Yu oscillating Generator ---- Overunity YOG Model

[FreeEnergy]

@mscoffman,
Good point, although the step function does need to step forward to the travel direction. The “Y” configuration would save energy by another 50%.

Energy for 90 degrees is half the energy for 180 degrees.   


@All,
I want to share a test result that I did in the past. When I was running the YOG to get some data. I had planned on using end stops to keep the drive magnet from hitting my floor’s tile.

I was looking for something I can use as a damper, some thing I could use to absorb the excess kinetic energy. While I was digging through my garage hoping to find some stiff springs. I found two rubber bungee cords.

When I placed the rubber cords on both ends of the swing, above the floor to catch the lever. What happened was very comforting.

The lever ended up bouncing off the rubber cords increasing the speed of the YOG to a point where the servos would not keep up with the speeds. The drive magnet wasn’t able to turn fast enough and eventually smashed against the frame breaking off the drive magnet. It cost me a servo but was well worth it. Imaging what kind of speeds I could of achieved if only I had a faster servo.   

Cheers
Howard

[tinu]

...
I suggest you see the videos first. Then on the one cycle video ask yourself is their a gain from the magnetic array. This will be your foundation for argument with out getting past that point your arguments will have no relevance.

One cycle   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gekDM8vg16k
Gain video  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq5r08eqgsk

@Howard,

There is no energy gain.

The extra movement in the first movie comes from extra energy provided by your hand in form of potential magnetic energy when placing the lever with magnet at the starting point. This action requires from your side a significantly larger effort as when placing the lever without magnet, even if both levers are otherwise identical (i.e. having the same mass, size etc)

The extra movement in the second movie obviously comes from the batteries, through the electric motor (servo) that increases the same potential energy of magnet at the end of the lever in respect to the array of stationary magnets.

I appreciate your perseverance but I humbly suggest you to study potential energy, then magnetism and conservative fields. Examples of failed similar contraptions are plenty into this forum. Yours is similar with SMOT, which could not be properly understood by a certain “physics professor” that made our life miserably around here several years ago.

Cheers,
Tinu

[WattBuilder]

Tinu,

Your response is incorrect. I believe you have not made it past the point of the one cycle video.

How can you say I applied more energy positioning the lever of equal length and mass?

Especially when the gravitational potential energy is the same at the start point.

Have you even read the past post on this thread.

Howard

[tinu]

...
How can you say I applied more energy positioning the lever of equal length and mass?

Especially when the gravitational potential energy is the same at the start point.

...

Howard,

I say so because it is as simple as that.
The proof is in your hands yet I understand why your mind will reject it.

A simple experiment to provide anyone with the evidence: side-by-side place the two levers (both of equal mass and dimensions but one with and one without magnet) elastically hanging from the ceiling or from another appropriate support so that levers can both swing with ease in a vertical plane, like a simple pendulum, but they can not rotate around their axis. When preparing this simple setup, let the free end of the levers (and the magnet for the lever that has it) be approximately in the same position relative to the stationary array of magnets as it was when letting them oscillate from the starting point, as in your movies.
By conducting the above experiment you will see that, at equilibrium, the non-magnetic lever stays vertical (it simply hangs down) but the magnetic one is feeling repulsion from the stationary magnetic array and therefore it will prefer to stay away from the vertical and further from the stationary magnetic array.
Now push the magnetic lever so it becomes vertical, as the non-magnetic one. Here is most of the extra energy you need to provide (aware of it or not, you provide it all the time), energy that you can now feel it and see it, in the simplest and most practical way I could come up with. In reality the extra energy applied is higher than that.
In short and in order to reply to the second line also: gravitational potential energy is the same but magnetic potential energy is not, hence total potential energy is not the same. Because total potential energy is different (higher in the ‘magnetic case’), it is perfectly natural that the amplitude of oscillations is different.

Hit me if I wasn’t clear enough.
If it’s technically uncomfortable to prepare the above-suggested setup, I can come up with a similar test that would only require the proper adjustment of the counter-balance weight that is attached to the wheel.

A movie would be instructive and fun.

Cheers,
Tinu

[WattBuilder]

Tinu,
Your contradicting yourself.

In short and in order to reply to the second line also: gravitational potential energy is the same but magnetic potential energy is not, hence total potential energy is not the same. Because total potential energy is different (higher in the ‘magnetic case’), it is perfectly natural that the amplitude of oscillations is different.

In the one cycle video both levers are entering the array with the same amount of energy. The drive magnet is too far away from the array to make any difference at the start point. I guess this is when experience comes into play.

Before you suggest to the inventor, to study potential energy, then magnetism and conservative fields. I believe you should first.

If you did not see the video of OC’s great contribution post on this thread that he ask adminonduty to do. Here it is again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP_o1_jBUSM

The experiment you are requesting is has been done in a different way on the one cycle video. The trigger stick hold up the weight serves that purpose and also the tape mark where I used the clip to hold the pipe does as well.

Bottom line you get a gain from the magnetic array vs no array.   
If you need further proof you can at any time do these experiments yourself.

Howard