New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)

[sidneo]

Hi here,


This is what i am building i will like to have your opinion on my design the (math and mechanical/electrical engineering)

[Low-Q]

Hi here,


This is what i am building i will like to have your opinion on my design the (math and mechanical/electrical engineering)

I have no math for you, but I can probably say something about this design:


An electromagnets magnetism is a magnetic respons that is equivalent to the supplied current and number of windings. Voltage is out of the equation when it regards elektromagnetism. If you have a permanent magnet with a given magnetic strength, you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanentmagnet. You can just imagine what this means. You could likely have a bare electromagnet and pulse it with current at the right timing to get repulsion or attraction. The energy input will be the same.


When you supply current, you will also supply voltage due to the resistance in the coil. That means you must supply energy into the coil for as long you want the magnetism to sustain. You will get back partially that energy when the coil shuts down. However, if the coil was super conducting, there would be no voltage, just current, and therfor no energy would be supplied to keep the electromagnet magnetic.


Only with a super conducting coil, your design would probably become a unity device (not over unity). Because when the electromagnet turns on, it takes energy to build up the magnetism. Under super conducting conditions, all this energy is taken back when the electromagnet turns off and the magnetism breaks down. You have unity.


br.


Vidar

[sidneo]

Same principle can be applied in magnetic gates .
As soon as you introduce an opposing polarity (repulsion) with equal force above the sticky point there is an equilibrium .
This equilibrium state allow theoretically to easily overcome the sticky point with little energy input  [size=78%].[/size][size=78%] [/size][size=78%] [/size]

[sidneo]

I have no math for you, but I can probably say something about this design:


An electromagnets magnetism is a magnetic respons that is equivalent to the supplied current and number of windings. Voltage is out of the equation when it regards elektromagnetism. If you have a permanent magnet with a given magnetic strength, you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanentmagnet. You can just imagine what this means. You could likely have a bare electromagnet and pulse it with current at the right timing to get repulsion or attraction. The energy input will be the same.


When you supply current, you will also supply voltage due to the resistance in the coil. That means you must supply energy into the coil for as long you want the magnetism to sustain. You will get back partially that energy when the coil shuts down. However, if the coil was super conducting, there would be no voltage, just current, and therfor no energy would be supplied to keep the electromagnet magnetic.


Only with a super conducting coil, your design would probably become a unity device (not over unity). Because when the electromagnet turns on, it takes energy to build up the magnetism. Under super conducting conditions, all this energy is taken back when the electromagnet turns off and the magnetism breaks down. You have unity.


br.


Vidar

Hi Vidar


Thank you for your lecture about electromagnets and magnetism .But have you overlooked this design?
i am well aware of "you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanent magnet"
and this is not my goal  .My goal is to weaken the attraction between the permanent magnet and the electromagnet to allow the previously canceled repulsive force to act most of the work is being done by the permanent magnets  .


even in the case of "you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanent magnet"
what really happening here is not only a "turn of " or cancellation but also a repulsion .
That previous attraction turned into repulsion unleashes the other canceled repulsive force  the one that does the free work .


the electromagnet is just assisting here





already calculated the resistance of my coil the power needed  etc .



Thanks for your opinion.

[sidneo]

This project as been inspired by this  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D0c2x2MBT0
in this case there no overunity of course  he is doing more work with his hand by putting the magnet a way and putting it back and the mechanic is inefficient.
But i did found it interesting because of the equilibrium state . If we replace the finger by an electromagnet to cancel and push at the same time.
instate of just canceling the attraction by the finger .We get work by the electromagnet and free work by the previously canceled permanent magnet .
That last one is our real motor the electromagnet is just here to unleash it.
as Low-Q said the energy supplied can be partially recovered from the coil as you all probably know (back emf).

But in my case i do not use a regular coil . I use a strait wire coil inspired by the work of Bruce-TPU on his EBLV Design (not for motional emf )  but to avoid Lenz's law in the interaction between the permanent magnets and the electromagnet. also to reduce the resistance while passing enough current to polarize the core of my electromagnet .


PS: forgot to mention that the current to produce the emf to polarize the core is almost completely recovered  minus the resistance wish is minimal since we are using a parallel circuit = low voltage -> big current -> big -> emf
in an open circuit.


Sidneo