Roll on the 20th June

[infringer]

I believe the magnets are placed wrong and in the wrong arc shape to take full advantage of the momentum.

I believe they should be arcing outwards like shown cause as it rides up the arc on the bottom it is also riding up an even higher arc on top extending the rod further and pushing it away from the wall effect at the top of the arc and if you notice the arc itself is also falling away on the bottom arc even without the lift of the top arc at the "wall" ... I know but what about the arc on top right well if you notice the arc on the top slopes downwards and it is here the gravity of the extension would take over and pass that second wall...

Below is a picture of the arcs in thought not perfect scale or anything close to it but the picture says a bit...

[sm0ky2]

[A author=infringer link=topic=4540.msg247878#msg247878 date=1278352541]
interesting I never drew conclusions from why the stoppers were put in place...

I think we need some details on each stopper ...

Your explanation leads me to believe you think the stopper is helping it evade the wall which makes little or no sense to me because if you hold the magnet closer to the magnetic field the more the wall should have a negative effect maybe I need to reread your post but I think you must elaborate more on the stopper cause this may be a key element of the working device...

ok .. NO.    sorry, i didnt mean to give the wrong impression there.
the stoppers are just to keep the rods from sliding out of the bearings. they have a little "track" that they ride on. and it keeps them in the range of operation. the rods can only slide so far. otherwise they hit the "wall" on the bottom side, and/or stick to the stick to the magnets at the top.

the question i was responding to above, was about adjusting this distance. Other designs may use a different method of stopping the rods at the top and bottom of their linear travel. (left/right whatever). i wouldn't depend on rod-stopper adjustment as your fine-tuning mechanism. its much siimpler to set them at a constant distance. then move the outer magnetic arrays closer or further away from the ends of the rods to fine tune it.

if you look at this one that Exx did way back when, he has the rods entirely enclosed inside a tube. using stoppers at the ends of the tube. Now, where he went wrong here was, at the end of the video he sets his magnetic arrays up so the top one "lifts".
You dont want lift form the top array, it should be much less than lift, set the BOTTOM one to do the lifting, and the top array only acts as an assist. You want gravity to take over and pull it out of the top array.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS1KTJRu7ys&feature=related

[sm0ky2]

@infringer

here is a pic with the arrays mounted in their proper places.
the wheel is off, but you can see the bearing mounts in the center.
the green line shows the approx. location that the arms enter into the arrays.
notice the arc on the lower left, it starts out gradual, then there is a massive shift of the rod during the top half of the array. this gradual movement is during the time the wheel decellerates. acceleration begins again shortly after the shift of the rod near the top.


a lot of times there is a short bump near the top, then a kick-out.
which seem to be conservative, same force in / out. and wether or not you get that bump fully worked out seems to be irrelevant.
sometimes i can get rid of it by tiling the exit end of the lower array away from the final arm position, though i dont have a lot of adjustment in those top two magnet-sets in my current set-up.

[sm0ky2]

the rods should exit the arrays close to ( or maybe slightly above) the horizontal line. if the exit angle is too steep, the gravitational vector is still down the path of rod-movement, and the rods will have a tendency to slide back the other way.

[sm0ky2]

ok, i got the rod-magnets glued back on securely.
and attached the torque-proofing plates to the 3rd rod.
counting from the face of the wheel, this is the outer rod.
and im ready to begin mass-calibration.

Here's the cheap-o calibration scale i made. its actually made from a piece of the rod-stock. string in the center, and strings on each end. you'll notice a couple extra holes on one end, these are calibration holes. for some reason, along a given piece of wood its not the same weight. so this balances out the scales with nothing on them.  each rod is weighed against a bucket of balls. (yes those are the Tri-Force balls). masses are as follows
Rod 1: 24 balls
rod 2: 22 balls
rod 3: 25 balls

im going to begin removing mass from the center of the rods and the eventual result will be closer to equal mass of all the rods.
this should help in calibrating the outer arrays, and at the same time give more gravitational torque.

Cheap-o Scales: