Arc Tourist
Member
- Messages
- 4,673
- Location
- Wales
It's titled : "Forbidden technologies and the silencing of their inventions", on YouTube.Any link to the video?
It's titled : "Forbidden technologies and the silencing of their inventions", on YouTube.Any link to the video?
That is exactly what my intuition suggests, @hotponyshoes. Unless you misstated what you mean. Of course the push/pull will depend on the strength of the magnets whereas the induction drag may relate to the magnetic strength by a different factor.No it's not true.
As you say, there will be losses.
So power in will always be more than power out.
Unless I'm wrong about the force on the wheel and there is some science I am unaware of that means it takes less force to push/pull a bit of metal in/out of a magnetic field than the equivalent push/pull of that magnetic field.
I have to say, people, that it is very encouraging that you are (mostly) prepared to discuss this in an intelligent and civilized manner.
I managed to watch the first "invention ". A levitation platform made by gluing beetle parts to it's underside which could then lift 300 metres and reach (potentially!) 1500kph. It also made the rider invisible from below. All from a man with no qualifications.It's titled : "Forbidden technologies and the silencing of their inventions", on YouTube.
The magnets never actually stick to the disc because their movement is restricted by the swash cylinder. We need a formula to calculate the inductive drag on the disc and a formula to calculate the push/pull forces.Think of it this way,
Completely ignore any forms of resistance, ignore the weight of the magnet, ignore stiction, ignore the weight of the metal, ignore the fact that the metal may not be 100% magnetic...
A magnet with a 1kg pull stuck onto a piece of metal will need a pull of 1kg to remove it.
You can test this easily with a magnet, a bit of metal and a spring balance.
It does not matter if you try to pull the magnet off the metal or pull the metal off the magnet. It will still need 1kg.
Try pulling the bit of metal off sideways (as if it was a rotating wheel) and it will still take 1kg
It may well take far less than 2kg to slide a piece of metal between 2x1kg magnets with opposing fields as the field interaction will be far lower.
If this action then causes the magnets to attract with full force you will get 2kg of force on the output side.
But, this 2kg of force is only generated from the 2kg of magnetic attraction to the metal plate so you'll need 2kg of force to get it out again.
So, if it only takes 100g of force to push the plate in you'll use 2.1kg of input to get 2kg of output.
That's what I want to investigate.The input is an eddy current brake. The losses at this point alone make it pointless.
I'll get on to 3d modeling. Years since I did any.Lots of us on here with 3D printers that would be happy to print suff for you I'm sure.
I managed to watch the first "invention ". A levitation platform made by gluing beetle parts to it's underside which could then lift 300 metres and reach (potentially!) 1500kph. It also made the rider invisible from below. All from a man with no qualifications.
Seems perfectly legit to me.
The magnets never actually stick to the disc because their movement is restricted by the swash cylinder. We need a formula to calculate the inductive drag on the disc and a formula to calculate the push/pull forces.
It may be so but I want to test that assumption to prove or disprove it. That's science. Since nobody seems willing or capable of giving me a proper analysis I'd prefer to test it for my own satisfaction.So you don't get any surface friction when trying to rotate the disc because there is an air gap.
But, all you will get is less magnetic force on the disc as the magnet(s) are further away.
So if you leave a small gap you might reduce the pull from 1kg to 0.999kg.
All that means is it will take 0.999kg to move the rotor again.
It may be so but I want to test that assumption to prove or disprove it. That's science. Since nobody seems willing or capable of giving me a proper analysis I'd prefer to test it for my own satisfaction.
I plan to.You could set up a simple test rig, you don't need to go as far as making the leavers and swash cylinder just to measure the forces
Have you actually read the link you quoted? Firstly it's title contains the word "apparent". The answers then proceed to show why it's only apparent and that actually Newtons third law holds for this case.To respond in a bit more detail, Newton lived from 1642 till 1726. Whilst electromagnetism was known about - at least in terms of lodestones and static electricity - it was not included in Newton's mechanics. Really the study of electromagnetism didn't begin in earnest until after Newton, with Ampere, Gilbert etc.
There was a discussion on the physics stackexchange about whether magnetism obeys Newton's 3rd law. Here is the link: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...ns-3-textrd-law-and-the-conservation-of-momen
The problem is that we have been indoctrinated with a lot of dogma that we tend to reflexively regurgitate without careful examination. A superb example is the reaction to @Guineafowl's post on the physics forum. Unexamined assumptions block our discovery of stuff and discoveries often happen when someone begins to question whether entrenched dogma really does reflect reality.
@Morris, I understand exactly where you're coming from, just I am not convinced that the induction/eddy forces exactly balance the push/pull forces. In addition to which, the rotor can't feel the load since power can't be pushed back through the system and if power can't then the load can't. If you run it in reverse then the magnets will simply reciprocate, using energy in opposing each other, there will be a certain fluctuating eddy field on the disc but the actual driving force can't be fully transferred to the disc. Or if it is then it is perpendicular to the disc and doesn't impart (and perhaps doesn't even impede) rotation to the disc. I don't know, if course, only experiment will show how things relate (or someone who is very familiar with flux forces may have a good understanding). I doubt there are many people who could look at this and have a thorough understanding of what is really involved in this device.Have you actually read the link you quoted? Firstly it's title contains the word "apparent". The answers then proceed to show why it's only apparent and that actually Newtons third law holds for this case.
You ask for proper analysis without saying what you actually want (do you want the magnetic fields analysed down to the quantum level? Newtons third law has been shown to apply at the quantum level) but appear to be somewhat selective in what answers suit you.
In my opinion this really doesn't warrant analysis by a physicist, the eyes of the skilled engineers on here are more than enough.
Myself I think that the input section will cause losses due to the eddy brake effect. The magnets will be attracted to the disc but the square law will be an issue. While being attracted,at the same time the repulsive force will increase to the same square law. Also the magnetic field is instant but the linkage and parts have inertia which introduces lag.
The "swash plate" will need a shallow angle because of the small amount of movement of the magnets will have (for the stated reason). A shallow angle gives the highest friction in the groove and a higher force required to move it.
I believe that the output section will reach a point of equilibrium during any time the input speed is above a few rpm.