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

[l0stf0x]

Hi Jimboot, can you  or anyone else help me find the "New thread" button?
thanks

[T-1000]

There was one design mentioned in overunityresearch forum - http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm

That build is close to Syrain's and also has merit to be tested by some experienced people. The magnetic forces are not balanced there so you will have drag due core attraction to magnet but the rest of build is on same principle with changing magnetic field on coil with iron core (should be transformer core to avoid Eddy currents) which is moving across path between coil and magnet...

http://www.google.com/patents/US5191258

http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/photos/ger4.gif

Cheers!

[Jimboot]

Hi Jimboot, can you  or anyone else help me find the "New thread" button?
thanks

Go here http://overunity.com/news/#.VKFZtMAACI and you'll see the new topic button

[lumen]

Luc:

In order to get the "C" core to pull to the gap in the "I" cores the "C" core would need to be much thicker. Going thinner would cause the "C" core to not want to stay in the gap but pull to one side or the other while if it was wider it would pull to where the flux is best conducted.

We can see by rotating a large "C" section that flux moves into the "C" making it a magnet, then as the core rotates it pushes back from the next pole causing a load on the drive system.  The problem with a wider "C" core is that it will load with even more flux and increase the drag.

To me the solution is to mount the "C" core stationary below the "I" cores and make the "C" core as wide as the outside of the "I" cores. (about twice as wide as is now)

Space the "C" from the "I" cores and rotate other smaller segments to transfer the flux.

The idea is that flux retained in the smaller rotating pieces will be small because they can only retain a small amount of flux.

Overall, the way to reduce the core drag is to reduce the size of the moving iron.

[gotoluc]

Luc-please watch this test. You need ferrite core's,as steel laminated core's are shocking,even at low rpm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAXtB_7RkEg

Good day Brad,

thank you for making this important video. I am aware of the difference in drag between Steel and Ferrite cores and why I used a ferrite as core in my test coil of the "Delayed Lenz or not?" topic:  http://overunity.com/15289/delayed-lenz-or-not-post-your-explaination/msg428570/#msg428570

However, what I don't know is how much the effect we are researching, often referred to as" Delayed Lenz" is reduced when using Ferrite compared to steel laminations?... all this needs much more testing.

Naturally it is much faster and cheaper to used steel laminations to build and test these new idea and is why I do so until I find what is the best design. Once this has been established we can order Ferrite cores and see how much better it does.

So I appreciate you taking the time to make this video so others can see there are possibly much more efficient core material we can use once we know the direction we want to take.

I have also experimented with Iron Powder cores and they are also very efficient and much easier to cut and shape then Ferrite, so they also need to be tested.

Thanks mate

Luc