STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[mondrasek]

I look at permeability as being 100% attraction and 0% saturation.  The permeability is just the inverse of saturation.  When the core is 100% saturated, then it will have 0% attraction. 

And I believe this is correct for electromagnetic situations.  But if a PM is interacting with a material, then there is only a finite amount that it can "saturate" that material.  So if the material is more permeable than the PM can, in effect, fully (99.99%) saturate, that is just permeability that works against the rotor PM in this orbo implementation.

Likewise, if there is more permeability than the PM can use, it can still be 100% attractive to the PM and have extra (wastefull) permeabilty left over.

Being able to saturate the core very quickly with a fast rise time in current and with magnetic A decreases the energy needed from the pulse to increase the core towards saturation so it begins to lose its attractiveness.  The faster the core increases towards saturation, the closer to TDC the rotor magnets can get before the pulse is needed and this will increase the speed gains.

I agree completely.

[lumen]

Now we are getting to the nuts and bolts of the operation.
Steorn originally said (a long time back) that there is an effect in steel and that they were looking at other materials also. So the original effect was found in steel which has high initial permeability and easily saturates.

@GB,
Sorry, but I believe the rotor magnets must be opposite polarities and that the toroid coil must also be standing upright as in the three operating Orbo (I wonder if Orbo is also plural) to be OU.

I'm thinking it's the fact that the rotor magnets do saturate part of the coils core as they approach, and then the current continues the saturation in the same direction (important) around the core.
This would then take less current to fully saturate the core.
Not a proven fact but merely the way I'm looking at it until additional information is provided.

[gravityblock]

@GB,
Sorry, but I believe the rotor magnets must be opposite polarities and that the toroid coil must also be standing upright as in the three operating Orbo (I wonder if Orbo is also plural) to be OU.

I'm thinking it's the fact that the rotor magnets do saturate part of the coils core as they approach, and then the current continues the saturation in the same direction (important) around the core.
This would then take less current to fully saturate the core.
Not a proven fact but merely the way I'm looking at it until additional information is provided.

You're right, the PM do saturate the coils as they approach with opposite poles.  This means the coil is losing it's attractiveness and you lose potential speed as it get's closer to TDC.  The additional speed it gains with like poles is not lost on it's departure.  With opposite poles, the mechanical energy it gained during the approach is lost during it's departure of TDC.  Yes, with opposite poles you do need less energy to saturate the core.....but the mechanical energy it gained during the approach will be lost while the core is increasing in saturation.  I know exactly what you are saying.  I have built an Adams motor in the past and have experience with that theory.  Steorn's device does not use the same principals of the Adams motor, but they do share some similarities.

Something interesting, when my replication has been running for awhile, I can squeeze and hold the bare wires with my fingers and the wire is not hot.  The wire is around room temperature.  The coil is around room temperature also.

[Edit:]  The only advantage I can see with having the coils vertical is you can fit more around the rotor without them interfering with each other.  It may even be possible to set them up in a way where they have a positive affect on each other, such as only energizing every other coil and alternating between them.  I am not that far yet.  A single coil being vertical or horizontal should have the same results.  There may be an advantage with multiple coils when they're vertical, since they will be farther away from each other.  I will test this when I have more than one coil.  I also plan on doing a spin down test with the coil vertical.

I do know that my reed switch works better when it is 180 degrees from the coil when it is horizontal.  If I place it at 90 degrees then it doesn't work very well.  I may be able to put the coil vertical and have the reed switch work at 90 degrees with the same performance.



GB

[gravityblock]

I need to make a correction in my previous post.  The reed switch now works at 90 degrees from the coil with the dual magnets having like poles with the same performance as 180 degrees.  When the dual magnets have opposite poles, then my reed switch doesn't perform well at 90 degrees.

Please note:  I am using a homemade mechanical reed switch.  It is cheap, durable, and fast to make.  I have yet to burn this homemade switch with the arcing.  When I have a recovery circuit and suppress the arcing, the homemade switch will be very reliable and dependable.  I do plan on trying different types of switching methods down the road.  Still a lot of work and testing to be done here.


GB

[FreeEnergyTruth]

New Steorn Photos Posted Showing Preparations For Tuesday's Talk

http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/