Asymmetric coil to magnet ratios

[Altair]

Wow Shadesz,
you're really on a roll there.

This thread will be a nice future reference for inquiring minds.

If I can add anything to your work, it would be just to mention that obviously, the most important parameter in a generator of this kind is the frequency into the coils. I have a strong feeling that the coils must be in resonance to be able to generate power. So, we must determine the number of coils & magnets that will allow the desired frequency, while keeping the RPM of the rotor within a reasonable margin to avoid structural failure of the rotor due to centrifugal force.

Keep up the good work !

[gyula]

Hi Shadesz,

I wonder if you have seen these videos, they are showing paper models of such setups you are providing in your nice animations. Maybe they serve for some further understanding for others.

Attempt at explaining the events inside the Muller Dynamo - YouTube

Virtual elastic south poles view - YouTube

Muller Dynamo. Comparison between numbers of coils and magnets - YouTube

Gyula

[Shadesz]

Wow Shadesz,
you're really on a roll there.

This thread will be a nice future reference for inquiring minds.

If I can add anything to your work, it would be just to mention that obviously, the most important parameter in a generator of this kind is the frequency into the coils. I have a strong feeling that the coils must be in resonance to be able to generate power. So, we must determine the number of coils & magnets that will allow the desired frequency, while keeping the RPM of the rotor within a reasonable margin to avoid structural failure of the rotor due to centrifugal force.

Keep up the good work !

Thanks, I'll keep going until I feel like I have a good grasp on the relationship of # of coils to # of mags. Hopefully it proves useful to more than just me.

Frequency is something I have wondered about. IMO there are two things I want to get a better understanding of related to frequency.

First is how to calculate output frequency, (maybe) on these units. It appears to me you would take 360 degrees (one rotation) and divide it by the degree turn per coil fire that I mention in post 15. This will give you the number of cycles per rotation. You then take that number and multiply it by your RPM's. Now you have cycles per minute. Then you divide that by 60 to reduce it to cycles per second.

So, in post 15 we found that we get 1 cycle per every 4.675325 degrees. Now take 360 degrees and divide that by 4.675325 and we find that one rotation gives us 77 cycles. Assume we rotate it at 2,000 RPM. We multiply cycles per rotation (77) by rotations per minute (2,000) to get Cycles Per Minute (154,000). We then divide by 60 seconds to reduce this to cycles per second, or Hertz. 154,000/60 = 2566.6 Hz or 2.5666 Khz

Or in simple terms...
Hz= cmr/60g

Where...
Hz= Hertz
c= number of coils
m= number of magnets
r= rotations per minute
g= greatest common factor between # of coils and # of magnets

Now to check this using the first line in this post.
Here rod is using 8 magnets and one generator coil. Plug this into the Hz formula...

Hz= cmr/60g
Hz=(1)(8)(4059)/60(1)

Hz=541.2
Hmmmm... this doesn't match his frequency of 663 per microsecond.
Any ideas? Did I do something wrong? Interpret his data wrong? Or is my currently limited understanding of pulse motors and frequency messing my calculations up somehow?
Perhaps someone can provide me numbers from their own generator so we can check those?

[Rubberband]

Animations

Hello, I need some help in a way with your animation skills, it's about seeing an idea I have dealing with a coil assisted gravity wheel. My email address is wallygrump@hotmail.com...If you're interested, please email me so we can talk? Wally

[marxist]

Hi Shadesz,
thanks for providing the animation I asked for.

....
Now to check this using the first line in this post.
Here rod is using 8 magnets and one generator coil. Plug this into the Hz formula...
Hz= cmr/60g
Hz=(1)(8)(4059)/60(1)
Hz=541.2
Hmmmm... this doesn't match his frequency of 663 per microsecond. Any ideas? Did I do something wrong? Interpret his data wrong? ....

I think you interpret his data wrong. I think the column "Frequency in micro seconds" in his data sheet does not mirror the frequency of the generated electricity. I will ask him for clarification in the Muller thread right now.
edit: I just saw you already are discussing that with him ...

[elias]

@Sahdez
thanks for the simulation, very much appreciated.

@Altair
I thought like this before I did this experiment:
Attraction vs Repulsion in Magnetic Fields 2 - YouTube

When you understand that there is an inherent asymmetry in repulsion and attraction, then you will do your best to avoid your rotor have any "sticking" due to attraction of magnetic fields, the Muller design does exactly that.
By pulsing, you keep the rotor in a state of UNBALANCED ATTRACTION, by using a small amount of energy to neutralize the magnetic field in the core, not so strong to repulse it, thus the rotor just turns by imbalanced attraction of magnetic fields.

That is why I think that Muller's design might be inherently operating by attracting magnetic fields, only at the expense of small energy to the coils to keep the system in an imbalanced state.

Elias

Personally, I do not see any advantage to having a different number of magnets versus number of coils, for SMALL generators like the ones that are built by people on this forum.

[gyula]

Hi Elias,

I wonder whether you have made sure that all the magnets in your test setup have the SAME strengths? Magnet manufacturers charge extra cost when a costumer wishes to buy "uniform" strength magnets for a special task and even then the magnets are uniform only within a certain toleration window, and the narrower this window, the higher the cost.

Would you mind shuffling the magnets or you have already done so, in this case sorry for this post.

I found the differing magnet strengths for the same type of block magnets when playing with a parallel path setup like the one here Image:Ppfigure4.jpg - PESWiki but I used paperclips on the side and I had to shift the inner magnet slightly to either left or right to cause the clips totally fall down.

Thanks, Gyula

[elias]

Hi Elias,

Would you mind shuffling the magnets or you have already done so, in this case sorry for this post.

Thanks, Gyula

In fact, I suspected that might be the case and I did shuffle the magnets, and it made no difference. I am 100% sure about this now. attraction is way stronger than repulsion.

[elias]

Attraction is really so much stronger than repulsion. This makes sense, because the attractive force must be stronger than the repulsive force so that the universe stays connected and doesn't fall apart. The repulsive force is a type of male force, which causes divergence, the attractive force is a type of female force which causes convergence. It is interesting to note that I suspect that the ratio of Attraction to Repulsion should be about 1.618 the golden ratio. The dance of repulsion and attraction therefore creates the universe we are living in in every moment.

[elias]

The problem with attraction is that it sticks!, and in order to release it you need to supply more energy to release it by using the power of repulsion so that the system becomes inefficient.

I don't know but i suspect that Muller knew about this, so he designed his generator in a way to avoid "sticking" by doing that he just supplied small amount of energy to his coils to neutralize the magnetic field, or even decrease it, so that the rotor will always remain in a state of unbalanced attraction. That is why Muller kept on saying: "THE MAGNETS ARE THE MOTOR".

So Muller's motor is overunity or very very efficient because of this geometry. The Lenz violation is another thing which makes it do what it claims it does.

Maybe you will stumble upon a better magnet to coil number ratio, So that it incorporates more of the attraction, without the "sticking" problem.

[Shadesz]

Hi Shadesz,

I wonder if you have seen these videos, they are showing paper models of such setups you are providing in your nice animations. Maybe they serve for some further understanding for others.

Attempt at explaining the events inside the Muller Dynamo - YouTube

Virtual elastic south poles view - YouTube

Muller Dynamo. Comparison between numbers of coils and magnets - YouTube

Gyula

Thanks! I thought it was interesting in the third video, for one magnet to advance one coil you have a full circle of coils firing. It was easier to see cause the video is more 'smooth' than my animations. I'll try to see if that pattern is consistent somehow, and derive a formula for it.

[Shadesz]

@Rubberband,
I'm not sure how much I can help (these skills are pretty basic) but we can find out. My computer crashed and I am rebuilding it right now. Monday or so I should be able to look into it. E-Mail sending now.

@Marxist,
YW. Glad to know I did interpret is input frequency as output frequency. So the formula may still be correct. Now to just get some numbers...

@elias,
yw, and thank your for the input and linking the repulsion vs attraction test.

@all,
If you have comments, questions, or ideas feel free to post them! The best way to engineer this aspect of the generators is to explore every idea and question. I am switching majors to electrical engineering and have to redo my schedule on top of other things. I have more I want to test here but might be away for a couple days. Addiction may keep me here though. lol.

[Shadesz]

I haven't seen any datasets to confirm my frequency formula but I need to dump the next concepts I had in my mind before they get flooded out by other things, so we will move on.

OUTPUT FREQUENCY AND ITS RELATION TO RESONANCE

If I can add anything to your work, it would be just to mention that obviously, the most important parameter in a generator of this kind is the frequency into the coils. I have a strong feeling that the coils must be in resonance to be able to generate power. So, we must determine the number of coils & magnets that will allow the desired frequency, while keeping the RPM of the rotor within a reasonable margin to avoid structural failure of the rotor due to centrifugal force.

In a generator we want to maximize the amount of electrons that can move through a circuit. The only time we generate this movement is while a magnetic field is moving past a coil. So, not only are frequency/cycles important, the "active" time during each cycle is just as important.

Assume you have a one coil generator with 8 magnets. You will have 8 cycles per rotation. BUT assume that the magnets are placed so far apart that their magnetic fields have a gap.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

(Note that the gap is not reflected by magnetic field to magnetic field, but rather magnetic field to coil to next magnetic field). This gap does a couple things. First, it makes our unit less efficient than it could be. This is because that gap time is dead time during the cycle. No electricity is being created because no magnetic field is influencing the coil. Hence the percentage of time that our coil is sitting there lonely is a percentage of time that our system is being un-productive.

Second, it seems to me that this gap would make it impossible to achieve true resonance. It makes sense that resonance would only be achieved when the end of one cycle happens immediately at the beginning of the next cycle. If you have a gap, it would be like swinging on a swing-set and trying to make it go higher and higher, but having to stop and take a break after every swing. There is now no way for the previous swing(magnet) to influence your next swing(magnet) if you have a gap in between them.

The correct spacing of magnets is determined by the size of the magnetic field, the size of the coil, how far the coil sits away from the magnet at TDC, and the radius at which your coils and magnets sit from the center of the machine. Adjusting coil diameter or magnet size/strength would be the easiest way to tune into this resonance timing on a system that is already built.

I plan to eventually formulate this and/or build a spreadsheet to help us determine the ideal gap between magnets but not tonight. It's time for bed. If anyone already has something to do so please share.

[marxist]

... we want to maximize the amount of electrons that can move through a circuit. The only time we generate this [electron] movement is while a magnetic field is moving past a coil.

Hi Shadesz,
I would put this slightly different:
We create this electron-movement by CHANGING the magnetic field that permeates the coil. It is the CHANGE in the field strength that creates the current.
Since toranarod has mounted all his magnets in such a way, that the same poles faces outward (all North out or all South out), the required CHANGE is only produced, if there is a large enough gap between the magnets.
If the magnets on the wheel were to close together, the field (strength) would not change enough.

This is why toranarod at some point, after using big magnets on the wheel (with small gaps between them), made a change. He took off the big magnets and mounted an equal number of smaller ones. So the gap size increased and his results got better.

This was a big achievement.
The next big achievement was his coil-slider which enabled him to precisely control the distance between the generator coil(s) and the magnets on the wheel.

This is what I understand from his experiments and I hope I am relating the truth.
Maybe toranarod will confirm.

PS
If the magnets are mounted so that alternating poles point outward (N-S-N-S-...), what I said about the gap size has to be reconsidered.

[Shadesz]

Well stated marxist. Thank you.