Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

Remember, as a rule of thumb, if you have a weight F acting on an arm L the largest torque there can be for these F and L is FL, independent of whether or not there are guides, slots, walls, contact surfaces or whatever else. Such additions would only cause decrease of the torque and never make it greater than FL.

These slots, walls, guides etc. are hindrances and not enhancers of rotation.

[mondrasek]

Yet they can.

[stgpcm]

If we break apart Abeling's design to the core:
- Weight on left side takes short cut.
- In a frictionless system, a weight on the rim would have made a lateral (out to 9:00) on top of the vertical movement.
- Said lateral movement is now taken out, and brought back only at the very top (acceleration)
- The surplus in lateral potential goes towards increased friction (zero to something) PLUS the impact of the weight in the slot at 1:00.
- When the added friction is low enough, the weight has a net lateral potential on top of the rim speed when reaching 12:00/1:00.

I don't see where the surplus in lateral movement is coming from -
in a simple wheel the weight moves outwards by the radius between 6:00 and 9:00, and then moves inwards between 9:00 and 12:00.

In the Abeling wheel the weights on the left don't travel as far outward, but they also don't travel as far back. However, during the ballistic phase of the movement, the ball isn't connected to the wheel, so that movement doesn't count as being on the wheel. Is that what you mean?

In a frictionless system in a vacuum, the weight will rejoin the wheel with the same kinetic energy it left it with, plus or minus any energy convertred to or from potential energy due to the change in height. all that energy was put into the weight by the wheel when it accelerated it, so the wheel gains nothing when it reclaims the energy as it slows.

[Omnibus]

@mondrasek,

That's incorrect. You're adding vectors frivolously, as I told you before.

If the length of the arm in 'Still More Vectors for OB.jpg' is L and the mass of support, part of the arm, is ignored (that is, without the sphere there will be no torque) the torque will be exactly 10L and not 15.75L as you imply.

The support cannot create more mass (weight) than the given mass of the sphere.

[mondrasek]

Nothing frivolous about it.  In the picture shown, the 10 kg ball is pushing against the 20 degree wall with a force of 16.73 and against the 45 degree moment arm with a force of 22.24.  That is basic vector math.  The sine of 45 degrees x 22.24 = 15.72.  The angles of the guides and slots do in fact allow for a 10 kg weight to apply a torque on the wheel that is greater than FL.

This is like the previously used cherry pit being shot out from between pinched fingers example, only in reverse.

The support is not creating more mass.  It is being used to leverage the existing mass into a Force greater than the weight of the mass.

Remember, if a spherical weight is supported by two parallel frictionless plates on the sides (90 degrees and 270 degrees), the force necessary to hold the weight is INFINITY.  If the plates are rotated so that they are now at 89 and 271 degrees, the forces are a bit less than infinity, but still much more than just the gravitational force of the weight.