Author Topic: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning ) (Read 613134 times)

Cadman · « **Reply #420 on:** December 12, 2014, 06:46:42 AM »

Quote from: lumen on December 12, 2014, 01:04:36 AM

Cadman, could you put some leaders on your cad model explaining the parts.
It's hard to tell the coil directions and some other parts.

Thanks

Look here

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19851-topic-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning-5.html#post268293

NoBull · « **Reply #421 on:** December 12, 2014, 12:20:46 PM »

Quote from: T-1000 on December 12, 2014, 12:37:54 AM

It is all good and nice classic model when you have single input power source and single closed loop circuit.
When it comes to two input power sources which are not directly related to each other then this model does not apply anymore.

Those laws are just elementary building blocks for induction problems. Electromagnetic induction is the production of an electromotive force across a conductor and electric current when it is exposed to a varying magnetic field.

That chart does not encompass the various phenomena involving ferromagnetic materials. It concerns only the phenomena happening in air coil induction. It disregards the source of varying magnetic flux, motions and forces acting on those sources. It just assumes the varying flux as given and provides answers how a coil responds to that.

I posted this chart to illustrate that the Lenz's law is just a qualitative law which merely defines the direction of the induction and the other laws do not help to define the magnitude of the induced current - especially in ideal coils.

Quote from: T-1000 on December 12, 2014, 12:37:54 AM

Like from my concept you can compare that case to vacuum triode: The main closed circuit is magnetic flux from magnet inducing current in coil and the weak force regulating magnetic flux resistance in its path is the external kinetic energy switching that flux
over moving iron core. The small change of kinetic movement causes great change in magnetic flux... In this case you get secondary reaction delivering power where primary action is doing same function as catalyst in chemical reaction.

Yes, any system involving a ferromagnetic component (a permanent magnet or ferrite or soft iron, etc...) is way too complicated to be defined solely by these simple simple induction laws, Alas!, books have been written about the BH curve alone.

However, the response of an air coil to the final flux picture - is always the same and easily describable by these induction laws.

P.S.
"Magnetic flux resistance" = Reluctance.

MileHigh · « **Reply #422 on:** December 12, 2014, 01:53:43 PM »

NoBull:

Quote

Yes, any system involving a ferromagnetic component (a permanent magnet or ferrite or soft iron, etc...) is way too complicated to be defined solely by these simple simple induction laws, Alas!, books have been written about the BH curve alone.

This is not the case. Yourself, and others in this thread, seem to be alluding to various kinds of "fringe" angles to various things when there really aren't any. Ferromagnetic materials consist of nothing more than a bunch of little magnets that obey the same laws and act in exactly the same way as big magnets. That's the beauty of it.

MileHigh

T-1000 · « **Reply #423 on:** December 12, 2014, 02:08:44 PM »

Quote from: NoBull on December 12, 2014, 12:20:46 PM

However, the response of an air coil to the final flux picture - is always the same and easily describable by these induction laws.

If you take away the fact the second power source is managing the flux change then it is close. In full picture it is not quite same...

The moving iron core between coil and magnet makes it different.
The best option here is just to make experiment then do all measurements you want before making any conclusions and assumptions...

thngr · « **Reply #424 on:** December 12, 2014, 02:32:05 PM »

Quote from: lumen on December 12, 2014, 02:29:19 AM

I am working on this concept because I have all the parts laying around.
Then I will do some tests to determine how well lenz forces in the coil can affect the rotor and if there is any advantage to flux switching.

there is no way to generate in this consept; may be volts but not amperes! you must find a core at least four poles. But do it who knows if we will learn some thing.

NoBull · « **Reply #425 on:** December 12, 2014, 02:36:52 PM »

Quote from: MileHigh on December 12, 2014, 01:53:43 PM

NoBull:
This is not the case. Yourself, and others in this thread, seem to be alluding to various kinds of "fringe" angles to various things when there really aren't any. Ferromagnetic materials consist of nothing more than a bunch of little magnets that obey the same laws and act in exactly the same way as big magnets. That's the beauty of it.

I am not alluding anything like that. My point was that ferromagnetic materials are not as easy to describe as a coil's response to a varying magnetic flux. Good luck analyzing the Gary motor with the just the Faraday's law and Lenz's law.

Could you even prove with these laws, that the flux enclosed by a closed superconducting loop remains constant and independent of any external flux, despite that this problem does not even involve any ferromagnetic materials ?

Ferromagnetic phenomena such as the BH curve, magnetostriction, Villiari effect, magnetoacoustics, VRM, Curie temp., μ-f curves, magnetocalorics, modulation of permeability by external E fields, etc... require a whole set of more complex tools (laws).

Also, remember that a lack of proof of existence is not a proof of nonexistence.

Jimboot · « **Reply #426 on:** December 12, 2014, 02:42:53 PM »

Quote from: thngr on December 12, 2014, 02:32:05 PM

there is no way to generate in this consept; may be volts but not amperes! you must find a core at least four poles. But do it who knows if we will learn some thing.

That's not true I can light a bulb with two poles. [size=78%]http://youtu.be/y3kbDQuoERA[/size]

What lumen will need to do though is place the coils perpendicular to the rotor though to maximize up. The better design is the one Cadman and syair have shown where the steel passes between the coil an mag..still try it lumen but get an extra coil to measure what is coming out the front. It will be double or triple what you get off the sides in that rotor.

FatBird · « **Reply #427 on:** December 12, 2014, 03:06:33 PM »

Nice Motor Prototype & setup. Thanks for sharing Jim.
.

Jimboot · « **Reply #428 on:** December 12, 2014, 03:24:43 PM »

I caught up with t1000 and grum via video and it was great to put a person behind t he handle . I think it's too easy sometimes to take cheap shots at each other when all we see is a username. I just want to thank everyone for their contribution. Just keep in mind there are new people here who don't know there are really smart fantastic people behind those usernames. All they read is what we publish.

lumen · « **Reply #429 on:** December 12, 2014, 04:10:40 PM »

Quote from: thngr on December 12, 2014, 02:32:05 PM

there is no way to generate in this consept; may be volts but not amperes! you must find a core at least four poles. But do it who knows if we will learn some thing.

Hi thngr
The idea is to have a small magnetic loop contained within the core of the coil. This loop induces no current in the coil so there is no lenz while the loop is contained.
As the rotor turns the loop will break into two loops, one still within the coil core and the other through the rotor.
When the loop expands it will cross the conductors and inducing current and lenz will push back but not on the rotor.
As the rotor turns further, the loop will be shorted back again to a small loop within the coils core.

Because the magnetic loop originates from within the coils core, lenz from current in the coil cannot influence the objects in the new path because it has already taken place before the magnetic loop reaches the controlling core.
Just another idea to test.

lumen · « **Reply #430 on:** December 12, 2014, 05:28:10 PM »

Quote from: Mister Caribbean Roots on December 12, 2014, 05:08:06 PM

That's a washing machine stator if i'm not mistaken, i did want to use it but i need a lathe to make some parts and that's what i don't have at my disposal now...sadly...

Looking forward to hear if that configuration can produce energy without lenz working against it...

Yes it is a washing machine stator.
I have been looking at it for some time until I finally understood how to get around lenz drag!

First, all magnetic fields are simply loops.
If you bring a coil with an iron core near the magnet, the loops cross through the coil into the core. The loops cutting through the coil to get into the core is what generates current.

If the coil has a load or is shorted then the current generated produces it's own field but opposite direction of the intersecting loops and so resists the incoming loops. This is lenz.
So how do you get around this?

Just think of it in reverse. Suppose the magnetic loop is contained within the coil.
Now if the loop is directed outside the coil, then as the loop cuts the conductors and there is a load or the coil is shorted, lenz will generate the opposite field to hold the loop inside the coil's core.
This cannot increase the load on the outer loop distracting device because lenz can only serve to reduce the loop connections making the rotor turn easier.

So in effect, lenz would be working to reduce the work under load and without any load, would turn only the same as any other well build generator.

Madeo · « **Reply #431 on:** December 12, 2014, 05:43:07 PM »

I just have a thought about Lenz problem. If a coil produces a counter EMF that opposes the rotor's magnet, what if we wound two coils (bifilar) ? One clockwise and the other counter-clockwise. When the magnet approaches the coils, the two coils will produce CEMF that will be opposite polarities to each other. They will cancel each other out and leaving the magnet itself with very little opposition as it passes by..... They will still be influence by the magnet's Magnetic field and would still produce power. This is just a theory, of course.

Just..Sayin.. · « **Reply #432 on:** December 12, 2014, 07:35:45 PM »

Quote from: Madeo on December 12, 2014, 05:43:07 PM

I just have a thought about Lenz problem. If a coil produces a counter EMF that opposes the rotor's magnet, what if we wound two coils (bifilar) ? One clockwise and the other counter-clockwise. When the magnet approaches the coils, the two coils will produce CEMF that will be opposite polarities to each other. They will cancel each other out and leaving the magnet itself with very little opposition as it passes by..... They will still be influence by the magnet's Magnetic field and would still produce power. This is just a theory, of course.

The current will flow in the same direction in both coils irrespective of which way they are wound......

Madeo · « **Reply #433 on:** December 12, 2014, 07:51:28 PM »

Quote from: Just..Sayin.. on December 12, 2014, 07:35:45 PM

The current will flow in the same direction in both coils irrespective of which way they are wound......

Even if that were the case, the coils would still produce opposite fields relative to each other which will cancel their CEMFs. I wish I haven't dismantled my bedini motor.

lumen · « **Reply #434 on:** December 12, 2014, 08:31:01 PM »

Quote from: Madeo on December 12, 2014, 07:51:28 PM

Even if that were the case, the coils would still produce opposite fields relative to each other which will cancel their CEMFs. I wish I haven't dismantled my bedini motor.

No, the field would be the same and the voltage generated would be opposite.
Lenz is always counter the inducing field direction or there is no current flow.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning ) (Read 613134 times)

Cadman

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

NoBull

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

MileHigh

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

T-1000

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

thngr

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

NoBull

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

Jimboot

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

FatBird

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

Jimboot

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

lumen

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

lumen

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

Madeo

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

Just..Sayin..

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

Madeo

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

lumen

Re: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )