Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

@i_ron,

Just eyeball it...the power stroke can only be from 2:00 to
5:00, which is three (spaces on the clock face) where as the
returning weight has to travel through nine spaces. Where is
this free lunch coming from? I already pointed out that at 3:00
with a two to one ratio the outside weight (the driving power)
will lift nearly two left hand weights... but ONLY HALF the distance of the outside weight. So the left hand weight must
be made to travel two times its law of the lever distance!
where are you getting this input from?

This analysis is incorrect. I have shown how to analyze this properly: in this kind of wheel as Abeling's the center of mass is persistently to the right of the axle which makes it permanently unbalanced, always tending toward equilibrium but never reaching it. It's difficult to take advantage of this in practice because forces of friction counteract efficiently that tendency. The goal is to overcome this difficulty through skillful engineering and have the desired effect demonstrate itself.

And, again, don't expect the government to meet this with fanfares splashing it all over the internet. The opposite is expected to happen as has happened throughout the whole history -- hide it and suppress it, never to be heard again.

[Cloxxki]

And, again, don't expect the government to meet this with fanfares splashing it all over the internet. The opposite is expected to happen as has happened throughout the whole history -- hide it and suppress it, never to be heard again.

Sure? We have some serious wind mill parks. recently opened on on an articial island 10km out of the coast. Politics in The Netherlands are not too hot on coal and nuclear.
The mentioned gas energy plant sits on a pretty huge gas field BTW. I think if you're going to take it from the earth, you might as well make sure it's turned into energy the most efficient and clean way currently available. But that's for another topic to comment on.
If Abeling's idea works, then Dusty and Eisenficker are going to confirm it. I rate them just as high as Abeling technically, and the idea came to them for free, plus they have the luxury of this forum to feed them with advice. If it works, we'll need little time to establish WHY it works, and create some good open source alternatives, to avoid patent infringement. Abelings seems to have patented his construction, not the reason why it works. It may be a relatively simple formula he devised first (having been sought for centuries), and then built a machine around.
A moving lower ramp has been suggested before, to harness CF from the weight at 6:00. I suppose a directional shift would be needed to release that force later during the more vertical path of the weight. Then, it may not be necessary at all.
The tighter curve upwards is generating greater vertical speed than had the weight remained on the wheel, while at the same time saving on torque by taking the inside path. That's something.

[eisenficker2000]

I have done some old fashioned calculating, for a static situation, so no WM2D or sims just some AutoCAD geometry and vectors.

I have found a resulting torque, okay about the same as produced by the #3 weight (counting counterclockwise with the top weight as #1), but still it is there
So the wheel should start by itself if the friction is less then the calculated forces...

Torque calculated as in the  drawn state of the wheel.

Vectors calculated, constructed axial and radial to their tracks (white).
Radial Vectors translated to center of wheel (green).
Taken G=10 with weights of 27 grams.

L= length of arm(meters), F= Force (Newton), Clockwise = negative.
T= Torque (Newton meters)

1 L = 0.0687 m   F = 0.072 N  T = 0.0049464 NM
2 L = 0.0424 m  F = 0.231 N  T = 0.0097944 NM
3 L = 0.0319 m  F = 0.262 N  T = 0.0083558 NM
4 L = 0.0361 m  F = 0.216 N  T = 0.0077976 NM
5 L = 0.0556 m  F = 0.106 N  T = 0.0058936 NM
6 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.191 N  T =-0.0133700 NM
7 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.270 N  T =-0.0189000 NM   
8 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.191 N  T =-0.0133700 NM
            ----------+
             Total Torque =-0.0088522 NM   ---> Wheel starts Clockwise

[Omnibus]

@Cloxxki,

You’re assuming there’s a formula that has been sought for centuries but that’s exactly what powers that be are making you to believe (this idea is obvious and it very well may be that it has been accomplished many times in the past only to be suppressed) in order for them to push their inefficient nuclear power stations and wind mills, not to say the oil industry and patents enslaving everybody. What we’re talking about is the most anti-business, therefore, anti-patent and anti corporate as anything can get. Therefore the government will never in a million years encourage its development. What’s expected to happen if this turns out to be practically applicable is for the government to ban production of energy in this particular way â€" through perpetuum mobile â€" because it will destroy everything else, including the society as we know it. Drugs are banned this way, aren’t they? Anything has to be their way and nothing freeing you from their iron grip would ever be allowed. So, don’t give me these examples of what the good government is doing for the energy policy and don’t worry about patents. No patent can ever be endorsed by any agency of the powers that be unless you think they are stupid and love self-destruction. They are not.

[Omnibus]

@eisenficker2000,

Your calculation of the overall torque differs slightly from that of @mondrasek and I think yours is the correct one. When finding the component of the force perpendicular to the arm to calculate the torque @mondrasek uses in all cases the total weight if the sphere. You are first decomposing that weight into two components one of which is the vector tangential to the track. It is this component from which you then find out the component perpendicular to the arm. This is the right way to do it because, indeed, if the sphere is left on its own it will slide along the track under the action of the tangential component of the weight.

It would be really useful if you can write a script to carry out these calculations automatically so that you can observe the result at the different positions of the wheel. That would be a really valuable proof for the viability of the device and can be compared quantitatively with the other, even simpler test, revealing the persistent sideways shift of the mass center with respect to the axis of rotation. At this point wm2d can give very easily results from that latter test for the different positions of the wheel and it makes it a really valuable tool in this respect.