Roll on the 20th June

[exxcomm0n]

im thinking tiny spools..
<snip>
.........is the most frictionally efficient method i have experimented with so far.
And i think that is one of the most important things to this whole device, is that the rods are able to slide easily and freely.
This is "step two", directly after step one, which is " that the WHEEL spins easily and freely / balanced"

without that, you're dead in the water before you put a single magnet on.

K then, we go back to the original-ish design w/ a few small amendments.
This is the least amount of fricative surface, even though it may not seem like it.
EDIT: If you get bearings with really THICK outer races, perhaps a groove could be milled into that outer race. Not a deep one, but enough that it would keep the rod from dragging on the wheel face.

The attached pic is (finally) in the correct orientation for wheel rotation and will only have 2 to 4 fricative surfaces per rod during rod movement.

As to the "step 1" and "step 2" thing, I think that it would be duplicate effort to balance the wheel, add the EB's and rods, and then have to balance it again.

I agree that balance will be a very important factor in this, but if you're going to have a 2-faced wheel with face mounted bearings, you really can't balance it without already having the EB's mounted as they are what keep the faces together, correct?

[exxcomm0n]

B - 5.) Use the wheel as the electrical generator instead of transferring its output to an external generator using a belt (I think this is how Crooker said his was built way back when)-

The more direct the connection, the less the losses, and in this case any loss could be the difference between success and failure.

As I said before, we already would have moving magnets if the concept would prove to turn by itself, so why not use them as that's what a DC generator does?

A coil closed on 3 sides like the UUC from woopy would be a good candidate to reap a charge from the rod end magnets passing through it from 1:45 to 5:30-ish since this is where the magnets would have the greatest speed of travel.

But maybe this would be just too complicated for some in tuning the cost of generation, and it would have many aspects to fiddle with which could lead to long testing and design trials.

If instead you mounted a classic DC generator on one side of the upright leg of the wheel support with its shaft going through the support leg to a gear on the end that engages gear track attached around the edge of one of the wheel faces.

So, you mill 3 slots in one of the upright supports. One that the gen shaft can go through and use different gear sizes attached to that shaft to change the gearing ratio for the most effect possible without stopping the wheel, and the other 2 slots to mount the gen so it can use a variety of gears to change the gearing ratio.

Whew! Finally done.....so far.

[exxcomm0n]

@ smoky

Now that I got all the noise finished, I have a rod question for you.

It seems way back when Crooker said that the rods should be 1/3 length greater than the wheel radius.
This makes sense as then you basically have a 2/1 lever for gravity to grab on to.

Is this your take on things?

[sm0ky2]

@ chet

the clanzer cnc rigs are not out of the question due to their small size.
there have been quite a few attempts at this using CD's
one of which, i have seen a video of its (alleged) successful operation.

the clanzer rig certainly has more mass than a CD, which would work to its advantage.

which leads me to omy reply on Exx's question...

@ Exx
          this ratio of rod length to wheel diameter, was studied extensively in my early investigations of the device. Yes, what archer says is true, the archemedian factor gives you a great advantage over the moment of inertia of the wheel-mass.

the exact proportion is not important, at least not as a broad spectrum covering all wheel sizes/masses...
what you must keep in mind is that as you lengthen the rods, you also increase the distance of travel they must perform. This is not obvious at small intervals, (almost counterintiutive) but as you get several inches away from the wheel,
the difference in offset mass of the rods, becomes less effective.
Thus, you have to move them further to achieve the required imbalance in momentum vs magnetic repulsion (wall).
In and of itself, this is a catch-22 situation, as a larger distance of travel requires a greater flux to mass ratio (stronger magnets).

all in all, i would suggest hat the rods are longer than the diameter of the wheel, to some degree. The optimum length will depend on a combination between the flux to mass ratio, and the ratio of the total mass of the wheel to the offset mass of the rods.

its not as complicated as i make it sound...  basically you want the rods to weigh enough that the small distance you are moving them, is sufficient to turn the wheel, at the offset distance from the center, when they are at full extension.  all of these factors are proportionally interrelated, so changing one has an effect on the others.



and at the end of the day, whatever rod length/mass/distance travelled that you choose, MUST fall within the limitations of the flux to mass ratio of the magnet pair. This is the ratio between the mass of the rods, plus the magnets, plus any added weight attached to the moving rods to the magnet pair's ability to lift said mass a given distance. This means that for any given magnet pair, you have a maximum mass and an associated maximum distance that it can be vertically lifted by the repulsion field.

i wrote extensively on this subject in previous pages, so i wont blab on about that right now...  i will however revisit it later on, once we get to the final stages of assembly. It is key to understanding how this device works.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[The Eskimo Quinn]

I have moved the video of the mayernick to a new page and cut the second video on to the end, i have alos removed the political comments (for speed of viewing) I packing to move out of the city to my property in the country, will be spending much time constructing the dwelling but will be building a workshop for various devices and fitting a mayernick drive for power on site whether the team that has it currently finishes first or not, i will be constructing a high power unit for the house using 20 x 12's for the track mags, the rotor and gen will simply be a cut down wind turbine, so i do not need to do anything other than plug it in to the batteries.

For those still working on the rod design dont forget it can "only run slow and heavy for power, speed will always create centrifuge to throw the rod aganist the firing direction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEwzalCFdKw

NB just contated by the team who have all parts ready to go for assembly for rptpr testing and no i cant see what i am typing on this site because the screen sits at the top, and by the way what the fuck is wrong with this site it takes forever to load and even just to scroll down the page, and only this site/