Author Topic: How does Perendev's motor work? (Read 78728 times)

jimhitt · « **Reply #45 on:** December 29, 2008, 11:25:18 PM »

You are right. At best you can bend the field mostly on the sides of the magnet. It is much more difficult to do at the poles. What do you mean by breaking the connection? Is there a way to cut, counter or interupt the field electrically or otherwise?

BEP · « **Reply #46 on:** December 30, 2008, 01:05:40 AM »

Here is an introduction - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080125230056.htm

If you figure a way to do it on a bench let us know

But then we'll probably hear the bang!

khabe · « **Reply #47 on:** December 30, 2008, 11:50:05 AM »

q: How does Perendev's motor work?
a: Nowise.
$:-\$

BEP · « **Reply #48 on:** December 30, 2008, 02:53:32 PM »

Quote from: khabe on December 30, 2008, 11:50:05 AM

q: How does Perendev's motor work?
a: Nowise.
$:-\$

Ah!

khabe, You have built a Perendev motor! Wonderful!

Please supply details on how yours failed so we can avoid those problems.

khabe · « **Reply #49 on:** December 30, 2008, 03:14:35 PM »

Quote from: BEP on December 30, 2008, 02:53:32 PM

Ah!

khabe, You have built a Perendev motor! Wonderful!

Please supply details on how yours failed so we can avoid those problems.

You like to see my not-working Perendev style motors?

Im 101% sure that all the world want to see an WORKING one,
Working one meanÅ› what really works ... and continiusly will work in the presence of independent auditors
Do you have?
Yes? - OK - then please YOU show it,
Otherwise this talking about is pointless.
Regards,
khabe

spinner · « **Reply #50 on:** December 30, 2008, 04:55:43 PM »

Quote from: BEP on December 30, 2008, 02:53:32 PM

Ah!

khabe, You have built a Perendev motor! Wonderful!

Please supply details on how yours failed so we can avoid those problems.

"Perendev motor" is a deception, a beginner's mirage, an illusion...

I will not provide the proof for my claim.

But You're very welcomed (if you feel like it) to provide a proof that it is really working as claimed....

Let's hope for the best. Good luck!

wizardofmars · « **Reply #51 on:** December 30, 2008, 07:54:25 PM »

Quote from: jimhitt on December 29, 2008, 10:59:45 AM

Any fool except you knows that electric motors are beyond 35 percent efficient. MagTec has made only one electric prototype and to my knowledge has not released specifications to it. Their devices are diesel and gas powered. While I'd expect most folks to know this, for your sake, I'll state the obvious. Diesel and gas powered reciprocating engines are 20 to 30 percent efficient, but their claimed heater efficiencies exceed 90%. Their pending patent's working principal is identical to Reed's.

You were the one claiming MagTec had a shipping patented device, and it turns out they have one prototype with a patent pending. Will you retract your claim as incorrect?

To point out yet another misstatement by you, they have released the specifications on their website, under the link 'Technical specs' -> http://www.magtecenergy.com/files/pdf/product_tundra1500.pdf

What is it about this field of overunity research that causes people to make claims up? Do you think others aren't going to call you on it?

jimhitt · « **Reply #52 on:** December 30, 2008, 10:13:38 PM »

Quote from: wizardofmars on December 30, 2008, 07:54:25 PM

You were the one claiming MagTec had a shipping patented device, and it turns out they have one prototype with a patent pending. Will you retract your claim as incorrect?

To point out yet another misstatement by you, they have released the specifications on their website, under the link 'Technical specs' -> http://www.magtecenergy.com/files/pdf/product_tundra1500.pdf

What is it about this field of overunity research that causes people to make claims up? Do you think others aren't going to call you on it?

God, Wizard you are such a stickler for detail. I said that they made gas and diesel powered products for which they claim over 90 percent efficiency, and that gas and diesel engine average between 25% and 30 percent efficient, and that was an interesting trick. Their devices are scaled for commercial use and start at 500,000 btu's up to 1,500,000 btu's. But you've have misquoted me. I said that they had not released specifications on their electrical prototype to my knowledge. I also said their patent was pending on those devices. Undoubtedly the field of over unity caused you to make unsupportable claims such as these. I said that I had made a magnet heater and that my results point to the accuracy of prior claims made by other researchers. I wish I were younger. I would so love to have a flying monkey for a pet.

You're likely one of the frequent contributors to ufo and antigravity sites. I agree with you that these may be possible Would they be over unity? You can not find something new by first asserting that it does not exist. I am not claiming that these devices produce more power than is used to operate them any more than a wind generator does. Wind generators receive power from the wind. Magnet heaters receive energy from magnets. I am asserting that we are idiots when we think we have discovered all the ways of doing things. I am asserting that magnets can do work. I am asserting that we do not understand how things work. And, that we are at best scratching the surface of energy alternatives. As you may know magnets like gravity are not well understood. So your laws, corollaries, and rules are merely witch doctor's superstitions.

This thread however is not about magnet heaters. Stick to the topic Wizard. It's about the Perendev Motor and how it works. Most everyone here asserted on the basis of opinion that it could not work. I asserted on the basis of experimentation that it could and provided an alternate magnet configuration to the conventional opinion of how it is configured. I have made a straight line rail and it does work. I haven't tried it in a motor so I don't know. But, it's at least based on empirical evidence and work not blather like you are spewing.

Your certainty based upon dead expertâ€™s opinion has blinded you. You can not prevent people from thinking even if you ask millions of critical questions, criticize their opinions, assert premises based upon no empirical observation only on conjecture and theory, accuse them of inaccuracies, and heap other forms of intellectual abuse upon them.. Everyone here sees your true colors. Go crawl into a hole and realize that your days of unearned reward at others expense based upon spreading illusion are coming to an end. Free energy exists, and soon I'm sure even your pal's the power elite won't be able to stop it.

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

BEP · « **Reply #53 on:** December 31, 2008, 01:38:22 AM »

Quote from: spinner on December 30, 2008, 04:55:43 PM

"Perendev motor" is a deception, a beginner's mirage, an illusion...

I will not provide the proof for my claim.
But You're very welcomed (if you feel like it) to provide a proof that it is really working as claimed....

Let's hope for the best. Good luck!

I appreciate the wish for good luck but it is misplaced. There are certain truths about magnet only motors. I'll not list them all as I have many times before.

There is one fact that has no solution, yet.

IF you get one that seems to work - acceleration and or running for a length of time beyond expected...

They always stop. Sometimes the magnets loose their magnetization. Sometimes not but the motor either never works again or it only works sometimes.

The majority of the time they are simply fakes.

"a deception, a beginner's mirage, an illusion" ? For most, yes. They are a great learning experience but pointless only for those burdened with failure, poor attitudes and no imagination.

The truth about magnetism (and all related) is surely not understood completely.

I will not provide the proof for my claim either.

We should all let the learning experience be lessons learned about the physics not childish pissing matches.

wizardofmars · « **Reply #54 on:** December 31, 2008, 01:45:39 AM »

Quote from: jimhitt on December 30, 2008, 10:13:38 PM

God, Wizard you are such a stickler for detail. .... I also said their patent was pending on those devices.

It's attention to detail that separates the people dreaming of free energy to those that actually achieve something.

Your original post:

Quote

For the record, regardless of actual results, MagTec Energy of North Dakota makes commercial diesel powered construction and offshore oil well magnetic heaters they claim are 95% efficient with motors that are at best 35 % efficient. Neat trick, huh. But don't let that sway you. Never mind that the patent office verifies claims in patents before granting them. Troy Reed and the patent office were unfortunate to not have had your expertise when the patent was granted otherwise they would have realized their calorimetric error.

It doesn't matter how you spin it - there are three errors in that statement. MagTec are not commercially producing heaters with 95% efficiency - it's a single prototype as you admitted. MagTec don't have a patent granted - it's an application. And the patent office doesn't verify claims in patents in that manner.

Anyway, I won't keep picking on the heater issue. You claim you've solved free energy from magnet motors so I look forward to the breaking news and acclaim which will come your way when you demo it on live TV. Since nothing could be more important than solving the energy crisis, and you are so sure you have a solution, I'm sure it'll be any day now.

jimhitt · « **Reply #55 on:** January 10, 2009, 03:31:58 AM »

http://www.magtecenergy.com/index.aspx This is Magtec's website, for anyone who is interested. I have no connection to them, but they produce gasoline and diesel powered portable magnetic heaters for the construction and offshore oil drilling industries that range from 500,000 to 1,500,000 btu's. They do not claim overunity for their devices which lease at prices starting @ $6500 per month. I am unfortunately ignorant of quoted purchase prices. They claim efficiencies of over 90%. Perhaps they have purchased Reed's patent as his patent is now listed as abandoned and his name is listed in their patent application.

Magtec does not produce an electrically powered model having only made one prototype for which they claim efficiencies of over 90 percent. Perhaps the following will clarify the potential efficiency of electrically powered devices, as Troy Reed's name is now listed on Magtec's patent application, perhaps his original observation is worth noting.

The following is a quote from Troy Reed's original patent:

[0169] An apparatus in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention may be configured so as to produce extremely high efficiencies, in terms of the amount of heat generated compared to the energy input required. The following description is provided as an exemplary case.

[0170] In an embodiment of the claimed invention similar to that illustrated in FIG. 1, the drive mechanism 70 comprises an electric motor, supplied with 95 amperes of current at 220 volts. As is well known, power may be calculated according to the relation:

P=I.times.V Equation 1:

[0171] wherein:

[0172] P is the power in watts;

[0173] I is the current in amperes; and

[0174] V is the electrical potential in volts.

[0175] In accordance with Equation 1, the power supplied to the electric motor is 20,900 watts.

[0176] In the exemplary embodiment, the fluid driver 80 comprises an electric fan, supplied with 8 amperes of power at 220 volts. According to Equation 1, the power supplied to the fan is thus 1,760 watts.

[0177] Thus, the total power input into the system is 22,660 watts. For the sake of convenience, the input power may be converted to BTU/hr. 1 watt is equivalent to approximately 3.415 BTU/hr. Thus, the total power input into the exemplary embodiment is equivalent to 77,179 BTU/hr.

[0178] Total power output in the exemplary embodiment may be conveniently determined from the change in thermal energy of fluid as it passes through the system. In the exemplary embodiment, air is used as a fluid. The heat output of the system may be determined according to the known relation:

Q=q.times..rho..times.C.sub.p.times.(T.sub.O-T.sub.I) Equation 2:

[0179] wherein:

[0180] Q is the total heat output

[0181] q is the flow rate of air through the system

[0182] .rho. is the density of air

[0183] C.sub.p is the heat capacity of air

[0184] T.sub.O is the outlet temperature of the air

[0185] T.sub.I is the inlet temperature of the air

[0186] In the exemplary embodiment, the air flowing through the device is heated by 80.degree. F. Thus, the difference between the outlet and inlet temperatures of the air (T.sub.O-T.sub.I) is 80.degree. F.

[0187] The flow rate of air through the system in the exemplary embodiment is measured to be 3200 ft.sup.3/min. This may also be expressed as 192,000 ft.sup.3/hr.

[0188] The remaining values are known to reasonable accuracy. The density of air .rho. at standard temperature and pressure is known to be approximately 0.075 lbs/ft.sup.3. The heat capacity of air C.sub.p is known to be 0.24 BTU/lb-.degree. F.

[0189] Thus, according to Equation 2, the heat output of the exemplary embodiment is 276,480 BTU/hr.

[0190] The efficiency of an apparatus is commonly expressed in terms of the output divided by the input. The efficiency of the exemplary embodiment in generating heat may thus be expressed as (276,480 BTU/hr)/(77,179 BTU/hr), which reduces to a value of approximately 3.58, or 358% efficiency.

[0191] It is noted that the preceding is exemplary only. An apparatus in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention is not limited to the particular devices, materials, or power inputs and outputs described in the preceding invention.

[0192] Furthermore, 358% efficiency is in particular exemplary only, and is not to be considered to be a maximum value, a minimum value, or even a preferred value. Apparatuses in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention may be constructed with a variety of operating efficiencies.

[0193] Thus, the total heat energy generated within the conductive member 40 exceeds the total energy applied to the apparatus 10. In the case described above, the ratio of heat generated to energy applied is 3.58 to one, i.e. an efficiency of 358%.

Of course as pointed out by previous posts, the patent office does not verify claims such as these. And undoubtedly carbon fueled engines powering such devices are osmotically embued with etherial capabilities. Measurement difficulties create an impossibility of accurate measurement calibration leading to such outlandish claims undoubtedly due to excessive enthusiasm, much like the Perendev claims. These are of course equally doubtful and highly uncertain having no support from conventional authorities dead or living. All magnetic motors violate the principle of conservation of energy and are thus not worth investigating. Working models undoubtedly are all hoaxes waiting merely to be debunked. Thank god and other mythical beings for the kindness and consideration shown by the senior members of this forum in gently guiding us toward more productive endeavor.

Mem · « **Reply #56 on:** February 12, 2009, 10:43:35 PM »

<<I have a friend of mine that he is currently likes to fabricate Perendev's magnetic motor.
(Extremely skilled machinist)
anyone interested in this please contact him.
Here is his website.http://atlantiansolutions.com/KelFab/magnetic_motor.htm
Mem.>>

nievesoliveras · « **Reply #57 on:** February 20, 2009, 04:27:09 PM »

@all

I did not want to say anything yet, but I am having a tremendous success!!!!!!
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6362.msg158838#msg158838

Jesus

x743 · « **Reply #58 on:** March 01, 2009, 05:03:52 PM »

Jim,
I think this is dealing with a 3 phase motor. Not single phase like your formula. Amps/(Volts x 1.73)=VA

This gives you volt amps you then need to know the power factor to find watts.

Magtec should take the power wires going to the motor and run it straight to an electric water heater. Then you could throw away the motor, the VFD, the magnet thing, the bearings, and be at 100% EFF.

The whole trailer would be much lighter and more reliable.

Quote from: jimhitt on January 10, 2009, 03:31:58 AM

http://www.magtecenergy.com/index.aspx This is Magtec's website, for anyone who is interested. I have no connection to them, but they produce gasoline and diesel powered portable magnetic heaters for the construction and offshore oil drilling industries that range from 500,000 to 1,500,000 btu's. They do not claim overunity for their devices which lease at prices starting @ $6500 per month. I am unfortunately ignorant of quoted purchase prices. They claim efficiencies of over 90%. Perhaps they have purchased Reed's patent as his patent is now listed as abandoned and his name is listed in their patent application.

Magtec does not produce an electrically powered model having only made one prototype for which they claim efficiencies of over 90 percent. Perhaps the following will clarify the potential efficiency of electrically powered devices, as Troy Reed's name is now listed on Magtec's patent application, perhaps his original observation is worth noting.

The following is a quote from Troy Reed's original patent:

[0169] An apparatus in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention may be configured so as to produce extremely high efficiencies, in terms of the amount of heat generated compared to the energy input required. The following description is provided as an exemplary case.

[0170] In an embodiment of the claimed invention similar to that illustrated in FIG. 1, the drive mechanism 70 comprises an electric motor, supplied with 95 amperes of current at 220 volts. As is well known, power may be calculated according to the relation:

P=I.times.V Equation 1:

[0171] wherein:

[0172] P is the power in watts;

[0173] I is the current in amperes; and

[0174] V is the electrical potential in volts.

[0175] In accordance with Equation 1, the power supplied to the electric motor is 20,900 watts.

[0176] In the exemplary embodiment, the fluid driver 80 comprises an electric fan, supplied with 8 amperes of power at 220 volts. According to Equation 1, the power supplied to the fan is thus 1,760 watts.

[0177] Thus, the total power input into the system is 22,660 watts. For the sake of convenience, the input power may be converted to BTU/hr. 1 watt is equivalent to approximately 3.415 BTU/hr. Thus, the total power input into the exemplary embodiment is equivalent to 77,179 BTU/hr.

[0178] Total power output in the exemplary embodiment may be conveniently determined from the change in thermal energy of fluid as it passes through the system. In the exemplary embodiment, air is used as a fluid. The heat output of the system may be determined according to the known relation:

Q=q.times..rho..times.C.sub.p.times.(T.sub.O-T.sub.I) Equation 2:

[0179] wherein:

[0180] Q is the total heat output

[0181] q is the flow rate of air through the system

[0182] .rho. is the density of air

[0183] C.sub.p is the heat capacity of air

[0184] T.sub.O is the outlet temperature of the air

[0185] T.sub.I is the inlet temperature of the air

[0186] In the exemplary embodiment, the air flowing through the device is heated by 80.degree. F. Thus, the difference between the outlet and inlet temperatures of the air (T.sub.O-T.sub.I) is 80.degree. F.

[0187] The flow rate of air through the system in the exemplary embodiment is measured to be 3200 ft.sup.3/min. This may also be expressed as 192,000 ft.sup.3/hr.

[0188] The remaining values are known to reasonable accuracy. The density of air .rho. at standard temperature and pressure is known to be approximately 0.075 lbs/ft.sup.3. The heat capacity of air C.sub.p is known to be 0.24 BTU/lb-.degree. F.

[0189] Thus, according to Equation 2, the heat output of the exemplary embodiment is 276,480 BTU/hr.

[0190] The efficiency of an apparatus is commonly expressed in terms of the output divided by the input. The efficiency of the exemplary embodiment in generating heat may thus be expressed as (276,480 BTU/hr)/(77,179 BTU/hr), which reduces to a value of approximately 3.58, or 358% efficiency.

[0191] It is noted that the preceding is exemplary only. An apparatus in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention is not limited to the particular devices, materials, or power inputs and outputs described in the preceding invention.

[0192] Furthermore, 358% efficiency is in particular exemplary only, and is not to be considered to be a maximum value, a minimum value, or even a preferred value. Apparatuses in accordance with the principles of the claimed invention may be constructed with a variety of operating efficiencies.

[0193] Thus, the total heat energy generated within the conductive member 40 exceeds the total energy applied to the apparatus 10. In the case described above, the ratio of heat generated to energy applied is 3.58 to one, i.e. an efficiency of 358%.

Of course as pointed out by previous posts, the patent office does not verify claims such as these. And undoubtedly carbon fueled engines powering such devices are osmotically embued with etherial capabilities. Measurement difficulties create an impossibility of accurate measurement calibration leading to such outlandish claims undoubtedly due to excessive enthusiasm, much like the Perendev claims. These are of course equally doubtful and highly uncertain having no support from conventional authorities dead or living. All magnetic motors violate the principle of conservation of energy and are thus not worth investigating. Working models undoubtedly are all hoaxes waiting merely to be debunked. Thank god and other mythical beings for the kindness and consideration shown by the senior members of this forum in gently guiding us toward more productive endeavor.

jimhitt · « **Reply #59 on:** March 02, 2009, 05:21:22 PM »

Quote from: x743 on March 01, 2009, 05:03:52 PM

Jim,
I think this is dealing with a 3 phase motor. Not single phase like your formula. Amps/(Volts x 1.73)=VA

This gives you volt amps you then need to know the power factor to find watts.

Magtec should take the power wires going to the motor and run it straight to an electric water heater. Then you could throw away the motor, the VFD, the magnet thing, the bearings, and be at 100% EFF.

The whole trailer would be much lighter and more reliable.

Interesting that your only respose is to criticize the math based upon what you "think" the was used to power their heater. No one cares what you "think". We are only concerned with facts in this forum which we attack with gleeful abandon. As noted earlier, all overunity is a function of measurement errors. It is so wonderful that you weighed in with yours.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: How does Perendev's motor work? (Read 78728 times)

jimhitt

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

BEP

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

khabe

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

BEP

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

khabe

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

spinner

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

wizardofmars

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

jimhitt

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

BEP

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

wizardofmars

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

jimhitt

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

Mem

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

nievesoliveras

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

x743

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?

jimhitt

Re: How does Perendev's motor work?