Reversing Lenz Project

[dd_alf]

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

I'm not quite sure whether I fully understand without a drawing for dummies, as usual. But when you use the reverse ratio concept, I guess there are many designs to invent! I just came up with one simple one, but I knew there is much more potential. No success however in trying to make it solid state, like the same principle in a transformer, because there you cannot "reverse space" because distances are fixed.
In terms of permanent magnet interaction (as much as I would love a PM only motor) I came to the conclusion that whatever you do, you end up in the equilibrium of forces. The coil however introduces a new, different factor. Reverse ratio was not the only, but the most obvious, logical loophole I found so far.

---

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

Sorry I can't access Youtube. I'd suggest to upload to a odysee.com channel. There is pretty much no censorship. You can auto-sync your channel to youtube, so it appears on odysee too.

[Jim Mac]

The polarity of the metal bridger changes depending which side the magnet is on. If the magnet and coil are on the same side of the bridger, the polarity in the bridger is Opposite from that of the magnet.  But if the magnet is on the opposite side of the bridger from the coil, the polarity in the bridger is the same as the magnet.  I can show a simple demonstration if needed.

This also may has ramifications on the outcome

   

[dd_alf]

The polarity of the metal bridger changes depending which side the magnet is on. If the magnet and coil are on the same side of the bridger, the polarity in the bridger is Opposite from that of the magnet.  But if the magnet is on the opposite side of the bridger from the coil, the polarity in the bridger is the same as the magnet.  I can show a simple demonstration if needed.

This also may has ramifications on the outcome

I am not so sure about that. Generally, the PM seeks to close it's path to the other pole. If there is iron, it is willing to seek extensively in this iron. As long as the iron itself is neutral, the magnetization is penetrating the iron almost radially, or following the shape of the iron. However if it finds an opposite pole at the other end of the iron, it will build a jet-stream-like flux path.

This test is important: Stick a nail to a PM, then stick a 2nd nail to the end of the 1st nail, so it holds barely. Now attach a 2nd magnet in the middle of the 1st nail, use the same pole like with magnet 1. Result: nail 2 sticks even better. Now alter the pole of the 2nd magnet. Result: nail 2 drops off. Because a north and a south pole have "satisfied" eachother, and wouldn't even look further for any poles, at the end of nail 1 or even in nail 2. They have built a jet-stream inside the iron, a flux path.

In your sample, if the coil and magnet are on the same side then the magnetic field will take a U-turn and hit the coil core by the same polarity, compared to when the field can go straight forward and to the other side. 

The iron core of the coil is nail 2, and the bridge is nail 1. No matter how you bend this. Sure, one or the other may be more feasible or beneficial. That bridge I'll cross when I get there.

Here is another thought to consider. Imagine my design, where coils and magnets sit on the same outer backend core. While that is useful as it allows the magnet to connect to its own other pole, through bridle and coil, it may also mean that if the coil actually accelerates the incoming bridge, magnetism at the backside of the coil will serially amplify the permanent magnet, and therefor ruin the effect, as now not only the coil pulls harder, but also the PM. Just saying, this COULD be an issue. However, open-end-core coils would not have that problem. Also, if the iron right below the magnet is fully saturated by default, then I assume it won't allow the magnet to be "amplified" by the coil. I guess it also depends on the PMs. Just like when you stack 2 magnets, they get stronger, the same could happen with the field of the coil.

Yeah, a minefield of things to solve, but we're getting there.

[Jim Mac]

I can show you with the oscilloscope the difference between the two. 

The polarity of the metal absolutely changes depending which side the magnet is on. The proof is in the sine wave polarity when it induces.

[SEYCHELLES]

I do not know if it is the right way to post this but it is very interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wM62LydLd0

---

Circuit diagram as per my interpretation     .

[dd_alf]

I can show you with the oscilloscope the difference between the two. 

The polarity of the metal absolutely changes depending which side the magnet is on. The proof is in the sine wave polarity when it induces.

Maybe I misunderstood what you mean. BTW. when you tested it, was there any difference on the scope, between full short circuit and diode?

[Dave Wing]

This is what Jim is describing…

https://youtu.be/5mbhBMLY91c?si=Rtc2Pw0PoE1mcOlZ

Dave Wing

[dd_alf]

I can show you with the oscilloscope the difference between the two. 

The polarity of the metal absolutely changes depending which side the magnet is on. The proof is in the sine wave polarity when it induces.

Ok, I guess I understand what's going on. When the coil is on the other side, the bridge faces its bottom side. However, when the coil is on the same side, you have now the coil's  top-side facing the bridge (in respect to scope wiring). which inverts the scope reading.

[Jim Mac]

This is what Jim is describing…

https://youtu.be/5mbhBMLY91c?si=Rtc2Pw0PoE1mcOlZ

Dave Wing

I am speaking of polarity in the metal when the metal is in motion and the magnet is still. 

I will record a demonstration when I'm home from work later tonight

[Jim Mac]

I can show you with the oscilloscope the difference between the two. 

The polarity of the metal absolutely changes depending which side the magnet is on. The proof is in the sine wave polarity when it induces.

Ok, I guess I understand what's going on. When the coil is on the other side, the bridge faces its bottom side. However, when the coil is on the same side, you have now the coil's  top-side facing the bridge (in respect to scope wiring). which inverts the scope reading.

Anything that is magnetized always has two polarities. There is no such thing as a monopole. 

When metal is magnetized, it has a North and a South Pole. I can demonstrate exactly what alignments cause the North and South to manifest where on the metal..

By positioning of the coil in relation to the metal, we could choose which polarity is rotating past the coil. This could add benefit because we can now control if the rotating metal will repel or retract off the magnet itself, as well as the coil