LENZ LAW

LENZ LAW

.

Once we realize that ferromagnetic materials are magnetic field conductors, rather than temporary magnets, we can expand into the realm of commercial electrical power generation almost solely derived from steam turbine powered alternating generators. There are of course few alternatives, be it hydroelectric systems, or combustion engine powered portable and back up systems, but all of these have one thing in common.

All alternating generators (a dynamo is also an alternating generator where a mechanical commutator changes the AC produced in the rotor coils into pulsing DC) suffer from one huge drawback. This drawback is the applicability of Lenz Law to power production, costing the Earth ecosystem along with humanity a great environmental damage. Yet, a simple change in the geometry of the stator core and its windings, along with a change in the primary magnetic field application would circumvent the circumstances leading toward the looming environmental disaster in a very short period of time.

All alternator cores known to the general population use an open core construction in their stators. Open core means that the core (or a set of cores) of each coil is not closed into a ferromagnetic loop like a core of a simple transformer. This forces the secondary magnetic field induced in the cores to exit the cores and return around the coil through the air gap between the stator cores and the rotor fingers (poles). This is exactly where the Lenz law comes into the picture causing repulsive force between the rotor poles and the coil fingers when approaching the coil cores and an attractive force when the rotor poles recede from the core poles.

Once we have established that the ferromagnetic material serves only as a conductor of magnetic field, we can easily design an alternating generator in which the secondary magnetic field induced in the stator coils remains contained within the ferromagnetic core, therefore preventing the induced coils field from the unfriendly interaction with the primary magnetic field of the rotor fingers.

There are few ways in which to design such generators and I will mention only a few.

My most favorite construction is the one symbolized by an ancient symbol of a snake, a wiper in particular, eating its own tail.

Fig 1

The blue plate can be bolted to the red plate on the outside of the permanent disc (bar) magnet by non magnetic fasteners. The permanent magnet can be of course replaced by a donut excitation coil. The coil does not need to spin with the rotor and therefore can be retained from the stator. Then the magnetic disc (blue in the schematic) can be bolted directly to the shaft for assembly purposes and the leads for the donut coil can pass through the stator as well. The assembly can be made brush less that way.

In any case, here are a few pointers.

• The distance between the finger discs has to be at least twice as much than the distance between the finger tips. This is very important. The flux will otherwise partially close between the discs, rather than only at the ends of the fingers.
• There has to be enough ferromagnetic material in the finger discs and fingers to prevent their saturation. The same applies to the snake core.

Second construction would be more similar to a set of transformer cores with single windings in a ring arrangement.

Fig 2

This design actually has partially open cores, but the core gaps are not in the area where the magnetic fingers pas the cores. Even this renders Lenz Law ineffective. This design lends itself to three phase power generation with different windings. As you may appreciate, only one rotating magnetic plate with fingers is actually necessary as long as there is no gap between the stator and the rotor in the center. The gaps introduced between the outer leg of the individual cores (gray) and the stator plate (blue) serve to prevent splitting of the passing field between the two legs, which would lower the efficiency of induction in the coils. As you may also see, this version is again brush less.

You need only imagination and a bit of electric induction knowledge to figure out all the different ways in which the coils can be arranged and connected for different purposes of power production. There is actually a way to produce pulsed DC.

Generators with closed core stator construction, as well as partly closed stator construction, if half decently executed, will not suffer from the phenomenon called back torque. Back torque is the force which every source of mechanical power (like a steam turbine) has to overcome the more so, the greater is the power draw from the generator.

Have fun.

P.S. I have to add now (21. February 00.15 am 2006) that there is a patent application by others for a somewhat similar system # 20030025416 courtesy of Stefan Sundström who looked it up. You need CPview plug in to see all the drawings.

It appears to state an experimental evidence that closed core generating systems are not subject to Lenz law.

Quote:

"EXAMPLE

[0067] A prototype of this embodiment was constructed using a standard 10,000 watt gas-powered generator. The stator was removed from the generator and its housing. The stator windings were removed from the stator and rewound by hand using a No. 10 size copper wire with 180 winds wrapped in a toroidal fashion around approximately 180 degrees of the stator. Because the stator housing could not accommodate the toroidally wound stator windings, the housing was cut to remove the portions of the housing adjacent the stator windings. The stator was then reinstalled in the modified housing and re-attached to the gas powered generator. A standard 12 volt car battery was attached to the input of the rotor. A 12.92 volt input with 0.8 Amps was measured as the input to the rotor. The output was measured as 6.5 volts with a 40 Amp output. A series of input and output measurements were taken for various inputs and are listed in the following table."

Here is another patent dug up by a fellow who seems to go only under the name Paul dealing with the same principle of getting around the Lenz law with some test data. It looks like I have reinvented a wheel, even though mine look fairly differently. :-)

6208061.pdf

You might appreciate that the testing may not have been done with well engineered prototypes and that the authors stopped showing test results below unity, even though the curve of performance increases with RPMs.

If you look and read through it, you will find out that the pairs of coils are on cores inserted into holes of other core parts. Each pair of coils is therefore wound on a closed core frame as if it were an equal coil (useless) transformer. It is the same principle I have suggested, even though skinned somewhat differently again.

When you read through its test data and you will see that the curve of performance increases with increased frequency, either as increased RPM, or increased quantity of magnets. While the back torque (load) is fairly constant, which would account for friction and magnetic drag, which are fairly constant, the Lenz is out of it. Anything above the friction and magnetic drag is free energy as far as you can technically push it.

If you decide to construct one of these, you may find it helpfull to see Fields 9