Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?

[postingsite]

    Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?

     With videos / photos 

     The idea in the diagram below,  is different ( how much ? ) to the videos on youtube  etc  .

     My aoplogies if this is already answered on any other thread,  I'm not aware of it.

     Below,  is my diagram of 3 generators on the same shaft,  completely  'Un-Aligned'  with each other so as to neutralize each others  cogging-torque( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogging_torque )

     This is in reference to a  self-powered device .

     Note - You obviously Don't  need any Permanent-Magnets  for this idea,   since it could just use electromagnets  -  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excitation_(magnetic)  ,  and could either be started up by itself( residual magnetism ) or have to be flashed only initially ( jump started )  .

     (  I assume even non-symmetrical weights, or a flywheel can reduce or overcome the  cogging-torque  ,   or even  just running the motor/generators  at a high enough speed  )

     (  And also,  Faraday's later improved version of his generator( which greatly reduced  electromagnetic eddies ) would have no  cogging-torque,  but it needs to run at a very high rpm to generate any current,  maybe it could be driven by a  Faraday electric motor,  or by any electric motor  )
   
     people must be very bored by this etc,  however,  some people still claim overunity does not exist

[sm0ky2]

Let's say we have an even number of 'cogs'
And we shall assign a value to the cog force
Call it -X


the propulsion force that breaks the cog
is then subtracted from, by X


In the simplest form, the propulsion force is X
so X -X =0 (the case of field symmetry)
The motor has no torque.


If the propulsion is greater than X (call it Y)
Then the force produced by the motor is Y -X
(assymetrical field)


The opposite can also be true, if Y is less than X
and we have a machine that wastes a lot of input,
with no return.


Using electromagnetic force, as in a standard motor
We already do this, by using extra electricity to
neutralize the cog force.

[AlienGrey]

Let's say we have an even number of 'cogs'
And we shall assign a value to the cog force
Call it -X


the propulsion force that breaks the cog
is then subtracted from, by X


In the simplest form, the propulsion force is X
so X -X =0 (the case of field symmetry)
The motor has no torque.


If the propulsion is greater than X (call it Y)
Then the force produced by the motor is Y -X
(assymetrical field)


The opposite can also be true, if Y is less than X
and we have a machine that wastes a lot of input,
with no return.


Using electromagnetic force, as in a standard motor
We already do this, by using extra electricity to
neutralize the cog force.

Can you explain that in English please ? or with a drawing ?

Why on earth not use a simple wheel with North facing magnetic poles out with drive solenoid coils
in series that turn on at the 'push away, repulsion' time from the magnets and turn 'off' smart-ish so the 'attraction
pull back time 'lens law' does not slow the device down. simple.

Also don't forget to disconnect the out going supply at the appropriate time on the cycle as well. 
Don't forget Badini spent 30 years perfecting this technology so why not keep it simple ?

[sm0ky2]

Hmm, it would be hard for me to explain physics without algebra


Even the basic form:  F=ma


But what the hell i'll try




Force is equal to the mass times the acceleration


Net force is the sum of forces acting on the object


Equal and opposite forces cancel each other out


opposite but non equal forces, the sum is a non zero number
equal to the difference
That is: one force minus the other force


therefore: the primary force minus the cog force is the sum
or net force


———————————————————-


if you aim to get rid of the cog by timing
As in a pulse motor format


That is not really "neutralizing"
But a whole other issue entirely.

[norman6538]

The Mueller generator had and odd magnet and even coil setup so that
the approaching attraction and the leaving hold back is all evened out.
That makes a more efficient generator but you still have the Lenz counter
to motion force that increases with output current.


If we could truely had a no Lenz generator then we would only pay for mechanical
motion. And that is why some folks have moved on to no movement generators
that vary the flux and thus induce a current like Thane Heins or Figuerra or Flynn
etc.

Norman