]]>
And you are right on track there. The vaveforms are EXACTLY as you stated, which is pretty much what is going on.
AlaskaStar
Statistics: Posted by AlaskaStar — Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:54 pm
]]>
Because you have a permanant magnet at the end of the coil's core, when the iron rod first approaches the end of the coil, the flux density of the coil drops as the field lines are now moving to the outside edge of the iron rod. This will cause a current to be produced in the coil for the first part of the cycle's wave. Then as the rod moves toward the center, the field density increases and then decreases as the rod leaves the other side of the coil on the second part of the wave.
Now here comes the good bit. Once the rod leaves the effective strected range of the magnet coil, the magnetic field snaps back to it's original position creating another, big, fat, pulse of voltage/current in the coils.
Am I on the right track here?
Now one thing that you haven't mentioned is the effect of the magnetic field on the iron rod. I think it is Lenz's Law that states when a conductor passes through a magnetic field a voltage is induced into the moving conductor. Now with waht that law states, what prevents us from grabbing some more power from that rod?
Statistics: Posted by Jehu — Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:51 am
]]>
]]>
Think about a large 10:1 transformer. This type drops voltage, but increases amperage. Now go with a 1:10 transformer (typically found in automotive ignition systems) you gain voltage but lose your amperage.
This is because they are wound on an Iron core. Now do it with a magnet. You gain your voltage and keep your amperage on the 1:10 system. You can keep your voltage and amperage on the 10:1 system.
NOTE: I AM PULLING 10:1 and 1:10 RATIOS OUT OF MY ASS HERE FOR CONVERSATION SAKE.
The power doesn't come from some cosmic energy. It comes from degaussing the magnet. The magnet WILL DIE. It is a DEATH SENTENCE for the magnet. Magnets are cheap, and the power from them lowers your cost in the end.
AlaskaStar
Statistics: Posted by AlaskaStar — Sun Oct 19, 2008 12:25 am
]]>
from www.rip-n-guitar.com
from someones photobucket
humm, got me thinking now.
<5mins later>
Ok, I just grabbed my Bass and chucked my Multimeter onto the end of the Guitar lead. Giving the E string (the big thick one) a good upwards pluck I got 179mV AC out of it. Giving all the 4 strings a strum I got over 200mV AC out of it.
The Bass is a Session oad series P-Bass (Fender P-Bass rip off) and the Multimeter is a Fluke 112 True RMS meter.
Statistics: Posted by Jehu — Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:20 am
]]>
]]>
There is a forum, and my Friend Scott Stevens owns/ runs it.
He is 2 years younger than I and he actually tries some pretty exotic stuff with the experiments he does.
There is a 'Donated only' section for PAID MEMBERSHIP. I donated about $2K worth of materials (including a car that was next to new condition...) and got membership in that end of the board.
You wouldn't have to donate that much though, far far far less than I did. Besides, he lives next to my MOTHER IN LAW!! Great for watching her hair get grayer by the day as he blows stuff up!
Seriously, you oughta check it out. The turbines he has are awesome. I helped install a set of them.
Back on topic...I could cut/ paste my post from there to here.
AlaskaStar
Statistics: Posted by AlaskaStar — Sat Oct 18, 2008 4:09 am
]]>
Is the iron rod connected to the coils or just free like the bedini magnets?
Any circuitry like in the Bedini circuit or do the coils go straight to the multimeter/load? I take it the second coil is to increase the current available from the coil?
Statistics: Posted by Jehu — Sat Oct 18, 2008 3:35 am
]]>
Two windings on EACH coil is correct. There is 2 coils PER MAGNET. Similar in configuration to the J. Naudin site/ John Bedini, but different in actual operation.
I found that I can degauss over a period of time and gather/ garner electricity in the middle.
AWG 41 wire, Magnet Type, with NEMA rated poly-coating.
AlaskaStar
Statistics: Posted by AlaskaStar — Sat Oct 18, 2008 1:01 am
]]>
Flashbang, I was also giving more thought to your comment about the flywheel on most engines and why not a linear (up/down) alternator instead. Think about how the a piston - or the mag in a shake flash light - moves. Once it gets to the top of its stroke, you have to put more energy into it to reverese its direction. IMHO it seems like that is a large waste of energy. And you can't rely on gravity to help you much because of the short stroke length.
Now this makes me think, would it be better to use a turbine instead? because or its rotary motion conserving any kinetic energy could it actually be moer effecient?
Statistics: Posted by Jehu — Fri Oct 17, 2008 10:04 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
Flashbang, usually a flywheel is used as an energy storage device, storing the energy produced as kinetic energy or inertia.
But your idea of a linear alternator is good coz it doesn't need much power to be run. Also with them shakelights, I think I might have a good idea to make more power from them. Get an non-magnetic spring and place it at either end of the tube so the magnet bounces back up again thus conserving energy and making them more effecient. All the shake lights I've seen just let it whack against each end of the tube. This may also silence them somewhat.
Statistics: Posted by Jehu — Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:23 am
]]>