my first post

[AB Hammer]

@jsngeorge423

I have 2 of that approach that addressed the friction factor and the angle factor, as well as the lift. And they are low on the to do list for I still see to much resistance to make them function. And one of them has an extreme extra attachment as well.

I have much better designs and I am also working with itsblockdog on a gravity wheel and magnet design, where we have mixed our ideas together. Buoyancy and gravity are in my opinion interesting but even in those there are a group of effects to overcome. As for WM2D it is a good program to rough out an idea but I wouldn't trust it for it has its own problems as well and can not be fully trusted when working with gravity type wheels.

[wattsup]

@jsngeorge423

Nice design and drawing but ABH is right all the way.

From the static position you have drawn, the next movement will require that the right a bottom shafts be pushed inwards. Inwards in fact means pushed upwards and that just won't happen. It is always goods to make the designs first before attempting a build, but the design should be rotated every 2 degrees from the start point to see how it will work. This one does not need to go any further. I think the main problem is you are trying to get too much on the right side. All you really need is 1% more and people all over the world are breaking their heads just to get that 1% more. If you bring the axle more to the center point, and maybe off just a tad, maybe then, if the roller bearings are made well and do not create to much added friction on the far left side, there is a chance it "could" be close. I'm always afraid of saying it could work because we all know this is impossible, right. heheheh.

[AB Hammer]

@wattsup

To many people have been trying for that 1% for all to long with no advancement. Lets say someone got that 1% and had it running. What good is it? You would have to have something the size of a fairest wheel to do anything at all. Bessler showed real power in his wheel back in the early 18th century. I will tell you that it was much greater than 1%. More like 50% or better. As someone who has been building wheels and feel I am on the final breakthroughs of just such a machine. One of my test units spinning at about 50 to 60 RPM (spin test) was having shifting problems and I reach up to spread the test stand a little hearing a knocking and nearly got my thumb nail tore of my hand. I assure you that that was allot more than 1 % effect. OUCH!!!

[jsngeorge423]

I completely understand what your both saying because there the exact concerns i had ringing in my head lol but Ive never attempted to build such a machine and therefor i still had the hmmm maybe just maybe thought in there to. I personally do not think that gravity alone is capable of creating perpetual motion? I'm now working on a machine that uses buoyancy as i think that I'm far more likely to succeed if i have two apposing forces (gravity and buoyancy). 

[utilitarian]

I completely understand what your both saying because there the exact concerns i had ringing in my head lol but Ive never attempted to build such a machine and therefor i still had the hmmm maybe just maybe thought in there to. I personally do not think that gravity alone is capable of creating perpetual motion? I'm now working on a machine that uses buoyancy as i think that I'm far more likely to succeed if i have two apposing forces (gravity and buoyancy). 

Buoyancy has a problem similar to gravity.  In order to maximize energy from buoyancy, you have to get a light object to the bottom of a container of water.  What you will quickly find is that with friction, it costs more energy for a float to penetrate the water pressure than what is gained by capturing the energy of the rising float.  If you can somehow beat this, then you will succeed.  But how do you defeat water pressure?