Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Muller Dynamo  (Read 4361304 times)

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3900 on: July 01, 2011, 05:52:51 PM »
Details . Core , mild steel about 10 mm diameter by 10 cms long . 125 turns of wire in a single layer , covering about 80% of core . Wire is about 28 guage SWG . Resistance about 0.4 ohms . Straight core , not horseshoe shaped .

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3901 on: July 01, 2011, 06:03:48 PM »
Details . Core , mild steel about 10 mm diameter by 10 cms long . 125 turns of wire in a single layer , covering about 80% of core . Wire is about 28 guage SWG . Resistance about 0.4 ohms . Straight core , not horseshoe shaped .

ok... more questions  :)

are all the e/ms single layer (just alternate, etc, windings)?

are the nails small (eg. tack size), or large (eg. floorboard nail size)?

if they're large, can you get better differentiation between bi & quadrifilar by using small nails for the 'pick-up' test?

did the source info comment on any diffs between long narrow coils & short wide coils?

thanks!

Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 682
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3902 on: July 01, 2011, 06:17:13 PM »
Hello All,

After the first few videos I did yesterday, I performed the same tests on the motor again only this time, the generator coils were connected in series adding rather than series canceling.

The results I obtained were quite fascinating to say the least, though the general behavior was the same as the series canceling configuration. Also as my previous results showed, the parallel configuration was the only one that gave me acceleration under load. But this time, rather than a 100RPM increase in speed, I saw over 2000RPM increase.

However, as myself and some people mentioned in previous posts, having the circuit wired in parallel with the capacitor does present a constant load to the coil until the coil is shorted. In the video you will see that the motor (without the capacitor in the circuit at all), will speed up to about 3770 RPMs and when I short the output on the DC side, the motor slows down. When adding the capacitor in parallel, the motor slows down to about 1900 RPMs or so and stays there (without the short). Once shorted, the motor speeds back up to about 3400RPMs (check the video for exact numbers, I'm going from my memory at the moment).

However, the output power is dramatically different with and without the capacitor! Without it, the max output votlage across the capacitor was about 30VDC. However, with the capacitor in the circuit, the output voltage pegged my meter at over 60V coming out of the system. Also when shorting the output, the power available appears to be much, much greater (plus the added bonus of the acceleration of the rotor).

What it appears is that the best way to extract energy from this system will be to use the coil shorting technique to convert the high current into high votlage. But using a wide duty-cycle pulse so that the coil remains in the shorted state most of the time to reduce drag on the motor.

Here is the link to the video. Please give me your comments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsePRUlrcAE

- Jason O

Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 682
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3903 on: July 01, 2011, 06:24:45 PM »
I would like to add following observations to my previous posting about the calculation of the phase angle between voltage and current.

The system can be designed in two ways:

1) High capacitance relative inductance (low resonance frequency)
Operating above resonance, phase angle decreases if speed decreases.

2) Low capacitance relative inductance (high resonance frequency)
Operating below resonance, phase angle increases if speed decreases.
This design can newer be a "run away" because when the speed increases to much, the phase angle will decrease and lower output (provided the resonance freq is not to high). 

So, how do I wind a coil with as little capacitance as possible and as large inductance as possible? Anyone with good advice?

Hi Rogla,

Very interesting thoughts there. What you described above reminds me of an interesting effect I noticed when shorting the output in parallel mode. For my setup, the resonant frequency of the system occured somewhere around 2600-2800 RPMs and if the rotor is shorted when the rotor speed is below the resonant range, the motor is very sluggish to start accelerating, but as the speed slowly approaches the resonant frequency, the acceleration of the rotor increases greatly and then stays constant above the resonant frequency until the rotor reaches the new steady-state velocity. The interesting thing is that the rotor will accelerate much easier if it is at or above the resonant frequency but not below.

As for your question about winding large L, low C coils, the best geometry for highest inductance would be the Brooks Coil. The proportions of width to height maximize the L and minimize the C of the coil. Also adding a metal core to the coil will increase the L but lower the frequency range at which the coil can be operated before the losses get too high.

- Jason O

itsu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1845
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3904 on: July 01, 2011, 06:47:45 PM »

Jdo300,  intresting video again, nice stuff you have overthere.

Concerning the coils used, you say and it shows on your diagram, they are 15.5uH each.

I find that hard to believe looking at those coils, and also with a 6uF capacitor in parallel, it
will resonate around 11Khz (http://www3.telus.net/chemelec/Calculators/LC-Calculator.htm)

So i guess your coils are 15.5mH, which will put the resonant frequency at around 375Hz (2812 RPM with your 8 magnets).

You also could try to reduce the high voltage and at the same time match the high impedance to a lower level by using a transformer
(less voltage, more current and impedance matching) like being mentioned by Bolt.
That is what i will try to do next.

I hope your motor survived that nasty noise at the end.

Regards Itsu

Super God

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 419
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3905 on: July 01, 2011, 06:55:43 PM »
If we increase the L in our coils, can we reduce the rotor speed? I wanted to be safe with my design and that means lower RPM...

breakthrough

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3906 on: July 01, 2011, 07:01:07 PM »
>> Anyway, back to Thane, i bet he has realized that fact by now and his countless experimentations hours but so far failed to come up with any reallife working device. (oil black ops?)

There was a situation where Thane reported OU by calculating input power as the formula P=V*I*cos(theta) where theta is the phase angle between V and I. This was with a transformer-like device, whose primary is driven into saturation so it generates odd harmonics. It wasn't a sine wave, in other words...

Thane wasn't aware that the cosine term in the formula he is using implies a sinus function, cos(theta) only works if V and I are both sine waves! If V and/or I are not pure sine waves then they have a harmonic spectrum, or a Fourier series with more than 1 term -- a list of sinus waves at many frequencies, whose sum yields the complex wave shape at hand (a nice Java app demonstrating this is at http://www.falstad.com/fourier/).

The Fourier spectrum is a series of sinus amplitudes *and* phases, so the power formula becomes a series of terms itself:

P(n) = V(n)*I(n)*cos(theta(n))

where n represents each harmonic in the Fourier expansion, so P(n) is the power at each harmonic. Then, summing all the harmonic power gives the true result. Understandably a little complex!

It's much easier to measure V and I using a digital scope that can yield both (a) the instantaneous math product V*I and (b) the mean value of that math product over some integer number of repeating cycles. As of 2011 there are USB-connected sampling scopes at reasonable prices available which can accomplish this. There are still pitfalls to watch out for (such as probe ground loops between V and I measurements, resistor parasitic inductance if I is measured as I=V/R, timing skew between V and I acquisitions, and scope amplitude and time quantization errors)... there are skills to learn before simply trusting what the scope says.

Some inventors just have power measurement errors despite their beliefs and Thane may have been in that category at one time.

-breakthrough

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3907 on: July 01, 2011, 07:06:21 PM »
@ Nulpoints , and also in reply to Pm from Mikestocks 2006 , 
  Bifilar in my case is as follows . Take 2 wires , A and B . Wind them "2in hand2 side by side . do not twist the wires together , and try to avoid crossed turns . All 3 electromagnets are wound single layer . Connect the start of wire a to the power supply . Connect the END of wire A to the START of wire B. Connect the connect the END of wire B to the power supply . So current flows from start of A to the end of A which is then connected to the start of B . The source makes no mention of the shape factor of the coil , but shows a similar arrangement to above . The nails I used were three-quarter inch upholstery tacks [tin tacks ]. Smaller nails would give a more accurate measurement , my tests were quick and dirty . If I can find the source I will edit it to this post shortly . You need to try it yourself .
Source:  WWW.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htp      I dont do links so you will have to type it .

Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 682
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3908 on: July 01, 2011, 07:11:18 PM »
Hi itsu,

Yes you are right, the coils should be 15.5mH, not uH. As for reducing the voltage. That can be achieved by simply shorting the output capacitor periodically to control the max output voltage. Also using the coil-shorting technique, we can precisely regulat the output voltage to impedance match to whatever sized load we want, while still making the output look like a dead short to the input side. My only question at this point is how much power can be extracted from the system.

@Super God,

Yes, increasing L will decrease the resonant frequency, but since you will have to wrap more turns of wire, that will also increase the resistance, which will lower the Q of the coil. The simple way is to use a larger capacitor to reduce the resonant frequency. (The trouble is that adding a larger capacitor will also reduce the Q of the circuit too if it is too big). It's a bit of a balancing act. Here is a website that I have used to get a rough idea of what to use:

http://www.calctool.org/CALC/eng/electronics/RLC_circuit

- Jason O

oscar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
    • Latest News
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3909 on: July 01, 2011, 07:11:35 PM »
Hi itsu,
thanks for your videos.

# try to compensate the "running away" under load/short by adding a "normal" not resonating coil pair which introduce drag, but  along the way also generates extra energy (4 pairs in parallel resonance, 3 in normal?).

If it is your goal to avoid that your systems "accelerates too much" , i.e. accelerates beyond the resonance speed/RPMs, you also have the option to regulate/reduce the input voltage.

Just to mention it.
Thanks for your efforts, all.

Sonedi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3910 on: July 01, 2011, 07:26:00 PM »
I am sorry I had to log in with a new UN.

Just to tell you - its working and obviously really simple. Have a look at the diagram - only the right part. The trafo is your coil. Just put a cap in parallel with your single coil with about 3uF and instead of the CR1 you put a mosfet there - switched from a hall in syncron with the rotormags. Use very short interruptions. For CR2 you use two 4007 diod in parallel. On the output you have about 20000uF. And now you can see under load it speeds up and the output is tremendous. With the mags on the coils you get more amps. I got the idea from http://www.teslaco.com/technology.html
Now you have the out of phase manner and that's the solution.

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3911 on: July 01, 2011, 07:27:14 PM »
I did a small experiment today involving bifilar windings . Someone else posted a link to a website about this . I made 3 electromagnets using 3 similar iron cores . Each magnet used the same length of wire . One was wound normally , one bifilar and one quadrifilar .The same power supply was used to test each electromagnet in turn . The strength of each was tested by seeing how many small nails it would lift . The results were as follows .
Normall wind- 4nails .
Bifilar wound - 12 nails .
Quadrifilar ,12 nails .
    Note that each electromagnet had the same core and the same Amp-turns .I was surprised that quadrifilar was no better than bifilar . This experiment seems ridiculous , but you MUST do it yourself . The implication is that by using a bifilar motor coil , you could create the same input torque for a much lower electrical input , maybe as low as one third . Got to be worth a try? But do the simple experiment first .

neptune,

It would be of great benefit to know the supply current in each case. I think you will find that for case 2 and 3, the current is higher than in case one, and hence perhaps the advantage to case 2 or 3 is only evident when you are restricted to a lower supply voltage.

.99

mikestocks2006

  • elite_member
  • Sr. Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 324
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3912 on: July 01, 2011, 07:28:58 PM »
@ Nulpoints , and also in reply to Pm from Mikestocks 2006 , 
  Bifilar in my case is as follows . Take 2 wires , A and B . Wind them "2in hand2 side by side . do not twist the wires together , and try to avoid crossed turns . All 3 electromagnets are wound single layer . Connect the start of wire a to the power supply . Connect the END of wire A to the START of wire B. Connect the connect the END of wire B to the power supply . So current flows from start of A to the end of A which is then connected to the start of B . The source makes no mention of the shape factor of the coil , but shows a similar arrangement to above . The nails I used were three-quarter inch upholstery tacks [tin tacks ]. Smaller nails would give a more accurate measurement , my tests were quick and dirty . If I can find the source I will edit it to this post shortly . You need to try it yourself .
Source:  WWW.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htp      I dont do links so you will have to type it .
Ok, so basically, each “layer” is progressively wound in the same direction along the axis of the core. E.g. if the core is positioned vertically, every “layer” is wound from bottom to top, then again bottom to top, instead of the normal bottom to top then top to  bottom etc.
Yes I think this was mentioned before. The current has an additional small additive component along the axis of the core instead of canceling.
Thanks
Mike

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3913 on: July 01, 2011, 07:39:23 PM »
@ Nulpoints
[...]
The nails I used were three-quarter inch upholstery tacks [tin tacks ]. Smaller nails would give a more accurate measurement , my tests were quick and dirty
[...]
Source:  WWW.tesla-coil-builder.com/bifilar_electromagnet.htp

thanks, neptune

ok, so you already used small nails (giving finer definition of power) - interesting about the bi - quad results, then

your normal/bifilar diff is better than quoted on the site - they say 'double', you got 3x

i wonder if the effect holds regardless of how many layers you divide the turns into

BTW the link you gave needs an .HTM extension, not .HTP

the 'fish pedicure' ad looks interesting (go on, admit it, you didn't know fish had feet) - maybe we could treat our hero to one for his next birthday?  ;)

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Muller Dynamo
« Reply #3914 on: July 01, 2011, 07:47:23 PM »
@Nul-points . Will you do us a favour and create a link please . Thanks . neptune .