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: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power  (Read 252417 times)

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #180 on: August 18, 2014, 12:56:55 AM »
I would guess you would be referring to the one I connected to my H-Bridge?... if so, sorry but no.

How about just testing the basic design to see if you feel it's worth more investment of time. I'm sure when the time comes Gyula can help with the schematics for more advanced switching.

Luc

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #181 on: August 18, 2014, 02:54:16 AM »
Hi Luc,
what is the nominal strength of the magnets you are using?
(The amount of force to pull from the steel plate)

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #182 on: August 18, 2014, 03:01:26 AM »
You'll have to look it up. My most recent one is made with 1" cubes N52

Luc

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #183 on: August 18, 2014, 03:26:56 AM »
Found
95 lbs
http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=BX0X0X0-N52
It would be interesting to see what happens when you double it,
may be with another set?

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #184 on: August 18, 2014, 06:43:50 AM »
I would guess you would be referring to the one I connected to my H-Bridge?... if so, sorry but no.

How about just testing the basic design to see if you feel it's worth more investment of time. I'm sure when the time comes Gyula can help with the schematics for more advanced switching.

Luc
What i will do first Luc,is make a standard solenoid setup,using a PM insted of a steel plunger(pistion). We can then compare results of lift/distance,and power consumption between the two setup's.This will let us know if your on the right track,and how much better your setup is than a standard setup.
Should have the first video results up tonight.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #185 on: August 18, 2014, 08:06:18 AM »
Well not even worth a video on the solenoid setup. I had to use 5 times as much power to achieve the 500 gram pull force.

Your on to something great here Luc-time to make the same type of setup i think-but one more thing to try first. So the idea is to achieve 500 gram's of pull force,using only .432 watts.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #186 on: August 18, 2014, 09:17:29 AM »
Here is the pull force(or torque) from a standard small dc motor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDLLphaRC-k&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #187 on: August 18, 2014, 03:21:15 PM »
Hi Luc,
 I keep thinking about this aspect of the testing:
For example, if you do the lifting test once per second,it
 consists of on/of duty cycle, which means that you apply  power only
half of the time of the cycle, which will be 0.2 W, instead of .4 W per second, to perform the same work.
Which means that for the present setup of 500g pull, you only need to lift
it twice per second by 2 cm to reach OU. If you do it more often - you are in a surplus territory.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #188 on: August 18, 2014, 03:31:24 PM »
Hi Luc,
 I keep thinking about this aspect of the testing:
For example, if you do the lifting test once per second,it
 consists of on/of duty cycle, which means that you apply  power only
half of the time of the cycle, which will be 0.2 W, instead of .4 W per second, to perform the same work.
Which means that for the present setup of 500g pull, you only need to lift
it twice per second by 2 cm to reach OU. If you do it more often - you are in a surplus territory.
This is an interesting test,but what are the ruel's based around the test.?
Would this be allowed-we have a spring sitting under the 500g weight.If Luc can get the weight with spring into resonance,and the 500g weight is lifted that 2cm's twice a minute,dose that still count?-are we aloud to use the spring. If a spring is not an energy source,then i dont see why not. this would then become like a kid on a trampoline.

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #189 on: August 18, 2014, 04:54:37 PM »
Thanks TinMan for making this excellent test setup using a standard motor.
Your 1 to 1 pulley is the right way to go to compere a standard motor pull force to my design.
You spring idea also sounds good.

@ telecom, when I came up with this design 5 years ago I ordered many large 2" square by 1" thick N52 magnets to build a super powerful version of it.
I never did build it because most said it wouldn't give OU and then the topic died.
I still have at least 10 or more of these super magnets in the original delivery box in storage . Today they are worth a fortune compared to when I purchased them.
I guess it's time to open the box and build the thing to see the real results!

I was thinking to build one that's at least 8 inches wide by using 4 of these 2" wide by 1 " thick magnets next to each other. That way most of the coils outer magnetic field is used. Only 1" on each sides where I attache the guides would be lost compared to my latest design where only half of the outer field is used.

Luc

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #190 on: August 18, 2014, 06:47:27 PM »
This is an interesting test,but what are the ruel's based around the test.?
Would this be allowed-we have a spring sitting under the 500g weight.If Luc can get the weight with spring into resonance,and the 500g weight is lifted that 2cm's twice a minute,dose that still count?-are we aloud to use the spring. If a spring is not an energy source,then i dont see why not. this would then become like a kid on a trampoline.
Hi Tinman,
I really don't know the answer:
On one hand, the spring will distort the actual output of the device, will make it higher;
On the other hand - this exactly what we want to achieve...

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #191 on: August 18, 2014, 06:49:21 PM »

@ telecom, when I came up with this design 5 years ago I ordered many large 2" square by 1" thick N52 magnets to build a super powerful version of it.
I never did build it because most said it wouldn't give OU and then the topic died.
I still have at least 10 or more of these super magnets in the original delivery box in storage . Today they are worth a fortune compared to when I purchased them.
I guess it's time to open the box and build the thing to see the real results!

I was thinking to build one that's at least 8 inches wide by using 4 of these 2" wide by 1 " thick magnets next to each other. That way most of the coils outer magnetic field is used. Only 1" on each sides where I attache the guides would be lost compared to my latest design where only half of the outer field is used.

Luc

Hi Luc,
this should work really well, IMHO
Looking forward to seeing it!

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #192 on: August 19, 2014, 03:39:56 AM »
Hi Tinman,
I really don't know the answer:
On one hand, the spring will distort the actual output of the device, will make it higher;
If a spring is not an energy source,but only an energy storage device,how will it make the output higher?
Think of the weight as an inductor,and the spring as a capacitor. All you need to do then is hit the right frequency of the tank circuit to gain resonance. Once resonance is achieved,we will get a large amplitude-in this case,the 1/2kg weight being lifted that 2cm twice per minute

To be within test guidlines,the 2cm lift would have to start from the point at which the spring is not compressed-just off the surface from which it will contact as the weight drops.If the spring is to compress 1cm,then the total travel of Luc's slide(coils travel) on his device would need to be 3cm.

Why the spring would allow the weight to be lifted more efficiently than if it wasnt there?.

The answer is simple. If there were no spring,and the weight was just allowed to hit the surface as it fell to a resting state,then energy is disipated from the system as noise/vibration. The spring removes this loss,and stores that energy that would have been disipated as noise/vibration,and returns it back to the system. So the spring wont actually distort the output,but it will make it higher due to less loss in the system.

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #193 on: August 19, 2014, 04:02:40 AM »
If a spring is not an energy source,but only an energy storage device,how will it make the output higher?
Think of the weight as an inductor,and the spring as a capacitor. All you need to do then is hit the right frequency of the tank circuit to gain resonance. Once resonance is achieved,we will get a large amplitude-in this case,the 1/2kg weight being lifted that 2cm twice per minute

To be within test guidlines,the 2cm lift would have to start from the point at which the spring is not compressed-just off the surface from which it will contact as the weight drops.If the spring is to compress 1cm,then the total travel of Luc's slide(coils travel) on his device would need to be 3cm.

Why the spring would allow the weight to be lifted more efficiently than if it wasnt there?.

The answer is simple. If there were no spring,and the weight was just allowed to hit the surface as it fell to a resting state,then energy is disipated from the system as noise/vibration. The spring removes this loss,and stores that energy that would have been disipated as noise/vibration,and returns it back to the system. So the spring wont actually distort the output,but it will make it higher due to less loss in the system.
When weight is being lifted, we increase its potential energy.
When it drops, the potential energy becomes kinetic, which is being absorbed
at the end by the holding string(w/o the spring).
When the spring is underneath, it absorbs the kinetic energy into the potential energy of the spring when it compresses, and releases it on the way up, which helps to pull
the weight up. This will distort the actual performance of the device.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Mostly Permanent Magnet Motor with minimal Input Power
« Reply #194 on: August 19, 2014, 04:21:16 AM »
When weight is being lifted, we increase its potential energy.
When it drops, the potential energy becomes kinetic, which is being absorbed
at the end by the holding string(w/o the spring).
When the spring is underneath, it absorbs the kinetic energy into the potential energy of the spring when it compresses, and releases it on the way up, which helps to pull
the weight up. This will distort the actual performance of the device.
No,the kinetic energy isnt being absorbed by the string,it is being transformed into vibrational energy via the string through the framework of the device,and then to the bench the device is mounted on,and finally to ground(earth). The spring stores the kinetic energy that would be normally transformed into vibrations/vibrational energy/sound,and returns it back to the system apon spring decompression. Energy is never absorbed,it's stored or transformed.