Free Energy Device Working - COP ∞ - Please Replicate This

[jibbguy]

Just a word of practical advice for folks thinking of trying Halbach arrays: Don't get the common 1/4" N42 cubes, and expect ANY glue known to man to allow you to glue them together in a classic Halbach, it is very difficult to do. Recently i tried this for a conventional alternative energy project i am part of here.

The closest you will likely be able to glue them, even with channel walls on either side as reinforcement to provide a much greater area for glue, and to keep them from turning... is about 1/8" apart. And even this small distance appears to matter to the overall effect. Trying to get these suckers to sit right next to each other without a fastener is virtually impossible, they are too strong for that (even clamping them overnight didn't help). I even tried that aluminum foil adhesive tape used in heating/cooling ducting as a little shield barrier in between, but it did not help much either because the field extends way beyond the cube.

So it is better to get either much weaker mags, or ones that are drilled for fasteners (or carefully and SLOWLY drill them all). And half of them must be drilled "N to S", and the other half drilled parallel to the N-S poles.

[Aaron]

Halbach Array

Jibbguy,

Having a setting screw is usually necessary with neos then once they are
set, superglue could be put around the cracks just for extra precaution.

I've used these arrays in quite a few different projects but was never
able to get anyone here interested in the Halbach array. I learned of it
when learning about "Electromechanical Batteries" with passive magnetic
bearings.

You can buy a circular array for about $300 for magnetic bearing application
but that is of course expensive but the magnets are specially charged to have
the field in the right direction for the trapazoids so 4 different ones.

This is more efficient than the standard lev track with Halbach array on
bottom of train moving over shorted coils.... much more efficient.

Applied Levitation - Reinventing Maglev Transportation: Home

And takes like 100 watts per TON of weight to keep it centered on the
the track.

[Aaron]

Halbach "unipole"

Matt, here's a pic



Looking at it again, I guess all 3 magnets on the bottom have N facing
out, analogy to halbach array would be a "unipole south"

Washing sure if it it was alternating or not. Horrible picture because
the horizontal magnets above, that N and S don't really show what is
going on.

Anyway, I have done this with half of the Halbach Array to get the
"monopole" setup on the track quite a while back. It seems to be an
easier way to get the Unipole effect without having to bevel magnets
etc... but anyway, field probably isn't the same.

[Matthew Jones]

Aaron

The author says ... It makes use if a unipole magnet so that a net force is exerted at all times on the armature magnets in one direction only.

Even a Halbach Array exerts force in 2 directions at the same time. A full magnet exerts force in 4 directions. Each corner exerts force.
The Halbach is asymmetric but not in the right fashion. It only creates a stronger North or South pole.
Every example Howard Johnson shows in rotary or linear track exerts energy from 2 corners of opposite poles from either the Drive or Driven maget. This is the key. This is how you maintian a spinning motion within the feild. The large corner exerts more than the smaller so in can fire the driven magnet set past the smaller corner. Or the smaller corner is shorted out all together to add to the net force of the larger ones.

I am not saying its not worth trying. I just say I don't see anything in it that shows force applied in rotary closed loop fashion.

Dr. Yin's said....If you think his design will not work please enlighten us as to why, im interested. Also, I will have a physical explanation as to why this idea will work, typed up soon.

I am not understanding the thought train that this is anything close to Howard Johnson's gates. I have built several gates for linear straight motion.
The gates first magnet emulate a hollow magnet. The one corners field rolls into the center. The second set of magnets allows for that field to roll through without being interrupted by a opposite poles field, this is why soft rubber poled magnets can be used.
The whole process is very asymmetrical through the tube. It also gains power from the A fields on the driven magnet.

On the contrary this magnetic assembly shows no asymmetrical behavior. In fact under a model it has very symmetrical fields that present themselves similar to the Halbach array. Except the field reside to the bottom of the assembly. The field is very weak at the top. This is why the author brings up angles. 30 deg. You can turn the DRIVE assembly 30 deg facing to the Right outside (as drawn) and you may get a small incomplete rotary motion. But you will not get a closed loop to roll all the way through.
The author says so as well. "The force disappears..."
I can tell ya why. When you stick magnets together they unite to create one field. When you space them out, as in the the driven example, the still flow through each other. The outer bands of the flux now are very weak and cannot interact with the fields on the drive magnet assembly.
Under an Open loop you will only gain power from the start and end magnet. The rest of the magnets will only allow for the field to flow by, at the same time they will take power from the system and not return it.
When closed there will be no power because the primary amount of the flux will stay withing the path of the magnets. You will have nothing to start the motor with.

Johnson solved the problem within is arrays by creating an interaction between to sets of magnets that would not allow them to stay in a stable field. They fired. The drive magnets and the driven magnets fired at every interaction between the 2. No exceptions. It also gained speed until equilibrium was achieved.

I have a small track that does this. Its not the one in my signature. But I have it posted here.

Now I would like to hear the argument for.

And again I don't want to discourage anyone from trying. I just am sharing my experience.

Matt

[Murlin]

Hey Matt, cool video. I was wondering if you laid out the ceramics on a 6" arc instead of a flat you might could use a 1 FT dia wheel. Mold it all together with epoxy to keep it in place.

Would that still constitute a linear device

regards,

Murlin

[Matthew Jones]

The drive array would have to be the same length (6.5 inches) or increments of and the same amount of magnets in the same pattern. The radius of the driven magnets (Center mag's) would be at 4 foot. So if you mold that 6.5 to a 4 ft radius then technically you could get rotation out of it. I doubt it would do work in its current state.

I just haven't had the time to try.

You could also mount the driven magnets inside a flexible rubber belt and use the drive array as is. You would need pulleys on each end.
This I already know works. Previous builds have given way to friction but the material I used to build it with was not top notch and the whole thing was prone to problems from craftsmanship. But it ran for a time. Long enough to prove the theory. The drive array was also not as powerful as this current build.

Would that still constitute a linear device

Technically in this device every magnet is driven, therefore the whole thing is a closed loop and still runs. Linear or rotary does not matter, the principle is solid and will work in just about any form with the correct fabrication.
This is a close to direct copy of most of Howard Johnson's rotary and linear work. All his machines run from about 3 key component rules(the best I can tell) . Although the shapes vary the rules do not change. You will not find the true value of these arrangements in a standard magnetic theory. Just indicators in field arrangements.

Matt

[Aaron]

quote

I am not understanding the thought train that this is anything close to Howard Johnson's gates. I have built several gates for linear straight motion.

It looks like you're quoting me through the entire message since you didn't
put Dr. Yin's name after the 2nd quote.

[Aaron]

magnet has 9 poles

A magnet has 9 "poles".

[Matthew Jones]

Sorry about that Aaron

9 poles? How you figure?

Matt

[Aaron]

magnetic poles

First, each entry or exit point on a magnet has to be multiplied by two.

There are north magnetic charges moving to south. While the south
magnetic charges are moving in the opposite direction towards north.

The magnetic flow is bi-directional at the same time just as there is a
bi-directional flow of of potential moving over a wire - positive and negative
- I don't mean electrons as the negative flow towards positive terminal.

The 9th pole is virtual or neutral type pole.

Multiple "poles" could be deceiving as there is north and south only

[sinergicus]

magnetic motor ideea to think about

I bought some time ago some plans ,including this magnetic free energy motor.
This motor ,in my opinion ,seems to using the principle described in this topic.

I tried to replicate it but no success.Maybe I missed something?
Anyway is an idea to inspire in constructing an working model....


Can somebody share the books of Joseph H Cater (The Awesome Life Force and The Ultimate Reality) in electronic format?
This will be very appreciated .These books seems to contain interesting and practical information's ....

[sebosfato]

I bought some time ago some plans ,including this magnetic free energy motor.
This motor ,in my opinion ,seems to using the principle described in this topic.

I tried to replicate it but no success.Maybe I missed something?
Anyway is an idea to inspire in constructing an working model....


Can somebody share the books of Joseph H Cater (The Awesome Life Force and The Ultimate Reality) in electronic format?
This will be very appreciated .These books seems to contain interesting and practical information's ....

If there is a net gain it can be certainly done

I was thinking in developing one using shields to try to find a region where any net gain could be obtained...

regards

[Stealth]

I,also have a copy of this motor. I have built one in linear form, and it does work. The theory is sound.I have not built one in circular motion. It usually takes a different approach to make a magnetic motor run in a circular motion. I am sure I know how to do this, but it would require several sets of magnets for the stator and two magnets for the rotor. They would need to be offset so only one set is engaged at one time. This way while one set is pulling, the other set is coasting. I have made a CAD design I am going to try as soon as I get the time and materials. I have the book, but not in electronic format, sorry. Good Luck. Stealth

[sebosfato]

Man can you show us a video of the linear acceleration you created?

[Stealth]

Sorry, I didn't make a video. I usually cannibalize my projects after experimenting to reuse the magnets on other experiments. This way I can save on repurchasing new magnets. The only one I have now is a TOMI linear motor which I can take a picture of a post here. Essentially it works the same way, except it uses two rows of magnets, on on each side of a rolling or sliding rotor magnet. You can use far less magnets with this magnet motor though. When I get time I will post several pictures of my TOMI. It is not hard to build a linear motion magnetic motor, several have been made and posted on here.Good Luck. Stealth