Core saturation and Lenz.

[broli]

Is there is a problem in possibly the current required waiting for the magnet to move away that will consume any final gain?

Yes you are right joule heating should be accounted for. I did some crude "realistic" calculation too a while ago which was posted elsewhere, here it is:

Here's some crude calculations. First let's consider the complete charge time to be 4*L/R to play it safe.

When the magnet is at TDC the inductance of the coil is 0.1mH. Assuming we have a 30V power supply that can supply 5A then we choose R = 6 Ohm so the charge time is 66µs. Assuming we use neo magnets and our C core gets perhaps saturated 10° before and after TDC. So we give ourselves 10° of charge time. Using our time constant this leads to a constant rpm of 2500 RPM. After this 10° the influence of the magnet on the core starts to diminish, but also meanwhile current is used as joule heating. Let's assume that 45° later the magnet has no more effect on the core and the coil can be discharged. First let's calculate the joule heating energy.

given period = 45°, since rpm = 2500 time is then 300µs. Joule heat enegy = V*I*t = 0.045J.

Notice that I ignored inductive energy input and just put it as a "loss" in joule heating, I'm that confident .

So finally now we can discharge our inductor without any external influence. I took the final inductance to be 0.1H and the load 333.33 ohM. First of all lets calculate the energy of the inductor.
E=0.5*I^2*L=0.5*25*0.1 = 1.25J.

Electric wise the energy out / energy in = 27 or 2700%.

Since this needs again time to discharge. 4*L/R = 1.2ms. From our 2500 rpm rotation that is equal to 180° of rotation. So it will take 180° of rotation to discharge our high inductive coil through the 333.33 Ohm load.

And to finish it all let's look at the power generation. We know it rotates at 2500 rpm and that every rotation steals 0.045J and gains 1.25J. In average watt values this results in 1.87 Watt of loss and 52.08 Watt gain.

And that's just one example of high energy gain from this system. Many parameters can be adjusted to gain any desired cop.

However I didn't talk about mechanical losses there. But they should be minimal as the magnet saturates the core before it's fully aligned with it. This design can use multiple core setups around the wheel to increase energy output. But if you have a big inductance difference only one magnet can be used as the increased inductance will take a while to discharge.

[lumen]

Yes you are right joule heating should be accounted for. I did some crude "realistic" calculation too a while ago which was posted elsewhere, here it is:

However I didn't talk about mechanical losses there. But they should be minimal as the magnet saturates the core before it's fully aligned with it. This design can use multiple core setups around the wheel to increase energy output. But if you have a big inductance difference only one magnet can be used as the increased inductance will take a while to discharge.

Ok, so then if I had the magnet connected to an arm that was connected to a flywheel by some elliptical gears, so the magnet would attract to the core at half the speed causing an increase in flywheel RPM, then leave the core at twice the speed which causes a decrease in flywheel RPM, then the mechanical loss would still be the same but the retraction time from the core would be half as long. (so I reason that if the exit loss is greater than the approach gain, an exit speed of 2x the approach speed would also result in a 2x exit mechanical loss)

Would the reduced exit time from the core provide additional performance on the output side since joule heating time would be cut in half also?

If so, then at what point would the mechanical leverage of the increased gearing on the exit side reach a point that any further increase in approach to exit change would increase the mechanical loss to a point where further reduction in joule heating time would no longer provide further final output gain? What would be point of maximum gain? (2x, 5x, 10x)

I'm not sure I explained this in a understandable way!

[broli]

Ok, so then if I had the magnet connected to an arm that was connected to a flywheel by some elliptical gears, so the magnet would attract to the core at half the speed causing an increase in flywheel RPM, then leave the core at twice the speed which causes a decrease in flywheel RPM, then the mechanical loss would still be the same but the retraction time from the core would be half as long. (so I reason that if the exit loss is greater than the approach gain, an exit speed of 2x the approach speed would also result in a 2x exit mechanical loss)

Would the reduced exit time from the core provide additional performance on the output side since joule heating time would be cut in half also?

If so, then at what point would the mechanical leverage of the increased gearing on the exit side reach a point that any further increase in approach to exit change would increase the mechanical loss to a point where further reduction in joule heating time would no longer provide further final output gain? What would be point of maximum gain? (2x, 5x, 10x)

I'm not sure I explained this in a understandable way!

Yes the increased speed will reduce joule heating as it would take less time to reach that 45°-away-from-tdc position. However it does not increase the mechanical losses as you say. Mechanical energy is force times distance; E=F*x The equation does not depend on velocity. In your example both the force and the distance haven't changed. It doesn't matter if you were rotating at 1 rpm or 10000, the mechanical losses always remains the same for the same amount of degrees. I hope it makes sense.

The idea of variable speed is good in theory, but as you notice yourself it becomes quite cumbersome in practice. Gears would already be overkill let alone elliptical ones. Definitely not something most garage scientists can build  .

[lumen]

Yes the increased speed will reduce joule heating as it would take less time to reach that 45°-away-from-tdc position. However it does not increase the mechanical losses as you say. Mechanical energy is force times distance; E=F*x The equation does not depend on velocity. In your example both the force and the distance haven't changed. It doesn't matter if you were rotating at 1 rpm or 10000, the mechanical losses always remains the same for the same amount of degrees. I hope it makes sense.

The idea of variable speed is good in theory, but as you notice yourself it becomes quite cumbersome in practice. Gears would already be overkill let alone elliptical ones. Definitely not something most garage scientists can build  .

I agree that the gain to the proposed flywheel during the approach would be the same as the loss at the accelerated exit, however something has changed at TDC. The core does not decrease in magnetic field as the magnet exits and therefore has a greater attraction during the exit phase.

This would increase the exit losses, and with 2x gearing there should be 2x the additional loss.

Even at equal speed, you have shown additional mechanical loss on exit. If the core was not energized, then the exit loss should be only little over approach gain.

I have made elliptical gears for other magnetic projects and I must say they are difficult. The layout alone in CAD can take an entire day for a single gear set. I can then mill them out of Lexan sheet in a few minutes.

[cletushowell]

I dont understand it but it sound like you do so Im going to tell you something
first Tesla is in the Bible revelation second he screwed us with ac and dc power now I know what everyone thinks im a idiot but listen photon power comes from 144,000 it cannot be measured in conventional volt metters or electric metters the reason theres no gaps so tesla created the gaps so jp morgan could sell the power to enslave the world now some are going to say its not teslas fault blame is not the point the point is the open loop between the magnets releases the frequency to the air that frequency is the ineffeciency so tesla knew the only way to release all the energy at once was to open the circuit the points which creates the spark so thats the wrong way now im not a engeneer but if you have a way to create the spark constant with no gaps thats the key and if you scientist figure out the frequency to offset the gaps in the 60hz we dont pay no one so it should be like this 60/144,000= frequency gaps the metter reads
or 60x144,000= frequency gaps
so with that we should be able to make a crystal or series of crystals to ballance our power to perfect from what tesla screwed the world with. turn the economy and finish my unimited earth battery conversion tesla took to his grave now if you know how to build the circuit i posted the video the battery is easy it went well over 5 miles
and next im going to build a martha stuart generator with vinegar milk grape honey molases =potasium salt and water thats the formula how it goes together good luck im going to a buffet in the morning if you beat me congrats.its about turning our economy from these dictators.