Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[cub3]

  Children, children, children... and you guys talk about Al's childish video then start a little pissing match all of your own.  Come on  guys, finish up here and get back to something productive.   

znel, My apologies, surely you meant Girls, girls, girls........... all this hair pulling, scratching and bit*h slapping has to stop.
Real MEN would take it outside, as was suggested earlier.

Den

[plengo]

I cant believe I waisted my time reading 20 last posts thinking I will learn something new. I really wish this nonsence stuff would be OUT OF THIS FORUM.

Can we just keep the science here and move on? There are other threads for discussion such as emotionals, non-scientific, waistfull and simple stupid.

Fausto.

[supersam]

@at all,

shuttinup, shuttinup! just keep up the good work.

lol
sam

[Bruce_TPU]

Hi Bill,

Good to know our bearings work, since we have the identical ones.  I agree that this is the first thing we change.  Super precision run about $6.00 each.  I think perhaps super precision, stainless steel, eh?

Which magnets have you got for the rotor?  Have you ordered any N35's?

I would like to see a drawing of how you used two bearings for your stators.

Great job!!   

Bruce

Hey Bruce
my mags are N42's 1/4" dia X 1/4" long, I stacked them(four) i did this so i could have some adjustably
I will post a stator disassembled for all to see the config.

have U come up with a non magnetic bearing from Mike" Even SS would be better that the all steel ones we are utilizing.

Regards
Bill

Yes, I definitely agree!  Though, I like the results with ours, thus far.  I built an ugly dirty model today.  I wanted to see how I wanted to connect the rotor, etc.  I learned a lot.  I used PEX flex .5 ID for stator holders, and used a dremel to grind a bit for a better fit for the magnets.  Bearings fit fine.

I drilled my rotor slightly off, so it has a nice wobble (I am just playing until the machined parts arrive next week, using Jason's accurate blueprints!  )

I oiled the bearings and they are smooth.  I played this evening.  I saw it sync and have a sustained run of near 30 seconds, many times.  A very cool sight to see.  Sore but happy fingers.  And this with the ugliest setup on the planet!  LOL  No pictures or vids, until the real deal is here. 

BUT I will say this...From what I have seen tonight, I am confident in the truth of Al's machine.  I think that it will be a matter of engineering.  I also want to use my N35's for the machined pieces coming.

Bearings, proper distance between stator and rotor (5mm) and proper distance of the plane from top of stator magnet to bottom of rotor magnet plane. 

I do not think this "anomaly" is either the material used nor the bearings being steel.  I think it is solely the magnetic field interactions.  IMHO  That said, I plan on even looking into air bearings Monday, if Mike is there.  It is a holiday, but I will see.  I will post the info when I get a hold of him.

@ All
I am starting a debate thread.  If you have a beef with someone, you can take it there, and leave this thread for magnet motor discussion.  The fighting is growing old.

Happy days,   
Bruce

[Omnibus]

Arranged the rotor magnets just for the heck of it as NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS and tried it with the three stators in various configs as well as with 2 and 1 stator, raising the rotor several times with washers. Rotor seems a little happier--wind down time close to 30s, stators lose rotation at higher rpm and only tremble. Now, back to the standard arrangement.

[Omnibus]

I'd like to reemphasize the points @fritz made and my reply there:http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3871.msg71709.html#msg71709 Proper form of the magnetic fields is of crucial importance in all these motors. Very hard to achieve. I'm looking now at one of my ostensibly (on the face of it) exact replicas of @alsetalokin's motor. Supposedly, when slowly turning the rotor the pattern one observes when the rotor is let go form a maximum to maximum (one feels these maximums when turning the rotor slowly by hand) should be of the same form repeated four times. Not so in my case. I'm observing the stator equally outstanding from the other two. If I start with a rotor magnet facing that stator the rotor bypasses the next magnet and bumps into the barrier formed by the third one. If I, however, continue and let go the rotor, further clockwise, from that barrier on the rotor stops at the fourth while it should bypass it if the pattern is to be preserved and so on. There's only one other place where the initially described pattern is observed, although slightly different (intermittent accelerations appear different). Now, that may be a significant problem. I've ordered more of these cylindrical magnets and will try to find matching ones to see whether this picture will improve. Of course, the stator magnets should be matching too. Wonder if someone else would be willing to check his rotor in this fashion.

[sveinutne]

Hi,
This might be very good news.

If my latest FEMM simulation is for real, it might give us the information we need.

It shows how we can get a positive torque for both the rotor and the stator.

Before I get too carried away here, we need to wait with the champagne till this has been triple checked.

It shows that the stator needs to deviate from a constant speed to get a gain. In this simulation this is taken to the extreme where the stator almost stops at the close passing of the rotor magnet, and gets maximum acceleration. As speed picks up the momentum of inertia increase and the torque from the magnets will give less change in speed. This will give less extra torque, and the power gain will be less.

So with a stator with high mass or momentum, it will be more easy to get into AGW locking, but the inertia will soon be too high for further increase in power. With a lighter stator it might be difficult to start, but at higher speed it will still fluctuate and give better torque.

Personally I thought my stator was too light, so I put lead inside it. It helped in getting a more easy AGW lock, but I do not see the OU any more. The first day before I added the lead, I had a gleam of what Al might have felt when his rotor started to spin by itself.

So maybe I will remove the lead and see if I still can get an AGW lock.

Svein

[Omnibus]

@sveinutne

When looking at my device it appears that all the conditions you found favorable are in place. The stators indeed come to a stop at some points and then accelerate thus deviating from constant speed which should make them get a gain. Also, the weight of the stators is according to the specifications outlined by @alsetalokin. Thus, as I already said, it seems to to me now the focus should be on ensuring proper fields.

[sveinutne]

@Omnibus

Maybe there is a limit to how much ?OU? you can take out of one stator, and if your system got more friction than that it will never sustain itself.
But to me most of the friction is in the fast turning stator, so the first thing I will do is going for two bearings on the stator to keep it more in place and hopefully reduce the friction.
Svein

[Omnibus]

@sveinutne,

I was thinking of that too. It seems to me, though, first the fields have to be fixed. Even with smooth bearings and lessened friction wrong fields won't bring success. Mind you, your FEMM is based on idealized field forms.