World human population:
Babies need loving homes.
Please adopt. World Chimpanzee population:
Year 2004: ~ 150,000
Present: Probably less! World Gorilla population: ~ 700! | Recent posts- Paranormal update ~ http://glo…
2010, September 2 - Spark of Divinity ~ http://hig…
2010, September 2 - @WhereIsPaulJr http://twitpic….
2010, September 2 - Paranormal update
2010, September 2 - Obtained Bonded NdFeB’s
2010, September 1 - Hue MCU efficiency meter update 5
2010, September 1 - Paranormal
2010, September 1 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31 - Free Tibet
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tor…
2010, August 31 - I liked a YouTube video — Tib…
2010, August 31
|
Please help keep 6 extremely important magnetic devices as open source: http://globalfreeenergy.info/misc/help-open-source.html What are they:
They are 6 solid-state magnetic designs that will self-run and produce “free energy.” These are the result of years of magnetic research based on the mathematics of conventional physics. What’s the problem:
In early 2009 I posted the 6 FEMM (a 2D magnetic simulation Windows application) designs to the google websites server, but google has since moved to a new server and is saying these files are in danger of being moved, which will reset the file date stamps, and hence destroy the evidence that they were last modified in February 2009. Another problem is that there’s a specific well funded company that IMO will try their best, legally, to prevent me from marketing these devices. Don’t get me wrong, I’m fighting to keep these designs open-source, but most people will have no interest in building such a machine, as they will want to buy a prefabricated unit. One day, soon, I will start a company to market such devices to such people, but anyone will always be free to build their own.
For anyone replicating the Steorn Orbo or any spinning machine, here are a few websites that can help you calculate wind drag, Drag force calculator java applet. Great calculator for even ultra light devices:
http://www.ecs.syr.edu/centers/simfluid/redder/dragforce/DragForce.html Aero drag calculator. This will not help you with small devices, but it will give you an idea how air drag changes with respect to drag coefficient, frontal area, weight, and rpm: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml Drag coefficient. WikiPedia page showing Cd (drag coefficients) for various shapes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_coefficient
Reynolds number calculator: http://www.calctool.org/CALC/eng/fluid/reynolds
Sorry to the few people that received a bunch of notifications of test posts today. Nearly all of the subscribers database was somehow modified to cause conflict with the subscription php code. It took awhile to fix, but everything once again looks like it’s working.
This is a continuation from Mathematical proof of over unity. As the post left off, the mathematics is indeed showing there’s something very odd occurring. The example in the above post considers a worst case scenario, where all of the energy that goes into saturating the core is lost. Real measurements on these experiments using Metglas MAGAMP cores show that roughly all of the inductance energy that goes into saturating the core can be captured back. That places a completely different spin on the problem. In order to compare two examples, the input energy from inductance in both examples needs to be the same. Therefore consider the following two examples. Note, once again for the sake of simplifying the mathematics, the size of the magnet & toroid are appreciably small relative to the separation distance. Example 1, a magnet with a volume of 1X moves from a far away distance to a separation distance of 1r, the toroid is saturated, the core moves away. Example 2, a magnet with a volume of 8X moves from a far away distance to a separation distance of 2r, the toroid is saturated, the core moves away. In example 2 the magnet has 8 times the volume as in example 1, but in example 1 the magnet moves twice as close to the toroid. So the magnetic field from the magnet on the toroid is the same in both examples. Therefore, the input energy into the toroid inductance is the same in both examples. Even though the input energy is the same, the output energy (from moving the magnets as they are attracted to the toroid) in example 2 is twice as example 1. This is seen in the following integrals. Example 1:  . Example 2:  . The  in example 2 is because the magnet has 8 times the volume, which produces a magnetic field 8 times the strength on the toroid, which means the field on the magnet from the toroid is 8 times as great. Since the field on the magnet from the toroid is 8 times as great, and there’s 8 times as much material, the attraction force between the magnet and toroid is thus times greater. The integral of example 2 is twice as example 1. The results from comparing both examples shows that the *efficiency* doubles when the magnet moves to a separation distance that is twice as far away from the toroid. Once again, the two examples are for a worst case scenario in that the all of the inductance energy is lost. Real experiments show that roughly all of the inductance energy is not lost, but most of it can be captured back and the remaining goes to Joule heating. Joule heating can be useful energy, as in the case of a heater. What the mathematics shows is over-unity / excess energy. The input energy in both examples is the same, but the output is twice the difference between example 1 & 2. Has the Universe provided a loophole, a doorway to excess energy? It appears to be the case. Please refer to the following blog posts: Tiny orbo replication 170 efficient Tiny orbo replication major update – – shows 3400% efficiency.
Recently I believe to have discovered a simple mathematical model that proves so-called over-unity or excess energy. Such mathematical proof is based on my magnetic switch designs, which are shown to use Metglas magnetic core material, and is based on measurements. Consider a coil wound magnetic toroid appreciably separated from a magnet. The magnet, pointing toward the toroid, applies a magnetic field on the toroid. The magnetic field is relative to  , where r is the distance between the magnet and toroid. The magnetic field produced by the toroid, due to the magnet, is relative to . Therefore, the magnetic field on the magnet produced by the toroid is relative  . The total energy from moving the magnet far away to a separation distance of r is thus relative to . As r doubles, the gained energy is 32 times less. Please integrate the equation to see. IOW, if the magnet moves twice as close to the toroid, then the gain in energy (due to the attraction between magnet & toroid) increases 32 times. It takes the same energy to pull the magnet back away from the toroid to its starting position, but if we sufficiently saturate the toroid core by means of current flowing through the toroid coil, then the attraction between the magnet and toroid appreciably vanishes. Please note there is no point where a core is 100% saturated on average over time, due to ambient thermal energy. Of course it takes energy to sufficiently saturate the core. Measurements on Metglas MAGAMP cores indicate that twice the magnetic field on the toroid requires twice the current. The magnetic field on the toroid from the magnet is relative to . Thus the coil current is relative to . Therefore, moving the magnet twice as close to toroid requires 8 times the coil current, and thus according to measurements requires 82 = 64 times more energy. Consider two examples. Example 1, the magnet moves from far away to a separation distance of 2r, then sufficiently saturates the core, then moves the magnet back away again. Example 2, same as example 1, except the magnet moves to a separation distance of r. Note, for the sake of simplifying the mathematics, the size of the magnet & toroid are appreciably small relative to the separation distance. In example 2 the mechanical energy gain (output) is 32 times greater than example 1, but example 2 requires 64 times as much electrical energy (input). Therefore, example 1 efficiency is twice example 2. Each time the separation distance (the closest the magnet moves toward the toroid) is doubled in the design, the efficiency doubles; e.g., 25%, 50% 100%, 200%, etc. This is mathematical proof that something very odd is occurring, that indicates over-unity or excess energy. While ignoring losses such as from electrical wire resistance (Joule heating), the math indicates that a design where the magnet goes twice as close to the toroid is half as efficient. [Important update: please see Mathematical proof of over unity part 2.]
All of the parts have not arrived yet, so today was spent doing lots of calculations. I thought of yet another effect to consider. So now I’m not certain that the tiny magnets very close to the core as planned for “Tiny Orbo Replication 3″ is a good idea. I’ll build #3 and see, and then I’ll build a version using larger magnets farther away from the core, “Tiny Orbo Replication 4″ as a comparison. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
The email subscriptions was not working that well because the server was not sending authenticated emails, so your email provider (e.g., gmail), was considering it spam. Emails are now sent out authenticated. Furthermore, they’re sent via secure SSL. So hopefully subscribers will now receive post updates via email.
I don’t have enough spare time to work on the “Tiny Orbo Replication 2.5.” So the next one will be the “Tiny Orbo Replication 3,” after all of the parts arrive sometime next week. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
While I wait for a bunch of parts to arrive sometime next week (2mm & 1.5mm ID ceramic ball bearings, tiny 1/16″ cube N40 magnets, more cores, etc), I decided to build another “Tiny Orbo Replication”, version 2.5. This will use 4 tiny Radio Shack NdFeB disc magnets, part number 64-1895, that are 3/16″ OD, and 61mil thick. These will be epoxied to a thin 9mil thick plastic round disc that will be ~ 1″ OD. The 1″ disc will spin on a tiny 5mm OD, 2mm ID steel ball bearing. For the cores I’ll use all 4 of my thinnest Metglas MAGAMP cores, part number MP1303P4AS. Those are the thinnest Metglas MAGAMP cores available. One of the parts that’s on order to arrive early next week that I’m excited about is a very thin magnetic core that has a height of only 0.8mm thick (0.0315″). That, along with the 1/16″ cube N40 magnets, should allow the coil current pulse to be extremely short. The permeability is 12000. Nothing compared to the Metglas MAGAMP 1 million permeability cores, but that’s not as important since the real work done in the Orbo is when the core is well into the saturation curve where the permeability is low. We’ll have to see if these cores can produce the excess energy like the Metglas MAGAMP cores. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
Someone emailed this to me –> http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Here are some more ultra thin toroids sold by Elna made by Ferroxcube, TC2.5/1.3/0.8-3E6
TC2.5/1.5/0.8-3E6
TC2.5/1.3/0.8-3E25
Hi, If anyone knows of a toroid core that’s thinner, heightwise, than 0.050″, preferably at least 5000 permeability, then please reply. So far I found the following toroids sold by Elna, that have a 0.050″ height: 0H-40200-TC , 0W-40200-TC, 0J-40200-TC.
After doing a lot of number crunching today on all aspects of the “Orbo replication,” it appears that tinier is better. Unless I’ve missed something, it appears the “Tiny Orbo Replications” will live on. In fact, the “Tiny Orbo Replication 3″ might be even smaller than the prior two. It’s good thing I ordered those tiny 1/16 cube NdFeB magnets.  I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
* Ceramic ball bearing, SMR52C-YZZ NB2, from bocabearings.com * Magnetic toroid core, MAGAMP MP1303P4AS, qty 32, from metglas.com * N40 1/16″X 1/16 X1/16″ Tiny Block Magnets, $6.99 for qty 500, from ebay.com * Hard plastic, 9mils thick (0.23 mm). * 26 AGW copper magnet wire for toroids. * Hall effect switch and circuit. I’ve posted the hall effect switch part number before, and will post it again next chance. The new circuit will be posted as well. * Epoxy to glue parts.
I’ll place as many MP1303P4AS cores around the top edge of the thin plastic disc as possible with ~ 1/2″ spacing between cores for a total of 32 MP1303P4AS cores. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
Lately I’ve been designing the new “Orbo Replication.” The present design is to use a thin 9mil thick sheet of plastic, cut in a round disc shape. The exact disc diameter is unknown. A small ceramic ball bearing, 2mm ID x 5mm OD, 2.5mm thick will go inside a hole in the center of the plastic disc. Tiny NdFeB *cube* magnets, 1/16″ * 1/16 * 1/16″ N40, will be epoxied on the outer perimeter of the plastic disc. Each spot will have two NdFeB magnets, each opposite polarity just like the Steorn Orbo. One difference is that the magnets will be facing upward (axially), rather than outward (radially) like the Steorn Orbo. The reason being is that it’s a lot easier to make, and a lot lighter. So the magnets will be epoxied on the top of the thin plastic disc. The reason I picked such small magnets is to considerably reduce the required coil current pulse width, which so far has by far been the the highest loss, electric resistance losses. Also, the cubed shaped magnet can be stacked to form larger size if necessary. These N40 NdFeB magnets were inexpensive, ~ $8 for 500 of them. N40 is a relatively strong NdFeB, but to honest, if they sold N35 or N28 I would have bought them instead for a good reason. A weaker NdFeB magnet means the toroid can be closer to the magnet, which means the coil current pulse width can be decreased. You might wonder, why not buy ceramic magnets. Ceramics might work well, but if memory holds true, Ceramics do not have the high magnetic viscosity like NdFeB’s, so the excess energy effect might vanish with Ceramics. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
In reference to my idea how to make a magnetic levitation bearings, Passive magnetic levitation bearing, it is very difficult to find radially magnetized ring magnets. I found one such company that sells radially magnetized NdFeB magnets, but they’re expensive, $50 each. The following image shows an easy way to make radially magnetized magnets, albeit not as good as the real deal, but should suffice. 
Each square is a cube magnet. The blue arrow shows the direction of the magnetic field, which is radially magnetized. I did not spend much time creating the above image, as each magnet is rotated 45 degrees. The above image shows are eight *common* axial cube magnets that you can buy at any magnet dealer or warehouse. Ideally you’ll want to place more magnets with less degrees of ration. For example, if you rotated each magnet by 20 degrees, then there would end up being 360 / 20 = 18 magnets in your ring. The nice thing about cube magnets is that they can be stacked. You can stack & then glue say two ring magnets length wise to make them longer if you want, or higher if you want the final radially magnetized ring magnet to be thicker. After you make your ring magnet, next you will want to make another ring magnet, except smaller and also polarized in the opposite direction. So the magnetic field, show as blue arrows in the above image, will be in the opposite direction. That completes two radially magnetized ring magnets, small & large, opposite polarities. Next double that for a total of two large and two small radially magnetized ring magnets. Then follow the directions at, Passive magnetic levitation bearing
In order for the radially magnetized magnets to work well in the magnetic levitation bearing, they should all be evenly rotated. Properly done, this could be a long and tedious task. You might want to place spacers in-between each magnet near the outer edge to help get a consistent spacing.
[2010/2/16 edit: Simple & inexpensive way to make the radially magnetized magnets.] I’ve outlined this before, a design for a passive magnetic levitation bearing. One obvious design is to place a small radially magnetized magnet inside a larger radially magnetized magnet. That is, do not place it exactly inside, but force it somewhat on top, but still inside a bit. Both radially magnetized magnets are opposite polarity, thus repelling each other. The small magnet is on a non-magnetic non-metallic rod. Do the same for the other end of the rod; i.e., add a small and larger radially magnetized magnets. This prevents the rod from appreciably moving. Preferably the magnets should be bonded NdFeB to prevent eddy currents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tMRjpN0t3o I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
It’s amazing what difference between ball bearing and ball bearing. I just extracted another ball bearing from a CPU fan. This was from a massive fancy fan for a high end CPU. Well, at least in it’s day. The ball bearing looks in good shape, but it seems that the lubrication is too thick because the “tiny orbo replication 2″ can’t even run. Although it’s by far the quietest of all the ball bearings. I can hardly hear it. The best ball bearing so far is the noisiest, sounding like sand paper.
Yesterday was a good day. I found another PC fan in the garage, which had the exact same OD & ID. When the “Tiny Orbo Replication 2″ ball bearing was switched with this one, the rpm increased by ~ 30%. Odd thing is this ball bearing so darn noisy. It sounds like sandpaper. So far all of my bearings are metal, not ceramic, and used ones at that. One could only image how fast it would spin with a new ceramic ball bearing. Also I found out that if the device is tilted 45 degrees sideways that the rpm’s increases by a noticeable amount. Another good find is that the entire coil pulse width does not need to be ~ 20 degrees. I have not measured the new setting yet, but it’s considerably less than 20 degrees. The rpm only dropped ~ 10 to 20 rpm’s. This will save a lot of power in maintaining the pulse current that is caused by electrical resistance. The bottle neck so far is still the bearing friction. In order to reduce the losses from electrical wire resistance sufficient enough to make a self-runner, the rpm needs to be ~~ 20000 or higher without any pickup coils. Note, rpm has no effect on the power losses due to electrical resistance because the coils are always on the same percentage of time regardless of rpm. The 20000 rpm figure is a rough guesstimate for now. The reason the rpm needs to be so high is that when pickup coils are added, the rpm will drop significantly, so the final design might be ~ 15000 rpm. I am not affiliated with Steorn. Orbo is trademarked by Steorn.
|
Loading ...
