OOOps! I was using stator magnet speed for may calculations and I should have used rotor speed. So multiply my figures by 4, or about 60-80 usec per transaction.

You're right. I was thinking revolutions per second, so we need to slow things down by another factor of 60, or about 3.6 - 4.8 ms per complete transaction.

edit: Still, if we add a really viscous substance like iron into the equation, something with viscous reactions (in bulk) in the seconds, we could probably see some effects.

The stator magnet rotates once in 8 milliseconds, during which time the rotor goes 1/4 revolution, or 2 magnet transactions in 8 milliseconds.

I think.

Maybe the answer is to use eddy current damping instead of bulk viscous reaction. Hence we could have a retarding effect without actual attraction and stickyness.

alsetalokin:Maybe the answer is to use eddy current damping instead of bulk viscous reaction. Hence we could have a retarding effect without actual attraction and stickyness.

The attraction and stickyness is what provides the dwell and loads the arm so it accelerates quickly in repulsion. I wasn't referring to any viscous damping. Here's a link to what I mentioned before, as a refresher:
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=59687&page=4#Item_45
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=59687&page=3#Item_44

We would probably need to add some viscous material in order to do it even then.

edit: and on the 3.6 - 4.8 ms I mentioned, that was counting 8 transactions per rotor revolution. If there are only 4, then these numbers would double, and that agrees pretty well with your 8 ms numbers. I used a range because of the gap between stators. I'm not sure how the gap affects the transaction. There could be some dead space in between or maybe the transaction actually continues even past the halfway point.

@Al,

If you want to do an interesting experiment, try this back-to-basics one. Remove all stator magnets except 2 next to each other. We'll only be considering 2 rotor magnets as well, just mark them with a piece of tape or something so we can keep track of just those 2 magnets. This will be something like the 2x2 simulation we want Debaser to do. We're going to rotate things slowly by hand.



()


() <-- Free to rotate

[] <-- Attracted to upcoming stator magnet
Rotor wants to move towards stator magnet


[]

---------------------------

()


() [] <- Rotor magnet in position, hold it there
and force the stator past the sticky spot
pushing it but not holding it, the rotor
should just suddenly spin past both stator
[] magnets. If not, the spacing may be too
close, try separating stator magnets by
skipping one hole and try again.


If you had enough hands, you could actually walk completely around the full 13x8 rig, holding all the required stator magnets in position and feeling the forces at work. To actually get the thing autorotating, I think we need both latches and pivots.

Re the copyright issue. Anything posted on a public forum can't be patented therefore anyone can copy it.

alsetalokin:The slowest they will remain in "opposite synch" seems to be around 1160 rpm (or about 290 rpm for the rotor). As the system brakes from a high-rpm run, the stator magnet loses synch and either stops dead or starts rotating in the "natural" or gear-like direction, but now at 2 x rotor rpm rather than 4x as before. Once this happens the rotor can no longer sustain rapid rotation and coasts to a stop.
I can start the thing by spinning the rotor to 300-400 rpm (that's as fast as I seem to be able to get it going by hand) and then flipping a stator magnet. It usually takes 5-10 tries, and several re-spins of the rotor, before it "catches" and the magnets go into "opposite synch" or whatever.

.....Now suppose this relationship continued locked in phase as the assembly gradually accelerates until reaching a maximum measured rpm of 1904 rpm for the rotor, and 7633 rpm for the stator magnet, both rotating clockwise.....

It's pretty scary when the thing gets up to max rpm. The little stator magnet really whiizzes at 7600 rpm. The first time I wasn't sure if it would stay together, or punch a hole in the ceiling, or what.
I got pretty excited, I must admit.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

So you spin the rotor to 300-400 rpm (as fast as you can get it going by hand) then reverse the spin on a stator magnet and it reverses the spin on all the stator magnets.

Then you gradually accelerate the rotor with a dremel tool?
What determines the maximum rpm of the rotor and stator (1904 and 7633 as mentioned above)?

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

CWatters:Re the copyright issue. Anything posted on a public forum can't be patented therefore anyone can copy it.

Thanks, CWatters. That was my general understanding as well, but I checked the TOS anyway, just to see what rights Steorn was claiming to have.

Summary: The idea is safely in the Public Domain

@rX: No, you have to reverse-spin each stator magnet individually by hand, and it can be hard to get them all going. A little bearing drag causes the magnet to refuse to synch in the reverse direction, or to drop out before reaching incredible speeds. Or maybe it's variation in the individual magnets. I found one last night that would go 8030 rpm, and a couple that I couldn't get to synch at all.
Mostly I am working with one at a time, and the others spin gear-wise for a while then give up and stop as the rotor spins up.
I'm not using the dremel. The spin rpm tops out, I think, because of air resistance and bearing friction. The slightest touch on the spinning stator magnet will cause it to "drop out" and decelerate to a stop incredibly fast, like from 8000 rpm to 0 in about 5 revolutions. At that point the rotor is freewheeling and slowing down, and because of its inertia and good bearings, that takes a couple minutes to get from 2k or so down to the 300-400 rpm range where I can re-spin the stator magnet to get it to re-synch. And that takes, as I said, 5-10 tries usually before it "catches" and then the cycle can repeat.
In my dreams, of course.

@OC, believe me I have done what you describe, in many possible variations, for hours on end. That's why I built these gadgets in the first place. I've even taken them out on the subway and the bus a few times.
Nothing I saw or felt would have enabled me to predict this behavior of spinning non-gear-like and causing such rapid rotation. I expected, if anything, a rather stately motion like a miniature Ferris wheel or something, but this phenomenon is in a completely different class altogether.
I think it's time to abandon the idea of mechanical latches. We seem to have progressed beyond that point, to where electronic latching will be needed. Maybe also some kind of field shaping coils a la Helmholz.

(ETA I discovered the reverse-spin phenomenon completely by accident--I was trying to see if I could get the magnet to re-engage in the gear-wise direction, flipping it over and over, until it finally took off and scred the crap out of me. I even repeated the thing several times before I realized I had been flipping the magnet the wrong direction and when it engaged it was spinning backwards, ie clockwise like the rotor.)

(I wrote the following before I wrote the preceding, go figure...)


Well, it's clear that I need more data. As you may know, for the last week or so I have been in my basement apartment, experimenting with a few tools and the 13x8 (or 7Ax8) test jig. I have a laser tachometer and a DMM and a few wrenches and screwdrivers and that's about it. Of course at the lab I have a bazillion bucks worth of exotic test equipment, picosecond oscilloscopes, screen rooms, function generators, machine tools, ceramics lab, you name it, I've pretty much got it at hand. But I haven't been out there since before Christmas, and won't be working again until Wednesday. So understand that recent reports are not even preliminary, they are more like rudimentary, like from Teej's planet or something.

As I said, I am in a basement apartment. My workbench is in the tiny kitchen, a slice of plywood up against a side (exterior underground) wall. The house's main electrical distribution panel is embedded in this wall. I just realized this over morning coffee (I haven't been sleeping very well the past couple nights...)

So. recalling RB's great vcr-head PMM, and some of the Steornish theorizing, I realize I need to dash out to the lab, I guess, and pick up a couple easily portable EM field testing meters and gadgets, to make sure that the damn electrical panel isn't causing the hypothetical effects that I hypothetically could be seeing.

Wednesday I'll truck the whole affair out to the lab, and if I still have a job, I'll try to sneak some more time to do some vids and of course more testing.

(Gee, as I recall we have been using the big screen room for storage, there are a few big HV devices in there, sparky, EMP-type things, a Podkletnov anti-gravity beam generator, a couple reverse-engineered ufo propulsors, etc...have to move all that stuff out for testing...boss thinks I'm nuts...because Permanent Magnet Motors Can't Possibly Work (PMMCPW!))

Oh, and Happy New Year to all!



(ETA there's always a typo somwhere)

@Al,
I disagree. I think we should methodically explore every aspect of the thing we can and document the results as well as we can. That's part of the reason I started soliciting for someone to maintain documentation. Mechanical or electrically actuated latches (with relay or solenoid far enough away that they don't affect the magnetic interactions) are something that need to be investigated and I believe will be more important when the stators are separated more (larger rotor). Right now, you are not seeing the necessity because of the close stator spacing and the interaction of the stator magnets on each other.

The effects with smaller rotors, closer stators, and higher speeds were things I hadn't really considered when I put this concept together. After hearing some of your results, I have decided this needs to be investigated as well. There are likely some very interesting things we can learn here. I believe the most likely anomalies we will see by going this direction will be from magnetic reconnection phenomena rather than magnetic viscosity.

But I don't want to neglect the original idea. In fact, I think the original idea is where our initial efforts should be concentrated. Let's see what happens there first. I really think a larger rotor will be needed to (in)validate my original copncept.

Too bad we can't seem to drum up more replicators to help with all the possible variations. Actually, if we could post a couple videos of things you have already done, I'm sure we could stir up some interest. A video showing the fields in motion, using the field viewing film would be interesting. So would this latest behavior you are describing.

Please, please, don't jeopardize your job. I don't know where we'll ever be able to find good testing facilities if you lose it. Best possible outcome would be to get the boss as interested as we are. Who knows, if he bacame a fan, maybe he might even give you more time and real support, even allocate some time from other employees.

But we really need documentation and some interesting results!

@Al,

These effects you have described here, which configuration are you seeing this with? Is it the 7x8 or 13x8? In either case, I think the first change that should be made is the addition of pivots for the rotor magnets. For a rotor of this size, spinning at say 50 rpm or more, we shouldn't even need any springs, just allow the magnets to pivot and swing the trailing end away, if and when it wants to. I would think it would be self-regulating above a certain speed (speed gets too high, centrifugal force is greater than can be overcome by the repulsive resistance which slows the rotor down until the magnets can pivot again to reduce resistance and allow the rotor to speed up again).

@Al
Very fascinating results!
This phenomenon is, as you said, quite unexpected.
I can see why the "reversed" stator magnet speeding up would really scare you and why you are not sleeping so well at night.
When you have the rotor spinning, how many of the stator magnets have you been able to get into "reverse" spin?
Does the rotor lose rpm (spin down) slower with more "reversed" stator magents engaged?

Sounds like history in the making.
Keep up the good work!

P.S. I also want to confirm you are saying the rotor is accelerating from say 400 rpm up to 1160 rpm by only reversing the spin of one stator magnet.

overconfident:

Please, please, don't jeopardize your job. I don't know where we'll ever be able to find good testing facilities if you lose it.

===========

LOL

You don't see compassion like that every day.

couldbe:You don't see compassion like that every day.

I'm not really well known for my compassion and empathy ... mostly for my wild ideas and long hours. Fortunately for me a number of my brain farts have proved to be practical, and I tend to come through in a crunch. That usually keeps my employer satisfied.

Right now, I really wish I had the facilities Al has and the skills to use them. This project has to be one of the most exciting things I have ever done.

It sounds like a resonance effect for now. Other rotors must be slowing by the same amount the reversed stat mag accelerates. Otherwise the energy of the system would be increasing...

@Al
Did you book your trip yet ?

Some ideas about things we can vary:

1) Number of magnets on stator and rotor: 3x2, 3x4, 3x8, 5x4, 5x6, 5x8, 7x8, 9x8, 11x8, 13x8, 15x8
For smaller rotors, we may want to see what happens when the ratio is greater than 2 to 1 (23x8?).

2) Rotor size and stator magnet spacing: various sizes and distances should be tried, stator magnets in close proximity up to a distance where they have no noticable interaction with each other.

3) Gap between rotor and stator magnets. Smaller gap produces greater forces, both positive and negative. Gap can also affect interactions between rotor and stator magnets.

4) Magnet sizes and strengths. I have seen best results when rotor magnet length is between 1 and 1.5 times stator magnet diameter. Longer rotor magnets and smaller rotor diameters may also cause more complex magnetic transactions, incorporating field interactions between 3 or more magnets simultaneously. Larger and more powerful magnets are available. Different magnet thicknesses can provide different responses due to field strength and distribution.

5) Pivot angle and magnet offset from pivot point can be varied for optimum results, far from pivot point for maximum centrifugal effect, closer for less.

6) A latching mechanism may be required, especially at slower speeds with larger rotors, and more so with longer rotor magnets.

7) Rotor magnet orientation (chained or alternating) can be switched for different effects.

8) Rotor magnet axis with respect to the stator magnet axis when in closest proximity.

9) Speed can be varied.

10) Ferromagnetic materials or coils can be introduced in a variety of places to note what effects they have. Pole pieces can be used to concentrate and alter the field distribution.

11) Lead and lag effects (articulated rotor arms) that can possibly leverage magnetic viscosity. Add viscosity by using different magnetic materials (iron pole pieces, Alnico magnets, etc). Slow in/fast out.

12) Magnetic reconnection effects (small rotors/fast speeds, magnet orientations).

13) Reverse the roles of stator and rotor. Odd number of rotating magnets on the rotor and even number of fixed magnets on the stator. Should change the dynamics a little bit.

14) Use different shape magnets. Do rectangular or cube magnets behave differently than cylinders? Corners and sharp edges may influence the magnetic field interaction.

15) Heavier and/or lighter weight rotor/stator. Lighter weight would respond more quickly to changes. Heavier would provide more momentum.

16) Dual rings of rotor and/or stator magnets influencing each other from both sides and greatly complexifying the issue.

17) Dual, counter-rotating rotors or dual stator rings with sandwiched rotor in between.


Any other suggestions for things we might want to check?

edit: added 10 - 17

Be careful..... at this rate you will be unveiling a working 'OC'bo long before steorn's machine. Maybe that was their intention all along?

nickthesafe:Be careful..... at this rate you will be unveiling a working 'OC'bo long before steorn's machine. Maybe that was their intention all along?

This is what has always intrigued me about Steorn; the motivation. I don’t think they have ever had a working device. What I think they have is an interesting effect that they can’t capitalise on. What they have done is pitch a half baked bread roll in the air in the hope that someone will finish baking it.

SearchingHighAndLow:

nickthesafe:Be careful..... at this rate you will be unveiling a working 'OC'bo long before steorn's machine. Maybe that was their intention all along?

This is what has always intrigued me about Steorn; the motivation. I don’t think they have ever had a working device. What I think they have is an interesting effect that they can’t capitalise on. What they have done is pitch a half baked bread roll in the air in the hope that someone will finish baking it.

... only thing is, they expected it to happen in the SPDC. Speaking of SPDC, I wonder if anyone over there has tried constructing an OC wheel? Surely they could give a yes or no to that question?

@OC: 7Ax8
@rX:
Q: "When you have the rotor spinning, how many of the stator magnets have you been able to get into "reverse" spin?"

A: Three is the most at once and that was really hard and only one kept in synch for any appreciable time.

Q: "Does the rotor lose rpm (spin down) slower with more "reversed" stator magnets engaged?"

A: I don't know for sure, because of the instability of more than one spinning.
I usually have been just spinning one stator magnet in the "reversed" mode while letting the others do whatever they want to. Maybe only one stator magnet is needed. Or maybe a bigger layout would help.

Q: "P.S. I also want to confirm you are saying the rotor is accelerating from say 400 rpm up to 1160 rpm by only reversing the spin of one stator magnet."

A: I'll bet you do. So do I.

@OC - it hasn't been attempted in the spud afaik. Of all the designs i've seen, i'd give something along these lines the best chance. I'd considered something similar last year a la constant mesh, but Sean's later tidbits put it to bed for me - simply cos it apparently wasn't relevent to Orbo, not because i could see any in-principle flaws (beyond CoE etc.)

Thanks, Vibrator.

@Al,

I appreciate your thoughts re electronic latches and Helmholz coils but I see downsides to either one.

Electronically controlled latches could facilitate our initial analysis. They may be easier to design and manage than purely mechanical latches and would provide more flexibility in timing, testing, etc. However, any demonstration device we create would instantly be suspect if any external power was required for operation. There is also the possibility of EMI influence on the device. If used, the electromagnetic components should be kept at a distance where EMI is unlikely and/or shielded from the device.

Helmholz coils are an interesting idea. Again, I have qualms about powered devices being used (unless they are actually internally powered by the device itself, without any batteries). Shielding would defeat the purpose of having the coils in the first place. However, it may be possible to achieve the required effects using permanent magnets and ferromagnetic materials. Halbach arrays have been successfully used to provide Helmholz-like fields.

I do not have any objections to using passive coils or ferromagnetic materials to help shape and focus the fields we are dealing with.

This project is as much yours as it is mine and I encourage you to do whatever you want. You have already discovered at least one phenomenon that I never would have expected. Who knows what you'll find next? I'm just kibitzing the best I can. Take it for what it's worth. This idea would never have progressed beyond a couple drawings and some random thoughts if you hadn't taken an interest.

If you look through the (growing) list of variations I posted earlier, you will see there are enough possibilities there to occupy you for a lifetime. And you just broght up a couple more.

I really think we should try to get as many replicators involved as possible. One way to do that is to post some videos showing curious behavior and to have some detailed documentation about how to build it, something any journeyman machinist could follow. Once they see how easy it is to replicate what you have, then they may be inclined to modify the experiment and explore other variations on their own.

I'm really happy to see RiterX take an interest. I hope he gets his supplies soon and gets started on the larger rig he is planning to build. I also hope he gets a chance to flesh out the documentation a bit more.

I wish some of the SPDC folks would participate. There are some talented folks in there. Guess they're preoccupied with their orbotic efforts.

@Al,

I made a rough drawing of my concept of a pivot. Something like this could be interchanged with different size rotors, as long as the rotors have approximately the same thickness. I'm sure you can design something better. Let me know what you think.
http://api.ning.com/files/L50DUpMAxO2FwLiCwTYXg3a-wRIA5hpJ71MVTyEhK5s_/pivot.gif

How much would you charge to make me a couple of these devices?

1) 18" rotor with 8 pivoting magnet mounts, bearing and hardware.
2) a base with 13 stator holes
3) another base with 15 stator holes
4) 15 stator magnet assemblies with bearings and hardware.

I can provide my own magnets if necessary, but it might be better if you mounted them as well. I'm likely to damage something if I have to use something more complicated than a screwdriver.

After all, why should you have all the fun?

You can't afford to hire me, I assure you!

3 new pictures up in the usual place.

I have determined that a slightly more sedate speed is better than trying for all-out. The unit runs well at a stator rpm of around 5000 (hence rotor around 1250). Yesterday at the higher speeds I wasn't able to maintain synch for more than a few minutes, but now that I figured out how to regulate things a little better (viscous damping seems to be the key, but I suppose a mechanical slip-friction in lieu of latches would also work) the slower speed seems better behaved. Just now I got a run of almost--well, I better keep the run times under my hat for now, until I can confirm the absence of external driving fields, but let's just say they are amazingly long. WIth no stator magnets in place, spinning up the rotor by hand to about 375 rpm, it takes about 2 minutes for it to stop spinning. With the setup I am experimenting with now, the system maintains a constant high rpm for a long time before the stator magnets "drop out" and the rotor slows to a stop.
The really difficult part is getting several stator magnets to start up in the anti-gearwise motion. I have found so far that the best set-up is 3x8 on the 13-hole baseplate, so the 3 stator magnets are not symmetrically arrayed. If I am lucky and can get all three going, that seems to be the best for duration.

@Al,

I'm impressed! I want to play too. I could offer you a token, say $1000.00. It would probably cost me that much to get it done at a local machine shop anyway. (But you could just consider it a belated Christmas gift to me.)

I want one! Beg, plead, cry, throw tantrum ...

Hmmm-sounds like you maybe are still celebrating the new year...

Seriously, I appreciate your offer and I was tempted for an instant--but then I realized that it would be better for all concerned if we didn't discuss matters like money just at this time or place.

I am sure you could get some local machinist or hobbyist to construct a unit for you--nothing about it is really hard, if one has access to a small milling machine and a lathe. I don't know what area you are in, but if you are anywhere near a big city you might try going to the LHS (local hobby shop) and asking around or putting up a notice on their bulletin board. I'm sure some kitchen machinist is just chomping at the bit for an interesting project, and if you start waving the Franklins around you will get some attentions quickly.

For what you have requested, not including magnets or bearings, I should think 3-4 hundred for the labor should do, depending on the materials you choose. Delrin and acrylic are really cheap, there's maybe 20 bucks of material there.

@Al,

I don't drink, and the offer was serious. You have a pretty good idea what's going on and would keep that in mind when building the rig. I wasn't trying to buy you. I know it would prbably take a lot more than I could spare. I was just hoping to let you know I was serious. Without detailed drawings, the local machine shop would probably tack on additional fees just for doing the design. And if something wasn't right, they'd just blame my specifications.

I am somewhat of a recluse and live in a small town almost 100 miles from the nearest city. I'm afraid the chances of finding a hobbiest here would be slim. There are a couple machine shops in town, but I have no idea what to expect from them.

Come on Al, spill the beans, your holding something back.

Hmm...Because of my current situation I can't really accept any kind of compensation for a project like this. As long as I am working strictly for my own amusement it's ok for me to use the facilities and scraps, and the miniature machine tools and the magnets and bearings and all that are my own personal property so there's no issue there, and there aren't any IP issues to worry about. As soon as I accept any compensation or enter into any agreements with anybody, most of that changes.
And also I am pretty strapped for time myself--I finally have the hi-vac system working at 10e-6 Torr and we are about to start an actual experiment inside it, and once that starts I will be really really busy earning my keep and advancing the course of speculative science.
I will continue to work on what I'm doing with the OC MPMM, and some of it is pretty exciting right now---I think things will really "take off" once I incorporate the pivots on the rotor magnets...

So really, it would be best if you could find somebody else to take up your commission. Maybe some of the lurkers have some suggestions...?

RunningBare:Come on Al, spill the beans, your holding something back.

That is true, RB--there are certain details of the configuration that I have only recently discovered are important, and I am still experimenting with those, so I haven't mentioned them.
Plus I have not yet been able to scan the EM environment to rule out the "RB Effect"--there could conceivably be some oscillating EM field that is coupling with the apparatus to produce the anomalous effects that I am (hypothetically, allegedly) seeing. I am, however, certain that it isn't due to a Steornish wobbly shaft, but I haven't been able to rule out Sv on any but theoretical grounds. That is, I feel that Sv is so much BS as an energy source or "leader-outer" or whatever, but I am unable as yet to rule it out as having an effect on the current experiment.

I forgot to mention, that I could draw up some dimensioned sketches in the format that I've been using (jpeg pics of rough hand-drawn scribbles), that some determined engineer could then transfer to AutoCAD--at that point it should be easy as cake (piece of pie?) for any competent machinist to whittle it out.
If that would help.

I just looked at the weather. It's -7 now (almost midnight), and the forecast high for tomorrow afternoon is -9. We've had about 8 cm of snow but it's stopped.
But--next week, Tuesday, the forecast high is--
...
...
Plus 13 degrees C !! Sunshine! On the 8th of January in Canada!

OK Al,

I'll try to pull as much detail as I can from your specs and drawings and see what the local machine shop has to say.

I don't know if you realize how it feels to have a dream and then just watch someone else turn that dream into a reality, or at least pretty damn close. I want to hold one of those things in my hand. I don't care about fame or fortune. I just want one I can play with.

And then I see you tending to go in a different direction than I want to go. More power to you. But I still want to try an 18" rotor and see how things go with 13 or 15 stators. That's where my dream and intuition are pointing me.

I'm really glad you got the opportunity to discover some interesting things of your own, things I wouldn't have expected. One of the reasons I made the offer was simply to allow me to try some of the things I want, so I can make sure that area gets some decent attention as well.

I think we have made a pretty good team so far and I really don't want to hurt that relationship. So keep doing what your doing. I'll see what I can do here, locally.

alsetalokin:I forgot to mention, that I could draw up some dimensioned sketches in the format that I've been using (jpeg pics of rough hand-drawn scribbles), that some determined engineer could then transfer to AutoCAD--at that point it should be easy as cake (piece of pie?) for any competent machinist to whittle it out.
If that would help.

That would definitely help.
Thanks

@Al,

I really think you should get some nonmagnetic bearings for the stators, nonconductive would be even better. Ferromagnetic materials will have a tendency to distort the fields by pulling them towards the bearing and will reduce the magnetic interactions with the rotor magnets. I don't know how much difference it will make ... but who knows, it might just be enough.

Please pardon this ignorant comment from a totally non-technical person but at some point should someone measure this thing to see if there's any EM effects coming from it?

I can understand why you don't want to use electromagnetic latches, have you thought of using air or fluid bearings? If the round magnets have a rough enough base on a rough surface they shouldn't move to much (latch effect) but when air is introduced using some sort of fluid logic it should separate the surfaces and allow magnet to spin freely. Sorry at least you can have a laugh.

[quote][cite] alsetalokin:[/cite]I forgot to mention, that I could draw up some dimensioned sketches in the format that I've been using (jpeg pics of rough hand-drawn scribbles), that some determined engineer could then transfer to AutoCAD--at that point it should be easy as cake (piece of pie?) for any competent machinist to whittle it out.
If that would help.
[/quote]Some detailed drawings would be great for other experimenters here.
A video of the "longer" run time might provide some incentive for others to get involved as well.

Keep up the great work guys!

@loreman: Definitely, something we wish to harness once we figure out how to keep it spinning.

@trim: Interesting idea. Keep that in mind. At the moment, I think we should avoid anything that requires external input. We need to get it working and then get it accepted. Any external inputs will have a tendency to complicate things.

@Lakes: All things I have been pushing for. There is another thread where I have been soliciting for help. Why haven't you volunteered?

@Trim
I can understand why you don't want to use electromagnetic latches, have to thought of using air or fluid bearings?

Maybe my dream of a rod mag in fluid was trying to tell me something...

[quote][cite] overconfident:[/cite]@loreman: Definitely, something we wish to harness once we figure out how to keep it spinning.

@Lakes: All things I have been pushing for. There is another thread where I have been soliciting for help. Why haven't you volunteered?[/quote]Maybe you misunderstood, I was commenting on Al doing some more detailed drawings (when he has time) with maybe a materials and parts list, so that others could help in working on this.
I have no autocad or similar skills myself, sorry.

@AI and OC:

I would be happy to model your part in Pro/E (I think. It didn't look too complicated). We could iterate until you are happy with the model. 2D prints are easy and step or iges files are also available if your machinist is using a CAM system. If you want me to do this, how can I get you my email address?

.

Al, back in the lab today? Pivots. We need pivots.

A dimensioned sketch of the bearing/magnet holder assembly is posted on the other site. The baseplate that I am using is acrylic plastic, 5/8 in thick, 7 3/4 in x 8 1/2 in,
with a 1/4-20 threaded hole in the center for the rotor axle, and 13 evenly-spaced 4-40 threaded holes for the stator magnet bearing holders, on a circle of radius 3 3/8 in centered on the axle.
The rotor is 3/4 in thick piece of HDPE plastic, 2 7/8 in radius, with a 0.500 in center hole bored all the way thru for the flanged axle bearings. Magnets are held in 8 evenly-spaced 1/4 in wide slots, 7/16 in deep, inner edge of slots at the 2 1/2 in radius from center.

This is the basic layout for the 13x8 version that I am experimenting with. But I am mostly just using 3 stator magnets and a couple of "dummy" aluminum pieces of the same size as the magnets, also mounted in the same type of bearing holder.

The stator magnets are mounted by a single trimmed 4-40 SHCS and a little washer to make sure only the inner bearing race is contacting the screw or the baseplate.
The rotor magnets are press-fit in place.

I respond to pressure in exactly the same way as a watermelon seed---when it gets too great I slip thru the fingers and get lost...