Author Topic: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors. (Read 182129 times)

Dog-One · « **Reply #390 on:** January 06, 2016, 04:06:05 AM »

Quote from: citfta on January 06, 2016, 03:20:43 AM

I can respectfully agree to disagree. But I do have one more question. If the magnets are only pushed against and don't return the push then why can't we just use something else to be pushed against?

Carroll

I tend to agree Carroll. Why go to all the trouble of magnetizing a permanent magnet when the armature could just pull against a dead piece of steel or iron. I think I know why--because that kind of motor would be a piece of trash with poor torque characteristics and high power demand. In other words, unusable as a convertor of electrical energy into mechanical force or rotation. As noted by Don Smith, it would spend a lot of energy just churning up the Aether.

gotoluc · « **Reply #391 on:** January 06, 2016, 05:23:32 AM »

Quote from: poynt99 on January 06, 2016, 01:18:56 AM

Let's have some fun and put this to bed. You up for a challenge Brad?

I challenge you to an efficiency battle using only flyback from a coil. You stick with your iron core coil and rotor of magnets, and I'll use whatever coil I choose, but with no rotor, and no resonant tank. What do you say?

Let me know if you're up for it, then we can agree on some goals for the challenge.

I don't see the fun in this challenge!

You could achieve 95 to 97% of your input from flyback with those conditions.
How could this be fair if you tell Brad what he has to use and you can chose what ever you wish?

Don't go for it Brad... unless you fire up your RT v3

Luc

Jimboot · « **Reply #392 on:** January 06, 2016, 05:50:23 AM »

Quote from: tinman on January 05, 2016, 03:02:23 PM

Jimboot
Looking at your pic's,and the twist direction of the string,the magnets in your video were spinning in the correct direction to untwist the string.

Nope - the string definitely wound up not down. That is why I posted the photo of the string after the run. Quite clearly it had wound up.

Quote from: tinman on January 05, 2016, 03:02:23 PM

[/size]One easy way to verify what is going on,is to lower your spinning magnets so as they are about 1mm of the floor. Then let the magnets spin. If the magnets touch the floor after some time of spinning,then you know the string was unwinding,and getting longer.

Brad

Or I could see the string not wound up before the test and definitely wound up after. When you release it after it has run it UN ravels.

edit: Ok just did the measurement test. The string was definitely winding up placing tension on itself then it began to drop. I examined the string and it was falling apart and had deteriorated to just a couple of strands. So the tension on the string is not in doubt for me and the end of a spin. Maybe the breaking string came first which triggered the spin? Not sure but I will do more tests. Most definitely not an unwinding string though.

hoptoad · « **Reply #393 on:** January 06, 2016, 05:58:58 AM »

Quote from: citfta on January 06, 2016, 03:20:43 AM

I can respectfully agree to disagree. But I do have one more question. If the magnets are only pushed against and don't return the push then why can't we just use something else to be pushed against?

Carroll

Because the nature of the 'pusher' dictates the nature of the push (or pull), and thus also determines the nature of materials used in the construction of both pusher/puller and pushed/pulled.

In any current driven DC or AC motor, electricity is the pusher. Utilizing the magnetism that's produced by the electricity is merely one method which allows pushing (or pulling) without physical contact.

Static driven motors operate using the electric field not the magnetic field. Neither electromagnets or permanent magnets are needed for them to operate. But you still need electricity.

Permanent magnets in a DC motor are the electromechanical equivalent of a chemical catalyst, improving the performance of the motor but not actually contributing energy directly in any way. Instead, they improve performance and reduce the input energy required by helping to provide better electromechanical characteristics than would be the case without them.

They can help save energy and they can assist in the translation of energy during a device's operation, but they cannot produce energy.

Cheers.

tinman · « **Reply #394 on:** January 06, 2016, 06:44:53 AM »

Quote from: poynt99 on January 06, 2016, 01:18:56 AM

Let's say you are right Brad, that the apparent inductance increases momentarily. I believe that it is possible, and I posted to that effect. Let's say we are both correct, and both are happening at the same time.

Now what? What are you going to do with this information? What is the purpose of all this to begin with? If the purpose is simply to make the most efficient IK power source, then see below.

You up for my challenge? Here is is again:

Let's have some fun and put this to bed. You up for a challenge Brad?

I challenge you to an efficiency battle using only flyback from a coil. You stick with your iron core coil and rotor of magnets, and I'll use whatever coil I choose, but with no rotor, and no resonant tank. What do you say?

Let me know if you're up for it, then we can agree on some goals for the challenge.

Sure-you know me-I never back down from a challenge.

But first you must finnish the challenge you have already voluntarily half completed--> and that is to get your simulated setup to replicate my results from my DUT. That is-to get the output current-power to increase when the input current-power is decreased.
Once you have answered and completed that challenge you put upon your self, then we can set the ! Apples for Apples! parameters for the next challenge.

You will of course be required to build an actual device for the next challenge-as I do. And you will be required to post a video here on this thread of your device under test, and the results obtained from that test during the video--> as I do.

So yes, im up for the challenge as long as we are on equal ground.

Brad.

tinman · « **Reply #395 on:** January 06, 2016, 06:50:16 AM »

Quote from: gotoluc on January 06, 2016, 05:23:32 AM

I don't see the fun in this challenge!

You could achieve 95 to 97% of your input from flyback with those conditions.
How could this be fair if you tell Brad what he has to use and you can chose what ever you wish?

Don't go for it Brad... unless you fire up your RT v3

Luc

The RT V3 will not be playing a part in this Luc, but you will get to see my latest desig and build of the LAG-if it comes to that. But lets just say that Poynt will have to be up at around the 96% efficiency mark before we start any fine tuning-and that is discounting the small air screw being driven at 2350rpm.

Brad

poynt99 · « **Reply #396 on:** January 06, 2016, 02:25:26 PM »

Quote from: tinman on January 06, 2016, 06:44:53 AM

Sure-you know me-I never back down from a challenge.

But first you must finnish the challenge you have already voluntarily half completed--> and that is to get your simulated setup to replicate my results from my DUT. That is-to get the output current-power to increase when the input current-power is decreased.
Once you have answered and completed that challenge you put upon your self, then we can set the ! Apples for Apples! parameters for the next challenge.

You will of course be required to build an actual device for the next challenge-as I do. And you will be required to post a video here on this thread of your device under test, and the results obtained from that test during the video--> as I do.

So yes, im up for the challenge as long as we are on equal ground.

Brad.

Huh? Your response to my challenge is another challenge?

My challenge stands.

My simulation was an attempt to explain what is going on in the circuit, but it has nothing to do with my challenge to you. Why would you base your acceptance of my challenge on me being able to exactly replicate your results in my sim?

I already told you, so listen good. I am not going to spend any more time on that sim OK? It requires extensive tweaking to get magnetics to work properly in a sim, and I have better things to do with my time. I would much prefer to build a real flyback supply to go up against your ssg rotor setup. So it is up to you, take it or leave it.

tinman · « **Reply #397 on:** January 06, 2016, 02:43:15 PM »

Quote from: poynt99 on January 06, 2016, 02:25:26 PM

Huh? Your response to my challenge is another challenge?

My challenge stands.

My simulation was an attempt to explain what is going on in the circuit, but it has nothing to do with my challenge to you. Why would you base your acceptance of may other challenge on me being able to exactly replicate your results in my sim?

I already told you, so listen good. I am not going to spend any more time on that sim OK? It requires extensive tweaking to get magnetics to work properly in a sim, and I have better things to do with my time. I would much prefer to build a real flyback supply to go up against your ssg rotor setup. So it is up to you, take it or leave it.

Poynt
You know as well as i do(along with everyone else here) as to why you put together your sim to try and replicate my DUT. It was to show(or try to)me that there was nothing special going on with my DUT. This was a challenge you bought upon your self,and you either can or cannot back up that challenge with results. I mean,if i have nothing out of the ordinary going on,and it is an everyday situation,then why must you spend so much time trying to tweak your sim to show these !nothing out of the ordinary! results. I think you should finish one challenge before you take on the next one

I have accepted your challenge on the grounds that you first finalize your!self induced! first challenge--so as we can all see the result's from that one first. Remember-you bought that one on your self,in the hope of showing me(and others) that my DUT was showing nothing out of the ordinary. So you either admit to not being able to replicate my results on your sim,or you spend the time to achieve the result you were hoping to show.

If you dont finalize the first challenge,then it looks like you are just moving on to the next one -and so on until you find one that succeeds. Thats not in the spirit of the research we do here. Turn the tables around Poynt--put your self in my position. Would you be that happy if i just said--no,im not finishing that one,as it dose not show what i am saying is true

--I'll have to keep looking until i find something that fits. How can you say that you dont have the time to finish one challenge,but have the time to take on another one?--make no sense.

So that is my offer-take it or leave it.
Finnish the first challenge that you took upon your self to prove me wrong,and lets all see the results from that,and then we can start our next challenge--that was also offered by your self.

I have had !some! members of these forums say i never finish a project,or take it to the end,so as we can see the end result's. So now it's time for you to take that on board,and finish the one you started,and share the end results.

Brad

poynt99 · « **Reply #398 on:** January 06, 2016, 02:55:14 PM »

Brad,

That's an extremely poor reason not to accept my challenge, and will be perceived as a cop-out.

So be it. You didn't have much of a chance anyway.

Carry on believing you have something extraordinary with your ssg rotor setup if you wish, but proof will be in the pudding, whether you can make anything extraordinary of it or not. I hope you do, but I'm quite certain that you're no further ahead when compared to good old fashioned proper engineering design.

poynt99 · « **Reply #399 on:** January 06, 2016, 03:00:19 PM »

Quote from: gotoluc on January 06, 2016, 05:23:32 AM

I don't see the fun in this challenge!

You could achieve 95 to 97% of your input from flyback with those conditions.
How could this be fair if you tell Brad what he has to use and you can chose what ever you wish?

Don't go for it Brad... unless you fire up your RT v3

Luc

Well hold on a minute there Luc, Brad is the one making claims that he has some extraordinary magic trick that is giving him better efficiency over anything else, so it is him that is putting those conditions on himself. The whole point of the challenge was to put good old engineering design up against his magic ssg scheme.

Capiche?

poynt99 · « **Reply #400 on:** January 06, 2016, 03:12:36 PM »

LOL,

It is ironic actually; I am often criticized for offering my simulations as a means to analyze a circuit and for rarely building anything, but here we have the exact opposite! Brad wants me to complete my simulation before he will accept a challenge where I would be building an actual device.

Too damn funny.

MileHigh · « **Reply #401 on:** January 06, 2016, 05:05:33 PM »

I'm just baffled that anybody can believe that a pulsing coil and a few magnets spinning on a rotor can be doing something special. However, we have been there dozens of times in the past.

It's fun to try to figure out exactly what is going on as an interesting challenge. I think it was on the other thread that I took some measurements that Woopy made on one of his builds and I crunched the hell out of his measurements and extracted lots of information and pretty much reverse-engineered the energy dynamics of his entire setup. All that I got was stony silence.

I notice that Brad takes exception if somebody that is a so-called "big gun" changes their analysis or adapts their analysis over time because of something that they did not think of before or because some new information becomes available. Horror of horrors, that's just not permitted!

In the spirit of the "understanding" challenge I will post some sample timing diagrams on another thread. I don't expect that Brad will ever do a timing diagram, but perhaps seeing some examples will inspire somebody else to make one for their next pulse motor build. In fact, if there is ever another pulse motor build off, supplying a timing diagram for your motor should be a requirement for entry into the competition.

http://overunity.com/16317/the-beauty-of-timing-diagrams/msg470448/#msg470448

verpies · « **Reply #402 on:** January 06, 2016, 05:32:00 PM »

Quote from: TinselKoala on January 02, 2016, 07:53:09 AM

Here's what the induced voltage looks like when a rotor magnet passes a coil.

As the pole of the magnet approaches the coil, it induces a voltage whose polarity depends on the polarity of the magnet facing the coil. As the magnet gets closer and closer the flux changes faster and faster so the amplitude of the voltage increases. As the magnet passes "TDC" or closest approach, the polarity flips (because now the flux is decreasing instead of increasing) and the amplitude starts high (fast change in flux) and decreases as the magnet moves further away.
If the rotor magnet is flipped so that the other pole is facing the coil, the induced voltage pattern is flipped: first positive, then negative.

That is all true an useful when the coil is open, but when the coil is shorted by a load or a constant voltage source, then another form of analysis becomes more useful, namely the conservation of flux penetrating the coil as shown here.

verpies · « **Reply #403 on:** January 06, 2016, 09:50:48 PM »

Quote from: gotoluc on January 03, 2016, 06:15:37 AM

Quote from: tinman on January 03, 2016, 04:19:56 AM
Now all you have to do is get the entire wave form above the zero volt line without the use of rectifiers
Why and what will that do for me?

According to Faraday's Law of Induction, if you get a waveform like that all above zero with an open coil that is not powered externally, then it means that the magnetic flux penetrating this coil is always increasing up and up and up....

gotoluc · « **Reply #404 on:** January 06, 2016, 10:00:29 PM »

Quote from: verpies on January 06, 2016, 09:50:48 PM

Why and what will that do for me?

According to Faraday's Law of Induction, if you get a waveform like that all above zero with an open coil that is not powered externally, then it means that the magnetic flux penetrating this coil is always increasing up and up and up....

Thanks verpies for explaining why it would be interesting to pursue this.
Now, when I achieve this (all above the zero line) and change the core to a Finemet core to boost the Inductance every time the special magnet arrangement goes by the coil, will there be any additional benefit?

Thanks for sharing

Luc

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors. (Read 182129 times)

Dog-One

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

gotoluc

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

Jimboot

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

hoptoad

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

tinman

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

tinman

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

poynt99

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

tinman

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

poynt99

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

poynt99

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

poynt99

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

MileHigh

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

verpies

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

verpies

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.

gotoluc

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.