Hi All ! I want to share a new idea . It is an efficient electric generator .Everything is very simple :) .There is a coil and a magnet .The magnet goes away and the coil produces an electric current.At this time, the coil prevents the magnet from moving with its field .Now we get rid of the braking of the generator shaft . Two iron washers are attracted by the coil and accelerate the rotor .The same Lenz force is used that prevents the magnet from moving.
Thus, in this generator the braking forces are compensated by the acceleration forces .This design has a number of specific features that should be considered for success. This will be discussed later .
Version V1 is here https://overunity.com/15307/lenz-free-generator/msg541343/#msg541343
The duty cycle of the generator begins when the magnet is opposite the coil ( on the picture MLG_V2.jpg ) .
At this moment the load is connected .
The duty cycle of the generator ends when the iron washers are opposite the coil . At this point, the load is disconnected until the start of the next cycle.
The easiest way to extract a duty cycle is to use a diode . The diode must be installed so as to pass the current of the desired polarity . The reason for these complications is that a magnet approaching the coil and moving away from it produces a voltage of different polarity .
(Attention ! The captions in the picture are randomly placed.)
Quote from: BorisKrabow on July 05, 2020, 02:16:41 PM
The easiest way to extract a duty cycle is to use a diode . The diode must be installed so as to pass the current of the desired polarity . The reason for these complications is that a magnet approaching the coil and moving away from it produces a voltage of different polarity .
(Attention ! The captions in the picture are randomly placed.)
When a rotor magnet passes a coil, on the approach the magnet field cuts the windings on that side of the coil causing current to flow in the whole coil in 1 polarity, and when the magnet is just passing the departing side of the coil, current in the coil occurs in the opposite polarity. Diodes or not, there will be lenz occurring on both affected areas of the coil. On approach there will be repulsion to the incoming magnet and repulsion passing dead center cutting the departing windings. When the magnet is crossing dead center, both the approaching side of the coil and the departing side are being influenced by the rotor magnet equally where no current flows in the coil as a whole. That is how the AC waveform happens when the magnet passes the coil.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on July 05, 2020, 05:18:38 PM
When a rotor magnet passes a coil, on the approach the magnet field cuts the windings on that side of the coil causing current to flow in the whole coil in 1 polarity, and when the magnet is just passing the departing side of the coil, current in the coil occurs in the opposite polarity. Diodes or not, there will be lenz occurring on both affected areas of the coil. On approach there will be repulsion to the incoming magnet and repulsion passing dead center cutting the departing windings. When the magnet is crossing dead center, both the approaching side of the coil and the departing side are being influenced by the rotor magnet equally where no current flows in the coil as a whole. That is how the AC waveform happens when the magnet passes the coil.
Mags
Hi Mags ! If the current in the coil does not flow, then there is no resistance to the movement of the magnet and no Lenz . If you take a small motor and connect a light bulb, it will be more difficult to rotate the motor than without a light bulb.Therefore, when the diode does not pass current at this moment, there can be no resistance to the rotor and Lenz cannot arrive .The reason is the lack of current in the coil without which a magnetic field can not be formed affecting the magnet
As for the polarity of the voltages from approaching and removing the magnet, that is, a good illustration from the textbook.
This phenomenon allows the use of a diode for undesirable polarity.
Quote from: BorisKrabow on July 05, 2020, 07:30:49 PM
Hi Mags ! If the current in the coil does not flow, then there is no resistance to the movement of the magnet and no Lenz . If you take a small motor and connect a light bulb, it will be more difficult to rotate the motor than without a light bulb.Therefore, when the diode does not pass current at this moment, there can be no resistance to the rotor and Lenz cannot arrive .The reason is the lack of current in the coil without which a magnetic field can not be formed affecting the magnet
As for the polarity of the voltages from approaching and removing the magnet, that is, a good illustration from the textbook.
This phenomenon allows the use of a diode for undesirable polarity.
Hey Boris
Well now you show a different magnet coil orientations. In your new orientation, the mushroom of flux from the magnet affects all sides of the coil equally. In the previous orientation, stop thinking about the center of the coil as the point of origin of the coils field. As the magnets face comes in front of the windings of the coil, it is that portion of the coil that is mostly being induced by the moving magnets field. Lets say that the coil has a 3ft diameter core. Even your new orientation will show a very very weak current with the magnet moving in and out, because the dense flux of the magnet is not anywhere near any windings. But if we brush that magnet against a portion of the windings, we will get more current.
So our rotor approaches the rt side of the windings first, and lets say current is going up in those wire in front of the magnet, the field produced by the windings on that part of the coil will go against the rotor magnet motion. And the same with the departing side of the coil, current will go upward(reversing the coil cirrent direction as a whole) and also produce a field that opposes the rotor magnet motion....
The new orientation does the same essentially, if we look at the angle of the flux from the magnet in relation to the windings. When the magnet goes in, the magnets field cuts all windings in the same direction, and the field in the winding opposes the magnets field direction of movement. The same with pulling the magnet in the outer direction, the coils fields oppose the fields of the magnet in the outer direction also. So if we use the word 'opposition' in relation to the magnets direction of field motion, we dont necessarily need to call it attraction or repulsion, once we understand what is actually happening between the moving magnet fields and the windings reactions.
So with a diode, you are only avoiding 1/2 of the induction of the coil by the magnet and half of the lenz in a sense. You will either have induction and lenz on the approach of say a positive polarity, or on the departure from dead center, a negative coil output and lenz once again, depending on the diode polarity set.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on July 05, 2020, 08:35:52 PM
Hey Boris
Well now you show a different magnet coil orientations. In your new orientation, the mushroom of flux from the magnet affects all sides of the coil equally. In the previous orientation, stop thinking about the center of the coil as the point of origin of the coils field. As the magnets face comes in front of the windings of the coil, it is that portion of the coil that is mostly being induced by the moving magnets field. Lets say that the coil has a 3ft diameter core. Even your new orientation will show a very very weak current with the magnet moving in and out, because the dense flux of the magnet is not anywhere near any windings. But if we brush that magnet against a portion of the windings, we will get more current.
So our rotor approaches the rt side of the windings first, and lets say current is going up in those wire in front of the magnet, the field produced by the windings on that part of the coil will go against the rotor magnet motion. And the same with the departing side of the coil, current will go upward(reversing the coil cirrent direction as a whole) and also produce a field that opposes the rotor magnet motion....
The new orientation does the same essentially, if we look at the angle of the flux from the magnet in relation to the windings. When the magnet goes in, the magnets field cuts all windings in the same direction, and the field in the winding opposes the magnets field direction of movement. The same with pulling the magnet in the outer direction, the coils fields oppose the fields of the magnet in the outer direction also. So if we use the word 'opposition' in relation to the magnets direction of field motion, we dont necessarily need to call it attraction or repulsion, once we understand what is actually happening between the moving magnet fields and the windings reactions.
So with a diode, you are only avoiding 1/2 of the induction of the coil by the magnet and half of the lenz in a sense. You will either have induction and lenz on the approach of say a positive polarity, or on the departure from dead center, a negative coil output and lenz once again, depending on the diode polarity set.
Mags
So if you use a diode, what advantage do we have by bypassing 1/2 of the induction cycle?
Mags
Hi Mags,
I think I understand what Boris is proposing. If you look at the picture he posted in the first post of this thread you will see a couple of pieces of metal as part of the rotor. I think his idea is that if you draw current from the coil as the magnet is leaving the coil, the current in the coil will attract the metal part of the rotor and help to overcome the attraction of Lenz. Since he has not shown any kind of working device I am assuming this is only theory on his part. It would be an interesting experiment to try I guess.
Boris, if I misunderstood what you are proposing then please correct my mistakes.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on July 05, 2020, 09:48:17 PM
Hi Mags,
I think I understand what Boris is proposing. If you look at the picture he posted in the first post of this thread you will see a couple of pieces of metal as part of the rotor. I think his idea is that if you draw current from the coil as the magnet is leaving the coil, the current in the coil will attract the metal part of the rotor and help to overcome the attraction of Lenz. Since he has not shown any kind of working device I am assuming this is only theory on his part. It would be an interesting experiment to try I guess.
Boris, if I misunderstood what you are proposing then please correct my mistakes.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Hi Carroll , Everything is right . ( Sorry I use google translator :D ;D )
The following happens on this device :
1. when the coil counteracts the outgoing magnet it at the same time attracts pieces of iron
2. Asymmetry applied . Pieces of iron are attracted to the coil, neutralizing the Lenz effect.
At this moment, the current and magnetic field in the coil disappear, since the magnet completely leaves the coil.
Iron parts leave the coil without being affected by braking forces .
So it turns out Free Energy :) Next, we are waiting for the repetition of this cycle. .... Eternal Holiday :D ....
I am grateful that attention was paid to my modest work .
Regards,
Boris
Quote from: BorisKrabow on July 06, 2020, 05:27:26 AM
Hi Carroll , Everything is right . ( Sorry I use google translator :D ;D )
The following happens on this device :
1. when the coil counteracts the outgoing magnet it at the same time attracts pieces of iron
2. Asymmetry applied . Pieces of iron are attracted to the coil, neutralizing the Lenz effect.
At this moment, the current and magnetic field in the coil disappear, since the magnet completely leaves the coil.
Iron parts leave the coil without being affected by braking forces .
So it turns out Free Energy :) Next, we are waiting for the repetition of this cycle. .... Eternal Holiday :D ....
I am grateful that attention was paid to my modest work .
Regards,
Boris
Hi Boris,
Could you share some measurement results on the generator performance?
I mean if you already managed to build and test such setup.
Of course, several "small details" are still to be taken care of in this setup but they are surely solvable. 8)
Greetings
Gyula
@Boris:
This is a very novel idea. Holds great merit for working well. Tests will show.
@Mags
In response to post #4, If you were to use a hall triggering a mosfet at the correct time as in starting of the outgoing cycle, would this not cure the need for the diodes? I am wondering also if an AC solid state relay triggered by the same hall circuit would work. Since it is a zero-crossing device, when triggered on, will stay on until the output of the coil passes the zero state and then reset.
Just rambles. thay
Quote from: Thaelin on July 06, 2020, 05:23:18 PM
@Boris:
This is a very novel idea. Holds great merit for working well. Tests will show.
@Mags
In response to post #4, If you were to use a hall triggering a mosfet at the correct time as in starting of the outgoing cycle, would this not cure the need for the diodes? I am wondering also if an AC solid state relay triggered by the same hall circuit would work. Since it is a zero-crossing device, when triggered on, will stay on until the output of the coil passes the zero state and then reset.
Just rambles. thay
Boris' configuration will have to be tested. If the iron washers help, Id like to see it.
Mags
I have another thought on this idea. IF this idea actually works then with the right size iron or steel piece of metal in relation to the size and strength of the magnet should make the device self adjusting in regard to overcoming the Lenz force of the leaving magnet. As you draw more current from the coil then the attraction of the iron piece to the coils should also increase helping to overcome the increase in Lenz force. An interesting idea.
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on July 06, 2020, 07:38:40 PM
I have another thought on this idea. IF this idea actually works then with the right size iron or steel piece of metal in relation to the size and strength of the magnet should make the device self adjusting in regard to overcoming the Lenz force of the leaving magnet. As you draw more current from the coil then the attraction of the iron piece to the coils should also increase helping to overcome the increase in Lenz force. An interesting idea.
Carroll
Hi Carroll,
Good comment, thanks, and additionally may I add the soft iron material should have low remanence and minimal eddy current loss in it (laminated core cut to size or ferrite pieces would be preferred).
Regarding the generator coils they should be wound with thick wire to reduce wire loss, and to make up for the not 100% output power utilization the number of coils and permanent magnets should be increased. (I mean the load appears only after TDC.)
Hi Boris, I am curious do you have Version 3 of this setup ? 8) ;)
Gyula
Considering Boris's MLG drawing 1. as a magnet and coil approach the near edge of a coil one current polarity make a sine wave up or down. Then at dead center that sine wave goes to 0. 2. as they leave dead center the current polarity is reversed as it leaves the other edge of the coil. The Lenz counter to motion force pushes against the approaching coil/magnet as they approach and that same counter to motion force wants to keep the coil and magnet together thus holding back on the coil and magnet leaving dead center. So lets say we have rigged the setup so the coil is open on approach and makes no current so the core and magnet are attracted to each other freely and then stuck at dead center. But at that point we close the coil so induction occurs and current flows and holds the coil and magnet back preventing it from leaving - Lenz counter to motion force. But we counter that with a magnet to attract the cored coil so that the Lenz counter to motion force is counter balanced.
So what have we done? 1. we reduce the output by 50% with no current on approach but gained a little from the attraction. 2. We have reduced the Lenz counter to motion force with some counter balancing attraction.
Then what - then comes the measurement of this idea to see if it has merit.
I leave that to others to show their measurements.
There is more to this because by introducing the magnet we now have a "sticky spot" that has to be overcome, subtracted, and compensated for.
Potential idea Boris but the "Devil is in the measurements".
I have used a pendulum with a one way switch to measure things like this on a small scale. ie. open the coil and count the swings and close the coil and count the swings - very clear and easy to measure this way.
Norman
Hi ! Parts area may vary.The gaps between the parts may also vary (Watch the picture at the beginning of the topic carefully).
By increasing the percentage of free energy, the power decreases or the weight of the generator increases. But we are not building a plane, but a power station without coal .
Iron is cheap and there are a lot of it in the world ;D
I propose to call this piece of metal Compensator .
Regards,
Boris
I had some spare time today so I did a quick and crude test of Boris' idea. I have included some pictures of my testing to help you understand what I have done. The first picture is of the rotor I used for a baseline test. I originally had 8 magnets on that rotor. But with 8 magnets there was no gap in the signal from one magnet to the next so I could not determine when the magnet was approaching or leaving the coil. Also you will note that for this idea to work all magnets must face the same way so that a rectifier could be used to only conduct current when the magnet was leaving the coil. With hall effect or some other type of timing then of course the magnets could be mounted with alternating poles like a normal generator.
With the rotor without any washers I got the following results after allowing the test to run for a while to get everything warmed up and stabilized. The rotor speed was 1560 according to my laser tach. The output volts were 5.74 volts DC across a 393 ohm load rectifying only the part of the cycle with the magnet leaving the coil. The input voltage to the scooter motor was 13.77 volts. I realize this is not a very good test bed for this test but I just used what I had handy by modifying my test setup.
The second picture shows the rotor with some 1/4 inch washers installed next to the magnets. There are 3 of them in each position stacked on top of one another in the holes I added to the rotor.
After allowing the test setup to run again for a while to let everything stabilize I got the following results. The rpm according to the tach was now slightly higher at 1563 rpm. The surprise was that the voltage had gone up by more than .2 of a volt from 5.74 to 5.98 across the same 393 ohm load. My input voltage to the scooter motor was slightly lower at 13.75 volts.
The last picture is of the test setup running. When the picture was taken things had not yet stabilized so the voltage readings on the meter does not agree with what I have posted. You can see from the scope shot in the background that I was rectifying the last half of the cycle. The input voltage and rpm changes are not really large enough to pay much attention to in my opinion. But what is interesting to me is why did the output voltage go up so much? I am puzzled by that.
Perhaps someone with more time and better building skills than mine would like to pursue this further because I am convinced adding the washers to the rotor DID cause the output voltage to go up.
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on July 08, 2020, 04:04:55 PM
....
But what is interesting to me is why did the output voltage go up so much? I am puzzled by that.
Perhaps someone with more time and better building skills than mine would like to pursue this further because I am convinced adding the washers to the rotor DID cause the output voltage to go up.
....
Hi Carroll,
Yes, adding the washers is the most likely explanation for the output voltage increase. This is because I think the washers increase the gen coil inductance a little whenever they pass in front of the coil. If you happen to have an L meter, I think it would show an increase when you position a washer to face the coil.
Thanks for doing this test and sharing your result!
Gyula
Good work Carroll. But what we really need is watts in and watts out.
I'm like you. I think it can be tweaked into something important.
Norman
Nice test citfta. About higher generated voltage with washers, did you check to see that the air gap distance was the same as baseline? A slight difference could cause it.
Regards,
bi
Good work Carroll ! You can do a simple test. Measure the motor current with an ammeter and at the same time switch the diodes of different half-cycles . Lenz - NoLenz . Maybe we will see the difference . But for this it is necessary to connect a large load to the coil .
In the picture, an option for tests .
Regards,
Boris
Thanks Boris,
I may not have time to do that today but I will make that test. That should prove more informative than the way I tested it. Trying to catch up on yard work today before more rain comes in.
Carroll
citfta,
Placing steel close to your disk magnet makes the magnetic field loop around through the washers. Sort of a distorted pole shoe.
It would concentrate the field through the rotor, probably accounting for the voltage difference.
Regards
Hi ! Asynchronous motor rotor can be an effective Lenz compensator ! :)
I got some time this morning to runs some more tests. I think my scooter motor driving my test set is too large to notice any significant change in current with a changing load. The current stayed very close to 750 milliamps for the entire test time.
What I did see that was interesting was the difference in voltage between rectifying the first half of the sine wave as the magnet approached the coil and the increase in voltage when rectifying the last half of the sine wave as the magnet was leaving the coil and the washers were approaching the coil.
Here are the results: First test using 393 ohm resistance.
Approaching coil: 4.36 volts
Leaving coil: 5.86 volts
Second test using 10 ohm resistance,
Approaching coil: .26 volts
Leaving coil: .61 volts
So it appears that adding some washers or other ferrous material so that it approaches the coil as the magnet is leaving the coil does have a pretty significant effect. I have a lot going on right now but someone with better building skills should pursue this to see what configurations could be used to improve and test this effect.
Thanks Boris for an interesting idea.
Carroll
Quote from: Cadman on July 09, 2020, 10:59:16 AM
citfta,
Placing steel close to your disk magnet makes the magnetic field loop around through the washers. Sort of a distorted pole shoe.
It would concentrate the field through the rotor, probably accounting for the voltage difference.
Regards
I agree. If the washer is on the departing side of the magnet, the approaching side of the magnet has less flux because the washer is pulling it to the departing side of the magnet.
To test that, remove the washer and measure the in and out voltages and then add the washer and see if the approach voltage is lower and the departing voltage is higher than without the washer.
Mags
Hi Mags,
If you go back to the previous page where I posted my first tests, I did test without any washers. And you are correct that after I added the washers the approaching voltage dropped and the leaving voltage increased. So is this something we can use to our advantage? We are getting a higher voltage across the same load on the leaving side by adding washers to that side.
As I said earlier my motor is too large to determine if the added washers are reducing or delaying the Lenz effect. A new test set up either with bigger or more coils or a much smaller motor needs to be done to determine the effect the washers are having on the Lenz effect.
Carroll
Quote from: citfta on July 10, 2020, 06:56:13 PM
Hi Mags,
If you go back to the previous page where I posted my first tests, I did test without any washers. And you are correct that after I added the washers the approaching voltage dropped and the leaving voltage increased. So is this something we can use to our advantage? We are getting a higher voltage across the same load on the leaving side by adding washers to that side.
As I said earlier my motor is too large to determine if the added washers are reducing or delaying the Lenz effect. A new test set up either with bigger or more coils or a much smaller motor needs to be done to determine the effect the washers are having on the Lenz effect.
Carroll
Hey Carrol
Sorry I missed that. As they always say, just because there is more voltage, doesnt mean there is ou. By using a diode to skip the approach induction and then letting the departure induction happen, cant say that there is anything more than a reshaping of the field using the washer as a core structure to do so and it directs more flux to the coil. So this is the test that needs to be done....
Use the diode to block all approach induction, washer and no washer. Load up the coil and see if the wheel has less lor more drag either way. Your probably doing that already. Sorry if I hadnt seen that. If the rotor is bogged down with the washer more than without, Id say its typical. But if the load gets more energy and less bogg, then it is worth looking into more.
Nice work ;D
Mags
Hi guys, thanks for sharing your experiments.
As a side note, in metal detection area it is well known that if we approach a variable magnetic field to a piece of iron, iron will develop a secondary magnetic field of the same direction with the inducer (in phase). Copper does just the opposite.It will develop an opposite secondary magnetic field (180 deg out of phase). So perhaps by combining the two metal's opposite behaviour you can enhance the effect.
Best regards
Jeg
Quote from: citfta on July 10, 2020, 06:56:13 PM
....
As I said earlier my motor is too large to determine if the added washers are reducing or delaying the Lenz effect. A new test set up either with bigger or more coils or a much smaller motor needs to be done to determine the effect the washers are having on the Lenz effect.
...
Hi Carroll,
Thank you again for sharing your new measurents on this interesting setup.
Would like to suggest a small modification on your rotor disk. When you have time, you may wish to mount and embed further two magnets
into the rotor, these would serve as rotor magnets for a small pulse motor, see the attached picture with my indicating the magnet places.
And you would have room for two small stator motor coils to mount them on a vertical wood support fastened on the base platform.
This way you could get rid of the scooter motor and would be able to sense any load behaviour on the generator side by monitoring the pulse motor input current.
The simplest pulse motor with one transistor controlled by a reed switch or a Hall sensor would serve well. The 2 motor coils would simply be in series and a fast diode would shunt both (or individually) for the flyback pulse to maintain motor coil current a little after the switch-off moments. Obviously such simple pulse motor could not provide high RPM for the rotor but would serve well for detecting any load change.
You could position the two motor magnets very close to the edges of the rotor disk alongside the diameter line (instead of the middle
I indicated), that would insure higher motor torque if that would be important. I apologize for giving you such suggestion from my 'armchair', I thought it mentioning at least for your consideration.
Regards
Gyula
Hello again Gyula,
I don't mind at all you suggesting ideas for further research. I do think that might be a good way to explore this a little further. Unfortunately I have several outdoor projects that I really need to get done so my time for working on this will be limited. It does get too hot a lot of times in the afternoon to work outdoors so I probably will have some time each day to rebuild this into a pulse motor for further testing. But it will probably take me a few days to get it done.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Take care,
Carroll
My simple suggestion is to use a pendulum instead of a rotor and count the swings when dropped from the same point once for the washer enhancement and once for standard setup. Then you will see if there is less Lenz counter to the direction of the motion......
If nothing comes out by next week I might have time to do that.
IRS comes first - 15th is coming.
Norman
First thing comes to mind is the pendulum swings both ways, so as citfta does, magnet encounters coil first, then iron washer, then on back swing, iron first, then magnet. Be interesting to see difference. I thought about suggesting citfta test running opposite direction of rotation. See if those numbers shed any insight.
I also noticed that first post original drawing has split rotor with iron going past rear end of coil core. I don't see the value for it. And as long as there is the rotor structure there, better off to use a magnet on it.
BTW, I think you could emulate a smaller (weaker) motor by shifting the brush holder end cap position and reducing motor voltage. Advancing brush timing weakens the motor field causing less torque per amp and higher RPM per volt. Just a thought. Might be quicker than adding magnets to make a pulse motor.
Regards,
bi
Quote from: bistander on July 11, 2020, 05:55:40 PM
...
I also noticed that first post original drawing has split rotor with iron going past rear end of coil core. I don't see the value for it. And as long as there is the rotor structure there, better off to use a magnet on it.
...
Hi Bistander,
Do you mean to use a magnet on the split rotor instead of the iron piece? I think you meant the iron on the bottom rotor disk in Boris's drawing, right?
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on July 11, 2020, 06:19:51 PM
Hi Bistander,
Do you mean to use a magnet on the split rotor instead of the iron piece? I think you meant the iron on the bottom rotor disk in Boris's drawing, right?
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
Yes. That's what I said, isn't it? Or was trying to say.
bi
Quote from: bistander on July 11, 2020, 07:09:46 PM
Hi Gyula,
Yes. That's what I said, isn't it? Or was trying to say.
bi
I think the magnet will introduce a sticky point, a drag just after TDC, just like the load current does earlier what the iron reduces. I understand that a magnet in the place of iron would give a better drag compensation up to TDC moment but after passing TDC it would introduce back attraction to the coil core. This is how I see it and asked whether I got your suggestion right.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on July 11, 2020, 07:22:11 PM
I think the magnet will introduce a sticky point, a drag just after TDC, just like the load current does earlier what the iron reduces. I understand that a magnet in the place of iron would give a better drag compensation up to TDC moment but after passing TDC it would introduce back attraction to the coil core. This is how I see it and asked whether I got your suggestion right.
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I'll try to explain better. To me, half of the original idea quickly was dropped. I don't know why but likely it was difficult for citfta to implement with his existing apparatus. But I saw no benefit of the moving iron on that end of the coil core anyway. However using another magnet in place of that iron would likely increase flux through the coil core thereby increasing the generator performance namely in efficiency and power density. That has nothing to do with minimizing Lenz. Sorry if that went off topic.
bi
Quote from: bistander on July 11, 2020, 08:52:12 PM
Hi Gyula,
I'll try to explain better. To me, half of the original idea quickly was dropped. I don't know why but likely it was difficult for citfta to implement with his existing apparatus. But I saw no benefit of the moving iron on that end of the coil core anyway. However using another magnet in place of that iron would likely increase flux through the coil core thereby increasing the generator performance namely in efficiency and power density. That has nothing to do with minimizing Lenz. Sorry if that went off topic.
bi
Hi Bi,
Thanks for explaining, I understand.
I see this setup differently. I still think Boris's claim is valid and using the iron pieces the usual drag an electric load imposes on the rotor (hence on the prime mover of this generator) could be reduced.
Lenz law still happens of course when the load current appears just after TDC but its counter to motion field (that normally causes the drag) is harnessed by attracting in the iron pieces with it.
OF course this is a claim and it should be verified in practice with measurements. Carroll's kind tests showed that the presence of the iron pieces indeed increases output voltage hence power.
I understand also that the iron piece mounted next to the leaving side of the magnet modifies the magnet's flux distribution, making it asymmetric.
Norman's pendulum test suggestion (Reply #32 above) is indeed simpler than using a pulse motor.
Gyula
Hi ! I have Variant 3 . Compensation occurs when approaching . The magnet works simultaneously with the iron compensator .
It is designed for pendulums and the simple conversion of electric motors into free energy generators.
V3 is different from V1, V2, and therefore the test results may be unexpected .
Regards ,
Boris
Quote from: BorisKrabow on July 12, 2020, 09:01:25 PM
Hi ! I have Variant 3 . Compensation occurs when approaching . The magnet works simultaneously with the iron compensator .
It is designed for pendulums and the simple conversion of electric motors into free energy generators.
V3 is different from V1, V2, and therefore the test results may be unexpected .
Regards ,
Boris
It must be added that the coil is connected to the load only when approaching . When moving away from the coil, the load must be disconnected. This will allow the magnet and the iron compensator to leave without resistance. You can use a diode or other methods to do this. ;D
Hi Boris,
Thanks for showing Version 3, it seems also interesting.
Would like to ask whether you have managed to test any version in practice?
It would be very good to see for instance V2 when you remove the iron from the top rotor disk and use the iron only on the bottom rotor disk.
Then the comparative load tests would nicely show how useful the presence of the bottom iron would be versus the case when the bottom iron is also removed.
Have you done such tests or any tests with these versions, or you have this idea untested by you? I am not nit-picking, this idea sounds very good, I am just curious what you experienced.
Greetings
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I have not conducted practical tests of this idea.
Just not enough time for everything.
To find a good design, you need to conduct hundreds of tests ......
Apparently, it is necessary to attract specialists on this issue.
I will be glad if business representatives show interest in the mass introduction of this technology.
Most people cannot make complex devices in the garage.
The optimal solution is quick assembly kits.
The community may have good ideas.
Regards,
Boris
An easy way to test this idea. Make a motor generator from a computer fan .
If it charges the battery it is connected to, you won the game :)
Low Lenz pendulum tests. In the photo you see a very large gap because the setup is not tight enough to make it smaller. I will work on more precision as time permits. You can see the metal beside the magnet.
I woke up wide awake at 1am thinking about this and rigged and tested as you see - not too exciting with large gap.
However look at B 3 highlighted text.
Measuring the current with a microamp meter shows no major difference with or without the metal except leaving the core seems greater amperage than approaching the core.
A. no metal
1. open coil 48 swings
2. short coil 38 swings
3. with diode 36 or 37 swings
B. with metal next to magnet.
1. open coil 46
2. shorted coil 37 or 38
3. diode > 44 swings - greater than A 3 above shows promise
4. diode > 43 swings
So I would say this idea warrants more study.
My old pendulum with 2 skate bearings was too sloppy so I used a bicycle front wheel axle and even as adjustable as that is and the arm 20 inches long there is some serious axle play.
What is amazing to me is the microamp meter moves further when the pendulum is not swing fast but less when it swings high and fast. go figure?
Norman
Hi Norman,
Thank you very much for doing and reporting this test.
Wish you good health.
Greetings
Gyula
if you use a part from a hard disk as a pendulum? There is a suspension(axis), there is a coil, there is a magnet ...
The bearing in the hard drive and also the VCR is hard to adapt whereas quick and dirty bike axles are easy to adapt and adjust.
I know because I have used the VCR bearing but not for a long pendulum where the least little bit of play will manifest itself.
See attached photo for how I adapted the front bicycle axle to make a pendulum. I wrapped some sheet metal around the axle and gripped it tight with a nut and then the wood is screwed into that metal. Out of the photo to the left is a front bicycle fork that holds the end of the axle. Since I repair bicycles I have lots of spare parts available.
My mistake was in using a 16 inch wheel axle instead of a 26 inch wheel which would have greater stability. If need be I can use 2 axles giving me the equivalent of a no sag fence gate hinge but don't have time right now.
Norman
Today I got a better axle and reduced the mag/core gap thus reducing the swings and now the difference in swings with coil open/closed and metal/no metal is 1-2 swings - around 7-9. I will retest to see if the numbers are valid and then report them.
Bad news for now. The coil does not generate enough voltage to allow a diode to give me oneway voltage/current so it will take a mechanical switch and I don't have time for that now unless my nightime brain wakes me up with a quick and dirty idea.
So my daytime curiosity brain came up with this.
Using a hand pressed micro switch because the pendulum swings slow enough to manually press the switch closing the coil in only 1 direction and 2 tests I got a difference of 1 both times. So
A. coil closed approaching metal then coil - 9 swings.
B. coil closed approaching the coil then metal - 10 swings.
C. 9 swings with coil open.
Which I interpret to mean that the Lenz counter to motion force is reduced with the metal on the leaving coil side. So we have quasi good news....
Norman
Norman
Hi Norman,
Thank you again for your kind efforts. Regarding the " The coil does not generate enough voltage to allow a diode to give me oneway voltage/current" problem, you may have germanium diodes in your junkbox? Or a germanium transistor used as a diode? These Ge diodes have 50- 100 mV forward voltage drop only. Low barrier Schottky diodes have 150-200 mV forward voltage drop.
Indeed your test results are promising. 8)
Greetings
Gyula
I see one small snag in the theory.
Whenever we place a piece of iron near a magnet the iron becomes a magnet in itself having an opposite polarity to the magnet which induced it, it's called magnetic induction. Therefore by placing a washer next to the magnet we have simply produced another slightly weaker magnet. The magnetic field induced in the iron washer is bound to the magnet thus it cannot change to any large degree unless the permanent magnet field changes. So when we add the iron washer we are simply producing a larger but slightly weaker permanent magnet field still subject to Lenz forces with respect to the coil and induced currents. Nature is very stubborn and seldom agrees with our theories to invoke change.
I have also been working on a partially lenz free generator following a new theory. When a magnet approaches or leaves a coil with an iron core the induced current in the coil always produces a secondary magnetic field in the core which opposes the motion of the permanent magnetic field. So theoretically we could gain free energy when a magnet is attracted to the iron of the core which will also induce a current in the coil however then we would then have to remove the magnetized iron core from the magnet. The initial work to induce the current in the coil is performed by magnetic attraction between the magnet and iron core and if we could remove the core from the magnet with less work we have a gain in energy.
Therefore our procedure is...
1)Let the magnet be attracted to the iron core inducing a current in the coil.
2)Turn off or interrupt the current flow in the coil to negate any further induced Lenz forces.
3)Demagnetize the iron core in some way so the magnet can leave the core without opposition.
The key word here is "demagnetization", not one magnetic field opposing or acting on another but removing or expelling the magnetic field from a region. Here we should understand using one magnetic field to negate another magnetic field is still "magnetism". I am talking about removing the magnetism all together so that the iron core becomes partially non-magnetic. In this case the magnet could move away from the iron core with little or no opposition.
So our problem then becomes how to demagnetize an iron core using less energy than was gained when the magnet was attracted to the iron core.
I think Victor Schauberger had it right... comprehend and copy nature, do the opposite of what others do.
Regards
Thanks Onepower, I think you made that clear. I was wondering about the same thing but thought a test would be better than wondering.
If I remember correctly your idea was a part of the Adams motor that never seemed to get anywhere. He was getting free energy from the attraction/induction current but then it had to escape from the sticky spot. I always thought that if a small current could be used to escape that sticky spot we would have it. The Kunnel idea was to use a PM with free flux then an interrupter coil to allow and disallow the flux into a generator coil on the other side of the interrupter coil but that never seemed to get anywhere.
Norman
I wonder if instead of blocking with diode it is allowed generate a voltage. The induced current would then be driven into a coil at a different position on rotor. That coil would then be attracted to and unmagnetized piece of steel. I'm thinking the second coil would need to be placed in a position where it's not influenced by another approaching or departing magnet. Think of it like a combination generator/reluctance motor. Obviously I haven't really put a great deal of thought into it this idea. My first impression is that it is just another version of self looped motor generator. But anyway that's my brain fart for today.
The problem that onepower describes is still there. The only difference is that your not fighting the attraction of a strong permanent magnet. But as usual a gain is always offset by a loss. I'm sure those losses will be uncovered soon enough.
Quote from: onepower on August 06, 2020, 11:10:54 AM
" .... Whenever we place a piece of iron near a magnet the iron becomes a magnet in itself having an opposite polarity to the magnet which induced it, it's called magnetic induction. Therefore by placing a washer next to the magnet we have simply produced another slightly weaker magnet.... "
Hi !
I have an early Variant 1 in which the compensator is located on the back of the coil . Maybe it will be interesting .
When an electric current flows in a coil, two poles appear in it. The compensator can be placed anywhere . The most important thing is that the counter-action energy is converted into mechanical acceleration .
I apologize for being rarely here
Regards
Boris I like your drawing but it appears that you are compensating for the Lenz counter to motion force only as the coil leaves the magnet but does not take care of the approaching the coil. And there is a field out of each end of the coil. So maybe we need to counter on both ends of the coil.... Or if we rig/fix one end of the coil does that weaken the other end.
I picture the Lenz counter to motion force to be a force on the outside of the coil pushing against the approaching magnet like water raining down on the outside of a glass turned upside down if you can picture that.
Norman
Hi Norman,
Thanks for the tests . I am impressed.
Apparently there are big discoveries ahead of us.
compensators on both sides of the coil have V2 ( picture at the beginning of the topic )
when approaching, we turn off the coil so that Lenz would not interfere with us when the compensator is not yet ready for work
The V5 design will work both when approaching and removing the magnet .I can see its outlines ... This takes time and a lot of mental strength.
Lenz is primarily the magnetic field of the coil, which brakes the approaching magnet with the same pole and the retreating magnet brakes with the opposite pole. it's like an electric motor, on the contrary, brakes instead of acceleration . But I guess how to deploy it so that it accelerates instead of brakes, but this is a different project.
MLG has several effects. the compensator is attracted to neutralize Lenz. The compensator being next to the magnet deforms the magnetic field of the coil, interfering with Lenz. The compensator changes the parameters of the coil and a parametric effect occurs, which acts in an unknown way. the flow of the magnetic field from the magnet through the coil shaft into the compensator can shift the Lenz phase, which will weaken the braking .
You can still think of many fairy tales, but I think that this will be enough for a start. :D :D .
Best regards ,
Boris
Right on Boris. You are the first person to articulate what I learned from simple magnet and coil on a pendulum experiments...
Keep going.... I like it.
Norman
Hi !
This is V4! If you need a lot of energy then you need to add more magnetic field .
I agree with what was said earlier in the topic :
multiple coils can be used in the generator .
ferromagnet can be any, the main thing is the best result for tests .
We must not forget that all the magnets on the rotor must be turned to the coils with one pole.
If you alternate magnets with different poles, then the OU effect will partially disappear.
If you do not use a diode when removing energy, then the power will increase, but the percentage of OU will decrease .
Direction of rotation as shown by arrow . In the opposite direction, it will work much worse.
Regards,
Boris
Hi !
It's V5! It works when the magnet approaches the coil and when the magnet moves away from the coil.
Segment A acts when approaching the coil. As soon as it covers the entire core of the coil, the compensator becomes neutral since its area does not change until the end of the cycle .
Segment B starts working when the magnet leaves the coil and until the end of the operating cycle .
Here we get both half-cycles of AC . A diode is not required.
Regards,
Boris
So that magnet looks to be off center. Is that good? Seems it would reduce efficiency. But basically any lower Lenz would make greater efficiency ie work in vs watts out.
So here is what has to be done. Come up with a good idea and then build it an test it to see if the idea has merit. I'm getting a little tired of being the tester for other non-bencher's ideas. I don't get it folks.... Is it that some people have great brains and no practical bench skills? I do quick and dirty rapid prototype stuff and then if it merits I refined the mechanism.
Norman
Hi Norman ,
I am not shy about using asymmetry to improve efficiency .
This allows the magnetic field of the permanent magnet to penetrate less into the compensator. The segments are located so that they interact less with each other by magnetic fields. It's easier to find ready-made components . This design has an acceptable cost. when synthesizing a design, I take into account many factors ...
Good, working, interesting ideas will be tested in research centers of large corporations and advanced startups. They will go through many thousands of tests before they hit the market.
I will check some ideas myself. It's hard for me to choose the best one. The problem is compounded by the fact that I have published less than a percent of what I have, and every day new ideas come up that overshadow the old ones.
The V5 is of course crazy. But the task was too difficult. Perhaps someone will suggest a better design. Now I see no other solution to this problem.
V6 is possible and there is much more crazy in it ;D
Regards,
Boris
OnepowerExcellent explanation of free energy.
Please a little more ... how to do it ... (giving a reverse pulse to the polarity of the magnetized core?)
Quote from: onepower on August 06, 2020, 11:10:54 AM
I see one small snag in the theory.
Whenever we place a piece of iron near a magnet the iron becomes a magnet in itself having an opposite polarity to the magnet which induced it, it's called magnetic induction. Therefore by placing a washer next to the magnet we have simply produced another slightly weaker magnet. The magnetic field induced in the iron washer is bound to the magnet thus it cannot change to any large degree unless the permanent magnet field changes. So when we add the iron washer we are simply producing a larger but slightly weaker permanent magnet field still subject to Lenz forces with respect to the coil and induced currents. Nature is very stubborn and seldom agrees with our theories to invoke change.
I have also been working on a partially lenz free generator following a new theory. When a magnet approaches or leaves a coil with an iron core the induced current in the coil always produces a secondary magnetic field in the core which opposes the motion of the permanent magnetic field. So theoretically we could gain free energy when a magnet is attracted to the iron of the core which will also induce a current in the coil however then we would then have to remove the magnetized iron core from the magnet. The initial work to induce the current in the coil is performed by magnetic attraction between the magnet and iron core and if we could remove the core from the magnet with less work we have a gain in energy.
Therefore our procedure is...
1)Let the magnet be attracted to the iron core inducing a current in the coil.
2)Turn off or interrupt the current flow in the coil to negate any further induced Lenz forces.
3)Demagnetize the iron core in some way so the magnet can leave the core without opposition.
The key word here is "demagnetization", not one magnetic field opposing or acting on another but removing or expelling the magnetic field from a region. Here we should understand using one magnetic field to negate another magnetic field is still "magnetism". I am talking about removing the magnetism all together so that the iron core becomes partially non-magnetic. In this case the magnet could move away from the iron core with little or no opposition.
So our problem then becomes how to demagnetize an iron core using less energy than was gained when the magnet was attracted to the iron core.
I think Victor Schauberger had it right... comprehend and copy nature, do the opposite of what others do.
Regards
Quote from: kajunbee on August 06, 2020, 12:10:36 PM
"...I wonder if instead of blocking with diode it is allowed generate a voltage. The induced current would then be driven into a coil at a different position on rotor. That coil would then be attracted to and unmagnetized piece of steel. I'm thinking the second coil would need to be placed in a position where it's not influenced by another approaching or departing magnet. Think of it like a combination generator/reluctance motor....."
Hi kajunbee ,
Interesting idea . It is desirable that this be accompanied by an OU .
For example, a coil attracts an iron compensator with a packet of short pulses,
between which there are Back EMF pulses ;D ;D
For this, the compensator and the coil core must be made of ferrite.
Regards
Surprise ! Work continues :)
Hello!
I added an illustration for my idea. I guess the drawing is easier to read than many pages of explanations.
The technology has not been tested yet.
Tests reveal the effect. I didn't take exact measurements.
You can try to use air coils to break the connection between the magnet and the compensator that occurs through the core of the coil.
There is another interesting addition: when the magnet moves away from the coil, the magnetic field decreases, then the compensator helps the process of reducing the field in the coil. Presumably this helps power generation and at the same time compensates for rotor drag.
regards Boris
Boris, The way I will test this today or tomorrow is with pendulum and then count the swings with the coil closed and with and without the magnet. But what should the polarity be?
Perpendicular or parallel to the coil.
Norman
Quote from: norman6538 on August 14, 2022, 09:30:52 AM
Boris, The way I will test this today or tomorrow is with pendulum and then count the swings with the coil closed and with and without the magnet. But what should the polarity be?
Perpendicular or parallel to the coil.
Norman
Hello Norman ,
Everything is not as easy as it seems .In the asymmetric variant, two asymmetries are applied:
1 first the magnet and then the compensator otherwise there will be double braking.( when the pendulum moves back, the coil must be turned off, this is a rather exotic switch ) .
2 you only need one half cycle of current when the magnet leaves and the compensator is attracted otherwise the energy will be half free :) .
Before the tests it is necessary to measure the magnetic field of the coil (eg with a compass). If there is a magnetic impulse from the reverse side of the coil, then oscillations can be counted. The most interesting thing is that on the reverse side of the coil, the polarity of the Lenz coincides with the polarity of the magnet if the magnet moves away from the coil.
In the second figure, a symmetrical version for the pendulum .Other processes take place in it and test results may be different. Here, on the contrary, the compensator and the magnet arrive at the same time; this half cycle must be used. When the magnet and compensator leave, the coil is switched off. This can be done with a conventional diode.
" Perpendicular or parallel to the coil " . If there are ready-made parts, it is better to use them. You can avoid extra expenses.
I expected to move the magnet from the end of the coil in order to apply the compensator from either side. You can go inside the hollow coil with a magnet and a compensator. You can use a flat crescent coil (similar to Gramme dynamo) .
The main thing is to use the principle that I described above .
The drawings from my previous post are very sketchy, but of course you can repeat this in the design. Use a long non - magnetic rod with a magnet and a compensator at both ends .
Best regards Boris
Hi ,
If you carefully consider drawing MLG1.333 from the last post, you can see that the polarity of the coil and the magnet in the compensator area are opposite . In this case, you can apply Variant 3
where the polarities of the magnet and the coil are the same
https://overunity.com/18539/minimal-lenz-generator-v2/msg547922/#msg547922
When a magnet approaches, the coil counteracts it with the same pole, which is good for a ferromagnetic compensator. It is attracted by the Lenz force plus the magnet. And when the compensator leaves and the coil is turned off, only the magnet acts. The difference when adding all the forces is a gain and is approximately equal to the force with which Lenz brakes the rotor.
Free energy - - - :)
in the figure, the alleged placement of parts on the example of a car generator. It is desirable to isolate the reverse side of the magnet from the ferromagnet of the rotor.
If this works, then once pushing a heavy pendulum, you can charge a car battery. The main thing is good bearings, low air resistance of moving parts, a massive compensator with good magnetic permeability.