CENTRIFUGAL FORCE CYCLIC ENERGY GENERATOR

[jim_mich]

CENTRIFUGAL FORCE CYCLIC ENERGY GENERATOR

Would it work?

Patent application 20040130227 filed Jan. 2, 2003

Charles F. Ricker
Spring Creek, Nevada, USA

Charles F. Ricker
P.O. Box 1691
Elko, NV 89803

This application has very poor quality pictures. (Pictures are gray shades while patents use black and white, which causes loss of resolution.) The description is very detailed giving dimensions of the parts.

His idea uses 4 weights, each weighing 4 pounds. They are mounted on radial rods and slide 9 inches from maybe 3 inch radius to maybe 12 inch radius. Centrifugal force of the spinning weights pulls cable around some pulleys and then squeezes some very strong springs.

A motor/generator spins the weights up to speed compressing the springs, which then latch into place. The motor/generator switches to generator mode and recovers much of the spin energy. The energy in the compressed springs is then used to drive a generator.

He claims "net energy output exceeding 6,000%"

I find this application interesting. I don't have the time right now to analyze it, but thought others might want to look at it.

My gut feeling is that he errors in assuming how long it would take to spin up to speed. Does he consider the variable tension as the springs compress and uncompress? Does he consider the variable centrifugal forces as the weights change radii?

-------------------

Search for patent application 20040130227 at...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm

Code: Select all

[0070] This particular embodiment of the generator creates excess usable energy from centrifugal force in the following fashion: 

[0071] 1) When the core of the machine is momentarily rotated by a 1 HP, 1700 RPM Electric Main Drive Motor 108 for about 1 second, centrifugal force equal to more than 8,170 kg (18,000 pounds) pulls four, 1.82 kg (4 pound) Weights 116 away from the center of rotation (FIG. 4). Wire Cables 117 attached between Weights 116 and Sliding Plate 130 via Pulleys 114 compress Main Springs 126 approximately 22.86 cm (9"), storing over 8,170 kg (18,000 pounds) of force. The locking mechanisms hold Main Springs 126 in the compressed position. 

[0072] 2) Most of the kinetic energy now stored in the spinning machine is extracted by using Electric Main Drive Motor 108 as a generator, for a net energy input of only about 0.2 horsepower. 

[0073] 3) After the machine comes to a complete stop, one option of spring energy to electricity conversion is to use a very small Hydraulic Pump 163 to fill a 7.62 cm (3") diameter Hydraulic Cylinder 160 with oil (FIG. 5), forcing Push Rod Trigger 152 to trip the locking mechanisms, transferring the energy stored in Main Springs 126 into hydraulic pressure that is used to rotate a Hydraulic Motor 164 connected to a 5 HP Electrical Generator 172 (FIG. 6). The energy released from Main Springs 126 in this particular embodiment within 2.5 seconds is equal to approximately 9,511.2 joules (84,544 inch pounds), or 3,804.525 joules (33,818 inch pounds) per second, or about 5.1 horsepower for 2.5 seconds, for a net energy output exceeding 6,000%. 

[0074] 4) After all the energy stored in Main Springs 126 has been converted into electricity, the cycle of actions is automatically repeated utilizing conventional mechanical or computerized timing controls (not shown). 

[jtolan]

Wow, IT WORKS!!!!

Here's my analysis:

Assuming a constant angular rotation and a weight which slides from R1 to R2, (makes the calculations easyer)

Kinetic energy = 1/2 m V^2, where 'V' is the velocity of a mass 'm'
Velocity = w * R, where 'w' is the angular velocity, in a rotational system.

So the extra energy we have to put in the rotational mechanism to maintain the constant rotation , as the mass slides out, is:

Ke = 1/2 * m * w^2 (R2^2 - R1^2), where 'w' is the angular velocity.

This is the energy input to the weight 'm' as it slides from R1 to R2, IN ORDER TO KEEP THE SAME ANGULAR VELOCITY.

This energy is RECOVERABLE, it does not waste!

Now, what energy did we input into the spring?

Well, we need to integrate the force x distance, since the force changes with radius change.

force = m * a = m * w^2 * R

energy = force x distance = m * w^2 * R * dR

therefore, work done on springs is found by integration:

Us = int( (m * w^2 * R) from R1 to R2, = 1/2 * m * w^2 * (R2^2 - R1^2);

so we see, the energy we put in the spring is extra and happens to be the same amount as the extra kinetic energy.

Its like the energy multiplied, we get TWICE the energy INVESTED, 100% return on investment!!! Yepeeeeeeeee!!!

(by the way, the trick is to lock the spring as the wheel is decelerated or we 'eat' back up the energy. It's very interesting how the energy gets created. Artificial 'gravity' gets created by the spin, and the weight "drops down" in this field giving energy, but we still have the energy that created the field!! Very nice!

By the way, a while back in school when I took fluid mechanics I remember that I worked out the pressure in a rotational pipe filled with water and ejecting water out the high pressure water nozzle at the end so as to act like a rocket that gave the pipe extra rotational force. The water got sucked in the pipe in the center.

That analysis also revealed extra energy. (It wasn't my concept, I think it belongs to Victor Schuberger, or whatever his name is) I kind of regret that it never crossed my mind to do an analysis with a spring. Very practical!

[jtolan]

guys, this could also be the secret of Besslers wheel. A swinging weight, like as in a pendulum, can pull a string and compress a spring.

thanks for posting jim. My wheels are turning now lol

[graham]

What an interesting concept, but what about the energy required from the motor to overcome the inertia of accelerating the weights up to speed.
Needs to be thought about.Thanks Jim.

Graham

[jtolan]

oh definitely graham, that's energy that's also recoverable.

The energies go like this (for a cycle where the radius change happens at constant angular velocity, other cycles are possible)

starting energy to get up to speed: U1
extra energy to maintain speed as mass slides: U2
energy CREATED and stored in spring: U3

U1, U2 is the input energy and its recoverable 100 % (assuming frictionless operation)

U3 is extra energy created and is 100 recoverable (must stop the wheel first else the energy is 'taken back' if the wheel is decelerated and the spring is allowed to expand back up.)

[jtolan]

Jim, you might have given us the wrong patent number, nothing comes up on that website with that number

[graham]

Thanks jtolan I understand what you are telling me ,of course you have stored energy like a flywheel.
It gets even more interesting. I predict that this will turn out to be a LONG thread :-)

Graham

[jim_mich]

Jim, you might have given us the wrong patent number, nothing comes up on that website with that number

opps, wrong link! Try this, enter 20040130227 to search at...
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html

Also note that the motor/generator must spin up to speed then spin down to stop each cycle. There will be electrical losses when acting as a motor and and again as a generator.

Experience tell me it take a LOT of energy to spin a large (24 inch) diameter object up to speed. I doubt very much that it can be done in the 1 second that he states. That would take a really exceptional motor.



PS. Remember this is only a patent application. It is not an issued patent!

[jtolan]

I simulated a sliding pendulum in WM2D (weight changes radius as it swings and stores the energy in a spring) I wanted to see how much energy I had in the spring and the kinetic energy of the weight. The energy input was from a torque and I could get the energy input by T * angle

I found out that the energies are equal , hence conservation of energy.

BUT, I DON'T BELIVE IT

Why, because the forces are decoupled. The sliding force has nothing to do with the torque, but only with the angular velocity. I also looked at my Statics & Dynamics engineering book I used back in school, and what do you know, I never found an example like what I simulated (and there are 20 or more examples per section) In addition, when the problems get more complex, they start using conservation of energy formations to find the kinematics (motion)

I think there is something here folks. We got to build this thing. Just a horizontal platform that can rotate with a spring and sliding grove for a weight. Then a calibrated amount of energy needs to be input into the system and the velocity of the weight and compression of the spring measured.

Energy of weight is 1/2 m * V^2
Energy in spring is 1/2 K s^2 (assuming linear spring, F=k*s)

In the picture attached, the bar starts out from horizontal and rotates counter clockwise. The spring has a length of 0.5 at rest. The torque applied is 10 N*m
When I do an energy balance I get 12.45 J = 12.45 J , so conservation of energy. But like I said, I don't belive it. The software is not capturing reality. Here's why, The torque is manifested in a force on the sliding weight that is at 90 degrees to its sliding path (the long rectangle has negligible mass, the ball has 1 Kg). SO NO COMPONENT OF THE FORCE ACTS TO COMPRESS THE SPRING!!! The compression of the spring is a secondary phenomenon due to the angular velocity. So there you have it.

[Jonathan]

The compression of the spring does not occur because the weight is exerting a magical force whose source is angular velocity, it is compressed because the weight tries not the move and the rod (read: far end of the spring) moves relative to it. Therefore the energy in the spring comes from the rotation of the rod, and the simulation is correct. Here is a less vague proof.
I hope this makes sense, I'm going off jtolan's attachment because I couldn't open the patent app. pictures.

[Vic Hays]

I simulated a sliding pendulum in WM2D (weight changes radius as it swings and stores the energy in a spring) I wanted to see how much energy I had in the spring and the kinetic energy of the weight. The energy input was from a torque and I could get the energy input by T * angle

I found out that the energies are equal , hence conservation of energy.

BUT, I DON'T BELIVE IT

I believe it probably is conserved. Some of the angular velocity is siphoned off to compress the spring.

[grim]

A spring is only a mechanical capacitor. It comes close to returning the energy stored in it by compression or expansion or torsion, depending on the type, minus the heat generated during its distortion.

[ken_behrendt]

Fortunately, I had a TIFF image file viewer program or I would not have been able to view the inventor's patent APPLICATION illustrations.

The first line of his Abstract would, of course, immediately catch the attention of the Patent Office examiners:

A perpetual motion machine of the first kind utilizing centrifugal force as the energy generator and accumulator

To me it just looks like another variation of a flywheel kinetic energy storage system. None of the other ones I've seen ever amplified any of the energy temporarily stored in them and I doubt if this one would either. In most cases, these systems must be VERY carefully designed to return most of the energy they are reved up with.

To get this Patent granted with a claim of perpetual motion will require the inventor to have a WORKING model that he will have to submit for testing by an authoritative body such as the Bureau of Standards.

Of course, IF it did work, then it would be a big discovery...not only for the power generation industry, but also in physics...

ken

[graham]

One way to find out if you have FREE energy stored in the springs would
be to try the following.

First you would need to run this spring and weight flywheel up to speed with the weights being allowed to move to their outer position and in doing so compress the springs. The time taken to do this with the motor doing all the work should be noted.
Then do it again with the weights already latched with springs compressed.

If it takes the same time in both instances then you have got those springs with stored energy at no cost. However if it takes more time to get the thing up to speed when you allow the weights to be thrown out to compress the springs then you have a problem

It's an interesting idea but I would imagine the control systems could be rather tricky.

Graham

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Jtolan,

Its like the energy multiplied, we get TWICE the energy INVESTED, 100% return on investment!!! Yepeeeeeeeee!!!

You are correct, this device and Bessler use the same technic. One with centrifugal force, the other with gravity force.

It is not your fault that you can not handle it with WM2D, software is as good as the developer of the program. WM2D doesn't take this possibility into account, it is based on 'known' rules.

Only an example which WM2D can not handle is a suddenly impact on a rotating mass.

the future has begun

Georg