Here is code for the Falstad sim. 

If you right click the background of the circuit screen, select/drag option will allow you to exchange the batteries to see what Im saying. The circuit works in both situations.

The first battery in the circuit when you import the code is Larskos first circuit.
The battery to the right not in the circuit is his second version. I made the batteries 1.2v for rechargeable.

Why would he change it if it works either way? Of course the polarity of the fields would change also. So is it N or S now?

The only other differences would be that the first circuit does produce true BEMF(Reverse Electro Motive Force) and charges back to the battery, but the second version only produces normal collapse current, just more continued forward emf, like in switching power supplies, and only drains the battery.


If the scope shots for both batteries do not show in the import, just right click the batteries and select scope.  Then right click the scope shot and select Show Power Consumed  and Show Negative Peak Value.

Sometimes the scope shots dont always arrive in the code. 

http://falstad.com/circuit/

$ 1 4.9999999999999996E-6 10.20027730826997 50 5.0 50
l 304 128 304 176 0 1.0 -1.291725244562808E-20
r 304 256 304 304 0 5.0
v 304 176 304 256 0 0 40.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 304 128 208 128 0
w 304 304 208 304 0
s 208 128 208 304 0 1 true
w 304 128 384 144 0
v 544 272 544 192 0 0 40.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 384 288 304 304 0
162 384 144 384 288 1 2.1024259 1.0 0.0 0.0
o 2 64 1 291 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 0 -1
o 7 64 1 291 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 1 -1


Now, which circuit would you rather build? The power sucker(Larskos last circuit presentation) or the first one?  ;]

I just dont get what is going on with that guy.   The first one works.  Some out there may be looking at the circuit and assuming actual BEMF isnt occurring so the led couldnt possibly be lighting. But it does either way. So maybe Larsko looked at it that way also. But he built the thing. He knows the polarity of the battery. He could have just as well on the second circuit just reversed the led's and gotten a good result.

I think the sim circuit shows it quite clearly.

Like I said, something is weird  here as to what is really going on. Larsko has produced a lot of vids, he knows what he is doing.

Mags

One more thing. All this show and tell, yet he hasnt ripped the top off of one of those coils yet to show the battery inside.  Maybe it is taking him this long to actually build the hollowed out coil/bolt and nut. lol After the fact, if you know what I mean.

Mags dont buy any of it.

At 1:54, he holds up the AA battery. The coil assembly does not look tall enough to contain an AA battery.

http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I

I just posted on his YT ch and asked a few questions. He really needs to clear this up.

Mags

Hi Ben,
nice to see you back experimenting.

What would happen, if you used IRON wire for the coils ?
Then the magnets would be attracted to the coils on its own
attraction and generate already induction which you could store via a diode in
a cap and when the magnets will be Top Dead Center you could
use the stored cap energy to pulse some additional copper coils around the iron coils
to get the magnets to escape from the iron wire attraction.

I guess it will only work something like this, if at all...


Regards, Stefan.