1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%

[gotoluc]

Looks fine now

Thanks

Luc

[gotoluc]

What do you think of this?
Is it an optical illusion or do the lower shaft stubs have a smaller diameter then the shaft. Also, do you see the stub at a different angle?
The second picture the stub looks off center to left and third picture (frames later) it looks off to the right?
Forth looks like stub is also bent

Luc

[Craigy]

gymbals are good.. It is possible to do either type of wobble quite easily with the gymbals. a left right wobble is easly done by locking one of the gymbal axis up..and a conical wobble by letting it free.. i think it best to discover by experimentation and not conjecture....

[i_ron]

What do you think of this?
Is it an optical illusion or do the lower shaft stubs have a smaller diameter then the shaft. Also, do you see the stub at a different angle?
The second picture the stub looks off center to left and third picture (frames later) it looks off to the right?
Forth looks like stub is also bent

Luc

I don't see it bent or off set Luc, he did have a lathe so stub ends are sure to be turned down.


Did you notice that the weights are most likely pipe with end plates and through bolted?


Ron

[i_ron]

Hi Ron, snip

I have a question for you. Which of the two weights do you believe is the one Mr. Skinner refers to as falling?

Luc

Neither, lol
"The "falling", Skinner said, is more correctly a following of the weights to new centres of gravity."
Here is my take on this...


How it works
The small motor drives the top section, the top section is the engine that drives the lower section. The operating principle is therefore the same for both sections.
The input to the top section rod(s) is critical, in that this motion is carried down throughout the machine. In the '39 video we can see the motion is circular. Focus on the closest rod and you should be able to see the eccentric arm that drives it. It is visible shortly after the rod moves past 7:00 o'clock and is visible as the rod travels around behind the 12:00 o'clock position, then is hidden in the glare until covered by the rod itself until it re-emerges.
If this is still to blurry to be convincing, change your focus to the left most rod. Let logic be the rule, if the motion on the first rod is linear then the motion is  from side to side as viewed from the camera position. If this were true then the motion of the left rod, being at 90 degrees to the first rod, said motion would be towards and away from the camera and be hidden by the steel corner post.
But this is not the case... the second rod is very visible as it shows first outside the corner post, then on the inside of the corner post. Logic dictates that if two rods at 90 degrees to each other exhibit the same motion then the only explanation is the both rods are travelling in a circular path.
The path of the top of the top section rod is circular. It passes through the gimbal where it is provided with a bearing for constraint and weight support before emerging at the level of the so called square plate. It is located in the square plate by the setscrew on the side of the plate. The rod is straight at this point and thus the weight, being attached to the square plate is subject to the tilt angle of the rod. The off-set hole, in the square plate, transfers the circular motion to the lower rod, at an increased radius and at a lag angle of 90 degrees.

The lower rod carries the lower weight and connection to the output shaft.
Ron