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


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mooker's No Lenz Magnet Generator
#11
(09-20-2023, 03:43 AM)Shylo Wrote: Interesting l would like to see you short the coil at just before peak so every quarter rotation.
Sorry maybe every half rotation.
It should spike which you could catch with diodes and a cap.
Also if you sent power through the coil wound it make the rotor spin?

Hi there,

If this thing proves no drag, then there really isn't a need to do anything else besides spin the tube and collect the energy.  The magnetic force of a magnet is many many times greater than the force it takes to keep that same magnet in rotation.  It is because of the drag created from lenz that keeps generators under unity.

If you could utilize the magnetic force of a magnet without that magnet reciprocating equal opposition to the force that created the movement, there is no doubt the output will be much greater than 100% if it is designed efficiently.
Reply
#12
I see no difference if the pickup coil was mounted in standard fashion passing the top part with the hole.  You still have a north and a south pole of the coil during each pass, and the same polarity magnets passing in the same direction.

If true, this would mean you could slide this rotor right into the center of a three-phase motor stator.

   
Reply
#13
Hi Jim
I noticed something about the turning of the screw.
if you had a wheel that had magnets all around the outside of the wheel same pole
and rolled the wheel across a flat type iron core coil - like a wheel from on end to the other end of the coil back and forth
This is much the same as the screw rotor does
there would be little Lenz effect because the front side of the wheel is pushing as it rolls and the backside of the wheel is pulling as much out as the front is pushing in.
The screw is doing this much in the same way as the wheel does.

can you see that also?

Tom
Reply
#14
(09-20-2023, 04:28 PM)Dr.Wlazlak Wrote: Hi Jim
I noticed something about the turning of the screw.
if you had a wheel that had magnets all around the outside of the wheel same pole
and rolled the wheel across a flat type iron core coil - like a wheel from on end to the other end of the coil back and forth
This is much the same as the screw rotor does
there would be little Lenz effect because the front side of the wheel is pushing as it rolls and the backside of the wheel is pulling as much out as the front is pushing in.
The screw is doing this much in the same way as the wheel does.

can you see that also?

Tom

Unfortunately, the induction is backwards in that model you describe. The coil will slow you at every point.

The coil has 2 polarities you pass. And the wheel only has 1.  If the wheel was South, the coil would react like the image below.

   

The system should cause magnetic movement perpendicular to the physical motion to beat lenz. And there can not be gears or any other mechanical transfer of energy.  

So even if your coil was straight up and the wheel rolled over the top- it would still oppose the motion on both sides..
Reply
#15
I would say:
did you notice that the new people seem not to be able to activate
I thought it was just me but 2 more new people have not activated to this forum
Three in a row. don't count Mr. Tom - that was a panic attack by Me. I thought I lost my ID.

New people means new input ideas, maybe the whole answer to the meaning of life
could be just an activation away?

As far as the wheel rolling over a flat coil, it is only a ponder the question of many concepts of many ideas possible.

Tom
Reply
#16
So I am making a similar rotor with real strong magnets to do real tests..  Here's the math..

3.14 Pi is an irrational number so the only way to make this almost perfect is to use magnets that are divisible by 3.14.  But good luck finding magnets 3.14mm, 6.28mm, 9.42mm, etc.  So we need to fudge it a little and do what we gotta do.  The sinewave will have some minor irregularities, but who cares..

I have N42 bar magnets polarized like this.  13mmx13mmx50mm

   

Now the last rotor was designed to reciprocate 1 polarity back and forth.  This one will do both polarities one after another.  Exactly like a generator does.  But the motion will still be perpendicular to the induction.

So take the magnet face size and divide by 2.  13/2= 6.5..   We divide by 2 because each magnet should overlap 1/2 with the previous to get the smoothest transition.

Now this 6.5mm needs to complete a half circle.  So multiply 6.5 X Pi (3.14).  And I get 20.41.   This number will be the angle of each magnet.

Now to figure out how many magnets.... take 180 degrees / 20.41.  In my example- this equals 8.819 magnets..  <---  this number will never be a whole number unless your magnets were a multiple of 3.14.  But whatever...

So rounded, I need 9 magnets to complete the rotor because my magnets are long enough to use both polarities.  If you are using flat magnets, you need double this many.  1 sine per half rotation.

Now I am off by 0.18079th of a magnet.  So we take that 20.41 number and round it to the closest degree which is divisible by 180.  in my case 20 degrees.    180/20 = 9 magnets.

So my magnets will be configured like this..  Except red on 1 side, blue on the other.

   

This design can not have a center shaft because of the single magnets.  But with flat magnets, you use double as many and you get to have a center shaft.

Now keep in mind, the last step to complete the revolution needs to also be the first step. 10 magnets puts be back at the starting point, but I only want 9 so the 9th is overlapping with the first at the same ratio all the others are.

Does it have to be this critical?  probably not.  But if I am using $50 in magnets and designing, I am going to try to get it right.
Reply
#17
This look interesting:
When do you think it will be done?

tom
Reply
#18
(09-20-2023, 08:26 PM)Dr.Wlazlak Wrote: This look interesting:
When do you think it will be done?

tom

Not sure- but I am printing now..  This is the rotor design I came up with.. The bearing holders are embedded in the ends. 

   

This is a more complicated print for me, so I am not sure the outcome yet.  I will know more by morning when it's done printing.

The magnets fit exactly inside a 2" PVC pipe to the wall.  So I can align them perfectly with the pipe.  Then if it works, I can use the pipe as a resin mold to encase it.

This idea can be done in other ways for sure..  I was alerted to a video of the same concept https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK3JOlY0V8Y&t=1059s
Reply
#19
After watching Jim Murray's video in full twice, here's what I see..

He is using a very similar rotor. But I do not think it has magnets in it.  It's just solid metal (as I see). So he is not really doing the same thing I have in mind.

   

It seems he is creating a magnetic field with a big coil.  Then routing that magnetic field so it is forced to flow through the 45 degree rotor  to return to the coil.  The 45 degree rotor makes the magnetic flux sweep through the pickup coils at a 90 degrees angle than the direction the motor is turning while it is in route back to the other end of the coil.

   

It's a very clever idea and method, but I want to continue my way for the following reasons:

1. He is using input power to juice the coil to produce the magnetic field.
2. He is using a big motor to spin a big heavy wobbly awkward rotor
3. He also has to spin counter balance weights because the rotor is so imbalanced.
4. He is making the flux travel through a good amount of core material

The advantages of the magnet spiral rotor I am building (as I see it) are:

1. Lightweight rotor that spins true - no big wobbly hunk of metal.
2. Way less Eddy currents.  Only the pickup coil's core.
3.. No need for counter balances
4. No input power needed to get the magnetic fields
5. Possibility of using multiple coils and getting multiple output phases
6. Less wind resistance / better aerodynamics

Now I had to redesign mine because I realized I have no way to spin it with the above design.  There is no shaft!  So I resolved that with an altered design which is printing..  But it will take a bit longer now.  Hoping it comes out good.

I have some other thoughts on the matter but I will reserve them until we have some real data on this design.
Reply
#20
hi Jim, In 1995 I did a similar design but a little different ( the concept was it would run on Permanent magnetic force and the electric power was only to be on 1/36 th. of the total time per rotation.)
The field was round with a North field only that was spring shaped divided in half
The rotor was elliptical shaped with electromagnets on each ends
the rotor had permanent magnets around it placed to pull and push to the highest point of the field once there the electromagnets coil would turn on just long enough to get past the high point and start the rotation again

This motor would run top speed about 3000 rpms
but it did not produce extra output energy
It was a one input energy to one output energy device

It was a learning curb

Tom
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)