a negative going induced induction in this instance and the induced induction between point B and point C is a positive going induced induction in this instance. It is also noted that the negative-going and positive-going induced induction curves are exactly the same but opposite to each other.
When the permanent magnet begins to induce a negative-going induction in the stator coil at 0° of the sine wave curve 31, the induction induced is then at 0. At 90° degrees of the sine wave curve the induced induction is at a maximum and then goes back to 0 when the permanent magnet is aligned with point B, or at 180° of the sine wave curve, when the permanent magnet starts to move away from its alignment with point B or is at 180° of the sine wave curve.
When the permanent magnet start to move away from its alignment with point B and is moving towards point C the now positive-going induced induction is first at 0 at 180° of the sine wave curve, then at a maximum of 270° of the sine wave curve and then back to 0 at 360° of the sine wave curve. It should be noted that 0° and 360° of the sine wave curve are not necessarily the same as point A for 0° and point C for 360° of the sine wave curve. Points A and C are determined by the strength of the rotors permanent magnet and the section area and/or shape of the stator iron core.
The negative-going induced induction between 0° and 180° of the sine wave curve produces an electro-magnetic force in the stator coil and iron core of opposite polarity. The iron core end facing the rotor is of opposite polarity to the permanent magnet in this instance, as shown in Fig.10. The positive-going induced induction between 180° and 360° of the sine wave curve produces an electro-magnetic force in the stator coil and iron core of the same polarity in the iron core end facing the rotor, being of the same polarity as the permanent magnet in this instance. When the permanent magnet reaches point A the natural magnetic attraction between the permanent magnet and the stator iron core is at it’s minimum and starts to move toward point B. When the induced induction then also starts to occur at 0° of the sine wave curve, being somewhere between point A and point B, the natural magnetic attraction has already increased.
When the permanent magnet is at 0° of the sine wave curve and is moving towards point B or 180° of the sine wave curve, the negative-going induced induction in the stator coil is producing an electro-magnetic force (field) in the stator iron core with the iron core end facing the rotor being of an opposite polarity to the permanent magnet and is at zero effect at 0° of the sine wave curve, than to a maximum effect at 90° of the sine wave curve and then back to zero effect at 180° of the sine wave curve.
The permanent magnet is then aligned at point B. There the magnetic attraction force is proportional with the distance and this increases exponentially when moving from point A towards point B. There the stator iron core is fixed and stationary at point B. Accordingly it will be the permanent magnet that moves towards point B.
For example, if the stator iron core was also a polarised permanent magnet of the same strength but of opposite polarity to the permanent magnet, the magnetic attraction force would be at least four times greater because of the distance factor as explained earlier. Furthermore, this would also occur because of the doubling of the magnetic force between the magnetic north and south arrangement. It follows therefore that the magnetic attraction between the permanent magnet and the iron core end facing the rotor increases dramatically when the induced induction in the stator coil produces an electro-magnetic force of the opposite polarity at the stator iron core end facing the rotor as described above. The increase follows the sine wave curve starting from 0° to 90° of the sine wave and the above effect decreases from 90° back to 180° of the sine wave curve.
A combination curve of the natural magnetic attraction and the induced induction in the stator coil, producing an electro-magnetic force at the stator iron coil end facing the rotor of opposite polarity 33 is shown in Fig.10 from 0° to 180°. For 180° to 360° the stator iron coil and rotor of like polarities 34 are shown. When the permanent magnet is aligned at point B and a direct current is supplied to the stator coil for only a short period starting at point B then the DC current is applied only long enough to overcome the natural magnetic attraction between permanent magnet and the stator's iron core end facing the rotor. The directed DC current as supplied to the stator coil is producing a like-polarity at the iron core end facing the rotor and thus is repelling the permanent magnet away from point B towards point C. The natural magnetic attraction has thus changed to natural magnetic repulsion due to the like-polarity of the stator iron core end facing the rotor.
The length of the “ON” period has to be sufficient to overcome the natural magnetic attraction and could be as long as until the trailing edge reaches point C where the natural magnetic attraction ceases. However there the positive-going induced induction in the stator coil as produced by the permanent magnet produces an electromagnetic force in the stator or iron core end facing the rotor, producing a like polarity as the permanent magnet starting at 180° of the sine wave curve or point B and zero at that instant. At 270° of the sine wave curve, it is at a maximum and then ends up at zero at 360° of the sine wave curve. In other words at 270° of the sine wave the force is at maximum repulsion and there is induced induction in the stator coil depending on the speed of the rotor. The effect of variation on the speed of the rotor is shown by curves 35 in Fig.11.
As shown in Fig.11 regardless of the speed of the rotor the induced induction in the stator coil is at a maximum at 270° of the sine wave curve.
The ON period can be brought back to the point where the induced induction is great enough to carry the electromagnetic repulsion through to 360° of the sine wave curve and beyond point C. Therefore the greater the rotor speed the shorter the ON period of the input DC current has to be, due to the high induced induction in the stator coil as explained earlier. When the “ON” period is switched off it is called the “cut-off” point. From the cut-off point to 360° of the sine wave curve the repulsion is produced by back-EMF the induced induction in the stator coil as previously explained.
During the ON period, the magnetic repulsion force produced between the stator iron core at point B and the permanent magnet can be viewed as a combined repulsion force. Some of this force is produced by natural magnetic repulsion of the permanent magnet and some by the input DC current as supplied to the stator coil. Therefore if the induced magnetic force as produced by the input DC current in the stator coil is made equal to that of the permanent magnet with the same polarity, then half of this repulsion force between the on period and the cut-off point, in this instance, is from the natural magnetic repulsion of the permanent magnet as a reaction to the induced magnetic force as supplied by the input DC current to the stator coil. The input DC current as supplied to the stator coil produces the magnetic repulsion force and is the only outside input to the overall system for total movement between point A and point C.
The total input can be summarised as:
a. The combined natural magnetic attraction and the electro-magnetic force as produced by the induced induction in the stator coil between point A to point B.
b. The combined magnetic repulsion force between the permanent magnet and the stator iron core facing the rotor during the on period and the cut-off point.
c. The electro-magnetic repulsion (see induced induction as explained earlier) between the cut-off point and point C.
d. The electro-magnetic repulsion produced by the back-EMF as represented by shaded portion 36 of Fig.11.
In another embodiment of the present invention the stator has two coils positioned at 180° with respect to each other and the rotor has three permanent magnets spaced at 120° apart. As set out in Table 2 below from 0 to 30° the resultant force urges the rotor counter clockwise. At 30° the resultant force is 0 and from 30° to 90° the resultant force is clockwise. From 90° to 120° the resultant force is counter-clockwise. This completes a full cycle which is repeated three times throughout a 360° rotation of the rotor.
With the above configuration of poles and coils, if it is desired to move the rotor clockwise, current would need to be supplied to the coils of the stator to overcome the counter-clockwise force whenever this is counter-clockwise, but as explained previously, current does not need to be supplied to the coil to energise the coil for the full period during which the resultant force is counter-clockwise.
For convenience and ease of explanation the above embodiments have been restricted to permanent magnets on the rotor and coils on the stator However the basic concept behind the invention does not change if the permanent magnets are replaced by coils which are energised to produce the appropriate magnetic poles.
Similarly for an AC rotary device a rotating magnetic field generated by the stator winding or by the rotor/armature winding could similarly be switched to reduce the amount of current required to maintain rotation of the motor in one direction and to maximise the influence of back-EMF on maintaining rotation of the motor in a single direction.
The above principles also apply to generators where coils are energised to produce a magnetic field. In such a situation the coils are switched on for a time sufficient to maintain rotation in the single direction and to maximise the influence of back-EMF which tends to maintain rotation of the rotor/armature in a single direction.
By using the above concept it is possible to produce an output which can be both mechanical and electrical at the same time. Current generated in the stator coil windings can be used as an output and likewise the torque generated by the rotor can be used to supply a mechanical output. Likewise only one or the other form of output may be utilised.
Tewari Paramahamsa’s Self-Powered Generator
In April 2015, the famous 80-year old Indian scientist Tewari (www.tewari.org) well-known for his use of the homopolar generator to produce large volumes of hydrogen for commercial use, announced his successful 20-kilowatt, self-powered generator design and his corresponding patent application, shown below, was published. Here is a picture of a prototype, which is held together by four spring-loaded straps. The coils are held in place inside the frame and permanent magnets are spun inside those frames:
The principle of operation is simple and elegant. The power output conductors are arranged in such a way so that half of the magnetic field generated by the output current (that is, the magnetic field which opposes the motor spinning the rotor) is in one direction and the remaining half is in the opposite direction, cancelling the effect of the first half. The result is an arrangement where increasing power output has no noticeable effect on the input power. In other words, the Lenz Law drag effect has been effectively overcome. Tewari is due our warmest congratulations for what he has achieved. Being sensible, Tewari does not mention anything about 20 kilowatts of self-powered output, but instead, puts the design forward as being an improvement in the design of existing generators – and it is most certainly that. Here is his patent application:
A reduced reaction alternating current generator including a hollow stator core, a cylindrical rotor within the stator, a freely rotating shaft coupled to the rotor, a first set of magnets in which the south pole of each magnet is coupled to the surface of the rotor and the north pole of each magnet is facing the inner surface of the hollow stator core, a second set of magnets in which the north pole of each magnet is coupled to the surface of the rotor and the south pole of each magnet is facing the inner surface of the hollow stator core, and a set of silicon steel pieces coupled to the outer surface of the rotor comprised of individual silicon steel pieces positioned adjacent to and longitudinally in line with each individual magnet within the first set of magnets and each individual magnet within the second set of magnets.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Michael Faraday discovered the principles of electromagnetic induction and invented the rotating electrical generator in 1832. The generator was known as the Unipolar Generator, Acyclic Generator and Disk Generator. This generator operated on the principle that voltage is induced in a conductor in relative motion to an external magnetic field. Moreover, when the conductor is configured as a closed circuit and is in relative motion with an external magnetic field, a current will be induced to flow through that circuit. The induced current itself will generate an induced magnetic field surrounding the conductor. The direction of the induced current is determined by Fleming's right hand rule which states that the magnetic field produced by the current induced in the conductor will repel the external magnetic field which induced the current in the conductor. As such, the induced magnetic field surrounding the conductor and the external magnetic field repel each other so as to create a torque on the conductor which opposes that conductor's movement relative to the external magnetic field. Faraday's generator and all subsequent generators have in common, the production of this counter or back-torque.
The efficiency of an electrical generator is governed by mechanical and electrical limitations. The mechanical limitations include windage and friction of the generator's rotor and bearings. The electrical limitations include electrical impedance within the windings of the generator as well as the above-described counter or back-torque.
A prime mover is attached to a generator so as to cause the rotation of the generator's rotor resulting in the production of either a direct or an alternating current within the generator's conductor and a back-torque which counters the rotation caused by the prime mover. The prime mover may be powered by steam, wind or water. Therefore, the problem with standard generators is that their efficiency is limited due to back-torque generated as a result of current induced within the generator's conductor windings.
The following definitions are provided for convenience and are not to be taken as a limitation of the present invention.
Fleming's Left Hand Rule refers to the effect that when a current flows in a conductor and an external magnetic field is applied across that current flow, the conductor will experience a force perpendicular to both the external magnetic field and the direction of the current flow. The Left Hand Rule can be used to represent three mutually orthogonal axes using the thumb to represent a mechanical force, the first finger to represent a magnetic field and the middle finger to represent the current, each finger positioned at right angles to each other.
Synchronous generator refers to an electrical generator which turns at the same speed as the drive mechanism, also known as the synchronous speed. A synchronous generator produces an alternating current and voltage at a frequency proportional to the rotation speed and to the number of excitation poles internal to the generator.
Asynchronous generator refers to an alternating current generator that uses the principles of induction to produce power. Asynchronous generators operate by mechanically turning their rotor faster than the synchronous speed, giving negative slip.
Low carbon steel refers to steel containing less carbon than other steels. This steel is inherently easier to cold-form due to its soft and ductile nature.
Grain-oriented electrical steel refers to sheet steel used for laminations in power transformers having a silicon level of 3% or less.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
It is the primary purpose of the present invention to overcome the above problems by providing a reduced reaction rotating alternating current generator providing improvement in efficiency characteristics not currently available in standard alternating current generators.
To accomplish this objective, according to one embodiment of the present invention a reduced reaction alternating current generator is disclosed comprising a hollow stator core having an axis comprised of longitudinally positioned sheets laminated with a high permeability magnetic material, the laminated sheets including longitudinally embedded slots in which a conductor winding is laid parallel to the axis, a cylindrical rotor concentric with and positioned inside the hollow stator core comprised of a high permeability magnetic material and a shaft coupled to the rotor and driven by an external source so as to freely rotate the rotor relative to the hollow stator core. The generator comprises a first set of magnets in which the south pole of each magnet is coupled to the surface of the rotor and the north pole of each magnet is facing the inner surface of the hollow stator core, a second set of magnets in which the north pole of each magnet is coupled to the surface of the rotor and the south pole of each magnet is facing the inner surface of the hollow stator core and a set of silicon steel pieces coupled to the outer surface of the rotor comprised of individual silicon steel pieces positioned adjacent to and longitudinally in line with each individual magnet within the first set of magnets and each individual magnet within the second set of magnets.
In addition to the foregoing, other features, objects and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the following description.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
The following detailed description, which is given by way of example only, will best be appreciated in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
Fig.1 depicts a longitudinal cross-sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.2 depicts an end cross-sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.3 depicts a centre cross-sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.4 depicts a longitudinal cross-sectional view of the flow of magnetic fields emanating from the first set of magnets within a reduced reaction generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.5 and Fig.6 depict the interaction between the magnetic flux originating from the north poles of the first set of magnets and the magnetic flux resulting from an induced current in the conductor winding according to an example embodiment of the present invention;
Fig.7 depicts a longitudinal cross-sectional view of the flow of magnetic fields emanating from the second set of magnets within a reduced reaction generator accordance to an example embodiment of the present invention; and
Fig.8 and Fig.9 depict the interaction between the magnetic flux originating from the south poles of the second set of magnets and the magnetic flux resulting from an induced current in the conductor winding according to an example embodiment of the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a reduced reaction rotating alternating current generator providing improvement in efficiency characteristics not currently available in standard alternating current generators.
Fig.1 depicts a longitudinal cross-sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention. As shown in Fig.1, the induction machine 100 comprises a shaft 101, a rotor 102, a stator 103, a first set of magnets 104, a second set of magnets 105 (not shown), a conductor winding 106 and silicon steel pieces 107.
The rotor 102 is a cylinder of high permeability magnetic material attached directly to the shaft 101 using any conventional known method that provides for a secure and permanent bonding under normal operating conditions. The rotor 102 is dimensioned so as to be fully enclosed within the stator 103 while the shaft 101 extends beyond one or both ends of the stator 103.
The shaft 101 is mounted within the stator 103 so as to allow the shaft 101 and the attached rotor 102 to rotate freely within the stator 103 when the shaft 101 is driven by an external drive source. The external drive source is coupled to one end of the shaft 101 that extends beyond the stator 103. The external drive source may be driven either at a variable speed or at a synchronous speed. As such the drive source may be an alternating current (AC) based source or a direct current (DC) based source. The drive source may also be a non-electric based drive source such as a hydro, wind or an internal combustion based source. The means of coupling the drive source to the shaft 101 will be dependent on the type of drive source and any conventionally known means appropriate to that drive source type.
In an example embodiment, the shaft is 30 mm diameter 1018 steel, the rotor is 370 mm diameter 1018 steel and the stator has a 570 mm diameter.
Provisions are made on the cylindrical surface of the rotor 102 for the mounting of the first set of magnets 104 and for the mounting of the second set of magnets 105 near each of the ends of the rotor 102. Provisions are also made for the mounting of the silicon steel pieces 107 on the rotor at positions near the centre of the rotor.
The first set of magnets 104 and the second set of magnets 105 (not shown) are attached to the ends of the rotor cylinder 102 using any conventional method known to provide a secure and permanent bonding under normal operating conditions. Each end of the rotor 102 contains one of the first set of magnets 104 and one of the second set of magnets 105, for a total of four magnets. The first set of magnets 104 are oriented with their north poles facing the stator 103 and their south poles coupled to the rotor 102. The second set of magnets 105 (not shown) are oriented with their south poles facing the stator 103 and their north poles coupled to the rotor 102. The magnets may be permanent magnets or electromagnets.
In an example embodiment, the permanent magnets are Neodymium magnets with a maximum energy product (BHmax) of 48 to 50 MGOe. Moreover, in another example embodiment, the electromagnets are radial pole and are attached to the rotor in a manner generally known in the industry.
The silicon steel pieces 107 are also attached to the rotor 102 using any conventional method known to provide a secure and permanent bonding under normal operating conditions. There is a single silicon steel piece 107 corresponding to each magnet of the first and second sets of magnets 104 attached to the rotor 102. Each silicon steel piece 107 is positioned in line with its corresponding magnet leaving a predefined distance 109 between silicon steel piece and its corresponding magnet. Each silicon steel piece 107 is comprised of silicon steel which is a speciality steel tailored to have a small magnetic hysteresis area and high magnetic permeability. A high magnetic permeability is defined as having a magnetic saturation level above 1.8 Teslas.
In an example embodiment, the first and second sets of magnets 104, 105 and the silicon steel pieces 107 are each dimensioned to have approximately the same surface area and the distance 109 between silicon steel piece and a corresponding magnet is no more than the length of the magnet in the axial plane.
The rotor 102 and the attached magnets 104, 105 and steel pieces 107 are each sized as to provide for an air-gap 108 of a predetermined size between the outer surfaces of the attached magnets 104, 105 and silicon steel pieces 107 and the inner surface of the stator 103. The air gap is chosen to provide free rotation of the rotor 102 and the attached first and second sets of magnets 104, 105 within the stator 103 as well as the efficient flow of magnetic flux into and out of the stator 103 across the air-gap 108. In an example embodiment, the air-gap 108 is within a range of 3 mm to 10 mm.
The stator 103 is composed of longitudinally placed silicon steel laminates having grains oriented along the path of the magnetic flux that enters and exits the stator 103. The stator 103 also includes longitudinally oriented slots in which the conductor winding 106 is laid, the conductor winding 106 positioned such as to be cut through by the rotating magnetic flux originating from the first and second sets of magnets 104 attached to the rotating motor 102. In an example embodiment, the stator is comprised of a magnetically inert material, such as PVC piping, of suitable strength to support grain oriented steel lamination sheets.
In an example embodiment, the magnetic flux emanating from the first and second magnets is approximately 10,000 Gauss.
Fig.2 depicts an end cross sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention. As shown in Fig.2 the first set of magnets 104 with their north poles facing the stator 103 and their south poles coupled to the rotor 102 are positioned at opposing in-line positions on one end of the rotor 102.
Similarly, the second set of magnets 105 with their south poles facing the stator 103 and their north poles coupled to the rotor 102 are positioned at opposing in-line positions on the same end of the rotor 102 at a ninety degree offset from the first set of magnets 104. An identical first set of magnets 104 and second set of magnets 105 are coupled to the other end of the rotor 102 at similar positions
Fig.3 depicts a centre cross sectional view of a reduced reaction alternating current generator according to an example embodiment of the present invention. As shown in Fig.3, a single silicon steel piece 107 is positioned longitudinally in line with each magnet of the first and second sets of magnets 104, 105 (not shown). The position of each silicon steel piece 107 provides for a predefined distance 108 between a silicon steel piece 107 and its corresponding magnet.
In an example embodiment, the distance between a silicon steel piece 107 and its corresponding magnet is equal to the longitudinal length of the magnet.
Referring again to Fig.1, an electromagnetic force (EMF) is created across the conductor winding 106 embedded within the stator 103 when the magnetic flux emanating from the first set of magnets 104 and from the second set of magnets 105 cut through the conductor winding 106 as the rotor 102 rotates. Looking in the direction of arrow C in Fig.1, with the rotor 102 turning in a clockwise direction and the magnetic flux emanating in a vertically upward direction from the north poles of the first set of magnets 104, the current generated as a result of the induced electromagnetic force will travel from left to right 110 within the conductor winding 106.
The current direction is as per Lenz's Law which states when an electric current is induced in a conductor, the direction of the induced current is such that its magnetic effect will oppose the action that gives rise to the induced current. As such, the direction of the induced current 110 results in a torque such as to oppose the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102. Specifically, looking in the direction of the arrow C in Fig.1, the interaction between the counter-clockwise magnetic field surrounding the conductor as a result of the induced electromagnetic force and the upward magnetic flux emanating from the north poles first pair of magnets 104 will create a counter-clockwise torque opposing the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102.
Fig.4 depicts a longitudinal cross sectional view of the flow of magnetic fields emanating from the first set of magnets within a reduced reaction generator. As shown in Fig.4, the magnetic flux 401 emanating from the north poles of the first set of magnets 104 travels vertically upwards, across the air gap 108 and into the stator 103 as the magnetic flux 401 rotates with the rotor 102 relative to the stator 103. As this rotating magnetic flux 401 enters the static stator 103, it cuts sideways across the conductor winding 106 embedded within the stator 103 and induces a current within the conductor winding 106.
Within the stator 103, a portion of magnetic flux 402 is now trapped within the grain stampings within the stator 103 and flows longitudinally in an effort to return to a corresponding south pole of the first set of magnets 104. This portion of the magnetic flux 402 is now static relative to the stator 103 and the embedded conductor winding 106. As such, this portion of the magnetic flux 402 flows through and exits the stator 103 without any sideways movement relative to the embedded conductor winding 106 and therefore without inducing a current within the conductor winding 106.
Outside the stator 103, a portion of the magnetic flux 403 crosses the air gap 108 and reaches the surface of a corresponding steel piece 107. The steel piece 107 focuses the magnetic flux 403 within the air gap 108 providing a more efficient and specifically designed path for the magnetic flux 403 to return to a corresponding first set of magnets 104. The magnetic flux 403 passes through the steel piece 107 and returns to a corresponding south pole of the first set of magnets 104 thereby closing the magnetic flux loop between north and south poles of each magnet of the first set of magnets 104.
Fig.5 and Fig.6 depict the interaction between the magnetic flux originating from the north poles of the first set of magnets and the magnetic flux resulting from an induced current in the conductor winding. In both Fig.5 and Fig.6, the current 110 induced in the conductor winding 106 by the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102 is shown coming out of the page. Moreover, in accordance with the application of the right hand rule, the magnetic flux 501 surrounding the conductor winding 106 as a result of the induced current 110 is shown as having a counter-clockwise rotation.
In Fig.5, the magnetic flux originating from the first set of magnets is shown traversing the air gap upwards and interacting with the magnetic flux surrounding the conductor winding. As shown in Fig.5, the magnetic field 401 originating from the first set of magnets 104 is strengthened on the right side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 501 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the same direction. However, the magnetic field 401 originating from the first set of magnets 104, is weakened on the left side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 501 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the opposite direction. As a result of this interaction, the net magnetic field in the air-gap 108 over the surfaces of the first set of magnets 104 results in the application of a counter-clockwise torque 502 to the rotor 102 which opposes the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102. This is in accordance with Lenz's Law and is confirmed by the right hand rule which shows that a conductor within an upward directed magnetic field and carrying a current in the induced direction (coming out of the page) will experience a counter-clockwise force.
In Fig.6, the portion of the magnetic flux which is routed back from the stator, downwards across the air gap and through a silicon steel piece is shown interacting with the induced magnetic flux surrounding the conductor winding. As shown in Fig.6, the magnetic field 403 routed down through the silicon steel piece 107 is strengthened on the left side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 501 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the same direction. However, the magnetic field 403 is weakened on the right side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 501 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the opposite direction. As a result, on the surface of the silicon steel piece 107, the magnetic field 403 develops a gradient from left to right thus creating a clockwise torque 602 which supports the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102. This is in accordance with Lenz's Law and is confirmed by the right hand rule which shows that a conductor winding 106 within a downward directed magnetic field 403 and carrying a current 110 in the induced direction (coming out of the page) will experience a clockwise force.
Therefore, as a result of this configuration, the conductor winding 106 embedded within the stator 103 is cut at two places by each magnetic flux originating from the north pole of the first set of magnets 104. Specifically, a first time when the magnetic field 401 enters the stator 103 in an upward direction and a second time when the magnetic field 403 exits the stator 103 in a downward direction through a silicon steel piece 107. The net effect is that the clockwise torque generated by the magnetic field 403 rerouted through the silicon steel pieces 107 partially cancels the counter-clockwise torque generated by the magnetic field 401 originating from the north poles of the first set of magnets 104. This results in a partial nullification of the back torque reaction caused by the effect of Lenz's Law reaction and results in a corresponding increase in the efficiency of the machine because the external drive source has to supply less torque to overcome the reduced reaction of the machine.
Fig.7 depicts a longitudinal cross-sectional view of the flow of magnetic fields emanating from the second set of magnets within a reduced reaction generator. As shown in Fig.7, the magnetic flux 701 flowing into the south pole of the second set of the magnets 105 travels vertically downwards from within the stator 103 and across the air gap 108 as the magnetic flux 701 rotates with the rotor 102 relative to the stator 103. As this rotating magnetic flux 701 exits the static stator 103, it cuts sideways across the conductor winding 106 embedded within the stator 103 and induces a current within that conductor winding 106.
Within the stator 103, a portion of the magnetic flux 702 flows longitudinally along the grain stampings within the stator 103 from a position where the magnetic flux 702 enters the stator 103. This portion of the magnetic flux 702 is static relative to the stator 103 and to the conductor winding 106 embedded within the stator 103. As such, this portion of the magnetic flux 702 enters and flows through the stator 103 without any sideways movement relative to the embedded conductor winding 106 and, therefore, without inducing a current within the conductor winding 106.
Outside the stator 103, a portion of the magnetic flux 703 flows from a north pole of the second set of magnets 105, through a corresponding silicon steel piece 107, upwards across the air gap 108 and into the stator 103. The silicon steel piece 107 focuses the magnetic flux 703 within the air gap 108 providing a more efficient and specifically designed path for the magnetic flux 703 originating from a corresponding second set of magnets 105. The magnetic flux 703 exists the steel piece 107 and enters the stator 103 thereby closing the magnetic flux loop between the south and north poles of each magnet of the second set of magnets 105.
Fig.8 and Fig.9 depict the interaction between the magnetic flux originating from the south poles of the second set of magnets and the magnetic flux resulting from an induced current in the conductor winding. In both Fig.8 and Fig.9, the current 110 induced in the conductor winding 106 by the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102 is shown as going into the page. Moreover, in accordance with the application of the right hand rule, the magnetic flux 801 surrounding the conductor winding 106 as a result of the induced current 110 is shown as having a clockwise rotation.
In Fig.8, the magnetic flux originating from the second set of magnets is shown traversing the air gap downwards and interacting with the magnetic flux surrounding the conductor winding. As shown in Fig.8, the magnetic field 701 originating from the second set of magnets 105 is strengthened on the right side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 801 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the same direction. However, the magnetic field 701 originating from the second set of magnets 105 is weakened on the left side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic fields 801 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the opposite direction. As a result of this interaction, the net magnetic field in the air-gap over the surfaces of the second set of magnets 105 results in the application of a counter-clockwise torque 802 to the rotor 102 which opposes the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102. This is in accordance with Lenz's Law and is confirmed by the right hand rule which shows that a conductor within a downwards directed magnetic field and carrying a current in the induced direction (going into the page) will experience a counter-clockwise force.
In Fig.9, the portion of the magnetic flux originally routed through the steel pieces 107, across the air gap 108 and into the stator is shown interacting with the induced magnetic flux surrounding the conductor winding. As shown in Fig.9, the magnetic field 703 routed upwards through a steel piece 107 and across the air gap 108 is strengthened on the left side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 801 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the same direction. However, the magnetic field 703 is weakened on the right side of the conductor winding 106 due to the superimposition of the magnetic field 801 induced in the conductor winding 106 in the opposite direction. As a result, on the surface of the silicon steel piece 107, the magnetic field 703 develops a gradient from left to right thus creating a clockwise torque 902 which supports the clockwise rotation of the rotor 102. This is in accordance with Lenz's law and is confirmed by the right hand rule which shows that a conductor winding 106 within an upwards directed magnetic field 703 and carrying a current 110 in the induced direction (going into the page) will experience a clockwise force.
Therefore, as a result of this configuration and as described above for the first set of magnets, the conductor embedded within the stator is cut at two places by each magnetic field terminating at the south pole of the second set of magnets. Specifically, a first time when the magnetic field 701 exits the stator 103 in a downward direction and a second time when the magnetic field 703 enters the stator 103 in an upward direction through a silicon steel piece 107. The net effect is that the clockwise torque generated by the magnetic field 703 rerouted through the silicon steel pieces 107 partially cancels the counter-clockwise torque generated by the magnetic field 701 terminating at the south pole of the second set of magnets 105. This results in a partial nullification of the back torque reaction caused by the effect of Lenz's Law reaction and results in a corresponding increase in the efficiency of the machine because the external drive source has to supply less torque to overcome the reduced reaction of the machine.
Lidmotor’s Low-voltage Rotor
One very experienced developer whose YouTube ID is “Lidmotor” (because he makes motors from the lids of jars) has a short video here showing a very simple rotor design with one of his jar lids mounted on a single bearing:
The white lid has four magnets attached to it spaced out evenly around the lid at ninety-degree intervals. Facing them is an air-core coil mounted on a non-magnetic support dowel and wound with 400 turns of ’30-gauge’ wire on a plastic spool. As ‘Lidmotor’ is American, the ’30 gauge’ wire is likely to be American Wire Gauge #30 with a diameter of 0.255 mm as opposed to the European Standard Wire Gauge size which has a 0.315 mm diameter. An air-core coil has no effect on the passing rotor magnets IF it is not carrying current. An output coil will cause drag on the rotor if current is being drawn from the coil, and so timed output switching as used by Robert Adams would be needed to not just overcome the drag, but to push the rotor on its way as well.
There are two very important features of this rotor drive design. One is the fact that a supercap (10-Farad, 2.3V) is used to drive the rotor and when supplied with a charge of only 0.5V to 1.0V, can spin the rotor for up to thirty minutes. That very long time is likely to be a feature of the second important item which is that he has placed an LED across the reed switch used to power the coil. When the reed switch opens, a back-EMF voltage spike occurs and the LED feeds that voltage pulse back into the 100% efficient supercap, recovering most of the current used to drive the rotor. This is the same method as used by Robert Adams in his motor designs. Lidmotor presents his circuit like this:
While the circuit shows the magnet operating the reed switch as being 180 degrees around from the coil, the photograph indicates that the switching magnet is one 90 degrees away. Any of the other magnets can be used. The reed switch operation is adjusted to get the best performance. This is done by moving the switch backwards and forwards along the moving path of the magnet to make the switching occur earlier or later. The objective is to push the rotor magnet on its way by pulsing the coil very briefly just after the rotor magnet has passed the centre of the coil. The length of time that the reed switch is closed can be adjusted by moving the switch closer to the magnet for a longer switch-closed time, or further away for a shorter switch closure. It is also possible to alter the closed time by positioning the switch across the path of the magnet travel or parallel to it.
If you are not familiar with a reed switch, it is just a glass tube, filled with an inert gas, and with two overlapping metal strips inside the tube:
The external magnetic field magnetises the strips and they spring together due to magnetic attraction and spring apart again when the magnetic field moves away. These switches come in various sizes and the smallest version tends to be unreliable and has a very low maximum current capacity. The larger versions are much more robust.
Lidmotor’s circuit is very simple and very effective, even though the rotor will have minimal weight and no significant drag. One wonders if adding a second coil and a diode feeding the supercapacitor, if the system could not become self-running.
Phemax's Inertial-Propulsion and Electrical-Generation System. Phemax Technologies, Inc. have developed what they describe as their 'sustainable transportation system' which is based on their inertial-propulsion generation wheel, which uses what they call '3-D Coraxial Hybrid Induction' (CHI), in which 'Coraxial' refers to their "combined radial-axial" technique where drive is provided by a radial pulsed magnet system and power extraction is achieved using an axially-orientated magnet/coil system.
Taiwan inventor, Tajen (David) Chi, says that his company, "Phemax Technologies Inc." will be demonstrating their technology in September 2010 at an expo, after which they will allow interested and qualified parties to come to their premises for licensing discussions.
Their device can take the place of the battery component of an electric vehicle or it can be used to supplement and recharge a battery bank in the vehicle. At the September exhibition, they will allow visitors to ride their 2 kW test car. David intends to put their test data on the Internet. With a rotational input of 1 NM at 500 rpm, a single inertial-propulsion generation wheel can produce 1 KW of axial generative power.
David also said that a 150W output from his motor actually produces between 180 and 200 watts of mechanical output, while a 1500W output produces a mechanical output of 1800 to 2000 watts (96 Volts at 20 Amps), as measured by a watt meter, speed meter, torque meter, and oscilloscopes. He says that these measurements were made by Michael Hseuh, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer.
Ceramic-based and carbon-based ultra-capacitors are used to return some of the output power to the input in order to keep the machine running continuously without the need for a power supply when the engine is running and providing it's output. When driving a vehicle powered by this device, the mechanical driving torque is provided via a continuously-variable transmission.
At this time, Phemax Technologies, Inc. have a 150-Watt and a 2 kW prototype which they plan to demonstrate in September 2010. He says that they generally run these prototypes for eight hours each day in their lab. The central principle of the Phemax Technologies Inc. process is what they call "CORAXIA" which stands for "combined radial-axial" hybrid induction, abbreviated to "CHI", which is David's surname. They also call this the "3-D Coaxial Hybrid Induction" system. They state that their electromagnetic 3-D arrangement enables the wheel to have both radial flux propulsion and axial flux generation with just a single rotor and two separate stators. As the radial electric drive rotates, the mechanical energy due to the inertia of the wheel and the ground power transmission mechanism enables the wheels of a vehicle to generate electricity as they rotate.
There are two videos showing the device generating electricity: here and here
Another application is where the electrical output from the device is being used to produce a hydrogen/oxygen gas mix from water using an underwater plasma arc.
David says he is self-taught in this area. He has three patents: Taiwan patent M352472, M372891 and M382655 (which are not in English). From his search of the patent index, the Internet and YouTube, David said he has not yet seen a patent or experimental set-up similar to what they have developed.
This motor/generator is unusual in that it uses pulsed rotor drive on magnets mounted on the circumference of the rotor and simultaneously, it picks up electrical energy from a coil/magnet arrangement mounted on the side faces of the rotor as shown here:
The basic drive/generator unit can be replicated on a single shaft to give increased power, still without increased frictional losses between the drive and the power generation:
It is unusual to see this technique used as it can be difficult to avoid interaction between the different magnetic fields. However, David has been entirely successful in doing this and the arrangement has no transmission losses between the drive motor and the generator as these are integral components of the system.
This system is capable of driving a self-powered air-conditioning unit and a 5 kW proof-of-concept prototype is shown here:
This device is also capable of driving electric lighting and with a 5 kilowatt output self-powered output, it can power most household needs. A typical washing machine has a 2.25 kilowatt maximum electrical draw as does the average tumble-dryer. Most fan-heaters are 3 kilowatts or less when on full output.
If a wind-power generator is already in place, then using the mechanical power of the generator to spin the axle of one of these CHI generators results in a very high-power electricity generation system.
Contact: Tajen (David) Chi, Taiwan e-mail: email@example.com
Inquiries to: Phemax Technologies Inc., Michelle Chen, Manager of Marketing and Business Development. Tel: 886-2-2371-5622 e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
The exhibition is at: The 6th Taipei International Invention Show & Technomart, website running from 30th September 2010 to 3rd October 2010 at the Taipei World Trade Centre, Exhibition Hall 1.
Raymond Kromrey. Where the objective is to produce electricity from a rotating magnetic field, there has always been a search for some method of either reducing, or eliminating altogether, the drag on the rotor when electric current is drawn from the generator. One design which claims to have very limited drag caused by current draw is the Kromrey design. The main characteristics of this design are said to be:
1. It has almost constant electrical power output even when the rotor speed is altered by as much as 35%.
2. It can continue to operate with it's electrical output short-circuited, without heating the rotor or causing a braking effect.
3. The production efficiency (electrical output divided by the driving force) is high.
4. The frequency of it's AC output power can be adjusted to that required by the equipment which it powers.
5. The rotor can be spun at any rate from 800 rpm to 1,600 rpm.
6. The simple construction allows manufacturing costs to be about 30% less than other generators.
7. This generator is recommended for supplying power at or above the 1 kilowatt level.
Here is the patent for this device:
Patent US 3,374,376 19th March 1968 Inventor: Raymond KromreyELECTRIC GENERATOR
My present invention relates to an electric generator which converts magnetic energy into electric energy using two components which can rotate relative to each other, i.e. a stator and a rotor, one having electromagnets or permanent magnets which induce a voltage in a winding which forms part of an output circuit mounted on the other component.
Conventional generators of this type use a winding which whose conductors form loops in different axial planes so that opposite parts of each loop pass through the field of each pole pair, twice per revolution. If the loops are open circuit, then no current flows in the winding and no reaction torque is developed, leaving the rotor free to turn at the maximum speed of its driving unit. As soon as the output winding is connected across a load or is short-circuited, the resulting current flow tends to retard the motion of the rotor to an extent which depends on the intensity of the current and this makes it necessary to include compensating speed-regulating devices if it is necessary to maintain a reasonably constant output voltage. Also, the variable reaction torque subjects the rotor and its transmission to considerable mechanical stresses and possible damage.
It is therefore the general object of this invention to provide an electric generator which has none of the above disadvantages. Another object is to provide a generator whose rotor speed varies very little in speed between open circuit operation and current delivery operation. Another objective is to provide a generator whose output voltage is not greatly affected by fluctuations in its rotor speed.
I have found that these objectives can be achieved by rotating an elongated ferromagnetic element, such as a bar-shaped soft-iron armature, and a pair of pole pieces which create an air gap containing a magnetic field. Each of the outer extremities of the armature carries a winding, ideally, these windings are connected in series, and these coils form part of a power output circuit used to drive a load. As the armature rotates relative to the air gap, the magnetic circuit is intermittently completed and the armature experiences periodic remagnetisations with successive reversals of polarity.
When the output circuit is open, the mechanical energy applied to the rotor (less a small amount needed to overcome the friction of the rotating shaft) is absorbed by the work of magnetisation, which in turn, is dissipated as heat. In actual practice however, the resulting rise in temperature of the armature is hardly noticeable, particularly if the armature is part of the continuously air-cooled rotor assembly. When the output circuit is closed, part of this work is converted into electrical energy as the current flow through the winding opposes the magnetising action of the field and increases the apparent magnetic reluctance of the armature, and so the speed of the generator remains substantially unchanged if the output circuit is open or closed.
As the armature approaches its position of alignment with the gap, the constant magnetic field tends to accelerate the rotation of the armature, aiding the applied driving force. After the armature passes through the gap there is a retarding effect. When the rotor picks up speed, the flywheel effect of its mass overcomes these fluctuations in the applied torque and a smooth rotation is experienced.
In a practical embodiment of this invention, the magnetic flux path includes two axially spaced magnetic fields traversing the rotor axis and substantially at right angles to it. These fields are generated by respective pole pairs co-operating with two axially spaced armatures of the type already described. It is convenient to arrange these two armatures so that they lie in a common axial plane and similarly, the two field-producing pole pairs also lie in a single plane. The armatures should be laminated to minimise eddy currents, so they are made of highly permeable (typically, soft-iron) foils whose principle dimension is perpendicular to the rotor axis. The foils can be held together by rivets or any other suitable method.
If the ferromagnetic elements are part of the rotor, then the output circuit will include the usual current-collecting means, such as slip-rings or commutator segments, depending on whether AC or DC current output is desired. The source of coercive force in the stator includes, advantageously, a pair of oppositely positioned, yoke-shaped magnets of the permanent or electrically energised type, whose extremities constitute the pole pieces mentioned above. If electromagnets are used in the magnetic circuit, then they may be energised by an external source or by direct current from the output circuit of the generator itself.
I have found that the terminal voltage of the output circuit does not vary proportionately to the rotor speed as might be expected, but instead, it drops at a considerably slower rate with decreasing rotor speed. So, in a particular tested unit, this voltage fell to only about half its original value when the rotor speed was dropped to one third. This non-linear relationship between terminal voltage and driving rate produces a substantially constant load current and therefore, electric output over a wide speed range, at least under certain load conditions, inasmuch as the inductive reactance of the winding is proportional to frequency (and consequently, to rotor speed) so as to drop off more rapidly than the terminal voltage, in the event of a speed reduction, with a resulting improvement in the power factor of the load circuit.
If the magnetic circuit contains only a single pole pair per air gap, the flux induced in the rotating armature will change its direction twice per revolution so that each revolution produces one complete cycle of 360 electrical degrees. In general, the number of electrical degrees per revolution will equal 360 times the number of pole pairs, it being apparent that this number ought to be odd since with even numbers it would not be possible to have poles alternating in polarity along the path of the armature and at the same time to have the North and South poles of each pair at diametrically opposite locations. In any case, it is important to dimension the curved facing faces of the pole pairs in such a manner so as to avoid allowing the armature to bridge between adjoining poles, so it is necessary to make the sum of the arcs spanned by these faces (in the plane of rotation) equal to considerably less than 360 degrees electrical.
The invention will now be described in more detail, reference being made to the accompanying drawings in which:
Fig.1 and Fig1A. illustrate a first embodiment of my invention, shown in axial section and in a cross-sectional view taken on line IA - IA of Fig.1 respectively.
Fig.2 and Fig.3 are perspective views illustrating two other embodiments.
Fig.4 and Fig.5 illustrate diagrammatically, two output circuit arrangements, one for a DC output and one for an AC output.
Fig.6 is a somewhat diagrammatic illustration of an arrangement for comparing the outputs of a conventional generator and a generator according to this invention.
The generator 100 shown in Fig.1 and Fig.1A comprises a stator 101 and a rotor 102 which has a pair of laminated armatures 102' and 102", carried on a shaft 103 which is free to rotate in bearings mounted in the end plates 104' and 104", of a generator housing 104 which is made from non-magnetic material (e.g. aluminium) which is rigidly attached to the stator.
Shaft 103 is coupled to a source of driving power indicated diagrammatically by an arrow 110. The stator 101 includes a pair of yoke-shaped laminated electromagnets 101' and 101" whose extremities form two pairs of co-planar pole pieces, designated respectively 101a, 101b (North magnetic pole) and 101c, 101d (South magnetic pole). The pole pieces have concave faces, facing towards the complimentary convex faces 102a, 102d of armature 102' and 102b, 102c of armature 102". These faces whose concavities are all centred on the axis of shaft 103, extend over arcs of approximately 20o to 25o each in the plane of rotation (Fig.1A) so that the sum of these arcs adds up to about 90o geometrically and electrically.
The stator magnets 101', 101" are surrounded by energising windings 109', 109" which are connected across a suitable source of constant direct current (not shown). Similar windings, each composed of two series-connected coils 106a, 106d and 106b, 106c, surround the rotor armatures 102' and 102", respectively. These coils form part of an output circuit which further includes a pair of brushes 107', 107" which are carried by arms 108', 108" on housing 104 with mutual insulation brushes 107', 107" co-operate with a pair of commuter segments 105', 105" (see also Fig.4) which are supported by a disc of insulating material 105, mounted on shaft 103.
By virtue of the series-connection of coils 106a-106d between the segments 105' and 105", as illustrated in Fig.4, the alternating voltage induced in these coils gives rise to a rectified output voltage at brushes 107' and 107". The unidirectional current delivered by these brushes to a load (not shown) may be smoothed by conventional means, represented by capacitor 112 in Fig.4.
Fig.2, shows a modified generator 200, whose housing 204, supports a stator 201 essentially consisting of two permanent bar magnets 201' and 201", extending parallel to the drive shaft 203 (on opposite side of it), each of these magnets being rigid and each having a pair of sole shoes 201a, 201c and 201b, 201d respectively. Rotor 202 is a pair of laminated armatures 202' and 202",similar to those of the previous embodiment, whose output coils 206a, 206b, 206c and 206d are serially connected between a slip-ring 205', supported on shaft 203 through the intermediary of an insulating disc 205, and another terminal here represented by the grounded shaft 203 itself. Slip-ring 205' is contacted by brush 207 on holder 208, the output of this brush being an alternating current of a frequency determined by the rotor speed.
Fig.3 shows a generator 300 which is basically similar to the generator 100 shown in Fig.1 and Fig.1A. It's shaft 303 carries a pair of laminated soft-iron armatures 302', 302" which can rotate in the air gaps of a pair of electromagnets 301', 301" which have windings 309' and 309". The commutator 305 again co-operates with a pair of brushes 307, only one of which is visible in Fig.3. This brush, carried on an arm 308, is electrically connected to a brush 313 which engages with a slip-ring 314 positioned on an extremity of shaft 303 which also carries two further slip-rings 315', 315" which are in conductive contact with ring 314 but are insulated from the shaft. Two further brushes 316', 316" contact the rings 315', 315" and respectively are connected to windings 309' and 309". The other ends of these windings are connected to an analogous system of brushes and slip-rings on the extremity of the opposite shaft, and arranged so that the two commutator brushes are effectively bridged across the windings 309' and 309" in parallel. Therefore, in this embodiment, the stator magnets are energised from the generator output itself, it being understood that the magnets 301' and 301" (made, for example, of steel rather than soft iron) will have a residual coercive force sufficient to induce an initial output voltage. Naturally, the circuits leading from the brushes 307 to the windings 309', 309" may include filtering as described in connection with Fig.4.
Fig.6 shows a test circuit designed to compare the outputs of a generator of this design, such as the unit 100 of Fig.1 and Fig.1A, with a conventional generator 400 of the type having a looped armature 402 which rotates in the gap of a stator magnet 401 which is fitted with energising windings 409', 409". The two generators are interconnected by a common shaft 103 which carries a flywheel 117. This shaft is coupled through a clutch 118 to a drive motor 111 which drives the rotors 402 and 102 of both generators in unison, as indicated by arrow 110. Two batteries 120 and 420, in series with switches 121 and 421, represent the method of supplying direct current to the stator windings 109', 109" and 409', 409" of the two generators.
The rectified output of generator 100 is delivered to a load 122, shown here as three incandescent lamps connected in series, and with a combined consumption of 500 watts. Generator 400, provides current into an identical load 422. Two wattmeters 123 and 423 have their voltage and current windings connected respectively in shunt and in series with their associated loads 122 and 422, to measure the electric power delivered by each generator.
When clutch 118 is engaged, shaft 113 with it's flywheel 117 is brought to an initial driving speed of 1,200 rpm. at which point, the switch 421 in the energising circuit of the conventional generator 400, is closed. The lamps 422 light immediately and the corresponding wattmeter 423 shows an initial output of 500 watts. However, this output drops immediately as the flywheel 117 is decelerated by the braking effect of the magnetic field on armature 402.
Next, the procedure is repeated but with switch 421 open and switch 121 closed. This energises generator 100 and the lamps 122 light up, wattmeter 123 showing an output of 500 watts, which remains constant for an indefinite period of time , there being no appreciable deceleration of flywheel 117. When the clutch 118 is released and the rotor speed gradually decreases, the output of generator 100 is still substantially 500 watts at a speed of 900 rpm. and remains as high as 360 watts when the speed dropped further to 600 rpm. In a similar test with a generator of the permanent magnet type, such as the one shown at 200 in Fig.2, a substantially constant output was observed over a range of 1600 to 640 rpm.
Teruo Kawai. In July 1995, a patent was granted to Teruo Kawai for an electric motor. In the patent, Teruo states that a measured electrical input 19.55 watts produced an output of 62.16 watts, and that is a COP of 3.18. The main sections of that patent are included on this site.
In this motor, a series of electromagnets are placed in a ring to form the active stator. The rotor shaft has two iron discs mounted on it. These discs have permanent magnets bolted to them and they have wide slots cut in them to alter their magnetic effect. The electromagnets are pulsed with the pulsing controlled via an optical disc arrangement mounted on the shaft. The result is a very efficient electric motor whose output has been measured as being in excess of its input.
James Hardy’s Self-Powered Water-pump Generator. There is a video on Google which shows a self-powered electrical water-pump driven, electrical generator at this location.
This is a very simple device where the jet of water from the pump is directed at a simple water-wheel which in turn, spins an electrical alternator, powering both the pump and an electric light bulb, demonstrating the capture and use of free-energy.
Initially, the generator is got up to speed, driven by the mains electrical supply. Then, when it is running normally, the mains connection is removed and the motor/generator sustains itself and is also able to power at least one light bulb. The generator output is normal mains current from a standard off-the-shelf alternator.
James has Patent Application US 2007/0018461 A1 published in 2007 on his design. In that application he points out that a major advantage of his design is the low noise level produced when the generator is running. In the video and the pictures above, the demonstration has the housing opened up in order to show how the generator system works, but during normal use, the compartments are completely sealed.
In his document, James shows the overall system like this:
The housing is divided into three separate compartments. The first compartment has a strong axle shaft running through it, supported on ball or roller bearings – possibly ceramic for this environment. The bearings are protected by being covered by splash guards which keep the water (or other liquid) off them. A waterwheel of almost any type is mounted on the shaft and a high-capacity water pump directs a stream of liquid on to the waterwheel, striking the paddles at right angles in order to provide the maximum impact.
This first compartment is sealed in order to contain all of the liquid inside it and the bottom is effectively a sump for the liquid. A pipe located near the bottom of the compartment feeds the liquid to the pump which is located in the second compartment. The pump boosts the liquid through a nozzle, directing it at the waterwheel. While almost any nozzle will work, it is usual to choose one which produces a concentrated jet of liquid in order to generate the largest possible impact. One would expect that the larger the diameter of the waterwheel, the more powerful the system would be. However, that is not necessarily the case as other factors such as the overall weight of the rotating members might affect the performance. Experimentation should show the most effective combination for any given pump.
The rotating shaft is given a third bearing supported by the side of the final compartment. The shaft then has a large diameter belt pulley mounted on it, the belt driving a much smaller pulley mounted on the shaft of the generator. This raises the rate at which the generator shaft is rotated. If the pump operates on AC mains voltage, then the generator will be one which generates mains voltage AC. If the pump operates on, say, 12 volts, then the generator will be one which generates 12 volts DC. The diagram above, shows the arrangement for a mains voltage system as that is probably the most convenient. If a 12-volt system is chosen, then the inverter can be omitted.
The generator is started by pressing the ‘normally open’ press-button switch marked “A” in the diagram. This passes the battery power through to the 1-kilowatt inverter which then generates AC mains voltage. The switch marked “B” is a “changeover” switch, and for starting, it is set so that it passes the AC power through switch “A” to the pump. This causes the pump to turn on and direct a powerful jet of liquid at the waterwheel, forcing it around and so powering the generator. When the generator gets up to full speed, switch “B” is flipped over, disconnecting the inverter and feeding the generator power through to the pump, keeping it running and supplying additional power to the output power sockets mounted on top of the housing. The press-button switch is released, disconnecting the battery which is no longer needed. Switch “C” is an ordinary On/Off mains switch which is needed if you want to turn the generator off.
A major advantage of this generator system is that the main components can be bought ready-made and so only very simple constructional skills and readily available materials are needed. Another advantage is that what is happening can be seen. If the pump is not working, then it is a simple task to discover why. If the generator is not spinning, then you can see that and sort the problem. Every component is simple and straightforward.
James suggests that a suitable pump is the 10,000 gallons per hour “Torpedo Pump” from Cal Pump web site:
Georges Mourier’s COP=10,000 Motor/Generator Patent
This patent from Frenchman Georges Mourier is quite remarkable in that it states clearly in the patent that it has a Coefficient Of Performance of 10,000 with an input power of just 10 watts producing an output of 100 kilowatts, which, considering the massive opposition of the US Patent Office to any claim of output power being greater than the input needed to produce that output, is little short of amazing. This patent contains a fair amount of mathematics where Georges goes about showing why there is a power amplification. This can be ignored by most people as the point to concentrate on is how to build a power-amplifying motor/generator.
Electrical machine operating as a generator or as an amplifier
The invention relates to an electrical machine. The stator 1 is a delay line, in the form of a low-pass filter in the example, formed by inductance 11 and capacitors 12 connected between these inductances and the common conductor 131. The rotor 2 comprises dissipating elements 22 incorporated in circuits 26, separate in the example, and having a common point 25. It is put in movement by a motor. The machine operates as a high-gain amplifier having a wide band of high-frequency signals applied to the input 14 of the stator, separated from the output 15 by the decoupling zone 30. High powers are obtainable. Application to installations for testing vibration of industrial equipment and to high-power long wave radio transmission.
The invention relates to an electrical machine capable of operating as a generator and as an amplifier. The machine comprises a fixed part, or stator, in which moves a moving part designated hereinafter by the term “rotor”, by analogy with the case of machines of the prior art in which the movement in question is a movement of rotation, although this movement may be other than a rotation and in particular a rectilinear translation in the case of the invention.
The stator consists of a line having two conductors which have two input terminals and two output terminals; it’s rotor comprises resistive elements under conditions which will be described in detail later.
In operation, a wave is propagated between the input terminals and the output terminals in question in this line. Electrical machines are known from U.S. Patent 3,875,484, in which the stator comprises inductances and capacitances incorporated in a transmission line, as in the machines of this invention, along which there is propagated, in operation, an electric wave, but contrary to the case of the invention, this line has only one pair of terminals to which those of the alternating current source are connected. The application of the voltage of this source between these terminals causes the rotation of the rotor of the machine which, as it is operating as a motor, does not have an output. Owing to the structure, a brief indication of which has been given above, the machine of this invention is intended, on the contrary, to operate as a generator or as an amplifier; it has an output constituted by the other pair of terminals of the stator, the rotor being driven by an exterior motor.
A better understanding of the invention will be had from the ensuing description with reference to the accompanying Figures which represent:
FIG.1, diagrammatically, the stator assembly and the rotor of a machine to which the invention is applied;
Fig.2 and Fig.3, diagrammatically, an embodiment of an electrical circuit of the stator of a machine of the invention and the corresponding diagram;
Fig.4, diagrammatically, a rotor structure of the machines of the invention;
Fig.5, a diagrammatic view of a variant embodiment of the machine of the invention having a stator according to the design of Fig.2;
Fig.7 and Fig.8, diagrammatic views of two variant embodiments of the machine of the invention operating as amplifiers;
Fig.6 and Fig.9, two modifications of the machine of the invention operating as generators.
Fig.1 shows diagrammatically, a machine structure to which the invention is applied, in which the stator 1 and the rotor 2 comprise poles aligned in the direction o --- x along which the rotor movement occurs. These poles are marked as 10 and 20 and are repeated with the same horizontal spacing or pitch p in both the rotor and the stator. References 11 and 21 are the inductive windings through which the coupling occurs between a pole of the rotor and a pole of the stator when they align in the course of their movement.
Vsn and Vrn are the instantaneous values of the voltages at the ends of these windings, and Isn and Irn are the currents in those coils at the moment of this alignment, n being the number assigned to the pole in each part of the machine. In order to simplify the notations, this index number ‘n’ will be omitted when mentioning the voltages and currents in question. φ designates the magnetic flux and M the coefficient of mutual inductances of this coupling. There are then obtained the following known equations:
where Ls and Lr are the values of inductances 11 and 21 and φs and φr the magnetic flux in these windings.
In these equations, the quantities ω and ω' are the angular frequencies of the currents in the stator and the rotor respectively; ω = 2πf, where f is the corresponding frequency. For equal phase differences between two successive poles of the stator and rotor, the pulses ω and ω' in the relation:
where β is in accordance with the usual definition the constant of propagation of the magnetic field wave along the stator, and u is the speed at which the rotor moves in front of the stator in the direction of the reference axis o – x in the case of the machine of the embodiment of Fig.1.
if Λ and vφ respectively are the wavelength and the phase velocity in the stator.
In the embodiment of the machine of this invention having a stator in the form of a low-pass filter transmission line with an input 14 and an output 15, and the inductances 11, charge-accumulating elements 12 mounted between these inductances, and a common conductor 13 as shown inFig.2 and Fig.3, there is added to the foregoing equations the following equation:
where α is equal to βp and Cs is the value of the capacitors 12 (Fig.2) included in the construction of the filter, it being observed that there is obtained with the notations of Fig.3:
There is also added:
the equation for a rotor constructed, as shown in Fig.4, by separate resistive circuits each of which comprises, in addition to the foregoing, coupling inductance 21, a resistor 22 of value Rr.
By eliminating the magnitudes of flux, voltage and current between the homogeneous equations (1), (2), (3), (4), (6) and (7) and by replacing ω' with it’s expression taken from equation (5), there is obtained an equation in β whose roots have an imaginary part, whence it results that the variation with respect to time of the wave propagated along the stator in the direction o --- x of Fig.1, whose amplitude is proportional, in accordance with the conventional notation, to exp j(ωt-βx), undergoes an amplification in the course of this propagation.
The equation in question is:
and assuming that α is small, that is to say, that the machine has a large number of phases in the electro-technical sense of the word, the roots of which will be calculated by their relative difference z from a reference value chosen to be equal to ω / u, which is but little different, under the conditions of operation of the machines of the invention, from the quantity β1 defined above; there is obtained:
The foregoing ratio ω/u is none other than the value of β in synchronous machines, in which ω' is null (equation 5). In the machines of this invention, ω' is non-zero: these machines operate in the asynchronous manner.
The equation in z is written:
in the particular case of a coupling coefficient
It has two roots having an imaginary part. The machine is capable of amplifying a signal applied to the input of the stator. The order of magnitude of this amplification is shown below as an example. The expression of these roots is:
to which the following numerical values correspond for a certain number of values of γ. The amplified wave corresponds to the root Z+.
The gain “g” in power per unit length of the stator is, according to equation (9) is:
In the given example, this gain reaches it’s maximum value for the wave corresponding to z+, for γ between 0.1 and 0.3. The imaginary part of z is then in the neighbourhood of 0.15, which gives for g, in respect of a stator whose length is 5 wavelengths (x = 5), about 40 decibels. It will be observed that the corresponding propagation constant β differs only slightly in absolute value from the constant ω/u corresponding to synchronous operation. The machine of this invention operates under conditions which differ only slightly from synchronous operating conditions.
The wave passing through the stator is amplified in the manner of an electromagnetic wave which is propagated along the delay line of wave propagating tubes employed in hyper frequency described, among others, by J. R. Pierce in "Travelling Wave Tubes", Van Nostrand Co, 1950. The amplification occurs, as for these tubes, in a wide band around the central frequency.
In the foregoing, the rotor has been represented, for ease of description, with a structure having poles (reference 20 in the Figures). With the scope of the invention the rotor could be in the form of the well-known squirrel-cage structure of asynchronous machines. The above calculations remain valid in giving to the notion of resistance and to the notion of inductance the signification they have in this case.
The foregoing properties have been established by means of simplifying hypotheses which permit a clearer presentation. These properties apply generally to all machines whose stator and rotor would have the indicated electrical structure, even in the case of an operation which would differ slightly from these hypotheses in the neighbourhood of synchronous frequency. Moreover, the case was considered of a coupling by inductance between the rotor and the stator with a mutual coefficient M. Within the scope of the invention, this coupling could also be of an electrostatic nature between the conductors of the stator and rotor; similar equations would be obtained by substituting for the coefficient M the coefficient of electrostatic influence between the conductors in question, for the quantity Lr that, Cr, of the capacitance of each circuit of the rotor and, after interversion between Ls and Cs. In this case Vr (equation 7) represents the voltage drop at the terminals of the capacitance of the rotor. The machine of this invention is also capable of operating as a generator, as will be seen below. A few embodiments of the structure of the machine of this invention will be given here.
Fig.5 shows a first modification of this structure comprising a stator in accordance with the low-pass filter diagram of Fig.2. The rotor is a squirrel-cage, the reference numerals 322 and 33 are the bars and the end faces. In operation, it is driven by a rotor (not shown) which rotates it in the direction of the arrow about axis X which is common to the rotor and the stator of the machine. A source of alternating voltage 40 is applied to input 14 of the stator, and applied to the output 15 is a load 36, the impedance of which is equal to the characteristic impedance of the line of which the stator is part. In this arrangement of revolution about the axis X, a decoupling zone 30 separates the input and output of the stator. Further, in this zone, and in order to avoid any risk of coupling between input and output of the stator by the circuits of the rotor, there is provided any damping device considered necessary, an embodiment of which is given below.
The different elements of the filter constituting the stator are damped by the resistors 16, and 18 which are connected as shown in the Figure between the windings 11 and the conductor 13 common to the terminals of the capacitors 17 and 19.
Such a machine operates as an amplifier of the signal applied to the input of the stator with a gain which is of the order of 40 db in the numerical example given above. Such machines may be used as supply sources for high-power vibrators for the testing of industrial equipment of all kinds. They have the advantage over presently-known installations of this type of avoiding the steep leading edges and the high frequencies which result in their spectrum. Output powers of 100 kilowatts may be obtained with 10 watts applied at the input, with frequencies ranging up to 50 kHz. The same machine may be used as a high-power amplifier in radio broadcasting.
Fig.7 and Fig.8 give two other modifications of the arrangement of the circuits of the rotor in which the same reference numbers indicate the same components as in the preceding Figures. In Fig.8, the coupling between the rotor and stator is electrostatic. It occurs between conductors 34 and 35 when they face each other in the course of the rotation of the rotor.
In Fig.7, 110 and 112 designate the two constituent parts of the self-inductances associated with each one of the poles 10 of the stator, and 210 and 212 the parts of the self-inductances of each pole 20 of the rotor. In both Fig.7 and Fig.8, 25 is a common conductor and 26 indicates all of the elements associated with each pole of the rotor. In the modification of Fig.8, an example is given of the construction of the damping device 31 in the zone 30. A rail 38 is earthed through resistor 37 and through a contact (not shown) of the circuits of the rotor out along this rail 38 when they pass through the zone 30.
The same machine is capable of operating as a generator (Fig.6 and Fig.9).
Fig.6 represents a machine whose stator is connected as a high-pass filter: each pole winding is connected at one end to the common conductor 13 and at the other end to two capacitors 12, as shown above. The filter thus constructed has a phase velocity which varies very rapidly with the frequency and in the direction opposed to that of the flux of electrical energy (inverse wave). The rotor has a velocity rather close to that of the phase velocity whereas the energy flows back to the load 36 in the opposite direction. The upstream side (for the energy) of the filter terminates on the characteristic impedance 42 of the filter. A generator is obtained in this way having a frequency which is determined within a wide band by the speed of rotation of the rotor. In the example shown in the Figure, the rotor has a squirrel-cage structure.
The machine of Fig.9 differs from that of Fig.6 by the addition of supplementary capacitors 120 arranged in parallel with the inductances 11. The circuit thus obtained is an inverse wave band-pass filter. The width of its band-pass is determined by the respective values of the capacitors 12 and 120. The phase velocity remains rapidly variable as a function of the frequency. The machine operates as a generator, the frequency of which, depends only very slightly on the velocity of rotation of the rotor.
The RotoVerter. Not all pulsed-drive systems use permanent magnets as part of their drive mechanism. For example, the RotoVerter systems uses standard three-phase electric motors instead of magnets. In addition, some of the electrical driving power can be recovered for re-use.
This system has been reproduced by several independent researchers and it produces a substantial power gain when driving devices which need an electrical motor to operate. The outline details are as follows:
The output device is an alternator which is driven by a three-phase mains-powered, 3 HP to 7.5 HP motor (both of these devices can be standard ‘asynchronous squirrel-cage’ motors). The drive motor is operated in a highly non-standard manner. It is a 240V motor with six windings as shown below. These windings are connected in series to make an arrangement which should require 480 volts to drive it, but instead, it is fed with 120 volts of single-phase AC. The input voltage for the motor, should always be a quarter of its rated operational voltage. A virtual third phase is created by using a capacitor which creates a 90-degree phase-shift between the applied voltage and the current.
The objective is to tune the motor windings to give resonant operation. A start-up capacitor is connected into the circuit using the press-button switch shown, to get the motor up to speed, at which point the switch is released, allowing the motor to run with a much smaller capacitor in place. Although the running capacitor is shown as a fixed value, in practice, that capacitor needs to be adjusted while the motor is running, to give resonant operation. For this, a bank of capacitors is usually constructed, each capacitor having its own ON/OFF switch, so that different combinations of switch closures give a wide range of different overall values of capacitance. With the six capacitors shown above, any value from 0.5 microfarad to 31.5 microfarad can be rapidly switched to find the correct resonant value. These values allow combined values of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, .....by selecting the appropriate switches to be ON or OFF. Should you need a value greater than this, then wire a 32 microfarad capacitor in place and connect the substitution box across it to test higher values step by step to find the optimum value of capacitor to use. The capacitors need to be powerful, oil-filled units with a high voltage rating - in other words, large, heavy and expensive. The power being handled in one of these systems is large and setting one up is not without a certain degree of physical danger. These systems have been set to be self-powered but this is not recommended, presumably because of the possibility of runaway with the output power building up rapidly and boosting the input power until the motor burns out.
The Yahoo EVGRAY Group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EVGRAY has a large number of members, many of whom are very willing to offer advice and assistance. A unique jargon has built up on this forum, where the motor is not called a motor but is referred to as a “Prime Mover” or “PM” for short, which can cause confusion as “PM” usually stands for “Permanent Magnet”. RotoVerter is abbreviated to “RV” while “DCPMRV” stands for “Direct Current Permanent Magnet RotoVerter” and “trafo” is a non-standard abbreviation for “transformer”. Some of the postings in this Group may be difficult to understand due to their highly technical nature and the extensive use of abbreviations, but help is always available there.
To move to some more practical construction details for this system. The motor (and alternator) considered to be the best for this application is the “Baldor EM3770T” 7.5 horsepower unit. The specification number is 07H002X790, and it is a 230/460 volts 60Hz 3-phase, 19/9.5 amp, 1770 rpm, power factor 81, device.
The Baldor web site is here and the following details should be considered carefully before trying any adaption of an expensive motor. The following constructional photographs are presented here by kind permission of Ashweth Palise of the EVGRAY Group.
The end plate of the drive motor needs to be removed and the rotor lifted out. Considerable care is needed when doing this as the rotor is heavy and it must not be dragged across the stator windings as doing that would damage them.
The second end-plate is then removed and placed on the opposite end of the stator housing.
The fan is removed as it is not needed and just causes unnecessary drag, and the rotor is inserted the opposite way round to the way it was removed. That is, the housing is now the other way round relative to the rotor, since the rotor has been turned through 180 degrees before being replaced. The same part of the shaft of the rotor passes through the same end plate as before as the end plates have also been swapped over. The end plates are bolted in position and the rotor shaft spun to confirm that it still rotates as freely as before.
To reduce friction to an absolute minimum, the motor bearings need to be cleaned to an exceptional level. There are various ways of doing this. One of the best is to use a carburettor cleaner spray from your local car accessories shop. Spray inside the bearings to wash out all of the packed grease. The spray evaporates if left for a few minutes. Repeat this until the shaft spins perfectly, then put one (and only one) drop of light oil on each bearing and do not use WD40 as it leaves a residue film. The result should be a shaft which spins absolutely perfectly.
The next step is to connect the windings of the two units. The motor (the “Prime Mover”) is wired for 480 volt operation. This is done by connecting winding terminals 4 to 7, 5 to 8 and 6 to 9. The diagram shows 120 volts AC as being the power supply. This is because the RotoVerter design makes the motor operate at a much lower input than the motor designers intended. If this motor were operated in the standard way, a 480 volt 3-phase supply would be connected to terminals 1, 2 and 3 and there would be no capacitors in the circuit.
It is suggested that the jumpering of the motor windings is more neatly done by removing the junction box cover and drilling through it to carry the connections outside to external connectors, jumpered neatly to show clearly how the connections have been made for each unit, and to allow easy alterations should it be decided to change the jumpering for any reason.
The same is done for the unit which is to be used as the alternator. To increase the allowable current draw, the unit windings are connected to give the lower voltage with the windings connected in parallel as shown below with terminals 4,5 and 6 strapped together, 1 connected to 7, 2 connected to 8 and 3 connected to 9. This gives a three-phase output on terminals 1, 2 and 3. This can be used as a 3-phase AC output or as three single-phase AC outputs, or as a DC output by wiring it as shown here:
The motor and the alternator are then mounted securely in exact alignment and coupled together. The switching of the direction of the housing on the drive motor allows all of the jumpering to be on the same side of the two units when they are coupled together, facing each other:
The input drive may be from an inverter driven from a battery charged via a solar panel. The system how needs to be ‘tuned’ and tested. This involves finding the best ‘starting’ capacitor which will be switched into the circuit for a few seconds at start-up, and the best ‘running’ capacitor. Help and advice is readily available from the EVGRAY Group as mentioned above.
To summarise: This device takes a low-power 110 Volt AC input and produces a much higher-power electrical output which can be used for powering much greater loads than the input could power. The output power is much higher than the input power. This is free-energy under whatever name you like to apply to it. One advantage which should be stressed, is that very little in the way of construction is needed, and off-the-shelf motors are used. Also, no knowledge of electronics is needed, which makes this one of the easiest to construct free-energy devices available at the present time. One slight disadvantage is that the tuning of the “Prime Mover” motor depends on its loading and most loads have different levels of power requirement from time to time. A 220 Volt AC motor can also be used if that is the local supply voltage.
If an alternator is being driven by the RotoVerter motor (the “Prime Mover”) but although the shaft is being rotated rapidly there is no output voltage, then it is likely that the alternator has been sitting around unused for a long time and has lost the magnetic properties which it needs at start-up. To fix this, connect each of the three output windings, one at a time, across a car battery for about five seconds to develop some magnetism and the alternator will then work. This is a one-off thing only needed after a long period of inactivity.
It is not essential to construct the RotorVeter exactly as shown above, although that is the most common form of construction. The Muller Motor mentioned earlier, can have a 35 kilowatt output when precision-constructed as Bill Muller did. One option therefore, is to use one Baldor motor jumpered as the “Prime Mover” drive motor and have it drive one or more Muller Motor style rotors to generate the output power:
Coil-Shorting. The RotoVerter output and the Muller Motor/Generator output (and possibly, the Adams Motor output) can be increased very substantially by a technique developed by "Kone" the moderator of the EVGRAY Yahoo forum already mentioned. The technique is to place a dead short-circuit across each output coil, just as the magnetic field of that coil reaches a maximum. This is done five times in rapid succession and can boost the output power by an estimated factor of 100 times.
On the surface, it appears complete madness to place a short-circuit across the very output which you are generating as the whole point of the exercise. However, it is not as mad as it seems. At the peak point, the coil itself contains a large amount of energy and when a short-circuit is placed across it, the result is quite unusual. The effect of short-circuiting an iron-cored coil has been demonstrated by Ron Pugh of Canada with a bench test using this equipment:
Here, a device for measuring magnetic fields is sensing the magnetic field of the coil as the rotor magnets move past the coil. The measurement is done with the coil operating normally and then again, with the coil short-circuited. The results are shown in these oscilloscope displays:
Quite surprisingly, the magnetic field is reversed by the short-circuit. If we consider just the first half of the cycle:
You will notice that when the open coil has a very strong positive position (relative to a North magnetic pole), the short-circuited coil has a strong reading of the opposite polarity. Therefore, at any given instance near the peak, there is the potential for a major magnetic reversal if the coil were to be switched from the red area into the blue area and back again. You might imagine that if the coil short-circuiting were performed very rapidly, that there would be a result like this:
However, this is not really possible with an iron-cored coil as it is not able to reverse it's magnetisation rapidly enough to produce this effect. Coils with iron cores might get up to 3,000 reversals per second although 1,000 would probably be a more realistic figure. For higher frequencies, a ferrite core could be used and for yet higher frequencies again, an iron-dust epoxy-encapsulated core is needed. For unlimited frequencies, an air-core coil is used.
In the RotoVerter / Muller Motor example where Kone has demonstrated major energy gains, the arrangement is different to Ron Pugh's bench-test example. Firstly, the magnets on the rotor present two poles to the coil as they pass by, giving a full, even sine wave output. Secondly, Kone uses an air-core coil and he has the fast switching implemented to take advantage of that coil type:
This screen shot shows exactly the same effect with the oscillating pulses plunging down to exactly where the negative trace would be at that time during each of the short-circuited periods. The display is showing a twenty-volt peak-to-peak waveform with each complete sine wave cycle taking 2 milliseconds.
Instead of the original gradual magnetic rise to a single peak, there are now five very sharp magnetic reversals, each of which are substantially larger that the original peak. It is the change of magnetic flux in the pick-up coil which produces the output power, so it can be seen that with this additional switching, a massive increase in flux change has been produced in the output coil. This increase is both a larger magnetic swing and a much greater rate of change of the flux, and as the rotor is spinning at some 1,800 rpm and has many magnets in it, the overall magnetic power increases by a major factor. Please not that in the following diagrams produced by Kone, the rotor magnet has a South pole which reaches the pick-up coil first, followed by a North pole passing the coil. This produces an excellent sine wave output in the coil.
The additional switching is performed by a mechanical brush and contact system and the power collection circuit used for the short-circuited coil is:
and when the coil is not short-circuited, the circuit is:
Doug Konzen has been developing this circuitry and generously sharing his results freely. His web site is here and his most recent practical circuit is:
There is a video on the web where coil-shorting is used on the output from a replication of John Bedini’s Window Motor. John’s Window Motor is a cylinder with magnets mounted in it, spun inside a large coil by a pulsed motor:
The motor can be a self-runner, but for the coil-shorting demonstration, it was just spun briefly by hand, producing voltage pulses of about 16 volts. When the coil-shorting is switched on, those pulses rise to about 440 volts even though the coil shorting was not the optimum five times at peak (which would probably have raised the voltage pulses to about 1,600 volts). The oscilloscope displays of the test shown on video are:
I’m told that this coil-shorting technique is used in industry but is consider to be a ‘trade secret’. Details of John Bedini’s Window Motor can be found at www.fight-4-truth.com/Schematics.html.
Raoul Hatem. Generally, the RotoVerter gives very low input power when not loaded and about a 90% energy reduction when under load. The ideal situation is where there is a constant load as the tuning of the RotoVerter does depend to some degree on the load. However, the RotoVerter performance can be increased very substantially by using the techniques introduced by Raoul Hatem in 1955, which conventional science will not accept because according to current theory, any such energy gain has to be “impossible” and so, cannot happen no matter what evidence there is (web site):
Raoul Hatem’s heretical statement is that using spinning magnets draws in energy from the environment, allowing a system to have COP>1 (ever heard of John Searle’s spinning magnet systems?). His method is to use a motor (whether RotoVerter or not) to spin a heavy rotor disc with 36 powerful rare-earth magnets mounted on it. Then, using an identical heavy disc with magnets mounted on a generator to give a magnetic coupling between the motor and the generator can give not just coupling, but an energy gain as well:
The heavy rotor provides some flywheel effect which helps with the operation of the system. Even with one motor as shown above, there is an energy gain as demonstrated in a recent video demonstration of the effect here where a simple system produces 144 watts of excess power. However, the really big gains are got when several generators are driven by just the one motor. In passing, it may be remarked that there are two separate energy gain systems operating here. Firstly, the rotating magnetic field acts directly on the excess electrons in the local environment, drawing them into the system just as the fluctuating magnetic field of the secondary winding of any transformer does. Secondly, the rotors are receiving a rapid stream of drive pulses, and as Chas Campbell has demonstrated, that draws in excess energy from the gravitational field.
Anyway, you will notice that the powerful magnets used have their North poles outwards on one rotor while the adjacent rotor has the South poles outwards. The very strong attraction between these opposite poles cause the generator disc to rotate in step with the motor disc. This process allows many generators to be driven by just the one motor as shown here and in the photograph above:
For ease of drawing, the diagram above shows only eight magnets per rotor disc, but you will notice in the photograph (and in the video) that there are three stepped rows of magnets on each rotor:
You will also notice that direction of the stepping is reversed on every second rotor disc in order for the magnets to match each other in position as they rotate in opposite directions.
While this type of arrangement gives a major increase in the output power compared to the input power, the situation can be further enhanced by retrieving some of the input power by means of electronic circuitry, and both Phil Wood and David Kousoulides have kindly shared their methods for doing this:
Phil Wood, another member of the EVGRAY enthusiast Group, who has many years of experience working with all varieties of electric motor, has come up with a very clever circuit variation for the RotoVerter system. His design has a 240 volt Prime Mover motor driven with 240 volt AC. The revised circuit now has automated start-up and it provides an extra DC output which can be used to power additional equipment. His circuit is shown here:
Phil specifies the diode bridges as 20 amp 400 volt and the output capacitor as 4000 to 8000 microfarads 370 volt working. The ON/OFF switch on the DC output should be 10 amp 250 volt AC working. The circuit operates as follows:
The charge capacitor “C” needs to be fully discharged before the motor is started, so the press-button switch is pressed to connect the 1K resistor across the capacitor to discharge it fully. If you prefer, the press-button switch and resistor can be omitted and the switch to the DC load closed before the AC input is applied. The switch must then be opened and the AC connected. The starting capacitor “S” and capacitor “R” both operate at full potential until capacitor “C” begins to charge. As capacitor “C” goes through its charging phase, the resistance to capacitors “R” and “S” increases and their potential capacitance becomes less, automatically following the capacitance curve required for proper AC motor operation at start-up.
After a few seconds of run time, the output switch is operated, connecting the DC load. By varying the resistance of the DC load, the correct tuning point can be found. At that point, the DC load resistance keeps both of the capacitors “R” and “S” operating at a potentially low capacitance value.
The operation of this circuit is unique, with all of the energy which is normally wasted when the AC motor is starting, being collected in the output capacitor “C”. The other bonus is where a DC load is powered for free while it keeps capacitors “R” and “S” in their optimum operating state. The DC load resistance needs to be adjusted to find the value which allows automatic operation of the circuit. When that value has been found and made a permanent part of the installation, then the switch can be left on when the motor is started (which means that it can be omitted). If the switch is left on through the starting phase, capacitor “C” can be a lower value if the DC load resistance is high enough to allow the capacitor to go through its phase shift.
The capacitor values shown above were those found to work well with Phil’s test motor which was a three-winding, 5 horsepower, 240 volt unit. Under test, driving a fan, the motor draws a maximum of 117 watts and a variable speed 600 watt drill was used for the DC load. The motor operates at its full potential with this circuit.
The circuit will need different capacitors for operation with a 120 Volt AC supply. The actual values are best determined by testing with the motor which is to be used, but the following diagram is a realistic starting point:
The 120 V AC motor runs very smoothly and quietly drawing only 20 watts of input power.
Advancing the design even further, Phil has now produced an extremely clever design by introducing an additional DC motor/generator coupled to the “Prime Mover” motor. The coupling is nominally mechanical with the two motors physically linked together with a belt and pulleys, but the electrical linking is such that the two motors will synchronise automatically if the mechanical linkage is omitted. I should like to express my thanks to him for sharing this information, diagrams and photographs freely.
This circuit is very clever as the DC motor/generator automatically adjusts the running of the AC motor both at startup and under varying loading. Also, the selection of the capacitors is not so critical and no manual intervention is needed at startup. In addition, the DC motor/generator can be used as an additional source of electricity.
As the loading on the Prime Mover motor is quite low due to the very, very high efficiency of the RotoVerter arrangement, it is perfectly feasible to drive the whole system with a low-power inverter run from a battery. If that is done, then it is possible to use two batteries. One is charged by the DC generator while the other is driving the inverter. A timer circuit then switches the batteries over on a regular basis using relay switching.
Extra Energy Collection
A very effective additional circuit has been developed by David Kousoulides. This circuit allows extra current to be drawn off a RotoVerter while it is running, without increasing the input power needed to drive the RotoVerter. David’s circuit can be used with a wide range of systems, but here it is being shown as an addition to the RotoVerter system, raising it’s efficiency even higher than before.
As is common with many effective circuits, it is basically very simple looking, and it’s apparent operation is easily explained. The objective is to draw additional current from the RotoVerter and use that current to charge one or more batteries, without loading the RotoVerter at all. The current take off is in the form of a rapid series of current pulses which can be heard as a series of faint clicks when fed into the battery.
Let us examine the circuit section by section:
First, we start with a standard “off the shelf” 3-phase motor. In this example, the motor is a 7.5 horsepower motor, which when wired in RotoVerter mode, using just a single-phase supply as shown here, only draws a very low amount of power when running, especially if the single-phase supply is about 25% of the voltage rating of the motor:
Because the running power draw is so low, it is possible to run this motor from a standard battery-powered inverter, but the current draw at start-up is some 17 amps, so the mains is used to get the motor started and then the motor is switched from the mains to the inverter. The inverter also allows easy measurement of the power input and so makes for easier calculation of the overall power efficiency of the system.
There is a power extraction device called a “diode-plug”, which in spite of it’s seeming simplicity, is actually much more subtle in it’s operation than would appear from a quick glance at the circuit:
This circuit has been presented as a public-domain non-copyrightable circuit by Hector Perez Torres and it is capable of extracting power from a range of different systems, without affecting those systems or increasing their power draw. In the circuit presented below, just the first half of the diode plug is utilised, though it should perhaps be stressed that it would be perfectly feasible to raise the efficiency of the circuit even further by adding extra components to duplicate the power feed from the battery, drawing on both parts of the diode-plug circuit. For clarity, this is not shown here, but it should be understood that it is a possible, and indeed desirable, extension to the circuitry described here.
When the motor is running, high voltages are developed across the windings of the motor. As only the first half of the diode-plug is being shown here, we will be capturing and using the negative-going voltages. These negative-going pulses are picked up, stored in a capacitor and used to charge a battery using the following circuit:
Here we have the same RotoVerter circuit as before, with high voltage being developed across capacitor C1. The battery-charging section is a free-floating circuit connected to point A of the motor. The high-voltage diode D1 is used to feed negative-going pulses to capacitor C2 which causes a large charge to build up in that capacitor. At the appropriate moment, the PC851 opto-isolator is triggered. This feeds a current into the base of the 2N3439 transistor, switching it on and firing the 2N6509 thyristor. This effectively switches capacitor C2 across the battery, which discharges the capacitor into the battery. This feeds a substantial charging power pulse into the battery. As the capacitor voltage drops, the thyristor is starved of current and it turns off automatically. The charging sequence for the capacitor starts again with the next pulse from the windings of the motor.
The only other thing to be arranged is the triggering of the opto-isolator. This should be done at the peak of a positive voltage on the motor windings and has been built like this:
Here, we have the RotoVerter motor as before, with the voltage developed on C1 being used to trigger the opto-isolator at the appropriate moment. The voltage on C1 is sensed by the diode D2, the pre-set resistor VR1 and the resistor R1. These place a load of some 18.2K ohms on capacitor C1 as the neon has a very high resistance when not conducting. The ten-turn preset resistor is adjusted to make the neon fire at the peak of the voltage wave coming from the motor. although the adjustment screw of most preset resistors is fully isolated from the resistor, it is recommended that adjustment of the screw be done using an insulated main-tester type of screwdriver, or a solid plastic trimmer-core adjustment tool.
The circuit to test one half of the diode plug is then:
The switch SW1 is included so that the charging section can be switched off at any time and this switch should not be closed until the motor gets up to speed. All wire connections should be made before power is applied to the circuit. Capacitor C1 which is shown as 36 microfarads, has a value which is optimised for the particular motor being used and will normally be in the range 17 to 24 microfarads for a well-prepared motor. The motor used for this development was retrieved from a scrapyard and was not prepared in any way.
The value of capacitor C2 can be increased by experimenting to find at what value the resonance gets killed and the charging section starts drawing extra current from the supply. It should be noted that many new thyristors (Silicon Controlled Rectifiers or “SCR”s) are faulty when supplied (sometimes as many as half of those supplied can be faulty). It is therefore important to test the thyristor to be used in this circuit before installing it. The circuit shown below can be used for the testing, but it should be stressed that even if the component passes the test, that does not guarantee that it will work reliably in the circuit. For example, while 2N6509 thyristors are generally satisfactory, it has been found that C126D types are not. A thyristor passing the test may still operate unpredictably with false triggers.
Please note that the 2N6509 package has the Anode connected inside the housing to the metal mounting tab.
When using and testing this circuit, it is important that all wires are connected securely in place before the motor is started. This is because high voltages are generated and creating sparks when making connections does not do any of the components any particular good. If the circuit is to be turned off while the motor is still running, then switch SW1 is there for just that purpose.
The operating technique is as follows:
Before starting the motor, adjust the slider of the preset resistor VR1 to the fixed resistor end of it’s track. This ensures that the charging circuit will not operate as the neon will not fire. Power up the circuit and start adjusting the preset resistor very slowly until the neon starts to flash occasionally. There should be no increased load on the motor and so no extra current drawn from the input supply.
If there is an increase in the load, you will be able to tell by the speed of the motor and the sound it makes. If there is an increase in the load, then back off VR1 and check the circuit construction. If there is no increased load, then continue turning VR1 slowly until a position is reached where the neon remains lit all the time. You should see the voltage across the battery being charged increase without any loading effects on the motor.
If you use an oscilloscope on this circuit, please remember that there is no “ground” reference voltage and that the circuit is not isolated.
Here is a picture of David’s actual board construction. There are various ways for building any circuit. This particular construction method uses plain matrix board to hold the components in position and the bulk of the interconnections are made underneath the board. The charge-collecting capacitor is made here from two separate polypropolene 440 volt capacitors wired in parallel. David has opted to use a separate diode on each capacitor as this has the effect of doubling the current-carrying capacity of a single diode and is a popular technique in pulse charge circuits where sometimes several diodes are wired in parallel.
David has included a heatsink, which he marks as being “not required” but you will notice that there is insulation between the SCR and the heatsink. Mica “washers” available from the suppliers of semiconductors are particularly good for this, as mica is a good insulator and it also conducts heat very well.
The components needed to construct the thyristor testing circuit shown below can be bought as Kit number 1087 from www.QuasarElectronics.com
The circuit is operated by operating SW1 several times so as to get capacitors C1 and C2 fully charged. LED1 and LED2 should both be off. If either of them light, then the thyristor is faulty.
Next, with SW1 at it’s position 1, press switch SW2 briefly. LED1 should light and stay on after SW2 is released. If either of these two things does not happen, then the thyristor is faulty.
With LED1 lit, press SW3 and LED1 should go out. If that does not happen, then the thyristor is faulty.
As mentioned before, even if the thyristor passes these tests it does not guarantee that it will work correctly in any circuit as it may operate intermittently and it may trigger spuriously when it shouldn’t.
Phil Wood has developed a particularly effective method for extracting the excess resonant circulating energy of a RotoVerter Prime Mover. This is the circuit:
Care needs to be taken when constructing this circuit. For example, the circuit performance is displayed by an HEF4017B 5-stage Johnson counter, but for some lunatic reason, the 4017 designation is also used for a completely different chip of the same size and number of DIL pins, namely the “CMOS high-speed hex flip-flop with Reset”, an action definitely worthy of a stupidity award. Another point to watch out for is that the 1A 1N5819 diode is a very high-speed Schottky barrier component.
The circuit operation is as follows:
The input from the RotoVertor motor is stepped-down by a transformer to give an 18-volt (nominal) AC output, which is then rectified by a standard rectifier bridge and the output smoothed by an 18-volt zener diode and a 330mF smoothing capacitor, and used to power the MC34151 chip. This DC power supply line is further dropped and stabilised by a 15-volt zener diode and a 47mF capacitor and used to power the LED display chip HEF4017B.
The raw RotoVerter input is also taken direct and rectified by a second 400-volt 35-amp rectifier diode bridge and smoothed by a 20mF capacitor with a high voltage rating. It must be understood that the RotoVerter system is liable to produce considerable power surges from time to time and so this circuit must be capable of handling and benefiting from these surges. This is why the IRG4PH40UD IGBT device was selected (apart from it’s very reasonable price) as it robust and can handle high voltages.
The resulting high-voltage DC is taken by the chain of components two 75-volt zener diodes, 20K resistor and the 100K variable resistor. The voltage developed on the slider of this variable resistor is loaded with a 10K resistor and voltage-limited with a 10-volt zener diode, and decoupled with a 10nF capacitor before being passed to the MC34151 high-speed MOSFET dual driver chip. Both of these drivers are used to sharpen up the pulse and drive the IGBT cleanly. The result is an output which is a series of DC pulses. The operation of the circuit can be seen quite clearly, thanks to the HEF4017B display circuit which drives a row of LEDs, triggered by the IGBT gate signal, divided by the 1K / 4.7K voltage divider decoupled by the 10nF capacitor. This display shows clearly when the IGBT is switching correctly - actually, the display circuit is quite a useful device for people who do not own an oscilloscope, not just for this circuit, but a wide range of different circuits.
The physical board layout for Phil’s circuit is shown here:
As you will notice from the notes on Phil’s board layout shown above, the first of the 75-volt zener diodes used on the direct RotoVerter power feed, should be replaced with a 30-volt zener if a 120-volt motor is used in this circuit.
Another important point which needs to be stressed, is that the pulsed DC output from this circuit can be at extremely high voltages and needs to treated with considerable care. This is not a circuit for beginners and anyone who is not familiar with handling high voltages needs the supervision of an experienced person. Also, if either this circuit or the RotoVerter is connected to the mains, then no scope ground leads should be connected as the circuit can be a hundred volts or more below ground potential.
The pattern of the printed-circuit board when viewed from the underside of the board is shown here:
And component packaging is:
Phil’s build of his circuit was implemented like this:
Lawrence Tseung. Lawrence has been presenting his theory of lead-out energy which indicates that excess energy is drawn from the environment when there is an impact. The method of producing this effect which he has followed is to create an unbalanced wheel and demonstrate that excess energy is produced. It should be stressed that energy is never created or destroyed and so, when he measures more energy in his device than the energy which he uses to power it, energy is not being created but is instead, being drawn in from the local environment. Lawrence has recently demonstrated a prototype to members of the public:
This simple device was demonstrated to have 3.3 times as much output power as the input power needed to make it operate. This is an early prototype which was demonstrated in October 2009 and Lawrence and his helpers are working on to produce more advanced models which have kilowatts of excess electrical power.
Mr Tseung remarks: "The Lee-Tseung Lead-Out Energy Theory was first disclosed to the world on 20th December 2004 at Tai Po, in Hong Kong. The Lead-Out Energy Theory basically says that one can lead-out (or bring-in) Energy from the surrounding environment into a Lead-Out Energy Machine. The total Input energy is equal to the sum of the Supplied Energy plus the Lead-Out Energy. For example, if the supplied energy is 100 units and the lead-out energy is 50 units, the device's total Input Energy will be 150 units. This means that the Output Energy can be more than the Supplied Energy of 100 units provided by the person using the device.
If we ignore the small loss of energy caused by less than 100% efficiency of the device itself, then the Output Energy will be the whole of the 150 units. If we use 50 of the output energy units and feed back 100 of the output units as the Supplied Energy, then that Supplied Energy can again lead-out another 50 units of excess output Energy for us to use. Thus a Lead-Out Energy Machine can continuously lead-out pollution-free, virtually inexhaustible and readily available energy for us to use. We do not need to burn any fossil fuel or pollute our environment. The two examples of Lead-Out energy which we access are Gravitational and Electron-Motion energy.
The Lead-Out Energy theory does not violate the Law of Conservation of Energy. The Law of Conservation of Energy has been used as a roadblock for the so called “Overunity” devices. The patent offices and the scientific establishment routinely dismiss an invention as belonging to the impossible “perpetual-motion machine” category if the inventor cannot identify the energy source of his invention.
We got the help of Mr. Tong Po Chi to produce a 60 cm diameter Lead-Out Energy machine in October 2009. The Output Energy of that device is greater than the Input Energy by a factor of 3 times. These results are confirmed by voltmeters and ammeters measuring the Input and Output energies.
The Tong wheel has been shown at two Open Shows in Hong Kong (Inno Carnival 2009 and Inno Design Tech Expo) in November and December 2009. Over 25,000 people have seen it. The Better Hong Kong Radio Show has video recorded it, the discussions being conducted in Chinese. At this time, the Tong wheel is at the Radio Studio available for experts to view and examine with their own instruments."
The Tong wheel has a diameter of 600 mm, 16 permanent magnets mounted on its rim and 15 air-core coils mounted around it on the stator. There is one position sensor. The coils can be switched to act as drive coils or as energy collection coils:
With this arrangement, if the positions the switches as shown for ten of the fifteen coils shown here, then they act as drive coils. The sensor is adjusted so that the drive circuit delivers a brief energising pulse to those coils just after the magnets have passed their exact alignment position with the coils. This causes them to generate a magnetic field which repels the magnets, thrusting the rotor around.
The pulse is very brief, so very little power is needed to accomplish this pulsing. As mentioned before, any number of coils can be switched to provide this driving force. With this particular wheel construction by Mr Tong, the best number has been found to be ten drive coils.
The power pick-up is achieved by gathering the electricity generated in some of the coils as the magnets move past them:
In this particular arrangement, five of the coils gather energy while ten provide the drive. For the sake of simplicity, the diagram shows the five collection coils adjacent to each other and while that would work, the wheel is better balanced if the drive coils are evenly spaced out around the rim. For that reason, this switching would actually be selected to give five sets of two drive coils followed by one pick-up coil as that gives a perfectly balanced thrust on the wheel.
The two diagrams above are shown separately in order to make it clear how the drive switching and the power pick-up switching are arranged. The full design arrangement and the balanced switching are shown in the following diagram which indicates how the full design is implemented on this particular implementation of the wheel design. The sensor can be a coil feeding a semiconductor switching circuit, or it can be a magnetic semiconductor called a Hall-effect device which can also feed a semiconductor circuit. An alternative would be a reed switch which is a simple mechanical switch encased in an inert gas inside a tiny glass envelope. Suitable switching circuits are described and explained in chapter 12 of this eBook.
Mr Tseung remarks that the large wheel size is due to the fact that the Pulse Force takes time to impart the impulse to the wheel and lead-out energy from the environment into the system. If you want to see this actual wheel, you can email Dr. Alexandra Yuan at email@example.com to make an appointment. The Tong wheel is located at the Better Hong Kong Radio Studio in Causeway Bay, Hong Kong. Just say that you want to see the Lead-Out Energy Machine. The demonstration can be in English or in Chinese. Ideally, there should be a group of at least six visitors with one or more being a qualified engineer or scientist, and you are welcome to bring your own cameras and/or test equipment. It is planned to produce a version which has a 300 watt output, and another with a 5 kilowatt output. Educational kits are also planned.
If you decide to replicate this particular design, then to raise the output power level you might consider putting another set of coils around the wheel and either using them as fifteen additional energy pick-up coils or alternatively, pulsing the wheel twice as often. Adding one or more additional rotor discs to the same rotating shaft is also an option and that has the advantage of increasing the rotor weight and improving the effect of the impulses on the rotor.
The diameter of the wire used to wind the coils is a design choice which has a wide scope. The thicker the wire, the greater the current and the larger the impulse given to the wheel. The coils are normally connected in parallel as shown in the diagrams.
Because of the way magnetic field strength drops off with the square of the distance, it is generally considered good design practice to make the coils one and a half times as wide as they are deep, as indicated in the diagrams above, but this is not a critical factor. This design is, of course, a version of the Adams motor described at the start of this chapter. Although motors of this kind can be built in many different ways, the construction used by Mr Tong has some distinct advantages, so here is a little more detail on how I understand the construction to be carried out.
There are two side pieces which are attached together by sixteen cross timbers, each of which are held in place by two screws at each end. This produces a rigid structure while the construction method is as simple as is possible, using readily available materials which are worked with the most basic of hand tools. The construction also allows the motor to be taken apart completely without any difficulty, transported as a “flat-pack” package and then assembled at a new location. It also facilitates people who want to see the motor taken apart after a demonstration in order to assure themselves that there is no hidden power source.
Each of the cross timbers provide a secure mounting platform for an electromagnet and it’s associated switch. In the implementation by Mr Tong, there appears to be just the one rotor, configured as shown above with sixteen permanent magnets mounted in it’s rim. The magnetic poles of these magnets are all orientated in the same direction. That is to say, the magnetic poles facing outwards are all either South or all North poles. It is not critical whether the outward facing poles are North or South as Robert Adams used both arrangements with great success, but having said that, most people prefer to have the North poles facing outwards.
Robert has always said that one rotor was enough, but his techniques were so sophisticated that he was able to extract kilowatts of excess power from a single small rotor. For us, just starting to experiment and test a motor of this type, it seems sensible to stick with what Mr Tong has experienced success. However, this build by Mr Tong is not his final motor but just one in a series of continuously improved motors.
The following diagram shows an arrangement which has three rotors attached to a single shaft and while you may choose to construct this with just one rotor, if the cross timbers are long enough, then one or two extra rotors can be added in very easily at a later date.
Here, just two of the cross timbers are shown. The electromagnet coils used by Mr Tong are air-core as that type have the least effect on the passing magnets. However, electromagnets with cores tend to be much more power for any given current flowing through them. In theory, the core should be made of lengths of insulated iron wire as that would reduce power loss through eddy currents flowing in the core, but Robert actually recommends solid metal cores, and as he was the most experienced person in this field, paying attention to what he said seems sensible.
The core material needs to be a metal which magnetises easily and powerfully, but which does not retain any of its magnetism when the current stops flowing. Not many metals have those characteristics and soft iron is usually recommended. Nowadays, soft iron is not always readily available and so a convenient alternative is the central bolt of a masonry anchor which has excellent properties:
The shaft of the bolt can be cut quite easily with a hacksaw, but be sure to remove (or file down) the head of the bolt as the increase in diameter has a marked effect on the magnetic properties of the electromagnet core if it is left in place. The bolt shown above is a M16 x 147 mm masonry anchor bolt with a bolt diameter of 10 mm. Some makes of dry-ink felt white-board markers have a rigid body which fits the 10 mm bolt exactly and provide an excellent tube for constructing an electromagnet bobbin.
With a core in the electromagnets, the rotor gets additional rotating power. Initially, the magnets on the rotor are attracted to the electromagnet cores, giving the rotor a turning force which does not require any current to be supplied. When the rotor magnets are at their closest point to the electromagnet cores, the windings are powered up briefly and that gives the rotor magnets a strong push away, causing the rotor to spin.
There are many different designs of simple drive circuits and it is probably worth trying out different types to see which works best with your particular build of motor. In the same way, there are many kinds of collection circuits for taking off some of the excess power generated. The most simple of these is just a diode bridge, perhaps feeding a battery and charging it up for use at a later time. If you get sophisticated with the collection circuit and just take power off for a very short period of time at the correct moment, the cutting off of the current draw, causes a back-EMF magnetic pulse in the collection electromagnet which causes it to give the rotor an extra drive push – both current collection and rotor drive in one combined package.
Here are two of the most simple circuits possible, one for drive and one for power collection. The drive circuit transistor is switched on by a voltage generated in the grey coil by a rotor magnet passing by. The transistor then feeds a large current pulse to the black coil, driving the rotor on its way. The neon and the diode are there to protect the transistor and a physical layout for this circuit might be:
The 1K variable resistor is adjusted to give the best performance and the On/Off switch is optional. More advanced circuits, such as the one on page 2 - 9 can also be tried and the performance compared. Generally speaking, I would expect a three-rotor version to give a better performance than a single rotor implementation, but experimentation is needed.
Art Porter. Art uses an electromagnet with a ring magnet mounted on the core. When the coil is pulsed so as to augment the field of the permanent magnet, Art says that his prototype produces 2.9 times the field strength of the permanent magnet on it’s own. When the coil is pulsed in the direction which opposes the field of the permanent magnet, the resulting magnetic field is zero.
This is a very serious change of magnetic field which can be used in different applications. One which Art has implemented is using the arrangement to power a crankshaft motor. Art shows several different motor builds including this one:
With this arrangement, Art states that 95% of the motor power comes from the permanent magnet. Art’s website is here and he has a very interesting, lengthy video showing all of the details here.
In the video, Art attempts to apply Ohm’s Law in an attempt to analyse the operation and is puzzled when the oscilloscope readings do not match his Ohm’s Law calculations. He thinks that there is a contradiction between the oscilloscope and Ohm’s Law, which he repeatedly stresses is a law of Nature, and he concludes that one of them has to be wrong. In actual fact, neither are wrong because Ohm’s Law only applies to DC current flow in resistive circuits, and Art is not using steady DC current or a resistive load.
Applying short DC pulses to a substantial coil of wire is the equivalent of applying AC to that inductor. Ohm’s Law does not apply due to the inductance of the coil. There is a Power Factor involved and Back EMF voltage pulses, so the oscilloscope readings are what is needed to calculate the input and output powers.
This arrangement is almost identical to that used in the Charles Flynn magnet motor described in chapter 1, and very close to the techniques used by Robert Adams in a properly tuned Adams Motor as shown at the start of this chapter. In my opinion, the effect which Art is exploiting would best be used if a large pick-up coil is placed against the end of the electromagnet core and the drive coil pulsed at the coil’s (high) resonant frequency as that will minimise the input power and maximise the output power. Stacking those units in a bank could well produce a very sizeable excess electrical output. Our thanks are due to Art and his colleagues for sharing their research work freely for others to replicate and progress further.
DC Motor Efficiency Commercially available DC motors are deliberately designed and manufactured to have extremely poor performance. In my opinion, the reason for this is that a properly designed electric motor could easily do away with the need for using internal combustion engines in vehicles and that would not suit the oil companies or their owners, the New World Order cartels. Worse still, electric motors with COP>1 open the way to self-powered free-energy systems and that would never do !!
Peter Lindemann’s video is available on the web and I strongly recommend that you watch all of it. I have only just seen it and it presents the basic facts very nicely. In brief outline, present day motors act both as a motor and as a generator of electrical power, but they are deliberately wound so that the power generation is used to oppose the input power and so produce a completely crippled output. During World War II, a German Engineer re-wired a standard electric motor and made it self-powered, that is, it ran and produced mechanical output power without the need for any input power once it had been started. That shows the potential of a properly constructed electric motor with the same size and general structure of any commercial electric motor.
The con job which has been run on us for many decades now is to wind the motor in such as way that the magnetic fields inside the motor oppose each other. When a current is passed through a coil of wire, it stores energy in that coil, and when the current flow is cut off, that energy needs to flow back out of the coil and it will do so in the reverse direction. This is sometimes called back-EMF (“Electro-Motive Force”) although many people are not happy with that description. However, no matter what you call it, there is energy stored in the coil and that energy can be used to do useful work. But, the motor manufacturers choose to wind the motor so that instead of extracting that useful power, they use it to oppose a major part of the input power, creating a weak motor which heats up due to the wasted energy.
Contributor “UFOpolitics” points out that a deliberate mis-design of electric motors has, for the last 130 years, been presented to us as the only way to make and operate such motors. He states that because the windings are arranged in a symmetrical way, that a braking effect is produced which reduces the output power of the motor by anything from 50% to 90%. That is, a properly wound motor would have anything from twice to ten times the output power for the same input power. This mis-design guarantees that present day motors are always less than 100% efficient and always heat up when run. This mis-design is caused by using symmetrical windings in the motor.
Presumably, he did that by adding extra brushes and using some of the windings in generator mode with their output powering the drive windings which were arranged asymmetrically. There was also one other man who achived self-powered re-wiring of a motor, but neither of those men shared their information publicly.
Standard motor wiring is quite different and the killer effect is caused by having two windings which face each other, powered simultaneously with currents flowing in opposite directions. This causes a complete conflict between the magnetic fields and that destroys the efficiency of the motor: A very experienced experimenter has started a forum thread on the energetic-forum, both to explain this and to show new and more advanced construction methods and to answer questions and encourage replications and further developments. The forum is here and is definitely worth visiting, especially if you are good with mechanical devices. The experimenter uses the forum ID of “UFOpolitics” and he has produced an animated video in an attempt to explain the basic problems with present day DC electric motors: video. He points out that a problem winding in the standard DC motor looks like this:
The input current for any winding is fed in through a single pair of brush contacts. The generated electrical power “Ec” is not extracted and is forced to oppose the input energy “Ea”, leaving only a fraction of the input power to actually run the motor. It is likely that a motor of this type will only operate at 25% of it’s potential efficiency.
“UFOpolitics” has produced and demonstrated a simple way of overcoming this problem while using the existing motor housing, magnets and brush contacts. He does this by extracting the generated electrical power as a useful output and so preventing that useful power being used against the motor’s operation. To implement this, he adds one additional pair of brushes and re-winds the motor coils like this:
Here, one pair of brushes is at the top and one pair at the bottom of the ‘armature’ (the bit that rotates inside the motor housing and provides the mechanical power output). The coils are rewound to form a series of separate vertical coils, connecting to one brush terminal at the top and one brush terminal at the bottom as shown above.
The input power is between the terminals on the left and flows through the coil shown in brown. The current flow generates a magnetic field, causing rotation because of the Permanent magnets marked “N” (for a magnet which has it’s North pole facing the coils) and “S” (for a magnet which has it’s South pole facing the coils). The black zig-zag line represents the resistance to current flow of the wire and brush contacts.
The coil shown in green on the right represents that same coil at a later moment when it has been disconnected from the power supply and rotated until it reaches that position, at which point, the energy stored in it is taken off as a useful output via the right hand pair of brushes. However, this is just an explanatory diagram and it does not show the very important fact that the discharging coil must not directly face a driving coil, because if it does, then the energy discharge would create a magnetic field which would interfere with the magnetic field of the driving coil and create a major problem.
Right, to say that again, any one coil is powered on the left hand side to drive the armature around and provide the output shaft with turning power (“torque”). Then that rotation disconnects that coil from the input power, leaving the coil charged with energy which has nowhere to go. That charged coil continues round until it hits the second set of brushes, which allow it to discharge through a load and do useful work.
The really clever part of the adaption of the motor is best seen from above the vertical rotor. If, for example, you were to take a five-pole DC motor apart and remove the windings, the shaft and armature body might look like this:
When making an asymmetrical wound rotor, the windings go like this.
The start of the wire is secured at the top and then fed downwards through the opening “A” and back up through the opening “B”. For the small Radio Shack motor, this winding would be 25 turns of # 30 AWG wire (described as radio Shack ‘red’ wire, with a copper wire diameter of 0.255 mm).
The end of the wire marked “FINISH” is not cut, but is taken down through opening “A” and this time, up through opening “C”. For clarity, these continuing turns are shown in a different colour, but please realise that it is the same single strand of wire being used throughout:
The final wire turn goes down through opening “A” and finishes at the other end of the body of the armature. In these views, the wire runs down into the paper, each turn forming a cylinder. This view may give you a better visual picture of what the coils are wound on:
The next step is to connect the START and FINISH wire ends of this V-shaped double coil to the “commutator” slip rings which allow current to be passed through the coil at just the right moment. Seen again from one end of the armature, the connections are like this:
The commutator slip rings are connected further up on the drive shaft and the start of the winding wire (shown previously in dark green) is connected to the top commutator sector in the position shown here. The finishing end of the wire is connected to the corresponding commutator sector at the far end of the shaft – that is, the sector directly in line with the upper sector just connected to the start of the wire.
This completes the first of five identical V-shaped coils. The next coil is wound in the same way. The armature is rotated one sector counter-clockwise so that sector “D” replaces “A” at the top and the next coil is wound with the wire starting at the top and going down through opening “D” and up through opening “E”, repeating the same number of turns, and then, without cutting the wire the next set of wires are wound going down through opening “D” and back up through opening “F”. The start of the wire is then connected to the commutator sector which spans between openings “A” and “E” and the end connected to the corresponding commutator sector at the other end of the shaft..
For each of the remaining three windings, the shaft is rotated one position counter-clockwise and the same winding and connecting procedure carried out. When completed, no matter which opening is placed at the top of the view along the shaft, the windings and commutator sector for the wire connections will be identical.
The winding arrangement is slightly different for motors which have three poles (or multiples of three poles such as 6, 9, 12, etc poles). For the very simple 3-pole motors, the armature looks like this:
and with this style of armature, the winds are around the three arms, like this:
And as before, the commutator sectors at the top are duplicated at the bottom, allowing separate input and output circuits for each of the three coils. The windings have many turns, filling the available space and each winding is connected to the slip ring sector directly opposite it, like this:
The Start of each winding is connected to the commutator slip ring sector at the top of the armature and the Finish is connected to the slip ring sector directly below it, that is, the sector which is at the same angle as the top one where the Start of the wire is connected. This allows the brushes which press against the slip ring sectors to connect to both ends of each coil in turn as the armature rotates. Three pole motors are particularly powerful and motors with six poles can be re-wound with pairs of adjacent sectors amalgamated to give three larger sectors. Nine pole motors can have three adjacent sectors wound as a single coil to provide the same effect as a three pole motor, and twelve pole motors can have four adjacent sectors wound as a single coil.
The positioning of the brushes is important. With the three-pole and five-pole arrangements, the brushes are aligned with the gaps between the magnets which surround the armature. However, the re-wound motor can be ‘tuned’ for improved torque and reduced drive current by adapting the motor housing to allow some adjustment of the position of the brush and commutator slip rings relative to the coils. This adjustment need only be slight as the angular movement of the brushes will be small. It is, of course, essential that the upper and lower adjusted positions move by exactly the same angular amount so that every upper commutator slip ring sector remains exactly above it’s corresponding lower slip ring sector. In other words, the commutator slip ring sector at the top and bottom of each coil, must be exactly aligned vertically so that the electrical connections are made and broken at exactly the same instant
The commutator and brush arrangement are shown here in UFOpolitics’ diagrams:
The Commutator brush marked “G” (for “Generator”) takes away the energy stored in each coil and passes it to an electrical load. The Commutator brush marked “M” (for “Motor”) feeds energy into the coil from the battery which is driving the motor. The red and blue stripes surrounding the armature are two permanent magnets. The magnet shown in red has it’s South pole facing the armature and the magnet shown in blue has it’s North pole facing the armature. This creates a magnetic field flowing horizontally across the armature. The five-pole arrangement is like this:
Here, the designation “R/S” stands for “Radio Shack” which is a chain of stores in America. In the forum, that is sometimes changed to “RS” and should not be confused with the large electronics outlet “Radio Spares” whose trademark is “RS”. UFOpolitics has suggested that the cheap 5-pole DC motor available from Radio Shack should be used by experimenters to become familiar with re-winding DC motor coils. Being a cheap product, those motors do not have a particularly high build quality, but they are suitable motors for experiments. Forum members share the details of how they dealt with adapting these and other motors.
I have to admit that motor windings and operation tend to confuse me and I sometimes find it difficult to understand what ‘UFOpolitics’ means when he talks about different winding strategies. However, it seems reasonably clear at this early stage of forum development, that his objective is to produce two things:
While ‘UFOpolitics’ is very patiently going through many of the possible variations on how a DC motor can be wound and connected, and showing various forum members where they have failed to get some of their windings positioned correctly, he has also shown some of the best ways of connecting a re-wound motor used as a driver or “Prime Mover” as some people like to call it, and a re-wound motor which is to be used as an electrical generator. He shows two important ways for making a very effective Motor/Generator combination, as shown here:
It needs to be realised that these arrangements are not conventional arrangements and that the re-wound motors operate in a different way to motors bought ‘off the shelf’. For this reason, it is necessary to isolate the electrical output to prevent current flowing through the load from affecting the operation of the Motor/Generator combination. This can be done by placing a diode in each of the output lines and charging a capacitor bank which is then used to feed whatever load is to powered. If my understanding is correct, then feeding any cold electricity produced into a capacitor causes the current to become conventional hot electricity. It is not clear if that action is part of this arrangement although the circuitry shown should be used. This is the second version:
‘UFOpolitics’ comments on these arrangements as follows: As we excite the input of the Motor, the Generator will start producing energy and that additional energy will flow through the Motor Output side because they are connected in series here. Two rectifiers must be connected at both output terminals, Positive and Negative, to avoid back flow from closing the circuit through the load.
As the Motor accelerates, the Generator boosts the energy flow which then runs through the Motor augmenting the Output Fields and when the output is loaded then an ‘Engagement’ of both Machines occurs as they start to compensate each other through their output flows. It should be understood that the Output should Capacitor Banked in a dedicated Reservoir.
When designing a Generator for a specific, existing Asymmetric Motor machine, it must be understood that Generator Interactions should be considered to run as “Counter Rotation” to the Motor Machine’s originally conceived rotation (which is easily done by just moving brush-lines passing stator bisector angles to the opposite of those needed for a Motor, or alternatively, setting the timing backwards). This will definitively enhance the assisted rotation of both Machines when connected together in this Face-to-Face mode.
As I do not find the forum comments easy to understand, I recommend that you visit the forum and read the posts as you may well understand the conversations easier to follow than I do.
On the forum, ‘Sanskara316’ states “I have re-wound a small 3-volt 3-pole motor. I used an almost dead, 6-volt sealed lead-acid battery to power the motor. This battery just sits at around 4 volts and if given a load, even a small LED, it’s voltage drops to 1 volt. The re-wound motor started very slowly - barely spinning, then after a minute or two it started to spin faster, and I noticed that the voltage on the battery was slowly climbing. I connected a small LED flashlight to the generating side and it lit up. Now the battery voltage under load is around 2+ volts. It’s been running for an hour now and the machine squeals a lot. It is conditioning the battery and the meter cannot be showing what really is happening. The motor draws 300 ma?? – That’s not possible as the battery just doesn't have that power”. To which ‘UFOpolitics’ remarks: “Well I am glad you have witnessed some of the ‘Effects’... these re-wound motors do recondition batteries...remember, Radiant Energy is taking over the Machine...so Radiant Energy comes out through the Input also… which is the reason why we get high Volts-Amps reading on a meter ...these motors use very small amounts of current and volts. Inside the motor, every coil is being ‘Self-Electromagnetically-Pulsed’ because they auto-disconnect from the power source, then the next coil in the sequence is assisted by the first coil when it has rotated to it’s next position, and so on. The commutator switching has become a ‘Self-Oscillator’ for every independently-energised coil.”
‘prochiro’ says: “I have also replicated the battery-charging events that 'Sanskara316' indicated. I started with a 12-volt 4 Amp-Hour battery which I had been using with another circuit two weeks ago and had not recharged it after using it for hours. It was sitting at 12.40 volts. I took my best-running re-wound motor, plugged it in direct and ran it. The battery voltage dropped to 12.24 volts and stayed at that level for 30 seconds. The battery voltage then started to rise 1/100 of a volt per minute. When it was at 12.27 volts, I disconnected the motor (the total run time was less than 5 minutes). I then let it rest for five minutes. At the end of the five minutes, the battery voltage had risen to 12.43 volts and is still at that voltage now. Just think what a larger motor would do on a big battery bank. Everybody needs to document this test as it proves what ‘UFOpolitics’ said.”
New DC motors, and particularly cheap motors, will have brushes which do not mate cleanly with the commutator slip ring sectors and so, when the modification has been made, running the motor for some time allows the brushes to wear in and that raises the efficiency of the electrical connections which in turn, improves the performance of the motor. If you wish to build and test one of these motors, then you can find help and support in the forum with your questions answered and numerous videos and photographs from different experimenters to help you.
Direct Coupled Motors
Rob Ellis shows a very strongly built arrangement which has a 100-watt motor driving a 500-watt generator and the output of the generator powers the drive motor and has 400-watts spare for driving other things:
This is shown here and nowadays is a popular style of free-energy device.. However, two points need to be mentioned here. First, I suspect that the quoted 400 watts is a calculated figure and as the motor is probably an ordinary commercial unit, it will be wound symmetrically which forces any output drawn from it to oppose the input power, making it so inefficient that its efficiency will never, ever, exceed 100%. If that is the case, then the 100-watt motor may not be able to drive the generator (which is probably also wound in the very ineffective symmetrical style) to its full output power.
Second, there appear to be a flywheel on each of the intermediate gearing shafts, and if that is so, then the inertial effects of those flywheels will draw in energy from the surrounding gravity field, enhancing the overall performance and making it a replication of Chas Campbell’s design in chapter 4.