Zero Force Motor Replication Project

[ZPDM]

Holiday Greetings to all,

The Aluminum rotor mod was completed first and the upgraded Neo's (3/4"Dx 3/8"T N52) installed. After the assembly of the rotor Neo's the unit was installed in the motor assembly. The greater strength Neo's markedly improved the speed performance of the ZFM proto at all operating dc voltages (12, 24 and 36voltages). However, the torque on the motor with this rotor remains low... There is no high speed O-scope available to inspect the voltages to the coils in detail.

Results
Timing Arc about 40 -45 degrees
1. 12v - 485rpm - 0.75A
2. 24v - 1377rpm - 1.37A adjust timing
3. 36v - 2025rpm - 1.75A

Timing Arc about 45 - 50 degrees
1. 12v - 785rpm - 0.85A
2. 24v - 1615rpm - 1.39A
3. 36v - 2415rpm - 1.77A

Timing Arc about 65 - 70 degrees
1. 12v - 977rpm - 1.12A
2. 24v - 2079rpm - 1.80A
3. 36v - 3157rpm - 2.13A

Timing Arc about 70 - 80 degrees
1. 12v - 1105rpm - 1.40A
2. 24v - 2474rpm - 2.09A
3. 36v - 3695rpm - 2.50A

The ZFM Proto data does indicate that for the ZFM AL Proto the following were demonstrated:
1. The speed increases with voltage for all firing arc durations.
2. The firing arc duration is influenced by the size and number of timing rotor magnets. The greater the magnetic field influence the greater the firing arc duration. This can be modified by the relative distance of the timing rotor Neo's to the reed switches - in the above instances maximum rpm was desired.
3. The amperage from the battery increases with greater firing arc duration and resultant rpm.
4. The magnetic strength of the rotor magnets modifies the speed of the ZFM at all the input voltages tested

The above data is not definitive, but can be viewed as an indicator of performance and motor behavior.

Excuse the rez on the video - a bit challenged here in the hills with the upload speed. However do note the wave pattern in the last segment of the video. This pattern is very reminiscent of the patterns produced by the SSG wheel at higher speeds in the transition zones. I looked at this very closely back earlier this year - amazing similarities.

There is still much that can be learned from the Aluminum rotor ZFM, alas the iron core rotor will be completed tomorrow and if all goes well it should be operational before New Year's day. The iron rotor will have four 3/4"Dx3/8"T Neo's glued to the rotor. The recommended adhesive from the techies at Loctite is 332 along with the primer 7387 obtained from Applied Industrial Technologies. Pricey for a years supply...

May the Spirit of Christmas gladden your lives,
Yaro

Hi Yaro,

Great to see the improvement and the project coming along. I got side tracked looking at pancake coils but will try and start winding coils for a ZFM tomorrow. Another thing one can see in your data, if kinetic energy is equal to 1/2mV2, in widening the pulse length power consumption increased less than 2 fold while kinetic energy increased more than four fold, so the wide pulse length clearly seems more efficient and perhaps more than twice so. Possibly another reason John had mentioned that this machine isn't a generator, the coil is on and saturated for a great deal of time for any spike, that and the spike somehow with the ZFM set-up and air core behaves "backwards". Don't understand but just saw that when I rectified off the air coil ZFM spike the rotor was dragged. This would also imply to me that unlike the SSG, the spike in an air coil ZFM is likely part of what is driving the rotor. Want another mystery, why haven't you fried all your transistors? I'm not being a wise guy, I have no idea and I have also never built a large powered SSG, but you were drawing 9 watts through two trannys so 4.5 watts per tranny and the spike wasn't shunted to any load or neon bulb etc. Again I'm not expert here so maybe someone who is will chime in, but I would think 3055's would not be at all expected to survive that.

[James McDonald]

Hi Yaro,
Want another mystery, why haven't you fried all your transistors? I'm not being a wise guy, I have no idea and I have also never built a large powered SSG, but you were drawing 9 watts through two trannys so 4.5 watts per tranny and the spike wasn't shunted to any load or neon bulb etc. Again I'm not expert here so maybe someone who is will chime in, but I would think 3055's would not be at all expected to survive that.

Hi ZPDM --

The pairs of transistors I used in the circuit are able to handle up to 200 watts at 30 Amps pulsed. These are only available from the United Kingdom.
I paid and extra $20.00 shipping fee to get them because they handle 50 more watts then the ones John Bedini used. The biggest issue here is keeping them
cool enough to keep running for a period of time. There have thermal pads under each transistor and they were glued down with thermal conductive glue to
an aluminum plate. Theses transistors are normally used in Audio amplifiers and can drive low resistance 4 ohm speakers. Unlike the SSG coil which is a
litzed type coil which makes a capacitor for stored voltage which would have a big kick back onto the transistors when the load resistance changes. This is why
the SSG has protection Neons to keep them from getting damage from the kick back spike. Each transistor pair is actually handling 90 watts of power at the
36 volt input power voltage. Since the transistors are only switched On for a short period of time these are only running at 50% of the specification listed in
the data sheet. If you were to build the same circuit using 2N3055 transistors you need to pair up each 2N3055 (NPN) transistor with a MJ2955 (PNP) transistor.
Each of these transistors would have to be the TO-3 or now TO-204AA package. But this paired combination will only handle 115 watts so I would not run these
at the 36 volt input voltage. You would also need to heat sink them good just to reach the 115 watt capability listed on the data sheet. Without a heatsink you
would be lucky to reach half the specification of wattage capability without burning them up. There are two limitations on the power handling ability of a transistor
Average junction temperature and Second breakdown voltage. Safe operating area curves indicate IC − VCE limits of the transistor that must be observed for reliable operation; i.e., the transistor must not be subjected to greater dissipation than the curves indicated on the data sheet.

-- James

[Yaro1776]

Another thing one can see in your data, if kinetic energy is equal to 1/2mV2, in widening the pulse length power consumption increased less than 2 fold while kinetic energy increased more than four fold, so the wide pulse length clearly seems more efficient and perhaps more than twice so.

Hello Paul,

Thanks for taking the time to comment on the ZFM Proto tests, however some clarification is required on the relationship between Kinetic Energy and Power for those out there in forum land that may be unclear on the differences. Kinetic Energy (joules) is the potential to do work due to a bodies motion, and once a body (in this case a rotor) is up to speed the Kinetic Energy remains a constant and will stay that way if there are no frictional and windage losses to slow the rotor down. Power is needed to get the rotor up to speed and create the Kinetic Energy and in an ideal world without losses the rotor will spin a very long time without any additional power input.

Power is defined as the time rate of doing work (watts or joule/sec), so in this instance the torque of the motor times its angular velocity defines the power produced. The torque is provided by the coils' magnetic push-pull on the rotor Neo's. By increasing the voltage, the amperage in the coils is multiplied and the torque (push-pull)value will increase - more power produced and consumed with more rpm. The same applies to the firing duration. All of this can be observed in the test data.

So the power consumed can be reasonably described by Operating Voltage x Amperage. The power produced can be reasonably described by the magnitude of the push - pull force x RPM. In this instance the values are relatively linear. At a later stage in this testing the Power produced will be measured.

Enough of the physics for today. The Neo's were mounted on the iron core this morning and the adhesive is curing. The Loctite AA 332 adhesive is very nasty stuff - the odor is a bit overpowering and requires a lot of ventilation. The rotor was placed in a remote corner by an open window to cure slowly and remove the odor. Next is the acid test - meaning assembly into the ZFM Proto.

Happy Holidays,
Yaro

[min2oly]

Here's a quick run with the coils using "The AND Gate" reed switch :-)

1000rpm - micro watts
1/2 x 1/4 x 1 inch X four neos @ 4V
23 awg
I made the coils using 8wires in parallel so I could experiment with different wire resistance vs voltage vs switching etc...

First coil is taking the power from the battery then sending spiky to the second coil/Cap to make them ring. :-)
KR - Patrick

[ZPDM]

Jeez Patrick,

Talk about throwing down the gauntlet, But seriously, that's a nice Christmas present, I won't ask for a diagram (though I won' refuse it either) but you maybe can mention if I am wrong on the concept here. You are taking the spike aka "spiky" sending it to a small cap and second coil in parallel and taking the spike off the collapsing second coil and sending it to the run battery?? I don't know, whatever it is it sounds pretty sneaky to me. BTW I like that "And Gate" name very catchy. Happy Holidays to you and yours. -Paul

[ZPDM]

Hi ZPDM --

The pairs of transistors I used in the circuit are able to handle up to 200 watts at 30 Amps pulsed. These are only available from the United Kingdom.
I paid and extra $20.00 shipping fee to get them because they handle 50 more watts then the ones John Bedini used. The biggest issue here is keeping them
cool enough to keep running for a period of time. There have thermal pads under each transistor and they were glued down with thermal conductive glue to
an aluminum plate. Theses transistors are normally used in Audio amplifiers and can drive low resistance 4 ohm speakers. Unlike the SSG coil which is a
litzed type coil which makes a capacitor for stored voltage which would have a big kick back onto the transistors when the load resistance changes. This is why
the SSG has protection Neons to keep them from getting damage from the kick back spike. Each transistor pair is actually handling 90 watts of power at the
36 volt input power voltage. Since the transistors are only switched On for a short period of time these are only running at 50% of the specification listed in
the data sheet. If you were to build the same circuit using 2N3055 transistors you need to pair up each 2N3055 (NPN) transistor with a MJ2955 (PNP) transistor.
Each of these transistors would have to be the TO-3 or now TO-204AA package. But this paired combination will only handle 115 watts so I would not run these
at the 36 volt input voltage. You would also need to heat sink them good just to reach the 115 watt capability listed on the data sheet. Without a heatsink you
would be lucky to reach half the specification of wattage capability without burning them up. There are two limitations on the power handling ability of a transistor
Average junction temperature and Second breakdown voltage. Safe operating area curves indicate IC − VCE limits of the transistor that must be observed for reliable operation; i.e., the transistor must not be subjected to greater dissipation than the curves indicated on the data sheet.

-- James

James,

Many thanks for the detailed explanation. My take home from this is that 1) I wasn't entirely off base that 3055s or Tip 31s would potentially have difficulty in this situation where the spike is unrectified to load in the circuit and 2) As these are higher power transistors at least there isn't yet another anomaly to worry about with the ZPM, we're seeing a lot already starting with the fact that I 'm not sure the textbooks say you can run something off the lines of force.

[min2oly]

Jeez Patrick,

Talk about throwing down the gauntlet, But seriously, that's a nice Christmas present, I won't ask for a diagram (though I won' refuse it either) but you maybe can mention if I am wrong on the concept here. You are taking the spike aka "spiky" sending it to a small cap and second coil in parallel and taking the spike off the collapsing second coil and sending it to the run battery?? I don't know, whatever it is it sounds pretty sneaky to me. BTW I like that "And Gate" name very catchy. Happy Holidays to you and yours. -Paul

Yea, I liked it much better. Makes more sense considering Tesla invented the AND logic gate - Thanks! :-)
Not much of a schematic, pretty much exactly as I describe in vid.Here is where I posted it a while back though, I posted a vid in that thread you can also find it on my youtube.

[Yaro1776]

Hey Patrick,

I really enjoyed your updated presentation of one form of the ZFM with the AND logic gate. Very nicely done and well executed. You certainly have the touch in presenting an elegant form for this motor.

Happy New Year,
Yaro

[ZPDM]

Alright I apologize to the group, not sure if I'll have an improvement over the Holidays. JB's work is pretty much always deeper than your first assessment. I acknowledge his genius and am making a tactical retreat for the moment. What I can say is I spun a rotor up to 2000 rpms and it flew apart (super glue, masking tape problem) so, after gathering myself, I rebuilt the same rotor with the same magnets facing radially instead of tangentialy. It didn't work quite as well (about 20-25% worse) and behaved differently, i.e. you needed a very large air gap (look at the conference machine, maybe 1/2 3/4 inch) even larger with an iron core. With the magnet's tangentially you needed maybe .5 cm iron core, less for air core. This finding also extends to a regular pulse motor/SSG setup, i.e it runs 20% better with magnets tangentially, at least in my set-up, and I did not track power of the spike. Also I was in error about the rectifying the pulse slowing down an air core set-up, or at least as a generalization. I was running the pulse to a 1.5 volt battery which was similar to shorting it to the other lead, when I ran an air core to a 6 volt battery I again saw improvement. In my set-up with the iron core ZFM I was seeing improvements in efficiency with multiple cores, I think this is a way forward, but I just ended up looking at so many different set-ups with different results that I sort of burnt out on this for the time being. I think that is a way forward, especially as we see the conference machine with windings spread around the rotor.

A little theory, there are three ways I can think of (maybe there are more) to run a rotor off a coil. First is, as in SSG, point it at the rotor and run off the B field, second sideways as in the ZFM and run it (though it shouldn't) on lines of force, third you could turn the ZFM coil up/down instead of sideways. In this case the rotor would want to turn through the table you have it on. That wouldn't work, unless you let the rotor turn that way and why not just wrap the coil right around the rotor, or, a Neuman Motor/Bedini Window motor. The ZFM and window motor run off the same lines of force. To improve any of these we need more induction. As Neuman pointed out very clearly induction is not linearly related to input power. To put it quite plainly induction is in large part a function of mass of the coil (again read Neumann's book) there are other factors of course, resistance of conductor, shape of coil and certainly core material if a core is present, however coil mass is quite important and generally the overriding variable in an air core.

From there we may go back to that great experimenter and scientist Michael Faraday. The power of the displacement current will be a function of the magnitude of the inductive change and the rate at which it occurs. This is not the 1000 year old Chinese science of rockets nor is it trephaning, it is Faraday. The question of what factors affect the rate of change of induction in a coil is one worth considering.

Apologize I had trouble improving my last version of the John Bedini's ZFM, perhaps in the New Year.

Happy Holy days to all.

-Z

[ZPDM]

Yea, I liked it much better. Makes more sense considering Tesla invented the AND logic gate - Thanks! :-)
Not much of a schematic, pretty much exactly as I describe in vid.Here is where I posted it a while back though, I posted a vid in that thread you can also find it on my youtube.

Didn't know that was Tesla, in any event I have got to look at what you are talking about as well as Laser Saber's V4 Joule Ringer. When I glanced at what does he call it SJR 4 it did remind me of an oscillator Forrest Mims showed where you charge a cap to a voltage that allows it to discharge through a transistor which turns on the power to charge the cap, etc. Seems similar except the cap gets charged by a radiant it seems. Must be a high Q oscillator if he is getting the sort of results he is talking about. If you have also applied this to a mechanical rotor that would be very, very cool, as I said I need to look at yours and his work. I have been discharging a set cap into all sorts of coils and measuring the radiant, cliff notes version, for a given mass the counter wound Tesla coil gives by far the best radiant, though I doubt it has great inductance.

[min2oly]

Didn't know that was Tesla, in any event I have got to look at what you are talking about as well as Laser Saber's V4 Joule Ringer. When I glanced at what does he call it SJR 4 it did remind me of an oscillator Forrest Mims showed where you charge a cap to a voltage that allows it to discharge through a transistor which turns on the power to charge the cap, etc. Seems similar except the cap gets charged by a radiant it seems. Must be a high Q oscillator if he is getting the sort of results he is talking about. If you have also applied this to a mechanical rotor that would be very, very cool, as I said I need to look at yours and his work. I have been discharging a set cap into all sorts of coils and measuring the radiant, cliff notes version, for a given mass the counter wound Tesla coil gives by far the best radiant, though I doubt it has great inductance.

Perhaps I should not have added THIS to the ZFM just yet. With a little fine tuning, I have been able to get the ZFM up to 1,130rpm no ringing involved still 4 volts still microwatts only one coil so far...
KR- Patrick

[Tom C]

what does this look like?
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tes...ernating-motor


Tom C

[Tom C]

From the above Patent:

By connecting up the main coils in circuit with a generator of alternating currents, the armature of the motor will be rotated. I have assumed that this action is explained by the following theory: A current-impulse on the line passing through the main coils establishes the magnetic poles of the annular field-magnets at points midway between said coils; but this impulse produces in the secondary coils a current differing in phase from the first, which, circulating through the second pair of energizing-coils, tends to establish the pole at points ninety degrees removed from their first position, with the result of producing a movement or shifting of the poles in obedience to the combined magnetizing effect of the two sets of coils. This shifting, continued by each successive current-impulse, establishes what may be termed a “rotary effort,” and operates to maintain the armature in rotation.


THINK about how much the ZFM is related to this patent

Tom C

[Michael Luton]

Yes and using the secondary winding to drive the next set of coils so the time delay would give the rotor time to reach the next set of coils showed some real cleverness for a simple solution. In my opinion he was trying for a simple motor that could be run directly off line voltage with no switching, control circuits, or commutation. However add the magnets to the rotor, a bit of control circuit, and a little switching and you have the ZFM. He probably never saw it as his goal was to simplify and make more economical. Still it was very interesting for what it was intended to do. I wonder why it was never adopted main stream or further developed by him. Maybe the problem could have been developing enough usable horse-power.

[ZPDM]

Alright I am going to talk about coils and give away Great Grand Poohbah secrets, eh maybe not, how the hll should I know. I am still at the point experimentally where there is a sliver of plausible deniability, so by all means don't take too seriously. This isn't my secret though I'll just repeat a point Joseph Neumann made beautifully, bring it up with him if you don't like it. So 100 feet of 30 gauge wire has a resistance of 10.3 ohms, lets say we use it to make a coil with 100 winds. Now if we used a length of 10 gauge wire such that it equalled 10.3 ohms resistance we would have over 10,000 feet of wire, let's say that only would make a 1000 wind coil. You now have the same input energy and ten times the winds, you see the problem? About the only way back to conventional heaven (or hell if you like) I can see is that the larger gauge wire coil will be physically larger and hence the B field more dispersed in space though its total MMF must it seems by definition be ten times greater, hence Big Eureka, I have at least seen video of Joseph Neumann running his Big Eureka machine.

Let's continue, so MMF is a function of Amp Turns n'est pas? at least primarily and if we neglect core material and coil shape. So let's take a coil of 100 turns at a voltage of 10 with resistance of 1. Now let's double the length of the coil, so now you have say 150 turns on your coil, V remains 10, as length doubled R now = 2. As resistance has doubled amp draw has halved, voltage remains constant so input power is one half. So lets say 1 amp over 100 turns = 100 AT to 0.5 Amps over 150 turns = 75 AT. We got 100 AT for 10 Watts and 75 AT for 5 Watts. Let's double the length of wire for the coil again and go to an alternate universe where doubling this length only led to a single wind being added to our coil. Resistance again doubled so we now have 0.25 amps over 151 turns = 37.75 AT now for 2.5 Watts, again an improvement. When adding winds leads to small incremental improvements the effects from the core and the shape of the coil become more significant, I suspect I know from Wheeler's formula the ideal core shape for maximal induction for a given wire length, that is beyond this discussion and I would also note I am not talking about the strength of the radiant which is a different animal only the strength of the B field.

So let's apply this to a motor, Well in general then more winds better and this finding would seem to increase with decreasing effect indefinitely. However with most motors as MMF increases Lenz effects increase adding yet another variable that might negate gains in efficiency. One would need to conceive of a Lenzless motor to be sure to see efficiency improvements from further winds. The ZFM may fit that bill, as I suspect would the Window Motor, however neither run on the B field, so does any of the above really apply?