- #1
artis
- 1,481
- 976
Ok so here is something that made me scratch my head and I still can't come to a final conclusion.
The basic idea is seemingly simple. You have permanent magnets attached to a core, the field lines close on both magnets through the core, so far so good. but the core also has electromagnets , put current through them one way or the other and they change the flux in the core, but given that in any case the flux for one of the two permanent magnets is already in the "right" or "wanted" direction then the electric coil only has to steer the field of the other magnet.
One essentially can control the flux at each end of a core by using a coil and some permanent magnets. The net strength of the field at the end in question is then the combined strength of both permanent magnets and the coil if one leaves it on. So in theory you get double the strength while you input just half the power, although the field of one of the permanent magnets is already there so you just input the power necessary to steer the other permanent magnet's field.
This is a COMSOL analysis done by local researches in a university near me.
Please see link
https://www.comsol.ch/paper/download/83413/dirba_paper.pdfBut things are not over yet, here is where matters get tricky. I found a website belonging to an inventor by the name Charles Joe Flynn, called Flynn Research. Now everything about it seems sketchy, but please see the PDF where he explains at first the workings of the permanent magnet type latch I described above, then goes on to show an example of the same principle used in a motor/generator.
As I go through the description I see the same mechanism used in the latch employed in the motor/generator, So I can't really figure out whether the claim has any factual basis that the motor would be more powerful output wise than it's electrical input because a device working over unity without an additional power source present would be a PMM which then is nonsense but as I look at this I can't exactly pinpoint whether or not it is the case.
Please see link. (not a long one)
https://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT technology white paper.pdfMy own short summary is that what I see is a rotor resembling the rotors used in reluctance motors/generators, with a toothed rotor. The rotor tooth's are latched in place after certain intervals by the flux passing through them which comes from the permanent magnets in the stator, but by controlling the stator coils one seemingly can change the position of stator poles that extend their flux through the rotor, this way moving the rotor forward step by step. the flux strength is that of the permanent magnet's + the electromagnets where it seems that again the electromagnet has to overpower one not two permanent magnet's in order to steer the flux and turn the rotor.
Please share your thoughts on this ?
The basic idea is seemingly simple. You have permanent magnets attached to a core, the field lines close on both magnets through the core, so far so good. but the core also has electromagnets , put current through them one way or the other and they change the flux in the core, but given that in any case the flux for one of the two permanent magnets is already in the "right" or "wanted" direction then the electric coil only has to steer the field of the other magnet.
One essentially can control the flux at each end of a core by using a coil and some permanent magnets. The net strength of the field at the end in question is then the combined strength of both permanent magnets and the coil if one leaves it on. So in theory you get double the strength while you input just half the power, although the field of one of the permanent magnets is already there so you just input the power necessary to steer the other permanent magnet's field.
This is a COMSOL analysis done by local researches in a university near me.
Please see link
https://www.comsol.ch/paper/download/83413/dirba_paper.pdfBut things are not over yet, here is where matters get tricky. I found a website belonging to an inventor by the name Charles Joe Flynn, called Flynn Research. Now everything about it seems sketchy, but please see the PDF where he explains at first the workings of the permanent magnet type latch I described above, then goes on to show an example of the same principle used in a motor/generator.
As I go through the description I see the same mechanism used in the latch employed in the motor/generator, So I can't really figure out whether the claim has any factual basis that the motor would be more powerful output wise than it's electrical input because a device working over unity without an additional power source present would be a PMM which then is nonsense but as I look at this I can't exactly pinpoint whether or not it is the case.
Please see link. (not a long one)
https://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT technology white paper.pdfMy own short summary is that what I see is a rotor resembling the rotors used in reluctance motors/generators, with a toothed rotor. The rotor tooth's are latched in place after certain intervals by the flux passing through them which comes from the permanent magnets in the stator, but by controlling the stator coils one seemingly can change the position of stator poles that extend their flux through the rotor, this way moving the rotor forward step by step. the flux strength is that of the permanent magnet's + the electromagnets where it seems that again the electromagnet has to overpower one not two permanent magnet's in order to steer the flux and turn the rotor.
Please share your thoughts on this ?