and I agree with Guyla's analysis.
You are wrong that all the flux takes the shortest route (or the path of least reluctance).
The magnetic flux takes all parallel routes inversely proportionally to their reluctances.

Finally! I've been waiting for someone to point this out. Thank you NoBull for your knowledge and your willingness to share it. (You may find that it is a thankless task, here, though.)

Gyula

Hi Gyula
Thanks again for taking your time and explaining all these for me, that is very kind of you I agree with almost everything you mentioned but I think there has to be a way to go around Lenz's law! I think we should just think and push as hard as we can and I'm sure we will break through this wall. I think if we all give it thought and work on it, we can do it That's why I'm gonna fire one more of my crazy designs hoping that this one might give us a bit more energy compared to the previous ones
Would you please be kind and let me know what you think about this one? And forgive me if I keep repeating the same mistakes, it must be because of my lake of knowledge in the filed of magnetism and electricity
In this design, on the right side of the picture I tried to show that the core must be rotated 90 degrees towards us so that the shunt would be positioned at 90 degrees compared to the plate that magnets are rotating at.

@ kEhYo77 Thank you my friend for sharing this design. And the video you shared was truly AMAZING. Thanks a lot for making this clear for us Would you please let me know how could I find more information about this design? under what name it goes and who did it please? And I also think that magnetic current takes the shortest path until the path is fully saturated and then the rest of the flux will take the second path Thank you everybody for sharing your thoughts in here, this is amazing and I really appreciate it

@life is illusion
There is only this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySId1F9YKvM as far as I know and I have not seen a replication yet.


@gyula
The parallel path just illustrates the behavior of flux switching nicely and an air gap is not required there. Without the gap it will
work just the same. Flux wants to take the most compact loop an once it is locked in there sitting pretty there is no easy way
to change that (like adding route for the flux will not change the distribution pattern of the flux lines to expand to available new space).


BTW the solution presented in this thread works on the basis of Thane's BiTT and he does not have any air gaps to make it work.
It is just a mechanical equivalent.


kEhYo

Hi Broli as a matter of fact I am building one too!
I think that in your design the flux going through all the 3 legs of the core on rotation will inhibit performance.
But I guess we will see about that.
In mine, the attraction forces from magnet to the cores are distributed on 3 phases. So there are 3 points
of attraction at a time in the form of a triangle. 9/12 ratio gives nice reduction of cogging as well!


kEhYo

Hi kEhYo77,

There seems to some misunderstanding between you and me in that what we originally meant... 

you wrote: "The parallel path just illustrates the behavior of flux switching nicely and an air gap is not required there. Without the gap it will work just the same. Flux wants to take the most compact loop an once it is locked in there sitting pretty there is no easy way to change that (like adding route for the flux will not change the distribution pattern of the flux lines to expand to available new space)."

I agree with all what you wrote above. What is more, I agree that Thane's BiTT setup has no air gap either, it does not need an air gap.
BUT Thane solved this as he wrote in his patent application, CA2594905: "The Bi- Transformer design also has one primary coil but it differs from conventional transformers in that it has two secondary coils. The two secondary coils are set on a Toroid shaped core with a reluctance which is maintained at a lower value than the primary core leg throughout the transformer's entire operating range. This can easily be accomplished by physically increasing the Toroid area or using transformer core material with a higher relative permeability." 

And Sam, (life is illusion) did not refer to any air gap or permeability condition in his setup for his center core and for his C core on the right hand side, so I had to define these conditions (to make real operation more understandable for his setup), and this is why I referred to an air gap as a possible means for influencing reluctance, when I answered to your reference to the parallel path setup shown in the video link. In Sam's setup in this thread there is an air gap into which the rotor magnets enter and the coming and leaving sequences of the magnets would represent Sam's primary "input coil", while Thane's setup has no air gap anywhere and his primary core is also a closed magnetic circuit with a given reluctance path versus his secondary path.


Does this all mean that in Sam's setup,  if the reluctances in the center core and in the C core on the right hand side are equal with each other,  then the incoming flux from the rotor magnets chooses both the center and the C cores i.e. input flux is divided into two (more or less equal) parts?  I think it does.

Now hopefully we can already be in the same boat from now on...   


Gyula

Hi Broli as a matter of fact I am building one too!
I think that in your design the flux going through all the 3 legs of the core on rotation will inhibit performance.
But I guess we will see about that.
In mine, the attraction forces from magnet to the cores are distributed on 3 phases. So there are 3 points
of attraction at a time in the form of a triangle. 9/12 ratio gives nice reduction of cogging as well!

kEhYo

It's true that flux will be distributed over the three legs but it was important to get as much surface area covered under the magnet as possible. In ideal cases I would have liked to have one continuous ring to leave no gaps, see attached stator example. This would reduce cogging and any back torque effect (See Lafonte's minimal air gap demonstrations). But this turned out to be not very economical financial wise so I turned to cheaper alternatives.

This ring type of stator would introduce low reluctance path from magnet to magnet and I doubt that any significant flux would go through the coil's core part to the opposite side. Basicaly it would short out the flux.

Correct... if you do not limit the amount of magnets on your rotor. At least that's what the simulation shows. However when you limit the amount of magnets to 2 (180°) or 4 (90°) the flux will mostly choose the shorter bridge rather than traveling 1 half or 1 quarter around the ring. That's why in the designs I focus more on the amount of bridge pieces than the amount of magnets. It's a small sacrifice to get zero cogging for free and potentially zero back torque.