Motors Without Windings

Unless I'm missing something, the title is a missnomer.

Yet another magnet powered motor. The website even has a picture of 2 multimeters as proof.

<sigh>

I think I will stick with my standard motors that actually work continuously under load thank you.

Extreme magnetic "cogging" equals garbage. Started out as another over-unity gizmo, now morphing into who knows what.

Regrettably my electrical engineering knowledge is limited and out of date, so please excuse me if my terminology is wrong. My quest is motivated by maglev trains which utilize a "Linear motor???" Would like to use this type of motor vertically for hoisting, say up to 250 tons or more. Feasibility?, Mr. Purrsona, not "why?"

This thing isn't a motor and it isn't wireless...

The voice coil is the motor e.g it provides the motive force...the movement...and of course a voice coil has wires...

I just can't see any advantage to it, or even what it professes to do which is unusual...well i s'pose if I'm generous it doesn't have a commutator like most DC motors...but it has a ton of mechanical bits attached....

I just don't get it...

I think you're right about the misnomer. I agree that the reciprocating device is not a motor. They had a motor driving the device. As for the functionality of the reciprocating device, well an application is a reciprocating sabre saw. The rotating to reciprocal motion conversion is magnetic, rather than -dare I say it (as a mechanical), an inefficient mechanical cam action. But then you say it has mechanical bits attached. Hmmm, maybe it is mechanical after all!

But, linear motors, other than Kundel???

I agree. Mechanical indeed. The same action could be accomplished with a shaft with the proper grooves or even an "electrical" piston and connecting rod. The magnetic coupling does, however, do way with friction.

It does away with some of the friction at the expense of magnetic cogging. At each excursion the magnets are required to break away from the force of attraction. In addition, it has no directional bias meaning that without a control device it would run arbitrarily in either direction.

Months ago I looked at the patent and the application that was later changed to avoid final rejection by the patent office. References to over-unity were cleverly removed for the patent to go through. Now he's trying to figure out what to do with this thing.

I'm sure it would make a nice paper weight. It seems that a voice coil oscillating like that would be awfully noisy and have lots of vibration.

One need read no further than this, in the first paragraph of the linked article:

The powerful energy stored within today's magnets can now be utilized.

Only in the E=MC² sense are magnets an energy storage device. The energy that makes a motor move comes from electricity (through the sun-plant-decay-heat-pressure-coal-heat-rotation-emf chain, typically), not from something mysterious locked inside magnets that the successful free-energy-over-unity-perpetual-motion fraudster will "discover."

From Kundel's page on peswiki (the free energy promotion site):

The speed of the rotation increases without adding more energy, even with a two pound flywheel.

Plausible?

I will not "subscribe to Motors today", if this article is typical. I, and many others here, have in intense interest in motor efficiency for all sorts of reasons. Many of us are happy to help the deluded "inventors" (who show up in these forums) steer away from "magnet motors" when we have the time. But to see such things actually promoted by GlobalSpec is a little discouraging.

well as you put it these magnets would then be the storage unit as in the report and book from Howard Johnson - The Secret World of Magnets (Spintronics) you can see where as the magets have properties that can be used to create energy as well as power from the magnets without using them as storage but as a fuel source. these magents will become the big thing in the next little bit with all the new discoveries and inventions that use them kundel was on his path in life trying to make a better motor he may be thinking outside the box but it just has to happen as most of the power systems that are here today are from the late 1800's with only minor changes

its time for a new idea as this dependancy on oil and other forms of power are just helping make this planet less inhabitable.

Richard

Hello Guest,

"its time for a new idea as this dependancy on oil and other forms of power are just helping make this planet less inhabitable."

You are quite right about that, but don't let enthusiasm get in the way of carefully recorded research.

I am never one to put a potential discovery down, or decry its use, odd and useful results often arrive from what seem to be accidents.

But sometimes it is better to point out the folly of trying to break immutable Laws of Physics (Unless there be a Miracle - and I have seen a few of those).

Attraction and repulsion is a well-known property of magnets.

But for useful actual Power to be extracted from something, Energy must first be placed there.

Now, thinking it out logically, if it were possible to get Power in useful amounts out of magnets, and not replace that Energy withdrawn from the magnets, then (apart from a Miracle), you achieve something for nothing.

If Power could be extracted from magnets, without a little more Energy being inserted into those magnets, (because of System Losses: friction = heat etc), than can be extracted from those magnets, I say carry on with your design, and I shall be knocking at your door, to buy such a machine, along with the rest of the world.

In life it is important to establish which courses of experiments are "blind alleys", thus releasing oneself for more productive efforts. In other words, save wasting a non-refundable portion of your life-span on some impossible search and fruitless efforts.

Please don't think I am being sarcastic, or 'knocking" your suggestion, just hoping you may save your inquiring efforts for some research which proves useful.

Kind Regards from far away....

well as you put it these magnets would then be the storage unit as in the report and book from Howard Johnson - The Secret World of Magnets (Spintronics) you can see where as the magets have properties that can be used to create energy as well as power from the magnets without using them as storage but as a fuel source.

That's not at all what I had in mind. I have not observed anything in the behavior of magnets that suggests that they can be used to create energy. I have made millions of observations that are in perfect concert with conventional physics and the laws of thermodynamics. I have never seen a "magnet motor" or "gravity motor" than runs without the input of an external energy source.

its time for a new idea as this dependency on oil and other forms of power are just helping make this planet less inhabitable.

Real scientists and engineers, by thinking outside the box in productive ways, have made great strides in this regard. In many locations solar photovoltaic panels can power an entire household and an electric car, for example. In contrast, the Bedinis, Johnsons, Steorn groups, Dennis Lees, Stanley Meyers and John Searls of this world think inside a tight little box in which the principals of science and physics are thought to be of no consequence. Perhaps as a result, they have contributed nothing tangible.

In physical terms, there is no more reason to believe that a permanent magnet motor would work than there is to believe that a pineapple can be caused to spin by holding a turnip near it. Perhaps there is some undiscovered force between turnips and pineapples that could be used to produce free energy. But why pursue such a low probability line of thought? Schizophrenics think well outside the box. Thinking outside the box is not inherently good or bad.

One could take three, four, five, or six physics courses at MIT and not come away with even a hint that "gravity motors" or "magnet motors" can work as advertised by the fraudsters or deluded folks promoting them. Wouldn't it seem that that there would be a higher probability of coming up with something that works by observing how things work in nature (which is what science does) than by ignoring how things work?

This is positively great! You've truly brightened my day.

This is not a motor but a special type of magnetic coupling.

These date back to 1906 (or may be earlyer) when synchro and resolver technology emerged to transfer compass indication from the place where the compass measured the ships course (or angle from ahead to north) to the many places where an indicator has to be: bridge , stern, captains cabin and some more.

Many technical devices now use pure magnetic couplings especially in vacuum feedthroughs.

Suggestion to CR4: any question or blog should cost one dollar and at the end of the year given to UNICEF or other childrens help or education fund.

RHABE

So if you were to use the wind to drive the reciprocation then use the reciprocation to drive a generator would this qualify as a free energy device.

Just kidding I had to throw that out there because it always sparks such Witty conjecture.

1. FRICTIONLESS Magnetic Cog / Gear
2. Reciprocation causes Rotation and Vice Versa
3. RPM and Reciprocation can be Controlled
4. Runs Clockwise & Counterclockwise
5. NO HEAT is Generated by the Interaction
6. Isolated Components

Comments in brief:

1. Untrue: There is ALWAYS Friction, in EVERY Mechanical device, when in use.
2. True, but with Friction.
3. True
4. True
5. Untrue: Heat will be there, and gradually build up, proportional to the actual friction/work being transmitted
6. Isolated from what?

"Using the Energy stored within the Magnets"...indeed.

We use the principle of magnetic coupling here:

http://www.pitchwell.com/Shop/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=81

I can see the use for this, as an interesting toy for children, or a learning tool.....

Now that is a real application for magnets. Very cost effective and improved safety too!

Hi, Sparkstation!

re your reply 11 "1 FRICTIONLESS Magnetic Cog / Gear. Untrue: There is ALWAYS Friction, in EVERY Mechanical device, when in use."

Consider the following "levitron" (not the company, but rather the toy's name) device. Imagine it being employed outside of the atmosphere to avoid atmospheric friction, and large enough to have an induction-activated 'solid state' radio circuit aboard that when energized by proximity to either one of the operating magnets (or both) can broadcast a signal to e.g. turn switches on and off at a distance as it rotates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05FDGCis-Sw&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;feature=fvw

Mechanical device. In use. No friction to speak of since magnetic lines of force seem to possess an extremely small coefficient if any --although enhancing/altering the emf artificially can produce a result that imitates friction's-- but no cogs or gears either. Theoretically, once started our out-world device works touchlessly and indefinitely.

Or does it? Where's the weakness in this exception to a rule? Is it over-unity if the energy required to impart the original spin on the rotating component is minimal and it spins a thousand years? Or does the example beg a new rule? Does the equation of the energy input change to a constant when the forces of entropy are environmentally reduced? Intriguing lead-in to finding perhaps even more exceptions to the laws of thermodynamics. (Even without this possibility, I'm sure we're not done yet!)

There is a definite difference between added energy (e.g. externally enhanced/altered emf in braking a motor or breaking down gasoline to power an i.c. engine) and inherent energy --an expansion perhaps of the concept of potential energy-- in any device/object.

Utilizing an inherent energy device to do work, such as releasing the energy inherent in an atom by breaking its core valences with minimal bombardment and watching the resulting reaction duplicate itself many-fold; or using a super magnet (or even just a strong one) by harnessing its perfectly normal powers of attraction and repulsion (and I don't mean necessarily the added-energy device that started this thread, but rather the toy used as an example here,) are commonplace. (I seem to recall that some watch company uses the concept exemplified by the toy in the video to produce a 'frictionless' component in the watch).

Where added energy must conform to the laws of thermodynamic entropy, inherent energy seems to present its own set of definitions. True, the amount of energy output still becomes less available over time and circumstance...but still, more work appears to be produced on the output side than is introduced on the input side, based upon our finite definition of the introduced energy.

Consider a potentially new source of inherent energy: water. Some chap You Tube is featuring is forcing mini-cavitation reactions to take place in pockets in a drum spinning in an enclosed shallow bath. We are told that comparing the power required to impart the spin and feed water to the device with the output in steam watts, the machine appears to be an over-unity device based upon numbers of cavitation reactions enabled by the number of pockets in the drum and their depth. (I wondered whether the resulting pitting that normally occurs on a rotating cavitator device was calculated into the equation, and which side of the equation they would place it on.)

Mark

PS Sorry to be years and years late in responding to this, Old Shock. I just 'discovered' this toy due to a reference by Blink to the pineapple/turnip motor elsewhere in here from another really old thread that somebody had just written to to jump all over poor old Richard and his attempt to find more information regarding a magnetically-driven generator he's building in there. Kids have been playing with this thing for a while, it seems, and I'm just finding out about it . Probably can't afford it anyway ! -M

The Kundel magnetic coupling device is an interesting idea. It seems to convert linear motion to rotational motion -- reversably. I wonder why the ratio of power-out versus power-in was not published? It is all good and well to spin fan blades from a voice coil but without blade pitch and air density we cannot estimate power output. The author did report power input in a believable format but without any indications of output power how are we to evaluate this invention? Let us see torque curves from stall speed to maximum RPM.

Ken Stewart