New permanent magnet motor on youtube from Roobert33

[maw2432]

@ Clanzer   

Nice work... Looks like you have most of the Kinks worked out with the cam.   I am looking forward to seeing your replication with the stator magnets installed.

Take a look at Clanzer's latest video.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/showthread.php?527-Flexible-V-Track/page2

  Bill

[Omnibus]

Can't see it on the iPad, unfortunately.

[tbird]

back to the subject ....

"New permanent magnet motor on youtube from Roobert33"

REPLY 399

hi,

this is for you "mechanically inclined" to tell this "mechanically challenged" guy if he is right or wrong.

thanks!

tom

from the lack of replies, i guess i have a "communication challenge" too.  i think i see where it is.

the statement about adding a push rod.....
of course segment b has to be changed a bit.  it would really be a cam with a 1 unit rise (lobe).  the lobe would push the rod (as the shaft turned) which would then raise the stator magnet assy.  the dwell on the cam would dictate how long the assy. stayed raised, just as the height of the lobe would dictate how high.

the low point/s of this cam would be the shaft surface.  if the low point/s were 1 unit higher than the shaft, you would have a longer circumference.  of course now the high point would be 2 units from the shaft surface and make a 5 to 2 ratio.

anybody still on topic, please jump in.

tom

[maw2432]

back to the subject ....

"New permanent magnet motor on youtube from Roobert33"

REPLY 399

from the lack of replies, i guess i have a "communication challenge" too.  i think i see where it is.

the statement about adding a push rod.....
of course segment b has to be changed a bit.  it would really be a cam with a 1 unit rise (lobe).  the lobe would push the rod (as the shaft turned) which would then raise the stator magnet assy.  the dwell on the cam would dictate how long the assy. stayed raised, just as the height of the lobe would dictate how high.

the low point/s of this cam would be the shaft surface.  if the low point/s were 1 unit higher than the shaft, you would have a longer circumference.  of course now the high point would be 2 units from the shaft surface and make a 5 to 2 ratio.

anybody still on topic, please jump in.

tom

Tom,  it looks like your are on track with making use of better leverage.  The problem that I see with the cam being significanty closer to the shaft is that it makes it more difficult to make adjustments.
There may be other ways to use leverage.  I will see if I can make a mock-up and show you what I mean. 

Bill

[neptune]

@tbird re cam . Here is my opinion . Suppose that due to the requirements of the system , the total lifting has to happen during 10degrees of shaft rotion . To achieve this with a smaller cam , the lobe or ramp on the cam needs to be much steeper and shorter . with the big cam the ramp is longer and less steep . The amount of work done is the same in both cases and happens in the same amount of time . Imagine biking up two hills . Both are 100 metres high . one is short and steep , the other is longer and more gradual . Both have to be climbed in the same length of time . The amount of work done is about the same in each case . That is my gut feeling .