Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Magnets, motion and measurement

Started by Floor, October 31, 2016, 09:11:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

lancaIV


Floor

Quote from: DreamThinkBuild on June 09, 2019, 03:03:36 PM
Hi Floor and Norman6538,

Been following your detailed work. I whipped up a quick sketch of a mechanism for moving the shields. The idea is to make a push slider which the trolley hits when it gets almost near the end. This of course would have to depend on the strength of the magnets and actuation distance needed. Thinner magnets could maybe help. I do not have enough hands on experience with your model so I do not know where the magnet starts to switch from shielding to repulsion( the most likely sticky spot). Maybe this will inspire another idea if it's not feasible.

Instead of the push slider another idea is using a compliant mechanism like the "Airplane" which creates a snap action toggle.

https://www.compliantmechanisms.byu.edu/flexlinks

Thanks DreamThinkBuild.

I appreciate your taking the time to do the drawing.

But please don't assume you know how or why these devices function.
          Your design is no good in this application.   
Because it entails installations and removals of the shield magnets BEFORE
AND WHILE the other magnets are in motion.

Don't know how you missed this point. 

Sorry If I seem harsh, but your miss understanding is leading people off into a completely wrong direction.
                                   NOT GOOD.

   Done correctly 

1. The shield magnet is removed ONLY after the output magnets have completely finished closing together and are at a stop.
2. The shield magnet is reinstalled ONLY after the output magnet have completely finished expanding and are at a stop.
3. No other way !

You may not see why this matters, but then, as I said, apparantly you miss understood / assumed the hows and whys.

    Also
There is / are no sticky spot/s, if it's done right.  Exception: at very close proximity there can be a very minor stickiness
due to domain re-orientations.  This is entirely different from what is classically called "the sticky spot"
There is no / are no sticky spots, in  the respect the words "stick spot" typically refers to,  in attempted magnet OU devices.

These designs are not attempts to conserve momentum or improve efficiency. 
They are work from permanent magnets, designs, not efficiency designs. 

In terms of the typical / conventional approaches,  these designs are / seem wasteful.

But if its OU, it's not wasteful ?


             floor

Floor

Quote from: lumen on June 13, 2019, 01:31:18 PM
Using this configuration there should be about a 3 Newton increase in force without the shield magnets.
Repelling magnets .25 x 1 x 2 and shield magnets .125 x 2 x 3.

The force between repelling magnets is 11.75 Newtons with the shield and about 15 Newtons with shield removed.
The shield magnets are held close together with repelling forces.

If you are encouraged because of this outcome, then I suppose this is a good thing.  But compared to what I
have seen in some of these interactions, those are mediocre results.

I can't give any advice as to how to improve your results. I don't have enough details.

      regards
                   floor

Floor

Thanks Norman

True, it might be more accurate to call the shielding, shunting.  But pretty much any kind of
shielding is shunting.


@ Lumen

The difference between when shielded (shunted)  and not shunted is huge in this
configuration.       https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x728wd9

Please do an exact replication of it.  But put both actions / magnet s on precision track system.

Note, as a second test, the shield magnets could be N to S on the broad sides, instead of the two
shield magnets being glued together in repulsion (wearing each other out).

                 Sorry if I've been testy /  out  of line
                     rough day
                       floor

norman6538

I really appreciate the civil discussion that we are having on this thread.
Its quite simple - take and idea and make something and test it and report
the results without name calling and accusations. Then with some critiquing
and suggestions improve it. And of coarse we will always hear "don't waste
your time because all energy is conserved" which means to me the energy comes
from somewhere and in the case of magnets we know where it comes from -
the magnet but after work is derived the reset for another cycle comes at a price.

I am now stuck at bearing tolerance. I use 2 skate bearings and they have enough
play to make 1/6 inch movement at the end of an arm 12 inches away.
some  folks have told me to look for RC car bearings. I'll get there but it
takes time.

Floor I would call your setup a magnetic field disrupter because it disrupts the
normal attraction or repelling.

Norman