Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: woopy on January 16, 2018, 10:39:01 PM

Title: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 16, 2018, 10:39:01 PM
Hi all

 I come back to this old topic, because i stumbled upon a very interesting patent from M. Harvey Fiala.

Of course i could not prevent me to replicate one of the simpliest device of the patent

https://youtu.be/AGKXnp1twUk

If some of you are interested for a discussion

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 17, 2018, 03:49:22 AM
Excellent work!!


Precession to linear force transfer
This will work as a space engine
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: TinselKoala on January 17, 2018, 05:48:52 AM
Excellent work!!


Precession to linear force transfer
This will work as a space engine

No, it won't. I do agree that Woopy has done excellent work with his build replication, as always, but his testing is flawed. Woopy's device is moving due to stick-slip friction and is pushing against the substrate. This can be demonstrated in the following way:

Get a sheet of plate glass. (Plate glass, in contrast to ordinary window glass, is uniformly smooth and dimensionally stable.) Put down some uniform spheres, like good marbles or ball-bearing balls, onto the black rangetop surface, and insure that the surface is precisely level. Put the plate glass down onto the balls, so that it is free to move in whatever direction it wants to move. Then put the apparatus under test onto the plate glass and turn it on. You will observe that the apparatus moves in one direction and the glass plate moves in the opposite direction, proving that the apparatus is _pushing_ on the substrate in order to move. It won't go anywhere in free space.

You can see even in Woopy's demo that the thing hardly moves, and even when it does move it takes one smaller step back for every larger step forward. The larger forward steps happen due to the slight misalignment of the ball-bearing "feet" of the apparatus, which then results in the stick-slip friction coupling the apparatus weight-shifts to the substrate. Newton rests peacefully in his grave.

These things have been tested properly many times before in very sophisticated laboratories. Even air tables or linear air tracks can be fooled by uneven, moving weight distributions which cause differential thrusts from the air blast suspension itself.

Now... as to precession.... ask Chet about me and precession.  Laithwaite was wrong, as he finally admitted before he died.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Magluvin on January 17, 2018, 07:59:15 AM
Back in middle school we had a guy come in to do demos of gyros. He sat on a bar stool that spins holding a spinning wheel that had handles on each side of he shaft and held it out in front of him. When he tilted it, it turned him around on the stool one way, and tilted it the other way it reversed his spin.

As for Smokys vision, say we have 4 of the gyros on a platform with each at the 4 corners. Now we use synchronized servos to tilt all 4 gyros say inward or outward simultaneously. Would it provide lift?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldqUV-DXiUg

Mags
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: ramset on January 17, 2018, 10:13:46 AM
Yes
a wonderful build and demonstration , yes the marbles or ball bearings or ?

apparently the wheels need to be "perfectly" aligned or this "sticktion" assists in movement [and confuses ]
even floating on water or on air tables has issues .[All mentioned already]

HOWEVER

antigravity tickles "everyone's " mind reading here ,

Gyro's and antigravity "effects".....

that itch you just can't  scratch .

I suspect there will be a lot more scratching here....or attempts at antigravity effects.



Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 17, 2018, 03:37:15 PM
I all

Thank's for compliments on my replication. But it should certainly be redone and more precisely, because this thing deserves a high craftmanship.

to TK

Yes i aggree that a test on the marbles should be done, but as me, you know that, to be convincing (good or bad) in this case, the DUT should be a (at minima) twin system running perfectly in opposition and also in perfect synchronisation to avoid the latteral parasite mouvement due to the  spinning asymetric mass. And frankly i am not sure to be able to realise such a device. But perhaps somebody else could try.

As you have correctly noticed, the device make a slight mouvement backwards and almost double the mouvement forwards. M. Fiala explain this in the patent. But i understand that it is a long and boring time to read the 33 pages of description of the patent.

I am not a seller of space propulsion devices, i am simply fascinated by this device, which can surprisingly also coast slightly.

Just for fun, as you seem to know very well the subject, would you be so kind to explain in simple words, how the old M. Laithwaite manage to lift the big wheel, and seems to withstand the centrifugal force so easily as per this video.
 
https://youtu.be/JRPC7a_AcQo

And for info i did the big wheel experiment with a lighter cart wheel (about 4 kg) spun with a grinder, and i have really the impression that it goes from itself around my head. But perhaps it is only impression, but what a great impression. Perhaps i have an addiction to be fooled.

Thank's

To Chet

I have not quite undestood what TK wanted to speak about precession. Can you eventually explain his words

Thank's

Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: ramset on January 17, 2018, 05:46:09 PM
Woopy
Honestly?
I'm confused

when I take the big 1hp hand held grinder  with the 14 inch diamond blade [for cutting concrete]
and run the blade up to 2-3000 RPM and move WITH precession,  I can relax certain muscles ...it feels lighter ,

and that is not a heavy blade [the saw is very heavy tho]

I did this "with precession movement" all the time in demolition business with similar very heavy gas-powered unit with Big wood cutting 12 - 14 inch carbide blades
it was a method to Move and not have to carry the full weight of the saw when working on ladders and repositioning
for another cut.[sort of cheating]

rev the saw and move with precession
----------------------------------------------------

if you put a scale under me on the ladder or Mag's barstool when the teacher spins ..or if you stand on a scale when "you" spin

no weight loss....try it.

but ...why did I use this "with precession movement " to rest my muscles when working up on the ladder [to move the very heavy saw to another Cut ??

makes no sense ....

and just Like you {and Tinsel too } it hurts the head....

and all agree it needs more looking and measuring and ...

?

perhaps a better method to measure this localized apparent weightless which cannot be seen on a scale ??

IMO there is something there which all here  agree... needs more investigation.

Confused but grateful [for you and your work]

Chet






Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Paul-R on January 17, 2018, 06:02:24 PM
For me, the interesting variant was a square piece of heavy ply with four electric motors at the edge of each side with shafts facing out.

Each motor had a heavy flywheel, and they rotated in the same direction, facing north, south east and west. When started up, the platform became heavier or lighter.

If heavier, it would be turned upside down, so that on rotating, the device should generate more lift than its weight, i.e. float. But I cannot find either the photographs or description.

This isn't the page but close. Look down the page to the image of the blue base, green motor/flywheels and  red arrows pointing upwards.
https://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SmartSPIN_X2/SmartSPIN_X2.htm
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 17, 2018, 06:51:21 PM
I Chet

very informative the fact that your big grinder seems lighter in precession. And that you use this caractéristic to relax your muscles.

I found this video, where"veritasium" replicate the Laithwaite experiment standing on a scale, which shows no weight loss.
Then it tries some explanations but i am not convinced at all.
At 2.50 he try to turn backwards with the big wheel spinning and he can simply not lift the wheel to face the caméra.
Perhaps he should have done this also on the scale to see if there is a weight gain when you go counter precession ?
https://youtu.be/tLMpdBjA2SU

Hi Paul R
Thank's for input

laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: centraflow on January 17, 2018, 07:49:17 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLMpdBjA2SU


Better video


Regards


Mike 8)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: TinselKoala on January 18, 2018, 06:21:39 AM
The "weight loss" phenomenon is a special case of forced precession.  There is no weight loss, as any number of scale experiments have proved.

As a Chinese fortune cookie once told me: "Every action has a counter action. Just if you can see it or not."

For your amusement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a81hS_iCi4E





Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: MagnaProp on January 18, 2018, 08:28:31 AM
Very good replication woopy. You mention Laithwaite who also has a patent for a gyroscopic propulsion device. He mentions at the end of his "Heretic" video that he mathematically proved that his gyroscopic propulsion device does actually works. Unfortunately the video ends with him moving a piece of a toy mock up but doesn't show the actual device working in full.

Do you think it actually works as he claimed?

https://www.google.com/patents/US5860317
 (https://www.google.com/patents/US5860317)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 18, 2018, 09:56:22 AM
The "weight loss" phenomenon is a special case of forced precession.  There is no weight loss, as any number of scale experiments have proved.

As a Chinese fortune cookie once told me: "Every action has a counter action. Just if you can see it or not."

For your amusement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a81hS_iCi4E (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a81hS_iCi4E)

Hi TK

Many thank's for the chinese words. It is excatly that.

In spinning mass, as a gyro, We CAN NOT SEE WHERE the action is taking place.

So the dear Isaac can RIP.

And it is the aim of this thread , to attempt to understand WHERE and how action and reaction are taking place . So no offence to established "laws" but open minding our brain.

We are often attracted by antigravity with gyro, but as i see at 2.50 of the video that me and Centralflow joined above, it would be very informative to redo the  Laithwaite big wheel experiment on the scale but forcing the wheel counter the natural precession, to see if the scale also does not show a WEIGHT INCREASE.

And at 2.50,  it seems almost impossible to "Veratisium" to lift the wheel in counter natural precession, even when trying to use his knees as a lever, and if in this special case, the scale does not show any weight increase, i think that the location of action and reaction is not at the right place we think that  should be. And if the scale does effectively show an increase in weight then ????....

As i doubt very much that "Veratisium" will show a test with the big wheel in counter rotation , i think i will try to do it myself. Or perehaps Chet could take one of his big saw and jump on a scale and rotate the saw in both directions ?

Could it be a mass transfer, as Laithwaite and many other as spoken about ?

Also thank's for the very intersting video, have you made it youself as i can ear your voice at the end ?


@MagnaProp

Without replicating i can not say anything.

But interestingly, Laithwaite understood that if the device has to work as a space propellant, it has to be not only a twin system but a double twin to direct the motorising effect in one direction.
So not easy at all to replicate without very high grade craftmanship.

Laurent



Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: ramset on January 18, 2018, 01:46:15 PM
Laurent
I think we need a self powered Flywheel,  A small one [or two / four as  mentioned] and one  of significant size or mass [maybe like one of Mags electric powered bike wheels ?]
and then play with the scale ...
you see in Tinsel's precession Cha-os Build he put speed control in there and patterns show up..

IMO a self sustained speed controlled wheel is needed here .

I will see if I can find one of these electric Bike wheels ,even changing out the air with fluid/sand/?  [maybe ferro fluid too for playing with magnets later?? ??

and then trying longer length support poles.[maybe up to 10 feet or longer ??

I do believe I have seen Videos of small children "doing the laithwaite" picking up a weight which they would Never be able to lift [close to their own  weight]
Precession....

hurts the mind [a good thing I think

Laurent,
as always ......  you inspire !

with gratitude

Chet


Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Paul-R on January 18, 2018, 02:22:05 PM
The "weight loss" phenomenon is a special case of forced precession.  There is no weight loss ...
But surely, there is no loss of mass but there is a loss of weight. i.e. one could make a helicopter out of the idea.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 18, 2018, 03:00:49 PM
This kind of ties into a recent post I made in the skinner thread...


“Weight” is a function of gravity.


Precession force is a completely different force. It will not change your “weight”
Just as two repelling magnets do not change “weight”
gravity is still providing all of its force


we can trick ourselves by placing the scales in certain places
like under the lower magnet it will tell you the lower magnet gets heavier
(not really, we are just adding gravitational force to magnetic force in the down vector)


precession force does the same sort of adding and subtracting with the gravitational force.
the actual “weight” doesn’t change.

Weight is tied to density, force is tied to mass.
density is also tied to mass, but by a different function.
By this, density of the mass is also tied to the density of the force. (torque)


In the simplistic mechanical view, only one vector is considered at a time.
when in fact, 360-degrees of vector are present in all 3 dimensions
So these calculations should be considered in all 46,656,000 vectors.


Anything less than NASA’s shuttle pilot trainer, is just playing in the sand with spinny objects.






Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 18, 2018, 03:33:28 PM
NASA’s chair only provides for a little over a 2 million vectoral control.
But because they allow it to transition across 8x 90-degree orientations
The user has roughly 50% of all vectors in his hands, at ~2.4degree intervals.


This is the closest thing we have in terms of experiencing all 3 forces simultaneously


A 2-dimensional gyroscopic precession exerts forces on the axi that go unobserved.
We see the vertical transition and the angular transition of only one horizontal dimension
at a time.
There are forces perpendicular to both of these that are not observed in a simplistic analysis.


When you pilot the chair, you can feel these forces, and have to compensate for them.
only when you provide the exact proportional and opposite force with your hands,
can you bring the chair under control.
This is done using coils and variable resistors on a joystick.


in short: we should be performing experiments with gyroscopes in 3 gimbles
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Paul-R on January 18, 2018, 05:20:49 PM
Look down the page to the image of the blue base, green motor/flywheels and  red arrows pointing upwards.
https://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SmartSPIN_X2/SmartSPIN_X2.htm (https://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SmartSPIN_X2/SmartSPIN_X2.htm)
I forgot to say: the blue base needs to rotate in its plane, of course.

Are people doubting that if this device were to be built, placed on scales and weighed, then the reading when the four gyroscopes and blue base are spun up would change?
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 18, 2018, 06:00:52 PM
Hi Chet

Yes i am thinking to dismantle my old electric bike to get out the rear wheel with the motor.
But there is perhaps  a better way to check the big wheel effect i will make some thinking these next days.

For info here the video of Laithwaite lecture and at 39.25 it is the experiment of the big wheel in the hands of a young guy, very impressive to see the guy lifting the heavy wheel seamingly without effort, because laithwaite controls the speed of rotation of the turning table, and so the rate of precession.

https://youtu.be/OpCEJxO6V9g

Thank's Smoky for input, but i need to reread your text , not very intuitive all this

Hi Paul R

I have a probléme with the link you mention, because the 4 gyros inside the rotating container seem to be fixed on the bottom. So they can not precess.
I have made some experiments with fixed gyros , and to me when they are fixed and can not precess at all, i feel no forces of any kind, the spinning gyro seems to be a dead mass. You can perhaps refer to  the experiment of Sandy Kidd which need the spring for precessing in order to exhibit some results.
As the spinning container seems to woble perhaps this wobling introduces some precession and eventually some effect on the scale ?? I have also noticed that the precession effect appears as soon as there is the slightest movement of the gyro axle. Extremely sensitiv this thing.

In my video (in my first post ), the device tries to stop the gyro precession on half a turn , so the gyro should be a dead mass with full inertia and centrifugal force, and free the complete precession on the other 180 degres so the gyro exhibit the full precession effect. So there is an asymetry (see Fiala's patent everything is explain)

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 18, 2018, 07:08:44 PM
Woopy


When a gyro is fixed (in any of the 3 dimensions)
The forces are constrained to the axis
Much like a shaft of a pendulum.
But we see in the pendulum, adding a fulcrum to allow
the forces to translate, we gain an additional dimension of
motion.


we cannot observe this force in a fixed pendulum.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 19, 2018, 04:41:28 PM
Hi all

I found some steel balls and a light flat structured cardboard plate.

So i  looked for a flat and smooth enough surface in my house to make some first crude "marble" test.

As expected there is dynamic torsions and drift because the device is not a twin device working dynamically against each other but allowing the main forward movement.

So i made a short video, where you can see that there is always a main forward direction of movement.

I also made a test on a not perfectly leveled surface (the steel balls roll down the very very gentle slope ) and to my great surprise, the device could coast.

Something interesting is that the drift movement tends to deregulate the device, and i had to increase slightly the diameter of the traction wheel to get the device working correctly on the marbles.

Then with the same traction wheel, i reinstalled the ballbearing wheels and redo a test by rolling (no more marbles) , and in this case the systems spins too fast and the traction wheel touch the ring track all along so there is no more gyroscopic precession on any  location around the 360 degre ring and the device move back and forth without any directional displacement. To get back  the forward rolling movement, i have to decrease the diameter of the traction wheel or decrease the spinning speed of the gyro.

Very sensitiv device indeed, but so a lot of fun.

https://youtu.be/4BHK4MkwCQM

Of course these test are "crude" and not made on perfectly smooth lab surface and probably my steel balls are not perfectly round. But to me and so far, the movement stay there. So i encourage replicators to redo all those test before going to any conclusion. We are so often fooled by unattended artifact that we have to be very careful especially with such sensitiv topics.

Hope this helps

Laurent




Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Paul-R on January 19, 2018, 04:52:17 PM
the 4 gyros inside the rotating container seem to be fixed on the bottom. So they can not precess.

Yes, they are bolted down. but remember that the base plate must be made to rotate (which is not that easy).
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: ramset on January 19, 2018, 05:31:59 PM
Laurent
\
  it moves with great speed !!
if you start it in the spot where it ended up [against the furniture]

and point the front drive  180 degrees towards the old starting point
will it travel the same line towards the old starting point [by the carpet?] [or is this the coasting you mention?
-----------------------------------------------

Paul R


This sounds very familiar , the 4 Gyro's were fixed vertically and NOT allowed to angle up in precession and as a result  were lifting the Plate they were attached to ... as the 4 gyro quad array was turned toward precession.

Yes !!

I do believe a had seen this Video too, along with weight scales and a claim.

gotta try that one !!

and as Laurent has mentioned this could be inverted to put weight on the scale too?

Chet
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 19, 2018, 09:44:57 PM
There are two perspectives, and both are correct in their own right.
In one, the force can only be on the entire assembly, and not on the inertial frame
of the gyro. This means that the force cannot be used to apply external motive force.
like two guys on a boat on a sliding platform, trying to push a wall to move the boat forward.


In the other perspective, the force represents itself along the axis in one or two of the perpendicular
dimensions, depending upon the applied force and the angle of the force to the angle of rotation.
This can manifest itself as a tangential-force vector.
applied to the axis.
If the axis itself is free to move in space, and precession interrupted appropriately, the result is
a linear momentum.


to truly direct this becomes tricky.
The gyro boat inventors used an additional motor to rotate the
platform the main axis was mounted to.
This allowed them to “steer” the linear force. (kind of)
what they learned indicated that the linear force has also a vectored component, from the rotational
momentum, and by steering it in their manner, did not give full control over direction.
but that it can be directed, if the variables are identified.
which we now know how to do,
If a modern-day attempt to construct the gyroboat were made, it would probably be quite an interesting
thing.

Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 20, 2018, 12:47:15 AM
Hi all

As TK made a very interesting comment on my video

i did  make his proposition

and so i reinstall the ballbearing wheels on the device and  place the whole system on the cardboard ( which as been replaced by a stiff and very smooth aluminium plate )

and all of the system  "floating "on the steel balls

https://youtu.be/G3b8-AOvzaM

Of course it is very difficult at technical level  to be very accurate. So please take all this stuff as simple experiment and not as established fact.

But perhaps as TK  seems to have made all this experiments long ago perhaps he could help us and show some of his experiment and results.

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: TinselKoala on January 20, 2018, 07:39:16 AM
Woopy, think about action/reaction. If your aluminum plate is much heavier than the device you are testing, it is possible for the device to "push" against the plate and move across it without seeing much opposite movement reaction of the plate.  For these experiments I have always used a precisely leveled machinist's granite "surface plate" for the base, and a sheet of plate glass for the substrate surface upon which the device under test (DUT) is placed. I generally try to ballast the plate glass with adjustable weights (like modelling clay) so that its mass is equal to the mass of the DUT. In this way I expect the glass+ballast to move in the equal amount and opposite direction as the DUT moves, if it is indeed pushing against the substrate.
 
Your latest test is intriguing because your device does seem to cause movement of the substrate aluminum plate and the DUT together in the _same_ direction. Is this because the aluminum plate is much heavier than the DUT? Is it because the bearing wheels of the DUT aren't exactly aligned with the preferred direction of motion? Or some other reason? I don't know. The fact that the whole setup _does_ move, rather than just the DUT moving across the substrate, indicates that the system is not totally reactionless. Otherwise the DUT would simply move across the aluminum plate without moving the plate.

For such a system to be useful as a space drive, or as a true weight-loss system, it must be able to move when it is not in contact with anything material it can "push against" to create an equal and opposite reaction. In testing, it should be able to move without moving the surface it is sitting on, if that surface is also free to move.

Anyhow, I admire your dedication to experimentation and I encourage you to keep going, with several more experiments you can try.  For example, does the device still cause movement when the gyro rotor is not spinning, and just the circular drive motor is used, hence eliminating any effects caused by precession alone?


(Some names: Tolchin, Shipov, Poponin, Kidd, Firmage. You may be interested in reading about Chris Duffield's experiments with the Tolchin device. It's not a gyro precession device, rather it is a weight shifter with centrifugal force. But many of the same testing principles apply.  Note especially what he says about air tables and linear air tracks. I myself also tested the same Tolchin device provided by Gennady Shipov at the ISSO laboratory in San Franciso in 1999. )
http://www.iptq.com/cd/progress_1.htm (http://www.iptq.com/cd/progress_1.htm)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 20, 2018, 04:41:49 PM
This simple experiment here is fairly similar to the gyroboat of the 90’s


Here a motor spins the gyro,
And a imbalance on the shaft pushes the motor in one direction
once per rotation, in exactly the same place.
this oscillating precessional force translates to directional linear forces.
In this example the forces are in two dimensions.
One is parallel to the plane of rotation (tangential or radial depending on perspective)
the other dimensional force is not clearly shown in this video, but some effects are present here.
It is a vectored angle, slightly off-axis from the vertical.
This causes a ‘lifting’ effect on the side of the frame where the motor is mounted.
The force is not really “up”, but on the axis which is tied to the frame (tape roll).


If you were to place a scale under one side of the tape roll, opposite the motor
Your scale would show increased weight, because the distribution has changed momentarily
the side under the motor would show decreased weight for the same reason.
This motion is restricted by the mounts and by gravity
But if you can imagine the machine flipped sideways, you can picture the normally demonstrated
precession force causing this action.


Watch the video closely, you can see that the forces are truly in 3-dimensions.


https://youtu.be/Cj_3DaFA_ns (https://youtu.be/Cj_3DaFA_ns)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 20, 2018, 05:05:32 PM
Here is a nice demo from an ex NASA physicist
NASA began investigating this some time in the late 80’s
(at least that was publicly released)
Inspired (allegedly) by the work of Sandy Kidd


The real experiments done by NASA involved large massive gyros
Some estimates place these wheels at 100-ft diameter weighing several tons.


This is a tiny version of an experiment, with many less degrees of freedom.
https://youtu.be/R9L8fmE0RlI (https://youtu.be/R9L8fmE0RlI)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 20, 2018, 06:20:15 PM
Hi TK

thank's very much for input and compliment.
I have done a last video, where i have replaced the steel balls by roller.
I have also balanced the weight of the substrate (the black alu plate which is originally almost 2 times lighter than the machine)
I don't know if the fact to use roller instead of balls interfer badly on the results ??
By doing this i can redo the test on my leveled and smooth cooking vitroceramique , i know that there is nothing to compare with a perfect machiniste plate, but it is better than my wooden table.
So it seems that, this time , the machine go forward and the substrate move almost not.

https://youtu.be/GSi1JzGogdM

I have looked some of your links and i don't know if the moving pendulums can exhibit some gyroscopic effect, but i have learned a lot on test on air tables or tracks and errors they can produce. And how easy it is to be fooled by those inertial systems.

So as usual i have to be very careful with the results, and i hope some others will come in the game so we can compare the results


Hi Smoky2

Yes M. Mccabe as made a lot of very impressive experiment with gyro and there is a lot of video on youtube. I have heard that he passed away (not sure) very sad. The one you have linked is probabbly something i will replicate to try to understand with my fingers what is going on.

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: telecom on January 21, 2018, 01:40:41 AM
You can probably increase the effect by applying an extra weight on a gyro end.
It should precess more (just guessing)
Can you measure the force by stopping the movement with a fish scale?
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 22, 2018, 12:04:27 AM
You can probably increase the effect by applying an extra weight on a gyro end.
It should precess more (just guessing)
Can you measure the force by stopping the movement with a fish scale?

Hi telecom

No i don't think it will help because if you read the Fiala's patent , you will understand that the less "no gyroscopic" mass you have  on the  the gyro , the better will be the effect.

So if you see on my video part 2 and part 3, where the system is on steel balls, the general mouvement is forward and drifting to the left.

So on the left 180 degree of the device there is full inertia and centrifugal force (the gyro is a dead mass), because the gyro is NOT in precession. And on the opposite 180 degree the gyro is in full precesssion and and so it exhibits very few inertial and centrifugal forces. And this is exactly that asymetry between the both 180 degree that propells the device. The greater the asymetry the stronger the effect.

 So if i add some dead (non gyroscopic) mass on the gyro side , the asymetry will be decrease and so the effect.

Hope this helps

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: telecom on January 22, 2018, 05:40:49 AM
Hi telecom

No i don't think it will help because if you read the Fiala's patent , you will understand that the less "no gyroscopic" mass you have  on the  the gyro , the better will be the effect.

So if you see on my video part 2 and part 3, where the system is on steel balls, the general mouvement is forward and drifting to the left.

So on the left 180 degree of the device there is full inertia and centrifugal force (the gyro is a dead mass), because the gyro is NOT in precession. And on the opposite 180 degree the gyro is in full precesssion and and so it exhibits very few inertial and centrifugal forces. And this is exactly that asymetry between the both 180 degree that propells the device. The greater the asymetry the stronger the effect.

 So if i add some dead (non gyroscopic) mass on the gyro side , the asymetry will be decrease and so the effect.

Hope this helps

Laurent
Thanks for the explanation, but if precessed side is getting lighter,
shouldn't the center of mass move to the rolled side? which is heavier?
On your video it moves to the precessed side, which makes the whole thing to roll forward.
Have you tried measuring the force?

Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Magluvin on January 22, 2018, 06:11:52 AM
Seeing a lot of vids with 2 gyros opposite of center, the gyros are mounted to an arm that pivots in the center. My first proposal earlier with 4 gyros, one on each corner of a platform, do not pivot on an arm from center. Instead they would pivot on their own center axis. Looking at each gyro from the vantage point of the center of the platform outward toward each of the gyros, one try would be to tilt them toward the center, or outward from center, all at the same time. Also looking at them from the same vantage point, tilt them all to the left or right, and or combinations of each for each. Im thinking having the arms tilt from the center of the platform relieves any lift that may be had by letting each gyro do as it will without actually providing any lift of the mech as a whole.

I have 2 pc fans that are stupid powerful and fast, 7k rpm, with blades removed, The blades are part of a plastic thin tube that slips over a metal spin drum containing the magnets. I was demoing one for a friend and while holding it, I went to flip it over to aim the out air flow toward him and the gyro effect took over and the blades bit my finger bad. almost to the bone. Needless to say some blades broke in the action. So I removed the whole blade assy and have a nice drum motor to fiddle with. Ill do a vid of these along with the 3rd one I have that is still bladed, as I took apart the second one the same as the first. Im sure many here will be surprised how much air this thing blows.  Can be had on ebay for $5. Will show the part no. and specs in the vid. The Thing is no joke.

So with the 2 debladed motors i will try a couple of my ideas. I have some carbon fiber rods to work a center controlling device to tilt the motors as I have stated. Contemplating a partial gimbal for each.

Will do the vid of the motors tomorrow.

Mags
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 22, 2018, 06:42:44 PM
Thanks for the explanation, but if precessed side is getting lighter,
shouldn't the center of mass move to the rolled side? which is heavier?
On your video it moves to the precessed side, which makes the whole thing to roll forward.
Have you tried measuring the force?

Hi telecom

The system move forward and drift to the left which is the NON precession side. To be more clear, on the left 180 degree side (related to motion), the gyro tries to precess, but it is not free to do this, as the axle is connected through the gimbal, to the traction wheel which is in contact with the ring track on the other (right side) 180 degre. And then, when the traction wheel jump down the track, BOTH , the gyro and the traction wheel do not touch the ring anymore. So the gyro can enter precession and that al along the right side 180 degree.

For info to me,this experiment is simply to check if the system is possible. which it seems to be.
Now why and how it can happen is my main motivation on this subject.
So right now,i am not very interested in measurement and optimisation of the device.

As you can see in the video, the moving force is far from tremendous, and the only way to get something usefull on this earth, would be to make the system very big and as already said in a minimum of opposite twin or a lot of opposite twin system combined and perfectly synchronised and built . And that is far from my possibilities.

I Mag

Can't wait for your video

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: Magluvin on January 22, 2018, 11:53:03 PM
Here is the fan motor vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MVM1hcdWA8&feature=youtu.be

Mags
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: telecom on January 23, 2018, 03:02:43 AM
Hi telecom

The system move forward and drift to the left which is the NON precession side. To be more clear, on the left 180 degree side (related to motion), the gyro tries to precess, but it is not free to do this, as the axle is connected through the gimbal, to the traction wheel which is in contact with the ring track on the other (right side) 180 degre. And then, when the traction wheel jump down the track, BOTH , the gyro and the traction wheel do not touch the ring anymore. So the gyro can enter precession and that al along the right side 180 degree.

For info to me,this experiment is simply to check if the system is possible. which it seems to be.
Now why and how it can happen is my main motivation on this subject.
So right now,i am not very interested in measurement and optimisation of the device.

As you can see in the video, the moving force is far from tremendous, and the only way to get something usefull on this earth, would be to make the system very big and as already said in a minimum of opposite twin or a lot of opposite twin system combined and perfectly synchronised and built . And that is far from my possibilities.

I Mag

Can't wait for your video

Laurent

This is the most interesting experiment I've seen in years.
No matter how small is the force, it has a huge importance.
Do you have any ideas how to optimize the device?
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on January 23, 2018, 04:23:42 PM
This is the most interesting experiment I've seen in years.
No matter how small is the force, it has a huge importance.
Do you have any ideas how to optimize the device?

Hi telecom

Yes it is also my most shaking brain experiment.

What we see on my video is only the starter, the main meal should be the understanding of why a spinning AND precessing gyro seems to loose some inertia and centrifugal force.

And the dessert should be to make something usefull with that.

Of course there is a lot of possibilities to increase the effect.

M. Harvey Emanuel Fiala took the immense time to write one of the the better patent i have ever seen. As i say in my video (part 1) this is better than a patent this is a full lecture.
There is almost 50 pleasant drawings of different embodiements and schematics and sheets of results of experiment. There is also 33 sheets of explanation of the general system and each figures is described.
A really remarkable work that everyone interested in the subject should read.

Personnally i have printed the whole 83 pages and made a reference book.

There is a lot of other papers and patent from M. Laithwaite, Alex jones, Sandy Kidd, a very intersting paper from the late Fran MacCabe in his internet site.
There is also the "gyroscope .org " forum with a lot of discussions about the gyros.

Etc..

I have found 2 other of these small centrifugal clutch wheels, and perhaps i will try to do a double rotor device for my pleasure and to learn more.

OK hope this helps


Hi Mag

Do you intend to replicate some of M. Fiala 's patent devices with your motor. Or do you want to experiment others gyro possibilities ?

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 10, 2018, 07:52:09 PM
Hi all

It seems that the inertial propulsion does not interest too much people ?

Always trying to understand the process i go on with some new experiments.

https://youtu.be/1IEi_4TWu5o

Hope this helps

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: webby1 on February 10, 2018, 08:10:22 PM

Hi Laurent,

I am following with interest, but I am playing with other stuff right now.


Keep up the sharing of your efforts, I appreciate what you are doing.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: telecom on February 11, 2018, 02:43:27 AM
Hi all

It seems that the inertial propulsion does not interest too much people ?

Always trying to understand the process i go on with some new experiments.

https://youtu.be/1IEi_4TWu5o

Hope this helps

Laurent

I think making a bigger flywheel was a huge step in the right direction.
Can you measure the pull now?
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: MagnaProp on February 11, 2018, 06:17:47 AM
Nicely done with that last video of yours. Looks like a very good mover indeed.

...
@MagnaProp

Without replicating i can not say anything.

But interestingly, Laithwaite understood that if the device has to work as a space propellant, it has to be not only a twin system but a double twin to direct the motorising effect in one direction.
So not easy at all to replicate without very high grade craftmanship.
Thanks for the info. Very intriguing experiments you are doing and comments about Laithwaite. Keep up the good work. These experiments of yours have peaked my interest.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 14, 2018, 07:31:11 PM
Hi all

I made a new test.

This time the gyro is attached on a bicycle wheel, which hang on the roof with a very thin MONOTORON (untwisted and unelastic) Kevlar (aramid) thread.

During the experiment, the thread is not detwisting, on the contrary it is winding.

So this time we have absolutely no friction at all, and the system seems to work well.

Apology for the long boring 7 minutes of the video but it seems that the gyro effectively loses some inertia on his back track, and this is what is interesting. And the question is why and how?

https://youtu.be/VoDj5KlJztc

just for info i have added 2 more "fidget brass ring" so the gyro has now 5 rings and work very good also on the ground.

Hope this helps

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 14, 2018, 10:53:33 PM
Great experiment! I like your last video (the thing hanging from the ceiling, part 6) which seems to prove that there is real propulsion (no back and forward movement, only forward).

I have a question:

The motor is spinning the weight. Does the long axle interact with the ring? Or asked differently, does the long axle every now and then touch the ring in order to make the contraption move around the ring?

Asked in a third way, the spinning weight is actively driven around the ring because the spinning axle touches the ring at least during part of the round trip along the ring?

In your first video (part 1), this grating sound can be heard. I this grating sound caused by the axle touching the ring (in order to drive the spinning wheel around the ring)?

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 15, 2018, 03:21:34 PM
Great experiment! I like your last video (the thing hanging from the ceiling, part 6) which seems to prove that there is real propulsion (no back and forward movement, only forward).

I have a question:

The motor is spinning the weight. Does the long axle interact with the ring? Or asked differently, does the long axle every now and then touch the ring in order to make the contraption move around the ring?

Asked in a third way, the spinning weight is actively driven around the ring because the spinning axle touches the ring at least during part of the round trip along the ring?

In your first video (part 1), this grating sound can be heard. I this grating sound caused by the axle touching the ring (in order to drive the spinning wheel around the ring)?



Greetings, Conrad

Hi conrad


Yes you understand well

There is only 1 motor which spins the long  shaft . There is no motor to rotate the system vertically.

The gyro is attached at one end of the shaft and on the opposite part of the long shaft there should be a traction wheel. But in this specific set up, the shaft itself is  the traction wheel.

The traction wheel is in contact with the ring (orange) on about 180 degrees of the rotation. During this contact, the traction wheel  does 2 actions

1- it forces the gyro to rotate perfectly horizontally around the ring (orange) at a very precise speed.

2- it prevent the gyro to precess because the gyro tries to raise up and prescess, but it can not, so the gyro behave as a simple "dead" mass rotating on a horizontal planar path. And the gyro exhibit its full inertia and centrifugal force. And as it can not precess the gyro also apply a strong gyroscopic vertical torque on the shaft which is transmitted to the traction wheel which get a strong downward push against the ring creating a good grip and the powerfull motorizing swing.

Then on the other 180 degrees, the traction wheel jump in "freefall" down the"cliff" of the splitted ring and does nothing more.

So the gyro is now free to raise up and precess. During this part of the rotation neither the traction wheel  nor the gyro are in contact with the ring(orange). All "float" in the air.

And during this part of the rotation, the precessing gyro loses a big part of its inertia, so it can can come back to the initial position by natural precession (precession due to gravity), without  swinging effect and without counter motoring effect.

You can clearly see that the gyro swing fast and precess (and also nutate) slowly .

And the question is how and why a precessing gyro seems to lose its inertia and centrifugal force ??????

I would recommand to read the patent (see in part 1 ) of the inventor, M. Harvey Fiala, it is very interesting and informative.

Hope this helps

Laurent

Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 15, 2018, 06:26:05 PM
Laurent, thank you for your reply and explanations. I read the patent but was not sure how your replication worked. (You did a truthful replication.)

1) I have the impression from your videos that the arm holding the spinning wheel (the gyroscope) is accelerated from the moment the traction wheel engages the ring till it loses contact (for 180° of the round trip).

    And then the arm de-accelerates while the spinning wheel is freely flying the other half of its round trip.

    In other words, the arm is not turning with a constant speed but speeds up during one half of its round trip and slows down the other half. (While the spinning wheel, the gyroscope, is always spinning at the same speed.)


2) I wonder whether the spinning wheel could stay in the same plane during its round trip (no nodding)? The nodding seems to be necessary in order to engage and disengage the traction wheel and may have no other purpose?


I once did some experiments in this field of research but only managed the ominous and well known back and forth movement. I dumped everything years ago but will make some drawings in order to discuss my findings and possible solutions based on the Fiala patent.


Laurent, your experiments made me dig up my collection of stepper motors and I might buy some modern stepper motor shields for my Arduino. It is intriguing. I am not expecting that a "space drive" which turns rotary forces into linear forces (as Fiala claims) is really possible, but there is still a lot to be learned about turning gyroscopes. I am particularly interested in the "nodding" of a gyroscope as Fiala is doing in his patent. It is strange that Fiala is only "nodding" his gyroscope a little bit (about 5°).

Concerning your latest experiment (part 6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoDj5KlJztc&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoDj5KlJztc&feature=youtu.be)): It is hard to explain the turning of your contraption other than by a net force in the turning direction. This should be impossible, but you did it anyway. It could be that the Fiala invention only works on a planet (against gravity) and not in free fall? In other words, the Fiala invention pushes against gravity (straight down) and turns that into a weak forward motion (probably by help of friction, even friction in the air). If there is no gravity to push against, it might not work? But this is only speculation.

The Fiala patent was filed in February 2011. If it had worked one would have heard about it in the meantime. There probably is a catch (an error of thought) in the thing. Some things are too good to be true. But your experiments are great whatever the end result.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: TinselKoala on February 15, 2018, 07:43:43 PM
Oh, I see. So with Woopy's present apparatus there doesn't appear to be any way to isolate the "gyro spinning" from the rotation in the precession direction. That's too bad because I'd like to see if there is any test that can be performed to see if it is really a gyro effect or if it is due simply to the variation in speed as the weight goes around the vertical axis.

I'd also like to be able to distinguish between "forced precession" and normal precession. That is, if the gyro is being rotated around the vertical axis faster than it would precess simply by gravity alone, this is forced precession and the gyro should rise up, which as I understand it would break the contact between the "friction wheel" or axle, and the circular ramp part.

I can testify that forcing a gyro to go faster around the precession axis than it normally would go, will yield very interesting results as the gyro rises (a la Laithwaite).

But I am still skeptical about the behaviour shown, since I think it's possible to "pump up" a torsion pendulum with properly timed rotational pulses, which I think could be provided merely by a nonspinning weight that accelerated and decelerated like woopy's gyro does.

At any rate this is a great series of experiments by woopy and I hope that he or we can figure out some way to actually test whether the gyro is doing the "dirty work" or if a nonspinning weight would do the same.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 15, 2018, 10:37:20 PM
I want to report some work I have done some years ago:

I built a platform with two stepper motors. Each stepper motor had an arm with a heavy weight on its end.

1) The arms were first turned synchronously and at a constant angular speed. Not surprisingly the platform moved back and forth (in the ideal situation without friction). But also in the real world it moved back and forth on the spot. The highest speed of the movement was observed at the middle of the way of the back and forth movement.

2) The arms were turned synchronously but accelerated from 0° to 180° and decelerated from 180° to 360°. The movement of the platform was again back an forth on the spot (theoretically without friction and in the real world if friction was very low). But the highest speed of the movement was observed near the end of the respective movement (not in the middle as with a uniform angular speed).

Now comes my speculation:

What happens if gyroscopes are used instead of the dead heavy weights at the end of the arms? Specially if the arms are accelerated and decelerated as in point 2) above?

Will "nodding" the gyroscopes make any difference? Not a slight "nodding" as in the Fiala patent but lets "nod" up 45° from the vertical plane during acceleration (first half circle) and then "nod" down -45° from the vertical plane during deceleration (second half circle). "Nodding" like a sine wave where the zero crossing is at 0° and 180° of the circle described by the gyroscope on the arm.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 15, 2018, 11:33:11 PM
Hi all

to conrad

yes your observation is right the swinging part is much faster than the precessing part.

So i can suppose that at the "jumping in free fall "moment of the traction wheel there is some extra speed that induces a slight forced precession which provoke the nutation.

Perhaps you could try some spinning gyros on your setup but don't forget that a vertical oscillation of the shaft has to be possible if you want to get any possible effect.

Just for fun prof Steven Johns asked me on youtube to let the system spin so long as possible.

So AMEN i did it, i replaced the monotoron kevlar line with a solid iron thread at the end of which i installed a high quality  ballbearing just at the top of the triangle bycicle wheel suspending wire.

And i let the system spinning and here the results.

first i put on a new charged 300 ma lipo battery and let the system spin  and the tension of the battery going down to a regular descharging rate during 4.5 mnutes.

than i measure the time to complete a full rotation each 3 turns (with a chronometer and by hand, so not super accurate)

so

1 turn    14,3 sec
4 turn     13.9 sec
7 turn     13.9 sec
10 turn    13.7 sec
13turn     13.3 sec
16turn     13.1sec
19 turn    12.9 sec
22 turn    13.00
25 turn    13.00

then i ear clearly the battery begins to deplete so end of the test

total duration of the test 4.5 warm up + about 5.5 test (25 turns at average of 13.3 sec)  = 10 minutes

So as you can see, the system seems not to slow down

OK will think of further test i can do with the sytem

Any good ideas are welcome if not too complex


to TK

yes i am sure that forced precession is a must.

I am slowly preparing me to test the Fialas forced precession system (second part of the patent) i am sampling some servos to this intention

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 16, 2018, 11:50:54 AM
to conrad

yes your observation is right the swinging part is much faster than the precessing part.

So i can suppose that at the "jumping in free fall "moment of the traction wheel there is some extra speed that induces a slight forced precession which provoke the nutation.

Perhaps you could try some spinning gyros on your setup but don't forget that a vertical oscillation of the shaft has to be possible if you want to get any possible effect.

Laurent


The big riddle for me is this rather "small vertical oscillation" which seems to be all important. I wonder whether a "big vertical oscillation" would make the machine more effective?

Also the "free fall requirement" (when the traction wheel is not engaged) is very mysterious.

In addition there seems to be a speed requirement imposed on the gyroscope. In the videos one sees Laurent adjusting the turning speed of the gyroscope. In the patent Fiala hints that the rotation speed of the gyroscope needs to be in a certain relation to the rotation speed of the arm carrying the gyroscope. Fiala goes on and on about the diameter of the traction wheel.

Very strange! The patent does not explain at which moment (while the arm carrying the gyroscope moves in a circle) the forward force is generated. And most strange is Fiala's idea that mass is decreasing once an object goes faster than light.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 16, 2018, 12:50:29 PM
To TK

Your remarks on the stopped gyro was intriging, and i did a test to check your proposal. As i have some of those 360 servos i mounted the gyro as a dead mass on one of them.

https://youtu.be/p3iEy5sprpA

But no chance to spin the bicycle wheel. In addition,I tested different speed and direction of rotation , and even by aiding the rotation it invariabely go to a stop. Exactly as Steven Jones said.

So the gyro seems to do the DIRTY WORK.


To conrad

yes the Fiala patent is disturbing, and it is exactly why i was intersted in a replication.

I hope that people will ,as you do, take the time to investigate the patent and eventually find what is exactly this DIRTY WORK as TK name it.

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 16, 2018, 02:50:29 PM
To conrad

yes the Fiala patent is disturbing, and it is exactly why i was intersted in a replication.

I hope that people will ,as you do, take the time to investigate the patent and eventually find what is exactly this DIRTY WORK as TK name it.

Laurent

My tests with the platform I showed above had the same results as your latest video (inertial propulsion with gyroscope part 7, servo driven).

Ratchet wheels on my platform (wheels which only turn in one direction) made it move forward because friction inhibited the backwards movement. One could also make the platform shoot forward once by starting from a wall which inhibited the first backward movement.

Turning the arms slowly from 0° to 180° and turning them very fast (fast speed up and fast breaking) from 180° to 360° (arms were turned synchronously) also caused forward movement because the slow backwards movement was mostly inhibited by friction.

So, my contraption (as shown above in principle) always needed friction to move forwards no matter what strange acceleration and deceleration I imparted on the two arms with complicated drive algorithms for the stepper motors.

So, moving dead weights in a circle seems to need friction for one directional movement (without friction and specially in free fall it would move back and forth on the spot).


Now let's put gyroscopes instead of dead weights. And as I said in previous posts, the strange idea of Fiala is a half cycle acceleration and a half cycle "free fall" which results in a strange "nodding" as I call it.

I have no idea how to implement "free fall" or "free coasting of a gyroscope" with a stepper motor because a stepper motor cogs severely in case no current is supplied. And I do not know how to drive a DC motor precisely which would be needed to accelerate for exactly one half turn. A DC motor does not exert much breaking forth in case no current is supplied, but still, it would not be "free coasting" too. So, I end up with the strange tracks in the Fiala patent which worry me a lot. From a mechanical point of view the Fiala contraption is very badly designed (acceleration by grating on a track and bumping against an incline on the track) and there should be an equivalent design which is more sound.

I do not want to start a replication till I have an idea for "free fall" or "free coasting of a gyroscope" with a more reliable drive mechanism than a "track". I like stepper motors because they allow for repeatable and precise speed and position control. DC motors are no good because they hardly allow position control and only vague speed control. A servo is not bad (because it allows position control) but also cogs severely if no current is supplied. From a control point of view a servo is a badly designed stepper motor based on a DC motor with position feedback. A servo is also slow in comparison to a stepper motor (but can be much stronger because a fast turning DC motor is geared down).


How important is the "free fall" or "free coasting of the gyroscope" in Fiala's patent? And is "nodding" really necessary? I pose this questions over and over again in my mind when thinking about the Fiala patent.


Accelerating a gyroscope (when it moves in a circle) seems to have the same effect as accelerating a dead weight, but then when acceleration stops a dead weight does noting strange but a gyroscope will "nod" (it translates the imparted acceleration into a nod). And it seems that this "nod" (which is not allowed to be "restricted" and has to happen "freely") is the trick and this "nod" needs not to be much, just a "little nod". Well, this is my bad and incomplete explanation.


Laurent's big and important contribution is that his replication shows that there is really something interesting in the Fiala patent. But I think that doing a second replication is not a step forward. I want to isolate the effect which apparently exits (as Laurent shows) with other means than a "track". May be a servo can be used. The servo could engage a lever while the gyroscope does a half circle and disengages the lever while the gyroscope "free falls" the other half circle. Well, needs some more thinking.


I have stepper motors, DC motors and servos. I just need to buy a modern motor control shield for the Arduino https://www.adafruit.com/product/1438 (https://www.adafruit.com/product/1438), may be two Arduinos and two motor control shields because I want two gyroscopes turn in a circle, one CW and the other CCW. The gyroscopes could be driven with DC motors and a simple speed control and their own battery (like Laurent has implemented his gyroscope with the heavy fidget spinner rings).

Laurent, what kind of speed control do you use for your gyroscope (must be a little DC motor speed control board) and what DC motor?


Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 16, 2018, 06:25:00 PM
Here a thread from 2013 and 2014 where a person tried to build a space drive (without success) http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.WocPXKjiaHs (http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.WocPXKjiaHs)


In this thread I posted photos of my own attempt as I described above. I attach two photos of the self contained little platform which was driven by a PIC-processor and a two stepper motor driver chips. It carried its own power supply (batteries). By reprogramming the PIC-processor I could try many different movements of the two arms each carrying a dead weight (brass ball and little brass plate at the end of a short arm fixed to the axle of a stepper motor). The arms were short because the two stepper motors had little torque. I needed to avoid missteps of the stepper motors in order to maintain programmed acceleration and deceleration patterns for the arms. I also tested the contraption swimming on water (on a piece of wood) and there one could clearly see that it moved only back and forth.


I built three contraptions. The first one was not self contained (needed wires to a stationary power supply and controller) and a third bigger one with strong stepper motors flinging 800 gram weights. It was fun and an absolute failure besides learning how to drive stepper motors. The shown second contraption was the best from a design point of view.


Just to show that I have been there with the usual outcome (failure). Everybody can build something that works. But it needs great skill to always build something that does not work.


Greetings, Conrad


(P.S.: I dumped the contraptions some years ago when I cleaned house, but luckily I found the photos on overunity.com)
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: DrJones on February 16, 2018, 06:44:37 PM
  This is very interesting work.  Thanks for the continuing videos, Laurent.


  I have a further suggestion for an experiment, and have stopped in our travels to make a quick post.
 
   Rotate your device 180-degrees, so now the "push" should be in the opposite direction.*  Now see which direction (counter-clockwise or clockwise?) the bicycle wheel turns.  Even though it will take longer (I think) to make a complete turn, the bicycle wheel should still turn.  Which direction the bike wheel rotates will tell us something![/font][/size]

[/font][/size]
*Alternatively, move the device without rotating it, to the OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BICYCLE WHEEL. [/font][/size]
--Steven Jones[/font][/size]
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 16, 2018, 09:17:30 PM
This thread http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt (http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt) is very instructive. The "inventor" is spinning two gyroscopes (drilling machines) and even waves them up and down like in Fig. 20 of the Fiala patent (see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCgrMetRsc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCgrMetRsc) ). It does not work, although the "inventor" wants to see something in his demonstration (but he stopped in 2014). The "inventor" exhibits the usual blindness concerning his "invention".

So, just spinning two gyroscopes (like I did with the dead weights) and even "waving" or "nodding" them up and down will not work. One seems to need that "free fall" or "free coasting of the gyroscopes" for half a circle like in Fig. 1 of the Fiala patent.

It means for me that I do not need to test "restricted" movement of gyroscopes around a full circle. I have to find a solution for the "free fall" or "free coasting" half circle.

I also suspect that only Laurent's replication works (Fig. 1 of the Fiala patent) und not the embodiment according to Fig. 20 of the Fiala patent. I see no "free fall periode" in Fig. 20 and therefore it will not work for the same reasons as the contraption in the unsuccessful thread http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt (http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt) . It might work if the "reset cylinder 182" (see Fig. 20) can set free the gyroscope for one half circle. The embodiment of Fig. 20 also lacks the "speeding up during one half circle", which hints that the inventor never built it.

Very intriguing! It always pays to study prior work. Most of the things imaginable have already been tried by some poor soul in the past.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 17, 2018, 11:02:16 AM
This thread http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt (http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt) is very instructive. The "inventor" is spinning two gyroscopes (drilling machines) and even waves them up and down like in Fig. 20 of the Fiala patent (see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCgrMetRsc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCgrMetRsc) ). It does not work, although the "inventor" wants to see something in his demonstration (but he stopped in 2014). The "inventor" exhibits the usual blindness concerning his "invention".

So, just spinning two gyroscopes (like I did with the dead weights) and even "waving" or "nodding" them up and down will not work. One seems to need that "free fall" or "free coasting of the gyroscopes" for half a circle like in Fig. 1 of the Fiala patent.

It means for me that I do not need to test "restricted" movement of gyroscopes around a full circle. I have to find a solution for the "free fall" or "free coasting" half circle.

I also suspect that only Laurent's replication works (Fig. 1 of the Fiala patent) und not the embodiment according to Fig. 20 of the Fiala patent. I see no "free fall periode" in Fig. 20 and therefore it will not work for the same reasons as the contraption in the unsuccessful thread http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt (http://overunity.com/14090/m-drive-reactionless-drive-invented-by-me/#.Woc1v6jiaHt) . It might work if the "reset cylinder 182" (see Fig. 20) can set free the gyroscope for one half circle. The embodiment of Fig. 20 also lacks the "speeding up during one half circle", which hints that the inventor never built it.

Very intriguing! It always pays to study prior work. Most of the things imaginable have already been tried by some poor soul in the past.

Greetings, Conrad

Hi conrad

This experiment is one of the most brain shaking machine.

Thank's very much for your interest.

I have made a rapid tour on the link you mention and i tried to figure out the analogy with Fig 20 of the fiala's patent. On the experiment of M.drive i don't see the precise timing of the gyros they seem to go back and forth quite heratically. Now if you look at the graph on fig 29 of fiala's patent, it seems clear that there is first a motorization of the rotation of the device on half a turn, which induces precession of the gyro which can freely raise up 60 degrees. Then the  rotation's motorization stops, and the piston (182)  push down the gyros  and this pushdown is the swing which should motorize up the whole device. What is not clear to me is if when the rotation's motorisation stops, if the vertical main shaft also stops or if it is free to spin during the down push. If it is free to spin, the down push should also exhibit an axial precession and perhaps diminish the power of the down swing but i dono.
M. Fiala speak also of stepper motor for this fig 20 setup. So perhaps you can imagine a programation for that purpose. I am personnally thinking to use 180 degree servo with one way bearing for the main shaft (if it is free to spin after its motorization) and another 180 deg servo for the vertical up and down movement. But it will not be an easy task for sure. And as you said some good studying before doing is a must.

To Steven

Thank's for the proposal, i will do.

Just for info, i made a small reflection this night:

when the device is on a flat floor and mounted on wheels (ball bearing) it speed up almost instantly, i mean at the first rotation (swing) it goes forward. But on the suspended wheel it need a very long time to speed up (some minutes from the zero speed start point).

So i think that the answer is that the suspended wheel (with 3 lines) plus a vertical monotoron, can woble in all direction and this wobling make the "floor of the wheel" somehow "wavy"
.
So when the device is on a flat hard floor,  the swing of the gyro (when the traction wheel is in contact with the traction ring) is perfectly horizontal all along the 180 derees and the gyro does not precess at all, so the swing is very efficient .

But on the suspended wheel, the floor is "wavy" and the swing is not perfectly horizontal all along the 180 degrees, so the gyro can slightly precess and , if the theory of m. Fiala is right, it loses some angular momentum, so the swing is not very efficient.

So i will redo completely the experiment with 4 lines  and no monotoron to max stabilise the suspended wheel and see if the gyro accelerate better, and then try all your suggestions.

Fascinating gyros !

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 17, 2018, 09:10:12 PM
@Laurent: I will read more carefully in the Fiala patent about the Fig. 20 type embodiment, may be there is more information in the many pages of the patent.

I think I found a solution for building a Fig. 1 embodiment (like your replication) with a stepper motor and no tracks. I will make drawings for discussion prior to implementation.

The Adafruit motor shield for the Arduino is in the mail. It should open up many options.

But everything is a lot of work and will take time.

A one way bearing on a servo is a good idea. If you drive a 360° servo with a microprocessor you can reduce its turning speed after 180° to let the gyroscope "fly freely" for the other half circle. At the end of the circle (at 0°=360°) you catch up with the servo to push again for 180°. But you have to limit the nodding of the gyroscope again with some rails. Wait for my drawing (a few days), may be it can be done with a servo as well. I just do not like servos, but this is a personal choice. A stepper motor is best for trying many strange movements, but it has to be done with a microprocessor (a program). An Arduino with motor shield is a overkill, but so what, it is not expensive and can be programmed easily with a PC.

Laurent, could you tell me which DC motor and which speed control you use for the gyroscope shown in your videos. Your gyroscope seems to work well and I could just copy it from you (including the figet spinner rings).

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: DrJones on February 18, 2018, 01:57:17 AM
 This is an important observation, Laurent:
"So when the device is on a flat hard floor,  the swing of the gyro (when the traction wheel is in contact with the traction ring) is perfectly horizontal all along the 180 derees and the gyro does [/font]not precess[/font] at all, so the swing is very efficient ."[/font]

[/font]

[/font]
Thank you for being so careful and observant!  [/size]
   I must say that the demo you did with a device rolling freely on marbles was very convincing to me.  For then, the device is free to move linearly (the term in English is, free to translate) or to rotate - yet it is seen to move linearly!  [/size]

[/size]
PS - may I insert a quick question to you, Laurent.  Years ago, I was following your excellent progress measuring the input and output power on a simple "cold fusion" flask using electrolysis in light water H2O. You were making progressive tests and improvements.  It did appear that you were getting "anomalous excess heat" (AEH) (which I think is a MUCH better term than "cold fusion" since in light water, the basis would not be fusion.)   [/size]
    My question is - do you still think that you were getting AEH?  or did you find some mistake??[/size]

   I do not ask this to cause any embarrassment - rather, I personally think there are conditions where AEH is quite likely (based on several experiments I have seen) - and I would appreciate a quick follow-up on your intriguing set of experiments with light-water electrolysis.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 18, 2018, 10:51:30 PM
Hi conrad

Very good idea if you can organize a steper motor and some elegant system to mimic the fig 1.

in general i find the matos in my generous backyard as i made a lot of modellism,  i have a lot of junk stuff every where in my house.

So for the small motor it is a old Graupner 6 volts (i had since a very long time) and the gear is self made with some plastic gears ratio 1 to 3.

For the motor controllers , and brass fidget rings, and ball bearing etc.. you will find at "chinese Banggood" for very good price.  I can look for detail parts if you will.


Hi Steven

I now understand why so few people are interested in this inertial propulsion with gyro.

This is the most unintuitiv  thing i have never experienced. You think you have understood , and right after the device behave totally contrary to your expectation. Fascinating at first glance but if you have bad luck or not enough craftmanship and perseverance you will rapidly give up and say OK that's a waste of time and anyway so many people have already tried and failed.

So i think i had great  luck to get it work on my 1 part video, which encourage me to go further.

So as i said i have redone the complete suspending system and also the device itself so i can easily rototate it all the 360 degres on the basis.

First i made a serie of test clockwise. And what surprise me is that there is always some wobling but also a SIDE push. Remember the marble test where the device does not translate straight forward, but drifted sideway.
And sideway drift pushes the suspended wheel also side way.  So in the clockwise test i have to reorient the "forward push " not tangential to the bicycle rim, but much "outer" . so the forward and sideward vectors compose in a rufly steady forward tangential vector. So now it is clear to me why on this suspended wheel it is impossible to get a motorising vector as efficient as per a floor contacting machine. And of course the wobling which does not help.

Plus of course the heavy rim (615gr) plus the counter weight (220gr) to move and also the ballbearing friction etc..

But in clockwise rotation , i always get good steady rotation , i also changed the position of the device on one side of the balsa wood end to the other, as you asked, and no significant change.

But when i rotate the device 180 degres, i also change the sideward displacement, so to get some counter clockwise translation, i have to rotate MORE than the 180 degres and now the composition of the pushing vector (forward and sideward) is very bad oriented. So i get a counter clockwise rotation, but soooo weak that at each time that the sustention ball bearing have the slightest resistance, the rotation stops. I suppose that with the monotoron kevlar thread, i will get some counter clockwise turns, but i have all dismantled, and i am not very much sure that it is relevant here.

So to resume for today experiment.    when the swing of the gyro is outer the rim, it pushes efficiently, and when the swing is on the inner part of the rim =nada. So this system does not behave as a pendulum as per part 7 of my video. and I HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THE GYRO dOES THE DIRTY WORK as Tinselkoala name it.

So for a good propulsion, it is absolutely necessary to mount a TWIN OPPOSITE and SYNCHRONIZED Spinning system, so the sideward forces are annulated and only stays the forward forces.

But as i said from the beginning of this thread, i am not interested in space propulsion system.

What puzzle me is the DIRTY WORK of the gyro----- what seems to create a reduction of the angular momentum in a spinning and precessing gyro.



Finally and out of topic
the big problem with my AES experiment was the measuremnt  of the INPUT power. So i could get no body  to help me  and only crude critics on the internet forum, so
without high quality instrument i was not able to go on this fantastic experiment. But as you say i am following the big progress of others and it seems that something is slowly progressing.
As a friend of mine says " they think that the real physic is in the classroom, not on youtube "

Laurent




Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: DrJones on February 19, 2018, 03:27:18 PM
  Laurent, I am very impressed by your enthusiastic pursuit of truth.  I like unusual/alternative approaches also.  Thank you for responding vis-a-vis the light-water experiment.  I found your work impressive.


   Back to the gyroscope system - as I mentioned earlier, I find your floor-based system, rolling freely on marbles, to be the best and easiest to understand the motion. 


   You wrote:
"Remember the marble test where the device does not translate straight forward, but drifted sideway.[/size]And sideway drift pushes the suspended wheel also side way.  So in the clockwise test i have to reorient the "forward push " not tangential to the bicycle rim, but much "outer" . so the forward and sideward vectors compose in a rufly steady forward tangential vector. So now it is clear to me why on this suspended wheel it is impossible to get a motorising vector as efficient as per a floor contacting machine. And of course the wobling which does not help."[/size]

[/size]
 Right - a sideways drift is observed, that's fine - it still moves in a such a way that (linear) momentum conservation appears to be challenged, and that is a lot of fun to see.


 If I could ask you to do ONE more experiment, it would be to repeat the marble test - taking video (data) for 2 or 3 minutes, and just let the device move freely.  Let's see how it behaves over time in this way.  It would be a fitting conclusion to a wonderful series of experiments that you have performed.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 19, 2018, 07:51:21 PM
  Laurent, I am very impressed by your enthusiastic pursuit of truth.  I like unusual/alternative approaches also.  Thank you for responding vis-a-vis the light-water experiment.  I found your work impressive.


   Back to the gyroscope system - as I mentioned earlier, I find your floor-based system, rolling freely on marbles, to be the best and easiest to understand the motion. 


   You wrote:
"Remember the marble test where the device does not translate straight forward, but drifted sideway.[/size]And sideway drift pushes the suspended wheel also side way.  So in the clockwise test i have to reorient the "forward push " not tangential to the bicycle rim, but much "outer" . so the forward and sideward vectors compose in a rufly steady forward tangential vector. So now it is clear to me why on this suspended wheel it is impossible to get a motorising vector as efficient as per a floor contacting machine. And of course the wobling which does not help."[/size]

[/size]
 Right - a sideways drift is observed, that's fine - it still moves in a such a way that (linear) momentum conservation appears to be challenged, and that is a lot of fun to see.


 If I could ask you to do ONE more experiment, it would be to repeat the marble test - taking video (data) for 2 or 3 minutes, and just let the device move freely.  Let's see how it behaves over time in this way.  It would be a fitting conclusion to a wonderful series of experiments that you have performed.


Hi Steven and all

Thank's for the proposal

Here the video

https://youtu.be/_WBD5hZu0t4

And as you can see there is a forward displacement of the center of mass of the device and the substrate almost don't move.

For info the ballbearing of the device are high quality fidget ballbearings without side protection so there spin very freely.

And as seen on the suspended wheel, there is also a sideward force to the right of the translation depacement.

So it seems that we have to seriously study what is going on here. The Fiala's patent could be a good base.

Hope this helps

Laurent

Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 19, 2018, 08:03:30 PM
Nice work Woopy




To all:


I must have missed the presumed logical fallacy.
What is the basis for conjecture against this form
of propulsion?
(I assume many of you never saw the gyro boat)


To me this all seems classical Newtonian.
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: woopy on February 19, 2018, 10:25:28 PM
Nice work Woopy




To all:


I must have missed the presumed logical fallacy.
What is the basis for conjecture against this form
of propulsion?
(I assume many of you never saw the gyro boat)


To me this all seems classical Newtonian.


Hi smoky

Very interesting , have you a link on this "gyro boat with inertial propulsion"

Because a know very well the gyro stabilization device for boat, but i never heard  from a gyro propulsion device for boat ?

many thank's for your interst

Laurent
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: DrJones on February 20, 2018, 01:23:52 AM
  Congratulations on a difficult experiment and test, Laurent - with your "part 8" video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WBD5hZu0t4&feature=push-u-sub&attr_tag=1X1BbXfPgaQNdIjg-6


I take note especially of those instances when the device goes left just a little, before proceeding to the right.


I posted further comments there.  Thanks again!
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: tinman on February 20, 2018, 02:47:57 PM

Hi smoky

Very interesting , have you a link on this "gyro boat with inertial propulsion"

Because a know very well the gyro stabilization device for boat, but i never heard  from a gyro propulsion device for boat ?

many thank's for your interst

Laurent

Hi Laurent.

I remember this one from years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4LT3GZjlY


Brad
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: DrJones on February 20, 2018, 05:19:05 PM
  I think this is important, regarding Laurent's demonstration #8:  does the device INITIALLY move to the left or right (or stationary) when first released? [/font][/size]
[/font][/size]
In several of the releases, it moves LEFT a little initially, THEN, not touched anymore, it moves to the right.  Look for example at the release which begins about 2m33sec - and you will see what I'm referring to.  These are the cases that interest me particularly and seem to show "momentum generation without observable recoil."[/font][/size]
Title: Re: inertial propulsion with gyroscope
Post by: conradelektro on February 20, 2018, 08:36:17 PM
I remember this one from years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4LT3GZjlY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4LT3GZjlY)


I do not know what made the boat move in the swimming pool, but I am pretty convinced (based on my experiments) that swirling dead weights in whatever way (e.g. like suggested in US4631971) will not work as an "inertial propulsion drive". And since 2014 nothing tangible came from this initiative http://www.americanantigravity.com/. One would have heard more if it really worked. These things come and then go away pretty fast. Yes, it could be a conspiracy, some men in black erasing all inertial drives ever invented. But this is even more far fetched than the inertial drives themselves.

For me gyroscopes still pose a mystery and Laurent made me restart experiments with his replication of the Fiala patent. Most probably it will not work either but it is interesting to investigate. At least I will understand gyroscopes better.

Greetings, Conrad