Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[broli]

It's good to have come this far but we have reached a point where Sjack must disclose his contraption already. Some numerous old farts can't even decipher Besslers wheels after decades of experience so I doubt we will see the light in here using wm2D  . I do agree on using the tools and technology of current times. It would be stupid to not use any hand drill for instance because Bessler didn't  . Or to not use computer simulation to optimize the device quickly.

[mondrasek]

Oh, as for the seemingly working model -- after fixing the overlaps and retaining 0.05AS and 0.011IE the model behaves as already seen. The additional collision force supposedly added by the algorithm is out.

For the last time:  Decreasing the Animation Step and Integration Error increases the accuracy of the sim!  As both of those factors approach zero, the sim approaches reality.  That is how these things work.   It is similar to integrating the area under a curve.  The smaller the quadrangles used to approximate the area under a curve, the better the accuracy.  As the quadrangles approach infinity (time step approaching zero), the result approaches the exact area.

You can blow up any sim by raising the Integration Error and Animation Step.

The effect of the Integration Error is related to the size/mass of the object you are simulating.  So large wheels do fine with larger values.  This wheel is smaller and requires smaller values.  So there is not a correct default value for each sim.  The program allows for you to change these values based upon your need (gross visualization vs. exact analysis), the size of objects, and your CPU speed and patience.

In this case the Integration Error and Animation Step are just too high.  Since the sim process is iterative, it must calculate the positional change and forces due to one object at a time.  If it gets to object #7 (for example) and this causes a huge overlap with #1 that was calculated previously, you get crap results.  So you need smaller values as you increase the number of components as well.

As was stated several times, when you are narrowing in on a specific action or see something unexpected, always decrease the size of the Animation Step and Integration Error to increase sim accuracy and check your results.

M.

[broli]

For the last time:  Decreasing the Animation Step and Integration Error increases the accuracy of the sim!  As both of those factors approach zero, the sim approaches reality.  That is how these things work.   It is similar to integrating the area under a curve.  The smaller the quadrangles used to approximate the area under a curve, the better the accuracy.  As the quadrangles approach infinity (time step approaching zero), the result approaches the exact area.

You can blow up any sim by raising the Integration Error and Animation Step.

The effect of the Integration Error is related to the size/mass of the object you are simulating.  So large wheels do fine with larger values.  This wheel is smaller and requires smaller values.  So there is not a correct default value for each sim.  The program allows for you to change these values based upon your need (gross visualization vs. exact analysis), the size of objects, and your CPU speed and patience.

In this case the Integration Error and Animation Step are just too high.  Since the sim process is iterative, it must calculate the positional change and forces due to one object at a time.  If it gets to object #7 (for example) and this causes a huge overlap with #1 that was calculated previously, you get crap results.  So you need smaller values as you increase the number of components as well.

As was stated several times, when you are narrowing in on a specific action or see something unexpected, always decrease the size of the Animation Step and Integration Error to increase sim accuracy and check your results.

M.

It's hard for me to say this but you are completely wrong.

[mondrasek]

Broli, that's a very provocative and otherwise pointless statement, wouldn't you agree?  If you have some knowledge to share, please do so.  I'm not into playing the "Yes it is!", "No it isn't!" argument game.

[persume]

It's good to have come this far but we have reached a point where Sjack must disclose his contraption already. Some numerous old farts can't even decipher Besslers wheels after decades of experience so I doubt we will see the light in here using wm2D  . I do agree on using the tools and technology of current times. It would be stupid to not use any hand drill for instance because Bessler didn't  . Or to not use computer simulation to optimize the device quickly.

Who are you calling an old fart? Just how old are you?