Yes, you can build a physical prototype of the wheel shown in your drawing. You can use permanent magnets, a wheel, magnet holders, a central shaft, bearings, and a frame. The important distinction is that building the mechanism is possible, but proving that it can rotate continuously and deliver useful power using only permanent magnets is a different matter.
Your design proposes an interesting idea: magnets push against each other like springs, and the wheel’s geometry is intended to balance compression on one side with release on the other. Let’s examine it step by step and work out how to test it properly.
1. Understanding your proposed wheel
Your drawing has five main elements:
Central shaft and bearings: The wheel rotates around its central axis.
Outer wheel and magnet holders: These support the magnets as the wheel turns.
Permanent magnets: Each holder contains magnets with alternating north and south poles, as indicated in your drawing.
Radial spokes: These connect the magnet holders to the centre.
Compression and release zones: The magnets are intended to be pushed closer together at the bottom, while the arrangement on the opposite side is intended to allow decompression.
Your proposed operating principle is that the magnets remain in a balanced arrangement, with magnetic repulsion acting like spring pressure. As the wheel rotates, one region compresses while another releases.
The key question is whether the release can produce more rotational energy than is required to bring the magnets into the compressed position.
2. Step-by-step explanation of the proposed operation
Step 1 — The magnets interact
Magnets with like poles facing each other repel; opposite poles attract. The force changes with magnet orientation, spacing, and geometry. The magnets can store potential energy in their arrangement, just as a compressed spring does.
Step 2 — The wheel carries the magnets around a circular path
Each magnet holder moves around the central shaft. For the wheel to rotate, the magnetic forces must produce a net torque around that shaft. A large magnetic force by itself is not sufficient: its direction and point of application matter.
Step 3 — Compression at the bottom
In your proposal, magnets approach one another at the bottom of the wheel. If like poles face each other, pushing them closer requires external work. That work is stored as magnetic potential energy, and the magnets exert a restoring force.
Step 4 — Release and back-pull reduction
You propose that the compressed magnets become easier to release from the metal and that their backward pull decreases. This is a testable claim, but compression alone does not guarantee a reduction in magnetic attraction. It depends on the actual magnet positions, pole orientations, metal type, and magnetic circuit.
Step 5 — Continuous rotation
The wheel must gain enough forward torque during every complete revolution to overcome its resisting torque. If the release produces a forward push, the force needed to recompress the magnets elsewhere must also be measured. The wheel’s total energy balance determines whether it can keep turning.
3. Your force calculations: 900 g, 120 g and 780 g
Your drawing gives these claimed measurements:
Forward pull
900 gf
Back pull
120 gf
Your proposed calculation
900 − 120 = 780 gf
The arithmetic is correct. However, the 780 gf result is a usable net force only if the two forces act along the same line, in opposite directions, at the relevant point, under comparable operating conditions.
Here, gf means gram-force, not grams of mass.
| Measurement | Approximate force |
|---|---|
| 900 gf forward pull | 8.83 newtons |
| 120 gf back pull | 1.18 newtons |
| 780 gf difference | 7.65 newtons |
| 60 gf proposed friction force | 0.59 newtons |
These conversions are correct, but they do not establish that the wheel can deliver continuous power.
Why this distinction matters
A force gauge might measure a forward pull of 900 gf at one position and a back pull of 120 gf at another. Those readings do not automatically give the net work over a complete revolution.
To determine the wheel’s output, we need to measure the force or torque continuously as the wheel rotates through all 360 degrees. We also need the radius at which each force acts. Rotational torque is:
where \(F\) is the tangential force and \(r\) is its distance from the shaft.
The work delivered over a complete revolution depends on the torque throughout the rotation, not simply the difference between two force readings. The principles of work and potential energy explain why the energy required to move through one part of a magnetic arrangement must be included in the overall calculation.
4. The most important question: does compression on one side cancel decompression on the other?
Your central idea is that when one part of the wheel is compressed, another part decompresses by the same amount. You believe this creates a continuous cycle in which the forward pull remains larger than the backward pull.
We can represent your proposed cycle like this:
1. Compression
Magnets move closer together; work may be stored as magnetic potential energy.
2. Wheel rotation and release
The geometry must convert the changing magnetic forces into net forward torque.
3. Reset for the next revolution
The wheel must return to its initial magnetic configuration without requiring as much or more energy than it delivered.
The third step is the decisive one.
If the wheel must do work to push the magnets back into their starting positions, that work must be counted. A mechanism can reduce the force at one location while increasing it elsewhere, or change the direction in which a force acts. But the complete cycle must be measured to determine whether the arrangement actually delivers net work.
In a static arrangement of permanent magnets, magnetic forces do not ordinarily provide net mechanical work over a complete closed cycle. This is why permanent-magnet-only motors have not been established as a source of continuous power.
That does not prevent us from building and testing your specific design.
5. How to build a prototype
I recommend starting with a smaller experimental wheel instead of immediately constructing the full-size machine.
| Component | Recommended starting specification |
|---|---|
| Wheel frame | Rigid, nonmagnetic aluminium or plastic |
| Rotor | Approximately 300–400 mm diameter |
| Central shaft | Steel shaft with suitable bearings, positioned away from the active magnet arrangement where practical |
| Magnet holders | Nonmagnetic plastic or aluminium |
| Magnets | Identical, commercially rated permanent magnets |
| Force gauge | Digital gauge with a suitable range and calibration |
| Torque measurement | Rotary torque sensor, or a calibrated tangential force measurement |
| Speed measurement | Optical tachometer or encoder |
| Protective enclosure | Clear polycarbonate guard |
These are suggested prototype dimensions, not validated dimensions for your particular design. The magnet dimensions, grades, spacing and pole orientations must be selected from the actual geometry and measured force-distance curves.
Construction procedure
Build the wheel and shaft.
Make a rigid rotor with the same number of magnet stations as your drawing. Begin with a smaller wheel so that the geometry can be adjusted easily.
Install the bearings.
Check that the unloaded wheel rotates freely. Measure the torque needed to turn it at several speeds before installing magnets.
Mount the magnet holders.
Use secure mechanical retainers rather than relying only on adhesive. Keep the magnet spacing adjustable so you can test different configurations.
Mark the poles and positions.
Identify north and south on every magnet. Record the pole orientation, angle and gap between magnets. Do not assume that alternating colours or positions necessarily produce the intended force direction.
Reproduce the compression zone.
Install the guides or moving components needed to bring the magnets closer together at the intended position. If a separate cam, sliding mount or linkage changes the magnet spacing, measure the force required to operate it as well.
Install measurement equipment.
Fit an encoder or tachometer to record rotational speed. Measure torque throughout the full revolution, not only at the top and bottom.
Perform a manual rotation test.
Rotate the wheel slowly through 360 degrees and record where it assists motion, where it resists motion, and where it tends to stop. Repeat with several starting positions.
Safety: Strong neodymium magnets can crush fingers, shatter on impact and launch unexpectedly. Wear eye protection, secure the magnets and guard the rotating assembly. Keep powerful magnets away from people with pacemakers and other magnetically sensitive equipment.
6. The experiment that will tell us whether your principle works
This is more important than the wheel’s appearance or how quickly it spins when unloaded.
Record torque at regular angular intervals, for example every 5° or 10° over one full revolution.
Prototype test checklist
Test progress
0 of 7
For a measured torque \(\tau\), the mechanical work over one revolution is:
Positive torque contributes work in the chosen direction; negative torque subtracts from it. This integral, together with any work required to change magnet spacing or reset the mechanism, is a much more useful test than subtracting two force-gauge readings.
If the wheel repeatedly stops at the same magnetic alignment, that is evidence of an equilibrium position. If it keeps turning, the next question is whether it can deliver measurable output under load for an extended period without an external energy input.
A wheel spinning freely is not proof of a power source.
7. Is the claimed 60 grams of friction realistic?
It is possible for a particular bearing assembly to have low friction, but 60 gf is not a universal force required to keep a wheel moving at any speed.
The result depends on the bearing type, lubrication, shaft alignment, seals, wheel balance, speed and external load. Also, a force of 60 gf measured at the rim is not the same as 60 gf measured close to the shaft.
For example, if 60 gf acts tangentially at a radius of 150 mm:
At 100 RPM, that resisting torque would correspond to approximately 0.93 watts of mechanical power:
This is an illustrative calculation, not a measurement of your wheel. It shows why the force measurement needs to be taken at a known radius and speed.
8. What about your claim that the design obeys the laws of thermodynamics?
Your intention is to make the wheel work without violating energy conservation. That is the correct question to investigate.
However, saying that energy is not returned to the permanent magnets does not by itself establish that energy is being produced. The relevant accounting must include:
Work done moving magnets into compressed positions.
Work released as they separate.
Work done by any mechanical guides or cams.
Friction and other mechanical losses.
Any energy supplied during startup or by an external mechanism.
Measured mechanical output under load.
Permanent magnets can provide magnetic forces without an electrical supply, and they are widely used in motors and generators. In conventional motors, however, an external energy source supplies the ongoing mechanical output.
9. My recommendation
Build the prototype, but treat the claimed 780 gf net output as a hypothesis to test, not a confirmed result.
The best first step is to settle one engineering detail before buying the magnets:
In your design, are the magnets fixed permanently to the wheel, or do they slide toward and away from one another as the wheel rotates?
That distinction is critical. If the magnets move relative to the wheel, we need to include the work required to move and reset them. If they are fixed, we need to determine how the magnetic forces create a torque that remains in the same rotational direction throughout the full revolution.
Once that detail is clear, we can develop a dimensioned prototype drawing, specify the magnet arrangement and prepare a test plan to evaluate your proposed mechanism.