Overunity.com Archives

Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: gwhy! on July 31, 2008, 08:54:51 PM

Title: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on July 31, 2008, 08:54:51 PM
uploaded video:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVLzYbkPlh4
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: FreeEnergy on July 31, 2008, 09:23:49 PM
you need to test the roller by putting it further back from the initial starting position. see if there is any repelling whatsoever by going farther back,  one inch at a time, keep going until there is no repelling.


thanks :)
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: Freezer on July 31, 2008, 09:31:40 PM
If you look at the level indicator in the video, its not level.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: FreeEnergy on July 31, 2008, 09:36:04 PM
deleted
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: capthook on July 31, 2008, 11:10:42 PM
Thanks for the vid gwhy!  Looks promising!

Please provide some details/commentary/data/observations etc.

And to address the out-of-level comments, you could flip the roller over after the 1st run and run it back the other way - like CLaNZeR does in his vids.
(oh - just thinking - the front gate may prevent this?  Will it run bi-directional?)
(and I didn't think the bubble close-up appeared out-of-level?)

tx
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 01, 2008, 05:22:42 AM
Quote from: capthook on July 31, 2008, 11:10:42 PM
Thanks for the vid gwhy!  Looks promising!

Please provide some details/commentary/data/observations etc.

And to address the out-of-level comments, you could flip the roller over after the 1st run and run it back the other way - like CLaNZeR does in his vids.
(oh - just thinking - the front gate may prevent this?  Will it run bi-directional?)
(and I didn't think the bubble close-up appeared out-of-level?)

tx

It dont run the other way, And yes it may be the slightest of a fraction off level ( front to back and or side to side ). I will do some more testing and let you know the results. As regurds the input replusion there isn't any but I will put another vid up soon to show this ( I dont have a long enough piece of plexi ).
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: CLaNZeR on August 01, 2008, 02:19:03 PM
GWHY!

Well done I like the way it gets past the sticky spot at the beginning by using attraction , yet clears the exit also.

Can you raise it a little so it goes uphill?

What config are the gates?

Cheers

Sean.

Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 01, 2008, 03:12:50 PM
Quote from: CLaNZeR on August 01, 2008, 02:19:03 PM
GWHY!

Well done I like the way it gets past the sticky spot at the beginning by using attraction , yet clears the exit also.

Can you raise it a little so it goes uphill?

What config are the gates?

Cheers

Sean.



Hi CLaNZer,

   It do look pretty good. But as Capt has pointed out the bubble on the level isnt quite in the center ( and looking at the vid again I tend to agree that it could be better ) So a little more testing to be done. There is no way it can pull the roller up a hill and spit it out the other end with this config as far as I can see. The roller mag gets pulled into the array lovely with no wall at all. This picture was my first setup and not the one in the vid all that is different are the lengths of the input array and the number of tri-gates.
Cheers.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: loop888 on August 01, 2008, 05:55:50 PM
hey! that s looking pretty good!

and according to the setup at the start of the track there should not be repulsion at all. gotta get some of those balls to try myself!

thank you gwhy!
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: xee on August 01, 2008, 06:37:56 PM
@ gwhy!
Very clever and it seems to work well. Thanks for posting it.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 01, 2008, 07:16:10 PM
New vid uploaded to answer some questions already asked.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jPhvB9Z7Ct8

OK It has some problems. Rusty-Springs has made some suggestions that I need to try, that may help to improve it. Still working at it  ;)
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 02, 2008, 05:24:28 AM
@everyone,
    Please can someone give me some comments on the graphic attached.. thanks.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 0c on August 02, 2008, 01:34:33 PM
@Gwhy,

Several of us have tried things similar to this. Seems whenever we close the loop, we lose. Maybe your idea will work? Won't know for sure unless someone tries it.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 02:24:08 PM
I like your idea.. it might work as they are spread out... I have been thinking a long the same lines in the following thread, but using shields instead of gaps.. what do you think?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,5268.0/topicseen.html

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 03:42:50 PM
Hi gwhy!

I think your idea is better than using shields.. check out the thread posted above for my latest graphic.. I think this will work!

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 02, 2008, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 03:42:50 PM
Hi gwhy!

I think your idea is better than using shields.. check out the thread posted above for my latest graphic.. I think this will work!

Jason

Hi Tesla,
     The trouble with the tri-gate is when you try and make it a loop with gaps is the the gap becomes very hard to jump once you place the array more than 180 degrees around the rotor, I did try and set it up with 3 rotors on a common shaft but this was still a no go, you can get it very close but there is never not quite enough power to push it through the gaps. I didn't try anything with shielding because I couldn't see how it would benefit the setup. it is very easy to test: make 3 sets of gates and place them equally in a straight line ( so the gap is exactly the same between them about the same length as one of the tri-gate sets) place the roller mag at the first gate I think you will find the roller exits the first gate and just enters the next gate but don't quite enter the third gate so you then move the third gate closer which then works but if you add another set of tri-gates this needs to be closer again for the roller to enter and so on. It is really frustrating...  >:( . The Idea of the graphic I have show is that there is no gate entrance repulsion so no loss going into each array which is what makes the setup you have shown fail. Hope this makes sense I'm not the best in the world at explaining things  ::)  If I get chance I will try and demo it in a vid.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 04:49:19 PM
Do you have any ideas on how to modify my last graphic to make it work?  Love to see more video!

Thanks,
Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 02, 2008, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 04:49:19 PM
Do you have any ideas on how to modify my last graphic to make it work?  Love to see more video!

Thanks,
Jason

Hi Tesla,
   The only possible way that I can see it working is to try and remove the repulsion area at the entrance to the gate but still keeping the kick out from the gate. This is what I am working on at the mo. There are some ideas in one of the other vids I put up onto youtube http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=pnMSSz7W8YU these are not my vids but do show lots of configs for the tri-gate.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 05:45:05 PM
Thanks for the video link!

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 02, 2008, 07:36:55 PM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 04:49:19 PM
Do you have any ideas on how to modify my last graphic to make it work?  Love to see more video!

Thanks,
Jason

Hi Jason,
  Short vid to try and show you what I mean about the gap.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8qToXhJOxNQ&feature=user
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 02, 2008, 08:35:55 PM
Thank you!  Great demo.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 03, 2008, 07:34:55 PM
There is a place within a tri-gate array that has no wall at all and still you get a kick out of it.

Video uploaded:
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7bRoYzANNZM

Now this for me is very exciting as it may fit in perfectly with one of the designs I'm playing with at the moment  ;) .
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: Rusty_Springs on August 12, 2008, 07:57:15 PM
Hi Gwhy
Here is a drawing of the new gate I was talking about.
Take Care Gway
Graham
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 12, 2008, 10:16:10 PM
Thanks!.. I'll have to get some horse shoe magnets.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 13, 2008, 05:24:26 AM
Quote from: Rusty_Springs on August 12, 2008, 07:57:15 PM
Hi Gwhy
Here is a drawing of the new gate I was talking about.
Take Care Gway
Graham


Thanks Rusty,
   I will try and get some larger horseshoe mags to play with.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: exxcomm0n on August 13, 2008, 10:17:10 AM
@ gwhy

You MIGHT be able to fudge on the horseshoe mags with hard drive mags.

I've had this idea for a while (and it seems Rusty has too, 'cept he's using HS mags ;) ) as it's harder to come by horseshoe mags these days.
(I  _think_  I've seen  _1_ vendor offering horseshoe neos [supermagnetman.net who gives better volume discounts than magnets4less, but I haven't researched the shipping differences].)

From the ones I have here it seems the polarity has a unique arrangement as the sides of the mag are the opposite polarity of that on the face e.g.:

         TOP  (FLAT)                              SIDE (EDGE)

        XXXX          N                            X        S
          XXXX        N                            X        S
             XXXX     N                            X        S
               XXXX    -                            X         -
               XXXX    -                            X         -
              XXXX     S                           X         N
           XXXX        S                           X         N
         XXXX          S                           X         N

....although, I have found a few that seem to be.......

         TOP  (FLAT)                              SIDE (EDGE)

        XXXX          N                           X        S
          XXXX        n                            X        S
             XXXX     s                            X        S
               XXXX   S                            X        -
               XXXX   S                            X        -
              XXXX    s                             X       N
           XXXX       n                             X       N
         XXXX         N                            X        N

Which is really confusing as I'm used to mags having diametrically opposed polarities.
So maybe stacked HD mags to get a greater area edge effect ?

This is not something that'll be that easy as the epoxy used to hold the HD mags to the metal backing for mounting in the HD is not that easy to break.

I've found (this has worked for me with 80/20% success rate) that you can use a guitar string (G (unwound), B, or high E) as a rope saw if you can get it between the metal mount and the mag to defeat the epoxy.

A question I have about your trigate/MkE-oneway marriage is, does the MkE have to have such sharp right angles?
Could a slope (before the crucial 2/3's point of the MkE) marry the MkE field to the trigate field and allow each (MkE slope) start to have the acceleration effect restart at each MkE beginning to negate the "wall"?

Have you set up multiple arrangements of these end to end to see if that is possible and you can create a loop without turning the arrays into a large multi-piece ring mag?

Like this:

T = trigate
M = MkE

                                                                                <-------------<------------<----------<----------

T  T  T  T       MMMMM      T  T  T  T       MMMMM       T  T  T  T       MMMMM       T  T  T  T      MMMM
                M                                     M                                      M                                     M
        M M                                 M  M                                  M  M                                M  M

........so instead of the MkE array being formed thus:

                                                             __________
                                                             -
                                                             -
                                                             -
                                            __________

.......it is formed like this?

                                                             ___________
                                                          -
                                                       -
                                                   -
                                  ________

That way it is covering the same area, but the 1/2 way point is still (marginally) allowing the roller into the trigate with its accumulated acceleration?

Just questions and wool-gathering dude. ;)

I do have to give you major kudos, as in another thread we've both participated in, array use seems chained to 2D thinking, whereas you've broken out of that mold and started thinking 3D which seems to be (the more I play with this stuff) the best way to think about array usage.

I'll be posting more of my recent failures over there shortly, and invite you to take a look as my failure MIGHT show you something it didn't show me and lead to your success.

;D 

P.S.   I just (finally) watched the vid you posted and I was wondering had you tried the roller without the BBs on the end yet?
Was the behavior any different?
Have you considered slotting a piece of plexi or other plastic to allow it to be sloped or form the MkE more uniformly?
What happens when you have the MkE formed as you do, but there is no receiving trigate on the end?
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: X00013 on August 13, 2008, 12:05:31 PM
@ 4Tesla , http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/GSDRVSM?PACACHE=000000064455056
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 13, 2008, 12:41:23 PM
Quote from: exxcomm0n on August 13, 2008, 10:17:10 AM
@ gwhy

You MIGHT be able to fudge on the horseshoe mags with hard drive mags.

I've had this idea for a while (and it seems Rusty has too, 'cept he's using HS mags ;) ) as it's harder to come by horseshoe mags these days.
(I  _think_  I've seen  _1_ vendor offering horseshoe neos [supermagnetman.net who gives better volume discounts than magnets4less, but I haven't researched the shipping differences].)

From the ones I have here it seems the polarity has a unique arrangement as the sides of the mag are the opposite polarity of that on the face e.g.:

         TOP  (FLAT)                              SIDE (EDGE)

        XXXX          N                            X        S
          XXXX        N                            X        S
             XXXX     N                            X        S
               XXXX    -                            X         -
               XXXX    -                            X         -
              XXXX     S                           X         N
           XXXX        S                           X         N
         XXXX          S                           X         N

....although, I have found a few that seem to be.......

         TOP  (FLAT)                              SIDE (EDGE)

        XXXX          N                           X        S
          XXXX        n                            X        S
             XXXX     s                            X        S
               XXXX   S                            X        -
               XXXX   S                            X        -
              XXXX    s                             X       N
           XXXX       n                             X       N
         XXXX         N                            X        N

Which is really confusing as I'm used to mags having diametrically opposed polarities.
So maybe stacked HD mags to get a greater area edge effect ?

This is not something that'll be that easy as the epoxy used to hold the HD mags to the metal backing for mounting in the HD is not that easy to break.

I've found (this has worked for me with 80/20% success rate) that you can use a guitar string (G (unwound), B, or high E) as a rope saw if you can get it between the metal mount and the mag to defeat the epoxy.

A question I have about your trigate/MkE-oneway marriage is, does the MkE have to have such sharp right angles?
Could a slope (before the crucial 2/3's point of the MkE) marry the MkE field to the trigate field and allow each (MkE slope) start to have the acceleration effect restart at each MkE beginning to negate the "wall"?

Have you set up multiple arrangements of these end to end to see if that is possible and you can create a loop without turning the arrays into a large multi-piece ring mag?

Like this:

T = trigate
M = MkE

                                                                                <-------------<------------<----------<----------

T  T  T  T       MMMMM      T  T  T  T       MMMMM       T  T  T  T       MMMMM       T  T  T  T      MMMM
                M                                     M                                      M                                     M
        M M                                 M  M                                  M  M                                M  M

........so instead of the MkE array being formed thus:

                                                             __________
                                                             -
                                                             -
                                                             -
                                            __________

.......it is formed like this?

                                                             ___________
                                                          -
                                                       -
                                                   -
                                  ________

That way it is covering the same area, but the 1/2 way point is still (marginally) allowing the roller into the trigate with its accumulated acceleration?

Just questions and wool-gathering dude. ;)

I do have to give you major kudos, as in another thread we've both participated in, array use seems chained to 2D thinking, whereas you've broken out of that mold and started thinking 3D which seems to be (the more I play with this stuff) the best way to think about array usage.

I'll be posting more of my recent failures over there shortly, and invite you to take a look as my failure MIGHT show you something it didn't show me and lead to your success.

;D 

P.S.   I just (finally) watched the vid you posted and I was wondering had you tried the roller without the BBs on the end yet?
Was the behavior any different?
Have you considered slotting a piece of plexi or other plastic to allow it to be sloped or form the MkE more uniformly?
What happens when you have the MkE formed as you do, but there is no receiving trigate on the end?


Thanks Exx for the heads up about HDD mags ( I got boat loads of them ) I will have ago at getting some of them off the metal they are stuck to.

The step in the MkE array can be sloped and should not be a problem the important thing I have noticed is the distance under the trigate needs to be right to get maximum efficiency i.e to small and the roller will not continue into the trigates to big a gap then roller refuses to even enter the first trigate.
I haven't setup multiple arrangements of these end to end as of yet but well worth having ago ( I'm not sure how well the end of a trigate array will marry into the start of a MkE array ) because as you have seen in one of my vids the roller do not get thrown clear of the pull back from the tri-gate array when rolling along a level plain ( its close, but not close enough. maybe a bit more tweeking ) so the fields would have to overlap. I have sort of been side tracked with the seasaw effect I shown in my last vid that will over come this problem of overlapping fields.

The BB's are mainly there to give the roller mag a big more weight and stop it flipping around so easily, but they do also help a little when going through the tri-gate array.
If you make the MkE array to much of a gentel slope there isn't enough momentum to break though the magnet that is connecting ( shorting )the first two trigates together.

If you have no receiving tri-gate the MkE act just like it would normally i.e the roller will go backwards and forwards over the array until it stops in the middle part of the array that is closest to the roller ( if you know what I mean ).

I will look forward to seeing any vids that show anything intresting positive or negative cos its all good and something that peeps can learn from.

Cheers. 
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 13, 2008, 04:28:06 PM
@all
   Just had another play with what I call the Kgate. I didn't vid anything dint think there was much point at the mo but some info for exx and anyone else thats intrested:

On a level plain the roller do not quite get thrown clear of the last tri-gate as I said before ( its very close ) but what I did do was to put another MkE array about the same length as the tri-gate array away from the  the last tgate and with very carefull placement ( distance ) the roller could be pulled free of the last tgate and into the MkE array  ;D . Some may say so what, but the cool thing was if you placed the roller at the very point it starts to get pulled into the MkE array and then remove the MkE array the roller do not get pulled back into the tgate Which may mean that there is something going on with the interacting fields ( on a positive side  ??? ). I need to get hold of a longer piece of plexi so I can see ( hope  ??? ) that 3 sets of Kgates will make the roller accelerate, that will be a step in the right direction.

P.S    just putting another tri-gate array at the end of the Kgate at the same distance was a non-starter the roller didn't get anywhere near the entrance to the second tri-gate array
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 13, 2008, 04:57:27 PM
Quote from: gwhy! on August 13, 2008, 04:28:06 PM
@all
   Just had another play with what I call the Kgate. I didn't vid anything dint think there was much point at the mo but some info for exx and anyone else thats intrested:

On a level plain the roller do not quite get thrown clear of the last tri-gate as I said before ( its very close ) but what I did do was to put another MkE array about the same length as the tri-gate array away from the  the last tgate and with very carefull placement ( distance ) the roller could be pulled free of the last tgate and into the MkE array  ;D . Some may say so what, but the cool thing was if you placed the roller at the very point it starts to get pulled into the MkE array and then remove the MkE array the roller do not get pulled back into the tgate Which may mean that there is something going on with the interacting fields ( on a positive side  ??? ). I need to get hold of a longer piece of plexi so I can see ( hope  ??? ) that 3 sets of Kgates will make the roller accelerate, that will be a step in the right direction.

P.S    just putting another tri-gate array at the end of the Kgate at the same distance was a non-starter the roller didn't get anywhere near the entrance to the second tri-gate array

I like to see video when you have a chance.

Thanks,
Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 02:43:12 AM
Hi Gwhy and all,

I just got my magnets and balls today.  I have been playing around with different tri-gate arrays and it seems that if you remove the back magnets you get less of a wall and even better if you extend the beginning and ending of the array.. I also found out that using this configuration that there is just a little wall if you go through the array, but if you go over the array, like you show in your videos, seems to be no wall at all... please try and let me know if you get the same results.

I have attached the configuration that I used, but I used 4 gate sets instead of three and when going over the array.. seems to be no wall.
Edit: playing with it more.. still maybe a little wall.. can't tell.. I'm using a piece of cardboard and can't see the array.. I wish I had a piece of the clear plastic.. I'll be ordering some of that next.

I can't do video so I'm hoping that someone else gets the same results and can video it.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 14, 2008, 04:23:51 AM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 02:43:12 AM
Hi Gwhy and all,

I just got my magnets and balls today.  I have been playing around with different tri-gate arrays and it seems that if you remove the back magnets you get less of a wall and even better if you extend the beginning and ending of the array.. I also found out that using this configuration that there is just a little wall if you go through the array, but if you go over the array, like you show in your videos, seems to be no wall at all... please try and let me know if you get the same results.

I have attached the configuration that I used, but I used 4 gate sets instead of three and when going over the array.. seems to be no wall.
Edit: playing with it more.. still maybe a little wall.. can't tell.. I'm using a piece of cardboard and can't see the array.. I wish I had a piece of the clear plastic.. I'll be ordering some of that next.

I can't do video so I'm hoping that someone else gets the same results and can video it.

Jason
Hi Jason,
    Thanks for the info, I will try it out as soon as I get a chance. I will try and put a vid up aswell.
Cheers.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 02:58:17 PM
Playing with it more.. still a wall  :(

Sorry.. I still would like video of your latest setup.

Thanks,
Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 03:08:56 PM
I noticed you bridged the first gate.. I tried bridging all the gates and gained a lot in acceleration.  Also seemed to reduce the wall.   :)

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 03:29:43 PM
The only problem with bridging them all is that it comes back after the exit.. Edit: I tried it a few more times.. added more gates and most of the time it was able to pass the exit without coming back.  Very impressed with the acceleration by bridging all the gates..  after playing with these different configurations, I take back about the walls (I didn't have the array perfectly level.. the last two setups were level).. I think the wall is about the same with all the setups I've tried so far.. so the only bonus is the acceleration.  Edit2:  I found that if you bridge all the gates that you can't start in the array.. you have to start at the beginning..  without the bridges you can start anywhere inside of the array.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 14, 2008, 05:31:43 PM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 03:29:43 PM
The only problem with bridging them all is that it comes back after the exit.. Edit: I tried it a few more times.. added more gates and most of the time it was able to pass the exit without coming back.  Very impressed with the acceleration by bridging all the gates..  after playing with these different configurations, I take back about the walls (I didn't have the array perfectly level.. the last two setups were level).. I think the wall is about the same with all the setups I've tried so far.. so the only bonus is the acceleration.  Edit2:  I found that if you bridge all the gates that you can't start in the array.. you have to start at the beginning..  without the bridges you can start anywhere inside of the array.

Jason

Hi Jason,
    It is suprising how much difference it makes if it is all on a slope, even just a couple of degrees out can give false results. Keep up the good work .
P.S you can get slightly different results if you replace the BB's with nuts ( as in nuts and bolts )  size m6 and m8 are a couple I have tried, seems to smooth the array out ( i.e no negative spots ) but positive power decreases.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: ThothTheSecond on August 14, 2008, 05:59:39 PM
@4Tesla

I must be doing something wrong with the setup as my image comes up different
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 08:15:53 PM
Quote from: ThothTheSecond on August 14, 2008, 05:59:39 PM
@4Tesla

I must be doing something wrong with the setup as my image comes up different

Not sure.. here it is showing polarity.  I don't think having the extensions helped reduce the wall.  I set the magnets strength to 100,000 microTeslas (the max streangth) by right clicking on the magnet and choosing "Change data" from the menu.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: ThothTheSecond on August 14, 2008, 08:32:22 PM
@4Tesla

I used 3 shorter segments instead of one long one for the "outriggers", changed it thinking that was my error, but ended up looking the same.  Oh well.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 08:38:13 PM
Well that may be why I still get a wall, because I don't have long magnets.. I used two short magnets to make the longer magnet when I tested this setup.  Something to still try if that makes the difference?

Edit.. and it looks like I should have used three.. that could have also been the problem, but I think the reason I still had a wall is because it needs to be one long magnet and not three short magnets stacked.

Jason
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 15, 2008, 05:12:03 AM
Quote from: 4Tesla on August 14, 2008, 08:38:13 PM
Well that may be why I still get a wall, because I don't have long magnets.. I used two short magnets to make the longer magnet when I tested this setup.  Something to still try if that makes the difference?

Edit.. and it looks like I should have used three.. that could have also been the problem, but I think the reason I still had a wall is because it needs to be one long magnet and not three short magnets stacked.

Jason


I don't thing three short mags connected together should make that much difference in vismag as long as they are really butted up to one another. Just a little out can make a difference though.
Title: Re: new tri-gate configuration
Post by: gwhy! on August 16, 2008, 06:22:12 PM
Quote from: gwhy! on August 13, 2008, 04:28:06 PM
@all

On a level plain the roller do not quite get thrown clear of the last tri-gate as I said before ( its very close ) but what I did do was to put another MkE array about the same length as the tri-gate array away from the  the last tgate and with very carefull placement ( distance ) the roller could be pulled free of the last tgate and into the MkE array  ;D . Some may say so what, but the cool thing was if you placed the roller at the very point it starts to get pulled into the MkE array and then remove the MkE array the roller do not get pulled back into the tgate Which may mean that there is something going on with the interacting fields ( on a positive side  ??? ). I need to get hold of a longer piece of plexi so I can see ( hope  ??? ) that 3 sets of Kgates will make the roller accelerate, that will be a step in the right direction.

@all
    Well it was a bit of a let down  :( putting a second Kgate after the first showed that it was not going to accelerate. The roller don't get thrown out so far after the second gate. So conclusion is the roller needs to get thrown well clear of the pull back of the last tgate to stand any chance of success. The 3 mags shorting the first  tgate can be removed and do not need to be there they have very little if no effect on performace of the Kgate. I think I'm gonna continue looking at running the roller backwards through the array using a seasaw motion, if this is setup correct it appears that the roller can start on a level plain be puller up a very small incline tip the seasaw and that small decent is enough to brake the wall on the other end and end on the same level as it started and be clear of the pull back in. I need to set this up more accurately just to confirm. I will do a vid with the results when I have the chance.