Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 525404
  • *Total Topics: 15644
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: Magnet question  (Read 18409 times)

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2013, 01:18:58 AM »
A drawing or scetch would help a lot.
I do have that... In very good detail. In sketchup & Cad(which I used to have a friend 3-Dprint it), But..... that would take a way from people using there minds to figure out a rather simple arrangement. I'm curious if people can see what I saw as the problem, and how to counter that issue? I have broke it down to a point were, I know for a fact, I would come quickly to the conclusion. It just took me till I had the info I gave. Before I could even see the real problem that had to be overcome, & how to do it. Now I need to figure out how to make it stronger. Because equal unity is not to useful, as kool as it is....

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2013, 01:18:58 AM »

Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #16 on: June 08, 2013, 02:30:52 AM »
Yeah drawing is not a strong point of mine, the air gaps are exaggerated to show the principle. Both motors are in attraction mode and turn in opposite directions.
The rotors will stop at the end of the spiral and as the cam strikes the stationary cam it knocks the rotor into a  spin and the process repeats.
Basically using the force of the moving rotor to knock the stationary rotor into action.

I am not great at riddles, but would be interested in your gate weakening method.

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2013, 05:17:55 AM »
The only issue I see is that the point of greatest attraction is to strong to be pushed through by one extra cam. 10 extra, would still be to weak. Plus you could achieve the same by dividing the gate on the same rotor/stator. With multiple armatures making the gears to drive the other cam. Just to achieve different positions on the gate at the same time. No longer needed, greatly reducing friction. That's if I'm understanding you properly. Here's a drawing for 10 armatures pushing 2 on a 4 gate stator. You can do up to 11 pushing 1. Without having to built to large to separate the flux each armature. While keeping the same degrees. It's is all useless, because it is still  not strong enough without calibrating the stopping/sticky point, to overcome it. With the force of added armatures. All designs have the same issues. The sticky point has to be weakened while not weakening (yet increasing) the drive. Without changing distance or adding any form of work what so ever to do so.....ask yourself what can do that? I more or less already told you.........

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2013, 05:17:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #18 on: June 08, 2013, 01:15:58 PM »
I like your V gate design, although if you rotate the rotor there comes a point where you have 4 of the rotors magnets at the gates. That means the other 6 have to be doing "work" greater than the forces at the 4 gates combined.

The drawing I posted was one I was playing with before, I have now got it down to a single rotor and changed the layout.
I did play with the configuration of the stators and rotor to include extra layers, but my best guess told me that for every extra one added to a single rotor I halved the force available to move the next cam.
Whereas  in the configuration shown each rotor makes a full rotation before transferring its energy to the next. Those exaggerated air gaps  do not help, but as an example if the air gap at the stationary rotor was 1mm and the attractive force was 9lbs,  by time the moving rotor was in the impact position it would have an approximate 2mm gap that may have an attractive force of 7lbs. So the impact of the cam needs to be worth an extra couple of pounds. Then you have to figure the torque of the moving rotor at impact. The cams running outside of the rotors arc should provide some extra leverage to move the stationary rotor enough to move it beyond the sticky point and back into rotation.
 
I only have my current drawing on paper, I shall transfer it to the computer and post it when I get chance. It has changed considerably, but as I mentioned before I still think cogging or the gate will be an issue.

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4065
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2013, 01:45:43 PM »
Thank you, I took a look and it seems he had the same problem "needing 2 shafts" I have got it down to one and will be starting a build in the next 2 weeks.

Here is an earlier one I was playing with.

Hi elecar,

I have edited your drawing a little to show what I think may help defeat or reduce the sticky point and also eliminate one of the shafts from your draw. The idea is not mine, you can see it here  http://www.rexresearch.com/werjefelt/fig8.jpg from this link:  www.rexresearch.com/werjefelt/werjefelt.htm

The principle is to compensate the sticky point somewhere else and not inside the setup which directly creates the sticky point. The "somewhere else" place has no magnetic interaction with the setup that causes the sticky point, they are connected only by the common and single shaft.

What do you think? I have not tested this, sorry and surely the shape, size and strength of the magnet pair compensating the sticky point should be chosen by testing the forces.

rgds, Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2013, 01:45:43 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #20 on: June 08, 2013, 01:48:58 PM »
Thinking about it, the best explanation for the method of the movement in the twin set up is Newtons cradle. Where kinetic "potential" energy is stored in the balls. In this case the cams. The major difference is that you only impart the initial energy into the Newtons cradle by physically moving the first ball yourself and adding no additional or equal force each time eventually due to losses it comes to a stop.
But in the case of the twin motor the magnets repeat the work "force" on each rotation and at the collision point the potential energy is transferred  to the next cam, which then becomes the next source of potential energy. Newtons cradle with an engine !!!

Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2013, 02:16:47 PM »
Gyulasun, that could well help in the twin set up where less kinetic energy would need to be transferred to set the stationary rotor into action.
But on a single shaft it can only do 1 of a few things. Be equal to, greater than, or less than. Weaker sticky point, new sticky point.
So it still requires some interaction.
On the twin motor that interaction comes from the work being done by the rotating half each time. Like in the Newtons Cradle example, instead of two fingers releasing the balls once, the two fingers are there every rotation doing the same amount of work each time.

So the torque can be used for work, and the kinetic "potential" energy can be transferred at the impact at the end of each rotation.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2013, 02:16:47 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4065
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2013, 02:35:23 PM »
...
But on a single shaft it can only do 1 of a few things. Be equal to, greater than, or less than. Weaker sticky point, new sticky point.
So it still requires some interaction.


Well, I see it a bit differently.  Suppose you have a single rotor facing the 'ramping' attracting circle around and the rotor arrives at the 3 o'clock positin as the drawing just shows. And you hold a small repel pole magnet against the also small sized magnet pole fixed onto the other end of the shaft. The fixed magnet rotates together with the shaft and encounters with the stationary repel magnet only at the 3 o'clock position. IT requires interaction but the sticky point at the attraction point of the main rotor - stator is weakened by the repel 'sticky' point, so as a result no sticky point from the shaft point of view. No?

Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2013, 02:59:05 PM »
I only have a hobby interest but I would have thought that the repelling magnets would have a gate all of their own to deal with ?
Perhaps there is a way to balance them so that they at least help reduce the lock on the rotor.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2013, 02:59:05 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2013, 09:45:19 PM »
Well, I see it a bit differently.  Suppose you have a single rotor facing the 'ramping' attracting circle around and the rotor arrives at the 3 o'clock positin as the drawing just shows. And you hold a small repel pole magnet against the also small sized magnet pole fixed onto the other end of the shaft. The fixed magnet rotates together with the shaft and encounters with the stationary repel magnet only at the 3 o'clock position. IT requires interaction but the sticky point at the attraction point of the main rotor - stator is weakened by the repel 'sticky' point, so as a result no sticky point from the shaft point of view. No?

You are very close to understanding what you need to do. Note use can't cancel a force. One will be stronger, even if slightly or only in a give point. So the sticky point will always be there. Also you need to make it so that it can gradually reduce. As a new force gradually increases, or it will still be far too strong. So it not that simple of a mod. You are for the most on the right track.  Also the sticky point will ALWAYS, mathematically, be a greater or equal to, in force. Then the drive form it's  gate in itself. So a longer drive adds to a stronger gate lock always. After so far of an increase the drives acceleration is to weak and the drive weakens. While the lock still gets stronger. So a long gate is more hurtful then good.

Also For the last two layouts I showed. At no point is more than one arm in the sticky point. At any degree of rotation. They always equal to same at all points. When you set magnets in a inclined configuration (like the V-gate) they are both contributing to the movement as much as they are against it, this means that for each next magnet that is closer to the center pushing/pulling. There is also another magnet before pulling/pushing it back, if only with a smaller force. In the end you are adding and subtracting force from each magnet and the total result of all forces is actually smaller or equal to the last magnet (the one at the sticky point). So for the last pic even though there is an 11 to one push at ALL points, of degree, of rotation. It is not strong enough. Even a 15 to 1 push, is to weak for the same reason. You just have to build larger to make the the degree distance between arms larger then the flux of the last locking magnet. To get 15 to 1. But like I said before you must increase the drive while weakening the sticky point.(last magnets effect.) Then use something else to overcome the the sticky point. Because even calibrating it alone, still will not make the increased drive of the gate stronger then the last magnet. It will just put them next to equal. Though that in itself is priceless.

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2013, 03:27:19 AM »
Also what I'm talking about cant not be achieved easily with a spiral design..... Unless modded to halve v-gate mini spirals. Halbach array could be used, (I think)but the V-gate is the simplest inclined configuration that works with this mod, with the best drive to sticky point ratio.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnet question
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2013, 03:27:19 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2013, 04:29:50 AM »
Seance you almost more or less halve way figure out the first problem. You get the easy acknowledgement of it anyway. I'll give you a clue to the second problem. Overcoming a weaken gate, needs gravity. (I think)Now remember I stated distance is not changed so then the whole unit must tilt equally. This is not so easy, like the first issue, of a too strong sticky point, but easier than it may seem. Which is were I am stuck. At equal unity. Just pretty art...So I look to the only other thing I've seen with equal unity.
   Finsrud's device holds all the answers to that. If you think about it.(Or so I think, still testing[building]) Most of his design is just to get a 120 degree drive rotation, so that it can tilt the center & platform. Seance you already have that drive for a partial rotation in the gate. Must of his devise is not needed at all.
   Also I drew this and uploaded a 90% complete, Finsrud's device to the site awhile back. So seeing what is not needed is easy. I drew some of it wrong at the time, but that was just a quick rough sketch. I have a far better version I did more recently. Fixing several of the flaws I had in how the main shaft tilted. Plus some measurement issues. Which I can most likely upload, if I can find them.
   If you plan to build and test anything. The cheapest way to make, smallish, custom, metal parts, I found, is to 3-D print them. Then have a jeweler's rubber mold ($30), & wax cast them. Then concrete cast the wax, then pour in your hot metal. Annealing Oven it Cool, break, enjoy. Cheap metal castings.

Offline linoavac

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2013, 04:32:08 PM »
please , magnetical principal square/triangle is very importante
tubes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLzyLqchwUw


if use 4(rotor)  >>>>> use 3*3*3* (multiples of 3 in STATOR)

but see photo

Offline elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2013, 06:19:10 PM »
Very nice Linoavac, but I do not want to use any electrical components at all.

Offline ace569er

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Magnet question
« Reply #29 on: June 09, 2013, 10:57:29 PM »
Here's the sketch I refereed to...

 

OneLink