OS:CD Motor FAQ
From PESWiki
|
You are here: PESWiki > Open Source > CD Motor > FAQ
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions relating to the CD Motor open source project.
If this FAQ looks a little long, remember, if over-unity physics was simple, it would have been in production long ago. The CD motor is the simplified version. Anything with pretensions to be commercial, would be substantially more complex again.
FAQ
As prepared by Tim Harwood, March, 2006.
Theory
Where did the theory come from?
I sent off for the Aspden-Adams British patent. The validity of the patent, and the extent to which it was derived with any meaningful input from Mr Adams, is open to question, but I hit upon the idea after reading it. So far as I can research, the theory was novel at the time it was proposed.
Haven't pulse motors been dubunked?
Well, its certainly true if you don't build them correctly, they do nothing special. I've seen kits with flawed rotor / stator geometry that purported to be exotic pulsed motors. In fact, I was emailed 2/3 times by people who had bought such kits, carried out modifications to bring them closer to the CD motor template, and quickly got vastly improved results i.e. cooler running, more back-emf. The key is having a precise idea of what you are trying to do. Just putting magnets on a rotor and pulsing it, in itself, does nothing special.
Isn't this just another pulse motor?
No. This one may look similar, but is based upon a very tight theory of operation, centering on the in-register geometry. The concepts being applied in terms of layout, timing, and recovery, are highly specific. The low cost of the apparatus should not hide the care and intellectual precision with which the experiment was conceived.
What is the Adams motor?
Mr Adams built MANY prototypes over the years. The Adams motor is NOT a fixed device. It is based upon rotor pms and over-wound stators configured as generator windings. To that extent, a wide variety of motors could be said to be within the Adams 'type.'
How close is the CD motor to the Adams motor?
The CD motor was an honest attempt to duplicate the characteristics claimed by Mr Adams, namely ambient operation, reduced current draw, voltage / energy gain. No contact was made with Mr Adams for its design and construction. To the extent it does replicate many of these claims it must have similarities to the Adams apparatus, but without inspection of the prototypes Mr Adams has in his possession, it is impossible to make any detailed comment.
Is this like the xxxx motor?
Mr Adams started his work in the late 1960s, and clearly has priority in terms of research claims. Since the Nexus article in 1992, other claims have followed for pulse motors, but prior art clearly belongs to Mr Adams. Everyone has their own particular way of building these things, but all designs seem to be derivative in some manner from the 1992 Nexus article. Personally, I have never had any problem acknowledging this.
Whats with the 5:1 rule?
The stator heads should be about 20% of the surface area of the rotor pm faces. The spacing of the pms physically, should produce a duty of about 20%. There is nothing magic about this i.e. if you deviate from it the motor stops working, but as a rough rule, that seemed to be what offered best voltage gain on the output. Mr Adams stated 4:1 in his original Nexus article, but this appears to have been based upon a current draw analysis, rather than voltage gain.
Does the effect come from the battery?
Strange battery effects were noticed at points during experimentation, but it seemed fairly clear the battery was NOT the source of the phenomena.
Can you provide an analogy for the effect?
Yes. Imagine striking a stone with a flint to create a spark. This is very much like the Adams motor effect. You ensure a clean strike with a fast rise switch and the low pm duty. You make the strike hard, by raising the input voltage. The cleaner and harder the strike, the greater the intensity of the spark shower you create.
How do you define over-unity with this motor?
Well, take the hard drive motor from the old Egroup. It was clearly measured with back-emf as 80% of input. This energy is fully recoverable. Battery charging tests at the time validated this hypothesis.
So the actual energy draw of the system, is really only 20% of what you would measure in conventional current / voltage terms, since 80% of the input is recovered and returned to the source. In strictly mechanical terms, the result is over-unity by a wide margin, as can be demonstrated by pony-brake testing.
However, electrical energy gain is the real goal. The problem with this, is that commutation will play a very large part in the outcome. You can have an identical motor, but when switched mechanically, it will output far more back-emf than with transistors.
Which comes to my point about the motor. The next level up for CD motor development would be transistor-to-MOSFET induction coil timing circuitry. Done right, it would bring major gains in system performance as regards the self runner goal, in lowering the draw of the circuitry, and boosting output.
Any Mathematical modelling?
Feel free to have a go.
Also, if you want 2-D modeling you may like FEMM http://femm.foster-miller.net/Archives/bin/
If you like 3-D modeling you may like GMSH http://www.geuz.org/gmsh/
Stators
Whats with the stator design?
The stators are generator windings.
A 6-9 ohm coil! Are you crazy? Won't that burn and melt!?
The facts of operation show this not to be the case. A 3-4 ohm coil made from 24 awg wire has been shown to DROP in temperature below ambient in one replication. Higher ohm coils tend to rise no more than a few degrees above ambient.
Is that 6-9 ohms per stator or in series?
Per stator. If you want stators in series, you'll probably want the low end of that range. MOSFETS tend to blow when pulsing high ohm sets, another reason mechanical switching has been employed with these motors.
What happens at 6 ohms?
About 6 ohms, you will find current draw magically drops by 50%, for no reason any textbook can offer you. Obviously, this represents a significant efficiency gain.
What depth should the stator be wound to?
No hard rule, but about 2 inches is reasonable. Not too deep.
Have you tried pulsing the stators in a static setup?
Yes. They started to melt after about 25 seconds. To my mind, proving the stator yaw-demagnetization cycle is critical to the manifestation of the effect.
How does stator material affect performance?
Depends what you want to achieve. I used mild steel nails. Many experimenters preferred bolts, because they were easy to fix in place, and to adjust the air gap distance.
If you want to optimize for rpms then pure iron was the material Mr Adams historically employed. If the back emf effect is most important, then black sand / magnetite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetite) is the best option. I would suggest black sand, as my thesis is that the Adams motor is primarily a pulse platform, rather than a drive motor. This was the opinion of Mr Adams as well.
How does the air gap impact performance?
1-1.2mm. Not critical, but too big or small decreases efficiency i.e. rpms.
Can I put output generator winds on the stators?
Nope. The stators should be configured to drive the motor only, otherwise the over-unity effect is compromised. The stator output comes from the back emf *ONLY*.
Magnets
What type of magnet should I use?
Grade VIII ceramics. NIBs only boost absolute output by increasing current draw, and therefore apparatus throughput. The device is no more efficient, and in fact due to possible core saturation, may well end up less efficient.
What diameter?
3/4". Larger magnets result in a longer pulse width, which tends to destroy the over-unity effect, or at least increases the difficulty of manifesting it. Again, you can only scale these devices by MANY smaller stators. Stop using 1" magnets. I told you once, twice, thrice.
Square or round-faced?
Does not seem to make a big difference. Round faced are generally easier to order, but were harder to glue between two CDs.
Do more rotor magnets make it more efficient?
They boost absolute output, but generally complicate the task of pulsing the coils, and balancing the rotor. 8 * 6 ohm coils in series (48 ohms) can be rather difficult to pulse with anything other than mechanical switching! In addition, the requirement for a 20% pm duty, means the resultant spacing forces relatively large rotor parts. There seems little benefit to 8 poles, before you have even mastered 4 poles.
Rotor
Do I have to use CDs?
Of course not. However, when used in pairs, CDs do provide a surprisingly strong rotor for unloaded low voltage experimentation. They key point about CDs, is really that they force proper duty. You can not reduce the physical spacing of the pms. It spoils the back-emf effect. Also, you need hard pressed CDS. CD-RWs are often no good.
Any other ideas for cheap rotors?
Kid's toy wheels.
Mounting for the rotor?
Easy. Old hard drives. Very low friction, well balanced, cheap. Easily emerged over time as the favorite rotor mounting. Can be ordered off Ebay even if you have none lying around.
Does a heavy rotor help?
Not that I was ever able to observe. Light and well balanced were the keys.
Circuitry / switching
Isn't over-unity only possible with mechanical switching?
Mr Adams, and Lutec, both employed mechanical switching. Clearly, superior back-emf results are obtained in this manner. The classic mistake of experimenters has been to perform mechanical experiments, and then think the same performance can be transferred to MOSFETS. In this respect, despite intensive research, efforts appear to have failed thus far. However, it certainly seems true to say that MOSFETS with shorter rise times, perform better than ones with longer rise times, and MOSFETS are capable when configured properly of performing better than transistors.
How should I route the back emf back to the battery?
Discrete fast recovery diodes will tend to yield best results. This could be in parallel with a reed switch - a popular combination because of its simplicity. MOSFETS of course have a diode built-in as a byproduct of the manufacturing process, so will re-charge the source battery automatically.
What sort of timing device should I use?
Best device is probably optical. Hall switches can be used, and you simply time off the magnetic field of the rotating pms. However, they are sensitive to high ohm sets. One of the most promising ideas was the induction coil timing system. More work could be done in that direction.
What voltage rating should parts have?
You should use MOSFETS / diodes / FWBRs rated to about 400v. In general, the higher the voltage rating, the less efficiently it conducts current. So you need a high enough voltage tolerance to assure reliability, but an excessive voltage rating just hurts current efficiency of the apparatus. The peak voltage of the back emf surge can be quite high, and thats what the circuit has to be able to withstand.
What's with the voltage input?
12v is a good basic input for battery charging tests. However, if properly configured, you will find rotor speed increases with voltage harmonics of 9 i.e. 18v, 27v, 36v, etc. No, I can't explain why that is, it merely is. Further up, inputs of 120v, and 240v yield gains, in an apparent 120v linear series. I noted JLN only got over-unity in some of his cold fusion data @ 240v (http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/html/cfrdatas.htm). Above 300v you will get sparking - so watch out! But please, do NOT go to 240v, before you have at least got to break-even at 12v. Only scale an effect once you have mastered it. Common sense.
Battery charging
What sort of battery should I use?
Lead acid 4 Ah is a good basic spec. Offers a high recharge efficiency.
Can I boost the battery charge with a generator winding?
Yes. Use a fwbr. If you got within 5-10% self runner with the back-emf alone, this could tip you over the edge. However, the generator winding should NOT of coruse be part of any of the stators. Discrete integrated 400v fwbrs can be bought cheaply enough - there is no need to connect up 4 diodes manually.
How can I increase the back emf re-charge?
Play about with MOSFETs with fast rise times, and get hold of some black sand / magnetite for the stator cores. Once the rotor has been physically built and mounted, those are probably the two biggest areas of gains.
Measurements
How do I determine rpms?
http://polly.phys.msu.su/~zeld/oscill.html
You can use your PC soundcard as an Oscilloscope. Use an induction coil, and divide the number of traces by 4 (the number of pms) to get rpm. Obviously, keep the induction coil away from the pms, as excessive electrical input to your soundcard could damage it.
How do I determine voltage / current draw?
http://www.simplemotor.com/exp&app.htm
Further research
The CD motor was never really finished, in the sense that all the best practise that was learned during the Egroup, was ever put into one single device. Sadly, time is limited, and other projects and lines of research took priority.
Hopefully this PESWIKI instance will open up pulse research to a new generation of researchers, and the project can be concluded, with optimal magnetite cores, and high quality MOSFET based induction coil triggered 12v 4Ah lead acid battery charge circuitry finally developed.
I will say research was taken beyond what is presented, and the CD motor should not be taken as actual apparatus I would ever put forward for commercial funding. It is a simple, scaled down experiment, designed primarily to be easy to replicate, rather than offering best performance. Please see and understand what is presented in that light.
Is this some sort of bizarre joke?
Nope. You really can build a proof-of-concept negative entropy pulsed motor device for $50 from household items. In fact, you could have done so almost as easily in 1880, as 2007. The issue is not the technology, it is the generational banking interests that stopped Tesla, stopped Robert Adams, and thwarted my good self, as well as countless others. I would recommend watching the film End Game: Blueprint For Global Enslavement. You may then begin to understand what is really happening in the world.
Any more secrets?
Yeah, lots, but how much do you expect for free folks? How to design a circuit board to handle the device output is a project unto itself. In fact, you can probably make up more gains from the output board, than optimizing the physical device. Go over all my work in the PESWIKI and try and find the hints. But the Holy Grail for the Adams motor is the runaway over-unity configuration. That was the commercial configuration for the steam apparatus Mr Adams pursued in the 1990s. It does exist. Even with a lousy circuit board, you're off the scale on o/u in that case. Happy experimenting. Best, Tim.
See also
- CD Motor Open Source Project - main page
- Other open source projects
- PESWiki home page
