Miller Colson Magnetic Motor

[Dusty]

Testing rotation and magnet layout

I wanted to test the magnet layout at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWgz51pmRpI

[bistander]

Nice

I wanted to test the magnet layout at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWgz51pmRpI

Hi Dusty,

Nice job on the model and demo.

Thanks,

bi

[Lidmotor]

I wanted to test the magnet layout at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWgz51pmRpI

Thanks Dusty. This is what I was hoping for---that someone would build a good model to show the action. Excellent!
I am such a rough 'kitchen table' builder I didn't even try. I will be very curious to hear your take on whether or not the device could ever work as shown. Perhaps something will be learned even if it doesn't.

---Lidmotor

[iflewmyown]

Dusty, Think about this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09jZsBDHalE
Garry

[Lidmotor]

3D Print it??

If Dusty gets his wooden model to look promising perhaps somebody can design and 3D print a desktop model. Lasersaber has had great success designing his EZ-Spin motors and then giving out the print files to everyone for replication.
Here is an example of a small 3D printed solenoid motor I found on YouTube. It show the easiest way to convert linear motion to rotary---a push rod and crankshaft.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZiPAJXnT6M

Cheers,
Lidmotor

[promt]

Hey Vidbid,
OMG, What are all the Skeptics gonna do now?
Where are they all gonna go?
Ufopolitics

Speaking about devil ("where's the Sceptics") Did you call me?)
Two losers finally found each other; where's a Zilano 5kwt OU device, Vibid?
Where's an ass-cemetery OU motor, Ufo? And shielding magnet does not work neither. What a shame
Regarding to this OU motor - how many 10 min OU devices on YT you want me to show you?
Where's me (Skeptic) next to the motor to verify it?
Remember, dreamer, when something comes to YT is not necessary means true; that's what working is on the market, not on YT.
Get you pills, "ufo" and answer to it, and see you, loser, in an year. I'll come back and check it
And get a job, loser, we're sick and tired to pay welfare to you f..g useless immigrants.

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent Model and Demonstration

I wanted to test the magnet layout at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWgz51pmRpI

Dusty,

Thanks for the great effort to show a model of the structures and the movements of the Miller-Colson machine. Your magnets are 1 inch in diameter, with a pole surface area of 0.78 sq. in. It looks like the Miller-Colson machine may be using 3 inch diameter magnets, with a pole surface area of 7.06 sq. in. So the magnets in the M-C machine are quite a bit stronger than your model.

We can see in the last of your film that if the rotor is just spun in the center zone, it tends to move back and forth. So that is the idea of the machine.

With that in mind, IF the magnets are strong enough, the friction is low enough, and the amount of energy needed to spin the rotor is less than the energy that can be recovered by the back and forth motions, IT MAY WORK!

That would be very cool!

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

One More Idea...

Dusty,

You also mentioned in your film that the next modification you are going to make is to move the magnets closer to the axle. May I suggest a different modification? What your model tells me is that your magnets are too weak for the distance of the movements, therefore you might try moving the end plates closer and asking the rotor to move a shorter stroke. Having the magnets at the larger diameter and physically far away from each other is beneficial to creating the three zones of action cleanly.

My analysis of what you are showing tells me that you do not need a smaller neutral zone, you need a stronger power stroke. With your strength of magnets, that means the end plates need to be closer together, leaving the wheels and magnets as they are.

Just a thought.

Peter

[Allen Burgess]

Maximum central power position and equal force distribution.

The disk constantly revolves in the same direction. It generates it's maximum attraction and repulsion in the middle, equidistant from both ends; then it turns neutral at 1/4 the distance from each end when the polarities begin to reverse. This keeps the attraction and repulsion force constant in both directiions as the force is an inverse square of the distance; So at the 3/8-5/8 distance respectivly , or midway between the middle and the reversal points, the magnets are turned to cover only 1/2 the face of their counterparts on the other ends, delivering an equally distributed force throughout it's entire spiral stroke.

The disk also appears to slow it's rotation down towards the middle and speed up towards the ends. This non proportional acceleration probably requires the sophisticated electronic servo.

[vidbid]

Alternation

Here's an experiment suggestion by me.



I would think that it would be easier to construct.

[Allen Burgess]

Vidbid's concept.

Here's an experiment suggestion by me.



I would think that it would be easier to construct.

You're spinning one stator when the design includes two, one on each end. Why would you need a spline on the reciprocating shaft if it's not rotating? I see your point, but you would need first a central axle to connect the two rotating stators. The otherwise rotating central disk now becomes the stationary stator. This might be pushed in and out by an external frame. The motor needs two magnet disks, one on each end to operate, because it uses the attraction field from the disk it's approaching to drive it. The repulsion is no longer a factor after the central disk travels past the halfway point into the opposite side attraction field.

In the original design, the reciprocating motion of the spinning rotor is powered by the magnetic attraction and repulsion. All the servo does in the original is spin the rotor. All the external frame would need to do is hold the central rotor in position.

We need one electric motor to spin the two outside disks connected by an axle, and a non-rotating central disk with a "Rotating Linear Ball Bearing" in the center to allow the disk hub to simultaneously slide over and around the axle; Then all we need is a simple sliding guide attached to the oversized center disk circumference and a frame to hold it steady. This sliding guide would act as the longitudinal power piston. The power from the guide piston should be enough to spin the stators connected to a "DaKrampus (Art Porter)" gear (Post #46 above), to run itself, because the attraction and repulsion are nearly twice the shear force.

This design's ready for Lidmotor's 3D desktop model.

[Allen Burgess]

Rotating linear bearing.

This kind of "Rotating Linear Bearing" would be required to allow the center magnet disk to both slide back and forth over the stators axle and allow the axle to rotate inside the hub simultaneously: I believe this bearing may have a second race hidden in the collar to handle the rotation.

[Allen Burgess]

Ceramic axle and bushing and stators speed.

For the money, this type of super hard, non-magnetic, self lubricating smooth ceramic axle and bushing can't be beat for combined linear and rotational motion. The mating parts won't heat up and lock from friction:

Specifications

Character: Thermo-stability, anti-corrosion, anti-friction, shock resistance, self-lubricating.

The stators spin rate can be made to speed up toward the end stroke with a cam axle on a motor accelerator, or a more tightly machined spiral groove on the "Art Porter" yoke, if they need to.

[vidbid]

Hi Allen

You're spinning one stator when the design includes two, one on each end.

True.

Why would you need a spline on the reciprocating shaft if it's not rotating?

To keep it from rotating.

I see your point, but you would need first a central axle to connect the two rotating stators.

We'll call it Version 2.0.

Does the axle have to go through the center? What about having the axle on the side of the device as in Sonny's first video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWggsnpEk_s

Notice that the axle in his first prototype is on the top of his device, and it runs parallel, along the device.

The otherwise rotating central disk now becomes the stationary stator.

In my design, I prefer to call it the reciprocating, non-rotating primary magnet carrier.

This might be pushed in and out by an external frame.

I'm not following you.

The motor needs two magnet disks, one on each end to operate, because it uses the attraction field from the disk it's approaching to drive it.

We'll put it in Version 2.0.

The repulsion is no longer a factor after the central disk travels past the halfway point into the opposite side attraction field.

Good point.

In the original design, the reciprocating motion of the spinning rotor is powered by the magnetic attraction and repulsion.

True.

All the servo does in the original is spin the rotor.

The operative word is servo.

My design doesn't require a servo, just an ordinary, high-torque electric motor.

All the external frame would need to do is hold the central rotor in position.

I'm not following you.

My design (Version 1.0) has the primary reciprocating, non-rotating magnet carrier moving up or down, relative to the position of the frame.

We need one electric motor to spin the two outside disks connected by an axle, and a non-rotating central disk with a "Rotating Linear Ball Bearing" in the center to allow the disk hub to simultaneously slide over and around the axle.

As I have said, you could also have an external axle in the Version 2.0 design. It might be cheaper to build than a center axle. Of course, if you had an externally-mounted axle in Version 2.0, then Version 2.0 could be turned on its side as with Miller's original prototype.

Then all we need is a simple sliding guide attached to the oversized center disk circumference and a frame to hold it steady. This sliding guide would act as the longitudinal power piston. The power from the guide piston should be enough to spin the stators connected to a "DaKrampus (Art Porter)" gear (Post #46 above), to run itself, because the attraction and repulsion are nearly twice the shear force.

My primary objective with Version 1.0 was to come up with a simple experimenter's design suggestion to test the concept.

I really don't like using servo motors.

Version 2.0 could easily incorporate your suggestions.

This design's ready for Lidmotor's 3D desktop model.

That's great! I hope to see it soon.

Thank you, Allen, for your suggestions. Much appreciated.

[Allen Burgess]

Version (2)

@VIDBID,

A side axle would still require bearings and partial center axles for the stators to spin on. The center disk could be supported by rail slides (Below). We could combine rail slides with a central axle that passed through a larger hole in the center disk just to turn the second stator.

Another option would be to use two split positive A.C. synchronous electric motors, one on each stator disk, and support the center disk on sliding rails. Twin microwave carousel motors and two sliding rails for the center disk would probably work fine; Facing each other, the carousel motors would spin the disks in harmony with a split positive from a 120volt 60Hz wall outlet.

I believe the central axle and "Linear Rotating Bearing" are probably the simplest and least costly approach. The carousel motors (Below Right) are stuck rotating at one speed.