Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Buddle Reciprocating PM

Started by prajna, August 15, 2006, 08:58:24 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

prajna

Hi tbird.

Yes, that is what I suggested to Gyula above but it would be simpler to move M1 and M2 as in the diagram below.

Duranza

Very interesting... but i think that the weight of the magnets will not be enough to push it to the repulsion side...
The only way to Validate is to Replicate!

tbird

hi again,

i have to agree a bit with  Duranza.  i would lable it differently, but do think that last drawing is a little weak.  the force of repulsion will get less as it heads to the other side.  when it runs into the vertical arm with spring tension, i don't think it will have enough momentum left to trip it over.  remember the shorter the distance m3 has to travel, the less leverage the vertical arm has to move m1 & m2 (more load).  with an attraction force looking at it on the destination side, it might continue.  this would give longer travel distance too.

i noticed in the drawing that the arms and connecting rods to m1 & m2 aren't the same size.  are they suppose to be or have i missed something?  i understand if it's just a freehand thing.

tbird
It's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it!

prajna

Hi Duranza and tbird,

You may well be right but remember that this is just the roughest sketch.  I have done no maths to calculate whether a magnet of a certain mass might have enough inertia at a particular velocity to overcome the inertia of the lever and its associated arbitrary spring.  It is only a sketch of the principle and is not any attempt to suggest that it will work; that has yet to be established or disproved by experiment or analysis (and I don't include "I don't think" in the definition of analysis).  :)

The connecting rods were only drawn thinner so that they did not appear to be part of the lever.

Whilst the force from the opposing magnets will diminish over the travel of M3, I would suggest that in analysing the force on the bottom of the overcentre lever only the total acceleration needs to be calculated; it is not as if M3 is slowed as the acceleration diminishes, any accelerating force will add to the speed (less any opposing force such as friction and influence from M2 or any attached load).

tbird

prajna, you said

Quote[/quo  I have puzzled on and off with the redesign of the machine from reciprocation into rotation but haven't come up with anything yet.  I thought it was perhaps time to put Uncle Allan's design out into the public domain so that some of you builders could have a go at prototyping it.
te]

i've had this link...http://www.leebell.net/workshop/pics/magani.gif.. in my favorites for a while.  may give you some fresh thoughts.

tbird
It's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it!