Zero Force Motor Replication Project

[James McDonald]

Zero Force Motor Improvements Since April 2017

Hi All --

I did a video last night on a few improvements to my Zero Force Motor. The motor is only
running on +24 volts of Lead Acid batteries so the RPM's are not over 3500 RPM in this video.
The new stronger Neo magnets do provide a lot more torque but they do reduce the RPM some.
I found that running my ZFM in the CCW direction I get more torque but around 500 RPM less
speed then the CW direction with slightly less torque then the CCW direction. I also found out
that depending on the type of timing magnet you use you will have to be careful of the North
South directions they are facing towards the front of the motor. The magnet type I used requires
one to be North facing forward and the other being South facing forward or the motor will not
run. The results are a high current draw that can damage the transistors. Make sure you hook up
a current meter to watch the current draw on your first power up of your ZFM build.

Enjoy the video!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfm5lFc3TI

-- James McDonald

[James McDonald]

Hi guys, this is Chad on RS's computer. I'm up at his shop for a few days.. We are working on all the projects for the museum. Right now I'm working on a hand crank generator. I'm looking for all the tricks in lowering Lenz drag in generator mode under load. My question here is, have you had a chance or the ability to manually spin up a ZFM using a drill, or any other prime mover...? I'm curious if the ZFM can generate voltage and current, and if so, does the load take off put resistance on the prime mover, and make it pull more current...? We understand that the ZFM is a bloch wall motor.. Is the ZFM also a BLOCH wall generator...??

Hi Chad --

I have hooked my Zero Force Motor up to a Capacitor Dump Circuit and the output spike from the Coils I measured was double the input voltage. At the time I did this experiment I was running my ZFM on one 12 volt battery and charging a second 12 volt battery through my capacitor dump circuit. The results were it was charging the battery but at the spike level it would take more then likely 2 weeks of running to charge a battery. You would be charging the run battery before the charge battery was even 10% charged. My Zero Force Motor board has timing LED's on it and when you spin the rotor and shaft with no battery hooked up the timing LED's do light up so long as the rotor is turning. My guess is at least 25 mili-amps is flowing through the un-powered ZFM board. As far as a BLOCH wall generator it would depend on how much current and voltage you are trying to generate. The LED's lighting up shows its generating voltage and current.

-- James

[RS_]

Hi guys, this is Chad on RS's computer. I'm up at his shop for a few days.. We are working on all the projects for the museum. Right now I'm working on a hand crank generator. I'm looking for all the tricks in lowering Lenz drag in generator mode under load. My question here is, have you had a chance or the ability to manually spin up a ZFM using a drill, or any other prime mover...? I'm curious if the ZFM can generate voltage and current, and if so, does the load take off put resistance on the prime mover, and make it pull more current...? We understand that the ZFM is a bloch wall motor.. Is the ZFM also a BLOCH wall generator...??

[Yaro1776]

Hey Richard thanks for the reply,

You will note that I stated "one of the primary goals" in my latest post. I have not published, to date, any information with respect to the efficiency for energy performance of the ZFM. The term "over unity" is not relevant to this machine since it is an "open system" design, and therefore, the term COP is applicable. An important point!

If any information is to be published on this type of energy efficiency, it will be done with solid information, data and other replicated efforts. This is the only way that I will approach it. So it is a moot point of discussion for the time being until all is thoroughly proofed and vetted. This is just good science and practice.

Be assured that once these power efficiency tests have been completed and proofed that the results will be published - be they good, bad or indifferent.

Sit back and enjoy the ride or better yet, become engaged,
Yaro

[Yaro1776]

ZFM with Water Pump

From the very beginning of this replication one of the primary goals was to demonstrate that the ZFM design concept is capable of performing work in the real world - in this instance pumping water. While the ZFM is a capable high RPM machine would it pump water? The overall torque of the YZFM has improved dramatically since the humble beginnings, but is it enough to drive a 4000 RPM pump, albeit that the pump speed is way low in comparison to the normal 10,000-12,000 RPM capabilities.

So to start, the ZFM is being asked to work outside of its normal operational zone, in reality the motor should have been outfitted with a speed reducing belt drive for best efficiency. Well all that was easily available was a 12 volt Harbor Freight utility pump, not a great performance fit, but workable. The ZFM shaft was modified nearly a year ago to accept this pump and recently the pump assembly was united with the ZFM.

Really the expectations were rather low for this test and no earth shattering performance was expected. So the performance figures are not anything great, but they are enough to show that the machine and pump assembly, albeit in a crude state will function and perform real work. That is the point here.

Basic performance data:
70 degree firing duration and 35-40 degree advance
24V at 2270 RPM with 2.16A and 2.3 GPM
36v at 2500 RPM with 2.82A and 3.0 GPM
48v at 3250 RPM and 3.38A and 3.4 GPM

The flow rates were relatively simple to calculate using a 5 gallon Lowes bucket and timing the fill to determine the true flow GPM (The Lowes bucket was filled to the brim and weighed for the capacity calc). The entire assembly was fairly sensitive to alignment and hose loading, but playing around with this gave relatively consistent results.

The highest amperage draw was observed at 48v with a 5 psig back pressure on the pump (using the ball valve to reduce the flow area) - this drove the amperage to 4.8 A and lowered the speed to 1535 RPM. For 36 volts the machine nearly stalled at about the same amperage. Both coils heated up rapidly - not ideal for the plastic housing.

So, while the performance was no better and less than a standard motor/pump assembly, though the ZFM was operated well outside of its speed range - well it did work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3fO-IQpPI8

This experiment then ends the YZFM replication project. On the horizon in late fall are the performance efficiency tests (COP) utilizing a Prony brake or similar method. Time for a hiatus for the last couple of months of summer. There are other ZFM fish to fry in the near future.

Thank you for your attention and encouragement,
Yaro

[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

[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

[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, 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,

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 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

[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.

[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

[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

[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.