Muller generator replication by Romerouk

[142857]

@12345,
it just spins faster, nothing going on here, a coil is a coil, Homo sapiens have invented all they can. gotta go reep what I sowed in spring.
see ya,

Everybody has a knee jerk reaction but nobody can seriously answer a legitimate question.

[Shadesz]

@Altair,
Thanks good to know.

@elias,
Done. I posted it in the new thread here.

[eternalightwithin]

Does this mean, that at a certain higher RPM, you would start going back to Lenz braking the system, as the current delay shifts back around?

Hi
<snip>
...What he demonstrates is the fact that when you short a coil, some time (dt1) it takes for the current to start flowing, and then after the current is flowing another time (dt2) it takes for the current to stop flowing which is taken to the load. And another delay takes place in the core which is the time (dt3) it takes for the current to induce an opposing magnetic field to the core.

So the time delay is dt = dt1 + dt2 + dt3. If the magnet get passed by the coil TDC faster than dt, Lenz causes acceleration instead of deceleration.

That's the whole theory I put together.


Elias

[Altair]

Hi shadesz,
basically, the more magnets you have, the more torque you get, but the slower will be the RPM, if you keep the number of coils constant.

I approve the idea of a separate thread for this.

[elias]

I am onto building a small 15 coil 16 magnet unit.

[Shadesz]

I just created a couple of animations that may help us understand the patterns with asymmetric coil to magnet ratios. They both assume a clockwise rotation. I'm still interested in input as to what one is better.

8 coils and 7 magnets

uyhvXO.gif (432x432)



8 coils and 9 magnets

LmPWIn.gif (432x432)

Edit: I can create an animation of any coil to magnet ratio. If you want to see any others just let me know... Hmmm... maybe I will just start a thread on it...

[Shadesz]

less coils than mags or less mags than coils?

Which seems to do better? Say you have one more coil, or rotor magnet than the other, which one do you want to be the bigger number?

And most importantly, why?

Just gathering data till my building skill is good enough I can build some stuff for you all to see.

[minoly]

Valid uses for this "lensless" generator? nobody yet?

I know you think I'm just picking and I know you all wish I'd shut up....

...I really am asking pretty valid questions.

Just because I already know that it's not going to "self run" doesn't mean I consider it useless.

I'm just wondering if this would be better than a currently available wind turbine?


As much as you guys are doing here, are you doing anything that's truly new? One would think that nearly every combination of coil/core/magnet has already been experimented with.


Is a free spinning "lensless" gen turning really fast on an input of "X" better than a traditional gen turning slower at the same X input?

Is it producing far and away more ele than say the same basic set up with air cores and bigger magnets?

We also know that reading the output of a machine isn't the same thing as using that ele.

Ultimately can this kind of system put out more energy from the same input as any number of other generation methods. or does it just spin faster?

I want to know your thoughts on what kind of real world uses this kind of a generator might really have.

@12345,
it just spins faster, nothing going on here, a coil is a coil, Homo sapiens have invented all they can. gotta go reep what I sowed in spring.
see ya,

[142857]

Valid uses for this "lensless" generator? nobody yet?

I know you think I'm just picking and I know you all wish I'd shut up....

...I really am asking pretty valid questions.

Just because I already know that it's not going to "self run" doesn't mean I consider it useless.

I'm just wondering if this would be better than a currently available wind turbine?


As much as you guys are doing here, are you doing anything that's truly new? One would think that nearly every combination of coil/core/magnet has already been experimented with.


Is a free spinning "lensless" gen turning really fast on an input of "X" better than a traditional gen turning slower at the same X input?

Is it producing far and away more ele than say the same basic set up with air cores and bigger magnets?

We also know that reading the output of a machine isn't the same thing as using that ele.

Ultimately can this kind of system put out more energy from the same input as any number of other generation methods. or does it just spin faster?

I want to know your thoughts on what kind of real world uses this kind of a generator might really have.

[redrichie]

This is what minoly is doing in his and his sons shorting vids. check em out. awesome.

Had an idea, but not sure what would come of it. If you want to short a coil at or near TDC the easiest way may be to short it automatically using the same technique they are using on the drive coil in the magnet kicker thread.

Simply put, why not use a small pickup coil right next to the generator coil, and use it to switch a transistor. The only difference would be that instead of linking in a pulse from a power supply, it shorts the coil when activated.

Seems pretty simple, but I am just learning... Thoughts?

[Shadesz]

Possibly the most simple way to time coil shorting

Had an idea, but not sure what would come of it. If you want to short a coil at or near TDC the easiest way may be to short it automatically using the same technique they are using on the drive coil in the magnet kicker thread.

Simply put, why not use a small pickup coil right next to the generator coil, and use it to switch a transistor. The only difference would be that instead of linking in a pulse from a power supply, it shorts the coil when activated.

Seems pretty simple, but I am just learning... Thoughts?

[Shadesz]

just to mention it:
When toranarod's rotor has a diameter of 160 mm (magnet to magnet - as posted here http://www.energeticforum.com/148586-post890.html)
and is driven at ca. 4000 rpm, then one would have to drive a rotor with double that diameter at half the rpm to achieve the same 'magnet-bypass velocity'.
More examples:
In order to achieve toranarod's 'bypass-velocity' between a magnet and a coil with rotors of other size ...
...a rotor with magnet-to-magnet-diameter 200 mm (RomeroUK's) would have to be driven at ca.3200 rpm
...a rotor with diameter 400 mm would have to be driven at ca.1600 rpm
Hope I calculated this correctly.

That conversion math works for me. I played with a little algebra and came up with a simple formula/process for people to use to calculate the magnet bypass similarities between units. Using your above calculations with the following formula confirms that they are correct. So again, here is a simple formula to calculate...

REQUIRED RPM's to ACHIEVE SAME MAGNET BYPASS VELOCITY as ANOTHER UNIT

st=km

where
s= the RPM of unit one
t= the radius to magnet in unit one

k= the RPM of unit two
m= the radius to magnet in unit two


So, if your 'radius to magnet' is different than say Rods, but you want to achieve a similar magnet bypass velocity as one of his tests, you simply plug his radius to magnet (t), and times it by his RPM (s) in that test and then divide that by your radius to magnet (m). VIOLA, you have the required RPM's that you need to achieve the same magnet velocity as his.

This may help if people are actually going to try to extract a working formula, or even constant, for time delay as elias hinted at.

[quantumuppercut]

Have you guys try this set up with the magnet rotor yet?

ImageShack&#174; - Online Photo and Video Hosting

This set up is posted by penno a while back but with a function generator. I tried it this morning with the computer fan rotor. Basically, it's a bifilar with wire not connected to each other. We use the wires as capacitance and turns as inductance. It's an equivalent of series cap I suppose. When connected to same end, it does not give out much. When connected in opposite ends like the picture, it gives out much voltage. My fan flew apart after I see it so repair time later. I suppose there also a sweet point too.

[elias]

Hi

Of course this can play a role, as I first started experimenting about this stuff speculating that the reluctance of Iron cores should make it work. After months of experimenting with different types of coils, I concluded that aside the magnetic reluctance delay, the L/R delay plays a significant role, now aside that there is a better method to extract power and cause delay even more tha the user Keykhin has posted about 2 months ago on overunity.com:

And This is his video demonstrating acceleration:
&#x202a;keykhin's Channel&#x202c;&rlm; - YouTube

What he demonstrates is the fact that when you short a coil, some time (dt1) it takes for the current to start flowing, and then after the current is flowing another time (dt2) it takes for the current to stop flowing which is taken to the load. And another delay takes place in the core which is the time (dt3) it takes for the current to induce an opposing magnetic field to the core.

So the time delay is dt = dt1 + dt2 + dt3. If the magnet get passed by the coil TDC faster than dt, Lenz causes acceleration instead of deceleration.

That's the whole theory I put together.
Also Note that when you short a coil R is at its minimum thus dt1 is at its maximum, so you can get pretty good amount of delay, I also suspect that Muller was doing coil shorting to make it work at lower RPMs, too.

Elias

Hi boguslaw,
I don't know.
But I think the speed-up effect is not primarily related to the "propagation speed" of the magnetic flux in a coil core.

I think what helps us and what causes the speed-up effect, is that it takes time to polarize and then reverse-polarize a ferromagnetic core. I think physicists call this "reluctance". A ferromagnetic core "is reluctant" to change its polarity (when forced to do so by a passing magnet).

With an air core or vacuum, polarization of the core would happen "instantaneous". And this is why we need ferromagnetic cores - if my understanding is correct.

In other words: with a ferromagnetic core, there is a DELAY between the cause (= the passing magnet) and the effect/reaction (= polarization of the core).

If the rotor speed is high enough and just right, then there is just the right delay that the Lenz-force speeds up the rotor instead of slowing it down.

[quantumuppercut]

Newbie question...

Is a cycle time considered the time it takes for the magnets effect to start and stop affecting the coil? Or is it the time it takes for the start of one cycle to the start of another cycle? Just trying to get my head around basic terminology. Thanks in advance

Good one. I think about this question today too. Depends on how we define it and how nature works, we can get different results I suppose. Still thinking about it.

I think the goal of all these is to understand the anomaly posted by Rod. Basically, Lenz violation or lenzless. Lenz violation is not directly about self-run or overunity. It is just a physics model violation/incompleteness.