Join us in the search for Free Energy. Share your experiments and discoveries, post your build logs, and discuss.

We have a strict No-Troll policy. So you can post without fear of being ridiculed.

New Members- Check Your Spam Folder For Activation Link

Please read our Rules. Any problems or suggestions- Contact Us

 

Other Overunity Forums:

Overunity Machines   ||   Overunity Research



Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Reversing Lenz Project
#21
Thumbs Up 
(06-29-2024, 03:43 PM)ovun987 Wrote: This is great! Keep it up!


Guests cannot see images in the messages. Please register at the forum by clicking here to see images.

(06-29-2024, 08:20 PM)unimmortal Wrote: Great results Jim!

What is the V/A you are driving with?

Are solid slugs instead of rings on the list?

8V input at somewhere between 800-900 Ma.  between 6.5 to 8 watts input.  

I can't seem to find ferrite soild round slugs.  But I would try them if I found them
Reply
#22
After a full evaluation, I have a nuanced theory which I presented why it should have reversed Lenz, but obviously it did not.  Although it appears it significantly reduced lenz drag.

I now have an understanding what went wrong and I may have found a way to configure it so we get the Lenz Reversal.  

So in a few days I should have a new test to share with the updated design.

Stand by.  I will explain once verified
Reply
#23
Standing by on a job well done. I don't understand Lenz that much but your results sound good.
Reply
#24
(07-02-2024, 02:44 AM)MagnaProp Wrote: Standing by on a job well done. I don't understand Lenz that much but your results sound good.

Hey brother. 

In it's simplistic terms, 

When a magnet on a rotor is approaching a coil, the coil sees a growing magnetic field. 

When a magnet on a rotor is leaving a coil, the coil sees a shrinking magnetic field. 

All the coil senses is if the magnetic field is growing or shrinking. And it responds accordingly to counter the motion that is creating the field from growing or shrinking. 

So a growing field will induce the same polarity in the coil as the growing field so it repels. And a shrinking field will induce the opposite polarity so it attracts the rotor on the way out. This causes drag. 

This entire build theory hinges on this principle. If we reverse the magnetic interactions to shrink on the way in and grow on the way out, then the entire machine reverses. 

Instead of putting energy into a coil to create rotation, if we reverse the magnetic action, drawing energy out of the system should create rotation. So the pickup coil instead becomes the prime mover. 

I am 100% convinced I have achieved a shrinking field on the way in in a growing field on the way out.  But there are a few aspects that must be dealt with in regards to geometry so the helpful magnetism is not negated by the permanent magnets that are causing the effect.
Reply
#25
(07-02-2024, 09:24 AM)Jim Mac Wrote: ...
Hey brother. 

In it's simplistic terms...
Thanks for that explanation. Seems pretty straight forward.
Reply
#26
Hi guys, just wanted to say, I am this other guy and I finally made an account.
That was beautifully explained!
Maybe a few words about my activities. I work on this maybe 10 years. I've learned a lot. From crappy hot-glue contraptions to serious industrial style design. The theory of reverse field-strength to distance ratio, is real. I even convinced ChatGTP that it works. First it said it could not work because it would violate Lenz law. In the end it agreed that Lenz law maybe needs a rewrite. Keep in mind the AI knows all theories, and has scored at IQ test with 150.

The thing is, in order to get a situation in which a distant magnet is strong (our starting point) we nevertheless must first position it there. By doing so, we induce already an increasing field. This movement however features normal field-strength to distance ratio, and has therefor the normal Lenz drag.
Like it was said, one side of the scope shows the accelerating part, the other the one with drag. The sum is then close to zero, or "Lenz-less".

Now the idea was to use a diode to prevent current from flowing during the drag phase. With one prototype, I have seen acceleration under load using an LED as diode. However, whether a certain "viscosity" despite the blocked direction, due to the impedance of the coil prevents this theory from working nicely, is yet to be examined closely. Was says the scope with a diode? BTW, with the diode it should run faster in one direction! That alone would also be proof of concept. (simply switch the diode direction and compare RPM) Because with the diode, in one direction it is theoretically with Lenz drag, and in the other with Lenz acceleration. (Tho, he doesn't really deserve that wording)
But there is also the option to simply run it Lenz-less, and use half of the output for a drive motor.
Either way, as this is a new technology, there is still a lot to optimize, and some aspects are fundamentally different and physically challenging. We are working with magnetic bridges here, gaping the space between magnet and coil, whereas in a standard generator a powerful magnet passes by a coil at a distance as thin as a hair, and this difference has a huge impact on the energy density of the device, and the ratio of in, out and esp. losses. Let me put it this way: if a design isn't 50% efficient when run in conventional Lenz drag mode, then you'll never see more than 100% output, despite using the ALF postulate, that we're talking about here. And frankly, I too have built many crappy generators with like 5 Watt in, 0.1 Watt out - it happens, it's a journey.
Inspired by your activities, I have a new prototype in the works. Looking forward to provide any help possible to your project, and I guess there's a good chance for synergy in both ways and beyond, as our projects work on the same principle.
Reply
#27
Welcome ** Name goes here**..  For now I will refer to you as "ALF".  I am pleased to see you here. 

Another point I wish to add..  There is a fine balance of metal bridger's to magnets that will make or break the build.  If your metal pieces are too close together, you will have lets say a North shrinking on the way in on 1 metal, and a South Growing on another. If these 2 bridgers are too close, the coil will detect both. 

Now due to the nature of induction, Growing South induces the same direction as Shrinking North.  So if they are too close, you end up lessening the amount of flux change the coil sees.  The more overlap, the more it is akin to trying to induce a coil with steady DC.  It just don't work.

The aim is as follows:

1. Good strong magnetic action and penetration in the bridgers
2. A configuration with minimal cogging
3.  Proper geometry to achieve as close to pure 1 way pulses as possible..  <---  this is key


As many saw in another thread, I started playing with revolving metal around a single magnet.  Now cogging can be reduced with my 150% rule..  150% of 2 is 3.  So using 3 bridges around 1 magnet is as balanced as you can get, which should reduce almost all cogging.  

   

So with 3 bridges, the wave form is very good also.  It ensures the next metal is 120 degrees away, so the wave form can finish and reach full potential before the next bridger comes into play.

Here is a shot of the wave with 3 simple test bolts and a hand spin

   

So now I am designing this to be more sturdy and try to replace the bolts with ferrite to reduce eddy currents.

ALF-  Again- thanks for sharing your work!
Reply
#28
You're welcome.
In regards to distances, my current understanding and design basis is: I want to keep the bridges as short as possible. Any magnetic fluctuation will be the result of a varying airgap of about 1 to 5 millimeters. As the field falls off at the power of two, I get a fluctuation of 1 to 25, for example 1 tesla versus 0.04 tesla.
That seems sufficient.
Reply
#29
(07-06-2024, 04:44 PM)dd_alf Wrote: You're welcome.
In regards to distances, my current understanding and design basis is: I want to keep the bridges as short as possible. Any magnetic fluctuation will be the result of a varying airgap of about 1 to 5 millimeters. As the field falls off at the power of two, I get a fluctuation of 1 to 25, for example 1 tesla versus 0.04 tesla.
That seems sufficient.

I am going to build a coil with a large magnet inside it, but the magnet will ne facing N/S Blotch wall out.  So the metal rotor has to pass North then South on the pass. 

And possibly switching the pickup coil to only collect at the right times
Reply
#30
Here is a video link of my old machine running, you see it produces the same waveform when the power is disconnected. I also have other videos on my channel as well regarding how to build the magnetic fields.

Anyway here is the first video, sorry for the poor video, I was holding an IPad during filming.

https://youtu.be/p-btQuWH5XQ?si=zWcPfxatoI9aNw6C


Dave Wing
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)