Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Free Book: "Harvesting Torque From Permanent Magnets"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Free Book: "Harvesting Torque From Permanent Magnets"

    If you could move the center of gravity at will, then you could design a gravity motor that would work.
    What I found is that I can change the center of a magnetic pole through creating a functional magnet through reconfiguration. I perform this reconfiguration in the stator assembly when needed.

    The attached book describes how this works.

    I believe that this new technology not only works, but it will be able to compete with current magnetic motors in vehicles by increasing their range by two or three times.

    This book has a lot more than that in it. I have modified the commonly used tank circuit with steering diodes. The electromagnets in the motor are in one leg of the tank circuit while the capacitor is in the other leg. The steering diode make sure that the currents flowing in the tank circuit are only flowing in the correct direction at the correct time they are suppose to flow in. By using the tank circuit with a variable capacitor, the energy that is used to power the electromagnets in the motor is recollected as the magnetic field collapses into the tank circuit, minus losses in the system. The capacitor is then topped off with the power supply, ready to be used again the next time the electromagnet is energized.

    The combination of these two new technologies used in motor designs should produce the highest efficiencies to date in magnetic motors.

    Some of my magnetic motor designs use the torque from 5 permanent magnets to 1 permanent magnet. This is like having 6 employees working and you, but only having to pay one of them.

    I have several motor designs along with several applications for people to freely use.

    I have a prototype motor design along with a parts list that can be built at home. The main danger is a pinched finger between the power of the permanent magnets.

    All of my designs are public domain. All I want to do is to help create a better world for people and in the book I tell you about a better tomorrow.

    I hope that you download this book and build one of the motor designs, or dow load the book and share it with someone who can.

    May God bless all of you.

    Jay Lunke

    Lunkster
    Attached Files

  • #2
    Thank you very much Mr. Lunke for your Godly generosity! God bless and be well!

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for sharing your work with us Jay, we appreciate it a lot. God bless you

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Lunkster View Post
        If you could move the center of gravity at will, then you could design a gravity motor that would work.
        What I found is that I can change the center of a magnetic pole through creating a functional magnet through reconfiguration. I perform this reconfiguration in the stator assembly when needed.

        The attached book describes how this works.

        I believe that this new technology not only works, but it will be able to compete with current magnetic motors in vehicles by increasing their range by two or three times.

        This book has a lot more than that in it. I have modified the commonly used tank circuit with steering diodes. The electromagnets in the motor are in one leg of the tank circuit while the capacitor is in the other leg. The steering diode make sure that the currents flowing in the tank circuit are only flowing in the correct direction at the correct time they are suppose to flow in. By using the tank circuit with a variable capacitor, the energy that is used to power the electromagnets in the motor is recollected as the magnetic field collapses into the tank circuit, minus losses in the system. The capacitor is then topped off with the power supply, ready to be used again the next time the electromagnet is energized.

        The combination of these two new technologies used in motor designs should produce the highest efficiencies to date in magnetic motors.

        Some of my magnetic motor designs use the torque from 5 permanent magnets to 1 permanent magnet. This is like having 6 employees working and you, but only having to pay one of them.

        I have several motor designs along with several applications for people to freely use.

        I have a prototype motor design along with a parts list that can be built at home. The main danger is a pinched finger between the power of the permanent magnets.

        All of my designs are public domain. All I want to do is to help create a better world for people and in the book I tell you about a better tomorrow.

        I hope that you download this book and build one of the motor designs, or dow load the book and share it with someone who can.

        May God bless all of you.

        Jay Lunke

        Lunkster
        Jay
        i read your book, I find that very interesting, not sure I follow it 100%, but I do believe the merit in it. Thank you for sharing. Will you be showing your prototype?

        Comment


        • #5
          thanks mr Lunke, will read you book tomorow, god bless you and your family

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Sawt2 View Post

            Jay
            i read your book, I find that very interesting, not sure I follow it 100%, but I do believe the merit in it. Thank you for sharing. Will you be showing your prototype?
            I have attached a few photos
            I must say that I am not a good prototype builder.
            I built the model with a lot of glue.
            I built it with a lot of adjustability in order to provide flexibility in the build.
            I listed some of the problems with this prototype in the book.
            The photo's will show how cheep of materials like PCV pipe in the build.

            But with poor shape that this is in, I believed that it did prove to me that their is more
            restrictions to moving the switching wheels than the forward torque produced between the rotor and stator assembly.

            Even if the motor worked, it would not be able to replace the magnetic motors in cars today because there would not be enough torque in this design configuration to do that.

            I should have built the prototype build that I have in the book first, because that has the best chance of operating properly with the new technology.

            All of my designs are motor theory and not proven fact. At my age still working and doing this research work as a part time hobby, does not give me the opportunity to build all of the devices I have in the book.

            I do believe in the technology in the book and want to see other people do research in this area.
            But as I learned, only building a working prototype will anyone take this technology serious. I can understand that.

            Lunkster
            Attached Files

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks very much for sharing your research, Jay. However, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't your document basically saying that whilst you believe you have come up with an overunity magnetic motor design, none of the builds that you have done so far have actually achieved this?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by purplepete View Post
                Thanks very much for sharing your research, Jay. However, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't your document basically saying that whilst you believe you have come up with an overunity magnetic motor design, none of the builds that you have done so far have actually achieved this?
                You are correct.
                I have only built this one prototype motor using the new Three Layer Electromechanical Movement technology.
                I have made prototypes several years ago using other technologies that did not pan out.
                They were also designs that were supposed to operate with no outside energy.
                As you can see from the drawings, I do not have the ability to build a proper prototype. The magnets are far apart from each other. I have clumps of glue to keep the gears from slipping on the shafts. The PCV pipe flexes too much as the switches rotate. There would be so much vibration in the motor if I went to the next step of adding electromagnets to the prototype. The motor would fall apart. Most of the aluminum parts were cut using a hand saw. This is not my ability. Someone else who has those abilities needs to build the prototypes.

                Now this new technology was first designed and written up using electromagnets operating with permanent magnets. The electromagnets were designed to provide the switching. It was only when I saw that the design has as much torque on the stator assembly from permanent magnets as the switching magnets that I thought that if I used a permanent magnet for the switching magnet, that then maybe the resistance from the physical movement of using permanent magnet in the switching position might be less than having continual forward torque between the rotor and stator assembly. I proved that my prototype of doing the physical switching was not able to accomplish that. But as I have written in the book, there are other designs that will reduce the physical switching of permanent magnets into the switching position. But after this prototype build of an "All Permanent Magnet Design" is less likely to be a realistic approach in using this new technology, the expense and maintenance would be much larger than other motor designs.

                The reason I tried the "All Permanent Magnet" design is because I currently do not even have a power supply to operate the electromagnets of the main motor designs. You can operate an electromagnet close to any permanent magnet and you get movement. So building prototypes with electromagnets that operate is not the issue of why I did not build one. It is because not only do I not have the equipment to evaluate the performance, but I would not be able to pay third parties to evaluate the prototype.

                So I am currently left with bringing the theory to other people so that they can evaluate if it would be worth taking the technology farther down the road of development. I work at a very large engineering company. There are several people and a lot of money to develop a new design in order to bring a product to the market. By having forums like this one. People can come together to bring new technologies into real products. I know that I can not do it myself. By sharing my theories in an open source public domain way, then maybe, just maybe one person would try one piece here and another person another piece there, and soon there would be something we all could build and use for the betterment of all of us.

                So in summary, I wish I had unlimited resources in order to build and test all of my theories out and then freely give them to the world. But in reality, I am only limited in sharing the theories and hope and pray that someone will pick up from where I have brought it and let them take them farther down the road of development.

                Lunkster

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi,

                  I wanted to add a torque comparison drawing that has a simple explanation of the difference of torque between two common motors used today and the motor designs I have in the book. This one drawing will give a simple explanation of what the difference is and why I am so excited about this new technology.

                  Lunkster


                  Torque Chart.png
                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Harnessing Magnetism:

                    I've briefly read over your book Lunkster, utilizing the energy of the permanent magnet is a great concept to build upon. The book reminded me of a concept of generating electrical power from permanent magnets, that I've been thinking about for the past few weeks. It came to me in an epiphany that you could oscillate the field of a permanent magnet while its stationary relative to you. Thus, using a wound coil, and the proper setup, you could probably utilize great amounts of electrical power by oscillating the magnetic field of a permanent magnet, with less energy than what is contained "within the field".

                    There was an inventor who was on the same thing I'm describing, Donald Lee Smith. Smith apparently designed many working functional models that harnessed untapped sources of energy. His devices had big outputs but the devices themselves could fit on a dinner table, one device produced a megawatt from 12 volt batteries. He utilized many principles, however there was one generator that used: neodymium magnets, coils, a rotating magnetic shielding material, and a dc motor connected to a battery source. The coils were wound around the neodymium magnets, the coils and magnets were stationary while set next to the rotating disc (made of the magnetic shielding material). The disc had holes periodically "cut out" to vary the flux of the neodymium magnets, as the disc spun. The likewise varying fields would induce current flow directly into the coils. These generators could be made too powerful, where the wires for the coils would start melting from the current flow. Below are some pictures of one device, and another picture of the basic components/concept.

                    Device09-1.jpg

                    Device09-2.jpg

                    image2-2.png

                    The device above can produce about 400 kilowatts. Each connected coil pair produces 1,000 volts at 50 amperes, which makes 8,000 volts at 50 amperes in total (therefore, 8,000*50=400,000). Its implied the initial input would be 12 volts at 7 amperes, or 84 watts, which makes this device "produce" almost 5,000 times the input power (all the output energy comes from the oscillating field of the neodymium magnets). I think this device would rotate the disc at about 3,000 rpm, but I'm not sure on that. With your interest in magnets, and being that the concept in principle is quite simple, maybe it'd something interesting for you to consider?

                    "The output is from the magnetic variation resulting from the shielding. Which is quite large." - Donald Lee Smith

                    There's another inventor's work I recalled when reading your paper, that was Howard Johnson. Howard Johnson made many apparatuses built purely around permanent magnets, and eventually built an apparently working motor that ran off of only permanent magnet power. If you haven't heard of him already, maybe you could get ideas/inspiration from him to possibly form ideas to improve your concept? He has three main U.S. patents that relate to this:

                    Permanent Magnet Motor: https://patents.google.com/patent/US...ward+r+johnson
                    Magnetic Propulsion System: https://patents.google.com/patent/US...ard+R.+Johnson
                    Magnetic Force Generating Method and Apparatus: https://patents.google.com/patent/US...Johnson&page=1

                    There's also two videos I found that go in depth about some of these concepts:

                    Energy From the Vacuum 04: https://archive.org/details/energy-f...ohn+Bedini.mp4
                    Energy From the Vacuum 11: https://archive.org/details/energy-f...ohn+Bedini.mp4

                    Another thing I had in mind, was that I often notice that purely permanent magnet motors incorporate asymmetry into their design. This asymmetry allows the continuous motoring process to be possible. In a concept likes yours, where you want to decrease the amount of electromagnets used, perhaps incorporating some asymmetry and doing research into that would seem rewarding.
                    Last edited by Doofus Nugget; 12-16-2020, 10:12 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Doofus Nugget,

                      I have read a lot about Howard Johnson's motors. A lot of people have been working on replicating his design. I do not need to go in that direction at the current time. I do not see high horse power being developed from those motors which is my ultimate goal.

                      As far as the Smith design's, their seems to be more people working on similar designs. I would not be able to add to the work that they are doing.

                      I have gone about as far as I can with the motor and motor control circuits from my wild imagination.
                      ​​​​​​​I have heard that Santa Claus is giving me a power supply and an oscilloscope for Christmas.
                      I have some indirect power generations that I want to explore. One of those designs I have in the book. I want to work with lower voltages than what Mr. Smith was working with in order to stay on the safe side of electricity. I may have to build a faraday cage to do my work so that I do not emit undesired RF into the air. I have several pounds of motor wire and several toroid coils that I purchased from surplus stores for only a very small fraction of the cost compared to when I find them online for. So that is where my future work will be headed.

                      My ultimate goal is to come up with a total system from power generation to high efficient motors that they can be used in automobiles. I see that future electric vehicles will have batteries in them so that the full torque from the overunity motor will be used to operate the vehicle during the day and the same motor will be switched into generator mode in order to charge the battery at night. THis would be ideal because the motor would be too large if it have to power the car at the same time as to produce electrical energy for other functions in the car. You only want the generator mode to occur during the breaking process and charging the battery when parked.

                      Lunkster

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Doofus Nugget,

                        I want to thank you for your input.

                        With the work I am doing, I do not want to infringe on other peoples work.
                        I want to see what they are doing and then see if I can do something better.
                        If it is not better then it is not worth doing.

                        Now there are plenty of claims of over unity generator designs.
                        That is great. I hope to see them third party verified, manufactured and sold to the public
                        at a reasonable price.

                        Until that time, I will work work with unique designs that I come up with.
                        SInce I have limited resources my work will be limited and very slow.
                        I want my work to remain public domain and I would be grateful for anyone to build
                        and sell the devices to other people. I believe that it is better to give than to receive.
                        I may be all wet in my idea's, but I will never know for sure if my designs are never built and tested out.

                        I have added another generator design that I will build and test out next year some time.

                        So, again thank you for the response and I will look at Mr. Smiths work more in depth in order to see
                        if his work can trigger some other thoughts about how to better approach electrical power generation.

                        I the diagram I use the term electromagnet. I use electromagnets as generator coils.
                        Sorry if this causes confusion for anyone.

                        Lunkster
                        Attached Files
                        Last edited by Lunkster; 12-17-2020, 11:04 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Lunkster, Your research is very interesting , and thank you for sharing your experience, study, your ideas, concepts, and the document.

                          I understand you when you say that you have to take advantage of the magnetism of permanent magnets and electromagnets, as a whole.

                          It reminds me of an idea that I have and a project under construction, it is simple but it would help to understand more how you can take advantage of magnetism and improve the efficiency of motors.

                          The premise is simple, when you put several magnets in repulsion in a circular rotor on its periphery, facing magnets in the stator, we all know that the repulsion will make the rotor rotate, but in a moment it will stop rotating the rotor, but if we change a few of the magnets that is in the stator by switched electromagnet, which is activated when the rotor magnet is in position, and deactivated when the magnet is already repelled and moves away, and so on.

                          Which electromagnet can be incorporated, it could be a Bedini coil, which would be the commutation, would be the one that would always give the impulse for the motor to rotate

                          The repulsive magnets will serve to give more torque to the motor, my experience with the Bedini motor, that you get great speed but not torque, I have taken advantage of them to make low consumption fans. But if you want them to do a job that requires more torque, you can't.

                          One can already see various configurations of this idea, and that something coincides with what you are doing, more elaborate and with more magnets and rotors to take full advantage of the magnetism.

                          Thus one is taking ideas and experiences of the achievements of some projects and trying to improve them.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Welcome to Energetic Forum, Lunkster. Allow me to be the first to give you a hard time and tell you what your problem is.

                            I have read your book and your conversation with people in this thread up to this point and it is clear you have something you feel the need to share and you seem to have shared it. The problem is that your thoughts are not all that original and you don't know what you are talking about. I'm sorry to be the first one to burst your bubble but until you up your game you are not going to get many positive responses on this forum. I have been reading and following this forum for quite a while and I can tell you there is a lot of good information here but the truth is there is also a huge amount of garbage.

                            I would say the garbage outnumbers the good information 10 to 1. The people on this forum that I respect are the people that get there hands dirty and build experiments and then report their results. As a long-time lurker and poster I can say that a good many people here share my view. Some results are promising and many claims are made. I could mention a few names but you already know that Don Smith and John Bedini are highly respected. The chances of you getting someone to build something because you have theory are few.

                            If you have the courage you can keep posting here but my suggestion is that you read through some of the threads and build another experiment. I mean do it yourself even if you have to build it with cardboard and string. There are plenty of people here copying Don Smith, John Bedini and others. Why should they try to copy you? Show me why your ideas are better than theirs. Doofus Nugget gave you a good suggestion but you are afraid of infringing on Don Smith's work? That shows you don't understand the legal environment around patents and inventions. Is that a real reason to do nothing or is it just an excuse? Go ahead and build it smaller, cheaper and better. Then talk about THAT. You can claim the improvements you made.

                            Not having money is a real reason but you also have the goal of building something inexpensive to power a 2000 pound car? Okay, maybe a skateboard. Learn to use a home made dynamometer and show you are getting some power out of your device.

                            I've said enough. I've criticized and now I expect to be criticized back. Good luck!
                            There is a reason why science has been successful and technology is widespread. Don't be afraid to do the math and apply the laws of physics.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by wayne.ct View Post
                              Welcome to Energetic Forum, Lunkster. Allow me to be the first to give you a hard time and tell you what your problem is.

                              I have read your book and your conversation with people in this thread up to this point and it is clear you have something you feel the need to share and you seem to have shared it. The problem is that your thoughts are not all that original and you don't know what you are talking about. I'm sorry to be the first one to burst your bubble but until you up your game you are not going to get many positive responses on this forum. I have been reading and following this forum for quite a while and I can tell you there is a lot of good information here but the truth is there is also a huge amount of garbage.

                              I would say the garbage outnumbers the good information 10 to 1. The people on this forum that I respect are the people that get there hands dirty and build experiments and then report their results. As a long-time lurker and poster I can say that a good many people here share my view. Some results are promising and many claims are made. I could mention a few names but you already know that Don Smith and John Bedini are highly respected. The chances of you getting someone to build something because you have theory are few.

                              If you have the courage you can keep posting here but my suggestion is that you read through some of the threads and build another experiment. I mean do it yourself even if you have to build it with cardboard and string. There are plenty of people here copying Don Smith, John Bedini and others. Why should they try to copy you? Show me why your ideas are better than theirs. Doofus Nugget gave you a good suggestion but you are afraid of infringing on Don Smith's work? That shows you don't understand the legal environment around patents and inventions. Is that a real reason to do nothing or is it just an excuse? Go ahead and build it smaller, cheaper and better. Then talk about THAT. You can claim the improvements you made.

                              Not having money is a real reason but you also have the goal of building something inexpensive to power a 2000 pound car? Okay, maybe a skateboard. Learn to use a home made dynamometer and show you are getting some power out of your device.

                              I've said enough. I've criticized and now I expect to be criticized back. Good luck!
                              I think what Lunkster means by "not infringing on others work" is that he doesn't want to actually build exactly what others are doing, meaning the exact replicas or models, but that's the way I intercepted what Lunster said. Not that the core concepts of those people can't be used, but they can be just in a different scenario. Or it could mean infringing in patent sense as you suggested wayne.ct, but Donald L. Smith only had one patent in Mexico, its probably expired by now since it was filed in the early 1990s-2000s, and his business ventures have halted since he died (I think in 2005 he passed away). If you want to patent these concepts, get a working model worked out first and start perfecting it. Then, you should patent it, but I've never filed a patent so I'm not a substitute for research.

                              I believe the these concepts should be approached experimentally, through the scientific method. Many people tend to forget that and fall into pseudo-scientific fantasies where they never experiment, all they do is talk and talk while being overly dedicated to their "theories" which are likely unsupported. So, I have to agree wayne.ct, some of the thinking and logic that goes on in some people's heads is enough to make you fall put of your seat.

                              Donald L. Smith was working more with solid-state devices with no moving parts, but it doesn't mean not learning from those people isn't helpful. I've researched in many categories, and I definitely recommend doing so, sometimes you may find something that'll light a spark inside you. But just because something may appear "objectively worse" than what you work on, should not divert you from investigating, because looking at and improving the old is how technology improves.

                              I do believe the core idea has flaws, as I'm sure many people will start pointing out in the future. Perhaps it doesn't mean the core technology is a bad idea, but that its possible other principles may be better in general, or that this technology will only go so far as with many technologies do.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X