New modification to my drawing

[preoccupied]

For some reason after thinking about it (I don't know the answer) I think that you take the difference plus one of cos to determine how difficult it should be to lift the stork's bill by a factor. I think this because when at 45 degrees you have the most movement potential so it must be the most difficult to move at that point. So cos(45)=0.7 and I think that's 1-0.7+1=1.3. So in my top picture on the bottom left when the stork's bill is at about 45 degree angle and the triangles are about 45 degrees also it would be 1.3*1.3*1.3*1.3=2.8561 difficulty to push the stork's bill and times that by the ramp 0.7=1.99927. I think that the right triangle might have to be 2x larger for it to be in the positions that I've drawn. This would make the upper picture about 13 on the left vs 16 on the right weights pressure instead of 11 vs 16. But I would get to have the 45 degree angle in the upper picture on the bottom left contract to that point. I don't actually remember my trigonometry very well. I need to watch some online videos or something and try to relearn it.

Several of the parts overlap in the drawing, it would have to be split up between two wheels if shaped the way I drew it. If I made the center circle larger then it might not be over balanced because the peg would be more difficult to cross.

[Tarsier79]

P. No matter what path, you can't get more out of gravity dropping a weight than it takes to lift it back up. The storks bill is just a lever. It complies with the law of levers.

Still a no-go from me.

[preoccupied]

What I think would make this design work is if it can contract and extend at an angle. As long as it can do that I
don't care how long the weighted right angle is it should be able to turn.

I really hope that the size of the blue levers that I made would work. Since those levers could actually be that big for this design. What do you really think about this Kaine? Do you think that these stork's bills can rise at an angle possibly?

This design is unique in that it creates a duo functioning stork's bill. In other stork's bill designs that I've seen here there is not more than that. In more previous drawings I had stacked stork's bills and that might have a similar effects but I think it would be a nightmare to build. Controlling the position of the stork's bill using the square along the circumference of a circle allows the stork's bill to extend outward higher up on the wheel and allows two storks' bills to be functional at the same time on one side of the wheel.

[Tarsier79]

If you are lifting a weight, even at an angle, it costs. The energy you get back is equal to the height you lift it to. This is no different to any other OB wheel.

[preoccupied]

If you are lifting a weight, even at an angle, it costs. The energy you get back is equal to the height you lift it to. This is no different to any other OB wheel.

What if it costs an opposite force rather than a force requiring movement? If this does push itself up and down mechanically with a force of gravity could it be possible that it is pushing the position of the planet slightly? An experiment that could be done in space is to push an object with a stork's bill or it could be done on an ice skating ring. Can you push the object without sliding much? Do you push the object using the stork's bill more less or about the same? If this device that I've drawn works it might shove on the orbital rotation on the Earth by a small amount in order to lift and drop the weight. If it doesn't move the position of the planet if it works it might put extra structural tension on the frame causing it to wobble if unsteady. It might just cause a wobbling effect. A small price to pay for free energy.

To me it looks like it would mechanically lift itself up, contracting or expanding. It would be self propelled weight. It wouldn't be lifted by another weight. It would just be mechanical. Shouldn't someone test this? I have like an ineptitude towards construction. I've been playing with toothpicks recently and it has been a struggle. But I bought some Elmer's glue and a hot glue gun. Have you built any stork's bills before?

[Tarsier79]

Yes, I built SBs with meccano when I was young, and I 3d printed some more recently. A good material that is fairly cheap is balsa. Paddle pop sticks will work but they are a bit short.

[preoccupied]

What is a good tool to connect the paddle pop sticks? They need connections at their pivots.

[preoccupied]

You're gonna love this.

This is my original square design in this thread with another modification. The top square should have VERY LITTLE torque against the wheel. The angle is super sharp over top the peg and it's not applying force on the left side of the wheel where it's located because its pivot is on the right side on a peg. Is that the right physics? The issue instead of torque over the top of the peg is the static pressure and the friction. It will try to pin itself there and hit the breaks but if you lube it or put it on a wheel peg it shouldn't be that bad.

[preoccupied]

I forgot that it uses angles and not circumference.

There is less weight on the rim of the outer circle. But there is still two weights there at the beginning of the turn. I had a lot of candy this evening. I am a little loopy or loony. It reminds of me of the sugar high that the two girls in my English class year 2002 had when they had sugar sticks. Or pixie sticks. Something like that.

[preoccupied]

Now for my math on the drawing. The far left weight is being lifted it is about 1.2 from the axle. 1.2+(3/4)1=1.95. On the right you have about 1.8+1=2.8. That's an over balance of 0.85. It should be smooth sailing after that. After the first weight on the right reaches the bottom the square is already riding the peg with the pivot on the right side of the axle and has a torque on the wheel less than 1.

edit maybe i calculated that wrong. I think it's 1.2+(1/4)1+1=2.45. If the circumference of the circle were more than one it would be 1.25(n) instead of 1/4(1)+1. So it's over balanced by 0.35. That's technically good enough.

[preoccupied]

The design is better if the peg is aligned to the axle.

There can now be three weights at the beginning of the turn. This makes is really super over balanced. SUPER DUPER OVERBALANCED.

In the picture only the one weight on the left is being lifted but there are three weights on the right side. I know that I drew three squares but you only have one square I was just looking at the position of the squares for comparison. In the picture the three weights along the outer rim on the right and the bottom left square is the only things in the device at the beginning of operation.

The math is clear on this I think. While the pivot to the square is on the right side of the axle it does not apply weight down on the wheel, only on the peg. The force pushing on the wheel while on the peg with the pivot on the right side of the axle is the rotational pressure from the square pushing into the circumference of the circle. The sharper the angle the less pressure it applies to the circle. So it's basically less than 1 torque all of the way around the peg. It's got massive friction though. I can deal with friction. You can add lube or put it on a rotating peg. That's what she said.

[Tarsier79]

Balsa is a great material. Light, soft, easy to cut and manipulate and fairly cheap.. It isn't strong though. You could push a pin through it for a pivot by hand.

P. If the weight is being lifted, it is creating counter torque. Once the weight isn't hanging or swinging, only weight position matters, not the pivot point.

[preoccupied]

That's wrong Kaine. If the weight is suspended on the rim of a circle and leaning against a peg its forces are split between the force pushing on the peg and the angle it is hanging from the pivot. I mean to say that the angle its hanging from the pivot determines how much force is being pushed downward on the wheel from the weight and if the pivot is on the right side of the axle then the left side of the axle doesn't get any weight pulling downward; it would all be on the peg then. When the peg is being pushed on the wheel is being pushed on too but only at the angle that it is being pushed on. If the angle is very sharp/steep (I don't know the right word to use) then it applies very little force against the wheel by pushing on the peg; it's actually a trade off of static pressure and torque

Sincerely,
Jon

[preoccupied]

Fletcher can you weigh in on this?

Look at that, the hanging weight is being pulled down on by a pivot that is on the other side of the axle leaning on a peg. It doesn't pull down on the wheel on the left side. It only applies force to the peg and it does so at an angle so it applies half of its force towards torque on the wheel and the other half towards friction or static pressure. It's a trade off of static pressure and torque. This creates an overbalanced wheel you just need some lube or something so it doesn't stick.

[Tarsier79]

P Forget all the other weights, just imagine your wheel has one weight half lifted as in the position you have drawn. Look at the leverage of the weight compared to the leverage of the small circle. Which way will it turn, and how much force do you think it will have?