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



The SMOT (PM3.2)

Started by CLaNZeR, November 24, 2007, 08:24:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Low-Q

Quote from: hanglow on November 25, 2007, 04:21:06 PM
Wouldn't I get the same effect of iron if I just moved the metal stator's further away? I have tried some other models of motor's as well and it seems to me that there is always a sticky place. I think it may need to be un-symetrical in design.
The metal plates attract the rotor magnets all the time. Where the rotor magnet has just passed the corner of one statormagnet, it will be more or less repelled.
I have however done more simulations in FEMM, and it shows that if I encrease accuracy in mesh size and encreased the number of contour lines, plot points, and line integral points, the total simulated output is decreasing rapidly. I used first mesh size of 0.5, which displayed an average of 74Nm. In a non working motor this average is 0. So did I reduce mesh size to 0.2, and now the average output is 5.7Nm. So if I can predict the outcome with infinite accuracy, the average output would be 0.

So FEMM might be good enough to predict reality, if you have high enough accuracy and plenty of processor power in you computer (It takes much time to calculate all these measurements with high accuracy)

Vidar

hanglow

Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?

Low-Q

Quote from: hanglow on November 26, 2007, 09:00:39 AM
Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?
After further research, I just indicates that the device will never work as the data I simulates varies so much just because of changes in samples, accuracy etc. At least the data measured is nothing to base the real life on. However, the data simulated is allways on the same side of the +/- scale, so maybe that's an indication on that it WILL work. I don't know for sure.

Vidar

Thaelin

   Once again, a sim program is only as good as its programmer. On of the best on the market missed the res point of a coil/cap pair by far enough to be in error for what I wanted. It did prove that the circuit would work but had to tweak it a bit to settle in on the right freq.
   On using it for magnets, age old point, 2d not 3d. So far femm dont do magnets very well. I trusted a design from a sim and spent the bucks for the magnets, yup you guessed it. Not gona work. I would love to see a sim made that would do magnetic fields correct. So on we go.......

thaelin

hanglow

I'm going to rebuild this one with 16 magnets and put some magnets on the side. It may take me a few days. Maybe I can try some shielding to get past the sticky points.