Creating Infinite Distance inside a wheel

[Tim Cochran]

Ok Fletcher,
I can see the system center of mass now. It is dropping more and more as the wheel turns. Bummer. This could mean the wheel has the wrong gear ratio, or the build is simply too crude(true), or the concept can't work, or any combination of those. Time will tell.
I tried making a single chain and it does render very slowly. Eight chains might be too much.
Thanks again for the help.

[Fletcher]

Personally I wouldn't worry too much about the Sys CoM dropping. You have to lose GPE in order to get torque.

The question is can you arrange things so that you get a lingering torque on one side of the axle (but beneath it). Then you would have asymmetric torque which will then accumulate wheel momentum.

That's where measuring the base wheels position (degrees) and its velocity (rpm) can be helpful. You can quickly see when the wheel reaches its position of lowest GPE (the PQ point, balance point) and when it eventually stops having forward impetus and reverses for instance.

Plenty of work-ons and good luck.

[Georg Künstler]

Flether wrote:

The question is can you arrange things so that you get a lingering torque on one side of the axle (but beneath it). Then you would have asymmetric torque which will then accumulate wheel momentum.

I think I have now found the asymmetric torque, which i had looking so long ago.

A torque will be created when a rolling swinging cylinder is blocked in one direction.

Doing this in my gravity converter I have a permanent swinging asymmetric torque on one side of the wheel.

[Tim Cochran]

Fletcher,

Thanks for the WM2D help so far!

Is there any way to measure the system center of mass as a numerical readout on the Y axis?
This would help me more than just watching the CoM symbol. So far in my models, it looks like my system CoM is somewhat stable as the weights revolve but I can't tell if I'm making it better or worse with each new gear ratio. For all I know the CoM could be momentarily rising and I wouldn't know.

-Tim Cochran

[Fletcher]

There is but it is more laborious. I often do it myself because I want to know both x turning moments and y displacements.

The way I do it is to make everything a very low mass except for my main weights. N.B. the base background wheel can be whatever mass you want coz it is rotating around the pivot not changing radius. I usually just make it 1 kg.

Then I create an Output of weight position, separating x and y (it measures distance from the 0,0 datum.

i.e. menu -> Measure>Position - build a vertical matrix or table.

Then sum them (say Output[123].y1+Output[123].y2+Output[123].y3 etc). You can then see the x and y moments at any stage of base rotation.

P.S. I also measure base Rotation is degrees and rpm found in the Measure menu. That way I can see when the rpm is increasing and decreasing i.e. acceleration, and how far it will rotate before reversing direction etc.

When the rpm starts to reduce tells me that torque has changed to the other side of the vertical line beneath the axle i.e. you have reached the PQ position (balance) or the position of least System GPE.

Hope that helps.

[Tim Cochran]

Thanks Fletcher,
Hmm, if I can sum all the y positions of all the weights that would help, but I don't know if knowing the moments will help on this design. The CoM will lower if my gear ratios are wrong but that is not what is supposed to "drive" the wheel.
It has continuous torque in one direction and should never has to raise the CoM between periods, so it's not like it has any problem rotating through periods; I just haven't proven that the period will be truly complete based of the CoM. The design does not ever use momentum to function nor does it ever convert kinetic energy into potential energy nor vice versa. (Gravity not counted as potential energy)
Honestly, I am reaching my limits trying to iron out all the geometric ratios on paper. I guess I don't trust my math when I run these partial simulations and my head hurts trying to wrap it around the whole concept.