Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: dieter on March 14, 2017, 03:48:44 AM
-
Can permanent magnets be used as an energy source?
According to accepted beliefs in established science, permanent magnets can only convert energy, but are not an energy source by their own.
But there are certain problems with this theory. Strange seems the fact, that very simple experiments obviously do not obey the laws of physics and yet are completely ignored by mainstream science.
One of these experiments that everybody can do at home I will now present to you. It consists of a coreless coil, about 100 turns, a 9V battery and a permanent magnet. Arrange the parts, so when you connect the battery to the coil for a brief moment, the coil will be repelled by the fixed permanent magnet. Measure how far the coil was repelled.
I am quite sure there are formulas that explicitely show how and why the coil went that far, solely based on the electric current consumption from the battery. Seemingly, that's all nice and fine.
Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.
How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?
In fact, it is stupidly simple. Total force= force of permanent magnet + force of coil.
Basicly, this is exactly what we have been searching for for so long time. A way to turn on and off a permanent magnet. Actually, we turn on and off only whether the coil is reacting to the magnet or not. But the effect is the same.
Conclusions:
By increasing the strength of the permanent magnets, less energy is required by the coils to maintain the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the coils energy requirement would decrease infinitely, while maintaining the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the torque would increase infinitely, therefor there is no linear relation between DC coil pulse and motor torque.
It must be possible to increase the strength of the magnets up to a point, at which the torque delivers enough energy to power an (inductively isolated) conventional generator, which then powers the coil pulses. Such a device would clearly violate a bunch of laws.
Applications
Back in the 19th century magnets were weak and expensive. The introduction of the selfexciting generator without permanent magnets lowered production costs greatly. Mechanical input energy was cheap. So permanent magnet motors and generators became widely obsolete.
Today we have strong Neodymium magnets, it should be possible to obtain considerable amount of torque even with a small motor. Although a big magnet with 1000 pound pull costs maybe 2000$, smaller magnets are much cheaper and can be stacked to increase their strength.
Right now this whole thing sounds too easy and too good to be true. All I can say is I made a test, as described above, with 3 magnets: a tiny Neo, about 5mm x 3mm, a medium size Neo about 5mm x 30mm, and a large stack of 4mm Neo disks, in all about 10mm x 70mm.
Coil was 0.5mm average diameter about 20mm, height about 10mm. No core.
With the tiny Neo the coil barely fell to the side.
With the medium Neo it flew maybe 80mm.
With the large Neo stack it fulminantly flew about 200mm, but was then stopped by the wire connections.
Could it really be that simple?
The future
Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.
But even simple "earthbound" applications may exhibit very interesting results.
-
I did the same test with a cap instead of the battery, 2200uF at 7.3 V. Same results. Coil is lossy, due to low dc resistance of 6 Ohm, but still.
-
Can permanent magnets be used as an energy source?
According to accepted beliefs in established science, permanent magnets can only convert energy, but are not an energy source by their own.
But there are certain problems with this theory. Strange seems the fact, that very simple experiments obviously do not obey the laws of physics and yet are completely ignored by mainstream science.
One of these experiments that everybody can do at home I will now present to you. It consists of a coreless coil, about 100 turns, a 9V battery and a permanent magnet. Arrange the parts, so when you connect the battery to the coil for a brief moment, the coil will be repelled by the fixed permanent magnet. Measure how far the coil was repelled.
I am quite sure there are formulas that explicitely show how and why the coil went that far, solely based on the electric current consumption from the battery. Seemingly, that's all nice and fine.
Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.
How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?
In fact, it is stupidly simple. Total force= force of permanent magnet + force of coil.
Basicly, this is exactly what we have been searching for for so long time. A way to turn on and off a permanent magnet. Actually, we turn on and off only whether the coil is reacting to the magnet or not. But the effect is the same.
Conclusions:
By increasing the strength of the permanent magnets, less energy is required by the coils to maintain the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the coils energy requirement would decrease infinitely, while maintaining the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the torque would increase infinitely, therefor there is no linear relation between DC coil pulse and motor torque.
It must be possible to increase the strength of the magnets up to a point, at which the torque delivers enough energy to power an (inductively isolated) conventional generator, which then powers the coil pulses. Such a device would clearly violate a bunch of laws.
Applications
Back in the 19th century magnets were weak and expensive. The introduction of the selfexciting generator without permanent magnets lowered production costs greatly. Mechanical input energy was cheap. So permanent magnet motors and generators became widely obsolete.
Today we have strong Neodymium magnets, it should be possible to obtain considerable amount of torque even with a small motor. Although a big magnet with 1000 pound pull costs maybe 2000$, smaller magnets are much cheaper and can be stacked to increase their strength.
Right now this whole thing sounds too easy and too good to be true. All I can say is I made a test, as described above, with 3 magnets: a tiny Neo, about 5mm x 3mm, a medium size Neo about 5mm x 30mm, and a large stack of 4mm Neo disks, in all about 10mm x 70mm.
Coil was 0.5mm average diameter about 20mm, height about 10mm. No core.
With the tiny Neo the coil barely fell to the side.
With the medium Neo it flew maybe 80mm.
With the large Neo stack it fulminantly flew about 200mm, but was then stopped by the wire connections.
Could it really be that simple?
The future
Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.
But even simple "earthbound" applications may exhibit very interesting results.
Now don't take this the wrong way because I admire people who actually build things and try new ideas out in the physical.
The above having been said, the error in your experiment was the ACCURATE measurement of the wattage used in each repulsion test of different magnets of different strengths. The ones that moved the farthest used more total wattage from your battery. Yes, the voltage may have been 9VDC in each case, but the current was much higher due to the higher inductive force with the more powerful magnets.
What sometimes helps inventors to understand magnets is to view them as springs. A spring can repel objects and a spring can also keep objects together making them difficult to separate as well. Can a spring motor work? Well clocks and watches use springs to power them, but they will always require rewinding, so the energy cannot be perpetual. It is important to understand that a magnet motor that spins forever and generates excess energy is pretty much the same as creating a spring powered motor that never needs winding.
-
Thanks for your interest. I did the same with a cap, the results where the same. The amount of energy available for a short pulse was the same for all tests, in watt, or joule.
Although your explanation would rescue the law of energy conservation, I think you're wrong here. The decreasing fieldstrength induces an attractive superimposition in the coil, which works against the repelling pulse, therefor increases the resistance of the coil. Even tho, this should lower the repelling force, the observation remains as described.
-
I agree with you.The problem as always is wrong interpretation of physic laws. I think that any object sitting on the table is working continuously against gravity (the molecular forces repel the object from the table). Magnet hanging on fridge is also doing work and energy is taken from vacuum, because magnetic field is "broken symmetry of vacuum"
Magnetic field and energy is one and the same.
-
Thanks Forest. Actually the german wikipedia entry on magnetism even says "Every magnetic Field contains Energy." Although wikipedia often isn't really helpful ^^.
See it this way: if you put two magnets into a glass pipe in repelling order, the top one will float above the bottom one at a certain distance. If you replace the bottom one by a much stronger then this distance becomes larger, simply because the repulsion forces add up.
Now, it is certainly possible to limit the current draw as desired, and finally ending up just like in the pipe example with two repelling forces, that are added together.
-
Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before
The stronger magnet also induces stronger back electromotive force within the coil. That is, you would need to use higher voltage at the input for to achieve the same increase of current, like at the case of weak or no magnet (plain ferromagnetic core). You can imagine it in reversed way, by utilizing the coil as a dynamo. The moving of coil inside stronger magnetic field would induce higher voltage at the coil. This is just the voltage, which you should overcome once you arrange the experiment in the opposite way: by utilizing the force exerted by coil loaded with voltage pulse.
In my theory (http://overunity.com/15124/simplest-theory-of-overunity-devices-possible) you cannot draw energy from coils and magnets until their response will be perfectly symmetric and reversible in time like the ideal spring - only under situation, when the magnetization of coil of magnet exhibits some delay, jumps of steps (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLXVLDysroY).
-
By using a stronger magnet you are obviously making the device more efficient. Considering the fact that this is how good old dc motors with permanent magnets fixed to the case work, you should be getting more shaft output power than dc input if you were extracting any power at all out of the magnet. I think something in the mid 90% is about the best you can get back, but i'm not much into motors.
Here is a system that probably really works, but practically could be a problem.
You could use a system for example that changes the capacitance of an already charged capacitor. A solvent between plates acts as a dielectric . Charge this cap and allow the acetone or whateversolvent to evaporate. The decrease in capacitance has given the cap many joules indeed, huge amounts more. Check it out by simple calcs using dielectric constants, and its not hocus pocus.
-
Hi Dieter,
I have experimented with this some years back.
It's true you can demonstrate these differences but how practical is it in real world application?
What's not being considered here is the difference in work force achieved between an air core vs a cored coil and the reason no practical motor has no cores.
Now, lets say you stay with coreless coils and you keep increasing the size of your magnet and even make larger coil if you wish.
In time there will be a point where the coil will produce as great of current (generator effect) then the coils input, which is caused by the coil moving through the larger magnet.
This is "counter EMF" and happens to all coils when moved in a magnetic field while the input power is switched on.
At this point you will realize the breaking effect caused by any coil moving in a magnetic field "while powered".
There are other braking effects at play as well.
At the same time the coils copper mass is subject to Eddy Currents which is another braking effect which increases proportionally with a stronger magnet or magnetic field.
Consider that at this time your test device is too small to visually detect these braking forces. However, in time as you increase the size of your magnet and decrease your coils dc resistance it will become more apparent.
I have taken builds and tests to those levels.
This may save you time and money if you read the remainder of the topic below which has video demos and results.
Even though my tests are done with cores the results eventually come to the same. No Gain
http://overunity.com/8429/mostly-permanent-magnet-motor-with-minimal-input-power/msg420188/#msg420188 (http://overunity.com/8429/mostly-permanent-magnet-motor-with-minimal-input-power/msg420188/#msg420188)
You cannot escape the above facts.
However, there may be a motor coil topology that once you power the coil the outside magnet flux field may not penetrate the coil which in return may beat the above laws.
That's what I'm interested in and working on.
Regards
Luc
-
Some interesting results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asCp-wLQ0UU
-
Hi all, These videos are interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kCkROMSGG0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kCkROMSGG0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbFqVh7GdGk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbFqVh7GdGk)
peace love light
-
You can take whatever energy you wish from magnetic field. Magnet can for example hold itself to the fridge wall for 100 years. ;-) You cannot take energy from inertial perspective however, unless you are the famous baron...
-
You can take whatever energy you wish from magnetic field. Magnet can for example hold itself to the fridge wall for 100 years. ;-) You cannot take energy from inertial perspective however, unless you are the famous baron...
And you can glue an ordinary unmagnetized piece of iron to the side of a fridge with Krazy Glue and the iron will stay in place for 100 years.
Is the glue expending energy to hold the iron in place?
-
Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.
How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?
All that this requires is a simple rational analysis of the situation. You don't even need to replicate it or make any measurements at all. You can do the entire experiment in your head and the answer is quite trivial.
There is no "additional energy" at all. Just think through the problem and arrive at the right conclusion.
-
Hi Tyson,
The first youtube link you refer to below has a thread where Ian who did that test and videoed it wrote about his findings here:
http://overunity.com/1754/pulse-motor-video/msg35080/#msg35080
Gyula
Hi all, These videos are interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kCkROMSGG0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kCkROMSGG0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbFqVh7GdGk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbFqVh7GdGk)
peace love light
-
@Skywatcher, thanks for the tube links. The 1st one is almost the same test that I did, but I pushed the coil away, so stacking multiple magnets to increase fieldstrength does give more repulsion, because the coil always has the same weight.
The beauty of the coreless electromagnet is, each turn has its own polarity and any opposite pole must obey the fundamental magnet laws of attraction and repulsion. A weak magnet that is repelled by a strong magnet isn't going to lose its polarity.
What happens is Lenz Law strikes like his: As the pm or coil is repelled, the inducing fieldstrength is decreasing. This will result in an induced attraction overlay. So theoreticly a stronger PM should be repelled lesser. But that just isn't the case.
Like the dude in the vid, I also used this statement: there is no linear relation between energy output and dc inout. Permanent magnets are one entire energy factor.
@Luc, thanks for your data. You are right in that power density in PM devices is comparably low.
Any combustion engine has a much higher energy density, so this may not replace car engines.
What I am really interested in is a tiny coil with a high Q in combination with some real big PMs.
Using Aircores can be perfectly efficient if the design deals with the special requirements. It does however greatly reduce friction losses. So if such a small device could be selfpowering, that would be very nice, even without kilowatts of gain.
And as I mentioned earlier, at low temperatures in space, or on the moon, such a tiny gain would become gigawatts, we are going to obtain energy in a superconductive regime in the future anyway, as soon as we can transfer that energy to earth efficiently.
So, maybe I just build me a little test setup, with those 30 or so Neos from an earlier project.
@All, thank you very much for your opinions and information.
-
And as I mentioned earlier, at low temperatures in space, or on the moon, such a tiny gain would become gigawatts, we are going to obtain energy in a superconductive regime in the future anyway, as soon as we can transfer that energy to earth efficiently.
If we could make a superconductive coils then we would have OU as a coils magnetic field is free.
Coil power consumption at this time is due to its DC resistance.
Luc
-
Precisely.
-
I really like this idea, to use most of the power of the magnet when interacting with a coil.
It would be interesting try to send the magnet upward against the gravity,
should be easier to measure the available potential energy.
Regards
-
You are not going to get OU because you have superconductive coils. Let's get real and talk about a simple experiment that anybody can do in the real world.
I am going to assume that you can measure velocity with a regular camera or a cell phone camera by doing frame-by-frame displacement analysis. Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means. (Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity.)
So you have a one-shot pulser circuit. Let's assume the pulse is one-tenth of a second at five volts. You start with the weak magnet. You pulse the coil and the coil jumps back by say 10 centimeters. You put in the strong magnet and you pulse the coil and the coil jumps back by say 20 centimeters.
So, did the strong magnet act as a source of extra energy, or did the pulser circuit act as the source of extra energy?
There is a current sensing resistor (CSR) in series with the coil, and your DSO is set up to measure the voltage and the RMS current from the pulser during the one-tenth second pulse. We are going to assume that the voltage is always a rock-steady 5 volts to keep it simple.
Naturally you have measured the resistance of the coil. You have also measured the mass of the coil and we can ignore the mass of the two single wires that attach to each end of the coil.
So you pulse the coil with the weak magnet in place. With the DSO you can make the following measurements; 1) the total energy in the pulse, 2) the amount of energy burnt off in the resistance of the coil, 3) the amount of energy burnt off in the CSR.
We are going to assume that the total energy in the pulse is greater than the resistive dissipative energy.
Then you repeat the whole process with the large magnet in place.
For the small magnet, you measure the maximum velocity of the coil and then calculate the kinetic energy in the coil. You do the same thing for the large magnet. (Or measure the energy based on the height of the vertical jump.)
Now, it's a mistake to assume that the pulse energy will be the same for the small magnet and for the large magnet. Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.
And logic is telling you that this is what your measurements should show you.
Pulse energy(weak magnet case) = coil resistance energy + CSR energy + coil kinetic energy.
- and -
Pulse energy(strong magnet case) = coil resistance energy + CSR energy + coil kinetic energy.
The conclusion is that the magnets in both cases are as dead as proverbial door nails and all of the energy for both cases was provided by the pulser circuit.
The other conclusion that you don't even have to run an experiment for is as follows; 1) you have no idea if the pulse energy in the two cases will be the same or not. 2) for each case, the pulse energy will be split into resistive dissipative energy and kinetic energy, 3) for each case you have no idea what what the split between resistive dissipaive energy and kinetic energy will be, but since for the strong magnet case the kinetic energy imparted into the coil is higher, you would strongly suspect that there will be a higher percentage of the energy in the pulse that becomes kinetic energy. All of this is just common sense.
MileHigh
-
That is the real simple experiment. Prove it to yourselves that the stronger magnet has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the coil jumps father when the strong magnet is in place. The challenge is to determine where the electrical pulse energy goes. The electrical pulse energy becomes resistive dissipative energy and kinetic energy. What is the split between resistive and dissipative energy for the case of the weak magnet, and for the case of the strong magnet? That is the real measurement that you must make and then you plug your numbers into the formula to see if it all checks out.
-
For the sake of completeness, there is one final unaddressed issue for the hard core measurement crowd. What happens at the end of the pulse? Is there still current flowing through the coil at the instant the pulse ends? That means that some of the initial pulse energy is still sitting in the coil. It also depends on the nature of the pulse driver circuit. So that energy may need to accounted for also, but I left it out of the discussion for the sake of simplicity.
-
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN . IS AN ELECTRIC MOTOR WITH A PM STATOR MORE
EFFICIENT THAT ONE WITH ELECTROMAGNET STATOR?
IS AN ALTERNATOR WITH A PM ROTOR MORE EFFICIENT THAN ONE WITH AN
ELECTROMAGNET ROTOR THE ANSWER TO BOTH IS YEEEES..SO WHAT MAKES BOTH
MORE EFFICIENT? PERMANENT MAGNET.WHY? BECAUSE IT IS A SOLID STATE ETHER RESONATOR .
AND MICROM LOW YOU CAN NOT ANALOGIES GLUE WITH MAGNETIC FIELD FORCE.. YOU LEADING
US UP THE GARDEN PATH WITH THAT..
-
Richard Willis device is all about extracting useful energy from magnet the same way. Look for the older pictures of prototype
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqDS8QQ_9Z0
-
Milehigh, you made the following statement:
Now, it's a mistake to assume that the pulse energy will be the same for the small magnet and for the large magnet. Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.
Then in the same post you made this statement:
The conclusion is that the magnets in both cases are as dead as proverbial door nails and all of the energy for both cases was provided by the pulser circuit.
Those two statements appear to me to be contradicting one another. If the magnets are dead as door nails then why would the pulsing current be different? And why would the current be less for the more powerful magnet?
Respectfully,
Carroll
-
Quote of quote:
Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.
So by that statement milehigh does support the deconstruction of the law of energy conservation, basicly saying what I said: the stronger the PM, the lower the coils consumption. Really surprising to hear that from Milehigh.
Thanks everybody for your interest and contributions.
-
The permanent magnet dynamo also produces more power per volume with stronger magnets. This doesn't make it more effective or even overunity.
-
SO IF WE WANT TO CREATE A MAGNETIC FORCE FIELD OF 100 MILLI TESLA.,
WE CAN JUST GET A MAGNET TO DO THAT
STRAIGHT UP. WE DO NOT HAVE TO WIND A COIL, WE DO NOT HAVE TO SPEND ANY
ELECTRICAL ENERGY TO CREATE THAT THROUGH AN ELECTROMAGNET.. WELL FROM
A COCKROACH POINT OF VIEW ONLY A DUUFUS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE GIST OF THAT..
-
You are not going to get OU because you have superconductive coils. Let's get real and talk about a simple experiment that anybody can do in the real world.
If a coil has zero resistance then once switched off (at correct time) you should be able collect back most of the input from the Inductive discharge.
The free lunch comes from the magnetic field created by the coil during its on time.
I am going to assume that you can measure velocity with a regular camera or a cell phone camera by doing frame-by-frame displacement analysis. Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means. (Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity.)
MileHigh
Taken from your quote above "I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means"
What do you think I did here? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw)
To think I've just posted a link to this a few posts back.
Luc
-
Milehigh, you made the following statement:
Now, it's a mistake to assume that the pulse energy will be the same for the small magnet and for the large magnet. Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.
Then in the same post you made this statement:
The conclusion is that the magnets in both cases are as dead as proverbial door nails and all of the energy for both cases was provided by the pulser circuit.
Those two statements appear to me to be contradicting one another. If the magnets are dead as door nails then why would the pulsing current be different? And why would the current be less for the more powerful magnet?
Respectfully,
Carroll
The pulsing current will be different because the magnetic environment is different between the two setups. That doesn't mean the magnets are doing anything special, it means the coils will experience different levels of changing flux as they are repulsed away from the two different magnets. In the case of the more powerful magnet, when the coil jumps away from the magnet, it will see a greater amount of changing flux with respect to time and therefore there will be more counter-EMF induced in the coil which will reduce the current flow more than for the case for the weaker magnet.
-
Quote of quote:
Chances are the pulse energy will be smaller for the case of the large magnet.
So by that statement milehigh does support the deconstruction of the law of energy conservation, basicly saying what I said: the stronger the PM, the lower the coils consumption. Really surprising to hear that from Milehigh.
Thanks everybody for your interest and contributions.
No, you are coming to an incorrect conclusion. See my previous post to Carroll. You are failing to look at this experiment as an exercise in analyzing power or energy transfer dynamics in a system as you change one variable. It is somewhat akin to impedance matching. With the stronger magnet the system is more amenable to taking the supplied power from the pulse circuit and turning it into kinetic energy. In essence, you have a more efficient motor with a more powerful magnet. "Efficiency" means looking at waste heat energy versus useful output energy. All discussions pertaining to issues like this that don't discuss waste heat energy and account for it are failing discussions. What is the extreme limit? If there is no magnet in place and you pulse the coil then it does not move and 100% of the pulser energy becomes waste heat energy. Presumably, if you start from a very weak magnet and slowly increase the strength of the magnet the coil will get more and more kinetic energy from the pulser. So you start with 0% efficiency with respect to kinetic energy as a percentage of pulser energy and that efficiency presumably increases as the magnet gets stronger. Is there some limit to this because of other effects not being accounted for? Perhaps there is, I don't know.
-
If a coil has zero resistance then once switched off (at correct time) you should be able collect back most of the input from the Inductive discharge.
The free lunch comes from the magnetic field created by the coil during its on time.
Taken from your quote above "I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means"
What do you think I did here? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw)
To think I've just posted a link to this a few posts back.
Luc
If a coil has zero resistance then once switched off (at correct time) you should be able collect back most of the input from the Inductive discharge.
The free lunch comes from the magnetic field created by the coil during its on time.
I don't understand what you are saying.
What do you think I did here? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zdfBbDarQw)
There is no optical speed measurement in the clip, "Mostly Magnet Motor Super build test 3."
To think I've just posted a link to this a few posts back.
Don't even start with the attitude, switch it off right now. Beyond that, I haven't watched your clips for the past three or four years.
-
@Zephir, by Dynamo (the farraday disc, homopolar) you mean the Magneto.
However, in conventional direct PM Generators the Lenz drag works against the input force. In a magnet motor the Lenz drag works against the PM, but can be weaker due to the recursive decay.
Speaking of which, there is only one recursion of induction, as the magnet will not mirror the secondary field.
In any way, I'd like to remind you of the essence of induction: when a field of an external magnet decreases in strength (because it's moving away) then the coil will attract the magnet (Lenz Drag).
But currently the pulse current does repell. So the induced current is opposite the pulsed current, increasing the resistance, decreasing the potential diffrence in voltage, heck, may even charge the battery.
And even so, the stronger magnet is repelled further away. In fact if a stronger magnet flies faster, the pulse may be shorter as well.
Sometimes these things are like glitches.
-
Btw, Zephir, quote:
"The stronger magnet also induces stronger back electromotive force within the coil. That is, you would need to use higher voltage at the input for to achieve the same increase of current.."
That is true, but even with a lower current flowing, the stronger magnet still flies further away. And that's exactly the point. Less input, more output.
-
I don't understand what you are saying.
MileHigh
I see!... anyone else having a problem understanding my quote below?
If a coil has zero resistance then once switched off (at correct time) you should be able collect back most of the input from the Inductive discharge.
The free lunch comes from the magnetic field created by the coil during its on time.
Luc
There is no optical speed measurement in the clip, "Mostly Magnet Motor Super build test 3."
MileHigh
That's correct! no speed measurement in that clip.
The clip is about the part you wrote (bold) below.
I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means. (Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity).
MileHigh
Don't even start with the attitude, switch it off right now. Beyond that, I haven't watched your clips for the past three or four years.
MileHigh
Come on MH
-
Hi all, Hi dieter, this is all that matters,"That is true, but even with a lower current flowing, the stronger magnet still flies further away. And that's exactly the point. Less input, more output."
Some can spin a web of confusion and by the end of the day, it can be the size of an encyclopedia, ignore those, they only try to impede the development of something different.
They will try and get one to bury ones nose in books and equations and soon, we forget all about that stronger magnet flying further away and we try to defend what's in a book.
Hope you get my points here, as they are very important to avoid the webs.
I've built an air coil motor in the past, with neo magnet rotors on each side of thin coils.
With one coil powered by a given voltage input, watts input was say for example, 10 watts at a given rpm.
I could easily feel the shaft power with my hand and it was not much to speak of.
By adding more coils in series and raising the voltage at each step and maintaining the same rpm and wattage input, the shaft power increased dramatically, barely able to hold the shaft by hand without burning my fingers.
I also imagine this can be done by series/parallel coil arrangements, to lessen the need to raise the voltage too high and we could still keep the same rpm and wattage input, while raising observable shaft power to great levels.
You see, something simple can only be hidden, if it is over complicated by subterfuge.
peace love light
-
That's correct! no speed measurement in that clip.
The clip is about the part you wrote (bold) below.
Here is what I said, "Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means."
For some strange reason, you are making a very clumsy attempt at bait-and-switch. I sat through your clip for eight minutes looking for an optical speed measurement and there was none. Your English skills are impeccable, go back and read the earlier postings and you should be baffled also.
-
Indeed, we should get some "Hoffman-Lenses" to demask those Agent-Smithes, telling us to forget and get back into row with the other cattle ^^
Coils in series is also very promesing. In a coil, current flows only when it is loaded. As they say the current is following the voltage. What is then loaded can be regained in the collapsing field.
Whether huge PMs or huge coils, this makes the rotor heavy, but that's ok, see it as a flywheel.
-
Hi all, Hi dieter, this is all that matters,"That is true, but even with a lower current flowing, the stronger magnet still flies further away. And that's exactly the point. Less input, more output."
Some can spin a web of confusion and by the end of the day, it can be the size of an encyclopedia, ignore those, they only try to impede the development of something different.
They will try and get one to bury ones nose in books and equations and soon, we forget all about that stronger magnet flying further away and we try to defend what's in a book.
Hope you get my points here, as they are very important to avoid the webs.
The above is nonsense talk. Don't be a zombie on autopilot and try to suggest that what I am saying is wrong. What is absolutely wrong is to not even consider waste heat energy on a web forum that is all about doing experiments and understanding energy issues.
Here is the simple fact: You get more output because your changed the configuration from lots of waste heat and small output to less waste heat and larger output. You are on an energy forum, are you suggesting that you can't understand this simple concept?
Plus I actually outline an experiment for you to do to prove to yourself with measurements that no extra energy is coming from the stronger magnet and the apparent "extra energy" comes from the fact that you reduced your waste heat and increased your useful output. Anybody with a DSO and a ruler and a scale can do this experiment and prove if for themselves.
Don't tell me that I am "spinning a web of confusion" and that you can't master these very simple concepts. I don't believe it, you can master these very simple concepts.
-
Dear SkyWatcher
I hope you trust me and my real physical experiments I have done in the recent past.
My post on page 1 (link below) contains the explanation and real tests to explain why this effect Dieter has put forward will not achieve OU
http://overunity.com/17178/simple-experiment-extraction-of-energy-from-permanent-magnets/msg501793/#msg501793 (http://overunity.com/8429/mostly-permanent-magnet-motor-with-minimal-input-power/msg420188/#msg420188)[/font][/size]
If Dieter does not believe my independent test results he will have to build the correct test device to measure the travel distance (weight) of the coil against gravity with a fixed (measured) Joule energy discharge to the coil and compare it to the distance conventional theory says it can travel.
Only then the claim of this topic "Extraction of Energy from Permanent Magnets" can be correct.
Without these measurements there is no use arguing what is correct.
I would be the first one to embrace such a thing but since I have already done the tests and measurement in the past I'm not going backwards.
Kind regards
Luc
-
Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means.
So soon we forget, eh? I've done optical speed measurements in at least three different experimental contexts that I've reported on this forum.
-
Indeed, we should get some "Hoffman-Lenses" to demask those Agent-Smithes, telling us to forget and get back into row with the other cattle ^^
You can also master the very simple concept of "when I pulse a coil, how much of the provided electrical energy becomes waste heat energy and how much of the provided electrical energy becomes useful output." You are on an energy forum where you are supposed to try to understand how energy actually works and do experiments to confirm or deny hypotheses.
This is basic stuff that anybody should be able to understand and if you have a DSO, a ruler, and a scale you can do the experiment for yourself and prove it to yourself. Make the magical transformation from a sheep into energy brainiac!
-
Here is what I said, "Measuring velocity is such a critical measurement that I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means."
Yes but here is what you also wrote
I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means. (Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity.
MileHigh
So I was going by your Or (option) comment
Are you saying you didn't write that?
Luc
-
So soon we forget, eh? I've done optical speed measurements in at least three different experimental contexts that I've reported on this forum.
Sorry, but I have been an extremely light reader around here for years so your work was not noticed by me.
-
Yes but here is what you also wrote
So I was going by your Or (option) comment
Are you saying you did not write that?
Luc
This is what you said:
Taken from your quote above "I am almost shocked that I have never seen someone do it around here by optical means"
And then you link to your clip. Is there any optical velocity measurement in your clip?
Enough Luc, go reread everything and I know you will understand it perfectly well. If you are trolling me then shame on you. I posted an experiment to advance the understanding for everybody so they could prove to themselves that "a bigger magnet is not 'adding energy.'" That is the topic of discussion.
-
@Luc, I wouldn't be here if I wasn't somebody who has to try everything by his own. That should not surprise anybody. Of course I don't expect you to go backwards. But I have to say, without a core this is really diffrent.
-
This is what you said:
And then you link to your clip. Is there any optical velocity measurement in your clip?
Enough Luc, go reread everything and I know you will understand it perfectly well. If you are trolling me them shame on you. I posted an experiment to advance the understanding for everybody so they could prove to themselves that "a bigger magnet is not 'adding energy.'" That is the topic of discussion.
As usual MH, pointless to explain
That's it from me
Luc
-
@Luc, I wouldn't be here if I wasn't somebody who has to try everything by his own. That should not surprise anybody. Of course I don't expect you to go backwards. But I have to say, without a core this is really diffrent.
Dieter, if you want me to test this you'll first have to provide a video demo of your device, method of measurements and test results.
This is what I provide when presenting an interesting effect.
Looking forward to your video
Luc
-
@Luc, see Skywatchets first tube link. It's the same.
Only my Pm was fixed and the coil loose. Too trivial for me, to mark this device with an ID-verified google cookie by using a youtube account, btw.
-
Can somebody quote MHs experiment suggestion pls?
-
@Luc, see Skywatchets first tube link. It's the same.
Only my Pm was fixed and the coil loose. Too trivial for me, to mark this device with an ID-verified google cookie by using a youtube account, btw.
I did see those videos years back when they were first posted and again when skywatcher posted them here.
The measurements are not complete, so these tests prove nothing.
If you or anyone else think these tests are proof, then you're not understanding how to correctly evaluate this.
I have given you the link to the details on how to measure this correctly. Read the topic.
Forget about MH velocity test. It's too complicated.
Do the option test MH added, which is what I did years back in the topic I told you to read.
MH quote:
Or you can flip the whole experiment on its side and measure the maximum height the pulsed coil jumps against gravity
ADDED
gotoluc quote:
measure the travel distance (weight) of the coil against gravity with a fixed (measured) Joule energy discharge to the coil and compare it to the distance conventional theory says it can travel.
It's that simple and all you have to do.
The math formula and xl sheet is in my topic
Luc
-
@Luc, it's not that I don't know how to accurately test it. I just didn't do that yet. That being said, the cap test isn't really that bad. Lower capacitance gives shorter pulse, something to experiment with.
I like to think it trough before building stuff.
-
BTW, is this right:
2200uF at 7 V is about 50 millijoule?
That in a 6 ohm coil sounds like a short pulse.
(that was in my crude cap test)
-
Forget about MH velocity test. It's too complicated.
With a little bit of thought and effort it shouldn't be that hard at all. You paint a tiny white dot on the coil. You position your 16-megapixel cell phone camera and take a reference picture of a measuring tape where the coil would be. You load the video clip into your video editor and advance frame by frame and measure the distance traveled. Assume that you are shooting at 60 fps with a very fast shutter speed. You can even make a spreadsheet to get nearly instant velocity measurements in meters per second.
With a little bit of practice you will be making optical velocity measurements in no time at all. With a bit more work on the spreadsheet and some extra measurements you could also measure acceleration and RPM.
-
Can somebody quote MHs experiment suggestion pls?
LOL
You can only see my postings if you enter the forbidden zone. Who has a book to unburn?
-
BTW, is this right:
2200uF at 7 V is about 50 millijoule?
That in a 6 ohm coil sounds like a short pulse.
(that was in my crude cap test)
it would be nice to know the initial speed - should show the kinetic energy produced.
-
Deiter different magnets react in different way to an energy pulse like an EMF discharge… Energy is converted with a more efficient conversion to mechanical power.. Neo-Magnets are the best !!
Please look at this clip of “Bruce DePalma” that made the “N-1 Homopolar Generator “.. from 1988 a local PBS radio show that was video recorded.. ( Yes he is THE guy)..
His rotor is made of Neo’s …(R.I.P. B. Depalma
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSeTrO5U2zw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSeTrO5U2zw)
And “yes” there are already machines that are running on this principle …
Neo Magnets.. are really UNIQUE …!!! YOU ARE RIGHT !!!
Here is another clip of that application… from India... Go figure that these must be owners who don't know about energy conservation ???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt21J3Oll-8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt21J3Oll-8) one from
P.s. find the “diesel generator here “…..Published on Jun 6, 2016
FUEL-LESS,NON-POLLUTED AN ALTERNATE POWER SOURCE
Acca..
If you want one let me know… Sorry the motors are in Poland on E-Bay a 300KW
It’s $17,000. plus shipping..
http://www.ebay.pl/itm/PMG-PMA-Brushless-Magnet-Generator-300kw-1500rpm-/282379098504?hash=item41bf1b1988:g:DzYAAOxyeR9THH9U (http://www.ebay.pl/itm/PMG-PMA-Brushless-Magnet-Generator-300kw-1500rpm-/282379098504?hash=item41bf1b1988:g:DzYAAOxyeR9THH9U)
http://www.ebay.pl/sch/wind_energy/m.html?item=282379098504&hash=item41bf1b1988%3Ag%3ADzYAAOxyeR9THH9U&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562 (http://www.ebay.pl/sch/wind_energy/m.html?item=282379098504&hash=item41bf1b1988%3Ag%3ADzYAAOxyeR9THH9U&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562)
http://www.weiku.com/products/19744659/20kw_900rpm_3000rpm_High_Efficiency_Permanent_Magnet_Generator.html (http://www.weiku.com/products/19744659/20kw_900rpm_3000rpm_High_Efficiency_Permanent_Magnet_Generator.html)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agkr53VJnvg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agkr53VJnvg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zexS-QOnC0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zexS-QOnC0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIZXhuJWtMI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIZXhuJWtMI)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8CEKgzTHOY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8CEKgzTHOY)
-
BTW, is this right:
2200uF at 7 V is about 50 millijoule?
That in a 6 ohm coil sounds like a short pulse.
(that was in my crude cap test)
Use this calculator: http://www.daycounter.com/Calculators/Capacitor-Energy-Time-Constant-Calculator.phtml (http://www.daycounter.com/Calculators/Capacitor-Energy-Time-Constant-Calculator.phtml)
Also, a coil also has an ideal on time (time constant) so a controlled on time switch between the capacitor and coil is preferable.
You ideally want a capacitor large enough not to experience a very large voltage drop from the on time once the coils ideal time constant is found.
Calculate the capacitors Joule energy before and after to find the coils consumption for its lift distance against gravity.
Use the math formula posted in my topic to find your score.
Best of luck
Luc
-
Deiter different magnets react in different way to an energy pulse like an EMF discharge… Energy is converted with a more efficient conversion to mechanical power.. Neo-Magnets are the best !!
Please look at this clip of “Bruce DePalma” that made the “N-1 Homopolar Generator “.. from 1988 a local PBS radio show that was video recorded.. ( Yes he is THE guy)..
His rotor is made of Neo’s …(R.I.P. B. Depalma
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSeTrO5U2zw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSeTrO5U2zw)
And “yes” there are already machines that are running on this principle …
Neo Magnets.. are really UNIQUE …!!! YOU ARE RIGHT !!!
Here is another clip of that application… from India... Go figure that these must be owners who don't know about energy conservation ???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt21J3Oll-8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt21J3Oll-8) one from
P.s. find the “diesel generator here “…..Published on Jun 6, 2016
FUEL-LESS,NON-POLLUTED AN ALTERNATE POWER SOURCE
Acca..
If you want one let me know… Sorry the motors are in Poland on E-Bay a 300KW
It’s $17,000. plus shipping..
http://www.ebay.pl/itm/PMG-PMA-Brushless-Magnet-Generator-300kw-1500rpm-/282379098504?hash=item41bf1b1988:g:DzYAAOxyeR9THH9U (http://www.ebay.pl/itm/PMG-PMA-Brushless-Magnet-Generator-300kw-1500rpm-/282379098504?hash=item41bf1b1988:g:DzYAAOxyeR9THH9U)
http://www.ebay.pl/sch/wind_energy/m.html?item=282379098504&hash=item41bf1b1988%3Ag%3ADzYAAOxyeR9THH9U&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562 (http://www.ebay.pl/sch/wind_energy/m.html?item=282379098504&hash=item41bf1b1988%3Ag%3ADzYAAOxyeR9THH9U&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562)
http://www.weiku.com/products/19744659/20kw_900rpm_3000rpm_High_Efficiency_Permanent_Magnet_Generator.html (http://www.weiku.com/products/19744659/20kw_900rpm_3000rpm_High_Efficiency_Permanent_Magnet_Generator.html)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agkr53VJnvg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agkr53VJnvg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zexS-QOnC0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zexS-QOnC0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIZXhuJWtMI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIZXhuJWtMI)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8CEKgzTHOY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8CEKgzTHOY)
Dear Acca
I don't have time to go through all the videos you posted.
Is there one that clearly demonstrates power in vs power out?
That is the very first thing that must be considered. If not, then how can this help anyone?
Real research is about real results!... so ignore and stop spreading information that don't have a video demo clearly demonstrating this as you are not helping the OU research cause and doing quite the contrary. Post only proof.
Also, if what you post is not directly related to the topic (like what you posted) please start a new topic.
Sorry to come down on you but I get fed up with all the unproven garbage that keeps being perpetuated by people that don't build or test claims.
If I am wrong and you have built and tested this, please accept my apology and post your video demo in a new topic and I will be the first one to support and replicate.
Regards
Luc
-
The future
Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.
Reality has given us a proper and correct perspective. We found out that using a larger magnet allowed the energizing pulse to become more efficient resulting in more push on the coil and less waste heat being burned off in the coil. Our mistake was that we forgot to consider the all-important waste heat. We deceived ourselves into thinking that the larger magnet was somehow acting like a source of energy when the energy actually came from the electrical pulse to the coil the whole time.
Superconductivity will do nothing special and not result in any extra energy. So there is not going to be any free energy from magnets that can be used to power greenhouses or space stations or spaceships.
The right scientific test is a test that tries to account for all of the energy from the supplied electrical pulse to the coil. From what I can see my test is the only test that tries to account for all of this energy and actually measure it. If your measurements yield good data that confirms the hypothesis then you can congratulate yourself for doing a good experiment. If you want to be really serious, you add estimated error tolerances to all of your measurements.
The conclusion: Magnets are not a source of energy.
-
Luc at least you should see some of these video clips as you have no time .. so what do you want ?
Proof of what ! ....
I have "spent my time here" to find the right material for this post.. I did have time today ..
Acca..
-
Hi I've used the calc which was pointed by gotoluc:
Voltage across capacitor
7
(V)
Capacitance
2200
(uF)
Load Resistance (Optional)
6
(Ohms)
Compute
Result:
Energy
0.0539
(Joules)
Time Constant
0.0132
(seconds)
Using law of conservation of the momentum for the magnet with the weight of 1 kg and repelling force of 10 kg (100N), I get:
M = F x T = 100 x 0.0132 = 1.32 Nm
The speed for the weight of 1 kg will be
V = M/m = 1.3 m/sec
Kinetic energy = mV2/2 =0.8 J
Where energy of the coil was 0.05 J
-
Tap into the energy. ;D
-
Permanent Magnet DC motors are now pushing 95% efficiency.
By the line of reasoning that Permanent Magnets in and of themselves are a source of energy, you would think that doubling the strength of a magnet in a good high efficiency P.M magnet motor would double the efficiency, possibly pushing it over 100% efficiency.
It does not.
It only gets you a little closer to 100%
If we put 745.699 Watts into a 95% efficient PM DC motor we get exactly 0.95 HP output. Input power x efficiency neatly matches output power.
If we double the magnet strength, we may go to 96% or 0.96 HP output.
So where is the power coming from if we can account for the fact that nearly 100% of the motor horsepower relates exactly to the input power, what part are the magnets actually contributing? It is coming from the power source input, since we can account for nearly all of the input power as directly related to the output shaft horsepower.
More powerful magnets, better steel, lower resistance windings, less friction in the bearings all get you closer to 100% efficiency but not over 100% with current designs.
The magnets are part of the structure (system) required to make the machine efficiently transform electrical power into mechanical horsepower. So are the steel return paths and copper windings, shaftbearings etc. Are they also a source of energy? Not as used in a motor. They are a contributor to higher efficiency when well designed.
Reducing the thickness of the copper windings results in more heat loss, increasing the thickness results in less Joule loss and higher efficiency. So is thicker wire contributing energy? No, it's just shifting the input energy into HP rather than waste heat
All of these factors when optimized push us close to 100% efficiency.
If we want to extract energy from magnets in a motor design, we will have to think about it quite differently.
MH good to see you back, you were missed.
BTW my guitar amp goes to 11 8)
-
The energy is not in the magnet it is in the field response.
Stronger field, stronger response.
Same energy, less waste.
-
It seems that, If OU can be done with PMs, then moving on to an electric motor
would be a logical next step.
It seems also, that energy can't be measured unless something that we can notice
changes.
I think that an electricaly operated motor without any PMs would be the ideal.
-
Floor here is an electric scooter that is "lets just say" it re-charges as it's being driven.. however the car will be next..
link to those that want to see that scooter that was made in India ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfm-WQ3arws (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfm-WQ3arws)
This has to be real as it was on TV !!!
Acca...
-
Quote from ACCA
"This has to be real as it was on TV !!!"
End quote
It really does have to be real, it was put on on the OverUnity forum by ACCA !!! :'(
-
I have always loved to read. When I was in high school about 55 years ago I thought if something was written in a book it had to be true. I naively believed there were some kind of truth police that didn't allow something to be published if it wasn't true. Since then of course I have learned you can't believe everything you read and especially can't believe what you see on TV or YouTube. Only a very young or naive person would believe something is true just because they saw it on TV. Even if the person presenting it believed it to be true how do we know they have the training and experience to properly judge what they are reporting about.
Respectfully,
Carroll
-
ALL FORM OF ENERGY COMES FROM ETHER ..MAY IT BE A GAS FIRE ,
ELECTRICAL, ATOMIC, SOLAR AND THE REST . A MAGNET IS AN ETHER
NONE M0VING PART SOLID STATE RESONATOR.. IT JUST FACILITATE
THE IMPROVED EFFICIENCY OF ANY INVENTIONS THAT INCLUDE A PM
IN ITS CIRCUIT. VORTEX1 HAS HIT IT ON THE RED HOT NAIL..I WILL
POST AN IDEA OF A
POSSIBLE FREE ENERGY INVENTION LATER.
-
All this 95%, 96% talk is just dogmatizing. If that is a word.
Anyway, I did the same test with a tiny 100 uF cap, again at 7vdc. The ratio of reaction was again the same with the various PMs. The coil was not pushed away, only shaked a certain amount. Clearly the cap fully fired in all tests.
So, if the scepticals theory is right (95% etc), then, by using this 100uF cap, there should be some kind of limit: a PM size or strength, that represents a 100% efficiency, and from which any further increase of PM strength will have no additional effect? And where exactly would that limit be?
At least that should be easy to test.
An other thing you must consider is: As the pulse pushes in this test, coil and PM are at Rest. Due to inertia the coil is just starting to fly away, but has already stored the main repelling push as momentum. It will generate its secondary field the faster it flies, which is at peak after the significant part of the primary pulse. So a certain phase shift may also play a role here.
-
Well, if you put a magnet near coil with DC pulse or AC current, magnet will vibrate, so would bigger magnet vibrate more? this vibrating magnet inside another coil = induction.
-
PolaczekCebulaczekz,
you may have misunderstood the question. Of course we know induction.
Referring to my last paragraph, there may be a diffrence, depending on whether the parts start at rest, compared to an ongoing rotation in a motor.
In the latter, the fieldstrength is already decreasing when the repelling pulse is fired.
Anyhow, at the basis of the experiment described, is there a certain upper limit of PM strength, above which no further repelling can be achieved?
According to the sceptical theory there must be such a limit. Where is it?
-
MH good to see you back, you were missed.
BTW my guitar amp goes to 11 8)
Thanks Ion, I am here in 'lite mode.' Tell your drummer to be careful!
-
According to the sceptical theory there must be such a limit. Where is it?
The limit is 100%. You can approach it asymptotically but never get there.
-
I dunno who MH is talking to, so much, but I don't see what he's writing. Just the ghost of christmas past.
-
I dunno who MH is talking to, so much, but I don't see what he's writing. Just the ghost of christmas past.
Okay, so I am going to assume that you haven't blocked me, and instead you are just playing a foolish game. It's ridiculous.
-
MILE HIGH, TK AND THE REST WILL ALWAYS BE HERE REASON BEING WE ARE ADDICTED
TO THIS NICOTINE OF SEEING THAT SUPER SIMPLE GENIUS WHO WILL FINALLY
COME UP WITH THIS SIMPLE FREE ENERGY MACHINE . HANG AROUND MILE HIGH IT
WILL HAPPEN IN YOUR LIFE TIME..
-
IT WAS NOT MY INVENTION BUT, I WOULD SAY A BREAKTHROUGH IN GREAT SIMPLE ENGINEERING.
IT IS A PERMANENT MAGNET SWITCH..THIS WILL CUT MOST OF THE LENS LAW ..AND THE NEXT
WILL BE LEVERAGE..COMING UP.
-
IT WAS NOT MY INVENTION BUT, I WOULD SAY A BREAKTHROUGH IN GREAT SIMPLE ENGINEERING.
IT IS A PERMANENT MAGNET SWITCH..THIS WILL CUT MOST OF THE LENS LAW ..AND THE NEXT
WILL BE LEVERAGE..COMING UP.
Hi
how exactly does it work?
-
It's like the casing on the back of the speaker magnet
Except it's on both halves of the magnet
What it does to the magnet is all internal so not important here
What the magnet does to the soft iron and its' response IS
A pulse in the direction of the magnet will be amplified and accelerated
BY the magnet. As if you had two electromagnets
The field collapse will be retarded.
A pulse in the other will be retarded, while the field collapse will
be amplified, and accelerated.
The trifilar coil is just Tesla's advancement on his bifilar one.
The principal there is the same.
-
THE SOFT IRON CORE IS SHUNTING PATH FOR THE PM FIELD,
WHEN THE ELECTROMAGNET IS POWERED UP IT IS THE SAME
POLARITY AS THE PM, THERE PROPELS THE MAGNETIC FIELD
OUT OF THE CORE THUS DOUBLING THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH..
SO IN A MOTOR WHEN THE ROTOR AND THE STATOR APPROACH THERE IS
VERY LITTLE RESISTANCE BECAUSE THE MAGNETIC FIELD IS SHUNTED..
AT TDC THEN THE PULSE IS APPLIED..
-
SEYCHELLES FREE ENERGY ELECTRICAL GENERATOR FREE TO THE WORLD.
-
All already done by Richard Willis in 2007, though we still are waiting for the economic world to accept such devices :-(
-
All already done by Richard Willis in 2007, though we still are waiting for the economic world to accept such devices :-(
You are in a class almost all by yourself, Forest. Richard Willis of Magnacoaster infamy was just a low-life
con artist operating in the free energy cottage industry. He barely had a clue about electronics and his
whole pitch was the usual thing we have heard many times before. He was nothing more than a barnacle
in the sea casting his filter feeding organ to eat tender morsels of money. That is the reality of Richard
Willis and you should try to understand that.
-
SEYCHELLES FREE ENERGY ELECTRICAL GENERATOR FREE TO THE WORLD.
After all this time, why are you still posting giant graphic images that look like they were made
with Microsoft Paint when Paint has a built-in image resizing function? You should make
your images no wider than 900 pixels.
Please stop posting giant images.
-
not even close to that willis guy invention..
-
yeah,no even close ::)
-
yeah,no even close ::)
No tweets from Richard Willis in nearly three years:
https://twitter.com/magnacoaster?lang=en
No new YouTube videos in three years:
https://www.youtube.com/user/Magnacoastermotors/videos
The domain name magnacoaster.com is long gone.
Article on Revolution Green:
http://revolution-green.com/rasa-viharii-decline-magnacoster/
Magnacoaster is a dead parrot.
-
Can permanent magnets be used as an energy source?
According to accepted beliefs in established science, permanent magnets can only convert energy, but are not an energy source by their own.
But there are certain problems with this theory. Strange seems the fact, that very simple experiments obviously do not obey the laws of physics and yet are completely ignored by mainstream science.
One of these experiments that everybody can do at home I will now present to you. It consists of a coreless coil, about 100 turns, a 9V battery and a permanent magnet. Arrange the parts, so when you connect the battery to the coil for a brief moment, the coil will be repelled by the fixed permanent magnet. Measure how far the coil was repelled.
I am quite sure there are formulas that explicitely show how and why the coil went that far, solely based on the electric current consumption from the battery. Seemingly, that's all nice and fine.
Now replace the permanent magnet by a much bigger, stronger permanent magnet. Repeat the exact same test, with the same DC pulse to the coil. This time the coil is pushed much further away than before.
How can this be? We used the same amount of input energy from the battery, but the output as a repelling force has increased. Where does the additional energy come from, if not from the permanent magnet?
In fact, it is stupidly simple. Total force= force of permanent magnet + force of coil.
Basicly, this is exactly what we have been searching for for so long time. A way to turn on and off a permanent magnet. Actually, we turn on and off only whether the coil is reacting to the magnet or not. But the effect is the same.
Conclusions:
By increasing the strength of the permanent magnets, less energy is required by the coils to maintain the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the coils energy requirement would decrease infinitely, while maintaining the same torque.
By infinitely increasing the strength of the magnets, the torque would increase infinitely, therefor there is no linear relation between DC coil pulse and motor torque.
It must be possible to increase the strength of the magnets up to a point, at which the torque delivers enough energy to power an (inductively isolated) conventional generator, which then powers the coil pulses. Such a device would clearly violate a bunch of laws.
Applications
Back in the 19th century magnets were weak and expensive. The introduction of the selfexciting generator without permanent magnets lowered production costs greatly. Mechanical input energy was cheap. So permanent magnet motors and generators became widely obsolete.
Today we have strong Neodymium magnets, it should be possible to obtain considerable amount of torque even with a small motor. Although a big magnet with 1000 pound pull costs maybe 2000$, smaller magnets are much cheaper and can be stacked to increase their strength.
Right now this whole thing sounds too easy and too good to be true. All I can say is I made a test, as described above, with 3 magnets: a tiny Neo, about 5mm x 3mm, a medium size Neo about 5mm x 30mm, and a large stack of 4mm Neo disks, in all about 10mm x 70mm.
Coil was 0.5mm average diameter about 20mm, height about 10mm. No core.
With the tiny Neo the coil barely fell to the side.
With the medium Neo it flew maybe 80mm.
With the large Neo stack it fulminantly flew about 200mm, but was then stopped by the wire connections.
Could it really be that simple?
The future
Permanent magnets have their limits. However, in space temperature is near 0 deg. Kelvin resulting in superconductivity, which would increase the efficiency by several magnitudes. The resulting Free Energy could be used to power greenhouse spacestations and spaceships.
But even simple "earthbound" applications may exhibit very interesting results.
The explanation to the further "jump" of the coil when using a stronger magnet is very simple.
If you calculate the kinetic energy of the coil when it has reach its highest velocity, you will see that this energy is less than the energy you apply to the coil. The stronger the magnet, the more "solid ground" it has at its drive. It's like standing on a soft versus solid ground and try to jump, but magnets will never become like a solid hard non flexible ground that makes the drive absolutely 100% efficient.
A larger magnet have a wider magnetic field that have an influence on the coils field. The magnetic field around the coil has more magnetic field lines to grab, and the repulsion will increase.
If you repeat the experiment with a non-magnetic "magnet", a piece of wood for example, the coil is still applied energy, but it will not go anywhere. Does that mean that energy is destroyed? I think not.
Your theory is well understood within loudspeaker drivers and electric motors. The larger the magnet, the higher the efficiency (Assuming that larger magnets are able to increase the flux density in the pole piece). The mechanical efficiency is easier to measure if you have an electric motor attached to a generator.
The highest magnetic density produced in the lab, is approx 36 tesla in 2016. It is literally an explosion because the materials used cannot withstand the enormous magnetic pressure that wants the magnetic material to fly apart.
Vidar
-
Thanks Forest. Actually the german wikipedia entry on magnetism even says "Every magnetic Field contains Energy." Although wikipedia often isn't really helpful ^^.
See it this way: if you put two magnets into a glass pipe in repelling order, the top one will float above the bottom one at a certain distance. If you replace the bottom one by a much stronger then this distance becomes larger, simply because the repulsion forces add up.
Now, it is certainly possible to limit the current draw as desired, and finally ending up just like in the pipe example with two repelling forces, that are added together.
Potential energy. Not energy. If you put a magnet inside an insolated compartment, will it heat up? No.
Vidar
-
YEAH FOREST NOT EVEN CLOSE MY CIRCUIT THE PM IS
ENCLOSED IN AN IRON CORE, NOT VISIBLE...LOOK AGAIN AT MY
DESIGN..
-
seychelles
if you want to patent then, yes it is different , but the principle used is the same, look at attached picture when Willis manipulated with magnetic field distance through core ,using coil at the end of stack of magnets attached to iron core
-
FORREST IT COMPLETELY DIFFERENT , WILLY PM IS NOT SHUNTED WITHIN THE IRON CORE .
MY VERSION WHEN THE ROTOR APPROACHES THE STATOR THERE IS VERY LITTLE MAGNETIC REPULSION,
IT AS IF TWO PIECES OF SOFT IRON CORE APPROACHES EACH OTHER.. WILLYS HAS THE PM AT THE END OF THE CORE
AND ACCORDING TO YOUR PICS THE ROTOR HAS EXPOSED PM ON IT.. DIFFERENT TOTALLY DIFFERENT..
-
Potential energy. Not energy. If you put a magnet inside an insolated compartment, will it heat up? No.
Vidar
What is the potential is a field that results from self-magnetization?
and where does this "energy" come from?
I would argue that there is no more "potential energy" in a field than
there is in a spring.
Unless, and except when, the forces CAUSING the field are the result of
a reversible process.
On another note: the interactions between two or more fields
can result in energy transformation from a source,
to a reference point from our perspective.
That is to say, "energy" does not come from the magnets,
except by a reversible process which destroys the magnet.
However, magnets can be used to convert energy.
From mechanical to electrical, or vice versa.
-
A METAL SPRING IS DEAD AS A CORPSE , A PM IS ALIVE..IT DOES NOT HOLD ENERGY AS SUCH.
BUT IT IS AT RESONANCE WITH ETHER THE SOURCE OF ALL ENERGIES...SAME A MAGNIFYING
GLASS IT IS AT RESONANCE WITH THE SUN TO BURN A HOLE IN THE PAPER IN FOCUS. THERE
NO ENERGY IN THE MAGNIFYING GLASS BUT THE SUN.
-
Energy comes from magnetic field of magnet - being a broken symmetry of vacuum or ether flow whatever you wish. This energy comes from outside of our 3-dimensional space and comes back so the net amount is ZERO.You can imagine our space as a flat paper while the magnetic field is coming at 90 degrees in one place and back in other place. We still do not know the proper way to extract this energy without inertial moving of magnet - but that's only engineering problem
-
Even Maxwell equations with slight modification (normalization of used constants) clearly tech us about the flow of ether.
-
yeah,no even close ::)
Hi Forest,
how this wheelbarrow works?
Than you
-
Hi Forest,
how this wheelbarrow works?
Than you
Read Richard Willis patent
-
Read Richard Willis patent
You are so sure of yourself that he is not a low-life criminal con artist even though the majority of people believe that he is a con artist. Do you have any electronics bench skills and a place to work? If yes then why don't you read the patent and build it yourself and demonstrate a free energy machine for us. It will be the biggest news story of the 21st century.
-
You are so sure of yourself that he is not a low-life criminal con artist even though the majority of people believe that he is a con artist. Do you have any electronics bench skills and a place to work? If yes then why don't you read the patent and build it yourself and demonstrate a free energy machine for us. It will be the biggest news story of the 21st century.
Unless a free energy machine could feed people, warm homes and eliminate pollution and wars - I'm not interested in any demonstration. Make a legal and supported way to spread this technology to fix this planet and you will see many demonstrations
-
Hi to all, :)
please forgive me but because of the huge amount of information in this blog I am still on a low knowledge level.
I think it would be better to come back to the original topic.
I wonder why the results are not known here: http://overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/
Unfortunately, the topic is asleep there and most links no longer work.
I have recently contacted the inventor and he has written to me that this year he would like to become more active and also to bring out more information.
Best regards
fr
-
FORREST I LIVE IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY , SO LET US START BY THE PM SWITCH.
ALL ONE NEED IS A SOFT IRON ROD ..APPROXIMATELY 6 CM DIAMETER AND DRILL
AN APPROPRIATE SIZE HOLE TO PLACE THE NIB PM .. THEN JUST PLACE A SOLENOID
AROUND IT WIRED ACCORDINGLY AND TEST THE MAG STRENGTH..
-
seychelles
you can everything, I believe in you. just remember that magnetic field is the source of energy - whatever you do - it's the way you treat magnetic pulse - the way to get more energy out then in
I believe you can use your oscillators or you can use capacitor discharge or you can use radio antenna circuit or you can use pm and ferrite rod
btw I'm glad you used ferrite dust , like I said many months ago on youtube ;-) I'm using it also with resin, though you have much better resins available, mine is quite toxic
-
FOREST ,SIMPLE SIMPLE. SOFT IRON CORE..IT IS THE BEST MAGNETIC SHUNTING SHIELDING..
EASY TO GET EASY TO DRILL. I WILL DO IT MYSELF WHEN I GET BACK TO AUSTRALIA.
-
Read Richard Willis patent
What exactly is it in this patent that we are supposed to discover?
What is unique about his patent?
This looks like a copy of Bendini patent. Slightly different wording
And no images?
The only thing Bendini does which is not covered by Willis,
is to loop the output back into the circuit.
Essentially - you have two coils, one kicks, one generates and
"pulls". It is the same wire as the first coil, so you can say the
two are in "series". One wound reverse of the first.
the two "ends".
Essentially, current that powers the motor combines with power
generated by the rotation of the same.
There is a timing circuit - for instance a reed switch would work.
Or any form of magnetorestrictive circuit, or simply a pickup coil
and a transistor.
While I myself have never seen a Bendini motor self-perpetuate,
(despite many unproven claims)
They can and do approach a state of "near unity".
Which cannot be said of many rotational motors/generators.
But, considering its' usefulness, we could throw the whole of
the electronics away and be better served with a Flywheel.
-
To come back on topic,
There were some nice explanations, about speakers, wood etc, basicly saying that above a certain PM fieldstrength no further optimation is possible.
Now, that was precisely my question, twice: What is this limit? Can it be calculated? Is there a linear relation to the coil pulse in joule?
I have to tell you, from what I see in my tests, the gain does not decrease progressively with bigger PMs.
Did you ever notice the tiny coils in speakers, compared to the PM size? Why is this ratio so diffrent from Motors containing PMs?
-
I think there are two types of action - when the force is momentary vs the force is
constant.
The work calculations are not applicable to the momentary force action,
but they are applicable to the constant force action.
But by sending the projectile up against the gravity with a momentary force,
it becomes possible to calculate work on the way down, when the gravity force is constant.
-
I'm not getting it, gravity is constant, so why not removing it from the equation in the first place?
Again, what happens is: a coil gets a short pulse and is repelled from the PM. As the coil is moving away, several things happen: the coil genetates a secondary field, that is attracting the PM, but this effect vanishes at square over distance. Also, the end of the pulse must cause a BEMF in the coil, theoreticly also attracting the coil. if the pulse is too short this may indeed reduce the efficiency.
However, in a motor with alternating PM polarity, the secondary field and BEMF of the coil would be attracted by the next PM, but this causes indiction again, this say thertiary field, so that would at least neutralize the conventional losses due to the seconday field. In fact, offering the secondary field a better fluxpath may not only be used to neutralize the Lenz drag from the repelling PM, but even to add torque to the shaft. Well just a thought.
-
Edit, uhm I said "but this effect vanishes at square over distance", what I meant is: The effect of attraction to the PM vanishes, while the coil keeps on generating current until it's out of the field entirely.
-
Uh, what was I thinking, need coffee...of course it should be "in a motor with non-alternating PM polarity...".
So the timing /RPM could utilize the current that is flowing while the pulse circuit is passive.
-
Uh, what was I thinking, need coffee...of course it should be "in a motor with non-alternating PM polarity...".
So the timing /RPM could utilize the current that is flowing while the pulse circuit is passive.
I only refer to the mechanical action where the transfer of the momentum occurs.
By the simple Newton formula F * dt =m * v
Where F is the repelling force between the coil and the magnet, seems to be proportional
to the strength of the magnet, dt - time of the capacitor discharge
m - mass of the coil and v - its speed.
Try to direct the coil upward. then on the way back down it can make work.
-
Yes but gravity doesn't alter the net gain, if there is any.
But you nailed it precisely by "proportional to the strength of the magnet".
Basicly, or eminently, the repelling forces add up. This force sum is present right after the coil is loaded, and therefor the force is transfered as a physical shockwave. The inductive reaction of the coil on the other hand is a transition from zero to max, where it is zero while the coil is closest to the magnet (so it has the highest effect) and at max when it reached a certain distance already.
So by means of logic, the secondary field will always be a weaker field than the primary one, and a huge magnet brings a relatively big diffrence between the two fields.
So I would definitely say, this diffrence is the gain that can be extracted as energy. So far experiments have shown no degradation in the amplification by PMs with increasing size. I have some Microwave Oven magnets and may try a stack of four against a tiny coil. Nobody cross that line of railgun fire tho ^^.
Actually, I think Art Porter was right about "magnetic amplification".
As a simple test device, a piston/crankshaft/flywheel type would make the whole Lenz drag department a lot easier, compared to a rotor type.
-
Yes but gravity doesn't alter the net gain, if there is any.
Of course, but it can perform work on the way down.
We had some discussion on the another forum re ballistic pendulum.
For example a bullet, if discharged vertically, will achieve a potential energy of
5000 J ( for the weight 10 g and a speed of 1000 m/sec).
At the same time, a ballistic pendulum will show its energy as only 30 J.
So, it looks like to avoid losses of the kinetic energy, it has to be transferred into
the potential energy first.
( That was the conclusion on my part from that discussion).
-
Don't know exactly what pendulum you mean but shouldn't you compare just vertical and horizontal bullet discharge?
Anyway, one day I'll get it.
Meanwhile I'm thinking about solid state ways with PMs. Lenzless reluctance switching.
PMs are amazing. Imagine a Neo PM, 1 inch diameter, 3 inches high. It has like 1 Tesla at the surface. Now add a closwd iron fluxpath, 1 inch dia. and 6 inch high. Now the entire iron part parallel to the PM has 2 Tesla. Double the length, double the strength. That's saturation. Even with emagnetics you can't go higher than to saturate the core. I can't understand why people say PMs are too weak.
-
No intention to confuse anybody, ballistic pendulum is used to determine the energy of the bullet.
We 've discovered the energy anomaly - energy of the bullet simply disappears when it hits it.
In any case, I'm really interested in what you are doing here,
probably the bigger the magnet, the better.
-
We 've discovered the energy anomaly - energy of the bullet simply disappears when it hits it.
This is rather common situation, once the bullet becomes subject of friction. After then the energy of bullet isn't converted and utilized to kinetic energy/momentum of the ballistic pendulum, but to its thermodynamic energy, i.e. the heat content. The gun suppressors work (partially) in similar way.
-
This is rather common situation, once the bullet becomes subject of friction. After then the energy of bullet isn't converted and utilized to kinetic energy/momentum of the ballistic pendulum, but to its thermodynamic energy, i.e. the heat content. The gun suppressors work (partially) in similar way.
But I can drive the same bullet into the same piece of wood and spend only 5 J, not 5000 J
In addition, why conservation of the momentum works, and conservation of energy - not?
They use a conservation of the momentum there.
It seems to me that conservation of energy only valid when kinetic energy is directly
transmitted into potential, as if the bullet was shot vertically.
In this case it would go up to 500 meters.
-
if you don't mind, "bullets" brings up some bad memories to me, thanks.
-
In addition, why conservation of the momentum works, and conservation of energy - not?
The energy is still conserved, but only portion of it gets stored in macroscopic momentum of ballistic pendulum - the rest goes into increase of microscopic momentum of its molecules - and we call this momentum heat.
-
The energy is still conserved, but only portion of it gets stored in macroscopic momentum of ballistic pendulum - the rest goes into increase of microscopic momentum of its molecules - and we call this momentum heat.
Its hard to see how it is conserved, considering that 95% simply disappears. But important part is, that it will be mistaken to apply a ballistic pendulum concept towards the jumping
EM coil for the recovering of its mechanical energy - it will be lost the same way as in a pendulum.
The better approach will be to catch the potential energy on the way down.
-
It doesn't matter, we are in overunity forum. The miraculous lost of energy bothers anyone here.
-
The RattleGen: This is a permanent magnet generator I developed a couple of years ago. OK, the thing works by adding kinetic energy but the way this is done is quite original. The electronic circuit is very elementary. I use a resistor to reduce the LED current. Doing experiments with a relay and a magnet, early 2013, I discovered on my oscilloscope screen a useful voltage. A ceramic magnet was put agains the relay coil. Pressing the contact lever made energy, as you can see in the video. A bit later I placed a strong neodymium magnet on the contact lever of the relay. As a result, the voltage was peaking 2 times higher on the screen. Then I took a small relay; the output peak voltage of the relay coil was 35 volt, without load. After the bridge rectifier the voltage peaks are smoothed by a condenser. To test the small generator I use an ultra bright LED. Take care; depending on the iron of the relay coil a stronger magnet will not give more flux, this because of the saturation. If you make the gap bigger between the contact lever and the relay coil the output will enhance. The magnet functions also as tension spring. The lever jumps back after pressing. This saves again one mechanical part. Before the LED light up you have to press the contactlever several times. The capacitor of 1000 microfarad 16 volt has to charge first. Watch the video to see the principle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMUjGYse8vc
-
Very interesting, Bertoa. Video not playing here ("Error 10" in my third party player). Certainly more reliable than dynamo type flashlights with plastic gears. And a nice size.
BTW, you may try this: a low leakage capacitor, and instead of the LED with the resistor, you drive a joule thief+LED, that will use the power more economicly, and lites an LED down to maybe 0.5V cap voltage.
-
The RattleGen: This is a permanent magnet generator I developed a couple of years ago.
....
Hi Berto,
Very cool idea indeed! I like its simplicity. Thanks for showing the video on it too.
EDIT: just noticed Dieter's additional idea of feeding a Joule thief + LED from the puffer capacitor, that is also a good idea!
Gyula
-
@Dieter/gyulasun, I was feeding a Joule Thief with the output of the generator. Maybe it was the combination of parts but the LED was only flashing once in the 3 seconds. I think the JT needs more power to keep the LED burning permanent. When my electronic lab is furnished again, I go on to enhance this minimalistic circuit. I made also a bike lamp using the wheel spokes for activating the RattleGen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbCTU6-8jQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwbCTU6-8jQ)
-
Maybe your Joule Thief didn't work well. Does it work with a 1.5V battery?
Additionally, you can feed the higher voltage of the back emf over some schottky diodes into the cap. Normally a joule thief oscillates at maybe 40 kHz, no way to flash only once every 3 secs.
Btw. how about using bicycle vibration for the rattle drive? When driving on gravel roads, this shoild work well, using some freely vibrating weight.
-
btw. robert murray-smith mentioned in one of his recent tube vids an smd joulethief that runs down to like 0.03 VDC, from ebay I think
-
Hi Dieter, thanks for your suggestions. You mention exact the investigations I want to do.
- First using the linear motion of the the bike vibrations. The rattlegen is a perfect vibration generator. It has some simularities with a ceramic transducer but it has more output power, depending on the used parts. Here is much more to gain!
- second a better joulethief will efficiently light up the LED. Maybe a suitable project for some of you? Because of the few parts, a nice circuit for a self charging flashlight!
-
Nice work Bertoa, this is the best thing I've seen on this forum in a while.
A diode or two and a reservoir capacitor should make it work with about any JT circuit, I should think.
(Of course it's not really "extracting energy from permanent magnets"; the magnet is just a tool to enable your system to extract and convert energy of motion, also called Kinetic Energy.)
-
Thanks, TinselKoala. You are right, opening and closing of the iron core around the coil needs kinetic energy. What did surprice me was that breaking a passive permanent magnet fluxfield in the iron around the relaycoil, by kinetic means, induces electric current inside the solenoide. The mechanical energy necessary to function as a fluxbreaker is minimal. I can imagine that the right parts and right dimensions can make the rattlegen to a more efficient generator.