Multiple Free Energy Technology Systems

[Lunkster]

This is an impressive amount of work that speaks of dedication. I doubt anyone goes though all the details tho, it is a bit overwhelming. Well for me anyway. In regards to your questions asked, particularly this image: https://www.mooker.com/attachment.php?aid=1377
I would argue: the flux always takes the easiest path. Easiness is defined by length of path, material and saturation. In the example drawn I think the flux completely ignores the right part of the toroid, containing the gap. You could not even stick a nail to it. And regardless of the field created by a coil on the toroid core (saturation issues aside) this flux will just ADD to whatever the coil does. It will be a static bias, not affecting the coil in COP, I would assume.

That said, when I was looking at it, I though it would also be a really interesting design if the gap area were on the other side of the torus, right next to the PM. Then one would close the gap frequently with an iron bar that's spun by a small motor. It would force the PM flux to alternate its path, hence inducing AC into 2 coils, sitting on the top and bottom area of the toroid core. The point however is, I see no reason why this little iron bar, that's rotating in the gap, should face any Lenz drag. (except eddy currents, that can be prevented with nonconductive ferromagnetics, or laminates etc.). In any case the gap must be sized correctly, so the secondary fields of the coils (of opposite polarity) will will not make the long path harder, compared to the gap, resulting in the flux jumping the gap, despite the gap-less long path provided. However, I would use Metglas for the toroid, to increase permeability and subsequently the effect.

Hi dd_alf

I want to thank you for your input.  It caused me to draw up a couple of new motor options that otherwise I may never have thought of.  
The first drawing shows a thinner core area parrellel to the permanent magnet that will saturate if flux more than one magnet tries to flow through the area.  The other area's of the toroid core suports the flux of two magnets.  Hopefully then the DC power of the toroid coil is supplied, the permanent magnet will need to reroute through another path.
Also you mentioned moving the gap area.  I moved it but am not using it as you suggested.  I have seen designs simular to what you talked about, so I do not want to duplicate thier work.

   

Now I miss-read your post at first and I thought you were saying that in the Three Layer Motor design would not move from under the permanent magnets to the electro-magnets, so I changed the tab design for the permanent magnets and toroid coil area's.  After re-reading your post, I realized I was wrong.  But that may have been for the good,

   

Thank you dd-alf for your input because I may not have taken a closer look at my designs and make these improvements.

I will try to test the flux in the gap area when I get some lab time.

Lunkster

[dd_alf]

Looking forward to seeing you progress.

[dxer_87]

I do believe in this idea that electrical circuit including moving parts is better than 'standing' because of the possibility for higher power gain, magnetism there may be used, amplificated and rest parts of the electricity generated backward consumed, flowing back into the machine again... Good look for these is to mount a fan with magnets near a transformer N.S... way. So the transformer is empowered. If right frequency is achieved like 50Hz, the system power will raise. In many qmogens this methos can be used very gladly.

Any coil can be poweed by moving magnets, even simple, small and of low magnetic power - just give several of such in an axial... Then the freq. will reach good point, and as we know most of the coils works better higher frequencies... All and all, any device from the 80's except TV's used moving parts to cool or read memory just as modern ATX utilize. If we are sly enough. We can clip a generator onto fan for high RPM, than we reuse the energy of the motors and may get back with these to power up the whole device. If there are three or four fans we can get hundreds of watts. The only key is to make the right generators... Same was with decks or vinyl players years ago.

It wasn't given because living under spy system, that any of us must agree with.

Still there are people on Earth that remember Net connection via electricity grid. But any energy maniac is not interested in signals, only in power and savings according to connections.

[Lunkster]

Thank you for your dxer_87 for your input.

I think that we need to work on all areas of free energy.
I personally stay away from things that cause danger to the hobbiest like high voltage.  

I like to include multiple free energy devices into one free energy system.  One example is the drawing below that includes a free energy motor that operates an overunity generators.  Both have moving parts.  

   

I like to compare physical things that people know about to better explain magnetism in my devices and how they can produce overunity.
The following drawing shows how one door or gate can shut off one flow of water in order to change the sum of water flows of water in several areas.  The sum of the water flows in the system is greater than the change of water flow through one gate of the system.  I believe that you can cause a change of flux flow in one area of the system that can change the flux flow in several other areas of the system.  You have to pay for the electric power for the water pumps but you do not have to pay for the power of the flux coming from the permanent magnets in a system.  You only have to pay for the power to open and close the one door or gate.

   

Thank you dxer_87 again for input.

[Lunkster]

   

I have a new toroid generator design

The design in theory reduces the torque needed to turn the generator rotor with increasing loads compared to conventional generators.  
The stationary permanent magnet interacting with the rotating permanent magnets that alternate between the rotor magnets alternating their polarity passing under the core bar will cause a changing flux magnitude passing through the pickup coil. 

Since the stationary permanent magnet and pickup coil are on the same assembly, the changing torque between these two components should not affect the torque in the rotor rotation.  

The flux from two magnets crosses the pickup coil in phase 1 and no flux across the pickup coil in phase 2.
This generator should be easy to duplicate.

The generator needs to be rotated by an external device.

[Lunkster]

   

Toroid Generator Two

Toroid two has a few improvements over toroid generator one.
The first thing is that each rotor magnet to permanent magnet set is offset with the other magnet sets in the generator.  This will smoothen out the overall generator’s average torque for each 360 degree rotation. 
Each of the two bearings hold the rotor to stator assemblies better.  This will provide better performance and longevity in the generator.
The drawing is designed only to show you the concept to the technology.
A summary of why in theory this generator should work better than other generators on the market today.

1.       The output coils are mounted on the same assembly as the stationary permanent magnet.  This means that as the generator is operating, the torques between the pickup coil and stationary permanent magnet do not affect the torque of the rotor within the stator assembly.   What this should do is reduce the rotor to stator torque with a changing load on the generator.

2.      The rotating Magnets are placed in the rotor so that the positive numbered magnets have the positive pole up and the negative numbered magnets have the negative pole up.  As the magnets alternate going between the upper and lower core bars, the flux alternates between double flux and no flux through the coils. Electrical energy is produced in the pickup coil.  This will happen, but now the question is how does the change in the load of the generator affect the torque to turn the generator?  Step 1 says it should be less.
 
Lunkster

[thaelin]

Hi Jay:
In the look for a gen head that is not prone to mag lock up. Looks like that is the case here. That would make each coil or pair of coils output separate from the others. That way you have little drag from the cores. Do you have any idea of the rpm necessary for good output?

good to see you still out and about on the forums. Your designs are always a good brain tease for me.
thay

[Lunkster]

Thay,

Thank you for your observation of the design.  
The RPM is determined a lot by the materials used in the rotor assembly.
The rotor magnets can be enclosed by the rotor housing because there is space in front of the rotor magnets between the two core bars that allows this to happen.  This is a big advantage over other motor designs where the magnets are glued to the rotor drum or disk. So I can see designs reaching very high speeds.  The pickup coil design may be a limiting factor on RPM.

The fact that this design reduces or eliminates rotation resistance with increased load on the output coils mean that in theory
This generator should become more efficient the faster it rotates.  I can say that the RPM will not have to be that fast when 
it becomes an over unity device. The  way I see it,  reducing the torque to turn a generator to produce electrical energy 
under load to the point that you can produce enough electrical energy to operate the motor turning the shaft with
additional electrical energy to operate other devices, this would be as important as designing a motor with a COP>1.

It is more important for people to replicate this design and test it than for me to build a prototype because I have seen
way to many devices built by the designer, having working models and people believing they are a scan.  So I more than 
ask and want other people to build and share the finding they have on this generator design.

I thank mooker.com for this opportunity to share my thoughts of over unity on this platform.

Lunkster

[thaelin]

Hi Jay:
    Well have decided to set up a pair of mags with bars and  a rotor with two mags to see what kind of  resistance will be. As stated, one mag pair will pull in and the other will want to repel at the same level. Provided the mags are of comparable power and distance. This will require an exacting level of placement. On OUR, one did a setup for moving in and out of a mag field. The placement was a razor edge to get the right output.
  Kind of feel that will be the need here too. Am going to setup just two stator mags and two rotor mags to see the result. Hand turning should produce the results that are present.
    The second version will most likely be the best but the other could have been achieved by placing a backer magnet on the bottom of the rig. Just not to the level as being inside it. Romero used backer magnets to achieve  better output.  More to come later.
thay

[Lunkster]

Thay

I want to thank you for taking the time to do the work you wrote about in the last post.
I am looking forward to your findings.

Lunkster