This is a concept for transferring the energy from a permanent magnet to electricity without using kinetic energy.
It doesn't seem to have been tried yet, as far as I can tell.
I haven't got the engineering expertise to build one of these as it needs some delicate tinkering (flux circuit balancing), so I'm hoping there's someone out there who can take over this project and finish it off.
Or, please tell me why it won't work.
The document is attached...
Also at:
https://www.scribd.com/document/373341757/The-SPG (https://www.scribd.com/document/373341757/The-SPG)
Or just Google/Bing search for:
"scribd spg electron"
Any relevant and helpful feedback will be much appreciated!
Check it out....
http://www.cheniere.org/megstatus.htm
Peace, out
My concern is that the induction is dependent on the rate of change in the flux. Magnet can saturate the core, but will that mean that lets say 80% of the core is always saturated by the perm magnet and 20% saturation left for the alternating current. Do we get any extra inducted current, if only 20% on flux is changing?
If the total flux can be made to change from 0~ to 100% in a wave then this device is a winner.
I am working on similar type device atm that incorporates an asymmetric transformer.
Quote from: Markius_Lanzius on March 11, 2018, 02:23:20 PM
This is a concept for transferring the energy from a permanent magnet to electricity without using kinetic energy.
I haven't got the engineering expertise to build one of these as it needs some delicate tinkering (flux circuit balancing), so I'm hoping there's someone out there who can take over this project and finish it off.
Or, please tell me why it won't work.
The document is attached...
Also at:
https://www.scribd.com/document/373341757/The-SPG (https://www.scribd.com/document/373341757/The-SPG)
Or just Google/Bing search for:
"scribd spg electron"
Any relevant and helpful feedback will be much appreciated!
I have to ask-->this is different from the MEG (motionless electric generator)how?.
QuoteIt doesn't seem to have been tried yet, as far as I can tell.
The MEG has been around some 20 odd years.
Look up Tom Bearden's MEG.
and I also think Bearden was a bit late too, even he got the patent. Asymmetric transformer experiments were done before Bearden's MEG
Quote from: tinman on March 13, 2018, 10:37:30 AM
I have to ask-->this is different from the MEG (motionless electric generator)how?.
The MEG has been around some 20 odd years.
Look up Tom Bearden's MEG.
So you got an asymmetric transformer or MEG at home the has COP of 6 :)
Isn't this the same idea as the Charles Flynn device? http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20Technology.htm (http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20Technology.htm). Here's a video of something similar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zh_C3yvJH0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zh_C3yvJH0). Incidentally this video was referenced by Eric Dollard (t-rex) here http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/9297-magamps.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/9297-magamps.html).
Quote from: Belfior on March 13, 2018, 10:58:05 AM
So you got an asymmetric transformer or MEG at home the has COP of 6 :)
Nope
And neither has anyone else.
Quote from: tinman on March 14, 2018, 04:00:57 AM
Nope
And neither has anyone else.
Yeah well! the guru to you! last I heard some inventors were stuck after trying everything and were looking for investors to develop a new alloy ;D ;D ;D ;D
any one got more money than sense ? sorry meant any money to wast, sorry meant invest ? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: AlienGrey on March 14, 2018, 09:33:35 AM
Yeah well! the guru to you! last I heard some inventors were stuck after trying everything and were looking for investors to develop a new alloy ;D ;D ;D ;D
any one got more money than sense ? sorry meant any money to wast, sorry meant invest ? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Thing is,you do not need fancy new alloys.
I posted two schematics,and no one paid any attention to them--except Erfinder :o Go figure. ???
Quote from: tinman on March 14, 2018, 09:59:30 AM
Thing is,you do not need fancy new alloys.
I posted two schematics,and no one paid any attention to them--except Erfinder :o Go figure. ???
could you repost? There are MANY posts on this forum and interested people might miss something :(
The Meg device is very similar, but it only supplies flux to one coil at a time. Although they're connected in series electrically, one of them is sitting dormant for half a cycle, which seems a wasted opportunity to gain efficiency to me.
By using an extra magnet, my design makes sure that both coils are supplied with alternating flux at the same time, continuously.
My design is like a 3D version of an extended dual-magnet MEG, I suppose.
from Belfior: (my quote button doesn't work!)
"My concern is that the induction is dependent on the rate of change in the flux. Magnet can saturate the core, but will that mean that lets say 80% of the core is always saturated by the perm magnet and 20% saturation left for the alternating current. Do we get any extra inducted current, if only 20% on flux is changing?"
------
The magnets and coils (when powered) need to be a total of less than 100% core saturation. So they should be 50% or less each (as all four work in two separate, but switching, flux circuits).
Each output coil receives flux from each magnet alternately (thanks to the flux of the input coils). The magnets have the opposite orientation from each other (NS - SN), so each output coil receives a full sine wave of polarity shifting flux as each magnet's flux is presented in turn.
This will provide a full AC electrical output from both output coils. The output coils also receive the flux back from the input coils (a kind of recycling) like in an isolation transformer. This would essentially double-up the flux.
Sync them all up polarity-wise, rectify and merge the outputs to give up to twice the electrical output that was put in.
Quote from: Markius_Lanzius on March 15, 2018, 11:23:29 AM
The Meg device is very similar, but it only supplies flux to one coil at a time. Although they're connected in series electrically, one of them is sitting dormant for half a cycle, which seems a wasted opportunity to gain efficiency to me.
By using an extra magnet, my design makes sure that both coils are supplied with alternating flux at the same time, continuously.
My design is like a 3D version of an extended dual-magnet MEG, I suppose.
Seems that you do not know much about induction.
When the magnetic field is induced into the coil,you will get current flow in one direction through the coil.
When the magnetic field is removed from the coil,you will get current flow in the opposite direction through the coil.
There is no 1/2 cycle dormant period for either coil in the MEG.
Yes you do, but only half of what you'd get if you then apply the opposite polarity field to the coil to get the full inverse current out.
When you apply a flux field to the coil, the free electrons move forward. When you remove the field, the electrons move back to their original position. This gives you the 'hump' of the amplitude sine wave of the electrical output. The 'trough' is the reverse polarity electrical output from the free electrons moving further backwards from the original position when the reverse polarity of flux is applied. When this is removed, the free electrons move forward again to their starting position.
The attached pics show the difference between conventional electricity generation and the workings of the MEG (http://www.overunitybuilder.com/megbuilder.html (http://www.overunitybuilder.com/megbuilder.html)).
As you can see, only one coil is generating power at a time as there is only one static magnet. The flux polarity is reversed by switching from one coil to another.
My design also switches between coils, but with 2 magnets, it can divert opposite polarity flux to both coils at the same time. Hence, double the output.
Also, my input coils (the equivalent of the MEG's coils A and B) are pulling the flux from the permanent magnet and are therefore having their flux recycled back to electricity with the flux of the permanent magnet.
In the MEG, the input coils are repelling the permanent magnet's flux and therefore not reclaimable. That input energy is lost.
Quote from: Markius_Lanzius on March 19, 2018, 05:15:39 PM
Yes you do, but only half of what you'd get if you then apply the opposite polarity field to the coil to get the full inverse current out.
When you apply a flux field to the coil, the free electrons move forward. When you remove the field, the electrons move back to their original position. This gives you the 'hump' of the amplitude sine wave of the electrical output. The 'trough' is the reverse polarity electrical output from the free electrons moving further backwards from the original position when the reverse polarity of flux is applied. When this is removed, the free electrons move forward again to their starting position.
The attached pics show the difference between conventional electricity generation and the workings of the MEG (http://www.overunitybuilder.com/megbuilder.html (http://www.overunitybuilder.com/megbuilder.html)).
As you can see, only one coil is generating power at a time as there is only one static magnet. The flux polarity is reversed by switching from one coil to another.
My design also switches between coils, but with 2 magnets, it can divert opposite polarity flux to both coils at the same time. Hence, double the output.
Your understanding on how the MEG works is wrong.
You fail to understand that while the flux directing coils direct the PMs flux through one coil,the flux directing coils also produce a magnetic field of the opposite polarity on the other side of the coil.
Now,knowing this,where do you think the PMs redirected flux will travel?
Brad.
Quote from: Markius_Lanzius on March 19, 2018, 05:20:49 PM
Also, my input coils (the equivalent of the MEG's coils A and B) are pulling the flux from the permanent magnet and are therefore having their flux recycled back to electricity with the flux of the permanent magnet.
In the MEG, the input coils are repelling the permanent magnet's flux and therefore not reclaimable. That input energy is lost.
And when the input coil is switched off,where do you think the PMs flux will go?--back through !the now! switched off coil--yes?
Brad have you a link to the two working circuit diagrams that dont need fancy alloys ? I thought one of your country men was saying that Neo magnets are banned is Oz, I hope you have a good stash or is that illegal too ?
This is a document outlining one of the fundamental designs of the SPG, and the specifications that would be required to get a prototype built.
I'm uploading this for people who have expressed an interest in the design and understand the maths behind it.
https://www.scribd.com/document/375038644/The-SPG-Technical-Specifications?secret_password=NYXjdM5ZUvl8DeQRZ6Jz (https://www.scribd.com/document/375038644/The-SPG-Technical-Specifications?secret_password=NYXjdM5ZUvl8DeQRZ6Jz)