Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On 01/01/2010 12:59 PM, William Beaty wrote: On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: An ideal toroidal coil has no external field -- symmetry and simple arguments regarding the curl of the B field show that it's got to be null outside the torus. In particular, any loop around the outside of the torus must have zero net B field (if we integrate it around the loop) Yep, that's exactly it. After a little more thought I realized I have no idea what the Steorn toroidal magnetic cores have for a B field. Anybody got a link to a picture, or could someone who knows how the field is shaped sketch it? B field lines are always loops but the field loops from a permanent magnet *must* intersect the material of the magnet (or be knotted around the magnet like the loops around a solenoid), so the field of a toroidal magnet can't be doughnut rings around the outside of the torus, as one might tend to imagine it. So, what *is* the shape of the field? And how can a toroidal coil wrapped around the core, which necessarily has a very different field shape (lines not even close to parallel to the field lines of the magnetic core), quench the field of the core? My presumption is that the effect of the coil's field on the core is to rotate its field so that it's parallel to the coil's field, at which point the field of the magnet, like the field of the coil, becomes invisible outside the torus. But that's really just a wild guess, based on bits and pieces of what Bill Beaty has said about toroidal core saturation.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Harry Veeder wrote: billb wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Nope. Look at it this way: if b-fields cannot leak out, then there is zero coupling to external magnets ...and external fields cannot induce any current in the coil. Or start out by imagining an air-core toroid. Air-core toroids are self-shielding, and external fields cannot induce any current in an air-core toroid, even if the fields are nonuniform. Now if you add a ferrite core, and keep it far from saturating: same effect, and the toroid inductor still self-shields against external fields. But if you bring a magnet too close, so the core is overloaded, then it cannot perform its self-shielding trick anymore. In a fluxgate magnetometer, the toroid coil brings the ferrite very close to saturation, then the added field from the Earth is enough to saturate it. Then two other coils can explore the directional saturation effect and determine the X and Y components of the Earth's field. If the PM magnets on the Steorn rotor are designed to be far enough away that they don't saturate the ferrite, then the toroid will self-sheild, and there will be no current induced in the toroid. But if the drive pulse *plus* the PM magnets *does* saturate the ferrite, then the toroid will behave very differently and will strongly interact with the rotor magnets when the drive pulse is there (when the two fields saturate the ferrite and ruin the self-shielding effect.) Fully saturated ferrite is non-magnetic! At least, for small AC signals it is. Ideally if you stick a fully-saturated core into a simple cylindrical coil, the inductance of the simple coil will not rise. A fully-saturated ferrite is magnetically like a hunk of air. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On 01/01/2010 03:30 AM, William Beaty wrote: On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, Harry Veeder wrote: billb wrote: On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Nope. Look at it this way: if b-fields cannot leak out, then there is zero coupling to external magnets ...and external fields cannot induce any current in the coil. Or start out by imagining an air-core toroid. Air-core toroids are self-shielding, and external fields cannot induce any current in an air-core toroid, even if the fields are nonuniform. #$%^$%!! So the problem I had is failure to properly picture a non-uniform magnetic field. First, let me explain that I see why an ideal toroidal coil has no external field -- symmetry and simple arguments regarding the curl of the B field show that it's got to be null outside the torus. In particular, any loop around the outside of the torus must have zero net B field (if we integrate it around the loop), because it encloses a surface which can be entirely outside the torus, which means curl(B)=0 on the whole surface. Second, I can see how conservation of momentum implies an external field can't affect the torus -- interactions must be a two way street, and if the torus can't talk back then it can't listen either. But third, it *seemed* to me that a change in a non-uniform B field would result in curl(E)=-dB/dt on one side of the torus than the other, and this would result in a net EMF in the torus. The point I missed is that the div(B) and curl(B) must both be zero in free space (absent any electric field) so a non-uniform B field can't just be a bunch of fence posts sticking straight up, with some posts shorter than others. That image has nonzero curl! Rather, the fence posts must bend, and they must bend toward the stronger part of the field. Consequently, the stronger part of the field affects less of the torus, the weaker part of the field affects more of it (because of the bending) and as the field changes the induced E field in the wires of the torus is balanced out. Gak. I've attached a crude drawing to show sort of what I'm talking about. In the drawing, longer arrows indicate a stronger B field. The direction of the B field relative to the torus, clockwise or counterclockwise, determines which way the induced voltage goes as the field changes strength. As a stronger B field changes it'll induce a stronger E field in the loops of wire in the torus around that portion of the B field. However, note in the drawing that the weaker B field, which is going clockwise around the torus, is affecting more of the torus than the stronger field, which is going counterclockwise. My explanation is not very clear -- I hope it makes at least a little sense to folks... attachment: B-field-in-torus-2010-01-01.jpg
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
I should have said more homogeneous that with a single magnet. On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: This video shows the two magnets clearly and has Sean describing the orbo and explaining the significance of some lines on a scope. http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/S5nae_I_Mus The magnetic field experienced by the torroid coil is characteristically inhomogeneous in time and space since the magnets are metalic discs and they are whizzing past the coils. For the coil to experience a homogeous magnetic filed, the magnet would have to be in the shape of a continuous metalic belt around the rotor. harry - Original Message From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 8:44:07 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication If you check carefully, Steorn uses two magnets to help make the field homogeneous. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: - Original Message From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 4:36:48 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Harry __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/ __ The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: My explanation is not very clear -- I hope it makes at least a little sense to folks... Much so, thanks! For those small magnets this is probably a fairly accurate representation. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: So the problem I had is failure to properly picture a non-uniform magnetic field. Or, from practical experience with inductors, I could imagine noticing the effects of saturation, but ascribing the cause to nonuniform fields! :) First, let me explain that I see why an ideal toroidal coil has no external field -- symmetry and simple arguments regarding the curl of the B field show that it's got to be null outside the torus. In particular, any loop around the outside of the torus must have zero net Yep, that's exactly it. But I see one extra source of confusion: any nonuniform e-field threading the donut hole of the torus, if it's fast-changing, constitutes a significant displacement current having a circular b-field in the core, and will induce a small current in the toroid coil. For example, if we place capacitor plates above and below the plane of the toroid coil and adjacent to the coil, then apply AC, we've essentially passed a single-wire primary coil through the donut hole, and the toroid acts as a transformer secondary. But those capacitor plates will measure a couple of picofarads. Moving magnets produce effects in tens of mSec, 10Hz - 100Hz, so the capacitive reactance will be ~billion ohms. My gut-level impression is that, for this effect to even be detectable, the fast-changing external e-field has to be damn fast, like tens of MHz. It may be a major effect when high-power RF is involved. But waving a magnet near a toroid won't do it. (Waving a magnet past the leads of an AC digital voltmeter won't produce a reading, even though in theory the changing b-fields in space are producing EM waves, and the meter leads must act as a dipole radio antenna!) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: When the power to the controller is switched off, no induction is measured in the stator coils. Why? Isn't this how a generator works? Ferromagnetic materials are nonlinear. If their operation is kept well below the saturation region, then yes, a motor must be a generator. But if the combination of drive current and PM magnet fields cause the core material to approach saturation, then the simple motor-generator rule no longer applies. By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. But if the combination of drive pulse and PM magnet's field are causing the toroid core to leave the linear operating region, then the generator effect can only exist during the drive pulses. It's similar to how flux-gate compasses work. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
- Original Message From: Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 1:13:39 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication Setting aside the issue of over unity or free energy, what does the 'zero' meter reading mean ? a violation lenz law? a faulty meter? or meter leads located at the wrong place? Are you implying that the amp meter is not connected correctly? If so, why would the current increase at low RPM. His explanation, that the circuit is open for a longer period of time, makes more sense. I was just speculating. Harry __ Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
- Original Message From: William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 4:36:48 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Harry __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
If you check carefully, Steorn uses two magnets to help make the field homogeneous. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: - Original Message From: William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 4:36:48 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Harry __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
This video shows the two magnets clearly and has Sean describing the orbo and explaining the significance of some lines on a scope. http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/S5nae_I_Mus The magnetic field experienced by the torroid coil is characteristically inhomogeneous in time and space since the magnets are metalic discs and they are whizzing past the coils. For the coil to experience a homogeous magnetic filed, the magnet would have to be in the shape of a continuous metalic belt around the rotor. harry - Original Message From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 8:44:07 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication If you check carefully, Steorn uses two magnets to help make the field homogeneous. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: - Original Message From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 4:36:48 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Craig Haynie wrote: By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Not in a toroid inductor with unsaturated core. The ring-shape core will shield the inductor against fields coming from nearby magnets. For no induction to happen, wouldn't this also require that the magnetic field (of the permanent magnet) be entirely uniform as experienced by the torriod? Harry __ Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/ __ The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
[Vo]:Steorn Replication
I find this video to be interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_gkxfX98as When the power to the controller is switched off, no induction is measured in the stator coils. Why? Isn't this how a generator works? By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Craig (Houston)
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
Here are two more replications: http://www.youtube.com/user/m1a9r9s9#p/u/2/nDABKqdB538 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGPRoHgz8Rw The first link shows no apparent current increase as the speed of the rotor picks up, and tends to really display the effect that is perplexing all of these people. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
Here is the same unit turned by hand http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo Setting aside the issue of over unity or free energy, what does the 'zero' meter reading mean ? a violation lenz law? a faulty meter? or meter leads located at the wrong place? Harry - Original Message From: Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 11:45:30 AM Subject: [Vo]:Steorn Replication I find this video to be interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_gkxfX98as When the power to the controller is switched off, no induction is measured in the stator coils. Why? Isn't this how a generator works? By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Craig (Houston) __ Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
What happens when two solenoids wound oppositely pass through a common magnetic field if you tie the conductors together? Terry On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: I find this video to be interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_gkxfX98as When the power to the controller is switched off, no induction is measured in the stator coils. Why? Isn't this how a generator works? By moving a magnetic field across a conductor, don't we get induction, and hence, electricity? Craig (Houston)
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
Setting aside the issue of over unity or free energy, what does the 'zero' meter reading mean ? a violation lenz law? a faulty meter? or meter leads located at the wrong place? Are you implying that the amp meter is not connected correctly? If so, why would the current increase at low RPM. His explanation, that the circuit is open for a longer period of time, makes more sense.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: What happens when two solenoids wound oppositely pass through a common magnetic field if you tie the conductors together? I suspect you would get a zero reading, but how is that relevant to this demonstration?
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
If you pass a plane through the toroidal inductor, you will see that, in cross section, piecewise it's the same effect. Terry On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: What happens when two solenoids wound oppositely pass through a common magnetic field if you tie the conductors together? I suspect you would get a zero reading, but how is that relevant to this demonstration?
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
If you pass a plane through the toroidal inductor, you will see that, in cross section, piecewise it's the same effect. I see... thanks. But doesn't that prove his point, though, that if there is no reverse induction, then the circuits are independent? But, even if they are independent, this would not preclude a relationship between the current needed to depolarize the magnetic conductor in the stator, and the amount of force you could get from using that same piece of conductor to attract a permanent magnet. Perhaps the relationship would always ensure that you couldn't gain energy from the system. In any case, this issue should be resolved fairly quickly from this point, with several different people working on what looks to be a simple task. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
At 12:14 PM 12/30/2009, Craig Haynie wrote: Here are two more replications: The first link shows no apparent current increase as the speed of the rotor picks up, and tends to really display the effect that is perplexing all of these people. http://www.youtube.com/user/m1a9r9s9#p/u/2/nDABKqdB538 You have got to be kidding. He uses a 5 amp analog meter to show a stated operating current, coil turned on, of 100 mA. It's hardly visible. The demonstration shows the claimed basic effect, which is a no-brainer: switching on the toroid current quenches the magnetic attraction toroid core for the permanent magnets mounted on the rotor. Thus the rotor accelerates. Where does the energy being stored in the rotor angular momentum come from? The demonstration is unable to show if there is any significant increase or decrease in current. It's just an analog meter, and way, way too insensitive. Further, I would not expect, even with a more sensitive meter, any visible change in current as the rotor speed varies, except when it gets very slow, you would see the coil current switching on and off. Rather, the key to the effect is the transitions. It is the switching of the response of the toroid to the permanent magnets that produces the acceleration of the rotor. Steady-state on, the rotor is freewheeling. Constant current, independent of rotor speed. Steady-state off, likewise, no effect on current (zero) from rotor speed. It's crazy to expect a visible change in steady-state current from rotor speed. But it is the transitions that are the issue. What happens during transition? It is during this time that an interaction between rotor velocity and current exists. Basically, the electronics, such as they are, are switching on and off a response to a magnetic field. This takes energy. Standard overall theory would predict that the energy it takes is greater than or equal to, but never less than, the energy increase in the rotor. And, since the energy it takes to accelerate a rotor like that, slowly, is quite small compared to the power consumption of the coil, it only takes a small jolt, each time the magnet passes the coil, to cause acceleration. And then this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGPRoHgz8Rw Nice demo. Notice the neon bulb lighting up, apparently with each shutdown of current to the coil. That's back-emf, as he notes. Lots of it, the bulb is a voltage-limiter, I'd expect, what, 65V? Notice that the bearing isn't low friction, the rotor slows down when the current is shut off. That high back-EMF will be associated with a current spike. That current spike, forgive me if I'm wrong, could cause a reversed magnetic field, to repel the permanent magnet as it moves away from the core. In any case, to show that there is some anomaly here would take far more sophisticated instrumentation, and might even be very difficult, since the amount of energy necessary to produce the observed acceleration is much less than what is being dumped through the coil with each cycle. It would only take a small effect, such as the repulsion I mention as a possibility, to cause acceleration. And I'm not satisfied with this explanation of mine. The basic cause of the acceleration is the attraction of the permanent magnet for the core. That attraction is switched off by the electronics, at a critical time, presumably the ideal point to switch it off is as the rotor magnet passes the ferrite core. how much power does it take to switch off the ferrite's attraction? Apparently quite a lot, and it must stay off for the entire time until the magnet begins to approach the next attractive core. This seems horribly inefficient, but that's beside the point. I've seen no evidence or analysis that actually considers the obviously relevant effects. The claim of no back EMF is obviously wrong. If I'm correct, they had a clamping diode in the Steorn demo to dump the back EMF current, back to the battery, providing a minor recovery of energy. Hand-waving. Suppose you have a magnet in your hand and you wave it. Wave it at the right time, and you could accelerate the rotor. But that process, action vs. reaction, would cause drag on your hand-waving. Not necessarily much, it might be imperceptible with each wave. But it only needs to be just a little to cause rotor acceleration. It is the high inefficiency, in fact, that makes it difficult to detect and measure the effect.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
At 12:15 PM 12/30/2009, Harry Veeder wrote: Here is the same unit turned by hand http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo Setting aside the issue of over unity or free energy, what does the 'zero' meter reading mean ? a violation lenz law? a faulty meter? or meter leads located at the wrong place? It means a 5 A meter being used to show a 100 mA steady-state current. Look at the label on the meter! It looks to me like the current might not even be 100 mA, I didn't see any change at all, but I might have overlooked it. I wasted enough time looking at that demo as it was. Like, duh! I get it! Steorn is running a school to teach people how to make totally stupid demonstrations that obfuscate the issues. It could be quite a useful skill, if you are planning on working on over-unity devices. I'm sure that there are lots of people wanting to know how they do it.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
At 01:13 PM 12/30/2009, Craig Haynie wrote: Setting aside the issue of over unity or free energy, what does the 'zero' meter reading mean ? a violation lenz law? a faulty meter? or meter leads located at the wrong place? Are you implying that the amp meter is not connected correctly? If so, why would the current increase at low RPM. His explanation, that the circuit is open for a longer period of time, makes more sense. I see no sign that it's connected incorrectly, but ... it's entirely the wrong meter for the task. Actually, the circuit is closed for the same time, I'd assume, except for a response time factor. When the rotation is very slow, though, you would see the on current distinct from the off current (zero). On that meter, the tiniest twitch. Assuming immediate response, the circuit is closed, current running, for a time dependent upon the angular position of sensors that turn it on and turn it off. The duty cycle will be constant, independent of rotation speed, only the frequency will change. But this neglects what happens during the transitions.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
Craig, I don't think you get that the demonstrations show almost nothing, except that the second video you pointed to conclusively refutes the claim of no back-EMF, and quite visually, with the blinking of that neon bulb, which, as I recall, requires about 65 volts to initiate, the bulb then becomes low-resistance, dumping the back-EMF current (into the power source, I think, you can see the schematic provided) until the current falls below a keep-alive value, much lower. That bulb can dump a few watts of power, as I recall. Steorn used a diode, I believe, which will do the same thing, but at lower voltage, and not visibly.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
On 12/30/2009 03:31 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: At 12:14 PM 12/30/2009, Craig Haynie wrote: Here are two more replications: The first link shows no apparent current increase as the speed of the rotor picks up, and tends to really display the effect that is perplexing all of these people. http://www.youtube.com/user/m1a9r9s9#p/u/2/nDABKqdB538 Rather, the key to the effect is the transitions. It is the switching of the response of the toroid to the permanent magnets that produces the acceleration of the rotor. Steady-state on, the rotor is freewheeling. Constant current, independent of rotor speed. Steady-state off, likewise, no effect on current (zero) from rotor speed. Wait -- after reading your descriptions (and others), if I understand what the descriptions describe, it looks like the key is somewhere else. Look at what we've got: We have a magnetic core in a coil, and a separate movable magnet, which can move past the core/coil combination. Switch the coil on, the field of the core is canceled. A while later, switch it off, the field in the core comes back. You put energy in when you switch it on, you get it back when you switch it off; to the extent that the system gets warm in between you get back less than you put in. Fine, but that's not where the motor part comes in. The motor part is the interaction between the other magnet and the coil. The full system is apparently this: 1) A magnet moves close to the magnetic core. It's attracted to the core, so it gains mechanical energy during this phase. 2) At closest approach, the coil turns on, energy goes into the system, and the core is quenched. 3) The magnet moves away from the core AND coil. Since the field of the core is canceled, this apparently takes no work. 4) At maximum separation the coil is turned off. The only interaction between a live electrical circuit and a physical object on which it can do work is in step (3). In that step, the coil is energized in such a way that it would REPEL the magnet, which is moving away from it. Think about it -- the core attracts the other magnet, and the coil is canceling that attraction, so the coil is repelling the other magnet. In essence, the coil is pushing the magnet away, working against the attractive force of the coil. So, the phase where work is being done by the battery is the phase when the coil is energized and the magnet and coil are moving apart. To see where and how much energy is being pumped into the system to do useful work, look at the induced voltage in the coil during that phase. Say it again, louder: Linear superposition! Sure, the magnetization of the core changes, but to a very large extent, when you cancel the field of the core, you're looking at the coil and core fields adding linearly. The field of the coil is still there, still interacting with the environment, but it's hidden by the superposed field of the core.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
At 04:37 PM 12/30/2009, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: On 12/30/2009 03:31 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: At 12:14 PM 12/30/2009, Craig Haynie wrote: Here are two more replications: The first link shows no apparent current increase as the speed of the rotor picks up, and tends to really display the effect that is perplexing all of these people. http://www.youtube.com/user/m1a9r9s9#p/u/2/nDABKqdB538 Rather, the key to the effect is the transitions. It is the switching of the response of the toroid to the permanent magnets that produces the acceleration of the rotor. Steady-state on, the rotor is freewheeling. Constant current, independent of rotor speed. Steady-state off, likewise, no effect on current (zero) from rotor speed. Wait -- after reading your descriptions (and others), if I understand what the descriptions describe, it looks like the key is somewhere else. Depends on key to what. But sure, I like Mr. Lawrence's explanation, in some ways. But I'm not sure it's accurate yet. Look at what we've got: We have a magnetic core in a coil, and a separate movable magnet, which can move past the core/coil combination. Ferrite core. (I'm very weak in this field, something whacked me over the head when the right-hand rule was introduced. Right hand? Why right hand? Does the universe have something against lefties? Apparently!) Characteristic of ferrites: the magnetic field can be easily reversed with relatively low energy losses as heat. Switch the coil on, the field of the core is canceled. A while later, switch it off, the field in the core comes back. Right. You put energy in when you switch it on, you get it back when you switch it off; to the extent that the system gets warm in between you get back less than you put in. Yes, the back-EMF represents getting the energy back as the magnetic field collapses. Collapse it quickly, the voltage can go very high, burning out the switches, unless you dump enough current that the voltage doesn't rise that high. However, note, it only takes a certain amount of current to establish the toriod magnetic field that cancels the ferrite's field. Only that energy, stored in setting up the toroid field, is returned when shutting the thing off. The current, however, must be continuous during the freewheeling phase, or else the ferrite will retard the rotation of the rotor, by attracting the permanent magnet in the reverse direction, slowing the rotor down. That energy is not going to be recovered, it does not get stored in the rotation, it is pure heat loss. Fine, but that's not where the motor part comes in. The motor part is the interaction between the other magnet and the coil. The full system is apparently this: 1) A magnet moves close to the magnetic core. It's attracted to the core, so it gains mechanical energy during this phase. Yes. Now, without the switching system, the rotor will oscillate if it starts out with the magnet to one side of the ferrite. This will continue and slow down only due to friction, because whatever is gained in one direction is exactly subtracted in the reverse direction. 2) At closest approach, the coil turns on, energy goes into the system, and the core is quenched. Yes. 3) The magnet moves away from the core AND coil. Since the field of the core is canceled, this apparently takes no work. And it doesn't take work. That is, at that point, the rotor is freewheeling. But notice, the core has a certain field. That field could be reproduced by an electromagnet. In this configuration, the permanent magnet on the rotor would be attracted by the electromagnet, which, when the permanent magnet passes it, would be shut off, awaiting the next cycle of approach. In this situation, we have one kind of motor. We are attracting a part of the rotor with an electromagnet, it takes energy to set up that attraction, which then does the work. The Steorn motor appears to be symmetrically the reverse. Instead of the work being done when the coil is energized, it's done when the coil is de-energized. But, it seems, or we would expect, the energy is the same either way, it's simply that the arrangement operates inversely. It appears that Steorn claims some anomaly in this. *How much of an anomaly?* If the anomaly is near noise levels, difficult to measure, compared to the energy already being dumped into the system, we can easily consider it artifact. However, Steorn is claiming 300%. I.e., that for every watt-second going into the coil, there are two watt-seconds of power going into the rotational energy of the rotor. This, if true, would not be marginal. But it would then also be easy to recover that energy and use it to maintain or increase the battery charge (or, much nicer, a supercapacitor charge, which then would provide a very convenient and direct measure of energy storage, not complicated). The generator would have to be only 50% efficient at
RE: [Vo]:Steorn Replication
Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com] wrote: The only interaction between a live electrical circuit and a physical object on which it can do work is in step (3). In that step, the coil is energized in such a way that it would REPEL the magnet, which is moving away from it. Think about it -- the core attracts the other magnet, and the coil is canceling that attraction, so the coil is repelling the other magnet. In essence, the coil is pushing the magnet away, working against the attractive force of the coil. So, the phase where work is being done by the battery is the phase when the coil is energized and the magnet and coil are moving apart. To see where and how much energy is being pumped into the system to do useful work, look at the induced voltage in the coil during that phase. Say it again, louder: Linear superposition! Sure, the magnetization of the core changes, but to a very large extent, when you cancel the field of the core, you're looking at the coil and core fields adding linearly. The field of the coil is still there, still interacting with the environment, but it's hidden by the superposed field of the core. Because the interacting fields are essentially perpendicular and the toroid is saturating, looking at this from the perspective of linear superposition is not productive. The motor needs to be considered from the point of view of a parametric interaction. There will be essentially no CEMF because of the perpendicular fields. A higher current will be required to saturate the core when the magnet is present, which suggests that more energy may be required. The interaction and energy input is quite difficult to calculate due to the inductance variation and the combined fields. There is no new physics in this motor. This does not prove that the design cannot be overunity. I have tested many magnetic parametric transformers including soft materials and magnets in many geometries. I started out with efficiencies around 30% but with carefully selected geometries, materials, frequencies and path reluctances obtained efficiencies of over 95 % energy transfer but so far no overunity. Motors with moving magnets in a parametric mode is something that I have considered but not built. George Holz Varitronics Systems
