This was a working permanent magnet motor,
but it discharged the Neodymium magnets due to eddy currents.
With Ferrite magnets it should run forever.
Description of principles of a permanent magnetic motor based on works in 1999 by Helmut G?bkes, Germany.
The permanent magnetic motor is a long searched device,
most (if not all) devices up to now do not work as expected.
First of all i had to say, that i am working on that Device for about one year and the only results I got are self sustaind runnings with a maximum time of about 50 Seconds.
I tell this, to reject all "self declared scientists" wich are expects a 1000kW Output @ zero input Device.
In my opinion, the first steps to get a **real working*** OU device are to understand the principles behind a (first time mostly small) 0.001% effect, before we can develop a bigger and real **energy** producing device.
Introduction: Some years ago, as i saw my first TOMI device working on my desktop, saw the magnet roll running upwards the ramp and
dropping down afterwards.
I know:
THAT is the first real flash of a working permanent motor device.
First of all, i tried to recognize the different forces, wich makes the TOMI working: the atracting part, the gravity, wich helps the rolling magnet to drop it out of the attraction zone and -of course- the many possibilities to loose energy in a TOMI device.
After a while of thinking and trying to eliminate each energy loosing parts of a "normal" TOMI, i had an interesting thought: Why not ***compensating*** what disturbing the moving part?
First of all, i had to eliminate the hassle of lifting up the magnetic roll against the gravity - and that was the easiest task.
I changed the Iron and magnetic parts (wich are interchangable in a TOMI too) and arranged it on the circumfirence of a rotor.
But now, i had a problem: I had no force, to got the magnets out of the attraction zone.
In the TOMI device, the Gravity helped the magnetic Roll out of this.
And here, my initial Idea of compensating the disturbing magnetic Field at the exit helped me.
I aranged a small magnet on the exit in repelling mode, with only enough force to compensate the attraction field on the exit part (of the TOMI).
So the accumulated inertia from the attraction pushed my wheel over that zone.
After some hours of playing around and thinking about the magnetic fields i got the final idea:
I built a soft iron part, wich attracts magnets on a rotor.
The soft iron stator is adjusted to form a field wich attracts the magnets at an angle of force wich speeds up the rotor.
Just before the magnets on the rotor are on the center zone (wich only produce sidewards directed forces on the shafts but no usable force)
the magnetic attraction of the soft iron bar is **compensated** by a small megnet in repelling mode (!)
This produces a small field around the center of about +/-15 degrees from the centerline in wich there is no force at all - no attraction and no repelling.
Within this "neutral zone", the wheel (and the magnets) are drive only by the accumulated inertia.
The adjustment is a little bit critical not to overcompensate and produce a counter-productive repelling zone instead of a neutral zone.
If the magnets are travelled thru this "neutral zone" the opposite effekt is effective.
If you position a stator wich had magnets so arranged that there is a increasing repelling field forcing to the (rotating) magnets,
the repelling produce an additional force to the wheel because the vector of force is (approx 10..15 degrees) above the center line.
In my experiments i found, that a +/- 10 to 15 degree "neutral zone" ist the best.
A smaller and a broader neutral zone tends to loose energy.
First, i tested these principle on a one-rotor device very successful.
My tests then proceed by adopting the principle to a two-rotor design, wich allows a better distribution of the forces.
A two-wheel design needs to be synchronized by two precision gears (diameter 200mm,Modulo 1 in my device) but this device acts less effective than the one-rotor device.
I assume, that the drag of the gears costs a lot of the (not so much) overunity force. CONCLUSION:
This kind of device is interesting, and the principle is easy to understand and to follow.
In my experiments, my magnets got weak after some hours of testing and never reached speeds more than 100..150 revolutions/minute.
This shows, that much energy is lost due to eddy currents wich are inducted in the soft iron and the nickel-plating of the magnets i used. Maybe also a big loss of energy is caused by my magnets itself, on memeber of the group tells me that my magnets (NeFeB) are highly conductive and so they are itself a big reason to brake the system due to eddy currents.
This the device spins without initial startup for up to 50 seconds. (I had some longer runs (up to five minutes) but this runs are not predictable and not safely repeatable.)
40-50 Second runs without any starting action was the "normal", wich is interesting enough to think and experiment a little bit more..
Further experiments will show, if ceramic magnets will do a better job!
Greetings, Helmut Goebkes
Have you tested this or do you assume that it did work?
Magnetism is known for a couple of hundred years, there have been 100+ attempts to build a mechanical-magnetic-self-running-machine
and all of them either turned out to not work or there is no proof?
Isn?t it a bit arrogant that we all think we can do it anyway? ;-)
Otherwise give me some proof, some people say there was no landing on the moon but we believe in a blurry video on youtube? HA HA.
Don?t get me wrong, I believe there is something but I don?t believe the energy is stored in the magnet.
We have to change our minds about the mechanical thinking. That way smart swiss clockmakers would have created a magnetic clock looooong before.
If magnetism is an effect of rearranging matter we should think of Tesla, Schauberger and some of Everts ideas.
Reproducing replicas based on replicated drawings or drawings based on blurry videos simply is a complete waste of time. Trial an error just leads to long threads, huge euphorism, tunnel vision and at the end no result.
If neutrinos can be detected, if any matter theoretically can be made from carbon, if the sun is cold and just the o2 in our atmosphere makes it warm. Doesn?t this all tell us everything is a result of the right interaction?
Tesla once said we will be able to use free energy when we synchronized ourself with the pulse of the universe.
So what is a magnet? In my eyes nothing else but a symbiosis.
At the end remember, Tesla didn?t know of neodym magnets and hightec circuits!
I would like to try prototyping this design. Do you have any drawings or cad files with concrete dimensions? I was also wondering what the longest tomi track you have made. I haven't tried one with iron in between the magnets, making a true tomi with no neutral zone. Just stacking the magnets together on a short distance produces a really strong propulsive force. If a tomi track does work on infinite distances, then I believe the rotary version should work if you are able to keep the magnetic fields acting at 90 degrees to each other. Have you known anyone to use a wedge type magnet to achieve this? Thanks. Sean
I watch these threads for three main reasons:
1. It is amazing what I've learned since starting to watch.
2. When I do experiment and try a new idea - sometimes - just sometimes - it is a blast seeing the unbelievable or misunderstood result and trying to understand it myself.
3. It is amazing AND humorous to watch the knuckle whackers in action when it is obvious they haven't tried the idea and they are just spouting scripture from whichever book they prefer or associating an action with something similar.
I await the knuckle whackers...... :)
This does not make sense since the iron cores will effectively become part of the stator magnet, if you look at the lower iron core, the part facing the rotor will become the north pole, so in effect this area will be in repulsion NOT attraction.
Take a magnet, stack some iron pieces on one pole, the end of those iron pieces will be the same pole.
S [magnet] N [iron] N
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D3979.0%3Battach%3D16782%3Bimage&hash=1cb3926c9c4c0054222db8df77600bed7631fa73)
@RunningBare
Good point but not completely correct.
Simple experiment:
Stick a fairly thick piece of steel sheet in a vise.
Put a magnet on opposite sides so the magnets would be in repulsion if the sheet was not there.
Slide both magnets together toward an edge of the sheet and past the edge.
Watch what happens.
The thickness of the sheet needs to be thick enough so the magnets will not repel each other when on opposite sides.
Knuckle-Whackers keep quiet unless you try this and don't see.
In regards to Magnets and Iron, there are some very interesting properties going on. These properties are very much worth investigating.
Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7IVWkRvVKk
[
.
Quote from: bastonia on January 24, 2008, 12:46:31 PM
In regards to Magnets and Iron, there are some very interesting properties going on. These properties are very much worth investigating.
Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7IVWkRvVKk
Hi,
this is very simple to understand.
the iro will come
with N / N or S / S connectet magnets
STRONGER with polarity (down) also N Polarity or South Polaraity.
If N / S.are connected on top. (om both sides)
the "Iron" COMES IN THE (middle) "NEUTRALE ZONE"
and have so also NEUTRAL magnetism down !!
thats fact , and all.
no mystery
Pese
pese.cjb.net (link collection) german and english.
http://pesetrier.stormloader.com/index0.html (german)
Quote from: bastonia on January 24, 2008, 12:46:31 PM
In regards to Magnets and Iron, there are some very interesting properties going on. These properties are very much worth investigating.
Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7IVWkRvVKk
Hi,
Although Pese explained the principle, you can see an experiment on the LaFonte setup shown in your video link with flux measurements by Naudin here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mep1.htm
rgds, Gyula
I had called Mr. Goebkes regarding this motor
back in 1999 and he told me several times, that the
motor did really work and only due to eddy currents
it did discharge the neodym magnets.
He sounded very sincere and if you make the basic experiment,
he is right, that with the right amount of iron you can have a changing
force, if you move a runner magnet horizontally from the iron part to
the position , where the stator magnet is behind the iron.
The force is then changing from attraction to repellation.
The axis of this motor must then be directly at the neutral zone,
so the lower part attracts the rotor and the upper zone
repells the rotor.
You have to finetune only the iron (plate and solid ) thickness
to get the desired forces.
It is much easier to fine tune than a SMOT or the recent Nikolatesla-backwards OC motor ( if this
is not a fake...!?)
Mr. Goebkes was very busy with his shop-job at this time and had
spent a fortune for the magnets at that time, so
did not want to repeat this and he did not know
about eddy currents at this time, so he was clueless
what else to try...
But with nonconducting ferrite magnets this design should
not discharge the magnets.
Suggestion for those worrying about guessing how much iron and magnet in the middle:
Start with what you can get and in the beginning use a solenoid coil with core for the middle magnet. Then you can adjust power to that solenoid (DC ONLY) and get a feel for how much iron and magnet are needed.
Don't let the coil flux bleed out onto the other parts!
Hi!
I can hardly believe this machine did work, but as Stefan says, the magnets did degauss during the operation.
What I then are thinking about is that is must be a quite much degauss in a short time to rotate the wheel.
I believe this is a hoax. I believe this motor can't work, because:
The magnets will allways be stucked in the most atractive part of the stator-iron part. The number of magnets in the rotor makes it going smoother, but there is no force whatsoever that is turning this magnetwheel.
In the explanation, the magnets will be attracted to the lowest iron piece, but are neutralized when approaching the statormagnet. The neutralized area is less attractive than the iron area longer down. So each magnet are therfor repelled backwards away from this area and forced to rest somewhere earlier in the iron part.
I have also simulated the device in FEMM. Moved the statormagnet up and down, to left and right, and adjusted the iron thickness so each magnet finally meets a neutralized area where it supposed to be in the drawing. I ran 150 samples in 15 degree rotation (The magnets are placed with 15 degree space). All I can find is an average torque of absolute 0.
If there is a picture of this device, so it's easier to calculate magnetsize, shapes of iron parts etc. it could be possible to simulate this more accurate.
However, the same excuse are rising every time someone claims a working magnet motor. The magnets get worned out, its impossible to rebuilt it due to its complexity. And ofcourse, the video camera have no batteries, or don't work, or the engineer don't know how to use his computer in order to post a video on internet. etc. Maybe a magpie was stealing all the shiny neo-magnets.
I'm for sure a sceptic, but never mind my posts - I'm just very tired of all excuses ;D
Vidar
Hi people,
About Magnet 'Motors'
May I quote my own message which was posted on another thread ?
Quote from: NerzhDishual on January 18, 2008, 05:36:09 PM
Hi sharp & accurate (N)PMM builders and freaks!
Sorry for disturbing, just my 2c :
Are all these N?PMM a matter of magic, serendipity, chance, patience or else? Are they reserved for PK (psychokinesis) gifted individuals?
A 83 years old retired engineer friend of mine has recently designed a self starting and self running (unfortunately for just a little while =/= 3/4 hour :( ) permanent magnet device. He insist that this thing must be very very accurately tuned (less than one milmeter). After that time you have to replace this ring shaped ferrite microwave oven magnet.
BTW: I have been told that ferrite and 'neo' magnets were not 'friends' and that you must mot mingle them. was I been told right?
I have shown his very device. Guess what? He was not able to get it running! Anyway, I trust him.
A couple of years ago I purchased a LEVITRON. Me and my son were also not able to have it turning! However this LEVITRON is now an 'official' device. Of course we could be morons. :P
I offered this (useless) LEVITRON my aged friend.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FImg%2FJSMotor.GIF&hash=3586bc8ecf9e44e82277cbbc6db3789218ffdafc)
Best
About ferrites and Neos not being friends:
Just my opinion>
I think it is just the neos that are not friendly. They are stronger but do not retain polarization as well as ceramics. They are usually coated with a conductive plating that allows Eddy currents to take shape and flow. They are also conductive inside. When flow starts any possible rotation energy just pushes the now movable electrons and the rotor winds down.
Heat is just as mysterious as magnetism. The Curie point may be reached during Eddy current flow then your magnets are just slugs.
I suppose if the magnets don't weaken then you can give it another spin. IMHO any moving magnet should be ceramic and non-conductive. Otherwise it will probably just stop working at some point.
BTW:
Folks that post intelligent reasoning - even if it is negative - are not considered knuckle-whackers in my book :)
Thank you, Nerz, for your effort to put in that drawing. The secret behind seperate iron or ferrite-magnets / iron-containing-soft-magnets could be there property, to interact with inertial iron-particles. These particles are adapting to flux-changes with a delay. during these process they either absorb or add additional magnetic force thru there according electrons-spin which is overunity (a sort of quantum mechanics). Neos are not soft.
I worked on a magnetic perpetual motor for about five years,and learned alot in the process, mine was based on Ezekiel wheels where both rotor and stator were moving,it the only way to go for infinity.But i gave it up,Here's why? All energy comes from light(electro-magnetism) C= M/E; light when it strikes matter(protons, earth) produce eletron-positron pairs.Electron positron collisions produce a pair a quarks, it takes 3 quarks to make matter, combining to form planets and stars, thus creating light. The circle is complete, not closed but open infinte,Thats all well and good for PM inventors exept one thing; the higher the over-unity the more light is needed, a mini-black hole.Stealing fire from the sun, might be bad for the liver,Of course fire from heaven might be bad for the soul. It's provable, the science is out there.Solution create your own light source, to go with your machine.Yours probably won't use to much light. Good luck.
Hi all !
I've seen somewhere web page with simmilar drawing
describing work of permanent magnet lifters...
can someone find original the link ?
...
priniciple of work is in picture
if build properly COP is easily 100 - 1000 !!!
Wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on January 31, 2008, 05:59:39 AM
Hi all !
I've seen somewhere web page with simmilar drawing
describing work of permanent magnet lifters...
can someone find original the link ?
...
priniciple of work is in picture
if build properly COP is easily 100 - 1000 !!!
Wiz
The diagram in essence is one of these...
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.walkermagnet.com%2FUK%2Flifting_handling%2Fimages%2Fneo-family-anim.gif&hash=855347422c66d3daab9d1420c3d9d4b55c175292)
It trades distance moved for force, unfortunately since magnetic flux degrades rapidly with distance it will never match the distance the lever has to be moved.
!
this is not a per. mag. lifter of type described in picture
this one doesn't shuts off mag. flux completely.
the one I'm talking about (principle described in picture)
completely rerouts flux so it is not existant for load and
in other moment there is full mag flux. wanting to grab something
energy to invest in rotation of magnet is thiny bit
in comparison what magnet will produce attracting heavy weight (load on rotor
) if air gap made sufficiently small.
wiz
Quote from: RunningBare on January 31, 2008, 06:54:29 AM
The diagram in essence is one of these...
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.walkermagnet.com%2FUK%2Flifting_handling%2Fimages%2Fneo-family-anim.gif&hash=855347422c66d3daab9d1420c3d9d4b55c175292)
It trades distance moved for force, unfortunately since magnetic flux degrades rapidly with distance it will never match the distance the lever has to be moved.
even this type of Perm. Mag. Lifter doesn't trades distance moved for force
(please be more carefull and find principle of work - I did)
it also reroutes mag field away from load (weight) but unfortunatelly not completely.
wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on January 31, 2008, 05:59:39 AM
Hi all !
I've seen somewhere web page with simmilar drawing
describing work of permanent magnet lifters...
can someone find original the link ?
...
priniciple of work is in picture
if build properly COP is easily 100 - 1000 !!!
Wiz
Hi Igor,
Seeing your drawing I remember an old US patent on magnetic lifters and it is 2,243,616 you can copy and paste this number into this link for a free download : http://www.pat2pdf.org/
Certainly there are other ideas of such magnetic lifters in other patents if you search them.
But the question again is whether you can make a simple mechanical solution that needs low input energy to keep up either the rotation or at least a pendulum-like movement of the arm(s) that are attached to the cylinder (or sphere) magnets?? And assuming of course that the output power you gain from the changing flux by an appropiate way will be sufficient for feeding back to cover for the input power needs...
Again, only practical testing can surely answer this. By the way, your idea could be combined with the parallel path setup to get an even higher flux change... ;) :) http://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT%20Technology.htm http://www.flynnresearch.net/young%20scientist/Josh%20Jones/PPMT%20Research%20Paper.pdf
rgds, Gyula
Hi all !!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_base
http://www.magnetics.com/product.asp?ProductID=52
http://realpower.hisupplier.com/product-130854-magnetic-holder.html
seems like there is only a need od 90 degrees to change states from on to off
(could it be done efficiently with el. relay ?)
can someone confirm that turning this device on or off doesn't reqiure much force, with or without attached weight
(clamped or no clamped) ?
anybody has experinece 'bout this ?
some of this devices can lift 5t !!!! still operating on/off with hands ???
wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on February 11, 2008, 07:55:36 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_base
can someone confirm that turning this device on or off doesn't reqiure much force, with or without attached weight
(clamped or no clamped) ?
anybody has experinece 'bout this ?
some of this devices can lift 5t !!!! still operating on/off with hands ???
wiz
A magnetic base can often lift large weights like 5 tons, but the distance of effective force to contact is very short. With the base in contact with the steel part the lever is fairly easy to operate. Without being in contact with the steel part the lever is much more difficult to use. This is such a common device that it seems improbable that energy can be harnessed from it unless this has been overlooked.
GearHead !
can you please answer aproximately
Let's say we have lifter PM device which is capable of lifting 200kg at a contact, what weight is capable of
lifting if device is spaced from weight with Aluminium sheet of 0.5mm thickness (this would be air gap in future rotor)
, and what weight (in Kg or pounds) needs to be applied to lever to turn on , and to turn off.
Many "impossible" things hasn't been given a little tought, cause they are "impossible".
This and simmilar stuf is not overlooked, cause nobody was looking at all.
Thanks
all the best Wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on January 31, 2008, 05:59:39 AM
Hi all !
I've seen somewhere web page with simmilar drawing
describing work of permanent magnet lifters...
can someone find original the link ?
...
priniciple of work is in picture
if build properly COP is easily 100 - 1000 !!!
Wiz
That was you designed here is principally not others than an DYNAMO.
If you conect coil instead the "weight".
Pese
Quote from: pese on February 11, 2008, 10:53:46 AM
That was you designed here is principally not others than an DYNAMO.
If you conect coil instead the "weight".
Pese
There is the catch that it is knowhere simmilar, cause "only" one thing wan't happen if made mechanicall
That thing is so crucial for this type of devices.
That "thing" is LENTZ counter mag. field
Unlike Coil, Weight or mechanicall load wan't allow Mr. Lentz to "spell" counter mag. field therefore wan't annihilate cause of action. There lies many many and all the free watts we need today.If weight is replaced with coil Lentz will make his "spell" and annihilate the cause. This is the huge difference.
After Mechanicall "Lent'z decoupler" it is possible to connect common el.generator on rotating (not mag. permeable) shaft...
Wiz
Hi All !
Here is another advancement proposed by Gyulasun of design and has some advantages when Flynn or Hildebrand concerned.
Both Hildebrand and Flynn type devices needs active coils all the time. In this type
Coils needs to be activated only period of time while magnet rotates to ON position, then coil can be switched off and let magnet
do rest of the work. This will mostly benefit the eventual motor to start easily (without inputing much of an energy). Disadvantage of this mechanically rotated magnet (and flux) might be observed in motor with when higher rpms develop.
Coil here, when ON, allso aligns magnet into ON position.
If you wonder How this synergetic(Wiz,Gyula,Flynn,Hildebrand) magnet on/off switch can be applied.
The answer is easy look at the Peter Lindemann motor and replace his coil with this mag switch.
In this type of motor you can see dissaproval that distance change is cause of rotation here. Reason for rotor turning is that mag. field Wan'ts to push All it's "vectors" through permeable rotor and Want's them to be spaced as much as possible through whole width of rotor.
Of course distance change has much bigger energy gradient but it is not utilised not even in todays motors-generators, cause of inability to
precisley control it.
Does anyone here in forum can or know someone who can make Silicon Iron sheets of custom dimensions cheap enough for prototyping ?
Wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on February 12, 2008, 05:22:48 AM
....Both Hildebrand and Flynn type devices needs active coils all the time.
Hello Wiz,
Thanks for thinking on my earlier hint and you show a good and interesting drawing, I like it! This seems to be another good way of joining the flux of an electromagnet to that of a permanent magnet, to sum them up.
However your above statement I quoted is not totally correct. If you study Hildebrand's magnetic valve it is ALSO pulsed when needed (just like yours) and this is true many times for the Flynn motors too. See Jack's valve here:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Hilden-Brand_electromagnetic_valve.gif from Jack's peswiki page here: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Director:Hilden-Brand_Electromagnet_Motor
My hint on joining parallel path principle for your device has come from an idea shown by Paul Noel, see this link:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:PpathMagControl.gif from this Paul page: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:FPPMT:Paul_Noel
The idea is that the control principle shown can be repeated several times, so you can really end up with a system (limited by core flux saturation only) where a very small rotary energy input for moving small masses of magnets will be able to steer huge forces from the summed up fluxes of the bigger magnets, as Paul described in the Invention section under his PpathMagControl.gif drawing.
Quote from: wizkycho on February 12, 2008, 05:22:48 AM
Does anyone here in forum can or know someone who can make Silicon Iron sheets of custom dimensions cheap enough for prototyping ?
Though I do not know such yet, Hildebrand found a problem with those laminations when used them for his valve. I quote his text from this link http://www.keelynet.com/energy/hildenbrand.htm :
Now I have talked to several motor engineers about the type of materials I have been using as the magnetic medium. Now, of course, money has always been an issue when it comes to buying materials. The magnetic medium I have been using has been confiscated from old electric transformers.
Well I have since found out that the silicon steel from transformers is oriented strand silicon steel laminate...and that motors constantly change north/south polarity and will not run if built with oriented strand silicon steel. Well my motors are running on this steel but I have pretty good proof that efficiency would greatly improve if I could get hold of some of the non-oriented silicon steel.
I think it means when you wish to pass flux in transformer laminations perpendicular to the normal flux direction it was manufactured for, you may end up with further losses you are not aware of. Of course if you use them for the normal rolled flux direction as manufactured, i.e. you excite the laminations like in normal mains transformers this is not a problem.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula and others !
In Flynn or Hildnebrand type devices coil must be energized all the time we want stator to attract mag. permeable rotor.
In this mechanicaly rotated magnet ON/OFF type coil is only energized while magnet rotates to ON position. in that time coil can be switched off and let magnet do all the rest attraction of rotor. After rotor does all the attraction to stator, there should be another
solenoid that moves magnet to off position.
This means that this setup needs two short impulses (one for ON, other for OFF), so in situation of low RPM (or starting from 0)
this two impulses would be much shorter in comparison to Flynn,Hildenbrand device types.
As the RPM is rising there would be a certain RPM when period of two short impulses (this device) allmost equals period of one pulse (Flynn,Hildenbrand...)...so this type of mechanicall magnet ON/OFF is for low RPM motors (that has lower energy reqiurements to start).
Not saying that starting is a problem of Flynn and /or Hildenbrand (they are far more efficient than todays motors
and going three times OU)
Now there is only a problem how to build them, and material to use. Scince custom shaped laminates are expensive (and may have some other unwanted properties) to build magnetic paths I would use Fe dust mixed with epoxy (might allso add some Co dust).
Now there I must again ask this forum can anybody supply me (or knows someone who can) with reasnobly cheap two component epoxy
and sufficient ammount of it, so I can start making custom "cookies"...?
Wiz
Hello Wiz,
Yes, I got it now, you are right with low RPMs up to a certain RPM the pulsed input energy need can be less with respect to the others.
I wonder if you know about another forum where (among other things) Lindemann's rotary attraction motor is discussed? And there is a member there from Latvia with friend circles of laser cutting possibilities and lamination sources... it would be worth a try to write him and ask if he could help?
If you think you can freely enter that forum by registrating first (so that you could see all the great photos / drawings on different motor replications) here: http://www.energeticforum.com/ and the this is the thread I point at:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets.html
This is quite a long thread already (started last April) and member Jetijs came there only at around Summer/Automn, you will surely find his posts and pictures, like this: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets-9.html#post11096
Good luck!
Gyula
Quote from: R_weng777 on January 30, 2008, 11:34:52 AM
I worked on a magnetic perpetual motor for about five years,and learned alot in the process, mine was based on Ezekiel wheels where both rotor and stator were moving,it the only way to go for infinity.But i gave it up,Here's why? All energy comes from light(electro-magnetism) C= M/E; light when it strikes matter(protons, earth) produce eletron-positron pairs.Electron positron collisions produce a pair a quarks, it takes 3 quarks to make matter, combining to form planets and stars, thus creating light. The circle is complete, not closed but open infinte,Thats all well and good for PM inventors exept one thing; the higher the over-unity the more light is needed, a mini-black hole.Stealing fire from the sun, might be bad for the liver,Of course fire from heaven might be bad for the soul. It's provable, the science is out there.Solution create your own light source, to go with your machine.Yours probably won't use to much light. Good luck.
Koje Laprdanje (Elephant Shit) !
Try and put some Cu wire in the sun and meassure voltage at the end - you 'll get nothing
Try better with coil - nothing again (you'll say because it is Pair of electron-positron so voltage is 0)
Lats have total absence of Sun and fire, lets have 0 K (-273 C) and still at this absolute zero you get current and magnetism that moves for free
and can make work - free energy. So where is the sun now. You have situation of total darkness but if energy is utilised - comming towards sun.
Your theory says that if you surrond OU device in a box of outvards mirrors that OU device will stop functioning ????
Your theory says that if I draw black circle on paper (scince black doesn't reflect light I must have created many many el-pos pairs and they can not escape this circle...) I have actually created a black whole ??? am I powerfull or what ???
Your theory says that all the cows with black shapes are potential danger of creating black whole. What about dalmatian dog's black spots all over
cccc.
So don't spread this old lady witch booga-boo thories - cause they are totaly apsurd.
Wiz
What about just put a sheet of alu-foil in two different locations. Connect a cu wire from each of them. Then you will measure voltage from the two other ends. There is allways electrical potential differences in two different locations, so you have a capacitor charged by the environment :) Cool?
OK. When it comes to magnetism, magnetism is only one element of at least two required to produce energy. So magnets alone will never produce energy out of free air. However there is many interesting approaches to OU, and I can never let the thoughts about a working magnet motor or SMOT let go.
Vidar
Using a little coil betwen the stator plates wouldn't regauge the stator magnets?
i am close to a freely rotating magnet arrangement.. i hope so. :)
hi ignilc, come back when you've got it running. good luck!
I wanted to put my two cents into this even though it looks like the thread is dead.
Firstly, Neodymium magnets are some of the hardest magnets to degauss. Eddy currents alone should not cause degaussing. This is because the eddy currents' flux will not be anywhere near as strong as the Neo's flux - it would take a flux stronger than the Neo's to cause degaussing, even then they are quite impervious.
Secondly, if the eddy currents were causing heat, then the magnets would have to be getting near 80C - highly unlikely. If spinning conductive magnets setup internal eddy currents which caused them to degauss, then there would be many motor manufacturers out of the business right now - in fact we wouldn't have electric motors if that was the case.
An excuse like "the magnets degaussed" is a very bogus statement which leads me to believe the motor design will not and did not work. It is also very clear to see that the rotor will find an equilibrium position and not spin.
In regards to Wizkycho's idea. This will generate electricity, but it will be nothing more than a standard electric generator. As the magnet rotates and field flows through the coils, the coils (assuming they are loaded) will repel against the rotating magnet. This will cause the magnet's rotation to become difficult, aka there will be a counter force or back torque associated with rotating the magnet when the coils are loaded. Looking at the links posted by Gyulasun, all the generators shown will experience the same back torque.
You need a way for the coils to see a changing magnetic field yet be isolated from the prime mover. If you could rotate the magnet and the coils' opposition to the flux would not hinder the rotation, then you have something big!
Just my two cents,
Charlie
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 23, 2008, 11:18:24 PM
I wanted to put my two cents into this even though it looks like the thread is dead.
Firstly, Neodymium magnets are some of the hardest magnets to degauss. Eddy currents alone should not cause degaussing. This is because the eddy
yea, that's the first thing I saw wrong too. Unless he overheated them, I do not see this setup doing it.
This thread is not picked up by Google because we are spelling Herr Geobkes first name wrongly.
It is Helmut Goebkes - Helmut Geobkes - Helmut Geobkes.
I am now convinced more than ever that there are secrets in this universe that remain so by design and for very important reason...
TS
This looks like every other geometry-based magnet motor - it will hit a parity point and stop dead. As for degaussing - I have a large number of 1/2" cube magnets and a handful that have been used in opposition quite a bit and don't notice much difference between the ones that have been used in opposition and the ones that haven't been. You could probably measure it with a gaussmeter, but I can't notice it much otherwise.
I've just noticed...
If you have a look at Steorn's PM Orbo concept:
http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf
, it looks almost the same as Goebkes's one.
Should work.
hrmmm I do not see the relationship per say other then it is an attempt at creating a magnetic motor...