Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Silly Electric motor improvement

C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Children generally suggest all sorts of things because education has not
taught them that the toys they play with can't possibly work. Ever seen the
"Nutcracker"?

My silly electric motor inspiration is not exactly childish it is that the
force between conductors carrying current is the motor force (not
electro-magnets) and that this force is bigger for a fixed distance if a
ferrite is placed between them so we don't need that heavy yoke just a thin
layer of ferrite embedding the conductors in the armature facing the stator
and in the stator conductors too. There is no need for any other heavy
metal, magnetic circuits or stuff like that. This will make motors lighter
and more effecient because of the removal of lossy iron.

Get up to date you motorists!

Chris.
 
M

Mungo \Two Sheds\ Toadfoot

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
Children generally suggest all sorts of things because education has
not taught them that the toys they play with can't possibly work. Ever
seen the "Nutcracker"?

My silly electric motor inspiration is not exactly childish it is
that the force between conductors carrying current is the motor force
(not electro-magnets) and that this force is bigger for a fixed
distance if a ferrite is placed between them so we don't need that
heavy yoke just a thin layer of ferrite embedding the conductors in
the armature facing the stator and in the stator conductors too.
There is no need for any other heavy metal, magnetic circuits or
stuff like that. This will make motors lighter and more effecient
because of the removal of lossy iron.

Genius!

[Aside........"Eh?"]

Si
 
M

Mark Fergerson

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
Children generally suggest all sorts of things because education has not
taught them that the toys they play with can't possibly work. Ever seen the
"Nutcracker"?

My silly electric motor inspiration is not exactly childish it is that the
force between conductors carrying current is the motor force (not
electro-magnets) and that this force is bigger for a fixed distance if a
ferrite is placed between them so we don't need that heavy yoke just a thin
layer of ferrite embedding the conductors in the armature facing the stator
and in the stator conductors too. There is no need for any other heavy
metal, magnetic circuits or stuff like that. This will make motors lighter
and more effecient because of the removal of lossy iron.

Ferrites are brittle, lousy heat conductors, and more expensive than
the materials you propose to replace them with.


Mark L. Fergerson
 
S

Stuart Gray

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark Fergerson said:
Ferrites are brittle, lousy heat conductors, and more expensive than the
materials you propose to replace them with.

In which case, the idea will be adopted by the major car manufacturers
forthwith. ;-)
 
P

PC Paul

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
Ferrites are brittle, lousy heat conductors, and more expensive than
the materials you propose to replace them with.

If I read him right, he's only suggesting a thin layer of ferrite to reduce
the gap between the stator and rotor hence increasing the force. None of
your points actually affect that aspect at all.

However, the idea that electric motors are not *already* made with the
tightest reliable tolerance available strikes me as pretty unlikely...
 
S

Sjouke Burry

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
Children generally suggest all sorts of things because education has not
taught them that the toys they play with can't possibly work. Ever seen the
"Nutcracker"?

My silly electric motor inspiration is not exactly childish it is that the
force between conductors carrying current is the motor force (not
electro-magnets) and that this force is bigger for a fixed distance if a
ferrite is placed between them so we don't need that heavy yoke just a thin
layer of ferrite embedding the conductors in the armature facing the stator
and in the stator conductors too. There is no need for any other heavy
metal, magnetic circuits or stuff like that. This will make motors lighter
and more effecient because of the removal of lossy iron.

Get up to date you motorists!

Chris.
Sorry dude, sombody else has already invented the ironless
rotor motor, either as a printed disk rotor or as a cage
rotor(looks like a cup,made of copper and glue only).
They are used for very high speed low enertia applications.
The disk rotor for exsample is at full speed in about
10 milliseconds, and an ideal component in servomotor
applications.
 
C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
If I read him right, he's only suggesting a thin layer of ferrite to
reduce the gap between the stator and rotor hence increasing the force.
None of your points actually affect that aspect at all.

However, the idea that electric motors are not *already* made with the
tightest reliable tolerance available strikes me as pretty unlikely...
The thin ferrite layer is to replace all the iron, there is no need for it.
Think like a capacitor the dielectric is only between the plates. The
ferrite only needs to be between the two layers of conductors and to embed
the conductors in it.
 
C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Sorry dude, sombody else has already invented the ironless
rotor motor, either as a printed disk rotor or as a cage
rotor(looks like a cup,made of copper and glue only).
They are used for very high speed low enertia applications.
The disk rotor for exsample is at full speed in about
10 milliseconds, and an ideal component in servomotor
applications.

That is not a suprise we all make iron less motors at school in the 2 grade.
Like everyone else I've made dozens of them.

The very simple cage motor is also well known and I really fail to see why
such complicated windings are used. This type with ferrite used as
described would make a very cheap, light motor.

The actual invention is the use of ferrite (not new) and its distribution
only between the two layers of conductors and embeding the conductors in it.
(I've not seen this anywhere).

Chris.
 
S

shazzbat

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
That is not a suprise we all make iron less motors at school in the 2
grade. Like everyone else I've made dozens of them.

The very simple cage motor is also well known and I really fail to see why
such complicated windings are used. This type with ferrite used as
described would make a very cheap, light motor.

The actual invention is the use of ferrite (not new) and its distribution
only between the two layers of conductors and embeding the conductors in
it. (I've not seen this anywhere).

All you need to do now is make one, prove it works, patent it worldwide, get
manufacturing licences sorted out, and retire to Bermuda. No problem.

Steve.
 
S

St. John Smythe

Jan 1, 1970
0
shazzbat said:
All you need to do now is make one, prove it works, patent it worldwide, get
manufacturing licences sorted out, and retire to Bermuda. No problem.

Contrary to popular folklore, in the U.S., at least, you don't even need
to make one (the requirement for a working model went away decades ago);
you need only to convince a patent examiner that it will work.
 
J

Jasen Betts

Jan 1, 1970
0
["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.]
That is not a suprise we all make iron less motors at school in the 2 grade.
Like everyone else I've made dozens of them.

The very simple cage motor is also well known and I really fail to see why
such complicated windings are used. This type with ferrite used as
described would make a very cheap, light motor.

The actual invention is the use of ferrite (not new) and its distribution
only between the two layers of conductors and embeding the conductors in it.
(I've not seen this anywhere).

In conventional motors the magnetic material is behind the conductors.
the large mass of iron is needed to carry the amount of magnetic field
produced by the high currents in the rotor.

if you put an unbroken layer of ferrite in front of the conductors
it will shield them from the magnetic filed on the other side of
the ferrite, this will make the motor less efficient.
 
C

CWatters

Jan 1, 1970
0
St. John Smythe said:
Contrary to popular folklore, in the U.S., at least, you don't even need
to make one (the requirement for a working model went away decades ago);
you need only to convince a patent examiner that it will work.

Way too late as Google will tell you.....

See (for example)...

http://www.thingap.com/
Quote: ThinGap's modern electromotive coil technology establishes a power
standard for DC brush and brushless motors, generators, and actuators. The
modern coreless circular copper coil increases copper density in the
magnetic gap. This coil eliminates problems inherent in iron core and wire
wound motors.

Photo
http://www.thingap.com/images/ThinGapCoil13.jpg
 
D

default

Jan 1, 1970
0
The thin ferrite layer is to replace all the iron, there is no need for it.
Think like a capacitor the dielectric is only between the plates. The
ferrite only needs to be between the two layers of conductors and to embed
the conductors in it.

There are probably some use for ferrite in the "ironless" rotors to
improve their efficiency, but what you are suggesting is probably not
going to work (with currently available metal alloys and processing
techniques). Ferrites have lower permeability than iron.

For high efficiency the magnetic circuit has to be as short as
possible. To carry the same magnetic field would take more ferrite
material than iron in the same application. The obvious choice would
be to use more ferrite, but then the windings have to cover more area
and copper losses, size, weight, and expense go up.
 
C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
For high efficiency the magnetic circuit has to be as short as
possible. To carry the same magnetic field would take more ferrite
material than iron in the same application. The obvious choice would
be to use more ferrite, but then the windings have to cover more area
and copper losses, size, weight, and expense go up.

There is no need for the magnetic circuit as the magnetic field does not
exist, it is a ficticious field that is the consequence of special
relativity and electrons moving relative to fixed charges in the conductors
and in other conductors.

The concept of the magnetic field is false. Chuck it in the bin.

There are different ferrites and by using a smaller amount of high
permeabilty material then you have a lighter motor. You can use Barium
Titanate as it is a high permittivity material and that also improves the
force over a vaccuum. There is a numerical conversion between the
permaabilty and permittivity it is just related by a constant multiplier. I
think it is c.

Chris.
 
C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
In conventional motors the magnetic material is behind the conductors.
the large mass of iron is needed to carry the amount of magnetic field
produced by the high currents in the rotor.

if you put an unbroken layer of ferrite in front of the conductors
it will shield them from the magnetic filed on the other side of
the ferrite, this will make the motor less efficient.

The iron "behind" the conductors only wastes energy in edy currents it has
no efect on the force. If you recall electric motor design the conductors
are in slots and the force is on the conductors in the slots. The force is
only increased by the high permeability between the concutor layers. All the
rest does not do anything.

I'm just working out a patent application (sorry you too late - you've
published it!)

Chris.
 
D

Don Stauffer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
The thin ferrite layer is to replace all the iron, there is no need for it.
Think like a capacitor the dielectric is only between the plates. The
ferrite only needs to be between the two layers of conductors and to embed
the conductors in it.
There must be some hysteresis loss in the ferrite. Is the mass of the
ferrite enough to keep it from being damaged by the heat? Most of the
ferrites I am familiar with are somewhat lossy.
 
S

Steve Firth

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don said:
There must be some hysteresis loss in the ferrite. Is the mass of the
ferrite enough to keep it from being damaged by the heat? Most of the
ferrites I am familiar with are somewhat lossy.

And that is why soft iron is used instead of ferrite.
 
K

Karl Uppiano

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chris said:
The iron "behind" the conductors only wastes energy in edy currents it has
no efect on the force. If you recall electric motor design the conductors
are in slots and the force is on the conductors in the slots. The force
is only increased by the high permeability between the concutor layers.
All the rest does not do anything.

I'm just working out a patent application (sorry you too late - you've
published it!)

If you are right, you will be credited with revolutionizing the power and
energy industries, and may finally free us from dependence on foreign oil. I
would be surprised if experienced magnetics engineers haven't already
optimized their designs, but you could prove me wrong.
 
C

Chris

Jan 1, 1970
0
I have very little knowledge of the hystresis loss of ferrite but there are
several ferrites but the hysteresis loss could well be a problem. I only
thought of the eddy currents. Another material is dust soft iron embeded in
a resin matrix. However the principle of only putting the high permeablity
material between the layers conductors and embed them in it is the only
relevent point.

Chris.
 
J

Jasen Betts

Jan 1, 1970
0
["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.]
There is no need for the magnetic circuit as the magnetic field does not
exist, it is a ficticious field that is the consequence of special
relativity and electrons moving relative to fixed charges in the conductors
and in other conductors.

QM says otherwise
The concept of the magnetic field is false. Chuck it in the bin.

what do you intend to replace it with,

hopefully whatever you replace it with can explain the operation of a
solenoid, if not it has little chance of being useful in motor design.

Bye.
Jasen
 
Top