Canceling Lenz's Law - Methods

[Bruce_TPU]

When you short the output leads of any generator the first thing that happens is the stator field starts to collapse.

When that field collapses the voltage falls almost completely to zero. How many Watts are you putting out if the volts are zero and the amps are [anything you want]?

Of course the rotor increases in speed. This is because the generator is shorted and is no longer a generator. It is a flywheel.

This is a very common mistake made by folks of every technical level.

A short circuit is not a load when the generator is so weak the voltage collapses to zero. If they wish to load it they should load it with a light or resistor. Then it will slow down, if the field isn't caused to collapse completely.

I've performed short circuit tests on 2 megawatt diesel driven alternators and generators. It is a rather strange thing to see the engine speed surge near a dangerous sounding level when you close that 6000 amp 3 pole switch, shorting the generator.

I do love the man's style and getting the kids involved in such fun.

I still believe the man's idea to be valid and the idea simple enough for some to experiment with.

For all we know, if a light were used as load perhaps it would accelerate, if lenz simply forces the magnet in the opposite direction.

So many here simply read and never build anything, well here is an opportunity.

[gyulasun]

Hi Folks,

Has anybody considered testing this idea from Tao?

Gyula

I see three ways to interact with Lenz and his Law:
1. It is there in its full glory, lets not forget all the devices that we use everyday that use this Law.
2. You effectively disable it, and hence take it out of the equation, in ways similar to BEP stated, among others.
3. You sit down and have a talk with Lenz and he decides to help you, thereby reversing his Law just for you because you were so nice to him

I am quite sure, that out of the three, you guys might want to know more about number 3? Or are you thinking it is just a joke?

Let me just give a quick example of how this can be done, and has been done, perhaps unknowingly in many devices, heh.

1. Ok, take a simple low remanence core and wind two coils on it. Call one a power coil, and the other the pickup coil. Both coils should be OPEN.
2. Have a rotor with magnets on it's outer edge. Spin the rotor slightly.
3. Now, what will happen? The nearest magnet on the rotor is going to be highly attracted to the low remanence core material and provide you with essentially free motive power.
4. When that magnet gets at just about TDC to your low remanence core/coils, you fire a pulse into your power coil. This pulse should create a magnetic field that 'zeroes out' the magnetic field from that magnet on the rotor such that the magnet on the rotor doesn't 'see' the low remanence core anymore. Leave the pickup coil OPEN at this time, so there is no Lenz effect from coil to coil.
5. The magnet on the rotor now maintains its momentum and continues around and easily passes TDC. Another thing to remember is, the magnetic field of the rotor magnet is no longer in the low remanence core, it is bend away from the low remanence core because of the pulse from the power coil.
6. So, it is at this moment that the next key thing happens. The power pulse shuts off abrubtly, re-OPEN-ing the power coil. At this same instant, or slightly before, the pickup coil is CLOSED, preferably with a load of some sorts.
7. What happens when that power pulse shuts off? Well, lets look at the situation. We have the rotor's MAGNET moving AWAY from the low remanence core and we have that rotor's magnet's FIELD moving TOWARD the low remanence core. Did you get that? The physical magnet is moving away from the core and WITH MOMENTUM and the magnet's FIELD is moving TOWARD the low remanence core. Remember, the rotor magnet's FIELD was bend and expelled from the low remanence core during the power pulse, so, now that the power pulse is gone, the FIELD is trying to move TOWARD the low remanence core.
8. What happens now? Well Lenz's Law happens! But, this time Lenz helps us. The FIELD enters the low remanence core, and since the pickup coil is CLOSED, Lenz's Law will kick in and the pickup coil will create current flow in the pickup coil and the magnetic field that results from that current flow will OPPOSE the INCOMING FIELD from the rotor's magnet. Did you just see what happened?
9. What happens then is this, the rotor's magnet is moving along with it's built up momentum, and it's field tries to get back into the low remanence core, but Lenz's Law kicks in within the pickup coil and opposes the rotor magnet's field. So, this means that the rotor's magnet will be PUSHED AWAY from the low remanence core BY LENZ'S LAW that is occurring in the pickup coil, this means that the momentum and speed of the rotor and it's magnet WILL INCREASE, and at the same time that is happening, we have POWER FLOWING INTO the pickup coil, all thanks to Lenz's Law.
10. More later, if so desired...

Thanks Lenz...

With proper geometry and design, you CAN have Lenz's Law WORK FOR YOU! It is possible.You might have to 'pay for a single pulse' (and this in many setups might make everything under unity), BUT the fact remains, you CAN make Lenz's Law HELP YOU...

Peace guys...

[SkyWatcher123]

Hi gyulasun, thanks for posting that quote.
I think that would be a great idea, why, because Robert Adams was doing that very thing in at least some of his motor/generators and now that i ponder this.
magnacoaster is probably doing the same thing, only he has boosted the effect by placing the large neo magnet stack at the back of his coil/core.

In magnacoasters case, the departing rotor magnet will snap back to the core with much greater velocity because the coil/core is already polarized to attract the neo magnet.
Just a matter of tuning and timing as someone pointed out i think.
Definitely this has to be tested, though switching would be key here, unless some more automatic and simpler method can be used.
peace love light
Tyson

[zuvrick]

Multi layer spiral coils start at one end of the form and stay at that same spot until the maximum diameter of the coil is reached and then begin a second layer by winding in an ever decreasing diameter toward the coil form center, reverse-create another layer and continue until the length of the coil form is covered.

Difficult to describe but think of a rod with a bunch of washers stacked and slid onto it.

Then think of each washer as a separate flat spiral coil. All of these coils have the same handedness BUT one half of them have their winding start from the inner diameter and the other half start from the outer diameter.

The matter of spiral construction above is ambiguous.

(Sorry for being such a Johnny-come-lately, but this topic has just become of interest.)

In my Figure 1 below left, the first coil (yellow) continues to the second spiral, which is wound from the outside to the center, as described by BEP. But wait, the handedness reverses.

In Figure 2 on the right the coils are wound with the same handedness (left) but the wires of adjacent pairs of coils reverse direction where they would interconnect.

So which is the correct way? Remove the ambiguity (someone, BEP?).

Winding from the outside toward the center in, of course, impossible, but if each layer is wound from the center to the outside periphery, and then the coils are joined by some means, constructing a stack should not be difficult. Wind each pancake separately with epoxy, let it harden before removing it from the winding spindle. Two thick hubs with an adjustable gap, covered with some mold release agent (Teflon), should work.

[TinselKoala]

The matter of spiral construction above is ambiguous.

Not to me.

(Sorry for being such a Johnny-come-lately, but this topic has just become of interest.)

In my Figure 1 below left, the first coil (yellow) continues to the second spiral, which is wound from the outside to the center, as described by BEP. But wait, the handedness reverses.

No, it doesn't. Point your thumb along the wire from start of the first coil, slide your hand along the wire from start to finish, you will see that your thumb and fingers always point in the same direction and you don't have to break your wrist where the first coil joins the second one. It's a continuous wire in the same direction, spiralling out then in smoothly without reversing direction.

In Figure 2 on the right the coils are wound with the same handedness (left) but the wires of adjacent pairs of coils reverse direction where they would interconnect.

If they are of the same handedness in Figure 2.... why is one wound clockwise, and the other counterclockwise, reversing direction at the outer edge where they are  joined? Maybe we are using different definitions of "handedness"?

So which is the correct way? Remove the ambiguity (someone, BEP?).

I think he's describing the first way.

Winding from the outside toward the center in, of course, impossible,

For certain rather limited values of "impossible" perhaps. But not for these kinds of coils.

but if each layer is wound from the center to the outside periphery, and then the coils are joined by some means, constructing a stack should not be difficult. Wind each pancake separately with epoxy, let it harden before removing it from the winding spindle. Two thick hubs with an adjustable gap, covered with some mold release agent (Teflon), should work.

Pancake coil winding: with this system you can wind flat coils in multiple layers, from out to in, or in to out however you like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-rW9hlIljY