Otitis

Faraday disk, unipolar machine, Faraday paradox. Rotating magnetic field - a new physical phenomenon

Jorge Guala-Valverde, Pedro Mazzoni

Unipolar motor generator

INTRODUCTION

Continuing our research on motor electromagnetic induction, which we began earlier, we decided to identify the presence of torque in "closed magnetic field" in unipolar motor generators. Conservation of angular momentum eliminates the partial interaction between the field-producing magnet and the wire carrying the voltage, as observed in previously studied configurations "open magnetic field". The balance of angular momentum is now observed between the active current and the magnet, as well as its entire yoke.

Electromotive force caused by rotating magnets

The figure shows the free clockwise rotation of a magnet whose north pole passes under two wires: sampler And contact wire, at rest in laboratory conditions. In both the above wires, electrons move centripetally. Each wire becomes a source of electromotive force (EMF). If the ends of the wires are connected, the circuit consists of two identical sources of electromotive force connected in antiphase, which prevents the movement of current. If you attach the probe to a magnet, thus ensuring the continuity of current flow through the wires, then direct current will flow throughout the entire circuit. If the probe is at rest relative to the magnet, induction will be observed only in the contact wire, which is in motion relative to the magnet. The probe plays a passive role, being a current conductor.

The above experimental discovery, being in full accordance with Weber's electrodynamics, puts an end to the issue of misunderstanding of the principles of motor electromagnetic induction, and also strengthens the position of supporters of the theory of “rotating field lines”.

Rice. 1. Unipolar positioning magnet, probe and contact wire

Torque observed in freely rotating magnets

Engine shown on Rice. 1, It also has a reverse action: by passing direct current through electrically connected but mechanically isolated wires, we obtain the configuration of the motor.

Obviously, if the probe is soldered to the contact wire, thus forming a closed loop, torque compensation prevents the magnet and loop from rotating.

Unipolar closed magnetic field motor

In order to study the properties of unipolar motors operating with a magnetic field closed in an iron core, we made minor changes to previous experiments.

The yoke is transversely crossed by the left part of the wire-circuit, located collinearly with the axis of the magnet, through which direct current flows. Even though the Laplace force acts on this part of the wire, it is not enough to develop a torque. Both the top horizontal and right vertical parts of the wire are located in an area that is not affected by magnetic field(ignoring magnetic scattering). The lower horizontal part of the wire, hereinafter referred to as sampler, located in the zone of greatest intensity magnetic field(air gap). The circuit itself cannot be considered as consisting of a probe connected to a contact wire.

According to the postulates of electrodynamics, the probe will be an active region for creating angular momentum in the coil, and rotation itself will take place if the current strength is sufficient to overcome the frictional torque.

What was described above led us to the idea that in order to enhance this effect, it is necessary to replace the single circuit with a coil consisting of n contours. In the described in at the moment configuration, the “active length” of the probe reaches approximately 4 cm, N = 20, A magnetic field on the probe reaches a value of 0.1 Tesla.

Although the dynamic behavior of a coil is easily predictable, the same cannot be said for a magnet. From a theoretical point of view, we cannot expect the magnet to rotate continuously, since this would imply the creation of angular momentum. Due to the spatial restrictions imposed by the yoke design, the coil is unable to full turn and, after a slight angular movement, must collide with the yoke at rest. Continuous rotation of the magnet implies the creation of unbalanced angular momentum, the source of which is difficult to determine. Moreover, if we assume the coincidence of kinematic and dynamic rotation, we should apparently expect a force interaction between the coil, the magnet, and the core as a fully magnetized array. In order to confirm these logical conclusions in practice, we conducted the following experiments.

EXPERIMENT N 1

1-a. Free rotation of magnet and coil in laboratory conditions

A direct current centrifugal at the bottom of the circuit, the strength of which varies from 1 to 20 A, is supplied to a coil located at the north pole of the magnet. The expected angular momentum is observed when the DC current reaches approximately 2 A, which is sufficient to overcome the friction of the coil supports. As expected, the rotation reverses when centripetal direct current is applied to the circuit.

Rotation of the magnet was not observed in any case, although the value of the frictional moment for the magnet did not exceed 3-10 ~ 3 N/mΘ

1-b. Magnet with a coil attached to it

If the coil is attached to a magnet, both the coil and the magnet will rotate together in a clockwise direction when the centrifugal direct current (in the active part of the circuit) reaches a force greater than 4 A. The direction of movement is reversed when centripetal direct current is applied to the circuit . Due to action-reaction compensation, this experiment eliminates the partial interaction between the magnet and the coil. The observed properties of the engine described above are very different from the equivalent configuration "open field". Experience tells us that interaction will occur between the magnet + yoke system as a whole and the active part of the coil. In order to shed light on this issue, we conducted two independent experiments.

Rice. 3. Used
in experiment No. 2 configuration

Photo 1. Corresponds to Fig. 3

The probe rotates freely in the air gap while the contact wire remains attached to the support. If a centrifugal direct current of approximately 4 A is flowing inside the probe, clockwise rotation of the probe is recorded. Rotation occurs counterclockwise if a centripetal direct current is applied to the probe. When the direct current increases to a level of 50 A, rotation of the magnet is also not observed.

EXPERIMENT N 2

2-a. Mechanically separated probe and contact wire

We used an L-shaped wire as a probe. The probe and contact wire are electrically connected through cups filled with mercury, but mechanically they are separated (Fig. 3 + photo 1).

2-b. The probe is attached to a magnet

In this case, the probe is attached to a magnet, with both freely rotating in the air gap. Clockwise rotation is observed when the centrifugal direct current reaches a value of 10 A. The rotation reverses when a centripetal direct current is applied.

The contact wire that causes the magnet to rotate in an equivalent configuration "open field" is now located in an area of lesser influence of the field, being a passive element in the creation of angular momentum.

On the other hand, a magnetized body (in this case, the yoke) is not able to cause rotation of another magnetized body (in this case, the magnet itself). “Entrainment” of the magnet by the probe seems to be the most acceptable explanation for the observed phenomenon. In order to support the last hypothesis with additional experimental facts, we replace the one with a uniform cylindrical magnet with another magnet that does not have a circular sector of 15º (photo 2). In this modification it appears singularity of close influence, which is limited magnetic field .

2-c. A probe that rotates freely in the singularity region of a magnet.

As expected, due to the change in field polarity, when a centrifugal current of approximately 4A is passed through the probe, the probe rotates in a counterclockwise direction while the magnet rotates in the opposite direction. It is obvious that in this case there is a local interaction in full accordance with Newton's third law.

2-d. A probe attached to a magnet in a magnetic field singularity region.

If a probe is attached to the magnet and a direct current with a force reaching 100A is directed through the circuit, no rotation is observed, despite the fact that the frictional moment is equal to that specified in paragraph 2-b. Action-reaction compensation of the singularity eliminates the mutual rotational interaction between the probe and the magnet. Therefore, this experiment refutes the hypothesis of a hidden angular momentum acting on a magnet.

Thus, active part the circuit through which the current flows is the only reason for the movement of the magnet. The experimental results we have achieved show that the magnet can no longer be a source of reactive torques, as is observed in the configuration "open field". In configuration with « closed field» The magnet plays only a passive electromechanical role: it is a source of the magnetic field. The interaction of forces is now observed between the current and the entire magnetized array.

Photo 2. Experiments 2-d and 2-d

EXPERIMENT N 3

3-a. Symmetrical copy of experiment 1-a

The yoke weighing 80 kg was suspended using two 4 meter long steel wires attached to the ceiling. When installing a coil with 20 turns, the yoke rotates by an angle of 1 degree when the direct current (in the active part of the yoke) reaches a value of 50A. Limited rotation is observed above the line with which the axis of rotation of the magnet coincides. A slight manifestation of this effect is easily observed when using optical means. The rotation reverses its direction when the direction of the direct current changes.

When the coil is connected to the yoke, no angular deviation is observed even when the current reaches a value of 100A.

Unipolar "closed field" generator

If the unipolar motor generator is a reversing motor, the findings related to the motor configuration can be applied, with appropriate changes, to the generator configuration:

1. Oscillating coil

Spatially limited rotation coil generates an emf equal to NwBR 2/2, changing sign when the direction of rotation is reversed. The parameters of the current measured at the output do not change when the coil is connected to the magnet. These qualitative measurements were made using a coil with 1000 turns, which moved manually. The output signal was amplified using a linear amplifier. In the case when the coil remained at rest in the laboratory, the rotation speed of the magnet reached 5 revolutions per second; however, the coil did not register the presence of an electrical signal.

2. Split circuit

We have not conducted experiments on generating electrical energy with a probe mechanically separated from the contact wire. Despite this, and thanks to the complete reversibility demonstrated by electromechanical conversion, it is easy to infer the behavior of each component in a real-life engine. Let us apply, step by step, all the conclusions drawn from the operation of the motor to the generator:

EXPERIMENT 2-A"

When the probe rotates, an EMF is generated, which changes sign when the direction of rotation is reversed. Rotation of a magnet cannot cause an emf.

EXPERIMENT 2-B"

If the probe is attached to a magnet and is rotated, a result equivalent to that described in experiment No. 2a will be obtained. In the case of any configurations using a “closed field”, the rotation of the magnet does not play any significant role in the generation of EMF. The above conclusions partially confirm some previously made, although erroneous, statements regarding the "open field" configuration, in particular those due to Panovsky and Feynman.

EXPERIMENTS 2-C" AND 2-D"

The probe, which is in motion relative to the magnet, will cause the generation of EMF. The appearance of EMF is not observed when the magnet is rotated, to which a probe is attached at the singularity of its field.

CONCLUSION

The phenomenon of unipolarity has been a branch of the theory of electrodynamics for almost two centuries, which has been the source of many difficulties in its study. A whole series experiments carried out, which included the study of configurations as "closed" so and "open" fields, made it possible to identify their common feature: conservation of angular momentum.

Reactive forces, the source of which is a magnet in "open" configurations, in "closed" configurations have as their source the entire magnetized array. The above conclusions are in full accordance with the theory of Ampereian surface currents, which are the cause of magnetic effects. Source of magnetic field (magnet itself) induces Ampere surface currents at the whole yoke. Both the magnet and the yoke interact with the ohmic current crossing the circuit.

In light of the experiments carried out, it seems possible to make a couple of comments about the contradiction between the concepts of “rotating” and “stationary” magnetic field lines:

When observing "open" configurations suggests the assumption that the power lines magnetic field rotate while being “attached” to a magnet, whereas when observed "closed" configurations, the above-mentioned field lines are presumably directed towards the entire magnetized array.

Unlike "open" configurations, in "closed" thanks to the “magnet + yoke” system, there is only an active torque κ (M+Y), C, affecting the active (ohmic) current WITH. The reaction of the active current to the “magnet+yoke” system is expressed in an equivalent but opposite torque κ C, M+Y). General value torque is zero: L - L M+Y L C - 0 and means that (Iw) M+Y =- (I) C .

Our experiments confirm the results of Müller's measurements of unipolar motor induction as applied to the generation of EMF. Unfortunately, Muller (like Wesley) failed to systematize the facts he observed.

This happened, apparently, due to an incorrect understanding of parts of the interaction process. In his analysis, Müller focused on the magnet-wire pair rather than on the magnet + yoke/wire system, which is essentially the physically relevant one.

So, the logical basis of the theories of Muller and Wesley has some doubts regarding the conservation of angular momentum.

APPLICATION:
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

In order to reduce the moment of frictional force on the load-bearing part of the magnet, we have developed a device shown in Fig. 4 and photo 3.

We placed the magnet in a Teflon “boat” floating in a bowl filled with mercury. Archimedes' force reduces the actual weight of a given device. Mechanical contact between the magnet and the yoke is achieved by using 4 steel balls placed in two circular grooves shaped like a circle and located on the combined surfaces of the magnet and yoke. We added mercury until the free sliding of the magnet along the yoke was achieved. The authors express their gratitude Tom E. Phillips and Chris Gagliardo for their valuable cooperation.

New Energy N 1(16), 2004

Literature

	J. Guala-Valverde, Physica Scripta 66, 252 (2002).
	J. Guala-Valverde & R Mazzoni, Rev. Fac. Ing. UTA (Chile), 10, 1 (2002).
	J. Guala-Valverde, P. Mazzoni & R. Achilles, Am.J. Physics 70, 1052 (2002).
	J. Guala-Valverde, Spacetime & Substance 3 (3), 140 (2002).
	J. Guala-Valverde, Infinite Energy 8, 47 (2003)
	J. Guala-Valverde et al, New Energy Technologies 7 (4), 37 (2002).
	J. Guala-Valverde, "News on Electrodynamics", Fond. Louis de Broglie, in press (2003).
	F.R. Fern6ndez, Spacetime & Substance, 4 (14), 184 (2002).
	R. Achilles, Spacetime & Substance, 5 (15), 235 (2002).
	G.R. Dixon & E. Polito, "Relativistic Electrodynamics Updated", (2003) www.maxwellsociety.net
	J. Guala-Valverde & P. Mazzoni, Am.J. Physics, 63, 228 (1995).
	À. Ê. Т. Assis & D. S. Thober, “Unipolar Induction...”, Frontiers of Fundamental Physics. Plenum, NY pp.409 (1994).
	A.K.T. Assis, Weber's Electrodynamics, Kluwer, Dordrecht (1994).
	E. H. Kennard, Phil. Mag.23, 937 (1912), 33, 179 (1917).
	D.F. Bartlett et al.Physical Review D 16, 3459 (1977).
	W. K. H. Panofsky & M. Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, Addisson-Wesley, N. Y. (1995).
	R. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics-II, Addisson-Wesley, N. Y. (1964).
	A. Shadowitz, Special Relativity, Dover, N. Y. (1968).
	A. G. Kelly Physics Essays, 12, 372 (1999).
	À. Ê. Т. Assis, Relational Mechanics Apeiron, Montreal (1999).
	H.Montgomery, EurJ.Phys., 25, 171 (2004).
	T. E. Phipps & J. Guala-Valverde, 21st Century Science & Technology, 11, 55 (1998).
	F. J. Muller, Progress in Space-Time Physics, Benj. Wesley Pub., Bloomberg, p. 156 (1987).
	F.J. Muller, Galilean Electrodynamics, 1, No. 3, p.27 (1990).
	J.P. Wesley, Selected Topics in Advanced Fundamental Physics, Benj. Wesley Pub., Bloomberg, p. 237 (1991).

Jorge Guala-Valverde, Pedro Mazzoni Unipolar motor-generator // "Academy of Trinitarianism", M., El No. 77-6567, pub. 12601, 11/17/2005

It was shown that his attempt to create a practically “perpetual motion machine” was successful because the author intuitively understood, or maybe knew perfectly well, but carefully hid the truth, how to create a magnet correctly the desired shape and how to correctly compare the magnetic fields of the rotor and stator magnets so that the interaction between them leads to almost eternal rotation of the rotor. To do this, he had to bend the rotor magnets so that this magnet in cross-section became like a boomerang, a weakly curved horseshoe or a banana.

Thanks to this shape, the magnetic field lines of the rotor magnet were no longer closed in the form of a torus, but in the form of a “donut”, albeit flattened. And the placement of such a magnetic “donut” so that its plane is approximately or predominantly parallel when the rotor magnet approaches the stator magnets as close as possible power lines emanating from the stator magnets, made it possible to obtain, due to the Magnus effect for ethereal flows, a force that ensured non-stop rotation of the armature around the stator...

Of course, it would be better if the magnetic “donut” of the rotor magnet were completely parallel to the lines of force emanating from the poles of the stator magnets, and then the Möbius effect for magnetic flows, which are flows of the ether, would manifest itself with greater effect. But for that time (more than 30 years ago), even such an engineering solution was a huge achievement that, despite the ban on issuing patents for “perpetual motion machines,” Howard Johnson, after several years of waiting, managed to obtain a patent, since, apparently, he managed to convince patent experts with a real working example of their magnetic motor and magnetic track. But even after 30 years, some of those in power stubbornly refuse to make a decision on the massive use of such engines in industry, in everyday life, at military facilities, etc.

Having made sure that Howard Johnson's motor uses the principle that I understood based on their theory of Ether, I tried to analyze from the same positions another patent, which belongs to the Russian inventor Vasily Efimovich Alekseenko. The patent was issued back in 1997, but an Internet search showed that our government and industrialists actually ignore the invention. Apparently there is still a lot of oil and money in Russia, so officials prefer to sleep softly and eat sweetly, since their salaries allow this. And at this time, an economic, political, environmental and ideological crisis is approaching our country, which can develop into food and energy crises, and if the development is undesirable for us, give rise to demographic catastrophe. But, as some tsarist military commanders liked to say, it doesn’t matter, women give birth to new ones...

I give the readers the opportunity to get acquainted with V.E. Alekseenko’s patent. He proposed 2 designs of magnetic motors. Their disadvantage is that their rotor magnets have a rather complex shape. But patent experts, instead of helping the author of the patent to simplify the design, limited themselves to formally issuing a patent. I don’t know how Alekseenko V.E. circumvented the ban on “perpetual motion machines,” but thanks for that. But the fact that this invention actually turned out to be of no use to anyone is already very bad. But this, unfortunately, the harsh truth the existence of our people, which is ruled by insufficiently competent or too selfish creatures. Until the roasted rooster pecks...

INVENTION

Patent Russian Federation RU2131636

FUEL-FREE MAGNETIC MOTOR

Page 1

Rotation of a permanent magnet with a frequency P creates a magnetic field in space, rotating with the same frequency. The same picture occurs in AC electrical machines if the rotor is a permanent magnet or an electromagnet. In a salient pole rotor (Fig. 18.2, a; 18.3, a), the core made of ferromagnetic material has pronounced protrusions - poles on which the coils are placed. The non-salient pole rotor (Fig. 18.2, b; 18.3, o) is made in the form of a cylinder on which the excitation winding distributed over the slots is placed. For multi-pole rotors (p 1) northern and south poles alternate. The rotors shown in Fig. 18.2, a, b, have one pair (2p 2), and those shown in Fig. 18.3, a, 6 - two pairs (2p 4) of poles. At 2p 4 the rotors are made salient pole.

Magnetic tachometer circuit.

The rotation of the permanent magnet 1 causes the appearance of induced currents in the disk (or cup) 2, made of non-magnetic material. As a result of the interaction of these currents with the magnetic field, a torque 7I1 arises; acting on the disk in the direction of rotation of the magnet and proportional to the angular velocity dz of the latter M1C1co1, where Cr is the proportionality coefficient.

When the permanent magnet rotates, the cartridge along with the axle rotates after it, twisting a spiral spring, which is attached at one end to the axle and at the other to the speedometer body. When twisted, the spiral spring creates a counteracting moment MI moment M2, which is proportional to the angle of rotation of the cartridge.

When a permanent magnet / rotates, a magnetic flux is created in the core 5 of the magnetic circuit, changing in magnitude and direction.

When the permanent magnet rotates during operation of the electric motor, an electric current is created in frame 2, resulting in an interaction force between the permanent magnet and the cylinder. The frame rotates, closing the contacts connected to it. When the electric motor stops, the contacts open.

Diagram of the ignition system from magneto low (a and high (b) voltages.

When a two-pole permanent magnet 1 (magneto rotor) rotates in fixed racks with a core 2 (magneto armature) and a primary winding wound on it, a current is generated in it, the strength of which is 2 25 - 3 5 A, a voltage of 300 - 500 V.

Installation of technical thermometers in frames when measuring the temperature of a medium with high pressure.

Therefore, when the permanent magnet rotates, the pin rotates, either lowering or raising the contact wire nut up or down depending on the temperature set. The contact wire is set to a certain height, at which a column of mercury comes into contact with the end of this wire and the temperature at which the contact closes or opens changes.

Stirring in such a cell is carried out from above by rotating a permanent magnet B in the so-called magnetic clamp, which in the case of reactors of irregular shape is much more effective than the usually used mixing from below with magnetic rods inside the apparatus (see Section

Does the number of separated metal particles depend on the rotation speed of the permanent magnet?

The considered method makes it possible to obtain one operation instead of two when a permanent magnet rotates around its axis (see Fig. 2.7, e), since the reed switch can only operate if the magnets are arranged in a consistent manner. Ring permanent magnets, one of which / is installed motionless (Fig. 2.12, c), and the other 2 moves linearly along the reed switch, also, when combined, cause the contact parts to open. With the last two methods, stationary permanent magnets set according to polarity can be used as bias magnets, creating a preliminary magnetic field that does not trigger the reed switch. At the same time, the weight and overall dimensions of the movable control magnet are reduced, creating an additional field necessary for the reed switch to operate. This design of the device helps to increase the overload stability of the device.

By RMF (Rotating Magnetic Field) we mean the field whose magnetic excitation gradient, without changing in magnitude, circulates with a stable angular velocity.

A good example

The practical effect of magnetic fields will be demonstrated by an installation assembled at home. This is a rotating aluminum disk mounted on a stationary impost.

If you bring a magnet close to it, you can make sure that it is not carried away by the magnet, that is, it is not magnetized. But, if you place a rotating magnet in close proximity, this will cause inevitable rotation of the aluminum disk. Why?

The answer may seem simple - the rotation of the magnet is caused by vortex air currents, spinning the disk. But everything is actually different! Therefore, for proof, organic or ordinary glass is installed between the disk and the magnet. And yet, the disk rotates, carried away by the rotation of the magnet!

The reason is that when the magnetic field changes (and a rotating magnet creates it), an EMF (electrical driving force) of excitation (induction) appears, which contributes to the emergence of electric currents in an aluminum disk, first discovered by the physicist A. Foucault (most often they are called "Foucault currents"). The currents that appear in the disk, through their influence, create their own, separate magnetic field. And the interaction of two fields causes their opposition and the spin of the aluminum disk.

Operating principle of the electric motor

This experiment raises the question: is it possible to create a high magnetic field without rotating a magnet, but using the nature of alternating current? The answer is yes, you can! An entire branch of electrical equipment, including electric motors, is built on this physical law.

To do this, you can take four coils and arrange them in pairs, at 900 relative to each other. Then apply alternating current, alternately to one and then to another pair of coils, but through a capacitor. In this case, the voltage on the second pair of coils will shift relative to the current by π/2. This creates a two-phase current.

If there is zero voltage on one pair of coils, there is no magnetic field. On the second pair, at this time the voltage is peak and the magnetic field (magnetic field) is maximum. Alternately connecting and disconnecting the coils will create a VMF with a change in direction and a constant value. Essentially, an electric motor was created, a type called single-phase capacitor.

How are three-phase currents created?

They flow through four-wire wires. One plays the role of zero, and the other three supply a sinusoidal current with a phase shift of 120º. If, using the same principle, three windings were placed on one axis at an angle of 120º and a current from three phases was applied to them, the result would be the appearance of three magnetic rotating fields or the principle of a three-phase electric motor.

Practical Application

The supply of electric current in three phases is most widely used in industry as an effective way of transmitting energy. Motors and generator sets driven by three-phase current are more reliable in operation than single-phase ones. Their ease of use is due to the absence of the need for strict adjustment of a constant rotation speed, as well as the achievement of greater power.

However, motors of this type cannot be used in all cases, since their speed depends on the frequency of rotation of the magnetic field, which is 50 Hz. In this case, the lag in engine speed must be half as much as the rotation of the magnetic field, since otherwise the effect of magnetic excitation will not appear. Adjusting the rotor speed of an electric motor is possible only with constant current, using a rheostat.

For this very reason, trams and trolleybuses are equipped with DC motors, with the ability to control the speed. The same control principle is used on electric trains, where the alternating current voltage, due to the movement of thousand-ton loads, corresponds to 28000V. The conversion of alternating current into direct current occurs due to rectifiers, which occupy most of the electric locomotive.

Still, the coefficient useful action in asynchronous motors, alternating electric current reaches 98%. It is also worth noting that the rotor of such an AC motor consists of a non-magnetic material with a predominant aluminum component. The reason is that currents best cause the effect of magnetic field induction in aluminum. Perhaps the only limitation in using a three-phase motor is the unregulated speed. But additional mechanisms such as variators or gearboxes cope with this task. True, this leads to an increase in the cost of the unit, as is the case with the use of a rectifier and rheostat for a DC motor.

This is how entertaining physics, the rotating magnetic field in particular, helps humanity create engines, and not only, for a more comfortable existence.

This article is devoted to the consideration of motors operating on permanent magnets, through which attempts are made to obtain efficiency >1 by changing the configuration of the wiring diagram, electronic switch circuits and magnetic configurations. Several designs are presented that can be considered traditional, as well as several designs that seem promising. We hope that this article will help the reader understand the essence of these devices before investing in such inventions or receiving investments for their production. Information about US patents can be found at http://www.uspto.gov.

Introduction

An article devoted to permanent magnet motors cannot be considered complete without a preliminary review of the main designs that are presented on modern market. Industrial permanent magnet motors are necessarily DC motors because the magnets they use are constantly polarized before assembly. Many permanent magnet brushed motors are connected to brushless electric motors, which can reduce friction and wear of the mechanism. Brushless motors include electronic commutation or stepper motors. The electric stepper motor, often used in the automotive industry, contains a longer operating torque per unit volume compared to other electric motors. However, usually the speed of such motors is much lower. The electronic switch design can be used in a switched reluctance synchronous motor. The outer stator of such an electric motor uses soft metal instead of expensive permanent magnets, resulting in an internal permanent electromagnetic rotor.

According to Faraday's law, torque mainly arises from the current in the plates of brushless motors. In an ideal permanent magnet motor, linear torque is opposed to a speed curve. In a permanent magnet motor, both outer and inner rotor designs are standard.

To highlight the many problems associated with the motors in question, the handbook states that there is a “very important relationship between torque and reverse electromotive force (emf) that is sometimes overlooked.” This phenomenon is associated with electromotive force (emf), which is created by applying a changing magnetic field (dB/dt). Using technical terminology, we can say that the “torque constant” (N-m/amp) equals the “back emf constant” (V/rad/sec). The voltage at the motor terminals is equal to the difference between the back emf and the active (ohmic) voltage drop, which is due to the presence internal resistance. (For example, V=8.3 V, back emf=7.5V, active (ohmic) voltage drop=0.8V). This physical principle forces us to turn to Lenz's law, which was discovered in 1834, three years after Faraday invented the unipolar generator. The contradictory structure of Lenz's law, as well as the concept of "back emf" used in it, are part of the so-called physical law of Faraday, on the basis of which a rotating electric drive operates. Back emf is the reaction of alternating current in a circuit. In other words, a changing magnetic field naturally generates a back emf, since they are equivalent.

Thus, before starting to manufacture such structures, it is necessary to carefully analyze Faraday's law. Many scientific articles, such as Faraday's Law - Quantitative Experiments, can convince the new energy experimentalist that the change occurring in the flow that produces the back electromotive force (emf) is essentially equal to the back emf itself. This cannot be avoided when generating excess energy, as long as the amount of change in magnetic flux over time remains variable. These are two sides of the same coin. The input energy produced in a motor whose design contains an inductor will naturally be equal to the output energy. In addition, with respect to "electrical induction", the changing flux "induces" a back emf.

Switched reluctance motors

Investigating an alternative method of induced motion, Ecklin's permanent magnetic motion converter (Patent No. 3,879,622) uses rotating valves to alternately shield the poles of a horseshoe magnet. Ecklin's patent No. 4,567,407 ("Shielded unified alternating current motor-generator having a constant plate and field") reiterates the idea of switching the magnetic field by "switching the magnetic flux." This idea is common for motors of this kind. As an illustration of this principle, Ecklin gives the following thought: “The rotors of most modern generators are repelled as they approach the stator and are attracted again by the stator as soon as they pass it, in accordance with Lenz's law. Thus, most rotors face constant non-conservative operating forces and therefore modern generators require constant input torque.” However, “the steel rotor of a flux-switching unitary alternator actually contributes to the input torque for half of each turn, since the rotor is always attracted but never repelled. This design allows some of the current supplied to the motor plates to supply power through a continuous line of magnetic induction to the AC output windings...” Unfortunately, Ecklin has not yet been able to construct a self-starting machine.

In connection with the problem under consideration, it is worth mentioning Richardson's patent No. 4,077,001, which reveals the essence of the movement of an armature with low magnetic resistance both in contact and outside it at the ends of the magnet (p. 8, line 35). Finally, we can cite Monroe's patent No. 3,670,189, which discusses a similar principle, in which, however, the transmission of magnetic flux is controlled by passing the rotor poles between the permanent magnets of the stator poles. Requirement 1 stated in this patent, in its scope and detail, seems to be satisfactory for proving patentability, however, its effectiveness remains in question.

It seems implausible that, being closed system, a motor with switchable magnetic reluctance is capable of becoming self-starting. Many examples prove that a small electromagnet is necessary to bring the armature into synchronized rhythm. Magnetic Wankel engine in its general outline may be given for comparison with the type of invention presented. Jaffe's patent #3,567,979 can also be used for comparison. Minato's patent No. 5,594,289, similar to the magnetic Wankel motor, is quite intriguing to many researchers.

Inventions like the Newman motor (U.S. Patent Application No. 06/179,474) have discovered the fact that a nonlinear effect such as pulsed voltage is beneficial in overcoming the Lorentz force conservation effect of Lenz's law. Also similar is the mechanical equivalent of the Thornson inertial motor, which uses a nonlinear impact force to transmit momentum along an axis perpendicular to the plane of rotation. A magnetic field contains angular momentum, which becomes apparent under certain conditions, such as the Feynman disk paradox, where it is conserved. The pulse method can be advantageously used in this motor with magnetic switched resistance, provided that the field switching is carried out quickly enough with a rapid increase in power. However, it is necessary additional research on this issue.

The most successful option for a switchable reluctance motor is Harold Aspden's device (patent No. 4,975,608), which optimizes the throughput of the coil input device and the work on the kink B-H curve. Switchable jet engines are also explained in.

The Adams motor received widespread recognition. For example, an approving review was published in Nexus magazine, in which this invention is called the first engine ever observed free energy. However, the operation of this machine can be fully explained by Faraday's law. The generation of pulses in adjacent coils that drive a magnetized rotor is essentially the same as in a standard switched reluctance motor.

The slowdown that Adams talks about in one of his Internet posts discussing the invention can be explained by the exponential voltage (L di/dt) of the back emf. One of the latest additions to this category of inventions that confirms the success of the Adams motor is International Patent Application No. 00/28656, awarded in May 2000. inventors Brits and Christie, (LUTEC generator). The simplicity of this motor is easily explained by the presence of switchable coils and a permanent magnet on the rotor. In addition, the patent explains that "a direct current applied to the stator coils produces a magnetic repelling force and is the only current applied externally to the entire system to produce net motion..." It is a well-known fact that all motors operate according to this principle. Page 21 of the said patent contains an explanation of the design, where the inventors express a desire to “maximize the effect of back emf, which helps maintain the rotation of the rotor/armature of the electromagnet in one direction.” The operation of all motors in this category with a switchable field is aimed at obtaining this effect. Figure 4A, shown in the Brits and Christie patent, reveals the voltage sources "VA, VB and VC". Then on page 10 the following statement is given: "At this time, current is supplied from the power supply VA and continues to be supplied until brush 18 ceases to interact with contacts 14 to 17." It is not unusual that this design can be compared to the more complex attempts previously mentioned in this article. All of these motors require an electrical power source, and none of them are self-starting.

What confirms the claim that free energy has been generated is that the operating coil (in pulsed mode) when passing by a constant magnetic field (magnet) does not use a rechargeable battery to create current. Instead, it was proposed to use Weygand conductors, and this would cause a colossal Barkhausen jump when aligning the magnetic domain, and the pulse would take on a very clear shape. If we apply a Weygand conductor to the coil, it will create a fairly large impulse of several volts for it when it passes a changing external magnetic field of a threshold of a certain height. Thus, this pulse generator does not require any input electrical energy at all.

Toroidal motor

Compared to existing motors on the market today, the unusual design of the toroidal motor can be compared to the device described in the Langley patent (No. 4,547,713). This motor contains a two-pole rotor located in the center of the toroid. If a single-pole design is chosen (for example, with north poles at each end of the rotor), the resulting device will resemble the radial magnetic field for the rotor used in the Van Geel patent (#5,600,189). Brown's Patent No. 4,438,362, owned by Rotron, uses a variety of magnetizable segments to make a rotor in a toroidal arrester. Most a shining example rotating toroidal motor is the device described in the Ewing patent (No. 5,625,241), which also resembles the already mentioned Langley invention. Based on the magnetic repulsion process, Ewing's invention uses a microprocessor-controlled rotary mechanism mainly to take advantage of Lenz's law and also to overcome the back emf. A demonstration of Ewing's invention can be seen in the commercial video "Free Energy: The Race to Zero Point." Whether this invention is the most highly efficient of all engines currently on the market remains in question. As stated in the patent: “functioning of the device as a motor is also possible when using a pulsed direct current source.” The design also contains programmable logic control and power control circuitry, which the inventors hypothesize should make it more efficient than 100%.

Even if motor models prove to be effective in generating torque or converting force, the magnets moving inside them may leave these devices without power. practical application. Commercialization of these types of motors may not be profitable, as there are many competitive designs on the market today.

Linear motors

The topic of linear induction motors is widely covered in the literature. The publication explains that these motors are similar to standard induction motors in which the rotor and stator are removed and placed out of plane. The author of the book "Motion Without Wheels", Laithwaite is famous for the creation of monorail structures designed for trains in England and developed on the basis of linear induction motors.

Hartman's Patent No. 4,215,330 is an example of one device in which a linear motor is used to move a steel ball up a magnetized plane approximately 10 levels. Another invention in this category is described in Johnson's patent (No. 5,402,021), which uses a permanent arc magnet mounted on a four-wheeled cart. This magnet is exposed to a parallel conveyor with fixed variable magnets. Another equally amazing invention is a device described in another Johnson patent (No. 4,877,983) and the successful operation of which was observed in a closed loop for several hours. It should be noted that the generator coil can be placed in close proximity to the moving element, so that each of its runs is accompanied by an electrical impulse to charge the battery. The Hartmann device can also be designed as a circular conveyor, allowing the demonstration of first-order perpetual motion.

Hartman's patent is based on the same principle as the famous electron spin experiment, which in physics is commonly called the Stern-Gerlach experiment. In a non-uniform magnetic field, the influence on an object using a magnetic torque occurs due to the potential energy gradient. In any physics textbook you can find an indication that this type of field, strong at one end and weak at the other, contributes to the generation of a unidirectional force directed towards a magnetic object and equal to dB/dx. Thus, the force pushing the ball along the magnetized plane 10 levels upward in a direction is completely consistent with the laws of physics.

Using industrial quality magnets (including superconducting magnets, at temperatures environment, the development of which is currently in its final stages), it will be possible to demonstrate the transportation of goods with a fairly large mass, without the cost of electricity for maintenance. Superconducting magnets have the unusual ability to maintain the original magnetized field for years without requiring periodic power supply to restore the original field strength. Examples of the current market situation in the development of superconducting magnets are given in Ohnishi's patent No. 5,350,958 (lack of power produced by cryogenic technology and lighting systems), as well as in a republished article on magnetic levitation.

Static electromagnetic angular momentum

In a provocative experiment using a cylindrical capacitor, researchers Graham and Lahoz expand on an idea published by Einstein and Laub in 1908, which suggested that an additional period of time was needed to preserve the principle of action and reaction. The article cited by the researchers was translated and published in my book, presented below. Graham and Lahoz emphasize that there is a "real angular momentum density" and propose a way to observe this energetic effect in permanent magnets and electrets.

This work is an inspiring and impressive study using data based on the work of Einstein and Minkowski. This research can have direct application in the creation of both a unipolar generator and a magnetic energy converter, described below. This opportunity This is due to the fact that both devices have an axial magnetic field and a radial electric field, similar to the cylindrical capacitor used in the Graham and Lahoze experiment.

Unipolar motor

The book describes in detail the experimental research and history of the invention made by Faraday. In addition, attention is paid to the contribution made to this study Tesla. However, recently a number of new design solutions for a unipolar multi-rotor motor have been proposed, which can be compared with the invention of J.R.R. Serla.

The renewed interest in Searle's device should also bring attention to unipolar motors. A preliminary analysis reveals the existence of two different phenomena occurring simultaneously in a unipolar motor. One of the phenomena can be called the “rotation” effect (No. 1), and the second - the “rolling” effect (No. 2). The first effect can be represented as magnetized segments of some imaginary solid ring that rotate around general center. Approximate options designs that allow segmentation of the rotor of a unipolar generator are presented in.

Taking into account the proposed model, effect No. 1 can be calculated for Tesla power magnets, which are magnetized along the axis and located near a single ring with a diameter of 1 meter. In this case, the emf generated along each roller is more than 2V ( electric field, directed radially from the outer diameter of the rollers to the outer diameter of the adjacent ring) at a roller rotation speed of 500 rpm. It is worth noting that effect No. 1 does not depend on the rotation of the magnet. The magnetic field in a unipolar generator is associated with space, and not with a magnet, so rotation will not affect the Lorentz force effect that occurs when this universal unipolar generator operates.

Effect #2, which takes place inside each roller magnet, is described in, where each roller is considered as a small unipolar generator. This effect is recognized as something weaker, since electricity is generated from the center of each roller to the periphery. This design resembles a unipolar Tesla generator, in which a rotating drive belt binds the outer edge of the ring magnet. When rollers with a diameter approximately equal to one tenth of a meter are rotated around a ring with a diameter of 1 meter and in the absence of towing of the rollers, the voltage generated will be equal to 0.5 Volts. Searle's design of a ring magnet would enhance the roller's B-field.

It should be noted that the principle of overlap applies to both of these effects. Effect No. 1 is a uniform electronic field that exists along the diameter of the roller. Effect No. 2 is a radial effect, which was already noted above. However, in fact, only the emf acting in the roller segment between the two contacts, that is, between the center of the roller and its edge, which is in contact with the ring, will contribute to the emergence of an electric current in any external circuit. Understanding this fact means that the effective voltage generated by effect No. 1 will be half the existing emf, or slightly more than 1 Volt, which is approximately twice as much as that generated by effect No. 2. When applying superposition in a confined space we will also find that the two effects oppose each other and the two emfs must be subtracted. The result of this analysis is that approximately 0.5 Volts of regulated emf will be provided to generate electricity in a separate installation containing rollers and a ring with a diameter of 1 meter. When current is received, a ball-bearing motor effect occurs, which actually pushes the rollers, allowing the roller magnets to acquire significant electrical conductivity. (The author thanks Paul La Violette for this comment.)

In a related paper, researchers Roshchin and Godin published the results of experiments with a single-ring device they invented, called a “Magnetic Energy Converter” and having rotating magnets on bearings. The device was designed as an improvement on Searle's invention. The author's analysis above does not depend on what metals were used to make the rings in the Roshchin and Godin design. Their discoveries are quite convincing and detailed, which will renew the interest of many researchers in this type of motor.

Conclusion

So, there are several permanent magnet motors that can contribute to the emergence of a perpetual motion machine with an efficiency exceeding 100%. Naturally, conservation of energy concepts must be taken into account, and the source of the proposed additional energy must be investigated. If constant magnetic field gradients claim to produce a unidirectional force, as the textbooks claim, then there will come a point when they will be accepted to generate useful energy. The roller magnet configuration, which is now commonly called "magnetic energy converter", is also a unique magnetic motor design. Illustrated by Roshchin and Godin in Russian Patent No. 2155435, the device is a magnetic motor-generator that demonstrates the ability to generate additional energy. Since the operation of the device is based on the circulation of cylindrical magnets rotating around a ring, the design is actually more of a generator than a motor. However, this device is a working motor, since the torque generated by the self-sustaining movement of the magnets is used to start a separate electric generator.

Literature

1. Motion Control Handbook (Designfax, May, 1989, p.33)

2. "Faraday's Law - Quantitative Experiments", Amer. Jour. Phys.,

3. Popular Science, June, 1979

4. IEEE Spectrum 1/97

5. Popular Science, May, 1979

6. Schaum's Outline Series, Theory and Problems of Electrical

Machines and Electromechanics (Theory and problems of electrical

Machinery and Electromechanics) (McGraw Hill, 1981)

7. IEEE Spectrum, July, 1997

9. Thomas Valone, The Homopolar Handbook

10. Ibidem, p. 10