PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-26, 15:26:02
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17
Author Topic: Flux Gate Interrupter, BEMF Redirector  (Read 335720 times)
Group: Guest
Dear Verpies and all.

I have put together a short video of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95CwLmqB-0

I know you will tell me where I have gone wrong !!  ;)  :)

Cheers Grum.

Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

In spite of having a higher resistance you should consider that a shorted coil is a very reactive device. You can have quite high current and still not generate a lot of heat because the current will be lagging voltage.
This adds Power Factor to your use of Ohm's Law. Of course, DC Ohm's law won't work anyway because you have changing magnetic fields.

You can bet that the rotor is heating primarily due to the Eddy currents being induced in the plates.

Still, great job! This IS the best way to learn what is going on.

 
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
In spite of having a higher resistance you should consider that a shorted coil is a very reactive device. You can have quite high current and still not generate a lot of heat because the current will be lagging voltage.
Not in a non-inductive load resistor
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[
Bad boys raped our young girls but Violet gave willingly...get some now.
   
Group: Guest
Not in a non-inductive load resistor

A shorted coil is still an inductor.

Besides, even an inductive resistor of that size and value range shouldn't have enough inductance to matter at those frequencies.
   
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 901
Dear Verpies and all.

I have put together a short video of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95CwLmqB-0

I know you will tell me where I have gone wrong !!  ;)  :)

Cheers Grum.

Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

Thanks for making this new video Grum

A few pointers. I see your scope can display data. If you can select VRMS instead of VPP it would be better for power calculation. Also, the way most scopes displays data is based on what you see in the window. To get more reliable numbers, you would need more samples (20 or so) will give you a better result. One or 2 samples like you did in your video would not be considered to be enough for a reliable data but is good when we want to look at the shape of the waveform.
Your voltage divisions could of been set one division lower so the waveform doesn't fill the screen as much, again this would be for more accurate data. But again, if you wan to just look at the waveform then it's okay.

Fine details but if you want to present information to .99, TK and MileHigh that they will consider, then these are the pointers they've taught me over the years!... oh, and I just remembered a real important one. Make sure your scope probe setting is on DC coupling and not AC coupling even though you are scoping AC.

I kind of knew you resistor was not correct the first time. I thought you would check it with your meter after I mentioned if it was a 0.1 Ohms it would be so hot you would not be able to handle it like you did. Glad you eventually found the problem.

So it looks like you had up to 5vpp which is about 3.5vrms across 100 Ohms = 0.122 Watts

Thanks for sharing your great research and being open to suggestions

Luc
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
Sorry!
« Last Edit: 2015-02-12, 22:58:50 by wattsup »


---------------------------
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 375
@wattsup

The build I described in http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg43271#msg43271 , http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg43377#msg43377 and following makes the induced magnetic force from coil to become pushing in whole cycle which allows us to manipulate it in way we want (help to rotor rotation as one of examples).
The BEMF cycle becomes in middle of iron core passage cycle from one magnet to other and this is where you see dampened sine wave. On this point of time there is magnetic attraction part just it does not effect rotor movement in any way due 90 degrees angle between rotation and coil/magnet.
This concept with following build was realized by Grum and I am very pleased to see many confirmations of behavior expectations. :)
There are things to improve as always just I know we are on right path... Hopefully that gives insight to you what we are after.

P.S> The E. Leedskalnin generator is where this concept was hidden.. You might try to study it from shattered pieces close as possible.
Cheers!
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
@T-1000
I get the build but I don't get the Modus Operandi
Could you elucidate ?
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 375
@T-1000
I get the build but I don't get the Modus Operandi
Could you elucidate ?
For http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction there are two ways to create magnetic flux change in coil:
1) By moving magnet or coil relatively to each other
2) By changing magnetic flux path permeability which changes resulting magnetic field strength on coil (The classic example - magnetic amplifiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier )

For full induction cycle of sine wave we need two induced magnetic polarities followed one after another.
In the first case the weakening magnetic field of moving magnet/coil creates opposite polarity in coil than it was when magnetic field strength was increasing. This results resistive deflection in coil on magnetic field strength increase and attraction when magnetic field strength weakens. Because that is caused directly by approaching and leaving magnet/coil the magnetic force from coil induction magnetic reaction (Lenz force) go against movement due same vector aliment with the movement - the classic situation.

On the second case it gets different because coil and magnet are static and any change in magnetic flux path permeability can be done in a way where the resulting magnetic forces between coil and magnet are isolated from force which change the magnetic field strength on coil. Also for a full induction cycle it is best to have changing magnetic polarity from two opposite magnets what go along induced magnetic polarities on coil which also have it changing over each full sine cycle. Also the point in time where the magnetic field is weakening on coil is on middle of movement cycle between two magnetic polarities of magnets so the magnetic attraction is redirected to that point of time. This allows us to have resulting net magnetic deflection when iron core on rotor is approaching coil and also when it is leaving coil (this is opposite from first case). So the build on which we are working on has that in design.

P.S> Wish we could have voice conversation so it would avoid lengthy typing with explanations...

Cheers!
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
1) By moving magnet or coil relatively to each other
That is a very conventional setup.  According to 200y of engineering experience it takes more work to approach the coil by a magnet then to depart it, unless the coil is open or ideal and shorted.  I am currently discussing with Cyril his idea to overcome that.

2) By changing magnetic flux path permeability which changes resulting magnetic field strength on coil (The classic example - magnetic amplifiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier )
The magnetic amplifier modulates the differential permeability.  Is this what this build is supposed to do?
Or is it supposed to modulate the absolute permeability ?

In any case, how do you accomplish this modulation without expending energy?

For full induction cycle of sine wave we need two induced magnetic polarities followed one after another.
Yes if you want a sine wave output.

In the first case the weakening magnetic field of moving magnet/coil creates opposite polarity in coil than it was when magnetic field strength was increasing.
Are you referring to the polarity of current flowing in the coil or voltage across the coil ?

This results resistive deflection in coil on magnetic field strength increase and attraction when magnetic field strength weakens.
You lost me here because of faulty grammar.  Don't take me wrong - I appreciate that I don't have to decipher that in a language that is foreign to me.

On the second case it gets different because coil and magnet are static and any change in magnetic flux path permeability can be done in a way where the resulting magnetic forces between coil and magnet are isolated from force which change the magnetic field strength on coil.
Up until now it always took more energy to modulate the reluctance of magnetic path than the energy gained from the resulting change of flux.  
How do you plan to overcome that cost?

Also for a full induction cycle it is best to have changing magnetic polarity from two opposite magnets
OK

Also the point in time where the magnetic field is weakening on coil is on middle of movement cycle between two magnetic polarities of magnets so the magnetic attraction is redirected to that point of time. This allows us to have resulting net magnetic deflection when iron core on rotor is approaching coil and also when it is leaving coil (this is opposite from first case).
The grammar is lacking again.  Can you draw a diagram of these forces and their distribution in time?

P.S. Wish we could have voice conversation so it would avoid lengthy typing with explanations...
Text is slower but more precise.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 375
@verpies
The English is my secondary language and the best guess for you is to repeat build from my CAD drawing then analyze everything step by step. Hopefully this will help you with understanding on everything what is going on there...
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
Sorry!
« Last Edit: 2015-02-12, 22:57:30 by wattsup »


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
You see the question is not, "let's take a guess at what we need to know". The question should always only be "what do we need to know". In this build, we already know what the magnet and iron rotor passage will do if you build the system simply in your mind without doing it on the bench. So the question we need to know is "how can we increase output by changing the pick-up method", and since the system like @Grumage is perfect for this type of R&D because the coils are on top and easily accessible to change, this is why I am saying that look man, we already know and knew what a standard wound coil will do, now what will other coil types do and that should be the only question right now.

I'll give you an example to try Grum:

Take some half inch cut slices of copper tubing, various diameters.  Replace your coils with these and observe the RPMs.  Now try this again with some soft iron slugs inserted into these copper tubes.  With enough patience, I think you will find a combination where the Lenz flux created in these tubes actually drives the generator like a motor.  Maybe not completely as in OU, but enough you will get some insight into what this design needs to work more optimally.  I think you will discover the reluctance of the slug within the copper tube makes a huge difference in behavior, different thicknesses, different materials and distance from the keepers.  You may even get to a point where you decide the same needs to be done with the rotating keepers.

I know you didn't start out here to build a magnet motor, but the concepts involved are universal.  If there is "Free Energy" to be had here, you can manifest it several different ways.  The way you will learn the most from this test fixture is the best way, whatever that turns out to be.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
You see the double hump waveform is exactly what I was expecting without a load and you can see the top of the humps are jittering slightly up and down, this is because the rotor plates are not perfectly in their 1/9th position so you see this slight variation or topological imperfection on the scope.
I agree with this statement completely.
I also expected the double hump waveform because the voltage induced across the coil is proportional to the rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) and the flux changes the quickest when the soft ferromagnetic plate is just entering and leaving the gap between the magnet & coil.  When the plate is exactly in the middle between the magnet & coil, then the flux does not change very quickly, although this is the point of the least reluctance (and the highest flux).  This is the reason why there is a dip between these two humps.

If you had measured the current flowing in a coil then you'd see a different waveform.  Such measurement should be done when the coil is shorted by a 0.1Ω current sensing resistor and at high rpm (so the evil resistance does not have the time to dissipate the current).
   
Group: Guest
Please don't go all crazy on the terminology or test method used in this video, as most of us can shoot big holes in it.  Instead, simply look at what he has and see if there is something there we can identify as missing from our experiments:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MPdylI0Ec4[/youtube]
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
I cannot even begin without the current waveforms in coils, correlated with the position of the rotor.
   
Group: Guest
Please don't go all crazy on the terminology or test method used in this video, as most of us can shoot big holes in it.  Instead, simply look at what he has and see if there is something there we can identify as missing from our experiments:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MPdylI0Ec4[/youtube]

I keep saying first you have drag, then you find a way to reduce drag approaching neutrality (Thane appears to have accomplished this mission), we cannot stop here, we must push generator, converting it into a motor.  This is what acceleration under load is, thing is, present demonstrations of the effect are limited.  When you think about it, the effect as we have become identified with it, its as if you trade one resonant frequency for one just a wee bit higher than the one you were operating at.  You get more momentum, but the overall energy stays the same.   What we want is that the device accelerate without limitation, well...that's what I want.  If the input doesn't increase, you're barking up the wrong tree in my opinion. Most say that's counter productive, they don't want the input to go up.

If the prime mover is a pulsed DC machine, one knows exactly which variables need to be kept low so as achieve maximum recovery.  The motor field is not harvested, the effect associated with a change in that field is!  We recover through the mechanism of self induction, induction isn't limited to self induction people.  The collapsing field is a source of flux change, a change which is orders of magnitude faster than a disk packed with magnets.  Think damn it, add that ultra fast changing (collapsing) field inducing ability with the slow as snails induction from all those magnets in the rotor together, a summing which results in higher electrical and mechanical output, the increase in electrical is clear (I hope....), the mechanical will need further clarification, maybe later.....  

My opinion, the ideas being presented by Thane need a face lift.  He should be using a pulsed DC motor as the prime mover and his generator coils should be mutually inductive to the motor coils, if and when this is properly done, the generator coils can be shorted all the time and there is no damn drag at all....stupid..  His mission it seems is to rewrite the law, this is a mistake, there's nothing wrong with the law.


Regards
   
Group: Guest
I keep saying first you have drag, then you find a way to reduce drag approaching neutrality (Thane appears to have accomplished this mission), we cannot stop here, we must push generator, converting it into a motor.  This is what acceleration under load is, thing is, present demonstrations of the effect are limited.

Do you think we will run into geometric or material limitations that make this impractical to pursue?

The universe itself seems to run at unity, zero sum.  I really have to wonder sometimes if it's possible from an engineering standpoint to calculate all the right variables and then assemble a device where the tradeoff for this, prevents that and so on.  If you know the answer, it would sure help my motivation.  If I knew the copper wire, magnets, capacitors, etc that I can obtain are plenty sufficient to build such a device that accelerates infinitely, a self-powered series wound motor, I think I would be more inclined to never give up or change directions.  At the moment I think it is possible, but I surely don't know it is possible.  I long for the day when I actually have to make a governor for such a device to keep it from self destructing.
   
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 901
Thane need a face lift.  He should be using a pulsed DC motor as the prime mover and his generator coils should be mutually inductive to the motor coils, if and when this is properly done, the generator coils can be shorted all the time and there is no damn drag at all....stupid..  His mission it seems is to rewrite the law, this is a mistake, there's nothing wrong with the law.

Regards

Interesting you mention this, over 5 years ago Thane patented a motor coil with its outside perimeter wrapped by a ReGen-X coil. He has not built it because of its complexity and lack of funds.

Luc
   
Group: Guest
Do you think we will run into geometric or material limitations that make this impractical to pursue?

I think there is a pattern, a quick look around us and we find that this might not be that far off....we are literally drowning in patterns.  Pick one, and allow it the room it needs to adjust to and integrate with its environment. No I do not think we will run into limitations.

The universe itself seems to run at unity, zero sum.  I really have to wonder sometimes if it's possible from an engineering standpoint to calculate all the right variables and then assemble a device where the tradeoff for this, prevents that and so on.  If you know the answer, it would sure help my motivation.  If I knew the copper wire, magnets, capacitors, etc that I can obtain are plenty sufficient to build such a device that accelerates infinitely, a self-powered series wound motor, I think I would be more inclined to never give up or change directions.  At the moment I think it is possible, but I surely don't know it is possible.  I long for the day when I actually have to make a governor for such a device to keep it from self destructing.

For whatever reason we are preoccupied with calculating.  All is number, we cannot calculate it all.  We cannot calculate that which matters.  I want it (the device), when the proper conditions are established, to present the numbers to me. Folks we need to make modifications in how we see things, how we see these systems, we are looking from the material in, whereas we should be looking at it from the perspective of the forces.  The complex impedance, the load, should drive the machine....an idea lost on most. 

The day you long for, when you must govern the machine to keep from self destruction......it's done!


Regards

   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 71
With motors, it may be just a question of changing the arrangement of windings to take advantage of what Lenz' law offers, rather than seeing it as a hindrance.  If I understand Erfinder correctly, the correct harnessing of both EM induction and BEMF will move our motors into a new paradigm of operation that allows us to envision possibilities for machines that we had previously excluded because we were told these things were not possible.
Bob
   
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 901
the load, should drive the machine.


Regards


Agree!

Luc
   
Group: Guest
The complex impedance, the load, should drive the machine....an idea lost on most.

As I suspected.

The day you long for, when you must govern the machine to keep from self destruction......it's done!

 O0

What is left is to put this effect on the benches of people reading this, with a thorough understanding of why and how it does what it does.  This would be knowledge we cannot afford to lose again.
   
Group: Guest
As I suspected.

 O0

What is left is to put this effect on the benches of people reading this, with a thorough understanding of why and how it does what it does.  This would be knowledge we cannot afford to lose again.

We have been provided with wonderful more or less self explanatory proof of principle devices which can aid in our understanding.  Those concept devices are not being used as aids, they have become products, building blocks they may have been, today they are reduced to and limited by ignorance in the most terrible sense.  You must ask the following questions, and recognize the provided conclusion for what they are.

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of shunt winding?

•   Shunt wound = Parallel Resonant Circuit

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of series winding?

•   Series wound = Series Resonant Circuit

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of compound winding?

•   Compound wound = Parallel - Series Resonant Circuit

Do I have any proof of this, it's a funny question, one which I don't answer when asked, I respond with a follow up question, do I need proof, can you prove the idea wrong......I don't think you can?

Why would they go through all that trouble to design very specific what some would call resonant circuits, I call them "reactive" circuits, the first catering specifically to either magnetic energy storage, the second to dielectric energy storage, and then a third, a hybrid which combined the two?  Powerful implications....  Resonant implies that the circuits are limited to operating at one specific frequency, were as the term reactive does not, to facilitate runaway, we cannot be limited to one frequency of operation. 

In my most humble of opinions a message was preserved, one which has stood the test of time.  One which is wasted on 99% of us consumers. 

A warning gentlemen and ladies.  My koolaid is bitter.  I don't do numbers, the ones I feel all are chasing are the wrong ones anyway.  The energy I want is in capacitance, born out of the capacitor's opposition to changes in voltage.  Before I can get it out, I have to make the case for capacitance in a situation where there is no case (parasitic capacitance doesn't count).  When that happens fiction replaces fact and fact fiction, in such an instance, a device mentioned in a movie can become real.....(Flux Capacitor.....go on....laugh....Hollywood is probably laughing too...) a coil's inductive property opposes changes in current, reaction to change in current is an induced potential, a potential which rises and falls, opposition to changes in the induced potential result in current.  A greater portion of this induced current is being transmitted via a longitudinally operating magnetic field.  Do I have proof?  No, I just take things for what they are, I observe where I am told to look for the coils capacitance, and note that there's something interesting going on at this location, namely, the magnetic field at this location is bucking.  We aren't ignorant to this, but we don't take advantage of the fact either.
 

Regards
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Do I have any proof of this, it's a funny question, one which I don't answer when asked, I respond with a follow up question, do I need proof, can you prove the idea wrong......I don't think you can?
That is a well known fallacy:

Lack of proof of wrongness is not a proof of correctness
...in the same manner as:
Lack of proof of existence is not a proof of nonexistence

   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 15:26:02