I have been seeing bits and pieces of work done by others that coincides with work I am doing as well. I also realized Floor was working on similar concepts 9 years or more ago. I just wanted a good thread to share info about these ideas and to post my own work as well as I work through some concepts to learn more.


First off, I had always been experimenting with sticking a magnet on the back of my pulse motor coils and seeing how it effects things. But I never got to deep down the whole idea of digging way deeper into what is actually going on there that appears to boost the output with no more energy, or sometimes maybe even less. I will try and reference others works as I find them here. Please feel free to share anything you know of as well. I believe if there isn't any OU available from these various setups, there is at the very least extreme possibilities of increased efficiency.


First off, it was work done by Robert Murray I saw on his youtube channel that inspired my current design I am working on. Here is the video I am referring to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xZa1JGP2oc&t=1s


I probably am not aware of many others who have worked on projects in this area but I know some was posted in another thread I will reference below.
Some very good info including patent info was posted by gyulasun on jimbo's thread here...
https://overunity.com/19030/new-electromagnet-configuration-4-times-out-verses-in/


Here is a post from gyulasun of much interest...

Hi Jimbo,

The concept of embedding a permanent magnet into a ferromagnetic enclosure and use a coil to control the setup was also proposed by Jack Hildenbrand, see his drawings in his thread here: 
 https://overunity.com/833/hilden-brand-magnet-motor/msg22925/#msg22925 

He built several motors with his concept, you can see some pictures on motors he uploaded in his thread but later he deleted them all (mainly due to the patenting process) and someone from the members here saved some of them in this site:
 http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Inventors/Jack-W-Hildenbrand/ 
In the folder you can see a video on a test demonstrating the Hildenbrand valve principle, done by another kind member here back then. 

Jack patented the concept as "System and method for utilizing magnetic energy", US7453341, the pdf file is also included in the folder.   He claimed a COP of around 2 (to 2.5) for his motors based on the concept https://overunity.com/833/hilden-brand-magnet-motor/msg23790/#msg23790 
(COP = Coefficient of Performance).  Unfortunately Jack deceased in an illness soon after he got the patent and, as I know, no successful replications have been done ever since to get COP > 1 with the concept. 

There was another member here, DMMPOWER, who showed a drawing on the concept as a "super" electromagnet, see here: 
 https://overunity.com/4624/how-to-make-bedini-motor-overunity/msg96814/#msg96814 

And see Floor's post with a link included in it:
https://overunity.com/13354/perm-magnet-only-core-with-iron-shell-motor-coil/msg563135/#msg563135  and see the start of the thread here:
https://overunity.com/13354/perm-magnet-only-core-with-iron-shell-motor-coil/msg354318/#msg354318     

Please do not misunderstand my mentioning the above examples, your efforts and enthusiasm are appreciated and please continue tinkering with this concept.

Gyula

Please feel free to post any other info anyone may have relating to this concept. I do not wish to take any credit away from anyone and their work. I simply want a thread I and anyone else interested in working with this concept can compare notes and share work.

How it should interact with the rotor. The first one is with the rotor having soft iron on it that is attracted to the electromagnet while turned on and drifts past it when turned off.


The second one uses a rotor with all apposing magnets. Because the field is mostly enclosed in the core of the coil due to the added iron on top and bottom of permanent magnet, the rotor magnet will now be attracted to core instead of slightly repelled by the opposing magnet in the core. After rotor magnet attracts to the coil, just after center, the coil will be turned on. This will create a much stronger repelling force shoving the magnet away.

And here I have my first coil made. For this one, I am trying high number of turns with thin wire to see how strong of a magnetic field I can get with smaller current draw.


This is 2200 turns of 30 AWG wire. Coil isn't looking perfect and is a bit ugly with super glue drying funny and other things. But it is a solid coil to use.

Thanks for the response and looking over what I've done so far. I can't seem to edit the post and add the measurements you requested. I'll add it when it let's me.

The coil I made is 2200 turns of 30 AWG wire. I used 119 grams of copper which made a coil of 80.1 ohms. If I figure correctly would be close to 800 ft.

I do have a couple oscilloscopes. Been a long time since I used them. Just may have to thump the dust off of those baby's. 

I am aware of the lens law that will induce drag on the permanent magnet on the rotor. It is duely noted. Hopefully it will help drop the current draw a bit while it is adding a little drag so maybe the tradeoff will be worth it. It seems to me that there should be quite a bit more torque for less current draw and less "on" time for good results. But of course, it's all theory at this point. The bench will tell the tale! With my design it is extremely easy for me to swap the rotor for iron instead.

I also am wondering the same thing about residual magnetism. I would feel better about it if I was flipping polarity but as of now, they will be pulsed with 1 polarity. After all, there is permanent magnet giving it a constant flux already. But, I figured it is worth a try to see if it makes enough of a difference to be an issue. Guess I will find out. But the ease of build for anyone with access to a simple hardware store makes it worth a shot.

Copied to here from the "new-electromagnet-configuration-4-times-out-verses-in" topic


There are several methods of approach in regard to electro permanent magnet interactions.

No doubt.  In some conditions the combination of an electromagnet and a
permanent magnet will      increase         the magnetic force from the magnet.
They add up.

No doubt.  In some conditions the combination of an electromagnet and a
permanent magnet will       decrease      the magnetic force from the magnet.
They subtract.

There are other things that one might hope to accomplish.

for example...
 
The turning on and off of a magnetic current, by a method which might in some
ways be like unto the way a transistor can turn on or off an electric current.
I refer to this as      shunting      the magnetic current into another path or as
simply  shunting.

Some transistors use an extremely low amount of power to do that switching.

If a permanent magnet can be switched in that way, this would be free energy from
that magnet.
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
Again copied to here from the
"new-electromagnet-configuration-4-times-out-verses-in"
topic

There are numerous related other approaches to the goal of gaining energy as well. 

Clarification of intent / approaches / design and some possibilities ?

We have concepts and / or designs,  wherein the intent is to
                                   suppress
a permanent magnet by means of the application of an opposing
electromagnet.  This is already being used in scrap metal lifting cranes
and so on.  No    direct    net gain here.
... ... ... ... ...
We have concepts and / or designs,  wherein the intent is to
                                      shunt
magnetic force in such a manner that the process of the
        cyclical, shunting and / or switching of that magnetic current from
shunted to un shunted,
                           will consume less energy than can be gained from
the energy difference between the application of that force when shunted and un - shunted.
... ... ... ... ...
We have concepts and / or designs,  wherein the intent is to
                                            balance forces
                 such that force vectors and / or other characteristics
              may be rearranged without a net opposition by magnetic forces
                                               and in turn
              those rearrangements give rise to  interactions which are profitable
                                      in terms of an energy gain.

... ... ... ... ...
We have concepts and / or designs,  wherein the intent is to
         stall or slow down in time / create some form of stasis in an event
                                     during which period we
                                     move a field or exit it,
                                                     or
                       in some other way alter some relationship/s
     such that force vectors and / or other characteristics may be rearranged without
                                                or with little
             significant opposition and there by profit, in term of an energy gain.
... ... ... ... ...
                  We have concepts and / or designs,  wherein the intent is
                   multiplications or additions (cascading) of force where in
                                                          there exits
                                                    no   apparent  gain,
                              because increases must be reversed or undone
                                             in order to proceed cyclically.
                                                                but
                      those forces can while in their multiplied state / conditions
                                                  give rise to changes
               which do not subtract from the energy used to cause reversal / undoing
                                                          and instead
                      only cause a delay in time in the macro world, of that reversal / undoing
                                   (apparently simultaneous to that reversal / undoing)
                                                              behavior
                               (which is  in some manner is like unto the behaviors
                                        of those, theorized, particles, which physics
                                                          has termed virtual).
... ... ... ... ...

                                              Some combinations of the above.

                                              Some of the above may be statements of
                                              essentially the same things.

                                              Other options.

Hi captainpecan, 

Jack Hildenbrand wrote about 8 to 10 W input to his electromagnet coils for his valve to operate as he expected if I recall correctly.  Your input power is around 2.3 W or so (considering 13.6 V and 80 Ohm coil resistance). Of course the iron sleeve, the magnet size and strength etc he and you used can be different (Jack never wrote about his coils data) but from your test observations I also think the input power is too small to open up the permanent magnet's  field locked into the washers. And when you increase the supply voltage beyond 13.6 V which seems to be a must, you will need to reduce the test time to as small as possible to prevent overheating the coil. At say 40 V the 80 Ohm coil may dissipate 20 W, so the intermittent testing is preferred, forcing you towards the pulsed operation (as you mentioned).   

Note also that the washers have air gaps between them (however tiny they are) and this may make overall "core" saturation even more input power demanding than in case of a solid sleeve, besides the fact that cores with an open magnetic circuit from the coil's point of view involve a certain input power demand in itself too. 

If you have a Variac, I suggest to build a simple variable DC supply using a diode bridge across its output with say at least a 100 VDC rated electrolytic filter cap (47 uF - 100 uF would be enough). I know a Variac autotransformer is galvanically not isolated from the mains but using it with care for such tests it may be okay.  If you have a step-down mains transformer say to 15 or 24V, it may be used in reverse, driven from the Variac and rectify its (primary) output, this would already be safe and galvanically isolated from the mains.   Unless you find other solutions to increase DC voltage

In case your magnet (enclosed inside the washers) can be removed relatively easily, then a kind of comparison test could be made between the electromagnet alone and the permanent magnet also alone. Check the magnetic field strength of the permanent magnet from a few cm distance.  Then do this with the electromagnet (with no magnet inside) for the same distance to have field strength comparable to that of the permanent magnet while varying the input voltage to the coil. Of course you need to act fast to avoid overheating when input voltage is increased to some ten volts and higher. This test is not an accurate comparison of course, perhaps good for a rough estimation on coil input power. 

Gyula

A little bit of research at K&J magnetics, it shows that for my 12mm by 12mm (1/2" basically) magnets, it only takes 2mm and above of plate to saturate one side of the field. That makes me believe if I cut the thickness surrounding the magnet to between 2mm and 4mm, it may greatly decrease the amount of energy needed to release the pm field from the core. It would easily make the core at least 2 or more times thinner. I think I will try wrapping a magnet with some layers of 1mm sheet metal I can easily cut with tin snips. Or maybe i can find a 12mm ID bushing i can work with that is megnetic. May be worth a little try before I go much further.

The coil looks a little crappy. But I made the coil with 2 center taps
500 turns 11.6 ohms
1000 turns 25.5 ohms
The spool was almost empty so I just ran the last of it on the end so it was 600 more turns.
The total of the coil is.
1600 turns 45.4 ohms.


Hopefully I can have some test results soon.