Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

@mondrasek,

This will not change the main conclusion but will be good to see a sketch.

I think @eisenficker2000's method is correct because the only thing that matters is the direction of the effective weight. If no track is present the effective weight vector would be the initial weight of the sphere and to obtain the acting vector on the arm we need to multiply it only by the sinus of the angle between the weight vector itself and the arm.

In our case here the effective weight vector is less than the actual weight and this decrease is only determined by the track (the ramp), not the slots. The slots provide only the point of application of the said vectors. The ramp is the piece that does the job of ensuring persistence of the negative torque throughout the whole turn. The method of analysis used is OK.

Recall I turned you attention to that difference between your analysis and that of @eisenficker2000 and mentioned that his is the correct one.

[weri812]

hello all
@mondrasek
saw video if  you can add a 9th arm and  make shure that you have 5 ball  right of center line should  turn clock wise. and keep going?

lots of luck   great info.

God Bless
wer

[Omnibus]

hello all
@mondrasek
saw video if  you can add a 9th arm and  make shure that you have 5 ball  right of center line should  turn clock wise. and keep going?

lots of luck   great info.

God Bless
wer

@mondrasek's video is a reply to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-dT4MZCtYo&feature=channel_page I posted, showing apparent perpetuum mobile. @mondrasek's is at two orders of magnitude lower integration limits and smaller animation step. Both videos are to be discarded because they use wm2d. The approximation methods and who knows what else which wm2d applies make it unsuitable for such simulations.

The only use wm2d may have is to demonstrate directly the persistent sideways position of the center of mass with respect to the axis of rotation for all positions of the wheel. This is a definitive proof that the wheel in question is a perpetuum mobile. This fact is corroborated explicitly by the other rigorous scientific method we are using recently -- calculating the net torque at every position of the wheel. the net torque turns out to be always negative at any position of the wheel, a result in full concordance with the previously mentioned persistent mass-axle discrepancy. Now reality of gravity based perpetuum mobile should be considered established. Similar phenomena govern perpetuum mobile based on the use of magnets. The discussed here case is more interesting in many ways which seem to be obvious. What remains now is to find ways to optimize the effect so that a practical machine based on this principle can be built (as it probably has been in the past but has been suppressed).

[weri812]

hello!!!! Omnibus

man you just blew me away.
but  i can take a licking and keep on ticking

that was a very good info.

keep up the good work  and i will just keep reading.

God Bless
wer

[mondrasek]

Well this is just annoying.  I've re-done the torque vector analysis of the 20 degree rotation (correctly this time) and it did NOT resolve to zero like I expected.  So this wheel design must also have an equilibrium point.  Not sure why, since I thought this resolved to an ideal case because of taking reactive torques from the center of each weight.  Maybe it is because of the multiple angles used in the slots?

Here is the corrected diagram and resultant torques:

1. 0.0700000m    -0.092345N    -0.0064642Nm
2. 0.0700000m    -0.244703N    -0.0171292Nm
3. 0.0700000m    -0.253717N    -0.0177602Nm
4. 0.0677295m    -0.024431N    -0.0016547Nm
5. 0.0446039m   +0.214698N    +0.0095764Nm
6. 0.0325295m   +0.247852N    +0.0080625Nm
7. 0.0341605m   +0.294555N    +0.0100621Nm
8. 0.0534965m   +0.304625N    +0.0162964Nm

Net Torque = +0.0009891Nm  --> Wheel starts Counter Clockwise