Magnetic OU principle, You should really take a look at this !

[Ergo]

@Ergo,
If possible, please provide a link or reference where 'physics' shows a motor or generator that has no 'cogging' or 'sticky point'.

My thesis was not to prove motors being free of cogging. It was just that it has nothing to do with overunity.
Any regular electric motor using skewed laminations have extremely low cogging.
Every electric motor using air coils without any steel lamination is absolutely free of cogging.

http://www.ampflow.com/ampflow_motors.htm
Quote:
The S28s have skewed armature laminations to eliminate the heavy "cogging" that results from using the extremely powerful neodymium magnets.

Here's an air coil motor with no cogging at all.
http://www.thingap.com/

Just google more on this and find out about it for yourself.

[wizkycho]

No wizkycho, eliminating cogging has nothing do do with overunity.
This is where you don't understand physics.

If Cogging (NdFeB magnet pair stucked on thick fanner) is present in this setup You need to generate Energy Peak/s.
If using 100 magnet pairs (why not) You will need 1kW (for at least second) Energy peak to unstuck the machine.
Now where would you get that ? but If do supply that E You get that material will start to bend - wobble, bearings streching - Losses that will prevent overunity to happen. Energy peak of that sort is thousends of times greater then when magnets are BALANCED.
Only E friction needs to be overcomed In every point of rotation. No need for massive and heavy rotors to integrate those energy peaks.
You don't understand Physics - and practically You sound like you never tried to unstuck NdFeB two magnets one from another
Try It and Imagine the Force to unstack 50 pairs. If you can not Imagine than Open Your Mind. This sounds only practical. but it is allso reason for OU. When working with that extreme short and very high energy peaks then parasitic Inertia comes into account and ITS still undefineable losses (by todays science), massive flywheels necceserry...but still...
no OU. cause complete energy is lost within (not observable) vibration (caused by Energy Peaking) in material !!! believe it.



An output from a motor or any other moving device is entirely created by torque and speed.
Just because you eliminate cogging you still have to add power to create torque.
My claim is that the input power is equal or higher than the output from a device using this new "dics" contraption"

If you can explain how great torque is created from this setup at none or very small power input then I might reconsider my stand.
If You still don't see BALANCING OU Try Hildebrand (magnetic transistor...)

wiz

[Koen1]

Ah, good. I knew I wasn't a complete idiot.
So there's more people who want to hear exactly how we arrive at the 50:1 ratio, it seems.
I feel that Ergo is right in his comments regarding the cogging thing.
"How does this produce 50:1 output-to-input?" is answered by "well, we don't use cogs!"
and that is still no explanation. A cogless setup will still need to somehow produce
50 times more output energy than you put in, and the omission of cogs does not
magically make that so. The 50:1 must be in the cogless setup to begin with, it
doesn't result grom omitting the cogs, does it? If it did, then surely the entire
50:1 thing has more to do with some magic cogging trick than with magnetism...

So how does the seperation of filaments add to the rotation of the wheel?
I can imagine that we may be able to create a somewhat balanced situation where
the removal of the filaments from the magnetic field is comensated by the introduction
of a second field on the other end of the filaments, so that no additional 'drag'
is produced...

Oh, hold on, that's what you mean by "cogging", isn't it? You're not talking
about cogs at all, you're talking about a magnet rotor/stator assembly getting
"stuck" at the "sticky point"...? Is that it? Jeez... Ok, if that's what you mean,
then please forget my above rambling on cogs.
But I still want to know where you get your 50:1 ratio, because even in a completely
dragless rotor you should only get out what you get in, like 1:1...

And that still doesn't really explain why the wheel would move continuously...

I expect Wyzkycho to reply overly aggressive again.. seems to be his style...

(@Wyzkycho: can you please not reply using those horrible RED CAPITALS?
It's really simple, you just click on "quote" and whenever you want to insert a
reply you just add "[/quote] Your Reply |quote]" and the quoted block will be interrupted
by your reply. It looks much better and is much easier to read that way. Thanks.)

[BEP]

@Ergo,

I'm not questioning your thesis. I'm doing research and terminology used is a problem. What is called cogging here should probably be called 'detent'.

What I'm looking for is a current example of a generator that has no detent effect (throughout the load curve) and zero torque ripple and no variation of torque regardless of  load.

I am very familiar with the motor types your references present. When the windings are shorted there is a definite resistance to rotating the shaft (yes, I'm referring to the ones without a brake).
In inductor terms - an inductor that has absolutely no CEMF (CEMF and BEMF are not the same, info for others, not you Ergo. I gather you understand the difference.)
To use terms common here, a Lenz-less generator or motor (not affected by Lenz's law). Most should agree such a thing does not exist? Anyone, if it does a patent number will be appreciated 

>>Edit...

Keon1 is correct..  Drag is the issue..

Yes, the amount of flux will not change whether it is routed through a compressed stack of washers (and naturally they will separate from each other) or when they are repelling each other - as long as the same amount of washers are there.

The question is - what use is this? Piston like action? Ramps? something else.....?

[wizkycho]

This simple (not too good) animation will give You 50 to 1 = O to I !

pic explain:

cyan-greenesh -> ferromagnetic stack, quadratic shaped (in stack isolated one from another and sufficiently thin to dissable eddy currents)

blue--> magnet north
red --> magnet south

strenght of magnets must never satturate fanners

So E Input is just friction - E output is Full mechanicall strenght of magnet
"Multiply this setup" times you want and friction INPUT stays the same, mechanicall OUTPUT multyplies by magnet pair times.

Again
Energy Peak is lost or most of it (heat or break) within intramolecular excahnge in mass of material if too short (and here is short) no matter how Powerfull so even Flywheel can not help cogged setup. remmember that.

This is balanced and smooth

Wiz

this can be made rotational setup but have no slightest idea how to couple mechanics of "multiphase" fanners to one energy extraction point.

maybe my avatar is scarry. this is two dark templars (Protos from Starcraft game) combined in energy archon who when clicked says "we need energy"