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: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?  (Read 32479 times)

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #45 on: July 25, 2009, 10:28:17 PM »
That's some really good looking info!
You have the magnets grouped F1 top, F2 center, and F3 bottom?

If you re-order the steps starting with the new step #1 (moving up or fading in the F3 magnet) it will be in order of operation.
It looks like the force on F2 was a constant -6.2N all the way through step 1.
Interesting when it's on a graph.
I may need to try writing scripts after all. That is nice stuff.

broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #46 on: July 25, 2009, 10:42:30 PM »
Lots of text very little images. I have 0 understanding of what all this talk is about. "Shift this, move that, flip that one". Can't you make images of the step by step process. I can make gif animations but I need to know what the heck is being talked about.

robbie47

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #47 on: July 25, 2009, 10:54:50 PM »
You have the magnets grouped F1 top, F2 center, and F3 bottom?

Lumen,
Glad you liked it.
Indeed:
F1 represents the forces of the small top magnet
F2 represents the forces of the long middle magnet
F3 represents the forces of the small bottom magnet

I will rewrite the script according to your latest info on movements, probably tomorrow.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #48 on: July 26, 2009, 01:49:37 AM »
@Broli,
Robbie was graphing out the data for the magnet sequence setup in FEMM4.2 that indicates a gain if stepped through manually which is a real pain.
The graphs look good but the sequence still needs to be changed before any real value can be determined. Even then, with 2D software, it will still needs a build to determine 3d results unless someone can further simulate it in 3D.

If you look back some posts at the FEMM plot, there is a description that gives a better concept of the moving principal.
Still at this time, it's probably not worth anyone else spending time on unless your looking for something to try yourself or see something that could make it better.

It only appears at this time that the setup can have a magnet inserted with no force, then some work gets done and the same magnet can then be removed with no work. (appears in FEMM4.2)




   
« Last Edit: July 26, 2009, 03:48:32 AM by lumen »

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #49 on: July 26, 2009, 07:01:49 AM »
Robbie,
I took your script and figured out how to work it, at least well enough to make the changes. It seems to work good, so I will try to graph some results later tomorrow.
Thanks for the help with FEMM scripting.



robbie47

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #50 on: July 26, 2009, 10:39:52 AM »
Robbie,
I took your script and figured out how to work it, at least well enough to make the changes. It seems to work good, so I will try to graph some results later tomorrow.
Thanks for the help with FEMM scripting.

Hi Lumen,
Good to hear you started to play with scripting.
If you need help, just let me know.
Yes, we would be curious about your desired results, so please post them here.

One remark: in my script at the end the magnets are set to their original position, but there is a small bug. For some reason Femm not always performs the last step when using the 'for do end' commands.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #51 on: July 26, 2009, 10:49:48 PM »
Well, according to FEMM 4.2, this procedure is all gain. There must be some problem somewhere in this that I missed so I am posting the FEMM setup and the script to make the moves and write the data. (Thanks to Robbie's help with the script)

The picture shows the starting position and these are the moves.
1: The lower small magnet rotates into position and pulls itself in.
2: The large magnet slides to the right .55" and does this by itself.
3: The lower small magnet rotates away from its position and is now pushed away.

If at this point the lower magnet's polarity was changed, it would again pull itself in and the process would reverse all in a gain direction.

The original concept was to have the the lower small magnet slide into position in the in/out screen direction but this cannot be confirmed in the 2D software so the insertion was changed to a rotate which also seems to work.
The rotate makes it harder to build a device to test the process.

broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #52 on: July 27, 2009, 12:05:56 AM »
I will ask again. Make a visual presentation of the whole process. I have no clue what you are showing or saying.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #53 on: July 27, 2009, 02:08:29 AM »
I agree, the concept is a bit difficult to follow in the previous posts.
These pictures indicate the operation steps in the FEMM script posted and should also help in understanding the posted data.


the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
Your basic setup is OU if modified in a simple way...
« Reply #54 on: July 27, 2009, 03:17:11 AM »
broli said:
Quote
I now want to confirm it's not the software giving me wrong results by having someone else confirm the data in FEMM.
You remember the old fashioned steam locomotives more that 100-125 years ago?

Go back to your drawing, take away one of the stationary magnets and place the other with the red end poing to the red end of the moving magnet.
The moving magnet should be inside a lubricated conduit so it can slide back and forth.
As it's pushed toward the other magnet's identical end, magnetic repulsion forces it away, until a spring arrangement along the centerline of movement pushes it back---just like a steam locomotive axle drive.
It's OU and it should beat Lenz law limitations, since there's no coil(s) to deal with.

Your software is correct in determining OU---it is OU.

--Lee

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #55 on: July 27, 2009, 03:49:31 AM »
The interesting thing with this configuration, is none of the magnets need to be moved, they all move themselves.
In step #1, the pivot magnet pulls itself into the configuration.
In step #2, the sliding magnet slides itself to the right and into a position that now pushes away the pivot magnet.
In step #3, the pivot magnet is now pushed away from the configuration because of the previous movement of the sliding magnet.

Then after step #3, if the polarity is reversed on the pivot magnet and the pivot point moved over a bit, it will again pull itself into the configuration to perform the entire sequence over again but in reverse.

I'm not sure how this could be true, but I think it couldn't hurt to look into this a bit further to determine why these results.


jonifer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #56 on: July 27, 2009, 08:17:10 AM »
Some rule for megnet motor (overunity too)
- the distance between the magnets does not change by more 1 mm
in right motor you can get 1000000 more power with same magnet.

0c

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #57 on: July 27, 2009, 03:48:15 PM »
Some rule for megnet motor (overunity too)
- the distance between the magnets does not change by more 1 mm
in right motor you can get 1000000 more power with same magnet.

True, but cogging / sticky spots will increase by the same factor. Definitely a consideration.

broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #58 on: July 27, 2009, 05:08:31 PM »
Thanks lumen now I see what's supposed to happen.

I have a question. Does FEMM indicate all this forces when you run through all these steps?

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Can someone confirm this in FEMM?
« Reply #59 on: July 27, 2009, 06:25:36 PM »
@Broli, FEMM can show data several different ways but I only required the XY force data.
I posted three txt files that contain the XY force data for every step in each of the three moves made.
The blank lines indicate when the next move starts.