about the Ferrocell (ferrolens)

[bistander]

Backiron

While I'm steering this thread (even if its off topic) there is a lot to be said about UFO's comment. Plenty of energy is lost in the 'back-iron' of a conventional motor (as heat). That's because they are thinking LINEAR - like iron filings.
When you utilize BOTH poles simultaneously, very little is lost to heat and you end up with a more magnetically-balanced and quiet running motor.
Guess what's in the middle between both poles:?

NOTHING !

Regards

Beg to differ. Take for example a DCPM motor, PM field stator with wound armature rotor. Like the Imperial from Ufo's Asymmetrical thread. The backiron is the outer steel tube and has a static (unchanging) magnetic field or flux in it. There is zero loss in the backiron.

Similar example. Magnet stuck to refrigerator. Magnetic field (flux) from the magnet completes the path through the steel panel on the fridge. Does the steel panel get hot? Is there power loss in that magnetic circuit (magnet and steel)?

Most all the typical motors (excluding transverse flux and homopolar) are double air gap machines meaning they do use both a N and S stator pole, both facing the air gap, magnetically connected through the stator by the backiron.

Regards,

bi

[dyetalon]

Regards

Beg to differ. Take for example a DCPM motor, PM field stator with wound armature rotor. Like the Imperial from Ufo's Asymmetrical thread. The backiron is the outer steel tube and has a static (unchanging) magnetic field or flux in it. There is zero loss in the backiron. bi

What about path length for the field? There's probably a .15mm gap between one pole and the rotor, but the other pole has to go thru the backiron, bearings, shaft, half the rotor and then to the rotor tip. Doesn't sound very balanced, does it?

Similar example. Magnet stuck to refrigerator. Magnetic field (flux) from the magnet completes the path through the steel panel on the fridge. Does the steel panel get hot? Is there power loss in that magnetic circuit (magnet and steel)? bi

Magnets don't generate heat sitting still. I said something to that effect in an earlier post.

Most all the typical motors (excluding transverse flux and homopolar) are double air gap machines meaning they do use both a N and S stator pole, both facing the air gap, magnetically connected through the stator by the backiron.

Regards,

bi

You need to look at one of mine: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140125154A1/en

It's by no means typical. No magnets in this one. Its a switched reluctance design. when the price of neo's went up I had to come up with a new plan.
Switched the magnets out to Hiperco and reversed the drive logic.

It sucks instead of blows

(as in attraction vs. repulsion)

[bistander]

Magnetic paths in motor

What about path length for the field? There's probably a .15mm gap between one pole and the rotor, but the other pole has to go thru the backiron, bearings, shaft, half the rotor and then to the rotor tip. Doesn't sound very balanced, does it?

...

Hi dyetalon,

You appear confused on motor magnetics. Here is an example of a 2-pole DCPM motor. The magnets and field in the stator including backiron do not move. The flux does not pass through the shaft.

https://quickfield.com/advanced/dc_motor_simulation.htm



Clearly shows two parallel flux paths. Nice simulation and I doubt it used iron filings as a base for the software, but you never know for sure.

Regards,

bi

[dyetalon]

Hi dyetalon,

You appear confused on motor magnetics. Here is an example of a 2-pole DCPM motor. The magnets and field in the stator including backiron do not move. The flux does not pass through the shaft.

https://quickfield.com/advanced/dc_motor_simulation.htm



Clearly shows two parallel flux paths. Nice simulation and I doubt it used iron filings as a base for the software, but you never know for sure.

Regards,

bi

Are you confused or just trying to be argumentive?
You are showing us a brush dc motor. I've been talking about inductive motors.
Start a motor thread. This could get out of control here.

[bistander]

Inductive motors?

Are you confused or just trying to be argumentive?

Neither.

You are showing us a brush dc motor. I've been talking about inductive motors.

But I don't see where you mentioned inductive motors. Can you define that for me? Induction motors, maybe?

Anyway, motors started with Ufo saying:

Ok Bistander,

This is to what am referring to...

Say it is a Motor...PM or wound Stators...no matter what pulses-feed it...PWM...AC DC
Look at STATORS MAGNETIC FIELD arrangement...then realize their armature-rotors interact only with 50% OF INNER STATOR POLES...while all outer poles are shunt to a steel housing...

You support him saying:

While I'm steering this thread (even if its off topic) there is a lot to be said about UFO's comment. Plenty of energy is lost in the 'back-iron' of a conventional motor (as heat)...

So he says PM or wound stator, PWM..AC DC. You say conventional motor. Where were you talking about inductive motors?

Oh well. I tried to leave it alone. Then I thought I might be able to help you understand. That's all. Really don't want arguments.

Regards,

bi

[dyetalon]

Neither.



But I don't see where you mentioned inductive motors. Can you define that for me? Induction motors, maybe?

Anyway, motors started with Ufo saying:


You support him saying:



So he says PM or wound stator, PWM..AC DC. You say conventional motor. Where were you talking about inductive motors?

Oh well. I tried to leave it alone. Then I thought I might be able to help you understand. That's all. Really don't want arguments.

Regards,

bi

Sorry, I felt you were intimidating me. My bad.
I didn't think my comments needed greater clarification.
Seems I'll need to be more specific in the future.

I suggest you google 'brushed motor' and 'brushless motor'.
And, magnets around the stator are not the same as magnets around the rotor.
There is a difference.

And field geometry changes with every type of motor. UFO is right when he talks about the back-iron.
Lets stop here and if you want to discuss field geometry and flux paths, start a motor thread & I'll do my best to answer your questions there.

Lets get on with the cell...

[Markoul]

Prove through experimentation

sorry but I have stopped responding to regends, bitstander, mikrovolt and Iamnuts. I believe this is a thread for serious researchers for the ferrocell and not constantly endless debating against it. It is waste of my time to try answer all the ignorant and off-topics they throw here. All what they try is to disprove the ferrocell and I don't fill any obligation to defend and prove anything to, specially to these guys whose minds are clearly preset, polarized as their iron filings experiment and their only motive behind any line they write is to disprove the ferrocell.

dyetalon ,

I agree with you but I find it better to explain the ferrocell operation through superparamagnetism but rather magneto photonics and related effects which many of them are actually macroscale effects and are not referring to nanomagnetism. Instead to try to present these complicated explanations of light interacttion, phase cancelations, zeros, etc. what you realy have to do is to proof experimentally 2 things:

A. that the single domain Fe3O4 nanoparticles because (this is mainstream accepted), are not magnetic dipoles meaning that there are little ferrimagnetic particles which can be either single north pole magnetized or south pole (no opposite pole or Bloch domain present on their tiny bulk mass) under an external magnetic field can bidirectional differentiate and follow the flux on of the two separate counter fields (magnetic bubbles) on the two physical poles of a dipole magnet.

Where iron filings fail and are unenable to do so since their strong ferromagnetism makes them magnetic dipoles acting more like a compass which their both ends being counter pulled (like two teams pulling on oposite sides a rope) toward strongest two potentials of the field thus the actual pole locations of the magnet, destined to show only the relative N-S pole axis direction of a magnet and and not its magnetic flux. Fe304 superparamgnetic nanoparticles can follow precisely the field flux lines and make a magnetic imprint image of the field.

This alone is theoretical prove that ferrocell showing the actual magnetic image of the field of a magnet and iron filings do not However the final nail in the coffin of the old wrong magnetic field image imprint obtained with the iron filing and correct one obtained with the ferrocell would be using electron microscopy at the time exactly where a magnetic field is applied in the ferrocell to show through the microscope the nanoparticles physically separating between the two opposite poles. We can use a slow motion video recording and aslo pass the video under MIT motion amplification algorithm. I am quite experienced with the motion amplification (have done it before) but not so much with high speed filming though.

and...

B. secondly and final step... plain simple, that underneath the light lines we see on the ferrocell glass surface, are actually the polarized magnetic chains formed by the Fe3O4 nanoparticles this chains must be perfectly aligned with the light lines we see, meaning light lines are in perfect match with nanoparicles chains copying the magnetic flux of the magnetic field under observation.

Proving also that light lines are not produced by some kind of fancy light interference play or optical trick but 100% from the partial reflected incident light by the magnetically polarized nanoparticle chains. This all can be done of course with an electron microscope.


EM

[Iamnuts]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...urBAa9b84Yz9ph

There's obviously been a huge amount of effort put in research.
Unfortunately it's way beyond what I can understand.

[Ufopolitics]

Sorry about the motors interruption Dyetalon...but it was Bistander's fault...

One important issue about ferrofluid - ferrimagnetic bidirectionality...is that:

Electrons are also Bi-Directional...

Photons are also Bi - Directional...

This above facts explain the CRT behavior, basically when in 3 e-guns (RGB)...They all split to form the dual Hyperbolas in a magnetic field.

Also, how light (photons) can also DIVERGE as Ferrolens Nano particles do, to show a clear image of the Dipolar Magnetic Fields.


My two pennies worth...

Regards


Ufopolitics

[dyetalon]

Sorry about the motors interruption Dyetalon...but it was Bistander's fault...

One important issue about ferrofluid - ferrimagnetic bidirectionality...is that:

Electrons are also Bi-Directional...

Photons are also Bi - Directional...

This above facts explain the CRT behavior, basically when in 3 e-guns (RGB)...They all split to form the dual Hyperbolas in a magnetic field.

Also, how light (photons) can also DIVERGE as Ferrolens Nano particles do, to show a clear image of the Dipolar Magnetic Fields.


My two pennies worth...

Regards


Ufopolitics

Well, your two pennies have matured into a couple of hundred bucks!

I agree with the CRT thing. I was putting magnets on Sony CRT's back in the 90's. When I saw the first dipole field using a Ferrocell, that's when I remembered where I had seen that image before.
See pix:

[Markoul]

latest greatest video by Brian,

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4KD_GGeyUk[/VIDEO]

I invited him in this thread here.

EM

[dyetalon]

Sorry about the motors interruption Dyetalon...but it was Bistander's fault...

One important issue about ferrofluid - ferrimagnetic bidirectionality...is that:

Electrons are also Bi-Directional...

Photons are also Bi - Directional...

This above facts explain the CRT behavior, basically when in 3 e-guns (RGB)...They all split to form the dual Hyperbolas in a magnetic field.

Also, how light (photons) can also DIVERGE as Ferrolens Nano particles do, to show a clear image of the Dipolar Magnetic Fields.


My two pennies worth...

Regards


Ufopolitics

Well, your two pennies have matured into a couple of hundred bucks!

I agree with the CRT thing. I was putting magnets on Sony CRT's back in the 90's. When I saw the first dipole field using a Ferrocell, that's when I remembered where I had seen that image before. But, the field looks 90 degrees offset between the CRT images and Ferrocell images. A cylinder magnet on the CRT has one pole on the glass, but the magnet under the cell has each pole visible (sideways).
See pix:

[bistander]

To dyetalon

Even though I quoted Markoul, this is addressed to the OP, dyetalon. Please do not believe what Mr. Markoul says about me in the paragraph quoted below. It is untrue. I do not have a motive to "disprove the ferrocell". In fact, I like the ferrocell. I want to better understand it. I have done much reading and studying with regards to ferrocells, finding Michael Synder's papers most informative.

I do take issue with some of the conclusions that Markoul claims as proof. I've asked him several questions and requested he show some data he claims he has. I suspect this is the reason he ridicules me and tells these untruths about me.

Be assured, I am not here to cause trouble or for the sake of argument. I am here to learn and share. I have an extensive background in electric machinery and magnetics.

With respect,

bi

sorry but I have stopped responding to regends, bitstander, mikrovolt and Iamnuts. I believe this is a thread for serious researchers for the ferrocell and not constantly endless debating against it. It is waste of my time to try answer all the ignorant and off-topics they throw here. All what they try is to disprove the ferrocell and I don't fill any obligation to defend and prove anything to, specially to these guys whose minds are clearly preset, polarized as their iron filings experiment and their only motive behind any line they write is to disprove the ferrocell.
...
EM

[dyetalon]

Even though I quoted Markoul, this is addressed to the OP, dyetalon. Please do believe what Mr. Markoul says about me in the paragraph quoted below. It is untrue. I do not have a motive to "disprove the ferrocell". In fact, I like the ferrocell. I want to better understand it. I have done much reading and studying with regards to ferrocells, finding Michael Synder's papers most informative.

I do take issue with some of the conclusions that Markoul claims as proof. I've asked him several questions and requested he show some data he claims he has. I suspect this is the reason he ridicules me and tells these untruths about me.

Be assured, I am not here to cause trouble or for the sake of argument. I am here to learn and share. I have an extensive background in electric machinery and magnetics.

With respect,

bi

Markoul is very passionate about his beliefs and theories. He's experimented with many Ferrocells. I've made a few custom units for his special RF research.
He's a university instructor in physics and an accomplished scientist (like Michael Snyder) with a formal education, degrees and many published papers on the cell.
Have a little respect for his efforts and hard work in this field.
It's not his hobby.

I think its a little frustrating when I try and explain things I have learned or observed and get an argument back. I understand his responses, and I'm not a teacher.

We're just a bunch of nuts from all over the world trying to understand and explain something that has been a subject of argument for centuries.

Don't take this stuff too seriously- we are all going the same way, we're just on different paths...not unlike domains

I welcome your comments (even if I don't agree with them). Ya gotta dig to find answers and ya can't dig without getting dirty.

I'd like to add one more comment:
Some of the stuff Michael, Markgoul and I work with is 'classified' and we've all signed documents that could get us in a lot of trouble legally if we say something we're not allowed to. That's the way it works in the Sci-Industry sector. No leaks.

In other words, there is a lot of stuff we can't say.

[mikrovolt]

@Markoul,
Use ( @ Dyetalon ) directly comment specifically to that person please,
The others need to allow reasonable dialog because of this application.

antenna on ferro viewer.JPG

We use our time on claims, Our style has a think tank objective sometimes gets too
picky. I agree with most of Markoul says. We are doing the best we can.
Dyetalon has a different aspect that we admire and think it appropriate that
he be able to develop his whole thought.