All things are 0% efficent, because all motion is stopped by friction, at some point in time, but everything is 100% efficient because heat is an output energy.

Posted By: alsetalokin

Posted By: QuantenQUestion , what difference would it do for the work function of the motor, if instead of having :
-> a ferrite core around on stator atracting possibly magnet on the rotor when current is off, but being shioelded when current is on
-> same PM magnet on rotor, but on stator a magnet which is off when no current , and on with the same attraction / B vector felt by the magnet when the curernt is on

If the case below is more easily modellable or known, then gut feeling for me is that there would be no difference in the final outcome, except that instead of switching off the stator you switch it on.

The difference is in that CEMF thing. Also in the first case, the Orbo case, the rotor gets thrust only when the coil is OFF so it's harder to track the energy flow and easier to be garden-pathed into starry-eyed oblivion. It's almost got me sucked in, and I haven't even been misedutained.

As with many energy problems, looking at this from the standpoint of balance is probably helpful.

The key is that work performed by the motor is exceedingly small. In a single 90 degree rotation the rotor expends energy overcoming the bearing friction and windage. Where does that energy come from? It comes from energy that is not otherwise converted to heat in the windings. However this energy is so small compared to the energy loss in this incredibly inefficient set-up that it is hard to measure directly with the set-up as it. So, the challenge is to show a way to measure the work. As with all electromagnets precisely knowing the voltage and currents will give us the power which we can integrate to get energy. In the Orbomination case, substituting a reasonable bandwidth current source for the hard voltage source Steorn use would allow us to see the BEMF impulses on the stator windings. Those impulses multiplied by the current through the windings provide a direct measure of the energy coupled to accelerate the motor.

Posted By: couldbe

Posted By: alsetalokinI have believed all this time that Steorn had nothing interesting, much less revolutionary, and that their mistake, if it was one, was a simple one. I think otherwise now. I still think they have nothing revolutionary, but at least they have something moderately interesting

Electro-magnets have been around, what, 150 years or more? They have been studied, I thought, to a fare-thee-well; yet even an adept such as yourself is surprised by the results of a very simple experiment.

Is it reasonable for civilians like me to think that the properties of magnets are far from being known completely, despite what has been said on these forums in the past?

And if you could nearly eliminate cemf so easily, is it possible that Sean was right when he claims that, with care, it can be eliminated completely?

Somebody correct me, but I think that Al is more astounded at the cleverness of the arangement, rather than a new property of the magnet. Unless I missed something, it seems that it is known that when current go through toroid magnet at saturation they emit next to no field. The cleverness is here to use the atraction of the ferite when it is off, the non-atraction when it is on. But tehre is really no new law, nothing which break previous knowledge.

Posted By: timetrumpet

Posted By: alsetalokinI guess this is as good a place as any to say this:

I have believed all this time that Steorn had nothing interesting, much less revolutionary, and that their mistake, if it was one, was a simple one. I think otherwise now. I still think they have nothing revolutionary, but at least they have something moderately interesting, and I'll bet there is a run on ferrite toroids right now. And their mistake is slightly less simple.

Anybody know the exact ferrite used by the lads?

I don't think that's been revealed anywhere IIRC, just general terms.

Two things:

1) Can you consider unblocking me (as "ingliss") from your Youtube channel? I'm not interested in any personality issues, so I'd like to think that lot could be put to one side. I don't intend to be posting replies or comment on anything other than whatever the video may be FWIW.

2) You've stated recently that the rig turned CW and then CCW. I don't think this is correct.

Sean Mc, certainly confused matters by saying this during the demo. I asked if he'd misspoke and he confirmed this; he meant to say "CW" both times.

I've confirmed this by running the video through VLC at (I think) 1 / 5 speed. CW both times.


Edit: erroneous "Steorn" (I set em up...)

1) I don't have a YT channel. You can check that for yourself.
If TK banned you, it must have been for a really good reason, and from looking at your posts here I can sort of agree with him.

2) Yes, I stand corrected. Thank you. I watched it several times myself, and I was confused by Sean's patter. Too bad his error made it into the director's cut; it should have been edited or annotated. The point still stands though: rotor direction in *some* pulse motors is independent of the coil polarities, as I have shown, hopefully, and this is not "unusual"; the "unusual" thing that Sean should have shown is that the attractive modality is not replaced by a repulsive one when the wires are swapped.

Posted By: QuantenSomebody correct me, but I think that Al is more astounded at the cleverness of the arangement, rather than a new property of the magnet. Unless I missed something, it seems that it is known that when current go through toroid magnet at saturation they emit next to no field. The cleverness is here to use the atraction of the ferite when it is off, the non-atraction when it is on. But tehre is really no new law, nothing which break previous knowledge.

It is sort of a party trick as far as I can see - clever in that sense. The idea of saturating a ferrite core to turn off attraction to a permanent magnet has been patented already for use in a relay. I can't find any patent that mentions using it in a motor. However, instinct is telling me that it will be considerably less efficient than standard techniques because of the mass of ferrite that has to be cycled round the M-H curve.

If the claim is 3X overunity and the power from battery to Orbo is significant (100 mw or more) then it should be possible to measure the heat produced with heat meters and a very sensitive and stable calorimeter won't be required. I say again-- put the whole mess into a polyfoam cube like a drink cooler with a calibration heater inside and place 3 or 4 heat meters on each of the six sides. If those cost too much, make them or borrow them. Last I looked each heat flow transducer was in the range of $200 each. Actually a Peltier cooler can be used as a heat flow transducer at fairly high heat flow resistance which the foam would be. Put a thermometer inside too.

Then measure (and if necessary integrate) the battery voltage and current while Orbo runs until a fairly steady state is reached. Measure the temperature rise inside the box and the heat flow through the walls. That will give an energy balance. I'll bet you a million dollars that the heat generated will NOT be 3X the electrical power consumed from the battery. It will not be more than measurement error different from the battery power consumed.

I also predict that Sean will NEVER allow such a measurement to be made-- kludged calorimeter like I suggested or the real MOAC at Earthtech. Won't happen. Sean is a crook but not a complete sot. He knows what those measurements would show.

Edit to add:

http://www.crazypc.com/products/5912.html shows a typical Peltier cooling plate. If you read out the leads instead of placing across a power source, you will have a heat meter. However, it's very low sensitivity so you'll need a high quality microvoltmeter to read it out. Calibration is easy. Put a heater in the enclosure with the Orbo and put in a known amount of energy. Read out the heat meters and make a curve. There are issues with achieving a steady state but they aren't insurmountable.

so far it's looking like an electro-smot.

Posted By: alsetalokinThe toroids make it possible to claim that the coil's field isn't directly driving the rotation of the motor, since "everyone knows" that the field of a toroidal coil is confined within the core.

But what is driving the motor?

Posted By: Knuckles OToole
But what is driving the motor?

Magnetic "energy"!

But what is driving the motor?
Magnetic "energy"!

Just offhand, I'd say what drives the motor is an Ansmann 10 amp hour storage battery, regularly recharged when Orbo goes "off line". Or did you think that's done because of bearings overheating? As someone noted somehwere "Reed switches are the new bearings!"