Crazy as can be wheel concept

[raj]

Lockdown obliged, I came up with this hazy/crazy as can be wheel concept.

[Robinhood46]

Raj,
Lockdown is no escuse. Many of us have been coming up with "crazy as can be wheel concept"s for decades.

[raj]

Hello Robinwood4,

I was not drawing, much more doodling in the haze..

Well, what this doodling represent...

1. wheel1 is a fywheel on freewheel3 on axle2.

2. Bob/weight4 swing/oscillate on 48 identical strings pivoting at 7.5 degrees intervals on rim of freewheel3.

That is all.
The wheel1 will be in a stable and unstable equilibrium every 7.5 degrees turn in any direction

Raj

[gravitationallychallenged]

I've thought of a similar design, Raj. If you can keep the center of gravity above the center of the wheel or axle, you have a runner.

[raj]

1 is a large wheel1,( 16 units diameter) on axle2.
3 is smaller wheel3 (4 units diameter) on axle4 geared to wheel1.
5 is small fix arm ( 1 unit length) on rim o wheel3.
6 are four pendulums (6 units long) with bobs/weights7 at 90 degrees intervals on rim of wheel1.
8 is long lever pivoting on end of arm5 rotating 180, rising 6 units, gets hooked to pull bob/weights 6 units nearer to axle2, at the 6 o'clock position nearer to axle2 and gets on hooks9 when wheel1 rotate clockwise 45 degrees and wheel3 rotates 180 degrees counter-clockwise because of their gearing.

This concept aims at moving bobs/weights nearer to axle on the ascending counter-clockwise side and further from axle on descending clockwise side, to provide unidirectional torque for wheel to rotate.

Raj

[raj]

MT55 and Apologia...

I have tried to make a connection between mt55 and apologia many days.

My concept above is the result of this study.

Here is a picture of some of my work linking MT55 with APOLOGIA.

Raj

[Robinhood46]

I've thought of a similar design, Raj. If you can keep the center of gravity above the center of the wheel or axle, you have a runner.

Gc,
I've allways found strange this assumption that we should keep the COG above the axle, or at least try our hardest to do so.
For it to be allways above this would imply hovering it somewhere between 12-3, or 9-12, depending on which way you wish it to rotate. Momentarily swapping from oneside to the other would be fine as long as the majority of the time the COG is one side.
If you do exactly the same thing below the centre, you would have exactly the same available height and distance to work with as above.
The only import thing is keeping the COG away from the vertical in one direction moereso than the other. Keeping the centre of mass to the left or keeping the center of mass to the right is what will give you a runner. If this happens in an upper quadrant or a lower quadrant or swapping between the two quadrants it is of no importance.
If you put a weight perfectly above or below the axis you have a balance, be it stable or unstable. This cannot happen on the other axis.

[agor95]

That is reasonable notion.

So you can imaging a device that is not moving having a COG just below the pivot point.

A small imbalance causes the COG to migrate off the vertical to the left or right.

The COG does drop in height and that appears as an increase in K. Energy.

The momentum cause the masses to be pulled further out and down on each rotation.

This causes the COG to drop even more and increases the K. Energy.

We have a counter force in the device too send the masses back to whence they came.

Also some 'moving pegs' if you will to create the asymmetry. So the COG is more on one side or the other from the vertical.

Cheers

[silent]

raj: According to circle on the overunity forum (his posts I've alluded to previously in other threads), MT21 is part of the solution, but he said in his posts that it is only one layer. I don't know whether he is a huxter or not, but your 210420.jpg diagram reminded me both the diagram and what circle claimed is part of the solution.

silent

[johannesbender]

Raj , i must comment on your diligence , you must have done an impressive amount of builds by now.

[Zhyyra]

Yes Raj, you seem tireless in your efforts. I too commend you. You may even end up building my current build before I do. I am about to release it to the community while still incomplete. The design is complete but the build is not :-)

Zhy

[raj]

I have tried to calculate torque as when the wheel/s would rotate, in the only way I can , by finding the distance of a weight from the vertical line through the axle.

I am presenting here 9 drawings, where drawing9 is a resetting drawing of drawing1, after wheel1 turns 11.25 degrees 8 times shown in drawing1 to drawing9, though 90 degrees.

I shall be grateful, if you can show me whether my calculations of torque are right or wrong.

Raj

[raj]

Here are the last three drawings referred to in my post above...

[Zhyyra]

Raj, I will gladly do torque calculations on this for you when I get the chance. I will be not be able to for the next few days though as I have other commitments to see to and will only be popping in here in the evenings on another computer.

At first glance all seems well with your calculations until drawing 6 where the small top wheel must now lift W2. You are then correctly using the distance to the lever on the small wheel (3 units) in obtaining a result but you can not now begin to exclude the torque still remaining on the big wheel due to W2. So, W2 will now have counter torque values of 3.0 and 1.5 because it is applying its weight to both wheels. It is 3.0 on the small wheel which transmits this through the gear teeth to the big wheel, and you must add to that the 1.5 still remaining due to forces at the hinge of W2 on the big wheel. During the lift, the weight transmits torque to both wheels. Thus your wheel will loose momentum and stop as the weights are lifted.
Sorry but I don't think this will work Raj.

Zhy

[raj]

If you say so! Zhy.

But I beg to disagree.

The torque by the w2 on the small wheel together with the torque on the large wheel MUST equal the total torque of w2 falling vertically down from its pivot point on small wheel which is 2.2 units from the axle.

When a mass hangs on two pivots, its gravitational force mg downwards acts on both pivots, totalling to the weight of the mass.
Raj