energy producing experiments
Moderator: scott
re: energy producing experiments
To answer your question Greendoor I have yet to find a situation where the energy equation did not give the correct answer. The mechanism I mentioned was to test a way I once thought I might be able to create energy. It didn't work, energy was conserved. What side of the fence do I sit on? I look and look, in an effort to find a way. Occasionally I find interesting things. This recent thing I have found ( which actually backdates to something I played with around 12 years ago ) looks promising but I won't know until I do a second test build. But putting this aside, with everything else the energy equation has always asserted itself to be the grand master. And geometric math easily shows why.
meChANical Man.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
Oke I have thrown in some dimensions.
There is really no limit here. Anything can work it just depends on the mass ratio = big mass/small mass which controls the swing radius. So any kind of setup can work if the correct mass ratio is found of the setup by just giving it a go. I believe those dimensions should for a 10/1 ratio or maybe even higher.
Again feel free to make your own adjustments to the material you have to work with. I'm not a mechanical engineering so I lack the knowledge of which parts to use best but I can suggest better ideas.
But there is one important note to keep in mind. The setup of the small masses should be lighter than the masses themselves. Or else the final momentum will not all go to the small masses. That's why I recommend the use of hollow pipes or beams on the light setup. Both to reduce mass and to reduce the second moment of area which leads to less bending.
The heavy setup on the other hand has no such restriction.
There is really no limit here. Anything can work it just depends on the mass ratio = big mass/small mass which controls the swing radius. So any kind of setup can work if the correct mass ratio is found of the setup by just giving it a go. I believe those dimensions should for a 10/1 ratio or maybe even higher.
Again feel free to make your own adjustments to the material you have to work with. I'm not a mechanical engineering so I lack the knowledge of which parts to use best but I can suggest better ideas.
But there is one important note to keep in mind. The setup of the small masses should be lighter than the masses themselves. Or else the final momentum will not all go to the small masses. That's why I recommend the use of hollow pipes or beams on the light setup. Both to reduce mass and to reduce the second moment of area which leads to less bending.
The heavy setup on the other hand has no such restriction.
- Attachments
-
re: energy producing experiments
Here is something you might consider.
Eliminate the top rod altogether.
Place the bearing end of the rods that hold the small masses just above the large mass.
Place pins on the large lower rod that come up and secure the small mass rods. The larger lower rod is the rod that holds the larger masses. These pins could release the small mass rods after the system is set in rotation. These pins could be time released with a wind up trip, or they could be radio controlled. Any mass (of the wind up or radio control) that is sitting on the large rod needs to be known but not limited.
Place a locking system (from the table) that can lock the large rod when it becomes stopped. This would prevent the rotating small rods from returning their motion to the large rod.
So in operation: Lock the small mass rods against the large rod, at an internal angle.
Rotate the entire system.
Unlock the small rods that hold the small (yellow) masses. Let the small masses swing out.
When the lower large rod (holding the large masses) is stopped: lock the larger rod.
This would leave the small masses rotating on the ends of the small rods. They (the yellow masses) would now be independent of the large rod, the larger masses, and each other.
This arrangement would eliminate the mass of the upper rod. Maybe this mass is not a problem, but brainstorming never hurts.
The small masses would be moving in a smaller circle but their velocity and energy is the same.
Eliminate the top rod altogether.
Place the bearing end of the rods that hold the small masses just above the large mass.
Place pins on the large lower rod that come up and secure the small mass rods. The larger lower rod is the rod that holds the larger masses. These pins could release the small mass rods after the system is set in rotation. These pins could be time released with a wind up trip, or they could be radio controlled. Any mass (of the wind up or radio control) that is sitting on the large rod needs to be known but not limited.
Place a locking system (from the table) that can lock the large rod when it becomes stopped. This would prevent the rotating small rods from returning their motion to the large rod.
So in operation: Lock the small mass rods against the large rod, at an internal angle.
Rotate the entire system.
Unlock the small rods that hold the small (yellow) masses. Let the small masses swing out.
When the lower large rod (holding the large masses) is stopped: lock the larger rod.
This would leave the small masses rotating on the ends of the small rods. They (the yellow masses) would now be independent of the large rod, the larger masses, and each other.
This arrangement would eliminate the mass of the upper rod. Maybe this mass is not a problem, but brainstorming never hurts.
The small masses would be moving in a smaller circle but their velocity and energy is the same.
I got pretty busy lately with some personal things but I hope this thread hasn't died off AGAIN. I thought it was an important thing to have someone with access to machinery to do some scaled up experiments but it seems like there's little commitment left now.
Common guys can't we get our heads together to manifest something here. Everything is in place all we need is some extra helping hands willing to work for charity.
Common guys can't we get our heads together to manifest something here. Everything is in place all we need is some extra helping hands willing to work for charity.
re: energy producing experiments
Using a 15.25 inch bola with a mass of 526 g (two 263 gram spheres) I stopped the spinning of a full 10 foot length of 3 inch I.D. PVC pipe. With the added couplers the total mass was over 5.5 kilograms.
This is the largest percent (total / spheres, 10/1) mass I have stopped with the cylinder and spheres arrangement. And it is the largest total mass for a cylinder and spheres arrangement.
I have stopped larger percentages and comparable total masses with wheels.
You could jam the 10 foot pipe when it is stopped and the bola would wrap back around it, so radius is meaningless. Real velocity is what counts.
This is the largest percent (total / spheres, 10/1) mass I have stopped with the cylinder and spheres arrangement. And it is the largest total mass for a cylinder and spheres arrangement.
I have stopped larger percentages and comparable total masses with wheels.
You could jam the 10 foot pipe when it is stopped and the bola would wrap back around it, so radius is meaningless. Real velocity is what counts.
If the swinging radius is too small for some given mass ratio the big mass won't be stopped completely. You can't expect to stop a big mass with a small mass using a swing radius of 1mm for instance, it doesn't make sense.
Every mass ratio has a specific radius swing length for stopping the heavier mass completely. Experiments can lead to some sort of formula that can give you the exact radius for every mass ratio.
For example: r= k*MassRatio or r= k*MassRatio²
Where k is some sort of setup dependent constant. Experiments can lead to the correct formula. Initial angular velocity is not part of the formula though. Regardless of initial velocity the radius remains the same for a given setup. I assume you already knew that.
As I said earlier the important thing right now is a stable setup with some dynamic parameters where final speed can be measured easily.
Every mass ratio has a specific radius swing length for stopping the heavier mass completely. Experiments can lead to some sort of formula that can give you the exact radius for every mass ratio.
For example: r= k*MassRatio or r= k*MassRatio²
Where k is some sort of setup dependent constant. Experiments can lead to the correct formula. Initial angular velocity is not part of the formula though. Regardless of initial velocity the radius remains the same for a given setup. I assume you already knew that.
As I said earlier the important thing right now is a stable setup with some dynamic parameters where final speed can be measured easily.
re: energy producing experiments
The “radius is meaningless� statement was meant for those that are enamored with angular momentum conservation.
Yes; a longer bola will stop more mass and there is undoubtedly a relationship between length and mass stopped. A more massive bola will stop more mass as well.
These larger masses are about 5 times what was done with cylinder and spheres before, but my guesses were very accurate. I calculated we would be up over 10 to 1, and we were.
Actually: final velocity can be acquired from strobe light photographs, and initial velocity from tachometers. The question is; will anyone repeat the experiments.
Yes; a longer bola will stop more mass and there is undoubtedly a relationship between length and mass stopped. A more massive bola will stop more mass as well.
These larger masses are about 5 times what was done with cylinder and spheres before, but my guesses were very accurate. I calculated we would be up over 10 to 1, and we were.
Actually: final velocity can be acquired from strobe light photographs, and initial velocity from tachometers. The question is; will anyone repeat the experiments.
re: energy producing experiments
Oh: and it should be mentioned that it is the linear Newtonian momentum that is stopped not just the mass. If I were to switch the 10 foot 4.433 kilogram 3 inch I.D. PVC pipe with a 4 inch I.D. PVC pipe I would only have to use (about 3.25 in. / 4.25 in.) a 3.390 kilogram pipe. 3.25 * 4.433 = 4.25 * 3.390. I have done this experiment and it worked; it is linear Newtonian momentum that is stopped not something else. A given spheres mass with a given tether length stops a precise amount of linear Newtonian momentum.
Re: re: energy producing experiments
I got tired of waiting, so I decided to look for a lath/milling job. To gain experience in machining and use their equipment to build my own projects.pequaide wrote: The question is; will anyone repeat the experiments.
re: energy producing experiments
Broli,
There are more than one member on this forum with lathe and milling capabilities as I have pointed out in the past.
I have offered to be of assistance on anything I consider either questionable or leave viable doubt. I do not see anything here worth building, and I have asked before for an explanation of how this design is supposed to be self-sustaining without an answer.
You know for a fact that you have/had contact with two other energy related forum members who have the resources and skills. I do not see them coming forth either.
Ralph
There are more than one member on this forum with lathe and milling capabilities as I have pointed out in the past.
I have offered to be of assistance on anything I consider either questionable or leave viable doubt. I do not see anything here worth building, and I have asked before for an explanation of how this design is supposed to be self-sustaining without an answer.
You know for a fact that you have/had contact with two other energy related forum members who have the resources and skills. I do not see them coming forth either.
Ralph
re: energy producing experiments
(deleted)
Last edited by Omnibus on Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
re: energy producing experiments
Ralph,
On the other hand the friction for any given construction is certainly of a variable value depending on the properties of the materials used, the form of the slots, ramp etc. Proper engineering can bring down the overall force of friction to values below the inevitable persistent, characteristic excess torque due to the above-mentioned axle-mass center discrepancy.
Independently, it was shown also that the overall torque characteristic for the discussed design is of persistent negative value for any position of the wheel. Proper engineering can optimize the value of said overall torque which upon successful choice of materials (to decrease friction), construction of slots, ramp etc. can lead to the wheel turning continuously in a self-sustaining manner.
Therefore, the problem of having a self-sustaining device is of purely engineering character.
I have given an explanation already as to why this design is supposed to be self-sustaining. In this design the center of mass is always sideways to the axis of rotation at any position of the wheel. This means that the lever balance rule is persistently violated at any position of the wheel. Any given construction has a strictly set, non-variable, characteristic above-described persistent discrepancy between the mass center and the axis of rotation.I have asked before for an explanation of how this design is supposed to be self-sustaining without an answer.
On the other hand the friction for any given construction is certainly of a variable value depending on the properties of the materials used, the form of the slots, ramp etc. Proper engineering can bring down the overall force of friction to values below the inevitable persistent, characteristic excess torque due to the above-mentioned axle-mass center discrepancy.
Independently, it was shown also that the overall torque characteristic for the discussed design is of persistent negative value for any position of the wheel. Proper engineering can optimize the value of said overall torque which upon successful choice of materials (to decrease friction), construction of slots, ramp etc. can lead to the wheel turning continuously in a self-sustaining manner.
Therefore, the problem of having a self-sustaining device is of purely engineering character.
re: energy producing experiments
You have been shown how to make it self-sustaining.
So making energy in the lab does not interest you. So what? What does this prove; other than the obvious. The spheres don’t slow down because you are not interested. You are telling me something about yourself not about the experiment. The experiments work, even though you don’t.
So making energy in the lab does not interest you. So what? What does this prove; other than the obvious. The spheres don’t slow down because you are not interested. You are telling me something about yourself not about the experiment. The experiments work, even though you don’t.
re: energy producing experiments
On the contrary, I'm telling you that the experiment, if properly engineered, must inevitably work as a self-sustaining device.You are telling me something about yourself not about the experiment.
Ralph a self sustaining design has already been discussed but I guess that's beyond your building abilities. I've learned one thing from this whole free energy research "community" thing. You are always on your own up until you show a (fake) video then everybody becomes your friend. People are not willing to help you with a build of a well thought idea, they wait until they can REPLICATE something without understanding it at all.
So that's why I said "screw everybody, I'm going to do it myself" and started looking for the job.
So that's why I said "screw everybody, I'm going to do it myself" and started looking for the job.