Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83535
  • *Latest: Fritzman

  • *Total Posts: 514386
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 5
  • *Total: 6

Author Topic: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power  (Read 172625 times)

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #405 on: October 14, 2014, 12:56:15 PM »
Hi Luc, an all.

I come back on this post of you, Luc, for MH.

Hi MH,

Today I found there is a difference between the coil connected in parallel vs series.
In today's tests the best efficiency results for the coil to move up against gravity was with it connected in series. However, I think the gain could be mostly from the boost in Inductance. Gyula suggested a way to measure the Inductance and the results are 8mH vs 30mH in series. So I think this would need to be considered.
indeed, as inductance expresses the ration of magnetic flux, in Webers (Wb) against the current flow in Ampers (A). So this is a kind of efficiency ratio. Higher the inductance is, higher is the magnetic flux will be for the same current. (But you probably know that :) ).

The problem, as I see it, is that inductance goes much with the number of turns.

You want to increase the number of turns to have better inductance but then you get, if same wire section in mm², a higher resistance if you increase the length of the wire in the same time.

Then, it may be ask what would be the optimum solution.

One can increase the voltage for example, to compensate the higher resistance.

As a matter of fact, there is no analytical formula for now, which allows to get the answer in terms of length of wire, number of turns, length of coil, inner and outer diameters. Only formulas exist for specific configurations.

I have worked these days on a spreadsheets and I have tried to test each characteristic, against an efficiency ratio I made: FLUX under INPUT POWER; which is, imho, the very ratio we need to work against.

The first results I have on a specific formula are, that the efficiency (having all the other factor maintained constant):

1. drops with voltage (very at the opposite I was thinking! ^_^)
2. doesn't really change with the inner diameter
3. drops with the wire diameter (because it change the outer diameter?)
4. increases with the number of spires (remember: all the other factor remain the same, so for a same wire length! will mean shorter coil...)
5. increases with the number of layers (which is equivalent to a shorter coil).

These are in my opinion important data to check and know to go in the right direction of researches and suggest that pancake coils would be the most efficient by this ratio.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that the flux here is gotten through the whole section of the coil while it is not necessarily what we are looking for in we want to concentrate to flux in the core of the coil.

BTW, all these results were for air coils.


Quote
Today's tests
All tests done with low voltage.
To maintain a stable low voltage through the coils power stroke, I used a 650F Super Cap fully charged and stable at 2.7vdc 
By using this low voltage the coil moves up slowly and resulted in less losses as these were the most efficient results to date.
so, this looks to verify my result number 1. :)

Quote
Using the coils maximum upward travel stroke of 23.5mm it used 1.2J connected in parallel and 0.94J in series.
If we use the 0.94J and we subtract 0.54J which would be the unity amount needed for the coil to travel 23.5mm (if my calculations are correct?) then we are left with 0.40J under unity.
However, by having the coil travel to the maximum height I was able to collect (in another cap bank) 0.32J as the coil fell back down with most speed.
So if we deduct that we are basically 0.08J under unity.
Very Great you had, Luc, the idea to make this calculations  8)


Quote
So it looks like at best around 90% efficiency.
No so bad :)

Quote
Now that it's confirmed the device is Under Unity, can you please help me to rate it as it's ideal work solution, a Solenoid.
I would need some of you guys, make systematic tests of different kind of coil so I could analyse it and produce a spreadsheet able to give the optimum coil in any case against any factor.

I have work indeed on existing formulas but I am not too confident in their behaviour compare to the reality, especially when we try to push a factor towards a certain limit. But seeing how many of us work with coils, I think it is most sad not having any real complete tool to calculate and predict the ideal coil for a specific use. We could work together all here on that research. What do you think here guys?


Quote
There must be an established protocol to test Push or Pull force vs power

Maybe, but remember they are not same kind of quantities cause FORCE missing the TIME DIMENSION and even the LENGTH DIMENSION. I remember you power goes with A MOVING FORCE IN A CERTAIN LAP OF TIME.

If you don't care of the time, then you deal with ENERGY, while ENERGY [Joule] = FORCE [Newton] * DISPLACEMENT [meter].

But you may indeed make yourself a ratio of power consumption against the pulling force of your coil as you have already done several times.


Quote
and stroke to rate the efficiency of a Solenoid as I've found charts in some solenoids pdf data (see below)

This would be of most help

Thanks

Luc
The protocol is just what you do: measuring pulling force against electrical input power, and for torque: not forgetting to divide the pulling force by the radius of the application point of the dynamometer.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3094
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #406 on: October 14, 2014, 07:20:21 PM »
Thanks Khwartz for your interest and posting your ideas.

Looks like no one knows how solenoids pull charts are done or they are not interested.

If OU is not a possibility or claimed, people are just not interested, even those who believe OU is not possible.

Luc

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #407 on: October 14, 2014, 07:56:06 PM »
I'm drowning in pink, what gives?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #407 on: October 14, 2014, 07:56:06 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #408 on: October 14, 2014, 09:37:23 PM »
Well nobody ventured an idea when I said that the variables being tracked for Luc's experiment were wrong.

Luc was quoting pull force per watt of consumed power.  What is wrong with that?  Well, I will use hypothetical data as an example.  Let's say that it's 10 watts for 100 grams of pull force.  Then we keep the same identical setup except we change just one thing.  Let's say we increase the diameter of the wire slightly, say from 32 gauge wire to 24 gauge wire.  You repeat the test and now you get 7.5 watts of power for 100 grams of pull force.  What conclusions can you arrive at after looking at that data?

For the commercial solenoid, Luc posted diagrams from the manufacturer that showed pull force vs. distance for different power levels.  Why is the manufacturer posting that data?  It's taken for granted that the higher the power you put into the coil the more pulling force you will get from the solenoid.  So what is the REAL reason for the manufacturer to post that data?

Offline phoneboy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #409 on: October 15, 2014, 12:19:40 AM »
@gotluc, might help??

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #409 on: October 15, 2014, 12:19:40 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline A_Giggle_For_Chaos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #410 on: October 15, 2014, 12:27:27 PM »
I personally don't understand the fuss about a solenoid. I would get that epoxy out and put connecting rods to a short stroke drive shaft and see what that puppy could do compared to a regular motor, IE 1 hp 746 watts.
A good diode protected H bridge circuit driven with an optical switch, all powered from a big a cap on the front end. Top off the cap as needed to measure input.
We can only imagine. Until then.

Giggles

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #411 on: October 15, 2014, 04:55:50 PM »
Pulsing a series connected bifilar vectors a magnet wave outside the coil. A single wire coil or parallel bifilar will not act the same way.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #411 on: October 15, 2014, 04:55:50 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #412 on: October 15, 2014, 06:26:26 PM »
Thanks Khwartz for your interest and posting your ideas.

Looks like no one knows how solenoids pull charts are done or they are not interested.

If OU is not a possibility or claimed, people are just not interested, even those who believe OU is not possible.

Luc
You're welcome, Luc, it was "for the cause" ;)

But to be honest, surely my bad English, I am not sure to well understand your post: do you say you are giving-up and no more willing to see if OU is possible?

Cause, as I have said many times: OU is already a current thing since long:

- heat pumps, solar panels, wind turbines, et cetera, are all overunity COP, even wind turbines and solar panel are infinite COPs

(no energy input power that you pay for to run the device)

(and I remember anyone that "COP" is something else than "physical efficiency":

- heat pumps, solar panels, wind turbines are all underunity physical efficiencies despite the fact that each takes its energy in a large reservoir of energy for free).

Best regards.

Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3094
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #413 on: October 16, 2014, 02:57:19 AM »
Bonjour Khwartz,
ce que je dis, c'est que je ne pense pas que les membres du Forum sont intéressés s'il n'y a pas de potentiel OU dans cette appareil.
J'ai construit cet appareil au mieux de mes capacités et il exécute comme il se doit dans la mesure où une bobine peut déplace un poids spécifique avec une énergie Joule spécifique.
L'appareil est sous l'unité et ne peut pas être mieux.
Ce que j'ai aussi essayé de dire, c'est que mon appareil peut être mieux qu'un solénoïde standard car de ce que j'ai pu trouver sur le net est sa force de tire par watt est plus de 10 fois plus.
Mais je n'ai aucune idée comment s'y prendre pour comparer les deux et personne d'autre ont partagé comment le faire.

Hello Khwartz,
what I'm saying is, I don't think the members of the Forum are interested if there is no OU potential in this device.
I have built this device to the best of my ability and it performs as it should as far as a coil can moves a specific weight using a specific Joule energy.
The device is under unity and cannot be any better.
What I have been also trying to say is, my device may be better then a standard solenoid because from what I could find on the net is its pull force per watt is more than 10x more.
But I have no idea how to go about comparing the two and no one else have shared how to do so.

Luc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #413 on: October 16, 2014, 02:57:19 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #414 on: October 16, 2014, 03:47:23 AM »
OK, apparemment tout tes test te donnent jusque là des résultats sous unitaire et tu voudrais comparer avec une bobine standarde, mais je ne comprends pas : tu as bien fait toi-même la comparaison (dix fois plus de force de traction) donc où est le problème ?

Tu as bien testé la force de traction de ta bobine sans l'amplification par l'addition d'aimants en comparaison avec ta manière de la faire, donc je ne vois pas bien ce que tu veux de plus :/

Cela dit, c'est vrai que passer du temps à faire des abaques qui n'intéresseraient personne ce ne serait pas très motivant pour moi.

Par contre, une chose qui pourrait permettre d'estimer s'il y a un espoir de surunité c'est si la courbe d'évolution du rendement est "divergente" ou "convergente". En effet, dans le premier cas la surunité serait très probable, dans l'autre très compromise.

A quoi cela correspond-t-il ? disons que si la tendance de la courbe va dans sa direction en gros "au-delà" de la surunité : bingo ! dans le cas contraire, si par exemple la courbe se rapproche tout le temps mais sans jamais vraiment "atteindre" et donc dépasser si on la prolonge (une asymptote), alors on améliore le rendement certes mais rien de plus.

---
OK, apparently all your test  give underuntity resutls and you would want to compare with a standard reel, but I do not understand: you did well yourself the comparison (ten times more of pulling force) thus where is the problem?

You tested well the strength of drive of your coil without increase/amplification by the addition of magnets in comparison with your way of making it, thus I do not see well what you want furthermore :/

Having said that, it is true that to spend time to make abacuses which would interest nobody it would not be very rewarding for me.

On the other hand, a thing which could allow to consider if there is a hope of surunité it is if the curve of evolution of the efficiency is "divergent " or " convergent". Indeed, in the first case the surunité would be very likely, in the other one very compromised.

To what does it correspond? Let us say that if the tendency of the graph goes in its direction roughly "beyond" the overunity: you get it potentially! Should the opposite occur, if for example the graph gets closer all the time but without ever "achieving" really and thus overtaking if we extend it (= an asymptote), then we improve the efficiency certainly but nothing more.

Didier

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #415 on: October 16, 2014, 04:58:04 AM »
Here's how I did it back in the Steorn Orbo days.
I measured the force (from the digital force gauge) and the distance (from the micrometer head adjustment) while running various levels of current through the coil.

Back off distance until at some "start" point. Apply current to the coil. Take force readings every 0.1 mm as you crank the micrometer head to make the magnet in the head of the force gauge get closer and closer to the coil. Take readings going in the other direction as you go back up. Then set a new current level, and repeat the measurement series. Plot the data.

In this way I was fully able to characterize the Orbo "core effect" and to show just how little reduction in attractive force was really needed to make the Orbo run at speed.


Inductors in parallel and in series:
Inductors add like resistors. That is, for inductors in series, the final inductance is just the sum of all the individual inductances. For inductors in parallel, the relationship is more complex.
 
Quote
the total inductance of non-coupled inductors in parallel is equal to the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals of their individual inductances
IOW inductors in parallel add up in the same way as resistors in parallel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_and_parallel_circuits#Inductors_2




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #415 on: October 16, 2014, 04:58:04 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3094
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #416 on: October 16, 2014, 08:28:53 AM »
Thanks for your post TK

I don't see or maybe don't understand the point of making a curve chart when my coils push or pull force is equal (does not change in any position) throughout its 1 inch of travel?

This is where my design blows away a standard solenoid.
As you know, solenoid are not capable of pulling over 2.5kg at the beginning of their stroke and maintain the same pull force for 23mm of travel and only consume 0.43 Watt continuous 24/7 without the coil even getting warm.

Luc



Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #417 on: October 16, 2014, 11:21:08 AM »
I'm a little confused here. I thought you  didn't know how to  measure these pull forces and you wanted to know how to do it. So I am puzzled that you now say you know what the forces are, you know they are constant over an inch of travel, etc etc.

How are you measuring this pull force? What is the smallest difference in force your method can reliably detect? Can you show a plot of force vs. distance along a well defined path, that can be compared with other coil configurations along the same path?

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #418 on: October 16, 2014, 04:16:17 PM »
Take a well wrapped bifilar solenoid coil connected serially with a welding rod core. Hang a steel carving knife by a string. Aim the center of the coil at the dangling knife and pulse it like you would a Leedskalnin device shorting the coil across a 12 volt battery. Watch what happens to the knife. Next, move the coil further away and try it again. This laser dimension magnet wave was broadcasted and received by Tesla at a distance of 40 miles from his downtown laboratory to West Point on line of sight. This was the first wireless transmission in History!. The broadcast and receiver coils were identical and both were grounded. The wave carried power that Tesla believed traveled through the ground! 

I re-discovered this effect by accident as I've recounted in the past: My first shop wound bifilar coil, 350 turns of 22 gauge, with welding rod core slid around ten feet to collide with a cutlery box that was drawn an equal distance along my kitchen counter, from one direct short pulse. The experience was traumatic! The magnetic force produced this way had nothing whatsoever to do with the customary D.C. Joule to coil flux ratios. Try it! 
 
« Last Edit: October 17, 2014, 04:05:06 PM by synchro1 »

Offline Khwartz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 611
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #419 on: October 16, 2014, 05:49:43 PM »
Thanks for your post TK

I don't see or maybe don't understand the point of making a curve chart when my coils push or pull force is equal (does not change in any position) throughout its 1 inch of travel?

This is where my design blows away a standard solenoid.
As you know, solenoid are not capable of pulling over 2.5kg at the beginning of their stroke and maintain the same pull force for 23mm of travel and only consume 0.43 Watt continuous 24/7 without the coil even getting warm.

Luc
Luc, could you indicate the frequency of the run up and down while pulling 2.5 kg 1 time (lifting) on 2 (lifting and dropping)? (I suppose you run it against the gravity, to talk about "kg", so mass, otherwise only about "pulling force" and so "newtons"...).

Because if I am not mistaking, if you lift 2.5 kg the first second, that you not energise at the second time and let the mass dropping, so no consumption of input power, you would have overunity, cause:

P [W] = W [Joule] / T [second]

P [W] = (F [Newtons] * Displacement [m]) / T [second]

P [W] = ((M [kg] * Gravity acceleration [m/s²])* Displacement [m]) / T [second]

so:

P [W] = ((2.5 [kg] * 9.84 [m/s²])* 0.023 [m]) / 1 [second] = 0.566 [W]

and:

COP = 0.566 [W] / 0.43 [W] = 1.32 ^^

Note: if you get that king of result while energising both times (lifting and dropping), it is even more promising cause we didn't care in the previous calculation of the work we may harness while dropping! in fact, it would correspond to a COP of (few mechanical losses aside):

COP ~= (2 * 0.566 [W]) / 0.43 [W] = 2.63  :D

 

OneLink