Can a self-exciting dynamo generate electricity without any mechanical input?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mgompert
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamo Self
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the feasibility of a self-exciting dynamo generating electricity without any mechanical input. Participants explore concepts related to dynamo operation, electromagnetic fields, and the potential for stationary systems to produce electrical energy through various configurations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if a generator can produce enough power to run its own electromagnet, it may be possible to create a generator that operates without mechanical movement by switching electromagnets on and off.
  • Another participant humorously compares the idea to reinventing a transformer, implying that the concept may not be novel.
  • A participant raises concerns about the principles of electromagnetic induction, stating that without movement, there would be no flux being cut, which is necessary for generating electricity.
  • It is noted that while a generator can power its own magnet coils, it must also supply power externally, complicating the idea of self-sustainability.
  • One participant questions the efficacy of using a stationary generator coil in place of a rotor in a three-phase induction motor, asking if this setup would generate electricity.
  • Another participant emphasizes that without movement, the system would behave like a transformer, producing less power than is input to create the magnetic field.
  • Concerns are raised about the impossibility of generating new power without an external energy source, with references to the prohibition of discussing "free energy" on the forum.
  • One participant reflects on the purpose of generators, suggesting they are meant to convert movement into electricity.
  • A later reply warns that the device would inevitably slow down due to energy losses, reinforcing the principle that one cannot obtain more energy than is input.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the feasibility of generating electricity without mechanical input. There is no consensus on the viability of the proposed ideas, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the assumptions of electromagnetic induction and the necessity of movement for generating electricity. The discussion also touches on the implications of energy conservation principles.

mgompert
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
self exciting dynamo question

I was reading about dynamo's and there was one that the power it made was used to run the electromagnet that made the magnetic field that the induction coil spun in.
This got me thinking if a generator can make enough electricity to power an electromagnet that is as strong as the magnet in he generator, could some one make a generator that did not move and instead of spinning the induction coil or the electromagnet you could simply turn a series of electromagnets on and off in order to induce current into a secondary coil?

I keep thinking about these self exciting dynamo's and about 3 phase motors and thinking to myself that putting these two devices together should make electricity with no mechanical input. But that cannot be right can it?
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Sounds like you're re-inventing the transformer. :smile:
 
I was actually thinking it would work more like a generator without any moving parts
 
1) In a steady electromagnetic field, the act of passing a wire through it to cut the flux will induce resistance in the wires generating the field as well. (Not an electrical engineer/did really badly in the course where I learned that/may be wrong). Similarly I believe the current running through the wire (which wouldn't actually exist since this doesn't work) would resist the current in the other wires generating the electric field, therefore the more power generated by the system, the more power required to run it, proportionally.

2) A pseudo-rotating electric field, i.e. a bunch of stationary fields instantaneously moving angularly around a wire (instead of a single rotating field rotating angularly) won't generate electricity since there won't be any flux being cut.

So that is why it will not work right?
I would prefer an explanation not just some one shouting "you cannot get more energy out than what you put in" over and over again. so if I am correct with the flux lines not being cut then let me know, thank you
 
A generator can certainly generate enough power to supply its own magnet coils (provided there is some magnetism there to start the process).

However, powering its own magnets is not the main function of a generator. It also has to supply power to the outside world, so that you can use it.

It is easy to turn the rotor of a generator when there is no load on it and a little harder if it is supplying power to its own field coils and much harder to turn it if there is a serious outside load on the generator.
This increasing difficulty in turning the generator translates into the use of more fuel in the driving engine.

If you supplied the field coils from a battery, as is done in cars, you would avoid the initial situation of having no magnetic field to generate anything with, but eventually, the generator is used to charge the battery, so that power still comes from burning fuel in the engine.
 
@vk6kro
but that says nothing as to why not or how much power you could get out of a device that switches a series of magnets on and off like a 3 phase induction motor.

In effect take a three phase induction motor and replace the rotor with a generator coil and bolt it in place so it cannot rotate, shouldn't electricity come out of that set up?
If no is it because of the flux lines not being cut by the wires in the generator coil?
 
Without movement then all you've got is a transformer. Sure you'll get "electricity come out", but always less then you're putting into create the field.
 
Last edited:
mgompert said:
@vk6kro
but that says nothing as to why not or how much power you could get out of a device that switches a series of magnets on and off like a 3 phase induction motor.

In effect take a three phase induction motor and replace the rotor with a generator coil and bolt it in place so it cannot rotate, shouldn't electricity come out of that set up?
If no is it because of the flux lines not being cut by the wires in the generator coil?

You want to switch current to the coils of a series of electromagnets? So, you must get this current from a battery? So you have some power being fed into the device.
You may get some power induced in the other coils like this, but it is just the power from the battery. You can't get more power out than you put in.

If no is it because of the flux lines not being cut by the wires in the generator coil
This is right. You may get a small amount of power from the battery induced in the other coils, but you won't get new power being generated.

You may not know this, but there is a prohibition on this Forum about discussing "free energy" and "perpetual motion machines". This is basically to avoid wasting time on pointless discussions.
 
mgompert said:
I was actually thinking it would work more like a generator without any moving parts
But what is a generator for? Surely it is to produce electricity from something moving (a different energy source).
 
  • #10
This sounds like generating power from a motorized appliance and then after initial startup from the utility power the device becomes self generating. For example a motorized appliance of 220 volt 9 amp draw turning at 1100 rpm.
 
  • #11
@stanco
The device will grind to halt because of the inevitable losses involved. It will slow down faster, in fact, than if you just let it run with no 'internal' electrical connections and rely just on friction.

General principle: if ever you think you're getting something for nothing - you're not.
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K