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

[Airstriker]

I don't think alteration of the  N-S orientation matters that much.

Actually it does matter - please read my post about cancelling back EMF. It's needed to move smoothly on the hysteresis loop. What also matters is the coils connections - you will find that also in the said post.
Please remember that everything counts here if you want to have a self runner.
As for the magnets tolerances it for sure has to be done as you've said - simply match the pairs.

@Paul
Why are you using only single magnets in your motor? Is there any special reason for this ? If not - could you test a pair of magnets in the configuration I've proposed and compare the input power needed ? Thanks in advance.

Good luck hardware men !

[maw2432]

Thanks for your reply Tesla..

BTW  I found this answer to  "What is Metglas?"

Metglas is an amorphopus metal, Amorphous metals do not have crystalline structure like other magnetic materials. All the atoms in an amorphous metal are randomly arranged, thus giving it a higher resistivity (about three times) value than that for crystalline counterparts. Amorphous alloys are prepared by cooling the melt at about million degrees per second. This fast cooling does not give the atoms enough time to rearrange into stable crystalline form. As a result one gets metastable amorphous structure. Because of the absence of crystalline structure amorphous alloys are magnetically soft (lower coercivity, lower core loss, higher permeability,...). High resistivity gives lower loss at higher frequencies. The losses are among the lowest of any known magnetic materials.

Sorry if this has been posted before but I am now convinced Steorn may have used this as his core material.

Bill

[gravityblock]

So selection of matching pairs of magnets will be required in my view.

In addition to every set of dual magnets. One set of dual magnets needs to match all the other pairs as closely as possible.

[PaulLowrance]

Holly Smokes!!! I just did some quick COP measurements, and when subtracting electrical resistance losses, it is showing my tiny "orbo replication" is way over COP 1.

Some real quick numbers just to get this post out:


Power input from inductance input: 12.9 mW

Power output in joule heating from rotating device: 32 mW

COP: 2.5


If that's not enough, I am not even considering that nearly all of the energy that goes into inductance can be captured back, at least according to Steorns recent inductance measurements on their Orbo. So lets take that into consideration -->


Power input from inductance input: 0.258 mW (258 uW)

Power output in joule heating from rotating device: 32 mW

COP: 124


If that is not enough, I did not even take into consideration all of the joule heating.


It's possible I could have made a calculator error. We'll have to see, but so far so good. Also, remember these are quick measurements, so it could be off a bit. IMO the COP is higher than 2.5. What's interesting is that this is very close to Steorn's COP claims. Note that Steorn also does not capture the toroid losses.


I hate to get everyone's hopes up, but this is a very sincere post. IMO this tiny orbo is over COP 1 when not considering electrical resistance from the wires and mosfet.

[PaulLowrance]

A bit more detail now. I found out how much energy is going into the actual inductance of the core. The core has appreciable inductance for ~ 60us (60 microseconds). So it's not difficult to calculate the energy that goes into the inductor per cycle.

Next post will be how I came up with the joule heating output.