inertial propulsion with gyroscope

[conradelektro]

I want to report some work I have done some years ago:

I built a platform with two stepper motors. Each stepper motor had an arm with a heavy weight on its end.

1) The arms were first turned synchronously and at a constant angular speed. Not surprisingly the platform moved back and forth (in the ideal situation without friction). But also in the real world it moved back and forth on the spot. The highest speed of the movement was observed at the middle of the way of the back and forth movement.

2) The arms were turned synchronously but accelerated from 0° to 180° and decelerated from 180° to 360°. The movement of the platform was again back an forth on the spot (theoretically without friction and in the real world if friction was very low). But the highest speed of the movement was observed near the end of the respective movement (not in the middle as with a uniform angular speed).

Now comes my speculation:

What happens if gyroscopes are used instead of the dead heavy weights at the end of the arms? Specially if the arms are accelerated and decelerated as in point 2) above?

Will "nodding" the gyroscopes make any difference? Not a slight "nodding" as in the Fiala patent but lets "nod" up 45° from the vertical plane during acceleration (first half circle) and then "nod" down -45° from the vertical plane during deceleration (second half circle). "Nodding" like a sine wave where the zero crossing is at 0° and 180° of the circle described by the gyroscope on the arm.

Greetings, Conrad

[woopy]

Hi all

to conrad

yes your observation is right the swinging part is much faster than the precessing part.

So i can suppose that at the "jumping in free fall "moment of the traction wheel there is some extra speed that induces a slight forced precession which provoke the nutation.

Perhaps you could try some spinning gyros on your setup but don't forget that a vertical oscillation of the shaft has to be possible if you want to get any possible effect.

Just for fun prof Steven Johns asked me on youtube to let the system spin so long as possible.

So AMEN i did it, i replaced the monotoron kevlar line with a solid iron thread at the end of which i installed a high quality  ballbearing just at the top of the triangle bycicle wheel suspending wire.

And i let the system spinning and here the results.

first i put on a new charged 300 ma lipo battery and let the system spin  and the tension of the battery going down to a regular descharging rate during 4.5 mnutes.

than i measure the time to complete a full rotation each 3 turns (with a chronometer and by hand, so not super accurate)

so

1 turn    14,3 sec
4 turn     13.9 sec
7 turn     13.9 sec
10 turn    13.7 sec
13turn     13.3 sec
16turn     13.1sec
19 turn    12.9 sec
22 turn    13.00
25 turn    13.00

then i ear clearly the battery begins to deplete so end of the test

total duration of the test 4.5 warm up + about 5.5 test (25 turns at average of 13.3 sec)  = 10 minutes

So as you can see, the system seems not to slow down

OK will think of further test i can do with the sytem

Any good ideas are welcome if not too complex


to TK

yes i am sure that forced precession is a must.

I am slowly preparing me to test the Fialas forced precession system (second part of the patent) i am sampling some servos to this intention

Laurent

[conradelektro]

to conrad

yes your observation is right the swinging part is much faster than the precessing part.

So i can suppose that at the "jumping in free fall "moment of the traction wheel there is some extra speed that induces a slight forced precession which provoke the nutation.

Perhaps you could try some spinning gyros on your setup but don't forget that a vertical oscillation of the shaft has to be possible if you want to get any possible effect.

Laurent

The big riddle for me is this rather "small vertical oscillation" which seems to be all important. I wonder whether a "big vertical oscillation" would make the machine more effective?

Also the "free fall requirement" (when the traction wheel is not engaged) is very mysterious.

In addition there seems to be a speed requirement imposed on the gyroscope. In the videos one sees Laurent adjusting the turning speed of the gyroscope. In the patent Fiala hints that the rotation speed of the gyroscope needs to be in a certain relation to the rotation speed of the arm carrying the gyroscope. Fiala goes on and on about the diameter of the traction wheel.

Very strange! The patent does not explain at which moment (while the arm carrying the gyroscope moves in a circle) the forward force is generated. And most strange is Fiala's idea that mass is decreasing once an object goes faster than light.

Greetings, Conrad

[woopy]

To TK

Your remarks on the stopped gyro was intriging, and i did a test to check your proposal. As i have some of those 360 servos i mounted the gyro as a dead mass on one of them.

https://youtu.be/p3iEy5sprpA

But no chance to spin the bicycle wheel. In addition,I tested different speed and direction of rotation , and even by aiding the rotation it invariabely go to a stop. Exactly as Steven Jones said.

So the gyro seems to do the DIRTY WORK.


To conrad

yes the Fiala patent is disturbing, and it is exactly why i was intersted in a replication.

I hope that people will ,as you do, take the time to investigate the patent and eventually find what is exactly this DIRTY WORK as TK name it.

Laurent

[conradelektro]

To conrad

yes the Fiala patent is disturbing, and it is exactly why i was intersted in a replication.

I hope that people will ,as you do, take the time to investigate the patent and eventually find what is exactly this DIRTY WORK as TK name it.

Laurent

My tests with the platform I showed above had the same results as your latest video (inertial propulsion with gyroscope part 7, servo driven).

Ratchet wheels on my platform (wheels which only turn in one direction) made it move forward because friction inhibited the backwards movement. One could also make the platform shoot forward once by starting from a wall which inhibited the first backward movement.

Turning the arms slowly from 0° to 180° and turning them very fast (fast speed up and fast breaking) from 180° to 360° (arms were turned synchronously) also caused forward movement because the slow backwards movement was mostly inhibited by friction.

So, my contraption (as shown above in principle) always needed friction to move forwards no matter what strange acceleration and deceleration I imparted on the two arms with complicated drive algorithms for the stepper motors.

So, moving dead weights in a circle seems to need friction for one directional movement (without friction and specially in free fall it would move back and forth on the spot).


Now let's put gyroscopes instead of dead weights. And as I said in previous posts, the strange idea of Fiala is a half cycle acceleration and a half cycle "free fall" which results in a strange "nodding" as I call it.

I have no idea how to implement "free fall" or "free coasting of a gyroscope" with a stepper motor because a stepper motor cogs severely in case no current is supplied. And I do not know how to drive a DC motor precisely which would be needed to accelerate for exactly one half turn. A DC motor does not exert much breaking forth in case no current is supplied, but still, it would not be "free coasting" too. So, I end up with the strange tracks in the Fiala patent which worry me a lot. From a mechanical point of view the Fiala contraption is very badly designed (acceleration by grating on a track and bumping against an incline on the track) and there should be an equivalent design which is more sound.

I do not want to start a replication till I have an idea for "free fall" or "free coasting of a gyroscope" with a more reliable drive mechanism than a "track". I like stepper motors because they allow for repeatable and precise speed and position control. DC motors are no good because they hardly allow position control and only vague speed control. A servo is not bad (because it allows position control) but also cogs severely if no current is supplied. From a control point of view a servo is a badly designed stepper motor based on a DC motor with position feedback. A servo is also slow in comparison to a stepper motor (but can be much stronger because a fast turning DC motor is geared down).


How important is the "free fall" or "free coasting of the gyroscope" in Fiala's patent? And is "nodding" really necessary? I pose this questions over and over again in my mind when thinking about the Fiala patent.


Accelerating a gyroscope (when it moves in a circle) seems to have the same effect as accelerating a dead weight, but then when acceleration stops a dead weight does noting strange but a gyroscope will "nod" (it translates the imparted acceleration into a nod). And it seems that this "nod" (which is not allowed to be "restricted" and has to happen "freely") is the trick and this "nod" needs not to be much, just a "little nod". Well, this is my bad and incomplete explanation.


Laurent's big and important contribution is that his replication shows that there is really something interesting in the Fiala patent. But I think that doing a second replication is not a step forward. I want to isolate the effect which apparently exits (as Laurent shows) with other means than a "track". May be a servo can be used. The servo could engage a lever while the gyroscope does a half circle and disengages the lever while the gyroscope "free falls" the other half circle. Well, needs some more thinking.


I have stepper motors, DC motors and servos. I just need to buy a modern motor control shield for the Arduino https://www.adafruit.com/product/1438, may be two Arduinos and two motor control shields because I want two gyroscopes turn in a circle, one CW and the other CCW. The gyroscopes could be driven with DC motors and a simple speed control and their own battery (like Laurent has implemented his gyroscope with the heavy fidget spinner rings).

Laurent, what kind of speed control do you use for your gyroscope (must be a little DC motor speed control board) and what DC motor?


Greetings, Conrad