Roll on the 20th June

[Rusty_Springs]

@ Graham, everything i was mentioning above, with the exception of the H.J.,, was YOUR invention. that you GAVE freely (thank you) to the entire world.

i haven't seen your 3rd design yet, i hope you found a way around the "issues" with the other two.
personally i found more "possibilities" with the Tri-Force than i did with the corner gate. there was something about the "forces" with the corner gate that didnt sit well with me. i haven't quite worked it out yet, but its almost like the magnets make it slow-down on its way out, even though its repelling..
With the Tri-Force (and H.J. linear) you get a full KICK out, which is impressive.

i kept hoping you would figure out a way to incorporate that effect into this wheel, but it seems like you are not interested enough in it to even give it a second thought...
i played around with some things, but all i got was a "booster" Tri-Force to help break the "wall" of the repelling magnets, but after playing around with it, i fould that the "roller-bar" gets in the way of the repell effect. so alas.....  Archer and Tri-Force may not be compatible..?? or i may jst not see quite how it could be done..

anyhow.  by "L" i mean the L-shaped Tri-Force configuration, that mimics your Corner Gate.
think it was on Clanzer's site, before he crashed it.. 

Have you given any thought to investing in GeoMag stock?? lol,  they're 08' profits are going to be off the chart!!

Hi Sm0ky2
I had a good laugh at the geomag stock but when it came out it was a good tool for people like us, it made things so much easier to experiment with.
I like you did think of the trygate for Archers problem but because it was designed to kick away and not up I didn't think it could work but if you think of giving it a try, try it with just set off one gates not the two that I normally have so instead of the rotor going through two gates its going above one, you still get the attract in and kick out but not as strong because your only using the one pole on the rotor magnet.
The corner gate works best with a bar magnet as the rotor not a block magnet.
Yes in all my test the 3rd gate fixes any problems that came from the first two.
Take Care  Sm0ky2
Graham

[spinner]

... Having limited resources I can't experiment as much as I'd like and I was wondering if anyone has done any research on using both poles of an electromagnet with a dual rotor system, to provide twice the output of a normal motor which would be approximately 180% efficient.   Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. 

(Hmm, Kai, is he joking, too? Just checking, lol..)

Hello, Xaverius! Having two underunity systems in combination (when one runs the other) makes that combined system even less efficient.
Two 90% efficient devices in combination acts like a single, 81% efficient device.

A different situation is if you combine 2 identical devices in "parallel operation" (like having 2 electro-motors (turbines, IC engines, PM rotors, Archer's Sword...) on the same shaft).
In such situation, the output is doubled, but efficiency is mostly preserved... (according to construction, it can vary slightly.. - Two 2-cylinder IC engines could have a little better combined efficiency..)

[exxcomm0n]

@ Exx,

here's the problem. These linear bearings (while they work better than ANYTIHNG i can find on the market) are a pain in the ass to assemble. as i found out today...
and small ball bearings are hard to find cheaply..

i ended up E-baying 30 bearings for about $25 (after shipping) which is cheaper than everything else i found. that gives me enough for 8 bearings. (6 to be used here unless i go for 4 arms).
On top of that, the bearings came split in two different sizes,
which makes this REAL FUN <-- thats me faking a smile...

Chintzy bastiges!

I'd build both sizes (2 bearing assem. per rod, if possible) an put the beefier ones on the outer edge.
With the outside weight addition , the outer bearing will keep getting the most "torque" from rod movement and momentum.

so at this point ordering another 24-30 bearings would just be rediculous... noones even gotten this damn thing to work  yet...

im muling over wether or not to use the neos..  that would give us a shorter push distance, but greater weight capacity, AS WELL AS - faster response time. which has PROVEN to increase RPM.
also the neos, being small, can be attached in multitude for added power.
downside is hard to adjust/easy to OVER adjust...  STRONG tension forces on parts of the wheel.
'hammering effect' when it hits the rod-stops. this has to be cushioned if i go neo.

Which is why I asked you about the bell flange. But now as I play the movie in my mind, the repeated "hammer" of rod travel limit now works upon 3-4 of the bearing supports and you're back to bowing again.

Chit.

Could you (I just love how a dinker like me can sit on his arse and just toss out this crap off the cuff) mount an upright support with the rod going through it and a light spring on either side of the upright with pins through the rod on the springs opposite ends to cushion the "snap" attraction of the mags?
(Springs NOT in constant contact, but acting like a "buffer"?)

In essence, try to lessen the "end of travel" impact without killing the attraction effect and, of course, easily compressing under just the influence of rod weight?

I figure the placement of this assembly would be in exact dead center of the rod, or better yet, between the rod end (magnet) and the bearing assembly (the you don't need the extra upright).

on the other hand, most of the ferrites i have push further, and are more constent, steadily changing throughout their fields. makes for easier tuning, more consistent results.
the downside is the slow-action of the rods, lower weight capacity, and they are a lot larger/heavier.


stepping it down to 2 rods  i could split them, but my mind wants to take me in the other direction...
4-12++ rods? i dunno..

From what Archer says, more rods = less tuning, and I can see how that might be the case.
But his build uses ferrites, and they are bus loads cheaper than neos (bigger too).

Use ferrites for proof of concept, and then go ultra fancy hipster super-tech with neos.

using 1 bearing per rod-half would require some sort of support - which adds friction. defeating the entire purpose of using this linear-bearing.  So now you see my dilema.......
i totally get all the why's that led archer to this latest development, it makes perfect sense, i cant believe noone else thought of it before he did...  just another ++ to the effect. i SOOO want to use that, but i can't see how i can now... 

You can't without throwing caution to the wind (as well as your pocketbook) and doubling up on bearing assemblies  for exactly the reasons you outline above.

The good news is IF the assembly works as advertised, you can spend a little skull sweat and make up drawings of it on varying scales and peddle it to a machine shop (of good
reputation) and Ebay resell the thing for a tidy income boost while helping your fellow man.

You couldn't find anything like them, I bet others might have the same problem.

Best i can come up with, i move the mounts close in towards the center, and put the mags at about half radii ??  if we get some wheels spinning, then i could see sinking a bunch of $$ into making a really good one, and i'd have someone make these damn bearings in a machine-shop where they know what the hell they're doing, and/or have the equipment to do it right.

Not quite sure I'm fielding the 1st sentence correctly, but about the 2nd..................

DING! dingdingdingdingdingdingding

i'm over here using 2 bearings opposite each other of one size, and the other 2 sides are slightly smaller. of course different I.D. too, so i have to add a cut piece of tensioner-pin to make up the gap.
hack-saw brass rod into tiny 13/16th inch sticks. cutting tiny wood squares, hand drilling them to accept the brass, fitting it to the rod, then glueing it all together..

i'll add pics later, possibly do a bearing-demo vid after the paint dries...

You might want to look into threaded bronze/brass 90 degree pieces in the diameter of your brass rod. They might be found in the plumbing/gas section of the hardware store to negate the above.
Also thin gas tubing (pilot light type gauge) might save you when ID shimming.
Then it's just a little tweaking to normalize weight.

A little extra weight, a lot less headache.

Once you verify that it's worth it, farm the machining out to pros.

we had that talk about Friction earlier.  Friction only "doesnt matter", when you dont have much to deal with. THAT's how i like to build things..   

i see stuff like the front surface of Dusty's wheel, or the scratches in the blue paint on Clanzer's "saw-blades"  and i can "feel" the friction!!!   like nails scratching down a chalkboard.

i can BREATHE on my wheel and it tries to spin around....

i want the rods to be that way too. which, with these linear-bearings, may actually be possible.
 
and if/when i get this thing to work, i have a crate full of "frictionless" A/C generator/motors torn out of misc. appliances (mostly microwave fans) ready to belt on.

Efficiency.

A PITA like no other, but once it's done, it's DONE.
Like Ed Leed's 9 ton door a child could open.

Amen.



Look bro, I'm just having a wheee of a time letting my altered imagination run wild.

Make it work as crude and low-ball as you can.

Once it does, you'll see extra expenditure for it easy as you'll make it up on the back end (AFTER buying an inverter, and making a battery bank too).

My next question is (Don't ya just love the way I'm just skipping to the next part with complete "faith" it'll work? It's REALLY good ganj.....), where can we store the energy that isn't expensive, heavy, and chemically poisonous?

Present battery technology SUCKS!

[exxcomm0n]

@ EXX
    Well, was going to save that till launch time but now that you brought me out.   

That was, if anything, a very oblique reference that would only make sense to someone who has painstakingly covered the entire thread, and I bet you've been chomping at the bit to talk about it.

I din't out no nuttin. 

   Will have 8 coils when done, 4 for testing. Done with the coils, 5" with 5" slugs on the end of SS rods. Set to lift up at around 2 Oclock. Putting latches on the rods so the coils only have to lift it up and it will stay until it rotates past six. 5 to one spinup on the gen head and winding the coils for that now. Need to make the triggers for the coils but simples there. Will be going Solid state for that although can easy be done mechaniclly as well.

I've always liked optical light switches...but that's just me.

That way I can set the pulse time so it will just be enough to ensure rod latch.   Looks like my design will be rather redundant compared to the new one.

B.F.D. (big farging dilemma) If it works and makes more than it consumes, it works.

Launchpad one now in T-2 and counting. Final check lists out.

thaelin

Aces bud!

Keep us in the loop.

[MrKai]

Wow.

I was castigated AGAIN on this forum for pointing out something someone typed WAS NOT TRUE...

What do you guys do?

JUMP ON ME because the LIAR meant well?!?!

Do you not see how...unbelievably fukntuz batshit crazy that makes you guys look to the causal outside observer?!

I point out out that not only did the poster LIE about the source of the info, but said info is a well known example of junk science and you guys decide to ATTACK me in follow ups about "not getting the point"?

PLEASE look up the definition and concept of "confirmation bias" and why it is so bad for your work, your 'scene' and ultimately, your progress.

-K