Technical controversy on the deviation of the field of a magnet

[Capt_Maloche]

Hi Quartz, your coil reminds me of when I was making pompoms in color you knit well say so

for the Nexus article, let's wait

There are people on the subject indeed, I saw that too: http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFbINO0dCU&NR=1

[quartz]

Good evening everyone,

Others have tried measurements on the Hilden Brandt valve, see here.
Another confirmation that there is a gain.
The problem is that the measurements remain static.
Dynamic mode would create an amplifying movement,
for the moment all the tests in this direction give nothing.

A + + +

[quartz]

Good evening everyone,

Here's another video from Hilden Brandt's valve.
This time there is a dynamic, slow, but dynamic notion.

A + + +

[quartz]

Good evening everyone,

With the above videos plus personal measurements made a few months ago, I went back to the simulation on FEMM,
added to this a new skill on software, namely the control of electromagnetic coil on the circuit in place of magnets.

By dint of tampering with the thing I ended up understanding why the MEGs that we have tried so far do not work better than a basic transformer.
It is just that the current of the coil produces a displacement of the flux of the magnets, already present.
conclusion that we recover it is just the product of displacement absolutely proportional to that which we inject into the deflection winding.
While in "mechanical" tests we measure the force.
and there how do you get more strength with magnets than without magnets.
Quite simply because we practice a vectorial addition of fluxes, of the coil on the one hand which has a double function,
both deflect the flow of permanent magnets and at the same time end up at the end of the magnetic circuit in parallel with the flow of permanent magnets which has no other possibility than to end up also in the magnetic circuit.
algebraic result of the operation for the saturation of a section of iron we are potentially left with a double section of saturated iron.
The precise work must be done with respect to the respect of the section surfaces.
I enclose some views to illustrate this.




A + + +

[bpval]

Quartz

Your persistence amazes me
Your explanations leave me unmoved
You haven't understood everything yet
I honestly don't understand anything

But I feel you tickle something in this overlay
of strength
of field
and what else do i know

I am wholeheartedly with you

GO

Hello

[Capt_Maloche]

Yep Quartz, how are you?

it involves moving the field lines as the subject title indicates from the start

Exciting isn't it?

Magnetic circuits die hard, difficult to imagine any energy extraction from closed circuits

[quartz]

Re Goodnight,

And yes I do not easily drop the song !!
This new understanding of the phenomenon led me to reconsider the Bulgarian MEG.

The Bulgarian MEG uses a different strategy, but which comes under the same subterfuge.
The designer also plays on the sections but in a roundabout way.
He observed that a magnetic circuit can in some ways isolate itself to become independent,
And not communicating with an external magnetic circuit.
You can see that the O-shaped circuit, as it is magnetized by a coil, no longer communicates with the main circuit.
A 0.05 mm air gap is enough for the circuit to stand out.
Thanks to this, it suffices to magnetize a weak section to obtain an effect on a section in principle twice as large.
This concept does not take advantage of the addition of magnetic fluxes but the result must be substantially identical.


A + + +

[quartz]

Good evening everyone,

I spread a ton of simulation, I think I have located the design that offers the best chance of working.
The concept remains basically the same, simply the arrangement of the pellets is different.
In the previously tested version I was trying to do a vector addition,
of the flus of the pellets, and of the deflection flux of the coil.
It didn't do much.
this time I try to add vectors from neodymium pellets,
Via a door in the form of a flat coil.

I present the simulation as close as possible to the model in the making.
I started with a recovery transformer, on the first images the dimensions of the object.

Then following the different current values ​​100 mA, 125 mA, 150 mA, 175 mA.
the recovery coils are not shown.

A + + +

[patou]

Re Goodnight,

And yes I do not easily drop the song !!
This new understanding of the phenomenon led me to reconsider the Bulgarian MEG.

The Bulgarian MEG uses a different strategy, but which comes under the same subterfuge.
The designer also plays on the sections but in a roundabout way.
He observed that a magnetic circuit can in some ways isolate itself to become independent,
And not communicating with an external magnetic circuit.
You can see that the O-shaped circuit, as it is magnetized by a coil, no longer communicates with the main circuit.
A 0.05 mm air gap is enough for the circuit to stand out.
Thanks to this, it suffices to magnetize a weak section to obtain an effect on a section in principle twice as large.
This concept does not take advantage of the addition of magnetic fluxes but the result must be substantially identical.


A + + +

Hello everyone

have you tried this principle:

http://pesn.com/2006/07/28/9500292_Magn ... 163971.pdf

Thank you
patou

[Christophe]

No imageshak please !!! We have our own image host ...

Quartz contact me in MP if you don't know how to do it ... but I'm going to have your images on imageshak in the coming days.

I don’t want a butt or casino ad on econo ... even indirectly !!