Magnets, motion and measurement

[Floor]

1.The presenter should video document the METHODS used
during the measuring process.

Because, there are so many ways to botch measurements... the presenter would be wise, to do a video which demonstrates the technique to be used for EACH action to be measured.....before the actual measurement sets are taken.  This will save the presenter, a lot of time and frustration.


2. Each measurement should be taken 5 or more times, and an averaged value,
then used in the calcs.


3. Write every measurement (in a chart which was prepared for that purpose).

    see example chart below
 
    a graph would be optional / nice

[Floor]

I recommend as well, that the experimenter, design / print out, a set of pages
just to write down the measurements on as they are taken .

5 measurements of each force applied and displacement that resulted.

as few as 5 or as many as 25 measurements per magnet action.

3 input actions and one output action to measure.

5 x 5 x 3 = 75 (3 Inputs) ?
                   and
5 x 25 (1 out put) = 75 = as maybe as many as 150 measurements total (typical).


              best wishes
                       floor

[ayeaye]

5 measurements, well that is. We need at least 5 measurements of the repelling output force. Better more, near the magnet where the force is the greatest, better to measure after every 2 mm, as the force changes the most there. Now, when we add the energies (work, work is energy) for all these small distances, the error increases. Taking average of several measurements, decreases the error. Depends also on the precision of the scales. Maybe as many measurements each time, as many distances we measure?

The magnetic force should decrease inverse of the distance in square. But in the reality it may differ, depends on the shape of the magnets, etc, so it cannot really be calculated, thus it should be measured after every small distances. Unless we perhaps see how it decelerates.

To do it with all the measurements, and to do it rightly, is really a great task by itself. Even when the actual device is the most simple.

And now we who only do here blah blah, don't do any experiments ourselves, only talk. One person does experiments, maybe two, several others do blah blah. I hope that i did more than talking though, that there has been some use of that which i wrote.

That is, when one does any measurements, then it at once enables many to talk, and find what was wrong, and whatever. It is though that, when one does no measurements, then such experiment should likely be rejected at once. When people talk, this means that the experiment was accepted, citfta did a great job.

The error calculation, when calculating the worst value, and then the best value, then the difference is the error. The problem is though that we need to add many energies at different distances, so if we calculate with the worst values in the scales error range, and then the best, the error will become very great, when we need to add many values. The matter is though, that when the forces are different, then the errors are likely more random, that is, they are not all to one side. Then it may be enough to calculate the error of the greatest energy, maximum value minus minimal value, and consider that to be the error of the whole calculation. In case of the citfta's experiment, if we consider the error of the scale 1 ounce, and even if we consider the maximum energy shifting the shield magnet 50 mm, then the calculation error will still be 28 mJ.

[lancaIV]

So, ayeaye, we are only doing actually " blah blah " :

do you a. not  b. think that some of us did c. not their " home work" about
magnetic and electromagnetic force,energy,work,power in their past ?


http://www.victorcassar.com/ims.html
http://www.imsolution.com.au/fluxgraphs-entry.html

JLN LAB "push & pull"- demonstration 1998. !
Permanent magnet force/ energy/ work "attraction/repulsion" potential distance related

compared
with exemplary electro-magnets :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19820817&CC=US&NR=4345174A&KC=A#

"....... The Operation of the inventive engine 10 wil now be decribed.  ..... "
2 x https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_battery  per electro-magnet = pure DC

By " pulsed DC" induction  !?

Electro-magnet with capacitive band-/foil- condenser winding and " pulsed DC" induction  !?

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20040226&CC=DE&NR=20317795U1&KC=U1#

Electro-magnet with capacitive coils-condenser winding and " pulsed DC" induction. !?

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Envez&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search


Rotoric electro-/permanent magnet wheel :
only 16.,17.18.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Oskar+becker&IN=Oskar+becker&CPC=&IC=

18.                         "  THE POWER REQUIREMENT.  ......... ONE ELECTROMAGNET.    "......
http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=3826970&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en


Compare : http://maddsci.tripod.com/george/id10.html
                   http://maddsci.tripod.com/george/id11.html.   " torque out for Watt in " 



I spoke with him more than an hour via phone,now 2019 : Keith Kenyon R.I.P.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=14&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19711005&CC=US&NR=3610974A&KC=A#

idem : now 2019: R.I.P.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20081118&CC=US&NR=7453341B1&KC=B1#

William J.  Putt :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=William+putt&IN=&CPC=&IC=

Horst von Heyer
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=&IN=Von+heyer&CPC=&IC=

Some researcher are " old school" : copying and working with different colour pencils and doing abstracts to concrete  !
"Permanent magnets" have their advantages but also disadvantages as " power source"  !

Fixed or variable speed ( R.P.M. and torque in Nm ) output  linear or rotatoric motor concept !

I hope for you that their written " blahblah" helps by your own development. !
Electro-motor power density prediction : 40 KW/ Kg. !

Your "permanent magnet" power density prediction/target. ,ayeaye. !?

The Flynn brothers worked over 25 year to optimize their PPM concept. !
Working with patience and concentration and precision. !

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-m&q=parallel+path+flnn+research&oq=parallel+path+flnn+research&aqs=heirloom-srp..

https://studfiles.net/preview/8199619/page:2/
"PAGE 10. Additional Observations : 

finite element analysis : real force conformity versus physical divergence = syntax error


Why they went back in their magnet material use : from Neodym to ferrit ceramic magnets.  ?

Ernie Esters : modular multi motors and/ or modular multi generator couple  on one shaft :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801111&CC=US&NR=4233532A&KC=A#



Sincerely
OCWL

[kolbacict]

why does not it work?
https://youtu.be/9WIUeWwjNBA