CF Equalizer

[Jonathan]

I recently came up with this device, it moves weights in and out in such a way that their CM moves, but there is no work done by/against CF. This would allow a successful overbalancing wheel to be unaffected by CF. I wasn't sure any of you would care, but I guess I'll see.
Attached is an animation of its behavior, and a drawing depicting the relevant measurements. The rotational inertia of the device about the pivot p (which has been disabled by an adjacent anchor for the sake of the animation) is mk², if the weights are points or are attached via pin-slots. If attached with keyed-slots, then you have to take into account the shape of the weights, but it is constant then too. The animation is actuated by a piston, but you can make it work however, that was just convenient.

[ken_behrendt]

Jonathan...

You have a very interesting mechanism there. Just looking at the animation immediately makes me think of the "shadow-boxers" referred to in Bessler's Apologia Poetica!

However, you say that the weights move so that their CM (which I assume is the same as CG) moves, but, if the weights are of equal mass, then would their CM not remain at a point in space between them? Again, I'm assuming that the two smaller circles are low mass objects to which to connect the massless rods that move the weights.

ken

[Jonathan]

Your assumption is correct, all but the big circles are supposed to be massless. The CM does move because the weights don't move equal amounts. When they are on top of each other, the CM is at k/√(2), and when one is on the pivot, the CM is at k/2.

[rlortie]

Looks like next years model of Claudios machine is already in the research lab.

Ralph

[ovyyus]

Great mech Jonathan.

[Jonathan]

Thanks Bill, I would have posted it sooner if I knew you'd think that!
Ralph, I don't know what you mean. But I don't appreciate your tying my work to someone else's, Claudio's device doesn't work.
This mechanism was an offshoot of my own failed attempt at PM. The idea was to either change the inertia of a rotating device while there being no work by/against CF, or to keep the inertia constant while work is done by CF. I tried the former, and had trouble finding a mechanism that would change its IMA in the appropriate way. I tried the latter, succeeded easily in keeping the inertia constant, and then realized that the same mech had exactly the IMA I'd been looking for, thereby proving that either version is impossible: the inertia is constant only if there is no work done by/against CF. (Which, had I been more skeptical, I would have assumed from the outset and saved myself a lot of time. The results conform to the proof I posted some time ago.)

[rlortie]

Jonathan,

Ralph, I don't know what you mean. But I don't appreciate your tying my work to someone else's, Claudio's device doesn't work.

This statement was meant to be a little humor in jest, due to the resemblance of all the reference lines.

I respect you and your input and owe you much gratitude for the assistance you have gave me on and off this forum. Of all the members on this board you are one of a few that I would not intentionally wish to offend. If I have done so, I truly apologize.

Ralph

[Jonathan]

Its no problem. I'm on a hair trigger about it because Georg has and intermittantly continues to do that, and it drives me crazy!

[Techstuf]

Could be worse, Jonathan. If Georg had been a big Star Wars fan....then you'd be hearing:

Begun, the future has.



Yours,


Yoda