Kinetics
Moderator: scott
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
- Location: England
re: Kinetics
Hi Ian,
Yes, they can give you run on to go through the flat spots, you can do this by adding fixed balance weights to the wheel as it save another wheel.
Regards Trevor.
Yes, they can give you run on to go through the flat spots, you can do this by adding fixed balance weights to the wheel as it save another wheel.
Regards Trevor.
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
- Location: England
re: Kinetics
Hi Ian,
It is a very good point, as it could mean the differents between success or failure in some designs, but I think you know that aready, so thanks for sharing.
Regards Trevor
It is a very good point, as it could mean the differents between success or failure in some designs, but I think you know that aready, so thanks for sharing.
Regards Trevor
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: U.S.A.
re: Kinetics
Flywheels, in and of themselves, will not give you anything more than you put into them unless someone can provide proof otherwise. I use them for control and regulation....that's about it. Reaction forces, use them...or lose them. A flywheel can definitely help in this process.
Steve
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
re: Kinetics
Yes; I have used flywheels to make energy.
All the data that I have collected shows that energy is made when a flywheel transfers its motion to a smaller object.
All the data that I have collected shows that energy is made when a flywheel transfers its motion to a smaller object.
I agree with Pequaide. Energy is made. Momentum is transferred. Just do the normal math formulas.
Kinetic energy of two objects is Ke = 1/2×M×V^2 + 1/2×m×v^2
Momentum of two objects is I = M×V + m×v
M and m are the mass of the two objects
V and v are the velocities of the two objects.
In certain circumstances the total KE increases while the momentum stays the same.
I believe this increased KE should be harnessable.
Kinetic energy of two objects is Ke = 1/2×M×V^2 + 1/2×m×v^2
Momentum of two objects is I = M×V + m×v
M and m are the mass of the two objects
V and v are the velocities of the two objects.
In certain circumstances the total KE increases while the momentum stays the same.
I believe this increased KE should be harnessable.
- Wubbly
- Aficionado
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 2:15 am
- Location: A small corner of the Milky Way Galaxy
- Contact:
re: Kinetics
Chris,
Maybe you missed pequaids energy producing thread.
He actually believes he is creating energy.
Maybe you missed pequaids energy producing thread.
He actually believes he is creating energy.
re: Kinetics
All the flywheel experiments (that I have done) show that energy is made and momentum is conserved.
Classic Physics advocates the concept (The Law of Conservation of Momentum) and the data from my experiments supports it.
Classic Physics advocates the concept (The Law of Conservation of Momentum) and the data from my experiments supports it.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
- Location: England
re: Kinetics
Hi Pequaide,
Sorry but I do not see your falling weighted lever with a rim attached to it as a flywheel, I believe that if you add the velocity gained in the levers fall and then added the work done stopping that velocity then there is no gain in kinetic energy on the projectile, I have not followed your work though, this is only based on a photo of your wheel,
I believe all the input work is done by gravity, so energy is converted.
Just my thoughts, regards Trevor
Edit, Remove and leverage, and add this, it is the Time scale of the energy conversion that is the answer to this problem, not a energy gain!
Sorry but I do not see your falling weighted lever with a rim attached to it as a flywheel, I believe that if you add the velocity gained in the levers fall and then added the work done stopping that velocity then there is no gain in kinetic energy on the projectile, I have not followed your work though, this is only based on a photo of your wheel,
I believe all the input work is done by gravity, so energy is converted.
Just my thoughts, regards Trevor
Edit, Remove and leverage, and add this, it is the Time scale of the energy conversion that is the answer to this problem, not a energy gain!
Last edited by Trevor Lyn Whatford on Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
re: Kinetics
Jim your math is a loop hole that I also see as being viable also; wish somebody would come up with a reset.
What goes around, comes around.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
- Location: England
re: Kinetics
Hi Steve, Pequaide
Steve, I believe you are correct.
In Pepuaide experiment given the weight of his wheel and the weight of his projectile the wheel becomes a fly wheel, wherein a weight is added that turns the wheel into a falling weighted lever which converts gravity to build up momentum on the fly wheel, there is no gain in energy on the projectile given the time it takes for the projectile to ascend compared to the time it would take the wheel to stop if the projectile was fixed to the wheel.
Hi Pequaide, it would be nice to see a comparison experiment between a projectile experiment, and a fixed weight experiment, wherein a record of the times it takes for the two different motions to come to rest, as it may be the answer to all this.
It could save all this number crunching and would be simple for people like me to understand.
Regards Trevor
Edit, it would be interesting to measure the circumference of the wheel on the fixed weight experiment to see what distance is covered, I know there would be a gravity energy input on the descending side, but this measurement could also help solve this problem.
Pequaide, I have not read your posts fully just a glimpse now and again, so you may have covered this already, if so please direct me to those post, cheers Trevor
Edit again, change the into that. changed the wrong the.
Steve, I believe you are correct.
In Pepuaide experiment given the weight of his wheel and the weight of his projectile the wheel becomes a fly wheel, wherein a weight is added that turns the wheel into a falling weighted lever which converts gravity to build up momentum on the fly wheel, there is no gain in energy on the projectile given the time it takes for the projectile to ascend compared to the time it would take the wheel to stop if the projectile was fixed to the wheel.
Hi Pequaide, it would be nice to see a comparison experiment between a projectile experiment, and a fixed weight experiment, wherein a record of the times it takes for the two different motions to come to rest, as it may be the answer to all this.
It could save all this number crunching and would be simple for people like me to understand.
Regards Trevor
Edit, it would be interesting to measure the circumference of the wheel on the fixed weight experiment to see what distance is covered, I know there would be a gravity energy input on the descending side, but this measurement could also help solve this problem.
Pequaide, I have not read your posts fully just a glimpse now and again, so you may have covered this already, if so please direct me to those post, cheers Trevor
Edit again, change the into that. changed the wrong the.
Last edited by Trevor Lyn Whatford on Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
re: Kinetics
Energy is not a function of time. Momentum is a function of time. You hit the nail on the head.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
- Location: England
re: Kinetics
Hi Pequaide,
When the calculation are done on paper there might seem to be a increase of energy on the projectile, but if the projectile was given work to do such as return the weight to its start height then this would pull down the projectiles velocity dramatically so it is seen as free flight velocity and not a working velocity. It might be worth fixing the weight to the bottom of the wheel, connect the projectile on a short peace of string at the top of the wheel and giving it a good whack with a tennis racket to see if it can lift the weight back up, I believe the projectile will take a circular path to try and wind its self back on the rim, all of the above is at your own risk.
To keep it short I am not convinced.
Regards Trevor
When the calculation are done on paper there might seem to be a increase of energy on the projectile, but if the projectile was given work to do such as return the weight to its start height then this would pull down the projectiles velocity dramatically so it is seen as free flight velocity and not a working velocity. It might be worth fixing the weight to the bottom of the wheel, connect the projectile on a short peace of string at the top of the wheel and giving it a good whack with a tennis racket to see if it can lift the weight back up, I believe the projectile will take a circular path to try and wind its self back on the rim, all of the above is at your own risk.
To keep it short I am not convinced.
Regards Trevor
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!