The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

[gotoluc]

Kator01:
I don't believe Luc ment to cut the center of the core out, I think he meant to just take the corners off in that area.

Thanks guys, I won't cut anything for now.

@ lumen, do you think my U-core should be wider as Kator01 mentions below. It's not a problem to make it wider if you think it needs it!

The ciritcal point I see is the very small overlapping area of the U-core cross-section. Most of this area is exposed to the airgap.

[Pirate88179]

5.  Heat up a ferromagnetic core inside a coil above its Curie point
6.  Chill a ferromagnetic core inside a coil below its Curie point
7.  Squeeze a ferromagnetic core inside a coil (including sound waves)
8.  Modulate the permeability of a ferromagnetic core inside a coil with a strong electric field.
9.  Change the shape of the coil

5. Adding energy to the circuit.
6. Adding energy to the circuit.
7. Adding energy to the circuit, either mechanical, or electric.
8. Adding energy to the circuit.
9. Adding energy to the circuit: mechanical.


I submit that any of your suggestions would require more energy than Lenz would take away...even IF you were able to suppress Lenz with any of these methods, which is not a given at this point.


Bill

[NoBull]

5. Adding energy to the circuit.
6. Adding energy to the circuit.
7. Adding energy to the circuit, either mechanical, or electric.
8. Adding energy to the circuit.
9. Adding energy to the circuit: mechanical.

Yes, most of these methods of changing the flux penetrating a coil requires energy input, except pt.6 and the energy balance of pt.8 is questionable (see the article by Konrad & Brudny in IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 41, No. 10 from October 2005)

I submit that any of your suggestions would require more energy than Lenz would take away...

Perhaps, but I did not claim otherwise.   For completeness, I just supplemented MileHigh's listing of methods that change the flux through the coil.

However,  I disagree with your implication, that the phenomenon described in the Lenz's law is responsible for any energy being "taken away".  For example, the mechanical drag (a mechanical energy loss) experienced by moving magnets in proximity to shorted/loaded coils and other conducting materials is not due to the Lenz's law but to their electrical resistance.

In an ideal coil without resistance there is no mechanical drag to an approaching and departing magnet, despite that current is still induced in such coil in full accordance with the Lenz's law.
In SC coils the integral of abs(force) over distance is exactly the same during the approach as during the departure of the moving magnet (to and from infinity), so there is no net gain nor loss (drag) of mechanical energy over the full cycle.

[Pirate88179]

In SC coils the integral of abs(force) over distance is exactly the same during the approach as during the departure of the moving magnet (to and from infinity), so there is no net gain nor loss (drag) of mechanical energy over the full cycle.

Thanks.  But, does this also include a load on the circuit?  What if the load increases?  Then what?

Bill

[NoBull]

Thanks.  But, does this also include a load on the circuit?  What if the load increases?  Then what?

It doesn't.  A resistive load will ultimately and irreversibly convert the mechanical energy to heat and a capacitive load will reversibly convert it to charge.
The irreversible conversion will be manifested as mechanical drag but Mr.Ohm will be the one responsible for it - not Mr.Lenz.