This device is the real self-running overunity?

[mscoffman]

I like it, looks very clean. Keep up the good work 

I am trying myself a replication, but it's somehow messed up, because I got no magnet bearings etc. Therefore my attempt will eventually fail. Though I will post a picture when it's done... if it doesn't work, at least I could teach how to not build this device.

One problem I see with this setup is the diameter of the rotor. I don't know why the inventor used such a huge diameter on his rotor - the larger the diameter, the lower is the frequency of induction :/

He may have been trying to make sure there was little magnetic interaction
between the two permanent magnets and make the magnetic approach
somewhat linear. But you are correct the bigger the rotor size the
lower the average electrical energy.

By the way I don't think magnetic bearings are all that critical if you set the
downward rotor thrust against some sort of glass or mirror or something. Any
ball bearings should be cleaned out and marginally lubricated with a very thin
viscosity oil. This is for an experimental rather than a perpetual set-up.

:S:MarkSCoffman

[gravityblock]

By the way I don't think magnetic bearings are all that critical if you set the
downward rotor thrust against some sort of glass or mirror or something. Any
ball bearings should be cleaned out and marginally lubricated with a very thin
viscosity oil. This is for an experimental rather than a perpetual set-up.

:S:MarkSCoffman

Why not use another stator 180^o from each other with rotor magnets 180^o.  This way the downward thrust would be canceled.  The rotor will be pulled down on each side at the same time and there will be no net up/down movement of the rotor, assuming both sides are pulling on it with an equal force throughout the interaction.  This can be used with magnetic bearings or with conventional bearings.  Having 4 or 6 stators would be even better.

GB

[gauschor]

I finished my attempt to replicate, however since it was not exact, I had no magnet bearings, no special wings, my results were bad too, I guess. I used a plexiglass disc with a diameter of only 12cm, put in 4 holes crosswise on the outer ends of the disc, put in an axis each and onto them 4 magnet discs of 3cm diameter each one (could rotate, but with friction...), 2 pickup coils only (400 windings each, 0.15mm diameter wire). This rotor was driven by a motor powered by 4x1.5V batteries. With aircoils my result was very bad, with using a core the result was still bad: my amperemeter showed only a current of 23 µA...
I must have made something horribly wrong, because I didn't even get my average red 5mm LED to work at all - although the inventor Wendell showed in his video that a white LED flashes brightly on his setup.

I guess I'll need to wait for the final demonstration of the inventor... which is approximate in 2 weeks, he wrote in his last mail.

[Sprocket]

@gauschor - You know what they say, the only way to learn is through failure!

And if that's the case, I must be on a fast-track learning curve - my v2 has also proven to be a monumental disaster,  far far too flimsy! Whereas v1 was too heavy - gotta find an in-between...

For the record, although my rotor would rotate for several minutes with just a hand-twist, once I took it above about 600rpm vibration sets in, the main brass shaft starts flexing, and the smaller brass shafts that support the rotating magnets start to bend due to CF.  As I said, way too flimsy...

[NickZ]

  All: 
  Flimsy or not, you might be on your way to one of the most usefull devices ever.  As you've seen, even the sole inventor will quickly tear it all apart and start over, so... best of luck, and don't give up, as many have tried and fail.  We are all for you.
                                                                                NZ