A most unusual 96 pole generator. Let's get it working.

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
I'd like to focus more on the mechanical aspect of this all. Like I asked about. And also about the it being a hallbach array or not.
I'd have to say no to the Hallbach array. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

And a better drawing of your disc could get better answers to that question. You call it a disc but what Panic Mode showed looks more like a cone. I'm not trying to put you down on this but it seems to fly in the face of all I've ever seen about PM's.
 

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
@quitenoob I don't know if this will be of any help, but KJmagnetics has a lot of stuff about permanent magnets, it's their business after all. https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=doubled-forces

When you Google effects of forcing like poles of a magnet together most say that over time it will make the magnets weaker, due to demagnetization. From what I know about magnetic poles and fields, to make a magnet or field stronger you stack them N to S, not N to N or S to S.
 

ci139

Joined Jul 11, 2016
1,898
I'll stick to my gut feeling until I learn I was wrong
forced an up vote // -- it might be , that in the assembly process you hit some exotic configuration - the problem is to recognize and chart one when it occurs = stop the experiment and under any circumstances NOT proceed until you cleared it out . . . while ago i run a buck experiment - at first the output was a high power 1 . . . then it diminished . . . i assume i magnetized the relatively tiny core - so it started acting as https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=magnetic+amplifier
(i just presented my arguments - how you take 'em is up to you . . . can't help with that)
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
I'd have to say no to the Hallbach array. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array

And a better drawing of your disc could get better answers to that question. You call it a disc but what Panic Mode showed looks more like a cone. I'm not trying to put you down on this but it seems to fly in the face of all I've ever seen about PM's.
I also think it is not an Hallbach array. Reason being that a Hallbach array is meant to increase the field on one side while decreasing it on the other. Hence it is used in particle accelerators (*citation needed)

Please hold on and I will post my latest design for the magnet holder disk. Give it a decade or 10 please ;) I will make sure to color code the fields.
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
When you Google effects of forcing like poles of a magnet together most say that over time it will make the magnets weaker, due to demagnetization. From what I know about magnetic poles and fields, to make a magnet or field stronger you stack them N to S, not N to N or S to S.
I really respect that you are trying to help. Please never stop.
But I've already done research and the phenomena you describe only applies to a magnet being exposed to an incredibly more powerful field than it's own.
Here we have similar magnets (sure their power is not scientifically equal) so there is no danger at all that the magnets will lose power regardless of the time they are repelling each other. As soon I am confronted with a scientific paper that states differently I will apologize for being stubborn again.

ADDITION: And let's not forget that if we have a traditional axial magnet arrangement. Then the diameter will need to increase to allow for coils to have any meaningful number of winds.
Resulting in a larger distance between magnets. Thus a weaker field to penetrate the coils.
I have thought about this for so long I am sure I am correct. However I am always open to evidence to the contrary. I am human after all and make mistakes
 

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
I am human after all and make mistakes
As am I, and am trying to help, I'm interested in magnets myself.

But the magnet weakening over time is something that can and does happen with similar magnets having similar poles together.

Next question, and again maybe I'm missing it but why do you put only N poles together? Even if it strengthens the N pole it takes both N and S to generate AC. So one weak and one strong pole will/should hinder, not enhance.

I also don't think or even imagine you getting the expected volt output at such low RPMs, or if you do it won't have very high amps. A lot of things that seem to fit our own logic don't happen in real life.
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
and am trying to help
I know you are, as are others, that is why I am so thankful. But I have to stay focused.

But the magnet weakening over time is something that can and does happen with similar magnets having similar poles together.
I am all ear so scientific data . ;) until that time my stance remains firmly ingrained in my brain ;)

Next question, and again maybe I'm missing it but why do you put only N poles together? Even if it strengthens the N pole it takes both N and S to generate AC. So one weak and one strong pole will/should hinder, not enhance.
Nah brother. Not only the N poles are repelling. Every pole is. I just drew only 2 out of a 260 degree array of 96 magnets.
Just imagine the photo of the disk you saw. and then take a look of my, rudimentary to say the least drawing. Now image the drawing if we have a full 360 disk.
Both the N's and the S's are oriented to repel
I also don't think or even imagine you getting the expected volt output at such low RPMs, or if you do it won't have very high amps. A lot of things that seem to fit our own logic don't happen in real life.
Can you please back that up with scientific data? or, as I know that kind of stuf is hard to get by, at least motivate that a bit more?

I have done many tests and that makes me say what I say. Sure those tests were done ages ago it seems as thing project has been VERY slow since my printer blew up. But still I have to seen or heard anything that makes me think differently.

As always, thank you for contributing and please never stop doing that.
 

MrSalts

Joined Apr 2, 2020
2,767
Can you please motivate?
Probably not motivate, but I can elaborate.

setting up a row of magnets all pointing the same direction (forced into position because of repulsion) makes one wide pole of "S" and one wide pole of "N". Gently tilting each magnet in the row to make a circle doesn't suddenly give you 96 poles. It is still one wide inner pole and one wide outer pole. Moving this wide (curved) pole across a coil results in a broadly distributed magnetic field with minor changes. You'll see 96 gaps and poles in the voltage generated but the amplitude will be very minor compared to the power that could be generated by passing 48 alternating "S" poles interlaced with 48 "N" poles past the coils. The power comes from the much greater change in magnetic fields caused by each pole.
 

atferrari

Joined Jan 6, 2004
4,764
Right now you have a two-pole magnet (inner radius and outer radius - draw out the magnetic fields to see what happens. Or, set it flat and lay a piece of white paper on top and sprinkle some of your iron powder over it to see where the lines of flus may be.
An obvious trick (that did not come to my mind) that could help to think of all this based on something real at sight.

Not an expert in all this myself I suspect that for the coils to "sense" one pole at a time should have a rather small diameter.

Do not take me too seriously. Just guessing.
 

MrSalts

Joined Apr 2, 2020
2,767
An obvious trick (that did not come to my mind) that could help to think of all this based on something real at sight.

Not an expert in all this myself I suspect that for the coils to "sense" one pole at a time should have a rather small diameter.

Do not take me too seriously. Just guessing.
Yes, the coils should be the size scale of each magnet diameter to avoid overlap with multiple magnets at the same time.
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
Probably not motivate, but I can elaborate.

setting up a row of magnets all pointing the same direction (forced into position because of repulsion) makes one wide pole of "S" and one wide pole of "N". Gently tilting each magnet in the row to make a circle doesn't suddenly give you 96 poles. It is still one wide inner pole and one wide outer pole. Moving this wide (curved) pole across a coil results in a broadly distributed magnetic field with minor changes. You'll see 96 gaps and poles in the voltage generated but the amplitude will be very minor compared to the power that could be generated by passing 48 alternating "S" poles interlaced with 48 "N" poles past the coils. The power comes from the much greater change in magnetic fields caused by each pole.
You might be on to something to help me better with better wording. Nothing I have read makes me think differently about being on a roll or not. But if you can somehow graphically represent what it is you are saying it might helo me avoid confusion in terms of wording
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
Yes, the coils should be the size scale of each magnet diameter to avoid overlap with multiple magnets at the same time.
My dear brother. I really wanted to focus on the generator.
The amount of work I have already put into the coils is out of this world.

I am currently determine how thick a coil can be given the limited amount of space.

first a side angle shot of the array
1652811932391.png

That leads to the true next question I have.

Please see this image from a long time ago.
1652812083851.png

I am not asking whats wrong with this. I think I already know. But this is to give you guys a heads up that there is MANY more that I am doing that I have yet to include to this forum.

Question being. What best way of testing how far and by what means we can optimally extend field strength.

I have powder, I have a tesla meter and what I do not have I can get if not 401k breaking.
ADDITION: for the rest of the world. 401k was meant to say: if it does not leave one without any cash for the future
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
Yes, the coils should be the size scale of each magnet diameter to avoid overlap with multiple magnets at the same time.
Sure, but I am now wondering rather than to go with a 3 phase configuration for the coils as one can see.
Maybe I should go for a single phase configuration and then I have a much better time winding a wide yet small coil and also I would not have to make 3 but only one transformer.
Because believe you me. This generator is going to output some insane voltages!! at low RPM
 

MrSalts

Joined Apr 2, 2020
2,767
Sure, but I am now wondering rather than to go with a 3 phase configuration for the coils as one can see.
Maybe I should go for a single phase configuration and then I have a much better time winding a wide yet small coil and also I would not have to make 3 but only one transformer.
Because believe you me. This generator is going to output some insane voltages!! at low RPM
The moving magnets with a brushless design will need some switching circuitry for commutation of the coils unless there is a topology I'm not thinking through correctly.
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
Ye
The moving magnets with a brushless design will need some switching circuitry for commutation of the coils unless there is a topology I'm not thinking through correctly.
Yes you have gotten things not quite correct. We are talking about an AC generator. the debate about whether it should be a 3 or single phase one is still ongoing.

Your DC reference (comutotaor or whatr ever it is called) more applicable in the motor side of things. Not in the generator side of things
 

MrSalts

Joined Apr 2, 2020
2,767
Ye

Yes you have gotten things not quite correct. We are talking about an AC generator. the debate about whether it should be a 3 or single phase one is still ongoing.

Your DC reference (comutotaor or whatr ever it is called) more applicable in the motor side of things. Not in the generator side of things
Either way, your power generation will go way up by alternating magnetic fields rather than the minor ripple caused by mono-polar alignment and small gaps between magnets in your current design.
 

Thread Starter

quitenoob

Joined Mar 27, 2022
262
Either way, your power generation will go way up by alternating magnetic fields rather than the minor ripple caused by mono-polar alignment and small gaps between magnets in your current design.
that's a bald statement. I would like you to demonstrate more underlying knowledge before I go again second guess my self.

let me phrase it like this then.

What do you think thins arrangement can churn out in terms of volts. given 100 winds per coil. And having .350 tesla field strength running over them at 192hZ

i think I know because I have been slaving nights at end in my garage doing experiments.

Still, I really want one to keep contributing. But let's keep it more fundated if we can ok?
 
Top