Simple Experiment: Extraction of Energy from Permanent Magnets

[dieter]

@Skywatcher, thanks for the tube links. The 1st one is almost the same test that I did, but I pushed the coil away, so stacking multiple magnets to increase fieldstrength does give more repulsion, because the coil always has the same weight.


The beauty of the coreless electromagnet is, each turn has its own polarity and any opposite pole must obey the fundamental magnet laws of attraction and repulsion. A weak magnet that is repelled by a strong magnet isn't going to lose its polarity.


What happens is Lenz Law strikes like his: As the pm or coil is repelled, the inducing fieldstrength is decreasing. This will result in an induced attraction overlay. So theoreticly a stronger PM should be repelled lesser. But that just isn't the case.


Like the dude in the vid, I also used this statement: there is no linear relation between energy output and dc inout. Permanent magnets are one entire energy factor.


@Luc, thanks for your data. You are right in that power density in PM devices is comparably low.
Any combustion engine has a much higher energy density, so this may not replace car engines.


What I am really interested in is a tiny coil with a high Q in combination with some real big PMs.


Using Aircores can be perfectly efficient if the design deals with the special requirements. It does however greatly reduce friction losses. So if such a small device could be selfpowering, that would be very nice, even without kilowatts of gain.


And as I mentioned earlier, at low temperatures in space, or on the moon, such a tiny gain would become gigawatts, we are going to obtain energy in a superconductive regime in the future anyway, as soon as we can transfer that energy to earth efficiently.


So, maybe I just build me a little test setup, with those 30 or so Neos from an earlier project.


@All, thank you very much for your opinions and information.

[gotoluc]

And as I mentioned earlier, at low temperatures in space, or on the moon, such a tiny gain would become gigawatts, we are going to obtain energy in a superconductive regime in the future anyway, as soon as we can transfer that energy to earth efficiently.

If we could make a superconductive coils then we would have OU as a coils magnetic field is free.
Coil power consumption at this time is due to its DC resistance.


Luc

[dieter]

Precisely.

[telecom]

I really like this idea, to use most of the power of the magnet when interacting with a coil.
It would be interesting try to send the magnet upward against the gravity,
should be easier to measure the available potential energy.
Regards

[MileHigh]

You are not going to get OU because you have superconductive coils.  Let's get real and talk about a simple experiment that anybody can do in the real world.

I am going to assume that you can measure velocity with a regular camera or a cell phone camera by doing frame-by-frame displacement analysis.  Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means.  (Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity.)

So you have a one-shot pulser circuit.  Let's assume the pulse is one-tenth of a second at five volts.  You start with the weak magnet.  You pulse the coil and the coil jumps back by say 10 centimeters.  You put in the strong magnet and you pulse the coil and the coil jumps back by say 20 centimeters.

So, did the strong magnet act as a source of extra energy, or did the pulser circuit act as the source of extra energy?

There is a current sensing resistor (CSR) in series with the coil, and your DSO is set up to measure the voltage and the RMS current from the pulser during the one-tenth second pulse.  We are going to assume that the voltage is always a rock-steady 5 volts to keep it simple.

Naturally you have measured the resistance of the coil.  You have also measured the mass of the coil and we can ignore the mass of the two single wires that attach to each end of the coil.

So you pulse the coil with the weak magnet in place.  With the DSO you can make the following measurements; 1) the total energy in the pulse,  2) the amount of energy burnt off in the resistance of the coil, 3) the amount of energy burnt off in the CSR.

We are going to assume that the total energy in the pulse is greater than the resistive dissipative energy.

Then you repeat the whole process with the large magnet in place.

For the small magnet, you measure the maximum velocity of the coil and then calculate the kinetic energy in the coil.  You do the same thing for the large magnet.  (Or measure the energy based on the height of the vertical jump.)

Now, it's a mistake to assume that the pulse energy will be the same for the small magnet and for the large magnet.  Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.

And logic is telling you that this is what your measurements should show you.

Pulse energy(weak magnet case) = coil resistance energy + CSR energy + coil kinetic energy.

- and -

Pulse energy(strong magnet case) = coil resistance energy + CSR energy + coil kinetic energy.

The conclusion is that the magnets in both cases are as dead as proverbial door nails and all of the energy for both cases was provided by the pulser circuit.

The other conclusion that you don't even have to run an experiment for is as follows; 1) you have no idea if the pulse energy in the two cases will be the same or not. 2) for each case, the pulse energy will be split into resistive dissipative energy and kinetic energy, 3) for each case you have no idea what what the split between resistive dissipaive energy and kinetic energy will be, but since for the strong magnet case the kinetic energy imparted into the coil is higher, you would strongly suspect that there will be a higher percentage of the energy in the pulse that becomes kinetic energy.  All of this is just common sense.

MileHigh