Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power

[gotoluc]

Hi TK,

I had no idea the topic was confusing but I'll sum it up in this one post.

Over five years ago I came up with a unique linear motor design where a coil moves on a steel core between two opposing permanent magnets.

The benefits I found in this design are:
1. The stronger the magnets and the more core surface area, the stronger the push or pull gram force is.
2. The design has no magnet cogging as the cores and magnets don't move.
3. The coils Inductance has next to no change as it moves since it never leaves the core.
4. If designed correctly the coils push or pull gram force is equal throughout the travel stroke.
5. Compared to a standard solenoid my design uses a fraction of the input power, so it can be continuously operated 24/7. A standard solenoid would catch on fire if it tried to continuously push or pull what my design can do.
6. My design offers huge travel distances compared to a standard solenoid.
7. It can be made to travel a 1/4 inch to 4 inches or more if needed while maintaining the same gram force throughout the stroke.

Here is a demo video of how my basic design works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eTQ49RcFKM
Here is a larger magnet version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa1dO8qWPQU
Here is a super build version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6pc-XNS9uo

All tests were done with the same digital scale which displays pull gram force in 5 gram increments.

Results of the tests in the same order as the videos above:

no.1 has   250 grams pull force with a continuous 1.2 watt input
no.2 has   500 grams pull force with a continuous 0.43 watt input
no.3 has 2500 grams pull force with a continuous 0.43 watt input

As you can see I'm demonstrating that the pull gram force can be increased by the force of the permanent magnet without increasing the input power. Note that test no.1 has 1.2 watt input and test no.2 has 0.43 watt input which is a 65% reduction in input power but still has double the gram pull force.
Test no.3 has 5 times the gram pull force of test no.2 using the same input power since the core and magnet surface area is 8 times wider.
So obviously not just the force of the magnet can play a part but more core and magnet surface area also increases the push or pull gram force.

This is what I've been trying to demonstrate in a nutshell. However, since this is the Overunity Forum people here are mostly interested in OU possibility rather then an innovation.
So to please everyone I did tests to see if the super build could have OU potential even though I knew it would not since the design also suffers of the generator effect as the coil moves in the permanent magnet field. Since it can only move at a certain speed because the coil generates power as it moves, it fights the input power which is coming in the same direction, so we cannot beat the laws of physics here.

So what I'm saying now is, lets forget about OU and look at this design and compare it to a solenoid since I think it has many advantages (listed above) and could be used in the industry to perform certain tasks that a standard solenoid cannot do.
However, I have no idea how solenoids are rated and I also have no schooling. So I looked around on the net and found a few charts which I posted to see if anyone would help but nothing has come of it.

Hope this clears up the confusion?

BTW, I don't have an off the shelf solenoid to make comparisons with. There must be a way to look at solenoid data to find their performances? so maybe we don't need to physically re-test a solenoid if the manufacture have done it?

Luc

[tinman]

Way to go Luc.
With out a doubt one of the best achievements I have seen on any OU forum-weather it's OU or not.

Brad

[Khwartz]

Would be great,  guys that if you speak about "force" you speak about "gram.force" (gf), or "kilogram.force" (kgf) but not just "gram" or "kg", otherwise it is confusing.

See on the charts you provide,  Luc, it is indeed "gf" for the "force" scale. Because if you just speak about "2.5 kg" this then just a mass and this can lead to wrong interpretation of the results. Now that I have seen your vid on the very large one you've just provided, I see it had nothing to do with lifting a mass.

But you're right, even if not OU it may have a industrial interest.

BTW, I would be very happy if "just for the pleasure" you could make a video, Luc, of the energy consumption against de lifting of a mass by cap discharge, like you have done apparently for yourself already: having the numbers is quiet good but seeing the thing been done is great too

[gotoluc]

Way to go Luc.
With out a doubt one of the best achievements I have seen on any OU forum-weather it's OU or not.

Brad

Thanks Brad for your positive comment. That means a lot to me coming from a great experimenter like you mate!

Luc

[gotoluc]

Would be great,  guys that if you speak about "force" you speak about "gram.force" (gf), or "kilogram.force" (kgf) but not just "gram" or "kg", otherwise it is confusing.

See on the charts you provide,  Luc, it is indeed "gf" for the "force" scale. Because if you just speak about "2.5 kg" this then just a mass and this can lead to wrong interpretation of the results. Now that I have seen your vid on the very large one you've just provided, I see it had nothing to do with lifting a mass.

But you're right, even if not OU it may have a industrial interest.

BTW, I would be very happy if "just for the pleasure" you could make a video, Luc, of the energy consumption against de lifting of a mass by cap discharge, like you have done apparently for yourself already: having the numbers is quiet good but seeing the thing been done is great too

I edited my post above to to gram force where it applies.

I did not do a video of the low voltage lift test as MileHigh was complaining of too many videos and not enough test result numbers. So I gave all the numbers instead of doing a video.

I'll see if I can do a video demo also.

Luc