Hi,
First I must say: I do not claim overunity in this post - the following experiment must be examined further to determind what the practical outcome will be!
I have played a bit with FEMM again. So I came up with an idea that is based on radially magnetized ring magnets. But in this model I will show you two half magnet rings which is magnetized radially opposite of each other and attached together as a normal ring. This magnet is from now on called "rotor". There are 8 pairs of round piston magnets magnetized through diameter. These are the stators, and might be made simpler or as single magnets.
I played a bit with stator magnets around this rotor, and came up with something that appears to make it possible to shift polarity of the statormagnets without adding energy. The stator magnets are paired and linked with a gear - if one rotate, the other counter rotates. Each pair points in the same direction except at the point of the rotor where the polarity shifts. At this point the present stator magnet pair do not contribute with torque. So it is convenient to rotate these stator magnets 180 degrees at that point, as there is (Probably) no forces that will prevent them to rotate and shift polarity. The net force required to do this appears therefor to be zero at this point. As the rotormagnet continues, the recent rotated statormagnets are locked by a track as all the other stator magnets are to maintain their position untill polarity swap occours again.
At the point of polarity swap, the statormagnets will suffer from counter force the first 90 A due to the polarity of the rotormagnet at this pont, but the next 90 A will ofcourse make up to it, so the net force, or energy, required to swap polarity is probably zero.
If this is true, this model at 40cm in diameter (rotor) and 10cm deep, N40 magnets all over, have an average torque of 85Nm according to the simulations. All torque measurements are on the same side of the scale.
Attached there is a FEMM file to play with, and a picture to show you the idea.
Just be sure to swap the polarity of the statormagnets that is in the area of the polarity swap in the rotor.
The iron ring around it all is present to minimize simulation error due to limited simulation space available. I could increase the simulation space to infinit, but then it would take infinite of time to simulate...
Enjoy, and please take notes and comments to this idea. I cannot see the flaw (if present), so please be honest and critical ;)
Looks complicated... But this "rotor" can realy rotate?
The rotor is the solid ring. As the ring rotates the stator pairs will not follow around, but rotate separately 180 degrees when the point in ring, where polarity are swapped, passes by. All magnets in the ring are fixed or glued to a plastic tube. And that tube can rotate inside the stator magnets.
I'll try to make an animation.
Here is three pictures showing the polarity swap of the stator magnets. Too much fuzz in making an animation.
PS! For those with open eyes, the rotation of the stator magnets are wrong (Opposite) in the drawing, but I didn't mind doing anything about it. It should however not make any difference in total.
Vidar
What is the force that makes the rotor (ring) magnet rotate? Magnetic attraction? Magnetic repulsion? An external force? ???
Sorry, my brain is not good interpreting complex drawings.
[A author=Rapadura link=topic=8999.msg236251#msg236251 date=1270416415]
What is the force that makes the rotor (ring) magnet rotate? Magnetic attraction? Magnetic repulsion? An external force? ???
Sorry, my brain is not good interpreting complex drawings.
[/quote]There is the stator magnets that pulls and push the rotor around - both attraction and repulsion- , but these stator magnets needs to swap polarity where the ringmagnet have a change in polarity (Which is present at two places 180 degrees apart) - in order to be in the correct mode for maintaining torque in the rotor.
I am performing a (Time consuming) calculation of torque in both the rotor and the statormagnets when they swap polarity. In the calculations, I have choosed to spend 30 degrees of the revolution to swap polarity, and let 15 degrees have no change (As there are 45 degrees (30 + 15) between each stator pair). I will be finished tomorrow. It looks like the result is closing to zero as the calculations are dangerously proving that there is a major counterforce in swapping polarity, but we'll se tomorrow. It's late.
Vidar
Your calculation is going towards 0 eh? That's too bad. It always is both depressing and a valued lesson to see how nature is always going to find a way to stop us! Haha. I do enjoy your extremely creative and though-provoking ideas though Vidar! Keep it up. ;D
The rotor alone have an average of approx 900Nm. Half way in polarity swap requires in average 90Nm countertorque. But then the countertorque seems to explode.... I do not look forward to do the remaning calculations...
900 N/M approximately equal 900 kW - electrical power/hour - which magnet diameter do your mind?
Well,
I am finished with the calculations. The result is promising, if I have done it right.
Method:
The polarity swap of the stators repeats every 45 degrees rotation of the rotor.
30 degrees of these are used to gradually swap stator polarity by 180 degrees, where:
Average rotor torque during this operation = 523Nm
Average stator torque during this operation = -322Nm (Both pairs are accounted for)
15 degrees is pure rotor torque with no counter torque:
Average rotor torque during these 15 degrees = 1017Nm
So the average torque is then:
[(15 x 1017Nm) + (30 x [523Nm - 322Nm])] / 45 = 473Nm
The question is then how the torque of the statormagnets are calculated. They should probably be a great deal higher as there is a gear ratio that I have not taken into account yet - between the stator magnets and the rotor.
I will try to calculate this later.
For now I will live in the hope of OU for a while ;D
Vidar
calculate every 0.25 degrease of rotor (1.25 - stator) - by 180 et all - and suffisiant.
[A author=jonifer link=topic=8999.msg236370#msg236370 date=1270481819]
calculate every 0.25 degrease of rotor (1.25 - stator) - by 180 et all - and suffisiant.
[/quote]Maybe that will change it all. What about possible gear ratio? Or does that not have anything to do with it as long I have used torque as measurements for all parts?
Lets say the counter torque of 322Nm for 66,67% of the measurement period should be scaled up due to gear ratio. I will check this right away. Because the rotor use 30 degrees to rotate the stator 180 degrees. That is a gear ratio of 6:1.
322 x 6 = 1932
1932Nm countertorque spread on 66.67% of the period does in average 1288Nm.....
2 seconds (or days)....I will check this out.
Vidar
Dooms day for my little idea:
I calculated the energy spent to do the operations.
Within 45 degrees the rotor provides about 2kJ
Within 180 degrees the stators takes about 2kJ
So I have learned a lesson: Do not base ideas on torque only. It is the torque pr. distance that matters - energy!
I'm mad, but not surprised. I will recover soon ;D
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on April 06, 2010, 09:26:50 AM
Dooms day for my little idea:
I calculated the energy spent to do the operations.
Within 45 degrees the rotor provides about 2kJ
Within 180 degrees the stators takes about 2kJ
So I have learned a lesson: Do not base ideas on torque only. It is the torque pr. distance that matters - energy!
I'm mad, but not surprised. I will recover soon ;D
Vidar
We learn from our failures. You have the right attitude though. Keep it up! ;D
Hi Low-Q and all you other guys dedicated into the intriguing task of harnessing the forces of the permanent magnet,
as a newborn member on this inspiring site I will first of all declare my deep devotion into the mystery of magnets and the
possible ways to create torque.
Now I really hope I'm not sounding patronizing, but after having studied several different approaches to create torque
in magnetic motors, they all seem to fail due to a common error in understanding the interaction of magnetic fields.
I am fairly convinced that no matter how the configuration is done, nothing will ever be gained as long as both poles
of the magnet are exposing their fields into the electromagnetic three dimesional surrounding.
As far as I understand, the crucial key is how to hide part of the magnetic field geometry trough effective shielding,
thereby gaining the necessary direction of force vector.
Otherwise it all evens out, no matter how intricate the interaction of magnetic fields is incorporated in a model.
Today the possibilities to shape, shield, hide or rearrange the geometry of the magnetic field is greatly enhanced
by the combination of new materials like pyrolytic graphite in combination with multilayers of soft iron shields and bismuth.
So my advice is to incorporate a discriminative shielding in a direction that enhances the desired torque vector.
This would certainly work just as well on a modified version of your 180 degree radially swapped motor,
as on for example a simple Perendev-type.
I am personally now initiating a series of tests in the art of shielding and reshaping magnetic field geometry, and will
keep you informed of my progress if anybody is interested.
Let,s solve the magnet riddle, it's the cleanest energy there is, and additionally it will free humanity from the grip of authority.
Gwandau
@Gwandau: first, welcome. I hope you can help people in this website to achieve the so dreamed perpetual motion.
Well, I think the problem with magnets is precisely the fact that magnets attract things in all directions. The fact that the attraction force is omnidirectional is the big problem.
If a magnet could only attract things positioned to its left side, and don't attract things at its right side, all our problems were solved. In that case, the magnet could attract a ball attached to the end of a rod wich has the other end fixed to a center of rotation, in such a manner that the ball could easily pass along the magnet and continue its rotation.
The big problem is that we don't have a magnet with unidirectional attraction force. I think you're right to suggest the use of magnet shielding. I don't know if magnetic shielding can give to us a "unidirectional attraction magnet" someday, but I think it is worth trying.
Thanks for the Welcome, Rapadura
My initial experience of this forum is positive, it's a friendly forum, which is the basis for creativity.
We will for certain achieve harnessing the magnetic energy, I can´t see why not. We have all the means.
Please read my comment in the "Magnetic Shielding" topic, and you may understand my optimism.
Simplicity and methodical constructive planning, and we will have this one!
Gwandau
Simply modelling you ideas in seriosly FEM software - and understand some mistake.
http://www.arnoldmagnetics.com/mtc/fea_bea_software.htm