F.B.D.I.S.S.M - Flux.Boosted.Dual.Induction.Split.Spiral.Motor.

[Ergo]

The Wankel: The little amount of energy you put in, will be at most the little amount of energy you get out. No matter the complexity, simplicity, or arrangment of electromagnets etc. The energy you put in will be the most you'll get out. The Wankel design is nothing more than a electromotor - in fact it seems to work pretty much like a regular brushless motor. But maybe overunity is not the goal?

Vidar

By this statement I assume you believe Paul Sprain was lying his ass of when he reported his wankel
to deliver 11544 watts output at merely 200 watts in?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2648.msg38778#msg38778

On the new machine we are getting 222 Nm at 52 radians. The maximum I can put
into the Electro-Magnet is 110 volts at 9 amps firing 33 times a second.
As you can see the input is nowhere near what the output power is.
(added by admin: Output is a huge 12.5 KWatts, while the input is just 200 Watts only !)
Paul

[Low-Q]

The Wankel: The little amount of energy you put in, will be at most the little amount of energy you get out

Have you ever designed and built a Wankel motor of your own?
It seems like your just guessing here.

No matter the complexity, simplicity, or arrangment of electromagnets etc. The energy you put in will be the most you'll get out.

Most of the torque is created by the natural twisting force of the neo magnets, not by the electro magnets.
So how can you determine that I'll only get out what I put in?

The Wankel design is nothing more than a electromotor - in fact it seems to work pretty much like a regular brushless motor.

I have designed a couple of BLDC motors and also their controllers in my career. And I see no resemblence to a regular motor whatsoever.
In a regular motor all of the torque is created by the electro magnets continuously working towards the permanent magnets. Push and pull.
And when the motor increases in speed it will output Back Voltage. When the Back Voltage has reached the same level as the working
voltage that is feed to the motor it stops to accelerate. This is the regular motors rated RPM level.
When you load the regular electric motor you will lower the RPM and the Back Voltage vill decrease as well.
The difference in applied voltage and the generated Back Voltage divided by the internal resistance of the motor equals the current going into the motor.
Simply Ohms law. This is why a regular motor consumes more current when loaded harder.
I can tell you for sure that a Wankel does not operate in this way at all. You better study regular motors before comparing those two motor types.
No offense towards you. I just wanted to explain how it really works.

But maybe overunity is not the goal?

Of course OU is the goal. Otherwise I would not spend time at this forum!

1.
Sometimes it is quite easy to predict the sum of 2 + 2.

2.
The torque made by the neos will for sure make some work over a sertain distance. However, they are not turned off at any time, and will allways affect how the motor will run. You can make electromagnets to add the energy to overcome the sticky point, but the sticky point will be there allways. Let's say that you can reduce, or even equalize the sticky point, but these actions require more or less energy to do. The more energy you put in, the weaker the sticky point is, the more powerful the engine will be. Nothing spooky with that. It is just an ordernary electro motor.

As you encrease power to weaken sticky points, the less torque you will achieve by the permanent magnets as well. You see, the sticky point is the reason why you have torque in the first place. The torque equalize just when the magnets has got to rest at the sticky point. However, the sticky point must be turned off while the rotor is in motion and is suppose to pass it - just not to get stucked there forever. An electro magnet can do that. Nevertheless, the output power of the motor will be the same or less than the power you put into the electromagnets.

3.
Thanks for the explanation. I do however still see similarities between the Wankel and the brushless motor. The main difference, electronically, is to me the time of applied current to the electromagnet to avoid the sticky points. Where the similarities stops seems to me to be the difference in how the electromagnet affects the rotor magnets. In the wankel you make the permanent magnets do most of the job, at least how I have understood the concept, and let an electromagnet take care of the short period of sticky point. Well, this period is not very short afterall. If you turn off the electromagnet right after the rotormagnet has passed the sticky point, the rotor magnet will deaccelerate due to counterforce made by the magnetism behind it - when there is no electromagnet to take care of this magnetism anymore. Due to this little problem the rotormagnet will not have the expected speed you are hoping for - without this problem, you would for sure have more output than input.
Well, then the magnet will speed up a little bit when approaching the next sticky point. The short time of applied energy through the electromagnet will again let the rotormagnet pass, but the built up acceleration, will again deaccelerate when the electromagnet is turned off, before the rotormagnet takes another turn. Little energy in, and little, or less, energy out.

4. If OU is the goal, the Wankel will in my opinion not be the solution.

Vidar

[Low-Q]

The Wankel: The little amount of energy you put in, will be at most the little amount of energy you get out. No matter the complexity, simplicity, or arrangment of electromagnets etc. The energy you put in will be the most you'll get out. The Wankel design is nothing more than a electromotor - in fact it seems to work pretty much like a regular brushless motor. But maybe overunity is not the goal?

Vidar

By this statement I assume you believe Paul Sprain was lying his ass of when he reported his wankel
to deliver 11544 watts output at merely 200 watts in?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2648.msg38778#msg38778

On the new machine we are getting 222 Nm at 52 radians. The maximum I can put
into the Electro-Magnet is 110 volts at 9 amps firing 33 times a second.
As you can see the input is nowhere near what the output power is.
(added by admin: Output is a huge 12.5 KWatts, while the input is just 200 Watts only !)
Paul

1. If this is true, Paul Sprain should be dead by now

2. If this is true, the world should knew it by now

3. No, I do not believe Paul is lying. He just hasn't done his calculations right. It is no problem to achieve more power out than you put in, but not for longer time than a fraction of the total loop. Test results do often look promising, but one also very often tries to neglect the rest of the loop - or just forgets it in all the excitements. I believe it is as simple as that. Maybe I'm a little arrogant when saying this, but this is my truly opinion on the subject.

Vidar

[Honk]

I dont believe in conspiracy theories, like getting mr Sprain killed just because hes got OU. No way.
Just listen to Mark Dansie, a member of NEC, that have been around for a while investigating many new power
sources and looking for OU proof. He has never encountered any conspiracy against new power inventions.
On the contrary, all new power findings, OU or not, have always been appreciated and well founded.
It's people like you and me that invent the conspiracy theories, but there are really none.
Don't you think e.g USA would love to get their hands on a new great and cheap power source so they
could get rid of their oil dependence. Of course they would. Anything else is just imaginations of peoples minds.
You should take into account that every year thousands of billions of dollars is invested into new energy development
like fission power, fusion power, solar power, wind power, wave power, water power and so on.
Where's the logic in killing an inventer that can provide another power solution, besides of of those I just mentioned.
You are so wrong, my friend...so very wrong...

[Honk]

1.
Sometimes it is quite easy to predict the sum of 2 + 2.

2.
The torque made by the neos will for sure make some work over a sertain distance. However, they are not turned off at any time, and will allways affect how the motor will run. You can make electromagnets to add the energy to overcome the sticky point, but the sticky point will be there allways. Let's say that you can reduce, or even equalize the sticky point, but these actions require more or less energy to do. The more energy you put in, the weaker the sticky point is, the more powerful the engine will be. Nothing spooky with that. It is just an ordernary electro motor.

As you encrease power to weaken sticky points, the less torque you will achieve by the permanent magnets as well. You see, the sticky point is the reason why you have torque in the first place. The torque equalize just when the magnets has got to rest at the sticky point. However, the sticky point must be turned off while the rotor is in motion and is suppose to pass it - just not to get stucked there forever. An electro magnet can do that. Nevertheless, the output power of the motor will be the same or less than the power you put into the electromagnets.

3.
Thanks for the explanation. I do however still see similarities between the Wankel and the brushless motor. The main difference, electronically, is to me the time of applied current to the electromagnet to avoid the sticky points. Where the similarities stops seems to me to be the difference in how the electromagnet affects the rotor magnets. In the wankel you make the permanent magnets do most of the job, at least how I have understood the concept, and let an electromagnet take care of the short period of sticky point. Well, this period is not very short afterall. If you turn off the electromagnet right after the rotormagnet has passed the sticky point, the rotor magnet will deaccelerate due to counterforce made by the magnetism behind it - when there is no electromagnet to take care of this magnetism anymore. Due to this little problem the rotormagnet will not have the expected speed you are hoping for - without this problem, you would for sure have more output than input.
Well, then the magnet will speed up a little bit when approaching the next sticky point. The short time of applied energy through the electromagnet will again let the rotormagnet pass, but the built up acceleration, will again deaccelerate when the electromagnet is turned off, before the rotormagnet takes another turn. Little energy in, and little, or less, energy out.

4. If OU is the goal, the Wankel will in my opinion not be the solution.

Vidar

1) Let's see the final outcome. Perhaps 2 + unknown factor = 6 this time.

2) I guess you haven't heard of overlapping magnetic fields. They will let the rotor pass without loosing momentum by the sticky spot.
    When the rotor magnet is next to the electromagnet it's activated to attract the rotor magnet away from the stator sticky spot ending.
    When the rotor is passing the electromagnet area the controller will flip fields and repel the magnet away.
    So there is no deacceleration due to any counterforce made by the magnetism behind it. It's pure repel. And this is how Paul does it.
    Except for the flipping of fields. That's my idea. And I have developed a controller capable of doing this in less than 200uS.
    And the power required by the electro magnets is minimised by using a Supermalloy core.

3) I repeat. There is no similarities between the wankel and a regular electric motor.
    The regular motor does not have any powerful coasting at all. All movement is accomplished by the applied electricity.