The Marinov Generator1

The Marinov Generator
Cyril Smith, May 2009

1. Introduction
The late Stephan Marinov experimented with a form of electric motor that he bizarrely called
Siberian Coliu. This motor has been discussed by Wesley and Phipps who used the more
explicit term Marinov Motor. Essentially the motor consists of an electrically conductive
ring rotor that rotates about its major axis, like a classical slip-ring. Two brushes make
contact at diametrically opposite positions, and current is passed through them so that the
current splits and flows in opposite circumferential directions around each half of the ring.
The ring is placed within a large ring
magnet, i.e. a toroid ring-core that is
permanently magnetized. In the
perfect case no B field exists outside
the toroid core, so the slip-ring sees
only an A field. Marinov claimed
that the slip-ring developed a torque
that produced rotation, thus
demonstrating a form of longitudinal
induction from charge movement
through an A field, something which
classical electrodynamics doesnt
recognize. However the torque is so
tiny that his experiments used a
conductive liquid within a circular
channel, where he noted only slight
movement of the liquid. Other
experimenters have used either a
suspended conductor, or a suspended
magnet, to attempt to exhibit the
torque. None of these experiments
have proved conclusive, with some
unable to measure any torque while
others claim that what little torque
Figure 1. Marinov Motor taken from Phipps
was measured could be explained by
the presence of a leakage B field.
Wesley and Phipps attribute the torque to the presence of an electric field given by the
A
involving the
convective term E = ( v ) A , which appears if the usual expression E =
t
dA
partial time differential of the A field is replaced by the total differential E =
. Thus for
dt
an A field that is fixed in time but varying in space, where the partial differentiation yields
zero E, a moving charge will still see a time variation in A due to its movement through
space, and that produces the convective E term, which includes longitudinal induction (i.e.
along the conductive path). However neither author make clear how a longitudinal force on a
moving conduction electron can then manifest as a longitudinal force on the lattice ions. In
my opinion such a force merely creates a potential difference across the ends of the
conductor, so the presence of that force would merely cause the currents in the two halves of
the rotor to be of unequal amplitude. It is possible that lack of conclusive evidence of torque
is because there is none generated on the lattice, that the E = ( v ) A term is valid but
would only be evidenced by the unequal currents, and there doesnt appear to be any
experiments to validate that claim.
Although the Marinov Motor has been the subject of considerable attention, there is no
evidence that the same can be said of the generator version. In the Marinov Generator the
slip-ring is driven mechanically and a DC voltage occurs across the brushes. The only
evidence to be found on experiments of this configuration is the Distinti Paradox2 which uses
open magnets, hence the A field has curl and there is a B field present. In this experiment the
slip-ring is held stationary, while the magnets plus brushes are rotated. Because the DC
voltage across the moving brushes is now located in a rotating frame, it requires two more
brushes to get that voltage out into the stationary frame. Clearly the device produces DC, and
although there is a B field present, that voltage cannot be explained by the usual E = v B
induction. It can be explained by the E = ( v ) A term, but Distinti prefers to invent his
New Electronics to explain the anomaly.
To provide more evidence on the Marinov Generator, with the help of a slip-ring
manufacturer I performed some tests using stationary magnets against a rotating slip-ring.
That experiment is the subject of this report.
2. The Experiment
BGB Engineering Ltd., a manufacturer of slip-rings and brushes located in Grantham,
Lincolnshire, UK, kindly gave me access to their slip-ring test machine. This drives slip-rings
at pre-set rotation speeds so that electrical conductivity and noise measurements can be made.
BGB mounted one of their standard 100mm diameter double slip-ring assemblies on the
Figure 2. Slip-ring Test Machine

machine, along with diametrically opposing brush connections to one of the rings. The set-up
is seen in Figure 3 which includes two NdFeB disc magnets mounted close to the brushes..
The large grey object is a protective cover to prevent injury from the moving mounting studs
that would otherwise be present there.
Figure 3. Showing the brushes and Magnets

In the initial experiment no magnets were present, the device was run up to speed to
demonstrate that no stray voltage was present across the brushes. Voltage and current
measurements were performed using an industrial Megger type M8037. Then a single
NdFeB magnet (25mm diameter and 7mm thick) was placed close to the slip-ring surface and
moved to various locations around the slip-ring as shown in Figure 4.
Zero voltage with
magnet here
Maximum voltage
with magnet here
N
Maximum reverse
voltage with magnet
here
N
Figure 4. Initial experiments with different magnet positions

DC voltage was observed, having a maximum value when the magnet was closest to one
brush (the brush assembly prevented the magnet from being positioned directly over the
brushes). As the magnet was moved around the circumference the voltage dropped, reaching a
zero value at the mid point, then rising in the opposite polarity to again reach a maximum
close to the opposite brush. At any point the voltage could be reversed by flipping the magnet
orientation.
The system was then reassembled having magnets clamped at their closest point to each
brush, as shown in Figure 5.
Rotation
Magnets
Copper Rings
Steel back plate
Insulation
Clamp screw
Glass-fibre polyester
Drive Shaft
Figure 5. Showing complete assembly with magnets

Figure 5 shows two magnets clamped at each brush location. Some tests were also conducted
with just one magnet at each brush.
3. Test Results
Voltage measurements were taken at four set rotation speeds, 300, 500, 800 and 1000 RPM,
with the results given in Table 1.
Rotation Speed
300 RPM
500 RPM
800 RPM
1000 RPM
Table 1. Test results

1 magnet per brush
0.94 mV DC
1.55 mV DC
2.47 mV DC
3.30 mV DC
2 magnets per brush

0.96 mV DC
1.60 mV DC
2.55 mV DC
3.16 mV DC
With two magnets per brush as in Figure 5, and at 1000 RPM, the Megger was switched to
measure short circuit current. This was performed with two different types of brush, copperloaded or silver-loaded. The silver-loaded brushes gave 1.47mA while the copper-loaded
brushes gave 1.43mA. All measurements were witnessed by Mark Chappel and Chris
Richards from BGB Engineering Ltd.
4. Discussion
Clearly the experiment demonstrated a form of DC induction. Because of the set-up it was
not possible to perform tests using a closed magnetic circuit where the slip ring would rotate
in a zero B field, hence this is not absolute proof of the E = ( v ) A induction. The slip
ring had significant radial thickness of several mm hence could endure the classical
E = v B radial homopolar induction. The presence of that radial component would create
eddy currents within the ring, as depicted in exaggerated form in Figure 6, so the measured
DC voltage could come from IR voltage drop along the outer surface.
Zero radial E here
S
Maximum radial E
near the magnets
Figure 6 Possible Eddy Current Loops

However because of the high conductivity of the copper, this explanation is considered
unlikely. Also FEMM simulations of the magnetic field close to the brushes indicates that in
the case for one magnet at each brush location (Figure 7) the field lines tend to enter the ring
radially, which is the wrong orientation for radial induction.
Steel Back-plate
Magnet
Slip-ring Cross section
Brush
Figure 7. Magnetic Field at brush location
Also for two magnets at each brush (Figure 8) the slip-ring cross section tended to be close to
a magnetic null, hence the radial induction would be small.
Steel back-plate
Magnet
Slip-ring Cross Section
Brush
Magnet
Figure 8. Magnetic Field at brush location

Further evidence that the measured results likely come from the E = ( v ) A induction
appears from simulations of the A field and evaluation of that induction. An Excel program
was written which models the disc magnets by their equivalent current loops, calculates the A
field at 1 degree increments around the slip-ring then evaluates the induced voltage. This
yielded results in complete agreement with the measurements, Figure 9.
3.5
3
measured
calculated
2.5
mV
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
RPM
Figure 9. Comparison of measured and calculated results.
5. Conclusion
A generator version of the Marinov Motor has been found to exhibit longitudinal induction
which agrees with calculations using the convective term E = ( v ) A . This form of
induction is not recognized by classical electromagnetic theory, and offers new possibilities in
the search for alternative forms of energy production.
Acknowledgement.
The help and assistance given by BGB Engineering Ltd is gratefully acknowledged.

The Marinov Generator1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Marinov Generator1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Marinov Generator1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Marinov Generator

Cyril Smith, May 2009

Figure 2. Slip-ring Test Machine

Figure 3. Showing the brushes and Magnets

Figure 4. Initial experiments with different magnet positions

Steel back plate

Figure 5. Showing complete assembly with magnets

Table 1. Test results

2 magnets per brush

Figure 6 Possible Eddy Current Loops

Figure 7. Magnetic Field at brush location

Figure 8. Magnetic Field at brush location

Figure 9. Comparison of measured and calculated results.

You might also like