Mechanical overunity, call it a Gravity engine if you wish.

[nicbordeaux]

Not sure of that, but the Mann Gravity Mover explanations are a little too complex for my small brain this morning. 

Whatever, there are many ways of shifting weight to alter CG ot let weight fall on the end of a lever, then retrieve it.

Who gets there first with a working and sustainable and useful device which can be mass-produced,  ist ganz egal.

[spoondini]

I'm sorry but I don't understand how this device will generate any additional energy?  As modeled, it might be an efficient user of energy input - but how would additional energy be created, or more energy extracted than what's put in?

[nicbordeaux]

The principle is rotating one offset mass located at the outer edge of a wheel mounted horizontally on a beam.

The beam is mounted centrally on a BB/axle.

The beam has a weight on the left end.

The wheel is mounted (free to spin on BB) on the right side of the beam.

When the wheel is placed so that the weight sat upon it is farthest away from fulcrum, the device is (to keep things very simple) in balance. It will stay "level".

When the wheel with weight is rotated (which takes one heck of a lot less energy than lifting equivalent weight vertically), the weight upon this wheel will approach the fulcrum, or axis of the beam. As it does so, weight is displaced so that it weighs less against the right hand side of the beam.

The weight or mass at left of beam will drop with G. The bigger the swing, the bigger the "hit".

As horizontal wheel continues to rotate, it will return to initial position, and lift right hand weight back to initial position. In simpler terms, the seesaw will be back to where it started out.

Problems encountered are in maintaining the horizontal wheel supporting assembly without removing too much from the energy produced by G. Also making the transfer of weight quicker, more brutal. Within the scope of the rotary horizontal mass distribution, this can be accomplished by restraint of appropriate end of beam, restraint of constant force, eg it will let go when a given amount of force (or mass, whatever) is applied. Problems were also encountered in the area of applyying weight constantly (or where required) to beam from horizontal wheel, as maintaining the assembly vertical entails moving in several planes. To stay simple, it has to be able to slide lengthwise, and also vertically.

For those who are still with me, cam and rod push or pull, and/or wire restraint can be configured so that the vertical assembly will move from vertical to one side then the other by a few degrees, inducing a self rotate of the wheel. Timing of course is of the essence, but auto-timing (mechanical) has been achieved (luckily, because with weights in the order of 8 - 10 kg individually, serious damage would occur if things got out of sych).

Whatever, you can modelize this with computer programs 'till the end of time and be nowhere near reality, the parameters are too numerous and not all immediately obvious. You might, if you could with this explanation, make a working device (I hope not ), be able to identify the parameters, measure all energy loss/gain, and obtain enough data to simulate this device.

For those who aren't still with me, you can have some serious fun and validate the very basic principle by building the following device : one piece of steel bar say 1.5 meters long with at central point a pivot (say a bicycle hub ?). At one end of this beam, fix a weight of 1 kg, 2 if you want to. To other end (right) of beam affix a weight of approx 1/2 of the weight attached to left end of beam. Now take a length of solid string (say 30 cm)? with a weight fixed on one end and fix it to beam on righthand side of pivot so that at rest the device is more or less horizontal.  Now swing pendulum and watch lever swing up and down. Erratically because length of pendulum needs to tuned, and even if in perfect tune, decay of pendulum movement occurs, and you get funny behavior. You could improve no end by using a rigid pendumum rotating freely on a BB (how about a bicycle pedal ?) This can be improved upon, I mean by that that the pendular form of device can made to have a quite long runtime and produce energy. More than was required to intiate the swing of the pendulum. If you are having too much trouble maintaining the beam swing up and down within a given radius of an arc, you might want to suspend the "dropping" end by a spring, or strong elastic. It'll upset the behavior pattern of course. If you are using a string, your beam assembly must be quite far forward from table, eiffel tower or whatever you are using as a support, because firstly there is this guy Foucault who is quite right about pendulum swing plane rotating, and secondly, but more important, strings on pendulums tend not to travel peacefully back and forth in a perfectly constant linear plane when they are being bounced all over the place by a silly swinging beam they are attached to.

The leverage means that the weight of the pendulum can be varied a lot, you just need to compensate by moving fixation point of pendul to beal longitudinally to attain balance. This will also greatly influence the behavior, and power delivery. At best, your available power in this config will be left weight + G minus right hand weight and restraining forces associated. Occasionally, there will be a moment when the pendulum weight will add to this. However, this is totally unpredictable. Power should be taken only on downstroke to left IMO.

This simple device however could be computer modelized, just don't forget to factor in moment of intertia, and weight of beam plus rod if rod is used for pendulum.

Hope that answers your question Mr Spoondini (Yes, this device will produce more than enough energy to bend a teaspoon haha)

Good luck then 

Oh, by the way, if I haven't stated this already on this forum in particular, if I am "outing" this info on this particular version of device it is because I think that many minds working together will improve it. Unfortunately, a lot of minds spend their time taking other peoples designs apart rather than inventing anything themselves, luckily not all.

Furthermore, I am now into devices of a different sort which show more potential in that they are much less costly to make, require less maintenance having fewer moving parts, and are easy for everyone (myself included) to explain and understand.

[FreeEnergy]

The principle is rotating one offset mass located at the outer edge of a wheel mounted horizontally on a beam.

The beam is mounted centrally on a BB/axle.

The beam has a weight on the left end.

The wheel is mounted (free to spin on BB) on the right side of the beam.

When the wheel is placed so that the weight sat upon it is farthest away from fulcrum, the device is (to keep things very simple) in balance. It will stay "level".

When the wheel with weight is rotated (which takes one heck of a lot less energy than lifting equivalent weight vertically), the weight upon this wheel will approach the fulcrum, or axis of the beam. As it does so, weight is displaced so that it weighs less against the right hand side of the beam.

The weight or mass at left of beam will drop with G. The bigger the swing, the bigger the "hit".

As horizontal wheel continues to rotate, it will return to initial position, and lift right hand weight back to initial position. In simpler terms, the seesaw will be back to where it started out.

Problems encountered are in maintaining the horizontal wheel supporting assembly without removing too much from the energy produced by G. Also making the transfer of weight quicker, more brutal. Within the scope of the rotary horizontal mass distribution, this can be accomplished by restraint of appropriate end of beam, restraint of constant force, eg it will let go when a given amount of force (or mass, whatever) is applied. Problems were also encountered in the area of applyying weight constantly (or where required) to beam from horizontal wheel, as maintaining the assembly vertical entails moving in several planes. To stay simple, it has to be able to slide lengthwise, and also vertically.

For those who are still with me, cam and rod push or pull, and/or wire restraint can be configured so that the vertical assembly will move from vertical to one side then the other by a few degrees, inducing a self rotate of the wheel. Timing of course is of the essence, but auto-timing (mechanical) has been achieved (luckily, because with weights in the order of 8 - 10 kg individually, serious damage would occur if things got out of sych).

Whatever, you can modelize this with computer programs 'till the end of time and be nowhere near reality, the parameters are too numerous and not all immediately obvious. You might, if you could with this explanation, make a working device (I hope not ), be able to identify the parameters, measure all energy loss/gain, and obtain enough data to simulate this device.

For those who aren't still with me, you can have some serious fun and validate the very basic principle by building the following device : one piece of steel bar say 1.5 meters long with at central point a pivot (say a bicycle hub ?). At one end of this beam, fix a weight of 1 kg, 2 if you want to. To other end (right) of beam affix a weight of approx 1/2 of the weight attached to left end of beam. Now take a length of solid string (say 30 cm)? with a weight fixed on one end and fix it to beam on righthand side of pivot so that at rest the device is more or less horizontal.  Now swing pendulum and watch lever swing up and down. Erratically because length of pendulum needs to tuned, and even if in perfect tune, decay of pendulum movement occurs, and you get funny behavior. You could improve no end by using a rigid pendumum rotating freely on a BB (how about a bicycle pedal ?) This can be improved upon, I mean by that that the pendular form of device can made to have a quite long runtime and produce energy. More than was required to intiate the swing of the pendulum. If you are having too much trouble maintaining the beam swing up and down within a given radius of an arc, you might want to suspend the "dropping" end by a spring, or strong elastic. It'll upset the behavior pattern of course. If you are using a string, your beam assembly must be quite far forward from table, eiffel tower or whatever you are using as a support, because firstly there is this guy Foucault who is quite right about pendulum swing plane rotating, and secondly, but more important, strings on pendulums tend not to travel peacefully back and forth in a perfectly constant linear plane when they are being bounced all over the place by a silly swinging beam they are attached to.

The leverage means that the weight of the pendulum can be varied a lot, you just need to compensate by moving fixation point of pendul to beal longitudinally to attain balance. This will also greatly influence the behavior, and power delivery. At best, your available power in this config will be left weight + G minus right hand weight and restraining forces associated. Occasionally, there will be a moment when the pendulum weight will add to this. However, this is totally unpredictable. Power should be taken only on downstroke to left IMO.

This simple device however could be computer modelized, just don't forget to factor in moment of intertia, and weight of beam plus rod if rod is used for pendulum.

Hope that answers your question Mr Spoondini (Yes, this device will produce more than enough energy to bend a teaspoon haha)

Good luck then 

Oh, by the way, if I haven't stated this already on this forum in particular, if I am "outing" this info on this particular version of device it is because I think that many minds working together will improve it. Unfortunately, a lot of minds spend their time taking other peoples designs apart rather than inventing anything themselves, luckily not all.

Furthermore, I am now into devices of a different sort which show more potential in that they are much less costly to make, require less maintenance having fewer moving parts, and are easy for everyone (myself included) to explain and understand.

please post drawings of this or any videos you might have. thank you.

[exnihiloest]

...
When the wheel with weight is rotated (which takes one heck of a lot less energy than lifting equivalent weight vertically), the weight upon this wheel will approach the fulcrum, or axis of the beam. As it does so, weight is displaced so that it weighs less against the right hand side of the beam.
...

It's not exact. The rotating weight of the wheel is not equivalent to a sliding weight along the beam. The force due to the weight is always applied to the beam at the same point: the point where the axle of the wheel is connected to the beam.
What is happening is that when the wheel is rotating, there is a torque onto its axle acting in the vertical plane including the weight and the wheel axle. It is this torque that applies to the beam. In order to keep the axle perfectly vertical, you have to exert an opposing torque so no useable work can be expected and the axle of the wheel would not slide. And if the axle was not kept perfectly vertical, then the height of the weight will be decreasing with the beam tilt due to the torque from the wheel axle, and you will just be able to recover the potential energy that the weight lost.








If the axle is kept perfectly horizontal,