----- Original Message ----- From: Horace Heffner <[email protected]> Date: Monday, June 29, 2009 4:26 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex balls!
> > On Jun 28, 2009, at 8:26 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > > Using a magnetic shaft might disrupt the effect, but I am only > > guessing. > > When I use the term magnetic I mean magnetic material like iron or > steel, not a magnetized material. If brushes are to be placed > directly on the circumference of the shaft then I say there is no > prospect of torque unless the shaft is magnetic - no hysteresis, no > torque. Ok. > > > > How about if the leads were connected to the ends of a fixed > shaft and > > let the outer racers rotate instead? That would eliminate the brush > > friction. > > > > Harry > > There would have to be brushes to the outer races - and thus the > friction would be there instead. Current has to make a closed loop. Yes the loop is closed, but I am working from the hypothesis that the bearings are accelerated by the magnetic field produced by the current flowing through the shaft. Therefore the bearings do not need to make electrical contact with the shaft, although they might need some start-up rotation. Note, my hypothesis is just a guess so I can't justify it on theoretical grounds using conventional physics. All I can say is that a "torque" is not required. This is becoming clearer to me as we talk about it. > The cool thing that would get lots of people the chance to first > hand > experiment would be to locate a cheap source for non-magnetic > stainless steel bearings. Non-magnetic (relative permeability > 1.01 > or less) bearings exist: > > http://www.nsk.com/products/spacea/non-magnetic/ > > but look pricey. > > Here is a Thomas register list of suppliers of non-magnetic bearings: > > http://www.thomasnet.com/products/bearings-ball- > nonmagnetic-3920402-1.html > > http://tinyurl.com/lbe8ck > > Here are some alternatives in the under $30 range: > > http://www.thomasnet.com/catalognavigator.html?cov=NA&what=non- > magnetic+ball+bearings&heading=3920402&cid=270891&CNID=&cnurl=http%3A% > 2F%2Fkmsbearings.thomasnet.com%2FCategory%2Fradial-ball-bearings-3 > > http://tinyurl.com/mk3o4d > > Other types available in the same metals: > > http://www.thomasnet.com/catalognavigator.html?cov=NA&what=non- > magnetic+ball+bearings&heading=3920402&cid=270891&CNID=&cnurl=http%3A% > 2F%2Fkmsbearings.thomasnet.com%2FCategory%2Fradial-ball-bearings-3 > > http://tinyurl.com/mk3o4d > > The key is to spend the time to locate really cheap non-magnetic > bearings that have identically sized and cheap magnetic counterparts. > > The configuration I suggested in Fig. 5 of > > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/HullMotor.pdf > > was for scientific purposes - to isolate the source of the effect. > > Using non-magnetic bearings as a control will only establish that > magnetic materials are required (or not). > > The drawback of the Fig. 5 configuration is that one brush point > replaces 8 points from a single bearing and 16 in the overall > motor. > The weakened motor also has to be able to push a conventional > brush. > However, by sandwiching a thin grooved copper disk between two iron > > disks, and using a copper shaft, the max current and force should > rise dramatically, so there are trade-offs. Construction is also > more > difficult, but the scientific results available are improved. > > Best regards, > > Horace Heffner > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ Harry
