The bistander thread

[BroMikey]

Yes I did,
I found it impossible to keep the handheld magnet steady.

A threaded fastener was used to position the opposition magnet.

bi

So what is your conclusion, why it speeds up? Are you leaning towards Dave's results? Is that why you decided the share your test bed data at this time? So you found out some things, what do you say about speed up? Is it lowering the motor power?

Here is one of thousands.why does it work Bi

See how one side works better? Which side r u on bi? 2nd video is best. all motors are not going down on input. 2nd video the guy is looking for the right spot to use his opposition magnets, he has a round motor and has found the optimum influence

The other guy does not know what do. Which guy are you?

[BroMikey]

Magnetism is the good stuff

[Turion]

Bro,
I am not using magnets on the motor. That doesn’t apply to what magnetic neutralization does in my machine. I did see that putting the hand held magnet across the rotor from the MOTOR coil in my little video demo also caused speed up of the motor, but I won’t be “sticking magnets” on my motor to increase the magnetic field.

We have been talking about magnetic neutralization and GENERATOR coils. bi says he didn’t get good results when he did the little 7th grade science experiment I show in my video, putting the magnet up to the rotor directly across from a generator coil that is under load. So I want to know if he really did it. If so, and if he got negative results, I know EXACTLY why and can show him how to fix it. But FIRST you have to actually BUILD it.

Most people won’t bother. Those that DO deserve to see it actually work. But it WONT unless you know what you are doing.

bi has not seen what I have seen, so he probably doesn’t KNOW how to make it work. But I can tell him.

For that experiment you need a generator coil with a single wire. You need a motor coil. You need a rotor with all N or S magnets. You need a bulb to light up. I don’t remember if I used a simple neon or LED, but it’s just a load. And you need a reed switch.
It couldn’t be more simple.

it is my claim that each coil added to the generator requires increased power INPUT to the prime mover to maintain the required RPM of 2800 RPM for my generator. It needs to put out constant power at that speed and achieve the “Lenz neutral” state for my generator coils. Magnetic neutralization on my machine ELIMINATES the need for this increase. Not 100%, but dang close. This is what I have ALWAYS said, and it is ALL I have claimed about magnetic neutralization.

[BroMikey]

Bro,
I am not using magnets on the motor.

We have been talking about magnetic neutralization and GENERATOR coils. bi says he didn’t get good results

So I want to know if he really did it. If so, and if he got negative results, I know EXACTLY why and can show him how to fix it. But FIRST you have to actually BUILD it.

bi has not seen what I have seen, so he probably doesn’t KNOW how to make it work. But I can tell him.

YER SPOILING EVERYTHING DAVE RIGHT WHEN i HAD BI THINKING EVERY MAGNET VIDEO IS THE SAME THING. HE IS NOT SPEAKING BECAUSE IT WORKS IN MANY WAYS WITH VARIOUS MOTORS BUT HE DOESN'T WANT TO ADMIT IT WORKS ON YOUR SETUP TOO. HE CAN'T FIGURE IT ALL OUT

[BroMikey]

Bro,
I am not using magnets on the motor.

it is my claim that each coil added to the generator requires increased power INPUT to the prime mover to maintain the required RPM of 2800 RPM

This is what I have ALWAYS said, and it is ALL I have claimed about magnetic neutralization.

Yes but your statement that when you added a generator coil in this video that you need an opposition magnet. But it is not generating any power in the video so we are not talking about the coil, we are talking about the core material dragging down the process.

Please correct your statements. I know what you mean. But hey all these slow mo video's only server to pizz me off, but that's me. 300-500rpm joke of a test, the gen coil is where the magic should be, however cores do matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1RvWOS32Tg

[Turion]

Yes, we are talking about the interaction between the magnet and the core of a coil when it is used as a GENERATOR coil.

As I understand it, a motor coil core is a two phase operation. The core attracts the magnet in, and then is fired as an electromagnet of the opposite polarity to the rotor magnet, and pushes it away in the direction of rotation. Interesting isn’t it? An axial force is used to increase (or change) the rotary momentum. I believe I have been arguing with someone about that EXACT concept.

A generator coil core is a 3 phase operation. The rotor magnet is attracted in by the core until Lenz occurs and the magnet is then repelled by the core until it is forced to alignment with the core (which for ease of conversation we refer to as TDC or top dead center, even though that term refers to internal combustion engines) by the prime mover, at which point the coil core polarity reverses and the magnet that is moving by is attracted backwards to the core.

A Lenz neutral generator coil as a generator coil acts entirely differently. But that’s a different discussion.

The generator coil was under load in the video I showed. I just forgot to film that. I did mention it though. It was lighting up a little bulb. Not much power, but it was still working. Don’t remember if it was a neon bulb or LED but I’d bet it was an LED.

I had surgery yesterday, so am out of it today and sleeping a lot. Should be up and around tomorrow and will go down to the shop and look. I got a new RPM gauge, and a small amp meter so I can put them on this little test setup. With just a couple coils I can prove everything I say is true while still working in my big machine. Got my wire in, Just need time and energy to get coils wound. And I still need to go to Sacramento to pick up core material.

[BroMikey]

The generator coil was under load in the video

I had surgery yesterday, so am out of it today and sleeping a lot.

Got my wire in, Just need time and energy to get coils wound

You need to rest. Last month my BP (blood Pressure) was so low I could do little so I did rest. Plus when I stood up my BP would drop to 70/30. Last Monday things changed and the BLOOD DOC says my leukemia in leaving and now I feel strong, better days ahead. I was required to sleep most of Nov, Dec and Jan and now it is paying off. I hated resting that much

You are under orders to get rest, not so easy for guys like us.

[BroMikey]

Yes, we are talking about the interaction between the magnet and the core of a coil when it is used as a GENERATOR coil.

Got my wire in, Just need time and energy to get coils wound. And I still need to go to Sacramento to pick up core material.

To bad I can't seem to find a 3" spool online with a 1" hole at the center. It maybe that the longer core and bigger core will solve your requirement.

[BroMikey]

Yes, we are talking about the interaction between the magnet and the core of a coil when it is used as a GENERATOR coil.

As I understand it, a motor coil core is a two phase operation. The core attracts the magnet in, and then is fired as an electromagnet of the opposite polarity to the rotor magnet, and pushes it away in the direction of rotation.

Interesting isn’t it?

An axial force is used to increase (or change) the rotary momentum.

A generator coil core is a 3 phase operation.

The rotor magnet is attracted in by the core until Lenz occurs and the magnet is then repelled by the core until it is forced to alignment with the core ....................... by the prime mover, at which point the coil core polarity reverses and the magnet that is moving by is attracted backwards to the core.

A Lenz neutral generator coil as a generator coil acts entirely differently. But that’s a different discussion.

That is the way I see it.

[bistander]

Yes, we are talking about the interaction between the magnet and the core of a coil when it is used as a GENERATOR coil.
...

Turion,
Please leave the rest of your post for later discussion. Please concentrate on the 7th grade. Is your first paragraph the confirmation which I requested here? Yes or no?

Turion,
...
Please just confirm or correct the above explanation without argument. Is it correct so far?
...
bi

Just click on the link to see the "above explanation" as I wrote it earlier today.
Thanks, bi

[Turion]

Somehow I skipped over this post and did not see it. I will respond. I am always happy to be civil when I am not being called a liar, fraud and con man.

Turion,

Look at it from a logical sciencetific prospective.
Magnetic neutralization. Define that. You say it is a method which you have devised to eliminate magnetic drag of the generator at constant speed operation. What is magnetic drag? You claim magnetic drag is the attraction, or caused by the attraction, of the magnet to the core at TDC, resulting in extra loading of the prime mover (motor). You agree that, at non-TDC positions, core/magnet attraction is cogging (or causes cogging) and that cogging does not significantly load the motor at constant speed operation.

Yes and no. Every coil (with core) that you add to the machine adds additional core material to which the rotor magnets are attracted and must be forced to move past by the prime mover. If you have the motor up to "operating speed" and start adding coils at THAT point, it will affect the required voltage and the amp draw of the prime mover to maintain the "operating speed" rpm. My clunker went fro. 7 amps to 36 amps. If you BEGIN with all the coils in place and bring the machine up to operating speed, there is no "drag" to affect that operating speed at all from the EXISTING coils because you addressed it as you brought the machine up to speed. But total power consumption of the prime mover will be GREATER over time than with NO coils in place.

And MY position is this. There are two forces...the attraction of the magnet to the core as it approaches the coil is equal to the attraction backwards as the magnet moves away from the core. If that was ALL that happened, there would be no cogging at all, just a gradual speedup and a gradual slowing down. The jerking motion you see at low RPM would NOT EXIST. Those two forces are equal. Magnetic attraction.

But there is a moment in time when coil core and magnet are perfectly aligned; when the magnetic attraction is at its GREATEST. This is the moment that causes "cogging," which is a physical jerking caused by the motor breaking that bond of attraction in order to continue on its rotation. If this moment did not exist (and you ridiculed me for saying it does) there would BE no cogging. The momentum of the rotor, or the ROTARY action of the motor is what breaks that bond of attraction You have said that the attraction is axial and you are correct, but axial attraction CAN impact rotary motion, or cogging wouldn't exist in the first place, and lots of motors wouldn't work. If I ran this machine as a motor, I would fire the coils as "opposition" magnets every time a coil aligned with a rotor magnet, which would be an axial force, and it would cause a rotary motion because that is the ONLY direction the rotor can move when you fire the coil and two like magnets push away from each other. They can't force each other directly backwards, and the stator is heavy enough that it won't move, so the rotor rotates to put the two magnets OUT of alignment. Axial force causing rotary action. You have argued with me on THIS point also, invoking Newton.

Also you agree that coils don't play a part in magnetic drag and your magnetic neutralization scheme, just the cores do, and the magnets.

I do

When we were discussing the 7th grade experiment, your generator design used all N facing magnets on the rotor, 22 of them. No additional "neutralization" magnets were required on the rotor, just on the stator. Target was 2800 RPM (constant) for generation of your claimed 1800-2000W real power output.

That was my HOPE, yes. I never claimed ANY output from the machine with 22 North magnets on the rotor. I have never claimed that 1800-2,000 watts of output on 300 watts of input is possible on ANY machine except the old clunker. That is the only machine that I have had up and running and producing power. (Other than ones BEFORE IT, which all put out power, but not to that extent, and they have all been scrapped for parts.) I only claim what I actually SEE on my bench. I only put TWO coils in the all North magnet rotor machine before I realized it was a total flop. The machine with all north magnets was an experiment that did not work. And I know why and will never make that mistake again. The NEW machine I have not claimed ANY kind of output on, although with the old iron coil coils in it, I would expect that it is as good as the old clunker. However the 24 magnet rotor SHOULD produce more power at 2800 RPM than the 12 magnet rotor. But I will not KNOW until I see it run. Also, the NEW coils have a different core material, so I have only two test coils to go by what the output COULD be. And with the current output of the coils, even with 24 magnets on the rotor, the coil output is a disappointment. When it is running with all the coils in it, as the old clunker ran, then I will claim whatever I see it produces on the bench. I hope it equals or exceeds the old machine, but I won't know until I wind two coils, am happy with the output, and then run the machine with all 12 in place. Two test coils running in isolation either unloaded or loaded are an INDICATION of what is possible, but not PROOF of what is possible. Running with 12 coils under load is PROOF. When I see it running on the bench, then I will claim what I see.

[QUOTE=bistander;n509162 I don't necessarily agree with your definitions above, but want to establish where the state of "development" was at time I designed my "7th grade experiment". Please just confirm or correct the above explanation without argument. Is it correct so far?
[/QUOTE]

I was the one who first brought up a "7th grade science experiment". The 7th grade science experiment I spoke of was the one I showed in the video I posted where I show that it works. That is an all N magnet rotor, which you MUST have to do the experiment the way I showed it. I showed the experiment that way because a setup VERY MUCH like that one is where I first saw what was possible with magnetic neutralization. I wasn't the only one. At the time I asked Carroll Brotzge (you may remember Carroll) and a few others who had tVERY SIMILAR setups on their benches (we were all working on small motors of that type) to replicate, and they all got the same results. That is when I first added magnetic neutralization to my large generator builds.

Once we settle that, I'll continue. Let's have a civil discussion without your insults, name-calling and ridicule.
bi

[bistander]

Somehow I skipped over this post and did not see it. I will respond. I am always happy to be civil when I am not being called a liar, fraud and con man.



Yes and no. Every coil (with core) that you add to the machine adds additional core material to which the rotor magnets are attracted and must be forced to move past by the prime mover. If you have the motor up to "operating speed" and start adding coils at THAT point, it will affect the required voltage and the amp draw of the prime mover to maintain the "operating speed" rpm. My clunker went fro. 7 amps to 36 amps. If you BEGIN with all the coils in place and bring the machine up to operating speed, there is no "drag" to affect that operating speed at all from the EXISTING coils because you addressed it as you brought the machine up to speed. But total power consumption of the prime mover will be GREATER over time than with NO coils in place.

And MY position is this. There are two forces...the attraction of the magnet to the core as it approaches the coil is equal to the attraction backwards as the magnet moves away from the core. If that was ALL that happened, there would be no cogging at all, just a gradual speedup and a gradual slowing down. The jerking motion you see at low RPM would NOT EXIST. Those two forces are equal. Magnetic attraction.

But there is a moment in time when coil core and magnet are perfectly aligned; when the magnetic attraction is at its GREATEST. This is the moment that causes "cogging," which is a physical jerking caused by the motor breaking that bond of attraction in order to continue on its rotation. If this moment did not exist (and you ridiculed me for saying it does) there would BE no cogging. The momentum of the rotor, or the ROTARY action of the motor is what breaks that bond of attraction You have said that the attraction is axial and you are correct, but axial attraction CAN impact rotary motion, or cogging wouldn't exist in the first place, and lots of motors wouldn't work. If I ran this machine as a motor, I would fire the coils as "opposition" magnets every time a coil aligned with a rotor magnet, which would be an axial force, and it would cause a rotary motion because that is the ONLY direction the rotor can move when you fire the coil and two like magnets push away from each other. They can't force each other directly backwards, and the stator is heavy enough that it won't move, so the rotor rotates to put the two magnets OUT of alignment. Axial force causing rotary action. You have argued with me on THIS point also, invoking Newton.



I do



That was my HOPE, yes. I never claimed ANY output from the machine with 22 North magnets on the rotor. I have never claimed that 1800-2,000 watts of output on 300 watts of input is possible on ANY machine except the old clunker. That is the only machine that I have had up and running and producing power. (Other than ones BEFORE IT, which all put out power, but not to that extent, and they have all been scrapped for parts.) I only claim what I actually SEE on my bench. I only put TWO coils in the all North magnet rotor machine before I realized it was a total flop. The machine with all north magnets was an experiment that did not work. And I know why and will never make that mistake again. The NEW machine I have not claimed ANY kind of output on, although with the old iron coil coils in it, I would expect that it is as good as the old clunker. However the 24 magnet rotor SHOULD produce more power at 2800 RPM than the 12 magnet rotor. But I will not KNOW until I see it run. Also, the NEW coils have a different core material, so I have only two test coils to go by what the output COULD be. And with the current output of the coils, even with 24 magnets on the rotor, the coil output is a disappointment. When it is running with all the coils in it, as the old clunker ran, then I will claim whatever I see it produces on the bench. I hope it equals or exceeds the old machine, but I won't know until I wind two coils, am happy with the output, and then run the machine with all 12 in place. Two test coils running in isolation either unloaded or loaded are an INDICATION of what is possible, but not PROOF of what is possible. Running with 12 coils under load is PROOF. When I see it running on the bench, then I will claim what I see.

I don't necessarily agree with your definitions above, but want to establish where the state of "development" was at time I designed my "7th grade experiment". Please just confirm or correct the above explanation without argument. Is it correct so far?

I was the one who first brought up a "7th grade science experiment". The 7th grade science experiment I spoke of was the one I showed in the video I posted where I show that it works. That is an all N magnet rotor, which you MUST have to do the experiment the way I showed it. I showed the experiment that way because a setup VERY MUCH like that one is where I first saw what was possible with magnetic neutralization. I wasn't the only one. At the time I asked Carroll Brotzge (you may remember Carroll) and a few others who had tVERY SIMILAR setups on their benches (we were all working on small motors of that type) to replicate, and they all got the same results. That is when I first added magnetic neutralization to my large generator builds.

Thanks for the reply. I break it up to simplify responses.
bi
edit 2: to add reason for edit 1

[bistander]

...

Yes and no. Every coil (with core) that you add to the machine adds additional core material to which the rotor magnets are attracted and must be forced to move past by the prime mover. If you have the motor up to "operating speed" and start adding coils at THAT point, it will affect the required voltage and the amp draw of the prime mover to maintain the "operating speed" rpm. My clunker went fro. 7 amps to 36 amps. If you BEGIN with all the coils in place and bring the machine up to operating speed, there is no "drag" to affect that operating speed at all from the EXISTING coils because you addressed it as you brought the machine up to speed. But total power consumption of the prime mover will be GREATER over time than with NO coils in place.

And MY position is this. There are two forces...the attraction of the magnet to the core as it approaches the coil is equal to the attraction backwards as the magnet moves away from the core. If that was ALL that happened, there would be no cogging at all, just a gradual speedup and a gradual slowing down. The jerking motion you see at low RPM would NOT EXIST. Those two forces are equal. Magnetic attraction.

But there is a moment in time when coil core and magnet are perfectly aligned; when the magnetic attraction is at its GREATEST. This is the moment that causes "cogging," which is a physical jerking caused by the motor breaking that bond of attraction in order to continue on its rotation. If this moment did not exist (and you ridiculed me for saying it does) there would BE no cogging. The momentum of the rotor, or the ROTARY action of the motor is what breaks that bond of attraction You have said that the attraction is axial and you are correct, but axial attraction CAN impact rotary motion, or cogging wouldn't exist in the first place, and lots of motors wouldn't work. If I ran this machine as a motor, I would fire the coils as "opposition" magnets every time a coil aligned with a rotor magnet, which would be an axial force, and it would cause a rotary motion because that is the ONLY direction the rotor can move when you fire the coil and two like magnets push away from each other. They can't force each other directly backwards, and the stator is heavy enough that it won't move, so the rotor rotates to put the two magnets OUT of alignment. Axial force causing rotary action. You have argued with me on THIS point also, invoking Newton.
...

OK, so if I modify my statements like this, are you in agreement to proceed?

...
Magnetic neutralization. Define that. You say it is a method which you have devised to eliminate magnetic drag of the generator at constant speed operation. What is magnetic drag? You claim magnetic drag is the attraction, or caused by the attraction, of the magnet to the core at TDC, resulting in extra loading of the prime mover (motor). You agree that, at non-TDC positions, core/magnet attraction is cogging (or causes cogging) and that non-TDC cogging does not significantly load the motor at constant speed operation. Also you agree that coils don't play a part in magnetic drag and your magnetic neutralization scheme, just the cores do, and the magnets.
...

Changes noted in red. We can discuss Newton's law later.

I'll post again later on the remainder of your previous reply. If you see a simple word addition or change in the above description of magnetic neutralization and magnetic drag, please indicate it by using a different color. But I'd like it short and clear. Don't need *reasons why* here, just *what it is.*
bi

[bistander]

.
...
That was my HOPE, yes. I never claimed ANY output from the machine with 22 North magnets on the rotor. I have never claimed that 1800-2,000 watts of output on 300 watts of input is possible on ANY machine except the old clunker. That is the only machine that I have had up and running and producing power. (Other than ones BEFORE IT, which all put out power, but not to that extent, and they have all been scrapped for parts.) I only claim what I actually SEE on my bench. I only put TWO coils in the all North magnet rotor machine before I realized it was a total flop. The machine with all north magnets was an experiment that did not work. And I know why and will never make that mistake again. The NEW machine I have not claimed ANY kind of output on, although with the old iron coil coils in it, I would expect that it is as good as the old clunker. However the 24 magnet rotor SHOULD produce more power at 2800 RPM than the 12 magnet rotor. But I will not KNOW until I see it run. Also, the NEW coils have a different core material, so I have only two test coils to go by what the output COULD be. And with the current output of the coils, even with 24 magnets on the rotor, the coil output is a disappointment. When it is running with all the coils in it, as the old clunker ran, then I will claim whatever I see it produces on the bench. I hope it equals or exceeds the old machine, but I won't know until I wind two coils, am happy with the output, and then run the machine with all 12 in place. Two test coils running in isolation either unloaded or loaded are an INDICATION of what is possible, but not PROOF of what is possible. Running with 12 coils under load is PROOF. When I see it running on the bench, then I will claim what I see.
...

Like before, would changes in red satisfy you?

.
...
When we were discussing the 7th grade experiment, your generator design used all N facing magnets on the rotor, 22 of them. No additional "neutralization" magnets were required on the rotor, just on the stator. Target was 2800 RPM (constant) for generation of your target 1000-2000W real power output.
...

Changed "claimed 1800" to "target 1000".

bi

[Turion]

You want simple. Here is simple:
Magnetic drag is the attraction, or caused by the attraction, of the magnet to the core at TDC, resulting in extra loading of the prime mover (motor) and magnetic neutralization eliminates this or SIGNIFICANTLY reduces it.

From bi:
When we were discussing the 7th grade experiment, your generator design used all N facing magnets on the rotor, 22 of them. No additional "neutralization" magnets were required on the rotor, just on the stator. Target was 2800 RPM (constant) for generation of your target 1800-2000W real power output.

I agree with that. (1800-2,000W is what I hoped for)

Again, I have NO IDEA what the machine with 22 N magnets would do, or if it would even work. It was a prototype I built to test whether I could use HALF the magnets I used on the big clunker machine and build something more compact. I KNEW there was a GOOD chance it would not put out the power the old clunker produced because it contained two FEWER coils; 10 rather than 12. I have no illusion that 10 coils can suddenly put out the same power as 12 just because I WANT them to. My HOPE was that 22 rotor magnets instead of 12 would make up for the missing coils. So yes, the target was 1800-2000 watts, because I know that is possible with the big machine. I always have HOPE. Reality is what I see when it runs on the bench.