Permanent Magnets

[Dean2]

Books

GB, I agree, many of the related material is quite expensive. I've been looking at some of the titles "used" from Amazon.

[Dean2]

Additional aspects of Overcoming lock-up and back-drag…

A force between a permanent-magnet and a permanent-magnet can be made equivalent to that between current-element and current-element. Continuous rotational motion is possible between multiple PMs, contrary to conclusions, which may seem to violate certain physics principals. As stated by Einstein, it is known that Maxwell's Electrodynamics, as understood when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries, which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena.

However, the magnetic pole back-drag normally experienced with permanent magnets, which prevents an object from continuous motion, and the magnetic lock-up that stops all motion, is overcome by the overall effect of the numerous multiple induced secondary currents.

Combined forces create a uniform asymmetric field well exceeding the drag and preventing the magnetic lock-up. The effects of back-drag virtually cease to exist and lockup does not occur. As explained, the multiple dual sets of induced electromotive effects are due to the permanent magnets rotation, plus the rotor-conductors motion relative to the asymmetric stators permanent magnetic fields.

…If these actions actually eliminate the potential back-drag, or simply overcome this force is not certain – the results are the same.
Demo at: Green Energy 211

[Joit]

Hi Dean,
i just wanna ask 3 Questions, even when they are may answered.
How much Money did you invest into this Stator, and how much would may cost one or 2 from this Fields.
I guess te complete Device is worth 3000 Bucks? and 2 Fields maybe around 300?
Do you have any 'rolling' in Forces to overcome, even, when it doesnt looks like that there are any
and, how much Force have your Stick when it starts rolling. Is it just rolling or is it still able to move a (small) weight?
Thanks in advantage.

[Dean2]

some specs...

Hi Joit, There are no “rolling” forces to overcome in this setup. What you see is true to reality. Yes, it is capable of moving a weight (performing work), also capable of traveling uphill at a constant 30-degree incline, or 180 degree turns.

I have built 50 or 60 tracks of various sizes; sorry it is difficult to guess a cost. Your best bet to estimating would be to decide on a width and length. Count the PMS in a given gate, and check current pricing. You can very easily pay too much for magnets, it pays to shop around. There are many good sources, depending on your location.

Another note, in the testing of one track, the free running rotor in testing rotated at approximately 2200 RPMs. The forward motion of the rotor while rotating was measured at approximately 2 mps. On a 3meter linear track this speed was constant and no acceleration was observed.
Green Energy 211

[Shamus]

Thanks Dean, those pics really help.

[Joit]

Hi Dean,
thank you for your Answer, the other solution maybe is, to use ceramic Magents, what are way cheaper as the Neodym.
But i do really enjoy the Pictures and Principles of the Track.
Still thinking about, if we can not apply it at other Devices,
because it looks simple, when you can arrange the Magnets, that it creates a Direction of a Force, and leave the opposite Force at the outside, or however you can descibe it.

[Dean2]

SIGNIFICANT additional thoughts on theory of operation:

We begin with the premise that with the appropriate permanent magnet geometry, and by applying additional magnetic fields to select permanent magnetic fields - instead of the action slowing down the system that created it, the reaction could add energy to the system. This is accomplished by changing the magnitude of one or more potentials. Change of a single potential is an asymmetrical change, and it also changes the net force field.

There are many subtle actions occurring within this track and axle. The rotor that runs on the track is an electrical “conductor”, yet has a neutral permeability of “one”, and it contains two pairs of magnetic poles. To further enhance, it is moving through varying “magnetic fields”. The rails of the track are also an electrical conductor and act as a stator. However, all forces are only induced by permanent magnets.

The two sets of poles in the rotor are attracted to the multiple two-sets of poles in the track. Of course, under conventional “rules”, the rotor (axle) should stop (and lock-up) immediately at the first significant attracting magnetic set of poles. Keep in mind, these are very strong neodymium magnets and arranged in a manner that even further strengthens their flux… the lock-up would be very significant.

Once movement begins a pair of “Motional EMF” fields are induced because of the conductor moving through the static magnetic fields. In addition to the conductor, we have dual sets of permanent magnets moving through these static magnetic fields, creating a second pair of EMF torques in tandem.

This NEXT effect cannot be explained in terms of the classical Faraday disc experiment, which involves the force on a charge moving in a magnetic field. The generation of an electrical potential by this technique is strange in classical terms. The existence of “unipolar induction” was probably one of the inspiring pieces of experimental evidence leading Einstein to propose the special theory of relativity. The interesting twist here, this action we are going to describe traditionally occurs in an “isolated” environment. In other words, there would not be other forces as we have just previously described, happening around it.

That said, when this occurs there are virtually equal and opposite forces, multiple electric fields that coexist in space. Conventional thinking says they combine to eliminate each other. The presence of the magnetic field suggests that the electric fields of individual charges in fact coexist. When the charge moves, the electric field moves with it. Now, let’s examine this next force.

A way of viewing this problem can be by first looking at an electrically neutral metal ring, in which an electron current is flowing counter-clockwise (negative current flowing clockwise), and which is moving to the left at a speed. In the rest frame of the ring no net charge density will exist at any point. As we view the moving ring, the electrons will be moving faster to the right at the top of the ring, while the positive charge will be moving faster to the right at the bottom. In our frame the length of the electron cloud on top and of the positive cloud on the bottom will be “relativistically” shortened, leading to a positive charge density on top of the ring and an equal negative charge density on the bottom.

Looking at the rotating magnet is to look at the equivalent electron current around the magnetic domains of which the magnet is composed. In our example, the end of the magnet facing us is South, and the magnet is rotating counter-clockwise, we observe that the velocity of the electron cloud and the velocity of the rotating magnet add on the outside and subtract on the inside of each loop.

This means that the electron cloud will have a greater velocity on the outside, so that in the fixed external frame of reference we will observe a length contraction of that side of the electron cloud. Because the electron cloud density in the magnet frame is uniform, we will then view the electron cloud as having a greater positive charge density on the outside, leading to a positive potential of the outside of the magnet relative to that of the center.

Based on that, my original theory was the combined forces create a uniform asymmetric field well exceeding the drag and preventing the magnetic lock-up. In other words, more forward torque in the direction of travel than drag. The effects of back-drag virtually cease to exist and lockup does not occur.

However, I would like to further suggest that yes, these multiple forward torque forces do outweigh the drag forces – but, cannot alone account for lockup not to occur at the strong flux points. I further suspect that my last point on “unipolar induction”, plays a more significant role. Besides the traditional lockup, it’s this force, that’s the other counter torque in the equation.

Now bear with me, as I express this new thought here. The forward movement “appears” fluid, yet the pull between the beginning and end of a gate is obviously more significant. The flux is much greater and would pull the rotor from any middle ground, to the closest strong magnetic lock-up point.

This action between these larger magnets DOES have a purpose and maintains the other forces as the moving conductor and flux fields pass through them. When “static” in time, the dual poles of the rotor are attracted to the major gate points, however when the rotor “arrives” at the junction, the “electron cloud” as previously described on the rotor ends, presents magnetic fields that negates the lockup. The rotor then passes this point resulting in a “null” state, immediately then influenced by the attraction of the next significant field of magnets. The forward torque returns and the rotor is pulled toward the next junction, only to repeat the process.

Granted, the interaction of these many forces combined, may also result in yet, an unexplained event. I do believe we are moving closer though, in understanding the magic. The ability to manipulate these fields (with only permanent magnets) opens endless opportunities of different approaches to break symmetry and literally put magnets to work. See link for video and previous references.
Green Energy 211

[Dean2]

Comment or Insight?

Any comments or insight on previous comments are welcome and encouraged.

[broli]

I think you have people on edge more than anything, I'm happy you have the budget for such setups and to be able to have gone this far.

But how pathetic it might sound, people, or at least me to not generalize too much, are waiting for a closed looped version before they nuke their wallets and replicate this. But on the other hand you can always ask for any kind of help or support in order to attain that goal, and asking is always free. Everyone has some skills, when we share them for the same cause is when we can achieve big things.

[void109]

Waiting to see

But how pathetic it might sound, people, or at least me to not generalize too much, are waiting for a closed looped version before they nuke their wallets and replicate this.

Roger that. I've been watching this thread with baited breath, eagerly awaiting the results of that beautiful circular version you posted a picture of.

What you're doing looks amazing, I'm still trying to wrap my head around, visualize, what is going on when that thing jets down the track, with all of the various fields inducing currents creating their own fields, it's complicated as hell, maybe impossible, to imagine the interplay of the many vectors.

It looks like you're very, very close to being able to test something with a closed loop. So I'm just waiting and watching. The moment that happens I'll happily drop money into a replication. I'm pretty invested in several other projects, so I'm just watching this one for now.

Keep up the great work, and thank you so much for being detailed in what you've shared. If you have a solution, we all know the world sorely needs access to it.

[Dean2]

Additional thoughts

A simple summary. The inducement of multiple forward torque forces, through the careful placement of permanent magnets. Secondary magnetic fields induced by the movement of PMs and Conductors through these flux fields. Plus, the proposed negation of the prominent locking force.

When considering a loop or rotary setup, keep in mind, the interactions of PMs within close proximity of one another that may have a negative influence on the goals.

Another consideration, with a better understanding of these many forces that can be induced with PMs - Consider hybrid designs to further enhance other power systems.
Video and theory at: Green Energy 211

[Shamus]

I don't believe you need a circular setup to see tangible gains from this kind of magnetic track--you just need to use some lateral thinking to see the possiblities.

I'm wondering if NdFeB magnets are required to make this work. If not, that would lower the barrier to entry in replicating Mr. Dean's work.

[Dean2]

options...

Hi Shamus, Not in any way to appear bias, yet I completely agree with you. Yes, we would all like to see a rotary system, and perhaps that will work as well. In my mind I, already see that happening. There are always problems to be solved; however they become much easier to overcome when you understand the nature of that problem.

For others, don’t let the current linear design discourage you from further understanding the theory behind it. I see it as painfully simple, however I am very aware, I have “lived” with it for years – and perhaps the “result” appears simple, yet the complexities are in understanding it. I can “see” flux in my mind, perhaps an unfair advantage over some.

The only thing that NdFeB magnets bring to the table are strength, which intrepts to “speed” in this case, IMO. Just as in a conventional generator, the speed in which a PM cuts across a coil affects the amount of current generated. I also think that the relativistically unipolar actions “may” be dependent on speed. In tests performed by independent labs, attention has been drawn to the RPMs reached by the rotor as a focus point. Implying speed may be important.

One would only need to build about three complete gates (3x5) with ceramic magnets to discover how dependent this variable is. I would remind one though; the use of metallic PMs in the rotor will be necessary. They would have to be something “weaker” than NdFeb to “balance” with the ceramic. I should mention in case, if it’s not obvious, there’s no need to “connect” or “glue” anything together. The magnetic forces are more than adequate to hold the assembly together. Other than attaching the rails to a base. So, it is easy to modify or disassemble.

It could also be much “smaller”; the dynamics of gravity is the only other aspect I see of concern. Magnets are proportionately “heavy”; more strength is needed to perform more “work”. Understanding that the simple movement of the rotor down the track DOES constitute “work”. Many of the, “General Public” actually thinks that high-speed trains “run on magnets”. So, there is a great lack of understanding in this field still today.

I believe the MOST important lesson learned here is: Magnetic Symmetry CAN BE BROKEN with only permanent magnets. This is crucial in performing work with these tools.
Video and theory: Green Energy 211

[gyula]

...
One would only need to build about three complete gates (3x5) with ceramic magnets to discover how dependent this variable is. I would remind one though; the use of metallic PMs in the rotor will be necessary. They would have to be something “weaker” than NdFeb to “balance” with the ceramic. I should mention in case, if it’s not obvious, there’s no need to “connect” or “glue” anything together. The magnetic forces are more than adequate to hold the assembly together. Other than attaching the rails to a base. So, it is easy to modify or disassemble.
....

Hi Barry,

I think Alnico magnets could fairly be used instead of Neos for the rotor magnets, they are also metallic and not much stronger than ceramic magnets (when ceramic magnets would be used for the stators), hence Alnico seems a good candidate.
Of course I suggest this for those wishing to experiment with this setup but would not wish to spend too much money on this initially. And later when a "proof of concept" has evolved in front of them, the much stronger Neos could come.

My question would be: in your setup the brass cylinders in the stator are also to be made of brass? And these also contain magnets inside?
Supposing brass is not used in the stator but Alu or copper instead, would it introduce drawbacks, just like when brass would not be used for the rotor?

Thanks, Gyula

[Dean2]

options

Hi Gyula, I agree, Alnico magnets would be a good substitute candidate for the rotor PMs. It can be done, without the brass in the stator, not quite as efficient. I would not use copper or aluminum as a substitute in these tubes. Better nothing at all.

The ideal combination that I found to date is: brass rotor and brass throughout stator interior, copper rails for stator. I have had success with aluminum rails and rotor, just not as good. The specific brass is a K&S product out of Chicago, found at many hobby or home improvement stores. The wall thinness is what makes its selection best. Too much mass seems to be an issue in any of these components.