FEMM simulation showing COP 3 and 7

[broli]

Doesn't keeping elements stationary when forces are present also consume energy?

Work or energy is the integral of force over a path. If you don't move at all then there's no work being done.

[Low-Q]

In short: Consider all MOVING parts when calculating the energy.

VERY IMPORTANT WHEN USING FEMM!!
What really bugs FEMM some times are the "working space". I FEMM you have to determine a working space where you can put your experiment inside. The smaller this space are compared to the object being experimented with, the more inaccurate the readings are.

I do allways place a toroide of steel around the experiment, just to make sure most magnetic fields are taken into account. If not doing so, FEMM will "hide" some magnetic flux "outside" the working space from the equation when calculating forces, and therefor the results will not sum up correctly. You end up in sometimes considerably more output than input.

So, broli, try to either increase the working space considerably (which takes more proccessing time), or add a thick toroidal steel core around the experiment. Add a space of "Air" outside the toroide also. Now your results, if taken into account ALL moving parts, ALL in its respectively directions, you will probably end up in COP 1.

Because, a magnetic force, provided by a magnet, will ALLWAYS attract to the steel just as much as the steel are attracted to the magnet - they are both in the same boat, so to speak. Therfor magnetism, just as gravity, cannot be used as a source of energy. Both are conservative forces. A force isn't energy.

Vidar

[broli]

In short: Consider all MOVING parts when calculating the energy.

VERY IMPORTANT WHEN USING FEMM!!
What really bugs FEMM some times are the "working space". I FEMM you have to determine a working space where you can put your experiment inside. The smaller this space are compared to the object being experimented with, the more inaccurate the readings are.

I do allways place a toroide of steel around the experiment, just to make sure most magnetic fields are taken into account. If not doing so, FEMM will "hide" some magnetic flux "outside" the working space from the equation when calculating forces, and therefor the results will not sum up correctly. You end up in sometimes considerably more output than input.

So, broli, try to either increase the working space considerably (which takes more proccessing time), or add a thick toroidal steel core around the experiment. Add a space of "Air" outside the toroide also. Now your results, if taken into account ALL moving parts, ALL in its respectively directions, you will probably end up in COP 1.

Because, a magnetic force, provided by a magnet, will ALLWAYS attract to the steel just as much as the steel are attracted to the magnet - they are both in the same boat, so to speak. Therfor magnetism, just as gravity, cannot be used as a source of energy. Both are conservative forces. A force isn't energy.

Vidar

This depends on your boundary conditions. I've used the mixed BC just like in that famous FEMM tutorial, 1/uo*R*mm where R is the radius of the boundary in mm. The calculation of force is quite far from this boundary especially for the magnets. You can actually see the paths for the force calculation.

And again calculating force or "work" on a stationary object is meaningless. I have no clue why this is even mentioned.

The simulation files have been posted, if you think there's something wrong with it I'd like to see your "corrected" results. It's easy to criticize, but contributing is something else.

[Omnibus]

@Low-Q, restrain from offering advise on matters you have limited or no understanding. @broli's calculations are correct, the efficiency (not COP) is indeed greater than 1 and it is supported by experiment. The problem is that the OU is so low (as low, if not lower, as in most of the studied constructions) that even the best workmanship would hardly end up
in a working device. Some new concept, a real breakthrough is needed which would bring about greater OU needed for making a real working device.

[exnihiloest]

...
This is not your forum, this is not a public place and your opinion is meaningless.
...
If you keep ignoring the polite request I'll ask for moderation of this thread and shut your anti progressive negative bullshit by force.

Therefore I presume overunity.com is Broli's forum!  . Your request was not "polite" but insulting. Keep cool, guy.
Femm uses the laws of physics to modelize the systems. Thus if COPs>1 appear, they are software bugs (like with wm2d or ltspice, it is easy to build perpetual machines). Otherwise there is a hidden energy source which has to be identified. This forum is devoted to free energy in real life not in pious image.
We see in this thread useless designs with comments not supported by facts and observations, not even by theory, but very pretty cartoons (I don't deny the artistic side  ). It is the interest of experimenters to know it and not to waste time in cartoons with no future because based on flaws. One can have a different opinion, I respect different opinions, they must all be expressed, but mine too. May be you are not from a country of free speech. You should learn what it is.