>The Wankel is almost entirely dependent on the magnetic twist. It cannot be
forced to deliver more output by adding more current to the electro magnets. The Wankel is engineered to a specific output, so to speak.<
Please correct me if this misses the point:

What happens when a load is applied?
My guess is that the rotor will slow down relative to the load applied until the attraction of rotor, stator and
electro magnetic forces cannot overcome the load anymore. Then the rotor stalls.
When the load is removed or lightened sufficiently, the rotor will accelerate again unless the rotor has stalled
in the sticky position and the electro magnets are not able to supply enough attractive force for a restart.
So the no load operation should also show the highest rpm.
Will the pulse speed and supplied current have to be adapted relative the speed of the rotor, e.g lower speed
requiring more current for the electro magnets and adjusted timing for the field reversal?
Cheers

I dont know for sure how much the load will reduce the speed. The only reference I've got is the statements from Paul.
His first Emilie motor was spinning at 190 RPM at no load, but at 6W load it was decreased to 90 RPM.

His new motor is spinning at 496 RPM at 11544W load (according to Sprain himself).
I don't know what the RPM will be at no load, perhaps twice as high, when comparing numbers to his old motor.

My idea of attracting then repelling the rotor magnets will perhaps let me start the motor without any interacting push.
I just know that the twisting torque can be calculated, and I got it to be approx 57 ft-lbs. And the highest useable RPM at that
torque will give the most horsepower output. I guess I'll have to wait until it's built and tested before I can answer your question any better.

The big difference would be that this design is not decelerating between it's pulse coils. That would make quite a big difference I think.

Which motor do you mean? Mine or yours?

I believe strongly mine will accelerate between the electro magnets.
Once past the electro magnet the rotor magnets is attracted towards the most narrow gap area and
it will accelerate to get there because the flux and rotational twist increases along the ride.

According to my calculations the twist increases from 27lb at the loop entry to 168 lb at the loop exit.
That is quite a difference in force that will perform a powerful accelerating twist.

The overlapping field is simply put the neutralizing of the sticky spot by applying a reversed field of the same strength.

The fast flipping of the flux field will give the rotor magnet a free pass from the sticky point without loosing any momentum at all.
Actually the fields doesn't need to flip, it's enough to let the rotor pass into the electro magnet area by sheer momentum
and then apply a reversed electro magnetic field to neutralize the effect of the sticky spot.
But I don't believe this way is the most optimal. The loss of momentum will be a lot smaller when using an attract/repel field.

Stefan quotes Paul S. somewhere in the Steorn thread saying that because Steorn used repulsion in their model it would lead to a degaussing of the magnets and that his motor is running on attraction only. If it is indeed the case that the magnets can be demagnetized by applying repulsive magnetic forces, then  repulsing  the rotor away might demagnetize it and nearby stator magnets and lead to a loss of torque or function. That could be an important point to consider.

@Gaby
Also I wonder if the Lee Tseung lead out theory might offer insights into the function of the split spiral motor on perhaps how and when the the electromagnetic force could be applied in the cycle. As the coils are expected to be really fast perhaps a double or more pulses can help to overcome the sticky point, hopefully in attraction mode only and/or by leading out more energy?

Cheers

Quote from: Honk on October 12, 2007, 09:14:21 AM

The more the electro magnets, the more it's starts to look like an ordinary pulse motor.

The big difference would be that this design is not decelerating between it's pulse coils. That would make quite a big difference I think.

Here are my thoughts on that.

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?t=107
View topic - constant velocity increase

Your solution is much better as my idea of adding large numbers of pulse coils. (as shown in the big pulse motor)

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/video?v=ArX7BDY1XRM

Maybe it's only me, but I'm quite sceptic to so called magnet motors with a lot of batteries ans wires all over the place...

Show me a video/evidence of a magnetmotor without any wires - at least no batteries

Vidar

Hi Honk,

Thanks for your patient explanation. This has cleared up a few missunderstandings.
As I am new to this field but fascinated by this split spiral motor concept there is lots to learn and relearn and very little in the sense of textbooks or prior art. Hence I am glad to be able to ask questions at this forum, hopefully contributing a little and not holding up or annoying anyone.javascript:void(0);
Your argument concerning demagnetization makes absolute  sense to me, especially in light of your ongoing twin magnet disc experiment. I did not think thought that the FBDISSM was operated in repel mode, I just assumed the repel pulse to be equal to the attraction pulse.

Cheers

Hey Honk,

You got a fascinating thing goin on here... I've got a couple of questions of course, and maybe an idea or two that might throw a monkey wrench into the mix
See my answers in blue.

1. Would it help the situation if there were 2 of these motors stacked on a single shaft? I.E.
Have the 2nd motor rotated a bit so that the sticky spots do not overlap.
Would having a setup like this decrease the "stickyness" to the sticky spot?
No, it would not help. There would just be 4 sticky spots and four electro magnets to overcome the stickyness.
It would only help if the motors was made in the opposite attraction mode and mounted exactly in the same position onto the shaft to
make use of the same electro magnets that will have to be bent between motors like a horse shoe magnet.
By this setup just two electro magnets is needed to do the jobb in a dual motor.
Right now my focus is to build a single motor.
The dual pancake setup is just to difficult to make and it would take to long time to finish.

2. Instead of using a normal N/S magnet in the rotor, could you potentially replace it with a Halbach array?
I've been surfing this forum for a while now and I don't think I've seen anyone mention using an array as a rotor or
a stator anywhere (correct me if I'm wrong - I've been gone a while).
If I'm reading the info on Halbach array's correctly they are the closest thing we could get to a magnetic monopole...
No, a Halbach array can't be used in this type of motor. A Halbach array constantly switches polarity, that's the nature of this array.
All of the rotor magnets must face the same direction, and all of the stator must must also face the same direction, and there must be
attraction between the rotor and stator magnets, elseway there would be no rotational force due to the gradient slope of the stator magnets.
The rotor magnets seek to find the area with the most flux and this is at the most narrow area between the rotor and stator magnets
In other words, at the very end of the stator magnet array just before the electro magnet.

3. Why use a stainless steel guide for the stator magnets? Will that not affect the magnetic field lines a little bit?
I understand that the effect will be fairly minimal, but in researching magnetic shielding a bit I'd think that there would be some kind of affect.
Perhaps a good quality plastic would be a better idea - I understand that it wouldn't be laser precise, but a good injection mould can do wonderful things
The best would be to use magnetic back iron. This would enchance the flux of the magnets and make the motor stronger.
But magnetic back iron is to soft to be precision cut by laser into these fine tolorances that I need.
Second best is stainless steel. Perhaps hard plastic in certain areas, but I have no access to cut plastic in a good way.
I'd like to add that plain Non oriented silicon steel is the absolutely best choise of material to use as flux enhancing back iron.
It's easy to cut, pretty cheap but is to difficult to get hold of in the specific size and quantity I'll need.
Therefore I have chosen ordinary stainless steel.

4. This is just a pure question for you Honk, because you sound like you really know your stuff
Would a product like Giron (http://www.lessemf.com/mag-shld.html) be of any use in a motor like this?
I.E. inserting it into the sticky spot to change if from a sticky spot to a coast spot. My understanding of magnetic shielding is very limited...
No, if you insert some kind of shield into the sticky spot area you just shift the sticky spot to the magnets besides the old spot.
You see, the sticky spot is nothing more than the strongest flux position between the rotor and stator magnets.
If you take away the sticky spot by inserting a shield, then the magnets next to the shield will form a new sticky spot.
And the magnets always seek to find the area of the most flux.

Thanks for the great work and honest and forthright replies Honk! I look forward to more details so we can all get to building one or 2... maybe 3...
My pleasure / Honk

There seem to be some missunderstandings by some people or newcomers on how the magnets are arranged inside the FBDISSM.
They are simply placed side to side facing the same magnetization direction. The stator and rotor magnets are in attraction mode.
Please have a closer look at the attached picture to see the rotation direction and the magnetization direction.
The movement of the rotor magnets is created entirely by the twist towards the narrow area by the gradient slope of the stator magnet wall.
At the spiral end the closest rotor magnet is tricked into a new loop by the electro magnet and the other rotor magnets is helping to push it.
The free ride rotational twist is calculated to be very strong. I have found it to be 49 ft-lbs at the weakest point and 57 ft-lbs at the strongest.

Thank you for your suggestion. I appreciate all input.
But this modification seems to complicate the motor just to much and I dont really see the gain in strength here!?
The steel bares you suggest must be thick enough to carry the flux.
And considering that each magnets is 8cm high would require 154pcs of 4cm high and 4mm wide bars on each side of the motor to carry the magnetic flux.
Seems kind of heavy and bulky.
The only feasible way I know to strenghten the flux path would be to add magnetic back iron or silicon steel onto the stator magnets outside.
It's not neccesary to have a return path for the magnets. Back iron is enough and I have already planned to use back iron on the rotor magnets.
If you haven't seen this type of motor run I suggest you have a look at this video. It might give you a hint on how it operates.
http://freenrg.info/Sprain/Paul_Harry_Sprain_magnet_motor.avi