Potential Difference National Research Council of Canada Report Final

POTENTIAL +/- DIFFERENCE Inc.

ReGenX Innovation Report
To the:

“From Discovery to Innovation”
Presented to: David Lisk / NRC
Prepared by: Thane Heins / PDI
Date: June 10, 2012

NRC – ReGenX Innovation Report
Preamble:

This document, prepared by PDI and delivered to the NRC, will show that the ReGenX
generator innovation reverses conventional generator armature reaction. The ReGenX
generator innovation accelerates the system under load rather than decelerating it as
per the conventional generator armature reaction paradigm. This paradigm shift will be
shown in both a Salient Pole Axial Flux Generator and an Induction Generator.

Introduction:

In electricity generation an electric generator is a device that converts mechanical
energy to an electromotive force. (1)

The induced voltage (called electromotive force or EMF) will create an electric current
through an external circuit connected to the coil terminals resulting in energy being
delivered to the load.

Thus, the kinetic energy that spins the source of the magnetic field is converted into
electricity.

Note that the current flowing through an external load
in turn creates a magnetic field that opposes the change in the flux of the coil,
so the coil opposes the motion (generator armature reaction).

The higher the current [flowing in the conventional generator coil (A)], the higher
the opposing force produced and the larger the force that must be applied to the
rotating magnetic field by the prime mover to keep it from slowing down. (2)

Conventional Generator Coil (A) Regenerative Acceleration Coil (B)

Low Impedance High Impedanc e
Low Frequency High Frequency
Inductor Operation Capacitor Operati on
Conducts current w/ Conducts current only at
100 % duty cycle TDC
Opposes magnetic rotor Delayed current flow
rotation 360 degrees Delays repelling magnetic
of current Sine wave. field production until TDC.

2|Page

Conventional Generator Operation (A)

When a “conventional” generator delivers power to a load, the load current causes the
generator to decelerate the prime mover. The greater the current magnitude the more
force (external energy) must be applied to the prime mover to keep the system from
decelerating.

Figure 1. Conventional Generator Torque Paradigm
In Figure 1 above the prime mover torque (Tt) rotates the generator in the
clockwise direction. The generator responds by creating a counter-
clockwise-torque (Tg) which opposes the torque supplied by the prime
mover.

PDI ReGenX Generator Innovation Operation (B)

The ReGenX generator innovation reverses the above scenario such that when the
ReGenX generator delivers power to a load the generator accelerates and assists the
prime mover rather than resisting it. The greater the current magnitude the less force
must be applied by the prime mover to keep the system from accelerating.

Figure 2. Regenerative Acceleration Torque Paradigm
In Figure 2 above the prime mover torque (Tt) rotates the generator in the
clockwise direction. The generator responds by also creating a clockwise-
torque (Tg) which assists to the torque supplied by the prime mover.

3|Page

Test Protocol 1. Universal Motor Prime Mover

(1) PDI will employ a conventional induction generator (A) and deliver electrical
current to a load to establish what minimum magnitude of current (0.2 Amps) is
required to cause system deceleration.

(2) PDI will introduce a conventional coil (A) into the ReGenX generator innovation
prototype and establish conventional generator coil (A) system deceleration with
1.4 Amps of load current (7 times the minimum load current required to induce
system deceleration).

(3) PDI will engage the ReGenX generator innovation coils (B) and establish system
acceleration with 1.57 Amps of load current – 685 % more load current than the
conventional generator in item (1).

(4) PDI will reconfigure the ReGenX generator innovation prototype with
Regenerative Acceleration Generator Coils (B) only and repeat item (3) and
deliver 2.2 Amps of current to the load with system acceleration and (1,000 %)
more load current than the minimum load current required to decelerate the
conventional generator system.

(5) PDI will configure the conventional induction generator to operate as a ReGenX
Induction Generator Innovation (B) and provide on-load system acceleration with
a load current of 0.3 Amps (50 % more than the minimum load current/system
deceleration required in the conventional generator baseline (A)).

4|Page

ReGenX Generator & Induction Generator Test Bench

ReGenX Generator

Universal Motor Prime Mover

Conventional Induction Generator

5|Page

Test Protocol 2. Induction Motor Prime Mover

(6) PDI will employ a pair of conventional coils (A) and a pair of ReGenX coils (B)
which are placed on two identical “I” cores. The two conventional coils (A) will
deliver AC power to the load while producing conventional generator system
deceleration (A) and the ReGenX coils (B) will be used to override the
conventional generator coils’ (A) deceleration while delivering increasing
amounts of power to the load with a decreasing amounts of prime mover input
power. PDI will highlight the slight IP limitation which led to the development of
the next ReGenX prototype and IP embodiment.

(7) PDI will employ an “E” core and place two ReGenX coils (B) on the centre core
leg and place the conventional coil (A) on the outer core. The conventional
generator coil (A) will deliver power to the load and will create conventional
generator (A) system deceleration. The ReGenX coils will be engaged and they
will do two things simultaneously. 1)They will accelerate the system while
reducing the input power required by the prime mover and 2) the discharging
magnetic flux from the ReGenX coils will be collected in the conventional coil’s
core and the total load output power will be increased accordingly (by about
15 %).

6|Page


TESTING PHASE PART 1

Test 1 Conventional Generator (A)

BASELINE CONVENTIONAL INDUCTION GENERATOR (A) (DECELERATION)
PERFORMANCE

Test 1 Demo Video: http://bit.ly/LM34Fd

Test notes:

(1)The conventional induction generator (A) had little or no deceleration effect on the
prime mover while delivering 0.19 Amps of current to the load at 4,073 RPM.

(2) With a load current increase to 0.22 Amps the conventional induction generator
(A) reduced the system speed from 4,246 RPM down to 4,169 RPM or a 1.8 %
drop in system speed.

Test 1 Conclusions:

A BASELINE load current of only 0.22 Amps is required to decelerate the system
prime mover by 1.8 % when a conventional induction generator (A) is employed.

7|Page


Test 2 Conventional Generator (A)

CONVENTIONAL COIL (A) IN ReGenX PROTOTYPE (DECELERATION)
PERFORMANCE

Test 2 Demo Video: http://bit.ly/KXQqaK

Test notes:

(3)The conventional coil (A) in the ReGenX prototype delivered 1.4 Amps of load
current and decelerated the system from 1,675 RPM (no-load) down to 1468 RPM
– a 12.4 % decrease in system speed.

(4)The prime mover input current increased from 3.61 Amps to 3.71 Amps in
response.(2.8 % prime mover input current increase).

Test 2 Conventional Coil (A) Conclusions:

The conventional coil (A) in the ReGenX prototype delivered 1.4 Amps of load current
and decelerated the system by 12.4 %.

Test 1 comparison - A BASELINE load current of 0.22 Amps is required to decelerate
the ReGenX prototype prime mover by 1.8 % in the conventional induction generator
(A).

Increasing the load current in the ReGenX prototype conventional coil (A) by 84 %
over the conventional induction generator (A) increases the deceleration by more
than 12 %.

8|Page


Test 2 ReGenX Generator (B)

Test 2 ReGenX COIL (B) OPERATION (ACCELERATION) PERFORMANCE

(5) Engaging the ReGenX coils (B) at a no-load speed of 1,659 RPM and delivering
1.57 Amps of load current accelerated the system up to 1,680 RPM (1.3 %
increase).

Test 2 Conclusions

The conventional generator coil (A) decelerated the system as expected while
delivering 1.4 Amps of current to the load.

The ReGenX generator coils (B) accelerated the system as expected while
delivering 1.6 Amps of current to the load.

A BASELINE load current of only 0.22 Amps is required to decelerate the
prototype prime mover by 1.8 % with the conventional induction generator (A).

Increasing the conventional generator (A) load current by 536 % (1.4 Amps) over
the baseline load current level (0.22 Amps) also increased the system
deceleration from 1.8 % to 12 %.

Increasing the ReGenX generator (B) load current by 685 % (1.6 Amps) over the
baseline load current (0.22 Amps) did not induce system deceleration but created
system acceleration instead.

Test 3 will show that further increasing the ReGenX coil (B) load current to
1,000 % (2.2 Amps) over the baseline (deceleration) load current ( 0.22 Amps) will
only induce increased system acceleration.

9|Page

Overall deduction:

Increasing the load current in the conventional generator (A) increases the system
deceleration (as predicted by conventional scientific wisdom) and requires an increase
in prime mover energy to supply the load power.

Increasing the load current in the ReGenX generator (B) innovation does not produce
system deceleration or require any increase in the prime mover energy to maintain load
power.

Test 3 ReGenX Generator (B)

ReGenX COILS (B) IN ReGenX PROTOTYPE (ACCELERATION) PERFORMANCE

Test 3 Demo Video http://bit.ly/LB8zvG

Test notes:

(6) Increasing the load current up to 2.2 Amps does not produce any adverse
(regenerative braking) conditions.

Test 3 ReGenX Coil (B) Conclusions:

Increasing the ReGenX coil (B) load current to 1,000 % over the baseline
conventional generator coil (A) (deceleration) load current will only induce
additional system acceleration and no conventional generator (A) armature
reaction (system deceleration).

10 | P a g e


Test 4 ReGenX Induction Generator (B)

ReGenX INDUCTION GENERATOR (B) (ACCELERATION) PERFORMANCE

Test 4 Demo Video: http://bit.ly/LriOR1

Test notes:

(7) The ReGenX Induction Generator (B) accelerates from 4,026 RPM to 5,900 RPM
(47% speed increase) while delivering 0.32 Amps of current to the load.

(8) Increasing the no-load speed by 3.7% to 4,176 RPM increases the load current
by 12% to 0.44 Amps while increasing system acceleration up to 6,313 RPM
(51%).

Test 4 ReGenX Coil (B) Conclusions:

The conventional induction generator (A) from Test 1 established a baseline load
current magnitude which decelerated the system with only 0.22 Amps of load current.

However increasing the load current in the ReGenX Induction Generator (B) innovation
by 45% accelerated the system by 47%.

Increasing the load current in the ReGenX Induction Generator (B) innovation by 100%
accelerated the system by 51%.

11 | P a g e


Graph 1.0 shows the magnitude of system deceleration or armature reaction in
the conventional generator (A) with a load current of 0.22 Amps and 1.4 Amps.

Graph 2.0 shows the system acceleration produced in the ReGenX generator (B)
innovations.

12 | P a g e

Conventional Generator Armature Reaction (A)

Note that in the conventional generator system (A) the current flowing through an
external load in turn creates a magnetic field so the coil opposes the motion of
the rotating magnetic field. The higher the current, (the higher the opposing
force) and the larger the force that must be applied to the rotating magnetic field
to keep it from slowing down.

ReGenX Generator Armature Reaction (B)

Note that in the ReGenX generator (B) innovation system the current flowing
through an external load in turn creates a delayed magnetic field so the coil
assists the motion of the rotating magnetic field. The higher the current, the
higher the assisting force and the lower the force that must be applied to the
rotating magnetic field to keep it from speeding up.

Part 1 Report Conclusions

The conventional induction generator (A) required a minimum load current of
only 0.22 Amps (baseline) to create system deceleration. Further increases in
load current above this baseline resulted in higher percentages of system
deceleration and increases in prime mover force would be required to sustain the
load power.

The ReGenX Generator (B) innovation did not produce any system deceleration
but produced system acceleration instead. Increasing the ReGenX generator’s
load current by 1,000 % over the conventional generator’s baseline still did not
produce any conventional generator system deceleration but increased system
acceleration and decreases in prime mover input would be required to reduce
system acceleration while delivering power to the load.

- End Part 1-

13 | P a g e


ADDENDUM PART 1

Universal Motor Speed-Torque Curve / Torque-Current Curve
Figure 2 shows the speed-torque curve and Figure 3 shows the torque-current curve.
The graphs show that, in the universal motor, the torque decreases when the rotation
speed increases and the torque increases when the current increases. (3)

14 | P a g e


15 | P a g e


Testing Phase Part 2

Test 5 “E” Core Concentric Coil ReGenX (B) Prototype IP
Iteration w/ Induction Motor Prime Mover and Magnetic Flux
Collection.

Test 5 Demo Video: http://bit.ly/LkUFd0

CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR COIL (A)

INDUCTION MOTOR PRIME
MOVER

AND ReGenX COIl (B)
ON AN “E” CORE

16 | P a g e

Test notes:

(9) The system was brought up to an initial no-load operating speed of 3126 RPM.

(10) The conventional coil (A) was engaged and produced 8.13 Watts to the load
while inducing conventional generator armature reaction and system
deceleration.

(11) The ReGenX coil (B) was engaged and the ReGenX coils’ (B) discharging flux
output was collected in the conventional coil’s (A) concentric core and the load
power increased instantly from 6.6 Watts load output from the
conventional coil (A) to 9.43 Watts. This represents a 43% load power
increase with system acceleration.

(12) ReGenX generator (B) output power continues to increase to 11.4 Watts.

(13) When the ReGenX coils (B) are disengaged the load power drops instantly to
8.59 Watts (a 24.6 % drop).

(14) At maximum RPM the ReGenX generator (B) delivers 13.4 Watts at 3300 RPM
with minimum stator current and minimum motor supplied torque.

(15) The conventional coil (A) delivers 0.017 Watts with maximum motor stator
current and maximum motor torque being supplied to the drive shaft.

The ReGenX generator (B) delivered
78,724 % more power to the same load
with less prime over input power and less drive
shaft torque than the conventional generator.

17 | P a g e


Graph 3.0 Comparison between ReGenX generator (B) output and conventional
generator (A) output.

ReGenX generator (B) performance advantage over conventional generator (A)
= 78, 724 %.

18 | P a g e

Test 5 Conclusions:

The conventional generator coil (A) delivered power to the load and decelerated the
system as expected. The induction motor prime mover self regulated the stator current
and responded by increasing the drive shaft torque to its maximum level possible.

Graph 4.0 Induction Motor Prime Mover Drive Shaft Torque Response with
Conventional Generator (A) Loading.

19 | P a g e

The ReGenX generator (B) delivered over 78,000 % more power to the same load but
required the minimum induction motor stator current and minimum motor supplied drive
shaft torque.

Graph 5.0 Induction Motor Prime Mover Drive Shaft Torque Response with
ReGenX Generator (B) Loading.

20 | P a g e


Test 6 “I” Core / Coil ReGenX Prototype IP Iteration w/
Induction Motor Prime Mover.

Test 6 Demo Video: http://bit.ly/MAJEUf

Test Notes:

(16) The conventional generator coil (A) produced a load current 0f 0.763
Amps with system deceleration and increased induction motor current draw.

(17) The ReGenX coil (B) and conventional coil (A) delivered 0.6 Amps to the load
with system acceleration and a decrease in prime mover input current.

21 | P a g e

(18) The ReGenX generator (B) delivered a maximum load current of 0.63 Amps
with the minimum input current to the induction generator and minimum drive
shaft torque.

(19) The conventional generator coil delivered a maximum load current of 0.23
Amps with the maximum input current to the induction generator and maximum
drive shaft torque.

Graph 6.0 Test 6 Conventional Generator (A) Load Current / Prime Mover Torque
vs the ReGenX Generator (B) Load Current / Prime Mover Supplied Torque.

22 | P a g e

Induction Motor Torque Speed Characteristics

Graph 7.0 Induction Motor Torque Speed Characteristics (4)

From the graph above we can see that the ideal operating region for an induction
motor is at 80 % of synchronous speed or 2880 RPM. Above 2880 RPM the torque
supplied by the induction motor is tending towards 0.0 Nm at synchronous speed
of 3600 RPM.

23 | P a g e

PDI operated the ReGenX generator (B) above the 2880 RPM mark where
increased system speed resulted in decreased induction motor supplied torque
while ReGenX supplied power increased.

The conventional generator coil (A) however took advantage of the induction
motors increasing torque magnitude at 2880 RPM but this still was not enough to
overcome the load current and supply a steady state power to the load.

Report Conclusions

Conventional scientific wisd
om states that, “electric generators must create resistive forces when converting
kinetic energy to electrical energy” and as a result additional input energy must
be supplied to the system above and beyond the original energy required to
establish a no-load steady state operating speed.

PDI’s ReGenX technology proves that, “electric generators can indeed create
assistive forces when converting kinetic energy to electrical energy” and as a
result - a reduction in input energy can be realized, reducing the input energy
required to below the no-load steady state energy requirements.

- End Report -

References:
(1) Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_generator
(2) LAZAR’S Generator Guide - http://www.generatorguide.net/
(3) Analysis of Characteristics of a Universal Motor http://www.jmag-
international.com/catalog/95_UniversalMotor_Characteristics.html
(4) Polyphase Induction Motor Basics http://cnx.org/content/m28334/latest/

24 | P a g e

Potential Difference National Research Council of Canada Report Final

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Potential Difference National Research Council of Canada Report Final

Similar to Potential Difference National Research Council of Canada Report Final (20)

More from Thane Heins

More from Thane Heins (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Potential Difference National Research Council of Canada Report Final