Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Magnet motor in Argentina

Started by Jdo300, March 19, 2006, 12:46:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

lancaIV

Danny,
shall you read the Kango IIda "Hydraulik Converter"publication and understand the resume,
then read the LI YNG TYAN invention,something like a " bifiliar" motor arrangement,then you get probably the imagination of "force amplification" !
F=mxa (translatory/linear/rotatory independant)

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca

silverdragonrs

sorry de lanca i dont have the first idea what most books like these are talking about... Ive said it several times. I am no scientist. i dont have the education or experience that most of you have. i have a great ability to understand things upon examination but i do not know most of the words or theories or inventers or publications............ that you all have come to know through time and experience and education. just a simple guy trying to learn a new thing!

so when you say look at those books.... no i probably wont.... just so i can avoid the headache that will soon follow. if you can give me the complete and total idiots version of those publications then i would be greatfull. i have done good to learn this motor as i had no idea what a stator was (still not sure) ...... anyways my point is i have learned as much as i am able for one month. i think taking a week to learn and understand this motor is good. and i am giving my brain a break while i build the thing. once i am done with the torbay motor i will be glad to dive head first into any pulication anyone wants to put in my way........ but my brain is on strike for now :) thanks anyways

danny
I would like to quote my idol... if you please.. press any key now.. "Anykey?!, Where's the N E Key?" ~ Homer Simpson ~ ......... one day.. With lotsa hard work and dedication.. I .. will be this good.. :)

orionjf

Hi everybody,
The first real test I did is not good enough. Actually, it is bad ?:'(. But I am happy because I have tested important issues and I learnt something about this.
The push down force is too strong. If I change the push point for decreasing this force, the torque available to do it at this time decreases too ???? I think use only one rotor and one magnet can be useful for measuring but not for working (I didn?t test rotors with bar or cylinder with diameter magnetization and I can?t do it before 2 or 3 weeks due to magnets delivery time).
But, at the other hand, due to experiments, I see new possibilities and, maybe, explanations about the original device. For instance:
- It?s critical the point to push down the stator. Probably is one of the keys for success (if it do). Simulation seems to conclude that this point is between the last magnet before gap and before the stator magnet reaches the middle of the stator that is pushing.down and the real model confirm it. Then, the best case will be that maximum of torque will be done at minimum of pushing force. This is impossible with one magnet only in the rotor but ? not impossible with two or three magnets in the rotor. This can be like an oscillator and requires a very good syncronism to reach this ?resonance? freq. alternating maximum torque with minimum pushing force. If we using another magnet for lifting (I think, it is not necessary probably), we have THREE magnets in the rotor. Anybody does sound like something?
- We are mixing forces, torques, works ? but each one has to consider in particular cases and then to compare similar magnitudes. For instance, the main issue, that is the push down force. This force, applied in ?vertical? has the same direction of stator movement, that is, the work is F*H (H is the height of lifted stator from the initial position). This force is applied by a ?cap? with a ramp with angle alpha, for instance. If the ramp is smooth (alpha small) Fr (Force against ramp) is small but the ramp length L is large therefore F*H=Fr*L and you don?t have a lot of space for pushing down because of torque losses in the next step. In the other hand, a sharp and short ramp needs a large Fr that brakes the rotor. There will be an optimal ratio between torque and ramp shape, and between them and the point for pushing down. Too complicated if ?papers? are used only. Probably test model can help for tuning.
- When an stator is lifted, there is a "violent" movement with a very clear energy that we don?t use. If this energy could be stored (by springs, for instance) and reused to push down, it will be great. If springs, it requires a perfect syncronism for timming the "stator bounced" just into push down point. (Its a very "nice" diferential equation to solve in paper).
I?m afraid my first prototype is too rough for these tests and tuning and I have to rebuild it. I recommend to build prototypes (only with a few stators and one rotor is enough) and play with all issues. I hope somebody can make progress in any direction. We have to be optimistic because, in any case, there is always something to learn.
Regards.

maxwellsdemon

The 'kick' up should be equal in force to the resistance to pushing down- if you're only looking at the stator magnets interacting with each other.
A well-designed spring system would even this out so you only need a little nudge to knock a magnet out and another little nudge to knock it back in.

But- if you look at the interaction of the stator magnets with the rotor, because the rotor has moved, it is resisting the stator magnet's return more strongly
than it was assisting its elevation.
  You will find that the amount by which those two forces differ is the same as the forward force on the rotor.

I'm not saying to take my word for it- by all means build your models and do the tests...

I have seen the FEMM sims posted here but none of them are legitimate, because they are only calculating one force- the rotor being pushed toward the gap.
This is not the only force at work, and without simulating the forces on all moving parts over a whole cycle, a torque calculation is meaningless.
This might be possible with Maxwell 3D, but not with FEMM.

It's possible to make just about anything look like a perpetual motion machine in your head if you just ignore half of the forces at work...

treb79

Yes, a well designed spring system, Although as I stated earlier, when the spring pushing the stator magnet back in is at maximum extension(weakest force), the repulsion force of the stator magnet is greatest. Two oposite nonlinear forces. The only way would be a complex system of linkages to modify the  force of the springs to somewhat match the force curve of the stator magnets. A difficult undertaking. Good luck.