Homopolar Stack (multiple generators on one common shaft) Brent Hasty

[teknomage2012]

Regular induction motors are already brush less and have no need of a halbach array. Now I could understand if you said a halbach array can make a induction motor bearing less.

So what you are describing is using a halbach (one or two?) copper shrouded on the rotor? and one in the housing underneath stationery copper that is allowed to rotate in sync with the rotor?

Would not the EMF in the copper enshrouding the halbach rotating relative to the copper subject your device to lorentz slowing and dragging upon the rotor?

How is it a halbach array would allow you to go brush-less?  In the same way the halbach arrays allow you to go brushless in regular induction motors.

Without contact, how do your propose inducting DC potential off the rotor?  By using what I call "virtual relative motion" between the discs.  In this setup there will be two discs and a closing circuit.  One disc will be induced with a negative polarity while the other disc will be induced with a positive polarity.  Basically, the two halbach arrays will be enshrouded in copper, and will rotate inside this copper shell.

I do realize you will say there must be relative motion between the disc and external circuit, but I will argue the relative motion only allows the disc and external circuit to have equal and opposite EMF that does not cancel each other out.  For instance, in this configuration disc/N/S/disc, the left disc will have the same polarity has the right disc if everything is rotating together, thus there is no potential difference in this setup.  In a configuration like, disc/S/S/disc, then the left disc will have an opposite polarity as the right disc, and there is a potential difference between them.

[teknomage2012]

We have gone as far as 1 volt using 4 of these small magnets rotating at about 6000 rpm, we were in the process of determining the effect of the spacing of the generators and the the effect of placing permeable and diamagnetic materials into that space. Until I got laid off from my job.....

If and when I can get around to the last few details of optimizing for voltage, then it is just a matter of building a homopolar stack of enough nodes to reach the target output voltage.

Yes we found the voltage linearly proportional. RPM's always help ;-)

For the shaft we were using a machinable nylon rod of a diameter that closely fit the ID of the ring magnets.

Rather than an insulated steel shaft, once a finalized version is defined I would use a unidirectional carbon fiber rod, if its conductivity proved troublesome despite its very high resistance it could be wrapped in fiberglass.

We went with the argon, due to its high atomic number and ability to carry current in the plasma sate without reacting since it is noble. Heading in the direction of a free floating evacuated magnetically suspended rotor with no hard physical contact. The use of a high voltage/frequency start to arc a lower voltage across a spark gap is similar to that used in arc welders. Tungsten faces with high surface area would be used across the spark gap to sustain the flow of electrons and survive it.

Like I said we were focusing on the homopolar stacks optimization for voltage when my funds ran low. We have not yet done the spacing and substrate testing in the stacks.

As the basic N-machine is a low-voltage/hi-current device, how successful has been your stacked arrangement, to increase the voltage ?
Is the voltage increase proportional to the number of magnets ? (or pairs).
The balancing issues must be the greatest problem to overcome in this type of machine. A dynamic balancer would be a mandatory piece of equipment to have...
The supporting shaft must be non-conductive, but at the same time as ridgid as possible. What material have you been using ?  Would it be possible to use a large steel tube for support, surrounded by another insulated tube ?

Have you tested it with un-evacuated chamber, with just air inside ? I suppose that the drag was quite high.  But at higher speeds, the centrifugal force would probably "evacuate" the inner spaces between the plates and magnets, which would slightly pressurize the peripheral area. Then you could let the casing open to athmospheric pressure and the inside pressure would equalize with the outside. For cooling, a restricted passage in the shaft would let air in. Air might be more effective for cooling than argon, but I don't really know. Of course, for the spark gap, it's not ideal.

How much power have you been able to extract to date with this 4" generator?
Sorry for all those questions 

Altair

[gravityblock]

Regular induction motors are already brush less and have no need of a halbach array. Now I could understand if you said a halbach array can make a induction motor bearing less.

So what you are describing is using a halbach (one or two?) copper shrouded on the rotor? and one in the housing underneath stationery copper that is allowed to rotate in sync with the rotor?

Would not the EMF in the copper enshrouding the halbach rotating relative to the copper subject your device to lorentz slowing and dragging upon the rotor?

Any motor which uses a commutator or a slip ring has brushes. The commutators can be replaced with power semiconductors to reverse the current without the need for brushes.  Halbach arrays are used in AC brushless motors.

What I am describing is two circular halbach cylinders enshrouded in a copper shell.  The two cylinders will rotate together inside this stationary copper shell.  A closing circuit is required to avoid cancellation of the EMF.  The closing circuit will run from axis to axis on the copper shell.  Now, I don't expect you to believe this will work in a stationary frame, so I will show how this can be made brushless in a rotating frame where everything is rotating together.

Take two magnets and two discs and place them on an axle like this, ==D/S/N====N/S/D==.  Now electrically connect the rim of the left disc to the rim of the right disc.  Also electrically connect the axis of the left disc to the axis of the right disc.  Depending on the direction of rotation, the current will flow from the axis of the left disc to the rim of the left disc, then from the rim of the left disc to the rim of the right disc.  From the rim of the right disc to the axis of the right disc, then from the axis of the right disc back to the axis of the left disc using the closing circuit.  As you can see, without the closing circuit, the EMF would cancel each other out at the axis of one of the discs.  This doesn't do us much good, because we would need to be rotating with the system in order to extract the current for our use.  This rotating frame is a proof of concept for a brushless HPM/HPG, which should be applicable to a stationary frame in the right setup.

GB

[gravityblock]

@Brent:

Are you familiar with the Paradox 2 experiment by Distinti?  If not, then here's a publication describing this experiment, http://www.distinti.com/docs/pdx/paradox2.pdf and a short video clip showing the device attached to an oscilloscope, http://www.distinti.com/docs/pdx/pdx2.MPG

GB

[gravityblock]

Would not the EMF in the copper enshrouding the halbach rotating relative to the copper subject your device to lorentz slowing and dragging upon the rotor?

Not anymore than if the disc rotated with the magnet and a stationary external circuit.  I suspect you think the counter torque is eliminated because the magnet and discs are attached to each other and rotate together?  Having the disc attached to the magnet and rotating in sync with each other does not eliminate the counter torque.

GB