Discover ORBO: The Revolutionary No-Drag Motor by Steorn

  • Thread starter Thread starter Skyhunter
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the ORBO motor developed by Steorn, which claims to eliminate drag from counter electromotive force (EMF). Participants explore the nature of the motor, its experimental validation, and the implications of its design, with a focus on its classification as a pulse motor rather than a permanent magnet motor.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the ORBO motor is not a permanent magnet motor but rather resembles a pulse motor.
  • There are claims that Steorn's experiments demonstrate the elimination of drag from counter EMF, with a final experiment expected to be revealed.
  • One participant suggests that the motors may be performing negligible work, which could lead to negligible back EMF, questioning the effectiveness of the design.
  • Concerns are raised about the credibility of Steorn, with speculation about whether the company is misleading or simply lacks understanding of the underlying physics.
  • A participant mentions the possibility of replicating Steorn's work with improved explanations of the results, indicating ongoing experimental interest.
  • There is a suggestion that the topic may not require further discussion in the Science and Debates section, as it can be tested and results published.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some supporting the experimental claims of Steorn while others are skeptical about the validity and effectiveness of the motor. No consensus is reached regarding the credibility of the claims or the nature of the experiments.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in the experiments, including concerns about negligible coupling, inertia, and load, which may affect the outcomes. There is also uncertainty regarding the motivations and understanding of the individuals behind Steorn.

Skyhunter
This is not a permanent magnet motor. It is more like a pulse motor

Their site has a number of experiments to demonstrate that they have eliminated the drag from counter EMF. The final experiment will be shown today.

Chttp://www.steorn.com/"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S5nae_I_Mus&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S5nae_I_Mus&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Thanks. link fixed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Skyhunter said:
"[URL
Check it out.[/URL]

Might need to clear your past buffer. Don't think that's the link you wanted for ORBO. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skyhunter said:
This is not a permanent magnet motor. It is more like a pulse motor

Their site has a number of experiments to demonstrate that they have eliminated the drag from counter EMF. The final experiment will be shown today.

You should look over this series of experiements replicating Steorn's work, but with better explanations of the results:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF0PdJn984s​
 
Is the Steorn crackpottery a banned topic?
 
it looks to me like their motors are doing negligible work, anyway, which would translate into negligible back EMF, no? sure, make everything slicker 'n shinola and very light with PTFE, keep most of your magnetic flux in the center of that toroid so that it's really not well-coupled, and then act all surprised that you can't see anything. negligible coupling, negligible inertia, and negligible load = failed experiment.

thing is, you never know if these guys are really con men, or just stupid/unedumacated. used to be, they would fool themselves because they didn't understand something like how to computer RMS, or the limits of their instrumentation. maybe when someone does a coherent writeup of why this thing is a failure, you won't see much of it anymore, either.
 
There is no need to address this in S&D because it can easily be tested and the results published.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 180 ·
7
Replies
180
Views
22K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
19K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
9K