see picture (you must be logged in to see attached picture).
* steel arms with wheels runs on track attached to squared wheel
* one arm is always attracted to magnet and tilts the wheel thereby moving other arms making one side heavier?
* * * * * update 4-12-07: since i've been using working model 2d i have found where the dead point of this wheel is. the original picture is all wrong. see http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,894.msg28133.html#msg28133
I don?t see why it won?t work. Suppose we put a pretty strong magnet and start as is shown in the picture, then the magnet will attract the steel plate on the right-hand side. Now if top plate was fixed rotation will stop at sticky point of the magnet. Top plate, however, slides and adds it?s weight as well as kinetic energy to the right-hand side thus pushing the lower plate out of the sticky point.
The problem of the magnetic motors has always been how to overcome the sticky point, how to cease the action of the magnetic field at that point so that the rotor can keep turning. One possible way is to take away the magnet mechanically, as Torbay does. Another way is to remove the object attracted by the magnet ? this is what SMOT does using gravity to remove the object. Here it is also gravity which helps get the attracted plate out of the way of main magnetic forces of attraction and thus enables the rotor to turn unobstructed.
This is what appears at first glance. The devil is in the details, however. It?s interesting to do a more precise assessment of the forces acting on the levers. Best to try to make a working model. Do you have a working model, FreeEnergy?
P.S. With Wesley Snyder's motor it's a different story. If it really works when left untouched, it would be a pure magnetic motor without additional mechanical help or help from gravity. Unless the wobbling of the rotor axis isn't that mechanical/gravity help. Help from gravity or through clever construction is OK, though, if the rotor keeps turning by itself, without putting in energy, it would be a self-sustaining device.
hey thanks for the input.
no i dont have a working model yet.
we shall see how things turn out.
That shouldn't be difficult to make. It's good to do some modeling before that, however, to shorten the process of choosing the right conditions (weight of plates, strength of magnet and so on). Probably Jason can help.
This reminds me of the proposal by Darlight of a motor utilizing hydrostatic and gravity forces in one of the previous threads.
Quote from: Omnibus on March 28, 2006, 05:06:24 AM
This reminds me of the proposal by Darlight of a motor utilizing hydrostatic and gravity forces in one of the previous threads.
yes it is where i got my idea from
Yours seems easier to put in place.
Hello FreeEnergy,
i like this idea. But I see a problem. If the wheel turns a little bit more clockwise, what will happen with the steel plate at the bottom? It seems to me it would slide down to the right side and maybe neutralize the "push" of the upper downsliding plate. Is there a mechanism to prevent this? And when I look at the picture it seems to me also, that most of the mass is on the left side of the wheel, so it would rotate the other way around. What do you think?
Abseits
If you'd allow me to interject ... You make a good point regarding the movement of the steel plate at the bottom. Simple lever calculations using Mechanics (methods described in Strength of Materials) will provide a better picture of the forces involved and their balance. These calculations have to be made before any effort to manufacture the device (that?s usual for the manufacturing of any machine). Going by intuition, the movement of the bottom plate doesn't seem to stand in the way.
As far as the second point regarding most of the mass being concentrated on the left-hand side, I think a strong enough magnet can take care of that.
Hello Omnibus,
thank you for your answer. I think a strong enough magnet should not be the problem. And you are absolutely right that calculations have to be made before the manufacturing of any device like this. At least the device itself seems relatively simple to build.
Abseits
i really dont know what to think untill me or someone construct this wheel.
And what will happen when the plate pass the magnet? It will attract the plate but in the opposite direction. How will you overcome that problem?
QuoteAnd what will happen when the plate pass the magnet? It will attract the plate but in the opposite direction. How will you overcome that problem?
The push of the right-hand side plate supposedly should overcome that attraction big time.
by then the upper arm plate already extended itself do to gravity and the left arm plate would go back in do to gravity making the wheel unbalanced.
i think it is one weight when the magnet attracts arm with extended arm and another weight when arm is not extended.
get what i am saying?
Maiking it simple.
So Magnet atraction force has to be bigger than weight of the arm B in order to flip over the rotor.
When that point is passed over arm A is atracted by the other side of the magnet.
So the weight of C that now have moved to the outside of the rotor, has to be able to over come the atraction force of the arm A
So if arm B and arm C are the same weight, were the force to overcome this sticky post comes from?
maybe while the arms are switching sides do to gravity it can produce energy to turn off/on the magnetic field with some circuit work.
*make it a one way wheel so when the magnetic field is turned off/on the wheel won't role back?
QuoteSo Magnet atraction force has to be bigger than weight of the arm B in order to flip over the rotor.
This is at the moment shown in the picture. This is before flipping over the rotor. This is just the beginning.
Suppose the magnet is so strong that it starts attracting plate A (countering the weight of the left-hand side).
At the very first moment of attracting A the top begins tilting and the upper plate C slides spontaneously under the action of gravity. It pushes so hard that adds to the attraction of the magnet and pushes plate A beyond the sticky point.
QuoteWhen that point is passed over arm A is atracted by the other side of the magnet which B doesn't.
So the weight of C that now have moved to the outside of the rotor, has to be able to over come the atraction force of the arm A.
It does. It overcomes it.
QuoteSo if arm B and arm C are the same weight, were the force to overcome this sticky post comes from?
Well, plates B and C have the same weight but C has also kinetic energy. Also B is beginning to shorten the lever arm while C is fully extended and is already starting to feel the pull of the magnet.
Quoteplate C slides spontaneously under the action of gravity. It pushes so hard that adds to the attraction of the magnet and pushes plate A beyond the sticky point.
Remenber Plate B is moving at the same time as plate C so the inercial push of C is counter acted by the inercial push of B.
QuoteIt does. It overcomes it.
Why, do not tell us it does... please tell us why and how.
QuoteWell, plates B and C have the same weight but C has also kinetic energy. Also B is beginning to shorten the lever arm while C is fully extended and is already starting to feel the pull of the magnet.
A wheel has no inertial energy unless it is turning and still there is not any force that makes it turns as it is in equilibrium.
If B and C are equal they will move at the same time if well constructed.
So if C is receiving atraction B is receiving it as well...
Quoteplate C slides spontaneously under the action of gravity. It pushes so hard that adds to the attraction of the magnet and pushes plate A beyond the sticky point.
Remenber Plate B is moving at the same time as plate C so the inercial push of C is counter acted by the inercial push of B.
QuoteIt does. It overcomes it.
Why, do not tell us it does... please tell us why and how.
QuoteWell, plates B and C have the same weight but C has also kinetic energy. Also B is beginning to shorten the lever arm while C is fully extended and is already starting to feel the pull of the magnet.
A wheel has no inertial energy unless it is turning and still there is not any force that makes it turns as it is in equilibrium.
If B and C are equal they will move at the same time if well constructed.
So if C is receiving atraction B is receiving it as well...
QuoteRemenber Plate B is moving at the same time as plate C so the inercial push of C is counter acted by the inercial push of B.
Not in the same measure. Plate C is extending itself while plate B is shortening the arm.
QuoteWhy, do not tell us it does... please tell us why and how.
Construction allows for it. Remember the kinetic energy of C, C already feeling the pull of the magnet etc.
QuoteA wheel has no inertial energy unless it is turning and still there is not any force that makes it turns as it is in equilibrium.
If B and C are equal they will move at the same time if well constructed.
So if C is receiving atraction B is receiving it as well...
On the contrary, as said, when starting at the position as in the picture, the magnet pulls A and the rotor starts turning. It?s not in equilibrium.
Also, as said, B and C are not equal. They differ in configuration, in kinetic energy and in experiencing magnetic pull. In this respect C has advantage over B.
Omnibus, do you have any studies on Newtons phiscs?
Do you?
Yes I do, and I can see that not all the people around does have them, that is why I try to simplify what I explain with the most simple words I can.
I can write you down all the momentum forces implicated in this wheel (will take me some hours that I do not have to do so...) but I am sure that only very little persons in this forum will understand them and will be just a waste of my time.
Think that wheel like this and even much more complicated that this one are common problems in mechanical engeneering issues so it is easy for me to understand what forces are involved in it and witch ones not.
In order to help you to analize the wheel like this or any other mechancal system the best way is if you imagine it in every stage or drawing it in paper in every stage and then draw the forces implied. To draw the forces you need to know the basics of the newtons phisics if you dont know them you will be not able to do it correctly and this is were I think you are having troubles as you are imaginating some that are not involved or forgeting some that are.
QuoteThink that wheel like this and even much more complicated that this one are common problems in mechanical engeneering issues so it is easy for me to understand what forces are involved in it and witch ones not.
In order to help you to analize the wheel like this or any other mechancal system the best way is if you imagine it in every stage or drawing it in paper in every stage and then draw the forces implied. To draw the forces you need to know the basics of the newtons phisics if you dont know them you will be not able to do it correctly and this is were I think you are having troubles as you are imaginating some that are not involved or forgeting some that are.
These are only some impressions of yours that have nothing to do with scientific argumentation. Empty words, so to say. Quite a useless undertaking.
Omnibus I am just trying to help, do not take it personal please.
What I just wrote is very good scientific argumentation, in other words what I say to you is observe (draw the device in every stage) and analize your observations (draw the forces involved in the proces)
Every one here will tell you that this is what all scientific investigations are about...
Observe and analize over and over again until you can reach a conclusion.
There is another way to aproach invesigations and it is by theory, sometimes theory goes before fisical investigation is posible, but that is another history...
Another point, my mother tong is not english, so I try to do my best when I write about technical staff.
Don't worry about the English. Just show some calculations based on the methods of Strength of Materials (a branch of Mechanics which usually the civil engineers are most drilled with). This would be the scientific approach. Best if one can find a computer program that would do such modeling. I already mentioned that in previous posts. Otherwise it's just hunch.
So you do not have any phisics studys. :-[
Don't sidetrack. I told you what to do if you want to be scientific.
anyone else think this will work?
another possible setup for the magnet
I think it will not work.
You have just drawn the sticky spot.
Why should it turn on, when the magnet has "grabbed" one lever arm ?
it has grabbed one lever arm but there are two other levers running free shifting weight to the right side making kinetic energy. if the right side is not heavy enough to break from the sticky spot, then the kinetic energy can be preserved as electric energy with some kind of circuit to turn off the magnetic field so it wont be stuck to the sticky spot.
* the magnet's location varies. would have to try different arrangements to see which is better.
yeah ive been studying this wheel for a while now and yeah you are right. it will not work. :-X
i could be wrong.
Quoteyeah ive been studying this wheel for a while now and yeah you are right. it will not work. Lips Sealed
i could be wrong.
What made you reach that conclusion?
well if anything it just might work with some kind of circuit setup like i mentioned above. only with circuit setup though...im not sure
See, the goal is to avoid any external energy input whatsoever. Also, I don't think you should easily give up on this before you at least carry out careful calculations applying the methods of Strength of Materials (the branch of Mechanics civil engineers use the most) or model it with a program that uses these methods to calculate the forces. What we're doing here is just judging by intuition which may be misleading in the long run (both pro and con).
I believe that it doesn't work. ( religious argumentation ) :)
wheel phases without magnet/circuit
please if someone could point me to the right direction for turning on/off magnetic fields using simple circuit setups? i really think this wheel will work with the help of turning on/off magnetic fields.
thanks guys,
FreeEnergy
Quote from: FreeEnergy on March 30, 2006, 01:57:54 AM
it has grabbed one lever arm but there are two other levers running free shifting weight to the right side making kinetic energy. if the right side is not heavy enough to break from the sticky spot, then the kinetic energy can be preserved as electric energy with some kind of circuit to turn off the magnetic field so it wont be stuck to the sticky spot.
* the magnet's location varies. would have to try different arrangements to see which is better.
Once you add the electricity required to make it run, you have (once again) invented the electric motor!
This magnetic motor will not rotate forever. The reason I say this is that it will reach equilibrium since the arm that is attracted to the magnet must also conteract the torque moment generated from the previous arm that is still positioned outward.
Valveman
Good finally is apearing some people that really understand fisiscs and how they work...
Good answers valvaman and Jake.
till i learn about turning off/on magnetic fields this will not work i think.
i already said that the arm is attracted to the magnet, once that happens there will be two other arms running free creating kinetic energy, this energy can be preserved with some kind of circuit with capacitor to turn on/off the arm stuck to the magnet.
if anything..all this can be made to work mechanically without circuits. would be a lot harder...or not
this is from a private messenge...
Quote from: pese on May 03, 2006, 01:28:52 PM
hi (from germany)
i see this morning your (bessler) wreel that was designet 4 week ago.
.
very interesting. its was an mashine in my zown thas was working like this.
(i as child , an dnot understand all.
this man was not nor living an now 50 jears past.
an bessler maschine will work
als in us it was one in 1800 you know ?
pese
;)
Who says the arms need to be made out of a ferrous material? Forgive me if I haven't read anything, but just looking at the design. Seems the arms could me made out of Plastic with lead weights attached. Even so, nothing prevents the weights from sliding back on the bottom so it won't work. You've got one weight pulling three up hill, during one phase. Inertia won't be enough to compensate.
Quote from: pese on May 04, 2006, 09:00:28 AM
yes i have seen this,
thisitem (3 weeks ago)
with the scares , this mus be that was i shown (in system) over 50 years ago
and it was working .
very loud and with problems in mechanichmes
(short after 2.war , it was not good materials on the marked.
the ma how hade constructed the and shown us children that , was
die on year later...
ihave try to calculate them and it give solutions from your to this delevopment that
must also work .
my "doityourself hp is
http://ch.to/FE
something bessler inside and 1 USA maschinery from 1800 .
many pictures but only german descritions.
will be in contct with you
could anyone please simulate this in a physics animation program? please ;D
US-inventor help searched ?
Donald Kelly(white pages:NY)
US4082969
US4167684 Magnetic Torque Amplifier/Multiplifier
US4179633
S
dL
Hello to all;
I'm new to this board and am always interested in free energy and mechanisms. Looking at your design, I feel the main problem is trying to keep B to the right side when it is at the lower horizontal plane. If you put a string from each end of A to B, B to C, C to D and D to A this may help. When A slides downwards by gravity, its momentum will pull on the string going to B which will pull it rightwards as B's position becomes horizontal. It may even have enough force to pull B all the way to the right, thus eliminating the force required to lift B in it's traditional position. This will depend on the friction of the wheels.
I took the liberty of modifying your design as enclosed.
welcome aboard...so is the magnet still playing part of your modification?
i guess not? am i right? lol good idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since I was using the same plate lettering as one of the former posts the string connections should
really be from A to B, B to D, D to C and C to A. All four strings would be the same length, that is, the length from the right tip of C to the roller end of A plus about 1/4' more to not stress the system during 75% of a cycle. The distance from the tip end of A to the roller end of B, if B was on the leftwards edge, would be longer, so the string would pull B rightwards. I guess if you started the wheel with B completely rightwards, you would not require the magnet since A would have enough momemtum to tilt the wheel and start C sliding right. This should actually work.
Just my two cents but, if you want to use a magnet, could you attach a small ball on the ends of the arms and then set up a smot system instead of the single magnet?
Tim
Quote from: MrMag on November 15, 2006, 11:10:04 AM
Just my two cents but, if you want to use a magnet, could you attach a small ball on the ends of the arms and then set up a smot system instead of the single magnet?
Tim
i don't see why not. have to test it out.
could anyone help me build this in wm2d please?
Enjoy...
I hope this is what you needed. Post some pics when your done with it.
~Dingus
Quote from: Dingus Mungus on February 23, 2007, 04:04:38 AM
Enjoy...
I hope this is what you needed. Post some pics when your done with it.
~Dingus
Thanks! :)
hmmm
good news guys. since i've been using working model 2d i have found where the dead point of this wheel is. the original picture is all wrong.
i think this wheel will work now that i have found the principle of http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2019.0.html machine. all i have to do is use a SMOT for one of the arms for my wheel and at the sticky point apply http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2019.0.html idea. i think one of the free running arms on my wheel will have enough kinetic energy to pull the plate of iron between the repelling magnets :)
thanks Dingus Mungus for the help.
hope this helps.
it is kinda of sloppy but you get the idea.
i just figured something out today. the smot should only be applied to arm A and not the whole weight of the wheel as shown. this is very important and makes the wheel so much more efficient. this should make OU.
i don't think i have to apply http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2019.0.html to my wheel anymore. will see.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D894.0%3Battach%3D7778%3Bimage&hash=48ea43740dbd1bd4cb0aa671d49b6b42ed06f0cb)
Sounds like a great idea!
If you can get enough rotational force from the smot track to
overcome the wind resistance then you'll have "perpetual motion"...
Till the bearings go out that is.
I noticed that a continuos rotational force of just a few N's could keep it going...
Good Luck,
~Dingus Mungus
if the smot is only picking up the weight of arm A this will be over unity i think. at the sticky point you will have twice (arm C and D) the weight of arm A going against the sticky point.
also the magnets would be at attraction mode and not repelling mode. the smot would be at a vertical position. the smot is what tucks arm A in.
hope this helps. see previous reply.
I can see the idea of operation when the motor is rotating very slow. What happens when the motor starts to increase rpms? What happens with the time delay in the falling arms caused by the limited acceleration of gravity (9.81ms^2) when it start to spin faster?
Br.
Vidar
use brakes? :)
also make it a one-way wheel
Well, I'm back. After running into some conclusions with my work I took some time off. So I'm back to share what I have found. I'll probably post my research and theories again in the next month or so. As for this problem. I would like to lend a hand. I just have a few questions to ask. Just so you know where I am coming from my current view is that this will not work. But I guess now its my job to prove my theory. So the questions I have are from the last picture:
Is the wheel rotating clockwise?
Is the magnet at the end of arm A being repelled from the SMOT? Same poles?
Where is the center of mass(balance) for each arm? At the center of the arm or at the end where the magnet is?
Here are a few links to information of physics and how to analyse a wheel. They are a good toolbox of knowledge.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html)
http://www.comfsm.fm/~dleeling//physics/torque.html (http://www.comfsm.fm/~dleeling//physics/torque.html)
http://physics.uwstout.edu/physapplets/a-city/physengl/lever.htm (http://physics.uwstout.edu/physapplets/a-city/physengl/lever.htm)
http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/Class/BBoard.html (http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/GBSSCI/PHYS/Class/BBoard.html)
http://cnx.org/content/col10322/latest/ (http://cnx.org/content/col10322/latest/)
Tim
hope this new picture explains it all. (must be logged in to see picture ;))
the smot must only be strong enough to pick up the weight of arm A. must be adjusted accordingly.
at the sticky point you will have twice (arm C and D) the weight going against the sticky point.
peace
ummmm I like this one and reckon I have got all the bits to actually knock it up within a couple of hours, so might try it out the weekend when back home and let you know what the results are.
The Mini Linear rails I have travel about 1.5", so I reckon If I mill the square out to 2" then give it a whirl.
Will post results as usual when it is done.
Regards
Sean.
The SMOT will no doubt pick up arm A, but magnets don't usually let go. Tuning the other forces to overcome the "sticky spot" seems to be the problem in these designs. Maybe when the force from arm D on the wheel increase arm A should be at the sticky spot.
@FreeEnergy
I think your current design is nicer than the previous. Maybe by adding the 4 strings I had shown on page 5 would work better, without any magnets. Everything on your wheel will be dependant on how the sliding motion will be as friction free as possible.
I am currently making a wheel. The parts are being cut this week by water jet cutter, and should have everything by next week to do my first trial. No magnets. Will show the results, good or bad, on the board.
Quote from: wattsup on April 12, 2007, 11:48:52 AM
@FreeEnergy
I think your current design is nicer than the previous. Maybe by adding the 4 strings I had shown on page 5 would work better, without any magnets. Everything on your wheel will be dependant on how the sliding motion will be as friction free as possible.
I am currently making a wheel. The parts are being cut this week by water jet cutter, and should have everything by next week to do my first trial. No magnets. Will show the results, good or bad, on the board.
hi and thanks for the input guys.
@wattsup i have tried the string thing and didnt work using wm2d, unless i didn't do it right. i think using the smot for this wheel is best for now.
peace
The hole functionality of this wheel seems to depend on the smot. Its the smot that is defying gravity here. So the question I have is, is there yet a SMOT that actually works? If there is then there are much easier ways of using a smot to make power off gravity.
Note: This is a simplistic drawing. If a smot works a solid state wheel could be created with only the wheel rotating.
Quote from: nwman on April 12, 2007, 05:53:31 PM
The hole functionality of this wheel seems to depend on the smot. Its the smot that is defying gravity here. So the question I have is, is there yet a SMOT that actually works? If there is then there are much easier ways of using a smot to make power off gravity.
Note: This is a simplistic drawing. If a smot works a solid state wheel could be created with only the wheel rotating.
good idea but i think you have the smot wrong on your graph. it should have more of an arc and the smot should go from being far to near the wheel.
Here is something I posted in Tom's SMOT thread.
thanks but i am sticking to my wheel for now.
peace
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D894.0%3Battach%3D8043%3Bimage&hash=07542be43b455c513ad6d70f1457aff1d0aed42f)
Please do! I would still like to ask everyone out there if there is a fully functional SMOT that doesn't have a sticky spot? If you have a working SMOT then devices like this would work no problem.
Notes about your last design change:
I think your going to run into problems with the angles of the forces pushing against the mechanics of the wheel.
Here us a mostly fixed state wheel where only the wheel should move. The wheel is balanced with two ring magnets on the edges of either side. If Tom's STOM design really does what it claims then the two ring magnets should be pulled into the SMOTs on either sides and rotated clockwise and pushed out of the SMOTs thus spinning. This really is simplifying the hole process down to its make physics components. K.I.S.S! So again if the SMOT works then this wheel should accelerate and be easy to pull power off of.
Tim
will see what happens.
peace
Started work on this one today, but got to go do the family thing for a bit, so thought I would do a quick update and I hope I am along he correct tracks!
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Ffe1.jpg&hash=7138865613dccf1ebc732fe4445bd257af8ee463)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Ffe2.jpg&hash=a77a6519a4981a7c6387b8599d44bb08ec903a5d)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Ffe3.jpg&hash=7b5e6c137f3d7894bacbc8a4533fb91a4c7df662)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Ffe4.jpg&hash=623221eab250f3606fb4c2d2c74244a46c955641)
Hope to do more tomorrow and update.
Regards
Sean.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on April 14, 2007, 10:44:54 AM
Started work on this one today, but got to go do the family thing for a bit, so thought I would do a quick update and I hope I am along he correct tracks!
Hope to do more tomorrow and update.
Regards
Sean.
thanks for the update! it is looking good :)
make sure the principle is the same as:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D894.0%3Battach%3D8043%3Bimage&hash=07542be43b455c513ad6d70f1457aff1d0aed42f)
peace
Quote from: FreeEnergy
make sure the principle is the same as:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D894.0%3Battach%3D8043%3Bimage&hash=07542be43b455c513ad6d70f1457aff1d0aed42f)
peace
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2Ffe5.jpg&hash=1fc12c56564019a98f547ccc11645bbd1b2e5251)
Comparing the two it is not too far off and the sliders do exactly as expected at each position.
I have attached some small Neo magnets for now to get the effect of weight while turning the wheel, will lathe some disks off some steel bar tomorrow and attach.
Then the next challenge will be the Smot ramp, ummmmmmmm should be fun.
Must admit one thing that comes to light is that you are not going to be able to spin this one too fast as by just doing it by hand, all arms remain outwards as RPM increases.
But for me personally alot of lessons learnt from building this one as with all other experiements I have done.
Regards
Sean.
Your might be able to through some steel washer stacked together on for the weights. Just a thought.
Tim
Quote from: nwman on April 14, 2007, 05:26:33 PM
Your might be able to through some steel washer stacked together on for the weights. Just a thought.
Tim
Excellent idea Tim, save time and effort, will bolt them on tomorrow.
Because of the small size of this unit, I am wondering if a couple of 50mm in length magnets will be okay for the smot, or whever to tape a few together to make a longer ramp, will play more tomorrow.
Regards
Sean.
wow it is looking really great.
another thing i was thinking about is that the smot doesn't actually have to physically touch the rollers. it would probably be better this way anyways. no friction, know what i am saying?
thanks for giving this wheel a chance and saving me time/money. really thanks!
peace
Technically magnets do have friction (heat) but it is still a small amount.
Tim
CLaNZeR any updates? :)
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 17, 2007, 04:08:13 AM
CLaNZeR any updates? :)
Sorry to say I had to do the family thing on Sunday and did not get much time on line or in my workshop.
I work away from home 5 days a week, so will not get back to it till next weekend.
I can work on other stuff in my hotel room while away such as drawing up PCB's and writing code needed for other projects but with the magnets and wheels I make, it is not so easy to take with you when flying all over the place, I would probably get stopped by security LOL!!
Will update over the weekend coming.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on April 17, 2007, 05:20:37 AM
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 17, 2007, 04:08:13 AM
CLaNZeR any updates? :)
Sorry to say I had to do the family thing on Sunday and did not get much time on line or in my workshop.
I work away from home 5 days a week, so will not get back to it till next weekend.
I can work on other stuff in my hotel room while away such as drawing up PCB's and writing code needed for other projects but with the magnets and wheels I make, it is not so easy to take with you when flying all over the place, I would probably get stopped by security LOL!!
Will update over the weekend coming.
cool man thanks for the update :D
i can't wait! (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhackersclub.net%2Funity%2Fe107_images%2Femotes%2Fdefault%2Fjoy.gif&hash=22509ba2ecd0cd133a6e223c88e7361fa236d8d4)
Just thinking again about the smot.
I was going to use two bar magnets set either side of the metal washers on the up stroke and set them out the same angle as the tradditional smot ramp with a air space either side. North facing in one side and South facing in the other.
I take it this is correct? if not can you expand on what sort of smot you are thinking of.
Regards
Sean.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on April 17, 2007, 05:52:14 AM
Just thinking again about the smot.
I was going to use two bar magnets set either side of the metal washers on the up stroke and set them out the same angle as the tradditional smot ramp with a air space either side. North facing in one side and South facing in the other.
I take it this is correct? if not can you expand on what sort of smot you are thinking of.
Regards
Sean.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D894.0%3Battach%3D8230%3Bimage&hash=0ee8a49bc7c7630fee9306eb7845e4f81e4d565e)
i am not sure what you're saying but this should explain it.
make sure the smot is only strong enough to lift arm A, anymore stronger and it wont work.
any news CLaNZeR? are you back? :)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhackersclub.net%2Funity%2Fe107_images%2Femotes%2Fdefault%2Fjoy.gif&hash=22509ba2ecd0cd133a6e223c88e7361fa236d8d4)
Hi
Yep back and usual manic weekend trying to get everything done!
I will find some time this afternoon to get the steel washers attached to the arms and knock up a simple ramp using two magnets and see how it goes, will post the results later.
Regards
Sean.
Right had a bit of play with this one and sorry to say I cannot see that she is going to fly.
The main thing is the balance of the arms and the simplest way for me to show this is by doing a little video and you will see what I mean. I am using a small screw driver to emulate the Smot lifting the arms and unless the smot ramp was curved in my mind it is not going to play ball.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/smotg.htm
I tried a few different magnet configs with the ramp and the arms travelled a couple of inches turning the wheel but again getting the height was the problem.
I even used a big smot as below.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FsmotG.jpg&hash=ec679a98ca32cf3262dbed29c4c43817077df3d1)
All good fun though and will pop the magnets back on the arms and mess around when I get more time.
Got to crack on with other projects for now.
Regards
Sean.
Sean,
movie is not found under this link,
please update the link.
Many thanks.
Sean,
What kind of hardware is used for your sliding components? Where might I be able to find something like them? Its for something else I'm working on. Thanks!
Tim
CLaNZeR the sliders are not sliding freely enough :-\ this is very important. let me know how it goes.
peace
p.s. will need to build this wheel myself too :)
If you are positioning your smot as per the drawings above, it is impossible to have this lift simply because your arms slide in or out but not up.
To give your smot position as shown in A the best chance, you would have to have the Arm A hanging on a swivel when extended.
Otherwise, if your system is as is try putting the smot like in B. The smot will be in the normal trajectory of the Arm A rotation aiding it to turn over.
Otherwise try like in C, my favorite. This smot position should push the Arm A back upwards while having the natural downward movement of the wheel helping to overcome friction. You may need a bigger smot.
In D, there are smaller smots in succession. This would keep the upwards push while in rotation.
CLaNZeR? any news?
Quote from: nwman on April 23, 2007, 01:53:59 PM
Sean,
What kind of hardware is used for your sliding components? Where might I be able to find something like them? Its for something else I'm working on. Thanks!
Tim
Hi Tim
They are THK miniature slides and very accurate, I got them off ebay in america at a very good price as THK in the UK quoted ?58.00 each to buy :(
The guy on Ebay took ages to deliver and I thought I had been ripped off, but they did eventually turn up.
Regards
Sean.
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 23, 2007, 04:03:13 PM
CLaNZeR the sliders are not sliding freely enough :-\ this is very important. let me know how it goes.
peace
p.s. will need to build this wheel myself too :)
Shame we lost all the posts from yesterday as I replied to this already LOL :)
The arms are sliding really smooth and should be with the THK rails being used, I am thinking it is more balance than the rails.
If you look at the picture below you can see that maybe I need to mill out a new square and butt the end of the sliders closer together. In other words get rid of the 8mm gap in front of each slider and reduce to 2mm and also with the 6mm gap reduce it to 2mm.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.org.uk%2FFE1-wheel.jpg&hash=1470b88007f8cd638408c2025063022d93105e27)
Like I said, will play more when I get the time, I want to get the pulse controller version 4 code finished this week and again a long thread on this got loast yesterday when the server went down grrrrrrrrr, I have updated my site with it though.
Regards
Sean.
thanks :)
we must try every possibly way :D
peace
by the lifting of only arm A there is enough dis imbalanced momentum to the whole wheel that causes arm C to shift its weight to the right, by this time there is leverage weight arm C and D going against the sticky spot; overcoming the sticky spot?
must be a one-way wheel.
peace
at 22 seconds of the video (http://www.overunity.org.uk/smotG.avi) you can see the arm is not sliding freely enough.
also could you post a video with the smot setup the way i explained?
thanks :)
CLaNZeR?
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 29, 2007, 02:44:24 AM
CLaNZeR?
Sorry mate, as stated above I will get the Version 4 Pulse Controller out the way and have more of a play with this one later on.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2263.0.html
I will get around to it, all in good time :)
Cheers
Sean.
Quote from: CLaNZeR on April 29, 2007, 01:38:12 PM
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 29, 2007, 02:44:24 AM
CLaNZeR?
Sorry mate, as stated above I will get the Version 4 Pulse Controller out the way and have more of a play with this one later on.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2263.0.html
I will get around to it, all in good time :)
Cheers
Sean.
no problem, thanks for the update.
peace
hopefully this wheel works, according to my physics this wheel should work. the smot should be the easiest part.
i was just thinking...Wally Minto's heat wheel would work great with my wheel too! just mixing ideas here... :D
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/minto.html
peace
Myth busters tried the hear wheel and it worked but it really didn't "work". It turned but at like 1/2 revolution a day.
Tim
Quote from: nwman on May 15, 2007, 03:28:40 AM
Myth busters tried the hear wheel and it worked but it really didn't "work". It turned but at like 1/2 revolution a day.
Tim
I don't think they built it right. I think I know of a better way.
peace
Even if you could make it work better it still uses solar energy to run. If you can make it more then 40% efficient then you might have something. The best solar cells today are only 38% efficient.
Tim
You don't need solar cells for that, you can focus and project heat using discs or panels.
Plenty of heat, then, see these fi :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q4UENGN_Yk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q4UENGN_Yk)
Quote from: JoinTheFun on May 16, 2007, 04:04:06 AM
You don't need solar cells for that, you can focus and project heat using discs or panels.
Plenty of heat, then, see these fi :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q4UENGN_Yk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q4UENGN_Yk)
you beat me to it! ;)
we can also use the earth's heat...also have you seen those type of cups that has a thin layer and has liquid between the thin layer?(the one you put in the freezer so your beer gets really cold :) ) well that technology can be applied for fast heat evaporation :) and yes we would use something that evaporates at a fast rate, something like thinner or alcohol, etc.
peace
Again both those idea use solar energy. The energy is coming from the sun. I like both those ideas in the videos and think they have real merit. The only down side them is that they need direct sunlight. The best case scenario would be to have the pure solar reflection arrays set up in space to collect the sun 24/7 with no interference with the atmosphere and then relay hat energy back down to earth via something like a lazier. Again its all solar energy.
Tim
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 26, 2007, 05:51:54 PM
at 22 seconds of the video (http://www.overunity.org.uk/smotG.avi) you can see the arm is not sliding freely enough.
also could you post a video with the smot setup the way i explained?
thanks :)
The problem here is that the arms are reacting too late. You see that the gliding arms are by gravity pulled out AFTER it has passed the top of the wheel, and are pushed in AFTER it has passes the bottom of the wheel. This time delay is impossible to ignore because of friction, and are also the cause why this gravity wheel does not spin alone. To make the gliders reacting BEFORE they pass the top and the bottom of the wheel, it require energy input, and then the wheel will start to rotate. There must also be an inbalance in when the arms are pulled or pushed. If it was possible to force the arms to be in "out possition" for shorter time than in "in possition", it also might work - but how do you do that?
The solution is NOT to attach a few stator magnets to attract the gliders earlier, because the angle of gravity will also change in the same direction. There must be another way to make this work.
Br.
Vidar
Quote from: nwman on May 16, 2007, 03:03:42 AM
Even if you could make it work better it still uses solar energy to run. If you can make it more then 40% efficient then you might have something. The best solar cells today are only 38% efficient.
Tim
Thats correct, all we have here on planet earth is powered by the sun. There is limitless of ways, or maybe roundabout ways, to utilize this energy. To utilize this energy directly, I believe is more efficient than any other types. However, the efficiency must also include the energy required to make a generator, if it is made as a solar panel or other types of generators.
Br.
Vidar
i think i have said this before but, the kinetic energy of arm C can be used to block arm A's sticky spot. well not completely block it, but decrease the magnetic field to some degree.
peace
Quote from: FreeEnergy on May 21, 2007, 05:26:11 AM
i think i have said this before but, the kinetic energy of arm C can be used to block arm A's sticky spot. well not completely block it, but decrease the magnetic field to some degree.
peace
I have then a few questions:
Where do the kinetic energy come from?
How much kinetic energy is present in the time when shielding?
How much will the shielding process brake the rotation?
If the kinetic energy come from the device itself, the kinetic energy is already limited by the forces which made it. In theory, the counter force which occurs when shielding, plus loss, is probably the same or more than the forces which made the kinetic energy available in the first place. So it will stop. I assume you're talking about the arms in the first drawings you made.
Br.
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on May 21, 2007, 02:34:20 PM
Quote from: FreeEnergy on May 21, 2007, 05:26:11 AM
i think i have said this before but, the kinetic energy of arm C can be used to block arm A's sticky spot. well not completely block it, but decrease the magnetic field to some degree.
peace
I have then a few questions:
Where do the kinetic energy come from?
How much kinetic energy is present in the time when shielding?
How much will the shielding process brake the rotation?
If the kinetic energy come from the device itself, the kinetic energy is already limited by the forces which made it. In theory, the counter force which occurs when shielding, plus loss, is probably the same or more than the forces which made the kinetic energy available in the first place. So it will stop. I assume you're talking about the arms in the first drawings you made.
Br.
Vidar
i already explained this i think, i'll explain again :)
when arm
A is lifted by the smot the whole wheel turns to the right, then arm
C slides to the right causing leverage weight. do you see? when arm
C slides we can use this kinetic energy to block the sticky spot (arm
A).
i don't have the mechanism for this yet but i know it's possible.
peace
Quote from: FreeEnergy on April 12, 2007, 04:47:20 AM
at the sticky point you will have twice (arm C and D) the weight going against the sticky point.
i was wrong about this part. the weight comes from the sliding (kinetic energy) of arm
C only. and i think the smot will provide enough momentum for arm
C to slide. has to be a one way wheel.
had another idea.
when arm C slides not only it can block the sticky spot but i think you could also have water pumped insided arm D somehow...and when arm D is at the beginning of the smot the water gets dumped out. make sense? :)
peace
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3484490731703421398&hl=en
Quote from: TerryT on May 29, 2007, 04:12:12 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3484490731703421398&hl=en
?
welcome to the forum
Quote from: TerryT on May 29, 2007, 04:12:12 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3484490731703421398&hl=en
I believe this car will run the 1/4 mile in 5min. or so - downhill ;D
Horrible.
i will post this under a new topic tomorrow since i think it deserves one :-)
basically it is the same wheel design but instead of using one wheel we use two wheels. this resembles something like i drew at an earlier post showing the phases of the wheel.
also only the tip of the arms should be attracted to magnet and not the whole arm.
all we need to do is place a magnet(s) at a certain location(s) to cause the arm(s) to slide horizontally making the wheel rotate.
the magnet should only be strong enough to pull the weight of arm horizontally and not vertically.
see what i am saying?
what do you think?
never mind that.
:-(