Safety first and its procedures are important. We have always suffered from these accidents, especially at high speed, and we learned a lot. You continued on your way , enjoyable presentation and good luck
I just read about the N-Machine for the first time, and it is a very interesting concept, but that rotor has a very different layout to the rotor I'm using, as it requires two large round magnets with a thick copper plate sandwiched in between: www.homemade-circuits.com/making-free-energy-generator-n-machine/ Or you mean to use the Adams Motor to power an N-Machine generator rotor? That could work indeed!
Your comment inspired me, and I re-assembled my broken flywheel rotor, and measured the DC voltage between the axle and the rim of the flywheel, but it didn't go much higher than 2-3mV. The rotor was only spinning at 1300 RPM though. Of course the magnets in this rotor are very small, weak, ferrite magnets, so I didn't expect spectacular results. If I ever build a rotor with neodymium magnets I might give this another try :-)
The problem with the N-Machine is the electrical resistance between the disk and the brushes. It is true that there's no back torque (I tested it) and based on that you may think that you won. BUT... the generated voltage is too low. In order to use the energy you generated, you would need very very low electrical resistance between the brush and the disk. Some say that Bruce de Palma achieved this by using mercury, but I really don't think so. Mercury has resistivity ~58 times the resistivity of copper. According to the tests I ran, copper is not good enough, you can imagine mercury... Well, feel free to ask about the tests I have done.
Have you thought about powering your coils with a MOSFET (FDL100N50F) and a gate driver (TC4420CPA)? Also, I would be using a ultra fast diode (STPSC30H12CWL) to capture the flyback. I can assure you that schematic that I previously provided a link for comes from an eminent source, one you probably already know about, which I'm not willing to reveal, and if I did, when it got back to him, he'd probably be pissed.
Hi Barry, the transistor I use now is the one recommended by John Bedini, which he picked after testing dozens of different options. I would like to experiment with MOSFETs, but could you tell me why they are preferred over regular transistors in this case? You mentioned more power can be transferred that way, but why would that be the case? And I also ordered some silicon carbide diodes (IDH12SG60C) :-) Curious now who created the schematic, you could always email me through my website ;-)
@@Waveguide The main reason is much more power. You can run four 3.5uH (Dayton Ohio) coils in parallel with a single FDL100N50F, but you will need a gate driver (TC4420CPA) circuit with its own isolated power supply. It is recommended for capturing the flyback that you use an ultra fast diode (STPSC30H12CWL). It also recommended that the charge battery be a deep cycle lead acid battery. Also, it is recommended that you place a protection capacitor across the MOSFET (100uF 450v Electrolytic). (Side note, you can also connect another four 3.5uH (Dayton Ohio) coils in series with a single high voltage diode to charge a high voltage capacitor, which you can periodically dump into your primary battery through a slip-ring-half-cycle-commutator. See the energizer of the Watson machine.)
Thanks for your explanation, but the Adams Motor does not need a lot of power through its coils. ~2 Watts will do, so more power would not be a reason for me to switch to MOSFETs. They do tend to be faster at switching than regular transistors, and it seems a very fast rise time is ideal, which is why Robert Adams kept using mechanical commutator switches. Plus, who is this person recommending all this? ;-)
@@BarryBranton if you check the `serial` branch on Github, you see the web dashboard I created for thr serial monitor data. This makes it a lot nicer to check the status of your motor.
Hi Nick! Well! And everything started so well ...Did you deliberately destroy your rotor, or did you not know that centrifugal force can destroy the rotor with increasing rotational speed?
I obviously didn't plan on this! It was really dangerous. I did underestimate the power of the centrifugal force. I will now run my motor at lower speeds, or hide behind something while it's running ;-)
I have a pulse motor and at 146 volts it spins at just over 1000 rpm and draws 180mA. How does people get there pulse motor to reach over 1000 rpm at 12 volts?
I'm guessing you're using neodymium magnets? They are much stronger than the ferrite magnets I'm using, and so require a lot more power to demagnetize the stator core. Robert Adams wrote about this extensively, and while you use more power with stronger magnets, they also generate more power, and so the overall efficiency of the motor can still be the same. Other than that, it all comes down to a good mechanical design, like using the right bearings and having minimal vibration.
@@Waveguide I am using weak speaker magnets and Im using the bearings that come out of a old vcr. you know the vcr head that the spins the tape, really good bearings. I think it has something to do with my inductance because my coils are thicker than they are long. they are over 500 turns. also I built my rotor out of layers of cardboard. it weighs about a pound. In addition my motor is an axial flux and yours is a radial flux. i built a radial flux out of plastic dish cover once and using the same voltage and magnets and I got over 1500 rpm till it split apart just like yours. My radial was also monopolar but i didn't get to test it as dual pole. From the axial im currently testing , I found out that dual pole give stronger flyback emf and only the dual pole was capable off reaching over 1000 rpm (monopole stopped at 920 rpm). Over 1000 rpm im able to use a technique that allows me to pull power from the rotor which causes the rpm to increase by 200+ and the current drop by 50-60%. Im not sure if this technique is possible with monopolar as It only happens when my rotor is over 1000 rpm. I figured out the technique by mistake but i believe its called back emf harvesting. Also by making the generator coil field lines parallels to rotor tangential velocity, i eliminated the drag by the generator coil. I later saw this on TH-cam and also saw a video saying that if you orientate the generator coil AND permanent magnet field lines parallel to the rotor tangential velocity, then pulling power from the generator coil will cause negative drag, ie, the rotor will speed up.
@@raloed.363 If you're using weak magnets, then you really should not need 146 Volts :-) The VCR bearings are good ones, but if the have grease in them, they will cause drag on the rotor, so a ceramic bearing might be a better option. My drive coils are also thicker than they are long (40mm wide vs 30mm long), so I doubt that is the issue. What wire guage did you use? And what is the winding resistance? If you could share a link to any video or textual information on the negative drag generator setup, I would greatly appreciate it, as I would love to give that a try! Thanks in advance.
@@Waveguide there are 3 coils in parallel, 19, 25 and 23 ohms. I don't know the wire gauge but its scrap wire I took from the secondary of a large microwave transformer, about 0.5mm in diameter. The video demonstrating the negative drag is here th-cam.com/video/MIbBaTf9m_M/w-d-xo.html
@@raloed.363 thanks for the video link, very interesting! Could you share what trick you plan to use above 1000 RPM that will increase speed while reducing current draw?
Just checked, and I have 3 rotors I'm no longer using, so you contact me through my website waveguide.blog if you want to see pictures. My old stators were pretty wimpy, so I don't think I have any of those anymore.
Safety first and its procedures are important.
We have always suffered from these accidents, especially at high speed, and we learned a lot.
You continued on your way , enjoyable presentation and good luck
Sawthoot wave form after the peak aligment. Great image of a linear decay.
would be interesting to see an Adams Motor/N-Machine generator combo, you could even use the same rotor with that brass disk.
I just read about the N-Machine for the first time, and it is a very interesting concept, but that rotor has a very different layout to the rotor I'm using, as it requires two large round magnets with a thick copper plate sandwiched in between: www.homemade-circuits.com/making-free-energy-generator-n-machine/
Or you mean to use the Adams Motor to power an N-Machine generator rotor? That could work indeed!
Your comment inspired me, and I re-assembled my broken flywheel rotor, and measured the DC voltage between the axle and the rim of the flywheel, but it didn't go much higher than 2-3mV.
The rotor was only spinning at 1300 RPM though.
Of course the magnets in this rotor are very small, weak, ferrite magnets, so I didn't expect spectacular results.
If I ever build a rotor with neodymium magnets I might give this another try :-)
@@Waveguide Neat! Would like to see a video if you try it with some better magnets.
@@Waveguide you could also just try setting a neo ring magnet on the brass disk, but it might mess with the other magnets.
The problem with the N-Machine is the electrical resistance between the disk and the brushes. It is true that there's no back torque (I tested it) and based on that you may think that you won. BUT... the generated voltage is too low. In order to use the energy you generated, you would need very very low electrical resistance between the brush and the disk. Some say that Bruce de Palma achieved this by using mercury, but I really don't think so. Mercury has resistivity ~58 times the resistivity of copper. According to the tests I ran, copper is not good enough, you can imagine mercury... Well, feel free to ask about the tests I have done.
Have you thought about powering your coils with a MOSFET (FDL100N50F) and a gate driver (TC4420CPA)? Also, I would be using a ultra fast diode (STPSC30H12CWL) to capture the flyback. I can assure you that schematic that I previously provided a link for comes from an eminent source, one you probably already know about, which I'm not willing to reveal, and if I did, when it got back to him, he'd probably be pissed.
Hi Barry, the transistor I use now is the one recommended by John Bedini, which he picked after testing dozens of different options. I would like to experiment with MOSFETs, but could you tell me why they are preferred over regular transistors in this case? You mentioned more power can be transferred that way, but why would that be the case? And I also ordered some silicon carbide diodes (IDH12SG60C) :-) Curious now who created the schematic, you could always email me through my website ;-)
@@Waveguide The main reason is much more power. You can run four 3.5uH (Dayton Ohio) coils in parallel with a single FDL100N50F, but you will need a gate driver (TC4420CPA) circuit with its own isolated power supply. It is recommended for capturing the flyback that you use an ultra fast diode (STPSC30H12CWL). It also recommended that the charge battery be a deep cycle lead acid battery. Also, it is recommended that you place a protection capacitor across the MOSFET (100uF 450v Electrolytic). (Side note, you can also connect another four 3.5uH (Dayton Ohio) coils in series with a single high voltage diode to charge a high voltage capacitor, which you can periodically dump into your primary battery through a slip-ring-half-cycle-commutator. See the energizer of the Watson machine.)
Thanks for your explanation, but the Adams Motor does not need a lot of power through its coils. ~2 Watts will do, so more power would not be a reason for me to switch to MOSFETs. They do tend to be faster at switching than regular transistors, and it seems a very fast rise time is ideal, which is why Robert Adams kept using mechanical commutator switches. Plus, who is this person recommending all this? ;-)
@@Waveguide That's fine. I appreciate the Arduino sketch code. Thanks.
@@BarryBranton if you check the `serial` branch on Github, you see the web dashboard I created for thr serial monitor data. This makes it a lot nicer to check the status of your motor.
Hi Nick!
Well! And everything started so well ...Did you deliberately destroy your rotor, or did you not know that centrifugal force can destroy the rotor with increasing rotational speed?
I obviously didn't plan on this! It was really dangerous. I did underestimate the power of the centrifugal force. I will now run my motor at lower speeds, or hide behind something while it's running ;-)
Ah yes, be careful Nick! I am going to view my Adams Motor from behind a shield when it it spinning fast for safety reasons!
Do you have a dynamometer?
I have the parts to make one based on Peter Lindemann's design, but have never gotten around to putting it together unfortunately.
I have a pulse motor and at 146 volts it spins at just over 1000 rpm and draws 180mA. How does people get there pulse motor to reach over 1000 rpm at 12 volts?
I'm guessing you're using neodymium magnets? They are much stronger than the ferrite magnets I'm using, and so require a lot more power to demagnetize the stator core. Robert Adams wrote about this extensively, and while you use more power with stronger magnets, they also generate more power, and so the overall efficiency of the motor can still be the same. Other than that, it all comes down to a good mechanical design, like using the right bearings and having minimal vibration.
@@Waveguide I am using weak speaker magnets and Im using the bearings that come out of a old vcr. you know the vcr head that the spins the tape, really good bearings. I think it has something to do with my inductance because my coils are thicker than they are long. they are over 500 turns. also I built my rotor out of layers of cardboard. it weighs about a pound. In addition my motor is an axial flux and yours is a radial flux. i built a radial flux out of plastic dish cover once and using the same voltage and magnets and I got over 1500 rpm till it split apart just like yours. My radial was also monopolar but i didn't get to test it as dual pole.
From the axial im currently testing , I found out that dual pole give stronger flyback emf and only the dual pole was capable off reaching over 1000 rpm (monopole stopped at 920 rpm). Over 1000 rpm im able to use a technique that allows me to pull power from the rotor which causes the rpm to increase by 200+ and the current drop by 50-60%. Im not sure if this technique is possible with monopolar as It only happens when my rotor is over 1000 rpm. I figured out the technique by mistake but i believe its called back emf harvesting. Also by making the generator coil field lines parallels to rotor tangential velocity, i eliminated the drag by the generator coil. I later saw this on TH-cam and also saw a video saying that if you orientate the generator coil AND permanent magnet field lines parallel to the rotor tangential velocity, then pulling power from the generator coil will cause negative drag, ie, the rotor will speed up.
@@raloed.363 If you're using weak magnets, then you really should not need 146 Volts :-) The VCR bearings are good ones, but if the have grease in them, they will cause drag on the rotor, so a ceramic bearing might be a better option.
My drive coils are also thicker than they are long (40mm wide vs 30mm long), so I doubt that is the issue. What wire guage did you use? And what is the winding resistance?
If you could share a link to any video or textual information on the negative drag generator setup, I would greatly appreciate it, as I would love to give that a try! Thanks in advance.
@@Waveguide there are 3 coils in parallel, 19, 25 and 23 ohms. I don't know the wire gauge but its scrap wire I took from the secondary of a large microwave transformer, about 0.5mm in diameter. The video demonstrating the negative drag is here th-cam.com/video/MIbBaTf9m_M/w-d-xo.html
@@raloed.363 thanks for the video link, very interesting!
Could you share what trick you plan to use above 1000 RPM that will increase speed while reducing current draw?
Oh well thats how u learn lol
Do u want to sell any your old rotors and staters
Possibly, yes. Would have to which ones are still intact.
Just checked, and I have 3 rotors I'm no longer using, so you contact me through my website waveguide.blog if you want to see pictures.
My old stators were pretty wimpy, so I don't think I have any of those anymore.