Eliminate lenz's forces using just one coil
Hi Vineet,
I need some more time to ponder on this setup. Although you wrote the build of your generator is a very simple task I have difficulties in understanding Fig. 3 and 4. Perhaps if you could sketch in the meantime a simple hand drawing in Windows Paint or a simple freehand drawing to show its perspective view that would be good. Sorry for my hard-headedness here...
Gyula
EDIT: I returned to this post to delete my questions because they have become obsolote after my oversight on Fig. 2 flux directions.
Hi,
Description to Fig 2 is wrong. Flux in a loop does not change direction.
A similar nonsense was published by a troll in the Kapanadze Dally thread concerning cw and ccw winding direction of a solenoid-coil dependent if you are looking in direction of the axis from the left or the right end of the coil...
Kator01
Hi Kator01,
Thanks for pointing this out, unfortunately I slipped over Fig. 2 too fast.
Here is link on a single turn coil: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/curloo.html I copied the picture on the flux lines, I encircled in brown color two flux directions going into the loop on the left side and in green color two flux directions coming out of the loop on the right hand side.
Gyula
@Gyulasun,
The picture you have given above shows the flux in CCW direction at the top and in CW direction at the bottom. Same thing only I have drawn in my Fig.2. The arrow marks which I have drawn is causing some optical illusion. That's why I typed 'same direction' inside the conductor. I have typed a foot note also implying that fluxes produced in opposite directions on circular conductor causes a unidirectional flux inside the core.
@Kator01
If direction of flux doesnot change in a circular conductor at diametrically opposite ends, you will not get flux in one direction at the center. In that case you will not be able to make a solenoid at all. I think that is the most basic thing in Electrical Engineering. I can feel proud that I am not a electrical engineer but still I know the basics.
Right hand thumb rule :
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:V-1_right_hand_thumb_rule.gif
hello
quote:"So the energy supplied to prime mover is limited only to overcome friction and air drag."
What about the core-magnet drag? . . . will it not need a bigger amount of energy at the input ??
I noticed that you forget the magnets-cores magnetic drag also in your previous proposals.
regards
Quote from: ALVARO_CS on November 20, 2013, 04:26:19 AM
hello
What about the core-magnet drag? . . .
You have got a good point but I don't think that it is a serious issue because this core drag acts in two ways. It slows down the magnet when a pole leaves the core but also accelerates the magnet when successive pole approaches the core. I think these two slowing down and accelerating drags can be made uniform by using a flywheel without affecting the input power. But if lenz's forces are present then slowing down drag will be far more than accelerating drag hence input power will be more corresponding to the output. (clarification needed)
Regards
Vineet.K.
Dear Vineet,
Let's start from the your pdf file again, so I kindly ask you if possible draw a perspective view of your setup because I still have problems in understanding fully your Fig. 3 and 4, sorry for my confusion.
Gyula
@Gyulasun
I am not good in working with computers. Somehow I have made one drawing and attached it as pdf. I hope you will get the idea.
The drawing is only to illustrate working principle. A practical generator has to be designed correctly with suitable number of poles / cores so that maximum inner surface of the conductor is exposed to one type of flux.
Regards
Vineet.K.
Quote from: vineet_kiran on November 20, 2013, 08:00:48 PM
The drawing is only to illustrate working principle.....
I think the working principle is same as that of a standard transformer. The coils wound on the transformer core will be exposed to one
type of flux on their inner surface and opposite pole on the diametrically opposite outer surface.
In a transformer since the central core produces only one type of flux, you need not twist the coil inside and outside of the core. The dimetric magnet you are using is producing both type of poles inside the coil. So to make the inner surface of the coil face one type of flux, you have to twist the coil inside and out side the individual successive cores as indicated in your figure.
This device may be useful only if lenz's forces are totally eliminated. If not it will consume input power just as in the case of a transformer.
Quote from: vineet_kiran on November 20, 2013, 08:00:48 PM
@Gyulasun
I am not good in working with computers. Somehow I have made one drawing and attached it as pdf. I hope you will get the idea.
The drawing is only to illustrate working principle. A practical generator has to be designed correctly with suitable number of poles / cores so that maximum inner surface of the conductor is exposed to one type of flux.
Regards
Vineet.K.
Hi Vineet,
Thanks for the drawing it helped much and now I have only one question. You wrote in the text:
"When diametric magnet is rotated by 45 deg., inner surface faces only N pole and outer surface faces S pole."
Is not a 90 deg. rotation involved as an example when you wish to mention the change of the poles? Why 45 degree rotation?
If it is indeed 45 degree, then I do not get how the diametric magnet is positioned in the centre?
By the way, is it a must to use diametric magnet here? because on a rotor four block magnets could be fixed with NSNS. Or you think of a multipole cylinder magnet as the rotor itself? what you indicated with yellow color in Fig. 3 of your first pdf file.
I edited your drawing to show a 90 degree rotation, the upper drawing is the one as you showed the poles, the lower drawing shows the magnets turned 90 degree clockwise. Please comment.
Gyula
@gyulasun
Yes. It is 90 degree only. Sorry for the confusion. Any arrangement of magnets with NSNS combination can be used. I use diametric magnets in such experiments only because it is easy to handle and uniformly magnetised (factory made).
Regards,
Vineet.K.
Hi Vineet,
I am not aware of whether your design as shown in your above drawings and description has been proposed by Bedini or Naudin, at least not publicly I know of.
However, the idea of letting one end of a magnetic core or cores open and claiming Lenz may have less effect was referred to (in 2005-06) by Slavek Krepelka here: http://home.primus.ca/~slavek.krepelka/ttf2/fields8.htm
Unfortunately I have not come across any proof of concept report on his proposed setups.
On your present single coil generator setup, all I can say is Lenz may get reduced, the possibility may be there. What I wrote in connection with your parallel core setup on little Lenz effect I referred to Bedini's similar setup which was a pulse motor setup and I forgot to consider that your parallel core setup is a generator setup, hence this latter has a continuously closed circuit whenever a load is applied at its output while the same setup in a pulsed motor mode as per Bedini has a closed circuit just during the ON times of pulsed coil(s).
Now your single coil generator setup also has a continuous load at its output of course and the moving magnet when sweeping its flux via the coil must "see" a certain amount of counter flux coming from the coil due to the load current, the induction takes place by the direct crossing of the number of turns, I am not sure the soft cores in the outer side of the coil matter much or not (from Lenz point of view) when you leave their other ends open, the counter flux coming from the coil must have a certain counter to motion force. How big this counter force due to the load current is the big question, and answerable only by building the setup.
If you disagree with any of my arguments above please tell.
Greetings, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on November 23, 2013, 06:46:14 AM
Now your single coil generator setup also has a continuous load at its output of course and the moving magnet when sweeping its flux via the coil must "see" a certain amount of counter flux coming from the coil due to the load current, the induction takes place by the direct crossing of the number of turns, I am not sure the soft cores in the outer side of the coil matter much or not (from Lenz point of view) when you leave their other ends open, the counter flux coming from the coil must have a certain counter to motion force. How big this counter force due to the load current is the big question, and answerable only by building the setup.
I agree with that. Thanks for all your help.
I had thought of one more setup making use of mechanical resonance to dissipate lenz's forces and posted a topic under the following link :
http://www.overunity.com/11370/resonating-generator/msg299479/#msg299479 (http://www.overunity.com/11370/resonating-generator/msg299479/#msg299479)
The only thing I didnot mention in that is the distance (gap) between the magnet and vibrating foil. Actually the foils have to be at maximum distance from the magnet such that they are just within the reach of magnetic attraction. When magnet is rotated, the foils vibrate and at some specific speed of magnet the foils vibrate with resonating frequency. At this point foils come closure to the magnet due to increase in amplitude of vibration. Hence stronger flux flows through the foils making the bulb connected to the coil to glow brightly and there will not be any increase in input power (infact input power goes down) since the rotating magnet will be in resonance with the vibrating foils (which are nothing but parts of central core).
This has nothing to do with electrical resonance. It just makes use of
amplitude gained by vibrating foils due to mechanical resonance. Any thoughts on that?
Regards,
Vineet.K
Hi Vineet,
Well, your resonating generator is also a clever setup. You wrote making use of mechanical resonance to dissipate Lenz forces but I think the word 'compensate' is more fortunate to use here. I mean that Lenz would manifest in reducing the magnetic attraction between the magnet and the foil and the amount of this reducement could be made up for a certain degree by the resonant vibration of the foil. Careful 'fine tuning' of the distances, the size of foils etc can surely improve performance versus a non-foil setup.
Whether the improvement due to the mechanical resonance is able to bring power output just beyond to that of the needed input power level is the question. Perhaps some members managed to test your setup discussed 2 years ago in the thread 'Resonating Generator' you gave the link to and now that you revived the topic they may come along with some results.
rgds, Gyula
PS I repeat the link to your Resonating Generator thread:
http://www.overunity.com/11370/resonating-generator/msg299479/#msg299479