An idea I wanted to get some feedback on

[fletcher]

I should think that back torque against the ramp will kill this design - nice presentation btw.

Here is something similar but with less moving parts.

[erickdt]

I should think that back torque against the ramp will kill this design - nice presentation btw.

Here is something similar but with less moving parts.

Hmmm, <strokes non-existant beard>... Thanks for the info. The difference between mine and this one is that the weights in mine transit over the rotational axis. By the time any particular arm reaches the 7:30 o-clock (negative 45 degrees) point the weight on that arm (theoretically) is located directly centered on the rotational axis thereby having a null effect. This way there is no weight what so ever to the left side of the rotational axis on any arm past the 7:30 o-clock point (negative 45 degrees) theoretically taking any counter clockwise torque out of the equation all together. Thoughts?

[Joh70]

very fine drawings! Congratulations to your AutoCad-experience. When balanced right thru best geometry and identical weights and levers, which is difficult enough, the only thing what happens will be: it turns one stage from 8 (no total revolution), then it rests. the best you can get, is a configuration which allows to overcome each stage at lowest possible resistance under influence of an external force. no endless motion here.

[FreeEnergy]

get working model 2d if you haven't already.

http://hackersclub.net/unity/download.php?view.5

[mapsrg]

When you consider the amount of linear motion required on each rotation of each arm there is alote of lost energy....