Sean,

A small suggestion: you may want to lathe out some acrylic/HDPE rods to replace the metal screws that hold up your rotor axle support bar. It's possible that it may be significant to the design and may be interacting with the fields, since Al's rig didn't have that.

Rosphere,

In regards to your thoughts about the stator:

If you only use one stator magnet and spin the rotor to get in sync you will have an unbalanced system.  Look at what magnets do, they just pull and push each other depending on the pole.  So when you have the other two stator magnets on the outside of the rotor it balances the rotor so that there is an equal amount of pull on all sides of the rotor.  If you move one stator magnet closer to the rotor, should you not move the other two the exact same distance? 

Now heres the trick, the one stator magnet that does its clock wise rotation with the rotor also unbalances the system because it pushes and pulls, so if you have the other two magnets going clockwise also then they are all in sync working together. 

The only other way to get the magnets in sync working together is to have those two magnets as neutrals not helping but also not causing any drag.  Alsetalokin achieved this by stopping the two outside stator magnets from spinning after the one stator was in sync doing its clockwise rotation with the rotor.  Doing this stopped the constant pull that those stator magnets were doing on the system.  With them stopped he got a push, pull, push, pull, push pull from those stopped magnets as the rotor continued to spin thus giving he rotor maximum ability to speed up because the whole system was working in a fashion with one stator in flux doing the work.  Its the only magnet we got doing a clockwise rotation with the rotor.  The system is in balance using the two extra stators as neutrals.

Then you have another slight issue which might not be an issue but i call it an infinity gap which if you can find a bridge then the rotor will spin forever (of course after getting the timing, distance, weight down to perfection).  The stators are all on a constant push, pull, push, push with nothing behind them unlike the rotor which is balanced.  My suggestion for them would be to create neutral stators directly behind them to help balance the system, its a small fix that should reduce the constant pull at least from the only stator doing the work.

I hope this helps, i put a lot of thought into it and felt i should share.

Adam Barnett

Quote from: ken_nyus on January 15, 2008, 04:05:24 PM

Quote from: vipond50 on January 15, 2008, 06:37:19 AM

@Crashuni1
Here's another Drawing of the Rotor Jason did an excellent job, but i alway work up my own so I can do amendments if needed.

Thanks Jason
Bill

I guess that is yet another way to interpret the 2.5" spacing of the rotor mags, you take it to mean 2.5" to one of the corners of the octagon, not the flat face.

Ok Ken & Group
What's the OD of the Rotor 2.875" or 3.0" ?
If measured other than other than what i show there is only 0.0440" of material left.

Bill

I think there is confusion here, I have seen 2.5" from the corner of the octagon in your drawing (which to me actually looks closer to the photographs), I have seen 2.5" to the center of the rotor magnet (the midle of the channel), and then on steorn someone thinks it should be 2.5" to the inside flat face of the octagon.

The poster that thinks it is 2.5" to the flat face of the octagon, also thinks the radius of the rotor should be 3" rather than 2.875".

When I look at the photos, the magnet channel (which is 0.25") looks about the same thickness as the thickest part of the material left on the outside of the rotor (the crescent shaped pieces), but it would be easy to miss a 1/16th difference in the photos.

It is hard to say, may have to study the photos closely.

Al seems to have disappeared from the steorn forums, so no info from the source right now!

Al seems to have disappeared from the steorn forums, so no info from the source right now!

He checked in yesterday and today... Steorn forum search

alsetalokins last visit to the steorn forum was 13 hours ago.

Hi Jason,
Surely you mean the rotor radius is 2.875 inches giving a rotor diameter of 5.75 inches or 146mm?
(I think everyone knew that anyway, just stating the obvious).
Regards
Rob

FWIW, In respect of the bearings used for this project...

Don't overlook "Faraday's Paradox", where even a rotating magnet spinning at the same speed as a metal disc, with the disc intersecting the magnetic field, will still yield potential and therefore oppose the change that induces it (Lenz's law).

These constructions certainly don't bear particular resemblance to those demonstrating Faraday's experiment, although the rapid and significant multi-angular distortions in EM fields (particularly around the diametrically-polarised cylindrical magnets) would inevitably have some  impact, albeit to varying degrees. Greater impact would be imposed by greater (metal) bearing width and thickness for example, so one area worthy of review if accurate reproductions persistently and inexplicably fail to sustain rotation   


FunkyJive

... i got the impression after watching the first video in youtube that when he stoped the two smaller round magnets it sounded like a small electric motor kicked in and made the big rotor speed up.... i watched it many times, got the same impression each time.