Today is another experiment for you, which, we hope, will make you think. This is dynamic levitation in a magnetic field. In this case, one ring magnet is located above the same, but larger. Magnets are sold cheaper in this Chinese store.
This is a typical levitron, which has already been shown before (material). Large magnet and small. They are directed towards each other by the poles of the same name, respectively, they repel each other, due to this, levitation occurs. There is, of course, a magnetic cavity, or potential well, in which the upper magnet sits. Another point is that it rotates due to the gyroscopic moment, it does not turn over for some time until its speed decreases.
What is the purpose of the experiment?
If we spin the top just to keep it from flipping over, a question arises. What for? If you can take some kind of knitting needle, for example, a wooden one. Attach the upper magnet rigidly to it, and hang the loader from below and position this structure above the second one. Thus, in theory, it should also hang, and the lower weight will not allow it to roll over.
It will be necessary to set the mass balance of this spinning top very accurately. It would turn out magnetic levitation without energy costs.
How does it work?
Here is a ring magnet, a wooden needle is rigidly inserted into it. Next is a plastic plate with a hole for stabilizing the spokes. And at the end - a weight. A piece of plasticine for more convenient adjustment of the selection of mass. You can bite off a little bit and pick up such a mass of this whole structure so that the small ring magnet falls clearly into the levitation zone.
Let's carefully place it inside the bottom magnet, it kind of hangs. With a piece of plexiglass, you can try to stabilize its position. But for some reason this does not give him horizontal stabilization.
If you remove the plate and return everything back, then the magnet, together with the axis on which it rests, will fall sideways. When it rotates, for some reason it stabilizes in the magnetic pit. Although, pay attention, during this rotation it moves from side to side, probably by five millimeters. In the same way, it oscillates in a vertical position from top to bottom. It seems that this magnetic well has a certain backlash. As soon as the upper magnet falls into the pit, it captures and holds it. It remains only a gyroscopic moment to ensure that this magnet does not turn over.
What was the point of the experiment?
Check, if we make the shown construction with the axis, it actually does the same thing, preventing the magnet from flipping over. It brings it to the zone of the potential hole, we select the weight of this structure. The magnet is in a hole, but, getting into it, for some reason it does not stabilize horizontally. Still, this structure is falling to the side.
After conducting this experiment, the main question arises: why is there such an injustice, when this magnet rotates like a top, it hangs in a potential well, everything is perfectly stabilized and captured; and when the same conditions are created, everything is the same, that is, mass and height, the pit seems to disappear. It just pops out.
Why is there no stabilization of the upper magnet?
Presumably this is because it is impossible to make magnets perfect. Both in shape and magnetization. The field has some flaws, distortions, and therefore our two magnets cannot find an equilibrium state in it. They will definitely slide off, because there is no friction between them. And when the Levitron rotates, the fields seem to be smoothed out, the upper part of the structure does not have time to go to the side during rotation.
This is understandable, but what motivated the author of the video to do this experiment was the presence of a potential well. It was hoped that this pit had some margin of safety to hold the structure. But, alas, for some reason this did not happen. I would like to read your opinion about this riddle.
There is more material on this topic.
Today, permanent magnets find useful applications in many areas of human life. Sometimes we do not notice their presence, but in almost any apartment in various electrical appliances and mechanical devices, if you look closely, you can find. An electric razor and a speaker, a video player and a wall clock, a mobile phone and a microwave oven, and finally, a refrigerator door - you can find permanent magnets everywhere.
They are used in medical technology and measuring equipment, in various instruments and in the automotive industry, in DC motors, in acoustic systems, in household electrical appliances and in many other places: radio engineering, instrumentation, automation, remote control, etc. - none of these areas is complete without the use of permanent magnets.
Specific solutions using permanent magnets could be listed endlessly, however, the subject of this article will be a brief overview of several applications of permanent magnets in electrical engineering and the power industry.
Since the time of Oersted and Ampere, it has been widely known that current-carrying conductors and electromagnets interact with the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. The operation of many engines and generators is based on this principle. You don't have to look far for examples. The fan in your computer's power supply has a rotor and a stator.
The impeller with blades is a rotor with permanent magnets arranged in a circle, and the stator is the core of the electromagnet. By remagnetizing the stator, the electronic circuit creates the effect of rotation of the stator magnetic field, the magnetic field of the stator, trying to be attracted to it, is followed by a magnetic rotor - the fan rotates. The rotation of the hard disk is implemented in a similar way, and they work in a similar way.
In electric generators, permanent magnets have also found their application. Synchronous generators for home windmills, for example, are one of the application areas.
Generator coils are located on the generator stator around the circumference, which, during the operation of the windmill, are crossed by an alternating magnetic field of moving (under the action of the wind blowing on the blades) permanent magnets mounted on the rotor. Obeying, the conductors of the generator coils crossed by magnets direct current into the consumer circuit.
Such generators are used not only in windmills, but also in some industrial models, where permanent magnets are installed on the rotor instead of the excitation winding. The advantage of solutions with magnets is the ability to obtain a generator with low nominal speeds.
The conductive disk rotates in the field of a permanent magnet. The current consumption, passing through the disk, interacts with the magnetic field of the permanent magnet, and the disk rotates.
The greater the current, the higher the frequency of rotation of the disk, since the torque is created by the Lorentz force acting on moving charged particles inside the disk from the magnetic field of a permanent magnet. In fact, such a counter is a small power with a magnet on the stator.
To measure low currents, very sensitive measuring instruments are used. Here, a horseshoe magnet interacts with a small current-carrying coil that is suspended in the gap between the poles of a permanent magnet.
The deflection of the coil during the measurement is due to the torque that is created due to the magnetic induction that occurs when current passes through the coil. Thus, the deflection of the coil turns out to be proportional to the value of the resulting magnetic induction in the gap, and, accordingly, to the current in the coil wire. For small deviations, the scale of the galvanometer is linear.
You probably have a microwave in your kitchen. And it has two permanent magnets. To generate the microwave range, it is installed in the microwave. Inside the magnetron, electrons move in vacuum from the cathode to the anode, and in the process of movement, their trajectory must be curved so that the resonators on the anode are excited powerfully enough.
To bend the electron trajectory, ring permanent magnets are installed above and below the vacuum chamber of the magnetron. The magnetic field of permanent magnets bends the trajectories of electrons so that a powerful vortex of electrons is obtained, which excites resonators, which in turn generate microwave electromagnetic waves to heat food.
In order for the hard disk head to be accurately positioned, its movements in the process of writing and reading information must be very precisely controlled and controlled. Once again, a permanent magnet comes to the rescue. Inside the hard disk, in the magnetic field of a stationary permanent magnet, a coil with current moves, connected to the head.
When a current is applied to the coil of the head, the magnetic field of this current, depending on its value, repels the coil from the permanent magnet more or less, in one direction or another, thus the head starts to move, and with high accuracy. This movement is controlled by a microcontroller.
In order to increase the efficiency of energy consumption, in some countries, mechanical energy storage devices are being built for enterprises. These are electromechanical converters operating on the principle of inertial energy storage in the form of the kinetic energy of a rotating flywheel, called.
For example, in Germany, ATZ has developed a 20 MJ kinetic energy storage device with a capacity of 250 kW, with a specific energy content of approximately 100 Wh/kg. With a flywheel weighing 100 kg, rotating at 6000 rpm, a cylindrical structure with a diameter of 1.5 meters, high-quality bearings were needed. As a result, the lower bearing was made, of course, on the basis of permanent magnets.
This article focuses on permanent magnet motors that attempt to achieve efficiency >1 by reconfiguring wiring, electronic switch circuits, and magnetic configurations. Several designs are presented that can be considered as 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 on the market today. Permanent magnet industrial motors are necessarily DC motors because the magnets they use are permanently polarized before assembly. Many permanent magnet brushed motors are connected to brushless electric motors, which can reduce friction and wear in the mechanism. Brushless motors include electronic commutation or stepper motors. A stepper motor, often used in the automotive industry, contains a longer operating torque per unit volume than other electric motors. However, usually the speed of such motors is much lower. The design of the electronic switch can be used in a switched reluctance synchronous motor. The external 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, the torque is mainly due to the current in the linings 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 draw attention to the many problems associated with the motors in question, the handbook states that there is a "very important relationship between torque and the reverse electromotive force (emf), which is sometimes not given importance." This phenomenon is related to the electromotive force (emf) that is created by applying a varying 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 of internal resistance. (For example, V=8.3V, back emf=7.5V, resistive voltage drop=0.8V). This physical principle leads 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 "reverse emf" used in it, are part of the so-called Faraday's physical law, 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 proceeding with the manufacture of such structures, it is necessary to carefully analyze Faraday's law. Many scientific articles such as "Faraday's Law - Quantitative Experiments" are able to convince the new energy experimenter that the change that occurs in the flow and causes a back electromotive force (emf) is essentially equal to the back emf itself. This cannot be avoided by obtaining excess energy, as long as the number of changes in the magnetic flux over time remains inconsistent. These are two sides of the same coin. The input energy generated in a motor whose design contains an inductor will naturally equal the output energy. Also, with respect to "electrical induction", the variable flux "induces" a back emf.
Switchable reluctance motors
Eklin's permanent magnetic motion transducer (patent #3,879,622) uses rotating valves to variable shield the poles of a horseshoe magnet in an alternative method of induced motion. Eklin's patent No. 4,567,407 ("Shielding Unified AC Motor Generator with Constant Coat and Field") reiterates the idea of switching the magnetic field by "switching magnetic flux". This idea is common to motors of this kind. As an illustration of this principle, Ecklin cites 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 are faced with constant non-conservative working forces, and therefore modern generators require a constant input torque. However, “the steel rotor of the flux-switching unified alternator actually contributes to the input torque for half of each turn, as the rotor is always attracted but never repelled. Such a design allows some of the current supplied to the motor linings to supply power through a solid line of magnetic induction to the output windings of alternating current ... ”Unfortunately, Ecklin has not yet been able to design a self-starting machine.
In connection with the problem under consideration, it is worth mentioning Richardson's patent No. 4,077,001, which discloses the essence of the movement of an armature with low magnetic resistance both in contact and out of it at the ends of the magnet (p. 8, line 35). Finally, Monroe's patent No. 3,670,189 can be cited, which discusses a similar principle, in which, however, the passage of the magnetic flux is suppressed by passing the rotor poles between the permanent magnets of the stator poles. Requirement 1 claimed in this patent seems to be sufficient in scope and detail to prove patentability, however, its effectiveness remains in question.
It seems implausible that, being a closed system, a switchable reluctance motor could become self-starting. Many examples prove that a small electromagnet is needed to bring the armature into a synchronized rhythm. The Wankel magnetic motor in general terms may be compared with the present type of invention. Jaffe Patent #3,567,979 can also be used for comparison. Minato's patent #5,594,289, similar to the Wankel magnetic drive, is intriguing enough for many researchers.
Inventions like the Newman motor (US Patent Application No. 06/179,474) have made it possible to discover that a non-linear effect such as impulse voltage is beneficial in overcoming the Lorentz force conservation effect of Lenz's law. Also similar is the mechanical analogue of the Thornson inertial engine, which uses a non-linear impact force to transfer momentum along an axis perpendicular to the plane of rotation. The 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 switchable resistance, provided that the field switching is carried out quickly enough with a rapid increase in power. However, more research is needed on this issue.
The most successful switchable reluctance motor is Harold Aspden's (patent #4,975,608) which optimizes coil input capacity and B-H kink performance. Switchable jet engines are also explained in .
The Adams motor has received widespread acclaim. For example, Nexus magazine published a favorable review calling this invention the first free energy engine ever observed. 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 actually follows the same pattern as in a standard switched reluctance motor.
The slowdown that Adams talks about in one of his Internet posts discussing the invention can be attributed to the exponential voltage (L di/dt) of the back emf. One of the latest additions to this category of inventions that confirm the success of the Adams motor is International Patent Application No. 00/28656, awarded in May 2000. inventors Brits and Christy, (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 clarifies that "a direct current applied to the stator coils produces a magnetic repulsive force and is the only current applied externally to the entire system to create a cumulative movement ..." It is well known that all motors work according to this principle. On page 21 of said patent, there is an explanation of the design, where the inventors express the desire to "maximize the effect of the back emf, which helps to 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, presented in Brits and Christie's patent, discloses voltage sources "VA, VB and VC". Then, on page 10, the following statement is made: "At this time, the 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 for this construction to 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.
Confirming the statement that free energy was obtained is that a working coil (in a pulsed mode) when passing by a constant magnetic field (magnet) does not use a storage battery to create current. Instead, it has been proposed to use Weigand conductors, and this will cause a colossal Barkhausen jump in the alignment of the magnetic domain, and the pulse will take on a very clear shape. If a Weigand conductor is applied to the coil, then it will create a sufficiently large impulse of several volts for it when it passes a changing external magnetic field of a threshold of a certain height. Thus, for this pulse generator, input electrical energy is not needed 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 Langley's 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 (eg with north poles at each end of the rotor), then the resulting arrangement will resemble the radial magnetic field for the rotor used in Van Gil's patent (#5,600,189). Brown's patent #4,438,362, owned by Rotron, uses a variety of magnetizable segments to make a rotor in a toroidal spark gap. The most striking example of a rotating toroidal motor is the device described in Ewing's patent (No. 5,625,241), which also resembles Langley's already mentioned invention. Based on the magnetic repulsion process, Ewing's invention uses a microprocessor-controlled rotary mechanism primarily to take advantage of Lenz's law and also to overcome 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: "the operation of the device as a motor is also possible when using a pulsed DC source." The design also contains a programmable logic control unit and a power control circuit, which the inventors believe should make it more efficient than 100%.
Even if motor models prove effective in generating torque or converting force, the magnets moving inside them may leave these devices unusable. Commercial implementation of these types of motors can be disadvantageous, 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 dismantled and placed out of plane. The author of the book "Movement without wheels" Laithwhite is known 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 by about 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-wheel cart. This magnet is exposed to the side of the parallel conveyor with fixed variable magnets. Another no less amazing invention is the device described in another Johnson patent (# 4,877,983) and the successful operation of which was observed in a closed circuit for several hours. It should be noted that the generator coil can be placed in close proximity to the moving element, so that each run is accompanied by an electrical impulse to charge the battery. Hartmann's device can also be designed as a circular conveyor, allowing the demonstration of first-order perpetual motion.
Hartmann's patent is based on the same principle as the well-known electron spin experiment, which in physics is commonly called the Stern-Gerlach experiment. In an inhomogeneous magnetic field, the impact on an object with the help of a magnetic moment of rotation occurs due to the potential energy gradient. In any physics textbook, one can find an indication that this type of field, strong at one end and weak at the other, contributes to the appearance of a unidirectional force facing the magnetic object and equal to dB / dx. Thus, the force pushing the ball along the magnetized plane 10 levels up in the direction is completely consistent with the laws of physics.
Using industrial quality magnets (including superconducting magnets at ambient temperature, which are currently in the final stages of development), it will be possible to demonstrate the transportation of loads with a sufficiently large mass without the cost of electricity for maintenance. Superconducting magnets have the unusual ability to maintain their original magnetized field for years without requiring periodic power to restore the original field strength. Examples of the current state of the art in the development of superconducting magnets are given in Ohnishi's patent #5,350,958 (lack of power produced by cryogenics and lighting systems), as well as in a reprint of an article on magnetic levitation.
Static electromagnetic angular momentum
In a provocative experiment using a cylindrical capacitor, researchers Graham and Lahoz develop an idea published by Einstein and Laub in 1908, which states that an additional period of time is needed to maintain the principle of action and reaction. The article cited by the researchers was translated and published in my book below. Graham and Lahoz emphasize that there is a "real angular momentum density" and offer a way to observe this energetic effect in permanent magnets and electrets.
This work is inspiring and impressive research using data based on the work of Einstein and Minkowski. This study can be directly applied to the creation of both a unipolar generator and a magnetic energy converter, described below. This possibility is due to the fact that both devices have axial magnetic and radial electric fields, similar to the cylindrical capacitor used in the Graham and Lahoz experiment.
Unipolar motor
The book details experimental research and the history of the invention made by Faraday. In addition, attention is paid to the contribution that Tesla made to this study. Recently, however, a number of new designs have been proposed for a multi-rotor unipolar motor that can be compared to the invention of J.R.R. Serla.
The renewed interest in Searle's device should also draw attention to unipolar motors. 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 "coagulation" effect (No. 2). The first effect can be represented as magnetized segments of some imaginary solid ring that rotate around a common center. Exemplary 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 are 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 frequency of 500 rpm. It is worth noting that effect #1 does not depend on the rotation of the magnet. The magnetic field in a unipolar generator is coupled to space, not to a magnet, so rotation will not affect the effect of the Lorentz force that occurs when this universal unipolar generator operates.
Effect #2 that takes place inside each roller magnet is described in , where each roller is treated as a small unipolar generator. This effect is considered to be somewhat weaker, since electricity is generated from the center of each roller to the periphery. This design is reminiscent of Tesla's unipolar generator, in which a rotating drive belt ties the outer edge of a ring magnet. With the rotation of rollers having a diameter of approximately one tenth of a meter, which is carried out around a ring with a diameter of 1 meter and in the absence of towing of the rollers, the voltage generated will be 0.5 volts. The design of the ring magnet proposed by Searl will enhance the B-field of the roller.
It should be noted that the superposition principle applies to both of these effects. Effect No. 1 is a uniform electronic field that exists along the diameter of the roller. Effect #2 is a radial effect, as noted above. However, in fact, only the emf acting in the segment of the roller 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 generation of electric current in any external circuit. Understanding this fact means that the effective voltage generated by effect #1 will be half the existing emf, or just over 1 volt, which is about twice as much as that generated by effect #2. When applying superimposition in a limited 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 adjustable 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, the effect of a ball-bearing motor 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 work related to this topic, researchers Roschin and Godin published the results of experiments with a single-ring device they invented, called the "Magnetic Energy Converter" and having rotating magnets on bearings. The device was designed as an improvement on Searle's invention. The analysis of the author of this article, given above, does not depend on what metals were used to make the rings in the design of Roshchin and Godin. Their discoveries are convincing and detailed enough to 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 greater than 100%. Naturally, the concepts of conservation of energy must be taken into account, and the source of the supposed additional energy must also 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 power. The roller magnet configuration, which is now commonly referred to as the "magnetic energy converter", is also a unique magnetic motor design. The device illustrated by Roshchin and Godin in Russian patent No. 2155435 is a magnetic electric motor-generator, which demonstrates the possibility of generating additional energy. Since the operation of the device is based on the circulation of cylindrical magnets rotating around the ring, the design is actually more of a generator than a motor. However, this device is an active 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 (Popular Science), May, 1979
6. Schaum's Outline Series, Theory and Problems of Electric
Machines and Electromechanics (Theory and problems of electrical
machines and electromechanics) (McGraw Hill, 1981)
7. IEEE Spectrum, July, 1997
9. Thomas Valone, The Homopolar Handbook
10. Ibidem, p. ten
11. Electric Spacecraft Journal, Issue 12, 1994
12. Thomas Valone, The Homopolar Handbook, p. 81
13. Ibidem, p. 81
14. Ibidem, p. 54
Tech. Phys. Lett., v. 26, #12, 2000, p.1105-07
Thomas Valon Integrity Research Institute, www.integrityresearchinstitute.org
1220L St. NW, Suite 100-232, Washington, DC 20005
Studying the Faraday disk and the so-called. "Faraday's paradox", conducted some simple experiments and made some interesting conclusions. First of all, about what should be paid the most attention in order to better understand the processes occurring in this (and similar) unipolar machine.
Understanding the principle of operation of the Faraday disk also helps to understand how all transformers, coils, generators, electric motors (including a unipolar generator and a unipolar motor), etc., work in general.
In the note, drawings and detailed video with different experiences illustrating all conclusions without formulas and calculations, "on the fingers."
All of the following is an attempt to comprehend without pretensions to academic reliability.
Direction of magnetic field lines
The main conclusion that I made for myself: the first thing you should always pay attention to in such systems is magnetic field geometry, direction and configuration of field lines.
Only the geometry of the magnetic field lines, their direction and configuration can bring some clarity to the understanding of the processes occurring in a unipolar generator or unipolar motor, Faraday disk, as well as any transformer, coil, electric motor, generator, etc.
For myself, I distributed the degree of importance as follows - 10% physics, 90% geometry(magnetic field) to understand what is happening in these systems.
Everything is described in more detail in the video (see below).
It must be understood that the Faraday disk and the external circuit with sliding contacts somehow form the well-known since school times frame- it is formed by a section of the disk from its center to the junction with a sliding contact at its edge, as well as the entire outer circuit(suitable conductors).
Direction of the Lorentz force, Ampère
The Ampère force is a special case of the Lorentz force (see Wikipedia).
The two pictures below show the Lorentz force acting on positive charges in the entire circuit ("frame") in the field of a donut-type magnet for the case when the external circuit is rigidly connected to the copper disk(i.e. when there are no sliding contacts and the external circuit is directly soldered to the disk).
1 rice. - for the case when the entire circuit is rotated by an external mechanical force ("generator").
2 rice. - for the case when a direct current is supplied through the circuit from an external source ("motor").
Click on one of the pictures to enlarge.
The Lorentz force is manifested (current is generated) only in sections of the circuit MOVING in a magnetic field
Unipolar generator
So, since the Lorentz force acting on the charged particles of the Faraday disk or a unipolar generator will act oppositely on different sections of the circuit and the disk, then in order to obtain current from this machine, only those sections of the circuit (if possible) should be set in motion (rotate), direction the Lorentz forces in which will coincide. The remaining sections must either be fixed or excluded from the circuit, or rotate in the opposite direction.
The rotation of the magnet does not change the uniformity of the magnetic field around the axis of rotation (see the last section), therefore, whether the magnet is standing or rotating does not matter (although there are no ideal magnets, and field inhomogeneity around axis of magnetization caused by insufficient magnet quality, also has some effect on the result).
Here an important role is played by which part of the entire circuit (including the lead wires and contacts) rotates and which is stationary (since the Lorentz force occurs only in the moving part). And most importantly - in what part of the magnetic field the rotating part is located, and from which part of the disk the current is taken.
For example, if the disk protrudes far beyond the magnet, then in the part of the disk protruding beyond the edge of the magnet, the current of the direction opposite to the current can be removed, which can be removed in the part of the disk located directly above the magnet.
Unipolar motor
All of the above about the generator is also true for the "engine" mode.
It is necessary to apply current, if possible, to those parts of the disk in which the Lorentz force will be directed in one direction. It is these sections that must be released, allowing them to rotate freely and "break" the circuit in the appropriate places by placing sliding contacts (see the figures below).
The remaining areas should, if possible, be either excluded or minimized.
Video - experiments and conclusions
Time of different stages of this video:
3 min 34 sec- first experiences
7 min 08 sec- what to pay the main attention and continuation of experiments
16 min 43 sec- key explanation
22 min 53 sec- MAIN EXPERIENCE
28 min 51 sec- Part 2, interesting observations and more experiments
37 min 17 sec- erroneous conclusion of one of the experiments
41 min 01 sec- about Faraday's paradox
What repels what?
A fellow electronics engineer and I discussed this topic for a long time and he expressed an idea built around the word " repelled".
The idea with which I agree is that if something starts moving, then it must be repelled from something. If something is moving, then it is moving relative to something.
Simply put, we can say that part of the conductor (the outer circuit or disk) is repelled by the magnet! Accordingly, repulsive forces act on the magnet (through the field). Otherwise, the whole picture collapses and loses logic. About the rotation of the magnet - see the section below.
In the pictures (you can click to enlarge) - options for the "engine" mode.
For the "generator" mode, the same principles work.
Here the action-reaction occurs between the two main "participants":
Accordingly, when the disk rotates, and the magnet is stationary, then the action-reaction occurs between magnet and part of the disk .
And when magnet rotates together with the disk, then the action-reaction occurs between magnet and outer part of the chain (fixed lead wires). The fact is that the rotation of a magnet relative to the outer section of the circuit is the same as the rotation of the outer section of the circuit relative to a fixed magnet (but in the opposite direction). In this case, the copper disk almost does not participate in the "repulsion" process.
It turns out that, unlike the charged particles of a conductor (which can move inside it), the magnetic field is rigidly connected to the magnet. Incl. along a circle around the axis of magnetization.
And one more conclusion: the force that attracts two permanent magnets is not some mysterious force perpendicular to the Lorentz force, but this is the Lorentz force. It's all about the "rotation" of electrons and the very " geometry". But that is another story...
Rotation of a bare magnet
There is a funny experience at the end of the video and a conclusion as to why part the electric circuit can be made to rotate, but it is not possible to make the "donut" magnet rotate around the axis of magnetization (with a stationary DC electric circuit).
The conductor can be broken in places of the opposite direction of the Lorentz force, but the magnet cannot be broken.
The fact is that the magnet and the entire conductor (the external circuit and the disk itself) form a connected pair - two interacting systems, each of which closed inside yourself . In the case of a conductor - closed electrical circuit, in the case of a magnet - "closed" lines of force magnetic field.
At the same time, in an electrical circuit, the conductor can be physically break, without breaking the circuit itself (by placing the disk and sliding contacts), in those places where the Lorentz force "unfolds" in the opposite direction, "released" different sections of the electric circuit to move (rotate) each in its own opposite direction to each other, and break the "chain" of the magnetic field or magnet lines of force, so that different sections of the magnetic field "did not interfere" with each other - apparently impossible (?). No similarities of "sliding contacts" for a magnetic field or a magnet seem to have been invented yet.
Therefore, there is a problem with the rotation of the magnet - its magnetic field is an integral system, which is always closed in itself and inseparable in the body of the magnet. In it, opposite forces in areas where the magnetic field is in different directions are mutually compensated, leaving the magnet motionless.
Wherein, Job Lorentz force, Ampere in a fixed conductor in the field of a magnet, apparently goes not only to heat the conductor, but also to distortion of magnetic field lines magnet.
BY THE WAY! It would be interesting to conduct an experiment in which, through a fixed conductor located in the field of a magnet, pass huge current, and see how the magnet will react. Will the magnet heat up, demagnetize, or maybe it will just break into pieces (and then it’s interesting - in what places?).
All of the above is an attempt to comprehend without pretensions to academic reliability.
Questions
What remains not completely clear and needs to be checked:
1. Is it still possible to make the magnet rotate separately from the disk?
If you give the opportunity to both the disk and the magnet, freely rotate independently, and apply current to the disk through the sliding contacts, will both the disk and the magnet rotate? And if so, in which direction will the magnet rotate? For the experiment, you need a large neodymium magnet - I don't have it yet. With an ordinary magnet, there is not enough strength of the magnetic field.
2. Rotation of different parts of the disk in different directions
If done freely rotating independently of each other and from a stationary magnet - the central part of the disk (above the "donut hole" of the magnet), the middle part of the disk, as well as the part of the disk protruding beyond the edge of the magnet, and apply current through sliding contacts (including sliding contacts between these rotating parts of the disk ) - will the central and extreme parts of the disk rotate in one direction, and the middle one - in the opposite direction?
3. Lorentz force inside a magnet
Does the Lorentz force act on particles inside a magnet whose magnetic field is distorted by external forces?
Jorge Guala-Valverde, Pedro Mazzoni
Unipolar motor-generator
INTRODUCTION
Continuing our studies of motor electromagnetic induction, which we started earlier, we decided to reveal the presence of a torque in "closed magnetic field" in unipolar motor-generators. Conservation of angular momentum eliminates the private interaction between the field-producing magnet and the wire carrying the voltage, as seen in previously studied configurations. "open magnetic field". The balance of the kinetic moment 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 with its north pole passing under two wires: probe and contact wire, at rest in the laboratory. In both of the above wires, the 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 fix the probe on a magnet, thus ensuring the continuity of the current flow through the wires, then direct current will flow throughout the 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 mounting magnet, probe and contact wire
Torque observed in freely rotating magnets
The engine displayed on Rice. one, it also has a reverse action: by passing direct current through electrically connected, but mechanically decoupled wires, we get the motor configuration.
Obviously, if the probe is soldered to the contact wire, thus forming a closed loop, the torque compensation prevents the magnet and the 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 a direct current flows. Despite the fact that 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 a magnetic field(not taking magnetic scattering into account). The lower horizontal part of the wire, hereinafter referred to as probe, 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 area for creating an angular momentum in the coil, and the rotation itself will take place if the current strength is sufficient to overcome the moment of friction.
The above described led us to the idea that in order to enhance the effect of this effect, it is necessary to replace a single circuit with a coil consisting of P contours. In the currently described configuration, the “active length” of the probe is approximately 4 cm, N=20 a a magnetic field on the probe reaches a value of 0.1 Tesla.
While 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, as this would imply the creation of angular momentum. Due to space constraints imposed by the design of the yoke, the spool is not able to make a full turn and, after a slight angular movement, must collide with the yoke at rest. The continuous rotation of a magnet implies the creation of an unbalanced angular momentum, the source of which is difficult to determine. Moreover, if we allow the coincidence of kinematic and dynamic rotation, we must, apparently, expect the force interaction between the coil, magnet, and also 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 the magnet and coil in the laboratory
Centrifugal in the lower part of the circuit, a direct current, the strength of which varies from 1 to 20 A, is fed to a coil located at the north pole of the magnet. The expected angular momentum occurs when the DC current reaches a value of approximately 2 A, which is a sufficient condition to overcome the friction of the coil supports. As expected, the rotation reverses when a centripetal direct current is applied to the circuit.
The rotation of the magnet was not observed in any case, although the value of the moment of friction force for the magnet did not exceed 3-10 ~ 3 N/mΘ
1b. A 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 exceeding 4 A. The direction of movement is reversed when a centripetal direct current is applied to the circuit . Due to the action-reaction compensation, this experiment excludes a particular interaction between the magnet and the coil. The observed properties of the above engine are very different from the equivalent configuration. "open field". Experience tells us that the interaction will take place between the "magnet + yoke" system as a whole and the active part of the coil. In order to shed light on this issue, we carried out two independent experiments.
Rice. 3. Used
in experiment No. 2, the configuration
Photo 1. Corresponds to Fig. 3
The probe rotates freely in the air gap while the contact wire remains attached to the support. In the event that a centrifugal direct current flows inside the probe, the strength of which is approximately equal to 4 A, the rotation of the probe clockwise is recorded. Rotation is counterclockwise when centripetal direct current is applied to the probe. When the DC current is increased to a level of 50 A, the 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 the contact wire are electrically connected through cups filled with mercury, but mechanically they are separated (Fig. 3 + photo 1).
2b. The probe is attached to a magnet
In this case, the probe is attached to the magnet, with both freely rotating in the air gap. Clockwise rotation is observed when the centrifugal DC current reaches a value of 10 A. The rotation reverses when a centripetal DC current is applied.
Contact wire causing magnet rotation in equivalent configuration "open field" is now located in the area of lesser impact of the field, being a passive element of the creation of angular momentum.
On the other hand, a magnetized body (in this case, the yoke) is not able to cause the rotation of another magnetized body (in this case, the magnet itself). The “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, let's replace the one with a uniform cylindrical magnet with another magnet that does not have a circular sector of 15º (photo 2). This modification shows near impact singularity, which is limited a magnetic field .
2-c. A probe that freely rotates around the singularity of a magnet.
As expected, due to the reversal of the field polarity, when a centrifugal current of about 4A is passed through the probe, the probe rotates in a counter-clockwise 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.
2d. A probe attached to a magnet at a magnetic field singularity.
If a probe is attached to the magnet and a direct current of up to 100A is directed through the circuit, no rotation is observed, despite the fact that the moment of friction force is equal to that specified in paragraph 2-b. The 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 the magnet.
Thus, the active part of the circuit through which the current flows is the sole cause of the movement of the magnet. The experimental results achieved by us 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 the source of the magnetic field. The interaction of forces is now observed between the current and the entire magnetized array.
Photo 2. Experiments 2nd and 2d
EXPERIMENT N 3
3-a. Symmetrical copy of experiment 1-a
The yoke weighing 80 kg was suspended using two steel wires 4 meters long, 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, which coincides with the axis of rotation of the magnet. A slight manifestation of this effect is easily observed when using optical means. The rotation reverses its direction when the DC direction changes.
When connecting the coil 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, conclusions related to the motor configuration can be applied, with the corresponding changes, to generator configuration:
1. Oscillating coil
The spatially limited rotation of the 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 attached to the magnet. These qualitative measurements were made using a coil with 1000 turns which was moved by hand. The output signal was amplified with a linear amplifier. In the case when the coil was left at rest in the laboratory, the speed of rotation of the magnet reached 5 revolutions per second; however, no electrical signal was detected in the coil.
2. Split circuit
Experiments on the generation of electrical energy with a probe mechanically separated from the contact wire were not carried out by us. Despite this, and due to the complete reversibility demonstrated by electromechanical conversion, it is easy to infer the behavior of each component in an actual operating 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. The rotation of a magnet cannot cause an emf.
EXPERIMENT 2-B"
If the probe is attached to the magnet and it 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 the EMF. The above conclusions partially confirm some earlier statements, although erroneous in relation to the "open field" configuration, in particular, those of Panovsky and Feynman.
EXPERIMENTS 2-C" AND 2-D"
A probe that is in motion relative to a magnet will cause an emf to be generated. The appearance of EMF is not observed during the rotation of a magnet, to which a probe is attached at the singularity of its field.
CONCLUSION
The phenomenon of unipolarity for almost two centuries has been an area of the theory of electrodynamics, which is the source of many difficulties in its study. A number of experiments, including the study of configurations as "closed" so "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 the entire magnetized array as their source. The above conclusions are in full accordance with the theory of Ampere surface currents, which are the cause of magnetic effects. The source of the magnetic field (the magnet itself) induces Ampere surface currents on whole yoke. Both the magnet and the yoke interact with the ohmic current traversing the circuit.
In the light of the experiments carried out, it seems possible to make a couple of remarks about the contradiction between the concepts of "rotating" and "fixed" magnetic field lines:
Under observation "open" configurations suggests that the lines of force magnetic field rotate when "attached" to a magnet, while when observed "closed" configurations, the lines of force mentioned above are presumably directed to 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 , acting on the active (ohmic) current With. The reaction of the active current to the "magnet + yoke" system is expressed in an equivalent but opposite moment of rotation κ C , M + Y) . The total value of the 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 EMF generation. Unfortunately, Muller (like Wesley) failed to systematize the facts he observed.
This happened, apparently, due to a misunderstanding of the parts of the interaction process. In his analysis, Müller focused on the magnet-wire pair rather than the magnet + yoke/wire system, which is essentially the physically relevant one.
So, the rationale for the theories of Muller and Wesley has some doubts about the conservation of angular momentum.
APPENDIX:
DETAILS OF THE EXPERIMENT
In order to reduce the moment of friction force on the bearing part of the magnet, we have developed a device shown in Fig. 4 and photo 3.
The magnet was placed by us in a Teflon "boat" floating in a bowl filled with mercury. The Archimedes force reduces the actual weight of a given fixture. Mechanical contact between the magnet and the yoke is achieved by using 4 steel balls placed in two circular grooves, having the shape of a circle and located on the combined surfaces of the magnet and the yoke. Mercury was added by us until the free sliding of the magnet along the yoke was achieved. The authors are grateful To Tom E. Philips and Chris Gajliardo for valuable collaboration.
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). | |
| A. Ê. Ò. Assis & D. S. Thober, "Unipolar Induction..", Frontiers of Fundamental Physics. Plenum, N.Y. 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, Addison-Wesley, N.Y. (1995). | |
| R Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics II, Addison-Wesley, N.Y. (1964). | |
| A. Shadowitz, Special Relativity, Dover, NY (1968). | |
| A. G. Kelly, Physics Essays, 12, 372 (1999). | |
| A. Ê. Ò. 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., Blumberg, p.156 (1987). | |
| FJ. Muller, Galilean Electrodynamics, 1, No. 3, p.27 (1990). | |
| J.P. wesley, Selected Topics in Advanced Fundamental Physics, Benj. Wesley Pub., Blumberg, p.237 (1991). |
Jorge Guala-Valverde, Pedro Mazzoni Unipolar motor-generator // "Academy of Trinitarianism", M., El No. 77-6567, publ. 12601, 11/17/2005
