Here's a patent from Steorn: http://www.google.com/patents?printsec=abstract&zoom=4&pg=PA3&id=1dOyAAAAEBAJ#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Inventors: Sean David McCarthy, Alan Simpson, Martin Flood, Maxime Sorin
US2009/0009157 A1 : SYSTEM
AND METHOD FOR MEASURING ENERGY IN MAGNETIC INTERACTIONS: An apparatus and method is provided for measuring magnetic force response time due to the magnetic viscosity of materials and for measuring total energy exchanged due to relative motion of magnetic materials. Voltage and current versus time through an electromagnet is measured and recorded.....
The SKDB may teach us how to build and use the patented measuring device mentioned above in order to perform tests on the materials so we will know the optimal parameters and are able to match the materials in a successful replication, thus the reason for the hard disc drive tolerances.
I think this device needs to be explored along with the other information in the SKDB. I will post the main parts of the SKDB in the next post.
GB
Some of the tools for testing noted below is used in the patented measuring device. This is the reason why I think it is essential to research the patented measuring device because it may be necessary for a successful replication. Also take note how it mentions Homopolar Motors and Generators under "Rotating Electromagnetic Systems". CLaNzer decided to build a Pulse motor and Homopolar generator combination and I believe he is part of the SKDB, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2I6sOc056k
e-Learning (Basic physics of Orbo)
Physics Primer
1) Atomic Structure
2) States of Matter
3) Force, Energy, Work, and Power
4) Forms of Energy
5) Newtonian Dynamics
6) Intro to Electricity
7) Intro to Magnestism
8) Intro to Thermodynamics
9) Frames of Reference
10) Resonance
Rotary Systems
1) Key Concepts in Rotary Systems
2) Coupling and Pure Momentum in Rotary Systems
Magnetism
1) The M-H Curve and Magnetic Domains
2) The Magnetic Force equation
3) Magnetic Effects
Rotating Electromagnetic Systems
1) Forward and Back EMF
2) Electromagnets in Detail
3) Homopolar Motors and Generators
Tools for Data Analysis
1) Statistics
2) Calculus
Tools for Testing
1) Oscilloscopes
2) Angle Encoders
3) Torque Sensors
4) Displacement Sensors
5) Thermocouples
6) Hall Probes
7) Data Acquisition Systems
Orbo
1) Conservation of Energy in Classical Permanent Magnet Interaction
2) Conservation of Energy in Electromagnet Interaction
3) An Electromagnetic Orbo Interaction
[Edit:] The above information was taken from the "SKDB learning resources" from SteornOfficial, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su3T7NFs85U
GB
What goes on in the Steorn SKDB Part 1, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1reS5ANxjg
What goes on in the Steorn SKDB Part 2, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVBcdEn-xa0
What goes on in the Steorn SKDB Part 3, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_1EcQcvkQc
What goes on in the Steorn SKDB Part 4, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev0B-_2PcMk
GB
There's been a lot of talk about the B-H curves in the other thread in relation to the core material.
The SKDB materials for the Orbo talks about the M-H Curves. This needs to be researched.
GB
An Angle Encoder is mentioned in the SKDB material for tools needed for testing. This is used in the Patent Measuring Device.
A rotary encoder is an electro-mechanical device that converts the angular position of a shaft or axle to an analog or digital code, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_encoder
GB
A Torque Sensor is mentioned in the SKDB material for tools needed for testing. This is used in the Patent Measuring Device.
A torque sensor is a device for measuring and recording the torque on a rotating system, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque_sensor
GB
A Displacement Sensor is mentioned in the SKDB material for tools needed for testing. This may be used in the Patent Measuring Device or in the assembly of the Orbo.
Capacitive displacement sensors “are non-contact devices capable of high-resolution measurement of the position and/or change of position of any conductive targetâ€. They are also able to measure the thickness or density of non-conductive materials. Capacitive displacement sensors are used in a wide variety of applications including semiconductor processing, assembly of precision equipment such as disk drives, precision thickness measurements, machine tool metrology and assembly line testing. These types of sensors can be found in machining and manufacturing facilities around the world, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitive_displacement_sensor
GB
Seems folks forget that even in magnets and materials related such as core materials have CEMF.
Any moving magnetic field that crosses a conductor causes a CEMF. Be it a magnet, or a core or even a nail.
Simple answer to 90% of Sterons BS.
The other aspect is change is never instant. That is the other 1% of Sterons crap.
You folks should be asking for real input, to output, noting else. Seems you will never get it from Steorn.
As for there education modules they are tailored to their claims.
gravityblock
The crap patent on the measuring device is such that such equipment is built to need.
There is noting new in that device. Even the way it is done is not new.
If you need a torque measurement, you build to the situation.
If you compared the input cost to the variations, it still will not be ou.
They play a game of look at this, and never, never, real input to out put.
If they had ou they would have shown it with out the BS. They have not.
they say it exists and then give out BS scope shots to say it might.
hell the output coil on the last demo does not even show up in the thermal imaging. Them input coils are easily seen. No OU.
Quote from: lostcauses10x on February 12, 2010, 12:58:06 PM
gravityblock
The crap patent on the measuring device is such that such equipment is built to need.
There is noting new in that device. Even the way it is done is not new.
If you need a torque measurement, you build to the situation.
If you compared the input cost to the variations, it still will not be ou.
They play a game of look at this, and never, never, real input to out put.
If they had ou they would have shown it with out the BS. They have not.
they say it exists and then give out BS scope shots to say it might.
hell the output coil on the last demo does not even show up in the thermal imaging. Them input coils are easily seen. No OU.
I could care less if it is new. If it is new or old, then it may be needed for a successful replication. The patented measuring device is to test and match the materials in order to have the maximum performance and best chance of OU. Even the same type of core materials and magnets will have slight variations within their specs and the tests will help you to match the materials for the build.
If you think Steorn is B.S and not showing OU, then you have no reason to be here other than to distract from the topic that is being discussed. I will not tolerate it. You've stated your opinion about the Patent, the measurements, the SKDB, and the Orbo......so you should have nothing more to say.
GB
The M-H curve is for the state of the magnetic position for recording of data digital or analog.
To low a curve and it would be easy to lose the information placed on the magnetic drive. To high and it will be difficult to change the state.
It again appears to be part of there play of similar to making a hard drive.
If so the average core material is not going to work well for this stuff. Most are designed to the domains to move a bit more rapidly than a magnetic tape or disk.
The M-H is the ability to change the state and keep it there. with also the need to be able to change that state.
The Magnetic Torque Measurement System is a system specifically designed and built to
measure the ‘pure torque’ of permanent magnetic interactions during rotary motion.
Below is a table of contents for the "Magnetic Torque Measurement System" publication, provided by Steorn, http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf
Table of Contents
1.1 Introduction.............................................................................................4
1.2 Measurement Arm ..................................................................................5
1.2.1 Angle Encoder .................................................................................6
1.2.2 Torque Sensor.................................................................................7
1.2.3 Drive System ...................................................................................9
1.2.4 Hall Probes ....................................................................................10
1.2.5 Displacement Sensors...................................................................11
1.3 Data Acquisition and Control Software .................................................12
1.3.1 Software Operation........................................................................13
1.4 Data Handling.......................................................................................14
1.4.1 Data Handling Method...................................................................14
1.4.2 Key Data Handling Techniques .....................................................16
1.4.3 Linear Interpolation........................................................................17
1.4.4 Friction Compensation...................................................................19
1.4.5 Base Line Measurements..............................................................23
1.4.6 Load Measurements......................................................................24
1.4.7 Pure Torque Profile and Magnetic Potential Energy......................25
1.5 Calibration Techniques .........................................................................27
1.5.1 Calibration Overview .....................................................................27
1.5.2 Principal of Torque Calibration ......................................................28
1.5.3 Static Calibration ...........................................................................29
1.5.4 Multi-Static Calibration...................................................................34
1.5.5 Effect of Radial Load .....................................................................42
1.5.6 Effect of Axial Load........................................................................44
1.5.7 Energy Measurement Uncertainty .................................................45
GB
Quote from: lostcauses10x on February 12, 2010, 01:30:22 PM
The M-H curve is for the state of the magnetic position for recording of data digital or analog.
To low a curve and it would be easy to lose the information placed on the magnetic drive. To high and it will be difficult to change the state.
It again appears to be part of there play of similar to making a hard drive.
This publication, published by Steorn, talks about the M-H curve, Asymmetry and Energy in Magnetic Systems,
http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdfAs you can see in the above article, the M-H curve is not just for the state of the magnetic position for recording of digital data or analog, but is for all ferromagnetic materials, including Metglas, Finemet, Nanoperm, etc. Recording tape is a ferromagnetic material, and to think the M-H curve is only relevant to recording tape, and isn't relevant to other ferromagnetic materials, is being very limited in your thinking.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on February 12, 2010, 01:25:28 PM
...
If you think Steorn is B.S and not showing OU, then you have no reason to be here other than to distract from the topic that is being discussed. I will not tolerate it. You've stated your opinion about
...
Your opinion also is stated. It is not the question.
This topic is not reserved to believers for repeating their act of faith, hoping it will make the reality.
The question is to say the truth about Steorn. There is no proof of OU but a erroneous calculus of energy balance: energy for aligning electron spins in the magnetic domains is accounting for losses! Hence Orbo principle is a hoax.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2010, 09:41:54 PM
This publication, published by Steorn, talks about the M-H curve, Asymmetry and Energy in Magnetic Systems, http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf
...
If this worked as specified, then it would be very very easy to build a PMM with a magnet rotor and asymmetric ferrite pieces around on a stator. No need of current. No need of coils.
Why does Steorn not build one and show us?
Quote from: exnihiloest on April 02, 2010, 09:10:43 AM
If this worked as specified, then it would be very very easy to build a PMM with a magnet rotor and asymmetric ferrite pieces around on a stator. No need of current. No need of coils.
Why does Steorn not build one and show us?
The anomaly in the PM Orbo, is rotation in one direction lead to a loss of the system's kinetic energy; rotation in the opposite direction lead to a gain in the system's kinetic energy.
Systems like this can be easily tested with a spin down test of the rotor without any magnetic interactions and with magnetic interactions. Spin the rotor to 300 RPM, then measure the spin down time with no magnetic interactions. Let's say this test has a spin down time of 90 seconds. Now, spin the rotor to 300 RPM, rotating CW and with magnetic interactions with the stator, then measure the spin down time with the rotor interacting with the stator. Let's say this test has a spin down time of 120 seconds. Do the previous test with it rotating CCW and take note of the spin down time. Let's say the spin down time is 60 seconds in this test.
Spin down time with no magnetic interactions = 90 seconds (Control Test)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CW = 120 seconds (A gain of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CCW = 60 seconds (A loss of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
As you can see, there is a gain in kinetic energy in one direction, and a loss in kinetic energy in the other direction in this hypothetical experiment and this is the same claim for the PM Orbo. This anomaly in the PM Orbo, led to the creation of the eOrbo because there is a need for current and a need for coils. The eOrbo has led to research into a ssOrbo, with no moving parts. You don't understand the claims, you don't understand the experiments, and you don't understand the system itself.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on April 02, 2010, 03:19:58 PM
...
Spin down time with no magnetic interactions = 90 seconds (Control Test)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CW = 120 seconds (A gain of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CCW = 60 seconds (A loss of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
...
Obviously it is not a proof of "gain". There are only more or less losses depending on the cases. And there are many possible reasons for that (not perfect ball bearings, asymetric forces influencing the frictions -only work is theorically symmetric-...).
Quote from: exnihiloest on April 03, 2010, 11:36:21 AM
Obviously it is not a proof of "gain". There are only more or less losses depending on the cases. And there are many possible reasons for that (not perfect ball bearings, asymetric forces influencing the frictions -only work is theorically symmetric-...).
The sticky spot during the magnetic interactions will slow the rotation, thus the rotation CW or CCW with magnetic interactions between the rotor and stator, having a sticky spot, should both be less than the control test of 90 seconds with no magnetic interactions or sticky spots. Do the control test both CW and CCW, to see if there are asymmetric forces influencing the frictions (this way you can be sure it's not influencing the experiment and that the spin down time is the same for both directions of rotation for the control test).
You should not have a gain of 30 seconds with sticky spots, over the control test that has no sticky spots. Air friction and friction from the bearings is irrelevant in this experiment, because all 3 tests were rotated to the same RPM of 300, which means all 3 tests has the same amount of friction.
In order for it to self-run, which would represent running for an infinite number of seconds, then you would need a COP of infinity. A spin down time of 135 seconds, which is a 45 second gain, represents a COP of 1.5 in my hypothetical test (above the control test of 90 seconds, is COP > 1). It is OU, but it's not able to self-run, without current, coils, and batteries to capture, to store, and to transfer this energy in order to close the loop and to feed this excess energy back into the input.
I am through with you. You do not contribute to this forum in anyway. Your arguments are baseless and you're always misinterpreting the results and data from an experiment. Please put me on your ignore list. I will not respond to any of your postings, from this point on.
GB
Quote from: exnihiloest on April 02, 2010, 08:37:45 AM
Your opinion also is stated. It is not the question.
This topic is not reserved to believers for repeating their act of faith, hoping it will make the reality.
The question is to say the truth about Steorn. There is no proof of OU but a erroneous calculus of energy balance: energy for aligning electron spins in the magnetic domains is accounting for losses! Hence Orbo principle is a hoax.
Steorn's creation may or may not be OU but you have proved (and are proving again in the above post) that you're incompetent to asses that. You have no place in these discussions.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 02, 2010, 03:19:58 PM
The anomaly in the PM Orbo, is rotation in one direction lead to a loss of the system's kinetic A; rotation in the opposite direction lead to a gain in the system's kinetic energy.
Systems like this can be easily tested with a spin down test of the rotor without any magnetic interactions and with magnetic interactions. Spin the rotor to 300 RPM, then measure the spin down time with no magnetic interactions. Let's say this test has a spin down time of 90 seconds. Now, spin the rotor to 300 RPM, rotating CW and with magnetic interactions with the stator, then measure the spin down time with the rotor interacting with the stator. Let's say this test has a spin down time of 120 seconds. Do the previous test with it rotating CCW and take note of the spin down time. Let's say the spin down time is 60 seconds in this test.
Spin down time with no magnetic interactions = 90 seconds (Control Test)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CW = 120 seconds (A gain of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
Spin down time with magnetic interactions CCW = 60 seconds (A loss of 30 seconds in kinetic energy)
As you can see, there is a gain in kinetic energy in one direction, and a loss in kinetic energy in the other direction in this hypothetical experiment and this is the same claim for the PM Orbo. This anomaly in the PM Orbo, led to the creation of the eOrbo because there is a need for current and a need for coils. The eOrbo has led to research into a ssOrbo, with no moving parts. You don't understand the claims, you don't understand the experiments, and you don't understand the system itself.
GB
GB, Thanks for the explanation. Are there any videos that demo this anomaly that show the gain in the spin down time? I would like to see this. Is this the anomaly that started Steorn's research?
Bill
Quote from: maw2432 on April 04, 2010, 08:34:10 AM
GB, Thanks for the explanation. Are there any videos that demo this anomaly that show the gain in the spin down time? I would like to see this. Is this the anomaly that started Steorn's research?
Bill
Orbo started its life as a measurement anomaly during the course of the development of a permanent magnetic micro-wind turbine. The anomaly in question related to a simple rotary interaction between permanent magnetic components. Rotation in one direction lead to a loss of the system's kinetic energy; rotation in the opposite direction lead to a gain the system's kinetic energy.
Steorn didn't use a spin down test to do their measurements. They used a magnetic torque measurement system instead. A gain in the system kinetic energy may not necessarily have a longer spin down time if it is doing work, and this is why Steorn measured the torque of the system to determine if there is a gain or loss in the kinetic energy. Measuring the torque is the proper way.
The skeptic is under the impression, if there is a gain in kinetic energy in the pmOrbo, then they could demonstrate a self-runner or OU without having to do measurements or the need to have a current and coils in the system, such as the eOrbo. This was the reason to use the hypothetical spin down tests to show how there could be a gain in kinetic energy without it being a continuous self-runner.
GB
Quote from: Omnibus on April 03, 2010, 03:40:59 PM
...you have proved (and are proving again in the above post) that you're incompetent to asses that. You have no place in these discussions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Quote from: exnihiloest on April 07, 2010, 04:30:22 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Wikipedia won't make you more competent. You need real education to have the nerve to pass judgement on scientific matters.
Quote from: Omnibus on April 07, 2010, 04:36:41 AM
Wikipedia won't make you more competent. You need real education to have the nerve to pass judgement on scientific matters.
but Wikipedia perfectly explains your inconsistent attitude
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Quote from: gravityblock on April 03, 2010, 03:17:13 PM
The sticky spot during the magnetic interactions will slow the rotation, thus the rotation CW or CCW with magnetic interactions between the rotor and stator, having a sticky spot, should both be less than the control test of 90 seconds with no magnetic interactions or sticky spots.
The sticky spot slows the rotation only when the magnet is moving away. When it is approaching, it is accelerated, leaving us with a null overall effect.
Thus with a perfect device, the rotation CW or CCW with magnetic interactions should be the same like without interactions.
Quote
...
You should not have a gain of 30 seconds with sticky spots, over the control test that has no sticky spots.
The sticky spot induces large radial forces. If the diametrically opposed forces are not exactly balanced (and imho it is very hard to maintain a perfect symmetry on 360°), there is a non null radial resultant force onto the axis, that can significantly change the frictions.
Quote
In order for it to self-run, which would represent running for an infinite number of seconds, then you would need a COP of infinity.
...
It is non sense due to your confusion between "gain" and "less losses".
What you say is the same as saying that replacing a coil of resistance R by a identical coil of resistance R' with R'<R, gives gain and is OU when it is just reducing losses!
Quote
I am through with you. You do not contribute to this forum in anyway. Your arguments are baseless and you're always misinterpreting the results and data from an experiment.
Your regular ad hominem attacks mean that you have no solid rational arguments. Sorry if my messages, coming from a critical and scientific thought, are the cause of shaken faith syndromes among devout believers.
Quote
Please put me on your ignore list. I will not respond to any of your postings, from this point on.
Only the scientific truth matters to me. I reply about what is written and not about who was writing. When I estimate that untruths are written, I give my position independently of who wrote them. It is a question of intellectual honesty, not a question of individuals.
Quote from: exnihiloest on April 07, 2010, 05:53:03 AM
but Wikipedia perfectly explains your inconsistent attitude
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Oh, yea, says who? The incompetent.
QuoteOnly the scientific truth matters to me. I reply about what is written and not about who was writing. When I estimate that untruths are written, I give my position independently of who wrote them. It is a question of intellectual honesty, not a question of individuals.
You have no qualifications to judge one way or another. Learn physics systematically first and then come here to express opinions. Semi-educated elements such as you are the greatest nuisance in the matters we're discussing here and only clog the exchange.
Make your own Dynamometer using an old scroll usb mouse, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSnnX1FwiWQ Youtube user, Eltimple, is a member of Steorn's SKDB.
A dynamometer, is a device for simultaneously measuring torque and rotational speed (rpm), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamometer
GB
Detailed information and software to build the home-made Dynamo-meter from an USB mouse, http://sci-spot.com/Mechanical/dyno.htm
The software continuously plots RPM, Torque, and Power. It can export torque and power Vs. RPM curves to excel in .csv format.
Software, http://sci-spot.com/Mechanical/dyno.zip
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on April 09, 2010, 07:56:06 AM
Detailed information and software to build the home-made Dynamo-meter from an USB mouse, http://sci-spot.com/Mechanical/dyno.htm
The software continuously plots RPM, Torque, and Power. It can export torque and power Vs. RPM curves to excel in .csv format.
Software, http://sci-spot.com/Mechanical/dyno.zip
GB
I suspect this project will not allow to measure the torque.
This system does not use a clutch or a torquemeter.
In this case we can measure the torque only during acceleration knowing the moments of inertia of rotating mass.
see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamometer
Quote from: wings on April 09, 2010, 11:29:13 AM
I suspect this project will not allow to measure the torque.
This system does not use a clutch or a torquemeter.
In this case we can measure the torque only during acceleration knowing the moments of inertia of rotating mass.
see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamometer
You only need to calculate the moment of inertia by hand
if you're not using a circular flywheel. If you're using a circular flywheel, then you enter in the outer and inner dimensions, and the density or mass (you don't need to know both, only need to know one or the other) and the software will do all of the other calculations.
This system is good to calculate the torque provide by the magnetic interactions during acceleration. It is not meant to measure the operating torque when it is under load, as you suggested. In addition it calculates the RPM, and will give you the Torque and Power VS RPM Curves. The motors effieciency at it's peak RPM can be calculated by: Efficiency = Max Power From Graph / (Volts * Amps).
A simple system like this would allow one to know the optimal distance between the dual rotor magnets and the toroid core along with the optimal strength for the magnets, etc. It's better than doing it totally blind. Steorn is measuring the torque during the magnetic interactions for a reason, because it's important to know for optimal performance. A member of Steorn's SKDB is using this, for his replications.
I'm sorry it doesn't meet your standards or expectations. I think it will be able to do the task at hand, which is measuring the torque during the magnetic interactions during acceleration, and in the end, this is the purpose of doing these measurements.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on April 09, 2010, 03:41:14 PM
You only need to calculate the moment of inertia by hand if you're not using a circular flywheel. If you're using a circular flywheel, then you enter in the outer and inner dimensions, and the density or mass (you don't need to know both, only need to know one or the other) and the software will do all of the other calculations.
This system is good to calculate the torque provide by the magnetic interactions during acceleration. It is not meant to measure the operating torque when it is under load, as you suggested. In addition it calculates the RPM, and will give you the Torque and Power VS RPM Curves. The motors effieciency at it's peak RPM can be calculated by: Efficiency = Max Power From Graph / (Volts * Amps).
A simple system like this would allow one to know the optimal distance between the dual rotor magnets and the toroid core along with the optimal strength for the magnets, etc. It's better than doing it totally blind. Steorn is measuring the torque during the magnetic interactions for a reason, because it's important to know for optimal performance. A member of Steorn's SKDB is using this, for his replications.
I'm sorry it doesn't meet your standards or expectations. I think it will be able to do the task at hand, which is measuring the torque during the magnetic interactions during acceleration, and in the end, this is the purpose of doing these measurements.
GB
I like these free projects
My standards are used, open source, simple.
I apologize if my comment may be hard but English is not my language
Quote from: wings on April 09, 2010, 11:13:16 PM
I like these free projects
My standards are used, open source, simple.
I apologize if my comment may be hard but English is not my language
No offense taken. I agree, it may not be the best solution, but it does keep the costs down in the experiments. It may be a good indicator for the optimal parameters and helpful in the fine tuning of the system. I plan on testing this idea. I'll be happy if it just gives me accurate RPM readings, but it should give good data on the torque during acceleration also. It could always be used in future projects that is unrelated to this topic.
You keep up the good work. I do enjoy reading your posts. I had a bad day here and I shouldn't bring it to the forum.
GB
Steorn has opened their SKDB Lite to the public. https://kdb.steorn.com/index.jspa
GB
Is that why nobody is communicating here?
Anyway the SKDB Lite is useless because a secret and MANDATORY "Discount Code" is needed to sign up for it.