Another claim to a working device...

[Furcurequs]

I didn't say it was as big as the pile of rubble.

I'm just saying they took down that line of shrubbery and the pad is sitting across where that line of shrubbery used to be.

Dwayne

[Grimer]

Out of curiosity I thought I'd try a Google translation of the Portuguese text.
I had to retype the words in the image so I didn't bother with accents.

Here is their original translation:



and here is the Google version:

The end pieces and weights of our engine powered
exclusively by gravity can be mounted
in various positions, but similar arrangements forming
different. We did tests on many
Final assembly of this part. The engine worked
perfectly on all models, ranging from greater
or less power or torque. We chose one of these
models to complete the assembly of the machine and it
back to show photographs.

[Grimer]

Copied from the Pure Energy Blog.


Stuart Campbell (Moderator) reply to Simon Derricutt • 2 days ago

Whilst I am no mechanical engineer, and never will be (even though my Grandfather was a Chief Engineer on giant ships, his talents never washed off onto me) one of the things I have always been able to do all my life is visualize. I have always been able to think ahead and not only project trends and concepts but also be part of making them happen. I have stepped into projects having absolutely no knowledge or skills in them, but can develop and then bring them to fruition through using other peoples talents.

In regard to RAR these are my views:

(1) In order to achieve its objective the machine has to be big. It could never be anything but as it's output will always be relevant to it's size.

(2) Losses due to friction. One commenter here today says he knows from "sources" that the machine runs for hours BUT eventually stops, no doubt due to friction.

(3) Achieving the water wheel effect. I can visualize that it would work on this basis. That if they can achieve an equivalent to a huge bucket (heavy weighted load) of water always tipping forward, and then retracting back to a small form factor for it's return upward journey, then it would work.

If the machine has run for hours then clearly the objectives are being achieved. But as I commented in another post transferring a model into a giant machine would bring a whole set of new problems to overcome.
BUT hours of continuous running certainly speaks volumes. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Your mentioning of laws is what always keeps us within the square Simon. Laws become mental barriers. Laws are used as a means to control the populace and most people can't think beyond that. Laws are used by the scientific community so as to keep people inside their web of control. It's those who think outside the square and keep pushing the boundaries, and ignoring the laws, in fact saying stuff the laws, that keep moving the world forward for others.


Frank Grimer reply to Stuart Campbell • 3 hours ago -


Stuart wrote:

"(2) Losses due to friction. One commenter here today says he knows from "sources" that the machine runs for hours BUT eventually stops, no doubt due to friction."

Yes, indeed - you've put your finger on it. Friction - but not friction as they perceive it.

As I've pointed out on another forum, we effectively have have an offset gyro situation here and this gives rise to huge twisting moments which the normal bearings that RAR have used are NOT designed to cope with. Consequently their bearings are giving out under all the grinding abuse they're being subjected to.

Once RAR appreciate this and provide bearings which can cope with twisting forces then the machine will run and run.

For me, the very fact that their machine has come to a grinding halt is a indication that it is genuine and the reports on it are true. They must be really puzzled as to why this has happened as they will have spared no expense to get the very best bearings available.

[Grimer]

Stuart Campbell Moderator reply to Frank Grimer • 4 hours ago -

That is a good idea Frank.
Could be just as you say, never thought of a possible gyro effect.


Frank Grimer reply to Stuart Campbell • 8 minutes ago -

RAR are moving weights around a closed path which does not include the main axis of rotation. This is essentially the same motion as that of the offset gyro although in the case of the gyro it's not at all obvious since the elliptical path taken by the incremental masses is so flat (think of it as a crossed section cut across a slinky spring squashed into a cylindrical form).

Now as you know, if you stop the precession movement of an offset gyro it immediately rotates violently upwards. If this motion is prevented, as in the RAR motor, then the action has to manifest itself in the other direction - in this case by acting on the crank attached to the main shaft.

[Grimer]

Since torque will be a very familiar concept to most members of this forum (unlike me - I'm more familiar with the concepts of couple and moment) it will be easiest to think of the energy generated by the RAR motor as Torque Energy, rather than the equivalent but less familiar terms of Jerk Energy and 3rd Derivative (of position with respect to time) Energy.

Torque Energy is generated by a force moving around the circumference of a circle in contrast to 2nd Derivative Energy ( Force x Distance) which is generated by a force moving in straight line.

If you think about it you will see that 2nd Derivative Energy is the boundary case of 3rd Derivative Energy, i.e. the case where the radius of the circle is so large that the distance moved by the force is for all practical purposes a straight line.

[Unbalanced]

Although I like the idea that this monster came to a screaming halt due to bearing failure caused by an asymmetrical twisting force applied to the crank shaft, I fail to see where this force comes from.

Grimer, you mention an offset gyro effect or interrupted precession but from the photos RAR Energia has posted, I can not envision where these forces are generated.

It appears that the crankshaft is experiencing the forces applied to any crankshaft, i.e. a force applied at right angles to the direction of its rotation.

What I assume to be the weights (of this devise) are pictured as gray, rectangular, inverted 'U' shapes hung from the last installed square section beams in the lower left of the last photos. If this is correct, these weights appear to be moving in an arc up and down not in a circular motion.

In fact, if I am not mistaken, the only component that appears to be rotating full circle, is the crankshaft. Every other component appears to oscillate including the black arcs of steel.

Where then (in the absence of circular motion) does this devise generate gyroscopic forces?

Although it makes no sense to me, there appears to be a function of waveform as though they have harnessed an anomaly of gravity waves? Never mind I can't hope to explain that one.

I find it curious that the 16 lever-arms are set in a two complete waves of 8 arms each and that two connecting rods (one from each set) are in the same position as if two straight-8 engines were connected end to end.

The failure I envision (if indeed there was one) is too much torque applied to too long a shaft that is in itself made up of many conjoined sections.

[Grimer]

I didn't say they were moving in a circular motion, I said they were moving in a closed path.

Ralph gave an example of such a mechanism a few weeks ago. If you search his posts you will find it.

[eccentrically1]

Torque Energy is generated by a force moving around the circumference of a circle in contrast to 2nd Derivative Energy ( Force x Distance) which is generated by a force moving in straight line.

you said circle.

[Grimer]

I didn't say they were moving in a circular motion, I said they were moving in a closed path.

Ralph gave an example of such a mechanism a few weeks ago. If you search his posts you will find it.

I've found the relevant post of Ralph's

It's here:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 993#109993

Click on his link to Hoeken's Linkage and you will see that the end traces a closed path.

RAR would seem to be doing something similar.

Are you back from your voyage or are you posting from your boat.

[Unbalanced]

@Grimer

Thanks Frank, for pointing out the link that Ralph submitted on Hoeken's Linkage.

I don't see how I missed that. There is indeed rotary motion in this linkage.

Now I'll have to go back to the photos of the RAR Energia devise and look more closely for this linkage. It does appear to be a similar configuration.

I am still confused about how (what on the surface) appears to be a mostly reciprocating configuration could instill the type of twisting forces that would tend to destroy a bearing.

I do not expect an education on the subject here.

[Unbalanced]

Home and hosed for the time being. You beat me to the punch with your last post.

[Grimer]

Torque Energy is generated by a force moving around the circumference of a circle in contrast to 2nd Derivative Energy ( Force x Distance) which is generated by a force moving in straight line.

you said circle.

I said:

"RAR are moving weights around a closed path which does not include the main axis of rotation."

In the following post I was talking generally about Torque energy and not about the RAR motor.

[eccentrically1]

lots of conclusions being jumped to.

torque is a force.

we don't know the operating conditions, speed, etc.
does the patent show the bearings?

[Unbalanced]

My misinterpretation came from your use of the word "around." Thanks for the clarification

[Grimer]

@Grimer

Thanks Frank, for pointing out the link that Ralph submitted on Hoeken's Linkage.

I don't see how I missed that. There is indeed rotary motion in this linkage.

Now I'll have to go back to the photos of the RAR Energia devise and look more closely for this linkage. It does appear to be a similar configuration.

I am still confused about how (what on the surface) appears to be a mostly reciprocating configuration could instill the type of twisting forces that would tend to destroy a bearing.

I'm not surprised you're confused. It takes a long time to get one's head around it.

There is an interesting analogy in the Roberval balance as Cloud Camper pointed out when he wrote.
...
"Just like you say, the Roberval is indeed overbalanced but it is the sideways stress (bending moment) in the central vertical support and the compression/tension in the horizontal elements that prevent the OB from operating."
...
Because the individual component of the Roberval are relatively massive compared with the stresses induced by the weights the joints can take the twisting moments. If you made a Roberval of very flexible materials then the twisting would rise above the threshold of perception - you'd see it in other words.