Chas Campbell free power motor

[wattsup]

@weri812

Thanks first for your advance PM and for following through with your corrections directly on the thread so others can see it. I had my figures all crunched on a spreadsheet and had done these very late at night.

It's funny, out of all the posts on Chas' thread, I think there may have been 5 on the actual gearing. Glad to see yours at this stage since I will be trying this soon.

Actually, the numbers look great using a standard 1800 rpm 60hz giving the needed 3600 rpm. At 1800 rpm, the drive will use maximum torque and at 3600 rpm, this is perfect 60hz production level. The magic of 3-6-9.

What's so good about this configuration is that generator drag (E) can reach the pulleys at (D) but will have a hard time stopping the Wheel at (C) because the 9" will try to stop the 6" that will have the advantage.

The startup may be difficult and may require a manual push on the flywheel to reduce start up amperage, but once this baby gets going, watch out.

If you are planning a 10kwatt gen, the bearings and pulleys should be on minimum 1" shafts, maybe even 1 1/4" shafts. Pulleys could be with toothed belts. Everything has to be well bolted and the flywheel structure should be extremely strong, possibly caged.

Again, good call. I appreciate it.

wattsup

[linda933]

@wattsup and weri

Hi...what will be the goal of this 3-6-9 machine?  Are you expecting the thing to put out more energy than it takes in?  If so, I'm curious what the theory is...is it strictly the series of false claims that Charles Campbell has made (all of which that have been tested have been found absolutely no where near truth) or is there some other reason to put effort into such a machine?

Charles' latest claim of having built and operated a successful self-running version is completely unverified and only a report, so far.  If you recall, the last set of claims Charles made that his machine drew 800W and produced 3500W were absolutely disproven and the truth was that it drew over 1400W just to run with no load and could not even put out 1000W for ten seconds!

His claim of having a self-running perpetual motion wheel based on pool balls was equally fraudulent and the design not only failed to run in practice but was easily proven to be unworkable in principal as well...even given a frictionless and loss-free ideal situation, there was no evidence of net torque or overbalance.

So, I am wondering what it is that keeps people willing to spend endless time and effort and money discussing, planning, building and speculating on this idea of motor-pullies-flywheel-pullies-generator as a smart idea for getting "overunity" operation.  How do you expect to combine a bunch of lossy elements in straight mechanical series and come up with an overall energy gain?  The only thing you'll get is energy storage and that will be at a considerable loss overall.  Not to mention noisy, bulky, heavy, maintenance-hungry and dangerous.  Oh, did I leave out expensive?

If you want to store energy in a flywheel; great!  Just be careful...it's dangerous...and expect to lose some of the energy you put in...a significant amount based on the design you show here.  I would guesstimate the overall losses will probably be at least 40% and probably more. 

Please tell me if you think I'm wrong and, of course, why you believe that.  Thanks...

Linda

[hansvonlieven]

G'day Linda, I give you:

               The Secret Of The 3-6-9 Machine




You really don't know much about fadic addition and numerology do you Linda dear?

Fadic addition (also referred to as "digiting down").

Simply add all the numbers together. If the sum is a double digit number, reduce it until you arrive at a single digit number. Zeros don't count.

Example:  19563 = 1+9+5+6+3 = 24 = 2+4 = 6   So 19563 becomes 6 by fadic addition, Get it??

This enables numerologists to reduce everything in life to a number between 1 and 9 and make predictions or by clever use of these numbers do extraordinary things.

Now we are getting to the 3-6-9 design.

3+6+9 = 18 = 1+8 = 9       So nine is the key number of the machine

The motor runs at 1800 revolutions                                    1+8 = 9

The next shaft with two pulleys runs at 900 revolutions              = 9

The flywheel runs at 2700 revolutions                                 2+7 = 9

The next set of pulley run at 1800 revolutions                     1+8 = 9

The generator runs at 3600 revolutions                               3+6 = 9

The flywheel is 18 inches in diameter. yes, you guessed it  1+8 = 9


See it is a nine machine, it will definitely work because of it.

Hans von Lieven

[linda933]

Ahhhh...enlightenment at last!  Let me see...five nines is 45 is 4+5 is...hot damn....9!  Okay then.  Not only that, but that makes six nines and that's 54 which, again, is...5+4=9!  And that makes seven nines, which is...63...oh, my God!  And that makes eight nines which is 72...this is a danged miracle!  Let's see...nine nines is...Oh, my Lord and Savior!  81!  Dare I test this further? 

Now I know that I have found the secret to all the universe for sure and I am finally and certainly able to accomplish all manner of heretofore impossible things.  Hans and all...I am eternally grateful for your impartation of this ancient wisdom.  I feel I must now give something back to the world...

Gee...maybe I could make something fantastic.  I have some of those new Canadian Gold Maple Leaf coins made from 99999 fine gold.  If I follow the advice of Lawrence Tseung and drill an axle-hole a bit off-center in a few of them (9?) maybe I can combine this 9 thing with the new "Wobbly-Flywheel Lead-Out" theory and it will take off spinning at an incredible radial velocity with unimaginable torque.  Why, of course it would...it would have to!

I figure I should be able to hook it up to a 9hp generator and get at least 99,999 Watts of continuous output power, utilizing my own newly-discovered Damiani Opto-mystic Multiplier principal.  I hope I can get one or nine of those special high-temperature Tseung expansion bearings that can handle and absorb the excess power when I can't find a load to accept it.  Let's see...hmmmm...maybe I can beat Charles, Ash, Gaby, Lawrence, Patrick Kelly and Ms. Forever to the punch and collect that $5,200,000 AERO prize myself!

Let the replications begin!  That should be enough information, I would surmise, for the average OU.com replicator to get started on the project.  How's that for open source, folks?

By the way, everyone, I have some 99999 fine gold Maple Leaf coins for sale that have been especially treated using Orgone Aetherization Frequency (OAF) magnets and Beardini Ultra Neutronic Kinesis (BUNK) energy waves!  I guess I could let some go for, oh, maybe $1800 each. I might even discount that for quantities of nine...say $15,111 for nine (1+5+1+1+1=9).  Just PM me for payment and delivery details! 

Of course, I cannot guarantee overunity because you will be responsible for drilling your own holes and, of course, the proper bearings.

Linda Damiani

[wattsup]

@linda933

Hans' depiction is correct but the main point is keeping advantage on the drive side.

Chas' original design does not have bearings on the drive and generator pulley so both of them will suffer from direct side stress on the motor bearings. First mistake. Then his design lacks the section "D", so his generator is directly on a 2.5" wheel connected directly to the flywheel, second mistake. So when the generator gives drag, it is directly pushed to the flywheel and then to the other side. So Chas' design favors the generator, where the 3-6-9 design favors the drive.

These differences alone warrant trials in my view. The investment will always be there in anything you undertake. I already ave motors and generators so what's a few gears and some structure.

All this was covered on the first pages of the Chas' flywheel thread months ago, but again, funny thing no one wanted to talk gears.

Also, the other trick is to use a smaller drive and larger generator and not to run the generator at full potential, meaning just take enough to loop the system and some small extra. This is the only point here. We're not looking to light up Manhattan.

So even if this design comes very close to OU without breaking the barrier, there then leaves room for better drive and generator choice, RV potentials, etc., and maybe then Honk or others could jump in with some fancy circuit control.

Like I said on the outset of this thread, Chas' designs may not work, but there is a foundation there that has potential to be explored. Plus, if you ask me, there are many who are trying this right now. Jesse McQueen is hard at work putting out his patented demo unit as we speak and it relies on gears also.

And imagine. @weri812 had the insight to go all the way back to the beginning of the threads to find the design. Crunch the numbers and make these corrections. Although his corrections to the rpm does not change the 3-6-9 design, you're always better to have the right numbers. Hats off to you guy.

I still would like to know what simple idea Chas is talking about? Every bit of "applicable" info would help.