--- On Mon, 2/1/10, fznidar...@aol.com <fznidar...@aol.com> wrote:
> From: fznidar...@aol.com <fznidar...@aol.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn's official Jan. 30th video
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 7:11 PM
>
>
>
>
>
> I smell a scam. Compute compute Eye
> Kearumba. The one way to
> prove over unity is to get rid of the battery.
> Replace the battery with a
> capacitor to supply a few seconds of storage if necessary
> and close the
> loop.
>
>
> Frank Z
My associate commented that the so called "reactionless" force whereby back
emf and lenz law applies; in industrial motors of the shunt variety type;
whereby the (field)part that does not rotate; but causes the rotation of the
external part as a motor principle to occur, there is a somewhat hidden
complexity. AC motors have numerous varieties of operation, of which I am not
proficient or remembering well of, but it seems simple to understand that the
operational agreement of the field and the armature to produce rotation
produces branches of current from the source for their independent operation,
one branch of current for the field, and the other more operational moving
part, which if I understand correctly can be the majority of current directed
to that part.
So the field and the armature which is moving, forgive me if the names are
wrong in descriptions; but they can be wired two ways, either in parallel or in
series, a seeming common sense thing where the parallel arrangement is called a
shunt winding.
Now my engineer friend who saw this ORBO video thing, stopped the video at a
certain point to speak about this so called riddle, which may not be such a
riddle at all.
There is a kind of DC motor using an AC input that uses a stationary field,
but the armature that rotates is SHUNTED by the field, or parallel to it. The
part that rotates consumes more amperage when load is added, exactly as
predicted. But the field which a part of the reaction force between them does
not vary in amperage on the shunt model, as does its counterpart field armature
series arrangement.
The very idea of having the field and armature currents in series means that if
a change happens on one side, it is ballasted by that reduction. This also
might be misinterpreted by analysying separate parts, and not the whole
totality of action. However twisting interpretations then it does seem somewhat
remarkable that in the shunted field motor case, its field amperage demand may
only be 2A, but the rotating part may be using 30 3phase A, and thus no back
emf or change is happening on the field itself, exactly as ORBO claims. Thus my
engineer friend says those folks must be a scam or something.CERTAIN MOTORS
EXHIBITING THESE EFFECTS HAVE BEEN KNOWN FOR YEARS. But he still has
reservations about this so called reactionless effect. No insulated silicone
layers are used in the motor he describes as A DC one, so I write him for
clarifications.
Sincerely
Harvey D Norris
>
>
