PPMT, Magnetic Flux Switch, electro-permanent magnet generator

  • Thread starter artis
  • Start date
  • #1
artis
1,327
878
Ok so here is something that made me scratch my head and I still can't come to a final conclusion.
The basic idea is seemingly simple. You have permanent magnets attached to a core, the field lines close on both magnets through the core, so far so good. but the core also has electromagnets , put current through them one way or the other and they change the flux in the core, but given that in any case the flux for one of the two permanent magnets is already in the "right" or "wanted" direction then the electric coil only has to steer the field of the other magnet.
One essentially can control the flux at each end of a core by using a coil and some permanent magnets. The net strength of the field at the end in question is then the combined strength of both permanent magnets and the coil if one leaves it on. So in theory you get double the strength while you input just half the power, although the field of one of the permanent magnets is already there so you just input the power necessary to steer the other permanent magnet's field.

This is a COMSOL analysis done by local researches in a university near me.
Please see link
https://www.comsol.ch/paper/download/83413/dirba_paper.pdf


But things are not over yet, here is where matters get tricky. I found a website belonging to an inventor by the name Charles Joe Flynn, called Flynn Research. Now everything about it seems sketchy, but please see the PDF where he explains at first the workings of the permanent magnet type latch I described above, then goes on to show an example of the same principle used in a motor/generator.
As I go through the description I see the same mechanism used in the latch employed in the motor/generator, So I can't really figure out whether the claim has any factual basis that the motor would be more powerful output wise than it's electrical input because a device working over unity without an additional power source present would be a PMM which then is nonsense but as I look at this I can't exactly pinpoint whether or not it is the case.
Please see link. (not a long one)
https://www.flynnresearch.net/technology/PPMT technology white paper.pdf


My own short summary is that what I see is a rotor resembling the rotors used in reluctance motors/generators, with a toothed rotor. The rotor tooth's are latched in place after certain intervals by the flux passing through them which comes from the permanent magnets in the stator, but by controlling the stator coils one seemingly can change the position of stator poles that extend their flux through the rotor, this way moving the rotor forward step by step. the flux strength is that of the permanent magnet's + the electromagnets where it seems that again the electromagnet has to overpower one not two permanent magnet's in order to steer the flux and turn the rotor.

Please share your thoughts on this ?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #3
Baluncore
Science Advisor
12,045
6,160
@artis
Why the fascination with technology beyond your basic understanding? You should focus on the study of the theoretical foundations before you try to analyse electrical machines that are poorly described, or exist only in simulations.

Most of us have crap detectors that prevent us being dragged into the internet sewer. You need to ask yourself why you impulsively dive in, and then expect us to waste our valuable time rescuing you.
 
  • #4
Tom.G
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,686
3,438
The main problem I see with the described approach is that magnetic materials can saturate, i.e. the have a limit on the amount of flux they can support.

Here is a quote from one source, the 2nd link is a graph there that will not post here:
https://www.duramag.com/techtalk/te...s-to-induced-magnetism-achieved-in-workpiece/

https://dla2j3t8lcy1kgas27cbo212-wp.../induced-magnetism-and-premeability-chart.jpg

The ability to induce a pole in a material is not infinite and is limited as a material’s magnetic permeability decreases. When the magnetic permeability of a “workpiece” drops to “1” the material is said to be saturated. This is the point where no more external applied field (H) will give rise to any additional magnetic induction (B). No additional magnetic induction, therefore no additional attractive force; the system has reached its maximum limit and it is said to be at saturation.

If you are trying to reverse the field from the permanent magnetic with an electromagnetic, you will need twice the electrical power to do so -- enough to cancel the permanent magnetic plus an equal amount to reverse the field.
However that would also (at least partially, maybe completely) demagnetize the permanent magnet; so you haven't made any real progress!

(above found with
https://www.google.com/search?&q=what+is+meant+by+magnetic+saturation)

Cheers,
Tom
 
  • #5
artis
1,327
878
@Baluncore I wouldn't necessarily say that I don't understand electrical machines, as most of them I do actually, thanks to folks like you here, although with you personally it has always been a little bit of a struggle. But my hat goes off to you anyway.

@Tom.G Well I think you almost hit the nail on the head, after thinking bit more about this I realized myself , I think, why this wouldn't work the way described.
In the simple latch case after one steers the flux of one of the magnets towards the other one you now have twice the field at one side. Now you want to reverse it, but in order to reverse it (ignoring any other problems like saturation or demagnetization) you now need to apply a field that exactly matches the field in the core , so you need to reverse the previously reversed magnet and the other magnet also. So it only works the first time around then every other time in order to reverse fully the coils need to have a current that builds a field that exactly equals that of the two not one magnets so the device is useless as is.

Well I guess my intuition was steering me in the right way , this is just another bogus technology the only difference that this one is presented in a more sophisticated manner.
 
  • #6
artis
1,327
878
PS. In my defense it seems like two doctoral students also studied this so apparently it wasn't obvious to them just by looking.
 
  • #7
Windadct
1,449
410
Magnetics are defiantly not my thing, I have some questions about the original paper, and I agree that the FLynn site seems a little off.

BUT - I am continually astounded by inventions and claims that seem to hang around, where the benefit would be SOOOO easily proven and commercially demonstrated. Yes - an invention may be novel, and have a niche application. But a motor concept with even 1 or 2% average efficiency improvement would have a commercial value of what... a billion? Efficiency is VERY easy to measure and prove, but also operating range, material costs and impacts - etc are factors.
 
  • #8
artis
1,327
878
@Windadct well you literally just said what I thought when I started to get the picture, like if those claims in those papers are correct, this thing should have been on the market by now, well I did fell for a while not realizing (the author probably still doesn't...) that in order to switch those permanent magnets continually the coils must produce the field equal to both permanent magnet fields instead of just one. So that easily the thing goes out the window.
 
  • #9
andydcoles
1
1
Joe Flynn explains PPMT Motor Technology well, in his White Papers. The second one, appears to have been pulled off the Web. The Title for that is long, but includes "Variable Speed Motor Applications", if anyone wants to look for it. One might check via the Way Back Machine, around March 2013. Possibly removed because it revealed too much Information?

I suggest looking at the Magnetic Flux Diagrams of the Motors, through rotation steps shown. This makes operation easier to understand. Others have used FEMM (there are Videos showing Flux movement during rotation).

Parallel Magnetic Paths is quite an obscure area of Physics.

Two Magnetic Fields are combined through the complex Stator. This is where the Magnetic Steering in done. The Stator will saturate, if powerful permanent Magnets (like NIB or Niron) are used. Ceramic Magnets are used. #8, if Memory serves.

There are three Magnetic Paths while Electro-Magnet(s) are still energized. Normally, an electro-Magnet is just pulsed, to flip the Magnetic Field Direction within the Stator. The Path flipped by an electro-Magnet Pulse will latch, while is a Rotor connection is maintained.

Back-EMF is captured (which could be done effectively in other Motors, by using Diodes in the Circuitry), to raise Efficiency.

The only information Joe Flynn has not revealed, is how the Electro-Magnets are commutated. Like an AC Synchro Motor, an optical Encoder Disc is used, to accurately track the Rotor Position.
 

Suggested for: PPMT, Magnetic Flux Switch, electro-permanent magnet generator

Replies
26
Views
605
Replies
7
Views
516
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
244
Replies
7
Views
458
Replies
8
Views
311
Replies
7
Views
471
Replies
16
Views
455
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
588
Top