Magnet motor revelation

[aguy]

food 4 thought

food 4 thought
it seems to me that a magnet on acceleration away from like pole should pull next magnet through gate a if it cant then the rotor should be linked[geared?] to outer dia magnets so that can be flipped changing pole

[BroMikey]

Gentlemen
As you know I do not control the English..........................

Thus the management of the force vectors explained, just acting the X ramp, also explained that at this time we can
determining the extent as said rotor had Mack, considering the extent of the rampe combo.

I can be wrong and the master Mack, you can correct me. Good luck in getting this engine.
best regards.

Thanks Cristian

I know you are still here

This is my idea.

@everyone

My past mistakes have been cleaned up or corrected including the last
ramp diagram with points on it. I use a big red X.

[lorinrandone]

[BroMikey]

I just stopped in to add another Mack Quote but I want to say this

break down in scientific terms by you Randy has shown me that you

are a very technical guy and this is a gift of yours. I can only observe the

gift and enjoyed your take on the motor.


@UFO, I know you saw it the first time

We want the rotor flux to transition between straight attraction to the ramp, then angle off to both sides smoothly while providing the least amount of back pull. As the rotor magnet gets closer to the stator magnet the flux will transition to an attraction mostly between the magnets and this is where the ends of the ramp need to lose their influence on the rotor magnet.

Mack

We are cooking now.

[tachyoncatcher]

...
@Tachyoncatcher,
Excellent. Very close.

Let's talk about Ufo's test device again, there is that nice kick from his repelling ramp at the bottom. What is responsible for that? Is it the attraction to the ramp and it's attendant acceleration? Is it a repelling field induced in the ends of the tines as the rotor magnet passes? A combination of the two? Is an induced repelling field in the tines collapsing later and suddenly re-attracting the rotor magnet? If that is the case shouldn't the rotor magnet field be transitioning to the next ramp before that happens?
The top ramp exhibits different behavior. There is no kick at the end of that ramp. It looks like an attracting field is being induced in the tine ends. If that is the case we need to neutralize that ramp as soon as it has done it's job of accelerating the rotor by changing the attraction vector to 0 (tines parallel to rotor magnet arc of travel) and reducing the magnetic attraction as much as practical (gradually reduce the mass of the tines) until the rotor magnet field can transition to the next ramp.
It's not all about gain, it's about loss prevention too. The two types of nodes have different properties so the ramps must be different to properly utilize them. ...

Dear Mack,
With the North facing rotors, we are chasing a South field down the ramps on both ends. On the repelling side based on Ufo's positioning of the ramp on the stator magnet, I would say the added length is needed to provide a place for that south field to move to. This then gives us the attraction seen that pulls the repelling rotor toward the end of the ramp. His ramp design and placement does not allow for inductive kick and this can be seen in the video. So, I don't believe the moving South field disappears, but gets moved to the bottom of the ramp where the opposing north field is weaker. Then moves to the end to create the pull we see of the rotor magnet to the repelling stator magnet. Yum, yum, my words taste good. Lol. So polarity IS used as a tool to further bias the nodes at the stator magnets.

Now with that said the attracting side is wholly different. The ramp has an inductive kick in front of the stator, but that moving South field is still present in the ramp. With ramps, as Ufo has them, this would amplify the South field of the stator and extend it past the stator magnet giving us the seen braking. So my take aways are such:
Attracting side-
The attracting ramp must end ~ the middle of the attracting stator magnet to end that moving field even with the magnet, for now. The ramp should terminate in such a way that the force vectors are as close to zero as possible and the mass is minimized at the center line of the stator magnet. I believe the ramp should also be near the face of the stator magnet.

Repulsion side-
The ramps should extend beyond the repulsive stator magnet. The end should be blunt and not too close to the face of the magnet. Mass at the end for the moving field to travel to. See Ufo's video of bottom ramp.

Thanks you Ufopolitics for the excellent video. It has been a great learning tool when used in slow motion. The process I use to view Youtube video in slow motion is by downloading the video, then viewing it with VLC media player. This allows you to slow the motion down as slow as you like. Something Youtube lacks.

Thanks All,

Randy

[Siggi1974]

Hi Mack,

thanks for that. This was pretty clear. However my question then would be, why we cannot use repelling stators only and tune all ramps identical

Best regards
Siggi

[Ufopolitics]

Let's talk about Ufo's test device again, there is that nice kick from his repelling ramp at the bottom. What is responsible for that? Is it the attraction to the ramp and it's attendant acceleration? Is it a repelling field induced in the ends of the tines as the rotor magnet passes? A combination of the two? Is an induced repelling field in the tines collapsing later and suddenly re-attracting the rotor magnet? If that is the case shouldn't the rotor magnet field be transitioning to the next ramp before that happens?
The top ramp exhibits different behavior. There is no kick at the end of that ramp. It looks like an attracting field is being induced in the tine ends. If that is the case we need to neutralize that ramp as soon as it has done it's job of accelerating the rotor by changing the attraction vector to 0 (tines parallel to rotor magnet arc of travel) and reducing the magnetic attraction as much as practical (gradually reduce the mass of the tines) until the rotor magnet field can transition to the next ramp.
It's not all about gain, it's about loss prevention too. The two types of nodes have different properties so the ramps must be different to properly utilize them.

@Ufo,
Is the above scenario an accurate description of what is occurring with your test device ramps?

Regards,
Mack

Absolutely right and got the message behind as well!...


Thanks Mack!


Regards


Ufopolitics

[BroMikey]

BroMikey,
Sorry, the ends in that ramp picture are completely wrong. You are not paying attention to the force vectors. Please, unless you know something I don't, let's drop the shunt or shielding discussion for now. Ramps first. We have to bake the cake before adding the icing

Regards,
Mack

Thanks Mack, I'll drop the shunting expose til later. ........No points

for termination..........

[BroMikey]

Collecting Gleaned Nuggets, It could be bent at the end of the repulsion
UFO!!!

The first step is finished. You can balance the magnets as needed.
We are at the second step, developing the ramp for the attraction magnets, without the repelling set.
After that comes the ramp for the repelling magnets, without the attraction set.
At this point you can determine the best rotor diameter.
Then, combine the action of the two ramps as a pair on the stator.
After that comes modifying the magnetic fields with shunts to assist rotation.
Then you will know exactly how to build the motor.


think about the magnetic flux involved between the rotor magnet, ramp, and stator magnet. Picture the flow of the flux in all directions as the rotor magnet passes along the ramp, it always takes the path of least resistance. We want the rotor flux to transition between straight attraction to the ramp, then angle off to both sides smoothly while providing the least amount of back pull. As the rotor magnet gets closer to the stator magnet the flux will transition to an attraction mostly between the magnets and this is where the ends of the ramp need to lose their influence on the rotor magnet.



Mack

There will be some back drag as the split in the ramp widens and this needs to be compensated for as best as can beThe fork tines would be parallel just before the stator magnet, giving the rotor magnet attraction or repulsion vectors to the ramp of 90 degrees to the direction of rotation. As the rotor magnet gets to the stator magnet there is nothing but air between the two.

I would like to point out that I have said nothing about the shape of the very ends of the ramp at the stator magnet, where the ends terminate, nor the various degrees of slope and rotor magnet clearance the ramp may have along it's length.

Regards,
Mack

I guess my ability to convey a design with words leaves a lot to be desired so from here on I will use drawings. Look at this one, it accurately shows the angle of the fork tines. It does not show the reduction in cross section or the ends of the fork tines. The angle of the upward bend at the left of the fork isn't exact either.

In the top view, the rotor magnet (dashed lines) at this point of rotation will be strongly attracted by the stator magnet. From this point onward is where the rotor's attraction to the ramp should be diminishing and where the cross section of the forks will be decreasing. By the time the two magnets are aligned we want the attraction to be between the two magnets with as little as possible left between the rotor magnet & ramp. How well this is accomplished has a great affect on the performance.

Regards,
Mack

[MadMack]

BroMikey,
Sorry, the ends in that ramp picture are completely wrong. You are not paying attention to the force vectors. Please, unless you know something I don't, let's drop the shunt or shielding discussion for now. Ramps first. We have to bake the cake before adding the icing

@Tachyoncatcher,

...you will only realize the gain when the nodes are close enough in proximity that the rotor magnets can transition each node inductively,

Excellent. Very close.

Let's talk about Ufo's test device again, there is that nice kick from his repelling ramp at the bottom. What is responsible for that? Is it the attraction to the ramp and it's attendant acceleration? Is it a repelling field induced in the ends of the tines as the rotor magnet passes? A combination of the two? Is an induced repelling field in the tines collapsing later and suddenly re-attracting the rotor magnet? If that is the case shouldn't the rotor magnet field be transitioning to the next ramp before that happens?
The top ramp exhibits different behavior. There is no kick at the end of that ramp. It looks like an attracting field is being induced in the tine ends. If that is the case we need to neutralize that ramp as soon as it has done it's job of accelerating the rotor by changing the attraction vector to 0 (tines parallel to rotor magnet arc of travel) and reducing the magnetic attraction as much as practical (gradually reduce the mass of the tines) until the rotor magnet field can transition to the next ramp.
It's not all about gain, it's about loss prevention too. The two types of nodes have different properties so the ramps must be different to properly utilize them.

@Ufo,
Is the above scenario an accurate description of what is occurring with your test device ramps?

Regards,
Mack

[Ufopolitics]

Gentlemen,
I have had an epiphany that has kept me awake most of the night so here I am, early morning, pecking away.

Hey Tachyon, that is called obsession...consult your psychologist...

Just kidding...LOL

Mack, you have described your motor as a modular device and in the fact that there are two types of NODES repeated radially it is. However, I and a few others, have been thinking of this motor in a modular sense. That the gain is a result of the interaction between the components of each module. Therefore the assumption that one module, carefully crafted, should create success. But as you have stated,

Ufo,
I never wrote it because I never got a 2 pole like this one to actually motor. Logically, you would think that it would, but that was not my experience.

Not only that Tachyon, but He also stated in that same post...:

The opposite ramps are not identical in my motors, in case that helps.

Which means exactly an "Asymmetry" on both Ramps...we were working on perfectly symmetrical ramps, upper and lower...well...wrong.

This can only mean one thing. This is a sequential device. The gain is realized BETWEEN the nodes, not in the nodes. For the sake of clarity, I will refer to the simplest form of this device, the 2 magnets ( 1 stator, 1 rotor ) and 1 preceding ramp as a NODE. The main thrust is the result of the bias between the nodes through the use of induction. Polarity has NOTHING to do with the gain. The node construction is to create a unit that causes an inductive differential between the entry and exit of each node through the use of geometric principals and careful balancing of the associated magnet polarities.

BINGO!!...I believe you nailed it on your first part of above paragraph...it is a sequential device...

Starting by just one single "Module" including its two opposite and Unequal ramps, does a part of the sequential rotation, where ramps are -in each module- in a Sequence between them, where one starts and before it ends, offering the possibility of back drag...then the opposite starts at its strongest attract and take off ramp...to complete the sequence, throwing a full power stroke.

This motor works because each node has an inductive differential and so you will only realize the gain when the nodes are close enough in proximity that the rotor magnets can transition each node inductively, but not so close that the magnetic polarities of the node magnets interfere with their neighboring fields.

From here on, I will be working with two models. A two node system to test component design of a node. A second model to which will have a full compliment of 6-8 nodes to test the differential between nodes. The fact that Mack has had success with an 8 node system, ( 8 stators ) is evidence to the fact that we are realizing gain through induction differential between nodes not polarities. With 8 nodes you would have two North nodes and two South nodes side by side.

I think by using the above descriptors and the realization of where the gain is coming from, many normally open minded people who have previously thought this impossible, might be able to shift their thinking to the possibilities here that Mack has so graciously presented.

To Greater Understanding,

Randy

The way I am trying to understand this is comparing it to a gas engine like Mack cites as well...

The SUM from the Two Ramps in a single Module are what offers the "Full compression stroke travel" for a single cylinder, building up the sufficient travel angle plus speed to rotor, so that in the sum between the two ramps, Rotor accelerates enough to reach compression TDC, and pass that point, generating the power stroke for that "Module-Cylinder".

Which makes sense...because IF we have Two Identical Ramps...like I had on video...then rotor will find symmetrical balance with identically set opposite ramps...

Then as we add each additional Module...they should also be in sequence with previous one...related now to Power Strokes...meaning that before Module One completes its power stroke...we should have Module Two working at the compression stroke two in the first ramp on the sequence, NOT just starting...in order not to allow "decay" or slow down rotor...and so on...

Related to the ending from ramps...Mack wrote this post previously related to ramp construction:

Regarding the relationship between a rotor magnet and a ramp+stator magnet, resulting in the rotational force actually applied to the rotor, the key is the manipulation and directing of the forces available.

Magnetic attraction or repulsion is a force.
Identify when, where, and the direction of, the force(s) in operation between the ramp and magnets. Manipulate the physical construction of the ramp to make the forces work in your favor. The ramp is more than a curved piece of rectangular iron.

Food for thought:
1 force cosine 0 degrees = 1 force
1 force cosine 90 degrees = 0 force

Mack

Then his last post on the ends of ramps...:

The blunt end of the top ramp. If the ramp is good up to that point then what if from that point on, the vector force between the ramp tines and rotor magnet remained at 0 while rotation continued and the attraction between the tines and rotor could also be reduced to 0?

Regards,
Mack

[Ufopolitics]

Wrong assumption....

sorry Mack but your idea based on symmetry is lacking IF symmetry is the key to your idea.

Einstein and company made the same mistake over 100 years ago and the mistake was not noticed until 1956 when parity violation of the 'symmetrical' four forces was observed.

theoretically your idea is a FAIL and I suspect your idea will never 'fly'



Here is where the big boys went wrong.

https://at37.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/nobel-prizes-for-graphene-asymmetry-etc/

selah

Raphael,

Mack's set up STARTS by Symmetrically setting all magnets in the system...so he obtains a perfectly balanced symmetrical zero forces system, cancelled by each opposite and equal number of counter forces...so up to here the system is Symmetrical...BUT, in order to achieve rotation, his ramps are Asymmetrical and in "sequence"...that is what brings motion to this device.


That is my opinion.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[tachyoncatcher]

Sequential

Gentlemen,
I have had an epiphany that has kept me awake most of the night so here I am, early morning, pecking away. Mack, you have described your motor as a modular device and in the fact that there are two types of NODES repeated radially it is. However, I and a few others, have been thinking of this motor in a modular sense. That the gain is a result of the interaction between the components of each module. Therefore the assumption that one module, carefully crafted, should create success. But as you have stated,

Ufo,
I never wrote it because I never got a 2 pole like this one to actually motor. Logically, you would think that it would, but that was not my experience.

This can only mean one thing. This is a sequential device. The gain is realized BETWEEN the nodes, not in the nodes. For the sake of clarity, I will refer to the simplest form of this device, the 2 magnets ( 1 stator, 1 rotor ) and 1 preceding ramp as a NODE. The main thrust is the result of the bias between the nodes through the use of induction. Polarity has NOTHING to do with the gain. The node construction is to create a unit that causes an inductive differential between the entry and exit of each node through the use of geometric principals and careful balancing of the associated magnet polarities.

This motor works because each node has an inductive differential and so you will only realize the gain when the nodes are close enough in proximity that the rotor magnets can transition each node inductively, but not so close that the magnetic polarities of the node magnets interfere with their neighboring fields.

From here on, I will be working with two models. A two node system to test component design of a node. A second model to which will have a full compliment of 6-8 nodes to test the differential between nodes. The fact that Mack has had success with an 8 node system, ( 8 stators ) is evidence to the fact that we are realizing gain through induction differential between nodes not polarities. With 8 nodes you would have two North nodes and two South nodes side by side.

I think by using the above descriptors and the realization of where the gain is coming from, many normally open minded people who have previously thought this impossible, might be able to shift their thinking to the possibilities here that Mack has so graciously presented.

To Greater Understanding,

Randy

[Raphael37]

I have thought long and hard about revealing the results of my magnet motor experiments but time is my enemy and time is growing short. I want to get this information out before it's too late so I wish to present to you a simple concept for a successful magnet motor. It is a basic rule of nature and that rule is balance. Yin and yang. There is symmetry in nature wherever you look.


Mack

sorry Mack but your idea based on symmetry is lacking IF symmetry is the key to your idea.

Einstein and company made the same mistake over 100 years ago and the mistake was not noticed until 1956 when parity violation of the 'symmetrical' four forces was observed.

theoretically your idea is a FAIL and I suspect your idea will never 'fly'



Here is where the big boys went wrong.

https://at37.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/nobel-prizes-for-graphene-asymmetry-etc/

selah

[BroMikey]

Basic shielding knowledge base.

Our target is MAGNETIC SHIELDING not EMI shielding.

If you are like me you want to know how thick a standard shielding

metal should be. 1/4" or .001. In these videos you can find answers.

What types of materials? Magnetic Shielding facts. Ferite shielding as well.

If we are going to advance the design we need to come up to speed

on available information so we may GLEAN, there is that word, something

through experimental data on this rig. Some of you more advanced builders

do not need to view these materials so bare with me and those who

are unfamiliar with basic shielding application. It appears that all motors

using magnets have some form of shielding that redirects flux to one side.

Such as a hard drive magnet making flux stay on one side. MuMetal is a

high nickel content alloy and is not needed for this demonstration.

Save your nickels.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXp5hgTG_Vc[/VIDEO]


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzqUum7MalE[/VIDEO]


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR2ZFnX9gnA[/VIDEO]


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aVxB9oXcEc[/VIDEO]


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TF5OaNu12Y[/VIDEO]