Gyroscopic Inertia Generator

[tinman]

Tinman:

This effect is dependent on geometry.  The more the coils resemble thin disks, and if the rotor magnet is also a thin disk, then the effect will be more pronounced.

You may have tried taking two equal bar magnets and pushing opposite poles together.  Have you every noticed that the repulsion force sometimes disappears when you push them all the way together?

Please look carefully at the attached diagram.

https://my.vanderbilt.edu/mrengineering2014/2014/04/matlab-simulations-on-gradient-coil-field-homogeneity-2/

MileHigh

Simulations MH,and done without a PM between the two coils.This in no way represents how the actual setup being discused performs.

Through much experimenting,i can say with certainty that having a coil each side of the magnet is 100%+ more efficient than having just one coil on one side of the magnet.

When you stated-Quote: Mr. Quanta Magnetics probably said to himself, "I will make an improved design where I put drive coils on both sides of the main center rotor.  With two drive coils on opposite sides of the rotor magnets I should get double the torque to make the rotor spin faster and more efficiently."

Im affraid Mr Quanta was right in this case MH,and these are things you find out with actual test of actual devices-not simulators.

[MileHigh]

Tinman:

In further thinking about it I could be wrong.  It depends on the motor configuration for the magnets and coils which I illustrate below.  I was not taking into account about the way the disk magnets on the rotor may be polarized in the Quanta Magnetics motor.

Here is a second go at it:  (coil, rotor magnet, coil where you are looking at the rotor edge-on and in reality the coils and magnet are tall and thin, not wide and flat.)

[s@@@n]  [n---s]  [s@@@n]

The above would represent the start of a repulsion push on the rotor.  In this case the opposing coils would have a strong field between them and it would be very efficient.

However, if the polarity of the rotor magnet is at right angles as shown below, then you would have the cancellation effect taking place.


                 [south]
                 [-]
                 [-]
[s@@@n]  [n]  [n@@@s]

So I qualify my comments in that I was thinking of the second configuration for the rotor.  I am simply not sure of the rotor configuration.  My apologies.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Tinman:

In further thinking about it I could be wrong.  It depends on the motor configuration for the magnets and coils which I illustrate below.  I was not taking into account about the way the disk magnets on the rotor may be polarized in the Quanta Magnetics motor.

Here is a second go at it:  (coil, rotor magnet, coil where you are looking at the rotor edge-on and in reality the coils and magnet are tall and thin, not wide and flat.)

[s@@@n]  [n---s]  [s@@@n]

The above would represent the start of a repulsion push on the rotor.  In this case the opposing coils would have a strong field between them and it would be very efficient.

However, if the polarity of the rotor magnet is at right angles as shown below, then you would have the cancellation effect taking place.


                 [south]
                 [-]
                 [-]
[s@@@n]  [n]  [n@@@s]

So I qualify my comments in that I was thinking of the second configuration for the rotor.  I am simply not sure of the rotor configuration.  My apologies.

MileHigh

I was going by the diagram you posted(reply 20),and by the way the quanta rotor/coils are set up.
Thin coils,and thin rotor magnets--> (s@n) (ns) (s@n). The fields from the coils dont cancel out each other,in fact,they pull one another tight(if you can picture it that way)-much like stretching a rubber band. Having the two fields also neutralises the side ways pull you get from only one coil acting apon the magnet,and this also adds a little extra rotational force-not much,but a little.Here is the kicker-you hook the two coils up in series(reversed pole of course),and you drop your P/in by half,while maintaining the same(if not slightly more)attraction or repulsion force on the rotor. And believe it or not,attraction mode actually give a slightly higher force output than repulsion mode for the same P/in.

In your second configuration you are creating a bucking field. This is how my L.A.G opperated,and the results are the same as the first configuration.

[tinman]

Here is a little setup i threw together today to show the results between 1 and 2 coil setup's.

Attraction mode.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qE_tg5KUZ8

Repulsion mode
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyegkVYMnfw

[TinselKoala]

The most efficient use of the fields involves using "both ends" of a single coil to push or pull on "both ends" of the magnet you are trying to move. This can be done in various ways but a "C" shaped core with the moving magnet passing between the open ends of the core is perhaps the easiest to arrange. I'm sure tinman knows what I'm talking about. In my SNOT testbed I use a homemade C core of soft iron with the coil wound around it and the "rotor" ball passing between the open legs. In this way I am able to use the entire field produced by the coil, concentrated by the core and running between the ends of the C,  to attract the steel ball (which is not a magnet). A magnet rotor would be arranged to pass the rotor magnets through this gap, with opposite poles of the magnet facing the poles of the "C" core for attraction-type PMs, or same poles facing for repulsion-type PMs. This arrangement allows most of the field produced by the coil, both polarities, to interact with both poles of the rotor magnet, producing by far the most thrust-per-ampere.
In the multi-layer Quanta design this is _almost_ achieved by the inner coils, where both poles of the coil are able to affect magnets on the rotor. But the outermost coils still suffer from using only half of the available field.