If we are to succeed in building an OU motor we should first understand how to do things differently, we do the same things over and over expecting different results, which never happens. Lets start with an easy experiment, something anyone can build and test and get tangible results.
In pictures, PMM-1 to PMM-3 we have a basic setup using two inductors which are 120v/12v transformers cut down into inductors---- having open paths. On each inductor is a 50lb pull neo magnet, 1" dia x 1/2" thick, there poles are oriented on the inductors so that they will attract each other. The only issue of importance here is the angle at which they are situated relative to each other and the rotor armature, as we see in picture PMM-4 this geometry produces a magnetic field in which the armature can be influenced by the magnetic field but not the poles of the magnets to any extent. In fact there is basically NO cogging in the rotor at all ----- that is the whole point of this experiment, but the armature will produce a very powerful acceleration within this field but only "between" the poles. The rotor armature is a bolt wrapped with wire, nothing more, no exotic materials or circuitry is needed to produce what we want, that is action without reaction on the source.
Picture PM motor T120-12 is a scopeshot of the inductors connected in series with a capacitor, the scale is 5v/division so peak voltage is 7v using the 120v connections to the inductors only, as we want coils of large self-inductance. If you look at the setup most would be surprised to see any voltage at all on the inductors, but it is there ---- Do you know why?
Im going to expand on one of the last images, PMM-4. I have added green lines to show the basic geometry in this setup, as well there is a large red line indicating the direction of the field cutting the armature ---- notice the field always cuts "across" the armature and never parallel to it ;) If the field lines were ever parallel to the armature the armature would become polarized in an opposite sense to the PM field resulting in attraction (cogging). That does not happen here as there is a threshold point at which the armature starts to line up with the PM field poles but the PM field is more attracted to it's other pole than to the armature thus there is very little or no attraction to either pole and the rotor armature can freewheel through the field when not energized. Remember if there is any attraction by the armature to any pole you will have to pay in energy to remove it, it is a losing proposition. The yellow lines represent a small window of opportunity in which the armature may be energized, residual magnetism will carry the armature though past the center line. It should also be noted that while the armature can attract the PM field the PM field will still only cut across the armature--- the armatue itself will stretch the PM field outward to itself. I think you are going to be surprised by the amount of torque generated on the armature rotor without using the poles of the PM field and the fact that the rotor just freewheels through when not energized.
--- It should be noted that the inductors can generate power but in this setup they are used for no other reason than to hold the magnets in place.--- :)
Best of luck
G'day allcanadian,
We are indeed on the same runway, as you put it. I did something very similar to you only I used permanent magnets on a steel yoke in my experiments. Like you I found what I consider a window of opportunity between the poles. This is my arrangement. I used two magnadur magnets. The rest is self explanatory.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeelytech.com%2Ffreischwinger%2Fmagnaduryoke.jpg&hash=e6556e910e1be9b13330a92b718dac7c05560af2)
Keep it coming. Good stuff.
Hans von Lieven
Thank you allcanadian for taking the time to help us see a way out of the groove we have been stuck in.
I will get the parts together and experiment A.S.A.P.
Will post my findings.
Thanks again ;D
Here is a better design which uses a brushless rotor :)
We can see it is an inductor (cut down transformer) with open flux paths, the inductor is about 3" from the PM rotor. The rotor will spin through almost 180 degrees with a single impulse into the inductor from a small 12v battery with quite a bit of torque. But this design has limitations in that the spin field is determined by the north pole of the inductorwhen both north and south fields should be utilized. A much better design will follow using a more natural spin field.
Here is a superior design which utilizes a more natural field, the double helix, which I think many of you have seen in various forms.
In PMM spin-1 we can see the inductor and PM rotor, to the right a top down view of the spin fields. The rotor will spin through 180 degrees with a great deal of torque from a single impulse into the inductor. In this case only two impulses are needed to spin the rotor through 360 degrees, in an AC induction motor you would be lucky to see 40 degrees rotation. This design also utilizes open paths so the field has "options" thus we are never forcing the flux flow and efficiency is raised in the process. I see this design as resembling a wind-up elastic band airplane, the tension between the inductor and rotor is a spiralling tension as the elastic band is in the wind-up airplane. The length of the flux lines changes very little as the tension is released, the flux lines move very little as tension is released. Now compare this to the conventional motors we know and we can see this PMM spin motor utilizes force to it's advantage where conventional motors rely on a change in distance where parameters are in continuous change, reaction influencing the initial action, which cannot happen here.
The next picture (PMM spin-2)is a representation of the magnetic fields in this motor, we can see the fields are spherical, if you take a very small 1/8" magnet lightly in your hands and follow the field lines you can feel that the field is in fact perfectly spherical, which is a problem. :D How do you utiize a perfectly spherical field?. We can see the red/blue polarity in this field and we can see that the field is divided through the neutral center, so we should understand we have more than just a couple of poles in this field, we have a three dimensional field. The best way I have found is to produce tension in attractive fields but not have them "move" to any extent so we wind the fields up in a double helix producing large powerful rotations in the rotor but have the field itself move very little. I think you will be very surprised at the torque this rotor generates.
It should be noted that we are only using one side of the rotor, we will add an inductor to the other side producing twice the torque later, a double-double helix for double the fun. ;D
We will put these inductors in series in a very cool circuit, with two short duration impulses from a small 12v battery into the inductor we will charge a capacitor to over 150 volts, we should never have to live with voltage drops, so we will reverse the equations. Voltage will only rise when utilized thus we will have many options with what to do with it.
Best of luck
Very interesting idea here. However, I do not see how this differs from a synchronous motor. With the rotor spinning at no load, there should be smaller amounts of current in the induction coil. If you load the rotor, the current usage in the coil will increase.
The torque it produces will not be as much as that developed from a regular synchronous PM motor because the magnetic coupling is low in this setup. Now if you add capacitance and make the inductor part of a resonant circuit you can improve the torque, since the magnetic field from the coil will be increased (aka an increase in magnetic coupling). By adding another inductor in series, you accomplish the same thing as you would if you moved rotor closer to the coil - in the single coil setup (basically adding the second coil is again the same as increasing the magnetic field coupling). This should still follow the same laws described by regular synchronous machines. Back torque will still develop in the coil and will counter a percentage of the applied impulse when the rotor spins. To reiterate, since the coupling is weaker, there is smaller percentage that goes into mechanical motion, the other part is recovered in your resonator circuit (aka capacitor and inductor).
Here's something else, you can take two rare earth, permanent magnets, and place them on very low friction bearings. Then, separate them by two feet. If you spin one, the other will also spin - at this 2 foot distance. Of course if you load one of the bearings (or use a bearing of higher friction) it won't spin.
Maybe I'm missing something inherent to this setup, but by my deduction, the only way an over unity device will be constructed is if the back toque can be de-coupled from the prime mover. I have come to realize that back torque is a necessary evil, you must have it. However, I do not think it has to be coupled as much with the prime mover as it is in modern motor/generator applications.
@Charlie_V
QuoteVery interesting idea here. However, I do not see how this differs from a synchronous motor. With the rotor spinning at no load, there should be smaller amounts of current in the induction coil. If you load the rotor, the current usage in the coil will increase.
Good questions ;D
The problems I see with synchronous motors are many, one is close coupling producing phase lag in the current source, how can an AC motor load be reflected back to the AC source-- the AC generator? So I partly decouple the load and source, if the reluctance in the PM path is raised the inductor will utilize the "other" open path that is the back side or front side of the "H" inductor so it has options--- it can short its magnetic path, what happens when an electromagnet starts acting like an inductor? The DC-DC step-upconverter can have efficiencies up to 95%, what happens when an inductor can recycle 95% of its energy to "recharge" the source and this inductor is part of a motor? As well synchronous motors do not have rotating fields, the seperate fields turn "on" and "off" giving the appearance of rotation but in no way rotate about themselves, they are static switched magnetic fields where this motor posted truely does have a rotating magnetic field, it must twist to couple with the PM's. All AC or DC motors do one thing-- they produce fields in attraction and repulsion, these fields "must" change in length thus strength to produce motion(inverse square law)-- they must switch rapidly producing eddy currents and residual magnetism (drag) on themselves. We could say AC/DC motors will always act like a split transformer with a variable air gap the load a differential time function.In my motor posted however the length of the field cannot change to any extent, it is a twisted field which must truely rotate and the air gap never changes. As an inductor with a constant open magnetic coupling it will act as an inductor will in DC-DC step-up converters- it efficiently produces a voltage rise, so there are a few differences from synchronous motors. I started by asking one single question---- How can AC/DC motors consume the power given to them? where does it go? When I answered this question it was easy to start doing something different. When you see the driver circuit all of this will make much more sense, this is not a motor :) it is an inductor which happens to couple to a PM rotor in certain instances, the fact that this PM rotor may rotate doing work has no bearing on the operation of the inductor whatsoever. ;)
Sounds pretty good, I'll need to re-read that when I get some more time because I'm in the middle of something. It does seem to be something slightly different - I like it!
Well, I was able to re-read it. How I've always understood it, when a standard motor has no load, the energy is reflected back to the source, thats what back torque is. The energy placed into the motion is put back into the coil and the current in the system is neutralized (for the most part). When a load is placed on the rotor, it starts to take the energy that is normally reflected back. The current is no longer neutralized and it flows, delivering energy to the load. Brushless DC motors (like the ones in computer fans) are the only ones I know of that use on-off cycles in the coils for driving. Regular single and three phase motors do have rotating magnetic fields that gradually increase and decrease at 60/50Hz - as gradual has 60Hz is at any rate. Of course there are motors with PWM control but this is more of an artificial means to make a controllable sine wave - its all so fancy haha. But I see what you are getting at, the field lengths do change quite vigorously.
I think the fields in your motor are also changing lengths - though they are smaller. The distance between one pole in the rotor and the pole of the inductor (when twisted) is longer than when - in the next instance of time - the poles are rotated and are right below each other. Then the inductor switches polarity and it repeats.
I'm not sure about the effect of the H inductor coil. That is rather interesting giving the field a second path to follow - that is definitely not done in regular motors. However, I'm not really sure how much that helps. Since the rotor is moving, there is an interaction between the coil and rotor. Otherwise, the flux would avoid the rotor all together and take the shortest path on the other side of the H.
I would imagine - and hopefully I'm wrong - that the energy reflected back to your drive circuit is 94%, with the loosely coupled rotor taking 1% WHEN loaded. If there is no load, then very near 95% (assuming the full efficiency) will come back. The loose connection assures you that only 1% will only ever be used from the rotor if it is loaded. Wouldn't this make the mechanical efficiency of the rotor really bad, whereas the electrical efficiency of the driving circuit is really good? It still seems like a regular synchronous motor, except it is very loosely coupled - back torque will still be the devil, just really tiny.
Now, if it turns out that the energy developed from the rotor is greater than the 1% powering it, then you have something very amazing. Perhaps the far field effects of a magnet are grossly overlooked!
@Charlie_V
I would agree with almost everything you have stated, it's really nice to talk with a person who can debate there perspective in detail but still be open to others opinions. I was reading some of the "lenz thane a hand" thread and it seems to have disintigrated into an endless rant session.
When you mentioned that---
QuoteThe energy placed into the motion is put back into the coil and the current in the system is neutralized (for the most part). When a load is placed on the rotor, it starts to take the energy that is normally reflected back.
I see this a little differently, I think an AC generator does nothing other than produce a potential difference (voltage) across it's terminals this difference is the "cause" of current flow, when current flows in a circuit the voltage drops thus the generator must "work" to maintain this voltage differential while current flow drops the voltage. So the generator is an electrical "pump" pressurizing the electrical "fluid" the current is a flow of this fluid which must drop the electrical pressure(voltage). This pressure is constant in DC machines and alternates back and forth in AC machines. We know from fluid dynamics that high flows produce drag and friction and that high pressure/low flow systems are more efficient.
If we use these analogies then how can an AC motor consume energy? I think it must produce a voltage drop through current flow because this is how they are rated, Volts x Amps= Watts. If we look at alternating current we could see it is a pressurized "fluid" producing flow in one direction then the flow is reversed as is the pressure. So the AC motor can restrict current flow through resistance but as soon as reactive components are added (capacitance and inductance) then the voltage(pressure) and current (flow) phases which are usually equal change (lead/lag) to produce a phase difference. This phase difference reflects back to the generator which must "work" to produce equal phase relationships, this is why I never use AC in my machines----pulsed DC only. The phase change(work) in AC machines is a "time function" nothing more, the capacitance or inductance in the coils store energy out of time with the generating phases.
Is it any wonder Tesla abandoned AC power for pulsed DC ;D We can still use AC but it must be high frequency and high potential , its funny how a high frequency AC "pulse" acts just like DC in a coil.
My motor is very simple, I introduce a fast DC impulse into a high inductance(inductor) this energy is stored as a magnetic field, this field interacts with a PM field but this coupling is always attractive never repulsive (a loose coupled helix field), when I collapse this magnetic field I store the discharge in a capacitor.(whatever energy goes in comes out)----then once the voltage on the capacitor reaches a certain level I discharge the capacitor back through the inductor into the battery, charging the battery.
QuoteI'm not sure about the effect of the H inductor coil. That is rather interesting giving the field a second path to follow - that is definitely not done in regular motors. However, I'm not really sure how much that helps. Since the rotor is moving, there is an interaction between the coil and rotor. Otherwise, the flux would avoid the rotor all together and take the shortest path on the other side of the H.
The question is "why" would it couple at all? The inductor is 4" away from the PM rotor and the inductor poles are 2" apart so why would it prefer the PM rotor? As well the PM's have no influence on the uncharged inductor, the rotor spins free without cogging(with really good bearings then yes it would move a little). But the inductor magnetic field couples to the "strongest" opposite pole which is the PM field sitting just at its boundary ready to couple. We could say the interaction is unidiectional, the inductor will couple to the PM but not the PM to the inductor.The point here is that I am giving the rotor little kicks with pulsed DC to the inductor, recovering these DC impulses and limiting the motion of the rotor by applying large loads to it---- this limits interaction due to rotation in the PM rotor and forces the inductor to act as an inductor in a static system. If I had to describe every aspect of this motor and circuit in one statement I would say" I move energy in whatever form it may take in descreet pieces so the reaction can never see it's original action". Another question was what happens when a electromagnetic system has properties more like an unloaded system when under high loading? Very interesting question :)
@ All:
I am posting this so I receive notice of future posts in this topic. I have nothing to add at this time but I am fascinated by this approach. It is making me think. Keep up the great efforts.
Bill
@ Allcanadian,
I like your point of view. It is a very interesting and simple idea. I wouldn't say Tesla abandoned AC, but he did use pulses more often than not.
About the PM coupling with the coil, I feel this is because all permanent magnets couple to their surroundings. Their fields extend outward, interacting with the edges of the universe, and return back - not trying to sound mystical here, just my point of view. The coil's fields will extend outward the same. So at a distance they should interact.
Like I talked about earlier, I've coupled permanent magnets up to 2 feet distance (3/4x1/2x1/4 neodymium N48's) which I still think is fascinating. If you do the calculations, there shouldn't be any appreciable force to even move at a distance of 2 feet, but they do. And interestingly enough, they can only effect each other at that distance if one of them is spinning (the famed rotating field). Its almost like their interaction distance is increased if they rotate. Anyway, I'm rambling. I think you have something worth following.
I have one last question, do you pay for electricity?
I found this: http://www.coralcastlecode.com/id21.html (http://www.coralcastlecode.com/id21.html)
as an example with coupling.
Eric.
@eavogels
LOL ;D I would not consider that a good example---- I would consider that a perfect example of the process required. We have this preoccupation with attaching coils in close relation to changing magnetic fields and each and every time expecting miracles, we expect different results when doing the same things over and over. Consider the picture at the link you posted, we have a multitude of magnetic poles in motion, each interacts with the other as such all must interact, one cannot change without all changing. So if we produced change in one, this change must move in a wave like motion through the field as a whole. In this case an "action" or interaction could provoke a "reaction" of much larger magnitude through a process used in nature called multiplicity.We could call this resonant multiplication, when one tuning fork is struck all must sound, as one field is moved all must move. Imagine trying to slow a single element of this spinning polarized field very quickly with a coil, this interaction then produces "change" in the field as a whole, this change spreads outward rapidly as a "radiating" field then when the boundaries of the field are reached reflects inward as a "gravitating" field but the small action has produced a massive change because it has upset a "balanced" field. The ensuing chaos can only multiply its force as motion until the system corrects itself to a balanced condition. This is the effect we are after, to have a system that seeks balance then upset this balance and utilize the motion through the double reaction--- The "radiating" disturbance in the medium and the "gravitating" restoration of balance.
My goal here is not to build a better machine, it is to build a very simple machine that works every time because it has no choice in the matter, I may as well tell you now the PM rotor can do no work nor can extraction coils be placed in its vicinity, It is a means to indirectly produce a changing PM field with little reaction on the source.
Complexity is easy ----- I am finding absolute simplicity is not so easy.
Hello to everyone here,
You are approx.70 % correct about your analogy in regards to the Equilibrius Grid. Although there is a good chunk of explanation that is very wrong.
I can extract energies from the grid. Also I can have all of them not spinning except for one still spinning all the way in the back of the grid (all the others will just twitch) >I also can spin half the Grid(8 Gears) one way and the other half(8 gears the other way) I have broken all kinds of traditional supposed laws and self imposed rules of science.
I've had as many as 38 gears going (ran out of extra gears)Basically: I expand a very small stable field into a GIGANTIC MAGNETIC FIELD , It quickly becomes A WONDERFUL MAGNETIC SNOWBALL EFFECT. >Does each gear add load to the source?ANSWER> NO it does not. NOT If you follow the LAWS of HARMONY which is the underlying principle involved (Hense "Equilibrius Grid">Just like a vibrating piano string or tuning fork. If you muffle it you lose the sound / vibration. So what does this tell us about extraction methods? I think you can guess right? " NO FRICTIONS " !!! Frictions equal the breaking of Harmony/ Resonance . Secret to finding new things is to "not" walk into the same closed door over & over & over again. That goes for extractions as well.
PLUS : THERE IS MUCH MUCH MORE INVOLVED(details) THAT SHOULD EXCITE ANY PERSON THAT KNOWS SOMETHING ABOUT ENERGY .So if this is the case which it is>why does the science community ignore me and try to steal my individual works/inventions for themselves ? because they all have ego's that won't allow them to admit that they don't understand something > Unless of course they have their own name on it.Then it's BRILLIANT.
This happens over & over again. This is why I am so reserved about revealing all the details.
I worked for many years on my own to finally find it even existed. Sacrificing many parts of my own life as to be able to help my family and the world as a whole .
After I do achieve it and try to share it I get treated like complete crap and still do to this day(few exceptions of course).I'm a bit bitter . Heee hee :)
Maybe one day I can get a group like all of you to help me bring it out in a self respecting manner.
You see it is all I have .. I have no education except self taught.Scientist's scoff & laugh at me because of that,but yet they can't achieve what I've shown them>what does this say?
I would be happy to share it with everyone If it was in a way that complimented some self dignity.
Hey Jon, I've always been a fan of your research. We use to talk on AIM until you blocked me - Ha I must have talked to you too much, sorry about that. Anyway, I think the problem you had is something I see a lot. Most in the scientific community would not even turn their head when someone "uneducated" outside of "science" makes a discovery that defies their laws. They just assume that person is crazy and never listen.
However, there are two type of people that will listen. Open minded, creative thinkers and un-imaginative ego maniacs. Unfortunately, there are very few open-minded creative thinkers in the science community - which probably explains why technological advances are slowing down. Most unfortunately, this leaves the vast majority of those who would listen to be ego maniacs. These people are generally desperate, about to lose their funding, and have no creative ideas to help support them. If they find something they can get their greedy paws on, they will strip it from you. From what you've told me, and expressed just now on the forum, these are the only people you've met - which sucks.
From my experience, people on this forum would gladly help you get your ideas out there, but it would be to the general public and you would see very little money from this. My best advice, and I gave you this before, would be to find an application for your discoveries that you could market and sell - even if it means crafting some art piece that uses your discoveries and selling it at craft fairs and art galleries. I wouldn't go for something major like powering a car or a house either, I'd stick to low profile markets like lawn care or toys - no one suspects the toy!!!
This forum is great for going public, but I don't think it would be very good for getting your ideas out there while retaining marketing rights. Plus, you can get screwed just as easily from a bunch of internet forum users as you could from some idiot professor.
My best advice would be to find a friend who is affiliated with a local university. Patent your discoveries through the university, through your friend - put his name on the patents for helping you. The university will take 50% of any royalties made from the patent and split the other 50% between the inventors. Your friend is a winner, your a winner, the university is a winner. Plus, the university will cover the expenses of the patent and defend it if someone tries to illegally use it - make sure it is a state-run university, you can always count on government to defend its interests when money is at stake! Then, you can find a market for it, license the patent from the university and start a business.
Just my two cents,
Charlie - aka Nojodes on AIM of whom you put on ignore about two years ago ???
Oh ... sorry
was not personal I was busy at that time and put some blocks up to prevent to many distractions
I forgot and never took that name off the block list. "Very sorry" about that if I had hurt your feelings or if I seemed rude.. Was nothing against you personally.
You've always been a nice person to communicate with... I remember.
Your current advice you've just givin me.. confirms an idea I had recently that I was thinking of trying. Thanks for the kindness and frankness. Refreshing honesty you have.
Feel free to Im if you still want to I removed that screename from the list.. fill me in on whats new with you.