Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ?

[allcanadian]

@hansvonlieven
Hans I would really like to thank you for introducing me to the balanced armature oscillator, It is people like you that take the time to research and post documentation that make this such a nice place to be. I was taken on quite a journey after my last post, mostly things I knew but could not put in there places.
If we look at the basic balanced armature and evolve it to a rotary machine some things become apparent, that switching is an issue. If we further evolve the design we would turn the rotary design inside out, that is PM's on the rotor and small/long core armatures of high self-inductance on the stator. The rotor would have alternating poles(N-S-N-S) and the flux paths would link---- our stream. This is the adams motor, the bedini monopole motor and the lutec motor ----- all are motor/generators!
So we have an evolution of design, a timeline starting at the balanced armature oscillator, the Wesley Gary oscillator(both poles utilized), the adams motor, the bedini motor and most recently the lutec motor/generator. Most people see these machines as repulsion motors but I think they are far from it, I would call them repulsion/attraction motors, both in the same instance. Based on a better understanding of the core technology(the balanced armature), I came to another understanding that the PM fields are always spherical in nature. We tend to see only the opposing poles of the PM and not the neutral center or the fact that the field becomes spherical the farther we move away from the field following the inverse squre law. In the picture below of a PM rotor we can see the fields and what could be considered nodes of sorts, the green lines would seperate outgoing flows and the blue lines incoming flows, the red lines the magnetic field and its direction of flow.So here we can see the need for continuous switching of the armature polarity and the losses associated with this switching is the biggest loss I can think of. It would seem that the simplicity of the basic balanced armature still has a lot to offer, maybe more so that it's evolved counterparts in this respect.
Realistically my previous rant has some merit, that is the field must be stretched out to a maximum length to minimize switching losses. The PM field should be very large relative to the rotor diameter so that the armature does not interact with any PM pole persay but with the spherical field as a whole as in the picture BA Rev5. This would not be a powerful motor but a very efficient one and that is what we are after I think, O/U would be about efficiency, that is energy in Vs energy out and not so much about power density. So I think this thread that Hans has started has a great deal of potential and I learned that even this old dog can learn some new tricks.

[hansvonlieven]

G'day all,

Perhaps one of you electronics guys can answer this one.

Given the same current, is there a difference in the magnetic field strength between a high impedance electromagnetic coil (say above 1 Kilo-Ohm, many windings with very thin wire) and a low impedance coil (say 100 Ohm, fewer windings, thicker wire)?

Hans von Lieven

[ltseung888]

Please read

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg79952.html#msg79952

for my comments

[gyulasun]

G'day all,

Perhaps one of you electronics guys can answer this one.

Given the same current, is there a difference in the magnetic field strength between a high impedance electromagnetic coil (say above 1 Kilo-Ohm, many windings with very thin wire) and a low impedance coil (say 100 Ohm, fewer windings, thicker wire)?

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,

Yes there is a difference: the coil with higher number of turns will produce higher field strength than the coil with less number of turns, assuming the same current for both.
There is the so called Amperturns (as characteristics coming from excitation law H*l =I*N  H=field strength, l =length of magnetic path, I=current, N=number of turns)  which means the number of turns  of a coil is multiplied by the current flowing in that coil, so the number of turns is linearly proportional to the received field strength [assuming the core (if any) is not approaching saturation].

Note: to maintain the same current in a coil with higher number of turns, you have to pay for it by feeding in higher input power.  (compare in you example of coils DC resistances:   I*I*1000 versus I*I*100)

Gyula

EDIT: one addition to a fuller picture is that in case of electromagnets the permeability of the core plays a tremendous role in the final ?strength?,  for the higher the relative permeability the stronger the emagnet can be, considering the same current.  See the very good experiments by member Honk here with electromagnets for his motor.

[Charlie_V]

Note: to maintain the same current in a coil with higher number of turns, you have to pay for it by feeding in higher input power.  (compare in you example of coils DC resistances:   I*I*1000 versus I*I*100)

Which also means theres going to be more heating.  If the internal resistance of a coil (the wire resistance) is too high, you'll have more of a heater than a magnetic field source.  The best thing to do, is to find an AWG wire gauge chart:

http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm

Select a wire with a current rating you'd like to use then calculate the number of turns you'd need to produce a magnetic field using the equation

B = (4Ïâ,¬x10^-7)*I*N/r

where I is current (amps)
N is the number of turns
and r is the distance between the coil and the point your measuring the field

This equation is only good for constant current flow. 

<ADD> the distance should be in meters.