From: <hvanesce@comcast.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <158ddfd1f0b-5980-42e@webprd-a47.mail.aol.com> <584AC31C.20803@posteo.de> <584EAB0D.4060004@posteo.de> <58555BA2.7050709@posteo.de> <1482320831911.81165@kuleuven.be> <b6ace890-c740-d217-6b34-88a41a3caaef@mollies.freeserve.co.uk> <CAA8k23SGbMn00LVywPELaJgz6=gPWmcv4kPU75s=bxqTNAFe3Q@mail.gmail.com> <5e649652-3dd6-e453-0b61-fd50939484cf@mollies.freeserve.co.uk> <1097D2C4-95FD-4FE2-A47C-32F2EE261EAB@gmail.com> <CAMFjj73xGimmwUX-L=OPKM=hiqfAk-UvZx=qStPOeBogJXTGJw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMFjj73xGimmwUX-L=OPKM=hiqfAk-UvZx=qStPOeBogJXTGJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 13:49:49 -0500
Message-ID: <030d01d25bbb$02c9d780$085d8680$@comcast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Thread-Index: AQHG3MFEo/oYDIYXYNZeoi44w4DdiQK+PtNRAIyoNXECAZg3ewG5PTzpAjwScKYA72GRFALY1nLZAb4i4XsCAdRXQaCjaQsQ
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: =?utf-8?Q?RE:_Re:_LF:_Re:_LF:_Re:_LF:_ULF_?=
	=?utf-8?Q?experiment:_A_MEchanical_Based_A?=
	=?utf-8?Q?ntenna=E2=80=8B?=
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Status: O

Warren,

Thanks for those comments. I have often wondered about the mechanical limits. I had to carefully enclose the neodymium in a high-shear-strength case to overcome the shear-strength limit of the neodymium, and even though the shear strength of the best-choice case material still greatly limited ERP, I always felt that operational aging of the interface between the neodymium and the case (very difficult to model) would be a more critical limit on ERP (in the context of avoiding the electromagnetic power to kinetic power transition). I had no idea what to expect of bearings and have always wondered about that; your comments are quite interesting.

73,

Jim     

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Warren Ziegler
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 11:34 AM
To: rsgb_lf_group
Subject: LF: Re: LF: Re: LF: Re: LF: ULF experiment: A MEchanical Based Antenna​

Hi John,

  I went to the M.I.T. library and made copies of Alexanderson's original papers and did some other research beyond that. The Alexanderson alternators were good up to about 20kHz, they achieved higher frequencies by feeding the output of the alternator into a saturated reactor which generated harmonics, they then filtered out the harmonic that they wanted and fed it to the antenna. Not sure but the antennas were of such high Q that additional filtering might not have been necessary. They would indeed fly apart if they tried to generate a 100kHz fundamental directly from the alternator!

About 15 years ago, I led a group trying to make high-speed energy storage flywheels, they rotated about 45,000 rpm. Initial attempts to use mechanical bearings mounted in  a springy steel housing were a failure, magnetic bearings (with a dsp based controller) were absolutely necessary to get through the various mechanical resonances.

I made a trip to see British Nuclear Fuels in the U.K.,  they did make a technically  successful high speed energy storage flywheel, but it flopped commercially since it was too expensive to make for the intended markets.

A group of Aero engineers at M.I.T. tried to make microturbines with dime sized rotors etched out of silicon or silicon carbide, they hope was to have a small power generation source that would operate from a gaseous fuel and replace batteries. The M.I.T. turbines would spin at over 100,000 rpm and generate A.C. (R.F.) at 3 to  4 MHz!  I met with Alan Epstein  and his group at M.I.T. back in the early 2000's  he detailed some of the problems they were having. I believe the project was ultimately abandoned.


73 Warren

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:41 AM, John Rabson <john.rabson07@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexanderson generators were built for frequencies up to 100 kHz and did not display a tendency to fly apart. For background information on the 17.2 kHz installation see CREGJ 96.
>
> John F5VLF
>
>> On 21 Dec 2016, at 13:54, Martin Evans <books@mollies.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Ah yes- of course Andy.
>>
>> Better stand well back when I try it then!
>>
>> Martin  GW3UCJ.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> 8000 * 60  = 480000 RPM
>>>
>>> 'jnt
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21 December 2016 at 12:42, Martin Evans <books@mollies.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> Forgive me for asking what may be quite obvious to many - but does this mean that if I spun a magnet at 8000rpm then I would generate a 8kHz radio signal, identical in every way to an 8kHz signal generated in a more conventional manner?
>>>
>>> If so, it sounds a lot easier than winding all that wire.....until the magnet flew apart anyway!
>>>
>>> Martin  GW3UCJ  Swansea.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ever heard of a "A MEchanical Based Antenna" ?
>>>>
>>>> Me neither until today ;-)
>>>>
>>>> 73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> john.rabson07@gmail.com
>
> Researching history of RABSON, BLACKSHAW, GAUNTLETT, VERLANDER and 
> ROBSONNE
>
>
>
>
>


--
73 Warren K2ORS
                WD2XGJ
                WD2XSH/23
                WE2XEB/2
                WE2XGR/1