Prajna

And from this is where we get the idea that the magnet is redirecting force rather than doing work? Ah ok, it starts to make sense. And really I should be thinking in terms of induced electrostatic forces rather than magnetic forces? Am I getting closer?

Watching from the sidelines with avid interest...

Splendid. Now all I need is for someone like @exchemist to translate this into simple terms that I can comprehend. I am still studying the wiki, btw, in the hope that I can get to a broad-brush understanding of how magnetism works.

You might note that an electric motor will not run until you flick the switch. Although it doesn't take much energy to flick the switch and the real energy that is running the motor comes from the power supply that switch needs to be turned on for it work. Here the operator is turning the rotor, effectively just switching fields in the magnet array, rather than any direct application of force to the rockers, which are what send work to the output. You may well understand how the linkage operates between the switching of the fields and output from the fields (and, apparently, the inviolable recovery of energy back into the field to balance it, if that is what happens) but it's far from clear to me. It seems to me that the connection is via magnetic attraction and repulsion of the switched magnets and by eddy current drag on the rotor tabs or fingers, but quite how that connection operates and how to begin to analyse it is beyond my current knowledge. If you can help me towards an understanding of that then I will be delighted. Leave aside any thought of it being any kind of perpetual motion/free energy/overunity device and look at it as just a transmission system: how is the work done on the rotor translated into work done on the output? You might like to analyse it in terms that a fellow engineer on the welding forum I frequent observed, "That's a very complicated system for what is effectively a brake." I particularly like the way @exchemist has approached analysing the device, I find it clear, logical and easy to relate to. Perhaps his specialisation is not physics but, for me anyway, I appreciate the way he has stated things.

True enough, it is only an animation, perhaps even a simulation though not necessarily accurate. I'm not sure I have advertised it in any particular way apart from being a curiosity. As a thought experiment surely I have presented enough to spark a discussion on (at least hypothetical) energy exchange. Thanks for continuing with your attention and thoughts.

Well your expertise is (probably) physics and mine is more geared towards engineering. I could divert my attention to studying physics but really my interest is in approaching this from an engineering point of view. If you can help me to understand how the energy exchanges occur in this device, preferably in simple terms, then I will be very happy for that. I can understand any frustration you might have in dealing with a physics-naif who could resort to studying physics rather than asking questions the answers to which might be obvious and intuitive to one with a deep understanding of physics. I hope you will at least admit that this device presents an interesting problem of analysis and the energy exchange is far from obvious (to most people anyway and, I guess, even to some physicists).

Here is the updated animation. I have modified the cam groove so that it matches the cam pin movement and generally improved the animation so that it is smoother and less glitchy.

Sorry to have been quiet, I've been redoing my animation to better represent movement (or approximated movement) in the device. @exchemist, I do hope to ask for some more detail regarding your analysis, particularly regarding what you consider as Stroke 4 in your analogy. @sethoflagos, I am also interested to explore hysteresis further to estimate what part it plays in the dynamics of the device. @swansont, thanks for the further response. It seems to me that you make bare assertions, such as, "Magnets don't do work" and the above, "The energy for doing stuff with magnets is not contained in the magnetic field." Now, most likely you are right and it just remains for us to research deeply enough to understand your assertions but it would be much more helpful if you would offer some explanations to go along with your assertions. Thank you.

There were very helpful comments today.

Thank you. Anyway, I hope there's nothing stopping me being able to do it tomorrow.

Excellent analysis, both of you. Sorry, I have no more reaction points available today or you'd both get a +1. This is exactly what I came here to explore. All I have to do now is re-read both comments carefully to make sure I understand. Thanks.

I did add a rather conspicuous wink but thanks for the clarification.

Sorry, I'm not sure of the dynamics yet. The rotor is rotated at whatever angular velocity, the tabs are spaced at 20 deg so the spacing will be varying. At the starting position one or the other side of the device will have a tab/finger centralised between the magnets and the other will have tabs spaced evenly above and below the gap. The magnets are prevented from closing completely on the tabs by a cam groove on the output flywheel. So, at the starting position the magnets with a tab in the gap will be at minimum separation.

In the current design the tabs or fingers are arranged every 20 degrees around the rotor. There are nine tabs and the rotor axle is co-planar with the centre line of the magnets, so when there is a tab central to the gap between the magnets on one side there is a space on the opposite side. The magnets are 10mm x 2mm neodymium (N52?) and the tabs centres are at approximately a 35mm radius. The 'bulb' on the tabs that lies between the magnets is 5mm radius to match the area of the magnets. This may be more or less optimal as far as effectiveness in switching the flux and suffering eddy current drag, I don't know yet. This is somewhat arbitrary and is just my first best guess of what might work. I wish you guys would stop with the perpetual motion slur, I'm rather hoping for over unity!

Sorry, I don't understand. Unless you mean it's a win that I'm belatedly reading about magnetism and you don't need to be involved in analysing the device. By the way, I stumbled back on the article about monopoles, for anyone interested, it was in Popular Mechanics: https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a60079037/magnetic-monopole-hematite/