Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > Benches > PhysicsProf (Moderator: PhysicsProf) > Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited

2024-11-27, 04:46:46
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 [2] 3

« previous next »

Author Topic: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited (Read 34179 times)

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #25 on: 2014-07-12, 20:53:48 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	and here is info on a remanence latching relay see wiki about latching relayLatching relay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relay#Latching_relay Quote Latching relay with permanent magnet A latching relay has two relaxed states (bistable). These are also called "impulse", "keep", or "stay" relays. When the current is switched off, the relay remains in its last state. This is achieved with a solenoid operating a ratchet and cam mechanism, or by having two opposing coils with an over-center spring or permanent magnet to hold the armature and contacts in position while the coil is relaxed, or with a remanent core. In the ratchet and cam example, the first pulse to the coil turns the relay on and the second pulse turns it off. In the two coil example, a pulse to one coil turns the relay on and a pulse to the opposite coil turns the relay off. This type of relay has the advantage that one coil consumes power only for an instant, while it is being switched, and the relay contacts retain this setting across a power outage. A remanent core latching relay requires a current pulse of opposite polarity to make it change state. A stepping relay is a specialized kind of multi-way latching relay designed for early automatic telephone exchanges. An earth leakage circuit breaker includes a specialized latching relay. Very early computers often stored bits in a magnetically latching relay, such as ferreed or the later memreed in the 1ESS switch. Some early computers used ordinary relays as a kind of latch—they store bits in ordinary wire spring relays or reed relays by feeding an output wire back as an input, resulting in a feedback loop or sequential circuit. Such an electrically-latching relay requires continuous power to maintain state, unlike magnetically latching relays or mechanically racheting relays. In computer memories, latching relays and other relays were replaced by delay line memory, which in turn was replaced by a series of ever-faster and ever-smaller memory technologies.

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #26 on: 2014-07-13, 00:41:17 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: Peterae on 2014-07-12, 20:53:48 and here is info on a remanence latching relay see wiki about latching relayLatching relay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relay#Latching_relay I never knew. I have seen and used the mechanical cam-type latching relays often, never the remanent core type before. Seems like these would be ideal for a Tesla Switch circuit or similar. I still find it interesting that as long as the core is "latched", the holding flux stays in there permanently, but once you break the flux, the only way to get it back is to re-energize it. That in itself is pretty much 100% efficiency.

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #27 on: 2014-07-13, 01:21:17 »
Group: Guest	Peterae, I'm afraid the PMH was solved a long time ago and probably many times since then. It shows up as one of the world's wonders about twice a year, from what I've seen. Matt, Those using non PM remanence or PM remanence (yes, a permanent magnet is another example of remanence) are only as permanent as that material containing the magnetic loop. All have leakage. I can think of a particular system which still retains its non-pm memory due to magnetic remanence - even after >30 years. (I don't work for them anymore but the current folks let me peek in once in a while ). What I find interesting (even though I understand it) is that you can 'recharge' a weak PM by applying a 'keeper'. The darned things become stronger over time (only up to saturation).

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #28 on: 2014-07-13, 07:16:30 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014-07-13, 00:41:17 I never knew. I have seen and used the mechanical cam-type latching relays often, never the remanent core type before. Seems like these would be ideal for a Tesla Switch circuit or similar. I still find it interesting that as long as the core is "latched", the holding flux stays in there permanently, but once you break the flux, the only way to get it back is to re-energize it. That in itself is pretty much 100% efficiency. No i had never heard of a Remanence latching relay either.

ion	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #29 on: 2014-07-13, 16:28:28 »
Group: Elite Hero Member Posts: 3537 It's turtles all the way down	We did a thread on this back in 2011 my bistable latch: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1044.msg16098#msg16098 --------------------------- "Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy

Farmhand	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #30 on: 2014-07-13, 16:49:03 »
Group: Guest	I think that maybe the energy required to maintain "keeper lock" is probably so small that any loss of energy over a short time would be difficult to notice. I also hazard a guess that if the PMH had some reluctance (I think it's called) in the joins between the keeper and the main body of the PMH then the keeper would fall of a lot sooner all by itself. just a guess. It would make sense to me that the better the facing match between the keeper and the main PMH body is the longer it would hold and also the better the material the PMH is made from the longer it would hold. Maybe it should be called an APMH Almost PMH. ..

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #31 on: 2014-07-13, 19:44:49 »
Group: Guest	Related is another device curiously mysticized by some OU groups... The Radus magnetic space boots. They also took advantage of magnetic lines of force tending to take the path of least resistance, tending to stay closed loop unto themselves and being easily redirected to another path with a simple low power pulse. I'm quite sure they are just another flavor of a bi-stable magnetic latch. Don't try to convince some folks of this. They will cry 'foul' or 'government agent'

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #32 on: 2014-07-14, 02:33:48 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	thanks for the stimulating discussion. My effort lately is to fire up the latching using a cap, so I can readily measure the input energy, then later try to capture the energy produced by the collapsing remanance (sp?) field in the coil (stimulating the collapse with a small "back" current.) the trick so far is that last part... Quote from: ION on 2014-07-13, 16:28:28 We did a thread on this back in 2011 my bistable latch: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1044.msg16098#msg16098 ION - good stuff, thanks. « Last Edit: 2014-07-14, 05:52:57 by PhysicsProf »

TinMan	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #33 on: 2014-07-14, 11:11:00 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	I remembered a video that Robert Murray Smith done some time ago(before the days of his conductive ink),that shows how easy it is to flip the magnetic poles of an alnico magnet.Thought it may be of some interest here on this thread. The sound on the video isnt that great,but still understandable https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZzosuvfvE4 --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #34 on: 2014-07-14, 11:30:05 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: TinMan on 2014-07-14, 11:11:00 I remembered a video that Robert Murray Smith done some time ago(before the days of his conductive ink),that shows how easy it is to flip the magnetic poles of an alnico magnet.Thought it may be of some interest here on this thread. The sound on the video isnt that great,but still understandable https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZzosuvfvE4 Tinman, Nice example of a little more inventive use of the same phenomenon. The demonstrated method is used in robotic grippers (part picking/placement) and magnetic chucks for metal turning/grinding/sanding machines. I find the interesting part to be the fact that such gripping using magnets consumes magnitudes less energy than the electromagnet versions. A MEG using the same principles might be interesting.

TinMan	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #35 on: 2014-07-14, 12:58:56 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2014-07-14, 11:30:05 Tinman, A MEG using the same principles might be interesting. WW-i was thinking the very same thing. Insted of pulsing a coil to deflect the field of the PM in the MEG,why not flip the poles of the magnet insted. A very short pulse of power will allow the fields to remain as long as we want. Then another short pulse to flip them again. Could even work in some sort of magnet motor setup-attraction,then repulsion. We could find out exactly how much power is needed to flip the poles ,simply by using caps. Just put enough in the caps to do the job of flipping the field's,and from that we can see how many joules of energy is required. I had compleetly forgotten about that video,until this thread came up. --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Grumage	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #36 on: 2014-07-14, 13:50:16 »
Group: Renaissance Man Hero Member Posts: 2765	Dear All. This drawing sprang to mind with the comments of Wave Watcher. The rotor is clearly shown to be permanent magnet !! Sorry, perhaps not !! But could be made that way !! Quote. " The armature may be of any of the forms used by me in my alternating-current system, and is shown as wound with two closed coils G H at right angles to each other. " T-1000 has said many times that this is a device that was hidden in plain sight !! Cheers Grum. ------------------------ Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited Tgen.png (111.59 kB, 1152x648 - viewed 1338 times.) --------------------------- Nanny state ? Left at the gate !!

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #37 on: 2014-07-14, 17:19:32 »
Group: Guest	It may be difficult to find a working match between A Neo and an AlNiCo. Edit>> Make sure the AlNiCo magnets are isotropic (can change polarization) !

Grumage	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #38 on: 2014-07-14, 18:55:33 »
Group: Renaissance Man Hero Member Posts: 2765	Dear Wave Watcher. I have just realised I mistook the acronym MEG for QEG !! My sincerest apologies. Cheers from a rather embarrassed Grum. --------------------------- Nanny state ? Left at the gate !!

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #39 on: 2014-07-14, 20:58:46 »
Group: Guest	Grum, I recall that discussion with T-1000 also. Though the direction I remember us going in was in regards to variable inductance. Which is a problem I have personally when we get too many abstraction layers away from what is physically happening in the device. But for the QEG, it would seem that a specific remanence in the core would be desirable. Goes back to the impulse or snap-on, snap-off action mentioned in the Flywheel thread. For a device like the QEG where you have rotation, timing would seem to be critical. You have to create the proper conditions in the core and allow the rotor to move away at a specific velocity where the change in flux can't quite keep up. When that happens, the opportunity for the AEther to pitch-in and assist increases. If that happens or how...? I have no idea.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #40 on: 2014-07-14, 22:02:33 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Interesting comments. I'm still wondering about QEG, HOPE-ing it will pan out... Meanwhile my experiments with magnetic clamping continue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV9WsZmJ7w8&feature=youtu.be Video taped today, just a few more interesting experiments. From my caption: Quote Published on Jul 14, 2014 Continuation of my magnetic-clamping experiments. As before, I use the ferrite C + I core, with a coil of 18 AWG speaker wire (50 feet long) on the C portion. Power input from a 1000uF capacitor (this is new). We calculate the input energy using Ein = 1/2 C V^2. The input voltage is about 5 volts, so available in the cap is Eavail = 1/2 (1000 uF) (5V)^2 = 12.5 mJ. This is the power delivered if Vfinal = 0 on the cap; but this is generally not the case as I quickly tap the yellow lead from the coil to the (+) leg of the cap. Test 1: Cap goes from 5V to 2.7V, and clamping does occur. Energy input from the cap: 1/2 1000uF (5^2 - 2.7^2) = 8.9mJ (Not 2 mJ, but as I noted I had seen clamping with 2mJ input before with earlier testing.) Test 2: Cap goes from 5V to NEG 0.7V. Negative voltages on cap are often seen with testing as shown, quick tap to the coil from the cap leg. The negative voltage on the cap presumably stems from flyback from the coil. In Test 2, the input energy from the cap is 1/2 1000uF (5^2 - (-0.6)^2) = 0.5mF (24.6) = 12.3 mJ. By applying a negative voltage on the coil (that is, current in the opposite direction), de-clamping may occur. PS -- if I hold the yellow lead on the (+) leg of the cap at 5V, instead of quick-tapping, the cap quickly drains to 0V, but clamping does not occur. The quick-tapping is important for some reason - and often results in a negative voltage on the cap (due to flyback from the coil no doubt). With a negative voltage of about -1V or so, I get de-clamping (when the coil is energized with a quick tap from the cap, as shown).

Peterae	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #41 on: 2014-07-14, 22:37:23 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3961	Nice PP Amazing how little energy it takes to hold that keeper, strange thing is wether the cross section area affects the strength of pull In a motor apparently not F=BIL no mention of pole area? So if your core cross section was infinitely small then the keeper should stick with the same force, maybe i am missing core saturation which would limit the minimun size.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #42 on: 2014-07-16, 00:50:04 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Yes, core saturation should certainly be considered, Peter; good thoughts. OK, I've been playing with the latching using my bench device. Turning down the voltage on the 1000uF cap, I still get latching down to about 1.2 volts. The best "run" so far is Vi = 1.19V on the cap After a quick tap with the yellow lead from the device, I find latching, and the voltage on the cap drops to: Vf = -0.4V. I think this negative V reflects flyback from the coil - please correct me if that is not right. Using 1/2 C V^2 to calculate input energy to accomplish the latching, I get Ein = 0.68 mJ. Which is (I think) remarkably small input to achieve this latching effect. Note that the bottom bar or "keeper" weighs (Mass actually) 359g. Next when I get time I will try lifting the keeper and will use Eout = mgh to evaluate Eout. Perhaps the bar can rise just a mm or two; we shall see. LOL -- maybe Ed Leedskalnin used a "trick" like this to lift heavy weights in Florida!

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #43 on: 2014-07-16, 02:45:35 »
Group: Guest	Dr. Jones, Instead of asking you this, I should probably be doing the work myself and publishing the results, but since you are all setup for this particular experiment... Could you insert a digitally controlled switch between your capacitor and coil that will one-shot trigger over some time range and maybe rough graph your results? I would be very curious to know if this turns out to be linear or if the electrically energy is bouncing back-n-forth between the coil and cap and that your latching results all hinge on where in this cycle the circuit is made or broke. Brushing an alligator clip across the metallic connector of an electrolytic capacitor "may" not be scientific or controlled enough to fully explain what is happening. I hope I said that nicely. I certainly am not one to criticize efforts being made to further our knowledge and understanding in any way. This experiment of yours has the potential of being extremely enlightening.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #44 on: 2014-07-16, 04:17:25 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	You understand (don't you?) that I'm no longer at the university with its fancy equipment - I live about 1,100 miles away in a rural community with wonderful family. But if you will describe this digital switch that you suggest, I can see what I can afford/do. Quote Matt: you insert a digitally controlled switch between your capacitor and coil that will one-shot trigger over some time range and maybe rough graph your results?

Matt Watts	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #45 on: 2014-07-16, 05:59:32 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2014-07-16, 04:17:25 You understand (don't you?) that I'm no longer at the university with its fancy equipment - I live about 1,100 miles away in a rural community with wonderful family. But if you will describe this digital switch that you suggest, I can see what I can afford/do. Yes, I had overlooked that. Please accept my apologies if my post seemed anything below board, it certainly wasn't meant to sound that way. I hold you in high respect and I am honored to participate in this environment with you. Honestly, I really do not know how rigorous the testing needs to be here. From the work done on the Akula device, I predict there is a lot more going on than we think. I have the exact same C/I core as you, from Surplus Supplies of Kansas too by the way and I'm sure I can find a roll of speaker wire that will fit on there. Parts should ship from Digi-Key tomorrow for my Universal Electronic Switch, which is basically a glorified high-speed bidirectional SSR. Give me a few days to assemble the switch and connect it to my pulse generator and I will gladly run some tests parallel to yours so we can examine the data in greater detail. This will also give me a chance to really test this switch I designed, which if it works well, I will happily send you one to test with too. Hopefully you do still have an o-scope in your possession as I think if we can get a good snapshot of the waveform, we can see the energy exchange between the two components. I am very curious as to what we might find and be able to predict. I truly wish I had everything I needed right at this moment to begin with these tests. I don't, which is why I posted my previous reply, but I will be ready shortly and follow through with my commitment to this research.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #46 on: 2014-07-16, 11:03:54 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Sounds great, Matt -- "formidable" as they say in French. Great that you have the same ferrite core (mine came from Nebraska Surplus). The 50 feet of speaker wire, I , I found at Lowe's hardware; I didn't need to remove it from the plastic wrapper, just the ends of the wires for connections. Yes, I have a decent DSO in my little home lab... which I use often (as seen in several of my videos). I look forward to what you find out - and thanks for this work on your part! Fun stuff.

PhysicsProf	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #47 on: 2014-07-18, 09:49:14 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 3017	Progress, I added small ferrite magnets so as to achieve magnetic clamping at 46 uJ. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkHyb01MfX8&feature=youtu.be From the video caption: Quote Continuation of magnetic clamping experiments. I've added three small ferrite magnets on either side of the I-core and two on the C-core above (about 1.5 cm separation), with fields enhanced in the direction supplied by a current in the 50-foot long speaker wire coil (bifilar wound as previously described). The energy required to achieve magnetic clamping is greatly reduced. In this demonstration, I find first charge the 1000uF capacitor to approx. 0.33V, so the energy in the cap by 1/2 CV^2 = 54.5 uJ. I discharge this energy through the coil by brushing the alligator clip on the + leg of the cap. Flyback current drives the cap to -0.13V, so some of the energy in the coil comes back into the cap, 1/2 CV^2 = 8.5 uJ. (Note, the voltage is squared so the energy stored is positive.) Subtracting gives net energy supplied to cause the clamping, 54.5 -8.5 uJ = 46uJ, 46 micro-Joules! Next, I apply the (approx) -0.13V back into the coil, but now the current flows in the opposite direction from the first time since the voltage is negative. This tiny negative voltage is sufficient to cause de-clamping of the keeper from the C-core. I have repeated this experiment several times, with variations in the flyback-generated voltage of course.

BEP	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #48 on: 2014-07-18, 17:34:08 »
Group: Guest	PhysicsProf, You may be interested in the attached. I built a similar acting device to see if I could create a linear AC generator. It worked quite well except the design and materials couldn't stand up to much use. ------------------------ PM Breaker - BI-Stable.pdf (305.17 kB - downloaded 683 times.)

Duncan	Re: Magnetic coupling and Leedskalnin's PMH revisited « Reply #49 on: 2014-07-19, 16:24:12 »
Hero Member Posts: 702	For your consideration I include this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_2G28531sI&list=UUhgi4ns1UCxX1DI3m390g0A for me it begs the intriguing consideration of the permanent magnet being used by whyme2B being replaced by an electromagnet and the possibility of the PM holder becoming a dynamic oscillating generator of sorts. I also draw your attenton Prof to the similar construct of this 'proof of concept' regarding Joe flynn's parallel paths system, very little is heard of this system now Joe has been sucked into the military machine http://www.pureenergysystems.com/academy/papers/How_Parallel_Path_Gets_Over_Unity/ however the simple validation experiment shown here http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Article:Joe_Flynn%27s_Parallel_Path_Magnetic_Technology_--_by_Tim_Harwood#A_Simple_Validation_Experiment has common ground for me . particularly regarding winding method --------------------------- How many more to be .threatened, abused murdered, Their research in the hands of evil corporations intent on total control ? http://dnp.s3.amazonaws.com/b/b9/suppressed.pdf whilst we know little .. friends remember, In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. D. Erasmus

Pages: 1 [2] 3

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2024-11-27, 04:46:46

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2