Where i'm at 1+1=3

[TinMan]

First up, I apologies for my absence.
As most will know, i started my own business, and that took up nearly all of my time, which caught me quite off guard.

As the money was flowing quite well, i decided to have an engineering company build me a precision prototype.
Biggest mistake i have ever made.
I won't go into it to much, other than to say i nearly lost the rights to my own invention.
I have removed the videos from my youtube channel for this very reason.
I still have the video's stored on my external HD, and i'm sure there are those that took copies as well.

Over the last 2 years, i have redesigned and reconfigured the motor, so as it does away with the coil and required electrical energy supply, as this seemed to be causing
a few issues in the build for some. The motor is now just a mechanical PM motor.

There is no need for anyone to build this motor at this point in time.
I am currently in talks with Chet, and another member of this forum.
The other member will soon be receiving all the stl files he needs to replicate this new design.
Once he has a running motor, he will confirm here on this thread that is actually works.

From that point, and only after confirmation, the plan is to have 10 fully engineered working prototypes built, as the3D printed  gears only last about 20 hours.
These will only be small 200 watt motors, so as to keep the cost down. Myself and the two mentioned above, will be choosing 8 people on this forum to receive 1 of these motors.
It will then be up to those 8 to share around as they see fit--This is an open source project.
Chet,Graham, and Darren are 3 of those 8 that i myself have chosen, due to their ongoing support over the years.

After the 8 have received the motors, i will be washing my hands of this project.

One last thing--> For those who thought that permanent magnets could not do useful work--you were wrong.
Anything that contains energy can do useful work.

Brad

[poynt99]

Very intriguing Brad. Looking forward to hearing more about this.

And thanks for naming me as one to receive a motor.

[CITFTA]

Hi Brad,

Good to see you back.  Are you using PLA+ for your gears.  I have found it to be very strong if you use 100% infill.  I have some pretty small gears I have even drilled and tapped.  They work fine.

Take care,
Carroll

[TinMan]

Hi Brad,

Good to see you back.  Are you using PLA+ for your gears.  I have found it to be very strong if you use 100% infill.  I have some pretty small gears I have even drilled and tapped.  They work fine.

Take care,
Carroll

Hi Carroll

I made the wall thickness 5mm, so the teeth them self are solid.
It is just the speed and forces that are applied to the gears that wear them out after some time, but nothing that can't be sorted with ali machined gears.

Brad

[gyula]

Hi Brad,

Would you mind telling what RPM the motor runs at when the shaft is unloaded (i.e. the friction of the gear system is the load) ?

Thanks
Gyula

[Aking.21]

TinMan: Very nice to have you back. Good luck to you and the replicators.

[TinMan]

TinMan: Very nice to have you back. Good luck to you and the replicators.

Thanks.

There is only going to be 1 replicator.
Others will just be receiving a working unit, which i hope they will share with everyone else.


Brad

[unimmortal]

One last thing--> For those who thought that permanent magnets could not do useful work--you were wrong.
Anything that contains energy can do useful work.

Brad

Thank you for sharing Brad. I completely agree with these statements.

Can I ask: if this device is using homopolar magnets in the way I think it is, can you share how you are deriving the power? Having spent many years playing with magnet/pulse motors, I am very curious to see how you have chosen to turn magnetic motion into power. 

[TinMan]

Thank you for sharing Brad. I completely agree with these statements.

Can I ask: if this device is using homopolar magnets in the way I think it is, can you share how you are deriving the power? Having spent many years playing with magnet/pulse motors, I am very curious to see how you have chosen to turn magnetic motion into power.

What is a homopolar magnet ?

If you mean a monopole magnet, no.
However, the driving field is monopole.

To fully understand magnetic fields, you have to get away from this !north/south field thing, which in nothing more than a man made construct.
A PM has only 1 field, not two. So in essence, all PMs have monopole fields. Think of the PM like a battery, and the field like electrons flowing through a circuit.
The electrons always flow through the circuit in the same direction (battery=DC), and that flow of current is the same value throughout the circuit.
And like with batteries, when you put two in series, you always connect positive of one battery to the negative of the other battery. Like wise with PMs.
And like with the two series connected batteries, where the circuit has not changed, the current flowing through the circuit is now twice as much, as is the magnetic field of the two series connected PMs.
Seeing a pattern yet?
Oh, and there is no such thing as field lines. Another man made construct in an attempt to work out how magnetic fields work, and why they do what they do.

Brad

[unimmortal]

What is a homopolar magnet ?

Ah sorry, monopole magnet. I was thinking about floodrods comment around the large ring magnet and thought to myself a couple of copper discs would make it homopolar and call it a day.

[poynt99]

And like with batteries, when you put two in series, you always connect positive of one battery to the negative of the other battery. Like wise with PMs.
And like with the two series connected batteries, where the circuit has not changed, the current flowing through the circuit is now twice as much, as is the magnetic field of the two series connected PMs.

If I understand correctly, I'm not sure there is a good correlation between batteries and PMs when they are stacked in series. I'm not sure I agree that the "magnetic current" doubles by stacking two PM's in series like adding a second series battery would in a resistive load circuit that remained the same.

The current density in the battery/load circuit doubles due to the doubled voltage source, but the field density in a PM remains the same when stacked in series with another identical PM. To double (or increase) the field density within the space of the PM, one would need to use better magnet material, or field concentrating material around it, or perhaps by "stacking" PM's in "parallel".

But I respect your work and I'm always open to being schooled, so please explain where I'm wrong!

[unimmortal]

If I understand correctly, I'm not sure there is a good correlation between batteries and PMs when they are stacked in series. I'm not sure I agree that the "magnetic current" doubles by stacking two PM's in series like adding a second series battery would in a resistive load circuit that remained the same.

The current density in the battery/load circuit doubles due to the doubled voltage source, but the field density in a PM remains the same when stacked in series with another identical PM. To double (or increase) the field density within the space of the PM, one would need to use better magnet material, or field concentrating material around it, or perhaps by "stacking" PM's in "parallel".

But I respect your work and I'm always open to being schooled, so please explain where I'm wrong!

I'm going to quickly chime in - from experience with the Adams Axial where I have 6 columns of N40 magnets stacked in the rotor (20x20, 10x5, 20x20), I can tell you as a fact that the field becomes much stronger and extends much further at the pole ends. I haven't done dead weight tests for numbers, but I have had to double my airgap to make it usable

[TinMan]

If I understand correctly, I'm not sure there is a good correlation between batteries and PMs when they are stacked in series. I'm not sure I agree that the "magnetic current" doubles by stacking two PM's in series like adding a second series battery would in a resistive load circuit that remained the same.

The current density in the battery/load circuit doubles due to the doubled voltage source, but the field density in a PM remains the same when stacked in series with another identical PM. To double (or increase) the field density within the space of the PM, one would need to use better magnet material, or field concentrating material around it, or perhaps by "stacking" PM's in "parallel".

But I respect your work and I'm always open to being schooled, so please explain where I'm wrong!

Ok, the field density when series connecting is not quite double, but close to it. A simple pull force test would show you this,
For example, we take a 10mm diameter x 10mm long neo magnet (lets say an N50), and we place it about 10mm away from a steel plate, we may get a pull force of say 100 grams.
If we then series connect another magnet the same, then the pull force will be about 190 grams.

And when we series connect two batteries, we double the internal resistance, so the peak current will also be less.




Brad

[chief kolbacict]

. If 1 battery can deliver a max current of say 1 amp, and we series connect another battery the same, so as we now have a single battery of double the voltage, then the max current would be about 1.9 amps, due to the internal resistance of the battery now being doubled.


Brad

But power which is getting in the load will be more in four time. 

[TinMan]

But power which is getting in the load will be more in four time.

Regardless, the max current will be less, as the resistance has increased.


Brad

[Frederik2k1]

Brad, I already tried it over the Shoutbox. Perhaps you haven't seen my request: Is it possible to reupload the relevant videos of your setup on youtube, perhaps with private links?

In which time will you give specification for the replicator and send out working units to chosen members?

[TinMan]

Brad, I already tried it over the Shoutbox. Perhaps you haven't seen my request: Is it possible to reupload the relevant videos of your setup on youtube, perhaps with private links?

In which time will you give specification for the replicator and send out working units to chosen members?

There are no relevant videos for the magnet motor as yet, due to the fact that it is very easy to build.

From past experience, people tend to stray from precise instructions given, which results in a failed build.
So this time i have chosen just 1 person to replicate the motor.
Once that is done, and successful, then 10 precision motors will be built, and handed out to the selected people here.
These selected people are those i believe will do the best job at delivering the motor to other here and throughout.
Once they have the working motors, then i'm sure the video's will come.
But once the motors are delivered, i will no longer be participating from then on.

I will how ever, as time permits, be making some videos that show how to curve, distort, and neutralize magnetic fields, so as they can be used for gain.
But as a bit of a hint, the magnet motor ( i have no name for yet), works by neutralizing the magnetic fields of apposing magnets at a certain point, and then flipping to repulsion mode once the rotor magnets have passed !what we will call! TDC.


Brad

[bistander]

Regardless, the max current will be less, as the resistance has increased.


Brad

Hi guys,
Having 2 identical batteries, the short circuit current is the same for each and for the pair in series.
Also, the maximum power, which occurs at one half of open circuit voltage, will double for 2 identical batteries, whether in series or parallel.
Now, for a fixed resistance load, adding a second battery in series will increase power by factor of 4. Because there is twice the voltage across the same resistance so twice the current. 2×2
bi

[poynt99]

Ok, the field density when series connecting is not quite double, but close to it. A simple pull force test would show you this,
For example, we take a 10mm diameter x 10mm long neo magnet (lets say an N50), and we place it about 10mm away from a steel plate, we may get a pull force of say 100 grams.
If we then series connect another magnet the same, then the pull force will be about 190 grams.

Field density and pull force are different things.

If you were able to measure the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 10 series stacked PM's, then compared that to the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 100 of the same stacked magnets, would the field density be significantly different in each middle magnet? Go crazy and extend it even further to a stack of 100 vs. a stack of 1000.

I propose that any observed increase in pulling force of stacking magnets is likely due to there being a more uniform field at the ends of the magnet when increasing its length, but one quickly hits a point of greatly diminishing returns to adding more magnets.

[bistander]

Field density and pull force are different things.

I agree.
I find an interesting method to visualize the effect is to use this calculator.
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/calculator.asp

Since stacking identical magnets is equivalent to increasing length, just calculate the pull force of, say one, 1" magnet, vs 2", vs 3" long magnet. Each .5" diameter at zero inches from plate. Also try for lengths of .5, .25, .125".

Hope that helps.
bi

[poynt99]

Thanks for the link bistander!

Looking at the various magnetic field visualizations and the given Gauss measurements in the centre (pink) when entering different lengths (thickness), indeed seems to support what I'm saying.

Too bad 3" is the max length, but the trend of a flattening max field density should be evident when looking at the measurements as the length is increased from 0.5", 1", 2", and 3".

[unimmortal]

Field density and pull force are different things.

If you were able to measure the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 10 series stacked PM's, then compared that to the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 100 of the same stacked magnets, would the field density be significantly different in each middle magnet? Go crazy and extend it even further to a stack of 100 vs. a stack of 1000.

I propose that any observed increase in pulling force of stacking magnets is likely due to there being a more uniform field at the ends of the magnet when increasing its length, but one quickly hits a point of greatly diminishing returns to adding more magnets.

This is quite similar to when we pulse coils, not to attract the oncoming rotor magnet, but to align electrons in the coil (Robert Adams)- the more voltage put into the coil, the more electrons are aligned, and more work can occur when the switch opens and field reversal occurs.  And like magnets, there is a diminishing return the more voltage you add.

[TinMan]

Field density and pull force are different things.

Go crazy and extend it even further to a stack of 100 vs. a stack of 1000.

, but one quickly hits a point of greatly diminishing returns to adding more magnets.

Field density and pull force are different things.

No, they are directly related.
The increase in pull force is a result of a more dense field acting upon the steel plate.
We seen this in the 1+1=3 experiments.

If you were able to measure the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 10 series stacked PM's, then compared that to the field density inside the middle magnet of a string of 100 of the same stacked magnets, would the field density be significantly different in each middle magnet?

Yes it would be.
But like all things, there is a point of diminishing returns as you state.
But we are talking only a few magnets here, of the smaller lengths, not 100's

I propose that any observed increase in pulling force of stacking magnets is likely due to there being a more uniform field at the ends of the magnet when increasing its length

Is pulling in the field to a more uniform field not exactly the same as making that field more dense ?

We can confirm this all by using the calculator linked by Bistander.
We can see how the field density increases in between the center magnets of the stack as we add more magnets in series, and also how the field density directly relates to pull force on a steel plate.
We are using just a 1 micron gap between magnets, which I'm sure you would agree, will show us the field density in the middle of the stacked magnets.
And as the gap between the magnet and the steel plate is just 1 micron, we can assume that all of the field at the end of the magnet is acting upon the steel plate, and the field is uniform in all cases, and not spread out into a wide field. From this, we can safely assume that it must be an increase in field density that increases the pull force when we stack more magnets together.
In order to increase pull force, you must increase the field density between the magnet and the ferromagnetic object it is acting upon.


Brad

[TinMan]

author=bistander link=topic=4603.msg110922#msg110922 date=1710944605

Having 2 identical batteries, the short circuit current is the same for each and for the pair in series.

Actually no.
The two batteries in series will have half the short circuit current than a single battery will have.

Brad

[bistander]

Actually no.
The two batteries in series will have half the short circuit current than a single battery will have.

Brad

By the math:

V = battery terminal voltage

V_oc = open circuit battery voltage

R_int = internal resistance of the battery

I = battery current

Accepted battery model equation
V = V_oc - (I * R_int)

At short circuit, by definition, V = 0

Then V_oc -(I * R_int) = 0
or
V_oc = I * R_int
or
I = V_oc / R_int = I_sc = short circuit current

2 batteries in series, total voltage = 2 * V where V is the voltage of one battery. I is battery current which is same for both batteries. Equation is

V_total = 2 * V = 2 * (V_oc - (I * R_int))
Set V_total = 0 for short circuit, then

0 = 2 * (V_oc - (I * R_int))
0 = V_oc - (I * R_int)
or
V_oc = I * R_int
so
I = V_oc / R_int = I_sc

or you could multiply the terms on the right side of V_total equation by 2 giving

V_total = 2 * V_oc - (I *(2 * R_int))
Where V_oc & R_int are values for a single battery and I is found by setting V_total to zero. Then

2 * V_oc - (I *(2 * R_int)) = 0
or
2 * V_oc = I *(2 * R_int)
or
V_oc = I * R_int
or
I = V_oc / R_int = I_sc

So the short circuit battery current is equal to the open circuit battery voltage divided by the battery internal resistance. This is true for one battery, or two batteries in series, or any number of batteries in series.

Example:

Car battery. V_oc = 12.6 volts and R_int = 0.01 ohms

I_sc = 12.6v / 0.01ohms = 1260amps

2 batteries in series V_oc = 25.2volts and R_int = 0.02ohms
Then I_sc = 25.2v / 0.02ohms = 1260amps.

Elements in series add. Voltage adds. Resistance adds. So the division, V / R remains the same.

I = V / R = 2V / 2R = 3V / 3R and so on. Adding batteries in series doesn't change the short circuit current value.
bi

*edit {25.2 was 25.6 in 2 places} changed due to error. 2*12.6=25.2 not 25.6 for two in series. Also, 12.6 was 12.8 in one place due to error.