Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: vineet_kiran on February 10, 2012, 02:34:41 PM

Title: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 10, 2012, 02:34:41 PM
 
Magnetic Engine using permanent magnets
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 10, 2012, 07:48:39 PM
It requires energy to remove the shield from the magnets. There is a connection between the forces and how they are distributed as you change the conditions during the loop. Forces are just "moved around" without actually doing any work.
The shield works well, but unfortunatly the shield is magnetic too and is a part of the system that works against what the piston is suppose to do.


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 11, 2012, 03:58:45 AM
 
@Vidar
 
It is true that you have to apply energy to remove sheilds from the magnets.  But this comes into picture only when there is potential difference in the area of movement of shield.  A  shield tries to move from region of lesser flux density to a stronger region.   You can move a shield without spending energy (other than to overcome friction) in a uniform magnetic field which will not have  potential difference.   
 
In the system what I have drawn a potential differnece will still be created when small magnet(piston) comes closer to the  stationary magnet.  But the force you have to apply on the shield to overcome this P.D.  is less compared to repulsive force which piston experiences from stationary magnet which is product of strength of both poles ( H1*H2 / d square)
 
I am not quite sure of the above theory but while working with magnets I observed that a shield can be moved freely in a uniform magnetic field espesially using wheels or rollers.  Without rollers the system will not work.
 
 
Regards,
 
Vineet.K.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 11, 2012, 06:23:22 AM
there are ways to shield on one side, and not have a major impact on a magnetic field on the other side.
Such shielding takes place in microwaves and harddrives.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 14, 2012, 11:04:18 PM
Well, whatever one might do with magnets, they all have a fixed set of magnetic lines (just for imaginary reference). These lines will be the same in number all the time, but over time the numbers are distributed differently at any given conditions of the machine - densed there, and less dense over here. Through a shield, or repelled by another magnet - whatever condition, you've got the same number of magnetic lines. What you gain in one situation will be lost in another, just because the number of magnetic lines did not change over that period of time. You are given a conservative amount of magnetism, that's all you've got, and it's constant in any situation. How can it be possible to maken an all magnet motor that works under these conditions?


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 15, 2012, 05:42:08 AM
Well, whatever one might do with magnets, they all have a fixed set of magnetic lines (just for imaginary reference). These lines will be the same in number all the time, but over time the numbers are distributed differently at any given conditions of the machine - densed there, and less dense over here. Through a shield, or repelled by another magnet - whatever condition, you've got the same number of magnetic lines. What you gain in one situation will be lost in another, just because the number of magnetic lines did not change over that period of time. You are given a conservative amount of magnetism, that's all you've got, and it's constant in any situation. How can it be possible to maken an all magnet motor that works under these conditions?


Vidar

 
@Vidar
 
 
 
That is applicable for everything in the universe.   Mass also remains constant throughout a given period of time.   It aquires energy due to its position, velocity,  difference of forces acting on it  etc.    Mass can also be converted into energy as per a famous equation.   When it is possible to convert mass into energy,  it should also be possible to convert field into energy since field is as real and universal as matter.     Can any scientist  explain what is matter and what is field?
 
Vineet.K. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 15, 2012, 06:39:31 PM
when Vidar speaks of the number of "field lines", this an arbitrary value, observed only by the effects of the field on another object. (i.e. magnetic viewer, gaussometer, ect.) What this really is refering to,
is the strength of the field itself. The Magnetic Amplitude, of the combined, alligned atomic radiation.
This field does radiate, though it is not generally percievable through mechanical interactions with matter.
And as such,. from a classical perspective, the field is considered "stationary".
 
It is easy to close your Box at this point, and blind yourself to all the possibilities, because you refuse to change your perspective view of a particular situation. It is like a man peering out the window contrasting what he sees to that of a man looking down at the entire planet from space.
 
From the man in space, there is a round mass, with a smaler mass orbiting around it, in what appears to be a semi-perpetual structure of interacting forces.
 
But the guy looking out his bedroom window sees a thunderstorm, lightning, and all sorts of other things going on around him.
 
It is great to ask the question -  "how could this be done?"
 
    But if you then close your mind to the answer, and instead hang yourself up on what you think is "impossible",  It is at that point, that your knowledge and understanding stops growing....
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: gauschor on February 15, 2012, 06:48:41 PM
Interesting setup. I think the most tricky part is to synchronize the movement of the flywheel with that of the shielding plate. Btw. I guess the flywheel would lose energy while passing either by
1) the solid shield - holding the moving magnet back resulting in cogging
2) the repelling pole - which the moving magnet needs to overcome first before it profits from the "push"

I don't think it's possible to get at a point where the pole of one magnet is at a position where only a repulsion accelerating the moving magnet in the "right direction" will take place (so says the experience unfortunately).
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: cyber19 on February 15, 2012, 07:32:48 PM
Start with a multi piston radial inside a flywheel with magnets extending over the top of the piston. The 1st 30 degree section of magnets is opposite poles to pull the piston UP then a gap very close to the piston Top Dead Center then a 30 degree section of LIKE poles to push the piston down. Adjust the position of the flywheel for timing the magnets to the piston position.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 15, 2012, 11:21:41 PM

 
@Vidar
 
 
 
That is applicable for everything in the universe.   Mass also remains constant throughout a given period of time.   It aquires energy due to its position, velocity,  difference of forces acting on it  etc.    Mass can also be converted into energy as per a famous equation.   When it is possible to convert mass into energy,  it should also be possible to convert field into energy since field is as real and universal as matter.     Can any scientist  explain what is matter and what is field?
 
Vineet.K.
Yes, mass can be converted into energy, but that also means that mass is loosed. You can get energy out of a magnet, but that means the cost is to loose magnetism. What use do you have of a non magnetic magnet which has released all its potential energy into work?


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 16, 2012, 12:29:24 PM
Interesting setup. I think the most tricky part is to synchronize the movement of the flywheel with that of the shielding plate. Btw. I guess the flywheel would lose energy while passing either by
1) the solid shield - holding the moving magnet back resulting in cogging
2) the repelling pole - which the moving magnet needs to overcome first before it profits from the "push"

I don't think it's possible to get at a point where the pole of one magnet is at a position where only a repulsion accelerating the moving magnet in the "right direction" will take place (so says the experience unfortunately).

 
(http://www.overunity.com/Themes/default/images/useroff.gif) (http://www.overunity.com/pm/gauschor.21805/sa/send/)
@gauschor (http://www.overunity.com/profile/gauschor.21805/)
 
Synchronization  can be achieved  easily  by using  a  90 degree cam.     Example  of such a cam is available  in the  following   website.       
 http://www.technologystudent.com/cams/camdex.htm
When piston comes back  ( when moves towards  stationary magnet)   it will not experience  any force  because  the cam  lifts  the shield  which in turn absorbs  the  flux  of  stationary  magnet   eliminating  repulsion.         When   piston magnet  comes   close to the  stationary magnet,       the  shield falls   due to 90 degree  fall  in the cam   exposing   the  repulsive  face of the  stationary  magnet   which  suddenly  repels  piston  magnet  with huge force.
 
If  you build  the engine  based  on this design,  you may  have  to  attach  non-magnetic  weights  on the rear  sides  of  the shield   which  makes  it  to fall  at 90 degree position of the cam.       The  energy gained  by flywheel  during  repulsion will  be  enough  to  lift the  shield  slowly again,   when  piston magnet  moves  away  from the    stationary   magnet.
Synchronisation   can also  be achieved   by  connecting    the shield  to  a quick  return  mechanism.    In that  case  you need   not  use  weights   on the shield.
 
Regards
 
Vineet.K.
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 16, 2012, 12:34:25 PM
Yes, mass can be converted into energy, but that also means that mass is loosed. You can get energy out of a magnet, but that means the cost is to loose magnetism. What use do you have of a non magnetic magnet which has released all its potential energy into work?


Vidar

 
What  is the use of  Nuclear Power Stations in which  mass is lost?
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: gauschor on February 16, 2012, 06:00:26 PM
@vineet_kiran: ah thanks for the hint, now I understand the setup completely. Nevertheless I think the problem remains:
First: the flywheel will lose energy by the transmission of the axis using the cam.
Second: The cam needs a considerable force to move the plate because the plate needs a counterweight to be pushed down.
Third: The cam needs even more power because the shield will be attracted to the solid magnets trying to hold the shields to its pole
Fourth: You still won't be able to get a point where the shield is only pushing the moving magnet in its direction: why?
Either the shield moves down too early => then the moving magnet is facing the same pole and you need to overcome the force of the opposing magnet first, before gaining a "push" in the right direction
Or the shield moves down too late, in which case the moving magnet will lose energy because he is getting attracted to the shield
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 16, 2012, 11:08:15 PM

 
What  is the use of  Nuclear Power Stations in which  mass is lost?
Nuclear power stations is using the potential energy inside an unstable isotop. The energy will reduce the isotops mass, but remember that 1gram of mass is enough to power 1500 average housholds for one year (given that there is no loss). Litterally a grape that is converted to pure energy will power your house for 1500 years. Nuclear reactions is different from magnetism. Magnetism is a force, but nuclear reactions produce energy. Distinguish energy from force. Energy is a product that can do work. Force is not a product. Force alone cannot do work.

Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 17, 2012, 05:22:08 AM
@vineet_kiran: ah thanks for the hint, now I understand the setup completely. Nevertheless I think the problem remains:
First: the flywheel will lose energy by the transmission of the axis using the cam.
Second: The cam needs a considerable force to move the plate because the plate needs a counterweight to be pushed down.
Third: The cam needs even more power because the shield will be attracted to the solid magnets trying to hold the shields to its pole
Fourth: You still won't be able to get a point where the shield is only pushing the moving magnet in its direction: why?
Either the shield moves down too early => then the moving magnet is facing the same pole and you need to overcome the force of the opposing magnet first, before gaining a "push" in the right direction
Or the shield moves down too late, in which case the moving magnet will lose energy because he is getting attracted to the shield

 
 
@gauschor,
 
All the above problems can be overcome by correctly timing,  machining of various parts, selecting correct thickness and weight of  the shield,  strength of magnets etc.
 
I conducted the above experiment by suspending the piston magnet like pendulam and allowed it to fall towards stationary magnet by gravity.   I  could move the shield without encountering  any of the problems you have stated above.   I  couldnot build a genuine model because I don't have proper machining / fabrication facilities.
 
 
Regards,
 
Vineet.K.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 17, 2012, 01:02:33 PM

 
 
@gauschor,
 
All the above problems can be overcome by correctly timing,  machining of various parts, selecting correct thickness and weight of  the shield,  strength of magnets etc.
 
I conducted the above experiment by suspending the piston magnet like pendulam and allowed it to fall towards stationary magnet by gravity.   I  could move the shield without encountering  any of the problems you have stated above.   I  couldnot build a genuine model because I don't have proper machining / fabrication facilities.
 
 
Regards,
 
Vineet.K.
If you change the timing, you will also change the kinetic energy at that timing also. That change will have inpact on the rest of the system that will counteract the benefit of correct timing - so the machine will not work anyways.


Br.


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on February 19, 2012, 05:04:07 AM
Nuclear power stations is using the potential energy inside an unstable isotop. The energy will reduce the isotops mass, but remember that 1gram of mass is enough to power 1500 average housholds for one year (given that there is no loss). Litterally a grape that is converted to pure energy will power your house for 1500 years. Nuclear reactions is different from magnetism.

 
Same thing is applicable to field also.   De-magnetisation only means dis-alignment of molecular magnets and not loss of magnetism.   Magnetism still exists in a demagnetised magnet  but magnetism of individual molecular magnets cancel off  one another due to dis-alignment.    When field is completely  converted into energy it should produce same effect as complete conversion of mass into energy because mass and field are real and equivalent.
Whether mass has jumped out of field or matter produces field is not known.  It is same as chicken & egg  case.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on February 19, 2012, 12:28:09 PM

 
Same thing is applicable to field also.   De-magnetisation only means dis-alignment of molecular magnets and not loss of magnetism.   Magnetism still exists in a demagnetised magnet  but magnetism of individual molecular magnets cancel off  one another due to dis-alignment.    When field is completely  converted into energy it should produce same effect as complete conversion of mass into energy because mass and field are real and equivalent.
Whether mass has jumped out of field or matter produces field is not known.  It is same as chicken & egg  case.
No need to discuss this further I think. Permanent magnets cannot do more work than the energy applied to them when magnetized.



Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 28, 2015, 11:03:38 PM
... Magnetism is a force, but nuclear reactions produce energy. Distinguish energy from force. Energy is a product that can do work. Force is not a product. Force alone cannot do work.

While the force of magnetism is often used to described the phenomena, as is force used to describe gravity.. This is not its only aspect.
This force exists along a gradient with the square of the distance from the magnetic source. This creates a well of potential energy.
Similar to the energy equation for gravitational potential (mgh), from a given "height" from the magnet, you have an amount of potential energy that exists.
Whether you are discussing attraction, or repulsion, at any given distance from a magnet, there exists a definable amount of potential energy, that can be used to perform "work". This is described in terms of Force, (N), in solitude. However, when this force is applied to a mass (m), the equation N * m = J(derived) = joules of energy. Of course, there are magnetic equations that describe the actual value of J, as a function of Gauss or Teslas, between the magnet and the object in it's field.

Force, alone, is not what a magnetic field "is". It's a potential well. Full of energy. This energy exists in a loop, which is why we have trouble accessing it. Action, and reaction, will add/take away the opposite to any affect we cause to the magnetic field, under most circumstances.
This is not always the case, but can be generalized as a rule of thumb. "What goes up, must come down...."

if you place an object in a magnetic field, there exists a potential energy, from that point in the field to, either:
 the magnet (attraction)   OR  a point far enough away that the field is diminished beyond effect (repulsion).

So, if you want to know how much "work" can be performed by a magnet, at a given distance from it::
you simply multiply the values for the magnetic moment and the field.
Each of these has their own equation to handle the discrete values, so it may not be as "simple" as it sounds,
but it is a value of energy, not merely a force as one would assume.

Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 01, 2015, 06:38:01 PM
Through extensive shield testing there is an interesting effect I have seen that could warrant further testing.
Consider the pictures below.

In Frame
#1:  The shield will pull itself over the magnet and can be extended further past the magnet with little force.
#2: The magnets can move together with little force.
#3 The magnets and shields will stay in contact with the gap in magnets.
#4 Magnets can now be moved tight together with little force.
#5 *** Once the magnets are moved tight together, the shield will move itself apart when released.
#6 Magnets will repel each other away if shield is held in position to magnet.
 
Using what seems to be a self sustaining cycle from #1 to #5, is it possible to build a magnet motor?
This is the only process I know that may yield an energy gain using shields due to the fact that the shields will both pull themselves onto the magnets and move themselves off the magnets in a cycle.
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on March 01, 2015, 09:52:53 PM
Through extensive shield testing there is an interesting effect I have seen that could warrant further testing.
Consider the pictures below.
The problem with this is that it is harder to slide away the shields at stage 5, after the magnets are pushed together in stage 4, than it takes to slide the same shields away when the magnets is already further apart - for example in stage 2.

Because when the magnets are together, more magnetic field is going through the shield.
When the magnets are apart, like in stage 2, the magnetic field is also traveling through air and not only through the shield.


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 01, 2015, 09:59:13 PM
The problem with this is that it is harder to slide away the shields at stage 5, after the magnets are pushed together in stage 4, than it takes to slide the same shields away when the magnets is already further apart - for example in stage 2.

Because when the magnets are together, more magnetic field is going through the shield.
When the magnets are apart, like in stage 2, the magnetic field is also traveling through air and not only through the shield.


Vidar

Low-Q
I was still updating my post before your reply but in fact, the shields will repel themselves for a segment of the magnets due to the field traveling in the same direction through the shields.
If the shields are held at this point to the magnets, the magnets will then repel each other and once separated the shields will once again pull themselves over the magnets and the process can repeat.
 
I have done much testing with shields and understand what you are saying. That is why I say this was the only method I have seen that may be exploited for energy gain. (or not)
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 01, 2015, 11:19:16 PM
I suppose what this really means is the next logical experiment.
Because we know that the shields will repel and open due to like field repulsion that will in turn cause the magnets themselves to repel, that leads to the next test.
 
Suppose the shield is made of laminations that were separated from like field repulsion the same as a sheet spreader and of course would take some work to compress them together but in their compressed condition would form the "U" shield.
 
Now, when we move the magnets together and the field strength increases, the laminations would simply repel harder and not only that but once they separate on their own the magnet themselves will repel each other.
So not only is there an energy gain in the separating laminations, but also in the repelling of the magnets.
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Pirate88179 on March 01, 2015, 11:21:57 PM
I suppose what this really means is the next logical experiment.
Because we know that the shields will repel and open due to like field repulsion that will in turn cause the magnets themselves to repel, that leads to the next test.
 
Suppose the shield is made of laminations that were separated from like field repulsion and of course would take some work to compress them together but in their compressed condition would form the "U" shield.
 
Now, when we move the magnets together and the field strength increases, the laminations would simply repel harder and not only that but once they separate on their own the magnet themselves will repel each other.
So not only is there an energy gain in the separating laminations, but also in the repelling of the magnets.

Where does this energy gain come from?  The magnetic force?  Force is not energy.

Bill
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 01, 2015, 11:30:21 PM
Where does this energy gain come from?  The magnetic force?  Force is not energy.

Bill

Very true, but force over distance is energy.
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 02, 2015, 12:17:03 AM
Based on the principal of some self removing shield, one might consider an engine design something like this where the laminated shield could be compressed or expanded along the same axis as the magnet moves and tied to the same operating component so both forces work together in unison.
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 02, 2015, 12:40:24 AM
Or the design could be arranged in the direction where the forces in the laminated area of the shield are known to expand with enough force to separate the shield after the magnets are moved together.
 
The expanding laminated shield is a new untested design where a solid "U" shield is already known to work.
However, logically if the forces are sufficient to separate a solid shield, one might try to optimize the effect by laminating the shield.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: shylo on March 03, 2015, 12:24:05 AM
use tapered steel to cause progressive motion, you can make magnets climb hills.
no force to overcome to enter the track ,and let gravity provide the force to exit.
artv
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Newton II on March 03, 2015, 03:05:00 PM

I was still updating my post before your reply but in fact, the shields will repel themselves for a segment of the magnets due to the field traveling in the same direction through the shields.



It depends on the thickness of the shield used.   If you use very thick shield, both poles get totally neutralized and you don't see any magnetic effect at all!!!   
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 03, 2015, 08:23:35 PM
Newton II:
A thick shield to totally redirect the field is what is required.
The shield will pull itself over the magnet and stop.
Then the shield must be moved further over the magnet to extend past the final edge of the magnet so all field is contained.
Moving the shield further onto the magnet takes little force.
Once two sets are then placed tight at the shields and the magnets are moved tight together, the shield will separate to expose repelling magnets.
If the repelling magnets move apart, the shields will pull themselves back over the magnets and must be latched at this point to prevent this action.
 
But in the end, the process appears to be a cycle.
I have done this experiment several times so I already know this is what happens.
I was only throwing it out there because it seems to be an exception that may be showing something useful.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: truesearch on March 03, 2015, 08:55:52 PM
@lumen:


Can you give the measurements of both the shields and magnets that you experimented with for the effect in your diagram in post http://www.overunity.com/11994/magnetic-engine/msg440471/#msg440471 (http://www.overunity.com/11994/magnetic-engine/msg440471/#msg440471)


Thanks!


truesearch
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 03, 2015, 09:25:17 PM
@lumen:


Can you give the measurements of both the shields and magnets that you experimented with for the effect in your diagram in post http://www.overunity.com/11994/magnetic-engine/msg440471/#msg440471 (http://www.overunity.com/11994/magnetic-engine/msg440471/#msg440471)


Thanks!


truesearch

I know the magnets were 3/4" cube but I need to dig up the shield which I'm thinking was about .062 wall but I'll find them.
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on March 04, 2015, 07:51:18 AM
 Video at :

http://youtu.be/kOQYEzIhTqU (http://youtu.be/kOQYEzIhTqU)

You can see that when a roller is used below the shield, it can be easily moved over a uniform magnetic field causing 'ON' and 'OFF' of the flux w.r.t.  another repelling magnet.  I have used a big steel ball and gap is more but even if you use a smaller steel ball you will get the same result.

If you don't use a roller and just slide the shield on magnet, it causes tremendous loss of energy due magnetic attraction.

Using a roller (not wheel) below a moving body is a very interesting phenomenon.  Best example is Egyptians lifted very huge and heavy stones up the pyramid using rollers!
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Newton II on March 05, 2015, 09:43:31 AM
Steel ball and steel shield are in repulsion because flux flows through them in one direction from bottom magnet. That is the reason for free movement of shield on the steel ball.  Shield will be held to the ball because it experiences more attractive force from the bottom magnet than repulsive force from the ball.

So, if you make repulsive force between ball and shield equal to attractive force between shield and magnet, then you can move shield without experiencing any force!!! (infact some friction force is required to keep roller in  motion)


Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on March 05, 2015, 03:09:49 PM
So, if you make repulsive force between ball and shield equal to attractive force between shield and magnet, then you can move shield without experiencing any force!!! (infact some friction force is required to keep roller in  motion)


That condition can be achieved just be arranging magnets without using roller itself.   Have a look at the attachment.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on March 05, 2015, 06:24:49 PM
Steel ball and steel shield are in repulsion because flux flows through them in one direction from bottom magnet. That is the reason for free movement of shield on the steel ball.  Shield will be held to the ball because it experiences more attractive force from the bottom magnet than repulsive force from the ball.

This is not accurate.  What is shown here in that video, no matter how you orient the magnet, the fields will induce in the same direction.
causing Attraction, not repulsion.  follow

magnet [N : S ] -> [N(ball)S] -> [N(steel)S]  OR   magnet [S : N] -> [S(ball)N] -> [S(steel)N]

either way, you have N&s poles attracting each other.

the reasons there is a reduced force between them:
 is (1) because the lines ( or direction) of flux follows the shape of the materials.
The ball pulls the flux around itself back to the other side, center of magnetism is near the center of the ball.
   (not exactly at center, because its shifted towards the stronger field of the inducing magnet itself)

in the Steel - the poles are orientated in the same direction, however, the flux is pulled perpendicular to the tangent of the balls surface.
    this is because the steel is very thin, and long. the magnetism tries to travel the length of the steel.
       center of magnetism in the steel is the center of the thickness, but the outer edges of the loop are stretched down the length

also, the attraction point of magnetism in a sphere is a small point tangent to the surface. weaker magnets like the ceramic ferrite shown here,
do not attract the ball very much and it rolls rather freely. a neo will hold it a little stronger, but it still doesn't take much force to move the ball.
The strength of the (induced) field itself in the sphere, will depend on the mass of the magnetizing material, and the strength of the inducing field (magnet).
    However, the attraction force, is only a fraction of that at or near the contact-point, as a result of tangential surface area.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on March 05, 2015, 07:22:52 PM

Magnetic Engine using permanent magnets
I have experimented with something similar a few years ago.


First off: A uniform magnetic field does not attract or repel anything.
Second: If the magnets is repelling eachother, it is harder to remove the iron plate than put it in place when the small magnet is not present.


Some how, the energy you gain by sync. the shielding, will be taken back by removing the iron plate. It's true. I have tried.

Edit: I have already replied to this Feb. 10.th...  :o

Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: lumen on March 05, 2015, 07:35:37 PM
Basic rule for magnetic field redirection (shielding)
1: Magnets in repulsion = Strong attraction to shield
2: Magnets in attraction = Little attraction to shield
 
 
 
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Low-Q on March 05, 2015, 08:18:13 PM
Here are some consideration you should note:
1- use a shield like mumetal not steel.  Steel in close proximity to a magnet becomes a magnet itself.
2- the shield surface area or size should extend to cover the magnetic field of the magnet to be shielded not the magnet itself.  Meaning the shield should be at least 6 times or more bigger than the magnet to be shielded. 
3- use polymer wheels not steel.  Reduce the attraction to the magnet (Less work).
4- use mechanical gears to synchronize the movement of shield and piston.  Timing is everything.
Goodluck
1. Mumetal is good. It does not as much as iron become magnetized, but it will not make any practical outcome of the experiment.
2. Is 6 times larger something you have experimentet with, or is it just an example of the shields size?
3. Agree. At least something non magnetic.
4. Gears are better than belt transmission - even if the belt has teeth. Less friction with gears, but the timing part will not change the outcome of the system.


Vidar
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on March 06, 2015, 01:24:59 AM
6 times may be a useful estimate, using certain magnets, but "field size", and field strength are two entirely different concepts.

Using only one test material of magnets, you may find a relationship between the size of the field and the strength of the magnets to be
somewhat proportional, for instance, a stronger magnet of the same type will produce a "larger" field.

But, different materials have completely different effects.
for instance, when you compare a ceramic ferrite magnet, to let's say a neo.
the ceramic ferrite will have a much larger "field size" than the neo, but much lower "strength".

The magnetic equations predict the relationship of field strength with the square of the distance from the magnet. This holds true in most cases, as the field itself is in fact infinite in size, ever-reducing in strength. What the equations are actually referring to is an EMF, not a magnetized material.

But in practice, we examine what is called the "effective field", and this is what is usually referred to as its "size"
    meaning the spatial area (volume) consumed by the field at a strength at which it "affects" the materials we are experimenting with.
    i.e. attraction or repulsion.

The field domains are much tighter in a stronger neo magnet, therefore the "effective field" will be much more compact.
  While in a ceramic ferrite, the field domains are loose, and the "effective field" will cover a larger volume of space.


It is also important to note, that when shielding a magnetic field, you greatly alter its shape and effective size. This is caused by the field domains entering into the shield material. Sometimes this can produce stray magnetic domains projected far outside the test area, or reduce the domains to far inside the expected volume of space. And often does so in a non-symmetrical manner.

Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: Newton II on March 06, 2015, 03:33:09 AM
This is not accurate.  What is shown here in that video, no matter how you orient the magnet, the fields will induce in the same direction.
causing Attraction, not repulsion.  follow

magnet [N : S ] -> [N(ball)S] -> [N(steel)S]  OR   magnet [S : N] -> [S(ball)N] -> [S(steel)N]



May be you are right.   But what I feel is,  when you keep a steel ball on a magnet, same type of flux coming from bottom magnet covers entire surface of ball inducing one type of pole on the entire surface of ball and opposite pole will be concentrated at the inside mass centre of the ball.  In this case the concentrated pole at the centre will be stronger than pole on the entire surface which is distributed over larger surface area!!!  (not sure)



Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on March 06, 2015, 03:49:11 AM

May be you are right.   But what I feel is,  when you keep a steel ball on a magnet, same type of flux coming from bottom magnet covers entire surface of ball inducing one type of pole on the entire surface of ball and opposite pole will be concentrated at the inside mass centre of the ball.  In this case the concentrated pole at the centre will be stronger than pole on the entire surface which is distributed over larger surface area!!!  (not sure)

IF that were the case, than making a "monopole" would be that simple, unfortunately it is not.
here is a drawing to visualize what actually takes place when you stick a steel ball onto a magnet.
you can see this by bringing another magnet near the other side of the ball and experimenting with the attraction and repulsion forces of the two poles. When you roll the ball around, the pole orientation stays pretty much the same, changing the internal flux through the ball material.
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: CANGAS on March 06, 2015, 05:13:48 AM
1. Mumetal is good. It does not as much as iron become magnetized, but it will not make any practical outcome of the experiment.
2. Is 6 times larger something you have experimentet with, or is it just an example of the shields size?
3. Agree. At least something non magnetic.
4. Gears are better than belt transmission - even if the belt has teeth. Less friction with gears, but the timing part will not change the outcome of the system.


Vidar



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_%28mechanical%29

The mechanical engineering rule of thumb is that:

A gear drives loses 10% of input power to friction each time that one gear meshes with another.

A film belt drive loses 2% in each case of one belt connecting two pulleys.

A flat belt drive loses 2% in each case of one belt connecting two pulleys.

A toothed timing belt drive loses 2% in each case of one belt connecting two pulleys.

A v belt drive...Fugget about it.

A chain drive loses 1% to 10% in each case of one chain connecting two sprockets, depending of course on the condition of the setup.


You are welcome
CANGAS 145
Title: Re: Magnetic Engine
Post by: vineet_kiran on March 06, 2015, 05:33:31 AM

First off: A uniform magnetic field does not attract or repel anything.


You have totally mistaken the working concept.   Uniform magnetic field is not in the sense that flux density is same starting from the pole to  any given distance from the pole outside the magnet.

I said uniform magnetic field in the sense that flux density in any plane parallel to a lengthy pole  will be same at all points because all points on a parallel plane (plane of shield)  will be equi-distant  from the pole.  This plane (or shield) will be obviously attracted towards pole because flux density is more near the poles but it can be moved in that parallel plane without experiencing any force.

Second: If the magnets is repelling eachother, it is harder to remove the iron plate than put it in place when the small magnet is not present.

That force can be totally eliminated by suitably arranging the magnets.  Shield and the magnet are two separate materials and forces acting on them will act as external forces.  Hence by properly arranging vaious forces,  you can eliminate the net effective force.  See the shielding arrangement which I have posted vide attachment in my earlier reply.

Some how, the energy you gain by sync. the shielding, will be taken back by removing the iron plate. It's true. I have tried.

There is no point in just making one attempt and lift your hands up.  You have to try with different combinations and designs just as Edison encountered 5,000 failures before he made a working lead-acid battery.