Zero Force Motor Replication Project

[Gary Hammond]

Hi Richard,

Thanks for pointing that out, Aaron.
In those notes dated 6-17-89 he refers to it as the LCF motor. It looks a lot like the window motor to me but I am not familiar enough with the ZFM or the other two to know the differences between the three of them..............

I have a folder I downloaded called "Bedini -Cole Window Motor Lab Notes" that I think Dave Wing posted a couple of years ago. One file shows a "multi pole inside out Faraday motor" dated 8-1988 (Cole - Bedini). In another file (by Cole) dated 9-1989 it's called a "6x6 LCF motor" and looks to be the same as a 6 pole window motor. And in a file dated 8-1988 (Brown, Cole, Bedini) showing the details of the rotor, it's called an LCF DC motor (Linear Counter Field). I think these are all early terms to describe what we now call a "window motor".

And there is yet another file showing a "Faraday type Ironless Motor" which looks to be what we now call the "Zero Force Motor" (ZFM).

My take away is that the window motor and the ZFM are two different versions of an ironless Faraday motor and exhibit very similar operating characteristics.

[Yaro1776]

ZFM Neo Barbecue

Hello All,

After the 2017 Energy Conference and armed with the newest ZFM details from Peter L. I ordered four 1"Dx3/8"T Neo's and sent my spare rotor to the shop to have the appropriate counterbore machined for the 1" Neo's. Finished with my vacation, I proceeded to assemble the modified rotor with the Neo upgrade using a Loctite 332 structural adhesive (334 will work also). Just prior to applying the adhesive I placed one Neo on the rotor to check the fit. Bad move! Removing it was a chore and I may have damaged one Neo. I finally removed it with a wood clamp and proceeded to glue all the Neo's to the rotor.

The assembly and gluing was straightforward. Clean all surfaces with acetone, apply the primer on the Neo's and apply the adhesive to the rotor. I used a plastic clamp to insert the Neo's - man these little Neo's are very powerful. They jumped out of the clamp to the rotor. Wearing gloves, I twisted the Neo's to seat them properly and set them outside to cure overnight. In the morning I placed the rotor assembly in a clear plastic salad container and let it cook in this mini solar oven for three hours until the adhesive was cured. Good to go!

The rotor was then mounted on the shaft and assembled into the YZFM. All the connections were completed and the unit started at 12v - no problem - 3800 RPM - no problems. The voltage was increased to 24v at 0 degrees advance and slowly increased to about 8,200 RPM when there was a pop and the ZFM stalled. Close inspection revealed one Neo had blown apart. Upon disassembly it was seen that one Neo had self destructed and damaged the other three Neo's - trashed!

Close Inspection of the faulty Neo revealed a failure of the coating and internal structure. Neo's are very brittle and apparently need to be handled very carefully as evidenced by this failed Neo. So what to do? Tried the brute force method of a chisel and a small sledge hammer - not very effective or very clean results.

Took a step back and used the techie noodle. Loctite 332 breaks down well over 400 degrees F and the Neo's start losing their strength around 200 degrees F. Fired up my barbecue grille and cranked it up to over 600 degrees F and then placed the rotor in an aluminum pan onto the grille and let it cook for 3/4 hour. Can't describe adequately the combo of Loctite 332 and burger grease odor. After the cooking interval the pan was removed and allowed to cool slowly.

Well sir, don't you know that the Neo's just dropped out of the rotor slicker than slush. The day was saved and the rotor can be used again. Ordered new Neo's and will try again end of the week or on Monday - hopefully with better results - may even use some fiberglass tape.

Safety glasses and gloves,
Yaro

[Deuis]

Another set of magnets closer to success.....

[Davy Oneness]

Hi Richard,



I have a folder I downloaded called "Bedini -Cole Window Motor Lab Notes" that I think Dave Wing posted a couple of years ago. One file shows a "multi pole inside out Faraday motor" dated 8-1988 (Cole - Bedini). In another file (by Cole) dated 9-1989 it's called a "6x6 LCF motor" and looks to be the same as a 6 pole window motor. And in a file dated 8-1988 (Brown, Cole, Bedini) showing the details of the rotor, it's called an LCF DC motor (Linear Counter Field). I think these are all early terms to describe what we now call a "window motor".

And there is yet another file showing a "Faraday type Ironless Motor" which looks to be what we now call the "Zero Force Motor" (ZFM).

My take away is that the window motor and the ZFM are two different versions of an ironless Faraday motor and exhibit very similar operating characteristics.

I would say the only difference between the ZFM and the LCF motor, is which "zero" it is running on.

[Yaro1776]

I would say the only difference between the ZFM and the LCF motor, is which "zero" it is running on.

Irrespective of all the different names they were all "Zero Vacuum Engines", an interesting and intriguing term, indeed.

[Davy Oneness]

After looking over my notes and the new PDF again last night, I take back what I said about the ZFM and the LCF motor running on different "zeros" . I can see both arrangements I had in mind are labeled "zero force" now.

Now I would say I think;

Zero=Zero Vacuum=Zero Force= Bloch Wall.

Linear Counter Field = Scalar Pole "zero".

And both ZFM and LCFM are running off the "vacuum" interactions with the bloch wall "zero"

I think the ZFM style coils are better than a window motor because it gives you more turns for less resistance.
The LCF motor seems to be the design they(Bedini/Cole) wanted to patent and produce at the end of the 80's as the ideal ironless Faraday motor. Some of the notes I have, clearly look intended to be included in a patent.

[Yaro1776]

YZFM Neo Upgrade - Again

The iron rotor was cleaned up and sanded after the removal of the damaged Neo's. Received the new set of 1"Dx3/8"T Neo's and installed them with the same procedure (did use 3 wraps of tape this time). The shaft was inserted into the motor and the assembly completed - ready to run.

The YZFM was cranked up slowly step by step to 11600 RPM without any signs of Neo integrity or adhesive issues. Great! Onto the performance tests.

The testing involved all the major variables that influence the ZFM: voltage (12v, 24v and 36v) firing duration (45, 60 and 70 degrees) and advance (10 through 45 degrees). Overall the 1" Neo's improved the torque of the motor and reduced the maximum RPM a bit. The general performance characteristics are very similar to the prior 3/4"Dx3/8"T Neo configuration. In that maximum speed and torque for this build are developed with a firing duration of 60 to 70 degrees and an advance of 35 to 45 degrees at 36v.

It appears that the larger Neo's definitely provide a greater torque, but with a price. The maximum RPM is reduced a bit and the amperage draw from the battery is increased at maximum duration (70 degrees and 45 degree advance).

As an example - 36 v, 11430 RPM and 1.08A in comparison to the prior Neo config (3/4"Dx3/8"T) yielding 36v, 12200 RPM and 0.83A. Bear in mind that with some additional tuning the data may improve.

Next on the agenda is raising the operating voltage to a maximum of 48v to assess how this impacts performance. The initial water pump test of the YZFM should take place next week assuming that Mr. Murphy is on vacation.

Yaro

[James McDonald]

Zero Force Motor Rotor & Shaft Magnet Polarity

Hi All --

This is a short note to show where I am after my magnet disaster when my Zero Force Motor
was running at 9500 RPM when one magnet flipped up and hit the coil then crashed into another
magnet causing a pile of magnet mess. I made a short video of the polarity of the rotor and shaft.
The original rotor has N52 Neos 3/4 inch by 1/2. The new rotor has N52 Neos 2 inches by 1 inch by 1/2 inch. Check out this Rotor and Shaft Magnet Polarity Video.

Very interesting results.

Enjoy the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAkMDPA-vDk

-- James McDonald

[min2oly]

Hi All --

This is a short note to show where I am after my magnet disaster when my Zero Force Motor
was running at 9500 RPM when one magnet flipped up and hit the coil then crashed into another
magnet causing a pile of magnet mess. I made a short video of the polarity of the rotor and shaft.
The original rotor has N52 Neos 3/4 inch by 1/2. The new rotor has N52 Neos 2 inches by 1 inch by 1/2 inch. Check out this Rotor and Shaft Magnet Polarity Video.

Very interesting results.

Enjoy the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAkMDPA-vDk

-- James McDonald

Interesting how the south overpowers the north, Eh... it would be pretty cool if we could use it to float the rotor.

[Gyula]

Hi All --
...
The original rotor has N52 Neos 3/4 inch by 1/2. The new rotor has N52 Neos 2 inches by 1 inch by 1/2 inch. Check out this Rotor and Shaft Magnet Polarity Video.

...

Hi James,

I think the new shaft will lose its South pole magnetism the very moment you fix the 4th magnet which was not present in the video. With all the 4 magnets in place, the iron rotor can collect and close the NSNS poles on themselves like it does for your 1st rotor assembly.
So it is not about the super strong magnets that the shaft becomes polarised (if this is what you meant, maybe I misunderstood the video) but the fact that two like poles work against one unlike pole and S pole can leak out towards the shaft ends (i.e. the whole shaft is magnetized as South).

Greetings,
Gyula

[James McDonald]

Hi James,

I think the new shaft will lose its South pole magnetism the very moment you fix the 4th magnet which was not present in the video. With all the 4 magnets in place, the iron rotor can collect and close the NSNS poles on themselves like it does for your 1st rotor assembly. So it is not about the super strong magnets that the shaft becomes polarised (if this is what you meant, maybe I misunderstood the video) but the fact that two like poles work against one unlike pole and S pole can leak out towards the shaft ends (i.e. the whole shaft is magnetized as South).

Greetings,
Gyula

Hi Gyula --

I did the experiment over again and I will make a new video. Once the 4th magnet was added to the rotor the shaft became divided into 4 magnet poles up to 1.5 inches up the shaft. So now if the shaft is rotated the magnet poles change from north to south pole. After the 1.5 inches up the shaft on either side of the rotor the magnet poles become undetectable by the tool. The other rotor with the smaller magnets did not magnetize the shaft up away from the rotor at all. This is showing a very strong magnetic field. I will show this in a new video I will make tomorrow.

-- James

[Gyula]

Hi James,

Okay, I understand. I think with the rectangular magnets the N-S poles of the directly adjacent magnets cannot fully 'join' their lines of flux as thoroughly as in the case of the cylinder magnets, this can explain the 1.5 inch flux leakage from the iron cube towards the shaft. I think this is the explanation while it is okay that these 2 inch by 1 inch rectangular N52 magnets are certainly stronger than the N52 3/4 inch OD cylinder ones witht he same 1/2 inch thickness.
I think if we had four 2 inch OD cylinder magnets (N52), then the 1.5 inch long leakage in the shaft would be much shorter or non existent (or non detectable by the same indicator) because of the regular cylinder shape. With the 2" x 1" rectangular shape there is much less symmetry from "lines of flux joinings" point of view

Thanks for showiing the video.

Gyula

[James McDonald]

Hi James,

Okay, I understand. I think with the rectangular magnets the N-S poles of the directly adjacent magnets cannot fully 'join' their lines of flux as thoroughly as in the case of the cylinder magnets, this can explain the 1.5 inch flux leakage from the iron cube towards the shaft. I think this is the explanation while it is okay that these 2 inch by 1 inch rectangular N52 magnets are certainly stronger than the N52 3/4 inch OD cylinder ones witht he same 1/2 inch thickness.
I think if we had four 2 inch OD cylinder magnets (N52), then the 1.5 inch long leakage in the shaft would be much shorter or non existent (or non detectable by the same indicator) because of the regular cylinder shape. With the 2" x 1" rectangular shape there is much less symmetry from "lines of flux joinings" point of view

Thanks for showing the video.

Gyula

Hi Gyula --

As promised a new video of the Zero Force Motor rotor and shaft and what different strength and size N52 Neo magnets do
to the rotor and shaft. Yesterday's video had one magnet not glued on at the time allowing the South Pole to show all the way down
the shaft.

Enjoy!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrIlDdh7YPU


-- James

[Gyula]

Hi James,

Okay, and thanks for showing the new test.

With the fourth magnet in place the 2 like and 2 unlike poles can mostly 'join' within the body of the iron rotor.

An interesting thing to consider would be that if there is no iron rotor but a non magnetizable rotor body for holding the 4 magnets in the same place, and the shaft would also be non magnetizable, the same 2 -2 poles would invariably join together inside the space the 4 magnets 'encapsulate', the drawback possibly would be that more unwanted flux could leak out and could negatively interact with the stator coils.

Gyula

[Yaro1776]

YZFM with 1"Dx3/8"T Neo's and 48v

A full battery of testing was completed for the rotor Neo upgrade (1"Dx3/8"T) using firing durations of 45 to 70 degrees, advance of 10 to 45 degrees and voltages of 12v, 24v, 36v and 48v. A complete menu of results that now describe the operational characteristics of the machine. Some of these results were desribed in the previous post.

The addition of the 48 volt operation was an eye opener when tested against the 36v mode. The 48v mode cranked up the amperage, speed and torque.
For example at 40-45 degree advance:
45 degree firing duration - 36v at 8000 RPM with 0.71A and 48v at 11014 RPM with 0.81A
60 degree firing duration - 36v at 11140 RPM with1.10A and 48v at 12410 RPM with 1.02A
70 degree firing duration -36v at 11600 with with 1.08A and 48v at 12800 RPM with 1.30A

The 1" Neo's do make the motor a bit more touchy at the higher advances and the position of the timing rotor and reed mount needs to be tweaked to achieve the best separation distance. The motor also appears to gain strength after running for an extended period of time, in that the amps will drop off while the RPM increases.

The 48 volt operation is a bit on the wild side. I had anticipated a greater gain in speed, perhaps close to 14000 RPM, but there appears to be a wall around 12800 RPM. The machine is not really happy operating at this speed and voltage, and it continually screams and complains about being held back. It wants to do more but something is not quite right in the tuning or hardware.

You can note in the video at 48 volts that the on screen amperage readings are offset to the the negative side - they are mostly below the 0 amp axis. In a separate test removing one leg of the reed firing circuit causes the amp value to read -1.06A (clamp on meter) with the speed dropping off to 12056 RPM. Switching to the other reed causes the amp value to read +0.60A with the speed dropping off to 11300. Stopping the motor and the restarting brings the values back to nearly the same readings. So running on half the circuit yields some fairly significant numbers. There is an instability and imbalance here for sure.

There are other peculiarities that have been observed and noted, but these are beyond the scope of this post.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5h_H...ature=youtu.be

Check out the video if you are so inclined and ride a bit on the wild side.

Water pump test video next,
Yaro