Roll on the 20th June

[purepower]

Greetings All

Friction is unavoidable. You can minimize it but you still have it. The reason the heavier wheel runs longer is it builds up kinetic energy from the spin, and the larger it is, the more of it you will have. Now if friction is stopping you from having a running wheel. Your wheel is just not strong enough, for if you have an effective wheel friction will not be a problem except for ware and tear, and that is were lubrication comes in.

purepower

  I posted almost the same time, but to add to what you said. Each time you break through the wall you will still get a jolt of negative resistance, so it will slow down. Just like a carnival cake wheel with a clicker, it will slow it down till it stops.

Agreed!

One other note, the momentum equation will tell you how long (time) the wheel will spin before stopping, the energy equation will tell you how many revolutions it will make before stopping.

Momentum

m*r²*w = r_b*F_b*t

m-mass of weights/wheel
r-wheel (or mass) radius
w-angular velocity
r_b - mean radius of bearings
F_b - friction force in bearings
t-time wheel rotates before stopping


Energy

.5*m*(r*w)² =  r_b*F_b*(angleOFrotation)

m-mass of weights/wheel
r-wheel (or mass) radius
w-angular velocity
r_b - mean radius of bearings
F_b - friction force in bearings
angleOFrotation - angle (or rotations) wheel rotates before stopping


Only instance I can think of where friction may be ignored (for the wheel) is if you were to use mag-lev bearings and rotate it inside a perfect vacuum. But even then, the wheel would not rotate forever due to the bearings as they are not perfect (close though), and anything we do in our backyard wouldn't even come close...

-PurePower

[purepower]

Hi Hammer
I agree with most but friction doesn't just cause wear and tear it also cause drag, as I know it its friction that stops any system running at 100% so for an OU you must over come friction or your system will just keep slowing down until it stops if your not adding energy to overcome that friction.
Take Care Hammer
Graham
ps I liked the way you explaned that Power.

Thank you!

And even if we could completely eliminated friction from the system, it isnt OU or "free energy," rather perpetual motion (for clarification between the terms, please see one of my previous posts, page 51, reply #2027). If we did have a wheel that spun forever without friction, as soon as we attach a load to it (like a generator), this would kill the perpetual motion much faster than a little friction would.

OU is much more difficult than getting something to spin forever because it has to generate more energy than necessary to keep itself going. And since we havent even gotten perpetual motion down yet, we have a ways before getting OU...

Hi All
I will put friction in terms of the lever, on the first drop you maybe able to get it to bounce right back up, I don't know how but lets say you do.
The next time you wont get up as high because the friction from your bearing and air friction gives you drag stopping your system going right up giving you less energy for the next cycle and it wont bounce as high again to you get to a point where you have equalibrium and no movement.

To change that you have to keep adding weight to your system every cycle.

Take Care All
Graham

Dont tell Archer this! We got into quite an argument over the friction in the lever. He's convinced there isnt any, which is why he can reset the lever with "no cost of energy to the machine."

No only does this neglect friction and drag, but it also neglects the energy needed to reset its gravitational potential (ie lift the weight of the lever).

After seeing Archer's last couple videos, Im convinced he's so far off the deep end his lever idea isnt even worth discussing/arguing. I dont have the time nor will to continue on with such a foolish idea.

If anyone is still considering his lever and has any general lever questions, I will still provide my input. But I am done discussing anything relevant to Archer's build in particular...

-PurePower

[EvilToeKnee]

Though this is my first post here, I have been reading here for quite a while.  I don't have a physics degree or anything like that.  However, there are not many things I believe can't be done.  Who cares if the "laws" of physics say something can't be done.  Why not try?

@Dusty
I hope you don't mind a suggestion.  With what you have in place now, would adding a magnet offset on the back side pushing at magnets fixed to the back of the wheel help?  I hope you understand what I mean because I have no idea how to add/make a picture.

Thanks for listening all.

Evil Toe Knee "as seen on Xbox Live"

[fletcher]

I'll probably throw this in just for good measure - quinn is also confused about friction being a non-conservative force - it works in any direction & robs a system of potential energy [this we know] - the way quinn deludes himself about it is by having large masses [in the lever & weights] - he figures the large mass [large weight force] more than compensates for the friction force because he says the momentum takes care of it - PP & others have explained why this is not so.

Consider this by way of example - why do various body's in free fall achieve different terminal velocities ? - it relates to quinns friction irrelevant argument.

Lets qualify things first - lets assume two objects are the same dimensions & volume but have different masses by a ratio of 1 : 10 e.g. a hollow sphere with mass 1 kg & an identical sphere with mass 10 kg's - they both displace the same volume of air & have the same frontal area - when they are released to free fall from the same height they both accelerate due to gravity force - the amount of gravity force is different for both objects [gravity has the ability to automatically calculate & compensate for the correct amount of force to give both objects the same rate of accelertion [in a vacuum] - but the lighter sphere reaches terminal velocity far earlier than the heavier sphere - that's because the air friction drag caused by aerodynamic drag & form [frontal] drag is the same for both objects but for the heavier object it opposes the greater gravity force to a lesser degree [by proportion].

Why mention it at all ? - well, if quinn were to scale down his lever & weights the frictional losses form pivot friction combined with air drag would severely & quickly deplete his system momentum, for all to plainly see.

[dirt diggler]

Hi All
I will put friction in terms of the lever, on the first drop you maybe able to get it to bounce right back up, I don't know how but lets say you do.
The next time you wont get up as high because the friction from your bearing and air friction gives you drag stopping your system going right up giving you less energy for the next cycle and it wont bounce as high again to you get to a point where you have equalibrium and no movement.

To change that you have to keep adding weight to your system every cycle.

Take Care All
Graham

Hello Rusty.
I'm sorry Rusty, but you will have to explain this to me cause I'm just not getting it(musta been that bump on the head today). If I take a lever set at 5:1 put 5 kg on the short end, and 1 kg on the long end, will it lift?
probably not, because of friction at the pivot. but if I move the 1 kg out 1mm then will it lift? sure will.  so now I have a 5.01:1 lever.
a very insignificant change to get the lift that I wanted. agreed?
Ok, so now I take my 1 kg weight off, and the lever drops.  Ok?
then I put the 1 kg back on at the 5.01m point on the lever. it lifts again right?
I can do this over and over for eternity(well, me and future generations of my family) and the lift will alway work, the friction will never make my lever lift less than what I designed it to.
the reason as I see it that friction is not really a factor in the lever is that if I get the lift that I want, the friction is already taken care of. yes it is there, but my very minor change in fulcrum length hadles it with no lose to how high my weight is lifted.

take care Graham
Dirt