Fletcher wrote:Mr V .. I suggest you run a third check comparison simulation scenario. The non radial shift v 2.
In this one when it gets to 3 o'cl let it remain as a point mass (non forced rotation) until 12 o'cl. And check against the other two versions for residual KE's etc. What trends are there here ?
I was watching the rpms of both comparison sims, the non radial shift and then the radial shift activated. I noted the rpms at 9 o'cl, 6 o'cl, and 9 o'cl. And visually compared them. When they are unlocked they act like point masses. When locked they are forced to rotate as well as follow the curved path. This we can all see.
It seems that when unlocked (to act like a point mass) the rpm instantly doubles, and when locked again the rpm instantly halves.
Should that phase transition be effectively instant ? Perhaps the motor is distorting things ?
Have you read the diagram on page 31? All this is covered! Here's the points you're missing:
• You have it back-to-front; when the orbiting rotors are
locked - oriented radially with one mass 'out', the other nestled in the center, orbital MoI is simply a function of those two outer masses. The two inner ones are effectively eliminated from the equation, since they're left free to rotate about their own axes, and at dead-center have an orbital radius - and thus orbital MoI contribution - of zero. This renders an effective violation of mass constancy, as you'll see..
MoI=mr² so calculate 2 * ½ kg * 4 m radius squared. That's our base MoI.
When the masses are drawn into their axial centers however, relative to the orbital plane we now have twice as much mass, at half the radius.
So now we calculate 4 * ½ kg * 2 m², and that's our
second MoI - if you got them sums right, you're now looking at a
lower value.
However there's
another key issue you're missing -
we do not need the radial translation to perform this MoI switchover!
It happens automatically the moment conventional torque's applied to the orbiting axes!
So it is the
net orbiting apparatus - both ½ kg masses on each rotor, and the rotor masses themselves - that converge to become effective point masses at the motor axes, the instant torque's applied to them!
So look closely at the sims again, from p.31 onwards - note the MoI switchdown occurs the instant the motors activate, and then switches
back up the instant they lock again!
Furthermore, whilst the orbiting rotors are being torqued against the central rotor, the actual mass radii can be changed to
anything -
anything whatsoever - and the orbital MoI
will not budge from that lower value!
The actual mass locations could be out beyond the orbit of Neptune - it's utterly irrelevant to the
orbital MoI, which is always just two half-kilogram lumps and a carbon-fiber disc, at 2 meters radius, so long as they're counter-rotating relative to the central rotor (even tho they're not rotating at all in reality).
So, whilst torquing the rotors and so pegging the MoI at '8', we can physically retract the masses into their axial centers, and so apply a
static MoI of '8' as a function of the actual mass radii!
Bashically, we're riding the coattails of a
dynamic MoI change - caused by torquing the orbiting axes against the central axis, which furthermore
ceases their real rotation, allowing us to change the
static MoI without having to perform any work against axial CF force.
We still have to perform work against orbital CF force, but it's performing equal opposite CF work back out at us, hence a zero sum cycle.
That took 30 mins to type out again so if i'm asked to repeat myself much more i'm just gonna have to start referring back to past posts.. It all starts p.31. Study the MoI diagram, check those MoI plots, and there you can see where the KE gain's coming from.
In this one when it gets to 3 o'cl let it remain as a point mass (non forced rotation) until 12 o'cl. And check against the other two versions for residual KE's etc. What trends are there here ?
Happy to try anything but if you'd only read the brief you'd already realise that with only one orbiting rotor mounted, the MoI is locked to a value of '4' so long as it's rotating relative to the central one, so instead of the gain condition ceasing at the 3' o' clock mark, we'll still be OU upon return to TDC. Here it is anyway:
@ 32765 frames by 2.02 secs = 16235.148514851485148514851485149 Hz w/ 100 integration steps / frame:
Motor Torque * Angle = 6.233336 J
So, during this period we could change the
static MoI - as an actual function of the masses' 'locked' orbital radii - to absolutely anything whatsoever, from a value of '4' up to
infinity kg-m².. but so long as the
relative rotation persists (notwithstanding that their true rotation obviously ceases), the orbital MoI is stuck at a rock-steady value of '4'.
Whatever the actual mass radius when the axial rotation locks, determines whatever the new MoI - and thus rot KE - the system lands on.
So in that run we began with 4 J, then spent another 6 J, making a total of 27 J. :|
None of this is news or progress, mate.. Sorry if things are moving fast but it's only a page or two of catch-up so far, the MoI diagram on p. 31 is the biggest head-start i can offer..
