Magnetic Torque Multiplier

[wattsup]

@khabe

Your last two designs look great but will not work since this is a magnet to magnet design, if whatever you are driving decides to stop, the magnets will smash together. The design cannot have any interleaving of the magnets since this will be exposed to some slippage and bang.

[khabe]

@khabe

Your last two designs look great but will not work since this is a magnet to magnet design, if whatever you are driving decides to stop, the magnets will smash together. The design cannot have any interleaving of the magnets since this will be exposed to some slippage and bang.

You mean worm gear? of course I have not probed, just drawed out few hours ago. But simple two wheel bush/bush magnet gear works well, nothing smashed together ...
the rest of your prophecies I just dont understand what you are speaking.
I try to explane:
If you put few or more ring magnets on to rod SN NS SN NS SN NS ... they will stay with distance. Its hard to press two magnets together and rod keeps it stable on line,
The same story when my bush/bush gear. When right geometry then magnets never touch together. Each wheel has axis of course - axis and wheels keeping all stable
Of course it is not meant as car reductor - max torque hang on about strenght of magnet
The only question is why and when to use stupid magnetic gear when common gear is much more simple, sure and more light-weight
Mmmmh ... sometimes/somewhere it could be useful ... for example when low torques and flexible vibration-isolation gear system is welcome 
These draws are simplified and robust. Just ideas. I have several more designs I hope you´ll not angry - some of theses I do ascribe as my properties.
Im sure you own somes as well
cheers,
khabe

[4Tesla]

Good idea, but I this is the problem I see:

[khabe]

Mh-mhh,
I never spoke its selfrunner or OU,
This is just magnetic gear.
At that simplified draw,
Oh dear ...
cheers,
khabe

[Jdo300]

@wattsup,

Yes, I know the inventor is not saying that it produces more electrical output than input, but he is saying that the device produces more mechanical torque than normal because of the magnetic force interactions. Yes I realize that part of this is because of reduced frictional losses because the parts are not in contact with each other. I also realize that the design will have slippage which is why the inventor stresses the importance of using strong magnets.

But what remains to be seen in my mind is the torque canceling effect because of the layout of the magnets. I believe that there is more to this cancellation than the simple fact that the gear ratio is so high from the worm gear configuration. From studying the diagrams, it appears that ther would be little to no mechanical force transmitted backwards from the large gear to the small worm wheel. And likewise, there would be minimal torque exerted on the worm wheel to turn the large disk. and this is not just because of the high mechanical gear ratio, but because the magnets are physically attracting and repelling the disk as the worm wheel magnets are moved into the plane of rotation of the large gear. Also, looking again at the second diagram on page 3 of the patent, it appears that when the worm wheel is in the position shown that the torque forces on the worm wheel are canceled out because the top magnet is attracting the wheel, but the bottom magnet is repelling. the magnet in the center would be the one exerting all of the force to physically move the large disk, and this force woud, of course not be transmitted to the worm wheel because the two wheels are at 90 degrees to each other.

However, I will admit that this canceling condition may not apply through 100% of the rotation cycle as the worm wheel magnets transition from one to the next. But the inventor does address this issue in the document. I still believe that there is something to this because I have been studying one of the basic principles that I believe can make magnetic systems function. It's called the Tri-Force principle and i outline it in this document here: http://www.fdp.nu/free_energy.asp?book=90

The only way I can see this arrangement working is IF the magnetic cancellation is taking place as I mentioned before. Otherwise I agree with you that there is nothing special about the design. But this can only be confirmed by a replication.

@khabe,

Great drawings you have there! I started to make some myself but I havent finished them yet. You definitely have the basic concept. Since I don't have any completed drawings to show everyone, I'll just describe the construction details. My idea was to construct two identical rotor disks using 1/4 in thick Plexiglass that anyone can get from the hardware store. If you buy some 1/4 in thick Neo magnets from K&J Magnetics, these would fit perfectly on the perimeter of the Plexiglas disks. You could just file flat spots onto the disk edges to glue the magnets on or file shallow slots into the disk to more securely fix the magnets. The ones I was looking at getting are 1/8" thick but they also have 1/16" thick ones as well.

For the worm gear, I was thinking of using a short length of PVC pipe which I could file flat spots on to glue the magnets down. Another option would be to simply drill holes into it and use round magnets but I'm not certain if this would compromise the performance of the design or not. From there one could glue PVC pipe ends onto the pipe and drill holes for a threaded rod to go through. Then you can just spin it by hand to observe the effects of the forces to see how it woks. L-brackets and roller skate bearings could be used to constrain everything to a base like shown in the patent.

God Bless,
Jason O