Here is my forth video in the hunt for a working magnetic motor. It's a work in progress. I have constructed a device on there stacked plates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4uhcMW5jFs&layer_token=1ec8ee2d878f631
What ever happened to your old attempt?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=919.msg6407#msg6407
How did it finally turn out.
Nice build! What if the armature magnets are spread out instead of in a straight row on the one side?
4Tesla
Try looking into what the fields are doing in an electric motor, since they actually work. There is infact a few concepts which allow them to work, then think of a way to recreate those effects in a perm magnet. Keep bouncing them around.
Quote from: billmehess on April 22, 2009, 10:49:31 PM
Here is my forth video in the hunt for a working magnetic motor. It's a work in progress. I have constructed a device on there stacked plates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4uhcMW5jFs&layer_token=1ec8ee2d878f631
Good job Bill. :) Here is a armchair quarterback question, What happens when all three magnet groups are placed in the same vertical column? Does the rotor assembly have 3 times the acceleration when placed in the "sweet spot" and then released?
No same speed. Even though there should be an increase in speed I'm sure this is compensated for by having to move 3 plates and running into the three magnetic entrance gates. The device works best in the combination I have it in. Again what interests me is the spin back under power. But I have noticed that the magnets must be aligned perfectly and in a little different pattern to make this happen.
Also under this configuration the magnets approach the gate much closer than when operating on a single plane.
Notice I use wood plates, I do not think that eddy currents which would result from using aluminum against the stator is desirable. Maybe they would be so small and not make a difference but...
The forward motion of the device and the spin back under power covers a distance more than the circumference of the plate.
I am seeing lots of different things happening when I play with the unit as opposed to a single plate method.
Here is my 5th video, I have added a 4th plate which has given me some extra speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBh0c7jAELM&layer_token=209e053b214f72
Lack of speed you mean.
I see no continues movement!!!!
Good attempt Bill.
As I was putt'sng around drinking my coffee a thought passed by while examining some of these "radio shack magnets" If a motor were to work I would think it would torq up pretty quick not slowly and even more so if the rotor magnets were on the outside of rotating part be it a wheel or what ever. The leverage based on the distance from the center shaft would have to almost lead to it reaching it's physical limit almost instantly.
Plus that would make it hard to stop if not impossible with out some measure of damage.
I just cant picture it ramping up slowly if it is going to work. There would likely be as many issues with it pushing a load since that would effect the timing when each stator begins to interact with the rotor magnets.It could result in a stall out if there was enough friction to prevent the next set of interactions in sequence to start before the drag causes it to stop even if you do get it to turn.Designs have to work past just simply going round so if someone does get lucky it will serve a purpose other then fodder for arguments.
The fun in this trip is not in reaching the destination but the travel to get there which eludes the rigid scientific mind. lol Hay that's pretty profound where did that come from?
Quote from: billmehess on May 14, 2009, 08:07:40 PM
Here is my 5th video, I have added a 4th plate which has given me some extra speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBh0c7jAELM&layer_token=209e053b214f72
I like your approach. I wonder if something like this might work for WhipMag?
Damn! Not a single magnet left in a 1 hour drive that resembles the radio shack ones. Are that many people who were suckered into the mylow thing or did it just spark a lot of child hood dreams in people.Last week there were 30 on the shelf at just one place.
Oh well have to wait for restock. 10 away from completing my version. Should I speculate the guys over at Black light are buying them all up ha ha ha Princeton rejects stay on your side of rt 537 with all the old people.
If there is any chance at all for a magnetic motor to actually be functional it will only be when a method has been discovered to alter the position(s) of the stator.
The most common method has been to do this by mech. means. The problem here is that there is so little real torque to work with that a lever of some sort simply will not move the stator to it's desired position. I am sure Rick of "pipe dreams" fame is finding this out.
I have come up with a way to move the stator that will have very little torque on the rotor magnets. Unfortunately at this time it is a one shot approach and will move the stator completely out of the way of the final gate influence and allow the rotor assembly to make 1.5 to 2.0 complete revolutions only one time before it spins down.
The important thing here is that this is being done entirely with permanent magnets. In other words there is nothing being done to the system other than positioning the stator in relationship to the rotor assembly and letting go.
I will post a youtube as soon as I rebuild the device into a more presentable platform (should take me just a couple of days).
The exercise has been to get more than one plus legit. revolution using only magnets. Hopefully further work can take this concept further.
Stay tuned.
Bill
Just finished up the next step towards a working magnetic motor. I will post the video June 18, Thrus. 9am pacific standard time USA.
The motor will start with a stator turning a platfrom with 12 magnets. The stator will drop down
before it comes to the last magnet. The rotor platfrom will continue on for 1.5 to 2+ revolutions before coming to a stop.
This was an exercise to see if it was possible under any conditions using only magnets to achieve at least one+ legit revolution.
Also since the rotor does not have the magnetic gate to get through I can finally see how far the rotor platform will turn on it's own
I do not claim overunity or a working magnetic motor at this point because the next step will be
reengage the stator to the rotor platform so that hopefully additional revolutions may be possible.
At least at this point where there is 1+ revolution there could be more.
You will see 150% to 200%+ revolutions again using only permanent magnets in the am. This video will be on youtube under excel60 with the other 4 videos showing the work I have been doing.
Bill
Looking forward to it Bill.
I'd bet almost anything that it won't work.
It's simply not possible to balance a pure magnet motor into action.
The forces will simply equalize on each revolution.
But good luck just for the sake of it.
Well...
Its 11;30 AM [1/2 hr,to go] here
Definitely rooting for you Bill !!
Chet
Here's the next video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO7FOZkqOX0&layer_token=51415b4ecc2ad2c
Quote from: billmehess on June 18, 2009, 11:55:06 AM
Here's the next video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO7FOZkqOX0&layer_token=51415b4ecc2ad2c
Pretty kool outside of the box thinking! :)
Outside the box approach is the only way to approach this problem.
First: elimanate the influence of the gate
Second: reengage the stator
I truely believe that a magnatic motor is possible, it is necessary to accept the possibility that a magnetic motor IS NOT a PMM. If one can accept this then all things are possible!
Bill
Thank you for sharing,and I'm sure you know the next wall [lifting the stator ].
Outside the box is cool!!
I'm watching with great anticipation
Chet
Bill,
I've been watching your videos with great interest and admire your approach to the problem. I, too, think it's possible for a magnetic motor to work, and after seeing your latest video I think you're on to a possible solution.
I don't know if this would work, but I'm throwing it out there to see if it helps.
Surely the easiest way to re-engage the stator is to lengthen the housing the 'stator block' is put into and fit a wooden shelf to the bottom. Make the housing deep enough so the stator block doesn't repel the top magnets in it's magnetic gate when it sits on the shelf, but obviously doesn't come down so low as to hit the bottom 'repulsion magnet' as it turns. When the bottom repulsion magnet comes around, it should repel the stator block back to where it was resting at the start, just in time to push the wheel again (and then drop back down on to the shelf).
You might have to reposition the bottom repulsion magnet slightly to compensate for the speed of the wheel turning, or the 'run up', or you might have to use 2 magnets - one magnet which is moved away at the start (to hold up the stator block) and another one that is fixed slightly off from where the first magnet was. You may even need a few more magnets before and/or after the main repulsion magnet so the stator block jumps up just in time to give the top magnets a push.
If it does work, another thought was you might have work on the stator housing so there's less friction, or maybe even slow it down a little with something like cupboard draw bracket rollers. Also, the speed at which the stator block jumps up at might be a bit violent, so you might need to fit a stopper above it.
Please keep us updated with your endeavours and I wish you the best of luck.
Thank you for your input lots of good ideas here. The answer will be a unique way of manipulating
the stator in and out of the rotor path. The key phrase is in and out.
Again think outside of the box is the key.
Bill.
An idea: When the stator drops, have another large repulsion magnet down below. Will the secondary repulsion be enough for the stator to rise to some kind of a latch, which will prepare it for the next transaction?
Dusty
Not really there will be just a very slight bounce, but keep those creative jucies flowing.
Bill
Dusty
You fellows have been trying very hard to get things to work
you may have heard a few weeks ago I met with a fellow who filed a patent app
for a mag motor
I mentioned he had a levitation disc ,a 12 inch circle cut in a piece of 1/4 inch plywood, in the circle was a 11inch [approx] plastic disc hovering in the field
he claimed people could stand on this Disc and not free it from the field
That part I said in a post and yes I held it in my hand [not heavy}
This part I did not say
It was partially disassembled [missing mags that had come out of the glue over time]but still hovering ,only to one side
It just occurred to me what I had in my hand
The disc was STUCK to one side [attraction] because the mags on the other side[that used to pull it back and center it] were missing
Dusty,
Have you ever done this?
It was claimed to be the BIG piece of a motor concept
Before I replicate this [Quite simple concept]
Will it be easier to turn/spin ,floating in attraction
Is it possible that when he says magnets can shield themselves.
He meant, in a field like this??
Did I describe this well enough for you to know what the hell I'm talking about?
Chet
PS
in the motor, he said this same disc would be hovering about 4 inches
PPS
I don't want to waste anybody's time ,as this seems quite simple[but a LOT of magnets] so if you know this to be a dead end please comment
Ramset
Are you saying he had a plastic disk magnetically suspended over a magnetic field?
Bill
It was a plastic disc[maqgs all around the outside]
Placed in side of a plywood frame [with mags all around this hole]
all mags were in attraction suspending the disc perfectly
My question was has anybody else done this ?
Simple concept hard to do
Chet
OK
I see this is looking alot harder than it is
Mental picture,
take a frisby lay it on a piece of 1/4 inch plywood
trace the outline of the frisby addng 3/8 of an inch all the way around
cut out the hole put the frisby back in the hole you should have 3/8 gap all the way around
Take a roll of pennies put them all around the outside edge of the frisby, flat on the top outside edge then put them all around the hole[flat on the top edge closest to the frisby]replace pennies with mags put them allnorth on the frisby allsouth in the hole
YOU HAVE SUSPENTION IN ATTRACTION
Of course the frisbee should be wood [so you can draw laytout lines from one side to the other so you know your mags are balanced]and the mags I saw were1/2 inch round by 1/2 inch tall cylinders
Chet
This has been done many times, a smaller disk with mags around its circumference placed slightly into a "valley" of another disk with mags each mag of like (+ to +) or (- to -) will hover suspended.
I did this once using a small funnel covered with mags sitting inside a larger funnel with mags.
Look at the Hammal spinner for the same idea .
Bill
Thanks, just for clarity you could flip this disc upside down and sideways and not remove the disc from the hole .
He said it would hold the weight of a person!![right side up or upside down]
Thanks for the explanation I don't want to waste any ones time doing a dead end
Chet
Bill
yes I have seen this
http://keelynet.com/gravity/bedham1.htm
Not what I saw !!
OK
I see this is looking alot harder than it is.
Mental picture,
take a frisby lay it on a piece of 1/4 inch plywood
trace the outline of the frisby adding 3/8 of an inch all the way around
cut out the hole put the frisby back in the hole you should have 3/8 gap all the way around
Take a roll of pennies put them all around the outside edge of the frisby, flat on the top outside edge then put them all around the hole[flat on the top edge closest to the frisby]replace pennies with mags put them allnorth on the frisby allsouth in the hole
YOU HAVE SUSPENTION IN ATTRACTION[NOT REPULSION}
Of course the frisbee should be wood [so you can draw laytout lines from one side to the other so you know your mags are balanced]and the mags I saw were1/2 inch round by 1/2 inch tall cylinders
just for clarity you could flip this disc upside down and sideways and not remove the disc from the hole .
He said it would hold the weight of a person!![right side up or upside down]
I suppose I'll replicate and share
Chet
PS
I suppose I'm just curious if this closed loop[trapped in attraction] hovering field will have properties that allow it to be spun with out gates/cogging?
PPS
is this the road to magnets shielding themselves ?[something I was told was possible]
Ply- N MAG 3/8 spaceS Mag d i s k S mag 3/8 N mag
==== ==== ==== ====
==== ==== ==== ====
======== ==================== ==============
PLY N MAG S MAG Disk S MAG N MAG PLYwood
THIS DISC FLOATS IN
ATTRACTION
If the top disk is spun it will rotate very unstable and it will stop quickly. There is no cog or gate in the configuration. I can see where you are trying to go with this but if you introduce an external stator assembly the standard coging issue will rear it's ugly head.
BILL
Its not a top disc
All mags were on the same plane === === FLAT
Chet
I understand , but again I suspect it's a Hammel spinner principal.
Quote from: ramset on June 19, 2009, 12:48:17 PM
BILL
Its not a top disc
All mags were on the same plane === === FLAT
Chet
Something is missing in your description. Next time you go for a visit, find out what. Better yet, take your camera and post some photos. Is there a patent description?
Thanx
OC
Here is the history
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7555.0
I have never viewed the Patent [I believe its in these post's]
Chet
Om Monday July 6th I will be posting my next video.
You will see for the first time a legit device employing the multi level system that I have been working with for the past few months. See youtube videos under excel60.
I can now get a rotor assembly to spin two complete times past a stator. There is a coging effect but the rotor gets through the magnetic gate and accelerates all the way around and enters and exits the gate a second time before stopping when it approaches the stator for the third time.
I have entrance and exit two times with visible acceleration
To my knowledge this has NEVER been done before.
I have two entrances and two exits of the gate with acceleration each time- very exciting!!!
The genie may not be out of the bottle yet but he is at least now looking over the top.
That is fantastic news, Bill.
I look forwards to seeing your video, it will be very interesting to see what approach you have gone with. Keep up the great work!
I've done some tweeking I can now get three complete revolutions through the stator with coging occuring on the forth.
The system is operating by generating enough "excess energy" beyond what is created by the
first rotor rotating through the stator.
Quote from: billmehess on July 04, 2009, 10:06:18 AM
I've done some tweeking I can now get three complete revolutions through the stator with coging occuring on the forth.
The system is operating by generating enough "excess energy" beyond what is created by the
first rotor rotating through the stator.
That does sound promising. I'm looking forward to seeing a video.
How are you starting your device?
What comparisons have you done?
Next video 9:00 am Mon. July 6 PST USA
I think your going to like what you see!!
The video is active on Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKagbsqppxE&layer_token=cfce0ab4ce533db8
Hope you find it interesting!
In the last 24 hrs I have had a real breakthru with a moveable stator. Here is my next video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7LEEL-E6JQ&layer_token=1e9fd11060b9957b
Received a lot of personal emails on my latest video placed Tues. evening on youtube. Thankyou they are very helpful and please keep them coming.
Bill
That is great, Bill!
There's certainly a lot of momentum from just one push.
Have you thought about adding another magnet, in front of the bottom main magnet, positioned just high enough to push the stator back in place?
Good luck!!
A magnet placed in front of the lower neo magnet would simply cog the stator magnet and the system would stop. I have found a way (as the device show) to move back the stator to allow the rotor to move past the magnetic gate 3-4 times. This has never been done legit before!
Now I am working on "poping" back the stator when the rotar magnets are in the right alignment.
maybe a rocker pull back lever system might work ... http://media.photobucket.com/image/rocker%20pull%20back%20lever/rudeego/camshaft/figure2.jpg .. if there was more space between the center circle and the stator housing, putting a loose spring for the stator bottom and a rod piece for the stator top?
One of the many things I am trying. Thank you for your input!
also, i think clockwise takes energy, and counter-clockwise adds energy to field, so maybe reverse to take energy from field, not sure though i don't know about this stuff, or maybe it's the other way around?
What happened to your videos bill??
strange...
Bill, please tell me you are creating a new youtube channel and haven't pulled the videos for some other reason.
If you're doing it for patent reasons, you know you have at least 100+ witnesses that can swear you came up with the idea first, myself included.
It would be such a shame not to be able to see your endeavours through.
As a side; did anyone save Bill's videos?
Another one bites the dust.
so....anyone out there want to replicate? we need to keep this ball rolling!
Bill;
I agree with your experiements; While dual static magnetic field
pure magnetic motors can not work, and normal AC and DC electric
motors work by reconfiguring their magnetic fields (using energy
shared from the local power utility). Your's works by reconfiguring
the field by motion (R^2). The key is that reconfiguring the field
and back again needs to be energetically completely funded by
just *one* magnetic interaction cycle of the rotor. The run-down
time is not important as there is no energy being added then.
If you can tilt the rotor back upright with one weight and find
out how much that weight moves and the distance and time
it takes, then compare those same parameters with how much
weight the rotor can lift, one could see how close (or far) you
are from meeting your goal. While the magnetic field latch is
interesting, it is not the only way to accomplish it's task.
You will remember that Clanzer has proven that the SMOT
ramps can be extended by any amount, given any amount of
stored energy gain needed - unfortunately that SMOT extension
amounts to a rotor disk diameter change in your machine.
:S:MarkSCoffman
All is very very well, next and last video will be what you have all been witing for. Be patient a litle bit longer as I reconfigure the device to accept my latest addition.
Bill
Quote from: billmehess on July 12, 2009, 01:32:57 AM
All is very very well, next and last video will be what you have all been witing for. Be patient a litle bit longer as I reconfigure the device to accept my latest addition.
Bill
I'm very glad to see you're still around, Bill.
My heart sunk when I saw your youtube page had be taken offline, as so many of the projects that turn up on these forums do.
I look forward to seeing your new video.
Bill:
I'll take my plate of crow well done. :-[
thay
Next video is up showing 7 complete revolutions- work in progress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DTwMf1OUN4&layer_token=f795fbbc20d803c5
Thanks for the update bill, what changes did you make to get more revs?
Quote from: Lakes on July 14, 2009, 04:39:15 AM
Thanks for the update bill, what changes did you make to get more revs?
Reduced the slight coging effect that was occurring between the stator magnet and the large neo
Slightly stronger magnets in the stator assembly focusing on the rotor magnets
Reducing slightly the space to a optimum point between the two stator magnets and the rotor magnets.
Quote from: billmehess on July 14, 2009, 12:29:04 AM
Next video is up showing 7 complete revolutions- work in progress
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DTwMf1OUN4&layer_token=f795fbbc20d803c5
I'll give it to you straight and hard.....it won't work and it never will.
I only see a device slowing down. There is simply no excess energy.
Your device does not accelerate between the sticky spots. It's a dead end.
Without any acceleration you loose energy on each turn. Acceleration is a necessity.
You would do a lot better if you mounted a spring release to a flywheel and let go.
That would spin 30-50 revolutions by the momentum if the ball bearing was classy.
But it would finally stop, as your device does.
Please continue to build and learn. Knowledge is always a good thing.
Don't listen to my fooolish words...I'm simply the judging crowd.
I think you are failing to see or hear what I have been saying. My goal is to be able to reintroduce the stator to the turning rotor assembly at about its mid point. When the device is started up I can keep it going by moving the stator every other turn. The point of achieving as many multiple revolutions as possible is not to see how far it goes before it runs down but to have enough torque to energize the stator. At now 7 revolutions there is a lot of torque during the first revolution and it is that energy I plan to use. Never say never.
Right now you are looking at a device which is moving through the magnetic gate purely on permanent magnet power. The device is started from a static position and achieves multiple revolutions through the gate.
This has not been done before!
I have read many times that there was no way for any combination of magnets to push a rotor through the gate since the rotor would naturally slow down and not have enough energy to get Thur the gate. Since this device shows the rotor moving past the gate numerous times then the energy being produced is MORE ( or in excess) than enough to cause these multiple revolutions to occur.
One more time, when the device is spinning and I move the stator to meet the spinning rotor platform in the middle ( and move it back) I can keep the device spinning continuously.
Quote from: billmehess on July 14, 2009, 09:45:05 PM
This has not been done before!
Oh yes it has...over and over.
It's only the initial release energy you are using. Like a spring.
Just like all the other guys trying on a pure magnet motor concept.
Please continue your design but I'm infinity % sure there is nothing
more to this than stored energy being released.
Quote from: Ergo on July 15, 2009, 06:49:04 AM
Oh yes it has...over and over.
It's only the initial release energy you are using. Like a spring.
Just like all the other guys trying on a pure magnet motor concept.
Please continue your design but I'm infinity % sure there is nothing
more to this than stored energy being released.
Of course its stored energy being released. All "magnetic motors" begin this way. I ask you the following please show me an example of:
1. Using
only permanent magnets (no springs or heavy fly wheels) a device making multiple revolutions
2. The stator used must be stationary and part of the closed system, in other words not just hand held .
3. The stator must on its own disengage from the system and allow the rotor system to run AND
move through a magnetic gate multiple times (lets say 7 times) before stopping.
What I have here is a sine wave on a decreasing base line slope. The rotor does accelerate each time it goes past the gate or the obvious coging effect would simply stop it. Energy is being lost
on each revolution because the stator is not being reintroduced -at this time- into the system.
My goal is not to see how many spin down revolutions I can achieve. That is only relevent because it is telling me the amount of initial energy available to me to be used
to push the stator back up into position to attempt to continue the revolutions.
The device will
on its own allow the stator to drop back each revolution . Again
with enough torque being created on the first revolution I would be able to move the stator back into position.
If that amount of initial torque can be generated remains to be seen, but it is to that single goal that I am working to.
Great to see the improvements on your device, Bill. I was quite impressed with the torque before, but now it's even better. No doubt this can be further improved if needed at a later date.
I have seen other magnet motors which have got a few a revolutions before but none that have managed to pass the magnetic gate as many times as you have managed with one 'push'.
I remember the guy at magnetnerd.com made something like this but is a firm believer that it just can't be done. I did laugh to myself about the comment of using a "drinking bird" to move the stator. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoiReuIlqMI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM2B-Lp6iTY
I have no doubt that with your no-nonsense approach you will be able to harness the energy to reintroduce the stator to the turning rotor. Whether or not it will produce the desired effect, or can continue to do this is another matter altogether.
delete
Quote from: The Ronin on July 15, 2009, 09:15:15 AM
Great to see the improvements on your device, Bill. I was quite impressed with the torque before, but now it's even better. No doubt this can be further improved if needed at a later date.
I have seen other magnet motors which have got a few a revolutions before but none that have managed to pass the magnetic gate as many times as you have managed with one 'push'.
I remember the guy at magnetnerd.com made something like this but is a firm believer that it just can't be done. I did laugh to myself about the comment of using a "drinking bird" to move the stator. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoiReuIlqMI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM2B-Lp6iTY
I have no doubt that with your no-nonsense approach you will be able to harness the energy to reintroduce the stator to the turning rotor. Whether or not it will produce the desired effect, or can continue to do this is another matter altogether.
Its certainly a work in progress, I am curious would you please let me know what devices you have seen that gets through the gate on even the first revolution using only permanent magnets and starting from a static position.
As always thank you for your input!
Bill;
While I am very impressed with what you have accomplished so far,
you are also espousing beliefs that seem off the mark. Meanwhile, I
want to thank you demonstrating features that allow me to see what
is going on here, and I hope you continue with your attempt. I suggest
that you review the following carefully before you *give up* on this
project, however, even if it means altering your approach.
I have a design for a pendulum device, presented below, that I think
takes into account balance of energy issues somewhat more
sensitively than your motor;
---
The Basic mechanism:
A) The pendulum would have the Mylow style rotor magnetic array
mounted on a crescent shaped drive board at its tip. A pendulum is a
better device for this application than a motor rotor because 1)
it's "back and forth form" matches the motion of the "back and forth
form" of the movement of the stator field magnet. Rather then a clutch
for rotary motion. 2) If your magnetic drive array is circular and has a
unitary sticky spot the pendulum does not need to transition the sticky
spot with its field magnet turned on!. It simply uses gravitationally
stored energy to back out of it's own position, back to the beginning.
3) A pendulum is fully self instrumenting since the energy is continually
interchanged between dynamic motion and gravitational stored energy
and is indicated by the limit of the rotor motion. A pendulum almost
begs to be modified and optimized for stored energy.
B) A cable drive mechanism; a dual windlass drum would be attached
to pendulum axle at the fulcrum.
C) The stator magnet is attached to a disk (rather than a hammer) in
a way as to minimize rotational momentum. Minimizing the rotational
momentum of field drive board is essential because all rotational energy
is dissipated when this drive board hits its stops. It is not necessary to
have this stator field magnet move particularly rapidly.
D) The above should be gotten to work rotating the field magnet board
by 180 degrees as the pendulum is rotated by 100->120 degrees, or
so. Later the stator magnet board would be reduced to 90 degrees
with stops when the storage mechanism (below) is made available,
---
Escapement Mechanism of the field magnet;
E) The key to making the motor/pendulum work is the field magnet
needs to be operated based on an "escapement mechanism". This
guarantees that the field magnet does not change position until all
or most of the rotor drive array magnets have passed it.
F) one could use two metal pull pins for field stator movement
synchronization.
G) the energy for synchronization pin pulling would be brought in
externally, initially, but this energy would ultimately need to be
supplied from the pendulum itself after the device has become
operational. The pulling pins must not add any energy to the
pendulum.
---
Energy balance adjustments:
H) Convert the windlass drum above to dual drive cones (could be
lucite plastic or wood) so that the position of the cable intersecting
the drum can be adjusted. This would minimize the drive energy pick-
off torque required to activate the field magnet. This is manual
adjustment number one.
I) Add two hanging weights that absorb energy by changing of their
relative heights while the escapement mechanism is locked. Manually
adjust the size of the weights to the minimum required to operate the
field magnet. This minimizes the amount of energy being removed from
the pendulum during operation. This is manual adjustment number two.
---
Magnetic drive;
J) Adjust the magnetic drive by making it as powerful as possible. One
way this could be done is:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7770.0
Note that one still wants to have a unified sticky spot. The field drive
magnet needs to be able to be inserted in line with the magnetic array
smoothly.
K) Note that user Ergo is wrong about the magnetic drive. At the very
least, one can sort the magnets from weakest to strongest, to where
they pull each other through to the field magnet in turn, to spread the
energy being generated over the entire rotor array. This will make the
the sticky spot stronger and rotor drive unidirectional, but so what?
---
The sole determinant of whether this will work or not is; Is the excess
energy above what it takes to lift the rotor gravitationally, is that
greater than the field rotational momentum energy of the stator field
magnet? Friction in the mechanism is factorable therefore is not as
important.
{eod}
---
In your motor design I'm concerned that the strong puck magnet is
being pushed out the way laterally by the hammer when it drops - this
initial acceleration will need to paid back during the disk rotation as the
field hammer is reset and doesn't necessarily represent gained energy.
S:MarkSCoffman
So, how are you doing with this device?
Any progress to report? Good or bad news is welcome!
I'd love to see a real overunity magnet motor in action!
I wish I could report progress, but I can't. You really have to work with one of these to see why they most likely will not work. Before a magnetic motor will work there must be some way to introduce additional energy into the sytem to over come the magnetic gate. That is the problem.
What I was doing was pushing the rotor assembly through 7 revolutions and seeing if the rotor would continue to run. In the final analysis even though I did see acceleration as the gate was breached each time I was only seeing basicly a sine wave effect with a ever decreasing amplitude.
Eventually it will slow down a stop. Fun to work with though, thanks for your inquiry.
Bill
Quote from: billmehess on October 01, 2009, 11:44:56 AM
I wish I could report progress, but I can't. You really have to work with one of these to see why they most likely will not work. Before a magnetic motor will work there must be some way to introduce additional energy into the sytem to over come the magnetic gate. That is the problem.
What I was doing was pushing the rotor assembly through 7 revolutions and seeing if the rotor would continue to run. In the final analysis even though I did see acceleration as the gate was breached each time I was only seeing basicly a sine wave effect with a ever decreasing amplitude.
Eventually it will slow down a stop. Fun to work with though, thanks for your inquiry.
Bill
Have you tried electricity?
Vidar
Quote from: billmehess on October 01, 2009, 03:07:39 PM
Are you serious?
Well, there is at least one thing you must do, which is to force the magnetic field to temporary collapse at the right time. I can't see so many other ways than using electricity through a coil to make that happen. To collapse a magnetic field temporary, you sort of "steal" or "borrow" energy from the system, just to give it back later when it benifits the rotation or motive movement in the system. There is however loss as friction that probably will stop the system from running.
Quote from: Low-Q on October 01, 2009, 04:45:09 PM
Well, there is at least one thing you must do, which is to force the magnetic field to temporary collapse at the right time. I can't see so many other ways than using electricity through a coil to make that happen. To collapse a magnetic field temporary, you sort of "steal" or "borrow" energy from the system, just to give it back later when it benifits the rotation or motive movement in the system. There is however loss as friction that probably will stop the system from running.
Well you can do this with a electromagnet but the idea of a permanent mag. motor is to use only perm. magnets. Introducing a outside electrical input defeats the purpose.
Paul Sprain tried to do this when he used a paulsing system to kick the spinning rotor past the gate, but the failure of all these approaches is that it uses more energy than what is created so what is the point?
Which source have told you that Sprain failed?
There is no public statements on how things have turned out
during the development of E.M.I.L.I.E. (The name of his motor)
Or is it just your own assumption?
Quote from: billmehess on October 01, 2009, 06:58:27 PM
Well you can do this with a electromagnet but the idea of a permanent mag. motor is to use only perm. magnets. Introducing a outside electrical input defeats the purpose.
Paul Sprain tried to do this when he used a paulsing system to kick the spinning rotor past the gate, but the failure of all these approaches is that it uses more energy than what is created so what is the point?
I refer to the last videos in this thread - with the rotor and the jumping stator.
What if the jumping stator is activated by altering its CG. Lets say the jumping stator is connected to a heavy sled which is moved back and forth with a rod that is attached to the spinning wheel. When the rod pushes the sled backwards on the jumping stator, its CG will move backwards and tip it up. When the rod is pulling the sled towards the wheel, the jumping stators CG will move back again so it will tip towards the wheel again.
PS! I mean that the sled is a rolling device inside the jumping statormagnet. The stator isn't moving back and forth - just the sled inside it, to allow the CG of the statormagnet to change.
Using the rod to move the jumping stator directly is to mee too obvious - it will not work. But maybe gravity can help just by changing CG. It should not take any energy to move a weight horizontally just to change CG. So gravity can do the rest of the job. Any thoughts?
The question then is how CG is changed when the magnetic field from the spinning wheel is changing. This potential difference might stop the system from running, but maybe it is worth a try.
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on October 02, 2009, 04:20:25 AM
I refer to the last videos in this thread - with the rotor and the jumping stator.
What if the jumping stator is activated by altering its CG. Lets say the jumping stator is connected to a heavy sled which is moved back and forth with a rod that is attached to the spinning wheel. When the rod pushes the sled backwards on the jumping stator, its CG will move backwards and tip it up. When the rod is pulling the sled towards the wheel, the jumping stators CG will move back again so it will tip towards the wheel again.
When you are working with one of the devices you will see there is very little torque when the rotor is moving. I was able to attach a cam assembly to the bottom plate that would move the
stator mag. out of the way to allow the rotor to get past the gate, This worked just one time as the system slowed down and stopped do the the pull of the stator on the rotor. A mechanical approach simply does not work, there must be some kind of outside input to add the necessary energy to push the rotor past the gate, and therein lies the challenge and the problem.
As far as Paul's device since he has only one revolution at a time to generate enough energy to pulse his electromagnet to move past the gate he will simply not not able to generate enough electricity.A electromagnet strong enough to accomplish this pulse would draw quite a bit of current and one revolution would not do the trick. Remember with strong enough magnets he could in even just one revolution generate a nice pulse to his electromagnet but the resulting gate is that much greater. With this type of approach the gateresistance will always be more than what can be produced to move through it.
PS! I mean that the sled is a rolling device inside the jumping statormagnet. The stator isn't moving back and forth - just the sled inside it, to allow the CG of the statormagnet to change.
Using the rod to move the jumping stator directly is to mee too obvious - it will not work. But maybe gravity can help just by changing CG. It should not take any energy to move a weight horizontally just to change CG. So gravity can do the rest of the job. Any thoughts?
The question then is how CG is changed when the magnetic field from the spinning wheel is changing. This potential difference might stop the system from running, but maybe it is worth a try.
Vidar
When you build one of these devices you will see there is very little torque any mechanical attachment will simply stop it.
Quote from: YeahRight on October 02, 2009, 03:08:59 AM
Which source have told you that Sprain failed?
There is no public statements on how things have turned out
during the development of E.M.I.L.I.E. (The name of his motor)
Or is it just your own assumption?
I built one of these it was obvious right away that the electomagnet needs more energy than the one revolution can produce to push the rotor past the stator. If this had worked for Paul I am sure we would have heard about it by now somewhere. At least when he would have picked up his Nobel prize.
Quote from: billmehess on October 02, 2009, 09:32:33 AM
I built one of these it was obvious right away that the electromagnet needs more energy than the one revolution can produce to push the rotor past the stator. If this had worked for Paul I am sure we would have heard about it by now somewhere. At least when he would have picked up his Nobel prize.
You shouldn't be so fast in making a conclusion in this matter.
1) Did you use the proper stator spiral, e'g an archimedean spiral, that develops the most torque?
2) Did you calculate the best angular slope of this spiral?
3) Did you make the electromagnet of the best high permeability alloy with very low hysteresis loss?
4) Did you pulse the electromagnet correctly? As stated pulse timing and duration is everything.
The slightest error in handling the EM vill detoriate the OU effect.
5) Did you measure the shaft torque correctly, or simply tried a connected generator in closed loop?
Not just anyone can build an Overunity Wankel. It takes skill and "know how" to reach the goal.
Quote from: billmehess on October 02, 2009, 09:10:55 AM
When you build one of these devices you will see there is very little torque any mechanical attachment will simply stop it.
It's not much torque, but it should be possible to increase by changing the design a bit.