GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83019
  • *Latest: Zeg01

  • *Total Posts: 502864
  • *Total Topics: 15031
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 23
  • *Total: 29

Author Topic: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?  (Read 3630 times)

Offline postingsite

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2018, 06:22:47 AM »
    The simplest solution to make this device function could be to :
     -  first,  power the  motor ( which is intended to rotate the generators ) by using an  'external power source'
     -  and then,  when the generators are generating power,   gradually mix the output of the generators with the current of the 'external power source',  and then gradually decrease the  'external power source',  until the device is self-powered

   Everyone realizes this could be as simple as two variable-rotary-resistors/potentiometers, connected together via two cog wheels,  so that when you increase one, you are also decreasing the other,  and their combined output going to the motor .

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline postingsite

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2018, 06:40:02 AM »
I just thought of a reason why the design that this thread is based on,  the design in the diagram,  on the very first post on this thread,  may ( ? ) have a problem .
    -   In this design,  when one  rotating-magnet  approaches a  coil-with-core, ,  that coil may already have current flowing through it,  because of current generated in other generators on the same shaft,  so because of that electromagnetic-field already emanating from the coils,  the device may experience  the  electromagnetic-braking-effect  problem experienced in other designs .
          -  Maybe each separate generator on the shaft,  could transmit it's power via an induction method,  but usually induction also works both ways .
          -  Maybe diodes would be a solution .

     I don't if this device would have the problem detailed above 

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #17 on: August 08, 2018, 05:18:46 AM »
Magnetic cogging neutralization.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzkQ57f3Gdo


This generator will put out between 1600-1800 watts. My bigger machine will put out between 1800-2000 watts. Input to this machine, run by an MY1020 rewound razor scooter motor is less than 300 watts. Of that 300 watts, the 3 Battery circuit that no one believes works can recover about 70%.


There are several keys to success. First, build the generator EXACTLY as I have described. All magnetic cogging is neutralized. There is a patent for this that is over a 150 years old, so it is in the public domain already. Second, wind the coils according to what Tesla described in his patent. (for this sized rotor with the magnets I have described in the video) 12 strands of #23 each 253 feet in length in parallel. Then connect groups of four strands in series. You will end up with 3 wires. That particular coil will speed up under load at 2200 rpm. This means the rewound motor must run on 24 volts to achieve the proper rpm.  Thats it. You can run it with a stock motor if you want. You just won't be able to recover much of the input energy. Still, the COP is pretty high.


When I would put 12 coils in my big machine I used to have to put a 12" crescent wrench on each end, and it took two people to turn it 1/6 of the rotation from one magnetic lock position to the next. Now, with all the magnets adjusted, I can spin the rotor by hand past the coils.


The only issue now is HEAT. The constant change of flux in the iron generates heat, and if you run the generator for more than an hour, you will melt the insulation off the wires in the coils and now you have close to $900 worth of paperweights. Been there. Done that more than once before I learned. I have some other coil cores I am testing on my coil tester, but won't have any info for at least a few months. In the process of moving right now. THIS IS A PROOF OF CONCEPT MACHINE ONLY not a prototype. There are half a dozen things I have learned that are not in this video that I now incorporate into the machine. I would suggest building a small machine with only a couple coils, one on each side of a rotor, and then the opposing magnets. It will prove to you whether I am full of crap or not. But really, this is NOT rocket science. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #17 on: August 08, 2018, 05:18:46 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline postingsite

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #18 on: August 08, 2018, 05:41:50 AM »
I know you're only demonstrating cogging-torque neutralization, and surplus output,  both impressive

Has it ever been self-running  ?
  - preferably without batteries, 
  -  no connection to mains
  -  any capacitors or batteries should hold no charge at all,   at the start, 

 -  Apparently batteries almost always have some charge left,  so batteries are not preferable for  a proof-of-concept  self-running  device  .

I keep on reading debunkers explanations for higher outputs than inputs,  so the only way it could not be debunked would be to be self-running ,  it's the only thing that counts  .

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #19 on: August 08, 2018, 06:58:18 AM »
I'm not claiming a self runner unless I have self run it on my bench. I have NOT. I'm in the process of moving so I have no time for at least a couple months to even unpack my stuff which is all in boxes. The video was made a couple months ago.


I ONLY posted because of the interest in neutralizing magnetic cogging. It should be OBVIOUS that this machine does that. Plus there is a patent from over 150 years ago that applies the same principle. The patent had: coil (in attraction) rotor then magnet (in repulsion). I didn't LIKE that arrangement because all the forces exerted on the rotor were in the same direction. Pulling it from one side and pushing it away from the other. That would really exert unnecessary torque on the rotor. In MY design there are coils on BOTH sides of the rotor in attraction and magnets on BOTH sides of the rotor in repulsion at the same time. Forces are equalized. When I have time to prove inputs and outputs on my generator, I will do that. Until then, please consider ONLY what I have shared about the elimination of magnetic cogging. Any reasonable individual should be able to see the benefit of THAT. The rest you can consider pie in the sky until proven.


Matt Jones over on Energetic Forum is building a SMALL version of the generator, only two coils, to see if one that small has a COP>1. I'll post the results here whether they are positive or negative. There will be video and measurements. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #19 on: August 08, 2018, 06:58:18 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5033
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #20 on: August 08, 2018, 04:27:28 PM »
 author=Dbowling link=topic=17587.msg524666#msg524666 date=1533698326]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzkQ57f3Gdo


Quote
This generator will put out between 1600-1800 watts. My bigger machine will put out between 1800-2000 watts. Input to this machine, run by an MY1020 rewound razor scooter motor is less than 300 watts. Of that 300 watts, the 3 Battery circuit that no one believes works can recover about 70%.


So to be clear--
Output minimum is 1600 watts
Input using the Matt wound motor is 300 watt's max.
If we use the 3BGS ,we can reduce that 300 watt input by 70%,and so our total input becomes just 90 watts.
So 90 watts in,and 1600 watts out,for a COP of 1777%

Quote
Second, wind the coils according to what Tesla described in his patent. (for this sized rotor with the magnets I have described in the video) 12 strands of #23 each 253 feet in length in parallel. Then connect groups of four strands in series. You will end up with 3 wires.

Ah yes,i knew Tesla would have to come into it sooner or later  ::)

Quote
That particular coil will speed up under load at 2200 rpm.

Any coil when loaded will speed up under load if the RPMs are correct.
What you fail to understand is !why! you get the speed up under load effect,even though you answer the question your self a little further down the page.

Quote
The only issue now is HEAT. The constant change of flux in the iron generates heat,

And there you go--the reason for !speed up under load!
Lets see--
-->No load on the coil,no current flowing through the coil,means no magnetic field produced by the coil that is of the same polarity as the magnet approaching it. Flux through the core of the coil is of the !!opposite!! polarity to that of the approaching magnet-eddy current heat high
-->load across the coil,current flowing through the coil,means a magnetic field produced by the coil that is of the !!same!! polarity of that of the approaching magnet-eddy current heat low
Wonder why you have the speed up under load effect?  ::)

Quote
You can run it with a stock motor if you want. You just won't be able to recover much of the input energy. Still, the COP is pretty high.

Well as we all know,the stock motor is far more efficient than the Matt wound bathroom heater--i mean motor ;D,but lets say the stock motor uses twice as much power as the !Matt! motor at 600 watts. The generator puts out a minimum of 1600 watts,so we should have 1000 watts to spare--correct?

Quote
and if you run the generator for more than an hour, you will melt the insulation off the wires in the coils and now you have close to $900 worth of paperweights.

Hang on a minute  :o
Quote:  12 strands of #23 each 253 feet in length in parallel. Then connect groups of four strands in series. You will end up with 3 wires
So each of the 3 wires is made from 4 lots of 23 gauge wire-being American,i would say 23 AWG-correct?.
The maximum current value for this gauge wire in this situation is 4.7 amps,and there is 4 strands to each of the 3 in total wires,which gives a current value total of 18.8 amps for each of the 3 litz wires. This means that each coil can handle 56 amps of current.
To get 1600 watts at 56 amps,your output voltage is only 28.57V/RMS  ???
Hmmmm--sum-ting-wong

 
Quote
This means the rewound motor must run on 24 volts to achieve the proper rpm.  Thats it.

 Hey  ???
Hang on a minute here
Quote: First, build the generator EXACTLY as I have described.Wind the coils according to what Tesla described in his patent. (for this sized rotor with the magnets I have described in the video) 12 strands of #23 each 253 feet in length in parallel. Then connect groups of four strands in series. You will end up with 3 wires.That particular coil will speed up under load at 2200 rpm
The !Matt! motor needs 24 volts to run at 2200RPM?
Your mate Matt said his modded motor ran at 4500RPM at 12 volts
Your video states within the first 12 seconds that the generator will speed up under load,and has no !!magnetic drag!!--so why the hell is the motor needing 24 volts to reach 2200 RPM?
Sum-ting-else-wong.

Quote
I would suggest building a small machine with only a couple coils, one on each side of a rotor, and then the opposing magnets. It will prove to you whether I am full of crap or not.

Get the buckets and shovel.

Quote
But really, this is NOT rocket science.

You got that right--rocket science is easy.
It's just the ejection of mass at velocity.
Your science makes no sense at all.


Brad

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2018, 05:32:27 PM »
Tin Man,
Either the concept I have shown for reduction of magnetic lock works or it does not. I have built several very expensive machines that show me it works. If you choose not to use the concept, that's your choice. That is all I wanted to share. The rest we can argue about when I have a machine running and can post video of inputs and outputs. I have several versions and they are all different, so the numbers are different, and without my notebooks, which are in storage, I could easily confuse different numbers from different machines. To me, reducing the amp draw of the motor unloaded from over 30 amps to less than 12 for my big machine was a major breakthrough, and THOSE are the numbers that stick in my head. But my big machine has 12 coils and 6 rotor magnets so the six magnets are ALWAYS locked on coils and you are ALWAYS trying to break the attraction of all six magnets at once. The smaller machine that I recommended probably has way less amp draw. Why is there any amp draw? Probably because there is STILL some magnetic cogging. But since I can now run the motor without burning it up and generate power with the generator, to me that is as cog free as I am likely to get mechanically, and is incredibly significant. Sorry you do not find this information valuable and would rather nit pick my numbers when I have ALREADY stated that I would rather wait until the thing is running on my bench again to even discuss inputs and outputs. When it is, I will be happy to run every single test YOU PERSONALLY would like to have run. Is that a deal? oh, and i won't talk about it until then either, if that makes you happy. One last thing. Any time I talk about this machine, it was running on a stock motor. In the beginning I was using the modified motor, but I kept burning up motors because of amp draw, and it was really frustrating to get a motor, take it apart and rewind it, and then burn it up a day or so later. So I have been using stock motors for quite a while and have burnt up MANY of them also. It doesn't hurt quite as bad, but it still hurts. It's just that I have done MANY experiments with Matt's motor, and I know what can be recovered, so I apply that information in my discussions even though I am NOT currently using the motor. Remember, I DID in the beginning and that is where I get my recovery data.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2018, 05:32:27 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5033
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #22 on: August 09, 2018, 01:27:32 AM »
Tin Man,
Either the concept I have shown for reduction of magnetic lock works or it does not. I have built several very expensive machines that show me it works. If you choose not to use the concept, that's your choice. That is all I wanted to share. The rest we can argue about when I have a machine running and can post video of inputs and outputs. I have several versions and they are all different, so the numbers are different, and without my notebooks, which are in storage, I could easily confuse different numbers from different machines. To me, reducing the amp draw of the motor unloaded from over 30 amps to less than 12 for my big machine was a major breakthrough, and THOSE are the numbers that stick in my head. But my big machine has 12 coils and 6 rotor magnets so the six magnets are ALWAYS locked on coils and you are ALWAYS trying to break the attraction of all six magnets at once. The smaller machine that I recommended probably has way less amp draw. Why is there any amp draw? Probably because there is STILL some magnetic cogging. But since I can now run the motor without burning it up and generate power with the generator, to me that is as cog free as I am likely to get mechanically, and is incredibly significant. Sorry you do not find this information valuable and would rather nit pick my numbers when I have ALREADY stated that I would rather wait until the thing is running on my bench again to even discuss inputs and outputs. When it is, I will be happy to run every single test YOU PERSONALLY would like to have run. Is that a deal? oh, and i won't talk about it until then either, if that makes you happy. One last thing. Any time I talk about this machine, it was running on a stock motor. In the beginning I was using the modified motor, but I kept burning up motors because of amp draw, and it was really frustrating to get a motor, take it apart and rewind it, and then burn it up a day or so later. So I have been using stock motors for quite a while and have burnt up MANY of them also. It doesn't hurt quite as bad, but it still hurts. It's just that I have done MANY experiments with Matt's motor, and I know what can be recovered, so I apply that information in my discussions even though I am NOT currently using the motor. Remember, I DID in the beginning and that is where I get my recovery data.

You have a deal there Dave for sure.

And yes,reducing magnetic cogging is a clear advantage in any machine of this type,as energy is lost through vibration. If you remove this loss,then you gain that loss in output.

I do believe there is a gain to be had when transferring energy from point A to point B,and have that energy do useful work on it's journey--no argument there.
But what im interested in is this 300 watts in--1600 watts out  ;)


Brad

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #23 on: August 09, 2018, 04:24:04 AM »
300 watts in and 1600 watts out... but still can't sustain self-running?   

Somebody needs to hire a consultant.    :'(



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #23 on: August 09, 2018, 04:24:04 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #24 on: August 09, 2018, 06:02:42 AM »
TinselKoala,
I never stated that the machine could not sustain self running. I stated that I have never TRIED. I was always focused on four things
1. Reduced amp draw of the motor from generator coils that speed the motor up under load
2. Increased production of the generator when the motor DOES speed up under load
3. Watts into the motor
4. Watts out to the load from the generator.


My assumption was that if all those factors got to where I wanted them, a self runner was inevitable.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #25 on: August 09, 2018, 08:38:56 AM »
TinselKoala,
I never stated that the machine could not sustain self running. I stated that I have never TRIED. I was always focused on four things
1. Reduced amp draw of the motor from generator coils that speed the motor up under load
2. Increased production of the generator when the motor DOES speed up under load
3. Watts into the motor
4. Watts out to the load from the generator.


My assumption was that if all those factors got to where I wanted them, a self runner was inevitable.
1. If you truly can obtain 1600 watts output for 300 watts input, it is trivial "for those skilled in the art" to connect one end to the other and have a self-runner.
2. If you can't figure out how to do it, I can tell you.... for a fee. But of course your output >> input claims must be true for it to work. You had those numbers, but you "never tried"? What's wrong with you?
3. I don't care about anything except your claim of watts out >> watts in.
4. I'll wager you a cheezburger that you cannot support this claim with a factual demonstration.
Your assumption is just that -- an assumption.  Let's see your FACTS.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #25 on: August 09, 2018, 08:38:56 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6294
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #26 on: August 09, 2018, 09:19:23 AM »
and I'll bet you a cheeseburger ,if I walked up to any man woman or child on the planetand asked them if they were ok with a device that turns 300 into 1600 but doesn't self run...
they wouldn't give a rats pajamas
probably would have the same answer for a device that turns 300 into 301

of course if I wanted all that attention you are always talking about the bad kind ??? ? the kind where they take it from you to make world ending wars...........a big self running show might not be .......................wise

 Dave  has agreed to Let Brad test anyway he wants.
I doubt very much that cheeseburger bets are needed on top of Brads test protocols.
but who knows

maybe Dave likes Cheeseburgers ??

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #27 on: August 09, 2018, 09:55:04 AM »
Do you like jam on your cheezburgers? As in, Jam Yesterday... Jam Tomorrow... but No Jam Today.

You talk like there is infinite time ahead of us... but there isn't. 

"I made a thing that makes five times as much electrical power out than it takes to run it. Unfortunately I didn't think about connecting it as a self runner, and then I took it apart, so I can't show it to you now. And I'm doing something more important right now, so you'll have to wait three months before I can rebuild it."

It's right there in the script.

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3822
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #28 on: August 09, 2018, 11:14:42 AM »
...

I ONLY posted because of the interest in neutralizing magnetic cogging. It should be OBVIOUS that this machine does that.  Plus there is a patent from over 150 years ago that applies the same principle. The patent had: coil (in attraction) rotor then magnet (in repulsion). I didn't LIKE that arrangement because all the forces exerted on the rotor were in the same direction. Pulling it from one side and pushing it away from the other. That would really exert unnecessary torque on the rotor. In MY design there are coils on BOTH sides of the rotor in attraction and magnets on BOTH sides of the rotor in repulsion at the same time. Forces are equalized.
....

Hi Dave,
Would you mind telling the old patent number you referred to above? 
Thanks,
Gyula

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5033
Re: Can anyone verify cogging-torque neutralization ?
« Reply #29 on: August 09, 2018, 02:41:03 PM »
Dave

I am a little confused as to why the motors burn out if they only need 300 watts to drive the generator,and where you point out that a stock motor can be used.
The MY1020 comes in a variety of sizes,from 250 watts/24v up to 1000 watts/48v.
The  !MY1020! stands for the mounting type on the motor,it is not to stipulate a power rating for the motor. The ZY1020 is the same motor,but where the mounting points are different.

So could you clarify as to what !size! motors you guys are using?.
If you keep burning out motors at 300 watts,then why not use the MY1020 500 watt-24 volt model ?. This is the motor i have ordered--the 500 watt MY1020.


Brad


 

OneLink