Welcome to Instructables

On this page you can find links to some of our most frequently asked questions. What is this site? Instructables is a place that lets you explore, document, and share your creations. How do I post an Instructable? We offer a free and easy online class to coach you through posting your first Instructable or you can just wing it and start a new one today. How do I get help improving my Instructable?Ask the community for help in The Clinic. How does my Instructable get featured? The best way to get your projects featured is by following the Featuring Guidelines. Where can I learn more about contests? Our Contest FAQ has all of the information that you need to know about contests. What contests are launching soon? Check out our list of upcoming contests. Are you on social media? Yes! Follow us on Pinterest, Instagram and Twitter. How do I contact Instructables directly? The best way to contact us is through our Contact Page.

Topic by randofo   |  last reply


I'm about ready to give up

For many years I have been a great follower of Instructables, and have contributed something like 70 instructables of my own. Prior to the recent site "upgrade," I would normally visit the site 3-4 times each day to see new submissions. Since the "upgrade," however, it has become so unstable that lately I only try to get to the "recent" items about once/day, and on most days that results in an error. In fact, over the past 7 days I've tried several times to submit this to the forum, but that would error out also. I'm now down to trying to launch Instructables about once/week, and that turns out to be a very iffy proposition. This was once a great site. It's sad that it has become so unstable.Note: Since there was not an appropriate category listed, I just selected "workshop."

Topic by knife141   |  last reply


Q: Others having difficulties about reading private messages in istructables profile page?

HiI just wonder, is it just me.. Or is there some known, wider issues on istructables page, that prevents reading private messages?I have tried couple days to read my messages, but when i click "Inbox", i end to the front page of the instructables, instead to my mail. :( ThanksTuomas

Topic by The other Finnish guy   |  last reply


What is going on? I want to see ALL the instructables, not a "homepage"

What is going on? I want to see ALL the instructables, not a "homepage". Stop messing with what works.

Topic by carlos66ba   |  last reply


Where is the induction kettle or hot water system?

No modern kitchen these days is complete without at least a single induction cooktop.Convient to even place on the table to keep things warm but also nice to have 4 or 6 "hotplates" to cook on that are actually not getting hot at all.When it comes to efficiency induction cooking tops all others as no heat is wasted.Which brings me to the point...A single cooktop goes now often for well under 50 bucks.Although the base might end up slightly higher than a normal kettle I fail to see why we don't have induction kettles in our kitchen.Why wait 12 minutes to have the thing boil if you can do it cheaper and faster?Way more convinient too as there is no pesky contacts and heating elements anymore, no failure due to leaks either...But what really got me wondering is the hot water systems or heating options like prefered in Europe.Here you have a central "boiler" so to say and water circulates through valves into finned radiators, usually located under windows.We have oil filled radiators of this kind as free standing units that are now being phased out because they waste too much energy with their heating elements.Same story for just hot water :(On demand systems are getting more popular now outside Europe but still the common solution is to have a few hundret liters of water in a tank that is kept hot no matter how much of it we use.Be is gas or electric both types have their drawbacks and to get ahead of the corrosion that always kills them we now opt for expensive stainless steel tanks...Using induction it would be very easy to have a fully sealed tank and to actually only heat what needs to be heated without wasting too much energy.The "heating" element could be just a steel plate inside the tank with no connections to the outside.The gap between wall and element doubles to make the water circulate.And changing from a fixed timer to a temperatur control system to turn the induction element on and off is not hard either.Do you have an induction based hot water system, heater or maybe kettle already?Would love to see it...

Topic by Downunder35m 


TV antennas and what is possible indoors

Back in my young years a TV antenna was on the roof, quite big and only required to get 3 or 4 channels at best.The basic design of these Yagi antennas has not really changed since then.Same for the antennas required to get UHF and VHF channels at the same time.They either comes as two seperate antennas with a mixer or as a UHF antenna with some added loops for UHF.To talk some basics:For UHF you can get away with quite small dimensions for your antenna bits.After all a quarter wavelengths here is only around 15cm long.With VHF though we get already 30 to 40cm here depending on the channels.So called bradband antennas claim to be able to get a wide range of frequencies.That however is only true for their dedicated frequency band.If you take a normal whip style antenna then this becomes obvious - just compare the lenghts required and you realise "going the middle way" will mean neither UHF nor VHF would get any usable reception.For a long time now there is the option of so called "fractal antennas" to get better TV reception....Fractal antenna? What the heck is that?The theories behind them are about as old as fractal antenna designs that were not even considered to be fractals.Let me explain with the example of a standard FM radio antenna.For them we use frequencies from about 88 to 108MHz.And of course, for our cars they are always on the roof or mounted somewhere around the wheel arches.Some cars however does not seem to have any antenna depsite having a working radio.In this special case rest ensured they do have one, usually behind the plastic bumper bar ;)I like to go off road every now and then and lost count how many times I had to replace my antenna after getting to close to some bushes and trees.As a solution I used some thin wire to create a L-style anteanna on the inside of my windscreen.And funny enough it picks up more stations than a "proper" antenna outside.Really old design and if you think about it then an antenna with a kink that looks like L is ""self similar" - the definition of a fractal ;)More complex shapes like the Sierpinski models do exactly the same just in one more dimension.Cell phones use them as well as you WiFi router that has no external antenna anymore.Their designs and looks are so different that it is next to impossible to list the currently used shapes here.What it comes down to, when you just take a very basic flat or wire shape is that the straight single segment of the active antenna is split into one or many shorter segments that change the angle.They all have similar relations to the wavelenght still.Means really long segments might be half of a wavelength while the shortest bits are just 1/64 of a wavelength.Think of it (far too simple of course) like amny matched antennas combined into a single one.With that often comes a destinct radiation pattern, usually with a quite narrow beam angle that provides a quite high gain.Are fractal antennas any better than for example a proper Yagi antenna?You can ask 100 people and you get 100 different opinions for this one.This is mostly due to some simple facts like:Not caring about actual comparisons.Not being accurate enough when building the fractal antenna.Using just very basic equippment to compare results.For example when you have a 30 year old and quite small TV antenna on your roof and struggle with digital TV reception than you might want to just replace it all.In some case even the old rabbit ears on your TV set will work better.But take modern Yagi antenna with 12 or more segments and even station that are 100 miles away have a good chance.Comes down to possible gain, frequency match and of course how well the antenna is aimed at the transmitter.Then why is it that some fractal antennas still seem to perform so much better?The big antenna scam....If you paid attention during the intial DVB-T rollout in your country then noticed two things.a) You were told you need a TV or set top box capable of receiving DVB-T signals.b) You need a suitable antenna.Well, A is obvious but for B a lot of people got scammed badly.You see, in almost all cases the frequencies allocated for TV signal did not change at all.And an antenna really does not care if the incoming signal is analog or digital - it only cares about the frequency.But more and more local stations often meant that the trnsmit power is limited.After all it makes no sense to have a 500kW transmitter if the area to cover is only about 20 square km big.So people were told they need new antennas once the noticed digital TV is more like playing Tetris, blocks everywhere....You analog TV had no problem with a slightly weak signal, you did not really notice it unless the weather was really bad as well.All the benefits of digital TV however only work with a proper signal strength.If your areas still has both analog and digital TV channels then have a look on how your local transmitter provides the signals ;)Part of the big scam was hiding a very simple fact:All analog TV is transmitted in a horizontal orientation while almost all digital TV is transmitted in a VERTICAL orientation.Ok, we already gain and ignored it but why would the orientation be important?Your radio antenna is vertical because the FM signal is transmitted the same way - the "waves" if you like go up and down like a sine wave.You still get reception if you turn the antenna 90° to make it a horizontal one but you will realise that weak station are no longer available.The same happened with digital TV.And if there is only digital TV left in your area then simple turning your antenna 90 on the mast to have the single elements vertical instead of horizontal gives you top reception again ;)If you struggle to get all station then just try it out before buying a new antenna ;)Modern fractal TV antennas come paper thin and often with rediculous claims in terms of gain and range.On Fleabuy you can even find models claiming to get stations from over 2000 miles away LOLSome even come with the fake claim of being omnidirectional, meaning it does not matter where you place them or how you orient them.A fractal antenna can't change basic phsyics though...High gain mean highly directional or at least with a very flat radiation pattern instead of being more like a sphere.A high bandwidth means you compromise on the gain and/or the phsical dimensions.For example a thin whip antenna is quite limited in the optimum bandwidth while a piece of tubing provides amuch higher bandwidth but at the expense of gain (and some other problems).A fractal antenna can compromise between the two worlds much better than anything straight.And you would even need to make the traces on the plastic extremely wide because you can simply add different lengths for different frequencies.Means a wideband fractal antenna for FM, VHF and UHF basically is three different antennas combined into a single one.It also means that there is usually always more than just one single element of the antenna that is receiving a signal.If you experimented with WiFi antennas for your router or modem than you certainly found the famous Pringles can antenna - highly directional and with an insane amount of gain.Works exactly like a simple directional microphone.And you could, at least in theory do the same with a TV antenna - if there wouldn't be the problem of the wavelenght.A pringles can works for WiFi because the wavelenght only requires an antenna of about 3cm in lenght.You might not want a row of steel drums with a diameter of around 80cm on your roof just to watch the news though...Ok, if I need a new antenna anyway then should I get a fractal antenna or not?I try to make it simple:Roof option not possible or too costly AND your transmitter is not too far away then try one of the cheap paper thin antennas you find online.If you already have an antenna on the roof that is suitable for the frequencies you need then check it to know if it is still any good.With age and weather comes corrosion and some antennas are connected badly in this regard.Sometimes you are lucky and all it takes is to cut off a few cm of cable to get back to clean copper and to give the terminals on the antenna a good fine sanding or a wire brush treatment.In other cases you might find an amplifier under the roof that has faulty power supply ;)And well, certain animals love to chew through your cable...If all is goo from antenna to TV then as said try to flip the antenna 90° to get it vertical.No, I did not mean to point it up to the sky..... ;)I mean rotate it around the x-axis if X is pointing in the direction of the transmitter...

Topic by Downunder35m 


Recent Feed Page

We have heard your feedback loud and clear, and we will be bringing back an easy way to see all recently published instructables. This requires some dev time because we changed things under the hood and need to do a little work to re-create this page. We hope to have it back shortly.We appreciate your patience as we continue refining the site after this release.Update:The recent feed has been released and can be found at this link:https://www.instructables.com/feed/recent/You can also find a link to it on your feed page.

Topic by randofo   |  last reply


Tesla coil antenna?

With the cold and bad weather out there I started again to tinker with my old UHF radio.Trying to build a nice antenna to put on the roof of the hous and such things...While looking up on the various antenna designs I could not help it and followed a few links with antenna designs and specs for all sorts of frequencies.There are things like horizontal or vertical transmission waves or even circular ones.But also some of the basics can be quite different, like whip antennas, dipoles or coiled ones.The later we often see in these keyfob transmitters and receivers for door bells and similar low range, low cost options.Some really old ham radio links got me to the topic or electrically shortening and lenghtening antennas.Things like coils in a whip or added capacitors to match the antenna to frequency and transmitter.A tesla coil usually produces a lot of RF interference, not just on the main frequency it operates on.And from research and physics we learned that for really great distances you need really low frequencies.Like for example the very low bands used for submarine communication around the globe.Here antennas on land can be several km long...The inventor had a few ideas in terms of wireless electricity and communication but I wonder if there is more to it...Despite the broadband EMF a tesla coil produces it is also a really narrow beam antenna.Basically the radiation cone is orientated straight up instead of the usual horizontal patterns we use for communication.The topload again provides a spherical radiation pattern.I am wondering about how a tesla coil would operate as a directional antenna if the topload is replaced with a whip style antenna of a lenght that matches the wavelength...The hip would again provide a more or less spherical beam but the coil underneath would "puch" a directional from underneath.In the classic design the topload is meant to prevent arcing while providing a capacitor so the whole thing is resonant.At lower power arcing is no problem anyways, but what effect in terms of capacitance would a whip style antenna have?Classic pherical or donut style toploads provide little to no gain in terms of antenna properties.If you would use a sphere as an antenna for your CB radio then it would be perfect for very short distance but utterly useless for open range communication.We all know the fun of placing a flourescent light near a tesla coil to show "wireless electricity".Sadly this is more an effect caused by the high frequencies be able to produce the glow in the gas filling.Trying to make an incandescent lighbulb glow is far trickier.Several experiments show that two properly tuned tesla coils can work as transmitter and receiver.But to my knowledge no one ever tried this type of experiment with an antenna on the tesla coil...

Topic by Downunder35m 


Diy o-ring with glue-gun

For emergencies, but not only: make your own o-ring. use a hot glue gun and some soft glue-stick. look for a round object more or less the size of the o-ring you need. form a steady bead of hot glue around it. wait for it to set. peel it off. if necessary: smoothen down the edges somehow (sanding-paper, file, etc). feedback appreciated. thank you.

Topic by la xerra   |  last reply


Author Spotlight Interviews: Nominate an author!

We recently began a new round of author spotlight interviews. For the first interview, we chose to reach out and chat with Nikus, who recently won the grand prize in this year's Epilog Contest. You can check out our interview here: Author Spotlight: NikusThese interviews are a great way to learn a little more about individual contributing authors here on Instructables, and see what makes them tick! Is there someone who is an active author that you'd be interested in learning more about? Now's your chance to nominate a fellow author. There are no set requirements to be eligible to be nominated. But generally, we're looking for authors who've shared a good handful of high-quality projects, which made a notable splash within the Instructables community.And yes, if you're feeling bold, you may certainly nominate yourself! : )

Topic by seamster   |  last reply


D.i.y. (plastic) nuts (for any kind of thread)

For emergencies or simple application: how to make your own nuts out of (p.e.t.)-plastic bottles:take a bottle (#1 plastic, preferably smooth, w/o imprinted patterns or design etc) > cut off bottom and neck > start cutting (scissors) > the resulting ´tube´ into a consistent (width, depending on desired usage), slightly diagonally, thus sort of ´peeling´ it > wrap the strip around the screw/threaded-part/etc you need the nut for twice (for a start) > ´melt´ the edges of the wrapped part = joining them (i use a little solder-iron) > this way the wrapped beginning of the strip wont come loose > ´brush´ with the solder-iron (or whatever other source of heat) over the wrapped part (w/o) burning holes in it > this causes the plastic to shrink and press down into the thread and adopt its shape > once set keep doing more wraps of the rest of the strip until you reach a desired diameter > now, again, join the edges of the wrap with heat, and afterwards brush again over the outside of the created ´nut´, so that the plastic shrinks down & compacts > after having cooled off: unscrew the ´nut´ with pliers > ready for useps this is just a simple sketch. got no camera to take photos. sorry. so, please, ask whatever if you got any question. and any kind of feedback is more than welcome. bowing.

Topic by la xerra   |  last reply


3D printed combination lock anyone?

I am in the finnishing stages for a fully 3D printed dial combination lock, similar to what would be used on a safe.Unlike what you might find in other places there is no metal parts.No crappy amount of possible combinations either, 72 per dial dial...I took me a few weeks and quite some filament to get from a draft in Sketchup to something that actually works as planned.As it was more a training excersize in Sketchup for me I had the the following goals:1. Everything is 3D printed with as little afterwork as possible.2. All required springs are 3D printed as well as all other moving or stationary parts.3. Where otherwise fasteners or screws would be required only short leftovers of filament are used to keep the parts in place.Only exception for security reason is the mounts for the front dial and holder.These should be glued or screwed in place if the actual intention is to use it as a working lock.4. The lock shall not be pickable by means of felling, hearing or just trying out random combinations.The above points I got sorted to my satisfaction.However I would like some feedback from trustworth beta testers on the general design and functionality.It is one thing to design something that just works but a bit harder to design it the best possible way.Another big drawback currently is that it seems to be impossible to export proper STL files in Sketchup once they reach a certain complexity.Automatic services or programs to fix these issues result in drastically increased file sizes.Some of the problematic part go from just under 200kb to over 10mb after "fixed".This is not acceptable for me and I have to work on fixing this issue.Most slicers correct these tiny errors automatically and produce a correct print but I prefer proper STL files of small size and complexity over inflated ones that I then need to double check for a long anyways.A few details need changing as my tests showed that you can't drive up print details to a certain level without risking to be unable to mount the parts without further sanding.I hope to have a full set of clean STL files ready for testing by the end of this month.If you are interested to try it out and maybe contribute to an improved version your time will be valued by being mentioned as a beta tester for the upcoming Instructable.Be warned though!This is not for the faint of heart and certainly not for someone who does not know how to calibrate all aspects of the 3D printer involved.The lock also uses quite a bit of filament, currently around 37m all up but I am working on reducing this by replacing solid parts with framework instead where possible.The assembly can be time consuming and frustrating if you realise only once finnished that you have certain parts in the wrong position or orientation.But as said, my goals were not really on making it as easy as possible LOLWhy desing a lock that is neither secure enough nor free of metal parts if there is other options ;)If you happen to work with an Inventor and PLA on the left side then I can provide ready to go .gx files if prefered.They would then be already confirmed to be working and usable on one of my printers.Let me know what you think ...

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


How much water is in my cistern?

I built a 33 gallon cistern my garage to collect condensate from my HVAC system. (I didn't have room outside my condo for a rain barrel). It has a spigot and a short hose, it lives above my utility sink, which is where the overflow goes when the cistern is full. I'm hoping some clever makers can give me some ideas on how I can build something that will tell me how much water is in the cistern. I have Samsung SmartThings so I've considered putting a water sensor just below the overflow hole, so I will know when it's at 100%, but I would prefer to have a percentage reading and an alarm when it gets to 90% or so. I considered an arduino with an ultrasonic sensor but that a bit involved... Not opposed to it but please be prepared to hold my hand thru the process of you propose it! ☺. Non-SmartThings solutions also welcome.Thank you - looking forward to your genius ideas!!Mark

Topic by MarkB673   |  last reply


Tips and tricks for UV curing glue, resin and coatings

Only a few years ago your only option to repair certain plastics, glass or even a broken crystal was epoxy based resin or the good old superglue.You might have already tried one of the 5-seconds-repair pens or tried your own UV curing nail polish art at home.For the later you might be lucky as the resins used here are optimised for the purpose and lights you get with them.Sadly even the best nail polish is no substitude for a glue as the material properties need to be different.One of the most common complaints when it comes to using some UV glue, like Kafuter or similar is that it never comes with instructions.Sould be straight forward but it is not free of problems.For example almost all commercail UV curing glues that you can buy require quite stirct procedures and for the light the right wavelenth(s).Resins and coatings can be even more painful here as they might also require you to stick to the correct temperature.Let's start with one thing you might have encountered already...The glue is definately cured and rock hard but the surface tacky and smeary.Quite annoying if you want to fix a piece of jewellery and can't prevent it from collecting dirt and dust...The next thing you might have encountered is that despite having transparent materials it seems to be impossible to cure the clue.Both problems come down to wavelenght and exposure.UV curing glue is prevented from curing in the presence of oxygen - a factor utilised for example in resin based 3D printers.Uncovered glue is exposed to the oxygen in the air and won't cure easy.The glue or resin below this layer however with fully cure with ease in the absence of oxygen.For the second problem consider that not all materials that you can see through will let UVC light pass through ;)Bonding strenght is another complaint I hear a lot...Be aware that certain things just are no good for UV curing glues or resins.Take the molds you get for that purpose: on the material the glue won't bond!Teflon is another prime candidate here.But in a lot of cases it comes down to surface preparation.Don't be afriad to sand the surface!Not only will the surface area increase but the scratch marks will be invisible once filled anyways.Use sandpaper on your fingernails, then go over with clear nail polish -mirror finish ;)With curing often a problem consider to fully cover the glue.A bit of clear sticky tape, food wrapping foil....If that is not an option then eliminate the oxygen.You can use a container filled with inert (for the glue) gas like CO2 or just place a burning candle in it until it goes out....Either way the amount of oxygen should then be low enough to cure the surface of your glue.Not always is any of the above an option.Then you can still try more power and a lover wavelength.Mercury based lamps for example provide a very broad and powerful light that in most cases will cure within seconds.For a proper surface cure you need a wavelength of 265nm or lower.LED's offering this exist but at prices well out of range for the hobby user.A mercury lamp under high pressure is nothing for short term use and the limited lifespan does not always justify the costs of buying them.Like with most things in life certain inventions can have a dual purpose.Quality germicidal lamp systems for examples often state to go as low or even lower than 265nm.And they come at a fraction of the cost you have with a broadband mercury lamp.Even cheaper is the fre weather forecast.If the sun is siad to be strong enough so you need protection than even the worst glue will fully cure in seconds outside in the sun - tackfree!Don't be fooled and protect yourself!!These tiny LED lamps for your glue stick, the curing thingies for your nailpolish and everything else using UV light comes with warnings.For very good reasons!It might be hidden in the fineprint but you can not really see UV light.The blueish-purple glow you see is on the high end of what comes out and by that in the visible range of your eye.Just because a LED only gives a faint glow you see does not mean the UV light wouldn blind you if you could see it!Even worse for fluoroscent lamps or open cruning systems like those for your nailpolish.Reflected UV light is still UV light and you can still NOT see it!Stories of people getting sunburnt from germicidal lamps in a butcher shop or other people going blind from checking money as their living have a true base...In most cases lamps used well past their lifespan or simply the wrong type of lamp but still: the damage came from UVC light...If you just love creating your own artwork or jewellery with UV curing resins and glues than protect yourself.Proper sunglasses with a stated UV protection for example or just black nitrile gloves for your hands...

Topic by Downunder35m 


Rewinding a DC motor for different voltages

I modified small DC motors, like used in toys and such but now I have one that requires to do it properly.Motor in question runs on 24V and uses about 3.5A under full load.Drives a high pressure water pump on either side of the shaft.The rotor is basically empty with just a few turns of wire and lots of empty space.I assume the same model is used for multiple power configurations by the manufacturer.For the toys my basic approach was to just calculated the number of turns or to count them when removing.From there I get the voltage per turn and can rewind accordingly.So in theory and by blissfully ignoring all higher things involved I could do this motor the same way.Right now I see 10 windings per coil, so with thicker wire I would use 5 to run it on 12V at roughly the same speed.Only problem is that thing then would use around 7.5 to 8A when running under full load and get quite hot.I need the speed to keep the flowrate at the same 7.5L per minute but I also need the power to be able to still get the 120PSI from just 12V.Isn't there any winding trickery that would allow me to reduce the required current a bit without sacrificing on speed or torque?

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Wordless how- to videos.

Https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r0oX4I11BMc This is not my video, but I thought it was pretty cool. I really like some of these wordless how to videos. I suppose that it assumes a certain familiarity with the processes from anyone who would do these projects. Yet, if you don't have a familiarity with welding for instance, you probably wouldn't do this project anyway. Any other good videos like this one?

Topic by Toga_Dan   |  last reply


High efficiency coilgun design

Hello there I need some (a lot of) help with my project. I've started to design a high efficiency multistage coilgun. The main feature of the design is using the self-inductance formed in coils that were shut down for accelerating the following coils. To perform this, we can divide each coil into 3 segments (lets call them subcoils), connected with a wire and power all them 3 with a single capacitor. At first, the current from the capacitor is flowing through all 3 segments and a projectile is being pushed through the first segment. Than the first sensor is being activated with the projectile and it switches the power flow to only second and third subcolis As the current in the first subcoil is changed, the self-inductance directed in the opposite direction is appearing. In theory, we can use this power to increase the current in the following segments. The same thing is happening between second and third segments. And I want to place 3 of this stages (9 subcoils in total) I will use 8mm caliber projectiles, 40mm or 50mm length. I chose 5200mkF 450V or 6800mkF 400V capacitors, 2 of them in parallel for every stage (6 capacitors in total) Yes, I know it sounds way too powerful, but that's my actual goal. It's not my own idea. I have learned it from here http://gauss2k.narod.ru/adf/gs3seg.htm (русские вперёд). So, some problems had appeared. I can't figure out how to properly calculate the required inductance of the coils. In the source it is said that the inductance of the first subcoil should be equal to two of the second and the third subcoils (L1=2*L2=2*L3) to achieve the best performance. Also, my rough estimates show that peak current through the coil will be about 1,5-2,0kA for 3,0-4,5ms. This is quite a lot! I'll have to manage this energy and choose the power switches rightly. To sum up, I will be glad to hear your opinions about this idea. It's kind of controversial, but I hope it's not a certain failure.

Topic by CosmoKnight   |  last reply


Nano-buble_ #tech_#eng_#design_@thermodinamics

Hi, I'm looking for some help to develop a nano-buble bubeling device.(thermodynamics, control logic, sensing, material technology - I touch all this subjects but in content) It will be for a good cause, like humanity, affordability, clean water at affordable costs. Also, electolisys has a higher efficiency in generation if H2o. It might not be the solution but it's still on the books/on the table. Get in touch @: remembereco@gmail.com or post comments on this platform. A great idea! Best wishes, ip

Topic by JagodaN   |  last reply


Design criteria for Ibles....

I just noticed that we have now standards that need to be followed if you want to publish an Instructable.Standards are good but not so much if the editing options for an Ible are at a standard from the year 2000.If I had fun designing something as simple as whistle that shall be created in a 3D printer: Then why would I need images showing how I designed it?Or why would I need images for the print settings or idea behind it?A community goes both ways!The editing tools are still sub standard and the images handling is a bad joke.If I need to explain something complex with the aid of images then of course I want the images in the right spot with the text - ever thought about this or visited website that offer similar after the year 2000?Usability is not just a means to provide the same look on all browsers and devices or to be able to use the most basic way to convert a website into a PDF.Usability is also for those who create it but that part seems to be lost for years now no matter how many times people ask, suggest or comment on the problem.I have no problem making my creations available elsewhere if that is the only way out here.If you want people to create proper Instructables then for crying out loud give them the means to do so!And fix the damn category selection bogus when posting in the community section.Has no use for years but why bother to fix it....Before you guys force people doing things your way only you should consider in what times we are and how proper usability would benefit this site....

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Here we go again...

Can't remember how many times a topic was started to address bugs, problems, issues and requests/suggestions.But it seems time to allow the developers to read up what the users here actually want, so let me start with some topics and you just post what I left out:1. Working search options.2. Working sorting options.3. A usable Editor for both Ibles and the community section.4. Proper categories and channels, actually working of course...5. Proper HTML editing options until the things the user needs are actually implemented into the editor.6. No forced layouts for Ibles! If one needs a pic in a specific location within the text then for crying out loud stop forcing the user to create a new step for it!7. Transperency for contests! Who, why, where, what... There is no point in contest systems that constantly cause users to question why some Ible was featured or declared a winner!8. Testing changes or fixes before misusing the user as a beta tester - we struggle enough as it is and really don't need more stuff ups every week.9. Working rezising options!! What is the point if a user needs to crop, mame and mutilate his images just to somehow make them fit into the box that holds the preview for the Ible?10. Easy and usable links to the fullsize images in the library without mutilating the filenames! Ever tried to find your images in the library???11. Stop wasting time making a total mess out of this site and just start listening! Three years now expired without anyone actually providing anything that should be standard for every website that allows posting things ito provide good info.12. Make the users want to stay instead of doing your best to drive them to other websites - Instructables is no longer the only option to share your projects with the world but the only one totally ignoring their users.13. For crying out loud: Provide a proper feedback and bug reporting section where you guys actually check in and reply! Where do you want me to post this? Circuits, Workshop, Craft, Cooking, Living, Outside??? You guys must be joking here :(

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


HOW TO SETUP 5 UNIT OF 3 PHASE WIND TURBINE 2KW 48V TO 10KW 240V HOME

Hai... I need some solution... I'm not a electrical engineering... so, there are 5 unit of 3 phase wind turbine, with rate output up to 2Kw, 48V each... and I need to produce current load for home about 7Kw to 9Kw, 240V,,, so, how to wiring from 5 unit of wind turbine to home current...sorry for my english and thank you...

Topic by zeak1975   |  last reply


Electric vehicle motor selection

As any one who has looked at my instructables knows whilst a school teacher I built a full sized electric racing car.https://www.instructables.com/id/Building-an-elect...This had a 250 watt DC motor over run to 500 watts - 20 amps at 24 volts .It was capable of running the car up to 25 - 30 MPH and using 2 car batteries drive for a couple of hours on the flat.Nowadays electric vehicles are all the rage. Looking at a few motores as small as 4000 watts are in use for city use where high speed isn't necessary.Now the question:https://hobbyking.com/en_us/turnigy-c580l-580kv-br...This motor intended for model cars is rated at 4000 watts RPM 26,100 100 amps at 45 volts. that's about 5.5 Hp.Suitably gears down could such a motor be a power unit for a light weight electric vehicle.The DC motor I used was, by comparison, huge and weighty. It seems to me that HP is HP and 5.5. Hp is plenty for what I have in mind.My concerns as always is I see no other commercial manufacture doing this - or anyone else for that matter, only electric bikes use small motors.There has to be a reason I am not catching.Experts out there you opinion please.

Topic by rickharris   |  last reply


The Moon - What do we really know and what is possible?

If we look up then seeing the moon is the most normal thing to us there is in the sky.But did you ever wonder how it actually got there? ;)Theories are out there by the lot, including those from real scientists.One of the most common is that it all started by catching the thing and that all was perfect at the time.Over time the orbit then stabilized.Other theories include that formed when our planet formed..What they all lack is what is common and true for all other moond out there: These rotate.According to science an object the size of our moon would need to rotate to maintain a stable orbit.No one told this to our moon, so it just stays in a stable orbit anyway.The only other accepted theory, that funny enough never mentioned OUR moon, is that the center of mass must be facing the orbiting planet.Now theories can run and wild if you let schientifically people loose on a subject.Official NASA data obtained by monitoring equippment on the moon supports the theory of the center of gravity.You see, sesmometers recorded "moon quakes" but also the impact of burnt rocket stages - the later were dropped on purpose.At first everyone agreed the equippment must be faulty but going through it again and again confirmed all works fine.So what got them so exited that was never officially made public?You see, every thing with suffient mass will create a sesmic shock on impact.On earth we can located the source of an earthquake or even explosion quite accurately.Same happened on the moon only with one difference to earth.Every impact caused a ringing effect.Like a bell, the soundwaves and shockwaves traveled through the moon for very long times.An early explanation was that the moon is made from really hard rock or that it might even have a metal core.This was rendered useless once the actual mass was calculated and it turned out the moon would rip us apart while spinning around us.The term "hollow moon" was born.Another interesting thing happens when you try to track down what equippment was left on the moon during which specific mission.Everything up there must have been installed at some stage.For some things though it seems there is no record when or where exactly something was left up there.Then there is the thing with the interviews...If you check the fuzz about the first moon landing then back then you couldn't help yourself but got exited as well.None of the three astronauts however appeared to be at least a little bit exited about going where no man has gone before.Somehow like visiting Iceland for the first time only to realise someone was there before you already.But it was the moon, not some easy to reach island...And while up there we did not see any exitement either, like fully staged and planned ahead.Like a not so 100% school rehersal.Claims that it was a fake and actually filmed in some studio have been verified to be false - they really were up there.After they came back two went silent and refused any interviews about the moon.All three though never spoke about anything we did not see on "live TV"...All the missing segments, the drop outs, the silence during communications...The money...Apart from the Pentagon making a disappearing act of 6Billion US, the already planned and staged moon missions were cancelled with no valid reason at all.One mission already ready to go to the launch pad, crew fully trained and briefed.Two more ready for final assembly.Official reason back then was "We have been there, it is time to explore new things."Almost the same statement was made by Obama a few weeks after he claimed "We will go up there again!".If you take away the costs for the abandoned missions then the money blown up to the moon has a huge difference to what can be tracked back.The lost sum equals out to about 8 more moon missions plus tons of state of the art equippment (back at the time it was state of the art).If you add what the Pentagon lost we are close to 15 more missions.The now...A few years back a lot of previously declared top secret documents have been released to the public.What was a good idea however turned out to be a bit too much.Quite a few documents were included that provide missing links to "incidents, missions, money spent"...Within these piles were documents indicating that space missions of the same extend as the much later moon missions were made.Same rockets, similar crafts, same requirements for water, food and oxygen, some though with just payloads of oxygen and water.Mind you though the documents speak from proposed options and not planned missions.And none of them had any exploration within it, just deliveries if you don't mind the comparison.Those documents about the ringing of the moon and how this would impact on the things we assumed to know about the moon were in there as well.What is really interesting though is what came back from the moon.None of it actually indicate that there is suffient ressources up there to justify mining.Funny enough exactly is planned on a military style.Seems fair enough considering the military can provide the best people for such a hard job.Some normal miner might have no problems getting under ground every day but knowing he is on the moon and might never make it back is another.With all the probing done that we know of you would assume the planned mining operations would be in an area rich in minerals, metals or at least something to generate fuel or oxygen.But no, it is planned to happen "on the dark side" and in an area that appearently was never explored in other ways then taking a few blurry pics while flying around the moon.However, both Russia and China claim to have been very close to this area long before details about the mining became public.And that brings us back to the past and what astromauts stated or to be precise refused to confirm or deny.In some videos we can see movements in the background.In several adio stream we hear the comments to what happens in the videos.If there is light moving around then it does not matter that is blue.You just wonder what it is and where it might have come from.Imagine the surprise if then in other videos you hear things like that the lights are back or that steam comes out of the moon like a gysir.There were official explanations for the first sightings made by the normal people when watching those videos on the NASA websites.Soon after the videos disappeared from the servers.Copies were made by the curious and quite a few videos were identified later to have contained "sightings" as well.Some even show what appears to flying machines with great manouverbilities.And if you take the high point of the happenings then it is also the same time when it was decided that we actually have no real interest in the moon.Astromauts later denied to have ever made any comments like that they are being followed or "escorted" by another craft.And the same Astromauts many years later still refuse to deny or confirm that what we could see and hear during their mission videos actually happened.Don't get me wrong but if the deny it then it just means we all saw some refections or such things.If the confirm it then we know something was out there with them.Doing neither usually means what we saw is ture enough to deny any knowledge about more details.Why then the sudden interest?Trump wants to get up there, military mining, private companies not to forget China.If there is nothing at all up there then why would they all spent money that could provide a much better living for those with low incomes?Even if it would be just for new schools and hospitals the money would be better spent if we trust the official claims about what is up there.The not so official claims....We already know NASA does not want to come with an official explanation why the moon sounds and reacts as if it would be hollow.Same for any video, audio or picture evidence indication there is sturctures on the moon or activities.Here is some of things that other people of great knowledge and with nice degrees under the belt say could, might or even is true about the moon.1. We have no evidence that the moon was always there, only what we have in record throughout history.Some claim the moon would be an artificially created structure.Indications of techonlogically highly advanced civilisations before us are there.And mining out a tiny planet and placing it in earths orbit is not far fetched if you consider higher technology levels than what we currently (officially) have.2. The satellite claim.Like the Death Star our moon could be an artifical satellite placed there for a purpose.What speaks for that theory is the impact craters on the moon.If it was never spinning or better rotating around all axis then a lot them would have been impossible.A crater always shows to some extend the direction of the impact.And on the moon they all apear to be direct and straight hits only.And even at some proper angle that against physics did not create a corresponding crater: Our plant would have been in the way.Officially it is claimed though that there would not be much of a directional crater because of the missing atmosphere and all debris settling evenly.Debris however does not explain the deformation from an impact at an angle.The satellite claim would also explain the missing depth in the craters.By the size of the bigger ones the crater should be much deeper and as said show some direction.If however the rocky surface landed there over time or is just the remaining natural hull then the craters could no go deeper.No advanced civilisation would design a stationary satellite that get a hole as soon as some big space rock hits it...3. Undocumented missions.If claims are true then we have been up there a lot more times than what our history lessons tell us.Tiny probes to analyse things, send data and so on are a thing not the the USA did.If you explain the reason for collecting seismic data by wanting to document an impact of an astroid then it is a joke.Sure it would be possible but what could we learn from the data?Nothing unless you consider that in some unoffial missions drilling was attempted on the moon.Sample collection to evaluate what is in the ground of use for future missions.Some documents now claim that all these attempts ended prematurely.Drills failed or broke, drill heads failed to go deeper and upon inspection were totally worn out.And all seemed to have happend at around the same depth.Although there is no atmosphere on the moon - if you stand on it you would be able to feel vibrations of the surface.Something astronauts would have felt during the drilling.And you can feel the difference between a vibration ending by stoping the drill and one that keeps going for a long time after...The dark side is visible in quite a few school books.Looks like the front with the brightness corrected just with different craters.Ever bothered to scan these pictures in and use some software to find matches to craters on the front of the moon ? ;)Anyways, those images show us the moon as near perfect sphere.What they don't show is how the images were actually made.They certainly did not use massive search lights from orbit to provide light for cameras.Means other sources were used, like IR, Radar, Microwaves and so on.Like we found the ruins of old civilisations by using satellites that can "see" through the forest and soil.And with that it would certainly be impossible to create such a nice and detailed image like we get from the front side.If some is edited, then why not all of it...And if all those missions we don't really know about also landed on the dark side it would explain a lot of things.All sightings seem to have disappeared to the dark side.And all leaked informations about previous missions before our first landing idicate the interest in the dark side was actually huge.They all ended though with one mission report claiming to have spotted lights on the dark side.Moving and stationary and when trying to get a better look by adjusting the orbit for the next round those lights were all gone.But audio recording indicate that from that moment on the astronauts were no longer alone and followed until turning back to earth.Several attempts seem to have been made to land near sightings on the dark side.Those where the astronauts returned home the never were the same again.Documents claim long treatment in mental facilites or suicide.The official missions appearntly started with the backstory of exploring.Some now claim it was attempt for a peaceful presence that still was not tolerated.4. Stories from involved companies.Even if NASA builds a craft themself they still need the corresponding supplies.And for a lot of things they are made outside by independent companies and contractors.Trying to track down early space mission again seems to confirm all claims about previous missions.The amount of materials provided would otherwise mean NASA actually crashed the majority of things right after take off without anyone noticing.5. Launches...So far all claims about previous moon missions or just secret ones were denied.I call this "plausible deniability".In all statements it is refered to the official launch sites.Things like being in public view and so on.What is not that commonly known is that there were a lot of capable launch sites available.After all big rockets have been tested in secrecy since we had the first.The claimed landing of the chinese started a big conundrum.At first the US claimed it never happened because there was no rocket that went up.Images prived by the chinese however clearly indicated the opposite.Not much later it was noticed that a few launches might have been misinterpreted as missle tests....What does that really mean?Quite simple: The surveillance is not perfect if the other side insists that it happened.The plausible deniablity is gone.If the US was "forced" to confrim they actually noticed the launches then it also means the chinese claims about the US doing the same could be true as well.And wasn't it a very important thing during the cold war to know when, where and why the other side launched anything?The silent agreement not to go up there again was broken many times...And although most if not all of these mission ended in orbit only it makes you wonder.What would be big deal even if all claims and conspiracies would be true?A hollow moon would defy what we know about how the universe works.With that it would also contradict some of solid laws of physics.So we need(ed) proof.Assuming we had that for a long time already then it leaves the big question of why it is hollow.Natural or artificial.Nothing natural would make sense so we investigate further.And if people still claim that they can use their little equippment to every now and then hear transmissions from the moon...Sure some things up there transmit data all the time but they do so on common frequencies and not in a range that is and never was used for long distance communications.The interest in the mon came back with our modern technology.We have watches with more computer power than what was used for the old moon missions.Materials and manufacturing methods that provide much safe crafts and space suits with a fraction of the weight of old designs.And we have new means of taking more or less limited energy up with us...We are prepared so to say.No matter what really is up there, no matter if it natural or artificial, just the fact that the moon is hollow changes our views on a lot of things....What do you think would be the best explanation for the data showing the moon rings like a bell?

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


make Butyl Caulking Tape more flexible...

Dear All..Can I mix some chemicals with Butyl Caulking Tape (please see photo) for become more flexible and sticky like as rubber cement glue (photo please). If yes please help me to know what kind of chemical (easy to find) and more detail if possible. Many thank you.

Topic by lam   |  last reply


What's on your tool wish-list?

I love making things. Don't we all?!I've always got a few tools in mind that I'd love to get next, to help me make better things. It's part of the fun for me! On my wish-list are various woodcarving tools and a belt sander. So, what's on your tool wish-list? What do you need to expand your creativity and making skills? It could be tools for electronics, workshop, cooking, crafting, etc. Share your wish-list below!

Topic by seamster   |  last reply


Control Amperage

Hiyas, I was wondering if you could point me in the right direction. I was wanting to build or buy something I could control Amp input. The system would be 12 -14 v dc and I want to be able to limit the input to say... 25 - 30 amps. So if a system would naturally draw more amps I want to be able to control the system be limiting the amp input...if that is making any sense. Got any thoughts ??? tks Huchleberry

Topic by huchleberry   |  last reply


Creating copper nano particles

Be it conductive ink, decorations or just a special pigment for your paint project, Copper is nice.Only problem is grinding this soft metal fine enough to be of any good use.A not so well documented feature of food additives is that they often have "unwanted" side effects.In our case E300, Ascorbic Acid or just Vitamin C.So how to make copper nano particles with it you might wonder?Prepare a well saturated solution of Copper Sulphate, you find the blue crystals in the gardening section together with fertilisers.It is best to use destilled water and not plain tap water, if in doubt go at least with the demineralised stuff for batteries.Adding E300 either dissolved in water or directly as crystals will start a nice reaction.The copper solphate is reduced back to metallic copper.There are a few problems though...For best results you need a saturation copper sulphate solution, low temperatures and a magnetic stirrer.This produced the finest particles for me at around 5°C.But even warm or at room temp the constant sirring is beneficial for even particle sizes.The ascorbic acid is used up in the process as well.You can start with a little and see how much you end up with in terms of a layer of copper particles at the bottom.Adding more E300 will cause a "rain" of fine copper particles - once this no longer happens you know the copper sulphate is used up as well.A dark greenish color of the solution will indicate this as well.Getting the copper out of the glass...Keep in mind the copper is extreme fine!As long as it stays in the solution it won't oxidize or otherwise react.Once out and in contact with just water and air oxidation happens quickly, after all it is pure copper...I found removing the watery solution and then adding destilled water to repeat the process is a good start.The waste from the first round can still be usefull though...In the final round I try to remove as much water as I can and then add methyled spirit to prevent the reactions.You can use oil as well or do a quick vacuum drying and store it in a sealed and oxygen free container.What to do with it?As a condictive paint with the right binder it only needs some rubbing with a smooth tool to create a conductive cover with a low resistance.In a clear paint or resin it provides some stunning color effects.You can even dust the dry powder onto a freshly painted surface to get a copper look.Leave without a top coat and you quickly get an old copper or even green look.If you ever wanted extreme fine metal particles you will come up with more ideas...Like shielding or sintering....

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


how adjust 25 inch Sony CRT TV(155watt) with normal China TV kit(75 watt)

Assalamu alaikum hi brothers, iam an TV mechanic and I get an very older Sony Trinitron 25 inch TV with dead mainboard I will adjust in it universal China kit but problems have 1- horizontal output transistor too mush heat and short 2- supply transistor is over heat and short 3- I can't get big ore wide size picture on this Sony screen any solution I components changing to get better results I will adjust an Sony flyback in TV china kit but this flyback creat more problem I get black lines on screen I don't understand how I solv these problems I have two month search and gone some other mechanic's but he will not help me this is my wish i manually make an simple TV board for sony 25_ inch screen are any help me here please

Topic by manzarHOSSAIN   |  last reply


Very old shielding materials and techniques for permanent magnets and resulting possibilities

Forromagnetic meterials are not just called that for no reason.It comes from ferrous - iron.Iron has the highest permeability at normal temperatures.That means a magnet is attracted to it very strongly.We utilise this for transformer cores, the stuff inside a relay and the moving latch of the relay itself.Like current from an electrical system magnetic fields like to take the easiest route possible.Air is a very bad medium, so any iron close by will be prefered even if it is at a slight distance.You can check with a magnet, a steel bar and some iron shavings - please cover the are with plate first ;)Slightly less known is the option to also guide and extend the magnetic field this way.If you check how far the magnetic field of a magnet reaches and note that distance,then you can add some steel bars or rods at the poles - the field will extend through the metal.The most powerful example of this are the shielded magnets used for hooks or speakers.Except for a tiny area the entire magnetic flux goes through the metal.So in this lefover area the magnetic flux density will my many times greater than what the magnet alone would be able to.What most people don't know is that magnets also interact with other magnets in terms of their fields changing and distorting.The Halbach Array is a good example of this.Seen as a single magnet the array would have one weak and one strong side instead of even strenght for both.Wherever magnetic fields change a conductor can produce electricity or current.This in return causes an electromagnetic field that opposes the one from the magnets.Just drop a magnet through a copper or aluminium pipe ;)Since these distortions are widely unknow to the hobby tinkerer mistakes can happen ;)In the early days of exploring science some people already knew about shielding.And they also knew that certain metals have certain properties.Where it is quite hard to create a good coil from steel wire, copper works fine as it is not magnetic.What would then a copper shielding do?If you have two moving magnets with only a tiny gap then the resulting field distortions are quite huge.A copper shield around the magnet like a pipe would then react to these changes and also create a megnetic field that works in relation to the enclosed magnet.In simple terms it means the shield would let the magnet appear weaker or stronger depending on the field change.A quite old document I found gave some hints on how people thought in different directions back then.It was in regards to the design of a magnet motor by the way.Here various magnets were shielded in tube made of a copper-bismuth-alumium alloy.These tubes were then electrically connected so it created a single loop conductor.The claim was that the resulting electromagnetic field of this ring would drive the fields of the enclosed magnets sideways out of alignment.Like bending straight pastic tubes sideways.This "pulsating" would always happen when the magnetic binding forces reach max and so basically drastically weaken this binding effect.Another document talks about a "magnetised brass rod".A holes of the rod diameter is drilled through a block magnet.Not from north to south but through the middle where the flux is greatest.The claim here was that if that rod rotates fast enough a very low voltage with a very high current will be generated.Sounds easy and interesting enough that I might have to test one myself one day.The best one however is what I consider a hoax or being as good as Starlite.Someone back in 1908 claimed to have created a material the reflects magnetic fields.In lame man's terms it would be like an insulator around some electrical wire.The claim and some pics showed it, was that no magnetic field can pass the material.Or to be correct only a tiny fraction of what would be possible through air.A small magnet inside a longer tube of this material would create almost the same attraction to steel at the tubes ends as on the magnet itself.Measurements showed the field strength would be almost equal to a long mangnet of the same field strength.Imagine guiding the field of a big and powerful magnet through a tube around some corners or other magnets and then end in just a tiny hole for the entire flux...Too bad he never shared his secret formula to anyone knows to mankind.Isolation...Imagine you have an array of changing magnetic fields and quite strong magnets.Then you might face the problem that your focus on the "working" end neglected the other end of the magnet (stack).Providing some iron core material will keep thes field lines contained and away from interfering with your setup ;)But it also allows to use te otherwise unused end of your magnets more directly.For example by guiding to another magnet to affect its field strenght ;)Placing a sheet or steel between two magnets in a setup provides a "shared pole" so to say.If you have a north and south pole on a rotor at a distance of 5mm then a sheet of steel between will drastically weaken the strenght and reach of this combined field.It is like pulling the arch between the magnets down to make it more flat.And at and an angle the resulting field will also be slightly angled ;)Capping...When I first encounter this many years ago I couldn't really make sense of it.Quite complex..If you check the magnetic field lines with iron filings or similar then you notice how they go in a rounded manner from pole to pole.This is because the single field lines are of equal polarity and will dirve apart like opposing magnets.By capping the ends of a magnet you provide a short.Instead of diverting out like mad they will follow the cap and create very intersting magnetic field in return.If both poles are capped it is like pressing the magnet flat but without having a field on top of the oles - only aorund the center part.For this the thickness much must match what is required for the flux density.As a rule of thumb: if the end is still very magnetic then it is not enough material tickness ;)Interacting fields in a tube...This one is quite old too and seemed to have found no usable inventions apart from simple magnetic spring replacement systems.But it gave me some clues about Tesla "earthquake machine" ;)If you place a magnet in a tube and at it's ends magnets with opposing fields to the one inside then you can fix this magnet in place.Push one magnet deeper and the distance from the inner magnet to the other end will shrink the same amount.In this old paper two coils were around the pipe with the inner magnet between them.In this gap and at about the same width as the magnets length another coil was placed.Violent shaking would then create electrical energy at much higher level then modern shaker torches.In return an AC current on the outer coils would cause the inner magnet to move back and forth to create electricity in the center coil.According to the paper possible uses include: core less transformer, measuring minute changes in AC voltages, providing free power from a running motor...The last one had me stumbled for a very long time.Until I considered a different configuration.The whole thing is basically a linear DC motor - with correct timing of course.And in some motors we use permanent magnets.I am starting to wonder what would happen if we would design a rotor magnet like this?The running motor would be subject to constant field changes that affect the rotor.And a normal motor is always "even".By using four magnets instead of one we can push the field really flat.This means the area where the coil would operate (about 1/5 of the magnets area) will have a much stronger field.The resulting torque should be higher by about 25% !!Even a simple two coil model setup should show a significant increase in performance here.Timing is critical here but I tried some calculations based on 8 poles and the required "on times" for the coils.In a standard motor configuration with a single rotor magnet the coil is active for about 12° of the rotation.With a 4 magnet configuration this "on time" can be reduced to under 8° of the rotation to get the same amount of torque.An energy reduction of about 4% if you neglect losses and only think in time.If you think in terms like impulse energy then we are talking of about 15% !Shorter on time but still much higher flux density overall than for the long standard timings.Going the long run now:If you check how most DC motors work then you realise soon that for most one rule seems to followed.Only use one coild pair at a time.This is quite contradictive if you consider the geometry and options.A dual commutator would allow to use a second coil pair with a field OPPOSING the magnets instead of being attracted to it.After all: on you bike you pedal with both legs and not just one...And if you do it professionally then yu do the same as I suggested for the motor - you use the up pull of your legs as well.Doing it brushless only requires amodified h-bridge desing to drive the second coil pair at the right timing.Some will now say that it requires twice the energy, I say that for the same motor size your get twice the torque!Just imagine what that means in possible weight reduction for a motor - or its size to deliver the same torque at the same power levels when a normal motor is used ;)The more poles the more complicate the precise timing but no big deal really with modern electronics.Can it be improved even further?I though long and hard about that one until I considered EMF.A DC motor produces a lot of it when the elecromagnetic field collapses in the the coils.We do not utilise this energy...There is a tiny delay until the released energy levels are at max.My theory is that it should be possible to divert this energy into another coil set.If that coil is not the next active but still within a strong enough field area then the EMF would actually add to the drive of the motor.Only downside is that according to my calculations at least 16 poles would be required to get an optimum result.Way above of what I can create in my little garage :(In theory it should then be possible to reach about 98% efficiency for the motor....

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Does anyone know if instructables will make it where we can post a picture inline with the text.

I feel like that would make things easier for people to understand. something like;Do this step. It should look like this:*Picture of step*Now do this. It should look like this:*Picture of next step*.Other forums have this. seems like a basic feature that would help encourage people to post more meaningful projects.

Topic by Terabull   |  last reply


CAR AC TO A SMALL BED CABIN

HI GUYS,can be placed a car ac in a bed cabin which is arranged as the same size of a car or a van? if the answer is yes, is that possible with solar energy?

Topic by mahmoodks   |  last reply


Email Alert Sent for New Contest Please

I know this has been asked for before, but I'd like to send it in again. I would LOVE to know when a new contest is created, the earliest the best. Being busy I don't always remember to check Instructables, especially if I haven't been doing any project work lately (dang work!).Getting an email for new contests would be awesome.Thanks

Topic by gdufford   |  last reply


Repulsine - the great mystery...

Even before the repulsine saw some attention during WW2 there were sightings of what we know call the classic UFO shape.Be it in Austria, Poland or other places in Europe, people reported weird disk like thing with a dome flying around.What leaked in images and documents after the war shoed that the repulsine looked basically identical to what people saw as a UFO in the sky over big parts of Europe.Then again, the repulsine appearently never made it a usable stage, same for most jet fighters at the time and still they flew around...If we now just take it for granted that actual test flights really happened back then you might wonder why we did not see any after the war anymore.For most critics it is a simple sign of facts and "confirms" that the replusine might have been a nice idea but never anything that really left the ground.As said, I often like to dig deeper and in this case the digging took far more years than what I planned on.I can not provide any solid proof for the following but I am sure even a sceptic will come to similar conclusions after reading it.Try to find some "eye witness" reports from people who saw the so called "Roswell UFO".Yes the one that made Area51 so secret and famous...Reports can be boiled down to some essential features of the hull, for those who saw it proof that it is alien.Three distinct round shpes on the underside, like you add the bottom of an egg to a round disk.Said disc of the bottom was also shaped like a wing, or the flying disk toys our kids like to play with.On the other side the shape grew up like a half shphere with an added cone or round top on it.On these area they claimed to have see engine outlets or similar and appearently the top cone was spinning in another direction than the rest of the UFO.Now I am no expert for Roswell but if I leave area and time out then I could have been fooled to think these people discribed exactly the same thing people saw a few year eariel flying over Europe.The Roswell UFO was not from another world, just stolen from the looser of a really bad war.What was seen was a working Repulsine, be it an original or something the US created from the 5 prototypes that disappeared after the war.Ha, ha, good one, then why don't we saw them flying after this anymore?Well, for starters it was a testflight gone wrong.Presumable it was planned to be limited to Area51 but the pilot lost control.Considering the Nazies appearently did their best to kill everyone involved in the project before the aliies arrived it is no big surprise.What that test flight would have shown is the impossible manouvers people already witnessed over Europe.90° or more turns at full speed instead of making a turn like a plane, sudden changes in alitude as well as accelleration on a level that makes even modern rockets blush.And if it really was the first bigger testflight they did it explains the big secrecy about the Roswell incident and what followed and created Area51 as we knew it.A "weapon" capable of these things would mean total dominance and options to impove planes and more.So why did they not even do that - or did they?The repulsine was created based on what we call today fringe- or pseudo- sience.If there is only one peroson, or a few that can even understand the claimed working principles that it can't be science as we know it.So, lets take a look what things were already heavily used in the repulsine that "we" claim to have developed or discovered decades later.Coanda effect.When air travels over a surface then it will follow the surface.You can try this with paper strips and blowing on them as well as a stream of water and some shaped objects.Long known but never found any real use until the military picked it up.For example air inlets were then developed to utilise the coanda effect.Remember how a lot of them these days look like a ducted fan housing?The round and slightly conical shape of the inlet will actually act like an airfoil and provide lift - of pulls forward in the direction of the air flow direction of the engine.I supercars we use it to create more downforce and better aerodynamics.Venturi effect.Again a very old one but funny enough also a major factor to make a jet engine work.Tesla turbine.In the Repulsine the rotating copper disks acted like a huge Tesla turbine by using a similar effect.The space between the disks got smaller and smaller towards the outer perimiter.Due to the fast rotation the molecules were accelerated and this created a partial vacuum.We use these principles today for specail vacuum pumps but also in military applications.Harmonics.Without harmonics and resonance the Repulsine would have been impossible.And at a first glance it seems we never made any use from that bit of the machine.Then why do we design exhaust systems in such a way than already the extractors ensure a pump like action and controlled backflow?The sound a good exhaust makes is also based on using the harmonics created by the explosions in the cylinders and expanding gasses.We learned that it is far more efficient to use harmonics and resonance in an exhaust system from somehwere ;)Plasma.The repulsine was said to have emitted a bright glow during certain movements or speeds.To create plasma we need a lot of energy, not so much however if the plasma is a by-product anyways.We learned that a high enough voltage differencial in a vacuum can create a nice plasma arc.From there things like analog TV monitors were created.But we never made anything that creates plasma for any use in an atmosphere.Well, unless you start to check supersonic rocket engines and other things.The working principle is very, very close here in some applications like the ramjet.Vortex energy.Today we see all vortex energy stuff as a free energy scam or at best a waste of time.But from the inlet to the outlet the entire Repulsine utilised what we now know as vortex energy, vortex math and so on.The air is twisted and spun around so many times that it is hard to keep track - but it always happened in a harmonic and resonant fashion.In some way this is implepemented in very expensive cars to keep the ventilation system almost silent even at full power.If you ever take an expensive car apart you might wonder why the air system is not as smooth and straight as you would have expected to get this silence ;)There is more but the list would become too long ;)So, if the repulsine was really that great then why was it taken apart to only utilise fractions of it in other things?If you have something really great that combines a lot of things then no one would suspect if you "developed or discovered" some of it in other projects.And to give you a very bad comparison for the other way around:If you know how to combine a petrol engine with some long blades then you could fly!I know, we did that already but you get the point.I can give you a motor and blades but that would not mean you could build a plane or even helicopter!At that time and still today something like a Repulsine would upset the "balance of power".If claims are correct then the engines of the repulsine were only required to provide the enrgy for directional changes or speed but it flew on "free energy" as the main engine system.In lame words like a jumbo jet that only needs a small engine for the hydraulics and electricity...Another big problem is the replication even if you would have a complete and working model to disect.You see most parts were brazed or welded as screw or rivets would have been problematic in certain areas.Other parts like the Kudo horn like intake systems would even today pose a challenge if you want to replicate them 100% correct.And if your understanding of science and physics greatly differs from those who originally created the thing...If your understanding tells you a dice has 6 sides (we all know that) but in my understanding it would have 16 then you would never understand how my dice rolls ;)Bringing true free energy of any form into this world is only allowed if someone can still make good money from it.Just check solar cells and wind generators - we all can have them but our providers make sure they have enough of them as well ;)Will we ever see a fully working Repulsine again?Of course !Some people like old cars, some collect old planes or old machines and tools.A great project for people in the right trades is always to build thier own little steam engine.So to say as a reminder of how it all started.Same will happen with the Repulsine as the first really utilised free energy machine the world had.The war and killings were not what really scared the world.This happened and will happen over and over again to various extends.Really scary was once certain people realised what might happen if over there the war would end with a victory and people would have time to develop for peaceful things instead.Without the war or this idiot Hitler a peaceful war would have taken over the world by storm.Those making sure we know nothing else but paying for our fuel and energy would have lost their monoply.Times change though...We destroyed our world with our needs for fossil fuels and electricity.What is left we destroy by chopping it down, digging it out or just by building new estates on prime farm land.People are now more desperate then ever to find ways to reduce their energy bills or enviromental impact.Otherwise Google wouldn't make billions on all the fake free energy videos out there.But what would it take to recreate the Repulsine?The person able to come up with the understanding of at least attempting to build one again would need to have certain qualifications and titles.He or she would hold a Nodel price for completing some of our known laws of physics or for finding some of the still missing ones.It would be a quite hard to understand and like person too, maybe even highly autistic.The person would also have an addiction like need to complete things, add the missing bits.And of course a totallydifferent understanding on how nature and the universe work.David T. from England is such a person, or at least the closest mankind can offer so far.He can see math in his head as shapes and images.Complex math problems appear to him like developing landscapes in high detail.He even learned to speak icelandic fluently within 7 days!!Imagine such a person would develop an interest in the old pioneers like Schuberger, Newman, Tesla and so on?Where we normal people fail to see any relevance or connection a guy like David would be able to literally see how all these inventions and ideas connect.He would be able to SEE the math behind it!Knowing how something was supposed to work and combining what is known through patents, drawing, videos or reports would enable such a person to make conclusions.For example where we might just see a nice pattern when we throw a stone into an undsturbed lake such a person would also already know and see the corresponding math the created the waves and why they were created exactly like this.Assuming David has no real interest in such things, then is it possible others already try?Sadly yes and even worse they do it with kids.Learning methods that are different can bring great results.For example while we use a calculator for big numbers some kids attend really strict and performance based classes to do this with an ancient abacus!After years of hard and often painful training they are able to it with a small abacus that only has a single row of discs.Shortly after they graduate to a virtual abacus - they only twitch their fingers in the same motions they would use on the real thing, but the disks and rods are all just visualised in their heads.That however is all meant as an improvement and the kids do it because they want to and not because they are forced to.Like learning to be a chess champion before even being old enough to work...In china however we have a very selective education program.Kids are not just trained slightly different to our kids but also closely monitored on their progress.As soon as one stands out for some skill it is subject to examination.Being well above average here means it is an opportunity for the kid and the parents - on paper at least.We in the western world would see it as a viscious circle though.Over the years china developed not only a better understanding of how these special kids brains actuall do their things but also how to create tests for this purpose.What looks like impossible or nonsense to most kids will trigger a scecific response and understand in those that are special.We would create something that allows parents to know early on where the kid has really good skills and what activities should be promoted.In china though the parents receive a nicer flat or some additional income while kids are send to a far away school.Again we would refer to such a school more as a boot camp.Discipline is at least on military levels, same is the punishment system.In most cases families are not reunited for many years, phone or even video calls only happen in the rare times when western TV crews are allowed a sneak peak.I just say: If a kid would see the parents often enough then it would not only know what to talk about but also be happy to talk to them - this however you won't see.It is like they talk to some distant uncle or such.What is really scary though is how these kids are trained to see their purpose and how important it is to be the best in what they do.Imagine you lost your kid at an early age and the only thing you got over the year was letters from the government saying how well it is doing and that you can be proud of it.Then it graduates and you are not even allowed to be there on that day...After that the kid is gone for good, you get a new flat and your proud kid supports you with some nice extra income.You don't get to know where it is working, what it is doing or if it might just be attending some university.By any standards these graduated kids can be seen as a great number of genius young people.Math, music, languages, science, you name it and they will have the experts aged below 20 for it.But what do they do once school is finnished and life starts?So far no reporter or family was able to figure it out.Means they don't appear in some high profile company, they don't start a successful business or teach at any public or private school.I leave it up to your imagination where thausands of kids find secret employment once they graduated....If, at least in theory we could be able to understand all these old technologies then why don't we at least try?Everyone has a goal, some desire a happy family and nice house, other need fame or just money to be happy.With that comes greed.You might have a really nice car but that does not mean you would give to some neighbour for a trip.Even if it just a nice rose garden, you might not want to share the views with anyone.This is true on all levels and we created a term for it "Need to know basis".If you just operate a press in a factory then you don't need to know when or what the next job is that comes for your press.You will know when it arrives and can check the documents attached.You don't need to know that your council is expanding and it is only seen as a courtesy to let you know on some notice board or in the local newspaper.And even our government does the same.What we do from the first days of our new baby we do on all other levels in the same way.What the baby does not need to know we won't tell or show.But we provide all the littly anklebiter needs to develop and be happy.Changing nappies, feeding, proving comfort when sick or having a nightmare.Later we teach language and other skills like walking.It goes on as you know...Humanity as a whole is like a little kid as well.If we would know all the little, dirty secrets then we would riot and go mad.Things that are of no concern are nothing we need to worry about, so we don't get to know them either.Knowing how build the latest fighter jets is seen as a thing that would give a possible enemy an advantage.Makes a lot of sense to everyone as these things might have to protect us one day.The questions that remain are:If humainty is a child, then how old are we now or when do we graduate?If there is a collection of secret and old knowledge then who owns and controls it?What would it take to force the release of all the things people actually created for a better world and not to be locked away?As funny as it might sound but one answer to all these questions would be to do nice orund trip in your Repulsine.Fly over ever single country in this world.Let their guided missle and what not chase you and once enough show then how quickly you can make a 180° turn to get behind them.So called unimportant countries might ignore you and the people only enjoy a nice show.Those powerful enough will fear you and think it was "the other side" showing their superiority.Once done with your round they all will have to realise there is a new power that is at the helm now: Knowledge and understanding.No more secrets, a repulsine for everyone who wants the plans to build one.A new world would start.Ever thought about that when wondering why all these "Aliens" we see in their ships in our skies never land to say hello ? ;)Even if they would be Aliens and not just some human pilot in some experimental craft:Shouldn't this demonstration of absolute power and control without any violence tell us something?The Repulsine need to come back to life to end all this UFO nonsense and Alien theories out there.You hear the sounds, see the ligh show and impossible abilities.And suddenly most if not all UFO sightings would have a common factor again.Just because the Repulsine is claimed to be lost and that it never actually worked despite film evidence showing the opposite does not mean there is no one using the technology.A working Repulsine available to everyone would also kill the doubt on so many other old inventors and "fringe" scientists.Science and physics would need to be redifined as would be able to find a lot of missing links.I know there is not only a lot of people out there trying to get what they can about the Repulsine but also that there are others who try to prevent this.You have a really easy time getting permission examine some old and histrically important artefact from a museum than getting just a hands on approch for what remains of the Repulsine in various places.Not even decent 3D scans will be allowed.Anything like just getting a tiny pipe cam inside is rejected with the excuse it could cause damage.If the thing is a hoax and never worked then why would it be so important to never touch or move it? ;)I recently got word that two of the remaining Repulsine "artefacts" were examined by the same group of "scientists".This happened in the late 80's and said scientists were claimed to have had acces to a collection of spare parts for the original Repulsine that was lost after the war.A private collector was also mentioned who denied all access but what he had in a secure storage facility appearently disappeared shortly after his refusal.Putting all the dots and hints together it would mean that someone in the late 80's was able to get literally everything that is left of the project in his hands.Those who claimed to have seen these scientists working on the Repulsine leftovers claim they used top notch technology to do so, including 3D scanners - and those were basically imossible to get back then for any uni out there...The laptops used were said to use touchscreens and were connected to all sorts of equippment.And they did it in almost total silence, like a group who studied a performance many times and knew exactly what do when and where without the need of many words.Professional in examining something unknown all all possible levels.I was unable to get any information on these scientist or who they worked for.But if you are one of them and readin this then I would love to hear from you!

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Linear magnetmotor - the basics for a beginner

Designing what is said to be impossible can be tricky, so I will try to give you some tips to reach your goal a bit quicker.A lot of people these days try to start with a wheel.Makes sense in one way as the final goal obviously is something that would rotate.However, considering angles in a rotating system is far easier with a usable baseline!We developed the liear motor well after any rotating electric motor.But only because someone already invented it for us.Making it flat was then more or less about finding a need for it first, like the modern highspeed trains on a maglev principle.If you want to make something move then it makes no big difference if you do it in flat or round.Flat however leaves you more options and much easier adjustments.And you will need a lot of the later...IMHO the best size and option for linear is the N0 model railway system.Tracks are only 3CM wide and second hand carriages to salvage the wheels is cheap.Either way, how would you start?We have multiple choices, like single row of magnets or double, maybe even tripple.Same for the actual magnet orientation.Flat, angled, attracting or repulsing...They all work if you understand how they actually work.Not the principle, the magnets ;)You see, a magnet always has two poles and without trickery both poles will be of even strenght, size, angle to each other and so on.Playing on a small and flat track with little resistance allows to use tiny magnets, like 5mm disc ones.If you follow the common concept of two magnet rows either side at a slight angle then you are half way there.People spent a lot of time trying not only to let the cart being attracted by the first magnets but also to let them pass out at the other end.In case you wonder why:Being able to be "sucked" in means you will have some force pulling on your cart from the next stage.Being able to fully pass through and preferably gain speed, means the cart would go from one set of magnets to the next - motion is accomplished.Let me give you my personal favourites for 5mm disc magnets:1. The rows are at an angle of 4-5° like a slim V-shape.2. Same as above by with the orientation changed by 90°The first basically means you have the magnets facing up while in the second you would have them mounted vertically.Both have good and bad sides and I think it is easiest to start with the first option.Here you would have a row of magnets at a slight angle either side of the track.Lets say it is all pointing away from you, then the north row would be left, south row on the right of the track.If you start narrow or wide depends if you want attraction or repulsion forces to work with.Again, it makes no big difference really, just a different way of operation, most seem to prefer repulsion though thinking the forces are greater - this is not true though ;)A very often copied way of mounting the working magnet (s) on the cart is by placing a magnet with south facing down on the left and one with north facing down on the right of the cart.Here you have the big problem of manipulating fields.The forces are quite strong and it seems the obvious choice but should be left for the advanced classes.Let me try to explain:No matter the site of your work magnet it has a very narrow acting field.Means you have a lot of attraction forces going only downwards and not providing any energy to move your system ;)If you orientate a magnet (stack) so north faces to the right and south to the left on either side of the cart you have more options.If the stack or single magnet has the correct length to match the angle of the magnet rows then a funny thing happens.Assume the outer most magnet is at about the same distance from center as the first magnet in the row.Means the inner most and opposing one is further away and the attraction forces gain the upper hand.While moving along though it moves away from the magnet row and whie still gaining force the last magnet in the row stops the cart dead center.This is the common scenario you see on the web when people try and fail.Now if you change the length of your working magnet and position in relation to the magnets in the row you can use the changes to your advantage.You can add slim disc magnets either side of your stack and observe the change in behaviour and where the cart starts to be repelled or gets stuck.In a bad case it starts fast but then stops with a big wobble back and forth.The perfect balance and size means the cart is attracted once it comes close to the magnet rows.There should only be a tiny sopt of very little repulsion right before the cart takes off.Like a hair trigger on a good gun if you know what I mean.It should then see some accelleration till about magnet 5-7 in a row of 14.From there it should level out and roll trough and keep rolling.I assume your first attempts now get you to the point where you cart start really nice, slows down a bit and seems just to miss a tiny extra push to make it out.It it shoots to the last magnet in the rows and then settles back to one or two before the end you are close!We have now two basic ways of manipulating the magnetic fields in our favour, or to "cheat" phsyics.Closing the gap.You will have realised by now that you need at least two stages for your system to be tested properly.Preferably 3 to get a 120° angle in a rotary conversion, but 5 would make sure there is hickups.This also means distance is now something to play with.Remember the pull before get at the same level with the first magnet in the rows?This is the first force we utilise by bringing the second stage at a distance CLOSE to take over the pull.Close because we don't want it to pull the cart out just like that.It would create a big "bump" and in a rotary system massive and unwanted vibrations.Instead we weaken the last magnet in either row.We still want to keep its pull but not so much the holding force that makes our cart go stuck here.Placing a magnet orientated in the same direction as your rows at the end of the row will change how and where the field of the last magnet in the row goes ;)Just to be precise: If the magnet in the row is north up and south down then the added magnet should have the poles 90° to that and in the same direction as the row.Depending how high, how close and with wich pole you place it the fields will change.You want to lower the locking force by at least 50% here - that will be suffient to overcome the holding force and gives the next stage a good chance to take over.It can also help to provide a sacrificial pole below the last magnet in the row.Again if north would be facing up then the lower magnet would also face north up but with a small distance to the upper manget.Ok, what happens here exactly?If I would want to be precise here you would need to read an awful lot, so make it simple...The lower magnet provides a way for the upper magnets south pole to get somewhere else instead of back to its original north pole.It also means there is another north pole "pushing" the north of the upper magnet more flat at the bottom half.This weakens the field strenght.Distance is key.The added magnet at the end does a similar thing.It provides attraction or repulsion forces that affect the field shape of the last magnet in the row.Imagine you have north facing towards the last magnet:You would push the last bit of the field up while also providing a very sharp end instead of a big round shape.The south pole of the last magnet also gets attracted by this added magnet, even more with one magnet below it.With those two added magnets you should be able to fully overcome the binding effect stopping your cart.It won't start and keep going when you let go of it half way down the track though, you need to start with the first magnet or give it a push to overcome the first binding effect.After that momentum takes over.If it really is that simple then where are all the successful videos about it?They are out there, you just need to look quite long for them.Most people still literally think only linear.A magnet has north and south and we can't change it - but we can...With field manipulations as above and shielding we get so much more than what physics currently dictates.Keep in mind that adding shielding under your rows of magnets will also affect how all works together ;)Some people forget this when using ferromagnetic things way too close to their testing area.Distance is also vital to keep in mind when experimenting.The closer two magnets are greater their forces to each other.You can utilise this for example by lowering magnets that seem to be far too strong in your configuration and cause a binding effect ;)And as said, shielding is nice thing for triack too - imagine what would happen with sielding on the sides of your magnet rows... ;)Make a negative into a positive!Extremly strong binding forces at a certain point in your track design can mean you might be able to utilise it instead of trying to waste it.Added magnets can divert the field to quite some extend.Shielding however can also direct them somewhere else - like in the core of a transformer where it all goes in a great circle.Even strips of shielding connecting magnets from one row to the one on the other side of the track can be utilised.Like that you turn two small magnets into one long one with twisted poles at the end.Provides more field strenght too and makes it good for areas with little to no attracting force to the cart.Then there is bigger design...Some people add a center magnet.With one on the cart and one in the center of the track you can create a cancellation field.The rows bind while the center magnet wants to push.If place where there is still enough forward momentum or even acceleration but close enough to the binding magnets it is possible to greatly lower the binding effect.But keep in mind you need to consider the added repulsion or compensated the field so it is most active towards the moving direction and less strong to where the cart is coming from.Advanced manipulations.You can machine magnets, sandpaper, file, grinder, CNC....Imagine you cut a square dice magnet from one corner to the other.Depending on how you have the field orientation you can end up several variations.But if north faced up in your dice then it will still face up in the cut pieces!Cut a pyramid and you end with a big flat south pole and a pointy north pole - and with extreme field strenth in this pointy bit.Similar story with half moon shapes.Imagine you machine a flat block magnet so you have a half moon with its pointy bits facing down and big round bit up.If north was up in the block and you shape the moon correctly then you end with two strong south pole points and a north pole that is strongest right between those points.Why is this so interesting you might wonder?Imagine you already know a magnets pole does not care if gos back to its own opposite or that of a different magnet.Then you also know you can machine and shape magnets to your will.Now imagine that for a change:Precisely machined pyramids that have the top chopped off.All tops in this example facing being the north poles and big bottom south.If you then machine a precise iron core block you make a nice cube.With magnets we need really good glue and a good press to make it happen.But if the center core is of proper size then we end with a block magnet that has a south pole on all sides.Of course to be 100% perfect we would need a zero tolerance gap but good glue and high forces can come quite close.Works as a sphere too but would even have clue where to start to machine the magnets LOL

Topic by Downunder35m 


"Sonic" drilling or cutting

If we look up sonic drills today we usually get some fancy machines driving pipes in the ground, preferably softer ground.But the term includes all types of machines that use sonic vibrations to advance through a media.With the ancient and claimed to have never existed technologies in mind I did some digging...In the food industry vibrating knifes are quite common, same for "air knifes" on softer food.Even in the meat industry they find more and more uses now.Ultrasonic cutting or welding is the same thing and included in "sonic".Same for some experimental sub sonic drilling methods currently being tested.The general idea might be as old as using vibrating equippment to compact stuff, like concrete, bricks and so on.What you can compact by vibration you can also make "fluid" by vibration.Industrial feeder systems utilise this to the extreme by even making light and fine particles like flour move like water without causing any dusting.What all the techniques have in common that a suitable tool or tool head is used and that it is attempted to use the most suitable vibration frequency for the job.Anyone operating an ultrasonic welder knows the pain of finetuning for a new electrode or just new part to be welded.What does that tell us now that makes the understanding easier?Take a bottle of ketchup, preferably one that is still quite full.Turn it upside down and noothing comes out.Shake it a bit and you are either lucky or drowned in red.But hold it at an angle and start tapping it and the red sauce flows out easily.What it true for most newtonian fluids is in some way also true for non-newtonian fluids.Ever mixed corn starch and water to make these funny experiments with it?Hit it hard and it reacts really hard and is not sticky at all.Leave your hand resting on it and in sinks in and sticks to it.Stirring it very slowly is easy, go faster and you get stuck.You can do similar things with by using an external source for vibrations.For example a vibration speaker mounted to a smal cup of the goo.If you place sand on a sloped piece of plastic or sheet metal then at a low angle it will pile up easy and stay.Start vibrating the plate and the sand will start to flow off.Works fine with a vibration source mounted to a piece of steel bar or rod and a bucket of sand too.Trying to press it into the sand requires a lot of force, especially once you are a bit deeper.Let it vibrate properly and it slides rights down.If we can do the simple stuff as well as really complicated stuff in the industry then what about other materials?So far we use vibrations to make things move out of the way, compact things, transport them or to heat them up for welding plus some cutting applications.Considering the variety one might wonder why no one tries it for "difficult" materials.Machined surface can be found throughout ancient history.Finding "machined things" were vibrations was clearly used is a bit harder.The great walls are not a perfect example here as the views differ quite a bit on how they could have been created.But if we leave things melting them or a secret concret like recipe for creating for example granite then vibrations start to make some sense.You find some interesting videos on youtube where people use speakers, wires and rocks to confirm you can actually "machine" them by vibrations.Especially granite has some quite musical properties, big boulders as well as smaller ones produce destinct sounds when you hit them hard.Tests and measurements were made on granite and other hard rocks to check how fast sound travels in them , how it is refeclted and where the sound comes out or affects the surface the most.Lets just say every sample gave different results.Shape, density and dimensions affect not just the resonant frequency but also where and how the sound travels in the rock.What if??We can use a simple speaker, a plate and some rice to see how patterns form under various frequencies.Works with sand or other granules as well.The interesting patterns are the so called harmoncis.Here we see clear and destinct patters, sometimes with extremely fine lines and areas of softly vibrating granules.Some people say these harmonic frequencies have all special meanings and uses.We mainly used them to avoid problems.Imagine your new TV would not have a housing tested to be stable with all frequencies the speakers can produce.All of a sudden your back of the TV might start to rattle ;)Same for car engines.Harmonic vibrations are eliminated wherever possible.Otherwise they could multiply and affect other things in the engine or around it.Simply put it means we have various options to detect and measure vibrations on a surface or in a system.Back in the day every half decent backup generator had a mechanical indicator for the frequency of the supplied electricity.A set of tiny forks with the desired on painted red and several on either side of it.These forks were designed to get into harmonic and therfor quite intense vibrations at their set frequency.If the one for 50Hz looked blurry then all was good ;)The same principle god be applied on a big boulder of granite.Place the "vibration meter" at the desired spot and start moving around the vibration source on the surface until you find a spot that causes maximum response on the meter.Best thing here is that if you then place that surface area onto another peice of fixed in place granite both pieces will start to loose substance if vibrations are applied.The fine sediment forming is then usable as an indicator where to move the vibration source to continue once the effect literally wears off.Is it feasable?Well, if we trust mainstream science then the answer is no.A huge amount of vibration energy would be required for such a hard material, despite ancient proof that says otherwise.Semi industrial test also seemed to confirm the theory as only with very high amplitudes (loudness) and while automatically adjusting for the resonant frequency changes a measurable amount of material was removed.I struggle a bit with that as for the testing tool heads made from hardened steel or carbide were used.And that with little or no regards on how the head and tool itself affects the output.I mean in terms of having the max possible movement happening right t the tool contact surface!There is a huge difference between applying a vibration to a tool and using a system, tool and tool head DESIGNED to work at the desired frequency!Otherwise we wouldn't need a computer to design and test a horn for welding purposes or shade a knife spefically so that the vibration go along the right axis and in the right direction.You not break a hard thing with a very soft thing unless it travels fast enough to become harder as the target!This complicated explanation basically just confirms that if you hit water at a too high speed then it will just break you into pieces instead of offering a soft splashPlease do not jump of bridges or such to confirm this yourself!!If that is really true and science says it is, then how about the other way around?Works fine too, or we wouldn't have pressure washers or water cutters.Now for the part where I hope some really smart people leave helpful comments:If we can cut steel with just a stream of water, then I ask:Isn't for example copper much harder than water?Steel is much harder than copper but water cuts through it.The answer here it simple or complicated, depending on how you want to expain how it works.Comes down to speed and pressure plus the right nozzle shape to prevent a beam expansion.But then water is indeed "harder than steel".Questions:Lets say we would use a copper pipe that in lenght, thickness, hardness and diameter is optimised to transmit a frequency so the pipe end sees the max vibration like a feed horn for ultrasonic welding.Not to hard to calculate these days :)Now imagine said "main frequency" would be optimised for the pipe but also be a harmonic frequency of the rock to be worked on.The pipe end would deform quickly, abrasion does the rest and it fails before even making a decent sratch that is not copper metal on granite.No matter how hard we press nothing good enough will ever happen.BUT: If we would add more hormainc frequencies to feed our pipe we can multiply the amplitude quite easy!Just try with a sound generator from your app store, needs 2 or more channels to be usable.Pick for example 400hZ on one and 800Hz on another, then finetune around these number to hear how the tone changes ;)My theory goes like this:If all "working frequencies" would just harmonics of the resonant frequency of the granite, then they can be tuned so the effect on the pipe end is minimised.The overlaying frequencies however should result in the same effect a water cutter has: The pipe becomes ultra hard.The better the match and the more you have to get it right the harder the pipe will be.Adding now a "drilling frequency" or multiple could be used to drive these harmonics slightly out of phase.Like with the sound generator on your phone we end up with a pulsating sound, or vibration.While the pipe still vibrates at the same "hardening" mix the drilling frequency creates a peak like a jackhammer.Try it by using the heaphone output on a small speaker and placing some light and tiny things into the cone.The will violently jump around during these pulsing tones.For a drilling system the output can be mechanically maximised by utilising a pitchfork design.A head holds the vibration speakers and the tynes are tuned good enough to the frequency of the speakers.Always two would have to operate in sync though as otherwise the pitchfork movement that transfers the sound down the center bar won't work.This head could then be desgined to act as a holder for a quick change of work out pipes that are no longer long enough for tuning.I guesstimate that a well tuned design would result in a copper pipe being able to drill at least 10 to 15cm into solid granite before it wears off too much.And we are talking here about just a few mm to get the thing out of tune!But would dare to desing such a thing just to confirm a theory that no one ever really dared to test? ;)And if friction welding works as good as ultrasonic welding, then what would happen if we try this with the right frequencies and vibrations instead of wasting tons of energy?

Topic by Downunder35m 


A little magnet experiment for everyone!

Some people just love to play with magnets and have a lot of them.If you are just like that and like to tinker a bit then I might have something for you.What magnets you use for the following experiment does not really matter but you should have 20 or 30 of identical properties.Can be disk magnets, block magnets or cubes, just not spheres ;)If you have a 3D printer you use it to make it fancy but a peice of wood, acrylic or such and a drill will do for round magnets.For cubes or flat packs you can make retaining walls on a flat surface.The experiment goes like this:I assume you already tried ways to combine your magnets to make them stronger, like stacking them up.But there is another way to really increase how strong they are combined.Start with one magnet at the center.Then like a ring add more magnets around it but with the oppisite side up.The created mounting solution is to prevent them flipping up and together, you want them as close as possible though.Add another ring and change the direction of the field again.Try this magnet, once all magnets are secured and compare the holding strenght to any other combo you tried so far.It will be much higher for the same amount of magnets.If you want to prevent the use of glue then try to create your mounting system with a really flat but strong enough bottom - this will then be the contact surface.Slightly reduced strength but you can re-use magnet with ease.But if you want to get a really strong one you need cube magnets.Like before you want to create some sort of grid, this time we go for a square.Start with cube in the center, facing north up.Leave enough space in your construction to add 8 more cubes around it - like on the face of a rubik's cube.Leave them empty for now !Add nother row, this time 16 to keep the square.Of course these one go with the south side facing up!Again one empty of 48 and then one last one with north side up with 196 magnets.Ok, to be fair, you wouldn't be able to pull it off a metal surface unless you used really tiny cubes, so if in doubt then go for just to 48 and leave the enter one out for now.Should be quite intense but similar to what any other shaped magnet would have done.Time to fill the voids!Add the cubes in the spce between the magnets so the north and south side face the magnets next to it!So basically sideways but in the correct orientation.You can then also add the center piece - try either orientation for that one ;)What happened now is that you forced the magnetic field lines to go up instead od for trying to go the easiest and shortest way to the next magnet.And "up" is where our magnetic surface would be, which provides the now overdue shortcut for the magnetic fields.Be amased how much stronger this version is and how much even 3x3x3 cubes would accomplish.With 10x10x10mm N52 magnets you might be able to use them support our wieght if you pull straight dwon from a horizontal surface...Ok, kidding, not just might, unless you are really big...One 10x10x10 might hold about 6kg.Stacked up a bit more but having 20 or stcked up would not be much stronger than 10.Even just 25 magnets with one in the center, one row of sideways orientated and one row with opposing field to the center one would be hard to remove from a steel surface.If we go with the imagined 6kg per magnet we could assume to get 25 x 6 = 150kg of holding power.Check you single magnet first then compare to the square of 25 ;)Consider using some plastic between magnet and surface so you can at least slide or pry it off if you have to.You can also combine magnets or a new one that has one side appear much stronger than the other.Meaning that for example on the north side it could hold 20kg while on the south side only 5.

Topic by Downunder35m 


The Newman Motor Challenge !

I was recently approached by someone claiming the old Newman Motor wouldn't be good for anything.Well, I was a little bit offended by this as I already had my little toy version of it as kid.At that time though it really was just a toy for me.Critics still say the Newman Motor is nothing more than some interesting machine.And even the biggest followers will admit it is not a free energy machine, just a very efficient one.I experimented with, what some call fringe science, now for about 30 years.And it all started with math and my interest in unusual ways of dealing with problems.So what's behind the challenge?The original design was suprisingly simple as you can see in the above Wiki link.Just a spinning magnet in a (split) coil.What you don't find anywhere though is real details on the how to.Sure, you need to have some sort of contact linked to the rotation and timing is critical but what does it all do?You can build a drt simple model in a few hours with stuff you might have around already.Quite a few Youtubers are happy to share their creations.The actual challenge is to come up with what Newman really did inside his drum.And also why I think it is not the full potential his machine had.Build a simple Newman motor and check for how long you can let it run on a charge super capacitor.Then sit back and read some of the other magnet stuff I wrote.After that come up with a better design ;)I started to create some 3D models that need testing once I find more free time - should take some leave one day..But for those with little patience and an interest in the Newman Motor I decided to share my current idea:For some it might be really confusing although they know motors and magnetic fields.Those just playing with magnets might have it easier for once as they can pretend they followed my thoughts ;)The original design used two coils and a rotating magnet.If you consider how the magnet creates an electromagntic field in the coils then you have to wonder right away how it can spin.And most designs will indeed need a push start to get going!You can't have electricity produced without the magnet spinning and you can't make it spin without electricity!The current from the battery or capacitor can only flow at the short moment of contact on the axle.This moment needs to be timed "mechanical" as we don't want to waste any power on not required electronics.If you ever bothered to check the timing of a Newman Motor then you realised the collapsing electromagnetic field at the moment of contact actually is in reverse to what the manget has in that position.Unlike any normal motor it means the magnet produces most of the power the coil needs to make the rotor spin!So far for the well known facts, now for my fiction:I would like to call my version the Aussie Newman Motor as all things downunder are just different ;)Here are my current desing mods, that I freely share so everyone can benefit form many years of experimenting to save a lot of time.1. Instead of two coils a not-really-bifilar coil is centered on the axle.The coil is created like two stacked relay coild that have no bobbin and a "dint" to allow the axle to pass through.Without the big gap of the original less of the magnetic field strenght is lost and the coil is far closer to a homogenous magnet.2. The timing done by salvaging a simple DC motor's contacts and brushes.This allows for far higher currents and if the salvaged motor had enough poles also for a very short "burst".3. The axle contact is made with a cleaned steel bearing.After cleaning very conductive copper based lubricant is used in tiny amounts to prevent corrosion and provide a lower resistance.The clear benefit is that with the new timing system a lot more current can flow.Initial tests with a mock up model showed an increase in run time from the capacitor of about 15% already.With proper bearings and a salvaged DC motor I hope to reach 18 to 20% more than the original design.Now why the DC motor if a reed contact or hall effect sensor would be even faster and with less resistence?Neither can handle really high currents without additional electronics ;)Plus of course I wanted to leave the door open for the Aussie Newman Motor 2020.You might now say "Why bother if the above improvements are already so great?".If you followed my elsewhere for a while then you know the Newman Motor is only 2D but I prefer 3D or more harmony if you like.Right now the imagination of people re-inventing Newman's machine is limited.They try to get on the horse from behind - literally.Fancy electronics, machined parts and so on.But they never go 3D ;)You got it? :)There is only two coils!!The magnet rotates, same as the contact on the axle.One set of coils for each contact the salvaged DC motor has.Each set aligend to the corresponding contact.And now you will ask "How do you plan to connect that to a single DC power source?Well, that is why it will be the 2020 model - my time for tinkering is sadly limited because I still need to work to support myself.But if you consider that the original as a good model can run for over 10 minutes on a supercapcitor then ask yourself how long it could run on 4 or even 8 coil sets.And although there is no such thing as "free energy": There will be still space for more coils.Or other coils to just provide electricity that does not power the motor.Critics will now see their chance and state that if we add a load to these additional coils then this will cause a strain on the system.Of course they are correct here.If, however, the load is mechanical then the motor needs to supply basically the same additional energy.Plus all mechanical losses.The question is: How much mechanical load can we add before the motor is down to the same efficiency of a very efficient DC motor? ;)And what if our Aussie Newman 2020 would actually violate the laws of physics?We can calculate how much electrical energy would be required so a given motor produces a fixed amount of torque.Or we can just measure it, the beauty of science...We can do the same in reverse of course.Let's say a mechanical pump would require 500RPM and 100Nm of torque to pump 100 liters per minute.Then we could calculate what sized motor we need to drive the thing and how much power the motor would need.So again: What if the Aussie Newman 2020 would require far less than what science makes us think and still does this job on a simple 12V lead acid batty of 4Ah?Just saying... ;)I hope to have a presentable and working 2 coil system by May, so stay tuned!In case you are faster or even beter then of course feel free to show off your results or to post a link to your Instructable so everyone can verify it.

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Magnetmotor - really impossible or just supressed?

When someone starts talking about a so called magnetmotor than most people judge right away.Laws of physics, perpetuum mobile is impossible, magnets are static....We all know the limitations nature puts on us... That however did not stop quite a few people since the 1950's to build working magnet motors. Or, to be precise: To make the claim, show them and then somehow disappear. A few though seem to have survived and even claim to make good business. Securely closed machine, stellite tracking and 24/7 online monitoring. Either just a bad and long running hoax or a real attempt to keep a secret secret. Even the somewhat famous Yildiz motor showed off around the world only to disappear.Some like them, some don't. Either way all this sounds like the perfect conspirary theory LOL So lets take a look on what is fake and what might be real but missing some vital clues. You can find several good Youtube channels created by people trying to build a working magnet motor. Some of them have no problems to admit failure and still keep trying and updating their projects. Did long enough and you see two outcomes. The first is giving up or "realising" that it will never work. The second often seems like a user is getting some relly good results and is really close to keep the magnetmotor running. Both disappear without and updates or traces. Now of course this is just confirmation that it will never work, but then again: What if it did already quite a few times? Even Tesla had patents for a magnetmotor and so far none of his patents were a hoax. Although none of his patents allow to actually build a working devices without some additional info and knowledge. And that is the key that I am trying to get: The lost knowledge.How can a magnetmotor never work? That one is quite simple from the start. If a linear model won't work no matter where you start then a rotary version will fail as well. And if a linear version works, it has to do so far at least 5 segments and with preferably increasing or at least constant speed. Having said that and assuming you know a little bit about magnetism: Ever wondered about shapes of magnets?? The common types are block, round like a bar and those disk like ones, some even with holes. A less well known version is the ring magnet. You can look them up as well as their corresponding magnetic field geometry - or what is assumed to be the right geometry. To give you a clue: All those floating spinning toys use a ring magnet in the base and onother one in the spinner. In the center is a dead zone for the magnetic field that is far lower than further out on the ring. And the strnger outer fields also reach further - giving the entire spinner a bowl like area to float on, the spinning just stabilises it like a gyroscope. A similar flat disk magnet wouldn't have this indentation in the field but rather a dome like sphere. The ring just kicks a dint into this sphere if you don't mind the simpification. Similar changes in the field structure happen when you combine two or more magnets. One example we all know is stacking identical smaller magnets. And often we are suprised how much stronger two thin disk magnets are compared to a single. Distance however sets a certain limit. And take those hook magnets... Just a small ring magnet in a metal pot with core. Remove the magnet and just by itself it is far weaker. Why? Quite simple.... The same way a transformer core directs the magnetic flow, the metal part of the hook magnet provides a shortcut for the magnetic field - and in return all is much stronger ;) Now you have some more clues, but still there are tons of options for failure... The most common is the sticking effect. No matter how well you planned and designed in most cases you linear or rotary prototype will stall sooner or later. Even if started manually at high speeds some seem to run very long but once they slow down and stop it is obvious they always stop where the magnetic field won't allow the binding effect to be overcome.Wouldn't dare to say that I have a working magnetmotor, but I might have some clues you want to try if you decide to give it a try yourself. So how COULD a magnetmotor actually work? Like in the Perendiv examples all over the web, you could aloow a moving responder to the rotor. Like a piston the responder will be lifted in areas it would otherwise limit or reduce the speed of the system. Well designed only a few mm would b required but it also means wasted energy to move the responder. Then there is the nice way of modifying fields by adding magnets in different angles and polarities. Lets say towards the end of your stages on the linear model it is hard to overcome the binding effect from the end of the previous stage. The perendiv model would now somehow change the distances. But you can also add magnets to lower the binding effect ;) Like a ring or hook magnet you can shape the field and offer a stronger repulsin field or a lower binding force. Last but certainly not least is the option of adding magnetic metals like iron or somehow weirder ones like bismuth. So, do we have any examples of something very common utilising any of this? We sure do :) Take a speaker apart and you end with the cage, the membrane, the actual work coil and the magnet. We don't need anything but the magnet so take a good and very close look. What in the audio world is called a shield to prevent the magnet from messing with things close by is exactly the same as on a hook magnet ;) Only difference is the tiny gap for the coil. The magnetic field is directed into two paths, one by the metal core, the other by the inner enclosure of the magnet or the magnet itself. The coil operates in the area of maximum flux.Last hints... If you take two identical and strong magnets with north or south facing up then it is quite hard to push them very close together. But check what happens if you try the same wen both soth poles (or both north poles) are placed on a magnetic surface - if in doubt your standard fridge door. Suddenly you can move much closer together with the same amout of force (not considering the added friction!). And similar story for opposing configurations. Where in free air or on a table the magnets would just jump together, on a metal plated you can move them much, much closer before this happens. Copper pipe and magnet fun :) Ideally you would have a straight copper pipe and a cylindrical magnet that has a loose fit in the pipe. Aluminium pipe work too or even a roll of aluminium foil if you have nothing else. A magnet in the pipe will travel very slow down the pipe, friction is not an issue here. So what is slowing it down? The magnet creates a field in the pipe and through that the pipe generates electicity. And funny enough this electricity creates an opposing magnetic field in the pipe - the magnet slows down. Even if you glue it onto a wooden stick it won't rush through it. Trying to push it by hand and you feel the created resistance. The faster you push, the harder it is to push! If you made it all the way down here with the reading then I have to assume you fit into one of three of my categories. a) You are a total sceptic and just read it for your amusement. If so, then please don't post a reply with usual negative feedback, instead see it as the same fun you had reading it ;) b) You are at least curious and like to play with magnets. In this case take the above as inspiration to explore more ways to have fun with your magnets! c) You are more or less frustated because you wasted a lot of time and some money to build a magnet motor that just won't work. A and B might go on and enjoy the fun, C however might want to read very attentive now ;) If you take some indicator sheet for magnetic fields, like these funny green ones, and play with moving magnets then you see a very interesting effect on the "screen". The otherwise static field lines change chape and sometimes even seem to disappear or shrink. With a small rotor assembly it almost looks like flashes when the magnets move past each other. This effect is often totally neglected and to be honest I overlooked it for a long time as well. Being able to see how the magnetic field changes gives the thing an whole new dimension so to speak. Creating a magnet with a complex shape is difficult to say the least. Only ferrite or ceramic ones can be used and you would cut of machine them according to your desired shape and with regards to the orginal center of the magnetic field. So most people revert to the classic way of shaping by adding magnets of various types, sizes and amounts. Modern neodymium magnets make this trial and error process easier as there are many sizes and strengths available. Add a detector shield of suitable size and you have hours of fun time ahead of you. But doing so in any rotary assembly is next to impossible. So what did Yildiz differently and what was missed so many times? Yildiz took it a step further and not only provided "shunts" to create very strong magnetic field from the generated electricity but also a second rotor. Since we all start small lets focus on the basics first. Remember the hook magnet and speaker or the copper pipe? Some examples for shape shifting your otherwise static magnetic fields: 1. A magnetic metal "connection" from one (low in the armature) pole to an opposing (high in the amature) pole with cause the field from the "high" pole to "bend" towards the connected magnet. 2. A magnet with an orientation of 90° to the last magnet is the sequence will severely influence the field of this last magnet! This goes for either orientations! 3. Adding a non-magnetic "shield" around a magnet, like a piece of copper pipe, will not affect the static field of the magnet. However it will severely alter the field of the enclosed magnet when another magnet passes it! It will also affect the overal field during the passing as the moving magnet will also induce a field in the copper by affecting the field of the enclosed magnet! Thickness and lenght of the shield influence the strength of these effects. 4. In a simple perendiv motor design the bar that creates the attraction for the spinning part is a magnet too. Either a long bar type or two small ones with an iron or nickel rod between them. There is no need for a piston or something that drives the bar up or out of the way ;) Just use the right magnet at the right spot on your rotor to repell the bar ;) Mount the ar with suitable springs and you suddenly can have multiple stages on your rotor instead of just the usual one! Don't forget the moving magnet on the opposing side of the segment in question though as otherwise you still will get stuck. (Hint: You can place a small but powerful magnet in the center of the opposing bar ;) Just make sure you limit the springs movement so the bar won't be pulled closer)Ok, hold on now! Does a magnet motor actually work or not? I can only give hints and say the laws of physics as we know them apply to magnetmotors the same way as everything else. Unlimeted motion without supplying energy is not possible. Limited motion with adding or using energy however is still possible and real. The same is true for being able to machine, 3D print or otherwise manufacture at very tight tolerence and accuracy levels. This includes bearings or bearing systems with very little friction losses. Just check these floting and rotating magnet toys that look like a spindle. Only a tiny needle like pin makes contact with a glass surface - next to no friction loss. A proper and supposedly working magnet motor should provide more energy than what it uses - one way or the other. No law of physics lets us get around the fact that such a motor could only keep spinning if the produced power or motion energy is at least the same as what is required to make it move. Magnets lose their strenght over time, they are like a very slowly depleting battery. So, isn't it funny that all magnet motors so far that claimed to work also had the requirement to replace the magnets once the things fails to work or start? And if you leave a very strong neodymium magnet shielded from outside fields or magnetic stuff than your grandkids will still find a quite strong magnet. Do a little performance test with your new magnets, like how much force is required is required to lift them off a steel plate. Make the same test with the magnets once you played around extensively with them in your motor. Now take a spare magnet that was never used from the orginal batch and compare both against each other ;) If the motor would not use energy then why are the magnets depleted to a certain degree, realted to runtime and usage time? Wait a minute! Does that now mean it actually works? Lets just say energy is certainly used. We only know similar effects from electromagnetic systems. But did anyone ever really check how much actual energy is in magnetic field generated by a non electric magnet? Get a good sized N52 neodymium magnet and check how much force is required to pull it off a steel surface. Now try to get the smallest sized electromagnet capable of that force and check how much energy it consumes at the level that equals the pulling force of the N52 magnet ;) Makes no sense to even try to compare these you will say now. I just say energy is energy and we were formed to only think in certain ways and don't even try silly things like this ;) To keep the fun up let us imagine we would actually have a similar energy available than what our electro magnet would require. In reality more because we wouldn't have electrical or flux related losses in the metal around the coil. Or is the imagined reality, no clue ;) If true it would mean even a motor with very bad efficiency would be able to create huge amounts of torque. Well, torque is basically acceleration. Which would mean our motor would not just be happy to spin, it would speed up until the bearing fail or the thing is ripped apart. Imagine a dental drill of that size and weight suddenly falling apart at full speed... Every example of motors claimed to be working, that are not fakes, seem to be happy no matter what the load is. It the thing turns a generator than it would have to slow down a bit with the increased load but they don't. With no limited factors otherwise this makes them a fake. Even a perfect motor would have to react to load changes.... Don't we agree that the stronger the magnetic force or field in a conductor the stronger the resulting magnetic and opposing field of the conductor? We use the difference to either drive a motor or take out electricity... But if you take the "open" shielding of a magnet in a changing field than the influence of the shield on the overall field gets stronger with stronger field changes. And properly desinged and orientated they would actually double as a natural limiter for the rotation speed. Once the electrical energy in the shield becomes too strong it will be able to cancel out the field of the enclosed magnet...If we assume a magnet motor is really possible and works with the intended output to keep it spinning or even take energy out: Then what would be possible downfalls that stop this thing happening in everyones garage? We can explore the stars but so far no one bothered to invent anything to visualise magnetic field in a 3 dimensional way other than by simulation. No realtime and true observation like this. The few working technologies that exist rely on sensors, interpretaion and filling in gaps. But imagine something like a detector shield as cloud! And then even better with selctive spacing to get a realtime view of where exactly the field lines go. All we can do is forget our teaching and try it out anyway ;) If by some mistake a magnet motor would really work right away, then chances are high the inventor would wonder why that thing takes off like mad and how to stop it. Unless well prepared it would certainly end in the destrution of the motor. But the inventor would know what to look for in the next prototype. The logical conclusion would be to the couple the energy taken to the speed while physically limittin the free load speed. The other one would be the design the electrical generator around the and within the motor. To even get close to this point you would have to spend endless days and nights working on finding a solution. The closer you get the more disappointment when the final model still fails to keep spinning for more than a few hours. Most people will then accept defeat and move on... Still not saying it actually works but if you made it to this point in time where it could be easier to move on and do other things:Ever wondered what would happen if you "shield" a magnet with a coil? Of course nothing would happen as we know. But try this in some fixed assembly that allows you move another magnet through the field of the shielded one. Perferably witha force gauge or some option to read out the energy required to move it through the various stages of the field. See what happens if you short the coil or add a resistor to it ;) Now if this coild is able to produce electricity then the more we use the more the effects on the required force would change. What do you think would happen if you combine common coil relations of electric motors to a "coil shielded" magnet motor? Right, all these coils would interact with the magnetic fields of the coils they are connected to... And through that with the overall field surrounding the enclosed magnet..... I leave up to you to imagine how these interacting coils could provide "resistance" or "acceleration"/"surplus electricity"...Like they say: You can only find out if you try ;) To keep up the positive thinking: A permanent magnet just sticks to any magnetic surface and does so with the same force. But the real energy loss in terms of getting weaker can almost be neglected. Any electromagnet capable of the same holding force woul require ongoing energy supplies to keep it up. It is using energy the same way the permanent magnet does! The difference is the permanent magnet is not seen as anything that would provide us with energy.... And if it can't provide energy other than passing through coils then why the heck does it keep sticking to the fridge year after year? It does require energy to keep this weight up doesn't it, even if you add a thin teflon disk and oil to reduce friction? ;) No magic, no "free energy" bogus, just plain physics viewed from a slightly different angle than what we learn in school ;) Have a good laugh and a good beer, then read it again and just consider some of the things here that are not mentioned in any literature about magnetism that we commonly use. Now I got you thinking, didn't I ? ;)

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Why is almost every free energy video you find a hoax or fake?

The term "free energy" is used both ways by us.What comes from wind, solar or water power is considered free energy.Also everything claiming to produce energy from nothing is considered free energy.Speaking of hoaxes and fakes now is a bit like comparing appels to tomatoes.For me it more like those stage magicians: It all looks real and impossible but they do it, so it must be real.If you really need to brag about your free energy device but are unable to sell a working model to interested people it at least means you are not a scammer.Several people play the game of exposing fakes.And if include this in your search then you get an idea about the amount of fakes or magically illusions out there.The internet is often abused to change opinions or make people do things they usually wouldn't do.Even if it is as simple as clicking on a suggested link for the next video.Patents can disappear or with enough money you can buy them off the inventor.One reason why more and more companies develop in secrecy and without ever applying for any patents - check the swiss army knife ;)There are no conspiracies involving "free energy" but imagine it would be the case...There currently is nothing that would actually allow you to produce enough electricity for your family all year round.At least not if you want to avoid several wind and water turbines and all possible areas covered with solar cells.If you would somehow make a device that produces more output than input (even if it uses up some form of stored energy like magnets) then how would you present it to the world??Could you take the abuse of literally everyone around you calling you a scammer?You know better, so you allow it to be tested - really??Unless you provide all details and open all up you would still be called a scammer.Someone offers you a lot of money to take the thing and have your assurance to never talk about it or invent something similar - suddenly not that impossible to think of...But what if there is no offer but threats instead?A nice show on the internet keeps you safe and allows the sceptics to brag how it is faked.What better way then to make sure there are tons of videos that show similar constructions that clearly can't work? ;)As with every good story there is always a bit of truth somewhere.Over 80 years ago people made magnetmotors that worked.Look it up and check their patents.Most of the fakes we see today are based on the same 4 or 5 machines from back then ;)Our modern life would not be possible without the inventions Tesla made.Still, basically all of his inventions that did not find public use are still considered bogus.How can one of the smartest man of that time have hundrets of used and recognised patents while those using them claim all the rest is useless and fake?Getting energy they can sell was fine.Allowing that everyone can generate all the electricity needed themself not so much.A free generator that everyone can build would never see a meter and you could not force people to put one on either.With unlimited money available those behind electricity, oil, gas and coal will always make sure that anything even just getting close to it will disappear.The internet changed this as now everyone can provide plans, videos and even all required parts if needed.Making someone or something disappear in Africa or Indonesia is easy, doing so with someone who has actual family, a job and lots of friends not so much.Money and contracts are the next best thing then...Remember the hype about Vortex energy a few years back?Videos claiming to have a vortex thingy producing more energy than what is used everywhere.Now in some regions vortex math is actually something people study.And with this the new videos about vortex based free energy devices went down to almost zero.Nothing new anymore that was not shown already.If you study a bit what Tesla did for students and teachers you will find a lot of similarities between his math and the new area of vortex math.But where those vortex guys use our modern math, limited constants and sequences, Tesla actually include all that was known at the time in his math.Like with scientology you have to work your way up the ranks in the vortex world.A lot of things you can only understand by confirming it in experiments, other stuff you will only get know when attending seminars.If you just get together what you find online and try to understand it then try again with a printout of Tesla's circle of math next to it.Knowledge is out there that we just fail to acknowledge or even try to explain if we see it.Just take ancient building skills.We know they did it because their monuments still exist today.But we would utterly fail to replicate this with our modern technology.Let alone with the tools claimed to be available at the time.....Levitation through sound was deemed to be impossible.Then one day we invented powerful ultrasonic speakers and it worked anyway.So how many real "free energy devices" are out there?How knows if it is one, a few or thausands.Same for all the websites and videos out there.After a while you learn how to spot the fakes quickly.Then you still find some videos where you fail to find the hidden battery or motor or power connection.In the end you are left with the same 4 or 5 possible types claimed to have worked almost hundred years ago.Eliminate the bogus and incomplete then there is still some left....It does not mean any of it actually works...That is if you exclude those few companies selling things like magnetmotor generators for a few years now.Going faster than a certain speed would kill you - then we moved on from steam engines.It will never be possible to use the power of the atom to produce electricity - we got nuclear reactors anyway.Now we even try to make fusion generators feasable...So ask yourself if all "free energy" bogus really is just bogus...We know life must exist on other planets outside out solar system but we still could not accept if this life would be more advanced or civilised than we are...Yet we feel the need "to go out there"...Where does Instructables come into play?Take the dare and provide a well documented Instructable that allows anyone to replicate your "free energy device".No solar cells or electric generators please, only stuff that should exist or work.If you don't speak or write english then use some translator and people here will help to properly translate it.The big community here will jump on it, find the hoax behind it and tear it apart.However if they can't then someone will build it to show that it can't actually work.Then imagine the surprise if "I made it!" starts to be clicked more and more...No one could stop the progess or hide it then ;)Of course we all know that nobody will ever post such an Instructable, don't we?Keep in mind that the scam behind "free energy" might just be result of too many scammers...

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Western Hemlock Project Boards?

I’m looking for some Western Hemlock project boards, but can’t find any stores in the area that have it or will order for me. Also striking out with online stores. Any suggestions on where to find this? It’s the state tree of WA, and I want to use it for a project related to my home state. Now we live in TX and I can’t find it anywhere.

Topic by jpmarth   |  last reply


Unable to create instructable, keeps erroring when I try to enter a title.

I am trying to create an instructable but get an error when entering the title. It gives me this message "Oops! We couldn't understand your request. Please contact us to tell us as much detail as possible about what you were trying to do when this happened". I have tried using both firefox and chrome browsers and get the same message. Is the site having problems at the moment? Appreciate any help, thanks.

Topic by parsons_woodcrafts   |  last reply


Mono pole / single pole magnets!?

I made a quite intersting discovery today.The use of mixed orientations for a stronger or more directed field on one side and a much weaker on the other side of a magnet is nothing new. But if you check modern wind turbines or even just any old hard drive you find "chokes". I talked about shielding before but combining shielding a choking provides again another level of manipulation.If you ask anyone who claims to know magentic field or sience in general then you right away hear: There is no such thing as magnet with just a single pole!Like a battery one pole can't exist without the other!Keep going and your conversation parten either get angry or declares you a nut case.Also said before: The laws of nature and physics are not set in stone or complete for that matter!We only use what we know, or to be precise what we told to take as facts.A magnet with just one pole is impossible to manufacture, if you only think like making the magnet like any other magnet.Even cutting it in half will only give you two normal magnets again.Why is that so?How are magnets made is what you need to know.No matter the material they start as a blank and during the final processing an intense electromagnetic field is used to "prime" them.Like you would do on a screwdriver the material then keeps the "charge" and becomes magnetic.And this process requires a certain orientation.Imagine a big hydraulic press to make the magnet with some super strong electromagnets right beside the forms.Explains why you won't find a block magnet with the poles on opposing corners - the form is not designed to be rotated ;)Ferrite magnets can often be machined.If you mark the field direction of a block then you could just cut it into the shape you need.Like a half moon, triangle, pyramid...The orientation does not change, so you need to create the cuts so your required orientation matches the orignal block.Creates a lot of waste, is messy and often the magnets shatter.Still not possible to create a mono pole ;)But it allows for a great deal of field manipulations.For example a thick north and a thin south pole would show very different field strengths at the poles.How to create a mono or single pole magnet then??If you think outside modern science restraints it is suprisingly easy!You see, unlike a battery the magnet does not care if the "current" flows back to its own pole or a pole from a different magnet.In a hard drive the choked magnets have a field strength between them that is not just twice as much as th one from a single magnet.The field between the magnets is very stable too!No matter where you measure it is the same.Place two magnets in the same configuration with the choke and all you get between them is a mess.To understand the reality with magnets I need to explain a bit more though:If it does not matter from where to where the field lines go the it becomes obvious that you can guide them.Horse shoe magnets of the old kind where just two steel bars with a block magnet between them!Take a compass and check from what distance your magnet will start to affect the orientation.Now take two iron bars, rods, block or similar of about twice that length.Place the compass between one end and the magnet between the other end.Even with a little gap your compass will still move!You just extended the length of the field lines and directed them somewhere else as it also works with odd shapes.We know know and confirmed how choking works and as shielding is basically the same thing but for a different purpose you might get an idea where I am heading already.A "potted" magnet, like what you find in a speaker or as a hook magnet utilises two destinct features.a) A ring magnet is used.b) The field lines are directed to a specific area.One has them directed into a gap for a coil like in a wind turbine, the other to the surface to massively increase the field strenght in that area.If you take either apart you will notice the magnet just by itself is considerably weaker.Removing a pole from a magnet...If you paid attention so far and have a few magnets around then you already developed a feeling for the difference.Lets crank it up a notch, shall we?Make this experiment:Take two identical magnets and a soft steel bar or similar of lesser thickness than the magnets.Usually around 2-3mm for smaller N52 Neodymiums will do.If you dare make the steel the same size as the magnets.Now place one magnet on the steel and use the other to observe the difference in feel.There won't be much and both poles should still fell like before only that the field is now slightly longer.Trying to get two magnets to touch at the same pole is really hard, but see what happens if you add the other magnet on the other side of the steel...Despite having the same pole on the steel they won't repel and stick to the steel.Checking the field now with a magnet provides a very different feel!It is like having a magnet with a split pole where the opposing pole now is in the center.Impossible I know but you have it in your hand, so deal with the explanation yourself ;)And if that is so damn easy then how hard can it be to actually remove one pole fully?Design of the impossible magnet...If you want the south pole only then it would be the entire surface of your impossible magnet.That means you either need to make sacrifices or get creative for the next steps.Easiest from my experiments is to sacrifice like all scientists do and allow for some minor gaps.I won't give any dimension or step by step instructions.Think 3D and use your imagination.Our impossible magnet starts from the center.All magnets used should provide the same field strenght!To be precise it means no matter their grade, the the "force" of the magnets should be as close to identical as possible even if the size is different.You can use stacks or different types/grades...The center is a square block of soft steel, or iron as pure as possible - it needs to have a low "resistance" if you compare them to batteries and to avoid confusing terms.On this "dice" you place one magnet on each face, preferably of identical size to the block.So, for a 10x10mm block you use 10x10mm magnets -simple isn't it.All magnets are place with the same pole onto the block!In out example to get the south pole outside you would use the north pole.Now use six bigger magnet blocks for another layer.This time they are placed in attraction mode, meaning you let them stick together naturally.The resulting magnet will be far from perfect but you will have a hard time finding a strong attraction to the soth pole of a magnet if you move it around your cube.If you check the geometry you will now see how 45° degree angles and matching sizes for the blocks would be beneficial.Using ferrite magnets you can machine them to the desired size and use a thin aluminium or breass frame to hold the outside properly together, like edging on a fancy tranport box or chest.Check the magnet now and try to find anything else but a destict south pole on all faces and corners.No more nother pole....Does that mean it really is a mono or single pole magnet?Since modern science does not even consider a construction like this to be worth testing you already know the anser.For those working on a different level with magnets it will be a true single pole magnet.For the rest it will just be another fake.As by science a permanent magnet is defined to have two poles and to have field lines going from one pole to the other.All modern machines using them operate on this principle and "fact".But if I would give you a block of steel that has a core of lets say brass and a suffien wall thickness...Then this block would appear to be a steel block and nothing else.Modern science fails to see a magnet any other than a battery!If the "current" does not need to go back to same pole and there is no need for the field lines to go back to the outside pole then it is a single ple magnet like the faked box is a steel box.The physical outcome or in our case magnetic field is what defines it!The contra...All good has some bad, magnets are no different.Purely scientific viewed it would be impossible to create a gap free magnet like I described.And because never all field lines will take the shortcut there will still be a small amount of "north pole" to be found on the outside.But if that is in the range of about 1% of the field strength of the magnet then I say it can be neglected for almost all real life uses of such a magnet.Like the Halbach Array it is just a neat way of manipulating and if you like bending the known interpretation of our scientific understanding.Possible uses for these magnets exclude convention designs and for this reason alone anything you create with them will be the target of scepticism to say it nice.Ok then, what real life uses could there be for something we never needed?The question is the answer, as the impossible magnet is the solution.Ever watched these shopping shows in the night program?"It solves problems you didn't even know you might get..."Means that if you ever get the ide that your project requires a single pole magnet then you know how to make one ;)All I can up with would go against common scientific understanding and teachings, so I will spare you with my use cases ;)And what is missing here to actually make it work?Quite a lot as you might have noticed in your experiments if you use really good test equippment.Not so much however if you consider what I said about shielding and choking ;)Provide a path of far less resistance and shield the rest that still bothers you.I am not providing a ready to go model here that you can buy, someone else will do that if they see a financial gain it.My gain is provide a new understanding of things we forgot by giving your brain things to work with and develop.You might still say in the end that my way (or your results) are not good enough in some way.But then please also consider how many other people or documents you might be able to find that would have provided you with this information.Free energy is only a myth for as along as we allow ourselfs to only trust what modern science allows us to have.Allow the old knowledge in and every now and then simple ignore what you know and things become possible sooner than you might think.Wind and water were used as a source of free energy since the dawn of mankind.Our first motorised boats used the same "wheels" we already trusted to be driven by water to power a mill, saw or similar.And after we learned about motors we also found a way to make wind - by reversing our trusted wind mills into a fan.Instead of using the free energy to generate power for us we evolved to use create wind and propulsion by providing power to drive the same thin in reverse.Using the sun for power other by using a mirror was seen as witchcraft throughout history, then we got solar cells...Same for heat in the form of peltier elements and other things...Why then should magnets be any different??Just "Because it is so!" did not work for wind, water and solar, not even for heat....All it takes is a little notch in the right direction to change the way we think about magnets.We have no problem using electromagnets to make a motor spin.We have no problem using magnetic field of any kind to drive motors or generate electricity.We even fail to have a problem by manipulation electromagnetic fields for that purpose.But we struggle like an ant in sand hole to reach the surface again to see what is outside our trap before something grabs us from behind when it comes to permanent magnets.Even worse if you dare to claim your magnetic machine delivers a higher output energy than what you use to make it run.And wasn't it exactly the same ignorance and manifested "knowledge" that got revised so many times throughout history already?Again: Why should magnets or their understanding of interaction be any different?If you follow the above with just matching magnets and the core cube then the result will be at least very surprising to you.Allow this surprise to be an inspiration to improve instead of seeing as a proof of failure ;)And if you made it then please post about it here.Let me know what disappointed you with the outcome.Let me know what really got you wondering.Let me know if you found a suffiently strong north pole to rival the impossible southpole! ;)Start sharing, make other people wonder and make them share it to, let us go viral!The first to post a conclusive Youtube video with results is certain to get a lot, lot, lot attention....

Topic by Downunder35m 


Plans

How do I get plans from instructables?

Topic by thecountrychick   |  last reply


Embedded printing

Some time ago I made a short Instructable on some basics of integrating other things with a 3D print job.I found some more uses that are not always conventional so to say.For example using an acrylic plate as the "bottom" layer and printing the rest around and on top of it, like a box with a clear bottom.Another nice thing I found is that quite often overhanging parts like hook type hinges can be avoided.Especially if said part needs to be really sturdy one could print it turned by 90° and with some support like an undercut add it to the print.Works really nice too is you want to have movable parts within your printed creation.I might have to do some print jobs next month and was wondering if I should add some more for another Instructable with proper instructions and examples?Anyone done some embedded printing based on my last Ible about it?

Topic by Downunder35m 


Low friction "bearings"

For several of my projects I required some sort of bearing that would not only allow for a minimised free play but also very low friction.Before you get too exited: This is not a new type of bearing or anthing for heavy duty loads, not even for ongoing use without servicing.I found that even slightly heavier things rotated on makishift bearing far easier if the axle was verticall instead of horizontally.This gave me the idea to try a simple needle-bearing approach.This is how it goes:1. Grind and polish your axle to get a nice needle point - it must be perfectly centered!I prefer to do this with the axle in a fast spinning drill on a fine grinder.The polishing in a simlilar way, but please do not try it with a cloth in your hand on a spinning axle!2. The other part of the bearing is a screw or pin with a punch mark.I grinded and polished a punch for this so it has an angle of 60° and polished it to a mirror finnish.If alignment is of importance then of course the pin/screw must work for this purpose!If in doubt make it spind an use a pencil to get the true center.A drop of sewing machine oil and it spins nice and with very little friction.The key is to adjust the gap(s) between axle and punch mark to next to nothing.You don't want any pressure along the axle as you would "drill" a hole into your mounts.And you don't want it too loose to avoid wobble.I hope it might give you an idea for your next project.

Topic by Downunder35m 


Updated 3D Model of the Instructables Robot!

Hey Everyone!Happy Friday!This week I uploaded our latest 3D model of the Instructables Robot to Thingiverse, in case you were looking for some inspiration for the Remix Contest ;) It's exciting to see how many people have already downloaded the model! Click here to grab the model, and be sure to tag us on Twitter and Instagram once you're ready to show off how you used this 3D model of our beloved robot mascot!Have a great weekend!best,audreyObscura

Topic by audreyobscura   |  last reply


Extemely simple automatic emergency light.

I'd like some help to settle an argument regarding my extemely simple automatic emergency light.According to my friend, who installs emergency lighting, this circuit is too simple and has too many components missing but I say he's wrong, if one part fails it can easily be replaced. I'm not and electronics expert either.I'll explain the circuit...5v comes from a 5v 2A phone charger. Battery is a 32Ah 12v SLA. 12v charger is a smart charger with built-in status monitor.SPDT 5v relay rated to switch 12v @ 17amp maxThe light is a 12v 5 metre LED Strip with built in current-limiters and draws arount 2A.Basically, 5v powers the relay which means the battery is connected to the smart charger that keeps it topped up while there is mains power (240v here in UK). If there is a power cut the relay turns off and battery is switches over to the LED light Strip. Its that simple.It works as designed, no parts have failed and I haven't found any signs of over-heating. My friend believes it should all be one circuit and not seperate parts and is a fire risk as it is.He just won't let it go, so does he have a point or is he just being a/an _________ (fill in the blank, lol)? I've included a schematic of the circuit. Not sure if I've drawn the relay properly though.

Topic by cyberraxx   |  last reply


Can't reply to comments on my instructable

Hi all,I have been unable to respond to comments posted on my instructable. I am using firefox 65.0.1 and it is set to auto clear browser cache when I close the browser. I'm not sure what else to try. Any ideas on how I can get this working? Appreciate any help. Thanks in advance.

Topic by parsons_woodcrafts   |  last reply


23 stage no-capacitor full auto coilgun

  *********I have updated my design since posting this topic. The video is the more current design than what is written below.**********    I came to the conclusion that using capacitors to provide the power for a coil gun is a stupid idea. A bold statement I know. The reason is that they are big and heavy, take time to charge, and need charging circuits. Also, the sharp rise in current that comes from capacitors is bad unless you are making an induction style coilgun, because the induced currents will hurt efficiency.    If coil guns are ever going to be a practical hand held weapon it will need to be lighter, simpler / less delicate, and more powerful than what you will find on the internet if you look up coil guns. A rate of fire that is competitive with conventional guns will also be needed if a coil gun will be used for anything other than target shooting or maybe hobby hunting. So I designed a coilgun to meet these requirements. Visit my website for a full explanation of the design: http://www.ourbadscience.com/#!em-guns/cwjy     I realized that a coilgun would not be a practical infantry weapon until batteries are more advanced anyway, so that just adds to the list of why capacitors are out. It will be powered directly off of the batteries, and have many coil stages. This allows a very high rate of fire. To get that rate of fire with capacitors you would need several capacitor banks charging at offset times, so after each bank fires another is just finished charging. That would be terribly bulky.    The lower voltage from the batteries will give comparatively slow current rise in the coils which normally would make the coil timing weird. I plan to use an unconventional coil timing though. All the coils will be activated at once, and the coils behind the projectile will be shut off as it passes them. This will have several advantages: -The coils will only be powering up for a split second at the beginning. Most coils will already be at full power when the projectile gets to them (that is not the case in most coil guns). -Induced current will not be any issue. -Since the coils will all act as one coil, the projectile will be drawn toward the center of all the coils that are on. Timing of the shut off of the coils will not need to be perfect.    This will be a pre-tuned passively timed system. I want to use a small adjustable electronic timer for the switch-off timing. This will require some work in the initial adjustment of the timing, but even actively switched coil guns (with optical sensors or something) require that. the advantage of a passive system over an active system is cost and simplicity, and you can pack the coils tighter on the barrel if you are not putting a sensor between each stage. That matters with 23 stages! As I said check out my website to see more details and pictures for this and other projects: http://www.ourbadscience.com/#!em-guns/cwjy

Topic by Jaycub   |  last reply


Need Recommendation for 3D Printer for Makerspace

Aloha. I am in charge of purchasing a couple of 3D Printers and associated programs/materials for our developing Makerspace. We are a two-year college. The equipment will be used primarily by students. It may also be used for a credit class. I appreciate any suggestions. Mahalo.

Topic by BethS117   |  last reply