New accelerating gravity wheel ! Converted video from www.newenergymachine.com !

[noonespecial]

Charlie,

Some times and quite frequently I might add; we overlook the obvious. I decided to take a coffee break from my own project and let my mind regroup.  I took a second look (as the first look was a quick glance)  at your work in progress and then at your drawing.  I am puzzled by what I now see that I missed first time around. Solid lines depict start of cycle while dash lines represent end of cycle. Rotor arm has not moved as indicated by arrow. 

You depict the actuator arm lifting a roller at 6:00 o'clock up to the ramp, roller has already been picked up 2.5" by cam. This roller I presume is on the end of your weighted lever. Won't the roller be in motion as it is picked up and be well past the ramp entrance when it gets there? What am I missing here?

Ralph

Hi Ralph,

Good catch. Its hard to depict properly in a static drawing. Once the geometry and timing of the arms are set properly the weighted actuator arm will be lowered just ahead of the rotating assembly. As you point out, 6:00 may be too late so I have moved the collision point back to around 5:00. Again, I'm hoping that I can raise the weights with this actuator arm to meet the ramp entrance by the 6:00 point. If this can be accomplished, it should run.

I've been working on trying to figure out how much force should be presented to the short arm to know how much counter-resistance will be required to lift the weight assembly. I'm assuming this is basically a Class I lever scenario but I'm unsure how to factor in the gravitational acceleration. In other words, its a lever, but the force being applied to the long arm is accelerating not static. Do I substitute (m*a) for F2? Any help here would be appreciated.

Regards,
Charlie

[rlortie]

Charlie,

It is a waste of time to throw mathematical equations my way!  It is well known over at Besslerwheel.com that do not do equations. In fact I am quite adamant regarding my math handicap. 

Some people have a phobia such as height, spiders, ETC. Mine is anything with any thing containing equations.  I have a very piss poor and impatient basic algebra teacher teacher in my freshman year of High School. I could not keep up with the class and was literally pushed aside and ignored.

I have made it through life by building a library of book contained charts. If I need to know the circumference of a circle I simply look it up. An Einstein Quote in so many words states; Why should I cram my brain memorizing known topics I can look up in a book. I take that to heart and made  a substantial working career in blue collar mechanical engineering with it.


Now with the technology of computers and Google their is not much one cannot find.

http://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=home

This one is for you!
http://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=navigate&topicid=2&stopicid=14

All my research is done by trial and error, more is learned by accident than I could  ever learn by analytical  use of doing it on computer and paper.

Ralph       

[noonespecial]

Hi Ralph,
Thanks for the reference! Great site.

A while back you asked:

"Sometimes (actually a lot of time)  I feel like the legendary Irish Banshee of Death,  It seems that I am always knocking on someones door explaining to them why I feel their idea will not work.  With your latest drawings I am having a problem figuring out how you get the tension spring loaded lever back under the rotating weight at six o'clock without deploying the same amount of force you expect in return?" 

The short answer is that I expect to have much more force available generated by the falling weight/lever combination than is required to load the arm and lift the weights. I have worked through what I believe is the correct math but need someone to validate my assumptions. I was hoping that was you based on the barrage of questions you gave me at the top of the page... .

Phobias aside, I assume you are familiar with a common lever? If the falling side of my 'lever' has a 10 pound weight which is located 4 times the distance from the fulcrum as the short end, theoretically, I could balance a 40 pound weight at the opposite end. Alternately, I could apply a 40 pound lifting force. So lets say I transfer 25 of those 40 pounds to some form of separate energy storage device (spring, weighted lever). If the total weight of my weight carriage is 20 pounds, I should be able to lift this weight with the stored 25 pounds of force (assuming some internal friction, etc.). And none of this includes the additional force from the acceleration.

There is obviously something I'm missing in either my math or my assumptions because this is all too simple.

Regards,
Charlie

[rlortie]

Charlie,

First off, check your forum mail box!

Phobias aside, I assume you are familiar with a common lever?

Ye I believe I am;  Types 1, 2, and 3

If the falling side of my 'lever' has a 10 pound weight which is located 4 times the distance from the fulcrum as the short end, theoretically, I could balance a 40 pound weight at the opposite end.

A balanced state  of ten and forty is feasible, but you also state 'falling'  Ten pounds falling on a 4:1 lever will lift more than forty but the height achieved will be less and directly proportional to the time/distance the ten pound weight falls and the length of the lever. Remember lever lift is 1/4 the operating fall distance.     


Alternately, I could apply a 40 pound lifting force. So lets say I transfer 25 of those 40 pounds to some form of separate energy storage device (spring, weighted lever).

Work; The transfer of energy from one physical system to another. Physics as we know it states that the force or gravity potential falling is the same as what was used to lift it. This gets rather muddling because you have to reset the falling ten pound mass back to its four times leveraged height of the forty gained. If you have any left (which physics says you will not) then yes it is physically possible to store it. The term is to 'accumulate' if you catch my drift!   

If the total weight of my weight carriage is 20 pounds, I should be able to lift this weight with the stored 25 pounds of force (assuming some internal friction, etc.). And none of this includes the additional force from the acceleration.

And this is the second glitch:  You cannot use entropic acceleration in a closed system to achieve work. Only the inertial and kinetic force at a given velocity which when tapped will slow it.

There is obviously something I'm missing in either my math or my assumptions because this is all too simple.

I agree!  Way to simple! Believe me if were that simple we would have had the energy crises solved and long gone many years ago. But I highly suggest you continue to build you device for two reasons: hands on education and research has been known to lead to accidental discoveries. Not necessarily hazardous to your health.       

By the way we need to discuss the grade of plywood your pictures appear to depict!  Looks like AC architectural grade. If so it is definitely not cost effective for wheel research unless  your access is other than market price.
 
Regards and keep thinking while you build!

Ralph

[noonespecial]

Hi Ralph,

Sorry, I missed your question regarding the plywood. I wouldn't say architectural, more like construction grade A-C. Only 5 ply.
I bought a couple of half sheets a few years ago for some project that I don't even remember now and had one full half sheet and another remnant left over which I've been using for this project. To date, my total outlay for this build is $1.38 reflecting my yankee frugality.

The neat thing though is the 3/4" thickness fits perfectly between the raised edges of my rollers and keeps it self-aligning.

By the way, I've made another design change eliminating to friction points so that should help.

Regards,
Charlie