MileHigh,
Yes all that double talk is just too much to be anything but impressive sounding.

I will assume that you are being sarcastic.  You have a physical 3D CAD model of your proposed design.  Is that were it stops?  Do you intend to physically build it?

I will just repeat what I stated previously because you have a small group of enthusiasts on this thread that shares your interests.  If you believe in your design then make a series of diagrams showing the flux flows at various stages of rotation of the rotor.  And more importantly make a timing diagram that also shows how it is actually supposed to work.  Motor/generators are designed on paper and analyzed on paper all the time.  I suppose that you are arguing that this design will generate changing flux so the coil can drive a load while at the same time there is no Lenz drag on the rotation of the rotor.  In other words, you believe that you have a "workaround" that somehow "cheats" how a standard generator works.  The way for you to start proving that to yourself and your peers is to make a comprehensive timing diagram that shows how it allegedly works.

MileHigh

I will assume that you are being sarcastic.  You have a physical 3D CAD model of your proposed design.  Is that were it stops?  Do you intend to physically build it?

I will just repeat what I stated previously because you have a small group of enthusiasts on this thread that shares your interests.  If you believe in your design then make a series of diagrams showing the flux flows at various stages of rotation of the rotor.  And more importantly make a timing diagram that also shows how it is actually supposed to work.  Motor/generators are designed on paper and analyzed on paper all the time.  I suppose that you are arguing that this design will generate changing flux so the coil can drive a load while at the same time there is no Lenz drag on the rotation of the rotor.  In other words, you believe that you have a "workaround" that somehow "cheats" how a standard generator works.  The way for you to start proving that to yourself and your peers is to make a comprehensive timing diagram that shows how it allegedly works.

MileHigh

I was not being sarcastic, I was agreeing with you about the "tubechop" generator.
It seems the video is simply trying to baffle with bull ####.

As for my design, I believe the idea of working on the opposite side of Lenz is the basis for a working OU generator.
Whether this design or any design can achieve that is speculation and based on 200 years of people building generators, it would seem someone would have come up with the same idea. (maybe they have!)

It's a simple build and should only take a day after adding the frame and other missing components.
A simulation would be fairly easy and could possibly show some useful information on flux retention in the core before a build.
So I may do a simulation even if it wastes some build time.

We both know that Syair's generator could not function as shown with Lenz working against it. This leaves only two options.
1: It doesn't work as portrayed.
2: It doesn't work against Lenz as a typical generator.

Time will tell which is true.

The field simulations show some very strong flux and now I'm thinking possibly not to rotate the entire stator.
In the first pic you can see the stator shorting the field as it should to maintain the flux within the core.
The second and third show the stator at 10 and then 20 degrees. The flux is very high in the stator indicating what has moved through the coil at some point.
The last pic shows the stator at 90 degrees and you can see some flux and this could cause some Lenz to work against the stator as it rotates from this position, though is probably small.
 
I may try to find a way to keep the stator stationary and rotate a small segment at each end of the stator instead. This would eliminate any Lenz affecting the stator as it no longer would move around the coil.
 

I did some simulations by rotating only small iron segments and the results are interesting.
The design is somewhat close to Syair's in operation but inverted. Makes you wonder doesn't it.
 
A and C would have near zero flux while B would be very high.
You can see in D that the flux starts to drop off fast from max in a very short rotation.
Lenz would appear to be virtually eliminated since the segments carry the flux for a short distance in an area where Lenz would have little impact on it.

 
 

To All:

Hopefully the attached graphic will be even more helpful.   The attached graphic is a distillation of the design down to its bare essence.

Moving the iron back and forth in the air gap with no load on the generator coil will be energy-neutral.  It will modulate the amount of flux that flows though the magnet and you will be able to measure an EMF output from the coil.  However, you can clearly see that there will be cogging. 

If you attach a load to the generator coil, then there will be Lenz drag.  It should be obvious to all of you why that is the case.

Like I said before, all of these attempts in search of a "magic workaround" can and should be analyzed on paper first.  There is no point in spending 20 hours building something if you can make a rational analysis of how it works on paper.

As far as the real design goes, you can see that it will also have a lot of cogging as the rotor rotates.  Even though cogging is in theory energy-neutral, we know that it puts stresses on the bearings and the overall build and ultimately causes friction.  Therefore, it will be really hard to distinguish the cogging from the Lenz drag for a typical experimenter.  That difficulty could result in somebody convinced that they have something when in fact they don't.  It could create a thread that lasts two years where people spin their wheels and get absolutely nowhere.

Now, to the regulars in this thread: Do you see and understand what I am saying between the attached diagram and my description above?

MileHigh

To All:

Hopefully the attached graphic will be even more helpful.   The attached graphic is a distillation of the design down to its bare essence.

Moving the iron back and forth in the air gap with no load on the generator coil will be energy-neutral.  It will modulate the amount of flux that flows though the magnet and you will be able to measure an EMF output from the coil.  However, you can clearly see that there will be cogging. 

If you attach a load to the generator coil, then there will be Lenz drag.  It should be obvious to all of you why that is the case.

Like I said before, all of these attempts in search of a "magic workaround" can and should be analyzed on paper first.  There is no point in spending 20 hours building something if you can make a rational analysis of how it works on paper.

As far as the real design goes, you can see that it will also have a lot of cogging as the rotor rotates.  Even though cogging is in theory energy-neutral, we know that it puts stresses on the bearings and the overall build and ultimately causes friction.  Therefore, it will be really hard to distinguish the cogging from the Lenz drag for a typical experimenter.  That difficulty could result in somebody convinced that they have something when in fact they don't.  It could create a thread that lasts two years where people spin their wheels and get absolutely nowhere.

Now, to the regulars in this thread: Do you see and understand what I am saying between the attached diagram and my description above?

MileHigh

In the diagram you show it is certain that Lenz will affect the iron if the coil is under load.
The reason is that the iron segment is directly used to increase the flux through the coil and so the flux will directly affect the iron also.
If you can understand that in your case the flux is outside the coil and the iron is used to move the flux through the coil in a conventional manner.
 
There may not be a "magic workaround" but if the flux is only inside of a coil and iron can be used to pull it out, then this is an inversion and the Lenz forces and will instead work against the expansion. That could only mean less attraction on the distracting iron.
 
Like I said, it's a theory that would work, but it may be impossible to construct a device to achieve it.
I am building a test device that I believe can achieve that goal but I also believe that there has been much more research put into generator technology than most would understand so at some point someone must have found the problem with this concept.
 

Lumen:

but if the flux is only inside of a coil and iron can be used to pull it out, then this is an inversion and the Lenz forces

There is no "inversion," that is the problem where you are not "seeing."  The only thing that counts is changing magnetic flux that goes through the coil.  The iron is not "pulling it out."  When the iron rotor lines up with the stator then that allows more flux to flow through the newly created path for the flux.  That is the only thing that is happening.  You are not doing anything in "some other way."  There is no "new technique" being experimented with here.  You just have to look at what is happening at take it at face value.  The flux of the magnet will flow based on the external environment for the magnet.  It does this "without thinking," for lack of a better term.  Your setup does nothing more than change the external environment for the magnet, and the flux from the magnet responds in turn.  Your rotor will need an injection of external mechanical power if the coil starts driving a load.

Please try to visualize this, that's all that I can ask of you.

T-1000:

The same comments above apply to you about the "90 degrees" stuff.  If your changing magnetic field is precisely at 90 degrees to a very precisely wound coil that is very uniform, then the output from the coil will be zero.   In reality, it's impossible for an amateur experimenter to make a setup where this happens.  A small amount of flux will still pass through the generator coil.  That will create a small output from the coil.

it indirect between force moving iron and force resulting from induction on 90 degrees angle and is different than in this drawing. This is fundamental difference.

Like I said above, there is no difference.  If you have some kind of a design that you think uses a "90 degree" technique, and you are getting output from the generator, then changing flux is passing through your generator coil.  This is Nature, and it's real.  If you have a build the challenge for you is to have a new look at it and make a serious investigation to find out how changing magnetic flux passes through your generator coil, even if you made your build with the intention that all of the flux would be at 90 degrees to the generator coil.  Like I say above, it's basically impossible for you to make a build where the 0% of the flux passes through your coil.  All of the magnetic field lines are curved and there is just no way you can accomplish 100% of the flux flowing at 90 degrees to your generator coil.  Also, if you actually could have 100% of the flux at 90 degrees to your generator coil, then the output from your generator coil would be zero.

So, if you have a build where you think that all of the flux is at 90 degrees, and you are getting an output from the generator coil, then you are wrong.  Some changing flux is going trough your coil.  These are the fundamentals of how your device acts.

MileHigh