Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion (42 page)
10.3 • THE FARADAY DISC DYNAMO EFFECT
The Faraday disc generator, also known as the homopolar generator, was first built by physicist Michael Faraday in the late nineteenth century.
Faraday placed a copper disc between the poles of two cylindrical magnets so that the magnets’ field ran perpendicular to the plane of the disc.
He found that when he spun the disc, a current was induced to flow, with electrons moving outward from the disc’s center toward its periphery.
This was attributable to the
v × B
rule, in which
v
represents a conductor’s velocity vector and
B
represents the magnetic force field vector, the two being vector-multiplied with one another.
Faraday also discovered that if the copper disc was cemented to the magnets and the magnets and disc were rotated together as a unit, electrons would still flow to the disc’s periphery (figure 10.10).
11
This led him to conclude that the magnetic field produced by the magnets did not rotate with the magnets, but rather was anchored in space (i.e., in the local ether rest frame).
Researchers such as Bruce DePalma, Adam Trombley, and Paramahansa Tewari built various versions of this cemented-disc homopolar generator with the hope of developing a motor generator having an overunity efficiency.
As in the classical Faraday disc generator, in this cemented-disc version the magnitude and direction of the electron-current flow is determined by the
v × B
rule.
Remember to use the left-hand rule instead of the right-hand rule when dealing with electron current flows.
That is, if you point the index finger of your left hand in the magnetic-flux direction (south to north) and your thumb in the direction of rotary movement, then your middle finger will indicate the direction of electron flow.
The runners in the SEG and the rollers in the MEC are essentially little Faraday disc generators.
They do not have a cemented-copper disc, but the magnets themselves are conductive—not as conductive as copper, but nevertheless they conduct electricity.
Thus, like the Faraday disc generator, they should generate a radial current.
If we consider a single roller magnet rotating in a clockwise direction with its north pole pointing up, as shown in figure 10.6, the left-hand rule indicates that the roller should produce an electron current flow from the roller into the stator ring plate.
However, when operating, the Searl disc and the MEC produce an electron current that flows outward from the plate to the rollers, not inward.
Figure 10.10.
A Faraday disc generator with a copper disc cemented to the magnetic pole pieces.
(After Archer Energy Systems)
This discrepancy arises because we have not accounted for the effect of the entire system in motion.
In addition to the Faraday effect due to the rotations of the individual roller magnets, we must also account for the Faraday effect produced by the collective translational movement of those magnets around the circumference of the stator plate, that is, about the stator’s central axis.
In considering this effect, we may treat the roller magnets collectively as composing a single ring magnet whose radial thickness is equal to the diameter of the rollers and whose magnetic field is in the same direction as that in the individual roller magnets.
*29
Once again applying the left-hand rule, we see that clockwise rotation of this ring produces an electron-current flow outward from the stator plate to the roller magnets, opposing the current flows arising individually from the Faraday effect of each roller.
As it turns out, the Faraday-effect voltage induced by this collective translation is much greater than the opposing voltage polarity that arises from the individual magnet rotations.
The net result is that the electron current should flow outward from the plate to the roller magnets, just as is observed.
For illustration, the relative magnitude of these two opposing Faraday disc effects is calculated in the accompanying text box.
Faraday Effect Potential Induced by Roller Ring Rotation
Let us first consider the voltage generated by the rotation of each individual roller.
The induced voltage may be calculated using the equation applicable to a Faraday disc dynamo:
12
(9)
V = ½ωB(b
2
– a
2
)
in which ω is the magnet’s angular velocity and
b
and
a
are its outer and inner radii.
In this case of the MEC prototype,
b
= 0.037 meter, the roller diameter, and
a
= 0.005 meter, the diameter of the roller’s central shaft hole.
When the ring of rollers is moving about the circumference of the stator plate at 550 rpm, the individual rollers will be rotating twenty-three times faster, hence, ω = 23 x 550/60 x 2π = 1325 radians per second.
Taking
B
= 0.85 tesla, equation 9 predicts a voltage of
V
= 0.76 volt, in which the center of the roller is positive and its periphery is negative.
Now let us calculate the voltage generated by the displacement of the entire ring of rollers.
The outer and inner radii of the ring are taken as
b
= 0.574 meter and
a
= 0.5 meter, which are the distances from the MEC’s central axis to the outer and inner circumferences bounding the roller ring.
If this roller ring revolves about the MEC’s central axis at 550 rpm, or at an angular velocity of ω = 57.6 radians per second, then equation 9 predicts that it would generate a voltage of
V
= 1.95 volts, with the potential being negative at the edge farthest from the stator plate.
Consequently, even though the roller ring rotates far slower than the individual rollers, it produces a far larger voltage.
On the side of the roller nearest the stator plate, the voltage generated by the clockwise displacement of the roller ring will be opposed by the voltage being generated by each roller.
Yet on the opposite side of the roller, the side farthest from the stator plate, the roller’s Faraday effect will produce a voltage polarity in the same direction as that produced by the displacement of the roller ring; hence, the two will add to one another.
The net result is that the Faraday effect arising from the rotation of each roller cancels out, leaving just that arising from the roller ring’s clockwise displacement.
In the example presented in the text box, this would leave a net voltage of 1.95 volts, inducing an electron current to flow toward the MEC’s periphery.
Roshchin and Godin used neodymium iron boron magnets in their MEC (typically 58 percent iron, 37 percent neodymium, 4 percent ferrous sulfate, and 1 percent boron).
This alloy has an electric resistance of about 144 micro-ohms per centimeter, so a 7.4-centimeter-diameter roller would offer a resistance of 1066 μΩ.
Roshchin and Godin did not state how much current was flowing into each roller at a given rotor speed, but as a guess, we might suppose that at an operating speed of 550 rpm, this was on the order of 800 amps for each roller.
As this electron current passes radially outward into the rollers, it generates a motive force on the rollers that assists their rotation.
This production of circumferential torque from a radial current flow is known as the
ball-bearing motor effect
.
10.4 • THE BALL-BEARING MOTOR EFFECT
I first saw the ball-bearing motor effect in action in the spring of 1999.
An alternative-energy political demonstration was being held in Washington, D.C., on the western Mall.
Many there were preparing themselves for the predicted breakdown of society that was expected
to occur the following year, when the year-2000 computer-calendar
glitch was to occur.
Among the attendees sprawled on the grassy lawn
was Mark Gubrud, a University of Maryland physics student.
He was
demonstrating an interesting motor that consisted of a shaft mounted
in a ball-bearing race (figure 10.11).
He applied DC voltage from a small battery pack between the shaft and the outer casing of the ball-bearing
race.
Then, when he gave the shaft a starting torque, it continued
to rotate in the direction of the applied torque and continued
to turn as long as voltage was applied.
If the shaft was given a starting
torque in the opposite direction, it again continued to rotate, but in
that new direction.
Gubrud had with him an explanatory write-up of
the motor’s principle of operation, which he gave me.
I gave a copy
to Tom Valone, and he subsequently published it in his
Homopolar
Handbook
.
13
Figure 10.11.
Comparison of the ball-bearing motor to the MEC’s stator and roller ring.
(a) The ball-bearing motor.
(After M.
Gubrud, in T.
Valone,
Homopolar Handbook
, 54–55) The central shaft rotates relative to a stationary cylinder.
(b) The lower portion of the above diagram, unfolded to show equivalence to the geometry of the roller magnets traveling around the MEC stator.
In each case, the electron flow moves from the stator toward the ball bearing (or roller magnet).
Charge polarity in (b) is reversed since the MEC functions instead as a generator, with the electron flow inducing the buildup of charge whereas in the case of (a) an applied charge instead induces electron flow.
After learning about this phenomenon, I realized that the same
effect powered the rotary motion of the runners in the SEG and the
rollers in the MEC.
Using Gubrud’s explanation, let us review how an
applied radial-current flow through a ball bearing induces torque forces
on the bearing, causing it to rotate around its bearing race (see figure
10.12).
A current passing through the ball bearing at time
t
1
, flowing
from the bearing casing to the central drive shaft, will magnetize the
bearing.
The bearing, though, will retain a residual field in this same
magnetization direction at time
t
2
, although the direction of this residual
field has changed because of the bearing’s rotation.
At time
t
2
, this
residual magnetic field will be directed at some angle α to the direction of current flow, which always occurs through the points where the ball bearing contacts the axle and bearing race.
The current component
i
that lies perpendicular to this residual field will then induce a force (F =
i
× B) that produces torques on either side of the bearing, which induces
it to keep revolving in the direction of its initial rotation.
*30
The same principle applies to the rollers of an MEC or the runners
of an SEG.
Consider the ball-bearing motor in figure 10.11a.
The outer
ball-bearing race remains stationary as the axle turns.
If we take this
outer-race circumference and fold it back so that its inside faces out, we
get the geometry shown in figure 10.11b.
Imagine that the ball bearings
are roller magnets rolling around the stator plate.
The two mechanisms
are then seen to be equivalent.
The electric polarities are reversed in each case because the motor in figure 10.11a is powered by dissipated power (electrons flowing from minus to plus) and the motor in figure 10.11b is powered by generated power (electrons flowing from plus to minus).
As in the ball-bearing motor, if an electron current flows from the plate outward through each roller, this current will produce a torque on each roller, assisting it to move in the direction of its established rotation.
Figure 10.12.
A ball bearing shown magnetized at time t
1
that retains a residual field in that same direction at time t
2
, even though it has rotated in a clockwise direction.
Vectors show the clockwise torques developed by the applied current.
(Based on M.
Gubrud’s diagram, in T.
Valone,
Homopolar Handbook,
54–55)
These two processes together, the Faraday disc dynamo effect and the ball-bearing motor effect, form a positive feedback loop in which a clockwise displacement of the roller-ring rotor produces a radial electric current that induces roller rotation and greater clockwise displacement of the rotor (see figure 10.13, upper left).
The high voltage the MEC induces at its periphery could be due to the sudden change in the electric resistance the electrons encounter in the course of their radial outward movement.
Upon leaving the low-resistance environment of the magnets and continuing their push through the high-resistance environment of the surrounding air, the electrons’ voltage potential associated with their current flow would have shot up proportionately, since E =
i
R.
That is, for the same current value, voltage will increase in direct proportion to resistance.
Roshchin and Godin found it necessary to use an external motor to apply mechanical torque to the MEC to start it and keep it going in the low-revolutions-per-minute regime.
Nevertheless, as in Searl’s earlier generators, they found that the roller ring began to spontaneously accelerate once it had been spun up to a critical threshold speed.
For the MEC, this critical rate of rotation was around 200 rpm, although Searl succeeded in designing generators that would spontaneously accelerate, even from rest.
This acceleration phenomenon suggests that the MEC, like the SEG, must have been receiving an additional input of energy from some unknown source.
Let us next consider where this energy may have been coming from.
Figure 10.13.
An energy flow analysis chart of the MEC.
(P.
LaViolette, © 2006)