Thread: where to buy parts for building a generator

iv been searching the net for about an hour and a half, but cant find the things i need anywhere.

I need some Iron (pref in I shapes but blocks would be fine too) for an electo-magnets.

thanks

Did you try ebay? Buy old electromagnets and salvage the cores.

ill give it a shot but I'm not too hopeful, I'm going to need a minimum of 8 of them, and they need to be identicle.

if you can use steel instead of iron, go to the junkyard

what sort of generator are you making?

also, if you post this in the engineering section, it may getter better attention?

sorry I'm new to the forum, (sorry if it in the wrong section) i thought magnetism - physics.

just enjoying a bit of tinkering, hoping to disprove ALLOT of people , more detail if I'm right, if not ill be sulking in a corner, hehe

I'm not much of a physicist but wouldn't the magnet be allot less powerful for the same amounts of material and current if i use steel?

I need it to be as efficient as possible without costing the earth.

Iron cores will remain magnetic after the electromagnet is switched off. For this reason, probably steel is a better idea.

do you have plans for this generator? any links or pictures? I'd like to see what you have in mind.

I can't figure out why you would want to use I beams except as a frame, but it seems you will be using them for part of the electrical generation process. I don't know much about this stuff either so bear with me, and take my criticism for a grain of salt.

Please make sure you know what your doing before messing around with electricity, there are plenty of resources, and probably many people who will help you out.

You can make a generator out of car alternators as well, it's already done, you just need some sort of motor to spin it, a belt and some wires. Although making a generator from scratch sounds like a fun and interesting project indeed.

Steel IS mostly iron, just fyi.

Also, what EXACTLY are you trying to do? If you told us, we may be able to give you some rather helpful hints and directions on where to go to disprove people. And... What are you trying to disprove?

Yes, but the small differences drastically affect the magnetic properties.

I'm getting my stuff confused though. It's so long since I did any studying/reading concerning magnetism.

... oookaaay... Steel is usually around 90-99% iron... Scrap steel, like from cars frames, is around the 97% range. Trust me, it behaves EXACTLY like you would expect the same weight (97% of the steel) of iron to. None of the constituents in steel, barring a few exceptions that are reserved for exotic steels, have a negative impact on induction. Induction is a guiding principle in electro magnetism that connects electrical current flow to magnetic fields. It is actually used here in the US as a means to trigger traffic lights (cant speak for you guys in the UK) and it works rather well, picking up on the steel in the car that is directly above the induction loop, altering the magnetic field.

http://www.alltronics.com/

I love these guys. I get the impression they specialize in taking apart old electronic stuff and reselling the parts that work. Kind of like a junk yard does for cars. So the prices aren't too bad.

If nothing else, I know they sell some pretty strong magnets. I haven't ever looked for iron cores there, though.

i posted up a rough design a while ago in another forum but they laughed me out very quickly, im working on something more accurate now but im still in the design faze.

i suppose if you had to state what i was trying to disprove it would be the statment "you can't get energy from nothing" but really i just thought of a way of getting energy from an unending supply which im told adds upto nothing.

tbh im not expecting it to work (someone MUST have thought of this idea before) but im one of those people who likes to try something and find that im wrong, rather than just be told (cos where is the fun in that)

besides im bored.

the I shape is simply so its easier to hold the wire coils in place. nothing massively scientific about it. hehe

i think ill give it a try with steel, it is so much more readily available than Iron its daft, i can always remake that part later if its not enough.

ill post a design when iv finished drawing it, alot of its in my head atm

For everyone’s sake ( if I’m authorized ) I’ll ask you go for a genset.

um, yeah, the only problem you are likely to run into here is friction, my friend. As soon as you can get rid of friction, you got yourself a perpetual motion device.

Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician

... oookaaay... Steel is usually around 90-99% iron... Scrap steel, like from cars frames, is around the 97% range. Trust me, it behaves EXACTLY like you would expect the same weight (97% of the steel) of iron to. None of the constituents in steel, barring a few exceptions that are reserved for exotic steels, have a negative impact on induction. Induction is a guiding principle in electro magnetism that connects electrical current flow to magnetic fields. It is actually used here in the US as a means to trigger traffic lights (cant speak for you guys in the UK) and it works rather well, picking up on the steel in the car that is directly above the induction loop, altering the magnetic field.

The magnetic property that is of interest here is magnetic permeability, or equivalently susceptibility (if you know one you know the other), and it is not adequately described by a "rule of mixtures" as you seem to suggest. There are alloys that have permeability much higher than iron, and alloys much lower. The heat treat can be important as well.

http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop...oils/mu/#ferri

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...agprop.html#c2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_(electromagnetism)#cite_note-hyper-4

Also the behavior in terms of induction of currents that generate magnetic fields opposed to the applied field has nothing to do with magnetic permeability. That is why the coils in generators are made of copper, and not a ferrous alloy of any kind.

i posted up a rough design a while ago in another forum but they laughed me out very quickly, im working on something more accurate now but im still in the design faze.

i suppose if you had to state what i was trying to disprove it would be the statment "you can't get energy from nothing" but really i just thought of a way of getting energy from an unending supply which im told adds upto nothing.

As you have been told before, you will fail. By making an energy loop where an electric motor turns a generator, which in turn provides the motor with electricity, for example, will not work, because the generator will always produce less electricity than the motor would require to keep on turning at the same speed. The closest you could ever come to getting the motor to keep working would be to use superconductors and magnetic bearings in a unit placed deep into interstellar space. But even there you will get short of 100% efficiency and the motor will stop turning shortly after the initial hand turn.

yep, air friction will be the main one but there are NO mechanically moving parts cogs or turbines etc. and the friction of the electricity on the wire (if that exists [not sure, think it probably does]). the air thing can be fixed with a vaccum of some sort.

a genset is basically what im making but a self perpetuating one. engine provides motion, motion makes electricity, electricty makes motion

Thx Dr Rocket, ill give those a read asap

Kalster, dont missunderstand, i dont think my idea will work, i just believe it to be an experiment, and no matter how unlikely it is to work. whats the harm in trying.

besides if everyone thought like that, we would still be ridding horse (for fear of melting) and sailing across the oceans because flight is impossible

Originally Posted by Dave_C

yep, air friction will be the main one but there are NO mechanically moving parts cogs or turbines etc. and the friction of the electricity on the wire (if that exists [not sure, think it probably does]). the air thing can be fixed with a vaccum of some sort.

a genset is basically what im making but a self perpetuating one. engine provides motion, motion makes electricity, electricty makes motion

Thx Dr Rocket, ill give those a read asap

Kalster, dont missunderstand, i dont think my idea will work, i just believe it to be an experiment, and no matter how unlikely it is to work. whats the harm in trying.

besides if everyone thought like that, we would still be ridding horse (for fear of melting) and sailing across the oceans because flight is impossible

Your idea can't work. It would require lossless processes at all stages. You need to eliminate all friction, operate in a perfect vacuum, and eliminate all electrical resistance without recourse to any loss-producing refrigeration.

Even if you could eliminate all of these sources of loss, to extract any work from your machine on a continuing basis would violate both the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Real processes are not isentropic.

There is a reason that the Patent Office will not grant a patent for a perpetual motion machine.

iv got to admit im surprised. iv said (3 times i think) that i dont think will work, but it wont do any harm to try anyway.

NOONE on here knows my experiment,
NOONE on here knows even the theory behind my experiment
yet you insist it wont work. yes it breaks rules that are currently in place but laws evolve. i wonder how many people (im guessing millions/billions) said that humans would never fly

humans really do never learn. maybe should move this discussion to behavior and psychology

i suppose we should just wait and see.

Also i found Iron at B&Q while looking for steel. who would have thought

When you get it perfected , please plug your computer into it and send us a message of triumph and I told you so! expect to hear from you shortly....or is that never?

for a bunch of scientists you people REALLY cant read

I D O N O T E X P E C T I T T O W O R K

i really CANNOT make it any clearer

yep, air friction will be the main one but there are NO mechanically moving parts cogs or turbines etc. and the friction of the electricity on the wire (if that exists [not sure, think it probably does]). the air thing can be fixed with a vacuum of some sort.

a genset is basically what im making but a self perpetuating one. engine provides motion, motion makes electricity, electricty makes motion

You mean a combustion engine? If you include a combustion engine, then obviously it can't perpetual, since you'll obviously run out of fuel. I assume then you mean an electrical motor? That is basically what I described above.

Electricity passing through a wire does undergo friction of sorts: electrical resistance. The loss of energy due to resistance is directly converted into heat. If you have a motor it would have to run on bearings of some sort and no matter how good a lubricant you use, you will always lose some energy due to friction (again, lost as heat). That is why I suggested magnetically levitated bearings (the best speed trains are magnetically levitated). If with all of this in place and expertly calibrated and with the thing running in a vacuum, you would still need to balance the rotary part to an infinite precision, otherwise gravity would stop you cold after a spell.

The best you can hope for, and what you'll probably achieve, is at least a more energy efficient power plant. Most, if not all, energy efficient cars use the same principle where mechanical energy is reconverted into electrical energy by turning generators when the car breaks.

I do sympathise with your enthusiasm (I have entertained similar notions in the past, as no doubt a lot of other people have), but it simply can't work. You would still need an extra power source for it to keep moving for any length of time, especially if you want to put it to use somewhere.

But nobody can stop you from making it, so when it doesn't work, you would at least have had some fun. Just know that your idea has probably been tried by many other people and in more ingenious ways.

for a bunch of scientists you people REALLY cant read

Only a few of us are scientists. Most, including me, are not.

I don't remember if I've already mentioned it. But if you want earth friendly power, you should try hooking up an alternator to a stirling engine and heating it with a Fresnel lense.

There are great ways to generate power. Spinning metal generators are only efficient, to the best of my knowledge, if the power source is free, IE, wind or water, or a huge operation like coal or nuclear power creating steam.

Gasoline powered generators do not sound very efficient, but I don't know for sure.


You can make homemade solar panels rather easily too. probably easier than building a generator.

Originally Posted by Dave_C

iv got to admit im surprised. iv said (3 times i think) that i dont think will work, but it wont do any harm to try anyway.


NOONE on here knows even the theory behind my experiment

This statement is simply not true. Several people here adequate command of physical theories to be able to categorically state thay your idea cannot work.

What is most certainly true is that you do not understand the theory behind your own experiment.

Originally Posted by Dave_C

for a bunch of scientists you people REALLY cant read

I D O N O T E X P E C T I T T O W O R K

i really CANNOT make it any clearer

What you "expect" is totally irrelevant.

IT CANNOT WORK.

Can I make that any clearer ?


Edit: How about this. If you do the experiment and afterwards you think thiat it did work, then you will have screwed up the experiments, the data interpretation, or both. Probably both.