Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Magnet motors

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

  • Originally posted by A.K. Boomer
    Wrong, there is an input of energy in the last experiment -- thats what created all the heat right?-- and when you go to answer the question tell me "why" --- Your allowed to quote some lame ass thermodynamic law of physics but it has to come with the thinking mans reason of where the experiment goes wrong - this is where field experience leaves book smart in the dust, this is where the breaking down of information takes place, Not in the quote "energy cannot be created or destroyed" -- all that does is teach you a concept.

    Remember --- if the energy output is almost as great as the energy input to begin with -- then all were looking for is a few percentage to "push it over the edge"
    Why wont the steam do that -- or wouldnt it turn to steam @ 1,000 degree's F ? or would the temp to steam conversion ratio drop the pressure further, but doesnt steam expand and wouldnt that counteract that? or what? how? WHY?
    No, no.

    You start with "cranking", that's input of energy.

    But the water cools the compressed gas, the eventual formation of steam further costs energy. On down-stroke it will condense due to expansion, delivering the absorbed heat energy.

    The water delivers no energy, it will only follow the temperature.
    Water goes in, water comes out. No conversion. So the energy is only used for a state change, if at all.

    So, all mechanical and thermal losses aside:

    If you have invested 1000 watt in compressing the air, injecting water will cool the medium, whether it becomes steam or not, with an energy of 1000 watt, minus the quantum of energy, required to heat the water, minus the quantum of energy required to inject the water.

    But I can understand where this all is going wrong.

    Here in Europe we apply the law of thermodynamics with interchangable symbols. 1 Joule = 1 Watt-second. 1 Joule = 1 Newton-meter.

    So without apples to oranges vice versa:

    A fraction of temperature difference, a fraction of friction, you'll never get the equation at 100%, let alone over 100%, the last one is what you're looking after. In metric it can't be done, with conversions and lousy calculations it can be done on paper.

    This must be the reason that America has as far as I can see the highest number of "optimistic" inventions. Hydrogen convertors, "Free Power" spark plugs and all kinds of inventions requiring to regularly drain the fuel tank of fuel, produced while driving with forementioned inventions.

    But where is the succes? The breakthrough?

    O yes, the inventors are murdered by the CIA and become heroes, taking their inventions with them to the grave.

    Comment


    • This must be the reason that America has as far as I can see the highest number of "optimistic" inventions. Hydrogen convertors, "Free Power" spark plugs and all kinds of inventions requiring to regularly drain the fuel tank of fuel, produced while driving with forementioned inventions.

      But where is the succes? The breakthrough?


      Yep. Nuthin' but a bunch of technological rubes here. Heyuck! Don't know why you even bother really. Say. You don't mind if we borrow some of them fancy symbols, do ya? At least the nuclear collider in my back yard works.

      Comment


      • This is why I always jump into these discussions and state my statement --- Iv already have several motors built in my head years ago
        Where did the energy to run them come from?

        Hint: Don't say the magnets.
        Free software for calculating bolt circles and similar: Click Here

        Comment


        • Evan,
          it's obvious.
          The energy to run them is also in his head, get me a drill
          Nick
          Last edited by NickH; 02-12-2009, 04:44 AM.

          Comment


          • Am I alone in thinking that a "Mind Experiment" based on data known to be incorrect isn't worth anything at all?
            You could solve all the world's problems in your head based on fabricated BS that won't work in the real world and still wake up in the sh*t, seems a bit pointless.
            Now if you base your "Mind Experiments" on things that do work or might work then they might do you or someone else some good, starting from a basis of "We Know That Won't Work" seems to be a recipe for a result of "Ain't Gonna Happen"
            Did I mention that I'm selling plans for an anti-gravity machine, $10 and (if you build it right) - guaranteed to work or your money back
            Nick

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MCS

              This must be the reason that America has as far as I can see the highest number of "optimistic" inventions. Hydrogen convertors, "Free Power" spark plugs and all kinds of inventions requiring to regularly drain the fuel tank of fuel, produced while driving with forementioned inventions.

              Yeah --- and things like space shuttles and stuff


              But where is the succes? The breakthrough?

              Take a look around you -- it sure the hell aint got a "made in holland" sticker on it
              Don't start bagging on my country due to a power mechanics 1 class that had some neat little mental experiments designed for 16 year old's. For the most part the teacher communicated well with us due to the fact of all of us making an effort on learning how to spell. Sorry it took so long to reply, it took me awhile to "decipher the code".

              Comment


              • Originally posted by NickH
                Am I alone in thinking that a "Mind Experiment" based on data known to be incorrect isn't worth anything at all?
                k

                Nick your missing out on the mechanical twist to it, I agree there isn't much merit in an "anti-gravity bucket" like I stated before.
                And keep in mind -- this was a simple mind exercise with pencil and paper so there really wasnt any investment lost except the time it took the teacher to "real" some of the kids back into "orbit".

                The reason I seen value in it at the time was it was fun to do and got kids excited -- we were kids - it was all new.

                The reason I see teaching value in it now is it doesnt give a "by-pass key" to unlock - or "cheat" right at the source of power -- remember - the anti-gravity bucket could do that, but it falls short because it goes right to the power source, what fun in learning is that?
                It was the value of having to design mechanisms between the power source and the drive unit - The shielding was a third player --- In many designs It far surpassed the complexity of a electric brushed motor as this just used an armature to distribute electrical current of the stator @ the correct timing against the fields, I might add - choosing something that cannot possibly work can allowed for totally clean slates - anotherwords - many of us kids had already taken allot of things apart by that age -- have kids design an electric motor and it might look just like the one in Dads drill -- maybe even have the word DE-WALT on it
                Another point being is any exercise that throws in a different variable from the start will inevitably have to have different operating principles, and since this is a variable thats never seen, and if this is a mechanical device it can produce far different mechanical design results -- since this was a POWER MECHANICS class it was paramount that we had good understanding of linkages/eccentrics/cams/gears/pulleys and sprockets/hydraulics/pneumatics and on and on, and just about every one of these things and more were used in the class units design --- the Main design flaw (the one you guys are fixated on) was of course overlooked -- but all the mechanical guts had to not only work - they were judged by the teacher whether or not they were practical and efficient in power transfer -- there was no grade given on this couple day project -- but Mr Dedischew went over everybodys example in front of the class and explained why or why not it would mechanically function --- I will always think he was a great teacher not just for the 5% of the time doing stuff like this - he made the real world stuff just as fun too.

                One day we came into class and there was a big circle on the floor -- he had us all move our desks into the circle and our entire class studied one of the large steam ship engines -- half way through he then stated that the circle was to the inch as big as the piston top of the engine we were studying, We all took a look around at each other thats good stuff when your a kid.

                The sign of a good teacher is of course one that can teach
                the sign of a great teacher is one that can both teach and inspire...
                Last edited by A.K. Boomer; 02-12-2009, 09:09 AM.

                Comment


                • if i was trying to solve this problem ..

                  I would not do it, by the way of rotating stuff ..or piston engines ..
                  I would try and build a linear magnet motor ...if it "works" with that ...only then move on to the more complex stuff.

                  all the best.markj

                  Comment


                  • Aboard -- GT2rides motor really is a linear engine in the way he's trying to function the "magnetic drive unit" He's just converting the reciprocating motion into rotary -- its damn handy to have a little rotary package for driving power transmission units and such

                    Comment


                    • It is possible to build a linear permanent magnet accelerator. You need spherical magnets set up like this:



                      http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~mc.../lin_accel.pdf

                      To summarize the explanation given in the link it works because of energy stored in the magnetic fields when the magnets are placed. The configuration takes advantage of an "island of stability" created by the arrangement that keeps the magnets, just barely, in a meta stable higher energy grouping. The energy still comes from outside the system. When the system is perturbed by allowing the initial magnet to impact the first pair it destroys the stability of the system and the external energy stored in the fields is released progressively until the last magnet shoots off the ruler. Because the magnets are highly elastic they transmit most of the kinetic energy of motion to the next pair in the series with the result that the last magnet accumulates most of the released energy and is therefore accelerated.
                      Free software for calculating bolt circles and similar: Click Here

                      Comment


                      • Evan that reminds me of the kinetic impact balls on string deals that everybody and their brother had on their desk 30 years ago, It could also be used in your example with inert balls (on a string) inbetween and then the end ball could repeat the process in the other direction if it had enough mustard left in it --- It was neat enough to watch the standard units but these would be even more interesting with the "herky jerky" acceleration patterns, The entire process would have to be progressively lightening fast. (only of course in the one direction like in the example given) I never really thought about it but what a great way to perfectly align poles is make the magnets spherical and let them do it themselves.


                        A quick re-look -- I dont think those are spherical magnets -- I think the blocks are magnets and the spheres are regular ball bearings -- this makes more sense to me in how the devise is supposed to operate - Yes?
                        Last edited by A.K. Boomer; 02-12-2009, 11:10 AM.

                        Comment


                        • You may be right. It can be made to work either way though. The force of the magnets is almost but not quite balanced. Keep in mind that when a magnetic material is in a magnetic field it is also a magnet since it is conducting and concentrating the lines of force. That's why you can pick up a string of objects with a magnet.
                          Free software for calculating bolt circles and similar: Click Here

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by A.K. Boomer
                            A quick re-look -- I dont think those are spherical magnets -- I think the blocks are magnets and the spheres are regular ball bearings -- this makes more sense to me in how the devise is supposed to operate - Yes?
                            That's right -- I built one of these with my 5 year-old about a year ago: you use square magnets with ball bearings, and the magnetic acceleration at each "stage" is transferred by inertia to the next ball bearing:

                            http://scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/magnets/gauss.html



                            This was a kid's project that I think started on the Science Toys web page a couple of years back, was Slash Dot'ed, and spread like wildfire.

                            At one point, someone asked if you put the ball bearings and magnets on a circular track, would it be a perpetual motion machine
                            Why a circular track will not be a perpetual motion device

                            I have been getting a lot of mail asking what would happen if we made the track circular. Would we get free energy? Would the balls keep accelerating forever?

                            I have been tempted to reply with the famous quote: "There are two kinds of people in the world -- those who understand the second law of thermodynamics, and those who don't".

                            However, I am not the kind of person to leave an inquiring mind unsatisfied, and it is more productive (and kind) to explain in a little more depth what is going on.

                            Suppose you made a circular track, and put two balls after each magnet. When the last ball is released, it encounters a magnet that has two balls at the ground state. There is no energy to be had from this magnet. The ball just bounces back.

                            Now suppose you had placed three balls after each magnet. When the last ball is released, it hits a ball that is 5/8ths inch from the magnet. It has not gained much momentum, because most of the momentum gained is in the last half inch as the magnet pulls much stronger on things that are closer. But the ball has enough energy from previous accelerations to release the next ball. However, that ball has less energy than the ball that caused it to release. It may have enough energy to release another ball or two, but each ball that is released has less energy than before, and eventually the chain stops.

                            You can show by inductive logic that no matter how many balls you stack in front of each magnet, eventually the system stops.

                            To estimate the losses due to heating the balls as they compress when hit, consider a plastic tube standing upright on a table. Place one steel ball at the bottom of the tube. Now drop another ball into the tube, so it hits the ball at the bottom, and bounces back up.

                            Now measure how high the ball bounced. If it bounces halfway back up, the losses are 50%. Perform the experiment for yourself with the balls from the Gauss Rifle. How high does your ball bounce? Send me mail with your results.
                            "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did."

                            Comment


                            • It's not that difficult (and made in Holland, by M.C.Escher)


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X