Muller generator replication by Romerouk

[Steve220]

yes I see your point of view. things seem to work like this as I have found.
If you turn of the magnets field to avoid Lenz drag you are at the same time not producing power. What we need in this case is the I want my cake and eat it to This is where the speed under load is taking us.
always looking for information to the contrary.


My new motor bent the brackets holding the magnet in place today. so its back to the drawing board. I Was a few thousand RPM away from my target.
so I really need to fix the design.

I see what you are saying, since if you turn off the rotor coils at the half way point, you are only generating power on the first half of the wave form of the coil, so the power output would be reduced by half, however the amount of energy to turn the rotor would be half too.

So to produce the same power more coils would be needed. But then the energy required to turn the rotor would increase back to where you started.

This may not work too well.

But here is something to think about, if you do cancel out Lenz, you may have the very same problem.

The reason is that the back drag on the rotor is part of the power production in the generator coil. If this was canceled out I don’t see how the generator coil could generate full power either.

The coil would only produce one half the power, and take half the energy to turn the rotor, so you would have to add more coils to make up the difference, but then the energy to turn the rotor would be right back to the same place before the Lenz cancelation.

I guess what I am saying is I don’t see any free lunch here even if you do manage to cancel out Lenz.

Just thinking here.

Steve

[Shadesz]

I don't see the benefit to electromagnets on a rotary generator. You could achieve the same effect by pulsing a solid state generator without adding the extra losses due to friction.

Rotary motors try to tap the continuous energy created by the permanent magnet.

Solid stat generators try to tap energy at the point of creation and collapse of the magnetic field of an electromagnet.

They are two different ball games.

This is just my .02

K time for some charts...

[Shadesz]

Disclaimer: this idea/understanding may be way off and is currently just speculation. Take it with a grain of salt.

For this data I used this force calculator at 97 data points each being 1/40 th of an inch apart. The magnet size was 1" wide by 1/8" thick. I set the measuring points like they were on a core face that was on an angle of 1/8" rise for every 1" of face.

The black line in the middle represents the center of the magnet. And the red lines roughly show you the ends of the magnet.



Pay special attention to the blue line. This line represents the sideways pull force on the magnet. If you compare the positive pull force that is to the left of the center of the magnet and the negative pull force that is to the right of the center of the magnet magnet you will notice that they are not equal. This difference in force will cause the magnet to move forward.

Now before I go on and explain more...
Think about this on an Adams motor. As the magnet approaches the coil it is at an angle of approach. This angle is causing the magnet to pull itself closer to the core. This is a form of acceleration.

This pull force isn't as pronounced on a Muller type rotor because you only have a flat magnet face to core face. The flat face will not add that 'little bit of extra' acceleration on approach to TDC.

Hence Lenz will be able to influence a Muller design a little more, and thus it is harder to overcome Lenz. Now suppose you angle the core face so as to add this unequal pull force to a Muller design. It may give the Muller the difference we are looking for.

This assumes a linear angle of force from the magnets center to the core face. Real life is a little different, but you should get the idea.

Easy Test...
If you want to test this theory take an empty core and put it up to the Muller against a magnet like the magnet is TDC. Now angle the core back and forth and observe what happens to the rotor. It should turn slightly back and forth based on the direction of your angle. This is what it did in my tests anyway.

Note: This exercise assumes that the core face is bigger than the magnet face like we have previously identified is desirable in these generators. If your coil face is smaller than the magnet face, you will probably not see this effect.

More to come about this concept... maybe. What do you think? Need me to explain a part better? Am I off in left field?

[elias]

I don't think so

@Shadesz

I don't think that the core angle will make any difference all by itself. If you look at the blue diagram, you will see that the right side is a bit "fatter" than then left side, although the peak is higher on the left side.

But ... the lenz delay which causes asymmetry in the system might be altered because of the slanted core, this needs to be tested.

Keep it up, it is very good that you are so enthusiastic with many ideas!

[Shadesz]

@Shadesz

I don't think that the core angle will make any difference all by itself. If you look at the blue diagram, you will see that the right side is a bit "fatter" than then left side, although the peak is higher on the left side.

But ... the lenz delay which causes asymmetry in the system might be altered because of the slanted core, this needs to be tested.

Keep it up, it is very good that you are so enthusiastic with many ideas!

Yes I was wondering the same thing. That is why I took the right side all the way until it's Gauss matched that of the left side.

Even then, I get a sum difference of 5,790 gauss in favor of the left side?

Now if you cut the measurements off saying that the 1" magnet is centered on a 2" face you get an even bigger difference of 6740 Gauss.

If you want, download this "word document" and change the extension to .xlsx to see how I calculated it. The sum of gauss difference is at the bottom of sheet one.

It may still be wrong, I just thought you should see the difference numbers...

[thaelin]

Angled cores

Don't have any idea how they will behave in generator but I do when used in a motor. I mounted a cold rolled extension piece on the magnet and the same type angled in the coil. I found that you have a sharp magnetic force on the sharp part of the angle of the magnet piece and less on the other.
In essence, it didn't work worth a diddly. I thought it would force the mag lines out the face, not.

At least I tried, right? $85 worth of cores down the drain.

thay

[Shadesz]

Don't have any idea how they will behave in generator but I do when used in a motor. I mounted a cold rolled extension piece on the magnet and the same type angled in the coil. I found that you have a sharp magnetic force on the sharp part of the angle of the magnet piece and less on the other.
In essence, it didn't work worth a diddly. I thought it would force the mag lines out the face, not.

At least I tried, right? $85 worth of cores down the drain.

thay

You are saying you angled both the core face and the magnet face? And they were angled opposite of each other (so the points were as close as possible when they were tdc?

This is interesting, I just want to be sure I understand it.

[Shadesz]

READ! I finally get what we are doing when we delay lenz! And I get how it helps!!!

So tonight as I am laying in bed I realized something you guys probably already know. But for those who haven't made the connection yet I figured I will post it.

I was laying there trying to go to sleep and it 'clicked'. I finally understand what we are trying to do when we delay lenz and what we need to focus on to do so.

Essentially, when we are trying to delay lenz what are we really trying to do?

Well we know that lenz law says that if we induce a current in a coil of wire, the coil of wire will create a magnetic field that is opposite our initial force. So what does that mean? That means this...

Say you have a south face side of a magnet approaching and leaving a coil as Rod does in his setup. This motion will create two currents in the coil wire. One current as it approaches the coil and another current as it retreats from the coil. (This is basic stuff)

Now lets take it step deeper...
Remember, our magnet face S is approaching the coil. The current that we produce in the coil is in such a direction that the side of the coil facing the magnet is now also a South pole. These two poles push against each other and what does that cause? Lenz law.

Now we switch direction and your magnet starts to leave the coil. As your magnet leaves the coil it creates a current in the coil wire in the opposite direction. This then creates a North pole on the coil side facing the S face of the magnet. This creates an attraction force and what do we have again? Lenz law.

So now we can see that lenz shows up twice per cycle. Once on approach (as a repulsive force) and once on retreat (as an attractive force)

Ok, still kinda basic level stuff, but maybe that's all we need....

What do we need to do to get Lenz to work with/for us?...

Ideally, if we delay lenz by just over half a cycle we get a driving force. Why? Because when lenz finally creates the S pole on the coil face, the magnet will already be on its way away from the coil, hence we get propulsion. Make sense so far? It does to me. But it gets more exciting!...

Is this possible? YES!

What is this called? Phase shifting!

Does phase shifting happen? YES!

Where? In transformers.

How do pulse generators relate to Transformers? They ARE transformers! The primary coil isn't a coil though, it's your rotor magnet. The secondary coil is a coil; you know it as your generator coil. Again, the primary coil is your rotor magnet, the secondary coil is your generator coil.

Now when we phase shift our 'transformers' just right, that phase shift can potentially DRIVE our transformers!

Here, check out this quick video to get the image in your head before you read on...
Phase shift differences under variable loads. - YouTube

Did the video make sense? Did you catch the cool part at the end? It explains why we are seeing acceleration with coil shorting! From 1:15 he explains...

"Depending on the size of load will determine how big of a phase shift there is. I am going to hook it up to a load with even less resistance here. ...??... Ok, I hooked it up to an even bigger load this time. So [now] you can see how the phase shift is even more pronounced when you have a bigger load on the secondary side of the transformer. [which in are case means the generator coil]"

This not only tells us that we can achieve a lenz driven dynamo (or at least lenz assisted), it tells us that we can control the speed of it to a certain extent!

Freaking cool if you ask me! Note: this also may explain those generators that were seeing more acceleration under a medium load than a full short. Their particular phase shift timing required a resistance that was a little higher than a shorted coil. Perhaps their shorted coil produced a phase shift that was too pronounced, and a less dramatic phase shift is what their design needed? More testing needed, but I feel this concept can help us focus on the right question...

How can we maximize and/or gain better control of phase shifting?

I haven't studied phase shifting yet so I have some basic questions. Do any applications encourage phase shifting? If so, what are they? How do they do it? How can we replicate the effect? Personally I think these questions are going to be the key to these generators going OU.

We already know one way, and that is to decrease the cycle time by increasing the RPM. IMO this would also explain why Romero says this...

Mariuscivic and toranarod are close enough.Both will have to concentrate to get the effect at lower speed. After a certain rpm you will have no gain then again at the next step will have again and so on...

Example: if starting the effect at 1000 rpm then the gain is going to vanish at 1600rpm then we can get it again starting at 2000rpm... at one point in every cycle voltage drops down even if the rpm is going high.We are getting multiple resonance points and not all are the seme, some are better than others. This is only one example, don't take for real and start looking to have 1000rpm...
Now I am not looking to get the speedup too much, I want the rpm to stay stable at any load or short. I am going to have it confirmed when I will finish my new generator, towards the end of this month.

Romero

The multiple resonance points may be explained by a static phase delay in our core/coil coming in and out of optimum phase shifts due to our changing the cycle time (RPM). Pretty cool! Although if this is the case, I don't see him getting a constant RPM with varying loads.

So the question remains... What other ways can we maximize and/or control phase shifting? What ways can we do it that won't require us to change the RPM?

Man I wont be able to sleep for a while now! lol

Disclaimer: The above principles and concepts are released open source to the world free of charge by David Sphar on Sept 19, 2011. Please make a copy of this post as a backup record of this release. (Just in case the idea actually proves to work and the $$ folks try to steal it)

[elias]

@Shadesz!

This was my line of thought too, we need a dual input oscilloscope for this and a sinwave voltage supply, with variable frequency. We need to make the phase shift 180 degree and this should make the input current decrease, or at least remain the same, when drawing current from the output, I recall Thane doing some such experiments. More experimentation is required ...

Also, about the delay issue, I think that it "might" be better to use magnets in a super pole configuration, because it narrows down the magnetic field while increasing the strength, this will make it require very small amount of delay to see this effect although I do understand that this may also reduce the amount of voltage generated. using magnets in alternating N-S super pule config. Also considering a core with a triangular head, that points towards the super poles.

Elias

[Steve220]

Phase shifting

That is interesting, but I wonder how Lenz delay would create OU.

If the current generated in the coil during the approach of the rotor magnet is now delayed and sent back to the coil to push the rotor magnet, it seem to me that there would be no current generated for external use as the current generated is used to push the rotor magnets after the Lenz (if this could be done) delay.

Looks like the result would be zero, even if Lenz is actually delayed.

See my idea about turning off rotor electromagnets after TDC of the generator coil core.

As Rod pointed out to me, this will only generate half the power that a permanent magnet rotor would and so you would have to have more generator coils to make the same power.

So the result would be the same amount of output as before for the same amount of mechanical input. The gain would be zero. I totally agree with Rod on this.

In a permanent magnet rotor, generator coil situation in order for there to be a full wave output from the coil, Lenz must be used.

If Lenz is canceled or delayed, the coil will only produce half the output it normally would.

If there is a flaw in this logic, please enlighten me.

Steve

[toranarod]

So tonight as I am laying in bed I realized something you guys probably already know. But for those who haven't made the connection yet I figured I will post it.

I was laying there trying to go to sleep and it 'clicked'. I finally understand what we are trying to do when we delay lenz and what we need to focus on to do so.

Essentially, when we are trying to delay lenz what are we really trying to do?

Well we know that lenz law says that if we induce a current in a coil of wire, the coil of wire will create a magnetic field that is opposite our initial force. So what does that mean? That means this...

Say you have a south face side of a magnet approaching and leaving a coil as Rod does in his setup. This motion will create two currents in the coil wire. One current as it approaches the coil and another current as it retreats from the coil. (This is basic stuff)

Now lets take it step deeper...
Remember, our magnet face S is approaching the coil. The current that we produce in the coil is in such a direction that the side of the coil facing the magnet is now also a South pole. These two poles push against each other and what does that cause? Lenz law.

Now we switch direction and your magnet starts to leave the coil. As your magnet leaves the coil it creates a current in the coil wire in the opposite direction. This then creates a North pole on the coil side facing the S face of the magnet. This creates an attraction force and what do we have again? Lenz law.

So now we can see that lenz shows up twice per cycle. Once on approach (as a repulsive force) and once on retreat (as an attractive force)

Ok, still kinda basic level stuff, but maybe that's all we need....

What do we need to do to get Lenz to work with/for us?...

Ideally, if we delay lenz by just over half a cycle we get a driving force. Why? Because when lenz finally creates the S pole on the coil face, the magnet will already be on its way away from the coil, hence we get propulsion. Make sense so far? It does to me. But it gets more exciting!...

Is this possible? YES!

What is this called? Phase shifting!

Does phase shifting happen? YES!

Where? In transformers.

How do pulse generators relate to Transformers? They ARE transformers! The primary coil isn't a coil though, it's your rotor magnet. The secondary coil is a coil; you know it as your generator coil. Again, the primary coil is your rotor magnet, the secondary coil is your generator coil.

Now when we phase shift our 'transformers' just right, that phase shift can potentially DRIVE our transformers!

Here, check out this quick video to get the image in your head before you read on...
Phase shift differences under variable loads. - YouTube

Did the video make sense? Did you catch the cool part at the end? It explains why we are seeing acceleration with coil shorting! From 1:15 he explains...

"Depending on the size of load will determine how big of a phase shift there is. I am going to hook it up to a load with even less resistance here. ...??... Ok, I hooked it up to an even bigger load this time. So [now] you can see how the phase shift is even more pronounced when you have a bigger load on the secondary side of the transformer. [which in are case means the generator coil]"

This not only tells us that we can achieve a lenz driven dynamo (or at least lenz assisted), it tells us that we can control the speed of it to a certain extent!

Freaking cool if you ask me! Note: this also may explain those generators that were seeing more acceleration under a medium load than a full short. Their particular phase shift timing required a resistance that was a little higher than a shorted coil. Perhaps their shorted coil produced a phase shift that was too pronounced, and a less dramatic phase shift is what their design needed? More testing needed, but I feel this concept can help us focus on the right question...

How can we maximize and/or gain better control of phase shifting?

I haven't studied phase shifting yet so I have some basic questions. Do any applications encourage phase shifting? If so, what are they? How do they do it? How can we replicate the effect? Personally I think these questions are going to be the key to these generators going OU.

We already know one way, and that is to decrease the cycle time by increasing the RPM. IMO this would also explain why Romero says this...



The multiple resonance points may be explained by a static phase delay in our core/coil coming in and out of optimum phase shifts due to our changing the cycle time (RPM). Pretty cool! Although if this is the case, I don't see him getting a constant RPM with varying loads.

So the question remains... What other ways can we maximize and/or control phase shifting? What ways can we do it that won't require us to change the RPM?

Man I wont be able to sleep for a while now! lol

Disclaimer: The above principles and concepts are released open source to the world free of charge by David Sphar on Sept 19, 2011. Please make a copy of this post as a backup record of this release. (Just in case the idea actually proves to work and the $$ folks try to steal it)

This is a well thought out reasoning. I like it fantastic stuff .
I have been trying to say the same thing its just that nobody understands the explication until they understand the theory.

There is a 90 degree phase shift every time you charge and discharge a coil.
Same thing with a capacitor it just in reverse.

The only problem with the coil is it also has resistance. and a capacitor has no resistance at all. A capacitor is purely reactive a coil is both reactive and resistant.
Now do you get why I have been winding so many coils and check there inductance against there core materials.
its all about what you have just described. keeping the phase shift at 90 degrees. the only way to do that is inductance high and resistance low.
and time shift as slow as possible. T = XL/R. RPM fast as possible. The longer the time moves forward the more L and R move into phase. YES.

just look at you capacitor time constant when a capacitor is full charged the light goes out. if you are charging it through a globe or LED.

do the same thing with a coil and the longer you charge it the brighter the globe gets until the only thing left is R and your coil is just a resistor.

This explains the problem between coils and capacitors why they are one of the same devices in electronics and how both of them get used in a speaker
cross over net work Or filters or surge protector
both of them oppose any sudden change to the supply voltage by shifting there Phase.

this is not the total answer to the design of the generator only part of the problem, there are many other factors. its like you just said this stuff keeps me awake lot of the night.

there are also construction issues, i am having major difficulty keeping the magnets in place at over 3000 RPM. I lost another one today came off at 140
Kmh. you can see why the Muller design is so popular, Magnet fixing is much
more simplistic.

[qvision]

@ Shadesz, thanks for the thought experiment and the video link.

To quote you earlier :

"Interesting. I still don't get why the field would be different with a rectangular magnet? I have tried to find models out there to compare the two but no luck."

The difference is simple, i posted this a couple of days ago but you may have missed it, with a straight-edged magnet the field arrives at the coil in a uniform manner, equal through space and time, whereas with a curved-edge the field more slowly approaches the coil.

So, perhaps it's the sudden and equal arrival (and exit) of the field that makes cubes superior to discs.

[quantumuppercut]

That is interesting, but I wonder how Lenz delay would create OU.

If the current generated in the coil during the approach of the rotor magnet is now delayed and sent back to the coil to push the rotor magnet, it seem to me that there would be no current generated for external use as the current generated is used to push the rotor magnets after the Lenz (if this could be done) delay.

Looks like the result would be zero, even if Lenz is actually delayed.

See my idea about turning off rotor electromagnets after TDC of the generator coil core.

As Rod pointed out to me, this will only generate half the power that a permanent magnet rotor would and so you would have to have more generator coils to make the same power.

So the result would be the same amount of output as before for the same amount of mechanical input. The gain would be zero. I totally agree with Rod on this.

In a permanent magnet rotor, generator coil situation in order for there to be a full wave output from the coil, Lenz must be used.

If Lenz is canceled or delayed, the coil will only produce half the output it normally would.

If there is a flaw in this logic, please enlighten me.

Steve

I've read argument that the shorted out current can't be useful and that shorted out is just the same as an open coil. I think the two situations definitely different. What I've seen so far neutralizing Lenz depends on L/R. Which means you can put any loading you want on the coil, just have to watch your L/R . Another thing I see when the magnet approach the core it lowered L which drag out the L/R making us use more speed than regular calculation.

[Shadesz]

@ Shadesz, thanks for the thought experiment and the video link.

To quote you earlier :

"Interesting. I still don't get why the field would be different with a rectangular magnet? I have tried to find models out there to compare the two but no luck."

The difference is simple, i posted this a couple of days ago but you may have missed it, with a straight-edged magnet the field arrives at the coil in a uniform manner, equal through space and time, whereas with a curved-edge the field more slowly approaches the coil.

So, perhaps it's the sudden and equal arrival (and exit) of the field that makes cubes superior to discs.

Interesting idea. I wonder why that would make a difference?

[Shadesz]

@all,

Thanks for the replies. I had a feeling that I was just catching up to what you guys already knew. haha!

Maybe we wont be able to beat lenz completely as this would require a complete 180* shift, and like others said, wouldn't this cause the generator to produce no output? (Perhaps this is what is happening when Romero talks about the voltage approaching zero as you pass through the rpm resonance points)

Man I'm so glad I found this forum and decided to go into EE. It just keep getting more interesting. Thanks guys.



@Rod,

I think I get what you are talking about with your coil short timing. Question, will that controller kit I'm getting from you allow me to do this? It seems like it would?