Quote from: X00013 on June 18, 2009, 03:08:34 AM
Where did everyone go? I feel so alone.     Is the Say Jack wheel dead?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPcKo10Ay6E

You're not along, many are still watching. I've exhausted my research into how it could work and haven't found enough to convince me it is a runner. Others idea's are interesting, but still don't seem to make it a runner. So until Sjack releases or soneone else figures it out, many will just be watching.

Regards, Larry 

Quote from: X00013 on June 18, 2009, 03:08:34 AM
Where did everyone go? I feel so alone.     Is the Say Jack wheel dead?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPcKo10Ay6E

I'm still lurking. I just haven't contributed much since my idea got dissed. I tried doing a WM2D model but can't seem to get WM2D to do what I need, needs 3D. I still think the idea of having weights on only one side, departing the wheel at the bottom, and rejoining above the hub is worthwhile.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg174032#msg174032

But just keep on keepin on. I'll keep lurking and if I feel the urge to say something, I will.

0c

I think J. J. Abeling has connected the dumbbell weights to a chain using flexible link segments (indicated in green in the attached sketch). These links act like flat springs (leaf springs, Blattfedern).

Imagine the laminated springs on the suspension of old trucks or a bow of a bow and arrow.

The overweight makes the wheel turn and the segments get compressed, when the dumbbells are pressed against the lower barrier.
The larger the diameter of the wheel, the less (over) weight is required to "overpower" the springs.

Each spring decompresses at approx. 11 o' clock, propelling the weight along the hockey stick track towards the perimeter of the wheel.

If that's true Abeling's complete explanation would read (as others have already suggested):
"The weight of the bodies together with the elasticity of the link segments and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated."

It is still an interesting problem to find the best shape for the lower barrier and the upper guide.

I have also attached the dxf-file which I used as the base for the sketch.

WHY GLASS???
allways suggests a fluid to me!
Not good with impact!!
Never heard of it being used as the structure of a rotating machine!
Why Glass??
Chet

Quote from: ramset on June 20, 2009, 11:51:24 AM
WHY GLASS???  less friction
allways suggests a fluid to me!    idk
Not good with impact!!     build it to tite tolerances
Never heard of it being used as the structure of a rotating machine!    glass and ceramics are not for novices
Why Glass??    99.9999 percent efficiency, very low rolling friction
Chet