W.K.Coombs Open discussion thread

[bourne]

Hi everyone

Lets assume that there might be something to this. Let us also assume that the one piece of information that we have been given that seems significant is what we need to test.

That being the 20-1 ratio for the lever. i.e. 1 unit in front of fulcrum 20 behind fulcrum.

Lets now make some more assumptions.

As the up and down movement is only part of the total circular movement required I am going to assume the side to side portion is also governed by the same rule.

If 1 in front and 20 behind leaves an excess of 19 behind? Yes?

This 19 behind needs to be balanced with the pendulum, so at rest they are perfectly perpendicular to each other and the upright. And when the pendulum is in motion at a certain speed will oscillate nicely together without crashing

Am I right in thinking this rule (should it be true) should apply to the carriage and wheels assembly so the side to side portion of the movement is also balanced nicely when the pendulum is in motion?

If so crashing into end-stops is not the way forward. I would assume that the weight of the carriage and wheels, if perfectly matched to the pendulum using the same rule as for the lever would not need end-stops. But just oscillate over a certain range of travel equivalent to the levers motion.

Thus producing a very tight circle for the pendulums fulcrum to travel in while it is spinning. Hopefully causing acceleration.

Any thoughts?

@Airstriker I would love to see those screen shots.

@Nightlife Is that really the first time you ave seen lasersabre's April fools joke video? hahaha

@anyone which thread was it that had the wm2d simulations of the synchronous orbit flywheel with the motors and generators as the axles?? Did I see that here or somewhere else.

[nightlife]

bourne, "@Nightlife Is that really the first time you ave seen lasersabre's April fools joke video? hahaha"

HAHA, very funny.
  It was the first time. I had taken a break from everything for a while and I just recently started to get back to playing with some ideas.
It was a good joke and I cant believe I fell for it and for that I deserve the abuse. So bring it on. LOL
I didn't play with the concept you mentioned yet but I hope to later after I complete the hunnydo list.
When I played with the first concept I mentioned my results about, the stops were mandatory and placement was critical to get the best results. Now, I think balance for the lever is going to mandatory and matching weights and the size of the base will need to be played with to see what ratios work the best.

[hhobrian]

New guy, here, I used a pic before to modify, as I am not good on CAD , etc. If this is against rules I will delete. But seems the sudden stop might loose to much energy, so was thinking more of a "roller coaster" effect..Hope this drawing makes sense.

[bourne]

@nightlife hehe You are quite safe, you are allowed some time off and consequently will miss a few things. How could you miss the name in the title?!?! Dazzled by the bright lights maybe.

@hhobrian Welcome !

You are welcome to modify the picture. I can assure you it is not a CAD representation, it is in fact a pencil and paper drawing scanned into microsoft paint to add the labels. I agree about the endstops and the 'roller coaster' idea might be something worth exploring.

I have made a short video of where I am with this at the moment. I went shopping this morning. I acquired some aluminium sections and have been very fortunate with some bearings salvaged from an old VCR.

http://youtu.be/Ne2dlV6FX2Q

[maw2432]

@Bourne

Nice video!!   I look forward to your progress. 

Bill