A sincere gentleman sharing a magnet motor build .[NDA issues??]

[hoptoad]

Of course ! Only you (plus some few others) can understand the simplicity and genious of this construction. It's not easy to build, and not very efficient due to mechanical ratchet device.
I have no ability to build it, but if you can and make it please let me know.
Patent (application) attached. The key theme I spotted is the different construction, adding additional axis of freedom to movement.I guess it may work due to Newton laws ! - imho - if you have a two massive wheels , one running in one direction and second running in opposite direction attached to the same shaft cleverly then the total sum of momentum is zero!

Indeed. I can understand why many here, including myself will not attempt to build this. It looks like it requires a fair degree of mechanical aptitude and machining resources. Most people here, including myself, are more likely to build things that are electronic and not mechanical in nature.

[Pirate88179]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtMZpDSCFEI&feature=youtu.be

from here

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20239-magnet-motor-revelation-19.html

thx for looking and commenting.

Chet K

This is the same mistake almost everyone makes with these things..."Well, it does not work with one stator, so I will add another.." and so on.  IF this design would ever work, it would only need one stator.  He could add 20 of them and it will still not work.  He is simply adding more sticky points.

That is a nice looking build though. I'll say that for him.

Bill

[forest]

Very true. 

[TinselKoala]

No, I disagree. And that's why I've advocated the stepwise testing against a blank, inert system consisting of the rotor with nonmagnetic weights instead of magnets and no stators.

Timing the rundown from a known starting impulse or RPM will allow you (or would allow ME, at least) to calculate the actual power dissipation of the blank rotor. Then adding the magnets and one stator and repeating the rundown time would allow the experimenter to see whether the single stator/magnet arrangement added a little drag, or a little thrust. It's possible that you only would get a small amount of thrust (added power) from a single stator, not enough to make it keep running but enough to offset _some_ of the power dissipation of the blank system. The rotor would take longer to run down in that case .  Add, say, six stators, all adding their slight amount of thrust (power), and perhaps they would be enough to more than offset the power dissipation of the blank rotor, and the device would speed up until bearing friction and windage again matched the added power and the thing would run along at a constant speed. Each stator would not be enough on its own but a number of them might add together to make the desired effect.

However the reverse is also true.... if an individual stator adds _drag_ instead of thrust, or does nothing (neither adds power nor dissipates it) then adding more of the same will only drag you down faster ( or do nothing) . But without doing the actual comparison testing against a blank system, you'll never know. Pushing around with Mister Hand, changing things because it doesn't continue to run, is just a waste of time and doesn't produce any Real Data that allows for making valid conclusions about whether or not your stator design is going to work or not. It's comical, to think that the experimenters might be missing the "correct" design entirely because they aren't making any real, valid, comparison tests against the blank system.

It's even more comical, since one reason they aren't doing this is _because the suggestion comes from me_.  An hour's worth of actual testing would tell them instantly whether or not their stator designs are helping (adding some power) or hurting (only adding drag), even with testing just a single stator and comparing against the blank inert system. 

Of course we know that there is no possible added thrust from any stator configuration they can come up with... and since actual testing would demonstrate this, they are not doing it, out of fear of what they might find.

[tinman]

No, I disagree. And that's why I've advocated the stepwise testing against a blank, inert system consisting of the rotor with nonmagnetic weights instead of magnets and no stators.

Timing the rundown from a known starting impulse or RPM will allow you (or would allow ME, at least) to calculate the actual power dissipation of the blank rotor. Then adding the magnets and one stator and repeating the rundown time would allow the experimenter to see whether the single stator/magnet arrangement added a little drag, or a little thrust. It's possible that you only would get a small amount of thrust (added power) from a single stator, not enough to make it keep running but enough to offset _some_ of the power dissipation of the blank system. The rotor would take longer to run down in that case .  Add, say, six stators, all adding their slight amount of thrust (power), and perhaps they would be enough to more than offset the power dissipation of the blank rotor, and the device would speed up until bearing friction and windage again matched the added power and the thing would run along at a constant speed. Each stator would not be enough on its own but a number of them might add together to make the desired effect.

However the reverse is also true.... if an individual stator adds _drag_ instead of thrust, or does nothing (neither adds power nor dissipates it) then adding more of the same will only drag you down faster ( or do nothing) . But without doing the actual comparison testing against a blank system, you'll never know. Pushing around with Mister Hand, changing things because it doesn't continue to run, is just a waste of time and doesn't produce any Real Data that allows for making valid conclusions about whether or not your stator design is going to work or not. It's comical, to think that the experimenters might be missing the "correct" design entirely because they aren't making any real, valid, comparison tests against the blank system.

It's even more comical, since one reason they aren't doing this is _because the suggestion comes from me_.  An hour's worth of actual testing would tell them instantly whether or not their stator designs are helping (adding some power) or hurting (only adding drag), even with testing just a single stator and comparing against the blank inert system. 

Of course we know that there is no possible added thrust from any stator configuration they can come up with... and since actual testing would demonstrate this, they are not doing it, out of fear of what they might find.

Oh come now TK,even when people do carry out careful testing with and without the magnets in place-(even going as far as adding weights that equal the weight of the magnet that will be placed in that position during the second half of the test),and show a positive result,they get comments like this : Next, we'll learn how _springs_ can "do useful work".

If not the magnets doing useful work,then maybe magic?.
No magic in this one TK,and easily replicated-by those that stick to design parameters,and dont go off on there own tangent,and then wonder why they didnt get the same result's.
Things are often designed the way they are because they work-yea?,and when you deviate from that design,there is every chance that it wont work.

Anyway,things are what they are,and i can achieve the same results over and over again-just by adding the magnets. The same go's for say a solenoid engine,where a solenoid with a steel cylinder is used,and a steel slug for the piston. Remove the steel cylinder,replace with say a nylon one,and replace the steel piston with a magnet,and you will get much more power out for the same power in-while maintaining the same heat output from the solenoid coil-so where did the extra energy come from?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhLlI8gclZQ