Just remember this, a transformer is designed for a purpose and it can be either a step up transformer or a step down transformer. Everything else you need to know is here.
Go to this web site to pick up the basic theory:
Go to this link to understand that it will work:
Go to this link for the formula an equations required to design and build your own:
Notes for an Introductory Course On Electrical Machines and Drives
Hee-hee-hee-hee... At least I didn't say Bwa-ha-ha-ha!
Free power! You won't last ten minutes once the oil companies hear about you. I hope you have lot's of life insurance!
I assume you are kidding, but the oil people really love free energy researchers. Their work keeps those people busy and from working in any useful replacement for oil or causing political trouble over global thermal runaway or other environmental issues. It is a very distracting and endless hobby.
-- Regards, John Popelish
theory:
work:
Drives
About 0.9/unity if I go buy a decent motor. Probably about 0.3/unity if I build my own, assuming I don't put an inordinate amount of effort into it.
Your coffee flavoring seems to be getting stronger. Wanna share the recipe for _that_ with us?
A Transformer can be 98% effecient. The rotor is the primary and the stator is the secondary. That's the same with a squirrel cage motor. But, the squirrel cage motor utilizes a shorted secondary and a rotating magnetic field. When you approach saturation in a transformer's core, you produce the maximum number of magnetic lines it can retain without loosing the effect or effeciency of the core material. The core material, is where you typically see the loss. Now, assuming that you design a motor, that is as much a transformer as any other transformer, all of the mechanical energy is dependant on the number of magnetic lines in the secondary. The secondary requires a short circuit to produce a high current and the maximum number of magnetic lines. When you use an isolation transformer with a 1:1 turns ratio that matches the output impedance of the motor's secondary windings, placing a capacitor in series produces a series resonant circuit. A series resonant circuit always acts like a short circuit and always allows for the maximum current flow if tuned to the AC converters frequency or 60Hz if you are using 60Hz. This places all of the potential on the secondary of the 1:1 transformer, and because it is an inductor it still acts like the same tuned short. At the point the isolation transformer is required it must be a 1:1 isolation transformer because, L1=L2=Lm, and reflected impedance does not effect the primary as with other turns ratios. Now, assuming that the transformer is 98% as well as the motor core, an electric motor requires 740 Watts per Horsepower, 740-2%= 725.2 Watts, assuming that the motor's loss the Isolation transformer's loss would be about the same 725.2-2%= 710.696 Watts. Since, you haven't lost that energy, and it can be converted back to DC, and at a loss of 10% converted back to AC the motor only uses 29.304 per horsepower, but with the supporting circuits that goes up to around 100.3736 Watts per horsepower.
That just means that for every 6 Horsepower one of these electric motors are designed to output, if the 7th horse is used to generate electricity, the motor is then lossless and Over Unity as a system.
Fuck the oil companies, if you discuss theory, then anyone can patent their own model, and the oil company would have to take over america and every electric motor winding shop in the US. Unless, they can write the law, anyone can patent their own model. Motors aren't different from TV, HDTVs, or any other Toaster, Radio, and or IBM compatable sound or video card. Theory is what they use to design the chips and circuit boards and doesn't prevent anyone form building anything just like it. Why the hell do you think I told ya? It should be possible to convert a Universal Motor over to operating on this Theory.
If you look into Baluns, RF transformers, they can be designed to operate at nearly 99% effeciency levels. 98% effecient is not unusual. Most of the time the problem is the operating frequency of the transformer. 60Hz is not ideal. But, early kilohertz is much closer to ideal like 1Khz is much much more effecient than 60Hz and
10KHz is a more effecient frequency for allot of transformer metals. 98% is real but the operating frequency is all key to that. Why do you think the military uses 440Hz instead of 60Hz? Smaller more effecient transformers.John Popelish,
You don't go to any of the links, or you wouldn't think the way you do.
Try this, print out everything at the first link:
Then print out every page on the subject of AC power and repulsion at this link:
Then print out this entire e-book:
Call it a coupon. Then go to an Electric Motor Rewinding Shop, and show it all to them.
Somehow I just can't see these people coming up with an useful R&D...
Are you saying this is the absolute upper efficiency limit? Real devices deal in practical efficiencies.
If the primary is where you connect the supply voltage, I think you have that backwards.
Only if the rotor is the secondary, not the primary. What motor doesn't utilize a rotating magnetic field? I can think of one.
Sorry, you loose efficiency long before you get to saturation. Have you ever thought about the area inside a BH loop?
In well designed transformers, the core loss and copper loss at full power are about the same. If one were much larger than the other, the design could be changed in a way that costs the same and has higher efficiency.
Like and ordinary motor?
If you are talking about a squirrel cage induction motor, the, the magnetic field depends on the stator excitation. The shorts in the rotor just remember that flux as long as possible. Look up L/R time constant.
I don't know where to start. Demonstrate that your understanding is right by building it and loading it with an dynamometer ans electrical load. That is, unless you want to understand your mistake without doing that. But I see no questions in your explanation that indicates you are not totally certain, already.
It it would actually do that, yes. Do you want to place a bet?
Anyone can patent almost anything that has not been patented already, and quite a few things that have. The patent office does not care at all if the idea does not work.
So do it.
-- Regards, John Popelish
You didn't wait for my answer.
-- Regards, John Popelish
You can post all the links you want. It is just a simple matter of logic and conservation of energy, you don't get something for nothing, EVER. If you are so confident, BUILD ONE! I will bet you a years pay that it will take more energy to run the motor than you get out of it. Just one of those DUH things.
Jim
...
Your logic in that first paragraph is a bit hard to follow, but one thing jumps out at me: in a series tuned circuit with perfect inductance and capacitance, at resonance the whole thing looks like a short, but only because the potential across the inductor is always equal to and of opposite sign to the potential across the capacitor. Energy is stored in the capacitor and in the inductor. If you remove energy from the inductor--as heat, as mechanical energy, through a secondary, whatever, then it no longer looks like a perfect inductor, and the tuned circuit no longer looks like a short. In equilibrium, the net power you put in is exactly equal to the net power that comes out. Energy is conserved. Got it?? Energy is conserved. Energy IS conserved. Energy is CONSERVED. Got it yet?? You get out no more than you put in.
Also note: if 1HP = 740 watts and you have a motor delivering 1HP at
98% efficiency, the power input to the motor must be 740/0.98, not 740*0.98. You get out no more than you put in.But please do tell us what magical potion you are flavoring your coffee with.
The only thing "Over Unity" is The Flavored Coffee Guy's ignorance.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave
I've seen it. Not very impressive.
Wonderful woodcuts and lots of good experimental science involving the new idea of AC electricity. No over unity, though.
I looked at it. It resembles the text book I still have from a semester course I took it college. Have you studied this? It contradicts most of the ideas you have about motors.
Why?
-- Regards, John Popelish
Please don't feed the troll.
-- Tim Wescott Control systems and communications consulting http://www.wescottdesign.com Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
IS
You are confused. As a trasnformer it's working at 98% effeciency. I didn't give any figures on how effecient the motor acting as a motor was or would be. 740 Watts converts to 1HP, so all of that was all about how much electrical energy is used. As a transformer the motor combined with a second 1:1 transformer uses 29.304 Watts up as core losses. You need to grab a 1:1 turn ratio toroid transformer and construct a series and a parallel tuned circuit, and then compare that to a step up in the same two configurations, then a step down in the same configurations. Place a potentiometer on the secondary. With both the step up and step down transformer, the resonant frequency changes as the result of reflected impedance. With step up and step down transformers reflected impedance is the result of mutual inductance changing the actual value of inductance of the primary. So, as you change the load using the potentiometer, the center frequency changes for the resonant circuits. Now, with the 1:1 turn ratio transformer, that's all different. For the motor it's important that there be a short to produce the maximum number of magnetic lines and maintain the highest current on the motor's secondary winding, or you will loose mechanical energy on the rotor. Although, the energy is stored, it's 180 degrees out of phase and acts like a short circuit when the primary of the 1:1 transformer is open. Mutual inductance, and the inductance of the primary and secondary are all equal. When the energy is not stored the secondary does take it from the primary. But, the series resonant circuit still acts like a short on the same frequency and does not detune. All you have effected is the Q value of the series tank circuit and it's ring value and yes the energy is absorbed by the secondary. When you take the power it becomes a short circuit, when it's just resonating it looks like a short to the AC applied to the rotor, and there's room for every half cycle volt and ampere of current. Only a 1:1 turn ratio transformer does not display reflected impedance as a change in the value of inductance of the primary. At that point, the primary produces magnetic lines, and the secondary absorbs them at a 1 to 1 ratio, and there is no imbalance in that ratio such as with a step up or step down transformer.
I wish you people would really read all of the material at all of the links that I have provided because, they would answer all of these questions. As for the people who think that they know everything without looking, and deem it impossible or disfunctional, you know that they be making any money.
It was suppose to be simple and easy to understand
As a transfomer, it has to move and the point of having a shorted secondary is made clear as to where the force for motion comes from in the motor design.
No, it doesn't. If you really looked at the schematic, you should have noticed the 1:1 transformer and the capacitor in series with it. When there is no load on the secondary, it acts like short due to resonance. When there is a load on the secondary it for all practical purposes is a short.
Nothing contrary to the laws of physics, just your choice to overlook every fact put in your path.
Because, maybe they observant enough to see what you can't.
John Popelish,
The Squirrel Cage Motor, is a bushless motor. So, ask yourself, where does the rotor aquire any kind of magnetic field to move? It's the secondary of a transformer in a rotating magnetic field, to put simply. The current is induced on the rotor which is a shorted secondary.
Guy, And here is the very core of your misunderstanding. A shorted secondary does not increase the flux passing through its core. It resists changes in the flux passing through its core. The basic principle is called Lenz's law. See:
The shorts surrounding the iron in the rotor of a squirrel cage induction motor do not increase the rotor's flux. They resist changes in its flux. That is, they give the rotor a form of short term memory of the flux pushed through it by the stator. Not a permanent magnet, but a fading magnet.
As the rotating field produced by the stator swirls around the rotor, some of it passes through the rotor (while being partially blocked by circulating current in the rotor shorts) but whatever makes its way through is then remembered (charges resisted) by the reverse circulation of current in those same shorts. This remembered magnetization is then reacted against the stator field that has mover on around the rotor, dragging it along after it. The memory lasts about as long as the L/R time constant of the rotor, which is well below a second, for most small motors.
If rotation is not involved, and you are dealing with a stationary transformer, shorting the secondary reduces the magnetization of the core by the amount that the primary and supply drop voltage by their resistance.
Essentially all the amp turns produced by the secondary short are canceled by oppositely directed amp turns produced by increased primary current. But that higher primary current consumes some of the supply voltage in the primary winding's resistance, so the effective voltage per turn goes down and thus, so does the magnetization swing of the core (which is proportional to the volts per turn).
You have gotten this fact backwards. And so, your free energy concept falls on its ass. A resonant short across a secondary does not increase the flux swing in the core, but decreases it. Sorry to be the one to rain on your parade.
-- Regards, John Popelish
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.