Fluxite

[Fluxite]

Thank you for the input.

It does not yet rotate 361 degrees, have to make that clear.

The bearings are skateboard bearings and I am not concerned with a.005 loss due to friction. 

Youtube has a far different crowd and I have posted here for intellectual comments.

Now we can discuss details. 

preamble: I tend to use common terms as its easier for others to understand.

In general, and simplified, the device has one magnet that pushes (a pusher) against a disk that contains many magnets.

In combination with a second magnet and metal plate (deflector), which is used to deflect / move the magnetic fields of the disk magnets in close proximity.

1) The deflector maintains its state with no energy used.
2) The pusher maintains its state with no energy used.
3) To get movement translated to the disk, requires energy.

The energy to move the disk comes from the magnetic field of the pusher pressing against the disks magnet V shaped  field.

The device does not yet spin however results are as expected and according to tests.

Fluxite

[conradelektro]

The device does not yet spin however results are as expected and according to tests.

I totally agree that the device does not spin.

How can there be "results as expected and according to tests" if the device does not spin?

Your theory predicts that the device will spin (will overcome cogging), but it does not, therefore the expectations of your theory are not present in reality.

What is missing in your device? What addition to the device would make it spin? Do you think you know how to alter the device in order to make its pin?

Greetings, Conrad

[Fluxite]

thanks for the note Conrad,

Its just being developed and spacing / mag strengths still need to be tuned.

The device is doing what its suppose to at this stage.

Perhaps an analogy will assist the understanding of what we have here:

===========
A 10 kg ball is lifted to the top of a slide. When it rolls down it uses up its stored energy.

However it only takes 1/2 the amount of that released energy to lift it back up to the top again.

===========

The Fluxite device presented uses less energy to 'bend' the fields than it takes to move the disk.

Not sure if that helps with this explanation but unless one were to take the time to grasp the details, its the best I can do.


You mentioned cogging - good because the movement is generated from the cogging, or at least one side of it.  This is what pushes the disk. The trick was to minimize the resistance from the other side of the cogging. Hope that doesn't confuse the discussion.

Fluxite

[seychelles]

FLUXITE great work there i know that together we will find an answer..This is my bucks worth..

[Fluxite]

mmm, interesting, got it,

Each magnet acts individually, meaning that each would have its own gate to overcome.

With this design, what would be needed is a method of overcoming each magnet's gate, so that more push is preserved than what is used to get each magnet to the next gate.

Or, another way to look at your image is that it does have a good layout but is missing the part that eliminates the energy needed overcome the approach.

I would have to study and incorporate the 'flux deflector' (sounds stupid but I don't know what else to call it) to understand the torque available with this design.

A magnets maximum torque can be measured in pounds and is the same energy required to pull two magnets apart at the distance they are apart in the device.

Sorry I am an inventor,  not a wordsmith so I do hope this makes sense.

Fluxite