Low-Q came up with the following link to the The SMOT (PM3.2).
http://www.geocities.com/k_pullo/SMOT15_PM3-3.htm
Looks simple enough, so what the heck, lets give it a go.
I want to use some of the magnets I already have as to keep buying new ones for each project gets expensive.
So decided for the Rotor magnets to use some of my good old dedicated 19mmSQ * 3mm Neo's
I have layed up the design and gone for a 120mm Rotor that fits 16 of these magnets around the outside nicely and because they are thin I only did a 6 degree slant, might have to increase this, but for now it is a building block.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FSMOT15_setup.GIF&hash=3822912bf16c4a1df051aebcd5f278e6f48a0c50)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun.jpg&hash=16a69c5a3f3e0ef7b05300dcad28736da1764e3c)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun1.jpg&hash=8ed2118c3733fc255dab47720046c1a7321b6337)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun2.jpg&hash=31b9d23f2f03effc983eda9ba6fffde65b9bcd67)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun3.jpg&hash=20d8352278bac299382015a795eade7881c49529)
As you can see gone for a small brass shaft that will pop in some small bearings to reduce the friction.
Off to knock the base up and will update later.
Cheers
Sean.
What kind of tool did you use to make those slots in the plexi glass?
This device is symmetrical and reminiscent of the tomi track
http://mmmgroup.altervista.org/e-magnet.html
The forces should balance out.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on November 24, 2007, 08:24:29 AM
Low-Q came up with the following link to the The SMOT (PM3.2).
http://www.geocities.com/k_pullo/SMOT15_PM3-3.htm
...
"Sorry, this GeoCities site is currently unavailable."
One funny bit from the geocities website, right below the video link:
"Unfortunately this prototype seems not to work."
Although the overall torque from the website in question does seem to be mostly positive, those values shown in the graph in comparison to the torque generated by any two magnets( rotor and stator) is miniscule, so the positive result in this case is probably just the result of noise or inaccuracy of floating point calculations. Any curve that looks as jagged and rough as that one is suspect.
Well the base is done and Rotor mounted on minature bearings
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun4.jpg&hash=cf2668e321aa4f7508a8ab4c30f27e6b0f962aa2)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fun5.jpg&hash=6ace6ed5717a77a6bc32cc2e8dedb18874c92901)
Lttle video to show how loose the bearings are.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZeRS-Smot-PM-attempt.wmv
Now to start the Stator mounts.
Quote from: hanglow on November 24, 2007, 10:11:20 AM
What kind of tool did you use to make those slots in the plexi glass?
Hi Hanglow
They were cut with a 3mm 2flute slot drill on a small CNC machine.
Cheers
Sean.
Quote from: Paul-R on November 24, 2007, 10:18:57 AM
This device is symmetrical and reminiscent of the tomi track
http://mmmgroup.altervista.org/e-magnet.html
The forces should balance out.
thx Paul
Interesting linkl, will go have a read
Quote from: acp on November 24, 2007, 11:19:28 AM
Although the overall torque from the website in question does seem to be mostly positive, those values shown in the graph in comparison to the torque generated by any two magnets( rotor and stator) is miniscule, so the positive result in this case is probably just the result of noise or inaccuracy of floating point calculations. Any curve that looks as jagged and rough as that one is suspect.
Well only one way to find out ;D
Be handy having a loose rotor to try a few other things as well, so not all is lost yet !
Quote from: CLaNZeR on November 24, 2007, 11:28:02 AM
Quote from: acp on November 24, 2007, 11:19:28 AM
Although the overall torque from the website in question does seem to be mostly positive, those values shown in the graph in comparison to the torque generated by any two magnets( rotor and stator) is miniscule, so the positive result in this case is probably just the result of noise or inaccuracy of floating point calculations. Any curve that looks as jagged and rough as that one is suspect.
Well only one way to find out ;D
Be handy having a loose rotor to try a few other things as well, so not all is lost yet !
I which you good Luck.
helmut
Try not to laugh to hard. I am new at this. I'm not real good at this but at least i'm slow. :) I don't have a fancey CNC machine yet. So I am using hand tools that are sometimes really hard to get accurate results. I originally was going to put 16 cube magnets in but after I got done shaving my oval in to a circle thanks to a rotor zip tool, it was to small to fit 16 so I said what the hell I'll just try 8 and I will have to make a new one that holds 16. Instead of using magnets on the outside stator I used pieces of steel that I found at the hardwood store. This motor didn't work but at least you can see what not to try.
here is another video file.
Here is a picture
Hanglow, I do not think you need a CNC machine mate.
Bloody good job, well done.
Be interesting to swap the metal plates for magnets.
Cheers
Sean.
I did try puting some magnets on the metal plates it just made it more stick more. I may try replacing the metal plates completely with magnets.
@hanglow
you need to put additionally a shielding iron piece on every magnet rotor magnet.
Otherwise you will have too much cog and attraction forces to the stator metals !
Try asymmetrial "L" shaped iron core pieces to add to each magnet.
Play with the thickness of the iron pieces.
Have a look at the Helmut Goebkes permanent magnet motor.
It describes a working principle.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: hanglow on November 24, 2007, 05:02:40 PM
I did try puting some magnets on the metal plates it just made it more stick more. I may try replacing the metal plates completely with magnets.
Get rid of the metal, and attach magnets in the same size with the correct polarity inwards. Cogging btw. is just a result of uneven forces around the wheel, but should never be a hindrance to rotation as long there is more force than counterforce.
Br.
Vidar
Quote from: hartiberlin on November 25, 2007, 12:50:20 AM
Have a look at the Helmut Goebkes permanent magnet motor.
It describes a working principle.
Regards, Stefan.
Wow! So, that was his name. I have been trying to track that for a while. Here is a selection of stuff:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/free-energy/files/goebkes%20magnet%20motor/
Nice one, Stefan.
Paul.
Wouldn't I get the same effect of iron if I just moved the metal stator's further away? I have tried some other models of motor's as well and it seems to me that there is always a sticky place. I think it may need to be un-symetrical in design.
Quote from: hanglow on November 25, 2007, 04:21:06 PM
Wouldn't I get the same effect of iron if I just moved the metal stator's further away? I have tried some other models of motor's as well and it seems to me that there is always a sticky place. I think it may need to be un-symetrical in design.
The metal plates attract the rotor magnets all the time. Where the rotor magnet has just passed the corner of one statormagnet, it will be more or less repelled.
I have however done more simulations in FEMM, and it shows that if I encrease accuracy in mesh size and encreased the number of contour lines, plot points, and line integral points, the total simulated output is decreasing rapidly. I used first mesh size of 0.5, which displayed an average of 74Nm. In a non working motor this average is 0. So did I reduce mesh size to 0.2, and now the average output is 5.7Nm. So if I can predict the outcome with infinite accuracy, the average output would be 0.
So FEMM might be good enough to predict reality, if you have high enough accuracy and plenty of processor power in you computer (It takes much time to calculate all these measurements with high accuracy)
Vidar
Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?
Quote from: hanglow on November 26, 2007, 09:00:39 AM
Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?
After further research, I just indicates that the device will never work as the data I simulates varies so much just because of changes in samples, accuracy etc. At least the data measured is nothing to base the real life on. However, the data simulated is allways on the same side of the +/- scale, so maybe that's an indication on that it WILL work. I don't know for sure.
Vidar
Once again, a sim program is only as good as its programmer. On of the best on the market missed the res point of a coil/cap pair by far enough to be in error for what I wanted. It did prove that the circuit would work but had to tweak it a bit to settle in on the right freq.
On using it for magnets, age old point, 2d not 3d. So far femm dont do magnets very well. I trusted a design from a sim and spent the bucks for the magnets, yup you guessed it. Not gona work. I would love to see a sim made that would do magnetic fields correct. So on we go.......
thaelin
I'm going to rebuild this one with 16 magnets and put some magnets on the side. It may take me a few days. Maybe I can try some shielding to get past the sticky points.
here you can see 3 S.M.O.T. Units in Line (with the description why a SMOT never will work)
http://www.drillingsraum.de/room-forum/showthread.php?tid=109
now there's a video avaiable (link above). But only with 2 Units. Anybody here who did it with 3 or more?
I have yet to see a conclusive experiment with a SMOT. So, I'm getting so frustrated with hearing about SMOTs that work I want to post a description of what I "think" would show that a SMOT works or not. Every video I see shows a person dropping a ball onto the beginning of a track. This is where I think the possible energy input may be. What would convince me is to see the ball sitting on flat level surface with nothing holding it so it can roll free with just the slightest force. Then instead of dropping the ball into the track push the SMOT to the ball. I have a feeling the ball will be pushed away as the SMOT nears it. If it pulls the ball in and possible lifts it and then releases it out the other side to roll free on the same level surface then I would be convinces they actually work. Does anyone else have input on that test idea?
Tim
Make it happen.