Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Work from 2 magnets > 19% output 2

Started by Floor, February 17, 2014, 01:53:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Floor


Low-Q

If I may add some tips and tricks to this thread.


When you calculate gain, it is very important to calculate the energy, not forces alone.
I say this because there is so many misconseptions about force.
Most people forget to take the distance, either in the form of linear motion or rotational motion into account.
A linear force, or rotational force (torque) can not alone be responsible for the overall performance.


Say you have two electric motors for example.
If both motors, motor 1 and motor 2, have a torque of, say 10Nm each.
Motor 1 achieve this torque at 1000RPM and motor 2 achieve this torque at 2000RPM.
Both motor 1 and 2 have the same torque, and the misconseption is that both motors would cancel eachother out if working agains each other.
However, motor 2 delivers 2 times more energy than motor 1. Therfor, motor 2 will win the competition between the two.
If you place a gear ratio on motor 2, so the shaft spins at 1000RPM and the same as motor 1, the torque would be 20Nm. Therfor motor 2 will win.


A practical experiment with two magnets, where you look at the forces to separate them in two ways. Just as an example.
1-One way is to pull them directly apart. This require 10N of force.
2-The other way is to slide them apart. This require 1N of force.


1-It require a very short distance of separation to take them apart.
2-It requires 10 times the distance to take them apart.


The energy input to separate them are therfor the same. Calculating energy is the very essence.


If you have a rotational device, and calculate torques in 1 degree steps for example.
You can take each sample and multiply with the number of samples. 10 samples for 10 degree motion.
Then you take the result and devide by 10 to get the average torque over 10 degree motion.
Examples of readings of two interacting rotors:
1 - 10Nm, 8Nm, 5Nm, 2Nm, 0.5Nm, 0.4Nm, 0.3Nm, 0.2Nm, 0.1Nm. Sum=26.5Nm/10 samples = 2.65Nm average @ 10° rotation.
2 - 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm, 2.65Nm. Sum 26.5/10 samples = 2,65Nm average @ 10°rotation.


I have done this wrong so many times, untill I suddenly realized that I need to figure out the total energy, not only torque or force.
Then I got the explanation why the practical experiment failed every time - because the product of force and motion was the same and opposite.


Vidar

Floor

@Low-Q

Thanks vidar
...................
At all (interested) readers

Energy (kinetic)= force times displacement.

The joule is a unit of measurement of both energy and work.

1 joule is the amount of energy expended in doing the work of lifting about 102
grams of weight, a distance of 1 meter (in standard gravity).
............................
The newton is a unit of measurement of force.

1 newton of force (by definition) is the force needed to ACCELERATE a 1 kilogram mass
(against a resistance to acceleration, which is due solely to the inertia of that mass)
at the rate of  1 meter per second per each second  (1m/s/s  or  1m/s^2) that the 1
newton of force is applied.
......................................
A 1 kilogram mass exerts 9.80665 (about 10) newtons of force down in Earth's standard gravity.

This because all objects (small objects) in near Earth gravity free fall accelerate at the rate of
9.80665 meters per second per each second that they free fall.

A force causing a 1 kilogram mass to accelerate at the rate of 9.80665 m/s/s is therefore, a force of
9.80665 newtons.

The greater the mass of an attracted object the greater also is the force exerted upon it, under a given
gravitational influence.

The greater the mass of an attracted object the greater also is it's weight, under that given
gravitational influence.
........................................
About 102 grams of mass, (or weight in standard gravity) exerts a force of 1 newton down.

1 newton of force causing  a 1 meter displacement of an object requires an energy transfer of 1 joule of energy. , or one can also say that 1 joule of work is done..

1 joule is the amount of energy expended in doing the work of lifting about 102
grams of weight, a distance of 1 meter (in standard gravity).

In the Twist Drive (TD) measurements, the degrees upon the degree scales represent an amplification of the  mm of fall, that the applied weights move during the increments of  measurement..

              Thank you again vidar.
                       
                            floor

lumen

@floor

It's interesting that after running extensive tests in a 3d simulator at 1% error, it does in fact show that a gain in energy is present.
The strange thing is that the gain that it indicates is just slightly over 25%. Though your setup is a bit different it seems the results are nearly the same.

If the results are within 1% at each position and there are 18 positions tested, then it seems it could be off as much as 18% if all tests were off in the same direction and near 1%.
I need to either lower the error to .1% or build a device to test the interaction and collect actual results.


Low-Q

An error measured in % is a relative figure. If you measure +1% error at a million samples per cycle, you still got only 1% error - not a million %.
So your simulations would be correct with an uncertainty of 1%. However, the longer steps you take for each sample, you might miss a lot in between. For example if you missed out a small area where the counter torque is very great.
That said, if the torque has the same sign all around one revolution, and not change sign from + to - the other half, it is probably a working design.


Vidar