Roll on the 20th June

[sm0ky2]

@ Exx

i finally got all 6 of your (not really 'your') bearings mounted on my wheel. Tonight i will begin balancing the wheel. once complete i can begin working on the sliding rods.

taking my time to make sure each piece operates as perfectly as possible, to avoid some of the problems people have been encountering with their builds.

almost ALL of these problems result from engineering flaws,  NOT from a lack of functionality of the device.
So if i can eliminate as much of this as possible, we should get to see an accurate representation of how this device will function under "ideal" conditions.

i DID notice that the 4-in1 bearings have noticibly more friction than a single bearing (which has almost none)
so i've made a tad more clearance, such that the 'rod' only sits on the bottom bearing, and "rests" on one of the sides. It will of course switch which bearing it runs on as the wheel turns, but if its only rolling on 1 or 2 bearings throughout its movement, that's HALF the friction of all 4, and i still have the advantage of the rod being 'caged' so it doesnt twist or torque in the wrong direction.

not quite as "perfectly frictionless" as i had hoped for,  but im satisfied with the functionality of them enough to move on to the next step.
It still seems to work WAY better than the linear slides and tubular-linear bearings that i have messed with.

I think when all is said and done, i will use a polishing-brush on the wooden rods, to get them smoother than i am able to with fine-grain sandpaper, that should help things along.

Maybe some pics tonight. and in the upcomming days i'll create a video or 2

[helmut]

@All
Just a quick thought to overcame some losses.

helmut

[fletcher]

Hi gwhy & rusty .. I will give my thoughts on your comments here as what I'm about to say also has a direct bearing on quinn's use of permanent magnets & the potential to do work i.e. as defined in the scientific sense rather than the vernacular.

Firstly, it was encouraging to see the rotor running up a slight slope & escaping the array - this might be a solution gwhy to your thoughts about dropping into the array to overcome the initial repulsion you usually experience entering the gates ? - perhaps a series of 3 or 4 gates per section, each section running up hill & forming a horizontal circle shape in total ? - if the rotor can drop into each section & escape to enter the next you might get past the resistance to entry & the rotor could pick up speed around the track, so to speak.

Yes rusty, I noted the fire truck experiment & thought it was interesting - I think my initial reaction would be much the same as you've already encountered - that is, that it takes energy to enter the system that you supply by lifting & placing the truck inside the array, past the resistance/barrier to entry point - then it accelerates & exits.

I think my first points last post are still valid - while I can accept your observational experience that the rotor leaves practically unimpeded I think you may have to design a more robust experiment to completely prove the point - for example, if the rotor [or truck, in this instance] continued to accelerate over the length of any array then you would have a convincing argument - you would need to video the experiment form side on [using a background distance marked board] & count frames to determine the acceleration & velocity - alternatively you could use either light trips or even mechanical trips connected to timers / oscilloscopes etc - I'm sure the electricians amongst us could suggest a good setup to use & you probably can think of one rusty - probably the most robust experiment to prove that there could be OU using tri-gates would be to line up the rotor/truck before the array at a set distance [but not inside it i.e. before entering the field] - apply a known force to the truck so that it accelerates & enters the field [breaking thru the repulsion] & travels & exits the array - at the same distance from the array that it started from it measure the kinetic energy of the truck impacting a force meter of some type - or, once again simply calculate the Ke using the frames/velocity per second etc - if the Ke is greater than the energy required to be given to the truck to get it to a speed to enter the system then that would indicate a surplus of energy available, IMO - if, the energy is less than required to get the experiment going then I would suggest that adding back frictional losses etc would zero sum overall & it would prove OU incapability.

As a suggestion, I would consider using a curved vertical track to let the truck roll down to enter the array - it has the advantage that you can directly calculate the Potential Energy [Pe] by the height you start at, & it can be easily adjusted as required to get just enough velocity & momentum to break the barrier to entry - this can be quickly compared to the Ke at the end of the experiment to see if there is a gain etc.

Now to the argument about doing work - I don't want to labour this as it is discussed all the time but it is very relevent to this thread I think - people often quote fridge magnets sticking to fridges as doing work - work = force x distance, so when a magnet is stuck to the fridge there is no work being done by the magnet or the fridge - to get the magnet into a position where its magnetic field could attract the fridge required you to provide the Pe - once the magnet is released it gains Ke until it impacts the fridge at which time the Pe is zero again - I often think of a magnetic field as a type of analogy or metaphor for a gravity field, except magnetism works in any direction & has a repulsion mode of course, when two magnets come into play - so when two magnets come together in attraction mode, they try to convert Pe to Ke - to get them apart you need to provide the force to re-establish the gradient or Pe again - in repulsion mode it is the same but opposite i.e. you are having to provide the force to give the magnets Ke & they build up Pe [i.e. they want to repulse away] - in quinn's grav-mag wheel ... 1 +1 = 2  [less losses] ; not ... 2 1/2  ... IMO - the tri-gate arrays must also be able to demonstrate that the magnetic fields or gradients are not always conservative i.e that they take what they give in every instance, though personally I suspect they do, when all said & done - but then, that's the beauty of doing experiments 

Just my thoughts.

[gwhy!]

Hi fletcher,
  Many thanks for your input.  The problem with using 4+  gates in a array is that the middle gates become equal and opposite so its appears to be all down to friction that will stop the roller in the center of a large array of gates. And I think this is why we are unable to just join the ends of a array together to make a closed loop. There has been many experiments done along these lines where a roller mag has been let go down a gentle incline but enough momentum to enter the array on a flat surface and distances measured without a array and than with a array and it has always proved positive as regards the distance the roller travels is greater with the array. I think Also Sm0key2 have also done a similar test with a roller mag connected to the end of a pendulum and it was seen that the pendulum swung higher when falling into a array. IMO this proves to me that there is more out than you put in ( without looking at any maths behind it ). 

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi fletcher,
  Many thanks for your input.  The problem with using 4+  gates in a array is that the middle gates become equal and opposite so its appears to be all down to friction that will stop the roller in the center of a large array of gates. And I think this is why we are unable to just join the ends of a array together to make a closed loop. There has been many experiments done along these lines where a roller mag has been let go down a gentle incline but enough momentum to enter the array on a flat surface and distances measured without a array and than with a array and it has always proved positive as regards the distance the roller travels is greater with the array. I think Also Sm0key2 have also done a similar test with a roller mag connected to the end of a pendulum and it was seen that the pendulum swung higher when falling into a array. IMO this proves to me that there is more out than you put in ( without looking at any maths behind it ). 

Hi All
Yes again I agree with Gwhy, all the test have been done by many people and the results were always the same the distance was alway further then the norm would be.
Also I could be wrong but I'm sure what I explaned as work is the scientific term for work and moving a load from A to B is what the Trigate does, this is magnetic force moving something from A to B and hence the magnets are doing work, this is not like lifting a weight or sticking a magnet to a fridge, this is magnets moving another object from point A to point B and like I said I could be wrong but thats the scientific term for work.
Take Care All
Graham