Wesley W.

GARY Magnetic Motor

Harper's New Monthly Magazine (March 1879, pp. 601-605)

With an ordinary horseshoe magnet, a bit of soft iron, and a common shingle-nail, a practical inventor, who for years has been pondering over the power lying dormant in the magnet, now demonstrates as his discovery a fact of the utmost importance in magnetic science, which has hitherto escaped the observation of both scientists and practical electricians, namely, the existence of a neutral line in the magnetic field --- a line where the polarity of an induced magnet ceases, and beyond which it changes. With equally simple appliances he shows the practical utilization of his discovery in such a way as to produce a magnetic motor, thus opening up a bewildering prospect of the possibilities before us in revolutionizing the present methods of motive power through the substitution of a wonderfully cheap and safe agent. By his achievement Mr. Wesley W. Gary has quite upset the theories of magnetic philosophy hitherto prevailing, and lifted magnetism out from among the static forces where science has placed it, to the position of a dynamic power. The Gary Magnetic Motor, the result of Mr. Gary's long years of study, in a word, a simple contrivance which furnishes its own power, and will run until worn out by the force of friction, coming dangerously near to that awful bugbear, perpetual motion. The old way of looking at magnetism has been to regard it as a force like that of gravity, the expenditure of an amount of energy equal to its attraction being required to overcome it; consequently its power could not be availed of. Accepting this theory, it would be as idle to attempt to make use of the permanent magnet as a motive power as to try to lift oneself by one's bootstraps. But Mr. Gary, ignoring theories, toiled away at his experiments with extraordinary patience and

perseverance, and at last made the discovery which seems to necessitate reconstruction of the accepted philosophy. To understand the operation of the Gary Magnetic Motor, it is necessary first to comprehend thoroughly the principle underlying it --- the existence of the neutral line and the change in polarity, which Mr. Gary demonstrates by his horseshoe magnet, his bit of soft iron, and his common shingle-nail. This is illustrated in Figure 1. The latter A represents a compound magnet; B, a piece of soft iron made fast to a lever with a pivoted joint in the center, the iron becoming a magnet by induction when in the magnetic field of the permanent magnet; C, a small nail that drops off when the iron, or induced magnet, is on the neutral line. By pressing the finger on the lever at D the iron is raised above the neutral line. Now let the nail be applied to the end of the induced magnet at E; it clings to it, and the point is turned inward toward the pole of the magnet directly below it, thus indicating that the induced magnet is of opposite polarity from the permanent one. Now let the iron be gradually lowered toward the magnet; the nail drops off at the neutral line, and now its point is turned outward, or away from the magnetic pole below. In this way Mr. Gary proves that the polarity of an induced magnet is changed by passing over the neutral line without coming into contact. In the experiment strips of paper are placed under the soft iron, or induced magnet, as shown in the figure, to prevent contact. The neutral line is shown to extend completely around the magnet; and a piece of soft iron placed on this line will entirely cut off the attraction of the magnet from anything beyond. The action of this cutting off is illustrated in Figure 2. The letters A and B represent the one a balanced magnet and the other a stationary magnet. The magnet A is balanced on a joint, and the two magnets are placed with opposite poles facing each other. The letter C is a piece of thin or sheet iron, as the case may be, made fast to a lever with a joint in the center, and so adjusted that the iron will move on the neutral line in front of the poles of the stationary magnet. By pressing the finger on the lever at D the iron is raised, thus withdrawing the cut-off so that the magnet A is attracted and drawn upward by the magnet B. Remove the finger, and the cut-off drops between the poles, and in consequence, the magnet A drops again. The same movement of magnets can be obtained by placing a piece of iron across the poles of the magnet B after the magnet A has been drawn near to it. The magnet A will thereupon immediately fall away; but the iron can only be balanced, and the balance not disturbed, by the action of the magnets upon each other when the iron is on the neutral line, and does not move nearer or father away from the magnet B. It may not be found easy to demonstrate these principles at the first trials. But it should be borne in mind that it took the inventor himself four years after he had discovered the principle to adjust the delicate balance so as to get a machine which would go. Now, however, that he has thought out the entire problem, and frankly tells the world how he has solved it, any person at all skillful and patient, and with a little knowledge of mechanics, may soon succeed in demonstrating it for himself. The principle underlying the motor and the method by which a motion is obtained now being explained, let us examine the inventor's working models. The beam movement is the simplest, and by it, it is claimed, the most power can be obtained from the magnets. This is illustrated in Figure 3. The letter A represents a stationary magnet, and B the soft iron, or induced magnet, fastened to a lever with a joint in the center, and so balanced that the stationary magnet will not quite draw it over the neutral line. The letter C represents a beam constructed of a double magnet, clamped together in the center and balanced on a joint. One end is set opposite the stationary magnet, with like poles separating each other. The beam is so balanced that when the soft iron B on the magnet A is below the neutral line, it (the beam) is repelled down to the lower dotted line indicated by the

letter D. The beam strikes the lever E with the pin F attached, and drives it (the lever) against the pin G, which is attached to the soft iron B, which is thus driven above the neutral line, where its polarity changes. The soft iron now attracts the beam magnet C to the upper dotted line, whereupon it (the soft iron) is again drawn down over the neutral line, and its polarity again changing, the beam magnet C is again repelled to the lower line, continuing so to move until it is stopped or worn out. This simply illustrates the beam movement. To gain a large amount of power the inventor would place groups of compound stationary magnets above and below the beam at each side, and the soft iron magnets, in this case four in number, connected by rods passing down between the poles of the stationary magnets. A "Pitman" connecting the beam with a flywheel to change the reciprocating into a rotary motion would be the means of transmitting the power. With magnets of great size an enormous power, he claims, could be obtained in this way. One of the daintiest and prettiest of Mr. Gary's models is that illustrating the action of a rotary motor. There is a peculiar fascination in watching the action of this neat little contrivance. It is shown in Figure 4. The letter A represents an upright magnet hung on a perpendicular shaft; B, the horizontal magnets; C, the soft iron which is fastened to the lever D; E, the pivoted joint on which the lever is balanced; and F, the thumb-screw for adjusting the movement of the soft iron. This soft iron is so balanced that as the north pole of the upright magnet A swings around opposite and above the south pole of the horizontal magnets B, it drops below the neutral line and changes its polarity. As the magnet A turns around until its north pole is opposite and above the north pole of the magnets B, the soft iron is drawn upward and over the neutral line, so that its polarity is changed again. At this point the polarity in the soft iron C is like that of the permanent magnets A and B. To start the engine the magnet A is turned around to the last-named position, the poles opposite like poles of the magnet B; then one pole of the magnet A is pushed a little forward and over the soft iron. This rotary magnet is repelled by the magnets B, and also by the soft iron; it turns around until the unlike poles of the permanent magnets become opposite; as they attract each other the soft iron drops below the neutral line, the polarity changes and becomes opposite to that of the magnets B and like that of the magnet A; the momentum gained carries the pole of A a little forward of B and over the soft iron, which, now being of like polarity, repels it around to the starting point, completing the revolution. The magnets A and B now compound or unite their forces, and the soft iron is again drawn up over the neutral line; its polarity is changed, and another revolution is made without any other force applied than the force of the magnets. The motion will continue until some outside force is applied to stop it, or until the machine is worn out. The result is the same as would be obtained were the magnets B removed and the soft iron coiled with wire, and battery force applied sufficient to give it the same power that it gets from the magnets B, and a current-changer applied to change the polarity. The power required to work the current-changer in this case would be in excess of the power demanded to move the soft iron over the neutral line, since no power is required from the revolving magnet under these circumstances, it being moved by the magnets compounding when like poles are opposite each other, three magnets thus attracting the iron. When opposite poles are near together, they attract each other and let the iron drop below the line. The soft iron, with its lever, is finely balanced at the joint, and has small springs applied and adjusted so as to balance it against the power of the magnets. In this working model the soft iron vibrates less than a fiftieth of an inch. This rotary motion is intended for use in small engines where light power is required, such as propelling sewing machines, for dental work, show windows, etc.

When Wesley Gary was a boy of nine years, the electric telegraph was in its infancy and the marvel of the day; and his father, who was a clergyman in Cortland County, New York, used to take up matters of general interest and make them the subject of an occasional lecture, among other things, giving much attention to the explanation of this new invention. To illustrate his remarks on the subject he employed an electromagnetic machine. This and his father's talk naturally excited the boy's curiosity, and he used to ponder much on the relations of electricity and magnetism, until he formed a shadowy idea that somehow they must become a great power in the world. He never lost his interest in the subject, though his rude experiments were interrupted for a while by the work of his young manhood. When the choice of a calling was demanded, he at first had a vague feeling that he would like to be an artist. "But", he says, "my friends would have thought that almost as useless and unpractical as to seek for perpetual motion." At last he went into the woods alumbering, and took contracts to clear large tracts of woodland in Western and Central New York, floating the timber down the canals to Troy. He followed this business for several years, when he was forced to abandon it by a serious attack of inflammatory rheumatism, brought about through exposure in the woods. And this, unfortunate as it must have seemed at the time, proved the turning-point in his life. His family physicians insisted that he must look for some other means of livelihood than lumbering. To the query, "What shall I do?" it was suggested that he might take to preaching, following in the footsteps of his father, and of a brother who had adopted the profession. But this he said he could never do; he would do his best to practice, but he couldn't preach. "Invent something, then," said the doctor. "There is no doubt in my mind that you were meant for an inventor." This was said in all seriousness, and Mr. Gary was at length persuaded that the doctor knew him better than he did himself. His thoughts naturally recurring to the experiments and dreams of his youth, he determined to devote all his energies to the problem. He felt more and more confident, as he dwelt on the matter, that a great force lay imprisoned within the magnet; that some time it must be unlocked and set to doing the world's work; that the key was hidden somewhere, and that he might find it as well as some one else. At Huntington, Pennsylvania, Mr. Gary made his first practical demonstration, and allowed his discovery to be examined and the fact published. He has long been satisfied, from his experiments, that if he could devise a "cut-off", the means of neutralizing the attractive power of a stationary magnet on another raised above it and adjusted on a pivot, unlike poles opposite, and so arrange this cut-off as to work automatically, he could produce motion in a balanced magnet. To this end he persistently experimented, and it was only about four years ago that he made the discovery, the key to his problem, which is the basis of his present motor, and upsets our philosophy. In experimenting one day with a piece of soft iron upon a magnet he made the discovery of the neutral line and the change of polarity. At first he gave little attention to the discovery of the change of polarity, not then recognizing its significance, being absorbed entirely by the possibilities the discovery of the neutral line opened up to him. Here was the point for his cut-off. For a while he experimented entirely with batteries, but in September, 1874, he succeeded in obtaining a movement independent of the battery. This was done on the principle illustrated in Figure 2. The balanced magnet, with opposite poles to the stationary magnet, was weighted so that the poles would fall down when not attracted by the stationary magnet. When it was attracted up to the stationary magnet, a spring was touched by the movement, and thus the lever with the soft iron was made to descend between the two magnets on the neutral line, and so cutting of the mutual attraction. Then the balanced magnet, responding to the force of gravitation, descended, and, when down, struck another spring, by means of which the cut-off was lifted back to its original position, and consequently the force of attraction between the magnets was again brought into play. In June, the following year, Mr. Gary exhibited

this continuous movement to a number of gentlemen, protecting himself by covering the cut-of with copper, so as to disguise the real material used, and prevent anyone from robbing him of his discovery. The publication in the local newspaper of the performance of the little machine, which was copied far and wide, excited much interest. But the inventor was by no means satisfied. He had succeeded in securing a continuous motion, but not in a practical motor. He had invented a unique plaything, but not a machine that would do a man's work. So he made further experiments in one direction and another, using for a long time the battery; and it was not until some time after he moved to Boston (which was about two years ago) that he was convinced that the point in the change of polarity, with which he was so little impressed when he first hit upon them along with his discovery of the neutral line, were the true ones to work upon. Thereafter his progress was most rapid, and in a little while he had constructed working models, not only to his own satisfaction, but to that of those experts who had the fairness to give them a critical and thorough examination, clearly demonstrating his ability to secure motion and power, as they had never before been secured, from self-feeding and self-acting machines. His claim, as he formally puts it, is this: "I have discovered that a straight piece of iron placed across the poles of a magnet, and near to their end, changes its polarity while in the magnetic field and before it comes in contact with the magnet, the fact being, however, that actual contact is guarded against. The conditions are that the thickness of the iron magnet must be proportioned to the power of the magnet, and that the neutral line, or line of change in the polarity of the iron, is nearer or more distant from the magnet according to the power of the latter and the thickness of the former. My whole discovery is based upon this change of polarity in the iron, with or without a battery." Power can be increased to any extent, or diminished, by the addition or withdrawal of magnets. Mr. Gary is 41 years old, having been born in 1837. During the years devoted to working out his problem he has supported himself by the proceeds from the sale of a few useful inventions made from time to time when he was forced to turn aside from his experiments to raise funds. From the sale of one of these inventions --- a simple little thing --- he realized something like $10,000. The announcement of the invention of the magnetic motor came at a moment when the electric light excitement was at its height. The holders of gas stocks were in a state of anxiety, and those who had given attention to the study of the principle of the new light expressed the belief that it was only the question of the cost of power used to generate the electricity for the light that stood in the way of its general introduction and substitution for gas. A prominent electrician, who was one day examining Mr. Gary's principle, asked if in the change of polarity he had obtained electric sparks. He said that he had, and the former then suggested that the principle be used in the construction of a magneto-electric machine, and that it might turn out to be superior to anything then in use. Acting on this suggestion, Mr. Gary set to work, and within a week had perfected a machine which apparently proved a marvel of efficiency and simplicity. In all previous machines electricity is generated by revolving a piece of soft iron in front of the poles of a permanent magnet. But to do this at a rate of speed high enough to produce sparks in such rapid succession as to keep up a steady current of electricity suitable for the light, considerable power is required. In Mr. Gary's machine, however, the piece of soft iron, or armature, coiled with wire, has only to be moved across the neutral line to secure the same result. Every time the polarity changes, a spark is produced. The slightest vibration is enough to secure this, and with each vibration two sparks are produced, just as with each revolution in the other method. An enormous volume can be secured with an expenditure of force so diminutive that a caged squirrel might furnish it. With the

employment of one of the smallest of the magnetic motors, power may be supplied and electricity generated at no expense beyond the cost of the machine. The announcement of the invention of the magnetic motor was naturally received with incredulity, although the recent achievements in mechanical science had prepared the public for almost anything, and it could not be very much astonished at whatever might come next. Some admitted that there might be something in it; others shrugged their shoulders and said, "Wait and see', while the scientific referred all questioners to the laws of magnetic science; and believers in book authority responded, "It can't be so, because the law says it can't." A few scientists, however, came forward, curious to see, and examined Mr. Gary's models; and when reports went out of the conversion of two or three of the most eminent among them, interest generally was awakened, and professors from Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology called, examined, and were impressed. More promptly than the scientists, capitalists moved; and before science had openly acknowledged the discovery and the principle of the invention, men of money were after Mr. Gary for the right to use the motor for various purposes: one wished to use it for clocks, another for sewing machines, others for dental engines, and so on. It is as yet too soon to speculate upon what may result from the discovery; but since it produces power in two ways, both directly by magnets and indirectly by the generation of unlimited electricity, it would seem that it really might become available in time for all purposes to which electricity might long ago have been devoted except for the great expense involved. Within one year after the invention of the telephone it was in practical use all over the world, from the United States to Japan. And it is not incredible that in 1880 one may be holding a magnetic motor in his pocket, running the watch which requires no winding up, and, seated in a railway car, be whirling across the continent behind a locomotive impelled by the same agency.

Canadian Patent #10239 (July 16, 1879) Improvement on Magneto Electric Machines Wesley W. Gary

The primary object of my invention is to facilitate and greatly lessen the expense of generating or developing electrical currents by dynamo machines, and instruments, by so improving their construction and modes of action that they may be operated by a very small amount of power and at high rates of speed. With this end in view, the invention consists broadly, in so constructing the machine or instrument that the soft iron armature or core used with the induction coil, is operated constantly in one and the same magnetic field, and caused to be polarized and depolarized or to change its polarity without departing from such field. Many machines have been hitherto constructed for the purpose of developing electrical currents, through the medium of a soft iron armature coiled with wire and subjected to and magnetized by the inductive influence of a permanent magnet, the armature or the magnet being moved, one in relation to the other, in such manner as to cause the armature to change or lose its polarity rapidly and at frequent intervals. In order to secure this reversal or loss of polarity in the armature without having it actually touch the magnet it has been hitherto considered necessary that the armature should be carried into and out of the magnetic field or field of attraction of the magnet; or else from the field of one pole into that of the other. This operation required the movement of the armature a long distance, necessitating the expenditure of a large amount of power, limited the frequency of the polar changes, and precluded the full utilization of the magnetic influence. My invention derives its value mainly from the fact that I do not carry the armature out of the magnetic field, but operate it wholly therein, and secure by a very slight movement the same or better results than those secured in existing machines. My invention is based upon the fact hitherto unknown, that there exists in the magnetic field or field of attraction of every magnet, at a greater or less distance from the magnet, what I term a neutral line at which soft iron will not be polarized, or magnetized, by the inductive action of the magnet. The location of the neutral line as regards its distance from the magnet differs in different cases, the line approaching the magnet in proportion to the increase in strength of the magnet and receding as the size or cubic contents of the armature is increased. The location of the line may be readily determined by applying a coil and galvanometer to the iron and moving it to and from the magnet; or by applying a dipping needle to the armature and noting the point at which the needle assumes a horizontal position or by allowing a tack or other small piece of iron to adhere to the armature and noting the point at which the tack is released by the same. I have discovered that iron placed on this line although subject to a strong attractive influence on the part of the magnet, remains unpolarized, but that upon moving it from the line in either direction it instantly assumes a polarity. I have also discovered that the polarity of the iron differs on opposite sides of the line and changes on crossing the same, so that if the iron placed in close

proximity to the magnet and polarized, by induction, be carried outward, it will lose polarity on reaching the neutral line, and then assume a reverse polarity as it passes from the line outward. By availing myself of this fact and arranging the armature to vibrate from the neutral line inward, or from the neutral line outward, or to work across the line, and in connection with a commutator, I secure the required changes in the polarity of the armature and produce the same results by a very short movement that are now secured by the longer one. In constructing machines and instruments on my plan, the details may be constructed and arranged in any manner desired provided the armature has the above described action in relation to the magnet. The best results are secured by using a horse-shoe magnet, compound if desired, extending the armature across its two poles on one side, and then arranging the armature to move only between the neutral line and the magnet. In the accompanying drawings, Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4, represent the relation of the neutral line to the magnet and magnetic field, and also the depolarization and change of polarity of the armature. Figure 5 represents a perspective view of one form of magneto-electric machine constructed on my plan. Referring to the drawings, A, represents a base frame provided with uprights, a, and sustaining in a fixed position a horizontal permanent magnet B, of the ordinary compound horse-shoe type. C, represents a flat horizontal armature of soft iron lying above and extending across both poles of the magnet and secured rigidly to one end of a horizontal vibrating lever D, which is sustained by a transverse shaft b, mounted in the standards a. This lever is provided with an upright arm c, the upper end of which is slotted to receive and is vibrated by an eccentric, d, mounted on a shaft, c, the end of which is provided with a small pinion f, and driven at a high speed by a large gear wheel E, as shown. This arrangement causes the rotation of wheel E to vibrate the lever and move the armature to and from the magnet with great rapidity. Around the armature, which is preferably reduced and rounded at the middle, there is wound an ordinary wire induction coil G. In order to balance or sustain the armature against the attractive influence of the magnet and avoid the necessity of employing a driving power sufficient to overcome the same, I place below the vibrating lever two or more springs H, of different heights, arranged to come into action successively against the under side of the lever and offer an increasing resistance as the armature approaches the magnet-and becomes subject to an increasing attraction. Under this arrangement it is only necessary, in order to vibrate the armature, to apply a very slight amount of power, an amount sufficient to overcome the friction and the inertia of the moving parts. In adjusting the machine it is preferred to vibrate the armature, from the neutral line, the position shown in Fig. 2, inward toward the magnet, to the position shown, in Figure 4, in which case the armature will be polarized as it leaves the line and depolarized as it again reaches the line. Owing to the fact that the armature requires a very slight movement, in some cases not exceeding the fiftieth part of an inch; and the fact that it is balanced or sustained against the attractive influence of

the magnet, I am able to drive the machine at a very high speed by the application of very little power; and owing to the fact that the armature is operated only in close proximity to the magnet where the attraction and inductive action are very powerful, I produce in the wire induced currents of great quantity and intensity. If for any special reason it may be considered desirable so to do, the parts may be adjusted to vibrate the armature from the neutral line outward without passing beyond the magnetic field. Or if desired, the parts may so adjusted that the armature shall vibrate to and from the magnet across the neutral line, without passing from the magnetic field. In such case there will be two direct currents or impulses induced during the outward, and two during the inward movement or the armature. For the purpose of producing a continuous current, a commutator or current changer of any suitable or ordinary construction may be used. This commutator may be actuated in any suitable manner, one simple arrangement being shown in the drawing, in which the rear end of the lever is arranged to vibrate an arm, J, the end of which is provided with two conducting fingers, K and L, to which the ends of the coil are connected. The fingers play across three metal plates, M, N and O, which are connected, the first two with the conductor P, and the other with conductor O, as shown, the arrangement being such that the course of the current is changed as the current in the coil reverses, so as to produce a continuous current in the conductors P and O. It is to be noted that in all cases the construction of the machine is to be such as to utilize the depolarization of the armature at the neutral line; that the armature is to remain within the magnetic field; and that it is unnecessary to move the armature through the entire field. The arrangement of the vibrating armature across both poles of the magnet as shown, enables me to make constant use of both poles and the entire armature, thus utilizing the full power and effect of the magnet. The best results are secured when the armature consists as shown in the drawing, of two plates or pieces riveted together. As before stated, the form, construction, and arrangement of the parts may be modified as desired, provided the armature operates within the magnetic field, and provided also, the current produced by the depolarization of the armature at the neutral line is made available for use. Having thus described my invention what I claim is: The herein described method of producing induced electrical currents, consisting in vibrating an iron armature coiled with wire, to and from the neutral line in the field of a permanent magnet. In a magneto-electric machine or instrument, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature arranged to move wholly within the magnetic field, to and from the neutral line. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and an armature, and operating mechanism arranged to vibrate the armature to and from the magnet, from or across the neutral line, without departing from the magnetic field. The combination in a magneto-electric machine, of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature vibrated only from the neutral line toward the magnet and back to the neutral line.

In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature arranged to vibrate to and from and to stop upon the neutral line in the magnetic field. The combination in a magneto-electric machine of permanent magnet, an induction coil, an iron armature vibrating wholly within the magnetic field, to or across the neutral line, and an automatic commutator arranged to change the course of the induced current when the armature is upon the neutral line. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil and armature, and an automatic commutator or current changer arranged to move as the armature reaches the neutral line in the magnetic field. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an armature moving to and from the same and a spring or its equivalent arranged to counteract the attractive influence of the magnet. The combination in a magneto-electric machine of a permanent magnet, an armature arranged to move to and from the magnet, and springs or equivalent devices, arranged to offer an increasing resistance to the armature as it approaches the magnet. The combination of the permanent magnet, the induction coil, and the armature extending across both poles of the magnet, and arranged to move to or from them both at the same time. The combination of the permanent magnet, the armature extending across both poles of the magnet, the induction coil, the vibrating lever, and the eccentric arranged, to vibrate the lever as shown. Wesley Ward Gary Washington DC February 27, 1879

Canadian Patent 190,206 (May 1, 1877) Wesley W. Gary Improvement in Electromagnetic Motors

To all whom it may concern:

Be it known that I, Wesley W. Gary, of Huntington, in the county of Huntington and State of Pennsylvania, have invented certain Improvements in Electric Motors, of which the following is a specification. My invention consists in the use of a reciprocating electromagnet, the poles of which are changed at each movement, between two permanent magnets arranged with their reverse poles opposite each other; in a peculiar arrangement of devices for reversing the current, and in other details hereinafter describe. The object of my invention is to apply and fully utilize, in an electric motor, the power of permanent magnets, and to develop from them the greater part of the power, so that motors of great power may be actuated by means of small electromagnets, and a correspondingly small expenditure of battery power. This end I attain by arranging two permanent magnets at a short distance apart,

with the negative pole of each opposite the positive pole of the other, and then arranging between them an electromagnet attached to the driving mechanism, and connected with an automatic pole changing device, so that the electromagnet is attracted and repelled by the two permanent magnets alternately, one attracting it at the same time that it is repelled by the other. In this way I am enabled to employ constantly and directly the full power of the electromagnet and both permanent magnets. As it makes no difference in the power o the motor whether the force to move the vibrating magnet emanates from permanent or the electromagnet, it is obvious that the same results may be obtained by the use of strong permanent magnets in connection with a weak electromagnet as are obtained by the use of weak permanent magnets and a strong electromagnet, so that on my plan I am enabled to construct motors of large size and power, and operate them with small batteries at a trifling cost. By increasing the power of the permanent magnets the power of the motor may be increased to any extent required without increasing the amount of battery power required, thus producing a large motor, which may be operated with the same battery power as a small one. In practice, however, it will be found best to increase the size and power of the electromagnet and its battery in proportion to the increased power of the permanent magnets, but the most satisfactory and economical results are obtained when the strength or power of the permanent magnets exceeds that of the electromagnet many times. The form and position of the electromagnet and the fixed magnets, the construction of the currentchanging device, the arrangement of devices for transmitting the power and motion from the vibrating electromagnet, and the other details may be varied at will, as they form no essential or important part of the invention. It is preferred to employ horseshoe magnets, and to arrange them in parallel planes; but they may be made in other forms, and arranged in different relative positions. The permanent magnets may each be made in a single solid piece, or of a series of thin magnets clamped together, the latter being preferred. In the accompanying drawings, Figure 1 represents a top plan view of one form of my motor; Figure 2, a side elevation of the same; Figure 3, a detail view, illustrating the construction of the current changer. A and B represent two horizontal permanent magnets, arranged one above the other, a small distance apart, with the positive pole of each opposite the negative pole of the other. C represents an electromagnet, secured to one end of a pivoted vibrating beam, D, which has its opposite end connected by a pitman, E, to a crank pin on a wheel, F, which is mounted on a main driving-shaft, G, as shown, so that the vibration of the magnet and beam will set the shaft in motion. The ends of the electromagnet C are flattened and extended between the permanent magnets A and B, and the parts so arranged that it is free to vibrate and carry the end of beam D up and down. The magnet C is connected with a battery of any suitable kind; but between the magnet and the battery there is interposed a current charger, H, which reverses the current of electricity and changes the polarity of the magnet at the end of each vibration of movement, in consequence of which the magnet C is alternately repelled by the magnet A and attracted by magnet B, and then attracted by A and repelled by B, so that it is kept constantly moving up and down between them. The vibration of the electromagnet operates the beam D, which, in turn, through the pitman and crank, operates the shaft on which the wheel is mounted. The current changer consists of a pivoted vibrating arm, H, having one end forked and operated by a tappet, c, attached to the beam D, and the other end provided with two spring conducting

fingers, d and e, which are connected with opposite ends of the helix, and arranged to play over three metal plates, f, f, and g, the two former connected with the negative and the latter with the positive pole of the battery. The fingers always connect with the opposite poles of the battery, and each finger alternates from the positive to a negative plate, in such manner that the current of electricity has its course through the helix of the electromagnet reversed at each movement of the fingers. In order that the permanent magnets may be adjusted in case of necessity, and that, when they are composed o a series of thin plates or magnets, plates may be added to or removed from the series in order to vary the strength of the magnets, they are mounted on vertical screws h, and secured by the nuts i, in the manner shown. In practice I find that, in order to prevent the permanent magnets from affecting and partially neutralizing each other, the faces or poles of the electromagnet should be made as wide or wider than those of the permanent magnets. It is also important that the poles of the electromagnet shall be flattened on the sides, in order that the entire faces may approach close to the faces or poles of the fixed magnets, which should be flattened in like manner. I am aware that motors consisting of an outside circular series of permanent magnets and a central rotating series of electromagnets, the polarity of which is changed as they pass the others, is old; but my arrangement differs therefrom, and is superior thereto, in this, that I apply the power to move the magnet directly in the line or path o movement, while in the rotary machines, the power is applied at a tangent, and consequently at a great disadvantage. I am aware that it is old to arrange a vibrating armature between two electromagnets which were either polarized alternately, or else their polarity reversed at each movement of the armature; but they differ in my engine, in that they derive their power wholly from the electromagnets, while in my engine the power is derived mainly from the permanent magnets, and also in that they require the use of two electromagnets, while in my engine one only is used. My combination possesses the advantages of requiring but little battery power in proportion to the amount of power developed by the engine, and of permitting the vibrating parts to be made light, so that the engine may be operated with rapidity. It is obvious that, instead of having a single electromagnet and one pair of permanent magnets at one end of the beam, there may be a similar combination used at each end or two or more combinations used at either end. It is also obvious that, instead of using the electromagnet of the horseshoe form, a straight one may be arranged transversely between the two permanent magnets. Having thus described my invention, what I claim is: 1) The combination, in an electric motor, of two permanent magnets, A and B, and an electromagnet, C, connected with a pole-changing device, and arranged to vibrate between the permanent magnets, substantially as shown and described. 2) The combination of two permanent magnets, arranged with their reverse poles opposite to, but separated from, each other, and a reciprocating electromagnet connected with an automatic polechanging device, substantially as described. 3) The combination, in an electric motor, of a reciprocating electromagnet, connected with an automatic pole-changing device, and two compound permanent magnets, arranged on opposite

sides of the electromagnet, each consisting of a series of thin magnets, mounted in such a manner that the series may be increased or diminished at will, for the purpose of increasing or diminishing the power of the motor. 4) In combination with the magnets A and B and the vibrating electromagnet C, the beam D, provided with the tappet c, and the arm, provide with the fingers d and e, moving upon the plates f, f, and g, as shown.

A Simple Magnet Motor

Mr. Wesley Gary's 1st patent gained the attention of Harper's magazine and an experiment was developed demonstrating it but, it is Gary's 2nd patent which shows a simple design, easily duplicated: It is as simple as putting 2 permanent magnets facing each other so that they attract then, put a small electromagnet between them, with 2 sets ofcontacts mounted so that as it approaches either magnet, its poles are reversed and it is repulsed back toward the other - with a lot of force! see the work in progress

Gary's 2nd patent

U.S. Patent 190,206

(May 1, 1877)

Improvement in Electromagnetic Motors Wesley W. Gary

To all whom it may concern: Be it known that I, Wesley W. Gary, of Huntington, in the county of Huntington and State of Pennsylvania, have invented certain Improvements in Electric Motors, of which the following is a specification. My invention consists in the use of a reciprocating electromagnet, the poles of which are changed at each movement, between two permanent magnets arranged with their reverse poles opposite each other; in a peculiar arrangement of devices for reversing the current, and in other details hereinafter describe. The object of my invention is to apply and fully utilize, in an electric motor, the power of permanent magnets, and to develop from them the greater part of the power, so that motors of great power may be actuated by means of small electromagnets, and a correspondingly small expenditure of battery power.

This end I attain by arranging two permanent magnets at a short distance apart, with the negative pole of each opposite the positive pole of the other, and then arranging between them an electromagnet attached to the driving mechanism, and connected with an automatic pole changing device, so that the electromagnet is attracted and repelled by the two permanent magnets alternately, one attracting it at the same time that it is repelled by the other. In this way I am enabled to employ constantly and directly the full power of the electromagnet and both permanent magnets. As it makes no difference in the power of the motor whether the force to move the vibrating magnet emanates from permanent or the electromagnet, it is obvious that the same results may be obtained by the use of strong permanent magnets in connection with a weak electromagnet as are obtained by the use of weak permanent magnets and a strong electromagnet, so that on my plan I am enabled to construct motors of large size and power, and operate them with small batteries at a trifling cost. By increasing the power of the permanent magnets the power of the motor may be increased to any extent required without increasing the amount of battery power required, thus producing a large motor, which may be operated with the same battery power as a small one. In practice, however, it will be found best to increase the size and power of the electromagnet and its battery in proportion to the increased power of the permanent magnets, but the most satisfactory and economical results are obtained when the strength or power of the permanent magnets exceeds that of the electromagnet many times.

The form and position of the electromagnet and the fixed magnets, the construction of the current-changing device, the arrangement of devices for transmitting the power and motion from the vibrating electromagnet, and the other details may be varied at will, as they form no essential or important part of the invention.

It is preferred to employ horseshoe magnets, and to arrange them in parallel planes; but they may be made in other forms, and arranged in different relative positions. The permanent magnets may each be made in a single solid piece, or of a series of thin magnets clamped together, the latter being preferred.

In the accompanying drawings, Figure 1 represents a top plan view of one form of my motor; Figure 2, a side elevation of the same; Figure 3, a detail view, illustrating the construction of the current changer.

A and B represent two horizontal permanent magnets, arranged one above the other, a small distance apart, with the positive pole of each opposite the negative pole of the other. C represents an electromagnet, secured to one end of a pivoted vibrating beam, D, which has its opposite end connected by a pitman, E, to a crank pin on a wheel, F, which is mounted on a main driving-shaft, G, as shown, so that the vibration of the magnet and beam will set the shaft in motion. The ends of the electromagnet C are flattened and extended between the permanent magnets A and B, and the parts so arranged that it is free to vibrate and carry the end of beam D up and down. The magnet C is connected with a battery of any suitable kind; but between the magnet and the battery there is interposed a current charger, H, which reverses the current of electricity and changes the polarity of the magnet at the end of each vibration of movement, in consequence of which the magnet C is alternately repelled

by the magnet A and attracted by magnet B, and then attracted by A and repelled by B, so that it is kept constantly moving up and down between them. The vibration of the electromagnet operates the beam D, which, in turn, through the pitman and crank, operates the shaft on which the wheel is mounted. The current changer consists of a pivoted vibrating arm, H, having one end forked and operated by a tappet, c, attached to the beam D, and the other end provided with two spring conducting fingers, d and e, which are connected with opposite ends of the helix, and arranged to play over three metal plates, f, f, and g, the two former connected with the negative and the latter with the positive pole of the battery. The fingers always connect with the opposite poles of the battery, and each finger alternates from the positive to a negative plate, in such manner that the current of electricity has its course through the helix of the electromagnet reversed at each movement of the fingers. In order that the permanent magnets may be adjusted in case of necessity, and that, when they are composed of a series of thin plates or magnets, plates may be added to or removed from the series in order to vary the strength of the magnets, they are mounted on vertical screws h, and secured by the nuts i, in the manner shown. In practice I find that, in order to prevent the permanent magnets from affecting and partially neutralizing each other, the faces or poles of the electromagnet should be made as wide or wider than those of the permanent magnets. It is also important that the poles of the electromagnet shall be flattened on the sides, in order that the entire faces may approach close to the faces or poles of the fixed magnets, which should be flattened in like manner. I am aware that motors consisting of an outside circular series of permanent magnets and a central rotating series of electromagnets, the polarity of which is changed as they pass the others, is old; but my arrangement differs therefrom, and is superior thereto, in this, that I apply the power to move the magnet directly in the line or path of movement, while in the rotary machines, the power is applied at a tangent, and consequently at a great disadvantage. I am aware that it is old to arrange a vibrating armature between two electromagnets which were either polarized alternately, or else their polarity reversed at each movement of the armature; but they differ in my engine, in that they derive their power wholly from the electromagnets, while in my engine the power is derived mainly from the permanent magnets, and also in that they require the use of two electromagnets, while in my engine one only is used. My combination possesses the advantages of requiring but little battery power in proportion to the amount of power developed by the engine, and of permitting the vibrating parts to be made light, so that the engine may be operated with rapidity. It is obvious that, instead of having a single electromagnet and one pair of permanent magnets at one end of the beam, there may be a similar combination used at each end or two or more combinations used at either end. It is also obvious that, instead of using the electromagnet of the horseshoe form, a straight one may be arranged transversely between the two permanent magnets. Having thus described my invention, what I claim is: 1) The combination, in an electric motor, of two permanent magnets, A and B, and an electromagnet, C, connected with a pole-changing device, and arranged to vibrate between the permanent magnets, substantially as shown and described. 2) The combination of two permanent magnets, arranged with their reverse poles opposite to, but separated from, each other, and a reciprocating electromagnet connected with an automatic pole-changing device, substantially as described. 3) The combination, in an electric motor, of a reciprocating electromagnet, connected with an automatic polechanging device, and two compound permanent magnets, arranged on opposite sides of the electromagnet, each consisting of a series of thin magnets, mounted in such a manner that the series may be increased or diminished at will, for the purpose of increasing or diminishing the power of the motor. 4) In combination with the magnets A and B and the vibrating electromagnet C, the beam D, provided with the tappet c, and the arm, provide with the fingers d and e, moving upon the platesf, f, and g, as shown.

Gary's 1st patent

( see improved 2nd patent above)

Canadian Patent #10,239

(July 16, 1879)

Improvement on Magneto Electric Machines Wesley W. Gary

Patent Text
The primary object of my invention is to facilitate and greatly lessen the expense of generating or developing electrical currents by dynamo machines, and instruments, by so improving their construction and modes of action that they may be operated by a very small amount of power and at high rates of speed. With this end in view, the invention consists broadly, in so constructing the machine or instrument that the soft iron armature or core used with the induction coil, is operated constantly in one and the same magnetic field, and caused to be polarized and depolarized or to change its polarity without departing from such field. Many machines have been hitherto constructed for the purpose of developing electrical currents, through the medium of a soft iron armature coiled with wire and subjected to and magnetized by the inductive influence of a permanent magnet, the armature or the magnet being moved, one in relation to the other, in such manner as to cause the armature to change or lose its polarity rapidly and at frequent intervals. In order to secure this reversal or loss of polarity in the armature without having it actually touch the magnet it has been hitherto considered necessary that the armature should be carried into and out of the magnetic field or field of attraction of the magnet; or else from the field of one pole into that of the other. This operation required the movement of the armature a long distance, necessitating the expenditure of a large amount of power, limited the frequency of the polar changes, and precluded the full utilization of the magnetic influence. My invention derives its value mainly from the fact that I do not carry the armature out of the magnetic field, but operate it wholly therein, and secure by a very slight movement the same or better results than those secured in existing machines. My invention is based upon the fact hitherto unknown, that there exists in the magnetic field or field of attraction of every magnet, at a greater or less distance from the magnet, what I term a neutral line at which soft iron will not be polarized, or magnetized, by the inductive action of the magnet. The location of the neutral line as regards its distance from the magnet differs in different cases, the line approaching the magnet in proportion to the increase in strength of the magnet and receding as the size or cubic contents of the armature is increased. The location of the line may be readily determined by applying a coil and galvanometer to the iron and moving it to and from the magnet; or by applying a dipping needle to the armature and noting the point at which the needle assumes a horizontal position or by allowing a tack or other small piece of iron to adhere to the armature and noting the point at which the tack is released by the same.

I have discovered that iron placed on this line although subject to a strong attractive influence on the part of the magnet, remains unpolarized, but that upon moving it from the line in either direction it instantly assumes a polarity. I have also discovered that the polarity of the iron differs on opposite sides of the line and changes on crossing the same, so that if the iron placed in close proximity to the magnet and polarized, by induction, be carried outward, it will lose polarity on reaching the neutral line, and then assume a reverse polarity as it passes from the line outward. By availing myself of this fact and arranging the armature to vibrate from the neutral line inward, or from the neutral line outward, or to work across the line, and in connection with a commutator, I secure the required changes in the polarity of the armature and produce the same results by a very short movement that are now secured by the longer one. In constructing machines and instruments on my plan, the details may be constructed and arranged in any manner desired provided the armature has the above described action in relation to the magnet. The best results are secured by using a horse-shoe magnet, compound if desired, extending the armature across its two poles on one side, and then arranging the armature to move only between the neutral line and the magnet.

In the accompanying drawings, Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4, represent the relation of the neutral line to the magnet and magnetic field, and also the depolarization and change of polarity of the armature.

Figure 5 represents a perspective view of one form of magneto-electric machine constructed on my plan. Referring to the drawings, A, represents a base frame provided with uprights, a, and sustaining in a fixed position a horizontal permanent magnet B, of the ordinary compound horse-shoe type. C, represents a flat horizontal armature of soft iron lying above and extending across both poles of the magnet and secured rigidly to one end of a horizontal vibrating lever D, which is sustained by a transverse shaft b, mounted in the standards a. This lever is provided with an upright arm c, the upper end of which is slotted to receive and is vibrated by an eccentric, d, mounted on a shaft, c, the end of which is provided with a small pinion f, and driven at a high speed by a large gear wheel E, as shown. This arrangement causes the rotation of wheel E to vibrate the lever and move the armature to and from the magnet with great rapidity. Around the armature, which is preferably reduced and rounded at the middle, there is wound an ordinary wire induction coil G. In order to balance or sustain the armature against the attractive influence of the magnet and avoid the necessity of employing a driving power sufficient to overcome the same, I place below the vibrating lever two or more springs H, of different heights, arranged to come into action successively against the under side of the lever and offer an increasing resistance as the armature approaches the magnet-and becomes subject to an increasing attraction. Under this arrangement it is only necessary, in order to vibrate the armature, to apply a very slight amount of power, an amount sufficient to overcome the friction and the inertia of the moving parts. In adjusting the machine it is preferred to vibrate the armature, from the neutral line, the position shown in Fig. 2, inward toward the magnet, to the position shown, in Figure 4, in which case the armature will be polarized as it leaves the line and depolarized as it again reaches the line. Owing to the fact that the armature requires a very slight movement, in some cases not exceeding the fiftieth part of an inch; and the fact that it is balanced or sustained against the attractive influence of the magnet, I am able to drive the machine at a very high speed by the application of very little power; and owing to the fact that the armature is operated only in close proximity to the magnet where the attraction and inductive action are very powerful, I produce in the wire induced currents of great quantity and intensity. If for any special reason it may be considered desirable so to do, the parts may be adjusted to vibrate the armature from the neutral line outward without passing beyond the magnetic field. Or if desired, the parts may so adjusted that

the armature shall vibrate to and from the magnet across the neutral line, without passing from the magnetic field. In such case there will be two direct currents or impulses induced during the outward, and two during the inward movement or the armature. For the purpose of producing a continuous current, a commutator or current changer of any suitable or ordinary construction may be used. This commutator may be actuated in any suitable manner, one simple arrangement being shown in the drawing, in which the rear end of the lever is arranged to vibrate an arm, J, the end of which is provided with two conducting fingers, K and L, to which the ends of the coil are connected. The fingers play across three metal plates, M, N and O, which are connected, the first two with the conductor P, and the other with conductor O, as shown, the arrangement being such that the course of the current is changed as the current in the coil reverses, so as to produce a continuous current in the conductors P and O. It is to be noted that in all cases the construction of the machine is to be such as to utilize the depolarization of the armature at the neutral line; that the armature is to remain within the magnetic field; and that it is unnecessary to move the armature through the entire field. The arrangement of the vibrating armature across both poles of the magnet as shown, enables me to make constant use of both poles and the entire armature, thus utilizing the full power and effect of the magnet. The best results are secured when the armature consists as shown in the drawing, of two plates or pieces riveted together. As before stated, the form, construction, and arrangement of the parts may be modified as desired, provided the armature operates within the magnetic field, and provided also, the current produced by the depolarization of the armature at the neutral line is made available for use. Having thus described my invention what I claim is: The herein described method of producing induced electrical currents, consisting in vibrating an iron armature coiled with wire, to and from the neutral line in the field of a permanent magnet. In a magneto-electric machine or instrument, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature arranged to move wholly within the magnetic field, to and from the neutral line. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and an armature, and operating mechanism arranged to vibrate the armature to and from the magnet, from or across the neutral line, without departing from the magnetic field. The combination in a magneto-electric machine, of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature vibrated only from the neutral line toward the magnet and back to the neutral line. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil, and a soft iron armature arranged to vibrate to and from and to stop upon the neutral line in the magnetic field. The combination in a magneto-electric machine of permanent magnet, an induction coil, an iron armature vibrating wholly within the magnetic field, to or across the neutral line, and an automatic commutator arranged to change the course of the induced current when the armature is upon the neutral line. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an induction coil and armature, and an automatic commutator or current changer arranged to move as the armature reaches the neutral line in the magnetic field. In a magneto-electric machine, the combination of a permanent magnet, an armature moving to and from the same and a spring or its equivalent arranged to counteract the attractive influence of the magnet. The combination in a magneto-electric machine of a permanent magnet, an armature arranged to move to and from the magnet, and springs or equivalent devices, arranged to offer an increasing resistance to the armature as it approaches the magnet. The combination of the permanent magnet, the induction coil, and the armature extending across both poles of the magnet, and arranged to move to or from them both at the same time. The combination of the permanent magnet, the armature extending across both poles of the magnet, the induction coil, the vibrating lever, and the eccentric arranged, to vibrate the lever as shown.

Wesley Ward Gary Washington DC February 27, 1879

Article based on Gary's 1st patent

( see improved 2nd patent at top)

Harper's New Monthly Magazine (March 1879, pp. 601-605) see on-line at Cornell Univ. Library http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/moa/sgml/moa-idx?notisid=ABK4014-0058-86 With an ordinary horseshoe magnet, a bit of soft iron, and a common shingle-nail, a practical inventor, ... now demonstrates his discovery of a fact of the utmost importance in magnetic science, which has hitherto escaped the observation of both scientists and practical electricians, namely, the existence of a neutral line in the magnetic field -a line where the polarity of an induced magnet ceases, and beyond which it changes. With equally simple appliances he shows the practical utilization of his discovery in such a way as to produce a magnetic motor, thus opening up a bewildering prospect of the possibilities before us in revolutionizing the present methods of motive power through the substitution of a wonderfully cheap and safe agent. By his achievement Mr. Wesley W. Gary has quite upset the theories of magnetic philosophy hitherto prevailing, and lifted magnetism out from among the static forces where science has placed it, to the position of a dynamic power. The Gary Magnetic Motor, the result of Mr. Gary's long years of study, in a word, a simple contrivance which furnishes its own power, and will run until worn out by the force of friction, coming dangerously near to that awful bugbear, perpetual motion. ... To understand the operation of the Gary Magnetic Motor, it is necessary first to comprehend thoroughly the principle underlying it -- the existence of the neutral line and the change in polarity, which Mr. Gary demonstrates by his horseshoe magnet, his bit of soft iron, and his common shingle-nail. This is illustrated in Figure 1. The letter A represents a compound magnet; B, a piece of soft iron made fast to a lever with a pivoted joint in the center, the iron becoming a magnet by induction when in the magnetic field of the permanent magnet; C, a small nail that drops off when the iron, or induced magnet, is on the neutral line. By pressing the finger on the lever at D the iron is raised above the neutral line. Now let the nail be applied to the end of the induced magnet at E; it clings to it, and the point is turned inward toward the pole of the magnet directly below it, thus indicating that the induced magnet is of opposite polarity from the permanent one. Now let the iron be gradually lowered toward the magnet; the nail drops off at the neutral line, and now its point is turned outward, or away from the magnetic pole below. In this way Mr. Gary proves that the polarity of an induced magnet is changed by passing over the neutral line without coming into contact. In the experiment strips of paper are placed under the soft iron, or induced magnet, as shown in the figure, to prevent contact. The neutral line is shown to extend completely around the magnet; and a piece of soft iron placed on this line will entirely cut off the attraction of the magnet from anything beyond. The action of this cutting off is illustrated in Figure 2.

The letters A and B represent the one a balanced magnet and the other a stationary magnet. The magnet A is balanced on a joint, and the two magnets are placed with opposite poles facing each other. The letter C is a piece of thin or sheet iron, as the case may be, made fast to a lever with a joint in the center, and so adjusted that the iron will move on the neutral line in front of the poles of the stationary magnet. By pressing the finger on the lever at D the iron is raised, thus withdrawing the cut-off so that the magnet A is attracted and drawn upward by the magnet B. Remove the finger, and the cut-off drops between the poles, and in consequence, the magnet A drops again. The same movement of magnets can be obtained by placing a piece of iron across the poles of the magnet B after the magnet A has been drawn near to it. The magnet A will thereupon immediately fall away; but the iron can only be balanced, and the balance not disturbed, by the action of the magnets upon each other when the iron is on the neutral line, and does not move nearer or father away from the magnet B. It may not be found easy to demonstrate these principles at the first trials. But it should be borne in mind that it took the inventor himself four years after he had discovered the principle to adjust the delicate balance so as to get a machine which would go. Now, however, that he has thought out the entire problem, and frankly tells the world how he has solved it, any person at all skillful and patient, and with a little knowledge of mechanics, may soon succeed in demonstrating it for himself. The principle underlying the motor and the method by which a motion is obtained now being explained, let us examine the inventor's working models. The beam movement is the simplest, and by it, it is claimed, the most power can be obtained from the magnets. This is illustrated in Figure 3. The letter A represents a stationary magnet, and B the soft iron, or induced magnet, fastened to a lever with a joint in the center, and so balanced that the stationary magnet will not quite draw it over the neutral line. The letter C represents a beam constructed of a double magnet, clamped together in the center and balanced on a joint. One end is set opposite the stationary magnet, with like poles separating each other. The beam is so balanced that when the soft iron B on the magnet A is below the neutral line, it (the beam) is repelled down to the lower dotted line indicated by the letter D. The beam strikes the lever E with the pin F attached, and drives it (the lever) against the pin G, which is attached to the soft iron B, which is thus driven above the neutral line, where its polarity changes.

The soft iron now attracts the beam magnet C to the upper dotted line, whereupon it (the soft iron) is again drawn down over the neutral line, and its polarity again changing, the beam magnet C is again repelled to the lower line, continuing so to move until it is stopped or worn out. This simply illustrates the beam movement. To gain a large amount of power the inventor would place groups of compound stationary magnets above and below the beam at each side, and the soft iron magnets, in this case four in number, connected by rods passing down between the poles of the stationary magnets. A "Pitman" connecting the beam with a flywheel to change the reciprocating into a rotary motion would be the means of transmitting the power. With magnets of great size an enormous power, he claims, could be obtained in this way.

(the best photo of a "Pitman" and crank I could find - on an antique sewing machine.)

One of the daintiest and prettiest of Mr. Gary's models is that illustrating the action of a rotary motor. There is a peculiar fascination in watching the action of this neat little contrivance. It is shown in Figure 4. The letter A represents an upright magnet hung on a perpendicular shaft; B, the horizontal magnets; C, the soft iron which is fastened to the lever D; E, the pivoted joint on which the lever is balanced; and F, the thumb-screw for adjusting the movement of the soft iron. This soft iron is so balanced that as the north pole of the upright magnet A swings around opposite and above the south pole of the horizontal magnets B, it drops below the neutral line and changes its polarity. As the magnet A turns around until its north pole is opposite and above the north pole of the magnets B, the soft iron is drawn upward and over the neutral line, so that its polarity is changed again. At this point the polarity in the soft iron C is like that of the permanent magnets A and B. To start the engine the magnet A is turned around to the last-named position, the poles opposite like poles of the magnet B; then one pole of the magnet A is pushed a little forward and over the soft iron. This rotary magnet is repelled by the magnets B, and also by the soft iron; it turns around until the unlike poles of the permanent magnets become opposite; as they attract each other

the soft iron drops below the neutral line, the polarity changes and becomes opposite to that of the magnets B and like that of the magnet A; the momentum gained carries the pole of A a little forward of B and over the soft iron, which, now being of like polarity, repels it around to the starting point, completing the revolution. The magnets A and B now compound or unite their forces, and the soft iron is again drawn up over the neutral line; its polarity is changed, and another revolution is made without any other force applied than the force of the magnets. The motion will continue until some outside force is applied to stop it, or until the machine is worn out. The result is the same as would be obtained were the magnets B removed and the soft iron coiled with wire, and battery force applied sufficient to give it the same power that it gets from the magnets B, and a current-changer applied to change the polarity. The power required to work the current-changer in this case would be in excess of the power demanded to move the soft iron over the neutral line, since no power is required from the revolving magnet under these circumstances, it being moved by the magnets compounding when like poles are opposite each other, three magnets thus attracting the iron. When opposite poles are near together, they attract each other and let the iron drop below the line. The soft iron, with its lever, is finely balanced at the joint, and has small springs applied and adjusted so as to balance it against the power of the magnets. In this working model the soft iron vibrates less than a fiftieth of an inch. This rotary motion is intended for use in small engines where light power is required, such as propelling sewing machines, for dental work, show windows, etc.

Personal History
When Wesley Gary was a boy of nine years, the electric telegraph was in its infancy and the marvel of the day; and his father, who was a clergyman in Cortland County, New York, used to take up matters of general interest and make them the subject of an occasional lecture, among other things, giving much attention to the explanation of this new invention. To illustrate his remarks on the subject he employed an electromagnetic machine. This and his father's talk naturally excited the boy's curiosity, and he used to ponder much on the relations of electricity and magnetism, until he formed a shadowy idea that somehow they must become a great power in the world. He never lost his interest in the subject, though his rude experiments were interrupted for a while by the work of his young manhood. When the choice of a calling was demanded, he at first had a vague feeling that he would like to be an artist. "But", he says, "my friends would have thought that almost as useless and unpractical as to seek for perpetual motion." At last he went into the woods a-lumbering, and took contracts to clear large tracts of woodland in Western and Central New York, floating the timber down the canals to Troy. He followed this business for several years, when he was forced to abandon it by a serious attack of inflammatory rheumatism, brought about through exposure in the woods. And this, unfortunate as it must have seemed at the time, proved the turning-point in his life. His family physicians insisted that he must look for some other means of livelihood than lumbering. To the query, "What shall I do?" it was suggested that he might take to preaching, following in the footsteps of his father, and of a brother who had adopted the profession. But this he said he could never do; he would do his best to practice, but he couldn't preach. "Invent something, then," said the doctor. "There is no doubt in my mind that you were meant for an inventor." This was said in all seriousness, and Mr. Gary was at length persuaded that the doctor knew him better than he did himself. His thoughts naturally recurring to the experiments and dreams of his youth, he determined to devote all his energies to the problem. He felt more and more confident, as he dwelt on the matter, that a great force lay imprisoned within the magnet; that some time it must be unlocked and set to doing the world's work; that the key was hidden somewhere, and that he might find it as well as some one else. At Huntington, Pennsylvania, Mr. Gary made his first practical demonstration, and allowed his discovery to be examined and the fact published. He has long been satisfied, from his experiments, that if he could devise a "cut-off", the means of neutralizing the attractive power of a stationary magnet on another raised above it and adjusted on a pivot, unlike poles opposite, and so arrange this cut-off as to work automatically, he could produce motion in a balanced magnet. To this end he persistently experimented, and it was only about four years ago that he made the discovery, the key to his problem, which is the basis of his present motor, and upsets our philosophy. In experimenting one day with a piece of soft iron upon a magnet he made the discovery of the neutral line and the change of polarity.

At first he gave little attention to the discovery of the change of polarity, not then recognizing its significance, being absorbed entirely by the possibilities the discovery of the neutral line opened up to him. Here was the point for his cut-off. For a while he experimented entirely with batteries, but in September, 1874, he succeeded in obtaining a movement independent of the battery. This was done on the principle illustrated in Figure 2. The balanced magnet, with opposite poles to the stationary magnet, was weighted so that the poles would fall down when not attracted by the stationary magnet. When it was attracted up to the stationary magnet, a spring was touched by the movement, and thus the lever with the soft iron was made to descend between the two magnets on the neutral line, and so cutting of the mutual attraction. Then the balanced magnet, responding to the force of gravitation, descended, and, when down, struck another spring, by means of which the cut-off was lifted back to its original position, and consequently the force of attraction between the magnets was again brought into play. In June, the following year, Mr. Gary exhibited this continuous movement to a number of gentlemen, protecting himself by covering the cut-of with copper, so as to disguise the real material used, and prevent anyone from robbing him of his discovery. The publication in the local newspaper of the performance of the little machine, which was copied far and wide, excited much interest. But the inventor was by no means satisfied. He had succeeded in securing a continuous motion, but not in a practical motor. He had invented a unique plaything, but not a machine that would do a man's work. So he made further experiments in one direction and another, using for a long time the battery; and it was not until some time after he moved to Boston (which was about two years ago) that he was convinced that the point in the change of polarity, with which he was so little impressed when he first hit upon them along with his discovery of the neutral line, were the true ones to work upon. Thereafter his progress was most rapid, and in a little while he had constructed working models, not only to his own satisfaction, but to that of those experts who had the fairness to give them a critical and thorough examination, clearly demonstrating his ability to secure motion and power, as they had never before been secured, from selffeeding and self-acting machines. His claim, as he formally puts it, is this: "I have discovered that a straight piece of iron placed across the poles of a magnet, and near to their end, changes its polarity while in the magnetic field and before it comes in contact with the magnet, the fact being, however, that actual contact is guarded against. The conditions are that the thickness of the iron magnet must be proportioned to the power of the magnet, and that the neutral line, or line of change in the polarity of the iron, is nearer or more distant from the magnet according to the power of the latter and the thickness of the former. My whole discovery is based upon this change of polarity in the iron, with or without a battery." Power can be increased to any extent, or diminished, by the addition or withdrawal of magnets. Mr. Gary is 41 years old, having been born in 1837. During the years devoted to working out his problem he has supported himself by the proceeds from the sale of a few useful inventions made from time to time when he was forced to turn aside from his experiments to raise funds. From the sale of one of these inventions -- a simple little thing -- he realized something like $10,000. The announcement of the invention of the magnetic motor came at a moment when the electric light excitement was at its height. The holders of gas stocks were in a state of anxiety, and those who had given attention to the study of the principle of the new light expressed the belief that it was only the question of the cost of power used to generate the electricity for the light that stood in the way of its general introduction and substitution for gas. A prominent electrician, who was one day examining Mr. Gary's principle, asked if in the change of polarity he had obtained electric sparks. He said that he had, and the former then suggested that the principle be used in the construction of a magneto-electric machine, and that it might turn out to be superior to anything then in use. Acting on this suggestion, Mr. Gary set to work, and within a week had perfected a machine which apparently proved a marvel of efficiency and simplicity. In all previous machines electricity is generated by revolving a piece of soft iron in front of the poles of a permanent magnet. But to do this at a rate of speed high enough to produce sparks in such rapid succession as to keep up a steady current of electricity suitable for the light, considerable power is required. In Mr. Gary's machine, however, the piece of soft iron, or armature, coiled with wire, has only to be moved across the neutral line to secure the same result. Every time the polarity changes, a spark is produced. The slightest vibration is enough to secure this, and with each vibration two sparks are produced, just as with each revolution in the other method. An enormous volume can be secured with an expenditure of force so diminutive that a caged squirrel might furnish it. With the employment of one of the smallest of the magnetic motors, power may be supplied and electricity generated at no expense beyond the cost of the machine. The announcement of the invention of the magnetic motor was naturally received with incredulity, although the recent achievements in mechanical science had prepared the public for almost anything, and it could not be very much astonished at whatever might come next. Some admitted that there might be something in it; others shrugged their shoulders and said, "Wait and see', while the scientific referred all questioners to the laws of magnetic science; and believers in book authority responded, "It can't be so, because the law says it can't."

A few scientists, however, came forward, curious to see, and examined Mr. Gary's models; and when reports went out of the conversion of two or three of the most eminent among them, interest generally was awakened, and professors from Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology called, examined, and were impressed. More promptly than the scientists, capitalists moved; and before science had openly acknowledged the discovery and the principle of the invention, men of money were after Mr. Gary for the right to use the motor for various purposes: one wished to use it for clocks, another for sewing machines, others for dental engines, and so on. It is as yet too soon to speculate upon what may result from the discovery; but since it produces power in two ways, both directly by magnets and indirectly by the generation of unlimited electricity, it would seem that it really might become available in time for all purposes to which electricity might long ago have been devoted except for the great expense involved. Within one year after the invention of the telephone it was in practical use all over the world, from the United States to Japan. And it is not incredible that in 1880 one may be holding a magnetic motor in his pocket, running the watch which requires no winding up, and, seated in a railway car, be whirling across the continent behind a locomotive impelled by the same agency.

Some basic observations concerning magnets

1. Two magnets repel further than they attract because of friction and inertia forces. 2. Most of our energy comes directly or indirectly from electromagnetic energy of the sun, e.g. photosynthesis and watercycle of ocean to water vapor to rain or snow to ocean. 3. Magnetic energy "travels" between poles at the speed of light. 4. Permanent magnets on both sides of an iron shield are attracted to the shield and only weakly to each other at close proximity to the shield. 5. Permanent magnets are ferrous metals. The attraction is an inverse square force. 6. Magnetic energy can be shielded. 7. The sliding or perpendicular force of a keeper is much less than the force in the direction of the field to remove the keeper. 8. Most of the magnetic energy is concentrated at the poles of the magnet. 9. A permanent magnet loses little strength unless dropped or heated. Heating misaligns the magnetic elements within the magnet. 10. If a weight lifted by a permanet magnet is slowly increased, the lifting power of the magnet can be increased until all the magnetic domains in the magnet are aligned in the same direction. This becomes the limit. 11. Using magnets to repel tends to weaken them as it causes more misalignment of the domains.

"You can get cheap and brittle ceramic magnets, stronger Alnico magnets, and even the new super strong rare-earth magnets (neodymium-iron-boron) of incredible strength" A reference on magnetic materials.

Magnet Materials
Alnico

Alnico magnet alloy is largely comprised of Aluminum, Nickel, Cobalt and Iron. Alnico is a moderately expensive magnet material because of the Cobalt and Nickel content. This alloy has very good corrosion resistance and a high maximum operating temperature. Some grades of this alloy can operate upwards of 550C. Magnets made with this alloy are available in a variety of grades and dimensions and they are usually cast and finish ground to size. Alnico magnet material is a mature technology and it has a relatively low Energy Product (BHmax). This material is now mainly used in military, aerospace, older proprietary designs and in applications where the magnet will be exposed to elevated temperatures.
Rare Earth

Neodymium Iron Boron (NdFeB) and Samarium Cobalt (SmCo) are called Rare Earth because Neodymium and

Samarium are found in the rare earth elements on the periodic table. Both Neodymium and Samarium Cobalt alloys are powdered metals which are compacted in the presence of a magnetic field and are then sintered.
Neodymium (Rare Earth)

Neodymium, or Neo, is made up of Neodymium Iron and Boron and is moderate in price. With poor corrosion resistance this alloy is usually plated or coated (Examples: Nickel Plated, Epoxy Coated, Parylene Coated). Neodymium is offered in a range of operating temperatures depending on your application (80C to 200C). Premium Neodymium Alloys capable of operating above 120C can become quite expensive. This permanent magnet material has many intellectual property rights associated with it and there are a limited number of licensed manufacturers in the world. Many infringing manufacturers from the Pacific-rim dump sub par material into the Western markets. This magnet material is extremely powerful and it has allowed for the miniaturization of many products from HDD (Hard Disc Drives) and motors to novelties and audio devices. Neodymium permanent magnets usually offer the best value when comparing price and performance.
Samarium Cobalt

(Rare Earth)

Samarium Cobalt is made up of largely Samarium and Cobalt and it is the most expensive magnet material to manufacture and to fabricate. Most of the cost is due to the high Cobalt content and the brittle nature of the alloy. This permanent magnet material offers high resistance to corrosion and it can withstand high operating temperatures, up to 350C. This material is used extensively in the aerospace market or in areas of industry where performance is the priority concern and cost is secondary. Samarium Cobalt is the second most powerful magnet material and it exhibits excellent resistance to demagnetization.
Ceramic

(Ferrite)

Ceramic magnet material (Ferrite) is Strontium Ferrite. This material is one of the most cost effective magnetic materials manufactured in industry. The low cost is due to the cheap, abundant, and non-strategic raw materials used in manufacturing this alloy. The permanent magnets made with this material lend themselves to large production runs. This magnet material has a fair to good resistance to corrosion and it can operate in moderate heat. The majority of the world's Ceramic magnetic material comes from China because of the alloys commodity nature and the high tooling costs found in the west. Ceramic magnets have a low Energy Product (
the energy that a magnetic material can supply to an external magnetic circuit when operating at any point on its demagnetization curve; measured in megagauss-oersteds. ) and

they are usually used in an assembly containing mild steel.

Bonded

Bonded magnet materials can be made from Alnico, Ceramic, NdFeB, or SmCo powders which are combined with a variety of plastic binders (Matrix). They can be either Injection Molded or Compression Bonded into complex shapes with finished dimensions. Bonded materials have a moderate resistance to corrosion and a low tolerance to heat because of the binder material. Bonded magnet materials are commonly used in automotive parts because they lend themselves to large production quantities and complex shape can be produced at a low cost.
Flexible

(Rubber)

Flexible magnets are manufactured by mixing Ferrite or Neodymium magnet powders and synthetic or natural rubber binders. Flexible is manufactured by rolling (calendaring) or extrusion methods. Versatility, low cost, and ease of use are among the reasons to choose ferrite based flexible magnets for your application. This magnet material is usually manufactured in strip or sheet form and it is used in micro-motors, gaskets, novelties, signs, and displays. Ferrite flexible magnet material is very low energy and it does not usually replace fully dense magnet materials. Flexible Neodymium material is higher in strength, but is it is made in limited quantities and the cost is high.

Another potentially valuable invention and its suppression

There is a US Patent number 3,890,548 submitted in 1975 by Edwin V. Gray, of Northridge, Calif. for a "Pulsed Capacitor Discharge Electric Engine" which also utilzes permanent and electro-magnets. Though it is complex and very expensive (he has spent $1million!) to build, in case you have heard and have wondered about it, the best source of information I have found on it is athttp://www.pureenergysystems.com/os/EdGrayMotor/PM_PEM_MG/patents/3890548/ The newspaper story of it's suppression is photocopied at (.jpg image) page 1 and page 2 Hopefully, the W. W. Gray motor is so simple that everyone can build it and no one will be able to stop the "movement".

Basics of Design Engineering - Power Actuators, Motors and Shock Absorbers - Rotary actuators
Rotary actuators Rack-and-pinion actuators use fluid pressure to drive a piston connected to a gear rack, which rotates a pinion. Standard units are available with rotation of 90, 180, or 360. They can be obtained with two parallel piston-rack units to double output torque. Outputs to 35 million lbin. are available. Helix actuators have helical grooves in the piston rod that convert linear to rotary motion. Helical actuators are available with standard rotations varying from 100 to 370 with outputs to 15,000 lb-in. A relatively new actuator gaining wide acceptance uses double helical gearing. This design features two moving parts: the piston sleeve, which reciprocates and rotates; and the output shaft, which only rotates. As the piston sleeve reciprocates in helical actuators, the outer spline engages the ring gear and causes sleeve rotation. At the same time, the inner spline engages another set of helical teeth on the output shaft. This causes relative shaft rotation in addition to that of the piston sleeve. Planetary actuators increase helix angle and reduce actuator length by replacing sliding action with rolling action. Planetary rollers on the piston between the helical shaft and housing grooves provide an arrangement similar to the gears in a planetary speed reducer. As in double helical actuators, planetary actuators have two basic moving elements, the piston assembly and shaft assembly. Piston movement causes rollers to follow helical grooves in the housing, forcing piston rotation. Simultaneously, the rollers follow helical grooves in the shaft, forcing shaft rotation. Design is such that 90 piston movement results in 180 of shaft rotation. Large-diameter bearings and mounting flanges on this unit can carry large moment, thrust, and radial loads. Linear cylinders consist of a simple cylinder with a pin-ended rod connected to a crank arm that drives the rotating shaft. These devices are typically pressure actuated in both directions and are equipped with adjustable stops for accurate adjustment of stroke. Stroke is ordinarily adjustable from 85 to 100. Fail-safe variations on the basic cylinder are used where a power failure or fluid loss could suspend the controlled object in a dangerous position. Fail-safe actuators are spring-loaded to ensure the return of the shaft to a safe position -- they are available with torque outputs to over 5,000 lb-in. Scotch yoke actuators provide torque from a linear cylinder mechanism. They can be either single or double acting, producing torque as high as 45 million lb-in., driving through comparatively short arcs -- about 90 maximum. Output torque is not constant, but increases as the piston moves away from its center position. Sprocket actuators provide long rotations. Up to five complete turns (1,800) and torques to 23,500 lb-in. are available from sprocket actuators. In these devices, two pistons, a chain, and a sprocket convert fluid pressure into torque. The large piston acts as the driver, pulling the chain. The smaller piston seals against fluid leakage past the return side of the endless chain.

the Howard Johnson motor Despite precise positioning demands, it still seemed more attainable than the others here below.
Also, read about Mike Brady's "Perendev" magnet motor at peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Perendev:300kW_Magnet_Motor_for_Sale "Poised to launch the first commercially viable magnetic motor as an alternate energy source."
Perendev Power Developments Pty (Ltd), of Johannesburg, has contracted with a German company to manufacture the first units. The license is for all of Europe, minus the U.K. Another agency is in line for production in Australia, and yet another for rights to North America.

A very different TESLA (+/-) magnet motor www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/adamsmotor.htm

Bowman Magnet Motor Open Sourcing Project

Status: Project commenced Dec. 2003 with Doug Mann's claim to a working device, which ended up running down due to demagnetization after three months of continuous running. Robert Calloway also claims to have accomplished rotation. Several other replications were made, but none of those achieved running mode. On July 31, 2005, the son of Lee Bowman contacted us. See report.

If this is a breakthrough then it would be one of the most ironic discoveries in history!

Because if you research "balanced armature driver" you'll discover they are used in popular earphones, which would

mean millions of people are walking around oblivious to the tiny OU devices in their ears.

tak

BAD_diag_.jpg (44.63 kB, 350x123 - viewed 1197 times.) Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #15 on: February 27, 2008, 03:57:28 AM Sponsored links:

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #16 on: February 27, 2008, 06:38:52 PM @ Tak, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

I know, also the same technology is used in small buzzers where the loudest possible noise with the smallest possible power consumption is more important than the quality of the sound.

Someone should have been asking questions about the device's potential for overunity long before now.

Hans von Lieven Logged

BEP

TPU-Elite Hero Member Posts: 1360

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #17 on: February 27, 2008, 07:43:52 PM

Hans,

Here is something you may enjoy. Probably not a well known version of an auto radio power supply. I always found them interesting because they were said to do a great job of heating the car when you didn't want to use gasoline.

SyncVibrator.GIF (5.23 kB, 539x377 - viewed 1152 times.) Logged

tak22

Sr. Member Posts: 265

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #18 on: February 27, 2008, 09:20:46 PM OK, so now we build a bigger magnet magnified "speaker", disconnect the speaker from the connecting rod, then attach what?

This is a new area for me. What is the most efficient known method for converting a pulsed force into electricity? Attach a magnet and shuttle it back and forth in a coil?

Also, is it essential to have a horseshoe magnet, or could it be done away with and just use magnets in place of the pole shoes?

With these question answered I'd know if my thoughts on a few ways to maximize the force and do away with the spring steel might work.

tak

Logged

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #19 on: February 27, 2008, 09:48:36 PM @ BEP elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Well observed, here the same principle is used to drive a vibrator in an inverter circuit.

@ tak

Yes , you could do this. It would seem to be a very clumsy way of going about it though. I actually designed something like this to test the system for overunity. I since have rejected the idea in favour of a far more elegant solution.

Below is my original concept

Hans von Lieven

testconcept.jpg (28.75 kB, 403x381 - viewed 1214 times.) Logged

tak22

Sr. Member Posts: 265

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #20 on: February 28, 2008, 03:08:53 AM Hans,

Greetings from the mild west of Canada! Does your 'more elegant' system still involve any moving/pivoting/swinging/rotating/pushing parts? No need to divulge yet, just curious to know if I should think of a better design than my current one, which has movement reduced to just linear motion of a transfer rod through a guide bearing.

I'm still not sure this can be done without a horseshoe style magnet. Can't know for sure until tried I guess.

tak Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #20 on: February 28, 2008, 03:08:53 AM Sponsored links:

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #21 on: February 28, 2008, 04:07:41 AM @ tak, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

I share your view with the horseshoe magnet as I think a clean north and a clean south is required, not a combination of both on either side, but maybe that does not matter if the magnets are long enough. Experiment will tell.

My concept drawing and animation of the motor are finished.I am now working on the write-up. I should have it up by tomorrow sometime barring the unforeseen

Hans von Lieven

Btw. The new design has no rods and no spring.

Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #21 on: February 28, 2008, 04:07:41 AM

fleebell
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #22 on: February 28, 2008, 04:16:37 AM I have been thinking I had seen something like this before. Finally found it. Jr. Member Posts: 83

This guy was doing something like this with magnets and pivots. You might want to look at his stuff too.

http://www.rexresearch.com/gary/gary1.htm

Lee Logged

nightlife

Hero Member Posts: 1068

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #23 on: February 28, 2008, 06:30:49 AM hansvonlieven, I am assuming you will be using a pulsed power source for the input and I am wondering if you have considered using the back EMF from the relay to enhance the output?

This next video link will give you a idea of what I am talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9OmLZ_wEVE&feature=related Logged

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #24 on: February 28, 2008, 05:58:11 PM elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Quote from: nightlife on February 28, 2008, 06:30:49 AM

hansvonlieven, I am assuming you will be using a pulsed power source for the input and I am wondering if you have considered using the back EMF from the relay to enhance the output?

G'day Nightlife and all,

You are correct in assuming that my device requires a pulsed power source. I have not thought about using back EMF. At this stage I want to get the mechanical problems out of the road and get a prototype running. There are considerable problems yet to be addressed in relation to the timing mechanism. Once these are overcome we will need to have a look if we can utilise back EMF.

It is early days yet.

Thanks for your contributions and suggestions. They are welcome.

Hans von Lieven Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #24 on: February 28, 2008, 05:58:11 PM Sponsored links:

neptune

Hero Member Posts: 1128

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #25 on: February 28, 2008, 08:42:23 PM I do not wish to discourage anyone from doing research. Personally, i feel that although this balanced armature device is very efficient at converting milliwatts of power into sound, it is probably not overunity. It just appears so, because of the very low efficiency of most loudspeakers in use today. This is not a problem, because audio amps are very cheap to make.The real difficulty , as always is measurement. How can you accurately measure sound output in watts? Logged

hansvonlieven
o
elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #26 on: February 28, 2008, 08:52:45 PM

Quote from: neptune on February 28, 2008, 08:42:23 PM I do not wish to discourage anyone from doing research. Personally, i feel that although this balanced armature device is very efficient at converting milliwatts of power into sound, it is probably not overunity. It just appears so, because of the very low efficiency of most loudspeakers in use today. This is not a problem, because audio amps are very cheap to make.The real difficulty , as always is measurement. How can you accurately measure sound output in watts?

This is possibly right. We don't know for certain though, do we? I feel it is worth inquiring into.

First we have to get away from sound to make real measurements, on that I agree. I am addressing this.

Hans von Lieven Logged

gyulasun

without_ads Hero Member Posts: 2437

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #27 on: February 29, 2008, 12:48:06 AM Hi Hans and all,

Somehow I still feel first a setup with a conventional electromagnet as the input power receiver is to be built and do our best making the output generating coils to produce at least the 60-70% of the total input, right? So far this is an unusual but valid AC/AC converter if you like with an expectable efficiency. And when we have such so called converter working fine, we could improve the input power receiver electromagnet with the addition of permanent magnets and see the hopefully useful effect of them in the reduced input power needed for the same output power as before without the magnets. Say we have to input 15W to the normal electromagnet to receive 10W at the output, this is about 66.6% efficiency and surely could be achieved. Better designed converters boost an efficiency number of well over 90% in a certain (narrow) output power range. After the addition of the improved electromagnet with the permanent magnets at the input, let's say we find the input power needed now is only 8W to get the same 10W output power. This would be about 125% efficiency (or a COP of 1.25). Hans, I like your proposed principle and I also can understand you wish to start with the improved electromagnet. I hope you will succeed. I just think to follow a safer way and work out.

rgds, Gyula Logged

hansvonlieven

elite_member

Hero Member Posts: 2558

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #28 on: February 29, 2008, 12:51:17 AM G?day all,

Before we go into the design concept for a motor, let?s have a look at the principle involved here.

(http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/freischwingerprinciple.jpg)

Fig. 1

shows the device at rest. There is no power supplied to the coil. The soft iron reed sits at the midpoint

between the poles, held in place by a spring. Since un-magnetised iron gets attracted by either pole there is equal pull from both sides, therefore the device is in a state of equilibrium.

Fig 2

shows the coil being energised by a forward current. The soft iron reed has now become an electromagnet.

The illustration shows the forward current forming a south pole facing the horseshoe magnet. The reed is now attracted by N and repelled by S giving it sharp unidirectional movement.

Fig 3

shows the current being reversed in polarity resulting in movement in the opposite direction.

What is remarkable here is that it needs very little power for these reactions to occur. The slightest magnetic bias in relation to the magnetic field of the horseshoe magnet triggers a reaction. The real work is done by the permanent magnet.

I see it like putting up a sail in a breeze. The more sail you put up the more power is delivered to your boat because you catch more of the wind.

Similarly here, the stronger the bias the more of the energy latent in the permanent magnet is caught.

Now this is where I get into trouble with conventional physics. Conventional physics sees the permanent magnet more like an anchor against which the electromagnet pushes or pulls itself toward dependent on polarity.

My leaning is more in line with Leedskalnin and Keely who see magnetism as two opposing streams of very real particles which cannot be created but only channelled by such things a permanent magnets and electromagnets and a whole host of other things where the effects are not as readily observable.

I see the permanent magnet like some sort of a canal where the particle flows are determined by the physical constraints of the channels, whereas I see the electromagnet as a sort of two way valve controlled by an electric

current.

Of course what I am saying here is pure heresy as far as conventional physics is concerned, but I have been called a heretic before, so it does not distress me unduly.

But back to our subject. The two main questions that need to be answered are: Can a motor be built using the Freischwinger system? and Does such a motor exhibit overunity?

The answer to the first question is: Yes a motor along those principles can be built with comparative ease.

As to the overunity question: Perhaps it can, experiment will tell.

So how would one go about designing such a motor?

Playing around with the fundamental principle I came up with the following approaches:

(http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/developideas.jpg)

Fig. 4

is just a extension of the original device. I have put two discrete magnets here, though a horseshoe magnet

can be put in its place. At the moment I don?t know if discrete magnets work in the same fashion. Something to find out.

I extended the reed upwards from the pivot to get more horizontal movement in order to drive a simple Faraday generator. The springs are still required to keep the device centred when quiescent. I did not like this as it costs energy. I decided to do away with it.

Fig. 5

shows a pendulum arrangement. This was a bad idea! I decided to try a pendulum to get rid of the spring.

The problem with this is the natural frequency of the pendulum.

The natural frequency of a pendulum is solely dependent on the distance between the fulcrum and the centre of gravity. In most places on earth (as gravity varies with latitude) that means that a one peter pendulum completes one cycle every two seconds, a 25 cm pendulum has a natural frequency of 1 cps and so forth. Since 1 cps was far too low for any practical application and 25 cm was about as small as you can get that meant that whatever pulses I fed into the device would have to overcome the natural frequency and force the vibrations. That would have cost a lot more than a spring in terms of energy, so it was back to the drawing board. Besides, I was unhappy with the reciprocal action of the device. Converting reciprocal movement into something usable is always inefficient and cumbersome. That is when I decided to try a wheel.

Fig. 6

shows the next arrangement. It became immediately clear that here was a far more elegant solution. I could

try for rotation.

The result was the following design.

Sorry fellows, on this one I am reserving my copyright, because I think here is a very real chance for something worthwhile, perhaps not overunity, but at least a fairly substantial motor that can run on very little energy. You can build the thing for yourself and play with it as much as you like, power your house or car with it if you can, I wish you well. Only where commercial exploitation is concerned I reserve my rights.

So here it is:

(http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/motorconcept.jpg)

Now this looks suspiciously like a common garden electromotor. So why should this thing be any better?

It requires only small pulses of energy to run.

I will go into the timing and nature of these pulses in my next article. In the meantime enjoy the animation.

(http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/motorconceptanimation.gif)

Hans von Lieven

Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? on: February 26, 2008, 04:40:31 AM G?day all.

Today I want to put a subject into the arena that to my knowledge has never been discussed here, though it should be. The device I am talking about is from the early days of radio and may well have exhibited overunity.

There is little detailed information of it on the net (one wonders why), so at the risk of boring some of you that are familiar with the history and technology I will start at the beginning.

I will leave aside the very early forms of wireless transmission via spark gap transmitters and coherer circuits as receivers, for they have nothing to do with the subject under discussion other than being a historical precedent.

The real revolution came about as the result of the researches of a man with the unlikely name of Greenleaf Whittier Pickard.

Greenleaf Whittier Pickard (born Feb. 14, 1877, in Portland, Maine) discovered that certain crystals, when touched by a fine wire (called a cat?s whisker) in certain spots, were capable of detecting RF waves and converting the signal into audible form. Thus he discovered semiconductors. Pickard patented his device in 1906.

This led to the development of the crystal receiver, or crystal radio as it was later known, which made its general appearance in around 1920 when it became a fad to build these receivers amongst radio amateurs.

The first sets were almost unbelievably simple. Here is a picture of the most basic form. You can build one of these today, it will still work. (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/detector.jpg)

As you can see it consists of an antenna, a tuneable coil a crystal detector (commonly a Galena crystal touched by a very fine silver wire) and a set of high impedance headphones. Antennas were usually between 30 and 100 feet long and about 10 feet or more off the ground. A good earth and a good antenna are crucial. There was no power other than what the antenna could drag in, which was typically in the Micro-Watt to small Milli-Watt range.

The next real trick was to convert these very small currents into a pressure wave to make them audible. Luckily the device that could accomplish this was already invented. Telephones were then in existence and the telephone earpiece made a good starting point.

So how did this work? (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs1.jpg)

The feeble current was fed into the coil of an electromagnet A. This in turn magnetised the soft iron core B in harmony with the strength of the signal, attracting the steel membrane C accordingly and creating a compression and decompression zone adjacent to the membrane, allowing these pulses to be perceived by the human ear.

For convenience and to cut out extraneous noise two these devices were employed in parallel and clamped to the ears of the listener. Acontemporary headset is pictured in Fig.2. Although the device pictured is from around 1930, they were available in almost unchanged form from around 1910 until the late 1950?s.

Coil impedance was generally between 1000 to 2000 Ohm, although coils with up to 4000 Ohm were in use at some time or other. This is very high by today?s standards where 8 or 16 Ohm are common. The coils were wound with incredibly thin wire, thinner than a human hair, often silk insulated, which was quite an engineering feat in itself at

the time.

OK, so much for background history and technology.

Headphones, at the best of times, are a pain in the butt. The headsets of early times were a hundred times worse. The metal membrane kills virtually all bass and has a tinny, grating sound which is hard on the nerves for extended periods. On top of this searching for a station would, in between signals, pick up static that screeched in your ears and send you almost deaf. Not a really good experience I can tell you. Apart from this, the things are uncomfortable and do not allow sharing of the broadcast, as two headsets on a single receiver are too much for the signal to drive.

The race to make it audible to more than one person was on. Thus the loudspeaker was born. A number of avenues were explored, including the use of a gas flame but since they are only of peripheral interest I will leave them aside.

The breakthrough came when some bright spark came up with a novel idea.

History appears to be strangely silent on the events leading up to this monumental discovery, in fact the whole thing appears to have disappeared from the text books, except in nondescript allusions. Again, one wonders why.

Instead of using an electromagnet to energise the membrane by direct influence he did the following: (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/partial.jpg)

He placed a soft iron reed B mounted on a support H via a piece of spring steel G, put it inside the coil A instead of a traditionally rigid core and found that the reed vibrated with the magnetic fluctuations.

Thist would not have given him much sound, but he went further.

Next he placed a permanent magnet around the device in such a fashion that the iron reed moved between the jaws of a permanent horseshoe magnet. To make the effect more pronounced he added pole shoes to the magnet to concentrate the field in the vicinity of the iron reed. He then added a connecting rod and a paper membrane to the device.

Like this: (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs2.jpg)

The effect was stunning. Suddenly the signal was amplified many times, to the point where it could drive a 7 inch paper cone and make the signal audible way beyond what a headset could produce, without additional input of energy. WOW! Hello There! (I will come back to this later.)

The trouble with this device was its poor performance acoustically. If the signal got too strong the soft iron reed hit the permanent magnet and got stuck there for an instant before the signal dropped to a point where it let loose again. This meant that the device could only be run at low volume.

I don?t know who invented this device, in spite of all by best efforts I have not been able to find out. There MUST have been a patent, if it still exists, as it should, I have been unable to find it. Make of that what you will.

Patents aside, this is not where development stopped.

The next development in this area was what German literature calls the Freischwinger. English literature is strangely silent on the matter.

Again, I have trouble locating who was responsible for this. One would have thought that in relation to a device like this, which was used by countless manufacturers from around 1925 to 1945 at least, and is still being used in some devices today where quality does not matter as much as very low current consumption, the relevant patent should be readily locatable, but no such luck.

Anyway, here it is: (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs3.jpg)

So, what are we looking at here?

Someone, perhaps the original inventor, took the system one step further, Instead of placing the electromagnet and its sphere of influence inside the horseshoe magnet he put it outside. Though still within the field of influence of the horseshoe magnet, the soft iron reed was now free to move outside the limits of the pole shoes. (Thus the German term Freischwinger, which means ?free to swing?) This allowed for much bigger amplitude. The result was much increased volume. In fact optimum volume since the device has never been improved upon.

Leaving its poor acoustic performance aside, I think we are looking here at a genuine amplification phenomenon. Energy is entering from somewhere. Keely talks about this, so do a lot of others. Rather than following a lot of dead avenues such as the Tasnierius device, the Perendev or Minato wheels, which have not produced anything of value, I suggest you look at this phenomenon. At least it works. Is it overunity? I don?t know for sure, but I would say it is likely.

Just to show how real this is have a look at the following photos: (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs4.jpg)

This is a photo of the real thing. Notice the horseshoe magnet, the coil, the soft iron reed and the connecting rod that goes through the wall energising the membrane.

Here is the whole device, the Fl?chenlautsprecher Nora L 10 - Jahrgang 1926 (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs5.jpg)

(sold and manufactured in 1926 in Germany) The German Volksempfaenger produced before and during the war had a similar loudspeaker.

Just think about it!

For better or worse,

Hans von Lieven

Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? on: February 26, 2008, 04:40:31 AM Sponsored links:

fleebell
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #1 on: February 26, 2008, 04:46:14 AM photos? where? Logged Jr. Member Posts: 83

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #2 on: February 26, 2008, 04:50:09 AM LOL fleebell, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

you were too quick for me, Still uploading

Hans Logged

fleebell
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #3 on: February 26, 2008, 05:05:30 AM I don't know about all the rest but that top photo is interesting. I used to have a book many years ago that was printed around the turn of the century with almost the same drawing. It had a 1 meg pot instead of the coil and and another ground rod instead of the antenna . We used to use the little high-z earphones you could get from radio shack with it. (those strange looking pink ones they sold) Some of us (teenagers at the time) tried it out and found out Jr. Member Posts: 83

you could tune in the local telephone conversations in the neighborhood. I guess it was picking up some kind of electromagnetic ground waves. I never could figure out how a 1 meg pot could tune it though but it did. Learned a lot of interesting things about the neighbors though

The rest looks like it would be easy enough to try out and see what happens. Lee Logged

helmut
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #4 on: February 26, 2008, 05:59:09 AM @Hans Thanks for the insight.Very interesting lesson. Hero Member Posts: 717

helmut Logged

gaby de wilde
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #5 on: February 26, 2008, 06:20:23 AM Sr. Member Posts: 470

Yes, This was exactly what I was referring to Hans.

Thanks for digging it up.

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=750 View topic - Perpetual motion made simple.

(http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/wesley-gary/1.png) In US Patent No. 190206[1] Wesley Gary[2] described the combination of pushing and pulling[3]. His devices embodies a permanent magnetic north and a permanent magnetic south pole with one end of a ferromagnetic core placed in the center, as a result the core moves neither up nor down. By creating an electromagnetic pole between the 2 permanent magnetic poles (what I refer to as) the effect of 3 points interacting arises[3]. Said pole is now subjected to both push and pull but in complimentary direction. This while the electricity consumed reflects the difference between the push and pull.

[1] - http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT190206 [2] - http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/wesley-gary [3] - http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/text/3-point-interaction [4] - http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?t=24

I also put together a video. 1 moment...

here

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/?wmf=perpetual-motion.wmv

or here

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/wesley-gary/?wmf=/../perpetual-motion.wmv

I also do art for fun when I don't have time. hahaha

How is this?

Greenleaf-Whittier-Pickard2.jpg (19.09 kB, 375x396 - viewed 1880 times.) Last Edit: February 26, 2008, 06:49:33 AM by gaby de wilde Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #5 on: February 26, 2008, 06:20:23 AM Sponsored links:

tak22

Sr. Member Posts: 265

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #6 on: February 26, 2008, 06:54:23 AM @Hans,

You bring some of the most interesting devices to our attention! Here's a clue to possible original patents:

http://www.crystalradio.net/soundpowered/introduction/index.shtml

Balanced Armature: A technology used to reproduce sound and is used in speakers, headphones and telephone units. First patented in 1918 by Henry Egerton and based on the 1882 balanced armature telephone patent of Thomas

Watson.

badrawing7c.jpg (64.98 kB, 510x322 - viewed 1915 times.) Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #6 on: February 26, 2008, 06:54:23 AM

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #7 on: February 26, 2008, 07:02:09 AM LOL Tak, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

It would never have occurred to me to look under "balanced armatures" A little too esoteric for me and my prosaic mind.

Thanks, I am enjoying this.

Greetings from the (Down) Underworld,

Hans Last Edit: February 26, 2008, 07:30:21 AM by hansvonlieven

Logged

tak22

Sr. Member Posts: 265

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #8 on: February 26, 2008, 07:23:01 AM Hey, might as well keep you laughing as I sure can't read this stuff

http://www.radiomuseum.org/forumdata/upload/328-332_Trockengleichrichter.pdf

The pictures look right though

tak Logged

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #9 on: February 26, 2008, 07:29:24 AM G'day Tak, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Greetings from the Down-Underworld.

Since we have had a lot of rain this year, the river Styx is full of water. Good old Charon is no longer pissed off about all the Mexicans that have been sneaking into the Underworld without permit or paying him.

Well, perhaps that will slow down the flood of Somalis coming here. But then with the government we now have that is unlikely.

They should give good old Caron his job back who according to Virgil (Aeneid (book 6, line 369)

There Charon stands, who rules the dreary coast A sordid god: down from his hairy chin A length of beard descends, uncombed, unclean; His eyes, like hollow furnaces on fire; A girdle, foul with grease, binds his obscene attire.

On the other hand, who needs a prick like this? Maybe Kevin Rudd is a little better.

Hans von Lieven Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #9 on: February 26, 2008, 07:29:24 AM Sponsored links:

tao

TPU-Elite Sr. Member Posts: 378

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #10 on: February 26, 2008, 08:01:18 AM Hans,

Thanks for the historic expose into this unique device.

Looking at the progression of designs that you have shown us, its obvious that there is definite GAIN (seen from the volume increases) going on this the successively designed devices.

Now, based on what I am thinking and seeing, I'd think that increasing the magnetic fields of the horseshoe magnet (or using a more modern setup with NdFebs, etc) would result is increased 'volume'. Therein lies the mechanism for GAIN, the shear presence of the permanent magnet(s), period.

Now, how does the presence of the horseshoe magnet (with pole shoes) increase the effective output (volume) of the device?

I am thinking along these lines (mind you, I usually ponder things much longer before posting, so excuse any errors in spelling or thought, lol):

(http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/fs3.jpg)

1. The device is at rest: the soft iron reed (B) is being equally attracted to both pole pieces of the horseshoe magnet which causes the soft iron reed (B) to stay right where it is. The mounting (H) and the spring steel (G) help the soft iron reed (B) stay right in the middle of the two poles of the horseshoe magnet. (Picture the mounting (H) and spring steel (G) pieces, as they are connected with the soft iron reed (B), picture this like a spring for the purposes of our discussion)

2. Now, when a current flows through the coil (A), a magnetic field will be setup along the length of the soft iron reed (B). Now, this is where I feel the GAIN is, because there is a magnetic now setup in the soft iron reed (B) and no matter how small that magnetic field is, there is now a disruption of equilibrium between the soft iron reed (B) and the horseshoes poles. So, in effect the equilibrium that was in Step 1 is now no longer. So, depending on the orientation of the magnetic field setup in the soft iron reed (B), the pole pieces of the horseshoe magnet will now attract and repulse the soft iron reed (B). An example would be, if at the end of the soft iron reed (B), that is near the poles of the horseshoe magnet, there is setup a south pole for instance, then the south pole piece of the horseshoe magnet will now repulse the soft iron reed (B) and the north pole piece will attract the soft iron reed (B). The force of these attractions and repulsions would be based on two variables, the strength of the horseshoe's pole pieces and the strength of the magnetic field setup in the soft iron reed (B) by the coil (A). Therefore, one could conclude that using stronger permanent magnets would result in MORE GAIN in this device.

3. Now, how does the soft iron reed (B) get back to the Step 1, for instance when the incoming audio signal to coil (A) alternates polarity, or the signal to the device via coil (A) is no longer incoming? Well, the answers to these two situations involve two effects I feel. One is the SPRING effect. Remember I said to think of the mounting (H) and the spring steel (G) as a spring. The other effect is the changed magnetic field on the soft iron reed (B) when the coil (A) reverses polarity or stops a signal all together. Now, for the case when coil (A) changes the magnetic field on the soft iron reed (B), the two effects combine to cause the soft iron reed (B) to move in the opposite direction. The one effect is the mere fact that coil (A) is producing an opposite magnetic field on the soft iron reed (B) which will cause a repulsion of the soft iron reed (B) from its current position, and the second effect involved would be the RELEASING of the energy now stored in the SPRING effect of the mounting (H) and spring steel (G). These combined things will cause the soft iron reed (B) to move to the opposite pole of the horseshoe magnet. Now, in the case where coil (A) is no longer providing a signal, this means that there won't be an impressed magnetic field on the soft iron reed (B) by coil (A) anymore and this fact and the ensuing RELEASING of the energy built up in the SPRING made up of the mounting (H) and the spring steel (G) will ALLOW the soft iron reed (B) to get BACK TO a state of equilibrium that it had in Step 1.

PHEW...

I can explain what I have written if anyone doesn't get it. It's about 1am, so again, please excuse any spelling or thought errors...

More on this from me later, heheh.

Last Edit: February 26, 2008, 09:36:53 AM by tao Logged

gaby de wilde
o
Sr. Member Posts: 470

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #11 on: February 26, 2008, 09:23:18 AM

Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote

from: from: from: from: from: from:

hansvonlieven on February 26, 2008, 05:01:28 AM gaby de wilde on February 26, 2008, 01:02:46 AM hansvonlieven on February 25, 2008, 08:09:25 AM gaby de wilde on February 25, 2008, 02:46:12 AM hansvonlieven on February 25, 2008, 02:00:20 AM gaby de wilde on February 24, 2008, 10:55:51 PM

He shows us even the most Heretic septic can lead out creative bursts or at least pulses of creativity. Still I find my own explanation some what less complicated.

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=750
View topic - Perpetual motion made simple.

I have been called a lot of things before, heretic - yes, skeptic - yes, Heretic septic LOL Never, I like it! Incidentally Gaby, your idea has merit. There was a similar system working in the 1930's where it was used to amplify sound. I don't know how good your German is but have a search under Freischwinger Lautsprecher. The system was used in the wartime German Volksempfaenger. Literature in English on the subject is non existent, just a few references to soft iron loudspeakers, nothing definitive. Hans von Lieven

(http://www.overunity.com/2794/the-lee-tseung-lead-out-theory/dlattach/attach/17985/image//) Is this what you mean? @ Gaby, Yes, But let's leave uncle Adolf out of the picture. It is the technology of the speaker (as in loudspeaker and not political speaker) I am talking about. The speaker, as used in the Volksempfaenger, was capable of reproducing sound with an unpowered crystal radio as a source, if used instead of the customary headphones. We are talking here about Micro-watts driving a 5 inch paper cone with the assistance of permanent magnets. If this is not getting close to overunity I don't know what is.

The system was made obsolete, not because of efficiency, but because of its poor performance where sound quality (fidelity) was concerned. It simply could not compete in this area against the newly invented moving coil loudspeakers. Hans von Lieven

Very nice, thanks for this. Quote The system was made obsolete, not because of efficiency, but because of its poor performance where sound quality (fidelity) was concerned. Yes, indeed I keep reading no no this is not good move on nothing to see here kinda articles. A bit like when some one said the halbach array was dangerous. haha You know like hydrogen? Danger danger? lol Quote It simply could not compete in this area against the newly invented moving coil loudspeakers. Hans von Lieven Sure, we only need one good speaker, the rest is often forgotten about. Here is some more info on the idea.

Perpetual motion made simple

Well Gaby, Jokes aside, I was serious, for once, in this thread. I have been working for a while on this, ever since Gustav Pese and I discussed the subject some 2 or 3 months ago. I put the finishing touches on my essay and put it up on the forum under

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4172.0/topicseen.html
Maybe it will be of help Hans von Lieven

Well Hans, don't forget that I'm the one who has been working at this for quite some time. I asked you for your opinion of my work. you was working at the earth batteries and the milkovic pendulum and at lawrence.

you say, "Incidentally Gaby, your idea has merit." and "Jokes aside, I was serious, for once, in this thread. I have been working for a while on this," And now this new topic where you disclose "your" grandiose idea that you worked at for some time. While you was the serious guy? And I was the incidental factor? Dude, you have only just begun taking the whole topic seriously.

I bet 10 min from now you even see merit in a Hamel spinner. hahahaha

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/wesley-gary/?wmf=/../perpetual-motion.wmv

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/?v=FaJb6uh-VuU

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/3-point-interaction

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/flux-switching

Then years later Hans says:

"Today I want to put a subject into the arena that to my knowledge has never been discussed here"

Sure hans!

pffff!!

3-points-interacting.PNG (13.07 kB, 360x388 - viewed 1719 times.)

wesley-gary-fig-1-v2b.png (60.58 kB, 561x339 - viewed 1730 times.)

neutral-trust.jpg (14.74 kB, 611x672 - viewed 331 times.) Last Edit: February 26, 2008, 09:46:27 AM by gaby de wilde Logged

gyulasun

without_ads Hero Member Posts: 2437

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #12 on: February 26, 2008, 05:48:04 PM Hi Folks,

I fully agree with the GAIN as Tao termed it in the setup referred to and it comes from adding flux from permanent magnet to that of electromagnet and the higher the flux of the permanent magnet the smaller input power is needed for the electromagnet for a certain task to fulfill. Fine, so far so good. The GAIN manifests in less input power to the electromagnet.

I would like to understand how or why this will bring us to overunity?

rgds, Gyula Logged

pese
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #13 on: February 26, 2008, 06:44:08 PM TPU-Elite Hero Member Posts: 1599

The FREISCHWINGER Loudspeackers .... Whole series VOLKSEMPF?NGER had. Did around 1950 with the father learned to repair such things (with 8-10 years ewis in garages).

Yes it is forgotten issue, which no one knows more and has garnicht of function. I see that with perhaps a 1-2 watts GIANTS-VOLUME reached TO and I simply so that the high Magnetic coil Milliwatts needs only to the anchor of the funds situation. This is in the "neutral zone" of the magnetic field. (Also a rare term that hardly recognized) BUT with the publishing from the neutral position is Very stiff cardboard with membrane VIOLENCE alternately by North / South dressed! There is an enormous power to the anchor "to attract" would, because the membrane forces against this magnet power. That means the construction works as MAGNET-AMP, in the truest sense of the word! De will work through the membrane into efficient strong speaker sound wiedergegen .. I have the "feeling" that the efficiency (by the magnetic force) is many times higher, than the current meters Speaker all with irrational watt high-performance driven,

ADD at 28.febr.08

THE MEMBRANE was very hard attached in Chassis an very hard to move . Only with stronger forces the mebrane was to move + - 1 mm !! With audio - sound it was less , ut very loud.

IT schowm that a low power on coil can not make the power to move the menbrane . The (overunity?) Forces comes from the Magnets ,when the tongue is leaving the neutral zone and the magnetic forces added

Gustav Pese Last Edit: February 28, 2008, 04:49:31 PM by pese Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #13 on: February 26, 2008, 06:44:08 PM

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #14 on: February 26, 2008, 10:09:10 PM elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Quote from: gyulasun on February 26, 2008, 05:48:04 PM

Hi Folks, I fully agree with the GAIN as Tao termed it in the setup referred to and it comes from adding flux from permanent magnet to that of electromagnet and the higher the flux of the permanent magnet the smaller input power is needed for the electromagnet for a certain task to fulfill. Fine, so far so good. The GAIN manifests in less input power to the electromagnet. I would like to understand how or why this will bring us to overunity? rgds, Gyula

G'day Gyula and all,

By and large I agree with tao's assessment of the device. By adding the permanent magnet there is an enormous increase in mechanical power observable in the device without any more input power being consumed.

That means that the magnetic field adds energy of some sort into the system. Isn't this what we are looking for?

To my mind it is the use of the neutral point between the poles that opens up an avenue for heterodyning of some sort. The famous Neutral Centre that Keely continually talks about, which according to Keely has to be established first before any influx of energy form the ether, as he terms it, can take place. Keely states that by influencing the Neutral Centre of a device the whole equilibrium can be disturbed with less power than it takes to wind a watch (his words, not mine). It would appear that here is an example of this mechanism.

The mechanical gain exhibited by the Freischwinger has never been satisfactorily explained, physics books simply

sweep the phenomenon under the carpet.

I am endeavouring to design a machine that makes use of this phenomenon. It is probably a better direction to follow than a lot of other ideas floating around. At least this one holds promise.

Hans von Lieven

: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #45 on: February 29, 2008, 11:35:44 PM G?day all,

Now we come to the pulsing required to get the device to work.

Before we get into this though we must take another look at the Freischwinger system in its original form. Because the energised soft iron reed moves between the poles of a magnet there is a definite limit to the amount of movement available. No amount of power will propel it beyond this. (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/limit.jpg)

Fig. 7

shows the limits of movement.

In position A the iron reed is un-energised. Since iron is attracted to either pole both poles exert equal pull, the forces balance each other out, and the system is in equilibrium.

If we now energise the reed by turning the coil on, it will become an electromagnet with two distinct poles. We can reverse the polarity of the electromagnet by reversing the flow of current through the coil.

Shall we say a forward current polarises the reed with the north pole facing the permanent magnet. Since like poles repel and unlike poles attract the reed is propelled by both poles to the right, up to the strongest point of attraction (point B). There it will come to rest, having found the point of equilibrium of all participating forces.

Reversing polarity will move the reed in the opposite direction and stop at point C.

If we switch the power off at the extreme points the iron reed will just stick there since it is still attracted, albeit with diminished power. That is why the spring is necessary to bring the reed back to the neutral mid point.

In the design of the motor we have to deal with these ?stick points? in some way before we can induce rotation. This we can do with well timed pulses. (http://keelytech.com/freischwinger/pulses.jpg)

Fig. 8

shows the pulse sequence.

The first pulse is applied as the reed reaches the limit of the magnetic sphere of influence of the horseshoe magnet (A). Strictly speaking this pulse is not required as the soft iron reed is attracted naturally, but an energy injection at this point is advantageous.

The polarity must be reversed when the ?stick point? is reached (here indicated by the black line). This polarity must be kept up until the next ?stick point? is reached (black line in B).

Now we must reverse again (C) until the reed is outside the sphere of influence of the horseshoe magnet.

Needless to say that all four magnets in the motor are energised simultaneously.

Thus we have rotation.

Hans von Lieven Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #45 on: February 29, 2008, 11:35:44 PM Sponsored links:

allcanadian

Hero Member Posts: 808

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #46 on: March 01, 2008, 12:49:26 AM @hansvonlieven LOL, we are on the same runway thats for sure, Hans I built "your" motor last year! But you are only utilizing one

pole, I also built the rotary version of Wesley Gary's process which uses both poles of the armature. As well you have no active means for energy recovery such as inductive kickback or transformer action to increase efficiency. It was only a matter of time before sombody got this so we may as well open this can of worms. If you look at the picture Hans posted we see an armature imbedded in the rotor, a non-metallic rotor, we could concieve this armature as a "monopole" as it relates to the PM field because it does not link in series with it nor does it actively repel the PM field in the usual manner. As such the PM field cannot couple to the armature field thus cannot effect its operation, the armature acts exactly like an open inductor not like a rotor armature as the PM field flux does not flow "through" the armature only "around" it---- this is the key to its operation. The drawback of Hans design is the fact that the armatures other pole is not utilized in any way.A better design is illustrated in the picture below (BA motor), the ring is made of ordinary iron washers with tabs welded on, the PM bridge section is an "H" transformer cut

in half with the magnetssecured as shown. The dark grey lines are the wires for the series wound armature the red lines are wires for energy revovery if one would wish to raise the output voltage through induction like in a transformer(recommended), the green lines indicate flux lines. This design works very well with the appropriate circuitry and can have many PM sections around the perimeter depending on the rotor diameter. The next photo(AB motor 2) is a design I developed from the Wesley Gary motor------ It is the Wesley Gary motor ------ only the rotor happens to run past the magnets and not between them. Here both poles of the armature are utilized, the main diagram is the top view, the red lines are windings on the dark grey armatures, on the lower left is a side view of the rotor and armatures. The magnet polarities are indicated as red (north) blue (south), the green lines are flux direction indicators. What is not transparent is the fact that little is gained from this setup from a magnetic perspective, there are forces acting against the rotor you just don't see them unless you build it. The gain comes from the fact that the armature can act like a "pure inductor" and not like aconventional rotor would where the flux must flow through it----- think residual magnetism and magnetic drag or the lack of it. Is it OU, I will let you decide when you build it.

Don't feel too bad that I beat you to this hans, I was beaten as well---- I built all the motors posted and was very excited ---- then I learned all of this has been patented in the 1940's LOL such is life. Maybe with help we could improve this to new heights!!! --- brushless maybe? . I was beaten to it by over 60 years,

BA_motor.gif (3.18 kB, 357x292 - viewed 696 times.)

BA_motor2.gif (3.62 kB, 357x292 - viewed 685 times.) Logged

nightlife

Hero Member Posts: 1068

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #47 on: March 01, 2008, 01:08:52 AM You all maybe should being looking at utilizing this next invention's concept by using voice coils instead of wind. It would be much more simple to design and build and yet would create 100% true free energy from thin air if a cystal radio concept was utilized in the design.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMojRXK14jU Logged

gyulasun

without_ads Hero Member Posts: 2437

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #48 on: March 01, 2008, 01:17:54 AM

Quote from: allcanadian on March 01, 2008, 12:49:26 AM

--- then I learned all of this has been patented in the 1940's LOL such is life. Maybe with help we could improve this to new heights!!! --- brushless maybe? . I was beaten to it by over 60 years,

@allcanadian, could you recall the patent number, please?

Thanks, Gyula Logged

allcanadian

Hero Member Posts: 808

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #49 on: March 01, 2008, 01:31:55 AM If Im correct I found it at the Rexresearch site or panacea , it was a motor like hans and another that used an insane amount of PM armatures like the ones I posted with the same armatures crossways on the rotor. In any case I was looking at patented devices, it broke my freaking heart is what it did, you think "ya" this is it I got a live one --- my own device, new and unique and then your crushed. Is there anything that has not been patented !! So we just keep plugging away----such is life-again I have my motors still, I scammed the neos and the bearings but I imagine I could get them running and post a few scopeshots if anyone wants. Logged

nightlife

Hero Member Posts: 1068

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #50 on: March 01, 2008, 02:52:11 AM allcanadian, I believe that anything we figure out, has already been figured out as well as patented. All we can do is make our findings public so those who want to, can build them themselves. Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #50 on: March 01, 2008, 02:52:11 AM Sponsored links:

allcanadian

Hero Member Posts: 808

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #51 on: March 01, 2008, 03:35:32 AM Damn, I thought I put this behind me but something Hans said got me thinking Hans said the field between the PM's is like a stream, if so then the armature is like a paddle --- we dip it in and catch

hold of the stream and at the center we reverse our paddle to propel ourselves out of the stream. But the power in this instant is limited due to the surface area of our paddle and the fact work is involved when we have to turn it at the center point, as well the stream is limited in distance --- we jump from puddle to puddle incurring more losses. What we want is to extend the stream as far as possible in length to increase efficiency but still retain the geometry of the stream, why use a paddle when we could use a paddle wheel ---- think of paddles only smaller whereby energizing one catches the stream but also induces a paddle next to it in sequence, this sequence moving in the opposite direction of the stream---- so it is standing still----in the stream but the armatures are moving !!!! So there would be no switching, it would be a series of timed inductive discharges in a ring of micro armatures, micro LC circuits ------ the more slip in the armatures the more current is induced in them and the more it grabs the stream accelerating the rotor. This could be done with simple slip rings on the rotor shaft to maintain the process. Im going to have to think on this a bit and do some calculations. Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #51 on: March 01, 2008, 03:35:32 AM

Charlie_V

Sr. Member Posts: 362

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #52 on: March 01, 2008, 05:36:07 AM I really like this idea! Time to ponder.... Logged

nightlife

Hero Member Posts: 1068

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #53 on: March 01, 2008, 06:14:38 AM In this next video, think of the this coil as a voice coil and how a voice coil works and the potential it has when coupled with a crystal radio and how the voice coil could be used to create movement needed to create energy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3ELycNRccY

Take for instance this next design of mine and alter it by replacing the battery with a crystal radio and replace the electromagnet with a voice coil. The EMF should be routed to the over all output. Also note that when the EMF is taken away, relays and coils tend to operate cooler which helps keep them as efficient as possible.

magnet_motor1.jpg (88.31 kB, 1218x822 - viewed 133 times.) Logged

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #54 on: March 01, 2008, 08:13:25 AM @ allcanadian, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

I am not altogether convinced we are talking about the exact same thing here. Give me a day or two to think about it in depth and we'll talk some more.

I appreciate your input and contribution. I just see things a little different right now. But that is what makes bookmakers so we cannot be doing all that bad.

Greetings from the Down Underworld,

Hans von Lieven Logged

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #54 on: March 01, 2008, 08:13:25 AM Sponsored links:

allcanadian

Hero Member Posts: 808

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #55 on: March 01, 2008, 04:58:25 PM @hansvonlieven Hans I would really like to thank you for introducing me to the balanced armature oscillator, It is people like you that take the time to research and post documentation that make this such a nice place to be. I was taken on quite a journey after my last post, mostly things I knew but could not put in there places. If we look at the basic balanced armature and evolve it to a rotary machine some things become apparent, that switching is an issue. If we further evolve the design we would turn the rotary design inside out, that is PM's on the rotor and small/long core armatures of high self-inductance on the stator. The rotor would have alternating poles(N-SN-S) and the flux paths would link---- our stream. This is the adams motor, the bedini monopole motor and the lutec motor ----- all are motor/generators! So we have an evolution of design, a timeline starting at the balanced armature oscillator, the Wesley Gary oscillator(both poles utilized), the adams motor, the bedini motor and most recently the lutec motor/generator. Most people see these machines as repulsion motors but I think they are far from it, I would call them repulsion/attraction motors, both in the same instance. Based on a better understanding of the core technology(the balanced armature), I came to another understanding that the PM fields are always spherical in nature. We tend to see only the opposing poles of the PM and not the neutral center or the fact that the field becomes spherical the farther we move away from the field following the inverse squre law. In the picture below of a PM rotor we can see the fields and what could be considered nodes of sorts, the green lines would seperate outgoing flows and the blue lines incoming flows, the red lines the magnetic field and its direction of flow.So here we can see the need for continuous switching of the armature polarity and the losses associated with this switching is the biggest loss I can think of. It would seem that the simplicity of the basic balanced armature still has a lot to offer, maybe more so that it's evolved counterparts in this respect. Realistically my previous rant has some merit, that is the field must be stretched out to a maximum length to minimize switching losses. The PM field should be very large relative to the rotor diameter so that the armature does not interact with any PM pole persay but with the spherical field as a whole as in the picture BA Rev5. This would not

be a powerful motor but a very efficient one and that is what we are after I think, O/U would be about efficiency, that is energy in Vs energy out and not so much about power density. So I think this thread that Hans has started has a great deal of potential and I learned that even this old dog can learn some new tricks.

BA_moto4.gif (3.55 kB, 357x292 - viewed 563 times.)

BA_Rev_5.gif (3.61 kB, 357x292 - viewed 534 times.) Logged

hansvonlieven
o
Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #56 on: March 01, 2008, 11:49:54 PM G'day all, elite_member Hero Member Posts: 2558

Perhaps one of you electronics guys can answer this one.

Given the same current, is there a difference in the magnetic field strength between a high impedance electromagnetic coil (say above 1 Kilo-Ohm, many windings with very thin wire) and a low impedance coil (say 100 Ohm, fewer windings, thicker wire)?

Hans von Lieven Logged

ltseung888

Hero Member Posts: 2532

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #57 on: March 02, 2008, 07:22:44 AM Please read

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg79952.html#msg79952

for my comments Logged

gyulasun

without_ads Hero Member Posts: 2437

Re: Overunity Device using Magnets in the 1920's ? Reply #58 on: March 02, 2008, 12:29:45 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on March 01, 2008, 11:49:54 PM

G'day all, Perhaps one of you electronics guys can answer this one. Given the same current, is there a difference in the magnetic field strength between a high impedance electromagnetic coil (say above 1 Kilo-Ohm, many windings with very thin wire) and a low impedance coil (say 100 Ohm, fewer windings, thicker wire)? Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,

Yes there is a difference: the coil with higher number of turns will produce higher field strength than the coil with less

number of turns, assuming the same current for both. There is the so called Amperturns (as characteristics coming from excitation law H*l =I*N H=field strength, l =length of magnetic path, I=current, N=number of turns) which means the number of turns of a coil is multiplied by the current flowing in that coil, so the number of turns is linearly proportional to the received field strength [assuming the core (if any) is not approaching saturation].

Note: to maintain the same current in a coil with higher number of turns, you have to pay for it by feeding in higher input power. (compare in you example of coils DC resistances: I*I*1000 versus I*I*100)

Gyula

EDIT: one addition to a fuller picture is that in case of electromagnets the permeability of the core plays a tremendous role in the final ?strength?, for the higher the relative permeability the stronger the emagnet can be, considering the same current. See the very good experiments by member Honk here with electromagnets for his motor.