Gravitational shortcut

[johannesbender]

The animations were spun on an axis almost similar to this animation toy , https://fristartmuseum.org/resource/cre ... aumatrope/

[Robinhood46]

The pivot point is at the same distance from the centre, not the weights at the ends of the arms that pivot.
Imagine the small arms with the weights being 4.5 miles long.
When the arm with the weight is perpendicular to the arm it is pivoting on, and parallel to the axle, it will be exactly the same distance from the axle as the swivel point (like the one at 3 o'clock in your image). It will be about 4.5 miles, further away from the axle, once it has pivoted 90°.

[johannesbender]

The pivot point is at the same distance from the centre, not the weights at the ends of the arms that pivot.
Imagine the small arms with the weights being 4.5 miles long.
When the arm with the weight is perpendicular to the arm it is pivoting on, and parallel to the axle, it will be exactly the same distance from the axle as the swivel point (like the one at 3 o'clock in your image). It will be about 4.5 miles, further away from the axle, once it has pivoted 90°.

Okay you made me look harder at the confusion , i was confusing myself with how i wrote it but this is the case , when viewed as i have drawn here the one flipped to the side would have a larger radius as the one flipped perpendicular to gravity and parallel to the axle , but i never placed my weights that far out though , i had them screwed in the middle of the flaps and they werent very far out because it was quite a small build .

So the Red radius would be further than the Yellow radius , how this confuses me is its kind of like a lift or radius shift even though i just turned the directions
.
Red vs yellow radii .

R1 > R2 , & , distance from center to A and B is the same .

[johannesbender]

Hope this helps my explanation , when the tab/arm is to the side it is at a larger radius than when the arm is to the front/back , in this 3d representation , the weight is moved in and out via a rotation along a vertical axis along a radius on the surface of an imaginary sphere along the two indicated planes , so from a central point of that sphere which coincides with the axle of rotation - the radii are different when the tab/arm is facing sideward or to the front/back as viewed from the front direction of the axle.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour JB, j'ai ce principe en attente de réalisation.
La rotation serait donnée par montage helicoïde type vis ecrou quart de tour, sur une roue tournant en sens horaire.
A deux heures le système remonte et tourne d'un quart de tour pour être en position à trois heures au plus loin du moyeu, le système est dans le plan de rotation.
Il entraine la roue jusqu'à sept heures.
A sept heures le principe s'inverse le système redescend pour être plus proche du moyeu, le système est dans le plan perpendiculaire au sens de rotation.
Je n'ai toujour pas trouvé de matériel standard du commerce pour faire mes essais et pas de possibilité de simulation donc cela reste de coté!
Mais cela ne dit pas c'est la bonne solution!
Bonne recherche.
J-B

Hello JB, I have this principle waiting for realization.
The rotation would be given by helical screw type mounting quarter turn nut, on a wheel rotating clockwise.
At two o'clock the system goes up and turns a quarter turn to be in position at three o'clock at the most far from the hub, the system is in the rotation plane.
He drives the wheel until seven o'clock.
At seven o'clock the principle reverses the system down to be closer to the hub, the system is in the plane perpendicular to the direction of rotation.
I still did not find standard equipment of the trade to make my tests and no possibility of simulation so it remains aside!
But that does not say it is the right solution!
Good research.
J.B

[johannesbender]

Bonjour JB, j'ai ce principe en attente de réalisation.
La rotation serait donnée par montage helicoïde type vis ecrou quart de tour, sur une roue tournant en sens horaire.
A deux heures le système remonte et tourne d'un quart de tour pour être en position à trois heures au plus loin du moyeu, le système est dans le plan de rotation.
Il entraine la roue jusqu'à sept heures.
A sept heures le principe s'inverse le système redescend pour être plus proche du moyeu, le système est dans le plan perpendiculaire au sens de rotation.
Je n'ai toujour pas trouvé de matériel standard du commerce pour faire mes essais et pas de possibilité de simulation donc cela reste de coté!
Mais cela ne dit pas c'est la bonne solution!
Bonne recherche.
J-B

Hello JB, I have this principle waiting for realization.
The rotation would be given by helical screw type mounting quarter turn nut, on a wheel rotating clockwise.
At two o'clock the system goes up and turns a quarter turn to be in position at three o'clock at the most far from the hub, the system is in the rotation plane.
He drives the wheel until seven o'clock.
At seven o'clock the principle reverses the system down to be closer to the hub, the system is in the plane perpendicular to the direction of rotation.
I still did not find standard equipment of the trade to make my tests and no possibility of simulation so it remains aside!
But that does not say it is the right solution!
Good research.
J.B

Shadow as far as i know and according to my experience ,the vertical axis is the only one imo , when if rotated ,and something is attached to it , the motion of that something attached to it , can be side to side (lateral) which is perpendicular to gravity , if the axis of rotation is not vertical then there is a lift that needs to happen , this is why in mine i wrote the reset must happen at a specific time and be fast because if its not vertical it becomes a lift , eta . For example look at the images i have drawn for better understanding of what i write : any angle not vertical when rotated along axis has a lift and drop except the vertical .


However i dont know if i understand you correct though , so i am not sure if what i write applies , good luck .

[Robinhood46]

Have you tried having the weights at any angles other than 90° JB?
If you can try them with different angles, you may be able to find an optimal angle, which could help us see what's going on.
I mean the angle between the two short arms with the weights. The bar that twists, at present twists 90°. Have a go with 30° 45° and 60° for example.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour JB,
Vous avez peut être raison, néanmoins je dois faire cet essais pour satisfaire ma curiosité et avancer sur cet énigme!
Pour l'instant je reflechi à mon idée de pilons pour tournder le roue, j'en suis à quatre pilons par système, deux systèmes en alternance par tour.
Plus une sciatique à résorber! car ma femme est une terroriste en matière d'aménagement de notre nouvelle demeure.

Hello JB,
You may be right, nevertheless I must make these tests to satisfy my curiosity and advance on this puzzle!
For the moment I thought about my idea of pilons to turn the wheel, I’m at four pilons per system, two systems in alternation per turn.
Plus sciatica to be taken out! because my wife is a terrorist in terms of the development of our new home.

[johannesbender]

Have you tried having the weights at any angles other than 90° JB?
If you can try them with different angles, you may be able to find an optimal angle, which could help us see what's going on.
I mean the angle between the two short arms with the weights. The bar that twists, at present twists 90°. Have a go with 30° 45° and 60° for example.

RH I understand what you mean , i have not tried that though , to be honest i know one of 2 things would work here (and elsewhere), a lift or more mass on top than down low .

But , its interesting .

[johannesbender]

Some old stuff:

Torque/cammed/spring/weight balancers/force reduction or cancelation tests:









Roberval type designs tests:


















Swapper test:

Radius throw test:

[daxwc]

Thank JB. Your "Swapper test" is interesting to me. What was the main objective... data? Was it meant to be a pendulum or just an impulse?

[johannesbender]

Thank JB. Your "Swapper test" is interesting to me. What was the main objective... data? Was it meant to be a pendulum or just an impulse?

It was suppose to be a mixed upgrade to a concept that starter out with one sided marbles (but did not have torque) , and a RB where the arms could reach out far from the center of rotation towards a larger diameter which would have more torque , i was heavily in to trying to swap weight positions between 2 different radiuses by not trying to "skip" the work involved , and also i was trying to keep things on one side , and so evolved some crazy concepts of which i will share some more here.

This was the initial geometry i tried working out for keeping marbles on one side of a larger diameter :

Then the animated 3d version to help me imagine it (the sim failed due to no driving torque -forces cancel) :



So i thought why not more instead (the sim failed due to no driving torque -forces cancel):



At that time i was still fascinated with trying to swap weights on RB's :

But the idea of RB's took over , i thought i would make the outer diameter large for torque superiority , and stretch the arms longer while maintaining a mechanical advantage (this is was the much earlier concept of https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 36#p196136).

So the "swapper" came about ,with the idea that the arms could be as long or short , it was suppose to deposit at A on a larger radius wheel along the red arc and pick up on B , but i needed to know what torque and speed ratios would work to have everything meet up and be able to lift and drop :

However smaller outer radiuses was not very big on torque so i went for stretching out the arms to accommodate bigger advantage with larger diameter wheels ,as a consequence the arc becomes smaller .

After that i started attempting torque cancelation and balancing concepts like:

This one i had a video on but i just did not build it as advanced (i needed the arms to be too long to reset the spring directions) :

[johannesbender]

This was part of the spring'ed torque canceler lever design i had on video , where i designed the method to flip the spring directions:

This was just an imaginary method of hiding a water/fluid bucket hanging on an axle inside a drum :

[daxwc]

Thanks for sharing JB. They are pretty clever in their own right.

At that time I was still fascinated with trying to swap weights on RB's :

Yes I moved away from that to counter-balance mechanism which I what you see now. The down energy harvest I imagine will be the easy part ;)))

[johannesbender]

Countering the forces is possible but its the reset thats always the issue , i would urge you to have a closer look at mt46 , look at mt46 and read the comments and ask yourself why the bucket would need lifting ?

It needs not be included in a lift , imo he used it to reduce the force or nearly counter balance the lifter by adding weights sand or water to the bucket (although i know the gearing looks wrong for my point ), so the lifter that lifts the masses would be easier to be driven by the dropping masses.

However issue is the bucket would lose height.

Mt29 is another slightly possible one , the yoked concept with a hanging mass on a cam pulley i did seemed to have some similatities.