Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect  (Read 756430 times)

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1215 on: April 25, 2013, 06:14:39 AM »
thanx conradelektro.im more a electrochemist than electrician but im looking for evidence of a 2nd law thermodynamics violation amongst electromagnetic systems as i have found plenty evidence in electrochemical systems.could you or perhaps anybody else here tell me if you have ever verified(to yourselves) that the kickback energy on any coil inductor has ever been measured to be greater/larger than input energy?  Many thanks

No I never have. When a coil is not in a stronger external polarized field I don't see how it could. I mean if the surroundings are net neutral (fluctuating around zero point), then
we feed a coil with current and it alone is what polarizes the surroundings, then when the current is stopped suddenly, we get back only what we put in with losses because that is all there is there to get.

But if the surroundings are pre-polarised with a field strength or density exceeding that produced by the coil then when the current is stopped it may just tap some energy from the external magnetic field. This is not OU it is tapping an external field, to exceed the strength of the field created by an electromagnet would not be easy and may well affect the coils or the cores parameters, though in my head it might be possible. The field would have to be artificial no natural magnetic field (such as that of the planet) would exceed that of an electromagnet. I think it could be possible but to what effect and to what end I cannot say. Maybe I'll try some experiments with that idea. I have no doubt it has been tried and experimented with before. But in what way is the question. If I find anything interesting I'll be sure to patent it immediately.  ;D  Kidding.

Transformers with magnets inside them and so forth come to mind. If I do the experiments I will make definitive measurements and hide nothing. Better to think for a while first.;)





A pulse motor can be made to charge it's supply as the magnet approaches under attraction but that slows the rotor down as per Lenz law. At some points in the video below it charges the supply (which has reverse blocking diodes behind a capacitor so the motor could charge the supply cap but not the supply battery, the setup was charging a charge battery in series with the supply battery (indicated by the 24 volt charge output level) the rotor magnets charged the supply cap to almost 24 volts before powering the coils, but the supply was only 12 volts.

Motor was slow because it was driving a universal motor shaft which I mounted the rotor on, the motor underneath caused a lot of unnecessary
drag, I'm working on a free spinning pulse motor design now which will have a horizontal and rotating shaft that can be loaded.

See the wave form in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mRVjbXNLBs

Cheers

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1216 on: April 25, 2013, 06:40:27 AM »
Farmhand:

I have an important point for you and feel free to verify it for yourself.  All the talk you read about putting magnets inside coils and adding external biasing magnets to pulse motors or putting magnets inside transformers is not going to give you anything extra.  it may be that adding an extra magnet to a pulse motor will give you better performance, but it won't be for the reasons that people think.  There is a perception that adding a magnet inside a coil may give it an extra "kick."

The reason this is a futile endeavour is deceptively simple:  Coils only respond to changing magnetic fields.  When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil.  So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.

To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!

MileHigh

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1217 on: April 25, 2013, 07:08:57 AM »
Farmhand:

I have an important point for you and feel free to verify it for yourself.  All the talk you read about putting magnets inside coils and adding external biasing magnets to pulse motors or putting magnets inside transformers is not going to give you anything extra.  it may be that adding an extra magnet to a pulse motor will give you better performance, but it won't be for the reasons that people think.  There is a perception that adding a magnet inside a coil may give it an extra "kick."

The reason this is a futile endeavour is deceptively simple:  Coils only respond to changing magnetic fields.  When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil.  So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.

To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!

MileHigh

I'm referring more to a polarizing field, not so much putting magnets on cores. I did say I have no evidence, it's just a thought. I might experiment with it.
Mainly I was explaining why I think nothing extra can come from normal coil operations.

It's already been shown that what seems like the way mother nature works to you is not always the case. eg. the bifilar winding (B) discharging the energy from a magnetic field created by winding (A). This is a simple concept but you could not see it ?

My reply was post 1190, some before and some after. I get it and have for some time. Just because we don't  talk the same lingo as you doesn't mean we know nothing.

If anything it is how you were told mother nature works, mother nature needs no words.



Cheers.

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1218 on: April 25, 2013, 07:14:42 AM »


 When you have a magnet in the presence of a coil that is static and not moving, then the magnet "disappears" from the viewpoint of the coil.  So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit.

To many this seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way Mother Nature works!


"So all non-moving magnets in pulse motor or transformer or related experiments are simply "not there," they are invisible to the operation of the circuit."

No, thats not how mother nature works silly.  ;)


 Irving M Gottleib  Regulated power supplies 4th edition Page298  Magnetically biased chokes and transformers.  ;)

Mags

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1219 on: April 25, 2013, 07:17:36 AM »
So MileHigh, am I to assume that you think two superimposed magnetic fields with matching polarization orientation will not interact ?

No one is saying the coil will be excited by the external field. Why would you imply that ?

Cheers

Edited: to add person post was directed to.

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1220 on: April 25, 2013, 07:30:11 AM »
So am I to assume that you think two superimposed magnetic fields with matching polarization orientation will not interact ?

No one is saying the coil will be excited by the external field. Why would you imply that ?

Cheers

Well if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil. And hey, if the backing magnet is set just right, maybe its field is doing all the work in the coil  and the rotor magnet is just manipulating that field within the coil from a distance. So maybe that means less lenz effect on the rotor because its the backing mag that is affecting the coil more than the rotor mag. ;D

Mags

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1221 on: April 25, 2013, 08:23:52 AM »
Well if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil. And hey, if the backing magnet is set just right, maybe its field is doing all the work in the coil  and the rotor magnet is just manipulating that field within the coil from a distance. So maybe that means less lenz effect on the rotor because its the backing mag that is affecting the coil more than the rotor mag. ;D

Mags

Yes Mags, My bad that reply was meant for MileHigh. Anyway that could be possible as well. But it would be harnessing the energy of the permanent magnet. If that's cheap to do and works then go for it. But I think core saturation might be a problem with backing magnets, I really don't know because I haven't studied that or experimented with it. Same with polarizing fields, I haven't experimented with it either.

Also even if it may reduce Lenz drag on the rotor, the amount of energy transferred from the rotor to the coils will be in line with Lenz law effects because the energy transferred from the magnet would reduce the amount of energy transferred from the rotor and therefore the associated Lenz drag would be reduced as a result of that..

Cheers


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1222 on: April 25, 2013, 08:39:03 AM »
Magluvin:

Quote
Well if you have a backing magnet that is of like field to the rotor mag, the field of the backing mag will be in and around the coil when the rotor mag is not. As the rotor mag approaches, it pushes the backing mag field to the opposite side of the coil relative to the approaching rotor mag. It should be a much denser field fluctuations in the coil.

But that doesn't happen if you are implying "denser field fluctuations" will mean a higher voltage/current output from the coil.  That's the point I am making.  The coil only sees and reacts to the approaching rotor magnet. The backing magnet may as well not be there.  Feel free to do some tests.

I haven't checked your link yet but I suspect it may have to do with an external magnet affecting the ferrite core of an inductor.  You can imagine that it reduces the ability of the core to store magnetic flux in a volume.  That will affect the coil because the core affects the coil.  So in this case the presence of a magnet has an indirect once-removed effect on the coil.

MileHigh

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1223 on: April 25, 2013, 11:15:48 AM »
Hi Conrad,

Some comments on sensor coil and reed switch:  yes, sensor coil can be small and handy and easy to explore its best position. Question is what you drive with it? say you drive the base-emitter of a bipolar transistor then I think a reed switch can also do that job in the same way when you use a few kOhm resistor in series with it which also serves as a base current injection to the transistor anyway so the current can be small via the reed. And you can find the same good position for the reed but I agree that many times a reed may need a separate control disk with small magnets on it to work reliable. On control disk I have referred to you already at a Bedini motor (zero force motor 2nd version, see second video link below) and he used reed switch, at rotor speed I estimate at least to be several thousand rpm. Of course a separate control disk needs some more job and material to build and anything you use is fine with me, :)


Would like to show you a video on Bedini's so called 'zero force motor'. It seems very simple, at least this first version he showed a few years ego at energetic forum (but later he deleted it). See this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpDMMcNQxc someone uploaded it again.
You can see a rotor with some cylinder Neo magnets, all like poles out and the coil is positioned tangentionally to the rotor. He says it is a no Lenz, no backemf motor, a more advanced version of this can also be seen on youtube but it has a ring shape stator with coils on the ring, its link is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TICXxP1jI4  Unfortunately, the very little info is what could be guessed from these videos, no further details have been given.

The coil position as shown in the first video above i.e. turning it sideways instead of the 'usual facing magnet' position was tested also by Naudin, you may have seen it in the right hand side scope shot here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif  (and you can read about his findings in this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm )

So what I would suggest is first to explore what waveform your present ring magnet would induce with its changing poles in such sideway positioned coil (because the interesting waveform shown on the right hand side is always made by a single pole, (only the voltage polarity flips) either a N or S but not by suddenly changing poles your ring magnet presently has.
Probably the induced waveform you may see will be different from that.  I editied your earlier magnet-coil position drawing to show 2 coils tangentially fixed wrt the rotor magnet above and below it (on the left and the right hand side of the ring magnet) or I considered the two coils either at one side or both sides of the ring (in this latter case coil length may be an issue). I show you all this because both pole ends of the drive coils are utilized. The ON time should be figured out of course (probably 25% is good).

These are only suggestions, of course I do not mean in any way to 'influence' your own way what kind of setups or circuits you build.

rgds, Gyula

PS If there is a television and video repair service near to your location, you could inquire about faulty VCR heads  (I mean even rotors with some aging problem in their bearings) because they are replaced to new ones and the old one is not renewed) such rotors can still be very useful for tinkering.


@Gyula:

Again, great suggestions. I think I can do some tests with this "lengthwise coil arrangement".  I just have to bend a suitable "coil holder" from aluminium and mount it near my ring magnet spinner.

I see the advantage of a control disk with small strategically placed magnets. May be my building skills advance, then I will dare to go into more complicated designs.

But as always, there are more ideas than time and capability to build them. I collect your suggestions and will go back to them when testing, advancing and redesigning my set up.

I do not mind corrections, new ideas and suggestions.

I have this Commutation Encoder Module with Codewheel AEDB-9340-2000 (180 positions) http://www.avagotech.com/docs/AV02-0075EN. One day I want to build a pulse motor controlled by a microprocessor (Arduino) and this Encoder together with a transistor H-Bridege. That would give endless control possibilities (pulse width, timing, commutation, shorting).

I found a VCR on ebay, if I am lucky I get it for a few Euros. (And of course I dumped two VCRs a few years ago, but my house would be full if I hoarded everything.)

Greetings, Conrad

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1224 on: April 25, 2013, 12:04:35 PM »
thanx farmhand.the reason why i ask is because the physicist called steven.j.smith(google steven j.smith magnetothermodynamics) has analysed the thermodynamic cycle of a simple paramagnetic(temporarily magnetised only while current runs)  inductor core with coil and has found that when you suddenly break the current the temperature of the paramagnetic material core drops momentarily below its curie point thus at that instant it changes from a paramagnet into a ferromagnet thus re-enforcing the collapsing magnetic field and giving an extra boost to the kickback current pulse.

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1225 on: April 25, 2013, 12:13:50 PM »
milehigh,if its true what you said then could you perhaps tell me where this man steven j.smith is wrong as his theory supports a re-enforcing of the magnetic field at the moment the switch is opened via curie point transition.

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1226 on: April 25, 2013, 04:41:39 PM »
Wrong Coils:

Version 2 of my ring magnet spinner runs, but the white coils are obviously of the wrong kind. The power draw of Version 2 with two white coils is much higher than of Version 1 with one black coil. And this is not only the lower DC resistance of two white coils in parallel (white coils each 90 Ohm, the black coil in Version 1 has 265 Ohm). Much more current for the same rpm (comparison Version 2 with two white coils and Version 1 with one black coil). The factor is at least 4 times more power requirement for the same rpm.

Please look at my  Reply #1181 on: April 21, 2013, 10:48:15 PM for Version 1 of the ring magnet spinner.

I will mount two black coils (each 265 Ohm DEC resistance) in Version2 for comparison. But it will take till tomorrow.

The ball bearings in Version 2 (inner diameter 5 mm, outer diameter 16 mm) run very smoothly and quietly, no rattling and almost no vibrations at 5000 rpm. But they still drag a bit. I will give them the acetone treatment (suggested by ALVARO_CS) after I have measured performance of Version 2 with two black coils (in order to have a good comparison with the white coils under the same drag).

Attached are also some scope shot specially for Gyula. They show the effect of the 4700µF buffer capacitor. The diode between power supply and H-bridge was always in place. The scope shot is always over the parallel coils.

Remark: Sorry, this is all about making a ring magnet spin and a circuit for that. I have not yet advanced to "Lenz free generator coils". But I want to have a nice and low power ring magnet spinner before going into the very difficult field of "Lenz free coils". The reason is, I see so many magnet spinners (on YouTube) which use a lot of power. How can one ever hope to get a self runner with a power draw of several Watts just for making the dammed thing spin? Which "magic generator coil" will ever produce several Watt? I have shown a ring magnet spinner (Version 1) which spins at 8400 rpm with less than 0.5 Watt or at 3000 rpm with less than 0.15 Watt, see my  Reply #1194 on: April 22, 2013, 06:40:53 PM. And I hope that I can beat that with Version 2.

In the mean time (while I am building my spinner) the good people who claim to have a "magic coil" should at least show careful input and output measurements (INPUT for driving their spinner and OUTPUT from the magic coil). I do not demand that they disclose their magic, just the measurements. Skycollection, Thane Heins, synchro1, how about that?

Greetings, Conrad

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4136
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1227 on: April 25, 2013, 05:15:34 PM »
Hi Conrad,

Just a quick observation:  the distance of the white coils from the ring magnet seems to me much less than the distance with the earlier type coil.  Also, the cross section area of the core of the white coils seems to me also higher than the other coil. So these two factors may mean a higher attraction force i.e. a higher input power to defeat the higher attraction force?

Thanks,  Gyula

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1228 on: April 25, 2013, 06:01:52 PM »
Hi Conrad,

Just a quick observation:  the distance of the white coils from the ring magnet seems to me much less than the distance with the earlier type coil.  Also, the cross section area of the core of the white coils seems to me also higher than the other coil. So these two factors may mean a higher attraction force i.e. a higher input power to defeat the higher attraction force?

Thanks,  Gyula

@Gyula: I had to move the white coils rather close to the magnet to get it to turn. I had the white coils at the same distance as the black coil in Version1 (i.e. 20 mm), but the magnet did not spin. So I found the 7 mm distance by moving the coil by hand closer and farer, till the spin was at a maximum for a given input power.

And yes, the end of the core of the white coil  is a bit strange, it is enlarged like the head of a rivet. May be that spreads the magnetic field at a disadvantage to the push action.

We will see what happens with the black coils.

Version 2 also works with only one coil (it does not matter which one, they have opposing magnetic polarity). And it works with the coils in parallel and in series. Of course, "just one coil" or "coils in series" makes it turn slower and has less power draw.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4136
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #1229 on: April 25, 2013, 06:49:25 PM »
Hi Conrad,

Okay I understand the positioning.  Do you happen to have an L meter to check the relay coils inductance? No problem if you do not,  just it would be helpful to know for the black and the white coils the mH values because it may also explain the possible force they can exert on the magnet at a given input current.  (The higher the L value, the higher the force, assuming the same current.)

Well, the enlarged head end of the white coil actually may 'increase' flux connection (so to speak), not neccessarily a disadvantage.

Thanks for the scope shots on this newer setup.  I have the impression that the very narrow spikes are cut by the immediate supply voltage change just after the switch-off, I mean some of the collapsing energy may get cut, so is lost from the recovery possibility. This is why the duty cycle would be good to control i.e. making it less than 50%, perhaps it would not influence too much the rpm.

rgds, Gyula