STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[captainpecan]

While finishing up my replication, I had an interesting thought that maybe we have not thought as much about as we should.  We've been pushing for as high of rpms as possible on as little current and voltage possible.  That's fine, and surely what we want to do.  But, when we see TK's great replication, we are looking at a 2 coil system doing near 800 rpms on 1.2 volts, but the current is still kinda high.  Ossie is getting great rpms on low current which is fantastic, yet he is using 4 coils as compared to TK's 2 coils, and seems to have many more turns on the coils.  But look at the Orbo.  They are getting between 800 to 1200 rpms, no clue on the current draw as of yet, but running it at 1.2 volts.  What I'm pointing out is that they are using 8 coils to do it.

The point in this obvious observation is this...  Steorn has said, and I cannot find the exact quote, but they have said that every replication they have seen is not correct, and that all the replications are running on emf pulses... Or something to that effect, I cant find the quote.  But Sean was basically saying our replications are pushing the rotor along like a pulse motor.  What if he is simply trying to say that we are supposed to only have enough pulse width to break the attraction for a split second, and no more.  If the replications we are seeing right now did this, the rpms would be really low, but the current draw would be next to nothing.  Steorn's Orbo combats the low rpms by simply adding more toroidal coils.  They are using 8, and none of our replications are using that many that I have seen.  It is possible if we had more toroidal coils, then we could pulse it for a much shorter period of time, and end up with 800 rpms.  It would then use much less current, and be able to recover a greater percentage back from the recovery circuit.  Basically just pulsing at the peak of the inductance change, and just enough to neutralize the attraction for a split second.  Not much power, but a small increase in kinetic energy, adding up with many toroidal coils.

Just a thought...  Maybe we are expecting to much, with to little coils.  Maybe 2 toroidal coils would barely run at all when tuned properly. 

[PaulLowrance]

Cam1 & 2 are still showing the orbo spinning and have not heard anyone say there was a swap yet.

[captainpecan]

Has anyone seen whether or not they have the pickup coils hooked up this time?  I may have missed it in the last demo, but when I was watching it during the demo, they did not even have the 3rd wire ran to the battery, that all the schematics show is needed for the design.  Now maybe I simply missed them hooking it up last time, but even in the images I've seen posted showing the battery, the third red wire is not hooked up.

[callanan]

Hi Ossie,

Do you have a self running magnet motor?

Thank you,

Bruce

Hi Bruce.

Unfortuanately no. There is still a long way to go yet. At least for me.

What I have learnt is the basic effect that drives the rotor in Steorn's motor is no where as efficient as normal pulse motors that I have made. But their theory of not have CEMF has merit and OU potential.

My coils do have some CEMF. As the rpms increase then there will be a point or a symmetry in the whole process where the CEMF will prevent the rpms from getting any higher. Steorn claims they have NO CEMF at all in their motors. If this is true then ideally, regardless of the initial efficiency of the motor, the symmetry is broken and ideally the RPMs will increase infinately.

This is how I see a way that their motor can become OU. As the RPMs increase past the normal break even point of the most efficient pulse motor, the OU energy will start to be stored in the rotor as it acts as a flywheel. When you take energy out of the rotor the rpms will decrease so then you will have to turn the gen coils off and let it build some OU energy back up in the rotor flywheel. This is what I am thinking of at the moment.

But as long as you have even a little CEMF, then the symmetry cannot be broken. So I am thinking that coils a fewer turns as possible can further reduce the CEMF down to nothing but you will have to deal with the current then by very small pulse widths. So it looks like you will need many coils of few turns, at least eight as they have shown, to give enough thrust to drive the rotor but keep the CEMF down to zero. Then you will break the symmetry and the rotor can begin to increase it's RPMs, to very high values if not ideally infinately...

Regards,

Ossie

[Omega_0]

Possible explanation:
As seen in Naudin's measures, the magnet acts onto the ferrite permeability. But the permeability is no more constant throughout the torus due to the fact that near the magnet the permeability is less than on the other side. Due to this permeability gradient, the magnetic flux in the toroid is no longer constant, which explains that the test loop emf is position dependant. But the flux being conservative, this means there is magnetic leakage. Because of the low permeability near the magnet, the flux lines not closed inside the toroid, close up outside. This is confirmed by the strong signal received by the external circuit only when the toroid is polarized by the magnet.

In such case, one should see a very large CEMF induced in the coil, as the fields are no more confined in the core and the core has non-uniform permeability. (as if one part air and other iron). But we see negligible CEMF in original orbo and its replications.

Have you tried saturating the core, and checking the effect of magnets ?
I'm guessing that after saturating, these classical effects will disappear, you will see no gradients and there should be no leakage.

Saturation and a sharp hysteresis is the key component here.

So far I've seen that all replicators are turning on the current at TDC, after reading your post, I feel that it should be advantageous to turn it on before magnet reaches the core, so that the core disappears before magnet gets a chance to introduce gradients and leakages in it.