Bep's MRM

[BEP]

I'm cluttering Butch's thread so I'm moving this concept here. Attached is the document posted before. Any more of my comments and discussion on this idea will be held here.

To recap:

BEP

Quote from: lumen on November 02, 2008, 19:15:50
It is like every line of force that is used to do work requires the same work to remove it. All the tests I have ever made using magnets as a source of energy always balance in the end.

I really thought this may have been the one that was different but I am sorry to say crap!

If anyone else has had any better luck I would like to hear about it cause I hate it when things don;t work as planned.
(and I don;t like being a fun wrecker)


@lumen

Your results match mine. However, these results are needed for the idea I’m pursuing.

From already discussed: If using a coil as the source the flux varies only very slightly from expanded to compressed washers. I say ‘washers’ but I’ve done very few experiments with them.

My experiments are with laminations with increasing gaps. Some will call them SMOT ramps but they are not toys. Not only do the washers try to separate but the magnets will move to the separations they are trying to create.
Since there is very little difference in flux density between compressed and spaced there is very little drag created at the point where the gaps are greatest and where they are suddenly compressed.

The simplest form would be similar to a rail-gun but the rail is not a rail with sequentially pulsed magnets. The projectile would be the magnets with flux passing through the rail. The rail would be multiple short sections of laminations. At one end the laminations would be compressed. The gap between laminations would increase like an opening Geisha fan.

The projectile will seek the widest point, within limits. The trick then is an old electric motor trick. If the rotor has an odd number of poles then the stator needs to have an even number of poles.

All you need is enough projectiles/magnetic points, with the correct spacing between them, and they will keep moving.

My idea is basically three fixed points 0, 120 and 240 as stator. A 20 section rotor. Each section is pie shaped and the wide end varies in gap between the layers. I'm on the road again now but was well into assembling the rotor sections. I'm using only two dognut shaped magnets. One around the rotor shaft on each of the two faces. The stator sections are roughly 'C' shaped making magnetic connection from the face of the donut magnets to the outer diameter of the rotor.

When complete at the point where one rotor section is leaving maximum spread there will always be two points where the flux is trying to reach maximum spread.

I've done it again Sad   No real documentation. Before you throw this idea out consider it.

The use of this spreading is not over yet  Wink
   
--------- when is said pie shaped I mean as in a slice of pie or radial section
--------- rather than take my words as gospel try a C-shaped magnet over fanned strips of iron.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2008, 21:50:11 by BEP »    Report to moderator   216.48.42.18

« Reply #314 on: November 03, 2008, 05:36:08 »
   Reply with quoteQuote
Thought about it over night....

I'm teaching a 2 week class far from my bench. No fancy software on this idiot box but I'll sketch something and send a photo later tonight.
   Report to moderator   216.48.42.18

« Reply #315 on: November 03, 2008, 21:33:45 »
   Reply with quoteQuote
Ok.

I borrowed an AutoSketch machine and scribbled the idea. Believe me when I say having the net result as zero is a good thing.

There is a reason why I am using a 1/2 inch shaft. Not only because those were the only parts I had left from another mag motor.

You can put simple coils in the stator sections to aid in gap adjustment (set for minimal variation and balance between the three dual stator sections.

A separate magnet on each side is required so there is additional torque generated where the opposite stators meet.
The sketch does not show the current state of my experiment. Mine has adjustment screws for adjusting rotor/stator and stator/magnet gaps. Balancing the three major sections is difficult. If one has a large difference it may take most or none of the magnetic flux.

Good luck. Don't waste your time with a simulator unless it is true 3D.

« Reply #316 on: November 04, 2008, 21:46:08 »
   Reply with quoteQuote
Due to some PM'd questions, I'll answer here:

Rotor construction: Qty 6, roughly C shaped laminations of the same metal as the rotor. Metal used is .26mm thick - measured.

"Orientation of laminations should be same as rotor sections!" - WRONG. In a conventional motor, yes. Not here.

No, I haven't measured the magnet's strength.

Q. "Half inch bearings and shaft? Are you kidding?"
A. NO. I only expect a maximum unloaded RPM of 462 but there are strong stresses already. I always overbuild. If it can't turn the bearings and shaft I'm not interested in it.

Q. "A separate magnet on each side is required so there is additional torque generated where the opposite stators meet. - Are your stators rotating?"

A. No, They are STATORS. Two separate flux - one from each magnet, meet to continue through the rotor sections. In the middle between the two pie-slice-shaped rotor sections (one on either face of the overall rotor) these two flux repel each other. This aids in the flux seeking a wider gap and in smoothing any remaining sticky points.

lumen

« Reply #317 on: November 05, 2008, 08:59:43 »

@BEP


I have my own CNC machines so it's possible for me to build virtually any prototype design. In the past I found it much easier to only build enough to test the operating principal. This usually indicates the problem and even lets you do some "what if " testing to find a modified condition which may improve possibilities of any gain in energy.

So far it looks like anything that depends on the changing magnitude of the field will always require the same energy in the opposite move to reduce the field.

At this point it looks like a moving field with a constant magnitude may be the only possibility.



BEP

« Reply #318 on: November 05, 2008, 11:56:32 »

Constant magnitude but no movement radially. The only movement I want is the (forgive me purists) expansion and compression of the field lines in the axial direction at each stator/rotor point.

I'm past the concept stage. The only problem is the increase in flux during expansion with side leakage. Those should be addressed with this design. A slight ramp in the radial dimension of each section should handle this along with create some attraction to the next section. The key is the expansion/contraction must be the same axis as the shaft.
I only used the CNC to build a mock-up of the supporting structures.

[molux]

Hello Sir,

I'ts a good things to do an other thread for your concept
I don't see your .pdf on the original thread of Butch LaFond

I don't understand all on the first reading but my english is not good, i have to read it another time slowly
I'lll write my opinion here when i understand what you say

Have good day

Molux

[BEP]

Reworking some mechanical aspects of this thing due to soft-foot and balance problems. I will update the CAD files and post as PDF when possible.

Cheers!