Check out this motor at http://www.gap-power.com/. The video's take a while, but worth viewing as the concept is fully explained. Found this info at Peswiki.
This motor is much more powerful than Orbo and no secrets.
Regards, Larry
Watched the whole clip. Seems very interesting. It would have to be made to ways to convince me though.
1 would be as shown, and the other would be with just coils and cores.
What I question is, if the coils were used to push and pull as compared to pull and cut off, there may be equal forces to the rotor either way.
Like speaker systems for example, 1 10in speaker at 100w lets say can put out 100db at 60hz. If we now have 2 speakers at 50w each and 60hz, we will have 103db, at the same power.
The way this works is, 1 speaker at 50w and put out 97db, if the power is doubled to 100w we get a 3 db increase.
But if we introduce a second speaker at 50w along with the other at 50w, the increase is 6db.
Sounds hard to believe a bit. Increasing output wattage, per say, to double by dividing the input power to 2 motors
and combining the outputs.
And if we have 4 speakers at 25w ea. the total out would be 106db.
This doesnt say much about the efficiency of the original speaker. Now we add a tuned port to the enclosure. At the tuned freq the db increase could be above 10db, This type of increase would require 10 times the original input power.
All in all, I have tested this with the speakers and it is true. As for this motor, it would have to go though the suggested test above to say if this idea works or not. If the motor as presented were 100% eff. and the 1 without perm. mags were 95% then I would say he has the advantage.
I wonder if the guy is still around, and if he could do these tests.
Mags
Larry
I watched the entire sequence also,
Seems like a really cool idea [magnets as batteries] a very simple concept with a very big payback [amplification and neutralization].
Do you know of any attempts?
are you considering one??
You always do such great builds it would be nice to see one that could make as much power as this one would seem to be able to do[linear power curve]
It seems that one could rip" Hell off its hinges" with one of these motors!
would be interesting to know amps on these coils[I know depends on mag strength],as the "pulse" would be infinitesimally short[back and forth]but always on?
Very cool Larry
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: LarryC on February 20, 2010, 05:07:38 PM
This motor is much more powerful than Orbo and no secrets.
Regards, Larry
Note that he is not claiming OU.
It is a very efficient motor. 95% saving is cool. However he should show the power consumption under load. Without such tests we won't know the actual savings.
Anyway good presentation.
Well...............
I just have to ask
If I can provide a constant 1000lb "pull" on a wheel with this set up ,
How the heck do you calculate OU[or any] efficiency utilizing ten 100 lb [pull] magnets as part of your power curve?
Thanks
Chet
@larryc
Thanks for posting this. I watched all the videoes and everything is described clearly.
@all,
Verification of what was described is quite simple obviously this can be done with a scaled down set up.
Hi Omega_0,
You have to read again the following sentence of Arthur :
QuoteAt 18 volts, 95.31 percent of the power produced by the above motor is generated by the permanent magnet. The electro-magnet is just simply acting as a switch, which at the appropriate time, is turning on and off the magnetism from the permanent magnet.
This means that - as an example - 4.69watt power-input is needed for an output of 100 Watt .
He is a wise guy. stays under the radar.
No ou ? LOL
Kator01
@All,
Thanks for taking the time to view his video's. Even John Bedini is impressed with the motor http://pesn.com/2010/02/20/9501617_GAP-Power_magnetic_amplification_and_neutralization_illustrates_regauging/
I have sent Art an email asking if he could give us more detail about the setup. It would save some time in building the replication.
It seems that when the coil is off with his configuration, a lot of the magnet flux is coming out the side of the core and back to the opposite magnet pole. The coil just focuses the flux thru the entire core length.
I would like to first replicate the basic coil core setup and do a pull test. Without more specifics this would be trail and error. Can anyone with a magnetic simulator try to reproduce the effect using the relative dimensional proportion shown?
Regards, Larry
Greetings Larry
I took a look at it and there is allot to learn from what I've seen. Good find. By the way, check out my new string, magnetic manipulation. I just posted it with youtube videos. simple test but who knows.
Alan
Here is one way to test this. Two identical coils on a soft iron core with
a magnet on. The core to the left is the output coil.
G.
Quote from: Kator01 on February 21, 2010, 10:01:42 AM
Hi Omega_0,
You have to read again the following sentence of Arthur :
This means that - as an example - 4.69watt power-input is needed for an output of 100 Watt .
He is a wise guy. stays under the radar.
No ou ? LOL
Kator01
I think you are misinterpreting the word "power". He does not talk about the output. He does not mean that feeding 4.69 W into the coils will "generate" 100 W, he means only that 4.69 % is the contribution to the output from the EM according to his definitions. What he has defined is:
100 - 100*Fe/(Fa-Fn) = %Fan
where %Fan is the % of force due to amplification and neutralization, Fa is force in amplification mode only, Fn is in neutralization mode and Fe is in EM only mode.
Feed the values:
100 - 100*4.4/(101-7.35) = %Fan
or
100 - 4.69 = 95.31 = %Fan
Now Efficiency = Eout/Ein
= torque*angle/(V*I*duty cycle)
= Fan*radius of rotor*2pi*RPM/(V*I*duty cycle*60)
So you can see that we know only 2 variables out of 7 (Fan and V) and it is not fair to say anything about the efficiency. He needs to measure Ein and Eout.
I'm not saying that this is underunity, there is a good chance that it is OU. Someone needs to measure it properly.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 21, 2010, 12:06:36 PM
Here is one way to test this. Two identical coils on a soft iron core with
a magnet on. The core to the left is the output coil.
G.
To increase the effect ... this solution from Lockheed Martin Corporation
An apparatus and method for creating a magnetic beam wherein a focusing magnet assembly.
Patent number: 5929732
http://www.google.com/patents?id=V7YYAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
To make it easy for the magnet simulators and replicators, the dimensions were taken off the Lock-up video. Not perfect, but close as I zoomed the picture until the alligator clips were the correct size in MM, which appear to be the small size from Radio Shack.
Regards,
Larry
An interesting comment about this Re gauging phenomena from user Dark speed
Quote
This GAP design is exactly the design in the magnacoaster patent... The version of the patent that involves rotation - not the motionless one
Coil shunts neo on approach then changes polarity (or turns off ) allowing the two neos to repell each other
-----------------------------------
Comment made here:[reply 56]
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=120.msg1962#msg1962
-------------
This I was not aware of ,RE magnacoaster
Chet
## User Darkspeed sharing his Re Gauging experiments/ experiences here[very impressive fellow]
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=133.msg1965#msg1965
PPS
I agree "Exactly" is a very BIG word !!
Quote from: ramset on February 21, 2010, 06:17:39 PM
An interesting comment about this Re gauging phenomena from user Dark speed
Quote
This GAP design is exactly the design in the magnacoaster patent... The version of the patent that involves rotation - not the motionless one
Coil shunts neo on approach then changes polarity (or turns off ) allowing the two neos to repell each other
Exactly???
No. There are no magnets on the armature as in Richard Willis patent, it is a metalic strip section on the armature. The amplication pulse increase the force of pulling the armature strip into the magnet, coil, core section, then it can be released as it would continue around with no restriction until the point where it needs the neutralization pulse to allow the armature strip to pass.
Regards, Larry
Larry
all I'm saying is this Gent [Darkspeed] is on this path, studying "parts" of this effect [re gauging],
and has done a lot of research and seems willing to share.
Quote
I did it with both static magnets and magnet in a rotating disk = same result
it does not matter if the material in the wheel is magnetic or not, the effect is the same.
It cancels the flux in the metallic core producing work
If you get the " gap " correct between the metallic core and the material in the wheel ( magnetic or not ) it will work
If the material in the wheel is magnetic and you get the gap set to a neutral flux location you can get more work out than if it was not magnetic
---------------------------------
Many hands make light work.
Chet
I revised my response to ( ok almost exactly ;D )
When energized, in the gap between the core and the material in the rotor (if non magnetic) there is a neutral zone where a balance is reached between the opposing magnet and coil. The voltage to produce this effect can be as narrow as .25v
Too much voltage or too little voltage and the balance will not result << this is very important!
It looks like the GAP is going beyond this balance and pushing the coil/core into attraction for most of the rotation and then into balance while the metal arcs pass the core.
When the material in the rotor is magnetic there is also a balance established between the repulsion of the domain at the end of the core caused by the PM and the magnet in the rotor..
To close and there is only attraction < blotch wall is moved too far inboard in the core
Too far and there is only repulsion > blotch wall is not moved in core
The magnacoaster way of doing it is very powerful, imagine 500+lb of neo force repelling the magnet in the rotor but at the cost of energizing the coil with a lot of amps for around 315deg of a 360deg rotation.
I actually like this idea but feel some improvements are needed to get the best results.
One would be collecting the energy from the collapsing fields and reusing it to lower the input consumption.
I hate wasting poles so I must add an improvement to the design. I also don't like to waste the length or strength of attraction so for that I will add another improvement to the design.
I will not agree and or disagree with this creating overuntity until a test is performed and proper data is collected but it does look promissing if it was designed properly.
We are given the volts used but that is worthless unless the amps are provided as well. We need to know what the total wattage used is and we need the design to produce more watts then the watts used before we can claim overunity being achieved.
We are supplied with the force created but we are not supplied with how much force is needed to to create the energy used to create the added force and or the neutralization.
Quote from: Groundloop on February 21, 2010, 12:06:36 PM
Here is one way to test this. Two identical coils on a soft iron core with
a magnet on. The core to the left is the output coil.
G.
I think this is a good way to test this theory without building a motor.
I have some things to try it pretty close to what is shown.
But I have a feeling that they effect may be the same as getting the mag field to go from N to S as compared to no field to more field. The N and S cause a revesal of poles, where the amplified magnet really only goes on and off. I would see the pole reversal as more happening than just on and off.
I will give it a go and see. It may be just an Orbo type effect. Imagine just a coil on a core and the rotor is attracted to the core, then the coil pulses a repulsion field just as the rotor meets the coil tdc. Almost the same thing, no?
Mags
Mags
Was thinking about it. The on function of attraction from the stator magnet, simulates a pretty long on time that doesnt even have to be paid for. Lts say skip the amplify mode for a second and just engage the turn off function as needed. The powerless stator mag attracted to a rotor mag, especially the long curved magnets he used in the motor, once the mags alone attract and glide after, no power was used from initial attraction to the point of turning on the coil to just pass the sticky spot. An electric smot flux control. Well for that very small pulse during the gate passing, we shouldnt be using much. But to also power the coils once more through each cycle, during the amplify pulse, well 1 we are using more power than just electro smot. 2 will the output be more than if the rotor was magnetically pulled and pushed in place of just power consuming gate passings like orbo with a big push half of the time.
Orbo is an electro smot, using power to pass the sticky spot. For as many great smots out there, I could only imagine how little power it would take to keep some of them going.
This motor is very interesting indeedy. But they all are at first.
Mags
@Chet,
Thanks, I understand.
@darkspeed,
Thanks for the information.
@All,
The amplification is only necessary when the metal arc is being attracted to the core. Once the beginning edge of the metal arc reaches the core the amplification can be turned off as the core slides along the metal arc. You can see how easy it slides in the videos. Then the neutralization is turned on as it gets near the end of the metal arc to slide pass. Thus the duty cycle need not be high. It really depends on how many sets of cores are used.
Now, this would require a lot of energy to overcome the massive Cemf, unless you use my secondary trick. Then you only have to have enough time for the core alignment.
IMG_0260 shows the core I used for the following scope shots. It is wound with two strands of wires. So I can power one and leave the second one open or shorted.
IMG_0263 shows the traces with the secondary open. Note the slope of the bottom trace(current), even with a 50% duty cycle the current does not reach the max.
IMG_0261 shows the traces with secondary shorted to create a max load effect. Note the current trace shoots up instantly because the shorted secondary removes the Cemf from the primary.
The secondary does not waste power, since a pulse is being sent and not a sine wave. Not shown, but the secondary traces are flat except for the spikes at the beginning and end. The secondary could be opened at the end of amplification to capture the massive back emf, since it should not effect the slide along the metal arc.
Regards, Larry
Thats a good idea Larry! Thats how all bifilar relays (solenoid) work, they short the second coil to kill the pulse.
@darkspeed,
Do you know the reason that Art would use a magnet diameter that is almost twice that of the core?
Also, do you know of any good reason to use low carbon steel for the core with all of it's problems, instead of more appropriate magnetic material. Art owns this place http://www.tru-fitalignmentsolutions.com/tri-tube/index.html. So he would have a lot of steel pieces available.
Regards, Larry
@LarryC, I think the idea is to have a soloniod / magnet/coil/core combination where the magnetic field can be in effect nullified conveniontly.
There are many fancy magnetic materials but for a cheap motor you would want cheap maagnets.
http://www.irm.umn.edu/hg2m/hg2m.pdf
Quote from: LarryC on February 22, 2010, 03:32:10 PM
@darkspeed,
Do you know the reason that Art would use a magnet diameter that is almost twice that of the core?
Also, do you know of any good reason to use low carbon steel for the core with all of it's problems, instead of more appropriate magnetic material. Art owns this place http://www.tru-fitalignmentsolutions.com/tri-tube/index.html. So he would have a lot of steel pieces available.
Regards, Larry
The smaller diameter core allows for flux focus from the PM and too much core material becomes a problem when you try to shunt the flux in it.
Soft Iron has good permeability, acceptable hysteresis , and its easy to machine into shapes like that from bar or TUBE sections.
When i prototype something - out comes the soft iron stock - to play with. It works very well, but if you pulse it to fast it will get very hot. Actually the only thing better would be a metglass magamp bar but those are hard to come by.
He may be playing games with your brain.. what looks like a bar is not always a bar.. you cant see what is under the core.. it could be a tube with end caps OR IT COULD HAVE A FLUX GAP ;) ;) ;) hidden under there
Pull test setup using the coil/core shown in reply #20.
Battery used was a 18 volt Ryobi rechargeable.
Coil is 38.6 Ohms with 28 gauge wire and dimensions are 2 1/4" L by 2 1/8" OD by 1" ID.
Core is laminated silicon steel and is 3-1/4" long by 3/4" square.
Berkley digital scale for lb oz measurement.
Each magnet in the stack is 1" diameter by 1/4" thick N45 neos.
Impressive results. The energy gain of going from 3 to 5 magnets is massive.
I don't think Art is playing any games as it was easy to get similar results without the same relative proportions as Art's.
Regards, Larry
Did he mentioned the power used to fire those electromagnets? He says 18 volts, but nothing about the ampéres. Anyway, it seams strange that the electromagnet only provide 4,4 punds of force while it at the same time can neutrilize the magnetic force which is greater than that.
I think that the magnets itself add more magnetic matter into the electromagnet, and therefor the electromagnet is more efficient when the magnets are attached. So the actual resistance is greater or different, and the amplification is misleading as the magnets also is a part of the magnetic conducting matter in the electromagnet - as the magnets are removed during the electromagnet test only. What if he had replaced the magnets with the same amount and shape of iron? What would the readings say then?
I think the readings are found on the wrong basis.
Vidar
Glad to hear you got it going!
A neo mfg. once told me that each neo stacked is roughly a 40% increase in strength
so 100lb + 100lb stacked should equal about 140lb pull
Since it seems that the people with magnetic simulators are not watching, would someone please download the trial version of Vizimag 3.18, but only if you haven't used it before. It is very simple and easy to use, but my trial period is over.
If anyone does download, please say so here right away, so others don't waste their trial.
By doing the simulation and showing the results here, it would help members understand how little energy is required to redirect the flux in Art's setup.
Regards, Larry
Hey Larry,
Have just downloaded and installed 3.18
Regards, Penno
Quote from: penno64 on February 23, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Hey Larry,
Have just downloaded and installed 3.18
Regards, Penno
Thanks, Penno.
Please use the proportional dimensions from reply #12 to help with the simulation dimensions. I don't know your level of technical knowledge, so others specs like Tesla, etc may require some research. Let us know if any assistance is needed. As I'm sure the combined knowledge and/or research ability here can be of help.
Regards, Larry
Hi Darkspeed and All
Very interesting thread,could you tell me what you consider the max hz when using mild steel as a stator? as that is all I have at the moment.
peter
Quote from: petersone on February 23, 2010, 06:35:20 PM
Hi Darkspeed and All
Very interesting thread,could you tell me what you consider the max hz when using mild steel as a stator? as that is all I have at the moment.
peter
Depends on your number of fire extinguishers?
It turns into induction heating around 10khz on up
Due to the eddy effect your going to have more losses the higher you go
You can get some rg60 welding rod and cut it into sticks and bundel that together for higher freq
or better yet get a ferrite bar from an old radio
Hey Larry,
Have you got a file you could email me - save recreating the setup ?
Regards, Pen
p.s. I'm off to work now - will be back in 6hrs. Pen
Hi Darkspeed
Thanks for your prompt reply,I like your sense of humor,so around 1khz would be ok,the welding rods you mention are gas rods? copper coated? don't they need to be coated with insulation before they are bundled?
peter
Quote from: penno64 on February 23, 2010, 07:06:53 PM
Hey Larry,
Have you got a file you could email me - save recreating the setup ?
Regards, Pen
Sorry, all files are deleted.
I can still see the menu, but I can't use. So my best guess is to:
First use the Add flux sources - Straight permanent magnet.
Second use the Add magnetic regions - Rectangular region.
Third use the Add flux sources - Straight solenoid.
I am attaching my analysis of the Magnacoaster design. The only difference should be the removal of the bottom magnet and the width and strength of the magnet, cores and solenoid coils.
Regards, Larry
PS: Play with the parameters, use the help, enjoy, take your time and get back to us when you can see the general working of Art's setup. We can perfect it later.
Quote from: petersone on February 23, 2010, 07:07:29 PM
Hi Darkspeed
Thanks for your prompt reply,I like your sense of humor,so around 1khz would be ok,the welding rods you mention are gas rods? copper coated? don't they need to be coated with insulation before they are bundled?
peter
Dont mean to intrude on Larrys thread but i wanted to answer..
Thanks,
you can lay them out flat and spray them with bbq grill paint then wrap them with Kapton tape if you want to be safe
1khz at a limited power.. The more flux and or frequency of flux change the hotter they will get.
You can also use thin wall pipe or tubing as well.
http://www.airgas.com/browse/product.aspx?Msg=RecID&recIds=18853&WT.svl=18853
Quote from: darkspeed link=topic=8796.msg229838#msg229838 A=1266974517
Dont mean to intrude on Larrys thread but i wanted to answer..
Thanks,
you can lay them out flat and spray them with bbq grill paint then wrap them with Kapton tape if you want to be safe
1khz at a limited power.. The more flux and or frequency of flux change the hotter they will get.
You can also use thin wall pipe or tubing as well.
http://www.airgas.com/browse/product.aspx?Msg=RecID&recIds=18853&WT.svl=18853
@darkspeed,
Please don't worry about intruding on my thread, all who wish to help, please do so freely. Darkspeed, you have passed along some new knowledge (Kapton tape, bifilar relay solenoids) to me and others, as i"m sure we can all pass some knowledge that will help with this project.
@All,
Observations on the metal arc. Of course it has screws on top to secure it to the post, but it also has crossbolts along the side, which seem to indicate that it is composed of arc metal lamination's that are bolted together. Maybe sheet metal and coated or painted to prevent rust. Any other opinions?
Regards, Larry
Thanks Darkspeed
I done a few test today on the Art thing,nothing fancy,using mild steel,hence my questions,and it seems there is a gain to be had,if the distances,voltage,etc. are just right,as you said.My mags are crap,the steel is crap and the coil is crap,but in-spite of all that there seems to be something in it imho.I look forword to more of Larry's findings.I'll do some more tests and see if I can find something more definitive.
peter
Well if you get serious about it. the material you want to use is called Vimvar it has a sat. ind. of 21,500 gausses, it is made by Carpenter www.cartech.com it is a vacuum melt low carbon magnetic. You can get it in rod shape from Ed Fagan Inc. I have used it in pulse motors and it is great stuff..
Also if you wind your electromagnet with c-200 wire and use the tesla bifilar wind it will be much more efficient.
Hi Darkspeed
Thanks for your reply,it looks like the people you mention are in the US,I'm in the UK,may be a prob.I'll see if I can get it here,what is c-200 wire?
peter
Quote from: petersone on February 24, 2010, 07:54:55 AM
Hi Darkspeed
Thanks for your reply,it looks like the people you mention are in the US,I'm in the UK,may be a prob.I'll see if I can get it here,what is c-200 wire?
peter
it is a high build ( thick coating ) high temp magnet wire
http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_nkw=magnet+wire+200c (http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_nkw=magnet+wire+200c)
Quote from: petersone on February 24, 2010, 07:54:55 AM
Hi Darkspeed
Thanks for your reply,it looks like the people you mention are in the US,I'm in the UK,may be a prob.I'll see if I can get it here,what is c-200 wire?
peter
You can go to a metal supply in the UK and get iron stock and have it annealed ( in an oven ) to a "dead soft" condition and it will work as well.
Dont annealed it then machine it - machine it then anneal it!
On the left in the attached picture is some additional info on Art's motor. The Metal Arc's are 60 degrees and the poles are 45 degrees apart, same as the cores(not shown).
On the right is a stator from a induction pancake type ceiling fan motor. It is make of laminated motor steel and could be cut into six 60 degree section. This could be used to make Art's prototype or the armature shown in video no. 2.
Notice the different color metal on the top and bottom, but only half way across the thickness. It is part of the shorting bar of an induction motor. It needs to be chisled off (soft material) and grind down any remaining metal to stop the magnetic field it would create, as it is would pull against the cores.
After doing the pull test, I'm sure this motor would work as stated. It seems easier to build then the other mag switch motors. I still have some questions on the coil parameter. But before deciding to build, I'm going to do some test on a large possible induction gain.
If the secondary was shorted before the start of the pulse to eliminate the induction and decrease the time it takes to align the core. Then if opened before the end of the pulse to get maximum induction, a large back emf would be created. The back emf also support the magnetic field polarity. It could shorten the pulse time required. This back emf can be seen in reply 20 scope shot with the open secondary. It is falling until the next pulse starts.
Regards, Larry
Good observations Larry. I think if the motor works because of the amplification, and the extra/free force you get from that, the shape of the arcs or the poles are not critical. I think the shape in the motor is made to minimize cogging. But cogging should not be a reason why this motor shouldn't work.
I think you can make this motor just as you like if you use coils and magnets, and use triggers correctly. The main thing here is the (claimed) difference between input energy and amplified force.
As in any conventional electrical motor, the construction is rather made optimized to get most possible efficiency. However, regardless on how you make an electric motor, it will work just fine if the timing of the polarity swapping is within a given period. Going beyond this period, the motor will reverse. If hitting the "dead" spot, the motor will just consume energy, get warm, and do not rotate. Hitting the "right" spot, and the motor will run very well.
Vidar
@all,
Perhaps someone with extensive work with magnets can answer this:
I have been following this thread from start and believe it holds promise but my
only reservation is because the magnets are being pushed to the limit, is there
not the strong posibilty for them to demagnetise after operating this motor fo a
while.?
Wow!!!!
It's the first time I'm reading this thread, and need to say it's FANTASTIC!!!!!!!
This thing has exactly the principle that I was thinking about: using the electromagnet just as "switches", with almost all the power coming from the permanent magnets!!
No doubt OverUnity can be achieved with this approach. No doubt!
When we try do to a motor with only permanent magnets, we have the problem of the sticky point, but using weak electromagnets we can invert polarities and cause repulsion to destroy the sticky points...
OverUnity is waiting around the corner!
Quote from: MasterPlaster on February 26, 2010, 06:26:12 AM
@all,
Perhaps someone with extensive work with magnets can answer this:
I have been following this thread from start and believe it holds promise but my
only reservation is because the magnets are being pushed to the limit, is there
not the strong posibilty for them to demagnetise after operating this motor fo a
while.?
No,
This motor works as any other electric motor with magnets and electromagnets. Except it is configured different. The magnets are exposed to both opposite and equal electromagnetism as in a normal brushed or brushless electric motor. So the average magnetic exposure from the electromagnet is 0. The magnet will be slightly demagnetized at when exposed to opposite magnetism, but later slightly magnetized by equal magnetism. There is the timing of the polarity switch which make the rotation - as in a regular electric motor.
Vidar
There is one big problem people are over looking here and that is that this motor must produce enough energy to fire the coil. That energy must be gained between each firing point. Based on the design, that would mean that it will have to produce the energy needed in just a fraction of the rotation which would be impossible. You may be able to create perpetual motion at best but nothing more.
Here is a good test for those interested in this. Use a iron core and power the coil and read how much pull is created. Then figure out the percentage of pull gained and compare the gain to the percentage of gain when a magnet core is used.
I am betting you end up with more of a percentage gain with the iron core then you do with the magnet core. ;D
Quote from: Rapadura on February 26, 2010, 06:48:46 AM
Wow!!!!
It's the first time I'm reading this thread, and need to say it's FANTASTIC!!!!!!!
This thing has exactly the principle that I was thinking about: using the electromagnet just as "switches", with almost all the power coming from the permanent magnets!!
No doubt OverUnity can be achieved with this approach. No doubt!
When we try do to a motor with only permanent magnets, we have the problem of the sticky point, but using weak electromagnets we can invert polarities and cause repulsion to destroy the sticky points...
OverUnity is waiting around the corner!
don't be so sure.
resistances:
1. friction.
2. gravity
3. magnetism
4. nuclear force.
5. weak force.
6. electromagnetic force.
7. Static forces.
it would require a unification of energy and or forces to do such a thing. nobody has yet achieved this. I am not saying that it couldn't happen but what I am saying is nobody has went as far as only coupling just a couple of forces at most. you have to couple all forces into one action.
what I am saying is nobody has gone far enough!
In case you want to watch full screen,
instead of that size constrained box...
UPDATE:
This forum's new kernal doesn't recognise the extended ASCII characters in the eleven links I posted...
I yanked 'um for now until I can figure a workaround.
I am im possetion of all eleven and the SWF player,
I have them as a kit as backup, but the kit is 163-MB...
you mean this one?
Hi folks, the old hat notion of why cant i buy one if its real, is really getting old and its not working to well anymore since people are thinking for themselves more and more. Folks, whether your hired to debunk or not, your colors are becoming more and more obvious. I would choose wisely to support humanity and not the interests of the few. With that said, i will be testing a small model of this. Right now, what i find interesting is the fact that when i put my neo magnets at the back of my coil/core and pulse to repel against the stator permanent magnet it nullifies all attraction to a piece of steel at other end. I'm not quite sure why this occurs, though i am giving it thought. At first glance, one would think that the magnetic field set up by the electromagnet to repel/nullify the stator permanent magnets field within the core would still attract the steel piece at the other end, but that does not happen, the coil/core acts as if it has no magnetic field at all. The combined magnetic field of the coil and permanent magnet is canceled. As simple as this is, i never ran quite this exact experiment to notice it and i believe that Bill Muller was doing something similar, as in one of his videos he shows a permanent magnet with a steel ball bearing attached and he lets another steel ball bearing be quickly attracted to the other steel ball and the first ball bearing attracted is violently repelled. Just a few thoughts.
peace love light
Tyson ;) :)
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on February 26, 2010, 09:38:54 PM
'All forces' have not been netted in this persons demo and gross ratio after all forces have been accounted for. there is an error in his math by not using all netted forces in this demo. you can't net a force without netting all the forces, this is totally wrong and gives people the impression that it is that easy, it is not! I wish it was that easy and if it was there would be perpetual devices running all over the place even though there is not!
OK, I'm committing the same crime here...
By re-posting the reply...
Wow, dude,
But why in the world did you
quote me to cite social/forum issues?
You've always but right-up on all
the comments I have ever read,
perhaps you meant to quote
another person by mistake ?
All I provided was links with no opinion.
I've watched, your worth reasonable respect,
But I'm not part of the opposing discussion,
I'm a provider of reference links ONLY here.
Did I cross a boundary that
is new to cyber-futilism I don't know?
Oh, and this new forum "Update"
NOW can't use the extended ASCII
character to make vids 4-11 work...
I've tried like a zillion ways around it,
the video pack is only 163-MB,
but it is obvious I can't post it here.
No offense meant Edge for sure,
kinda don't get your reaction really.
For others, websites and data evaporate daily,
I download many forums daily as a defense,
(Not this one Stafan, hope that's not some new insult)
But I already downloaded the cores of gap-power.com
ONLY because I have learned data goes away eventually...
I may be on a balance beam on this,
I wage intellectual rights and property,
against loss of data period for all
that (It) was posted public...sue me.
More directly (As I want to participate)
I have three current running themes:
1 - Coils catch "Stuff" while fields collapse (Timing dependant)
2 - parallel path is prime application theory and proven
3 - Applying this to #1 yields off the charts possibilities !
OK, I just wanted to help with links and stuff,
I am now dragged into this opposition discusion
of beliefs that I see as no different in the first place!
This is not crap people, open your eyes!
Yup measurement (In vids) are also crap,
but that discovery even explains so anyway
SIMPLE fundamentals of observation.
Edge, your right in that they do not supply a secondary rotary plateau to run gauges from, but the straight-pull math IS CORRECT.
Both you an I are not dumb enough to fall for rotary to stationary axial measurements
I have tested parallel path variables, these forward looking statements are correct,
but yes your right, they are trying to apply them to rotary geometry.
Almost always a failure point...BUT,
replace that wheel with a section of a wheel (Lever),
and it makes sense what the thinking is, right?
his observations without judice
will yield faulty results and data.
Oh an I am on a hunt to find
(From 128 extended ASCII characters)
the correct value for "Space-Bar" for links.
I mean those that this forum (Software) engine will respect.
Meanwhile, in the interest of backing up
and not loosing "gap-power.com" to .GOV's.
Where can I supplant a 163-MB file,
without really short inactivity penalties?
OH, and would you (OnTheCuttingEdge)
please edit that post before you cannot.
Please remove my entire quote,
as it is faulty due to new forum issues.
I am going back and removing my post
(Until URL submissions are respected).
Maybe I'll host the twelve as archive,
but that would require the site's approval.
Sigh
OK, why can't I delete a double post here too?
Quote from: Groundloop on February 21, 2010, 12:06:36 PM
Here is one way to test this. Two identical coils on a soft iron core with
a magnet on. The core to the left is the output coil.
G.
Look's like this would make a great MEG just the way it is pulsed around 200Hz.
Testing has shown what Art states in his pull test are true, but it does not seem to have any advantage over a DC Permanent magnet motor (shown below). Let's consider it a 1/4 HP motor.
Comparable electromagnet only pull test:
Replace the magnets with metal arcs. The motor would still run, but the torque would be very low and could easily be stopped by hand.
Comparable magnets only pull test:
With the magnets in place and no power applied, the rotor would be hard to turn by hand.
Comparable magnet and electromagnet pull test (amplification):
With the magnets in place and power applied, the rotor would be impossible to stop by hand.
The nullification test does not apply because the rotor is almost all the way around and has tapered edges on the poles to reduce the magnetic lock-up effect.
The flux is being realigned or switched in both cases, but the DC PM motor has an advantage of a North to South pull connection thru the rotor.
So I will not attempt a replication. I'm normally trying to prove OU, but in this case it does not seem possible.
Regards, Larry
Larry,
Thank you for taking the time to investigate this and share your opinion.
Sure seemed like a good idea!
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 02, 2010, 11:03:59 PM
Larry,
Thank you for taking the time to investigate this and share your opinion.
Sure seemed like a good idea!
Chet
You're wellcome Chet. My fun is in the analysis and the building.
I've included another scope shot for those who still wish to build. The blue trace is showing the magnetic flux at the face of the core in amplification mode using a pulse gen. It is much greater than the Em only mode, but I still believe it is a common DC PM motor characteristic where torque varies with magnet strength.
This test used 18V at .5A at 84.75 Hz using transformer core. A solid iron core would be slower at switching and may explain the unusual design of Art's motor. Large diameter to allow time for switching and to reduce heating losses. With transformer cores the motor would only need two outside magnetic poles and multiple (4,6,8) metal arc's on the rotor to produce the same results.
Regards, Larry
Quote from: darkspeed on February 24, 2010, 02:22:40 PM
You can go to a metal supply in the UK and get iron stock and have it annealed ( in an oven ) to a "dead soft" condition and it will work as well.
Dont annealed it then machine it - machine it then anneal it!
@ Darkspeed, does Ed Fagan supply small orders of VimVar, as in 1" x 1" x 12"? Also where can you get small parts annealed? Thanx.
A much optimized version by the inventor. He states that overunity is achieved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig)
Quote from: hanon on September 27, 2014, 10:53:11 AM
A much optimized version by the inventor. He states that overunity is achieved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig)
"This video does not exist"?
Quote from: hanon on September 27, 2014, 10:53:11 AM
A much optimized version by the inventor. He states that overunity is achieved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKig)
Sorry, I copied the link badly.
This is the good link to the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKigs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnWuPzAKigs)
I can't believe this topic died in 2010 after Larry said he would not replicate it because OU were impossible with this design. AFAIK Art claimed OU already back then, so basicly he was called a liar. Also RWG, who pretty respectless dumped his halfhearted Replication officially into a dusty corner and said he would most likely never use it again.
Art Porter seemed to me one of the most trusty developers I have ever seen. But the point is, obviously none seems to understand why there is OU. People get exited by assuming it is the repulsion of the PM. How smart, Pulses, totally new...
Actually I think if you explain it to somebody, they even don't want to hear it.
Have you seen this? Art says his rotor might improve from magnets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxrJoGZy1to
Yes I have seen that. He's a talented guy, but like all others misses the point.
A rotational device hits the Lorentz force in a worst case scenario. No OU possible, no matter how much PMs you add. Actually you have to increase the neutralisation pulse accordingly, or linearly.
Speaking of linear, the piston design, Arts design, is unusual in that it hits most of the Lorentz force in a 90° angle. I think even Art is not aware of that.
Peace.
Ok, Russ / RWG has a new replication of the GAP, upped vid from 14. Dec., two weeks ago, looking pretty good!
I take back the "halfhearted" and "respectless". Promising stuff there. 1kV spikes... see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xOLm7uPIJU
Peace
Yes, that's impressive all right. You wouldn't want to get your fingers caught in there, would you.
If you are impressed by 1kV spikes from a switched inductor or a "magneto" type generator arrangement, please let me know, I have some things I can show you.
A little bump from me. :)
I just finished my old GAP-Power motor setup to include generator coils with a feedback loop.
Here is the schematic I will be using in testing.
More to come...
Quote from: kEhYo77 on May 15, 2017, 09:45:23 AM
A little bump from me. :)
I just finished my old GAP-Power motor setup to include generator coils with a feedback loop.
Here is the schematic I will be using in testing.
More to come...
KEhYo77,
Looks fantastic! Can't wait to see some P/I P/O measurements. High hopes for this design. Try placing "Piggyback" output coils around the magnet stacks! This will generate "Lenz Free" output through induction alone!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx7HOUJl2Ro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx7HOUJl2Ro)
You have got to see this quick test of mine!
Generator is a catcher of electromagnetic wind.
Quote from: Erfinder on June 09, 2017, 03:15:38 PM
I have a completely different opinion..... Forgive me for intruding....
I would like to hear your opinion though.
Quote from: kEhYo77 on May 15, 2017, 09:45:23 AM
A little bump from me. :)
I just finished my old GAP-Power motor setup to include generator coils with a feedback loop.
Here is the schematic I will be using in testing.
More to come...
hello
could you please tell me, how many turns do the coils have?
and about the magnets, could you please tell me how to place them in the coils. could you please explain a little?
and this unit you built is overunity?
thanks in adavance for your comments
regards
Quote from: Frank2025 on June 18, 2017, 10:54:51 PM
hello
could you please tell me, how many turns do the coils have?
and about the magnets, could you please tell me how to place them in the coils. could you please explain a little?
and this unit you built is overunity?
thanks in adavance for your comments
regards
Magnets are attached to the iron powder/magnetite cores by attraction.
Driving coils are bifilar in series and then two of them in parallel, using 0,8mm magnet wire. Just fill the bobbins up (common medical tape).
Nothing really special here (No OU), just a test bed for testing generator coils.
KehYo77
Sometime late last year a team went to help qualify Art's claim
there was an error found in the Duty cycle application [from the scope] to the output measurement.
pleas do not take my word for this
ask Art ,he is a good and honest fellow who sincerely believes in this quest.
respectfully
Chet
PS
I am having extreme difficulty reading and writing ATM [eye surgery issues]
I will not be available to discuss this here .
Greetings
It has been a long time since any advance of this engine has been written, or replicates that they have been realized.
I would like to know if anyone knows how this coil is built:
1.- what gauge of wire is used in its construction
2.- how many turns of wire does it have
I would appreciate if someone can inform
see you soon
Where does energy go from hysteresis losses? Into the warmth? :)
@Alextecmen,
It's all good! Art's coil looks around 30 gauge. (28-32)
Every magnet core coil shares the same features regardless of the copper wire gauge or number of turns:
The magnet reduces the coil's inductance. This allows the coil to switch on and off at a higher frequency. This causes the coil to draw more power and consequently raises the level of recoverable backspike.
Art Porter found that the ratio of magnet strength and coil inductance (Wire gauge and number of turns), and the frequency and strength of his A.C. input resulted in OU COP's of BEMF.
Anything will work depending on how you phase power to it. Ring frequency is the only factor that matters.
The amplitude of the AC input needs tp power the coil to an equal gauss of the magnet. The frequency of current reversal, timed to coincide with the Lenz reversal of the coil.
The coil inductance measured with the magnet inside the coil core will yield the correct SRF with the standard equation:
Quote from: synchro1 on October 16, 2020, 12:13:13 PM
The amplitude of the AC input needs tp power the coil to an equal gauss of the magnet. The frequency of current reversal, timed to coincide with the Lenz reversal of the coil.
The coil inductance measured with the magnet inside the coil core will yield the correct SRF with the standard equation:
OK, thank you, I found this information from
it is from another coil a little less long
will serve as orientation
What does the experimenter expect from this coil arrangement ?
Does he/she knows Keith Kenyons em-concept ?
The Angus-Motor ?
The Flynn Bros. magnetic coil arrangement, force amplifying/neutralizing ?!
Thomas Townsend Brown GB application his up to 1 Mio. times force out/eWatt in capacitive winding drive ?
Sanshiro Ogino s * basic factor * and effect ?
For higher mmf output = higher frequencies = higher RPM
Tesla Inc. cars with nominal 18000 (eight-ten thousands) RPM e-drives equipped
Based by T.T.Brown,Plauson,Imris : 2500 W continous force out/25 eWatt in possible ( as prototype realized )
It does not change much !
Sincerely
Here we have other data of the constructor
you look at your measurements, they seem pretty good to me.
But you have to experiment if this type of coil can really provide very good energy gain results.
Here are two questions, I can believe and I cannot believe
The tests and data that any source provide us must be validated, the safest way is to carry out the prototypes and test their operation.
Nothing costs to verify experimentally, if so desired, or required, everything according to our scope and possibilities
Art Porter's coil is designed to have an SRF of 60 cycles per second so he can run his 1500 watt lamp directly from the coil with no full wave bridge rectifier.
The control used by Art Porter is very expensive, it has a very high price.
There is one that knows a cheaper one and that can fulfill the same function of activating the relays.
Or if there is a scheme to build a simple control to activate the two relays. and at what frequency you have to operate them.
Thank you all for your comments and contributions
This is the way of working of the activation of the relays.
Cycle Description:
Step 1. Relay 1 is energized for 30 milliseconds.
Step 2. Relay 1 is de-energized for 10 milliseconds.
Step 3. Relay 2 is energized for 30 milliseconds.
Step 4. Relay 2 is de-energized for 10 milliseconds.
Returns to Step one and repeats as required.
This is the way of working of the activation of the relays.
24 VDC relay Dayton 5YP80
greetings to all
Continuing with this project and experimenting
I have 2 "x 0.7" magnets to test
I am going to carry out the project of the coil without movement, without moving parts, initially I am going to test with a coil that I have from a Bedini motor
So I will try different coils, any suggestions or comments welcome
Well I used the two opposite magnets in polarity with the coil, I fastened it with tape, or I was surprised to give it 24 v voltage, the top magnet shot out, with the luck that it did not hurt me and it was attached to a metal plate, I trust it is so strong momentum.
The coil applying the 24 volts consumes 3 amps, I am going to hold the magnets well to prevent it from flying off, I want to see how much energy I can have from the recoil of the cut of the emf.
I wanted to show you images but the page does not let me upload them, how much can I show them
I already tested the coil with opposing magnets, that is to say in the between the coil with equal polarity, the coil the core I have is a welding rod, when I put the magnets opposite to the coil core, the two were slightly attracted by core, I don't have the core that Mr Porter uses.
I held the magnets well to the coil so that they did not fly away, I applied 24 volts to it, manually, that is, I connect and disconnect the cable freely.
I put a car bulb, 1.5 amperes in series with a rectifier to use the recoil of the emf, but it did not turn on the bulb, then I put a 12 volt led bulb, and it turned on very bright when I cut the power, there it was back fem was present.
I'm going to have to get the nucleus that Art Porter proposes.
What if the great repulsion and force of the rejection of the magnets is present.
I was left with the desire to obtain energy and to turn on the car bulb, and it did not turn it on, only the 12 volt led
De que material propone Art Porter para el nucleo de la bobina?
@alextecman;
Quote from you:
"I wanted to show you images but the page does not let me upload them, how much can I show them".
Do you know the procedure to capture a screen shot? What kind of operating system are you using Mac or Windows.
Windows
Quote from: alextecmen on October 20, 2020, 04:00:37 PM
Windows
Press the
Windows key + Shift + S.
You can drag to select a portion of the
screen to
capture. The
screenshot will be copied to the clipboard, which you can paste into another program. May 18, 2020.
thanks synchro1 for the guidance
Magnetic
these are the magnets i am using
In this structure install the coil and magnets.
I have to improve some things to have the expected effects
I see that this experiment is no longer interesting to you, since they are in other experiments, but with your comments and information or guide that you provide I can improve it.
Thank you all
Returning to work, continuing with the prototype and project of the researcher Art Poster.
Change the coil for a larger one with thicker wire, this coil already had it, it is a bifilar coil, 20 gauge, the core is made of welding rods, they are a little outside the coil, I used it in other experiments , and remember that there it was saved, well I said I'm going to try this coil, to see what results I get.
Install and adjust the coil, make the relevant connections, to see the effect of the emf induction, connect a 12 volt, 21 watt car light, apply 24 volts DC.
The energization and shutdown of the coil was done manually, I connect and disconnect by touching and not touching one of the power cables.
Now if I already get a little but significant lighting in the focus, which indicates that I am moving forward.
The connection and disconnection of the energy to the coil, the faster it was done, the brighter the bulb, for now I don't have a relay, or a signal generator, I'll get them.
But I have an idea that I will use to connect and disconnect.
Now that I have more progress, I am going to build the coil to Art Porter's specs, and get her 3 "magnet.
If Mr. Art Porter obtained acceptable results, taking advantage of the magnetism in opposition, with the return of the fem. I think one can also make progress.
Art's coil is shaped to 1.5 to 1: I very carefully measured Unity with your kind of setup! I am using an Electromagnet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL7-60ZZa10 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL7-60ZZa10)
Take a look at the shape of this 640 pound force electromagnet. The core is a high perm material! This is the kind of force you need to balance the very high strength Neo disks you are using! This gets tricky because it's a W core. Poles on rim and center:
Thanks synchro1, for your information, the very interesting video, and the 640 pound force electromagnet can be used for the Art Porter generator, I think it would be super better
Well over here, continuing with the project, I gave myself the task of making a mechanized switch, for energizing and cutting power to the coil.
With enthusiasm and wanting to achieve better results, I took on the task of using a Rotate Drill Grinder, I adapted a plastic disc with a transformer sheet, sand it and cut to the size of the disc about 4 cm in diameter, like this It had a sheet traversal to the plastic circle that held the drill.
This small adaptation is simple but very meaningful for me, so I can switch the energy of the coil, and get the return of the emf, and energize the focus.
All installed and configured, I turn on the drill at its lowest speed, and manually make contact with the center of the sheet and the other wire on the periphery of the circle, and thus have the ignition and cut of the coil power.
The brightness of the focus is very good, let's say about 80% to 90% or more, since it depended on the good contact that was made in the rotor.
Check the amperage consumption in the direct coil with 24 volts, and it was 2.66 amperes, then checking the amperage consumption already in the coil's on and off operation, the amperage varied from 0.4 to 1.5 amps, and the brightness was variable Also, what I appreciated on occasions at 0.4 amperes had a good brightness, I also noticed that when I made more contact on the switch disk, and the speed was lowered, good brightness was obtained, that is to say, on occasions it had more speed of swchit, it did not obtain more brightness .
I increased the speed of the drill, and the bulb did not turn on much, that is, at a higher speed, the induction did not improve.
I built another disk, now with another conductive strip, the conductive strips were in the shape of a cross, that is, at every 90 degrees the coil would be connected to the energy.
With the new disk (every 90 degrees connection) the brightness, the light of the spotlight increased, much better.
I have managed to advance, and I still do not have the ideal, that is, that the work and the prototype with which I am improvising, is with coils that are not yet those specified by Art Porter, with core of welding rods, without relays, but all that helps me to advance and improve.
I will continue to advance and improve the materials of the prototype.
Thank you again synchro1 for your contribution, you can only provide the link of the electromagnet that you showed.
Friends continue with your projects experimenting and testing your ideas or replicas, good luck to all
Coil Popping https://youtu.be/azfxP9lBAao (https://youtu.be/azfxP9lBAao)
Thank you again synchro1 for your contribution, you can only provide the link of the electromagnet that you showed.
amazon.
Field effect transistor: (FET)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH7UW8MmC4c
The source and drain of the Mosfet connect the power to the coil. The gate is connected to a razor blade by magnet wire.
A ferrite ring is attracted to the Electromagnet and tethered to a rubber band. The ferrite is connected to the ground.
The gate sensitive razor blade detects the ground wire to the fe ring. This can attach anywhere to your coil to power the oscillation.
It is important to understand that the ferrite ring is attracted to the neo backing magnets on the Electro-magnet and that the pulse neutralizes the attraction. The "Pulling Away" of the ground connected ferrite ring from the gate blade triggers the pulse.
The test involves finding a location where the ferrite is attracted to the Electromagnet coil when the coil is energized.
The ferrite ring is attracted to the back spike. The power pulse neutralizes the neos then the back spike attracts in sympathy with the neo backing magnets.
This oscillator is powered by the backspike, and runs completely for free!
Here we see two coils. The electromagnet has backing magnets. The coil is connected to a second coil with a loop diode. The pulse sends the piston one way and the back spike attracts it back inside the second coil.
The throw would equal the throw on the ferrite ring: Sharing the same time interval.
Quote from: synchro1 on October 23, 2020, 10:54:20 AM
It is important to understand that the ferrite ring is attracted to the neo backing magnets on the Electro-magnet and that the pulse neutralizes the attraction. The "Pulling Away" of the ground connected ferrite ring from the gate blade triggers the pulse.
The test involves finding a location where the ferrite is attracted to the Electromagnet coil when the coil is energized.
The ferrite ring is attracted to the back spike. The power pulse neutralizes the neos then the back spike attracts in sympathy with the neo backing magnets.
This oscillator is powered by the backspike, and runs completely for free!
Very interesting, one looks for how to do things and improve them.
I remember in my high school studies, we made some relays, where the contacts were some car platinum, we used it as the contact material
I have new rotors to test with the drill, the contact strips that I have used is one, two in the shape of a cross (four contacts per revolution), I am going to make one with eight contacts per revolution, I am also going to get a solid core, and see the difference of induction. I think all that will improve
Thank you synchro1 for your information, let's keep working and building with the contributions that each one inform
The drill that I am using is like one of these at the lowest speed, I adjust the discs that I build and adapt to the shaft
Suspend a magnetic object by a rubber band over the top and see if you can get it to attract and jump while stretching with the power pulse.
Quote from: synchro1 on October 23, 2020, 03:43:24 PM
Suspend a magnetic object by a rubber band over the top and see if you can get it to attract and jump while stretching with the power pulse.
OK good as soon as I can I do it to see the effect of magnetism
Okay. Continuing with the work, I built or assembled another rotor with 8 strips of transformer plates, balanced them on a plastic cover, and then fastened it to the drill, as you can see in the image.
Apply 24 volts to the coil. and I have configured the 12 volt car light with a diode to take advantage of the energy from the back fem.
By rotating the disk with the drill, I manually make contact with the wires in the contact bars, and the light starts to turn on, with this rotor with more blades, I further improve the brightness of the light, and the consumption of the coil. It is variable.
What I observe that sometimes there is very good brightness and speed of the disk and current consumption about 1.5 amp, but it also happens that sometimes I do not have much speed (due to greater pressure that I make on the contacts), and I get very good brightness and low current draw 0.9 to .06 amp more or less. it means that you have to find the right pulse or operating frequency, just like Art Porter did.
Then change the source for another 24 volt but higher amperage, in vacuum gave 33 volts, and with this source I get more lighting, I have not tested the circuit with battery, but I will.
With this new source when the bulb had good lighting, the voltage dropped to 25 volts and amperage from 1.5 to 0.5 amps, and as I said it is variable because sometimes it has very good brightness and low consumption.
I will continue with changes, I am going to change the core rods and put a solid core on the coil, I ask you friends, will it improve the induction, I think so, I await your comments.
I'm going to buy a relay, I'm going to see how to make a signal generator.
What I have done is move forward, so that I can create the Art Porter prototype with its recommendations and characteristics, if it worked for Mr. Art Porter, it should also work for us.Thank you soonModify message
P channel Mosfet: This voltage gate controlled Field effect Transistor as a switch is much more sensitive then the current gate transistor. The proximity of the ground to the gate is a field effect that triggers the switch with no contact at very high frequency. This transistor will amplify the output a thousand times!
Fish for a flutter area in adjacency of the coil. Maybe a spacer between the magnet and coil will open an area that picks the field oscillation up. You only need a tiny area to self oscillate the coil at high frequency.
The load is between the ground and P channel MOSFET on the right; This is the correct configuration.
Thanks for the scheme synchro1
Returning to work, the core of the coil with which I was working were welding rods, I replaced it with a solid core, to see what changes would occur, perhaps increase the induction a little more.
A test that made the voltage increased more, to 60 volts, and the back fem force increased, as well as the consumption, it was to be expected, well that is normal, more voltage, more induction, but also more consumption, I wondered there is not the via, because it is about achieving more induction with less consumption.
Well, to test the prototype with a relay, I bought a 24-volt car, in order to activate it I used a dc motor speed control.
Testing a spotlight first to see flicker when you control it with cruise control.
Already connected with the coil and with the relay and speed control, and a bulb with a rectifier to take advantage of the induction of the back fem, the circuit came into operation, the brightness of the bulb was not what was expected, it was low, and the consumption high Around 2.3 amps, and increasing the control frequency did not get better results.
It must be taken into account that the frequency of the speed control and its waveform is not the most suitable, for this device, nor the car relay is also not the most suitable. but I wanted to try with a relay and with a signal, and that's what I could get for now.
It is seen how the shape of the signal and the frequency are important to improve the induction of this Art Porter device.
I did a test with the magnets in attraction, to see what happened, and the result was the induction was not adequate, the focus had a minimum light, with which it can be deduced that the opposition of the NN poles gives us a better contribution to induction back fem.
The strength of the neodymium magnets is tremendous when I was placing them on the coil, they get together and catch my fingers, which hurts me, I'm fine, but you have to be very careful.
With what I did today, I can conclude that you have to have the right relay, the right signal generator.
Although, on the other hand, I have obtained the best result using my 8-strip contact disc, I am going to improve that rotor, I believe that you can have good results already with the rotor well done with copper plates, with contact carbons, etc.
Tomorrow I'm going to try another coil, it has more turns and a thicker core, I'll see what improvements I can get.
Little by little I am learning more and experimenting more, I am also going to start acquiring the pieces of Mr. Art Porter's project, 3 "x 1/2" magnets, wire? , the dayton 5x852 relay, the most expensive is the 2601 control.
I appreciate your information and comments, as well as your contributions.
Just an FYI
Aaron Murakami did an interview with Paul Babcock and Paul gave a very simple recipe for an effective core material:
https://youtu.be/WXMWvloZBgQ?t=1045 (https://youtu.be/WXMWvloZBgQ?t=1045)
Aaron made a video documenting the core build process: https://youtu.be/kpHEyzvc4dY (https://youtu.be/kpHEyzvc4dY)
Paul is a Flyback guy (back emf), and so anyone experimenting as such should find Paul's teachings to be helpful.
Thanks, I already saw the first video, and if your experiments are very interesting and important, it guides us, when you comment when the power is cut, the collapsed field provides a very fast induction high voltage and little current, and shows us how He found a solution and how to use the back emf.
Just a question where is the engine you mentioned can be built, are there replicas?
I will continue watching the following videos, thank you.
Quote from: alextecmen on October 24, 2020, 10:56:48 PM
Just a question where is the engine you mentioned can be built, are there replicas?
Was that question for me?
What engine?
It is for those who have information about Mr. Paul Babcock's project
Something practical and prototype or a replica
Look at the Homemade Reed Switch in this video. One wire wrapped around an iron nail! (Collecting Backspike).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EThAfZ07YU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EThAfZ07YU)
Connecting one side of this spring wire Reed Switch to the ground and the other to the MOSFET gate would trigger the transister at proximity with no current passing between the electrodes.
All you need to do is fish for a position near the coil where the switch moves just a tiny bit; Much less flutter then you would need to run the contact switch with current!
A regular (Magnetic) Reed Switch coupled with a transistor or a Hall effect transistor combination would also furnish the coil with the oscillation; However, the MOSFET gate (ground voltage) sensitivity can't be beat!
Let me try and reemphasize the central point:
The neutralization pulse needs to trigger on the tail end of the field implosion; Not the high side!
That's why the P channel MOSFET with the ground retraction feature on the switch is needed! It tucks the pulse in.
This works just the opposite from a normal Magnetic Reed switch or Hall effect transistor where the high field strength does the trigger work.
The P switch delivers a retarded pulse phase that increases the BEMF window. I think the P option applies to the other switchs too. You have no way to control the pulse timing with your Dremal! The coil needs off time for output. The destination reverses and becomes the source. There can be no input while the coil is outputting power as the source. The only BEMF output available from the coil is inside the off time frame you allow the coil to output power as source. You are fighting the output.
The coil needs to be off more then on to generate BEMF power!
A Reed Switch (Ground to Gate) P channel MOSFET and Relay:
Gotoluc drives the ignition coil with a spark from a gator clip on a Neo magnet sphere. You can drive your magnet coil simply by jumping a spark off one of the magnets like Gotoluc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3OkDvmp_Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3OkDvmp_Y)
@alextechmen You should use a $2 arduino nano instead of this expensive controller.
Quote from: alextecmen on October 17, 2020, 09:48:51 PMThe control used by Art Porter is very expensive, it has a very high price.
There is one that knows a cheaper one and that can fulfill the same function of activating the relays.
Or if there is a scheme to build a simple control to activate the two relays. and at what frequency you have to operate them.
Thank you all for your comments and contributions
Quote from: synchro1 on October 25, 2020, 06:47:37 AM
The P switch delivers a retarded pulse phase that increases the BEMF window. I think the P option applies to the other switchs too. You have no way to control the pulse timing with your Dremal! The coil needs off time for output. The destination reverses and becomes the source. There can be no input while the coil is outputting power as the source. The only BEMF output available from the coil is inside the off time frame you allow the coil to output power as source. You are fighting the output.
The coil needs to be off more then on to generate BEMF power!
Agree, with my controller I am aware that it is not optimal as I mentioned, of course the field has to be interrupted, cut the current, and let the BEMF generate.
Mr. Art Porter mentions that the wave turn on should be 30 milliseconds, and the turn off 10 milliseconds, which gives about 25 hz, if I'm wrong, correct me.
In the test with the 8-strip machined rotor, when the connectors were pressed more and the speed of the disk slowed down, he got a good result, because, because it gave him more time to energize the coil and also gave him time to the quenching and induction of BEMF.
Let's do a test, I already did it, for example I make contact and energize the coil and hold for about 5 or 10 seconds, we have the magnetic field in the coil well formed, then I disconnect, I would expect the required induction to be generated, that the test bulb It will light up very well, but no, the bulb or a little lighting, no brightness, but because if I have a good field that was formed, and when it collapses it must induce very well.
Now let's continue with another test, I manually connect and disconnect the contacts quickly, now if I get a few flashes of light,
which indicates that you have to have a frequency and duty cycle in order to obtain the best BEMF induction, and of course not fight against the on and off cycle.
What I comment above is already known to all of you, most of you.
little by little I am going to incorporate the most optimal devices
:)
Quote from: GreaT on October 25, 2020, 02:52:10 PM
@alextechmen You should use a $2 arduino nano instead of this expensive controller.
If I have the arduinos, I'll see when I incorporate it,
I already have a circuit to make the generator with ic 555.
I have a pulse generator there, I hope to find it.
the proposal of
synchro1
(A Reed Switch (Ground to Gate) P channel MOSFET and Relay :)
It is also interesting
thanks for your contributions and proposals, comments and videos, so we continue to learn, inform and build
I changed the bifilar coil for a bigger one, more wire, 2020 turns, wire 23 and 26, I used them in a bedini motor.
The result was that I did not turn on the 12 volt car light, I put a 75 watt incandence light on it, and the coil was powered with 60 volts, and it turned on 1/3 of its illumination, plus resistance plus voltage to power generate the back fem, but the way is not there to increase the voltage, of course I still do not have the appropriate signal generator, but I wanted to experiment.
The task is to replicate Mr. Porter, in a functional and practical way. Is it possible? Are the results true?
Around here one tries to achieve it or obtain some good energy.
Has anyone of you tried it? I have achieved good results
As always, I appreciate your comments and contributions
here's the Arduino and a Hall effect sensor; this detects the magnetic field peak. the ground to gate p channel reed, the collapse.
the hall for top dead center power and the p channel for neutralization.
Okay. Thanks, I'll check it, but the arduino has to be programmed
Today I found the signal generator, I am going to have to adapt the power circuit to it, since I have it I can control the relay, or through transistors or mosfet, so I have some work, I want to try first in this way with the generator, and then I will do tests with what they have shared with me about the arduino control
Greetings
Continuing with the work, I got up early today to assemble the power system of the salts generator, since yesterday I went to buy the components, taking advantage of the time that I have free, since one stops working due to family tasks. In what he likes, to carry out his hobbies, experiment, make prototypes, good at research is coil, and we do it according to our disposition of material and economic resources, and to our knowledge, perhaps most do not have a laboratory, but If you have a lot of desire and talent to discover new alternative sources of energy or improve them, adapting them etc.
The coil power management device was simple, a BC558 transistor, two resistors, and a tip 41 transistor, and connection cables.
Once assembled and connected to the signal generator and the coil, and the 12 volt bulb (BEMF pick-up element), the signal generator was fed with 12 volts, and the power or output device 33 volts.
Once everything was in operation and I turned on the circuit, and as the frequency increased, the bulb began to shine at 130 hz, and its brightness improved by increasing it to 270 hz, more light was achieved in the bulb, but the duty began to increase. signal and much improved the brightness of the photo
Increasing the frequency gave an increase in brightness but going from one range to another, for example 270 hz, at 370 hz, the brightness was increased, but every 100 hz of increase the increase was less and less, that is, if it increased but but less.
I also tested with change in duty signal, the brightest range was obtained from 1.65% to 1.70%, at any frequency.
Increase the frequency to many cycles above 1khz and more, there almost no longer any perceptible changes in the brightness of the bulb, what if it is advantageous at high frequencies is to avoid the hiss or hum of the frequency.
In testing and making changes to other tests, the tip 41 transistor was damaged 3 times, in one because I turned on the coil without the capacitor bulb, and the BEMF struck the transistor.
I read applied voltage, amperage drawn by power element (magnetized coil).
The bulb is 12 volts, 21 Watts, in some of the readings 32.46 volts was applied, with a consumption of 0.52 amps which gives us 16.8 watts, the brightness of the bulb is at 90 or 95 of its total brightness.
By varying the frequency, duty had either an increase or decrease in current, increase or decrease in voltage, but in average terms, the 0.52 was the most repetitive.
Tomorrow if I have more time I will give you images of the reading.
I'm also going to try motfet transistors.
The coil used does not yet have the specifications that Mr. Art Porter proposes, I will make one according to your specifications, measurements, coil resistance, magnets, and the core.
From what I have commented, we welcome your comments and suggestions.
greetings to all
Today I made a change, the power transistor, the work that I showed previously was with the tip 41 transistor, and I replaced it with the tip 122.
Everything seemed that it would not have any change, but when moving the duty signal, the brightness of the bulb increased considerably.
When measuring the consumption increase, so the same in the voltage and amperage focus.
It is a matter of continuing to search and see which elements are more optimal for the best performance to generate more profit.
What if I have to make another coil, since the one I'm using has very little ohms, I need it to have more, in order to raise the BEMF voltage, a value closer to those proposed by Mr. Art Porter.
Continuing with the project
Build a circuit to use the IRF 540 mosfet, and see what happened.
And if it is better to use mosfet to switch signals, I obtain much better brightness, and at a lower operating frequency, as well as less current consumption, the duty signal cycle also varies.
I have been working with 24 volts output on the power. I'm going to try 36 volts, so if I'm going to make another coil, I need 28 ohms, for more induction voltage.
I appreciate your comments and suggestions.
today greetings
I worked on Mr. Art Porter's coil project, I increased the voltage:
38 volts with a consumption of 1.10
48 volts with a consumption of 1.32
and it was to be expected more voltage plus lighting, I try to keep consumption at 1.5 to 0.6 more or less.
By changing the duty signal I get a super bright one, but the consumption increases 2 amp to 3 amp.
In the image that I show you there is more brightness, but I realize that the camera does not capture as bright as I see.
For now I have been feeding it through DC power sources, the interesting thing would be to do it with the batteries and see the operation time, the consumption time and the battery charge, if the BEMF voltage increases the operation of the battery operating the signal circuit, power circuit, coil, focus, would be the most interesting.
Although I have made voltage and current readings, where I have doubts is the measurement of the amperage and voltage BEMF,
The readings of the parameters are done with the MS21O9A, the BEMF with the hook of the tester in alternating current, and the voltage in AC.
The commutation consumption of the direct coil in series with the ammeter.
Something important and that is what I have been working with a single switching of a single polarity, that is, that I only energize the coil in a single sense of the polarity of the voltage application (+, -), I have not worked at the same time the change of polarity (-, +), I think that if I work both directions of polarity of voltage applied to the coil would have a better result? Do you think so?
As I work with a signal generator and I only apply the signal to the power circuit, I have to find a circuit or a way to do how to reverse the polarity of the voltage applied to the coil. You have any circuit or suggestion friends.
Thank you for your attention
Art's BEMF output measurements were all through a Full wave bridge rectifier in D.C.
Thanks so is. synchro1
The measurement that I take is after the diode.
Since I'm not applying double polarity to the coil, that's why I don't have the other signal cycle, so I can use the full-wave diode bridge.
The application of double polarity to coil I have to solve it.
Something very interesting watching one of Art Porter's videos, he comments that the input power he applied to the coil consumes 9 amps, and he had a 7 amp fuse, (interesting). but the reading he made with his oscilloscope gave him consumption close to 7 amperes.
Today I will perform tests with the largest coil, it is bifilar, one of the cables is 23 gauge, with 30 ohms, the other is 26 gauge, since I have the generator and I can apply the signal well to them and alter the duty cycle, I will see the results.
I appreciate your contribution synchro1 , thank you
I did a test of placing the magnets in attraction on the coil, first take a reading of the magnets in repulsion:
Repulsion values: 36 volts, 1.45 amperes, frequency 239, work signal 1.52, spotlight with a lot of light.
Attraction values: 35 volts, 156 amps, frequency 239, work signal 1.52, spotlight with lots of light.
The displayed values vary according to the operating time.
It is seen that there is not a very significant change, since changing the field changes the values, but the most optimal values can be found by varying the frequency and the duty signal.
I think that if you work in fields of attraction of the magnets, you prevent them from heating up more, in addition to when the energy is applied according to the polarity, there will be repulsion, and the change of polarity will increase the attraction, of either of the two forms the induced field and the magnets are altered, for now I don't have the circuit to automatically apply the polarity to the coil.
In conclusion, from what was obtained, it is possible to work in the magnet attraction mode, as in the repulsion mode.
All my tests were in the attraction mode. Brad (Tinman) did some interesting magnet coil tests in attraction mode. His closely examined I/O results were identical to mine; Unity! I'm assuming you know of his videos?
How interesting what you comment synchro1
I will review the videos you comment
Continuing with the project, I tried with the larger coil and larger core, but I did not get the expected results, it is because the core is large and almost equal to the size of the 2 "magnet.
So I have to get larger diameter magnets
Here's his confirmation video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSODFYCqQH8&t=36s
working and making various configurations
with the coil.
Now use the coil to charge 2 batteries of 12 volts, connected in series 24 volts.
Apply 24 volts, and put some car lights on the battery.
What I can summarize for you that the maximum I could get was the following:
The consumption of the generating coil was always higher than that obtained in the coil as an inductor, for example if the coil consumed 1 amp. In the inductions of the coil, 0.9 amperes will be obtained, and the charge of the battery with the bulbs, was carried out, if the consumption of the bulbs was always lower for example. about 0.5 amperes, this is the only way to charge the battery, and if the bulbs were consumed more heavily, for example 1.5 amperes, the battery decreased the voltage and therefore the load, it is logical.
I made various configurations and it was not possible to obtain a greater inductance to be able to obtain more amperes and charge the battery more, that is, it was not possible to obtain more output watts, than what was applied to the input.
You are about to make another coil and try to get a higher output gain by using more magnets and more wire in the coil.
later I will put several magnets where I will show you the data obtained.
Adding magnets will increase the inductance and allow more power to fill the coil. This will result in increased output. Both Tinman's experiment along with mine (On Itzu's measurements) COP proved to equal Unity;
So more magnets, more power in and more power out: Unity!
yes, thank you. synchro1
It is when you want more induction in any generator, you increase the magnetism, more number of magnets and poles to produce energy, and you also increase the coils, everything is related.
Now there is something important, as Joshep Newman said, he increased the gauge of the wire to obtain more induction as well, and thus handle less current, but he obtained great inductance for the coil so large that he built, applying a small current to it, but since it had a large mass of wire, produced a large magnetic field.
Well, there are many things that can be combined and seek to have a better efficiency in obtaining energy.