Another gravity wheel?

[Wheeler]

Hi Jon
Can you tell me what th this is?

[Jon J Hutton]

Wheeler,

Of course you know they are either motors or dampening motors but not from my drawing...below is a list of makup of my drawing.....Why do you ask.



Information Export Utility version 1.0.2
Date: 04-30-2006
Time: 18:30:23
Simulation File: smot 39


Section: Unit System

Distance: meters Energy: joules Force: newtons Frequency:
Mass: kilograms Power: watts Time: seconds Velocity:


Section: Integration Settings

Variable/ Animation Overlap Assembly Gravity
Integrator Fixed Step Error Error Gravity Constant
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kutta_merson Variable 0.050 0.016 0.002 Linear 9.807


Section: Bodies

Body Name Kind Px/ Vx/ Mass/ Sfric/ Geometry
Py/ Vy/ Area/ Kfric
Pr Vr Density COR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Body[4] Rectangle rect 3.614 0.000 1.000 0.300 Height: 5.000
-1.741 0.000 area 0.300 Width: 0.200
-5.590 0.000 density 0.500

Body[8] Circle circ 2.016 0.000 12.000 0.300 Radius: 0.500
0.183 0.000 area 0.300
-5.590 0.000 density 0.500

Body[13] Square rect 2.455 0.000 0.108 0.300 Height: 0.328
-6.894 0.000 area 0.300 Width: 0.328
0.450 0.000 density 0.500

Body[14] Square rect 2.750 0.000 0.108 0.300 Height: 0.328
-6.752 0.000 area 0.300 Width: 0.328
0.450 0.000 density 0.500

Body[15] Rectangle rect 2.599 0.000 0.011 0.300 Height: 0.061
-6.808 0.000 area 0.300 Width: 0.174
0.450 0.000 density 0.500

Body[19] Circle circ 5.202 0.000 1.750 0.300 Radius: 0.164
-3.627 0.000 area 0.300
-2.990 0.000 density 0.500

Body[23] Circle circ 2.601 0.000 0.499 0.300 Radius: 0.398
-6.816 0.000 area 0.300
0.450 0.000 density 0.500


Section: Pins

Constraint Name Kind Body1/ Point1/ P1x/ P1y/ Active When
Body2 Point2 P2x P2y
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constraint[26] Pin Joint pin body[0] point[24] 2.609 -6.812 Always
body[23] point[25] 0.009 -0.001


Section: Forces

Constraint Name Body1 Point1 P1x/ Fx/ Rotate Active When
P1y Fy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constraint[38] Friction Fo body[4] point[37] -0.004 equation No Always
1.004 equation


Section: Curved Slots

Constraint Name Kind Body1/ Point1/ P1x/ P1y/ Active When
Body2 Point2 P2x P2y V1x: V1Y:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constraint[2] Curved Slot body[0] point[1] 0.000 0.000 Always
2.000 -1.000
3.000 -1.000
3.000 -2.000
2.000 -2.000
2.000 -2.000


Section: Round and Square Points

Point Name Body Px Py Constraint
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Point[1] Curved Slot body[0] 0.000 0.000 constraint[2]

Point[5] Point body[4] -0.004 1.004 constraint[2]

Point[6] Square Poin body[8] 0.002 -0.015 constraint[9]

Point[7] Square Poin body[4] 0.003 2.486 constraint[9]

Point[10] Square Poin body[4] 0.002 -2.405 constraint[12]

Point[11] Square Poin body[19] 0.043 -0.045 constraint[12]

Point[16] Square Poin body[13] 0.118 0.018 constraint[18]

Point[17] Square Poin body[15] -0.049 0.003 constraint[18]

Point[20] Square Poin body[14] -0.116 0.014 constraint[22]

Point[21] Square Poin body[15] 0.045 -0.002 constraint[22]

Point[24] Point body[0] 2.609 -6.812 constraint[26]

Point[25] Point body[23] 0.009 -0.001 constraint[26]

Point[27] Square Poin body[14] 0.094 0.095 constraint[29]

Point[28] Square Poin body[23] 0.257 0.087 constraint[29]

Point[37] Base Point body[4] -0.004 1.004 constraint[38]

[Jon J Hutton]

Wheeler,

Sorry didn't mean to so too defensive... if that is from my drawing and it could be.. sometimes I mess around with pin friction scipts and that is the tool that wm2d uses.....which is also the same as a motor icon. but as you can see from the documented model description there is definitely no motor needed in #39... for the ou results. Thanks for asking.

JJH

[Wheeler]

OK Jon
I think it is me that is mixed up.
Me meaning myself.
Thanks
the program is a little more than I expected, but clear.
Can you describe this system in simple terms?

[ME]

Hi Jon
Can you tell me what th this is?

1. Don't mix up the image and the one who did post it.
2. Look at the whole picture and not a part of it.

As you can see at the lower left of the whole picture "JimsSmot3.jpg" There are setting for the pinfriction. The device also works without it, but this a more fair, although set at 0.05.
Pinfrictions are shown as motors, but if my word is worth something: they are not.

[gearhead]

Jon J.

Your idea I belive is a vertical representation of Finsrud's horizontal setup study his too see what I mean...

http://www.galleri-finsrud.no/sider/mobile/mobile.html

[Jon J Hutton]

gearhead,

I've read a bit on his mobil, and your right the theory is the same like I said in a previous thread

"The only thing that makes me not think it is a glitch is the theory behind what is going on. If you cant find a material to block a magnetic field then you would have to acomplish the same thing by inertia and distance from the magnet doing the pulling, which is what this acomplishes the faster the speed the less the mech needs to pull apart from the magnetic force acomplished by the circular track...its all a matter of ratios. This theory although not new, but maybe in application, will hopefully lead to some interesting discoveries."

IMO it is not a glitch mathematically but would be next to impossible to get the build to behave like the computer model.

Still no news from wm2d I guess I'll call them.

[Gravmaster2000]

After playing with smot39, some observations:
The way the pin slot "hangs" on the side and suddenly drops at the start looks glitchy to me.
I can 'see' how this works at the slow speeds, with the pivot rocking, the inertia of the big weight+the magnet pull throws it farther up the slide track, as it comes down and across to the other side, the big weight helps to 'throw' the little weight away from the magnet.
More slot friction makes it accelerate more quickly-almost seems^2 (the faster it is going, the faster it accelerates) try 30!
Making gravity somewhat stronger has little effect.
No world friction kills it, but I assume it needs to be re-tuned for that.
Definitely has a preferred direction-mirror image the start position, still goes same way after a bit.
It WILL turn the other direction, if the magnet is moved to the left slightly.
Just how strong/weak is this 'magnet' in the real world? Neo-strong?
Concerned about using 'monopoles',set force to + on back magnet, no effect.
Stripped magnet wheel away to just 1 magnet, no effect on running.
Got it to run once stably with weight bar in line with slot track, both weights spinning around it!
In its current form, it would make a great power generator.(6-10 foot model?)
There are a LOT of very subtle things going on here that allows only most of the energy to cancel-call it the 'not quite cancelled' drive.
I will keep playing with this...This is exiting!

[LustInBlack]

Interesting, that reminds me of someone saying : If someone find the right way to do it, it will not only move, it will be hard to stop it from working ..

Well, seems like this is the situation here !

But, I am not sure if WM2D can emulate magnets correctly .. !????

This should be relatively easy to build I think ..
Just need to know the power, size and type of magnets .

[ken_behrendt]

LIB wrote:

But, I am not sure if WM2D can emulate magnets correctly .. !????

Supposedly, it can even though one must "fake it" by using electrically charged objects to represent the poles of a magnet. This is because the equations which define the forces acting between electrically charged bodies are almost identical in form to the ones that govern the forces acting between magnets.

However, because of the glitches that can exist in ANY CAD program, one must be very suspicious whenever a virtual model displays perpetual motion. In such cases, it is probably more likely for the observed behavior to be due to a glitch rather than the "real" thing.

In the final analysis, virtual model is fine and can save one a lot of wasted time, effort, and money, but only a working real model can determine if one has finally achieved OU/PM or not.


ken

[LustInBlack]

Ken : Yes I'm 110% agreeing with you with that last statement ! ..

[Gravmaster2000]

Note to all:The weight bar BY ITSELF in SMOT39 will swing higher and higher if air resistance is turned on; it does seem to behave with only 1 weight, as in a straight pedulum! Count another bug fellas! Just how trustworthy is this program?!

[Jon J Hutton]

Hello all,

I did hear back from Mr. Woo at wm2d and he had the following to say.

I will say first that their are some similarities between this motion and other motions such as Sanjay's but I could be way off. That's just my opinion.

I showed Mr. Woo drawing number 39, 40, and 41. He said that 30 is definitely flawed because the slot mechanism can't be used for critical calculation because its not an accurate prediction other than the sliding motion to the ends of the slot. Ok, scratch 39.... 40 and 41 really took him by surprise because, he has on his computer the ability to run the simulation out to infinity ( I don't know what that means). He said he compared the frames and found the build not to be loosing "any" energy even with accurate resistance coefficients. He said he has looked at other perpetual motion designs and they all stalled almost immediately. So, he said its worth the build, but, his final words were he thought that the design hit the perfect numbers, but to make the build react the same mathematically would be difficult. So my next pointed question was then mathematically perpetual motion is possible ......... "yes".

[ken_behrendt]

We already know that this design displays OU/PM without the stator magnet and, now, according to Gravmaster with just the lever bar alone without any magnets! This is obviously a glitch and I think we can safely dismiss the design at this point.


ken

[Jon J Hutton]

Ken,

You and gravemaster are talking about a different drawing that has restraint coefficients that lead to faulty conclusions (slot versus restraint motor). The drawing ( 40 and 41) although similar in objects and theory, are very different. Those are the drawings Mr. Woo was commenting about. I do agree with you however about moving on....unless someone builds it and it works.

JJH