Overunity.com Archives

Drawings to follow.

Please mirror if you can.

Thanks,

M.

Remove the .txt extension and then use HJ-split to join the four pieces.

M.

#2

#3

#4

Hey mondrasek. Sounds interesting.  :)

I'll download the pics and read the doc when I get home. The hjsplit files give me a "violation of compressed documents" notice when I try to download them at work.  >:(

shakman

Shakman,

Well thanks for trying.  You wont be disappointed.  Hopefully someone will put it together and host it by then.

M.

Same problem here. When I join the files together the resulting zip file cannot be decompressed.
Specific error in WinZip is "invalid compressed data to inflate"

Freddy

Hmm.  I just re-assembled with HJsplit and can open fine.  You have all 4 pieces?  You have removed the .txt extension from all so it ends in only .001, .002, etc?

If so, someone teach me how to upload more than 100 kb!

Thanks,

M.

Yes - I did that exactly - I also re-downloaded twice and did it again - very strange - I would really like to view the file. - why not upload to a free file hosting site or something - there are lots of them.

Freddy

I'll e-mail to anyone who wants them.

WTF is Clanzer when I need him?

M.

You could use a free file service like: http://www.savefile.com/ and post the link

(I just googled "free file host")

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 05:29:06 PM

If so, someone teach me how to upload more than 100 kb!

Thanks,

M.

Hi,

Here is the upload link for this Forum for max 5MB files:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=upload

Could you try it?

thanks,  Gyula

I uploaded Gravity Motor.zip under the Subject "Gravity Motor Patent"

Hope it works.

Hey, the wife and kids are home so I might not be able to respond quickly from now on.

Thanks,

M

Looks interesting...do you have a working prototype?

Freddy

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 05:57:02 PM
I uploaded Gravity Motor.zip under the Subject "Gravity Motor Patent"

Hope it works.

Hey, the wife and kids are home so I might not be able to respond quickly from now on.

Thanks,

M

OK, it works now,  thanks. 

Are you aware of someone's built it successfully already?

Gyula

I built enought to prove it works to myself (mech engineer with 20+ year experience, 15+ in robotics).  I don't have the tools to test or optimize the design and playing with stuff in my garage would just delay getting it into the hands of those who have the tools.  Someone with software that models kinimatics and magnetics would model and prove this in less that 4 hours I'd guess.  Hopefully it will be done by the end of the weekend.

M.

Ehm...could you give a link to the people that don't know where the hell this subject is.

Someone help.  I don't even know where it's posted. 

Sorry for not being an expert in this forum stuff.  I normally just troll and (rarely) post, not upload.

M.

BROLI its at the top of the page click on his paper clip

Quote from: broli on July 11, 2008, 06:23:37 PM
Ehm...could you give a link to the people that don't know where the hell this subject is.

I think this will take you there:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl

delete

I hope this patent is a joke. Not that it's a bad idea but it's probably the most general gravity+magnet wheel. It seems to me you just made the patent up just to be on the safe side if someone decides to have a go. You greedy little critter.

Greedy? 

I have not slept well since I concepted this on July 2.  I have been sick to my stomach ever since. 

A patent is the best way to get serious attention and I forced it through (with my own money) in just 9 days.

Why?  Every water pump that uses this device will be allowed without license fees.  So will any other humanitarian device.

For the rest of the world:  Free electricity, hydrogen, locomotion.  Imagine de-salinization plants on the coast running with no power requirements, pumping fresh water anywhere inland with no more cost than to build and maintain.

There goes you electric, heating and cooling costs.

Also, why stay with AC when every structure can have it's own DC Gravity Motor/Generator supply?  That eliminates fire and elctrocution hazards.

The end of greenhouse warming?  Anyone?

The world will change immensly in the next few years.

And this device works not only on Earth, but any heavenly body.

It is part of the puzzle to exploring the Universe.  (But not the way to get there)

Yes I want some money.  I want to take my wife and kids on vacation.

So do you.

M.

mondrasek

Welcome to the forum and thanks for being open like you are. But being someone who has built several wheels see a typical flaw in your design. Each time each magnet going over the bottom magnet it will hit what a lot of the people here call a wall and each time it hits it will slow it down till stop. You also have to look at what kind of power you can get out of it if you can overcome the wall. A toy? permanent magnets would have to bee absolutely huge to be of any use for power and what I also see that you would not be able to take it to outer space and have it run for its only possible movement is still gravity. Only a straight magnet motor will be of use by its self if one can be done.

Won't work in outerspace.  I agree.  It's a gravity motor, right? 

You can make the wheel as big as required to add enough mass switches to overcome the stator "wall".

Also, when you replace the stator magnets with electro magnets that only fire in the optimum possition you eliminate the "wall".

Thanks,

M.

mondrasek

I myself work with mostly mechanical gravity wheels, I am also helping another person known here as itsblockdog with another gravity/magnet motor. I would have been done with it but I have been very sick of late, and I still have other doctor appointments. So it may take me another week to finish what I have in the works.

@ mondrasek

Looks cool mate. Good work!

I think the greater the weight you can shift with this relative to the weight of the wheel itself, the greater the torque will be. I could be wrong there but I imagine a wheel shifting 30kgs would outperform one shifting 3kgs.

In figure 8 it appears that the Stator magnet at 12 o'clock moves with the wheel. There is not indication of separation. I assume this is something you missed in your rush. This is something you might want to clear up with the patent office.

If you do have a stationary section around the axle which can hold magnets, ala Archer Quinn's first prototype with the stationary clock face, you would be able to have an inner and outer stator magnet at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock so that you had a "push-pull" action on the magnets inside the guide tubes. Then you could potentially use two magnets either side of a weight within the guide tube.

I've just illustrated this. I hope I'm not repeating anyone. I started typing this then realised I should really illustrate what I am saying for absolute clarity.

Sorry if I missed any important details. Let me know if I have and I will add them.

Cheers,

shakman

Look to be a good design. I only skimmed through your patent.. What are the sideways v shape magnet blockers made from  and of course they move when the magnets hit them.But how do they move exactly?



edit -- In a large scale running at low RPM. I can see this providing a hell of a lot of torque.

Shakmen,

Great illustration but one big problem:  There can be NO PULLING MAGNETS!  Magnets have magnitudes of power more force than gravity.  Gravity will never overcome the attractive force of a magnet that has attratively captured it's target.  This is the flaw of A. Quinn's and many other designs.

Please remove the attracting magnets.

And thank you for your assistance.

Australia is one of the places on my wife and mine's places to visit.  Hope to meet some day.

M.

By stator the patent means not moving relative to the rotor (wheel 50).  Yes the drawing does not show a support structure, but the stator magnets are not rotating.

The latches I made were from brass strips super-glued (CA'd) to an aluminum tube.  Both came from a hobby shop.

Thanks for finally chiming in guys!

M.

Definitely a low speed design.  Torque scaling is by either increasing the wheel size or by putting multiple wheels on a common shaft or gearing them together.  It is completely scaleable.

M.

PS.  Thought this board was only full of nay-sayers up until now!

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 09:56:16 PM
By stator the patent means not moving relative to the rotor (wheel 50).  Yes the drawing does not show a support structure, but the stator magnets are not rotating.

The latches I made were from brass strips super-glued (CA'd) to an aluminum tube.  Both came from a hobby shop.

Thansk for finally chiming in guys!

M.

Just flexible brass strips? I see this running well at Low RPMs.. But I see it having some issues of centrifugal forces at high rpms.. Nice job so far.. Hopefully you or someone else will try to make a working model of this.

--edit your were writing your last post while I was writing this one..

I have been working with magnet motors for many years and while I admire your efforts at making the patent application, I honestly cannot see how your design is any different from the very basic magnet-assisted gravity wheel, which is an idea that has been around for a long time.
I'm not trying to be a nay-sayer, I am only saying that your design isn't so new.
In fact, a colleague of mine showed me one very like it, sometime before the year 2000.

Of course you have found a way to overcome frictional losses when the magnets are sliding in their tubes.

I should also say, get some sleep, man. Calm down. People have been working on this for literally hundreds of years, a few hours isn't going to make or break it. Get some sleep.

Hmm.. the more I look at it the more I like it.. Perhaps you can use magnetic and centrifugal force to control the latching to be used at high rpms?

The latch arms are not flexible.  They are pivoting around an axel.  Only the top arm will enter the tube.  It is positioned this way due to gravity.  When the mass switch is inverted gravity causes the other latch to enter the tube.  It works great on my simple builds, though I assume there are better engineering solutions for a full scale power turbine replacement (or home gernerator unit).

Centrifical force is not a problem because this is a low speed device.  Very much like a large wind tubine spins slowly. 

If you need to drive a high RPM devie like an AC generator you would attach the output shaft to a planetory or other gear set to spin up the RPMs just like in a big wind generator. 

I dont see the main gravity motor wheels spinning more than 33 RPM.

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 10:17:31 PM

Centrifical force is not a problem because this is a low speed device.  Very much like a large wind tubine spins slowly. 

If you need to drive a high RPM devie like an AC generator you would attach the output shaft to a planetory or other gear set to spin up the RPMs just like in a big wind generator. 

I dont see the main gravity motor wheels spinning more than 33 RPM.

M.

Oh definitely.. I concur and understand fully.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 09:52:07 PM
Shakmen,
Great illustration but one big problem:  There can be NO PULLING MAGNETS!  Magnets have magnitudes of power more force than gravity.  Gravity will never overcome the attractive force of a magnet that has attratively captured it's target.  This is the flaw of A. Quinn's and many other designs.

Please remove the attracting magnets.

M.

Hey mate, glad you're still kicking. I was worried your next post would be from hospital after your last few posts over on Archer's thread.

I am aware of said issues. Did you notice however that I turned them on an angle to reduce their affect? Wouldn't this combat this problem? I'm not claiming to know the answer to that, I'm just asking. I would have thought this would do the trick....

To answer my own question - you are right if it is running at low speed. I didn't think about the wind-up speed when the wheel is moving slowly. But if the wheel can be wound up to speed first or the magnets added in once the motor is turning full speed I imagine this would be okay...? This could help combat the problems with centrifugal forces that Rasta pointed out. Then you might be able to have a high speed motor  ;D I guess it will all come down to trial and error. I was expecting a delivery of some magnets yesterday but they never turned up  :( But I should be able to do some testing next week.

As for the naysayers.. don't worry they'll be here. They remind me of one of my favorite movie quotes (paraphrased slightly) "If you (start to) build it, they will come".  :-\

Anyway, it's the weekend here and I've spent far too much time on the PC already. PM me if you want me to send you an edited version - just list the changes you want to make (i.e. remove the pulling mags).

shakman

Every hour lost is another hour that a child dies of disentary or some other disease because they did not have clean water.

Not trying to put anyone down.

We need to focus on this.

This is important.

Do you know anyone at a university or institution with the tools to begin modeling and making this happen?  If not, do you know anyone who does?  Are they asleep right now?


Wake them up.

Thanks again for getting on board.

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 09:52:07 PM
Shakmen,

Great illustration but one big problem:  There can be NO PULLING MAGNETS!  Magnets have magnitudes of power more force than gravity.  Gravity will never overcome the attractive force of a magnet that has attratively captured it's target.  This is the flaw of A. Quinn's and many other designs.

Please remove the attracting magnets.

And thank you for your assistance.

Australia is one of the places on my wife and mine's places to visit.  Hope to meet some day.

M.

Hey M!

Finally another engineer! Someone I can talk detailed concepts with and not have to cover the basics around every corner. Sorry I have not had the time to drop by. Been a lil busy elsewhere.

Anyways, I'd like to introduce myself. I am PurePower, and I will likely be your toughest critic. However, my criticisms are never meant to discourage, only point out errors so they may be addressed.

I felt it necessary to make this known from the start. AQ does not understand the concept of "constructive criticism" and continually let's emotion deter the discussion. If we can get past that, I think I may be helpful.

Unfortunatly, I am unable to view the files at this time. However, reading off other peoples posts, I think your problem (if any) will be the magnets. AB hammer gave a pretty good explanation. I have a post on AQs wheel that I will try to find later you may find valueable. I dont want to say too much on the issue as I have not read your personal description yet.

As far as trying to find a potential builder, I would ask "batman," "Newtonian god," or "clanzer." All three have very good shops and would probably help (especially clanz).

-PurePower

PS you might want to have a little "no mudslinging" policy so this doesnt turn into AQs thread. I see you are already catching grief for being greedy. My guess is they want to see you fail because you are educated and dont claim things they cant/dont understand are wrong. You might get the attention you are looking for if you rant about the powers that be and call everyone a moron...

lol,, might not want to call people morons to get your point across.. I for one see a definite potential with your design.. No doubt in my mind that it will turn.  :)

If you really need to get it built right away in order to get some sleep, why not run down to your local high school with a shop class? They are always looking for interesting projects, and from the drawing and the patent description it should be really easy to build. Most cities have a "hobbytown" chain store where you can get the magnets you need, and the materials are easy to come by.
I'd build it myself, but none of my motors ever seem to work.

Shakman,

The up pulling magnets would stop the wheel dead.  If an up pulling magnet is close enough to atract another mangnet and pull it up it is already stronger than the gravety pulling that target magnet down.  Once the pulling magnet has it's target and starts to lift it (slightly more force than gravity) it with increase in force exponentialy as the two become closer.  So the pulling magnet will grasp and HOLD the other magnet with many times greater force than gravity.  THIS WAS THE FLAW IN A. QUINN'S CONCEPT AND MANY OTHERS.

My design relies on the "mass switch".  This is the basic concept.  The repulsive magnetic force is needed to move the mass "up the hill".  But only in one switch at a time.  The mechanical latch holds it "up the hill".  And we can add as many switches to the wheel as needed until the wheel imbalance overcomes the "wall" of the stator magnets. 

The mass swithc (as I call it), in any form (simeple, improved, or yet to be discovered) is the "missing link".

M.

Quote from: purepower on July 11, 2008, 10:22:41 PM
Hey M!

Finally another engineer! Someone I can talk detailed concepts with and not have to cover the basics around every corner. Sorry I have not had the time to drop by. Been a lil busy elsewhere.
...
PS you might want to have a little "no mudslinging" policy so this doesnt turn into AQs thread. I see you are already catching grief for being greedy. My guess is they want to see you fail because you are educated and dont claim things they cant/dont understand are wrong. You might get the attention you are looking for if you rant about the powers that be and call everyone a moron...

Let ye who have not sinned throw the first stone.
Oops, too late PP. You've already come on hear to insult my intellect.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 10:34:39 PM
...
Once the pulling magnet has it's target and starts to lift it (slightly more force than gravity) it with increase in force exponentialy as the two become closer.  So the pulling magnet will grasp and HOLD the other magnet with many times greater force than gravity. 
...
M.

Aha, that makes perfect sense now.
I'd still like to tinker with this concept to try to get it working fast thought ;)  Where are my magnets!?!?!  >:(
Here ya go. I've made the updates as requested.

Last post for the day***

shakman

***unless I hit "Post" then read something that gets my nose out of joint

EDIT: Needs a bit of work with positioning at 12 and 6. PM me the rest of the changes and I'll sort it out by Monday at the latest.

Please understand my immediate goal.  I am trying to get this into the hands of every company, worldwide, that has the capability and desire to develop solutions.  It is already in the posesion of my (previous?) employers since they agree that it is my own invention and they would have to contract with me to produce a sellable product.

This device has too many humanitarian applications not to distribute as quickly as possible to every engineering  and manufacturing firm that can optimze and produce solutions.

Please forward to any and every contact that you have in these types of organizations.

The patent pending status means it is disclosed to the world.  Everyone can investigate and develop, even build usefull devices at home.  The only limitation is they cannot sell to others unless we have an agreement.

I will agree to wave any fees fot the use of this patent for any water pump that does not then create power from the pumped water.  And any other humanitariany device presented to me.

Thanks,

M.

Hi M.

Sorry I replied to you in the wrong thread ( AQ's ) , To be short : any videos ? a youtube account where they will be posted ??
I'm talking about showing the principle with your 4 arms prototype.
Device looks great!

Thanks

Quote from: mondrasek on July 11, 2008, 10:49:37 PM
Please understand my immediate goal.  I am trying to get this into the hands of every company, worldwide, that has the capability and desire to develop solutions.  It is already in the posesion of my (previous?) employers since they agree that it is my own invention and they would have to contract with me to produce a sellable product.

This device has too many humanitarian applications not to distribute as quickly as possible to every engineering  and manufacturing firm that can optimze and produce solutions.

Please forward to any and every contact that you have in these types of organizations.

The patent pending status means it is disclosed to the world.  Everyone can investigate and develop, even build usefull devices at home.  The only limitation is they cannot sell to others unless we have an agreement.

I will agree to wave any fees fot the use of this patent for any water pump that does not then create power from the pumped water.  And any other humanitariany device presented to me.

Thanks,

M.

All fine and dandy.. But the only way to get this in the hands of everyone would be to make a working prototype no matter how small and then get it on your local tv station, then national, then cable and so forth.. It is not going to all happen instantly.

Shakman,

That's it.  Perfect.

We need to make sure everyone knows the design with the ultimat effiency is one where the stator magnets are electromagnet coills that are pulsed only when the "mass switch" magnets are in the proper orientation (ie, directly vertical and therfeore past the "wall").  This should give us close to a 95% conversion of gravitational force to rotational torque with good axel bearings {magnetic} and electromagnet wires and circuits (supercondutors).

But who cares about efficiency if the input source (mass effect, errr... Gravity) is free?  That is unless you have to carry the thing all the way to the moon where it will make only 1/6 the power as on Earth?

Are you feeling me yet?

I also need to sign off.

Hope to see you in the morning, but I have to watch the baby while the Missus is at work in the AM.

Thanks for restoring my faith.

M.

I just had another careful look at your documents. It is clear that the wheel is an overbalanced wheel of the standard variety. It is not a magnet motor, as the magnets do not provide any propulsive force. The magnet interactions only move the moving magnets, acting as weights, from the inner position to the outer and back. The wheel itself is rotated by the asymmetry in weight. So the new part of your patent (you believe) is the fact that the weight-shift is from magnets in repulsion, and using the magnets themselves as weights.  Yes? Am I understanding this?
Well, gravity wheels of simple (which this one is) and complex design have been around for a long long time, and nobody, except Besseler and Archer Quinn, has made one work yet.
So what you have illustrated for us in your documents is, if anything, a new and novel magnetic way to make a wheel that is already known not to work.

But please, build it and prove me wrong. CLaNZeR loves this stuff, wait till he gets home and I'll bet he'll put one together in an afternoon. Maybe he'll be able to get it to work.

But I don' t think so.

"We need to make sure everyone knows the design with the ultimat effiency is one where the stator magnets are electromagnet coills that are pulsed only when the "mass switch" magnets are in the proper orientation"

Now it has become an electromagnetic pulse motor!!!
I know you are having us on. This is just too much. Cut it out. Serious people are trying to get work done here.

Silly question, but don't you need a working model of an invention to be granted a patent?  This design does seem very 'general' in nature to me, so it is kind of hard to believe it hasn't already been tried and found not to work (think we'd have heard if the opposite had been the case!)...

btw, I still think AQ is the best hope for getting this wheel-type demonstrably working anytime soon.  Obviously can't speak for the man, but the 'flaw' you allude to in his design involving the top permanent magnets' 'wall' was shown in his videos to have been 'nulled' sufficiently by the use of the extension rods to be a non-event.  Also, it is more financial than technical difficulties that has delayed the building of a working wheel...

He got a Provisional Patent.. So he has 12 months to produce that.. hmm.. Makes you wonder ,eh.. Sneaky.

Quote from: therealrasta on July 12, 2008, 02:32:21 AM
He got a Provisional Patent.. So he has 12 months to produce that.. hmm.. Makes you wonder ,eh.. Sneaky.

Just to clarify what a Provisional Patent actually is:

A provisional patent application allows filing without any formal patent claims, oath or declaration, or any information disclosure (prior art) statement (1). It provides the means to establish an early effective filing date in a non-provisional patent application (2). It also allows the term "Patent Pending" to be applied.

You can read more about Provisional Patents here:
http://inventors.about.com/od/provisionalpatent/a/Provisional_Pat.htm (http://inventors.about.com/od/provisionalpatent/a/Provisional_Pat.htm)

The patent includes the base technology: the "mass switch".  This is unique because it moves the mass (in this case the perminant magnets in the non-ferous guide tubes) from one location to another across the length of the guide tube.  The mass then stays in the relocated position without any adiditional force required.  The switch is made using a switching force (sideways repulsive force, known as the"wall" when the stators are perminant magnets) that does not increase.  Yet the output torque of the wheel due to gravity and the overbalance can be increased by increasing the number of mass switches on the wheel and/or the diameter of the wheel itself.  Therefore it is alway possible to make a wheel with enough overbalance to overcome the switching force.

This is the first gravity motor that actually works that I know of.  Isn't that unique enough?  If not, I'll be out the ~$3000US in patent attorney and filing fees due at the end of the month.

If you replace the perminant stator magnets with pulsed elctromagnets (bleeding off some power generated from the gravity driven rotational torque) you eliminate the repulsive "wall" of the simpler design that uses perminant magnet stator magnets.  This actually improves the power efficiency.

A pulsed magnetic stator made of semiconducing materials is theoretically a loss-less device.  When turned on the curent rushes into the ciol and creates a magnetic field.  Once saturated the magnetic field requires no more current.  When turned off the magnetic field collapses through the coil creating an equal amount of current to when the field was created.  This current can be reclaimed with the proper circuit design. 

Using an electro magnet to accelerate a perminant magnet up a mass switch guide tube takes no more current than if the perminant magnet was not being accelerated.  The magnetic field of the perminant magnet is what accelerates it up the guide tube when the electromagnetic stator becomes charged with an opposing magnetic field.

Mondrasek, what kind of feedback have you gotten from your patent attorney?

Specifically, does your patent attorney want a piece of the action?

It sounds like you have a working prototype. Correct?

If so, how long has it been running?

How much power is it putting out?

Where can we see photos and video?

Quote from: Newtonian God on July 12, 2008, 03:31:31 AM
Mondrasek, what kind of feedback have you gotten from your patent attorney?

Specifically, does your patent attorney want a piece of the action?

It sounds like you have a working prototype. Correct?

If so, how long has it been running?

How much power is it putting out?

Where can we see photos and video?

He does not have one.. He wants us to build one.. He said he has done some experiments and believes it works. He needs us to build one. So he can use that as proof of his design...........

My pattent attorneys were just as amazed at the concept as every other engineer I have told.  And I brought them one of the improved mass switches to play with.

No, I don't have a working prototype.  The first magnets I ordered were only 1/4 inch diameter by 1/4 inch long.  I received 24 but don't think they have enough mass to overcome the switching "wall" in only a 24 mass switch arrangment.  I would likely have to make the wheel with many more mass switches of this size to overcome the repulsive force.  This would take and waste time.  I am confident enough with the small build that I completed to file the patent in order to get the design out to those who have modeling software that could optimize the design for a given magnet mass and force.

I do not have the tools to optimize the design.  I am playing with tiny N45 magnets.  An optimized design might show that much larger and weaker magnets are the way to go.

The electromagnet stator idea is beyond my ability to calculate (I'm a mechanical engineer, not electrical or magnetics) or build.

I work for a technology company who's parent company's core technology is electric motors and invertors.  They have been sent the patent first.  I am posting here in the hopes of getting parallel development leading to usable devices faster.

I have friends at work who have forwarded the patent to contacts at Universities and in industry as well.  I was hoping that others here would do the same.  Those "skilled in the art" will see that this design works.  If they have the tools and time they will model it in software.  Making a toy in my garage is still something I want to do, but not at the expense of delaying work by others on actual producs such as the water pump.

Oh using an electromagnet now aren't we...Let's see where that idea has been suggested before. Oh yeah I did a while back!

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4769.msg100143.html#msg100143

Which in turn was inspired by our beloved archer and his replicators.

Look I don't have a problem with you or your invention. If it works kudos! But I have a problem with your patent. If it's money you want you'll get plenty of it, if it runs that is...and you won't need a patent for that. And you get all the credits in the world for making it run. But having a patent on it makes you evil in my eyes and makes you deserve shit. How many times do I have to use the same preach on people about patents. When will they get it. When will they let lose of their greed.

If this doesn't run you'll not even get a second look my friend. Because people won't trust you anymore. The next time people help you with an idea they fear you turn in the greedy devil and just try to patent everything you can as soon as possible. And spare me "I want to have a vacation with my family" bullshit. Give the world what it deserves or go fuck off. This place is called a FREE ENERGY forum for a reason and not "please replicate my PATENT PENDING idea because I want to use you guys for my own benefit." forum.

The energy is still free.  Regardless of the patent, any device that uses the technology will come with a price tag.  I will ask for a tiny portion of the profits that any manufacturer of these devices makes.  It in now way hurts you, the recipient of free electricity for lighting, heating, cooling, and other conveniences.  Nor does my patent and subsequent wealth impead the reduction in greenhouse emisions and other pollutions.  It also does not impede the development of any humanitarian devices that others will still profit from, but I will forgo.

The patent is the fastest way to get the attention of the institutions that can develop the technology quickest.

I am not asking for replication.  I want the attention of the institutions that can develp this technology.  I was hoping this forum could start a buzz.  I was also hoping some that are "skilled in the art" and have an interest would have a go at it.  The motive is only to expedite getting this technology into the world where we can all benefit from it.

You see this is where you and I differ. Your vision has already been tainted with greed before even having a working model. This is the failure of most inventors.

Well you better hurry up and come up with a working prototype before the deadline.. Also you might want to do some vast research and make sure no one has come up with any similar ideas and posted them online before your provisional patent was filed.. If so.. Its public source. Anyways..People can still build it without your consent as long as they do not profit from it.


edit -- And how much value will this have once a fast rpm magnet motor is released open source.. Where tons of companies can develop/sell it without paying a dime to anyone. Some are in the works and seem to have a good chance to work..

I had two paths to chose from:

1)  Try to make a working device in my garage, through experimentation, without adequate tools or measuring equipment for relatively cheap.  This could have taken weeks or months.
2)  Spend ~$3000US of my own money to have a patent drawn up and released immediately so that individuals or institutions with the correct tools could engineer the optimized solutions and begin devloping products today.

I would and will get paid either way.  Greed was not the motive.  Expediency was.

I could barely get anyone to listen to the idea since it sounds very crazy until you see the diagrams.  Once I was able to show people my contract with the lawyers and now the patent app, they listen.

If someone has already released something similar to the public, I am out my $3000.  That was an easy risk to take compared to the guilt of not expiditing this technology for the humanitarian applications.

I welcome people to build it!  I still plan to work on mine when I can.  But having a full time job and our first baby at home keeps me from doing so quicker than anyone who has the proper equipment.  I was lucky my boss agreed to let me work on the patent app at work so I didn't have to take vacation days to get it processed so quickly.

Again, I am not in it for the money, though that posability is also not being avoided.

If someone has a better way now or in the near future I am out ~$3000.  Wouldn't you risk that in order to expedite gravity operated water pumps to the world?

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 05:43:47 AM
If someone has already released something similar to the public, I am out my $3000.  That was an easy risk to take compared to the guilt of not expiditing this technology for the humanitarian applications.

I welcome people to build it!  I still plan to work on mine when I can.  But having a full time job and our first baby at home and those things keep me from doing so quicker than anyone who has the proper equipment.  I was lucky my boss agreed to let me work on the patent app at work so I didn't have to take vacation days to get it processed so quickly.

My understanding is that you have a certain amount of time to release a prototype and when that time is gone anyone can file a patient on the same thing.. Or perhaps your findings just become open source since you already posted it to the public.. Best way to release something is open source to about 50 websites at the same time if your worried about it getting to the people that need it the most..

I have one year to file the final patent.

Please to help by posting on those other 49 web sites!

I have an e-mail campain sending this to every institution, scholar, and tech geek my work friends can think of.  I posted here.  I haven't been able to get an account working on Steorn or Fizzx.  I have sent a message to Pure Energy Systems.  I have PM'd Clanzer.  Other suggestions?

If you have accounts on any other relavant boards, please post the link to the patent app or upload there.

Truely, my focus was on releasing as quickly as possible.  I only came up with the idea for the simple mass switch on July 2.  Prototyping and experiments lead me to the improved design over the weekend, and I built as much of a prototype as I could on Sunday.  Monday morning was spent trying to get any attorneys to talk to me so that I could get the patent app out and be taken seriously.  I was only able to get an appointment after going to the president of my company and he asked our lead councel to see me as a personal favor.

I didn't think getting it distributed would be a problem.  I thought it would spread like wild fire.  And it still may be, just in the e-mail world.  My net release is obviosly not going so well.  But I'm an Engineer, not a marketing specialist.

Thanks,

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 05:52:36 AM
I have one year to file the final patent.

Please to help by posting on those other 49 web sites!

I have an e-mail campain sending this to every institution, scholar, and tech geek my work friends can think of.  I posted here.  I haven't been able to get an account working on Steorn or Fizzx.  I have sent a message to Pure Energy Systems.  Other suggestions?

If you have accounts on any other relavant boards, please post the link to the patent app.or upload there.

Thanks,

M.

Thats your job to make a working prototype and advertise.. You should be doing that as fast as you can.. Seeing your trying to make money off this.. Seriously, you should be able to design and construct a working prototype of this easily if you already made the latches, and such. You said you demonstrated that to the patent lawyers and some engineers, if I remember correctly. 

Hi Mondrasek

Just looked at your design and like it :) well done.

I have a couple of concerns

1.) The strength and size of the magnets needed to get the rotor magnet to the correct height and past the latch. The bigger the magnets the greater the entrance wall will be when approaching the stator magnet.

2.) The latches will need to be balanced correctly, so they fall back in place at the exact moment to get in place for holding the rotor magnet.

Will try find some time to have a play today and post back

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 12, 2008, 06:16:48 AM
Hi Mondrasek

Just looked at your design and like it :) well done.

I have a couple of concerns

1.) The strength and size of the magnets needed to get the rotor magnet to the correct height and past the latch. The bigger the magnets the greater the entrance wall will be when approaching the stator magnet.

2.) The latches will need to be balanced correctly, so they fall back in place at the exact moment to get in place for holding the rotor magnet.

Will try find some time to have a play today and post back

Cheers

Sean.

Well this guy is your guy here.. I have seen some stuff he has done..Always looks top notch in quality.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 05:25:10 AM
The patent is the fastest way to get the attention of the institutions that can develop the technology quickest.

The fastest way to get the attention of the so called "institutions" is to show them a working prototype!

If you are looking for financial investors, than yes, a patent is what they are going to want in order to protect their investment. If this is the route that you are going then good luck to you...maybe we'll see you in a few years...but I doubt it. The patent process is slooooooooooow...and it derails many good ideas.

If you have discovered the key to free energy, and if you are really concerned about saving people that are dying of starvation today, tomorrow, and the next day, then lay your cards on the table and show us what you have now! Don't worry, the money will come as soon as you show the world how to build a working perpetual motion machine and you will go down in history as the greatest inventor of all time. But you had better hurry, Archer Quinn is almost there....but you can still steal his thunder!

Quote from: Newtonian God on July 12, 2008, 06:52:11 AM
The fastest way to get the attention of the so called "institutions" is to show them a working prototype!

If you are looking for financial investors, than yes, a patent is what they are going to want in order to protect their investment. If this is the route that you are going then good luck to you...maybe we'll see you in a few years...but I doubt it. The patent process is slooooooooooow...and it derails many good ideas.

If you have discovered the key to free energy, and if you are really concerned about saving people that are dying of starvation today, tomorrow, and the next day, then lay your cards on the table and show us what you have now! Don't worry, the money will come as soon as you show the world how to build a working perpetual motion machine and you will go down in history as the greatest inventor of all time. But you had better hurry, Archer Quinn is almost there....but you can still steal his thunder!

Maybe you should read the whole thread newtonian moron. The principle is quite clear to make a build out of.

Prototypes are rarely not modeled in software programs first.  The prototype is then built to work out real world bugs.

As Clanzer has stated, there is a relationship between mass, strength and the repulsive "wall" force that needs to be balanced for an optimal or even working design.  Variables include magnet size, shape, strength, positioning and speed of the wheel (centrifical force).  Modeling software would show solutions much faster than trial and error.  If I had that type of software and/or expertise in these fields so that I could calculate expected results, I would.  That is why we are sending to every scientist, institution, individual, we know by e-mail.  I ask that you do the same.

Clanzer, my 1/4 dia 1/4 long N45 magnets are in guide tubes made of rolled up 8.5 x 11 paper.  The OAL is 8.5.  I can easily "shoot" the magnets well past the latch.  I recommend making your guide tubes a bit shorter than the maximum you think you can.  Then just lower the stator magnets until you have only the needed firing force.  This minimizes the repulsive force.  FYI they will hover another magnet approximately 30mm.  But I think bigger, less strong magnets are the way to go with a mechanical set up.  With electromagnet stator magnets anything is possible.

Fore everyone's reference:  The guide tubes must be non-conductive, not just non-ferous.  Any conductor will slow the magnets due to eddie currents setting up resistive magnetic fields in the tube walls when the magnets try to move.  Learned this after purchasing aluminum tubes at the model airplane store.  Later I used those tubes as my form to wrap the paper around for my guide tubes.

The latch is also suprisingly simple and realy works simply if made like the diagram.  They automaticaly switch by gravity when at 10:30 o-clock if no magnets are latched on them.

My provisional patent process:

Met with attorneys at 4 pm 7/7.
Did own write up and diagrams to save money and expedite.  E-mailed to attorneys around 11 am 7/8.
Received first draft and returned mark ups by 11 am 7/9.
Received final draft at 5.01 pm 7/10.
Authorized attorney to file the application around 6 pm on 7/10.
Patent app filed around 8:40 pm on 7/10.

Even my patent attorney worked late to rush this through.  He's got a Masters in Mechanical Engineering, so he's as excited as I am.

I'll get a bill for legal services at the end of the month.

Quote from: broli on July 12, 2008, 07:09:28 AM
Maybe you should read the whole thread newtonian moron. The principle is quite clear to make a build out of.

Hey Broli, go fuck yourself!

I've posted pictures of my build from last Sunday.  Front view with 4 mass switches in place.  Close up of mass switch and latch.  Back view showing my bearing system and balancing weights.  No stator magnets yet.  I was holding the lower magnet in place by hand only to see if the switches worked, which they did.  But the side forces sometimes warp the wheel alowing the magnet in a switch to slide around the stator magnet instead of going right over the top.  That's why I say it is better to use a bar magnet here.

I received bar magnets and 24 1/2 dia x 1/2 tall n45s on Thursday.  Might play with them today, but I really need to mow my grass first.  I didn't do it last weekend because of this project and now it looks terrible.

Its called Gravity Motor Pictures in the Pictures category.

If someone could post a direct link that would be appreciated.

Thanks,

M.

Okay had a play with the MGW!

I must admit I expected the wall to be greater, but it is not that bad, still there but the design of simply pushing the Rotor magnet up on a loose brass rod cuts it down a lot.

Below is a video of me testing it against different Stator magnets.

I simply mounted a Ring magnet on a sliding brass rod as pictures below and mounted on a bike wheel that I was using for another test.

Next I will work out the latches and mount a top and bottom one to see what the effect is like.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw1.jpg&hash=f5e65fb74e19b449b9c9e4b9c42858b35f307bd0)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw2.jpg&hash=af99856c54fe5676b2919dd9f74c76d7b0353c66)

Right click and choose save on link below.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW1.wmv

Cheers

Sean.

I think the important part is mass here. Making the whole wheel as heavy as possible so the magnetic wall is a negligible force.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 07:46:30 AM
If someone could post a direct link that would be appreciated.

Hi Mondrasek

I have upload the picturs to my server and placed below.

Nice build/rig you have there mate.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2FFront.JPG&hash=d1a3835e4668be6ca59f5ac4080345acc5e48cf7)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2FBack.JPG&hash=dba478d4ec0009abf3652f2fd75d99eee3d36197)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2FMass%2520Switch2.jpg&hash=bae976676c42c782990c08428a7577de9b90df96)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2FMass%2520Switch.JPG&hash=f2e62dc1dac3dae4cde96a602d4c4203a40cac7a)


Cheers

Sean.

Would someone kindly upload Clanzer's video to YouTube or make a much smaller version of it. I'd love to see it, but I'm on a metered connection down here in NZ.

Thanks Clanzer, for all of your work throughout these projects. I've been a fan of yours since the whipmag days.

Clanzer,

That gave me chills.  Can't wait for the Missus to finish feeding the baby and put her down for a nap so she can see.

You can take it all the way from here.  Hopfully we wil share a beer some day soon.

Hopefully you will not loose as much sleep over this as I have this past 10 days.

M.

@mondrasek

Good luck with your design. Once CLaNZeR  finishes with the wheel you will then see the problems that you must overcome. Of course I will let you know one of them. The distance travel will be a problem. I would first shorten it to about 1/2 the travel you are trying to get. Even a slower speed has CF problems and the shift time is very important.

Quote from: kevin on July 12, 2008, 09:57:59 AM
Would someone kindly upload Clanzer's video to YouTube or make a much smaller version of it. I'd love to see it, but I'm on a metered connection down here in NZ.

There ya go mate

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tnB2tDVgzOs

Cheers

Sean.

Right after stacking and un-stacking magnets on the stator, I am happy that the strength is about right.

A short video below showing it lift when the Rotor magnet is at the top of the wheel.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW2.wmv

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw3.jpg&hash=944de70a177e1440a671a02862a891c731d10561)

Off to make a few more sliders.

Struggling with the latch design though at the moment, must admit.


Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 10:25:21 AM
You can take it all the way from here.  Hopfully we wil share a beer some day soon.
Hopefully you will not loose as much sleep over this as I have this past 10 days.

Na I won't loose sleep over it  ;D ;D

I should have enough Ring magnets to make 4 sliders and get the feel for it, then if it shows promising I will order some more.

Still struggling to see how these latches will work bi-directional, but will think it out as I lathe down the other brass rods, it may come to me.

Back later

Cheers

Sean.

Nice work CLaNZeR, I knew you would be the man to do it. Just one thing, though. If you fix the sliding magnet in position, any position but preferably the "firing "position, and compare the wheel's motion with a "calibrated push", does it swing more, or less, than it does with the magnet free to slide like in your video?
Because the energy to move the magnet must come from somewhere, and I think it comes from the rotation of the wheel. SO it is a loss mechanism, the only ( potential) gain mechanism in this design is the weight shift.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 12, 2008, 12:12:27 PM
Just one thing, though. If you fix the sliding magnet in position, any position but preferably the "firing "position, and compare the wheel's motion with a "calibrated push", does it swing more, or less, than it does with the magnet free to slide like in your video?
Because the energy to move the magnet must come from somewhere, and I think it comes from the rotation of the wheel. SO it is a loss mechanism, the only ( potential) gain mechanism in this design is the weight shift.

Yep agree with you here and the only way to do that is to fine tune the Stator magnets so the wall is not too strong, yet gets the magnets to a good enough height that they will in-balance the wheel. Then hope that the momentum of the un-balanced wheel will have enough get through the wall.

As usual I try not to over analyse things or I would never build anything  ;D ;D ;D

We will see if she rocks or not as we go along.

Here is video3 showing two points firing at the same time. At the moment the wall is too strong and I need to reduce the strength of the stator stacks. One thing you will notice though that the faster you push through the higher the magnets will flick, so maybe a small force is needed on the stators and go for a higher RPM to do the flick as such.

Need to try get these latches done now.

Video3 download link below:

http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW3.wmv

Cheers

Sean.

Clanzer, cant you make the latch the same as mondresek's design? just slot the wood behind the travel path and pin the latch from behind. You will need some stop pins on either side of the latch, but if you slot it you could then adjust it up and down as needed. Also, are you planning on making a fully working model? Just curious and thanks for taking an interest in this project as I have.

If the "wall" shows to be too much of a problem, would you consider firing the magnets with some sort of electromagnet/ microswitch setup? This would bring in external power source for testing but later could be generated by the wheel itself.

Nice to see you in here dudeman750,  (He's been my best friend for 20 years or so.  Initially thought I was crazy when I told him I had solved the world's energy crisis)

Everyone understand that the "wall" force will not increase even if we double or triple the diameter of the set up so we can hang more weight on it? 

She'll run eventually if not on this diameter.

Dudeman750 just wants to skip ahead to the electromagnets that eliminate the wall altogether.

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 12, 2008, 12:51:47 PM
If the "wall" shows to be too much of a problem, would you consider firing the magnets with some sort of electromagnet/ microswitch setup? This would bring in external power source for testing but later could be generated by the wheel itself.

If you fire two Coils each revolution, there is no way you will re-gain the energy you just used to power those coils.

If you are going for a pulse motor, then you are better off going for a heavy flywheel that has a long wind down time, then pulse it once every so many hundred revolutions. This way you might just get enough energy back from the spinning wheel to do the next pulse of the coil.

If you can get a self running gravity wheel, then it may take a long time at slow RPM's to charge anything up, but atleast you are not having to use any of that power gained to keep it running.

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 12:59:22 PM
Nice to see you in here dudeman750,  (He's been my best friend for 20 years or so.  Initially thought I was crazy when I told him I had solved the world's energy crisis)

Everyone understand that the "wall" force will not increase even if we double or triple the diameter of the set up so we can hang more weight on it? 

She'll run eventually if not on this diameter.

Dudeman750 just wants to skip ahead to the electromagnets that eliminate the wall altogether.

Agreed but you'll need the right variables. So if it doesn't run it might be because of some variable not being in sync with the rest.

Clanzer,

In theory (using superconducting materials), when you excite an electtomagnetic coil the current rushes into the coil and stops once the magnetic field is saturated, right?  When the coil is disconnected from the power source the magnetic field collapses through the coil windings (back EMF) sending the current back the way it initially came.  Can this current not be reclaimed so that a loss-less device is created (again assuming superconducting circutry and wires)? 

This is just theory on my part since the last Electrical Engineering class I took was 20+ years ago.  But if true in theory, the only energy we would need to bleed off of the Gravity Motor output to run this circuit would be to replace the real world current losses due to resistance.

Haven't had any of my Electrical Engineer friends give me the answer to this one.  What do you think/know?

M.

The electromagnets do not accelerate the wheel.  They only replace the stator magnets and fire the perminant mass switch magnets up their respective guide tubes.  This should eliminate the "wall" alltogether.

We have plenty of power to work the electromagnets.  You can always scale the diameter of the wheel up and add more mass switches to create larger output torque = generated electricity.  Complete scalability is one of the beauties of this design.  The question is:

Does replacing the "wall" associated with the perminant magnet stator magnets with the power drain of electromagnets and a firing circuit for stator magnets create more or less efficient conversion of Gravity to power?  I think ultimately the electromagnets will be more efficient (again, I am hesitant about my electro-magnetic theory recall).

Anyone else care to weigh in on the electromagnet stator magnet possiblities?

Thanks,

M.

Either way, the perminant magnet stator magnets are the way to go for a first build.  Electromagnet stator replacements are just topic for discussion at this time IMHO.

(rolls on the floor laughing)
So now we are reinventing the Bedini motor, or any number of devices that attempt to capture and use BEMF.

mondrasek, have you done very much reading about the topics you are discussing?

Because it seems like you are "discovering" ideas that have already been discovered and explored, and there are actually threads on this very site that discuss all of them that you have come up with so far.

Next you will propose using the electrical output of your (non-existent) generator to electrolyze water so that we can run our cars on it.

But this idea, too, has been out there for a long time.

(It is actually extremely difficult to come up with a genuinely new and original idea. SO don't feel too badly when you learn that yours, well, just aren't.)

So, so far we have a Besseler-Quinn-Bedini wheel. Let's add some more stuff. If you rotate the stator mags at the right time, in the opposite direction from the way they would rotate if they were simply geared, the rotor will experience a push-pull as the rotor magnets swing past the stators. Conversely, this same effect could be achieved with a reversing (not just an on-off) electromagnet.
So we would be building a Besseler-Quinn-Bedini-OCMPMM wheel.

TinselKoala,

I am still not proposing to use the magnets in any way to propel this motor.  Gravity does all the work.  I am proposing using an electromagnet to move the magnets in each mass switch up (at 6 and 12 o-clock) in a more efficient manner than using the perminent magnets we can all see are able to accomplish this in Clanzer's videos.

Off course the pulsing electromagnet stator magnet designs would not be 100% efficient.  But would they be more efficent than having to overcome the wall in a perminant magnet?

I don't know if re-capturing BEMF from an electromagnet is possible or not.  That was my question.  Anyone have answers?

Do I have to post the links, or can you be bothered to look on this site for them yourself?

Your story is not credible. You claim to be an engineer with 15+ years of experience, working for a major engineering firm, yet you do not seem to have access to a machine shop, and you made the incredibly basic blunder of trying to use aluminum tubes for your magnets in your first attempt. And you spelled "eddy currents" wrong. Etc. Etc.

20+ years, 15+ in robotics.  But I am a Mechanical Engineer.  Understandably weak in Electrical and Magnets wouldn't you agree?  That is why I pose those theories as questions.

But I am not here to argue with you.  If I am proved wrong it will still be worth the loss of the patent app fee.  I doubt I'll sleep well until I see one run or learn why it will not.  None of the dozen or so Engineers I have disclosed to can tell me why it will not run.

Your ideas are also welcome. 

I have acces to a machine shop.  Not a model shop, but it could make a larger scale version.  But replication was not my goal here.  I want this modeled in simulation software.  Trial and error prototyping is an inefficient way to optimize a design.

I am thrilled and honored that Clanzer is going for a build.  But I still ask any and all who have contacts with institutions and individuals with the simulation capabilities and interest to forward them the design info.  That is the fastest way to actual producable water pumps, or the unerstanding why this design does not work.

There has been something that I have been thinking about for a while, and it may be useful for this application.  I saw a product called magswitch on the internet.  It somehow mechanically turns a magnet on and off.  I don't know much about magnetizm, but could this process be used to turn the magnet on at just the right time to push the stator up?

Does anyone know how that product works.  It could be useful for a few different applications.

@mondrasek
I doubt if you will actually read it, but here is a good place to start. You might also give those other engineers this link.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/overbal.htm

@ mondrasek: please do the following: look at the top of the page here. You will see a "search" button.
Click on that button. In the "search for" window that you see, enter "capture back EMF" without the quotes. Then click Search or simply hit "enter".
Also you may want to search for "pulse motor" and "Bedini".
Have fun.

sorry double post
I keep hitting the wrong buttons!

Tinselkoala,

Do you have to be so rude? You obviously don't understand what is being discussed here. And what does spelling have to do with anything.. this thread was started on a concept. Mondresek is NOT an EE and I myself only have associates degree in EE and many years since classes and theory. The wheel is powered only by gravity, the magnetism only a vehicle for moving the mass of the magnets around to create the out of balance wheel. We were discussing using em to drive the mass of the magnet up to create more efficient wheel, reduce the opposition from the driving magnets, and asking for expertise in design of such a circuit as not to detract from the efficiency of the final output of the wheel. Both Mondresek and I have access to many machine shops as the area we live in is quite the industrial hub of our country. However, he was hoping someone could model this on computer first rather than many hours tinkering with "real" models. We don't have access to software that can do the physics involved with such a machine. He was hoping someone we contact might. If you take a minute and actually look at the "out of balance wheel" that he is proposing, I implore you to tell us why it won't work. That is what we are waiting for.

Please do not listen to TinselKoala. If you want to know why something works or doesn't learn it out of experience instead of reading it from the biggest skeptic around. You'll learn nothing from someone who doesn't believe in this stuff to begin with.

Read the simanek link. Or build one that works. Or show a simulation that does.
In other words, put up or shut up.

"We don't have access to software that can do the physics involved with such a machine."

This statement is also inconsistent with the claim that one is a robotics engineer working for a major engineering firm. If such a firm doesn't have such software, who the heck does?

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 12, 2008, 03:28:51 PM
Tinselkoala,

Do you have to be so rude? You obviously don't understand what is being discussed here. And what does spelling have to do with anything.. this thread was started on a concept. Mondresek is NOT an EE and I myself only have associates degree in EE and many years since classes and theory. The wheel is powered only by gravity, the magnetism only a vehicle for moving the mass of the magnets around to create the out of balance wheel. We were discussing using em to drive the mass of the magnet up to create more efficient wheel, reduce the opposition from the driving magnets, and asking for expertise in design of such a circuit as not to detract from the efficiency of the final output of the wheel. Both Mondresek and I have access to many machine shops as the area we live in is quite the industrial hub of our country. However, he was hoping someone could model this on computer first rather than many hours tinkering with "real" models. We don't have access to software that can do the physics involved with such a machine. He was hoping someone we contact might. If you take a minute and actually look at the "out of balance wheel" that he is proposing, I implore you to tell us why it won't work. That is what we are waiting for.

In the first place, how many threads did mondrasek spam and interrupt with his "announcement"?
Second, I do in fact understand what is being discussed here, evidently much better than you do.
Third, many "wheels powered only by gravity" have been designed over the years, and if you look at the link I posted you will see some of them. How, then, is mondrasek's wheel fundamentally different from those, and how does he overcome the clear analysys of why they don't work, detailed on that link?
Fourth, a working model is the only thing that will convince anybody with any money. I can make a gravity wheel work in the "phun" simulator, for example, and there are other threads on this forum where other people have made gravity wheels work in simulators. It's no big deal, and it doesn't translate to reality. SO get thee to a machine shop.
Fifth, there are lots of circuits for extracting BEMF on this site and on others. It almost sounds like you are asking us to do your research for you.
Sixth, the software. I don't believe that you cannot access such software, because I can, and I don't work for a "major engineering firm."
Seventh, see the simanek page I linked, before your post here.

you know of any CAD software that takes into account mass, kinetic energy, gravity, and such? Maybe in some university somewhere but not in an engineering dept!

That link you provided was very interesting but it is based on the premise that the energy gained by the mass shift is nullified by the energy lost in the opposing mass shift. This design may overcome this, we will see. The simplicity of the design is what is exciting. If the mass on the heavy side of the wheel is great enough to overcome the magnetic or EM resistance of moving or "loading" the mass of the magnets into the "mass switch" then it should work, right?

By the way, Mondrasek has in fact been a mechanical engineer for as long as I have known him. He successfully modeled several innovative designs for his company as well. Don't belittle people because you think you know better man, its just mean.

Quote from: broli on July 12, 2008, 03:29:00 PM
Please do not listen to TinselKoala. If you want to know why something works or doesn't learn it out of experience instead of reading it from the biggest skeptic around. You'll learn nothing from someone who doesn't believe in this stuff to begin with.

Please do not listen to Broli.  ;)  If you want to know why something works or doesn't learn it out of experience instead of reading it from the biggest believer around. You'll learn nothing from someone who only agrees with everything you say.

@ CLaNZeR
Latch suggestion. Use plastic from plastic container lid or other stiff but still flexible plastic. If plastic just catches edge of moving magnet it should hold it against gravity but the force of the moving magnet should be strong enough to push through it easily. No guarantees but it might work. Playing card could be used in place of plastic just to try it (but I suspect it will not hold up as well as plastic).

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 12, 2008, 03:49:07 PM
Please do not listen to Broli.  ;)  If you want to know why something works or doesn't learn it out of experience instead of reading it from the biggest believer around. You'll learn nothing from someone who only agrees with everything you say.

TinselKoala...what kind of idiotic post is that. Why are you tainting this thread with your smelly shit. If you can't contribute with anything constructive then fuck off with your museum of closed mindness.

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 12, 2008, 03:48:59 PM
you know of any CAD software that takes into account mass, kinetic energy, gravity, and such? Maybe in some university somewhere but not in an engineering dept!

That link you provided was very interesting but it is based on the premise that the energy gained by the mass shift is nullified by the energy lost in the opposing mass shift. This design may overcome this, we will see. The simplicity of the design is what is exciting. If the mass on the heavy side of the wheel is great enough to overcome the magnetic or EM resistance of moving or "loading" the mass of the magnets into the "mass switch" then it should work, right?

By the way, Mondrasek has in fact been a mechanical engineer for as long as I have known him. He successfully modeled several innovative designs for his company as well. Don't belittle people because you think you know better man, its just mean.

Google "phun" and have phun. It's pretty processor intensive and has only rudimentary physics but it will show you what is out there for free, and you can imagine what the professional packages can do. Yes, it models mass, KE, gravity, friction, air resistance, stickiness, spring constants and other stuff (but not, sadly, magnetics) , and it's just a toy. I think it will be possible to model mondrasek's wheel in phun, the weight-shift part anyway. Why don't you try it?

"That link you provided was very interesting but it is based on the premise that the energy gained by the mass shift is nullified by the energy lost in the opposing mass shift."
And all theories of working gravity wheels are based on the premise that it is not so nullified. So? Nobody's done it yet, and although Simanek doesn't stress them, there are sound physical principles why not. Like gravity being a conservative field, for instance. Like conservation of momentum, for another instance.

It's not unusual for people to make very basic errors when they try to work out of the field they are experienced in. But usually a bit of prior research minimizes the embarrassment. Everything, with the possible exception of the latches, in mondrasek's patent has been suggested and tried before, many times, and has never worked. Everything he has suggested as add-ons in this thread, has also been suggested before, and tried, without success. Are we to expect that the latches are the critical element that will save the world from the tyranny of oil, simply by adding them to an existing non-working design? Or should we expect that this endeavor, too, will be another one of those never-ending threads, like so many you see here, that start off with "I have found Free ENergy!" and wind up...just sort of trailing off....into nowhere....


EDIT to add: http://www.scribd.com/doc/259189/Orffyreus-wheel  This link is about the only gravity wheel in history that may have worked, and as you will see near the end, Besseler (Orffyreus) himself invented a magnet-assisted version, but knew that the magnets available at the time would not be strong enough. It is likely that his design's magnetic portion was similar to mondrasek's, although the gravity drive was probably different.

Quote from: broli on July 12, 2008, 03:59:17 PM
TinselKoala...what kind of idiotic post is that. Why are you tainting this thread with your smelly shit. If you can't contribute with anything constructive then fuck off with your museum of closed mindness.

Sorry, I missed the part where you contributed anything constructive. At least I back up my statements with links.
You are just backed up, period.

Oops. I missed this constructive post from broli, sorry.
"Agreed but you'll need the right variables. So if it doesn't run it might be because of some variable not being in sync with the rest."

Really constructive. I'm sure that will save a lot of people a lot of time. Unlike my posts.

xee, it seems to me that your latch suggestion is a good one--it might be a low-loss way of implementing the latches, as it might return the energy required to go thru it, on the way out, by slapping the magnet in the 'butt' so to speak. There will still be losses of course, that will have to be made up from the rotational energy somehow.

(see there, I'm not a total nay-sayer.  ;)  )

@All,

Even if Archer's current approach works by using lets say a 80% mag filled loop, it is going to be hard to pull any power off of the rotor because it would interupt the momentum that it is using to get thru the circle and the rolling unit would hang.

Mondrasek has a nice concept, but I think when it starts using larger masses it will have issues.

So please find below the drawing for a new combo concept, which would be good at moving large masses and maintaining it's position.

Notice the catch basis at the end of each run which will break the wall and catch and hold the mass roller until the angle changes enough for the ball to get pass the timing bump and run up the other side. The timing bump is used to stop the roller from starting at to low a speed. It may not be needed, just the last magnet being closer could do it.

Can anyone see any problems with this design?

Also, the roller balls should be in some kind track to keep them centered.

Please excuse the hand drawing, but just starting to learn Sketchup.

Regards, Larry

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 12, 2008, 12:31:29 PMAt the moment the wall is too strong and I need to reduce the strength of the stator stacks. One thing you will notice though that the faster you push through the higher the magnets will flick, so maybe a small force is needed on the stators and go for a higher RPM to do the flick as such.

@CLaNZeR

Perhaps a spring attached to the flat side of the ring magnet to dampen the flick effect?  Or even consider oscillating the stator kind of like ZeroFossilFuel's OSPMM.

Awesome work, man!  You're definitely added to my list of heroes!

LarryC

LOL it looks like a cooling fan. I don't see much hope for this one either.

@mondrasek and CLaNZeR

I have already stated to shorten your distance of lift, so now make sure that the catch is of an easy movable catch and when upside down it releases. any hard movement with what you are doing will hurt.

Good luck.

Quote from: AB Hammer on July 12, 2008, 05:15:29 PM
I have already stated to shorten your distance of lift, so now make sure that the catch is of an easy movable catch and when upside down it releases. any hard movement with what you are doing will hurt.

@AB Hammer

Would this kind of latch work?

@xee

Sorry for absconding with your art, but it makes the point so well.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained! Every worth wild idea/invention has faced unnecessary critisism and it appears from reading this thread that this one is no different. The world needs more people like you all who are working TOGETHER for the greater good. Best of luck to you!

Quote from: AB Hammer on July 12, 2008, 05:15:29 PM
LOL it looks like a cooling fan. I don't see much hope for this one either.

The following is what Archer posted about it, maybe he is seeing something that you're not.


Now this guy is a geneius, that will absolutely work, i urge everyone to look at the drawing, it would likely work with most mag train setups actually, not as easily as one that runs under instead of both sides. but with the new array that would work. Of that i have no doubt at all.

Go for it, you should be able to build heaps of machines using it. That what you need people, more of these.

Exceptionally well done.

Note.

I should note you will need to find a way to break the wall on a vertical climb. But the mecahnics are brilliant. I could fix it for you only takes about five mins for me to work that sort of stuff out. but I let others have a play for a while.

PS got it already

try thinking along the lines of shakmans idea and you will see what i mean, think how the rods work

LarryC

[Can anyone see any problems with this design?]

Normally I do not get involved with threads of this design, I have seen it to many times in the last 50 years of my involvement. Each new generation believe they have found the answer.

Yes I see a problem!  Or maybe it is what I do not see, that being any out-of-balance  (OB)

A vertical vector diagnostic shows that both sides of the wheel are within frictional loss of showing any gradient. In layman language it is a balanced wheel, just as a pendulum is balanced when resting true vertically.

For those of you that have been around the block a couple of times,  I am surprised of the interest this thread is recieving.

You need to go back to Bessler's MT drawings and refresh your memory with the first eight or so wheels depicted. With or without magnets it will not work!

Still in doubt? go back to the original drawing and do a mass to leverage calculation and you will see that that the concentrated mass on the ascending outweighs the leverage gain of the decending.

@CLaNZeR and AB Hammer, Broli,  I am surprised to see  you spending time on this,  Fool me once and its my fault, fool me twice and.............. Is TinselKoala the only one here that can see this?  A stupid question as  I know better from my own experience with others involved here.

Ralph

I'm sorry Ralph

Being sick I didn't have much to do at the time. You know these guys don't believe us when we say it won't work. But you are correct and I only had a mild excuse to post on it. I am going to take a nap until the fever drops.

Thanks  :-X

Back from a nap. 

Dudeman750, we can talk on the phone.

TinselKoala,

Sorry for the delay.  But I wanted to address some, but probably not all, of your previos comments.

The difference between my concept and the previous "gravity wheels" that I have seen on the site you referenced is (I bellieve) the base technology of the "mass switch".  I use a constant force to switch the mass of the mass switch magnets from one location to another.  They then remain in the new location or even travel farther (gravity assisted) with no additional input power.  I can arrange these mass switches as shown in all the documents to make an unbalance wheel.  The wheel can always be made big enough and have enough mass switches to overcome the constant force needed to activate the mass switch.  ie.  Making the wheel bigger makes the output rotational torque due to gravity greater while making the wheel bigger does not increase the repulsive force needed to activate the mass switches.

My employeer is a wholly owned subsidary of the firm that does have the simulation software needed.  They were sent the patent to analyze on Friday mornging.  My office does not engineer the base technology that would require that type of software.  We engineer manufacturing equipment that uses their technology, so we have CAD, FMEA, etc.  It is like if my parent company built motors and we built conveyors that use motors.

I am still not asking anyone here to make me a prototype, though I cannot be happier that Clanzer is doing so for us all to see.  I only ask that you forward the patent app and any other relavant information to any other institutions or individuals with the tools and desire to begin work on this.  This will expedite the release of humanitarian and other products that use this technology (assuming it works).  For example, if GE was to begin working on large scale power generator today, they could license the technology next month and not have mearly wasted a month.  More importantly, if any firm begins to develop a gravity motor powered water pump now, it will begin saving lives sooner.  I will wave any licence fee for such humanitarian devices.

Quote from: rlortie on July 12, 2008, 06:17:33 PM
[Can anyone see any problems with this design?]
Normally I do not get involved with threads of this design, I have seen it to many times in the last 50 years of my involvement. Each new generation believe they have found the answer.

Yes I see a problem!  Or maybe it is what I do not see, that being any out-of-balance  (OB)

A vertical vector diagnostic shows that both sides of the wheel are within frictional loss of showing any gradient. In layman language it is a balanced wheel, just as a pendulum is balanced when resting true vertically.

Well, I'm from your generation. Maybe my simple drawing does not explain it well enough. Have you seen Archer's mag array demos? It can move large masses at high speed for much greater distances then just a repulsion magnet. Excuse me but my drawing assumes you know that. So that movement at (1) 1:30 and (3)7:30 is almost instantaneous. I don't know why your so called 'vertical vector diagnostic' is not picking up an extreme out of balance at this point. Of course this may be due to input data based on my less than full explanation.

Regards, Larry

I have been playing with that Phun software all afternoon and Im totally impressed and having a ton of fun with it. Thanks for that at least Koala. Its low learning curve is great, lack of some tools sucks though. I am now looking for something with more capabilities if anyone would like to chime in and let me know some package that might do real time physics modeling and dosent require 2 years to learn.

LarryC,

Intersting design.  I can see how it is out of balance, but believe the use of uphill pulling magnets would not work as you envision.  But I would love to see someone model or prototype that to prove me wrong.  Anyone know of a way to roll cylintrical or round magnets/steel balls up a ramp with static perminent magnets?

Either way, if you would like to pursue this topic further I ask that you create a new thread so that this one does not start covering two designs.  That gets confusing for everyone.

Best of luck!

Ha!  Dudeman750 is going to join me in the world of sleeplessness.

Clanzer, any news?

M.

LarryC,

[I don't know why your so called 'vertical vector diagnostic' is not picking up an extreme out of balance at this point. Of course this may be due to input data based on my less than full explanation.]

Please copy and paste either your  depiction or a facsimile of the topic of this thread  into MS "Paint"...  Using the shift key draw vertical lines from center of each mass to the bottom of  the wheel. Add another through the axis,  Now look at the symmetrical placement of the total lines (five for your wheel).  Please tell me where and how you see any extreme out of balance?

Go to http://www.orffyre.com/mt1-20.html Draw the same vertical lines as described above in MT #1 through #5 You will see that they always come out with the same conclusion, they will not work.  Moving the weights by magnets, magnetic ramps or physical ramps does not change the balance issue. Magnets may decrease friction and back torque over a stationary ramp, but the end result is still  the same.

If it was as simple as what is being described here, don't you think it would have been done years ago? 

Ralph

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 07:30:34 PM
LarryC,

Intersting design.  I can see how it is out of balance, but believe the use of uphill pulling magnets would not work as you envision.  But I would love to see someone model or prototype that to prove me wrong.  Anyone know of a way to roll cylintrical or round magnets/steel balls up a ramp with static perminent magnets?

Either way, if you would like to pursue this topic further I ask that you create a new thread so that this one does not start covering two designs.  That gets confusing for everyone.

Best of luck!

Thanks, no problem, just though that since you enjoyed free post at Archer's site that you wouldn't mind.

But, if you don't mind one last response, your question has been answers on many of Archer's recent videos.

Regards, Larry 

Thats a very good point Larry the double standard is officially in place  Chet

Thanks guys.  I haven't actually read anything on Archer's site in awhile.  Only skimmed it to see if he had a new video or build drawings of a revised SOG.  Last I looked it seemed he was working on something else, but as I said, I didn't read it.  I'll check it out.

Again, good luck with everything!

M.

  I think I tried this before and it did not work,   I hope it did , but it does not, you see, the more arms with magnets you put into the system the more weight needs to be lifted up in the left hand side and therefore the torque remains the same, but hopefully someone will come up with a diferent approach and make it work.
noname

OK, just to show you I'm not all a bad evil skeptic, I did a quick redesign of mondrasek's idea. It is a sketch, but I'm sure it will be clear to everybody. If not I'll try to clarify.
I thought of using an external magnet or magnet pair, rigidly mounted outside the sliding magnet's tube, to act as the latch. IF done properly it should return the energy taken to drive the slider into the latch field.
Anyway here's the sketch:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F57655b01b9c563b104eb545c819d7aa24g.jpg&hash=fdc83bd4c9bc5131325709cabfb2caf51e36899f)
.
. and here's a link to a Phun definition file that is a self-turning gravity wheel (thanks Harvey).
Save the file with the .phn extension and load it into Phun. Use any text editor to edit it.
Have phun...
http://www.mediafire.com/?kdnyloqmjhx

Quote from: mondrasek on July 12, 2008, 07:30:34 PM
LarryC,

(snip)   Anyone know of a way to roll cylintrical or round magnets/steel balls up a ramp with static perminent magnets?

(snip)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjnaudin.free.fr%2Fimages%2Fs102anm.gif&hash=ece1f822b8d3518b178ff14b6ade5ad7f7545ccb)

From Naudin's site, made in 1997.
That's eleven years ago, in case you forgot your calculator.
And still no continuous SMOT.


Really, I suggest you google or use this site's search function when you come up with a "new" idea, and see if there is any previous work on it.

Clanzer, thanks for the youtude vids!

After watching them.... I wonder if Bedini's superpole magnet configuration could help with the stators?!

Create a narrower flux beam by gluing like magnet faces together. Example: Glue N to N. Apparently, this narrowly focuses the flux, making the size (diameter?) of the wall smaller. The flux can be focused more along the vector of the arm, instead of around it as it approaches the stators.

These guys are talking about it:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/1211-radiant-energy-actual-results-2.html

That looks like it would help out on this one.

Man Tinsel, you show us buddie!

I love PHUN!  I have an almost working model of Mondresek's wheel. Unfortunately the software lacks the mechanism I need to fire the 12 and 6 masses. Im thinking I can map this to my 120 button flight controller, but the mass acceleration coefficient dosent seem to be enough to simulate what a short burst em pulse would do. When I manually actuate the masses, the wheel sure enough generates drive though. Im definately feeling positive about the concept still despite the controversy. Im no physicist, but always had an interest in all areas of science! This is fun whether it works or not!!! I will continue tweaking my phun model and see if I can get something to show you tomorrow. Im beat for the night. Thanks for all the input guys, that last post on magnetic field manipulation looks interesting. Good night!

Nice work clanzer.. Are you making a 4 arm version to show if this thing works or not? Oh yeah your workspace reminds me of mine.. LOL  ;)

Oh yeah, my PHUN model is an 8 arm and appears to work great, again this is being manually actuated so Im not saying anything either way, just that the model runs as the concept started. This is not taking into account any friction, or other variables.

COME ON CLANZER TELL US IT WORKS!!!  ;D

or not...  :(

You could try sticking springs in there in the Phun simulation. If you make them springy enough, and have the masses "collide with stuff" but slide frictionlessly in their channels, and play with the inertia to get the "bounce" right...
I sure wish the thing had magnets. Maybe somebody could get the source code, or contact the originator or something...

or not badmouth it so much,  or any of the above... sometimes you gotta be a captive of terrestrial physics.

Peace!

Yes TK, I played with the springs, but only for a few minutes. I wish I knew of some software just like this but just a little more advanced with just a few more tools and options, man that would be powerful for creative people, (which sadly Im not). It seems that magnetism could be incorporated into this package very well since they already have the code for gravity and air it would not be that much different.

Trying .... to ... tear.. my self... off this.... computer.... can't .. do .. it... aaarrrrrgh....

This concept is very similar to the post I made on Clanzer's site many weeks ago where I analyzed Quinns concept and outlined what needed changed it was to work. In that post, if you'll recall, I outlined the use of a diametrically magnetized cylinder magnet to be placed in the center. This eliminates the need for any latches.

I must say, the latches in this design are novel and gravity powered :) I like 'em even if they aren't necessary.

RE: No Attracting Magnets.
I'm afraid this point works both ways. If the attracting force cannot be overcome by Gravity, then neither can the repulsive force. If the repulsive force magnets can be arranged to allow gravity to overtake them, then the same holds true for the attractive force magnets. All permanent magnets in production have a distance (usually withing arms reach) where gravity will over take the pull force. You simply have to tune your wane at the proper distance so that momentum shear and gravity can separate the pull.

I wish everyone the greatest success!

Cheers,

Harvey

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 13, 2008, 01:07:56 AM
Man Tinsel, you show us buddie!

I love PHUN!  I have an almost working model of Mondresek's wheel. Unfortunately the software lacks the mechanism I need to fire the 12 and 6 masses. Im thinking I can map this to my 120 button flight controller, but the mass acceleration coefficient dosent seem to be enough to simulate what a short burst em pulse would do. When I manually actuate the masses, the wheel sure enough generates drive though. Im definately feeling positive about the concept still despite the controversy. Im no physicist, but always had an interest in all areas of science! This is fun whether it works or not!!! I will continue tweaking my phun model and see if I can get something to show you tomorrow. Im beat for the night. Thanks for all the input guys, that last post on magnetic field manipulation looks interesting. Good night!

Try a motorized firing pin. Use a motor to kock the spring and a cam on the wheel to relese it. ;)

Just a quick note on Clanzers brass rods.

Ever drop a magnet down a copper tube? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcVG6c_OvYU&feature=related

Or even slide in in an aluminum track?

Using highly conductive materials (yes even salt water) around magnets, will impede movement due to the eddy currents.

Lenz's Law applies.

Cheers,

Harvey

@ Mondrasek
Sorry mate had to get out of the workshop and into the shower to go out for a meal and TOO much drink LOL
Now sat here with a bad hangover, doing plenty of coffee and smokes.

One thing I did conclude last night is that I broke my own rule of using a bloody metal wheel. The spokes are attacted to the Stator magnets way too much.
Gonna let my head get better this end and go cut out a wooden wheel later.


@Xee
Nice idea and thanks for the drawing, had a similar idea yesterday and was using some rigid thin laminated paper, but was a little bit too rigid.

@rlortie
You should not be surprised that I am working on this, I work on most ideas, even if they are mad ones because I enjoy playing aorund with this stuff. Most of the designs I see and attempt to build shout out at me that they will not work even before I begin, but I still go ahead because I enjoy it and it is a great learning curve.
And of course there is always that WHAT IF! moment of madness that creaps in hehehe

@LarryC
Nice design mate.


@Kevin
Have played around sticking magnets together before, last time was to make an Radial Magnetized Ring magnet by squeesing two Axial Magnetised ones together. Was a bitch to get them together and I clamped them in a holder which seemed secure, but overnight the damm things broke the holder, amasing strength these neo's have LOL  ;D

@Harvey
Agree with you regards the brass rods, but for the moment it is the least restrictive way I see of moving magnets up and down as doing. They move very freely and do the job for now!

More coffee needed  :P

Cheers

Sean.

Harvey,

Yeah, I mentioned in my first reply to Clanzer's offer to build (on page two of this thread) that the guide tubes in my build configuration needed to be non-conductive, not just non-ferous as the patent app says.  I was not sure if Calnzer was using brass rods just because it was all he had on hand or if the arrangment he was using (slider magnets on a rod, vs. cylindrical magnets in a tube) would not have that effect.  Thanks for pointing it out again.  I have no annular magnets to play with to test.  Anyone know if using annular magnets guided along a conductive rod will cause the magnets to slide slower than if they are guided on a non-conductive rod for certain?

Whoops.  Looks like Clanzer is awake and well aware of this issue.

Clanzer,

Good morning, Sean.  Glad you had a good time last night.

Dudeman750,

Guess I'll have to get Phun this morning so I can view your sim.  Hope you don't sleep 'till noon again.  I'm sure you had a drink in your hand right up to the end last night!  You ever going to give me a logon/password fro your server?

@ LarryC-  I think your idea would run now that I see how your magnet arrangement could carry a ferous cylinder or sphere up hill!  Excellent!  The amount of gravity it can convert to power for a given size will be much lower than the MGW, but maybe there are applications for both.

@ TinselKoala-  Please stop telling us to search the web or forums (do our own research) before we ask questions.  That is similar to telling anyone never to ask a question in life without researching for the answer first.  I made this thread to discuss the MWG patent app so it is appropriate for us to ask questions that others have the answer to.  It sometimes speeds up finding the answer.  I appreciate when you give us the links or tell us what you have already researched because this cuts the time of searching.  I am also glad that you have joined us by adding your ideas for a novel latch design.  I haven't checked your drawing but will do that next now that Phun is downloading.  And many thanks for showing us Phun!  Dudeman750 can't get enough of that.  Understand that this is his first time ever in these types of forums or working with these concepts.  He was dragged here since I have been telling him of my concept and patent since July 2 or 3.  Let me tell you, he was not the most supportive at first.  But I kept forwarding him my correspondences with the patent attorneys since I value his input and friendship.

@ Harvey-  I think the difference between using attracting magnets and repelling magnets is quite different for this reason:  Put two in a vertical attracting arrangement and allow them to approach slowly while restraining the upper.  Once close enough so that the attractive magnetic force can overcome the gravitational force pulling the lower down, they will accelerate together and hold with a force greater than gravity.  So gravity cannot over come and move either magnet, even when the arrangement is inverted.  Now when you do the same with repulsive magnets gravity is always free to act on the unrestrained magnet.  Does that make sense?  I'm not entirely happy with how I explained it.

Magnets have an attractive and repulsive force available.  At this time gravity only has an attractive force.  So the MGW uses the attractive force of gravity and the repulsive force of magnets in a novel way to create usable rotational torque IMHO.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 12, 2008, 04:03:31 PM
Google "phun" and have phun. It's pretty processor intensive and has only rudimentary physics but it will show you what is out there for free, and you can imagine what the professional packages can do. Yes, it models mass, KE, gravity, friction, air resistance, stickiness, spring constants and other stuff (but not, sadly, magnetics) , and it's just a toy. I think it will be possible to model mondrasek's wheel in phun, the weight-shift part anyway. Why don't you try it?

Hey Tinsel, thanks for the tip. Cool program.

I'm not sure how accurate it is though, I was fumbling around with it and managed to get a wheel spinning for over ten minutes after a small tap just by using a block hinged to it and a spring connected to an off-axis point and another block stationary to the wheel to knock it off balance. It was getting enough of a kick from the springing hinged block every time to get it to about 11oclock, the the hinged block tilted over and started the process again every time. My laptop spat the dummy when I went to make some changes and I didn't get a chance to save it. I think I'll need to run it on my main PC which is currently out of action. But on that note, the little test I set up really wouldn't/shouldn't have worked that way in real life. I've attached what it was from memory. I'll need to test this out on a PC with grunt.

I don't think I have a perpetual motion machine here, and evne if I did it wouldn't generate much power. I'm just saying based on this test that I'm not sure Phun is very accurate for testing these things.

shakman

EDIT: Forgot the attachment but it doesn't matter. Read below to see why...

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 12, 2008, 03:45:53 PM
....
I can make a gravity wheel work in the "phun" simulator, for example
....

Oops, sorry mate, just read that. Catching up...  :-[

@Clanzer,

Cool vids mate! I've seen quite a few of your experiments in the past and I've always very impressed. I'm a big fan of your tats too!  8)
Thanks for the credit in Vid 1  :D  I always hoped I'd be able to contribute something worthwhile here :)

shakman

@shakman: This might be an appropriate time to state "Ibison's law": If your simulation software or your mathematical model predicts violation of conservation of momentum or a violation of 2LoT, then the software or the model is in error.
But they are "phun" to play with anyway.

I am in the lab today, actually working on a model of mondrasek's wheel, as per my drawing earlier. Will post pics later.

Magnetic latches? We shall see.

While waiting for Clanzer's next post I decided to go out in the garage and get stators on my build.  Again, since I am playing with tiny 1/4 dia x 1/4 long magnets (n45) I have doubts that I would have enough mass to over come the wall I face.  I am not just sliding the magnets up to their natural hover hieght by any means.  I am firing them almost the entire length of my 8 1/2 inch guide tubes.  So my stator and thus the repulsive wall is kinda high next to the mass of my switch magnets.  But I am causing them to travel a rlatively large distance so that torque unbalance might be relational to the higher wall force.

My stator magnets are now bar magnets (1/2 x 1 x 1/4, n40 I think).  That gives my stator wall a straighter edge for the switch magnets to approach.  I am "eyeballing" everything and fixing with screws and super-glue (CA) without any adjustment capabilities except for shimming.  My mass switch guide tubes also have some burrs around the whistle cuts for the latch that sometimes catch a magnet.  I cant completely clean them up since I am working at such a small scale with 40+ year old eyes.  But after shooting some locksmith dry graphite down each paper guide tube they seem to fire as needed about 95% of the time.

Some interesting observations:  If you spin the wheel by hand too quickly the centrifical force cuases the mass switches not to work and the magnets in each stay out towards the rim.  You can hear each one fire as it approaches the bottom stator, but they do not launch high enough to make the lacth (again due to centrifical force).  As the wheel slows you can hear when the mass switches begin to operate properly.  And they do so for longer than I expected, but then again I have alot of inertia in my wheel compared to my tiny magnet's mass and the wall forces.  She almost looked like she wanted to run!  But soon enough you see the pulsed slow down as the wall takes off speed with each approaching mass switch. 

I am suprised by how robust the design appears to be.  My stator magnets are not adjusted to the optimal position to minimize the wall yet stil fire the switch magnets past the latch. My switches ares crap yet work just fine about 95% of the time.  I may work up another four to add.  I layed out the wheel for 24 and rolled that many guide tubes last Sunday.  The whistle cuts and clean up take the most time.  But four shouldn't take more than 2 hours.  Unfortuantely my garage is hotter than hell right now.  But maybe 24 will make her run, so I guess I'll try while waiting for Clanzer.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 13, 2008, 02:27:48 PM
@shakman: This might be an appropriate time to state "Ibison's law": If your simulation software or your mathematical model predicts violation of conservation of momentum or a violation of 2LoT, then the software or the model is in error.

With any luck some time soon we will need to write an exception to that rule  :P
:D

Here's a way to tell if your weight shift or magnet assist is really working. You need to be able to give your wheel a "calibrated spin". In my lab we do this by taking a known weight (I usually use a boxend wrench) and some string, tying the string to the known weight, and wrapping the string an exact number of times around the axle or the outer periphery of the wheel. Suspend the thing an appropriate distance from the ground, measure the height of the weight. Let the weight fall, unwinding the string and accelerating the wheel. Note the height of the weight when the string lets go. So the weight has fallen through a height of (first height - last height) and has imparted a calculable momentum to the wheel. Count the turns of the wheel to come to rest.
Now do a comparison--with your weights fixed in place so they cannot move (choose some average position, or compare inner and outermost positions, etc. ) and also test in "free running mode" that is, as you expect it to operate.
If your weights are helping turn the wheel, you will know about it using this technique even if self-sustaining operation is far away
This is why I have incorporated a groove around the outer periphery of my mondrasek rotor.
Which, BTW, is nearly complete. I just need to drill 12 more holes for the outer magnet retainers, and tap 23 holes (I already drilled the inner retainer screw holes and tapped one of them.) When this operation is complete, the rotor will be ready for magnets and bearings.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 13, 2008, 03:18:18 PM
While waiting for Clanzer's next post I decided to go out in the garage and get stators on my build. 

Hi Mondrasek

Nothing new to report this end apart from marking out my new wooden wheel and getting the bearings sorted.
Also working out a way to make sure I have the wheel perfectly balanced before adding each component, so it can be un-balanced very easly.
I also want to get the laser tacho rigged up to see at what RPM the magnets fly out and stay out if you get what I mean.

Sorry to say I work away from home during the week, so will not be doing anything else till next weekend :(

Will be online during the week to keep a breast of whats going on though :)

Cheers

Sean.

TinselKoala's (evil skeptic) Mondrasek rotor, with non-magnetic bearings (sapphire balls, plastic races).
It's a 12-holer, but I only had enough magnets for 6 holes. They slide fine both with gravity alone and with "firing" stator. The little slot halfway in is for the latch magnets (so far this idea seems to work too, if you have tiny magnets for the latches). The retainer screws are plastic, #4-40.
I used Acrylic instead of Delrin because, well, I didn't have a big enough piece of Delrin scrap.
Plus the clear plastic lets one see where the magnets are and what they are doing.
This represents about 4 1/2 hours work (I don't use CNC, it's all by hand) and about a quart of WD-40.
.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F8b715f0456a4da63a9845444bbaf5b984g.jpg&hash=865a722190f4c6c0ee61bd00daf555bba789b9fc)

Tomorrow I'll mount it on a vertical stand and make the stator mounts.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 13, 2008, 05:52:07 PM
This represents about 4 1/2 hours work (I don't use CNC, it's all by hand) and about a quart of WD-40.

Very nice work Tinsel.
I hope all the hard work goes towards curbing your skepticism  :P

shakman

Quote from: Harvey on July 13, 2008, 04:40:53 AM
Just a quick note on Clanzers brass rods.

Ever drop a magnet down a copper tube? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcVG6c_OvYU&feature=related

Or even slide in in an aluminum track?

Using highly conductive materials (yes even salt water) around magnets, will impede movement due to the eddy currents.

Lenz's Law applies.

I don't want to sound like a broken record but Harvey is absolutely correct. Experimenters need to source
non metal, non conductive, materials for use directly inside magnetic fields. Think, carbon composite, fiber glass,
lucite, plastic pipe and engineered stone material for weights. If you don't do this then one experiment does not
immediately let you conclude the success of the next. Note that Lenz braking will be proportional to mass.
In the final version after you sure you've optimized everything then you can try adding in metal. You may be able to
use your device as a space heater who knows? Just Kidding. Remember when Archer said his machine became more
powerful...when he removed his magnet arrays. Also Steel and ferrous metals will magnetize over time changing
magnetic parameters...*if* permanent magnets erase themselves try an aluminum buffer sheet again ala Archer. It
may be that magnetic domains move because of brownian molecular hits causing permanent mag fields to be
slightly more noisy than electrodynamic fields and aluminum may filter and smooth this out.

S:MarkSCoffman

Quote from: shakman on July 13, 2008, 05:59:55 PM
Very nice work Tinsel.
I hope all the hard work goes towards curbing your skepticism  :P

shakman

Thanks, shakman. But there's only one thing (or set of things) that will curb my skepticism, and that's building one that works. Or seeing someone else do it.
I build them myself, generally because nobody will believe me when I tell them their ideas won't work. So I try to get around the objections of improper materials, inaccurate builds, and overenthusiastic designers who only see what they want to see, by building one myself to the designer's specifications or with obvious improvements or buildability mods. Unfortunately, even when these things are done correctly, the devices still won't work...
Except for one time, when this technique backfired on me...but that's another story altogether.

So with my mondrasek rotor, I know it's a bit small and the magnet/weights don't travel very far. But the wheel itself is well-balanced and the bearings are pretty good, and it only takes a miniscule out-of-balance to make the wheel rotate. Even if only one single magnet is out while all the rest are in, the weight shift is enough to overcome friction and rotate the wheel until the heavy spot is down. The magnets slide nicely in the channels from gravity alone at about 30 degrees from horizontal--so if the magnet is near the hub (top magnets) when the wheel rotates so that the channel is about 30 degrees below horizontal, themagnet will slide to the outside under its own weight. Ditto the other side--if the magnet is at the outer rim, as the channel comes up past about 30 degrees above horizontal, the magnet slides under its own weight to the inside stop.
I expected greater angles would be needed--I guess I got the inside of the magnet tubes sufficiently smmootthh enough.
Tomorrow the running mount and the stators.

Interesting design do you have a working unit that you could put up on youtube in action?

I think its logical but how does your heavyside remain heavy do the magnets slip past the little wisbone switch you have made once they reach a certain part on the wheel I guess functionality is kinda a question here how does this wheel function ?

-infringer-

Hey everyone.  I've was draged off to a pool to go swimming with my daughter and wife for the first time ( first time with the daughter and all together).  Well worth it.

TK!  Mad skills!  That is one impressive piece of work, especially manual!  Didn't know we had a machinist in our ranks.  Thank you very much.  Saphire bearings with plastic races?  Where the heck do you work?

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 13, 2008, 08:49:52 PM
Hey everyone.  I've was draged off to a pool to go swimming with my daughter and wife for the first time ( first time with the daughter and all together).  Well worth it.

TK!  Mad skills!  That is one impressive piece of work, especially manual!  Didn't know we had a machinist in our ranks.  Thank you very much.  Saphire bearings with plastic races?  Where the heck do you work?

M.

Thanks, but it's really no big deal. You should see the stuff CLaNZeR builds.
There are lots of machinists of all stripes (get it? you cnc drivers might not) among these threads. I most admire those who can build incredible stuff with only rudimentary tools.
I once saw, back when the Russians were mired in Afghanistan, a documentary that showed an Afghani tribesman sitting on a carpet up in the mountains somewhere, making semi-automatic handguns. He had an original for a model, a bunch of scrap metal bits, a manual drill press and a handful of files. When I saw that I knew the Russians didn't stand a chance. When I remember it, like now, I think the USA doesn't stand a chance over there either.

I made that rotor on the shop's worn-out old Bridgeport mill, with the aid of my fairly good little Sherline rotary table.
The bearings sound fancy, and I suppose they are, in a technical sense, but they aren't really very accurate. They are cheapos from Small Parts Co. that I've had in my junkbox for a long time. I was originally going to put them in my Dirod (http://www.mediafire.com/?kg1diqlmdim) but it wasn't necessary.
I could tell you where I work, but then I'd have to...well, never mind.  ;D

TK,

Well said. 

Have you taken a look at my bearing system?  It's the wheel assembly from one of my rollerblade wheels (in-line skates)!  But "back in the day" we were all about upgrading those so they have ABEC-6 shielded bearings.

Hey everyone.  I want to thank Clanzer first and foremost for bringing credability to this thread like no one else.  Dude, your builds have been followed by people like me who are also thrilled by the WHAT IF factor.  You are one of the reasons I keep coming back to forums like these.  Like you, I many times could see the flaw in a concept, but your builds were always exciting to watch.  Sorry you can't take the week off and keep at it.

Any chance you can show us your new set up before you head off to work?

Thanks to all of you following this thread and those of you working on the concept in your garage.  I have four more mass switches about 1/3 done to go on my set up.  Hopefully work and the baby will let me finish and mount them this week.

This has been the most intense weekend sinced last!  Thankfully I am not alone anymore.

I'll be watching and posting from work all week (unless the MIB come for me LOL)

One last thing ...a special thanks to all of you who are PMing me, especially in languages other than English.  That means we have world wide attention and can get this technology to the masses where it can do the most good ASAP.

Mond, man, do spend that time with family. As you probably know, chasing this particular "pot of gold at the rainbow's end" has been the destruction of many great family relationships. It ain't worth it.
I know.

Just my 2 cents worth. I have talked with mondresek about this at length and he honestly wants this and I quote "for the greater good of mankind" and several times spoke of water desalination, purification and irrigation use in poor countries. These are examples of applications he keeps harping on. So rest assured, if we finally break the gravity wheel curse it will be for the world to use and not one man.

Nice f'n work TK! WOW! that is a beauty, we are anxiously wanting to see more... thanks sir!

Okay.  At work right now.

I finished assembling 4 more mass switch modules for my set up and mounted them this morning.  My wheel now has eight total.  I could notice a big difference in that it took much longer to slow down since the weight imbalance in now larger and closer to the wall force need to overcome for the Gravity Motor to work with perminent magnet stators.

My mass switch magnets were firing way harder than needed, all the way to the top of the 8 1/2 inch long guide tubes on ones where the tube has the least amount of resistance due to my whistle slots having burrs and other irregularities due to my hand built tubes and latches.  So I tried lowering the stators to decrease the wall and only kick the switch magnets up high enough to latch.  The results were fantastic!  I believe it is possible to make a unit run with just these 8 mass switches if the tube and latch designs were low enough friction.  Having the ability to adjust the height of the stator magnets would make it very easy to dial in.  Unfortuantely my build is not easy to adjust (I have everything screwed together with wood screws and have to move things by relocating those).

MO when you get it dialed in, try to shoot some video of it with whatever you have. Between Aaron and I we can convert/encode it into some usable format. Even my digital camera can shoot digital video if you need to borrow. I have a cheapie digital video cam you could use as well didnt think of that, we got tripods and everything you prob need.

Dudeman

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 13, 2008, 07:36:58 PM
...
I build them myself, generally because nobody will believe me when I tell them their ideas won't work. So I try to get around the objections of improper materials, inaccurate builds, and overenthusiastic designers who only see what they want to see, by building one myself to the designer's specifications or with obvious improvements or buildability mods. Unfortunately, even when these things are done correctly, the devices still won't work...
Except for one time, when this technique backfired on me...but that's another story altogether.
....

@Tinsel

Please, do tell... You're not hiding something from us are ya mate?  :-\

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 13, 2008, 05:52:07 PM
This represents about 4 1/2 hours work (I don't use CNC, it's all by hand) and about a quart of WD-40.
.

Really nice work TinselKoala

Think you will find using a old Bridgeport mill, and doing it by hand takes a lot more skill than using a CNC machine, well done.

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 12, 2008, 11:54:12 PM
I thought of using an external magnet or magnet pair, rigidly mounted outside the sliding magnet's tube, to act as the latch. IF done properly it should return the energy taken to drive the slider into the latch field.

Now that is weird I was thinking this while driving up to work this morning.
At first I thought magnets and then my mind drifted to using steel plates on the end of tubes and rubber stops between to make the flux less.

Then it is just making sure the stator is strong enough to push it away.

TinselKoala , is this AL?

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 13, 2008, 10:16:49 PM

Sorry you can't take the week off and keep at it.

Any chance you can show us your new set up before you head off to work?

LOL if I took a week off, everytime I wanted to build something I would be skint. With this FE/OU stuff you have to find a balance as others have said and do not let it rule your life.

I was up at 5:30am and out the door for a long drive to work, so did not have time to take any photos.

I was sorting some bar magnets today, going for a 1 meter Wooden wheel and wanted some nice weighted magnets to make sure it moves and looking to order some these
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fbigrod.jpg&hash=59935c927390ff5cab91f8f59b76b45b82dc1716)

They are Diameter 3/4" x 1.5" in length Rods - Grade N42.
Not sure whether to go for 8 arms or 16 at this point so far.

I then went on to source some Pirex 20mm glass tubes, as this would cut down the friction, but then a second thought that maybe plexiglass would be better as if I need to use latches atleast I can cut it  ;D ;D. The glass tubes would be cool if using the magnets top and bottom for latching though.

Hopefully I will get it sorted and ordered to arrive for the weekend.

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 14, 2008, 11:04:58 AM
MO when you get it dialed in, try to shoot some video of it with whatever you have. Between Aaron and I we can convert/encode it into some usable format. Even my digital camera can shoot digital video if you need to borrow. I have a cheapie digital video cam you could use as well didnt think of that, we got tripods and everything you prob need.

Yep agree get dome videos up, it all helps us and get a close up of those latches as my mind needs to see them in action  ;D ;D

@CLaNZeR: Yep. (Shhh!!)

Here's my mondrasek magnet-assisted gravity wheel, on its base, with axle and bearings.
I didn't have the right camera today so the pix are kind of low-res. Better ones (and stator mounts) tomorrow.The big white thing in the pix is the axle mount, just a block of UHMW plastic to hold the axle securely.
Would you believe--it already almost runs....  even with no stator mags.   ;)
.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F2d3118c5991edbbb0fac5e487d7e49996g.jpg&hash=e253a2b94229e41dccf941566b219932bf756de0)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F2e00de0c8c8e8a49b35489d45d04e10a6g.jpg&hash=b094ba3ca972a04c96d2db983d650ce8104cc71a)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F0b19720c4dfaa3c75dbb2191f88156456g.jpg&hash=329827df77ec75c791f2b4ca14f9d747150e6460)

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 14, 2008, 03:53:57 PM
@CLaNZeR: Yep. (Shhh!!)

LOL  ;D ;D
Nice to see you mate, sorry if I am a bit slow..

Quote

Here's my mondrasek magnet-assisted gravity wheel, on its base, with axle and bearings.
I didn't have the right camera today so the pix are kind of low-res. Better ones (and stator mounts) tomorrow.The big white thing in the pix is the axle mount, just a block of UHMW plastic to hold the axle securely.
Would you believe--it already almost runs....  even with no stator mags.   ;)
.

Looking really good, you are as bad as me and just Love to build :)

Still like the idea of magnets on the end of the tubes, what do you think of using metal instead, just need to find one that does not attract the magnet too much to stop it being pushed away by the stator, maybe the old metal test videos would help us decide?

http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZeR-doing-Gabys-PM-switch-test.wmv

http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZeR-doing-Gabys-PM-switch-test-Part2.wmv

Cheers

Sean.

Clanzer,

My first experimental rig used the simple mass switch design shown in the patent app.  It had the magnet latching at both ends of the tube by attaching magnetically to steel pins.  These can be used to make a gravity motor, but there are several problems.

1)  Centrifical force becomes more of a concern.  If the wheel is spinning too fast the magnets will not reach their target which is also true with the mechanical latch.  Both are RPM self regulating in this respect.  But if the wheel moved too slow they can hit their targets with too much force and bounce back.  Therefore you must design switch lengths for a specific RPM range.  The switches with latches are never limited by the wheel running slow at start up.

2)  The stator magnets are also attracted to whatever ferous end cap/target you use on the mass switches and slow the wheel.

3)  Centrifical force combines with gravity on the bottom but is against gravity on the top.  So the kick needed from the stator magnets is different on the top and bottom.  The length of the tube cannot be perfectly optimized for a given RPM.  Using the center latch allows me a broad band of RPMs to work with since I can always overshoot the latch with lttle or no negative effects.  However, the need for different upper and lower stator magnet forces may be overcome by placing the stator magnets at different distances away from the switches at 6 and 12 however.

It was because of these issues that I wanted to latch mechanically.  It is a more robust and forgiving design upon start up and can still be optimized with the proper load and stator magnet positioning.  And it had the effect of almost doubling the travel distance of the switch magnets in the 9-12 and 3-6 quadrants.

I believe the ultimate design will end up being to have two separate one way gravity latches at each end.  That way you could fire the switch magnet the entire length of the tube (easily more than the 8 1/2 inches in my build) and hold it there, not at only past a latch in the middle.  With this improvement all the light side magnets would be at the axel end of long switch tubes and all the heavy side magnets would be at the rim end of long switch tubes.  This would maximize available output torque, but would also require two latches per switch (more work to build in a prototype but not a problem for production devices).

TK, I look forward to seeing your work.  Unfortunately my connection here at work will not allow the pictures from where you are posting to load.  Any chance you can embed them in the forum like Clanzer is doing (and he did with mine)?  I wanted to show some co-workers your work.

TK!  Very slick.  I also like your nick!  Very fresh.

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 14, 2008, 04:25:14 PM

1)  Centrifical force becomes more of a concern.  If the wheel is spinning too fast the magnets will not reach their target which is also true with the mechanical latch.  Both are RPM self regulating in this respect.  But if the wheel moved too slow they can hit their targets with too much force and bounce back.  Therefore you must design switch lengths for a specific RPM range.  The switches with latches are never limited by the wheel running slow at start up.

2)  The stator magnets are also attracted to whatever ferous end cap/target you use on the mass switches and slow the wheel.

3)  Centrifical force combines with gravity on the bottom but is against gravity on the top.  So the kick needed from the stator magnets is different on the top and bottom.  The length of the tube cannot be perfectly optimized for a given RPM.  Using the center latch allows me a broad band of RPMs to work with since I can always overshoot the latch with lttle or no negative effects.  However, the need for different upper and lower stator magnet forces may be overcome by placing the stator magnets at different distances away from the switches at 6 and 12 however.

It was because of these issues that I wanted to latch mechanically.  It is a more robust and forgiving design upon start up and can still be optimized with the proper load and stator magnet positioning.  And it had the effect of almost doubling the travel distance of the switch magnets in the 9-12 and 3-6 quadrants.

I believe the ultimate design will end up being to have two separate one way gravity latches at each end.  That way you could fire the switch magnet the entire length of the tube (easily more than the 8 1/2 inches in my build) and hold it there, not at only past a latch in the middle.  With this improvement all the light side magnets would be at the axel end of long switch tubes and all the heavy side magnets would be at the rim end of long switch tubes.  This would maximize available output torque, but would also require two latches per switch (more work to build in a prototype but not a problem for production devices).

Okay get what you are saying about the Centrifugal force and if it becomes a self runner then agree that at a certain RPM the effect will be removed, but this will make the wheel slow down, which then will make the effect kick back in, so self tuning really as it falls back into sync.

After just experiementing this weekend I can see that at a certain RPM the magnets are flown right to the stops on the slider and when you get past a certain speed the magnetic interactions are just not there. But what about a mechanical latch with two individual pins as you can on each tube as you says, that gets triggered when the magnet hits the Stop end and drops by gravity again?.

So much for me getting an early night.

Just had a thought.

What if the tubes were filled with a liquid/fluid of some sort that had the correct viscosity to allow the magnet to shoot upwards but slowly let it drift down, just enough time to get past the the 12:00 to 3:00 mark and the 6:00 to 6:45 mark.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Fliq.jpg&hash=9fd2b86c71c9d34f43014f809cdf748310aca360)

Cheers

Sean.

I think one way to combat the centrifugal forces is by a "brute force" approach by incorporating an array of stator mags from 6-9 o'clock as Archer Quinn did in his Sword of God design.

I'm not sure what dentrimental effects this might have on the wheel, particularly at slow speeds, but one idea might be to have some smaller/weaker stators positions such that if the sliding magnet is above the latch the interaction with the stator is minimal, if it is below the latch (centrifugal forces at play) then there will be multiple repels fired at spaced intervals before gravity takes over (at which point if we're not past the latch we're probably screwed anyway).

Anyway, as always, a picture says a thousand words so I won't waffle on too much. Take a look and let me know what you think.

shakman

PS Clanzer/TK brilliant work so far guys!

EDIT: Removed incorrect pic

Oops, I forgot to change the size of the additional stators.   :-[
Here's what I meant to post...

Hi Folks,

Naudin made some force measurements between two repel magnets when they approch each other from sideways and then axially, see this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/2magpup.htm

Unfortunately, I am not aware of any further info on anyone's using this shown difference between the two forces since 1998...

The mass switch here just seems to utilize this force difference, right?

rgds,  Gyula

Shakman,

I think your additional kicker magnets would help to latch a magnet that had not made the latch at 6 due to centrifical force.  But I'm not sure if this would help.  We would have lost the energy from the failed kick attempt already and slowed the wheel without accomplishing the goal of re-positioning the switch magnet.  A second kick would slow it down a second time, etc.

I think it would be best to avoid allowing the wheel to accelerate to this centrifical failure mode speed.  The wheel should be coupled to a load (generator) that keeps it at the RPM where the design is most efficient.  Higher RPM does not gain us anything in the wheel.  If you need high RPM just build a slow wheel with lots of torque and run the output to a gear box to wind up a higher RPM drive shaft.  I see the gravity motor wheel being constant low RPM.

Gyula,

I wasn't aware that the forces were so unbalance when approaching from the side vs. co-axially.  That would definitely work in our favor.  It also explains why the wall doesn't feel that strong for the kick we witness when the switch fires. 

I so wish I had measurement equipment.  And every machine tool in the MicroMark catelog!  Maybe someday...

Thanks for the link.  Good stuff there.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 14, 2008, 07:24:55 PM
Gyula,

I wasn't aware that the forces were so unbalance when approaching from the side vs. co-axially.  That would definitely work in our favor.  It also explains why the wall doesn't feel that strong for the kick we witness when the switch fires. 

I so wish I had measurement equipment.  And every machine tool in the MicroMark catelog!  Maybe someday...

Thanks for the link.  Good stuff there.

A few posts back I detailed (or tried to) how to tell if your experiments are helping, hurting, or having no effect.  All you need is a known mass, a yardstick, a stopwatch, and a piece of string. For qualitative measurements (simply to tell if a change helped or harmed) you don't even need to know the mass--just use the same wrench every time.

Tomorrow if I have time I will try to illustrate what I mean with a video, using my Evil Skeptic build of the Mondrashek Magnet-Assisted Gravity Wheel. 

Of course this technique is based on the assumption that a change for the better, would reduce friction or add thrust, which would equate to a longer rundown time for a known energy input, and a change for the worse, or no effect, would give shorter or unchanged rundown times. This seems like a logical assumption to me, and is very likely to be true, unless there is some "quantum jump" from a non-performer to a real runner under unusual conditions, like maybe a higher rpm is required to initiate an effect. For example something like this might happen: a configuration doesn't self start, nor run from a low rpm, but if spun up faster than the "centrifugal lockout" rpm, it might catch and start running, sustaining, as it slowed and the magnet/weights started to drop. Odd effects like this have been noted before, in certain other devices, and it makes things a bit harder to test, but still, there are (cheap and effective ) ways, if it comes to that.

(It is surprising to me how few experimenters (even in physics laboratories!!) are willing to do the simplest control experiments. Personally, I think it would save a lot of time if they did them more often.)

All,

Here is the what I can't get past that make the design workable for me.

We know we can make mass switches and fire them at the 6 and 12 o-clock positions.  The stators magnets that cause them to fire have a repulsive force that must be overcome as the magnets in the mass switches approach.  Lets can this force "F" for each stator, so we have 2xF force against rotation of the wheel.

If you start with only two mass switches on your wheel you have a measurable imbalance that will try to rotate the wheel due to gravity.  This force may not be greater than 2xF so the wheel will not run.  But add a second pair of mass switches so that you have four total and the measurable imbalance due to gravity will increase.  However, the repulsive force 2xF did not increase.  Continue adding mass switches as needed until you have an imbalance that exceeds 2xF.  If you run out of room on a given wheel size/configuration, increase the wheel size so you can add more mass switches.

Does the repulsive force 2xF not remain the same?  Is not the imbalance increasing everytime a mass switch pair is added?

Of course there is a lot more going on and I can only theorize with the knowledge that I have at hand.  I am no fanatic who is 100% confident this wil work.  I just have not been shown or learned the reason why this simple logic does not mean it must work.  I would love for someone to show or teach me the flaw so I can just move on.

Sharing ideas is a great way to brainstorm; however, I am confused about the premise in which these ideas are allowed to exist.  There are only two ideas I can think of 1) being that conventional physics has limitations to its validity, and 2) Gravity is a deletable energy supply.

If #1 is true, then I can understand how someone can ignore the conservation of energy law that states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.  If that is the case, I can understand why there is a high level of interest in this proposed device.

If #2 is true, that would mean that as more people build gravity motors, that people would weigh less because gravity would be depleted.  Clearly, that would make a lot of people happy since they wouldn't have to diet, but doesn't the end result mean people end off floating into space when all gravity is depleted?

I applaud creativity in trying to solve major issues, but my curiosity stems from the lack of understanding to the rules applied to the filtering of ideas.  I would be interested to understand if anyone has taken the time to do an energy balance, and my guess is that this has not happened.  I wonder if it has, if the results have been verified by a second source to check the validity of the calculations.  If the calculations are accurate and there shows to be a net energy output, then I understand the effort.  If they turn out that the energy is balanced, and there is a debate as to the accuracy of the laws of physics then I understand the effort.

My guess is the work done by the magnets has not been done or done accurately.  I have at my disposal, magnetic analysis software that I have been using for 20+ years and I would offer to take the other energy calculations and compare them to the work done via the magnetic field.  I know most people do not understand magnetism, and I am guessing that is the real missing link in why effort is being done to build a prototype.  I am not trying to be discouraging, but I am trying to offer conclusive evidence as to the result

The only thing I can add is that the repulsive wall might be considered per degree of rotation. So every time you add a mass switch, yes you are not creating more resistance but it is occuring more often so that would hurt inertia wouldnt it? All these problems will become evident when someone succeeds with an adjustable model to play with. We may find it works better with less tubes or more, it may be a cancelling factor since every tube pair adds another "wall" but yes I see your point in that there is more mass on the heavy side to counter this. If we take the wall out of the equation with pulse electromagnet then it wouldnt matter anyway, but all the ME that I talk to seem to think the repulsion of the 12 and 6 magnets will counter any energy generated by the clockwise motion even with a pulse firing circuit. and when I bring that up, they think even with BEMF circuit that it will consume more energy than the wheel could generate. I think the bottom line is that we need to see it in action in real life to answer all these questions. Im anxious for all 3 of you to complete each of your models.

Im kind of unhappy that TK and Clanzer are not taking to your little switch/catch though. Its too simple and I feel adding latching magnets is just clouding the design. I was picturing a tube style deal like MO came up with but slotted all the way up and down such that you could move your switch/catch on a separate small plate and adjust where the magnet is captured. Also slot and make adjustable the stator magnets as far as space would allow. Then a various assortment of different strength magnets with similar diameter, but diff lenths and densities maybe. I know all this would take a lot of work and cost a bit though. 

I wish I had more formal education on this stuff. Its really interesting to me.

I will be traveling by you today, I can drop off that camera sometime.

Git er dun guys! LOLOLOL

Magnet Helper,

Dudeman750 let me know you are his contact that reviewed this yesterday.  Thanks for taking the time and offering to do what I always expected:  Sim or calculate the system.  I welcome your assistance.

Clanzer and TK both love to build.  And both do it when they know why the design will not work due to their own individual passions.

A build was not what I had expected, but I welcome them since noo ne yet had a better way to show me the flaw in this concept.  A sim or explanation of which law of physics this violates (that I can understand) is all I am looking for.  Barring that, I have to pursue.

I do not believe this rewrites any current laws.  If it runs it is due to our miss understanding of gravity as a usable force.

A simple electric motor runs due to the attraction of perminant magnets and electromagnets in a rotor/stator configuaration.  The electric energy is used to create magnetic fields and switch them so that the perminant magnets are in a state of continual attraction.  The elecricity is not the force that makes the motor run.  It is the attractive magnetic field forces, not the electricity that turns the motor.  The perminant magnets do not get weakend by the use of this force.

Gravity is also an attractive force.  We have not been able to make a motor of the same type as the simple electric motor using gravity because we cannot change the direction of gravity.  But if we harnessed gravity in some way I believe it would also not weaken, similar to the perminant magnets not weakening in the simple electric motor.

Just to stem some foreseeable rebutals, I am aware that perminant magnets decay with time and heat, etc. but that is a materials and environment issue, and is not caused by using their attractive force to make a motor rotate.

If this is a duplicate then I apologize, but I did not see where my last post ended up.

What I was essentially saying was that as a background, I was a motor designer for 4 years so I understand the magnetic/electrical aspects and that I am a PE with undergrad in ME, so I understand the dynamics aspect.  I also have dynamic software simulation capability as well as the magnetic analysis simulation so I should be able to tell you about anything you want to know about this concept. 

I would be happy to model this if you can give me the dimensions and materials. This way, you would be able to have information for making any other decisions.

Magnet Helper,

Great.  Let's start a model using some common materials.  I recently ordered and received 24 1/2 dia x 1/2 long neodymium magnets rated ~ N45.

I'd like to have them in phenolic tubse that are .580 ID and .75 OD (not so common, I know, but not as exotic as carbon fiber and very available).  OAL we'll make 8 inches.  Capture the magnets in the the tube with phenolic disks .75 dia and .05 thick.

Can you wing the whistle cuts and latch or do you need me to CAD something up?  Latch can be brass for now.

Mount the tube and latch to a 1/4 x 2 x 7 wood strip with 1/2 x 2 champhers at the end that will point towards the axel like in the pictures of my build on the bottom of page 2.  The tube should hang off each end of the wood strip equially.  This will be one switch module.

We can start with an array of 4 modules on a 24 inch diameter wheel.  Wheel should be wood 24 dia and 3/8 thick.  Array equally so the bottom edge of each mass switch is hanging 1/4 inch past the rim of the wheel.  Bearing system is up to you.  Should not need to be non-conductive or anything special.

The stators will be 1/2 x 1/4 x 1 N40 neodymium magnets.  Place them in position so that the 1 x 1/2 surfaces are centered and face the bottom of the switch tubes when at 6 and 12.  The switches should approach the 1 inch edge.  Adjust the gap between the stators and the switches so that they throw the switch magnets up the tubes just far enough to make past and then fall back and catch on the latch when the wheel is forced to rotate 33 RPM.  That'll be our maximum RPM design target.

We can begin doubling mass switches on the wheel as needed from here.  Also, we can increase the wheel diameter if need be (unless we find what makes this another non-runner idea first).

Let me know if you have any difficulties with this plan or need more info.  Also, PM me if you want to exchange or have my cell number to discuss further.

M.

The information you supplied looks sufficient to get started.  I will probably ignore the latch since I was really only interested in the inertia of the wheel and the latches won't add much based on the other components.

This will take a while to get the magnets correct since I have to find the equilibrium point, or at least get a close approximation.

One thing I just realized, and you don't have to comment, but you mentioned something about 33 RPM.  The way I see this working (if it works the way it is intended) is that there is always a torque applied to the wheel due to it being out of balance.  Unless there is a friction, the torque will continually apply an acceleration, so the wheel would continue to gain speed with time.  We know, that in the practical world there will be some friction, but I am wondering where the 33 rpm's came from.

As I said before, it is not important because my model will calculate the net torque and determine the acceleration and velocity and be able to plot them with time.  Of course, my model will not include friction, so you will see the best available scenario.  I can put in friction if I wish, but I don't think that will be necessary.

MH,

Centrifical force is in play and acting on each switch magnet with increasing force as the RPM increases.

If we set the stators to mass switch gap so that the switch magnet only fires high enough to make the latch at 33RPM, the switches will not fire high enough to reach the latch at 34 or higher RPM.  The design is self governing with respect to RPM.  It cannot run awy beyond the RPM where centrifical force causes the bottom switches to stop working.  If it does it will slow back to 33RPM and below where the switching will begin to operate properly again.

I just chose 33RPM arbitrarily as a design parameter for this test.

Having the stator magnets closer to the switches than necessary to just sustain 33RPM would allow for a higher maximum RPM.  But doing so also increases the wall that is the repeling force each stator has when each mass switch approaches.  It would increase the number of switches and possibly the diameter we would need to build a self running device.

I hope to adjust the other variables in this design so that it works with the 24 1/2 dia and 1/2 long magnets I have or less.  This is so (if we run) others can build a replica relatively simply and easily.

M.

Hi Everyone,
  Just playing catchup on this thread.. Its all looking and sounding very good and all positive input. Just thought I will pop by and say well done and a very big up to the builders taking this concept on (nice) .....  8)

Just a thought from a newbie here.  I can understand the whole wall thing when two magnets interact with each other, but what if there were no magnets in the rods

Just a piece of metal/ball/whatever that would be repulsed by the magnet on the outside at 6, past the latch.  Then the same would occur with the magnet on the inside at 12.

Would there still be a wall ?

ThothTheSecond,

Unfortunately a magnet will only attract ferous objects.  It can only repel if interacting with another magnet.  At least as far as we know so far.

Thanks for the reply, was just playing with a couple of small fridge magnets and a piece of metal and realized how silly an idea that was.  Hard to input anything with all you smart people here.  Back to my lurky chair.

We all played with magnets, and still do.

And let me add, any idea is worth listening to.  You'd be suprised how many will not listen to me.  But I must continue until someone shows me exactly how this will not work.   Everything I do leads me to the same conclusion:  This will work.  But as an Engineer I still cannot accept it myself.  It is too radical a change to my understanding of the Universe.

If it does not work I will continue on content with the life I have and had before this idea came to me.  I was not actively trying to make a gravity motor.  I was just looking at a Clanzer build and doing what I do best:  Working to simplify and optimize the design to save cost of manufacturing.  The mass switch idea happened by accident.  It's been a snowball running downhill picking up speed and size ever since.

Cheers,

M.

Are there any of you brainiacs who think you understand magnetism and gravity? I watched a show that dealt with quantum physics and part of it basically stated that science can't fully understand the principles. Don't magnets and gravity break your laws of physics? Isnt a magnet pulling a paper clip breaking some rule? And where does that energy come from? The fact that mass has gravity? Where does that come from? Where does the matter go into a singularity? Out a white hole? How does it get there? Through a worm hole? Is the matter time traveling? Does time even exist?

Ok enough fun, dont wanna shift the thread just kidding guys.

Ow. my head hurts... LOL

Lots of interesting posts.
What I would like to see is a video of mondrasek's latches in operation. I understand their function but I do not understand exactly how they are implemented.
My magnet latch idea will work as intended but only with a third stator set to release the latch, and of course every time you have magnets moving past each other you have that "wall" which takes energy to overcome.
Magnet Helper seems to understand that you cannot extract energy from a conservative field--I laughed at the image of gravity motor builders getting lighter as gravity depletes.
I have detailed how to tell if your changes are helping, and I promised a video of me using this technique on the Evil Skeptic build. But I had no time today to do it. Maybe tomorrow.

But--I did make some stator mounts and improved the wheel hub to take out the bearing play. This unit almost runs--it actually accelerates occasionally at certain points around the wheel..then of course it slows down. The other folks in the lab are amazed, first that I of all people would build such a thing, then, they are amazed at how it "almost" runs.
Then I remind them that the PE of a mass depends only on its height and is independent of the route it takes to get there, and that to lift a mass, takes "work" which is energy expended during a time interval, and is also independent of the path taken to lift the mass. So, the wheel lifts a weight, doing a certain work on the mass, by lifiting it against gravity. Gravity then returns exactly the same amount of work as the weight descends. Not More!! Not even Less!! The same amount!!! That is why we call it a "conservative" field or force (it is actually neither a field nor a force, but that is beside the point, it is still conservative.) In the absence of all losses, spin the wheel and it will keep turning forever.  Introduce real world losses, like friction, like overcoming the magnet "wall", like air resistance, etc. and the wheel inevitably will slow down and stop.
Magnets "work" the same way. The addition of a repulsive modality doesn't change things one bit, wrt magnetism, which is also a conservative field or force.
Magnets do NOT do work!! Not even in an electric motor. The work is done by a prime mover, like the sun, which evaporates water which rains into reservoirs and is allowed to fall through turbines to convert some of the sun's power into electrical power, which is then used to React against the magnets in the motor to cause a torque. If you hold the magnets still (like in a mounted motor) the armature produces useful torque. The work is NOT coming from the magnets, nor is it coming from the gravity that pulls the water through the electrical turbine at the dam. It is coming from the sun, which lifted the water in the first place.

OK, there is one explanation as to why gravity wheels won't work. For them to work, either gravity must be depleted, as Magnet Helper says, or conservation of momentum must be violated. Neither of these things occur in this universe, and it's a good thing too, because if they did, we wouldn't be here.

So, here are some more pix of TinselKoala's Evil Skeptic build of the Mondrasek Magnet-assisted Gravity Wheel.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F6b56282f5589c651ac185e55e027742b4g.jpg&hash=4f5f8686401159bd31900dd9c465b54fda028704)
.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F4f0a3ed2dc34f9051ba3d3a2da7c54e44g.jpg&hash=ed5f2a733ca293cb0d28cd95df6ca1be438d0daf)
.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F4d359c255733142ada82d75a2eb6444b4g.jpg&hash=c602485c97a307968b4663c9511f396b2deed5be)
.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Fimgbnc.php%2F417e69d2b3d782ba03a346e6b1eaea984g.jpg&hash=e28791cdfa914369daddb11badb41ddd3c85e5e7)
.

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 15, 2008, 09:12:37 PM
Are there any of you brainiacs who think you understand magnetism and gravity? I watched a show that dealt with quantum physics and part of it basically stated that science can't fully understand the principles. Don't magnets and gravity break your laws of physics? Isnt a magnet pulling a paper clip breaking some rule? And where does that energy come from? The fact that mass has gravity? Where does that come from? Where does the matter go into a singularity? Out a white hole? How does it get there? Through a worm hole? Is the matter time traveling? Does time even exist?

Ok enough fun, dont wanna shift the thread just kidding guys.

Ow. my head hurts... LOL

LOL is right!!
Guess what: no experiment, no phenomenon, nothing in the real world is able to violate the "laws" of physics. What really happens is that a new phenomenon may be discovered that appears to violate some law. If the phenomenon is real, then the laws must be rewritten to accommodate it. The perfect example in this context is Newtonian gravitation. It was OK as long as we couldn't make really good measurements, but even so there were discrepancies that we could measure, but couldn't explain (like the precession of Mercury's perihelion, for example.) These discrepancies (and others) hinted that Newton's gravitation was at best incomplete, and at worst simply wrong. So folks like Minkowski, Einstein, and that Copenhagen mob doodled up a more complete and more accurate Theory. Someday when we can make the right measurements, we will have to discard General Relativity and adopt something better. This does not mean that the new, deeper measurements are revealing violations of some physical "law."  What it means is that the theory behind the existing "laws" is, at best incomplete and at worst, simply wrong.
(Newtonian physics is so good that we were able to soft-land land a robot probe on Saturn's moon Titan, using Newtonian dynamics and "law" of gravitation. That's pretty darn good shootin', for a "wrong" law, if you ask me.)

I showed the build to one of my colleagues today and he instantly came up with a good idea. In mond's patent app the first embodiment uses ferromagnetic pins to retain the sliding magnets at the ends of their travel. We realize however that the pins will be attracted to the stator magnets and will make an even worse "wall" to overcome.

BUT: instead of pins retaining the magnets, use a continuous iron wire of the right (small) diameter going all around the periphery of the wheel, and a similar wire or ring on the inside. There will be no wall added as the wire or ring goes all around with no gaps; the small sliders will be retained by the wire at either extreme of travel, until the next stator pushes the magnet away.
I haven't tried it but it seems logical.

Yes, TK but if we simplify this down to a lever on a fulcrum, wont gravity always pull equal weight on the longer side down? Is that not what this is in its simplest form? Im no mechanical engineer or PE but that is what I see when I reduce this machine down  in my mind. Am I wrong? I feel like I have been following along with all of you who are very much more educated than me fairly well. Im no genius but through the years I have done a lot of optical, mechanical and electrical work and tinkering. For me maybe not knowing all the LAWs of physics and energy make it simpler to see. Don't get me wrong, im still not sure if this thing will work or not. Im on the fence totally. I have listened to both sides of the coin and still no one has definitavely  said " this will not work because of _______" reason. All of you keep saying it goes against a law or theory and im just hard headed enough to want to see for myself. Thats probably the only reason im still onboard and active besides supporting my friend.

Just my 2 cents worth again. If you tell me im an idiot it won't bother me a bit. Im still young enough not to care... LOL  (much) lol

Sorry,

But TinselKoala is playing everybody for a fool.

Regards, Larry

Quote from: LarryC on July 16, 2008, 12:31:57 AM
Sorry,

But TinselKoala is playing everybody for a fool.

Regards, Larry

Hmm--let's see. I've put in nearly two fulltime days building a mondrasek wheel (this is work for which I could have billed 800 dollars), I've sketched a design variant, I've tried to explain clearly the conventional explanations of why it won't work, I've posted photos and videos, I've given educational links...and I'm playing everybody for a fool.
Thanks, Larry, for the heads up.
Better look out!! The EVIL SKEPTIC is gonna get you!!!

Quote from: LarryC on July 16, 2008, 12:31:57 AM
Sorry,

But TinselKoala is playing everybody for a fool.

Regards, Larry

I am interestedin NOT being played for a fool.  Please elaborate as to what TK is saying/doing that is playing us?

thanks

@dudeman: all I can say is, yes, you are right, but you don't go far enough. Let me put it this way: What goes up must come down. And, more importantly, what goes down must have gone up.
All the available work from one end of your lever going down, is used up "resetting" the system for another cycle (or another mass switch to "fire".) The mondrasek wheel, mine or anybody else's, will not work.
Care to wager a thousand dollars of Monopoly Money on it? I'd bet against it in a heartbeat.

EDIT Of course I do encourage you to see for yourself. That is why I do what I do--I'm seeing for myself. In spite of Larry's opinion, I'm not "playing anyone for a fool". I am really seriously trying to keep some extremely creative and intelligent people from wasting the time and money they could be using actually to improve the world, or at least some little part of it.

@All,

Just review his post, just review his post on Roll on the 20th June, if it is not obivious then accept him for what he says he is.

Regards, Larry

Quote from: LarryC on July 16, 2008, 01:05:23 AM
@All,

Just review his post, just review his post on Roll on the 20th June, if it is not obivious then accept him for what he says he is.

Regards, Larry

Which post #, which post # on Roll on the 20th June?

Quote from: LarryC on July 16, 2008, 01:05:23 AM
@All,

Just review his post, just review his post on Roll on the 20th June, if it is not obivious then accept him for what he says he is.

Regards, Larry

I have a direct quote from Archer Quinn's own website where he says his first wheel on that site, the one he started with, "ran roughly" and "was working" until he decided to smooth it out by fixing the axle. This, to me, means that he had a working wheel that ran of itself. Or is not being exactly truthful.
If the first, why doesn't he just fix that one. If the second, why the heck are people sending him money?

So I want him to fix that first wheel and show it, so nobody can call him a deluded baldfaced liar.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 16, 2008, 12:49:02 AM
@dudeman: all I can say is, yes, you are right, but you don't go far enough. Let me put it this way: What goes up must come down. And, more importantly, what goes down must have gone up.
All the available work from one end of your lever going down, is used up "resetting" the system for another cycle (or another mass switch to "fire".) The mondrasek wheel, mine or anybody else's, will not work.
Care to wager a thousand dollars of Monopoly Money on it? I'd bet against it in a heartbeat.

EDIT Of course I do encourage you to see for yourself. That is why I do what I do--I'm seeing for myself. In spite of Larry's opinion, I'm not "playing anyone for a fool". I am really seriously trying to keep some extremely creative and intelligent people from wasting the time and money they could be using actually to improve the world, or at least some little part of it.

Well, TK at least you are man enough to admit what you are trying to accomplish and you are much better a man than most of the hidden distractors. You have earned my respect for that statement. Just keep in mind that the researcher on this site don't care if the goal is impossible according to known physics. We just don't believe that all is known and will continue to explore new possibilities no matter the odds.

Regards, Larry 

Here is another latch suggestion. Instead of putting steel wire over whole tube, just put it at center of tube. The end of the magnet closest to the center of the tube will be attracted to the steel wire and held in place until a stronger force pulls (or pushes) it away.

In above latch suggestion there will be some energy lost to eddy currents, but the simplicity of the design seems to make it a good choice for easy to make units. Eddy currents can be eliminated by putting a vertical slot in the steel sleeve.

Okay all.  I've finally figured out (in terms that I can understand) why this will not work.  My assumption was that the only major force that needed to be overcome is the repeling force of the stator magnets.  I thought this could be overcome by the fact that we can put as many mass switches on a wheel as necessary to create an imbalance that would do so.  But there is a limit to how many switches can fit on a wheel of a given diameter.  My solution to that was to increase the wheel as needed.  But here's the catch:  The repeling force of the stator magnets is applying a negative torque which is force x distance.  When the wheel is scaled the stator magnets move further out as well and therefore the resistive torque (not force) is also scaling linearly.

I made up some  drawings and charts to see if maybe the torque due to the larger wheel and more switches scaled faster than the resistive stator torque.  But it does not.  I have posted those in the download section for those that would like to see.  I used a mass switch with the 1/2 dia x 1/2 long magnets Magnet Helper was helping to model.  I shortened the guide tube to 5 inches and planned to fire the magnet that complete distance and latch at each end.

I did drawing and calculation showing a 24 inch wheel with 8, then 16, then 32 mass switches.  I then upped the wheel size to 48 inches and repeated with 8, 16, and 32.  The torque imbalance for these were identical to on the smaller wheel as many of you could have predicted.  The larger size wheel allowed me to double the number of switches again to 64.  But if you look at the gains in torque due to the imbalance it is not increasing proportionally or greater as would be needed to overcome the resistive stator torque.  The increase in torques are approximately:

8 to 16 switches - 208% increase in torque
16 to 32 switches - 202% increase in torque
32 to 64 switches - 201 % increase in torque

So the gains are diminishing.

Another problem is that as you put more and more switches on the wheel they become closer together and not just one switch magnet is being repelled by the stator magnet, but several.  Then next two or three are also starting to be repelled.

So unless the firing of the magnet upwards by approaching the stators from the sides allows it to fly so high that the resulting Potential Energy is more than the energy required to move it into firing position this idea is another version of every other gravity wheel and will not work.

Oh well.  I never set out to build a gravity wheel .  Or any other OU or "free energy" device since I don't believe those can exist without finding some unknown phenomenon or force.  But I could not see the flaw in this idea and the more I thought about it, the more intriguing it became.  For a simple electric motor can make torque due to the attraction of magnetic fields.  And magnetic field are conservative fields of force, just like gravity.  But in the motor we use electricity to make some of the fields generate in different directions so that the rotor keeps turning.  Gravity is always in one direction and we cannot generate it in different directions like with magnets.  But now I see the flaw. 

Thanks,

M.

And finaly, the video of the simple latch.  Sorry it is so blurry.  Dudeman750 loaned me a little camera/vido/MP3 thing he had lying around and it's focus ain't great up close.  But it records straight to MPEG4 so it was the easiest.  All I have is a HD one the records to tape that we use to video the baby and local wildlife.  I haven't tried converting that on the computer to a format and size that would be uploadable here.  I'm not much of a picture/video geek myself.

You'll see how the toggle easily catches the magnet as I rock one tube back and forth near 3 o'clock.  You can also see how easily the magnets slide in the paper tubes, especially once a bit of dry graphite has worked it's way in.  Next I try to show a switch fire at the 6 o-clock position.  It does not latch does not catch the first time.  Right before you will here the switch at 12 fire.  Then I spin it and let it run out. 

Quote from: mondrasek on July 16, 2008, 08:18:39 AM
Okay all.  I've finally figured out (in terms that I can understand) why this will not work.  My assumption was that the only major force that needed to be overcome is the repeling force of the stator magnets.  I thought this could be overcome by the fact that we can put as many mass switches on a wheel as necessary to create an imbalance that would do so.  But there is a limit to how many switches can fit on a wheel of a given diameter.  My solution to that was to increase the wheel as needed.  But here's the catch:  The repeling force of the stator magnets is applying a negative torque which is force x distance.  When the wheel is scaled the stator magnets move further out as well and therefore the resistive torque (not force) is also scaling linearly.

I made up some  drawings and charts to see if maybe the torque due to the larger wheel and more switches scaled faster than the resistive stator torque.  But it does not.  I have posted those in the download section for those that would like to see.  I used a mass switch with the 1/2 dia x 1/2 long magnets Magnet Helper was helping to model.  I shortened the guide tube to 5 inches and planned to fire the magnet that complete distance and latch at each end.

I did drawing and calculation showing a 24 inch wheel with 8, then 16, then 32 mass switches.  I then upped the wheel size to 48 inches and repeated with 8, 16, and 32.  The torque imbalance for these were identical to on the smaller wheel as many of you could have predicted.  The larger size wheel allowed me to double the number of switches again to 64.  But if you look at the gains in torque due to the imbalance it is not increasing proportionally or greater as would be needed to overcome the resistive stator torque.  The increase in torques are approximately:

8 to 16 switches - 208% increase in torque
16 to 32 switches - 202% increase in torque
32 to 64 switches - 201 % increase in torque

So the gains are diminishing.

Another problem is that as you put more and more switches on the wheel they become closer together and not just one switch magnet is being repelled by the stator magnet, but several.  Then next two or three are also starting to be repelled.

So unless the firing of the magnet upwards by approaching the stators from the sides allows it to fly so high that the resulting Potential Energy is more than the energy required to move it into firing position this idea is another version of every other gravity wheel and will not work.

Oh well.  I never set out to build a gravity wheel .  Or any other OU or "free energy" device since I don't believe those can exist without finding some unknown phenomenon or force.  But I could not see the flaw in this idea and the more I thought about it, the more intriguing it became.  For a simple electric motor can make torque due to the attraction of magnetic fields.  And magnetic field are conservative fields of force, just like gravity.  But in the motor we use electricity to make some of the fields generate in different directions so that the rotor keeps turning.  Gravity is always in one direction and we cannot generate it in different directions like with magnets.  But now I see the flaw. 

Thanks,

M.

Are you saying it is "game over?"

Yep.  It's can't work based off of everything I knew, have learned, and finally figured out.  It was a simple mistake of thinking the repulsive force of the stators would not change, and therefore I could always increase the torque due to gravity to overcome by scaling the wheel diameter and adding switches.  But the repulsive force of the stators is also acting as a torque and scaling the wheel diameter directly scales the repulsive force.  Easy to see now.  Wish someone could have seen/explained it in those terms to me slighly less than two weeks ago.

Back again.  How about a combination trigate/Mondrasek wheel

@ mondrasek
Where did you post your video?

Here.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl

Well, good, I suppose. There are other reasons besides the scaling one, more fundamental ones, that don't require an engineering analysis, as I have tried to show.
For what it's worth,  I videoed the test procedure I spoke of earlier, and had some interesting results. Perhaps it is moot now: after all we are seeing an event that is extremely rare in these parts: a free energy invention repudiated by the inventor.
And so soon, too. I expected it to go for at least a couple more weeks.
Well, anyway, here's the video. It's about 16 minutes long, 4 separate configurations tested, 14 trials total. The silly thing almost runs. Almost. He hee heeee....
(And by the way, not shown in the video but tried later: JK's idea of using a ferromagnetic wire in place of latches, or pins as in the first embodiment, looks like it will work. Not as free energy, just in place of latches. I'll try to illustrate tomorrow.)
(if anybody is still interested...)
http://www.mediafire.com/?wuldel0syug
about 48 MB

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2008, 12:40:36 AM

(if anybody is still interested...)

Yes - still interested.

Tx for the vid.  Nice build.

I would like to see a vid with the wire/pins in place of the latches and the results.
From the original design - it seemed the mags should stay at the top of the tube, rather than settle to the middle where the latches were. (and/or the latches should be at the top rather than middle) ?
The pins/wire should accomplish this.

What are you using for a bearing?  It seems kind of tight...

Interesting to see the 1:00 and 7:00 stators gave better run times than no mags.

Odd how quickly mondrasek gave up after (apparently) spending $3,000 on a patent application....

Doesn't the saying go : "if at first you don't succeed - try again!"  ;)

@ TK

would love to see you finish the wheel with the latches.

I think you could use the mondresek (its mon-dray-sek) latches if you carefully slotted into your channels and attached a small block to the front or back of the wheel to hold the pivot pin. Then the block would act as the stop as well, EDIT: that wont work the latches wont work right that way. They must be on the side of the channel so they reset properly.

But im sure you can figure it out.

I was thinking of a latchless system just now by using a reverse "z" channel. would work with your stators at 7 and 1 I think. The magnet would have to fall into a side notch though at bottom and top and not get jammed up though.

Hi Tinsel,

In the video you need to show that with the magnets between 1 and 5 all the way out and the magnets between 7 and 12 all the way in whether or not the wheel will rotate from the imbalance

Your video as it stands appears to show a Machine that will run until the parts break (pm?) but just isn't far enough out of balance. You can dispel this thought by showing whether or not a magnet all the way in at 9 with a magnet all the way out at 3 will rotate the wheel.

By the way very nice work putting together that wheel I really enjoyed watching the video.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2008, 12:40:36 AM
Well, good, I suppose. There are other reasons besides the scaling one, more fundamental ones, that don't require an engineering analysis, as I have tried to show.
For what it's worth,  I videoed the test procedure I spoke of earlier, and had some interesting results. Perhaps it is moot now: after all we are seeing an event that is extremely rare in these parts: a free energy invention repudiated by the inventor.
And so soon, too. I expected it to go for at least a couple more weeks.
Well, anyway, here's the video. It's about 16 minutes long, 4 separate configurations tested, 14 trials total. The silly thing almost runs. Almost. He hee heeee....
(And by the way, not shown in the video but tried later: JK's idea of using a ferromagnetic wire in place of latches, or pins as in the first embodiment, looks like it will work. Not as free energy, just in place of latches. I'll try to illustrate tomorrow.)
(if anybody is still interested...)
http://www.mediafire.com/?wuldel0syug
about 48 MB

Nice video.. You definitely do good work..

@ TinselKoala
Great video. Thanks.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2008, 12:40:36 AM
For what it's worth,  I videoed the test procedure I spoke of earlier, and had some interesting results. Perhaps it is moot now: after all we are seeing an event that is extremely rare in these parts: a free energy invention repudiated by the inventor.
And so soon, too. I expected it to go for at least a couple more weeks.

JK's idea of using a ferromagnetic wire in place of latches, or pins as in the first embodiment, looks like it will work. Not as free energy, just in place of latches. I'll try to illustrate tomorrow.)
(if anybody is still interested...)

Excellent video TinselKoala.

I am still interested in alternative latches. I was thinking of turning the Rod neos sliding up and down the tubes into hedgehogs as such so they had little spikes strong enough to hold the magnet when at TOP position, yet loose enough for the force of the stator magnet to still move them.

Sorry to hear mondrasek that you suddenly discovered that Physics say it will not work. I think most people are aware of this when they first see a design, but the whole idea on the search for FE/OU is to try the design anyway, just incase they hit a quirk that bends those laws!!

No going back for me, Plastic tubing arrived, 10 big bad boy rod magnets on the way and a big wooden wheel too cut out when I get home this weekend.

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: ThothTheSecond on July 16, 2008, 12:45:54 PM
Back again.  How about a combination trigate/Mondrasek wheel

Hi ThothTheSecond,
   Good thinking, may need some playing with the placement,lengths and angles of the gates but well worth a try,.Cant see any obvious why this would not help rotation. 

Sorry if any of you are disapointed that I now believe it won't work.  But the idea was based on a false premise that was not apparent in the patent app.  I understand completely why anyone with experience with the gravity wheels or just a good understanding of the laws could look at the patent app and know it would not work.  I also understand why those who learned about it directly from me would miss the now obvious flaw that I missed.  I'll try to explain.

What is not in the patent app is this:  The major force needed to to be overcome is the repulsive force of the stator magnets.  This force does not change as we scale the wheel.  The imbalance and resulting torque due to gravity scales larger as the wheel is made larger and more mass switches are added.  Both these statements are true.  So it appeared to me, and to those hearing my explaination, that I could scale the wheel and resultant torque infinitely larger and it therfore must be able to exceed the non changing repulsive force of the stator magnets.  But the flaw is that while the repulsive force does not scale, the resultant resistant torque (force x diameter of the wheel) does scale.  It scales linearly.  The torque due to gravity as we add mass switches and increase the wheel diameter does not scale any faster, and actually less than linear.

Once that was realized I understood that I had invented nothing new.  This gravity wheel uses a unique mechanism to push the weights "up the hill" (the mass switch firing).  But it takes an equal amount of force to push through the wall and make them fire.  Plus we have all the losses due to friction and heating etc.  No energy is being added to the wheel to make it spin.  Gravity provides a positive torque and the stator magnets provide an equal negative torque.  Firing the switch at 6 moves a magnet mass inward and will accelerate the wheel while the firing the switch at 12 moves that magnet mass outward and decelerates the wheel an equal amount.  The same is true for the magnets sliding inward and outward in quadrants 3~6 and 9~12.  Every interaction is neatly balanced.  So friction wins again, as always.

I understand now why TK et al. thought I was so dense.  They did not hear my explanation where I missed the flaw.  Also, when I drew how the wheel could scale, I did not diagram a bigger wheel around the existing axel (this would have caused me to move the stator magnets and I would have seen the flaw.  Instead I drew a huge arc representing a massive wheel tangent to the smaller wheel at the 6 o-clock position.  The stator that I had already drawn did not move in the drawing, but it would have moved relative to the new axel position of the huge wheel.

I still like my improved mass switch.  It uses a simple mechanical latch to effectively allow the enclosed magnet to travel almost two times the distance that the stator magnet can fire it.  But you need to invert the switch to realize that extra travel.  Maybe this can be usefull in some device.

I am happy to continue participating in this forum and offering mechanical ideas.  But I do not believe we are working on an energy producing device.  But who knows, maybe it has some other uses in its entirety or pieces.

M.

And if anyone can host TK's videos (Clanzer?) where I can look at them at work, that would be great.

@TinselKoala:
Great experiment I like the scientific approach.

You should get the best results from stators at 3 and 9.
That is because in that position you don't have to work against gravity of rotor magnets. There are only friction loses of magnets sliding.

So if you can, please  try setups with stators at 3-9 and 2-8.

Have fun. ;)
Frenky

Quote from: gwhy! on July 17, 2008, 05:15:42 AM
Hi ThothTheSecond,
   Good thinking, may need some playing with the placement,lengths and angles of the gates but well worth a try,.Cant see any obvious why this would not help rotation. 

I thought a lot of tweaking would be necessary, perhaps even some curve to the ramps.  I believe this concept could also be accomplished with the Mayernik effect (ala Archer Quinn) as the gravity pull on the unbalanced wheel would help break the wall.

I'm still learning this stuff (only started reading this site a few months ago) so please forgive my newbieness.  If my young kids give me a turn with the magnetix one day I might be able to try some of this cool stuff.

Quote from: ThothTheSecond on July 17, 2008, 11:21:27 AM
I believe this concept could also be accomplished with the Mayernik effect (ala Archer Quinn) as the gravity pull on the unbalanced wheel would help break the wall.

It may well do but very unlikely , there are pro's and con's of both arrays IMO the tri-gate would be much better in this application. But not to difficult to try the both arrays.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 17, 2008, 09:31:09 AM
Sorry if any of you are disapointed that I now believe it won't work.  But the idea was based on a false premise that was not apparent in the patent app.  I understand completely why anyone with experience with the gravity wheels or just a good understanding of the laws could look at the patent app and know it would not work.  I also understand why those who learned about it directly from me would miss the now obvious flaw that I missed.  I'll try to explain.

What is not in the patent app is this:  The major force needed to to be overcome is the repulsive force of the stator magnets.  This force does not change as we scale the wheel.  The imbalance and resulting torque due to gravity scales larger as the wheel is made larger and more mass switches are added.  Both these statements are true.  So it appeared to me, and to those hearing my explaination, that I could scale the wheel and resultant torque infinitely larger and it therfore must be able to exceed the non changing repulsive force of the stator magnets.  But the flaw is that while the repulsive force does not scale, the resultant resistant torque (force x diameter of the wheel) does scale.  It scales linearly.  The torque due to gravity as we add mass switches and increase the wheel diameter does not scale any faster, and actually less than linear.

Once that was realized I understood that I had invented nothing new.  This gravity wheel uses a unique mechanism to push the weights "up the hill" (the mass switch firing).  But it takes an equal amount of force to push through the wall and make them fire.  Plus we have all the losses due to friction and heating etc.  No energy is being added to the wheel to make it spin.  Gravity provides a positive torque and the stator magnets provide an equal negative torque.  Firing the switch at 6 moves a magnet mass inward and will accelerate the wheel while the firing the switch at 12 moves that magnet mass outward and decelerates the wheel an equal amount.  The same is true for the magnets sliding inward and outward in quadrants 3~6 and 9~12.  Every interaction is neatly balanced.  So friction wins again, as always.

I understand now why TK et al. thought I was so dense.  They did not hear my explanation where I missed the flaw.  Also, when I drew how the wheel could scale, I did not diagram a bigger wheel around the existing axel (this would have caused me to move the stator magnets and I would have seen the flaw.  Instead I drew a huge arc representing a massive wheel tangent to the smaller wheel at the 6 o-clock position.  The stator that I had already drawn did not move in the drawing, but it would have moved relative to the new axel position of the huge wheel.

I still like my improved mass switch.  It uses a simple mechanical latch to effectively allow the enclosed magnet to travel almost two times the distance that the stator magnet can fire it.  But you need to invert the switch to realize that extra travel.  Maybe this can be usefull in some device.

I am happy to continue participating in this forum and offering mechanical ideas.  But I do not believe we are working on an energy producing device.  But who knows, maybe it has some other uses in its entirety or pieces.

M.

Although we appreciate your honesty and ability to admit you don't think your wheel is 'the one' you are approaching it all the wrong way.

At this point you need to begin to benign skeptics, rant, swear, go off on tangents, and tell people they are idiots if they don't understand the genious of your device.  THEN and only then will get true believers to send you money.  You can then continue to string them along and get them to send more money if you continue to belittle them and talk on tangents.   :D

Quote from: ThothTheSecond on July 17, 2008, 11:21:27 AM
If my young kids give me a turn with the magnetix one day I might be able to try some of this cool stuff.

LOL  It was Magnetix (slightly reduced in diameter using a drill for a lathe and a file and sandpaper) inside a MacDonalds drink straw and straight pins that I used to make my first simple mass switch on July 4!  I spent all day in the lab (garage) learning with two switches attached to a piece of wood on the roller blade wheel trying to made the first gravity wheel.  It is also these that showed me the problems I outlined with using ferous targets at the tube ends as latches.  From there I started working out the mechanical latch idea.

@OU-812

Another brilliant idea!  I was kind of thinking about a donate to my paypal deal on the honor system of if this has or does give you any entertainment value.  Kind of like "pay for view".  Or maybe someone will want the screen rights to my sad story!

Quote from: mondrasek on July 17, 2008, 09:31:09 AM

What is not in the patent app is this:  The major force needed to to be overcome is the repulsive force of the stator magnets.  This force does not change as we scale the wheel. 

Hi Mondrasek and All,

I would propose an idea of placing both stator magnets onto two separate small wheels (planet? wheels) which are geared to the big rotor wheel at 12 and at 6 o'clock positions and the gear ratio ought to be chosen so that when one mass switch is just passing the stator magnet, by the time the next mass switch arrives the stator magnet already have made one full circle on the small wheel.
This way the repulsive force could be reduced because the repel magnets would not approach each other perpendicularly but the "stator" magnet would just come anticlockwise from below and could push upwards the rotor magnet in the switch gradually.  I attached a small drawing showing one small wheel with the stator magnet on it at 12 o'clock and the big rotor magnet switch at the 6 o'clock position.
What do you think?

rgds,  Gyula

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 17, 2008, 03:25:37 AM
I am still interested in alternative latches. I was thinking of turning the Rod neos sliding up and down the tubes into hedgehogs as such so they had little spikes strong enough to hold the magnet when at TOP position, yet loose enough for the force of the stator magnet to still move them.

Sorry to hear mondrasek that you suddenly discovered that Physics say it will not work. I think most people are aware of this when they first see a design, but the whole idea on the search for FE/OU is to try the design anyway, just incase they hit a quirk that bends those laws!!

No going back for me, Plastic tubing arrived, 10 big bad boy rod magnets on the way and a big wooden wheel too cut out when I get home this weekend.

Glad to hear that you're still going to give it a real try. I have my doubts about the design, but would still like to see your results. Especially since TK's device was just a work of art engineered to fail. Nobody making a serious attempt, would try to move such a large rotor mass with those few little magnets and try to break two walls. I'm sure its value was to show that if such a well built device can't run then what's the use of  anyone else trying.

Regards, Larry

So where's the electro-magnet variant.

Quote from: gyulasun on July 17, 2008, 12:27:56 PM
Hi Mondrasek and All,

I would propose an idea of placing both stator magnets onto two separate small wheels (planet? wheels) which are geared to the big rotor wheel at 12 and at 6 o'clock positions and the gear ratio ought to be chosen so that when one mass switch is just passing the stator magnet, by the time the next mass switch arrives the stator magnet already have made one full circle on the small wheel.
This way the repulsive force could be reduced because the repel magnets would not approach each other perpendicularly but the "stator" magnet would just come anticlockwise from below and could push upwards the rotor magnet in the switch gradually.  I attached a small drawing showing one small wheel with the stator magnet on it at 12 o'clock and the big rotor magnet switch at the 6 o'clock position.
What do you think?

rgds,  Gyula

This was the same idea Dudeman750 e-mailed me yesterday!

When you fire a mass switch by approaching from the side you have a big wall force.  And therefore a big acceleration of the the switch magnet once it fired.  You get exacly the same amount of energy out as it took pressing through the wall, minus losses to friction, etc.

Without the wall you will only be able to hover the magnet in the tube to the same hieight as they will if you put two in a tube opposing and hold the bottom one from falling.  With my set up the hover height was ~30 mm.  So that would be a huge reduction in the imbalance of the wheel compared to if you fire them, but yes you have also reduced the wall.

The + torque of the imbalance would be small but still exist.  Unfortunately there is an equal and opposite torque on both the main and smaller stator wheels as they approach position to line up.  Might still have some wall left too.

But try it and see!  That's how I learned the wall could be used to fire a magnet and lead me to the improved mass switch and latch idea.

@ LarryC,

Actually the rotor mass makes no practical difference just so long as it is balanced.  It is nothing but a flywheel.  It will slow acceleration and deceleration times but not affect whether a torque force can rotate the wheel (assuming no increase in friction).  It actually smooths out the cogging effect that is slowing the wheel each time you approach the walls.  A lighter wheel would spin down faster if started at the same RPM since it has less inertia.

Quote from: gyulasun on July 17, 2008, 12:27:56 PM
This way the repulsive force could be reduced because the repel magnets would not approach each other perpendicularly but the "stator" magnet would just come anticlockwise from below and could push upwards the rotor magnet in the switch gradually.
...What do you think? 
rgds,  Gyula

Always good to hear new ideas - but,

Friction is already a problem.  The gears will add even more.  And then there is the extra energy needed to drive the gears/stator wheel.  Those 2 added up (or even one) would result in more "energy" loss than the magnetic wall IMO. 
If anything - use pulleys - as they can be upwards of + 94% effecient, are cheaper, and can be easily sourced.  But again - IMO - too many losses.

A variation of the idea would be to have the gears with just a couple of teeth, so that it only engages briefly so as to rotate the stator like 45 degrees, to like 12:30, with the stator magnet slightly angled, and then the stator drops back down due to gravity to like 3:00 and is supported by a rod/latch etc..

Quote from: mondrasek on July 17, 2008, 12:58:47 PM
Actually the rotor mass makes no practical difference just so long as it is balanced.  It is nothing but a flywheel.  It will slow acceleration and deceleration times but not affect whether a torque force can rotate the wheel (assuming no increase in friction).  It actually smooths out the cogging effect that is slowing the wheel each time you approach the walls.  A lighter wheel would spin down faster if started at the same RPM since it has less inertia.

I'm not saying a lighter wheel. Move that wasted rotor mass out to the magnets and it increases the leverage to break the walls.   

Regards, Larry

Quote from: LarryC on July 17, 2008, 12:35:51 PM
Glad to hear that you're still going to give it a real try. I have my doubts about the design, but would still like to see your results. Especially since TK's device was just a work of art engineered to fail. Nobody making a serious attempt, would try to move such a large rotor mass with those few little magnets and try to break two walls. I'm sure its value was to show that if such a well built device can't run then what's the use of  anyone else trying.

Regards, Larry

Larry, with all due respect, you don't know WTF you are talking about. The wheel in the video  is so well-balanced and the bearings are so free, that the imbalance caused by a SINGLE SLIDING MAGNET remaining out-of-position provides more than enough torque to rotate the wheel until the imbalance point is on the bottom. This can be seen in the video in certain places, as the wheel rocks back and forth around the repulsive "wall" at the end of several stator trials.
Build a better one, show it, THEN criticize my work. Otherwise, you can take a long walk off a short pier, because you are already all wet.

(EDIT speling)

Quote from: gyulasun on July 17, 2008, 12:27:56 PM
Hi Mondrasek and All,

I would propose an idea of placing both stator magnets onto two separate small wheels (planet? wheels) which are geared to the big rotor wheel at 12 and at 6 o'clock positions and the gear ratio ought to be chosen so that when one mass switch is just passing the stator magnet, by the time the next mass switch arrives the stator magnet already have made one full circle on the small wheel.
This way the repulsive force could be reduced because the repel magnets would not approach each other perpendicularly but the "stator" magnet would just come anticlockwise from below and could push upwards the rotor magnet in the switch gradually.  I attached a small drawing showing one small wheel with the stator magnet on it at 12 o'clock and the big rotor magnet switch at the 6 o'clock position.
What do you think?

rgds,  Gyula

Sounds good Gyula, maybe with some other mechanical integration it might work.

"So, so far we have a Besseler-Quinn-Bedini wheel. Let's add some more stuff. If you rotate the stator mags at the right time, in the opposite direction from the way they would rotate if they were simply geared, the rotor will experience a push-pull as the rotor magnets swing past the stators. Conversely, this same effect could be achieved with a reversing (not just an on-off) electromagnet.
So we would be building a Besseler-Quinn-Bedini-OCMPMM wheel."

From my post on the third page of this thread.

For those who can't download TK's 50 mb vid, the essential screenshot is attached.

So it takes more time to run down with stators at 1-7 oclock positions.
He says it can be due to bearing getting loose. But TK why don't you do a run down again without magnets and stators. If the bearings are looser, it will go beyond max time and we can go home ?

Also, what will happen if the stators are at 3-9 or 2-8 positions ?
And what happens if latches are included ?

(At 3-9 position it won't need latches to hold the magnets where they should be)

Here would be my explanation.  The blank wheel does not have the added mass and therefore the added inertia of the wheel with the magnets.  It cannot be direclty compared to the trials where the magnets are added.  To do so you need to run a wheel with the magnets added but not moving, and no stator interaction. 

I could do this on my wheel by configuring so all the magnets are near the latches by placing a ferous pin the the whistle cuts and letting the magnets catch.  TK, you could drill a pin hole in the middle of all your switch guide holes and do the same.  The run down time should then be longer than any of the configurations where the switches are in operation.

Has anyone considered setting this up so the stator at the bottom of the wheel fires before 6 o'clock?

I would imagine shooting the magnet when the arm is completely vertical and starting to rise on the left hand side (in a clockwise rotating wheel) would not be ideal in this design. Shooting it at 5 o'clock or 5.30 would mean that the magnet would begin moving to the left towards the centre of the wheel, the same direction that the arm is moving (as opposed to moving to the right after 6 o'clock, which is in the opposite general direction to which the arm is shifting) and would also reduce some of the gravity issues introduced with trying to shoot the magnet directly up.

There would still be an imbalance of weight on the falling side due to leverage.

@Clanzer/Tinsel

Care to test this idea?
Sorry I can't myself just yet. I've ordered some magnets from the USA to save some $$$... still waiting.

shakman

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2008, 02:04:13 PM
(EDIT speling)

LOL... speling  :D

Anyway, good video TK. Nice handy work. Any chance you can test with the bottom stator moved to 5.30 or 5 o'clock? (see my last post).

shakman

Sorry, I don't have time to do any more tests as I have TDY coming up tomorrow, and will be out for at least a month.
I can report that JK's idea of a ferromagnetic wire around the outside and the inside, works as described. The magnets just barely cling to the wires, and when they pass the stator they are fired all the way across the channels to the other wire, where they adhere until passing the next stator. I'll try to post a short vid this evening to show this detail.
Then I will be gone for a while, so you all can get back to work.

@mondrasek,

Have you tried using some aluminum shielding to block the field from the approaching "mass switch"? This may reduce the wall from the stator magnet. A couple of pieces of shielding on the left and right of the stator magnet might do it. any thoughts on this guys?

Quote from: starcruiser on July 17, 2008, 04:13:58 PM
@mondrasek,

Have you tried using some aluminum shielding to block the field from the approaching "mass switch"? This may reduce the wall from the stator magnet. A couple of pieces of shielding on the left and right of the stator magnet might do it. any thoughts on this guys?

Not me.  My build is not precise enough to do any worthwhile experiments with.  And I don't know anything about magnetic shielding theory, though I'm sure if I searched this forum I would find alot of info, some of which would be true.  This sounds like a job for TK and/or Clanzer!

Anyone else built or planing to build one of these things?

Who's gonna put on the electromagnetic stators and pulse them to eliminate the wall?  Or are we all convinced the energy to pulse them would be the same amount as the energy to push through the wall?

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2008, 02:04:13 PM
Larry, with all due respect, you don't know WTF you are talking about. The wheel in the video  is so well-balanced and the bearings are so free, that the imbalance caused by a SINGLE SLIDING MAGNET remaining out-of-position provides more than enough torque to rotate the wheel until the imbalance point is on the bottom. This can be seen in the video in certain places, as the wheel rocks back and forth around the repulsive "wall" at the end of several stator trials.
Build a better one, show it, THEN criticize my work. Otherwise, you can take a long walk off a short pier, because you are already all wet.

(EDIT speling)

Sorry TK, just stating what I learned from other wheel builds. Working on a couple of other projects right now, so I'll just wait for Clanzer's build.

Regards, Larry

@Omega_0
You are absolutely right. I should have done a repeat of the empty-rotor baseline trial at the very end to check that the apparatus had not changed during the previous tests. This is (or would have been) what is called an "A-B-A" design, where before and after baseline data are compared to data from an experimental manipulation.
Thank you for pointing this out. Rest assured, as soon as I am able, I will be doing such comparisons.

@starcruiser:
Any conductive material near moving magnets will have eddy currents induced within it. These eddy currents get their power from the motion of the magnets, and retard that motion correspondingly, even though the material itself isn't attracted to the magnet. Lenz's law shows that the eddy currents themselves generate a magnetic field, and this field always opposes the motion of the magnet responsible. This can be illustrated easily by dropping a NdB cylinder magnet down an aluminum or copper tube. The fall of the magnet is considerably retarded by these opposing mag fields from the eddy currents.
Also, any real conductive material has resistance, which means that in addition to subtracting energy from the motion of the magnet, even more energy is dissipated into the environment through Joule heating.
Energy is subtracted from the swing of the arm in very sensitive laboratory balances, thus dampening the swing so the scale can be read, by moving a magnet past aluminum plates (or vice versa).
If anyone can figure out a path and/or geometry for a magnetic shield that avoids these effects, please let me know, right away. Please.

Not only can't you win, you can't even break even.

:P

Quote from: broli on July 17, 2008, 12:39:59 PM
So where's the electro-magnet variant.

Using electromagnets in tandem with Permanent Magnets would be a viable option.  The power requirements would be substantial, you would need complicated timing circuitry, a power supply and other mechanical features such as dampers, rotor brushes, etc., depending on how it was designed.

The amount of electrical energy needed should be less than what the wheel can produce.

Quote from: Xaverius on July 17, 2008, 07:06:06 PM
Using electromagnets in tandem with Permanent Magnets would be a viable option.  The power requirements would be substantial, you would need complicated timing circuitry, a power supply and other mechanical features such as dampers, rotor brushes, etc., depending on how it was designed.

The amount of electrical energy needed should be less than what the wheel can produce.

Seems that this guy has it figured out....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2LEXuIBHc&NR=1

I have made a short (5 minutes, 19 megabytes)) video of the magnetic wire latch idea, which is similar in concept to modrasek's first embodiment in his patent application. This is conceptually simpler and I believe energetically more favorable (less lossy). But I could be wrong. Experiment will tell.
No music, edits are kind of sloppy, but it's pretty clear that the magnet wire latch works--at least on the bottom. Thanks JK for the idea!
http://www.mediafire.com/?xhtlsgmm2tt

Seems that this guy has it figured out....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2LEXuIBHc&NR=1

anymore feedback on this guy?

mccorrade: are you on this site?

Quote from: noonespecial on July 17, 2008, 08:16:55 PM
Seems that this guy has it figured out....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2LEXuIBHc&NR=1

Wow! What can we call it, I wonder??

I know--how about "the electric motor."
Has a catchy ring to it doesn't it??

Too bad it's already been done.

Several times.

I am very happy to announce that I have successfully tuned the upper stator arrangement in my embodiment of the Mondrasek Magnet-Assisted Gravity Wheel. It turns out that a little "centrifugal force" is needed, since the attraction to the wire must be so light. I don't have time this morning to demonstrate it by video, but if anybody is still building, this idea works fine as intended, and is simpler and more efficient than mechanical latches would be. The best part is that it does not add perceptibly to any "wall" or energy hill. I have not had time to do rundown tests, but so far--no go, Even with the apparent imbalance caused when the latches function as intended, the wheel still will not turn of itself, and we know the reasons why.
Just looking at it, it is hard to see how there could not be several gram-centimeters of torque generated by the off-center magnet arrangement produced as the stators fire. Spin the wheel by hand, stop it to see the magnets and all the magnets on the right are out, all on the left are in, as they should be when clockwise turning. It is fascinating to see.
I almost believe it would run, myself.

We want video !  ;D

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 18, 2008, 07:31:53 AM
I am very happy to announce that I have successfully tuned the upper stator arrangement in my embodiment of the Mondrasek Magnet-Assisted Gravity Wheel. It turns out that a little "centrifugal force" is needed, since the attraction to the wire must be so light. I don't have time this morning to demonstrate it by video, but if anybody is still building, this idea works fine as intended, and is simpler and more efficient than mechanical latches would be. The best part is that it does not add perceptibly to any "wall" or energy hill. I have not had time to do rundown tests, but so far--no go, Even with the apparent imbalance caused when the latches function as intended, the wheel still will not turn of itself, and we know the reasons why.
Just looking at it, it is hard to see how there could not be several gram-centimeters of torque generated by the off-center magnet arrangement produced as the stators fire. Spin the wheel by hand, stop it to see the magnets and all the magnets on the right are out, all on the left are in, as they should be when clockwise turning. It is fascinating to see.
I almost believe it would run, myself.

@TK

Good work with the retuning. Also looking forward to the vids.

Please read this. It is a constructive and possibly important post, unlike some of the little digs we've had at eachother over at the Archer Quinn thread. I think this could be the key to getting a wheel like this to work and the main reason why things like the Besseler wheel don't work. I know these don't use magnets, but it all has to do with the position mean centre ('center' for my friends in the USA) of the magnets as opposed to the wheel axel.

Has anyone tried out my idea of firing the bottom stator earlier (say, at 4.30 or 5 o'clock, maybe even earlier)?

The way I see it, by firing directly up at 6 you are creating more negative torque than neccessary and fighting gravity more than at any other angle.

But, more importantly, the natural movement of the magnets with gravity when firing at 6 also puts the centre of the weight of the magnets to the bottom right of the axel (on a clockwise spinning wheel) which is definitely not ideal. You want the push to come from the top of the wheel. Also the shape of the mags that is being created by firing at 6 and 12 keeps the weight fairly well centred across the horizontal in general by pushing out a shape resembling "cD", where "c" is the small circle created by the rising side of mags affected by gravity and "D" is the falling side. Notice the symmetry? You really want to throw this thing off-centre as much as possible while keeping the mean centre of magnet formation to the upper falling side of the axel.

I really believe this wheel will never work when firing at 6 & 12 as originally planned in the patent, it is too balanced across the horizontal.

@Clanzer - Any chance you could try this too?

I will be testing out these ideas myself shortly. I will buy some magnets and materials on the weekend, I'm getting a little impatient waiting for my package from the US!

Cheers,

shakman

BTW If this does by some crazy chance work by using my "early firing" idea and this contribution makes the patent null, I will personally send a donation to Mondrasek but I declare this info public property. If it works but doesn't make the patent null, I urge Mondrasek to be careful with whom he deals.

I can't believe I am gonna go here, but...  Halbach Arrays.  If you force 5 square magnets together in the proper orientations in a Halbach Array you move most of the magnetic field to one of the long sides.  That side now has a North and South pole of nearly double the strength centered around the second and fourth magnet.  But what happens to the wall if approached from the side?  I believe it would be pulled closer to the edge of the array, but then be proportionally stronger, requiring just the same amount of energy to traverse as that of a regular magnet of equal strength.  Like the magnetic field lines have been squeezed on the sides.  Is this correct?  Anyone know of a diagram that shows the field lines on a Halbach Array through sections cut in each of the 5 magnets?

@Shakman,

Are you wanting to fire the magnets early (before 6 and 12) due to the time it takes them to travel to the other end of the switch tubes?  So, in effect, they fire early (advanced), but make it to the other end exactly at 6 and 12, or at and equally late time (retarded)?

I like this idea.  For example, if you fire the bottom switch at 5:45 and the magnet arrives at the other end at 6:15 at the optimized RPM.  Am I following you correctly?

Quote from: mondrasek on July 18, 2008, 11:31:00 AM
I can't believe I am gonna go here, but...  Halbach Arrays.  If you force 5 square magnets together in the proper orientations in a Halbach Array you move most of the magnetic field to one of the long sides.  That side now has a North and South pole of nearly double the strength centered around the second and fourth magnet.  But what happens to the wall if approached from the side?  I believe it would be pulled closer to the edge of the array, but then be proportionally stronger, requiring just the same amount of energy to traverse as that of a regular magnet of equal strength.  Like the magnetic field lines have been squeezed on the sides.  Is this correct?  Anyone know of a diagram that shows the field lines on a Halbach Array through sections cut in each of the 5 magnets?

Just got home this end for the weekend and catching up :)

Here are some Halbach array videos I did earlier on this year.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments1.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments2.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments3.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments4.wmv

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 18, 2008, 11:37:23 AM
@Shakman,

Are you wanting to fire the magnets early (before 6 and 12) due to the time it takes them to travel to the other end of the switch tubes?  So, in effect, they fire early (advanced), but make it to the other end exactly at 6 and 12, or at and equally late time (retarded)?

I like this idea.  For example, if you fire the bottom switch at 5:45 and the magnet arrives at the other end at 6:15 at the optimized RPM.  Am I following you correctly?

Hey mondrasek

Close. The idea is to have the magnet arrive at the switch well before 6am.

This puts the mean centre of the magnet orientation above the axel, theoretically causing gravity to attempt to correct it.

It should also reduce the amount of negative torque as the weight shift of the magnet across the horizontal is moving left to right, the same direction the bottom half of the wheel is moving (in a clockwise spinning wheel).

It should work, in theory, but we've seen what happens to a lot of theories over time, so take it with a grain of salt for now. But I definitely see the advantage in such a setup.

shakman

EDIT: Ooops, messed up the underline  :-[

Quote from: shakman on July 18, 2008, 11:14:05 AM

The way I see it, by firing directly up at 6 you are creating more negative torque than neccessary and fighting gravity more than at any other angle.

I really believe this wheel will never work when firing at 6 & 12 as originally planned in the patent, it is too balanced across the horizontal.

@Clanzer - Any chance you could try this too?

Hi Shakman

Planning on making the bottom stator movable as such, so will try this when the new big wheel is up.

Just unpacked me parcels and trying out the tubes and magnets below :)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw4.jpg&hash=82d5df252e22fa9156e8cc25931a8dd4b1d924e7)

Magnet is a nice fit without being too tight.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw5.jpg&hash=6a4bee22faadf8bf179e2c020170c86bbe0240ba)

Here is a quick video to show the strength of these magnets.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW4.wmv

Waiting for another 6 magnets to arrive tomorrow and my plastic pipe clips that I expected to be here today but they are not grrrrrrrr

Good news is that I should have most of next week time to build it as I do not have to go away to work  ;D ;D ;D

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 18, 2008, 12:17:05 PM
...
Planning on making the bottom stator movable as such, so will try this when the new big wheel is up.
...

@CLaNZeR

Awesome work as always!

A movable stator should allow you to quickly test lots of configurations. It might be a good idea to make the upper stator adjustable within a small range too while you're at it if it's not too hard to implement. Again, firing straight up is against all natural forces so maybe a 12.30/4.30 set up might yield the best results. But it's your experiment so don't let me interfere, I've got nothing set up to test with yet outside of my CAD illustrations (i.e. my imagination) so I'm not in a position to talk really  :-[

The new plastic pipes look brilliant. That should let everyone see what's going on.

Love your work!

shakman

@Clanzer

Nice size tubes and mags.. Can't wait to see some footage..

Quote from: shakman on July 18, 2008, 12:00:34 PM
Hey mondrasek

Close. The idea is to have the magnet arrive at the switch well before 6am.

This puts the mean centre of the magnet orientation above the axel, theoretically causing gravity to attempt to correct it.

It should also reduce the amount of negative torque as the weight shift of the magnet across the horizontal is moving left to right, the same direction the bottom half of the wheel is moving (in a clockwise spinning wheel).

It should work, in theory, but we've seen what happens to a lot of theories over time, so take it with a grain of salt for now. But I definitely see the advantage in such a setup.

shakman

EDIT: Ooops, messed up the underline  :-[

Either I am not quite following still or I think you are mistaken.  The maximum torque due to gravity and the imbalance will be provided when the Center of Gravity of the wheel is directly to the right of the axel when spinning clockwise.  In your cD representation this is the case.  In order to move the CoG above the axel as you suggest you need to rotate the cD imbalance counterclockwise some.  This in turn moves some of the heavy side "D" to the wrong side of the axel.  Same with the light side "c".  So the light side gets a bit heavier and the heavy side gets a bit lighter.  This gives less imbalance and less torque due to gravity.

Am I stil misunderstanding?

Clanzer,

Welcome home and thanks for the links to your Halbach Array videos.  I'm sure Dudeman will be amazed and call me once he sees them.  And it looks like I'll have to learn about the tri-force gates.  That's a new one for me.

@Clanzer
I would think that you would want to make the magnets as long as possible in order to generate the largest possible change In center of gravity for the wheel. Your magnets look pretty short.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 18, 2008, 12:55:39 PM
Either I am not quite following still or I think you are mistaken.  The maximum torque due to gravity and the imbalance will be provided when the Center of Gravity of the wheel is directly to the right of the axel when spinning clockwise.  In your cD representation this is the case.  In order to move the CoG above the axel as you suggest you need to rotate the cD imbalance counterclockwise some.  This in turn moves some of the heavy side "D" to the wrong side of the axel.  Same with the light side "c".  So the light side gets a bit heavier and the heavy side gets a bit lighter.  This gives less imbalance and less torque due to gravity.

Am I stil misunderstnading?

Clanzer,

Welcome home and thanks for the links to your Halbach Array videos.  I'm sure Dudeman will be amazed and call me once he sees them.  And it looks like I'll have to learn about the tri-force gates.  That's a new one for me.

The idea is to have magnets (weights) towards the inside of the wheel all the way around the wheel except for a section from 12-12.30 and 4-5. This means the greatest amount of weight is on the upper part of the falling side of the wheel.

A simple experiment you can set up to see my logic for having the majority of the weight at the upper falling side of the wheel:

Connect a weight to a point at the rim of a wheel. Turn the wheel at random then hold it still and let it go. Repeat this experiment several times. Putting the weight at the upper right quadrant of the wheel should produce the best results (EDIT: for clockwise momentum). The idea is to emulate this effect with the weights in the arms.

The biggest problem with the current design is that the weights at the bottom of the wheel will move further out than those at the top, putting the CoG below the axel. Gravity will win.

My idea is just a theory as I said, but one definitely worth exploring IMO.

Regards,

shakman

EDIT: Clarified a few things and fixed some typo's. Mutli-tasking here at work - the brain went off on a few tangents.

Quote from: xee on July 18, 2008, 01:19:29 PM
@Clanzer
I would think that you would want to make the magnets as long as possible in order to generate the largest possible change In center of gravity for the wheel. Your magnets look pretty short.

Hi Xee

They are 1.5 " long and as the video shows, fires a fair distance. If anything I fear they will travel too far LOL
These are strong magnets and weigh 80 g a piece and can easly take a chunk of skin out with one false move hehe

I am going to setup a tube tommorow on a wheel and find the best travel length that suits there weight and the speed that I estimate the wheel will run at.

Love TK's video with the wire and have a few other ideas I want to try along the same line. If it does not work out too well I will go down the latch route.
As TK said it is making sure the Rotor magnets do not make full contact with the wire, or else you will not get enough force to launch them again.

As usual only experiementing will show.

Cheers

Sean.

Wow just had a nice result.

Neighbour knocked on the door and parcels had been delivered to them :) :)

Now got my bits ready for the weekend.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw6.jpg&hash=ec049abe680a7fd982bceba2c05fc2bc1924953a)

Gonna replace the metal screws in the pipe clips for plastic ones BTW.

Building big wheels seems to be more fun, must admit, Less CNC'ing as only need to mill out the end caps  ;D !!

Cheers

Sean.

From what I can tell there is a bit of firing energy lost when you use the wires as the latch as you must first break that hold and the wire should be acting as a tiny shield in the magnetic fields, warping them slightly.  And a bit of energy is lost when bumping the latch out of the way with the mechanical catch system, plus it would be very difficult to have the switch magnets latch exactly at the end of the tubes.  So I guess it is whichever can be made with the least amount of loss that will give the longest rundown times.

The mechanical latches are more complicated but are more robust as far as having your stator magnets too close.  With my experience (and I think TK witnessed this) if you fire too hard the magnets can hit the wire and bounce back instead of catching.  But both mech. latch and wire latch systems should be able to be tuned properly by adjusting stator height for the desired optimal RPM.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 17, 2008, 12:53:43 PM
This was the same idea Dudeman750 e-mailed me yesterday!

When you fire a mass switch by approaching from the side you have a big wall force.  And therefore a big acceleration of the the switch magnet once it fired.  You get exacly the same amount of energy out as it took pressing through the wall, minus losses to friction, etc.

Hi Mondrasek,

Ok on your explanation, I understand it now. 

Thanks,  Gyula

TinselKoala:

Those bearings don't look to be very free to me at all.

Even without the magnets installed your wheel comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse. Either the wheel is perfectly balanced or you have a fair amount of drag in those bearings. I'm betting the latter. I've got bushings here that would allow the wheel to spin longer than those bearings.

Are there rubber seals in them that you could remove?

omg.....

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 18, 2008, 08:01:56 PM
omg.....

I'm going to assume that is directed at me. Though I really can't see anything wrong with what I said.

I can assure you those bearings have significant drag whether it be seals or heavy grease... I am not saying the wheel will run with the drag removed. Just that it IS there.

I can assure you don't know TinselKoala

No offense, man. These guys are on a different plane of crafting. I think he used some kind of ceramic gemstone wonder bearing. If it dosent appear to spin very long its because its so light. If it weighed 10 pounds it would probably spin for 3 mins.

No offense taken. These guys are not on a different plane of crafting from myself.. I know a dragging bearing when I see one.
He stated himself that the bearings were wobbling and had possibly come loose in one of the videos.

I don't want to clog up this thread any further so I won't post any more on it...

Please do , dont wanna piss u off just that I think he would see if the bearing was crap or not.

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 18, 2008, 09:03:57 PM
Please do , dont wanna piss u off just that I think he would see if the bearing was crap or not.

I don't think its a crap bearing at all.
But with the wheel being so light, and the magnet weights being light also. Just a bit of heavy grease will make to much drag in the bearings. If it is grease that is the problem it should be cleaned from the bearings and some light oil should be used in its place.

I agree with Boke on this.. It seems to me his bearings or bearing is slightly dragging.. Also saying this is probably not effecting the wheel turning by itself though..

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 18, 2008, 11:44:54 AM
Here are some Halbach array videos I did earlier on this year.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments1.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments2.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments3.wmv
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments4.wmv

Cheers

Sean.

Tx for sharing the vids Sean!
I have never seen halbach array tests done.
The long array was great and obviously took some time to rig it up.

The entrance and exit both appear to be easier/weaker compared to the tri-gate, but the speed/power seems less. (the power difference being apparent in the firetruck comparsions)

An array that starts and ends with halbachs with trigates in the middle could hold promise for closing the loop on ...... something!! (ideas?)
And the "dead" side of the array could be implemented in a design that needed shielding on one side...

I've got a folder setup just for your saved vids.....
CLaNZer - you are, without a doubt - THE MAN!

tx

Quote from: mondrasek on July 15, 2008, 07:04:16 PM
ThothTheSecond,

Unfortunately a magnet will only attract ferous objects.  It can only repel if interacting with another magnet.  At least as far as we know so far.

Investigate the properties of Bismuth ;)

Quote from: Harvey on July 19, 2008, 04:38:25 AM
Investigate the properties of Bismuth ;)

Or even better: Pyrolytic graphite

This just gave me the thought of maybe a way to create frictionless horizontal movement.

A magnet will stabily levitate over Bismuth/Pyrolytic graphite.(when properly setup)  With a large enough surface area and magnets - you could then horizontally transport objects friction-free!  ? ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamagnetic

http://www.fieldlines.com/other/diamag1.html
(image from this site)

Thoughts?

I see there are some serious attempts to make this work.

There are 3 points I see that need addressed.

1. The momentum of the mass must be sufficient to shear the fields of both exterior stators.
2. The speed of the wheel must be tuned to prevent centrifugal collapse of the interior magnet sets.
3. A diametrically magnetized interior stator magnet is key.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Furad.net%2Fforums%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fuserpics%2FURAD_Alternate.JPG&hash=8b23fbebef5bdc6213d0007efefe04baa0b7c521)

In addition to these points it should be considered that energy is lost during the abrupt speed change of the plunger magnets. It should be considered that these be treated as pistons connected to a crankshaft that assists the wheel in turning thus converting the kinetic linear energy to torque.

Cheers,

Harvey

Oh no.  I had some very weird realizations this morning.

Think about the path and speed that our switch magnets enter and exit the stator magnet field.  Path in:  Clockwise cicular path.  Path out:  Counterclockwise parabolic path.  Speed in:  Slow.  Speed out:  Fast.

Have we stumbled upon....?   I won't say it.

Have we?

Quote from: capthook on July 18, 2008, 10:43:22 PM
An array that starts and ends with halbachs with trigates in the middle could hold promise for closing the loop on ...... something!! (ideas?)

I found the tri-force gate very interesting and set this up to play with:  I removed the mass switches and stator mags from my wood wheel (we have Clanzer building, so why do I need my crappy version?).  I then arrayed 12 of my 1/2" dia x 1/2" long mags on the rim so that the North face was on one side of the wheel and the South on the other (centerlines in same plane as the wheel axel).  Then I made one tri-force gate and put it in place near where the bottom stator magnet used to be.  Really neat to see the pulsing that goes on near the end of a wind down.  The rotor mags slow as they approach the gate and then fire through with obvious acceleration.  When the wheel stops it will settle so that one mag is very close to the push side, but the other is very far from the pull side.  So there is a definite repulsive force on the pull side that acts over a longer distance.

Using TK's "calibrated weight drop" test method (only one time each) I witnessed 38 revs (no stop watch) with the gate in place, but 47 without it.  So it is definitely being retarded by the single gate.  I plan to play with it further later today.

Does anyone know of a thread where this type of configuration is/has been tested?  If not, if anyone else wants to start playing with this configuration lets start a new thread.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 19, 2008, 08:13:34 AM
I found the tri-force gate very interesting and set this up to play with:  I removed the mass switches and stator mags from my wood wheel (we have Clanzer building, so why do I need my crappy version?).  I then arrayed 12 of my 1/2" dia x 1/2" long mags on the rim so that the North face was on one side of the wheel and the South on the other (centerlines in same plane as the wheel axel).  Then I made one tri-force gate and put it in place near where the bottom stator magnet used to be.  Really neat to see the pulsing that goes on near the end of a wind down.  The rotor mags slow as they approach the gate and then fire through with obvious acceleration.  When the wheel stops it will settle so that one mag is very close to the push side, but the other is very far from the pull side.  So there is a definite repulsive force on the pull side that acts over a longer distance.

Using TK's "calibrated weight drop" test method (only one time each) I witnessed 38 revs (no stop watch) with the gate in place, but 47 without it.  So it is definitely being retarded by the single gate.  I plan to play with it further later today.

Does anyone know of a thread where this type of configuration is/has been tested?  If not, if anyone else wants to start playing with this configuration lets start a new thread.

Hi mondrasek,
   I dont know how you would configure the tri-gate with your current setup to get the most out of it ( the tri-gate that is )  I have posted a few ideas  (drawings) That I believe stand a very good chance of working using a tri-gate ( I am also building ). I think the beauty of the tri-gate ( which I think has been overlooked by many people ) is that there is a null spot on the entrance to the gate and also at the exit of the gate just before and after the negitive effects of the gate ( hope this makes sence ). Please try for your self put together a 3 gate array on a level surface there is a point at the start that the roller mag neither gets pushed or pulled  and there is a simular spot at the end of the array. My theory is if the roller mag can enter the array at this spot with minimum work and then lifted out at the other end with minimum work then we will have a runner. The negitive effects of the tri-gate extend well beyond the end of the array so its more of a engineering problem. Just some food for thought.

Hi Mondrasek and Gwhy,

There have been attempts to reduce the entry repel force at the tri-force gate setup by making some extra magnets and / or shaping the input part of the gate into kind of V arrangement.
A good collection of these videos are here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnMSSz7W8YU 
Clanzer also dealt with this entry repel problem, see his video 14 and later here: http://www.overunity.org.uk/triforcegate.html

And here is an interesting test showing some gain againts gravity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCW6T7oKq2c

There have been a thread on the tri-force gate here but it was cut up by personal attacks unfortunately? http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4142.0.html

rgds,  Gyula

Quote from: gyulasun on July 19, 2008, 12:31:43 PM
Hi Mondrasek and Gwhy,

...
And here is an interesting test showing some gain againts gravity? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCW6T7oKq2c
...

rgds,  Gyula

H'mm...having this runner going through the array in reverse takes all of the extra energy back out!

:SMarkSCoffman

Quote from: noonespecial on July 17, 2008, 08:16:55 PM
Seems that this guy has it figured out....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2LEXuIBHc&NR=1

Thanx for the link, the next step would be to optimize the electromagnet to use as little power as possible to provide maximum speed and torque.  Then couple the rotor to a load, preferably a generator that feeds back a PORTION of it's power to the inductor.

Well the wheel build went well today.

Here are some photo's and a video showing it winding down. I think I got the bearings spot on as takes over 10 minutes to wind down from 50 RPM :)

First I drilled a center hole and got a 1 meter length of extruded ally and attachd a pen to it.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw7.jpg&hash=43aaa57004744d3b1aa7d83aa87473c113e25ab0)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw8.jpg&hash=d51ee7c64638e44387e4122d1969b5c515d0db35)

Marked out the lines for each arm.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw9.jpg&hash=951a0c4eff0b2c4c4827d4c259e8223ed746744e)

Now made an attachment for the Router.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw10.jpg&hash=4032db13a8cee25fbbff4ecf741e4ed0b85efd09)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw11.jpg&hash=9446f75075823c97491cbf768d48f2f159ca2f07)

It cut out the circle perfect :) :)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw12.jpg&hash=5987397bd99fff01da766b10edf8b3a0e5158215)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw13.jpg&hash=a9015a9a271d52b0793da5dd1bd5f54bde112a71)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw14.jpg&hash=542a36417a8b0023f3081a1f30abcdd9d10b002a)

Next was to cut out some bearing plates.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw15.jpg&hash=d988317d9e636d4d827d0dd7e6ea238255807944)

And lathe out a insert to keep the bearings spaced so they can be done up tight later when on the mount.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw16.jpg&hash=ea83d30a665c2fd1b54159e234cb8a7ca94088a1)

Bearing plate mounted
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw17.jpg&hash=a0430218b6c1876565a8144e028209dbd336c06d)

And finaly it all up and mounted, ready for a Wind-Down test.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw18.jpg&hash=2a235af2c3f8fbb24a443c9be6138f84465a7431)

Here is a movie showing the wind down. Very impressed.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW5.wmv

Now to get on with the next stage.

More to come

Cheers

Sean.

@Clanzer

Impressed,Envious, and all out mortified... If anyone has a free spinning wheel it is you!!!.. WOW!.. Please coat that MDF with some moisture resistant substance.. It is almost perfect! Great Job man.. So your using magnetic bearings?? Joking.. I know you not..LOL..

Great Job!

EDIT 1 -- Oh I figured it out.. It is the mystical powers of that pyramid sitting behind it..lol  :)

EDIT 2 -- Please tell me what model bearings you have and where you got them..

EDIT 3 -- I see you used all torque screws.. Did you actually use a torque gauge too?

Quote from: therealrasta on July 19, 2008, 02:23:21 PM
EDIT 1 -- Oh I figured it out.. It is the mystical powers of that pyramid sitting behind it..lol  :)

EDIT 2 -- Please tell me what model bearings you have and where you got them..

LOL  ;D well the Pyramid had to be usefull for something hehe

The bearings are very small but very tough and can easly take the weight of the wheel. I lathed down the shaft out of hardened steel rod and fit perfect must admit.

As you can see by the video the reduced friction by using small bearings is incredible when you have got a wheel that weighs a fair amount.

I used to use these bearings when I building my CNC machines and originally got them from a supplier in Germany. Have not got the details here now as was a couple of years ago.

These are just a bit smaller than skate bearings.

Cheers

Sean.

@ Clanzer

Cool.. Thx for the info.. I just got some bearings today to use on a 3/8 inch Diameter Aluminium (however you spell this) rod.. I got high RPM RC axle bearings.. Very small.. Hope it spins half as good as your.. But mine are gonna be used on AQ.. SOG.. thingy..

Quote from: boke on July 18, 2008, 07:33:31 PM
TinselKoala:

Those bearings don't look to be very free to me at all.

Even without the magnets installed your wheel comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse. Either the wheel is perfectly balanced or you have a fair amount of drag in those bearings. I'm betting the latter. I've got bushings here that would allow the wheel to spin longer than those bearings.

Are there rubber seals in them that you could remove?

You evidently aren't watching the same video. In MY testing video, there are several trials where, at the end of the trial, the wheel rocks back and forth several times between the energy "hills" caused by two rotor magnets interacting with a stator between them. The bearings are very free indeed. Go back and take another look if you don't believe me.
There are no "rubber" seals on these bearings, and they are perfectly clean; they are designed to run without lubrication..
I seriously doubt that your bushings would cause a spin longer than these bearings. Do you think that I do not have bushings available, made of Oilite, Teflon, sintered bronze, graphite-graphite, or  ceramic refractory materials, etc. and that I was too lazy to try them?
Oh, ye of little faith...

Quote from: mondrasek on July 19, 2008, 07:08:47 AM
Oh no.  I had some very weird realizations this morning.

Think about the path and speed that our switch magnets enter and exit the stator magnet field.  Path in:  Clockwise cicular path.  Path out:  Counterclockwise parabolic path.  Speed in:  Slow.  Speed out:  Fast.

Have we stumbled upon....?   I won't say it.

Have we?

No. The velocity of the interaction in th Mond wheel is waaayyyy too ssssllloowww to invoke any assistance or retardation due to the mysterious thing that you are reluctant to specify. We need microsecond time scales for that. And even so it is only an energy-subtracting mechanism.

Quote from: boke on July 18, 2008, 07:33:31 PM
TinselKoala:

Those bearings don't look to be very free to me at all.

Even without the magnets installed your wheel comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse. Either the wheel is perfectly balanced or you have a fair amount of drag in those bearings. I'm betting the latter. I've got bushings here that would allow the wheel to spin longer than those bearings.

Are there rubber seals in them that you could remove?

Please watch the "testing" video again. You are clearly wrong about your contention that the wheel "comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse."
It does just that, after several of the trials including stators. A couple of times it even rocks back and forth.

And yes, the blank wheel is as perfectly balanced as I could make it. That's what those partial holes are for. The extruded Acrylic plastic scrap that I used is not very uniform in thickness or density, as ayone who has ever tried to balance such a wheel can attest. Nevertheless, the wheel in my videos is quite well-balanced, without the magnets in it. The magnets themselves add a degree of imbalance as they are not uniform in mass (they vary from each other by several hudredths of a gram).

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 19, 2008, 03:12:08 PM
Please watch the "testing" video again. You are clearly wrong about your contention that the wheel "comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse."
It does just that, after several of the trials including stators. A couple of times it even rocks back and forth.

And yes, the blank wheel is as perfectly balanced as I could make it. That's what those partial holes are for. The extruded Acrylic plastic scrap that I used is not very uniform in thickness or density, as ayone who has ever tried to balance such a wheel can attest. Nevertheless, the wheel in my videos is quite well-balanced, without the magnets in it. The magnets themselves add a degree of imbalance as they are not uniform in mass (they vary from each other by several hudredths of a gram).

Your right.. And I can see how the 1/00 of a gram weight can throw off your wheel , since it is very small sized wheel.. So every detail is more critical.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 19, 2008, 03:12:08 PM
Please watch the "testing" video again. You are clearly wrong about your contention that the wheel "comes to a fairly quick stop and does not even try to rotate in reverse."
It does just that, after several of the trials including stators. A couple of times it even rocks back and forth.

And yes, the blank wheel is as perfectly balanced as I could make it. That's what those partial holes are for. The extruded Acrylic plastic scrap that I used is not very uniform in thickness or density, as ayone who has ever tried to balance such a wheel can attest. Nevertheless, the wheel in my videos is quite well-balanced, without the magnets in it. The magnets themselves add a degree of imbalance as they are not uniform in mass (they vary from each other by several hudredths of a gram).

I am talking about the video with the wheel unloaded.. no magnets or stators. It does stop quicker than it should. PERIOD. Look it makes no difference to me I'm not sure why I bothered to point it out.

Quote from: Harvey on July 19, 2008, 05:43:56 AM
I see there are some serious attempts to make this work.

There are 3 points I see that need addressed.

1. The momentum of the mass must be sufficient to shear the fields of both exterior stators.
2. The speed of the wheel must be tuned to prevent centrifugal collapse of the interior magnet sets.
3. A diametrically magnetized interior stator magnet is key.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Furad.net%2Fforums%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fuserpics%2FURAD_Alternate.JPG&hash=8b23fbebef5bdc6213d0007efefe04baa0b7c521)

In addition to these points it should be considered that energy is lost during the abrupt speed change of the plunger magnets. It should be considered that these be treated as pistons connected to a crankshaft that assists the wheel in turning thus converting the kinetic linear energy to torque.

Cheers,

Harvey

I think Harvey's idea is an excellent one. I won't be able to try it for at least a month though, as I am travelling and I didn't take the wheel with me. (Customs officer: What's this? TK: It's a research prototype of a free energy perpetual motion machine. Customs officer: Uh-huh. Please go wait over there, sir, someone will be with you in a moment, and you can try to explain it to him.)
Maybe someone else can be persuaded to try it.

Right now I am in an internet cafe in Buffalo NY. This town illustrates that America has big problems. The walk from the motel to the neares bus stop was 1.46 miles (I carry a pedometer wherever I go). There were no sidewalks along the busy 6-lane road. It's saturday, so the bus comes at 12.03 pm and the next one is at 3.35 pm. The bus carried me along Genessee Avenue into downtown Buffalo. Perhaps 10-12 years ago, Genessee was lined with thriving small businesses and nice homes. Now, it is a wasteland. Very few businesses are open, lots and lots of buildings boarded up, homes with no roofs, no employment opportunities, very few people standing around (but they all have cell phones!!) It was a 45 minute ride through some of the worst urban decay I've seen. Getting to downtown, nobody walking around. At 1:30 on a Saturday afternoon! Finally someone in a Starbuck's directed me to a real internet cafe. 8 more blocks walk, and 4 dollars an hour at the cafe (PLUS TAX!!!) In the city I came from the internet cafes charge a dollar an hour, no tax. Why? Competition. There's practically one every other block in the downtown core.

And the computersin this cafe do not have Firefox installed (I complained to the mgr.) and the WindBlows OS is configured to store passwords (or it was, until I sat down.)

Then, about half-way into my sesson, some dude comes up and retrieves his USB key drive from the back port of this computer, that he "left there by accident."

I freaked out.

"Don't worry, your secrets are safe with me" he says.

Uh-huh. Now I have another item on my pre-takeoff checklist.

Quote from: boke on July 19, 2008, 03:26:09 PM
I am talking about the video with the wheel unloaded.. no magnets or stators. It does stop quicker than it should. PERIOD. Look it makes no difference to me I'm not sure why I bothered to point it out.

You expect an unloaded wheel with no stators to come to rest and then TURN BACWARDS? OK. Have fun.

I am looking forward to your video illustrating this effect, using your bushings.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 19, 2008, 03:35:40 PM
You expect an unloaded wheel with no stators to come to rest and then TURN BACWARDS? OK. Have fun.

Of course not if it is perfectly balanced! As I'm sure I stated in my post.

You think I'm actually going to bother setting up and balancing a wheel to prove to you you you have some stiff bearings LOL...

Was just trying to be helpful... That is all...

@ TK

hillareous story about internet finding here in the US. I think the Internet cafe thing is not so big due to everyone having it at home!  I myself have been an internet user since its inception and never been to a "cafe". Also our mass transit system sucks as well, because most of us drive! Only in the most dense of population centers will you find a transit system that half works. Much different from the EU my friend. Sorry you went to the dregs! most of america is beautiful.

Watch out for those info nappers! I myself never use a public computer. Take your laptop with you wherever you go. You can find many unsecured hotspots to tap everywhere.... use networkstumbler

Dudeman

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 19, 2008, 03:06:01 PM
No. The velocity of the interaction in th Mond wheel is waaayyyy too ssssllloowww to invoke any assistance or retardation due to the mysterious thing that you are reluctant to specify. We need microsecond time scales for that. And even so it is only an energy-subtracting mechanism.

Hell, sounds like the perfect excuse to crank up the RPM like shakman is want to do!  Maybe she starts self-running over 10K RPM.  Guess that would depend on the diameter of your wheel.  And the stators will need to be horribly strong to counter act the centrifugal force.

Might be too dangerous for us to try.  Instead, let's start an Internet rumor and then get Mythbusters to have a try.

Cheers,

M.

Mo,


thats a great idea, I'll email mythbusters and see if they are interested in working on this project. Jamie wont but Adam might take it on. They have done free energy devices before but the ones they did were frankly idiotic.

Dude

Ok I put a link up to this discussion on mythbusters board. I will monitor it to see if we get any bites.

Actually, I take that back, the one they did trying to run a car on hydrogen worked pretty good, just feeding it in through the carb. It backfired a couple times producing a nice fireball, but probably because they were not metering it and it over saturated the manifold and carb throat.

Dude.

FYI, I've done a bit more testing on the Tir-force Gate wheel.  Put the array of three gates on and did run down tests using TK's calibrated weight method.  I moved the wheel off my workbench onto a wood table since I was worried about attraction of the rotor mags to my metal file cabinet, tool box, etc.  I was initially impresed by run down revs (still no stop watch) that went up as high as 60 and especially the two out of four that ended exactly at 56+ change.  Exactly (that was cool!).  But the first test without the Tri-force Gate ran 63+ revs easy.  I stopped after that.

Looks like the Tri-force Gate takes as least as much energy to enter as to exit so far.  Following the laws again.

Now back to the mondrasek wheel build by Clanzer.  Take it away, Sean.

M.

Screw the myth busters.. Clanzer is doing a better job than they would.. Did you see his lastest vid.. And current new wheel.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 19, 2008, 03:35:40 PM
You expect an unloaded wheel with no stators to come to rest and then TURN BACWARDS? OK. Have fun.

I am looking forward to your video illustrating this effect, using your bushings.

Sorry TK, but that is a relatively easy thing to do with a crude unbalanced wheel.

But take your wheel for instance, balanced to precision and coupled with unlubricated high quality bearings...no way its moving backwards without a force to make it do so.

Cheers,

Rev Yah

@therealrasta

thought it would be fun for a show anyway. Adam gets so carried away sometimes with builds it would be fun to see Adam and Jamie do a "build off" with each of their own designs.

Yes, I cant wait to see Clanzers big wheel and TK's finished wheel.

Quote from: Harvey on July 19, 2008, 05:43:56 AM
I see there are some serious attempts to make this work.

There are 3 points I see that need addressed.

1. The momentum of the mass must be sufficient to shear the fields of both exterior stators.
2. The speed of the wheel must be tuned to prevent centrifugal collapse of the interior magnet sets.
3. A diametrically magnetized interior stator magnet is key.

Good thinking Harvey. Simplicity and pure beauty !
As I see it, removing the stators should help, it will remove two sticky points while still keeping the wheel unbalanced.
Lubricating the inner sides of the tubes with a light oil should also help. The magnets can slide freely.

A more realistic mod is attached below, taking gravity's action on magnets into consideration. Magnets have weight so they will try to balance themselves between the two forces.
Why this would work ? I don't see any balanced state here. Balance for gravity will unbalance the magnetic state and vice versa.
Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.

(I feel turning the center magnet anticlockwise by 45 deg should unbalance it even more ..........)

Omega_0

I see CF problems if you can get it to spin, and 1 big wall to overcome to do that. This has been tried before many times from back in the 70s.

But still thanks to itsblockdog and allot of people here, I have had to play with magnets again, and I haven't even finished my other builds. But after the 10th of Aug. I will have a week to finish all my projects, but until then I have allot of armour to get out to my vendors for the big event in Pennsylvania.

Have a great time

@ Mondrasek,

You wrote "...Okay all.  I've finally figured out (in terms that I can understand) why this will not work. ..."

And then summarized that there was insufficient room even with different diameter wheels.

Just a few alternatives to that barrier:

1. Dual sided wheel for increased mass in the same spoke width
2. Rectangular magnets that protrude into Z axis for increased mass within the same spoke width
3. Secondary shorter spokes operating from the midpoint to the outer rim between full length spokes
4.  Mechanical Cam Follower for additional mass transfer.

Food4Thot

Cheers,

Harvey

OK all

I am going to tell you what you need to do get past the wall block. You are going to have to learn how to flutter the magnet. And I hope to be able to show my flutter magnet wheel soon. but until then, you guys will have to figure it out yourselves. I still have to finish it but that won't be for a couple of weeks due to my living work, but the test unit fluttered 4 magnets past the wall with no slowdown, and I do believe they sped up faster than hoped.

Okay breaking for Dinner this end, but good morning so far.

Got the clips attached to the wheel

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw19.jpg&hash=83fbb78c2ebd11656c2a20447fb6c72b5710e62d)

Then I cut down the 4 tubes and glued rubber end caps on after inserting a magnet in each. Then taped up the ends to just make sure they are going to hold :)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw20.jpg&hash=faa5e148fffff7f464b6567a29d8124c23fe8210)

Gonna eat now and will post this afternoons progress later today.

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: AB Hammer on July 19, 2008, 06:50:12 PM
Omega_0

I see CF problems if you can get it to spin, and 1 big wall to overcome to do that. This has been tried before many times from back in the 70s.

But still thanks to itsblockdog and allot of people here, I have had to play with magnets again, and I haven't even finished my other builds. But after the 10th of Aug. I will have a week to finish all my projects, but until then I have allot of armour to get out to my vendors for the big event in Pennsylvania.

Have a great time

If by CF you mean centrifugal force, then it should not matter at slow speeds. The sign of OU is that the wheel should self start and complete a a full 360. From there the problem reduces to an engineering one.

@Omega_0

My first hammer gravity wheel started by its self and spun a full 7 turns before lock up. It should me that I was trying to move to much at one time, but any less and it wouldn't do anything. I have put that project to the side to go back to from time to time. When you achieve certain levels of success, a single turn is not enough. It has to keep going. I do expect my flutter magnet wheel to do this and I am starting to draw up a version of gravity combination to show other application to the flutter effect.

@CLaNZeR
Nice construction.

Quote from: AB Hammer on July 20, 2008, 11:03:57 AM
@Omega_0

My first hammer gravity wheel started by its self and spun a full 7 turns before lock up.

AB, that sounds cool....
Have you thought of open sourcing the plans (If you haven't done that yet, or if I missed them) ?
May be someone else with time and resources can take it further.

Okay another update.

After spending hours altering the pipe length and the best place to mount, I have came to my final configuration regards where they should be and their length in relation to the magnets strength and travel.

As you can see they got chopped down alot. Please to say the wall is not so bad with a big wheel and not so much stress on the bearings as I thought :)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw21.jpg&hash=65fa2a80a95fdff70cf155e6c4fd0a77170dc8a4)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw22.jpg&hash=6b95112eb2cf31ac09887c0dedf241ee6e7fa1e4)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FMGW%2Fmgw23.jpg&hash=8f55b86fa11fb56060be251decd535f068c89c55)

I tried various steel screws to hold the plastic brackets in place to find the right one that would hold the magnet each end of the tube also, but they had to be weak enough to allow the replusion of the next stator magnet to release it.

I think I have got it close enough as the video below shows, but still got to experiment a bit more.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW6.wmv

Now time for a glass of wine!

Cheers

Sean.

forgive me, but why so short travel on the tubes?

 Clanzer wrote:

QuoteAs you can see they got chopped down alot. Please to say the wall is not so bad with a big wheel and not so much stress on the bearings as I thought

This is an important aspect of these systems if they are going to work. The momentum of the wheel for the desired RPM must equal all negative torque thus balancing the system. These leaves all positive torque free to maintain RPM. Thus you capitalize on the conservation of angular momentum. It would be a mistake to think 'the more momentum the better', as the increase in mass distribution involved is counter to the positive torque and also adds unnecessary friction to the bearings. So you want it to be the minimum required.

So your video demonstrates two things of note.
1. The speed of the magnetic field increases its reaction. This results in the plunger 'bouncing' off the top.
2. You have a timing constraint relative to the acceleration of the plunger even with the shorter distance.

#2 Thus illustrates that the stator field must be wide enough to stay in play for the duration of the plunger travel at the desired RPM.

So far slow good! (pun on the RPM constraint)

As always your construction and documentation exceed our expectations in both time and quality :D

Cheers,

Harvey

Quote from: dudeman750 on July 20, 2008, 02:49:34 PM
forgive me, but why so short travel on the tubes?

Because after spending hours chopping them down, that is the best configuration I have came across with these magnets and the stator I am using.

But do not worry , I have some smaller tubes that have arrived and plan on using smaller magnets as well which will have longer travel.

The travel in my mind does not matter, because it is in the in-balance of the wheel that counts.

The wheel is well balanced and simply by adding a small weight such as a couple of big screws will make it rotate 180 degree's. So you do not have to shift long distances to in-balance the wheel. The more length you are moving the more friction you have involved and also the more energy it takes to get that magnet to travel that distance.

This is just my findings after playing today.

Quote from: Harvey on July 20, 2008, 03:15:40 PM
So your video demonstrates two things of note.
1. The speed of the magnetic field increases its reaction. This results in the plunger 'bouncing' off the top.
2. You have a timing constraint relative to the acceleration of the plunger even with the shorter distance.

#2 Thus illustrates that the stator field must be wide enough to stay in play for the duration of the plunger travel at the desired RPM.

So far slow good! (pun on the RPM constraint)

As always your construction and documentation exceed our expectations in both time and quality :D

Thanks Harvey

While using steel screws instead of the latches to keep the magnet where it should be at any given time is one part of the main key to this working in my mind.

I now feel that the heavier/bigger wheel has overcame the stress on the bearings as the wheel just turns, looks at the wall and Rolls it's eyes as it goes in and out very happy :)

Also it only takes a small in-balance on a wheel of this size to get it turning.

After playing and getting a feel for this today, I have to concentrate on getting the correct amount of steel on the end caps that hold the magnet where it should be, but also is not strong enough to stop the magnet being released as it passes the next stator.

If I can get this right I would expect after a spin up that the initial RPM would blow the routine all out of sync, but as the speed drops I would hope it found the SWEET spot RPM where everything dropped into sync as such.

Bit more playing will tell!

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: Harvey on July 20, 2008, 03:15:40 PM

1. The speed of the magnetic field increases its reaction. This results in the plunger 'bouncing' off the top.

I am not so sure that the magnetic field increases with speed.  I think it is the centrifugal force that is causing the bounce.  The faster you spin, the more centrifugal force is acting on the switch magnets tending to throw them to the rim of the wheel.  Going slow you have only the repulsive force of the stator magnet (on top, 12 o-clock position).  When you add rotational speed you add centrifigul force.  So now you have the repulsive force of stator + centrifigul force.  The added centrifugal force is causing the switch magnets to shoot too high and bounce back off the sends.  That is what makes the "magnetic latch" version so hard to set up.  It really needs to be tuned for a specific RPM.  It was this realization that caused me to switch to the more forgiving (but possibly less efficient) mechanical latches.  A mechanical latch system can be tuned and will work at any RPM below where centrifugal force does not allow the bottom (6 o-clock) stator to fire switches all the way to the latch.

Sean, it looks great so far!

M.

Quote from: mondrasek on July 20, 2008, 03:37:53 PM
I am not so sure that the magnetic field increases with speed.  I think it is the centrifugal force that is causing the bounce.  The faster you spin, the more centrifugal force is acting on the switch magnets tending to throw them to the rim of the wheel.  Going slow you have only the repulsive force of the stator magnet (on top, 12 o-clock position).  When you add rotational speed you add centrifigul force.  So now you have the repulsive force of stator + centrifigul force.  The added centrifugal force is causing the switch magnets to shoot too high and bounce back off the sends.  That is what makes the "magnetic latch" version so hard to set up.  It really needs to be tuned for a specific RPM.  It was this realization that caused me to switch to the more forgiving (but possibly less efficient) mechanical latches.  A mechanical latch system can be tuned and will work at any RPM below where centrifugal force does not allow the bottom (6 o-clock) stator to fire switches all the way to the latch.

Hi Mondrasek

I think the mechanical latch may be the next try as I just popped out and added a bottom stator, Rotated it slowly 180 degrees to get all the tubes in the right firing positions as such, then let it go.
It was obvious I needed to give it a hand to start it going, but just that little speed increase got it out of sync again grrrrr

Tuning it using steel to hold the magnets where they are meant to be, is going to be a tricky thing and maybe back to the original mechanical latches is the way to go.

Cheers

Sean.

I would think that the centrifugal force would keep the magnets forced to the outside and no attraction would be needed. I would also think the repelling magnets would have to be used from just after 6 and stopped just before 9. his would create a upward push as well as it would create the push back that is needed. The centrifugal force would then throw the magnets back to the outside which would again create a upward push.

Quote from: CLaNZeR on July 20, 2008, 03:45:41 PM
Hi Mondrasek

I think the mechanical latch may be the next try as I just popped out and added a bottom stator, Rotated it slowly 180 degrees to get all the tubes in the right firing positions as such, then let it go.
It was obvious I needed to give it a hand to start it going, but just that little speed increase got it out of sync again grrrrr

Tuning it using steel to hold the magnets where they are meant to be, is going to be a tricky thing and maybe back to the original mechanical latches is the way to go.

Cheers

Sean.

Sean,

Mechanical latches solve alot of build problems, and maybe they can be made to work with less losses than magnetic latches. 

You have now witnessed one of the problems with magnetic latches.  An easy fix is to put more iron at the end so the magnets grab with more attractive force.  But that decreases the stator firing force (I believe) due to the attraction of the switch magnets needing to be overcome, and possibly shielding of both repulsive magnetic fields.  The other problems:  The stator is also attracted to the iron and slows the wheel, and the stator creates eddy currents (and resultant negative torque mag fields) in the iron, again reducing speed of the wheel.  TK's build nullified some of these issues using JK's continuous wire as the magnetic latch (very nice, simple solution JK).

I couldn't imagine trying to figure out the most efficient magnetic latch design in the lab (garage).  I think mechanical latches at each end would be much easier to tune for a max RPM.  Only downsides are the extra work, needing to minimize the firing switch magnet losses due to the latches, and trying to latch them exactly at the ends of the tubes since any less travel decreases the imbalance.

M.

Hmmm, perhaps a stationary steel ring around the outside edge that ends prior to the BDC, and around the inside edge that ends prior to the TDC. Of course the attractive nature of it would add negative torque on the exit but this should be balanced by positive torque on the entrance. (if it were not balanced then it would be a viable source of magnetic imbalance that could exploited). It is only needed between  12:00 and 3:00 for the exterior and between 6:00 and 9:00 for the interior.

Just a thought.

And while were thinking, here is an incomplete Offset Roller GWD. I have purposely left out an important aspect because I am interested in how other perceive the design. Some will add the aspect properly and others will not and I am interested the preconceptions involved and the populace distribution (numerically) within the ranges.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Furad.net%2Fforums%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fuserpics%2FURAD_Offset_Roller_GWD.JPG&hash=0814bf4b7fdaf696f2a26d2f55328a644d4dad22)

What are your thoughts regarding the design?
Is there a difference between magnetically moving a weight vs. mechanically?
Do those difference impact the operation of the Gravity Wheel?
When you first saw the design, what dimensions did you give it in your mind? Why do you think that is?

It is my belief that we hamper our creativity by preconceptions and illusions. Has this image changed either for you?

Cheers,

Harvey

More to ponder:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y7GzaFoAe8&NR=1
:D

@Harvey

A stationary steel ring around the outside edge? Only 2 warnings on this, A Ramp and Friction.

@CLaNZeR
The only hope for this one in this configuration, is a mechanical latch that will grab when low and release when high.

Good luck

@AB Hammer,

On Clanzer's Rig, Non-Contact ;)

Quote from: Harvey on July 20, 2008, 05:45:46 PM

What are your thoughts regarding the design?
Is there a difference between magnetically moving a weight vs. mechanically?
Do those difference impact the operation of the Gravity Wheel?
When you first saw the design, what dimensions did you give it in your mind? Why do you think that is?

I think the design is very creative.  But I also see it to be a more complex and therefore friction limited version of a gravity wheel with simple ramps at 6 and 12. 
The difference I see in the way that magnetic mass switches raise the weights is that it is relatively quick.  So each switch magnet is in it's optimal location (close to axel or rim) for the majority of the rotation.  The design you show only accomplishes this at 3 and 9 where at all the other positions the weights are moving away from the ends where they produce the greatest imbalance.
The mass switches reguire all the energy to fire the magnets in a single impulse, causing a cogging effect.  The design you show moves the weights gradually so there would not be that impulse and it would turn smoothly.  But I believe smooth acting magnetic ramps could also be made, so no real difference.  I am not sure if magnets or mechanical can be made with the least amount of loses.
I didn't imagine the design in any specific size.  I only looked at the mechanics involved.  I would say the size is limited by the linear bearing each weight rides on to move radially.  Could use miniature linear slides like in Clanzer's SOG.  I believe I am thinking in this scale due to the economics of building a test unit - trying to minimize cost.

good building clazner u need longer travel for tube magnets

@CLaNZeR

Very good and sturdy wheel :)
IMO, the displacement of weights by sliding magnets for such a short distance would not make much difference here. Compared to the weight of whole wheel, these magnets won't make any effect (especially while spinning at reasonable speed) because they won't unbalance it much.

What I see is, they barely escape the influence of that strong stator magnet...which only means one thing - drag and stickiness.

Anyway, you must have thought something before cutting the tubes so short, so give it a try and let us know....

My suggestion is to not to build the whole wheel at one go, but to go step by step.
(I made this procedure for myself, but I'm pasting it here for you and for all)

1- Build the wheel only (which you have already done nicely)

2- Balance it perfectly (it should stay still when let go)

3- Put just one tube on it (going from center to the rim) with a magnet in it.

4- Latch the magnet on the rim side and let it go from 12 o'clock. The wheel should rotate to 270 deg on its own (say CW). If it doesn't, its not unbalanced enough and you need heavier magnets.(or lighter wheel). Replace and repeat till its right.

5- Install the first stator magnet at the center of the wheel. Latch the slider magnet at the center end and again let it go from 12 o'clock. The magnet should get pushed to the rim and get latched there and again the wheel should go 270. If this fails, you need a stronger stator magnet. Repeat.
(Don't cut the tubes short to get it latched, because if you do, you will need to make the wheel smaller as well, and the leverage will be lost, but if you do, make the wheel smaller and lighter)


6- Put another identical tube and magnet exactly opposite to the first, so that both are on the diameter. The wheel should balance again.

7- Latch both the slider magnets at the center. (note that the bottom slider magnet is getting attracted to the stator, which is creating a sticky, so shield the stator magnet with mu-metal at the bottom pole).

8- Let go the wheel from 12 o'clock again. The upper slider magnet gets pushed to the rim and the wheel goes 180 deg, when the other slider reaches the top and gets pushed to the rim as well. The wheel balances at this point and will come to rest.
If the second slider magnet fails to reach the rim, while in rotation, your stator magnet is too weak.
If the second slider magnet hits the wall (which will be at 11 o'clock roughly) and fails to reach 12 o'clock, your magnets are too strong.
Replace and repeat.

9- Install an identical stator magnet at the bottom. It must be identical. (Ensure by replacing the center stator and doing the step #8 again)
10- Let go the wheel from 12 o'clock, while keeping both sliders latched at the center. The first slider should get pushed to the rim and turn the wheel by 180. When it reaches 6 o'clock, it gets pushed to the center, while the second slider which is at the top gets pushed to the rim. The momentum of the wheel should be enough to take it past 12 o'clock and re-start. So it becomes self starting !
If it fails to complete 360, well....the momentum was not large enough to break the repulsive wall and the magnets are too strong. Try adding non-magnetic weights on the wheel's rim. Or replace them and repeat.

If it does self start and completes more than 360 degrees, you have shown that it is OU and can stop there. The world will take it over and produce a big generator out of it. No need to invest thousands of dollers on stuff and instruments ... no need to show LEDs glowing ....

Now its a mere engineering exercise to add more tubes and stators along the rim..... any kid can do it.

Its better if you go on recording weights and such and plotting graph while doing intelligent trials (not hit and trials). Because you will get and idea where the sweet spot is when you see the graph. Remember that if there is OU here, it will be very tiny and its absolutely possible to miss it.

You will find that it will take days and months to finally see why it will work or why it will not. Don't give up....At most you will prove that this design is non-working and enlighten everyone.... :)

Quote from: Omega_0 on July 22, 2008, 05:06:19 AM
Very good and sturdy wheel :)
IMO, the displacement of weights by sliding magnets for such a short distance would not make much difference here. Compared to the weight of whole wheel, these magnets won't make any effect (especially while spinning at reasonable speed) because they won't unbalance it much.

Hi Omega and thanks for the great input.

I spent a long time sussing out the length and trying different combinations, but as usual if I did a video of it all then it would slow me down even more.

Busy week this end as yesterday was travelling all over the place, but back home at the moment and will step through your ideas when I get time.

Here is a quick video to show that one Rotor magnet is more than enough to get it past the 270 degree mark.
As stated before the wheel is heavy but it is on very loose bearings and only a small amount of weight is needed to unbalance it.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/MGW/CLaNZeRMGW7.wmv

More when I get time.

Cheers

Sean.

Thats cool Clanzer. You are already on the step 5.
It goes almost 330 deg. You need to steal 30 more degrees from the Nature :D

Lets see how much drag the stator adds. If its too much, the wheel will go less then 330. Anyhow I expect that it won't be too serious and you can jump to step 6 with just a casual check.

I guess there is no harm in trying out these short tubes, since the your wheel is extremely sensitive and free, it may work. And if it fails there is always an option to try longer ones.
Best of luck. :)

Lifting the weight of a magnet accross the wheel but near the hub is a better test here. The outside magnet must get past the 6:00 position with the other magnet in place.

Sean, what is the clicking sound we hear as the magnet reaches the 1:30 spot?

Kudos on the progress. Will you be able to offer the same run tests that TK performed with his version?

Cheers,

Harvey

Quote from: Harvey on July 23, 2008, 02:37:27 PM
Lifting the weight of a magnet accross the wheel but near the hub is a better test here. The outside magnet must get past the 6:00 position with the other magnet in place.

Sean, what is the clicking sound we hear as the magnet reaches the 1:30 spot?

Kudos on the progress. Will you be able to offer the same run tests that TK performed with his version?

Hi Harvey

I never noticed the click before but now you mention it I can hear it on the video. Just went out and ran the wheel from 12:00 again and the click is still there at around 1:30. Listening to it, it seems to be coming from the bearing/axle area, so seems the bearing could be binding with all that weight.

I dought if I will do the same tests as TK, because you should know me by now, I have not got the brains or education of you lot and go for the suck and see approach LOL !!!!

If it run's it run's, if it does not run then onto the next project!!

Cheers

Sean.

Quote from: Omega_0 on July 20, 2008, 01:02:43 PM
AB, that sounds cool....
Have you thought of open sourcing the plans (If you haven't done that yet, or if I missed them) ?
May be someone else with time and resources can take it further.

Well I won't show the mechanisms the worked it but I will show the wheel without.

CLaNZeR

I do all my first test without bearings, due to if they cant run without them, they won't be worth much with them. But your design has to have them doe to your mount. You can spray a little WD-40 into the bearings which will loosen them up quite a bit and then spin it fast to work out the click.

Quote from: AB Hammer on July 23, 2008, 07:46:51 PM
Well I won't show the mechanisms the worked it but I will show the wheel without.

Looks great !!
It already looks pretty unbalanced and as if its about to start turning.
Well the world will wait for the 'mechanisms'. You have already claimed that it works,  wonder what is holding you back. :)

Quote from: Omega_0 on July 24, 2008, 09:28:26 AM
Looks great !!
It already looks pretty unbalanced and as if its about to start turning.
Well the world will wait for the 'mechanisms'. You have already claimed that it works,  wonder what is holding you back. :)

:D no, no, no this is not unbalanced. The leverage on the right of 3 arm & hammers is quickly balanced by the 5 on the left. This is a common balance arrangement with 8 actuators. Look back at my drawing, you will see there are 5 rollers in a lifting state and only 3 in a leverage state. Also notice the spacing between the rollers, and the spacing between AB's arm & hammers;  see the familar widening of the gap between the leveraged actuators? His wheel is designed to rotate clockwise and requires an energy transfer to flip the arm & hammer over the top, no doubt the mechanisms in question.

Here is some food for thought:
If centrifugal force pulls the actuators out during high speed turns then there is no need to push the actuators to the rim. Is there a way to push them into the center and hold them there for half the cycle? Can this be done absolutely perpendicular to the rotation so that no negative torque is applied to the rotation? How much energy is required to push one actuator electromagnetically? If the actuators are magnetic, can we extract that much energy from multiple actuators using pickup coils? Has this concept been tried before?

Cheers,

8)

p.s. Amazing what can be accomplished with some disassembled gear pullers ;)

@Harvey

You are very correct. To show this wheel as is shows no secrets at all, except the bearings for the mechanism. As is, it can not run and with the 1st mechanisms in place CF taught me a valuable lessen.  I have put this wheel in 7 new variation of mechanisms. Some stopped the CF cold, but the shift wouldn't happen either. On this model I have 3 new designs to try but I put them up for I have much better designs. But since it was one of two wheel being my first. I still would like to make it work if ever possible without changing it to much. LOL

@Harvey

You are very correct. To show this wheel as is shows no secrets at all, except the bearings for the mechanism. As is, it can not run and with the 1st mechanisms in place CF taught me a valuable lessen.  I have put this wheel in 7 new variation of mechanisms. Some stopped the CF cold, but the shift wouldn't happen either. On this model I have 3 new designs to try but I put them up for I have much better designs. But since it was one of two wheel being my first. I still would like to make it work if ever possible without changing it to much. LOL

If anyone has a wheel that "almost works" better than the one I showed in the videos, please post a video of it, including the test procedure.
Thanks in advance.

By the way, in the "Roll On" thread, I have extended my offer of One Thousand American Dollars as a prize, no strings attached, to ANYBODY that can demonstrate to a scientist (degreed please!) of their own choosing and a representative of the local Skeptic's group, a self-running magnet or gravity (or combo) wheel by the 20th of September 2008.
The usually understood definitions of "self-running" and "demonstration" apply, of course.

ABHammer, let's see what you've got that's new. The design you showed in the picture is at least 12 centuries old.

Hey TK,

How about this concept, have you read of it anywhere?

Large wheel, say 4 feet on the bottom, small wheel, say 1.5 feet on the top. distance between the wheels, say 30 feet. A chain or belt connecting the two wheels and has an inner retainment system perhaps like the bottom of roller coasters to keep it from leaving the prescribed course.

Now we arrange AB Hammers around the chain. We can experiment with sliding the top wheel left or right to give the upside chain an incline and the downside chain a vertical or negative incline slope.

We run it up until the centrifugal force swings the hammers around the small wheel and they lock in the leverage position. The leverage on the oneside must outweigh the combined leverage and dead weight on the otherside(since centrifugal force will cause the hammers to swing out early at the top causing some negative torque).

The speed is engineered such that the top will centrifuge and the bottom will not.

Whattayathink?

8)

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 25, 2008, 08:28:18 PM
By the way, in the "Roll On" thread, I have extended my offer of One Thousand American Dollars as a prize, no strings attached, to ANYBODY that can demonstrate to a scientist (degreed please!) of their own choosing and a representative of the local Skeptic's group, a self-running magnet or gravity (or combo) wheel by the 20th of September 2008.
The usually understood definitions of "self-running" and "demonstration" apply, of course.

Only a $1,000 Tinsel?  ;D

I like the magnet in the tube idea!!  I would make the tube the length of how far the magnet will repel so it won't be slamming into the end of the tube.  The wheel should work as long as magnets are only repelled and and not pulled.. If they are pulled you will get the wall effect.

I have attached a very rough graphic (not good with graphics yet) of how I would set it up. No latches.

Jason

Quote from: 4Tesla on July 28, 2008, 07:55:21 PM
I like the magnet in the tube idea!!  I would make the tube the length of how far the magnet will repel so it won't be slamming into the end of the tube.  The wheel should work as long as magnets are only repelled and and not pulled.. If they are pulled you will get the wall effect.

I have attached a very rough graphic (not good with graphics yet) of how I would set it up. No latches.

Jason

I've always thought that in any configuration similar to this the magnets or weights (depending on what you're using) should be attached to the magnet/weight on the opposite side of the wheel. This way the opposing weights "help" each other stay in the correct position.

On the nearly impossible chance that you get some speed of rotation you will have trouble with this setup with centrifugal force. If the weights are attached, then the weight that is further from the center (the down side) will keep the other weight from flying out to the perimeter.

You are correct.. but how would you connect the magnets in this type of setup..  this current setup would have to be low rpm to avoid the centrifugal force issue.

Jason

Check out this thread.. it has a gravity wheel that you have described.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2326.msg115091.html#msg115091

Jason

I'd have to dig back through my email but as recall this was an airpowered test. Pressure was needed to initiate and sustain operation. Also, the frame was ripped apart and needed re-engineered. Hospitalization and a new project consumed his time.

Does any one know if there has been new developments?

Talking about the thread I just posted.. no, he is now working on a hydrogen project.

Jason

Quote from: 4Tesla on July 30, 2008, 12:10:59 AM
You are correct.. but how would you connect the magnets in this type of setup..  this current setup would have to be low rpm to avoid the centrifugal force issue.

Jason

Well in your design the magnets only need to be connected by a string or small wire because you're fighting a pulling force (centrifugal), not a pushing force.

TinselKoala, you have a nice wheel build, but I wonder why some segments in it has no holes in it drilled. Is it intentional making this wheel unbalanced? (the wheel has three segments without holes in them).

@aleks:
Sorry to take so long to reply, somehow I missed the question earlier.

I started to build the rotor using a scrap piece of acrylic plastic from our junk pile. It already had the 6 equally-spaced holes all the way through in the circular pattern.

Later, when I balanced the wheel, I made the other holes (actually they don't go all the way thru so they are spotfaces or recesses) to remove weight. It looks a little odd, but it's balanced quite well.

@Harvey:
I missed yours too, sorry. I think that it would be equivalent to a single wheel with "ABHammers" on it. I don't think "centrifugal force" will help at all.