Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: wizkycho on June 02, 2005, 06:56:53 PM

Title: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 02, 2005, 06:56:53 PM
This works 100% much over 100% :o
don't move from this site until you make it.

http://starglider.netfirms.com/PMM%20only.html

You may comment and I'll discard any suspition with pure and naked facts.

wizkycho
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: pinobot on June 02, 2005, 07:51:38 PM
I love it. :)
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 02, 2005, 11:53:22 PM
I love it. :)


just love it ? not any doubts that it works ?

come on folks try me ?
demagnetization ... shielding... etc. try to make this one look NOT OU and I'll open your eyes that it is well beyond 100% eff.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: hartiberlin on June 03, 2005, 12:00:52 AM
Looks very good !
Should work.
Are you going to build it soon ?

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: magpower on June 03, 2005, 12:07:38 AM
This works 100% much over 100% :o
don't move from this site until you make it.

http://starglider.netfirms.com/PMM%20only.html

You may comment and I'll discard any suspition with pure and naked facts.

wizkycho


Looks like it might work and both ends in repell, question what is making the lever rock up/down. Is it free moving rocker or is it conected to sider middle magnetic. One could use plastic tubes and small 1/4" neos to test out. Any special metal shield at the ends. How long does it run?

magpower
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: ooandioo on June 03, 2005, 12:21:16 AM
Interesting Idea. You need perfect timing...
Whats the "shielding" exactly and how is the lever with this shielding connected?
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: norman6538 on June 03, 2005, 02:56:32 AM
If you study the Echlin which was a metal blocker between repeling magnets then you will understand this is much the same. Hint  what will the attraction on two sides do at a closer distance than the repel force that it undoes?

Norman
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: Light on June 03, 2005, 03:23:52 AM
Sorry, won't work. Will stuck in the middle position.
Will work if shielding material really "shield" it. I've heard about this material (military applications), but never seen.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: hartiberlin on June 03, 2005, 03:38:22 AM
@Light,
did you try it ?
As the lever is pulled up and down by the other side every time,
it could work in my opinion.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: pinobot on June 03, 2005, 03:43:49 AM
It's the best design i've seen to date.
Damn you Wizkycho. :D
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: Light on June 03, 2005, 08:00:32 AM
did you try it ?

It's not meaningful to do the certain things and this scheme is described in Museum unworkable devices. And besides I tried many schemes, so this one is substantially clear to me.

But THIS scheme works a little differently:
http://kalinin-engine.com/index.html
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 08:44:25 AM
Looks like it might work and both ends in repell, question what is making the lever rock up/down. Is it free moving rocker or is it conected to sider middle magnetic. One could use plastic tubes and small 1/4" neos to test out. Any special metal shield at the ends. How long does it run?

magpower

Lever is not in any way connected to the piston.
I need some proposal how to transfer a bit of piston energy back to lever to make it self runner (without finger on lever). Please make a picture. even simpler one makes more sense than a book of words.

Shielding should be balanced (thickness and distance from side magnet) in that way that when shielding completely covers side magnet piston magnet does not feel push or pull force at his far end position (not that complex to balance).
Material is steel with fair enogh permeability factor and fairly high saturation (not hard to find).
Material for lever is nonmagnetic steel (not hard to find).

If we make fair enogh distance between side and piston like pole magnets in a way we don't break magnets *elasticity - it can run from 100 to 500 years (NdFeB used) .

* when you stretch rubber and if we go beyond it's elasticity factor it looses shape and even breaks
the same thing can apply to magnets - they loose magnetism if like poles forced too hard. But if we don't go beyond it's factor magnet restores it's field **allmost completely. **That is why it won't 1000 but only 500 years.


Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 09:07:39 AM
Interesting Idea. You need perfect timing...
Whats the "shielding" exactly and how is the lever with this shielding connected?



no need for perfect timing. here is why ?
The piston in animation is connected to max load (means it is mechanically (or with some coil) conected to do some work)(it was allso the easier way to make animation). That is why piston waits until complete shielding is removed and repel force is the greatest. If load is lighter than piston would start to move sonner but will allways follow in what state  lever(shielding) is, therefore output phase will follow input phase.

Shielding in this setup is permeable steel with fairly high positioned saturation knee.It is mechanically fixed to non magnetic material (lever).
Shielding on both magnets acts in atract mode. But when attracted to some distance magnets will eventually feel repel
force from each other and will stop getting any more closer.
Thicker the shielding or higher satturation material - closer the magnets get to each other.
Shielding here is actally ATTRACT - REPEL BALANCER.

Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 12:35:00 PM
If you study the Echlin which was a metal blocker between repeling magnets then you will understand this is much the same. Hint what will the attraction on two sides do at a closer distance than the repel force that it undoes?

Norman


Hi Norm. love your experiments !

Ecklin did not have like poles facing. but lets say he did: you must se the crucial difference between Ecklin type shielding
and this PMM.
On Ecklin - shielding is trying to be moved from the position of high magnetization (between magnets) to the point
with no magnets at all (this is done on both sides of Ecklin gen. - rotator has shieldings in 180deg.) - therefore very
huge ammount of energy needs to be spend to remove shieldings to area with no magnetizm.

well I don't understand quite this Hint... can You describe it further.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 12:48:43 PM
Sorry, won't work. Will stuck in the middle position.
Will work if shielding material really "shield" it. I've heard about this material (military applications), but never seen.

You didn't say WHY would it stuck (it is very important to say)?
Like i said this is not "disapearer of flux" (shield) this is mearly PUSH PULL BALANCER but resultant only looks like the part of the field strenght disapeared.

let's not waste to much time on the obvious:
NAKED FACT: Two magnets opposing each other with like poles will get closer if between them stands permeable material and will get further appart if that material is removed !
BTW: military doesn't have it, knowone has it - only god. there is no cancelation of mag. flux only it's rearangement and vector change.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: m668004 on June 03, 2005, 12:57:35 PM
@all

What do you think about this? 4 diskmagnets were used. The 2 outer magnets are connected by an rotating axis. The 2 inner magnets were connected to move freely in horizontal direction. When the axis is rotating, one of the inner magnets get repelled, the other attracted, so the work required to repell will compensated by the attraction of the other side, so the total amount of work to rotate the 2 outer magnets is very small, maybe smaller then the work done by the inner pushed and pulled magnets.

M.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 01:00:43 PM
It's not meaningful to do the certain things and this scheme is described in Museum unworkable devices. And besides I tried many schemes, so this one is substantially clear to me.

But THIS scheme works a little differently:
http://kalinin-engine.com/index.html
Quote

Sorry I haven't seen this blasphemous "museum". What it says ? can You send a link to it.
Or would be much appropriate to say in Your own words and facts WHY it won't work.

BTW: complexity of proposed design exceeds practicality.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: m668004 on June 03, 2005, 01:15:12 PM
@wizkycho

Here is the link, but I think, your device operates in an other mode, so it's not the same like in the museum. I think yours will work.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm

M.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 01:50:11 PM
@all

What do you think about this? 4 diskmagnets were used. The 2 outer magnets are connected by an rotating axis. The 2 inner magnets were connected to move freely in horizontal direction. When the axis is rotating, one of the inner magnets get repelled, the other attracted, so the work required to repell will compensated by the attraction of the other side, so the total amount of work to rotate the 2 outer magnets is very small.

M.

very nice try but:

magnetfieldstrenght= magnetstrenght/distance^2
small distance rise means large field strenght weakening

let magnet on right is in attract mode to piston
let magnet on left is in repulsion mode to piston
     therefore attraction magnet is much CLOSER to piston then repel magnet is
     therefore ATTRACTION force is STRONGER than repel force. (cause attractor magnet is closer)
     therefore a lot of force must be applied to unstick from attraction wich prevails in this setup.

         Design made like this won't work ! Am I right ?

Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: m668004 on June 03, 2005, 02:22:29 PM
@wizkycho

Thank you for your answer. The two inner magnets (piston) can move freely and easily. So when for example the left magnet gets in repulsion mode, the piston can move easily away and has not to wait until the full repulsion is arrived. Perhaps this makes a small but importent differences.

M.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: ooandioo on June 03, 2005, 03:49:55 PM
Sorry, won't work. Will stuck in the middle position.
Will work if shielding material really "shield" it. I've heard about this material (military applications), but never seen.

You didn't say WHY would it stuck (it is very important to say)?
Like i said this is not "disapearer of flux" (shield) this is mearly PUSH PULL BALANCER but resultant only looks like the part of the field strenght disapeared.

let's not waste to much time on the obvious:
NAKED FACT: Two magnets opposing each other with like poles will get closer if between them stands permeable material and will get further appart if that material is removed !
BTW: military doesn't have it, knowone has it - only god. there is no cancelation of mag. flux only it's rearangement and vector change.

The principle is very clear to understand, i think. The idea itself is also nice but what permeable material will you use. Any metal will also be attracted by the magnets (e.g. MU Metal)...

-- Andi
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 07:18:13 PM
@wizkycho

Thank you for your answer. The two inner magnets (piston) can move freely and easily. So when for example the left magnet gets in repulsion mode, the piston can move easily away and has not to wait until the full repulsion is arrived. Perhaps this makes a small but importent differences.

M.

let rotating side magnets represents input energy Ei
let piston (with its magnets) represent output Eo
let Ef is friction energy loss.
let Eu(usefull) is additional work that piston does when under load

      if piston is NOT under load Ei must be exactly enough to move the mass of the piston + Ef
         therefore your Eo=Ei-Ef => Eo<Ei
      if piston IS under load (pushing some other mass) the input energy must be exactly enough to move Eo(piston) + Eu(add work) + Ef
        in your setup any load or usefull work is transfered directly to input (like in any other no worth mentioning todays motor)
        therefore Ei=Eo+Eu+Ef => Ei is rising lineary with load Eo+Eu<Ei

the only thing that can come to rescue your device (but it is very streched)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/2magpup.htm

the tangential force is LESS THAN the axial repulsive force
which would give your device COP factor arround 2

now come to think of it device would WORK  :o but not the way You explained it

Well done.


Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 03, 2005, 07:29:34 PM
Quote

The principle is very clear to understand, i think. The idea itself is also nice but what permeable material will you use. Any metal will also be attracted by the magnets (e.g. MU Metal)...

-- Andi
Quote

permeable means it will attract, it conducts mag flux. both shields ATTRACT => net force at shaft near zero.

steel steel steel. there are many types ones that have high permeabilityes and satturations (for "shieldings") all the way to the ones that are absolutely blind to magnets (not permeable) (like common plastic or common wood) for lever mechanism.
all of these steel types are cheap to get.

Mu metal is expensive and has very low satturation (high permeability though but unusable satturation)
no need to complicate further.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: m668004 on June 04, 2005, 12:27:52 AM
@wizkycho

Quote
permeable means it will attract, it conducts mag flux. both shields ATTRACT => net force at shaft near zero.

Yes, both shield attract, but at one shield the endmagnet oft the piston is closer to this shield than the other endmagnet to the other shield, so the net force at the shaft maybe is not zero. I mean, when the lower shield lift up it has to overcome the attraction both of the outer magnet and the endmagnet of the piston. At the same time the upper shield on the other side goes down and is only attracted by the outer magnet but not so much by the pistonmagnet, because its distance is greater then to the other shield. What do you think?

M.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: ooandioo on June 04, 2005, 12:41:00 AM
@wizkycho

Quote
permeable means it will attract, it conducts mag flux. both shields ATTRACT => net force at shaft near zero.

Yes, both shield attract, but at one shield the endmagnet oft the piston is closer to this shield than the other endmagnet to the other shield, so the net force at the shaft maybe is not zero. I mean, when the lower shield lift up it has to overcome the attraction both of the outer magnet and the endmagnet of the piston. At the same time the upper shield on the other side goes down and is only attracted by the outer magnet but not so much by the pistonmagnet, because its distance is greater then to the other shield. What do you think?

M.

Thats what i mean. You will need a non magnetic shield...

-- Andi
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: hartiberlin on June 04, 2005, 12:53:22 AM
No, it will only work with an iron or steel shield.
But the question is, if the force attraction of the 2 magnets in
repellmode to the shield is stronger than the single magnet
wanting to pull the shield down at the other side...

Hmm, I unfortunately guess, that? the force is stronger to hold and keep the
shield at the repelling magnets side between these magnets there.

As the airgap is pretty big at the other end, where the single
magnet wants to attract the other shield, this force is probably smaller
and this way it will not work.

Otherwise if maybe 2 of the units would be synchronized and
phased maybe 90 degrees out of phase, maybe it will work then ???

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: Light on June 04, 2005, 03:41:54 AM
" You did not say WHY "
It's obviously. The screen at approach of magnets becomes a magnet itself, but not as has wrongly described Pino (sorry). Polarization will take place - the near (closest to magnets) and far ends of the screen, but not lateral faces. From it the "screen" will sit down dead between poles (and even not in the middle of magnets) and it is necessary to apply energy to pull it out therefrom.
I do not remember a link, but there this scheme was discussed.

And "Kalinin"  motor does not work. The shielding material is necessary. One of participants of this project has got it, but he's doing his own project. From his description it is a thin plate from several layers of different metals (probably works on a principle of eddy-curent).
Title: I am "Kalinin"
Post by: Anatoliy on June 04, 2005, 10:51:27 PM
My engine does not work. But experiences which I have lead{have carried out}, confirm his{its} serviceability.
More in detail: http://kalininaa.narod.ru
Excuse for literacy, but I write from Russia.
I add a photo of last updating of model
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: hartiberlin on June 04, 2005, 11:40:18 PM
Here is the animation photo of your machine, Anatoliy.

Looks good.
Did you try it ?
Does it really work ?

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: ooandioo on June 05, 2005, 12:27:15 AM
I saw this scheme some times ago.
I think it could work if you delete most friction to the shield. Any ideas about this?

-- Andi
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: Light on June 05, 2005, 04:49:48 AM
" it could work if you delete most friction "
It's not a matter of friction, but matter of principle. Is not it clear?
When piston goes down,  the "shield" covered the top magnet and reduced repulsion. And in the same time the spring of lever brakes the cam. Piston will stoped somewhere on the way down. Is not it so, Anatoliy?
Title: About the magnetic engine
Post by: Anatoliy on June 05, 2005, 06:02:34 AM
I did measurements of forces on all a cycle of rotation of a shaft of the engine. Considered closing ferromagnetic screen. But useful job of rotation of a shaft is more than job spent on moving ferromagnetic screen. Tests spent and in movement. Job of a shaft all the same is more.
The given engine does not work only because the lever of a drive ferromagnetic screen is made badly, and there is no good coordination of movement. As will appear money, I shall complete this mechanism.
Yours faithfully, Anatoly
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: Light on June 05, 2005, 07:39:32 AM
What kind of magnets U used for such heavy machine? And where's the spring? Inside of this small box?
"But useful job of rotation of a shaft is more than job spent on moving ferromagnetic screen".
-Wait a minute. Useful work per cycle is only when piston goes down, all other movements - lost energy. That's why U should to measure THIS move of repulsion to compare to  " screen" closing forces.
I thought it would be easy to make first more simple models.
Anyway - nice try, really very, very good job.
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 05, 2005, 09:29:08 PM
@wizkycho

Quote
permeable means it will attract, it conducts mag flux. both shields ATTRACT => net force at shaft near zero.

Yes, both shield attract, but at one shield the endmagnet oft the piston is closer to this shield than the other endmagnet to the other shield, so the net force at the shaft maybe is not zero. I mean, when the lower shield lift up it has to overcome the attraction both of the outer magnet and the endmagnet of the piston. At the same time the upper shield on the other side goes down and is only attracted by the outer magnet but not so much by the pistonmagnet, because its distance is greater then to the other shield. What do you think?

M.

this is logical (but first look) thinking, nevertheless it still gives COP 2.
The full replay is in the first post of "Rotational PMM by wizkycho"

Thx
Title: Re: PMM by wizkycho
Post by: wizkycho on June 05, 2005, 09:31:27 PM
No, it will only work with an iron or steel shield.
But the question is, if the force attraction of the 2 magnets in
repellmode to the shield is stronger than the single magnet
wanting to pull the shield down at the other side...

Hmm, I unfortunately guess, that  the force is stronger to hold and keep the
shield at the repelling magnets side between these magnets there.

As the airgap is pretty big at the other end, where the single
magnet wants to attract the other shield, this force is probably smaller
and this way it will not work.

Otherwise if maybe 2 of the units would be synchronized and
phased maybe 90 degrees out of phase, maybe it will work then ???

Regards, Stefan.

this is logical (but first look) thinking, nevertheless it still gives COP 2.
The full replay is in the first post of "Rotational PMM by wizkycho"

Thx