Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: sidneo on April 25, 2012, 11:11:29 AM

Title: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 25, 2012, 11:11:29 AM
Hi here,

This is what i am building i will like to have your opinion on my design the (math and mechanical/electrical engineering)
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: Low-Q on April 25, 2012, 01:16:35 PM
Hi here,

This is what i am building i will like to have your opinion on my design the (math and mechanical/electrical engineering)

An electromagnets magnetism is a magnetic respons that is equivalent to the supplied current and number of windings. Voltage is out of the equation when it regards elektromagnetism. If you have a permanent magnet with a given magnetic strength, you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanentmagnet. You can just imagine what this means. You could likely have a bare electromagnet and pulse it with current at the right timing to get repulsion or attraction. The energy input will be the same.

When you supply current, you will also supply voltage due to the resistance in the coil. That means you must supply energy into the coil for as long you want the magnetism to sustain. You will get back partially that energy when the coil shuts down. However, if the coil was super conducting, there would be no voltage, just current, and therfor no energy would be supplied to keep the electromagnet magnetic.

Only with a super conducting coil, your design would probably become a unity device (not over unity). Because when the electromagnet turns on, it takes energy to build up the magnetism. Under super conducting conditions, all this energy is taken back when the electromagnet turns off and the magnetism breaks down. You have unity.

br.

Vidar
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 25, 2012, 01:28:41 PM
Same principle can be applied in magnetic gates .
As soon as you introduce an opposing polarity (repulsion) with equal force above the sticky point there is an equilibrium .
This equilibrium state allow theoretically to easily overcome the sticky point with little energy input  8) [size=78%].[/size][size=78%] [/size][size=78%] [/size]
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 25, 2012, 01:51:20 PM

An electromagnets magnetism is a magnetic respons that is equivalent to the supplied current and number of windings. Voltage is out of the equation when it regards elektromagnetism. If you have a permanent magnet with a given magnetic strength, you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanentmagnet. You can just imagine what this means. You could likely have a bare electromagnet and pulse it with current at the right timing to get repulsion or attraction. The energy input will be the same.

When you supply current, you will also supply voltage due to the resistance in the coil. That means you must supply energy into the coil for as long you want the magnetism to sustain. You will get back partially that energy when the coil shuts down. However, if the coil was super conducting, there would be no voltage, just current, and therfor no energy would be supplied to keep the electromagnet magnetic.

Only with a super conducting coil, your design would probably become a unity device (not over unity). Because when the electromagnet turns on, it takes energy to build up the magnetism. Under super conducting conditions, all this energy is taken back when the electromagnet turns off and the magnetism breaks down. You have unity.

br.

Vidar

Hi Vidar

Thank you for your lecture about electromagnets and magnetism .But have you overlooked this design?
i am well aware of "you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanent magnet"
and this is not my goal  .My goal is to weaken the attraction between the permanent magnet and the electromagnet to allow the previously canceled repulsive force to act most of the work is being done by the permanent magnets  .

even in the case of "you must supply an opposite equivalent magnetism to "turn off" the permanent magnet"
what really happening here is not only a "turn of " or cancellation but also a repulsion .
That previous attraction turned into repulsion unleashes the other canceled repulsive force  the one that does the free work .

the electromagnet is just assisting here

already calculated the resistance of my coil the power needed  etc .
:)

Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 25, 2012, 02:35:11 PM
in this case there no overunity of course  he is doing more work with his hand by putting the magnet a way and putting it back and the mechanic is inefficient.
But i did found it interesting because of the equilibrium state . If we replace the finger by an electromagnet to cancel and push at the same time.
instate of just canceling the attraction by the finger .We get work by the electromagnet and free work by the previously canceled permanent magnet .
That last one is our real motor the electromagnet is just here to unleash it.
as Low-Q said the energy supplied can be partially recovered from the coil as you all probably know (back emf).

But in my case i do not use a regular coil . I use a strait wire coil inspired by the work of Bruce-TPU on his EBLV Design (not for motional emf )  but to avoid Lenz's law in the interaction between the permanent magnets and the electromagnet. also to reduce the resistance while passing enough current to polarize the core of my electromagnet .

PS: forgot to mention that the current to produce the emf to polarize the core is almost completely recovered  minus the resistance wish is minimal since we are using a parallel circuit = low voltage -> big current -> big -> emf
in an open circuit.

Sidneo
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: Low-Q on April 25, 2012, 11:26:24 PM
In the best case you will have an efficient electromotor, but not over unity. Regardless how I misunderstood the design (Which design I understand now after examining it closer), there is loss in the coil which prevents it from delivering all the energy back.
Further, if you load the motor, the efficiency will decrease due to increased heat in the coil.

The best case is a superconducting coil. Then you can expect the motor to have a potential efficiency of 100%. The coil cannot deliver more back emf than the energy supplied to it in the first place. However, if it had, you would have a motor with more than 100% efficiency - over unity - with a coil which is more than super conducting. The question is: What coil have less than 0 Ohms resistance? Because, that is what you need to reach over unity in this particular case.

Good luck with the project anyways  :)

Vidar
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 26, 2012, 02:26:29 AM
In the best case you will have an efficient electromotor, but not over unity. Regardless how I misunderstood the design (Which design I understand now after examining it closer), there is loss in the coil which prevents it from delivering all the energy back.
Further, if you load the motor, the efficiency will decrease due to increased heat in the coil.

The best case is a superconducting coil. Then you can expect the motor to have a potential efficiency of 100%. The coil cannot deliver more back emf than the energy supplied to it in the first place. However, if it had, you would have a motor with more than 100% efficiency - over unity - with a coil which is more than super conducting. The question is: What coil have less than 0 Ohms resistance? Because, that is what you need to reach over unity in this particular case.

Good luck with the project anyways  :)

Vidar

Hi Vidar

Got your point but its clear that you didn't understood it since the electromagnet doesn't represent more than 1/3 of the energy involved here just like a "car jack" .
the coil is 0.0144 ohms  and it doesn't really matter . 550 paralleled wires 3 centimeters long  almost  no voltage just current  and there is no back emf nor lenz's law here  since the coil does not interact with any of the rotor changing flux and its not a closed circuit just a medium producing emf as byproduct in an open circuit .

A source of power
|
|
|------C EMF
|
|

anyway that's not the point here and i will not try to convince you any way don't worry i know how misconceptions ,bad math and misunderstanding of physic 101 can lead to ridicule . But that's not the case here  .

Thanks Sidneo

Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: Low-Q on April 26, 2012, 01:32:35 PM

Hi Vidar

Got your point but its clear that you didn't understood it since the electromagnet doesn't represent more than 1/3 of the energy involved here just like a "car jack" .
the coil is 0.0144 ohms  and it doesn't really matter . 550 paralleled wires 3 centimeters long  almost  no voltage just current  and there is no back emf nor lenz's law here  since the coil does not interact with any of the rotor changing flux and its not a closed circuit just a medium producing emf as byproduct in an open circuit .

A source of power
|
|
|------C EMF
|
|

anyway that's not the point here and i will not try to convince you any way don't worry i know how misconceptions ,bad math and misunderstanding of physic 101 can lead to ridicule . But that's not the case here  .

Thanks Sidneo
OK. Just don't mix up ENERGY and FORCE.

You can lift a car with your bare hands with a jack, but on the cost of how long distance your hand moves versus the distance you lift the car. The "force x distance = same energy"

Vidar
Title: Re: New simple pulsed Device Potential (Overunity)
Post by: sidneo on April 26, 2012, 03:23:02 PM
OK. Just don't mix up ENERGY and FORCE.

You can lift a car with your bare hands with a jack, but on the cost of how long distance your hand moves versus the distance you lift the car. The "force x distance = same energy"

Vidar

Hi Vidar

LOL that's why i used the jack analogy  the 2 permanent magnets around  the jack (electromagnet+ pulsed current) are  the car and the hand doing the work.

Jack =  (electromagnet+ pulsed current)
Car  = north permanent magnet
Hand doing work =south  permanent magnet

in this case the jack is only providing dynamisme to a static potential .

Anyway i will try it and if it does work i will post the apparatus and the protocol to replicate
if it doesn't i will also post why not and maybe avoid a waist of time to others .

Thanks Sidneo