Roll on the 20th June

[sm0ky2]

@smokey2
thank you for the info on the magnets, I really appreaciate that. just one last detail, the linear A that exxcommon devloped, I have been through the thread for hours and could not findthe description.
I want to get as close to your design as possible and then do variations fom there.
Kind Regards
Mark

ok. took me a minute to find where i put this video. guess its still on the Tube. Basically, you have a square, with 4 bearings. one on each side, with the outer edge of the wheels facing in. so in the center of the square you have 4 perfect rollers, and you size it to fit either a square or round rod. This can be modified for a triangle, or probably any geometrical shape. My rods are square, because of a fundamental engineering flaw discussed on the previous page. But if you figure out a way to mount them where the magnets are directly on the ends and it doesnt matter which way they spin, then round rods are perfectly ok. Heres the bearing demo vid. from way back when.
Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JbcNVdWGOE

[markdansie]

@smokey2
Thanks for the video. If you were not so far away I would buy you a beer
Kind Regards
Mark (Australia)

[mscoffman]

@sm0ky2 - Thanks for the explanation, a real eye-opener.  Yes your wheel's operation is definitely different than I had envisioned it - definitely more clock-like than wheel-like imo...


Dunno, I must be doing something wrong 'cos my experiments indicate that for a given magnetic field strength (how far the magnets ramps are from the rotor magnets) and at low rpm's, (again hand-powered but much faster than sm0ky2's self-running speed) therefore low CF, the weights latch powerfully.  Increasing the rpm's sees CF acting counter to the magnet ramps till they no longer are able to lift the weights...

I think we are saying the same thing. The CF is what I am calling the
latching force. Because without any other forces the unbalance
of the arm will propagate itself in that state, which define "a latch".
The more angular momentum the stronger the unbalance will be
- the stronger the latching force is on the arm.

I see the magfield as an unlatching pulse because, to create dynamics
the magnitude of that force must exceed the latching force in the
opposite direction if the first is acting against mechanical stops.

The wheel itself sees the gravitational vector as spinning around
it so the angle of the wheel then comes into play relative to the
angle of the magnetic array "pulse".

:S:MarkSCoffman

[mscoffman]

@Sm0ky2

On these issues I am not saying that there is a problem only
that if I saw a machine spinning and needed to come up with a
way to discredit it, this is what I would suggest.

Good dischargable magnets would lose only a small fraction of their total
energy on each pass proportional to their total energy. I would expect
magnets to recover over time to some extent because environmental heat
would jiggle domains back. I saw a patent once where the guy proposed
recording a HF signal on magnetic tape which could be played back to
supply power. I assume this would leave the signal erased (or it be
a source of OU energy). I still suspect new rotoverter setups
may work this way, by erasing the armature core rather then the field
magnets.

The mag capable backing plate explanation really helps because it
makes it look like an iron "armature" which is a magnetic conductive
circuit. Aluminum kind of just spreads the field around some, making
it more diffuse. The picture makes it look like flattened shelving steel
or something which could conceivably be written to preserve state.
This making more likely to have parameters change and the wheel
stop.

I do think mechanical tensile strength could be used to stored energy.
That is how, I assumed, Archer's, "Rod of god" really worked. Often
when motor vehicles wreck into trees or multiple trees abnormally
energetic things happen. Hence ball bats and telephone poles.
Metals could be expected to gain some
strength back due to environmental thermal fluctuations. Again
I believe that there is a patent on roadway gates that contains
a pyramidal shaped of stacked metal rods, at top, that use tensile strength
of metal to assist the lifting of the gate.

:S:MarkSCoffman

[sm0ky2]

I see the magfield as an unlatching pulse because, to create dynamics
the magnitude of that force must exceed the latching force in the
opposite direction if the first is acting against mechanical stops.

The wheel itself sees the gravitational vector as spinning around
it so the angle of the wheel then comes into play relative to the
angle of the magnetic array "pulse".

:S:MarkSCoffman

you're absolutely right here mark. the angle of the array, vs the rod magnets plays a great role in how fast the linear translation of the rods. Yet at the same time, you get an opposite effect to the speed the rod enters the array (sticky spot). 

i imagine that ona very large wheel, this angle will play a significant role in the RPM, however, with my small 2-foot arms, the rotational speed doesnt change much, and infact runs better at the slower speed, with less required entry-force.

i call it "smooth", because when you move the arm into the array, that what it feels like when you are close to the operational parameters. there's not a great deal of back force stopping the rod from going in, up(across) , and out.

thats why on my machine, the distance variable it set at the flux/mass ratio. and 90% of the adjustability of my array is in the angle and "arc".

be forewarned, when you change the mass, distance, and/or magnets, you change the flux/mass ratio. It must stay within the proper proportion defined by the lift capabilities of your repelling sets of magnets. (array vs [rods + mass] ). this is the most important factor in this machine, it is the "what makes it work" if you will..  this flux to mass ratio must be correct, or no tweaking or adjustments will do you any good. i cant even tell you how many sleepless nights it took me to learn this the hard way.

the "1-rod on a wheel" set-up is great for experimenting with the flux/mass ratio of your magnets, just keep one important thing in mind. weigh the test-rod, and place 1/2 mass at each of the other 4-points around the wheel, so that the wheel is balanced when the rod is locked dead-center.

this will allow you to change magnetic set-ups quickly and easily to find the ratio that fits your design / wheel mass/ size/ ect.
small increases or decreases in magnet weight wont affect the tests a great deal, but if you increase the mass a lot, you will need to add additional mass to the counter-weights on the test-wheel.

i didnt build two wheels like that,. i just locked two rods at a time in the "center position", to test the 3rd. 

i didnt mean to discredit NEO magnets, i was just saying i didnt have any success with them.  i think if you had enough neos on a flexible (but sturdy) backing, you could adjust the array more and maybe something can be achieved there. my problem with NEOs was i was getting way too much sticky spot, and not enough lift distance to create the required momentum to overcome it.  wheel would take a large jolt entering the array, and lose most of its momentum before the rod had a chance to the arc.
i call that " un-smooth entry",
the ideal situation is for the rod to smoothly enter the array, with a gradual slowing, not a big "jolt".  This is mostly controlled by entry-angle. the angle of the bottom portion of the array with respect to the approaching rod-magnet. this portion of the array is "less round" than the upper 3/4's - which must be almost perfectly "round". [note: rather their cummulative field must be almost perfectly round. this can either be felt or observed with a magnetic viewer.]

----------------------------------------------------------------
[sm0ky begins to ramble..]
about that tape thing, the original idea, ( at least the way we learned it in engineering school) was to record all 8 tracks with a different signal, and such that there is constructive interference so that the amplitude of the resulting frequency was so great that it demolishes any attempt at a thermodynamic excuse. Radio stations actually spend several tens of thousands of dollars to prevent this sort of thing from sending massive jolts of destructive electricity
(from constructive interference, heh heh) from destroying their broadcast tower, in a fiery explosion that looks like a powerplant blowing up.
anyhow, the magnetic tape thing actually works. we demonstrated how in the lab, that the amplitude of the signal increases just as theory predicts. its simple waveform mechanics. it takes very little energy to playback the signal, you're just powering 8 read-heads
and the spool motor, all of which was accounted for. and we studied how the signals interacted with one another each pass, and the increase in amplitude.  we didnt take it any further than that, it was used to show us the PROBLEMS it causes in audio-based applications!!!  think we went off into Optics after that or something, but i remember we theorized that the magnetic tape would have to be interupted (energy extracted) periodically w/ respect to the resultant frequency, to keep it from exploding to values outside of the playback devices capabilities. There's actually a guy who makes this wind-generator, which is a magnet on a string, that flops back and forth on a coil, a speaker designed in this manner would be ideal for the magnetic tape thing. just play it back through your speaker/generator and as the amplitude increases so will the back EMF from the generator and i theorize that it should stablize out at some amplitude/ nominal power output, based mostly on the length of the speaker/generator.

done rambling
--------------------------------------------------------------