Manipulating Of Magnetic Flux

[Guest]

I like your figure 3 the most but not as you describe it.
Here's how I would use it. As the iron gets attracted the flux in the coil decreases and causes a current to flow that will resist change. But the coil is tricked since there's nothing to resist.

You're probably right on that one. I'm no expert on magnetic fields, all I know that since symmetry is maintained, the force you put in is the force you get out by moving the plate, yet you get extra energy on the coils.

I will be doing some small tests soon and I'll keep everyone posted on how they go.

[broli]

You're probably right on that one. I'm no expert on magnetic fields, all I know that since symmetry is maintained, the force you put in is the force you get out by moving the plate, yet you get extra energy on the coils.

I will be doing some small tests soon and I'll keep everyone posted on how they go.

That's not really true. If you analyze the problem carefully this is what happens;

1) iron piece aproaches and decreases flux through coil
2) this change causes a current to flow in coil creating an electro magnet which is oriented in such a way that its in attraction with the PM
3) the iron piece is now attracted even stronger due to two magnets pulling on it
4) when the iron piece hits TDC the flux is at its lowest value and the voltage/current in the coil at its peak
5) when the iron piece moves away from TDC the voltage makes a very sharp reverse in voltage and thus magnet polarity flips abruptly
6) so now the coil is in repulsion with the PM
7) we then end up with again both the PM and coil pulling back on the iron piece but the coil has a reveres polarity than the first stage

So it's not completely symmetrical as you see. On the other hand the forces might be symmetrical regardless of which pole the coil starts and ends with. Experiments might clear that up.

But my suggestion doesn't deal with the second stage. The iron piece gets attracted by both coil and PM until it hits TDC. Before it makes the sharp polarity flip in the coil you break the circuit and let the iron piece fly out only having the PM attracting it.

Anyone can perform the simple experiment I did. That is showing that two magnets in attraction will attract an iron piece more strongly than one magnet on its own. In your case the second magnet is an electromagnet created by the very motion of the iron piece.

[Guest]

Yes I agree. I think for the sake of simplicity, I am going to pursure diagrams 2 and 4 because they are more straightforward to analyse since there is no coil directly involved in the mover's path.

[gyula]

Gyula,

I just checked and they seem to be mostly the same file. My version has 74 slides where the current one linked only has 70 slides. The four missing slides show actual photographs of the apparatus used to measure the forces and come in right after Slide 36. Everything else seems to be the same, so you have the whole thing, essentially.

Peter

Thank you Peter for taking your time to compare the two files.
No real need for the bigger file then.

rgds, Gyula

[broli]

Yes I agree. I think for the sake of simplicity, I am going to pursure diagrams 2 and 4 because they are more straightforward to analyse since there is no coil directly involved in the mover's path.

I think you would be letting go of the best idea if you do that. I think especially 4 is the least promising one.

Figure 4 is not symmetrical. The energy capturing coil will first try to stop your magnet from compressing the spring and then it will try to stop it from uncompressing it. So the cycle is always inhibiting motion and thus not a symmetrical one.

Figure 2 on the other hand is interesting once again if you change it a bit.

When the iron piece approaches the PM's, the spring will uncompresses slightly. But since there's a coil this will happen at a decelerated speed. When the iron piece just passes TDC again the coil circuit gets broken. The PM's will repel once again but now there's nothing that decelerates the speed of the spring PM so the spring will get compressed faster and thus the iron piece would be attracted back to the PM's with a smaller force since the spring PM has moved out more than in the first cycle was the case.

Again this would then be 2 overunity systems in one.

I'm not sure whether figure 2 or 3 would generate more power.

Meanwhile I made an animation to make things more clear:

The first one shows the behavior of the coil if you don't break the circuit (note that the coil flips polarity at TDC);



The second one shows what happens when the circuit is broken at TDC:

[Guest]

Ok I see what you mean, I did not bargain on the fact that in figure 4 the coil would also prevent the spring from uncompressing.

So I guess it comes down to truly "gating" the flux with a ferrous metal. This means that my rotor disc would probably some type of perforated steel disc, or plastic disc studded with metal inserts.

To one side of the perforated disc there would be fixed permanent magnets concentric to the rotor's circumference and the other would have spring bound sliding magnets or coils depending on which is more predictable.

Those are some nice animations, I think the second is especially interesting, although I do not know how it will behave.

[broli]

It's best to build your own gaussmeter and test how much the strength changes of the field with different setups;

Build your own Gaussmeter

[Guest]

I was thinking that although inefficient it could be possible to use the design in figure 4, by turning its coil off before the spring is about to release as suggested by you in your second animation. Thus only being able to capture energy from one energy process i.e. repulsion.

Figure 2 is better because it harnesses two energy processes, both attraction and repulsion.

[broli]

I was thinking that although inefficient it could be possible to use the design in figure 4, by turning its coil off before the spring is about to release as suggested by you in your second animation. Thus only being able to capture energy from one energy process i.e. repulsion.

Figure 2 is better because it harnesses two energy processes, both attraction and repulsion.

Yes but in that case something negative will happen. Let's go by it step by step:

1) the moving PM approaches the spring magnet
2) the closer it gets the stronger the repulsion thus the spring magnet will move up, compressing the spring AND generating current in the coil
3) since there's an electromagnet at play the magnet moves up slower compared to a setup without the coil
4) since its slower it means that the magnets are repelling more stronger than a setup without the coil
5) now the moving magnet hits TDC and the spring is compressed at its maximum length and the coil is shut off
6) as the moving magnet moves away the repulsion becomes weaker and the spring uncompresses
7) the force it repels with is exactly the same as the force it would have had if we had a setup WITHOUT the coil. Since we established that this force is weaker than a setup with a coil we can conclude that the force on the exit is weaker than on the entry
8) thus the setup will push the magnet harder when it enters than when it leaves and we end up with asymmetry which leads to an energy loss

Of course we have the energy in the coil. But unlike the other setups theory this is not self accelerating, on the contrary it's slowing down the motion each time you go through the cycle.

Again only experiments show the truth. I'm sure the above will make no sense whatsoever if you read it one time. If it keeps being senseless I could visualize it.

[Guest]

No worry, your explanations make perfect sense to me and thanks for the input, it's helped me understand things a lot better.

[broli]

Someone with the alias DQuale has something close yet far to figure 3. Here's his youtube channel

YouTube - DQuale's Channel

And his awfully designed website:

OVERUNITYBUILDER-HOME PAGE

There are two differences.

1) He uses one continuous ring magnet. This completely throws away any attraction the iron has to the magnet as its constant all around. The only attracting element is thus the coil (which gets killed, see below).

2) He doesn't break the circuit at TDC so the coil keeps attracting the iron when it exists thus nullifying the gained attraction of entry point.

Besides these two remarks and what I learned from your ideas his setup would indeed be drag less like he promotes it. But he could improve it insanely if he added in the changes.

[Guest]

How do you think something like this would play out?
Here we make use of attraction and repulsion processes instead of just repulsion.

[gyula]

@PArAd0X

I like this idea too...

Question on your earlier Fig. 3 setup: did you think of a coil with ferromagnetic core in it or an air core coil? Maybe the operation gets modified a little when the coil has a core and when it has an air core only?

Thanks, Gyula

[broli]

You should stick to the iron piece.

[Stealth]

The iron helps to nullify the repulsion. As the iron is removed, both magnets will repel or fly apart, if not stationary. Once the iron is reintroduced, the magnets will either mildly attract or be neutral. If both magnets are moveable, then you can get energy from both magnets. If they are connected, through gears and cranks, then you can get substantial power from this setup. See JL Naudins version, to get a better idea of how to set it up. I have been thinking of using a straight six automobile engine to set one up. GOOD luck. Stealth