All,

I'm looking for an answer to this question:

If one is to energize any electromagnet (you pick the specs) for 1 msec, what is the power consumed by the electromagnet?

vs.

If one is to energize the same electomagnet for 1 msec, but this time, with a permanent magnet (you pick the specs) in close proximity such that the permanent magnet N pole is facing the electromagnet N pole so as to repel the permanent magnet, what is the power consumed by the electromagnet?

Sorry if this is known information.  I've not been able to find it and my experimental measurement capabilities are severely limited.

Thanks in advance!

M.

Hi Mondrasek, if you use an electromagnet rated at .01 Henry (10mh) with a coil resistance of 5 ohms and an applied Voltage of 10 volts, then at 1ms the power consumption would be 20 watts.

If the electromagnet is energized in proximity to a permanent magnet in repulsion the power consumption should be slightly more, maybe 21 of 22 watts.  When a magnetic force (the permanent magnet) is moved away from a coil of wire(in this case caused by repulsion) it generates electricity, so the power level rises, although only slightly.

Thanks guys.  Good info.

So, say one is to take a cylindrical electromagnet with opposite pole configuration.  Set it with the North pole facing up and uncharged.  Place a perminant magnet on top so that it's North pole is down and it is in contact with and in attraction to the ferrous core of the electromagnet.  When you apply an electric source to the electromagnet it should repel the perminant magnet.

How much power is required to break the attraction of the perminant magnet to the electromagnet core?  How is the power of the electromagnet related to the strength/size of the perminant magnet? 

If two perminant magnets are forced together in a vertical arrangement so as to repel, and then the top magnet is released, it will accelerate upwards to a height much greater than where it will eventually settle and hover over the bottom magnet.  Can the electromagnet/perminant magnet arrangement be made to act the same?  What is the relationship of the power consumed by the electromagnet to the strength/size
of the perminant magnet to create this equal opposing force?  Does the fact that we must first break the attraction require more power to the electromagnet than if there was not the attraction?  Does the acceleration of the perminant magnet away require more power to the electromagnet due to the fact that the perminant magnet is moving through the electromagnet field?  Or will the electromagnet field generate outwords from the center of it's core and drive the perminant magnet away so that the two fields never overlap?

Thanks again for your input.

M.

These are good questions mondrasek. The electromagnet and the permanent magnet are interchangeable in their effects, you obviously
have to "fund" the solenoid with external energy. Field strength is measured in Gauss. A permanent magnet located near an electromagnet
will effect the current required due to higher inductance but only when the inductors field in changing, not when it is a constant. A moving
magnet in the field of inductor will induce a voltage that either adds to or subtracts from the voltage already on the inductor - that is
exactly the "generated" current. Whether the magnet is attracted to an off inductor depends on whether you use a ferrous core inside
the inductive coil to focus the magnetic flux. The magnet will be attracted to the core material but not to the inductor wire itself.
If you have a inductive coil of wire with no core switched off with no load resistance => no letnz law braking recirculation current will
occur in the wire.

If you want to know comparable Gauss between a permanent magnet and an electromagnet you need what is called a nonograph of the magnetic field strength as a function of diameter and length of the solenoid you can Google for them.  The strength is dependent on a lot of variables. A nonograph is like a multidimensional graph where  diameter, length, number of turns, gauge of wire resistance of the particular kind of wire, applied voltage ect.

A much better approach may be to do an experiment! With some regular insulated hookup you can wind a one layer solenoid
on a glass tube or a sawed off nail. Nails are not the greatest core material, Bedini SGS suggests welding rods. Put some
current through the solenoid in series a wire wound resistor or rheostat variable resister and see what it can do. Power equals
voltage times amperes. If you need some more Gauss power, then wind on some more wire turns. Make sure your solenoid doesn't
overheat. It's actually better to build your overunity machine out of solenoids first as they are completely adjustable, even though
they require DC current. Afterwords one can translate the fixed current solenoids to permanent magnets and things should operate
the same way.

I have an electronic circuit in mind that can run a Clanzer like overbalanced Wheel with solenoids wound around those eight
glass tubes. Once the wheel is turning it would be much easier to add external magnetics and watch the wheel's rpm to keep
it's power high as you go, while switching off each electronic sector as you add external magnets. If you add adjustable solenoids
first it seems almost certain one could achieve a working wheel, even though it might be very touchy dependent on field strength.
I think it makes more sense to tune a operating wheel then it does to try to make a non-operating wheel operate very close to unity.
I will post the circuit's flow diagram here once I have generate it. The hardest part is that one will need a slip-ring mechanism to get
dc current to the circuit board rotating with the center of the wheel.

:S:MarkSCoffman
 

@mscoffman  Wow, great answer!  A lot for me to digest in that.  I look forward to your future posts.

@Gyula  I don't believe there is a need for the attraction.  I believe it could possibly help to an extent, but also the perminant and electromagnet will never actually come into contact.

The idea here is to use pulsed electromagnets as the stators in the patent design.  If the electromagnet stators can be pulsed and fire the mass switch magnets instead of perminant magnet stators there would be no approach wall that creates a negative torque.  If the BEMF can be captured when the electromagnet is turned off (ala Bendini) then the only power needed to fire the mass switch (minus losses) is that of energizing the electromagnetic field.

I am trying to understand if the mass switch perminant magnet will fire to it's maximum height due to the energy of the electromagnet current AND the perminant magnet's force.  If the resulting PE of the raised magnet is equal or less than the energy used to energize the electromagnet this is also a loss.  If the PE is greater (due to the perminant magnet field) then we have captured that energy.

Thanks again for the great input.

M.

Thanks guys.  Good info.

So, say one is to take a cylindrical electromagnet with opposite pole configuration.  Set it with the North pole facing up and uncharged.  Place a perminant magnet on top so that it's North pole is down and it is in contact with and in attraction to the ferous core of the electromagnet.  When you apply an electric source to the electromagnet it should repel the perminant magnet.

How much power is required to break the attraction of the perminant magnet to the electromagnet core?  How is the power of the electromagnet related to the strength/size of the perminant magnet? 

If two perminant magnets are forced together in a vertical arrangment so as to repel, and then the top magnet is released, it will accelerate upwards to a height much greater than where it will eventually settle and hover over the bottom magnet.  Can the electromagnet/perminant magnet arrangement be made to act the same?  What is the relationship of the power consumed by the electromagnet to the strength/size of the perminant magnet to create this equal opposing force?  Does the fact that we must first break the attraction require more power to the electromagnet than if there was not the attraction?  Does the acceleration of the perminant magnet away require more power to the electromagnet due to the fact that the perminant magnet is moving through the electromagnet field?  Or will the electromagnet field generate outwords from the center of it's core and drive the perminant magnet away so that the two fields never overlap?

Thanks again for your input.

M.

Hi, ceramic permanent magnets have a magnetic flux density of  approximately .5 Tesla, neodymium magnets have a magnetic flux density of 1 Tesla and more.  Assuming your using neodymium(the overunity builders material of choice) then your solenoid/inductor/electromagnet would need the same magnetic flux density, 1 Tesla.  Anything less and the solenoid/permanent magnet may attract even when opposite poles are together.

Ordinary unpurified iron such as found in fasteners(nails, screws, and bolts)  has a relative permeabilty of at least 50.  The formula for magnetic flux density is

Ampere-Turns/length of the core material X ur

Turns=number of turns of wire
length=measured in meters
u=permeabilty of free space/air/vacuum  4pi x 10^-7
r=relative permeability

If you are using a nail or bolt that is .1 meters long for your core material (about 4 inches) with diameter of .01 meters(about .4 inches), the cross-sectional area of the bolt/nail would be .00007854.

For iron, r=50.  r X u =.00006283.  1 Tesla divided by .00006283 is approximately 16000 Ampere-Turns/meter.  16000 X .1 meters(length of the core) is 1600 Ampere-Turns. If the coil resistance is 10 ohms and you wish to use 1 Amperes then you'll need 10 Volts.  With 1 amperes you'll need 1600 turns of wire.(1 Amperes X 1600 Turns = 1600 Ampere-Turns).

The power consumption for the coil would be 10 Volts X 1 Ampere = 10 Watts.
At repulsion when the electromagnet is energized, force is calculated like this:

F=B^2A/2u

B=Total Tesla which in this case is 1(electromagnet) + 1(permanent magnet) =2
A=in this case .00007854
u=4pi X 10^-7

F=2^2(4) X .00007854/2 X 4pi X 10^-7=125 Newtons

Something else you have to consider is the pulse rate of your electromagnet, the faster it is switched off and on the higher the Reactance which is a form of electrical resistance.  So the higher the Reactance then the more Voltage needed to produce the necessary Coil power.  One way around this is to wind multiple coils around the core and wire them in parallel.  For example if you are using 100 feet of wire for your coil, you can divide it up in to 10 foot lengths. Wind each ten foot section individually one on top of the other and attach the ends of the wires together at each end.  This will reduce the Reactance and keep the required voltage from rising.  Hope this helps.

@ Xaverius.

Excellent.  That fills in a lot of the gaps in my knowledge. 

Very kind and generous of you to spell it all out.  I realy appreciate it.

Thanks again,

M.

Sure, glad to help out.

X

From my point of understanding:

Just use an idealized model:

Driving the (superconducting) electromagnet with a current source -
you invest certain energy to establish the magnetic field.
If you do that in the presence of a permanent magnet you need more -
or less ( depends n-s configuration) energy to establish this field.
You get the same energy back if the field collapses (back emf).

As long as you dont change the mechanical issues (move coil, magnet)
there is no extra energy needed to maintain that field. ( in principal you can
(have to)
short-circuit the energized superconducting coil now - means the current
goes on forever)

This means: it totally depends on the losses from copper (current),
and iron (flux) - how much energy you need. (after the field is established)
(in realworld)

If you move permanent (repelling) magnet away from the superconducting
electromagnet - (does some physical work) - you extract energy out of the
electro magnet(field) - the current goes down, the collapsing field has less energy
to offer.
If you energize the electromagnet - and move the permanent magnet repelling
near the em - you strengthen the energy in the field, the current goes up - and
the work you performed on moving the p.m. close to the e.m. adds to the flux
and can be found as extra energy in the collapsing field of the e.m. on "turning
off".

Thats at least how it "should" work.

As long as you use idealized models - everything is quite simple.

In real world - the energies involved are dominated by losses in copper and
iron. The work to establish the field or the back-emf happens "on the way".

BTW: good question

if you take the formula n(windings) x phi (flux) = L(ind) x I (current) -
a changed flux results in different current (if the permanent
magnet would?t effect the inductivity of the e.m.)
In real world there would be 2 extrem scenarios -
1.) The p.m. increases the ind. in a way where the current is
the same or lower
2.) The p.m. doesn?t effect the ind. at all  and the curren goes up

In an attracting situation, the current x ind. product will go down,
repelling situation: product will go up.

pls. feel free to correct me - but this should make sense.

Hi Fritz,

When I recall my earlier tinkerings with permanent magnets' effect on air and ferrit core coils' inductances, I can say the followings: 

There is no or only negligible effect of a pm magnet placed near or inside of a air core coil's  inductance (this is simply because the permeability of any permanent magnet is pretty near to 1, max up to 1.2 for ceramic magnets.

In case of ferrite or laminated core coils (any cores with ferromagnetic properties) the effect of a permanent magnet on such coils' inductance is the same as if you apply a DC bias current through the coil: it shifts the operation point on the core's B-H curve towards the higher or lower B value (depending on the direction of the DC current or in case of pm magnet it depends on which pole you place closer to one of the ends of the core and how strong the magnet is), hence the coil's inductance changes accordingly. The limits in both cases are core saturation.

IF these can be of any help for your above thoughts, then please ponder further on with these data.

rgds,  Gyula