Roll on the 20th June

[Rusty_Springs]

It is a very satisfying thing to use squeegie'ing water on a basement floor with your nearly 12 yo daughter, teaching her fluid dynamics with it, and having her "get it".

Even if it's just to get the job done faster (for her).

The wall of water that one squeegie's motion  makes, applying force behind that wall to keep it going when it travels to where you can influence it, seesaw'ing your feet so they don't impede the wall, inertia, inertial mass, etc.

Not formulas, real world examples which have real world benefits.

I may forget what r and M and the elipson symbol signify, but I'll remember how something moves and why I want it to.

It's a heredity thing I think.

Anyway, in the picture attached, you'll see a very crude representation of the concept.
(BTW, these (concepts) are never yours, nor mine, but entities unto themselves.
Wiggy, huh?)

You'll see the 7:00 wall is still there, but converted to a counterbalanced class 1 lever (I never knew about this lever class stuff b4! I just "knew" them.) with a hinged weight on one side, and wall lever on the other with a spur and a wheel at its end.

The wheel on the end of the lever hits the tooth slope and pushes the repel wall away from the wheel while driving the spur in towards the center of the wheel and under the rod just above it helping to push it up and saving (or counterbalancing) some of the momentum being robbed by the away push.

When the wheel on the lever hits the apex of the tooth and goes over the edge, gravity grabs the counterweight and the lever pushes the wall into the magnet end so the force is even pushing in, and not more or less in front or back of it.

Think of a magnet as a really squat Q-tip (cotton swab on a stick for others not from america).

The stick is the magnet, the cotton is the field (kinda an over-simplification, but it works for me).

Might help if the arm had a curve in at the 6:00 end. Push in AND up?
Could you do that without having the coming rod run into it during it's path?

Now gravity works on both sides of the machine.

This still has to be tuned, but not nearly as much.

The 1:00 attract wall starts around 12:30 sloping in (my prefence, not necessary I suppose) so that when the rod end is pushed up to the 1:00 end it has even attract force on all sides that, with momentums addition, is enough to stick it there.
(Maybe this would be variable to compensate for RPM???)

Put a tooth at each rod end (yes, this arrangement limits the amount of rods you can have.  I think 6 would be maximum, but I'd have to try it to see).

Lather,
Rinse,
Repeat as necessary.

I know the tooth/ramp - wheel/fulcrum combo is creating friction and robbing momentum.......

But how much?

I get pictures in my mind, but don't see a lot of things until I start drawing them, and I'm not that artistic as you can see.

But I didn't think about the spur until I saw the more basic basis for it.



EDIT:

Wait!

Put a hinge post @ the 12:30 end of the (now) wall/lever and then use it to do the RPM compensation AND be the "off" switch.

EDIT2: What if the angles of the 7:00 wall were more acute (closer together)?
Maybe a little shorter to, so it has time and distance keeping it out of the oncoming arms way.


Now i wanna look @ Perendev motor structure!

I only got to the wall of water then you lost me because I'm sure it takes energy to get that wall of water moving and when it stops more energy to get it moving again, this is energy you don't have because you have no extra energy comming from the lever.
Take Care Exx
Graham

[arXiv76]

I disagree.
The correct arm weight centralized or not, placed in the right location will give the overall device arms enough momentum/kintec force to slip past the oval wall; in affect a forced slippage in the downward motion (thank you gravity) of the arms. Each slippage should increase RPM. I do not currently see a way to control RPM's accept by friction or a additional control device. Friction is also not a concern at this time. Once the device is running and fully understood;only then should you start picking and prodding at it to make it more efficient/sleek/aerodynamic, yada yada yada...
I for some odd for some odd reason feel archer is holding back the secret ingredient (the gravy).
I am overall watching this with anticipation! I can see it working but for some reason my brain tells me there is something missing. I have all the parts sitting around so when the 20th comes I'll be ready to build that damn thing over night and start feeding the grid. In my city they pay back what you feed back. Screw Solar, I want me an Archer wheel on speed!
C-yall on the 20th.

I have been watching this topic, quite a popular one too, how can we be sure there is going to be a working wheel on the 20th June? I have seen the footage and it looks like to me that once all magnets are set, there wont be enough power in the wheel to over come all of those magnets...

I reckon this wont work...

[exxcomm0n]

I only got to the wall of water then you lost me because I'm sure it takes energy to get that wall of water moving and when it stops more energy to get it moving again, this is energy you don't have because you have no extra energy comming from the lever.
Take Care Exx
Graham

Graham, it's about not letting it stop.

If it (the water) stops, it spreads. You have to work quick and in sequence.

So you are using momentum to keep the water higher on one side by either pushing it with a broom, or pulling it with a squeegie and you can move a lot of it.

I have yet to find an allegorical equation for it (moving water) to be a lever too, but give me time.

It will probably be in your better interest to go back and skim from the top until you see the sentence:

"It's a heredity thing I think."

....and then start reading that this is about the wheel.

[purepower]

Another long one, really only for Exx and Dark Star...


@Exx

Deal. I understand most people would rather learn be doing than reading a post, so Ill try to come up with a few experiments as we go along or stumble on a concept someone is struggling with. I tend to leave out minor details in my explanation from time to time, so simple experiments should serve to fill them in...

In regards to your drawing (and dont think Im trying to shoot you down, just giving advice), here are a couple things you might whant to considder. If its the rotation of the wheel that pushes down the lever, thus lifting the counter weight, then it is the lever's energy used to lift the weight. Also, you will need to make sure that the counter weight is heavy enough so that upon its return, the lever has enough torque to remain in position to lift the rod.



@DarkStar

Okay, with the fulcrum centered on the lever, and the weights on the center axis, then the lever should remain or "float" in any postition, assuming everything is perfectly symmetric. This is because the center of mass of the entire system is located at the axis of rotation. Since rotating the lever would not change the height of the center of mass (and therefor energy of the system), the lever would not rotate itself.

However, once the weights are allowed to hang below the center axis, things would change. By moving the weights vertically, the center of mass has also shifted vertically. Since the center of mass is now off the axis of rotation, the lever will always rotate so its center of mass is to the lowest possible point possible (directly below the axis of rotation, ie lowest point of energy), similar to how a ball always rolls to the lowest point on a hill.

Lowering the weights below the center axis is similar to lowering the entire lever from the fulcrum. For further description and visual representation, please see post on page 51 where I address the effects of a "slung" lever. And yes, one having them hang at different heights would produce a different effect due to unequal vertical shift contributions from each side (also, like Rusty said, the weight of the rope too would have some effect).

However, shifting the location of the weights vertically would not have any effect on the lift ration. The only thing shifting the weights vertically of the weights would do is change how the lever comes to rest. I am careful to specify "vertical" in those last statements because a horizontal shift would effect the lift.

In regards to the drawing program on OSX, I use ViaCAD. Is $100 at the Apple store, Staples has it also. Its pretty decent, quick to learn, yet powerful. I also have Solidworks via BootCamp.

-PurePower

[Rusty_Springs]

I disagree.
The correct arm weight centralized or not, placed in the right location will give the overall device arms enough momentum/kintec force to slip past the oval wall; in affect a forced slippage in the downward motion (thank you gravity) of the arms. Each slippage should increase RPM. I do not currently see a way to control RPM's accept by friction or a additional control device. Friction is also not a concern at this time. Once the device is running and fully understood;only then should you start picking and prodding at it to make it more efficient/sleek/aerodynamic, yada yada yada...
I for some odd for some odd reason feel archer is holding back the secret ingredient (the gravy).
I am overall watching this with anticipation! I can see it working but for some reason my brain tells me there is something missing. I have all the parts sitting around so when the 20th comes I'll be ready to build that damn thing over night and start feeding the grid. In my city they pay back what you feed back. Screw Solar, I want me an Archer wheel on speed!
C-yall on the 20th.

I can never understand why people just dismiss friction, they just through it aside as if its nothing to worry about but don't they understand its friction thats stopping you from having OU, friction is your main enemy.
Take Care All
Graham