The GraMag Motor

[Grimer]

Inspired by the following pathfinder post:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 3841#63841

and the video that he links to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMxwt8w3lB0

I have connected up some insights put forward on the Steorn forum and come up with the following design for a gravity-magnetic motor.


+IHM+IHS+


The soft iron in a tube on a spring is mounted on a bicycle wheel.
The wheel is balanced by an identical tube and magnet on the opposite side.

The tube does a fly-by past a powerful magnet mounted in line with the horizontal diameter of the bicycle wheel.

As it passes the magnet the soft iron is drawn towards it against the spring force. As it leaves the influence of the magnet the soft iron returns to its original position.

Now no energy is obtained from the magnetic field since energy gained going into the field is equal to the energy lost going out of the field.

But gaining magnetic energy is not the object of the exercise.

The object is to move the centre of mass of the soft iron in the horizontal direction so that right hand side gravitational moment about the centre is increased. This unbalanced moment drives the wheel in an analogous manner to that of the Rubber Band Motor.

----------------------------------------

Now the above sets out the essential principle.

I'm sure forum member can think up obvious improvements, like using a magnet instead of a soft iron for example; having a similar arrangement at the other end of the diameter where a magnet is repelled against as spring force instead of being attracted; having catches to maintain the magnetic displacement beyond the reach of the magnetic field, etc.

[greendoor]

Good thinking ... i'm looking for the catch and not seeing one yet ...

This has a similarity to the Ecklin generator (Variable Magnetic Flux generator). At least in the idea that the energy required to extract the iron out of the magnetic field is supplied by the energy gained as the iron is attracted by the field. Being balanced, it shouldn't require any energy input (other than friction losses) to move the iron sideways, and that's where gravity can do it's thing ...

We probably don't need the springs - if pairs of magnets are mounted at the end of rods that slide within holes in the axle (does that sound familiar ...) and are alternately attracting and repeling ...

Bessler did own a lodestone ... were his weights actually magnets?

[greendoor]

By moving the weights horizontally, they will then fall a further distance due to the greater radius. Which means they will have to be lifted back up to repeat the cycle. The question in my mind is whether the energy obtained from the fall is greater than the energy required to lift the mass back up again. I'm not sure that this solves anything ... isn't this just a variation on the classic non-runner over-balance PM wheels?

[Grimer]

You're thinking about it Greendoor and trying to find the showstopper - which is what is required. Well done.

The springs are needed otherwise as you rightly point out, it would be "just a variation on the classic non-runner over-balance PM wheels"? Full marks for pointing that out.

Think of it this way. One is transducing magnetic energy into elastic strain energy. Then when one is away from the magnetic influence one is releasing the strain energy. One is transforming electron motion (magnetism) into atomic motion (strain).

In Bessler's case he appears to be doing the same kind of thing with pendulums. In his case it is gravitational potential and inertial potential.
At the top of the swing a pendulum has maximum gravitational potential and minimum inertial potential. Vice versa at the bottom of the swing.

If the attraction starts at +10 degrees and finishes at - 10 degrees, say, then extra amount of fall by the larger radius is negligible, hopefully.

[Grimer]

Bessler did own a lodestone ... were his weights actually magnets?

Lodestone is so horribly weak compared with modern magnets that I think it extremely unlikely he used magnetism.

There's a nice comparative illustration somewhere. I'll have to see if I can find it.

[Grimer]

Mmm... - found it quicker than I expected.


+IHM+IHS+IHM+IHS+IHM+IHS+


Brass bound lodestone, ferrite block and NdFeB magnet: each store the same magnetic energy
(~0.4J) & contain ~70% iron by weight, yet the mass has decreased a thousand fold.

[nicbordeaux]

Looks interesting, though you'll have to build it to find out :) Regarding the bike wheel, a point to bear in mind is that you have some beautiful bearings, but the spokes and often the eylets in the rim are steel, eg susceptible to influence from magnets. Which is where a modified bicycle wheel comes in handy.

If you were "inspired" by the thread you mention, there are further mentions of telescopic and ways to implement it in this one http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3263

[Grimer]

@ nicbordeaux

I remember from my cycling days that you can get cycle wheels with wood rims. You can certainly get them with carbon fibre rims though they are jolly expensive.

Acting as devil's advocate for greendoor's showstopper it could be argued that whether the mass is pulled one way by magnetism and the other way by elastic strain doesn't really matter.

Yep. I'm inclined to think that is the case. Back to the drawing board unless I can think up a reason why it should matter.

[nicbordeaux]

@ Grimer : perfectly correct, though with a wooden rim you still have steel spokes. I suggest a smaller diameter normal wheel (cheapo kidy 24 inch or smaller mtb) with a wooden ouer circle of plyboard, cut in half and glued/screwn with brass fixtures onto the rim. say 6 to 8 inches height. Or whatever. Drill it/cut holes if too heavy :))

Your assumption thatt a metal plate being acted upon by magnet (or vv) on the downstroke being zero loss/gain is incorrect in realworld bicycle wheel thingies : you are getting acceleration out of the "downward" part of the rotation, maximum possible velocity from G is not attained in a short distance such as this. Therefore, any slowing of the wheel durinf this 180° is a big loss. Maybe not big enough to stop the device from working, you'll have to try.

On the magnetic one way, elastic or spring on the other direction, don't omit the force required to stretch that elastic band in the first place by magnetics.

Anyway, brilliant thinking and deduction, this could see CM a "outed" reality in no time at all. If, and only if the other guys on this forum are following the rules and sharing info, not trying to do it solo in their littles garden shacks and just using the forum to lift ideas. Or it could be that the members are more interested in theory than in solving the problem ? Therefore not following this particular thread. If they are, the "PM" thing is about to take a mammoth public step forward.

You can also use an external slide or "telescopic, call it what you will: a non ferrous metal rod upon which a drilled weight or magnet slides. Might simplify construction and keep it all visible so you can visualize what's going on.

So: this is the correct concept for a wheel, it requires work, if the forum is a sharing community as claimed, the chalenge is on. I'm prepared to share more info, but only if a load of other people are too.

[Grimer]

@ Grimer : perfectly correct, though with a wooden rim you still have steel spokes. I suggest a smaller diameter normal wheel (cheapo kiddy 24 inch or smaller mtb) with a wooden outer circle of ply-board, cut in half and glued/screwed with brass fixtures onto the rim. say 6 to 8 inches height. Or whatever. Drill it/cut holes if too heavy :))

Your assumption that metal plate being acted upon by magnet (or vv) on the downstroke being zero loss/gain is incorrect in realworld bicycle wheel thingies : you are getting acceleration out of the "downward" part of the rotation, maximum possible velocity from G is not attained in a short distance such as this. Therefore, any slowing of the wheel during this 180° is a big loss. Maybe not big enough to stop the device from working, you'll have to try.

On the magnetic one way, elastic or spring on the other direction, don't omit the force required to stretch that elastic band in the first place by magnetics.

Anyway, brilliant thinking and deduction, this could see CM a "outed" reality in no time at all. If, and only if the other guys on this forum are following the rules and sharing info, not trying to do it solo in their little garden shacks and just using the forum to lift ideas. Or it could be that the members are more interested in theory than in solving the problem ? Therefore not following this particular thread. If they are, the "PM" thing is about to take a mammoth public step forward.

You can also use an external slide or "telescopic, call it what you will: a non ferrous metal rod upon which a drilled weight or magnet slides. Might simplify construction and keep it all visible so you can visualize what's going on.

So: this is the correct concept for a wheel, it requires work, if the forum is a sharing community as claimed, the challenge is on. I'm prepared to share more info, but only if a load of other people are too.

My first concern is to refute the devil's advocate contention that the GraMag is equivalent to a falling arm Bessler wheel. Unfortunately I have found another argument to support the devil's advocate. Magnetism can be regarded as a kind of spring and every combination of spring and gravity must have been tried by now. However, let's assume for the moment that it is false and the way that the magnetic spring grabs the wheel has not been tried. After all, the magnet is quite independent of the wheel - a bit like Bessler's outer casing being independent of the inner movements - an external rock to pull against.

Your suggestion about the outer circle of plywood is excellent. It wouldn't have to be very large either since magnetic attraction decreases as the square. Also, the non magnetic cylinders and pistons could be allowed to rotate as they came in to the magnetic field so as to cut down on friction between piston and tube.

The attraction leaving the magnetic field which will slow the wheel should be balanced by the attraction entering the magnetic field which will speed the wheel.

I like the idea of the iron piston sliding along a rod. Maybe it could do this inside a plastic tube so the tube can rotate. The rod would keep the piston clear of the walls

The pulse would only be small but one could have a whole series of devices arranged around the perimeter at distances so that the magnetic effects are independent.

[erick]

I think you'll find that no matter what magnet you choose it will not be sufficient to pull a piece of ferrous metal as far as your wanting it to due to (for lack of a better term) "magnetic falloff" which is exponential. Even if you were able to achieve this you'd then find that once the ferrous material has been attracted by the magnet it will be very difficult to remove it from the magnets influence. Trust me I know from many experiments. When working with magnets and trying to create this kind of movement you must devise a way to constantly keep the magnet(s)/ferrous material under roughly the same amount of magnetic influence. Otherwise the point where the magnet/ferrous material enters/exits the area of magnetic influence will always be the "sticky spot"...

E

[Grimer]

I think I can see a anti-devil's advocate argument.

The traditional argument assumes that the gravitational field is uniform and that movement around a closed path in that field encounters that uniformity everywhere.

But if we think of the magnet as a kind of supergravity a little bit of neutron star which is exerting a much greater force than gravity close to, then clearly the gravitational field is not uniform but asymmetric. The iron chunk does a fly by and follows the net effective gravitational field lines.

Bessler must distort the net effective gravitational field using inertia. We can do it using magnetism.

Anyway, that argument seems plausible enough to make it worth while some keen builder having a go and winning fame and fortune - perhaps.

[Grimer]

I think you'll find that no matter what magnet you choose it will not be sufficient to pull a piece of ferrous metal as far as your wanting it to due to (for lack of a better term) "magnetic falloff" which is exponential. Even if you were able to achieve this you'd then find that once the ferrous material has been attracted by the magnet it will be very difficult to remove it from the magnets influence. Trust me I know from many experiments. When working with magnets and trying to create this kind of movement you must devise a way to constantly keep the magnet(s)/ferrous material under roughly the same amount of magnetic influence. Otherwise the point where the magnet/ferrous material enters/exits the area of magnetic influence will always be the "sticky spot"...

E

I can well believe what you say is so. However, most of the sticky spot problems are encountered when one is trying to get perpetual motion from magnetism. In other words to get an energy gain. We are not concerned with an energy gain here but merely a movement towards and away from a magnet so I can't see the problem. For example, given sufficient inertia one could swing a pendulum with a soft iron bob past a magnet without any trouble. True, one would not have movement in that case but one could arrange a spring force to rise with an appropriate characteristic as the magnetic force so controlling it.

Good point though, erick. Thanks for giving us the benefit of your practical experience.

I wonder if an appropriate arrangement of magnets could give us a linear increase rather than a square increase in attraction. The SMOT comes to mind. This would ease the problem.

[Grimer]

Thinking about it further I reckon that with an appropriate arrangement of magnets one can make the effective gravitational field lines anything one wants. For example, there's something called the Halbach array which manipulates the magnetic field pretty drastically.

[erick]

I can well believe what you say is so. However, most of the sticky spot problems are encountered when one is trying to get perpetual motion from magnetism.

In my experience, the sticky spots are encountered in between magnets. IOW the transition from one magnets magnetic field to another's. This ceases to be an issue if you can devise how to use the magnetic field of one magnet to affect the movement of your magnetic or ferrous weights throughout the entirety of the rotation of your wheel (like if you were to use a large ring magnet).

E