energy producing experiments

[ovyyus]

The third wheel (Merseburg) and fourth wheel (Kassel) were both 12 feet diameter. FWIW.

[rasselasss]

Trebuchet as an interest was never top of my list but i have seen the working machine at Warwick Castle,at 22 tons its very impressive and well worth seeing it in action.....when i was young i used to go to the shooting range at a country estate and" pull "the clay pidgeon or skeet targets for the shooters,the arm that flung the skeet was telescopic,manually adjusted,the spring strength could be adjusted as well,if we did'nt like a shooter we'd take him out of his comfort zone by quickly changing the speed and angle.....truly surprising the distance and height they could fling a skeet...Good Luck.

[pequaide]

The ‘most powerful trebuchet in the world, (www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyCJ69GU974) demonstrates the difference between just overbalancing and throwing. The YouTube video shows a steel arm trebuchet painted in camouflage. They throw a few cars but then toward the end they attach what I assume is a similar mass to the arm. They think the difference is humorous.

The input energy is roughly the same: you have the overbalanced mass on the top and the car mass on the bottom. So you would expect the output energy to be roughly the same for the different arrangements; but it is not.

The force times time (of F =ma) relationship in the arrangements is vastly different. The car is drug along the ground at first allowing a larger Force to accelerate the two spoke wheel or arm. By the time the car is lifted there is a large quantity of momentum in the arm and the time period over which the car is lifted is smaller than when the mass is fixed to the arm. Then the trebuchet does what the trebuchet does best; it transfers motion from the arms (or wheel) to the car. This allows an energy increase to occur for the mass of the car. The fixed (no sling) mass has no such increase in motion and is domed to a laughable blooper off the end of the arm.

I am going to guess that if the concrete mass were placed on a cart and thrown in the same manner as the cars that the concrete would be thrown just as far as the car. But the blooper throw itself must have the same energy as the input energy. The Law of Conservation of Energy (E = Force in N * distance dropped) would be true all the time; for each throw. So they would all have to be bloopers.

But there are a multitude of FT (from F=ma; a =v/t) arrangements; and as one would expect you get a multitude of different throws. All the throws are from the same overbalance but the trebuchet gives varying applications of F for a variety of throws. If The Law of Conservation of Energy were true it could give one and only one type of throw because there is one and only one input energy.

Which type of throw would you want inside your twelve foot wheel?

[pequaide]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyCJ69GU974

[pequaide]

I was going to post this on the Merseburg wheel part thread, but that thread is moving fast in another direction.

A quote from jim_mich 2:49 am Merseburg wheel part: The same energy is required to stop the wheel, whether it is applied to the axle handle or to the rim. Force times distance would be the same. A much greater force but at a much slower speed needs to be applied to the axle handle, while a much weaker force but moving at a much faster speed needs to be applied to the rim. The energy needed to stop the wheel is the same in either case.

Okay; 16 pounds on a 2 feet lever arm causes an equal acceleration as 32 lbs on a 1 foot lever arm.

I did about five experiments concerning this. My experiments in (I = mrr vs I = mr thread) prove that this is a true statement.

But Tarsier conducted experiments (same thread ) that he felt proved that this is not a true statement. He stated that (for instance) it would be harder for the 16 pounds at two feet to accelerate the wheel.

So, Jim, what do you think?

One of the mentioned experiments:
Because you are moving the position of the inertial masses I decided to do the same with the 18 inch wheel. I kept the drive mass in the same location. 

I placed 1180 grams (590 both ides) at 8.91 (r) inches and accelerated it, and the wheel, with 118.2 grams extra on one side. 

I added the mass by suspending 590 grams from both sides of the wheel at the 17.82 inches diameter. This makes a 1180 gram Atwood's which is attached to about a 3000 gram wheel. The 118.2 grams was attached to one of the 590 gram units. The 590 grams was a 1 inch bolt with washer, and the 118.2 grams was a nut. 

After the third rotation of the wheel, as previously described, the flag tripped the (26 mm apart) gates at .0631, .0631, .0628 second. 

I calculated what mass would be 17.82/12.05 ths as much as the 1180; which was 283.5 (more) grams for each side. 

I then added 283.5 grams to each side. This new 1747 gram Atwood's was placed at 12.05 inches. The 118.2 gram drive mass was given its own string and it remained at 17.82 inches. Without moving the gates or the flag I did five runs. The flag tripped the gates at .0625, .0630, .0624, .0629, .0625 second. 

This is a near perfect mr relationship. I prefer to call it laws of levers. 

So it doesn't mater if you move the position of the drive mass or the position of the inertial mass it is all laws of levers

[pequaide]

Laws of levers (mr) is important to the understanding of the transfer of motion from the wheel to the missile.  So some were trying to argue that it is mrr instead of mr.  They allegedly conducted an experiment that proved their theory; they said that the drop time was doubled when half the mass was placed at twice the radius.  Their actual data was that the drop took 3.83 seconds for the m at r position; and 7.26 seconds for ½ m at 2 r position, and then they said that this is about twice the time.

But twice as hard to rotate means that the acceleration lowers to half; not that the time double. F = ma means that if the force remains the same and the inertia doubles then the acceleration must become halved; time is not one of the three factors. Their poor understanding of physics revealed that the data in the experiment was manipulated. They also cooked the data so that ¼ the mass at twice the distance had the same drop time.

Getting one data point wrong is one thing; and oddly it is nearly perfectly wrong 3.75, and 3.83 sec.

But getting the second data point wrong; and that point being what they thought it should be (7.56 sec), is a violation of scientific ethics. The time they were really looking for was about 5.41 seconds not 7.56.
For this and other reasons I consequently have the two on my no read list.

I just say this to put people on the alert. Not all posting on this site are here to assist you, in fact it may be the opposite; even to the point of them presenting false data.

Sequeen; some have said things to drive you away from my assistance. But I assure you, my intent is to help you make free energy.

[sequeen]

pequaide
How could you assure to help me to make free energy?
Yesterday I finished to build my one crossbar wheel.
Result was not so bad.
It rotate pretty long time, better than my expectation.
I think it is near to the answer.
But still need some more improvements.
Today I think about the need of springs.
I need a friend to discuss about my wheel building.
If you have interest to be a friend I want to discuss with you.
From this month my business start to busy.
At first time I tried to finish this research before it is warm in my country.
I am an air-conditioner engineer in Korea.
In summer I cannot invest my time to this study, because I receive too many calls from my customers.
Yesterday I found something to improve in my wheel, But I could not do it because of my business was too busy today.
I need a friend who can help me to finish my study.

SK

[Tarsier79]

What business are you in Sequeen?

[pequaide]

You can apply a large force to the axle of a wheel for a long period of time.

The force application over a period of time is stored as spinning motion of the wheel.

This motion of the wheel can be transferred to a smaller mass that is on the end of a string that has been wrapped around the outside of the wheel.

After doing this; we have transferred the Ft (force over a period of time) stored in the wheel to a small mass or missile.

The force of gravity on the missile is small because its mass is small. Because of this smaller force a longer period of time is needed to bring the missile to a stop.

While the missile is coming to a stop it is flying upward. The missile will fly upward to a higher energy level than the large mass was dropped.

My current model applies 122.4 kilograms of mass (1200 newtons of force) on a 3.49 cm diameter axle.

The Ft is stored in the 54 kilogram wheel (rotational inertia), the missile, and in the moving 122.4 kilograms that is dropping.

All this motion is transferred to a few kilograms missile that is sent flying up. How far up is a guess of course but I am trying to do it without getting killed. With smaller wheels I have thrown over the tops of the trees and to the property line.

This is all a use of F = ma; or because a = v/t; Ft = mv

I will send pictures: but right now my missile (BB bag) blew out and I have to sew it back together.

[nicbordeaux]

What you are claiming here is that you have perpetual motion. You are transferring energy (or call it momentum, no hassle) from a wheel to a small flung mass, and from the flung mass back to the wheel. With a gain in energy each time because you are creating energy.

I was trying to tune the mass ratio on a wheel trebuchet. I knew that the tether and mass were too long and too high but I had lost my golf ball in the leaves. The BB bag did something I was unfamiliar with; It stalled in mid air about 300° out. The tether had not yet released of course. I was a bit surprised as the bag stalled so I looked back at the wheel. The tether finally released and the wheel was spinning with what appeared to be the original velocity. But the wheel was spinning in the opposite direction.

The bagged had absorbed all the motion; stopped the wheel; and restarted it in the opposite direction. I had seen restarts a lot but what was interesting was how violently the wheel was spinning. It was quite obvious that the bag had returned almost all the motion to the wheel.

A total return of motion to the wheel would be impossible if the BB bag had conserved the energy of the wheel instead of conserving the momentum. Because we know that only the momentum of a small object can be given to the larger object. If the bag had only the energy of the wheel it would have had only 1/6th or 1/7th of the necessary momentum to restore the motion back into the wheel.

[sequeen]

Tarsier79

I am an air-conditioner engineer in Korea.
I do sale and service and install, but not a big company.

pequaide

I still do not understand what you try to explain.
If I saw a picture it will be helpful to me.

SK

[nicbordeaux]

Pequaide is talking about something like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkqRimNrPMg unless I am wrong. My results were flawed because I got the different sizes of lead weights (the one on the wheel which causes overbalance and therefore drive) mixed up. Hope that helps. Wubbly did a very good replication which invalidated my results, maybe somebody has the url to the video ? There was no energy creation.

[pequaide]

On the first page or home page of 'bessler wheel' log in and then click 'albums' at the top of the page. Then choose pequaide in the forum index pic area. This will give you the pictures I have posted. There are five or more wheels in the album. Some pictures show strings wrapped around the wheel. The indoor wheels were more accurately measured than the outdoor wheels. The indoor wheels are the ones that had photo gates, strobe lights, and video tapes used on their motion.

All experiment abide by F = ma and the Law of Conservation of Momentum.

The cylinders are floating (falling) wheels that have counter balanced weighed strings. The weights were spheres. Oh; I don't show the mechanical release for the cylinder and spheres. I had jaw type mechanical releases for the cylinder and spheres mounted on a drill press motor. That way I could start with a known rpm. I had to use two motor heads (belt drive) to gear down the rpm.

It is just a wheel with weighted strings.

For the general idea see 'smokin lamas'.

About nick and wubbly: Slow throws should be done in the horizontal like the cylinder and spheres. But they for some reason did not want to try that.

You can not see nicks wheel movement: I am guessing it moved backwards. Plus nick does not release; that makes evaluation difficult.

[pequaide]

In wubbly's best throws there is significant backward motion in the wheel. This eats up a huge quantity of motion. But the main thing is the slow throw. The time down and the time up are to similar in slow throws. And the idea is to cover the same distance in a shorter period of time.

Slow throws can be done in the horizontal to check momentum conservation.

[pequaide]

Wubbly's wheel:

After the bob or missile has swung free and is on the left side: what is gravity doing to the bob and wheel?

Gravity is working on the bob on the left side and the force of gravity pulls the string so as to make the wheel turn in the opposite direct. The wheel is not really going in the opposite direction but gravity is slowly forcing it into the opposite direction. Gravity is now reducing the preexisting momentum of the wheel. And it is the preexisting momentum of the wheel that throws the missile. Gravity is reducing the throw.

Gravity is a function of time. If you give it less time gravity will have less negative effect upon the throw. The plan or idea is to use gravity over a large period of time on the right side and reduce the time on the left side. The slow throw does not do this; the time period on the two side are to nearly the same.

Now remember bearing friction and air resistance are eating up some of the throw as well but you almost make the line.

In a manner of speaking the transfer of motion from the wheel to the missile need not even have a left side. What I mean is that the motion transfer can be done in a horizontal plane and gravity would have no effect upon the transfer. After the transfer is made the direction of the missile can be pointed upward. There is no speed change in a direction change.

Gravity is used to accelerate the wheel to a certain spin rate but you need not lose the motion to a slow vertical throw. A rapid vertical throw can also be used. Because the same distance over which the force acts can be crossed in a much shorter period of time.

These gentleman are coming so close and they are not even trying to cut the time on the left side.