Thanks for the explanation

Here is some calculations. These are based on a simpler verstion with 45 degree rotormagnet, and not 90 degrees.

There is 12 magnets in total. I have paired them as shown in the pictures below. There are 6 pictures with the 6 possible different calculations of torque, and forces. If I sum up what all the statormagnets represent in forces separately, and sum up the torque affecting the rotor in these 6 steps, I get more torque than countertorque.

For the o^o picture, only the X-force is representing the countertorque all alone.
For 30^o, and 150^o picture you calculate normally with cosinus for X and sinus for Y.
For the pictures 60^o, and 120^o the Y-force represent a countertorque equal to Y x (1 - sin60) or Y x (1 - sin120). Else normal cosinus for X.
For the 90^o picture, no forces are affecting the torque at all as it works angular to x-direction.


Here is the results for these angles separately without influence from other statormagnets.:

1. 0 degrees.
Torque = -17 650Nm
x-component: -121610 N
y-component: 565835 N
Countertorque: 121610Nm

2. 30 degrees.
Torque = -15 500Nm
x-component: 184817 N
y-component: 340430 N
Counterforce: (184817 x cos 30) + (340430 x sin 30) = 330271Nm

3. 60 degrees.
Torque = -12 800Nm
x-component: 339211 N
y-component: 186645 N
Counterforce: (339211 x cos 60) + (186645 x (1 - sin 60)) = 194611Nm

4. 90 degrees.
Torque = -475 000Nm
x-component: 580705 N
y-component: -99619.1 N
Counterforce: 0

5. 120 degrees.
Torque = -1 470 000Nm
x-component: 77815.8 N
y-component: -1.06873e+006 N
Counterforce: (77816 x cos 120) + (-1068730 x (1 - sin 120)) = -182090Nm

6. 150 degrees.
Torque = 854 000Nm
x-component: -1.04384e+006 N
y-component: 65234.4 N
Counterforce: (-1043840 x cos 150) + (65234 x sin 150) = 936608Nm

Tota torque:
(SUM:Torque 1->6) - (SUM:Countertorque 1->6)

-1136950Nm + 1103766Nm = 0

Here is the result for the last picture with all the magnets in place:
Rotor torque: -1.10836e+006 N*m
x-component: -14629.3 N
y-component: +13575.4 N

So where did the countertorque go when all the stator magnets is in place?

br.

Vidar

Now that you're close to a radial field, you can inspect what I have been saying in my thread . Just put a magnet which has a magnetic field that is tangentially to the radial field, although the field is far from radial you could always try. I currently waiting on very strong neodymium magnets I bought as speaker magnets are far too weak then I'll show my little toy I have been working on.

Yes, the field is almost radial. I made a model similar to my model above, but where all statormagnets had the same distance. I put the rotor excentric inside that arrangement and the simulation didn't find any torque at all.
the difference between mine and yours is that there is allways a stronger field on one side and a weaker field on the other side of the rotor magnet. In your design there is equal magnetic field on both sides. Not that it probably would make a difference. I still believe neither mine or your design will work, but I have had some hard time finding out why my motor doesn't work Why your design doesnt work is for me quite obvious because the rotormagnet does never have a sticky spot it wants to go to.

Take a look at the design below, where all statormagnets have equal distance. The torque here is litteraly nothing even if the rotormagnet is excentric just like the designs above.

br.

Vidar

Low-q stop being ignorant and educate yourself. Magnets are not electric charged dipoles. I agree with you if my idea was using charged electric dipoles then it would never work. The force causing the torque on the dipole would then be radially if we assume an electric charge was in the middle making a radial field. Then what is the difference? The difference is huge. Magnets are made of trillions upon trillions of small current loops which are said to be either orbital electron spin its axial spin. These loops all have radial TANGENTIAL forces to them this is called the Lorentz force. Whether you have one big loop (electro-magnet) or trillions of small loops (permanent magnet). The Lorentz force stays the same. When I get my neodymium magnet I'm going to prove it with an electro-magnet.

It seriously pisses me off when people act like they know what they are talking about when they are instead making fools out of their selves. If you respect my knowledge I will respect yours.

I am verry sorry for offending you or anyone else, but what is the problem actually? I really respect your work and your aproach to magnet motors. I just said it is for me obvious that your design doesnt work - also because I actually built it yesterday to test your particular design. Wasn't it you that had these drawing of the ringmagnets with the outer rotormagnet on it?
If so, I also told you that my own design probably doesnt work too, but my lack of knowledge couldn't at the moment see why my design doesn't work. We all know that magnets are conservative, they will allways get back what they give - in one way or another. My approach is more like a quiz - find 5 errors sort of type. As I couldn't find the error that stops my design from working, I asked all you guys to maybe find out something that I have overseen. Maybe it works - I don't know really.

br.

Vidar

Low-q all I'm asking is to use pretty basic electro-magnetic concepts. If I showed you a working prototype then wouldn't you be asking yourself what was wrong with yours? Use common sense, it's not rocket science but simple things that were known for 150 years. I believe I already told you to look up the Faraday motor and the rail gun concept. If you understand those then you will understand where I'm coming from.

SomedayIsle if you can't contribute with anything positive leave your negativity for yourself.

It seems like it would be the same design if the outer magnets were just placed stationary in a circle and the inner bar magnet rotated around the point you have marked "joint".

This would still maintain the magnetic relationship only you don't need all the rods.

Just a thought.

Hi Low-Q
Do you have any means possible to build a small simple test version of your design?
Using of shelf magnets and some small necessary custom made magnets
might cost you 500-600 USD. This way you could build and test your motor.
Sometimes a theory is not enough. You actually need to feel the hardware.

This place can provide you with both regular and custom made magnets: http://www.magnesy.eu
They are not expensive but if you wan't it cheap you could go for their selection of ferrite magnets.
I have myself ordered custom made NdFebs from Magnesy in the past, delivered in excellent quality.

Thanks for the info, Honk. I have in fact a lots of neomagnets. Maybe 20 -25 in total of 70mm x 5mm x 5mm, and 70mm x 5mm x 2.5mm. They are all magnetized through thickness and has been used in ribbon tweeters. I also have a defective Fountec tweeter with four big block neos inside, but that tweeter I use for test purpose (I also engineering loudspeaker drivers as a hobby). So I have all the magnets and it will not cost me anything, but I have no tools for making the actual motor, so I need help for that.

If anyone is interested, just send me a PM so I can ship my neos for a small desposit + shipping. The neos is not for sale so I want them back so I can use them for loudspeaker test purpose.

Br.

Vidar

Low-q all I'm asking is to use pretty basic electro-magnetic concepts. If I showed you a working prototype then wouldn't you be asking yourself what was wrong with yours? Use common sense, it's not rocket science but simple things that were known for 150 years. I believe I already told you to look up the Faraday motor and the rail gun concept. If you understand those then you will understand where I'm coming from.

Hi,

I know how a faraday disc is working, and a rail gun, but I just cannot see what these concepts has to do with a magnet motor, or how you ar going to close a loop using magnets in stead of electric supply in your construction, and make those work as OU. So could you please make a drawing of your design with an explanation. There is obviously something I have missed in your previous explanations. You also mentioned electromagnets - are you also using those in your design?


Br.

Vidar

@Honk, you reminded me of wondering where Clanzer is. He hasn't been active for quite a while

@Low-Q, Take a linear rail gun and bend it into a circle, that is pretty much the idea. Experiments show that the rail gun has a significant recoil that can compress the rails carrying the current themselves this is what ampere kept calling the longitudinal magnetic force that acts ALONG instead of PERPENDICULAR to the current carrying wire. Now instead of making your own magnetic field with current like the rails do here I use permanent magnets in repulsion to obtain the same field as a rail gun. Because that's what a rail gun is as well. Two rails with opposing current direction repulsing each other.

Now I'm suggesting two things. One is to have a stationary piece of wire (in a rail gun this is what gets shot out) and allow the actual rails themselves to rotate due to that longitudinal force. In my design this means that the magnets are rotating while the wire is stationary. As the magnets rotate the wire sees no change or is not moving so no lenz effect or back emf arises. This means that the magnets can rotate as fast as they want and can. My other suggestion is instead of a current carrying wire one could even use a permanent magnet for either the same exact setup or to let everything rotate. The magnets in repulsion that provide the field will rotate due the longitudinal force while the magnet on the sides inside this field will rotate due the Lorentz force.

I see, so you want to use permanentmagnets instead ofthe supplied energy to create the same field in a coil?
But doesnt the projectile accelerate because of a sudden and brutal change in magnetic field - from nothing, to destructing amount of magnetic fields? I cannot see how a permanent magnetic field can do the same unless you mechanicly move them to change the field - or something. A railgun works pretty much like a squirrel cage induction motor which is working by changing a magnetic field that will, as it change, induce a similar magnetic field in the conductors in the rotor that force the rotor to turn. These motors are like a railgun, but in a closed loop. But these motors doesnt work with DC current or a static magnetic field.
Just some thoughts.

Br.

Vidar