top

AGW question

Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | WhipMag Discussion/Development Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next   Page 1 of 3

Sat May 03, 2008 7:13 pm PostPost subject: AGW question
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

Why do I not find a description and/or diagrams to this effect and the relations of the magnets to create such effect? It has been duplicated.

This is the first observable effect that lead to the second?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 04, 2008 4:06 am PostPost subject: Re: AGW question
munchausen
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Posts: 54

Reply with quote

And how does that make you feel?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 04, 2008 7:44 am PostPost subject: Re: AGW question
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

lostcauses wrote:
Why do I not find a description and/or diagrams to this effect and the relations of the magnets to create such effect? It has been duplicated.

This is the first observable effect that lead to the second?

@lostcauses

The AGW phenomenon is real and apparently is a precrusor to self-sustained rotation and acceleration -- "the Whipmag effect." Although AGW has been reproduced successfully by several investigators, it is not the only catalytic mechanism, and there is at least one other mechanism that has not yet been identified. For example, it is widely believed that the stator magnets (and stator assemblies) play a very important role in producing the effect, but characterizing them precisely is proving to be very challenging.

AGW is not completely understood, and I believe you'll find a few theories in some of the other threads:

..Data and Discussions: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?t=307

..Whipmag Theory: http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?t=318

..Google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=AGW+whipmag

Cheers Smile
Yada..
_________________
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (Clarke's law)
Changing the world, one magnet at a time. (Yada)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 04, 2008 6:34 pm PostPost subject:
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

How does this make me feel?

Woundering!


Thanks for the links though I have read a great deal of them.
As for why I am asking!

I got's to be insane to do this.
The anti gear wise effect is such that at times the field are in opposition. of course this appears to be at the weaker times. For the agw effect to take place the interaction of the rotating rotor and the stator must interact to allow a greater force to overcome that opposing area. The strength and size of the magnets are in play here.

Look at the rotor of the device. 8 magnets with 16 locations of maximum force.
The closer to the end of the magnets the stronger the force.
This effect of the 18 strong points of magnetic force even in the gear wise direction will cause the direction of turning to at times be the opposite direction. Hence the wobble of the stator when it is stopped.

It is this single thing that allows the second effect of agw. As with any mass there exist inertial and also timing of interaction of force. sorry but magnetic field interaction also shows not to be instant.
The interaction of the force of the speed of rotor and the interaction of the stator will even lessen the action of gear wise action.
Back to the whip mag AGW effect. First is the noted approx 4 to one ratio of the stator to rotor rotation. Point of this is that it is an eight magnet rotor with 16 high designated field points. (The closest points to the end of the magnets.) To achieve this the speed of rotation is high, so the inertia of the rotor and stators is good. It does become a factor of operation of this device. It is also the time of force interaction on the magnets of the rotor and stator due to speeds has less time to interact. More it has been noted by some replicators that the rotor is easer to rotate during the AGW effect.

now some notes:
1; aprox: a 4 to one turn ratio of the stator to rotor is said to be observed. Since there is a basic 18 strong points such that they are placed opposing, one might conclude only 8 but the distance between make 16. Some thing else I have not found stated.

2: the 16 point of strong force cause a problem in the gear wise force causing even more force against turning the stator adding to the entire force needed to rotate the device in that direction.
To see this effect move the rotor very slowly and notice the position of the stator magnet. at one point it will break from the turn of the strong point, and try to reverse to the next strong field point of the pole to pole position of the rotor.

2A: in the anti gear wise effect the loss due to the field distance may be an adding force in relation to the direction of inertia. ( a force is applied that opposes the inertia direction of turn and also one that adds to it: does this cause the reduction in force need to turn the rotor, and even maybe the effect of speeding up the rotor and stator?)

3; The domains of a magnet when being made first go in the direction of easy, then reverse to become a strong more lasting domain. Just a thing I noticed may be in effect in this device showing a natural effect in the universe.

Agw sync?

So we place force on the rotor and a force to the stator so they go against the easy force and direction. At first it does not seem to sync. To the point if it is not set up properly the field will try and keep this from happening. So what happens when this does syc up?
Well what is given to us? a approx 4 to 1 ratio of the stator to rotor. In one claimed effect in seems to cause force to speed up the rotor and stator. In other stated effect is it is said to be easer to speed up the rotor when is sync.

Folks would like to write it all of as nothing and useless, As a fake or fraud. Even the person who gave us this does not understand it though claims to have replicated it. Damn I do want to belive!

LOL it is such it is very worth wile to try and understand. Ether way this has provided some very interesting effect that should be studied further. Lack of funds and equipment will make this hard for me.

As for the originator of the device, and any one else that has gotten AGW sync; I have given the best advice I can and that is a high speed camera so the relation of AGW sync can be seen and understood better.
Note the type of high speed camera I am talking about can catch and show bullets etc and interactions we would not normally see due to the speed of an item. A strobe is not going to do this.

What is my thought of this, well
One is the AGW creates some interesting timing and force angles with the stator going in AGW. The originator is one lucky person from what I can tell to get the second effect even with the inducting dampener. Distances of the fields and strength of them do play a great role in the second effect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sun May 04, 2008 8:44 pm PostPost subject:
Yadaraf
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 30 Jan 2008
Posts: 436

Reply with quote

lostcauses wrote:
How does this make me feel?
...
The anti gear wise effect is such that at times the field are in opposition. of course this appears to be at the weaker times. For the agw effect to take place the interaction of the rotating rotor and the stator must interact to allow a greater force to overcome that opposing area. The strength and size of the magnets are in play here.

Look at the rotor of the device. 8 magnets with 16 locations of maximum force.
The closer to the end of the magnets the stronger the force.
This effect of the 18 strong points of magnetic force even in the gear wise direction will cause the direction of turning to at times be the opposite direction. Hence the wobble of the stator when it is stopped.

It is this single thing that allows the second effect of agw. As with any mass there exist inertial and also timing of interaction of force. sorry but magnetic field interaction also shows not to be instant.
The interaction of the force of the speed of rotor and the interaction of the stator will even lessen the action of gear wise action.
Back to the whip mag AGW effect. First is the noted approx 4 to one ratio of the stator to rotor rotation. Point of this is that it is an eight magnet rotor with 16 high designated field points. (The closest points to the end of the magnets.) To achieve this the speed of rotation is high, so the inertia of the rotor and stators is good. It does become a factor of operation of this device. It is also the time of force interaction on the magnets of the rotor and stator due to speeds has less time to interact. More it has been noted by some replicators that the rotor is easer to rotate during the AGW effect.

now some notes:
1; aprox: a 4 to one turn ratio of the stator to rotor is said to be observed. Since there is a basic 18 strong points such that they are placed opposing, one might conclude only 8 but the distance between make 16. Some thing else I have not found stated.

2: the 16 point of strong force cause a problem in the gear wise force causing even more force against turning the stator adding to the entire force needed to rotate the device in that direction.
To see this effect move the rotor very slowly and notice the position of the stator magnet. at one point it will break from the turn of the strong point, and try to reverse to the next strong field point of the pole to pole position of the rotor.

2A: in the anti gear wise effect the loss due to the field distance may be an adding force in relation to the direction of inertia. ( a force is applied that opposes the inertia direction of turn and also one that adds to it: does this cause the reduction in force need to turn the rotor, and even maybe the effect of speeding up the rotor and stator?)

3; The domains of a magnet when being made first go in the direction of easy, then reverse to become a strong more lasting domain. Just a thing I noticed may be in effect in this device showing a natural effect in the universe.

Agw sync?

So we place force on the rotor and a force to the stator so they go against the easy force and direction. At first it does not seem to sync. To the point if it is not set up properly the field will try and keep this from happening. So what happens when this does syc up?
Well what is given to us? a approx 4 to 1 ratio of the stator to rotor. In one claimed effect in seems to cause force to speed up the rotor and stator. In other stated effect is it is said to be easer to speed up the rotor when is sync.

Folks would like to write it all of as nothing and useless, As a fake or fraud. Even the person who gave us this does not understand it though claims to have replicated it. Damn I do want to belive!

LOL it is such it is very worth wile to try and understand. Ether way this has provided some very interesting effect that should be studied further. Lack of funds and equipment will make this hard for me.

As for the originator of the device, and any one else that has gotten AGW sync; I have given the best advice I can and that is a high speed camera so the relation of AGW sync can be seen and understood better.
Note the type of high speed camera I am talking about can catch and show bullets etc and interactions we would not normally see due to the speed of an item. A strobe is not going to do this.

What is my thought of this, well
One is the AGW creates some interesting timing and force angles with the stator going in AGW. The originator is one lucky person from what I can tell to get the second effect even with the inducting dampener. Distances of the fields and strength of them do play a great role in the second effect.

@lostcauses,

It's obvious that you have given considerable thought to AGW. Your critical and analytical thinking is to be applauded Cool and Kudos on your elaborate reply. Please continue your evaluation of the phenomenon considering aspects of rotor-stator geometry -- including the requirement for a 5mm offset and the positioning of the stator magnets below the rotor, which seem necessary for AGW.

.. Q: What do you make of the fact that during AGW the stator is very sensitive and drops out under the slightest perturbation?

Cheers Smile
Yada ..
_________________
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (Clarke's law)
Changing the world, one magnet at a time. (Yada)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Mon May 05, 2008 12:21 am PostPost subject:
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

" Q: What do you make of the fact that during AGW the stator is very sensitive and drops out under the slightest perturbation? "

It is such that disturbance of the interaction through the float (crossing the opposing fields) will cause this to drop out. It seems to be the main reason some bearings worked over others. is this reason. The offset of the stator also seems to limit it helping the parasitic vibrations from interfering with the item.

If I am correct in the interactions, ( I may be wrong): of this being inertia used for timing, this item is tight in the set up. It would not take to much to mess up the inertia of stators. If one tried to center the stators it would tend to vibrate magnetically more than offset. I suspect the offset is just plain easer on the friction of bearings. One of them practical observations of this device. It simply reduces the potential disturbance of the inertia and fields.

Strangely enough this is the main reason I can see AL saying to go with OC original ideas. Were as the whip mag is an interesting device with most interesting results, (Most interesting results). It has some problems to allow it to be used in a practical sense.

Kinda like them way old days of static electricity being interesting put no practical applications. Yet today we have computers motors etc. All coming from some one seeing the strange interactions going on and questioning it.

As for giving this device time, yes I have and will. The agw effect itself is worth the time to look at. I have done this enough to realize the second part may have a good possibility of being an effect also. I have as of yet not been able to set the variables of this second effect. I do see this has possible locations it can happen.

35 pages of notes and drawing on this so far. The wish for a lab so I could quantify some of the effect would be very usfull, such as magnet distance apart on the rotor to actual speeds and forces upon a stator ect. The variables on this are so many that can cause effect on the AL's second effect.

I can see why Al works for the lab. He is damn good or damn luck or both. a good asset for the lab he works for.

To use available parts to come up with the AGW itself would be an achievement, but to get it in the windows to speed up? Almost unbelievable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 08, 2008 7:27 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Here is the breakdown in my visualization of the AGW timing:

For this, we are going to assume constant speed in AGW mode and will cover just 1 of 8 cycles that occur during a single rotor rotation. Thus we shall cover 180 of stator rotation and only 45 of rotor rotation. Each of the other 7 cycles shall be considered identical. The speeds shall be 5000 RPM on the stator and 1250 RPM on the rotor. The mental layout shall be referenced with the rotor directly behind the stator on the Z-axis. The maximum Z value for each rotating body shall be 0 and the minimum Z value shall be 180. The Xmax will be 90 and the Xmin will be 270 denoting clockwise rotation of of each rotating body when viewed from above. We will place the origin of 0,0,0 (x,y,z convention throughout) at the center of the rotor. Thus the field center for the stator will be at 0,-6,-84. Measurements are in millimeters and seconds. We will number the rotor magnets M1 - M8 clockwise. The weight of the stator assembly is considered to be 10grams and the rotor is considered to be 268grams. Degrees for the rotor will be denoted with the prefix R and degrees for the stator will be denoted with the prefix S. North will be default while (South) will be in parenthesis. (M5) would be the south pole of rotor magnet 5.

Our cycle begins with the equatorial line of M1 at physical position 0,0,59; R0 with its North face at 6.5,0,59 and its South face at -6.5,0,59. Thus M5 is in a similar but inverted configuration at R180 with equatorial line at 0,0,-59 and the North face at -6.5,0,-59 etc. Our stator is oriented with it's equatorial line also drawn from S0 to S180 and is congruent with M5 thus displaying its North face to 270 on its rotational axis. We will step the stator in 10 degree increments giving 18 snapshots of its smooth rotation.

1. At t=0.0S we find the torque at zero for both R & S as the torque curve sharply climbs from maximum negative torque to maximum positive torque. Motion on both R & S is purely by momentum. Magnetic fields are balanced.

2. At t=333.34S we find our torque at +max for both R & S. The torque curve is nearly horizontal when graphed. We now have magnetic field asymmetry. M6 & M5 are in a state of strong repulsion, while (M5) & (M4) are in a state of attraction with S. This is because the equatorial line for S has rotated to S10 and S has exposed its field to the (M5)-(M4) midpoint for connection. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R180 to R182.5. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R182.5.

3. At t=666.67S we find our torque beginning to diminish along a sinusoidal path. The torque curve begins to slope down some. M6 & M5 continue in strong repulsion with S while (M5) & (M4) continue in attraction. The equatorial line for S has rotated to S20. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R182.5 to R185. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R185.


4. At t=1mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path. The torque curve has a noticeable downward slope. M6 & M5 repulsion diminishes according to 1/r where r is the radius of the respective fields and (M5) & (M4) continues in increase in attraction according to the same principle. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet#Force_between_two_magnetic_polesto help determine the actual forces at work. It is a bit more complex than that, but simplifying will help visualize it. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S30. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R185 to R187.5. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R187.5.


5. At t=1.334mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path as (S) rotates away from R and S rotates toward R and the vectors become more obtuse. The torque curve increases in slope. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S40. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R187.5 to R190. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R190.

6. At t=1.667mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S50. The torque curve is more vertical than horizontal. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R190 to R192.5. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R192.5.

7. At t=2.0mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S60. The torque curve is increasingly more vertical than horizontal. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R192.5 to R195. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R195.

8. At t=2.334mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S70. The torque curve is dropping closer to zero as it becomes steeper yet. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R195 to R197.5. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R197.5.

9. At t=2.667mS we find our torque continues to diminish along the sinusoidal path. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S80. The torque curve is dropping to near zero as it becomes nearly vertical. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R197.5 to R200. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R200.

10. At t=3.0mS we have reached a critical point. Torque has reached zero. The torque curve is vertical. The equatorial line for S has advanced to S90. The equatorial line for M5 has rotated from R200 to R202.5. M5 Vector B is perpendicular to R202.5. We find S at the midpoint between (M5) and (M4) and (S) at S180. The system has reached magnetic equilibrium in time. We will note here that the M4 equator is at 157.5 and is always 45 behind M5. We can also note (as most readers have discerned by now) that for every 10 advance of S we have 2.5 advance of R. The next 90 of S will take us through the negative torque portion of our cycle. This is where we can use some expert mathematicians.

11. At t=3.334mS the torque curve still vertical goes negative. The equatorial line for S is now at 100 which places the B vector for S at 10. We now experience opposition from M4 & M3. If the interactions of these fields are weak enough and the momentum of both R & S are great enough, the fields will shear rather than connect. We need the exact formula for this to be worked out. The more shear we have here the better the performance. M5 is now at 205. If the fields do not shear, the torque will be the inverse of the preceding S90.

12 17 increment t by 333.34mS for each snapshot. Increment S by 10 and R by 2.5. There should be a minimum negative torque during this duration if the fields shear properly. If there is any, it will follow the sinusoidal path started at the beginning and will degrade the momentum of both R & S. There will be some drag associated with the shearing as magnetic reconnection is attempted and fails at the speed of light over and over. The timing of these reconnections is relative to the density pools created by the shear eddies. Each pool will attempt a connection. Im sure harmonics will play a part here as well.

18. At t=6mS. Lets back up a few microseconds here. As the equatorial line for S passes through 357 (or 177) we see a severe reversal of any negative torque that may be present do to unwanted magnetic reconnection. The torque curve spikes vertically from minimum (most negative) to maximum (most positive) in about 6 (or less) of S rotation. This snapshot is at zero torque smack-dab in the middle of that spike just as the S equatorial line aligns with S0 along with the M4 equatorial aligning with R180. We now have (S) at 270 and are ready to begin another cycle with polar reversals.

In this embodiment, a well balanced, low friction system will out perform a vibratory lossy system. Exact tuning of field shape and strength to mass is required. Well balanced stators do not dropout as easily.

I believe the grommets under Al's spindle helped to dampen unwanted vibrations.

Cheers,

Harvey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 08, 2008 2:34 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

@Harvey,

It's going to take me a mighty long time to digest what you just said. I can get through about 2 or 3 steps and then I can't seem to wrap my brain around the next one without losing something from the previous.

Think you could turn this into an 18 page picture book?

Thanks,
OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 08, 2008 4:53 pm PostPost subject:
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

oc
Harvey has done a good job. Put it into a graph to better understand it.
You can also go with a graph of simply the magnet field interactions to get an Idea were the interactions are. When this is looked at it will show the speed is not a constant. It will show were one speeding up would slow the other in a normal pattern. This is the one being observed in the AGW sync in reproductions. One of those things a high speed camera would see if device was properly marked.

Harvy as you can see the friction on this is important.

Such as the bearings for the stators in the original (I believe skate was a term used for the noise) even the offset of the magnetic fields of the rotor stator will change it due to the torque change this friction. One of the more important part is the dampener also will create a counter force that will cause a change in the torque on the frictional coefficient of the bearings.

LOL even the steel table working shows the relation of this effect.

The statement of some bearing magnet combos do not work is important in all this.

Lets take the statement of the rotor would reverse to AGW from GW and speed up. This it would seem would be the normal state of such a low friction device. So how would one set this up to stop the smaller mass from being driven to peak speed first with minimum effect on the rotor?

Why does the Stator not just run away on Al's? Why is the reproductions not showing the speed up effect.

Remember oc's original ideas are to use latches to control were the torque interactions happen. Even the whip mag has to have some point were it at least causes the interactions to be were the forces cause effect to were it can cause a speed up. The options on how to do such are limited in the device shown in the video.

Go back though the ideas, the way things are mounted and were it can be that such can be done on the whipmag.

Were I am at now is the question: can I come up with a frictional switch based on the magnetic fields to replicate Al"s second effect?

And just a note: Al has said he has been around this stuff for some time. He also spent a lot of time with different combinations of magnets to bearings etc. What did he say "I dont need no stinking latches"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 08, 2008 9:49 pm PostPost subject:
korkskrew
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Longmont, CO

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
@Harvey,

It's going to take me a mighty long time to digest what you just said. I can get through about 2 or 3 steps and then I can't seem to wrap my brain around the next one without losing something from the previous.

Think you could turn this into an 18 page picture book?

Thanks,
OC


I have a graphic that shows some of this, but I don't know how to post a picture...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Thu May 08, 2008 9:56 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

@korkskrew,

Post the pic somplace like photobucket and provide a link here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Thu May 08, 2008 11:26 pm PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

There are two perspectives regarding the friction.

1. The lower the friction, the less drag on momentum, thus more momentum force is available to initiate the required shear.

2. Some stator friction must exist to be added to the stator momentum as an opposing force to any push back (negative torque) thus helping to initiate the required shear.

It would have to be evaluated to see if perspective 2 provides an advantage over perspective 1. It is possible, as the frictional curves do not follow the inertial curves and thus the two may intersect at some optimum.

Madprofs rotor seems like a good candidate for super balanced testing. My rotor on the other hand is a good candidate for eccentric testing. My magnet circle has approximately 1/8" runout. I intended to eventually get a 'Phase II" spindle and make eccentric plugs to correct the runout - I was then going to basically 'balance & blueprint' it for speeds upto 10K RPM. However, when I ran my Lissajous tests I discovered that the runout didn't seem to affect the sync or the speed of the stator even with a 100% variation in magnet sizes. I saw such a small impact on the stator for such a large variation in the rotor magnets that I set this aside for a while. The only major affect I could contribute to the variance was the radial push on the bearings increased and an unwanted vibration developed that seemed to add drag to the system.

@OC,

I will see what I can do to put this into graphic form - IIRC Yirkha already put the magnetic interactions in an animation where shear did not exist, but the timing is the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 12:01 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Harvey,

Have you seen my post at http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?p=3679#3679 ?

The reason for my latches was to extend the time in the middle state, to gain positive torque on the rotor. In Al's implementation, I believe there is some form of drag that reaches a maximum when the rotor and stator magnets are in direct opposition, thus providing essentially the same torque but not requiring latches to do the job.

I do not think it will be easy to reproduce the exact relationships Al has seen. There are just too many factors: mass of rotor, mass of stator, bearing materials, bearing drag, bearing play, synchronization speeds, wobble, rotor and/or stator eccentricities, magnet strengths, magnet spacing.

I sincerely believe the best way to achieve the effect is by artificially controlling the stator spin (latches) to increase the dwell time in a favorable orientation. To go along with this though, requires the stator to be very responsive, low mass and low friction, because it will have to catch up with the rotor after the dwell period.

BTW: I have seen some unusual behavior when I introduce wobble to the rotor (raise it up so the upper bearing is not on the shaft) or eccentricity to the stator (stick a ferrous object to one side of the stator magnet). None of this has led to acceleration so far, but I think it might be possible if the timing and magnetic relationships are just right. But I have been able to achieve AGW spin with some of these arrangements.

OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 1:50 am PostPost subject:
korkskrew
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Longmont, CO

Reply with quote

Here is a graphic to compliment Harvey's explanation of the torque interactions between the rotor and stator. The X axis is stator rotation in degrees.

This is derived from the torque tables that I used in my javascript model. It doesn't agree with Harvey's description completely. There is a little dipsey-doodle in the middle that is at odds with his description. I'm not sure why. My FEMM model shows four zero crossings on the rotor torque cycle. The two important ones are at 0 and 90 degrees.

Tr is Rotor Torque (left Y axis scale)
Ts is Stator Torque (right Y axis scale)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:41 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

@korkskrew,

Thanks, I needed that.

I would be interested in seeing Harvey's numbers in a graph like that. Even better, I'd like to see some real torque measurements from one of the sustained AGW whipmag runs (Al, can you do this?).

OC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:46 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

@OC,
Your graphic looks dead on for the force vectors Very Happy

@korkscrew, what was the phasing for your data?

3 should be at max torque and 177 should be at min torque. Thus 183 will again be at max torque.

Start your data with the equitoral lines aligned at 0 (like poles of both stator and rotor facing same direction) and proceed from there. IIRC you derived your tables from a FEMM model?

That being said, my torque statements regarding the actual curve following a sinusoidal path may be incorrect. Mentally I see the torque curve as two quarters of a circle. Take a circle and quarter it. Remove the lower right and upper left quadrants. Slide the upper right over into the upperleft and slide the lower left into the lower right quadrant spaces. This is what I see in my mind, a repeating pattern of these with a vertical line connecting the bottom of the curve with the top of the next succeeding curve. I tried to plot what I see using Excel in this Torque Plot but it clearly resembles your plot where it crosses zero torque. Confused How do I plot what I see in my head... Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:53 am PostPost subject:
korkskrew
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Longmont, CO

Reply with quote

My FEMM model of Al's WhipMag test rig is here.
Edit: If you want them my rotor torque table is here, and the stator torque table is here. There is a 270 degree offset on the stator angle between these tables and Harvey's description because the tables correspond to the angles in the FEMM model.

The phasing for my graph was to your 18 step description above.


Last edited by korkskrew on Fri May 09, 2008 3:31 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:56 am PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:

How do I plot what I see in my head... Razz


Stop that! Now you're starting to sound like me. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 3:05 am PostPost subject:
korkskrew
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 106
Location: Longmont, CO

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Even better, I'd like to see some real torque measurements from one of the sustained AGW whipmag runs (Al, can you do this?).

Ah, there's the rub. If anyone could devise an experiment method that could map the actual torque curve, I'm sure Al would be all over it in a heart beat. The results of that experiment would answer many questions (and I'm sure would lead to many others).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Fri May 09, 2008 5:45 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

korkskrew wrote:
overconfident wrote:
Even better, I'd like to see some real torque measurements from one of the sustained AGW whipmag runs (Al, can you do this?).

Ah, there's the rub. If anyone could devise an experiment method that could map the actual torque curve, I'm sure Al would be all over it in a heart beat. The results of that experiment would answer many questions (and I'm sure would lead to many others).


Accelerometers?

Laser interferometry?

Both?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 6:23 am PostPost subject:
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

Hmm that dip reminded me of the scope shot on the temp page. sense_2t.JPG

I have tried to reply to this four times, will have to let what is in my mind (a scary place) get converted to words. LOL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 6:26 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

lostcauses wrote:
Hmm that dip reminded me of the scope shot on the temp page. sense_2t.JPG

I have tried to reply to this four times, will have to let what is in my mind (a scary place) get converted to words. LOL


Yep, they are both caused by the same thing - a gap between rotor magnets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 10:26 am PostPost subject:
Frank
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 360
Location: Harrow, England

Reply with quote

lostcauses wrote:
" Q: What do you make of the fact that during AGW the stator is very sensitive and drops out under the slightest perturbation? "
...

During the AGW phase the fields are in repulsion. North facing North; South facing South. Repulsion is inherently unstable.
To take an example from structural engineering:-
The load a long column will take in tension is unaffected by length.
A long column in tension is inherently stable.
In compression on the other hand a long column is inherently unstable. The longer it is the lower the load it will support without buckling.

I suppose the corollary is that the shorter the distance between the magnets and the wider the magnets, the more stable AGW will be.
What is the distance/area ratio for typical rigs?
_________________

instaurare omnia in Christo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
Fri May 09, 2008 11:29 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Harvey wrote:

How do I plot what I see in my head... Razz


Stop that! Now you're starting to sound like me. Wink


http://urad.net/forums/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=35&fullsize=1

This is what I visualize the torque curve to be.
The sharp upward rise is at the eqitorial pass and the midpoint of the curve is midpoint between rotor magnets.

I hope that helps. Confused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 11:49 am PostPost subject:
Harvey
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 1927

Reply with quote

Frank wrote:
lostcauses wrote:
" Q: What do you make of the fact that during AGW the stator is very sensitive and drops out under the slightest perturbation? "
...

During the AGW phase the fields are in repulsion. North facing North; South facing South. Repulsion is inherently unstable.
To take an example from structural engineering:-
The load a long column will take in tension is unaffected by length.
A long column in tension is inherently stable.
In compression on the other hand a long column is inherently unstable. The longer it is the lower the load it will support without buckling.

I suppose the corollary is that the shorter the distance between the magnets and the wider the magnets, the more stable AGW will be.
What is the distance/area ratio for typical rigs?


Actually the stator migrates through an asymmetrical simulataneous repulsion / attraction into an attraction / repulsion during each 180 traversal. There is a shift at the midpoint between rotor magnets from positive torque (supporting AGW) to negative torque (working against AGW). If the momentum of the stator is sufficient it will shear through the negative torque part of the cycle. A change in stator momentum will cause the shearing to fail and all foward momentum will be absorbed by the rotor during the negative torque interaction in just a few cycles.

AGW simply cannot work without shearing or flux re-routing.

I recommend the replicators to do controlled rundown tests in both GW and AGW to discover which mode produced the most drag on the rotor. Where shearing occurs, drag will be reduced.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 1:01 pm PostPost subject:
Frank
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 360
Location: Harrow, England

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:
Frank wrote:
lostcauses wrote:
" Q: What do you make of the fact that during AGW the stator is very sensitive and drops out under the slightest perturbation? "
...

During the AGW phase the fields are in repulsion. North facing North; South facing South. Repulsion is inherently unstable.
To take an example from structural engineering:-
The load a long column will take in tension is unaffected by length.
A long column in tension is inherently stable.
In compression on the other hand a long column is inherently unstable. The longer it is the lower the load it will support without buckling.

I suppose the corollary is that the shorter the distance between the magnets and the wider the magnets, the more stable AGW will be.
What is the distance/area ratio for typical rigs?


Actually the stator migrates through an asymmetrical simultaneous repulsion / attraction into an attraction / repulsion during each 180 traversal. There is a shift at the midpoint between rotor magnets from positive torque (supporting AGW) to negative torque (working against AGW). If the momentum of the stator is sufficient it will shear through the negative torque part of the cycle. A change in stator momentum will cause the shearing to fail and all forward momentum will be absorbed by the rotor during the negative torque interaction in just a few cycles.

AGW simply cannot work without shearing or flux re-routing.

Agreed. Smile

And a long column cannot work (support a load) without internal shearing (bending to compensate unavoidable eccentricity)
and stress (a two-way flux) path re-routing.

My answer to the question lostcauses asked was intended to address the instablity question and its implications,
i.e. the wood, rather than the trees. Wink

Quote:
I recommend the replicators to do controlled rundown tests in both GW and AGW to discover which mode produced the most drag on the rotor. Where shearing occurs, drag will be reduced.

And if the drag is reduced then over the time span that the drag is reduced the rotor will turn faster than it would have done had drag not been reduced. So there must have been a reduction in retardation. A reduction in retardation is an acceleration. Maybe AGR is the clue that Steorn followed up in their motor investigations.
_________________

instaurare omnia in Christo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:31 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Harvey wrote:

http://urad.net/forums/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=35&fullsize=1

This is what I visualize the torque curve to be.
The sharp upward rise is at the eqitorial pass and the midpoint of the curve is midpoint between rotor magnets.


Helps a lot. Mighty steep curve during the shear. I take it this is for AGW, stator-only. Now, if we could plot the rotor and overlay it. Then add a 3rd dimension for time. Speeds vary and if we introduce artificial dwell at certain points, it will vary even more.

To test this, we need to sense rotor and stator angular positions and torques, plot against time and overlay the stator and rotor charts. Anyone up to the task?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 2:35 pm PostPost subject:
overconfident
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 1121

Reply with quote

Frank wrote:

A reduction in retardation is an acceleration.


Not unless there is also an applied force. Where is the force, Frank?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 09, 2008 4:23 pm PostPost subject:
Frank
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 360
Location: Harrow, England

Reply with quote

overconfident wrote:
Frank wrote:

A reduction in retardation is an acceleration.


Not unless there is also an applied force. Where is the force, Frank?

The stator force of repulsion, of course, which dominates during AGR.

Repulsion is active. Attraction is passive. Compressive strain energy is positive. Tensile strain energy is negative.
_________________

instaurare omnia in Christo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
Fri May 09, 2008 4:56 pm PostPost subject:
lostcauses
Major Contributor
Major Contributor


Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 871
Location: NM

Reply with quote

Account for the friction increase and decrease (bearings) on the shear and normal forces folks. Also why I am looking at a magnetic controlled friction device. The repulsive area is not were this would gain speed, but inertia would have to carry it through. The reason why this thing has to have some speed to get it in the AGW action. What is the forces of friction in al's set up on bearing friction with weight and torque and field interaction?

Remember the magnet bearing combos folks. Some magnets work, some bearings work. Magnets are easy to see why as variation happen. Why the bearings? Ahh yes again the variation in the friction. Some may even be such that they have race and ball variations. Even for that it is such these are running in a varying magnetic fields: some shield better from the effects than others, etc.

To get it to add to the rotor speed the friction at the time of attraction for a time, friction should be higher on the stator so the effect is to the rotor, but not so much it can stop the inertia to carry through on the stator during shear.

Thinking on a stationary rotor: using a revolving plate to hold the revolving stator may be one solution and easer to time this thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | WhipMag Discussion/Development
View previous topic
View next topic
Display posts from previous:   




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum