Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity!

[bistander]

                     Hi!   This video is from another thread, this device showed the reversal of Lenz's Law.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANXhrdRNrss     

I don't see connection to Lenz, but off-topic, IMO.

        but even here it is clear that the stronger the magnets interact, the weaker the middle and the stronger the field at the ends. This happens until the two magnets merge into one magnet. And this composite magnet has a field in the center equal to Zero.

Agree

          Perhaps I am far away and cut off from the generally accepted opinion, but it is already doubtful to draw lines of force through a magnetically hard material on a par with a magnetically soft material.

Maybe, but it's the lines outside that we deal with. Current modeling techniques seem to work quite well.

         here another strange phenomenon can occur, at a certain percentage of interaction between the magnets, a rapid restructuring of the properties of the magnets can occur. In this case, the connection between the rotor and the stator can be momentarily lost .

Is this different from cogging?

There are many such little-studied phenomena and it is impossible to model them.

              first you need to model without a stator, the overall picture and understanding will be clearer.

          From all that I have said, a simple conclusion is that we need an exact replication of this device.
        These are not all phenomena, I will leave a couple of surprises for myself for now ........  


                         Boris
           

             

Yes, I would love to see accurate replication, or better tests of original. Until then, research and discussion will suffice.
Regards
bi

[r2fpl]

Why would the field of the magnet N change from 1 to 2? N is a magnet that is very strongly attracted to the stator steel. You can only use force to move it to position 2. You can use an electric field or move it manually, e.g. by pulling it. This is what the magnet inside does.
All I see here is a jump torque and nothing else. It looks nice but when we make it, for example, generators, there will be no profit because there will be no jump! only movement. Why ? because we have reverse currents that inhibit the flashover.
Maybe I'm wrong, but the guy built something that he thought would work. If it worked, there would be a queue of applicants for its patent.

[bistander]

Are you able to calculate and display force at each increment between position 1 and position 2? While all the time the center director is changing its gaps affecting total circuit reluctance? Then we can get somewhere but still need to enter dynamics with moments of inertia.

But your question. Static picture at 2 is same as at 1, if director is in relative same position.

My take.
bi

[sm0ky2]

Your restraint is far greater than mine :-D
Wise to remain doubtful, the more we notice, the less convincing a case it appears to become.

I imagine the one-way bearing's job might be to prevent the COP 1:2 phase on one side of either first or second stage?
Or would that serve another, unconnected role?
Apologies if this has been discussed, but would the second stage (rotor) never get into a situation of risking kickback? A one-way bearing on that mounted to the stator, couldn't hurt?
Alternatively I could imagine a flywheel mounted via one-way bearing to either interruptor, rotor, or both. The flywheel could be driven by spring load to keep pace with its associated member, and then more or less lock in that speed for it member through the one-way bearing. It's a different things to be prevened negative rotation, and to run into a hard flywheel connection when slowing down. Intuitively I'd want to try and keep the accelerated positive rotation mostly disconnected from the flywheel, although input smoothening may well turn out advantageous anyway.

With the much larger momentum on the second shaft i do not think thats a concern.


As for the difference between a mechanical planetary gear and this magnetic analogy
theres really not much to contrast. The physics are almost identical save swapping mechanical friction for the magnetic gearing interface.
The magnitude of either is solely dependent upon the quality of construction.


There are some limitations I notice at small device sizes or large magnetic 'gear tooth counts'
There is an unavoidable field blending that will limit how close the components can be to one another.


more teeth will mean larger machine diameter's or possibly stacking them along the shaft to keep fields apart.


There is an acceleration time period; where energy is being consumed by the primary circuit
but the secondary rotor has not yet reached generation speeds
This time period may be a key point for analysis.


Also what is not known clearly is
the affect of drawing current from the output on secondary rotor RPM
Also, probably key information

[r2fpl]

Are you able to calculate and display force at each increment between position 1 and position 2? While all the time the center director is changing its gaps affecting total circuit reluctance? Then we can get somewhere but still need to enter dynamics with moments of inertia.

But your question. Static picture at 2 is same as at 1, if director is in relative same position.

My take.
bi

The question is, is it supposed to work with or without a load? This is essential.
If without then the torque of inertia is fine as long as the revs aren't too high. If with a load, for example with a coil, there will be no torque at all.
Have you seen a magnet fall onto a solid block of copper? here is the answer.