Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Gravity motor concept design  (Read 26473 times)

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #15 on: January 08, 2011, 03:34:48 PM »
@solardark,

So, why should anybody else do it and not do it yourself? This is a well-known idea and therefore in this case it is not the idea but the making of the device that matters. We all know that someone has to make it and we don't need to be told once again what we already know.
Logged

MrMag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #16 on: January 08, 2011, 04:51:24 PM »
Quote from: Omnibus on January 08, 2011, 03:34:48 PM
@solardark,

So, why should anybody else do it and not do it yourself? This is a well-known idea and therefore in this case it is not the idea but the making of the device that matters. We all know that someone has to make it and we don't need to be told once again what we already know.

Spam
Logged

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #17 on: January 08, 2011, 05:30:39 PM »
I will tell you why it cannot work!
This is a very good illusion but it is easy to see the problem. The pressure angle of the rotating spokes as it attempts to raise the weight up the straight wall looks to be about 30 degrees. This means that at the point where the weight is first trying to ride up the straight wall only about 50% of the force us upward and 50% into the wall.
This means without any friction, the weight at this point appears to weight twice as much as the other weights. The reason is at this point for the same rotation of the spokes, the weight will raise twice as fast, so to the center hub point it appears twice as heavy. This tapers off as it reaches the center of the straight wall (90 deg point) then again increases as it reaches the top.

Simple trig calculations will easily show this.
Still looks convincing though!
Logged

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #18 on: January 08, 2011, 05:36:08 PM »
Logged

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #19 on: January 08, 2011, 06:01:17 PM »
Quote from: lumen on January 08, 2011, 05:30:39 PM
I will tell you why it cannot work!
This is a very good illusion but it is easy to see the problem. The pressure angle of the rotating spokes as it attempts to raise the weight up the straight wall looks to be about 30 degrees. This means that at the point where the weight is first trying to ride up the straight wall only about 50% of the force us upward and 50% into the wall.
This means without any friction, the weight at this point appears to weight twice as much as the other weights. The reason is at this point for the same rotation of the spokes, the weight will raise twice as fast, so to the center hub point it appears twice as heavy. This tapers off as it reaches the center of the straight wall (90 deg point) then again increases as it reaches the top.

Simple trig calculations will easily show this.
Still looks convincing though!

This is the known "scissors" problem we've been discussing in the Sjack Abeling thread. You have to show it isn't because of friction. Analyze it in absence of friction.
Logged

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #20 on: January 08, 2011, 06:11:34 PM »
Quote from: Omnibus on January 08, 2011, 06:01:17 PM
This is the known "scissors" problem we've been discussing in the Sjack Abeling thread. You have to show it isn't because of friction. Analyze it in absence of friction.

I thought I stated " without any friction" ?
Yes, scissor action is a good description.
Logged

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2011, 06:52:26 PM »
Quote from: lumen on January 08, 2011, 06:11:34 PM
I thought I stated " without any friction" ?
Yes, scissor action is a good description.

i know you stated it but you didn't quite do the analysis. @Cherryman's sim indicates otherwise.
Logged

brian334

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 633
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2011, 11:50:57 PM »
How do you make round  magnets? How easy do the magnets roll?
Logged

solardark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2011, 02:28:25 AM »
magnets roll easy. take out the disk-like magnet in a burnt speaker, place it on the side of a fridge and let go. you should have bit of the stuff all over the floor.
Logged

solardark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #24 on: January 09, 2011, 04:33:58 PM »
@omnibus... ok you and mrmag have a thing going on there (spam ;D). anyways i can't cos i don't have much workshop experience.if i tried i'd probably mess it up with all the imperfections that are bound to be in my work. if everybody's willing to wait maybe 2 or 3 years i'm sure i could build a unit by then but... do we have to?

@lumen... goood one. the pressure angle in the drawing is actually 45 degrees (pic 6). i had to exaggerate the drawing so it's clear to everyone what's happening.

 Had reservations about that too but i figured if the unit was moving real slow it wouldn't matter much. plus, that angle can be reduced while still getting a torque difference in the system. if we bring it down to 26 degrees we have [T=0.1*M*R] to play with. the present config. gives [T=0.293*M*R]

i do have to read more about the scissor problem issue so i have a better idea of what you're saying. i'm guessing there are are limits beyond which the scissor effect becomes irrelevant. do you know those limits?
Logged

solardark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2011, 04:45:17 PM »
could someone please post a link to the scissor effect discussion on abeling's thread. the search i did returned something about patents instead.
Logged

spinn_MP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2011, 08:44:30 PM »
Quote from: solardark on January 09, 2011, 04:45:17 PM
could someone please post a link to the scissor effect discussion on abeling's thread. the search i did returned something about patents instead.
Just search for the "Sjack Abeling" thread. It's quite informative...
You may find some unpleasant information about the Omnibot's science, though...

Entering at your own risk...
« Last Edit: January 09, 2011, 09:45:25 PM by spinn_MP »
Logged

Low-Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2011, 11:01:21 PM »
Quote from: solardark on January 06, 2011, 01:09:53 PM
hi all. I have a concept design that I have been trying to fault for almost a year now. the system seems capable of producing a consistent unidirectional torque. I was hoping someone here may be interested in investigating the design. i have attached pictures of the system showing the way the end product would look. feel free to input figures in the drawing as you see fit.

note: the flat side of the supports is the chord the of inner circle. the sector angle of that chord is 90 degrees at the center. pic 6 shows that clearly. Also a four armed system (pic 6) would result in a minimum torque value of  zero at the position shown. the six arm system keeps torque consistently above zero.

I really hope someone with good workshop experience can try this out and let us all know if it's workable.

sola oladosu
dishour@yahoo.com
Just that the weights have to return to the same hight for each revolutions, says this wheel cannot produce excess energy. Consider the time it takes for each wheight to go from top to the bottom versus the time it takes for them to go from the bottom to the top. It will take the very same time. When the hight is the same as well, there should be no reason why this wheel work.

When the "overbalanced" part goes down, the mass in the opposite side must accelerate and deaccelerate in order to follow the different path on its way up. This acceleration of the mass will compensate for the "overbalanced" side and equalize the time it takes for each masses to reach the bottom and the top respectively - thus the energy given and taken from each side will stay the same.

Vidar
Logged

AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2011, 05:08:46 PM »
solardark

Welcome to the forum, and thanks for posting. The design you have shown has several problems like catch corners, magnetic drag (which you need to address in the design), only 1 arm free moving per turn and 2 arms under extra friction. Let me clarify the free mover is 1 but for a short time you have two but only one for a full rotations but switching to make that one alone, the push arrow is the direction you magnet weight has to push. Every turn you have 12 corner catches. It only took me a glance to see the problems. Understanding what you have to beat is what you need to learn. Good luck

Alan
Logged

solardark

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Gravity motor concept design
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2011, 06:20:18 PM »
forget the catch thingi.we can solve that by using a larger radius at the corners.pls elaborate on the push issue instead
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »