MEMM

[PaulLowrance]

Hi,
I read the messages in this forum and then tried to reply, but everything went dead. Found out that my system suddenly got 9 viruses, lol. Anyhow, everything's reinstalled and back online, finally. :-)

You guys are beyond me in electronics. For now I just use a breadboard, sort of like plug and pray.  Looking forward to seeing kingrs results. I'm still designing the circuit for the 1 uW iron transformer. This is turning out to be real fun.

mramos,

I understand, getting a car for your oldest has high priority. If you have some silicon iron U-cores around then perhaps you could replicate Naudin's iron version. I'm predicting that _if_ the input power could be lowered to a few microwatts that you could create a self-running machine. Efficiently working with a few microwatts could be tricky. I believe you can actually see a lit microwatt LED in complete darkness. Just need to allow your eyes to adjust. Hey, it will be the first freely published self-running machine, lol. From that point there's no place to go but up and next thing you know you'll be in the kilowatts.


Regards,
Paul Lowrance

[MeggerMan]

Hi Paul,
I was wondering why you were quite.

Status:
I have ordered up a 30v 2.5A  variable bench power supply to feed the pulse circuit.
I plan to drive the pulse circuit from 12V and the MOSFETS from the variable supply up to 25V.
This way I can prevent damage to the gate of the MOSFET and keep the chip consumption out of the power input equation, albiet, a small power draw.

My AMCC-320 core has been dispatched now.
I need to order some TL494CN chips and some heavy duty resistors, I think I have most of the other components.
Started on the PCB design for the circuit using Eagle, not sure about the placement of the MOSFETS though.

Hi MrAmos,

I used to have a panasonic KXP4420 laser, a few years back, cost me a small fortune 600GBP ($1000).
Now I have a cheap Samsung ML1510.
Works very well.

Regards

Rob

[PaulLowrance]

kingrs,

That's much better than the power supply I yanked from an old PC. It gives 30A @ 5V and 15A at 12V. It's not very good for noise and stability. They must use cheap regulators or something. When I need to keep the noise down I use batteries and various size caps across the source.

Paul Lowrance

[PaulLowrance]

Hi,

Someone from the MEG_Builder group asked me some questions. I thought it might help people to better understand the MCE process of collecting electrical energy. -->

-----------
There are several methods. Method #1 is the easiest. Normally MCE (magnetocaloric effect) heats up, cools down, etc. In electrical conductors such as iron and Metglas a lot of the MCE energy goes to micro eddy current bursts. Normally the eddy currents dissipate all the energy in the form of heat. If you pulse the core at the correct speed you will get a _coherent_ avalanche pulse. IOW, the avalanches are occurring at roughly the same time. You'll get eddy currents. When the Eddy currents reach peak then your receiving coil will attempt to rob as much energy from the Eddy currents. You do this by placing a load across the coil.

Picture a nano size group of atoms that flip. There are many factors that determine the flip rate such as magnetic field strength, but free electrons plays a huge role. The free electrons act as inductance, resist the flipping magnetic moments. (You can see this effect by dropping a neo magnet down a hollow Al tube.) This gives a micro eddy burst. So you could say its like a microscopic coil around the avalanche, which is a good thing so as to collect a high percentage of the MCE energy.

Under normal conditions you have millions of micro eddy currents that are simultaneously increasing and decreasing all over the place within the core. In other words, the bursts are not coherent. Micro eddy bursts do not last very long, which is why you need to pulse the core fast enough and then quickly absorb some energy from the eddy currents. Although, when the eddy currents occur at the same time then the bursts decay at a much slower rate, which is a good thing.

Where the energy comes from is fascinating. Without ambient temperature (vibrating atoms) magnetic material would align (saturate) and that's the end of the story. Even when you remove the applied field the core would remain magnetized. It is vibrating atoms that give low coercivity. So when you remove the applied field it is the atoms that _force_ the magnetic moments to break alignment with the net magnetic field. That requires energy, which is exactly why magnetic materials cool down when the applied field is removed. That is where MCE energy comes from. Even the NASA guy who contacted me agreed.


Trying to compute the energy relative to the field strength is perhaps not the correct method. Consider two PM's each on swivels, so they can rotate. The PM's are rotated so they repel each other. The magnetic fields cancel each other, so the net magnetic field is relatively low, just within close proximity of each PM. Now allow the PM's to quickly rotate so they align. You get energy _plus_ you get a net magnetic field, lol. Magnetic moments also rotate as IBM's experiments revealed. Normally this flip/rotation rate takes a few nanoseconds, but in electrically conductive materials such as iron and metglas it takes many microseconds.
-----------


Regards,
Paul Lowrance

[PaulLowrance]

Hi mramos,

I know what you mean, as I am fairly certain I saw your post. It seems to be gone.

I'm in Los Angeles County, CA., USA.  I am still waiting for Metglas to ship me a small 2714AF core, but still no shipment. For now I am working on a cheap silicon iron core, ~half inch in diameter.

If you would like, you could wait to see kingrs results. Although on a personal level I am very confident that kingrs will succeed, but what if he does not? I don't see any reason for more than one person replicating the same experiment unless such a person can easily afford the costs. Hopefully kingrs will receive a _real_ metglas core.

The reason I am experimenting with silicon iron core, beside the fact my Metglas did not arrive as scheduled Oct. 17th, is that I am testing a theory that less power equates to higher efficiencies. As admitted this particular theory of power-vs.-efficiency is not set in stone, as it's merely a somewhat complex simulation done in my mind. It's a little complex so I could have easily made a mistake. Better to allow the computer to accurately reveal the results or just do the experiment, lol.

One thing that does not entirely make sense is Naudin's efficiency dropped like a rock toward 10 volt input. Of course his chip has a _minimum_ source voltage spec of 7 volts. I am wondering if Naudin fine-tuned his circuit for 10 volts to see the maximum efficiency. It sure would be nice to converse with Naudin!!!

Regards,
Paul Lowrance