parallel path magnet motor

Joepostal

100 W
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
123
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/magnetictechnology.htm

This is something I looked at long ago and wondered if there was another way to force this to happen?

The technology is patented but there might be a way to cause the effect by applying the reverse charge but larger on the coil that is generating the back emf. Anyhow I think it would be amazing to try to recreate this in the existing brushless RC motors.

We can still make a huge jump from where we are from what I can tell...

FUN :D
Joe

[edit: I could not find the thread about the ultimate RC bike motor to add this to that discussion]
edit woops broken url
 
If you want to learn about brushless electric machines, go read Hanselman. The "parallel path electric motor" design may be patented, but so is a lot of other useless stuff.

BTW, if you want efficiency, the CSIRO axial flux motor in an Australian solar car was 99%+ efficient. Not cheap and not easy, but a compelling design nonetheless.
 
Hey miles,

I happen to agree, I won't be designing the next super motor but I am thinking that we should apply the same principles that they use for sound cancellation to back emf. Equal and opposite :)

Wanders thanks for the info I will look into it.

I am just trying to find out where we are headed after we own the RC/brushless motor. Can you imagine Matt's PK Ripper being 15% more efficient. Top speed of 53mph with no changing in the current gearing.

I couldn't find the thread that relates to the RC motor built specifically for bikes but I wanted to see what the guy who is building that motor thought of the PPM motor.
 
i had read 98% b4 CSIRO/UNSW revamped their site & removed all the info relating to the motor, or at least i can no longer find it.
so a statement like "We can still make a huge jump from where we are...", it doesn't seem like there's anywhere to go, i don't see how it's possible to gain another 15% without going overunity.
the only gains would be reduction in size & weight, efficiency on electric motors has been pretty good since the intro of the RE magnet.

my presumption how the CSIRO got such good numbers stemmed from it's use of a Halbach winding (which is very real) & i would like to know why we don't see it in any readily available commercial motor.
the motor is a hubbie BTW, just thought i'd mention. :D
 
Miles said:
Where did you see 99%+ efficiency stated?

Miles, the paper you posted is the best reference for the CSIRO motor, as poor a reference as it is, unfortunately. I have suggested to the authors that they publish better specs, and in particular details on how they fabricated their stator, but I got an email reply that I should just buy one of their motor kits. Those frameless kits contain only "two rotors (which contain surface mounted magnets), a wound stator, position sensor and three inductors" for the relatively princely sum of AU $11,900, or about US $8,815, at today's exchange rate, more than I want to pay to learn how to build an axial-flux coreless stator.

With regard to the 99% figure, I guess I "misremembered" it (in the words of Roger Clements). The CSIRO website states 98% efficiency. Sorry for the confusion!

Efficiency comes from Halbach magnet array, small air gap, coreless stator using Litz wire, all the usual axial flux tricks. Be careful when you try to assemble one of these motors - the axial force from the magnets is life-threatening!

The CSIRO website can be hard to navigate, but the motor page is here.
 
Oh, well oops than lol. I guess I just got that in my head for some reason. Why do they use gold for CPU pins than if it's not that good a conductor?

Edit: just looked it up, gold doesn't form an oxidation layer, so small electrical signals don't get blocked by it. Where as with high currents in copper even if oxidation forms the currents are enough to break down the layer.
 
Just to add a disclaimer, I am not thinking of this PPM (parallel path Magnet) motor as being over unity. Obviously a wheel doesn't turn by it self. I just read enough to be intrigued. The claim is that the opposing pole is negated and that causes a 4x increase in the working pole. The example that someone else also built seems to work...

The other claim is very interesting. It doesn't generate any heat since there is basically no back EMF. If that is the case I can imagine there must be other shapes, physical or electrical, that can extort these benefits.

The ICE is on it's way out (I hope) finally! Even at 70% efficient electric just destroys ICE. I can't wait to see more EVs than ICE even if they are hybrids.
 
Wanders, thanks for the legwork and all of the links!

-----
Silver, copper, gold....


Off the top of my pumpkin head, and I am no engineer and am not looking up any data:

Silver is faultless. Its oxides are the only metal oxides (well its common oxides) that do not resist electricity.
A flashlight/torch with silver plated contacts would never give its owner a bit of trouble.

Copper: nearly as good a conductor as silver, but its oxides are absolutely ruinous to small voltage currents' passage.
Copper oxide was once the only, commonly used semi-conductor: they made low current AC rectifiers from stacks of copper disks.

Gold: the standard for fools and for reliable LOW CURRENT conductor terminations. It's a mediocre conductor.
It must be usually plated atop nickel, itself a poor conductor. Or put it on copper; the copper underneath eventually tarnishes,
yet the connector still passed current due to the immutable gold micro-thin plating.

The BEST of all is silver. Old milspec tube gear, used in the most demanding, damp circumstances, spec'd HEAVY silver plate on its contacts, connectors, tube socket pins. It's great stuff. It turns black in time, usually, but no matter: no resistance. DON'T polish silver plate.

BRASS, aside from cheap, brass or gold or copper plated steel, is the WORST of any electrical conductor: an alloy of copper with zinc:
Zinc is a terrible conductor and I mean, terrible. The copper is fine, but, hell, it tarnishes. Buss bars should never be of brass, but only of copper, or bronze; unless you could afford solid silver.

Aluminum: good conductor, cheap, terrible resistances form when the contacts oxidize. Special anti-corrosion pastes must be at the junctions.
Al. oxide is a perfect non-conductor.

Love silver, silver plate, and your grandmother's tea set.
Gold plate is for computers and delicate, cheap connectors.
Gold plated brass is shite.
Gold plated bronze (very rare) is good for the fact that bronze is a fine conductor, as its alloy metal is tin;
tin is a fine conductor, and its oxide is not all that much trouble.
Bronze for buss bars would be pretty good. So would be pure tin. But brass?

What is the conductivity of brass? Someone will look it up; it sucks.
Why don't "they" mass produce electrical switches and push-spring connectors of bronze,
and possibly silver plate?
Because the costs of the metals (tin and silver) are high.
The cost of gold plate is small because the coating is never thicker than a micron or three.

-----
Tinhorn Reid, the conduction kink master
 
Back
Top