Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

2022 builders survivor board => General Builders discussion => Topic started by: floodrod on April 14, 2022, 03:15:12 AM

Title: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 14, 2022, 03:15:12 AM
I been thinking about this since last night, considering a new build. But before I commit- I want to see what feedback / suggestions / criticism others have.

Purple shaft is spun by a motor from outside power.  Exactly half the rotor will be steel or iron thick enough to redirect most if not all flux.. 

2 pairs of magnets all same polarity on reciprocation bearings with air gap between the rotor. These magnets can freely move in linear motion. 

In any position of the rotor, there should be the exact amount of flux in contact range from the rotor to the metal.  So there should never be more or less (barely any fluctuation)  magnetic force upon the rotor. So in theory, the power to rotate the shaft should not increase whether we use HUGE magnets or Small magnets and will not increase in any position of the rotor because it is Always balanced..  At the exact moment one set of magnets is crossing the edge away from the steel, the other set of magnets is crossing into the steel's line of flux always keeping the amount of flux equal.

When 2 same pole magnets flux are in range of the metal, they attract to the metal exactly as the other 2 magnets repel each other. Creating 4 individual reciprocators which can all be converted to rotation or whatever.

I am thinking this configuration may unlink the balance of input to output allowing one to scale the output power by increasing magnet sizing without adding additional input to rotate the center disk..

Does anyone know so similar designs that were tested or can point out errors in my thinking?  I've noticed very few things work as I think they will, so any feedback appreciated before I start designing this.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 14, 2022, 11:25:14 AM

Exactly half the rotor will be steel or iron thick enough to redirect most if not all flux.. 


1. The drawing does not match the (above quoted part of the) description ?

2. Magnet repulsion and magnet attraction are each weaker at far distances and
each is greater at close distances.

          But...

3. In general, magnet    attraction (N to S)   is    greater than   magnet    repulsion
(N to N or S to S),    when two magnets are at    close    distances.   

4. In general, magnet    repulsion (N to N or S to S)    is    greater than   magnet     attraction
(N to S),   when two magnets are at    far   distances.

5. Spinning an iron disk in front of a magnet will produce an electric current in the iron
disk.

6. The electric current within the disk will produce a magnetic field that will oppose the
rotation of the iron disk (especially at high speeds).

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 14, 2022, 01:54:31 PM
1. The drawing does not match the (above quoted part of the) description ?

5. Spinning an iron disk in front of a magnet will produce an electric current in the iron
disk.

6. The electric current within the disk will produce a magnetic field that will oppose the
rotation of the iron disk (especially at high speeds).

Thank You Honorable Floor!


1. Yes the drawing and description is not matching exactly with regards to the metal in rotor thickness. But I assume you got the idea from it.

5 and 6.  Would this effect still be produced when both sides of the iron plate are exposed to the same polarity of magnetic field?

Please forgive my ignorance in these subjects, but the sharing of your wealth of knowledge is highly valued by me.

Edit- and for clarification in case my description was lacking-  each of the 4 magnets have their own linear rail and all 4 can move in a linear direction from and away from the disk independently.  And all the same polarities will always face the center disk.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 14, 2022, 05:15:44 PM
Thanks for the further explanation and for your usual excellent builds
and sharing.

5 and 6... yes, both poles matching or not, drag upon the disk's spinning
will be present due to the electric currents produced. 

How much that drag will be, can easily be tested by spinning a complete steel disk
between two magnets.  It may not be all that great of an opposition / much of
a problem?
                           See this very short video @
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30oPZO_z7-4

       Also...
This will produce heat in the disk. 
The high elecrtical resistance of the steel or iron will produce heat.

            best wishes
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 15, 2022, 03:08:27 PM
           P.S.

Same magnet polarity on opposite sides of the spinning disk.

Will they each cancel out the current loops produced by the other / no drag ?
              Very interesting idea / cool !
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
If the disk is too thick, they definitly won't cancel. On the other hand, if too thin
there will not be enough attractiion to cause strong motion.
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

If that works out..

You could try a 1/2 disk and a coil around each magnet (non reciprocating /
non moving magnets)?
                                       or
A disk with holes in it and a coil around each magnet (non reciprocating /
non moving magnets)?
                      for electricity generation...
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 15, 2022, 07:34:31 PM


5 and 6... yes, both poles matching or not, drag upon the disk's spinning
will be present due to the electric currents produced. 

How much that drag will be, can easily be tested by spinning a complete steel disk
between two magnets.  It may not be all that great of an opposition / much of
a problem?
                           See this very short video @
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30oPZO_z7-4

Thank You.  I did google it for a bit but all the info I found on these currents were speaking of Changing magnetic fields creating eddy curents. Such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current
"Eddy currents (also called Foucault's currents) are loops of electrical current induced within conductors by a changing magnetic field in the conductor according to Faraday's law of induction."
I was unsuccessful finding any verification of this effect with like pole magnetic forces.

           P.S.

Same magnet polarity on opposite sides of the spinning disk.

Will they each cancel out the current loops produced by the other / no drag ?
              Very interesting idea / cool !
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
If the disk is too thick, they definitly won't cancel. On the other hand, if too thin
there will not be enough attractiion to cause strong motion.


Now you are peaking my interest again to try it.  Can you point me to some material which references that you speak on,  same pole forces creating current?


If that works out..

You could try a 1/2 disk and a coil around each magnet (non reciprocating /
non moving magnets)?
                                       or
A disk with holes in it and a coil around each magnet (non reciprocating /
non moving magnets)?
                      for electricity generation...


You lost me on the non-moving magnet parts.  But I'm interested, as non moving stuff is a lot easier to build..  Interested in hearing more on this
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 15, 2022, 09:22:42 PM
I did a basic test spinning a solid thick disc against 4 magnets all on the same side of the disc.  I could not test opposite side of the disc because of the motor design.

1. No magnets in range:  29 volts-  .5 amps
2. All 4 North Magnets-  29 volts .8 amps
3. Two North magnets , Two South magnets:    29 volts / 1.15 Amps


I have this on video- and I understand this was not a controlled scientific test.  Just based on observation:  .6 amp increase of input power with alternating polarity.  .3 amp increase with like polarities.  Will need more tests to verify, but based on this:

????  Drag increases with like poles,  but only half as much compared to using opposing poles ?????

I uploaded the rough test here-  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FKg-1Qnk8

NOTE-  Also tested with 2 magnets only.  Little noticeable differences in amperage between like and opposing poles.  Both ways relatively the same increase.   Trying to think of the reason, and possible extensive testing to follow.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 16, 2022, 03:18:48 AM
Thank You.  I did google it for a bit but all the info I found on these currents were speaking of Changing magnetic fields creating eddy curents. Such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current
"Eddy currents (also called Foucault's currents) are loops of electrical current induced within conductors by a changing magnetic field in the conductor according to Faraday's law of induction."
I was unsuccessful finding any verification of this effect with like pole magnetic forces.

A changing magnetic field is not limited to            swapping polarities.

An expanding or contracting field, either one is also a changing field.

An approaching or retreating     '          '      '   '    '      '       '           '

A sliding across                                                '    '      '       '           '

And they all produce an electric current in a near by conductor.
Steel is a conductor.

A good video demonstration of this is here @
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sENgdSF8ppA












Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 16, 2022, 03:39:27 AM
Don't use a power supply that compensates / holds a set voltage
when under a load.

Spin the motor / disk.
Read the RPMs.

Approach the spinning disk with a       magnet       or     magnets.
Read the RPMs with the magnet or magnets in place.

The magnets must be directly across from each other and on opposite sides
of the spinning disk.  Like in your reciprocator drawing.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 16, 2022, 03:50:13 AM
Floodrod quote

"You lost me on the non-moving magnet parts.  But I'm interested, as non moving stuff is a lot easier to build..  Interested in hearing more on this"

The end of that quote

Passing a steel plate between two opposing magnets (in then out the other side) will
fluctuate the magnetic field around those magnets (changing fields).  Coils around
those magnets will be within changing magnetic fields and will there fore produce
electric currents / generate electricity.

If two same polarity (N to N or S to S ) / opposing magnets can be placed on opposite
sides of a spinning steel disk,  without this putting a drag on that spin, then ...

This may indicate that an electric generator could be built which does not bog down
the mechanical power source / prime mover of the generator when a resistive load is
placed across the generator ?

Repeat.. A changing magnetic field does not    only   refer to an alternating polarity field.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 16, 2022, 04:11:13 AM
Floodrod quote

"You lost me on the non-moving magnet parts.  But I'm interested, as non moving stuff is a lot easier to build..  Interested in hearing more on this"

The end of that quote

Passing a steel plate between two oposing magnets (in then out the other side) will
fluctuate the magnetic field around those magnets (changeing fields).  Coils around
those magnets will be within changeing magnetic fields and will there fore produce
electric currents / generate electricity.

If two same polarity (N to N or S to S ) / opposing magnets can be placed on opposite
sides of a spinning steel disk,  without this putting a drag on that spin, then ...

This may indicate that an electric genetator could be built whch does not bog down
the mechanical power source / prime mover of the generator when a resistive load is
placed across the generator ?

Gotcha..   I am going to hunt down some steel disks to test with.  And I can do RPM with my other supply that does not lock the voltage, recording watts needed to obtain XXX RPM.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 16, 2022, 04:13:58 AM
Cool and thanks !

I moded that last post a little.

Best wishes
     floor
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 16, 2022, 04:45:19 AM
While we are discussing, I have 1 more thing I been thinking relating..  What about ridding the steel.  (see pic)

2 magnets (no steel) on a rotor alternating polarity spinning..  4 stationary magnets-  same polarity on 1 side, opposite polarity on the other.  With coils around the stationary magnets.

One side of the rotor always attracting to the outer magnets when lined up,  the other side always repelling. 

"Changing" polarities of the outside magnets while Cancelling drag out?? 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 16, 2022, 04:57:29 AM
Numbers 2, 3, and 4

https://overunity.com/19091/quad-reciprocator-motor-idea/msg565711/#msg565711

Note... There is a range of distance apart, in which attraction and repelling
force magnitudes will balance...  Both decrease with distance, but not at the same rate
per distance increment...

if blanced between the attarct and the repell, then no drag from mechanical magnetic
forces.

and no eddy currents inside the neo magnets I'm pretty sure ....
but definitly no currents within non electrically conducting ceramic magnets
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 16, 2022, 05:22:38 AM
Numbers 2, 3, and 4

https://overunity.com/19091/quad-reciprocator-motor-idea/msg565711/#msg565711

Note... There is a range of distance apart, in which attraction and repelling
force magnitudes will balance...  Both decrease with distance, but not at the same rate
per distance increment...

if blanced between the attarct and the repell, then no drag from mechanical magnetic
forces.

and no eddy currents inside the neo magnets I'm pretty sure ....
but definitly no currents within non electrically conducting ceramic magnets

Your answers sound promising.  No drag = Scalable.
Magnet to Magnet sounds like it will cause more flux change than steel to magnet. And no hunting down exact thickness steel.

It's sounding more like a "Go". 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 16, 2022, 01:04:21 PM
The results you got came from the changing amount of flux available from the 3 test cases. 

When the N and S poles are able to join via the rotor plate, test 3, (even via air gaps) their number of "fluxlines" is the highest, hence the eddy drag in the rotor plate reflecting back the prime mover is the highest.
When all N or (all S) poles are able to attract to the rotor plate, test 2, their number of "fluxlines" can only be less than in test case 3, hence eddy drag is less.

I would suggest to get rid of the steel plates and attempt to use ferrite disks or plates instead.

FYI   https://www.laird.com/tool-bar?q=ferrite%20disk (https://www.laird.com/tool-bar?q=ferrite%20disk)

Mouser have them: https://eu.mouser.com/c/passive-components/emi-filters-emi-suppression/emi-gaskets-sheets-absorbers-shielding/?q=mm1400 (https://eu.mouser.com/c/passive-components/emi-filters-emi-suppression/emi-gaskets-sheets-absorbers-shielding/?q=mm1400)   
     their relative magnetic permeability is around 650
You could encase the ferrite disk or disks in a 3D printed plastic case with holding shaft(s) also printed for them I think.

EDIT:  I understand you modified the idea and replaced the steel disk with permanent magnets.  Well,  as long as the "fluxlines" inside any of the magnets remain quasi stationary and they move only when they leave the surface the eddy current cannot develop inside an otherwise conductive magnet.  Tests can show whether the body of the magnets would warm or heat up after a certain run time.  The closer the magnets would move near to each other, the higher the chance for having moving "fluxlines" inside their body.
I agree that using ceramic magnets has no chance for eddy current develop inside,  in their case the issue might be demagnetization on the long run when they used between strong Neo magnets.  So an all ceramic setup on the long run is preferable.
Gyula

I did a basic test spinning a solid thick disc against 4 magnets all on the same side of the disc.  I could not test opposite side of the disc because of the motor design.

1. No magnets in range:  29 volts-  .5 amps
2. All 4 North Magnets-  29 volts .8 amps
3. Two North magnets , Two South magnets:    29 volts / 1.15 Amps


I have this on video- and I understand this was not a controlled scientific test.  Just based on observation:  .6 amp increase of input power with alternating polarity.  .3 amp increase with like polarities.  Will need more tests to verify, but based on this:

 ??? ?  Drag increases with like poles,  but only half as much compared to using opposing poles ??? ??

I uploaded the rough test here-  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FKg-1Qnk8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FKg-1Qnk8)

NOTE-  Also tested with 2 magnets only.  Little noticeable differences in amperage between like and opposing poles.  Both ways relatively the same increase.   Trying to think of the reason, and possible extensive testing to follow.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 07:49:11 PM
I started printing this out, but evaluated the whole process and I have doubts:

In reference to using all magnets (no steel).---

Repelling Side--  When the NORTH magnet on the rotor passes the stationary NORTH magnets, the coil around the stationary magnet will gather flux that will oppose the repulsion, or weaken the repulsion.

Attraction Side-
When the SOUTH magnet on the rotor passes NORTH magnets, the coil will work with the stationary magnet and ADD even more attraction to the Rotor.

With any generation of power, the balance between the poles will be offset in equal proportion with the power generated, thus applying drag on the rotor.

Is my logic here correct? 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 08:26:46 PM
IMHO yes, your logic sounds correct. 

But such test would still be useful to do...  8)    All the 4 stator magnets will have a coil on them, right?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 08:43:35 PM
IMHO yes, your logic sounds correct. 

But such test would still be useful to do...  8)    All the 4 stator magnets will have a coil on them, right?

I want to say thank you for taking the time to evaluate these configurations.  Your knowledge is very useful and appreciated.

In this plan, yes all 4 stationary magnets would have coils.  But I am drawing it out trying to find a configuration that has the best chance of goodness.  I have another configuration that is boggling my mind, trying to think of what would happen.

In the config below, it should balance and also have no drag.  If the center 2 stationary magnets had coils on them, I have no idea how the induced polarities would align, that is if any current is even generated.  Surely there must be some moving flux lines in such a configuration. But will they just buck and cancel each other out?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 08:56:19 PM

I think that using coils at each pole end of each stationary magnet would give the best induction just because the flux change is the greatest at the ends, see attachment for coils position. 
I will think on your new drawing above later on. 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 09:17:59 PM
Yeah!

I have 1 more design idea that has really got me intrigued to the extreme.  Such a simple concept.  Reverse the whole logic..

Coils wrapped around the stationary magnets..  LOTS AND LOTS of drag when starting it up..  And let Lenz Law reverse the drag from the permanent magnets as it speeds up.

You should be able to push generation up until the current created induction in the coils equals the flux pull of the permanent magnet, thus cancelling out drag.  We should only be able to draw until the flux in the coil is equal to the magnets flux. If we go past that point, drag will start increasing again but in the attraction direction

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 09:50:01 PM
Don't even need to wrap coils over the magnets..

2 permanent magnets opposing the rotor.  2 Coils on on the opposite sides..

As the motor gets speed, coils attract to the rotor from the Lenz Flux, neutralizing the repulsion (drag) of the permanent magnets.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 11:00:44 PM
In your config shown in Reply #18, i.e. in this post quoted,  you would get a more active flux change  compared to the config shown in Reply #12. What I mean: 

 In case of the config in Reply #12, in the Repel moments the flux can change relatively little at the outer poles of the 2 stator magnets so the coils at that outer ends will produce little output I think.

 When the same 2 stator magnets get into the Attract moments,  the flux can change in a bigger quantity at all the end poles of these 2 magnets because the neutral area of them (being normally in the middle of their length) will move towards the center of the rotor magnets.  So this moving "zone" can cause higher induction at each end of them I think versus the Repel moments when the neutral zones remain more or less in the original center zone of the stator magnets involved and the bigger induction can happen only at their repelled pole ends where two repel poles 'clash' (rotor and stator like poles).

So in the config attached to this post  the neutral zone of the stator magnets will be forced to move both in the Repel and Attract moments and this and the repel flux clashes may yield a higher overall output I think. This is why the coils are to be placed near to the pole ends.




I want to say thank you for taking the time to evaluate these configurations.  Your knowledge is very useful and appreciated.

In this plan, yes all 4 stationary magnets would have coils.  But I am drawing it out trying to find a configuration that has the best chance of goodness.  I have another configuration that is boggling my mind, trying to think of what would happen.

In the config below, it should balance and also have no drag.  If the center 2 stationary magnets had coils on them, I have no idea how the induced polarities would align, that is if any current is even generated.  Surely there must be some moving flux lines in such a configuration. But will they just buck and cancel each other out?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 11:04:53 PM
Yes, I agree.  And this involves a not so widely varying load current to remain in the relatively narrow range where the preferred condition you describe may be met. 



Yeah!

I have 1 more design idea that has really got me intrigued to the extreme.  Such a simple concept.  Reverse the whole logic..

Coils wrapped around the stationary magnets..  LOTS AND LOTS of drag when starting it up..  And let Lenz Law reverse the drag from the permanent magnets as it speeds up.

You should be able to push generation up until the current created induction in the coils equals the flux pull of the permanent magnet, thus cancelling out drag.  We should only be able to draw until the flux in the coil is equal to the magnets flux. If we go past that point, drag will start increasing again but in the attraction direction
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 11:09:27 PM
Yes, this sounds better...   8)   

And mechanical drag due to the repel poles (cogging?) may be compensated by too,  but then you will be in the same situation when Lenz still applies for the coils like in this case the drawing is showing?  Need to think on this Lenz drag further on. 


Don't even need to wrap coils over the magnets..

2 permanent magnets opposing the rotor.  2 Coils on on the opposite sides..

As the motor gets speed, coils attract to the rotor from the Lenz Flux, neutralizing the repulsion (drag) of the permanent magnets.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 11:24:24 PM
I had to do a rough test and I am liking what I am seeing so far.

Jerry rigged like the last pic.  But 1 magnet opposing the rotor..  and 1 iron core coil on top.  Not balanced or optimized in any way.  Just to see if it got more efficient as I increased speed.  Load connected to coil was 8 ohm resistor.


WITHOUT ANY Magnets / Coils for reference. Rotor alone

1. 5V .57 Amps. 2.85 watts.  1050 RPM  368 RPM Per Watt
2. 8V .64 Amps 5.12 Watts.  1845 RPM  360 RPM per Watt
3. 12V .75 Amp= 9 Watts.  2935 RPM..  326.1 RPM per watt

Next- Hooked up the opposing magnet / coil...

1. Input 5 Volts , 1.2 amps.  6 Watts,  RPM=  707.  707/6= 117.8 RPM per watt.  Output- .2V
2.  Input=  8 Volts, 1 amp..  8 Watts..  RPM=  1700..  1700/8= 212.5 RPM per watt input..  Output = .2V AC
3. Input= 12V .85 Amp.  10.2 Watts.  RPM=  2900.    2900/10.2= 284.3 RPM per watt.  Output-  .4 Volts AC

Percentages.  6 watts to 10.2 watts is a 70% increase of input power.
117 RPM to 284 RP.3 RPM is an increase of 141.34% RPM Per Watt.

**  It got more efficient while pulling more power from it ** <-  I did not measure output amperage in this test

I figure I should be able to increase input power till I am about at 360RPM per watt again- matching the unloaded tests.  Then this configuration will be at maximum.  But if these tests are correct and repeatable- this is scalable.  Add more repulsion and I can draw more causing attraction. 

I will need to build this much better- but I think the more I draw from it, the more efficient it will get till the flux pulls are equal.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 11:31:53 PM
Yes, this sounds better...   8)   

And mechanical drag due to the repel poles (cogging?) may be compensated by too,  but then you will be in the same situation when Lenz still applies for the coils like in this case the drawing is showing?  Need to think on this Lenz drag further on.

I think in this case we want Lenz drag.  The more Lenz drag the coils induce, the more it neutralizes the 2 repelling magnets against the rotor.  I think we want to speed the motor up till the flux in the coil (from pulling amperage) is equal to the flux of the permanent magnets.  But no more or the lenz will start to hurt us
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 17, 2022, 11:43:39 PM
Yes, in this case Lenz is a must indeed, your concept is based on that.  Thanks for sharing the results.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 17, 2022, 11:58:06 PM
I think this will be the final idea for the real build.  To fix the issue of the small output power and make it full alternating current on the coils..
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 18, 2022, 12:24:11 AM
I like this latest concept.   8)   

Perhaps the coils orientation could be like Naudin showed in his drawing on the right side: 
http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif  (http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif)  Tests can give a correct answer which is better.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 18, 2022, 12:53:48 AM

Regarding the coils "tangential" orientation I mention above, here is an interesting induction method from member partzman which yields more induction to that of shown in Naudin's right hand side drawing: 
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999)   

and the induced waveform:   
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002   (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002)   

EDIT: Just reading partzman's following posts on this induction method, the magnet does not move towards the coil but in front of it like in Naudin's case but both poles of the moving magnet induces 'tangentially':   
   https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010)   
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 18, 2022, 01:04:35 AM
Regarding the coils "tangential" orientation I mention above, here is an interesting induction method from member partzman which yields more induction to that of shown in Naudin's right hand side drawing: 
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999)   

and the induced waveform:   
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002   (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002)   

EDIT: Just reading partzman's following posts on this induction method, the magnet does not move towards the coil but in front of it like in Naudin's case but both poles of the moving magnet induces 'tangentially':   
   https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010)

NICE!   Yes I want to look into all of that...  I am rigging up the full test build, seems I have all the parts to make a rough model of all the components.  If I verify this design will work as intended then we can see what coils work best..

The way it's going- I should have some results tonight!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 18, 2022, 03:18:35 AM
 :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

I tried the latest design and the numbers were complete opposite from the first test.  Efficiency went down..  Numbers posted below..

I will have to experiment and redo the first setup to figure out whats going on...

IN 6v 7.62 watts
Out .3465 watts
LOST 7.27 watts
RPM 1100
RPM per watt- 144


IN 8v 11.68 watts
OUT 1.087 watts
LOST 10.593
RPM 1580
RPM per watt- 135.27

IN 10V 17.2 watts
OUT 2.158
LOST 15.042
RPM 2063
RPM per watt- 119.94

IN 12V 24.72 watts
OUT 3.498 watts
LOST 21.222 watts
RPM 2507
RPM per watt- 101.415

IN 13V 28.6 watts
OUT 4.418 watts
LOST 24.182 Watts
RPM 2740
RPM per watt- 95.80

IN 14V 33.18 watts
OUT 5.16 Watts
LOST 28.02 watts
RPM 2950
RPM per watt- 88.91
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 18, 2022, 05:12:01 AM
I am thinking it may be cores and the timing throwing me off.

The only bog down the repelling magnets are causing is during the approach to top dead center of the rotor magnets.  At top dead center, the repelling magnets will actually help the rotor by repelling it away to keep spinning. So I would want to kill ALL attraction right after top dead center so the rotor can get that big kick.

But the iron cores + flux will be attracting the rotor even after top dead center, thus robbing me of that kick.

So first I think I need to offset the 2 rotors so coil induction occurs a little earlier than the approaching repelling rotor so it can neutralize the repelling force as the rotor approaches the repelling magnets. Then when the repelling magnets are top dead center, KILL the generator coils with a switch, to reap the repulsion kick.

And finally I think I need to lose the iron cores.  The attraction has to be finely tuned and the cores are going to add attraction when it needs to be killed.

I will lose some induction from losing the cores, but I guess I can make it up with more copper.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 18, 2022, 12:56:32 PM
Sorry for disreagarding the cores attraction, I was sticking to your drawing that shows air core coils... 

If you still have the setup, you could attach a magnet onto the back ends of the coil cores in an attempt to just compensate for the attraction ?

Edit: you would lose both the on approach and the on leaving attraction of the cores.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 18, 2022, 01:16:22 PM
Sorry for disreagarding the cores attraction, I was sticking to your drawing that shows air core coils... 

If you still have the setup, you could attach a magnet onto the back ends of the coil cores in an attempt to just compensate for the attraction ?

Edit: you would lose both the on approach and the on leaving attraction of the cores.

It's cool yo...  Yes I thought about it all night and I think I can get this to work..  I will be rebuilding everything properly..

The attraction (collecting current) timing is critical..    I definitely only want to use air coils so i can control the attraction completely. And Then I only want to collect (induce an attraction field) when the rotor magnet is approaching the stationary magnets (repelling)..    When the rotor magnet is at top dead center from the stationary magnets, the magnetic field in the coils must collapse, thus allowing the rotor to be kicked by the repelling magnets.

I can offset the 2 rotors slightly so I am collecting at full amperage force just as the repelling magnets are approaching at the most critical moment needed to neutralize the resistance.

If this works as I imagine, there will be a point where the resistance from the repelling magnets is reduced so much that the motor is harvesting pure gain of momentum from the repelling magnets kicking the rotor. Then it could possibly run itself disconnected from the motor.

Balancing of the fields will be crucial. So in my build, I must make the stationary magnets and generator coils adjustable to be able to dial it in. And I will probably need a Mosfet and a Hall sensor to cut the generator coils at the precise timing
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 19, 2022, 12:36:14 AM
Here is the Build Plan..

"Floodrod's Lenz Dependent Generator"

1. Since I will be using air coils, I will need more flux (Lenz) than if I was using iron cores. So I will use 4 coils with 4 big Neo's on each rotor.
2. I want the ability to alter the amount of stationary repelling magnets based on the performance, so starting with 2 stationary ones.
3. The magnet count on each rotor must match but the stationary magnet count can be either 2 or 4.
4. The coils will be switched with a mosfet to only collect upon approach of the repelling fields. Then collapse around top dead center. of the repelling fields.
5. The rotors may be offset for 2 purposes. 1- harvest current at the optimal time / gain. 2- To neutralize the repulsion field upon approach.

This design also allows for additional rotors / coils / stationary magnets to be added to the main shaft if the needs arise. Perhaps 4 coils can not generate enough Lenz to neutralize the stationary magnets, no problem. I can add another rotor and more coils. Same logic with the stationary magnets.

It will take me a few days to get all the pieces ready for assembly.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 19, 2022, 01:38:11 AM
Looks good for a first look,  will come back tomorrow if I find issues.   8)
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 19, 2022, 03:22:19 AM
I guess this thread is morphing into my brainstorming idea thread.  As I am printing, I have another idea somewhat related.  I am going to throw it out there and see if anyone has any comments.

OK, so while thinking on Lenz Law, it seems the most hurtful part of it is immediately after top dead center and when the rotor is trying to leave the coil.  The flux wants to pull the rotor back in..  I figure after the rotor is clear from the coil, the buildup of flux in the coil from the next rotor magnet actually helps to attract the rotor to the coil.  But only helps till top dead center again, where it becomes a hinderance.  The issue is that the most powerful part of the flux buildup in the coil comes exactly when we don't need it or want it.

I was doing some tests holding a powerful magnet against a spinning rotor that had 2 same pole magnets. I placed magnets real close to the rotor in Repel and Attraction mode. Neither of which slowed the rotor nor made the drive motor pull more power so long as the magnets used to cause drag were balanced against the rotor evenly.  I assume many of you already know this, but I think Lenz drag happens not because of the magnetic fields themselves, but because these fields vary in strength at exactly the wrong times. 

What if we could flip the polarity of the coil exactly after the rotor magnet reaches dead center of the coil.  The coil world then repel the rotor magnet at the perfect time.

I am wondering if this can be done with a 2nd rotor.  Both rotors would  use same polarities between magnets. And both rotors would be orientated same polarity towards the coils between them. They would need 4 magnets each and the rotors would need to be aligned at a 45 degree angle from each other.  The spacing of the magnets on the rotor would also need to be dialed in so that both rotor's magnets overlap at the exact sweet-spot.  When 1 coil is aligned top dead center (Full Harvest Season), the next magnet on the other rotor is coming in to flip the coil's field to propel the first rotor. And the cycle continues.

Even though we are using same polarities all facing in, the magnetic fields in the coils would be flipping twice as quickly as opposed to using 1 rotor of alternating polarities. Thus producing AC. If this is possible, we might even be able to use iron cores for better power production..  Not to mention no need to switch the coils at all.

When viewing the pics, Assume all magnets only have 1 pole. (Yes I understand monopoles do not exist, but for simplicity of the diagram). So again, all the same poles facing towards the inside coils. Offset 45 degrees, and magnets spaced perfectly on the rotors where the pole flip comes right after dead center.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 19, 2022, 01:38:31 PM
Unfortunately I think that latest design will not do any good.  After evaluating it, i think at top dead center when the attraction is the greatest, the "approaching flipper" will be opposing the rotor spin along with the the Lenz at dead center.  Thus cancelling any advantage .
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 20, 2022, 03:56:08 AM
deleted
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 20, 2022, 09:52:38 AM
Here is a video demonstrating the main "Power Gain" concept behind the upcoming build.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8U102MgiiY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8U102MgiiY)

Some of the main parts have completed printing, I have a few more parts to still design and print.

Since this was an "Idea" thread and now has off-topic ideas cluttering it, I will be starting a new thread in a few days documenting my build -- "Floodrod's Lenz Dependent Generator"


Interesting concept. I will be watching to see how things go. I do however have a question. I think in the video you describe opposite of Lenz law when you say the coil will attract the magnet towards it due to Lenz law. I could be thinking backwards, but Lenz law always opposes the motion of the magnet. So on the way in, it will try and repel to slow it. It will attract when the magnet is trying to pull away.
Now, if you are referring to using the concept we spoke about in your adams motor thread, where this coil is energized by another magnetic field on another rotor, I believe your experiments showed the original generated current was cut doing that but it did generate a field in the diversion coil. Problem is, that new approaching magnet will also generate a field in it counteracting it all.
BUT, you can do what I was referring to before. Instead of the diversion coil pointed at another magnet, point it at steel on that rotor. Then it WILL attract and aid in rotation. The exact concept im building into my generator. Mine doesn't have your stationary magnet though like yours. I hope my rambling made sense.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: BorisKrabow on April 20, 2022, 12:12:38 PM


.....BUT, you can do what I was referring to before. Instead of the diversion coil pointed at another magnet, point it at steel on that rotor. Then it WILL attract and aid in rotation......
  Hi!   Сaptainpecan . I agree with your ideas , just make small changes to the design . But this design has limitations.
          It is necessary to connect the coil at the moment when the magnet leaves the coil and the ferromagnetic compensator approaches , a diode can be used for this. in this version, all magnets must be turned to the coil with one pole .
          The device can be based on the rotor of a car generator, magnetize only one side of the rotor, and leave the opposite teeth without a magnetic field . the second half of the rotor will become compensators . If the coil core interferes, air coils can be used.

   regards Boris   
   
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 20, 2022, 01:02:18 PM

Interesting concept. I will be watching to see how things go. I do however have a question. I think in the video you describe opposite of Lenz law when you say the coil will attract the magnet towards it due to Lenz law. I could be thinking backwards, but Lenz law always opposes the motion of the magnet. So on the way in, it will try and repel to slow it. It will attract when the magnet is trying to pull away.
Now, if you are referring to using the concept we spoke about in your adams motor thread, where this coil is energized by another magnetic field on another rotor, I believe your experiments showed the original generated current was cut doing that but it did generate a field in the diversion coil. Problem is, that new approaching magnet will also generate a field in it counteracting it all.
BUT, you can do what I was referring to before. Instead of the diversion coil pointed at another magnet, point it at steel on that rotor. Then it WILL attract and aid in rotation. The exact concept im building into my generator. Mine doesn't have your stationary magnet though like yours. I hope my rambling made sense.

Wow..  I appreciate that!  You are right- It always works against you during approach and exit.  As you say- it repels on the way in, and attracts on the way out.  That must be why switching coils off and on never really increases anything, because yes switching them would cut 1/2 the drag out, but you lose 1/2 the output power.  Makes sense..

That put a monkey-wrench is my whole design.  Back to the drawing board...
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: BorisKrabow on April 20, 2022, 01:42:11 PM
Voila   ;D        https://overunity.com/18539/minimal-lenz-generator-v2/
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 20, 2022, 11:10:17 PM
I am sure this has been thought of before, but what about this.

The generator coil inside a horseshoe or c-shaped iron core

When lenz drag happens, the other pole of the coil is now located also in line with the rotor magnet. When the coil is switched on, the South Pole of the magnet attracts the North Pole of the coil in the escape, the other side of the horseshoe-shaped core is now south canceling out or repelling the rotor at the same time.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 21, 2022, 02:15:53 AM
Regarding the coils "tangential" orientation I mention above, here is an interesting induction method from member partzman which yields more induction to that of shown in Naudin's right hand side drawing: 
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564999/#msg564999)   

and the induced waveform:   
 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002   (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565002/#msg565002)   

EDIT: Just reading partzman's following posts on this induction method, the magnet does not move towards the coil but in front of it like in Naudin's case but both poles of the moving magnet induces 'tangentially':   
   https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010 (https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg565010/#msg565010)

I have been looking into your links you graciously provided.  I want to make sure I understand this, as it seems important.

Image on left is the normal coil orientation.  Equal repel and attraction force both working against the rotor.

Image on the right, small amount of repel on both the approach and escape, but one BIG attraction spike right at dead center..

If I am viewing the correctly, it would seem my idea of the 2 repelling magnets may indeed be feasible still..  I would lose a little on the small repel force on the approach, but my stationary magnets can neutralize out the big attraction spike then ride the stationary magnet repel force + the snall escape push on the way out.

If this is correct, this would be phenomenal.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 21, 2022, 03:02:58 AM
I haven't had a chance to look over the links yet. But those pics you posted remind me of the zero force motor. Something I have been considering building myself to learn more about it. I saw tinman has a video of his and he wasn't real happy with how it turned out. Bedini made one that rips pretty good and supposedlybuses next to no current. I dont know enough about it yet though. But it uses that sideways coil concept. But reading those scope pics, it's a cool effect. There is only one large pulse because the magnet is only cutting wires in one direction, instead cutting 2 opposite with a core in the middle as usual.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 21, 2022, 03:52:11 AM
There is only one large pulse because the magnet is only cutting wires in one direction, instead cutting 2 opposite with a core in the middle as usual.

I am new to the game, I have not seen it yet.  They say it is a lenz free configuration.  If the only spike is at dead center it makes sense..  The flux pulls the magnet rotor in, then opposes it on the way out.  Thus practically cancelling out lenz.  But I don't think my stationary magnets will have any use here

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 21, 2022, 06:55:46 PM

I am experimenting with the "Parallel Core Generator"   as outlines in the attached PDF.  According to that PDF, it states "Even when the core is turned by 90 degrees, it generates electricity as efficiently as conventional generator since the individual wires of the coil cuts the magnets flux at 90 degrees satisfying the equation E = nAH ɯ sin(ɵ) where 'ɵ' will be 90 degrees"

I have the output of my coil hooked up to a full wave bridge rectifier and I am measuring Volts and Amps coming out, as well as watching RPM.

I am not generating enough current to effectively measure lenz drag. But I can say that the horizontal 90 degree alignment does indeed generate some power.
My crude tests are not good though because holding it the standard way which directs the flux at the magnets is exposing more surface area towards the magnets, thus generating more power.

I will have to wind a coil in the horizontal fashion which exposes as much area of the wire to the magnets flux path to get a better idea of what's happening. 

I am thinking that if the power output is the same, this must indeed assist in directing Lenz Drag Flux away from the rotor.  I think it is worth the effort to do real tests with this.

As a note- I tried Partzman's Optimal Topology positioning but could not generate anything.  But I can't get the coil in close to the magnets in that way with the current rotor design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vur1cqpq2-U

I ordered a scope which should be coming tomorrow.  I don't know how to use it, but I guess I need to learn as I am beginning to see the importance of it.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 22, 2022, 12:03:22 AM
I have been looking into your links you graciously provided.  I want to make sure I understand this, as it seems important.

Image on left is the normal coil orientation.  Equal repel and attraction force both working against the rotor.

Image on the right, small amount of repel on both the approach and escape, but one BIG attraction spike right at dead center..

If I am viewing the correctly, it would seem my idea of the 2 repelling magnets may indeed be feasible still..  I would lose a little on the small repel force on the approach, but my stationary magnets can neutralize out the big attraction spike then ride the stationary magnet repel force + the snall escape push on the way out.

If this is correct, this would be phenomenal. 
 

Hi,  all I can say is the best to test this idea...   I am not aware of anyone reporting the setup based on the image by Naudin on the right side would be with even a low Lenz effect but this proves nothing.   

I include an edited picture where I copied the scope shot member partzman made on the coil  current belonging to his mentioned test with the shown coil and magnet orientations. Note what partzman wrote: 
    "The magnet moves left-to-right or right-to-left at a right angle to the center line of the induction coil."   so this is not a tangential induction with respect to the coil side as Naudin had it in the right hand side image.   
The coil shape you show in the test video (Reply #49 above) may not have a good shape,  a solenoid shape is preferred I think.   
 
 When doing such tests, do not use LED diodes or lamps as a load because they conduct in their forward direction so load the half of a full wave and also load the peak amplitudes of the waves.  Use a normal (non wirewound) resistor set say 10 , 22, 51, 100 Ohm etc  An incandescent lamp seems also good as long as you can measure its current and the voltage just feeding it because it is also a non linear load.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 22, 2022, 12:20:49 AM
Folks,  regarding the zero force motor (ZFM) setup,  it does have back emf and Lenz effect in spite of  Bedini's claims...   Yaro Stanchak at energyscinceforum.com made extensive tests on ZFM setups and found efficiency range between 50% - 53% between electric input power and mechanical output power  .https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/2603-zfm-advanced-explorations-part-ii/page4 (https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/2603-zfm-advanced-explorations-part-ii/page4)     
   https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/72864-advanced-zfm-explorations-part-3/page2#post73321 (https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/72864-advanced-zfm-explorations-part-3/page2#post73321)   
 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 22, 2022, 02:02:34 AM
Folks,  regarding the zero force motor (ZFM) setup,  it does have back emf and Lenz effect in spite of  Bedini's claims...   Yaro Stanchak at energyscinceforum.com made extensive tests on ZFM setups and found efficiency range between 50% - 53% between electric input power and mechanical output power  .https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/2603-zfm-advanced-explorations-part-ii/page4 (https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/2603-zfm-advanced-explorations-part-ii/page4)     
   https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/72864-advanced-zfm-explorations-part-3/page2#post73321 (https://www.energyscienceforum.com/forum/alternative-energy/john-bedini/72864-advanced-zfm-explorations-part-3/page2#post73321)   
 


Yeah, I kind of figured. I haven't built one yet, but tinman was not impressed with his build. Even though bedinis looks impressive, I kind of had other things I wanted to try first. All I know is that it does use the coils in this orientation. I'm not real familiar with it. Will be interesting to see some tests.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 22, 2022, 08:54:03 PM
Got my scope in..  Don't really know how to use it yet, but I see squiggles!!!!  LOL

Here are my results holding an air coil against a rotor.

1. Same polarity Magnets on rotor Normal position coil..  Notice I have 1 N52 and 3 N45's in the rotor.  You can see every 4th wave is Bigger.
2. Alternating Polarity Magnets -Coil 90 degrees
2. Alternating Polarity Magnets -Coil standard orientation
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: broli on April 22, 2022, 10:30:43 PM
You should focus on your second design WITH a core. Saturating a core using the magnet perpendicular to the coil's field will make the core lose it's ability to amplify the coil's magnetic field. This collapse will inturn make the energy spike as the coil does not like the sudden change in flux due to the magnet saturating the core in the perpendicular direction. This spike in current will change the magnetic energy of the system due to (L*I^2)/2 (Energy of an inductor). Another way of seeing this is that L*I has to always remain constant, if L drops I will rise proportionally but since I has a squared dependency in the energy equation, you will gain energy.


I'm myself experimenting with something similar but using a toroid instead, the magnet moves over the toroid and saturating its core the coil will spike its current but this will not affect the magnet. However it might affect the force the magnet moves away at and this might were you pay the energy penalty.


TLDR: Saturate the core in perpendicular direction, gain more inductive energy as a result. The only question is will you pay for it in mechanical energy?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 22, 2022, 11:05:20 PM
You should focus on your second design WITH a core. Saturating a core using the magnet perpendicular to the coil's field will make the core lose it's ability to amplify the coil's magnetic field. This collapse will inturn make the energy spike as the coil does not like the sudden change in flux due to the magnet saturating the core in the perpendicular direction. This spike in current will change the magnetic energy of the system due to (L*I^2)/2 (Energy of an inductor). Another way of seeing this is that L*I has to always remain constant, if L drops I will rise proportionally but since I has a squared dependency in the energy equation, you will gain energy.


I'm myself experimenting with something similar but using a toroid instead, the magnet moves over the toroid and saturating its core the coil will spike its current but this will not affect the magnet. However it might affect the force the magnet moves away at and this might were you pay the energy penalty.


TLDR: Saturate the core in perpendicular direction, gain more inductive energy as a result. The only question is will you pay for it in mechanical energy?

Neat Stuff!  Thanks and I would like to follow your results.

I am just tinkering till I have a better understanding..  I am just stumped at the moment on something..

I have been watching dozens and dozens of videos of magnets passing coils with a Galvanometer in slow motion..  Trying to study and understand exactly what's happening and when - so I can dissect it to work with it instead of against it.

I believe the thought "Repel on approach, attract on exit"  is not correct in all scenarios.

View this carefully..  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAD_aHLrbFQ

Based on what I am seeing and looking at the scope waves- "I Think" The whole Repel on approach, attract on exit should only hold true when either changing directions of the stroke or changing polarities of the magnet that is going in 1 direction.. 

1.  Pass a bar magnet all the way through a coil..  .  It will indeed Repel on approach and Attract on Exit..  Bar magnet has 2 polarities which went through in 1 direction.

2. Push one polarity of that magnet half way into a coil then pull it out.  Indeed it will repel going in, and attract coming out.  We Changed Directions With 1 Polarity

3.  Pass one pole of a magnet past a coil in 1 direction all the way past it...  There was no change of direction or polarity flip.  The coil should repel equally throughout the pass..

#3 above is how our common Axial Flux generators work.  There is only 1 polarity passing a coil..  And no change of direction or polarity flip till we reach the ZERO LINE between magnets.  I can't see how this could possibly attract during magnet exit.

See the image attached.  The current is only flowing 1 direction from zero line to zero line during one magnet pass.  And that video i posted shows similar things of a coil + Galvanometer reactions.  A coil going into one leg of a horseshoe magnet all the way past the magnet pole only makes the needle move 1 way.. 

If I am right, why do we have drag when 1 magnet passes a coil in 1 direction?  Or perhaps I am wrong and just don't get it yet..  But I do think something else is happening other than the common explanation that it is repelling while entering and attracting while exiting.

I ordered a Galvanometer so I can test this for myself.  I want to experiment switching the coil at exact times, but I need to understand exactly how the current reacts to different coil orientations and fine a situation where there will be benefit switching a precise moment.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 03:16:44 AM
I have my full working theory I am going to test...  I am venturing to say the drag is coming from the "Brick Wall" at top dead center..

When collecting - the whole wave cancels out EXCPET passing dead center.  It's at dead center when the 2 repelling fields must meet and must overcome each other. 

Same concept as repelling 2 magnets and trying to use the repulsion to make it past another repelling field of equal strength as the first.  The only way it's possible is if you use momentum inserted from another source..  But in the case of a PM generator, it's even worse because there is no gain anywhere to use.  All the potential gain cancels out leaving you with a solid brick wall you must pass through with input power.  If you ever get 60-70% efficiency consider yourself lucky. 

If my "imaginary theory" is true-  it's good news because it should be beatable.  You would have to give up the greed and sacrifice somewhere between 51% and 55% of the cycle by only collecting AFTER the rotor passes dead center of the coil and disconnect the coils again at or before the zero line between magnets.  Sure you miss most the good juice, but in return, the generator speeds up when collecting.

My theory may be way off base- but it's the only way that makes sense to me and all the pieces fit (in my demented mind)  .. 

2 Images attached.  First is 1/2 wave showing where I predict the forces are in the cycle-  second showing when to collect and disconnect the coils.

1 last note-  magnet past iron / metal creates the same drag- just like magnet to magnet.    The attraction of the magnet to the core is not strong enough for the magnet to sail past the core and give it any additional power.  Iron Cores will just rob us of power so have no place in this design if this theory pans out.. 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 09:48:22 AM

3.  Pass one pole of a magnet past a coil in 1 direction all the way past it...  There was no change of direction or polarity flip.  The coil should repel equally throughout the pass..

#3 above is how our common Axial Flux generators work.  There is only 1 polarity passing a coil..  And no change of direction or polarity flip till we reach the ZERO LINE between magnets.  I can't see how this could possibly attract during magnet exit.

See the image attached.  The current is only flowing 1 direction from zero line to zero line during one magnet pass.  And that video i posted shows similar things of a coil + Galvanometer reactions.  A coil going into one leg of a horseshoe magnet all the way past the magnet pole only makes the needle move 1 way.. 

If I am right, why do we have drag when 1 magnet passes a coil in 1 direction?  Or perhaps I am wrong and just don't get it yet..  But I do think something else is happening other than the common explanation that it is repelling while entering and attracting while exiting.


Okay, this one took me a bit to grasp also when I was trying to learn it, but I think I understand it myself now. For ease of explanation, lets assume all air core coil for what I am about to say.
Where you have above showing "coil is between magnets" is actually the magnet at TDC of the coils core or center of air core. Where you have as "brick wall" is actually the center of the copper turns on either side of the core. Let me explain.
 
Work your mind from the center of the coil outward in both directions.... If you are the magnet passing the coil perpendicular, the normal way we always do it, the dead center position of the coil is 0v on the scope. If you move from the center to the left you begin to see a voltage move higher giving you the voltage rise. Now, go back to the center again, and move towards the right. You will now see the voltage fall on the scope. Why? Think about what is causing it. The magnetic field interacts with the copper wire. The position of the magnet that causes the flux to cut the most turns of copper at onc time is your peak on the scope. The polarity changes when moving the magnet only one way also. This is simply because you may have wound the coil all in one direction, but from the perspective of the magnet, the wire is running upward on one side and downward on the other side. That is why you get the polarity flip. The wire has changed directions in the perspective of the magnet, even though the magnet has not.


Now, and iron core looks slightly different. But the dead center spot is still 0v. The difference you will see on the scope is simply a sharp change from peak to peak when passing the center. This is because the iron core simply draws the magnetic flux toward the center. You get a more confined magnetic field so the change in polarity at the center is much more direct. To me, I used to think the peak was the center of the coil. This is not true. The center MUST be zero because it is equally between two sets of copper turns, both running opposite directions, and the dead center is both sides cancelling each other out making it zero on the scope. This however is not the case of a parallel coil. I am referring to the traditional way we always use them.


Hope this helps. If I am off in this somehow, someone please correct me so I understand as well. Here is a really crappy quick sketch to try and show what I'm saying.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 10:26:28 AM
I need to play with it myself because it's been an interest I haven't gotten around to understanding fully yet. But my take on the parallel coil is that you still have Lenz but I'm not sure how much it would be reduced. The peak of the waveform is in the center because that is where the flux cuts the most turns of copper at once. It shows as one polarity because since you only use 1 side of the coil, the wire does not change directions from the perspective of the magnet. It is possible that more flux is concentrated in the center of the coil causing less Lenz drag, but there still will be some. Those copper turns each have a magnetic field rotating around them as well that is not inside the core. So as long as current flows, there will be that opposing field. The question is how much of course and is it less because more is concentrated in the center. But, let's also not forget, we are now only using half the coil. So half the energy as well. Very interesting stuff I want to learn more about.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 04:38:50 PM


Where you have above showing "coil is between magnets" is actually the magnet at TDC of the coils core or center of air core. Where you have as "brick wall" is actually the center of the copper turns on either side of the core. Let me explain.
 


This should be easy to prove .
Assuming we have 4 magnets and 1 coil (which I do) in your model, there should be 4 complete sine waves per revolution.  in mine, there should be 2 complete sine waves per rotation.  So all we have to do is mark one magnet so it shows on the scope and count the sinewaves.

So I added a magnet to only 1 pole of a 4 pole rotor.  So we can see the wave peak difference and know when the rotor completed 1 revolution.

@@@@  Notice the peak from the extra magnet on the top and bottom wave.  Much bigger peak on 1 side than the other. 

Captain- I am totally up for explanations and willing to listen to all viewpoints and view all related data.  Please do not take this as me being stubborn. I just need to see it for myself to confirm it.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 05:38:42 PM
The reason I am investigating this so closely is because the ramifications are huge..

It is assumed there is no point in the generation process where the flux from the coil helps the rotor.  It's "Always" opposing the rotation.

But if my theory is correct, there may be a brief window where the flux is helping the rotor.  And the main drag not happening exactly at the places we assume.

If correct, the windows of collection will be small and difficult to catch.  Hall sensors or reed switches would ne near impossible to time in so exact.  So I will use infrared sensors.

With my round magnets and current rotor design, my windows of collection would be at the holes in my attached timing wheel.  Avoiding collection during dead center alignment and also avoiding all sections that would induce drag.

I may be totally wrong...  but I have to try!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 05:50:40 PM
Yeah, it's there. Take another look. The peak is on both sides as it should be. Can you see what I am talking about?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 06:08:42 PM
Yeah, it's there. Take another look. The peak is on both sides as it should be. Can you see what I am talking about?

Yes, I considered that..   I have a working theory on that also.  But first, please explain the wave count.

4 magnets / 1 coil.  2 complete sinewaves in 1 rotation.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 06:43:38 PM
Is it a coil pair? Because there is only 2 full cycles. Where are your probes attached? You can test that by adding a magnet to the next rotor magnet as well... NOT across. Right next to it. And see if ALL have the added peak.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 06:47:30 PM
Is it a coil pair? Because there is only 2 full cycles. Where are your probes attached? You can test that by adding a magnet to the next rotor magnet as well... NOT across. Right next to it. And see if ALL have the added peak.

1 coil only.  4 alternating polarity magnets.  Scope clipped on to the coil leads.

I got the motor apart to add my next pieces. I will do your test soon
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 06:55:36 PM
He explains it pretty well here. Skip to around 8 minutes. Also again around 19 minutes he is swinging a magnet on a pendulum. He shows the parallel coil as well. But keep watching because he explains things really well after 22 minutes or so that may help a lot.
https://youtu.be/H6H3RymQC7g (https://youtu.be/H6H3RymQC7g)
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 07:53:34 PM
He explains it pretty well here. Skip to around 8 minutes. Also again around 19 minutes he is swinging a magnet on a pendulum. He shows the parallel coil as well. But keep watching because he explains things really well after 22 minutes or so that may help a lot.
https://youtu.be/H6H3RymQC7g (https://youtu.be/H6H3RymQC7g)

Wonderful Video.  Especially this point at the attached image

In that configuration he says the poles are trying to align..  and the rotor creates current in only 1 way only.  Now imaging switching the coil off at exact timing.  This video may contain what I am seeking..  A way to align a coil to induce current in only 1 direction per pass.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 08:49:01 PM
I happen to have a test device of his same orientation.  (just smaller)  So I scoped it..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YIC7rbscUk

I like!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 08:54:05 PM
Yeah, it's not easy to wrap your mind around. But when you get the hang of it, that scope is an AWESOME tool to have. What helps me is I keep thinking to myself, it is the copper the current flows in, the magnetic field is changed with iron around it, bit it's still the turns of copper being cut by the field. It gets confusing. But it's kind of an "ah ha" moment when you finally get it, and realize what you can actually see now.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 09:29:43 PM
I happen to have a test device of his same orientation.  (just smaller)  So I scoped it..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YIC7rbscUk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YIC7rbscUk)

I like!
Awesome... look at you go!!! Keep playing. The more understanding of all of this we get, the better chance we can find a way to squeeze some advantage SOMEWHERE...
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 09:31:30 PM
I'm still a little confused on your earlier scope shots? There was only 2 cycles. Did you see if it was measured funny or something since you expected 4 cycles?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: citfta on April 23, 2022, 09:36:02 PM

Floodrod.


Captainpecan is explaining it correctly.  Your magnets are so close to each other they are affecting the field of each other.  Make a rotor with only one magnet and then spin it past the coil and you will plainly see the sine wave if the end of the magnet passes the end of the coil.  Lenz force has nothing to do with the flipping of the flux in the coil.  Lenz force is the mechanical force necessary to generate the current being used by the load.  Here is a picture of a signal I generated by changing the orientation of the magnet so that one polarity of the magnet approaches the coil and then as the magnet leaves the coil the other end of the magnet with opposite polarity leaves the coil.  In other words a bar magnet with the side of the magnet moving past the coil.


Keep studying and learning.  I like to see someone new actually trying to learn on their own instead of just believing whatever someone tells them!


Carroll
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 10:45:44 PM
I'm still a little confused on your earlier scope shots? There was only 2 cycles. Did you see if it was measured funny or something since you expected 4 cycles?

I don't know..  It still seems possible to me,,,  See my test here-  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JuYJ-2TfVM
I can repeat it 1000;s of times. same result.

Center to center  = Current in 1 way..

The rotor alternates polarity.  So the 2 magnets lined up with the coils are both the same polarity. 

If the current is causing the coils to attract to the rotor as they leave, then that same current direction must be also attracting the next rotor magnet in.  (because my rotor magnets alternate). 

Maybe I am mixed up- but if it's attracting to the magnets that it's closest to, switch the coil during that 1/8th rotation so it only amps up the coil when that direction current will attract the next magnet and pull it in.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 11:22:01 PM
I see why that test showed you what it did and why it is confusing you. You are slowing it down and stopping in the middle of the coil each time. So you only see the 2nd half of the coil. That's why you are only seeing one polarity each time. You are pushing it away but slowing it on the way in. If you assume the peak is the center, it makes you only test half of the cycle. Don't assume that. I know it sounds true, but it isn't. You will see. You just have to step back and look at it different than you are. Turn it from before the coil to after it. One full pass. Not from center to center. You will then see both polarities with one pass.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 11:23:43 PM
I have a theory why I am seeing this.  (my theories lol...)

your model is correct with 1 pole magnet.  But my rotor has alternating polarities.  And it happens to be lined up almost perfectly while one magnet is crossing the edge of the coil, the next opposite pole rotor magnet is crossing the other side on the way in. .  So the flipping we see with 1 magnet is not manifesting because I am neutralizing out the flip that happens with 1 pole entering and exiting.

Just a theory...   

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 11:32:29 PM
Your video still proves it. You accidently showed it at the last second the video cuts when you pull you hand away from the rotor. The magnet does 1 full pass without you stopping it. Look at the wave form at the last second.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 11:41:46 PM
I see why that test showed you what it did and why it is confusing you. You are slowing it down and stopping in the middle of the coil each time. So you only see the 2nd half of the coil. That's why you are only seeing one polarity each time. You are pushing it away but slowing it on the way in. If you assume the peak is the center, it makes you only test half of the cycle. Don't assume that. I know it sounds true, but it isn't. You will see. You just have to step back and look at it different than you are. Turn it from before the coil to after it. One full pass. Not from center to center. You will then see both polarities with one pass.

Your probably right-  starting between magnets does flip at dead center. 

 but this is still considered a win to me..  Center to center = 1 direction current.  No current flip exiting and entering on the next magnet till dead center.

If I have same way current from dead center to dead center-  the induced flux has to be attracting a rotor magnet and repelling the other since they are alternating.

I marked the rotor with a red dot on 1 magnet.  Spunn the rotor 1 complete revolution and took a pic.  1 rotation = 2 complete waves.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 11:48:48 PM
Yeah, here was screen shots of the last second of your video. It shows it happening on 1 pole of a magnet passing.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 11:53:39 PM
I marked the rotor with a red dot on 1 magnet.  Spunn the rotor 1 complete revolution and took a pic.  1 rotation = 2 complete waves.
There you go. Now the original waveform makes sense. Now you can see the 2 cycles yourself hopefully. It's a bit hard to wrap your mind around, I know. I had many confused nights trying to understand it myself. But when you get it, you really start to understand things better. It's awesome to know someone else here that has a twisted mind like me has this tool as well.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 23, 2022, 11:58:27 PM
@floodrod
BTW, feel free to message me if you want any special threads for research or builds. Stefan hooked me up with a builders board and I can easily get you any moderated thread you would like to work with. Just message me and I'll hook you up.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 23, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
There you go. Now the original waveform makes sense. Now you can see the 2 cycles yourself hopefully. It's a bit hard to wrap your mind around, I know. I had many confused nights trying to understand it myself. But when you get it, you really start to understand things better. It's awesome to know someone else here that has a twisted mind like me has this tool as well.

Yes..  But not 4 sinewaves per rotation..  Only 2...   Same way current center to center..  =   it can not be opposing rotation the whole way.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 24, 2022, 01:24:14 AM
Cool!..  When 2 alternating polarity magnets pass a coil-  the joining line between the magnets work together and eliminate a polarity change causing an amplified wave rather than 2 smaller waves individually.

The pattern is as follows:

1 magnet= 1 Sinewave...
2 magnets = 1.5 sine waves.
3 magnets = 2 sine waves
4 magnets= 2.5 sine waves
5 magnets = 3 sine waves
6 magnets = 3.5 sine waves.

In the case of my rotor- I have 4 alternating magnets.  If I go dead center to dead center without passing the last coil- I get 2 sine waves.  If I go past the coils center before stopping I get the 2.5 sine waves.

We can control the sine wave count if your rotors magnets are within flux range from each other and if they are alternating.  Which means we can pick the direction of current on exit.

------>    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXt78KfV8RU
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 24, 2022, 02:25:31 AM
Interesting stuff. That wave from the 2 magnets looks very similar to the waveform of a sideways coil.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 24, 2022, 02:57:29 AM
Interesting stuff. That wave from the 2 magnets looks very similar to the waveform of a sideways coil.

My theory on that is:

when the current flips at dead center, if the magnets flip polarity at that exact spot, it cancels out a current flip and amplifies that spike.

1 Magnet has 1 sine wave
2 magnets would have 2 sine waves, but we have 1 join so subtract 1/2 sine wave and get 1.5
3 magnets should have 3 sine waves, but we have 2 joins so subtract 1 sine wave and get 2
4 magnets should have 4 sine waves, but we have 3 joins so subtract 1.5 sine waves and get 2.5
5 magnets should have 5 sinewaves, but we have 4 joins so subtract 2 and we get 3
6 magnets should have 6 sine waves, but we have 5 joins, so subtract 2.5 and we get 3.5
etc.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 24, 2022, 01:04:52 PM
After drawing this all out dozens of times-  I realized It has to be true..    If it didn't do this-  standard alternating magnet generators would have no drag...  but this isn't the case!  That cancelling out of a current change is making sure standard generators do NOT go overunity.


on my alternating pole rotor- if it made 4 sine waves it would have no drag!  but it can't let that happen... so it removed a current polarity swap per magnet and only has 2.

but now i know how to change current direction..  Perhaps there is a configuration that would do what I seek. I have to work out all combinations and sine wave directions and see..  There are dozens of possibilities to explore with this.  but one thing is for sure-  my current rotor / coil design with 4 poles and 4 coils aligned can not eliminate drag in this configuration..

Not a "success" yet-  but certainly a "win" .  Now I am not randomly switching coils in the dark with no idea what's going on..  Now I have the tools to make a complete strategy and attack plan.  A step forward!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 25, 2022, 03:08:48 AM
Just wanted to say that it's much appreciated (the topics etc.) that
you and Cap. Pecan are doing..
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 03:33:19 AM
Thanks Floor- I am enjoying myself and learning..

Next Post question:

4 same polarity coil.....   (adams style)...   Where is the drag????  All drag must be neutralized in it...

Picture it..  all magnets are same polarity..  So the coil can be ANY polarity and no drag..

1. if  Coil is always north= Neutralized
2. If coil is always south = Neutralized
3.  if coil is South on entrance, North on exit=  Neutralized
4. Coil is North on entrance , south on exit- Neutralized.

I can see only 1 possible way there can be drag-  if coil polarity flips exactly between magnets.

Where is the Zero points in this setup?  I watched it on my scope and know (as the scope looks) 1 revolution of 4 magnets makes 4 complete waves.   Or it might be 4 half waves one way and the bottom looks like a down wave.  Not sure..

I assembled this setup with 6 coils around 4 magnet rotor and have a timing circuit in place to collect only 4 pulses per revolution in hopes to catch it at a place where juicing it would initiate rotation, but no luck yet.  The air coils I have in place may not be getting enough power from it..  Or maybe my timing is off.  I assume there will be 4 places that assist the rotation.

But knowing how thing go in this hobby, I wouldn't be suprised to hear they flip between the magnets..  (the only place I see limiting us)

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 04:10:06 AM
Cool!..  When 2 alternating polarity magnets pass a coil-  the joining line between the magnets work together and eliminate a polarity change causing an amplified wave rather than 2 smaller waves individually.

The pattern is as follows:

1 magnet= 1 Sinewave...
2 magnets = 1.5 sine waves.
3 magnets = 2 sine waves
4 magnets= 2.5 sine waves
5 magnets = 3 sine waves
6 magnets = 3.5 sine waves.

In the case of my rotor- I have 4 alternating magnets.  If I go dead center to dead center without passing the last coil- I get 2 sine waves.  If I go past the coils center before stopping I get the 2.5 sine waves.

We can control the sine wave count if your rotors magnets are within flux range from each other and if they are alternating.  Which means we can pick the direction of current on exit.

------>    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXt78KfV8RU

Regarding this.  I used the data to figure out exactly what kind of wave pattern we need per 1 full rotation in order to find a neutral point where there is at least 1 place where pulling power can possibly help the rotor go. 

The results are stupid..  Alternating polarity magnets evenly, no possible way...  1 revolution needs to end on a half sine wave.  If 1 revolution ends on a full wave, 100% rotor drag every step of the way.

Best chance is Adams motor style.  All same polarity.   

"NOTE-  This info depends on where / if there are polarity flips on all same pole rotors.  I can happily send videos of scope shots of the action is one wants to evaluate
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 25, 2022, 04:28:47 AM
4 same polarity coil.....   (adams style)...   Where is the drag? ???  All drag must be neutralized in it...

Picture it..  all magnets are same polarity..  So the coil can be ANY polarity and no drag..

I can see only 1 possible way there can be drag-  if coil polarity flips exactly between magnets.
Thanks again Floor...


As far as the quote, what do you mean? There is plenty of drag in an adams motor. I think you are referring to the back emf caused by Lenz law? If so, the polarity of the magnet does not matter, as well as if they are are the same pole. The magnetic field created by the current induced in the coil will always work against what ever polarity of magnet induces it. (Unless of course we find something special)


As far as not being able to see all the poles on the scope when the magnets alternate, I thin what you are seeing is them working together. The magnetic fields are directed at each other and creating virtual poles, I think you could call it. Bedini spoke of it often. But if you think about it, all the same polarity, the fields are forced into their own area per say. So each pole is more defined. That's at least what I think you could be seeing.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 04:44:24 AM
Thanks again Floor...


As far as the quote, what do you mean? There is plenty of drag in an adams motor.

Please explain.  See pic below. 

rotor passes coil:  (assume all magnet polarity are positive)

if polarity of coil is + (pos) between magnets -  Kicks one magnet forward- kicks the other back. =  Neutral

if polarity of coil is - (neg) between magnets -  attracts trailing magnet in - holds leading magnet back. =  Neutral

Every position of the rotor- there is another same pole magnet coming in / going out neutralizing evenly.

In this unique case, opposing any rotor magnet is helping the next one because the next one is the same polarity also.. 

EXCEPT-  if polarity flips exactly between magnets.

If I am wrong- please explain. 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 25, 2022, 07:58:47 AM
Okay, I get what you are saying now. I think at the exact center between the coils would be exactly like being at TDC of the coil. If I am thinking correctly, the two sides would cancel out, so you should be correct. But... I'm not sure what you are thinking for using that to our advantage or if you are just picking around to understand it. Because in most cases if the magnet is exacy between 2 coils, I doubt it would even be a closed circuit at that time. Most likely it would be an open coil situation if you thinking about a motor side.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 12:45:50 PM
Okay, I get what you are saying now. I think at the exact center between the coils would be exactly like being at TDC of the coil. If I am thinking correctly, the two sides would cancel out, so you should be correct. But... I'm not sure what you are thinking for using that to our advantage or if you are just picking around to understand it. Because in most cases if the magnet is exacy between 2 coils, I doubt it would even be a closed circuit at that time. Most likely it would be an open coil situation if you thinking about a motor side.

Cool now we are on the same wavelength again..

But if everything is the same size and same spacing,  it is not only balancing between magnets.  Also balancing at every spot.  When magnet entering coil, other magnet is exiting. whatever way the coil charges, one is hurt- one is helped.  At every place.

Now picture this..  If coils and magnets are aligned perfectly = they counteract each other almost evenly.  reduced drag, but no way to slice it apart and only use the advantage because at every time the coil is helping the rotor, it is also hurting it evenly at the exact same time.

But what if we take away 1 coil..  4 magnets / 3 coils..  Now the coil and magnets still balance out to some degree but not so evenly.  Since the coils are not aligned at the same spacing as the magnets, it leaves us brief moments in the rotation where the the help to hurt ratio are uneven.  Thus allowing us to switch the coils in the harvest windows.

Sort of like a muller / adams combined

If robert adams really did get overunity-  it wasn't from that flyback spike.  His coils must have been aligned not perfectly -disrupting the balance.  And we know he switched the output coils.  Whether he knew what was happening or not- I think that was the source of gain in his design.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 25, 2022, 04:14:21 PM
Yeah, that's the muller concept. Interesting enough, I can't find it now, but many years ago I saw a piece written up that said muller specificly said his unbalance of rotor coil magnet ratio was from adams. It interested me when I saw that, but I was not able to find anything from adams actually showing it.  It's a concept I always keep in mind actually. I was going to do that with my current motor design but I wanted more in series for more turns on thinner wire. So I want with 8 on the rotor and 6 coils. Firing the coils in pairs gives me 24 pulses per rotation. It's how I have it built now. It's kind of the best of both worlds. Because many are build using the 4 to 3 ratio as well. Muller did however use 9 to 8 I believe, or at least it was only a gap of 1 between rotor magnet ratio. It is a very effective way to cut down on magnet cogging. But it doesn't do anything for Lenz law of course. It just evens it out and splits up those sticky spots. A flywheel helps too quite a bit.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 05:22:36 PM
Yeah, that's the muller concept. Interesting enough, I can't find it now, but many years ago I saw a piece written up that said muller specificly said his unbalance of rotor coil magnet ratio was from adams. It interested me when I saw that, but I was not able to find anything from adams actually showing it.  It's a concept I always keep in mind actually. I was going to do that with my current motor design but I wanted more in series for more turns on thinner wire. So I want with 8 on the rotor and 6 coils. Firing the coils in pairs gives me 24 pulses per rotation. It's how I have it built now. It's kind of the best of both worlds. Because many are build using the 4 to 3 ratio as well. Muller did however use 9 to 8 I believe, or at least it was only a gap of 1 between rotor magnet ratio. It is a very effective way to cut down on magnet cogging. But it doesn't do anything for Lenz law of course. It just evens it out and splits up those sticky spots. A flywheel helps too quite a bit.

According to my current research, no way to fully eliminate lenz if magnets are alternating.

But if magnets are all the same polarity, lenz does not affect the rotor.. I am skeptical on blanket statements and textbook answers. I need to see things from myself.

In my previous image of four same poles and four coils, if anyone can point out where in the rotation lenz drag can affect the rotor, I would be appreciative.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 25, 2022, 05:58:31 PM
According to my current research, no way to fully eliminate lenz if magnets are alternating.

But if magnets are all the same polarity, lenz does not affect the rotor.. I am skeptical on blanket statements and textbook answers. I need to see things from myself.

In my previous image of four same poles and four coils, if anyone can point out where in the rotation lenz drag can affect the rotor, I would be appreciative.


I definitely appreciate your need to test and see for yourself. There are so many times I know something will not work before I do it, but I still do, because I don't understand WHY it won't work. So I get it.
As far as the Lenz drag though. What you are referring to as Lenz drag is the back emf. Think about what it actually is. A changing magnetic field cutting through turns of wire. This enduces current in the wire. If it not connected, you will get a voltage shown on the scope, but no Lenz drag yet. Because what you are seeing is just the POTENTIAL or, voltage. Put a load on the coil, and the current will flow. The voltage will adjust according to the load, but current is now flowing. Now you are getting the back emf, or lenz drag. And it will always work against the magnetic field which creates it. It is the current that causes it because it is the current flowing that creates it.
So, long story short, as long as you have current in that coil, you have that back emf. It does not care which polarity of the magnet it is seeing. It will adjust to drag it down whichever direction. It's just how it works and it sucks ass. But it's finding that very core understanding of what it is, will help in the hunt to defeat it, or at least work with it better.
If you have not watched it yet, Peter Lindemann explains it very well in his video Electric Motor Secrets. There is a copy on you tube but the audio gets way off from the video a ways into it. But his explanation for back emf is great and very understandable. It's in the first 45 minutes. It's worth a good watch if you have never seen it because he also shows exactly how to test a motors efficiency. Which I will be doing in next couple days I hope on mine.
https://youtu.be/OSJF3GlYGVc (https://youtu.be/OSJF3GlYGVc)
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 25, 2022, 06:31:11 PM
...

I see what you're saying. My brain just works a little differently to understand things.

Lenz is still happening. I am neutralizing some of it out with the cost of being less electricity produced.
I have another idea I am going to try. I might take you up on that moderated thread.

Thank you
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 26, 2022, 12:08:59 AM
Just message me with what you want it named. Let's keep the ideas flowing!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 26, 2022, 03:48:21 AM
Had several ideas..  Put together easiest one..  10 minute assembly for some proof of concept.

I am pretty sure this design should be free from Lenz Drag.. 

Its producing some voltage while hand spinning- even with god-awful gap between coil and rotor and 1 small bolt as a core.  Wondering if it is capable of producing usable power in this config.

Note-  Magnets are alternating polarity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elXPP8GwjQU
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 26, 2022, 04:19:16 AM
But how would the coil push the rotor? There is a line of flux cutting wires somewhere there. Is the rotor perfectly aligned with the center of the coil? I am thinking it's off center just enough to cause some of the flux to cut turns. A voltage is created somehow. Interesting because it should make very little voltage if any. Worth understanding better.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 26, 2022, 04:55:35 AM
But how would the coil push the rotor? There is a line of flux cutting wires somewhere there. Is the rotor perfectly aligned with the center of the coil? I am thinking it's off center just enough to cause some of the flux to cut turns. A voltage is created somehow. Interesting because it should make very little voltage if any. Worth understanding better.

No claims of coil pushing the rotor here.  Just trying to find a way to beat lenz.

I had the magnets in same polarity in that video.  I just switched them.  lighting an Led and getting just about 11 volts with the Led connected by hand spinning.  The wave form changed now.  Looks much better..

Maybe misaligning it would be better in this situation?  If we could align it where one rotor magnet gets more flux exposure from the coil than the other- perhaps it can help the spin by repelling harder.

Too much to think about now!  But here's the vid llighting an Led with 11 volts hand spinning  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz6LlKrKoVk


Edit--  We can probably cut more flux with different shaped magnets and still keep both aligned to neutralize drag.  Pic attached
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 26, 2022, 07:53:35 AM
I could be wrong, but it seems like you spin it a little less hard the first time and it spins longer and smother with open coil. But when you hook the led to it, it seems to slow faster. Like it's getting the brakes put on by Lenz still. Can't tell for sure of course from that video, but it kind of looks that way. Something you can do to test it easily is hook a second led up across the 1st one, just opposite. Then you will load both positive and negative sides and leds will alternate lighting. But if there is back emf kicking it will double and make it more obvious. Just FYI, you probably figured it out already, but if you hadn't understood it yet looking at the wave form, you can see why it's a square wave on the top only. You can clearly see the dip still on the negative side but the led is making the positive side a square because it is forward biased. Adding the reversed led should give you the square on the bottom as well. Just pointing it out for learning in case you didn't notice. Keep it up!
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: Floor on April 26, 2022, 08:03:29 AM
And / or, add additional led s, in parallel (same polarity) to the already present one
(increase the load)?
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 26, 2022, 08:05:35 AM
Yeah, just lay one across the same leads in parallel but reversed. It will flash one for the positive cycle and the other for the negative cycle. If Lenz is in fact present, you may be able to see it easily that way because it will double it.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: gyulasun on April 26, 2022, 10:15:58 AM
Yeah, just lay one across the same leads in parallel but reversed. It will flash one for the positive cycle and the other for the negative cycle. If Lenz is in fact present, you may be able to see it easily that way because it will double it.


Yes, what you suggest is much better than using only one LED. But the even better load would be to use a Wheat lamp instead of the LEDs. Random search below but ebay also a good source: 
https://www.allelectronics.com/category/320700/lamps/miniature/grain-of-wheat-lamps/1.html (https://www.allelectronics.com/category/320700/lamps/miniature/grain-of-wheat-lamps/1.html)   

These small lamps still give a nonlinear load behaviour but at least they do not have a forward voltage threshold like LEDs do under which no load current can flow. 
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 26, 2022, 12:22:43 PM
I will test more tonight..  But did a few quick ones.

1. 2x leds.  no notice of drag
2. Shorted coil leads totally- no notice of drag
3. used 8 ohm resistor as load-  no notice of drag
4. used Led and switched resistor in parallel while spinning.  No notice of rotor slowdown

Tonight after work- I will hook a motor to it and count RPMs and input required to load it.

Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: floodrod on April 26, 2022, 08:32:05 PM
No usable amperage. You can light an Led obviously-  but as captain said- the position of the coil is less than optimal.

I am assuming there is drag.  But even if there ain't-  it would take buss full loads of magnets and copper to do anything useful with it.
Title: Re: Quad Reciprocator Motor Idea.
Post by: captainpecan on April 26, 2022, 09:07:46 PM
Yeah, the low drag is because of barely any amperage. The drag is caused by the field generated from the flow of current. But, one more bit of understanding, knowledge, and something tried. That's a win in my book.