At 10:18 am 26/02/2006 -0500, you wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Nick Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:29:33 -0000 >Subject: Re: Sprain Mag Motor > >Terry - this motor looks like another variation on the "regauging" >idea. Permanent magnets on the rotor are attracted to others on the >perimeter, spaced progressively closer to the rotor so there is a >magnetic "hill" to go down. At the bottom of the hill is a pulsed >electromagnet to pull the rotor magnet past the bottom of the hill and >"regauge" it. Surely these motors fail because the amount of energy >needed to "regauge" is equal to, or in excess of, that which can be >extracted from the rotor as it goes round? > ><><><><><><><> > >I'm glad you asked. <g> > >According to the inventor, and as I observed. The rotor will not >self-start. You can place it in most any position and it will not move >with a load on the shaft. Paul initiates the rotation (as can be seen >in the vid) by passing one of the rotor mags near the emag. Position >sensors "wake up" the microcontroller, Paul gives the rotor a kick >start, and away she goes. > >Position sensors at the bottom of the shaft determine when to fire the >emag. The emag (electromagnet, btw) fires just when the rotor mag >begins to exit the field. The short pulse momentarily negates the >attracting field of the mag with the smallest airgap to the rotor >allowing the rotor inertia to take it over the hump and onto another >cycle. > >Now, the shaft is split between the rotor and the top bearing and load >device. In the split is a $10k custom built, hall-effect torque >sensor. This is the only device with which I have no experience. I >will return with my ME buddy to take a look later; but, having faith in >who seems to be an honest inventor, I believe the device accurately >measures the torque on the shaft. > >Paul applies a load on the bearing side of the shaft with the screws >visible in the image: > >http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/load_screws.jpg > >The display for the load sensor reads 0.6 Newton-meters as the device >rotates. The electrical pulse: > >http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/pulse_display.jpg > >Indicates less that he is inputting less than 1.1 Watt-seconds of >electrical energy into the pulse. In 3*Pi radians (1.5 rotations) he >has input less than 3.2 Ws (3 pulses) and output around 6 Nm of >mechanical energy (1 Nm = 1 Ws = 1 Joule). This is a COP of 1.88. > >Regauging? Call it what you may, I think it just might be the Holy >Grail. > >Terry
£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££ Mmm...All very interesting. It seems to me it's a bit like the SMOT which you mentioned in another post, only whereas the SMOT used gravity this uses inertia as the other arm of the cycle. The trouble with the SMOT was, it resembled the John Logie Baird TV system whereas the Sprain is more akin to the Philo T. Farnsworth system - with the difference of course that unlike the SMOT the Baird system did at least work, albeit crudely. I must admit that I would be happier if the energy output was measured by the kind of brake used to measure the output of automotive engines in my mechanical engineering practicals at college, i.e. by a steel band around a flywheel with a weight hanging on the end and cooling water steaming away merrily. Still, as the good book says: "Blessed are those who believe and have not seen." or words to that effect. 8-) As for the emag being the Holy Grail, I would rather think it's more akin to the Philosophers Stone which can deliver an inexhaustible supply of Black Gold's energy. Frank Grimer
