Overunity.com Archives

Below is a pic of a toroidal motor that I designed. I'm not even sure if this is even half baked. LOL

Here are the advantages I see with this motor:

1) The magnets do not rotate around the coil in the traditional way and the coil doesn't rotate around the magnets, which eliminates the polarity or direction of the current from always switching.

2) With the right arrangements of magnets on the top and bottom, this may reduce Lenz's law or even eliminate it. I have a few ideas on this, but haven't been able to fully think those ideas through until I know what this motor could do.

3) If this doesn't provide overunity, then it may provide for a more efficient motor and generator.


The disadvantages with this motor:

1) Not even sure if it will produce a current or emf (LOL), and I apologize for wasting the time it took you to read this.

Please let me know if it could be a thumbs up or a thumbs down and your reason. Thanks

Looks interesting, would be easier to test if it weren't around the rim of the toroid, but on either side of it ..like a U shape.

You'll probably have to have intermittent winds, and for goodness sakes, make it symmetrical,otherwise you're just going to make a giant vibrator.

You're most likely hoping for something without a commutator... a constant flux device or something of that nature.  I've always wondered if the path would somehow follow the flux, but it tends to want to be perpendicular.

This principle and your reasoning is quite similar to something I'm working on right now. Yes it's sounds a bit cliché on this forum  ;D. But your rotating part is a bit vague. I'll try and improve it, if this is not what I think it is then the improvement can be ignored. Will post it when finished drawing.

Edit: Finished drawing it and attached. Btw the design can also have both magnets rotating which I didn't indicate. The problem with this is finding radial magnetized ring magnets, as they seem to be rare.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on February 17, 2009, 04:29:10 PM
Looks interesting, would be easier to test if it weren't around the rim of the toroid, but on either side of it ..like a U shape.

I agree with you on the U shape.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on February 17, 2009, 04:29:10 PM
You'll probably have to have intermittent winds, and for goodness sakes, make it symmetrical,otherwise you're just going to make a giant vibrator.

I had my wife draw the pic because I can't draw (You should see some of her chalk drawings, they are awesome). I didn't have her make it symmetrical because that was more work for her and she's upset with me because my sleeping schedule is messed up (Just trying to get some input on the feasibility of this design). You're probably right about the winds being intermittent.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on February 17, 2009, 04:29:10 PM
You're most likely hoping for something without a commutator... a constant flux device or something of that nature.  I've always wondered if the path would somehow follow the flux, but it tends to want to be perpendicular.

You're right for not needing a commutator since the polarity is not switching. I also wonder about the path following the flux and I almost didn't post this for that reason alone since I haven't seen any other motors like this. I think it would follow the path without the opposition of the changing flux because if you drop a round magnet through a metal tube it will take longer to fall through the tube. The opposition of the changing flux should be outside of the magnets because it's not perpendicular, thus getting around Lenz's law. It's more than likely you can't have one without the other and if this is the case then you need to use the other in a productive way and not being counter productive.

@broli: 

I've seen your thread before I posted this and realized the ideas are similar but different in approach. It's good to see someone thinking along the same lines as me.

I'll be honest with you, I understand the concept of emf, cemf, magnetism, lenz's law, etc but I get lost when it comes to motors and generators because of all the different frames of references.

Thanks for the pic, it looks better than mine.

All the theoretical bogus surrounding frames of references should be discarded and replaced by your own experiments and observations. That is what true physics is about. I currenlty did a crude experiment which is explained here

http://www.energeticforum.com/45789-post7.html

This shows that atleast there's no lenz effect that can cause breaking. But now I also have to show/prove that the thing will indeed rotate if there's a current through the wire, which I'm working on right now...slowly but steady. I'm by no means a practical person or do I have the right equipment, so like someone else said "I feel like I'm making fire with stones and twigs". ;D

@broli:

I fully understand what you're doing now. That is a brilliant setup and experiment. I see no reason why it should fail in the next phase looking at your model. I'm in the same boat as you, trying to make fire with sticks and stones.  The worst part is no one taking an interest. I posted a previous thread about the misconceptions of the north and south poles of a magnet. You seem to understand this also or at least your model reflects this :)

One quick question for you. Apparently the wire was in a closed loop during testing for voltage in the wire. Did you try the same experiment in phase 1 where the wire is completely shorted out?  This would represent the wire having a full load.

Also, in the next phase of your experiment, don't forget to reverse the polarity running through the wire (switching the negative and positive on the terminals). I have a feeling one polarity will turn the top magnet and the other polarity will not.

Good Luck and I'll be following your threads

Either polarity should work fine. The top magnet will turn on the basis of newton's third law whether the force is in the positive direction or negative it shouldn't matter much. Everything wants to rotate actually, the lower magnet would want to rotate along with the top while the wires go in the opposite direction (but the point is to never let the wires rotate because this apparently induces a counter emf for some strange reason). But it's much easier to only let that top magnet rotate.

Also as something kind of related. When I went to sleep yesterday night I received an extremely simple method to create radially magnetized magnets. I'll probably make a thread about it.

After more thought, the polarity may not be an issue regarding the rotation. Could it be possible that one polarity will have the counter emf while the other polarity does not?

Of course, I think you're correct in that it doesn't matter as long as the wire isn't allowed to rotate. I'm saying if the wire must rotate, then the polarity may be the issue.

I have two sides. One side of me is saying it doesn't matter while the other side of me is saying it could become a factor. If it does become a factor then I believe the polarity will resolve the issue if the wire must rotate. One of them must be correct. They both can not be wrong (but then again mother nature may decide both are wrong....LOL).

Yes and the radially magnetized magnets is your missing piece. I'm very interested in your method for this. I see a lot of potential with this kind of magnet.

Concerning the polarity when the wires are rotating. No matter how the current flows I always end up (right hand rule) with a Force which is essentially an electric field in the wire in the opposite direction of MY applied voltage source. The reason why I find this concept strange is because I was "educated" by Faraday's law. That is a current loop seeing a change in flux will generate a voltage. But there is no change in flux even though it's moving. That's why I believe Faraday's law is just a subset of the Lorentz force law. So all we do is say "screw you wire", hold it still and rotate the magnet MASS instead, which we know will not rotate the magnetic FIELD. To be honest this is when I started to see the genius behind Tesla's induction motor. He has a rotating field but the mass generating the field is stationary. We just do the opposite

Btw the thread on making radial magnetized magnets is up..

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6856.0;topicseen

That is great news broli.

For those who may be trying to follow this, I will try to explain what broli and I are trying to do.

When a magnet is rotating around it's magnetic axis the magnetic field will remain stationary, thus not creating a counter emf to the induced current that caused it to move.

This is not the way we are currently doing things. We are currently rotating the magnet using a coil in a way that causes the magnet to change its magnetic field, which creates a counter emf or a change in it's magnetic field.

What we want is to have the stationary coil to rotate the magnets where the magnet is rotating on its magnetic axis so that the magnetic field doesn't change. Since the magnetic field doesn't change, then there is no counter emf.

If you compare both of our methods, you will see us both trying to do the same thing.

This is really simple and an elegant solution to our energy problem. This is overunity at it's best.

Gravityblock since I got a bit wiser since I made the first post in this thread. You should notice that my latest design is very similar to what is done here. Only is the toroidal coil replaced by a single permanent magnet. Imagine the permanent magnet is a single winding from the toroidal coil, that would make things clearer...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7007.0;attach=31674;image

Notice the field coming from the stator magnets being radially outwards. So this shows that you don't need some rare radially magnetized magnet but two axially magnetized magnets can do the trick. If you want to add another on the outside to replace this outer radial one...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6847.0;attach=30757;image

All you have to do is at two other ring magnets on the outside like this...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7007.0;attach=31664;image

Here both magnet sets are making a field that attract each other unlike your original idea where they repulse. I believe attraction would give better results. But that's also the beauty of it you can as easily test repulsion by just flipping the magnets over while in a true radially magnetized magnet you have to completely re magnetize it or have another one in opposite polarity. I believe this design is now very easy to build. You need 4 sets of magnets plus a toroidal coil that can fit in between them. It's best to not buy a toroid with a magnetic core. I think it can be done for under 100$ and that includes some serious ball bearings and what not.

I attached a cutaway rendition of the design in question.

In your earlier experiment, you were able to make the top magnet rotate by applying a current to the wire that was wraped around the bottom magnet (where both magnets were in attraction)?  But when you moved the top magnet by hand nothing was induced in the coil?  I wanted to be clear that applying current produced movement but manual movement produced no current. 

Or was the test to see if current would be produced - which it wasnt? 

I'm confused.  I see what you guys are trying to do but is it based on a principle that works or a concept that might work?

Thanks,
Charlie

I have only done the second thing you mentioned. That is to see whether a current is generated when the magnet is rotated around it's magnetization axis, which it didn't. This is conform to the thingy called the Faraday paradox that shows that the field does not "move" when the magnet rotates around its magnetization axis. No moving field means no relative motion between charge which equal ZERO back emf. This proves that when the magnet rotates there's no generator effect that kills of my applied current.

Now all I have to show is that indeed the magnet would rotate. You are right it's just a concept, but all the facts that support this concept are as obvious as day light. This would make the perfect dc motor first of all as you apply true DC and not switched by some split ring. And a true DC generator at the same time. I plan on closing the loop with a generator that uses the exact same setup but where the conductor is rotating. The cool thing is that even for this generator you get rotation of its magnets for free.

I'm currently waiting on some neo magnets I just ordered that should arrive in a few days. Hopefully I will then show that indeed a radial field made by two opposing magnets can generate a Lorentz force that's causes at every angle of rotation a net torque unlike a conventional dc motor where you have to flip polarity. Then I need to acquire a toroidal air wound coil to prove that the magnet will rotate if allowed and show free energy.

it looks to me like you have the inside out version of a "faraday flashlight"

the flashlights have a magnet running in the middle of a coil of wires

interesting concept though, i had no idea it worked in reverse as well

i think ive solved it using this method (not yours but variations) that im still kicking around


until next time

Quote from: gravityblock on February 17, 2009, 03:53:29 PM
Below is a pic of a toroidal motor that I designed. I'm not even sure if this is even half baked. LOL

Here are the advantages I see with this motor:

1) The magnets do not rotate around the coil in the traditional way and the coil doesn't rotate around the magnets, which eliminates the polarity or direction of the current from always switching.

2) With the right arrangements of magnets on the top and bottom, this may reduce Lenz's law or even eliminate it. I have a few ideas on this, but haven't been able to fully think those ideas through until I know what this motor could do.

3) If this doesn't provide overunity, then it may provide for a more efficient motor and generator.


The disadvantages with this motor:

1) Not even sure if it will produce a current or emf (LOL), and I apologize for wasting the time it took you to read this.

Please let me know if it could be a thumbs up or a thumbs down and your reason. Thanks

Hi,

I made once a generator/motor with a toroid (Not a transformer - they have only one set of windings). The toroid is at the size of a 60VA transformer, so it isn't very big. However, I did put a normal ringmagnet on the top and the bottom where the north pole facing the toroid from both magnets. I put current in the toroid, but nothing happens. I was hoping I could make a brushless motor with DC current. I got the idea because I fly RC planes with brushless motors. But these have a special controller that is a 3-phase AC power supply.

Then I understood the problem. There is equal numbers of fluxlines entering through the windings and into the iron core as the number of fluxlines exiting the iron core through the windings. So the forces in the toroid cancelled out perfectly - even if there is current flow through the windings that is making a static magnetic field in the toroid core.

So I am just poiting out that I have already tried this (Also one like in your drawing), and it doesn't work :-\ How convenient it would be then if we could replace thet toroid with a round magnet with a curcular magnetic field and made it work.

However, If you manage to force the fluxlines from the magnets in going only one direction through the toroid windings and find another path back to the magnet withour affecting the windings, it would defenitely work. The question is just how to get these flux lines back in the magnetic loop without crossing the windings on the way back. Without that possibility the forces will be cancelled, whether you want it or not ;)

Loudspeaker coils do exactly what we are looking for, but they have also limited allowed travel length because the magnetic lines CAN go back without crossing the windings again.

br.

Vidar

Quote from: mr_bojangles on March 18, 2009, 04:13:40 PM
it looks to me like you have the inside out version of a "faraday flashlight"

the flashlights have a magnet running in the middle of a coil of wires

interesting concept though, i had no idea it worked in reverse as well

i think ive solved it using this method (not yours but variations) that im still kicking around


until next time

The Faraday flash light relies entirely on magnetic induction. The proposed concepts here do not rely on induction. Induction is really a small part of the bigger picture, the bigger picture being the Lorentz force. This means that you can describe it with the Lorentz force but can't with the induction law because there's no changing flux.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 18, 2009, 04:36:56 PM
Hi,

I made once a generator/motor with a toroid (Not a transformer - they have only one set of windings). The toroid is at the size of a 60VA transformer, so it isn't very big. However, I did put a normal ringmagnet on the top and the bottom where the north pole facing the toroid from both magnets. I put current in the toroid, but nothing happens. I was hoping I could make a brushless motor with DC current. I got the idea because I fly RC planes with brushless motors. But these have a special controller that is a 3-phase AC power supply.

Then I understood the problem. There is equal numbers of fluxlines entering through the windings and into the iron core as the number of fluxlines exiting the iron core through the windings. So the forces in the toroid cancelled out perfectly - even if there is current flow through the windings that is making a static magnetic field in the toroid core.

So I am just poiting out that I have already tried this (Also one like in your drawing), and it doesn't work :-\ How convenient it would be then if we could replace thet toroid with a round magnet with a curcular magnetic field and made it work.

However, If you manage to force the fluxlines from the magnets in going only one direction through the toroid windings and find another path back to the magnet withour affecting the windings, it would defenitely work. The question is just how to get these flux lines back in the magnetic loop without crossing the windings on the way back. Without that possibility the forces will be cancelled, whether you want it or not ;)

Loudspeaker coils do exactly what we are looking for, but they have also limited allowed travel length because the magnetic lines CAN go back without crossing the windings again.

br.

Vidar

Low-q I don't like your negative comments. Your flaw is obvious experimental and mentality wise. I'll show you in a few days that this is possible so you can stop your negative rants. You can't do simple mechanical calculations (this will show you that even the flux going in and out is equal the TORQUE IS NOT) you can't do simple electric calculations (this will show you the direction of all the forces and reaction forces) but yet you are very quick in belittling people by your broken knowledge.

So, you want to create a brush less DC motor? ...the toroidal idea seems sound.  Wouldn't a bifilar wound toroid do the trick? ...you may want to use something which a permanent magnet isn't attracted to as the toroid though.

Quote from: broli on March 18, 2009, 05:33:29 PM
Low-q I don't like your negative comments. Your flaw is obvious experimental and mentality wise. I'll show you in a few days that this is possible so you can stop your negative rants. You can't do simple mechanical calculations (this will show you that even the flux going in and out is equal the TORQUE IS NOT) you can't do simple electric calculations (this will show you the direction of all the forces and reaction forces) but yet you are very quick in belittling people by your broken knowledge.

Please be objective. More of those personal attacks, and I sure will recommend someone to throw you out of this forum for good. Grow up!

Vidar

Objective? This isn't politics buddy.This is you spreading your negativity. I tried to reason with you many times but you are either ignorant or do it on purpose to sell your disinfo. If you don't like to talk to me then stop posting where I post. As long as you are ignorant to ideas I propose I will be there to defend them. I accept skepticism but then point out where the flaw is. Simply saying "I tried this in my hands just now and it didn't work so stop working on it" deserves no respect.

Oh and threatening to ban me is hilarious. I guess we aren't all adults here.

Quote from: broli on March 18, 2009, 06:24:31 PM
Objective? This isn't politics buddy.This is you spreading your negativity. I tried to reason with you many times but you are either ignorant or do it on purpose to sell your disinfo. If you don't like to talk to me then stop posting where I post. As long as you are ignorant to ideas I propose I will be there to defend them. I accept skepticism but then point out where the flaw is. Simply saying "I tried this in my hands just now and it didn't work so stop working on it" deserves no respect.

Oh and threatening to ban me is hilarious. I guess we aren't all adults here.

The flaw is that you are forgetting that the fluxlines in the inner part of a toroid is denser than the outer part. So the torque is equal on both sides. Simple as that. No offence.

Vidar

Well, ignoring the pissing contest....

Broli,

When you tested the induction of the wire, I imagine applying a current didn't cause the top to spin either?

Quote from: Charlie_V on March 18, 2009, 11:40:15 PM
Well, ignoring the pissing contest....

Broli,

When you tested the induction of the wire, I imagine applying a current didn't cause the top to spin either?

That's right.

hi broli !

We (as civilization) know so little of homopolar setups
since this is homopolar setup and we know hompolar generator and motors are actually achiveable machines

This is wonderfull idea that I think has potential to solve main drawback of constructing hompolar generator and that is
obtaining low inner resistance and extracting kiloAMPERES.

Here with added coils I think voltage generated will be more usefull (much higher) and amperage more in range for our todays loads.

So broli I think you solved main drawback (and that is mechanicall complexity)

this is brilliant idea. one of the best and not just recently.
even if for some reason I can't see, it fails we will learn much more about such machines.

seems to me now even speed of magnet doesn't have to be that large.

this thingy if build properly could go past COP = 10......pure electricity.

what thinking !!!!!!

please if it works or not inform us.

as I said this is Drumm and Bass from Space and knowone and ever can escape it (even the ones not doing anything trying even not to think and have new ideas)

so everybody can only come and Join...nothing else.

Wiz

Thank you wizkycho. Finally someone who's on the same page. You are exactly right. The main draw back is current in a classic homopolar motor. Because in theory the homopolar motor only uses one winding according to the below formula. While in this concept you can have as much windings as you like. So instead of having large currents you just increase the amount of windings or the wire length that's in the magnetic field. F= B*I*l *n, this the the force on the wire. In a regular homopolar motor n = 1 in this idea n can be as big as 1000. This means that with 1000 windings you only need to apply 1A. In a classic homopolar motor you need to apply 1000A for the same force.

Thanks for understanding I really needed this. I felt like I was talking to a brick wall with all the naysayers. I don't want people to just look at it and try a replica out I want them to understand the reasoning behind it so they can fine tune it themselves and know exactly what to adjust for more power.

Just one question @broli:

Which picture is correct (Look at the magnetpoles on the outer magnet in your original picture compared to the modified one below)? I got confused by your original picture and asked myself why the outer magnets are attracting each other and not repelling eachother, so I modified your picture below, together with some fluxlines-pictures of original and modified.

Vidar

Good catch low-q I rendered this one wrong. It should be like you modified it.

Just out of curiosity, what are you using to render the images?

Google's sketchup.

Hey broli,

I think this should work.  The torque forces should be the same but because it is on a wheel, I would think the forces toward the outside of the wheel will produce more leverage causing rotation.  Oh but I just realized something, the wire toward the outside of the wheel will be moving at a higher speed, so in fact it will generate a stronger force than the one closer in.  So its going to have a counter emf.  But what is cool is you've invented a homopolar generator that can have multiple turns (instead of just 1).  I suspect that you'll be able to make this device spin so fast it tears itself apart (like a universal motor).  The efficiency should be much better than the conventional homopolar generator too. 

You should patent this if you can.  If you live in the USA, by making it public you've given up your international rights but you can still hold a US patent.  You have like a year after you make it public to apply for a patent.  After that it becomes public domain.

Good luck,
Charlie

Quote from: Charlie_V on March 19, 2009, 10:50:53 PM
Hey broli,

I think this should work.  The torque forces should be the same but because it is on a wheel, I would think the forces toward the outside of the wheel will produce more leverage causing rotation.  Oh but I just realized something, the wire toward the outside of the wheel will be moving at a higher speed, so in fact it will generate a stronger force than the one closer in.  So its going to have a counter emf.  But what is cool is you've invented a homopolar generator that can have multiple turns (instead of just 1).  I suspect that you'll be able to make this device spin so fast it tears itself apart (like a universal motor).  The efficiency should be much better than the conventional homopolar generator too. 

You should patent this if you can.  If you live in the USA, by making it public you've given up your international rights but you can still hold a US patent.  You have like a year after you make it public to apply for a patent.  After that it becomes public domain.

Good luck,
Charlie

Isn't this already patented?  It's not much different than the watt hour meter on all the buildings........lol
The utility companies are seeding us with electricity, so we can generate our own, and then charge us for what we generated from their seed electricity.  This is too much......lol

Yhea, but let's take another step, and incorporate it with a gyro, and this won't have a counter emf.  The only limit will be mechanical.  Please don't laugh at this idea.  This idea has some interesting results, in thought.  I can't speak for broli, but I think he is on the same page.  Now, this is for another topic, which is already being discussed in various areas of this forum.

Broli went full circle with this and never gave up.  Out of respect, it is only reasonable, to ask the members of this forum who is capable, to give this some thought, build, and test this device.  I believe this is no longer half baked, but is a fully baked idea.  Let's get this idea moved out of this section, by building and testing, and hopefully rejoicing with the results.  Enough with my philosophical B.S.


"The day you stop thinking, is the day you die"

These kind of generator broli has drawn can work as generator but not as a motor. If I remember correctly.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 20, 2009, 02:14:33 AM
These kind of generator broli has drawn can work as generator but not as a motor. If I remember correctly.

With a gyro, it can work both as a generator and a motor, without the counter EMF.  ;D

Why does it have to be a motor?

Looks a bit like this:

http://www.koremag.com/ (http://www.koremag.com/)

Quote from: Charlie_V on March 19, 2009, 10:50:53 PM
Hey broli,

I think this should work.  The torque forces should be the same but because it is on a wheel, I would think the forces toward the outside of the wheel will produce more leverage causing rotation.  Oh but I just realized something, the wire toward the outside of the wheel will be moving at a higher speed, so in fact it will generate a stronger force than the one closer in.  So its going to have a counter emf.  But what is cool is you've invented a homopolar generator that can have multiple turns (instead of just 1).  I suspect that you'll be able to make this device spin so fast it tears itself apart (like a universal motor).  The efficiency should be much better than the conventional homopolar generator too. 

You should patent this if you can.  If you live in the USA, by making it public you've given up your international rights but you can still hold a US patent.  You have like a year after you make it public to apply for a patent.  After that it becomes public domain.

Good luck,
Charlie

I never think about patents when I post my ideas. The moment I post them they belong to the general public. Also I said something wrong to a reply to you on an other thread. The motor part of this will not be the spinning toroid but will actually be the spinning magnets. They will spin because of newton's third law action=-reaction. But when they spin nothing changes at all in the system so they don't cause some induced counter voltage, this is Faraday's paradox. That means the torque on them stays constant no matter how fast they spin. Now to get power out of this you then hook the exact same motor to it but now allow the toroid to spin. This will generate electricity from the torque of the motor. The cool thing about this is that the magnets will yet again spin in the generator due to the newton's third law. The Lorentz force doesn't predict this reaction force but experiments on especially the rail guns show them. The other cool thing about it is that all the math is very simple and you can easily predict what the speeds are with the used parameters like field strength,windings count and toroidal size.

There's a method to have the torque rely on the outer/inner diameter of the toroid only by magnetically shielding the outer/inner diameter windings. This can or cannot be worth it.

Advantage: The OD (inner diameter) and ID (inner diameter) can be close to each other. Because torque only depends on ID (or OD if ID was shielded) with this method. This means you can spare on a lot of wire for the same torque. This also renders the motor lighter.

Potential disadvantage: The cost of mumetal magnetic shielding sheet or w/e type you use might be more expensive than copper wire  So it might not be worth it in the end;

The below drawing shows this more in detail. As you can see the inner winding can now be much closer to the outer one because it's shielded. Also instead of windings toroids one might probably find it much easier to just wind loops of many turns and attach them to the stator like that. In the case of shielding this is the best option. As winding it on a toroidal shape and putting the shielding on every piece of wire that's going on the inside can be very painstaking.

Maybe it's easier to make the inner part of the winding more attractive, rather than making the outer part less attractive? If you maybe tried to make the inner part of the winding made of iron, and let the outer part still be pure copper? Then the magnetic fields would be more focused on the inner part than the outer part?
Making them should be easier as you can make these windings by soldering tinned ironwire with copper wire by first make a whole bunch of "C" shaped wires of both copper and tinned iron and solder them together as windings?

Vidar

That's also a solution but it's a lots of work too. You have to remember that one loop in the rendition consist maybe of 100 wire loops. Think of lazyman's solutions  ;D. The idea I proposed just let's you wind as many windings as you need and then just wrap something highly magnetic permeable around it.

And low-q this is the kind of attitude I need. People giving constructive advice to each other to better the main concept.

Also last nigh I made a very important realization. I now am 200% certain this will work.

I think the good attitude is important, but also that one can question an idea without someone believing that person having a bad attitude and being attacked - at least that is what I have felt lately anyway ;). I have never meant to be rude, or bad to anyone. 

Anyway, I really hope you're right about your idea (200% certain is quite ambitious, so I hope you'll survive a possible fall - meant as a joke :)), and that the conservation of magnetic fields will benifit, and not counterwork everything we try to do. You know, iron wrap around the winding will probably not do any difference as the magnetic field, as it is denser in the iron, it also moves more slow through the wire. I mean that there isn't more fluxlines that is crossing the windings at a given time. Just a critical thought that might be in the way. I think however it is best to build it and see for real if it works.

I have A LOT of neomagnets and ringmagnets, and several kilometers of insulated copperwire, litzwire and so on - some steelwire too (Musicwire). I will contact my loudspeaker supplier for the biggest ringmagnets they have, and some smaller one to easily fit inside those big ones. If you could make a "final" drawing on how you want to build your prototype, I probably can do it too. I have tools to make simple prototypes, so I am quite limited regarding the complexity.

Vidar

The setup mainly depends on how uniform the field is. The more uniform the less forces you get in the direction you don't want, this is why shielding can be useful to shield the parts that don't need the field. One should also be very generous on the windings. I'm currently waiting on these neo mags I ordered...

http://www.emovendo.net/magnet/2-x-18-x-14-rings.html

The setup I currently have is kind of a joke. It uses k'nex as the construction  ;D. I don't know if the forces will be enough to spin the magnets but they should be enough to spin the conductors. But as stated the main idea is to only spin the magnets but I don't have much choice currently. I'm also kind of limited on the power side. I don't have any dc power supplies or fancy stuff like that.

I'll try and take a picture of the construction I currently have. Currently speaker magnets are on it. The are heavy and weak so a very bad thing to demonstrate. The one coil of wire barely moves when I apply some D type batteries in series to it. You can see it moving slightly in the direction of movement but the force is probably to weak to overcome friction so it just stays still.

@broli:

What about increasing the "diameter" of the windings so the non shielded part closest to the magnet are in the center of the disc magnet instead. In the center there is no moving magnetic force at all, where the flux is spread in all directions, hence the force acting in that part is undetermind or zero. The flux that is coming from the wires parallell to the discmagnet will cancel out, but left you will have the fluxlines crossing the outer part of the windings only.

So in basic you make a toroid coil with an absolute minimum inner diameter, and let that center be in the center of the disc magnets.

I have made two equivalent drawing with only magnets. Looking forward to your thoughts.

PS! I know this isnt working with both ringmagnets as inner and outer magnets - I have tried already. But maybe it's different with a discmagnet as the inner magnet instead. Look at the drawings of top view and side view.

Vidar

Low-q you will end up with a lot of wasted copper windings that's on the top and bottom toroid that doesn't contribute to the torque. This is why I'm looking for the most compact,simplest and cheap solution. Also the permanent magnet solution you show is very close to the permanent magnet concept I posted a while ago. So it should be looked further into.

Also I agree partially on the ring magnets. The ring magnets will not work with permanent magnets if the magnet is between the rings. It should be outside of the ring which will then be exactly the same as previous posted concepts.

If you want to stay in between the rings then permanent magnets cannot be used. Because shielding should be employed and thus only a conductor can be used like you see below which is a cross section of 2 ring magnets opposing each other. Forces on the two wire pieces point IN the screen so magnets will move out of screen due the reaction force. The cool part of this design is that the torque scales with the overall ring size. Meaning the size difference between OD and ID can remain the same. I attached an example of this where the ring is very large.

Edit: I just noticed you can shield the left and right wire pieces and get the same or even better result because those wires are closer to the magnets and thus are in a much stronger field. So many possibilities we only need people working on it now  ;).

Edit2: The previously edited statement is exactly the idea this thread started with. Only with shielding and rotating magnets instead of conductor. 

Here are some examples on what you can use for shielding. They can be bought in most electronic stores. Here are some pictures from the Northern Europe electronic chain ELFA.

The material is a nonconductive ferrite, which I believe is important.

PS! None of your examples will work. You must have two windings which is seen as opposite. The two windings is placed on the left and right part of the disc magnet.

Vidar

Thanks a lot low-q now I know what to look for. On first look Ebay seems significantly cheaper than ELFA. I'm mainly looking for those snap-on cores.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 05:40:28 AM
Thanks a lot low-q now I know what to look for. On first look Ebay seems significantly cheaper than ELFA. I'm mainly looking for those snap-on cores.

I have ordered 25x of those beads at almost half price, 25.4mm length and 5mm inner diameter. Looks nice I guess on a motor rather than the snap-ons ;D But the snap-ons are for sure easier to remove... I already have a few of those I will use on a prototype. But the final motor/generator will use beads.
Hey, this is starting to get very fun :). Maybe I now can also making a brushless motor that runs on pure DC current.

Can't wait till I get those ferrite-beads :)

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 22, 2009, 05:52:51 AM
I have ordered 25x of those beads at almost half price, 25.4mm length and 5mm inner diameter. Looks nice I guess on a motor rather than the snap-ons ;D But the snap-ons are for sure easier to remove... I already have a few of those I will use on a prototype. But the final motor/generator will use beads.
Hey, this is starting to get very fun :). Maybe I now can also making a brushless motor that runs on pure DC current.

Can't wait till I get those ferrite-beads :)

Vidar

I would have recommended the snap-ons This way you can take many turns of wire and snap it on them immediately instead of wasting a lot of time inserting the wire loop one by one as if you're sewing :p.

Edit: Doing some field simulations I noticed there's a small leaking factor if these beads are used. One has to leave some space between the wire(s) and beads to really sit in that 0 field spot. The below simulation shows a cross section of a bead with a 10 A wire(s) going in the middle of it. As you can see the wire(s) should at best not touch the inner surface of the bead to sit in that zero field spot.

Edit2: I think this leaking is a software thing. If you logically think about it, the field should be in the other direction which contributes to the torque. So I guess this isn't something to be worried about.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 06:39:15 AM
I would have recommended the snap-ons This way you can take many turns of wire and snap it on them immediately instead of wasting a lot of time inserting the wire loop one by one as if you're sewing :p.

Edit: Doing some field simulations I noticed there's a small leaking factor if these beads are used. One has to leave some space between the wire(s) and beads to really sit in that 0 field spot. The below simulation shows a cross section of a bead with a 10 A wire(s) going in the middle of it. As you can see the wire(s) should at best not touch the inner surface of the bead to sit in that zero field spot.

Edit2: I think this leaking is a software thing. If you logically think about it, the field should be in the other direction which contributes to the torque. So I guess this isn't something to be worried about.

I do not think it is critical to have the wire in the very center to make this work at all. I think at first it is more important to make the wires go through the hole in the bead, and then it could be possible to tune the efficiency to its maximum by centering the wires.

I have done some experiments already. Look at the pictures below. I didn't find those snap-ons, so I used several nuts that I used some shrinking tube on as a bead.

I tested this with a battery source in the windings, and it seams the magnetic shielding does change the torque at that part of the windings. I have not tried this as a generator yet, but I am positive to go further with this experiment as a motor.

Nice work work and good alternative solution for the beads. I might do the same if my neo mags arrive.

Also since you're using ring magnets I recommend this solution instead...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6847.0;attach=31902;image

You get more field on the wire with that method. The integral calculation shows this as well. Will attach it in a minute.

Attached now.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 10:08:37 AM
Nice work work and good alternative solution for the beads. I might do the same if my neo mags arrive.

Also since you're using ring magnets I recommend this solution instead...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6847.0;attach=31902;image

You get more field on the wire with that method. The integral calculation shows this as well. Will attach it in a minute.

Wouldn't this method below work better? In your original drawing there is no torque horizontaly into the paper, but vertical. So you need two windings as shown below. And notice the curent loop in them that is neccessary to have torque in the right direction.

EDIT: What software do you use to simulate this? It looks pretty nice!

Quote from: Low-Q on March 22, 2009, 10:45:11 AM
Wouldn't this method below work better? In your original drawing there is no torque horizontaly into the paper, but vertical. So you need two windings as shown below. And notice the curent loop in them that is neccessary to have torque in the right direction.

You're only looking at one half of the picture. This is a cutaway of a ring magnet. So the center is off to the left.

I use vizimag. It's very easy to use unlike FEMM. It is a 30 day trial but you can easily bypass that by changing the year on your pc if the 30 days are over  ;D.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 10:47:50 AM
You're only looking at one half of the picture. This is a cutaway of a ring magnet. So the center is off to the left.

I see now. I wondered for a while why you had that other magnets. I see now, thanks.

Well, I have more nuts, so I can make a new test. But for now It seams the rest of my family just entered the doorstep. You know kids - They want to play with daddy, strangle him, climb on him, scream happy high notes right into his ears. I'm almost deaf on one ear because of that ;D

More experiments to come later.

This is seriously my lucky day. What I found today proves everything I have been saying so far. I first stumbled on his papers on this subject then googled him and found his site.

Check this scientists webpage out !!!!

http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/index.html

Watch the video first to understand his experiment. The video shows the reaction force on the magnets I kept and keep talking about. Look how he casually mentions 30.000 HP engines to be made by the navy. This is the real deal  ;D. I fully understand his experiment. Please ask if you don't get something.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 12:14:13 PM
This is seriously my lucky day. What I found today proves everything I have been saying so far. I first stumbled on his papers on this subject then googled him and found his site.

Check this scientists webpage out !!!!

http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/index.html

Watch the video first to understand his experiment. The video shows the reaction force on the magnets I kept and keep talking about. Look how he casually mentions 30.000 HP engines to be made by the navy. This is the real deal  ;D. I fully understand his experiment. Please ask if you don't get something.

To me it looks like the red wire he put on the inside force the magnet to rotate, and not the needle. I must think about it, because I have a doubt as the disc also slows down when it reached a critical position where the needle approached 180 degree off the red wire. Just look at it once more - it is a bit hard to explain.

Anyway I have done some more experiments. See the picture below. I have four long neo magnets placed so equal poles are facing. In the middle I put a new winding with two shields. When I put on the battery, there is no force whatsoever that will move this winding anywhere. Maybe I do something wrong, but it didn't work as I hoped.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 22, 2009, 12:40:02 PM
To me it looks like the red wire he put on the inside force the magnet to rotate, and not the needle. I must think about it, because I have a doubt as the disc also slows down when it reached a critical position where the needle approached 180 degree off the red wire. Just look at it once more - it is a bit hard to explain.

Yes that's the point! the magnet rotates according to the reaction force and thus has no speed limit.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 22, 2009, 12:40:02 PM
Anyway I have done some more experiments. See the picture below. I have four long neo magnets placed so equal poles are facing. In the middle I put a new winding with two shields. When I put on the battery, there is no force whatsoever that will move this winding anywhere. Maybe I do something wrong, but it didn't work as I hoped.

This setup seems very weak. I don't think the magnetic fields will be enough like that. Put the coil flat on something and bring in the magnets very close to it. Make sure sure the coil then can move forward/backward easily. Also increase the power of the coil. My tests were using 7.5V @ 1.7A and the thing was barely flinching.

Edit: Sorry this suggestion should make the coil jump or go down not move forward. Do you have more of those magnets? It's best to at least cover the whole wire length for more beneficial results.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 12:51:10 PM
Yes that's the point! the magnet rotates according to the reaction force and thus has no speed limit.

This setup seems very weak. I don't think the magnetic fields will be enough like that. Put the coil flat on something and bring in the magnets very close to it. Make sure sure the coil then can move forward/backward easily. Also increase the power of the coil. My tests were using 7.5V @ 1.7A and the thing was barely flinching.

If I rise the coil higher so the lower shielding is in the same level as the magnets, it flips around in one direction, and if I lower the winding so the upper shielding is level with the magnet, it will flip the other way. So sure there is magnetism in the shielding that wants to do something, but in opposite way. Hmmmmm-..... I must think further..

I have great space because its hard to not let the nuts get stucked on those magnets. I need a more rigid setup so I can move those magnets closer.

Vidar

You're on the right path.  I have almost a zero doubt that this will work.  Tesla has his fingerprints all over this device.  There is another movie I could post, that would remove all doubt of this working, but I don't want it to be a distraction at this moment (I don't think it would help in building this device).  The movie is over an hour long and is posted in another thread.  It talks about the watt hour meter, gyro's, the Navy, the Bell experiments, the air force, and Tesla.

The entire world is going to be pissed off, when they realize this technology has been used in secret for all these years.

I know it's nice to receive confirmation, but the best confirmation is to see it working in your lap. :P

Wish I could be more helpful at the moment.

Quote from: gravityblock on March 22, 2009, 01:08:08 PM
You're on the right path.  I have almost a zero doubt that this will work.  Tesla has his fingerprints all over this device.  There is another movie I could post, that would remove all doubt of this working, but I don't want it to be a distraction at this moment (I don't think it would help in building this device).  The movie is over an hour long and is posted in another thread.  It talks about the watt hour meter, gyro's, the Navy, the Bell experiments, the air force, and Tesla.

The entire world is going to be pissed off, when they realize this technology has been used in secret for all these years.

I know it's nice to receive confirmation, but the best confirmation is to see it working in your lap. :P

Wish I could be more helpful at the moment.

Thanks gravityblock. Me neither anymore.

Low-q I don't think you fully understand his experiment. There are parts where you have to consider the red wire and parts where you don't. The first experiment he did of the bridge piece only shows typical Faraday motor behavior. the bridge accelerates untill it hits the gap. The reason why it stops is because the field between the gap is in the other direction than the rest of the magnets. That's why the bridge will hit the gap and stop because the gap wants to push it back while the magnet main field wants to push it forward.

In the next experiment you have to indeed account for the red wire. The bridge piece at this point is inside a space where there's no magnetic field so you have to forget about it completely! So the whole setup rotates due to the reaction force on the magnets caused by the red wire.

I made a new test but turned the winding in plane with the magnets. I can feel a great directional force depending on the polarity of the battery. The drawback is that I can get the same or greater force without the shielding - I made a new coil with the same number of windings. I guess it flows about 20A through that coil as it gets hot in an instant.

Then I replaced the neos with the ringmagnets in the same vise where the neos was placed - equal poles facing. Now I got more area, I tested in the same way as with the neos last experiment, and got the same result but with less force. Then I placed the coil as it is suppose to be by turn it 90 degrees - radially. Now there isn't any directional force I can feel at all. I think the reason is that the coil somehow, regadless if shielding or not cannot work as a motor - there no net change in the magnetic field in front and in the back of the coil that will force it to move.

I will then make a guess that it will vork as a generator, but as soon as the generator is loded, current flow in the coils will probably generate a magnetic field in the shield that will create counter EMF, and maybe also make the generator suddenly less efficient. The voltage drop will probably be considerably great with relatively small loads.

This is the one to test next time. Now it starts to get late, and my wife do fuss about me helping her with all and everything ;D

Vidar

Low-q you still are denying it. The invention is 150 years old and called the Faraday homopolar MOTOR. It does not rely on induction (ie change in field) the field remains constant at all point and yet there's motion. It relies on the Lorentz and ampere force. I know it will work as a generator but the main point now is to capture the reaction force of the magnet which has a torque that is constant REGARDLESS OF ITS SPEED.

Make a rotatable fixture then you'll see what'll happen.

Quote from: broli on March 22, 2009, 05:11:18 PM
Low-q you still are denying it. The invention is 150 years old and called the Faraday homopolar MOTOR. It does not rely on induction (ie change in field) the field remains constant at all point and yet there's motion. It relies on the Lorentz and ampere force. I know it will work as a generator but the main point now is to capture the reaction force of the magnet which has a torque that is constant REGARDLESS OF ITS SPEED.

Make a rotatable fixture then you'll see what'll happen.

I do not deny it, I just havent the right equipment to make good experiments. However I became sceptic when I didn't see any reaction when the coil was placed correctly. I also recalls that the faraday disc needs a brush so the spinning disc allways can be free to spin and escape the magnetic flux generated by the current flowing from the edge to the center. If you fix the wires to the disc and spin the magnets only, like the experiment I have carried out but reversed, there isn't any output. At least what wikipedia says about it.

The coils in my experiment will follow the connector like you only spin the magnet.

magnet         disk                  external indicating circuit        voltage indicated?
stationary      stationary         stationary                              no
stationary      rotating             stationary                             yes
stationary      stationary         rotating                                 yes
stationary      rotating             rotating                                 undetermined
rotating         stationary          stationary                             no
rotating         rotating             stationary                              yes
rotating         stationary         rotating                                  yes
rotating         rotating             rotating                                 undetermined

The main thing that I'm after is not on that Table  That is fix disk, fix external circuit and allow magnets to rotate. If you do this magnets will rotate due to newton's reaction force. The beauty of this is that it induces no counter EMF like that Table tells you so the magnet accelerates due to this torque to "infinite" speed on constant current/voltage ;).

In you current experiment you're doing...

magnet         disk                  external indicating circuit        voltage indicated?
stationary      rotating             stationary                             yes

which is the same as....

stationary      rotating             rotating                                 undetermined

So yes it acts as a generator when the conductor is allowed to move but I already knew that a month ago.

professor emeritus
salt and pepper beard
assistant
formulas
symphony
modest kitchenette
==============
Homopolar Motor

What WE can do? - Nothing!
Even so my beard is longer - my wife does not sanction to make any setups or experiments in the kitchen,
I have to accept my fate - my laboratory (workshop),

Anyway - well articulated speech - thats I like!
Was it Spanish?
Most of videos seen before - inventors speaks like potato  in mouth -
- and poor lighting as a rule 8)

Regards,
khabe

Quote from: khabe on March 22, 2009, 06:30:17 PM
professor emeritus
salt and pepper beard
assistant
formulas
symphony
modest kitchenette
==============
Homopolar Motor

What WE can do? - Nothing!
Even so my beard is longer - my wife does not sanction to make any setups or experiments in the kitchen,
I have to accept my fate - my laboratory (workshop),

Anyway - well articulated speech - thats I like!
Was it Spanish?
Most of videos seen before - inventors speaks like potato  in mouth -
- and poor lighting as a rule 8)

Regards,
khabe

Shhhhhhh, be gone troll.

cheers

Quote from: khabe on March 22, 2009, 07:16:16 PM
Thanks, broli,
contrary to someones - I have my own Toroid machine,
I prefer to do, instead of speaking and masturbating,
cheers,
khabe

PS,
I did not say any bad words about Jorge Guala-Valverde,
Yes - bit joke about kitchen ... and so what?
We cant live without humour,
Unfortunastely somes have no vein of humour,
Have you?

That vein is currently pinched. Also what is that picture supposed to show? If you joke about others at least don't be the joke yourself  ;).

This is working model of toroid machine I made.
This is not a over unity  ( as well as Guala-Valverde´s machine is not described as over-unity?)
This machine is small - ca 80mm OD and weights 195g, kV is very low - 111 rpm/V
its very high efficent machine because used materials.
Nothing more,
absolutely,
cheers,
khabe

Quote from: khabe on March 22, 2009, 07:16:16 PM
Thanks, broli,
contrary to someones - I have my own Toroid machine,
I prefer to do, instead of speaking and masturbating,
cheers,
khabe

PS,
I did not say any bad words about Jorge Guala-Valverde,
Yes - bit joke about kitchen ... and so what?
We cant live without humour,
Unfortunastely somes have no vein of humour,
Have you?

You obviously don't have a sense of humor with the spray can (I guess you don't have a vein of humor either)........lol

Unbelievable you would sidetrack this discussion.  I'm guilty of this myself, even with my own threads....but that was totally blatant.

Since, you say, you prefer to do and not speak.....then this is a blessing.....but also a curse, cause you not doing, you are speaking........the very words you wrote were speaking and not doing. 

So, please go and do, and not speak, then we'll all be blessed and not cursed.

cheers,  ;D

gravityblock

Quote from: khabe on March 22, 2009, 07:42:34 PM
This is working model of toroid machine I made.
This is not a over unity  ( as well as Guala-Valverde´s machine is not described as over-unity?)
This machine is small - ca 80mm OD and weights 195g, kV is very low - 111 rpm/V
its very high efficent machine because used materials.
Nothing more,
absolutely,
cheers,
khabe

You took the easy way out.  We decided not to take the easy path, and not settle for something less than unity (We already have highly efficient motors, why redesign or reconfigure the wheel to have the same results as the motors we already have, that is insanity).  You obviously haven't read this thread in it's entirety, or you would have realized it is based, on more than a conventional toroid motor. 

cheers,  ;D

gravityblock

Dont worry,
Be strong, guys!
cheers,
khabe

Quote from: gravityblock on March 22, 2009, 07:58:48 PM
You took the easy way out.  We decided not to take the easy path, and not settle for something less than unity (We already have highly efficient motors, why redesign or reconfigure the wheel to have the same results as the motors we already have, that is insanity).  You obviously haven't read this thread in it's entirety, or you would have realized it is based, on more than a conventional toroid motor. 

cheers,  ;D

gravityblock

Oh yes, gravityblock, now I remember why you are resentful - because Gyroscope arguing,
You dont need,
Really not,
Im making Gyroscopes as well - high speed bldc toroid motor (24kRPM) wheres precision balanced Tungsten sleeve upon,
Have a nice Sunday evening,
and good sleeping,
regards,
khabe

Quote from: khabe on March 22, 2009, 08:12:19 PM
Yeah, men ...
How old you are?
Im 56,
Do you think you gave me drubbing ... wound to the quick ...
And now Im close to tears,
Oh dear!

Dont worry,
Be strong, guys!
cheers,
khabe

hereby one more toroid machine made by me - and again - working model 8)
whos smart enough can understand on what its mounted,
I can not show it larger because confidential agreement,
And repeat - it is not a overunity.

Life is like a roll of toilet paper, khabe.  The closer you get to the end, the faster it goes.  A few more wipes, and you'll be gone. 

We don't really care about the boys (You) who have confidential agreements, secrets, patents, non-disclosure agreements, etc.  I'm not impressed with that stuff.  Real men do things in public sight...boys do things indoors and out of public sight, such as the masonic lodge and confidential agreements.

You probably in a big kids club, such as freemasonry, skull and bones, knights of templar, etc.  Not able to think or do anything on your on accord, without help from the members of your big kids club......lol

And repeat - Go do, and not speak.....if this is possible for you.

cheers,   ;D

gravityblock

P.S.  I need to wipe.   :o

Quote from: gravityblock on March 22, 2009, 08:38:14 PM
Life is like a roll of toilet paper, khabe.  The closer you get to the end, the faster it goes.  A few more wipes, and you'll be gone. 

We don't really care about the boys (You) who have confidential agreements, secrets, patents, non-disclosure agreements, etc.  I'm not impressed with that stuff.  Real men do things in public sight...boys do things indoors and out of public sight, such as the masonic lodge and confidential agreements.

You probably in a big kids club, such as freemasonry, skull and bones, knights of templar, etc.  Not able to think or do anything on your on accord, without help from the members of your big kids club......lol

And repeat - Go do, and not speak.....if this is possible for you.

cheers,   ;D

gravityblock

P.S.  I need to wipe.   :o

Why to bloviate, young man?
´confidential´ because customer wants like that,
Its my bred and butter - I have to accept agreements and I do,
Now its deleted - you can sleep and dream,
Dont overdo at nights - mama will be angry,
cheers,
khabe

He didn't deny being in a big kids club.......lol

There's no more I need to say...lol

cheers,  ;D

gravityblock

At least he understood there's no point in showing a picture if he's going to be vague about it. Kind of ironic that the same person belittles others for showing way more than two pictures.

What is the relative difference between a rotating magnet and a rotating disc and connector? The centrifugal force might make the difference.
Else there is none. We must built it to confirm this.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 23, 2009, 02:13:32 AM
What is the relative difference between a rotating magnet and a rotating disc and connector? The centrifugal force might make the difference.
Else there is none. We must built it to confirm this.

Yes, inertia (mass) is different.
And when rotating magnets then why brushes anymore ??? ::)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But anyway rotating disc or magnet - common disc causes huge eddy losses at the same time it moves or magnets move,
It works like motor and brake at the same time, thats because relatively low speed of those set-ups,
I think that using Litz wire braidings bound up like close ´spokes ´ soldered ID and OD ... or when disc is pressed from wire filamentous,
Eddy losses will be reduced even when wire is made from not insulated strands.
I have made eddt losses experiments and for example desoldering braid works very well as conductor in air cap motor.
respect,
khabe

Quote from: Low-Q on March 23, 2009, 02:13:32 AM
What is the relative difference between a rotating magnet and a rotating disc and connector? The centrifugal force might make the difference.
Else there is none. We must built it to confirm this.

I will assume you don't understand the Faraday paradox. Basically Faraday made 3 experiments with 3 conclusions.

1) Rotate conducting disc, hold magnet stationary. Voltage was induced.
2) Hold conducting disc stationary, rotate magnet. No voltage was induced.
3) Rotate both. Voltage was induced.

2 and 3 show that rotatating a magnet around it's magnetization axis doesn't change the field. So it acts as if it was stationary. And this is the thing I want to exploit. The magnet will rotate due to the REACTION FORCE of newton's third law. But if it rotates its MASS rotates not the field so electrically nothing changes! So it will keep on speeding up due to this reaction force untill it explodes.

This is my n-th time I try to explain this to you. I hope today is the day you finally get it.

Quote from: khabe on March 23, 2009, 04:08:08 AM
Yes, inertia (mass) is different.
And when rotating magnets then why brushes anymore ??? ::)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But anyway rotating disc or magnet - common disc causes huge eddy losses at the same time it moves or magnets move,
It works like motor and brake at the same time, thats because relatively low speed of those set-ups,
I think that using Litz wire braidings bound up like close ´spokes ´ soldered ID and OD ... or when disc is pressed from wire filamentous,
Eddy losses will be reduced even when wire is made from not insulated strands.
I have made eddt losses experiments and for example desoldering braid works very well as conductor in air cap motor.
respect,
khabe

Eddy currents? I don't think so. Eddy currents only arise in a classic Faraday disk setup where the disk is a lot larger than the magnetic field covering it. If the magnetic field covers the entire disk then eddy currents are not there. The braking (if used as a generator) will still be there but not due to eddy currents but due to moving charge in a constant magnetic field.

Quote from: broli on March 23, 2009, 05:39:01 AM

Eddy currents? I don't think so. Eddy currents only arise in a classic Faraday disk setup where the disk is a lot larger than the magnetic field covering it. If the magnetic field covers the entire disk then eddy currents are not there. The braking (if used as a generator) will still be there but not due to eddy currents but due to moving charge in a constant magnetic field.

Yes, I meant common Faraday disk setup ... perhaps as well as similar designs,
Im busy with some drawings - thats because Im cheek by jowl with my PC already second day and night,
and the ony vac was and is - to read threads and  leaving some extravagant thoughts .. unfortunately result was war :'(
I think I do konw something about Eddy´s ... but ok -  will not show off ...
In fact I did just a coup d'oeil about Guala-Valverde´s machine - no time to indagate,
Perhaps there is simple schematic about this setup - then no needs to read all this Opus or wach video one time more at least now?
regards,
khabe

Quote from: khabe on March 23, 2009, 07:37:35 AM
Yes, I meant common Faraday disk setup ... perhaps as well as similar designs,
Im busy with some drawings - thats because Im cheek by jowl with my PC already second day and night,
and the ony vac was and is - to read threads and  leaving some extravagant thoughts .. unfortunately result was war :'(
I think I do konw something about Eddy´s ... but ok -  will not show off ...
In fact I did just a coup d'oeil about Guala-Valverde´s machine - no time to indagate,
Perhaps there is simple schematic about this setup - then no needs to read all this Opus or wach video one time more at least now?
regards,
khabe

I don't think you have a choice. I didn't pretend to know this stuff in one day. It took more than 1 month of research of almost every waking moment I had. I went through a lot of happy and sad moments  ;D.

Quote from: broli on March 23, 2009, 05:39:01 AM
I will assume you don't understand the Faraday paradox. Basically Faraday made 3 experiments with 3 conclusions.

1) Rotate conducting disc, hold magnet stationary. Voltage was induced. Stationary brush
2) Hold conducting disc stationary, rotate magnet. No voltage was induced. Stationary brush
3) Rotate both. Voltage was induced. Stationary brush

2 and 3 show that rotatating a magnet around it's magnetization axis doesn't change the field. So it acts as if it was stationary. And this is the thing I want to exploit. The magnet will rotate due to the REACTION FORCE of newton's third law. But if it rotates its MASS rotates not the field so electrically nothing changes! So it will keep on speeding up due to this reaction force untill it explodes.

This is my n-th time I try to explain this to you. I hope today is the day you finally get it.

My brain suffer from Eddy currents, and therfor goes quite slow. I also get very dizzy and lots of neck ache if I try to rotate my head when the body is stationary.
Well, I only refered to wikipedia and the list of experiments done. Anyway, I will soon get my beads so it is possible to make a generator. Untill then, the results is undetermind.

Edit: I have known pretty much basic things about the faraday disc for 20 years now, but there is often no relationship between seniority and knowledge. ;D

Vidar

I have searched the brain for the wonderful material magnetic resin. A "liquid" magnetic material made of resin and magnetic powder. This can be used on regular toroid transformers or toroid coils by coating the part of the windings you whish to eliminate from magnetic fields, rather than wind a numberless turns via beads or snap-on ferrites. After a while the resin together with a magnetic accelerator will harden almost into ferrite. What do you think?

Vidar

I think that whatever is simplest to work with is best  ;D. If the resin and snap on pieces give the same result I'd rather go with the snap on then for ease of use. The resin is for permanent application which we are very far from at this current time.

Low-q I illustrated an experiment that you should definitely try with those magnet pieces you have. I'm starting to believe that the reaction force on the magnets is weaker than the action force on the wires. This means there is a net unidirectional force. You should perform this experiment on some kitchen scale. Use some scotch tape to stick the windings to the magnets. Also inverse the setup to look for weight gain. Try to squeeze as much windings as you can against the magnet. Maybe you will see lift off  ;D.

Edit: Hmm why make it hard if it can be easy. You could just forget about the shielding and make it circular. This is pretty much how a speaker coil works Or what you expect to happen if the coil was a permanent magnet. This should easily show or prove whether newton's third law is obeyed nicely or not. If the rod is able to drag the magnet with it on a homopolar setup like there are 1000's on youtube then why can't these wire drag the magnet with them as well  ;D.

Edit2: I did an experiment with the last setup. I used an analog kitchen scale which is accurate to +-20g. There is no visual scale deflection if a coil is used with about 30 windings and 1.7 A. Either the third law holds or the difference between the action and reaction force cannot be measured with this kind of accuracy. A +-0.1g digital scale should give more conclusive results.

Broli, those are nice cad drawings, what program are you using?

Quote from: Charlie_V on March 24, 2009, 12:35:05 PM
Broli, those are nice cad drawings, what program are you using?

I used lightwave 3D for those. I was a 3d designer in a distant past.

Quote from: broli on March 24, 2009, 07:16:56 AM
Low-q I illustrated an experiment that you should definitely try with those magnet pieces you have. I'm starting to believe that the reaction force on the magnets is weaker than the action force on the wires. This means there is a net unidirectional force. You should perform this experiment on some kitchen scale. Use some scotch tape to stick the windings to the magnets. Also inverse the setup to look for weight gain. Try to squeeze as much windings as you can against the magnet. Maybe you will see lift off  ;D.

Edit: Hmm why make it hard if it can be easy. You could just forget about the shielding and make it circular. This is pretty much how a speaker coil works Or what you expect to happen if the coil was a permanent magnet. This should easily show or prove whether newton's third law is obeyed nicely or not. If the rod is able to drag the magnet with it on a homopolar setup like there are 1000's on youtube then why can't these wire drag the magnet with them as well  ;D.

Edit2: I did an experiment with the last setup. I used an analog kitchen scale which is accurate to +-20g. There is no visual scale deflection if a coil is used with about 30 windings and 1.7 A. Either the third law holds or the difference between the action and reaction force cannot be measured with this kind of accuracy. A +-0.1g digital scale should give more conclusive results.

Hi,

You make nice drawings, that's for sure. However, your idea about magnets lifting off, may not happen, but funny though :). Well, the loudspeaker works almost like the last drawing, except the flux is crossing the coil in only one direction - flux never goes back via the same coil at any possible position of the coil.

I cannot replace that coil with a solid permanentmagnet very easily as the flux from the coil have the ability to take a loop going through thin air and not via a solid material like iron or ferrite as in a permanent magnet. So it isn't easy, probably impossible, to make a good air-coil equivalent with permanentmagnets.

I did the experiment like the first example you have with the coil in that direction (Not fixed to the magnet though). The coil wanted to go unidirectional with and without the shield - within a given distance from the magnets. Too far away it was forced in the oposite direction - ofcourse as the magnetic flux is at some poit returning to its "host", where the flux is starting to go in the opposite direction relative to the coil.

If I fix the coil to the magnet - well I believe the force on the coil is related to the magnetic fluxdensity in the magnets and the current flowing through the (hot) coil. Force equals counterforce, but of course I can try. So then I can finally explain why we see hovering UFOs some times ;D

I'll give it a shot, and reply here shortly.

Vidar

Mean while I did numerous other experiments that indicate there's always a reaction force. I think I'm getting the hang of this quite good. Even with ferrite magnets I'm getting good results I can't wait for the neo magnets. The reason why I mentioned the asymmetrical reaction force is because every youtube homopolar motor video shows this fact and especially Jorge Guala-Valverde's experiment (at 3:14) shows this nicely. That is the fact that the conductor can drag the magnet with it. According to action-reaction this is not possible. The magnet should push equally hard in the other direction thus resulting in 0 motion yet a simple battery and neo magnet shows otherwise  ;D.

?

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 24, 2009, 06:33:33 PM
?

I don't know what you are correcting. The purple vectors are force vectors not field lines.

I dont think so, Low-Q,
In loudspeakers magnet flux has always just one direction through coil,
Broli´s scheme has the same ... theres no flux returner, but OK - in this case two oposite magnets are pressing the flux widely outer direction (radially),
In principle theres nothing new - it is voice coil motor as well as it is like part of tubular linear motor without outer iron,
One thing I wonder in all OU threads - you always ignore in magnetics back irons anf flux returners ::)
Added draw is part of Tubular Linear Motor where coils are A,a,A,a ...
There I removed Spacers, Liners, Flux returner and coils of phase b and c (was 3-phase),
When Spacers replaced to radial magnets - then its Halbach array...
I tried as Halbach too - was not good - I did write about somewhere in forums,
Radial magnets I made from arc segments , when last segment placed - then some kind of anomaly happend - all ring lost most of properties ... and I waived.
I know that ten years ago it was "even theoretically impossible" to make radial neodymium magnets - but also I know that some companies can do it and these magnets (one piece ring) exist,
cheers,
khabe

Reading the forum some to catch up I found this quote.

QuoteYou probably in a big kids club, such as freemasonry, skull and bones, knights of templar, etc.  Not able to think or do anything on your on accord, without help from the members of your big kids club......lol

I don't understand how the knights templar is equal to the skull and bones or the freemasonry?  Would then the knights of saint john (knights hospitallers), tuetonic knights, or any other knightly order from the crusades classify as this?  Those holy orders haven't existed since 1300AD.

Quote from: broli on March 24, 2009, 06:56:38 PM
I don't know what you are correcting. The purple vectors are force vectors not field lines.

hmm, consider rotating the 'coil' about the axis as shown, and you'll have a generator.  ..and yes, i know they're vectors.

Quote from: Charlie_V on March 24, 2009, 09:40:13 PM
Reading the forum some to catch up I found this quote.

I don't understand how the knights templar is equal to the skull and bones or the freemasonry?  Would then the knights of saint john (knights hospitallers), tuetonic knights, or any other knightly order from the crusades classify as this?  Those holy orders haven't existed since 1300AD.

Did I say knights templar were evil?  No, I did not.
Did I say knights templar were equal to freemasonry?  No, I did not.

Why did I categorize them together?  Because, most of those organizations have information on life and technology from the ancient of days, and are using or hiding this information for their own benefit, and suppressing others with it.

I know the secrets that they hold, not in detail, but in general.  I do not plan on turning other people's belief system upside down, just to answer a question.

Those organizations aren't any different than the governments of this world, using or hiding information of life and technology from the ancient of days, for the benefit of a select few.  All of the secrets go back to the ancient of days.

Satan can appear as an angel of light.  He is the ruler (god) of this system of things.  He has blinded the minds of the entire world.  Don't forget this, it can't be overstated.

Now, I didn't answer your questions, but have saved you a tremendous amount of pain and sorrow.  The bible says, increase your knowledge and you'll increase your sorrow.  You won't get anymore out of me than this, sorry......

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 24, 2009, 11:43:59 PM
hmm, consider rotating the 'coil' about the axis as shown, and you'll have a generator.  ..and yes, i know they're vectors.

Where have you been, jadaro?

You're right....but you a day late and a dollar short, lol

but don't worry........I'm right behind you  ;D

Does this device look interesting to you?

Yes, I may need to read back a little.

having the magnets in repulsion makes an interesting field.

Someone here on this forum mentioned placing a disk beetween what you have and that it won't create any bemf, but I doubt that - it really doesn't matter where the field is, if there's rotation cutting it, it's going to create eddy currents.

This device does look interesting though.

Someone mentioned in a debunking steorn thread that any permanent magnets will eventually loose their magnetism to heat or whatever, this is true - so, removing the magnetic aspect from the moving current should extend the life of the mentioned magnet.

Here's something interesting, it could provide you with an inversion design...  these section, are made magnetized through their thickness, so that the inside or the outside is north or south, them may ...well, make what you will of this.

technically, they could all be made to fit in, north oriented out, south in, but they would have to be forced together.

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/products.asp?cat=165 (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/products.asp?cat=165)

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 01:00:41 AM
Yes, I may need to read back a little.

having the magnets in repulsion makes an interesting field.

Someone here on this forum mentioned placing a disk beetween what you have and that it won't create any bemf, but I doubt that - it really doesn't matter where the field is, if there's rotation cutting it, it's going to create eddy currents.

This device does look interesting though.

Someone mentioned in a debunking steorn thread that any permanent magnets will eventually loose their magnetism to heat or whatever, this is true - so, removing the magnetic aspect from the moving current should extend the life of the mentioned magnet.

Here's something interesting, it could provide you with an inversion design...  these section, are made magnetized through their thickness, so that the inside or the outside is north or south, them may ...well, make what you will of this.

technically, they could all be made to fit in, north oriented out, south in, but they would have to be forced together.

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/products.asp?cat=165 (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/products.asp?cat=165)

Demagnetization cools down a magnet. This tehnology is used to cool new fridges which is practically noiseless when they work. A ringmagnet is magnetized in one part of it and heats up right there. This heat is transferred to the surroundings, and when the magnetized part is cooled down by the surroundings, it is then is demagnetized, in some liquid, and the liquid cools down. This cool liquid is used to cool the fridge.

So if a permanentmagnet motor of some kind works, it will also probably cool down due to demagnetization - as demagnetization may be the reason why they should work.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 25, 2009, 02:39:51 AM
Demagnetization cools down a magnet. This tehnology is used to cool new fridges which is practically noiseless when they work. A ringmagnet is magnetized in one part of it and heats up right there. This heat is transferred to the surroundings, and when the magnetized part is cooled down by the surroundings, it is then is demagnetized, in some liquid, and the liquid cools down. This cool liquid is used to cool the fridge.

So if a permanentmagnet motor of some kind works, it will also probably cool down due to demagnetization - as demagnetization may be the reason why they should work.

Vidar

A friend of mine, who works for whirlpool, said the new refrigerators actually heat to cool the fridge........This is exactly what you are saying.  He also said the freezer is on the bottom and the refrigerator is on the top.  I may have misunderstood him though.

Strange - ..I though that those new fridges were made with peltier cells.

Also, ...what I'm refering to is a gradual decrease over time - heat causes a rapid decrease over time, additionally,  heat is what makes the rotoverter technology obsolete / useless after a few minutes - only good for busrt processes.

What I initially refer to is, not using a permanent magnet in the rotor - as interesting as this may be.  Removeing it it from the flow of current or preemtively cooling it.

Seebeck / Peltier devices are good for this, ...this is what most of those new compressorless fridges are made of.

One can debate about the demagnetization of the magnets in these setups. But if it can produce 10kw continuously for even a week then demagnetization is not an issue as some of that energy can be used to re magnetize it. In the end the best solution is probably using an electro-magnet with a high permeable core instead of a PM. In this setup the core would rotate and the electromagnet stays stationary. This way the magnetic field is energized continuously and demagnetization will never happen.

Btw if you want a lenzless generator all you have to do is rotate the windings WITH the magnet. When the windings are generating current they produce a counter torque in the opposite direction of initial rotation. But if the magnets are rotating with the windings then the reaction torque (newton's third law) on the magnets will rotate with the rotation. Thus these two forces cancel out and you have lenzless generation of electricity. But I've been speculating that the reaction force on the magnets is a bit weaker than the action force on the conductor. Thus it means that the counter torque on the conductor will win and will stop the rotation. But this also means that anti gravity (unidirectional force) could be possible  ;D. Either way the result will be cool.

Quote from: broli on March 25, 2009, 06:08:08 AM
One can debate about the demagnetization of the magnets in these setups. But if it can produce 10kw continuously for even a week then demagnetization is not an issue as some of that energy can be used to re magnetize it. In the end the best solution is probably using an electro-magnet with a high permeable core instead of a PM. In this setup the core would rotate and the electromagnet stays stationary. This way the magnetic field is energized continuously and demagnetization will never happen.

Btw if you want a lenzless generator all you have to do is rotate the windings WITH the magnet. When the windings are generating current they produce a counter torque in the opposite direction of initial rotation. But if the magnets are rotating with the windings then the reaction torque (newton's third law) on the magnets will rotate with the rotation. Thus these two forces cancel out and you have lenzless generation of electricity. But I've been speculating that the reaction force on the magnets is a bit weaker than the action force on the conductor. Thus it means that the counter torque on the conductor will win and will stop the rotation. But this also means that anti gravity (unidirectional force) could be possible  ;D. Either way the result will be cool.

Regardless of your numberless times of explanation to me, I still have a feeling that a both rotating winding AND magnet in the SAME direction will NOT generate electricity. There is no flux to cross. I believe strongly this is the same as believing that this generator will produce energy just by walking around it when the whole thing is stationary - it appears to be the magnet/coil that is spinning, but the truth is that you are walking around it. See?

When you load the coil (Rotary magnet, stationary coil), it will "drag" the flux in the magnet with it. This drag is a counterforce that will prevent the magnet from spinning. I general, you will allways have Lenz law  acting as long there is energy taken out of the system. If you only measure voltage (No load) there is no Lenz law that counterforce either. You will also have a Lenzless generator if the flux is able to find an alternative path when you load it. However, loading it will result in a massive voltage drop, and left there is literally no energy left to counterforce the system by Lenz law.

You can test this just by moving a magnet around in a toroid transformer. You will measure voltage, but loading it will end up in allmost no voltage, and therefor still no (allmost) counterforce by Lenz law - because the load will force the flux from the magnet to choose an alternative path in the toroids iron core. And when the flux evens out at full load, there is no longer voltage output as you have a perfect counterbalance between two equal but opposite flux crossing the windings.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 25, 2009, 07:13:32 AM
Regardless of your numberless times of explanation to me, I still have a feeling that a both rotating winding AND magnet in the SAME direction will NOT generate electricity. There is no flux to cross. I believe strongly this is the same as believing that this generator will produce energy just by walking around it when the whole thing is stationary - it appears to be the magnet/coil that is spinning, but the truth is that you are walking around it. See?

When you load the coil (Rotary magnet, stationary coil), it will "drag" the flux in the magnet with it. This drag is a counterforce that will prevent the magnet from spinning. I general, you will allways have Lenz law  acting as long there is energy taken out of the system. If you only measure voltage (No load) there is no Lenz law that counterforce either. You will also have a Lenzless generator if the flux is able to find an alternative path when you load it. However, loading it will result in a massive voltage drop, and left there is literally no energy left to counterforce the system by Lenz law.

You can test this just by moving a magnet around in a toroid transformer. You will measure voltage, but loading it will end up in allmost no voltage, and therefor still no (allmost) counterforce by Lenz law - because the load will force the flux from the magnet to choose an alternative path in the toroids iron core. And when the flux evens out at full load, there is no longer voltage output as you have a perfect counterbalance between two equal but opposite flux crossing the windings.

Vidar

So according to you a hompolar generator is...not a generator? LOL  ;D. Low-q you are just arguing for the sake of arguing it's a bit stupid. The reason why relative rotation does not inudce a voltage like you just said is because Einstein polluted physics with his relativity theories.The Lorentz transformation which turns a magnetic field into an electric field and vice versa between two moving frames is the biggest bag of bullshit in the whole of "academic" physics. A magnetic field stays a magnetic field regardless of my movement.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/farhom.htm

I I finally made a big decision. Newton's third law is obeyed all the time. J. Guala-Valverde & R. Achilles's papers and experiments are very obvious now. The reaction force is always the same size as the action force.

Physicist have just been on the wrong road for over a century. There is no such thing as the weak form of newton's third law. All action reaction forces act on the line joining them.

The reason why all the homopolar videos on youtube work is very obvious now. Look at the below attachment for the correct reason why a homopolar motor works with a neo magnet that has a conducting coating. To claim the current going along the conducting nickel is the source of torque is plain stupid because the magnet which is GLUED to this coating has the same but opposite reaction torque thus nullifying rotation. So the source of rotating must be the outside wire like you can see below. If you glued this outside wire to the magnet as well no rotation what so ever will take place. If you allow both this outside wire and magnet to rotate freely you'll see both will rotate in OPPOSITE direction.

These explanations that are popping up on this thread seem silly.  Flame all you want.  Just move your wire so that it's not parallel to the screw or nail - ..come in with it planar to the magnet and your idea falls apart.

In the above picture, nothing has changed from wrong to right.  The fact that they've used a screw only obscures the fact that one can use a nail and achieve the same results.

What creates torque on that particular model pictured is the current flowing perpendicular to the magnetic field created by the magnet.  This is what causes rotation. ...this single vector perpendicular to the magnetic field and radial to the axial rotation.  You could create a spiral copper wire from the inside of the axial rotation to the outside and it would still be this radial vector where the torque force is exerted.  If you were then to create a single path back to the center radially from the outside of this spiral, it would cancel out, equally, the amount of torque generated by the overall direction of the whole spiral.

Rotating a magnet will cause a current to flow in it with from it's center of axial rotation ( given that it's circular ) to it's periphery.  ( A radial path ).  This is natural flow.  Consider that any conductor touching it will induce friction - and then assume that it's not a magnet at all, that it is simply an iron disk - this point of friction with regard to it's axis of rotation is a path where energy is lost ( and moved elsewhere as charge or heat, or both ).  In either case, energy will flow out of the system due to the motion.

As for rotating the magnet with the inductor - ..you're simply adding weight to the inductor, and because the magnet is rotating, a current will also be induced to flow in it if it is part of the path of the current.

Rotating anything in an even magnetic ( regardless of it being a local magnet, or the Earth's magnetic ) field will cause energy (voltage or current ) to flow in it if a path is provided from it's center of rotation to its periphery.  These are just basic Faraday disks. In some cases, the path can be created across the diameter.  ..almost everything which uses disks - whether they're wimhurst machines, bonetti machines, or faraday disks, rely on this principle for operation.

The idea of something being Lentzless ....anything at stationary relative to a stationary magnetic field.  Start changing the magnetic field, then something will  happen in the conductor, start changing the conductor and something will happen in the conductor and the magnetic field.  Both are reactionary.

The reason why homopolar motors work is because the connector is stationary so the half part of the magnet can escape the circular magnetic field in the conductor including the nickel coating.
I cannot see any special thing here Einstein didn't accounted for.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 05:24:49 PM
These explanations that are popping up on this thread seem silly.  Flame all you want.  Just move your wire so that it's not parallel to the screw or nail - ..come in with it planar to the magnet and your idea falls apart.

In the above picture, nothing has changed from wrong to right.  The fact that they've used a screw only obscures the fact that one can use a nail and achieve the same results.

What creates torque on that particular model pictured is the current flowing perpendicular to the magnetic field created by the magnet.  This is what causes rotation. ...this single vector perpendicular to the magnetic field and radial to the axial rotation.  You could create a spiral copper wire from the inside of the axial rotation to the outside and it would still be this radial vector where the torque force is exerted.  If you were then to create a single path back to the center radially from the outside of this spiral, it would cancel out, equally, the amount of torque generated by the overall direction of the whole spiral.

Rotating a magnet will cause a current to flow in it with from it's center of axial rotation ( given that it's circular ) to it's periphery.  ( A radial path ).  This is natural flow.  Consider that any conductor touching it will induce friction - and then assume that it's not a magnet at all, that it is simply an iron disk - this point of friction with regard to it's axis of rotation is a path where energy is lost ( and moved elsewhere as charge or heat, or both ).  In either case, energy will flow out of the system due to the motion.

As for rotating the magnet with the inductor - ..you're simply adding weight to the inductor, and because the magnet is rotating, a current will also be induced to flow in it if it is part of the path of the current.

Rotating anything in an even magnetic ( regardless of it being a local magnet, or the Earth's magnetic ) field will cause energy (voltage or current ) to flow in it if a path is provided from it's center of rotation to its periphery.  These are just basic Faraday disks. In some cases, the path can be created across the diameter.  ..almost everything which uses disks - whether they're wimhurst machines, bonetti machines, or faraday disks, rely on this principle for operation.

The idea of something being Lentzless ....anything at stationary relative to a stationary magnetic field.  Start changing the magnetic field, then something will  happen in the conductor, start changing the conductor and something will happen in the conductor and the magnetic field.  Both are reactionary.

Do you know how far behind you are?

Quote from: Low-Q on March 25, 2009, 05:37:28 PM
The reason why homopolar motors work is because the connector is stationary so the half part of the magnet can escape the circular magnetic field in the conductor including the nickel coating.
I cannot see any special thing here Einstein didn't accounted for.

Is there noone on this forum who GETS THIS? Geez.

Today I came up with a solid state solution even. But seeing how slow some people are there's no point in sharing.

WOW. Jorge Guala-Valverde died last month. He died even on a relative young age namely 59. Looks like someone has to continue where he left off  ;D.

Inform yourself and read what this man has shown...

http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Scientists&tab2=Display&id=579

Quote from: broli on March 25, 2009, 06:18:11 PM
Is there noone on this forum who GETS THIS? Geez.

Today I came up with a solid state solution even. But seeing how slow some people are there's no point in sharing.

Broli, please post the solid state solution.

Most people will not go against the grain, even when it is very clear.  Yes, you are right........physics is very far behind, along with the people following the B.S....lol

I don't understand everything.....but I understand enough to know I'm being lied to by those physic books.

@jadaro:  Here's some more silly stuff for you.

Let's re-examine the inside of a permanent magnet.  The electron's spin are aligned in a PM.  The more electrons you have with their spin aligned.....the stronger the magnetic field of flux.  How can this be possible when there is nothingness, the vacuum, between the electrons?  There must be something between the electrons to cause the magnetic field to strengthen.

What is between the electrons?  It is the aether.  Without the aether, you could have a huge amount of electrons with their spins aligned, but this wouldn't increase the strength of the magnetic field of flux.

There must be an aether, since the magnetic field of flux increases in proportion to the number of electrons with their spins aligned.

The magnetic flux associated with a magnet is coming from the Aether and not from the magnet.  This is clear as day with the homopolar generator.

"Frame dragging" is another euphemism of the Standard Model intended to acknowledge the properties of Aether, but without calling it Aether. Essentially, the frame dragging of General Relativity theory is the same as the Aether moving with matter.

It is so apparent, that the governments have one set of physic books, while the general population has a different set of physic books.

This is a big fat wtf going out to broli.

How far behind am I? ...how far AHEAD are you?

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 07:51:08 PM
This is a big fat wtf going out to broli.

How far behind am I? ...how far AHEAD are you?

You will know yourself when you stop denying what I'm sharing.

Quote from: gravityblock on March 25, 2009, 07:35:21 PM
Broli, please post the solid state solution.

I will after I done some experiments to avoid ending in useless discussions of closed minded people  ;). I'm looking for supporters not dead weight.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 07:51:08 PM
This is a big fat wtf going out to broli.

How far behind am I? ...how far AHEAD are you?

Your almost 150 years behind.   ;D

I guess I was wrong about you being a day late in one of my previous posts.  :o

Quote from: broli on March 23, 2009, 05:39:01 AM

Eddy currents? I don't think so. Eddy currents only arise in a classic Faraday disk setup where the disk is a lot larger than the magnetic field covering it. If the magnetic field covers the entire disk then eddy currents are not there. The braking (if used as a generator) will still be there but not due to eddy currents but due to moving charge in a constant magnetic field.

Ok, ..so publish your data.  The free world would rather not have to go back and piece together a series of your assertions, rebuttals and propositions in order to understand what you're talking about.

Your assumption that a large magnetic field causes there to be no Lentz reaction force is simply put, asinine.  If you're going to call Lentz laws bullshit, then replace it with something that works - and then please tell me what it is.

You assert that there are only eddy currents when the magnet is small, and I guess, off center, and used as a break.  Or what have you.   Making the magnet a disk, and that same disk a homopolar generator, then the magnetic field is just that, a magnetic field, it won't appear to rotate with the magnet because the magnet is symmetrical.  This is a moot point - it becomes arguable that it does or does not rotate with the magnet.

I say that it does .. try drilling an off center hole in that same magnet, it's no longer symmetrical, and tell me that when it rotates the field strength doesn't decrease near where that hole is?

SO what are you saying that I'm not ( understanding )?

Quote from: gravityblock on March 25, 2009, 08:00:59 PM
Your almost 150 years behind   ;D

I sure am.

http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/index.html (http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/index.html)
I'm assuming that the experiments that you are talking about are the ones where this guy has what looks like a bunt cake pan, turned upside down, with a vertical axis in the center - etc. ..he then proceeds to show us how he can make a symmetrical object spin.

This is great, but, i'm thinking that so long as he has to hold that inside lead the way that he does, ...he could be pushing it along. LOL ....anyway, i doubt he is, but, since this is a liquid brushed setup, as it is in this configuration, removing the inner part of the axial bar, where the electricity is conducting so that the brush can stay in the liquid without being hit by the bar, then is would spin at an increasing speed until the current flowing through it were imperceptible to the magnetic field - it would reach an equilibrium - would it not?

I'm sorry broli, and gravityblock - I just don't see how we're in disagreement - except that the disk would have eddy currents produced in it even when the magnet is as large as the disk or the disk is the magnet.

So where are the solid state answers?  ..and, yes, I have read the posts.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 08:34:34 PM
Your assumption that a large magnetic field causes there to be no Lentz reaction force is simply put, asinine.  If you're going to call Lentz laws bullshit, then replace it with something that works - and then please tell me what it is.

He never said that.  He said,  "If the magnetic field covers the entire disk then eddy currents are not there."  There is a Big difference in what he said, and in what your stating he said.

You can't even quote someone properly without taking it out of context and totally changing the meaning.

You remind me of a prosecutor changing or misquoting a defendants statements in order to obtain a prosecution.  This happens all the way from the bottom to the top, from the police to the judge......just so they can be right and close the case.  There is no chasing after the truth.....only the simplest and easiest way to get this off their desk, regardless of the truth.

You deny the very fact that a generator or motor actually works.

This stuff isn't new physics or new science.  This stuff has been mis-understood and pushed under the carpet for all these years.

Jadaro, I can't believe you asked about the solid state solution.  Would the solid state device change the underlying principals of the mechanical setup?

I'm waiting on broli to chime in.

..you would bring this to court room status though ....you didn't even address the ideas i presented, just stated an opinioon that I misquoted him....   I didn't even quote him on that... I paraphrased.

..say then instead, that there's no magnet, and that the disk is just sitting in earth's magnetic field: is that constant enough for you?  ...broli, are you suggesting that there are no eddy current in such a rotating disk?

Quote from: gravityblock on March 25, 2009, 09:51:48 PM
Jadaro, I can't believe you asked about the solid state solution.  Would the solid state device change the underlying principals of the mechanical setup?

Speaking purely binary: 1

A solid state device would prove that magnets have current flowing through them - being channeled through the aether.

A mechanical setup would just further prove the current norms.

Quote from: jadaro2600 on March 25, 2009, 10:53:17 PM
Speaking purely binary: 1

A solid state device would prove that magnets have current flowing through them - being channeled through the aether.

A mechanical setup would just further prove the current norms.

Jadaro, we're definitely not on the same page.  It's OK that we do not agree.  It would be a boring world, if everyone thought and agreed to everything I thought.

Believe what you want.  I know that a mechanical device proves the same thing as a solid state device.  That is just common sense.  The same underlying principals used for building a mechanical device would also be employed into the solid state device.  They would both represent the same principals.

So, Speaking purely binary: 0   ;D

Quote from: broli on March 25, 2009, 07:32:40 AM
So according to you a hompolar generator is...not a generator? LOL  ;D. Low-q you are just arguing for the sake of arguing it's a bit stupid. The reason why relative rotation does not inudce a voltage like you just said is because Einstein polluted physics with his relativity theories.The Lorentz transformation which turns a magnetic field into an electric field and vice versa between two moving frames is the biggest bag of bullshit in the whole of "academic" physics. A magnetic field stays a magnetic field regardless of my movement.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/farhom.htm

A homopolar generator is a generator, but not without Lenz law affecting it. And when it comes to who is arguing for the sake of arguing, I'm not so sure whos that is gonna be ;). You deny my experiments, deny that i have testresults of several experiments. And who are you rising above Einstein and other physicists? I know you do not know much such about physics after I read another thread about some transformers with these high Ohm resistors to make it Lenzless.

I got the beads, and made a very simple generator. The hope was to make the flux following the beads to prevent it from crossing the wire as shown in one of your previous pictures. What do you know - It didn't work. Not a single mV to indicate. The flux is somehow crossing the wire when it jumps from one side of the bead to the other, the flux HAS TO get "airborne" and cross the hole in the middle of the bead where the wire is. So I guess it wasn't that easy to make a hmopolar generator with several windings after all. I kind a knew the result in advance, but I had to try it to proove me wrong or right.

I look forward to your physical proof of your theories. I also whish you could tune down a bit, and become a little more moderate in your unsurpassness as skills in physics - you might be wrong about it. If you're right, you may have to make a 10 cubic mile big generator to get out 1 pW. Then a windmill is far more efficient ;D

Vidar

Quote from: broli on March 25, 2009, 06:49:11 PM
WOW. Jorge Guala-Valverde died last month. He died even on a relative young age namely 59. Looks like someone has to continue where he left off  ;D.

Inform yourself and read what this man has shown...

http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Scientists&tab2=Display&id=579

He has played too much with mercury in his homopolar motor - maybe that was a catalyst to his death?

Vidar

My neo mags came today and had lots of fun with them. All experiments were predictable others didn't do what I wanted.

@Jadaro2006: What I'm saying is nothing new in fact it's 150 years old. If you are ready to listen I will talk. But as long as you have that closed minded attitude we need to leave each other alone. Less talk more research please.

Quote from: broli on March 26, 2009, 06:11:38 PM
My neo mags came today and had lots of fun with them. All experiments were predictable others didn't do what I wanted.

@Jadaro2006: What I'm saying is nothing new in fact it's 150 years old. If you are ready to listen I will talk. But as long as you have that closed minded attitude we need to leave each other alone. Less talk more research please.

I'm 'listening' - reading, in all truth.  I've read a bunch of stuff on hpg's ....but not the one book which many people have reccomended - "The Homopolar Handbook", have your read this one?

Why don't you take a ring magnet and see for yourself. The only problem is that you need a pretty large one to do some decent experiments. 6-8" in OD should be good, can be found on ebay for around 25$/magnet. Obviously a ferrite magnet as the same sized neo magnet would cost in the thousands of â,¬/$/£... and can mutilate you  ;D.

I have an idea on how to get this device to act as both a generator and motor.  This idea has a built in firewall between the generator and motor, in order to bypass the counter emf.  I had this idea before I posted my drawing in the first post of this thread, but didn't know how to draw it or explain it in a way that could be understood.

We'll build on top of the design that broli has proposed.  We know that spinning a magnet on its magnetic axis will produce electricity, and this is known as the homopolar generator.  In addition to spinning the magnet on its magnetic axis around or with the toroid, we'll also have it flip or spin on it's north and south poles through the toroid from the electricity that was generated in the toroid using the hpg technique, and this is known as a conventional motor.

The emf or counter emf of the conventional motor will not oppose the magnets spinning on it's magnetic axis, since we know that running electricity through the toroid will not cause the magnets to spin on it's magnetic axis in the hpg.  I speculate that the counter emf of the conventional motor will oppose the high current and low voltage that was generated from the hpg, and will cause the current to decrease and the voltage to rise.  The voltage and current may be able to be regulated through the amount of the load that is put onto the motor.  We would need to have some of the work of the motor to be put back into spinning the magnets on it's magnetic axis in order to maintain a constant rpm without an external power source, which would not require much energy, due to no counter emf of spinning the magnets on it's axis.  I see a runaway affect with this, with lots of torque in the motor.

What do you think?  Am I totally misunderstanding this?

If you have any questions or input, please let me know.  I am sure this may need clarifications in some areas.  This is all speculation, but I find it interesting to think about.

GV, what's wrong with your first sentence. You first clarify that one can generate electricity easily by just spinning the conductors over the magnet then you go and make it complicated by spinning the magnet on two axis  :o.

Like I said before, if you don't want any counter torque when generating electricity you just attach the magnet to the conductor being the toroid or w/e. I can explain the reason step wise. But you have to understand a "law" first. That is Ampere's original force law. Not the one found in modern textbooks or wikipedia. But one that has been nearly forgotten over the past century. This law really opened my eyes and made sense of a lot of results. This law also accurately predicts the recoil force of a rail gun which according to Biot-Savarts law isn't present.

If you can we could have a live chat on an irc channel or IM method. PM me if you use msn or don't so I can share an irc channel where we can chat.

Quote from: gravityblock on March 28, 2009, 04:58:36 PM
I have an idea on how to get this device to act as both a generator and motor.  This idea has a built in firewall between the generator and motor, in order to bypass the counter emf.  I had this idea before I posted my drawing in the first post of this thread, but didn't know how to draw it or explain it in a way that could be understood.

We'll build on top of the design that broli has proposed.  We know that spinning a magnet on its magnetic axis will produce electricity, and this is known as the homopolar generator.  In addition to spinning the magnet on its magnetic axis around or with the toroid, we'll also have it flip or spin on it's north and south poles through the toroid from the electricity that was generated in the toroid using the hpg technique, and this is known as a conventional motor.

The emf or counter emf of the conventional motor will not oppose the magnets spinning on it's magnetic axis, since we know that running electricity through the toroid will not cause the magnets to spin on it's magnetic axis in the hpg.  I speculate that the counter emf of the conventional motor will oppose the high current and low voltage that was generated from the hpg, and will cause the current to decrease and the voltage to rise.  The voltage and current may be able to be regulated through the amount of the load that is put onto the motor.  We would need to have some of the work of the motor to be put back into spinning the magnets on it's magnetic axis in order to maintain a constant rpm without an external power source, which would not require much energy, due to no counter emf of spinning the magnets on it's axis.  I see a runaway affect with this, with lots of torque in the motor.

What do you think?  Am I totally misunderstanding this?

If you have any questions or input, please let me know.  I am sure this may need clarifications in some areas.  This is all speculation, but I find it interesting to think about.

You cannot load generator without loading it. That must be rule #1. :)

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 29, 2009, 10:36:22 AM
You cannot load generator without loading it. That must be rule #1. :)

Vidar

Better add "As far as I know" to that sentence. Don't limit others with your own limits  ;).

Quote from: Low-Q on March 29, 2009, 10:36:22 AM
You cannot load generator without loading it. That must be rule #1. :)

Vidar

An electron has an axial spin and an orbital spin (momentum).  The orbital momentum is the generator (homopolar generator) and the axial spin is the motor (conventional motor).  An electron's axial spin undergoes Lenz's law (just like a conventional motor), and it is the orbital momentum that overcomes this force to give us torque or power.

Now, this may not be describing how the electron works correctly, but if it is correct then rule #1 doesn't apply to the electron or to what I described about the 2 axial system.

My ideas are trying to mimic nature.  When you try to mimic nature, then you don't need to worry about the rules or laws that may apply.....because if you do successfully mimic nature, then it is only reasonable to believe that it will follow the laws of nature.

I'm trying to learn the correct laws to assist or guide me in the right direction to mimic or to understand nature, so I can come up with better or correct concepts......  ;D


"The day you stop learning, is the day you die"

Oke here is my latest design in this whole story. I learned that it is crucial to have the wire piece being between the inner and outer diameter of the ring magnet. If you go beyond that region it will have a force in the other direction on those pieces. It's also crucial to shield the circuit that doesn't contribute to the wanted torque as good as possible to eliminate any interaction between the magnets. I plan on buying some big ferrite ring magnets for this experiment.

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 07:46:56 AM
Oke here is my latest design in this whole story. I learned that it is crucial to have the wire piece being between the inner and outer diameter of the ring magnet. If you go beyond that region it will have a force in the other direction on those pieces. It's also crucial to shield the circuit that doesn't contribute to the wanted torque as good as possible to eliminate any interaction between the magnets. I plan on buying some big ferrite ring magnets for this experiment.

You really are a racer in 3D :) Nice drawings you make @broli!

I have an idea you can try, and it is very easy to test.
But first: I don't know if you have read my tests with the ferrite beads, but I discovered that the flux is crossing the wire right at the point when one flux line is going from one side of the bead to the other. Right at this moment the fluxline are crossing the wire, making a counter current in that part of the wire - so the result is zero energy output as there is all flux that at some point will cross the wire no matter what solid material you shield it with.

However, then I was thinking on something else. If you use steel springs as a shield, the spring shape will probably work as a shield that continously moves a fluxline to the other side without actually crossing the wire itself. If it do it will cross the wire almost in parallell to it and not angular to it. So I had hoped that the flux lines that was crossing the shield didn't create current flow in the wire.

These springs can you get almost everywhere, from small diameter to big diameter. If they are flexible, you can easily "wrap" the spring around the wire by screwing the spring in place. It will probably not shield 100%, but the magnetic flux will prefer the spring and follow the shape of the springwire instead of crossing the air where the coil wire is.

Just an idea that will probably work better than a "conventional" shield of solid ferrite or steel.

Vidar

I don't quite understand why the flux crosses the wire like you mention. Can you make a drawing of this?

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 02:29:23 PM
I don't quite understand why the flux crosses the wire like you mention. Can you make a drawing of this?

In the attached picture you can see a fluxline is crossing the airgap inside the shield. You think "Only one?, that is nothing compared to the other ones in the shield!!". Well the flux density is very weak inside there, but the travelspeed of that flux is extremely fast compared to the speed of the shielding. All fluxlines must pass this gap in order to come over to the other side, and that means they must speed up quite much in order to account for every fluxlines that the shield is crossing.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 31, 2009, 03:15:28 PM
In the attached picture you can see a fluxline is crossing the airgap inside the shield. You think "Only one?, that is nothing compared to the other ones in the shield!!". Well the flux density is very weak inside there, but the travelspeed of that flux is extremely fast compared to the speed of the shielding. All fluxlines must pass this gap in order to come over to the other side, and that means they must speed up quite much in order to account for every fluxlines that the shield is crossing.

Vidar

Low-q what have you been smoking  :o. What's the point of the shield if it doesn't shield lol. The reason why the flux inside is 0 or very weak is because the field caused by the inside wall of the shield cancels the outside incoming field just like the concept of a static electric shield. What is so hard to get about this? I already told you a few times now. But I haven't explained how. Everything gets very simple if you replace the magnets with electro-magnets. In this case you have to replace the shield with some type of circuit configuration. Then you will see why it "shields".

Btw your simulation tells me the shield is coming from the left/right not the bottom.

Edit: I just did my own simulation and the strength of the field gets linearly weaker at the center with the relative permeability of the material. So if the relative permeability was 100 the field inside is 100 times weaker than outside. If it is 1 000 000 it is 1 000 000 weaker inside.

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 03:24:23 PM
Low-q what have you been smoking  :o. What's the point of the shield if it doesn't shield lol. The reason why the flux inside is 0 or very weak is because the field caused by the inside wall of the shield cancels the outside incoming field just like the concept of a static electric shield. What is so hard to get about this? I already told you a few times now. But I haven't explained how. Everything gets very simple if you replace the magnets with electro-magnets. In this case you have to replace the shield with some type of circuit configuration. Then you will see why it "shields".

Btw your simulation tells me the shield is coming from the left/right not the bottom.

Edit: I just did my own simulation and the strength of the field gets linearly weaker at the center with the relative permeability of the material. So if the relative permeability was 100 the field inside is 100 times weaker than outside. If it is 1 000 000 it is 1 000 000 weaker inside.

As I said, the flux density is very low inside the shielding, and that is because the shield is a magnetic conductor that guides the magnetic flux outside an area with much lower permeability - we can agree with that. However, this field inside the empty space IS still present, and is moving across this empty space as well as the shield moves along the magnet - we are talking about motion, an object that is crossing a bunch of magnetic lines. All these magnetic lines can't move through the shield without crossing the air in the middle. At some point a magnetic line must decide to jump to the other side. In this jump, the magnetic line is crossing the emty area in the middle - in a very high speed. The speed of this jump corresponds perfectly with the flux density inside the empty space.
As you know, a given EMF is given by a given number of magnetic lines per time crossing a wire, and are not determind by the magnetic flux density alone - time is the second factor. If you have a weak magnetic field you must move the wire faster to obtain the same EMF. That is what happening inside the empty space inside the shield when you MOVE the shield through a magnetic flux. The number of lines per time that is crossing the wire inside it, is the very same number as there wasnt a shield at all, except the flux density is much lower and the flux speed is much higher. Hence there will be a counter EMF generated where the wire is "shielded".

Just try it in practice, and you'll understand these principles.

Vidar

Low-Q. Let me apologize in advance. You are full of shit.

FIRST of all. What you just said makes completely no sense to me. Where do all these conclusions come from? Are you basing them on the induction law, Lorentz force law, relativity...?

SECOND of all. The motor will have the magnets rotating not the conductors. It's in the generator setup where both will be attached to each other and forced to rotate without any counter torque arising.

Low-Q use some sources when you want to educate me. I'm willing to learn but it doesn't have to sound like you're pulling information out of your ass. But maybe it's just me.

Maybe there is indeed a single flux line that "moves" so fast that it makes up for all the loss of the channeled flux lines....no fuck that, that makes no sense at all ;D.

If what Low-Q is saying is true, then why not have a small coil in the empty space where the turns of wire are running in different directions to cancel the flux?

Only asking this question for learning purposes and not trying to complicate this.

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 04:53:54 PM
Low-Q. Let me apologize in advance. You are full of shit.

FIRST of all. What you just said makes completely no sense to me. Where do all these conclusions come from? Are you basing them on the induction law, Lorentz force law, relativity...?

SECOND of all. The motor will have the magnets rotating not the conductors. It's in the generator setup where both will be attached to each other and forced to rotate without any counter torque arising.

Low-Q use some sources when you want to educate me. I'm willing to learn but it doesn't have to sound like you're pulling information out of your ass. But maybe it's just me.

Maybe there is indeed a single flux line that "moves" so fast that it makes up for all the loss of the channeled flux lines....no fuck that, that makes no sense at all ;D.

I might be full of shit, you have all the rights to express yourself as you want, it's also ok to deny my results on the subject - offence not taken, but you cannot gain energy out of something that isn't moving relative to eachother. If you are going to attach the coils to the magnet and spin both in the same direction with the same speed, how in h... are you gonna take energy out of that ?? You are trying to make a big collision by driving behind a car that runs as fast as you are - What "bang!" that will be!
I know you are wrong, and you haven't seen the whole picture - obviously - when will you understand this? Not before you try it.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 31, 2009, 05:15:41 PM
I might be full of shit, you have all the rights to express yourself as you want, it's also ok to deny my results on the subject - offence not taken, but you cannot gain energy out of something that isn't moving relative to eachother. If you are going to attach the coils to the magnet and spin both in the same direction with the same speed, how in h... are you gonna take energy out of that ?? You are trying to make a big collision by driving behind a car that runs as fast as you are - What "bang!" that will be!
I know you are wrong, and you haven't seen the whole picture - obviously - when will you understand this? Not before you try it.

Vidar

The generator will obviously use brushes to get electricity out. I have tried and tried but when will you get it is the question. I already told you to investigate ampere's original force law which you obviously didn't. Oh well. Since you're one of the few replying I should respect you a bit more before I'm left alone  ;D. That's why I apologized in advance  ;).

Some additional information (not taken from thin air - this isn't rocket science): If you are looking at a homopolar motor, the wire from the power supply is sliding along a conductive plate that exists in a magnetic field. This conductive plate itself does not generate energy as it spins together with the magnet - if you use it as a generator. This conductive plate is helpful to complete a conductive circuit, so the flux crossing the sliding wire are able to generate voltage and ampére. As a motor it is the wire which slides along the magnet that is pusning the magnet around, not the conductive plate attached on the magnet. Look at the wire when you touch the outer edge of a conductive magnet. The wire want to go in the opposite direction as force equals counterforce.

Vidar

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 05:20:29 PM
The generator will obviously use brushes to get electricity out. I have tried and tried but when will you get it is the question. I already told you to investigate ampere's original force law which you obviously didn't. Oh well. Since you're one of the few replying I should respect you a bit more before I'm left alone  ;D. That's why I apologized in advance  ;).

Ok, so you ar going to have brushes? If you already has explained that to me earlier, I'm very sorry. Using brushes makes this a complete different story.

Keep working with your ideas, but I do not think it will be lenzless (Is that something I misunderstood too?) :)

Quote from: Low-Q on March 31, 2009, 05:25:41 PM
Some additional information (not taken from thin air - this isn't rocket science): If you are looking at a homopolar motor, the wire from the power supply is sliding along a conductive plate that exists in a magnetic field. This conductive plate itself does not generate energy as it spins together with the magnet - if you use it as a generator. This conductive plate is helpful to complete a conductive circuit, so the flux crossing the sliding wire are able to generate voltage and ampére. As a motor it is the wire which slides along the magnet that is pusning the magnet around, not the conductive plate attached on the magnet. Look at the wire when you touch the outer edge of a conductive magnet. The wire want to go in the opposite direction as force equals counterforce.

Vidar

I understand everything what you just said. So who is missing the puzzle pieces? There's two things you have to distinguish. Voltage and current. The voltage that gets generated is due to the rotating plate. But voltage alone is nothing. So if we close this up by a circuit that is, a stationary wire brushing this disc we have a current flow. THEN AND ONLY THEN you start applying all your laws and what not. For instance you see there's a current on the plate so there's a force but there's a reaction force on the magnet as well due to this force. But since they are glued together this plate/magnet system nullifies and we forget about it! So next we see what else near the magnet has current and we discover the wire that's brushing along has a current and thus we calculate its force and again this will have a counter force on the magnet thus indeed things will rotate clockwise and counter clockwise depending on the force/reaction force.

Do you understand now?

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 05:39:54 PM
I understand everything what you just said. So who is missing the puzzle pieces? There's two things you have to distinguish. Voltage and current. The voltage that gets generated is due to the rotating plate. But voltage alone is nothing. So if we close this up by a circuit that is, a stationary wire brushing this disc we have a current flow. THEN AND ONLY THEN you start applying all your laws and what not. For instance you see there's a current on the plate so there's a force but there's a reaction force on the magnet as well due to this force. But since they are glued together this plate/magnet system nullifies and we forget about it! So next we see what else near the magnet has current and we discover the wire that's brushing along has a current and thus we calculate its force and again this will have a counter force on the magnet thus indeed things will rotate clockwise and counter clockwise depending on the force/reaction force.

Do you understand now?

I have understood practice and theory regarding ampére, voltaget, watt, whatever, for a few decades, but I thought you was not going to use brushes.
So a new question arise: Have you taken into account that the single wire that represent the brush is the only wire where EMF is generating in? The coils you are attaching the magnet will not do any good, just increasing resistance. So you're probably back to square one minus additional losses. The coils itself will probably not increase voltage (If the goal is to increase voltage and reduce current). I'm not claiming anything, just think on it for a moment.

I'm going to bed now. It's late. We'll talk more shit tomorrow :-X

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 31, 2009, 05:25:41 PM
Some additional information (not taken from thin air - this isn't rocket science): If you are looking at a homopolar motor, the wire from the power supply is sliding along a conductive plate that exists in a magnetic field. This conductive plate itself does not generate energy as it spins together with the magnet - if you use it as a generator. This conductive plate is helpful to complete a conductive circuit, so the flux crossing the sliding wire are able to generate voltage and ampére. As a motor it is the wire which slides along the magnet that is pusning the magnet around, not the conductive plate attached on the magnet. Look at the wire when you touch the outer edge of a conductive magnet. The wire want to go in the opposite direction as force equals counterforce.

Vidar

According to this, the only thing that would determine output would be the strength of the magnets and the speed of the disc (conductive plate).  The size of the disc wouldn't mean anything in terms of output, since it's purpose is to complete a circuit.

With broli's design, the coil (conductive circuit) can have many turns of wire, which would increase the voltage and current (output) with the same amount of energy put in as compared to a conventional HPG because there is no or very little BEMF.

In the design we are working on the toroid (number of turns of wire), strength of magnets, and speed is relevant to the output.......so, don't dismiss this only because it's not relevant in the conventional HPG.

We can get more voltage and current with this design for free and the conventional HPG isn't able to do this, as you stated.  This is the difference between the two.

The conventional HPG is a proof of concept that this will work.

Quote from: Low-Q on March 31, 2009, 05:55:07 PM
I have understood practice and theory regarding ampére, voltaget, watt, whatever, for a few decades, but I thought you was not going to use brushes.
So a new question arise: Have you taken into account that the single wire that represent the brush is the only wire where EMF is generating in? The coils you are attaching the magnet will not do any good, just increasing resistance. So you're probably back to square one minus additional losses. The coils itself will probably not increase voltage (If the goal is to increase voltage and reduce current). I'm not claiming anything, just think on it for a moment.

I'm going to bed now. It's late. We'll talk more shit tomorrow :-X

Vidar

Vidar NO NO NO and NOOOOOOOOOO. You do this on purpose and I'm getting really tired of it. Everything I say you switch over without any reason wtf man. Are you paid to do this?

Broli, I'm still not sure where you stand on the hpg issue..

What causes the motion of the hpg rotor is the path of the current across the magnetic field - which just happens to me moving across a conductor - which just happens to be symmetrical about an axis... the entire effect is coincidental of design.

..this is without regard to the 'corrected' image you posted of the vectors - both what you claim is wrong, and what you claim is right are the same thing vector - if not, then post a clearer image of what you mean.

Jadaro, the coating of the magnet causes no torque because this coating is attached to the magnet which wants to rotate in the other direction so they cancel out. The cause of rotation is the stationary wire outside.

I know your post was to broli, but I'm not sure how he could post a clearer image of this.

Quote from: gravityblock on March 31, 2009, 09:30:02 PM
Jadaro, the coating of the magnet causes no torque because this coating is attached to the magnet which wants to rotate in the other direction so they cancel out. The cause of rotation is the stationary wire outside.

I know your post was to broli, but I'm not sure how he could post a clearer image of this.

I'm not sure how you could paint a more blurry picture of how it works...

You're saying that the reference frame for the rotation is the stationary circuit outside ...and based purely upon experimental evidence...this is true ONLY because attaching the power source and the path and the wire all allowed to spin freely suspended will not spin to expend energy?

This is susceptible to scientific superstitions.

The fact that the disk spins, you jokingly say that the coating isn't causing it to rotate because the outside wire is, yet any way that you orient that outside wire should have an effect on the rotation of that disk?  IF the wire is causing the rotation, then shouldn't there be as much action on the rotor as the wire, and wire as rotor .....btw, the wire flipping around in the movie we love to reference is doing that because there's 100+ amps going through it and it's IN the magnet's field.

...yet, if you change it, it does not, theoretically then, orienting the wire perpendicular to the magnetic field should cause the disk to malfunction and stop spinning.  That means having the brush come in planar to the disk, and it will run just as well regardless of whether the wire is 1 foot long or 10 feet long, and we're not idiots here..so we both know that the supporting magnetic field strength around the wires required to provide the same said reference frame FALLS OFF abruptly.  How does your theory then pan out?

You'll probably tell me, again, how I need to understand things.  I wish you would, and do so then....I'll tell you one more time, but differently, then, at least through courtesy, you should tell me differently - so that my puny mind can understand what your idea is.

The path between the axis and the periphery of the disk is a radial path. This is a fact, there's no getting around that.

The current must flow along this radial path to get to the brush.  ( and please don't bother me just yet with you're brushless hypotheticals )  While the current flows, an oppositional force in the 'b' field of the current creates a force perpendicular to that of the magnet - this same force causes the atoms in that conducting path to want to move out of the way (The conductivity is attached to the atoms [ through the electrons ]) - they're then replaced by another set of atoms that want to conduct, yet also want to move out of the way - the ONLY reason this thing rotates, is because it is affixed upon an axis, and the same axis is about it's symmetry and the current is a radial of that symmetry.

Now, for something completely different:  While studying these devices, I took two neodymium magnets and placed them on the table such that they were both flat, where one magnet's north pole was facing up and the adjacent magnet's south pole was facing up.  There's a balance here because the north and south poles are repelling and attracting each other equally - they don't slam together like a book.

I then cut a circular disk out of copper foil - this was easy to do with a compass, it marked the center and it made the circle; I  cut it out and then punched a hole in the center and ran a non conductive axis through it so that it could spin freely and not be effected by current.  At this point it looked like a very flat copper umbrella - and I hung it up-side-down so that I could position it, centered, over the pair of the magnets.

I then used a battery to create a conducting path, directly over the magnets, through the copper foil disk, diametrically.

This device proceeded to spin just like any normal homopolar disk,... except with a diametric path.

This is because there is as much 'b' field influence on the opposite sides of the axis.  A normal homopolar disk, in a uniform field will do nothing and act as a normal conductor when diametrically conducting.

If your idea that the wire is the reference frame panned out, then my device would not work?  IF then, how so?

Quote from: broli on March 31, 2009, 06:16:53 PM
Vidar NO NO NO and NOOOOOOOOOO. You do this on purpose and I'm getting really tired of it. Everything I say you switch over without any reason wtf man. Are you paid to do this?

Imagine when the brush for a short period of time have contact with the rotating coil. As the coils are moving together with the magnet, no EMF is generated in the coil that you can take out. Imaging you are sitting on the magnet and measuring the output of the coils as you take your ride round by round. The only relative movement you have left is the movement between the brush and the spinning coil/magnet. I said I didn't claim anything, just asked you to think on it. How can you get out voltage of a coil that follows the magnetic field? Just think on it - that's all.

Further, when you load the generator, a current flow will go through the coil. This will create an electromagetic field in the coil, and only that. It does not do anything else than that as it follows the magnet. However, the electromagnetic field in the stationary brush, will counterforce the direction of the magnet, but only if you load it - lenz law. So I do believe you are back on square one with a "regular" homopolar generator. Again, just think on it.

Vidar

I can't help you jadaro.  I don't see your point.  Change the frame of reference, then you going to get a different result.  This doesn't prove the other wrong.

In your setup, each side of the disk is seeing a different pole in regards to it's rotation (left side seeing the north pole and the right side seeing the south pole).  This has the same affect as rotating a disk through a changing magnetic field.  Place a black dot on your copper sheet, and you will see how the black dot is moving from the north pole to the south pole when there is rotation (the field is changing for the black dot).

Now, do this with a homopolar motor and you will notice that the black dot doesn't see a changing magnetic field when rotating (the field will be uniform for the black dot, not changing).

The name homopolar refers to the absence of polarity change.  Your experimental motor is not a homopolar motor, and this is evident by the black dot seeing a changing magnetic field (polarity changing for the black dot).

You're trying to compare an apple to an orange.  You can't prove something wrong with a negative. 

Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2009, 01:49:31 AM
I can't help you jadaro.  I don't see your point.  Change the frame of reference, then you going to get a different result.  This doesn't prove the other wrong.

In your setup, each side of the disk is seeing a different pole in regards to it's rotation (left side seeing the north pole and the right side seeing the south pole).  This has the same affect as rotating a disk through a changing magnetic field.  Place a black dot on your copper sheet, and you will see how the black dot is moving from the north pole to the south pole when there is rotation (the field is changing for the black dot).

The name homopolar refers to the absence of polarity change.  Your experimental motor is not a homopolar motor, and this is evident by the black dot seeing a changing magnetic field (polarity changing).

You're trying to compare an apple to an orange.  You can't prove something wrong with a negative. 

You are almost right about this, except the black dot will in a homopolar motor also see a change in magnetic field when it pass the magnetic field made by the radial current flowing from the the edge to center. This change is the reason why the disc is spinning. In @jadaros setup there is two poles facing the disc. These fields is still not changing. It is still a homopolar motor, but there is two of them in the same setup with one common disc.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on April 01, 2009, 03:46:25 AM
You are almost right about this, except the black dot will in a homopolar motor also see a change in magnetic field when it pass the magnetic field made by the radial current flowing from the the edge to center. This change is the reason why the disc is spinning. In @jadaros setup there is two poles facing the disc. These fields is still not changing. It is still a homopolar motor, but there is two of them in the same setup with one common disc.

Vidar

In jadaros setup, the fields are changing relative to the rotation of the disk.  No rotation of the disk equals no change in the field for the disk (You're right when it's not rotating).  Rotation of the disk equals a change in the field for the disk (You're wrong when it rotates).  This is easily seen with the black dot.  This is not a homopolar motor.

How does the field change in a homopolar motor when the magnet is rotating on it's magnetic axis?  A black dot on top of the rotating magnet, will not see a change in the magnetic field.  Since the electrical current is not changing, then how does this change the magnetic field for the black dot?

Requirements for a Homopolar motor:

1) Electrical current does not change.
2) Strength of magnetic field does not change.
3) Orientation of the magnetic field does not change, relative to the conductor or coil. (jadaro's setup fails this requirement for a homopolar motor when it's rotating) 

I've come to accept the fact that nobody will agree with anyone.  As long as we can make progress disagreeing, then so be it.......lol

The black dot is the observer.  How can you disagree with the black dot?   ;D

Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2009, 04:20:36 AM
In jadaros setup, the fields are changing relative to the rotation of the disk.  No rotation of the disk equals no change in the field for the disk (You're right when it's not rotating).  Rotation of the disk equals a change in the field for the disk (You're wrong when it rotates).  This is easily seen with the black dot.  This is not a homopolar motor.

How does the field change in a homopolar motor when the magnet is rotating on it's magnetic axis?  A black dot on top of the rotating magnet, will not see a change in the magnetic field.  Since the electrical current is not changing, then how does this change the magnetic field for the black dot?

Requirements for a Homopolar motor:

1) Electrical current does not change.
2) Strength of magnetic field does not change.
3) Orientation of the magnetic field does not change, relative to the rotation of the conductor or coil. (jadaro's setup fails this requirement for a homopolar motor when it's rotating) 

I've come to accept the fact that nobody will agree with anyone.  As long as we can make progress disagreeing, then so be it.......lol

The black dot is the observer.  How can you disagree with the black dot?   ;D

The current that is going from the edge to the center of a homopolar motor, is creating a circular magnetic field, according to the right hand rule. This magnetic field will move the magnetic flux in the magnet angular to the radial current direction, and compress the magnetic field on one side, and expand the magnetic field on the other side. This magnetic flux difference, the rotating magnet wants to recover, so it is forced to rotate. When the magnet has spun up to the rpm required to generate the very same counter EMF, THEN there is no change in the mgnetic field seen by the black dot.

However, the system is not 100% efficient so the black dot, in addition to become very dizzy, it will feels a change in the magnetic field every time it is passing the radial current flow.

So the black dot is wrong, therfor I disaggree with it. It is often hard to discuss with a black dot, but this time I know I'm right, and the dot is wrong :)

Vdar

Quote from: Low-Q
The current that is going from the edge to the center of a homopolar motor, is creating a circular magnetic field, according to the right hand rule. This magnetic field will move the magnetic flux in the magnet angular to the radial current direction, and compress the magnetic field on one side, and expand the magnetic field on the other side. This magnetic flux difference, the rotating magnet wants to recover, so it is forced to rotate. When the magnet has spun up to the rpm required to generate the very same counter EMF, THEN there is no change in the mgnetic field seen by the black dot.

However, the system is not 100% efficient so the black dot, in addition to become very dizzy, it will feels a change in the magnetic field every time it is passing the radial current flow.

So the black dot is wrong, therfor I disaggree with it. It is often hard to discuss with a black dot, but this time I know I'm right, and the dot is wrong Smiley

Vidar

You said in a previous post, that a homopolar generator can't be used as a motor (current in the disk will not cause the magnet to spin on it's magnetic axis).  Now you say that a radial current flowing from the edge to center of a homopolar motor, which is no different in how the current flows in a HPG, causes the magnet to spin on it's magnetic axis (It can do it in the motor, but can't do it in the generator).  :o 

One of your statements is wrong and you can't be correct.   ;D

jadaro2600 ...WRONG. No matter how you orient the wire no matter how creative you are in doing that the force will always and always point in the same direction. You don't even have to apply the ampere force to show this. The Biot-Savart/Lorentz law shows this but what they don't show is the correct reaction force but that doesn't matter now. Take a paper replace the magnet by a a circular circuit and draw out the result, then try to approach it from its perimeter and find out what the force will always be. If you want to stick to something wrong at least use it the right way.

Here's another thing you should think about jadaro2600. If you attach this outside wire to the magnet according to you the whole thing will still rotate since it's the current of the coating that drags everything with it according to you. Well this is wrong, if you attach it to the magnet nothing will happen. But I'm sure you will have a nice excuse for this as well.

Since Last night I was looking for a way to get rid of the shielding and I believe I finally did it using only coils. I have to thank Klaus Halbach for his Halbach-array for the inspiration. Will post a rendition shortly.

Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2009, 06:54:23 AM
You said in a previous post, that a homopolar generator can't be used as a motor (current in the disk will not cause the magnet to spin on it's magnetic axis).  Now you say that a radial current flowing from the edge to center of a homopolar motor, which is no different in how the current flows in a HPG, causes the magnet to spin on it's magnetic axis (It can do it in the motor, but can't do it in the generator).  :o 

One of your statements is wrong and you can't be correct.   ;D

I think I said that a toroid generator cannot be used as a motor. I can explain why this is the case if you want.

Vidar

Quote from: broli on April 01, 2009, 08:04:30 AM
jadaro2600 ...WRONG. No matter how you orient the wire no matter how creative you are in doing that the force will always and always point in the same direction. You don't even have to apply the ampere force to show this. The Biot-Savart/Lorentz law shows this but what they don't show is the correct reaction force but that doesn't matter now. Take a paper replace the magnet by a a circular circuit and draw out the result, then try to approach it from its perimeter and find out what the force will always be. If you want to stick to something wrong at least use it the right way.

Here's another thing you should think about jadaro2600. If you attach this outside wire to the magnet according to you the whole thing will still rotate since it's the current of the coating that drags everything with it according to you. Well this is wrong, if you attach it to the magnet nothing will happen. But I'm sure you will have a nice excuse for this as well.

I must say you have a quite big mouth @broli :P. Watch out, you might be wrong ;)

I agree with. I'm a bit too overconfident. It all comes down to the shielding, if it works everything works period.

Quote from: broli on April 01, 2009, 08:04:30 AM
jadaro2600 ...WRONG. No matter how you orient the wire no matter how creative you are in doing that the force will always and always point in the same direction. You don't even have to apply the ampere force to show this. The Biot-Savart/Lorentz law shows this but what they don't show is the correct reaction force but that doesn't matter now. Take a paper replace the magnet by a a circular circuit and draw out the result, then try to approach it from its perimeter and find out what the force will always be. If you want to stick to something wrong at least use it the right way.

Here's another thing you should think about jadaro2600. If you attach this outside wire to the magnet according to you the whole thing will still rotate since it's the current of the coating that drags everything with it according to you. Well this is wrong, if you attach it to the magnet nothing will happen. But I'm sure you will have a nice excuse for this as well.

Since everyone is being so polite,

..it doesn't matter where the wire is, as long as there is a radial current, the rotor will rotate.  It sounds like we agree on this then.

Biot and Savart account just fine, as you point out - ...but that force is not acting with regard to the wire.  You have this hair brain idea that magnet is somehow pushing off the wire to rotate.  If this is the case, then if you move the wire, the vectors of force will change!

You've established a MOOT point ..very scientist of you to do so to, to argue a moot point.. there's infinite recursion in your idea, and I admire that, but it's crap And I'de like you to clearly state the dynamics of a homopolar motor / generator as you see it in your mind's eye.

What's the force reacting to?

Some of you have said that it can't be the conducting coating of the magnet, and claim that it's the wire.  You should look up the pancake motor.

I beg to differ, it can only be effected so much by the wire - and by so much, I mean the current flowing through it to get to the radial path - Where do you differ from me, WHERE?

I fail to see where you differ from me in our explanations and HOW?  You have yet to post this.

I stand by my reasoning, the wire is not the reference frame, only the supply of current and nothing more.  The reference frame of the entire machine is the stationary field of the earth... we could get into a relativity argument now.  Go right ahead, but there is one fact only with regard to this, there is relative rotation - this is the only logic supporting your claim.  The axis is fixed to the earth, not the wire.

Current is moving across the atoms radially in a magnetic field, since the disk if freely spinning, the atoms move out of the way, being replaced with yet another path of atoms, etc, this causes the rotation.

You're eventually just going to blurt out that ..well, the wire carrys the current, thus the wire causes the rotation... which is a very troglodyte thing to say, so I'll preempt you on it.  Haha, very bright then... it couldn't rotate without a current, is that what you've been trying to say this whole time..?

Are YOU the one's that's being paid to post crap to forums?

*edit:  Just because we share, as a viewer, our reference from with the stationary, wire, doesn't mean that the wire is the reference frame - it means we share reference frame with the wire.  Since we share a reference frame, then we effect the rotation just as much as the path of the wire - we mush therefore be the reference fram asa well.

THat reference frame is the earth, our stationary nature, and the stationary nature of the radial path with regard to us.  Does this not support your claim?

I think we are speaking the same language here, just not agreeing on what the reference frame is..  And I NEVER claimed that attaching the entire thing would cause it to spin, the radial path has to be stationary.

..and before I completely disenfranchise myself from this thread,

Do we all agree that a standard homopolar motor is wasteful?

I've seen the research, and you don't get out nearly as much as what you put in because of the dynamics.  It takes a great deal more current to maintain the spin that it produces spinning at the same speed.

Make sure the door doesn't hit you on the way out.

Quote from: broli on April 01, 2009, 06:13:45 PM
Make sure the door doesn't hit you on the way out.

...just blow it out your ass (already).

You have yet to explain...

Quote from: Low-Q on April 01, 2009, 03:23:18 PM
I think I said that a toroid generator cannot be used as a motor. I can explain why this is the case if you want.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on March 20, 2009, 02:14:33 AM
These kind of generator broli has drawn can work as generator but not as a motor. If I remember correctly.

I don't think you was referring to a normal toroid generator.  This toroid generator, the one we're working on, is based on the principals of the homopolar generator, where the magnets spin on their magnetic axis.  The statement you made, "these kind of generator broli has drawn", is in direct reference to what we're working on and nothing else. 

Also, if what you say makes the homopolar motor rotate is true, then it must also be true that the electrical current would cause the magnets to spin in the homopolar generator, but that is not right.  I'm not trying to prove you wrong.  I am only trying to point out what I see as a discrepancy in what you have said, so I can understand the difference.

I guess we need a name for the type of generator and motor we're working on, to differentiate it from the others.

It doesn't really matter who is right or wrong in regards to what makes it rotate, as long as we know and understand that the principals work, in causing rotation.  We're arguing about, if the chicken or egg came first.......lol

I think you understand the potential, benefits, and viability of what we're working on.  Let's continue to work on the shielding aspect of it, in order to bring this device to reality.

I think the Halbach-array that broli mentioned earlier for the shielding, is interesting and promising. 

Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2009, 08:32:49 PM
I don't think you was referring to a normal toroid generator.  This toroid generator, the one we're working on, is based on the principals of the homopolar generator, where the magnets spin on their magnetic axis.  The statement you made, "these kind of generator broli has drawn", is in direct reference to what we're working on and nothing else. 

Also, if what you say makes the homopolar motor rotate is true, then it must also be true that the electrical current would cause the magnets to spin in the homopolar generator, but that is not right.  I'm not trying to prove you wrong.  I am only trying to point out what I see as a discrepancy in what you have said, so I can understand the difference.

I guess we need a name for the type of generator and motor we're working on, to differentiate it from the others.

It doesn't really matter who is right or wrong in regards to what makes it rotate, as long as we know and understand that the principals work, in causing rotation.  We're arguing about, if the chicken or egg came first.......lol

I think you understand the potential, benefits, and viability of what we're working on.  Let's continue to work on the shielding aspect of it, in order to bring this device to reality.

I think the Halbach-array that broli mentioned earlier for the shielding, is interesting and promising. 

The dinosaurs laid eggs way before the chicken was "invented", so the egg came first :)

Do you have a suggestion what this new generator should be named? Homoidal generator, or something? ;D

Vidar

I was thinking of the same thing myself as a dc generator.  I'll keep this as simple as possible.  Once the toroid is wound it is placed into a hole the same size as the wound toroid so it fits nice and snug, two plates on a shaft running through the toroid sit above and below the ring.  The two plates have different polarity magnets on, so the top could have all north facing magnets towards the ring and the bottom has south facing upwards.  The whole idea is that the north facing magnets push the current in one direction and considering they're on a ring they will all be going in the same direction and the south will push the current in the opposite direction on the opposite side.  What'll happen is the  current will be continually pushed around the coils. You could easily wrap more coil around it for more power.

Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 18, 2009, 05:24:23 PM
I was thinking of the same thing myself as a dc generator.  I'll keep this as simple as possible.  Once the toroid is wound it is placed into a hole the same size as the wound toroid so it fits nice and snug, two plates on a shaft running through the toroid sit above and below the ring.  The two plates have different polarity magnets on, so the top could have all north facing magnets towards the ring and the bottom has south facing upwards.  The whole idea is that the north facing magnets push the current in one direction and considering they're on a ring they will all be going in the same direction and the south will push the current in the opposite direction on the opposite side.  What'll happen is the  current will be continually pushed around the coils. You could easily wrap more coil around it for more power.

I think you're describing this concept...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6847.0;attach=31902;image

illustrated is a single winding. But I still have to stress that the shielding is the important part. If the shielding does what I think it does this idea should be a solid one.

I have come a long way but I still have not fully solved the puzzle yet. I have some other designs that I will share later on.

I still think you should give my idea more consideration, ignore the deep physics and just go for what sounds simple.

You could put as many winds as you want on it and it'll have a cumulative effect, i've already used a similar principal on another device and that works pretty well. :)

Quote from: Pageygeeza on April 18, 2009, 05:51:38 PM
I still think you should give my idea more consideration, ignore the deep physics and just go for what sounds simple.

You could put as many winds as you want on it and it'll have a cumulative effect, i've already used a similar principal on another device and that works pretty well. :)

Can you make an illustration of it please? Just a cross sectional one like the image I just illustrated.

I'll do a quick sketch tonight and post it up tomoz. :D

Here ya go bud. :D

Your image is huge. I made a colorized version for you. But I don't know what the two bars on the side are for?

Also I don't believe this will work unless you you show me how you did it in your working device. Because I went over this many times and the contribution of the wire going away from the pole will cancel out the contribution from the wire going along the pole. This is not obvious with the simple known textbook laws. Because you can correctly assume there's no force on the vertical wire pieces but that only means that the contribution of both magnets cancel out so there is a force on the magnets. This is why I started looking in shielding. If you can make the vertical wire "invincible" then you have a working device. Of course all these assumptions are coming from pure theory. I didn't want to start building something until I was absolutely sure about it. That and the lack of any funding or support  ;D.

Ooops, think I should have made it a tad clearer.  They aren't bars on the outside, but it's the hole on which the toroid is placed because there isn't an easy way of placing it so the magnets move over the surface.  I suppose you could sandwich the final wound toroid inside two sheets of thin perspex, drill a hole dead centre for the shaft and the two magnet plates could sit so the magnets just skim the surface of the perspex.  I'm also running on the fact the discs have button magnets mounted on them, the spacing could be alternated between the two discs.  So the top disc could have say a space between the magnets twice the size of the magnets themselves and on the underside the other magnets would be spaced similarly but in between the spaces of the top ones, if that makes sense. :D

Also you could test out different shaped toroids to see if it could improve flow, one suggestion would be to use a toroid with a wide top and bottom surface.  Toroids can be a bugger to wind at best, but i'm sure you could find someone to do it for you.  Plus you could use wood as toroid to test out the principal.

As for the principal:  Move a magnet over a wire and it makes current flow in one direction, change the pole and it flows in the opposite direction.  Now considering the wind flows in the same direction around the coil, basically the top wind would go in one direction and the bottom would go in the opposite direction, so.  As the magnets poles are different on each side, it makes a continual flow.

Very simple, I know this as i've already tested the principal out and it works pretty well.

I'm in the same boat as you dude, but i've been using common hardware items to make my project.  If you improvise, you can make your project as cheap as possible.  The max i've paid out so far is for the 20 neo magnets, which came to about £20.  For total parts used, I think i've spent about £50.

So you're describing a generator? And I still don't understand your design fully. Do you have any pictures or video of the concept you built?

I've had to scrap my old rotor because it was unbalanced.  I need to get a new one crafted tomorrow to allow for 20 magnets.  Once I have that up and running I'll upload a vid as a few people are quite interested in it now. :)