What if?

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

johannesbender
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2438
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: not important

Re: What if?

Post by johannesbender »

Daniel.R wrote: Fri Nov 29, 2024 11:44 am
johannesbender wrote: Thu Nov 28, 2024 8:40 pm
Tarsier the issue with all these types of designs i tested and looked at is the resets , but it is true that it takes very little energy to move because the forces are near equilibrium , of course friction and air resistance wont disappear , and i believe the adjustment is counter balanced , i saw a few patents with adjustment counter balancing systems although i believe the rotary one in the video is being locked when he adjusts , but i get what you see in it (why reset if you can adjust).
johannesbender wrote: Thu Nov 28, 2024 3:41 pm
Daniel a way to do it is to match the torque of the pivoting weight (or the "arching weight" as you call it) to the force of the lateral translating weight by its distance on a lever but if you are really keen on keeping it horizontal then a spring instead , the designs i did was a hanging mass matched to a cam so that the force of the hanging weight (your lateral weight example) was levered with the cam shape which then connected to a yoked arm ("the arching weight") , and another i did was a spring that was forced matched on the opposite end of a weighted lever.
This is the effect I believe we're after, but without springs. Those counterbalanced manipulator arms surely makes the total weight of the system easy to manipulate... duh.
Using springs however is how the reset problem introduces itself. Matching the torques with a strictly horizontal moving weight should be able to counterbalance a vertically arching weight, just like the cam and spring system does. Having the counterweight move in strict X-axis removes the reset problem due to no GPE being gained or lost while counterbalancing.
How did your design with the hanging mass and cam system operate JB? Did the hanging mass translate up and down while counterbalancing the arching weight? Do you believe this would be possible with a horizontally translating weight and an arching weight instead?
The problem you are going to solve would be how exactly would a lateral moving weight apply a counter force if its not actively pulling or pushing on or against the rotary lever , because gravity wont be giving it any lateral force though , this is why springs work and possibly hanging weight designs too springs can provide its force in any direction for example.

I guess if you were to create a mechanism that pairs different weights against the current torque of the arm (angle force and distance) to a cam , such that the weights provide enough sliding friction or inertia via the cam to the arm to match the torque it could possibly be done , or you pair some sort of resistance mechanism to the torque .

I never did build the hanging weight version ,ran in to issues and looking in to it a little more.
Last edited by johannesbender on Fri Nov 29, 2024 2:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Its all relative.
Kattla
Dabbler
Dabbler
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2024 10:12 pm
Location: Haugesund, Norway

Re: What if?

Post by Kattla »

Daniel.R wrote: Fri Nov 29, 2024 11:44 am
Oh, I was actually wondering about the weight of it all. I couldn't understand how the small lifted counterweight could balance the system, unless the rolling balls where very light, which they were. Now I can see how it works. Is the action fast? I bet it is. Very interesting nonetheless.
Good job on that!

-------------

I feel it almost redundant to mention, but I'm not discussing trying to turn off gravity in the literal sense. I'm merely trying to find a mechanism that mimics the effects of doing so. In my mind, a balanced beam is prime example of that.

/Daniel
It's fairly small, so, yes, the actions are fast. Which is one of the reason timing are an issue, with both the maybe and promising version.
If the rollers rolls over too soon, they will stop at the rod before they have enough momentum to fully push the rod which that pulls the small weight.
If they roll over too late, i think it should be fine , unless they roll too slow. Or if the path is too long, the counterbalance may not be good enough, etc.

And that is one of the reasons i like to experiment, to get answers to all those "maybes" , whatifs and such.
Many small issues that shows up when actually experimenting. Sometimes they are bad, other times they can give rise to new ideas. I also build in lego , which sometimes may not be the best for this type of experimenting.
Although, if something do work in Lego, there is a fair chance it will work even better in a dedicated setup.
Post Reply