pat. 3469130 Jines, J.E. Magnetic Motor, does it work?

[tbird]

I would buy an item for 11 cent, repair it, and sell it for 30 cent.

wrong!

this is exactly why i put this challenge out there.  to show how quickly people here get away from the topic by not reading or at least not understanding what is stated.  nothing was mentioned about converting or giving change or whatever.  the question is "what 2 coins would they be?"  very simple.

tom

[tbird]

Agree!
just some considerations
In the the patent, 7 shielding plates are over the relative magnets and the operating springs are compressed, just one off and the relative spring is not compressed.
The rotating magnets running out on larger radius, the stator magnet are bit inside all seem designed to suck (operate) the shielding plate in traction way not pushing???  at least near balanced.

wings,

again we find someone who doesn't understand the subject.

this machine only uses magnets that don't move, thus they are part of the stators (2 stators).  also the radius of where the shields go is the same as the rotor blocks.  the drive for moving the shields does have a smaller radius.  this gives the force of attraction (rotor block to stator magnet) leverage to move the shields.

please study some more.  i'd love to have your comments once you know the subject.

tom

[wings]

wings,

again we find someone who doesn't understand the subject.

this machine only uses magnets that don't move, thus they are part of the stators (2 stators).  also the radius of where the shields go is the same as the rotor blocks.  the drive for moving the shields does have a smaller radius.  this gives the force of attraction (rotor block to stator magnet) leverage to move the shields.

please study some more.  i'd love to have your comments once you know the subject.

tom

An important issue is the friction between the shielding plates and the stator surface.
A very simple analysis with hypothetical numbers can show OU less friction more gain.

[tbird]

"if you are given the choice of a 25 cent, 10 cent, 5 cent, & 1 cent coins to make 30 cents using any 2 coins with the condition one of them can NOT be a 5 cent coin, what 2 coins would they be?"

hi all,

it has been over a day since i posted this challenge.  no one has come forth with the answer.  well, for those who are waiting on pins and needles, here is the answer.

the 2 coins will be the 25 cent and 5 cent coins.

i know what you are thinking, "..but he said one couldn't be a 5 cent coin!!"  that is right.  the 25 cent coin is not a 5 cent coin.  note in the condition it says "one of them", not "neither of them".

as has been said before, "the devil is in the detail!".

tom

[tbird]

The travel distance of the shield, or any shields, is a very important detail.

i agree, to a point.  the distance the shield has to travel in this machine is the width of the stator magnet.  in this machine, at worst, it is the same as the distance the rotor block will travel once the shield is removed until it is replaced (power part of cycle).  what you may not be considering is the spring that moves the shield off the magnet.  the attraction of the magnet to the shield works in one direction while the force of the spring works in the other direction.  since the spring has 1 (+or-) unit more force than the attraction, the spring wins the battle by a net force of 1 (+or-) unit.  from fig.5 we see the rotor has about a 4 to 1 leverage advantage over the cam.  this reduces the load of the shield even more.  the hard part (in my mind) is the angle of the cam (ramp) the roller on the inner end of rod 64 has to climb.  here, as wings says, friction will play a big part.  i think this is where we will have to make changes for this machine to work.

If the "units" corresponds to the energy, I strongly believe your figures are wrong as long the equations ends up in more or less than 0.

please feel free to rework my numbers.  if i have made a mistake, let me know.

Let us turn this motor (in the patent we are discussing) "up side down" and let the rotor bee the magnetic shielding, and the shield be the part that is suppose to do work.

to me, that would be like using the wheels of a car to turn the engine.  why would we do that except to start the engine when the built in starter didn't work.

...no matter how the shields are controlled and moved around, it ends up in the same configuration as when you started - at the very same potential.

this doesn't seem to be a bad thing with this machine.  to start, the rotor is being attracted to a stator magnet.  this produces energy.  from here that energy is passed to the power shaft which passes a small part to the cam to move the shield at about the end of the power section of the cycle.  the rest can be used to do work elsewhere.  now we are back where we started.  let's do more work in the next cycle.

It is still impossible to create energy out of a conservative force like permanent magnetism -  by "conservative" we mean "no change", also by "permanent" we mean "no change".

The motor in the patent will not work.

this is the saddest thing i've seen you write.  if you believe this, why are you here?  there must be something else that can happen (in your mind) that allows this to be true and yet will give us our goal.  enlighten me.

tom