12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

[Cloxxki]

Hi folks,

please go back to page 100, Reply #991 on and review I_RON measurements

Kator01

You mean this, I suppose, making it easy for others to find it again:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Merenja/Ronald_Pugh_Input-Output_Measurement_Mk5.pdf

Nice doc. I am however confused by the COP figure.
Is the lifted weight always a new weight, or the same weight that was given opportunity to help reset the system, or at least pick itself up after coming down, thus pretty much vertically oscillating (a state more than an output in my humble book)? If you always pick up a new weight and place these on a conveyor, it will be hard to get such figures, I'm afraid.
It can't be hard to calculate how much weight should be left on the shelf to be allowed to call it OU. I don't yet see how it could be looped, or even OU when expecting the device to actually do some repeated lifting without placing the weight back down all the time. The dropped weight is resetting he device, the way I see it.
Challenge: educate the dumb (me). How is there any efficiency at all, if we start with a weight on the floor, put in serious wattage, and end up with the same weigh on the floor, or at best a couple inches up, when it's been there 100 times before? If lifting the light pendulum once over height Y can lift the greater weight once to the same height, or multiple consecutive equal weights to similar height, I will be on my rooftop shooting into the world the proclamation of OU.
I've been called gullable and naive. Convince me :-)
I know Raymond is way serious into this, and his well-thought through approach with specific geoemtry and ratios has merit in my book, looking forward to his results, hoping he's got a way to trick Mother Nature.

[Nabo00o]

You aren't dumb Cloxxki, but this setup can be hard to understand, and especially if the way we load it is inconclusive, which some find it to be.

One demonstration video made by Milkovic which I liked very much is the one where he shows the difference of loading a 2-stage system from a 1-stage system. My opinion is that both are (or at least can be) driven by resonance, since they have their own resonant frequency. The problem with the 1-stage is that any work which it is made to do, will do the the same negative work back on it to stop it (opposite reaction).
This is because distance and force goes both ways, just like in all ordinary system.

The video I am talking about is where he shows a simple educational demonstration-set which could be bought (I think it can), where a vertical steel rod is suspending another bendable rod.

First he attaches a large piece of stiff paper on the end of the rod, pulls it a little up and lets it go.
The rod will then bounce up and down, but because of the large air resistance it will come to a stop very fast, almost immediately.

Then he attaches a small and simple pendulum to the bendable rod and let it swing. It will continue for long time without being excessively slowed by the load of the air resistance. In fact, because the 2 stage oscillator works the way it does, the more you would have loaded it (the larger the surface to push air), the longer it would take before the pendulum would stop. This is because it would limit the distance moved by the pendulum pivot even more.


I think this is a very good video to show the difference between normal oscillation (where if it is resonantly driven, it will always be drained by the same amount by which it does work), and a 2-stage or parametric oscillation (where it will be drained by distance only, and thus where resonance can be used to do much more work, if the distance on which it does work is kept the same or lower (which again can be done by increasing the load)).

So here is the point: increase the power of the pendulum, then increase the resistance of the load whatever it may be, and the total efficiency or COP of the system will go up.
This is the power of parametric resonance.

Julian

[Merg]

The video I am talking about is where he shows a simple educational demonstration-set which could be bought (I think it can), where a vertical steel rod is suspending another bendable rod.

You should post the video link so that all of us know what you want to say - watch from 02:00 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8961722273257830738#

[Nabo00o]

You should post the video link so that all of us know what you want to say - watch from 02:00 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8961722273257830738#

Sorry Merg, but I didn't really remember which video it was, thanks for posting it 

[Cloxxki]

Thanks for the link, had not seen it.

Around 7:30, this does not impress me. The paper is not waving like that one time when the wire is plucked. It seems safe to say (prove me wrong) that energy absorbed by the paper is exponential with amplitude. The the pendulum can move the wire and paper a bit, is not world shaking. It's not like it's a friggin' desktop fan now or anything.

EDIT
12:30. If it would fit, I'd put my pinky under there. I am not impressed with the hit of the hammer on the anvil.
14:00 Neutral position of the weight is already pressing the lamp in some, should that be considered?
16:00 one tap of the pendulum doesn't bring the whole systm in full oscillation, all that energy is stored in the multiple taps, it seems?