Overunity.com Archives

Just saw this...

Corbin introduces magnet-powered motor


Mike Corbin, one of Hollister's best-known business owners who has been a household name in the motorcycle world for decades, recently introduced his "proof of concept" prototype for a magnetically powered motor that he thinks will revolutionize the electric vehicle industry.

Known as the Corbin Motoflux Principle, Corbin secured a U.S. patent for the motor a couple years ago. The Motoflux principle uses a three-component design that incorporates a radial director that distorts the magnetic lines of flux in the armature, Corbin explained in a series of videos he rolled out this week for Motoflux's public reveal. As the flux lines seek to shorten and tighten, the armature is drawn forward to the next closest pole tip of the stator. As a result, the Motoflux device has shown a torque output increase of four to 25 times more than input.

These gains, Corbin explains, are produced solely from the power of the permanent magnets inside the Motoflux motor.

"(We) want to extract power from the force stored in permanent magnets," Corbin said. "The Motoflux principle gives us a way to get a magnetic field to rotate and give us torque."

Motoflux has the potential to become the industry standard for clean-energy travel, Corbin said. The Motoflux motor consumes a fraction of the power that most commercial electric vehicle motors require, and thus needs very little energy storage, Corbin explained.

Read the rest here...https://sanbenito.com/corbin-introduces-magnet-powered-motor/?amp (https://sanbenito.com/corbin-introduces-magnet-powered-motor/?amp)
Here is a link to his website:https://www.motofluxpower.com/ (https://www.motofluxpower.com/)
Videos on his website explain the concept.

https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html (https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html)
search for  Motoflux returned with error.
Search for Corbin  I didn't find mentioned  patent application.
________________________________________________

Video https://youtu.be/3qO-7YKzM4A?t=69 (https://youtu.be/3qO-7YKzM4A?t=69)  looks like not listed  as it is not in  his   
YouTube list: https://www.youtube.com/@corbinseatsofficial/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@corbinseatsofficial/videos)
Corbin patent  application is not a patent and  all it is shown  by him is the picture below.
That is not how patent application looks like.
The quote from the  picture below  is true:
Under the law set of papers was received and satisfied the  requirement and  patent
will be  issued as law says but  it doesn't say  that  it will be issued for this particular  applicant

All his videos are mastered with high quality   professional filming  good as commercial  only.

You cannot extract energy from magnets. You can just disrupt the orientation of the molecules (dipoles) in the magnet
extract-energy-from-magnets#:. (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/35565/extract-energy-from-magnets#:~:text=You%20cannot%20extract%20energy%20from%20magnets.%20You%20can,from%20the%20charge%20of%20an%20electron%3F%22.%20Its%20impossible.)

Some more brain storm is here  from MIT students:
https://alum.mit.edu/slice/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-source-energy (https://alum.mit.edu/slice/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-source-energy)

So if wealthy guy at his 70ties wants some fame he  can file patent application that likely will be rejected.
But it is good for  business advertisement and popularity  ...


Wesley

He's discovered cogging.
bi

It is said that magnets do no work and are "useless". Is gasoline the same? YES ! until the energy is released from it. Magnets also have this energy and are waiting for it to be released. The problem is that we need motion for the magnet, or precisely for the magnetic field.
Sweet Floyd tried to make a magnet that vibrates. Unfortunately, he was the only one who did it, so it's not possible to say that it's possible. Changing the magnetic domains involves the use of a magnetic field, but are there other possibilities? YES ! Everyone knows how iron is magnetized. Are you sure ? How can it be done? how to change the orientation of magnetic domains without involving a magnetic field or current? who knows ?
I will add that it is possible.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 03, 2023, 02:37:52 AM
how to change the orientation of magnetic domains without involving a magnetic field or current? who knows ?
I will add that it is possible.

If domain is something material particle,We can take small tweezers, a microscope, and arrange them correctly.

Quote from: kolbacict on March 03, 2023, 04:18:00 AM
If domain is something material particle,We can take small tweezers, a microscope, and arrange them correctly.

The answer is acoustic vibration which is basically mechanical vibration. We know that in this way the magnet loses its magnetic field. Vibration is needed for the domains to be left randomly. If we have an iron rod, it has a specific frequency for each sound wave. When a sound wave is a standing wave, the sound will resonate. This sound will be like a bell many times stronger and will cause vibrations for the domains.
This is noteworthy as one of the possibilities of MEG or other devices like TPU or even Kapanadze :/
This is just my opinion.

Quote from: am1ll3r on March 02, 2023, 07:32:40 PM
Just saw this...
Corbin introduces magnet-powered motor
Mike Corbin, one of Hollister's best-known business owners who has been a household name in the motorcycle world for
decades, recently introduced his "proof of concept" prototype for a magnetically powered motor that he thinks will revolutionize the electric vehicle industry.
Or yes known for making comfortable seats for bikes,..
Question is : are we talking about Hollister city in California  or Hollister business,  in regards to Corbin?

Known as the Corbin Motoflux Principle, Corbin secured a U.S. patent for the motor a couple years ago.

US city of Hollister population of 41,678  is also known as Hollister brand  for
Hollister or HCo., is a Fashion Trends mostly retail brand owned by Abercrombie & Fitch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abercrombie_%26_Fitch) Co,

QuoteHollister uses a narrative of being founded in 1922 in Hollister, California (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister,_California);
however, it was founded in 2000 in Ohio by Abercrombie.[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister_Co.#cite_note-bbc-5)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister_Co (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister_Co).

Small city of Hollister is the biggest in the region, known from its (highly business sponsored) controversial  bike rally, and
Corbin is making seats for motorcycles, bikes and bicycles .  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister,_California (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollister,_California)

The  first comment  quote was taken from   here :
https://sanbenito.com/corbin-introduces-magnet-powered-motor/

(https://sanbenito.com/corbin-introduces-magnet-powered-motor/)

QuoteThe Corbin Motoflux principle uses a unique, three-component design incorporating a radial director that distorts the magnetic lines of flux in the armature.
As the flux lines seek to shorten and tighten, the armature is drawn forward to the next closest pole tip 

https://www.bing.com/ shown  that is unsafe!!!! (https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=005da6f924a534edJmltdHM9MTY3NzgwMTYwMCZpZ3VpZD0wZmE4YjAzYy1mYmZlLTYwODItM2M2My1hMmY0ZmE0ZTYxOGEmaW5zaWQ9NTQwMA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=0fa8b03c-fbfe-6082-3c63-a2f4fa4e618a&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9maW5hbmNlLmF6Y2VudHJhbC5jb20vYXpjZW50cmFsL2FydGljbGUvbmV3c3dpcmUtMjAyMy0yLTE2LW1vdG9mbHV4LWluYy1wcm92ZXMtdGhlaXItbmV3bHktcGF0ZW50ZWQtZGV2aWNlLWdlbmVyYXRlcy1wb3dlci11dGlsaXppbmctb25seS1wZXJtYW5lbnQtbWFnbmV0cyM6fjp0ZXh0PVRoZSUyMENvcmJpbiUyME1vdG9mbHV4JTIwcHJpbmNpcGxlJTIwdXNlcyUyMGElMjB1bmlxdWUlMkMlMjB0aHJlZS1jb21wb25lbnQsdGhlJTIwbmV4dCUyMGNsb3Nlc3QlMjBwb2xlJTIwdGlwJTIwb2YlMjB0aGUlMjBzdGF0b3Iu&ntb=1)[
So all that notion with  invention and  bikes and city is  ..for some entity business promotion.. likely, surely? what you think?

Wesley

Here is the link to the patent.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166

Quote from: stivep on March 02, 2023, 10:03:21 PMhttps://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html (https://ppubs.uspto.gov/pubwebapp/static/pages/ppubsbasic.html)
search for  Motoflux returned with error.
Search for Corbin  I didn't find mentioned  patent application.

Inventor  Michael Hanagan  (https://patents.google.com/?inventor=Michael+Hanagan)is not Corbin
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166 (https://patents.google.com/?inventor=Michael+Hanagan) who has - application !!! granted .
look here :  https://patentrebel.com/what-does-patent-grant-me (https://patentrebel.com/what-does-patent-grant-mean/#:~:text=Patent%20issued%20means%20the%20same%20as%20patent%20granted.,and%20design%20patents%20that%20are%20issued%20are%20granted.)an
he is listed  as with  - Corbin Pacific, Inc and  few more.
https://patents.google.com/?inventor=Michael+Hanagan (https://patents.google.com/?inventor=Michael+Hanagan)
-so we see here : Entegris, Inc, Hanagan Michael W, Coorstek Inc. .. - the way to  make living
isn't it?

Wesley

 ..

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

QuoteThe present invention pertains to a magnetic circuit.
More particularly, the present invention relates to a Method and Apparatus to Control an Armature Rotating within a Magnetic Circuit.
so the guy applied for patent  trying to secure  method of controlling  rotating armature in within magnetic field..

- that's all he did...
   no magic energy  yet.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166#legalEvents (https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166#legalEvents)

Wesley

Dear lankaIV  I do appreciate your dedication  very much  :
You are great thinker.
____________________________________________________
Some  additional information
_{also for German audience:
https://www.allmystery.de/themen/gw5574-419 (https://www.allmystery.de/themen/gw5574-419)}
for patent international:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/074180673/publication/WO2021126713A1?q=pn%3DUS10897166B1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/074180673/publication/WO2021126713A1?q=pn%3DUS10897166B1)

here is something else:
https://dfpi.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/337/2012/03/corbin_stipulationhanagan.pdf (https://dfpi.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/337/2012/03/corbin_stipulationhanagan.pdf)

_{opinion expressed is my own. Material  included is  taken from public domain.}
Wesley

 At first  the inventor doesn't call subject of his invention - "The motor! "
instead he calls it : "An apparatus"  :!
and
he talks about:  "Method and Apparatus to Control an Armature Rotating within a Magnetic Circuit."
because he wants to get the patent... and it may be not important  how practical it is..
_{definition of  word armature: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/armature (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/armature)}


"someone wants to become inventor for his own pride... of it"
But if he said that  he has  motor driven by energy  extracted from magnets he would be denied  the patent.
After the patent is issued  there is freedom to say whatever  you can about how smart you are  my friends...
Magic frequency, magic power...  and so on...

Did you get the picture?


____________________________________________________________________

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166#legalEvents (https://patents.google.com/patent/US10897166B1/en?oq=US10897166#legalEvents)
This  looks like  the core of invention:
let name some structure that looks like "magnetic motor"
and we will call it from  now: "Apparatus to Control an Armature Rotating within a Magnetic Circuit."
if e.g  gasoline engine is driving that "magnetic motor" aka "Apparatus"
control mechanism - shaft. than this "motor" is controlled and in motion by that gasoline engine.
From that point it is true that  patent is securing control mechanism as in its  title:
"Method and apparatus to control an armature rotating within a magnetic circuit"
and if you use your hand to drive that "motor"  than it is also true that you are controlling that "motor" with your hand
as if you  had  single magnet in your  hand and flip it with your fingers-  it is  also your
total control over motion  and polarity  of that magnet and  rotation of any shaft having magnets
or  interaction with any magnets  close enough to its magnetic field .
please read in patent  :
"What is claimed is :" section.

:) WOW  :D ?  grin...
is that all?  really? that much?
Where is that magic energy  stored and than "extracted" from the magnet the guy is talking about in his videos ?
Wesley

A really great feature of an electric motor is that it is also a generator. Along with reversibility, it is a symmetrical 4 quadrant conversation device. CW or CCW rotation direction. Positive or negative torque. Motor or generator. Accelerator or brake. Basically equally efficient in all models. Amazing, in my opinion.

I wonder how the subject apparatus does with opposite power flow.
I wonder its efficiency.

It appears to me to be a clutch.
bi

 I'm not  sure if I understood you correctly.
Open  please the link and read  the  Patent  claims.


Inventor in his video  was talking about  using energy   stored in the magnet to power his device
and he was also talking about his patent securing the concept.?
--------------------------------
Quick look at the patent   reviles much different animal than you were told it would be there.?
- no motor, no  power from  magnets ..?
So how can you create a generator from some armature having  now patented magnetically controlled rotation
and only if it rotates.and is not a motor and it doesn't have coils.......(- according to the patent) ?
what kind of joke it is?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qO-7YKzM4A&t=69s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qO-7YKzM4A&t=69s)


But  of course you need to  rotate it first  by some motor... or other  mechanism..- according to the patent.?

_{opinion expressed is my own . All doubts are  expressed in form of questions not as a statements in all of my comments related to discussed subject.}
Wesley

I am saying the apparatus is a clutch, not a motor or generator, by normal definitions. I base my opinion on the apparatus shown in the videos.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 04, 2023, 03:38:27 AM
I am saying the apparatus is a clutch, not a motor or generator, by normal definitions. I base my opinion on the apparatus shown in the videos.

Kind of a clutch, but not exactly.  I'd call it a torque amplifier when used under
ideal conditions.  It behaves similar to a gear with the major difference being
the director shaft rotates at the same RPM as the output shaft.  And though
it's not a motor at all, I can certainly see its utility.  Suppose we insert it between
a 1 HP electric motor and a 2500 watt generator.  If it would indeed allow us
to spin that generator at normal motor shaft RPM while powering a 2500 watt
electrical load, we're in business.  No batteries required.   :D

Interesting is the story created around it.
- like as if you found some stone on the street and start to claim that it has some sort of an "energy" you can use.
Pride and popularity makes you special  as you  are the owner of something others don't have.
It is perfectly legal as long as you don't attempt to sale it creating disappointment  of the buyer expecting
that "energy" to work for him from now.
At that point inventor or seller action  becomes criminal based on false promises  seller cannot or does not want to fulfill.
- like a compensation to the buyer  right?

It looks like  the intention of a patent  owner is not financial gain nor sale of the  device but just  pride of being special
and that  may help  his business popularity. isn't it?
Wouldn't you my friends want to become special, unique, respected, adorned, known and symbolic?
<sub>As far As me personally - I DON'T.
nor I care , nor it is important to me,
I'm not special ,  and I differ from many of you,  because  I may be not as good in something you are good at.

opinion expressed is my own . All doubts are  expressed in form of questions not as a statements in all of my comments related to discussed subject.</sub>
Wesley

Look up US patent requirements.

Among first listed
"The invention must be useful."
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 04, 2023, 09:31:14 AM
Look up US patent requirements.

Among first listed
"The invention must be useful."
bi

It is useful, and it is unique enough for a patent, but you wanted  a Tiger as it was advertised  and it is a Rat isn't it? 
Let's compare this video with reality of its patent and please correct me if I'm  wrong. :)
https://youtu.be/3qO-7YKzM4A?t=160
you can't even find this video if you don't know its title as it is not in the list ( not listed) at this particular present time right?
look at the list of videos here : https://www.youtube.com/@corbinseatsofficial/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@corbinseatsofficial/videos)

_{opinion expressed is my own . All doubts are  expressed in form of questions not as a statements in all of my comments related to discussed subject.}
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 04, 2023, 09:41:16 AM
It is useful, and it is unique enough for a patent, but you wanted  a Tiger as it was advertised  and it is a Rat isn't it? 
Let's compare this video with reality of its patent and please correct me if I'm  wrong. :)
...

Hi,
I base my opinion on video linked in website referenced in thread's first post: https://www.motofluxpower.com/how-it-works/

I briefly looked at patents/applications referenced in subsequent posts but have no desire to study them as I find them as useless as the apparatus itself.

I am familiar with past accomplishments of Mike Corbin and respect him for work with EVs and electric land speed racing, areas of interest to me. I like the Sparrow. I am surprised to see him associated with such an apparatus as this useless clutch gizmo. Perhaps his idea of joke?

Only my opinions.
bi

This is the same mechanism of showing how beautiful it will be in the world with my device.
How could no one understand this! If it was real, there's no need to advertise it. When I see a beautiful video with ecology,
I know that 99.99% of it doesn't work. Unless it's a magnetic clutch :) as he says bistander too.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 04, 2023, 11:12:52 AM
This is the same mechanism of showing how beautiful it will be in the world with my device.
How could no one understand this! If it was real, there's no need to advertise it. When I see a beautiful video with ecology,
I know that 99.99% of it doesn't work. Unless it's a magnetic clutch :) as he says bistander too.

I agree that video is beautiful. Made with professional crew, using professional slider:
https://youtu.be/tW2iiL_mluo?t=36 (https://youtu.be/tW2iiL_mluo?t=36) and tripod
and camera like mine  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CppZpVfgCE8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CppZpVfgCE8)
or like   BMPCC 6K Pro (I have it too.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nu9C-Qc1G0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nu9C-Qc1G0)
and video editing program like  Davinci Resolve 18 (free version of it is offered too. Just download it)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEksPdEc7aI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEksPdEc7aI)

___________________________________

But - it is not proven nor recognized in physics to extract energy from magnet and use it to  perform work.
work is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(physics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(physics))
Magnet can't perform work.
https://www.quora.com/When-a-magnet-attracts-another-magnet-can-we-consider-work-to-be-done-If-yes-then-how-Does-the-magnet-lose-its-magnetic-energy (https://www.quora.com/When-a-magnet-attracts-another-magnet-can-we-consider-work-to-be-done-If-yes-then-how-Does-the-magnet-lose-its-magnetic-energy)
Can you use magnets to create energy?
https://reimaginingeducation.org/can-you-use-magnets-to-create-energy/ (https://reimaginingeducation.org/can-you-use-magnets-to-create-energy/)

You have tendency of not responding to  the questions or statements you made r2fpl
can you respond to that?

Wesley

Hello to All,

So, IMO this Apparatus is incorrectly called "motor"...
Yes it is more likely a "magnetic clutch", like Bistander mentioned...
HOWEVER, besides clutching from Input to Output (mechanically) it uses the "Magnetic Jump" (if we could call it like that), thanks to the stator design with the indented notches/air gaps, which adds MORE TORQUE (Amplifies) to the OUTPUT SHAFT...(remember that Input Shaft is NOT mechanically connected to Output Shaft).
This "Magnetic Jump" from the Armature (Secondary Rotor) trying to follow the Inner Input Rotor (called Director by Corbin) is what actually "HAMMERS" a constant and continuous Higher Torque at Output Shaft when running at a steady RPM.

The drawbacks as I think, is that it could "slip off" (meaning "Director" would run away/slips from second rotor or "Armature" whenever a very heavy (mechanical) torque is applied to the output shaft, as an example, trying that a smaller electric motor run a loaded generator. Note that when He is turning Director by hand, there is an "Angle-Gap" until the armature fully reacts or "jumps" to the next step...so, IMHO, the minimal this angle is, the better it will work.

So, whenever they build a setup, where an Electric Motor is fully running a loaded generator through this invention...and it will not slip off, then reuse -some part- of the output generated power to run prime mover motor ...or looping it...then we all will see that it does work...or not.

From my end point, I believe the Armature would need some Couterweights installed, so that the "hammering effect" (like an Air Impact Tool have) is of much higher torque, by "assisting" each magnetic hammering step.

Regards

Ufopolitics

If the 'gain of torque' is so high, why doesn't he put a generator at the output which could power the input motor ?

This would be a 'proof of concept'.  Torque measurements are not.

Quote from: skywatcher on March 04, 2023, 12:20:04 PM
If the 'gain of torque' is so high, why doesn't he put a generator at the output which could power the input motor ?

This would be a 'proof of concept'.  Torque measurements are not.

Exactly...agree.(That is what I have written on my previous post)

He might be aware that anything claiming free energy without any external input or fuel often (always?) attracts the wrong attention and is made to disappear, get shelved or the inventor 'dies suddenly'. 


I think a heavy flywheel could help prevent sudden load slip... 


I won't discount this device as fake until proven as such.   I do think it might be good to contact him privately to talk about a looped device test.  Maybe he has already done that or might be open to it ... privately.

I think the disk break shown prevents the "hammering effect"

https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=190 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=190)

I imagine if it didn't have that it would jump or slip out of sequence.

The chief enemy of this design is core saturation.  High perm materials can help reduce the hysterisis loop but the losses make this kind of generator extremely inefficient over prolonged run time. He says "The rotor begins to jump ahead"! This is because the stator is magnetized and chasing the rotor. Kickback! The ordinary result of saturation.

Quote from: am1ll3r on March 04, 2023, 02:11:14 PM
I think the disk break shown prevents the "hammering effect"

https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=190 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=190)

I imagine if it didn't have that it would jump or slip out of sequence.

Negative, the disc and caliper is just to add a mechanical load, by putting some hydraulic pressure on disc brake pads through caliper pistons, it will add more friction to output shaft. Not necessarily fully stopping it.
The hammering effect would be there at all times, by armature following the director input shaft to next step or jump.


Ufopolitics

I think UFO is positively correct about the hammering effect and I would
bet if this device was connected to a generator the output waveform would
show it by not being a true sine wave and instead looking more like short
pulses.  As such, it's unlikely you would achieve full output power either.

Looping with the MotoFlux would likely be difficult if not impossible.

I now suspect there's a reason the demo did not have a flywheel
installed on the output shaft, because by doing so, there would be
massive slipping when trying to amplify torque.

Understanding Torque and power :

QuotePower is simply that torque multiplied by engine speed.
Fundamentally, then, an engine's torque is the measure of its muscle and how much it can flex.
Power is how fast it can flex it across a given period of time.
In a boxer, torque would be how hard he or she
could punch; power is how fast they could produce those blows.

Isn't that some sort of  misunderstanding by few of the forumers  associated with some of the comments?
compare it to the hammer  in your hand movement while  nailing ..
and than compare  it with inventor device  "arm" when he  turns the shaft.
Wesley

I am very clear about "Torque and Power".

Torque is Power, not speed.
There could be very high speed, however, without torque, whenever a mechanical load is applied it literally stops.
Plus, you could have a very low speed machine with such high torque, that it is simply "unstoppable"...
Torque is the Force/Weight applied.
Whenever I mentioned the "Hammering Effect" was not related to holding a hammer in my hand and hitting a nail...
I was referring to the hammer effect, similar to the one on an Impact Air Tool (and I mentioned that comparison on my post), it could be from a simple air ratchet to remove wheels stud-nuts to a bigger air hammer to cut and penetrate concrete.

And for everyone's knowledge:
I am NOT going to engage with absolutely anyone here about arguments related to any subject on this thread.
I just rendered my solely opinion about this device, period.
And so, I could care less, if you agree or disagree with me.

Ufopolitics

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 04, 2023, 04:07:52 PM
I am very clear about "Torque and Power".
And for everyone's knowledge:
I just rendered my solely opinion about this device, period.
And so, I could care less, if you agree or disagree with me.

Ufopolitics

I do appreciate your opinion very much  and I believe  most of the audience too.
here is the link:
my quote in the previous  comment was taken from:
https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/whats-the-difference-between-power-and-torque-
(https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/whats-the-difference-between-power-and-torque-87830#:~:text=Power%20is%20simply%20that%20torque%20multiplied%20by%20engine,is%20how%20fast%20they%20could%20produce%20those%20blows.)Please compare it and respond if you feel  it is different than that.
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 04, 2023, 04:36:46 PM
I do appreciate your opinion very much  and I believe  most of the audience too.
here is the link:
my quote in the previous  comment was taken from:
https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/whats-the-difference-between-power-and-torque-
(https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/whats-the-difference-between-power-and-torque-87830#:~:text=Power%20is%20simply%20that%20torque%20multiplied%20by%20engine,is%20how%20fast%20they%20could%20produce%20those%20blows.)Please compare it and respond if you feel  it is different than that.
Wesley

Torque does not need to be related to speed at all. Torque is power as it is, period.
In a manual Torque Wrench, tightening a bolt in an Engine or any other mechanical component, you apply the specific torque as per the manufacturer spec's...and here (on the spec's), there is absolutely no mention of speed at all, but the Angle of Displacement of your torque wrench from start to end, and normally that angle is given on a range of swing travel. That angle requirement is given in order to apply the proper seat of the fastener, whether a bolt or a nut.

Torque is measured in Newton-Metre [Nm] or Pound-Feet [Lb-Ft] or Pounds-Inch [Lb-In]

Torque is measured by taking readings at "Momentums" of the rotation, which will not require a specific speed.

So Torque is a completely independent parameter, not "directly" dependant upon speed or acceleration.

Now, when we add speed (considering a displacement or travel) plus torque, it then moves to a different situation, which will involve mass weight of the traveling body which will add more torque force.

Related to this device mentioned on thread, the torque amplification would be given by the magnetic attraction stepping of the Armature at each angle plus the magnets spec's related to their pulling force.


Ufopolitics

Torque is not power. This is as fundamental as it gets. Torque is not power. Look it up. Also force is not power.

Really basic physics.
Power is the rate at which work is done or the rate at which energy is used, transfered or converted. Look it up.
bi

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 04, 2023, 05:09:06 PM
Torque does not need to be related to speed at all. ...

This is a correct statement. Torque can be a static (motionless) feature or quantity, as in a measurement by a torque wrench. The torque is applied to the bolt and is there without motion.

But without motion, there is no power involved.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 04, 2023, 05:41:40 PM
This is a correct statement. Torque can be a static (motionless) feature or quantity, as in a measurement by a torque wrench. The torque is applied to the bolt and is there without motion.

Thks Bi,

Quote from: bistander on March 04, 2023, 05:41:40 PM
But without motion, there is no power involved.
bi

Now, here I disagree, as we are entering into "power" definition...as it depends on what power we are referring to, example electric power does not require motion when it comes from a battery...
However, coming back to torque and power...yes, you are right that torque bolts down to a Vector of Force and not necessarily to power itself in many applications.

Regards

Ufopolitics

 I agree to that.
Torque can be divided into two categories, either static or dynamic.
The difference between them lies in the produced effect.
If the torque produces a reactive force, the torque is considered a static torque.
On the other hand, the torque is a dynamic torque if it produces a rotation.
-but  we have rotation in  the device in  question.
Wesley

Quote from: bistander on March 02, 2023, 10:18:07 PM
He's discovered cogging.
bi

Expanding on my earlier post:

QuoteCogging torque of electrical motors is the torque due to the interaction between the permanent magnets of the rotor and the stator slots of a permanent magnet machine. It is also known as detent or no-current torque. This torque is position dependent and its periodicity per revolution depends on the number of magnetic poles and the number of teeth on the stator. Cogging torque is an undesirable component for the operation of such a motor. It is especially prominent at lower speeds, with the symptom of jerkiness. Cogging torque results in torque as well as speed ripple; however, at high speed the motor moment of inertia filters out the effect of cogging torque.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogging_torque

This cogging is strictly between the rotor magnets and stator teeth.

In one of Mike's videos he shows the torque sensor graphs (from the torque transducers at input and output on the apparatus). Unfortunately I can't read the data. But the average torques are equal minus a slight friction, aerodynamic and core loss. Since the input and output RPM are equal, input and output power are equal, minus the mentioned small loss. The instantaneous torques will differ, but average torque per revolution times the RPM yields power.
bi

Quote from: Dog-One on March 04, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
I think UFO is positively correct about the hammering effect and I would
bet if this device was connected to a generator the output waveform would
show it by not being a true sine wave and instead looking more like short
pulses.  As such, it's unlikely you would achieve full output power either.

Looping with the MotoFlux would likely be difficult if not impossible.

I now suspect there's a reason the demo did not have a flywheel
installed on the output shaft, because by doing so, there would be
massive slipping when trying to amplify torque.

Hello Dog-One,

Thanks, however, I think at high RPM's (like required by a Generator, 3600-3000) we will not see any stepping or square waveform or short pulses.
Related to a Flywheel...I believe by adding a flywheel it will completely kill the "hammering effect" (strong force magnetic stepping advance)

Further on, I believe for a Motor-Generator application of this apparatus, there must be several calculations done, one of them being the neo magnets pull force versus the type of generator required spec's (torque) under load conditions.
Plus, on this demo video the armature is based on only a two magnetic pole rotor...and like in any electric motor, the more magnetic poles the higher the torque...but then, the higher the Input required to rotate it from prime mover...

Regards

Ufopolitics

Quote from: stivep on March 04, 2023, 06:02:50 PM
I agree to that.
Torque can be divided into two categories, either static or dynamic.
The difference between them lies in the produced effect.
If the torque produces a reactive force, the torque is considered a static torque.
On the other hand, the torque is a dynamic torque if it produces a rotation.
-but  we have rotation in  the device in  question.
Wesley

I mean really? Torque is torque. Sure, it applies to a static system, or a dynamic system. But torque is the same. Just like force. Applied to static and dynamic systems. And like force, there is always a reaction. Equal and opposite. Look up Newton.
bi

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 04, 2023, 05:52:20 PM
Thks Bi,

Now, here I disagree, as we are entering into "power" definition...as it depends on what power we are referring to, example electric power does not require motion when it comes from a battery...
However, coming back to torque and power...yes, you are right that torque bolts down to a Vector of Force and not necessarily to power itself in many applications.

Regards

Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,
You forget. Electric power = Voltage times Current. Current = Coulombs per second. Electric power has motion.

Power = Volts * Coulombs/second.
bi

some addition for you to discuss.
At the  end it is a man holding hammer and applying force not the hammer holding man.
Wesley

For better understanding the picture from above.
-if you have seesaw where  you are in the middle and two identical kids are  on the sides
Try to control  the seesaw from the middle of it.
when kids can do it with their  legs at no problem  at the ends_{.
The device of an inventor is trying to move shaft  and the the "director"  so in result ends of the  long arm}  704 and 706 _{coggs
and there are  two of them at opposite ends. so force applied in the middle is x 2
The longer are arms the more force is needed till the arms are infinitely long and power required to move them is increasingly bigger growing to up to infinity .
But magnetic force needed to  perform  cogging reminds  the same.- only length of the arm  704 and 706 has changed symmetrically}

Wesley

Quote from: bistander on March 04, 2023, 06:12:39 PM
I mean really? Torque is torque. Sure, it applies to a static system, or a dynamic system.
But torque is the same. Just like force. Applied to static and dynamic systems.
And like force, there is always a reaction. Equal and opposite. Look up Newton.
bi

look here:

QuoteOn the other hand, the torque is a dynamic torque if it produces a rotation.

what-is-the-difference-between-static-torque-and-dynamic-torque (https://reimaginingeducation.org/what-is-the-difference-between-static-torque-and-dynamic-torque/#:~:text=Torque%20can%20be%20divided%20into%20two%20categories%2C%20either,a%20dynamic%20torque%20if%20it%20produces%20a%20rotation.)

___________________________________________
You  the audience may also look here:
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574815/#msg574815) « Reply #43 on: Today at 12:25:17 AM »
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 04, 2023, 07:58:05 PM
look here: what-is-the-difference-between-static-torque-and-dynamic-torque (https://reimaginingeducation.org/what-is-the-difference-between-static-torque-and-dynamic-torque/#:~:text=Torque%20can%20be%20divided%20into%20two%20categories%2C%20either,a%20dynamic%20torque%20if%20it%20produces%20a%20rotation.)

___________________________________________
You  the audience may also look here:
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574815/#msg574815) « Reply #43 on: Today at 12:25:17 AM »
Wesley

Yes, that is what that says. It appears to be simplified explanation made for young schoolers or mechanics. It is not accurate physics definition. One thing which I notice is they appear to mix static friction (sometimes called stiction) in with torque without motion and call it static torque. That possibly helps the uneducated visualize a difference in what they may encounter with mechanics' tools, but is misleading in regards to true understanding.

I do not see references or sources or author for the quote or linked reimagining website. You would benefit from a physics textbook definition or several. I've studied this for 50 years. But don't trust me. Look it up. I'm often surprised how many incorrect "lessons" are posted on the interwebs. If by chance, you, or someone else, finds a reputable accredited source (in physics) which contradicts my statements, please list it.
Regards,
bi

{edit}
I see you added a graphic. If it doesn't move, it is static. If it moves (rotates) it is dynamic. Torque is like force. It will always have equal and opposite torque, like a force always has equal and opposite force. Difference: force is for mechanical translational system and torque for mechanical rotational system. This is valid whether or not there is motion, static or dynamic.

..

Dear bistander and others:

I often take and post quotes because  I don't have time to write essays-and  it is easier to throw the link to support it.
I do not deal here much with  physicists but  with  curiousness  of an average  reader.
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 05, 2023, 08:05:46 AM?
<<<snip>>>
[/b]Is the nature of the concern  clear enough now?
Wesley

Dear Wesley,

Please chill. No, it is not clear. I have no idea what you're going on about. Please drop it. I apologize if somehow I have offended you. All I said or/and implied is "torque is torque". period

Respectfully,
bi

 Its OK, no problem.
I pointed here:
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574818/#msg574818)  « Reply #44 on: Today at 01:04:47 AM »
Look at the two vectors,  in green and red.
In regards to the picture power distribution  as per seesaw.jpg (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/189996/) 
that  there is unlikely any benefit or no benefit  at all from the structure proposed by  the inventor
as his device must be rotated  by some  sort of  engine or motor as the power  delivered to the shaft and  its "director" #708
must be big enough to turn  arm  #704 and #706 to cogg.
The longer is the arm   #704 and #706 respectively the more power is required  on the shaft,while magnetic field  opposing
it reminds unchanged .
another words  power delivered to the device must be bigger than power  used for cogging  + load on it if present.
By that  statement of the inventor   is unsubstantiated- to be delicate...
There is no extraction of energy stored in the permanent magnet !!
Please comment on it  honestly and I do thank you very much for your previous response.
Wesley

And this is what I have?
Your American pump JOHNSON PUMP AB SWEDEN , stolen by me a long time ago. ;)
Magnetic coupling with four-pole magnets on both sides.

Hello everyone!
Thank you very much am1ll3r for starting this thread.

After I learned, I thought that Corbin motors might really amplify torque.
But I don't know where the extra energy comes from.

I assume: the rotor contains an inertial wheel of suitable mass,
Mask the Hammering Effect and only look at the average.
And the entire rotor system is rotating clockwise at a constant speed.

A rough schematic


1. Figure 1: Setting: A certain moment in the rotation is the initial state.
Magnetic field lines are linked from the red and blue permanent magnets along the yellow rotor core to the stator salient pole.
From this moment on, quickly rotate the magnet of the axis clockwise by a large angle.
Make magnetic field lines rarely pass through the yellow rotor.
In this way, the moment of the yellow rotor leaving the stator salient pole is very small (torque).

2. Figure 2: The yellow rotor rotates to the position away from the stator salient pole.
From this moment on, quickly place the magnet of the axis
Rotate counterclockwise back to the right angle,

3. Figure 3: Reaching this position, the magnetic field lines pass more through the yellow rotor core.
The yellow rotor core rotates clockwise to the next stator salient pole at several times the torque.

In Figure 1, because the radius of the red-blue magnet is small,
The moment when the magnet rotates away from the yellow rotor core is also small (torque).

In Figure 3, the torque of the yellow rotor supplying the rotor inertia wheel is several times larger.

Is that so? Please advise.


If this principle is correct, the torque can really be amplified, and it is worth continuing to improve.

Is it a little similar to the double-layer rotor structure of Holcomb motors?

An improvement could be:
A red-blue permanent magnet in the center that can be replaced by a multipole electromagnet.
Perhaps the electromagnet does not have to rotate.
At the position of Figure 1, the electromagnet is de-energized and the magnetic force disappears.
The yellow rotor core easily leaves the stator salient pole,
This has little resistance to the inertia wheel.
When the yellow rotor core rotates to the position of Figure 3,
Turn on the electromagnet current, generate magnetic field lines,
Pull the yellow rotor core to rotate clockwise.
The acceleration torque is output to the inertia wheel.

Thank you!

vectoral power  distribution  as per seesaw.
Wesley

Not seesaw.
Do not use the force of the magnet to move the yellow arm away from the stator salient pole at the initial position in Figure 1.
It is necessary to quickly remove the magnet so that there are basically no magnetic field lines on the yellow arm,
and there is no resistance to leave the salient pole.

The magnet should return to the right angle, and the yellow arm should be moved to the next salient pole.

The inertia wheel has a very important role.

Quote from: stivep on March 05, 2023, 09:59:46 AM
There is no extraction of energy stored in the permanent magnet !!
Please comment on it  honestly and I do thank you very much for your previous response.
Wesley

Well, you've asked to comment, so I will, on the above bold out statement.
I completely disagree.
Permanent Magnets have unlimited force and not only in a single form, but in TWO ways, Attraction and Repulsion!!
Neodymium Magnets could retain their force for over a period of 100 years without loosing a bit.
So, the FACT that We have not being able to HARNESS their power, their energy, their FORCE, it does not means magnets do not have power/force/energy.
They do...
There are very simple reasons why, science and physics have "adopted" all that same saying you are repeating above, over and over for so long...
And the fact is so simple, it requires almost no explanation...because the single minute that anyone of Us, shows up a fully self running Magnet Motor...it will cause such a huge collapse on everything we have been tought about the "myth" of "Perpetuum Mobilia"...it will automatically be shown that all was a very well elaborated LIE that have lasted hundred of years!!
And so that "Game would be over, finished, ended"
First than all, I am a BUILDER, NOT just a "theory writer or a Copy & Paste responder" that on this Forums are SO MANY!!...and so they call themselves "Scientists"...
I have built so many prototypes where you can observe the magnets force at work...but, like I have said before...I will not engage into that here.
However, let's try this:
THE WEEDEATER SINGLE STROKE GAS ENGINE EXAMPLE:
So, just let's go to this very simple tool that almost anyone have on their garage...and observe its characteristics...:
A small, single stroke gas engine, seen on every lawn tools...say a "weed eater"...
It is running perfectly well, it has been tuned to perfection, in order that just a single pull from its cranking cord will start it up right away.
And a very IMPORTANT FACT to have in mind!!...NONE of these little Gas Engines have a Battery, nor a Capacitor of any kind...to STORE ENERGY!!
Now, take this small engine apart, and just REMOVE the very small magnet on its revolving armature...then re-assemble everything back as factory spec's...
Now, try to start it...I will watch you...
It will simply NOT start.
Just because that very small magnet was in charge to provide/generate/create, that very much needed "spark" which will ignite the whole Engine...PLUS keep it running as long as is operating.
My question is...Is there any other material/component on Earth, that we all could use to replace that very small magnet?
The answer is a radical NOPE, there is NOT!!
That little magnet had the stored energy, only compound in our planet, known as Magnetic Field, that is able, whenever passing through a simple coil of enameled wire...to generate that required "spark" in a timely order, to start up that complex little gas engine...
Now, everything could go wrong with that small  engine...carburation adjustment, a gas leak, a pressure leak, the small diaphragm pump, a gas filter clogged that will avoid from it to start...however, the only component which you could always leave for last to diagnose...is that very small permanent magnet.

Now, no matter how many links you copy and paste here, how many explanations and "run arounds" you try...You, or anyone else, will NOT be able to change my mind but not even a bit...no matter what.
Therefore, it is useless to try...sorry.

Sincerely

Ufopolitics


Edit 1: And please, not stupid answers allowed here with this level of knowledge...like: "Well, if you also remove the wire coil, or the small inlet gas hose, the engine would not start either..."
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PERMANENT MAGNETS HERE. SO, LEAVE ALONE ALL OTHER ENGINE COMPONENTS!!

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 05, 2023, 11:57:55 AM
So, the FACT that We have not being able to HARNESS their power, their energy, their FORCE, it does not means magnets do not have power/force/energy.

lets start with MIT *  Massachusetts Institute of Technology blog:

Quote"Magnetism is a force, but it has no energy of its own,

https://alum.mit.edu/slice/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-source-energy (https://alum.mit.edu/slice/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-source-energy#:~:text=%E2%80%9CMagnetism%20is%20a%20force%2C%20but%20it%20has%20no,for%20converting%20energy%20from%20one%20form%20to%20another.)

Quote

To 'get' Energy out of a device, a Force has to be moved through a Distance. (https://alum.mit.edu/slice/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-source-energy#:~:text=%E2%80%9CMagnetism%20is%20a%20force%2C%20but%20it%20has%20no,for%20converting%20energy%20from%20one%20form%20to%20another.)

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/why-is-a-magnet-not-an-infinite-source-of-energy.752748/


Why can't magnetism be used as a source of energy?

QuoteBecause magnets do not contain energy — but they can help control it...

https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/ (https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/)

Now a little of confusion:

QuoteThe potential energy of a magnet or magnetic moment  in a magnetic field  is defined as the mechanical work of the magnetic force
(actually magnetic torque) on the re-alignment of the vector of the magnetic dipole moment  and is equal to: 
Energy is also stored in a magnetic field.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_energy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_energy)

I gave you  picture with vectors
when you look at magnetic field think about  air Balloon
The energy used  to pump it  can't be used but you can push it with your finger and it will interact.
In order  to release/ use  this energy you may   pierce the balloon .
In order  to release energy from the  brick wall build with  sweat and work of construction guys you may destroy it
In order to release energy used to create   atomic structure  of the magnet you need to destroy that atomic  structure  and you'll deal with   
the weak force and strong  force bonding it. 
But good thing is that  magnetic field is "flexible" similar to the balloon.
Wesley

Quote"Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth" - Joseph Goebbels, Nazi propagandist.
The illusory truth effect (also known as the illusion of truth, truth effect, or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe in false information after hearing it repeatedly.

Link: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/illusion-truth-effect-repeat-lie-often-enough-becomes-pei-ying-chua (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/illusion-truth-effect-repeat-lie-often-enough-becomes-pei-ying-chua)

And so, this lie about Magnetism, Permanent Magnets, Energy, etc,etc,etc...and a very long etc...has been spreaded/propagated over hundred of years...then the image below applies...majority believes it...it is "typical Human Nature behavior".
Now, thanks to God, not everyone does!!

Ufopolitics

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 05, 2023, 11:57:55 AM
Now, no matter how many links you copy and paste here, how many explanations and "run arounds" you try...You, or anyone else, will NOT be able to change my mind but not even a bit...no matter what.
Therefore, it is useless to try...sorry.

Sincerely

Ufopolitics

In case you did not read me well...on my previous post.

..

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 05, 2023, 11:57:55 AM
...
My question is...Is there any other material/component on Earth, that we all could use to replace that very small magnet?
The answer is a radical NOPE, there is NOT!!
...

A piezo ignition system.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 05, 2023, 01:08:40 PM
A piezo ignition system.
bi

You know perfectly well that a piezo ignition system will not work as a simple permanent magnet will.
besides the costs...
A piezo electric system requires a compression force to be applied in order to ignite every time we need the spark to be generated.
A PM will not need but just to simply "pass by the coil"...every certain degrees...a simple rotation which is part of the engine function.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity)

Ufopolitics

Quote from: panyuming on March 05, 2023, 11:29:41 AM
Not seesaw.
Do not use the force of the magnet to move the yellow arm away from the stator salient pole at the initial position in Figure 1.
It is necessary to quickly remove the magnet so that there are basically no magnetic field lines on the yellow arm,
and there is no resistance to leave the salient pole.

The magnet should return to the right angle, and the yellow arm should be moved to the next salient pole.

The inertia wheel has a very important role.

I don't understand what would be the benefit from removing cogging?
Wesley

..

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 05, 2023, 01:50:21 PM
You know perfectly well that a piezo ignition system will not work as a simple permanent magnet will.
besides the costs...
A piezo electric system requires a compression force to be applied in order to ignite every time we need the spark to be generated.
A PM will not need but just to simply "pass by the coil"...every certain degrees...a simple rotation which is part of the engine function.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity)

Ufopolitics

Ufo,

You asked for a replacement. Piezo is perfectly legitimate. It could work. It's used many places in appliances. For an engine, it would not be as cost effective* or durable as the PM , but certainly doable. If China closed the door on PMs, small engines would find other ignition systems.

It's off topic. I just answered your question.... with a correct answer.
bi

* Cost effective.... For now. But economics change. Maybe tomorrow a piezo chip will be less expensive than a PM and copper coil. Perhaps the piezo system could eliminate the spark plug.

..

..

_..

..

 You got your cogging  right?
  _{(picture was removed)}
so now power  only that additional  device  from whatever , solar ,wind,  hand, water,... gravity  what else?
And all it is is just a simple seesaw ....
Wesley

Hmm,
I think the motoflux is different...Wesley...
What are your drawings about ?
Why are there the magnets oposing each other ?
Makes no sense...to me...hmm....

I guess the MotoFlux concept is simular to the Hatem
motors configuration, but the MotoFlux motor has the magnets inside the rotor !!!

Maybe that makes a difference in the cogging and slippages forces..

Not so easy to understand it all...
Would love to see more videos from Corbin.

Regards, Stefan.

Here this guy did not get the Hatem motor running overunity :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au2jDbiyveQ

But maybe it is different, when the magnets sit inside the rotor,as can be seen inside the one video from Corbin.
Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 05, 2023, 04:08:57 PM
Hmm,
I think the motoflux is different...Wesley...
Regards, Stefan.

Please fallow it step by step as it is written in time spend at it  below:

1. I expressed nonsense of  patented design as self powering and extracting energy from magnet.     
I'm not touching  a concept of the motor. Lets say it  is the way  it was patented.

2. I only posted  simplified  version  of  vectoral power distribution.
     and based on it  created a picture representing it.

3. Than few participants pointed at cogging . and I pointed at  another nonsense based on vectoral power distribution.
    in few of my comments. That means that shaft  having Fi 2cm must move "director" that causes arm to slightly move and magnetic flux becomes  distorted
    looking for the shortest path  . In effect we have cogging  but the force needed to be applied to the shaft must be strong enough to move entire arm from
    its lacking point and create   cogging.

4.  as an example
:   If we have seesaw with two identical  kids at each  end
     than controlling seesaw right from  middle  of  the seesaw is much more  difficult than  if these two identical kids were   doing it at the end of the seesaw
     So the  conclusion was to apply force at the end of the arm of the inventor device  and cause  cogging.

5. Than I ask the audience   what is their position in that and no one  responded.
    So I posted few pictures explaining how that cogging can be done..
     But if that is too confusing   to someone  I  remove it no problem..
    :)


   
conclusion:
if you were  to  attach the motor  rotating  the shaft  of  inventor device  and  you need  e.g 10W per cogg at 360 degrees. ( depends from length of the arm)
after you make suggested by me change  you'll need ~0.1W to do the same _{( not calculated ,approximate figure given  as load is unknown)}
And cogging at 360 will also turn the shaft that doesn't need to be connected from now to any motor, but can be connected to the generator instead. 

In contrast to it: The inventor device must  have  motor connected to the shaft  and this motor is moving shaft . !!!!!   
So this motor must  turn 2cm  diameter shaft  with 7cm "director" where  total  length of an arm that (MUST MOVE TOO)  is 30cm.... and at the end there is  opposing magnetic force.
do you see the difference now?

I hope it helps.



Wesley

Very confusing all your drawings, Wesley ..
Do you say it is working based on your drawings or not ??

Anyway, lets see, if the inventor comes up with more explanation videos..

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 05, 2023, 04:51:09 PM
Very confusing all your drawings, Wesley ..
Do you say it is working based on your drawings or not ??

Anyway, lets see, if the inventor comes up with more explanation videos..

Regards, Stefan.

Drawings are explaining  mechanism of  a little power to be applied .
And all of these  drawing are important   in this explanation.
The original mechanism  of the inventor  reminds unchanged.
But  operation of inventor device  (based on my pictures) 
- from now is based on  that force that was delivered  at the end of  the arm.

No worry I just removed  the drawings. :)

Wesley

I don't have time to study it deeply now..Wesley...
to me, these drawings are more confusing...than helping..
Try to make an animation video with them.You already have the 3D program, maybe it it then getting more clear...


Anyway, here is a German document from Adolf Schneider from Borderlands.dewho looked into it.


http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Magnetmotor-Hanagan.pdf
Regards, Stefan.

..

..

Quote from: stivep on March 05, 2023, 02:02:31 PM
I don't understand what would be the benefit from removing cogging?
Wesley

Thanks to Stivep for your advice. Please forgive me for being slow to respond.

Probably fig6 in Corbin's patent
The magnetic field lines are drawn incorrectly.

I think it should be fig 6-2 below

Turn a few more angles, and the magnetic field lines look like fig 6-3

In the patent schematic, the stator salient spacing is relatively small.
The rotor core is prone to step out.
Therefore, in fact, the spacing of the stator salient poles accounts for about 1/4 of the period.

Quote from: panyuming on March 05, 2023, 08:06:14 PM
In the patent schematic, the stator salient spacing is relatively small.
The rotor core is prone to step out.
Therefore, in fact, the spacing of the stator salient poles accounts for about 1/4 of the period.

Yes, but he has 3 Stators stacked axially each separated by a spacer appears to be same thickness as the individual stator core, and the 3 stators offset angularly about a tooth width. Three PM rotors are in line axially spaced apart same as stators. As it rotates, the rotor(s) sequentially align with each of the 3 salient teeth then a blank space for each "total" pole pitch. Each "total" pole consist of 3 "mini" poles ( or teeth) and a blank space. I assume each of the 3 rotor magnets has a corresponding director and each its own magnetic circuit (path).

This complicates the 2D analysis. But it is hardly a method for power gain. Also, watching the video to analyze construction I notice his instruments regularly read a gain of about 20. If that was real, he'd certainly be able to replace the disc brake with a small generator and loop it.
bi

This device should be easy to analyze-simulate using the free FEMM 2D CAE. Might
answer some technical questions (provide some actual numbers) and confirm the
viability of various magnetics and physics.
Maybe even create animated plots with actual torques and legends.

https://www.femm.info/wiki/HomePage (https://www.femm.info/wiki/HomePage)

Since the device is simple enough, some Student versions of other 3D CAE platforms
might be capable of analyzing it as well. Wouldn't hurt to check anyway! 

Just sayin'

Not curious enough myself to bother, but if you fellows come up with something
promising, maybe at some point.

looks pretty simple:


a rotating magnet placed in the center of two opposing stator magnets.


has anyone tested this? or do i waste my time building another HJ?


the principal is sound, does anyone have the magnets?


HJ said this works, and showed us many ways to do it, this falls in line with any of those.




we're at page 6 here? any experiments? videos? etc? theories ? conjecture?

Quote from: bistander on March 05, 2023, 09:17:47 PM
Yes, but he has 3 Stators stacked axially each separated by a spacer appears to be same thickness as the individual stator core, and the 3 stators offset angularly about a tooth width.

Thanks bistander for discussing!

The structure of three layers combined at different angles is for smoother rotation.
My thinking has not yet taken into account the three layers.
I'm just guessing in the case of a single layer whether the Corbin principle and improvements can amplify the torque.

I also consult you where the extra energy will come from.

I figured out the single layer and then further learned the three-layer structure.

Thank you, everyone
panyuming

Quote from: panyuming on March 06, 2023, 12:57:38 AM
...
I also consult you where the extra energy will come from.
...

Fairy tales.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 06, 2023, 06:58:57 AM
Fairy tales.
bi

OK。
Thank you。 :)

power distribution as per seesaw.
controlling  seesaw at the pivot point  vs controlling  seesaw at the  end of seesaw
applied  to the inventor  rotary device.

conclusion :
if the goal is cogging of entire  arm than  why than apply  force at the 2cm in diameter shaft when length of the arm is e.g 8.2m
as in  the drawing ?
Explanation for Stefan.
My solution to this problem was presented and explained  in my earlier comments where for example
~10W power at the shaft  required to move it and  create cogging,  was replaced with  ~0.1W to create the same effect using  magnetic force.


Wesley

The child changes the center of gravity. Don't stand in the middle because it won't change the truth.
In the device, the center of gravity is always the same.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 06, 2023, 10:01:44 AM
The child changes the center of gravity. Don't stand in the middle because it won't change the truth.
In the device, the center of gravity is always the same.

You didn't read English on the picture - is it  because of language  problem?
We are not talking about gravity in inventor device but about  power distribution  similarity
in the inventor device vs seesaw.

In other words  if you were to pay $10  for  the same work done  instead $0.1 would you be rather
listen to the solution and spend less ?
And that is exactly what I'm pointing at  in my pictures.

Let's say:
Entire  Invention is  about cogging:
-You  want cogging and this is your goal.
And  you  make cogging  but now for much less.
I'm applying magnetic force to make cogging happen  but at different place .
Now my shaft is free, doesn't have  any  driving motor  and can be used to connect  e.g alternator.

__________________________________________________________________________
However we need to remember that there is no way to extract  energy stored in the magnet 

Quotebecause magnets do not contain energy.!!!

https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/ (https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/)
<sub>MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Entire Inventor  patent including his claims  doesn't say  a word about it.
But his verbal claims do.
And that is not protected by a patent if for some reason  he somehow "miraculously"   shows  his device working  beyond any doubts.
I hope it helps now.

opinion expressed is my own
Wesley</sub>

Stefan's borderlands link mentions the Feb 10 press release
And the claimed gain mechanism !


http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Magnetmotor-Hanagan.pdf (http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Magnetmotor-Hanagan.pdf)
Seems the key is the center mechanism and how it can reach out
Through flux to effect larger efforts than were previously possible ...and does this utilizing magnets,
His "proof of concept  video"... makes gain claims directly attributed to this patented center mechanism  .


Would be nice to have a translation of Stefan's document.
Even Better to interview the inventor.....
Perhaps he will allow license of some open source efforts?
Respectfully
Chet K

I think it's about the moment of inertia when the arm is longer and jumps to a different position.

https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/
The energy in the magnet is like gasoline. It is useless until used correctly.

Yes, I have a problem with the language and I don't always understand what is written correctly. I don't think it's just me, but it's not a problem if someone corrects me  :)

Wesley,
I don't understand why you want cogging. Of what use is it?
bi

Concerning a previous post of mine describing 3 layers, I just noticed new information. There appears to be no blank in the 1,2,3 teeth sequence. This can be seen on the spacing in the attached photo.
bi
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574865/#msg574865

Quote from: r2fpl on March 06, 2023, 10:48:30 AM
I think it's about the moment of inertia when the arm is longer and jumps to a different position.
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/ (https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/)
it's not a problem if someone corrects me  :)

Please look here again I posted picture  about magnetic field applied at the end of the arm instead  of in the shaft.
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574880/#msg574880)  « Reply #89 on: Today at 04:10:45 PM »
Wesley

Quote from: ramset on March 06, 2023, 10:34:38 AM
claimed gain mechanism !
His "proof of concept  video"... makes gain claims directly attributed to this patented center mechanism  .
Chet K

He only presented cogging in his video.
This is not the proof of concept of extracting energy from a magnet .

Quotebecause magnets do not contain energy.!!!

look here:
https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/
Zero
Zipo
None

Wesley

ok, stivep

I think we can use the motor stator by removing every second pole or find a stator with fewer fields less.
I've noticed the jump before in another project but it was ordinary magnets on both sides only.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 06, 2023, 12:09:06 PM
ok, stivep

I think we can use the motor stator by removing every second pole or find a stator with fewer fields less.
I've noticed the jump before in another project but it was ordinary magnets on both sides only.

Yes we can.
But there  is no gain in cogging.
It might be some energy saving if any but I doubt it .
Wesley

  e = m x C²  where: e is energy, m is mass and "c" is velocity (acceleration) per second squared,

amount of energy transfered relates directly to the density of lines of flux present,

kinetic energy formula is helpful in establishing the amount of energy present, 

the formula squares the velocity times the mass,

the acceleration increase is non-linear (sudden cog release), and obeys the Law of Squares,

e.g.: 1, 4, 16, etc. - the faster the release of energy (the cog release) the more power is created,

the Law of Squares (d?/dt),  potential energy build-up (cog hold-off) , sudden release
(holding energy is overcome), rapid move to the next position (cog again) yields a square
of the initial potential energy built-up, a.k.a. kinetic.

The more times you use the Law of Squares per time (c² per seconds x RPM), the more
kinetic energy is produced.

This is also valid for electrical (pulsed) systems; (dv/dt - di/dt, etc.), internal combustion engines,
water hammer, pounding nails, jack-hammering concrete, driving piles, and so forth.

Synchronization is also required to sustain the process and gain from the bennefits.

Quote from: SolarLab on March 06, 2023, 12:15:34 PM
..

Simple logic:
The shaft is driven by 10W motor
- how much energy  is used ~ on cogging?
- how much energy you have left at output of the device that is driving a load x =10W
Do you see any gain there or you see the losses?  :)
_{Will you provide your answer  or you rather not? :)}
Wesley
 

If the speed is too high, there is no skip/jumping. We can even see it in the video when the engine is spinning. Then we have locked magnets in a horizontal position.
There is no profit. There is not even a magnetic moment, only motion.

Quote from: stivep on March 06, 2023, 12:34:38 PM
Simple logic:
The shaft is driven by 10W motor
- how much energy  is used ~ on cogging?
- how much energy you have left at output of the device that is driving a load x =10W
Do you see any gain there or you see the losses?  :)
_{Will you provide your answer  or you rather not? :)}
Wesley

Beyond my pay grade - so I'll have to trust the answers given by those of you here who
are "skilled-in-the-art!"

But thanks for asking...  :)

Quote from: r2fpl on March 06, 2023, 12:56:29 PM
If the speed is too high, there is no skip/jumping. We can even see it in the video when the engine is spinning. Then we have locked magnets in a horizontal position.
There is no profit. There is not even a magnetic moment, only motion.

You might be right. r2fpl

Wesley

Quote from: SolarLab on March 06, 2023, 01:05:10 PM


Beyond my pay grade - so I'll have to trust the answers given by those of you here who
are "skilled-in-the-art!"

But thanks for asking...  :)

it was simple answer you avoiding to handle. what is it  ?
Are you hurt so much?
Or you were  totally wrong?
Yo wanna show  how smart yo are  so do it SolarLab or go  hide in the bushes.
please respond to this will ya?

QuoteThe shaft is driven by 10W motor
- how much energy  is used ~ on cogging?
- how much energy you have left at output of the device that is driving a load x =10W
Do you see any gain there or you see the losses?  :)
_{Will you provide your answer  or you rather not?}

:)
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 06, 2023, 01:11:15 PM
it was simple answer you avoiding to handle. what is it  ?
Are your hurt so much?
Or you were  totally wrong?
Yo wanna show  how smart you are  so do it SolarLab or go  hide in the bushes.
please respond to this will yo? :)
Wesley

Um, lets see, "fight" or "bushes?"   Such choices...

Ok, its, uh, - hide in the "BUSHES"  - for 300 points!   :)

_{you kinda gave that one away didn't ya...}

Quote from: SolarLab on March 06, 2023, 01:22:54 PM
Um, lets see, "fight" or "bushes?"   Such choices...
Ok, its, uh, - hide in the "BUSHES" //   :)
_{you kinda gave that one away didn't ya...}

Yes it is all you can. All your value.
All your genius..at kindergarten...You can't even answer  simple question.... here:
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574898/#msg574898) « Reply #103 on: Today at 07:11:15 PM »
Wesley

Quote from: SolarLab on March 06, 2023, 01:22:54 PM


Um, lets see, "fight" or "bushes?"   Such choices...

Ok, its, uh, - hide in the "BUSHES"  - for 300 points!   :)

_{you kinda gave that one away didn't ya...}

but I did get (a free, for nothing) 300 points, right! Not a total loss...

Here the discussion is about an "impossible magnetic  gain mechanism "
Attributed to a very specific type of cogging  mechanism ,
Which manipulates impulses through the flux to achieve a gain over input !
Here our host contributed a link ( very recent link)
http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Magnetmotor-Hanagan.pdf (http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Magnetmotor-Hanagan.pdf)


Also to be noted discussion is about the claimant and "his " method!


Please stay on topic of "Proof of concept video ",which incorporates his patent into an application
With measurements!!
Not hypothetical claims which would never show such a gain !


I am still trying to find an independent 3rd party test lab result ?


And am planning to contact claimant as representative of open source community !

EDIT for comment below


Please no more hypothetical comments unassociated with
Claimants gain mechanism!


You have stated the profoundly obvious position of science!


Here we will investigate this as thoroughly as allowed .
This is after all what the open source FE community does !
Respectfully
Chet K

Quote from: ramset on March 06, 2023, 01:53:14 PM
Here the discussion is about an "impossible magnetic  gain mechanism "
Attributed to a very specific type of cogging  mechanism ,
Please stay on topic of "Proof of concept video ",which incorporates his patent into an application
With measurements!!
Not hypothetical claims which would never show such a gain !

The device is a cogging device. Its name in the patent is:
_{"Method and apparatus to control an armature rotating within a magnetic circuit "
and not much than that.
If I correctly understood from the videos - the inventor verbal  claim is gain  in utilizing energy  stored in the magnet.}
But magnet has no energy !!!!! look here  for exact quote:
_{https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/ (https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/why-cant-magnetism-be-used-as-a-source-of-energy/)
Video shows cogging device and provides prove of its work Yes it does. And nothing more.}

There is no hypothetical gain and I don't see any gain  at all.
And if there is any gain than that gain is highly likely :)  not patent protected :)
but that  is just my personal opinion :)
Wesley

Try this:

Take a powerful magnet in your hand, fingers on the edges. Now move this magnet, slowly, close
to a steel plate. At some point the magnet will rapidly snap to the plate; you won't be able to stop
it, and your fingers will be pinched (blood blisters)!

The point where you can no longer stop the magnet from attaching to the steel plate is where the
cog energy transpires (takes place). It happens very fast and thats where the energy comes from (d?/dt).

Hey, we've all done it - but usually not more than one time!

Scientific observation at it's finest. The blood blisters were not there before and I didn't cause them,
except for my "a priori" lack of knowledge and failure to follow the cautions on the box.

If this is "off-topic" then sorry, just remove it...

It reminds me mechanism secondary clock.
If you remove the coil and rotate the stator itself.
There, too, interaction occurs in shocks.

 Let me correct, or clarify, my previous post where I state:

"You slightly disrupt the "completed" magnetic field by raising one side of the magnet, thus allowing the magnet to be easily lifted free of the plate."

This should read:
"You slightly disrupt the "completed" magnetic circuit by raising one side of the magnet, thus allowing the magnet to be easily lifted free of the plate. 

My appologies!




 

I translates the German PDF File from Adolf Schneider with
Google Translator and here is the ENglish PDF File to download:

Stefan  please get a copy of:
Study of cogging torque in surface-mounted permanent magnet motors with energy method.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030488530300324X

Quotecogging torque in permanent magnet motors with skewed rotors,

Quotemethod for analytically predicting the cogging torque and provide a convenient tool for the analysis of cogging torque.
The study assumes that the airgap permeance repeats from tooth to tooth periodically.
Then the expression of coenergy in airgap is obtained after the Fourier expansions of magnetization and airgap permeance.
The validity and correctness are verified by calculated results obtained from FEM.
Finally, the effects of some factors on cogging torque are discussed on the basis of the above, and several conclusions are drawn.

At the bottom  of the  article you have all other  links  you need.
Wesley

Stefan
Thanks for providing the  "analysis of claim" translation from borderlands link
Seems Large COP gains and discussion of methods used .


Sending out to various open source resources to hopefully start a path towards a meeting!
Or see if there has been any actual visits to facility from independent investigators ?


Respectfully
Chet K

..

 Let me correct, or clarify, my previous post where I state:

"You slightly disrupt the "completed" magnetic field by raising one side of the magnet, thus allowing the magnet to be easily lifted free of the plate."

This should read:
"You slightly disrupt the "completed" magnetic circuit by raising one side of the magnet, thus allowing the magnet to be easily lifted free of the plate. 

My appologies!

Department of Electrical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150080, China
look at the date :) Received: 1 July 2014
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/10/6665 (https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/10/6665)
The similarity  is double rotating element exactly what we  want.
Some of  motors are easy to be converted to the device of our interest.

Next one  show tools used in cogging   measurement and analysis .
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/4/12/2166/htm (https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/4/12/2166/htm)

what is cogging, what makes cogging and how to make it from ready to use motors.
https://www.kollmorgen.com/en-us/blogs/everywhere-cogging-torque-and-torque-ripple-what-you-need-to-know/ (https://www.kollmorgen.com/en-us/blogs/everywhere-cogging-torque-and-torque-ripple-what-you-need-to-know/)

understanding measurement shown in the inventor video by using the same sensors and Test and Measurement Software
https://www.futek.com/applications/Cogging-Torque-Measurement (https://www.futek.com/applications/Cogging-Torque-Measurement) 
here is a link to the inventor  video  for comparison: https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=101 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=101)
https://www.futek.com/store/instruments/digital-hand-held-display/digital-hand-held-display-IHH500 (https://www.futek.com/store/instruments/digital-hand-held-display/digital-hand-held-display-IHH500)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA9ikjQDXPQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA9ikjQDXPQ)

SCIGATE software * older version) https://youtu.be/jVpoLrh6dvk?t=103 (https://youtu.be/jVpoLrh6dvk?t=103)

Wesley

Hello Wesley,
I edited this previous as it was unclear, I guess, that the inquiry was directed to you. Would you be so kind as to answer? Thanks.
bi

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574884/#msg574884

Reply #92

"Wesley,
I don't understand why you want cogging. Of what use is it?
bi"

_{it is not that I want cogging. But inventor uses  cogging and makes claims.
If so than I  proposed cogging in his device with less energy used  here:
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574880/#msg574880) « Reply #89 on: March 06, 2023, 04:10:45 PM »
Tomorrow I'll give you few easy links good for understanding  pros and cons. it is night here  now.}
Wesley

One possible analysis method (easy to set up with good results) uses Solidworks built-in EMWorks. From my experience this
a very good package, especially for initial magnetic problems, and it's quite popular.  ;)   Check around... 

A related video link is found below, however a Youtube search for Solidworks EMS will yield literally hundreds of examples and
tutorials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Feqtm4rgY1U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Feqtm4rgY1U)

This allows you to quickly varify the theory as well as design your system using software; before spending time and money on a
prototype build. Saves on a lot of hand waving, nonsense and conjecture as well!

Hello,

I would like to clear out some errors when interpreting this device, by some comments here I have read from some members:

1-First, the "Director" (which I would have call it "Driver" for better understanding)...is NOT A PERMANENT MAGNET!!
This "Driver" is just a piece of laminated steel, a smaller rotor which "drives" the bigger rotor which DOES have TWO MAGNETIC POLES.
2- And...No!!, We can not "just use ANY PM Motor", and so we will have same configuration!!..NEGATIVE!!
This device needs TWO SHAFTS, One for Input (Driver), Second for Output (Permanent Magnet Armature)...So, the only direct connection between shafts is purely magnetic.
So, if We want to use "any PM Motor", would require MAJOR MECHANICAL STRUCTURAL RECONFIGURATION!!

The basic configuration of this device is to use very low torque at Input to drive the center NON PERMANENT MAGNET BASED Steel driver, called "director"...And so, the Permanent Magnet Armature Rotor would just "FOLLOW" this Driver or "director"...

Also, let me remind you all, that "PM cogging" reduces considerably at higher speeds (It is only critical and lot of drag at very low speeds)...and any Generator requires High Speed which starts at 3000 RPM's (for two poles 50 Hertz)...

Finally, by the Director or Driver being built with NO PERMANENT MAGNETS, PLUS having a smaller Arm length, it will require much less effort to rotate it, rather than, DIRECTLY driving the longer Permanent Magnet based Armature ENGAGING with Stator.

Now, imagine this device installed between a Motor and a Generator... already running at the operational speed (3600 RPM's)...So, once we load Generator, all that mechanical load will completely fall just on the Magnetic Armature Output shaft, and NOT on the Input Driver "director" shaft...

Now, by looking at the way the Stator is designed, where there are almost no gaps when we look at all 3 stators alignment...then the Armature at high speeds, becomes like a Magnetic Flywheel, where the length of its longer arms would be adding the required torque plus inertial mass forces to output shaft.

I sincerely hope all this facts plus clearing up, somehow, contributes to the better understanding of this device.

Ufopolitics

Quote from: Ufopolitics on March 07, 2023, 09:13:12 AM
Hello,
1-First, the "Director".is NOT A PERMANENT MAGNET!!
This "Driver" is just a piece of laminated steel, a smaller rotor which "drives" the bigger rotor which DOES have TWO MAGNETIC POLES.
2- And...No!!, We can not "just use ANY PM Motor", and so we will have same configuration!!..NEGATIVE!!
This device needs TWO SHAFTS, One for Input (Driver), Second for Output (Permanent Magnet Armature)...So, the only direct connection between shafts is purely magnetic.
So, if We want to use "any PM Motor", would require MAJOR MECHANICAL STRUCTURAL RECONFIGURATION!!
"PM cogging" reduces considerably at higher speeds, and any Generator requires High Speed which starts at 3000 RPM's (for two poles 50 Hertz)...

Finally, by the Director or Driver being built with NO PERMANENT MAGNETS, PLUS having a smaller Arm length, it will require much less effort to rotate it, rather than, DIRECTLY driving the longer Permanent Magnet based Armature ENGAGING with Stator.//
Once we load Generator, all that mechanical load will completely fall just on the Magnetic Armature Output shaft, and NOT on the Input Driver "director" shaft...
The Armature at high speeds, becomes like a Magnetic Flywheel, where the length of its longer arms would be adding the required torque plus inertial mass forces to output shaft.
Ufopolitics

I was about to compose exactly the same comment.
Thank You very much for that.
Ufopolitics you are  Great thinker

Please note that  inventor employed  geared speed  reducer between his driving motor and the shaft holding "director"
as  very much low speed  expressed   at  mentioned by him  the "sweet spot" makes device  to perform the best. 
_{look at the picture.
__________________________________________________________}
The video clearly shows more energy OUT than energy IN.
But we don't see and don't know and don't understand what that energy comes from.

QuoteEnergy can't be created nor destroyed it can only be converted to another form of energy!!!!!

The gain shown  by inventor may also come from lack of calibration  of measuring device :
link here: Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574918/#msg574918) « Reply #117 on: Today at 01:47:22 AM »
or if there is any gain than that gain is not explained and  not protected by the patent.

conclusion:
Something  causes measuring devices to show gain  >1
so it is a need to explain it why?
We saw inventor device under the simulating a load device "breaker" on his video.
We didn't see his device  connected to any generator and we didnt see  IN/OUT P=UxI
_{where P is power  U is voltage  and I is current}
We didn't see his device  acting in  changed speed.
The "sweet spot" of performance directly depends from it.
Notion about " accurate pulse adjustment" is related likely to  motors PWM if such are employed.
video for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gGLN2LxwkY&t=51s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gGLN2LxwkY&t=51s)
I hope it helps
Wesley

Some observation:
For me interesting is that  given - is not appreciated by you the audience
and that is evident when I or someone gives you great technology for free.
All pressure, criticism,negativism is on me to prove that it works, or you don't want to  even listen about it.
I'm producing  beautiful  pictures with explanation and still doesn't work as if  I was talking to the wall.
As my partner told me today: _{In the expensive restaurants the average Joe gets  food   he'll  appreciate.}

Conclusion:
So I need not only give it to you for free but  provide proof that it works.
but
In this forum Kapanadze, Akula, Ruslan, were  discussed and tried and experimented  for years.
Because it was something  you were not given to and you didn't have.
And this discussion here is about patented  device you'll not have unless you pay for it  despite if it is worth something or not.
Sorry to say but this is who you likely  are  excluding few of you.
Wesley

I thought we were in discussion and analysis to learn something. No requirements on anyone.
bi

Me? I want to learn why Mike thinks there is free energy from that apparatus.

Calibration error mentioned. He could easily swap transducers and verify.

Test lab 101(Day 1)
Calibration certification always necessary prior to
Use ( last Date of calibration and specs)
And noted in report !
Reputations require this !
EDIT
Apparently Mr Corbin has a very long history with electric powered motorcycles ( decades and then some)
Which of course would make excellent test beds !
Respectfully
Chet K

Some high resolution photos.

Analysis of Patent US 10,897,166 B1 "METHOD AND APPARATUS TO
CONTROL AN ARMATURE ROTATING WITHIN A MAGNETIC CIRCUIT"

A brief examination appears to show when the so-called "control shaft" rotates
the "radial field control 106 (708, 900, etc.)" thus interupting the magnetic circuit.
   
However, It should be noted that (a.) the direction of rotation is not exactly
determined, and  (b.) rotation of the "radial field control 106" may not be
enough, by itself, to move 116 and 118 to a new pole position.

Although very preliminary, a specific "boost" may be required. This might be
a part, or component of, the "one-way bearing" refered to below.
The specific magnetic pull force, or action, has yet to be determined.

One-way Bearing  (from the patent disclosure)

At 7 line 32 thru 44 "one way" bearings are briefly discussed:
Note that during the rotation of the control shaft there is interaction with the output shaft which has the armature with the permanent magnets attached and both the control shaft and output shaft may try and turn the other in a different direction than desired. That is, for example, as the control shaft rotates in a given direction the output shaft may try and rotate it in the opposite direction (i.e. backwards). In one embodiment, the control shaft cannot be forced backwards by the output shaft if one-way bearings hold the control shaft. Likewise, in one embodiment, one-way bearings may be used to hold the output shaft so that it can only rotate in one direction. In one embodiment, the control shaft and the output shaft are each held by one-way bearings.

Further - At 7 line 45 thru 60:

In the specification and figures the control shaft as noted has attached to it the radial field control, this control shaft may be rotated, for example, by a motor or other rotating mechanism. What is to be appreciated is that the control shaft having the radial field control is able to control the armature rotating within a magnetic circuit. The magnetic circuit comprises the radial field control the armature having permanent magnets and the stator. The output shaft which is connected to the armature can rotate (assuming it is not overloaded or locked) and this rotary motion can be used. Thus, the input control shaft can control the output shaft.
While the description has shown two permanent magnets as part of the armature the invention is not so limited and any arrangement of magnets on the armature that yields a magnetic flux passing through the radial field control and
stator can be used.

Further - At 8 line 44 thru 47: (see patnt text)
Reference to "one-way bearings" also appear in claim 8., 9.  and is mentioned
at 5 line 31 and 33.

This is still an on-going analysis and no conclusions should be drawn from the
above observations.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 07, 2023, 12:38:15 PM
Some high resolution photos.

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/190041/ (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/190041/)
absolutely great pictures. thank you,
Each section uses different cogging  angle steps by that  all individual sections coggs  independently but jerking  is less visible.
That means there is no   amplification  of cogging but  more frequent cogging takes place
Wesley

Picture shows speed control box of DC motor.
Wesley

We know now what motor it is
I found   speed control used in the assembly.
PWM DC Motor Speed Controller
https://www.ebay.com

(https://www.ebay.com/itm/363222615161?hash=item5491c14479:g:oEEAAOSwmOhf2dbz&amdata=enc%3AAQAHAAAA4LTggd1H%2FBOAJ8bq%2Bja7HRSNpPBE24QF8ufRLYaGr9e8Ip4MtbW8ObERgJwGt%2FGhkW7oXhWSzN%2FfV5ARaYj9mFga5VdgfvmPQdm9KaIyV7birVZ6Li5uUsM%2FaI6%2F1H3zkRjdim3%2FSwKPdDu6eq21Nag89L%2FuLOXj%2FGb8UtmhwXtPFsqVW7BLcCCjbi%2BeWrrC4%2F7MPqmP3pjqgp%2FqKPa7%2FMhox%2B5qm8UZ0aS7dtuxakcgUe%2B7pn9XqY6JA9VA1V4FS%2FG3DKiU%2FAXR96xbhoSUVbcTHeQ%2F5FCnzwX86dvaN5UR%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR7Dbl9_XYQ)EDITED:speed control below is also made in other voltages  range

_{FeaturesWide voltage from DC 7V to 70V , large current 30 Maximum
A switch with Run , Stop , Brake functions on the board
Adjust speed by PWM , motor has no noise and shock
Using high pressure MOS , There are three high voltage low resistance capacitors with 100V
A high quality car fuse onboard
This controller can be used for brush motor and fan such as:  power wheels , trolling motor , spray motor ,LED strip...etc...}
Note: This controller is just for DC Brush motor , it can't be used for DC brushless motor and AC motor
_{ParameterInput voltage: DC 7-70V (70v is the maximum voltage, please live a margin)
Drive current: Maximum 30A (Please use within 30A)
Controlling power:  recommended within 12V 300W  / 24V 400W / 48V 450W / 70V 500WDuty cycle range: 1%-100%PWM frequency: 12KHz
Size: 85 * 59 * 34 mm / 3.34 * 2.32 * 1.33 inches}

Please look at right  side  bottom of the picture in the video
here: https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=182 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=182)
Wesley

This is the motor it was used in the assembly.



Edited:
-these motors are in 12V or 90V depends from the model.
The  spec is here :
https://cdn.automationdirect.com/static/specs/ironhorsemtg.pdf (https://cdn.automationdirect.com/static/specs/ironhorsemtg.pdf)
Speed control is  also made for different voltages so  matching type can be found.

The second picture shows exactly that  particular motor  compared to original pictures from video.
look at  the video and notice  two side screws  mounting motor.here:
https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=115 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=115)

Wesley

 Correction :
While examined  models matching inventor  motor  it was found that only
models marked in green color below correspond to the  that particular build.
When you go  to link :
https://cdn.automationdirect.com/static/specs/ironhorsemtg.pdf
(https://cdn.automationdirect.com/static/specs/ironhorsemtg.pdf)please click on  the left on the model number  and compare it  with pictures.
_{Note: In the list   from link  you will not see Green  color.
I used  green color to mark motor  models  of that build!!!}


These motors are made   on 12VDc  and 90V DC as well.
It was also found that  speed control as is shown  in previous comments
is also made  at 12V and  90V as well  although both look alike.
Driving motor  information is very important  in  evaluation of the device
along with spec of the motor,


Wesley

Please remember that here you have   measuring equipment and software used by inventor:
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574918/#msg574918 (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574918/#msg574918)
That is important as:
inventor shows on exactly the same  set of  measuring devices that  he  achieved  more energy out than  en energy IN.
If physics this is impossible, non-doable, rejectable, and  nonsensus,
_{It could be, due to  lack of calibration or any other  error.}
Wesley

Since he is using a bench power supply which likely has variable voltage with current limiting, I wondered he needed the PWM speed controller. I suspect that would facilitate an attempt to loop the system. He'd have to gear up the output RPM steeply but if the gains are anywhere near claims, gear losses wouldn't kill it.
bi

Did you happen to find out anything on the "one-way bearings" mentioned in the patent disclosure?

<sub>One-way Bearing  (from the patent disclosure)

At 7 line 32 thru 44 "one way" bearings are briefly discussed:
Note that during the rotation of the control shaft there is interaction with the output shaft which has the armature with the permanent magnets attached and both the control shaft and output shaft may try and turn the other in a different direction than desired. That is, for example, as the control shaft rotates in a given direction the output shaft may try and rotate it in the opposite direction (i.e. backwards). In one embodiment, the control shaft cannot be forced backwards by the output shaft if one-way bearings hold the control shaft. Likewise, in one embodiment, one-way bearings may be used to hold the output shaft so that it can only rotate in one direction. In one embodiment, the control shaft and the output shaft are each held by one-way bearings.

Further - At 7 line 45 thru 60:

In the specification and figures the control shaft as noted has attached to it the radial field control, this control shaft may be rotated, for example, by a motor or other rotating mechanism. What is to be appreciated is that the control shaft having the radial field control is able to control the armature rotating within a magnetic circuit. The magnetic circuit comprises the radial field control the armature having permanent magnets and the stator. The output shaft which is connected to the armature can rotate (assuming it is not overloaded or locked) and this rotary motion can be used. Thus, the input control shaft can control the output shaft.
While the description has shown two permanent magnets as part of the armature the invention is not so limited and any arrangement of magnets on the armature that yields a magnetic flux passing through the radial field control and
stator can be used.</sub>

Cigaret Lighter indicates 12V
look at the picture.I'll find more about it
but  pictures are self explanatory


So now our list of  motor models is much shorter

I spend   1 day to find everything you didn't find yet
- measuring   apparatus   model  and manufacturer
- speed control  model    and manufacturer
- motor  used  model      and manufacturer
- list of motors and specification  model  and manufacturer
- power supply model  and manufacturer
Please do me a favor guys:
just read it from here will you ? :
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574947/#msg574947)  « Reply #129 on: March 07, 2023, 09:09:11 PM »

_{opinion expressed is my own}
Wesley

<sub>For Non English audience I repeat text is on the picture :
Motor model is  established now based on  used by inventor  Power supply/ we know speed and torque.
But interesting is that  the same  motor driving inventor device shown in two  different  instances in the same video shows:

motor IN at its 51 RPM speed shows 0.7 ft-lb
motor IN at its 33 RPM speed shows 0.1 ft-lb



while  inventor is trying to prove  gain of the device :)
___________________________________________________________________________</sub>





The inventor claim of more  energy OUT than IN
and  surprising evidence on measuring  equipment
was analyzed by me:
So look at picture and in video  and it is :
up to you  to   conclude :)
https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=133 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=133)

_{opinion expressed is my own}
Wesley

Please look at  below showing two different
time frame  pictures in the same video and look at:
connector connection to the measuring device
But this is not all:
Please also look at time on the video showing measurement IN
and compare it with   IN - picture from up there  in the previous post  from the same video.   
Look at measurement numbers too.

:)

_{opinion expressed is my own}
Wesley

.

Wesley, please stop confusing the members with
unrelated screenshots..
These Input settings were taken at different RPM settings and surely the input power and torques are then different...as long as the output power is integrated over several revolutions is always higher, the claims from the inventor are valid ..!
You always have to integrate the forces and torque to see the Average display values...

So what is your point...??
So please stop these confusing posting...
Thanks.
Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 08, 2023, 10:38:32 AM
Wesley, please stop confusing the members with
unrelated screenshots..
These Input settings were taken at different RPM settings and surely the input power and torques are then different...
Regards, Stefan.

No problem.
I did the job nobody  else did equipment specs, model numbers  all data is in front of you.
IS THAT NON RELATED? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??
COMPERE THE NUMBERS  PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was not making any judgement.
AT ALL!!!!!!!
I posted that what is on the video!!!
It is not RPM that matters.
It is torque at given speed that differs vs HP.

Re:picture here  (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574960/#msg574960)« Reply #138
at the picture here on the right
at RPM 35 torque is 0.2188
HP is 0.0014
at the  the same picture on the left
at RPM 50 torque is 3.412 look here !!!!
HP is 0.0032

Re: picture here  (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574959/#msg574959) Reply #137
at the picture on the upper right
at RPM 36 torque is 0.1289
HP is 0.0008
at the  the same picture at the bottom
at RPM51 torque is 0.7311 look here and compare it with another blue  up  there  !!!!
HP is 0.0069

please compare the colors of the numbers green to green, orange to orange !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and blue to blue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

please look also at the connectors connection and cyan color line pointer   on the left hand side of the picture
_{look very carefully  on the very top of that connector little to the top right - is that something connected to it? I gave you device link and spec too just read it before you tell me to shut up.}
Re: Magnetic flux motor just patented that creates it's own electricity! (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574960/#msg574960) « Reply #138 on: Today at 01:50:08 PM »
compare it  with the same device on the right side of that picture
do you see  something or you not? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?


who is confusing whom?

PLEASE ANSWER

Wesley

Hi!
After I learned Corbin Motor, I developed a possible structure.
See schematic

The position of Figure 1-1, carmine magenta represents the coil that starts to send power.
The coil current generates magnetic field lines, which strive to be the shortest,
Just pull the rotor and start rotating in the direction of the alignment of the lugs.


Figure 1-2 is located, yellow represents the de-energized coil.
At this position, the current in the coil has = 0, and there are no magnetic field lines.
The magnetic force when the teeth are aligned has disappeared
The rotor continues to rotate by inertia without resistance.


Position sensor according to the circuit,
And over and over again, energizing and powering the coil.
The rotor is constantly rotating.

It seems that Corbin's lever amplification moment is not used here.
Can you still OU?


Please note: The coil here, after the power is applied,
Power off at one angle before the teeth are aligned.
The coil releases magnetic energy with a back EMF.
The current continues until the teeth are aligned, and the current = 0.

This allows the coil to consume very little energy.
The rotational moment of the rotor does not decrease.

Is this OU?

Please advise.


Figure 2 is the side view The display structure is very simple.

Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the rotor and stator.

Thank you!

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 08, 2023, 10:38:32 AM
...
These Input settings were taken at different RPM settings and surely the input power and torques are then different...as long as the output power is integrated over several revolutions is always higher, the claims from the inventor are valid ..!
You always have to integrate the forces and torque to see the Average display values.
...
Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

You say "These Input settings were taken at different RPM settings".
I'm not sure. If you're referring to the side by side display readings, those are instantaneous data on the input shaft from the torque sensor at 2:19 and 3:38 minutes. They are not necessarily different RPM settings. The speed and torque varies rapidly due to cogging as seen on the strip charts on other video. I find it quite interesting this particular data.

At 2:19                      At 3:38                       Average
RPM -50                   RPM -35.                    RPM -42.5
ft.lb. +0.3412           ft.lb. -0.2189             ft.lb. +0.0612
Deg -123206            Deg -127904
HP   -0.0032             HP   +0.0014             HP    -0.0009

Simple averages do not yield correct power. The calculated HP using +0.0612ft.lb. & -42.5RPM = -0.00049HP. So integration is needed.

Also I wonder if negative torque is actually transmitted to the motor.  If so, the PWM controller may not tolerate it. But the polar moment of inertia of the shaft, gears, and armature may dampen it sufficiently.

Also I wonder the effects of one-way bearings that SL has mentioned.

The more we pick apart (I mean analyze) the apparatus, the more likely we are to discover its true operation.

In reading over the literature from the Futek torque sensor reminds me of their sensitivity to alignment and calibration. I've never used two in line like this and saw no other such reference to do so. Is there anything peculiar about it? And I'd like to see static torque calibration. This was always done when using these sensors with torque arms and precision weights.

And then, as mentioned previously, proof of pudding, loop it.

Regards,
bi

..

Here the only thing that will move this forward is a test report from an independent
3rd party certified test lab ( which community has access to)
Hopefully next few days will provide more info !


This has always been the standard for claims in our world!
Respectfully
Chet K

Quote from: bistander on March 08, 2023, 12:47:23 PM
Hi Stefan,
You say "These Input settings were taken at different RPM settings".
I'm not sure.

Thank you bi.
and look again I made some  color marking here :
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574966/#msg574966 (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574966/#msg574966)

Your data can be more complete  if you add readings HERE TOO:
https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=48 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=48)  at: 0.37

please look at my numbers on the pictures there
You'll see  all ...  :) and again compare it with  that what I pointed at in blue color
Don't look at average but at  RPM, torque and HP  together .. for that given reading and than compare.

I pointed  :
at RPM  50 torque is 3.412
HP is 0.0032
and
at RPM 51 torque is 0.7311
HP is 0.0069
You analyzed only that:
At 2:19                      At 3:38                       Average
RPM -50                   RPM -35.                    RPM -42.5
ft.lb. +0.3412           ft.lb. -0.2189             ft.lb. +0.0612
Deg -123206            Deg -127904
HP   -0.0032             HP   +0.0014             HP    -0.0009



Wesley :)

Hi panyuming,
What you show is a switched reluctance or stepper motor. Quite common. Typically multiphase so they are self starting and smoother. And no reports of OU of which I am aware.
Nice sketch.
bi

Much easier magnet motor to fabricate for evaluation, test and so forth: 

SWITCHED MAGNET MOTOR

MotionMagnetics homepage
https://www.youtube.com/@Motionmagnetics

Magnetic Switch Motor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbWmoUL7I00

The Key to building a Magnetic Motor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGyQABZjSWw

Quote from: stivep on March 08, 2023, 01:06:39 PM
...
Your data can be more complete  if you add readings HERE TOO:
https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=48 (https://youtu.be/_gGLN2LxwkY?t=48)  at: 0.37
...

This I find interesting. From the video linked above. Mike must turn up pressure on the brake caliper just before the green marker line. Before that, the input torque was back and forth across zero with an average close to zero. Pretty much no-load on the drive motor. Just enough to keep rotation at set RPM. Then when he adds load, both input and output increase about 0.5ft.lb. To me, the apparatus appears to add ~5.5 ft.lb., not multiply torque.
bi

{edit- comment added}
I'd like to see the output sensor reading with the caliper completely off the disc, true no-load.

At yellow line. 5.75 ÷ 0.15 = 38.3 gain
At green line.  6.65 ÷ 1.1 = 6.05 gain

Here again Stefan's translated pdf from borderlands recent query Into this claim .
In this document (along with other analysis) it does mention/ suggest possible modeling
Similar to member Solarlabs work .

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 06, 2023, 03:08:06 PM
I translates the German PDF File from Adolf Schneider with
Google Translator and here is the ENglish PDF File to download:

As mentioned prior ..efforts underway to get more info on testing ( 3 rd party ) if no independent 3rd party has been arranged, will see about connecting claimant to that resource _also_
Once testing is verified , will  Ask about licensing for educational research purposes!
Respectfully
Chet K
PS
Edit to add new link to Stefan's PDF translation of German Borderland document on Mr.Corbin 's claims
Thanks Jim ( I had actually checked it twice prior to logging out  ....?hopefully it works

Hard working from just the phone here ..

Quote from: ramset on March 08, 2023, 07:04:29 PM
Here again Stefan's translated pdf from borderlands recent query Into this claim .
In this document (along with other analysis) it does mention/ suggest possible modeling
Similar to member Solarlabs work .


As mentioned prior ..efforts underway to get more info on testing ( 3 rd party ) if no independent 3rd party has been arranged, will see about connecting claimant to that resource _also_
Once testing is verified , will  Ask about licensing for educational research purposes!
Respectfully
Chet K

I think your file is empty Chet. It has 0Kb

Quote from: bistander on March 08, 2023, 01:13:48 PM
Hi panyuming,
What you show is a switched reluctance or stepper motor. Quite common. Typically multiphase so they are self starting and smoother. And no reports of OU of which I am aware.
Nice sketch.
bi

Thank you! Thanks for the guidance.
I'll think again.

.

Solarlab
Here we seem to have a path towards actually engaging with Claimant ,
(In the works...) the goal being 3rd party validation ,
might take some time to arrange.


Respectfully
Chet K
PS
If you have info on lab/test results from Perendev or access to unit for testing?
perhaps reboot one of the topics here on Perendev

Quote from: ramset on March 09, 2023, 01:31:22 PM
Solarlab
Here we seem to have a path towards actually engaging with Claimant ,
(In the works...) the goal being 3rd party validation ,
might take some time to arrange.


Respectfully
Chet K
PS
If you have info on lab/test results from Perendev or access to unit for testing?
perhaps reboot one of the topics here on Perendev

Sorry, I'll remove the post - don't follow the forums that much lately.

Have a good one, and thanks.

Don't want to interupt the serious Expert Magnet Motor validation
being conducted here;
but I just can't resist this one  ;) (another Saturday with the Kids!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMD-GSjqqmc

Quote from: SolarLab on March 11, 2023, 01:03:13 PM
Don't want to interupt the serious Expert Magnet Motor validation
being conducted here;
but I just can't resist this one  ;) (another Saturday with the Kids!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMD-GSjqqmc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMD-GSjqqmc)

Totally Fake.. It does not respond to the change of the stator magnets.. It is just driven with a hidden motor....
lol..

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 11, 2023, 02:55:38 PM
Totally Fake.. It does not respond to the change of the stator magnets.. It is just driven with a hidden motor....
lol..

Thanks for the expert insight - could't find the totally fake or hidden motor - but i'll look again more closely  :) lol

Regards!

Assuming the inventor is correct that he can get out more power from the output shaft than power put in at the input shaft, it really doesn't matter to me whether he's "extracting energy stored in the magnets" or "tapping the infinite seas of energy in an out of phase parallel universe". Even what the correct definitons of torque and power are, although I do having my own opinions on that.
It's all just semantics and some people seem to not want to believe the machine can be overunity, strictly based on their own belief system of what magnet are or do. All people without a proven OU machine, I gather :)

Overunity inventors over the centuries have often expressed themselves in ways that rubbed us the wrong way, they never said what we wanted to hear. For an inventor who loves life and aims to maximize it, making it seem like the energy was always there in the magnets for us to extract, kind of makes sense from a human life cycle optimiziation perspective. Any verbal BS I will *wink, wink* going along with or at least try to shut up about with for the sake of figuring out how to replicate and improve this machine.
----
Off-topic, but quite relevant and in line with this claimed invention as from the outside I can't differentiate it:
I've been approached by a company who's in the business of supplying energy to clients through mobile generators. They've been at it for over a decade, and claim to have a fleet of 1000s of units already. I have not seem them yet, so I can't attest.
This company shares nothing about it actually being a magnet motor at the core, it's not in any of of their documents. Stemming from a desire to survive in the Earthly life experience a bit longer, which I do share. The inventor indeed is still alive and his company is selling low cost energy to industrial clients who don't appear to care where the energy comes from: diesel, magnets or angels' farts.
Smallest commercially deployed unit is rated at 2 MW. The proprietary aparatus rougly cylindrical and similar in volume to a somewhat higher rated alternator. Seems SUPER similar to the invention in subject, just with a casing around the magnet motor bit. COP ~6 in commercial application, based on what I gather from off the record explanations.
200-500 hp (this is what I was told) primed at a defined torque from an electric motor, for max 2 MW+ out from an axially downstream placed output axle driving the alternator. The whole process is ceremoneously started from a diesel genset that (scretly?) shuts off once the apparatur is running, looped I suspect. Whether input and output rpm are also the same in their system as with MotoFlux, I'm still iffy on, but it seems more likely than not. I've not yet gained the needed trust from the inventor/company owner (only his right hand) and he's far from a great communicator in writing, most digits and units are obviously wrong. Customers seem happy with the energy prices they are paying, and the company appears to spend very little on diesel to keep the generators running.

When I get better access (I'll need to, to help them with operations and sales), I'll push for a very convincing demonstration setup. I hope someone who's respected in this field will agree to help me devise an acceptable demonstration setup, even if we are unlikely to hear the nitty gritty of what going on in their magnet motor. 2MW is so much power, that if we can verify that output, and shut off the genset after a short while (with measurements on the power provided to the prime motor), the presence of large batteries or ginormous inductive trickery will be easily dismissed with an hour's running.
My main concern would be: where do I find a load that will pull 2 MW from a device for an hour? :) Right now their setup is a bit too bulky to put on an electric plane, but if there is an electric ferry available without batteries somewhere, that would be be handy :-D
If anyone wants to discuss a suitable validation arrangement, please get in touch with me on Telegram or Insta, @cloxxki
I've not used this site since 2010, can't promise to return to read my PM's. In fact, I had an unread one from 2010 as I just found out.
Of course I really hope I can satisfy myself that the invention is real, as I have loads of uses for cheaper electricity and have been invited to take commissions on sales I generate. I can't ethically do that until I know more. It's a bit of a process to break through the barriers the inventor put up over the years. Their generators have more cameras on them than modern cars, and I kind of suspect there might be a self destruct sequence for when it's poked the wrong way :-D
Super low energy price are indeed possible if the company I'm talking to is indeed for real (and then has been for real, commercially deploying bulk OU energy, for over a decade). MW build cost way lower than wind or solar. kWh cost I think can be brough under 1 eurocent while MUCH greener than either wind or solar. Less tonnage to produce 1 MW worth of equipment, and much better to recycle. I'm super hopeful, but need to know before you'll hear me go "Eureka!".

@OT: please scratch my itch, change the title to reflect "its" in stead of "it's"? Thank you and apologies for my own doubtless many typos above.

I compiled 2 new videos  from all the data we already have about this motor:

MotoFluxPower.com New patented Permanent Magnet Motor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qHOLvSms1I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qHOLvSms1I)

I made a new video about motofluxpower.com

MotoFlux new permanent magnet motor technology will change the world
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU2JyE9h5o8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU2JyE9h5o8)


Hope this helps,
Regards, Stefan.

I'm grateful for learning about this project through your videos, Stefan!

You mention something one-way? A one-way bearing perhaps, input shaft, output, or bopth? That would actually make sense to me, to claim every degree of rotation achieved.

If I see correctly, the input shaft had three inline magnets acting on offset 1-2-3-1-2-3 rotor positions.
I wonder whether 3 is the perfect number geometrically, or whether anything over 2 works, and more might even be better/smoother. In a compact rotor, some intepreference might act up when flux paths get too close laterally?

The shown torque traces seem quite erratic, I wonder why. Also I wonder what the project is trying to achieve by going public at this stage. What do they need to be able to call more more than "proof of concept"? Is it not a runner yet? A tiny battery would loop it, if consecutive cog-overs can be achieved with more torque out than in? Or are rpms and torque achieved still too low to get an alternator to do its job? Waveform too messy to work?
Effects of a flywheel on either input shaft or rotor or both would be fascating to understand.

So what do they need? A big investor to buy it all up for billions? A big engineering company to fix their problems at their own costs?

Cloxxi
Not to speak out of turn...
Stefan is quite busy with administrative and some other obligations ATM


Here of course our goal is open source,for clarity the LENR community
Which we have members activity involved in ...is also open source ( conferences .. experiments etc)
Those resources and others are being brought together around this claim ( in the works)


Hoping for a good test protocol and hopefully a path ( if tests show merit) to some educational
License agreement?
Nothing ventured nothing gained !
BTW nice to see you around
As an aside Rick at Aaron's forum is rebooting his magnet /gravity Device soon
Will probably look to reboot an old topic here on that ( I believe he has had excellent results to share ?)


Forward ~~~~~>
Respectfully
Chet K
EDIT to cloxxi comment below
This is all conjecture at this point for many reasons ,
Hoping for the best for all involved ( large sums have been offered
In the past to inventors willing to open source a free energy tech )
We shall see ?

I recently learned that Stefan's facing some hopefully temporary struggles. Him posting those videos once more show what level of legend he truly is. While I thanked him for his work, I was meaning address the whole community with my thoughts and questions, I wouldn't dare to ask his time directly, thanks for stipulating.

I hear you on the open source thing as well. I wish I were the one to come up with a working magnet motor, and I'd like to think that I'd found a way to open source it. Never sure, greed is a great temptress as is megalomania.

We can't change the past (on this time line at least), let alone someone else's decisions.
Even more important than open source free energy, is to actually have technologies compete on price. Crappy open source stuff might be trumped by fierce commercial competition.

The technology in subject is patented however, as you will know. Didn't stop Stefan from allocating his precious time to it. Is their intent to open source it in the end without a pay day first? I'm unsure why they are at the "proof of concept" with big gains in torque at same rpm. That's only a quick battery hook up from having a full runner, surely?
If this patent is not maintained for it to enter into the public domain...cool! Is this promised by the inventor?
If meant to be open source, we'd expect better drawings to come out and help to be recruited?

Are there replication efforts to this MotoFlux tech, is it even welcomed?
Sorry, I can slow the Earth's if I start asking questions...

Messed with the Magnet Motor a bit in the "cartoon show" analyzer and the preliminary
indications are this motor might well work as claimed.

Briefly;

(a.) initially, the rotor magnets are aligned to the stator "poles;"

(b.) the interuptor is rotated (cw or alternatively ccw - but only in one direction;

(c.) this disturbes the "magnetic circuit" (see patent diagrams);

(d.) at a certain RPM of the disruptor, the rotor magnets are moved away from the stator poles;

(e.) when enough movement is attained, the rotor magnets "cog" rapidly to the next stator pole position;

(f.) this "rapid snap action" is where the system gain appears (call it what you will);

(g.) now, this is where the "one-way bearings" are needed - the approaching rotating disruptor must be kept
from causing the backward action of either the rotor magnets, the disruptor, or both - allowed to move only
in one direction;

(h.) so, at what RPM is the disruptor most efficient? This is yet to be determined. Or maybe it's a speed control
mechanism of sorts.

In a strange way it's like the Tesla Pump!

OK, now more beer so I can determine the optimum disruptor RPM vs Magnet Field Strength...

Thanks for watching!

SL

Should add:

Of course the "interuptor" is operating within a magnetic enviroment; so that's
quite interesting as well...

SL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG32MoYXDbw

Seems open enough.  Complete strip down

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 13, 2023, 03:47:25 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG32MoYXDbw

Seems open enough.  Complete strip down

Can't you see it's a scam!

There is a rotating magnet under the table! or coil.  :o

Quote from: r2fpl on March 13, 2023, 04:53:55 AM
Can't you see it's a scam!

There is a rotating magnet under the table! or coil.  :o

Normally I would be inclined to agree with you and whilst Im not saying its 100% proven, the layout of the magnets are almost identcal to the Yildiz motor

I actually travelled the world investigating new tech so am familiar with the usual crap

As far as scam goes -

1)  you have to sell something to be a scam....he isnt selling anything
2)  its a damn long video for the sake of some hits on youtube that wont make him money to recover the cost of magnets
3) Given that perm magnets do NOT have a very long field of reach, and considering he picks up the device and is too far away from the table AND angles it different ways free-hand....I dont see how any perm magnet wheel under the table is going to be effective.  That also goes for any pulsing coil

Either way I have nothing to gain or lose nor am I affiliated with him.  Besides there are way better tech and solid state capture devices out there without buggering around with perm magnets.  This thread is about another magnetic flux path design and this little motor works in similar fashion.

I guess after reviewing over 850 patents going back 100 years on all sorts of tech, one thing I have noted is this.....the fraud and the REAL get ridiculed alike.  I have sat in front of directors and engineers assessing new GENUINE tech and they cannot grasp that there is something out there thats better than what they have.   

Human nature really is incredible.  The psychology of people wanting to know the secret to the magic trick and then when you show them they dont believe or want it.

Curious to learn of the legitimate technologies you encountered on your travels, did you post on them some place?

What's your present assessment of the MotoFlux thing?
"Proof of concept" after all those years. Why still all about torque and rpms and not about power in and out, let alone a self contained apparatus with just power out?
I think we agree that most magnet motor presentations are either scams or lack of understanding from the inventor. Or a cry for help thinking they are *this* close. What might be the case for MotoFlux? The scale of the build seems almost industrial. Why not build smaller, does something get impractical there, perhaps with the one-way bearings, rpm and cogging periods?

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 13, 2023, 07:10:25 AM
Curious to learn of the legitimate technologies you encountered on your travels, did you post on them some place?

What's your present assessment of the MotoFlux thing?
"Proof of concept" after all those years. Why still all about torque and rpms and not about power in and out, let alone a self contained apparatus with just power out?
I think we agree that most magnet motor presentations are either scams or lack of understanding from the inventor. Or a cry for help thinking they are *this* close. What might be the case for MotoFlux? The scale of the build seems almost industrial. Why not build smaller, does something get impractical there, perhaps with the one-way bearings, rpm and cogging periods?

hey Cloxxi

I was curious about the whole torque calcs thing myself.  Also the VERY slow rpm they have it demonstrated at.

I mean right at the end of shaft where they put a disc brake and caliper why not put a winding with generator and use that to charge the battery which is driving the input??  Those are things that instantly hit me.

My assessment -   I think given the low efficiencies of electric-dynamos, the issue is that the power factor will NOT be enough to drive to OU.  The concept is good and essentially when you look at the diameter of the internal mechanical perm magnet 'leader" then essentially this is a low geared shifter which results in leverage on the outer stator.  Fact is they have chosen torque over electrical output and the internal design means that air resistance will prevent it getting up to high RPM which is another reason why they havent spun it up as a high speed turbine.  It simply wont work as such.  Inventors present calcs  that are going to flatter the design and put it in the best possible light.

They are chasing funding which means that they themselves are not happy with the proto and it need more development.  My assessment is that even with the strongest perm magnets its not a good design for the reasons above.  Laminated silicon steel that they are using has its limits in saturation.  Its a LOT of metal for very low output and a basic analogue design.    I would not invest in this and it wont go anywhere.

There are much better turbine based models similar to yildiz.  If you are going to use parallel path tech solid state like the flynn or Meg is better but even they are tricky.

I dont have a site where I display anything because most of the consult investigations are done under NDA. 

What I said in previous post is true.  There are literally thousands of good patents that were just ahead of their time.  Everything from harvest from atmosphere or water type fuels or a cross breed of catalytic conversion that utilizes materials at incredible efficiency.  Once Apon a time back in the 20's so much of it was not classified.  But much is hidden in plain sight.  The rest is obscured with the noise of ridicule and close minded boffins

There are a few old boys on youtube that actually present the real deal or at least very good principles to employ

I have seen far better than this NOT get funding.  The world is just not geared for change yet.  Its disgraceful.  But this motor design is very basic and not a good performer.  Thats my honest take without having the energy in and out presented in another way. 

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 13, 2023, 05:50:02 AM
Normally I would be inclined to agree with you and whilst Im not saying its 100% proven, the layout of the magnets are almost identcal to the Yildiz motor

I actually travelled the world investigating new tech so am familiar with the usual crap

As far as scam goes -

1)  you have to sell something to be a scam....he isnt selling anything
2)  its a damn long video for the sake of some hits on youtube that wont make him money to recover the cost of magnets
3) Given that perm magnets do NOT have a very long field of reach, and considering he picks up the device and is too far away from the table AND angles it different ways free-hand....I dont see how any perm magnet wheel under the table is going to be effective.  That also goes for any pulsing coil

Either way I have nothing to gain or lose nor am I affiliated with him.  Besides there are way better tech and solid state capture devices out there without buggering around with perm magnets.  This thread is about another magnetic flux path design and this little motor works in similar fashion.

I guess after reviewing over 850 patents going back 100 years on all sorts of tech, one thing I have noted is this.....the fraud and the REAL get ridiculed alike.  I have sat in front of directors and engineers assessing new GENUINE tech and they cannot grasp that there is something out there thats better than what they have.   

Human nature really is incredible.  The psychology of people wanting to know the secret to the magic trick and then when you show them they dont believe or want it.

Why do people cheat? if not for money then why?
For the popularity of the channel on YT! they think it will make them money someday but they just get bored and like to watch people see the truth out there. They're just having fun.

google key: free energy (3 340 000 000)
YT this some few millions

I am not aware of any credible modern device that has been independently proven. However, I know many that were probably scams, but less than 1% of all may be true.

Remember Trump's speech when he was running for president. He said there are about 5,000 patents that need to be released because they are classified. It will do humanity some good. Including free energy patents.
Why didn't he?! Because he wasn't allowed.
The hypocrisy of people and corporations is huge.
I know that such devices exist or mechanisms that can be used, but we must be dependent on oil, gas, electricity. What they give us is PV and that's it.

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 13, 2023, 07:54:12 AM
hey Cloxxi

I was curious about the whole torque calcs thing myself.  Also the VERY slow rpm they have it demonstrated at.

I mean right at the end of shaft where they put a disc brake and caliper why not put a winding with generator and use that to charge the battery which is driving the input??  Those are things that instantly hit me.

My assessment -   I think given the low efficiencies of electric-dynamos, the issue is that the power factor will NOT be enough to drive to OU.  The concept is good and essentially when you look at the diameter of the internal mechanical perm magnet 'leader" then essentially this is a low geared shifter which results in leverage on the outer stator.  Fact is they have chosen torque over electrical output and the internal design means that air resistance will prevent it getting up to high RPM which is another reason why they havent spun it up as a high speed turbine.  It simply wont work as such.  Inventors present calcs  that are going to flatter the design and put it in the best possible light.

They are chasing funding which means that they themselves are not happy with the proto and it need more development.  My assessment is that even with the strongest perm magnets its not a good design for the reasons above.  Laminated silicon steel that they are using has its limits in saturation.  Its a LOT of metal for very low output and a basic analogue design.    I would not invest in this and it wont go anywhere.

There are much better turbine based models similar to yildiz.  If you are going to use parallel path tech solid state like the flynn or Meg is better but even they are tricky.

I dont have a site where I display anything because most of the consult investigations are done under NDA. 

What I said in previous post is true.  There are literally thousands of good patents that were just ahead of their time.  Everything from harvest from atmosphere or water type fuels or a cross breed of catalytic conversion that utilizes materials at incredible efficiency.  Once Apon a time back in the 20's so much of it was not classified.  But much is hidden in plain sight.  The rest is obscured with the noise of ridicule and close minded boffins

There are a few old boys on youtube that actually present the real deal or at least very good principles to employ

I have seen far better than this NOT get funding.  The world is just not geared for change yet.  Its disgraceful.  But this motor design is very basic and not a good performer.  Thats my honest take without having the energy in and out presented in another way.

Cheers for the comments.
I do think we need to see a thing like this in the 1000s of rpm range. It may even need to be forced there, rather than self-run itself to that speed.

How do you rate other design "better" if we don't have a runner sitting in the shed selling energy to the grid under the guise of "solar" power?
If there really are 1000s of patents, then the problem is with the inventors, not the market that's against them. An inventor that wants their tech to be used, discloses it to enough people. Like a wax job, just a quick pull to get it over with. Loads of addresses, spam them all with wonderful fool-proof blueprints, and some with working miniatures. Brand the heck out of it and become an overnight celebrity. Instantly too late to be Stanley Meyered.

The company I was contacted by may have found a loophole, making the machines and just selling the energy under the market price. Under the radar. But kind of small scale and a well kept secret how it really works. From the shown models, it may well be the MotoFlux system, I wouldn't be able to tell from the outside. But it's running at over 1000 rpm and seems to be making the company some money. No legacy though, as it's all so secret and small scale.

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 13, 2023, 07:54:12 AM
My assessment -   I think given the low efficiencies of electric-dynamos, the issue is that the power factor will NOT be enough to drive to OU. 

Physics doesn't recognize OU. Here is video about cogging.
Re: Wesley's  Kapanadze and other FE discussion forum (https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575069/#msg575069) « Reply #2409 on: Today at 02:59:58 AM »
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 13, 2023, 10:39:03 AM
Physics doesn't recognize OU.

Once we have clear proof that magnets can help us to overunity when used correctly, physics will suddenly want to define whether it was done at high enough efficiency.

To do anything in this context with magnets, we may need to see them as solid straws attached to two vessels, one higher pressure, one lower. The stronger the magnet type the higher the flow per cm².
If we can get a good amount of momentum from the "snap" initiation when magnets come together, but switch the attraction off right at peak force to prevent decelleration, there might be a runner. No new concepts are being presented here.

From my limited understanding of magnets and motors, it seems this design is at least trying to get the pull, without waiting for it to complete the cogging. Because, why would you unless you're building a clutch? If I could get a super high torque clutch that way, I'd like that, actually.

If someone's understanding is there there is no energy to be extracted from magnets, there is no point for them discussing it.

Hope is an optimistic state of mind that is based on an expectation of positive outcomes characteristic to the  fool (Thomas Edison.)
  Denial is a type of defense mechanism that involves ignoring the reality of a situation to avoid anxiety.
- it is not acknowledging reality or denying the consequences of that reality.
   There's plenty of sense in nonsense sometimes, but that  doesn't apply to physics.
    Energy Cannot Be Created or Destroyed, But It Can Be Converted From One Form to Another.(Einstein)
      It is never late  to go to school for you too.
        here is yet another one: https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575094/#msg575094 (https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575094/#msg575094)
Wesley

Edit: added disruptor operating magnetic field environment at (e) and comparison of the two magnet motors.

Messed with the Magnet Motor a bit in the "cartoon show" analyzer and the preliminary
indications are this motor might well work as claimed. Seems to be straight forward once you
understand the principles.

Briefly;

(a.) initially, the rotor magnets are aligned to the stator "poles;"

(b.) the interuptor is rotated (cw or alternatively ccw - but only in one direction;

(c.) this disturbes the "magnetic circuit" (see patent diagrams);

(d.) at a certain RPM of the disruptor, the rotor magnets are moved away from the stator poles;

(e.) note that the interuptor is steel and not a magnet, however it is rotating within a magnetic field. 

(f.) when enough movement is attained, the rotor magnets "cog" rapidly to the next stator pole position;

(g.) this "rapid snap action" is where the system gain appears (call it what you will);

(h.) now, this is where the "one-way bearings" are needed - the approaching rotating disruptor must be kept
from causing the backward action of either the rotor magnets, the disruptor, or both - allowed to move only
in one direction;

(h.) so, at what RPM is the disruptor most efficient? This is yet to be determined. Or maybe it's a speed control
mechanism of sorts.

Operation appears to follow, in a way, a magnetic clutch (or centrifical clutch) scheme. Interesting! 

OK, now more beer so I can determine the optimum disruptor RPM vs Magnet Field Strength...

Thanks for watching!

NOTE: This device, although it uses magnets, operates a little different than the example I posted above:

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg575033/#msg575033 (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg575033/#msg575033)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMD-GSjqqmc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMD-GSjqqmc)

SL

A lot of emphasis on the presence of friction and other losses, as if anyone claims such don't exist, apparently implying that because there are losses, no technology can every be worthwhile when having any sort of cogging take place. A childish fallacy. I don't off the top of my head know of any method of power generation that managed to avoid losses.

Harnessing explosions will have seemed unlikely, today more mobility is based on that principle. Gliding like a bird in a constructed wing will have seemed unlikely. Breaking the atom will have seemed unlikely, let alone worthwhile to generate electricity.
Permanent magnets, when used well, seem to make electric motors better. Lower heat losser than in most alternative designs. I'm not sure permanent magnets will prove to be absolutely crucial to achieving OU in a motor. For certain arrangements, they may well help.

I hope to seen be able to help validate a 2 MW system that's been in use for over a decade. when I'm satisfied, I'll do what I can to make affordbale energy available to those who need it. A 20 kW unit may suffice for a personal car, in conjuction with a common PHEV style 5-20 kWh battery and e-drivetrain. A 20 kW generator in Europe can almost earn a daily wage reverse charging the grid, let alone a 50 kW system which I think would be more appropriate. 22 hours a day, €10/hr, 365 days a year.

Would you guys recommend the likes of MotoFlux and others to allow a free private license for single ~2 KW units per household? It would be such a gift to humanity... Power a small buffer battery overnight and stick it on a tiny car or scooter during the day for errants.

The MOTOFLUX should be quite easy to build once all the parameters are determined.

A steel ring that will accomodate four (?), or more, rows of soft magnetic bolts spaced as determined
(whatever # of stator poles).

Two magnetic "bars" (rotor) - stacked pucks or bar types (restrained), open at the hub.

A rotating soft magnetic steel "interuptor" with a drive motor (small stepper or other adjustable speed?)

Two sets of "one-way" bearings (common). Nothing really complicated here, or difficult, or fancy.

Might take a bit of engineering design and experimenting, but it's all there! And the materials are not exotic, 
scarce, or expensive.

I'm sure we'll see a few examples in the near future!

Same for the "Brazilian Soda Bottle model...

Build one - especially if you're still convinced, or believe, that "magnets have no power!" or whatever!   ;)
But take care - blood blisters do really hurt...

SL

So is only the interruptor driven, no extra firing of coils to induce a field?
To rely on the magnets to their work alone, almost passively just off a rotating interruptor that's trying to get the rotor up to speed...might not been enough. I'm far from an expert, but firing coils at the right moments, could that be of use?
With the interrruptor being rotated alone, the potential for added power past unity might be small and indeed inhibit useful rpms.

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 13, 2023, 03:43:16 PM
So is only the interruptor driven, no extra firing of coils to induce a field?
To rely on the magnets to their work alone, almost passively just off a rotating interruptor that's trying to get the rotor up to speed...might not been enough. I'm far from an expert, but firing coils at the right moments, could that be of use?
With the interrruptor being rotated alone, the potential for added power past unity might be small and indeed inhibit useful rpms.

There's a link to the patent somewhere here and a few good videos - have a read and a view, and your questions will be answered.

See Hartiberlin's attachment and videos - they're good ones.

Sorry - can't find the patent link or patent attachment; so it's attached:

Simulation of Corbin Motor magnetic levers.
A short section below is a magnet.
Other silicon steel fragments, magnetic permeability,
From 8000, changed to 20000,
There is not much difference.
It seems that there is a torque amplification effect.

This is a really interesting idea. I can kinda see how it works.

I wonder if there is some other type of metal that can be used instead of silicon steel. If not, replicating would cost a little bit. Unless you have an old motor laying around then it all has to be designed around that size. Ripping apart a bunch of old transformers would only get you a bunch of small pieces. Seems like buying sheets large enough for the stator(s) is hard to find without buying in bulk. Is there a place in the usa where you can get flat sheets of that stuff without requiring a semi to deliver it?

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 13, 2023, 09:34:16 AM
Cheers for the comments.
I do think we need to see a thing like this in the 1000s of rpm range. It may even need to be forced there, rather than self-run itself to that speed.

How do you rate other design "better" if we don't have a runner sitting in the shed selling energy to the grid under the guise of "solar" power?
If there really are 1000s of patents, then the problem is with the inventors, not the market that's against them. An inventor that wants their tech to be used, discloses it to enough people. Like a wax job, just a quick pull to get it over with. Loads of addresses, spam them all with wonderful fool-proof blueprints, and some with working miniatures. Brand the heck out of it and become an overnight celebrity. Instantly too late to be Stanley Meyered.

The company I was contacted by may have found a loophole, making the machines and just selling the energy under the market price. Under the radar. But kind of small scale and a well kept secret how it really works. From the shown models, it may well be the MotoFlux system, I wouldn't be able to tell from the outside. But it's running at over 1000 rpm and seems to be making the company some money. No legacy though, as it's all so secret and small scale.

Hey Cloxxi

I like the way you assess logically.  Your first sentence I agree with but I would abandon the motoflux design.  THE PRINCIPLE IS FINE....the anlogue design is inefficient. 

Regarding the 2nd paragraph your comments.  Mutiple issues.  YES sometimes its an inventor issue but imagine for a moment you have spent on average (and these are the numbers) 20 years working on your design and machining, + funds + time....thats at least 2 million on average.  NOBODY after working to put their heart and soul into it will not wantt to see return for simply wages.  ITS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF AN INVBENTOR.
Look, there are invnetors that hang on too tight and they are too precious and i have seen scores of deals fall through because they expected too much.  But overall I can tell you that the reason we dont have Free cheap energy today is beacuse the world, politics and the HUGE industrial powers ABOVE the politicians that TRULY RULE the world will not allow it.   As for your suggestion of lets say installing a massive solar array and then hiding under it a black box power supply to feed into and sell to the grid.....ahh....you know what,.....a group of investors wanted to do that and they have a solution but again the powers above the politicians have now put into legislation and red tape all these laws so that will never happen.  It MIGHT have been possible about 25 years agio but now its NOT 100%.  Its all sewn up.   Let me explain.   I cannot even sell 100 watts over a certain KW CAP with Solar.  The power companies in cahoots with politics and law come out and assess your solar array.  Then they say ok this is rated for X amount of Megawatts.  Then you get paid per KW of what you provide.  Everything is checked over with a fine tooth comb.  If i suddenly start putting out more, they will investigate and also PAY ME LESS.  This varies country to country but I am in Australia and thats how it works in most western lands.

Your comments on third paragraph....YES you can only get away with it in small scales.  One option is build a business model for remote power supplies like those guys that have diesel gens in a sea container and drop it where its needed on a hire rate.  But if you swap your tech out for the diesel gen and now you have no running costs then of course you can make big money.  Its the big boys supplying the grid that you cannot mess with.  they will run the last bit of oil and coal and then one day release the next gen of supply that they have locked up for 70 years.

Energy solutions are so many now its only the 90% blinded fools of the public that dont believe it.  It cannot be denied anymore.  Theres thousands of patents and great stuff out there.  But when News releases talk about CERN and various researchers and we might have cold fusion in 30 years,....thats all just garbage information to candy up the minds of those that believe we have nothing better now.  So...all the drones go back to working their 9-5 jobs believing that maybe one  day we will live in a utopia.  Its disgusting the money they spent at CERN trying to craack atoms when free energy can operate at room temp

Psychology and mass psychosis is fascinating

Quote from: stivep on March 13, 2023, 10:39:03 AM
Physics doesn't recognize OU. Here is video about cogging.
Re: Wesley's  Kapanadze and other FE discussion forum (https://overunity.com/17735/wesleys-kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion-forum/msg575069/#msg575069) « Reply #2409 on: Today at 02:59:58 AM »
Wesley

Yes I agree physics doesnt recognize it.  I dont need convincing of that.  I dont know what your point is?  Im on your side

But you do post reams of pages of talk that goes nowhere

Read, watch, listen, learn.
OU,-  is a nonsense.
Pinpointed for you :
https://youtu.be/au2jDbiyveQ?t=201 (https://youtu.be/au2jDbiyveQ?t=201)
https://youtu.be/9JkREsSFwLA?t=682 (https://youtu.be/9JkREsSFwLA?t=682)
https://youtu.be/7qbm4pJqnu0?t=116
Wesley

Quote from: stivep on March 13, 2023, 09:46:32 PM
Read, watch, listen, learn.
OU,-  is a nonsense.
Pinpointed for you :
https://youtu.be/au2jDbiyveQ?t=201 (https://youtu.be/au2jDbiyveQ?t=201)
https://youtu.be/9JkREsSFwLA?t=682 (https://youtu.be/9JkREsSFwLA?t=682)
https://youtu.be/7qbm4pJqnu0?t=116
Wesley

Im only going to try talking to you one more time and then I will stick to my policy of not arguing with Village idiots.

1)  I dont know the point of your pages of diatribe that go nowhere and are illogical
2)  There is no such thing as OU or energy from NOWHERE.  IF I have ever used the term OU it is LOOSELY meaning we CONVERT energy from "free" sources whether those sources are in the air, muons, pions, neutrinos, solar radiation particles, water or whatever.
3)  THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY

4)  You really need to UP your medication of Lithium or decrease it...I dont know what.  You have a huge pride issue and you need to discuss things more with your psychiatrist also learn to read carefully what others post.

Have a nice life and try not to smoke and drink so much.  Anyone that smokes cigarettes in this day and age is an idiot and a contradiction.  How can a foolish person who does not even know how to look after his own body talk to others about the secrets of the Universe.

Energy is all around you

Good day sir!!

THE SHIT NEVER ENDS   ;D

I will leave quotes for evaluating this engineering solution, from an engineer who dealt with a similar topic.

QuoteОбалденная тема! Это практически новое прочтение эффекта Стовбуненко, как обычно из другой страны только.
Это вывернутый наизнанку мотор Стовбуненко, обалденное решение, мужик реально гений!
Главное что показал в подробностях, и в патенте расписано хорошо, что редкость!
Концепция же буквально в воздухе витала! Это все продолжение вечной дискуссии о том, насколько энергозатратно именно переключение внешнего магнитного поля от сторонних источников .в том числе и мощных постоянных магнитов! Белецкий (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0raoW1WAiYc) тоже, при всем своем скепсисе, косвенно подтвердил работоспособность этой идеи
Гениальность американца Ханагена оказалась в том, что он решил поставить замыкающий кусок магнитопровода в центре общей магнитной системы, и она переключает магнитные потоки боковых магнитов так, что они по радиусу увеличивают крутящий момент, сохраняя при этом практически ту же частоту вращения! Обалдеть, насколько изящное решение! Я несколько лет назад ломал голову над реализацией подобной концепции, когда изучал Стовбуненко, но тогда отбросил именно данную топологию потому, что мне казалось, что при увеличении радиуса магнитопровода (столбиков постоянных магнитов) сила, с которой они будут притягиваться своими внешними концами к железу статора, тоже будет уменьшаться, но аменриканец показал, что это не так!

Awesome topic! This is practically a new reading of the Stovbunenko effect, as usual, only from another country.
This is the Stovbunenko motor turned inside out, awesome solution, the man is a real genius!
The main thing is that he showed in detail, and the patent describes it well, which is rare!
The concept was literally in the air! This is all a continuation of the eternal discussion about how energy-consuming it is to switch an external magnetic field from third-party sources, including powerful permanent magnets! Beletsky (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0raoW1WAiYc) also, with all his skepticism, indirectly confirmed the viability of this idea.
The genius of the American Hanagen turned out to be that he decided to put the closing piece of the magnetic circuit in the center of the common magnetic system, and it switches the magnetic fluxes of the side magnets so that they increase the torque along the radius, while maintaining almost the same rotational speed! Stunned, what an elegant solution! Several years ago I puzzled over the implementation of such a concept when I studied Stovbunenko, but then I rejected this particular topology because it seemed to me that with an increase in the radius of the magnetic circuit (columns of permanent magnets), the force with which they will be attracted by their outer ends to the stator iron , will also decrease, but the American showed that this is not the case!

My material about Stovbunenko in Russian.
In 1959, Leonid Stovbunenko demonstrated an electric car that, when driving around St. Petersburg (Leningrad) for a whole day on two batteries (standard for cars of that time), did not completely discharge them.
By decision of the USSR military-industrial complex, Stovbunenko's inventions were classified.

https://drive.google.com/file/u/1/d/1IHbDrGiso2UU2jvyI0O7l0f16mAY5CJf/view?usp=sharing

Here is a practical design to test this MotoFlux idea.
The first stage (the little) shaft has to have one-way bearings to prevent the kickback.

Quote from: Mem on March 14, 2023, 03:49:11 AM
Here is a practical design to test this MotoFlux idea.

I also came to participate in the discussion.
I think that in your drawing, the No. 4 material is made of permanent magnet,
which will not be able to leave the salient pole of the stator.

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 14, 2023, 02:02:55 AM
Awesome topic! This is practically a new reading of the Stovbunenko effect, as usual, only from another country.
This is the Stovbunenko motor turned inside out, awesome solution, the man is a real genius!

Bravo!
These motors is working by it princip as well.

Ракарский,ты у нас специалист по электродвигателям,скажи хоть ты,
что внутри этого мотора.Десять лет никто не может дать ответа.
Если и ты не скажешь,сегодня же возьму ножовку и распилю.

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 13, 2023, 08:46:34 PM
Hey Cloxxi

I like the way you assess logically.  Your first sentence I agree with but I would abandon the motoflux design.  THE PRINCIPLE IS FINE....the anlogue design is inefficient. 

Regarding the 2nd paragraph your comments.  Mutiple issues.  YES sometimes its an inventor issue but imagine for a moment you have spent on average (and these are the numbers) 20 years working on your design and machining, + funds + time....thats at least 2 million on average.  NOBODY after working to put their heart and soul into it will not wantt to see return for simply wages.  ITS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF AN INVBENTOR.
Look, there are invnetors that hang on too tight and they are too precious and i have seen scores of deals fall through because they expected too much.  But overall I can tell you that the reason we dont have Free cheap energy today is beacuse the world, politics and the HUGE industrial powers ABOVE the politicians that TRULY RULE the world will not allow it.   As for your suggestion of lets say installing a massive solar array and then hiding under it a black box power supply to feed into and sell to the grid.....ahh....you know what,.....a group of investors wanted to do that and they have a solution but again the powers above the politicians have now put into legislation and red tape all these laws so that will never happen.  It MIGHT have been possible about 25 years agio but now its NOT 100%.  Its all sewn up.   Let me explain.   I cannot even sell 100 watts over a certain KW CAP with Solar.  The power companies in cahoots with politics and law come out and assess your solar array.  Then they say ok this is rated for X amount of Megawatts.  Then you get paid per KW of what you provide.  Everything is checked over with a fine tooth comb.  If i suddenly start putting out more, they will investigate and also PAY ME LESS.  This varies country to country but I am in Australia and thats how it works in most western lands.

Your comments on third paragraph....YES you can only get away with it in small scales.  One option is build a business model for remote power supplies like those guys that have diesel gens in a sea container and drop it where its needed on a hire rate.  But if you swap your tech out for the diesel gen and now you have no running costs then of course you can make big money.  Its the big boys supplying the grid that you cannot mess with.  they will run the last bit of oil and coal and then one day release the next gen of supply that they have locked up for 70 years.

Energy solutions are so many now its only the 90% blinded fools of the public that dont believe it.  It cannot be denied anymore.  Theres thousands of patents and great stuff out there.  But when News releases talk about CERN and various researchers and we might have cold fusion in 30 years,....thats all just garbage information to candy up the minds of those that believe we have nothing better now.  So...all the drones go back to working their 9-5 jobs believing that maybe one  day we will live in a utopia.  Its disgusting the money they spent at CERN trying to craack atoms when free energy can operate at room temp

Psychology and mass psychosis is fascinating

Yes, a low wage is an insult after such work put in.
However, an inventor may not get a lavish millions/billions too easily, even for a perfect invention.
With a bit of marketing help (inventors NEED that desperately usually), we can get an inventor, through open sourcing, hundreds or thousands of streets named after them, honorary professor chairs at universities, high dollar consultancy gigs, all the young busty women their worn out hearts can handle. A direct monetary reward is far from the sole way to get recognized, and in that regard investors may also lack vision.
It's a pain how energy companies get to prevent competition, but a large investor can get around that of course.

The company that approached me does just that, supply power to remote work sites, and just doesn't spend a lot on keeping the supply going. Client is happy with a no hassle solution, and the energy is worth most to them to run their operation, and it's ALL needed for their operation. Clients would pay a lot more, but they don't need to and that's their win, every day.

With a personal license for a single 2 kW unit per person, to be bought on an approved web shop, that could get an inventor more fame than Einstein himself. Get Tesla Motors to rename themselves to the new guy. Fewer batteries to be purchased, yay!

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 14, 2023, 02:02:55 AM
I will leave quotes for evaluating this engineering solution, from an engineer who dealt with a similar topic.

My material about Stovbunenko in Russian.
In 1959, Leonid Stovbunenko demonstrated an electric car that, when driving around St. Petersburg (Leningrad) for a whole day on two batteries (standard for cars of that time), did not completely discharge them.
By decision of the USSR military-industrial complex, Stovbunenko's inventions were classified.

https://drive.google.com/file/u/1/d/1IHbDrGiso2UU2jvyI0O7l0f16mAY5CJf/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/u/1/d/1IHbDrGiso2UU2jvyI0O7l0f16mAY5CJf/view?usp=sharing)

Fascinating!

Did Stovbunenko just shut up and not leave elaborate notes on his inventor to prosterity? So frustrating when the likes of Stovbunenko  and Stanley Meyer have a total runner and then allow external factors to keep it from humanity. Neither probably have universities named after them now.

Tesla also seemed to know more than he left behind dying at an advanced age. Fun trivia: after the inventor's death, #45 DJT's full uncle John G. Trmp was in charge of cleaning out Tesla's residence for science papers and the like.

Quote from: kolbacict on March 14, 2023, 07:08:41 AM
Десять лет никто не может дать ответа.//возьму ножовку и распилю.

Я думаю, ты говорил о другом моторе, поэтому я удалил свою ссылку
Wesley

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 14, 2023, 07:51:05 AM
Fascinating!

Did Stovbunenko just shut up and not leave elaborate notes on his inventor to prosterity? So frustrating when the likes of Stovbunenko  and Stanley Meyer have a total runner and then allow external factors to keep it from humanity. Neither probably have universities named after them now.

Tesla also seemed to know more than he left behind dying at an advanced age. Fun trivia: after the inventor's death, #45 DJT's full uncle John G. Trmp was in charge of cleaning out Tesla's residence for science papers and the like.

Under a 1951 US law, many developments in the United States, including energy production and energy conservation, are given the status of state secrets. The USSR was no different in this aspect. Take for example motor and power generating systems, magnetic flux switching. By the way, this mechanism, to which the topic is devoted, belongs to this direction.
In the USA, Flynn (died in 2021), in Russia Kornilov (died in 2021, while his laboratory, where a 70 kW self-propelled unit was already ready, was looted).

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 14, 2023, 08:31:42 AM
Under a 1951 US law, many developments in the United States, including energy production and energy conservation, are given the status of state secrets. The USSR was no different in this aspect. Take for example motor and power generating systems, magnetic flux switching. By the way, this mechanism, to which the topic is devoted, belongs to this direction.
In the USA, Flynn (died in 2021), in Russia Kornilov (died in 2021, while his laboratory, where a 70 kW self-propelled unit was already ready, was looted).

Laws are a thing, but criminality is as well. For some reason, the inventors who oppose such laws are very abiding of them. All that work, just to abide and then allow a quick looting of your lab to make it all go away forever. Humanity deserves smarter and more naughty inventors. So so so many criminals, none of them free energy inventors.

Kornilov was asked several times to give presentations. But alas, the old man was stubborn.
There is nothing complicated in this technology, except for the manufacture of the appropriate equipment. A good thing, you need to design, for the tasks. And the majority are trying to take something from the landfill and make a self-running generator.
Production is already a game according to the rules of the system. The system (the one that sets the laws) believes that its interests are more important.
By the way, the Turkish magnetic motor, after a warning, during an Italian online demonstration, sat quietly waiting for permission, today the site disappeared.

Quote from: stivep on March 14, 2023, 08:02:04 AM
https://www.amazon.com/TYC-50-Synchronous-5-6RPM-Torque-4kg-cm/dp/B013W3UAE2?th=1 (https://www.amazon.com/TYC-50-Synchronous-5-6RPM-Torque-4kg-cm/dp/B013W3UAE2?th=1)
в видео - представление изнутри -.не, когда Вы имеете VPN - ON. Я попробовал инкогнито и не Firefox. Page works but not when you have VPN - ON . I tried with incognito and not  Firefox.
Wesley

No no no. It's about this motor.
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/190116/image// (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/190116/image//)

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 14, 2023, 08:48:46 AM
Kornilov was asked several times to give presentations. But alas, the old man was stubborn.
There is nothing complicated in this technology, except for the manufacture of the appropriate equipment. A good thing, you need to design, for the tasks. And the majority are trying to take something from the landfill and make a self-running generator.
Production is already a game according to the rules of the system. The system (the one that sets the laws) believes that its interests are more important.
By the way, the Turkish magnetic motor, after a warning, during an Italian online demonstration, sat quietly waiting for permission, today the site disappeared.

Waiting for permission when detailed drawings and explanations would bring the tech to the world. If one can build it from "scrap parts" and get real net output, surely with proper details provided it can be replicated. Ever that waiting for applause, approval or billions before doing any proper disclosing...

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 14, 2023, 10:23:49 AM
Waiting for permission when detailed drawings and explanations would bring the tech to the world. If one can build it from "scrap parts" and get real net output, surely with proper details provided it can be replicated. Ever that waiting for applause, approval or billions before doing any proper disclosing...

Cloxxi
Somethings just are "that important "
Here I have access every moment to this huge investment from  ??
Sunshine ..atmosphere ...water _life_ etc etc ( our very existence


I also feel this example/gift from ( whomever)
Should be "status quo " regarding FE and planets health
Regardless the personal investments ..
Actually I believe most here who toil ( your good example )
Are bound to this arrangement,
It's in the mission statement.


Open source !
Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
Cloxxi, it might be nice to drop an email to Stefan
For clarity it would be private...
I just try to cheer and encourage him


It has been a ruff time ...
I feel we turn a page soon ( open source page !!

Quote from: panyuming on March 14, 2023, 05:50:31 AM
I also came to participate in the discussion.
I think that in your drawing, the No. 4 material is made of permanent magnet,
which will not be able to leave the salient pole of the stator.

Yes, that's correct. "No. 4 material is made of a permanent magnet,"  What do you suggest, shouldn't be a permanent magnet?

Quote from: Mem on March 14, 2023, 12:56:36 PM



Yes, that's correct. "No. 4 material is made of a permanent magnet,"  What do you suggest, shouldn't be a permanent magnet?

But item #3 is not PM, it is ferrous steel, which they call the radial director. See:. https://www.motofluxpower.com/how-it-works/
bi

Quote from: panyuming on March 13, 2023, 06:17:59 PM
Simulation of Corbin Motor magnetic levers.
A short section below is a magnet.
Other silicon steel fragments, magnetic permeability,
From 8000, changed to 20000,
There is not much difference.
It seems that there is a torque amplification effect.

Many thanks for the simulations.
Can you please make more simulations about it and store the single pictures and then make a video out of it,so we can see, how you came to the conclusion, that it is really coming more torque out of it ?

Please post the video then to Youtube, so it can be viewed easily.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: Mem on March 14, 2023, 12:56:36 PM
Yes, that's correct. "No. 4 material is made of a permanent magnet,"  What do you suggest, shouldn't be a permanent magnet?

In my opinion, when part 4 is aligned with the stator salient pole,
there are the most magnetic field lines, and it is difficult to move away.
As shown in Figure 3

It is easy to rotate only if the permanent magnet below rotates at a large angle,
so that the magnetic field lines at the salient pole are reduced to as few as possible.
As shown in Figure 4

If the No. 4 part is a permanent magnet,
the magnetic field lines at the salient pole are not easily reduced,
so it is difficult to leave and cannot be rotated.

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574831/#msg574831

Hannagan, Fourier, Foltz, induction from the earth's core




This is permanent magnets but emf is the same or a combination

https://youtu.be/SULL1Rh9wsM (https://youtu.be/SULL1Rh9wsM)

Archimedes still applies here



If you were to suddenly stop the earth's rotation
the forces from the rotating core would spin it back up again
almost as fast as it was spinning to begin with

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 14, 2023, 05:06:20 PM
Can you please make more simulations about it and store the single pictures and then make a video out of it,so we can see, how you came to the conclusion, that it is really coming more torque out of it ?

You know what it looks like Stefan?

An invisible rubber band.

An attractive magnetic field force squeezes the flux path.  It will
only expand if an overpowering force makes it do so.  In this
case, because the director iron is right at the point of rotation
you have a huge mechanical advantage over this magnetic
rubber band.  The moment a preferred flux path appears,
this squeezing force literally crushes the rotor into its new
position.  And being a magnetic force, it will indeed accelerate
to this new position.  (F = ma)  Without damping, the force will
overshoot this new position and vibrate to a halt--underdamped
oscillation.

I think the primary reason for a torque gain is that the director
iron is in the optimal position being at the center of the shaft.
I also think the smaller you can reasonably make the director,
the more torque gain you can get.  Obviously, if it's too small
it can no longer do its primary function to redirect the flux path.

Quote from: panyuming on March 14, 2023, 05:07:11 PM
In my opinion, when part 4 is aligned with the stator salient pole,
there are the most magnetic field lines, and it is difficult to move away.
As shown in Figure 3

It is easy to rotate only if the permanent magnet below rotates at a large angle,
so that the magnetic field lines at the salient pole are reduced to as few as possible.
As shown in Figure 4

If the No. 4 part is a permanent magnet,
the magnetic field lines at the salient pole are not easily reduced,
so it is difficult to leave and cannot be rotated.

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574831/#msg574831 (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574831/#msg574831)

Thanks for taking the time and simulate the concept. Make sense, it will be difficult to rotate the primary armature.

Many Thanks panyuming or the simulation pics.

Can you see from the forces in the simulation if there is really a torque gain with such a setup ?


Can you please post the numbers that the simulation puts out ?

Many thanks.


Regards, Stefan.

A set of strong magnets that are locked together, we can twist to release. If we the angle one magnet to attract the other, we can easily a few fingers in the quick snap back together. No gain there, but we COULD restain the hand held magnet before aligning it, much like the one-way bearing is doing here.
If that 3-phase or whatever to call that offset always requires less torque to twist off one and be attracted by the next, that's quite something. Why they'd not have a good runner with their sizable setup then seems puzzling, even if at low rpm.
Sure, a jagging rotation is to be expected, but could one not simply add more offsets in smaller increments to smoothen that out? A well designed (calculated) non-round cog timing system should further help "iron" out jarring effects, perhaps to the point of obsoleting the one-way bearings?
If their torque and rpm reading are reasonabily representable rather than cherry picked, it appears some vital information is withheld as to why they don't have a runner. What might it be? Alternator minimum rpms, can't they put the torque through a gear multiplier? The losses are much greater than with gear reductions.
Thinking of a mechanical feedback loop from output shaft to interrrupter shaft, I could imagine a slight over-gearing through a non-toothed belt drive. The input shaft always "drives" ahead of the output shaft. Spring tension is also something I could imagine, but if the invention truly is UO, I'd expect a runaway situation or at least an equilibrium of high loss, high heat, high wear at some rpm.
Might the system accumulate heat that diminishes the returns of the over-torque characteristic?

As usual with these things, many questions and base don prior cases, limited expectations as to the arrival of any answers.
How many millions to get those answers? :)

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 15, 2023, 06:30:22 PM
Can you please post the numbers that the simulation puts out ?

Regards, Stefan.

Thanks to Stefan for joining the discussion.

I don't know much about that software,
I just learned it during the 30-day trial period.
Probably get the following data.

I can see that the position of the parts in the diagram is very small,
and the force is much worse.
It seems that the magnetic field lines are not significantly different.
I did not learn how to move parts precisely in diagrams.

I changed the method of moving parts and got Figure 8.

The force is generated by magnetic field lines.
It should be that the magnetic field lines are similar, and the force is similar.
Precise calculations may be required to get quantified results.
I don't have such abilities.

Hello everyone!
Re-simulate Corbin Motor, as shown in Figure 9.
The center magnet aligns the stator salient pole with the rotor long arm.
Magnetic field lines are dense and do not rotate easily.

As shown in Figure 10, the center magnet is rapidly rotated 90 degrees,
There are few magnetic field lines between the long arm of the rotor and the salient pole of the stator,
It's very easy to rotate.
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574831/#msg574831


If the magnet in the center is fixed together with the long arm of the rotor, it cannot be rotated.

If the center magnet is replaced with a solenoid coil.
When the long arm of the rotor needs to leave the stator salient pole,
the coil is de-energized, which is very labor-saving.

When the rotor arm is sent to the solenoid coil before it wants to align with the next stator salient pole,
the rotor arm is magnetically accelerated to rotate to the next stator salient pole.
See Figures 11 and 12

So as Mr. Bistander said, it's Stepper Motor.

With such a structure, can the effect of the long arm still be shown?
Is there still a torque amplification effect of the long arm?

Then, I equated it to look like this.     Reply #142
https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/msg574967/#msg574967
It's more like Stepper Motor.

However, the hope that Reply #142 gives me is that the coil structure,
unlike Stepper Motor, is not a separate coil on each stator pole.
Reply #142 uses a monolithic coil.


When the coil is energized, the rotor is not aligned with the stator salient pole,
which is equivalent to a large air gap in the iron core of the integral coil.
The coil inductance is relatively small.
Inductance at this point = L1.
The magnetic energy in the inductor is W1 = 1/2 L1 I2       
When the rotor is aligned with the stator salient pole,
the overall coil core has the smallest air gap and the largest inductance.
In this case, the inductance = L2, i.e. W2 = 1/2 L2 I2 
Because L2 > L1, W2>W1.     

In practice, when the rotor is aligned with the stator salient pole,
the power supply to the coil is stopped,
and the energy in the inductor is recovered using the back EMF.


In this way, is the recovered energy W2 greater than the energy W1 transmitted?
In fact, the rotor is rotating, and the current is changing.
The inductance is also changing.
I do not have the ability to calculate these cases with the integral formula.
W1, W2 are all rough estimates by me.
Probably there is a big difference here.
Causes W2>W1 to error.

Is this the same as what people call 'parametric oscillations'?


Also, if W2=W1, or W2 is slightly less than W1.
In the case of little loss of electrical energy,
It does get a strong mechanical rotational energy.
Will this be OU?  ：）

So Corbin presents three stacked phases of rotor only magnetically interfacing with a central prime axle.

Are the three to be condered fully isolated magnetically, or might the action on one interrruptor/rotor sub-interface also affect the flux lines on other sub-interfaces? Assuming they are less than perfectly isolated, the rpple effect can be either negative or positive, I suppose?

With unlimited funding, I'd build a copy of the setup, but with a carbonfiber prime axle, much larger axial spacing between the sub-interfaces, and look for differences in behavior at low and high speed. Spring loading individual interrupters from the central axle may further help or worsen performance at various speeds.

I have such a flashlight.
I disassembled it. And I did not see Stovbunenko's teeth in the design of the generator. Why ?
Obviously it could work better with this.

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 16, 2023, 09:52:13 AM
So Corbin presents "

"With unlimited funding, I'd build a copy of the setup, "

Cloxxi
Hold that thought.. for educational purposes there just might be a path forward...


Our problem here has been too many pots on various fires ,
Priority one
Open source no excuses !!
And an organization which will support this ( as per Stefan's mission statement)
This open source community has TREMENDOUS resources!
Just all spread out ( less effective)
Let's try to fix that !


Respectfully
Chet K
PS
Will be engaging moderators and Stefan ( he is in process of organizing a moderator group here) to see our options ...probably start a topic soon !

Hello panyuming,
I like your work. However Mike's device uses a soft iron radial director as central (center) input member. It is not Permanent Magnet. The arms on the outer rotor are PM. Then outer stator is again soft iron. It is symmetrical. Analyzing one half, magnetic path has 2 gaps. These 2 gaps:
Have equal energy?
Have equal air gap distance?
Difficult to model, in my opinion.

Also question why you look at inductance when there is no coil?

Also, outer stator can take energy from system but not deliver energy to system. It can convert core and eddy to heat. It also stores energy in magnetic field by cogging.

Center radial director/PM bar on rotor are a clutch and "spring". It can transmit energy, store energy and dissipate energy (convert to heat). Its only source of energy is rotation/torque of shaft from prime mover.

Trying to visualize mechanical rotational system analysis diagram and state equations but been too many years and never had example problems include PMs. Interesting puzzle. Yet to see any possible gain mechanism.

Carry on, please.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 16, 2023, 02:46:42 PM
Hello panyuming,
I like your work. However Mike's device uses a soft iron radial director as central (center) input member. It is not Permanent Magnet. The arms on the outer rotor are PM. Then outer stator is again soft iron. It is symmetrical. Analyzing one half, magnetic path has 2 gaps. These 2 gaps:

Thank you Bistander!
I misread Corbin's design. The long arm is PM.
I don't understand.
I can only say that I think my pictures work better:)
It made everyone laugh.

Quote from: panyuming on March 16, 2023, 07:29:25 PM
Thank you Bistander!
I misread Corbin's design. The long arm is PM.
I don't understand.
I can only say that I think my pictures work better:)
It made everyone laugh.

Hi Panyuming,

First off - don't worry about it! We've all managed to get things mixed up a bit from time to time,
the only way to avoid that is to do "nothing - then you can't mix things up because you do nothing!

Using CAE is very difficult, but as time goes you get more seasoned and that pays off big time in
the end (I know this from experience) and you will end up being well ahead of herd in the end.

Nice work so far - and it's quite easy to change the materials (magnet and steel) around. A major
advantage when using a CAE approach.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your work and keep at it - over the ten+ years of following these boards
your much further ahead, even at this point, than 99.9% of the other participants, trust me!

And, don't worry, those few that have "been there and done that" are not laughing - only the idiots
and lamers will dare laugh...

SL

Quote from: SolarLab on March 17, 2023, 12:54:29 AM
Hi Panyuming,

First off - don't worry about it! We've all managed to get things mixed up a bit from time to time,
the only way to avoid that is to do "nothing - then you can't mix things up because you do nothing!

Thank you!

Then I'll continue to be funny.

I then simulate the rotor long arm to PM,
Figure 13.
Even if the center part is rotated 90 degrees,
The magnetic field lines at the stator salient pole are still very dense,
It shows that such a structure is laborious to rotate.
Actually, I don't think it can be rotated.

Well, it can be rotated and the video has a display.

Hi panyuming,
This was problem I saw. So make air gap larger at the stator tooth than air gap at radial director. Length of air gap is radial distance between iron face and magnet. The longer gap will have less force. Having lower force at the outer gap will allow rotor to move with the force at the inner director air gap.

The other variable influencing force at the air gap is the area or coverage of magnet face/tooth face. Per arc distance (or degree of rotation), this area decreases more at the stator compared to the inner director. Since this case uses same magnet (rectangular), at opposite ends, displacement at the ends are not equal, and affect each other due to common magnetic circuit.

I like to think the limit case. If outer gap is very large, there is no resistance to movement at inner gap. As outer gap decreases, attractive forces between magnet/stator tooth start to oppose movement of rotor to follow the radial director rotation. But the radial displacement of inner radial director/magnet will affect flux & force of outer magnet/stator tooth. At some point, attraction of director to magnet is just a bit greater than attractive force of magnet/stator tooth. Then rotation will start and continue, with cogging.

It is a complex puzzle to me.
bi

MOTORFLUX "kick-back"

I'm sure most are aware of the MotorFlux kick-back but I'll document it anyway.
Probably the reasoning behind the use of "one-way bearings."

Attached is a pdf of a series of snapshots from "The Motoflux Principle: How it Works"
video by Mike Corbin - https://www.motofluxpower.com/ (https://www.motofluxpower.com/)

SL

Here's a nice graphic of cogging torque per radial position.
From:
Torque Ripple of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Torque Motor
Autor: Ing. Jan Moravec
Vedoucí: Doc. Ing. Pavel Souček, DrSc.

bi

Motorflux Torque Curves

It appears the " Torque Curves" provided in Corbin's "Proof-of-Concept" video
follow the theoretical curves given above.

In particular the "Control Motor Input Torque" - attached.

The variance in RPM and Load is also somewhat apparent.

Attached a pdf for easy comparative study as well.

SL

Quote from: SolarLab on March 17, 2023, 08:40:28 PM
Motorflux Torque Curves

It appears the " Torque Curves" provided in Corbin's "Proof-of-Concept" video
follow the theoretical curves given above.

In particular the "Control Motor Input Torque" - attached.

The variance in RPM and Load is also somewhat apparent.

Attached a pdf for easy comparative study as well.

SL

Thanks SL,
I had not previously noticed that first chart in your pdf labelled "Start-up". I find it very interesting. One assumes the torque sensors are recording as the control motor is started. You can clearly see on the lower trace (torque input lb.ft.) a linear ramp up to ~0.5 lb.ft. and then a sudden break downward. I can't read the sample point on the x-axis, but you can see the vertical grid up through the upper trace. That upper trace remains steady right at 6.0 lb.ft. from the start to that grid line at the point (time) which input torque starts to decrease. As the input torque decreases (lower trace), the output torque also decreases (upper trace). While input torque decreases linearly about -0.65 lb.ft., the output torque decreases a bit less, about -0.5 lb.ft. slightly curved. From there on, the traces oscillate as expected of cogging torque, the lower trace around ~0 average and the upper trace around ~5.7 lb.ft. The magnitudes of the torque ripple for both curves appear to be about the same.

Very strange, in my opinion. It leads me to believe that output torque sensor was biased to 6.0 lb.ft. in the static condition prior to and throughout the test. Then that the measured and recorded input and output torques are approximately equal in magnitude.

Just offering my observations. I'll post a copy of your pdf chart for convenience. Also a copy of the cogging torque calculation from the pdf in my prior post.
bi

Good find, and a bad showing for MotoFlux to not immediately declare and explain. Much better would have been to account for it on torque in/out comparisons.

Could a one-way bearing be spring loaded for that torque bias in static state? Depending on understanding of the apparatus, a static base torque might make more sense on the input side.
I can imagine a situation where one might want the output to be pre-loaded and only bleed off output above a threshold. A spring load and resticting dampened tether on the output would deliver torque more gradually to the alternator as theorized above.

Quote from: bistander on March 18, 2023, 01:01:15 AM
It leads me to believe that output torque sensor was biased to 6.0 lb.ft. in the static condition prior to and throughout the test. Then that the measured and recorded input and output torques are approximately equal in magnitude.

That does not look very good granted.  There is a possibility the pressure
on the disc brake hadn't been released prior to the run.  With the cogging
aspect of the output rotor, I can see where the torque meter might start
out with this measurement.  It's a simple testing mistake; I have done it
myself in the dyno lab years ago.

We'll see if there is an answer..( explanation
Edit : removed unrelated

https://youtu.be/SPlsunCiduM

A Russian has built this simple replication...

Quote from: Dog-One on March 18, 2023, 05:07:03 AM
That does not look very good granted.  There is a possibility the pressure
on the disc brake hadn't been released prior to the run.  With the cogging
aspect of the output rotor, I can see where the torque meter might start
out with this measurement.  It's a simple testing mistake; I have done it
myself in the dyno lab years ago.

Could be - but it looks like that's how he set it up (calibrated/levels) - after reviewing
the SENSIT T&M Software Manual it appears thats how to get both data streams
on the same display. Could be wrong however, but it makes sense and is doable that way.

Quote from: hartiberlin on March 18, 2023, 04:31:28 PM
https://youtu.be/SPlsunCiduM (https://youtu.be/SPlsunCiduM)

A Russian has built this simple replication...

Thanks - answers a few more questions! Also looks easy to do... 

This Magnet Flux Motor might be one of easiest and cost effective to do.
No exotic materials and readily available magnets (or configurations).
Think I'll have a more detailed look at it.

My mind keeps being drawn to the (here three) axial phases on the rotor with the uniform drive axle interruptor.

Could these phases, each a jarring motion laid over the other...be replaced by a more continuous pull from incorporation of a spiral on the drive axle and/or the rotor? On the soft iron drive axle that's just a machining job, but my knowledge of magnetism combined with #D thinking is well outside the comfort zone. You understand what I'm getting at, right? Might such a smoothing effort be viable, or is the clear jump from one pole to the next, albeit with the rotor as a flywheel, an absolute must have?

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 18, 2023, 08:41:03 PM
My mind keeps being drawn to the (here three) axial phases on the rotor with the uniform drive axle interruptor.

Could these phases, each a jarring motion laid over the other...be replaced by a more continuous pull from incorporation of a spiral on the drive axle and/or the rotor? On the soft iron drive axle that's just a machining job, but my knowledge of magnetism combined with #D thinking is well outside the comfort zone. You understand what I'm getting at, right? Might such a smoothing effort be viable, or is the clear jump from one pole to the next, albeit with the rotor as a flywheel, an absolute must have?

Hi Cloxxki,
Jarring motion is cogging in this context. It is clearer for everyone to use appropriate terminology. And cogging is the only thing there is in Corbin's apparatus. He claims he sees free energy from it. I attempt to find how and am not interested in changing or improving the mechanism. If the discussion gives you ideas to make a device, great, but, in my opinion, that needs its own topic or thread.

With regards to the use of parallel cogging, which I see as the three adjacent stators, the overlap/interaction may not be essential to the basic energy introduction, if there is such. After all, he started with a single stator, then double and then the triple. I think the analysis most beneficial would include the center radial director, magnet arm rotor and a single tooth stator. With that develop a torque vs angular position graph using FEMM and system analysis. Making a visual aid like these. From that, it would facilitate combining the action of multiple teeth in series (around the circumference) or/and in parallel (adjacent stators).

Respectfully,
bi

Ref. reply #222

The magnetic field analysis shows nothing that changes when the center magnet is rotated.
It looks like you can use regular rubber instead of a magnet. This is an ordinary clutch that is used in e.g. stepper motors.

Thank you r2fpl,
In line with my reasoning.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 18, 2023, 09:34:24 PM
Hi Cloxxki,
Jarring motion is cogging in this context. It is clearer for everyone to use appropriate terminology. And cogging is the only thing there is in Corbin's apparatus. He claims he sees free energy from it. I attempt to find how and am not interested in changing or improving the mechanism. If the discussion gives you ideas to make a device, great, but, in my opinion, that needs its own topic or thread.

With regards to the use of parallel cogging, which I see as the three adjacent stators, the overlap/interaction may not be essential to the basic energy introduction, if there is such. After all, he started with a single stator, then double and then the triple. I think the analysis most beneficial would include the center radial director, magnet arm rotor and a single tooth stator. With that develop a torque vs angular position graph using FEMM and system analysis. Making a visual aid like these. From that, it would facilitate combining the action of multiple teeth in series (around the circumference) or/and in parallel (adjacent stators).

Respectfully,
bi

Ref. reply #222

It makes sense to try to tr and replicate what Corbin claims to produce excess torque.
Are there no ways to collaborate with the man himself, or is he jut on the usual quest for a trillion dollar payout before he does a further grain of sharing or work? Investor that hide "a secret ingredient" are part of a 100% unbroken tradition of keeping technologies from the public. Have replicators ever managed to overcome such an inventor-introduced hurdle to discovery?

The "proof of concept" verbage and the high flat line torque reader seem to lower the odds of there being a runner in there at this time already?
The Russian poster that did the one over-cog setup must be commended. I wonder whether he'll feel intrigued enough to make it a 360º setup from the same materials and dimensions.
I commend all replicators, I appreciate your skill and patience :)

EDITED TO ADD: On YouTube, "tech mech" says he won't scale up his replication unless he were to be paid very well. He sees no overunity.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 19, 2023, 04:12:17 AM

It looks like you can use regular rubber instead of a magnet.

Quote from: bistander on March 19, 2023, 04:27:43 AM
Thank you r2fpl,
In line with my reasoning.
bi

А я и говорю об этом.Я на Веслиса ставлю. :D
Where is the prize money?

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 19, 2023, 07:45:16 AM
It makes sense to try to tr and replicate what Corbin claims to produce excess torque.
Are there no ways to collaborate with the man himself, or is he jut on the usual quest for a trillion dollar payout before he does a further grain of sharing or work? Investor that hide "a secret ingredient" are part of a 100% unbroken tradition of keeping technologies from the public. Have replicators ever managed to overcome such an inventor-introduced hurdle to discovery?

The "proof of concept" verbage and the high flat line torque reader seem to lower the odds of there being a runner in there at this time already?
The Russian poster that did the one over-cog setup must be commended. I wonder whether he'll feel intrigued enough to make it a 360º setup from the same materials and dimensions.
I commend all replicators, I appreciate your skill and patience :)

EDITED TO ADD: On YouTube, "tech mech" says he won't scale up his replication unless he were to be paid very well. He sees no overunity.

Hi Cloxxki,
I am familiar with accomplishments of Mike Corbin and respect his efforts in electric land speed racing and commercial ventures of manufacturing/marketing. Electric motorcycle Bonneville mile record held for decade or more around 160-170 mph (back with Pb-Acid batteries) and the Electric Sparrow, 3-wheel highway capable car sold to public having moderate success mostly in California. I've never met him. Obviously he's still in business, motorcycle seats. I think he operates a place renting space for small businesses and workshops. I think he is approachable. Go for it. I'm retired.

I was surprised to see him behind this apparatus because it strikes me as a loser. If you haven't noticed, I am skeptical of such claims and look for proof or reasonable explanation of principle. I'm certainly willing to give people a chance, and actually help efforts to demonstrate and/or develop reasonable approaches.

Who is tech mech?
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 19, 2023, 09:31:56 AM
Hi Cloxxki,
I am familiar with accomplishments of Mike Corbin and respect his efforts in electric land speed racing and commercial ventures of manufacturing/marketing. Electric motorcycle Bonneville mile record held for decade or more around 160-170 mph (back with Pb-Acid batteries) and the Electric Sparrow, 3-wheel highway capable car sold to public having moderate success mostly in California. I've never met him. Obviously he's still in business, motorcycle seats. I think he operates a place renting space for small businesses and workshops. I think he is approachable. Go for it. I'm retired.

I was surprised to see him behind this apparatus because it strikes me as a loser. If you haven't noticed, I am skeptical of such claims and look for proof or reasonable explanation of principle. I'm certainly willing to give people a chance, and actually help efforts to demonstrate and/or develop reasonable approaches.

Who is tech mech?
bi

Tech mech is on YouTube and only has a single short video showing the MotoFlux cogging between two poles in a simplified demontration of the mechanism.

I'm gullible like a child at first, with most any notion. Then I get excited, want to learn more and more, and then I end up testing my belief. Most things then get re-assessed or discarded. But at least my new position then gets to be based on insights both for and against.

Which key aspects of the apparatus make it strike as a loser in your estimation or intuition?
It sure seems odd for a man of some reputation to go public with an OU claim if not fully substantiated. But here we are, not seeing a runner yet.

See reply #2. With a clutch of sorts. I see nothing more there.
bi

Ok guys, i remade my video with (i hope) better audio


Also changed the drive magnet to something easier for me to demo


https://youtu.be/0KqaxvxDKKE (https://youtu.be/0KqaxvxDKKE)


You can throw this interaction into your FEMM simulator
or build something on your own


The math checks out, and this works in real world examples


That being said:


I don't see how this is any different than a mechanical drive mechanism.
Take for instance a linear spin drive: where you apply a mechanical force in one direction
and it translates to a high rpm spin in a single plane


This was used in devices like toy helicopters with a squeeze trigger to launch them
Or some types of pedal-sewing machines, etc.


There IS a mechanical leverage


I am not entirely certain wether or not this amounts to a gain in total energy.
At this point i have not seen evidence of such.

Planetary gears have shown to be extremely efficient,
Which is why they are used by people like NASA and robotics engineers


So the research may have valid applications


As per the "OU" claim,
I'll wait for a working replication

If its main rival were to be the planetary gearset, what applications might the cogging NOT be a deal breaker for, considering the minute losses to be overcome? :)

Brain fart: With the system in repelling mode, the rotors seeks an equilibrium between stator poles, correct? Elimitating the closer proximity cogging, I could see that being advantageous. Less sure whether it's workable...

The stable detent is when magnet is aligned with tooth. See the graphic attached to my post. Position C, figure 6.
bi

Excuse my reply if I am wrong.  I usually won't reply if I feel it is out of my lane, which this is.  But I have to ask..

It appears to me like the machine builds great torque only when it jumps the gap.  But then there is the opposite reaction when the flux path aligns again which results in little to no torque. So the torque on the output is not constant. It has peaks and valleys.

I see this somewhat similar to the "twist drive".  In that case, COP 2:1 is created- but COP 1:2 when resetting the device.

Here is the manual for the FUTEK IHH500. https://media.futek.com/content/futek/files/pdf/Manuals_and_Technical_Documents/IHH500Manual.pdf

Seems this advanced torque meter can be programmed to display any result we desire.  And we can not see the settings, The demo does not show wattage in / out comparison, does not show it looped, etc.

I remain doubtful till I see more.

Quote from: floodrod on March 20, 2023, 07:16:00 AM
Excuse my reply if I am wrong.  I usually won't reply if I feel it is out of my lane, which this is.  But I have to ask..

It appears to me like the machine builds great torque only when it jumps the gap.  But then there is the opposite reaction when the flux path aligns again which results in little to no torque. So the torque on the output is not constant. It has peaks and valleys.

I see this somewhat similar to the "twist drive".  In that case, COP 2:1 is created- but COP 1:2 when resetting the device.

I remain doubtful till I see more.

Your restraint is far greater than mine :-D
Wise to remain doubtful, the more we notice, the less convincing a case it appears to become.

I imagine the one-way bearing's job might be to prevent the COP 1:2 phase on one side of either first or second stage?
Or would that serve another, unconnected role?

Quote from: Mem on March 14, 2023, 03:49:11 AM
Here is a practical design to test this MotoFlux idea.
The first stage (the little) shaft has to have one-way bearings to prevent the kickback.

Apologies if this has been discussed, but would the second stage (rotor) never get into a situation of risking kickback? A one-way bearing on that mounted to the stator, couldn't hurt?
Alternatively I could imagine a flywheel mounted via one-way bearing to either interruptor, rotor, or both. The flywheel could be driven by spring load to keep pace with its associated member, and then more or less lock in that speed for it member through the one-way bearing. It's a different things to be prevened negative rotation, and to run into a hard flywheel connection when slowing down. Intuitively I'd want to try and keep the accelerated positive rotation mostly disconnected from the flywheel, although input smoothening may well turn out advantageous anyway.

Quote from: floodrod on March 20, 2023, 07:16:00 AM


I see this somewhat similar to the "twist drive".  In that case, COP 2:1 is created- but COP 1:2 when resetting the device.



I remain doubtful till I see more.

If we install another such device on the same shaft, but with a shift by some angle.
So that when there is a large torque on one device, and a small one on the other.
And they worked the both  on one common output shaft.
Then it will all just turn into a device that transmits rotation one to one? :D

Quote from: kolbacict on March 20, 2023, 08:36:49 AM
If we install another such device on the same shaft, but with a shift by some angle.
So that when there is a large torque on one device, and a small one on the other.
And they worked the both  on one common output shaft.
Then it will all just turn into a device that transmits rotation one to one? :D

The "proof of" concept is presented with 3 phases of stators. Isn't that largely the same thing?
Would you feel it would be better to have two, perfectly out of phase?
I'm not sure the half phases are perfectly symmetrical, else that would look really well.

Quote from: kolbacict on March 20, 2023, 08:36:49 AM
If we install another such device on the same shaft, but with a shift by some angle.
So that when there is a large torque on one device, and a small one on the other.
And they worked the both  on one common output shaft.
Then it will all just turn into a device that transmits rotation one to one? :D

Basically yes as I see it.

Take a magnet rotor. Put another outside magnet close to the rotor. You created a situation where you get more torque when it repels the rotor, less torque as it's approaching the repelling field.

Now put two magnets on either side of the rotor. They pretty much cancel each other out if position perfectly.

 Hi !   Mike Corbin came up with a very interesting idea.   One can imagine such a legend - Edward Leedskalnin woke up William J Putt and William J Putt woke up Mike Corbin   :) :)   .  A common phenomenon for them is the interaction and change in the properties of magnets in various ways.
           I see a high probability that this device is a workable energy multiplier.

          Perhaps I will have time to adapt this technology for a solid state device. It is also desirable to adapt this technology for easily accessible parts.
         And after these works, I plan to publish everything in the public domain   :) .

                                          I hope that Big Oil trolls won't send me a lot of messages with ridiculous offers again   :)  :)  :)  ;D


                              Best regards Boris

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 05:46:56 AM
Hi !   Mike Corbin came up with a very interesting idea.   One can imagine such a legend - Edward Leedskalnin woke up William J Putt and William J Putt woke up Mike Corbin   :) :)   .  A common phenomenon for them is the interaction and change in the properties of magnets in various ways.
           I see a high probability that this device is a workable energy multiplier.

          Perhaps I will have time to adapt this technology for a solid state device. It is also desirable to adapt this technology for easily accessible parts.
         And after these works, I plan to publish everything in the public domain   :) .

                                          I hope that Big Oil trolls won't send me a lot of messages with ridiculous offers again   :) :) :) ;D


                              Best regards Boris

When you manage a solid state adaptation with good energy output per kg that makes energy cheap on large and small scale, I'll be petittioning to have your name to be put on high profile streets, parks and cities :-)

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 21, 2023, 06:59:44 AM
When you manage a solid state adaptation with good energy output per kg that makes energy cheap on large and small scale, I'll be petittioning to have your name to be put on high profile streets, parks and cities :-)

Before the publication of many technologies  I try to carefully check for effectiveness. So that this technology cannot be used on flying drones with a range of over 1000 miles.   :)  :)
            But it happens that errors occur, especially under the influence of alcohol and other factors ......  :)   :)   :)   ;D

You are naive, just an example of modern history from free energy generators: Muammer Yulduz Motor   https://overunity.com/8870/muammer-yildiz-magnet-motor/

It started in 2010. In addition, the author already had a company in Turkey, with a line of magnetic generators. In 2019, we tried with an Italian partner to bring it into the information field.

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2020/03/blog-post.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp


After a probably very rude explanation in 2019, the author waited for permission and after the earthquake, the site simply disappeared. http://hmsbturk.com/tr/urunler/
These are bare facts, fully proven technology! And where are the laurels and named streets?

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 21, 2023, 11:47:07 AM
You are naive, just an example of modern history from free energy generators: Muammer Yulduz Motor   https://overunity.com/8870/muammer-yildiz-magnet-motor/ (https://overunity.com/8870/muammer-yildiz-magnet-motor/)

It started in 2010. In addition, the author already had a company in Turkey, with a line of magnetic generators. In 2019, we tried with an Italian partner to bring it into the information field.

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2020/03/blog-post.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp (https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2020/03/blog-post.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp)


After a probably very rude explanation in 2019, the author waited for permission and after the earthquake, the site simply disappeared. http://hmsbturk.com/tr/urunler/ (http://hmsbturk.com/tr/urunler/)
These are bare facts, fully proven technology! And where are the laurels and named streets?

Was anyone able to buy a runner from him? It would not depend on one author then, surely...
Facts and proof are on a sliding scale in this business. Most inventors are the key obstruction for their invention to be known and understood, let alone enjoyed by anyone else.
Once you have a runner, scale it down and distribute models with full drawings.

        And let me tell you my vision of the processes in Mike Corbin's device .

                           Since the Director is made of a material with high magnetic permeability, its rotation changes the force of interaction between the two compound rotor magnets. Everyone is well aware that when two magnets approach with opposite poles, they turn into one magnet. There is also a reverse process. At the same time, the strength of the poles of these magnets changes to a large extent.There are also many intermediate positions.
                                                  Thus, the rotation of the director in the center of the rotor significantly changes the strength of the magnetic field at the two ends of the rotor.
                                           
                                          I want to see the continuation of this story, otherwise I'm bored alone writing fairy tales .....   :)   :)

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 02:12:35 PM
        And let me tell you my vision of the processes in Mike Corbin's device .

                           Since the Director is made of a material with high magnetic permeability, its rotation changes the force of interaction between the two compound rotor magnets. Everyone is well aware that when two magnets approach with opposite poles, they turn into one magnet. There is also a reverse process. At the same time, the strength of the poles of these magnets changes to a large extent.There are also many intermediate positions.
                                                  Thus, the rotation of the director in the center of the rotor significantly changes the strength of the magnetic field at the two ends of the rotor.
                                           
                                          I want to see the continuation of this story, otherwise I'm bored alone writing fairy tales .....   :)   :)

Hi BorisKrabow,
Refer to reply #233. Image attached below for convenience.

This shows the flux in the outer gaps remaining the same as center director is displaced. I suspect that there would actually be some distortion of the field in the magnet/stator tooth air gap because the overall circuit reluctance changes and because the rotor magnet will displace relative to the stator tooth (which is not obvious in the FEMM). I think a more detailed analysis is in order. The rotor does move from tooth to tooth, so there is more to it. This is a first step, and nicely done.

Previously, a member commented he didn't see how torque on the director could cause the rotor to move past the stator tooth (stable detent). With equal distance and area gaps, that may well be the case. This FEMM supports that. My contention, since there is actual rotation, that there is another factor at play, for instance, the outer air gaps made longer than inner gaps at the director.

Also, in regards to your remark about breaking a magnet in half, good thought process. I suggest you take it a step further. I'll post a link to a pull force calculator. Run through a simple quick exercise. Choose a material, diameter, thickness, etc and find the force. Repeat with everything the same except half the thickness. How does resultant force compare?
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp
bi

Hi!
                   For me, this is big news. I did not know that everyone here believes in simulations. Apparently no one now measures magnetic fields with instruments. This model, like many others, does not even closely show the ongoing processes.
     
But that's not a problem, just copy the device like Mike Corbin suggests and you'll be fine.

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 08:26:08 PM
Hi!
                   For me, this is big news. I did not know that everyone here believes in simulations. Apparently no one now measures magnetic fields with instruments. This model, like many others, does not even closely show the ongoing processes.
     
But that's not a problem, just copy the device like Mike Corbin suggests and you'll be fine.

So, show us your measurements.
bi

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 08:26:08 PM
Hi!
                   For me, this is big news. I did not know that everyone here believes in simulations. Apparently no one now measures magnetic fields with instruments. This model, like many others, does not even closely show the ongoing processes.
     
But that's not a problem, just copy the device like Mike Corbin suggests and you'll be fine.

Hi BorisKrabow,

Of course there are a number of ways to develop the Corbin patent and just copying the device
is probably one of them. The problem is; it's quite difficult to simply copy the device - not enough
information is given in the patent or on the web side pages (at least I can't find enough there to
even attempt a "just copy the device" starting point.

However, I never approach a design from that prospective anyway since its too expensive, time
consuming and risk prone. A good professional CAE Analysis and Simulation is much less risky IMHO.

So anyway, I have taken the concept and began developing it using Solidworks EMworks 3D CAE
simulator and so far found considerable merrit in Corbin's concepts; this includes reviewing the
simulated torques and forces for the various elements, including different types of magnets, thru
it's various operational angles and interactions.

Still a work-in-progress but it appears, initially at least, the invention is viable and will function close
to what is claimed. Since the device is relatively simple and I have a modern CNC machine shop,
a replication will likely be attempted (after the in-process Holcomb LinGen and, next-in-que, Perendev
designs are finished).

Note that I don't find any good reasons to publish much on the open forums anymore for obvious
reasons... however I'll keep the group informed as things progress [but it won't be anywhere near as
detailed as the LinGen was].

SL

Quote from: bistander on March 21, 2023, 09:03:51 PM
So, show us your measurements.
bi

Hi!   This video is from another thread, this device showed the reversal of Lenz's Law.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANXhrdRNrss              but even here it is clear that the stronger the magnets interact, the weaker the middle and the stronger the field at the ends. This happens until the two magnets merge into one magnet. And this composite magnet has a field in the center equal to Zero.

          Perhaps I am far away and cut off from the generally accepted opinion, but it is already doubtful to draw lines of force through a magnetically hard material on a par with a magnetically soft material.

         here another strange phenomenon can occur, at a certain percentage of interaction between the magnets, a rapid restructuring of the properties of the magnets can occur. In this case, the connection between the rotor and the stator can be momentarily lost :). There are many such little-studied phenomena and it is impossible to model them.

              first you need to model without a stator, the overall picture and understanding will be clearer.

          From all that I have said, a simple conclusion is that we need an exact replication of this device.
        These are not all phenomena, I will leave a couple of surprises for myself for now ........ :)  :)


                         Boris
           

               

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM
                     Hi!   This video is from another thread, this device showed the reversal of Lenz's Law.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANXhrdRNrss (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANXhrdRNrss)              but even here it is clear that the stronger the magnets interact, the weaker the middle and the stronger the field at the ends. This happens until the two magnets merge into one magnet. And this composite magnet has a field in the center equal to Zero.

          Perhaps I am far away and cut off from the generally accepted opinion, but it is already doubtful to draw lines of force through a magnetically hard material on a par with a magnetically soft material.

         here another strange phenomenon can occur, at a certain percentage of interaction between the magnets, a rapid restructuring of the properties of the magnets can occur. In this case, the connection between the rotor and the stator can be momentarily lost :) . There are many such little-studied phenomena and it is impossible to model them.

              first you need to model without a stator, the overall picture and understanding will be clearer.

          From all that I have said, a simple conclusion is that we need an exact replication of this device.
        These are not all phenomena, I will leave a couple of surprises for myself for now ........ :) :)


                         Boris
           

             

Hey Boris - take a break until you have really figured it out - just IMHO!

SL

Quote from: SolarLab on March 22, 2023, 01:37:30 AM
Hey Boris - take a break until you have really figured it out - just IMHO!

SL

          I agree with you my measurement methods are inaccurate, the knowledge is not deep enough and often there is too much humor in my posts . I'm trying to share my observations and suggestions for those who want to use it. Of course, it should be clear to all readers that any new phenomenon or statement must pass several independent tests.
                                     It was an attempt to be self-critical, to conduct introspection and explain to everyone on the forum my style of work. No offense   :)

More contributions from both of you would be appreciated. Purpose of forums, is it not?
bi

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM
                     ...
              first you need to model without a stator, the overall picture and understanding will be clearer.
...

This is nothing more than a magnetic shaft coupling. It is well understood.
Outer stator and rotating magnets are simple cogging. Again, well understood.
Combination is unseen before. Attempting to understand details of interaction.
Your help/insights are appreciated.
Regards
bi

Quote from: SolarLab on March 22, 2023, 01:37:30 AM
Hey Boris - take a break until you have really figured it out - just IMHO!

SL

SL's opinion, not mine.
bi

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM
                     Hi!   This video is from another thread, this device showed the reversal of Lenz's Law.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANXhrdRNrss     

I don't see connection to Lenz, but off-topic, IMO.

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM

        but even here it is clear that the stronger the magnets interact, the weaker the middle and the stronger the field at the ends. This happens until the two magnets merge into one magnet. And this composite magnet has a field in the center equal to Zero.

Agree

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM

          Perhaps I am far away and cut off from the generally accepted opinion, but it is already doubtful to draw lines of force through a magnetically hard material on a par with a magnetically soft material.

Maybe, but it's the lines outside that we deal with. Current modeling techniques seem to work quite well.

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM

         here another strange phenomenon can occur, at a certain percentage of interaction between the magnets, a rapid restructuring of the properties of the magnets can occur. In this case, the connection between the rotor and the stator can be momentarily lost :).

Is this different from cogging?

Quote from: BorisKrabow on March 21, 2023, 10:47:53 PM

There are many such little-studied phenomena and it is impossible to model them.

              first you need to model without a stator, the overall picture and understanding will be clearer.

          From all that I have said, a simple conclusion is that we need an exact replication of this device.
        These are not all phenomena, I will leave a couple of surprises for myself for now ........ :)  :)


                         Boris
           

             

Yes, I would love to see accurate replication, or better tests of original. Until then, research and discussion will suffice.
Regards
bi

Why would the field of the magnet N change from 1 to 2? N is a magnet that is very strongly attracted to the stator steel. You can only use force to move it to position 2. You can use an electric field or move it manually, e.g. by pulling it. This is what the magnet inside does.
All I see here is a jump torque and nothing else. It looks nice but when we make it, for example, generators, there will be no profit because there will be no jump! only movement. Why ? because we have reverse currents that inhibit the flashover.
Maybe I'm wrong, but the guy built something that he thought would work. If it worked, there would be a queue of applicants for its patent.

Are you able to calculate and display force at each increment between position 1 and position 2? While all the time the center director is changing its gaps affecting total circuit reluctance? Then we can get somewhere but still need to enter dynamics with moments of inertia.

But your question. Static picture at 2 is same as at 1, if director is in relative same position.

My take.
bi

Quote from: Cloxxki on March 20, 2023, 08:35:12 AM
Your restraint is far greater than mine :-D
Wise to remain doubtful, the more we notice, the less convincing a case it appears to become.

I imagine the one-way bearing's job might be to prevent the COP 1:2 phase on one side of either first or second stage?
Or would that serve another, unconnected role?
Apologies if this has been discussed, but would the second stage (rotor) never get into a situation of risking kickback? A one-way bearing on that mounted to the stator, couldn't hurt?
Alternatively I could imagine a flywheel mounted via one-way bearing to either interruptor, rotor, or both. The flywheel could be driven by spring load to keep pace with its associated member, and then more or less lock in that speed for it member through the one-way bearing. It's a different things to be prevened negative rotation, and to run into a hard flywheel connection when slowing down. Intuitively I'd want to try and keep the accelerated positive rotation mostly disconnected from the flywheel, although input smoothening may well turn out advantageous anyway.

With the much larger momentum on the second shaft i do not think thats a concern.


As for the difference between a mechanical planetary gear and this magnetic analogy
theres really not much to contrast. The physics are almost identical save swapping mechanical friction for the magnetic gearing interface.
The magnitude of either is solely dependent upon the quality of construction.


There are some limitations I notice at small device sizes or large magnetic 'gear tooth counts'
There is an unavoidable field blending that will limit how close the components can be to one another.


more teeth will mean larger machine diameter's or possibly stacking them along the shaft to keep fields apart.


There is an acceleration time period; where energy is being consumed by the primary circuit
but the secondary rotor has not yet reached generation speeds
This time period may be a key point for analysis.


Also what is not known clearly is
the affect of drawing current from the output on secondary rotor RPM
Also, probably key information

Quote from: bistander on March 22, 2023, 05:37:13 AM
Are you able to calculate and display force at each increment between position 1 and position 2? While all the time the center director is changing its gaps affecting total circuit reluctance? Then we can get somewhere but still need to enter dynamics with moments of inertia.

But your question. Static picture at 2 is same as at 1, if director is in relative same position.

My take.
bi

The question is, is it supposed to work with or without a load? This is essential.
If without then the torque of inertia is fine as long as the revs aren't too high. If with a load, for example with a coil, there will be no torque at all.
Have you seen a magnet fall onto a solid block of copper? here is the answer.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 22, 2023, 07:04:40 AM
The question is, is it supposed to work with or without a load? This is essential.

What is the point? Presumably in the video, Mike starts it without a load. At least there is approximately zero average torque on the input torque sensor however with rotation, so, to me, that is a no-load running condition. Then Mike says he applied pressure with the caliper imparting a load via the disc brake. This shows on both input and output torque sensors. That is a loaded running condition.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 22, 2023, 07:04:40 AM
If without then the torque of inertia is fine as long as the revs aren't too high.

Sorry, but I don't understand you. Inertia of each moving component as well as on input and output, influence system behavior at each velocity change, which happens continually in a cogging system when it's rotating.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 22, 2023, 07:04:40 AM
If with a load, for example with a coil, there will be no torque at all.

Again I don't understand. There are no coils.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 22, 2023, 07:04:40 AM
Have you seen a magnet fall onto a solid block of copper? here is the answer.

Sure, I've seen that video. Also done it. Where is copper in this system?
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 22, 2023, 07:29:55 AM
What is the point? Presumably in the video, Mike starts it without a load. At least there is approximately zero average torque on the input torque sensor however with rotation, so, to me, that is a no-load running condition. Then Mike says he applied pressure with the caliper imparting a load via the disc brake. This shows on both input and output torque sensors. That is a loaded running condition.

Sorry, but I don't understand you. Inertia of each moving component as well as on input and output, influence system behavior at each velocity change, which happens practically continuously in a cogging system when it's rotating.

Again I don't understand. There are no coils.

Sure, I've seen that video. Also done it. Where is copper in this system?
bi

I just don't see anything to increase power here. That's all.
Measurements may be incorrect because we do not know how the torque impulse affects the measurement. This is just an example.

If this device is to be useful, you need to find a use for it, because as a generator it is unlikely to work, but I can be wrong of course.

Quote from: r2fpl on March 22, 2023, 07:37:02 AM
I just don't see anything to increase power here. That's all.
Measurements may be incorrect because we do not know how the torque impulse affects the measurement. This is just an example.

If this device is to be useful, you need to find a use for it, because as a generator it is unlikely to work, but I can be wrong of course.

I never said it was useful. I'm just trying to figure out why Mike says it is. I thank you for your help.
bi

Quote from: bistander on March 22, 2023, 07:50:03 AM
I never said it was useful. I'm just trying to figure out why Mike says it is. I thank you for your help.
bi

Everyone has an opinion about it. I just saw a lot of devices where someone claims that it works but only works for him. Maybe there is something I don't see or understand.
:D

https://www.motofluxpower.com/pudding/
https://www.motofluxpower.com/its-official/

In addition to the actual materials on the site and on their YouTube channel, is there any data from third-party observers?

Hi all,
I ran across a saved paper on cogging which I thought was quite well presented. It's based on a motor having surface mounted PMs spanning multiple teeth, but does show the effects of dimensional and other variations. Use or lose.
bi

...

I suspect there will be noise induced in the coils from cogging of the rotor and also from armature reaction.
How is this relevant to topic?
bi

...

No need for sorry. Just asking. So you're looking for energy in cogging?
bi

Well guys they appear to be right.


<1/4 ft lb = > 5 ft lbs


https://youtu.be/woejdNvCZpc (https://youtu.be/woejdNvCZpc)


Need some quantitative testing with accurate measurements
But at face value it seems to check out

Out of curiosity i tried to belt a motor to the upper disk
Hoping to generate measurable current


To my surprise; the spinning magnetic field tries to drive the small dc motor
(opposed at first but when i flipped it over tried to drive the disk that was powering it!)


Not sure where to go with that. To remove the situation i suppose i could find a longer belt

Quote from: sm0ky2 on March 24, 2023, 06:26:16 PM
Out of curiosity i tried to belt a motor to the upper disk
Hoping to generate measurable current


To my surprise; the spinning magnetic field tries to drive the small dc motor
(opposed at first but when i flipped it over tried to drive the disk that was powering it!)


Not sure where to go with that. To remove the situation i suppose i could find a longer belt

could the prime mover be a pulse motor and do away with the belt?

I don't see why not


So long as the pulse motor produces enough impulse torque to overcome the magnetic compression necessary to overcome the moment of inertia of the secondary rotor mass.


Also theres a number that seems consistent regardless of the size or proportionality of the device
I don't know what it means but:


Pi * r^2 = 1/2 pi having to do with torque amplification
(note: these tests were done with a diametric constraint of the gap size:[/size]
Total Gap (left + right) ~= diameter of inner drive magnet assembly)[/size]
i left just enough clearance for rotation.[/size]

[/size]

Its slightly above 10:1 torque amplification
Adding more weight doesn't increase or decrease this value


Although adding more devices on a common shaft like the inventor might

Quote from: sm0ky2 on March 25, 2023, 10:59:28 PM
Its slightly above 10:1 torque amplification
Adding more weight doesn't increase or decrease this value


Although adding more devices on a common shaft like the inventor might

Interesting, thanks for the video too. It got me hunting around for bearings.

Quote from: sm0ky2 on March 25, 2023, 10:59:28 PM
Its slightly above 10:1 torque amplification
Adding more weight doesn't increase or decrease this value


Although adding more devices on a common shaft like the inventor might

Did you deduct the 6 lb-ft baseline for that calculation? :)
Yeah, I'm curious what that's about.
With a one-way bearing involved, I can see how on some point there will always be "torque".

Even in a zero rpm situation, you can just attach levers on both input and output shaft, say 1 foot each, and see whether the 1 or 10 pounds on the input can actually lift a multiple attached to a same length lever, while keeping an eye on level angle, start with 180º, input top right, output top left. It's NOT that hard, if the torque measurements are representative.
That Corbin setup BEGS for simple lever work. He can machine that proof of concept apparatus, he can fabricate levers to attach weights to.
If a level isn't enough, a simply pulley on each side is even better. Pulley, cord, weight, input and output.
People throw around "oooh you need to be a physicist to be able to say anything about a magnet motor", but come on, I only have highschool and all I'm doing is actually remembering the basic stuff.
Inventors are very good at finding ONE AND ONLY WAY to extract "anomalous" measurements, and they'll stick to it. I truly hope we'll soon hear that Corbin's setup is able to produce excess work in low rpm, even useful power at whatever rpm the setup can handle now.
All the focus on torque though (he's a car guy, so perhaps we need to give him a pass for that?), so that 6 lb-ft flat line is worrisome.
I'll happily take COP=5. Let a 1 pound weight on a pulley lift a 5 pound weight on the other side, on a same size pulley for the same vertical distance. With 5, we can work, 10 would be amazing.

Quote from: sm0ky2 on March 25, 2023, 10:59:28 PM
Its slightly above 10:1 torque amplification
Adding more weight doesn't increase or decrease this value


Although adding more devices on a common shaft like the inventor might

Hi sm0ky2

That should teach people to build instead of speculate!

With a double device like your build, using the first secondary rotor to drive a second prime mover, the second secondary rotor would produce ~100 times the first primary mover's torque?

I wonder if the second device would need magnets 10 times more powerful.

Quote from: Cadman on March 26, 2023, 07:21:19 AM
Hi sm0ky2

That should teach people to build instead of speculate!

With a double device like your build, using the first secondary rotor to drive a second prime mover, the second secondary rotor would produce ~100 times the first primary mover's torque?

I wonder if the second device would need magnets 10 times more powerful.

if you have 2 idential systems, and the second can still offer a 10x, then you might as well start giving the first device a 10x larger input, as the output is worth it. Half the building cost for 90% the output, a much better deal.

No inventor I've seen has done this, make two devices, one powering the other. In needs to be done, though.
An input multiplying device once working (which is the main hickup of course) will have an optimal input for greatest power multiple, and likely a higher input power (for instance in the form of rpm and resistance settings) that will product the greatest net overunity in Watts. The latter is more important, as those are the Watts get get for the kgs (cost) of the machine.
If you want more gains, you tend to need a bigger machine, or at least rated for such.

Once a few devices are linked in series at optimal net gain, the amount of output power that needs to be re-routed to the primal input become a very small percentage. You get a pyramid of devices, small to large and only the biggest one in is charge of re-routing anything to loop. Most of the output is available to exit the system.

Sorry, I was being facetious. I don't understand where the gain is observed.

Quote from: Cadman on March 26, 2023, 01:35:44 PM
Sorry, I was being facetious. I don't understand where the gain is observed.

??? :o ;D

Quote from: Cadman on March 26, 2023, 01:35:44 PM
Sorry, I was being facetious. I don't understand where the gain is observed.

I'm not prepared to call it a "gain" yet. Need more data


There is definitely an increase in torque
But i can do that with a fat kid on the other end of a See-Saw


What i see is 'magnetic leverage'


To quantify an energy gain we need measurements

Quote from: sm0ky2 on March 27, 2023, 05:32:37 AM
...
What i see is 'magnetic leverage'
...

Leverage is good...

Can you answer this please, if you were to tape a couple of wood sticks across all 3 sets of magnets, tying them rigidly together, would it take more effort to turn the crank than it does in your video?

Quote from: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 08:00:19 AM
Leverage is good...

Can you answer this please, if you were to tape a couple of wood sticks across all 3 sets of magnets, tying them rigidly together, would it take more effort to turn the crank than it does in your video?

That was the first test:
I belted the upper (weighted disk) and spun that as a base reference.
Then again using only the lower disk with the center magnets.
To see how much force it takes irrespective of the magnetic gear


Spinning the weights directly with the belt is rather difficult and stretches the belt
its this elasticity constant that indicated i should continue the tests
Had there been no leverage, the belt would have stretched in the geared tests


Also its very noticeable. Build one


Note: i did not use any "1 way bearings"
If you need one for your build, we may be able to harvest them from rear bicycle wheels?

What im thinking is happening here, as we apply force to the gear magnet,
the gap between the fields closes, pushing both magnets with the strength of the compressed magnetic field
This is not the same as physically pushing an object:


i can set up some linear magnetic sliders to demonstrate this if needed
or move a magnet using a solenoid (field interaction)
Then again Physically attached to the solenoid piston


We know from hydraulic control solenoids that the field has more leverage than our physically pushing a rod
The "leverage" in the electrical case, is synonymous to a hydraulic fluid system.
This is understood, and can be dismissed. Instead we measure energy into the solenoid
and output force on the magnetic assembly.
(attached and unattached, taking careful note of the distance moved)

Note: a basic set-up of the above experiment will require moving the measurement point further away during the magnetic test to account for the gap between the assemblies. Failure to account for this applies incorrect pressure onto the measuring device and will change the results.


Also important to understand is the magnetic compression ratio between the magnetic pair.
This won't make or break the effect, but will change precise force measurements between different magnetic pairs. Meaning ratios should be used to represent input vs output, rather than sharing explicit newton measurements for every unique build. (which would just serve to convolute our understanding)

Thanks for the information! Much appreciated.

Thanks to your input here I am contemplating a build. I did notice in the video that your magnets were repelling. The patent drawing field lines indicate attraction, but skimming the patent, nowhere are the poles for the center magnet specified.

Would I be correct in assuming your magnets are all ceramic and not neos? I have neos on hand but no ceramics.

Quote from: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 11:44:49 AM
Thanks for the information! Much appreciated.

Thanks to your input here I am contemplating a build. I did notice in the video that your magnets were repelling. The patent drawing field lines indicate attraction, but skimming the patent, nowhere are the poles for the center magnet specified.

Would I be correct in assuming your magnets are all ceramic and not neos? I have neos on hand but no ceramics.

Hi Cadman,
That's because there is no center magnet in Mike's device. He clearly says a number of times that the radial director is steel. As such, it is always attracted to the magnets on the rotor. No repulsion there, or anywhere else in this device.
bi

Quote from: Cadman on March 27, 2023, 11:44:49 AM
Thanks for the information! Much appreciated.

Thanks to your input here I am contemplating a build. I did notice in the video that your magnets were repelling. The patent drawing field lines indicate attraction, but skimming the patent, nowhere are the poles for the center magnet specified.

Would I be correct in assuming your magnets are all ceramic and not neos? I have neos on hand but no ceramics.

I did some tests with neos, fields are stronger at close range but the distance is where they lack
Neos fall off along a sharp curve
These old school ceramics have a fairly consistent field at a much further distance
As long as you get the spacing right (close but not touching when they rotate) should work fine with any types of magnets.
Other reason i went with ceramic is the weight
Theyre heavier (not enough because i still added weights on top)




You are correct about my polarity i DID begin my video in repulsion


However they over spin one another and doesnt seem to matter which way it flips


I will point out that at a standstill repulsion provides more starting torque
So to start it up you might want to set it to repulsion
But once its going the rpm's don't lock in synchro
Outer disk can get going faster than the drive magnets

This was over at another thread and I am placing here also because it is to do with leverage also

LOOKS like a working prototype and a genuine inventor

No claims by me as to whether it is more energy out than in but the videos and inventors claims seem to indicate that

Frustrating that many interesting inventions coming from eastern bloc countries.  Im intrigued what their common thread is


Firstly Andrey Ermola from Kharkov. Secondly, its gearbox converts the static mechanical pressure on the gearbox rod into a rotational torque. What does this mean: once you have created a force of a vector plan (for example, a jack) per unit of time and remove the torque. What is the output, connect your business.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g0FcY-7Fw0&t=173s

https://www.youtube.com/@andreyermola

Don't understand much of that language,
But it looks like an elliptical planetary drive
Newscast video seems to indicate he got the idea from Bessler


Striking similarities when you visualize the magnetic fields


I think what this means is we should spin all wheels as if
we were children on the whirly-go-round (leverage)
Like putting a crankshaft on a crankshaft (William Skinner, etc)

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 27, 2023, 06:16:16 PM
This was over at another thread and I am placing here also because it is to do with leverage also

LOOKS like a working prototype and a genuine inventor

No claims by me as to whether it is more energy out than in but the videos and inventors claims seem to indicate that

Frustrating that many interesting inventions coming from eastern bloc countries.  Im intrigued what their common thread is


Firstly Andrey Ermola from Kharkov. Secondly, its gearbox converts the static mechanical pressure on the gearbox rod into a rotational torque. What does this mean: once you have created a force of a vector plan (for example, a jack) per unit of time and remove the torque. What is the output, connect your business.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g0FcY-7Fw0&t=173s

https://www.youtube.com/@andreyermola

Seems very transparent about it and open source   Wont be easily replicated though unless you are machinist and have his drawings

The gearing is complex

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUo1dqXP2j8

This interview obviously complains a little of perpetual motion in history

Its a good interview

But hey the fact that he completed it over 12 years ago and still nothing in production shows the same old problems I have mentioned before.  The system is not interested in anything remotely free energy

Are you wondering why it's not running? I will even say more, Andriy turned to President Poroshenko to implement his project in 2015-16, where he, NOT very politely, was shown the door. Perhaps they even threatened him, because after that he dismantled everything and disappeared from the information space. Just released a video recently.

Relevance?
I thought topic is MotoFlux device by Mike Corbin as related in first few posts.
bi

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 28, 2023, 07:47:00 AM

Seems very transparent about it and open source   Wont be easily replicated though unless you are machinist and have his drawings

The gearing is complex

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUo1dqXP2j8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUo1dqXP2j8)

This interview obviously complains a little of perpetual motion in history

Its a good interview

But hey the fact that he completed it over 12 years ago and still nothing in production shows the same old problems I have mentioned before.  The system is not interested in anything remotely free energy

Endlessoceans
Yes a very big piece of meat ...
For a very hungry planet


I am uncertain if there is a dedicated topic here already?
If none ...Please start one !
Nowadays 3d printing has advanced way beyond 12 years ago
Nothing ventured nothing gained !
Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Perhaps we can ask Floodrod if we can start a topic in his board ?
( I will try now to reach him)
EDIT
Yes Floodrod will review info and host topic..( for comments, discussion , etc
Perhaps we can invite the inventor too( if we get that far ..)
As time permits ..

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 28, 2023, 08:35:53 AM
Are you wondering why it's not running? I will even say more, Andriy turned to President Poroshenko to implement his project in 2015-16, where he, NOT very politely, was shown the door. Perhaps they even threatened him, because after that he dismantled everything and disappeared from the information space. Just released a video recently.

Thanks Rkarsky

Any idea where he is located?

Quote from: bistander on March 28, 2023, 08:53:26 AM
Relevance?
I thought topic is MotoFlux device by Mike Corbin as related in first few posts.
bi

Hello Friend

I have investigated and been paid to help develop/fund these type devices for the past 18 years

The RELEVANCE is this....I can tell you that all devices which run close to or over 100% whether they be coils, magnet motors, geared mechaniccal contraptions all have at least one thing in common.  Leverage and pivots.  I

I posted this here because its a common thread.  But Im sorry if this has muddled the waters.  As far as I see it it only clarifies things

Its just another shape of energy producer

does a helicopter look like a F18 Jet or a jumbo or a rocket?  NO  But they ALL fly by means of the same principle

See the principle....bend it to your will and then you can shape it any damn way you want

Quote from: ramset on March 28, 2023, 10:18:38 AM

Endlessoceans
Yes a very big piece of meat ...
For a very hungry planet


I am uncertain if there is a dedicated topic here already?
If none ...Please start one !
Nowadays 3d printing has advanced way beyond 12 years ago
Nothing ventured nothing gained !
Respectfully
Chet
Ps
Perhaps we can ask Floodrod if we can start a topic in his board ?
( I will try now to reach him)
EDIT
Yes Floodrod will review info and host topic..( for comments, discussion , etc
Perhaps we can invite the inventor too( if we get that far ..)
As time permits ..

Thank you Chet

Keep up the good work

Quote from: endlessoceans on March 28, 2023, 07:26:38 PM
Thanks Rkarsky

Any idea where he is located?

Really,could someone of you to create that topic?
I am a few doubting about this idea.
But an enthusiast,who is believe in that ought to open that thread.

As mentioned above
New placeholder for Mr.Andrey Ermola Device ( towards a build discussion?)
Thanks again to Floodrod for hosting at his moderated board !
https://overunity.com/19431/placeholder-for-discussion-andrey-ermola-his-device-and-theory-of-operation/msg575910/#new (https://overunity.com/19431/placeholder-for-discussion-andrey-ermola-his-device-and-theory-of-operation/msg575910/#new)


Also below from a very dedicated open source researcher regarding a Japanese claim
Will post in appropriate spot ( once found)https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J61m6YY-2sY (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J61m6YY-2sY)

Respectfully
Chet K

Quote from: ramset on March 29, 2023, 12:00:20 PM


Also below from a very dedicated open source researcher regarding a Japanese claim
Will post in appropriate spot ( once found)https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J61m6YY-2sY (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J61m6YY-2sY)

Respectfully
Chet K

Thanks chet.
(Not to get off topic but to help classify this device)
To sum up the Japanese device:


We have a pulse dc and a sine wave, theyre wound on the same stator core
They are operates in parallel IN PHASE (probably just 1/2 wave rectifier on one) at the same amplitude and frequency
same number of turns, size of wires etc.


To turn a single rotor

I watched their videos and then used chatgpt to crunch the numbers. Here are the results:
Improvement percentage = (New value - Old value) / Old value * 100

Where:
- Old value = 0.2110 ft-lb
- New value = 4.2396

Substituting these values in the formula:

Improvement percentage = (4.2396 - 0.2110) / 0.2110 * 100
Improvement percentage = 1905.21%

Therefore, the improvement percentage is approximately 1905.21%.

.I apologize for the confusion earlier. I have reviewed the FAQ section on MotoFluxPower.com and I couldn't find any information about a movie or video that explains the difference on 1905.21%. However, according to their website, MotoFluxPower.com claims that their patented motor concept uses a unique combination of radial select capability and contoured pole tips to offer increased rotational torque using just the power of nature. They also claim that their design can be used in place of any electric motor application from powering vehicles to manufacturing equipment. The improvement percentage calculated earlier was based on the input and output values provided and does not necessarily imply that overunity has been achievedTo calculate the improvement percentage, we can use the formula:

but i disagree with you (ChatGPT) since there is data in their video proving that overunity has been achieved by way of magnets. what do you have to say about this clarification?
It said sorry. I'm new and terminated itself. :o

Bump


Been discussing this with a few open source builders ...
Gotoluc is most definitely intrigued.. although he is
Quite busy on an unrelated ( to FE research) project ATM
For perhaps the rest of this month...


Hopefully a builders board can be started after some simple tests show promise?
I know Smokey did a quick mockup which seemed to imply a path worth investigating
Will repost that here ...

Quote from: wampum on April 13, 2023, 09:42:03 AM
I watched their videos and then used chatgpt to crunch the numbers. Here are the results:
Improvement percentage = (New value - Old value) / Old value * 100

Where:
- Old value = 0.2110 ft-lb
- New value = 4.2396

Substituting these values in the formula:

Improvement percentage = (4.2396 - 0.2110) / 0.2110 * 100
Improvement percentage = 1905.21%

Therefore, the improvement percentage is approximately 1905.21%.

.I apologize for the confusion earlier. I have reviewed the FAQ section on MotoFluxPower.com and I couldn't find any information about a movie or video that explains the difference on 1905.21%. However, according to their website, MotoFluxPower.com claims that their patented motor concept uses a unique combination of radial select capability and contoured pole tips to offer increased rotational torque using just the power of nature. They also claim that their design can be used in place of any electric motor application from powering vehicles to manufacturing equipment. The improvement percentage calculated earlier was based on the input and output values provided and does not necessarily imply that overunity has been achievedTo calculate the improvement percentage, we can use the formula:

but i disagree with you (ChatGPT) since there is data in their video proving that overunity has been achieved by way of magnets. what do you have to say about this clarification?
It said sorry. I'm new and terminated itself. :o

What job did you give Chat GPT? Because even that simple calc us off a bit. Typo? +1909% would be closer. But don't trust me, I barely finished high school.

I've found that even the most basic physics calculations, it will mess up.

I had it calculate a theoretical power and speed for a perfectly double scaled submarine. It needed a lot of guidance and correction. Every step of the way it would acknowledge my correction, but it tool a while to get it to agree to the number I had in mind, whether that was ever correct or not.
Seems it takes SOME fomulas it can find, and then with misplaced confidence applies them, eliminating what it can't place. You can't trust Chat GPT with physics calcs any better than you can trust a Tesla on Autopilot approaching a tight bend in the road. It's also very modern "science" biased. What billionaires and governments want the populous to know. Chat GPT was programmed by Microsoft people and fed with data that was allowed to be online and part of its dataset by 2019.

To me the torque means little. I expect someone who can build THAT apparatus to attached efficient drive motor and generator with battery to loop it, or better: a mechanical loop. If it can really demonstrate over-torque at 37 rpm or whatever, I'm quite confident that with Legos and ultra basic crafts supplied, I'd mechanically loop it.
If a very specific input drive is needed, all it takes is a good torque and speed logging and program that into an efficient drive motor. The people to do that work are right here in this community, and they'd do it in their leisure time.

It's fancy website and video, but the inventor seems to want to make it the problem of an investor to actually make it work? If he'd ask help from builders, I bet he'd get it but they'd immediately be asking the right questions.

Quote from: wampum on April 13, 2023, 09:42:03 AM
I watched their videos and then used chatgpt to crunch the numbers. Here are the results:
Improvement percentage = (New value - Old value) / Old value * 100

Where:
- Old value = 0.2110 ft-lb
- New value = 4.2396

Substituting these values in the formula:

Improvement percentage = (4.2396 - 0.2110) / 0.2110 * 100
Improvement percentage = 1905.21%

Therefore, the improvement percentage is approximately 1905.21%.

.I apologize for the confusion earlier. I have reviewed the FAQ section on MotoFluxPower.com and I couldn't find any information about a movie or video that explains the difference on 1905.21%. However, according to their website, MotoFluxPower.com claims that their patented motor concept uses a unique combination of radial select capability and contoured pole tips to offer increased rotational torque using just the power of nature. They also claim that their design can be used in place of any electric motor application from powering vehicles to manufacturing equipment. The improvement percentage calculated earlier was based on the input and output values provided and does not necessarily imply that overunity has been achievedTo calculate the improvement percentage, we can use the formula:

but i disagree with you (ChatGPT) since there is data in their video proving that overunity has been achieved by way of magnets. what do you have to say about this clarification?
It said sorry. I'm new and terminated itself. :o

I am also new here. In the FAQ section of the MotoFlux Website I found the following in answer to the question if this is a free energy device:  "To the best of our knowledge (and the scientific community in general), there is no such thing as free energy. At the very least, the production of permanent magnets requires energy. Also, the operation of the radial field director requires energy. "

This is a strange explanation! Only a part of the energy used in production of magnets can be found in the magnet, and if you buy a magnet, you have to pay for all the energy which was used in the production and for much more. Thus, if the MotoFlux machine just delivers this energy, the costs of the machine with its magnets must be considerable higher than the costs of the energy which can be gained! I have tried to get a clarification about this but I only got a very short answer by Mr. Corbin which ignored my question and no more answer on a second try. The whole construction is dubious. I can't understand there is an increase of torque. There is actio and reactio. If there is a torque on the shaft with magnets, there must be an equal counter-torque on the shaft of the director and this torque must be overcome by the motor driving the director.

Maybe someone could go there to verify the results or possibly get some exact cad drawings to build a duplicate (or scale) device for testing for peer review?

Watched the video several times looking at all the detail. It's clear this machine has about a 20x output from the input.
The initial force on the input director must be about the same as the output drive receives, but the diameter is much smaller so the torque is less.
Just doing an approximation of the input directors radius it appears to be about 10 to 15 times smaller than the radius of the drive stator. With equal flux on each, the larger produces more torque.
Looking at the output at higher RPMs, the input torque goes up but also shows some additional gain on the output torque but the efficiency drops some possibly due to reluctance in the stator material.


It looks like there's is allot of room for improvement in design, but what he is showing at this point is that it in fact produces energy!

Quote from: rakarskiy on March 28, 2023, 08:35:53 AM
Are you wondering why it's not running? I will even say more, Andriy turned to President Poroshenko to implement his project in 2015-16, where he, NOT very politely, was shown the door. Perhaps they even threatened him, because after that he dismantled everything and disappeared from the information space. Just released a video recently.

Sir Kolbacict
Quite a few are very intrigued by this topic
We do have one builder in particular that is chomping
At the bit to try this ( gotoluc)
He is unfortunately quite busy on a job for the next month or so...


Your link would not open for me ?


Respectfully
Chet K

That is not link,just archive.  It can open any internet browser.
It was found in my computer yesterday.
I could not give a regular link, because this forum has not been around for many years.
But this is not on the topic of this thread, this is according to Yermola.
It was just interesting. The well-known now Bucha is mentioned.

Quote from: ramset on May 12, 2023, 04:30:46 PM
Quite a few are very intrigued by this topic
We do have one builder in particular that is chomping
At the bit to try this ( gotoluc)
He is unfortunately quite busy on a job for the next month or so...

I'm glad someone else is attempting to build this. It seems like it has potential. Either way, I'm not getting my hopes up. I'm kinda taking a stab at it too. Although I'm just using the thin sheets of metal you can get from lowes, not electric steel. I had some time to kill but should have it done in a couple weeks or so. I'm hoping there are more people attempting to build also.


Can't remember how to embed photo's in the post itself so i'll just add it as an attachment. <edit> Never mind it did it automagicly.

Quote from: Drak on May 13, 2023, 12:26:45 PM

I'm glad someone else is attempting to build this. It seems like it has potential. Either way, I'm not getting my hopes up. I'm kinda taking a stab at it too. Although I'm just using the thin sheets of metal you can get from lowes, not electric steel. I had some time to kill but should have it done in a couple weeks or so. I'm hoping there are more people attempting to build also.


Can't remember how to embed photo's in the post itself so i'll just add it as an attachment. <edit> Never mind it did it automagicly.

Hi Drak,
As long as it wasn't stainless steel, I think it should function like electrical grades basically but with higher loss. However at the apparent frequency and induction, likely be unnoticed. Nice job on the stator rounds. Wonder how you cut those laminations. Nice.

I can't make out the magnet arrangement in the rotor arms. Have you s photo of the magnet alone?

Following with interest. Have you ideas for test fixture?
bi

Quote from: Drak on May 13, 2023, 12:26:45 PM

I'm glad someone else is attempting to build this. It seems like it has potential. Either way, I'm not getting my hopes up. I'm kinda taking a stab at it too. Although I'm just using the thin sheets of metal you can get from lowes, not electric steel. I had some time to kill but should have it done in a couple weeks or so. I'm hoping there are more people attempting to build also.


Can't remember how to embed photo's in the post itself so i'll just add it as an attachment. <edit> Never mind it did it automagicly.

That looks awesome mate. How did you cut the sheets? Thanks for sharing. Nice work.

Quote from: bistanderAs long as it wasn't stainless steel, I think it should function like electrical grades basically but with higher loss. However at the apparent frequency and induction, likely be unnoticed.

Yeah, stainless steel doesn't even stick to magnets, at least the little bit that I have laying around. The loss is what I'm worried about. Even if this thing doesn't work I can't say Mike's device doesn't work because I didn't use the same steel he used. Your right the induction shouldn't be a problem because this thing would never run fast enough to make a difference. (actually I hope I'm wrong about that)

Quote from: bistander
Nice job on the stator rounds. Wonder how you cut those laminations. Nice.

Thank you, I try to copy as close as I can and give it my best when I do try to copy something. The laminations were cut using a cnc I built that I copied from Strange Garage's youtube channel here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmQWsWh0Zsk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmQWsWh0Zsk)
That was the first time I ever cut steel, and I will tell you this: I DO NOT LIKE CUTTING STEEL. I don't think that machine was designed for cutting steel and struggled through every piece. I mean its a strong machine but every piece I cut was an adventure mainly because my speeds and feeds were not correct. I only bought 2 steel cutting bits and by the end of it one bit was broken and the other wouldn't cut hot butter. I think my spindle speed was way too high. I could rant about that forever but you get the jist.

Quote from: bistander
I can't make out the magnet arrangement in the rotor arms. Have you s photo of the magnet alone?

I'll post more photos below

Quote from: bistander
Following with interest. Have you ideas for test fixture?

Yes, I plan to put the same size diameter pullys on the input and output shaft and use weights, like in Willy's twist device setup. If it is able to lift more then it takes on the input then it should called a success. At that point it would be just a matter of putting a third shaft parallel to the input/output shafts and connecting a belt or chain from the output shaft to the third shaft and from the input shaft to the third shaft, then put a slight torque on the input shaft, lock it in place, let go, then run out of the room. I'm not getting my hopes up though, over the years of building sh_t I've learned better. I might order more magnets, those things I'm using now have been sitting around here for years and I don't know what grade they are.

Quote from: Jimboot
That looks awesome mate. How did you cut the sheets? Thanks for sharing. Nice work.

Thanks! See above and below.


I designed the whole thing in FreeCAD. Took me about a week to design it. I used the spread sheet in FreeCAD so I could change dimensions on the fly. FreeCAD can also generate the G-Code for the CNC. <edit to add> I know in the picture of the cad the strators are not twistd for each phase, for the life of me I could not figure out how to get freecad to twist the strators as it goes back, but the holes are there to do that after the pieces were cut.

Looks great Drak.
Suggestion. Electrical grade steels typically use core plate. This is a thin layer on the surface, both sides, although only one side would be necessary. This core plate is an insulating film. You might spray a light coat of varnish. This would go a long way to eliminate eddy currents and avoid about half of the core loss. You'll get a certain amount of interlamination resistance from the natural surface oxidation and flatness/compression imperfections which might be enough. But if you entertain high speed trials, I'd coat it.
Cool project.
bi

https://www.axalta.com/electricalinsulation_global/en_US/electrical-steel-coatings/what-are-electrical-steel-coatings.html

Quote from: bistander on May 14, 2023, 01:06:05 PM
Looks great Drak.
Suggestion. Electrical grade steels typically use core plate. This is a thin layer on the surface, both sides, although only one side would be necessary. This core plate is an insulating film. You might spray a light coat of varnish. This would go a long way to eliminate eddy currents and avoid about half of the core loss. You'll get a certain amount of interlamination resistance from the natural surface oxidation and flatness/compression imperfections which might be enough. But if you entertain high speed trials, I'd coat it.
Cool project.
bi

https://www.axalta.com/electricalinsulation_global/en_US/electrical-steel-coatings/what-are-electrical-steel-coatings.html (https://www.axalta.com/electricalinsulation_global/en_US/electrical-steel-coatings/what-are-electrical-steel-coatings.html)

OMG I completly forgot about that, I remember that being discussed back on Jack Hildenbrand thread. Thank you so much. I think they were talking about using news paper and stuff. This is what I have on hand will any of these do, or should I specifically buy varnish. If so what brand?


If you have any other suggestions I'm all ears.

Drak,
I certainly would not use a paper. And I think you should use what you have one hand, maybe something with a temperature claim, and try a test sample. Just look for something that will apply even and thinly and dry hard.
If you're into it, check a nearby motor rebuild shop. They may sell or point you to an easy source. Gylptol is the common red motor insulating varnish and not what you want. It'd work, but way to thick.
bi

Drak,
Something comes to mind. Unsure how it will play out. But I imagine to replicate and get effects near what Mike shows in his videos, you may need to adjust that air gap distance. This is done on motors and generators using separate pole pieces and shims. So you might keep this in mind. Could it be possible to build in adjustment on the rotor magnet arm assembly? Just something to consider if it sticks (cogs) too much, or too little.
Do you have a dial indicator for alignment of the assembly?
Using quality ball bearings?
Might load a gaussmeter app on smart phone to check magnets.
bi

Quote from: bistander on May 14, 2023, 02:10:06 PM
Drak,
I certainly would not use a paper. And I think you should use what you have one hand, maybe something with a temperature claim, and try a test sample. Just look for something that will apply even and thinly and dry hard.
If you're into it, check a nearby motor rebuild shop. They may sell or point you to an easy source. Gylptol is the common red motor insulating varnish and not what you want. It'd work, but way to thick.
bi

Diluol
transparent nail polish (beauty-case equipment ?
instant adhesive/super glue
transparent self-glueing thin plastic-foil,anti-static

https://motorkote.com/ (https://motorkote.com/)

wmbr
OCWL

Quote from: bistander on May 14, 2023, 02:33:34 PM
Drak,
Something comes to mind. Unsure how it will play out. But I imagine to replicate and get effects near what Mike shows in his videos, you may need to adjust that air gap distance. This is done on motors and generators using separate pole pieces and shims. So you might keep this in mind. Could it be possible to build in adjustment on the rotor magnet arm assembly? Just something to consider if it sticks (cogs) too much, or too little.
Do you have a dial indicator for alignment of the assembly?
Using quality ball bearings?
Might load a gaussmeter app on smart phone to check magnets.
bi

The Air gap is kinda baked into the design I can't really change that except for sanding down the steel. The bearings seem quality, not much play in them. I ordered them from McMaster-Carr: https://www.mcmaster.com/6138K65/ (https://www.mcmaster.com/6138K65/) <edit to add> I will eventually remove the rubber gasket on the bearings to reduce friction but for now there is too much debris until i finish


In the picture below the red is acrylic, yellow is the magnet(s), the grey is the steel. Currently because my steel cutting abilities suck, the steel came out bigger then expected. Which in a way is a good thing. So the outer rotor will not currently fit inside the strator. Same thing happened with the inner rotor to the outer rotor. I had to sand it down. So its a one way permanent adjustment. Unless I cut more steel. Which I have been thinking about doing because I can fit another magnet in there to make it stronger. Currently I have three .25 inch cube magnets where the yellow is in the picture. I could have fit 4 and I don't know why I didn't.


No dial indicator, no specialty tools like that, but I do want to buy one sometime. I wanted one when i build my cnc to test for play, just never got around to getting one. I'm thinking the magnets might be n42, but I'll will probably just order an assortment of grades and test them all. As for your previous post before, you mention temperature claim. I doubt this thing will ever get that hot, I'm just building this to see if the claim is real. If it is, I will not use acrylic in the next build. Unless "temperature claim" means something else besides what i'm thinking it does.


Thanks for all your inputs so far.

Quote from: Drak on May 14, 2023, 03:04:05 PM

The Air gap is kinda baked into the design I can't really change that except for sanding down the steel. The bearings seem quality, not much play in them. I ordered them from McMaster-Carr: https://www.mcmaster.com/6138K65/ (https://www.mcmaster.com/6138K65/) <edit to add> I will eventually remove the rubber gasket on the bearings to reduce friction but for now there is too much debris until i finish


In the picture below the red is acrylic, yellow is the magnet(s), the grey is the steel. Currently because my steel cutting abilities suck, the steel came out bigger then expected. Which in a way is a good thing. So the outer rotor will not currently fit inside the strator. Same thing happened with the inner rotor to the outer rotor. I had to sand it down. So its a one way permanent adjustment. Unless I cut more steel. Which I have been thinking about doing because I can fit another magnet in there to make it stronger. Currently I have three .25 inch cube magnets where the yellow is in the picture. I could have fit 4 and I don't know why I didn't.


No dial indicator, no specialty tools like that, but I do want to buy one sometime. I wanted one when i build my cnc to test for play, just never got around to getting one. I'm thinking the magnets might be n42, but I'll will probably just order an assortment of grades and test them all. As for your previous post before, you mention temperature claim. I doubt this thing will ever get that hot, I'm just building this to see if the claim is real. If it is, I will not use acrylic in the next build. Unless "temperature claim" means something else besides what i'm thinking it does.


Thanks for all your inputs so far.

Hi Drak,

Re: 3 to 4 magnets. On surface one might think this will increase flux, and therefore force, by 33%. Fallacy. Doesn't work that way. Yes, there is benefit, but not as you might expect. Without going into theory detail, which a textbook would serve you better than I, do this. Use. This magnetic calculator.
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp?calcType=block
Use N42. I sample ran 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.75 thick & 0.025 inch gap vs same only 1.0 inch thick. Not much difference in pull force at all.

Change the face area, like 0.25 x 0.5 x 0.75" thick and see the difference.

Like they say at the race track, run what you brung. Modify later.
bi

ps. It was likely the bearing seals removed.  And likely they were greased. Especially if you may have contaminated them, clean/flush with solvent to remove all grease and lubricate with light oil, not wd40. Occasionally add a drop of oil. Keep clean, perhaps fashion paper non contact shields.

Quote from: bistander on May 14, 2023, 04:23:47 PM
Hi Drak,

Re: 3 to 4 magnets. On surface one might think this will increase flux, and therefore force, by 33%. Fallacy. Doesn't work that way. Yes, there is benefit, but not as you might expect. Without going into theory detail, which a textbook would serve you better than I, do this. Use. This magnetic calculator.
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp?calcType=block (https://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp?calcType=block)
Use N42. I sample ran 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.75 thick & 0.025 inch gap vs same only 1.0 inch thick. Not much difference in pull force at all.

Change the face area, like 0.25 x 0.5 x 0.75" thick and see the difference.

Like they say at the race track, run what you brung. Modify later.
bi

ps. It was likely the bearing seals removed.  And likely they were greased. Especially if you may have contaminated them, clean/flush with solvent to remove all grease and lubricate with light oil, not wd40. Occasionally add a drop of oil. Keep clean, perhaps fashion paper non contact shields.

Thanks, thats a relief, I 'm glad it won't make much of a difference. I'll run all the tests I can with what I got and modify as I go. These bearings are in good condition not contaminated or anything, I haven't removed the seals yet, all of the sanding waste would make its way in them, as soon as it all fits together and spins nicely and the.. device.. is all cleaned out, then I'll remove the seals. I've removed the grease before on other bearings, I replaced with 3-in-one oil, unless there is another easy to get off the shelf product. I'm guessing just for a few tests it should be ok.

If you watch the graphs that show the input torque to output torque, they appear to be nearly inline as if the director is simply pulling the armature magnets around.
It seems to make some sense in that the same field force on a smaller diameter will take less torque to break free while the magnet tries to connect both poles by adjusting it's position moving the armature at it's larger diameter to do so.
I was thinking that once the director core was rotated that the field through the armature magnets would become weaker and break free from the stator with less force. But maybe not!


Watching the video carefully may reveal the effect causing the gain and how better results might be achieved.


There are also small laminated pole pieces on each end of the armature magnets that assure a strong field connection to both the director core and the stator core.

I'm doing a single test build to test the relationship of the director core and the stator index.
The build will allow me to vary the alignment of the armature and director core with the stator so the field connection to the stator can be weakened to allow proper indexing with the director core.


I had some .015 inch silicon steel laying around to make the director and stator. The stuff is hard on carbide tools.
Just waiting for the epoxy to set on the tiny armature arm.

The initial testing required the removal of half of the stator plates because they were overly attracted to the armature magnets.
On top of that, I had to shim the rotor up 1/8 inch to lower the field connection further to reach an acceptable attraction. Then I was disappointed that the director was just dragging the armature showing no useful gain.


Then!
I made a new director with the laminations vertical or opposite the stator laminations. When the director is rotated to the 90 degree point there is a very noticeable drop in the armature to stator field connection. I feel now that this device may in fact operate with some level of gain.
The new director works more like a shield or disconnect with the armature magnets reducing their fields as it now switches poles much easier and then aligns again with the director to apply full force at the next pole.


More testing required.

I went back to the old director (laminations same direction as stator) because even though the vertical laminations reduce the armature field strength, it doesn't provide enough pull to move the armature.
That sorta tells me that the director only pulls the armature to another detent and the only gain in torque is from the attraction to the next stator detent.


That means the attraction from the stator to the armature magnet must be less than the director to the armature.
This seems a bit like it could not provide any gain if that's the case but then even a smaller attraction at a point further out with greater leverage may be what's providing the increase in torque.


So where it's at now with a larger gap from the armature to the stator, it switches well when rotating the director. I have added some slots around the stator and plan to wrap these areas with coils to draw off power and create drag. The director rotation now is causing the armature to jump several detents now and by adding the coils I am trying to force a load that will help it jump a single detent drawing energy off each index.


Seems like a logical next step.

Well i have been out of the game for some time now, due to having to run my very busy business.
I have also been perfecting another device i designed and built some years ago.
I have since sold my business, and have gone into semi retirement, and so have a lot more time for such projects.

On that note, it is good to see some of the old crew still here- A BIG hi to Chet, it's been a while.
And good to see that bistander is here now--been looking forward to engaging with you.

I only came across the motoflux device last night, while laying in bed, watching youtube.
It came up in my youtube feed, and got me straight away. Needless to say, there was not much sleep last night, but more so lots of thinking of the mechanism of gain in said device.

I have spent the last 2 hours reading the whole thread, and i see that a couple here were on their way to a replication,
but nothing for the last two months ? Did everyone just give up ?

Anyway, it was an early start, with pen, paper, and my 20+ years building and learning how magnetic fields react in all sorts of
situations. After reading the thread, i don't think anyone has fully worked out the working principle of the motoflux device. Some have
come close, but there is more to it-so i believe.

And before i go on any further, yes, i have begun my replication, although on a smaller scale to start with.
But it will be large enough to see if there is any gain, which i believe there is.

First i see a lot of talk about the cogging in the device. I do not believe that this has any impact on the device delivering excess torque,
but more so just a result of the devices design.

Second- I see there is some concern about one of the graphs showing the output having torque before the device is set into motion.
I also do not think that is something that writes this device off, or that the inventor off set the output scale up to the shown value.
If the device was shut down while still having the brake applied, and was some way through a cycle, then a static torque very well could have been being applied to the output torque sensor before the device was fired back up.

I believe the critical point with this device working, is going the be the gap between the rotor poles, and the stator poles.
This will largely depend on your devices dimensions, magnets used, and type of steel used in the laminates.
With my replication, i will be able to adjust the gap between the rotor pole pieces, and the stator poles quite easily, as i think this is a must. The gap between the rotor pole pieces and the radial field director must be as close as possible, but at 90 deg, must be as far away as possible to obtain the best possible flux gap.

Well i think that is enough for my first post.
More to come soon.

Congrats on the business sale and retirement Tinman! Your input will be most interesting.|
The driving force behind the concept seems to have died out a bit at the source. Things have been less convincing than initially presented. The usual measurement deficiencies and adjustability to get the very best from the setup (last part is my guess).

Brad
So Glad to read...
Much more than a breath of fresh air!


With gratitude
Chet
PS
Word on the street is this one is a tuff nut
But not written off by any means!


And I believe inventor might even help ...( he is a good man)


BTW
I had to give up the Magnums...( almost
Those Carmel Dark chocolates still scream to me at the store ...

Quote from: Cloxxki on August 20, 2023, 12:21:14 PM
Congrats on the business sale and retirement Tinman! Your input will be most interesting.|
The driving force behind the concept seems to have died out a bit at the source. Things have been less convincing than initially presented. The usual measurement deficiencies and adjustability to get the very best from the setup (last part is my guess).

The fact that it has gone quite from the inventers side of things, could be good news.
If by some miracle you did actually have an !OU! device, what would be the best way to try and real it back in from the public, and keep it on the low down ? Maybe they got a big investor that would only invest in it if it were kept quiet, so as those like the chinese (who don't give a rats about patents) don't start mass producing it.

Knowing first hand that !some! of these !so called! laws of physics need re-evaluating, we should leave no stone unturned.
I have a good deal of time on my hands now, so i am going to get back into what i love.

Here is something to think about.
How can the conservation of energy and entropy (the degradation of the matter and energy), both exist in a closed or open system ?

Ok, a quick update.

Seems 3D printed parts are not going to cut the mustard here (well mine anyway).
To much flex, which is allowing the rotor to pull onto the stator.
So looks like more time will have to be spent machining parts from ali.

 

Quoteauthor=ramset link=topic=19405.msg581437#msg581437 date=1692549855

QuoteWord on the street is this one is a tuff nut
But not written off by any means!

As my printed setup is not much good, i think the way to go would be to set up a manual test bed, where we can measure the torque required to rotate the flux director shaft each degree of rotation between each jump of the stator poles. We can then measure the output shafts torque at each degree between the same stator pole jump.
We can then graph both the input and output torques over the degree values.
That way we would have conclusive evidence as to whether there is a gain or not.
So i think i will make up a solid test jig first, and if i see a gain, then spend the time to machine up a complete unit.

QuoteI had to give up the Magnums...( almost
Those Carmel Dark chocolates still scream to me at the store

Never  :D

QuoteAnd I believe inventor might even help ...( he is a good man)

Now that would be helpful.

I did start this project but have been distracted by a transverse flux generator. Congrats on the sale Brad.

Quoteauthor=Jimboot link=topic=19405.msg581490#msg581490 date=1692673243

Quotebeen distracted by a transverse flux generator

Whats one of them ?
Like this ?--> https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html

QuoteCongrats on the sale Brad

Thanks, but i must say, it was a long 2 years, but paid off in the end.

Will make a call today on this one ( for update)
Just to get some clarity...( Cloxxi concern above)


And pass it along !
With gratitude
Chet

Quote from: ramset on August 22, 2023, 09:05:49 AM
Will make a call today on this one ( for update)
Just to get some clarity...( Cloxxi concern above)


And pass it along !
With gratitude
Chet

That would be great.

Quote from: tinman on August 22, 2023, 08:53:24 AM
Whats one of them ?
Like this ?--> https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html (https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html)

Thanks, but i must say, it was a long 2 years, but paid off in the end.

Yup.

Quote from: Jimboot on August 23, 2023, 01:51:06 AM

Yup.

I must say, i'm not sure how it is suppose to induce a current flow through the windings, as almost all the magnetic flux would be contained within the cores, and next to none outside them to cut through the windings.

And i notice that each pole piece opposite to each other in your design, is off set to each other.
Is there a reason for that ?

36 poles rotor will have 72 pm. This way was easier to mill with the three dremels I burned out. Thank goodness for Bunnings 30 day return policy. I still have a brand new one in a box ;)  Here's RMS build. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw)


https://www.gknpm.com/en/solutions/electric-motor-innovations/ this mob was bought out.

Tinman

QuoteI must say, i'm not sure how it is suppose to induce a current flow through the windings, as almost all the magnetic flux would be contained within the cores, and next to none outside them to cut through the windings.

Indeed, I looked at the link you posted here, https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html , and figured out the operating principal in around a minute. However I understand 99% of people wouldn't understand how it works because they rely on textbook theory rather than first principals.

I will explain how it works but I would also like to hear others theories before I explain the answer. Here's a clue, the picture below contains all the information we need to know. From this we can deduce how the transverse generator works.

AC

Quote from: onepower on August 24, 2023, 07:33:30 PM
Tinman
Indeed, I looked at the link you posted here, https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html (https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html) , and figured out the operating principal in around a minute. However I understand 99% of people wouldn't understand how it works because they rely on textbook theory rather than first principals.

I will explain how it works but I would also like to hear others theories before I explain the answer. Here's a clue, the picture below contains all the information we need to know. From this we can deduce how the transverse generator works.

AC

Ok I'll bite.
Its works by creating an alternating A vector potential field which induces a current in the coil in the center of the cores.  It's pretty obvious from the drawing that there are half as many cores as rotor magnets so at times when the magnets are aligned on center with the cores they are either all north or all south.

Quote from: onepower on August 24, 2023, 07:33:30 PM
Tinman
Indeed, I looked at the link you posted here, https://www.pengky.cn/zz-direct-drive-turbine/transverse-flux-generator/transverse-flux-generator.html , and figured out the operating principal in around a minute. However I understand 99% of people wouldn't understand how it works because they rely on textbook theory rather than first principals.

I will explain how it works but I would also like to hear others theories before I explain the answer. Here's a clue, the picture below contains all the information we need to know. From this we can deduce how the transverse generator works.

AC

The image you posted should have you asking questions, as it proves my point--how will it work ?

Look at the images below of the generator, and then look at your image again, showing the direction of current flow in relation to the magnetic field. Do you not see something wrong in the images of the generator from that website ?

With, lets say, the north pole of the magnet between the C core, in which direction will the field be going around the windings, in order to determine the direction of current flow, via your diagram ?

The drawings from the website are incorrect, as it shows all the arrows for the magnetic fields pointing in one direction for each pole.
This cannot happen when you have only a north or south pole interacting with the core at one time. In order for there to be a field direction going around the core, you would need a north field at either the top or bottom of the core, and then the south field on the opposite side of the core.

QuoteHowever I understand 99% of people wouldn't understand how it works because they rely on textbook theory rather than first principals

I have added a second image, where i have corrected their mistake.
So using your image, and the corrected magnetic field orientation, and throwing out the text books, which way will the current be flowing through the windings ?

Brad

Quote from: phoneboy on August 24, 2023, 08:12:41 PM
Ok I'll bite.
Its works by creating an alternating A vector potential field which induces a current in the coil in the center of the cores.  It's pretty obvious from the drawing that there are half as many cores as rotor magnets so at times when the magnets are aligned on center with the cores they are either all north or all south.

Ok, so which way will the current flow through the coil ?, going by the right hand rule.
And if current starts to flow through the coil, the coil will produce a magnetic field.
Where will the south field be produced, and where will the north field be produced from the coil ?

Quote from: tinman on August 25, 2023, 12:41:36 PM
Ok, so which way will the current flow through the coil ?, going by the right hand rule.
And if current starts to flow through the coil, the coil will produce a magnetic field.
Where will the south field be produced, and where will the north field be produced from the coil ?

@Tinman
The current is AC, and its frequency is determined by the rotors rotational speed.  The drawing onepower posted is correct because he's referencing the induced current (left hand rule) not the field generated by us applying an external current through the coil (right hand rule).  E=-dA/dt.  Also, Lenz still applies even though there is no flux cutting.

I have to agree with Brad.  There is no changing flux around the inductor with the shown magnet assembly.  For a more complete explanation of transverse flux designs see the attached pdf below.

Pm

I'm thinking a magnetic field is always a loop and doesn't just appear in the G segments. It would travel as a loop into the G shaped sections and cut through the coil as it encounters back EMF the same as any generator.
(Had to do a quick picture hack to show poles on the magnet!)

Tinman
It's best to start logically breaking the problem down into first principals.

1)We know the generator in question works as claimed because it was replicated in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw
1968 The Generator You Have Never Heard Of - Transverse Flux
A working replication/experiment is the best proof, it works and we can leave it at that.

2)You are correct in implying that the optimal design would use North and South pole magnets on either side of the disk. In fact conventional transverse flux generators do exactly that as shown in the picture below. However, optimized or not the question we want answered is only how and why it works. What I see in the responses are not answers rather guesses or distractions from the actual cause and effect in my opinion.

3)From the statements above we know the concept works and the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced. Here we could introduce a new concept so simple it's hard to imagine how anyone could miss it. Let's go back to the left hand rule for electron flow in a conductor as shown below.

The left hand rule shows the magnetic field curling around the conductor clockwise (the fingers) if the electron current was moving through the conductor towards us(the thumb). Likewise, if a process was reversible then the opposite should be true. That is, if we produced a changing magnetic field which curls around a conductor (the fingers) then an electron current should be induced in the conductor (the thumb). In fact this is exactly what we see in the transverse flux generator but for some reason most people cannot put two and two together. It's a very simple concept, it's right there staring at everyone and yet it eludes many, why is that?.

Here's a clue, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYpz9ak34e0
I took a snapshot shown below. Now if the magnetic flux is supposedly enclosed within the core of a toroidal core then how was the thick conductor through the toroid center induced with an electron current which then acted on the magnet inside the conductor loop?. In fact the principal is no different that the transverse flux generator. Whenever a changing magnetic field curls around a conductor in a core an electron current is induced in said conductor within the core.

In fact what was shown here only scratches the surface and it gets even more bizarre on many different levels as we learn new concepts...

AC

Quote from: phoneboy on August 25, 2023, 02:00:00 PM
@Tinman
The current is AC, and its frequency is determined by the rotors rotational speed.  The drawing onepower posted is correct because he's referencing the induced current (left hand rule) not the field generated by us applying an external current through the coil (right hand rule).  E=-dA/dt.  Also, Lenz still applies even though there is no flux cutting.

Yes, his drawing is correct.
So now tell us as to which direction the current will flow, when the magnetic field is going both CW and CCW around the windings.

Quote from: lumen on August 25, 2023, 07:08:09 PM
I'm thinking a magnetic field is always a loop and doesn't just appear in the G segments. It would travel as a loop into the G shaped sections and cut through the coil as it encounters back EMF the same as any generator.
(Had to do a quick picture hack to show poles on the magnet!)

That drawing is correct, and a current would flow through the coil.

I see nothing magical in the tranverse generator/motor. It operates like any generator or motor.
It is though a keen design!


Subject is a bit off for this thread though.
I do see some overunity in the original motoflux design but it's hidden in the force over distance problem of the center director.


The director builds resistive force as it is rotated then causes the rotor to jump (sometimes many detents / revolutions)
If the director is prevented from falling all the way back to the start position then it's possible to conserve some energy for a greater return on the next indexs on the rotor.
That is why there is a break on the output and a constant input to prevent the director from dropping back to position and requiring more energy to start the next rotor detent jump.


Not real clear but anyone building the motoflux will likely encounter this problem.  Leads to the fact that there is some free energy but may also require some beter concept to make more useful.


JMO

Quote from: onepower on August 25, 2023, 07:56:11 PM
Tinman
It's best to start logically breaking the problem down into first principals.

1)We know the generator in question works as claimed because it was replicated in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw
1968 The Generator You Have Never Heard Of - Transverse Flux
A working replication/experiment is the best proof, it works and we can leave it at that.

2)You are correct in implying that the optimal design would use North and South pole magnets on either side of the disk. In fact conventional transverse flux generators do exactly that as shown in the picture below. However, optimized or not the question we want answered is only how and why it works. What I see in the responses are not answers rather guesses or distractions from the actual cause and effect in my opinion.

3)From the statements above we know the concept works and the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced. Here we could introduce a new concept so simple it's hard to imagine how anyone could miss it. Let's go back to the left hand rule for electron flow in a conductor as shown below.

The left hand rule shows the magnetic field curling around the conductor clockwise (the fingers) if the electron current was moving through the conductor towards us(the thumb). Likewise, if a process was reversible then the opposite should be true. That is, if we produced a changing magnetic field which curls around a conductor (the fingers) then an electron current should be induced in the conductor (the thumb). In fact this is exactly what we see in the transverse flux generator but for some reason most people cannot put two and two together. It's a very simple concept, it's right there staring at everyone and yet it eludes many, why is that?.

Here's a clue, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYpz9ak34e0
I took a snapshot shown below. Now if the magnetic flux is supposedly enclosed within the core of a toroidal core then how was the thick conductor through the toroid center induced with an electron current which then acted on the magnet inside the conductor loop?. In fact the principal is no different that the transverse flux generator. Whenever a changing magnetic field curls around a conductor in a core an electron current is induced in said conductor within the core.

In fact what was shown here only scratches the surface and it gets even more bizarre on many different levels as we learn new concepts...

AC

Of course it would work if the magnets had the south going in one end of the core, and the north in the other.
But the design i posted the link to will not work as you claim, and Robert showed in his video is the same design, but it is not what he built. He built one that had a north field going in one side of the core, and a south field going in the other side, which will work.

You stated that it took you one minute to work out how it works when you looked at the drawings from the web site i posted.
So im asking you to explain as to how it works, using the diagram below.

I stated that i can't work out how this design would work, and i still cant.
If the magnets were placed so as the north field went in one side of the core, and the south field went into the other side, then it is just a standard alternator setup.

QuoteI took a snapshot shown below. Now if the magnetic flux is supposedly enclosed within the core of a toroidal core then how was the thick conductor through the toroid center induced with an electron current which then acted on the magnet inside the conductor loop?. In fact the principal is no different that the transverse flux generator. Whenever a changing magnetic field curls around a conductor in a core an electron current is induced in said conductor within the core.

Yes, been there, done that many years ago. But this is also not the same as the setup i posted from the website, as a toroid will generate say a CW north field, and a CCW south field within the windings. The windings passed through the toroids center are nothing more that a loosely coupled secondary winding, and nothing out of the ordinary.

So i do ask again, how does the below generate a current flow through the windings ?
And as the field wraps around the windings in both directions, how does the right hand rule know which way to send the current flow ?

Brad

Wrapping each C may create a current individually and then the winding thru the center of each would create another current.I can't see it creating 2 separate currents with using just one winding thru the center of all the C's.
10 C's = 10 separate currents + 1 center run = 1 current. That's a possibilty of 11 different currents unless all ten C's were tied together to create one which may be a stronger current making 2 separate currents. But getting 2 currents from the center winding doesn't make sense.
It's easy to duplicate and upgrade but I can't see overunity or it even being 99% efficient.
The energy used Trump's the energy created.

OT - But - Food for Thought - Questions:

If "1" (the magnet) in the diagram from the Chinese website were "replaced" with
an Electromagnet that used a "soft magnetic core (B-H Curve related) - then a small
current (H A/m) could generate a much larger toroid core magnetic field (B).

This, in turn, causes a "larger Magnetic Flux" in the "3" (toroid), which, in turn, creates a
current in "2" (Faraday) Would this create an "excess energy", that is, could H A/m truns
result in, or provide, more power in "2" (induced) than was expended in creating the
electromagnetic inducer "1"?   

Would the B-H Curve of the material used in "3" (toroid) be relevant"?

Would the toroid "3" concentrate the magnetic field around "2"? Does this aid
in the creation of excess energy, if there is any?

How many - quote "poles" - would be required and what would the polarities and electromagnet(s) drive
sequencing consist of?

Would replacing the magnets with switched electromagnetics reduce the magnetic drag and eliminate the need
for an external mechanical driving force? Of course if the application is for a windmill then this question is moot!

Just asking for a friend!

SL

https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/192596/image// (https://overunity.com/19405/magnetic-flux-motor-just-patented-that-creates-its-own-electricity/dlattach/attach/192596/image//)
Isn't similar working of this kontact welding apparat ?

Quote from: tinman on August 25, 2023, 08:38:08 PM
Yes, his drawing is correct.
So now tell us as to which direction the current will flow, when the magnetic field is going both CW and CCW around the windings.

How would that happen (the magnetic field is going both CW and CCW around the windings)? Based on the presented images there is a small gap between the permanent magnets. I guess you are referring to the time when that gap would be centered on the core.  I imagine that the flux from the magnets would take the easiest path which would be across the core which would be tangent to the coil which in an ac signal would be the middle of the cycle.  I also have to correct myself as there would be flux cutting of the coil as the field expanded through the core, have to catch myself and remember that an individual component of a magnetic field is always a loop not a line.

Tinman

QuoteOf course it would work if the magnets had the south going in one end of the core, and the north in the other.
But the design i posted the link to will not work as you claim, and Robert showed in his video is the same design, but it is not what he built. He built one that had a north field going in one side of the core, and a south field going in the other side, which will work.

You stated that it took you one minute to work out how it works when you looked at the drawings from the web site i posted.
So im asking you to explain as to how it works, using the diagram below.

I stated that i can't work out how this design would work, and i still cant.
If the magnets were placed so as the north field went in one side of the core, and the south field went into the other side, then it is just a standard alternator setup.

Okay I see where your going, you seem to have a problem with the depiction of the magnets on the rotor. Since there are no magnetic mono poles and the flux loop in the core is in one direction what did you think was happening?.

As I said in this statement...
3)From the statements above we know the concept works and the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced. 

The direction of the flux in the core tells us everything we need to know and we could draw a kitchen sink in place of the magnets for all it's worth. I knew immediately what the author was trying to describe based on the direction of flux in the core and the left hand rule for electron flow/flux curl.

QuoteIf the magnets were placed so as the north field went in one side of the core, and the south field went into the other side, then it is just a standard alternator setup

It's not a standard alternator setup in my opinion because most people claimed that all the flux is contained within the toroidal core and cannot induce a conductor in the center. Now they should understand that it could be a circular solenoid coil, a closed or open toroidal coil or simply a magnet moving between a C shaped iron core. As I said, "the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced".  There could be thousands of possible designs and variations on this theme.

As well many seem to be infatuated with flux linking and cutting. Yet here we have a magnetic field which curls around the conductor inducing it. The flux within the circular core does not appear to cut the conductor like a common generator nor does the flux link like a transformer.

AC

Quote
As well many seem to be infatuated with flux linking and cutting. Yet here we have a magnetic field which curls around the conductor inducing it. The flux within the circular core does not appear to cut the conductor like a common generator nor does the flux link like a transformer.

The flux in a torroid coil will cross the center hole as the AC changes direction. The flux always is a loop and is forced to cross the center hole like a washer with a wire through the center hole, How can you flip the washer without cutting the wire?

lumen

QuoteThe flux in a torroid coil will cross the center hole as the AC changes direction. The flux always is a loop and is forced to cross the center hole like a washer with a wire through the center hole, How can you flip the washer without curring the wire?

Interesting take on it but no.

The current and flux increase to a maximum, decrease to zero, then increase to a maximum in the opposite direction. Similar to a Sine wave, increase to max (+)>>>decrease to 0>>> increase to max (-), repeat.

Which begs the question, if the magnetic field can supposedly only expand and contract within the core then how did the conductor at the center get induced?. Here is the thing, no real expert believes the field is confined to the core only amateurs listening to hearsay.

Hey, let's try asking an expert like ChatGPT...
Question, is all the magnetic field confined to a toroid coil with a core or just part of it?.

QuoteIn a toroid coil with a magnetic core, while the core does indeed concentrate and enhance the magnetic field, it doesn't confine the entire magnetic field exclusively within the core.

In reality, a portion of the magnetic field still extends outside the core and into the surrounding space. The core's purpose is to enhance the magnetic field strength within the core itself and to guide the magnetic flux, but some field lines will still extend beyond the core's boundaries.

Hey we could be onto something let's try something else...
Question, can a magnetic field expanding into a conductor induce an electron current?.

QuoteYes, when a magnetic field expands or changes within a conductor, it can induce an electron current. This phenomenon is known as electromagnetic induction and is one of the fundamental principles of electromagnetism discovered by Michael Faraday.

Nice, now how about...
Question, so the magnetic field does not have to cut the conductor but can expand into it?

QuoteYes, that's correct. The magnetic field doesn't necessarily have to physically cut through the conductor to induce an electric current. Even if the magnetic field expands or changes near a conductor without directly intersecting it, it can still induce an electric current in the conductor.

Well, damn that was easy and my mind is absolutely racing with all the possibilities of what we just learned. That versus the mind numbing dogma of others peddling nonsense not based on facts.

Hey, let's try something different, something creative and interesting for a change...
Question, So if a magnetic field can expand into a conductor could it also displace an external magnetic field already within the conductor?

QuoteYes, a changing external magnetic field can induce currents within a conductor that can, in turn, affect the distribution of the internal magnetic field.

Wait, what?... so if a magnetic field like the Earths or a nearby PM was already influencing a large conductor and we effected the distribution of the existing magnetic field within said conductor with our own magnetic field in some way then...

AC

Probably as roto-r-verter ,coupling

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=5&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20031204&CC=US&NR=2003222512A1&KC=A1#
with

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=26&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19990930&CC=DE&NR=19741256A1&KC=A1#

Quote from: onepower on August 26, 2023, 11:50:16 AM
Tinman
Okay I see where your going, you seem to have a problem with the depiction of the magnets on the rotor. Since there are no magnetic mono poles and the flux loop in the core is in one direction what did you think was happening?.

The direction of the flux in the core tells us everything we need to know and we could draw a kitchen sink in place of the magnets for all it's worth. I knew immediately what the author was trying to describe based on the direction of flux in the core and the left hand rule for electron flow/flux curl.

It's not a standard alternator setup in my opinion because most people claimed that all the flux is contained within the toroidal core and cannot induce a conductor in the center. Now they should understand that it could be a circular solenoid coil, a closed or open toroidal coil or simply a magnet moving between a C shaped iron core. As I said, "the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced".  There could be thousands of possible designs and variations on this theme.

As well many seem to be infatuated with flux linking and cutting. Yet here we have a magnetic field which curls around the conductor inducing it. The flux within the circular core does not appear to cut the conductor like a common generator nor does the flux link like a transformer.

AC

Ok, i will try once again.

As depicted in the images from that website, the alternator will not produce a current flow.
You do not need a monopole magnet to have a single field entering both ends of the core. You simply need either the north or south end of a long magnet between the core at one time. And this is not a toroid, as the magnetic path is broken.

And in the case of the toroid example you posted, where the secondary loop passes through the toroid transformer, and produces a current flow in the loosely coupled secondary winding--that current is produced by the electric field around the toroid, not the magnetic field within the toroid.

So it is plain and simple.
1- if only a north or south field is present in the core, no current will flow through the coil.
2- if a north field enters one end of the core, and a south field enters the other end at the same time, then a current will flow through the coil. If you wanted to make this version of alternator more efficient, you would drill a hole through the cores, and pass the windings through the hole, rather than have the loosely coupled windings sitting where they are.

Quote from: onepower on August 25, 2023, 07:56:11 PM
Tinman
It's best to start logically breaking the problem down into first principals.

1)We know the generator in question works as claimed because it was replicated in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8weP9Cpphw)
1968 The Generator You Have Never Heard Of - Transverse Flux
A working replication/experiment is the best proof, it works and we can leave it at that.

2)You are correct in implying that the optimal design would use North and South pole magnets on either side of the disk. In fact conventional transverse flux generators do exactly that as shown in the picture below. However, optimized or not the question we want answered is only how and why it works. What I see in the responses are not answers rather guesses or distractions from the actual cause and effect in my opinion.

3)From the statements above we know the concept works and the only requirement is that a changing flux curls around the conductor to be induced. Here we could introduce a new concept so simple it's hard to imagine how anyone could miss it. Let's go back to the left hand rule for electron flow in a conductor as shown below.

The left hand rule shows the magnetic field curling around the conductor clockwise (the fingers) if the electron current was moving through the conductor towards us(the thumb). Likewise, if a process was reversible then the opposite should be true. That is, if we produced a changing magnetic field which curls around a conductor (the fingers) then an electron current should be induced in the conductor (the thumb). In fact this is exactly what we see in the transverse flux generator but for some reason most people cannot put two and two together. It's a very simple concept, it's right there staring at everyone and yet it eludes many, why is that?.

Here's a clue, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYpz9ak34e0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYpz9ak34e0)
I took a snapshot shown below. Now if the magnetic flux is supposedly enclosed within the core of a toroidal core then how was the thick conductor through the toroid center induced with an electron current which then acted on the magnet inside the conductor loop?. In fact the principal is no different that the transverse flux generator. Whenever a changing magnetic field curls around a conductor in a core an electron current is induced in said conductor within the core.

In fact what was shown here only scratches the surface and it gets even more bizarre on many different levels as we learn new concepts...

AC

All,

Just a quick note here - the "Right Hand Rule" does not apply here (Transverse Flux); it uses the "Co-Energy principle."

This was also discussed in the "LinGen development analysis"

Here's an interesting (Penn State Dissertation) Video that briefly touches on co-energy as well (at 3:10 - 3:14):

Transverse Flux Motor - Video #35096
https://altoona.psu.edu/video/35096/2020/12/14/transverse-flux-motor

SL

The current and flux increase to a maximum, decrease to zero, then increase to a maximum in the opposite direction. Similar to a Sine wave, increase to max (+)>>>decrease to 0>>> increase to max (-), repeat.



But if Chat GPT says that's correct then it must be true?
Chat GPT is only a parrot and can discover nothing new so what you get is the old dogma found already on the net.


Transvers flux motors have been around for many years.
Those tiny stepper motors in PTZ cameras are trans flux motors.

Quote from: SolarLab on August 26, 2023, 09:00:45 PM
 

All,

Just a quick note here - the "Right Hand Rule" does not apply here (Transverse Flux); it uses the "Co-Energy principle."

This was also discussed in the "LinGen development analysis"

Here's an interesting (Penn State Dissertation) Video that briefly touches on co-energy as well (at 3:10 - 3:14):

Transverse Flux Motor - Video #35096
https://altoona.psu.edu/video/35096/2020/12/14/transverse-flux-motor

SL

Yes, you notice how the magnets are arranged.
If they were either north or south each end, the motor would not work.
The same applies for the generator.

Brad

Quote from: tinman on August 26, 2023, 09:13:41 PM
Yes, you notice how the magnets are arranged.
If they were either north or south each end, the motor would not work.
The same applies for the generator.

Brad

Brad,

When I get some time I'll finish the "LinGen V2" which is based on the above, except
LinGen V2 is linear (a long oval rather than circular). Easier to make and integrate.
Plus it can be scaled, stacked and linked. A second stator coil is also added to power only
the electronics and drivers leaving the actual output as a seperate inverter feed.

In short; the "Stator U shaped elements are extended a bit and an "Electromagnet" is
inserted where the magnets are (N S). Pulsing the Electromagnets in sequence should
(?) produce some interesting effects. Initial CAE analysis shows great promise.
Watch Holcomb OUR for future details, etc..

Attached a pdf for review (note the magnets used were 1.2T which is easy for an
electromagnet using a good (SMC) material core).

SL

Quote from: SolarLab on August 26, 2023, 09:42:53 PM


Brad,

When I get some time I'll finish the "LinGen V2" which is based on the above, except
LinGen V2 is linear (a long oval rather than circular). Easier to make and integrate.
Plus it can be scaled, stacked and linked. A second stator coil is also added to power only
the electronics and drivers leaving the actual output as a seperate inverter feed.

In short; the "Stator U shaped elements are extended a bit and an "Electromagnet" is
inserted where the magnets are (N S). Pulsing the Electromagnets in sequence should
(?) produce some interesting effects. Initial CAE analysis shows great promise.
Watch Holcomb OUR for future details, etc..

Attached a pdf for review (note the magnets used were 1.2T which is easy for an
electromagnet using a good (SMC) material core).

SL

Looking forward to seeing the end results.

Brad

@SL


Thanks for the PDF on the transversal motor/generator.
Lots of good design info!

Tinman

QuoteAnd in the case of the toroid example you posted, where the secondary loop passes through the toroid transformer, and produces a current flow in the loosely coupled secondary winding--that current is produced by the electric field around the toroid, not the magnetic field within the toroid.

Right, try applying 12v AC to the toroid and measuring any external electric field let alone one which could induce the center conductor. In reality it's a pipe dream. The electric field theory your talking about is a math construct relating to equations needing to balance in an imaginary closed system not reality. Anyone who has actually bothered to measure the external electric fields with an electrometer array like I did would know the theory is nonsense.

Here's a clue, how many people do you know who use an electrometer or electrometer arrays?, the answer is basically none. So it's kind of problematic when nobody seems to be checking there facts and simply guessing.

So to recap, in the picture below you believe a weak electric field traveled through the insulation of the wire and toroid, through the 10mm air space and thick 2mm plastic insulation into the very large conductor which produced an electron current forcibly moving the magnet in the large conductor loop?... really?. Having actually measured external electric fields what your suggesting sounds more like unicorns and fairy dust to me.

AC

@AC


I think a simple Hall sensor in the hole and a scope would answer your assumption.
If you think about the field lines as only closed loops it would make sense that they take the shortest path which is the center hole.
Do you get the same effect with the cable on the outside of the torroid?

LM

Quote from: onepower on August 28, 2023, 12:43:23 PM
Tinman
Right, try applying 12v AC to the toroid and measuring any external electric field let alone one which could induce the center conductor. In reality it's a pipe dream. The electric field theory your talking about is a math construct relating to equations needing to balance in an imaginary closed system not reality. Anyone who has actually bothered to measure the external electric fields with an electrometer array like I did would know the theory is nonsense.

Here's a clue, how many people do you know who use an electrometer or electrometer arrays?, the answer is basically none. So it's kind of problematic when nobody seems to be checking there facts and simply guessing.

So to recap, in the picture below you believe a weak electric field traveled through the insulation of the wire and toroid, through the 10mm air space and thick 2mm plastic insulation into the very large conductor which produced an electron current forcibly moving the magnet in the large conductor loop?... really?. Having actually measured external electric fields what your suggesting sounds more like unicorns and fairy dust to me.

AC

I can assure you that it is the electric field around the toroid transformer that is inducing the current flow through your loosely coupled secondary.

The electric field does not cut through any part of the secondary, it follows the secondary around it's circumference. As we all know, a changing electric field is always accompanied by a changing magnetic field, that is at right angles to the electric field. It is this changing magnetic field that accompanies the electric field, that cuts through the loosely coupled secondary winding, creating current flow. It is not the magnetic field within the toroid core that induces current flow in your loosely coupled secondary.

We all also know that the current flow through the windings will lag 90* behind the voltage across the windings.
So if what you are saying were true, then the voltage across the secondary would be produced by the current flow in the secondary, and there for would be 90* out from the applied voltage to the primary windings-which it is not.

The voltage across both the primary and secondary will be in phase, not 90* out from each other.
This changing electric field around both the primary and secondary produces a changing magnetic field that is at right angles to the electric field. It is this changing magnetic field that induces current flow through both the primary and secondary windings.
It is not the magnetic field within the toroid core that induces a current flow through your loosely coupled secondary.
If it were, then the voltage across the secondary would be 90* out of phase with the voltage across the primary-which it is not.
The voltage across both the primary and secondary are in phase, which means that it is the electric field inducing a voltage across the secondary winding, not the magnetic field. And what do you get when there is a potential difference across any resistance, such as a coils windings ?, yep, a current flow.

So once again--> if it were the magnetic field from the primary inducing a current flow in the secondary, then the voltage across the secondary would be 90* out of phase with the voltage across the primary, which it is not.

Tinman
Basically everyone in the scientific/engineering world would disagree but I say let's go there...

Here is a question, so if in your picture we did have a one turn coil with next to no resistance ie. voltage drop across said conductor then how did the supposed E field evolve?. Follow the logic, a superconductor has no electric field because it has no resistance which could increase the charge density across the conductor producing an electric field. An external electric field is only produced because either the (-) or (+) charges bunch up or increase in density which is the cause of the external electric field. If the charges present cancelled, were negated internally or cannot increase in density then there is no external electric field. Ergo, cause and effect.

Think of it this way, as a hydraulic analogy the electric field is an electrical pressure(charge density) and the current (charge flow). If there was no resistance to flow then no pressure could evolve thus the pressure could not increase ergo no external electric field. So the picture you presented seems completely absurd to me because all the details which could describe what actually happens in reality are missing.

QuoteWe all also know that the current flow through the windings will lag 90* behind the voltage across the windings.
So if what you are saying were true, then the voltage across the secondary would be produced by the current flow in the secondary, and there for would be 90* out from the applied voltage to the primary windings-which it is not.

Indeed, why does any current(flow) lag behind the voltage(pressure)?. We could ask why does the water flow lag behind the water pressure from the source which produced the pressure which led to the flow in the first place?. The basic logic should be self evident but apparently it's not.

AC

 

Quoteauthor=onepower link=topic=19405.msg581701#msg581701 date=1693276975

Tinman

AC
[/quote]

QuoteHere is a question, so if in your picture we did have a one turn coil with next to no resistance ie. voltage drop across said conductor then how did the supposed E field evolve?

.

The E field is produced by the primary windings around the toroid transformer, not the single turn secondary.

QuoteFollow the logic, a superconductor has no electric field because it has no resistance

A true super conductor also rejects any magnetic field trying to be induced into it.
So in this case, where your toroid is a true super conductor, nothing would happen when a voltage was dropped across the windings.
In order to get a magnetic field into a super conductor, the magnetic field must be induced while the core is in a non super conductive state, and then cooled down to super conductivity. This is why a magnet will float above a super conductor, as super conductors appose any change in their magnetic field--the Meissner effect.

QuoteSo the picture you presented seems completely absurd to me because all the details which could describe what actually happens in reality are missing.

The diagram is correct.
All you have to do is add the magnetic field, that accompanies every changing electric field, at right angles to the electric field, and you can then see very clearly that magnetic field cutting through the secondary, which induces current flow.

The magnetic field produced in the primary windings is contained within the toroid core, and dose not induce the current flow in the loosely coupled secondary in your example.

QuoteWe could ask why does the water flow lag behind the water pressure from the source which produced the pressure which led to the flow in the first place?. The basic logic should be self evident but apparently it's not.

If we are talking water in pipes, then there is no lag, as water is non compressible.
So as soon as the water at one end of a pipe see's a change in pressure, the other end of the water in a pipe will see that change at the very same time.

QuoteBasically everyone in the scientific/engineering world would disagree

Oh, i don't think so.

Added-- https://www.iqsdirectory.com/articles/electric-transformer/toroidal-transformer.html
Quote: In regards to a toroid transformer, the magnetic flux density is concentrated inside the coil, while none is present in the outside regions.

Brad

Quote from: onepower on August 28, 2023, 10:42:55 PM
Tinman
Basically everyone in the scientific/engineering world would disagree but I say let's go there...

AC

Here are some more scientists/EEs that do not disagree with me--the real ones.

It is not the magnetic field that creates current flow, it is the electric field.
The magnetic field around a conductor is a by-product of current flow, which was created by the electric field.

Here are the steps--
1- an electric field is applied along the length of a conductor in a circuit.
2- this applied electric field causes current flow through that conductor.
3- this flow of current creates a magnetic field around the conductor.

This is why the voltage (electric field) always leads the current, which means it always leads the magnetic field built by that flow of current.

Brad

FWIW, one might wish to look at the attached paper by Edwards and Saha on their position that the transfer of power from secondary to primary is via the Poynting vector or S=EXH.  IOW, the current flow in the secondary is the cross product of the E field and the H field.

Please note the toroid example near the end of the paper.

Regards,
Pm

Quote from: partzman on August 29, 2023, 08:50:28 AM
FWIW, one might wish to look at the attached paper by Edwards and Saha on their position that the transfer of power from secondary to primary is via the Poynting vector or S=EXH.  IOW, the current flow in the secondary is the cross product of the E field and the H field.

Please note the toroid example near the end of the paper.

Regards,
Pm

In near field coupling, i would agree.
But AC's example has the secondary in the far field, where the H field dose not exist or link with the secondary.
The paper also seems to indicate that the H field in the near field also dose not link with the secondary.

To quote that paper--Quote:  (This H field enters the core just
below each primary turn and returns to circulate
around the outside of the secondary. The resultant
leakage flux flows around the outside of the secondary
winding and does not link with it.
Most of the power (P) will flow in the inner space of
the toroid where the E field is greatest)


Brad

The magnetic field does not exist except as a closed loop.
If you wind the torroid primary over only a short area, it will still induce current into a secondary on the side opposite of the primary.

The question is, how did the loop get into the secondary on the other side?

1: It just left one end of the primary and went around the core returning back into the primary.
2: It expanded a loop as the primary current increased until it cut through the secondary winding.

Quote from: lumen on August 29, 2023, 02:57:03 PM
The magnetic field does not exist except as a closed loop.
If you wind the torroid primary over only a short area, it will still induce current into a secondary on the side opposite of the primary.

The question is, how did the loop get into the secondary on the other side?

1: It just left one end of the primary and went around the core returning back into the primary.
2: It expanded a loop as the primary current increased until it cut through the secondary winding.

Ok, here is what happens in this case.

1-an EMF (voltage) is dropped across the primary coil
2- this electric field now exists along the entire length/turns of the conductor windings.
3- this electric field starts to push the electrons through the windings
4-current starts to flow
5-a magnetic field starts to build around the windings, due to this current flow
6-this increasing magnetic field induces a counter EMF, and also starts to travel around the core.
7- this changing magnetic field enters the secondary windings on the other side of the core.
8- an electric field always travels with a changing magnetic field.
9- this electric field once again, induces a current flow in the secondary, in the very same way it did in the primary.

Magnetic fields do not have a flow, such as indicated by the pretty pictures of magnetic fields.
Magnetic fields do not induce the current flow in a conductor. It is the electric field that accompanies a changing magnetic field, that pushes the electrons through the conductor, inducing current flow. Once current starts to flow, a magnetic field builds around the conductor, which apposes the original magnetic field.

Brad

Faraday and Lorentz would be dissapointed to learn: 

"a magnetic field does not induce a current flow in an conductor!" Well, maybe if it's static, of course.

Me too...

;)

Quote from: tinman on August 30, 2023, 02:46:44 AM
...
Magnetic fields do not have a flow, such as indicated by the pretty pictures of magnetic fields.
Magnetic fields do not induce the current flow in a conductor. It is the electric field that accompanies a changing magnetic field, that pushes the electrons through the conductor, inducing current flow. Once current starts to flow, a magnetic field builds around the conductor, which apposes the original magnetic field.

Brad

Hi Brad,
Well said.
Does the first sentence (my bold) equate to say magnetic flux is not a flow? I get a lot of flack when I tell people that.
Thanks,
bi

Quote from: bistander on August 30, 2023, 03:03:19 AM
Hi Brad,
Well said.
Does the first sentence (my bold) equate to say magnetic flux is not a flow? I get a lot of flack when I tell people that.
Thanks,
bi

Help me out here - define "flow".
Thanks.

Quote from: SolarLab on August 30, 2023, 03:18:05 AM


Help me out here - define "flow".
Thanks.

SL,
I'll pass. The definition is easily found elsewhere and I doubt my interpretation of flow differs.

And maybe you're disappointed, but I doubt Faraday or Lorentz would have been with anything in tinman's post.
bi

Quote from: bistander on August 30, 2023, 03:38:33 AM
SL,
I'll pass. The definition is easily found elsewhere and I doubt my interpretation of flow differs.

And maybe you're disappointed, but I doubt Faraday or Lorentz would have been with anything in tinman's post.
bi

Not a problem, just curious how you define "flow." No big deal - we all have our definitions to work from!

Quote from: bistander on August 30, 2023, 03:03:19 AM
Hi Brad,
Well said.
Does the first sentence (my bold) equate to say magnetic flux is not a flow? I get a lot of flack when I tell people that.
Thanks,
bi

That is correct.
Magnetic flux or fields are not a flow of anything.
People have been indoctrinate by the pretty pictures showing arrows in magnetic fields, and think that something is actually flowing in a magnetic field/flux.

Brad