Perendev Motor & Magnet Motors Debunked

Here are copies of two messages from the energy2000 group. It shows some interesting problems with magnet motors running down.

Ron Frazer

------------------

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/energy2000/message/23158

Thread-Topic: [energy2000 / energy 21) Re: New perendev replication
thread-index: AcSzAcdCERiSdnZoR7OPotTuKZCzSQCJpffQ
To: <energy2000@yahoogroups.com>
From: "Keith Anderson" <keith@purescience.com>
Mailing-List: list energy2000@yahoogroups.com; contact energy2000-owner@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:09:33 -0600
Subject: RE: [energy2000 / energy 21) Re: New perendev replication
Reply-To: energy2000@yahoogroups.com

I have seen first-hand three magnetic motors running and have written
cost feasibility and reproducibility reports on all three. Two of them
I had in my lab and my staff used the inventors' plans to build several
working replicas. We also went and saw, first-hand, the Perendev
device.

All three designs used "Rare Earth" magnets (Neodymium, or more
correctly stated, Neodymium Iron Boron or NdFeB) and our various
reproductions used NdFeB, SmCo and Ferrite magnets. We did not attempt
to reproduce the Perendev device because of its design proximity to one
of the other two.

The results were always the same: they all run down. Under load, they
run down very quickly. It doesn't take very long for magnets to lose
their magnetism when they are constantly being put in opposition to one
another.

Every magnet has a "maximum energy product" rated in Mega Gauss
Oersteds, MGOe. This is the amount of work a magnet can do before its
level of magnetism has deteriorated to the point that its energy doesn't
reach out far enough to affect anything surrounding it. Contrary to the
popular notion that rare earth magnets are invincible, even the most
expensive sintered NdFeB magnets max out at less than 50 MGOe. If they
are used in a device that puts them constantly in opposition, they will
run down, and this is the whole assumption behind so-called "magnetic
motors".

The amount of energy used in manufacturing a magnet is typically 10
times what the magnet is capable of producing. More expensive magnets
are even less efficient. Add to this the losses in energy incurred by
these 33%-66% concept magnet devices themselves, and the energy consumed
in the overall manufacturing process is 20-25 times the energy you will
get out.

There are situations where these types of devices may be useful, but
they are not "free energy", nor do they represent any sort of
"overunity" phenomenon, nor any solution to the energy crisis.

> I'm still on the fence when it comes to magnet motors. I'de love to
> see one working! To that end i'm offering to cut free of charge
> whatever acrylic is needed on an laser engraver free of charge*.
> Rather than repeat something i've already posted, check out the
> message below.
>
> I've love to see one of these things run. I don't believe its
> theoretically impossible, i just don't have the time to figure out
> if it is possible. If anyone believes they have what it takes to
> make a magnet motor. I'm glad to help you build ones as long as i
> have the right to make as many as i can if successfully.

----------------

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/energy2000/message/23160

X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email
X-Sender: keith@purescience.com
X-Apparently-To: energy2000@yahoogroups.com
To: <energy2000@yahoogroups.com>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353
Thread-Index: AcS1LhPjiYp5IXX5T5SibHsDL0+hWAAAWUNg
X-Declude-Sender: keith@purescience.com [63.147.40.230]
X-Declude-Spoolname: Df26705180098234c.SMD
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 63.147.33.20
From: "Keith Anderson" <keith@purescience.com>
X-Yahoo-Profile: wildrailmotorsports
Mailing-List: list energy2000@yahoogroups.com; contact energy2000-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list energy2000@yahoogroups.com
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:energy2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:42:16 -0600
Subject: RE: [energy2000 / energy 21) Re: New perendev replication
Reply-To: energy2000@yahoogroups.com
X-ELNK-AV: 0

Without putting the magnets in opposition at some point during the cycle,
and probably for at least 33% of the time, you will have the same problem
that exists with the many hypothetical gravity motor designs that don't
work. What goes up, comes down. Nothing will simply come down without
having gone up first.

You have to treat magnets a lot like springs from a design standpoint,
although the mechanics of magnetism aren't as simple as that of springs.
There are billions of spring-powered motors in the world: clocks, toys, etc.
They all run down. Nobody will ever design a spring-powered motor that runs
forever without winding.

> How about putting the magnets into a cooperative or use them in
> attraction mode only?
> Over time the magnets MIGHT gain strength they definitely will not loose
> their strength so quickly.
> The biggest issue with this idea is that the attraction force is much
> less and occurs over a much smaller distance on the other this does not
> mean that it cannot be done.

Greetings to Everyone and good morning.

If the magnets are placed in a state of repulsion only against each other in a magnet motor system, I would agree they will lose their magnetism over time. If the magnets in the Perendev magnet motor are always in a state of repulsion only, then this would explain the magnet depletion problem.

However, if the magnets are placed in a working system so as to have repulsion forces on one half cycle and attraction forces on the other half cycle, then the magnets will continue their magnetic field density unchanged as they will realigned themselves.

Thus my Impulsion motor.

I have a set of 36 neodymium rare earth magnets grade 35 mounted in my permanent magnet dynamo since 1987, and I have found no difference in the magnetic field density today as compared to the time I first ordered them in 1987.

Sincerely
Alan L Francoeur
ALF
Inventor
B.C. Canada