Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: The SMOT (PM3.2)  (Read 19795 times)

hanglow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #15 on: November 24, 2007, 11:02:40 PM »
I did try puting some magnets on the metal plates it just made it more stick more. I may try replacing the metal plates completely with magnets.

hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2007, 06:50:20 AM »
@hanglow
you need to put additionally a shielding iron piece on every magnet rotor magnet.
Otherwise you will have too much cog and attraction forces to the stator metals !

Try asymmetrial "L" shaped iron core pieces to add to each magnet.
Play with the thickness of the iron pieces.

Have a look at the Helmut Goebkes permanent magnet motor.
It describes a working principle.

Regards, Stefan.

Low-Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #17 on: November 25, 2007, 01:10:09 PM »
I did try puting some magnets on the metal plates it just made it more stick more. I may try replacing the metal plates completely with magnets.
Get rid of the metal, and attach magnets in the same size with the correct polarity inwards. Cogging btw. is just a result of uneven forces around the wheel, but should never be a hindrance to rotation as long there is more force than counterforce.


Br.

Vidar

Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #18 on: November 25, 2007, 03:42:59 PM »
Have a look at the Helmut Goebkes permanent magnet motor.
It describes a working principle.
Regards, Stefan.
Wow! So, that was his name. I have been trying to track that for a while. Here is a selection of stuff:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/free-energy/files/goebkes%20magnet%20motor/
Nice one, Stefan.
Paul.

hanglow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2007, 10:21:06 PM »
Wouldn't I get the same effect of iron if I just moved the metal stator's further away? I have tried some other models of motor's as well and it seems to me that there is always a sticky place. I think it may need to be un-symetrical in design.

Low-Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2007, 01:45:53 PM »
Wouldn't I get the same effect of iron if I just moved the metal stator's further away? I have tried some other models of motor's as well and it seems to me that there is always a sticky place. I think it may need to be un-symetrical in design.
The metal plates attract the rotor magnets all the time. Where the rotor magnet has just passed the corner of one statormagnet, it will be more or less repelled.
I have however done more simulations in FEMM, and it shows that if I encrease accuracy in mesh size and encreased the number of contour lines, plot points, and line integral points, the total simulated output is decreasing rapidly. I used first mesh size of 0.5, which displayed an average of 74Nm. In a non working motor this average is 0. So did I reduce mesh size to 0.2, and now the average output is 5.7Nm. So if I can predict the outcome with infinite accuracy, the average output would be 0.

So FEMM might be good enough to predict reality, if you have high enough accuracy and plenty of processor power in you computer (It takes much time to calculate all these measurements with high accuracy)

Vidar

hanglow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2007, 03:00:39 PM »
Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?

Low-Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2007, 06:09:33 PM »
Low-Q are you saying it will not work even with magnets on the stator?
After further research, I just indicates that the device will never work as the data I simulates varies so much just because of changes in samples, accuracy etc. At least the data measured is nothing to base the real life on. However, the data simulated is allways on the same side of the +/- scale, so maybe that's an indication on that it WILL work. I don't know for sure.

Vidar

Thaelin

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1093
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2007, 07:28:49 PM »
   Once again, a sim program is only as good as its programmer. On of the best on the market missed the res point of a coil/cap pair by far enough to be in error for what I wanted. It did prove that the circuit would work but had to tweak it a bit to settle in on the right freq.
   On using it for magnets, age old point, 2d not 3d. So far femm dont do magnets very well. I trusted a design from a sim and spent the bucks for the magnets, yup you guessed it. Not gona work. I would love to see a sim made that would do magnetic fields correct. So on we go.......

thaelin

hanglow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #24 on: November 26, 2007, 08:04:29 PM »
I'm going to rebuild this one with 16 magnets and put some magnets on the side. It may take me a few days. Maybe I can try some shielding to get past the sticky points.

Jileha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2007, 12:32:54 AM »
here you can see 3 S.M.O.T. Units in Line (with the description why a SMOT never will work)

http://www.drillingsraum.de/room-forum/showthread.php?tid=109

Jileha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2007, 04:09:33 PM »
now there's a video avaiable (link above). But only with 2 Units. Anybody here who did it with 3 or more?

nwman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2007, 05:28:59 AM »
I have yet to see a conclusive experiment with a SMOT. So, I'm getting so frustrated with hearing about SMOTs that work I want to post a description of what I "think" would show that a SMOT works or not. Every video I see shows a person dropping a ball onto the beginning of a track. This is where I think the possible energy input may be. What would convince me is to see the ball sitting on flat level surface with nothing holding it so it can roll free with just the slightest force. Then instead of dropping the ball into the track push the SMOT to the ball. I have a feeling the ball will be pushed away as the SMOT nears it. If it pulls the ball in and possible lifts it and then releases it out the other side to roll free on the same level surface then I would be convinces they actually work. Does anyone else have input on that test idea?

Tim

hanglow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: The SMOT (PM3.2)
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2007, 05:48:39 PM »
Make it happen.