Magnet motor revelation

[BroMikey]

The presenter is TinselKoala. No mistaking that voice and delivery.

I don't like that guys way of handling things. Thanks for the heads

up Dog

Thanks Mikey.
Much remains to be done. Hopefully not leave us Ufopolitics. He is the real motor that drives us forward
Regard. cristian

Yes I agree Cristian

UFO has a big heart, that is why he has so much going for himself

he is looking at sharing all of the time. He needs to rest up and most

of all he won't just talk all of the time till he is sure. He is doing testing.

Mikey

[RAMSET]

I believe that video OF Tinsels was taken down for a reason

Its a teaching video of sorts [I will clarify that with a query to him today at the other forum .
respectfully
Chet
Edit
here is the answer from Tinsel

Quote


I'm in no mood to discuss trivia at the moment... I just read Mark Dansie's report about MarkE.

I can tell you these things:

The device was originally designed by Overconfident, who died of a brain tumor (malignant melanoma) several years ago.
The video was put up on YouTube to prove a point to Omnibus and was taken down after only being up for 27 minutes, as soon as Omnibus had seen it.
All copies of the video available on YT are unauthorized, plagiarized and many have been altered in various ways. Someone copied it without permission in the 27 minutes it was up and reposted it and it's all downhill from there.

The device is now lost, but you know where it may be (even if you don't realize it).

Teaching? Yes, undoubtedly. Did anyone learn anything from it? I certainly did.
"If what you think you are seeing appears to violate some physical law or principle, examine your assumptions...."

Out of respect for the memory of Overconfident, I really don't want to discuss it further. It was done to death back in the day, anyhow.

end quote

I believe it was not a true event which was witnessed in the video ,I recall air or some other "assist" as a lesson to "the Buss" {member omnibus]
at OU.Com ,that is the reason for the poor lighting and "untypical [of Tinsels vids] focus and no panning of the area around the motor.

also to add it is sad to read of the passing of member Mark E

[lorinrandone]

I don't like that guys way of handling things. Thanks for the heads

up Dog



Yes I agree Cristian

UFO has a big heart, that is why he has so much going for himself

he is looking at sharing all of the time. He needs to rest up and most

of all he won't just talk all of the time till he is sure. He is doing testing.

Mikey

I appreciate what makes Tinsel Koala. It is a cerebral guy

-Ufo, sure this testing before stating something

[tachyoncatcher]

Progression

...One last thing. Start thinking in three dimensions and give the “transition point” between the ramp and magnet some thought.
Mack

For my ramps, I am focusing more thought on attraction rather than polarity. Not that I am totally ignoring polarity, I'm not, but my ramps will be/are trapezoidal.
Good Luck,
Randy

[Stealth]

The major difference I can see is the orientation of the magnets. Two polarities and two polarity of ramps. Remember, everything in balance. North magnet and north ramp, south magnet and south ramp. Each ramp needs a slot to adjust the position to compensate for the magnet and ramp inbalancies. Using tow ramps and two magnets more than doubles the power. You can use ramps on each side of the magnets or on the top and bottom. The ramps create the gate for the magnets. When I have time I will make a diagram on my cad and post it. Good Luck. stealth

[tachyoncatcher]

The major difference I can see is the orientation of the magnets. Two polarities and two polarity of ramps. Remember, everything in balance. North magnet and north ramp, south magnet and south ramp. Each ramp needs a slot to adjust the position to compensate for the magnet and ramp inbalancies. Using tow ramps and two magnets more than doubles the power. You can use ramps on each side of the magnets or on the top and bottom. The ramps create the gate for the magnets. When I have time I will make a diagram on my cad and post it. Good Luck. stealth

Thanks @Stealth,
That would be great. I think I understand what you are saying, but a picture/drawing would be enough to be sure. We all communicate a bit different and I have totally misinterpreted someone's description before. I think I agree with you to a point, but I need to see what you are speaking of to be sure.
Respectfully,
Randy

[lorinrandone]

The major difference I can see is the orientation of the magnets. Two polarities and two polarity of ramps. Remember, everything in balance. North magnet and north ramp, south magnet and south ramp. Each ramp needs a slot to adjust the position to compensate for the magnet and ramp inbalancies. Using tow ramps and two magnets more than doubles the power. You can use ramps on each side of the magnets or on the top and bottom. The ramps create the gate for the magnets. When I have time I will make a diagram on my cad and post it. Good Luck. stealth

I think you have reason to put ramps up and down the magnets. I did some tests with a ferrite core U-shaped, and I found that the effect is much more relevant.

[MadMack]

Regarding the relationship between a rotor magnet and a ramp+stator magnet, resulting in the rotational force actually applied to the rotor, the key is the manipulation and directing of the forces available.

Magnetic attraction or repulsion is a force.
Identify when, where, and the direction of, the force(s) in operation between the ramp and magnets. Manipulate the physical construction of the ramp to make the forces work in your favor. The ramp is more than a curved piece of rectangular iron.

Food for thought:
1 force cosine 0 degrees = 1 force
1 force cosine 90 degrees = 0 force

If you would like to have a refresher on “Determining the Components of a Vector” see
Resolution of Forces

Mack

[tachyoncatcher]

Yeah!

Regarding the relationship between a rotor magnet and a ramp+stator magnet, resulting in the rotational force actually applied to the rotor, the key is the manipulation and directing of the forces available.

Magnetic attraction or repulsion is a force.
Identify when, where, and the direction of, the force(s) in operation between the ramp and magnets. Manipulate the physical construction of the ramp to make the forces work in your favor. The ramp is more than a curved piece of rectangular iron.

Food for thought:
1 force cosine 0 degrees = 1 force
1 force cosine 90 degrees = 0 force

If you would like to have a refresher on “Determining the Components of a Vector” see
Resolution of Forces

Mack

Thanks for that Mack. It is the direction I have been moving. It has been my thought process that with the polarity in balance you must have another force to cause the rotation. That of inductive attraction, not polarity. If it was strictly polarity, you would have balance, an equal push and pull. Not a formula for movement.

Mack: If this device has been built with some really good bearings and very little frictional loss, is there a danger of runaway? Or does this device, like a electric motor, reach a peak rpm based on some resonance point? I have to believe the later.

While I have the basic unit built, I decided it was more important to understand the geometrical relationships involved in magnetic induction and have built a number of test jigs to further that study. Most surprising from the dogma we have been taught since childhood. I am nearly ready to start testing acceleration.

Ufopolitics: Centrifugal forces are definitely at work here. On all sides .

Take Care,
Randy

[BroMikey]

Thanks Mack
Resolution of Forces






I will refresh my "Vectors"



Vector Analysis Study Simplified



SOH,CAH,TOA.

A way of remembering how to compute the sine, cosine, and tangent

of an angle.


A way of remembering how to compute the sine, cosine, and tangent of an angle.

SOH stands for Sine equals Opposite over Hypotenuse.

CAH stands for Cosine equals Adjacent over Hypotenuse.

TOA stands for Tangent equals Opposite over Adjacent.


Mathwords: SOHCAHTOA


How to Use SohCahToa to Find the Trig Functions of a Right Triangle - For Dummies



[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek13B8mCq1E[/VIDEO]

[BroMikey]

Hello Magnet motor mad men.

Here is a diagram that I am not sure is correct.

What has been pointed out is that we first determine the amount

of force of the traveling magnet by vector.

[Ufopolitics]

Thinking 3D...Mack

Hello to All,

Sorry guys, I have been very busy...

But, ever since Mack gave Us the below post...

[...]

One last thing. Start thinking in three dimensions and give the “transition point” between the ramp and magnet some thought.

Mack

I stopped doing all this 2D CAD images...swapped program to a much expensive one...(MAYA) and really started "thinking" and building in 3D Models (I can animate it as well)...changes that could be done...plus all advantages that doing so could bring Us...

I can see the whole picture now...better balancing between Modules...plus, a more effective way to "project" Ramps Induced Poles into the Rotor Magnets (180º straight line)

But here they are sharing them with you all.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]



Like I wrote on the first image on top...it is better to imagine the angles between Planes...and not through Axes. (it tends to confusion)

The Ramps could easily be redirecting Stators Polarity to face Rotor Magnets at a very effective straight angle...in favor of rotation of course...


Regards


Ufopolitics

EDIT 1: Actually, if you've all noticed, the only change done here...is to adjust the Rotor Magnets based on their Y Axis...to about 30º inclination, while keeping the original 30º from our previous 2D Diagrams, as recommended by Mack.

Only thing is...that when we do this...then the third plane also gets inclined as well.

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo gracias. Propongo personalmente a los demas, la version de 4 polos. Es la forma mas sencilla que se puede llamar motor y que permite un ajuste bastante bueno para lograr el balanceo.Es mi opinion. Desde ahi , una vez conseguido,ya se puede pensar en añadir mas polos.De todos modos yo voy a construir un rotor de mayor diametro, porque noto una insuficiencia en hacer las pruebas con el. Si me recordó bien, MadMack recomienda construir un rotor amplio.
Atentamente. cristian

Translation:

Ufo Thanks,

I propose the four poles version, it is the easiest set up that could be called motor and allows a very good adjustment to achieve balance. Is just my opinion. Anyways I will make a rotor of bigger diameter, 'cause I feel too limited to make tests, I remember that Mack recommends to make a big rotor.

Regards,

Cristian

Hola Cristian,

Gracias, pero Mack escribió antes que el mínimo número de imanes en un rotor es de Seis (6) en su diseño.

Cuatro polos es demasiado ancho el espacio para las rampas (90º)...y recuerda que rampas muy largas tienen un recorrido muy corto, y no puedes adicionar alto torque.

Saludos


Ufopolitics

My answer translated:

Thanks, but remember Mack wrote that Six(6) is the Minimum number of poles in his design.

Four Poles is too much of a gap for ramps (90º), and remember that longer ramps will pivot much less, therefore, can't add much torque.


MadMack's Posts related to minimum six poles:

One set of magnets every 45 degrees works well. Magnets at 0, 90, 180, and 270 degrees in attraction. Magnets at 45, 135, 225, and 315 degrees in repulsion. This balances the side forces to the rotor shaft and stator housing. Magnet pairs every 60 degrees will also work.

Did you use the same number of magnets as in the Bedini picture on the rotor?

No. The least was 6. The rotors diameter has a direct bearing on the output torque.

[lorinrandone]

Translation:

Ufo Thanks,

I propose the four poles version, it is the easiest set up that could be called motor and allows a very good adjustment to achieve balance. Is just my opinion. Anyways I will make a rotor of bigger diameter, 'cause I feel too limited to make tests, I remember that Mack recommends to make a big rotor.

Regards,

Cristian

Hola Cristian,

Gracias, pero Mack escribió antes que el mínimo número de imanes en un rotor es de Seis (6) en su diseño.

Cuatro polos es demasiado ancho el espacio para las rampas (90º)...y recuerda que rampas muy largas tienen un recorrido muy corto, y no puedes adicionar alto torque.

Saludos


Ufopolitics

My answer translated:

Thanks, but remember Mack wrote that Six(6) is the Minimum number of poles in his design.

Four Poles is too much of a gap for ramps (90º), and remember that longer ramps will pivot much less, therefore, can't add much torque.


MadMack's Posts related to minimum six poles:

UFO Saludos.
Como has visto, este hilo ya se murio. Solo Mike move algo, pero los demas, nada..... Estan construyendo el motor, o se dieron cuenta que es otro engaño mas.Nadie hace regalos como este, asi que no vale la pena romperte la cabeza con mas dibujos, porque este es el fin.
Me alegro por comunicar contigo y nos vamos a <<ver>> en otro hilo.
Atentamente. cristian alba

[Turion]

Build

This is what ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS happens on these threads. When someone has a new idea, or an INTERPRETATION of what the original inventor came up with, instead of KEEPING IT TO THEMSELVES until they have positive results to show by taking that idea and APPLYING IT TO A WORKING MODEL, testing it, examining the test results and comparing them to a baseline BEFORE sharing them with everyone, we get EVERYONE'S UNTESTED IDEAS and this kind of input takes us down side tracks and away from the BASIC design we started with. WHY is that I wonder? I'm not saying that any of the ideas people have come up with are WRONG. What I am saying is, when one idea is on the table and twenty people toss in their idea that is UNTESTED and may have NO positive effects on the outcome, now the few people who actually BUILD are totally confused about which direction to go and the whole project gets sidetracked. Let's leave just ONE idea the table. If you have a modification, TEST IT and make sure it WORKS, and THEN share with the class.

I love all the graphics you guys are capable of coming up with. They are truly amazing. But I would trade them ALL for a crappy video of your idea applied to a model you have BUILT, showing that it works or doesn't work. I'm not trying to be rude or insulting guys, but build it, test it, and then show us what YOU did that was so significantly different that it caused the thing to work.

Again, I do NOT mean to be insulting to anyone, as I know you guys are putting in the time on this project and I am not right now. I'm just observing and getting frustrated.

By the way. I get to go home tomorrow and see if I still have a house. Will know by this time tomorrow. Then I can test some ideas I have been sketching out the last few days. I wish I was better with a cad program, but I am not, so I just draw crap on paper and then build it.

Dave